City Council Packet - 02/05/2019 • -' . City of Tigard
TIGARD Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda
0
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY February 5,2019
Revised agenda item#9 agenda title
MEETING DATE AND TIME: February 5,2019 - 6:30 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 6:15 p.m. to
sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 6:30 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 (TDD -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:
htto://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/council meeting.oho
CABLE VIEWERS: The first City Council meeting of the month may be shown live on Channel 28 at 6:30
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.
. City of Tigard
Tigard Business Meeting-Agenda
TIGARD
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY February 5,2019
Revised agenda item#9 agenda title
MEETING DATE AND TIME: February 5,2019 - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting
MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223
6:30 PM
1. BUSINESS MEETING
A. Call to Order
B. Roll Call
C. Pledge of Allegiance
D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less,Please)
A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication
B. Citizen Communication—Sign Up Sheet
3. TCDA JOINT MEETING WITH TOWN CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION 6:30 p.m.
estimated time
4. URBAN RENEWAL BEST PRACTICES 7:10 p.m. estimated time
5. TCDA CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT#7 TO THE CITY CENTER URBAN
RENEWAL PLAN MINOR AMENDMENT
8:00 p.m. estimated time
6. TCDA CONSIDERATION OF LEASE AMENDMENT AND RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE 8:05 p.m. estimated time
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL-
7. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON
COUNTY FINDINGS REGARDING VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IN
RIVER TERRACE 8:15 p.m. estimated time
8. DISCUSSION ON INCREASE TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION FEE 8:25 p.m.
estimated time
9. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO
THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE RELA LED TO RIGHT OF WAY
LICENSES AND PERMIT FEES 8:55 p.m. estimated time
10. NON AGENDA ITEMS
11. 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.
12. ADJOURNMENT 9:15 p.m. estimated time
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2B - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: February 5, 2019
(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 ofpersons who
attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a
public record.
NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF
! Please Print CONTACTED
Name: (1/414\54. c"4-6--
Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will fa-ft'
help the presiding officer pronounce: 1e
Address MO% c1/4 "t0m A X
���
City kcy,vA � <
State Oqt" Zip 811i'1,1
Phone No. 1.011)
Name:
Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will
help the presiding officer pronounce:
Address
City
State Zip
Phone No.
Name:
Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will
help the presiding officer pronounce:
Address
City
State Zip
Phone No.
CITIZEN COMMUNICATION
I:\ADM\CITY RECORDERS\000 Cit'Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignnp\Citizen Communication.doc
SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET
FOR mu�n
February 5, 2019 (DATE OF MEETING)
Hello my name is Ahsha Miranda and I reside at 11675 SW 90th Ave, here in
Tigard, Oregon 97223.
Good evening Mayor Snider, Council President Goodhouse, Councilors Anderson,
Newton, and Leub.
I am here to ask you to please press pause on considering amending the lease and
providing relocation assistance for the TCDA property located at 9110 SW
Burnham Avenue in order to move swiftly toward construction of the Universal
Plaza.
I am very concerned that the proposal provides almost half a million dollars to the
national corporation of Ferguson Enterprises, a corporation valued to $16.7
Billion dollars, with 1400 locations, to move industry and living wage jobs to
Tualatin.
I ask the council, why is this the best time to buy out this lease agreement? With
the impending changes to our downtown, with the addition of the SW Corridor
Max route and station, the "in flux" nature of the surrounding properties, would it
not make sense to coordinate a more comprehensive plan on how to engage a
Universal Plaza with routes to the eventual station and other civic amenities.
At heart, I am an Urbanist. I am for a Universal Plaza. And I am for a spray park.
However, I'm unsure if this property is best suited for one or both at this time.
Removing a revenue generating business now, tearing down a building that can
never be rebuilt due to flood plain considerations and building a disconnected,
yet destination driven spray park without additional parking may create a poorly
used community asset.
Again, I ask you to press pause on throwing good money out of our community
and to direct further alternative site analysis for a spray park, and additionally-
provide more robust, transparent community engagement on creating a
downtown Universal space that connects to our roots and environment, serves
our community desires, and provides ease to access.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
AIS-3706 3.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 40 Minutes
Agenda Title: Joint meeting with Town Center Advisory Commission
Submitted By: Sean Family, Community
Development
Item Type: Joint Meeting-Board or Other Juris. Meeting Type: Town Center
Development
Agency
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
Town Center Development Agency Board/ Town Center Advisory Commission Joint
Meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Meet with the Town Center Advisory Commission to discuss their 2018 Annual Report and
their draft 2019 Goals.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Town Center Advisory Commission (TCAC) makes recommendations to the Board of
the Town Center Development Agency (ICDA) on urban renewal policy, budget and
implementation measures. Since updating its bylaws in September 2017, the TCAC makes
recommendations on urban renewal policy, budget and implementation measures for the
Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal area as well as to the City Center (Downtown) urban renewal
area.
Two items will inform the joint meeting discussion. The first is the TCAC's 2018 Annual
Report, describing the key activities of the commission (required by TCAC by-laws); it was
previously provided in the December 6, 2018 Council Newsletter. Among the goals that the
TCAC advised on in 2018 are participating in the SW Corridor process to determine the
station locations in the Tigard Triangle and Downtown, and developing a strong knowledge
base of the Tigard Triangle. The TCAC recommendations for TCDA are included in the 2018
Annual Report. These are:
•Continue to work with Metro and TriMet to ensure stations are walkable and activate the
area around them. Ensure that the Hall Blvd. station design and location promotes
connectivity with the Downtown Main Street area;
•Look for opportunities to partner with developers and other agencies to increase the
supply of affordable housing units;
•Budget for and acquire land in the Triangle for public spaces that encourage walkability
and equitable business development; and
•Develop opportunities for equitable business development in the Triangle through urban
renewal funding and other funding sources such as grants.
The TCAC developed draft goals for 2019 at their January 9 meeting. The TCAC will review
these draft goals with the TCDA Board before finalizing them at their February meeting. The
draft goals are:
Aspirational Goal
Facilitate opportunities for development that promotes walkability, equity, and connectivity
across both urban renewal districts.
Downtown
Identify new revitalization projects & drive existing projects to completion in the Downtown
Urban Renewal District.
Tigard Triangle
Participate in the development of the Tigard Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal
Implementation Project.
SW Corridor
Consider, investigate and recommend specific planning components associated with the
adopted SW Corridor alignment and station locations in both downtown and the Triangle.
Affordable Housing
Recommend specific programs and policies to City staff and Council that directly affect,
support and encourage the development and preservation of affordable housing downtown
and in the Triangle.
Equitable Business Development
Recommend specific programs and policies to City staff and Council that directly affect,
support and encourage equitable business development downtown and in the Triangle.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
N/A
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council Goals 2017-19:
Goal 3: Make Downtown Tigard a Place People Want To Be.
Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 3:
Engage the community through dynamic communication.
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
October 16, 2018 Joint meeting with TCAC
Attachments
TCAC 2018 Annual Report
TCDA/TCAC Joint meeting PPT
_ -
1
Il
2018 Annual Report of the Town Center Advisory
Commission to the Board of the Town Center Development
Agency
December 1,2018
The Town Center Advisory Commission(TCAC) adopted annual goals and objectives for calendar
year 2018. The annual agenda for the TCAC was largely devoted to developing and implementing
the goals.This report is organized around the adopted 2018 TCAC Goals and Objectives.
Goal 1. Develop a strong knowledge base of the Tigard Triangle to inform our
recommendations for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Implementation Project.
Outcomes:
The Commission started the year with a briefing from staff on the Triangle Urban Renewal Plan.
This was followed by a briefing on Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal. Several members of the
TCAC volunteered to serve on the Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal sub-committee which will
start meeting next year supported by the consultant team that was selected to perform the Metro-
grant funded project.
In September, Commissioners participated in a bus tour of the Triangle. Points of focus included
the condition of Red Rock Creek,locations of proposed SW Corridor light rail stations,traffic flow
and affordable housing.
Portions of November and December meetings will be devoted to a deep dive on the Triangle
including current demographics and economics,existing regulatory and zoning laws,and the
commission's future plans and recommendations.
Goal 2. Participate in educational and planning activities that result from the SW Corridor
Project to inform our recommendations to regional and local government entities.
Outcomes:
A large portion of the commission's time this year was spent on educating ourselves on all facets
of the SW Corridor Project so that we could make informed recommendations.
Members of the TCAC participated in a wide variety of SW Corridor planning activities including
serving on the Citizens Advisory Committee and giving public testimony.The TCAC received SW
Corridor briefings from staff and TriMet/Metro including a special joint meeting with the Tigard
Transportation Advisory Committee (TTAC) in July.
Two commission meetings were dedicated to discussion of the impact of the preferred alignment
on the Urban Renewal Districts especially as it pertains to affordable housing and traffic
congestion. The outcome was a consensus opinion which formed the basis of our
recommendation.
The TCAC wrote a formal recommendation on the preferred alignment of the Tigard Triangle and
Downtown light rail stations and presented the recommendations to the Board of the TCDA at our
October joint meeting. It was also submitted to Metro and TriMet as part of their public outreach.
Goal 3. Identify and prioritize opportunities for development to improve walkability,
equity,and connectivity across both urban renewal districts.
Outcomes:
Walkability within and connectivity between the two urban renewal districts continues to be a key
issue for the commission. We received briefings on and participated in the SW Corridor planning
project which would provide a direct transit(and perhaps bike and pedestrian) connection
between the two districts.We need to ensure that stations are walkable and activate the areas
around them.
An observation from our bus tour of the Triangle is the lack of walkability in the Triangle,with the
exception of the path along Red Rock Creek adjacent to the Walmart development. The Triangle
lacks a Main Street area,but this could be overcome by clustering mixed use development into
blocks that would provide walkability and equitable business opportunities. This is something
that needs to be addressed in the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Implementation Project.
The TCAC October meeting included a discussion of equitable business. Some of the ideas
included:
• Developing funding for equitable business development perhaps from Federal and/or State
grants,lease income and facade improvement grants
• Tying affordable mixed-use development to business incubation space
Goal 4. Explore ways that policy changes can encourage and support the building of
affordable housing and equitable business development.
Outcomes:
Affordable housing is a critical part of the Urban Renewal plan and is of special interest to the
TCAC. The commissioners attended the Housing Options Workshop to give input on development
code changes that could encourage more affordable housing choices. We also received briefings
on the SW Corridor Equitable Housing Strategy,later acknowledged by Council. The TCAC will be
involved in the Tigard Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation Project,which will
2
explore how to encourage and support the building of affordable housing and equitable business
development.
The CPAH Red Rock Commons Project is an example of how urban renewal funds can stimulate
additional funding for affordable housing. We will continue to look for opportunities to partner
with developers and other agencies to increase the supply of affordable housing units.
The Town Center Advisory Commission is already looking forward to 2019 and the kickoff of our
key initiative:the equitable implementation of the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan.
On behalf of the Town Center Advisory Commission,
Kate Rogers
Chair
Recommendations for Town Center Development Agency Consideration
Background:
The Town Center Advisory Commission(TCAC)is charged with advising the Town Center
Development Agency(TCDA) on policy and projects related to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan
and the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan. The commission is charged with producing an
annual report and recommendations for the TCDA's consideration.
2018 Recommendations
• Continue to work with Metro and TriMet to ensure stations are walkable and activate the
area around them
o Ensure that the Hall Street station design and location promotes connectivity with
the Downtown Main Street area
• Look for opportunities to partner with developers and other agencies to increase the
supply of affordable housing units
• Budget for and acquire land in the Triangle for public spaces that encourage walkability
and equitable business development
• Develop opportunities for equitable business development in the Triangle through urban
renewal funding and other funding sources such as grants.
3
i •
• Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Do
TCDA/TCAC Joint Meeting
5 February 2019
City of Tigard
Agenda
• Introductions
• City staff liaison opening remarks
• Discussion of 2018 recommendations
• Presentation of 2019 draft goals
• TCDA feedback on 2019 goals
City of Tigard
2018 TCAC Goals
• Develop a strong knowledge base of the Tigard Triangle to inform our
recommendations for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal
Implementation Project
• Continue to participate in educational and planning activities that
result from the SW Corridor Project to inform our recommendations to
regional and local government entities
• Identify and prioritize opportunities for development to improve
walkability, equity, and connectivity across both urban renewal districts
• Explore ways that policy changes can encourage and support the
building of affordable housing and equitable business development
City of Tigard
2018 TCAC Recommendations
• Continue to work with Metro and TriMet to ensure stations are
walkable and activate the area around them
► Ensure that the Hall Blvd. station design and location promote
connectivity with the Downtown Main Street area
• Look for opportunities to partner with developers and other agencies
to increase the supply of affordable housing units
• Budget for and acquire land in the Triangle for public spaces that
encourage walkability and equitable business development
• Develop opportunities for equitable business development in the
Triangle through urban renewal funding and other funding sources
such as grants
City of Tigard
Aspirational Goal
Facilitate opportunities for development that promotes walkability, equity, and connectivity across both urban
renewal districts.
Downtown Tigard Triangle
Identify new revitalization projects & drive existing Participate in the development of the Tigard Triangle
projects to completion in the Downtown Urban Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation Project
Renewal District
SW Corridor
Consider, investigate and recommend specific planning components associated with the adopted SW Corridor
alignment and station locations in both downtown and the Triangle
Affordable Housing 1
Recommend specific programs and policies to City staff and Council that directly affect, support and encourage the
development and preservation of affordable housing downtown and in the Triangle J
( •
Equitable Business Development
Recommend specific programs and policies to City staff and Council that directly affect, support and encourage
equitable business development downtown and in the Triangle
i,
t� fi •s c -
City of Tigard
:F.:
x.,
x.._E::Y. Q1 Planned Activities : .. .X X::::
x': January 9th - completed • _< .•% ••
•
:•Final Financial Impact State en E.
€ ian Renewal Amendrnrt ��
s:
<•: niversal Plaza Update .I: ,: :. ..%::: *ili :.:x x X X X %::::
.. '•X x x•
•
x. ect n of off i ..•"-rs & 201 x-Goal e p i..g,.$ Sion ::. .:.%::: x :e::x % % x X X::::
x X X x x x . % X :::X X::::X .:.......%........ .. :x...... . %. E::x x x x x x x x::::
•:``::X x %.....x x x x ] %.....x:::::X::::X x :::X % % X x �.. .: -.x x X x % X::::
:X-1FEE bruoi
:.X X:..:::X X X X • X: •Y,.....X•:::::5 x::::x % X X X x :5::••::x E x ..-....•. C. .. :% - >. ,'::% X.....% % X• .
::: f' :is ti °°o :)4•:19:: o i s: :::EE::..:: ::
... .. X . . x % X % % %• %:::::]:.....X......X::::::X % %..• x x::cc
X::p::x ..:
i~iaiso ; s : elms..s::: ..:..
X ] x:::::X x::: X x %... . ..X......x x:::::X x x x X••:::x x xeeE::x... ........x ..x.• x % %::::
•
X.......i x ,'•x :5::: J�+nt�`1/t .:... •x X............:% X:• l x :S x:::::x x x x x x x.....% x::::::5 . X•••••X X x:::::X X•-"•X:::.." X:::::::5::::
R ..... .. cx % : .. .•.. ::^'SC^•"".:.. S
•
• E.........................X....
k % X:::::X % % .......5::::::x......v... :% X %.....x:':.:] ....::5.::'..::%......X......?S:: ::% X % X X %. % % %.....% %.........
X % %:::::% %:.••••< S"'••X X••-'•'X X Y X x:: ::X X X•••••X X x X X X:::•:X 5' .'S::..:::x ::X••.••X"''X X X::. .::::X X::..
•
e�
C 3: t
r•
x x :X..,.. .. .. �..x:::::X. ...X X X::::::X x X-.:::% %:: ::% %...:.X::::::%.....X....X % % ..%:::::% % .., ........-...X,......
X X X:::::X X:: [:Tga rd-'T i ngl:e...m 1-I:pl.e:me rtd:Wiit :. H : ::::% X %:::::%....k % X X:::: •:7i.. :. •:,�L::x X x x X- x X X::::
Tnangte.sUbC99 r.n 1^•' i )`::::::x % %....:x X x.... .:.x:::. -:x x x...... •..K.....X X 5
x x x::: .%... .x::. .: �koo:€�� nr�:: e�� i���
% ::: X:::::X:::::X X......v x X X:: : X % x X % % x::::
x::::::. ter tate.7.I`r iix. .pdat , :'. t -
% X X k %::::.x •X" X.....X x x a, % x x ..
'- ..:xr .: ......X^....X.^^X': :...sr...,---,...---..„--" :Ti '^"R^""R".: iF"'."i:'^"'X'^^'R
%: x x:::::x x x x x X x x:::::x x x x... .x X A. x• X.:E::% x x. ••••x x x x:::F:' :X X % % X"••"%:::.
€€ ::..,
AIS-3707 4.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 50 Minutes
Agenda Title: Urban Renewal Best Practices
Prepared For: Sean Farrelly, Community Development
Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development
Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Town Center
Development
Agency
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
Presentation and discussion on Oregon urban renewal best practices from advisor Elaine
Howard.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
The Board of the TCDA is requested to receive the presentation and participate in the
discussion, along with the Town Center Advisory Commission. The Board is also welcome to
communicate with TCDA Executive Director Marty Wine any specific questions to be
addressed in advance of the session.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
Urban renewal advisor Elaine Howard will provide a refresher session on Oregon urban
renewal law and practice.
Among the topics she will cover:
•Why use urban renewal.
•Definition of urban renewal / definition of blight.
•State limitations on urban renewa.l
•How does urban renewal financing work?
•How does the Assessor compute the dollars that go to urban renewal /Why is urban
renewal on the property tax bill?
•Impact on Taxing Jurisdictions.
•Goals, Objectives, and Projects of Tigard's City Center and Tigard Triangle urban
renewal plans.
•The relationship between Agency boards, advisory commissions, and staff.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
N/A
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council Goals 2017-19:
Goal 3: Make Downtown Tigard a Place People Want To Be.
Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 3:
Engage the community through dynamic communication.
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
June 4, 2013 Urban Renewal Best Practices presentation.
Attachments
No file(s) attached
mENTAL PACKET 2/4/2019
SUPPL, E 44_
FOR M EE TING)
(DATE OF
URBAN RENEWAL 101 - TIGARD
H• w
,,,,,NuELT,,NOG„„ALLCR
ROADMAP 0 Relationship between Advisory Committee
and Agency
COWhy use Urban Renewal?
Crash Course—UR 101
420 Crash Course—UR 201
0 Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area
CICity Center Urban Renewal Area
GI Pending Legislation
1
2/4/2019
Tigard Residents
Board of the Town Center
City Attorney ---------
Development Agency
(City Council)
TWA Budget Town Center
Executive Director of the
Committee TCDA Advisory
Commission
Mart Wine
Finance Director Community
Development Director
Toby La France Kenn Asher
Redevelopment
Project Manager
Sean Farrell
Town Center Development Agency Organizational Chart
Town Center Development Agency, Town Center Advisory
Commission and Staff
• The elected body (TCDA Board) establishes policy, adopts
budgets, decides on projects, and makes final decisions.
They are charged with responding to the public on issues.
• The ICAC provides input/recommendations for those
decisions. The Agency Board might choose to go in a
different direction
• The TCAC advises on more global matters.
• Details and implementation are the responsibility of staff.
2
2/4/2019
WHY USE
URBAN RENEWAL?
PI N
Many opportunities City general funds Urban Renewal
for improvements typically lack the provides a funding
and redevelopment in funds to contribute to source to bridge the
cities that need these opportunities gap
funding
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
CRASH COURSE I UR 101
•
PROPERTY TAX REVENUE REGULAR TAXING
JURISDICTIONS
S S S S City,County,Etc.
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
3
2/4/2019
0
NT
D
CRASH COURSE I UR 101
s s 0
PROPERTY TAX REVENUE Mil
PROPERTY TAX REGULAR TAXING
INCREASES s SSS s JURISDICTIONS
7.3%Appreciation
2.Substantial Improvements City,County,Etc.
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
NN_0
•
m
CRASH COURSE I UR 101
0
•
^�^ PROPERTY TAX REVENUE S Zili
PROPERTY TAX
INCREASES s S S ss REGULAR TAXING
1.3;App.ec;aGon JURISDICTIONS
2 Substantial Improvements City,County,Etc.
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
4
2/4/2019
0
N
lY
HOW DOES URBAN RENEWAL FINANCING
WORK?
N O
O
J W
q a
w .c O
0 t u
z COF` r
rT
W
'14
INCREMENT
a I _
ai
FROZEN BASE
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
UR201 • Economic development tool
WH AT IS • Unique in that it is a financing tool.
URBANbut also a plan with projects
• Used to address"blighting"
RENEWAL2 influences in specific areas
• • Functions on increases in property
tax revenues in"Urban Renewal
Areas"
• Used all over Oregon(Map on
next slide)
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
5
2/4/2019
CITIES WITH URBAN
RENEWAL
PORTLAND ,o, `� w
p �xoo•HNER•�•� p,me°W.+.p
0
R�/'�Jp o WLLHCNVLLLE
r mr•�cj•I ~SALEM
dr •.'^p•IEHANON
b _� B '.., YA
p o�p"°.u` ,O LAND
. .�a
7,11117:—
ew- _
OREGON wCO\ppu o
aNNoN;a0NVILLE O4w .p u
Anuv
O.
.«..
rnNoox "'"'rgw•r .ou•u.O OR Or�WM
•
Oouu.aS•ALEN e
�
x7 o
dm
WHAT IS BLIGHT?
• Blight is a precondition to any Urban Renewal
Area
❖ Specific criteria defined by state statue,
generally covers:
• Underdevelopment or underutilization of property
• Poor condition of buildings
• Inadequacy of infrastructure including streets and
utilities
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
6
2/4/2019
0
N
cc
HOW DOES AN URBAN
RENEWAL AREA FUNCTION?
1. Income Source
• Yearly property tax collections based on growth within
Boundary(more detail on mechanism in later slide)
2. Expenses
• Projects,programs,and administration
3. Spending Limit
Capped by Maximum Indebtedness(MI): ��
• The total amount of money that can be spent over the life of
the district on projects,programs,and administration.
Eleine Howard Consulting ILO
LEVERAGING CITY TAX RATE
Tax rates
2%
4'
•County
23 a County Library
SO and Water
4H and Extension
m_._. •City
:` •School Dbstriot
53
■Community College
■ESD
34%
S port
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
7
2/4/2019
A HYPOTHETICAL
PROPERTY TAX BILL
Taxing District Rate Property Value
Property Value $100,000
County $ 3.5000 $350.00
County Library $ 0.3947 $39.47
Soil and Water $ 0.0500 $5.00
4H and Extension $ 0.0800 $8.00
City $ 5.1067 $510.67
School District $ 4.4614 $446.14
Community College $ 0.5019 $50.19
ESD $ 0.3049 $30.49
Port $ 0.6004 $60.04
Urban Renewal
Total $ 15.0000 $1,500.00
..,.Consul!ina LLC
A HYPOTHETICAL
PROPERTY TAX BILL
Property Value
Taxing District Rate Property Value without UR
Property Value $100,000 $103,000.00
County $ 3.5000 $350.00 $360.50
County Library $ 0.3947 $39.47 $40.65
Soil and Water $ 0.0500 $5.00 $5.15
4H and Extension $ 0.0800 $8.00 $8.24
City $ 5.1067 $510.67 $525.99
School District $ 4.4614 $446.14 $459.52
Community College $ 0.5019 $50.19 $51.70
ESD $ 0.3049 $30.49 $31.40
Port $ 0.6004 $60.04 $61.84
Urban Renewal
Total $ 15.0000 $1,500.00 $1,545.00
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
8
2/4/2019
A HYPOTHETICAL
PROPERTY TAX BILL
Property Value Property Value
Taxing District Rate Property Value without UR With UR
Property Value $100,000 $103,000.00 $103,000.00
County $ 3.5000 $350.00 $360.50 $350.00
County Library $ 0.3947 $39.47 $40.65 $39.47
Soil and Water $ 0.0500 $5.00 $5.15 $5.00
4H and Extension $ 0.0800 $8.00 $8.24 $8.00
City $ 5.1067 $510.67 $525.99 $510.67
School District $ 4.4614 $446.14 $459.52 $446.14
Community College $ 0.5019 $50.19 $51.70 $50.19
411 ESD $ 0.3049 $30.49 $31.40 $30.49
Port $ 0.6004 $60.04 $61.84 $60 04
Urban Renewal 1$45.00
Total $ 15.0000 $1,500.00 $1,545.00 $1,545.00
1111 Elaine Howard Consulting LLC \\\
iiPROPERTY TAXES AND
1 URBAN RENEWAL
I
i
• • Urban Renewal Division of Taxes does not increase
property taxes, it uses increases in property taxes that
were already happening
• Urban Renewal is a line item on your property tax bill
• The Assessor must go through the following steps when
distributing Urban Renewal Taxes:
1. "Calculation"of TIF to be collected
2. "Distribution"of TIF Citywide to property tax payers
ilil 3. "Collection"of property tax revenues
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
9
2/4/2019
URBAN
RENEWAL
UTOPIA
The following slides detail in a conceptual 40 Calculation
manner the steps an Assessor goes
through to distribute TIF revenues to an 0 Distribution
Urban Renewal Agency:
® Collection
<
E.
F
ili "DISTRIBUTION" To:.t(Av„{a. 51000000
Io
Houses in URA 10
2
U.1 ” . ,, "1 "1 *1 Ai / so ,S LS- i SEA.' Ill° ? Lilj r SVB3
Z
In ' SO NiN7 "00 N 4'0\1 141 Al' '$0 N "$0 ‘ 4\O
./..;\0-1 //:-....:k /5, tit *, s/„,,,o„, /„..,.....,, „<„,:_.,
,,,,,,,N.1 /$0.\\1 /9....\-,,„ tii, illi 61 s/,,./.0\., 4\o„Lr,
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
10
Slide 20
SVB3 Change values to 45 for each house.
Scott Vanden Bos,8/16/2018
2/4/2019
a
0
I-
"DISTRIBUTION" 4a
Q $a,a00.000
2$%i rslve=3r $1,000,000
L1.1 Houses;r URA 10
Z
w SVB4
SB $9 $45 $45
Z a' li�J
CO WWWWyy ,
Lru
, ` 'CJ OL $45 _� S65 j i fi nj L..SO
nJ
Lrij _ * * L.nJ LnJ
51
.11- - - — - —
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
VB5
n-
0
"DISTRIBUTION" + 4°
Toat AV 1st Year $4,000,000
5 "COLLECTION"
w h is
I
Z $L'r I (;1Leico
a
$ l r is
F iaine Howard Consulting LLC
11
Slide 21
SVB4 Change values to 45 for each house
Scott Vanden Bos,8/16/2018
Slide 22
SVB5 change value to 11.25 for each house
Scott Vanden Bos,8/16/2018
2/4/2019
o
'r
D
IMPACTS TO TAXING DISTRICTS
❖ Urban Renewal does not provide new money
• Diverts funds that would go
to other property tax districts
❖ Continue receiving taxes on frozen base
•:• Temporarily forego taxes on any growth in
Urban Renewal area
Growth may not have occurred but not for urban
renewal Ii
Elite Howard Consulting LLC
URBAN RENEWAL IMPACT
Local Schools
ID64l PPrPEPii TAX REVEIfUes LOCALSCOOOL DISTRICT EX=ESic
Went, 9 ®®OIECTIMPACT
Er••Tnlln
9.061w.
wirter
in sae wide nem*
Tee anew Peet
31.3% EU AIJZATION FORMULA
TAKES MM.-COUNT
•Whetter s MMMT is",noir
•Speria Modems
STATE SCHOOL FUND
exharlEspenence
1
Hata*FM PM t/wrrrwr Otater led
teem tax le* seem.
,,,�•,• 62.9% 3.7% 2.7%
Elare arc�Cons Inc LLC
12
2/4/2019
0
A
N
STATE LIMITATIONS
ON URBAN RENEWAL
Population over 50,000
• 15%of Assessed Value of Property in City
• 15%of Acreage of City
Existing Plan limitations:
• Can not be increased in size by more than 20%of original
Plan acreage
• Maximum Indebtedness(MI)can not increase by more
•
than 20%of original MI, indexing
• May increase MI above 20%as adjusted only with
concurrence from 75%of other taxing districts
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
Assessed
Value UR Excess Acreage
City of Tigard $5,907,591,736 8,129
City of Tigard
minus UR excess $5,875,954,608
City Center URA $117,012,843 $31,637,128 228.96
Tigard Triangle $429,654,966 547.90
City Center Plus
Tigard Triangle $546,667,809 776.86
Percentage in UR 9.30% 9.56%
13
2/4/2019
0
N
HOW IS A PLAN ADOPTED?
• Public Input
Public • Goals and Objectives, Projects,
Initial Budgets
• Agency Reviews and decides
Agency whether to send out for public
review
County • Presentation to County
• Planning Commission Review
PC • Conformance with
Comprehensive Plan
• City Council Hearing and Vote
CC • Notice to all Citizens
• Refers to Citizens for VOTE
VOTE • Citizen Vote
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
PENDING LEGISLATION
1. Definition of Public Building
2. Increased consult and confer timelines—60
days
3. Public building limitations and concurrence
4. Clarifies the 20%addition language
5. Includes MI calculation as part of the annual
report
6. Requires distribution of the annual report to
taxing districts
7. Clarifies the 1% amendment restriction
Elaine Howard Consulting LLC
14
2/4/2019
Tigard's two urban renewal areas:
Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area
City Center Urban Renewal Area
Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area Tigard Triangle
,,•+i� Urban Renewal Area
1,' b • Approved by voters in 2017
• 547.9 total acres
• 327 tax lots
• MI $188,000,000
• 35 year plan
• Frozen Base: $448,433,963
• FY 18-19 Assessed Value
$424,027,237
(No incremental value - issue c'
utility values)
„
- a
15
2/4/2019
Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area
Goal 1 —Encourage meaningful involvement by citizens,interested parties,and
affected agencies throughout the life of the urban renewal district to ensure that
it reflects the community's values and priorities.
Goal 2—Provide a safe and effective multimodal transportation network that
provides access to,from,and within the Area and supports mixed-use and
pedestrian-oriented development.
Goal 3—Provide public utility improvements to support desired development.
Goal 4—Create a clear identity for the Area as a fun and diverse place to live,
work,shop,eat,and play by building upon existing unique and desirable
features.
Goal 5—Provide financial and technical assistance to new and existing
businesses and housing developments that contribute to the Area's diversity
and vitality and help it transform into a mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented
district.
Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area
Project Funding Categories Expenditures Percent
(nominal$) (constant$) Allocations
Transportation ($87,803,000) ($40,000,000) 42%
Public Utilities ($21,410,600) ($13,000,000) 14.25%
Public Spaces,Facilities,and 16%
Installations ($30,369,400) ($15,000,000)
Re/Development Assistance 23%
and Partnerships ($39,211,300) ($22,000,000)
Project Administration_ _ ($6,607,100) ($3,500,000) 3.7%
Finance Fees $1,648,100 $1,000,000 1.05%
Total Expenditures (SI87,049,500) ($94,500,000) 100%
16
2/4/2019
City Center
Urban Renewal Area
j; "° • s�••••;1 • Approved by voters in 2006
1h z
228.96 total acres
t ••'� • 198 tax lots
• MI $22,000,000
• Estimated termination FYE
•• 2034
• Frozen Base: $118,734,696
rte,; • FY 18-19 Assessed Value
•
` $162,815,485
�••.. +•'"" • Incremental value
� $44,080,789
..r Twa oryc....URA
City Center Urban Renewal Area
Goal 1 —Revitalization of the Downtown should recognize the value
of natural resources as amenities and as contributing to the special
sense of place.
Goal 2—Capitalize on Commuter Rail and Fanno Creek as catalysts
for future investment and development.
Goal 3—Downtown's transportation system should be multi-modal,
connecting people, places and activities safely and conveniently.
Goal 4—Downtown's streetscape and public spaces should be
pedestrian-friendly and not visually dominated by the automobile.
irift Goal 5—Promote high quality development of retail,office and
IMF residential uses that support and are supported by public
streetscape,transportation,recreation and open space investments.
17
2/4/2019
City Center Urban Renewal Area
Street and Streetscape Projects
.,
¢ -1.41.t-.; -ccs =C
q
F
.
o' .-,.
City
Center Urban Renewal Area
Redevelopment
€ j 1:0 1; 1 ,
.i ,_
Ii
Lit
.-
18
2/4/2019
City Center Urban Renewal Area
Improvement Matching Grants j
F
City Center Urban Renewal Area
Facade Improvements
s..
Avialusii
1111
*.r � �
19
2/4/2019
City Center Urban Renewal Area
Project Priorities 2019-22
1. Universal Plaza
2. Fanno Creek Overlook
3. Rotary Plaza/public restrooms
4. Main Street Green Street Phase 2
Where can I learn more?
Tigard,Oregon
Explore
PFMOINO
VOTE MAY 2017
CITY Of TIGARD
Urban Renewal
www.tigard-or.gov/urbanrenewal
20
2/4/2019
Questions?
Comments?
il)0 RE 4
HEALTHIER
• STRONGER •
GREENER
TIGARD
21
AIS-3762 5.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes
Agenda Title: TCDA Board Consideration of Amendment #7 to the City Center
Urban Renewal Plan- Minor Amendment
Prepared For: Sean Farrelly, Community Development
Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development
Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Town Center
Resolution Development
Agency
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
The Board of the Town Center Development Agency is requested to consider a resolution
for a minor amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan finding that building a public
restroom in the Rotary Plaza benefits the City Center Urban Renewal Area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Staff recommends that the Board of the TCDA approve the resolution.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
A public restroom is proposed to be constructed as part of the Rotary Plaza project in the
City Center Urban Renewal Area. Urban renewal funds are contemplated as the funding
source. Public restrooms are listed under the Public Facilities project in the City Center
Urban Renewal Plan. However, the Plan also requires that prior to the expenditure of tax
increment revenues for any Public Facilities project, the Agency must adopt a Minor
Amendment to the Plan. The amendment must explain how the facility serves or benefits the
Area, and further state the proportion of the benefits of these facilities that will accrue to the
Area and find that the amount of the expenditure is proportional to the amount of benefit to
the Area.
The attached resolution contains the findings that the City Center Urban Renewal Area
benefits from the Rotary Plaza public restroom. It is an amenity for people visiting downtown
to shop, recreate, or attend community events. Currently the closest public restroom is
located a half mile away near the Jim Griffith Memorial Skate Park. Since the restroom will be
located in the heart of downtown, off Main Street, 100% of the benefits of the facility will
accrue to the area, so it is appropriate that 100% of the public restroom will be funded by
urban renewal.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
The Board of the TCDA could choose not to adopt the resolution to amend the plan, which
would delay the Rotary Plaza restroom project.
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council Goals and Priorities 2017-19
Goal 3: Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be.
City Center Urban Renewal Plan
Goal 4B: Develop urban spaces that will provide active and passive recreational opportunities
for pedestrians and attract residents and visitors to downtown.
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
This is the first time for the TCDA Board to consider the topic.
Attachments
TCDA Resolution
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
A RESOLUTION FINDING THAT BUILDING A PUBLIC RESTROOM IN
THE ROTARY PLAZA BENEFITS THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL
AREA AND APPROVING A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CENTER
URBAN RENEWAL PLAN
WHEREAS,Public restrooms are a project provided for under Public Facilities in the City Center
Urban Renewal Plan, and
WHEREAS,a public restroom is proposed to be constructed as part of the Rotary Plaza in the City
Center Urban Renewal Area,and
WHEREAS, the Plan requires that prior to the expenditure of tax increment revenues for any Public
Facilities projects,the Agency must adopt a Minor Amendment to the Plan,and
WHEREAS,the provision of a public restroom in the Rotary Plaza will benefit the City Center
Urban Renewal Area. The public restroom will be an amenity for visitors to downtown Tigard and
will make the Tigard Street Heritage Trail and Rotary Plaza more practical for public events -like
street fairs and farmers markets.A farmer's market currently operates six months out of the year off
of Main Street,and five annual events draw thousands of visitors to the City Center Urban Renewal
Area.At this time,the closest public restroom is located a half mile away near the Jim Griffith
Memorial Skate Park,and
WHEREAS, the public restroom will be located just off Main Street the most important commercial
street in the City Center Urban Renewal Area. Since all users of the public restroom will be visitors
to the City Center Urban Renewal District,100% of the restroom will benefit the area,and
WHEREAS,it is appropriate that 100% of the Public Restroom be funded by urban renewal, since
100% of the benefits accrue to the area.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the Tigard Town Center Development Agency that:
SECTION 1: The proposed public restroom in the Rotary Plaza is an eligible project
authorized by the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.
SECTION 2: The Agency approves the findings and explanation stated above as a minor
amendment to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.
SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED: This day of ,2019.
TCDA Resolution No. 19-
Page 1
Chair—City of Tigard
Town Center Development Agency
ATTEST:
Recorder—City of Tigard
Town Center Development Agency
TCDA Resolution No. 19-
Page 2
AIS-3765 6.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes
Agenda Title: TCDA Board Consideration of Lease Amendment and
Relocation Assistance
Prepared For: Sean Farrelly Submitted By: Sean Farrelly,
Community
Development
Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Town Center
Resolution Development
Agency
Public Hearing No
Newspaper Legal Ad Required?:
Public Hearing Publication
Date in Newspaper:
Information
ISSUE
Shall the TCDA Board approve an amendment to the lease with Ferguson Enterprises to
allow early termination and provide relocation assistance?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Staff recommends approval of the lease amendment.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Town Center Development Agency acquired the 1.18-acre property at 9110 SW
Burnham Avenue in 2014. The property had a lease in place with Ferguson Enterprises, with
renewal rights for the tenant through July 2024.
The Board of the Town Center Development Agency directed staff to investigate the
potential for a public plaza on the property. In 2017 and 2018, the Universal Plaza concept
was developed and presented to the Board, as well as the Town Center Advisory
Commission, Parks and Recreation Board, Committee for Citizen Engagement, and the ADA
Focus Group.
If Ferguson Enterprises exercised its lease renewals, the earliest the plaza could be completed
would be 2026. In an executive session on December 4, the Board directed staff to negotiate
with Ferguson for an early lease termination and relocation of the business to allow for an
expedited timeline to construct the plaza.
On December 11, 2018 Ferguson reported discovery of a potential relocation site in Tualatin.
The per square foot lease rate is significantly (47%) higher than their current rate. After
negotiations, Ferguson agreed to the TCDA's $450,000 relocation assistance offer. This
payment, from urban renewal funds, is designed to compensate Ferguson for the increased
lease rate they will be paying as a result of the early lease termination, as well as the costs to
move and reestablish the business at a new location. The Town Center Development
Agency's relocation policy mirrors the Federal Uniform Relocation Act and has provisions for
payment for moving and reestablishment expenses,which informed our negotiations and the
relocation assistance offer.
The agreement is set forth in the attached Third Lease Amendment and Release. The
document allows Ferguson to terminate the lease early by giving 30-day notice, with the
relocation payment due 5 days after vacating the premises. TCDA Executive Director Marty
Wine has signed the Amendment to facilitate the Ferguson's internal approval process;
however, it is not effective until the Board approves it. Ferguson expects to take at least 6
months to complete tenant improvements at the Tualatin location, along with other actions
necessary to move.
Solicitation for a design team to help further plan the plaza will occur in the next few weeks.
Construction of the plaza is expected to begin in 2021.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
The Board could choose not to approve the amendment. This would delay Ferguson's
relocation and the Universal Plaza project.
COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council Goals and Priorities 2017-19
Goal 3: Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be.
Focus on identifying and acquiring property, and developing the Downtown Plaza.
•Design and develop Tigard Street Heritage Trailhead plaza as a gathering place and event
space.
•Complete design and engineering for Main Street at Fanno Creek public space.
•Evaluate locations for other plaza/public space, including as part of Civic Center
visioning.
City Center Urban Renewal Plan
Goal 4B: Develop urban spaces that will provide active and passive recreational opportunities
for pedestrians and attract residents and visitors to downtown.
DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
The issue was discussed in Executive Sessions on December 4, 2018 and January 15, 2019.
Fiscal Impact
Cost: S450,000
Budgeted (yes or no): no
Where Budgeted (department/program):TCDA
Additional Fiscal Notes:
The relocation payment from urban renewal funds was planned to be included in the
FY19-20 Town Center Development Agency budget. For this budget, the Agency will make
a large borrowing to be repaid with TIF income. This borrowing will fund several larger
projects, including the Universal Plaza. The relocation assistance payment will likely be paid
in FY 19-20, however if Ferguson vacates the site earlier than expected, it may need to be
paid in FY 18-19.
Attachments
TCDA Resolution
Exhibit A
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE THIRD AMENDMENT AND RELEASE
FOR THE LEASE WITH FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC., WITH
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
WHEREAS,the Town Center Development Agency owns the property at 9110 SW Burnham
Avenue and leases the property to Ferguson Enterprises,Inc;and
WHEREAS,Ferguson Enterprises,Inc. has the right to lease extensions that run through July 2024;
and
WHEREAS,the Town Center Development Agency desires to possess the property earlier in order
to facilitate the construction of a public plaza on this site;and
WHEREAS,the Town Center Development Agency and Ferguson Enterprises,Inc. have
negotiated a Third Amendment and Release to the lease that provides for an early lease termination
and$450,000 in relocation assistance to compensate for the increased lease rate at their new location
and for moving and reestablishment expenses;and
WHEREAS,the City Urban Renewal Plan authorizes the payment of relocation benefits when
businesses and residents must be relocated due to public acquisition.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the Tigard Town Center Development Agency that:
SECTION 1: The Agency approves the Third Amendment and Release to the lease with
Ferguson Enterprises,Inc.,including the payment of$450,0000 in relocation
assistance,in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A,and authorizes
the Agency's Executive Director to effectuate this decision.
SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED: This day of , 2019.
Chair—City of Tigard
Town Center Development Agency
ATTEST:
TCDA Resolution No. 19-
Page 1
Recorder—City of Tigard
Town Center Development Agency
TCDA Resolution No. 19-
Page 2
Exhibit A
THIRD LEASE AMENDMENT
AND RELEASE
THIS THIRD LEASE AMENDMENT AND RELEASE (this "Agreement") dated as of
the 1'day of February,2019,by and between the TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY,
an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency of the City of Tigard (fka City Center Development
Agency) and ultimate successor-in-interest to Southwest Portland Partnership ("Landlord"), and
FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC., a Virginia corporation and successor-in-interest to Familian
Northwest,Inc. ("Tenant"),provides:
WHEREAS,Landlord and Tenant are parties to an Agreement of Lease dated April 27, 1988,
as supplemented and amended by those certain Lease Modification Agreements dated May 1, 1993
and October 31, 1997, that certain Letter Agreement dated October 31, 2002 (revised), that certain
First Lease Amendment dated March 1, 2008, and that certain Second Lease Amendment dated
February 1,2013(as supplemented and amended,the"Lease"),covering the premises located at 9110
Southwest Burnham Street, City of Tigard, Oregon (the "Premises"), as more fully described in the
Lease;and
WHEREAS,the current Lease term expires July 31, 2021 ("Fifth Renewal Period"), subject
to one (1)additional renewal period of three(3)years("Sixth Renewal Period");and
WHEREAS,Landlord desires to redevelop the Premises and has requested that Tenant waive
its option to extend the term of the Lease for the Sixth Renewal Period and vacate the Premises or on
before the expiration of the Fifth Renewal Period in exchange for relocation payment assistance(the
("Relocation Project");and
WHEREAS,Landlord and Tenant have agreed to amend the Lease to(i)document the terms
and conditions of the Relocation Project,and(ii)otherwise modify the Lease as provided herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above recitals, and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the
undersigned, Landlord and Tenant hereby agree as follows:
(1) For the consideration set forth in Paragraph 2 below and subject to (a)Tenant's receipt of .
finance committee approval for its new premises and(b)Landlord's receipt of formal approval by
its Board, Tenant hereby waives its right to exercise the Sixth Renewal Period.Upon receipt of the
Relocation Assistance Payment(as hereinafter defined),the Sixth Renewal Period shall be deemed
null and void and no longer in force and effect and the Lease shall terminate no later than expiration
of the Fifth Renewal Period.
(2) Within five (5) business days after Tenant's vacation of the Premises at the expiration or
earlier termination of the Lease term, Landlord hereby covenants and agrees to pay to Tenant a
relocation assistance payment in the amount of FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND AND
00/100 DOLLARS ($450,000.00) (the "Relocation Assistance Payment"). Landlord and Tenant
acknowledge that the Relocation Assistance Payment is a material inducement to Tenant entering
into this Agreement and agreeing to waive its right to the Sixth Renewal Period. If Landlord fails
to pay the Relocation Assistance Payment within the time period set forth herein,Tenant shall have
all rights as are available to Tenant at law or in equity to redress such failure.
1
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Lease to the contrary,Tenant shall have the right
to terminate the Lease effective any time upon at least thirty(30)days prior written notice to Landlord.
(4) To the best of the Landlord's and Tenant's knowledge,no event has occurred and no condition
exists which with the giving of notice or the passage of time(or both)would constitute a default by
Landlord or Tenant under the Lease, and all obligations of Landlord and Tenant have been fully
performed in all material aspects.
(5) The parties acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes a settlement and compromise of
any and all claims whatsoever, known or unknown, current or arising in the future in any way
relating to termination of the Lease and Tenant vacating the Premises under this Agreement,
including but not limited to any claims under the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act or ORS
Chapter 35. EACH PARTY RELEASES,WAIVES AND COVENANTS NOT TO SUE THE
OTHER FOR ANY SUCH CLAIMS. This paragraph (5) shall be effective immediately on
payment in full by Landlord of the Relocation Assistance Payment upon Tenant vacating the
Premises. Nothing in this paragraph (5), however is intended or shall be construed as waiving
either party's rights to enforce the terms of the Lease for any breach arising during the term of the
Lease, including but not limited to failure to pay any rent due to the date of termination. This
paragraph(5) shall survive termination of the Lease.
(6) Except as amended herein,all other terms and conditions of the Lease are and shall remain in
full force and effect, unaffected hereby, including without limitation, Tenant's responsibility for rent,
taxes, insurance,utilities and building and property maintenance in accordance with the terms of the
Lease. Rent,taxes and utilities shall be prorated as of the date of termination. This Agreement shall
override and supersede all sections of the Lease in conflict herewith and shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their successors and assigns. All capitalized terms used
herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed in the Lease.
(7) This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which will be
deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one(1)and the same instrument.Further,
this Agreement may be executed through the use of facsimile or scanned signature pages, which
shall be deemed originals for all intents and purposes.
(8) This Agreement is binding on the heirs, successors and assigns of the Parties.Upon request
of Landlord, Tenant shall execute a memorandum of this Agreement for recording in the real
property records of Washington County.
(9) Landlord and Tenant each represents and warrants to the other that it has full right and
authority to enter into this Agreement, and that all persons signing on behalf of such party were
authorized to do so by appropriate actions.Each party agrees to furnish to the other,promptly upon
demand, a corporate resolution, proof of due authorization, or other appropriate documentation
evidencing the due authorization of such party to enter into this Agreement.
[The remainder of this page left blank intentionally; signature page follows]
2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Landlord and Tenant have caused the execution hereof by a duly
authorized party.
WITNESS: LANDLORD:
TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TIGARD
By:
Name: Date
Title:
WITNESS: TENANT:
FERGUSON ENTERPRISES,INC.
By:
Kirk D.Wall,Senior Director of Facilities Date
3
AIS-3708 7.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes
Agenda Title: Consider a Resolution Concurring with Washington County Findings
Regarding Vacation of Public Right of Way in River Terrace
Submitted By: Lori Faha, Public Works
Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council
Resolution Business
Meeting -
Main
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
Shall the City of Tigard approve a resolution concurring with the Washington County Board
of Commissioners' findings as to the vacation of portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW
Scholls Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers Road (Vacation No. 535)?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Approve the resolution concurring with the findings.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
Council is being asked to consider a resolution concurring with a decision made by the
Washington County Board of Commissioners. The Commissioners received a petition to
vacate portions of right of way along SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls Ferry Road, and
SW Roy Rogers Road. The area to be vacated is along frontage of Polygon River Terrace
subdivisions. The vacation must be approved in order for building permits to be issued.
Washington County staff reviewed the request and determined the rights of way are no longer
necessary for public use. On November 20, 2018, the Washington County Board of
Commissioners approved Resolution and Order No. 18-111 granting the request for the
vacation. The area to be vacated is under the jurisdiction of Washington County, but lies
entirely within the city limits of Tigard. It is therefore necessary for the City of Tigard to
concur with the findings of the county governing body per ORS 368.361(3).
Attachments include the proposed City of Tigard Resolution in addition to the Washington
County Resolution and Order, and vacation report with legal description and maps.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
Council could choose to deny the resolution which would result in conflicts with the
proposed development of the surrounding area.
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS
Promotes implementation of the River Terrace Community Plan.
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
This is the first time the council will address this matter.
Attachments
Resolution of vacation
County R&O
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY FINDINGS REGARDING
VACATION OF PORTIONS OF SW SCHOLLS HIGHWAY 210, SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD,AND
SW ROY ROGERS ROAD (VACATION NO. 535)
WHEREAS, Washington County Board of Commissioners Resolution and Order No. 18-111 (the Order)
ordered the vacation of portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers
Road,lying in the Northeast and Southeast One-quarters of Section 6,T2S,R1W,W.M.,Washington County,
Oregon,as described and shown in the attached Vacation Report;and
WHEREAS,after receiving noticeof the proposed vacation and prior to the County adoption of the Order,the
City of Tigard reviewed the proposed vacation and concurs with the findings of the County;and
WHEREAS,ORS 368.361 (3)provides that a county body may vacate property that is under the jurisdiction of
the county,and that is entirely within the limits of a city,if the city concurs with the findings of the county.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: Based upon the above findings,which are incorporated herein by reference, the City Council
concurs with the findings of Washington County as specified in Washington County Board of
Commissioners Resolution and Order No. 18-111.
SECTION 2: A copy of this Resolution shall be provided to the Washington County Surveyor's Office.
SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED: This day of 2019.
Mayor-City of Tigard
A'1"1'EST:
City Recorder-City of Tigard
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
Page 1
Washington County,Oregon 2018-0 9676
11/26/2018 12:19:50 PM V 7
0•VAC Cnt=1 Stn=31 RECORDS1
$70,00$5.00$11.00$60.00-Total=8145.00
After Recording Return To: I 1111111111111111111 IIIUhIIIIIIIllhiI
Washington County LUT 02440282201800796760140146
,Richard Mobernicht,Director of Assessment end ,,.•Aatr
Taxation and Ex Officio CountyClerk for Washington '-i."::.
n4
County,Oregon.do hereby certify that the within Y�(,?:,..4;..i,
Instrument of writingwas received e d recorded In the•,;
�
Survey book of records ofsidoou ✓;+ �.
MS-17 Richard Mobernicht,Director of A meet and -rz,.;,ad<
Taxation,Ex-Officio County Clerk
AGENDA
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Agenda Category: Public Hearing—Land Use &Transportation (CPO 4B & 6)
Agenda Title: HOLD PUBLIC HEARING TO VACATE PORTIONS OF SW
SCHOLLS HIGHWAY 210, SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD,AND
SW ROY ROGERS ROAD (VACATION NO. 535)
Presented by: Andrew Singelakis,Director of Land Use & Transportation
SUMMARY:
A petition was received by the Board to vacate portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls
Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers Road, lying in the Northeast and Southeast One-quarters of
Section 6, T2S, R1 W, W.M., Washington County, Oregon, as described and shown in the
attached Vacation Report.
These portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers Road
proposed to be vacated, are unused right-of-way resulting from previous realignments of SW
Scholls Ferry Road. SW Scholls Ferry Road has been re-aligned several times since the original
alignments of County Roads 348 and 746 were established in 1919 and 1922, and the alignment
and rights-of-way used for public purposes today have been established as County Road 3110.
Vacating the proposed rights-of-way will allow for the development of a new subdivision
included in the River Terrace Community Plan.
(continued)
Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order
2. Vacation Report with legal description and map(Exhibit A)
DEPARTMENT'S REQUESTED ACTION:
Vacate the right-of-way described in the attached Vacation Report, and request that the City
Council of the City of Tigard resolve or order concurrence with this vacation pursuant to ORS
368.361(3).
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S RECOMMENDATION:
I concur with the requested action.
1,••••••• / I Agenda Item No. 3.a.
Date: 11/20/18
PUBLIC HEARING TO VACATE PORTIONS OF SW SCROLLS HIGHWAY 210,SW
SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD,AND SW ROY ROGERS ROAD (VACATION NO. 535)
BCC 11/20/18
The vacation petition was signed by more than 60%, but less than 100%, of the abutting property
owners. As a result, ORS 368.346 requires the County to hold a public hearing on this matter. The
Board, by Minute Order 18-288 set today,November 20, 2018, as the date of the public hearing.
Proper notification has been made pursuant to ORS 368.346 and Minute Order 18-288.
A Resolution and Order has been prepared granting the requested vacation and,when executed, it
will complete Washington County's portion of the vacation proceedings. These portions of right-
of-way are in the city limits of Tigard. Pursuant to ORS 368.361(3),the City,by resolution or
order, must concur in the findings of the county governing body to complete the vacation
proceedings.
1 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
2 FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
3 In the Matter of the Vacation of portions of ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER
SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls ) No. 10 -111
4 Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers Road, in ) VACATION NO. 535
the northeast and southeast One-quarters of )
5 Section 6, T2S, R1W, W.M., Washington
County, Oregon
6
7 The above entitled matter having come regularly before the Board at its meeting November
8 20, 2018;and
9
10 It appearing to the Board that on October 2,2018,the Board initiated and set the date for a
11 public hearing to vacate portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls Ferry Road, and SW
12 Roy Rogers Road,public rights-of-way situated in the northeast and southeast one-quarters of
13 Section 6, T2S, R1W,W.M., Washington County Oregon; and
14
15 It appearing to the Board that notification was provided by posting,publication, and
16 service,pursuant to ORS 368.346(3); and
17
18 It appearing to the Board that on November 20, 2018, a public hearing was held pursuant to
19 ORS 368.346 and Minute Order 18-288, and at said hearing,the Board did describe the public
20 right-of-way proposed to be vacated,the names of the parties to be particularly affected thereby,
21 and set forth the particular circumstances of the case; and
22
Page 1 -RESOLUTION AND ORDER ( )
WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL
161 NW ADAMS AVENUE,SUrrE 305,MS#24
HILLSBORO,OR 97124
PHONE(503)846-8747-FAX(503)846-8636
1 It appearing to the Board that the public right-of-way proposed to be vacated is under the
2 jurisdiction of Washington County and entirely within the corporate limits of the City of Tigard,
3 Oregon; and
4
5 It appearing to the Board that the public right-of-way proposed to be vacated is described
6 and shown in the attached vacation report; and
7
8 It appearing to the Board that the right-of-way proposed to be vacated is no longer needed
9 for the use of the public; and
10
11 It appearing to the Board that the County Road Official did examine the area proposed to
12 be vacated and hereby submits to the Board the Vacation Report attached hereto,and by this
13 reference made a part hereof, in accordance with ORS 368.346; it is therefore
14
15 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the public right-of-way, proposed to be vacated and
16 more particularly described in the attached Vacation Report,is hereby vacated as it is in the public
17 interest. This vacation shall become final upon the formal concurrence of the City of Tigard by
18 either resolution or order pursuant to ORS 368.361(3); and it is further
19
20 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Surveyor of Washington County, Oregon,
21 be and hereby is authorized and directed to mark the vacated portion of public road on the plats
22 1 and records of Washington County,Oregon; and it is further
Page 2 -RESOLUTION AND ORDER ( )
WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL
161 NW ADAMS AVENUE,SUITE 305,MS#24
HILLSBORO,OR 97124
PHONE(503)846-8747-FAx(503)846-8636
1 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Surveyor of Washington County,Oregon,
2 be and hereby is authorized and directed to have this order of vacation recorded in the records of
3 Washington County, Oregon, and cause copies of this order to be filed with the Director of
4 Assessment and Taxation and the County Surveyor's Office in accordance with ORS 368.356(3).
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 DATED this 20th day of November,2018.
12
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
13 FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
,r•
14 AYE NAY ABSENT � '�--
OUYCK __ CHAIR
15 SCHOUTEN V
----- ___ ..._. 842444-149
16 MIa1LINOWSKI ✓ RECORDING SE(R :9RY
ROGERS
17 TERRY �w
18
19 Approved as to form
20 a ►. � ____
Cort ey D. Duke-Driessen
21 Assistant County Counsel
Date: l t/51 tfl3
22
Page 3 -RESOLUTION AND ORDER ( )
WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL
161 NW ADAMS AVENUE,SUITE 305,MS#24
HIH SBORO,OR 97124
PHONE(503)846-8747-FAx(503)846-8636
DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
REPORT ON VACATION NO. 535
November 20,2018
VACATION OF PORTIONS OF SW SCHOLLS HIGHWAY 210, SW SCHOLLS FERRY
ROAD, AND SW ROY ROGERS ROAD
A request for vacation proceedings has been received by the staff for the Board of
County Commissioners to vacate portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls
Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers Road, public rights-of-way situated in the Northeast
and Southeast One-quarters of Section 6, T2S, R1W, W.M., Washington County,
Oregon. Said portions of said roads being more particularly described and shown on the
attached "Exhibit A".
The owners of the property abutting the unimproved roadway to be vacated are:
2S106B, TL 600 2S106DB, TL 14600
Beaverton School District#48J Aurelio G. Martinez-Kalifa
16550 SW Merlo Road 17369 SW Forest Hollow Street
Beaverton, OR 97003 Beaverton, OR 97007
2S106AC, TL 350, 351, and 352 2S106DB, TL 14700
2S106DB, TL 24300 Andrew Joshua and Cortney Lynne Short
Polygon WLH, LLC 17343 SW Forest Hollow Street
703 Broadway Street#510 Beaverton, OR 97007
Vancouver, WA 98660
2S106DB, TL 14800
2S106DB, TL 14200 Tony Thomasian and Rachael Davenport
Albert and Lyn Cercenia 17327 SW Forest Hollow Street
17435 SW Forest Hollow Street Beaverton, OR 97007
Beaverton, OR 97007
2S106DB, TL 24100
2S106DB, TL 14400 River Terrace Northwest HOA
Celerina Aileen D. Paglinawan 109 E. 13TH Street, Suite 200
17405 SW Forest Hollow Street Vancouver, WA 98660
Beaverton, OR 97007
2S106DB, TL 14900
2S106DB, TL 14500 Kaleigh Nicole Kelchner and
Tony Huynh and Diana Mai-Huynh Jonathan Raymond Kelchner
17385 SW Forest Hollow Street 17315 SW Forest Hollow Street
Beaverton, OR 97007 Beaverton, OR 97007
2S106DB,TL 15000 2S106DB, TL 15100
Casey D. Trestrail Derek J. and Esther Bell
17303 SW Forest Hollow Street 17295 SW Forest Hollow Street
Beaverton, OR 97007 Beaverton, OR 97007
2S106DB, TL 14300 2S106AC, TL 200
Stephanie Lynn Smith and Arbor Cooper Mtn, LLC
Major Joshua William Smith 735 SW 158th Avenue, Suite 130
17419 SW Forest Hollow Street Beaverton, OR 97006
Beaverton, OR 97007
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF ROAD VACATION REQUEST
1) Conformance with the County's Comprehensive Plan
The portions of roads described herein and proposed to be vacated are
not a part of the current transportation plan in the area. These portions
are a part of the River Terrace Community Plan which shows these areas
as being a part of a future subdivision plat. These portions of roads are
not in use and will not be needed for future use. Currently, there is a road
improvement project at the intersection of SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW
Roy Rogers Road. The right-of-way being retained is adequate for the
project as well as for additional turn lanes that may be warranted in the
future.
2) Use of the Right-of-Way
These portions of roads, proposed to be vacated, are unimproved and no
longer in use. Once vacated, they will be incorporated into the lots of the
adjoining land owners and will be developed through a proposed
subdivision plat as part of the River Terrace Community Plan.
3) Impact of Utilities and Emergency Services
Utility providers have been notified and easements have been provided, including
one to Tualatin Valley Water District and the City of Hillsboro Water Department
for the future Willamette Water Supply Program water pipeline. There are no
adverse impacts to public utility providers or emergency services.
4) Limits of Vacation and Evaluation of"Public Road" Status
These portions of SW Scholls Highway 210, SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy
Rogers Road, proposed to be vacated, are not needed for public use as a result
of the realignments of SW Scholls Ferry Road and the development of the
adjacent properties. The rights-of-way are within the city limits of Tigard and,
pursuant to ORS 368.361(3), the city must concur with this vacation proceeding
for it to become finalized.
The limits of the rights-of-way proposed to be vacated are logical and justifiable,
and the vacation of these rights-of-way will not have any adverse impacts on the
public or the abutting properties.
Based on the above statements, it is recommended that the Board of Commissioners
grant the vacation of the road proposed herein, as it is in the public interest.
Jo u
s, P. ,
Interi Washington County Engineer
111111(IIIiI ,
EXHIBIT A
October 3, 2018
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Job No. 395-061
Vacation of Right-of-Way
Vacation of Right-of-Way within the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 2 South, Range
1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon,
described as follows:
PARCEL 1 - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
BEGINNING at a 3/4 inch iron pipe with yellow plastic cap stamped "COUNTY SURVEYOR" at
Scholls Ferry Road station 121+37.33, 49.00 feet right, as depicted in Survey No. 32,411,
Washington County Survey Records, said point being an angle point on the northerly property
line of Lot 142, plat of "River Terrace Northwest";
thence parallel with and 49.00 feet southerly of the centerline of SW Scholls Ferry Road (County
Road 3110), along a 1481.39 foot radius curve, concave northerly, with a radius point bearing
North 08'42'45" West, arc length of 18.57 feet, central angle of 00°43'05", chord distance of
18.56 feet, and chord bearing of North 80°55'43" East;
thence parallel with and 3.00 feet northerly from said southerly Right-of-Way line of SW Scholls
Highway 210 (County Road 348), South 89'46'19" East, a distance of 144.63 feet;
thence parallel with and 80.00 feet southerly of said centerline of SW Scholls Ferry Road
(County Road 3110), along a 1512.39 foot radius non-tangential curve, concave northerly, with
a radius point bearing North 14°50'24"West, arc length of 8.35 feet, central angle of 00°18'58",
chord distance of 8.35 feet, and chord bearing of North 75°00'0T' East to a point of tangency;
thence continuing along said parallel line, North 74°50'38" East, a distance of 206.60 feet to
the intersection of the southerly Right-of-Way tine of said SW Scholls Ferry Road (County Road
3110) and the northerly Right-of-Way line of said SW Scholls Highway 210 (County Road 348);
thence along said northerly Right-of-Way line, South 89'4619" East, a distance of 242.23 feet
to the intersection of said northerly Right-of-Way line and the westerly Right-of-Way line of SW
Roy Rogers Road (County Road 3150);
thence along said westerly Right-of-Way line, along a 294.97 foot radius non-tangential curve,
concave westerly, with a radius point bearing South 88°2312" West, arc length of 23.58 feet,
central angle of 04°34'52", chord distance of 23.58 feet, and chord bearing of North 03°54'13"
West to an angle point;
Page 1 of 5
12564 SW Main Street,Tigard,OR 97223 • [T]503-941-9484[F]503-941-9485
thence continuing along said westerly Right-of-Way line, North 47°5719" West, a distance of
46.57 feet;
thence leaving said westerly Right-of-Way line, along a 55.00 foot radius non-tangential curve,
concave southwesterly, with a radius point bearing South 00°18'14" West, arc length of 75.86
feet, central angle of 79°01'20", chord distance of 69.99 feet, and chord bearing of South
50°11'06" East;
thence South 10°4076" East, a distance of 56.36 feet;
thence along a 250.00 foot radius tangential curve to the right, arc length of 14.82 feet, central
angle of 03°23'47", chord distance of 14.82 feet, and chord bearing of South 08"58'33" East to
a point on the southerly Right-of-Way line of said SW Scholls Highway 210 (County Road 348);
thence along said southerly Right-of-Way line, North 89°46'19" West, a distance of 642.98 feet
to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 24,004 square feet, more or less.
PARCEL 2 - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
BEGINNING at a brass disk stamped "WASH C.S."at Scholls Ferry Road station 131+80.86, 55.00
feet right, as depicted in Survey No. 32,41, Washington County Survey Records, being at the
intersection of the southerly Right-of-Way line of SW Scholls Ferry Road (County Road 3110)
and the northerly Right-of-Way line of County Road No. 746;
thence along said northerly Right-of-Way line, South 57'2425"West, a distance of 276.44 feet;
thence leaving said northerly Right-of-Way line, South 00°01'17" West, a distance of 53.49 feet
to a point on the extension of the northerly Right-of-Way line of SW Friendly Lane (County Road
No. 3282 T/J);
thence along said extension line, South 89°46'19" East, a distance of 9.12 feet to the most
westerly corner of Parcel 3, Partition Plat No. 2016-038, Washington County Plat Records;
thence along the southerly Right-of-Way tine of County Road No. 746, North 57°24'25" East, a
distance of 350.48 feet to an angle point;
thence continuing along said southerly Right-of-Way line, North 77°55'20" East, a distance of
2.75 feet to a point of non-tangential curvature;
thence continuing along said southerly Right-of-Way line, along a 691.20 foot radius non-
tangential curve, concave southeasterly, with a radius point bearing South 29°33'4T East, arc
length of 33.43 feet,central angle of 02°46'15", chord distance of 33.42 feet, and chord bearing
of North 61°4971"East to the easterly line of the West half of the Northeast quarter of Section
6;
Page 2 of 5
Pacific Community Design,Inc.
12564 SW Main Street,Tigard,OR 97223 + (TI 503-941-9484[F]503-941-9485
thence along said easterly line, North 00°2012"East, a distance of 20.69 feet;
thence parallel with and 55.00 feet southerly of the centerline of SW Scholts Ferry Road (County
Road No. 3110), along a 1377.39 foot radius non-tangential curve, concave southerly, with a
radius point bearing South 10°29' 59" East, arc length of 106.39 feet, central angle of 04°25'
32", chord distance of 106.36 feet, and chord bearing of South 77°1T 15"West to the POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Containing 17,874 square feet, more or less.
Basis of bearings being plat of "River Terrace Northwest", Washington County Plat Records.
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
00--
OREGON
L.... JULY 9, 2002
TRAVIS C.JANSEN
57751
RENEWS: 6/30/2019
Page 3 of 5
Pacific Community Design,Inc.
12564 SW Main Street,Tigard,OR 97223 ♦ [T]503-941-9484[F] 503-941-9485
PARTITION PLAT .. 1
NO. 2018-024
—R=1512.39' PARCEL 3
L=8.35' PARTITION PO 3110)
RL' 8. 579 NCH 8.,35 20167 038 p4�5 BERRY Rp (GR R=55.00'
6. 43'05 0 0 E SC>a L=75.86'
CH=18.56' S SW A=79.01'20"
N80'55'43"E o. o CH=69.99'
'o S50'11'06"E
N47-57'19"W
Ne.fk.50 3B, o a 46 .57' ...
1
PARCEL 1 - t Ai
60.
S89'46'19"E 242.23' ; .00' o
�� •50'36" / /A�N89-46'19"W—o 7qrAp'
S89"46'19"E 144.63' Aar' it r SW
SCHOLLS HIGHWAY 210 (CR 348) 14
POB N89'46'19"W 642.98'
co R=294.97'
03 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 v 149 150 151 o L=23.58' R=250.00'-_
,� A=4'34'52" L=14.82'
i g CH=23.58' A=3'23'47"
NO3'54'13"W CH=14.82'
4 lV S08'S8'33"E o
_ in
aPi
1 RIVER TERRACE - DOCUMENT NO. 3
2016-080677
NORTHWEST 51.0O' <o ..�
7
1 v'
W
O
r
0
\ \ i cc
3
F y 1
b
gi
(i)0
51
o-
1
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL 1 - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
DRAWN BY: GPS DATE: 10/03/18
s REVIEWED BY: ICJ DATE: 10/03/18 / 12564 SW Main St
PROJECT NffiO.: _ 395-061 f'<I I I Tigard, OR 97223
SCALE: 1"=100' ( I I I I I I I 1 iI 11 i I [T] 503-941-9484
PAGE 4 OF 5
I ) i��I [F] 503-941-9485
PARTITION PLAT NO.
2016-038
PARCEL 2
cr ------------------
m
o o. I_� R=691.20'
R=1377.39' L=33.43'
(C 3110' L=106.39' X2'46'15"
CNQ1'�S Vf-C* ROAO cr CH=106 36' N61'49'21?E 14 on
SW S J��-'`' t` S77'17'15"W i°
o. POB oo N
z
s
..7
ate.
r, N77'55'20"E �"'�
Op. �p so 2.75' F
?SIN '1.16. O.
I 9 S EASTERLY LINE,
tk€ WEST HALF,
N 1 ,61 5c�O NORTHEAST QUARTER,
<G� �� PARCEL 2 SECTION 6
2
S 01.,La PARTITION PLAT NO.
2016-038
3 PARCEL 3
p
y
4 f]
0
g o
0 S89'46'19'E SW FRIENDLY LANE (CR 3282 T/J) o
9.12' o
Z __________
Gra
1
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL 2 - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
I DRAWN BY: GPS DATE: 10103/18
ts
§ REVIEWED BY: TCJ DATE: 10/03/18 ♦'"°� ��, 12564 SW Main St
PROJECT NO.: 395-061 1 -,i 'l I I Tigard, OR 97223
SCALE: 1"=60' l- . ,, I i I I I I I I I I I :. [T] 503-941-9484
`. ;I >I I [F] 503-941-9485
Z PAGE 5 OF 5
AIS-3712 8.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 30 Minutes
Agenda Title: Consider an Increase to the Parks and Recreation Fee
Prepared For: Brian Rager Submitted By: Brian
Rager,
Public
Works
Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Meeting Type: Council
Staff Business
Meeting -
Main
Public Hearing No
Newspaper Legal Ad Required?:
Public Hearing Publication
Date in Newspaper:
Information
ISSUE
The council will hear an update from staff regarding the activities of the Parks and Recreation
program and the status of the Parks and Recreation Fee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Staff is requesting direction from the council regarding the Parks and Recreation Fee ahead of
the Fiscal Year 2020 budget process.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
On November 20, the council conducted their annual joint meeting with the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). Staff also provided a report to the council regarding the
Parks and Recreation Fee (PARF). At that time, staff was gearing up for a budget process that
would fully eliminate the recreation program in Fiscal Year 2020. Members of the PRAB
expressed concern with the potential loss of that program and asked the council to consider
an increase in the PARF that would be dedicated to retaining the recreation program. After
some discussion, the council directed staff to schedule a follow meeting in early 2019, after
the new council was seated, to continue that discussion.
Staff has prepared a short follow up report that provides an update regarding the current
status of the General Fund as a result of expenditure reductions in Fiscal Year 2019. Those
reductions coupled with other adjustments made by the Finance Department have resulted in
a much better forecast for that fund and fewer reductions are needed for Fiscal Year 2020
than what was anticipated. The proposed budget will show retention of the recreation
program, and hold it to 1.0 FTE (Recreation Coordinator). Further, no reductions or
enhancements of park maintenance operations are shown. However, staff is preparing "add
packages" for both programs to document the service needs in each and required resources.
Staff will go over those service needs with the council and will seek direction as to whether or
not the council would like to increase the PARF to address them.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
Not applicable.
COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS
Council Goal #2: Expand Recreation Opportunities for the People of Tigard.
DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
Staff discussed the needs of the park maintenance and recreation programs with Council on
November 20, 2018.
Attachments
Parks&Recreation Fee Memo
III ` City of Tigard
TIGARD Memorandum
To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Brian Rager, Public Works Director
Re: Park and Recreation Fee
Date: January 22, 2019
BACKGROUND
Parks &Recreation in Tigard is currently underfunded.The city spends about 32 percent less per
acre and devotes 61 percent less staff per acre than the national average to maintain its parkland.
This results in impacts like overgrown vegetation,less frequent litter and trash collection,delays in
needed maintenance and an inability at times to meet customer expectations.
Last year, additional funding reductions were proposed that were set to begin on July 1, 2019:
• 1.$300,000 Eliminate the Recreation Program
• 1.$150,000 Reduce water for irrigation and other reductions
During a joint meeting on November 20,2018,Tigard City Council heard from the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) about their concerns surrounding the proposed reductions.
Specifically, council heard many statements by PRAB members asking council to retain the
Recreation Program. PRAB members felt recreation was an important program for Tigard and was
key to meeting the city's strategic vision.
UPDATE
After additional work by the Finance Department,including analysis of the impact from the
substantial expenditure reductions in the current fiscal year,the total amount of citywide reductions
for FY 2020 has been reduced.The good news is that the additional reductions in Parks&
Recreation are no longer being proposed. The city manager is prepared to bring forward a proposed
budget that retains the Recreation Program at its current funding level (1.0 FTE),and keeps the
parks maintenance budget at its current funding level.
DISCUSSION
While the base budget for the Recreation Program is good news from a standpoint of retaining this
popular program,it is still important to discuss that a status quo budget for parks maintenance
and/or the Recreation Program is not sustainable over time.
1
First,as the Public Works Director,I am concerned about the ever-declining condition of the park
system due to a lack of parks maintenance staff.At present,the Parks Maintenance Division is
behind by 2.0 FTE in being able to meet the optimal level of service in the system. Additionally,
there are new parks being developed that will come on line in FY 2020 and subsequent years that
will make this problem even worse.
Figure 1
PARK MAINTENANCE
SERVICE LEVEL
�
pc e
DECLINING LEVEL OF SERVICE
Fundin
(ell"ofseryf e
While the size of our parks
land grow 52% during 2000-
2015. our budget could only Time
afford a 12 percent staffing
increase to address parks
maintenance.
Second,the Recreation Program functions at a very minimal level with 1.0 FTE (Recreation
Coordinator).A program funded at this level would result in a few public events, such as the annual
Egg Hunt,some Movies in the Park and possibly one concert. Recreation classes would be reduced,
and the after-school program has been discontinued.Additionally, the program will be vulnerable
with only the one staff person,as the Public Works Department will have little to no backup if that
staff person is sick,on vacation or leaves city employment. The program functions much better with
at least two full time staff.
Figure 2 below provides a good overall picture that relates to the recommendations of the Recreation
Program Study,dated March 2015. That plan served as the launching point for the Recreation
Program and set the city on a path of implementation over a five-year period. Figure 2 shows the
primary program elements and where the city stands at present. If the city were still on track with
the plan,it would currently be in year four of the five-year plan and,in theory,roughly 80 percent
implemented on the various program elements.As can be seen in Figure 2,especially given the
budget reductions thus far,the program is well short of implementation. Further, the program was
starting to see the growth of revenue from two primary resources: payments from recreation
providers for classes held;and sponsorships from companies related to public events. However,
with the program reduction,the ability to achieve revenue is diminished.
2
Figure 2
RECREATION
SERVICELEVEL Program Guide • • •
Grants&Scholarships •
DELAY IN MEETING STUDY
Programs&Classes • •
RECOMMENDATIONS
Outdoor Events • •
The Recreation Study Indoor Events •
recommended immediately
Facility Reservations •
enhancing recreation
information, programs and Drop in Activities •
events for all residents. hut
especially for underserved • Current progress on meeting 5-year
Study recommendations
groups.
OPTIONS
Council is being asked to consider an increase in service in the Parks Maintenance and Recreation
Programs.Additional funding will be required.
Current Funding
The Parks Maintenance and Recreation Programs are budgeted in the Park Utility Fund. Currently,
this fund receives revenue from the PARF and a "transfer in" from the General Fund (GF).The
PARF is currently set at$4.17 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) and covers roughly 30 percent of
program costs. Therefore, the transfer in from the GF covers the remaining 70 percent of program
budgets (Figure 3).
3
Figure 3
PARKS & RECREATION FUNDING
70% GENERAL FUND. 30% PARKS AND RECREATION FEE
Current Residential Fee:$4.17 per month
70% A
70%
Park Maintenance Recreation
Future Funding
Staff recommends against an additional General Fund contribution, as we believe it is important to
continue the great work started in FY 2019 to stabilize that fund as much as possible. Staff does
recommend an increase in the PARF if council wishes to increase service levels.
Figure 4
FUNDING INCREASED SERVICE
PARKS AND RECREATION FEE
Projected need in Parks&Recreation
Additional resources required
IPII ill to meet projected need
Status quo funding
iii rs rill inn
Current Residential Fee: per month.
426%annual Index Increase
General Fund Contribution:
Remains Constant
'19 '20 21 22 '23 '24
Finance staff have determined that for every$1.00/EDU increase in the PARF,the resulting annual
revenue is roughly$275,000. Said another way, for every$100,000 in revenue needed, the PARF
would need to be increased by roughly$0.36/EDU. Further, as is shown in Figure 4,it is assumed
4
that the General Fund contribution to the Parks Maintenance and Recreation Programs will remain
essentially constant over time.
With all of this in mind, the table below is provided to give some examples of choices council could
make with respect to either program.
Table 1.0
Example Service Enhancement Choices
What Estimated Annual PARF Increase Required
Cost
Restore Rec Program to 2017 S145,000 $0.52/EDU
level (2.35 FTE)
Increase LOS in Park S285,000 $1.02/EDU
Maintenance to account for
existing inventory
Increase LOS in Park $290,000 $1.04/EDU
Maintenance for FY 2020
(account for new parks added)
As shown in Table 1.0,the incremental increases required in the PARF are manageable for any given
service level enhancement. Staff recommends council consider increasing the PARF to address the
service level needs.
CONCLUSION
On February 5,council will hear directly from staff about the needs in the Parks Maintenance and
Recreation Programs and the funding options. Staff will be seeking direction from council on
whether any of the proposed service level enhancements above should be brought forward as an
amendment to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule related to the PARF. If council is interested in
increasing the PARF, staff recommends they do so ahead of the annual budget process so that the
FY 2020 proposed budget can be prepared to include the changes in revenue and proposed new
expenditures.
5
AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: February 5, 2019
TESTIMONY
SIGN-UP SHEETS
Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on:
DISCUSSION ON INCREASE TO
THE PARKS AND RECREATION
FEE
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 become part of the public record and is openly
available to all members of the public. 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.
Due to Time Constraints
City Council May Impose
A Time Limit on Testimony
AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: February 5, 2019
PLEASE PRINT
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 become part of the public record and is openly
available to all members of the public. 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.
Proponent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
I,'td) ayn Gco.ss
' a53 (,A) s ; IIc
5C3 - 51 — ci5c/
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
AIS-3714 9.
Business Meeting One
Meeting Date: 02/05/2019
Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes
Agenda Title: Informational Public Hearing: Consider an Amendment
to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule Related to
Right of Way Licenses and Permit Fees
Prepared For: Brian Rager Submitted By: Brian
Rager,
Public
Works
Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council
Resolution Business
Public Hearing - Meeting -
Informational Main
Public Hearing Yes
Newspaper Legal Ad Required?:
Public Hearing Publication
Date in Newspaper:
Information
ISSUE
Shall the Tigard City Council amend the City's Master Fees and Charges Schedule to
implement the recently adopted Utility Service in Public Rights-of-Way ordinance and adopt
new fees related to small wireless facilities?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Adopt the resolution amending the Master Fees and Charges Schedule as proposed.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
On December 4, 2018, Council adopted Ordinance No. 18-24, the Utility Service in Public
Rights-of-Way Ordinance. This ordinance replaced utility franchises with licenses. As such,
the City's franchise fees must be replaced with license fees, though the rates will remain the
same. Staff is also recommending adding a new $50 license application fee for the review of
new license applications.
In addition, the City needs to adopt new fees related to small wireless facilities (SWFs). As a
result of last year's FCC order, these fees must be a reasonable approximation of the City's
costs, the City's costs themselves must be reasonable, and the fees must be
non-discriminatory. Based on best estimates at this time, staff believes the proposed fees
comply with these requirements.
For SWF permit fees, City staff is proposing a $150 planning review fee. This fee will be be
applied to the costs of Planning staff conducting a plan check and routing the initial
application. It will cover up to five (5) batched applications,with an additional fee of$45 per
application for each application over five.
For SWFs wishing to locate in the City's right-of-way, the planning review fee will be in
addition to a public facility improvement (PFI) permit. All work in the right-of-way, whether
done by a private party or a licensed/franchised utility, requires a PFI permit in accordance
with TMC 15.04. Each SWF requires its own PFI, even if part of a batched application. The
PFI permit fee is currently $300 minimum or 7% of the estimated cost of the project.
Finally, the City must adopt a SWF fee for use of the right-of-way. Typically, franchise fees
have calculated this based on a percentage of gross revenues. However, as a result of the
FCC order, this calculation cannot be used for SWFs because the fees must be a reasonable
approximation of the City's costs related to and caused by the deployment of SWFs.
Specifically, the order states that these costs include the costs of processing applications or
permits, maintaining the right-of-way, and maintaining a structure within the right-of-way.
Though the FCC order sets $270/year per SWF as a presumptively reasonable cost, staff has
determined that fee would be less than the City's actual costs.
In proposing a SWF fee, staff have considered the City's overall costs of maintaining the
right-of-way as well as administrative and overhead costs. Based on these factors, staff is
proposing $650 per year per facility.
By comparison, the yearly, per SWF fees for other nearby cities are:
•Lake Oswego: $750.73
•Tualatin: $625.00
•Hillsboro: $1,700.00
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
Council could decide to propose alternative fees.
COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS
DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
This is the first discussion of SWF fees.
Fiscal Impact
Cost: $0
Budgeted (yes or no): NA
Where Budgeted (department/program):NA
Additional Fiscal Notes:
The change to the master fees and charges covers two areas. First, the creation of the Right
of Way license creates a streamlined application and review process that will not impact the
city's revenues from franchises. Second, the fees for the small wireless facilities are intended
to cover the City's costs and should be a neutral impact; however, the exact impact of the
additional workload is unknown at this time and will be reviewed in a year's time.
Attachments
Resolution
Exhibit A-Master Fees and Charges Revision
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES TO ADD FEES RELA lED TO
RIGHT-OF-WAY LICENSES AND SMALL WIRET FSS FACILITIES
WHEREAS,Ordinance 18-24 amended Tigard Municipal Code 15.06 and adopted the Utility Services in Public
Rights-of-Way Ordinance,shifting from franchises to licenses for use of City rights-of-way;and
WHEREAS, the Master Fees and Charges must be updated to reflect the new license fees, as well as the
addition of a license application fee;and
WHEREAS,the adoption of new fees is necessary for small wireless facilities ("SWFs");and
WHEREAS, as a result of the FCC Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order 18-133 ("FCC Order"),
SWF fees must be a reasonable approximation of costs,the costs themselves must be reasonable,and the fees
must be non-discriminatory;and
WHEREAS,staff has estimated the proposed SWF fees to be a reasonable approximation of the City's costs of
processing applications or permits,maintaining the right-of-way,and maintaining a structure within the right-of-
way;and
WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council finds it is in the public interest to establish fees as proposed.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: The Master Fees and Charges for the City of Tigard are amended to: (1) add right-of-way
usage fees; (2) add a $50 utility license application fee; (3) add a $150 planning review fee for
SWFs; and (4) add a $650 right of way usage fee for each SWF per year, as shown in the
attached schedule(Exhibit A).
SECTION 2: The City will compare its actual costs incurred to the fees in this Resolution once a sufficient
number of applications have been processed in order to evaluate the accuracy of these
estimates. The City may adjust the fees as necessary to more accurately reflect the City's costs
or in response to the outcome of legal challenges against the FCC Order.
SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED: This day of 2019.
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
Page 1
Mayor-City of Tigard
A 1'1 EST:
City Recorder-City of Tigard
RESOLUTION NO. 19-
Page 2
Revenue Source Fee or Charge Effective Date
FINANCIAL&INFORMATION SERVICES
Assessment Assumption $50.00 4/22/1985
Budget Document
Compact Disk(CD) $10.00 7/1/2007
Paper $50.00
Business License
Annual Fee*
0-2 employees $94 /per year 7/1/2018
3-5 employees $125 /per year 7/1/2018
6-10 employees $440 /per year 7/1/2018
11-20 employees $722 /per year 7/1/2018
21-50 employees $828 /per year 7/1/2018
51-75 employees $902 /per year 7/1/2018
greater than 75 employees $1,220 /per year 7/1/2018
*Adjusted annually in conjunction with the Portland Consumer Price Index(CPI).
Pro-Rated Fee Schedule
Issued January 1 -June 30 See Fee Schedule above
Issued July 1 -December 31 1/2 the annual fee
Temporary License $25.00 1/1/2008
Duplicate License/Change of Ownership Fee
Change in ownership or name only $10.00 1/1/2008
Copy/replacement of license $10.00 1/1/2008
Delinquency Charge
the original business license fee due and payable shall be added for each calendar month or fraction thereof that the fee remains
unpaid. The total amount of the delinquency penalty for any business license year shall not exceed one hundred percent(100%)
of the business license fee due and payable for such year.
Page 1
Revenue Source Fee or Charge Effective Date
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report $0.00 2/7/2002
Franchise Fee ' - -•• - .!; (for existing franchises)
(Owns facility in ROW and provides service to customers
Electricity within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue or$4,000 whichever is greater 1/9/2015
(Owns facility in ROW and provides no service to customers
Electricity within Tigard) $2.90/linear foot of installation in right-of-way 1/9/2015
or$4,000,whichever is greater
(Using a non-owned facility in ROW and provides service to
Electricity customers within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue 1/9/2015
(Owns facility in ROW and provides service to customers
Natural Gas within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue or$4,000 whichever is greater 1/9/2015
(Owns facility in ROW and provides no service to customers
Natural Gas within Tigard) $2.90/linear foot of installation in right-of-way 1/9/2015
or$4,000,whichever is greater
(Using a non-owned facility in ROW and provides service to
Natural Gas customers within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue 1/9/2015
(Owns facility in ROW and provides service to customers
Telecom* within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue or$4,000 whichever is greater 1/9/2015
Telecom* (Provides no service to customers within Tigard) $2.90/linear foot of installation in right-of-way 1/9/2015
or$4,000,whichever is greater
(Using a non-owned facility in ROW and provides service to
Telecom* customers within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue 1/9/2015
*(Includes telecommunication utilities, long distance providers,
private networks and competitive access providers)
Utility Franchise Application Fee $2,000.00 8/8/2006
Solid Waste Disposal(See TMC 11.04) 5%of gross revenue 7/1/2013
Cable TV(See TMC 5.12) 5%of gross revenue 1/26/1999
Application filed with MACC(email macc@maccor.org)
Right-of-Way License(See TMC 15.06) 2/5/2019
Right-of-Way License Application Fee $50.00
Electricity (Owns facility in ROW and provides service to customers 5%of gross revenue or$4,000 whichever is greater 2/5/2019
Page 2
Revel Source Fee or;Ch*rge + ` . .
(Owns facility in ROW and provides no service to customers
Electricity within Tigard) $2.90/linear foot of installation in right-of-way 2/5/2019
or$4,000,whichever is greater
(Using a non-owned facility in ROW and provides service to
Electricity customers within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue 2/5/2019
(Owns facility in ROW and provides service to customers
Natural Gas within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue or$4,000 whichever is greater 2/5/2019
(Owns facility in ROW and provides no service to customers
Natural Gas within Tigard) $2.90/linear foot of installation in right-of-way 2/5/2019
or$4,000,whichever is greater
(Using a non-owned facility in ROW and provides service to
Natural Gas customers within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue 2/5/2019
(Owns facility in ROW and provides service to customers
Telecom* within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue or$4,000 whichever is greater 2/5/2019
Telecom* (Provides no service to customers within Tigard) $2.90/linear foot of installation in right-of-way 2/5/2019
or$4,000,whichever is greater
(Using a non-owned facility in ROW and provides service to
Telecom* customers within Tigard) 5%of gross revenue 2/5/2019
*(Includes telecommunication utilities,long distance providers,
private networks and competitive access providers,but does not include small wireless facilities)
Small Wireless Facilities $650 per year per installation 2/5/2019
Lien Search Fee $35.00 2/1/2004
Overhead Fee
Added to charges for property damage/repair 10%of total charge
Returned Check Fee $20.00 10/9/2001
Sewer Reimbursement District Loans
Interest Rate Applicable Federal Rate(AFR),Table,Long-term,semiannual for the
month the loan is approved
System Development Charge Financing(other than Sewer Reimbursement District Loans)
Application Fee $25.00
Interest Rate Prime rate as published in the Wall Street Journal as of the date of the
application plus 4%
Page 3
Department Revenue Source Fee or Charge Effective Date
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT-MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT
Fee in Lieu of Sewer Based on actual cost of sewer connection, 1998
if sewer was available
(MU-CBD zone only) the current Washington County Assessor-determined
real market value of the land(not improvements)by 10%
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee $5,650 /dwelling unit 7/1/2018
(This fee is determined by Clean Water Services.
The City of Tigard receives 3.99%of fees collected.)
Water Quality Facility Fee(Fee set by Clean Water Services)***
(City receives 100%of fees collected)
Residential Single Family $245.25 /unit 7/1/2018
Commercial&Multi-family $245.25 /2,640 sq.ft of additional 7/1/2018
impervious surface
Water Quantity Facility Fee(Fee set by Clean Water Services)***
(City receives 100%of fees collected)
Residential Single Family $299.75 /unit 7/1/2018
Commercial&Multi-family $299.75 /2,640 sq.ft of additional 7/1/2018
impervious surface
Metro Construction Excise Tax 12%of building permits for projects 7/1/2006
(City will retain 5%for administrative expenses) with a total valuation of$100,001 or more;
(Tax set by Metro,but collected by cities) not to exceed$12,000.
School District Construction Excise Tax
(City will retain 4%for administrative expenses)
(Tax set by school districts based on ORS 320.170-189 and collected by cities)
Beaverton School District $1.30 /sq.ft.residential construction 7/1/2018
$0.65 /sq.ft.non-residential construction 7/1/2018
$32,600.00 Non-residential maximum per building permit or 7/1/2018
per structure,whichever is less
Tigard-Tualatin School District $1.26 /sq.ft.residential construction 7/1/2018
$0.63 /sq.ft.non-residential construction 7/1/2018
$31,400 Non-residential maximum per building permit or 7/1/2018
per structure,whichever is less
Small Wireless Facility Planning Review Fee $150 per application,up to 5 batched applications,then$45 per application over 5 2/5/2019
Type II(Major)Modification Project Valuation Threshold*
$30,000 1/31/2019
Page 4
Department Revenue Source Fee or Charge Effective Date
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT-MISCELLANEOUS DEVELOPMENT
Urban Forestry*
Hazard Tree Dispute Resolution Fee $187 +$55.00 each additional tree 7/1/2018
In Lieu of Planting Fees(Planting&3 Year Maintenance)
Street Tree $608 per 1.5"caliper tree 7/1/2018
Open Grown Tree $608 per 1.5"caliper tree 7/1/2018
Stand Grown Tree $433 per tree 2'in height or 1 gallon container 7/1/2018
Tree Permit Fees(Complex)
Simple $0 7/1/2018
Complex $333 7/1/2018
Tigard Triangle District Tree Removal Fee $300 per caliper inch DBH 7/1/2018
(only applies in TMU Zone when removal approved
through an adjustment)
Tree Canopy Fee $2.95 per square foot of tree canopy 3/1/2013
Urban Forest Inventory Fees
Open Grown Tree $168 +$28.00 each additional tree 7/1/2018
Stand of Trees $221 +$44.00 each additional stand 7/1/2018
Tree Establishment Bond(Planting&Early Establishment)
1.5"Caliper Minimum Street or Open
Grown Tree in Subdivisions or Minor
Land Partitions $554 per tree 7/1/2018
1.5"Caliper Minimum Street or Open
Grown Tree in Land Use Review Types
other than Subdivisions or Minor Land
Partitions $499 per tree 7/1/2018
2'in Height or 1 Gallon Container
Minimum Stand Grown Tree in
Subdivisions or Minor Land Partitions $416 per tree 7/1/2018
2'in Height or 1 Gallon Container
Minimum Stand Grown Tree in Land Use
Review Types other than Subdivisions or
Minor Land Partitions $396 per tree 7/1/2018
Vacation(Streets and Public Access)* $2,937 /deposit+actual costs 7/1/2018
Vertical Housing Development Zone*
Precertification Fee $800 7/1/2018
Final Certification Fee $1,200 7/1/2018
Annual Project Monitoring Fee $300 7/1/2018
*Per Ord 03-59,fee is a4iustedyearty based on the Construction Cost Index for the City of Seattk as published in the April issue of Engineering News Record
**$310.00 per tree up to and including 10 trees.If over 10 trees,the applicant submits a deposit of$310.00 for each tree over 10 trees up to a maximum of 45,000.00.The applicant is charged actual staff time to
process the permit and will be refunded the balance of the deposit if any remains after the review is complete
*** Thisfee is determined by Clean Water Services.
Page 5
SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET
/-� FOR't-1f-rti 9' K +7 ccmn iS
/ \ (DATF OF MEETING)
WPGWIRELESS POLICYGROUP
February 5, 2019
The Honorable Jason Snider, Mayor
Tigard City Council
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
SENT VIA EMAIL: CouncilMail@tigard-or.gov
Re: Small Wireless Facilities - Proposed Fees
Agenda Item #9 -February 5, 2019 Hearing
Dear Mayor Snider and Councilors:
Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on the proposed fees for small
wireless facilities installed in the City of Tigard (the "City"). We submit these
comments on behalf of AT&T.
As you know, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") adopted an Order'
addressing a local jurisdiction's regulation of small wireless facility deployment,and
much of the FCC Order went into effect on January 14, 2019.
With regard to fees charged small wireless facilities,the FCC Order requires that: (1)
fees are a reasonable approximation of the local government's costs related to and
caused by the small wireless deployment, (2) only objectively reasonable costs are
factored into these fees, and (3) the fees are no higher than the fees charged to
similarly-situated competitors in similar situations.2
Further, the FCC Order sets a presumptively reasonable recurring fee for small
wireless facilities located in the right-of-way of$270 per year, per facility.3 For non-
recurring fees (including application fees), the FCC Order sets a presumptively
reasonable fee of $500 for the first five small wireless facilities in the same
1 Accelerating Wireless and Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment,
Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order,WT Docket No.17-79,WC Docket No.17-84,FCC 18-133(rel.Sept.27,
2018);83 Fed.Reg.51867(Oct.15,2018).
2 FCC Order,para.50.
3 FCC Order,para.79.
(fax)206.219.6717
www.wirelesspolicy.com
February 5, 2019
Page 2
application,with an additional$100 for each small wireless facility beyond five in the
same application.4
The staff report for tonight's meeting recommends a recurring fee of$650 per small
wireless facility,per year,and a"planning review"fee of$150 (for up to five facilities,
with an additional $45 to be charged for each facility in excess of five). The "planning
review" fee is intended to be charged in addition to the public facilities improvement
("PFI") permit fee,which the city charges all applicants for improvements in the right-
of-way.
These proposed fees are substantially higher than the FCC's presumptively
reasonable fees. Further, the staff report does not show that the proposed fees are
"related to and caused by" the small wireless facility and reflect the facility's "degree
of actual use of the public rights-of-way."5
The staff report provides no cost analysis in support of the proposed fees;instead,the
staff report refers broadly to "best estimates at this time" and that "staff has
determined that [the FCC's presumptively reasonable] fee would be less than the
City's actual costs." Without cost information to support the proposed fees, it is not
possible to evaluate whether they are cost-based as required by the FCC.
Furthermore, the staff report does not explain how the potential public facility
improvement ("PFI") permit fee of up to seven percent of the estimated value of the
improvement is related to the cost of the City's review of a small wireless application.
Moreover, the "planning review" fee is apparently not charged other installers of
similar improvements in the right-of-way, and it appears the City intends to charge
this fee without regard to whether the small wireless facility is subject to land use
review. You may recall from AT&T's comments regarding the City's development
code update last year that AT&T has significant concerns about the thresholds the
City has adopted for land use review of small wireless facilities in CDC Chapter
18.530. In addition, AT&T has expressed significant concerns with the land use
review thresholds set in the City's Public Improvement Design Standards for small
wireless facilities, effective January 15, 2019. As an initial matter, the thresholds in
each are not consistent with the other. Second, AT&T suggests that small wireless
facilities in the right-of-way be exempt from land use review entirely, so long as the
proposal meets the FCC's definition of small wireless facilities.6 Finally, a "planning
'Id.
5 Id.at footnote 131.
6 Further,as AT&T commented previously,the City's height standards in CDC Chapter 18.530 constructively eliminate
use of standard utility poles in residential zones because the height limits cannot be met(most existing standard
utility poles are already 35-40 feet in height and the height caps do not account for the vertical clearance required
between wireless facilities and wirelines).
February 5, 2019
Page 3
review" fee should not apply to facilities when they are exempt from land use review
and the City does not charge such a fee to other installers of similar improvements in
the right-of-way.
AT&T supports the City's adoption of small wireless facility right-of-way and
application fees that are in line with the FCC's presumptively reasonable fees and
suggests that the City reevaluate the proposed fees.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Karen Manske will be attending
your hearing on AT&T's behalf.
Sincerely,
, /1/ . 4
Plieridee Pa t
meridee.pabst@wirelesspolicy.com
cc: Brian Rager, Public Works Director
Shelby Rihala, City Attorney
DavisNright Suite 2400
1300 SW Fifth Avenue
Tremaine LLP Portland,OR 97201-5630
Alan J.Galloway
503.778.5219 tel
503.778.5299 fax
alangalloway@dwt.com
SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET
February 5, 2019
FOR y i T Kahle llv3v5
(DATE OF MEETING)
Via Email (CouncilMail@tigard-or.gov)
Mayor Jason B. Snider
Council President John Goodhouse
Councilor Tom Anderson
Councilor Liz Newton
Councilor Heidi Lueb
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: T-Mobile Comments on Proposed Master Fees and Charges
Dear Mayor Snider and Members of the City Council:
T-Mobile West, LLC ("T-Mobile")respectfully submits the following comments on the
City of Tigard's proposed amendments to the Master Fees and Charges applicable under Tigard
Municipal Code 15.06, as recently amended. T-Mobile appreciates the City's recognition that its
fee schedule requires amendment in light of the clarification of law provided by the FCC in its
September 27, 2018 Declaratory Ruling.1 However, as discussed below, T-Mobile is concerned
that the Master Fees and Charges as proposed do not fully comply with federal law.
The proposed Master Fees and Charges, among other things, imposes at least three
different fees on small wireless facilities in the public rights of way: a"planning review fee;" a
"public facility improvement" ("PFI")permit fee; and a"right of way use"fee for each small
wireless facility.
First, the proposed PFI fee is the higher of$300 or 7%of the estimated costs of the
facility's installation(the PFI fee does not appear on the Master Fees and Charges schedule, but
it identified in the meeting agenda). Setting the PFI fee as a percentage of the carrier's project
costs is inconsistent with the FCC order, because the cost of the project to the applicant is not a
reasonable estimate of the City's costs, and the FCC Order requires the City to base ROW fees
on a reasonable estimate of its own reasonable costs. For any individual project costs,
'Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment,Declaratory
Ruling and Third Report and Order,FCC 18-133(released Sept.27,2018)("Declaratory Ruling"),
hftps://docs.fcc.gov/publiciattachments/FCC-18-133Al.pdf.
Anchorage I Bellevue I Los Angeles I New York
Portland I San Francisco I Seattle I Washington,D.G.
City of Tigard
February 5, 2019
Page 2
T-Mobile's costs vary based on labor, equipment, materials, etc. that have no relation whatsoever
to the costs borne by the City in connection with the review of any individual application. If
City believes $300 is insufficient for a particular project(a position that T-Mobile feels would be
unlikely given the PFI fee and the planning review fee),then any additional costs should be
captured on a cost recovery basis.
Second,the $650 per facility recurring annual fee is also unreasonably high. Under the
FCC's Order,the burden is on the City to justify a fee above the presumptively reasonable $270
fee amount identified by the FCC. While we recognize that the City has offered such a
justification, it appears the City is including costs that are not specifically related to and caused
by T-Mobile's deployment. Notably,the agenda report states that the City has considered the
overall cost of maintaining the ROW.
This is inappropriate because the general upkeep of the streets, for example, is not a cost
that is specifically related to or otherwise impacted by T-Mobile's ROW occupation. T-Mobile
and other similarly situated carriers will be attaching to existing poles,with no or limited
physical impact on the streets. And even for those deployments that involve a new pole,those
poles, like other poles, are to the side of the ROW (i.e.,no more impactful to pavement and
access than any existing poles) and any impacts to the ROW as a result of the installation of
those poles (e.g., street cuts)would be addressed as part of the installation project.
While the report correctly asserts that Tigard's proposed fees are lower than a few other
surrounding cities,the level of right of way fees imposed by surrounding cities is irrelevant to
whether the Tigard fees accurately estimate Tigard's actual reasonable costs associated with a
small cell deployments. Even if cities like Hillsboro are charging more ($1,700 per site per
year),that does not justify the Tigard fee (indeed, the $1,700 per year fee vastly exceeds the
FCC's presumptive maximum, and is hard to envision being cost justified).
Third,the multiplicity of fees imposed is cumulatively unreasonable. The City cannot
imposed multiple layers of unnecessary review and with each seek to impose additional fees. As
the FCC pointed out, if a municipality incurs unreasonable costs, it cannot pass those through to
the provider. (Decl. Ruling¶70.)
Finally, T-Mobile notes that for telecom providers who are not installing small wireless
facilities, the City plans to charge a 5%gross revenues fee. Continuing to use a gross-revenues-
based fee for other communications providers is clearly unlawful as it is unrelated to the City's
costs, as required by 47 U.S.C. § 253. The fee is also unlawful in that the City appears to apply
it even to providers, such as resellers, that merely lease capacity on existing fiber,without having
any facilities in the ROW, and therefore do not use the public rights of way. This too is
inconsistent with applicable state and federal law.
4843-3244-6855v.4 0048172-001006
City of Tigard
February 5, 2019
Page 3
T-Mobile appreciates the City's efforts to come into compliance with the FCC Order.
However, T-Mobile submits that further changes should be made to bring the associated fees in
line with the limits established by the FCC, as outlined above.
Sincerely,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
*1 /1,
T. Scott Thompson
Alan J. Galloway
Counsel to T-Mobile
cc: Shelby Rihala, City Attorney (shelbyr@tigard-or.gov)
Brian Rager,Public Works Director(brianr@tigard-or.gov)
Schuyler Warren,Planning(schuylerw@tigard-or.gov)
4843-3244-6855v.4 0048172-001006
SUPP ENIENTAL PAC��
og
WPGWIRELESS POLICY FORit GROUP (DATE OF MEETING)
February 5, 2019
Mayor Jason Snider
Tigard City Council
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, Or 97223
SENT VIA EMAIL:Schuyler Warren, Associate Planner, SchuylerW@tigard-or.gov
Re: Small Wireless Facility fees
Dear Mayor and Councilors:
Small cells are a new technology essential to adding network capacity for the city's
residences and businesses, and also providing the means to deploy 5G when it becomes
commercially available. Unlike a single cell tower that can provide coverage for miles,
small cells add data and voice capacity with signals that only cover a few blocks. Small
cells are targeted for existing utility poles and light standards in the right of way, with
antennas and equipment similar in look and scale to what is typically seen on utility
poles today. More sites are needed to add small cells than is the case with traditional
macro cell towers.
The recent FCC Order, "Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing
Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order
(September 26, 2018)" ("Order") places significant guardrails on the fees that can be
charged for use of the right of way and use of city assets. The Order specifically finds
that fees for access and attachment for small wireless facilities in the right of way, even
if they are placed on city owned assets, are limited to recovery of the city's actual costs.
The FCC found that the following fees would be presumptively reasonable: " (a) $500 for
a single up-front application that includes up to five Small Wireless Facilities, with an
additional $100 for each Small Wireless Facility beyond five, and (b) $270 per Small
Wireless Facility per year for all recurring fees, including any possible ROW access fee or
fee for attachment to municipally-owned structures in the ROW." Order at Paragraph
76, p. 37.
1420 W.Gilman Blvd. #9030, Kim.Allen@wirelesspolicy.com t 425.628.2666
Issaquah WA 98027 www.wirelesspolicy.com
February 5, 2019
Page 2
The fees proposed in AIS-3714 exceed the safe harbors discussed above for
presumptively reasonable cost based fees. While fees higher than the safe harbor
amounts can be recovered under the Order, the city must explain how the higher fees
relate to cost. The staff report provides no insight into how the proposed fees reflect
the city's actual costs, but rather provides examples of what some neighboring cities are
charging, without the underlying factual basis for the cost based nature of those fees.
The staff report also contains a reference to an additional public facilities improvement
("PFI") permit for small wireless facilities wishing to locate in the City's right-of-way.
This fee is listed on page 28 of the Master Fees & Charges Schedule Fiscal Year 2018 -
2019 as" 2% of plan review plus 5% of estimated cost of public improvement with a
$300 Advanced deposit of 10% of the above or minimum of$300." This is different
from the staff report which describes this as "$300 minimum or 7% of the cost of the
project." These are very different calculations and require some additional explanation.
The PFI fee on the schedule appears to limit the fee to public improvements, whereas
small wireless facilities are private projects.
This PEI fee should also not be applied to small wireless facilities, especially when
attached to existing vertical structures in the right of way, because it does not correlate
to any added city costs. The impacts of small wireless facilities are more akin to the
"routine maintenance or repair that does not alter or disturb the right-the right-of-way,
such as replacement of a light fixture or trimming of trees...", which can be exempted
from the need for a this permit under Section 15.04.030(A).
Verizon would ask that the city delay the adoption of the proposed fee resolution so
that the providers and staff can meet to understand the cost drivers underlying the
proposed rates, the detail and source of authority for the proposed PFI fee and to
provide the Council with a more comprehensive cost analysis to support their decision.
Verizon will have a representative at the meeting to answer any questions you might
have.
Sincerely,
Kim Allen, Wireless Policy Group, LLC
Representatives for Verizon Wireless
AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: February 5, 2019
TESTIMONY
SIGN-UP SHEETS
Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on:
CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO
THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES
SCHEDULE RELATED TO RIGHT OF
WAY LISCENSES AND PERMIT FEES
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 become part of the public record and is openly
available to all members of the public. 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.
Due to Time Constraints
City Council May Impose
A Time Limit on Testimony
AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: February 5, 2019
PLEASE PRINT
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 become part of the public record and is openly
available to all members of the public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or
participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes,
which is a public record.
Proponent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
?O os5,0 POPPI.bC,
6V/36:1-11 C - 9 11`�
�ffcs�-9(09-n(oCo
GTIT" +T_
rr-
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
I Trio NUJ icth atsvo tArI¢t Q
U1►lisPro d g7b l
(oi 1,4 Gtt f $ u€qoii)
'1i1- 29y- 2or�'3
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.
Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.