Washington County - Urban Planning Area Agreement (1988) Al
ORDINANCE
332 & 333
,a
EXHIBIT
URBAN PLANNING AREA
AGREEMENTS
ISSUE PAPERS
Ordinances 332 & 333
September 1988
WASHINGTON
f COUNTY,
OREGON
September 1, 1988
TO Board of County Commissioners
FROM Bruce A. Warner, Director
Land Use and Transportation
SUBJECT UPAA UPDATE - ORDINANCE NUMBERS 332 AND 333
Background
Planning Division staff has been in contact with all the
cities in Washington County since the first Planning Commis-
sion public hearing on Ordinance Nos. 332 and 333 that was
held on July 27. Discussions with the cities have indicated
that either no further changes are required or, where chang-
es are needed, they were identified and proposed language/
map changes have been prepared. The following is a summary
of the status of the changes in the fourteen urban planning
area agreements since they were originally filed as part of
Ordinance Nos. 332 and 333 :
Text Map
City Changes Changes Status
Banks No No
Beaverton Yes Yes See Attachment A
Cornelius No No
Durham No No
Forest Grove No Yes See Attachment B
Hillsboro Yes Yes See Attachment C
King City Yes Yes Specific changes not
yet identified
North Plains Yes No See Attachment D
Portland No No
Sherwood No No
Tigard Yes No See Attachment E
Tualatin Yes Yes See Attachment F
Wilsonville No No
Staff Recommendation
Planning Division staff requests that the Board of County
Commissioners approve the Urban Planning Area Agreements
and attached modifications.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approved as per staff recommendation.
BAW/KM:pf
Department of Land Use And Transportation,Administration
150 North First Avenue Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Phone:503/648-8761
ATTACHMENT "A"
PROPOSED
BEAVERTON MODIFICATIONS
1. Add new Section III. (Special Policies) I:
I. The COUNTY and the CITY will execute a Memorandum of
Understanding outlining the methodology for transfering
COUNTY records regarding land use activities to the
CITY when property is annexed to the CITY. The
Memorandum of Understanding shall be drafted and
executed by December 31, 1988.
2. Add new Section III. (Special Policies) J:
J. The COUNTY and the CITY will execute a Memorandum of
Understanding outlining the respective responsibilities
for collection of fees, inspections and drainage
maintenance districts on platted subdivisions annexed
to the CITY. The Memorandum of Understanding shall be
drafted and executed by December 31, 1988.
3 . Section II. (Coordination of Comprehensive Planning and
Development) B.2 is amended as follows:
2. The COUNTY will provide the CITY with the opportunity to
review and comment on proposed development actions requiring
notice within Aree-"Au-of the designated
Urban Planning Area.---ene}-tke-29HPF� -*a ��-pe�ie�e-tke-E��i�
W�tk--the-eppe�tttni��r-to-�eE,*nevi-anel-eeramenb-en-p�epesed-small
t�aet--eeatp�ehens��e--part--mep-amendments-w�th�n-r��eet—u$u-ef
tke--designated--8�ben--P�anrtng-rl�eer The CITY will provide
the COUNTY with the opportunity to review and comment on
proposed development actions requiring notice within the
CITY limits that may have an affect on unincorporated
portions of the designated Urban Planning Area.
4. Exhibit "A" (Urban Planning Area Map) is amended by removing
references to areas "A" and "B".
5. Section II. (Coordination of Comprehensive Planning and
Development) D is amended as follows:
D. The CITY and the COUNTY agree that when annexation to the
CITY takes place, the transition in land use designation
from one jurisdiction to another should be orderly, logical
and based upon a mutually agreed upon plan. Upon
annexation, the CITY agrees to convert COUNTY plan and
zoning designations to CITY plan and zoning designations
which most closely approximate the density, use provisions
and standards of the COUNTY designations. Such conversions
shall be made according to the tables shown on Exhibit "B"
to this Agreement. Pt��bhene�e---bhe--el�P'f--agrees--be
mainbain--bhis--designabien--few-ene-yeas-afber-bhe-effeebive
lobe--ef--anne�abian--unless--bebh--bhe--e���--ane -bhe-e6UPi��
Planning--Hireebe�rs--agree-ab--bhe-bime-a€-anne�abien-bhab-bhe
e9UNTY---elesignabien--is--et�be}abeel--and--amenelmenb--eet�lel--be
inibiabee}-bef awe-bhe-ene-peace-pe�iee}-is-eb*e�r
6. Exhibit "B" is amended as follows:
a. Change City equivalent of County R-6 from R-7 to R-5.
b. Add the following footnote:
When partially completed developments such as residential
subdivisions, apartment complexes industrial parks retail or
office centers , etc. are annexed to the CITY after receiving
development approval from the COUNTY the CITY may, at its
discretion, continue to apply the COUNTY's development
standards relating to setbacks lot sizes lot coverage and
heights for buildings and accessory structures for any new
construction taking place after annexation.
(doc:staffrpt)
UPAA 8/88
EXHIBIT "B"
CITY-COUNTY LAND USE DESIGNATION EQUIVALENTS
County Beaverton*
Plan/Zoning Plan Zoning**
Residential 5 u/ac Urban Standard Residential R-7
Residential 6 u/ac Urban Standard Residential R-:� R-5
Residential 9 u/ac Urban Standard Residential R-5
Residential 15 u/ac Urban Medium Residential R-2
Residential 24 u/ac Urban Medium Residential R-2
Residential 25+ u/ac Urban High Residential R-1
Office- Commercial Office Commercial O.C.
Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Commercial N.S.
Community Business District Community Service C.S.
Town Center (for property
west of Hwy. 217 and south
of Center only)
General Commercial General Commercial G.C.
Industrial Industrial Park I.P.
Campus Industrial C.I. ***
Light Industrial L.I.
Institutional Shown on Plan Zoned to the
most restric-
tive abutting
zone.
Significant Natural Resource Significant Natural Not designated
Resource on zoning map
* When partially completed developments such as residential subdivi-
sions. apartment complexes industrial parks retail or office
centers, etc. are annexed to the CITY after receiving development
approval from the COUNTY the CITY may, at its discretion
continue to apply the COUNTY's development standards relating to
setbacks, lot sizes, lot coverage and heights for buildings and
accessory structures for any new construction taking place after
annexation.
** Beaverton's residential densities identified in Exhibit "B"
reflect current standards. Amendments to the City's standards
shall revise this exhibit- upon final approval by the City.
*** Planning Director shall determine the appropriate industrial
designation based upon prevailing industrial land uses and the
characteristics of individual activities, i.e. , extensive outside
storage, non-conforming characteristics, etc.
CITY• OF
FOREST GROVE
URBAN PLANNING AREA
ue
l rr
\:;: i i':i'::'::5:•:•;:::;.:. :.;:::. EXHIBIT A
UGSI
I
:.:.:.:..::..:�.:.':�. WASHINGTON COUNTY FOREST
GROVE
AN
PLANNINGN
IND AREA EA A
GREE
ENT
I
t•
.• I i
I
— I
l
t I
w
'w
(w
o�
w'
L
u .
t t
I w
I.
` y
1
1
_ r
_ r
r
�• �° ' � II �, MODIFY CITY LIMITS
7
c.
a I
�1 t• _
1•
,
:t
O ..
V
:v
t:f
.y
r
.'^'�f •l..•.1 • N r
YI R
♦ 'll E �.
•L
NO
r
I -
,,j
O1
c
I
I:
n❑ ( r,� r _ ,Y,
CI
l]
❑ sly i:: [. -.u— 111w L L_
J 13UYLl .",,
•.. i u[a.c E —
71
: . 0 ♦1 �I=l [" elf ( [ —�. lr... l k
jl_N 1988 � r leo' i-u.y�
J D
UNINCORPORATED
URBAN PLANNING AREAMI
SIWAGf z
...�.E�.. CITY LIMITS ,.., _...,
---- URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY `—� ,
ATTACHMENT "C"
PROPOSED
.HILLSBORO MODIFICATIONS
Replace Section III. D with:
D. Urban Area D, (Exhibit "A")
1. The CITY has identified Area D as a potential area for
annexation and the future provision of urban services
by the CITY. Area D includes only those unincorporated
properties within the Regional Urban Growth Boundary,
and does not include any properties within other
cities.
2 . In Area D, the CITY will continue its current annex-
ation policy, under which property owners interested in
annexation are welcome to contact the CITY for whatever
information and assistance they need to initiate and
complete the annexation process.
3 . Upon annexation within Area D, the CITY will initiate
Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Transportation Map
changes on recently annexed properties, to CITY land
use designations and functional street classifications
corresponding as closely as possible to those designa-
tions and classifications already adopted by Washington
County for those properties.
4. The CITY will negotiate with the service districts
currently providing urban services to properties in
Area D, and will address service provision issues on an
individual basis upon receipt of petitions for annex-
ation. The CITY will work toward formal long-term
service agreements with each affected service district,
and shall consider Area D in all public facility plans.
HILLSBORO
URBAN PLANNING AREA
EXHIBIT A
NN
WASHINGTON COUNTY-HILLSBORO URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT '1111
a �,11a1 ii
Esr / ai �f. ._... •.y
Fmic;nrrN
.. !_ _ 1 \` i I A :f1GIlEEN fpr,/� 1. 1
IunuillnlN -NN 1-1 , 11 hi.1 < l Al�irNln �/ In In '1 r 1, !11)
lip
l� n
I1� 111111':1 (11111 At 1 1`%0(1IU 1.1 V I ]AK Ill 1 ti
1 HIL _SI OR ' l,� 11 \ �o k
1 u
(- 111 x — W
III IING III j —-1
1 o COIINELL {`L_r a. 1, 1
hII 1AI 111 IBIAN) S1 •I ?• L 1'
(�
IAI'h SIW 1 1 1 l ). 1` 1A
IINI:I IIN II II M;I)IN ;x , 1
+� MAIN ::I IAIN 1 I I (•
+- - fi SI IASE{JN- i 1 170 I 'I l ---1
>
WAI NI I /lAK til 1 z
1 . MA#j ISI
A S
�Ij H aMIN L 1 _� JP
q!(E{ + �i j i 1 MI nll)nu ✓ENkl�
Y IIWY -� 111Ns LD/ s
,V ti
1
(� IIWY
1 ;
1 -I
1\1\\\�.1
1988
CHANGE TO AREA
•'••" 1 l r IIIVISION r
URBAN PLANNING AREA
BOUNDARY W.�..I� —'—f ---� 11 I �(i�O� $ ' vll A(l `
•-- I r- UAK I
IV
..w I( NA •:L fl
A IMMEDIATE URBAN AREA • I _ i _ -1
�� nn
11n n 1 �
L MANY
I � � • AI (- _- IIN
(SEE TEXT)
C • s
Wit. + { { t Haunt Na
�.1 F 3
1• L) m
•�— � ;A SNFI 4UL
1 111;
1 1r 1 ! 1
ATTACHMENT "D"
PROPOSED
NORTH PLAINS MODIFICATIONS
Amend Section III. (Special Policies) A. 1 as follows:
A. Definitions
1. Urban Growth Boundary means the area within which urban
development will occur e�,*e�--tl�e--newt--fie--yews---the
Hrbart--6�ewth--Bettnday--o£ as represented in the City of
North Plains' Comprehensive Plan is-eete�minet�s-with-tl�e
e4:ty--14:rn:its. The CITY is responsible for comprehensive
planning within the Urban Growth Boundary.
2 . Area of Interest means the area adjacent to but outside
of the existing Urban Growth Boundary which is not
currently identified as needed for urban development by
the CITY but is the most logical area for urban expansion
should a future need be demonstrated. The COUNTY is
responsible for comprehensive planning and development
actions within the area of interest until such time as
the CITY Urban Growth Boundary is expanded and the area
annexed to the CITY.
3 . Urban Planning Area means the combined area of the Urban
Growth Boundary and the Area of Interest. The CITY and
the COUNTY shall notify one another of proposed
comprehensive planning and development actions within the
Urban Planning Area according to the provisions of this
Agreement.
B. Approval of any annexations outside the CITY's Urban Growth
Boundary must be preceded by or in conjunction with a
comprehensive plan amendment to the CITY's Urban Growth
Boundary. Such amendments shall be subject to the major
amendment provisions of the CITY Comprehensive Plan and shall
adequately address all applicable LCDC Statewide Planning
Goals.
C. Amendments to the CITY Urban Growth Boundary within the
identified Area of Interest shall not require an amendment to
Exhibit "A" of this Agreement. Amendments to the Urban Growth
Boundary outside of the identified Area of Interest shall
require an amendment to Exhibit "A" as outlined in Section IV
of this Agreement.
ATTACHMENT "E"
PROPOSED REVISION
WASHINGTON COUNTY - TIGARD UPAA
Replace Section IV.B with the following:
B. Prior to the next biennial review of this agreement (Fall, 1990) ,
the CITY and the COUNTY shall mutually study the following topics:
1. The feasibility of expanding the "active planning area" to
include the current "area of interest" and assigning land use
planning responsibility to the CITY.
2 . The feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the CITY and the
COUNTY contracting to provide building inspection and plan
review services, administer development codes and collect
related fees within the active planning area.
Proposed revisions to this Agreement shall be considered by the
CITY and the COUNTY as soon as analysis of the above topics is
complete, subject to the time constraint and other requirements of
the COUNTY's land use ordinance hearings and adoption process.
PROPOSED REVISIONS
WAS14INGTON COUNTY - TIGARD UPAA
WASHINGTON COUNTY PROPOSAL:
Replace Section IV.B with the following:
B. Prior to the [next biennial review of this agreement (Fall, 1990)]
commencement of periodic review for the City of Tigard and the County' s
Urban Areas (April, 1989), the CITY and the COUNTY shall mutually study
the following topics:
1 . The feasibility of expanding the "active planning area" to include the
current "area of interest" and assigning land use planning
responsibility to the CITY.
- 2. The feasibility and cost—effectiveness of the CITY and the COUNTY
contracting to provide building inspection and plan review services,
administer development codes and collect related fees within the
active planning area.
Proposed revisions to this Agreement shall be considered by the CITY and
the COUNTY as soon as analysis of the above topics is complete, subject to
the time constraint and other requirements of the COUNTY' s land use
ordinance hearings and adoption process.
Language proposed by Washington County is shown in [brackets].
Language proposed by the City of Tigard is underlined.
ht/15DD
7 �
ATTACHMENT "F"
PROPOSED
TUALATIN MODIFICATIONS
Add new Section III.I:
I. The Tualatin Comprehensive Plan employs a one-map system
wherein the Comprehensive Plan Map fulfills a dual role by
serving as both the Plan Map and Zone Map thus eliminating
the need for a separate Zone May. The CITY's Comprehensive
Plan Map establishes land use designations for unincorporated
portions of the Urban Planning Area. Upon annexation of any
property within the Urban Planning Area to the CITY the
Planning District specified by the Tualatin Comprehensive Plan
Map is automatically applied to the Property on the effective
date of the annexation (as authorized by ORS 215. 130 (2) a) .
If a property owner, contract purchaser, the authorized
representative of a property owner or contract purchaser, or
the CITY desire a Planning District different from that shown
on the Comprehensive Plan Map, an application for a Plan Map
Amendment may be filed with CITY at the time of or following
annexation.
CITY OF
TUALATIN
URBAN PLANNING AREA
EXHIBIT A
WASHINGTON COUNTY-TUALATIN URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
BULL �1 —�
-� = 4, BONITA RD
MCN P,
SATTLEA ST Q I GPS
/ Q c
/ j = 2 �9
Qell
RD LC
;END DUANAM AD ` _ � l
it
CITY LIMITS CHANGE
CITY LIMITS CHANGE ' R U l.j f f l"�fTl '.4. /
RD
_ I
...•'f�tiC
Tualatin
CITY LIMITS CHANGE
Eh
SAGERT RD
�I AVERY ST
r RD SHC. W CITY LIMITS CHANGE o 0
c
z cn
Q
0
Y
J ST _ = v
<
p O
HELENIUS �� w MERIDI,
AO Q CUTOF.
1988 cn
NORTH 0()P RD C <�
���■
=
URBAN PLANNING AREA L F-
BOUNDARY
C DA YrRa �
UNINCORPORATED URBAN
PLANNING A
R
AREA
c
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
P malxmw NO. 88- 11
A RESCUJTICK ADQP'Tn G AN URBAN PLANNING AREA AQUEKIM (UPAA) BEIWffiJ THE CITY
OF TIGARD AND WASHIN3 ON COUNTY
MEIMAS, the City of Tigard arra Washington County, to ensure coordinated and
consistent co nsive . plans, eonsiit m3tually advantageous to establish
a process for coordinating waive planning arra development in the Urban
Planning Area; and
V.
WHEREAS, the Urban Planning Area Agreement expired an November 81 1988; and
SAS, the City of Tigard and Washington County have mutually agreed to
perfa m a feasibility study to consider expansioan of the City of Tigard's
"active planning area" and the encpedi,enoe of the City to provide development
services to the expanded area; and
WHEREAS, the Urban Planning Area Agement attached includes a provision
requiring the City and the County to complete the feasibility study prior to
of periodic review in April 1989.
NOW , be it resolved by the Tigard City Council that:
Section 1: Zile City Council adopts the attached Exhibit "A" titled "WASEIINGIC�t
00UNI'Y - TIGARD URBAN PI ANNING AREA Ate.
Section 2: The Mayor arra Deputy City Recorder are hereby authorized to sign the
Urban Plannning Area Agreement on behalf of the City of Tigard arra
Deputy City Recorder is further directed to file a copy of said
agreement with Washington. County.
PASSED: This day of DaU4m�, 1988.
ATTEST:
Mayor - City of Tigard
Deputy Recorder - City of Wgard
J
REV'D
CITY OF TUALATiN
WASHINGTON 18
49
COUNTY, NOV IIN
OREGON NOW _
RECEIVED PLANNING AAM^ --R�m1n Afet
Mice Finswe
Ing A Bldg_ Plrnnlaj
NOV 121991 fake 6 Rw 11Drf
November 16, 1988 omm"Ons __Ur9 Bennsl
tegM __
James Jacks, Planning Director
City of Tualatin
P.O. Box 369
Tualatin, Oregon 97062
RE: ADOPTION OF THE URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
On October 25, 1988, the Washington County Board of Commissioners
adopted Ordinance Nos. 332 and 333, amending the Washington County
Comprehensive Plan. Ordinance No. 332 officially adopted the Urban
Planning Area Agreement with your city. A final signed copy of the
Agreement is enclosed for your records.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in the process to update
the Urban Planning Area Agreements. If you have any further questions,
please give me a call.
r_
Kevin J. Martin
Senior Planner
KJM:mb
enclosure
Department of Land Use And Transportation, Planning Division
150 North First Avenue Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Phone:503/648-8761
8/88
WASHINGTON COUNTY - TUALATIN
URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 6,h/w ,
19 _ by WASHINGTON COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of
Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY" , and the CITY OF
TUALATIN, an incorporated municipality of the State of Oregon,
hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" .
WHEREAS, ORS 190. 010 provides that units of local government may
enter into agreements for the performance of any or all functions and
activities that a party to the agreement, its officers or agents,
have authority to perform; and
WHEREAS, Statewide Planning Goal #2 (Land Use Planning) requires that
City, County, State and Federal agency and special district plans and
actions shall be consistent with the' comprehensive plans of the cit-
ies and counties and regional plans adopted under ORS Chapter 197 ;
and
WHEREAS, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission
requires each jurisdiction requesting acknowledgment of compliance to
submit an agreement setting forth the means by which comprehensive
planning coordination within the Regional Urban Growth Boundary will
be implemented; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY, to ensure coordinated and consis-
tent comprehensive plans, consider it mutually advantageous to
establish:
1. A site-specific Urban Planning Area within the Regional
Urban Growth Boundary within which both the COUNTY and the
CITY maintain an interest in comprehensive planning;
2. A process for coordinating comprehensive planning and
development in the Urban Planning Area;
3 . Policies regarding comprehensive planning and development
in the Urban Planning Area; and
4 . A process to amend the Urban Planning Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNTY AND THE CITY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I. Location of the Urban Planning Area
The Urban Planning Area mutually defined by the COUNTY and the
CITY includes the area designated on Exhibit "A" to this agree-
ment.
Page 2
II. Coordination of Comprehensive Planning and Development
A. Amendments to or Adoption of a Comprehensive Plan or Imple-
menting Regulation
1. Definitions
Comprehensive Plan means a generalized, coordinated land
use map and policy statement of the governing body of a
local government that interrelates all functional and
natural systems and activities relating to the use of
lands, including, but not limited to, sewer and water
systems, transportation systems, educational facilities,
recreational facilities, and natural resources and air and
water ;T- aality management programs. "Comprehensive Plan"
amendments do not include 'small tract comprehensive plan
map changes.
Implementing Regulation means any local government zoning
ordinance, land division ordinance adopted under ORS
92. 044 or 92. 046 or similar general ordinance establishing
standards for implementing a comprehensive plan. "Imple-
menting regulation" does not include small tract zoning
map amendments, conditional use permits, individual subdi-
vision, partitioning or planned unit development approval
or denials, annexations, variances, building permits and
similar administrative-type decisions.
2 . The County shall provide the CITY with the appropriate
opportunity to participate, review and comment on proposed
amendments to or adoption of the COUNTY comprehensive plan
or implementing regulations. The CITY shall provide the
COUNTY with the appropriate opportunity to participate,
review and comment on proposed amendments to or adoption
of the CITY comprehensive plan or implementing regula-
tions. The following procedures shall be followed by the
COUNrMf and th.n CITY to notify and involve one another in
the process to amend or adopt a comprehensive plan or
implementing regulation:
a. The CITY or the COUNTY, whichever has jurisdiction
over the proposal, hereinafter the originating agency,
shall notify the other agency, hereinafter the respond-
ing agency, of the proposed action at the time such
planning efforts are initiated, but in no case less
than 45 days prior to the final hearing on adoption.
The specific method and level of involvement shall be
finalized by "Memorandums of Understanding" negotiated
and signed by the planning directors of the CITY and
the COUNTY. The "Memorandums of Understanding" shall
clearly outline the process by which the responding
agency shall participate in the adoption process. If,
Page 3
at the time of being notified of a proposed action,
the responding agency determines it does not need to
participate in the adoption process, it may waive the
requirement to negotiate and sign a "Memorandum of
Understanding" .
b. The originating agency shall transmit draft recommenda-
tions on any proposed actions to the responding agency
for its review and comment before finalizing. Unless
otherwise agreed to in a "Memorandum of Understand-
ing", the responding agency shall have ten (10) days
after receipt of a draft to submit comments orally or
in writing. Lack of response shall be considered "no
objection" to the draft.
c. The originating agency shall respond to the comments
made by the responding agency either by a) revising
the final recommendations, or b) by letter to the
responding agency explaining why the comments cannot
be addressed in the final draft.
d. Comments from the responding agency shall be given
consideration as a part of the public record on the
proposed action. If after such consideration, the
originating agency acts contrary to the position of
the responding agency, the responding agency may seek
appeal of the action through the appropriate appeals
body and procedures.
e. Upon final adoption of the proposed action by the
originating agency, it shall transmit the adopting
ordinance to the responding agency as soon as publicly
available, or if not adopted by ordinance, whatever
other written documentation is available to properly
inform the responding agency of the final actions
taken.
U. Development Actions Requiring Individual Notice to Proper-
ty Owners
1. Definition
Development Action Requiring Notice means an action by
a local government which requires notifying by mail
the owners of property which could potentially be
affected (usually specified as a distance measured in
feet) by a proposed development action which directly
affects and is applied to a specific parcel or par-
cels. Such development actions may include, but not
be limited to small tract zoning or comprehensive plan
map amendments, conditional or special use permits,
individual subdivisions, partitionings or planned unit
developments, variances, and other similar actions
requiring a hearings process which is quasi-judicial
in nature.
Page 4
2 . The COUNTY will provide the CITY with the opportunity
to review and comment on proposed development actions
requiring notice within the designated Urban Planning
Area. The CITY will provide the COUNTY with the oppor-
tunity to review and comment on proposed development
actions requiring notice within the CITY limits that
may have an affect on unincorporated portions of the
designated Urban Planning Area.
3 . The following procedures shall be followed by the
COUNTY and the CITY to notify one another of proposed
development actions:
a. The CITY or the COUNTY, whichever has jurisdiction
over the proposal,' hereinafter the originating
agency, shall send by first class mail a copy of
the public hearing notice which identifies the
proposed development action to the other agency,
hereinafter the responding agency, at the earliest
opportunity, but no less than ten (10) days prior
to the date of the scheduled public hearing. The
failure of the responding agency to receive a
notice shall not invalidate an action if a good
faith attempt was made by the originating agency
to notify the responding agency.
b. The agency receiving the notice may respond at its
discretion. Comments may be submitted in written
form or an oral response may be made at the public
hearing. Lack of written or oral response shall
be considered "no objection" to the proposal.
C. If received in a timely manner, the originating
agency shall include or attach the comments to the
written staff report and respond to any concerns
addressed by the responding agency in such report
or orally at the hearing.
d. Comments from the responding agency shall be given
consideration as a part of the public record on
the proposed action. If, after such consider-
ation, the originating agency acts contrary, to the
position of the responding agency, the responding
agency may seek appeal of the action through the
appropriate appeals body and procedures.
C. Additional Coordination Requirements
1. The CITY and the COUNTY shall do the following to
notify one another of proposed actions which may af-
fect the community, but are not subject to the notifi-
cation and participation requirements contained in
subsections A and B above.
Page 5
a. The CITY or the COUNTY, whichever has jurisdiction
over the proposed actions, hereinafter the origi-
nating agency, shall send by first class mail a
copy of all public hearing agendas which contain
the proposed actions to the other agency, hereinaf-
ter the responding agency; at the earliest
opportunity, but no less than three (3) days prior
to the date of the scheduled public hearing. The
failure of the responding agency to receive an
agenda shall not invalidate an action if a good
faith attempt was made by the originating agency
to notify the responding agency.
b. The agency receiving the public hearing agenda may
zi-espond at its discretion. Comments may be submit-
ted in written form or an oral response may be
made at the public hearing. Lack of written or
oral response shall be considered "no objection"
to the proposal.
C. Comments from the responding agency shall be given
consideration as a part of the public record on
the proposed action. If, after such consider-
ation, the originating agency acts contrary to the
position of the responding agency, the responding
agency may seek appeal of the action through the
appropriate appeals body and procedures.
III. Comprehensive Planning and Development Policies
A. Definition
Urban Planning Area means the incorporated area and
certain unincorporated areas contiguous to the
incorporated area for which the CITY conducts
comprehensive planning and seeks to regulate development
activities to the greatest extent possible. The CITY
Urban Planning Area is desginated on Exhibit "A" .
B. The CITY shall be responsible for comprehensive planning
within the Urban Planning Area.
C. The CITY shall be responsible for the preparation,
adoption and amendment of the public facility plan
required by OAR 660-11 within the Urban Planning Area.
D. As required by OAR 660-11-010, the CITY is identified as
the appropriate provider of local water, sanitary sewer,
storm sewer and transportation facilities within the urban
planning area. Exceptions include facilities provided by
other service providers subject to the terms of any
intergovernmental agreement the CITY may have with other
Page 6
service providers; facilities under the jurisdiction of
other service providers not covered by an
intergovernmental agreement; and future facilities that
are more appropriately provided by an agency other than
the CITY.
E. The COUNTY shall not approve land divisions within the
unincorporated Urban Planning Area that are inconsistent
with the provisions of the Future Development 10 Acre
District (FD-10) .
F. The COUNTY shall not approve a development proposal in the
Urban Planning Area if the proposal would not provide for,
nor be conditioned to provide for, an enforceable plan for
redevelopment to urban densities consistent with the
CITY's Comprehensive Plan in the future upon annexation to
the CITY as indicated by the CITY Comprehensive Plan.
G. The COUNTY shall not oppose annexations to the CITY within
the CITY's Urban Planning Area.
H. The CITY and the COUNTY have arrived at different
conclusions as the the significance of a rock quarry
located on Tax Lots 901 and 1201, Map 251-35B. The quarry
shall be considered significant as determined by the
COUNTY's Goal 5 analysis and shall be protected by the
Mineral and Aggregate Overlay District as long as it
remains outside the CITY. Upon annexation to the CITY the
CITY may choose to remove the Mineral and Aggregate
Overlay District and not preserve the site for future
aggregate extraction.
I. The Tualatin Comprehensive Plan employs a one-map system
wherein the Comprehensive Plan Map fulfills a dual role by
serving as both the Plan Map and Zone Map, thus elim-
inating the need for a separate Zone Map. The CITY's
Cc�.rprehii:nsJ.e Plan Map establishes Land use designations
for unincorporated portions of the Urban Planning Area.
Upon annexation of any property within the Urban Planning
Area to the CITY, the Planning District specified by the
Tualatin Comprehensive Plan Map is automatically applied
to the property on the effective date of the annexation
(as authorized by ORS 215. 130 (2) a) .
If a property owner, contract purchaser, the authorized
representative of a property owner or contract purchaser,
or the CITY desire a Planning District diffrent from that
shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map, an application for a
Plan Map Amendment may be filed with the CITY at the time
of or following annexation.
Page 7
IV. Amendments to the Urban Planning Area Agreement
A. The following procedures shall be followed by the CITY and
the COUNTY to amend the language of this agreement or the
Urban Planning Area Boundary:
1. The CITY or COUNTY, whichever jurisdiction originates
the proposal, shall submit a formal request for amend-
ment to the responding agency.
2 . The formal request shall contain the following:
a. A statement describing the amendment.
b. A statement of findings indicating why the pro-
posed amendment is necessary.
c. If the request is 'to amend the planning area bound-
ary, a map which clearly indicates the proposed
change and surrounding area.
3 . Upon receipt of a request for amendment from the origi-
nating agency, the responding agency shall schedule a
review of the request before the appropriate reviewing
body, with said review to be held within 45 days of
the date the request is received.
4 . The CITY and COUNTY shall make good faith efforts to
resolve requests to amend this agreement. Upon
completion of the review, the reviewing body may
approve the request, deny the request, or make a
determination that the proposed amendment warrants
additional review. If it is determined that ad-
ditional review is necessary, the following procedures
shall be followed by the CITY and COUNTY: -
a. it inconsistencies noted by both parties cannot be
resolved in the review process as outlined in
Section IV (3) , the CITY and the COUNTY may agree
to initiate a joint study. Such a study shall
commence within 90 days of the date it is deter-
mined that a proposed amendment creates an _
inconsistency, and shall be completed within 90
days of said date. Methodologies and procedures
regulating the conduct of the joint study shall be
mutually agreed upon by the CITY and the COUNTY
prior to commencing the study.
b. Upon completion of the joint study, the study and
the recommendations drawn from it shall be includ-
ed within the record of the review. The agency
considering the proposed amendment shall give
careful consideration to the study prior to making
a final decision.
Page 8
B. The parties will jointly review this Agreement every two
(2) years, or more frequently if mutually needed, to evalu-
ate the effectiveness of the processes set forth herein
and to make any necessary amendments. The review process
shall commence two (2) years from the date of execution
and shall be completed within 60 days. Both parties shall
make a good faith effort to resolve any inconsistencies
that may have developed since the previous review. If,
after completion of the 60 day review period inconsisten-
cies still remain, either party may terminate this
Agreement.
V. This Urian Planning Area AgreemeitV repeals and replaces file
Urban Planning Area Agreement dated September 9, 1986.
This Agreement commences on Z , 19 no
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Urban Planning Area
Agreement on the date set opposite their signatures.
CITY OF IU LATIN
By ��C',C� ��,� Date October 24 , 1988
Mayor Pro-Tem
WASHINGTON COUNTY o
By 1 L- Date
Chairman, Board of Cou ty o issioners
LA121T14,( _2AC Date �1 % 'op
ecordinS retary
CITY OF
TUALATIN
URBAN PLANNING AREA
EXHIBIT A
WASHINGTON COUNTY-TUALATIN URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
BULL �� L� —_'?
M�N Pp u, BONITA RD
o SATTLER ST Jco
Q Q�MPr
RD ,. King'
DUA)4AM RD
Ln S`
HER D 0
uThkm W
Tualatin
I
p0 SAGERT RD
AVERST
Y
Q
RD H .` >'t w Q o 0
S
C Q
PSP cc
'.::•:..:. z Y
2
Y C/1 Q
Q
J
O
U
O
\ O
Q;
2
J
O
HELENIUS h w MERIDI,
RDm Q CUTOF,
1988 �- cn
NORTH OOP RD Q
s �4
Q
URBAN PLANNING AREA
BOUNDARY _ Lo
DA Y7Ra
UNINCORPORATED URBAN
PLANNING AREA
^04%, /
CITY OF TIGARD.- OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: DATE SUBMITTED: July 15, 1988
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Renewal of PREVIOUS ACTION: Adoption of previous
Urban Planning Area Aqreement �!qreement on September 9, 1988
PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Ann Newton
DEPT HEAD QICAJ� CITY ADMIN OK_JW��, REQUESTED BY: Community Developme
POLICY ISSUE
Should the City Council conduct a limited review of the Urban Planning Area
Agreement or open up the agreement for introduction of new issues and
renegotiate existing language.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Urban Planning Area Agreement entered into by the City of Tigard and
Washington County on September 9' 1986^ will expire on November 8^ 1988^ under
provisions of the existing agreement. If, after completion of a 00—day review
period inconsistencies remain' -either party may terminate the agreement. Prior-
to
riortn entering into the review process with the County it seems appropriate that
the Council and staff discuss the range of issues that are relevant to the Urban
Planning Area Agreement. Attached is a memo which outlines the purpose of the
agreement in more detail .and a worksheet which lists possible issues for
discussion.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
FISCAL IMPACT
Will be determined when policy direction in provided by Council .
SUGGESTED ACTION
Discuss how extensive the review of the Urban Planning Area Agreement should be
and provide direction to staff on specific issues where consensus can be reached .
ht/5976D
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF fIGARD, OREGON
TO: Mayor and City Council July 15, 1988
FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Developm i
SUBJECT: Urban Planning Area Agreement
The Urban Planning Area Agreement entered into by the City of Tigard and
Washington County on September 9, 1986, will expire on November 8, 1988, under
provisions of the existing agreement. If, after completion of a 60--day review
period inconsistencies remain, either, party may terminate the agreement.
The stated purpose for the UPAA is the requirement that as part of
Comprehensive Plan acknowledgement and compliance, each jurisdiction within
the Portland Regional Urban Growth Boundary submit an agreement setting forth
the means by which planning issues will be coordinated. In addition, the City
and County have included sections on property owner notice, planning and
development policies in the Active Planning Area and Area of Interest, and
Special Policies including delign standards for specific streets.
On June 3, 1988, my office received a letter from Washington County indicating
the elements of the agreement their staff would like to review which are
limited to coordination procedures, the boundaries of "areas of interest" and
any other minor modifications necessary for clarification or to improve the
functioning of the agreement.
Prior to entering into the review process with the County it seems appropriate
that the Council and staff discuss the range of issues that are relevant to
the Urban Planning Area Agreement. To facilitate the discussion, a worksheet
is attached which lists the possible issues staff has identified, with options
for consideration, and a position recommended by staff. In addition, a column
labeled "consensus position" is included to record the outcome of the
Council 's discussion.
ht/5960D
Attachment
June 22, 1988 City of Beaverton
Mr. Ed Murphy
Planning Director
City of Tigard
POB 23397
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: Urban Planning Area Agreements Updates with Washington County
Dear Mr. Murphy:
No doubt you have recently received a letter from Washington County --
outlining their process for review of the Agreements. It is our thought that
it would be beneficial to present a coordinated or unified approach on any
issues we have in common.
I enclose a copy of my response to the County highlighting areas we would
like them to consider. Please give me a call should you wish to discuss any
mutual concerns we may have or other aspects of the review. If there is
sufficient interest, we may want to have a meeting.
Sincerely,
Linda L. Davis, AICP
Planning Director
0428k
4755 S.W. Griffith Drive, P.O. Box 4755, Beaverton, OR 97076, General Information: (503) 526-2222
An Equal Opportunity Employer
x
City of Beaverton
June 22, 1988
Mr. Brent Curtis, Planning Manager
Washington County
1150 North . First Avenue
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
Dear Brent,
In response to your letter of May 31st outlining the process of Memorandums of
Understanding and the UPAA Update, I offer the following.
As part of your program to entertain revisions to the Community Development
Code, we would like the County to consider changes to individual zoning
categories to more clearly define uses and purposes and possible methods to
handle inconsistencies between the City and County's development standards.
Our experience with administering the UPAA in its current form has brought to
the forefront several situations which present difficulties with respect to
annexed lands. For example, your industrial categories have some development
standards and uses listed that are quite different than our own. Another
typical inconsistency that comes up quite often is the differences in
residential standards for lot sizes permitted in the zone and setbacks.
In addition, I hope that the County will consider adoption of the Metro solar
access protection ordinances. It's to the benefit of both jurisdictions to
have these adopted as soon as possible, especially for new subdivisions.
Subdivision lots which do not meet the solar access code will be subject to
the i.^.f 11 St?n!inrds later--a nrohl crn for vni t anri nno fnr i is ac ct ibdi vi ci nnc _
are annexed.
With regard to the the Urban Planning Area Agreement, there are several
changes the City would like to discuss. While I understand your goal is to
limit the review to certain aspects and sections, a few of our interests may
not be addressed if you strictly adhere to that framework. Among the issues
we wish to negotiate or include are:
1. Inclusion of methodology for transfer of records regarding land use
activities on properties annexed to the City. Although we have had
an informal agreement, attempts to implement have been met with
resistance and confusion;
4755 S.W. Griffith Drive, P.O. Box 4755, Beaverton, OR 97076, General information: (503) 526-2222
An Equal Opportunity Employer
2. Inclusion of understanding that has been informally agreed upon
between the City and County engineering managers regarding the
respective responsibilities for collection of fees, inspections, and
drainage maintenance districts on newly platted subdivisions. This
could be placed under section III, Special Policies; ;
3. Suggest that we eliminate "A" and "B" notification differences on as
illustrated on map called Exhibit A of the Agreement. It seems that
in practice we have been notified of actions in both areas;
4. Expansion of Exhibit B (City-County Land Use Designation Equalivents)
to include assignment of development standards, such as heights,
minimum lot sizes, setbacks, etc. ;
5. Delete Exhibit C and text references thereto (page 6, paragraph H).
This is a moot issue now;
6. Eliminate the requirement on page 5, paragraph D, last sentence,
which states that the City agrees to maintain the County land use
designation of annexed properties for one year unless there is an
exception agreed upon. Our differences in scheduled times for
processing Plan amendments can result in property owners being
considerably delayed in bringing their issue to hearing.
Please call me at your earliest convenience to make arrangements to discuss
the above items in further detail.
Sincerely,
Linda L. Davis, AICP
Planning Director
cc: CPO's 1,3,4,7
Ed Murphy, City of Tigard
li
slow ir%vlr:J, i.iTj vi Hillsboro
Norman Abbott, City of Portland
0437k
� r
WASHINGTON
COUNTY, �e
OREGON
May 31, 1988
Ed Murphy
Community Development Director
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Memorandum of Understanding for 1988 Land Use
Ordinance Hearings; UPAA Update
Memorandum of Understanding
In accordance with the provisions of Chapter X of the Washington
County Charter, public hearings on land use ordinances will be held
before the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners at
various times between July 1 and October 31, 1988 . The land use
ordinances will address the following topics: --
- Washington County Transportation Plan Update
- revisions to the Community Development Code
- biennial review of the Urban Planning Area Agreements
Other issues may be considered if the need arises. Exact hearing
dates have not yet been determined. We will provide you with a
list as soon as it is finalized.
As stated in the current UPAA between the County and your city, you
may elect to have your city's involvement in the ordinance adoption
process defined by a "memorandum of understanding" . The memorandum
would clearly outline the process by which your city would partici-
pate in the adoption process for these land use ordinances. Should
you desire to execute a memorandum of understanding please contact
me.
You may choose to waive the requirement to negotiate and sign a
memorandum of understanding but still participate in the ordinance
adoption process. Copies of all relevant materials will be forward-
ed to you as they -become available. You may relay comments to me
prior to the appropriate public hearings or you may provide written
or oral testimony in person at the public hearings.
Urban Planning Area Agreement Update
Language within our current urban planning area agreement requires
that it be reviewed every two years and updated if necessary.
Since the UPAA was last updated in 1986, it is now time to begin
Department of Land Use And Transportation,Planning Division
150 North First Avenue Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Phone:503/648-8761
Letter to Ed Murphy
From Brent Curtis
Page Two
our biennial review. It is our goal to limit the review and update
to the following elements of the UPAA:
- the coordination procedures in Section II;
- the boundaries of unincorporated "areas of interest" ;
- any other minor modifications necessary for clarifica-
tion or to improve the functioning of the agreement.
Please review the current agreement at your earliest convenience
and identify any modifications you feel are necessary. If at all
Possible we would like to discuss any proposed changes with you by
the end of June. We will contact you again in several weeks to
discuss the status of your review.
If you have any questions regarding the memorandums of understand-
ing or the UPAA please contact me at 648-8761 or Kevin Martin at
640-3519.
SAcely,
Curtis
Land Development Manager/
ng Manager
BC/KM:pf
City of King City
Robert W . Jean , Administrator
City of Tigard
P . O . Box 23397
Tigard , OR 97223 February 1 , 1988
Re : Area of Interest Agreement
Dear Bob :
Since your letter of mid-December on the subject of "area of
interest" , we have had several discussions with City Councillors .
At present there is general consensus that such an agreement would
be beneficial to our interests particularly if it identified more
preceisely what the specific "interests" were .
Essentially "interests" in the past have focused on land use ,
service providers and other elements relating to " impacts" on -the
immediate adjacent area , or policies pertaining to whom was respon-
sible for the delivery of a service . While we are still interested
in those specifics we are equally concerned about the "interests"
which Tigard has relating to transportation system issues and storm
water drainage problems that are relevant to each of our area of
interest .
To be more specific , we have just received a storm drainage
report covering King City which notes the importance of storm water
drainage policies and plans from areas outside the City limits,
either in Tigard ' s area of interest or in other Washington County
unincorporated area . We know that alone we can address and solve
only part of what are serious problems . A similar case exists
regarding Beef Bend Road and the intersection of Beef Bend And Pac-
ific Highway . Frankly , we are looking for both "partners" and "par-
ticipants" which will , with County assistance , allow us jointly to
address and solve these specific problems . I ' ll contact you in the
next week or so to see if we can develop an agenda to guide dis-
cussion .
With reference to the "Urban Planning Area" map used by King
City , we intend to seek an amendment which expands our "interest"
in urban development south of Beef Bend but westerly of 131st
Avenue to include the area within the amended urban growth boundary .
These comments are made only to bring you up-to-date on our
thinking . It is evident , I am sure , that each subject will require
better definition and discussion .
• City of King City • 15300 S.W. 116th Avenue, King City, Oregon 97224 • (503) 620-6444 •
In the interim we would welcome the opportunity to review a
draft agreement that represents Tigard ' s policy position and
service objectives .
Sincerely ,
George E- Morgan
City Administrator
P . S . I have appreciated the opportunity to review Tigard ' s
program to update your Transportation Plan . My thanks
to Randy Wooley .
CITY OF TIGA M
December 18, 1987 OREGON
Mr. Pete Harvey, City Manager
City of Lake Oswego
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Subject: Area of Interest Agreement
Dear Pete:
As we discussed on the phone last week, the City of Tigard has had some past
contacts regarding annexation to Tigard of areas South of Kruse Way and East
of I-5. We have stated, and will continue, our support for annexation of
those areas to Lake Oswego, or if further south, to Tualatin. The City of
Tigard has no annexation interest East of I-5.
The attached Urban Planning Area Agreement map shows Tigard's Urban Services
Areas of Interest, areas we would consider for annexation. While formally
adopted between Tigard and Washington County, it is probably now time to
ratify such understanding between Tigard and our neighboring cities. We will
prepare a draft Agreement in January for your consideration.
Please let me know if I may be of any further assistance in clarifying
Tigard's position prior to a formal agreement between Tigard and Lake Oswego.
Yours truly,
R*er W. Jean
City Administrator
RWJ:lw/2376D
13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171
CITY OF I' , I ( L • '
fc Fr ,
TIGARD
URBAN PLANNING AREA
EXHIBIT A
WASHINGTON COUNTY-TIGARD URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
\ _ i - -
V• �./ IF
JU
t �' _ - ,�y�� `_ •• ; .-• to
LE
tt
,: I —�.x� �(' r�•r' __ -tel \\�*., •,��
�• : i ��t— �— I ';,rG=ill'.�® � �•,•---` `�� ?�
1986
] Vulk LAI
,
Ir t— 1 ,t,d 11
s..
Cl
y
URBAN PLANNING AREA c'
BOUNDARY
ACTIVE PLANNING AREA \\� - ,,,. IJ I '
AREA OF INTEREST ��s` I it 1`.�' �► A II
ORIGINAL
WASHINGTON i'p
COUNTY,
OREGON
January 5, 1989 L"
Catherine Wheatley
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
RE: ADOPTION OF THE URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
On October 25, 1988, the Washington County Board of Commissioners
adopted Ordinance Nos. 332 and 333, amending the Washington County
Comprehensive Plan. Ordinance No. 332 officially adopted the Urban
Planning Area Agreement with your city. A final signed copy of the
Agreement is enclosed for your records.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in the process to
update the Urban Planning Area Agreements. If you have any further
questions, please give me a call .
Kevin J. Martin
Senior Planner
KJM:mb
enclosure
Department of Land Use And Transportation, Planning Division
150 North First Avenue Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 Phone:503/648-8761
RECEIVED ► 2 i i�g8
�� �f-► �T `'P�',
s/sa
WASHINGTON COUNTY - TIGARD
URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 6± day of ! )PCC_rn
19q_ by WASHINGTON COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of
Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY" , and the CITY OF
TIGARD, an incorporated municipality of the State of Oregon,
hereinafter referred to as the "CITY" .
WHEREAS, ORS 190.010 provides that units of local government may
enter into agreements for the performance of any or all functions and
activities that a party to the agreement, its officers or agents,
have authority to perform; and
WHEREAS, Statewide Planning Goal #2 (Land Use Planning) requires that
City, County, State and Federal agency and special district plans and
actions shall be consistent with the comprehensive plans of the
cities and counties and regional plans adopted under ORS Chapter 197;
and
WHEREAS, the .Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission
requires each jurisdiction requesting acknowledgment of compliance to
submit an agreement setting forth the means by which comprehensive
planning coordination within the Regional Urban Growth Boundary will
be implemented; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY, to ensure coordinated and
consistent comprehensive plans, consider it mutually advantageous to
establish:
1. A site-specific Urban Planning Area within the Regional
Urban Growth Boundary within which both the COUNTY and the
CITY maintain an interest in comprehensive planning;
2 . A process for coordinating comprehensive planning and
development in the Urban Planning Area;
3 . Policies regarding comprehensive planning and development
in the Urban Planning Area; and
4. A process to amend the Urban Planning Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNTY AND THE CITY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I. Location of the Urban Planning Area
The Urban Planning Area mutually defined by the COUNTY and the
CITY includes the area designated on Exhibit "A" to this
agreement.
Page 2
II. Coordination of Comprehensive Planning and Development
A. Amendments to or Adoption of a Comprehensive Plan or
Implementing Regulation
1. Definitions
Comprehensive Plan as defined by OAR 660-18-010 (5) means a
generalized, coordinated land use map and policy statement
of the governing body of a local government that
interrelates all functional and natural systems and
activities relating to the use of lands, including, but
not limited to, sewer and water systems, transportation
systems, educational facilities, recreational facilities,
and natural resources and air and water quality management
programs. "Comprehensive Plan" amendments do not include
small tract comprehensive plan map changes.
Implementing Regulation means any local government zoning
ordinance, land division ordinance adopted under ORS
92 .044 or 92 . 046 or similar general ordinance establishing
standards for implementinga comprehensive plan.
"Implementing regulation" does not include small tract
zoning map amendments, conditional use permits, individual
subdivision, partitioning or planned unit development
approval or denials, annexations, variances, building
permits and similar administrative-type decisions.
2 . The County shall provide the CITY with the appropriate
opportunity to participate, review and comment on proposed
amendments to or adoption of the COUNTY comprehensive plan
or implementing regulations. The CITY shall provide the
COUNTY with the appropriate opportunity to participate,
review and comment on proposed amendments to or adoption
of the CITY comprehensive plan or implementing
regulations. The following procedures shall be followed
by the COUNTY and the CITY to notify and involve one
another in the process to amend or adopt a comprehensive
plan or implementing regulation:
a. The CITY or the COUNTY, whichever has jurisdiction
over the proposal, hereinafter the originating agency,
shall notify the other agency, hereinafter the
responding agency, of the proposed action at the time
such planning efforts are initiated, but in no case
less than 45 days prior to the final hearing on
adoption. The specific method and level of
involvement shall be finalized by "Memorandums of
Understanding" negotiated and signed by the planning
directors of the CITY and the COUNTY. The
Page 3
"Memorandums of Understanding" shall clearly outline
the process by which the responding agency shall
participate in the adoption process. If, at the time
of being notified of a proposed action, the responding
agency determines it does not need to participate in
the adoption process, it may waive the requirement to
negotiate and sign a "Memorandum of Understanding" .
b. The originating agency shall transmit draft
recommendations on any proposed actions to the
responding agency for its review and comment before
finalizing. Unless otherwise agreed to in a
"Memorandum of Understanding", the responding agency
shall have ten (10) days after receipt of a draft to
submit comments orally or in writing. Lack of
response shall be considered "no objection" to the
draft.
C. The originating agency shall respond to the comments
made by the responding agency either by a) revising
the final recommendations, or b) by letter to the
responding agency explaining why the comments cannot
be addressed in the final draft.
d. Comments from the responding agency shall be given
consideration as a part of the public record on the
proposed action. If after such consideration, the
originating agency acts contrary to the position of
the responding agency, the responding agency may seek
appeal of the action through the appropriate appeals
body and procedures.
e. Upon final adoption of the proposed action by the
originating agency, it shall transmit the adopting
ordinance to the responding agency as soon as publicly
available, or if not adopted by ordinance, whatever
other written documentation is available to properly
inform the responding agency of the final actions
taken.
B. Development Actions Requiring Individual Notice to
Property Owners
1. Definition
Development Action Requiring Notice means an action by
a local government which requires notifying by mail
the owners of property which could potentially be
affected (usually specified as a distance measured in
feet) by a proposed development action which directly
affects and is applied to a specific parcel or
parcels. Such development actions may include, but
not be limited to small tract zoning or comprehensive
Page 4
plan map amendments, conditional or special use
permits, individual subdivisions, partitionings or
planned unit developments, variances, and other
similar actions requiring a hearings process which is
quasi-judicial in nature.
2 . The COUNTY will provide the CITY with the opportunity
to review and comment on proposed development actions
requiring notice within the designated Urban Planning
Area. The CITY will provide the COUNTY with the
opportunity to review and comment on proposed
development actions requiring notice within the CITY
limits that may have an affect on unincorporated
portions of the designated Urban Planning Area.
3 . The following procedures shall be followed by the
COUNTY and the CITY to notify one another of proposed
development actions:
a. The CITY or the COUNTY, whichever has jurisdiction
over the proposal, hereinafter the originating
agency, shall send by first class mail a copy of
the public hearing notice which identifies the
proposed development action to the other agency,
hereinafter the responding agency, at the earliest
opportunity, but no less than ten (10) days prior
to the date of the scheduled public hearing. The
failure of the responding agency to receive a
notice shall not invalidate an action if a good
faith attempt was made by the originating agency
to notify the responding agency.
b. The agency receiving the notice may respond at its
discretion. Comments may be submitted in written
form or an oral response- may be made at the public
hearing. Lack of written or oral response shall
be considered "no objection" to the proposal.
C. If received in a timely manner, the originating
agency shall include or attach the comments to the
written staff report and respond to any concerns
addressed by the responding agency in such report
or orally at the hearing.
d. Comments from the responding agency shall be given
consideration as a part of the public record on
the proposed action. If, after such
consideration, the originating agency acts
contrary to the position of the responding agency,
the responding agency may seek appeal of the
action through the appropriate appeals body and
procedures.
Page 5
C. Additional Coordination Requirements
1. The CITY and the COUNTY shall do the following to
notify one another of proposed actions which may
affect the community, but are not subject to the
notification and participation requirements contained
in subsections A and B above.
a. The CITY or the COUNTY, whichever has jurisdiction
over the proposed actions, hereinafter the
originating agency, shall send by first class mail
a copy of all public hearing agendas which contain
the proposed actions to the other agency,
hereinafter the responding agency, at the earliest
opportunity, but no less than three (3) days prior
to the date of the scheduled public hearing. The
failure of the responding agency to receive an
agenda shall not invalidate an action if a good
faith attempt was made by the originating agency
to notify the responding agency.
b. The agency receiving the public hearing agenda may
respond at its discretion. ,. Comments may be
submitted in written form or an oral response may
be made at the public hearing. Lack of written or
oral response shall be considered "no objection"
to the proposal.
C. Comments from the responding agency shall be given
consideration as a part of the public record on
the proposed action. If, after such
consideration, the originating agency acts
contrary to the position of the responding agency,
the responding agency may seek appeal of the
action through the appropriate appeals body and
procedures.
III. Comprehensive Planning and Develoyment Policies
A. Active Planning Area
1. Definition
Active Planning Area means the incorporated area and
certain unincorporated areas contiguous to the
incorporated area for which the CITY conducts
comprehensive planning and seeks to regulate
development activities to the greatest extent
possible. The CITY Active Planning Area is designated
as Area A on Exhibit "A" .
2 . The CITY shall be responsible for comprehensive
planning within the Active Planning Area.
Page 6
3 . The CITY is responsible for the preparation, adoption
and amendment of the public facility plan required by
OAR 660-11 within the Active Planning Area.
4 . The COUNTY shall not approve land divisions within the
Active -Planning Area which would create lots less than
10 acres in size, unless public sewer and water
service are available to the property.
5. The COUNTY shall not approve a development in the
Active Planning Area if the proposal would not provide
for, nor be conditioned to provide for, an enforceable
plan for redevelopment to urban densities consistent
with CITY's Comprehensive Plan in the future upon
annexation to the CITY as indicated by the CITY
Comprehensive Plan.
6. Approval of the development actions in the Active
Planning Area shall be continent upon provision of
adequate urban services including sewer, water, storm
drainage, streets, and police and fire protection.
7 . The COUNTY shall not oppose annexation to the CITY
within the CITY's Active Planning Area.
B. Area of Interest
1. Definition
Area of Interest or Primary Area of Interest means
unincorporated lands contiguous to the Active Planning
Area in which the CITY does not conduct comprehensive
planning but in which the CITY does maintain an
interest in comprehensive planning and development
actions by the COUNTY because of potential impacts on
the CITY Active Planning Area. The CITY Area of
Interest within the Urban Planning Area is designated
as Area B on Exhibit "A" .
2 . The COUNTY shall be responsible for comprehensive
planning and development actions within the Area of
Interest.
3 . The COUNTY is responsible for the preparation,
adoption and amendment of the public facility plan
required by OAR 660-11 within the Area of Interest.
4 . The CITY may consider requests for annexations in the
Area of Interest subject to the following:
a. The CITY shall not require annexation of lands in
the Area of Interest as a condition to the
provision of urban services for development.
Page 7
b. Annexations by the CITY within the Area of
Interest shall not create islands unless the CITY
declares its intent to complete the island
annexation.
c. The CITY agrees in principle to a plebiscite or
other representative means for annexation in the
Metzger/Progress Community Planning Area, which
includes Washington Square, within the CITY Area
of Interest. Not contrary to the foregoing, the
CITY reserves all of its rights to annex and
acknowledges the rights of individual property
owners to annex to the CITY pursuant to Oregon
Revised Statutes.
d. Upon annexation of land within the Area of
Interest to the CITY, the CITY agrees to convert
COUNTY plan designations to CITY plan designations
which most closely approximate the density, use
provisions and standards of COUNTY designations.
Furthermore, the CITY agrees to maintain this
designation for one year after the effective date
of annexation unless both the CITY and the COUNTY
Planning Directors agree at the time of annexation
that the COUNTY designation is outdated and an
amendment may be initiated before the one year
period is over.
5. The City of Beaverton and the City of Tigard have
reached an agreement on a South Beaverton-North Tigard
boundary establishing future annexation areas of
interest. This boundary coincides with the northern
Urban Planning Area boundary shown on Exhibit "A" .
Washington County recognizes that the future
annexation area of interest boundary line may change
in the future upon mutual agreement of both cities.
C. Special Policies
1. The CITY and the COUNTY shall provide information of
comprehensive planning and development actions to the
Community Planning Organizations (CPO) through the
notice procedures outlined in Section III of this
Agreement.
2. At least one copy of any COUNTY ordinance which
proposes to (1) amend the COUNTY comprehensive plan,
(2) adopt a new plan, or (3) amend the text of the
COUNTY development code shall be mailed to the CITY
within five (5) days after its introduction.
3 . At least one copy of any COUNTY ordinance which
proposes to rezone land within one (1) mile of the
corporate limits of the CITY shall be mailed to the
CITY within five (5) days after its introduction.
Page 8
4. The City of Tigard, City of. Beaverton and Washington
County have agreed to the following stipulations
regarding the connection of Murray Boulevard from Old
Scholls Ferry Road to the intersection of SW 121st
Avenue and Gaarde Street:
a. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and
Washington County agree to amend their respective
comprehensive plans to reflect the following
functional classification and design
considerations:
1. Designation: Collector
2 . Number of Travel Lanes: 2 (plus turn lanes at
major intersections)
3 . Bike Lanes: Yes
4 . Right-of-Way: 60 feet (plus slope easements
where necessary)
5. Pavement Width: 40 foot minimum
6. Access: Limited
7 . Design Speed: 35 M.P.H.
8 . Minimum Turning Radius: 350 to 500 feet
9. Parking Facilities: None provided on street
10 . Upon verification of need by traffic analysis,
the connection may be planned to eventually
accommodate additional lanes at the Murray/Old
Scholls Ferry and Murray/New Scholls Ferry
intersections.
11. The intersection of SW 135th Avenue and Murray
Boulevard connection will be designed with
Murray Boulevard as a through street with
135th Avenue terminating at the Murray
connection with a "T" intersection.
12 . The general alignment of the Murray Boulevard
connection is illustrated in Exhibit B.
b. Any changes to land use designations in the Murray
Boulevard connection area shall be coordinated
with all jurisdictions to assure that traffic
impacts are adequately analyzed.
Page 9
C. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and
Washington County shall support improvements to
the regional transportation system as outlined in
the adopted Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) .
d. Improvements to SW Gaarde Street between SW 121st
Avenue and Pacific Highway 99W should occur
coincident with the connection of Murray Boulevard
from Walnut/135th Avenue to Gaarde Street.
e. The City of Tigard and Washington County, with
involvement by affected property owners, shall
jointly develop an alignment for the connection of
Murray Boulevard between the 135th Avenue/Walnut
Street and 121st Avenue/Gaarde Street
intersections in 1986.
5. The CITY and the COUNTY shall informally establish
administrative procedures and designate appropriate
personnel to receive and review notices required by
Sections II A, B and C of this Agreement.
IV. Amendments to the Urban Planning Area Agreement
A. The following procedures shall be followed by the CITY and
the COUNTY to amend the language of this agreement or the
Urban Planning Area Boundary:
1. The CITY or COUNTY, whichever jurisdiction originates
the proposal, shall submit a formal request for
amendment to the responding agency.
2 . The formal request shall contain the following:
a. A statement describing the amendment.
b. A statement of findings indicating why the
proposed amendment is necessary.
C. If the request is to amend the planning area
boundary, a map which clearly indicates the
proposed change and surrounding area.
3 . Upon receipt of a request for amendment from the
originating agency, the responding agency shall
schedule a review of the request before the
appropriate reviewing body, with said review to be
held within 45 days of the date the request is
received.
4 . The CITY and COUNTY shall make good faith efforts to
resolve requests to amend this agreement. Upon
completion of the review, the reviewing body may
approve the request, deny the request, or make a
Page 10
determination that the proposed amendment warrants
additional review. If it is determined that
additional review is necessary, the following
procedures shall be followed by the CITY and COUNTY:
a. If inconsistencies noted by both parties cannot be
resolved in the review process as outlined in
Section IV (3) , the CITY and the COUNTY may agree
to initiated a joint study. Such a study shall
commence within 90 days of the date it is
determined that a proposed amendment creates an
inconsistency, and shall be completed within 90
days of said date. Methodologies and procedures
regulating the conduct of the joint study shall be
mutually agreed upon by the CITY and the COUNTY
prior to commencing the study.
b. Upon completion of the joint study, the study and
the recommendations drawn from it shall be
included within the record of the review. The
agency considering the proposed amendment shall
give careful consideration to the study prior to
making a final decision.
B. Prior to the commencement of periodic review for the City
of Tigard and the County's Urban Areas (April , 1989) , the
CITY and the COUNTY shall mutually study the following
topics:
1. The feasibility of expanding the "active planning
area" to include the current "area of interest" and
assigning land use planning responsibility to the
CITY.
2 . The feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the CITY and
the COUNTY contracting to provide building inspection
and plan review services, administer development codes
and collect related fees within the active planning
area.
Proposed revisions to this Agreement shall be considered
by the CITY and the COUNTY as soon as analysis of the
above topics is complete, subject to the time constraint
and other requirements of the COUNTY's land use ordinance
hearings and adoption process.
C. The parties will jointly review this Agreement every two
(2) years, or more frequently if mutually needed, to
evaluate the effectiveness of the processes set forth
herein and to make any necessary amendments. The review
process shall commence two (2) years from the date of
execution and shall be completed within 60 days. Both
parties shall make a good faith effort to resolve any
inconsistencies that may have developed since the previous
review. If, after completion of the 60 day review period
inconsistencies still remain, either party may terminate
this Agreement.
Page 11
V. This Urban Planning Area Agreement repeals and replaces the
Urban Planning Area Agreement dated September 9, 1986.
This Agreement commences on DIP c e i T) 11,/1- KC , 19 .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Urban Planning Area
Agreement on the date set opposite their signatures.
CITY OF TIGARD
By ��` Date
Mayor
WASHINGTON COUNTY
By ` ' Date Z2 q",
Chairman, Board of ou Commissioners
q
Date
Recordin Secretary
dor
TIGARD ��K��_, I
� ,�;
AN PLANNING »�' 9 -- - / '
URB ING AREA r:_ �� �'� . . 3 y.�jn
EXHIBIT A /'
kitill
WASHINGTON COUNTY—TIGARD URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENTS „'
Il .
_, LLL
� __'� _. E . . I I �,r� x,,.71 G � _ .,�'ya�:•:�:' �� ���'
r •� '''• I[ � �" { IIF. �•
-.- _ - 1
CJ7filllrt_f9c_
... �- --_ ;✓ 7 /`1 �'7 , - _L71 r TIGARD (�jr`• f `'
I rP
,° �j , �bra— '��� -� °, 1�� _1_-:Il�•• , _� i
:� IGARd r
--
•i
1 i
1
I
f
1 i
t
- •1
1 �
t
Cl t1' _�•
i
_ _ n
/ , r
f>'
l
7�
I
I
I -
n
n
i,
t
- t
t
.....................
.....................
:ill.. •+i , W�✓ 1
0
I
-- E
r
:l.•
w� • f
T
:•1l%' �n��' 1
...............
e
� _l}� �f"5 v .
- - Il
:>::: :::::>::: :<>:::<::: •:::::•: ;::•:;• ::::. :::::. :, ::::::tel£ 'L� , ��L_ Il3L`7CIflS!' `;
.:.:...:: ::
(� r
..: ::...:.:..
r
�L
cets�
i fWle
) a_
it
1
� ! -
r
l
< i"
» I
A
t
I^
t�
I
u
•r
'4
:•�>::',:yip.`;i'�"'i::'ii;�'>.��??:'•'.•;•:�:'<::: 5'�:':s'`j :+"` F -
xl `.��...:: ..!�t� *G•'�ttjY�VI/j� Ifr�-<"-%���1--� �}C,.)f a •'�'• =1� .\�`t r�'`�r ( •es
��'�%::'�"•�� _rte... ii
r -
•u
9.jY: 1• :yam �. �_.-
(� I
PL '11
- t
1988 = , 'i; _;�`"r�I�-= -� F ;Y � _ ... ,:'- SIM i►! ILII , ..-
N ' I rk riUc f 1_ , 1 I `�€�?` TIGARD
`.
� »R '•� �
URBAN PLANNING AREA
LIK
il�lll�!!1 BOUNDARY —t — _ `/ r--' r ►�
U ��
ACTIVE PLANNING AREA i„ L`�:y y
„.�e--- r_''-t' -d�ut�7F=•- ---�- •1 "Fk 'Ir J�! ' ` F'I P'..
fir.:,
AREA OF INTEREST
(_______„_T11AI ATINI — fl�,'�
�, II �
MURRAY E -JD. CONNECTION
co
m GENERAL ALIGNMENT
J
}
EXHIBIT B
600
602 URBAN PLAMM AREA AGEMENT
601
604 501 107
800 301 106
500
108
101
1100 100
200
5
1101
4
1301
M
1200 r
1302
1300
100
201
101
200
MURRAY BLVD. CONNECTION