The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 01/24/2017 CityIN of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD ' ' 0 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: January 24,2017 -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 503-718-2419, (voice) or 503-684-2772 (11)D -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: 503-718-2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: h ttp://live.tigard-or.aov 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. 11 a City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD , IMMw SRL- .a. _• TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: January 24,2017 -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 6:311 PM •STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. CONSIDER A REQUEST TO NAME THE PLAZA AREA OF TIGARD STREET TRAIL 6:45 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. Tigard High School Student Envoy C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce D. 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. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: •November 1,2016 •November 22,2016 •December 13,2016 •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. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING:TOPPING C-P TO R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE with PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 7:35 p.m. estimated time 5. REVIEW BALLOT MEASURE TITLE FOR CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT 8:35 p.m. estimated time 6. REVIEW BALLOT MEASURE TITLE FOR TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN 8:55 p.m. estimated time 7. NON AGENDA ITEMS •EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation or litigation likely to be filed,under ORS 192.660(2) (h).All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 9:15 p.m. estimated time 8. ADJOURNMENT 9:35 p.m. estimated time 1101 City of Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Agenda .TIGARD, January 24, 2017 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION - 6:30 p.m. A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS B. CONSIDER A REQUEST TO NAME THE PLAZA AREA OF TIGARD STREET TRAIL 6:45 p.m. estimated time Administrative Items: 1. Council Outreach is next Tuesday, 6-8 p.m. in FRONT area of Max's Fanno Creek Pub. 2. February 28 will be a joint meeting with Lake Oswego City Council at Tigard. Council Meeting Calendar January 3* Tuesday Council Inauguration Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 10* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 17* Tuesday Council Business/Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 23 Monday Council Goal Setting—6-9 p.m.,TVF&R Headquarters, 11945 SW 70th Ave,Tigard 24* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 31 Tuesday Council Outreach Event—6:00 p.m.—8:00 p.m.,Max's Fanno Creek Pub, 12562 SW Main St.,Tigard February 7* Tuesday Council Business meeting- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 14* Tuesday Council Business Meeting- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 21* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 28* Tuesday Joint Meeting with Lake Oswego City Council- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall March 7* Tuesday Council Business meeting- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 14* Tuc3day Council Buaincss Meeting —CANCELLED 21* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 28* Tuesday Council Business Meeting- 6:30 p.m.,Town Hall Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk (*). AIS-2945 B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/24/2017 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider a Request to Name the Plaza Area of the Tigard Street Trail Prepared For: Steve Martin,Public Works Submitted By: Steve Martin,Public Works Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall council consider a future resolution to name the Tigard Street Trail Plaza "Rotary Plaza"? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff requests direction on whether or not to proceed with the request. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY On December 7,2016,staff received a request from Mr. Marland Henderson on behalf of the two local Rotary Clubs in Tigard (knows as the "Noon" and "Breakfast" clubs -- see attachment 1).The request is to designate the name, "Rotary Plaza," for the plaza area adjacent to the Tigard Street Trail.The small plaza area covers the area roughly from the far end of the Pacific Highway overpass to Main Street. Development of the Tigard Street Trail and parts of the plaza area will be starting in 2017,and the use of the area will increase when completed.The plaza will be considered a park area and it is hoped that suitable events and uses will be programmed to utilize this area in the heart of downtown. It is a timely request,as it is common to name a park area when it undergoes development to help give an identity to the park. The Tigard Street Trail itself does not yet have an official name,but has been referred to informally as the Tigard Street Heritage Trail. The city's Naming&Recognition Policy (attachment 2) states that requests to name key city features, buildings and existing property must be reviewed by the parks manager and approved by formal action of the City Council. The purpose of this meeting is for informal discussion of the naming request. Staff and representatives from Rotary will be present to answer any questions. Staff is looking for council direction to determine: •Does council wish to consider a resolution to formally adopt the name? •If so,who should be financially responsible for the costs to implement the name,including a plaque or signage (either the city or the"requestee")? OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose another name for the plaza area,or choose to not name the area. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Council has not considered this matter before. Attachments Request letter to name the plaza Relevant naming policy December 7, 2016 Parks Manager, Steve Martin City of Tigard, Public Works Regards: Request to name a park in downtown Tigard Steve, As a representative of the local two Rotary Clubs in Tigard, Noon and Breakfast,we are requesting the naming of a new park/plaza for the downtown of Tigard, better known as the South Entry of the Tigard Heritage Trail. This week we have created a consensus between the Noon and Breakfast Rotary to work together in partnering with the City of Tigard to create a gathering place that identifies and gives Rotary a presence in the downtown of Tigard. The committee of the Noon Rotary has been established for several weeks to secure this endeavor and has been attended by many of its long time leaders. The Breakfast Rotary was represented by their President, Jim deSulley, which is now part of this committee to name and manage the Rotary Plaza Project. With the agreement of both Clubs and from a selection of many names the name was chosen as ROTARY PLAZA. This name was chosen mainly for its simplicity and it identified everyone's goal of creating a gathering place that has been a long time goal of both clubs Upon serious consideration we have agreed to move forward with this naming of the area of the Heritage Trail from North side of Main Street to under the North side of the overpass of Pacific Highway, from the East property line of the Chamber of Commerce Building to the West of the Railroad Easement. Please advise next steps including a submittal document if possible. We have been in contact with Liz Newton and following her guidance. As a member of the Noon Rotary and the Chair of the Community Development please feel free to respond to me as necessary. Marland HenSierson , ./(7- 1795 SW Kat erine Street,Tigard, Oregon Cell 503-329-0159 e-mail mhcon@aol.com City of Tigard Naming & Recognition Policy Effective September 3, 2013 A. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to provide consistent standards and procedures to: b Name city key features, buildings and property. IS Install items on city property to recognize an individual, group or event. B. Naming Criteria for City Key Features, (such as open-air shelters, sports fields, gardens, rooms, trails, etc.), Buildings and Existing Property, Including Parks 1. All requests to name city key features, buildings and existing property must be reviewed by the parks manager and approved by formal action of the City Council. 2. To assist the public in identifying and locating key features, buildings and property, proposed names should be descriptive in nature or should contain a descriptive element, such as the Fanno Creek House, Dirksen Nature Park, Woodruff Bridge or John Anderson Baseball Fields. 3. Proposed names shall recognize one or more of the following: -A physical, historical, or unique characteristic of the key feature, building or existing property. -An event that had a significant impact to the city. -An individual or individuals, living or dead (memorial),who made a significant contribution to the city, either historically, financially or through civic duty. -A group or groups that made a significant contribution to the city, either historically, financially or through civic duty. -A property owner(s) who donates or sells property to the city. C. City-Initiated Requests to Name City Key Features, (such as open-air shelters, sports fields, gardens, rooms, trails, etc.), Buildings and Existing Property, Including Parks 1. The process to consider a city-initiated request is as follows: a. A city councilor or designee, city board or committee, or city staff member, "City Requestee," interested in naming a key feature, building or property must submit a written request—including specific information as to the purpose,proposed location (if applicable) and significance of the name—to the parks manager. b. The parks manager will prepare a recommendation, including a cost estimate to implement the name. c. The request and recommendation will be placed on a council agenda for informal discussion by the City Council. d. At the discussion the council will either: - Direct the parks manager to prepare a resolution to formally adopt the name. If applicable, staff will assist the council in identifying and selecting a city funding source to implement the name. - Determine that a majority of the city councilors do not support the name, and the request will not move forward. e. With council support, a resolution naming the feature, building or property will come before council for formal action. f. If the resolution is adopted, the parks manager will implement the name. D. Non-City-Initiated Requests to Name City Key Features, (such as open- air shelters, sports fields, gardens, rooms, trails, etc.), Buildings and Existing Property, Including Parks 1. The process to consider a non-city-initiated request is as follows: a. An individual or organization, "Requestee,"interested in naming a key feature, building or property must submit a written request—including specific information as to the purpose,proposed location (if applicable) and significance of the name—to the parks manager at the following address: Parks Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 b. When applicable, and if the name is intended to recognize an individual(s), group(s) or event, the parks manager will attempt to verify that the recognition is acceptable to the individual(s),group(s) or event, or the appropriate representative of the individual(s),group(s) or event. c. The parks manager will review the request and prepare a recommendation and cost estimate to implement the name. d.The request and recommendation will be placed on a council agenda for informal discussion by the City Council. e. At the discussion the council will either: -Direct the parks manager to prepare a resolution to formally adopt the name. Under this option, the council will also need to determine whether the Requestee or the city will be financially responsible for the costs to implement the name,including a plaque or signage (if desired). If the city assumes the costs, staff will assist the council in identifying and selecting a city funding source to implement the name. -Determine that a majority of the city councilors do not support the name, and the request will not move forward. f. With council support, a resolution naming the feature, building or property will come before council for formal action. g. If the resolution is adopted, the parks manager will work with the Requestee to implement the name. SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR City Council Update Jan 2017 (DATE OF MEETING) .1 Chamber Update Citi zen Corn m ern J Ca /et • Leadership Tigard—Government day was this month and the class learned about the different departments in the City of Tigard,their role and challenges. Day included tour of CWS at Durham and then a hands on exercise grappling with the COT role in Homelessness and ended with providing some recommendations. • Jan—Feb 23rd Scholarship Applications Now Open, three $1,000 Scholarships available • Now—March 3—Nominate for Shining Stars Community Awards Good Morning Tigard (GMT),Thursday A.M. Networking 7:30 a.m.—Weekly 1/26—Hosted by KPAM Radio at the Broadway Rose 2/2—Hosted by Musimack Marketing at Tigard Chamber Pacific Residential Mortgage 2/9- Hosted by Pacific Residential 2/16—Hosted by Center for Discovery 2/23—Hosted by Pamplin Media Group Other • 2/14—Leadership Tigard—Education Day • 2/15—1:15 p.m.—Tigard Chamber Gov't Affairs committee meeting • 2/15—5:30 p.m.—After Hours Open House Tigard Triangle Smils • 2/21—5:30-7 p.m.—G.E.T. Connected After Hours Networking • 2/24—3:30 p.m.—Grand Opening/Ribbon Cutting Center for Discovery • 3/4—10 a.m.—Bowlorama @ Tigard Bowl,join us with a team Check our event calendar at http://business.tigardchamber.org/events/calendar/for details follow us on Twitter @tigardchamber Tigard Farmers Market Update • Vendor applications for the 25th anniversary season are now open • Mid-week market,Thursdays 8-4 p.m.June—Aug Tigard Street Trail • 1St Annual Farm to Table Dinner! -Save the date 7/21 • Follow us on Facebook at tigardfarmersmarket and on Twitter @tigardfarmers TDA Downtown Updates • Save the date for Art Walk Mother's Day Weekend, May 2017—Details coming soon Find us on Facebook at exploredowntowntigard and at www.exploredowntowntigard.com. Follow us on Twitter @Tigarddowntown and on Instagram at downtowntigard IP TIGARD rays N��l��{L. CHAM/ER OF COMMERCE tlgardyoungprofessionalsiE l � ^ ��R.GIVE. connectcollectcollamesto.climb, SUPPLEMENTAL PALL FOR n . `/ a 62/ 7 _... (DAT OF MEETING, Tigard High School Update : January 23, 2016 c h Commun�'+ ro2 • Recent o Human Rights month: #Respect Week, Latin America Week, Truth Week, Human Trafficking Week o Omekongo Dibinga flew out from Washington D.C. to speak at our annual Human Rights assembly o Hung up posters disproving myths for various groups o Held a free leadership workshop for middle schoolers o Winter sports are doing well, however they are very busy with all of the make up games • Coming Up o Slam poetry on Wednesday o Senior Citizen Prom on Sunday February 12 from 1 pm-3pm • Theme: "All That Jazz" o Father Daughter Dance to raise money for our Sparrow o Student directed One Acts on February 23, 24, 25 @7:30pm and 25@2pm • Tickets are $8 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 D - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: January 24, 2017 (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. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Pri-it CONTACTED Name: }}r = JLS Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Addres100c5(kf, M City State / Zip9 7,-2 Phone No. \5U 3 6 --./6 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 1:\ADM\CITY RECORDERS\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 161101.doc AIS-3001 3.A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/24/2017 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: No 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: *November 1,2016 •November 22,2016 •December 13,2016 OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments November 1,2016 Minutes November 22,2016 Minutes December 13,2016 Minutes City of Tigard S Tigard City Council & CCDA Meeting Minutes TIGARD November 1, 2016 EI STUDY SESSION Council Present: Mayor Cook, Councilor Henderson, Councilor Woodard, Council President Snider and Councilor Goodhouse Staff Present: City Manager Wine, City Attorney Olsen, Public Works Director Rager, Division Manager Goodrich,Lake Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership Director Koellermeier, Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance and City Recorder Kruger A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Councilor Henderson asked about a newspaper advertisement for River Terrace housing that mentioned multiple swim centers. Mayor Cook said pool amenities were included in the developer's plans from the beginning. Councilor Henderson announced that the Behavioral Health Collaborative Center is moving all intakes to Hawthorne Center,which is near the MAX line in Hillsboro. He noted that Oregon is rated 49th in the nation for mental health spending and needs more mental health facilities. Councilor Woodard reported on the Trick or Treat Main Street Halloween event which attracted a large crowd. He referred to the previous council discussion on the civic center and said he will remain open-minded but will be interjecting ideas about combining a recreation center with a civic facility. He noted that he requested Assistant City Engineer McMillan develop three images for this idea and said he wants to be involved. City Manager Wine said while the Leadership and Study Teams will make recommendations it is the City Council that will make the decisions and there will be multiple opportunities for their input. She noted that council was invited by consultants Barney and Worth to give input to their survey. Mayor Cook said he asked that a discussion be added to a council workshop meeting. Councilor Woodard asked Public Works Director Rager to pass along kudos to Assistant City Engineer McMillan. Mayor Cook spoke about the great job the businesses did during the Halloween event and said he thanked them for participating and allowed them to hand out business cards and coupons. He noted that even some businesses not directly on Main Street such as Tigard Tap House, Frame Central and La Fuente Restaurant also participated. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 1 of 14 Administrative Items: City Manager Wine said City Attorney interviews will be held on November 22 at 6:00 p.m. and reminded council that they are scheduled to tape their TVCTV holiday greeting at 7:15 p.m. that same evening. Council meals will be delivered at 5:30 p.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 6:47 p.m. Mayor Cook read the citation for an executive session called under ORS 192.660 (2) (f) to consider records exempt by law from public inspection. The executive session ended at 7:11 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. At 7:30 p.m. Mayor Cook called the City Council and City Center Development Agency meeting to order. B. City Recorder Krager called the roll. Present Absent Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ C. Mayor Cook asked everyone to stand and join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Mayor Cook called for non-agenda items. None 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication -None B. Citizen Communication—Sign-up Sheet. —None 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council&CCDA) A. RECEIVE AND FILE • Council Calendar • Council Tentative Agenda for Future Meeting Topics TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 14 B. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: • September 20,2016 • September 27, 2016 C. CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY-APPROVE CCDA MINUTES: • September 6, 2016 • October 4, 2016 Councilor Woodard noted that he was absent on September 27 and October 4. Council President Snider moved for approval of the Consent Agenda as proposed and Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ 4. CONTINUED LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDER MARIJUANA FACILITIES ORDINANCE a. Associate Planner Kowacz and Assistant Community Development Director McGuire presented the staff report for the ordinance which brings forward changes recommended by the council at the October 18 legislative public hearing. b. Council discussion—None. c. Council consideration of Ordinance No. 16-22. Councilor Woodard moved for adoption of Ordinance No. 16-22. Council President Snider seconded the motion. City Recorder Krager read the number and title of the ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 16-22-AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 18) TO ADOPT TEXT AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 18.735 (MARIJUANA FACILITIES) THAT REDUCE SPACING REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN FACILITIES AND CHANGE PERMITTED HOURS OF OPERATION City Recorder Krager conducted a roll call vote. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 3 of 14 Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 16-22 passed unanimously. 5. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING: 2016 OMNIBUS CODE AMENDMENT PACKAGE a. Mayor Cook opened the public hearing. b. City Attorney Olsen read the hearing procedures. c. Staff Report— Associate Planner Kowacz and Assistant Community Development Director McGuire gave the staff report which included a PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Kowacz said three amendments are in this omnibus code amendment package. She said the first is in response to a request from council for staff to consider the current regulations for animal boarding. The second amendment is to raise building height limits in the Main-Center sub- area in the Tigard Downtown Plan District and the third is to amend the Tigard Triangle Plan District to allow multi-family dwelling units within the General Commercial zone. Associate Planner Kowacz said staff researched how nearby cities zone animal boarding and the staff recommendation is to change the classification of animal boarding from Animal- related Commercial to Personal Service which would allow it in most commercial zones. She noted that it would be prohibited in residential zones. Associate Planner Kowacz said the second amendment is to raise building height limit from 45 feet to 80 feet in the Main-Center sub-area in the Tigard Downtown Plan District. Prior to the establishment of the Downtown Plan District the zone was called the Central Business District and had 80 foot height limits. In 2010,when it became the Downtown Plan District it was divided into four sub-areas and two retained the 80 foot limit but two received reduced height limits to 45 feet due to a perceived conflict with the existing development on Main Street. Increasing the height would make new construction more financially feasible in the downtown. Ms. Kowacz said the Tigard Triangle has two zones: Mixed-Use Employment (MUE) and General Commercial (CG). Multi-family housing is currently allowed in the MUE zone at 25 units per acre and allowed in the CG zone only through a planned development review and is limited to 25 percent of the gross floor area of the building. The proposed change supports the Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan which emphasizes this area as a mixed-use employment area with a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system. The plan also recommended greater housing choices and affordability and this code change would allow for more housing options in the Triangle. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 4 of 14 Council has been copied with public comment letters and emails,including those from Steve Martin,Bill Kabeiseman, Rachel Duke from Community Partners in Affordable Housing, Sheila Greenlaw-Fink from Community Housing Fund, and Richard Shavey. ODOT commented that this code amendment satisfies the criteria for the transportation rule. d. Public Testimony— Rachel Duke, Community Partners for Affordable Housing,P. O. Box 23206,Tigard OR 97281, said she was very supportive of the omnibus code amendments and is excited about the proposed changes in the Triangle because they support the vision of the Triangle and multi-family housing will be a great asset. Another reason CPAH is excited about this is because there is an affordable housing crisis in the metropolitan region. Recently publicity covered the Walnut Tree Apartments in Tigard where close to 40 families lost their housing. CPAH is proposing to build multi-family housing in the Triangle on some property they own that will be regulated. Their mission is to provide affordable housing and this amendment would make that possible in the Triangle. She thanked the city for previous support and noted that they cannot do this on their own;it is through public/private partnerships with jurisdictions they serve that they can provide these resources. No other testimony was given. e. Council Questions— None f. Staff Recommendation—Associate Planner Kowacz said the staff recommendation is for the City Council to approve the code amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. g. Council Discussion— Council President Snider referred to feedback from Bateman/Seidel and asked if staff shared any of the concerns raised about the potential for unintended adverse impacts and whether or not this change in the Triangle is too broad and does not require review. He asked for clarity on the impacts regarding tax lots 400 and 402 specifically noted in their letter. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire responded that the comments were reviewed and discussed at the Planning Commission meeting and staff does not share concerns that opening General Commercial in the Triangle to housing would prevent commercial development. He said the owners are in a situation where the location,lot pattern and ownership pattern will have more influence on potential business and developer interest in those properties. Mr. McGuire said one of the tax lots referred to is currently under Planning Commission review for an oncology center and he believed it would likely develop in a few months so it will no longer be on the table as potential housing. In response to a question from Council President Snider on access to the property,Mr. McGuire replied that public works and engineering staff are working with the property owners and applicants on access issues. At TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 5 of 14 present there is no requirement for them to extend the street or create that access. It is an aspiration of the Triangle plan but the only requirement in the code is a possible bike/pedestrian connection. He noted that the proposed oncology center property owner has access on 72nd and also an access agreement with the owner of the Walmart property to the west. A similar agreement could be worked out for the other property although there are some slope issues. Councilor Woodard asked if the code change will help the doggie daycare business on Barrows Road get back into business. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said the code amendment would allow it. Mayor Cook said it was unknown if that particular business would reopen. Councilor Woodard said he had mixed emotions about raising the height on Main Street because his memory from discussions in 2010 was that having a 45-foot height allowed drivers on Highway 99W to view the downtown but allowed taller buildings on the east side of Main Street. He said he did not want the activity downtown visually blocked from Highway 99W by a row of buildings. Being able to see helps market and promote the downtown. He said he also needed to be convinced that there was adequate infrastructure and parking. Councilor Goodhouse commented that more events and more people living and working there will attract people to come downtown. Mayor Cook noted that the peak of Symposium Coffee almost reaches the viaduct level. 45 feet is another 20 feet above that so if all Main Street roofs were built to current code drivers would not be able to see over them anyway. Council discussed the cost effectiveness of multiple stories when building. Councilor Henderson noted that building up would get rid of the current problem of unsightly rooftops. Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly said the price break is below six stories. Five stories of wood can be built on a concrete base. Above six stories there must be steel framing. Mayor Cook said he is favorable to having greater housing choices and housing affordability but is concerned about taking the CG zoned land and allowing anything to be built. We need jobs and housing and if we give up job land for housing it upsets a balance. The housing under discussion tonight is not retail on one floor and housing above as envisioned for the Triangle. Allowing housing anywhere in General Commercial areas can cause some lots to be unbuildable. Council President Snider asked staff if the mayor's concerns could be addressed through a conditional use process. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said conditional use usually looks at aspects such as parking, offsite impacts on a specific location basis. He clarified with council the concern is that opening it up to a property developer to choose whether they want to build commercial or residential, they would rather see combine TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 6 of 14 mixed use in CG. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said the Planning Commission took under consideration that there is a finite number of properties that are zoned CG in the Triangle.The Triangle Plan and complete rezoning is coming up in six- eight months so this is a window to allow an affordable housing project to be built. He addressed unintended consequences and said it does open it up to market choice and for owners to analyze the market and do what they think is best. He noted that even when zoned MUE a developer could choose between all housing and all commercial. In response to a question regarding the Triangle acreage Associate Planner Kowacz said there are 450 acres in the Triangle and less than half is zoned CG.There will be less once the proposed lean code comes forward. Mayor Cook asked about the location of the CG acres. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said staff will project a map on the screen. He said the majority face 99W. Some are near Costco,Walmart and Winco and there are also some smaller areas including Mr. Martin's property. Council President Snider offered support for affordable housing but suggested if that is the problem staff is trying to solve;the code amendment seemed like a broad brush approach. He was supportive of making an exception tonight for one affordable housing project but was worried about unintended consequences Councilor Woodard asked about commercial vs. mixed use property valuation. Mr. McGuire said he did not know for certain but the change proposed does not take away any of the uses allowed now;it adds one and he assumes this would add to the value. Councilor Woodard said there is enough big box retail. He likes the idea of creating a mixed-use village and not just apartments. He suggested apartments may be good transitions from the big box stores. Councilor Goodhouse said, "It is a blank canvas with one shot to get it right." If there is any hesitation,we need to look into it before it gets developed.A mistake here can affect not only Tigard but the entire region. Mayor Cook asked staff about portals and transportation,specifically when a developer would become responsible for building a road or the excess capacity. He said the first one in has plenty of parking,but a developer coming in later may not be able to afford to build because of greater costs due to less capacity for transportation infrastructure. He noted that if the SW Corridor project goes ahead there may be a Highway 217 flyover but there is no guarantee that the flyover will have automobiles,which would completely change the funding source. He asked how to make it more fair and if the Local Improvement District (LID) process could be used,whereby the first person in and the last person in pay a share. Council President Snider asked staff what they thought Community Development Director Asher and Economic Development Manager Purdy (not present)would say about this discussion. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said we are moving towards mixed use in the Triangle. This is a 20-year vision and we are reinforcing it now. Allowing residential development in the CG Zone is a form of mixed use. The other direction the city TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — November 1, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 7 of 14 is going with the Triangle code is to back off on regulations and allow the market to generate the pattern. Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly replied that he thought Mr. Purdy would say allowing residential near commercial property is by definition mixed use. It promotes walkability and supports the SW Corridor. Allowing residential lets the market decide where the best place is for residential and the best place for commercial rather than having artificial lines drawn by planners. Councilor Woodard said the city is looking at making this a potential urban renewal zone. That is a way to subsidize affordable housing for 20 years and this may make it more palatable to developers and there would be the opportunity for a vertical housing zone. Councilor Henderson said the 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street area is almost a district in itself and is a jewel for Tigard. He asked if it is possible to carve out an area to preserve the CG zoning. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said a sub-area could be created. Associate Planner Kowacz showed council a map indicating where the CPAH project is. Leaving in the Planned Development process but changing the 25 percent was discussed. Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly recommended keeping the Planned Development process to maintain that extra level of review and getting rid of any requirement for commercial. He said this would enable the project at hand to obtain financing. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said having residential development go through a planned development review process would require notification to all neighbors. Mayor Cook said he could support that. City Attorney Olsen suggested staff could amend the ordinance deleting reference to Tigard Triangle provisions and could start over with an ordinance specific to the Triangle. Councilor Goodhouse said council could wait and do everything together in six months when the other code changes are considered. Council President Snider said the affordable housing development is a critical need for the community so he did not want to delay. Councilor Woodard moved to approve Ordinance No. 16-23, striking 18.620 Tigard Triangle Plan District. The motion died. City Attorney Olsen read his notes on what would change in the ordinance language. Council President Snider requested that staff and the city attorney take time to mark up an amended ordinance and provide hard copies to council for clarification. h. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. Council President Snider moved to table the item while the city attorney and staff prepare the requested documentation. Councilor Woodard seconded. Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion to table passed unanimously. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 8 of 14 Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Council moved on to Agenda Item No. 6 at 8:28 p.m. Council returned to this item (Agenda Item No. 5) at 9:22 p.m. i. Council Deliberation and Consideration of Ordinance No. 16-23 City Attorney Olsen said when discussing with staff there was some concern about delaying the decision on the multi-family project in the Triangle Plan District by not adopting it tonight. He said there are two options. One would be to adopt everything except the Tigard Triangle Plan language related to multi-family housing. The second option is to adopt amendments to Chapter 18.620 with suggested language. Instead of language approved by the Planning Commission for the Tigard Triangle, the following would be added, "In addition to the uses permitted by Chapter 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts),multi-family dwelling units are permitted in the CG zone through a Planned Development review. Minimum and maximum density requirements do not apply to these developments. The floor area limit on multi-family development provided for in the Planned Development Chapter shall not apply." City Attorney Olsen distributed paper copies with the changes marked for council review. Mayor Cook reopened the public hearing and asked those in the audience that had commented to respond to these suggested changes prior to council voting on them. Rachel Duke,Community Partners for Affordable Housing, said they can live with the wording. Their main concern was to be able to respond in a timely fashion in case they are awarded the funding they just applied for. She said one of their board members is in the audience tonight and CPAH is excited to be in the Triangle and build housing. They want to do what they can to facilitate that and will work closely with staff to make this work. Steve Martin said he lives on Tax Lot 401 in the Triangle and they objected to the blanket approach. He said the analysis tonight was excellent. He said he did not want the housing development held up but at the same time did not want his property to be negatively impacted. He noted that the projects are in different parts of the Triangle. Council President Snider clarified that there will be more scrutiny with the suggested amendment where there would have been none before. Mayor Cook said residential development will go to the Planning Commission and their decision can be appealed to the Council. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said it has elements that a regular apartment TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 9 of 14 complex building in a multi-family zone does not have including private outdoor space and a 20 percent open space requirement. Mr. Martin noted the idea of sub-districting was discussed which would affect the CPAH project more than it would him. He was favorable towards the suggested amendment which puts residential development under more scrutiny but which will allow the affordable housing project to get underway. Mayor Cook noted that Mr. Martin was a member of the Tigard Triangle Citizen Advisory Committee and has been involved from the beginning. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. City Attorney Olsen read the changes staff made to the proposed ordinance. o Added to Section 2 at the end "except that Chapter 18.620 is amended as provided in Exhibit B-1 rather than as shown in Exhibit B. o Exhibit B-1 reads, "In addition to the uses permitted by Chapter 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts,multi-family dwelling units are permitted in the CG Zone through a Planned Development review. Minimum and maximum density requirements do not apply to these developments. The floor area limit on multi-family development provided for in Section 18.350.040.C.2 shall not apply. Council President Snider moved to approve amended Ordinance No. 16-23 as described by the City Attorney. Councilor Henderson seconded the motion. City Recorder Krager read the number and title of the ordinance. Ordinance No. 16-23—AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18.130 (USE CATEGORIES), 18.510 (RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS), 18.520 (COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS), 18.610 (TIGARD DOWNTOWN PLAN DISTRICT),AND 18.620 (TIGARD TRIANGLE PLAN DISTRICT) FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING AN OMNIBUS AMENDMENT PACKAGE TO CLASSIFY ANIMAL BOARDING AS A PERSONAL SERVICE USE CATEGORY, INCREASE HEIGHT LIMITS IN THE MAIN-CENTER SUB-AREA OF THE TIGARD DOWNTOWN PLAN DISTRICT,AND ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE WITHIN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE-(DCA2016-00003), as amended City Recorder Krager conducted a roll call vote. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 10 of 14 Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 16-23 as amended was adopted unanimously. 6. PRESENT POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION RELATING TO TRANSIENT LODGING Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance gave the staff report and said it is the beginning of a public discussion that began last year with the Budget Committee regarding potentially funding the Tigard Downtown Alliance (TDA) with a Transient Lodging Tax (TLT). There is currently a Washington County TLT but this would be a separate tax on Tigard hotels, motels and Airbnb stays. Mr. LaFrance gave some background on TLTs. The average rate within the state is 7.5 percent. There is a requirement that 70 percent of what is collected must be spent on tourism promotion or tourism-related facilities. The remaining 30 percent can be used for general governmental activities. The agenda packet for this item contained a lengthy presentation from the League of Oregon Cities conference. A sample ordinance was provided should council decide to move ahead on this in the future. Mr. LaFrance described tourism promotion as advertising,publicizing and distributing information for the purpose of bringing in tourists. It can be used for planning for tourism development, marketing and special festivals and events.The tax could also be used to fund an economic development division which would allow the city to expand its economic development reach. A tourism facility is defined as a convention center,a conference center or visitor information center but it can also include improved real property with a useful life of ten years or more that has a substantial purpose of supporting tourism or accommodating tourist activities. Tiff revenues can be spent on those items. There is also a definition of a tourist and that is a person who for business or pleasure,recreation,or participation in the arts,heritage,culture,and travels to the community in which that person is a resident of a different community. For the tourist trip the person must travel more than 50 miles from their community of residence,or they must have an overnight stay. Mr.LaFrance has begun outreach with a general manager at Embassy Suites. He said there are differing opinions on how TLT funds can be spent. There would need to be evidence that the Tigard Heritage Trail or Tigard Balloon Festival are actually attracting tourists. Mayor Cook asked for an example of an event at Embassy Suites that would attract tourists. Even if the funds helped pay for a performing arts center,he questioned whether people would meet the definition by traveling 50 miles to watch local theater. He noted that Seaside has a convention center and the TLT helped retire the existing debt. He asked if the Balloon Festival could be funded because the balloonists stay in Tigard motels. Councilor Goodhouse commented that Seaside is a tourist destination but Tigard is not. Councilor Woodard noted the potential for BMX biking events. He asked if street fairs qualify. Mr. LaFrance said if Tigard's event is promoted more than 50 miles away, the UT can be spent on it. Mayor Cook asked Mr.LaFrance to bring back a laundry list to help figure out what projects can go into the 70-30 percent. He said he would like to know where the city is already spending money that could be recouped and put back into the general fund. He asked if the tax could be used to add a TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 1, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 11 of 14 second baseball field to Dirksen Nature Park so that a Babe Ruth Baseball tournament could be held or if building a BMX track near the Tigard Heritage Trail could be covered. He asked if the city wanted to use the tax for a tourism-attracting project, such as a BMX trail, but could not afford to buy the property for ten years, can the TLT be collected and saved in a dedicated fund until then. Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance said he can develop a model to show how a Tigard TLT could be spent and bring it back to council for continued discussion,including input from the hotel/motel industry. 7. RECEIVE UPDATE ON WILLAMETTE WATER SUPPLY PROJECT INTAKE STRUCTURE ALLOCATION Public Works Director Rager, Lake Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership Project Director Koellermeier,Division Manager Goodrich and Dave Kraska from Tualatin Valley Water District. (TVWD) were present to give an update on this item. Mr. Rager said he briefed council on September 20, 2016,introducing this opportunity to purchase water intake capacity from TVWD. Council identified several questions for staff response at the September meeting and Mr. Koellermeier responded in a memo that was in the packet for this meeting. Staff recommendation is that it is a good idea for Tigard to invest in this intake facility. It is a one- time opportunity and the city can pay for it through SDCs. TVWD and the City of Hillsboro have both agreed to language in the agreement whereby if Tigard is either not able to use the intake structure or chooses not to, they will buy back and reimburse Tigard for its investment. Water Partnership Director Koellermeier described the 18-month effort seven jurisdictions spent on crafting a future agreement. The original concept of one agreement for seven agencies did not work as there are different timing needs and issues for each community. There will be four agreements and Tigard may potentially be a party in two of them. The City of Tualatin has opted out of the project. The City of Sherwood is still a partner. A key issue for Tigard was protecting its water rights and they will be protected as part of this agreement. Tigard will grow into needing this water; it is not needed now. However, staff recommends that now is the time to make the investment in this one-time offer. If Tigard chooses not to buy into the project the city will end up with water rights but no infrastructure to use it. SDCs would be used to pay for it so it does not necessitate a water rate increase. Councilor Woodard said water is a precious commodity and the city needs to be ready for future density and development. Council President Snider said it is a smart business and planning move. Councilor Henderson said it is important to keep communication open with the Willamette River Water Coalition and he hoped that meetings are at least held biannually. Mayor Cook discussed the SDC cost. Currently it is about$8,000 and it says it might go up to $8,500. Every time the city raises SDCs it ruffles feathers. Methodology studies can be challenged. Council President Snider said ideally it would be paid for by those who will use the water and that is a ways off. It is good news that we will not have to raise customer rates but increasing SDCs is not so simple. Utility Manager Goodrich said 976 homes with a 5/8-in meter would pay for the $9.5 million cost. After the master planning effort is adopted, staff would move forward with an SDC TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 12 of 14 update. He said from the 2010 experience with the Home Builders they know that water supply is a key issue and they are looking for a fairness doctrine and are not trying to avoid paying their fair share. Mayor Cook noted that water supply is the one issue that stopped Wilsonville from building 15-20 years ago. Councilor Goodhouse said it is a smart decision to invest in water as it is a commodity there will be less of in the future. In response to a question from Mayor Cook about whether the city would need to bond in order to pay the $10 million now,before the houses are built. Utility Manager Goodrich said staff looked out to the year 2021 with River Terrace. With expanding the intake structure most costs are anticipated to occur near the end of the project. Mr. Goodrich said $639,000 would be due by the end of Fiscal Year 2017 which is the buy-in for the existing structure. He anticipated that in 2020 and 2021 there would be some $2 and $3 million payments due but at the same time there will be revenue coming in from additional housing units being built in the city and staff has been assured that 1300 units are coming to River Terrace. King City is also looking at expanding their urban growth boundary and perhaps adding 1300 units in that expansion which would be served by this water also. Council President Snider asked if this can be paid for without raising the SDC cost and Mr. Goodrich said that was correct. Councilor Henderson asked about next steps. Mr. Koellermeier said TVWD will deliver a letter of offer to purchase which will develop into the purchase and sale agreement to be negotiated by the parties. This will come before council in December or January. Council consensus was for staff to move ahead. 8. CONSIDER RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY FINDINGS REGARDING VACATION OF A PUBLIC SLOPE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS IN RIVER TERRACE Public Works Director Rager presented this housekeeping item at Washington County's request. Their findings indicate that previous slope and drainage easements are not needed in some River Terrace lots. This resolution vacates and removes them so they are not an encumbrance on the owners' properties. City concurrence with Washington County's findings is required by Oregon state statutes. Council President Snider moved for adoption of Resolution No. 16-46. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. City Recorder Krager read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 16-46-A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY FINDINGS REGARDING VACATION OF PUBLIC SLOPE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS IN RIVER TERRACE NORTHWEST AND POLYGON AT WEST RIVER TERRACE Mayor Cook asked if there was any further discussion. There being none he conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 13 of 14 Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider V Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook V 9. NON AGENDA ITEMS None. 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION None held. 11. ADJOURNMENT A 9:39 p.m. Councilor Woodard motioned for adjournment. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse V Councilor Henderson V Council President Snider V Councilor Woodard V Mayor Cook ✓ Carol A. Krager, City Recorder Attest: John L. Cook,Mayor Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 1, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 14 of 14 III City of Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes TIGARD November 22, 2016 STUDY SESSION CITY ATTORNEY INTERVIEWS—6:00 p.m. Council Present: Mayor Cook, Councilor Woodard, Councilor Henderson,Council President Snider and Councilor Goodhouse Staff Present: Senior Management Analyst Wyatt and Assistant City Manager Newton Council interviewed the firms of Beery Elsner&Hammond,LLP;and Jordan Ramis 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. At 7: 39 p.m. Mayor Cook called the City Council and Local Contract Review Board meeting to order. B. City Recorder Krager called the roll. Present Absent Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ C. Mayor Cook asked everyone to stand and join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items - None 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication—None. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 22, 2016 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 10 B. Tigard High School Student Envoy—Associated Student Body Activities Director Taylor Smith gave a report to the Tigard City Council on THS events. The homecoming parade and dance were held in October with over 800 students attending the dance.A Halloween trick or treating event was held for community families and received good attendance. Over 70 veterans came to the annual veterans'breakfast and assembly. The Tigerette dance team is undefeated this fall and has championship contests this weekend.The color guard and band have also had a successful season and the boys cross country team qualified for State. Open Table was held featuring food from several different countries and encouraging understanding of other cultures. The football team will play Central Catholic in the semi- finals on November 25. El C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce CEO Debi Mollahan updated council on chamber events.The Leadership Tigard November class focused on human needs and connected with agencies serving the community such as Community Partners for Affordable Housing (CPAH), Good Neighbor Center,and St.Anthony's severe weather shelter.The Leadership Tigard group is considering what they wish to do for their community project. Next month will feature Business and Economy Day and Economic Development Manager Purdy will help lead that session. The Tigard Downtown Alliance is hosting the annual tree lighting event on December 2. She thanked the city for the new lights. She noted for the community that this year's assembly area to view the lighting will be in the Rite Aid parking lot. El D. Citizen Communication—Brian Borello, 5660 N. Greeley Avenue,Portland,OR 97271, said he is grateful and proud to be the artist of the Main Street gateway sculptures and is hoping to get them presented in the best possible manner. He distributed copies of photos and email correspondence with staff regarding the appearance of the concrete bases and noted he has been asking for larger plantings which would hide the exposed concrete, particularly at the south-end sculpture. His original design was not followed. He said staff offered three solutions,allowing another growing season for the plants to reach their potential,adding mulch around the bases or painting the concrete bases black or brown. He • said none of these solutions is adequate to him and he would like to see more plantings. Council President Snider asked for clarification that the bases are still necessary;it is the aesthetics that need to be addressed. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council) A. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: • October 18,2016 • October 25,2016 B. PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 26,2016 AS SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 22, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 10 Councilor Woodard moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ 4. DISCUSSION ON THE COUNCIL GOAL TO PROVIDE RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR TIGARD RESIDENTS le Senior Management Analyst Wyatt gave the staff report for this follow-up to a council discussion in August. He noted that council heard at the November 15 workshop meeting the importance of a recreation program for livability in Tigard. A council goal has been to explore potential partnerships. He responded to six key topics that were requested by council at the August 16 meeting. 1. Status of Wilsonville ballot measure for a proposed aquatics and recreation center. Wilsonville's proposed measure failed in the November 8,2016 election. Their staff reported that they do not envision this going back to a vote. Mayor Cook said the City of Gresham's measure also failed. 2. Explore Partnership Opportunities with the City of Tualatin A discussion was held regarding the proposed Atfalati Recreation District which was defeated on the ballot in 2000. In 2008 Tualatin voters rejected a$49.4 million parks bond. Tualatin is willing to explore potential partnerships including revisiting the parks district or more informal programs with our parks and recreation staff. 3. Provide the Latest Information on Sherwood and the YMCA Sherwood indicated that 2017 is their decision point on an operator. They are willing to consider some sort of partnership with Tigard. 4. Examine partnerships with For-profit Providers The City of Tigard's recreation staff is currently having discussions with Skyhawks Soccer and Mad Science. The for-profit partnerships are scheduled to be looked at in year two or three of the recreation program. There has been talk about for-profit providers for a community recreation center such as the Kroc Center in Salem. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 22, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 3 of 10 5. How much do residents pay for recreation in Tigard? A Tigard household pays approximately$58 per year in property tax that goes towards the city's parks and recreation budget. The parks and rec fee is$45 a year so it is around$100 annually. Some funding is expected to increase as the city develops more of a recreation program. This brings up a question about what residents would save if Tigard joined THPRD. 6. Explore a Recreation Provider Task Force. Council heard from PRAB and suggested looking at a Recreation Advisory Board. Council wants to avoid overlap. Council President Snider asked if we could adjust what PRAB does to include this. Mayor Cook said council does not take lightly adding another committee. They require not only staff hours but council liaison time. He said the Bike/Pedestrian Sub-committee of the Transportation Advisory Committee is a great example of a successful and passionate sub- committee. Councilor Woodard noted that PRAB is also focused on things like parks and heritage trees, for example,but the necessary expertise for a recreation board probably exists right now on the PRAB. He said,"They've earned a shot at this." He agreed with the mayor on sub-committees and said an expert could come in and assist the group. Council President Snider urged the city to continue combining things with the City of Tualatin. He said he did not think there needed to be a special district but if so;it might be easier with two communities rather than one. Councilor Goodhouse agreed with keeping a focus on partnering with Tualatin because we already share a border,trails and the school district,and are considering joining them to become a Blue Zone community. Mayor Cook commented on the Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District and said THPRD is an exceptional model but is expensive. One aspect that people do not realize is that their members pay $1.62 in taxes where Tigard residents are paying.45 cents. He likes that staff is meeting with them and doing their due diligence. He said he is favorable to building partnerships with Sherwood, Tualatin and the Tigard-Tualatin School District to use empty school buildings and fields during the summer months. Council President Snider reminded everyone that a special service district for aquatics is already in place and there would be legal issues since there cannot be another district doing the same thing. He noted that if the city wants to add pools to a recreation center someday,this will need to be considered. Councilor Goodhouse suggested taking baby steps and exploring partnerships rather than asking voters now to take on something big. He said that may be a plan for ten years from now. He said if the decision is made to partner with Tualatin we should consider the possibility of sharing a person to leverage our parks or joint recreation programs. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 22, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 4 of 10 Mayor Cook said the city needs to make sure the MIG Recreation Study five-year plan is followed. Councilor Woodard said this is a perfect time (second year) to start a recreation advisory committee. He agreed that if PRAB takes this on they should attend the Budget Committee hearings. Senior Management Analyst Wyatt said he heard that council wants to continue conversations about engagement with other communities and also to create a PRAB Sub-committee on Recreation. 5. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD DISCUSSION OF UPCOMING CONTRACTS Senior Management Analyst Barrett updated the LCRB on three upcoming contracts for banking services,prosecutorial attorney services and virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI). LCRB direction was sought on any additional information they would like to see in preparation for awarding the contracts. Senior Management Analyst Barrett said staff is asking the LCRB for permission to allow the use of the City of Salem's Request for Proposals (RFP) and subsequent contract and approval of new banking services with US Bank.The contract is for one year with four one-year extensions. The current banking services contract is with US Bank and the city has been pleased with their service. The contract includes general checking,merchant services and lock box services. Council President Snider asked if there was something like the CIS (City/County Insurance Services) for banking contracts and said if there was it would probably save cities money. Mr. Barrett said there was only one response to an RFP for the city prosecutorial attorney. Larry J. Blake has been the city's prosecutor for many years and staff recommends awarding this contract to him. Mayor Cook clarified that the proposed fees are the same as the current fees. IlEiIT Manager Nolop spoke to council about the Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) purchase. He gave some background and said the city's IT Department was tasked with replacing more than 250 computers that are five years old or older. A budget of$249,000 was added to the IT budget.He said the physical desktop replacement model is problematic with current IT staffing levels and they looked at the best way to utilize the budget. Desktop computer maintenance and over 6,109 types and versions of software require several fulltime staff to maintain. Mr. Nolop said VDI puts the computer power in the data center and is delivered to the end users through the network to any device with a network connection regardless of physical location. Instead of buying 250 computers VDI could handle the licensing of 400 devices,allowing almost a complete refresh of the city's system. Council President Snider asked how much each box costs and what the reliability is and Mr. Nolop said the boxes cost$150 up to$350 and said the technology is reemerging. Ten years ago the technology was new but now more and more government agencies are going to this system. He said all the current servers are virtual and the city has been virtualizing data services for several years. Councilor Henderson asked if the current computer equipment will be resold. IT Manager Nolop said they will not be replaced until they burn out. He said they will be kept running. He noted that council's computers at the dais are nine years old but may run for another nine. Council President TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 22, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 5 of 10 Snider requested that they be replaced by then.He said this system works well when everything is normal in the operations but wanted to know what Mr. Nolop was planning when the city is full of dummy terminals and a contractor cuts through fiber by mistake,or the power to the server room dies. IT Manager Nolop said that would be dealt with through a disaster recovery program. In response to a question from Council President Snider,Mr.Nolop said work is being done on this. Councilor Goodhouse asked if time or money would be saved if an IT staff person does not have to work on an individual computer and can take care of things centrally. Mr. Nolop said it will reduce staff time not to be hardware specific. Updates can be distributed to everyone at the same time and the numerous versions of software can be standardized. Senior Management Analyst Barrett said $249,000 is in the budget and the quote is $289,000 but if purchased by the end of December there will be a$49,000 discount. Council agreed that all three contracts may go on a future consent agenda. 6. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON DEFINING THE CITY'S ROLE IN HOMELESSNESS Senior Management Analyst Wyatt led a discussion with council on defining the City of Tigard's role in addressing homelessness.At the September 20 council meeting,staff presented information on resources currently being devoted to homelessness and opportunities for council to consider when defining the city's role. Additional information was requested by council and Mr.Wyatt addressed this with a PowerPoint. Highlights include: • Create a Task Force—how to make this not just another committee but a substantive group that will meet for two months and bring forth short and long term recommendations for actions that are within the council's scope of authority to implement and help the council develop their role in addressing homelessness.There are many people who want to participate on this task force. • Research City of Eugene's approach—Officers Orth and Wakem spent a day in Eugene studying their approach. Information on their Community Outreach Team is included in the packet for this meeting.If Tigard was to lose Officers Wakem and Orth there should be a structure in place so staff continuing efforts with the homeless would know how to carry it forward. • Provide a Post Office Box—Through discussions with Just Compassion it was learned that having a post office box address is helpful to homeless individuals.The cost for a box at the downtown Tigard Post Office would be only$90-100 annually and Just Compassion has asked if the city is interested in funding this. • Developing the Council Goal on Homelessness—Councilor Woodard mentioned that addressing homelessness should remain a council priority. Council will hold their Goal Setting meeting on December 15. Staff can provide information needed for this discussion. Senior Management Analyst Wyatt said the Tigard-Tualatin School District is talking about bringing the"Family Promise"program to the Tigard community. Family Promise is non-profit homeless shelter program for families with children, supported by volunteers and faith communities who TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 22, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 6 of 10 promise to help families return to a home of their own. Cities are required to have a day center in order to participate in the program. Mr.Wyatt highlighted recommendations from the quarterly Community Roundtable. They included: 1. Using vacant commercial buildings for temporary shelters 2. Making post office boxes available 3. Cooperating with other cities. 4. Permitting small dwellings to be built 5. Changing zoning to support affordable housing 6. Paying overtime for police,$55 an hour in overtime,as a short-term option,or hiring a full- or part-time person. Officer Orth said there is a backlog in some of their proactive work with Tigard's homeless population. Council asked questions about the mail box logistics and whether a government agency might prevent many people from getting their benefits and other mail sent to the same address. Mr. Wyatt said he will discuss these details with Just Compassion. Councilor Woodard noted that the city needs to be proactive and the goal should be defined. He said there are increased camps and panhandling activities. He liked the idea of a task force but there is a need to develop a goal. He asked where a designated area for homeless people would be and how it could be subsidized.He sees the need as task force coordination,providing a post office box, and providing van service to go out and talk with those needing assistance. Council President Snider said he supported the task force and the idea of providing a mailbox and suggested contacting benefit agencies in advance so they are not alarmed by numerous people using the same address. He said the city needs help and does not have expertise in this area. He proposed that a medium-to long-range solution would be for the Tigard Police Department to hire a part- time social worker. This would provide the right level of skill and is efficient because we could afford a social worker for what is now being paid for police overtime. Councilor Goodhouse asked how long the task force would be active and Mr.Wyatt proposed a two-month timeframe for the task force to develop recommendations and then present them to council in February or March. Mayor Cook suggested a"deep roster" on the task force and said while he liked the shorter timeline he did not think early January 4 was a good kickoff date. Council President Snider requested that a TVF&R representative be included on the task force. Councilor Henderson said,'We are in year eight of a ten-year plan to end homelessness in Washington County. It increases between six and ten percent each year. We spent most of our time thinking about maintenance of the homeless and not ending homelessness. The problem is lack of homes."He said mental and physical health issues as well as other kinds of tragedies are involved and need to be considered. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 22, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 7 of 10 Mr. Wyatt said there is an amazing number of people wanting to participate on the task force. Mayor Cook said Tigard is not Salt Lake,Eugene or Portland and does not have the staff or the dollars. He asked that staff and the task force look at what cities with a population of 50,000 or less do without having money in their budget. He added that Tigard has eight percent of Washington County's population and eight percent of the county's homeless and this has been the status quo. Councilor Woodard said he would like to know if the Max orange line impacted safety in Milwaukie when it came on line and asked staff to get statistics from their police department. He said his biggest concern about high capacity transit is safety and wondered how many more transients will come to Tigard on transit. In response to a question from Councilor Woodard on the commitment required for participating in Family Promise,Mr.Wyatt said it is for homeless families and TTSD is interested in housing it within Tigard or Tualatin. There would be a headquarters and he noted church members commit to take in homeless families. 7. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF TWO UTILITY BILLING PAYMENT PLANS Utility Billing Supervisor Blecker gave the staff report on this agenda item. He said council was being asked to approve one payment plan and authorize staff to negotiate a payment plan with a second customer. In mid-October staff discovered two sewer-only accounts in arrears in excess of $10,000. The Tigard Municipal Code requires council approval of payment plans above$10,000. Mr. Blecker said he contacted a customer with a$45,000 sewer account in arrears and he was willing to participate in a payment plan by adding$5,000 when paying his current sewer bill monthly until the amount is paid off. Mayor Cook asked,"If$10,000 is the litmus test,how does anyone get to$44,000?" He asked what the average sewer only monthly bill is and Mr. Blecker said the owner has two multi-family residential buildings and his average bill is $5,400.The current owner purchased the property last year. Prior to that the account had been turned over to the city's former collection agency,which was unable to locate the old owner.When staff tracked down the new owner they found he was unaware of the previous bill. Mayor Cook said he was glad to hear the collection agency described as "former." Council President Snider asked why,if they collected the money from their renters,would they need a payment plan. He asked who took the money the former owner collected from their renters for utilities. He said most multi-family residential building owners contract out billing to a third-party service and someone should have noticed. Mr.Blecker said the customer asked if the city would accept$30,000 instead of$45,000 and he would not approve that.He said the customer was very forthcoming and admitted he did not realize what had happened before he purchased the building. He has already paid$10,000 towards the bill in arrears. Councilor Woodard asked if this scenario has occurred before. Mr. Blecker said not that he knew of. Council President Snider asked if the TMC allows a lien to be placed on a property. Mr.Blecker said the code allows a lien but Washington County is not in favor of supporting any tax liens. City Attorney Rihala clarified that utility billing debts are debts against a person and not property so you cannot lien the property. Council President Snider said we should change the code. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — November 22, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 8 of 10 Mayor Cook concurred with Mr. Blecker and said he would rather have$45,000 over time instead of $30,000 at one time but suggested attorneys prepare a strong promissory note to go along with the agreement. Mr. Blecker said he had one prepared to send to the city attorney for approval. Councilor Woodard moved to approve the payment plan for Account#014915-000,multi-family dwelling, for$44,000. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Council President Snider said he did not like the level of due diligence in this matter. Mayor Cook said he agrees that the money went somewhere but often owners do not follow the financials and the property management company should have seen this as they budget and compare expenses. He asked Mr. Blecker about the additional$5,000 paid and he said the total amount is $31,564. Mayor Cook asked Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance if the city charges interest. Mr. LaFrance said he did not recall charging interest and there have been very few accounts where the amount due has reached this level. Councilor Goodhouse asked,"If there are no penalties or charges,what is keeping someone from not paying their bill and using it as a cheap loan." Mr.LaFrance said there are late fees and are included in the amount owed. These are a fixed fee adopted in the fees and charges schedule.Mayor Cook suggested a future discussion and when staff sees an amount owed nearing$10,000 they need to get involved right away. Mr.Blecker said staff is looking into things they can do and has also hired a new collection agency. Mayor Cook conducted a vote on the first motion. Yes No Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Council President Snider moved for approval of a payment plan for Account No. #014915-000, multi-family dwelling,for$31,564 with a payment of at least$5,000 per month.Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion and Mayor Cook conducted a vote. Yes No Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ The motion passed unanimously. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—November 22, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 9 of 10 Mr. Blecker said the owner of Account#0141099-002 lives in San Francisco and is out of the country until February.The people Mr. Blecker contacted are reluctant to act on the owner's behalf. He said the amount of$22,000 is eleven month's worth of charges yet they are paying the current monthly amount. Council President Snider asked if the sewer can be shut off and Mr. Blecker said the Public Works Department said they were hesitant to dig up a sewer line and cap it. Council President Snider asked for the payment history and Mr. Blecker said they may be a new owner. Until he can talk to the property owner he does not know why the former balance for this commercial property was not paid. Mr. LaFrance said if council wants to wait until staff has caught up with the owner,talked to them and come up with a payment plan for approval, staff can return for approval at a future date. Or,he said,council could delegate authority to staff with the construct that they take the amount in arrears and create a payment plan that will take care of it within a twelve-month period. Mr. Blecker said when the payments started coming in on time his research showed that they have a new management company so his impression is that this owner may be new but this in unverified. Councilor Goodhouse asked if council could move ahead with a payment plan tonight and tack it onto the next bill. City Attorney Rihala said the issue with that is that a payment plan is a voluntary agreement and the city cannot impose a voluntary agreement. Councilor Woodard said he was in favor of staff following up on this and coming up with a payment plan. 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS None. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION None. 10. ADJOURNMENT At 9:39 p.m. Council President Snider motioned for adjournment. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse I Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Carol A. Krager,City Recorder Attest: John L. Cook,Mayor Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —November 22, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 10 of 10 .11L ,, City of Tigard = Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes TIGARD December 13, 2016 STUDY SESSION Council Present: Councilor Goodhouse,Councilor Henderson,Council President Snider,Councilor Woodard and Mayor Cook Staff Present: Assistant City Manager Newton,City Manager Wine,Risk Manager Curran,City Attorney Rihala and Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne A. City Council went into executive session for legal consultation with counsel concerning rights and duties regarding litigation or litigation likely to be filed. B. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. At 7:36 p.m. Mayor Cook called the City Council meeting to order. B. Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne called the roll. Name Present Absent Councilor Goodhouse Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook C. Mayor Cook asked the audience to stand for the pledge of allegiance. D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items—There was none. 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication—None. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 1 of 10 B. Tigard High School Student Envoy Associated Student Body President Lauren Brown talked about the football team making it to the finals and barely loosing,the schools giving back/canned food drive for Tigard Caring Project and the fall play Much Ado About Nothing. She said the varsity dance team placed first in three categories,the upcoming talent show would be at the end of the week, the business club was running a business tree to help those in need and winter sports would be starting soon. C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce -None. D. Citizen Communication Jim Long, 10730 SW 72nd Ave.,Tigard,OR 97223,chair of the Washington County Volunteer Committee asked council if they would encourage their group to have meetings in the Tigard area and talked about seismic updates being needed and asked council to look into this. Neil Brown, 13853 SW Boxelder Street,Tigard,OR 97223,said he is feeling healthier and getting stronger every day,talked about army beating navy in the recent football game,said he has a passion for parks and had helped the city buy Bull Mountain Park and Bagan Park and had found property for sale off of Gaarde Street that he believes is a good location for a city park. He talked about the asking price and passed a map of the area out. Peter Dillenburber, 1500 NE Irving St.,Portland, OR 97232,passed out information to council regarding the property for sale that Mr.Brown discussed. Councilor Woodard asked if this information had gone in front of PRAB. Mr.Brown came back to the podium and explained that it had. Mayor Cook explained any further discussion would need to be discussed in executive session. 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD CONTRACT AWARD—PROSECUTING ATTORNEY B. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD CONTRACT AWARD—BANKING SERVICES C. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD CONTRACT AWARD—VIRTUAL DESKTOP INFRASTRUCTURE (VDI) TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 2 of 10 D. RECEVE AND FILE: 1. Council Calendar 2. Council Tentative Agenda for Future Meeting Topics E. RECEIVE AND FILE—CANVASS OF VOTES FOR NOVEMBER 8,2016 ELECTION Mayor Cook called for a motion to adopt the consent agenda. Council President Snider motioned to approve the consent agenda and Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse �l Councilor Henderson Council President Snider \I Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook Mayor Cook announced that the consent agenda passed unanimously. 4. APPOINT BUDGET COMMIIIEE MEMBERS Confidential Executive Assistant Lutz discussed staff's recommendation for Budget Committee member appointments. Councilor Henderson motioned to approve Resolution No. 16-49 and Councilor Goodhouse seconded. A RESOLUTION APPOINTING STEPHANIE VEAL, RAJENDRA PATEL AND TOM SCHWEIZER TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING WILLIAM LUDWIG AS AN ALTERNATE MEMBER Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse Councilor Henderson Council President Snider \I Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 10 5. APPOINT PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS Assistant Community Development Director McGuire discussed staff's recommendation for Planning Commission member appointments. Councilor Goodhouse motioned to approve Resolution No. 16-50 and Council President Snider seconded. A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING BRIAN K. FEENEY AND APPOINTING AARON K. FAHR AS VOTING MEMBERS OF THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AND APPOINTING NATHAN C.JACKSON AS AN ALTERNATE,NON-VOTING MEMBER Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse Ai Councilor Henderson A/ Council President Snider -V Councilor Woodard Al Mayor Cook 4 Mr.Jackson was present and Mayor Cook presented him with a Tigard City pin and thanked him for volunteering. 6. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING—TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN Senior Planner Shanks gave the staff report,and consultant Elaine Howard was present. Ms. Shanks explained the potentials and problems associated with the Tigard Triangle area. She said the Tigard Triangle can overcome the many problems it has by funding projects that stimulate growth and align with the city's vision. Ms. Shanks said that urban renewal is used throughout Oregon in revitalized areas that are not living up to their potential. She explained that currently the area contains many big-box stores and office buildings that are more suburban in nature,but that the vision of the Tigard Triangle is for it to be a mixed-use oriented district and that the vision in this area is to be more walkable and connected;creating more jobs and housing. She explained urban renewal can help fix infrastructure deficiencies and bring in private development. Elaine Howard talked about how urban renewal works at the time an urban renewal area is adopted and how the tax assessor calculates the value for the frozen base;explaining it is the total assessed value of all real,personal,manufactured and utility assessments in the area. She said the frozen base doesn't mean an increases in property value or in taxes,but that the existing taxing district continues TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES— December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 4 of 10 to get their fair share of taxes off of that assessed value of the property at the time urban renewal is adopted. She said the goal for urban renewal is there is more growth in the area than otherwise would have been if urban renewal wasn't there. Ms. Shanks said the reason staff recommends the Tigard Triangle for an Urban Renewal District is because it meets the requirement for being a blighted area,brings new businesses into the Triangle creating an increase to Tigard's tax base,improves Tigard's walkability goal and supports alternate travel modes. Ms. Shanks discussed the city's new web page regarding urban renewal where people can go to learn more. She gave an overview of the discussions that had taken place with the Citizen Advisory Council,Technical Advisory Committee,Planning Commission,TVF&R and the public outreach staff had done. She said the Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the plan and suggested council consider Jim Long's request to expand the boundary. Ms. Shanks explained that the Citizen Advisory Council had also heard Mr. Long's request,and that after speaking with Mr. Long and careful consideration,they had rejected Mr. Long's request. Ms. Shanks explained the plan proposes a maximum indebtedness of$188 million and would take thirty-five years to implement. Councilor Henderson asked if there would be a reduction in the overall dollar amount if it didn't take the full thirty-five years to implement and Ms. Shanks responded it would. Ms. Shanks continued to discuss the types of projects,existing conditions,possibilities for improvement,transportation improvements,development assistance and site analysis of what will work with the market. Council President Snider asked staff for confirmation that staff was not recommending including Mr. Long's request and Ms. Shanks confirmed that. Councilor Woodard asked about TVF&R's concerns and how the city was able to reach a compromise with TVR&R. Ms. Shanks explained staff made language changes that TVF&R is comfortable with. Public Comment: Daniel Heffernan,2525 NE Halsey,Portland,OR 97232,with Specht Development said they fully support staff's proposal as well as the Planning Commission and Citizen Advisory Council's recommendation and looks forward to working with the city if they approve the plan. Carine Arendes,9524 SW North Dakota St,Tigard,OR 97223, supports Urban Renewal in the Tigard Triangle for three reasons: • Clear and transparent way for the city to be involved in property development. • Urban Renewal plans are great action plans. • Urban Renewal provides a dedicated source of revenue generated money that gets spent back into the area. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 5 of 10 Jim Long, 10737 SW 72nd Ave,Tigard,OR 97223,said he is worried about safety on SW 72°d Ave between Pacific Highway and the big-box stores. He discussed letters that were submitted to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board regarding bringing a park into the area and thought this would be a good way to get a park. He referenced the petition that included two-hundred signatures of people who want a park in the Tigard Triangle area. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. Council President Snider asked about the suggestion from the CPO and Mr.Long regarding the request to extend the Tigard Triangle boundary and include a park. He also asked if due to the property not currently being within the Tigard Triangle area if the city was prohibited from doing so without an amendment to include it. Staff replied yes. Councilor Woodard asked what the cost would be to expand the boundary as requested and if it would hurt the city in anyway. Ms.Howard said that if council wanted to amend the plan tonight to include the parcel of land,it could be done and the process as it is could go on. She explained that technically all that was involved would be extra work and would cost approximately a couple thousand dollars. Councilor Woodard said he sees this as an opportunity to serve a large number of people in the community and would bring a lot of good will into the Triangle and feels that people will contribute because of that. He understands including the additional property into the Triangle is not a tax increment generator,but feels it would still be a big win for the city and is a good idea. Mayor Cook said he liked some of Mr. Long's comments and feels it is a creative way of problem solving,but doesn't feel the Tigard Triangle is the appropriate location. Councilor Goodhouse agreed with Mayor Cook. Council President Snider said even if it was included in the plan,it wasn't guaranteed to be a park and said he will yield to the Citizen Advisory Council's recommendations and would need a compelling reason to disagree with recommendations. He asked why the Citizen Advisory Council didn't include it in their recommendation. Ms. Shanks explained the Citizen Advisory Council had a thoughtful discussion about this, but the group expressed concerns that it wasn't keeping with the goals and objectives of the plan and doesn't belong in the area. She said they felt the properties on the Northside completed both sides of the streets. They also questioned the feasibility and the cost to change everything. Councilor Goodhouse said his recollection of the CAC meeting was that their main focus was within the Triangle. Council President Snider asked if council could expand the boundary later without a public vote. Ms. Howard said council could expand within one percent without a substantial amendment that would require a vote. Ms. Shanks said that the one percent is equal to approximately five acres and TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 6 of 10 Mr. Long's suggested property inclusion is two acres and therefore would not require a public vote. Councilor Woodard asked if the Citizen Advisory Council had a representative from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on it. Ms. Shanks replied they did not and that PRAB did not send anyone to the table. Ms. Howard explained that they use to be able to use imminent domain from private property for private use and now that isn't allowed by Oregon State Law. She said the city may take private property for public use. Councilor Woodard said he still believes this is a good area for a park, but that he isn't sure if this is the right tool to do that with. He agrees that in terms of priorities,the land may sit vacant before a park could be developed. He said it was unfortunate that no one from PRAB was part of the Citizen Advisory Council discussion on this topic. Council President Snider motioned to approve Ordinance No. 16-24 and Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne read the number and title of the ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 16-24,AN ORDINANCE MAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS RELATING TO AND APPROVING THE TIGARD TRIANGLE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE PUBLISHED Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne conducted the roll call vote. Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse Councilor Henderson 4 Council President Snider Councilor Woodard Mayor Cook Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 16-24 passed unanimously. Ms. Shanks said staff was also requesting council's approval for staff to prepare the ballot title. Council President Snider amended the last motion to include directing staff to prepare the ballot title and Councilor Woodard seconded. Councilor Goodhouse said he would like to see multiple renditions of the ballot title brought forward and council agreed. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES —December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 7 of 10 Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Councilor Woodard aJ Mayor Cook �l Mayor Cook announced the motion to amend passed unanimously. 7. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly gave the staff report and presentation. Mr. Farrelly explained that the City Center Urban Renewal Plan was approved by voters in 2006 and included street and street scape improvements,public spaces and parks,public facilities,planning and development assistance and property acquisition and disposition. He said there are underdeveloped properties that were not currently living up to their potential and talked about the successes that have occurred since the plan was approved in 2006. Mr. Farrelly explained the amendment was needed because the current plan did not meet the approved maximum indebtedness of$22 million within the plan duration,the downturn during the recent recession,and said the city will be unable to complete Urban Renewal Plan projects. Mr. Farrelly discussed the projects that would not be completed due to lack of funding if the plan was not amended. Ms. Howard explained the plan was originally written with tax increment projections for 2016 of between$800,000 and$900,000,and that in reality and in part due to the unpredicted recession,the tax increments are between$300,000 and$400,000. She said if the city only added additional acreage to the plan area,the city would still not meet the projected maximum indebtedness. She discussed the limitations and what State Statute allows and that the amendment will still only project an increase to capacity of$19.1 million. Mr. Farrelly said the original size of the plan was 191 acres and that staff is proposing to add an additional thirty-seven acres for a total of 228 acres,which will include seven additional lots. He said they are limited to twenty percent of the original acreage limitation. Mr. Farrelly said the amendment had been reviewed by the City Center Development Agency,City Center Advisory Commission,Citizen Advisory Council,Transportation Advisory Committee and that staff went out for public review and held a community open house. He said the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission approved staff's recommendation to forward the plan to city council. Carine Arendes,9524 SW North Dakota St,Tigard,OR 97223, said she was speaking as the chair of the City Center Advisory Commission and said they voted unanimously to support this. Ms. Arendes gave background on how they came to support the plan and said they did have some concerns because of the way the plan has been implemented and are worried that not all projects would be implemented. She said one of the concluding recommendations was to think about TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 8 of 10 modifying and expanding the district. She said they did approve unanimously to recommend approval for both the amendment and the proposed areas for expansion,and that this is a great way to be efficient with resources and time and would help keep the City Center in-sync with the Tigard Triangle. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. Council President Snider said they have discussed this topic many times and he is supportive of the ordinance. Councilor Woodard agreed with Council President Snider. Councilor Goodhouse motioned to approve Ordinance No. 16-24 and Councilor Woodard seconded. Council President Snider amended the motion to direct staff to draft the ballot title. Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne read the number and title of the ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 16-25,AN ORDINANCE MAKING CERTAIN DETERMINATIONS AND FINDINGS RELATING TO AND APPROVING THE TIGARD CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND DIRECTING THAT NOTICE OF APPROVAL BE PUBLISHED AND DIRECTING STAFF TO DRAFT THE BALLOT TITLE Deputy City Recorder Burgoyne conducted the roll call vote. Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse 4 Councilor Henderson 4 Council President Snider 4 Councilor Woodard 4 Mayor Cook 4 Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 16-25 passed unanimously. 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS -None. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION -None. 10. ADJOURNMENT At 9:03 p.m. Councilor Woodard motioned to adjourn the meeting and Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Motion passed by unanimous vote. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES— December 13, 2016 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 9 of 10 Name Yes No Councilor Goodhouse Councilor Henderson Council President Snider Al Councilor Woodard -V Mayor Cook �l Kelly Burgoyne,Deputy City Recorder Attest John Cook,Mayor Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—December 13, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 10 of 10 AIS-2990 4. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/24/2017 Length (in minutes):60 Minutes • Agenda Title: TOPPING C-P TO R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE with PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Prepared For: Gary Pagenstecher,Community Development Submitted By: Gary Pagenstecher,Community Development Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting Public Hearing-Quasi Judicial -Main Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall Council adopt an ordinance approving the request to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map to change the Comprehensive Plan Designations and Zoning Districts from Professional Commercial,C-P,to Medium Density Residential,R-12,on a three-parcel property totaling 1.54 acres? In addition,if the Council approves the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map amendment, shall the Council approve by motion the proposed Planned Development Concept Plan that shows 18 single-family detached homes with approximately 23 percent of the site in open space? STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends and the Planning Commission recommended (6-1 in favor) that Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment,as determined through the public hearing process. Staff further recommends and the Planning Commission recommended (5-2 in favor) that Council approve the Planned Development Concept Plan with clear direction to the applicant for preparation of a detailed plan,as determined through the public hearing process KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Project History In 2015,to facilitate the retention of R-12 zoning in the City,City Staff had requested approval of a zoning "swap" from C-P to R-12 on the subject property and from R-12 to C-G on another property of roughly the same size located on Pacific Hwy and School Street(CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007).The City Council approved the Pacific Hwy property rezone. However, the Council did not approve the rezone for the Spruce Street property. Instead,the Council directed the property owner to submit a quasi-judicial zone change application on their own if they wanted to continue to pursue the zone change on the subject property. For this application,Stafford Land Company is the applicant with support from the City,whose interest is increasing the supply of R-12 zoned land as intended in the City's prior zone change proposal. The affordable housing types allowed in the R-12 zone warrant the City's support because of the City's housing goal to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. The City is also in need of adequate commercially zoned land to support employment and economic development goals. However,the proposed rezone of the subject site from commercial professional to medium density residential is in a location where the existing commercial zone designation has resulted in underdeveloped land for the past ten years,since annexation in 2006. To ensure the neighborhood would have an opportunity to be constructively involved in how the property could include open space that it desires in the area,the applicant agreed to apply for a Planned Development concept plan review concurrently with the comprehensive plan/zone change. Staff has documented the quasi-judicial process and engaged the neighbors directly in the process to ensure information is available and notice received. Site Description The subject property (3 parcels totaling 1.54 acres) is developed with single-family residences and was annexed in 2006 (ZCA2006-00003),which changed the County zone from Commercial Office (OC) to the City's Professional Commercial(C-P) zone,the zone most closely implementing the County's plan map designation.The current zone does not allow residential use,which the market has identified as its highest best use as evidenced by the applicant's several pre-application conferences over past couple of years to change the commercial zone to residential. The subject site is located across Spruce Street from Fred Meyers and within 1,000 feet of Pacific Hwy. The locational characteristics of the subject property support the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change.The subject property fronts on a local street and a neighborhood street and is adjacent to property zoned R-4.5 and low-density unincorporated Washington County.The adjacent lower class streets and low density residential use zone makes the property more suitable for medium density residential use to form a transition from the General Commercial (C-G) zone to the south. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Deny the CPA/ZON map amendment(precludes motion on PD concept plan). Approve CPA/ZON map amendment;deny PD concept plan. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Supports Council's interest in affordable housing. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Initial hearing on January 12,2016 and a continued hearing on February 2,2016 Attachments Ordinance Exhibit A CPA/ZON Map Exhibit B PC Recommendation PD Concept Plan Topping PD Narrative Public Comments PC Minutes 11-21-16 CC Minutes 2-2-16 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 17- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2016-00002 AND ZONE CHANGE ZON 2016-00001 TO AMEND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS MAP FROM C-P TO R-12 ON TAX LOTS 1S136ACO2200, 15136ACO2400, 1S136ACO2500. WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires quasi-judicial amendments to be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure when a zone change application also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment, as governed by Section 18.390.050;and WHEREAS, on February 2, 2016, the Tigard City Council considered the City's application to facilitate preservation of R-12 zoned land (CPA2015-00005/ZON2015-00007) and approved the rezone of a parcel on Pacific Hwy from R-12 to C-G but directed staff to remand to the Planning Commission the proposed rezone of the subject property from C-P to R-12, subject to re-application by the property owner. WHEREAS, the applicant now requests an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map to rezone the subject property, as before, from C-P to R-12;and WHEREAS, on November 21, 2016, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing, which was noticed in accordance with city standards, and recommended approval of the proposed CPA2016-00002/ ZON2016-00001 by motion with a 6-1 vote in favor;and WHEREAS, on January 24, 2017, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing, which was noticed in accordance with city standards, to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA2016-00002/ZON 2016-00001, to hear public testimony,and apply applicable decision-making criteria;and WHEREAS, Council's decision to approve CPA 2016-00002/ZON 2016-00001 and adopt this ordinance was based on the findings and conclusions found in Exhibit "B" and the associated land use record which is incorporated herein by reference and is contained in land use file CPA2016-00002/ZON 2016-00001. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Tigard City Council amends the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map to change the Comprehensive Plan Designations and Zoning Districts as shown in Exhibit "A" SECTION 2: Tigard City Council adopts the findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "B" in support of the Council's action and to be the legislative basis for this ordinance. ORDINANCE No. 17- Page 1 PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of ,2017. Carol Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2017. John L. Cook,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney ORDINANCE No. 17- Page 2 O A K S 1 Exhibit A VICINITY MAP i 10490 7218 10491 1 -- � �._..._..� 10500 10495 CPA2016-00002 7508r 7408 ...17350 7300 -----M.7"'-1 Z0N2016-00001 I 1052_,/ 10525 10530 PDR2016-00012 10525 Topping Comp Plan/Zone � ; Change and Planned 10555 I 7405 > Development Concept Plan a Q 10565 Review 7333 7311 7217 7203 '- 10560 �" 7411 _ _I "Z � 10595 � '--t j R-4.5 Q PINE ST i- u) t subject Site 7540r4065� 10650 7212 ~ '"�"" �. _.1 1 7330„ 7310 7212 72,1_01 10640 7130 10655 Q _.J - 10685 = 10�f] 7290 T ' = (11067. �[- —(f _s r.. 1a' ''0 10700 a . 10705 ` J '�{c..- . „ 7535 7515 7415 383 : r-- ` —ii ;r _ 7: 13 ' �.. U —_. f.�� SPRUCE IN 7510 10815 C-P to R-12 (1.54 acres) 10820 7302 10900 10855 } 10850 Approx.Scale 1 2.000-1 1n=167 n R-2J Q Map pnnted at 12:07 PM on 10-Jan-1710900 L -7- Inbmvlbn en m4 ae S Ct1",—melbnryNebNab Der000 M 10885 1OSSO 10900 ° DATA IS DERNED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES.THE CRY OF TIGARD MAKES NO WARRANTY REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE o+.. CONTENT,ACCURACY,TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN.THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS,OMISSIONS,OR INACCURACIES IN THE 1090 0 10915 INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED. 10910 .3 10900JEW c. or Ti atd e� 131825 SW Hall Blvd el JRatT� iO '��jR',j �Ps Ti503 8 9-4171OR 23 � a '- P' www.tigardor.gov TIGARD EXHIBIT B rat vised PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2016-00002 Zone Change (ZON) 2016-00001 Planned Development Review(PDR) 2016-00012 FILE TITLE: TOPPING C-P TO R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE with PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: Stafford Development Company,LLC. 485 S. State Street Lake Oswego,OR 97034 REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Commercial, C-P, to Medium Density Residential, R-12, and a Planned Development Review for a Concept Plan only on a three-parcel property totaling 1.54 acres. The proposed concept plan shows 18 single-family detached homes with approximately 23 percent of the site in open space, a portion of which is located at the corner of SW Spruce Street and SW 72nd Avenue. In 2015, to facilitate the retention of R-12 zoning in the City, City Staff had requested approval of a zoning "swap" from C-P to R-12 on the subject property and from R-12 to C-G on another property on Pacific Hwy and School Street (CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007). The City Council approved the Pacific Hwy property rezone. However, the Council did not approve the rezone for the subject property portion. The Council directed the property owner to submit a quasi-judicial zone change application on their own if they wanted to continue to pursue the zone change. LOCATION: 7303 SW Spruce St., 10705 SW 72nd Ave., 10735 SW 72nd Ave; TAX MAP/LOT#'s: 1S136ACO2200, 1S136ACO2400, 1S136ACO2500. COMP PLAN DESIGNATION/ ZONING DISTRICT: FROM:Professional Commercial(C-P) TO: Medium Density Residential(R-12) PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 1 OF 13 APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.380.030, and REVIEW 18.390.050; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2, 10; Statewide Planning Goals 1, CRITERIA: 2, 10; and Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 1, 7, and 12. SECTION II PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends to the Tigard City Council APPROVAL of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment. The Planning Commission further recommends to the Tigard City Council APPROVAL of the Planned Development Concept Plan with clear direction to the applicant for preparation of a detailed plan,as determined through the public hearing process. SECTION III BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History In 2015, to facilitate the retention of R-12 zoning in the City, City Staff had requested approval of a zoning "swap" from C-P to R-12 on the subject property and from R-12 to C-G on another property of roughly the same size located on Pacific Hwy and School Street (CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007). The City Council approved the Pacific Hwy property rezone. However, the Council did not approve the rezone for the Spruce Street property. Instead, the Council directed the property owner to submit a quasi-judicial zone change application on their own if they wanted to continue to pursue the zone change on the subject property. For this application, Stafford Land Company is the applicant, with support from the City whose interest is increasing the supply of R-12 zoned land, as intended in the City's prior zone change proposal. The affordable housing types allowed in the R-12 zone warrant the City's support because of the City's housing goal to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. To ensure the neighborhood would have the opportunity to be involved in how the property could be developed for residential use, the applicant agreed to apply for a Planned Development concept plan review concurrently with the comprehensive plan/zone change. Staff has documented the quasi-judicial process and engaged the neighbors directly in the process to ensure information is available and notice received. Site Description The subject property (3 parcels totaling 1.54 acres) is developed with single-family residences and was annexed in 2006 (ZCA2006-00003),which changed the County zone from Commercial Office (OC) to the City's Professional Commercial (C-P) zone, the zone most closely implementing the County's plan map designation. The current zone does not allow residential use, which the market has identified as its highest best use as evidenced by the applicant's several pre-application conferences over past couple of years to change the commercial zone to residential. The subject site is located across Spruce Street from Fred Meyers and within 1,000 feet of Pacific Hwy. The locational characteristics of the subject property support the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The subject property fronts on a local street and a neighborhood street and is adjacent to property zoned R-4.5 and low-density unincorporated Washington County. The adjacent lower class streets and low PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 2 OF 13 density residential use zone makes the property more suitable for medium density residential use to form a transition from the General Commercial (C-G) zone to the south. Proposal Description The applicant requests approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Commercial, C-P, to Medium Density Residential, R-12, and a Planned Development Review for a Concept Plan only on a three-parcel property totaling 1.54 acres. The proposed concept plan shows 18 single-family detached homes with approximately 23 percent of the site in open space, a portion of which is located at the corner of SW Spruce Street and SW 72nd Avenue. Decision Process The Commission will make a recommendation to Council on the Comprehensive Plan/Zone Change and Planned Development Concept Plan. The Council must first approve the Comprehensive Plan/Zone Change before consideration of the Concept Plan. Council's Approval of the Concept Plan must give the applicant clear direction for preparation of the Detailed Plan. The Detailed Plan will be by separate application and will be reviewed and decided by the Planning Commission. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS This section contains all of the applicable city, state and metro policies, provisions, and criteria that apply to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, zone change,and concept planned development review. 18.380 ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS Chapter 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map. A. 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: (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. FINDING: The proposed quasi-judicial amendment is being reviewed under the Type III procedure as set forth in this chapter. This procedure requires public hearings before both the Planning Commission and City Council. 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; Chapter 1: Citizen Involvement Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Policy 2 The City shall define and publicize an appropriate role for citizens in each phase of the land use planning process. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CI'T'Y COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE,3 OF 13 Policy 5 The opportunities for citizen involvement provided by the City shall be appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and shall involve a broad cross-section of the community. Citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions were given the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Several opportunities for participation are built into the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, including public hearing notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 18.390.050 of the Tigard Community Development Code. On October 18, 2016, public hearing notice of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings was sent to the interested parties list and all property owners within 500 feet of the subject parcels. On October 27, 2016 a notice was published in The Tigard Times. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the staff report to the Planning Commission could be viewed. On October 31,2016,the site was posted with a notice board. On October 17,2016,the proposal was posted on the City's web site. On November 14,2016 the staff report was made available on the city's website. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above,the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.1 Policies 2 and 5 are met. Chapter 2: Land Use Planning Goal 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative basis of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 1 The City's land use program shall establish a clear policy direction, comply with state and regional requirements, and serve its citizens' own interests. The goals and policies contained in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan provide the basis for the city's land use planning program.This policy is met. Policy 2 The City's land use regulations, related plans, and implementing actions shall be consistent with and implement its Comprehensive Plan. The City's development code,Title 18, has been found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This policy is met. Policy 3 The City shall coordinate the adoption, amendment, and implementation of its land use program with other potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. Potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies were given an opportunity to comment. Any comments that were received are addressed in Section VI: Outside Agency Comments.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." The Metro 2040 Growth Concept Map shows that Pacific Hwy, through Tigard, is designated as a "Corridor." The proposed rezone of the subject site from commercial professional to medium density PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 4 OF 13 residential would meet market demand for residential development where the existing commercial zone designation has resulted in underdeveloped land for the past ten years, since annexation in 2006. This policy is met. 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. 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 The rezoning of the subject property to medium-density residential would allow for a needed increase in the variety of housing options available to the citizens of Tigard. The proposed zone change would allow for smaller lot sizes, higher density, and more affordable housing options, promoting a greater level of financial stability among the citizens of Tigard.These policies are met. 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; B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services; ODOT's trip generation analysis for the subject site (ODOT Comment letter, dated December 2, 2015) showed a reduction of trips, from 220 PM trips under the current C-P zone to 43 PM trips under the proposed R-12 zone. Therefore, a determination of no significant adverse effect on the transportation system can be made and the Transportation Planning Rule compliance measures under OAR Section 660- 12-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments are not invoked. Additional public services such as stormwater, water, and sanitary sewer will connect to existing infrastructure and it is not anticipated that the proposed zone change from C-P to R-12 will result in additional demands on public services. These policies are 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; 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 proposed rezoning satisfies a need for property zoned R-12. In 2013 the City Council adopted a Housing Strategies report prepared by Angelo Planning Group and Johnson & Reid in support of the PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 5 OF 13 Periodic Review update to Goal 10, Housing. This report illustrated that at that time the city had nearly twice as much buildable land in areas zoned R-7 (72.1 net buildable acres) than in areas zoned R-12 (36.7 net buildable acres). The report analyzed the city's current and future housing needs, which included the following conclusion: "In general,there is a need for some less expensive ownership units and rental units". R-12 zoned land permits attached single-family and multi-family housing types, which contribute to the city's variety of more affordable housing stock. The city is also in need of adequate commercially zoned land to support employment and economic development goals. However, the proposed rezone of the subject site from commercial professional to medium density residential in a location where the existing commercial zone designation has resulted in underdeveloped land for the past ten years,since annexation in 2006.These policies are met. 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; A planned development concept plan is being concurrently reviewed with the proposed zone change to demonstrate that medium density residential use can be developed in compliance with applicable regulations and the purposes of the planned development chapter.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; and The proposed R-12 zone would allow residential housing types at a scale that would be compatible with adjacent low density residential and commercial uses;there is no reason to believe the property could not be developed in conformance with R-12 standards. A planned development overlay is proposed on the subject property to ensure compatibility. This policy is met. G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. The subject property has been previously developed with single family dwellings. The site has a six percent slope toward the west and does not contain any city-regulated sensitive natural resources. The proposed rezone would not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems.This policy is met. Policy 20 The City shall periodically review and if necessary update its Comprehensive Plan and regulatory maps and implementing measures to ensure they are current and responsive to community needs,provide reliable information, and conform to applicable state law, administrative rules, and regional requirements. The proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment would increase the City's supply of R-12 zoned land. Staff supports the zone change in response to the growing need for affordable housing. The City supports the proposed update to its Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map through this process to ensure it is current and responsive to community needs and will conform to applicable state law, administrative rules,and regional requirements.This policy is met. Chapter 10: Housing PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 6 OF 13 Goal 10.1 Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types at a range of price levels to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policy 1 The City shall adopt and maintain land use policies, codes, and standards that provide opportunities to develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. The subject property was annexed in 2006 (ZCA 2006-00003), which changed the Washington County comprehensive plan and zoning designation from Commercial Office (OC) to the City of Tigard's Professional Commercial (C-P) zone, the zone most closely implementing the County's plan map designation. However, since the subject property's annexation in 2006, the City's need for residential property zoned R-12 has increased. In February 2016, in response to CPA 2015-00005 & ZON 2015-00007, the City Council approved the rezoning of a 1.37 acre site on Pacific Hwy W from R-12 to C-G, but not the rezoning of the subject property from C-P to R-12, resulting in a loss of 1.37 acres of residential property zoned R-12. Medium- density residential properties are important to the ongoing implementation of the City's housing policies, for a number of reasons, including growth in population of the City of Tigard, and a need for flexibility in allowable and available housing types to provide a level of affordability for first time home buyers, singles and retirees, as well as other members of the populace who desire more affordable housing options in Tigard's neighborhoods. The population of Tigard has increased by 6.6% since 2010 (United States Census Bureau). With this increase in population, the demand for housing continues to grow, particularly the need for residential properties zoned with the flexibility necessary to promote a level of affordability. In 2013 the Council adopted a Housing Strategies report prepared by Angelo Planning Group and Johnson & Reid in support of the Periodic Review update to Goal 10, Housing. This report illustrated that at that time the city had about twice as much buildable land in areas zoned R-7 (72.1 net buildable acres) than in areas zoned R-12 (36.7 net buildable acres). The report analyzed the city's current and future housing needs, which included the following conclusions of relevance to the application: • "In general,there is a need for some less expensive ownership units and rental units." • "Single family attached units are projected to meet nearly 20% of future housing need." • "It is projected that in coming decades a greater share of housing will be attached types, including attached single family." This type of housing is possible in the R-12 zone,which allows attached and multi-family housing on 3,050 square-foot lots. R-12 is a versatile medium density residential zone that can better meet the preferences and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. This policy is met. METRO Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 1: Housing Capacity The Regional Framework Plan calls for a compact urban form and a "fair-share" approach to meeting regional housing needs. It is the purpose of Title 1 to accomplish these policies by requiring each city and county to maintain or increase its housing capacity. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 7 OF 13 The City's Housing Strategies Report indicates that "in general, there is a need for some less expensive ownership units and rental units." This type of housing is possible in the R-12 zone,which allows attached and multi-family housing on 3,050 square-foot lots. With this quasi-judicial action,the zone change to R-12 on the subject site will result in a marginal increase of R-12 zoned land in the City of Tigard to help meet the preferences and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents, consistent with the purpose of Tide 1. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed comprehensive plan/zone change demonstrates 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 FINDING: As shown in the findings above and below, the proposed comprehensive plan/zone change demonstrates compliance with all applicable standards of the provisions of Title 18 and other implementing ordinances. 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. The population of Tigard has increased by 6.6% since 2010 (United States Census Bureau). This influx in population has generated an increased need for housing in the City of Tigard. In particular, there is presently a deficit in the availability of affordable housing in the City of Tigard. Zoning the subject property R-12 would help accommodate the City's growth in population and subsequent need for residential properties. The increasing need for affordable housing is a change in the community that supports the comprehensive plan/zone change. Given the variety of permitted housing types, property zoned R-12 is of increasing importance in the City of Tigard to insure the availability of affordable housing. With a minimum lot size of 3,050 S.F. the R-12 zone provides the flexibility necessary to meet the housing type preferences and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. The trend in the market and development in the community as a whole is progressing towards smaller lots, in an effort to satisfy the demand for affordable housing in the region. Since the subject property's annexation and zoning in 2006, properties zoned R-12 have been developed in the surrounding area.An R- 12 zoning of residential property in the area is ideal due to the proximity of services and transit options. White Oak Village, an R-12 zoned subdivision,located 2/10ths of a mile southwest of the subject property at SW 74th Ave. north of SW Pacific Highway,was developed in 2008. Increases in population and commercial and residential development have led to an increase in traffic in the neighborhood. While increased traffic is clearly an issue effecting property's owners in the vicinity of the subject property,an ODOT Trip Generation Analysis showed that the proposed zone change of the subject property from C-P to R-12 will result in a reduction of 220 PM trips to 43 PM trips. Rezoning of the subject property to R-12 may help curb future traffic pressure in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the proposed development includes future street improvements to SW Spruce St. and SW 72nd Ave. which will reduce an existing lack of parking in the surrounding area by including the widening of roadways and addition of parking lanes. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 8 OF 13 There is an increasing need for open space in the surrounding neighborhood, as the general development patterns in the area and public testimony received through CPA 20015-00005 & ZON 2015-00007 public hearings suggest. The proposed Planned Development Concept Plan includes two proposed open space tracts that comprise approximately 23.8% of the subject property that will preserve natural open space and promote pedestrian connectivity. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, there is evidence of change in the neighborhood or community to support the proposed comprehensive plan/zone change. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the Tigard City Council APPROVAL of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment as being in compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies, all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance, as evidenced by change in the neighborhood and the community, and as determined through the public hearing process. 18.390 DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES 18.390.080 General Provisions D.Applications 2. Consolidation of proceedings. Whenever an applicant requests more than one approval and more than one approval authority is required to decide the applications, the proceedings shall be consolidated so that one approval authority shall decide all applications in one proceeding; a.When a request which contains more than one approval is consolidated, the hearings shall be held by the approval authority having original jurisdiction over one of the applications under this chapter in the following order of preference: the council, the commission, the hearings officer, or the director. b.Where there is a consolidation of proceedings: i. The notice shall identify each action to be taken; ii. The decision on a plan map amendment shall precede the decision on the proposed zone change and other actions; and iii. Separate actions shall be taken on each application. FINDING: The applicant has requested concurrent review of a comprehensive plan map amendment from Professional Commercial to Medium Density Residential District/Zone Change from C-P to R-12 and a Planned Development concept plan approval. According to 18.390.080.D.2, the proceedings are consolidated and decided by the City Council. Notices have identified each action to be taken. The decision on the plan map amendment shall precede the decision on the proposed zone change,which shall precede the decision on the planned development concept plan,with separate actions being taken on each application. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 9 OF 13 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria A. The concept plan may be approved by the commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. The applicant states that"The proposed development includes two open space tracts totaling.31 acres (20.3 percent of the site) which will preserve existing conditions and natural resources, including an existing oak tree in the northwest corner of the subject property. Open space will promote natural amenities and provide a more walkable community, while serving as a transition between surrounding low-density residential properties and existing commercial properties." The applicant's statement and concept plan address preservation of the existing oak tree on the site and how the proposed open space protects the natural features of the site. The applicant only minimally indicates how the proposed open space areas relate to access and use by future residents of the development or by the public. This criterion is met but the Commission may require the applicant to more substantively address the open space area designations as to their intended level of use and how they relate to other proposed uses on the site. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of trees and other natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection,preservation, and/or management. The applicant's concept plan identifies areas of trees and other natural resources and minimally identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and management. The narrative states that "The Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G illustrates the proposed development's two open space tracts totaling .31 acres, and their relationship to other uses on the subject property. There are no wetlands or sensitive areas on the subject property. All existing trees on the subject property have been identified (see Concept Development Plan,Exhibit G)." The applicant's narrative does identify a large oak tree in the northwest corner of the site, but it should be shown on the Concept Plan and additional methods for management should be identified as well as an indication of how it would be incorporated into the development. This criterion is minimally met. To better meet this criterion, the Commission may require the applicant to substantively address methods for the oak tree's maximized protection,preservation,and/or management. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. The applicant states that "The proposed Planned Development Subdivision is designed around the existing transportation network, and will not require or result in any changes to the functional classification of the transportation system in the vicinity of the subject property. As shown on the Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G, the layout of the proposed development concentrates homes to SW Spruce St., SW 72nd Ave. and the proposed private drive, while preserving two open space tracts totaling .31 acres on the northern, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 10 OF 13 western and eastern property boundaries. These open space tracts will serve as an additional buffer between the existing low-density residential and commercial uses. A total of eighteen lots are proposed. Eleven lots will have frontage on SW Spruce St., three lots will have frontage on SW 72nd Ave, and four lots will have frontage on the proposed private drive. The private drive runs north to south in the middle of the subject property, ending at an open space tract on the subject property's northern boundary." The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood using the existing streets and providing a transition with open space buffers.This criterion is met. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes,linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. The applicant states that future development of the site with street improvements on SW Spruce St. and SW 72nd Ave., including sidewalks and planter strips will promote a more walkable neighborhood. This criterion is minimally met. To better meet this criterion, the Commission may require the applicant to substantively address how the concept plan also promotes transit ridership. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. The applicant states that "The Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G illustrates the proposed arrangement of lots and their relationship to open space tracts on the subject property." As show on the concept plan,this criterion is met. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. The applicant states that "The proposed concept plan would provide a density consistent with the R-12 zone. Two open space tracts comprising 23.8% of the subject property are proposed; their design will preserve an existing oak tree in the northwest corner of the subject property, while providing natural amenities, promoting pedestrian connectivity within the area and serving as a buffer between existing residential and commercial developments in the surrounding area." The proposed development of 18 single-family dwellings would be permitted in the R-12 zone at the maximum allowed density, consistent with the general purpose of the zone. Trees,including the large oak in the northwest corner of the site, will be protected within an open space tract. This criterion is minimally met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 11 OF 13 To better meet this criterion, the Commission may require the applicant to provide more information on how the concept plan provides significant advantages over standard development with additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the concept plan approval criteria are minimally met, but may be strengthened subject to the Commission's direction to the applicant to revise the proposed Concept Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed Concept Plan, subject to the Commission's direction to the applicant to supplement their findings on the approval criteria, as determined through the hearings process. SECTION V. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Development Services Division (Engineering), and Public Works Department had an opportunity to review this proposal and had no objections. SECTION VI. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The following agencies/jurisdictions had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond: Metro Land Use and Planning, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue reviewed the concept plan proposal and provided a comment letter dated October 31, 2016 addressing basic approval standards. Additional opportunities for substantive comment will be provided with application for a Detailed Development Plan. Clean Water Services reviewed the concept plan proposal and provided a comment letter dated October 26, 2016 addressing basic approval standards. Additional opportunities for substantive comment will be provided with application for a Detailed Development Plan. Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 1 reviewed this proposal under CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007 and provided a comment letter dated December 2, 2015 from Marah Danielson, ODOT Development Review Planner. ODOT determined that for Site A (the subject site),vehicle trips to OR 99W intersections will likely be reduced and that the proposed zone change from C-P to R-12 does not significantly affect a state highway facility. SECTION VII. INTERESTED PARTIES COMMENTS The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on March 16,2016. Documentation is provided in Exhibit E of the application. Seventeen attendees discussed the proposed zone change, comprehensive plan amendment, and the planned development concept plan. Issues discussed included open space and parks, streets and utilities,housing type and design,and land use process. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 12 OF 13 The city received written comments from neighbors within 500 feet of the subject properties regarding the proposed amendment. Approximately 140 neighbors within a half-mile of the subject property who live both within and outside of the City boundary signed a petition in support of the use of the subject property as a "walk-to residential park." Nancy Tracy submitted a letter requesting that the City buy and preserve the land for park use. These comments included a letter dated April 18, 2016 from Holly Polivka, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board,in support of the park idea,with the caveat that the City did not have funding to help purchase the property. Further testimony reiterating the community's interest in a park on the subject site was presented at the November 21,2016 hearing. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION As demonstrated by the findings above, the Planning Commission finds by a vote of 6-1 in favor that the proposed Comprehensive Plan/zone change amendment complies with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, applicable regional, state and federal regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances and can be approved. In addition, with a vote of 5-2 in favor, the Commission approved the proposed planned development concept plan with direction to the applicant to further refine the public open space allocation on the site and to redesign access to lots to maximize on-street parking. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt by ordinance the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change, and the proposed planned development concept plan, as determined through the public hearing process. &44113 Rp-Zt-41,-.4— January 10,2017 PREPARED BY: GPagenstecher DATE Associate Planner January 10,2017 APPROVED BY: Tom McGuire DATE Assistant Community Development Director PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL CPA 2016-00002/ZON2016-00001/PDR2106-00012 TOPPING PAGE 13 OF 13 ~ I OPEN SPACE ' TRACT B 1 g 11,809 S.F. a W i 1 95.0 - 1 30 0 95.0 xW Y '� 11 12 E. . 4 ,N2,660 S.F. 2,660 S.F. N 2,475 S.F. 1 W W a 0 13 � I '' 10 Z " "a 78 0 2,660 S.F. 2,660 S.F. �� 2,478 S.F. Q `— 1- 40.0-- — -- - ----- _.-- -- I. N 25 l m 26.0, 6.0 -_-- _-� .0 -- - ---� .,._26.c 26 0 31.0 m_31.( :.-28_0 -.-. 28.0 I_ 28 0__ �, __28.4 ...,,.,..'.,° .. , ix y O i STQRM 1 CN C 8 9 7 1 6 5 4 a • 18 � 17 16 u 8 � � TO I TRACT 2,444 of 2.444 at 2.444 of 1 5 i 1 4 ' Q r�"jt SII 2,914 S.F. 2.632 S.F. 2,632 S.F. 2,632 S.F. �� 2,632 S.F. 2.632 SF. — 2,444.1 2.914 S.F. O I `\ ,, 00 c N ,0 0 :0 W 1 `i' N C7 4' mil w ,Irn 0,i rn Q)C' I / 1 r Z $$ W a g , a.0 . U N I I D F 1 1 II t� to _. -_.-- - _ h �' . . _ _ _.._ —_-_ - IL --�. /I ria.r=LMIZEZ R.0 W. CENTERLINE_ d is —��. .— ._. ._�,—._._. .—L—.— .—. —. .— .—.�.—.� SW SPRUCE STREET . r r — PD CONCEPT Plan - Single Family Detached Residential Lots i Open Space Density & Setbacks Utilities & Parking a Gross Site Area = 67,325 s.f. Compliance with R-12 Density Public Sanitary, Woter Sc Storm Available in Minimum 20% = 13,465 s.f. Maximum 18 Units Single Family Detached SW 72nd and SW Spruce. On—site Proposed Open Space = 15,997 s.f. (23.8%) Setbacks easements will be located as determined at G k (Excluding Star, Tract= 13,650 s.f. (20.3%) Side=5' Rear=15' Front—Garoge=20' Detailed Concept Plan Approval ! 3 Front — Building=12' 8 - 5 Parking — Each Lot Driveway & Garage and SHEET Public On—Street 1 a 1 I. JOB NO. 2634-001 1 Table of Contents LIST OF EXHIBITS I APPLICATION AND SUBJECT PROPERTY SUMMARY I PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 LAND USE PERMIT REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING MAP AMENDMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW 2 APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES 2 APPLICABLE METRO POLICIES 6 APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES 7 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE COMPLIANCE 8 18.350 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 9 18.380 ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS 14 18.390 DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES 16 SUMMARY AND REQUEST 17 Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc List of Exhibits A Land Use Application Form B Tax Map 1S 1 36AC C Title Deed D Pre-Application Conference Notes E Neighborhood Meeting Documentation F Impact Study(per TDC 18.39O.O4O.B.2.e.) G Planned Development Concept Plan H Planned Development Concept Plan Statement Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.I Application and Subject Property Summary SUBJECT PROPERTY: Tax Map: 1S136AC Tax Lots: 2200, 2400, 2500 PROPERTY LOCATION: 7303 SW Spruce St. Tigard, OR 97224 PROPOSAL: Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment; Planned Development Overlay Zone with Planned Development Concept Plan Review SITE SIZE: 1.54 Acres EXISTING COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: C-P PROPOSED COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: R-12 PROPERTY OWNER: Richard Topping & Katherine Kemp 19765 Derby St. West Linn, OR 97068 APPLICANT: Stafford Development Company, LLC. 485 S. State Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Ken Sandblast, AICP Westlake Consultants, Inc. 15115 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150 Tigard, OR 97224 Phone: 503.684.0652 Email: ksandblast@westlakeconsultants.com Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.II Project Description The following is a request for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Commercial, C-P, to Medium Density Residential, R-12, and a Planned Development Overlay zone with Concept Plan review. The subject property is three parcels totaling 1.54 acres located at 7303 SW Spruce St., 10705 SW 72nd Ave., 10735 SW 72nd Ave; Tax Map/Lot#s: 1S136ACO2200, 1S136ACO2400, 1S136ACO2500. In 2015, applications CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007, requested approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment of the subject property, also known as "the 72nd Ave. property", from C-P to R-12, in addition to the Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment of another property on Pacific Hwy W, from R-12 to C-G. Both of these applications had formal public hearings before the Tigard Planning Commission in December of 2015 and the Tigard City Council in January and February of 2016. The City Council approved the Pacific Hwy W property for the zone change and comprehensive plan amendment as proposed by CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007, however, "the SW 72nd property" portion of the applications was remanded to the Planning Commission for a public hearing after completion of applicable Type III Quasi- Judicial public notice and neighborhood meeting requirements. Since that time, City of Tigard planning staff completeness letter dated August 25, 2016 has recommended that the property owners submit revised land use applications for a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment, in addition to a Planned Development Overlay Zone with Concept Plan review, so as to provide specific and binding land use approval for future development on the subject property. Thus, the property owner and applicant are submitting this application to request approval of this Comprehensive Plan Designation, Zoning Map Amendment, and Planned Development Concept Plan review. The applicant's proposal is in direct response to, and acknowledgement of testimony received to date for the rezoning of the subject property. A neighborhood meeting was conducted on March 16, 2016. Documentation is provided in Exhibit E. Attendees discussed the proposed zone change and comprehensive plan amendment, in addition to the planned development concept plan. The proposed development is consistent will all applicable provisions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the Community Development Code, in addition to Statewide Planning Goals and Regional Regulations. There are a total of three (3) requests for approval for the subject property: 1. CPA 2016-00002 Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Commercial Professional to Medium Density Residential 2. ZON 2016-00001 Zone Change from C-P to R-12 3. PDR 2016-00012 Planned Development Review Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.1 Land Use Permit Request: Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map Amendment and Planned Development Concept Plan Review This application establishes compliance with all applicable provisions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Development Code, in addition to Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, and Regional Regulations, After reviewing the record established through the City land use applications CPA 2015- 00005 and ZON 2015-00007, and attending a pre-application conference with City of Tigard staff for this Planned Development Concept Plan application, the applicant submits the following narrative and exhibits to request approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment, in addition to a Planned Development Overlay Zone with Planned Development Concept Plan review. In order for the proposed Planned Development Concept Plan to be approved, it must first be rezoned from Professional Commercial (C-P) to Medium Density Residential (R-12) with a Planned Development Overlay zone and Concept Plan review. In Table 18.390.1 of the Tigard Development Code(Summary of Permits by Type of Decision-Making Procedure), "Zone Map/Text Change/Quasi-Judicial" is listed as a Type IIIB Procedure pursuant to Section 18.390.050[Type Ill Procedure], with a cross-reference to Section 18.380.030[Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map]. Separately, TDC Section 18.380.030 provides that "Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050[Type Ill Procedure]. Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies Chapter 1: Citizen Involvement In an effort to promote citizen involvement, greater notice and procedural protections, the applicant proposes that this quasi-judicial zoning map amendment be undertaken by means of Type III-PC procedure per TDC Section 18.280.030. The proposed development supports Goal 1.1"Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process", as well as Goal 7.2 "to ensure all citizens have access to:A. opportunities to communicate directly to the City;and B. information on issues in an understandable form". Through the required review and approval process, citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions are provided the opportunity to be involved, including: - A neighborhood meeting for this PD Concept Plan application on March 16, 2016 - Public hearings for the Planning Commission and City Council - Public notice and property sign posting - Posting on notice board at City Hall - Posting on City's website Chapter 2: Land Use Planning The subject property is predominantly flat, with a slope of approximately 5%. There are no sensitive natural resources on the subject property. As per Policy 15.F. the proposed development will be compatible with the environmental conditions and surrounding land Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.2 uses. As per Policy 15.G.the proposed rezoning will not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. The proposed development satisfies Policy 6, as the rezoning of the subject property to medium-density residential would allow for a needed increase in the variety of housing options available to the citizens of Tigard. The proposed zone change would allow for smaller lot sizes, higher density, and more affordable housing options, thus promoting a greater level of financial stability among the citizens of Tigard. The proposed zone change allows for increased compatibility with adjacent land uses, and will be developed in conformance with R-12 development standards. There is no overlay district on the subject property. Therefore, the proposed development satisfies Policy 15.E. In support of Policy 15.C.and Policy 15.D. the proposed rezoning satisfies a need for property zoned R-12. In 2013 the City Council adopted a Housing Strategies report prepared by Angelo Planning Group and Johnson & Reid in support of the Periodic Review update to Goal 10, Housing. This report illustrated that at that time the city had nearly twice as much buildable land in areas zoned R-7 (72.1 net buildable acres) than in areas zoned R-12 (36.7 net buildable acres). The report analyzed the city's current and future housing needs, which included the following conclusion: "In general, there is a need for some less expensive ownership units and rental units". Thus, there is an insufficient amount of developable land zoned R-12, and the rezoning of the subject property would satisfy Policy 15.C. by fulfilling a proven community need for a wider range of housing options and prices available in the City. While the need for developable land zoned R-12 is present throughout the entire City of Tigard, the proposed development would also satisfy needs apparent in the neighborhood surrounding the subject property. The properties to the north and west are predominantly low-density residential, however, commercial development to the south of the subject property has increased in past decades. The proposed rezoning would allow the medium- density residential property to act as a buffer between existing low-density residential properties, and increasing commercial developments to the south. Roadways will be widened to include parking lanes, street trees and sidewalks, improving the quality of the adjacent streetscape and the pedestrian environment. Furthermore, 23.8% of the proposed development is compromised of open space tracts which will abut neighboring residential properties, and act as further buffer between existing residential and commercial developments. This will fulfill the neighborhood's need for a residential buffer, while promoting natural open space and pedestrian connectivity, in addition to preserving the existing aesthetic of the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant has also reviewed the Recommended Action Measures and has found the proposed development, and subsequent residential buffer would be consistent with Recommended Action Measure iii, as the proposed development fulfills each example of "preserving and enhancing the quality and character of Tigard's residential districts", including: "infill development, mitigating impacts of adjacent dissimilar land uses, improving quality of streetscapes and the pedestrian environment, and providing greater access to open space". Public services such as stormwater, water and sanitary sewer will connect to the existing infrastructure. As per Policy 15.A. and 15.8. the proposed development will not exceed Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.3 capacity of any public facilities or services in the area, nor will the proposed development require or result in any changes to the functional classification of any transportation facility. The proposed R-12 zoning of the subject property will result in future traffic volumes and access in a manner consistent with the functional classification of SW 72nd Ave., which is classified as a local street, and SW Spruce Street, which is classified as a neighborhood route. There is presently sufficient capacity in the transportation system to serve the proposed development. ODOT's trip generation analysis for the subject property (ODOT Comment letter, dated December 2, 2015) showed a reduction of trips, from 220 PM trips under the current C-P zone to 43 PM trips under the proposed R-12 zone. Therefore, a determination of no significant adverse effect on the transportation system can be made for the proposed development. In summation, there are no sensitive natural resources on the subject property. The proposed development is compatible with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses, and will not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. The proposed zone change allows for increased compatibility with adjacent land uses, and will be developed in conformance with R-12 development standards. The rezoning of the subject property to R-12 would satisfy a needed increase in the variety of housing options available to citizens of Tigard. Furthermore, the proposed zone change would satisfy a need for a residential buffer in the surrounding neighborhood. Public services such as stormwater, water and sanitary sewer will connect to the existing infrastructure. The proposed development will not exceed capacity of any public facilities or services in the area, nor will it negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities or services. Chapter 10: Housinq The subject property was annexed in 2006 (ZCA 2006-00003), which changed the Washington County comprehensive plan and zoning designation from Commercial Office (OC) to the City of Tigard's Professional Commercial (C-P) zone, the zone most closely implementing the County's plan map designation. However, since the subject property's annexation in 2006, the City's need for residential property zoned R-12 has increased. In February 2016, in response to CPA 2015-00005& ZON 2015-00007, the City Council approved the rezoning of a 1.37 acre site on Pacific Hwy W from R-12 to C-G, yet remanded the rezoning of the subject property from C-P to R-12. Thus, the City suffered a loss of 1.37 acres of residential property zoned R-12. Medium-density residential properties are important to the ongoing implementation of the City's housing policies, for a number of reasons, including growth in population of the City of Tigard, and a need for flexibility in allowable and available housing types, so as to provide a level of affordability for first time home buyers, singles and retirees, as well as other members of the populace who desire more affordable housing options in Tigard's neighborhoods. The population of Tigard has increased by 6.6% since 2010 (United States Census Bureau). With this increase in population, the demand for housing continues to grow, particularly the need for residential properties zoned with the flexibility necessary to promote a level of affordability. Approval of the proposed zone change to R-12 and planned development concept plan satisfies a need for smaller lot sizes and higher densities within the Urban Growth Topping PD Concept Plan 1303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.4 Boundary, in satisfaction of the City's Housing Goal 10.1 to "provide opportunities for a variety of housing types at a range of price levels to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents". Furthermore, as the proposed zone change would allow for smaller lot sizes, higher density, and more affordable housing options, the proposed development would promote a greater level of financial stability among the citizens of Tigard. Thus, the proposed development satisfies Policy 1, which states that "the City shall adopt and maintain land use policies, codes and standards that provide opportunities to develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents". Additionally, the applicant has reviewed the Recommended Action Measures and has found that the rezoning and development of the subject property supports the following measures. The proposed development supports Recommended Action Measure vi. by promoting the development of a broader range of housing choices in proximity to a major activity center. In this case, a medium-density residential development in close proximity to increased commercial development along SW Pacific Hwy, south of the subject property. As previously mentioned, the Housing Strategies report adopted by the City Council in 2013 analyzed the city's current and future housing needs, which included the following conclusion: "In general, there is a need for some less expensive ownership units and rental units". Aligned with this Housing strategies report, Recommended Action Measure xvi. seeks to "provide opportunities for affordable home ownership by:adapting the City's land use program to allow for development of a variety of residential building types and ownership arrangements". The proposed development supports the goals of both the Housing Strategies report, as well as Recommended Action Measure xvi. by allowing for more flexible development, a wider range of building types, and more affordable housing options, which take into account the housing needs of all of Tigard's citizens. The proposed development also satisfies Goal 10.2, to "Maintain a high level of residential livability'. The rezoning of the subject property will allow the proposed medium-density residential property to serve as a residential buffer. Presently, properties to the north and west of the subject property are zoned predominantly low-density residential. However, since the subject property's annexation and zoning designation in 2006, commercial development to the south of the subject property has increased. This commercial development has necessitated a buffer to preserve the character of the existing neighborhood to the west and north of the subject property. The proposed R-12 zoning and planned development with open space tracts abutting neighboring residential properties would provide a significant buffer for existing residential properties in the surrounding area; serving to alleviate the effects of commercial development, such as increasing noise levels and declining neighborhood aesthetics, while promoting the use of open space in residential neighborhoods. Thus, the proposed development supports Goal 10.2, as well as policy 1, which states that "the City shall adopt measures to protect and enhance the quality and integrity of its residential neighborhoods". The proposed development also supports Policy 8 by offering measures to "mitigate the adverse impacts from differing, or more intense, land uses on residential living Topping PD Concept Plan 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.5 environments". Policy 8 offers three examples of the mitigation of adverse impacts on residential living environments; the proposed development employs all three examples, as follows: (1) the rezoning of the subject property would offer a smoother transition from lower-density residential properties to commercial development; (2) the proposed development is 23.8% open space; proposed open space tracts abut neighboring residential developments, and seek to protect existing vegetation and natural resources, while promoting open space in the neighborhood; (3) the proposed medium-density development and open spaces will serve as a buffer between existing low-density residential homes and commercial development. For similar reasons as to its support of Policy 8, the proposed development also supports Recommend Action Measure vi. by enhancing livability for Tigard residents presently living near major streets, by use of"appropriate setbacks, buffering and screening, noise mitigation, building orientation, landscaping etc." In summation, the proposed development supports Goal 10.1 by allowing for diversified housing types, as well as financially sound housing options, in an effort to "provide opportunities for a variety of housing types at a range of price levels to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents". Approval of the proposed zone change to R-12 and planned development concept plan satisfies a need for smaller lot sizes, higher densities, and more affordable housing options, thus promoting a greater level of financial stability among the citizens of Tigard. While there is a need for property zoned R-12 in the City of Tigard; moreover, there is a need for the subject property to be zoned R-12. In support of Goal 10.2, the proposed medium-density residential zoning and open space tracts, will allow the subject property to serve as a buffer for existing residential properties; alleviating the effects of commercial development, while promoting open space and neighborhood connectivity. Applicable Metro Policies Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 1: Housing Capacity Pursuant to Title 1:Housing Capacity, "the regional framework plan calls for a compact urban form and a "fair-share"approach to meeting regional housing needs". The rezoning of the subject property supports the "fair-share"approach of Title 1, while combating future Tigard population growth, development, and a need for a variety of housing types. Furthermore,Title 1 addresses that its purpose is to "accomplish these policies by requiring each city and county to maintain or increase its housing capacity'. As previously referenced, the Housing Strategies report adopted by the City Council in 2013, confirms that the City of Tigard has as deficit of developable land zoned R-12. Thus, the proposed development would support Metro Regulation Title 1:Housing Capacity by prompting the City to increase its housing capacity where a notable inadequacy has been observed. Title 7: Housing Choice Pursuant to Title 7:Housing Choice, the Regional Framework Plan calls for Cities within the Metro region to ensure their comprehensive plan and ordinances promote "strategies to ensure a diverse range of housing types within their jurisdictional boundaries". Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.6 Furthermore, the Regional Framework Plan requires Cities "include plan policies, actions, and implementation measures aimed at increasing opportunities for households of all income levels to live within their individual jurisdictions in affordable housing". Thus, the rezoning and development of the subject property supports the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan by fulfilling the City of Tigard's need for a more diversified range of housing types and affordable housing options within its jurisdictional boundaries. Title 12: Protection of Residential Neighborhoods The intent of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 12:Protection of Residential Neighborhoods is to "protect the region's residential neighborhoods". While the subject property has been zoned C-P since its annexation in 2006, neighboring properties to the north and west are mostly low-density residential. However, properties to the south of the subject property, south of SW Spruce St., are predominantly commercial developments, most notably a large Fred Meyer grocery store. These commercial developments have necessitated a buffer to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods to the west and north of the subject property. The proposed rezoning of the subject property to R-12 and planned development with open space tracts abutting neighboring residential properties would provide a significant buffer for existing residential properties in the surrounding area; serving to alleviate the effects of commercial development, such as increasing noise levels and declining neighborhood aesthetics, while promoting the use of open space in residential neighborhoods. In summation the proposed rezoning would serve to protect residential neighborhoods in the vicinity of the subject property, while upholding the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 12: Protection of Residential Neighborhoods. Applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines As the City of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan incorporates Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, the proposed development's compliance with all applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies, demonstrates its compliance with all Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. The applicant's review of applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines is detailed as follows: Goal 1: Citizen Involvement As per OAR 660-015-0000(1) the applicant has sought to involve citizens in all phases of the planning process. Through the required review and approval process, citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions are provided the opportunity to be involved, including: - A neighborhood meeting for this PD Concept Plan application on March 16, 2016 - Public hearings for the Planning Commission and City Council - Public notice and property sign posting - Posting on notice board at City Hall - Posting on City's website Goal 10: Housing As per OAR 660-015-0000(10) of Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, the proposed development supports the State's goal to implement plans which "encourage Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.7 the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type, and density'. As previously referenced, the Housing Strategies report adopted by the City Council in 2013, stated "... there is a need for some less expensive ownership units and rental units". Thus, as the City has an inadequate amount of developable land zoned R-12, the proposed rezoning of the subject property would serve to alleviate this deficit, while upholding the State's Goal 10: Housing by encouraging the development and availability of more diversified housing types, as well as greater flexibility in regards to residential density and price ranges. Transportation Planning Rule Compliance The City of Tigard 2035 TSP predicts a growth in households of 8,911 homes and a growth in employment of 24,829 jobs between 2005 and 2035. The following, Figure 4-4 Forecast Employment Growth 2005 to 2035, is found in Section 4 Development of the 2035 City of Tigard TSP. Figure 4-4 = Forecast Employment Growth 2005 to 2035 Tigard Urban i 1 7 Planning Area cs ; l .- Change m Employment/Acre Negative or No Change 0 to 1 Job/Acre •1 1 to 3 Jobs/Acre ? i t � nxssr . 3 to 5 Jobs/Acre 0 :, - More than 5 Jobs/Acre Other Map Elements k„, 0� h`le�a TC Transit Center s, y s, Tigard City Boundary ±4-4-44-Other RailLines .r` 4 Ilk me I .tiiA RD i PIMI IA RI. ■11 J t lin 1 5 fi NM RD 0111, The City of Tigard 2035 TSP states that "Figure 4-4 shows that the areas anticipated for the most employment growth are concentrated along Highway 217 including the areas around Washington Square Regional Center, downtown, the Tigard Triangle and Pacific Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.8 Highway'. The subject property, located just north of the Tigard Triangle and Pacific Highway, is identified has having an anticipated increase of 3 to 5 jobs per acre. The City of Tigard 2035 TSP,also states that the"City of Tigard plans for increased residential and commercial density in Downtown Tigard". Thus, the subject property, located within an area anticipating increased commercial development, would better serve future Tigard citizens if developed under medium-density residential zoning standards.The property would be better suited zoned medium-density residential in anticipation of future changes in the neighborhood, particularly due to the subject property's close proximity to increasing commercial development and public transportation.There is a bus stop located on Pacific Hwy W approximately .2 miles from the subject property.Additionally, the Tigard Transit Center at 8960 SW Commercial Street, is 1.5 miles southwest of the subject property via Pacific Hwy W,and houses seven bus lines, as well as the WES commuter train connection. As per OAR 660-12-0060, the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the functional classification, capacity and level or service of the existing transportation system. The proposed development of the subject property will not require or result in any changes to the functional classification of existing and planned transportation facilities, nor would it require a change to the standards implementing the functional classification system. Furthermore, the types and levels of travel and access proposed are consistent with the functional classification of all existing and planned transportation facilities. The proposed R-12 zoning of the subject property will result in future traffic volumes and access in a manner consistent with the functional classification of SW 72"d Ave., which is classified as a local street, and Spruce Street, which is classified as a neighborhood route. ODOT's trip generation analysis for the subject property(ODOT Comment letter, dated December 2, 2015)showed a reduction of trips, from 220 PM trips under the current C-P zone to 43 PM trips under the proposed R-12 zone.Therefore,a determination of no significant adverse effect on the transportation system can be made for the subject property. 18.350 Planned Developments 18.350.010 Purpose A. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard'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 Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.9 will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; and 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features 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 city;and 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) Response: The proposed development satisfies the standards of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. The rezoning of the subject property to R-12 allows the subject property to serve as a buffer between existing low-density residential properties to the north and west of the subject property and commercially zoned properties to the south of the subject property. Additionally, the proposed development includes two open space tracts totaling .31 acres which will preserve existing conditions and natural resources, including an existing oak tree in the northwest corner of the subject property. Open space will promote natural amenities and provide a more walkable community, while serving as a transition between surrounding low-density residential properties and existing commercial properties. Furthermore, while serving as a significant buffer for the surrounding residential community, the subject property will provide housing styles and types which are currently needed in the Tigard community. Although the proposed development includes smaller lot sizes and higher densities than that of surrounding properties, this variety is necessary to accommodate the diversity of individuals living in Tigard's communities. As such, the proposed development supports the City's Housing Goal 10.1 to "provide opportunities for a variety of housing types at a range of price levels to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents". 18.350.20 Process A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. Planned Developments 18.350-2 AP Update:2/14 B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan;and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. C. Decision-making process. 1. The concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type 111-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.050. Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.10 2. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by a means of a Type lll- PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept plan. 3. The planned development overlay zone will be applied concurrently with the approval of the detailed plan. 4. Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval. All applicants are advised that the purpose of separating these applications is to provide them clear direction in developing the detailed plans. Rejection of the concept plan will result in a corresponding rejection of the detailed development plan and overlay zone. 5. In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone, once construction of the detailed plan has been completed, subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter which apply to the particular land use application. 6. If the application involves subdivision of land, the applicant may also apply for preliminary plat approval and the applications shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan. D. Concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed plan. In the case of concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed development plan, including subdivision applications, the applicant shall clearly distinguish the concept from the detailed plan. The Planning Commission shall take separate actions on each element of the planned development application(i.e., the concept approval must precede the detailed development approval);however each required action may be made at the same hearing. (Ord. 06-16) Response: This application contains a request for the approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan. The Planned Development Concept Plan is shown in Exhibit G. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type Ill-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by subsection B of this section. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: a. A description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant; b. An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; c. An explanation of how the proposal relates to the purposes of the planned development chapter as expressed in Section 18.350.010;and d. An explanation of how the proposal utilized the "Planning Commissioner's Toolbox." 2. A general development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.11 3. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development. In the case where a residential subdivision is proposed, the statement shall include the applicant's intentions whether the applicant will build the homes, or sell the lots to other builders. Response: Exhibit H contains the Planned Development Concept Plan Statement,which explains the proposed development and how it meets the intent of the Planned Development criteria. With approval of this application for a Planned Development Concept Plan,the property owner and applicant intend to proceed with preparation and approval of a Detailed Development Plan and Land Division Application approval followed by construction of the planned development improvements and the building of residential homes on the subject property in the latter half of 2017.The applicant intends to build the homes as part of completing the planned development and to sell the homes to Tigard citizens. B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in subsection A of this section, the concept plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information, the detailed content of which can be obtained from the director: 1. Existing site conditions; 2. A site concept including the types of proposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site; 3. A grading concept; 4. A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s); 5. An urban forestry plan consistent with Chapter 18.790; 6. Parking concept; 7. A sign concept; 8. A streets and utility concept;and 9. Structure setback and development standards concept, including the proposed residential density target if applicable Response: The Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G is a site concept plan including proposed land uses and open space tracts. As the proposed development is for a single family residential subdivision, off street parking requirements will be provided by driveways on each lot. Future development of existing rights-of-way of SW Spruce St. and SW 72nd Ave. will include the widening of the public right-of-way to accommodate a parking lane. SW Spruce St.and SW 72nd Ave. will have right-of-way dedications of 27 feet from the centerline and 16 feet of pavement from the centerline, in addition to curbs, 5 foot sidewalks, and 5 foot planting strips with street trees. The proposed 30 foot wide private drive will serve four lots and will have 24 feet of pavement from the centerline,as well as curbs and five foot sidewalks. While setbacks and building heights of development on the subject property were of concern to surrounding property owners, development intensity is more intense in the C-P zone, thus the proposed zone change would allow development more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The rezoning of the subject property to R-12 would require reduced building heights(C-P: 45 feet; R-12: 35 feet), increased minimum landscape requirements(C-P: 15%; R-12: 20%), increased lot coverage limitations (C-P:85%; R-12: Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.12 80%), as well as minimum setback standards that are more compatible with surrounding residential properties. 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria A. The concept plan may be approved by the commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of trees and other natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management. Response: The Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G illustrates the proposed development's two open space tracts totaling .31 acres, and their relationship to other uses on the subject property. There are no wetlands or sensitive areas on the subject property. All existing trees on the subject property have been identified (see Concept Development Plan, Exhibit G). 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. Response: While the subject property was zoned C-P at the time of its annexation in 2006, the surrounding community has changed in the past decade. Properties to the north of the subject property have remained primarily low-density residential, however, commercial development to the south of the subject property has increased. The proposed R-12 zoning of the subject property would provide a significant buffer between the commercially zoned properties to the south, and low-density residential properties to the north and west. The proposed Planned Development Subdivision is designed around the existing transportation network, and will not require or result in any changes to the functional classification of the transportation system in the vicinity of the subject property. In an effort to promote access on a roadway with a higher functional classification, the majority of lots take access on SW Spruce St. (neighborhood route), rather than SW 72nd (local street). A total of eighteen lots and two open space tracts are proposed. Eleven lots will have frontage on SW Spruce St., three lots will have frontage on SW 72nd Ave, and four lots will have frontage on the proposed private drive. The private drive runs north to south in the middle of the subject property, ending at an open space tract on the subject property's northern boundary. As shown on the Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G, the layout of the proposed development concentrates homes to SW Spruce St., SW 72nd Ave. and the proposed private drive, while preserving two open space tracts totaling .31 acres on the northern, western and eastern property boundaries. These open space tracts will serve as an additional buffer between the existing low-density residential and commercial uses. Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.13 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. Response: The future development of the site with street improvements on SW Spruce St. and SW 72nd Ave. will reduce an existing lack of parking in the surrounding area by including the widening of roadways for parking lanes. Proposed sidewalks and planter strips will promote a more walkable neighborhood. The preservation of two open space tracts will provide an opportunity for increased livability and neighborhood connectivity. S. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. Response: The Concept Development Plan in Exhibit G illustrates the proposed arrangement of lots and their relationship to open space tracts on the subject property. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. (Ord. 12-09 §1; Ord. 06-16) Response: The proposed concept plan would provide a density consistent with the R-12 zone. Two open space tracts comprising 23.8% of the subject property are proposed; their design will preserve an existing oak tree in the northwest corner of the subject property, while providing natural amenities, promoting pedestrian connectivity within the area and serving as buffer between existing residential and commercial developments in the surrounding area. 18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map 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; Response: The applicant has demonstrated compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations via this narrative. 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance;and Response: The applicant has demonstrated compliance with all applicable standards of the Tigard Development Code via this narrative. Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.14 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: Since the subject property's annexation and zoning in 2006, the surrounding neighborhood has undergone a number of changes, including: Need for Residential Buffer: The properties to the north and west of the subject property are predominantly low- density residential zoning; however, there has been an increase in commercial uses to the south of the subject property, south of SW Spruce St, most notably a large Fred Meyer grocery store. These residential and commercial developments have necessitated a need for a buffer. The R-12 zoning of the subject property and proposed open space tracts abutting neighboring low-density residential properties will provide a significant buffer, preserving the neighborhood's aesthetic conformity while transitioning between residential and commercial properties. Need for Properties Zoned R-12: Given the variety of permitted housing types, property zoned R-12 is of increasing importance in the City of Tigard to insure the availability of affordable housing. With a minimum lot size of 3,050 S.F. the R-12 zone provides the flexibility necessary to meet the housing type preferences and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. Since the subject property's annexation and zoning in 2006, properties zoned R-12 have been developed in the surrounding area; R-12 zoning of residential property in the area is ideal due to the proximity of services and transit options. White Oak Village, an R-12 zoned subdivision, located 2/10ths of a mile southwest of the subject property at SW 74th Ave. north of SW Pacific Highway W, was developed in 2008. While proposed lot sizes on the Planned Development Concept Plan are smaller than that of adjacent properties, the trend in the market and development in the community as a whole is progressing towards smaller lots, in an effort to satisfy the demand for affordable housing in the region. Increased Population: The population of Tigard has increased by 6.6% since 2010 (United States Census Bureau). This influx in population has generated an increased need for housing in the City of Tigard. In particular, there is presently a deficit in the availability of affordable housing in the City of Tigard. The zoning of the subject property R-12, would offset the City's growth in population and subsequent need for residential properties, as well as a variety of housing types and prices. Increased Traffic: Increases in population and commercial and residential development have led to a raise in traffic. While increased traffic is clearly an issue effecting property's owners in the vicinity of the subject property, an ODOT Trip Generation Analysis stipulates that the proposed zone change of the subject property from C-P to R-12 will result in a reduction of 220 PM trips to 43 PM trips. Thus, the rezoning of the subject property to R-12 will help curb increasing traffic in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the proposed development includes future street improvements to SW Spruce St. and SW 72nd Ave. which will reduce an Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.15 existing lack of parking in the surrounding area by including the widening of roadways and addition of parking lanes. Need for Open Space: As noted via general development patterns in the area and public comment testimony received through CPA 20015-00005 & ZON 2015-00007 public hearings there is an increased need for open space in the surrounding neighborhood. As depicted on the submitted Planned Development Concept Plan, the two proposed open space tracts created through approval of this application comprise approximately 23.8% of the subject property and will preserve natural open space and promote pedestrian connectivity. Conclusion: Since the subject property's annexation and zoning in 2006, the surrounding neighborhood has undergone a number of changes including: an increase in commercial properties and a subsequent need for a residential buffer, an increased need for properties zoned R-12, an increase in population, an increase in traffic and an increased need for open space. For these reasons, there is evidence of a change in the subject property neighborhood and this criterion is satisfied. 18.390 Decision Making Procedures 18.390.050 Type 111 Procedure A. Preapplication conference. A preapplication conference is required for Type III actions. Preapplication conference requirements and procedures are set forth in Section 18.390.080.C. Response: Two pre-application conferences took place in March 2015 and August of 2015 as part of CPA 2015-00005 and ZON 2015-00007. A separate pre-application meeting for this Comrehensice Plan Designation, Zoning Map Amendment, and Planned Development Concept Plan application for the subject property was held on February 16, 2016. Notes and associated documents provided by City staff are attached in Exhibit D. B. Application requirements. 2. Application forms. Type Ill applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by 18.390.080.E.1. 3. Content. 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. 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 Topping PD Concept Plan /303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.16 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: This application and supporting materials have been prepared using the forms and instructions provided by City staff. A copy of the Land Use Application is provided in Exhibit A. This narrative document cites and quotes applicable Tigard Development Code provisions and provides Responses from the Applicant, with evidence and explanation of how all applicable approval criteria have been met. The Applicant has provided a request for mailing labels from the City of Tigard with the application, in Exhibit E. The Applicant has also provided an Impact Study, in Exhibit F. These provisions have been satisfied. Summary and Request With submittal of this application narrative, exhibits and supplemental evidence, the Applicant demonstrates that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation, Zoning Map Amendment and Planned Development Overlay zone with Concept Plan review comply with all applicable standards and approval criteria; therefore the applicant respectfully requests approval of this Land Use application. Topping PD Concept Plan - 7303 SW Spruce St.Tigard,OR 97224 WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS,Inc.17 November 20, 2016 FILE NO: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA)2016-00002 Zone Chane(ZON)2016-00001 Planned Development Review(PDR)2016-00012 FILE TITLE: Topping C-P to R-12 Comprehensive Plah Amendment/Zone Change with Planned Development Review. APPLICANT: Stafford Development Company, LLC 485 S.State Street Lake Oswego,OR 97034 LOCATION: 7303 SW Spruce St., 10705 SW 72"d Ave, 10735 SW 72"d Ave. To Whom It May Concern: As a resident of the neighborhood and a property owner whose land borders the proposed construction site, I would like to state that I oppose heavy housing development on the property referenced above. It would create an undue burden on homeowners and residents surrounding the land because of increased traffic and a safety hazard because of the lack of sidewalks and proper street lighting. It would also increase noise pollution. I would like to state that I support the land be developed as a park in the Tigard Triangle district due to the lack of park space in this area. A park would greatly increase the livability of the area. Than you fifi /It :y Wakeland 7210 SW Pine St. Tigard,OR 97223 -,AgNo - h. ) \D AO11'0 I( ID 12/cijcp 0V- c>--Y-040)(3 ADcf ' Aa . -4',41- : 4 6:3 : 3 - 97- --- ------\) ?c9 • lisi -1-- ‘ pr\\,--- f - - - -lacy- --- -D. y\-- N\k4g- 4.fri P • 4.\,,,---A.-p- \\-a,) ) -- -ON p 7,1:tAiir - .1 \Aci),v_yator 11\---0--------- 7j0 \-- ?vYS.(20- N_:_ . xt3. -y)c)16,1- -Q-,- _.\—. -D r\-b-AA " 1rvu. wc-,T\ --GMT- s-yrp a-cA-. I. ;;<- lx•YJ- a -9- 4 ' 772 -i.-- -- ---5wAl_ : y2 AQ) - V 31)j-, .--YJD \ Nrfj.------ --- - - ()A---pa-Z, - –r-i*dio-- 3 ',..-3\A/TOU\ a-Fp—WM ----Vc7Q 4 EP,- • .a0 3-3O DN7.1\:\ .___A__ - • - 41. 91AoK5\--- . • ---? Q Qy.„ --.‘010*.• • , ----- -\--- . , .2a a I01.7 il/P 1 1 'V,CW.' --D'W Q\ .D9; ---- ' , .n _ _--DVO--- 53)-W. -T -'X-21- .t Da:) ,- - . *14 elt e — .-40- VaLTD i , - A71-c,--4 -.(-- --- --D4 la --RAl Fri vAo , i\-v-z sr--z or) ,(-_-_- G Lat-7-- - --po ,A c-)EA (71-2- ---,i\ &V ite- 110 3 .11 -, F), --gTh:_-_\ ---- `7)C-2,C. | ! --- ---- ' | ---�---- - --- ---- - --- -- ---- -- � -------- --- --- '---' / / --- ---- . ` _-_ __~ ' . _-_ ' --- '------------- --�-- -- - ------' �------ --'---------------�--------- . ! | . � -__' _ '_ �__�� _- _. -_ - -�_-__-_-______-1__ i __- ___ -___--_ __ __ _-_ -_- �^_ -____--- ! � ! | . _ - _--- -_'-__I_________. ___ _____-___.___- __-_______ __ ___________ _ __ _ | / - - i ��m� / . __-_-_' - ' �� ' __ i - | ' _t__-___�-_- '-- _- - / '_ __ __- � ___ c...,...--•-''�~�~�~ ~� _ - '' __�_--~__--_�__--_ - _ �-' -- _ --- - ____' ~ . ^ ^ ' -C3 Za 1 cj 1 1 4\0 1 jr_AA ora---44)4:Z6\ .7______ _ _._ . . _______Ab: 0 W 0 .I. "X:S-1 • ?--) O --a•-- __ rx.a...,‘ ,Atro- id .9 t : A P \ ?if\ i ytqD - c2.9Del • **AI : ! -a\I U. .. _.--)\ CL> ___V-C.-; C-- ÷*lig . ___. I,4. - T__ _, \d, L04..., Th9 7k, _ xi _ .;/-_--------._ ...r:• -- fl cr-A t ivy • c., )D5-0 ?t,-A-01AA -4,a) ..,-- 4-a- ; ' ---- u- '14, _,FIV -7.j-W -D--)‘-(411) faDtA 001. j ac7Uk *-0- --3- - ->-- -1-7\j\-) .4%71 a ----/c . : - ,--Y1012-3)P --\ -&-v-3Nif7 ___ .. _____ _(:::57_,5035,10___ ____ ___ __‘___.,.i._________._.__ 00 ,ow2,017 _ 102 , :it ..___ .x),3. _ _),31cy . _,:...__._ _ , __,_ - ------VA110 U) Dri&pc2)-3-1--) d\4r-k. k,o ivg k,\ . ' November21,2016 TO: Tigard City Planning Commission c/o Gary_ Pagenstecher, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 FROM:_ Jim Long, Chairperson, Citizen Participation Organization-4M 10730 SW 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 503-647-0021 FILE NOS, Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2016-0002 and Zone Change (ZON) 2016-00001 and (PDR) 2016-0012 FILE TITLE: TOPPING C-P to R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE with PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: Stafford Development Company 485 S. State Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 My name is Jim Long. I am the volunteer Chairperson of CPO-4M, the Citizens Participation Organization serving East Tigard—Metzger— and Durham. I am here speaking for both the CPO-4M, and it members in the Tigard-Metzger neighborhood. These are preliminary comments. The CPO-4M will be meeting on December 16th and you are invited. Goal # 1 of Oregon land use laws (1971) requires that citizens be involved in every phase of the planning process. This has not happened so far in this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change with Planned Development Review case. And, unfortunately, the Stafford Development Company [concept] application has not been fully reviewed (since, in part, because the City Planning depai tifient's office is closed on Fridays) and it lacks details. CPO-4M's boundaries include both incorporated and unincorporated areas. In contrast to access via the city, the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation sends the CPO chairs copies of development applications for review (at/before the Comment period starts). Why doesn't the City of Tigard follow the same procedures as the county and supply/post the developer's application online for residents and interested parties to see? Or, at least, why doesn't the city provide the appropriate Community Planning Organizations with a copy of the development applications? 1 November21,2016 First, as chair of the CPO-4M, in December 2015 in response the city as applicant for a zone swap for this property, the local east CPO-4M discussed the city planning department's request and voted unanimously to endorse retaining the Commercial-Professional/Commercial General zoning. So, your local CPO-4M asks that you deny this Comprehensive Plan [MAP}Amendment, Zone Change, and Planned Development Review. We the citizens (both nearby residents and CPO member attendees) do not support residential use, particularly R-12 and multi-story buildings (19 Ayes, 0 Nays at the CPO-4M meeting October 26, 2016). R-12 zoning does not fit the character of the neighborhood. R-7 or R-5 makes more sense, if the property does not remain commercial zoning. At this weeks CPO-4M meeting (November 16 it was 9 Ayes to 0 Nays) unanimously in support of a motion to ask the City of Tigard to include the three properties at the NW corner of 72"d and SW Spruce in the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal boundaries for a park. So, in conclusion, the CPO-4M membership asks that you deny the applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Planned Development Review, at this time. Thank you. 2 November21,2016 TO: Tigard City Planning Commisssion FRom: Jim Long, Public Citizen 10730 SW 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 503-647-0021 FILE NOS, Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2016-0002 and Zone Change (ZON) 2016-00001 and (PDR) 2016-0012 FILE TITLE: TOPPING C-P to R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE with PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: Stafford Development Company 485 S. State Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Goal 1 Citizen Involvement Goal 1.1 (page 3) is to provide citizens the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Public Notice Sign Unreadable One city PUBLIC Notice sign was visible on Monday October 31st, and when you look at it, the print on the public notice sign is too small (about 28" x 19") for people to read. People in cars have to stop, get out of their vehicle, and then have to squat down in front of it to read it. Passersby also squat down to read the PUBLIC NOTICE sign. Before Thanksgiving of last year(2015), when the City of Tigard's proposed Zone Swap commenced, the city installed two (2) Public Notice signs at 72nd & Spruce one sign on SW Spruce and another sign on SW 72nd Avenue. Both signs blew down due to Oregon rains and winds. Why was only one sign put up this year (2016)? When I looked for the city's most recent and only PUBLIC NOTICE sign on last Saturday morning November 12, 2016, the flimsy sign had fallen off one of its posts and curled up so it is currently unreadable, again due to Oregon rains and winds (see pic below). In the past week, I pointed out the city's unreadable sign to city Public Works staff who were out washing the stop signs and street signs. They didn't seem to care. 3 November21,2016 This has been a recurring problem for years, e.g. Public Notice signs by the city and developers regarding various application neighborhood meetings and public hearings over the years are flimsy and can't stand the weather, and become unreadable. As it was earlier this year in the failed Zone Swap application, this signage is a violation of city land use codes related to Citizen Involvement. Interested people who pass by this site cannot receive information they need to know what is planned. This sign has been unreadable for nine (9) days. Public notice signs are critical, especially for residents who rent. This is a violation of due process (197.763.8) and does not allow full and fair opportunity for citizens to see the city public notice and provide input. So, this public hearing has no real effect. There has been no readable, effective Public Notice signage at (72nd and Spruce) for the past nine days. Even after one Planning Commissioner last year and a city councilor this year suggested last year that sturdier, weatherproof signs be used. Nothing changed. My neighbors to the east, west northwest, and north did not receive notice of this public hearing in the mail. Neighborhood meeting notes: At neighborhood meeting last March we found it to be highly irregular that city staff was present. I've been to dozens of Neighborhood meetings and that was the first time I ever seen staff from the planning jurisdiction present. Ken Sandblast apologized for the wrong dates on the public notice signs on- site {We don't know how many people didn't show up because of their errors] "Park zone" occurs only when land owned by the city R-12 is not a good buffer/transition Gordon Root, the developer, said they ("We) have options if the zone plans don't go through." 4 November21,2016 City Comprehensive Plan Goal 2 Land Use Planning According to the Cogan, Owens, Cogan Report "City needs a minimum of 51 acres of vacant commercial to satisfy its commercial long-range planning needs for 2011-2031. {So, don't take the 72nd Ave. out of commercial zoning.} It is important to note that earlier this year there was no loss in residential property because school property (Site"B") was not included in your inventory of properties zoned residential. The language in the 2006 City of Tigard annexation ordinance had reasons justifying the importance of"Site A" to be "Commercial-General". Contrary to the 2015 staff report this property on the west sloping foothills of the Tualatin Mountains is not level, but has a 6% slope with drainage issues. This proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not a `periodic review', but a periodic review has occurred in recent years and the commercial zoning remained the same. The City staff report incorrectly states in the description of Site A: "the current zone does not allow residential use". There were three houses and currently two residential houses on "Site A" have been lived in as residences for decades. . So actually the out-of-date map in the staff report shows a house that isn't there. The city says it doing this Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment to facilitate preservation of R- 12 zoned land and ensure it is applied in a location that supports residential use. [We the citizens do not support residential use! Particularly R-12 and three story buildings.] Since there is a deficit of commercial properties, why take "Site A" out of commercial zoning? The City should not be taking "Site A" out of commercial. Why not rezone the excess R-7 property? As per the Angelo Housing study, rezone R-7, there's twice as much as the city needs. The City's had reasons for keeping it Commercial-Professional zoned during the annexation in 2006 and subsequent periodic reviews. The city has not projected the population need for R-12. 5 November21,2016 • • * -, b /moi '• --? The applicant's Planned concept review still refers to the subject property at 72nd and Spruce as Site "A". Thank you for considering these comments. 10 RECEIVED NOV 07 201( To : Ti9Ara P) &nr>,►n5 CornmtsSto-rt CITY OF TIGARD J PLANNING/ENGINEERING go Gory PA.ge,nsf8c)'lerr, 13125 S.W. 1•-1U11 131Vd,, 'Tigard 0M47223 From Navtctj ¶trod , 13t0 SW Pine, SI-. Me1_zfger, OR q7 223 SO3 - 20, - (algo File NOS, Comprehensiv% 'Plan Arnen drnerr+ 201 (0 - 0002 aha Zone. Change 2016 — 00001 rat T i+l e. : Toppi-ng CP +o R12 Comprellenstve. Plan Amenc1-rrert+ Zone Chan6e: w114-) Developfinevnl'- Review App1 ican+ s+aFfo'r A Development- Co . 14'35 S, S 1-ct e 54-ree;f- La6 Os nrti t , O R 4 0 314 My :home is NAncl T ra ctj , to 5L1 W./LW res)den+ or art , long -+;m-e. CPO member ref-ince! Tigard PIA Wit Schoo13 }ea.cker Tigard Library 14511An}ee_r Nof-11;n3 is going +0 save Phis East- arzct From bii9h* if houses are 4-0 Pill 1-14e o-n13 eenFrallj local-eek Fand, Gable }v accommoclafe recr6a4-oncl heeds of preser and Fui-Ure residenl's Unpr-eseJidenkd papula "on grorrfh of 1-11'7s CenI-urj pu1-s n-ew face ort planning for resiiden-h w,f-h 114-1-le or no oul-sidA, space b call own, bur planntd no►4ure park , ids Children's plaij air-ea moe1tl.e.d c•S-1-e*-- Por4land 's Ms1•morcland 'Parks nafured alaij area, backed h mane gfudiw✓s from tine MA10 Clinic and pork professionals nat-icniw',ck These, Faye proven gleir e pe c t-ive,ness in rel revin9 ph 9 si cal , rnertfal cold .ewwohonal �ensTiors our elAclren I,va; w11'11 -today . A Sur rot namj • Jogg;►v3 tnd Walking 4-rack, , r-e.cu4.54'cd, bj resident-s Anal a pleLee 4-0 play ball provide elder c,hilden ana dud Is .1.11,z, sarrie hea(Th inene 1>`-s . preserves far a pork i-k-is gem of optn space, '15 i414 Cii-9of TY9ara's insurance, a911.nn6i- 1-tie 0w04 aF overcrawdin9 whi'ck how }hr.afe,n +o elr.¢9rad-e, prvperr-y veduts of all why (tee hent . Increaseol hoist, -�raFfc, po))ufio- and riswny Crime rafts wi)I -Fate c;r 4,311 . T e ease dor li`veabwlihj Ios+ in e grin+ odr a market. sysJ-ew 44a.1- leave) people ou+. 'We ask j Cihj 4-o buffs , preserve +kis I14-nd bor a hei9kborhood,waik-40 `'park , As job oppmr4-us- flies increase. in 4#I1e_ ri9ord Ir)ang1e so w'►If d_oman� For aCivrriabla. 11ou5n- 'In 4-h is ax-ec. -kit Cu t1 o1- 1.19&rd - and Fred Me9tr,c16 no) mai is un unplanned mess of. a ne.iyhborlood aa's ios� its (ivea1o1(;f a .4-o 4-a. Vi$10)1 For rhe T196.r6( Trwan9k j .isf- Rerobs acihiC_ hniy T1'►cuik you fbr- LJo 1r el5►'i bi ettraJov, shcertkd , r�a�,u7 fyatj Nov, 21 , 201 Re : CPA or(0 - 00002_ Zones chc&nL 2016 — 000 0i P1 cm ryte( t`J.ay. tRe,i to ani •;zol - 00 019- �oaJJ-,an ; 73 0 3 SW 6pwuc.e., to 5u/ 7f1; 10735 61,1/ 72' Pre s2rvecl as a perk , 1-kis load 'is 4-kt 61-+13 o$ Trgar-c('s be5'I- irtsurctncl✓ 90.1; .5+ wh;ek hap,ens wh.an rtsi cle.nl-5 lack close (tut 55 -1-0 014-door re_crt.ocil <5?ace . Proper-1 j vodue`s 90 &Ivo) , S-ertoU5 goes up . Mod- Vi(,-h-.fmi2¢41 are_ our 010 lel ren I. Young �.�t'i 1dren ,cL n,. -d 1.4e, VIG :s,r6uS , d+�4-uoor e,,�erCi52 4-11.9heed , WtII I)v-, In -ht oh)_.9 sa1~e. Space IeF+ I�e1'ny �-1,e, t1o6-e.c1, locket( doors of home or , Transport-ea-ion is ' ri 19144 snare di re ads .• A tan 64,r vt l"vi a s4-,rn a-i-e of /00 Tenn mul,sr ei+tr• ,SPruee Fri SO/ it-(1441.81 767 bow de.u[enc! sare��s� t to-n.11 A, n.e.Pv (Led e.Iarm-e414 tori Spru- , a-vt.rean 6W 78'444r.el Pear Arr. r child-rtn , swhoh boa44-119 4-k .school bus. h/ars.e ek- 4ie, d- �je4-wee.n rn 4.0 &011' 145 lO c -1-ktrauykwr hr 4•raFciL 40 anei Frarn Pac;1GtL. M>� Can'1rt"5irt� 1� w-etk. btiougTilt -10 +w-o raMct (aA.'heA,5 4-ossin�r 11 04- bulls -I-o �-{-, dsarls. Oris dub wlt<s he4nwuz.d. in br� tours park¢ok orr• -e Flit 5 t et iwa,t k 11'1!1 of he,r duo , pixy Ad,. i h et11 ant tjo4-11 o 4'11-tht, graaLe atKool a.'` yrknelsons could +prow 4-6 10,01 zt Tour 4-+n e Ay-Wu-- 010,n r44, rI 1Ox Spatz alloweck R.hci 4-ke it Fru slra+,on show L. A+ anol- r Vom.c a moo-hear it.,,ked IF 44-uz park wouIa oBier space ;or key w17ee1chcur—barZd a - old . 441 aU1swc-ral- 4'h15 pm-k would serv-e me.eds o� ¢he nel5hbw 000l 2ckoi444 .fhz +I of it jars( oPlers n.tti1 re i ckr i-/-3 " Ike vIr i) 50 4-he, enc fir,, m i 1e, , d o +h- rig b+- 1+141 , enc c.eec( f�CP F C�"Q . Ori S S lea rJ Cart h+uR resRe is It m,r&ZIA, 4411S prri - tknde✓e.lopad IancL c&pL Qx�s 4-oclatl For i4- a,fenii ,. _preszrv. 4 as a park, u6tn9 tnrba.n r.e✓n a( Aitnds wiI) .wnhance. proper v® ,u,2.s far al( -xis+in and PO-11re d-tv-e_lop+nexi+. Soret, i-h;v1.5 is w ran3 wkem codQ' bix doubles/de " pa3t4 4-c, J us4 Fy use, of 411i5 G-crita3c For Art l -�'Itius� veloprngin , b�� cods 4-0 re.Goy) x.e ov r 20 0.home- owners who h&ve p e.4.14-;one-d h e e cl -For u� park a f 'i s Sia e-y in aM ares, ry h..re. rt cr -ek pop LA U:I-ror% de n s i hi rto1A545, Conccos 4,Qdx 4-menh — is & 9evert . Ftth4re Iivabil;+1 of- 4--11 is ne yk boyhood olepenob upon 4-kis Ptrk . AA)"15 w 64141 a. I sk-nc- 11A.cm/ , Respec+-abIu submIHHH-ed, IVB ry-aky '73/6 &11) p,he. 9-- Foyi-tetAtd. , OR q 72,x,3 603- —61go \At v41\_,,\ kft05` A 46 v4P al 3. Wilt TIGARD con4inuw ,Q) � fobsLplaCc, o � til (a z h ovi 7. t."416 Jiq wy, Jad,gi Ptiv 7..wo 711€ a� of TIGARD'S Srynal-wres Colle04cc( p!ale Feb.Jan. 2110 Mixon .t."2 .fi /.51,Yv`C. W‘) (051"-' JQV vv>1 M S 5-z1?) o ?Q'r'`'`�` -a!Iti'C n-Vd 5 ins ) S7F j 9115,//.3 r ,,:(2Q. hccot "")0S • --4PPO / rt 9 by cvs o-z t$ 11,`M 5 nb ,14 ,P77/ —7%0 QQ&/ qe-ra-Nei/4 1 - 7i57.-0& J,*? 1911.1 / ) Wi ( sad( .45 ,/2j '9 7v44: ! �5.71-/70 C-Q C€sL INN-14 2..57)-v 0 rvIS fS –39' 7,W5r d loco t Gi")?a(�9J 1I0. H L , Ner4 u6 l k, .1,1. -21-'149)V ;inuett/tad J 1.11400 S) -4117M -wntit nodi fl "�� 'i } �v -204r3 -1.11)4 p,ro Ffi 01 NO i i 0.3d 5,414 71 .."l ?AV' u t 92'."17 f7- ` rx"l ds 'Ji'5 EQ.�e f : (.{0H17d0V b -1110 �ts Cis sl.(7)L4,40.-a-0‘ Tyub fie--.g5 • ),ornrif_. >,/ yo / ' i,9 f . 01 -kv_evrp , vv, g c),Ne 0,/ , 0$ S 0 j 1 0-1 p . stcag NgZiandmAht 5010 L- - CZ-Ta, we refit, vitivIA7v1017 - ?'puht4 mss, oulL I cc.-ZZ ertii191 '' (y) Lys'(V1 2/9 /-714441d.-e,,,y1 N19 sz, }) • _w )bow9 X001 a9 21.t, C(0 "kil off/. 07±55T #s v? Ms, /pm_ , )115Avvrolio +19 LVQ `I"'ffl woyv, 0--617.) _4511-)pl pAc .E . cz2 L 1g /- > '.� sa, - Egc •, (-15 4.12 •s-1carau,u�s zo y 5s-0ploy �� gWY(Y %tono ua _f • bJ1 via 't'i ,Jaue(t'fiad tot--vu Ai S) d �, ap 07} - '119Rc aR Leom f -1"42j 1- n 93,111" -arra :Wdd.rn$ .ru 61 c;414 Pam �� v�!� �f p u i rl 7,r."w tr i'J "ni CSS •M9 Ea. . off c� r Loed4-tP o-n : 7303 S,W. 5pruCa 1,54 c�.er�. 4 bLkind -F-ii-e Tilerd Fr,.cl ME.jQ.r5 27.::_:::.: PeT1 T toN -0 64--1 or- Ti"9 curd o 41 r. sm0—r;1- t bt aF 1 , 1cwel l-a__ f 9:u.r "- © .be ,, ,ILt- -Fo r.e.4.i cl t (5►rI n co ur-e, of Pe-wail .r; Nd,n c- irpl, MAM Ad re s bl me�+� �� 1-Ptzt-4� 6 87S S 1 1°//4e os" -oC Sai e...." ,(ifitime..- 77“-tet) 0 k_ q 1-1,1 ,6Y0 s' 9"/A 6i-ceP2 rr c or 3 hi I et _Ticlait,60, since w,r467 i btf\ &uthe. -`ayvp5m. 6600 , 121! Pin E5+ d- I ! Cj7 i 3 mo ' 01/4Aisl-01-- (ore ii' " �- 57. l ' $ 1722.3 Areit-127, - ,(1 1)61,, \-\a-k-li\s„,,,i Am Lilo sv.i P ;Aa� 5 I r@e i lei Q& 822.3 3 fiii4e c ')41 --f i" 17Z340tiikj_ 1-(IiifYet-re -71 )5 S& p/dev4 .es / y t Fc, T Pirkam,,,,„,tdy;v, ;, -76re_D _swittiphimr 51- __-___- ______,---- sfr,.- - ----- L.- 7-64.6Ceee-----• ---7‘f/74W2.-,4441- eC/ /// / 0 Ar / / ,d' 1" 'A of Ark) Vj( 5 I i, L)4j; 44-0-yLd t-76,is" -s:-14.) -(24 k c -. J 1 ' 7G 5 5 0 50-41.5-1- iir I ,.- e LOCeicils cir : '7 503 6,W, Sprucz ( ,5-q acre$ bgilfnd f4,1E T ord Frrtd Melers — _. . PE i i 'rtON 4--o 61-j o Tiq aid : . Irl- ub¢_ oP +k s (an4 ?Yr-cl. if Sou wand f .40 be. iii e..l1c- -1-ti r.a4idt,4-'-i&( ar & (S i@ ri odure, of Pe-,i-ionert JitN' AiAh1 . 7r1ra3e> Aotdre5s 451:114:- OA-rnmU -S T Cc)) }Z 1 i0494 170 MA-(, t q5C 5;,1 L�odeuS a y �,q{1 a Jam! �,a C orf': 4Y �,�,-)" L -Pi _ti i:i1 . 6811 S.(.z) , �� 5f rla 4 to - 2e-1(e so3-�,4L - ire t- rrye. OVr ,*, -',►ldcli (corer) 1 dog Tiiard a.c011 Lvc6.,c -;L.3 677`k-,/ pe(A_ av/J 11-c- 01-64k1 .64kr i 1/44 1(0.A -7-i) cc✓i 71q?'74 if ti°` 1 • 1 U t.t,`>> S 7 tit.- - ,L= ' sem `--0L-. E' 6\Z `1-17;z3 so 6,6,4) `>L.J '71 1 AUL a t-I rz is (\NI baa SCA' 7 /6 r1 2A, G(z- V.7z z. -0.k. i Ar?Y { rot o .., 9-12.z. . .P4rK ,rotk,c- pk 4. ( , 5-0 ?(-1 .5c-0 7 P.' Aoe, / /lilts c)7 (Pilki< 4)d 1--. h 7I-z ) 5 G3 fitA�(..‹.1Sr I Let: i,,ct,- - � f. L. oe,T- tk,Q via `;7t 7 z .Z Z • Ra Vic., /: r OceepA , .i, ppikoi i ,.„ r.,, q aulek. g 7, (9-3 1 4a(c. sem' ?u� St e) a. ° ;r `� f ji- L00641'01 7303 6,W, Spruce, (,5-q, cLer-e-5 kg-hind flit, {1iga-sclFred Metge-r5 PETITION 6 1-y (+g cir d : .r, ppt7 E amt.. oc 441:1 s [anal. crr. Iffy ba, an-1 mak- F�o� ids ,i_ o , (SI oht�u-e of Pe-h-�)aner- 1' O1/4 ) 4, 4vuoh A1,4h1 -1'P.,1N1- ACM I^e4s ,�Q�¢ rnrnth-r4-stA Cell 5,016] Vr&'c ,c1 '%v` sz 3 3 1 5 LI ` n-�` 7 ,f'L,r f 1� t" ,i 7. t<` =z;jf J l ; , 7 �- / .e• -- -A-7/4/. 445/-ige_ /0___T— C) ' t.:7_ i x I-(2 G ee, ) �.�(�,,^ 17 Is"' 5-,IJ�4 rd i' . d > �; ) i 4,,e . l/lei� +�%rit Al 1-� l 1 ��3 ov. C it ,1 nie..),-ti 10415-6 5 L. // 1` ;64 it ej &( (K !r/4',,i1, ✓e.61 r 4, 5;13- -26l 's ) 11,?...a. ...),-2.\d 0A -Ito , ., . „, ( -7(-•1-) . i -b 7 St L 1 I CI 3. S-64/ f-an c. C,17 / ' 7 c-ec- cio 1 1 k -\-C1/4.V\ko) Ni).(i.ttic co IL-27q0 ‘7)(iti -9' Icjk ,. '89r)- 5 9 -4- IN . , 6, , uy y9eymiv3 I/iSO61 , , E- LE ' �- 5Tic deem elacileAA toq i 1 Stu 'C.\elk 5- pe-r-ke.) f:6Y 41;5 ll a . ., ctu'4, Rfac (AP 51.tJ 6(.1--K 1-- �^ V • LCidiick Plana. l b c- 5 i, ' 6.'' A.m.- . `( il r t, ;- e. f3y 'fra/17' A4/.1,/,*), 4-f s-Kr, 8i &- - 5°3- Pe_io by- , . . 4 --LI c-r_si-il Pcf--0-.. . !.i , ., 0 . z.)7,777- --72-eT7927,4 z ciri5 0, CrI7Pin t p f / , f • p i k'i7( eV-71/V p-)74 w/ 11-/ /) 7Z Pi. ciT /-*-73 :-f. f' / I, 51i ( .Y)0 .11 .2z ris '--- . e537(2ii. Ci 7g_7744 cjr;fl---;)-VIS. 441/1/10 titil ut9-,7 i i!Pttir31 j_i t).-1/7 iki --i's -w/12a7//1.5 fte,'02, ..i.:2p.i,u...1->ILIA, • , ' 05 r4 /12.S\ (2M/ -4-'7'&8—APN.--t1i7L 6'4iv e/z- (7$' -471 9•1'41/7127.es--0-roV7-4A (Ajl'-'469 N''''n oucJi eli 0)901 kt, .,c3.T. Nucc)o\i /-0 /, tAAPD i:1-"Y13 kti .6 / p:yd 0:14 )9/VW 311, . s se9 () / r- . Jo ruili_ ci.s 0c- o.1 ,,A.2.5,,,,viNcyvtA) 11,-A4n-H .)2P -,,•Pit pe--) ,7 g 7-47.0-fi i'r'fr-wir9 FPI r 2, cns 0044/. 5--Pliti ! uprzioly (POJs5-1-LowLon ' e S-S-a.4 prof ,J,Ncia.-- - gWV(Nif z, airt_L _ • 00' ea VP?"kt: . • 90A4 # ;Jaua.Lotad jo 2-.04121.4!s) --ef-44,71.7-77-1.70-1- -7----7-9Tali "bc1 c+ 0.014 rio6 II 91* Jo .--7,9)1 iLtocidvi5 f : p,ra bii -Jo ki-9 0--v. MO IA i).3d. !..taim r2f_u p."0611 rttf p U19701 7a:-.01D '1 ?,nids - '9 00c,L : Li.”--trvd07 • Sl Loco ern : '7303 S.W. Spruce 1,5L aeras behind Az Tlard Ereti Meyers PET) i-i ON 4-0 64-Li or- Ti g cxv'cl ; r Support- IA be- OF 14%15 rang. hp- a_ if 90u n+anl Wa.11c. -Fo rx, idr.+1'r-t&I park , (5ignai1Are, of PetrTione.r: j0614( t‘I 41 4-vuch. : 4 131"3 e. (ir$ . Te, Tr ,A►1A1w1 z y r A1otd,-e ss . �p14 ' efu rn m e l -s Nil o ' ' ars.d, ac- t.wi1 aw ' 104. -401q, C44%J £eu J r4 to ''J3Ia 5+`► Pato 01.1-0orf e l come_ c�n �.r aW- r �l?Z23 J f ark .0 .041.0-op,v, dims 4-Li , A.,-) .:\ k cx,;.;S "i-i--; k'l.t (\k,,S e l 4,-1 E, I ,2 , (? 0-11 IA -1 :I ) it b .5h% n1.5 -e ITA:,-5 i 71/�, T-ToJ u(v- 1 J'A _.3 /---(_; .)LL +c\ckri 12 `'17 `3 , + Ckcoc: L�'; c---4 ct\,\E'{ 1e' , -3(c �,,, s i' �ti s,,\"0 1 ..\�.(.C-) (s S 19 6 E ill 0,c V e\1.5 o irc�c o .5L•11,i 4 72 z \3 t \,- cQ ., .�JLI , i >.(„ ;" LQ -c-',� i r / Gc,c /64-..$(— __---- Do 6 ' , :iRi n e loRol Z l + i L, 5 WS—I '.sem . / r'l '-iJ I(a+lr.� �,� ccS 5�. P;nk ,t, -� )T .. 7Sreci ts-,,,ik. —,7L7,qc: 5o, riii.k. 5 1-rce Ai , '�1> �,'��E.c___. �-] "'-� �,� �' 1 1,, � �� C Atm --s -1-“\\ E Too5-03VI m�N q ?Ar'A 5 oil 7 Dr 3 i k 13()W m 1-.3i 1 f—, �i N E Wr IJ D A Ve 1, To' (---;.0.-- - —rt C�aAR►7 0R_ c1 27 3 2.6.:(2,:— `��iZ `i (�'`l ',ird,im fill N 7fz797-7SvJSprtw ' 97 J dee 072 hay? (_A4lf(sa.f) 1V)aq. Vk'Savollt -411- c6 -.4.3N_L5c0 -er-4i_210 /141-1 6=4 cv‘c 4,?9, 1r2514 'rf fh2 21.5rdit`'d gooLL ›p©Q t1tA1 1,s aorlJJS (Y).s ,TIhl. )0/(i 04)31 a s Q L 1. 1_,qJ A.}-\\, -201) 14.24. M5 Se b o,I 9/-X",-P-6°;9 ?AV Ms QL11I fl) Yi/j0/1 ? \14sc Ob-0/// >'3P1'7; t/ c) 7 r-44(19 SI21 1 a b✓� Jtbi 9.yr i a_c*ki ciste:A * ' 257 -12/14gyi1,44)9,7.-ied J - )ffni 4S____ zog6.11`24w-Vp4v(v 3 c2su� i� L� J Vr�bSLse`. Suv2k1D". - she ',Tnn� 4a i a.1-4>L. ( ,-,s a I\o vu t.1-cuL o * ) 'U`v u ipo ur �r1 - fl 7 111"i Li! ; �auQif adjo at }nu5q °A [I M Faµ no t fZ - 'f l l sib} Jo -a4rt i:,coddvts : p.rn 6,11 -Jo RI No - 1,L 3d, �_ - s.Az a a p.11411 u c-am fi `j ?->n•J Cis 11/1`9`9 £O L : LIQ t -VdQ 4 . . Loc6-4--;cal 7 03 6.W, Spruca 1 ,54 cur.e.6 ictell i n d -41-e TI of'el Fri el ME q r5 pE 1 T-, ow 4-0 6-i- or- Td : _..E....ti.Asr.t5T,1-... .t...A to 62, walk- 4-0 t--et,11. ck.r.k. (S.ipahlr-E, of Pell 4-itrne r: Eri n 50 Lin 0 c kl ) 143 1 A)A/A E. Adel re.5..s .• evo-rn rre urri-s' •4* .1.01‘9;7' , _ i1e/1/7-tree 64,..SCAV oe 60 )J-3 ,.... • i _f in ocvloc‘<-(4 lic -ii 5(,ti Spode- e i i 'Ird Oit ci1tz,3 ., f) . „ .-3,c)Sii, ..) -‘ , • . ..._, c • , Icy:(St.. 00, ci/G2,2-5 )-. • u (•:- . k k. .. c-lt-- p,-A-5it c2:1- tckL- —NY. 9 5 -) 5-Ac -, - r-/- I , •Ii I .--i •) 71 J) iDK q.7223-7-)4.,-L i_r:;•,,,. _,- 4 • 1 R :44-ovcc CO )i.A.6 ,.i,L --- -7 q t1"ii t .> T722 .. ( 1 .. --Ts; I spys.- 6',AA Cci-so I(c. ii. ,:.4A,.-7(. ':}t(0.----tc., 5vi _Sicv-LACQ.. i • it' -.. ,--VVAitifr Ckjtiiiii. , T'6'C"--\ ? ‘7.- (11)42D J _ C.,14-1 rc I 5 -1—/Atf-e..._ 10 c.'ele,--c - 7: '-• ..- , ".. - P. f/44. 5. '' ,C5.5 314i S.Ptaz 57( , 0k , . Lick. ,S0)114, c/7 2 9-3 - ai-oL,:let• per i.k.nAllc-r. la cali ;in tvi.A.1-0 i 1 , .. . . Locedis 0-x-1 : 7503 .5,W• Spruce ( '514 a..cre6 fazhinci 4--ie Tga^d Fre4 Meger5 PET) r 1 ON CA-{-,J o cj c,.'d : t 5vnppor1- Ube- of -His (`arid a-fi. �fe�ue an4 - to wa.1 - -o r-e-64te4.11-i rlt, (51ynahr-e of Pe4-14-ione.r; dtwfrti ` ) ; 4ouoh ; ALA A 11a _ erc;3 e> Aral re ss R a8 - rn m e� n 6-Y, � 7)1 �1 Cc)) V i fL ►tJ l it 10`(00 Sc,J 16 0 —,- 91 a I .brOCk,t fiA. JA5 a Jo 7 0014) 76"--1-1/4.12/ \t„S �z ,, (of 5U3 s� G /fT( , ,c/ 9?ZZ3 k ;AVX 147i73- min-,7 3-11 (6100 5W -761--, p j _ 1 71 Wc3 0 rr o(. . ?4--0( (S__ 9 77 a ` L G _ iocav pwt �i2 1 17 Le_.--,,, --Le t.s- 09'676 —/-e/20?-is.--- eld44.(.--ybuLd, iezi__..._— A ”.- ., - -- ..._._. ' tc )Co vw 71, Pt '"t1 603 1�pr--1c;�AA 9 7 P.3 ,,,elifeat411.P�,_ ? acc�`r 11�NI ��2 in1/1/1 /OgOD.SA 7 1 /af�f, Cr 40 . s 771 —71; A if t i tfry1 . Pyr-'1i 1, / .r _ i/ f 97�� $63 -.S?-30— Mulik Morn's ekk 7750 s&J Pike ?t-, i Port I an o(, O) X 23 -Za di c1, J Y&:C.5 O c- SW SP"cC 5A 5 ar+o.� 4-o3 - T13 - 'T.304 oil `1742_17 5-2.23 / - - S �iJ sp- , ' ��Pc�r/a ,�,� �1i Y36-371-300 gal- of dh O Gi v M 2oe/k4e/ q p 23 r 7740 5q) 7.- :e .553 ee,r/ arc ,c &a, - iJeie -. z.,,,,( , r LOC6.4 trn : 7B03 5,W, Spruces ( b. t4. cLerk.6 .hind -c-L `dig&rd Frn,a Mejers ... _ . PET 1 1-1 OWI 4-0 61-tj 01~ Tag (Ltd ; r Suu�Part- tAbk_. }i.is [unet ,-- i you ward ` - to .be, WI-1k- 4-o r.e-Sidor b1&l park (sip Mune, of Pe•Ii}ianer. 1 ori 0ouch /M A M E ��i�a�e� Rti° .. AS rn rn e,�,-1-s �"�1, m • "��Z1't�tst' Metre 45 ��14 Cell Aitiit la \\I.* 101+16 SW 72n '''''''r d -P� r� tr Mt 5 °I3S - aY Dr 61722.3 '-10 play in I WWIZCik) 72.E >4 'e IL Cf4 . r L)' z 3 1-I cuitaiki gia q4ii-t (.6i.ii:cu-g- 31. oe(et_ DA.e 41, ?oktk5cn ci to qi-422•a -11Al2 10111 ! 7-0"1 SW Loc LiSt- st, lh,Urvk.Geh �ortta>1d, Q .a"1 ad 3 _ ' ®a ai6 L 4 i,Vvhiurt, - ILtriOGSO3 y lAuv, 0 7 q(e) 5 CJ L.occ rt- /tJ e--.& o So) rob; YU St. -71' e.,, 47Zz 3 a &act.._ ip, 5 5(5 -I LioGi 1 1 i e_ irlaeffer. lit I i & i o c u l ,S-I---, ,74 6Wer X77- CYl l KQ, e-F- o'^�`'l'i olz, °I 72•7,3 • .0I10Z 'f 4 5.W . L-cc� w� � o arc rAect S'�'2u�. (`nAy b+fir�'� � 5� Mace_ �Ac'C �' eon-1/4-kiNAa drepr. 9.T1-23 cvc'vvoi wc- l'oe Cc4' ="1°k* 6 cite( V rY a46:‘,.y ekore e +e(sca\7,4.1/45-C1/ fl' v , i "1[424} / 00g° Sud .7.-7 'cc ® AI_ e__ _ (ii:?k-10,4164.}0_,-A 7 a-ii- ,..gArttk 'I M A►Q i 1 `r" (.t' t-KE_ ,s /001Ka Ski 7/!Mt) ' We ) .ti 4icire-i9ekr,� ., i°02-71/44d Ofd 9 7a:3 _ S L 1 1 R A`s f I LL9 --7s7/ Sw LeGuS l 51 W E!t-) gkip-.. 57)3 ri b ea kj , b, ' 5 k22Z 'otia 5P'�- S ay5-B5 'rtkik ,, k., 7 ` Lo Jam-, beic. 11°105. M iit, /02.(56' RI 77rh 9 74Q_3 I!Auac 2 r'tc.‘6W -3-b I I io bw_ k i ,,, . . • . • . , •" ...440,,,.?•-•4,‘•• .4 4 , • . -1 '..4'4 LE .11. 9 [0110/ 0. - , . , .. . - • 1' •i - - . .-.. . . 4tor _ • •, ' AZI., iM'S , Lug....g. ..4_.. , , , . 1ar,-,-f.lowa -A. . Ave?IA . . . ‘',. .., s 4..,',,Ce..';•••-•Ir - -,,/,'`.....•! .4,- . . ..Alt.. ..P". .,,,, i • . . f .. -- ' •: . . f,),, " .4 .''''. iri- ' il '11).•", 4,1, ,-- .' ,. A -"' -*arc:- • ., -:•••• --' 4..,- ., ' : .; .A.4 .,:..,.,Y.- -'ir.lc": n; • ..- . .... , -. , .• , - •,. i#it. • X ;'- k•• . - ' 4 -•414 -.••:. , , 4) . -... . . • ••••••. ` • • - -,..A•.gr• ..•-••, . .• ., . -...'• ; ,,,,, ..„,•„• •. , • •.• -, , .'`.Ni.,•I- . • . -,. . %,... -• .'.' - . . , • • ...,,. :;.1"..4• '... •, • .....H___ I ••• ' . -.1. • 1', .16' ' t2E .•1. 1 .1 9 l'Oal LO I ZO . ' . • : ). .P.A+ , .. ir . .,. ,.. , . , . • : ..,_. .44,11,1; ,, .. :1 ,,/ ,... • • .• .. t oli- " =04 ,' s41-',, ',... • ' .., . at -:". '''' ' ' . .:.*--1•--.1.:,,,,', 4k-'7,-; .. ,...-,9t,..'1 '.5.'5"'1 fi..." f • ,N, . - ...,f,i,,-,,,' •r'.446-11..,•4•-•'•-• ''" - • g- i,''"''..r.1,44 '*. ' ' 4, . t.;,-4.,..''-.:. •••.---7-----.7.,—..•••.4..:4'..'-, . * ,..4.4 1,, • 7,..5F .• , ,„. . 4,4,:-/'....- , ' 1.!.. ,,-i. ,,,,,* ,.• ... '• . ,,,,,,'. Vr.,‘,.,4WPI*L•1 .; . . . •k : .*' "sr''i‘, ' ' --r.'4'. • ,-, . 1... ,•••••--.ad...,.., ;4: • , iill• • .4. ; , , i,r. " ,- i •- --,\,t..... ;,:„...,,- .. • * . ,,,,tt - ' ','..,..-4...- ,,'?.; 1. °,..1.:'.•,.'.,-f• 4*..t-t4:11)•'..,,•,,•;$^4-ifkas,,t14 • , , .„_ ..- . f - , - *...ti . . - .. • -te.• 2 .6,, ...-,' . i. ,11. ,,,,,,.„A,",i,,A.,„;;-r,r:'....,, :e„. .,,, , ,. •- .'':-- .,:;,', • •••• i.';..i''-'..•••.'•*''-...*,.-",",.*,".:.-;,..':-•.P'•c'A••••'••'-.` '.•4-..t.-•4i':'34.V..,',.'••'•.',,•,''-•\'--.-''I'kI' , ''..,'-','•..'1, . -'' ,,,-I•:"`- .-1•-1 4, 4-.•r*e'...0;.'.'••4i'40'',,'•,''..•,t',,,•',.,\,.'.' . „. $ „ . :y •,.,.,.,'. • ,,,,,,,....i.,- ,::,„s„ ..:•,••• -, -- ... •,, ,.., .,,,,,„:„.,. „,‘..• 5 •. -, ' ap •- '. 4 ....#4j, ,... ,•,•• . ,,..-......--. ,,....r.,-..A.4.•-,..,-„,„,„., .,...„ • , , .:,• •., ,,, . , ,..„:,,,,.. .._,..... . ,':'''..1 , k Alf ,›tiii.• .1.-‹_.,-,t7:,,:::;,', - 4? -,-:-.,',. • , . • ' .••••-- -IT' ,Nr:','y.,..---,ak +. 11,:-: t'W:c• -,..... • --," ''„?q- --le : • 'sir. ' '.':., .'i.,,e. -•-•1,:ffS)IttV/14t,',N:4,-, 1,4'1 ,,,,. '. '''• ''f/.14P •- re; . ... , •'. , A , „.34' . L'.'f, ,,,„ .,.i.114-'-'7.rtr4:,1',,,,,,..,••Vot.!"N„',. !;,14.'- ',,,,,t,4.• ,,,/, '',. -; '5 f.414 .',., 11 • .*k' ,!..,.,*- r. ,,-. -!•:•-' ";-,P,••,yr4v44',10!"1`•‘•••;;A4. ..','' 4-:4"''' • • .:"*2, :-471,:r '. ','-'.'.'''' ,•...'1,• ‘.' '1"),' %-",..-•".;1:-:, ,.‘`...''''!',.'1_ .'-''''' '', i.,%, ..;',''.. .. ',, '4, .4,-,./,..,: .. • ,:. ----• - ,...,. - ._ ..,,,,,,,.... 7-.;.--.1-•.- 1,----7.1-;7.,1" `,Ve--av 4. 0 .. . g-, .+, ,-i .6.0, ;,1 "v",*ii.+••• •. -* ,-- -,6•11,-.,• . .-,.. ,,, • ,.. • , -4 ''''./ ''. ' . - ,, • ;r. . • i/." .-'.° ' - ,'1,, . +-.. ',I:4 • I .;f`,,• ",., .*' ": ' ',*,,.';'-,...'. '%':' "1,4,• "tit 1.,1'51e , 4....1(11344_,•*f.,' '''.:' .4 1: ' • 4' ' •• -;"'`'• ,",'," j,••••,,'.. .-**"... ;,. r., , " •- , .r,,,t 4 ' ' . ,.. ., .. A * '4Cw#AO:t." . • ' ' •44.1 • • 4 ff - • • "t•iir .4 '•'14 ..,• e". ". ..." ^; *4ft' • • ' • .. -k414,.E* • . • -. A , , • , '..tl,V.; 'i•S el Y1 oldS -- - • ...„ - -. . •• •.- • 1 42 -- -- ',. -:. ..._ _.• _ . , 0..1. ,r ' „ •• '..„.. 1- --. -'1, . . . --•-' -li'' IA40.21 .• .,- • , I,...," litt ' a.. ••C'' - .•,•'. ..1•4; • - ''..1, '.''• ..-- . . • • ' ' Iviqt I A - .- , • -•• - . Kr •,. -.• -,,,,..--.-. ,. . • i • • . ,, November 21,2016 Page 1 of 4 In 2016 to date, members of 206 households within a half-mile of SW 72nd and Spruce signed a petition circulated primarily by retired elementary school teacher Nancy Tracy in support of a park there and they added the following comments: Would love to see a park, would use A place to take our great grandchildren Great! Park would be great! Please, a park! Park for me Park! We have two kids! We need a park Needed a Park! We'd love to have a park like Westmoreland Park. A natural play area A park would be nice. A park would be perfect for this neighborhood. [2] The park seems to be ideal location. More parks. Very much needed. Great idea. We need more parks! Great opportunity Yes, Please! — NO MORE HOMES Yes, another park is needed Yes needed. Hundreds of homeowners would welcome a nature park to offset growing density Absolutely! November 21, 2016 Page 2 of 4 We need open space! Good way to build community Good idea! Great Good use of otherwise unsuitable land. Wonderful idea Can't have too many parks We need a "walk-to" park. Called in to support a park. Go for the park Great to have a park No comments Yes, park would be great. I love parks! Park is a good idea. Children need a place to play. Supporting a park. We need a park!!! Park please We need a park! (Smiley face) Suggests a path around perimeter for walking. A park for my 5 boys to play in would be wonderful! Great use of the land! In need of a park in this area A park is super great! November 21, 2016 Page 3 of 4 More activity for our neighborhood would be far better than adding more people to over-populate area. Park would be a great thing for the area. We need more park space. We need more natural spaces. Great Kids First! Kids First Great idea Thumbs up Nature! CHILDREN! HEALTH! Great walking destination We need more parks! Great opportunity Yes, Please! No more houses Yes, another park is needed Yes needed. We don't have sidewalks, but we do need a safe place to walk. A perimeter park for walking Love to have a nature park. We need more natural spaces The City of Tigard doesn't have any park space near here. We need a park with wheelchair paths The City hasn't done much for this area since many blocks were annexed into the city. November 21, 2016 Page 4 of 4 More (recreational) activity far better than adding houses. Go for a park! Nature! Children! Health! Great walking destination Thumbs Up Good way to build community A place to take our grandchildren A great thing for this area Our kids and families need this Kids and families need park close by I've got two little ones that would love this park. I would use it often (a neighborhood park) Traffic is very bad already. This neighborhood in serious need of a park. 1 'Pis TIGARI) City of Tigard November 17, 2016 To the Tigard Planning Commission: An active group of neighbors in the Spruce Street area has regularly been attending Parks and Recreation Advisory Board(PRAB) meetings since the beginning of this year.They have gathered a substantial number of signatures in support of a petition to the City in purchasing a property at 73rd Avenue and Spruce Street for use as a future park.The Tigard Park System Master Plan goal is to develop parks located within a half-mile of every Tigard resident.The PRAB is in agreement that this location would make a nice neighborhood park in an area that does not currently have a park.We have seen what a motivated group of neighbors can do with a neighborhood park and would like to be able to work with this group. However, the City does not currently have funding to help purchase the property. If you have any questions you may contact me at 503.372.0724 or Steve Martin, Parks Manager,at the City of Tigard at 503.718.2583. Thank you for your consideration of this property. Sincerely, ,e:ilittei2.(3 IQ Holly Polivka Chair Tigard Parks and Recreation Advisory Board 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov January 16, 2017 Tigard City Council and Mayor 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 Subject: Zone Change(ZON)2016-00001 I am writing with regard to the application by Stafford Development for rezoning of property at 72nd & Spruce in Tigard, Oregon. I understand that the application for rezoning submitted by Stafford Development in the November 21, 2016 Tigard Planning Commission meeting minutes was suppose to be available for us to read. I have searched for this application on the City of Tigard Website and cannot find it. In the November 21, 2016 Tigard Planning Commission minutes, Gary Pagenstecher plainly states that the application is online. I am frustrated to find that materials that should be available to me are missing and therefore I cannot comment on them. The rezoning of the 72nd & Spruce property affects my family greatly and I am very concerned about the impact on our neighborhood. Sincerely, �{t7L.J< (6444• i CLQ. Debbie Bowman 7311 SW Pine Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 January 16, 2017 Tigard City Council and Mayor 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 Subject: FILE NO.: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(CPA)2016-00002 I am writing with regard to the application by Stafford Development for rezoning of property at 72nd & Spruce in Tigard, Oregon. I understand that the application for rezoning submitted by Stafford Development in the November 21, 2016 Tigard Planning Commission meeting minutes was suppose to be available for us to read. I have searched for this application on the City of Tigard Website and cannot find it. In the November 21, 2016 Tigard Planning Commission minutes, Gary Pagenstecher plainly states that the application is online. I am frustrated to find that materials that should be available to me are missing and therefore I cannot comment on them. The rezoning of the 72nd & Spruce property affects my family greatly and I am very concerned about the impact on our neighborhood. Sincerely, � e(�GJi odwnrt Debbie Bowman 7311 SW Pine Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 ch "01g- baZ- January 16,2017Zoe 7�Ib _ O amp To The Tigard City Council and Mayor: Pp C 246 C7`) O (2— Concerning ZConcerning the application by Stafford Development for rezoning of property at 72nd and Spruce. After a painstaking search of the City of Tigard website I am unable to find the application for rezoning submitted by Stafford Development. I read through the minutes for the November 21, 2016 Tigard Planning Commission and found a statement from Gary Pagenstecher, on page 6, saying the application was online. Because of the recent inclement weather I am unable to drive and cannot go to City Hall to view it. This concerns me because I cannot review and comment on it.As my property borders the property being considered for rezoning I am highly impacted and very interested. Concerned citizen, Penny Stewart 7330 SW Pine Street Portland,Oregon 97223 January 16, 2017 Honorable City Council and Mayor Cook: Re: Application by Stafford Development for rezoning of property at 72nd Avenue and Spruce Street As a resident of Tigard, I am voicing my concern about the possibility of rezoning a plot of land very close to my home that would have an adverse impact on me, as I live only a few hundred feet from the property, at the corner of 74th and Spruce. My understanding of City regulations is that homeowners have a right to review such documents; however I am unable to find this document on the City of Tigard website, despite Planner Gary Pagenstecher's advisement that it could be found there. As I am unable to drive to City Hall due to the snow and ice on the roads, I am unable to view the document there. I am greatly interested, as such a large enterprise only a few hundred feet from my dwelling is concerning. I urge the City Council and the Planning Commission to make available this important document, so that I, and others so impacted, will have the opportunity to learn the particulars of the proposal. mcesply yours, Heidi ec�ht>ger `' " 10815 SW 74th Ave Tigard, 97223 C,- 1 7 — CPt Z�r� 2t J 6- ao� poi . -2 - Carol Krager From: Joanne Bengtson Sent: Tuesday,January 24, 2017 10:40 AM To: jimalong@icloud.com' SUPPLE ENT L PACKET Cc: Carol Krager; Gary Pagenstecher;#Councilmail FOR Subject: Subject: Public notice sign down again on SW Spruce Attachments: Joanne Bengtson.vcf (DATE OF MEETING) Hi Mr. Long, Gary Pagenstecher tells me that the old land use sign has been picked up and another sign has been placed on the site. Thanks for letting staff know! Joanne Bengtson 111 City of Tigard $ Exec.Asst.to City Mgr&Mayor e P I y City Management (503)718-2476 Work 503-684-7297 Fax joanneWtigard-or.gov 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 Original Message From:James Long [mailto:jimalong@icloud.com] Sent: Monday,January 23, 2017 2:12 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher <Garyp@tigard-or.gov> Cc: Carol Krager <carolk@tigard-or.gov>; #Councilmail <#councilmail@tigard-or.gov> Subject: Public notice sign down again on SW Spruce Good afternoon Gary - One of my neighbors told me she couldn't read this sign. As per your request, you wanted me to notify you whenever the signs weren't up. I think this is at least the fourth sign down. As per previous photo of unreadable sign on SW 72nd, again this unfairly prejudices the substantial rights of citizens in this proceeding. I am a volunteer. As we've discussed, you are paid to put up readable Public Notice signs for the City of Tigard. Questions? --Jim Long 1 CPO chair 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." CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes November 21,2016 CALL TO ORDER President Fitzgerald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Fitzgerald Alt. Commissioner Enloe Commissioner Hu Commissioner Lieuallen Commissioner McDowell Commissioner Middaugh Alt. Commissioner Mooney Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Schmidt Absent: Vice President Feeney;Commissioner Jelinek Staff Present: Tom McGuire,Assistant CD Director; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner;Doreen Laughlin,Executive Assistant COMMUNICATIONS—None. CONSIDER MINUTES November 14, 2016 Meeting Minutes: President Fitzgerald asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the November 14 minutes;there being none, Fitzgerald declared the minutes approved as submitted. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING- President Fitzgerald opened the hearing. PUBLIC HEARING TOPPING C-P TO R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (CPA)2016-00002; Zone Change (ZON)2016-00001; (PDR)2016-0012 REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Commercial, C-P, to Medium Density Residential, R-12, and a Planned Development Review for a Concept Plan only on a three-parcel property totaling 1.54 acres. The proposed concept plan shows 18 single-family detached homes with approximately 23 percent of the site in open space, a portion of which is located at the corner of November 21,2016 Page 1 of 9 SW Spruce Street and SW 72nd Avenue. LOCATION: 7303 SW Spruce St., 10705 SW 72nd Ave., 10735 SW 72nd Ave;TAX MAP/ LOT#'s: 1S136ACO2200, 1S136ACO2400, 1S136ACO2500;ZONE: Existing: Professional Commercial (C-P);Proposed: Medium Density Residential (R-12);APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.380.030, and 18.390.050; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2, 10; Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 10; and Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 1, 7, and 12. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS President Fitzgerald read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no abstentions; there were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: Commissioner Middaugh noted that Mr. Long proposed adding these properties to the Urban Renewal District a year earlier. Site visitations: Commissioners Fitzgerald,Hu, and Middaugh. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. STAFF REPORT Staff reports are available on-line on the City website one week prior to public hearings. Assistant Community Development Director Tom McGuire came up to give some information and refresh the memories of the Planning Commission regarding this case. He noted that the Commission had seen this a year prior involving two properties at that time. He said at the end of that case, the Council decided to split the two apart and approve the zone change for that which is now commercial property on 99W and they told the owner of this property—that if they wish to see this zone change, to come back separately on their own; so that's why this review is here tonight. They've submitted an application on their own for the change that had originally been proposed—which is from Commercial C-P to R-12. Gary Pagenstecher, City of Tigard Associate Planner,referred to a hand-out that had been distributed to the commissioners earlier in the evening. There was a letter from Holly Polivka the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) chair (Exhibit A) commenting on the suitability of the site for a park and emphasizing that there's no money to actually follow through with that at this time. Also, a letter from citizen Nancy Tracy including a petition (Exhibit B) was distributed to them. Gary noted to the commissioners that the Planning Commission will need to make two decisions tonight, the first one would be to consider the Concept Plan and Zoning Amendment, and then consider the other- a Planned Development Concept Plan. Gary noted the city supports the comp plan/zone change amendment because the increase in R-12 zoned land supports affordable housing, has flexible housing; and is locationally appropriate—to provide a screen between lower density, residential, and the commercial areas to the north and south effectively; and it's located on local and neighborhood streets. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION November 21,2016 Page 2 of 9 Ken Sandblast,Director of Planning—Westlake Consultants, there on behalf of the applicant, noted that there was a very extensive set of neighborhood meeting minutes subsequent to the City Council hearings that were held on the original application package. It was well established and Gary touched on a petition in some of the continuing efforts of some in that area. He noted they'd talked at length about not just the zoning of the property but also their desire to have it as a park, and they've continued to advocate for that exactly as they discussed when they had the meeting-which is to participate in the system that the city has established through its PRAB and budgeting processes. He noted they'd also spent a good deal of time talking about the Planned Development Concept Plan—why they would do the concept plan,what the process is —that this is only a step in the process;that there are additional public hearings that will occur after the planned development concept plan is approved, assuming it is. There's a detailed plan and a land division and those kinds of things that are subsequently going to be done as part of the public hearing process with all of those details—including pathways and some things that aren't detailed out on this concept. He explained to the commissioners why one would want to present this PD and it's not changed since then. He noted that meeting had lasted close to two hours. He wanted to give that as context to let them know that they did make that commitment, that they went out and had that dialogue—and that's in the record. Morgan Will,project manager,with Stafford Development company, spoke about the value of R-12 and a project that can serve the different needs of the market. He said they build houses that are large on large lots and medium on medium lots and small on small lots. In this particular project is a development targeting the design of smaller lots with smaller houses to meet the target for the market. The locations, close to major streets, close to other commercial tends to be a great location for a higher density type smaller lot development. They feel this site is the right site for this type of housing and they tried to display a concept plan that reflected that. He noted that there had been several pre-application conferences with city staff as noted in the record (three now). The previous concept plans were different. The lot orientation to how many lots are focused towards the public street, "we've changed to increase the number of lots to put more eyes on the street" and went on to explain the differences between the previous plans and the changes that had been made to reflect comments of staff to orient the bulk of the open space to the northwest and that is an area where the Oak tree is that we hope to preserve. He noted the open space and the relationship of the developments—they're trying to keep urban but also have access to nature. He commented that developers are always in coordination with property owners and their desire is to sell their property. He knows there've been a lot of community members that have expressed interest. He was at the neighborhood meetings where they talked about some of the ideas for the use of this property and they've been working closely with the sellers (the Topping family) who would like to get this property sold and developed. 'We understand that there are some neighbors who would like to see this property used for a different use—we've said we would be willing to sell our contract rights to develop it, if anybody wanted to buy it. Since nobody's come forward to buy it,we ask the Planning Commission's consideration of this proposal that we're presenting today." Gordon Root, developer representing the applicant, came up and noted in the Housing Preference Analysis and Needs study that was conducted last year, a broad sweeping housing preference study sponsored by Metro, and many cities and other organizations, stated that the number one desire of most people is to own a single family detached home. He said they found November 21,2016 Page 3 of 9 that with regard to town homes, only 7/10's of 1% of the market prefer a town home and 90% of those prefer a single family detached after 12 months of living there. So they've had to be innovative as developers and come up with a single family detached product which is very livable. Yes,it's narrow but if you take your ranch style home and turn it sideways, that's a very narrow footprint. There's plenty of room inside,it meets the needs,it has light,windows on all four sides. It fills a need for people who can't afford the higher priced homes on the larger lots or simply don't want the maintenance burden. He noted that residential development brings trees to the overall community- and there's no better example of that than the City of Tigard— if you look at the before and after pictures—when it used to be cleared farmland versus now it's a tree canopy. We've incorporated the open space and preserved the trees as well. So I encourage you to approve the application zone change. QUESTIONS What would be the price point for the attached home... you're saying your single family detached homes are in the $350,000 - $375,000 range;what would be the price point of the townhome style? Townhomes in this area would probably run $339,000. TESTIMONY IN FAVOR— None. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION Jim Long, 10730 SW 72nd,Tigard provided written testimony from neighbors who couldn't attend the hearing (Gay Wakeland,Exhibit C; N. Gibbons Exhibit D). Mr. Long noted that he is the chair of CPO4M. He said he has testimony as chair of CPO4M and also testimony for himself as a citizen and asked if he could have extra time (which he was granted.) As CPO 4M Chair—he handed out written testimony on behalf of the CPO members - for the record (Exhibit E). He noted the residents and CPO member attendees do not support residential use,particularly R-12 and multi-story buildings, stating that R-12 zoning does not fit the character of the neighborhood. They believe R-7 or R-5 makes more sense if the property does not remain commercial zoning. They ask that the commission deny the applicant's request for a Comp Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Planned Development Review, at this time. QUESTIONS Are you aware of any other funding source other than the city that would substantiate the support for a park? No. We've been looking,we've checked—we've done other jurisdictions, foundations, etc. We haven't found anything. It's a creative opportunity I think that could be put to the voters and it would be very popular. But no—we haven't found any other big pockets of money. ODOT's study shows that traffic would go down if it's zoned residential. Why do you prefer this to be commercial rather than residential? If it's professional,it will probably be November 21,2016 Page 4 of 9 less busy on weekends. I tend to disagree with ODOT's study. It depends on what kind of commercial it is. Jim Long, 10730 SW 72nd Ave. 97223 as a private citizen read his testimony (Exhibit F). He addressed citizen involvement and land use planning. Among other things,he said the public notice signs are inadequate in that they're hard to read and they blow down. QUESTIONS OF MR. LONG Are you a resident of Tigard?Yes. What would it cost to purchase this property—where would that money come from?As part of the creative financing I was looking at,part of the Urban Renewal Levy could go out for acquisition of the property,plans for development and developing it. How long do you think it would be before that money would be available to spend for a park? I'm not sure—it depends upon the priorities that are set out. It depends upon voter approval, come May. So if we get voter approval in May, are you thinking that we have that money available in 12 months? 24 months? 5 years? I'm not sure. So we would have to ask the people who own this property to not develop their property for an unknown period of time before the city has the money available to purchase this property—to make it a park. I like the park idea,but it's hard for me to tell a property owner to sit in limbo and not develop their property while we attempt to come up with a funding source to begin to negotiate to purchase the property;that's where I'm at. I don't think anyone disagrees that a park would be awesome—my fear is that it's hard to deny a person the use of their property. Is the preference here that we deny the zone change as more or less in hope that it delays development until that money becomes available for a park? Is that what you're hoping for in denying a zone change?Yes, to some degree that's true. You need to let this play out—get it to the City Council as far as the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal is concerned, and then let it play out and see how it works. Good things take time. Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine St.,Tigard has been in this neighborhood for 54 years. She would like the area to be preserved as a park using urban renewal funds. She read through her testimony (Exhibit G) and said she believes the area is in danger of blight—blight being the result of an area that lacks close access to outdoor recreation space. After her testimony,President Fitzgerald stated for the record that Ms. Tracy also submitted a full copy of the petition that was signed—it was also included in the applicant's packet. Robert Breckenridge —7218 SW Oak St.,Tigard (Unincorporated WaCo)- said the streets are not lit well there. He's very concerned about the streets becoming even more narrow and not well lit. He's concerned about safety;he's had one dog hit on the street already. People speed by his house at 35 to 40 mph in a 25 mph zone, and sometimes they run stop signs. More traffic November 21,2016 Page 5 of 9 coming through will make it an even worse situation. It's becoming a thoroughfare when there's a problem on 99W or Hall—everyone comes through their neighborhoods now. Sometimes they can't get out of their own driveways. He knows you can't stop progress, but safety is a real issue here. Christina Hanson - 10670 SW 75th Ave.,Tigard feels the property should stay zoned as is or go back to the original R4.5. Rezoning would alter the essential character of her neighborhood. She believes it would negatively affect the surrounding neighborhood property values. She doesn't believe the area she lives in is in need of affordable housing since all the houses in the area have sold at the asking price and most of them selling above the asking price. She wants a plan suitable to all who live in the area—whether it be a park, a development, or a small development along with the park. If it goes through—her concern is stormwater and rain runoff into her backyard during the winter. She gets inches of standing water in her yard now. Also, she doesn't want the building heights to be too high. STAFF'S COMMENTS Gary Pagenstecher reminded the commissioners that the purposes of the PD include considering weighing the amount of development on a site to balance interests of owner, developer, neighbors, and the city; and relating the built environment to the natural environment. He said the six Concept Plan approval criteria are guidelines,with discretion on how the outcomes are achieved and even to what level of achievement is expected. With respect to the comments that were brought up by Jim Long, Gary noted, "The application is available online and in the office, and indeed Jim has been in the office—I've spoken to him on more than one occasion about this, and specifically about the posting of the site and couldn't we work together to make sure that the sign was up at all times. Since Jim lives across the street, I thought he would be someone who'd be aware of that and notify me if the sign were to come down. He didn't notify me about that so I was unaware that the sign was down." Gary stated that there's some discretion the Planning Commission has so far as Criteria 6. He reiterated, the approval criteria are guidelines,with discretion on how outcomes are achieved and even to what level of achievement is expected. He spoke about open space, natural resource protection,neighborhood integration, and promoting walkability and transit. QUESTIONS It seems that a lot of people on the petition are Metzger residents. I'm curious as to what our relationship is between Metzger and Tigard. Could you elaborate on that relationship? Broadly drawn, the Metzger area is within our urban services area. We expect to provide services there in the long run. Similar areas out in the Bull Mountain area exist. So we have an interest that this be a well-designed neighborhood; even though WaCo standards apply currently. Also—Mr. Breckenridge commented to me that he got a notice of this land use hearing and wondered because he's not a resident of Tigard—why he'd be getting that when he didn't get to vote in the Tigard election —but here he's getting a land use notice. Our land use notices are within a 500-foot diameter around the area—regardless of which jurisdiction they are November 21,2016 Page 6 of 9 in. That's another way of saying we care about what happens in the unincorporated area—in our urban services area that we expect someday will be ours to manage. Tom McGuire,Assistant Community Development Director,explained further about urban service areas. He explained in more detail the differences between the two areas—Metzger and Tigard. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Morgan Will said he'd reviewed the letters and noted there was quite a bit of material submitted by some opponents. He noted some of the information was duplicative and he believes a lot has been already addressed by their application. There was concern about heavy traffic and ODOT's findings were that there will be less traffic with a residential development. There was one testimony saying they weren't sure they believed the findings. He said, 'We often have traffic engineers do studies for us and findings are based upon their professional opinions and ethical requirements to represent the findings of their data. So, I want to say for the record that sometimes we have applications where they show there is a need for a new stop sign, or striping, etc. so it goes both ways. In this case, there's a finding that there's less traffic. That has ripple effects through a lot of the comments. There was concern about the road widths;we are going to add pavement width to streets as well as pedestrian improvements. Regarding housing needs—there are more people moving into the area—one of the comments was —`there's not a need for new housing in the neighborhood—all the houses that are listed are sold.'But there are more people moving into the community—we cannot constrain the number of housing in our community and still meet the demands. One of our goals is to meet the demands for an increased population. We concur that there will be more information. This is a concept plan. Our intent was always to submit the concept plan to help give shape to the future discussion. Ken Sandblast had read the submitted letters as well. He touched on the comment saying that "it depends upon what kind of commercial it is." He said that comment caught his attention because they'd offered this concept plan to get at the definition of what this will become with approval of the zone change. They are striving to achieve that kind of certainty by submitting and proposing this concept plan. Regarding the signage, he said, "Mr. Long has been an eagle eye on public notice for this process. I did listen to all the video tapes and he's been on top of public notice both at the city and what's been done to date. As recorded in our meeting notes, we posted a notice—a large sign but it had the wrong year on it—instead of 2016—it said 2015. Because of that error,we re-noticed everything and recreated and reposted that sign so there were actually two notices. I wanted to say thank you to Ms. Hanson who testified about the stormwater and the runoff—that kind of information is good information for us to have as this moves into the detailed plan phase—assuming it's approved by yourselves and council. That knowledge about stormwater and runoff and what's going on at that site is good information. Lastly, I want to thank Gary for pointing out that the PD criteria are guidelines and that there's flexibility on how they're met. That indeed is what we're doing with this concept plan. We have looked at the entire code, and what you see before you is a balance of that criteria and those guidelines,but it is proofed against the code—for not just open space, but we're aware of the kind of set-back issues that Gary noted. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED November 21,2016 Page 7 of 9 DELIBERATION ON COMP PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE President Fitzgerald asked the commissioners to isolate the conversation to two parts— focusing first on the Comp Plan Amendment Zone Change. A C-P (Professional Commercial) is being proposed to be changed to an R-12 (Residential). Comments from Commissioners: • I like the transition to the residential. I feel like it fits the neighborhood better than commercial use. I also feel that later in discussions regarding the detailed plan—maybe we could work out a few things that would make the neighborhood happy about some open space changes and how that can be worked into a development. • I think it makes sense to go to R-12 to maximize that space. • If we can't get a park there, I would rather have R-12 to have less traffic than the commercial. • I don't think the change to R-12 is in the best interest of the neighborhood at the moment, and I am going to vote against it. • The city doesn't have the funds to make it a park. It's always been this odd little property that's commercial that's tucked away from the main thoroughfare. I heard that a daycare center was a possibility there,but it never came about. It just sat as property with these three tiny houses on it and one of them got demolished, so now there are two tiny houses on that big property. • I have concerns about the quantity of driveways facing Spruce limiting the amount of available on-street parking. Some of the properties could be turned so that the driveways could face the new street on the property. • Providing a sidewalk/path connecting 72nd—to the Oak Tree area—then to Spruce would support Tigard's walkability goals. • I like the transition from commercial to residential—it's higher density residential,but it would still transition to that lower density, so I agree with the zone change. MOTION Commissioner Middaugh made the following motion: "Regarding CPA2016-00002 and ZON2016-00001—I move we forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council and adoption of the findings of approval contained in the staff report and based on the testimony we received tonight."The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schmidt. The Vote: All in favor with one opposing (Commissioner Lieuallen cast the opposing vote) DELIBERATION ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN Comments from the commissioners: November 21,2016 Page 8 of 9 • I think this isn't the best plan to maximize public space. I think the neighbors would like to see a park, and I think the developer could come up with a plan to make more of this open space publicly accessible; I'm not seeing that reflected in this concept. • I'd like to see the open space more accessible but we have to remember that this is a private owner—there is no obligation that they have to the neighborhood that they have to develop it for public use. Also—it's been mentioned that these are guidelines, my thought would be if we want to approve it,we can approve it for the 18 units versus something less. • I like the concept—the open space is a good compromise. I appreciate the Oak tree being preserved. I like the sidewalks where there currently aren't any. I think this will help pedestrians walk through the area. • The houses are big—I like the concept. • I think the concept plan is a good compromise—there could be some progress made in the detailed plan—I'm in favor of the concept plan. • Excited to see dedicated sidewalks. They won't make a narrower street. I'm concerned about the number of curb cuts on Spruce. I'd like on-street parking. MOTION ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN Commissioner Middaugh made the following recommendation: "I move for the Planning Commission to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council of PDR2016- 00012 with 18 lots, and adoption of the findings of approval contained in the staff report, and based on the testimony received tonight." Seconded by Commissioner Muldoon VOTE Recommendation Passes 5 —2 with Commissioners Hu and Lieuallen casting dissenting votes RESULT —RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PASSES 5 -2 OTHER BUSINESS—There will be one more meeting on Dec 5. CD is still planning a tour of River Terrace sometime after the first of the year. ADJOURNMENT President Fitzgerald adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Doreen Laughlin,Planning Commission Secretary ATTEST: President Fitzgerald November 21,2016 Page 9 of 9 71 .., City of Tigard • Tigard City Council/CCDA Meeting Minutes TIGARD February 2, 2016 II 1. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 6:32 p.m. the Tigard City Council entered into an Executive Session called under ORS 192.660(2) (f).The Executive Session ended at 7:09 p.m. 2. BUSINESS MEETING A. At 7:10 p.m.Mayor Cook called to order the City Council and City Center Development Agency meeting. B. City Recorder Kroger called the roll: Present Absent Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse V Councilor Henderson I C. Mayor Cook asked everyone to stand and join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items—None 161 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 3. JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION la The City Center Advisory Commission(CCAC)members present were: Chair Carine Arendes, Gina Schlatter,Vice-Chair Linli Pao,Richard Shavey,and David Walsh. They presented a PowerPoint on the vision for downtown Tigard. The vision was developed through a public process related to the Downtown Tigard Improvement Plan (DTIP). The vision was that downtown"is a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of our community. Pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation and it recognities and uses natural resources as an asset and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,play,work and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigan." TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard ( 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 14 The TDIP identified some potentially unifying themes: community,nature and art.There was not a lot of graphic representation of what this might look like so in addition to adopting code changes the city has also engaged in a number of projects that help paint a picture of what the written vision might look like.These include the Streetscape Design Plan,the Fanno Creek Park Plan,and the Tigard Future Vision and there is a plan to update the original urban renewal plan to contain more visual elements.The Tigard Downtown Future Vision was a further refinement of the TDIP and included renderings of what it might look like with development on Highway 99 and Hall, housing at the redeveloped public works yard,transit oriented development located near high capacity transit in the urban core,as well as arts involved community center. The city has adopted a Strategic Plan which is a vision for the entire city. The CCAC asked the CCDA to consider how compatible these two visions are.Chair Arendes said she felt the TDIP vision fits very well under the umbrella of the citywide walkability vision.She said the vision of a thriving,active,vibrant urban core is the one that the CCAC considers when coming to the CCDA with project recommendations.This vision is what they keep in mind when setting their annual goals. Vice-Chair Pao discussed their goal setting process this year which was a little different than usual since they had several new members. They compiled a document with all the goals and implementations since the CCAC began setting them in 2009. They held a session for 2016 goals and came up with four main categories: • Support urban renewal area project infrastructure and development;provide input • Identify and discuss long-term impacts of future development in the downtown area • Communications and engagement • Self-education on topics of interest to the downtown such as marketing opportunities to developers and affordable housing Vice-Chair Pao said if the CCDA Directors and Chair have input they would like to hear it so they can incorporate it into their goals. Commissioner Shavey spoke about marketing and branding and the CCAC's goal to advocate for potential funding options to keep the Tigard Downtown Alliance(TDA)momentum going. Consultant Michelle Reeves and the Leland Company recommended supporting a downtown association for coordinated marketing and promotion.The CCAC supports the land and business owners doing this task and they confirmed the importance of getting involved in the marketing and branding effort. However,they acknowledge that TDA's organizational capacity would need to be increased prior to them taking on this task. The TDA is maxed out with volunteer activities now. Chair Arendes said the CCAC recommend the following urban renewal plan identified projects as priorities as the CCDA works on their budget filling in the gaps on Hall Boulevard sidewalks,plaza development,the Tigard Street Trail,and public restrooms in the downtown area. She noted that the city is going to do a public facilities plan and hoped that public restrooms,a public market and an arts-oriented community center,all facilities identified in the urban renewal plan,will be considered in this study. Director Woodard said the CCDA takes the CCAC's recommendations seriously. He reflected on many community planners and experts who gave the city ideas and concepts that should be reflected in the goals. He asked them to keep in mind the puzzle pieces: connectivity,walkability,activation of TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 2 of 14 the downtown,business opportunities,infrastructure,circulation and recreation. He said he was pleased to hear Commissioner Shavey speak about branding. He quoted Director Henderson, "without identity we have no community." He said a lot of good work has been done but there is a lot to do. He recommended adding developing a brand as a goal. He said hiring a marketing manager is important. He suggested picking two businesses along Main Street and talking to the owners to get their ideas on what they need to succeed. He added that circulation is very important and advised that the Ash Creek crossing be kept in mind. He clarified that he meant the railroad crossing. Director Snider said the CCAC has done a great job and he will keep their recommendations in mind while working on the budget. Chair Cook agreed that their goals are great and he agrees with Director Snider;it is a different CCDA than it was in 2011 and the CCAC can expect a little different outcome. Circulation was discussed and Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly reminded everyone that the Ash Creek rail crossing is still in the mix with the SW Corridor. He noted that the city is getting the first leg of a transportation system improvement completed due to the Ash and Burnham development. Chair Arendes invited further comment and said the CCDA is welcome to come to their meetings or send ideas to their email. 4. UPDATE ON THE MAIN STREET/FANNO CREEK SITE(SAXONY)REDEVELOPMENT STUDY Redevelopment Manager Farrelly gave the staff report for this meeting which included a PowerPoint.He introduced John Flynn and Suenn Ho of Resolve Architecture. Architect Flynn described the property and progress made in the concept design. He said they would like to hear feedback on the design. Slides were shown of possible uses of the building including public space. The first floor could be small restaurant and retail with creative office tenant space on the second and third floors. The sixth floor is only at the back of the building, fronting 99W. He said the pro forma studies indicate that it has to be really small or really big. Resolve Architecture's charge is to create a design that appeals to the city and the developer. This floor space works either way. If they were divided there could be eight 1,000 square foot living areas. Suenn Ho said this is a challenging site. There is a bridge with fast paced cars going by. Within the south side there is a pedestrian-friendly street. On the west is a creek. On the east side there is a sewer easement. A southern elevation shows steps going down to the creek. On the highway side there is verticality. Main Street will be a great opportunity to give the development presence with tall buildings along the highway.There is a vegetative strip owned by ODOT behind it. Slides showed opportunities for materiality such as green ways,glazing balconies and store fronts. Ms.Ho showed a sketch of the painted building. Green roofs celebrate nature. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 14 Mayor Cook commented that the design has come a long way. He agreed that it is a challenging site but appreciated what they have developed so far. He said triple-glazed windows will keep the sound down on the north side. He said the taller buildings will have great views. Mayor Cook said he likes the mixture that goes right onto a festival street. Councilor Goodhouse said he likes the green roofs and the stair steps make it resemble an art piece. Councilor Woodard had some design questions regarding guest parking. There can be issues if tenant and guest vehicles take up all the parking spots so customers cannot find places to park. Another concern he has is the occasional high Fanno Creek water levels. Mr. Flynn said a movement joint could be created for the deck. Clean Water Services redundancy is good to have for high water situations. Mayor Cook commented that the concept design process was good and he looked forward to the next update. CITY COUNCIL 5. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING:CONSIDER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONING CHANGES TO PRESERVE MEDIUM DENSITY (R-12)RESIDENTIAL LAND a. Mayor Cook reopened the public hearing. He said at the initial hearing before council there was testimony suggesting that this matter should be heard using the quasi-judicial procedures and standards rather than legislative. The city attorney was asked to review those concerns and he recommended that council do that as a precaution.He asked the council if there was any objection to that process.There was none. He asked the city attorney to explain the process for the hearing. b. City Attorney Olsen said the city is the applicant in this proceeding and accordingly the process for the hearing shall be as follows: City staff will state the applicable criteria and summarize the application, staff report and the staff's recommendation.Council will then take public testimony and staff will have an opportunity for rebuttal or other comment. Council may ask the staff and witnesses questions throughout the hearing until the record closes. After the record is closed the city council will deliberate about how to proceed. During deliberations the city council may reopen the public portion of the hearing,if necessary,to receive additional evidence before making a decision. Testimony,argument and evidence must be directed toward the applicable criteria including any additional criteria that a participant in the hearing thinks might apply. Failure to raise an issue clearly enough so that the city council understands and can address the issue preludes an appeal on that issue. He covered testimony guidelines. City Attorney Olsen said that prior to the end of the hearing he would explain how any participant may request a continuance or that the record be kept open for more time.Council TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 4 of 14 may approve all of the requested Comprehensive Plan amendments and zone changes,some but not others or may deny the applicant in its entirety. He said since this started out as a legislative matter,quasi-judicial notice (Type III)was provided prior to the hearing. At the end of the hearing council will vote to approve or reject the ordinance. c. Council Questions: Mayor Cook asked for clarification that any prior written or oral testimony on this matter is included in this hearing and that it is part of the record.City Attorney Olsen said that any testimony provided to the Planning Commission,written submittals and the staff report,etc.are all available and included in the record. He said however,that the hearing is being conducted as a de novo hearing which means that people are not limited to issues raised at the prior Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Council President Snider explained to the audience that council made a decision tonight to hear this as a quasi-judicial matter which is a different forum than the previous hearing. Staff prepared some material that council needs to take time now to read. City Attorney Olsen added that the material included proposed findings from staff should council decided to approve the application. Extra copies were available so anyone in the audience can review the same material.Council read the material from 8:22 p.m. to 8:38 p.m. d. Challenges and Declarations: City Attorney Olsen asked council if they had any ex parte contact,site visits or related prior information to disclose. None. City Attorney Olsen asked if any council members had any potential or actual conflicts of interest to declare. There were none. Mayor Cook asked if there were any challenges from the audience on any councilor's ability to participate in this hearing. There were none. e. Staff Report Assistant Community Development Director McGuire gave the staff report. He read the approval criteria applying to the proposal. He said per 12.380.030.b standards for making quasi-judicial decisions,recommendations or 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 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 Mr. McGuire referred to two memos provided by staff.The February 2,2016,memo provides findings in favor of the proposal.A January 26,2016,memo from Associate Planner TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 5 ()f 14 Pagenstecher provided responses to council's specific questions and issues raised after the first public hearing. He said there were a few errors in some of the notices such as listing the year as 2015 instead of 2016. There was also a typo in the staff contact phone numbers. The department has safeguards in place.The planner prepares the notices and an administrative staff person prints the notices and helps with processing and distribution,yet the two typos made it through those screens. He noted that the public notice sign was damaged and it is assumed it blew down in the storm in early December. Since that time staff has changed to using plastic coated paper with double sticks to hold the sign in place. In the future staff will monitor the signs and check on them after a bad storm. Mr. McGuire noted that Council President Snider asked about process issues related to public testimony and responded that any appeals would go directly to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA),whether legislative or quasi-judicial. He said the city's parks staff was asked about Property A ever being considered for purchase as a parks property and it was not. A question from Councilor Henderson at the last hearing related to the real estate sign advertising Property B as commercial property when it is zoned residential. Mr. McGuire said commercial real estate signs are not addressed in the code and as council is aware,per federal and state Supreme Court cases,staff cannot regulate the content of signs. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire gave the background on this issue. When he first learned of this potential zone change application on Site B from R-12 to Commercial the city was in the middle of the Heritage Crossing hearings. Specifically,staff was addressing one of the Comprehensive Plan policies on housing. He read some of Goal 10,Policy 10.1,"to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types at a range of price levels to meet the housing needs of current and future city residents." In the Heritage case staff held multiple Planning Commission hearings and council hearings and staff had been stressing the point of that policy and the diversity and variety of housing that is available in R- 12 zoning. He said it is not just a numbers issue. We need to meet Metro requirements but that is not the focus of that policy. The issue is the variety that is available in that zone which creates a diversity of price ranges important for young,first-time home buyers and also those that are downsizing. This makes more housing available for people to purchase at varying price ranges. He said Community Development Department staff need to be consistent in interpreting the city's code and policies. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said the market is sending a signal through the pre-application conferences that Site A is a good location for R-12. There are other R-12 sites zoned right in that neighborhood and it is between high-intensity commercial use Fred Meyer and lower density residential. He noted that Site A and Site B are very similar in size. Because of this,staff initially chose a legislative process because council would have the ability to examine the Comprehensive Plan policies and have a little more leeway than in a quasi-judicial process. Mayor Cook asked council if they received answers to all their questions.Council President Snider said he appreciated that the answers were very thorough and specific and he would like this to be the model for future staff reports. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 6 of 14 f. Public Testimony Mayor Cook said due to the time each person may talk for two minutes. Council President Snider reminded the public that this is a quasi-judicial hearing,and council is acting as judges, not legislators. He said their testimony is most effective if it relates to the criteria that is what council must consider in their decision. Richard Topping, 19765 Derby Street,West Linn,OR said he and his wife own Site A. He said it has been on the market for eight years. They have gone through five commercial real estate agents who have done a lot of aggressive marketing and all came to the conclusion that it is not a viable commercial property. He addressed the testimony neighbors gave at the last hearing noting their great sense of ownership and how they felt the property was part of their community. But they are not paying the upkeep or property taxes. The existing houses cannot be replaced and the city is in need of more R-12 housing. They strongly feel that this would be a good thing for them and for the city. Levi Levasa,Stafford Land Company,485 S. State Street,Lake Oswego,OR,97034,is the potential developer for Site A. He asked that council echo the recommendations of the Planning Commission and adopt the findings of the staff report. He said staff did a great job on the findings and agreed with the quasi-judicial approach. He said the property looks like R-12 property,not R-4.5. The entire frontage needs to be improved and splitting that up between four to six lots does not make much sense. R-12 zoning allows a variety of housing types. Kelli Hossaini,Miller Nash, 111 SW Fifth Avenue,Portland 97204 represents Tigard-Tualatin School District,the owner of Site B. She said the R-12 zoning is a holdover from the 1940s and the district's use of the site as an administrative center. This property has been on the market for ten years. The market views this property as commercial. She said Leadership Circle wants to develop the property into a natural grocer which would be a great use near the elementary school and for people in the neighborhood. She said she could understand opposition to a zone change on Site A but encouraged council to adopt the Site B zone change. Read Stapleton,DOWL Engineers and Planners,720 SW Washington Street,Suite 750, Portland,OR,97205,said he agreed with Ms. Hossaini and believes Site B is optimal for commercial development. Historically residential zoning may have made sense but the most recent Economic Opportunities Analysis recognized there is a dearth of commercial land. This request will improve that lack of capacity. He said Leadership Circle has been meeting with city staff since last year. He asked for council's approval on the zone change for Site B regardless of whether it is considered with the other site. Debbie Bowman and Penny Stewart signed up to speak but said they would give their time to Dorothy Cofield. Jim Long, 10730 SW 72nd Avenue,Tigard,OR 97223,gave some written testimony which has been added to the record. He said he would speak first as Chair of CPO4-M and then as a private citizen.On Monday,December 4,2015,CPO4-M discussed the planning department's request and voted unanimously to endorse retaining the commercial/professional district TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2, 2016 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov ( Page 7 of 14 zoning for Site A. Speaking personally,he said if the city moves forward and approves this application with staff's first recommendation the decision will be vulnerable to appeal and the city will lose. He said last month that the city should start over. He noted that the process has been changed to quasi-judicial but the notices are still in error.There are landowners who did not receive notice. New signs were put out on two posts but did not last. The notices did not have the right time,place or phone number. The website did not list this public hearing for four days in December. The title is misleading and the word"preservation"does not explain the nature of the application. He had pictures in the testimony that are still relevant. Mayor Cook asked if the new postings are correct. Mr. Long said he heard staff say they were going to monitor the signs but they are gone so the city did not provide the information required by the code. Council President Snider said staff was asked by council to start completely over with their noticing. He asked if Mr.Long was testifying that after the lecture from council, staff did not in fact redo the sign posting. He said the sign on 72nd Avenue is blank. Mr.Long said Councilor Henderson asked for the commercial sign to be removed but it is still in place. Dorothy Cofield,8705 SW Nimbus,Suite 380.Beaverton,OR 97008,said she represents Jim Long and Nancy Tracy as individuals. She said she submitted a memorandum to council along with seven exhibits. She noted that Mayor Cook gave the differences between legislative and quasi-judicial public hearings. She said this was done at the eleventh hour after there may have been discussion and talking. She said the city needs to start over to do this process right. The notice lists preservation of R-12 zoning but does not have the quasi-judicial criteria. Without that being in the notice LUBA says anyone can raise anything because the notice did not list the criteria. Ms.Cofield said staff and the Planning Commission were hanging their hat on the Angelo Study which said that Tigard is deficient in R-12 land. She said the executive summary does not say this at all. It says 6,000 units(53 percent are projected to be detached single-family home). The idea that Tigard needs attached homes is not supported by the record. Regarding changing the zoning,the Cogan Economic Analysis Report says there is a deficiency in commercial land. Taking the Topping site and removing the commercial zoning is inconsistent with evidence in the record. She asked council to consider this rather than the planner's desire for more attached housing. She asked to keep the record open because they just received the findings and want to review whether or not the neighborhood has changed.They want to put evidence in the record. Regarding the sign on Site B,she felt the city can regulate it if it says it is zoned for commercial and this has not yet been done. The city should tell the developers that this has not gone through a zoning change yet.She ended by saying that although they believe that the process is flawed,her clients would be in favor of changing the zoning for the school district site. She asked that council adopt the alternative to change the zone for Site B but they object to any zone change on Site A. Ann Murdock,7415 SW Spruce Street,Tigard,OR 97223,handed in some written testimony. She highlighted that if this land is zoned R-12 it allows the owners to put in 12-18 units. With each there could be two cars,pets, and two children. She doesn't see how the parking will work. She said there is a new development on 74th Avenue and the people living there are already parking in front of her house because they do not have enough parking. People from Tigard Woods park in front of her neighbors'mailboxes. She mentioned that there is a spring TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 8 of 14 on the west end of the property. She asked who will be responsible for fixing it if the spring is paved over and the water runs onto her property. Richard Garber, 10680 SW 71"Avenue,Tigard,OR 97223,lives two blocks from the subject property. He walks his dog on the property and reiterated what the previous speaker said;it is a swamp. He has seen the tractor mower sink down and then avoid large areas of the property. He noticed in the handout a lot of concern for the property owners but it would be better if the city was concerned about the residents. He has made bad investments before and it is not the city's fault. He said R 3.4 zoning might be a possibility. Chris Glawe,9830 SW Pine Street,Tigard,OR 97223,said he was here in support of Jim Long and the neighbors. He said neighbors look out for each other by placing flyers and he did not know about this until a neighbor placed a flyer out for this meeting. He did not receive the official statement that was mailed last fall. Nancy Tracy,7310 SW Pine Street,Portland,OR 97223,brought a handout for council. She said she was here on behalf of the children. The children are our city's future and they have a tough road ahead of them. Cities,communities,parents and schools are all responsible for children. She said she hoped that council will read her pamphlet. Richard Allegretto signed up to speak but gave his time to Jim Long. Jim Long said the most important thing is that Site B was left out of the city's inventory of residential land so there is no need to balance out the residential because there was no loss of residential. The city can go ahead and change it to commercial. The city does have a deficit of commercial land. He said the equality swap"does not wash."He objected to the commercial sign. He commented that the city is rezoning some property in another area and if R-7 there can change to R-12,it does not need to happen here. The citizens do not support three-story buildings on Site A. Nathan Murdock 7415 SW Spruce Street,Tigard,OR 97223,noticed that during the last month a big problem in getting a vehicle from Hall Boulevard and 69th Avenue onto Highway 99W. ODOT says it should not be a problem but it is now,without having another 30 cars from people that are not in the neighborhood. Read Stapleton asked to rebut Mr.Murdock's testimony but Mayor Cook said the city-is the applicant and he could not testify. He has already spoken tonight. Charlie Hanson 10670 SW 75th Avenue,Tigard,OR 97223,lives on a flag lot with 50 feet of his side yard along Site A. He said the land is swamp-like and test pits done for the preschool verified drainage issues. He said he experiences drainage problems onto his property from the subject property. He showed a picture of a notice and said there was no notice of a continuation until Nancy Tracy came to his door one day ago. He said the property is more of a wetland than a viable property and that may be why commercial builders have not shown interest either. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2, 2016 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 9 of 14 Julie Garvin,7025 SW Mapleleaf Street,Tigard,OR said she just received a flyer at her door and from what she is hearing regarding the procedural information it is clear to her that council should evaluate Site A and Site B independently and they both must meet the criteria.They cannot be evaluated conjoined and there is evidence that Site B meets all the criteria. She does not think Site A meets the criteria in terms of there being a change in the neighborhood or an error or mistake in the zoning. g. Staff response to testimony: Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said he would respond to specific council questions. h. Council questions: Council President Snider asked about Ms.Cofield's testimony that the city should restart the process to have it follow the full quasi-judicial process and if the city has done what was necessary to meet those requirements. City Attorney Olsen replied that in terms of procedural error LUBA and the courts have held that a person alleging a procedural error has to demonstrate substantial prejudice and the courts generally have held that if there was a procedural error in the process,as long as at the final hearing before the final decision maker,those alleged irregularities are addressed and the full quasi-judicial rights are substantially afforded,then it is very difficult to make a finding of substantial prejudice. He said in this case notice went out as if it was a quasi-judicial hearing despite the fact that it had been legislative so notice was provided in accordance with the code.The city council made the determination in the response to citizen concerns that it would afford those full quasi-judicial processes and protections,including the substantive criteria,rather than go forward with the legislative hearing which the council could have done. Council President Snider commented that the public indicated that they would have immediately appealed. City Attorney Olsen said in effect the council has responded to the concerns raised. He said Ms.Cofield is correct that the notice sent out did not list all of the applicable criteria,and that may provide more of an opportunity for an appeal on a substantive ground with LUBA but it is not really a procedural error. In this case,there have been no other criteria identified other than ones staff have addressed. And that is a Type III quasi-judicial process. He said there might be a standard that the notice did not indicate and that no one else has raised. But it is not one that staff or the citizens are aware of. He said council made it clear that they are addressing the applicable standards. Council President Snider referred to a comment made about two properties being considered under the same quasi-judicial public hearing. City Attorney Olsen said council needs to apply the criteria to each property and needs to make a decision on each property to approve both, approve one and deny the other or deny both. He said it is appropriate for staff to inform council and for the council to consider the context in which the Comprehensive Plan policies and housing policies apply. City Attorney Olsen said Ms.Cofield and others requested additional time and many potential problems are cured during the process if the record is kept open for additional testimony during a continuance. Council President Snider asked if the city has an excess inventory of R-12 land as heard in some of the testimony,and Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said it did not. He said the housing study addresses that and is part of the record and in the staff report. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 10 of 14 Council President Snider noted that at least some people clearly living within 500 feet of Site A did not receive a notice. He asked how confident staff is that proper notice was made. Mr. Pagenstecher said the notice went out for the first hearing. Council President Snider said council direction was to notify everyone of the continued hearing.Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said staff prepared a second notice and posted the property. Council President Snider said he did not think that was what council asked staff to do. Councilor Snider asked about the parking standard for R-12 zoning. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said each unit is required to have its own on-site parking but it is hard to estimate how many cars because there is such variety in R-12 housing. The R-12 developments are attached or narrow units and some off street is parking lost to the number of curb cuts for driveways. It has been an issue. In River Terrace the city required extra parking per tracts. Council President Snider expressed many concerns about the process. Councilor Woodard said he thought the two separate properties should have their own consideration but did not think council had to start all over. He said by design,development can take care of wetland and parking issues. Mayor Cook advised that this is not a development review;it is a zone change. Councilor Goodhouse asked if the properties can be separated in a decision tonight. City Attorney Olsen said they can be considered separately and in fact,when looking at options staff drafted an ordinance approving only the zone change for Site B. Council could adopt it and remand Site A back to the Planning Commission. Councilor Woodard commented that no one said they did not receive a notice about Site B. He said staff did the best they could to rectify the notice issue. He said staff put up signs and he did not know if someone was pulling out the signs. He gave staff credibility. He asked Assistant Community Development Director McGuire if notice was provided. Mr. McGuire responded that staff used the quasi-judicial noticing requirement prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Every property owner within 500 feet received a notice;it was advertised in the newspaper and on the website and the property was posted prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Staff did the same procedure prior to the last council hearing (mailed notices,site posting,website and newspaper). He said he did not hear at the last hearing that council was instructing staff to resend the notice. However,the notice was revised and the site re-posted. Council President Snider asked for confirmation that staff used a quasi-judicial notice process for a legislative hearing held months ago. Assistant Community Development Director McGuire said staff"over-notified"the meeting as it is standard to err on the side of more public participation. Council President Snider asked City Attorney Olsen if the notice requirement was not an issue.City Attorney Olsen expressed confidence that in terms of Site B there was not a notice issue. He said in terms of Site A,generally the case law is that a minor defect in the noticing is not a fatal flaw. He said while the notice is not perfect,the city has taken appropriate steps to address the issue from a legal standpoint. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES — February 2, 2016 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 11 of 14 Councilor Goodhouse moved to approve Ordinance No. 16-05,approving Site B and remand Site A to the Planning Commission as quasi-judicial matter. There was no second and City Attorney Olsen said he needed to read a statement first. City Attorney Olsen read a statement saying any participant may request an opportunity for more time to present additional evidence,arguments or testimony regarding the application for either of the properties. If such a request is received the city council has a choice. Council may continue the public hearing for at least seven days and at the continued public hearing if new evidence is submitted,any person may then request that the record be left open for at least seven additional days to submit written evidence,arguments or testimony for purposes of responding to the evidence at the continued hearing. Or council could leave the written record open for seven days rather than continue the public hearing. During the seven days, any person may submit new evidence or argument. The record is then kept open for an additional seven days for anyone to respond to written materials submitted during the first seven days. Then the applicant has the discretion of requesting a continuance.After the written record is received then council would conduct its final deliberation and make a decision. City Attorney Olsen said the attorney for some of the neighbors asked for a continuance. He said he has heard that there may be some councilors considering denial of one of the applications and that may mean the counsel withdraws her request for additional time.He asked if anyone else in the audience wished to keep the record open. Ms. Cofield said if Site A will be denied and Site B recommended for approval she was in favor of that and would not need a continuance but of course,she would not know that until deliberation. She asked if she could make her request contingent. City Attorney Olsen said that was appropriate. Mr. Levasa asked if he could ask for a contingent continuance as well. If Site A is remanded he would not need it but if it is denied he does want a continuance. Mayor Cook accepted his request for a contingent continuance Councilor Goodhouse moved to approve Ordinance No. 16-05,approving Site B and remanding Site A to the Planning Commission. Councilor Woodard seconded the motion. Council President Snider asked if the remand required a full quasi-judicial noticing process. City Attorney Olsen said it did;it was like starting over. Mayor Cook said he would like staff to demonstrate with date-stamped photos that signage is intact and notification was complete. Councilor Woodard suggested using a simple checklist and dating it. Council President Snider said the residents near Site A need to recognize that the property is two blocks off of Highway 99W and behind a huge commercial center. It is probably not going to be developed as a commercial property. He suggested that they as a neighborhood figure out how they can live with whatever will be done residentially on that property at some point. He said he thought it would be hard for the neighborhood to prevent things from happening on the property because of Oregon land use law and Tigard's Community Development Code. Councilor Woodard addressed Jim Long and suggested there is time to talk to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board(PRAB)about using it for a park. Mayor Cook added that anyone could buy the property and donate it to the city. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 12 of 14 i. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. j. Council Deliberation Mayor Cook asked City Recorder Krager to read the number and title of the ordinance. Ordinance No. 16-05 — AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2015-00005 AND ZONE CHANGE ZON 2015-00007 TO AMEND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS MAP City Attorney Olsen said while the title is the same,the body of this ordinance only relates to Site B. Council President Snider asked if the ordinance needs to mention the remand and City Attorney Olsen said the remand for Site A would not be part of the ordinance for Site B and staff was directed to remand the other matter back to the Planning Commission. Councilor Woodard asked if the property owners near Site A will be notified when the Planning Commission meets and City Attorney Olsen said they would;the applicant is basically starting over. City Recorder Krager conducted a roll call vote. Yes No Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson (absent) Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 16-05 passed unanimously by a vote of those present. 6. CONTINUED DELIBERATION: APPROVING AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 3.75 PARKS MAINTENANCE FEE AND APPROVING A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE Due to the late hour council elected to carry this item over to the next council business meeting on February 9,2016. 7. DISCUSSION ON THE PROPOSED FY 2017 CITY COUNCIL BUDGET Assistant City Manager Newton gave the staff report for this item. She asked that council look at the highlighted items.An inauguration photographer,a slight increase in Tigard Downtown Alliance dues,and a reception were added. She noted that the Tigard Youth Advisory Commission Washington DC trip has been added to council's budget. She said these are the only changes to the original version council received earlier. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES— February 2, 2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 13 of 14 i Assistant City Manager Newton confirmed there are only enough funds to send two youths to Washington DC. Council President Snider said council should budget for five kids to go next year. Mayor Cook said he did not think the cities always pay. Some cities have their youth fundraise for the trip.Council President Snider mentioned being on the school board as a youth and felt he was more effective at the California legislature than some adults. Councilor Goodhouse recommended four. Council President Snider suggested partial payment and encouraging the youths to raise some of the funds themselves. 8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS None. 9. ADJOURNMENT At 10:20 p.m.Council President Snider moved for adjournment. Councilor Woodard seconded the motion. Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. Yes No Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson (absent) '�'vdi c-( A A Carol A. Krager,City Recorder C� Attest: John ''ook, :ala for 11 " 90/4 Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/CCDA MEETING MINUTES—February 2,2016 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov 1 Page 14 of 14 CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care Do the Right Thing I Get it Done TIGARD Stafford Development, LLC / Topping C-P to R-12 Comp Plan Amendment/ Zone Change with Concept Plan Planned Development SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET City Council Hearing FOR IDA E OF MEETING) Agenda Item #4 9 er ila h rriY Community Development January 24,2017 CITY 0 1' '1' 1 \ R ll Council Direction: New Application for CPA/ZON Professional Commercial (C-P) to Medium Density Residential (R-12) / 1.54 acre site / R-12 allows lower impact development p p II than C-P (building height and traffic) " / R-12 provides appropriate transition between low density residential and commercial uses ThEilimmems / R-12 allows smaller lot development 0141148 and a variety of housing types in support of affordable housing i� � �„ CITY O F T I G A R I) Council Direction: Document Quasi-Judicial Process March 16,2016 Neighborhood Meeting(w/staff) ', October 17,2016 proposal on the COT webpagetooOwkg.,, - y 'n `', October 18,2016 mailed notice of hearings - � At October 27,2016 published notice in The Times s I: October 31,2016 posted site(first time) F• ,f f , , November 14,2016 staff report on the COT webpage - R November 21,2016 Planning Commission hearing !k January 3,2017 re-posted site(see inset photos) a,,,,,, 1-/o n(n L January 17,2017 AIS packet on the COT webpage • January 24,2017 City Council hearing « i „ ` • R. fir.. ; '' :-.,,; ,. .4- , --'";.: _ *Staff has periodic discussions and information sharing with Jim Long at Permit Center counter Nip 1nx 1-73-17IIL) C I T Y O F '1' I C \ R 1) Council Direction: Neighborhood involvement in design of uses allowed in the R-12 zone PD Concept Plan Review 381' _. provides forum for design § ga°� M discussion s • 2.. ..1.'.. . or ew so . toe Zno sl. ,A, ai• Neighborhood Meeting . 1i comments focused on impacts of residential development and I preference for low density ' housing or commercial use —�- __` sw s ucE$TREEr" ' �'— ,le., / - . 11Mi PD CONCEPT Plan-Illhalo Pry Dutadrd Rwldw'lidLob Written comments and ° ,1'.°:.:....,..,„ D.,,.. &s.ro«k: Ufa.1.03 et:..or.tn2 . petition focus on use of the ._. r",..., ;"V" " '...o • Ce,,,101.4.roval �• whole site for a public park "" ' CITY OF TIGARD Council Direction: Neighborhood to talk to Parks and PRAB about using site for a park November 17, 2016 PRAB letter states support for a 110 public park on the subject ?�o` S 1666� 11 site, but identifies lack of z , ;1 funding. 13 10 3 +' R 26lP i. 2660 S. ami PD Open Space requirement ^ ` "' can provide opportunity for Y.. u . .7 �5 t 5 t� 9 6 7„ 6 5 compromise, e.g.: ) / Tract A multi-use / Tract B through path _ — — / Tract C dedication and suf SPT2UE srREET" improvements — —; --_-- / Tract D integration CITY 0 1. 'l' T G \ R 1) Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the City Council take two actions tonight: %raw . : -� 1. First, adopt ordinance approving the proposed Comp Plan Amendment - and Zone Change. °, 2. Second, pass a motion approving the proposed PD Concept Plan with clear _ direction to the applicant for preparation of their detailed plan. CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done TIGARD Stafford Development, LLC / Topping C-P to R-12 Comp Plan Amendment/ Zone Change with Concept Plan Planned Development City Council Hearing Agenda Item #4 Community Development January 24,2017 Quasi-Judicial Land Use Hearing Procedures Statement by City Attorney This is a quasi-judicial land use proceeding. Council's decision must be based on the following substantive criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.380.030,and 18.390.050;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1,2, 10;Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 10;and Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 1, 7,and 12 Testimony,arguments and evidence must be directed toward the applicable criteria. Failure to raise an issue clearly enough so that Council understands and can address the issue precludes an appeal on that issue. Members of the City Council will be asked whether they have any conflicts of interest. If a Council member has an actual conflict,the Council member cannot participate. Council members must declare any contacts about this case with a member of the public. Council members must also declare if they have independent knowledge of relevant facts,such as from a visit to the site in question. A Council member who describes ex parte contacts or independent information may still participate in the decision. After the discussion of conflicts and ex parte contacts,any person may challenge the participation of a Council member or rebut any statements made. The Council member in question may respond to such a challenge. Council members also may ask the staff and witnesses questions throughout the hearing,until the record closes. After the record is closed, the City Council will deliberate about the request. During deliberations, the City Council may re-open the public portion of the hearing if necessary to receive additional evidence before making a decision. Please do not repeat testimony. If you agree with the statement of an earlier witness,please just state that and add any additional points of your own. When you are called to testify,please come forward to the table. Please begin your testimony by giving your name, spelling your last name, and give your full mailing address including zip code. Statement by Mayor The conduct for tonight's hearing shall be as follows: 1. City staff will summarize the written staff report. 2. The applicant will testify. 3. Council will take public comment. 4. Staff will have an opportunity to respond. 5. The applicant will be given an opportunity for rebuttal. AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: January 24, 2017 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on: QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING - TOPPING C-P TO R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT / ZONE CHANGE WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROPOSAL: The applicant requests approval of a Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Map Amendment from Professional Commercial, C-P, to Medium Density Residential, R-12, and a Planned Development Review for a Concept Plan only on a three- parcel property totaling 1.54 acres. The proposed concept plan shows 18 single-family detached homes with approximately 23 percent of the site in open space, a portion of which is located at the corner of SW Spruce Street and SW 72nd Avenue. LOCATION: 7303 SW Spruce St., 10705 SW 72nd Ave., 10735 SW 72nd Ave;TAX MAP/ LOT #'s: 1S136ACO2200, 1S136ACO2400, 1S136ACO2500; ZONE: Existing: Professional Commercial (C-P); Proposed: Medium Density Residential (R-12);APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.380.030, and 18.390.050; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2, 10; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 10; and Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 1, 7, and 12. Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony 04, 6w,v/ vv0vid (t) to- Vs' j fic hap iSitm ALAI .1 Ir r) AGENDA ITEM No. 4 (4;733.s v..; Date: January 24, 2017 cri • - RINT Proponent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. told,► ke.CJA. �. Ipti(sdw m ��z3 i la , 31(7 '01. — Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. C\n‘iI * v\A HA vY\ 1bw-10 Sv) sve., Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. - Name,Address&Phone No. MAO ) U5 OG t,_gzz -Fi35 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Ph ne No.I Name,Address&Phone No. Gay La � T &44s-,)_ 04*I Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address& hone .. Name,Address&Phone No. Vy\r►is (,i�.ke\& . St 79►0 SW r 1\0 T4 ag 03- 4s .- (7crI Name,Address&Phone No. Nathe,Address&Phone !- Name, dress Phone No. r.-1)-v‘ y A-4 W) Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: January 24,2017 PLEASE PRINT Proponent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Ph?ne No. Name,Address&Phone No. kp Cs ; vice Y. )I- ql �l Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. tSoree n bb� 3DB (., R7a2,3 x'5-7 b s6 • Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. A ar.Y 9\ 3a 'As !moo SW 017223 5 . -333- -1e234 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. . I' 61-05 50 ittntr mci op_ .c6 . 93qPI q0-z2.3 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.)47) )00 S ;fr_ L'i‘ 37/ ,3cq 3 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. '7310 /o Due Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: January 24, 2017 PLEASE PRINT Proponent-(Speaking In Favor) Opponent-(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. KILL KO‘--IL M IO410(' 5� '‘ r'k 11 "y 1" 1crr ,2P dZ 917-2- 3 5 .Sx` 1) - G.S- Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Anil Y�tvrdoC �ue,S`,' -)Lit St,3 5 S . `2115 -5� �'11 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. 7.4(5 S .4 PKC S sea •i 7-37 I l Ji' Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Add s&Phone No. 1,pm Name Ad ress&P one No. ter 1z I v 5 /VU., �1-' ` U Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. A Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony Testimony Draft 1 12417 SUPPLE,�CENTAL PACKET FOR 9 a o i 7 To: Tigard City Council (DA l ; OF MEETING) ✓ jeh c1.2 f-,te gi7 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223 FROM: Jim Long, Chairperson, Citizen Participation Organization-4M 10730 SW 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 503-647-0021 FILE NOS, Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2016-0002 and Zone Change (ZON) 2016-00001 and (PDR) 2016-0012 FILE TITLE: TOPPING C-P to R-12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ ZONE CHANGE with PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: Stafford Development Company 485 S. State Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034 My name is Jim Long. I am Chairperson of CPO-4M, the Citizens Participation Organization serving East Tigard—Metzger— and Durham. I am here speaking for both the CPO-4M, and it members in the Metzger-Tigard neighborhood. These are preliminary comments. The CPO-4M met Jan 18 to discuss this and other proposals. First, as chair of the CPO-4M, in December 2015 in response the a proposal with the city as applicant for a "Zone Swap" for this property, the local east Tigard CPO-4M discussed the city planning department's request and voted unanimously to endorse retaining the Com mercial-ProfessionaliCommercial General zoning. So, your local CPO-4M asks that you deny this Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zone change, and Planned Development Review. We the citizens (both nearby residents and CPO member attendees) do not support residential use, particularly R-12 and multi-story buildings (19 Ayes, 0 Nays at the CPO-4M meeting October 26, 2016). R-12 zoning does not fit the character of the neighborhood. If the property does not remain commercial zoning. R-7 or R-5 makes more sense. On Jan. 18th,2017, the CPO-4M (East Tigard-Metzger- Durham] CPO voted unanimously to encourage the city council to include the property within the boundaries of the Tigard Triangle. 1 Testimony Draft 1 12417 (The Toppings have no guarantees for this property, and contrary to the neighborhood meeting minutes, application, and staff report there are legal not economic reasons for the Toppings not being able to fulfill their purpose for annexation into the city which was to build)" The application does not have the correct facts about why the preschool never opened. So why reward them when they want a CPA amendment??? So please deny this app. CRITERIA CPA: The Comprehensive Plan should have (and probably did) take into consideration that growth was built in. So, it is probably built in already. ZON PDR: Just because the applicant is just in concept PDR stage, doesn't mean the city is in the preliminary stage now too. The city planning department should be providing more details to justify the CPA and ZON. Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, Chapter 18.350 + 18.350.010 1. Purpose 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 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. [THERE IS NO EVIDENCE] {We ask for denial]. 18.380 18.390.050 The property is within drainage ways,No impact study.//All people who have submitted a written request to be notified. This was remanded and continued.//Type III Comprehensive Plan Goal 1, Citizen Involvement Comprehensive Plan Goal 2 Land Use planning Comprehensive Plan Goal 10 Housing Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 10;and Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 1,7,and 12. 2 Testimony Draft 1 12417 Under Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies for Citizen Involvement: Goal # 1 of Oregon land use laws (1971) requires that citizens be involved in every phase of the planning process. This has not happened so far in this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change with Planned Development Review case. There were many meetings citizens to which citizens were not invited. The Stafford Development Company `conceptual application' has not been fully reviewed. So there was another week (9 weeks already) from January 10 to 17 that we did not have access to the application online but only at city hall. City Hall was not open from Jan. 11-17 due to snow and holiday and (since, in part, the City Planning department's office is closed on Fridays). CPO-4M's boundaries include both incorporated and unincorporated areas. In contrast to city procedures, the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation sends the CPO chairs full copies of development applications for review at/before the Comment period starts. ADD Staff has NOT documented the quasi-judicial process and NOT engaged the neighbors directly in the process to ensure information is available and notice received. In November 21st PC testimony we asked: Why doesn't the City of Tigard supply/post the developer's application online for residents to see? Or, at least, why doesn't the city provide the appropriate Community Planning Organizations with a copy of the development applications? After he heard me say that on Nov. 21a, Gary Pagenstecher told the Planning Commission decision-makers and public in his public testimony that the development application is "online" in public testimony The CPO could not find it in November or December. So here we have an example of`alternative facts'. So, on January 10`h, at 4:50pm at Tigard City Hall I asked Gary Pagenstecher where online we could fmd the development application; Gary P. looked online for 10-12 minutes and couldn't find it. It's not there. He misleads the PC and public. I asked him if the city had an extra copy of the application so we could review and he said "no". This affects citizens' substantial rights by minimizing their ability to review plans and comment fully about them. So we still did not have access to a copy during the snowy week (Jan. 10-17). 3 Testimony Draft 1 12417 So, I want to point out two false statements and an omission made at the Planning Commission and in the official minutes of the PC for 11/21/16. Commissioner Chris: Jim Long did not request a year earlier did not request that this property be included in the Tigard Triangle. Actually he didn't have the idea until summer of 2016 when he saw boundary map for the Tigard Triangle. Assoc. Planner Gary Pagenstecher: It is/was not "online"(as stated above). Calista Fitzgerald's comments are not all in the PC minutes; hence errors and omissions (27-foot loss in elevation). Remember earlier last year, when this room was pretty-well packed with people interested in this 72nd and SW Spruce property who opposed the Zone Swap? Did the city notify all those interested parties? Shouldn't they be considered interested parties in this proceeding? Your local CPO doesn't like to have to be watchdogs over what the city planning department is doing outside its own code. But, if necessary will be. Existing ZONING Currently Zoned Commercial- Professional --- Proposed zoning: Medium Density Residential (R-12) There are currently 7 properties along Spruce Street near 72nd within the City of Tigard that are zoned Commercial-PROFESSIONAL. Whereas all the nearby residential to the west and north is R-4.5 residential. What is this "co-applicant" status for the city? Similar to the 2015-2016 failed "Zone Swap", it appears the City is both the (co-) Applicant and the person reviewing the application for this Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Again, the city is not neutral? Whose idea was it to start the "Zone Swap" as a legislative proceeding? Cite pages of application. Please pay attention to a large citizen measure of local input and delay this proposal until a better proposal appears, or deny this application and let them come back with a better one, better than this. The concept of a "Buffer" between the City of Tigard and unincorporated "Town of Metzger" makes no sense. The buffer should be a park. Not R-12 houses for a buffer. 4 Testimony Draft 1 12417 "Gateway to Metzger" views The city has in its power to ask for another proposal for this location. Longer time for consideration is important. Public Notice Sign Unreadable Gary Pagenstecher asked me in October to keep an eye on City's public notice signage. I did. One city PUBLIC Notice sign was visible on Monday October 31st, and I have been looking at it and the public notice sign is too small (about 28" x 19") for people to read. People in cars have to stop, get out of their vehicle, and then have to squat down in front of it to read it. [Insert pic] Passersby also squat down to read the PUBLIC NOTICE sign. Before Thanksgiving of last year (2015), when the City of Tigard's proposed Zone Swap commenced, the city installed two L2) Public Notice signs at both properties, one on SW Spruce and one on SW 72nd Avenue. Both signs blew down due to Oregon rains and winds. Why was only one PUBLIC NOTICE sign put up in November of 2016? When I looked for the city's most recent and only PUBLIC NOTICE sign on Saturday morning November 12, 2016, the flimsy sign had fallen off one of its posts and curled up so it is currently unreadable, again due to Oregon rains and winds (see pic below). This has been a recurring problem, e.g. for Public Notice signs by the city and developers regarding the A&O Apartment application neighborhood meetings and public hearings in 2015. On January 23rd, 2017 sign on SW Spruce down and unreadable. [pic submitted]. By today, January 24th the sign was totally removed. At 2/2/16 Public Hearing at City Council meeting, GP said: "Since that time staff has changed to using plastic coated paper with double sticks to hold the sign in place. In the future staff will monitor the signs and check on them after a bad storm. The plastic covering actually makes the sign more difficult to read. Perhaps the planning department is understaffed as Gary said on January 10. There are landowners who did not receive notice. 5 Testimony Draft 1 12417 .:ice-�"'� - � , ... .. Nt ftt • .tom- ,. � �.� i a . , a ' *lit \ k--+ • K �, ` / - Yin-. yo fl. F I /. arms " - .: r , ....\\.,,,,,, 00Y .:r tea....... _ ` 6 Testimony Draft 1 12417 .-- -''-tk.x,.--t i....\ ,°16 101;°-'7e. ' \t'' II i '' ',.. 4 I 'I '',''' ...Ili f*Te:_,. , , , %: t _fix r i /f s d... 4* •.^+,' •',wg. V 710 111001011 `t t. ,/,z , ,+gar a _ � 'r4tp 5. .,.. 1.: e so-',,,f.= ." YFbI�cC q, ;p , ,.a,KI... it . ¢ yi er•Y ire_.s.''' '�`. --4 4.-4,..;',...e,'• �:'. *.c v ter '` {,.., i d.i F a c :,S�!} ,r t k,, Y ^t '41�r i of ?_ $4.4 q, NT3 ,.f4 ,. r .*. �w r -r Fez - a,,�_ Y ) �� }� ° PPi w .. a � Ai' ... ` t - t n,,y`a�+z-,STM_.: °�'. „ ,,,i .�i� r Tl"f� Jin ; Y t. 10-7,,,A ,--,;4:w ' !` . h�f y{�.- �,,,,k.,, ,,,-,,..,-,...4 ��.!-I� f-g .if X7 -•,, Zs., it 4'S .- t. -AP' ..x'; ay! i m c Ys�Y y�r i..:',------A-t" L %':. AA' ,i to - {�° 3` }t "' y,+..,.3 s.,v,- ��'$v it at i s'[, , /i•_ d ,,,, -74.r.,:'' d+, i 47 �'y•s3'.`,°ry� - . p 4'. '.ySd N„ '� . - i-d s 4r ;*. Fix a C U. ""' . '• j i�r.: +q>+�i{. 4 yy.. "4.'ter "!f a ' - ',. . w '. A t t** ?�+ by Fy. �M1 4,4'r� * ..-xe-."- a k,,,-,;,,-;__y# +5 pa .,_ Ain,. _. .SRO 1..w `-t /, v 4°."Y ,`i ',I4�S : 'G3 .� ...f� i �.�'. '.2!,. As it was last year in the 2015-2016 failed 'Zone Swap' application by the city, this signage is a violation of city land use codes. Interested people who pass by this site cannot receive information they need to know what is planned. As of January 3nd, there is still •not a sign posted. Preventing residential now, does not preclude it from becoming residential later. NOTE: This information is provided here as a courtesy only. before developers submit certain land use applications to the County (for areas outside cities). These meetings provide a forum for the developer, affected CPO (Community Participation Organization) and nearby property owners to discuss the proposal informally. County staff do not schedule or attend these meetings. It was irregular for the city of Tigard to be attending neighborhood meetings. On 2/2/16, Charlie Hanson said his land at the lower west end of the property is "swamp-like," with plenty of drainage problems. "It is more of a wetland, than viable property and that may be why commercial builders have not shown interest." [So, there is an environmental impact] Testimony Draft 1 12417 From the Feb. 2, 2016 minutes at the City Council Public Hearing when "Council President Snider said residents near Site A need to recognize that the property is two blocks off of Highway 99W and behind a huge commercial center. It is probably not going to be developed as a commercial property. He suggested that they as a neighborhood figure out how they can live with whatever will be done residentially on that property at some point. He said he thought it would be hard for the neighborhood to prevent things from happening on the property because of Oregon land use law and Tigard's Community Development Code." Does this mean that Councilor Jason Snider is not neutral in this case in 2017? "Councilor Woodard addressed Jim Long and suggested there is time to talk to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) about using it for a park." We did and the Park and Recreation Advisory Board agreed it is a good place for a park. Jim Long came up with a creative way to fund the park through the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal levy if approved in May. You (the city) do not have enough Commercial properties. {There us a Deficiency} of Commercial as shown in Cogan, Owens, Cogan. There is a Deficiency of R-12 residential zoning as shown in Angelo report. There is no loss because [TST] school property was not included in the City of Tigard's inventory of properties zoned residential. {How did that residential zoning originally happen in West Tigard?] So, in conclusion, the CPO-4M membership asks that you deny the applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Planned Development Review, at this time. Thank you. 8 Testimony Draft 1 12417 Code is 5 feet between houses, not 6-8, not 10 feet, because that's what `market' prefers. Setback 12 feet supposed to be 15 feet. Nether the city or the developer ever contacted the HANSONS RE: DRAINAGE problems at the site. NO Capital Improvement Projects in annexed part of north Tigard (old Metzger) Public records procedural — have to show prejudiced and that my/our substantial rights have been minimized. Not being able to get application. Access to application [[I was able to go to City Hall a few times, and got to talk to Gary Pagenstecher and reviewed document briefly, but not fully until given a copy a week ago, Jan. 17th, 2017. This has prejudiced my rights and neighbors rights to _ (review and comment) and our ability to participate (in this land use proceeding) Public Info. Request (get copy of application) would mean a weeklong delay (We were) Delays in getting application impaired our ability to comment on the PDR. Once a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map is set up -- you've got to stick with it. There is not a minimal level of discretion to change. Yes, the City has ability to change zoning, (but) it is the city's burden to prove the need to change the plan. Staff report says simply: population increased. *The city needs to prove the need for change, and they haven't done that. Populations are increasing all over Oregon which increases demand for commercial-professional/commercial-general. Just that the population has increased is not enough to justify this proposed Zone change 9 Testimony Draft 1 12417 Neither the application nor the staff report explains why the city is needs to change their (its) zoning maps, especially if it is eliminating Commercial-Professional zoning. Private park or open space, not visible Concept plans The review criteria is loosey-goosey Staff report says minimally meets the criteria not once, but multiple times. If the applicant proposes minimally meeting the criteria once (may be OK) but multiple times of just minimally meeting the criteria (It is not acceptable. We deserve better.) How many times do you want to be just `minimal"? The city can ask for more. Why doesn't make this a model/ask for something better? If they can't improve their proposal, negotiate with them. The planning department suggestions for "Conditions of approval" cannot substitute for meeting the applicable criteria. The City of Tigard needs to explain conditions of approval [here now in this public hearing] in meeting the applicable criteria Zoning — lack of data on need (for zone change?) Population growth is not a blank check Concept plan — "we do not know" any specifics The neighborhood citizens have appealing arguments for why the city should hold off, deny, and not approve this CPA,ZON, and PDR. Meet criteria now // can't let them all slide Conclusory statements jump to conclusions without facts. R-12, R-5, It would make sense to rezone R-7 to R-12 What is affordable? $339,000 10 Testimony Draft 1 12417 The applicants Concept Plan PDR barely meets loose standards. City needs a more detailed plan, another Type II/III proceeding This R-12 application doesn't show a substantial change in the community. There are increases in population everywhere/experiences The Comprehensive Plan should have (and probably did) take into consideration that growth was built in. So, it is probably built in already. How has the community changed? It is not articulated in the application Charge disparity FM store always commercial and has always been there Not a fundamental change in the community that you comprehended when you (the city) set up (established the Comprehensive Plan.) 11 Testimony Draft 1 12417 There isn't a need for a buffer. It doesn't make sense. "Buffer" — doesn't make any sense, re: abuts county buffer is still residential Losing the buffer because Commercial-Professional does have an impact as big FM store. It doesn't make sense. Public Records law — minutes need to be accurate, general applicable law failure to maintain accurate records, give specifics Changes do not warrant changing the zone code Instead of R-12 zoning, R-7 or R-5 makes more sense and first neighborhood character better, so drop this concept plan. Zon map/cpa made in 1970s what has substantially changed/ The population increase has increased the need for open space. Wetlands Pp 10, 11, 12 Zone Change- incompatibility with adjacent properties Goal 10.2 not true Approval criteria R-7 to R-12 setback 3-4 feet codes, online, objective codes 30 feet house away widen Spruce Swale is it excluded from open space?? 20 feet wide, how tall?(not what xxx yyy talking about before Nmtg., 2 stories, more? Exclude storm tract, add 27feet / / / / Only 20.3% open space For 40 years this property was zoned 1-story Professional -commercial Windows overlooking Cars obstruct driveways and sidewalks at Legacy Oaks 12 "This application would create spot zoning and is unsupported by the evidence in the record: While zoning changes is a legitimate function of the City, the Supreme Court has cautioned against the practice, especially once a zoning map and comprehensive plan is in place: The enabling legislation under which county governments may enact zoning regulations requires the enactment of a comprehensive zoning plan. ORS 215.050. Once a plan is adopted, changes in it should be made only when such changes are consistent with the over-all objectives of the plan and in keeping with changes in the character of the area or neighborhood to be covered thereby. Arbitrary, or 'spot', zoning to accommodate the desires of a particular landowner is not only contrary to good zoning practice, but violates the rights of neighboring landowners and is contrary to the intent of the enabling legislation which contemplates planned zoning based upon the welfare of an entire neighborhood. See Holt et ux. v. City of Salem et al., > -:(; , 215, . _ ' Uw) ft �: ; 1 Yokley, Zoning Law and Practice, 128, § 3-5 (3d ed. 1965). Even though there is a presumption of legislative regularity when the governing board of a county enacts a change in a zoning ordinance, the antithetical character of spot zoning and its recognized erosive effect upon the comprehensive zoning plan automatically tends to neutralize, if not to overcome, the presumption in the particular case. Accordingly, courts generally view spot zoning as being outside the presumption of legislative regularity, and require substantial evidence of change in the neighborhood in order to justify the rezoning of a small tract as an amendment in keeping with the comprehensive plan. See Annotation, 51 , 303 (1957).' Smith v. Washington County, 241 Or 380 , 383-384 (1965). The Supreme Court's discussion in Smith regarding the need to produce "substantial evidence of change in the neighborhood is consistent with the approval criteria set forth TDC 18.380.030(3), which requires the applicant to demonstrate the "evidence of change in the neighborhood or community" to justify the requested zoning change. This criteria is not satisfied. The only "change" in the community '• = tified • t e appli .nt or staff a ge l in. -ase in - - •.ty's po• latio ov- the ears o, eve o \ijes do • ow and -n increa - population, by its- annot form the /3 The only "change" in the community identified by the applicant or staff is a general increase in the city's population over the years. However, most cities do grow and an increase in population, by itself, cannot form the basis for a change in the existing comprehensive plan. When the City first adopted its zoning map and comprehensive plan, it would have necessarily considered the natural increase in population in decades to come and the plan would have been designed to accommodate such anticipated growth. If population growth, in and of itself, can justify zoning map changes, then the comprehensive plans would lose any meaning and could be manipulated and changed after every new population census. Instead, the applicant must demonstrate some other type of change in the community. For example, a sudden and significant disproportionality between needed commercial properties and needed residential properties might justify changing a zoning designation, especially if such disproportionality did not exist and was not contemplated at the time of the enactment of the comprehensive plan. The applicant, however, cites no such sudden changes in the availability of lots suitable for housing versus lots suitable for commercial construction that might justify a zoning map change. Moreover, the increase in population cited by the applicant would presumably include an increase in the need of professional services and maintaining the existing inventory of professional-commercial zoned properties as shown on the plan is necessary to accommodate such growth. However, applicant does not even attempt to address the effect of the loss of professional- commercial zoned property on the overall comprehensive plan. Without more evidence demonstrating that the existing comprehensive plan and zoning map is inadequate to address how the City has grown, the proposed zoning change is the type of "spot zoning" that the Supreme Court warned against and should be denied." The applicant's argument that the proposed R12 will form a "buffer" makes no sense because it will push dense residential development to just across the street from busy commercial areas, when under the existing plan, the professional-commercial zoning designation already provides a much more viable buffer. SUPPLE EN"1 A ':v CKET FOR (DATE OF MEETING) Mayor and Council: A / h d Q /,,-e►'Y1 1,,./ RE:CPA 2016-00002;ZON 2016-00001;PDR 2016-00012 J My property borders the proposed property to be rezoned.I am concerned about what an R12 development will mean to my neighborhood. After the City Council meeting in which Gary Pagenstecher stated the development application could be found online at the city of Tigard website I tried to access it to better study the proposal and understand the impact but was unable to locate it.Nor was I able to drive to city hail to read it due to the recent inclement weather.The city hall was also closed from January 18-January 23. I sent a letter to Gary on January 17 stating so.I also left a phone message on January 17 to call me back and walk me through finding the application online.He did not return my call or acknowledge my letter.I have had very little time to study it,therefore.This prejudiced my ability to form a comment.In the little time I had to study it before this meeting tonight I noted a few things I did not agree with: 1. A change in zoning would violate my rights as a neighboring land owner.I did not buy my property with the expectation or desire to be bounded by 18 2 story homes in my back yard. 2.Per approval criteria stating the proposed development satisfies goal 10.2 of land use planning to protect and enhance the quality and integrity of residential neighborhoods is just not true.The quality of this neighborhood would suffer because of the increase in traffic and the inappropriate density as compared to the rest of the neighborhood and its larger lots. 3.The increase in population THROUGHOUT the Tigard area does not justify spot rezoning in our neighborhood.The Comprehensive Land Use Plan addressed the expectation of growth at its inception. 4. The development does not satisfy the needs apparent to this neighborhood and surrounding properties as our petition for a park has demonstrated.There is no where close for a mother to take her children to play within walking distance. Pte. Penny Stewart 7330 SW Pine Street Portland,Oregon,97223 To whom it may concern, I oppose rezoning the tax lots located west of the intersection of SW 72nd and Spruce from commercial to R12. I have reviewed the proposed 18 unit housing development and have serious concerns regarding their construction as follows: • My view from my back yard is of the tax lots in question.All of the proposed designs are not in character with the surrounding houses and will damage my viewshed. • I am concerned with loss of privacy where multiple houses will be able to see into my back yard. • Traffic on SW Pine is pretty bad and people speed in front of my house on a regular basis. I have a 14 month old son and fear for his safety. Adding 18 new houses one block away will increase the traffic,further eroding my son's safety with an increase in traffic. • It is difficult to get out of the neighborhood during rush hour due to traffic congestion.This will only increase with the addition of 18 new houses. I am unclear if the increase in traffic was considered regarding this development. This is a serious concern. • There are no places within safe walking distance(no sidewalks)to take my son to play. A better use of the land would be a park to service the existing neighborhood. Sincerely, SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR A-k k/ /7,0 i 7 (DATE OF MEETING) Scott Braunsten Ale,hda /1c m 7212 SW Pine Street Tigard,Oregon 97223 braunsten@comcast.net S03-939-7910 Tao, 2.4, 2D11 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET To Au T i y ar d Ci Cour t✓'i l FORf T o l 7 Re� Comprehen' " 13101 Amen kola/n.4- Lo 1 in -- 0002 (DA OF MEE/TiING)�/ Zone- CkJh _ 20I C 00'O) 4 G en CL✓G� I T r►i Dear M6.9 or Look and CNA!)c i l o-rs , A rea.dincj of- +V)e. Sl-of-c-ord 1) opmerf Companu's comp repeat left me, one rmpre;s"ion a lob of chcarl- and I ansuavi used Fa snake a bad ;at& took food . A+ fhe )\lcvember Tigard `P(&nhinl Commission Hearin) And at 4-his one, focca1 , flue Comp an Fit fcl►red Fly pick-are. kotA ill i p So I oicerphotos -t-ake n on c sktor+ wciik. up SM 7L44`of. Spruce, . I real;x�. the 1' 2/,,, +Ory houses Have been modified, Th-e S -afford ones &llaw !o Fee-+, no-4- y f biz+ween koUses , ¶ht Com p ci n i s c i ct'i m +hat- 1'l e s e. lo w.vr k oases pro v i cae a trte e d tet( buffer is I imdt`eroiks , when Tie, real buffer is the, r1U+ural open space., rcidia�inr� oia+ 'tri all direaions 44-o 5ey ve recrectl-ional needs of 4-his :leiyhborhoad. iii15 is waF 1ivab-t1i-1- f is at I 4190u.0-, Th�encl result ef loss of land for a. park, will be {-o open area, 1•o rampan-1 over-development+-. kis find , 4-he e,i4i're area -en cam passec{ bid 4-he S+clFfor4 cleve(oprrk_ni-, is 4-I-1-e, on19 CtCreci9e, IaryL enOu5h 4-o serve recreal--ionai nee: s of our rie 9kborhood . Your Tigard P&rks and Advi`sor9 board has twice b,t r i f-I--e n 4 n e e d for a park 'i n $lois Are,a_, Con we, pic+ti-rf. ii 'lead rnonej i'nve,fed {or a safe pea e:st-rictvi bic>7cle i)as_age, ove-r Pacth"c Hwy. 1-o 4-he ¶rgard Triangle , +he. 61-)3s planner Commercial vetsls in ow +o+lxlj9 c&rAclap Ext den4- Ott I-rayeous 2 A4-4-41t_Any3 least .11-25 at+hou9hl- dal- Could s1-ori- & C 0 h 0,rsa{-toh We should be Navin jr . S-1r ccerely J\Gtnej Trae� "7310 61/J Kng- Si-- • h ) 4-raxii 2.‘;�d jrr a)( csw, A441:1 - pi, v—--i-- -,),Iti )-v--)14. 4.4?I dd)15 V AO - /A loll 0+ "i)-40 Ll 2t/v1 . 0 -1 yu\ 1 .1.2,+ ).) - so (Lid .... , 0000!".. ..,..;',1,-,,,T'-; -,',, •„ , •-, .,1 1 ,. . ----;-.111,-;74' .,./ , ., I• 1 i ., . v-42,..feic4; -, di ,•:;, • ' ..' ,. • vo , t--_,. .......-: . .. , .. , , ,, 1 , . - , 4' $1 , r-- - _ , , - ".".,.." 2: ';// ''', ,,..--1 . , .. , . • , ' OtOr' . . i ...1,, • .4.*.''. .'•-: - - - , ., . ,_, _ ....,, ,--•,;.•. -1. - ' - .i--; - • - -.... IV-- -- i • .. . ,--,., • - - -- ,-- „,: _ . ,_.. ..,__ _.4\ .11,1,•• ...., .— . . 1 14.,..-.• •• '•- /./•7.' , , „.. - . -- •.,. ' ••-•1---• - • - , i '• • \ .. .. - - - . - I ...... ,, ..... .._ •.. ... - ,.......,..... , . ' - .- • - -• ---' . .• .- -, - . 'i..• • - - ..,. .------ . ,.„..„.„.„, _, ...... . _ ,. _.,.„,..,../.,,,,,,, --_ .._.,_,v,..,,..i...,:..,....___,...•• . .. ,, -, .. ,.......- :-„,i,*.---.cicr,--... it;_ ,3.*31.--•".•' ' ' it ,..._ . E „..,,,,t,.,,,,,,,,,,,,•,,,,,,,. ,.;6,-'...ny.._ '.:v,,... ' ''i 1 ' -.:,-.,' . _ :,.: *-1.\•;" . .'"-v;,,.;*,.,#,,‘''_.,44FS'.•7.. . -,,0%.,--r.,".t..1. i!,.1, „ f , _ . .. 4 , .' • . - • • .,. .77- --.• --- --- - •- , .• -. ' -:•• ' • ''• - .. 1 ...---:i - ,:. * •,!' ' . , \..\• . ..iN 4,-z141f*Y:"....i.c --, .,f,-. -,, . _,, -'',. -'-..' ' ,-• -........11 ---- . . '. _ - / • . _ , ,. . , . -p,-.. .. .,"°''r N'ili4,,,,,...;,„1,1)•--,,P, ,- •/a 10 ', ' la .91ittliiP*, iii . ^,1,,,,,..;.,S. : '' '',. '"- •'':i' ' " ' f - . - .A. : :/ . ' r': , ----, , , ,. ,..,. .. ., .p....,..,, , . . ... ..,, . . . - . ,,,- .- .) :--• ..i...,-- -4:-. - , ',, p.' , liii,/,',,/','4,44.'. ' , 2,,,,,,A.,,...:‘,.\\ . . .; . , ... . .4. •_: +.61 .*3,S f/IMIIMMINIII 11/16.." < .---------. •'' '''),r ' ' ,i.IW:., ,,,:'' l' 11',, -' t; :' ,-.- ,,,!t //i!lilt':''''I,' i '. .1., 1,\\ . .. ._ _ ...... .' ., . .„.. _.....- L ; 1 \ I _,..;.: _ , ,. i I ',...•,,e..11 , . , - ' ----11' . . ,— .. "Md AIS-2884 9,dkv , i a 0/'7 5. Business Meeting 74717, Meeting Date: 01/24/2017 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Review Ballot Measure Tide for City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment Submitted By: Sean Family,Community Development Item Type: Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Staff requests input from Council on the ballot measure title for the Substantial Amendment to City Center Urban Renewal Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Direct staff to prepare a final version of the ballot title for Council's adoption at the February 7,2017 Council meeting. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council unanimously approved the City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment at a public hearing on December 13,2016. The amendment would add seven properties to the district,totaling 37.7 acres. Per the City Center Urban Renewal Plan,the addition of land that totals more than 1 percent of the total plan area is considered a Substantial Amendment and must be approved by Tigard voters. To facilitate the desired increase in financial capacity of$2.8 million,staff proposes to put the plan amendment on the May 2017 ballot. A draft ballot title is attached for Council's review and consideration. Staff will ask Council to finalize the ballot title and refer the plan to voters at its next meeting on February 7,2017.The draft ballot title was initially developed by the City Attorney and staff. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to postpone the ballot measure process and refer the plan amendment to voters in a future election. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones Goal#2.Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be City Center Urban Renewal Plan Tigard Comprehensive Plan Special Planning Areas-Downtown Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. City Strategic Plan City Strategic Plan Goal 1: Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity. City Strategic Plan Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION December 13,2016:Approved City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment and referred it to the voters for adoption October 4,2016: Public Review of City Center Urban Renewal Plan Substantial Amendment September 20,2016: Discuss Adoption Process for Substantial Amendment to Downtown City Center Urban Renewal Plan May 3,2016 :Discuss Potential Substantial Amendment to City Center Urban Renewal Plan. Attachments Ballot Title Draft Ballot Title for City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment CAPTION (10 words max) City Center Urban Renewal Plan Amendment QUESTION (20 words max) - Shall the City amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan by expanding the size of the urban renewal area? SUMMARY (175 words max) This measure approves the ordinance authorizing the City Center (Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan Amendment, which increases the size of the urban renewal area by adding seven properties, or 37.70 acres. The original City Center (Downtown) Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) was approved by voters in 2006 and includes projects such as street and streetscape improvements, bike and pedestrian improvements, park improvements, and support for public spaces and buildings. However, as a result of the economic downturn, tax increment revenues are less than originally projected. The Plan Amendment provides additional capacity to complete those projects. The Plan Amendment would not increase the approved $22 million cap for the Plan and would not impose new taxes. Funding comes from capturing increased property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area that otherwise would go to the City general fund and other taxing entities. Copies of the Plan and Plan Amendment are available at: http://www.tigard- or.gov/city hall/urban renewal.php ave✓ 1/3i/ /7 J22 7`'/79 AIS-2881 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 01/24/2017 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Review Ballot Measure Title for Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Prepared For: Susan Shanks Submitted By: Susan Shanks, Community Development Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg -Study Sess. Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Review and discuss the draft ballot title language for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Direct staff to prepare a final version of the ballot title for Council's consideration at the February 7,2017 Council meeting. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City Council unanimously approved the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan at a public hearing on December 13,2016.Per the City Charter,the plan will not go into effect unless approved by Tigard voters at a general election. Staff proposes to put the plan on the May 2017 ballot in keeping with the project's schedule and grant funding contract and has attached a draft ballot title for Council's review and consideration. Staff will ask Council to finalise the ballot title and refer the plan to voters at their next meeting on February 7,2017. The draft ballot title was initially developed by the City Attorney and then reviewed and edited by members of the project's consultant team with expertise in urban renewal,public outreach,and marketing research. The draft ballot title incorporates results from a survey conducted in December 2016 by EMC Research on behalf of the city.The survey results are attached for Council's information. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The city needs to prepare a ballot title for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan and refer it to Tigard voters in order to meet its Metro funding obligation and City Charter requirements. However,Council may choose to postpone the ballot measure process and refer the plan to voters in November 2017 instead of May 2017. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS City Strategic Plan Goal 1-Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity City Strategic Plan Goal 2 -Ensure development advances the vision City Council Goal 3-Adopt and begin Implementation of Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan (1-ISP) DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION 2015 • Staff completed the Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan ('FISP) -March •'Council directed staff to submit a CPDG application to Metro for funds to implement the TTSP -June 2016 • Council directed staff to enter into an IGA with Metro for CPDG funds -February • Council awarded a contract to MIG Inc. to implement the TTSP -March • Council approved the formation/membership of a Citizen Advisory Council (CAC) for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) -April • Council appointed an additional CAC member-August • Staff briefed Council and Planning Commission on the Plan-September • CCDA initiated public review of the Plan—October • Council approved the Plan-December Attachments Ballot Title Triangle Survey Report AgendaQuick©2005-2017 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved Draft Ballot Title for Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan CAPTION(10 words max) Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan Implementation QUESTION (20 words max) Shall the City implement an urban renewal plan, including the use of tax increment financing,for the Tigard Triangle? SUMMARY(175 words max) This measure approves the ordinance implementing the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) and the use of tax increment financing to fund projects undertaken as part of the Plan. No new taxes would be imposed. Funding comes from capturing increased property taxes from new development and increased property values in the urban renewal area that would otherwise go to the City general fund and other taxing entities. The Plan's proposed boundaries,goals, projects, and provisions for amendments are described in the Plan.The Plan currently includes many projects,such as: • Red Rock Creek restoration,focusing on water quality and public access • Street and sidewalk construction,focusing on connectivity and safety • Major sewer repairs to address public health • Intersection improvements,focusing on traffic congestion and multimodal access • New trails and parks Unless otherwise amended as allowed by the Plan,the total amount of tax increment that can be spent on projects over the life of the Plan is$188 million.This is anticipated to take 35 years. A copy of the Plan is available at: http://www.tigard-or.gov/Projects/TigardTriangle/tt UR Plan.pdf 0.0\ a. .06e tisae Cspa y 0.." V I pm pp i 040,11, ' 3 j Portland 14PCommunity G, College x"847 Id Nelli `\ IR i......... vRatti 14 ii s \ CO 4_ is of Wi [duos` \��A, in N.trtw.s 1 Map K!Y 1111 Pr, .,y Study Area , lake O 9 m -Seco.,dary Study Art. ` swe$0/KrufP w Mule"'w 1P 1 \14) MARKET City of Tigard S OPINION RESEARCH Tigard Triangle Development Survey ,.FiN '1 m ; • SERVICES December 2016 Methodology ► Live telephone survey of registered voters in the City of Tigard ► Conducted December 6th to 11th, 2016 ► 300 total interviews, with an overall margin of error of ±5 .7 percentage points at the 95% confidence interval ► Interviewing conducted using trained, professional interviewers ► Data weighted to be demographically representative of voters in the City of Tigard ► Tigard is divided into North and South regions in analysis primarily by SW Gaarde and SW McDonald Streets Please note that due to rounding, some percentages may not add up to exactly 100%. MN EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 12 MARKET Mood of the City & OPINION RESEARCH LIMO' � SERVICES Direction of the City A majority of voters in Tigard feel optimistic about the direction of the city. Right Direction 68% Wrong Track 19% (Don't Know) 14% 4. Do you feel that things in the City of Tigard are generally going in the right direction or do you feel things ME have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 14 City Improvement Priorities Reducing traffic congestion is the highest priority overall and by intensity. Growth and development is clearly the second highest priority. ■ 7 - Very High Priority 6 Total High Priority Reducing traffic congestion 48% 21% 69% Improving how we handle growth and development 28% 47% Getting MAX light rail service to Tigard 21% 31% Making all of Tigard more walkable 17% 15% ` 32% Improving bus and express bus service 17% 12%'= 29% Developing a currently underdeveloped area of Tigard with 9% 21% new housing, restaurants, and shopping 5-10. For each of the following items, please tell me how much of a priority you think that I _. item should be for the City of Tigard. EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 15 MARKET Reception of & OPINION L. RESEARCH Urban Renewal Plan F = : SERVICES Familiarity with Tigard Triangle A majority of Tigard voters are familiar with the Triangle, with over a third saying they are very familiar with it. Familiar 65% Somewhat 29% Not Familiar 32% $°.a Very 36% (Don't Know/ 24% Refused) 3% 111.1 11. Are you familiar with an area of the City known as the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 17 Familiarity with Tigard Triangle — By Subgroup Voters over the age of 50 and frequent voters are the most familiar with the Triangle, while voters under 50 and infrequent voters are the least familiar. ■ Very Familiar Somewhat familiar Total familiar OVERALL 36% 65% Male (n=141) 41% 65% Female (n=159) 32% 65% 18-49 (n=147) 30% 52% 50+ (n=153) 41% 77% North (n=176) 37% 67% South (n=123) 35% 62% Voted in 4/4 elections (n=72) 45% 79% Voted in <4/4 elections (n=228) 33% 60% 11. Are you familiar with an area of the City known as the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 18 Measure Support — Initial After hearing the initial ballot title, a majority of voters support the measure; at the same time, almost three-quarters of that support is soft support ("somewhat"). In addition, a large proportion are unsure initially (22%). Next May, there may be a ballot measure in Tigard to create an urban renewal area in the Tigard Triangle which reads: "Shall the City of Tigard implement an urban renewal area and plan for the Tigard Triangle?" Support 57% Somewhat 41% (Don't Know/ Oppose Refused) 21% 22% Somewhat 11% Strongly 16% ° Strongly 10% 12. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose this measure? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 19 Measure Support — Initial , By Subgroup There is relatively consistent support across demographic groups. Net support, the gap between support and opposition, is also fairly consistent across groups. Despite the fact that frequent voters are significantly more familiar with the Triangle than infrequent voters, support levels are similar. ■ Support (Don't Know) • Oppose Net OVERALL 57% 22% 21% +36% Male (n=141) 56% 23% 22% +34% Female (n=159) 58% 21% 20% +38% 18-49 (n=147) 61% 23% 16% +45% 50+ (n=153) 53% 21% 26% +27% North (n=176) 57% 20% 23% +35% South (n=123) 56% 25% 19% +38% Voted in 4/4 elections (n=72) 58% 21% 22% +36% Voted in <4/4 elections (n=228) 57% 22% 21% +36% Mil 12. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose this measure? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 110 Measure Support — Informed After hearing additional information about the measures, support increases. However, the increase in support is almost exclusively among soft supporters. "This potential ballot measure would create an urban renewal area in the Tigard Triangle....Urban renewal is used throughout Oregon to help revitalize areas that are Support underperforming or that lack public 70% infrastructure. Urban renewal does not impose a new tax. However, it does reduce the amount of tax revenue that taxing districts receive for the life of the Urban Renewal Plan. It does this by giving a portion of taxes collected from within the area to the Urban Renewal Agency Somewhat to fix specific problems in the area. If an urban 54% renewal area is approved by City Council and Oppose voters, funds generated by the area would be 26% spent on improving the transportation and (Don't utility infrastructure, attracting new Somewhat Know/ businesses and housing, and developing public 14% spaces such as parks, plazas, and trails. The Ref) Strongly o maximum indebtedness under the Urban Strongly 4% Renewal Plan is $188 million over a period of 16% 13% no more than 35 years." *emphasis added in report only, not during interviewing r'\40 13. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose this measure? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 111 Measure Support — Initial and Informed Initial Support Informed Support Support 70% (+13%) Support 57% Oppose .omewhatry, (Don't 26% 41% Know) Oppose (+5%) 21% 22% (Don't ° know) ewhat 11°,o 4% Strongly 16% ° (-18%) 16% Strongly 10% 13/° 12, 13. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose this measure? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 12 Measure Support — Informed , By Subgroup Support increases across all demographic groups. Net support increases the most in voters under 50, infrequent voters, and those in the North, and decreases the most among frequent voters. ■ Support (Don't Know) • Oppose Change From Net Initial OVERALL 70% 26% +8% 1 Male (n=141) 69% , °i 27% +8% Female (n=159) 71% , °, 25% +8% 18-49 (n=147) 78% '`' 19% +13% 50+ (n=153) 62% :_4 33% +2% North (n=176) 72% 26% +11% South (n=123) 67% '°, 27% +3% Voted in 4/4 elections (n=72) 59% 7% 33% -10% Voted in <4/4 elections (n=228) 73% ,0 24% +13%""`` VIII 13. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose this measure? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle! 13 MARKET Potential Benefits of Plan d OPINION F.1RESEARCH a SERVICES Potential Benefits ► [RESTORING THE MAIN CREEK, 61% VERY IMPORTANT] Restoring the main creek in the Triangle, which would decrease sewer damage and flooding and improve habitat, water quality, and the overall health of the Tualatin River watershed ► [NEW STREETS AND SIDEWALKS, 53% VERY IMPORTANT] Building new streets and sidewalks in the Triangle to improve safety and relieve traffic congestion ► [MAJOR SEWER LINE REPLACING, 47% VERY IMPORTANT] Replacing a major sewer line in the Triangle that the city has fixed temporarily ► [PUBLIC PARKS AND TRAILS, 34% VERY IMPORTANT] Building public parks and trails in the Triangle ► [EASIER TO WALK OR BIKE, 32% VERY IMPORTANT] Making it easier to walk or bike to nearby shops and services in the Triangle ► [STABLE FUNDING SOURCE, 30% VERY IMPORTANT] Providing a stable funding source to build or fix infrastructure in the Triangle that the city may otherwise delay or never be able to afford ► [PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED DISTRICT, 26% VERY IMPORTANT] Changing the character of the Triangle from an auto-oriented district with suburban offices and big-box stores into a pedestrian-oriented district with a diverse mix of destinations and activities ► [MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, 21% VERY IMPORTANT] Attracting mixed-use development, especially around light rail stations that may be built in the Triangle in the future 1111111 EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 115 Potential Benefits Restoring the main creek in the Triangle is seen as the most important potential benefit of the measure, closely followed by building new streets and sidewalks and replacing a major sewer line in the Triangle. All other benefits are seen by a majority as important, but with decreased intensity. ■ Very Important Somewhat Important % Total Important [RESTORING THE MAIN CREEK] 61% 30% 91% [NEW STREETS AND SIDEWALKS] 53% 32% 85% [MAJOR SEWER LINE REPLACING] 47% 38% 85% [PUBLIC PARKS AND TRAILS] 34% .ry 74% 11111111111111111. [EASIER TO WALK OR BIKE] 32% 39% 70% [STABLE FUNDING SOURCE] 30% 47% 77% [PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED DISTRICT] 26% 63% [MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT] 21% � 62% 14-21. Now I'm going to read you some of the potential benefits of this measure. EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle! 16 Potential Benefits — Overall vs Movers Those who move to support the measure after this section find similar benefits to be important as the whole group of respondents, but much more so. • Overall Positive Movers (n=92) % Total Important [RESTORING THE MAIN CREEK] 91/ 97% [NEW STREETS AND SIDEWALKS] 85/ 97% [STABLE FUNDING SOURCE] 77/ 91% [MAJOR SEWER LINE REPLACING] 85/ 90% [PUBLIC PARKS AND TRAILS] 74/0 88% [EASIER TO WALK OR BIKE] 70/ 85% [PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED DISTRICT] 63% AMII 81% [MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT] 62% 80% Mil 14-21. Now I'm going to read you some of the potential benefits of this measure. EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle! 17 Measure Support — After Potential Benefits Progression Total support increases slightly after respondents hear about potential benefits of the measure, but there is a significant increase in intensity of support (+11%). Initial Support Informed Vote After Potential Benefits Support Support 72% 70% (+2%) Support I 57% 46% 54% Somewhat (Don't Oppose Oppose 25% 41% Oppose Know) 26% 21% 22% , (-2%) (Don't at 14% (Don't °p Know) Know) 27% 3% Strongly 16% Strongly 16% 13% 4o � 13% (-1%) 10% 22. Given what you have just heard, do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or 11111. strongly oppose the measure to create an urban renewal area in the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 118 Measure Support — Potential Benefits There is a slight increase in total support across all demographic groups. The largest gain in net support after hearing potential benefits of the measure is among frequent voters. ■ Support (Don't Know) ■ Oppose Net Change From Informed OVERALL 72% 25% +4% Male (n=141) 71% 28% +0% Female (n=159) 74% ° 21% +7% 18-49 (n=147) 81% 19% +4% 50+ (n=153) 64% % 30% +4% North (n=176) 74% 24% +4% South (n=123) 70% •% 25% +4% Voted in 4/4 elections (n=72) 68% ° 30% +13% Voted in <4/4 elections (n=228) 74% ►° 23% +1% 22. Given what you have just heard, do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or IIIMI strongly oppose the measure to create an urban renewal area in the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 19 mo__ MARKET Positive Messages & OPINION RESEARCH SERVICES Positive Messages ► [WOULD NOT RAISE TAXES, 35% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] The urban renewal area would not raise taxes. It creates its own funding source by using a portion of property taxes from within the Triangle to fix identified problems within the Triangle. ► [SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS COULD BE HELPED, 29% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] Many people call the Triangle home and thousands travel there every day to work and shop. Yet it has significant problems such as flooding, traffic congestion, ongoing sewer line issues caused by creek erosion, and a lack of sidewalks, paved roads, and parks, which could all be helped with funding from urban renewal. ► [MORE WALKABLE COMMUNITY, 28% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] The Triangle is generally unfriendly to pedestrians and cyclists. Urban renewal can help build needed sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes, and trails, which would further the community's goal of becoming a more walkable, interconnected and healthy community. ► [COMPLETE COMMUNITY, 25% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] By fostering the creation of a complete community—one which has jobs, housing, services, and transit—urban renewal can help transform the Triangle into a place with walkable neighborhoods and commercial districts where people can live, work, and learn. ► [INCREASES TAX BASE, 24% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] By bringing new businesses into the Triangle, urban renewal increases Tigard's tax base over time which, in turn, helps fund city services for all Tigard residents. ► [INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE, 19% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] Urban renewal in the Triangle is an investment in Tigard's future, its infrastructure, and its economic stability and vitality. ► [READY FOR CHANGE, 15% MUCH MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT] By focusing on the Triangle, which is already zoned for commercial and residential density, urban renewal steers investments toward an area of the city that is the most ready for change. NM. EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 121 Positive Messages All but one message makes a majority of voters more likely to support the measure. The most persuasive says the measure won't raise taxes. • Much more likely to support Somewhat more likely to support Total more likely to support [WOULD NOT RAISE TAXES] 35% 30% 65% [SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS COULD BE 29/0 31% 60%° HELPED] [MORE WALKABLE COMMUNITY] 28% 32% 60% [COMPLETE COMMUNITY] 25% 27% 52% [INCREASES TAX BASE] 24% 38% 62% [INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE] 19% 32% 52% [READY FOR CHANGE] 15% 30% 45% 23-29. Next I'd like to read you statements from people who support the measure creating an urban renewal area NOM in the Tigard Triangle. EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 122 Positive Messages — Overall vs Movers Those who move to support the measure from the initial vote find the message that significant problems could be helped to be the most compelling, closely followed by the message that it would not raise taxes. ■ Overall Positive Movers (n=103) % More Likely to Support [SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS COULD BE 60% 79% HELPED] 65% [WOULD NOT RAISE TAXES] 78% 60% [MORE WALKABLE COMMUNITY] 75% 62% [INCREASES TAX BASE] 70% 52% [COMPLETE COMMUNITY] 68% 52% [INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE] 60% 45% [READY FOR CHANGE] 57% M. 23-29. Next I'd like to read you statements from people who support the measure creating an urban renewal area 7 in the Tigard Triangle. EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle I 23 Measure Support — After Messages Progression After hearing the messaging, support increases another 2 points, mostly in intensity. This would suggest the additional positive messages aren't doing much to further increase support, though the structure of the poll somewhat obscures this; in either case, pairing the positive messages with the benefits will result in the largest increase in support. Initial Support Informed Vote After Potential After Positive Benefits Messages Support Support Support 75% 70% 72% (+2%) Support 57% 45% 54% Oppose Somewhat Oppose Oppose 23% 41% Oppose (DK) 26% 25% (-1/) 21% 22%0 3 (DK) 11%o 12% ��.wv 111% (DK) 27% (DK) 30% 2% .tro ogl 16% 16/° 10% 13% 4% 13% 3% 12% (-1%) 30. Given what you have just heard, do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or IIMEI strongly oppose the measure to create an urban renewal area in the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 124 Measure Support — Positive Messages Total support continues to slightly increase across all demographic groups. Messaging leads to the largest increases in net support among voters in the South and frequent voters. ■ Support (Don't Know) ■ Oppose Net Change From Benefits OVERALL 75% 23% +4% Male (n=141) 72% ° 26% +4% Female (n=159) 77% 22% +3% 18-49 (n=147) 81% 16% +3% 50+ (n=153) C8% 30% +4% North (n=176) 76% 24% +2% South (n=123) 74% 23% +6% Voted in 4/4 elections (n=72) 71% ° 27% +5% Voted in <4/4 elections (n=228) 76% 23% +3% 30. Given what you have just heard, do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or MA strongly oppose the measure to create an urban renewal area in the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle' 25 PMARKIENT N I Open- Ended Reasons for rv[r4 & O O RESEARCH Support or Opposition Main Reason for Measure Support After the messaging vote, we asked open-ended questions about the main reason respondents supported the measure, opposed it, or were still undecided. The measure's ability to make the area more usable, attractive, and walkable came out as the top reasons for voters' support. Make the area more usable 15% Make it more attractive/Enhance the area 14% Make a more walkable community 13% Improve the congestion 8% Sounds like a good idea (Unspecified) _MEM8% Positive for the area (General) ME= 7% Provide economic benefits MEM 6% Help with the environment AWE 5% Done without raising taxes 11.11 4% Keeping up with the area's growing population 111111 4% Because I live here JIM 4% Other 7% Don't know enough about the measure/Details _ 4% No Answer - 2% 1.111 31. What is the main reason you support this measure?(n=224) EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 127 Main Reason for Measure Opposition Over a quarter of those who oppose the measure do so because they believe it will negatively affect taxes. Other reasons for opposition are that change is not necessary or that change could cause more congestion. It will negatively affect taxes 22% Change is unnecessary 19% It will make the area more congested 15% Don't trust the leadership's decisions/ability 13% Not the right area for this measure 7% It will negatively affect traffic 5% It will increase the costs of everything in that area 3% There are more important issues out there 3% Other - 6% Don't know enough about the measure/Details - 6% KOMI 32. What is the main reason you oppose this measure?(n=70) EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 128 MARKET 2006 Downtown & OPINION RESEARCH SERVICES Urban Renewal 14 ,,� � Has Downtown Urban Renewal Been Positive ? Almost two-thirds of voters see Downtown urban renewal as a positive thing for the area. As with the Triangle measure initially, most of the positivity is soft ("somewhat"). Positive 65% Somewhat 42% (Don't Know/ Refused) Negative o 19% 16% Very 23% Somewhat 9% Very 6% 34. Voters approved an urban renewal area for Downtown Tigard in 2006. From what you know or have heard, has this been a very positive, somewhat positive, somewhat negative, or very negative thing for Downtown Tigard? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle I 30 Measure Support — Urban Renewal Comparison Although a majority of voters see urban renewal Downtown as a positive, the net effect of connecting Downtown with the Triangle is to erode support for urban renewal in the Triangle. Support 70% (-5%) Somewhat 43% Oppose 27% (+3%) (Don't Know/ Somewhat 12% o Refused) Strongly 3% 26% Strongly 15% (+2%) 35. Urban renewal funding has been helping Downtown's revitalization efforts. The Tigard Triangle urban renewal area is modeled after the one created for Downtown. After hearing this, do you strongly support,somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose the measure to create an urban renewal area in EMCSI the Tigard Triangle? EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 131 Measure Support Progression Measure support peaks at three-quarters support after messages, and has a slight drop-off after comparing the plan to the one implemented Downtown. 75 % 70% 72% • 70% Support • • 57% Undecided 0 26% 25% 23% 27% 22/ • • Opposition 4% 3% 2% 3% Initial Informed After Benefits After Messages Downtown Comparison EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 132 Conclusions ► Reducing traffic is the top priority in Tigard, followed by improving management of growth and development. ► Self-described familiarity with the Triangle is high (65%). ► There is majority support based on only the ballot title (57%). ► While all of the potential benefits tested are important, there are three that stand out from the rest in intensity and overall : restoring the creek, creating new sidewalks, and replacing the sewer line. ► While a majority of voters support the measure as the survey progresses, support remains mostly in the "soft" category. ► Comparing the Triangle urban renewal to Downtown actually erodes support (-5%). MN EMC 16-6248 Tigard Triangle 133 Contacts . . ,or . , . . • . _ a ■ Ian Stewart Ian@emcresearch.com 206.204.8032 Alyssa Mendlein Alyssa@emcresearch.com 206.204.8037 City of Tigard, Oregon 11. Affidavit of Posting 11 In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) T I GARD STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, '' 84.4,A 3rOcrLe, ,being first duly sworn,by oath, depose and say: I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) / 7-0 / which were adopted at the City Council meeting of artist q P y2., n thetrtl day , 2017 . U a 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon Si ature of erson who erfor ed Posting Subscribed and sworn before me this tJ day of t'6-i Nu4.120I ) by k-eilci gj L c+=711-e • _^' � OFFICIAL STAMP !I 6` ( Al�C� CAROL ANN KRAGER NotaryPublic—State of Or on NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON \S.='- :" COMMISSION NO.924954 y....,,MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEBRUARY 10,201$ I:\ADM\CITY RECORDERS\FORMS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING-ORDINANCE.DOC