The URL can be used to link to this page

TCDA Packet - 02/05/2019 City of'Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda 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"30p.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: http://www.tieard-or.eov/city hall/council meetingphp 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 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- T 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 RELATED 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: 5 Y Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: JeQ� _ Address City k64V✓i � State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION L\ADM\CITY RECORDERS\000 Cit'Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\Citizen Communication.doc SUPPLEMENTAL.PACKET FOR Q h CmNVn February 5, 2019 (DATE OF MEETING) Hello my name is Ahsha Miranda and I reside at 11675 SW 901h 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 1 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 Farrelly, 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 Toint meetinjZ PPT 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 ICAC. 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, rsr,11 �1 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 =�� . <' RespectandCare � DodleRightThing ( Get itDci 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 • 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 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 t TigardCity of ...... :::xr 1 Planned Activitie- : : January 91h - completed: •: al Financial Impact Sta -........ .... '. ifian Renewal Amendrn�r��:�`��:��'° "'��°. ................ <. hNdr sa l Plaza EU d ate %......X::::::X::::.:.:::: .. %::::::%::::::%EEEEEE%EEEE:E%:::: p .... .....:...................................... :X k offi.: rs & 201`9:-GI111 ' :.::::: ....:................ .. _...................... .. .......................................................... P ..... .... ............. ... :E.. .......................................................... :. ::: � ........................................... . .... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ..::::::................................... .................. ...... ..::. X ....%......%......%......X......X.. .....X......X.........: ......Y......% ....%......%.....%.....%......%......%......X..............%...... R FIN .. ... .. :.. . .. .. .... .. ... ... .... ::•... .......::... ...... ...:.: ................................................ .. ... X......x.....X. X ......:..::..:::.. .. .. .... X...... ...... ...... ...... ... ...... ..................................1�.................................................. ...................... 1............................................ .......................... ................. ................. ................. ::.. X : . . EE• :: ,:::x::::::x:.....x.... ::::X::::::X::::::X:::::x::::::%::::::%::::::%::::::%. :.x......x::::::'' ii%::: i%:::.:: ............. ........... ...� �..g. .. ......................... :::.... ........ .......... ............................................................................. .................. ... ................... ............. ....... ........... ................... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.......... ... ..................................... .............. x......x ^.x......x.: x. .r.::: x .:x x x x x ::::::x::::::x :x::::::x::::%EeEEieSEEEEi.' e%EieEEE% EE%3EEiiE%'riiBE%iiE ii%iii'rEx r°i �a ::li ..... �m:................................................................:.. . ........... ...... ...... ..... ...... ... . . . .............. x D. r .. . i. ' ` s..... i roc .. . . ..��... �. �.................... ....._.................... ::::::::::::::::::: I ...... . .. ........... f ..... .....................I ..... , .. ..... . ........... X......%......%.....%......%...:<::::::::::::n:.....n:::.::n:......5:::::%......X::::::%......Y ........Y•:::::%......%:::::%::::::%::::::X::::::%......X......%......X......%......%:::::%::::::5' .'}::..:::X:::::: ::X::::: XX: ...... ......... ............ .......................... P .0 :.A:• t ....... ............................ X......X......X.::::%,..... ...:::::::::::::::..::::::::::::::::::.:. ....... ..... ...... ......X.....x::::::x::::::x::::::X.... ...•.. .. ...xx...::x:::::: .................... .................. ... ........... .......... .............. .............. -': . ... . .. ..............:............ ....... ... ................. Van I I ...... ... .. �€ ..rt . err.:.._::mea t .. . . :.............:..................... :..:: ...�. ........................ ..... ........p ................. �... .....::::........ ...... ...... ... ...... .. X......x::::::x::: .x:::••.x:r• :: a ......X.::...x::::::xc8e px::::::%::::::%:-:. :x:::. :.....:x::::::z::::...E::ES::%::: :%::::::%::::::>i:::: gran Ces r rr». nr e :� .. . :: g u t .. ....... ..........:..... . .............................................................. ... . . ..:....... :............:....:.......:::::::.::::......:.:...... ::::.:... _........ ...... ...... x::::::x:........ ....x....•:x x .Y. _.,.........;:::::x::::::. ::: ...... iSc%••::•.%::::.. : te �ta '`I` a date :::.................................................. :... ..::::::::::::: . ................::::::: ::...............................: ...,.,. x.:....x......x::....x::::r::......x::::.x::r..X......x::::•:%::::.::..:...:x: .:.x........ .........X::::::%:.....% s::••• `° _...... ..... ::.... ................. ................: ........................ ... .:::: : : ':: :: ............... u.. . : :....... ........ ...... . ... . ..... .: .... .......... 4...,..C^^'%^''R^^^%"' •• .••"'^'R::': i :i....:::X:^.^.'R :t:E ... ............................ ..... ... ..............................................................................................................................:::'::::....... .................... ....................-..... .................,....:':::'::.............. ....X......X......X......%:.....%::::::%:::::X::::::X::::::X::::::X:.....X::::::x:::::::c.....'X::::::%:.:::%......X......%., ....�C......%......%::::::%... .. ...... ...... .. ..........:::.:..........::::::.......:...........................:::............... ...... ...... ..... ...... .... .... E.................... ::..............:::. 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. UppLF,m ENTAL PACT 2/4/2019 0F EFTG HOWARDTF URBAN RENEWAL 101 - TIGARD HELAINE CONSULTING,LLC • • , • 1. Relationship between Advisory Committee and Agency 2. Why use Urban Renewal? 3. Crash Course—UR 101 4. Crash Course—UR 201 5. Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area 6. City Center Urban Renewal Area 7. Pending Legislation 1 2/4/2019 DirectorBoard of the Town Center Development Agency (City Council) Executive TCDA i Finance Director Toby La France Redevelopmenti Project Manager --Sean Farrelly 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 • WHY USE NMI It, URBAN RENEWAL? 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 ■ • , ■ 1 S PROPERTY TAX REVENUE ; , 'XING ,, s s s sCity,County,Etc. 2/4/2019 CRASH COURSE ( UR 101 PROPERTY PROPERTY TAX REGULAR TAXING INCREASES s sJURISDICTIONS 7.3%Appreciation 2.Substantiat ImprtrvemeMs City,County,Etc. Elaine Howard Consulting LLC CRASH COURSE UR 101 CITY ss s PROPERTY REVENUE PROPERTY TAX i INCREASES S S S Ss REGULAR TAXING JURISDICTIONS 7.3:Apprecialion 2,Substantial Imp—ememsmomm A City,County,Etc. Elaine Howard Consulting LLC 4 2/4/2019 HOW DOES URBAN RENEWAL FINANCING WORK? O J 3G W Z > W INCREMENT Q F 31 FROZEN Elaine Howard Consulting LLC Economic development tool ♦ Unique in that it is a financing tool. ♦ but also a plan with projects • Used to address"blighting" ♦ influences in specific areas • Functions on increases in property tax revenues in"Urban Renewal Areas" • Used all over Oregon(Map on next slide) 5 2/4/2019 PORTLPOFM -- AND . xoo•RIUER o,e,e,� 008 o j.r..0 O p o WLLHOMVLLLE ND �r mr•�cj•I ~SALEM OREGON �fS O 0 WIOONVILLE Nu O4 Av pw rn.00x Ocoa.�ur pws.r .omeup Oa Onr+WM Oouu.( �S.AIEN 0e N. 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 Elalne Noward Consulting LLC 6 2/4/2019 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): IN IN • The total amount of money that can be spent over the life of the district on projects,programs,and administration. chine Howard Consulting LLC LEVERAGING CITY TAX RATE Tax rates .�onnt, a count,Library 5oi!and Water 4H and Extension 30% AiikLWOCi�— _._. m •city •56.0 District ■community College ■ESD .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 Ci $ 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 UrbanRenewal Total $ 15.0000 $1,500.00 con h g 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 1 $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 �gourity 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 Ci $ 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 ESD $ 0.3049 $30.49 $31.40 $30.49 Port $ 0.6004 $60.04 $61.8 Urban Renewal Total $ 15.0000 $1,500.00 $1,545.0Olin'R\ Elaine Howard Consulting LLC \ PROPERTY TAXES AND URBAN RENEWAL • 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 3. "Collection"of property tax revenues Elaine Howard C-tmg LLC 9 URBAN RENEWAL UTOPIA The following slides detail in a conceptual Calculation manner the steps an Assessor goes through to distribute TIF revenues to an Distribution Urban Renewal Agency: Collection Q CL 0 F M J "DISTRIBUTION" ,� Houses n URA 10 Z w S65 $45 Z Q m $45 $45 M $GS $45so LJ $G5 $i5 Slide 20 SVB3 Change values to 45 for each house. Scott Vanden Bos,8/16/2018 2/4/2019 "DISTRIBUTION" 40 Sa,ao0.000 259%First Yr-ar $1,000,000 SVB4 LJ1s So $0, $0 o A�l so, Elaine Howerd C.—Ring LLC VB5 • "DISTRIBUTION" + "", 40 Twat AV is?Year $4,000,000 "COLLECTION" 41225 $1 /$1215 $1za\ Iti ► �, !$IZ25 $1225 LJ .$1215 $12Z Sl� $1225 x $12_75 $12Z is Raine Howard Consulting LLC 11 Slide 21 SV64 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 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 LC Elalrw Howard Consulting LLC URBAN RENEWAL IMPACT L ocal Schools LmsceooLmlff olnECTRrrACT Er.,TbMn PW 1. .00K. .O.0.. .rlleer�.ler EA AIRATION FORMULA 31.3% TAKES INT0ICCW KT: •W�eMer a pslncl is"small •Specie zcudemz STATE SCHOOL FUNO :LeacheT— r Eapenence iW.eewM FaM Wyp•p� gLad • r•semww ,,,�•,• 62.9% 3.7% 2.7% Elaine arc'Cons I.nc LLC 12 2/4/2019 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 Haire 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 $31,637128 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 HOW IS A PLAN ADOPTED? - Public Input Public - GoalsandO4e ' . - Budgets Agency and decides Agency whether to send out . public review CountyPresentation. Commission PC - Conformance Comprehensive . City Council Hearing and Vote CC - Notice to all Citizens . Refers to Citizens for 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 •' :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) h - 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 Expenditures Percent Project Funding Categories Allocations (nominal (constant 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 (5187.049.5001 r 100% 16 2/4/2019 City Center f Urban Renewal Area ,, j; "° • s� '•; Approved by voters in 2006 �� ' �� 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 Twacnrc....wn 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. Goal 5—Promote high quality development of retail,office and 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 UILA City Center Urban Renewal Area Redevelopment 18 2/4/2019 City Center Urban Renewal Area Improvement Matching Grants �.F I� City Center Urban Renewal Area Fagade Improvements LW Ila 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 VOTE MAY 2017 Urban Renewal www.tigard-or.gov/urbanrenewal 20 7/4/ZOl9 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 Cit,: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 12019. 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 I'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 anytime upon at least thirty(3 0)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. O 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 ATTEST: 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 D•VAC Cnt=1 Stn=31 RECORD51 $70,00$&00$11.00$60.00-Total=$146.00 After Recording Return To: 1111111 111111111111111111 Washington County LUT 02440282201800796760140146 ,Richard Hobernicht,Director of Assuement end Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clark for Wsahlnpton County,Oragon,do hereby certify that tfie within Y ; Survey Instrumd e tl re orent of wrltlnp was raceiwded in the i book of records of Bald cau tt((��JJ + ;r � Richard Mobernicht,wractor of Assessment ander MS-17 Taxation,ExdHfkio County Clark 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, RI 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. 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. I 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. is —III 4 Ferry Road, and SW Roy Rogers Road, in ) VACATION NO. 535 the northeast and southeast One-quarters of ) 5 Section 6, T2S, R1 W, 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, R1 W,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,SvrrE 305,MS#24 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 PHONE(503)846-8747-FAX(503)846-8636 I 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 DUYCK +/ CHAIR 15 SCHOUTEN ✓ � �� 16 Al ALINOWSKI ✓ RECORDING SECX ;9XY ROGERS 17 TERRY —7 �w 18 19 Approved as to form 20 CM L-QoL�.L, >� Corthey D. Duke-Driessen 21 Assistant County Counsel Date: {L 51 1 Z 22 Page 3 -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 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: 2S10613, 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 rfts, P. InterhiM Washington County Engineer 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 Scholts 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'OT' 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"46'19" East, a distance of 242.23 feet to the intersection of said northerly Right-of-Way line and the westerly Right-of-Way tine 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 88'23'12" 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°57'19" West, a distance of 46.57 feet; thence leaving said westerly Right-of-Way tine, 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°40'26" 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 tine, 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 57'24'25"West, a distance of 276.44 feet; thence leaving said northerly Right-of-Way tine, 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°33'47' 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°49'21"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 + IT]503-941-9484 IF]503-941-9485 thence along said easterly line, North 00°20'12"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 OREGON 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 ♦ IT]503-941-9484 IF] 503-941-9485 PARTITION PLAT 1 NO. 2018-024 R=1512.39' PARCEL 3 L=8.35' PARTITION PO 310) R1481.39' CH-8., 35' 20167038 p4�5 �ERRK RO (,GR R_55.00' L L= 8.57' N 0 0 E SCN L=75.86' AxOCH=18.56' SW e=79'01'20" N80'55'43"E a, o CH=69.99' o S50'11'06"E N47'57'19"W O 46.57' 0 4.50'3S •$ 0 o N? PARCEL 1 S89'46'19"E 242.23' Op' o 206 6p � .a —o N7 4*50' o S89'46'19"E 144.63' SW SCHOLLS HIGHWAY 210 (CR 348) �^ POB N89'46'19"W 642.98' R=294.97' 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 v 149 150 151 o L=23.58' R=250400'-- A=434'52" =250.00'-- A=434'52" L=14.82' CH=23.58' e-3'23'47" NO3'54'13"W CH=14.82' S08'58'33"E o Ln a rn R1 VER TERRACE DOCUMENT NO. NORTHWEST 2016-080677 51.00' 0 ir � W C7 O r 0 y F i b �i 0 51 o- n EXHIBIT A PARCEL 1 - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY DRAWN BY: GPS DATE: 10/03/18 REVIEWED BY: TCS DATE: 10/03/18 12564 SW Main St PROJECT NO.: _ 395-061 Tigard, OR 97223 SCALE: 1"=100' [T] 503-941-9484 PAGE 4 OF 5 [F] 503-941-9485 PARTITION PLAT NO. 2016-038 PARCEL 2 m R=691.20' R=1377.39' L=33.43' CR 310' L=106.39' X2'46'15" CNO��S F�R�Y ROAO cr CH=106 36' N61*49'21"E iv CDSW 5 `' �` S77'17'15"W V p POB oo N s ate. r, N77'S5'20"E gyp. �p 02.75 � ' F 9 � �6 a! 9 S EASTERLY LINE, WEST HALF, NORTHEAST QUARTER, PARCEL 2 SECTION 6 2 PARTITION PLAT NO. 2016-038 3 PARCEL 3 > p ri o� V, f] O g o S8946'19'E SW FRIENDLY LANE (CR 3282 T/J) o 9.12' o EXHIBIT A PARCEL 2 - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY 6 DRAWN BY: OPS DATE: 10/03/18 REVIEWED BY: TCJ DATE: 10/03/18 12564 SW Main St PROJECT NO.: 395-061 Tigard, OR 97223 SCALE: 1"=60' [T] 503-941-9484 Z [F] 503-941-9485 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 (DRAB). 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 ICDA 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 _ City of 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: • ,x$300,000 Eliminate the Recreation Program • x.$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 I 1 SERVICE �e pc DECLINING LEVEL OF Funding 1_eye�Ofs2015. our bUdget eryf e land grow 62�XQ dwing 2000- COUld Time afford increase to address parks 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 SERVICE LEVEL I Program Guide • • • Grants&Scholarships • DELAY PECOMMENDATIONS Programs&Classes • • Outdoor Events • • Fhe Recreation StudyIndoor Events • recon-irnencled Facility Reservationsenhancing recreation information, programs and • Drop in Activities • events for all residents. but especially • Current progress on meeting 5-year Study recommendations 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 70cY� GENERAL FUND. 300/c 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 RECREATIONFUNDING INCREASED SERVICE PARKS AND Projected need in Parks&Recreation Additional resources required to meet projected need M WNX Status quo funding N OW N 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 $145,000 $0.52/EDU level (2.35 FTE) Increase LOS in Park $285,000 $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 ITETI No. 8 Date: Februal�T 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. Pro orient—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,address&Phone No. Name,address&Phone No. Name,address&Phone No. 0, -SCo; IICi q Name,address&Phone No. Name,address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. I,AAIW— WCOC>itP� 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 RELATED TO RIGHT-OF-WAY LICENSES AND SMALL WIRELESS 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 ATTEST: 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 u dth 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 V 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 RiLpht of Way Uggwe Fee See TAIL 15.06)(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 mac @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 . RweiWe Sou Fee or Oawge (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* $50,000 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/l/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 a4usudyearly based on the Conduction Cost Index for the City of Seattle as published in the April issue of ExBinetring New Record **$310.00 per tree up to and including 10 trees.If oxer 10 trees,the applicant submits a deposit of;3 10.00for each Are over 10 trees up to a maximum of 45,000.00.The applicant is charged actual staff time to process the permit and mill be refunded the balance of the deposit if any remains after the review is complete *** Thu fee is determined by Clean Water Services Page 5 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET /—� FOR 4--m-419' Kr+7 Can n\,ni-z / \ WIFELESS POLICY (DATE OF MEETING) WPG GROUP February 5, 2019 The Honorable Jason Snider, Mayor Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 SENT VIA EMAIL: Council MailOtigard-ongov 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.z 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). z 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 4 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. Thankyou for your consideration of these comments. Karen Manske will be attending your hearing on AT&T's behalf. Sincerely, Videe meridee.pabst@wirelesspolicy.com cc: Brian Rager, Public Works Director Shelby Rihala, City Attorney Suite DavisWright 1300 S2400 W Fifth Avenue Tremai ne 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 (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.' 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"), https:Hdocs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-133AI.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. (Deel. 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 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 EMENTAL PACKETED W^� WIRELESS POLICY FOR PG/ 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 PFI 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. Pro onent—(Speaking In Favor Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. 1?MS5A3 Pogx�bc, C-`� , 6z 9-*I 1 -ZA-9(09 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. I `i9�'a NUJ�cthats�►o�r��Q ►11 s gtwo, &� q-100 (ar bei al f 4 Vet,'JOA) 71- 2Qy- 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.