ZCA1996-00005 i
' -
March 10, 1999
CITY OF TIGARD
Oregon Department of Revenue OREGON
Cartography Department
955 Center Street Salem, OR 97310
RE: Formal submittal of the Ordinance and related Exhibits officially
withdrawing properties annexed into the City of Tigard from the
Tigard Water District.
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter serves as formal notice that certain properties annexed into the
City of Tigard have now been officially withdrawn from the Tigard Water
District. Enclosed is a copy of the signed Ordinance passed by the Tigard
City Council on 2/23/99 withdrawing those properties from the Tigard
Water District. The Department of Revenue previously had the
opportunity to review the "draft" ordinance and the necessary changes
were made at that time to the exhibits prior to -adoption by the City
Council.
Thank you for your tirne on this matter. If you have any questions or
comments, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x407.
incerel
S y,
.
Julia Powell Hajduk
Associate Planner .
i:\curpln\julia\annex\wdlet2.doc
Enclosure: City of Tigard Ord. No` 99-05 & Supporting Exhibits #1-27
C: Tigard Water District Withdrawls from 3/23/98 to 12/31/98 Planning File
1999 Planning correspondence file
City Land use files: ZCA 92-7; 93-2 & 4; 95-1,2,3,4,5,6 and 8; 96-1,3,5 & 6;
97-1,2 & 3; and 98-1,2,3 & 4.
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772
_ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 0 I~
ORDINANCE NO. 99- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD DECLARING THAT PROPERTIES THAT HAVE RECENTLY
BEEN ANNEXED TO TI-IE CITY ARE WTTHDRAWN FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, The City of Tigard withdrew from the Tigard Water District on March 23, 1993; and
WHEREAS, since that time, the City has annexed certain properties that were within the Tigard Water District; and
WHEREAS, property within the Tigard Water District annexed into the City after March 23, 1993, must be withdrawn from
that Water District to insure the proper entity receives the taxes; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.520(2), the City is liable to the Dish-ict for certain debt obligations, however, in this
instance, the District has no debt for the City to assume, therefore, no option regarding the assumption of debt needs to be
made; and
VIBEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, notice was given and the City held a public hearing on the issue of withdrawal of
those annexed properties from the Tigard Water Disti-ict on February 23, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of
the annexed properties from the Tigard Water District is in the best interest of the CityfTigard; and .
WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the District by
ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECITON 1: The properties located in the Tigard Water District which have been annexed by the City of Tigard and
Final Order by the Metro Area Boundary commission after the City withdrew from the Tigard Water
District on March 23, 1993, are hereby withdrawn from the Tigard Water Dish-ict.
SECTION 2: Legal descriptions and maps of the properties to be withdrawn from the Tigard Water District are attached
hereto as Exhibits 1 through 27 and incorporated herein.
SECTION 3: Pursuant to ORS 222.465, the effective date of the withdrawal of these properties from the Tigard Water
District shall be July 1, 1999.
SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its enactment by the Council.
PASSED: By U1)6t►~(-MV~ vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this ~
day of 1999. .
Catherine Wheatley, City Recor
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this24~ day of , rz~'U/jx','~99.
&es Nicoli, Mayor
Approved as to form:
A
i Attorney
Date
ORD[NANCE No. 99-_ Tigard Water District Withdrawls from 3/23/93 to 12/31/98
Page 1 of 1 i:\citywide\ord\wdwithdr.ord.doc Julia H. I I-Feb.-99
' ' y ~ • i
~ CITY OF TIGARD WATER DISTRICT WITHDRAWAL ,
Boundary Commission
' Final Order No. .3659
. ZCA No. 6 - D00
EXHIBIT 19
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA
.
A tract of land in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 3, T2S, R 1 W, Willamette Meridian
Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows:
. .
Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 13 of Cottonwood Place as recorded in
Book. 21 Page 30 of. the Washington County Subdivision Records; thence along the
boundary of said lot the following courses; thence north 89 degrees 21' E a distance
of 100 feet; thence 00 degrees 10' west a distance of 160.12 feet; thence north 75
degrees 05' west a distance of 52.82 feet; thence south 89 degrees 36' 30" west a
distance of 49.15 feet; thence north 00 degrees 10' east a distance of 150.00 feet
to the point of beginning. i
VICINITY MAP Of THE AREA
L -1 -i' • ; : • ' . re.aoo::. - - : r - ` i
- ~ _ C Y;-D E ~`A
S•W ~ r 106.
~fiSOb • G ' 10 -
~y ✓°T`~ CLYOESOAL
47 -1500
1z •
: , a •x.' u ~ .
, m - K n • 1 (
~ i : aqo 4 ' ♦ l4oo ]
~ ~ ~•22 21 ' ~700 N 1
7 zd 17 < . • ♦ • . .
C O. i T T ~ w~0 N: yY O O D .
• noa . • z noa ~ n a r
t . y = S.W. JOFiNSON STREET~
4400 ,M x "04 _r M, ~ , x ~ P L c ~
.2
, ~ ~ ~ ~ N NO] _ H02 1101' <}•^,~`r,.:~`;i:
.
'J :.J
~l
23 -78
I . 7.400 ,:.AREATO
ANNEXED ' -
. .
• _ ~ • ` ~
, . YW
-4 roa ancsz.cMr unro:cs o.~r ~i \
oo "or AeLr o. foR •.r.ar„cR u:c •
~ . . , _
.~..gitftO~~~~.~~~~~~.,.~~~~~g:~~~~..1" _ • T16A
Z
fCf rA• 1S I ]ao y . ' • S ~ J
. • • •
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 96-CDa
A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT B(ZCA 96-0005).
' WHEREAS, the Tigard Ciry Council held a hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider the annexation of
one parcel consisting of 0.33 acres located at the Southeast comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation constitutes a minor boundary change under Boundary Commission '
law ORS 199.410 to 199.519; and
'
' WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council is authorized by ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B) to initiate an annexation upon
receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be
annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be
annexed; and
WHEREAS, the property which lies within the boundary of the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs
Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting
District #1 and the Washington County Vector Control District would, by operation of ORS 199.510, be
automatically withdrawn from those districts immediately upon completion of the annexation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
Section 1: The City Council, pursuant to ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B), hereby initiates proceedings
for annexation to the City of Tigard of the temtory described in Exhibit A and ~
illustrated in Exhibit B.
Section 2: The City Council hereby approves the proposed annexation and requests that the
Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission approve the
proposal and effect it as soon as possible.
Section 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file certified copies of the resolution with
the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Govemment Boundary Commission at once.
~
PASSED: This 19%~ day o ,
Mayor - City of Tigard EST:
'X.[
'Cl .
y Recorder - City of Tigard
~►/~~~aG Certified to be a True Copy of
Date Origina n file'~~' ~ (6,1 CAY~►
I:\CITYWIDEU2ES1ZCA96-05.1RES By•
-City Recorder - City of Ti ard
~ v/4 lc'tC,
9
oa$e:
RESOLUTION NO. 96A2-Page 1
. • • •
STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT A I
~ September 24,1996
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
TIGARD TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD
TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS
1. Generallnformation ,
CASE: Zone Change Annexation 96-0005
REQUEST: To annex one parcel of .33 acres of unincorporated
Washington County land to the City of Tigard and to change
the zone from Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard R-4.5.
APPLICANT: Steve Sanders
12390 SW 106th Ave
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNERS: Same
LOCATION: At Southeast corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive -
WCTM 2S1 3 AA, lot 1916 (see vicinity exhibit map).
2. Vicini Information
Properties to the north, south, east and west are in Washington County and zoned
R-5. These parcels have single family residences on them.
3. Backaround Information
The applicant approached the city with a request to annex the property. No
previous applications have been reviewed by the city relating to this property.
4. Site Information and Proposal Descri tp ion
The site is sloped to the north with a gentle rise toward the southem end. There is
one single family house on the southern portion of the site. The site is located on
i
. • • •
the corner of SW Johnson St. and SW 106th Avenue which are both local streets.
The site has approximately 100 feet of frontage along SW Johnson Street and 150
feet along SW 106th Avenue.
The applicant has requested that the site be annexed to the city by means of the
double majority method. Representing the owners of more than half the land
(100%) and a majority of the registered electors (100%) of the area proposed to be
annexed, the applicant has initiated this action through his written consent. The
applicant intends to obtain sewer service after annexation to the city.
The proposal includes the request to initiate annexation to the city and to change
the zone only on the property. Because the property is in the city's Active Planning
Area, it has already been assigned a Tigard Comprehensive Plan designation,
which is Low Density Residential.
5. Baency Comments
The Engineering Division, Tigard Police and Water departments, Tualatin Valley
Fire and Rescue District, PGE and General Telephone have reviewed the proposal
and have no objections. No other comments were received at the time of this
report.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1,
10.1.1, 10.1.2, and 10.1.3; and Tigard Community Development Code chapters
18.136 and 18.138.
Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of
the Comprehensive Plan based on the following findings:
1. Policy 2.1.1, requiring an ongoing citizen involvement program, is satisfied
because the Central and West CITs and surrounding property owners have
been notified of the hearing and public notice of the hearing has been
' published.
2. Policy 10.1.1, requiring adequate service capacity delivery to annexed
parcels, is satisfied because the Police Department, Engineering, Water
Department, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District have reviewed the
proposal and indicate that adequate services are available and may be
extended to accommodate the affected property.
2
. • •
3. Policy 10.1.2, boundary criteria for annexations, is satisfied because the
Police Department has been notified of this request and has no objection;
the affected land is located within the city's urban planning area and is
contiguous to the city boundary; and adequate services are available to
accommodate the property.
4. Policy 10.1.4, zoning designation, is satisfied because the affected parcel
will be designated as R-4.5, which is the most closely conforming zoning
designation to the existing Washington County zoning of R-5.
Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of
the Community Development Code based on the following findings:
1. Code Section 18.136.030, requiring approval standards for annexation
proposals, is satisfied because:
a. Service providers have indicated that adequate facilities and services
are available and have sufficient capacity to serve the affected site.
b. Applicable comprehensive plan policies and code provisions have
been reviewed and satisfied.
c. The zoning designation of R-4.5 most closely conforms to the county
designation of R-5 while implementing the city's Comprehensive
Plan designation of Low Density Residential.
d. The determination that the affected property is an established area is
based on the standards in Chapter 18.138 of the code.
2. Code Section 18.138, providing standards for the classification of annexed
land, is satisfied because the property shall be designated as an
established area on the development standard areas map of the
comprehensive plan.
C. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings noted above, the planning staff recommends approval of
ZCA 96-0005.
1:1LRPLNW ELS\ZCA96-05. STF
3
r
I . , _ ~ . _ . _ . _ _ . . . _ .
Y~ . ~i .
1 h 64 ♦ l \ _.j t / xr ~ ~ ~ M~,Y .
, ~ ~ FI i t ~ • ~r Y
jA`
: ~ : A~ ~ 3-- -ra ~ ~ - . a - t+t~t r .r:o; ~ '~wwa.Aa 3~~M ic'tr2~ °Ci+ .a~,
i. r ~ "'x .r_ ♦ _.x c ~ y_ q:M~ - 7 i -.ti t.v 1.
iC'i KIA k-y . ~ 6 ipG~_ L:1~` , iiY14
t - .'7 ~ 1~/ ~•~"t~.~ . 4i r•~,F ' . : w i. _
t
~ ~ ' + t _ x ~,~.t- •s 1`~ -s ~z _ t . ~ 1 ~ ~~r ~ ~ ~ ,~vv~~r ~ ~ F ~ -
.7
7
. 4-~
a r I.,t ~ ~ ~ S .r y~ ` ~
.
' ' _ . _ " ' ' a:- .j . '4•;1 _ .i'
_ 4~•
.
j. Y } ' ^ . r .Sr
i. . 4 ~r . f' J" r, 7~, Sh '~t sr ~Y' ~ ♦ ...7, . n 7 l : s 4 rt T' ~4 4..,. «,J ~ ~ ,4'+. '^ili, ♦ .r-MA(e?.~,`:
~ . .6 . , Y" F ~ ~'1 t ~ - N' . . u' ~r ~ _ t-1 ~ } fi. ~ ~y ~.R.+~ + A v' - ~w ' 1 ~ _ . ,
Wr"n}.,,s~1i
. ~ .i vi- ` r-~3 : ..a `t.. ~ z ' L P,.f: _ c ♦ .
cu
J H O •VTi v.. r ~+ar~ ~v.- r.,~. si .
.x.~.s i i' i • z _ ~ , tt , ,
l"' . ♦ ~31 f { f1.'
~ ~ ; •l C 4~ ie ~ ~
~ 'A3T
~ ~ ~ r G~~1 ~r~f~ N.~f~ t ~9 "z j~.`~ f f{~~q ~ ■ ~
, • . '<k - s. ~I ; ~
~ .,..,1'tF- • ~ - ° ~a~- w--a ft - 'J ~y ~ ~ ~ --r~-- y
cu
i~;.'~ ~ :y .a '`'r ` _ r a b,~ .•yYi ~ y,t
~ . - ~l c-• $ 'x'J : .-y
CL
' ~ ,:.u, a..,a~,~. ' .s ~ (
1 - _ • • O~ _ - J ~ MSwl\
r~', • ae.c , ' i~ ~c~T H, ~ ~z. •,:i._ ~V_ ~,,,f
• . ~ Z
cu j
~ P . . / A F~'l _ . k'4 . .11•l ~1.T •'A ~ .i[~ YJ-yl c~'~`.+. y -kL_ ~
I ^
. _
.
, .
.
. ' • -
_ _ ~ i " - ':N~ T'«~ .-1+~- .1~ l~-. I~ I
I ; ~ ' ~-Tt~'S ..rtJ ' : 3r 'L.~ I I
, ~ % 3` = ~ - _ f ~ .c.+ ~^1• - I
i j ' •t ie... - ' k ~ ~l ' ~ ~ l JM ~`~T / ■
i
1 , = . - ~ ^ . _ _ ~ y-'t ■ ~
~ - n . ,y . ' i . .t a a ' ~ .1 zi,..~ - •w+~c Y o't.w S - 7r .
~ •-•.rk.~ _ ' . . ~"~r.- =-r'."--~ :F :i ,eovi,e`{ ~rs~ _ - .""i-• ~%•fi'~" .i'~~"~. 'rT''_R~ ~
. i
~ ~f'• • . ' • : . _ - - _ _ =.:i 1 t ~ _ ~ rn :
~ / ~ - _
. . . _ ' ~ ' ,
~.u .i•• ~ • ' ' ~ - h..n~f T ~ ,s
_ - _ L a i
_ - _ . _ ..w. . ~ I
~
i ~
~ E1u111711 nDn
~ ~ ~ AWCfAT10N AND ZONE CFiPJ~C'~E FROAA '
' ZCA76-V W S COUNTY R5 TO GTY RAS ~
~ Sanders Annexation VNTHIN l1GAR0 CITY LIMTS
I
I
• • DOR 34-1176-96 ~
Notice to Taxing Districts Oregon Department of Revenue
ORS 308.225 Cartographic Unit i
i 955 Center St. NE
Salem, OR 97310
(503) 945-8297, fax 945-8737
CITY OF TIGARD Descr~ption and Map Approved FINANCE DIRECTOR
' 13125 sw xaLL BLVD December 19,1996
; ,
TIGARD, OR 97223 As Per ORS 308 225: '(Z Description N Map received from: P.M.B.C.
On: 12/2/96
This is to notify you that your boundary change in Washington County for
ANNEX TO THE CITY OF TIGARD. WITHDRAW FROM THE WASH. CO. ENHANCED
SHERIFF'S PAT.
FINAL ORDER # 3659
has been: N Approved 12/19/96
❑ DisaPProved
Notes:
I
Deparcment of Revenue File Number: 34-1 i 76-96
Prepared by: Michael Hughes, (503) 945-8287
Boundary: N Change ❑ Proposed Change ❑ Planned Change
The change is for:
❑ Formation of a new district
Z Annexation of a territory to a district
Z Withdrawal of a territory from a district
❑ Dissolution of a district
❑ Transfer
❑ Merge
County Commissioners or County CourdBoundary Commission copy - Copies to: Taxing District, County Assessor, DepaMient of Revenue
• ~
m SENDER:
:2 ■Complete itema t anmor z tor addinonal servicea. I also wish to receive the
H p 4? 4 569 898
■Complete itema 3, aa, and ab. following services (for an
d■ Pdnt your name and addresa on the reverae of this form so that we can retum thfa
~ card co you. extra fee): US Postal Service
~■Attach thia tortn to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not
, d ~
permlt. I - ❑ Addressee's Address 9 Receipt gcP CePQ0fl(d 90
d■ Write'Retum Receipt Requested'on ihe mailpiece below the article number. d No Insurance Coverage Provided.
~■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the artide was delivered and the date 2• ~ Restricted Delivery 0 Do not use for Intemational AAail See reverse
o deuvered. Consult postrnaster for fee. E. sen
-o 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number
a ~("Oy 5/_ ~O C StreNumb I
~u
o C enercA -Tdepune- Cb , CC "~r-N (1o 4b. Service Typs ~ Po ce,.stere, a ziP code
~ p,~x 9 522~ ❑ Registered ~ Certifled ~ f
W ❑ Express Mail Insured so) Postege $ _C~5
Q TrV l n51`TN 15N5 ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD ' Cerfired Fee 1 J~
Q 7, Date of Delivery .0
Z p Spedel Detivery Fee
~ 5. Received By: (Print Name).
8. Addre see's A dress (Only i/ requested c Restricted Delivery Fee
~ and fee is paid) W ~
-1 6. Signature: (Addressee orA ent) Retum Receipt Showing to
0 _ Whom & Date Delivered 1c)
Remm Receipt Showing ro Whom,
PS Form 3811, Decembe 94 ~ oate, 8 Mdressee's address
Domestic Return Receipt
~ TOTAL Postage & Fees ~ 215
~
~ Postrnark or Date
I ~
~ a
r
d SENDER: I also wish to receive the
v■ Complete items 1 and/or 2 for adtlitional services.
m•Complete items 3, aa, and ab. following services (for an P 474 569 897
d■ Print our name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can retum this
~ Y extra fee): ~ US Postal Service
~ card to you.
~ ■Atlach thia form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not 1, ❑ Addressee's Address • ReCeBpt foB' Cei'tified ll~aH
d• Wri ei~Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article numbec 2. ❑ RBStdCted D9livery y ~o Insurance Coverage Provided.
■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the artide was delivered and the date Do not use for Intemational Mail See reverse
~ deuvered. Consult postrnaster for fee. a Senc
~ 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number ~ Street r
d A-ig 5 $91 c
N l R~
E ~NCCI 4b. Service Type ~ Pos~ fice, state, ziP code
c°~ L ❑ Registered O-Certified W
Ar~i: ~3ru~ c,F
W ❑ Express Mail p Insured S Postege $ 'rj
Nw m* ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD ~ 'Q
p o Certified Fee
c 1., 7. Date of D livery
Z un, O~ q-ict(,
l o Spedal Delivery Fee
zaql
~ 5. Received By: (Print Name) 8. Ad essee's Address (Only ff requested r Restriaed Delivery Fee
W and fee is paid)
Retum Receipt Showing ro
g 6. Signature: ddressee orA nt) ' Whom 8 Date Deiivered . tc)
0, i, Rewm Receipf Slrowing ro wham,
m ' Date, & Addresseo's Addross
Ps Form 3811, December 1994 Domestic Return Receipt
TOTAL Postago & Fetjs $ 2.15
Postmark or Date
0
U
CO
a
~ •
F--
~ S~NDERems 1 and/or 2 for additionat servicea. I also wish to receive the P. 4 7 4 5 6 9 8 9 9
~•Complete items 3, 4a, and ab. following services (for an
d0 Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can retum thia extra fee): US Postal Service
~ card to you. d
~ ■Attach ihia fortn to ihe hont of the ma(Ipiece, or on ihe badc if space does not 1, ❑ Addressee's Address "ReceoPt for Cert6foed f~aH
` pem'it. ~ No Insurance Coverage Provided.
$■write•Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the aRicle number. 2, ❑ RBStdCt9d D811V6ry v~ Do not use for Intemational Mail See reverse
■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the artide was delivered and the date
o deiivered. Consult postmaster for fee. t to tcue-IL w e
« 3. Artlcle Addressed to: 4a. Article Number JE stre Number ~
9 'P y--1 q~ c gE M 4CA
"EL PQCt~ G~~~ I ~6~~1 4b. Senrice Type ~ Post ice IState, S ZIP Code
~ o
y y50 fi~ ~ 1~ ~~bM ❑ Registered ~ Certified m
W 1V ~ O Express Mail ❑ Insured P0~9e $ ~ 55 I
p ~~~e~(,(ei ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise p COD ' ~r;fedFee Ip
7. Date ~liv~%e~~~~
Z p Spedel Delivery Fee
~ S. Received By: (Print Name) 8. Addressee's Address (Only il requested ~ Restriaed Delivery Fee
w and fee is paid) t,,, O
Retum Receipt Showing to ~
0 6. Signature: e or Agent) wnom a oaca ~rva~d
~ x - ~ Retum Receipt Showirg ro Whom,
~ ~ Date, 8 Addressee's Addre.ss
PS Fokni 3811, December 1994 Domestic Return Receipt e
0 MTAL Postage & Fees' 2~ls
M Postmark or Date
~
0
~
~
a
r
d SENDER: p 474 569 903
o ■Complete items t and/or 2 for additional seMces. I HISO wiSh t0 f8C81V8 tf18
~■Complete items 3, aa, and ab. following services (for an US Postal Service
~ ■Prlnt your name and address on the reverse of this fortn so that we can retum thia extra fee): ~t(1
d ■Att ch th~s fortn to the front of the maiipiece, or on the back if space does not 0 ~~6~8~~ u ~i~p ~~~0~~~~ u~u~~~
1. 0 Addressee's Address No Insurance Coverage Provided.
` Perrnit. Z
d Do not use for Intemetional PAail See reverse
d■ Write'Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number. 2. ❑ RBSt~iCtBd D91iV8ry y
■Trie Retum Receipt will show to whom the artide was delivered and the date a Sent to C
r deiivered. Consult postrnaster for fee. M LI
~ 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number ¢ Street mber ~l ~
a C CQ,, c Post ice, Stat 8 ZIP Code O
d M q 9 0 '
E M ~ er 5 cl~~~rU J~' V I C'C. ~~C• 4b. Senrice Type ~
0
~ p, ❑ Registered Certified c
f/ postage $ , SS
v^ Z1-1 I ❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured . etum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD ? 7 Certified fee
7. ate of Delive wa ~Y 3 Spedal`Delivery Fee 47
0
a
5. R e' ed By: (Prlnt ame) Addressee' Ad ress (Only il requested Resmaed Delivery Fee
' ~j9-M Ut '7' S ~ and fee is paid) t~ Retum Receipt Showing to ( ~
g . Si •(Addresse or Agent) ~ ~ c whom & Date Deiivered
o ReWm Receipt Showing ro Whom,
~ Dato, 8 AddrascSs Address
~ orm 3811, December 1994 Domestic Return Receipt C) TOYAL Postaga 8 Fees $
Postrnark or oate
~ •
C
li.
i
cn
a
~ ~
d SENDER: I also wisn to receive the P 530 219 007
■ Complete items 1 and/or 2 for addilional seMcea.
m■Complete items 3, aa, and ab. following services (for an
Print your name and address on the reverae of this form so that we can retum this extra fee): US Postal Senrice
`ca`d'o You. Recei 4 fo~ Cert6fi~d Mafil
~ ■Attach thia fortn to the iRfnt of the mailpieca; or on the back if space d0es not 1, ❑ Addressee'S AddfASS ' P
~ rmit. Z No Insurance Coverage Provided.
d re~ivrite•Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number. Q, ❑ RBStdCted Dellvery c°n' Do not use for Intemational Mail See reverse
r~ ■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the artide was delivered and ihe date ~ Sent
c deuvered. Consult postrnaster for fee. 15 c Zfrv I
0
v 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number d Street umber ~ ~
d P 53b Z1 ~ DO-i 1025 I a ~ E Post , State, & ZIP ode
E ~,hM~-~ 5~ L~{~ J~~ 4b. Service Type ~ l Gn~3
0
~ ❑ Registered ~ Certifted m .
~ z3~-5 so R~s ~ ~ P~~a9a $ , 55
❑ Express Mail p Insured . '
a~ 'b ~~,.9 OR Gj~Z23 ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise O COD ~i CeAified Fee,
o 7. Date of Delivery ~ ~q~ Delivery Fee
Z
m
o 5. Received By: (Print Name 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested c Restricted Delivery Fee
¢ ~ and fee is paid) r ~
Retum Receipt Showing to IO
g 6. Signa re: (Addr ssee or`Agent) : Whom & Date Delivered
o Retum Receipt Showing to Wtrom,
~ X fy) Date, & Addtessee's Address
- Ps Form 3811, December 1994 Domestic Return Receipt ; TpTALPostage& Fees
~ Postmark or Date
€
0
LL
N
a
+
m SENDEFi.- p 474 569 902
~■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional servicea. I 81S0 WISh t0 r8C8iV8 th6
y ■Complete items 3, aa, ar,d ab. following services (for an US Postal Service
~■Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can retum thia gx(f8 fe9): ',~D~Q QOI~ ~C~(~QOqlad l~l ~10~
~ card to you.
■Adach this fortn to the front of the mailPiece, or on the back if s ace does not ~ No Insurance Covera e Provided.
` p 1. ❑ Addressee's Address
P 9
ermit. Do not use for Intemational PAail See reverse
~•Write'Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the aAicle number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Uj t to
~ ■The Retum Receipt will show to whom ihe aAide was delivered and the date
' o deuvered. Consult postrnaster for fee. a
~ 'et & Numbe
-o 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number d V~I I
a ~ q O'Z c Post~ftice, tate, & IP Code
o?or-~l~inc~ fi~enerc~l ~1ec-nL 4b. Service Type
~
N hl~n • Cuc~i~ v~ ) Ma~ ❑ Re9istered ~Certified ag ~ Posta9e $
L J `x'ia ~ '-"'`~I C,^ ❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured ~
W 1 f L/ m~ Certified Fee
p 12~ SW 51.~►'ho~~ Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD
,0• Spedel Delivery Fee; `
Q ~~~,~~n~~ n~ Z~ 7. Date o Delivery
Z , a~.) qestrided Delivery Fee
~ Z 5. Received By: (Print Name) 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested Ratum Recelpt Showing to I ~
w and fee is paid)
mi = - Whom 8 Date Delivered II
0 6. x Signa r(Addres or Agent Rewm Receipt Showing to Whom,
Date, & Addressee's Address
,
~ mwl o TOTAL Postege & Fees $ 222
PS Fo 3811, Decemb r 1994 Domestic Return Receipt co
€ postmaRc or Date I
0
LL
U)
a
+ ~ -
~
; SENDER: P 530 219 008
~■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional servicea. I 81SO wish to reCeive the
~■Complete items 3, aa, and ab. following services (for an
d■ Print your name end address on the reverse of this fortn so that we can retum this US POSt81 SeNiCe
~ card to yau. extra fee):
~ ■Attach this fortn to the frorn of the mailpiece, or on ihe badc if space does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address ~~e~~Bp~ ~ertu~i~~ ~flae~
~ permN. Z No Insurance Coverage Provided.
d■wrice'Retum Receipt Request~qd'on the mailpiece below the article number. 2, ❑ Restricted Delivery N Do not use for Intemational Mail See reverse
$■The Retum Receipt will show tb whom the artide was delivered and the date
~ deiivered. Consult postrnaster for fee. a ualc~n Va~ ~►Ja~er 1~~'
0
v 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number ~
d o Street umber
d n
a ~UQ.n U~QIIL V~}~~ D1~. P ~O LI -1 WC~ C 74 5-
Post ZIPCode
~ 4b. Service Type ~
N A : C~G ~ QQe~ ❑ Registered ~ Certifted ~ postage $ ~`J
~ ❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured 5
W
p 0 Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD 2. Certified Fee
Q &OVaibn, Op, 9-0-7,5 7•DateofDelivery
~
~aW Deuvery Fee
Z iz'
Zy~ o~ .
~ 5. Received By: (Print Name) 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested ~ Restrided Delivery fee
W and /ee is peid) ~LO ( O
Q t~ Retum Receipt Showing to
93
g 6. Signature: A r ee or ge ~ ~ vVhom & Date Delivered
X ReNm R~eipt Showirre ro Whom,
Date, & Addressee's Address
- Ps Form 3811, oec ber issa Domestic Return Receipt C TOTAL Postage & Fees $
~
~ Postmark or Date
~ 0
LL
ur
a
c'• SENDER: P 474 569 900
~■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. 1 elso wish to rBCeive the
Z ■Complete items 3, aa, and ab. following services (for an JS Postal Service
y ■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this fortn so that we can retum this 8Xtf8 f98):
~ cardtayou. dReCe6p$ ~er41f6ed MBa90
~■Adach this fortn to the front of the mailpiece, or on the badc if space does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 'E,Vo Insurance Coverage Provided.
4)■ Wne ~~Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailPece below the aAicle number. d Do not use for Intemational Mail See reverse
d 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery
N
■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date a Sent to
~ deuvered. Consult postmaster for fee. 0 - tAw
0
v 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number d Street 8►J}~mbe~~ :5
d P ~04 5~ CIOD ~ C-C
. Service T e
~ KW R~Lll~.~ E}C1s (C~YY1 paYl 4b yp ziP coae q 12 D
c°~ • ~ ❑ Registered ~ Certifted ~I postage $ S~
v~) CW~~rn~ h~u~nn .~'4". ❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured E'
p Z22 N~l ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD Certified Fee
Mc+)at
7. Date of D rY Speaal Delivery Fee
0 7--a ve °
Z ~r-~I6~d , ~ q~ZO~, - 9 -2 G 0~----
~ 5. Received By: (Prinf Name) 8. Addressee's Address (ONy il requested c Restricted Dalivery Fee '
W and lee is paid) co Retum Receipt Showing to 1 O
m IE Whom 8 Oate DeGvered (
g 6. Signature: (Addressee r t)
Rewm Receipt Showing to Wlwm,
Date, & Addressee's Address
~ PS Form 3811, Dece "ber 1994 Domestic Return Receipt TOTAL Postage 8 Fees $ "15
• Postrnark or Date
60
U)
, a
d SENDER: I also wish to receive the p 474 569 901
0 ■ Comptete items 1 and/or 2 for additional serv(ces.
■Completa items 3, aa, and ab. following senrices (for an US Postal Service
N■ Print your name and addresa on the reverae of thia form so that we can retum this 8Xtf8 f99):
card to you. ~ g Receipt gop ~m
,4Qeglif led Mali
Peramc i thia fortn to the hor~t of the mailpiece, or on the badc if space does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address No Insurance Coverage Provided.
d■wr;ce•Rerum Receipt Requesred' on the mailpiece below the eAicle number. Q, ❑ RBStfICtBd 0911V8ry N Do not use for Intemational AAail See reverse
~ •The Retum Receipt will show to whom the artide was delivered and the date Sent t
o dervered. Consult postrnaster for fee. a G
-a 3. ArtiCle Addressed to: 4a. ArtlCle Number ,d Stree18 N mber
p, 1 ~{1'~.l a.-! ~P ~ n 1 o V n,~ TA ~
~ 19D ~ Post 1 S te, & ZIP Cods T
o 4b. Service Type ~
v c+ ~ ❑ Registered ~Certifled ¢ pp~$9e ~ ~ -r'j5
W ~ ❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured ~
~Q
¢ fied Fee
0 5b i~~-~y~ Ft Y~ C~ ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD Certi
~
0 ~Q 7. Date of Delivery w
Z I 1 P s q J o~ Spedal Dalivery Fee
L• f)
~ Restriaed Deiivery Fee Y
~ 5. Received By: (Print Name) 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested~
I and fee is paid) 10 ~a, qetum Receipt Showing to ~ g 6. Sig ture (Addressee orAg ) ~ Whom & Date Delivered ; , 1 O
o Rewm Receipt ShWAg to Whom,
:0` $ Date, 8 Addressee'S Address
U) PS Form 3811, DeCembef 1994 Domestic Return Receipt ~ YOYAL Postage ~F.ees.- i
~
~ Postrnarh or Date I
0
U.
N
a
SENDER: ~
v■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. I also wish to receive the P 474 569 9[] ~I
~ ■Complete itema 3, 4a, and ab. following services (for an
Print your name and address on the reverse of tAis fortn so that we can retum this gxtr8 fee):
~ card to you. ai US Postal Service
~ ■Atlach this fortn to the front of the mailpfece, or on the badc if space does not 1.❑ Addressee's Address °Rece0 t foP Cer{g$ied Maj0
m
d ■ Wn e ~tRetum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the arlicle number. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery ~ No Insurance Coverage Provlded.
~■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the aAide was delivered end the date a Do not use for Intemational Mafl See reverse
o deiivered. Consult postrnaster for fee. Sent to ~
~ 3. ArtiCle Addressed to: 4a. ArtiCle NUmbef c ~reet M. 4~4 s~9 go~ .
~
a
o 4b. Service Type d posc pH~ce, State, & ZI Cotle
~ ❑ Aegistered Certified °C act
c q . ~
W O • ~x (,lL0 O Express Mail ❑ Insured postage ~ ~`'1j5
~ ~~-w ~ ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD ~
~ I U\ L. cerfired Fee , I p
Date of Delive~
z 0Spedal Dalivery Fee
m 5. Received B:(Print Name) r~ 8.: 'ddressee's Address ()nly if uested c
¢ 'nd fee is paid) m ~ Restrided Delivery Fee
Retum Receipt Showing to
~ 6. Signat :(Addressee orAgen
- Whom 8 Date Delivered ,
X uvl.,r ~ rReNm Receipt Shrnving to Whan, ~
~ Ps Form 3811, De ember 1994 Domestic Return Receipt ~°a1e, & Aftinsee'sAftess ~
~ TOYAL Postoge 8 Fees $ 215
N Postrnark or Date 'I
0
LL
~
a
- - i
0
Return completed questionnaire to:
Center for Pooulation Research and Census
Portland State Universitv
Portland, OR 97207-0751
No later than December 26, 1996 for certification on December 31,
1996.
A N N E X A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E
Ci ty of County of fA544NGT'vN) '
Annexation Ordinance Number or Final Order Number Qm j- 2 6 C')1 7
~ Effective Date of Anne:cation
NOTE: Enumeration of annexations which involve 200 or more housing
units must be conducted under the supervision of the Center for
Population Research and Census to be certified. Complete the
following section if there are less than 200 housing units in this
annexation.
Attach completed confidential census schedules for all housing units
both vacant and occuaied. There must be one sheet for each
inhabitable housing unit.
HOUSING UNITS P,IVD POPULATIOIV AT TIME OF ANNEXATIOIV
TOTAL OCCUPIED VACANT PERSONS
UNITS IN SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES
UNITS IIV MULTIPLE FAMILY STRUCTURES
MOBILE HOMES OR TRAILERS
TOTAL POPULATION OF ANNEXED AREA DATE OF ENUMERATIOIV
17
ENUMERATED Y g POS ITIO~ .
i
TELEPHONE 1VUMB'ER
r/
This questionnaire and the completed census schedules are the only
daca used to certify annexed population. Please DO NOT send maps,
copies of the final ordinance, lists of addresses, etc. to our office
uniess you are requested to do so. :L tnere are any questions, or to schedule a census, contact Howard
wineberg at the Center for Population Research and Census (503) 725-
3922.
THANiC YOU.
CONFIDENTIAL
City of
0
Address
HOUSING TYPE TENURE
Single Unit Structure (vr Owner Occupied (N'
Multiple Unit Structure Renter Occupied
Trailer or Mobile Home Vacant
Seasonal ( 1
RESIDENTS •
Last Name rirst Name Sex Age
Respondent
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Portland State University School of Urban and Public Affairs
Center For Population Research and Census (503) 725-3922
• , i
November 27, 1996
FINAL ORDERS ON ANNEXATION 3658 (ZCA 96-0006) and 3659 (ZCA 96-0005)
We have received the final orders for Annexation 3658 (ZCA 96-0006) and 3659 (ZCA
96-0005), effective November 14, 1996. Maps of the annexed properties are attached.
Census information is as follows:
Final Order 3658:
Owners:
Lynn & Sharon Hatch 2S110AB-03700, Outbuildings only on site
14135 SW 114th Site address: 14225 SW 114th Ave.
Tigard, OR 97223
2S110AB-03800, 1 SF Dwelling
Site address: 14135 SW 114th Ave.
Est. population - 2
' 2S110A6-03900, Vacant lot
2S110AB-04300, Outbuildings only on site
No address .
Estate of Ralph Flowers 2S110BA-00800
12930 SW Bluebell This parcel is used as a private street - SW 117th Avenue
Beaverton, OR 97008
Final Order 3659:
Owners:
Maryrose Sanders 2S1 03AA-01 916, 1 SF dwelling
12390 SW 106th Ave. Site address: 12390 SW 106th Ave.
Tigard, OR 97223 Est. population - 2
Please call me if you have any questions.
Laurie Nicholson
Community Development Department
J ' \ ~ • ~ S .NvTA~
4i<~ )
3
40 ,n g ~
~ . 0
. T
. .
~ ~ .
S yy-
1rtEADOW $7 ~ENr~R
SW ,
S~~ KqTNE ~~V
.
4 T/QqF,+O ' Cp~I
C~7 cr MF'R'r~
589
. ~.U ~R . , 6 `
146 ~ . • ARD.
~ G ~A
cti4.
SCNOOl- s.w.
1 :YpES,
PIC • / ~ Jv~ 2
J ON
11 ~
vi ~ r U. Y ~
'il ~s ~
~T
'~f"
~ 4 JOt~Ns PL.
~ i J . S •'N ~ /Q W / ~
u `
5T . , ~,p•
' ~ ~~i 7~ ~ ^ • c ~p s X P~ $j, ~j~ c~~'
U T • ~ r X.
S.w
. /WA
LT S
co)
sr
E R R OL s. F+° sr
S'T
i
I _ . . 'o
; ,
, , .
,
• , .
CITY OF TIOARD
Communiry Develop»rent
Shaping A Better Commanity
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
TO: Ron Goodpaster, Amanda Bewersdorff, Brian Embiey, Cathy Wheatley, Greg Berry,
Jiil Aldrich, Kathy Davis
FROM: Laurie Nicholson
DATE: November 27, 1996
' SUBJECT: Final Orders on Annexation 3658 (ZCA 96-0006) and 3659 (ZCA 96-0005)
We have received the final orders for Annexation 3658 (ZCA 96-0006) and 3659 (ZCA 96-0005),
effective November 14, 1996. Maps of the annexed properties are attached. Census information is
as follows:
Final Order 3658:
Owners:
Lynn & Sharon Hatch 2S110AB-03700, Outbuildings only on site
14135 SW 114th Site address: 14225 SW 114th Ave.
Tigard, OR 97223
2S110A6-03800, 1 SF Dwelling
Site address: 14135 SW 114th Ave.
Est. population - 2
2S110A6-03900, Vacant lot
2S110AB-04300, Outbuildings only on site
No address
Estate of Ralph Flowers 2S1106A-00800
12930 SW Bluebell This parcel is used as a private street - SW 117th Avenue
Beaverton, OR 97008
Final Order 3659:
Owners:
Maryrose Sanders 2S1 03AA-01 916, 1 SF dwelling
12390 SW 106th Ave. Site address: 12390 SW 106th Ave.
Tigard, OR 97223 Est. population - 2
~ •
- - - - - - - _
- - - - - - - - _ ~ - - -
~ - - _ -
- ~ - - - - .
_ c~~s~ = - - - - - -
- - -
• • •
t
Z~- oav s ~~s~
Name Final Order Number
ANNEXATION FOLLOW-UP PROCEDURE
1. Receive Final Order from Boundary Commission. Date/ "~L-z
2. Request census.
If less than 200 homes City Recorder must perform.
(Put in work order for Office Aide assistance)
If more than 200 homes, Portland State performs: Date J22__2-44
PSU Center For Population Research 464-3947
. Individual census form to be filled out for each address
when interviewing residents at their homes.
• If annexation area comes in close to end of the quarter
(March 31, June 30, September 30, December 31) get census
certified to Portland State approximately one week prior
to these dates to allow state-shared revenue to be received
for the next full quarter.
• If census to be done through PSU, call and schedule census
to be completed as soon as possible. Negotiate contract and
get necessary signatures. Check with Recorder for any Local
Contract Review Board involvement requirements.
3. Make 25 copies of Final Order.
4. Prepare department distribution of Final Order w/map.
Chief of Police - Ron Goodpaster
Engineering -
Planning - Ray Valone
Accounting - Amanda Bewersdorff
Building Official - David Scott
Librarian - Kathy Davis
Community Development - Nels Mickaelson
City Recorder - Cathy Wheatley
Water - Randy Volk
Send memorandum to department distribution, listing names
and addresses of all citizens in the newly annexed area.
Effective date from Boundary Commission should be included
in memo. Date
. ~ •
5. Notify agencies of annexation (see list attached). Letters must
be sent by certitied mail to:
General Telephone Co.; Pacitic NW Bell Telephone; NW Natural Gas;
Unifled Sewerage Agency; MACC; Portland General Electric;
Tualatin Valley Water District; Pride Disposal; Mlller's Sanitary
Service, Inc.; Schmidt's Sanitary Service.
Only send letter to OLCC if a liquor license outlet is involved. Date 11'2 7 1
6. Send Mayor's welcome letter to newly annexed citizens at each
address (include New Citizen Packet with letter).
(Also check with City Recorder if annexation 90 days before primary
or general election on even years or 34 days prior to any special
election date.) Date
7. Ifthe area being annexed has a hotel ormotel, notify Washington
County for receipt of Transit Room Tax. Date
8. If there are businesses in the newly annexed area notify Business
Tax Coordinator for the City. Date
9. City Recorder has a file folder titled "TRUE CASH VALUE." This
file is to be kept up-to-date with annexation statistics at all times! Date
10. Complete and mail Portland State Questionnaire, when received.
Include cover letter, completed questionnaire and individual
census forms to: (Retain copy for our files)
Annexations
Center for Population Research & Census
Portland State University
P.O. Box 751
Portland, OR 97207 Date
11. Place annexation file folder in Central Files. Place all material
in date order. Type label to reflect annexation name, Boundary
Commission Order number along with location description. Date
h:\login~o\an nexpro.l
Revised 03/95
' • ~
PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION.
800 NE OREGON ST #16 (STE 540), PORTLAND OR 97232-TEL: 731-4093
FINAL ORDER
RE: BOUNDARY CHANGE PROPOSAL N0: 3659- Annexation of territory to the City of Tigard.
Proceedings on Proposal No. 3659 commenced upon receipt by the Boundary Commission of a
resolution and property owner/registered voter consents from the City on October 15, 1996, I
requesting that certain property be annexed to the City. The resolution and consents meet the
requirements for initiating a proposal set forth in ORS 199.490, particularly Section (2)(a)(B).
Upon receipt of the petition the Boundary Commission published and posted notice of the public
hearing in accordance with ORS 199.463 and conducted a public hearing on the proposal on
November 14, 1996. The Commission also caused a study to be made on this proposal which
considered economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections and physical
development of the land.
The Commission reviewed this proposal in light of the following statutory guidance:
"199.410 Policy. (1) The Legislative Assembly finds that: •
' "(a) A fragmented approach has developed to public services provided by local
government. Fragmentation results in duplications in services, unequal tax bases and
resistance to cooperation and is a barrier to planning implementation. Such an
approach has limited the orderly development and growth of Oregon's urban areas to
the detriment of the citizens of this state.
"(b) The programs and growth of each unit of local government affect not only
, that particular unit but also activities and programs of a variety of other units within
each urban area.
"(c) As local programs become increasingly intergovernmental, the state has a
responsibility to insure orderly determination and adjustment of local government •
boundaries to best meet the needs of the people.
"(d) Local comprehensive plans define local land uses but may not specify which
units of local government are to provide public services when those services are
required.
"(e) Urban population densities and intensive development require a broad
spectrum and high level of community services and controls. When areas become
urbanized and require the full range of community services, priorities are required
regarding the type and levels of services that the residents need and desire.
Community service prionties need to be established by weighing the total service needs
against the total financial resources available for securing services. Those service
priorities are required to reflect focat circumstances, conditions and limited financial
resources. A single govemmental agency, rather than several governmental agencies is
Final Order - Page 1
' ' '1 • •
' in most cases better able to assess the financial resources and therefore is the best
mechanism for establishing community service priorities.
"(2) It is the intent of the Legislative Assembly that each boundary commission
establish policies and exercise its powers under this chapter in order to create a
governmental structure that promotes efficiency and economy in providing the widest
range of necessary services in a manner that encourages and provides planned, well-
ordered and efficient development patterns.
"(3) The purposes of ORS 199.410 to 199.534 are to:
"(a) Provide a method for guiding the creation and growth of cities and special
service districts in Oregon in order to prevent illogical extensions of local government
boundaries and to encourage the reorganization of overlapping governmental agencies;
"(b) Assure adequate quality and quantity of public services and the financial
integrity of each unit of local government;
"(c) Provide an impartial forum for the resolution of local government jurisdictional
questions;
"(d) Provide that boundary determinations are consistent with acknowledged local
comprehensive plans and are in conformance with state-wide planning goals. In
making boundary determinations the commission shall first consider the acknowledged
comprehensive plan for consistency of its action. Only when the acknowledged local
comprehensive plan provides inadequate policy direction shall the commission consider
the statewide planning goals. The commission shall consider the timing, phasing and
availability of services in making a boundary determination; and
~ "(e) Reduce the fragmented approach to service delivery by encouraging single
agency service delivery over service delivery by several agencies.
"199.462 Standards for review of changes; territory which may not be included in
certain changes. (1) In order to carry out the purposes described by ORS 199.410
when reviewing a petition for a boundary change or application under ORS 199.464, a
boundary commission shall consider local comprehensive planning for the area,
economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections pertinent to the
proposal, past and prospective physical development of land that would directly or
indirectly be affected by the proposed boundary change or application under ORS
199.464 and the goals adopted under ORS 197.225."
"(2) Subject to any provision to the contrary in the principal Act of the affected
district or city and subject to the process of transfer of territory:
"(a) Territory within a city may not be included within or annexed to a district
without the consent of the city council;
"(b) Territory within a city may not be included within or annexed to another city;
and
Final Order - Page 2
. • ' • •
"(c) Territory within a district may not be included within or annexed to another
~ district subject to the same principal Act."
The Commission also considered its policies adopted under Administrative Procedures Act
(specifically 193-05-000 to 193-05-015), historical trends of boundary commission operations and
decisions and past direct and indirect instructions of the State Legislature in arriving at its decision.
FINDINGS
(See Findings in Exhibit "A" attached hereto).
REASONS FOR DECISION
(See Reasons for Decision in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.)
ORDER
' On the basis of the Findings and Reasons for Decision listed in Exhibit "A", the Boundary
Commission approved Boundary Change Proposal No. 3659 on November 14, 1996.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED THAT the territory described in Exhibit "B" and depicted on the
attached map, be annexed to the City of Tigard as of the date of approval.
PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL GOVERNMENT
BOUNDARY COMMISSION
DATE: BY:
Chair
ATTEST: Final Order - Page 3
. ' • •
Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3659
FINDINGS
1. The territory contains 0.33 acres, 1 single family dwelling, an estimated population of one
and is evaluated at $155,400.
2. The owners desire City services to facilitate future additional residential development.
3. The Boundary Commission has three adopted policies. The first of these policies states that
the Commission generally sees cities as the primary providers of urban services. Recognizing
that growth of cities may cause financial problems for the districts, the Commission states in
the second policy that the Commission will help find solutions to the problems. The third
policy states that the Commission may approve illogical boundaries in the short term if these
lead to logical service arrangements in the long term.
4. The parcel slopes form north to south.
5. The territory is within the regional Urban Growth Boundary and the boundary of Metro.
6. The territory is located within the County's West Tigard Community Planning area. The West
Tigard Plan states:
The West Tigard Planning Area has been identified as part of the City of Tigard 'Active
Planning Area.' Under the active planning concept, a City accepts planning
responsibilities for areas outside of its corporate limits because the City feels the area will
ultimately have to annex in order to receive urban services for development. Although
most of the West Tigard Planning Area will have to rely on the City for urban services,
some portions may be able to obtain the services for urban development required by the
County urban growth management policies through service districts other than the City.
Because of this possibility for development in both the City and the County, Washington
County has agreed to adopt a plan for the area which is consistent with the
comprehensive plan developed and adopted by the City of Tigard."
The site is designated under the County Comprehensive Plan as Residential, with a zoning of
R-5, which permits 5 units per acre.
7. Washington County reviewed its role in service provision in its Countv 2000 Plan program.
In this document, the County adopted a policy of supporting a service delivery system which
distinguishes between municipal and county-wide services to achieve tax fairness and
expenditure equity in the provision of public services. The County policy states that
municipal services should be provided either by cities or special districts.
8. The City of Tigard and Washington County have entered into an Urban Planning Area
Agreement (UPAA) which is a part of both the County's and the City's adopted Compre-
hensive Plans. The UPAA establishes an "Active Planning Area" where the City assumes
responsibility for land use planning, and an "Area of Interest" in which the County agrees to
coordinate its planning because of the potential impacts on Tigard.
Final Order - Page 4
. • • • •
' Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3659
This proposal falls within the "Active Planning Area" as designated in the UPAA. The
following pertinent provisions are from Section A, the "Active Planning Area" portion of the
UPAA:
A. Active Planning Area
1. Definition
Active Plannin4 Area means the incorporated area and certain unincorporated
areas contiguous to the incorporated area for which the CITY conducts
comprehensive planning and seeks to regulate development activities to the
greatest extent possible.....
2. The CITY shall be responsible for comprehensive plannin9 within the Active
Planning Area.
3. The CITY is responsible for the preparation, adoption and amendment of the
public facility plan required by OAR 660-11 within the Active Planning Area.
4. The COUNTY shall not approve land divisions within the Active Planning Area
which would create lots less than 10 acres in size, unless public sewer and
water service are available to the property.
5. The COUNTY shall not approve a development in the Active Planning Area if
the proposal would not provide for, nor be conditioned to provide for, an
enforceable plan for redevelopment to urban densities consistent with CITY's
Comprehensive Plan in the future upon annexation to the CITY as indicated by
the CITY Comprehensive Plan.
6. Approval of the development actions in the Active Planning area shall be
contingent upon provision of adequate urban services including sewer, water,
storm drainage, streets, and police and fire protection.
7. The COUNTY shall not oppose annexation to the CITY wiihin the CITY's
Active Planning Area.
9. The City of Tigard has a"city limits" plan. The County's plan and ordinances remain
applicable unless the City takes other action after the annexation is effective. The City's
Comprehensive Plan Policy 7.1.2 states that as a pre-condition to development the City shall
require that:
a. Development coincide with the availability of adequate service capacity including:
1. Public water;
2. Public sewer shall be required for new development within the city unless the
property involved is over 300 feet from a sewer line and Washington County
Health Department approval for a private disposal system is obtained; and
3. Storm drainage.
Final Order - Page 5
' • .
' Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3659
b. The facilities are:
1. Capable of adequately servicing all intervening properties and the proposed
development; and
2. Designed to city standards
c. All new development utilities to be placed underground.
The Tigard Comprehensive Plan contains an Urbanization element which includes the
following implementation strategies involving annexation.
URBANIZATION
10.1.1 Prior to the annexation of land to the City of Tigard:
' a. The city shall review each of the following services as to adequate capacity,
or such services to be made available, to serve the parcel if developed to the
most intense use allowed, and will not significantly reduce the level of
' services available to developed and undeveloped land within the City of
Tigard. The services are:
1. water;
~ 2. sewer;
3. draina9e•
,
4. streets;
5. police; and
6. fire protection.
10.1.2 Approval of proposed annexations of land by the city shall be based on findings with
respect to the following:
a. The annexation eliminates an existing "pocket" or "island" of unincorporated
territory; or
b. The annexation will not create an irregular boundary that makes it difficult for
the police in an emergency situation to determine whether the parcel is within
or outside the city;
c. The police department has commented upon the annexation;
d. The land is located within the Tigard urban planning area and is contiguous to
the city boundary;
e. The annexation can be accommodated by the services listed in 10.1.1(a).
Final Order - Page 6
. ' • .
Exhibit A
~ Proposal No. 3659
The City of Tigard/Tigard Water District water rates begin at a flat rate of $14.30 for 800
cubic feet, charged bi-monthly. Additional water use over 800 cf. is charged at $1.32/100
cf. for territories both within and outside of the City/District boundaries.
12. Upon annexation to the City, the territory will be automatically withdrawn from the
Washington County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District and the District's $ .7481 per thousand
property tax will no longer be levied against the territory. The County Service District
provides a level of service of .51 officers per 1000 population which in addition to the
general County level of .43 officers per 1000 population means that the current level is .94
officer per 1000 population.
Subsequent to annexation, the Tigard Police Department will provide police protection to the
territory. Tigard provides a service level of 1.3 officers per thousand population.
Emergency response in Tigard is under five minutes.
13. The territory is within the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District. Annexation will not affect
this service because the City is in the District.
14. The territory is within the boundary of the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance
District. Upon annexation the territory will be automatically withdrawn from the District and
the District's levy of $.2886 per $1000 assessed value will no longer apply to the property.
15. The Unified Sewerage Agency levies an annual assessment for storm drainage services of
$36 per dwelling unit of which $24 goes to the City.
16. The territory is within the Washington County Service District #1 for street lights. The
District provides services to areas within its boundary which request street lighting services.
The District uses local improvement districts to finance the service. Upon annexation it will
be automatically withdrawn from the District.
The City provides street lighting service out of its Street fund which receives State shared
gasoline tax revenues as its primary revenue source. Street lights are required by the City in
residential subdivisions. Upon installation of street lights by a developer to City standards,
the City accepts dedication of the street lights and takes on ongoing operation and
maintenance costs.
17. The territory is within the boundary of the Washington County Vector Control District. Tigard
is not a part of the District. Upon annexation, the territory will be automatically withdrawn
from the unfunded Washington County Vector Control District.
Final Order - Page 8
• Exhibit B
Proposal No. 3659
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ANNEXATION TO
City of Tigard
A tract of land in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 3, T2S, R1 W, Willamette Meridian
Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest corner of Lot 13 of Cottonwood Place as recorded in
Book 21 Page 30 of the Washington County Subdivision Records; thence along the
boundary of said lot the following courses; thence north 89 degrees 21' E a distance
of 100 feet; thence 00 degrees 10' west a distance of 160.12 feet; thence north 75
degrees 05' west a distance of 52.82 feet; thence south 89 degrees 36' 30" west a
distance of 49.15 feet; thence north 00 degrees 10' east a distance of 150.00 feet
to the point of beginning.
Final Order - Page 10
,
PROPOSAL ■ 3659
NE1 /4 NE1 /4 SECTION 3 T2S R1 W W.M. 2S 1 3AA
Washington County
Scale: 1 250'
U~~ N« 5C.; I0Q
' ~ ~W'KATHERIN T M.~~.
wi I ~ ~ '
loo 3s
rr.q-
unooa oi:r.., r» 1
; ~
ILI /o.aM .m .v ~
1-
, , . ~ ~
1\lrr LLi
, • -
=ti.
~
1 ~ \r~ 1~~~Y~ Z ' i r n` r'
I ~ . I J~'1~_
p 1 ~ L
.
N
-rio~y
Z n~
. ,oa
.
r1I9J1Tl ',r1\IGED
;
~ - - - - ~ - - - ►
TIGARD
M
. ~ 2 74 : =,aa "zl- ~ =TOO. ~
:I~ ' t ~ :I • y TRACT
] .ir5 B ~ t, A
' ~ ~ ~ L r•w ~ 9L 3
I ~ • . ~ ~ ~ s.w. , /OSt~ • ~500 • 4 , 10
N ~ ' .~i~a.oo .'°d '~~h e ~ s•" ~e~n 1.
24
" i ~ CLYDESDAL
i ~ - ' - s• _ ~ • W .r ~ C~""S. . . . iioo ~
.:ssoo ix
m x ~e .
~ .i 'o . , •3400
~ I
}o ~
zz zi •~je roo• 14 ilt 1
3
' SOI• ]00~ { rY• d
1906•~ 1907 1910 r, i9~~ i913M
C d`I T T g0 l\ ly~/ O O D
g s io _
.i ~
1905 • r 1908
19 IE '7
S.W. JOHNSON STREET+
~ i300 1600 1700 1702 1701r 1904
lOI~ 900 IOOi ipp2• I100 1•• ~1 _I' ~1918 ~i;?:•> 19~7 19H 191)
i ~ . . r
LC ~
isw
E C H C H E H r 23-78 x - • ~ ~ ~ ~
.I „ j - ' ! • l 1900 '
1 ' ~ ,a: . .~.r °(~eoa•... ; '$y1•~..__ ' y•.
' 7'7
~eoz i•°'r I
!f4. • ~ .t~ ~ ~p
4 3 AREA TO
C%,. ANNEXED ~
. _ .
. ~=~Q q~0 ~ I~ ; . , •
FON ASSESSMENT P/PVOSES ONIT
00 NOi RfLT ON fOR AN7 OTM6N US! ' #
. ~ ~ • .a~ ..r✓ ,
. itRO ~~g, TIG
~ G ~ ~ j
3 • ~ 3EE NAv 25 I 3v0 y • •
PROPOSAL NOo 3659
CITY OF TIGARD
ANNEXATION
FIGURE 2
~
• •Agenda Item No.
TIG.IRD CITY COQNCIL Meeting of
• . MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996
• STIIDY SSSSION
> Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Council President Paul
Hunt.
> Council Present: Council President Paul Hunt, Councilors Brian
Moore, Bob Rohlf, and Ken Scheckla.
> Staff Present: City Administrator Bill Monahan; Acting City
Engineer Greg Berry; Community Developmenc Director Jim Hendryx;
Finance Director Wayne Lowry; Administrative Analyst Loreen Mills;
~ Asst. to the City administrator Liz Newton; Legal Counsel Tim Ramis;
and City Recorder Catherine Wheatley.
> Discussion of Anne:cation Analysis Option for the walnut Island
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, presented the staff
report describing four options available to Council. He mentioned
that this issue came to the Council as a result of septic tank
problems on James Street. Re reviewed the methods of annexation
available: double ma]'ority, island, and health hazard. He noted on
a map where the problem was located.
Mr. Hendryx explained Option A, a cherry stem annexation, involving
only °Area A." The Council could direct staff to initiate an island
annexation or to request the neighbors to request a double majority
annexation.
Mr. Hendzyx explained Option 8 which involved a larger area of 49
acres with just under 100 parcels (all the developed land west of SW
iZist). He commented that with a larger group, an island annexation
by the City might meet more opposition from those uninterested in
annexation. He recommended having a financing plan in place to
extend the sewer and pointed out that they could make a good case
for annexing a subdivision that already had sanitary sewer.
Mr. Hendryx explained Option C, the alternative of annexing the
entire Walnut island (225 acres with 441 lots of varying sizes and
development). He said that the critical factor in an island
annexation was proving that the City had a plan in place and the
capacity to meet a specific need; with this size of annexation,
doing so would be a challenge to the City.
Mr. Hendryx explained Option D, a modification of Option C to delay
annexation of the large undeveloped parcels until they developed.
Acting City Sagineer Greg Berry commented that the cost estimates in
the staff reDort were the overall costs that could be expected; they
did not include any potential challenges. Mr. Hendryx noted the
estimated costs for each anne:cation: Option A-$600,000; option B '
' - $860,000; and Option C - $3,900,000.
Finaace Director Wayne Lowry noted that the revenue expenditures
were based on an update of the 1993 assumptions which had included a
review of the storm water system. He said that the cost of dealing
with the lack of a storm water syste:n in the area would outweigh the
revenues received from the area for quite some time. He said that
the general fund expenditure of providing police protection was
pretty equal to the revenues received.
Mr. Hendryx recommended going with either Option A or B, both of
which would meet the James Street neighborhood's immediate needs.
Council President Hunt expressed concern that City sewer fund money
would be used to pay for this extension to those who have not been
paying City taxes. He noted that citizens who have been paying City
taxes were in need of sewer extensions also. He supported an LID
where those receiving the extension paid for it.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MZNUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 1
• • .
Mr. Ber:y said that all the ootions were open, and that with the .
larger parcels in Option C, the developers might pay for sewer
hookups. He said that the area was large enough to make an LID
Peasible. He said that an LID in Option A was also feasible though
more marginal. Mr. Hendryx said that the staff intent in its
recommendation was that the property owners would pay for the
extension.
In response to a question from Council President Hunt, Mr. BerrX
said that the cost estimates were for sanitary sewer only and did
not include the storm system. He explained that it was difficult to
put in a stor,n system without street improvements, esnecially curbs,
whereas a sanitary sewer system could be ut in at ar.v time. Mr.
Hendryx noted that a substantial cost woupld be added if they tried
to put in the sanitary sewer and storm systems at the same time
because of the need for a sidewalk collection system.
Councilor Rohlf asked if staff checked with the neighbors in Option
B. Mr. Hendryx said that staff has not done any canvassing. He
suggested holding an open house to inform the residents in Area B of
what was happening and to determine interest.
Mrs. Tibbetts said that she canvassed the neighbors primarily on
James, Alberta and Marion Streets. She commented that the people
realized that annexation was inevitable and that neighbors on James
Street fear a tragedy in the future because of the pollution level.
City Adminiatrator Bill Monahan suggested starting with Option A,
since they did not have evidence of 50% support in Area 8, and
holding the open house to determine interest in Area B.
Council President Hunt commented that timeliness was extremely
important but preferred getting both areas if it wouldn't slow the
process too much.
Councilor Scheckla asked if they had evidence of better than 50*
support in Area A. Mr. Hendryx said that the evidence of support
came from Mrs. Tibbetts' efforts and that the City had no formal
petition from the neighborhood.
Mrs. Tibbetts stated that she did not canvass every house but said
that the pollution was so bad in her neighborhood that this could '
not be a situation where people could say no. She described the
polluted and unhealthy living conditions currently existing in the I
neighborhood. She said that if the County was forced to deal with
this as a health problem, people would be evicted from their homes.
Councilor Scheckla expressed concern that Mrs. Tibbetts' neighbors
did not attend the Council meetings to show their support. Mrs.
Tibbetts explained that the neighbors were not informed that this
was the meeting to attend.
Councilor Scheck?a commented that the people wouldn't want this
until they knew the price tag. Mrs. Tibbetts said that the
situation was irreversible and that the price tag was irrelevant,
commenting that they knew the City did not put in sewers based on an
unlimi_ed budget. She reiterated her concern for the health of the
children.
Council President Hunt suggested that staff see how fast the City
could move on Options A and B. Councilor Moore commented that,
given the history of the cold reception in the Island to proposed
annexations, he wanted to make sure that the City was welcomed by
the hor.:eowners. He concurred with starting with Option A and moving
on to Cotion B if there was sufficient acceptance in the
neighborhood.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the City had any authority to alleviate
unhealthy conditions. Mr. Ramis said that the City was aithorized
by statute to allow an annexation to take place because of a health
hazard, and therefore could apgly for a health hazard annexation.
CIT'! COWCIL MEETZNG MIWTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 2
• •
• Mr. eerry e:cplained that if there was a problem, they could bring in
health officials to verify the need for a health hazard annexation.
Mr. Monahan reviewed Council direction which was to hold a
neighborhood meeting for Areas A and B to determine interest. Mrs.
Tibbetts stated that Gearhart Mathias at the County was fully aware
of the situation. Mr. Monahan suc~gesced asking Mr. Mathias for
background information at the neighborhood meeting.
Councilor Rohlf stated that he was biased in favor of bringing in
bigqer chunks of the Zsland at a time and encouraged the James and
Marion Streets neighbors to work with those on Alberta and Tibbett
Place to brinc Area B in at the same time. He said that he was
opposed to bringing in Area A just by itself.
Councilor Moore concurred with bringing in more people at one time,
noting that doing so lowered the cost to the individual homeowner. > Discuss Solid Waste Task Force Assignments
Loreen Mille, Adminietrative Analysis, referenced the September 26
staff inemo. She reported that Councilor Rohlf, the Council liaison
to the Solid Waste Task Force, suggested broadening the scope of the
study to include not only the haulers' efficiency recommendations
but also examination of the cost effectiveness of the franchise
operations, consideration of City participation in hauler business
decisions, examination of current service standards, development of
service measurement criteria, and discussion of regional issues and
Tigard's role as a regional player.
Ms. Mills noted regional issues such as the difference in the
tipping fee between the Metro transfer sites and other transfer
sites and whether or not Metro had the right to require that cities
in the Metro region use their facilities.
Councilor
Rohlf commentel that he wanted the time spent on the Task
' Force to be worthwhile for the members and that looking at only the
, hauling efficiencies was too limiting for the Task Force. He
suggested looking at the larger issues that affected the rates and
garbage hauling methods in the City. He expressed concern that the
Task Force lacked residential and commercial customer
representatives.
Councilor Moore, as a newer Council member, commented that he did
not know much about this topic. Ms. Mills stated that an
educational element for the Task Force members would be included in
the expanded scope. She said that there was a standing invitation
to the Council from the haulers to ride along with a truck.
A hauler, who was present at the meeting, asked for clarification on
the objective of the Task Force. Councilor Rohlf said that he
proposed to review the efficiency suggestions and make
recommendations to the City along with looking at regional issues
and discussing Tigard's role.
A second hauler, also present at the meeting, commented that if
Council understood the issues and problsms the haulers dealt with,
then Council could better answer citizez questions on rate increases
or program changes.
The Council agreed to direct staff to expand the role of the Task
Force and to add more members. The matter wi21 be placed on the
Octobe: 8 Consent Agenda.
> Agenda Review
Mr. Monahan reported on the vandalism by juveniles at the Windmill
on Fricay. He said that the fire damace was limited; the City had a
$1,000 insurance deductible but the insurance company should pick up
the rest.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINLTTES - SEPT~'~BER 24, 1996 - PAGE 3
1
• • .
Mr. Monahan noted Chat the Council needed to elect a votin9 delegaca
and alternate to the National League of Cities Conterence in
Novembez.
Mr. Monahan noted the staff recommendation to discontinue the public
hearing on the Tigard Feed and Seed store and referred to the state
statute dealing with removal of historic designations.
Mr. Monahan noted Councilor Rohlf's request to discuss calling up
the Hillshire Hollow subdivision for review to consider the issue of
private streets. Mr. Ramis cautioned that Council could not accept
testimony on this matter if the Council decided to call it up for
revizw.
Mr. Hendryx mentioned that the Planning Commission wrestled with the
issue of private streets, eventually conditioning the application to
put property owners on notice through the Conditions, Covenants &
Restrictions (CC&Rs) that it was a private street and that they had
maintenance responsibility.
Council President Hunt concurred with Councilor Rohlf on calling up
the application up to discuss the issue of private streeCs. He said
that he'd like to see private streets prohibited or built to city
standards if allowed.
> Executive Session: The Tigard City Council went into Executive
Session at 7:20 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d),
(3), &(h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions,
current and pending litigation issues.
> Executive Session adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
l. SIISZNBSS MEBTING
. • Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
Council President xunt called the business meeting to order at 7:40
p.m.
0 Council Communications/Liaison Reports
Council President Hunt reported that the Cook Park open house
meeting has been postponed until the consultant produces plans more .
in accordance with the committee's objectives. He said that in his
opinion theY had asked the consultant to find a way to preserve the
wetlands while at the same time still allowing the City use of the
property; the consultant had returned with plans that allowed no use
of the dairy property the City was purchasing.
Mr. Hendsyx stated that ample notice of this meeting would be
provided once the date was set.
• Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items:
City Administrator Monahan noted Councilor Rohlf's suggestion to
discuss whether or not the Council wanted to call up the Hillshire
Fiollow subdivision for review.
> Council President Fiunt noted three proclamations: October 1996 as
Crime Prevention Month, October 1996 as Disability nmployment
Awareness Month, and Recycling Awareness Week.
2. VISITOR'S AG$NDA
Joha L. Cook, 12314 SW Millview Court, Chamber of Commerce representative,
expressed the Chamber`s support of the visioning process initiated by the
City. He commented that he has heard only positive feedback from the
Board and from Rotary Club members on staff's presentations to the groups.
CI'?'`! COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEM13ER 24, 1996 - PAGE 4
i
. ~ ~
Liz Newtoa, Aasistant to the City Adminiatrator, reported on the scatus of
the presentation phase of the visioning process, nocing that thex had 30
presentations scheduled for the next monch with more groups in line. In
response,to a question from Council President Hunt, Ms. Newton said that
they were working with the schools to develop appropriate activities for
3rd, 4th graders and 7th graders and high school juniors to participate in
the process. There is a contest underway at the Tigard High School to
design the logo for the visioning project.
Mr. Monahan commented that the meetings were accomplishing the purpose of
getting peopla involved who have not been involved before.
3. CONSSNT AGSNDA
Council President Hunt asked for confirmation that the approval of the
. Planning Commissien bylaws would not neqatively affect the issue of the
roles of the CITs and the Planning Commission in the CZP process. Ms.
Newton reviewed the process wherebX that issue was being resolved, noting
that the CITs wanted to report their comments directly to Council, and not
go through the Planning Commission.
Motion by Couacilor Rohlt, aeconded by Couaciloz 3checkla, to approve the
Coasent Agenda.
Motion was approved bx unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Council
President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.")
3.1 Approve City Council Minutes: August 20, 1996
3.2 Receive and File: Planning Commission Bylaws and Rules of Procedure
3.3 Approve Updated Water Rate Structure - Resolution No. 96-58
3.4 Approve Dedication of Property at S'A Burnham Street and SW Main
Street to the Public as Right of Way - Resolution No. 96-59
3.5 Approve the Znterest Rate for 196j97 to be Applied to Al1
Reimbursement Distric[s Formed During the Year - Res. No. 96-60
4. PIISLIC 883►RZNG - FOItMJ1TI0N OF SANITARY SSWER R13IbBIIR3ffiUNT DISTRICT NO. 8
a. Council President Aunt read the hearing title and opened the public
hearing.
b. SCaff Report
Gzeg Berry, Acting City $nqiaeer, presented the staff report. He
noted that this was the first sewer extension project in the
Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program (Council Goal 6). He reviewed
the specifics of the project to extend the existing sewer on SW
170th Place approximately 335 feet along Tigard Street to serve four
parcels. He said that each property owner has requested the
extension with two of them anticipating immediate connection. He
noted that the contractor was available to begin construction upon
Council aporoval.
Mr. eerry explained that in this Reimcursement District, the
property owner would pay a fair share of the total project costs at
the time of connection to the sewer. The property owner will not be
required to cennect to the sewer once it was installed or pay any
fee until connected. He reviewed t:ze estimated costs of the .
project.
In response to questions from the Council, Mr. Berry said that the
City would recover all its cost over a 15-year period if all four
connected. He said that construction could be done by the end of
the week with only one traffic delaX on Tigard Avenue. Councilor
Scheckla requested advance signage in the area to warn motorists of
the traffic delay in order to allcw them opportunity to find
alternate routes.
Council President Hunt asked if the:e were other sewer extension
requests waiting to be processed. Mr. Berry said that staff was
CZTY COUNCIL MEETING MINiTTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGc^ 5
• • .
working on two others at this time and talking to other in[erested
property owners.
c. Public Testimony: None
d. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Berry recommended approval of the Reimbursement District and
direction to proceed with the conscruction.
e. Council Questions: None
f. Council President Hunt closed the public hearing.
g. Council Consideration: Resolution Nv. 96-61
RESOLUTION I30. 96-61 - A RESOLUTZON ESTABLISHZNG SANITARY SEWER
DISTRICT N0. 8.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, aeconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt
Reaolution 96-61.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
"yes.
S. PIISLIC IiBARING -(QQASI JUDICIAL) - ZONB CHANGS ANNSXATZON (ZCA) 96-0005
SANDSRS ANN$XATION RBQIIEST:
The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city
and a change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from the city and a
change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to
City of Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast
Corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLB RSVISW CRITBRIA:
The relevant review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies
2 .1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service delivery capacity; 10.1.2,
boundary criter?a; and 10.1.3, zoning designation. Community Development
Code chapters 19.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land
classification of annexed territory. ZONS: Presently, Washington County
R-5.
a. Council President Hunt read the hearir.g title and opened the public
hearing.
b. Declarations or Challenges: None
c. Staff Repozt
Nela Mickaelson, Asaociate Planner, presented the staff reoort. He
reviewed the specifics of the annexation request, noting the parcel
location on the map and the single-=amily house locaced on tze
southern portion of the lot. He said that the owners were
requesting annexation by double majoritf to obtain sanitary sewer;
their request met all the agplicable annexation criteria of the City
and the Boundary Commission. He notzd a correction to an error in
the original proposal; the narcel already had a Comnrehensive Plan
designation of low density resider.tial.
Mr. Mickaelson stated that the parceI was adequately se=-ved by City
facilities and services. cie reviewed t::e notices sent out and
reoorted that they received no objec=ions from citizens or private
or public agencies. He recommended adoption of the attached
resolution and ordiaance to forwazd the pronosal to the Boundary
Commission. Fie said that staff would send letters to adjacent
prooerty owners encouraging them to add to this annexation at the .
Boundary Commission level.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Mickaelson
stated that the apolication for annexation came from the new owner.
~ CITY CO:.'NCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTENBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 6
. • •
d. Public Testimony
PROPONENT
Steve Sanders, 12390 SW 106th Drive, applicant, stated that they
wanted annexation to hook up to the sewer. He commented that others
in the neighborhood were interested as well.
Councilor Scheckla noted that the streets in that area were recentlv
paved and expressed his disappointment that the sewer installation could not have been timed to occur prior to the County repaving the
roads.
In response to a question from Councilor Moore, Ms. Wheatley stated
that the City sent notification to have the franchise fees changed
upon annexation.
e. Staff Recommendation
Mr..Mickaelson recommended annexation of the parcel.
f. Council Questions
Councilor Rohlf asked how much it would cost the City to have this
approved. Mr. Mickaelson said 5225, explaining that the rate was
based on acreage. He noted that if other property owners tagged
onto this request after Council approved it, the fee was not
increased. Mr. Aendryx said that there were approximately 1,000
parcels in the Walnut Island.
Councilor Rohlf requested a separate policy discussion to encourage
larger groups of the walnut Island parcels to annex at the same time
so that the City could avoid incurring the fees over and over again
in a piecemeal approach; it was the current taxpayers who bore that
cost, not the applicants. Mr. Hendryx explained that staff did
contact property owners to see if there was any interest in
annexation but that they did not hold up a request in the hope that
others would "hop on.^
Councilor Rohlf requested a cost study comparing the cost of
annexing the optimum number of parcels at one time as opposed to the
piecemeal agproach.
g. Council President Hunt closed the public hearing.
h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 96-62 and Ordinance No. 96-35
The City Recorder read the number and title of Resolution No. 96-62.
RESOLUTION NO. 96-62, A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXr1TIQN TO THE CITY
OF TIGrIRD OF THE TERRITORY .a.S DESCRI3ED IN EXHIBIT AW ILLUSTRATED
IN EXFiIBIT B (ZCrI 96-0005).
~I Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adop2
Resolution No. 96-62.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
11yes.
The City Recorder read the number and title of Ordinance No. 96-35.
ORDINAAICE I30. 96-35, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND DECLaRING AN ErFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-
0005 ) . Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt
Ordinance No. 96-35.
CI'-'Y COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPT..MBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 7
• • Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
"yes.")
6. PIIBLIC HEARING -(QQASI JUDICIAL) - ZONF CHANG$ ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006
FL'►TCH ANNEXATZON
RSQUFsST: The applicant requests annexation on behalf of the owner for
four parcels of land with a total acreage of 2.52 acres into the City and '
a change of the zoning from Washington County R-5 to CiGy of Tigard R-4.5.
LOCATION: West of 114th Avenue and SouCh of Gaarde Street. APPLICABLE
RBVISW CRITSRIa: The relevant review criteria in this case are
Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service
deiivery canacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning i
designacion. Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexaCion
requirements; and 18.138, land classification of anne:ced territory. ZON$:
Presently, washington County R-5. I
a. Council President Hunt read the hearing Citle and opened the public
hearing.
b. Declarations or Challenges: None
c. Staff Report
Mr. Mickaelson presented the staff report. He reviewed the
specifics of the annexation request, noting the parcels' location on
the map and the single-family house located on the middle parcel.
Fie said that the owners were requesting anne:cation by double
majority to obtain sanitary sewer; their request met all the
applicable annexation criteria of the City and the Boundary
Ccmmission.
Mr. Mickaelson stated that the parcel was adeVately served by City
facilities and services. He reviewed the notices sent out and
reported that they received no objections from citizens or private
or public agencies. He recommended adoption of the attached
resolution and ordinance to forward the proposal to the Boundary
Commission. He said that staff would send letters to adjacent
property owners encouraging them to add to this annexation at the
Boundary Commission level.
d. Public Testimony
Council President Hunt read the hearing criteria.
PROPONEN'TS
Nick Stearna, 4035 Douglae Way, Lake oawego, applicant, requested
the annexation primarily to obtain sewer so that he could develop
the properties in the future. He said that he agreed with the staff
findings.
Councilor Rohlf asked if the owners of the two properties adjacent
to the parcels were interested in annexing to the City. Mr. Stearas
said that he did not know buC that he understood they refused
annexation opportunities before.
In resnonse to a comment from Council President Hunt, Mr. Monahan
said that the Council could discuss forced annexation of those two
oroperties and add them to the recommendation they send to the
3oundary Commission; the property owners would have the opportunity
at the Boundary Commission hearing to object. Council could also
forward the zequest cn withoLt adding the properties and the
3oundary Commission cn its own motion could decide to include them.
Brad wright, 14235 Sw 115th, spoke to the Council discussing a more
aggressive annexatior, policy to hring in the Walnut Island, pointing
out that piecemeal anne:cation led to a scattered service area for
police.
I CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINtTTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 8
• ~ •
e. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Mickaelson recommended annexation of the parcels.
f. Council Questions
Councilor Scheckla asked the City Attozney Eor his opinion on the
ramifications of forced annexacions. Mr. Ramis stated that
historically the Council has avoided forcing island annexations but
that they had the authority to revisit the policy and take a more
aggressive approach. Mr. Monahan noted the ramifications in public
relacions pointing out that citizens forced into the City could be
unhappy citizens who expressed their discontentment at the ballot
bo:c.
_ Councilor Scheckla commented that while the City miqht win in the
short term over forcing anne:cations, it could lose in the long term
if unhappy citizens voted down city ballot measures.
Mr. Hendry:c ~:ommented that there were statutes and procedures that
governed the annexation process, pointing out that while the City
could initiate an annexation request, the Houndary Commission had to
approve it. Mr. Ramis concurred that the City did not make the
ultimate decision on annexations.
Mr. Wright concurred that issues existed at the ballot box -egarding
forced anne:cation but argued that economically it didn't make sense
to do it piecemeal. He reiterated his suggestion that the Council
consider a more aggressive policy and annex those parcels that were
surrounded by annexed properties within the island. He said that
there was recourse for people to object. He commented that the
Boundary Commission looked not only at economic issues but prudent
planning also.
Mr. Wright concurred that some people would be upset but contended
, that the City would save the taxpayers considerable money by cutting
, its costs by bringing in several parcels at once.
g. Council President Hunt closed the public hearing.
h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 96-63 and Ordinance No. 96-36
The C;
_t Recorder read the number and title of Resoluti
Y on No. 96-63.
RESOLUTZON NO. 96-63, A RESOLUTION INITIATZNG ANNEJWTION TO THE CITY
OF TIGARD OF T:iE TERRITORY AS DESCRZBED IN EXHIBIT AND ILLUSTRATED
IN E.iCFiIBIT B (ZCA 96-0006).
Motioa by Couacilor Moore, aecoaded by Couacilor Scheckla, to adopt
Resolution No. 96-63.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present.
(Council P:esident Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
, "yes .
The ~
C_ty Recorder read the numbe-
_ and title of Ordinan
ce No. 96-36.
ORDINr1NCE NO. 96-36, AN ORDINANC= t1DOPT1NG rZWINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
TO aPPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND DEC!ARING alJ 3FF'ECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-
0006).
Motioa by Couacilor Moore, secoaded by Couacilor Rohlf, to adopt
Ordinance No. 96-36.
Motion was apDroved by unanimous roll call vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors hioore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
"yes.
> Mr. Monahan announced that Mr. Mickaelson has accected a position with
Washington County to work on their GZS system.
CITY COU'NCI*_. blEETING MIWTES - ScPT :NBER 24, 1996 - PAGc 9
• ~ •
PIIBLIC HB.IRING -(QIIASI JIIDICIAL) - ZONS CHANGS (ZON) 96-0006 TZGARD FEED
STORS
A request to remove the historic overlay designation and permit the
demoiition of the Tigard Feed and Garden building, designated as
historically signi:icant by the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 12355 Sw Main
Strezt. APPLIGIBLB RSVI$W CRITERIA: Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1
and 3.7.1 and Community Development Code, Chapter 18.82. ZONE: CBD
Mr. Monahan noted that the application tonight was to remove the historic
overlay designation on the Tigard Feed and Seed Store building. He
e:cplained how the passage of ORS 197.772(3) by the legislature in 1995
preempted the cities' auchority in the hiscoric desiqnation process; if a
property owner requested removal of the historic designation, the City had
to grant it. Eie cited the City Attorney's opinion given to the City of
Milwaukee.
Mr. Monahan said that he e:cplained to the Chamber what had happened and
that the Chamber chose to ask for suspension of the City's proceedings and
to come under the new statute and DLCD administrative regulations, which ~
mandated a 120-day waiting period prior to issuance of a permit for
demolition. He said that he understood they were willing to have someone
step forward during that 120 days and remove the building rather than
demolish it.
Mr. Monahan noted that this matter was an administerial decision which
must be granted upon request.
Councilor Scheckla asked for staff analysis on Ms. Fessler's letter. Mr.
Monahan noted that Judy Fessler and her husband were the only opponents ac
the Planning Commissien hearing staff advised her of the change in
state law. He explained that he understood from her letter that she
realized the City had to follow the new regulations. She requested that
the City complete its process since the application was made under the o13
rules.
Mr. Honahan said that while he thought that completing the process was
discretionary on the City's part, he saw no reason to mislead the public
by having a hearing and implying the right to appeal. In response to Mrs.
Fessler's suggesCion that the Chamber bear the full cost of demolition
following the 120-day waiting period, he commented that the CitX has
always understood that the Chamber would oay full cost of demolition in
anv case. Council President Hunt noted that Mr. Cook from the Chamber
indicated his agreement.
Mr. Ramis stated that in his opinion the City did not have the ability to
conduct a hearing because the state preempted authority in this area and
established the simple rule of granting removal of the designation upon
request. He noted Mrs. Fessler's alternate interpretation of when to
start the 120 days but gave his opinion that the staff's interpretation
was reasonable and would provide lio+ days for someone to come up with
another solution.
Mr. Monahan reviewed the agreement between the City and the Chamber,
notiag that the Chamber agreed to remove the building within six monChs of
purchase or tze City would have the ootion of buying the building and
removing it. He recommended that the Council direct staff to amend the
agreement to allow the Chamoer the time it needed to comply with t:e
statute, but noted that the City could exercise its eDtion to buy tre
bui?ding and take full responsibility for its removal.
Councilor Rohlf suggested that the City invest some money in advertising
the availability of the store in hopes of finding a party interested in
saving the building; he cited the interest of a segment of Tigard citizeas
in saving the building as justification for sper.ding a lit*_le ta.rpayer
money on the possibility of saving it. Mr. Monahan said that staff could
research how they handled the Gaarde building, which was a City-owned
buildir.g that found another home.
Mr. Monahan commented that once the 120 days was up, the Chamber had
control over when the building was demolished or turned over for removal
CIT`! COUNCIL MEETING MI-NiTTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGe, 10
~ •
• to another site. He noced that the Chamber has baen accepting inquires
from people incerested in saving the building.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, aeconded by Councilor Moore, to accept the
ataff recommendation that becauee of the exiatence of ORS 197.772(3.) and
the advice of the City Attorney that the City diacontinue the proceas of
the land uae hearing at the requeat of the Chamber of Coamerce.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Council
President Hunc, Councilors Moore, Roh1F and Scheckla voted "yes.")
Councilor Rohlf asked John Cook, Chamber representative, if anyone was
interested in the buildinq. Mr. Cook said that they did not want to
actively publicize the building until the historic overlay was removed but
that they have been talking private:y with some interested groups. He
notad an interested party who was looking for a site for the building.
Councilor Rohlf asked if the Chamber would be willing to contribute the
cost it would have paid for demolition towards the cost of removing the
building. Mr. Cook said that he could not speak for the Chamber Board on
that question but that they would entertain the idea. He said that they
have discussed writing a press release to advertise the building's
availabilit notin tha
t h sical ossession could n
Y, g p y p ot occur until after
120 days.
Mr. Cook e:cplained that the Chamber had always intended to take between
30-90 days to demolish the building once the designation was removed, and
that they would be willing to offer that same timeframe to anyone who
wanted to remove the building, especiallY since the 120 days were uo in
January. He asked for a 12-14 month period in the contract to allow time
for removal or demolition.
Councilor Scheckla referred to the construction report which said that the
building was contaminated and asked if the ground was also contaminated.
Mr. Monahan said that the City had an ESEE analysis done on the prooerty
prior to its involvement in the purchase; the consultant reported that the
ground was fine but e:cpressed concern about the building which had been
used to store chemicals and pesticides. He commented that precautions
were still required in the demolition and/or removal process. Mr. Cook
exmlained that the Johnsons had removed most of the chemicals in
accordance with Metro regulations, and that the Chamber intended to use
the same process to remove the containers still remaining.
Councilor Scheckla said that he wondered because a Halloween party had
been held in that buiZding about a year aqo. Mr. Cook said that the
Johnsons had owned the building at that time. He said that the Chamber
Board has closed the building to all activity except showings to
prospective purchasers.
The individuals who had signed up to soeak at the hearing in opoosition,
Jim Griffith and Gary Lass. Both staced that in light of the new
iaformation they had no comments.
wr. Monahan suggested that staff work with the Chamber to write something
~ uo for the Cicyscape and possibly share the costs of advertising
elsewhere. The Council concurred.
Council Presideat Hunt asked if t'.:e Counc41 established an historic
cesignat'_on, did they then have t'r.e authority to make the owners maintain
t:e prooerty in a presentable cor.dition, citing the peeling paint cn the
Tigar3 house. Mr. Monahan pointed out that a property owner could simply
request removal of the designation, which reduced the City's ability to
require maintenance of an historic property. He said that the City
I'_aison to TAFiPA was Rathy Davis, City L4brarian; this budget cycle
included money to reeaint the structure.
CI?'Y COUNCIL NIEETING MINiJTcS - ScPT..,MBEcZ 24, 1996 - PAGE 11
~ ~ ' • .
8. NON AGfiNDA ITEMS > Hillshire Hollow subdivision.
Mr. Monahan reviewed that Councilor Rohlf requested discussion of calling
this proQerty un for review because it included a private street, an issue
of concern to the Council.
Council President Hunt said that he favored Councilor Rohlf's suggestion
but asked how fast Council could deal with this issue. Mr. Monahan said
that staff has not moved quickly on this, as Council had indicated that it
wan;.ed the policy reviewed in con ction with the Code update. Mr. Ramis
confirmed that the Council could ~ unegally call this application up for
review but advised them chat their discussion would be limited to
interoretstions under the existing rules referencing the question of
private streets. Concerns noted could provide the basis for future
discussions possibly leading to Code amendments.
Mr. Monahan said that staff did not want to mislead Council into thinking ~
that simply calling up the application for review meant that they could
change something when in fact the rules might dictate otherwise. He noted
Mr. HendrY:c's comment that the Planning Commission discussed this in
depth, which was an indication that the provision of private streets was
discretionary on the part of the City without any strict standards
mandatinq particular actions. Mr. Ramis concurred.
Councilor Rohlf asked that the apglicant come grepared to speak to the
issue of private streets.
Motioa by Councilor Rohlf, secoaded by Couacilor Scheckla, to pull up the
Hillahire Hollow Subdivision for review.
Councilor Moore said that while he agreed with discussing the issue of
private streets, he did not think that this 100-foot street, given the
Planning Commission conditions, was a big enough issue to hold up the
application. He stated that he would onpose the motion.
Motion was approved by a 3 to 1 voice vote of the Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Rohlf and Scheckla voting "aye";
Councilor Moore voted "no.")
Mr. Monahan noted for the record that the 120-day waiting period for the
~ demolition permit requested by the Chamber began today. He would notify
the Chamber and Ms. Fessler by letter.
9, BXBCIITIVB S8SS20N: None
10. ADJOIIRNI[ENT: 9:05 p.m.
attes erine ' eac ey, it ecor e:
y , ity ot igar
.
' ~ Dlaa i~c~
~tz .
'I CI':"! COUNCIL M=ETING MINL3TES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 12
. , • : ` ~ Agenda Item No.!
Meeting of
TIGARD CITY COWi CIL
MEETING y1INUTES - SEPTENIBER 10, 1996
• STUDY SESSION
> ?Vteeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Nfayor Jim Nicoli
> Council Present: i'viayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian L'vfoore, Bob
Rohlf, and Ken Scheckla.
> Staff Present: City Administrator Bill Monahan; Le;al Counsel Chuck Corrigan
(for Execuave Session only); Communiry Development Director Jim Hendryx;
Finance Director Wayne Lowry; Associate Planner Laurie Nicholson; Legal
Counsel Tim Ramis; Public Wocks Director Ed Wegner; and Ciry Recorder
Catherine Wheadey.
> Jim Hendty-t, Community Development Director, introduced Laurie Nicholson
who had been hired to take Ray Valone's position as an Associate Planner.
> Bill vionahan, City Administrator, advised Gus Duenas was recendy hired to
fill Gary Alfson's position as Engineering Manager. He reported that they did
not fill the Ciry Engineer's position from this round of applicants; they would
readvertise in 3anuary. Nleanwhile, Gus Duenas, Greg Berry, and Brian Rager
would temporarily divide up the City Engineer's duties.
> Esecutive Session: The Tigard Ciry Council went into Executive Session at 6:42
p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), &(h) to discuss labor
relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues.
II > Executive Session adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
> A;enda Review
Mr. Monahan reported that the Planning Commission rejected the staff .
recommendation to remove the historic designation from che Tigard Feed & Seed
store due to lack of informadon on the costs of renovation. This matter was
scheduled to come to the Ciry Council in two weeks.
LvIr. i'vIonahan explained that there was a new properry owner involved in the
Sanden Anneration (Agenda Item #7) and requested that it be set over to
Sepcember 24. He aoted chat the Counry just repaved two roads in that area.
vir. vionahan noted that the Ciryscape was not published on time. He said that
' Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder, has spoken to Community Newspaper
Publishing who has assured the Ciry this would not happen a;ain. .
Councilor Rohlf expressed concerns reearding the Solid Waste Task Force that
I was established at the last Council meetina. He pointed out there was not
sufficient provision for citizen input on this issue of interest to the communiry.
CITY COL,'NCIL MEETING vIINUTES - SEPTE~vIBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 1
He stated chat the review would not succeed as lung as it only looked at che
haulers' comments on efficiencies rather chan also including the citizen's
comments on service. NIr. i'vtonahan said chat he would have Loreen ?VIills
contact Councilor Rohlf.
> Discuss City Administrator Review Process
i'vir. NIonahan presented three of che City Administrator evaluation forms he
requested from ei;ht neighboring jurisdictions as samples for Council to review in
developing an evaluation form. He explained that the contract called for a I
Council evaluation by October 16.
Niayor Nicoli sug~ested that the Council meet alone next week for 10-15 minutes
to discuss the handouts and develop a direction for the review process.
> Mayor Nicoli adjourned the study session at 7:40 p.m.
1. BUSINESS iNEEETING
• Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
Mayor Nicoli called the business meeting to order at 7:46 p.m.
• Council Communications/Liaison Reports: None
• Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: . ,
> Mr. Nlonahan noted a non-agenda item to consider an intergovernmental
agreement on the shared use of the public telecommunication network.
> Mr. Monahan asked that Council set Item #7 over to Sepcember 24 at the
request of the new property owner.
2. VISITOR'S AGEiNDA: None
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Councilor RohIf, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt the Consent
a;enda:
3.1 Approve Ciry Council vlinutes: July 29 and August 13, 1996
3.2 Receive and File:
a. Ciry Council Calendar -
b. Tentative Aaenda
3.3 Approve Mark Cottle as the East County City Emergency Medical Service Policy
Representative
3.4 Anend Water Meter Installation Char;es - Resolution 96-55
CITY COLTNCIL MEETING iMINUTES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 2
~
I
• ~ I~
~
3.5 Local Contract Review Board:
a. Rejecc Bid from Kerr Contractors, Ine., for Conscruction Contract for the
Tigard Senior Center Improvements
b. Award Bid to A.C.E. Janitorial for the Janitorial Services Contract
c. Award Bid to Hanson, Dunahugh, Nicholson Architects PC for
Architectural Services for the Expansion of Ciry Hall at the Police
Department
ivIotion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Ntayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Nloore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.
4. iNIETRO FUNCTIOIYAL PLAiN DISCUSSIOIY/UPDATE
ti1r. Monahan reviewed the status of the tiletro Functional Plan, presendy under
consideracion by the Metro Council. He said that staff invited Jon Kvistad, Metro
Councilor, to address the Council on how they could best participate in the remainder of
the process.
Jon Kvistad, Presiding Officer of the Nietro Council, explained that the Functional
Plan was part of a three step program to adopt rules and guidelines to manage regional
growth. The program was comprised of the Urban Growth Report, the Functional Plan,
and the discussion on the 28,000 acres in the Urban Reserve areas, including a decision
on the expansion of the UGB; the Functional Plan was the early implementation of the
2040 plan to ;ive the region a headstart on managing the growth that was already here.
Councilor Kvistad noted the short timeline that the Metro Council had to review the
Function Plan. He commented that he was not sure that either the local jurisdictions or
' ivIetro were prepared for the consequences of early implementation of 2040 if the
Functional Plan went forward as scheduled.
Councilor Kvistad stated that he was. familiar with Tigard's comments on the Functional
Plan. Although he personally agreed with the majoriry of them, he said that he could
not say that a majority of the Metro Council would support them.
tifayor Nicoli referenced the Washington County Coordinating Committee (WCCC) letter
that outlined sir items of mutual concern to all the Washington County cities within the Metro recion. He noced that all the mayors were si;natory to che letter, and that the
Counry Commissioners, while not signatory, did reference it in their letter to Me[ro. He
emphas►zed that these were the issues that the WCCC, not just individual mayors.
ivfayor Nicoli commented on the process of the 2040 plan, notin; that while they had
been given o onuni to rovide in ut there w ' o
pp ry p p, as one issue (addressed in writm` to
Lvfecro) which 'i'vietro staff retused to address: who would pay for the implemen[ation of
the 3040 plan? He cited the Plan expecations regarding street improvements and
poin[ed ouc that transportation fundin~ was disappearin;.
Niayor Nicoli said that they could not afford to implement the 2040 plan, every item of
which had associated coscs. He reiterated that Metro has refused to discuss the financial
side of the 2040 Plan. He suQ~ested chat Metro halc the process un[il their staff could
provide chem with the implementation cost impacts for each jurisdiction, contending that
CITY COUNCIL LIEETING iNIINUTES - SEPTE:v1BER 10, 1996 - PAGE 3
~ ~ .
they shuuld know what it would cost before implementing it. He said that Tigard did
favor 2040 but expressed his concem that adopting the Plan without ac least one
discussion on its financin; was improper.
Councilor Kvistad concurred that the funding issue was one of the major issues that the
iNierro Cuuncil had to address; two Metro Councilors have spoken to that very point but
remained a minoriry. He commented on the difference in perspective among regionally
elected officials from different cities. He said that Washington Counry cities wanted to
know whac cheir money was buying and how much any project would cost before
a;reein; to it: therefore, they reasonably expected a regional cyovernment to provide the
same information.
Councilor Kvistad commented that there was a misconception regarding the Metro
E.recucive Officer. Because he was also elected, many thought that he was a policymaker
when in fact he managed the affairs of the agency; the functions and Qowers of Nletro
were all vested in the Metro Council.
Councilor Kvistad said that there would be a full and complete discussion at the Council
of every line item in the Functional Plan, despite the short timeline developed by the
Growth Management Committee. He reported that based on the first public hearing on
the Functional Plan, there were a lot of opinions in the region on [his plan, and that the
moving forward according to the schedule was debatable.
Councilor Rohlf asked which of Tigard's positions did Councilor Kvistad find difficult to
support. Councilor Kvistad said that Metro could not shoulder the burden of paying for
this alone. He reviewed the structure of the Metro government according to the Charter,
and noted that they had no taac base or source of general funds. They were a pianning
or;anizadon with deadlines by which to complete cenain programs but they had no
money to fund those programs. He said that he did not lrnow where the line was
between what they could reasonably ask the regional partners to do and what Metro
could do.
Councilor Kvistad said that he was concerned about the regulatory nature of the
Functional Plan, stating that the citizens did not know what the Plan meant to them. He
reported that Metro's current densiry numbers for 2017 meant doubling the existing
density for every communiry outside of Portland, both inside ciry limits and in the
unincorporated areas.
Councilor Kvistad said that a second concern was housing affordabiliry; ri;ht now in this
communiry [he cost of a single family house was in excess of 5145,000 - this elimina.ted
the averacre citizen as a homebuver. He stated that the regulations of the Functional Plan
should not further de;rade the abiliry of average citizens to buy homes.
Councilor Rohlf asked if there was any discussion at Metro on how to ;enerate the
funds. Councilor Kvistad said that chey discussed it daily in terms of Metro budgets but
not in terms of how much specifically each jurisdiction would have to allocate to
accommodate arowth. • they did not know what those requirements were. He said that a
bia concern of his was the fact that, though larQer communities had the staff and dollars
to implement the required code changes and implementation mechanisms, the smaller
cities did not.
CITY COLTNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEyiBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 4
. • •
Cuuncilor Kvistad recommended that the City Council attend the Metro hearings to tell
the Council what they thought, pointing out that few elected officials attended the
meetings (chough many special interest ;roups did).
Mayor Nicoli expressed discomfort with Metro taking on the role of a day to day
planning organiza[ion instead of remaining in an oversight capaciry coordinating regional
functions. He asked if the Metro Councilors understood that that was what was
happening. He noted that many people didn't trust the cities to make the right decisions
and would not trust Metro to do so either.
Councilor Kvistad stated that ultimately all the decisions would be local. He said that
prior to the passa;e of the Metro Charter in 1992, they had been working on 2040 but
that the Charter and the Regional Framework Plan transformed what they were working
on into regional growth planning.
Mayor Nicoli concurred but reiterated that he agreed with the group that did not think
hte[ro was supposed to be involved in day to day planning functions but rather was to
make the region work in terms of interconnecting the cities in those areas which they all
shared (i.e., transportation, gazbage, etc).
ivIayor Nicoli said that he has been shocked at some of the statements made by Metro
staff and questioned whether or not Metro staff undentood the role that they have
recommended for themselves. He said that that was why he thought it was fair for the
Metro Council to ask its staff how much it would cost and what were the daily
manpower requirements needed to make the Plan work. He said that he was not
suLmesting the end of 2040 but rather shifting completely away from daily planning
functions at Metro and keeping Metro at a higher level.
Councilor Kvistad commented that 2040 was intended to address how the region would
arow and that most people thought that the general structure worked. He said that che
difficulty lay in the regulatory part which was the regional ComPrehensive Plan, • Metro
could not develop that without coordinating with local jurisdictions and their
Comprehensive Plans but each local jurisdiction was unique with different needs and
priorities. Yet the regional government, representing 1.5 million people, approximately
half of Oregon's population, was trying to develop a plan that in theory should be able to
address everyone's needs 20 years in the future.
Councilor Kvistad said that either they would successfully develop a pian with a light
enough hand and a natural progression of events that they would end up with a quality
reeion or they could create a situation where they would not only not enhance the qualiry
of life, Ehey would destroy the basics of the individual communicies. He said that they
could noc use a cookie cutter approach in a re;ion with such a diversiry of communities.
Councilor Kvistad conunented ' on the chanees in Wastuno
_ton Coun that have occurred
ty since he was bom. He noted the need to deal with what was coming and that
discussions and "headbutting" over decisions on dealing with transitional problems were
only to be expected. He said that it was better to go through that process now to find a
win-win solution than to wait 10 years while the roads and infrastructure collapsed and
housing became so unaffordable to the average citizen that an "island of wealth" was
created into which people commuted to serve a place in which they could not afford to
CITY COUNCIL ti1EETING iNIINUTES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 5
• .
•
live. He noted chat another major concern was "rural sprawl", the ancillary cities
growing cowards che 4letro area.
Councilor Kvistad commented that Ti;ard has stood up for what it believed in and was
takin; the heat for it. He said that he agreed wich che City Council in tecros of the
philosophy behind their amendments and in terms of what Nletro's role was. He said
that he was concerned that more cities have not stood up to say that more attention
needed to be paid to tlieir areas of concern. He noted chat the "drop dead" deadline for
LlyIecro Council was December 31, 1997 when they had to have the Regional Framework
Plan completed per Charter mandate.
Councilor Kvistad said that the slow, complex and detailed process was difficult for the
Nietro Councilors to understand, let alone the jurisdictions and the ordinary citizen. He
reiterated that the average citizen did not understand what this plan meant. He said that
when he explained to cituen groups what 2040 was they invariably said don't move the
UGB and don't put density in my neighborhood. He noted over 70 people move into the
State of Oregon every day with 45 - 50 of those people coming to the Portland Metro
azea. He emphasized the need to make hard choices by the mandated deadline to meet
the growth that was coming.
Councilor Kvistad said that while he did not know if the timelines were viable, they
were the ones they had to work with. He emphasized that it would be very difficult to
move off the current agenda without City Councilors coming to che hearings and telling
the Mecro Council what they thought.
Councilor Hunt asked if the projects in the plan were so intertwined that they could not
be separated out, should it prove not passible to fund everything. Have priorities been
set on what could be eliminated to save dollars?
Councilor Kvistad said that the Functional Plan had certain specifics and tarsecs that each
ciry would be required to meec. He explained that the Functional Plan was eazly
implementation of the 2040 plan in order to reduce the need to expand the UGB and to
minimize the amount of land needed in the future because of the changes made within in
the current UGB.
Councilor Kvistad commented that a discussion that could occur would be on whether it
was possible to implement 2040 faster or co stop or mitigate the expansion of the UGB.
He said that he thou;ht that if Metro worked closely enough with the Plannin; staff and
Commissions of che larger jurisdictions, they could implement a solid portion of this by
shifting and changing density and looking differently at the way they were currently
arawin.a.
Councilor Kvistad said that he did not know if all communicies would be able to live up
co all the elements in the Functional Plan but that there was nothing in the Plan that
could be opted out. He expressed concem that the Functional Plan also lacked a process
for amending it and reconsiderinQ elements that did not work.
I CITY COLNCIL MEETING ~UTES - SEPTFa~iBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 6
` . •
Councilor Kvistad commented that the money would ultimately come from the citizens,
whecher it went chrough Metro or the cities. He said that it was difficutt to know what .
was ressonable to expect people to spend but that he hoped they could be flexible enough
to keep the plan in p(ace while allowing reconsideration oF elements.
Councilor Rohlf commented that it appeared that Tigard, despite its letters and staff time
ailocated to chis issue, was not as effeccive in communicating their message to iNfetro as
they could be. He asked Councilor Kvistad how they could be more effective.
Councilor Kvistad stated that the political makeup and structure of the Nietro Council
and the detail of the Plan required local jurisdictions to come forward to talk to che
Lvtecro Council about their concerns. He said that che little cities needed to come
forward because Mecro mostly heard from those, communities who have had the majoriry
of the problems with growth.
Councilor Kvistad commented that the major voice Metro has heard has been MPAC
which was supposedly representative of all the jurisdictions; it was not but was
composed of a subset of the jurisdictions. He said that many of the recommendations
and amendments to the Functional Plan came from what was represented to the Metro
Council as being che local governments - namely that the local governments wanted the
parking maximums, stream corridor setbacks, etc.
Councilor Kvistad noted that the Council also heard from the special interest groups and
the Metro Executive Officer. He mentioned the need to educate the seven Metro
Councilors on the issues and pointed out that three of the Councilors have not had a role
in the growth management aspects of Metro. He said that he understood the time
conflicts of elected officials but reiterated the importance of elected officials coming in
person to testify before the Metro Council.
Councilor Rohlf suegested that the Metro Council initiate meetinas with the City
Councils and iNfayors to ~et one-on-one feedback instead of crying to go through MPAC
or written statements, if they truly wanted to engage the local jurisdictions as "partners."
Councilor Kvistad said that he attended meetin;s of the cities in his district as did most
of the ocher Councilors; however the Metro Council was also part cime. He said thac he would like to use the same process they used in presenting the 2040 plan to each ciry but
that che time constraints were different at this time.
Councilor Rohlf said that he thou;ht the meetina between Niike Burton and the
Washinaton County jurisdictions was productive. He suQgested bringing the cities
together at one place and time to meet wich the tiletro Council to ;ive direct feedback
without competition from the special interest aroups.
Councilor Kvistad reiterated that a major problem was the misconception that the b~Retro
Executive could make policy decisions; chat was the prerogacive of the Metro Co-mcil.
He said that he would take the suQQestion under advisement but stated that it woL'.. be
impossible to convince cercain Councilors to implement it, even thou;h the entire
Council needed to hear the jurisdictions' comments.
CITY CO[.TNCIL MEETING NiINUTES - SEPTEv1BER 10, 1996 - PAGE 7
• • ~
Councilor Kvistad cited the Mecro Listening Posts concept to take hearings out into the
community; they would use that with the urban reserve plan. He said that while he had
advocated doing the same thing with the Functional Plan, certain Councilors stron;ly
opposed doing so; only two public hearings testified to the unwiltin;ness of the Nletro
Council to take che Functional Ptan out to the community. He reiterated the importance
of the Council hearing what the people had to say, noting that it was different from what
' he heard sittin, on the Council.
Councilor Hunt asked if the Council would receive a staff inember presenting a City
Council's opinions. Councilor Kvistad said that they would to the extent that the staff
person represented the Council's views. However he pointed out that a staff inember
was not as powerful a presence as an elected official, noting that one Mayor has made a
difference by attending nearly every session and speaking to the changes. .
Councilor Kvistad asked the Councilors to come to [he hearings to support their position.
Though he agreed with many of their comments, he was a minoriry vote on the Council.
, Councilor Scheckla expressed concern on several issues, asking how Metro would
address those. These included the transportation problems on Highway 99 and the
allocation of all transportation dollars to light rail, the increasing problems with
displaced wildlife as more and more development occurred, and the dissolution of the
Boundary Commission in a year. He asked if reducing the number of Metro Councilors
from 13 to 7 was a better working arrangement.
Councilor Kvistad said that a seven-member Council was better able to handle the
functions of a deliberative body. He stated that he thought Metro had an opportunity to
play a major positive role in the community far beyond anyching he has seen so far, and
to be a facilitator government for local jurisdictions. It could also become something
that it was not intended to become unless checked and held on track.
Councilor Kvistad said that they were moving into the next level of the Transportation
Improvement Plan in which they had $80 million dollars to allocate among $400 million
dollars worth of projects around the region. He pointed out that they would see traffic
increase by one chird to one half over the next two to three years because of the growth
within the UGB even if it was not expanded; communities were not equipped to deal
with it. He said that he did not think that the region was politically willing to take the
heat it would take to deal with the transportation needs because it meant road
construction and reconstruction. He said that he saw a move in the opposite direction,
away from constructing roads, as thou;h the quality of life could be preserved by
making it impossible to live here.
Councilor Kvistad said that, with reaards to the wildlife issue, he thought that what they
were experiencing has been erperienced by every city on the East Coast at some point; it
was part of what happened when a communiry grew. He pointed out that OreQon was a
small rural state with a basically rural tax base; the Portland Metro area represented half
the state's population and less chan 5% of the state's land mass. He commented that
contradictions occurred when trying to rapidly adapt this many people to that amount of
area.
Councilor Kvistad said that hopefully the Functional Plan would ;ive them a framework
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 8
- ' . • •
with which to move forward. He said that he was willing to work with Tigard on every
aspect of it because they agreed on probab(y 90% of the Plan; the other 10% they could
work out.
Notin; local attempts to clean up Fanno Creek and che Tualatin River, Counciloc
Scheckla asked what Me[ro would do regarding the dumping of sewage into the
Willamette by Portland's storm sewer system. Councilor Kvistad stated that that was
Portiand's problem, and not one that i'vfetro had to address. He noted that Portland
would spend $3 billion to rebuild their sewer and storm water system without ti:cing the
prob(em; the open sewer pipes would still overflow into the Willamette. He said that he
thought it was still worth communities cleaning up rivers and maintaining wacer quality
despite che frustration over the lower Willamette.
ilvfayor Nicoli commented that currently there was a move to erase all the current
transportation projects with allocated funding; new projects would be allowed into the
mix and the funding reallocated. He noted the I-51217 interchange and the Greenburg
Road overpass in particular as Washington County projects whose funding could be
pulled. He expressed his distress that Metro was doing this while at the same time Tri-
Met was asking for the bulk of a-ansportation dollars to buy new buses with. He asked
Councilor Kvistad do everything he could to see that the state and Metro lived up co
their commitments on the already funded projects.
Mayor Nicoli noted that Washington County and some of its cities were funding a study
on light rail on heavy rail lines. Councilor Kvistad said that he told Commissioner
Rogers that he would fully panicipate and move at the Metro Council to participate in
funding the project.
Lfayor Nicoli said that he was upset when he heard the commitrnent that Metro was
going to make, noting that Sherwood could outfund Metro.
Councilor'Kvistad concurred with Mayor Nicoli's comments. He said that he directed
staff to do some funding of the project, and while they were not happy about it, he
thought that they got the message. He reiterated his commitment to this issue.
Councilor Kvistad stated that as a Metro Councilor he would fight anyone that would
remove any of the Washington County projects from the list. The Counry has been a
good regional player and it was now its turn to have its projects funded. He said that he
would work for full funding of the I-5/217 interchange, including the overcrossing.
Mr. Monahan said that he understood that Ti;ard would continue to give input and
attend the Thursday hearin;. He asked how much time a Councilor would be allowed to
speak. Councilor Kvistad said that normally the Councii allowed elected officials to
finish their comments if they went beyond che three minute cime limit.
Mr. Monahan asked the Council for direction on whether or not to include Councilor
Rohlf s sue?estion in the testimony before the Metro Council.
viayor Nicoli said that he would try to attend the Thursday hearing; staff should attend
regardless.
CITY COUNCIL ti1EETING MINUT'ES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 9
• • ' 5. PROPOSED ORDi 1AYCE TO ESTABLISH A PROPERTY TAY EYEMPTIOY
A,YD APPLICATION CRITERIA FOR YOIY-PROFIT, LOW-I~i 1COiNiE HOUSI~i 1G
Wayne Lowry, Finance Director, referenced the August 20 Council work session on
this capic, and noted that consideration of affordable housing was a Council goal. He
explained that che ordinance established a section of the Ti;ard Municipal Code under
which non profit corporations could apply for properry tax exemption for low income
housing projects. He said that approval of this ordinance did not approve any tax
exemptions; it simply put a process in piace for non profits to apply for an eremption.
He mencioned that the Council would approve or deny the requests on an annual basis.
In response to a question from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Lowry clarified that "governing
body" referred to the Council.
In response to a comment from Mayor Nicoli, Mr. Lowry reviewed how this ordinance
followed state law.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to adopt Ordinance
No. 96-34.
The Ciry Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 96-34, AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A SECTION .OF THE
TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TITLED "NON PROFIT CORPORATION LOW
INCOME HOUSING" AiND ESTABLISHING THE EXEMPTION CRITERIA.
Niocion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Moore, Rohif and Scheckla voted "yes.
6. FIlYA,L ORDER - CPA 96-0002 (AKA BUSIVESS SERVICES, INC.) - TO DELNY A
COiNiPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT A:vENDMENT REQUEST: Amend the test of
policy 12.2.192)(1a) of the Comprehensive Plan to modify the spacing and locational
criteria for General Commercia] land uses. LOCATION: City Wide. ZONE: N/A
aPPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIr1: Statewide Planing Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 11 and
12; Ti;ard Comprehensive Plan policies 1.1.1(a), 1.1.1(c), 2.1.1, 5.4, 6.1.1, 8.1.1 and
12.2.2; TiQard Communiry Development Code chapter 18.30; and Oregon
Administrative Rule Chapter 660, Division 12.
a. Scaff Report
LIr. Hendry:c presented the resolution that Council directed staff at the August 13 public
hearing co prepare to deny this request. He recommended approval.
b. Council Discussion
c. Council Consideraaon: Resolution No. 96-56
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Rohlf to adopt Resolution
No. 96-56.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTENIBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 10
• !
The City Recorder read the number and title of the Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 96-56, A RESOLUTION BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR A
COtiiPREHENSIVE PL-kN TEXT AMENDMENT SEEKING A 96-02 REQUEST BY
AKA BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.
ivfotiun was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (i*vIayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, i'vIoere, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.
7. PUBLIC HEARI~i 1G -(QUASI NDICI.aL) - ZONE CHr1~~1GE AiNNEjCATIOY
(ZCA) 96-0005 SAi'YDERS A.YNEXATION
REQL'EST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the ciry
and a change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to
Ciry of Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of
Johnson Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRI'TERIA: The relevant
review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement;
10.2.1, service delivery capaciry; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning
designation. Community Development Code chapcers 13.136, annexa[ion requirements;
and 13.133, land classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington
Counry R-S. .
iNIotion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Moore, to set this hearing
over to September 24, 1996.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Moore, Rohif and Scheckla voced "yes.
8. PUBLIC HEARn 1G TO CONSIDER CHA~~1GES TO THE CITY'S WATER
SYS'Y'EM DEVELOPNEEN1' CHARGES (SDCs) Air"D TO THE VIETHODOLOGY
PERTALYING TO THE CAI.CULATION OF THESE SDCs.
Under the proposed schedule, the charge for the 410 service zone would increase from
$845 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDL) to $986 and the charge for the Bull Mountain
System would increase from $1,000 per EDU to $1,507. The char;es for water SDCs
' have not been increased since 1990.
a. Mayor Nicoli read the hearing title and oPened the Public hearing.
b. Staff Report
Ed `Ve;ner, Maintenance Director, referenced che CH,,*VI Hill rate study
adopced by the Inter~overnmental Water Boazd in June which recommended
increasing SDC char;es for the first time since 1990. He said chat staff reviewed
the study and proposed increasing the Ciry's SDC charges in the 410 and Bull
i'vIountain zones.
iNIike Miller commented that the purpose of the SDCs were to generate revenue
for the Ciry and to insure fair and equitable financing of water system
improvements necessitated by new development. He noted the fee increases:
CITY COUNCIL ti1EETING i'vIINUTES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 11
• ~ I +
from $345 to $986 per EDU in the 410 service area and from $1000 to $1,507
per EDU in the Bull i'vlountain service area. He pointed out that.even wich the
increase in the 410 SDC, Tigard's race was the second lowest in the region; the
increase in che Bull Mountain SDC put che rate near the middle of SDCs in the i
revion. He reviewed the mechodology CH,,VI Hill used to generate the figures.
In response to a request from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Nliller explained that the Bull
tifountain SDCs were higher because the water had to be pumped up to that
re;ion from the 410 reservo+r; also additional facilities were required to serve
Bull vlountain.
Mr. We;ner repvrted that the Homebuilders Association of Metro Portland
submitted a letter supporting the recommended changes but requesting an
effective date of January 1, 1997 instead of the November 1, 1996 date stated in
the resolution; staff had no objection to the requested change. He said that they
received no objections at the public meeting held by the City.
Councilor Rohlf asked what the financial implications were of those additional
months. Mr. Wegner said that there wouldn't be much construction activity
durincy November/December. C. Public Testimony: None
d. Staff Recommendation
' Mr. Miller recommended approval of the new SDCs.
e. Council Questions '
Councilor Hunt requested more discussion on the new date. Mr. Monahan
commented that many multifamily applications have been initiated and asked
about commercial applications. Mr. Hendryx said that last year the Ciry issued
350 single family permits but that he did not have the data on the multifamily or
commercial permits here.
v1r. Monahan explained that staff proposed two additional months to give
adequate notice. He said that they expected a rush of applications prior to the
effective date, and felt that it would be a service to the community to push off
that rush by a couple of months. Mr. Lowry said that, ;ive 60 units in the 410
zone, the City would not ;et $8,000 -$9,000 by postponing the date.
f. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing.
Council Consideration: Resolution 96-57
iNiotion by Councilor iNioore, seconded by Couacilor Scheckla, to adopt
Resolution 96-57 with the effective date to December 1, 1996.
The Citv Recorder read the number and ticle of the Resolucion.
CITY COUNCIL NIEETING iMINUTES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 12
. ~ ~ •
RESOLUTION NO. 96-57, A RESOLUTION AIMENDING THE CITY OF
' TIGARD WATER SERVICE AREA SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
AND THE NIETHODOLOGY USED TO ESTABLISH THE CHARGES.
LvIotion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor
Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, tiloore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.
9. NON AGENDA ITEMS
> i'vIr. L'vIonahan requested a Council motion authorizing the Nlayor to sign an IGA for the
Ciry to secure use of public communication network equipment wi[h Hillsboro,
Washington County, Lake Oswego, and Tualatin Valley Water District. He said that
chey have cooperatively purchased equipment over the past year with those cities; this
agreement included access to the Internet for $2 a month for all City computers. He
said chac the money was in the 1996/97 budget.
Nlotion b Councilor Hun
, y t, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to authorize the Mayor to
sign the inter;overnmental agreement.
ivfotion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.
' > Ms. Wheatley distributed informadon sent by Metro Executive Officer Mike Burton
e.cplaining his proposal on the urban reserve areas.
10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: None
11. ADJOURNMENT: 9:13 p. m. ,
~
,
~L, UA4rL~
Attest: Catherine Wheatley, Ci Recorder ~
2~4'lor, Ciry of Tigard
Date:
CITY COIJNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 - PAGE 13
6
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
In the Matter of the Proposed '
c.- N o.z----'(v5C1 ~ l, t G I(, SW k O b-~ '.1c~N So ►-I
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington ) ss.
City of Tigard ) I
I, 1" V? h being first
duly sworn, on oath depose and say:
That I posted in the following public and conspicuous
places, a copy oL,&AM Notice of Public Hearing of the
a copy of said
notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof,
on the ~0 day of 199(-
~
( n ~
/
~ ~
v
Name of Person Who Performed Posting
Subscribed and sworn to before me this,-30t)day of C~;L~L
Notary Public for Oregon
OFFICIAI SEAL ~
CATHERINE WHEATLEY My Commission Expires : ~
NOTARY PUBLIC•OREGON
COMMISSION NO.Oa2176
~ 'AY C.OMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 10. 1999
affpost
CiACKAMAS
MULTNOMAH
WASHINGTON
PORTLAND METROPOLITA 'R ' O ' GOVERNMENT 't IA' 1 1
800 NE OREGON STREET # 16 (SUITE 540) PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 PHONE: (503) 731-4093 FAX: (503) 731•6376
October 16, 1996
Nadine M. Smith
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall BLVD
Tigard OR 97223 .
Ref.• 3658 & 3659
_ Dear Nadine:
The Boundary Commission Statute, ORS 199.410 to 199.534 authorizes posting
~ of Public Hearing Notices within the area(s) to be annexed .
In order to meet the requirements of ORS 199.463, they need to be posted by
October 31, 1996.
Therefore, we would appreciate your cooperation in posting 3 copies of the
enclosed NOTICE OF HEARING and map. They should be posted in conspicuous
places within and/or immediately adjacent to the involved area(s) and they
should be placed in a manner reasonably calculated to be observed by the public.
(The additional copy of the hearing notice is for your records.)
Also would you please send us an "AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING."
Thank you.
Kenneth S. Martin
Executive Officer
KSM/Imr
Enclosures ~
STAFF COMMISSIONERS IKENNETH S. MARTIN, Executive OKicer
RAY BARTEL, Chair MAqILYNN HEL2ERMAN
DENIECE WON, Executive Assistant TOM WHIT7AKER, Vice-Chair SY KORNBRODT
LANA RULIEN, Administrative Assistant BOB BOUNEFF STEVE STOIZE
NATHALIE DARCY
PROPbSAL ■ 3659
NE1/4 NE1/4 SECTION 3 T2S R1W W.M. 2S 1 3AA
Washington County
Scale: 1 250'
u I Ha 5C._ IO4 ,
I ~ ^W'KATHERIN T
`
101 I ; •100 JS
lJ..O~c
JC.WOt O~JIw IJ~ \y wr
/../ronl. M. N I 1-
~ . NrJ -'H w
I
NOR-
~ ~~\RDV1L IG~''InYIL ~
loa . z D1TlUi~l
AI9D1'fl '-1\Il7iD
i ~ ~ ~ 1.: - - - ry~ ~ sao eoi i - . ►
TiGARD ~ V
zow 23 z300. ~ = Z,~. ~ •.~9~
TRACT
_ _ ~ . . ~ ~ `f? I'J r.a . ~1 ~
1061 ~500 ~ 4 ~ ' 10 „
• ~ 'y 1a~00 h 8 f. p n •:~~11 I
24
° i ~v f ~•I' ~ CLYOESDAI ~ ~
`a ~ - ' - - ~ : rt,• y f~"'S. . . L. l:oo • ~
1• .:3500 t i:
1 4~~ . I ff~ P 6 I! . I
t100~ . .a~.~ ♦ •3400 )
' ie oo•
:i n
] OI • 300~ I: ~:'r.r• 17 r ~ -
~~~y . y ' . e~
1906•~ t907 1910„ ~9i~ 1912~•
T T ;O JNyY O 0 D
9 10
1905 190B ~ 19 10 '1
e~l~ 2 S.W. JOHNSON STREET I
, . _
S i '
lOI~ 900 i00~ ~002 I100 ~300 ia00 I700 I70I 1101 N 1904
~909 _I' ':Il16::•:i:? 1913 19~~ 19~3
I .i.r s . . , w. r
C
L
` ivm • _ ' isoz' reoi' O ~'?~S' :
. ~ :I• ~ M ' •I "I J
N : u.7 ie u
' ~ ~ H H r ~ 23 -78 ~ . .
1900
~eoxr i-oy~ i-no• °_i-eoo'~... \ a y~ f`T
4 • , AREA TO BE~"
iroy •1103 ANNEXED
uao uoo. ~ - =
g j •i~ . k ~ . ~ 1~~~
1 • ~ /OR ASSf35MENT PUNPOSCS OnIT ~la
I'- _ ~ . 00 NOi NfL7 ON faA aN1,0iNEN US!
_ , ..r.r wrr ~ ~
.~1~~..~~l~.~~~~c✓yw-...~- - - T 16A
3 • . •11:.
' Sf! MAP ZS 1 3v0 2S I 3
y • PROPOSAL NOo 3659
CITY'OF TIGARD
ANNEXATION
FIGURE 2
MULTNOMAH WASHINGTON ~ •
'I' A 1 METROPOLITAN A' A 1 A GOVERNMENT :1 IA' ! 1
000 NE OREGON STREET N 16 (SUITE 540) PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 PIiONE: 731•4093
PLJBLIC.
107ricE
NOTICE OF HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT AT 7:00 PM ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1996, IN ROOM
, 602 MULTNOMAH COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 1021 SW 4TH AVE., PORTLAND, OREGON, THERE
SHALL BE A PUBLIC HEARING BY AND BEFORE THE PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL
GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION ON PROPOSALS, INCLUDING THE ONE LiSTED BELOW.
INTERESTED PERSONS MAY APPEAR AND WILL BE GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO BE
HEARD.
PROPOSAL N0. 3659 - ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD of territory located generally in
the center of the City, on the corner of SW 106th Dr. & SW Johnson St.; more particularly TL
1916, NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 3, T2S R1 W, W.M. Wash. CO., OR.
GENERAL INFORMATION, MAPS AND AN AGENDA MAY BE OBTAINED BY CALLING 731-4093.
OCTOBER 16, 1996 RAY BARTEL, CHAIRMAN
I
STAFF COMMISSIONERS
KENNETH S. MARTIN, ExecWive Olficer RAY BARTEL, Chair MARILYNN HELZERMAN i
DENIECE WON, Executive AsSislanl TOM WHITfAKEA, Vice-Chair SY KOfiNOF100T
Ll1NA RULIEN, AdminislraUvo Assislant BOD BOUNEFF STEVE STOLZE
NATHALIE DARCY
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington )
City of Tigard )
I, ~G..~ h'e-r~ 2. w~QR--~~-P~`1 , hereby certify:
Please Print
That I am a~~~-f for the City of Tigard, Oregon.
That I served notice of the Tigard City Council ✓I(o~j GC_ 0~ ►'1aL
~'t(nAdb S- Drd q413 s) ~
.~Li~"
/Ln.e4r~~,t~~ C O~Ps • &a - S
of which the attached is a copy (Marked Exhibit A) upon each of the following named
persons on the -7 b-6 day of (~)f.'t"p &n. , 19 qCl . by mailing to each of
them at the address shown on the attached list (Marked Exhibit B), said notice is hereto
attached, and deposited in the United States Mail on the LZ day of 0G~&,,L.
,
19 Q~ , postage prepaid.
~
Prepared Notice
Subscribed and sworn to before me this dav of t._. 19 ~
. L- ~ ,
` OFFICIAL SEAL
AA JO ANPI HAYES Notary P'c of Oregon
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ~ rccG
CbMMISSIONNO.Oa2iae ' My CO1711111SSIOII EXPIrBS: 1MAew [77
MY CbMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 05, 1999
. h:\logln\cathy\afofmall
i
,
,
CITY OF TIGARD .
Washington County, Oregon
, NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY CITY COUNCIL
Concerning Case Number(s): ZCA 96-0005
FILE TITLE: SANDERS ANNEXATION
~
APPLICANT: Maryrose Sanders OWNERS: Same
12390 SW 106th Ave
Tigard, OR 97223
LOCATION: At Southeast Comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and a
change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to
City of Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen
involvement; 10.1.1, service delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3,
zoning designation. Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation
requirements; and 18.138, land classification of annexed territory.
;
ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
Action: EyApproval as requested ❑ Approval with conditions ❑ Denial
Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to:
~ The applicant and owner(s) Z Owners of record within the required distance
~ The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator Z Affected governmental agencies
~
Final Decision: THE DECISION WAS SIGNED ON d , 1996, AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON (0 / a j , 1996. 5uja:jec~- &0 c~,Q
The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of
Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223.
A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent with the Oregon Land Use Board of
Appeals (LUBA) according to their procedures.
QUESTIONS: If you have any questions, please call the Tigard City Recorder at (503) 639-4171.
I .
~ • •
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 96-35
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-0005).
i
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Councii held a public hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider a zoning
designation for one parcel of land located at the Southeast comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
, WHEREAS, on September 24, 1996, the Tigard City Council approved a resolution fonivarding the
i proposed annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Govemment Boundary Commission; and
WHEREAS, the zoning district designation recommended by the planning staff as set forth in the attached
staff report and in Section 1 below is that which most closely approximates the Washington County land
use designation while implementing the city's existing Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density
Residential.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Upon annexation, the affected property shall be designated as follows:
Tax Map. Lot Number Current Zonina New Zoninca
2S1 03 AA, lot 1916 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
~ SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council,
signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder.
PASSED: By lanQAiftW vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title
only, this aq day of 996.
1~~¢ •.C~
Ca erine Wheatley, City Recorder
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this _ day of , 1996.
.farrtes-IV+s&; Mayer
-7
A roved as o f } Gt,ccL 14ur1+
' Att mey
OIQ v /4G
Date
I:ICITYWIDE\0RD\ZCA96-05.ORD
- ,
ORDINANCE No. 96- 35
Page 1
i . I .
~ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON •
RESOLUTION NO. 96-4Oa
A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT B(ZCA 96-0005).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider the annexation of
one parcel consisting of 0.33 acres located at the Southeast comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation constitutes a minor boundary change under Boundary Commission
law ORS 199.410 to 199.519; and
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council is authorized by ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B) to initiate an annexation upon
receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be
annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be
annexed; and
WHEREAS, the property which lies within the boundary of the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs
Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting
District #1 and the Washington County Vector Control District would, by operation of ORS 199.510, be
automatically withdrawn from those districts immediately upon completion of the annexation.
i
NOW; THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Tiqard Citv Council that:
Section 1: The City Council, pursuant to ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B), hereby initiates proceedings
for annexation to the City of Tigard of the territory described in Exhibit A and
illustrated in Exhibit B.
~
Section 2: The City Council hereby approves the proposed annexation and requests that the
Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission approve the
proposal and effect it as soon as possible.
Section 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file certified copies of the resolution with
the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission at once.
(~1
o?~ ay o ,
PASSED: This a
Mayor - City of Tigard
Ay3WEST:
~il>
y Recorder - City of Tigard
q_/Q yL4G
Date
1:\CITYWIDEV2ES\ZCA96-05. RES
RESOLUTION NO. 96-&2-
Page 1
6 . ,
, . ' • •
STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT A
September 24,1996
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
TIGARD TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
A. FACTS
1. Generallnformation
~
CASE: Zone Change Annexation 96-0005
i REQUEST: To annex one parcel of .33 acres of unincorporated
Washington County land to the City of Tigard and to change
the zone from Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard R-4.5.
~ APPLICANT: Steve Sanders
i23yu .
Jvv iuoiii r,vc
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNERS: Same
:
LOCATION: At Southeast comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive -
WCTM 2S1 3 AA, lot 1916 (see vicinity exhibit map).
' 2. Vicinity Information
Properties to the north, south, east and west are in Washington County and zoned
R-5. These parcels have single family residences on them.
3. Background Information
The applicant approached the city with a request to annex the property. No
previous applications have been reviewed by the city relating to this property.
4. Site Information and Proposal Descri tion
The site is sloped to the north with a gentle rise toward the southern end. There is
one single family house on the southern portion of the site. The site is located on
~
~
~
~
~
' ' • •
the corner of SW Johnson St. and SW 106th Avenue which are both local streets.
The site has approximately 100 feet of frontage along SW Johnson Street and 150
feet along SW 106th Avenue.
The applicant has requested that the site be annexed to the city by means of the
~ double majority method. Representing the owners of more than half the land
~ (100%) and a majority of the registered electors (100%) of the area proposed to be
annexed, the applicant has initiated this action through his written consent. The
appiicant intenas io obiain sewui 5ei vicc a►ter annexatiun io tl ie ciiy.
The proposal includes the request to initiate annexation to the city and to change
the zone only on the prope►ty. Because the property is in the city's Active Planning
~ Area, it has already been assigned a Tigard Comprehensive Plan designation,
which is Low Density Residential.
5. Laenc.y Comments
The Engineering Division, Tigard Police and Water departments, Tualatin Valley
~ Fire and Rescue District, PGE and General Telephone have reviewed the proposal
and have no objections. No other comments were received at the time of this
~ report.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1,
~ 10.1.1, 10.1.2, and 10.1.3; and Tigard Community Development Code chapters
18.136 and 18.138.
Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of
, the Comprehensive Plan based on the following findings:
1. Policy 2.1.1, requiring an ongoing citizen involvement program, is satisfied
because the Central and West CITs and surrounding property owners have
been notified of the hearing and public notice of the hearing has been
published.
2. Policy 10.1.1, requiring adequate service capacity delivery to annexed
parcels, is satisfied because the Police Department, Engineering, Water
Department, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District have reviewed the
proposal and indicate that adequate services are available and may be
extended to accommodate the affected property.
2
' ' • •
3. Policy 10.1.2, boundary criteria for annexations, is satisfied because the
Police Department has been notified of this request and has no objection;
the affected land is located within the city's urban planning area and is
contiguous to the city boundary; and adequate services are available to
accommodate the property.
~ 4. Policy 10.1.4, zoning designation, is satisfied because the affected parcel
will be designated as R-4.5, which is the most closely conforming zoning
' aesignation io ii ie exisiiiiy 'v'v'dsi Ili iy'LuVI CoW-Ity zoning ol' R-5.
Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of
the Community Development Code based on the following findings:
1. Code Section 18.136.030, requiring approval standards for annexation
proposals, is satisfied because:
a. Service providers have indicated that adequate facilities and services
are available and have sufFcient capacity to serve the affected site.
;
b. Applicable comprehensive plan policies and code provisions have
been reviewed and satisfied.
, c. The zoning designation of R-4.5 most closely conforms to the county
designation of R-5 while implementing the city's Comprehensive
~ Plan designation of Low Density Residential.
d. The determination that the affected property is an established area is
based on the standards in Chapter 18.138 of the code.
2. Code Section 18.138, providing standards for the classification of annexed
land, is satisfied because the property shall be designated as an
established area on the development standard areas map of the
comprehensive plan.
C. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings noted above, the planning staff recommends approval of
ZCA 96-0005.
1: XLRPLN W ELSIZCA96-05. STF
3
~
~
. .
~ .
,
. .
. . _
. . ._:.z,
_ . .
_ . ~ . . . _
. . .
- ~ • , ~ ' • ` r r . I
, ~ ~y i I
~
.
, ~ . ' ,~i ♦
r' \ i . ` ~ ' ~ ~ ' s :,.i ♦ . ,.r, a,E
. ~
~.i; ~ : / . , , . , • ~ . , I
~ ` , ~ . . 4-j;
;
.
.
~ ~ . ~ . , . ~ , . . . . I
. , . . . _ . , . . .
. . , . . . . - . . ~
i~ . . . . . . , ' . ' ~
i ~
~
%
~ ~ . . ~ ~ . ~ • ~
~ ~ , . ~ • . ~ r ~ S I
. . s : ' , .
1 r• • ` ' . : . . . ' . f
I
~
%
~ . s . . , . _ . . ~ .
~
, I . . i. " - . . . . . . . , . . . . . ~ • . ~
J H
i - 1T
I . . ~ I
cu ;
~
, 0)
, -
, . .
_ ,
.
~ -
r
:
; ..r.._
- .f. .~a:.: - - 'U
i
; EXFIIBIT "B" a,wDwnoNnrrozoW cwwcE FRann I
ZCA96-OOO5 ~ courmrRSroanR-4s i
~ Sanders Annexation N '~`^"TH" nGARD an unmrs '
- - - • - - ---F
~ Avery Laser Labels #2163
~
. !
i
~
' ti .r~-. . ti~;~.;1 i`i' ~ ' . „ • ~
i
d
i
£ZZL6 2I0 PjLlgi.L i'
anuand Ip90I MS 06£Zi
sJaput's anals ; .
~
. ~
i'
~
i~
~ AVERY "
r`-_iw~ t, i+?r+, . ''`....ttiS:R'"~~~. . ~ i •....Jt ~
~t~~n:,d~9nk=~9'Y:. +'µr:.~`a37`+-,`..~'t'.~'~... l!.~7i~tlir~`~?..~-Y~~" ..:~ti~a,: •
• CITY OF TIGARD. OREGON •
,
ORDINANCE NO. 96-35
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-0005).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider a zoning designation for one parcel of land located at the Southeast corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1996, the Tigard City Council approved a resolution forwarding the proposed annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Govemment Boundary Commission; and
WHEREAS, the zoning district designation recommended by the planning staff as set forth in the attached
staff report and in Section 1 below is that which most closely approximates the Washington County land
use designation while implementing the city's existing Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density
Residential.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Upon annexation, the affected property shall be designated as follows:
Tax Map. Lot Number Current Zonin4 New Zonino
2S1 03 AA, lot 1916 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council,
signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder.
~ PASSED: By U11Q11iM1W vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title
only, thisa14 day of 996.
Ca erine Wheatley, City Recorder
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this _ day of , 1996.
:
.+8fl4es PlFf AIi, M8 fAf
A roved as to
,
' Attomey
' 9fQ vl~'G
Date
I:1C ITYWI DE\ORWCA96-05.0 RD
ORDINANCE No. 96- 35
Page 1
~,D
,y/ ~
~ ,
. \
CITY OF TIGARD
:.:7~~I . . k, .
. ti...:.::~:~::....
~:~.\.e:..:~.;.x.........~•..:\:.~.v`::.•,~\~::::..y~ti•`"~``\\.
~ \ . \
. , 1..
PllBLIC NOTICE:
.
Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda
\ \ , , ~~v +ti . ` ~ `
~ • .\~;a \~>ti \vti\..•:\\\~ • \
item should si8'n on the aPProPriate siSn'
" ~ ,,,.~~up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask
N~ ~~~~\~~,;.~~to be recognized by the Mayor at the
~
......~N ,
: beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's
Agenda 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 Ciry Administrator.
Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying
be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business
agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 u.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 caU 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD -
Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
llpon 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 bilingval 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 date at the same phone
numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD -
Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 1
~
AGENDA
Tigard City Council Meeting - September 24, 1996
• STllDY MEETING
> EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into
Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d),
(e), 8z (h) to discuss labor retations, real property transactions,
current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions
within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this
meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the
news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose
any information discussed during this session.
> Discuss of Annexation Analysis Option for the Walnut Island
> Discuss Solid Waste Task Force Assignments
> Agenda Review
1. BtlSINESS MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - Ci Council 8t Local Contract Review Board
ty 1.2 Roll Call .
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications/Liaison Reports
1.5 Gall to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please)
3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be
enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request
that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action.
Motion to:
3.1 Approve City Council Minutes - Augvst 20, 1996
3.2 Receive and File: Planning Commission Bylaws and Rules of
Procedure
3.3 Approve llpdated Water Rate Structure - Resolution No. 96-
3.4 Approve Dedication of Property at SW Burnham Street and S.W.
Main Street to the Public as Right of Way - Resolution No. 96-
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 2
z ~
: ~ • I
3.4 Approve Dedication of Property at SW Burnham Street and S.W. I
Main Street to the Public as Reght of Way - Resolution No. 96- !
3.5 Approve the Interest Rate for 1996/97 to be Appiied to All
Reimbursement Districts Formed During the Year- Res. No. 96-
• Consent Astenda - Items Removed for Seuarate Discussion: Any items
requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate
discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted
on those items which do not need discussion.
4. PUBLIC HEARiNG - FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER
REIMBIIRSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 8
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Staff Report: Public Works Department
d. Public Testimon Pro onents O onents
Y ~ P , PP )
e. Staff Recommendation
f. Council Questions
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Council Consideration: Resolution 96-
5. PllBLIC HEARING - (QllASI ]llDICIAL) - ZONE CHANGE
ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0005 SANDERS ANNEXATION
REQIlEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and a change of the comprehensnre pian and zoning from
Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5.
LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria in this case
are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen invoivement; 10.1.1, service
delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning
designation. Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation
requirements; and 18.138, land classification of annexed temtory. ZONE:
Presently, Washington County R-5.
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Declarations or Challenges
§.1 Staff Report: Community Development Department
Public Testimony (Proponents, Opponenu, Rebuttal)
e. Staff Recommendation
f. Council Questions
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Council Consideration: Resolution 96- 8z Ordinance 96-
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 3
0 0 ~
6. Pl1BLIC HEARING (QllASI ]UDICIAL) ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION
(ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: The applicant requesu annexation on behalf of the owner for
four parcels of land with a total acreage of 232 acres into the City and a
change of the zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard R-4.5.
LOCATION: West of 114th Avenue and South of Gaarde St. ~
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria in this case
are Comprehensive Plan policies 2. 1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service
delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning
designation. Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation
requirements; and 18.138, land classification of annexed territory. ZONE:
Presently, Washington County R-5
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Declarations or Challenges ,
c. Staff Report: Community Development Department
d. Public Testimony (Proponenu, Opponents, Rebuttai)
e. Staff Recommendation
f. Council Questions
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Council Consideration: Resolution 96- 8t Ordinance 96-
7. Pl1BLIC HEARING (Ql1AS1 JIIDICIAL) - ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 96-
0006 TIGARD FEED STORE
~ REQl1EST: A request to remove the historic overlay desigmation and
permit the demolition of the Tigard Feed and Garden building, designated as I
historically significant by the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 12355 SW Main ,
St. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Comprehensnre Plan policies 2.1.1
and 3.7.1 and Community Development Code, Chapter 18.82 ZONE: ~
CBD
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Declarations or Challenges
c. Swff Report: Community Development Department
d. Public Testimony (Proponents, Opponents, Rebuttai)
e. Staff Recommendation
f. Council Questions
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 96-
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 4
t
. • •
8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9. EXECIlTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive
Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), 8T (h) to
discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending
litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are
confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those
present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this
session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session.
10. ADJOIlRNMENT
i: \adm\cachy\cca\960924p. da:
COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 5
~ .
. •
AGENDA ITEM # S
For Agenda of Sgqtember 24. 1996
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Zone ChanQe Annexation ZCA 96-0005 - Sanders
PREPARED BY: Nels Mickaelson DEPT HEAD OK lGl ITY ADMIN OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should the City Council forward to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary
Commission a request to initiate annexation of one parcel consisting of 0.33 acres located at the
Southeast comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution and ordinance to forward the annexation request to the Boundary
Commission and to assign a zone designation to the properties in conformance with the city
comprehensive plan.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Because the ownership of the subject property changed after annexation forms were submitted, this
item was set over from the September 10th public hearing before the City Council to the meeting on
September 24th. This was to allow the new owner to obtain the required signatures to initiate
annexation.
The proposed annexation consists of territory comprised of one parcel of land totaling 0.33 acres.
Because the territory is located within Tigard's active planning area and has already been assigned a
comprehensive plan designation of Low Density Residential, the City Council only need assign a
Tigard zone designation to the property. Attached is a resolution initiating annexation and an
ordinance to change the ione designation from Washington County R-5 to Tigard R-4.5.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Deny the request.
FISCAL NOTES
Since the territory is within Tigard's active planning area, the city is responsible for the Boundary
Commission application fee of $225.
. • ~
STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT A
September 24,1996
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
TIGARD TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
A. FACTS
1. General information
CASE: Zone Change Annexation 96-0005
REQUEST: To annex one parcel of .33 acres of unincorporated
Washington County land to the City of Tigard and to change
the zone from Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard R-4.5.
APPLICANT: Steve Sanders
12390 SW 106th Ave
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNERS: Same
LOCATION: At Southeast corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive -
WCTM 2S1 3 AA, lot 1916 (see vicinity exhibit map).
2. Vicini Information
Properties to the north, south, east and west are in Washington County and zoned
R-5. These parcels have single family residences on them.
3. Bac ground Information
The applicant approached the city with a request to annex the property. No
previous applications have been reviewed by the city relating to this property.
4. Site Information and Proposal Description .
The site is sloped to the north with a gentle rise toward the southern end. There is
one single family house on the southem portion of the site. The site is located on
1
• ~
the corner of SW Johnson St. and SW 106th Avenue which are both local streets.
The site has approximately 100 feet of frontage along SW Johnson Street and 150
feet along SW 106th Avenue.
The applicant has requested that the site be annexed to the city by means of the
double majority method. Representing the owners of more than half the land
(100%) and a majority of the registered electors (100%) of the area proposed to be
annexed, the applicant has initiated this action through his written consent. The
applicant intends to obtain sewer service after annexation to the city.
The proposal includes the request to initiate annexation to the city and to change
the zone only on the property. Because the property is in the city's Active Planning
Area, it has already been assigned a Tigard Comprehensive Plan designation,
which is Low Density Residential.
5. BQency Comments
The Engineering Division, Tigard Police and Water departments, Tualatin Valley
Fire and Rescue District, PGE and General Telephone have reviewed the proposal
and have no objections. No other comments were received at the time of this
report.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1,
10.1.1, 10.1.2, and 10.1.3; and Tigard Community Development Code chapters
18.136 and 18.138.
Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of
the Comprehensive Plan based on the following findings:
1. Policy 2.1.1, requiring an ongoing citizen involvement program, is satisfied
because the Central and West CITs and surrounding property owners have
been notified of the hearing and public notice of the hearing has been
published.
2. Policy 10.1.1, requiring adequate service capacity delivery to annexed
parcels, is satisfied because the Police Department, Engineering, Water
Department, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District have reviewed the
proposal and indicate that adequate services are available and may be
extended to accommodate the affected property.
2
. • • •
3. Policy 10.1.2, boundary criteria for annexations, is satisfied because the
Police Department has been notified of this request and has no objection;
the affected land is located within the city's urban planning area and is
contiguous to the city boundary; and adequate services are available to
accommodate the property.
4. Policy 10.1.4, zoning designation, is satisfied because the affected parcel
will be designated as R-4.5, which is the most closely conforming zoning
designation to the existing Washington County zoning of R-5.
Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of
the Community Development Code based on the following findings:
1. Code Section 18.136.030, requiring approval standards for annexation proposals, is satisfied because:
a. Service providers have indicated that adequate facilities and services
are available and have sufficient capacity to serve the affected site.
b. Applicable comprehensive plan policies and code provisions have
been reviewed and satisfied.
c. The zoning designation of R-4.5 most closely conforms to the county
designation of R-5 while implementing the city's Comprehensive
Plan designation of Low Density Residential.
d. The deteRnination that the affected property is an established area is
based on the standards in Chapter 18.138 of the code.
2. Code Section 18.138, providing standards for the classification of annexed
land, is satisfied because the property shall be designated as an
established area on the development standard areas map of the
comprehensive plan.
C. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings noted above, the planning staff recommends approval of
ZCA 96-0005.
I:XLRPLNW ELSXZCA96-OS.STF
3
•
' t ♦r` 4 _ zt! ~,a 'jk'~s ~ ) `•~7°-.in . F J '1.ni 1 ~.-.1 i. ~ J.,'. t t. : 'r rr. ~
, ~ F . i ~?x:p~ ` ..a•~ S ~ , 4 4 , i.
I y . . j~ _ , i . x aiS'+= .aa.i . . :a . . ' , . I~'
f. ~ E..r a ~ Y s~£ ~~`K•~ ri' a. 1~, ~ ~t a
~ I i ~ i AY. * i~ 1~
' . ` ~ ,;1 R,~, ~ ~`•\.i
7 j t . . , s~~ I 3 ~*.a 't~, . yi1 i~•~ y1a .t~ } 4 r • t y~ ,F ` . ~ts Y
_ .3 ' _ I...~ 1 . . •1 4 . ~y _4 ~ "C.'~Ys l ~':k^l !R-~ 2 Z , ♦ ~ y ` ~ -v t h~ f ~~rs"~~y 3 : 'tr ~ Ap a
/ \ + F t i( Wk ~JG1 x iA Y LM.4 ~
j / ~ j ~ t f ~ .T~ ~r. t ~~Y~ .1 ~..,k~~~y iJS' 4 v r:.." "~Y=r"M" . A ' 4 .,Si''
r iY ~y, : ~ . t~ .lN a Ql 1 -ha-J tYa.rc.r Ya~, . .:~.k't~'w.-~T~.^S~lh ,`tM ~~~tr
J C
h...~~i_..~~.~t1~4.~ t - 1 M 54 r~ ~ i ~ ` S~ ~ ~aFlk ' y.a l t' ' • ~ ~ ,y~~ , t, ~'~.J~[.FYIMy,' r' ~
t F tr ^ . :-F :r: . ' •
.X-. ? ~ .4 ` ~ ~ wrc F. '~,.«i .uyr a w~'w. F-~ •
.
.
~ 4 t . . . ~ ; r w i -l. r _b.. ~ ; ":r-K . J . . ` `
.'a.~... : ~ _ _ ' J , ' .1..i, 1 ~ j _
.
. . . i u A . .
: ' Y ~.~.'1" =Y .`,_+..1 71: .!R 1i~'~iJ' , F C `t • ~
'L, T co
~ - ~y~.• . q' ~ ~ " t -_',i_:~i '-x`r.'F' iSt
J H O :Vr~
.at ~ t~
~1 e
~r
~ i`tZ,'.,~,. ; r. ~-t.~ • r+, ~ .
~,y~-i, {Y` , f ~ . r. , ` -ta y y ,y~- 1~ ~
CD
• ~a5~n ~ f..~}~f.,y~.'wr' ~ '~L"` t'~£.. t ~i:r+" T. 3 ~
I T ~ ~ ` ( Y , ~
~ F. t - ~T. • -
. ' ~ ~'eT - ~ .L~
I . "~'i ~ ~ • - ,t ♦ _ ~ 'y,~ ♦ .Y ,J
. ~ • i . '~Cd _'f ~ ~ , . f
. - ~ o. ).J r*° i. r -i- c-r
~ ;i .'o ; =t •~~r
• I~ ~ ~ '.,p. ~ ,T~ _ _.J`..
' c~r :i:x . q ' f,%' _ h.
"
.
co
~ . - ~t... ~ ~ ry.3~ 1.4 aY,- r'A I ■ I
I e . _ r , • ' t _ "t.9~`t R ^f-.l •r ~ ~"7. ` . _ f ~ . L I
' Y t•vi v S kj ~ I~ I
' I" ^ ' h l , f -'S ~v i`ilk?7 ~ =a "4.c~ ~ .C•y, •
. .
, .
. :
.
'
- } ~ ~ r .zs_.~,~' u~~'~~~"`_`' J_ .i~ +_,j • ~
:
S` ~ I
. . . . . . ..r-a:..15 +a,
~ ! a°; . w " ~ ♦ sj e. ~ ~ '
' ~ • .b'' '-v t . _ z I I
, . . _ . ._a...., ~ ......r. 5.ti~.s _..a. 1.^..:~n._...~.... ,v. ..a...:._~ . .s.::id I
• i
~ ~M I ID t I ANNDlAT10N AND ZOPE G"IANC~,E FRONA ~ I
D
ZCA9 COUNfTY RS TO GTY R-d.S
; Cr0005 ;
~ Sanders Annexation vNhuN ncARD arr uMTS
~
. . •
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 96-
A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT B(ZCA 96-0005).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider the annexation of
one parcel consisting of 0.33 acres located at the Southeast comer of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation constitutes a minor boundary change under Boundary Commission
law ORS 199.410 to 199.519; and
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council is authorized by ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B) to initiate an annexation upon
receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be
annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be
annexed; and
WHEREAS, the property which lies within the boundary of the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs
Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting
District #1 and the Washington County Vector Control District would, by operation of ORS 199.510, be
automatically withdrawn from those districts immediately upon completion of the annexation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
Section 1: The City Council, pursuant to ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B), hereby initiates proceedings
for annexation to the City of Tigard of the territory described in Exhibit A and
illustrated in Exhibit B.
Section 2: The City Council hereby approves the proposed annexation and requests that the
Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission approve the
proposal and effect it as soon as possible.
, Section 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file certified copies of the resolution with
the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Govemment Boundary Commission at once.
PASSED: This day of , 1996.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
Date
I:\CITYWIDE\RES\ZCA96-05. RES
RESOLUTION NO. 967
Page 1
• •
•
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 96-
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-0005).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider a zoning
designation for one parcel of land located at the Southeast corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1996, the Tigard City Council approved a resolution forwarding the
proposed annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Govemment Boundary Commission; and
WHEREAS, the zoning district designation recommended by the planning staff as set forth in the attached
staff report and in Section 1 below is that which most closely approximates the Washington County land
use designation while implementing the city's existing Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density
Residential.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Upon annexation, the affected property shall be designated as follows:
Tax Map. Lot Number Current Zoninca New Zoninc
2S1 03 AA, lot 1916 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 da s after its assa
y p ge by the Council,
signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder.
PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title
only, this day of , 1996.
Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this _ day of , 1996.
James Nicoli, Mayor
Approved as to foRn:
City Attomey
Date
I:\CITYWI DE\ORDIZCA96-05.ORD
ORDINANCE No. 96-
Page 1
. ' ~ •
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ~
CiTY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Kelley Jennings. PD DATE: Auaust 6. 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 Sanders Annexation
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and
a change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson
Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria
in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service
delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning designation. Community
Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land
classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
Attached is the vicinity map for your review. From information supplied by various departments and
agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on
this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: August 19, 1996. You may use the
space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to
respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and
confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard
Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
~ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
_ Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
(Please provide the following information)
Name of Person Commenting:
Phone Number: ~
. ' •
-~--„-_------~--~--~_-r _
~ i : ~ ~e~,.,.~ t.. r ~ ~ i . ~ i~.w ~:,y .~,..y f"`".~'' '..a-~r •y' 'z".~~''_4 -..n~ ° ~::f~- y°~a..11' s'~ 'T"'I ;"'r .~--"~i
. ~ . . . - . . - ~
1.up o
. ✓.A ~ ~.R ..y.
, i.r > ~ .w-x` _ 'y.b ~ ~ -4.~~k~--a~:rs'+~,:~'~•f;. i ~ . { ~ r ~ t . . ' • . .
. . . . . ~ ~ ..i.. ~.n: ~.t .~'u k +t . r ' • ~ Y x rn ~^w,~iE~ ~«py~'
. .
. . . .r-r--~.«~ . ~ -"s- ~ ,.g,..y;_•°a„~.. y....,, .t ,
4-1
. . . 1 4 3 a✓ } Z 1F 1; i
„ ' • ~ j . 1 ~-.R .lq..~x~^H ; Y.....rtl~ ~ ~.resa~.`~Ci.
n
v T
.
` ,
a .e: . t .
r ~ , ~ .k.~...r. . . . . ~ ~ . ~
~ .
1 ~4
, kt ..t 7 t
. . . ; _ _ ~ ~ ~ .i ^ . . -c , m-~ ~ h ~;~""t 'r~+y,.-a. I . ..k5y-. ..i. ~fx . o , K r. .9 ,
, -
, . . . ~ ~ 4 .
cu
~
; ~ . .
-t~' . '-~y • - -T'+»
. . . . . . -
. _ ~ . . ' + . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . _ '
~ . • .
- ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~
' ' ,.._,_.w:MR ~..C._~ y ~9a+,C]^~ • "Y !4 s's' `N.Q~~M 41.Y1' 31b~t~ ..~h~
vY s _ ~
~ ~ t \ Y ~ ~ `l~~~y "l.Y~ 4• ~
I W'°~, co
I _ A`t l°
?ZS"~
-~+e~
--D -
-77
i r-~'-.Y
l ~ L Yk ~
I , - ~f ~ ~ ` - / 4 - f ■
~ ' - ~ ~ ~
~ . . . . . ~ t
.
~ - • : ' • t. , . - 7 ? A - -
~ . . ~
~ . .
. ~
0
.
I . _ Y• ' ~ -
.
,
t A
.
~
. _ . . . '
( y . i . : h
. ,
'
~ . .
- -~-~.T•. i.. ..r . . _ " ' x Y ~ . '
~ " " . _ 1, t~ ~ ' . 1 .Y. ! ~ 1 (
~L
11 S~'
. r
~ F
r
. . . y t'
' _ ~:i _ _ ~ y.. R_v t ~?x ~ tr '►i s
. . > , .
. _ . . ~ .,.a~. 4 ~ . z.._.
~ .C CHAM3E /y.
Ffp`V1Y1
7~,L~C~ ~ V ~v~wMrRGlL`w71 /yvC1'lJY`~
( uvl L~~~ /Y Ck1ANGE FROM OOUP(TY R-5
~ Sanders Annexation MCffY`°'"°°'S".
LE~:~^ WITHIN TIGARD CITY LJMITS
N
' • .
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ~
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Brian Moore, PGE DATE: Auaust 6, 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 Sanders Annexation
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and
a change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson
Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria
in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service
delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning designation. Community
Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land
classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
Attached is the vicinity map for your review. From information supplied by various departments and
agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on
this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: August 19, 1996. You may use the
space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to
respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and
confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard
Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
✓ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
_ Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
(Please provide the following information)
' Name of Person Commenting:
Phone Number:
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
CiTY OF TIGARD ' OREGON
TO: Brian Raaer. Enaineerina DAT : s 6 996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division TAFF CONTA T: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: -4171 Fax: 503 684-729-
RE: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 Sanders Annexation
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and
a change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson
Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria
in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service
delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning designation. Community
Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land
classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
Attached is the vicinity map for your review. From information supplied by various departments and
agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on
this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: August 19, 1996. You may use the
space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to
respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and
confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard
Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
~ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
_ Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
(Please provide the following information)
Name of Person Commenting:
~ Phone Number:
~ . ~
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION A~
CITY OF TIGARD
FILE NO: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 OREGON
FILE TITLE: Sanders Annexation
APPLICANT: Maryrose Sanders
12390 SW 106th Ave
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNERS: Same
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and a
change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to
City of Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5.
LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen
involvement; 10.1.1, service delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3,
zoning designation. Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation
requirements; and 18.138, land classification of annexed territory.
ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
CIT: West and Central CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request
PHONE NUMBER: (503)
DECISION MAKING BODY
STAFF DECISION
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 730
HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00
X CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: 9/10/96 TIME: 7:30
RELATIVE COMPONENTS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
VICINITY MAP X LANDSCAPING PLAN NARRATIVE
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SITE PLAN OTHER
~ STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson (503) 639-4171 x321
21
RECEit1ED
C11rY OF TIGARD, OREGON 1`'~~ 2 -r~ 1996
COIIgMUN
I Ty DEVfLUP
MfNr
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ZONE CHANGE/ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDm:NT APPLICATION
CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Bos 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 -(503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY
CASE NO. 'ZZA
OTHER CASE NO'S:
~ RECEIPT N0.
APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY:
DATE:
1. GENIIi.AL INFORMATION Application elements submitted:
P!tOPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION (A) Application form (1)
0~ ,;2.;-) 3
(B) Owaer's signature/written
TAX MA.P ~ND TAX LOT N0. authorization
(C) Applicant's statement
~
SITE SIZE "C' n C~~ ~ (pre-app check list)
PROPERTY OWNER/'DEED HOLDER* (D) Filing fee
I. ADDUSSv7-5 n7v S~ ~0 (,p 77-~ ONE Additional information for Compre-
CITY ZIP ~ ZZ sive Plan Map Amendments/Zone Changes
APPLICANT Syo, blll (E) Maps iadicating property
T I •
ADDRESS PHONE location (pre-app check list)
~ CITY ZIP (F) List of property owners and
*fdhen the owner and zhe applicant are different addresses within 250 feet (1)
people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record (G) assessor's Map (1)
or a leasee in posse3sion with written authorization (H) Title transfer iastrument (1)
from the owner or an.a,gent of the owner with writtea
authorization. The owner(s) must sign this
apolication in the space provided on page two or
submit a written authorization with this application. DATE DETER.~IINED TO BE COMPLETE:
2. , PROPOSAL SUMMARY
The owners of record of the subject property FINAL DECISION DEADLINE:
request a Comprehensive Plaa Amendment (if COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION:
applicable) from to
and a Zone Change from to
. N.P.O. Number:
' OR
The apoiicant requests an amondment to the Planning Commission Approval Date:
iollowing sections of the Cotrgrehensive Plan
' or Community Developmeat Code
City Council Approval Date:
, 0737P 23P
Rev'd: 5/87 '
1* 0
3. Lis[ any variance, conditional uses, or other land use actioas to be considered
as part of this application: ' .
4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to eubmit attachmenta
described in [he attached information sheet at the time you submit this
application.
~
5. THE APPLICANT(S).SHALL CERTIFY THAT:
A. The above request does not viola[e any deed restrictions that may be
attached to or imposed upon the subject property.
• B. If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights
granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and
limitations of the approval.
C. All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan,
attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the ~
applicants -so acknovledge that any permit issued, based on this
application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statemen[s are
false.
D. The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including
the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving
or denying the application.
DATED this day of 19
SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subjec[ property.
K
~
~
(ICSL:pm/0737P)
~
~
19 tAo.
pA ~
~ ~ .
~ ~ E1VED FROM ~ ppL1.AaS $
REC S
s~ r i .b CMa
o m'"` .
m rn
k"" ~a: +S'~ SJ J
M r
o .av c-~~ ca M FpR
~ W UNS ~
~7 4^ : q ACGO pROER
AMT.PA~O ~
A~V CE
6
L)
~
PAMLGBC FO&V A16
CERTIFICATION OF PRDPFRTY OW1YERSHIP
• (Double 1fajoriry J-fethod)
I hereby certify that the attached petition for annexarion of the territory described therein to the City
of 7-;-,ZZT!A 2 n contains the names of the owners* of a majoriry oi the land are3 of the
territory to be annexed, as shown on the last available complete assessment roll. .
NAIN
TITLE
DEPr1R1-I'ViENT ffSSC.s'S~n~w,~ ~ ~i~c
COLTNTY OF
DATE ge~.1 A9G
* "Owner" means the owner of the title to resl oroperry or the contract purchaser of re31
property.
PAIALGBC FMI -r"r 17
CERTIFIGA?TON OF REGISTERED VOTERS
I hereoy certi"ry that the att3caed petition for annexation of tz:ritory described he:ein to the City of
contains the names oi at Ieast a majority oi the
elec:ors re;istered in the territory to be snnexed.
V ~~f E
1
DEP?.,RTN iEIT T
COLNTY OF
DA i~
--18--
Revised 11/93
. . ~f
~ I
i
P:tiIAL GBC FOktit #4
CE'RTIFICA TION OF LFGAL DESCRIP TION AjVD MAP
I hereby cercify that the descriprion of the properry included within the 3ttached perition (located on
Assessor's Map O-S l 75 Ar ~ ~ ~ u )
has been checked by me and it is a true and ex3ct descripdon of the property under consideration,
and the description corresponds to the 3ttached map indicating the properry under consideration.
vAINfE Q. KA-v
TITI.E _ 5'~N co~ Cf42 t7~ G,Q..~4-~f~~
DEP.kR'Ii~EINT tt55 ES51`''! g,4U T- 'r 7AKA-(70/V
COLivI'Y OF GJA S~( tu 6 7-0 /`1
DATE -7-- ( 9-- Y6o
19
Revisad I1i93
~ P1titaL GBC FOILtiI #1 0
PETITION FOR kVNEYr4T101V TO THE CITY OF l~ OREGON
T0: The Councii of the Ciry of Oregon
We, the undersigned property owners of and/or registered voters in the area described below,
hereby peririon for, and give our consent to, annexation of the area to the Ciry of ,
-["'k (-.~V pr(Z~ . If approved by the ciry, we further request that this peerion be
forwazded to the Portland Metropolitan Area local Govemment Boundary Commission for
the necessary procedures as prescribed by ORS 199.490(2). .
The property to be annexed is described as follows:
(Inaert Lega! Description liere OR attacli it as Exliibit "a '
17
Revised 11193
atil'TION sicNeHs
NUTE: This pntiiiun nwy bu aipnud by cpiuliliucl pursuns nvun Ihuuuh thoy n►uy nut kiiow lhuir proparty Jnscrlptiun or prncinct numbar.
SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME I AM A:• ADDRESS PROPERTY DE&CRIPTION PRECINCT 8 DATE
PO RV OV LOT A~ 1/4 6EC. T R
KAR-~rc~sE sANDEeS ~ lz3~io sw lob'~ AvE i3 3AA ti
. ~
• PO = Prupnrly Owner
RV = Eauuistnru(l Vutur
OV - Uwnur Vutur
• •
- - Pr,oper•ty nata Selection Menu - -
ProP ID o R469736 (Real Estate) Ownere SANDERS9 MARYROSE
(c585E~9) ic391Z~ SW 14aE7H DR
Map Tax Lognz
Legal ACE, LOT 1,_, TIGARD, OF~ '37r`.
,
co~,v~--( oR.
SitLis a 12390 SW 10ETH RVE Year, Built < 1962
Living Areao 2468
Code Area o 0c3o 78
Sale Date o08/05/94 1995.Property Values,
Sale Price o 162g S00 Improvements $ 1109 040
Deed 7ype e DW Land $ 45,360
Instr,ument o 94073918 ~ Appraised 4 155,400
1995 Tax Statias Exemptians $ 0(-)
Ci_irrent Levied Taxes o 1,951.81 Assessed $ 155,400
Special Assessments o
# UnPaid Taxes
(1) Alt Disp (c) Pr^imary. (3) Secondary (4) Land/Impr
(5) Gen Appr (E) Owner,ship (7) History (n ) Mor•e
Enter Option from Above or <RET> to Exite _
II
• ~ I
Jerry R. C-taiiscsaq Ex C)ffiicia
Glashingion C:c,rYnty (.'1er. k;
1ts N !s•t Avenue Suite 130
Hi11sbUru, Ui 9I124
F HC.l NE t-.; 48-0i51
Receipt f y1t;t.3;i 1`_,i Maryruse tiaMers
07/1.9/1996
A'ce.soo,eovo..oaaee flccuunte..ded4e.a Totalnoooo
34988- AStiEStiURS AN 30.00
34988 - ASti1E;SSC1Rti 11 2.50
' 32e 5U
Gra"d '.Cot8l k'aid 32.50
~
i
~ i
HeiLls(:1X1 q Ex Off 1. ci.o
WasI-Aingtnr, C:ouiity C.::Lerk
154 ! J 1 stAv e nue ti u i te 130
•
Tlillsboroy i:lr 97124
PFiC11VE 643-8751
~eceiptf a Ia i i YI. s W ci nsC.)Y'a y B<:~ rbara
09/13/1996
Feeeeaaodod.,evoaee Artountdeooavaeoo '1`ca'L'alae.o.
34988 - F'tiSEStillFtti hl 2.50
54985- AySEStiOF:S Ahi ;iU .00
3:.' o5U
Gt'and Tut:rl Paid :32n 50
II
{
. ~
Px-caperty L)at<y tie1ection Mentr
t'rop IC) . h'.469736 (h.ea.1 Estate) itwne.ru SWAf.X4il,d, I:.`Afi'.RA.E,A .fJ
I` i ry p 7'r Lr.a •t- e 2S 1 ;3 A.... t? 1. 9t 6 (302299) 12390 SW 1(} r, "l' lE•I D1,'.
j Lega1 e(.,i..i"I:'"I:'i 1;l'wf-1f117 .(''f.,Ac:'E, LnT 13 'T.':l:CA:R.i) 9 i1R 9?'? 2:3
-t. n '.l~{ ~ "
t- 1.,:'7.~{.. i -t:~t`
`;`.lj.Y.~ , ) ~;i.' 11~';'1~. .~t~ .'C k~t?a.l~' u ~ .F,')
0 ~r. 4~ .
:
L'l.v1%'ig Al:'ec`i : 2463
Cr,de n~~~ea . 023.70
r
~a .1 c~•~ 1~ a~!-. c:~~ o t}; j r~ 1995 i.~ opei:, t:. y Vcy lC.r F:? s
tial.e t'ri.ci:=: 17:3,000 7mpr.,Q<reinkzlts 7 110,040 (1-1
Drapd ':f'y:G'p e r'SC'! :f,a.r.,d t 45,360 i-i- )
In s'h'.vcrm~nt: 96077818 An?:~z~~~ i.:-~e~:.1 $ 155,400 ( )
1995 '1"{yy `?ti:+j"tY`°3 Y';;iefiipt'.7("}nS $ 0
C:'Tc rren't Levr.ed "1.'axa5 ; a 1,951.01 As;.-.eyyed $ 15594U 0(=)
J} E' c1 aJ Asc; esFmt' l? t5
-k :4• :k * i(t"1 I.'axes OCIE' ~F ~c #
(i) A'1t I'1.a.sp t?? Prirnarv (3) tiecnndary (4) Land/Tmp:r•
(5) c.:7en Appr (6) I'lwnar=:(,.ip (7) Hi.y-rr,i,y ( a ) Mure
Entet, nptjon i'rom Abr.,ve r.,r WH.:T> to F°xai.1= e_..
~
U t2"r
i ~ ,
,
~
rl)
~
R5
y5
. ~ tA
~ .
~ .
,
~ . ~
0 •
L(~~l.s 6►J OS
.
JT- 717c".T~j nl F
4,57 or ~.~~~~e~ t+oo.~. ~l~ z r~ ~
(0z o-5-6 c s-
I~- E rj I~ ~ oST-J lr - - GPq ~ L C F F SS ~ ~E
C 14-
<<fl o~ ae..o G o-r ,j G--
f O C.\l. L o t?
.
~ f rvTf ~t- t~?- s
(o,~ ~~~t ` ~
. ~ , ~ f ~Q°~ ~ r~=' ~ ~ ~J Y ~2 o ~ ~ , ~ _ ~ ~
~
~C,
i
• ,
Ken Martin, Executive Officer
Portland Metropolitan Area
Local Government Boundary Commission
800 N. E. Oregon Street #16
Suite 540
Portland, OR 97232
Dear Ken:
I am writing to submit the enclosed forms for a city-initiated, double majority
annexation (Tigard ZCA 96-0005 Sanders) and to request space on the
Boundary Commission's agenda of November 21, 1996. If you have any
questions or need additional information, please call me at 639-4171. Thank you
for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Nadine Smith
Senior Planner
Community Development Department
Enclosures
- FAX TRANSMITTAL -
• PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGAWOGO
LEGAL NOTICE SECTION OF TIGARD TIMES
DATE:August 3, 1996
TO: Mary White, Legals (fax) 620-3433
FROM: Jerree Gaynor, City of Tigard (Ph.) 639-4171
The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on September 10, 1996 at 7:30 PM at the
Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written
testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the rules of
Chapter 18.32 of the Tigard Municipal Code, and rules and procedures of the City Council. Failure to
raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing on the request or
failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decisionmaker an opportunity to
respond to the issue prior to the close of the hearing on the request, precludes an appeal to the Land
Use Board of Appeals based on that issue. Further information may be obtained from the Planning
Division at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171.
PUBLIC HEARINGS •
Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 Sanders Annexation
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and a change of the
comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard Low Density Residential/R-
4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLE REVIEW
CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen
involvement; 10.1.1, service delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning designation.
Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land classification of
annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
~
P
~
Q
NS . ~
- ~
~V ~ • ~
c
C:
c~
~
-o
L
F-
0
~
. -1--~
U
TT PUBLISH August 29, 1996 ^n ~ n R:~~°^^
ZCC176-0Q0' awace ~on+casm a•s
Sanders Annexation r - '°Gr`°`V°°.Sr_
N I
• 4PUBLIC HEARING • EXHIBIT ~2-
NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL,
AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, September 10, 1996, AT 7:30 PM,
IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, li
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223
WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION.:
Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 Sanders Annexation
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and a change of
the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard Low Density
Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson Street and 106th Drive.
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan
policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and
10.1.3, zoning designation. Community Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation requirements;
and 18.138, land classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF
CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED
BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH
IN CHAPTER 18.30.
ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY
WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND
QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 323
(VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN
ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS.
i ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN
, WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE
PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF
REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER; OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING; AND INVITE BOTH
ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC
HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT
TO THE APPLICATION AFTER August 20, 1996, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE
OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN
THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS AFTER
THE HEARING.
INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM
THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE BASED UPON THESE
I
CRITERIA AND THESE CRITER NLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS ORTANT THAT COMMENTS
' RELATING TO THE REQUEST PE IN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLIC~ CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF ~
THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT
TO AFFORD THE DECISIONMAKER AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRIOR TO THE
CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST, PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF
APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE.
ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR '
INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS PER PAGE, OR
THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS
PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT
NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT
RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER, Nels Mickaelson, AT (503) 639-
4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON.
- - I~
. . . . .I
~
~
CL
N S . Q
~ ~
c~
a.
-0
~
c~
~
~
0
4_4
U
- -
~ ANCONFMISIGM NEXAMN
ZCA96-0005 ~ ~~~,R~_- -
Sanders Annexation roaTVLaNOOVSrtv.
N
- • • ExxIBrr 3
2S 103AA-01914 2S 103AA-04100
BADGER, QUENTIN J EUNICE BOYER, SANDRA RAE
10490 SW JOHNSON ST 12244 SW CLYDESDALE CT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-01908 2S103AA-01912
BRUGGER, JUDITH C AND COOK, JOHN E PANSY
JOHN A 10455 SW JOHNSON
12355 SW 106TH TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-01913 2S1026C-02006
COOPER, LISA L EDWARDS, ANNE D 8 HARVEY O
10450 SW JOHNSON ST 10610 SW WALNUT ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S 103AA-01909 2S 102 BC-02005
FLATTERS, JAMES G FRISBIE, OWEN P JR AND
LORAINE M ROXANNE L
12385 SW 106TH AVE 10620 SW WALNUT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-01900 2S103AA-01902
HADDOCK, GLEN RICHARDS AND HATANAKA, BARRY
KATHRYN RUTH TRUSTEES RURIKO
10495 SW WALNUT ST 10625 SW WALNUT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-03400 2S103AA-01901
HEASLEY, KENT W& DANA L HELMER, GARRY L BARBARA S
10470 CLYDESDALE PL 10585 SW WALNUT
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-01903 2S103AA-01915
KUHN, EDWARD T DIANE F LAMBERT, ROBERT A
10645 SW WALNUT ST 10530 SW JOHNSON ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S10268-00700 2S103AA-03500
LAWTON, MARY JANE LEWIS, GARY JAMES 8 DAWNA L
i NOW SKELTON 10490 SW CLYDESDALE PL
10355 SW WALNUT TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-03600 2S103AA-01906
LINDQUIST, ROGER A MARILY MARTIN, RICHARD E
10520 SW CLYDESDALE PL 12320 SW TIEDEMAN AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-01904 2S103AA-03800
MARTINI, ROBERT C AND MCDANIEL, ROBERT D AND
VIRGINIA M JACQUELINE K
10675 SW WALNUT 1339 CRUZERO ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 OJAI,CA 93023
~
i 2S103AA-03300 ~ 2S103AA-01910 •
MOSTUL, CRAIG S& KENNA J PEARSON, RICHARD E& MARY ANN
10450 SW CLYDESDALE PL 12330 SW 106TH DR
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103AA-01911 2S103AA-01907
POITRAS, JOSEPH E TRUSTEE RANF, KEITH N AND GAIL L 10515 SW JOHNSON 12325 SW 106TH DR
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S1026C-02001 2S103AA-01916
ROSE, MARTIN D& LEILA L SANDERS, MARYROSE
10540 SW WALNUT ST 12390 SW 106TH DR
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 ,
2S103AA-03700 2S103AA-01917
SCHOOR, BARBARA E SHELLEDY, RODNEY F
12300 SW 106TH JEANNINE B
TIGARD,OR 97223 12440 SW 106TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S1026C-06700 2S103AA-01905
TIGARD, CITY OF YORK, DANIEL L/KATHLEEN S
13125 SW HALL 12350 SW TIEDEMAN
PO BOX 23397 TIGARD,OR 97223
TIGARD,OR 97223
. • ~ i .
'CITY OF TIGARO
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I OREGON
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington ) ss.
City of Tigard )
I, Jerree L. Gaynor, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say:
That t am a Senior Administrative Specialist for The City of Tigard, Oregon.
X That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR:
That I served NOTICE OF DEClSION FOR:
_ City of Tigard Planning Director
Tigard Planning Commission
_ Tigard Hearings Officer
X Tigard City Council
A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was
mailed to each named person(s) at t e address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked
Exhibit "B", on the day of , 1996; said PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE as hereto attached, was post d on an appropriate bulletin boar on the n/a day
of n/a and deposited in the United States Mail on the -'2z~_'~'~ay of ,
1996, Posta9e PrePaid.
~
Prep!fNotice
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ~day of , 1~V.
OFFICIALSEAL NOTARY PUBLI4rires: ORE O
DI
ANE M JELDERKS 7-1 NOTARY PUBLIC•OREGON My Commission COMMISSION NO.Oa6142 '
MY COMMISSION EXPIFiES SEPTEMBER 07, 1999
I
• •
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ~
CSTY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Per Attached DATE: August 6. 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: _Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 96-0005 Sanders Annexation
REQUEST: The owner requests annexation of one parcel of 0.33 acres into the city and
a change of the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard Low Density Residential/R-4.5. LOCATION: At Southeast Corner of Johnson
Street and 106th Drive. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant review criteria
in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen involvement; 10.1.1, service
delivery capacity; 10.1.2, boundary criteria; and 10.1.3, zoning designation. Community
Development Code chapters 18.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land
classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
Attached is the vicinity map for your review. From information supplied by various departments and
agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be
prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on
this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: August 19, 1996. You may use the
space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If vou are unable to
respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and
confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard
Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223.
PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY:
_ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it.
_ Please contact of our office.
_ Please refer to the enclosed letter.
_ Written comments provided below:
(Please provide the following information)
Name of Person Commenting:
Phone Number:
• REQUEST FOR CONTS
NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & DEVELOPM PLICAiIONS
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM3
{circle one}
CIT Area: L JSJ E C M Placed for review in Libra CIT Book Aa
CI7Y DEPARTMEN?S
BIDG. DEPT./David Scott, akoddingonkb xPOLICE OEPT./Kelley Jennings, G:naHe•enNOnOllka OPERATIONS/John Acker, Monl. SprY.
CITY ADMIN./Cathy Wheatley. CiryRxada '2~ENG. DEPT./Brian Rager, osveiog~taeiw,.e,w~ _ COM.DEV. DEPT./O.S.T: S
ADV. PLNG./Nadine Smith, r-.w:,.vtip WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,
SPECIAL DISTBICtS .
FIRE MARSHAII x UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY YTUAIATIN VALLEY WATER DIST.
Gene Bircheil SWM Program/Lee Wolker PO Box 745
wa. County Fire Disirict 155 N. First Street Beaverton, OR 97075
ick-u box Hillsboro. OR 97124
AFPECTED JUBISDICTIONS
WA. CO. OEPT. OF LAND USE 3 TRANSP. _14ETRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION METRO-GREENSPACES
, 150 N. First Avenue 800 NE Oregon St. # 16, Suite 540 Mel Huie (CPA's/ZOA's)
Hillsboro. OR 97124 Portland, OR 97232-2109 600 NE Grand Avenue
Portland.OR 97232-2736
Brent Curtis (CPA's) STATE HIGHWAY DIVISION
Jim Tice (IGA'S) Sam Hunaidi _ METRO
Mike Borteson (Engineer) PO Box 25412 Mary Weber
Scott King (CPA's) Portland. OR 97225-0412 600 NE Grand Avenue
Tom Harry (Current Plonning App's) Portland. OR 97232-2736
_ Lynn Bailey (Current Planning App's) OREGON DLCD (CPA's/ZOA's)
1 175 Court Street, N.E. ODOT/REGION 1
CITY OF BEAVERTON Salem, OR 97310-0590 laurie Nicholson/Trans. Planning
, larry Conrad. Senior Planner 123 N.W. Flanders
PO Box 4755 CITY OF PORTLAND Portland. OR 97209-4037
1120 SW Sth
_ CITY OF BEAVERTON Portland. OR 97204 ODOi/REGION 1, DISTRICT 2-A
rvtike nnotteucci, Neighborhood Coordinator Bob Schmidt/Engineering Coord.
PO Box 4755 _ CITY OF DURHAM 2131 SW Scholls/PO Box 25412
Beaverton, OR 97076 Ptanning Director Porflond. OR 97225
Beaverton, OR 97076 City Manager
PO Box 23483 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
CITY OF TUALATIN Tigard. OR 97281-3483 City Manager
PO Box 369 PO Box 369
Tualatin, OR 97062 _,90THER% Lake Oswego, OR 97034
CITY OF KING CITY
City Manager
15300 SW 116ih
Kinq Ci , OR 97224
SPECIAL AGENCIES
GENERAL TELEPHONE ELECTRIC ~ PORTIAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COLUMBIA CABLE CO.
Elaine Self, Engineering Brion Moore Craig Evestone
PO Box 23416 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Rd. 14200 SW Brigadoon Couri
Tigard, OR 97281-3416 Beaverton, OR 97007 Beaverion, OR 97005
NW NATURAL GAS CO. w,ooa:(sw) rn.:wr METRO AREA COMMUNICATION$ TRI-MET TRANSIT DEVEIOPMENT
Scott Palmer r= (sw) 721 •ss= Jason Hewitt Kim Knox. Projeci Planner
220 NW Second Avenue Twin Ocks Technology Center 710 NE Holladay Street
Portland, OR 97209-3991 1815 NW 169th Ptace 5-6020 Portland. OR 97232
Beaverton, OR 97006-4886
TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON ~ US WEST COMMUNICATIONS SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS. CO.
Linda Peterson Pete Nelson Ciifford C. Cobe, Const. Engineer
3500 Sw Bond Street 421 Sw Oak Street 5424 SE nncLoughlin
Porfland. OR 97201 Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97202
STATE AGENCIES PEDEBAL AGENCIES
AERONAUTICS DIVISION (ODOn DIVISION Of STAiE LANDS US POSTAL SERVICE
COMMERCE DEPT.-M.H. PARK FISH 3 WIIDIIFE Randy Hammock. Growth Cord.
PUC DOGAMI Cedar Mill Station
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY _ U.S. ARMY CORPS. OF ENGINEERS Portland. OR 97229-9998
_OTH ER h:\bgm\patry\moumf\itcnoiic.msi
,
00005
l
. . , . ;.l ~ ~'iM~p;a', qy.; ~ . *a ,tm.~ ,x f 4 .ty.~ [;~.;~':P P~ r, M ~ ~ ,C; ~ °V-~~,x'~; . „ , , ~ ~ , , t . ~ ra~ . ~ t~'. ~ . . . ~ ~~a ; n ' : ij r#~ ~ ' t '~f 'F . ' . , - k:'4 ~b~`~. . ~ ~ ;.~y~ iry~K; ~ ~.4 .fy.yE.: . „ . ~ :.,a,' ..'c4 ~z_~ ° ¢ 7:a 3,~ c ~~a~ ' ,i.. ~ ; u~.}
P g , y, ,~+~tt~ ~.x''' , , :9,, { , i ~ - ~p • ' i.. ~ m ~u. ~ ~ < fa ~ . 's,~u ar .x•y,.: a 4 ~ n~~ 4i'~ W `'i 's~'x i-', u'Y"' i ~ " ~R ~ ,r r ~ . ~ x~~~~ ' ~ ~ 1 ,~..g w,~ . ~ , r .rw ~.sa ~ - . _ . . r 'P~~ . 4,r~~. q ! ~ ~~l~ p ' - ' 7 e~.~. : ~ ~ ~1, r . ;~i , x,,', , ~'IaG'~ '3NpA,~ . ~,~.s :~~,jy~ ~k ~ewf'~~ ~u p $ :~`~"l: ~tad~~ . ,R~,~~~"1~~e 1~ s ,"~~`r a~ l~.,~ w ,aKy~~~z?, . ! ` ( ~ .,^s ~ , ' ' .~3`~~'~~,~i '~a~ .V ~ 'i~ " ~ 5 ,x ~C •-r ~ ° 9 , E~b , S e ~ f~ R 1~. n ~,k. . rr s r 'r-~~' . i€~ a i a a t~ ~~e. ~ ~ g~Y , „ ~.,w, a~r„~+~'i~ , i~s '.~a a~ s ~ , ~ a^~ ~ f:~~~ r , ~,i ~ ~u ~ ~ ~~f ~ 2: F~% a h~st '~'4 -.ANi ~,,"~~~5 ~ r°~' ~ wr. •'8~='~ ~ )i.:~~C ~~~i~i ~~."~+'C ¢~g' ksn`. ~~~~a,~t3 'S . ..t ' ~ . _ _ . i
k, i :u ,p ~,e 9~ ~i s S r 3~~r. ~ - i.i`~ r .}i- ~ ~ # t r, .~V ~ , .y k ( f y~ {y j b . , y , f ~a°' ~ r ~,',~u y,~ ~ ~ t h {,-0P~ ~ ° D a~~ -}.g 1 3 ~y.~ ~ ~ - '.f~ ~ -s 4 ~;c~, aY n` 1 ~ . ~ ~ . lr ~ . ~ ~ g~i. ~ 7 P. ~'~w~,', . ~ . ' , `.y,- , r„t„~ a. a~ `d'~' ~ ~.lo ;M'.. ~ -'sTw{I i`t„
y~ ♦ . !i~ "w,~". ;,p f~` ~ P, ( ~zx ~ w , T t $ a'a: ~ , YI . ~ n • ,.'a4 f+ $ - , , ' if F f i ' . 4 , - . i`~"t' ~•td~. , , , ~ ,.R~~., ~ , . ; a ~yyy, 61 ~ , , s
. ~ ~ . ~ #~~t ~~f ~~.~pp ,1r~~ yj .i ._y, .4~' ,t '4~ m*' ~~}i , '.j<: I~ ' . ~'~~'~An ,~•,~~~§,y 4a Y■ .,R~;~ k ;i~~G~ ~ . ' x,6.f~ ' ✓`r ' , ~°'~6~ ~,,~;r~~i t.~u ~ ~ f~w,s, ~ ' 4 ' rr ~('ec,. t. ',k ,.~1~ !Y y'~ ~ Y 6 M' ' ~ t,. , ~ rr,. + .~,.k ,~~~a, i a ~ ~r,, "4~",~~,;~~ F~~. :a ,94' ,~z,y~ o~ _
~ ' '~i~"~' ,+,y ~ i t 4' P ,}.j!'"' 4 ~ L 9,6 g,' 1 5 N ~ l~ p. , y ~ ~ , ~ : C':~ Mj ~ } p, . d, , ~t~y''p~ , a P-e,; 1' ~ Y 4 en . . . r`, . v . . 1A . I'~ "i .A4. P`~P~~ : i~.':l f . ^ M , . ~l:i , ~3. S'~p~~~ 1' ~g,~,' t i . a . ~
nQ Q , . t ~,,y 5 . ~,~a ' ~ t', y ~ f~L., ~e~( '~5,~~ ~ ~ , . . Ri W ' . i~ . . ~ - 1t w{'. k ~ ff, ~ t ~ , r x t~y, ` - ti ~t; , i t`..~,:~' . W ~y ~y' 4~"a ~ 9 ► . 'i ~k. 7~~,. ~ ~ l .N~ ~ ~~p ~ . , 1`/ i, ~y y~p ~.y"" s~ ;7~ W,:~ , ~ ~ ~ ;e , ~ Q :~':':it ~ ~ ~Js • ~y.bo O ~ { ~ \ ~a ~ e. ~ g, , ~ . ' . R ~.'r , , ' '?'S
. , , ~ ~ ~r ~ „ ~n , . ~ ~ ~ .t,„„ ~,'.i ~ i ~i .ek;4 r' a. Y , , ~ ~{c~J g°µK,p r ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~k , i ~ lb -..»-j a , , ~ 'I+ ~f 'i~ y ~,~~p, . t d{: nt~ , , ' , t3r ~ ~ , {i ~,a~ r ~ , t~ i , ~ ~ N) q, '~`x. ~a~ ~ '
tS ~ ~ z j a~ . ~ ~ + ~ ~ j ~ i x~. . . ~1 ~~"a ~ A_ ,.4~ q . ~ ~ L ~ ; ~ ~y ~i~~ _1~
~L-.~ , r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ro ~ . ~ . ~ ; i c~ ~ ~ ~ +---t_ 9# _ ~ w ~ ~k~i ~ r ~
~ ~ t ~ . . ~ t~ ~ ~ , ~t~~ ' . ~ ~ C~9 . ~ i~ ~ ~ ~
I. , b~~~b ~ „ . . ~ ~ ~ ° . ~ y ~ `s ~ , ~ L ~ ~ : ,a ~ b ~ , ~ ~ L[
~ L ' W , O ~ Nr tl ; ~ ~ =x „ ~ ~ u oD ~ ; ~ M
~ d~ o ~i a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ . . L ~ ~ y,~ W ~ a ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ,r ~ ~ ' ~ .o ~ . ----i ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~~J IW ~aQ ~~yy ,
/a i ~K I~ ~1~1 v Ba,,.~ t ' , . ``~~j ~ 5 , 1~~~ I4~~V ~ { .w ! ~ . ri . . A , i ~ e
~ ~ , C1 ►n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t: . . , , r~ , ~:,,z ~ ~ t~ ~ , . , ► ~
t . , ~.~~i~~ w , , ~ , . ,a ~ O • ~ ~y+1 ~MMt K k - ~ ~ 6 I~ . ~ ~ ~_fr t. . e , U ~ ~ 4 A
~ a .,~,~sw, . . I ,~`R~~ ,'r~4 ' ~ i ~ ~k. . f~i# 1 ` . n ~ . b., `rj. ' , , . ' ~ ~ , .g< I~'j~,- , r i aA,~. . Q, ~ ~ , . • . , ;.k. R
' i t .i' , :k~ `i', i , y ~ , / ~ ~11~ 'Itigtl ~ ~ , ~ , ~ ~ . ~ ~M.,» s . ~ 6 , . ~ 4 , . ~ j . x . • ~ °k~.
, . ' . ~ iF~ ~:b'~, ~~n a~~'. ~y '~5 1 ~ x ~ ~ • ~ ~a~ p ` ~ y,, , ~q , ~ . ~ ~ ~ , . . ~'y. ~ ~ r , . ' ~ ,;i . ~ ~2~ : ~ ~ a g;~ ca~' ~ u ~ - ~'7'
~ y~ . ' ~~}~c ';r~' ` a°., i ~ wr4 - R~ t~ t'.+~i;-, ,~r - ~ O ~ ~ y , o y~ * . ~ii, ~,y, ~ ' V~ ,rt,~ ' ~ 1'~ 4 ~F'~+ , !:'49 ~ \ , ' ' ~r' W: f ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
~ . ~2'~ . ' y , , ~ ~ ~ @~~ ~ h i i~i0! , . $ -a~; 1 , i~.- _ , .~1~ ~ k 8.y.;k8
.'~v~ ~t~, ~ < (p { j ~ ~ ~ a t; ~ ',d, d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e:~~~~ , ~h , , ~ ~ ~ B r ~ ~ ~ 's , ~ ~ j~ Y
~ ~ , ' . ~+W+. .r..+~. '=+EU ~ 1, ~ ( ~14 rp~ ~ i~ ac; , h~ ~ . ~ . ' - G , ~~~~Bd~I ' , , ; ~ ~r, `
~ _ ~ ' t ~ tlIl 1~1 ti ~ ~ ~ , . . ~ ~ . a ~ . . ~ ~ , d , ~ ~::t..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 6►~ ~d+ ` } , r~: ,~~~~y 6 qp~,r, ~ , ~1 d ~ y +4'~, 1~;~~~iJ.~'9'° , , ' ~ ~ ~ i~ ~1~,~
r ~ ~ ~ , „ , a, q i.di: , iF5„ ~ : ~ ~ . ; ~ y ~ 4. . ~A 'w5 ~-t , . ~ --i ,~i ~ ,
~ . . ~ ~j ~ , ` ~~(t . ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~ e it FkM - r ~ ~ Am~ ~ ' S ~ r /r ~ ~ ~r ~ `E, ' t~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ' - , i '°I ~ ~ 5 ~ ~1. " ~kr.: x~ z ~
~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ F , ~ 4l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j° ~~u~~~~ , k;~t d~ -~1 ~ ~ ~ .1' , ~ ~ f ~ / . ~ 1~ ~tl . ~ r : ~ ~ ,
k,~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ , ~ ` r~ . . e;.~~ J',~- i r . , ~ w. , t - . !.,1 ' "-1 ~ g _ ~ ;t1 a~i r . ~ ~W.'~:. ,1*.i,~,..;,ka'~. ' .~y ' -a' , r, # E;~~i, ,3^ R 1~~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ l S I' , i " ~ . . r - ,_.ti.~: rd ~
~ ~i ~.~r'~ ~ . , , s'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ t ~ ; , ~ ~ ; r~~ ~r ~~k,a:~. -~e M .i' n' .k~°~',., a r , ~ . ~ . l~ jyi ~s; } ~ , ra x ~ + r:,~ ~C" i ~ , , ~
~ . _ , $ -:'t~ t,':. ~ ~ s ~ ; g $ ,+.e~~~°^~e ~ Y.t~C~~ ~.~y, V ~t. . ,Rq. ,y~ y .~Y"r ,y{ 1~, I~~ .Ji ;9 ,H~. q y ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~V; ,ry ~ r 4 IP ~T -y,k:' 't"~, `~t~'' ~ . f . ' . ~ ~a.'~ . ~ # ~3~ °',~~,5 ~ O~~ ',7.i~~' ',N' , '.a .q> ;.6 ~.ir~ * 5 i . . . , ~i ~4~~ s,i, r-'r~9 1
~ a , .~a ,t , 1 ° ~ } ~ ~1'~ ~ r ~ A~` ,i a-,. x g(k~ ' <d; ~pa;, - ~z~ ~ _ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ed ; ~ 's~ ~r ~ y.; ' ~ ~ ; ~ i~ , ~ ~ ~ YJ. r a
~ ~ ; ,~r. ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ a<~ ~ i ~ ~ ` ~ , ~ . . . ~ ,;i.~ , , 'a , ~ ~ ~ ~ .u 1i~Ai , ~ , . ~ ~ ",e.,`~' _ ".e ` ~~q~° ~ k k~~..,~ i i~ • ~~~i~~ ~jy. i~ ~ ~ ~ At~ ~1~ ~ ~ T
~ t"3 . , ; y~ ~ o , - ; r: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~..~.p ~ ~ t~ ~ ~ lSi: Y ~ , ~ ~ ^ ~ s `Y , r f ~ g !1 k t a ` '3°~l~:u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , p~.. k, 4 ~ m ~ ` 4. . ~ ~ y -j~ S~. V_3~
1 ~ . ~ g,~.~[ ~ ^ 4$'.+q :P~^~ .,F.~.~: " ~ ~~y ~y.p ' ~ i ''c 'T.~. ' l. ' . , , ~ , F^ V ls., :F. ' ~ , ~l ~ 4 ~ . . _ . . 'wq ~ . , 4J ~ ~ 1 ' 1~ i4'ar . , "t' . . ~ • , ~ ~p ,~,i ~ ,F~.N ~ 1
C~ . h i 1~ ih , p, ~ r r ~ + , I~ e,. , do L ~ , , ~ ~ . x
( ~ , ~ . ~ ~ r` ~ . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ • ~~;'l ~ ~ ~ tC ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~r , ~ ~ ~ ~
. . ~ t~ ~ ~~t !rt ~ i~ ~ . • - ° ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~c t~ ~
~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ , . W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >4 ~ _ , . ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ S~ :u ~f o ~ ~ ~
~ ' . ~ /y~~,, ~ ~ , i , ~ ~ :.4 . ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ V~ r1 ~ ',~,M,(~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ':~i rr ~~o~~ ~ ~d~ tt~~e21 ~~~~~1 , ~ ~r'r ~ ~ ~ ~ _.___..._...W . ~ ~ _ t ~j,
~ ~ ~ . a ~ t a ~w~~~.~ . ~ b~ #~y~ ~ N . ~ e _ +~U. i9, z I~II, f~ . . . , ~Yl` iC` ' ' , ~ ,!F hF'i`~ J~' ~i~ , r >:P ~ ~ ~ ~ i . d ~M . _
y j~~ . i ~i~ y i .'r: ~a . r ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ " I ' f ~ ~#N'< ~f ~SX„`~y I~~ _E~
Z ~ ` ~ ~ ^ I~ ~ .~y, ' ~ ' •aa . ~ Cj ~ , IOb/ZZ01 ~1'1~f1d , bJ. ~ „ r. 3~_-~
~ ~ F ~ oc~ , ei s. ~~o~ oo i $ :,~,a ~,Y,. ~r { ~ o ~ r i } a ~ ~ . x ~ ~ i ~ ~ 1~~~ y ' ~ ~ . ' .'iM'~ '
r 4 . ! ~ ~ ~ ,
t~ ~a r ~ . ~ o ~ ~ n ~ ~ a ~ ~ a o ~ , ~ w
. ~ ~ , ~ x u ~ ~ . ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ , I'~ - ~ ~ , ~ ~ ` ~ ~,~j ~ ;;,a",
~ ~ , 2 r'.' J ~ ~'~a:: ~ w ~ ~ ~ 'b'
i., . , R ~ t~ ~ ~ {~~q o . , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ pa~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ?r":' ~4'. V til 1~ 1'^
E 1. j' ~ ;,r.~ i 0 t~J " i. Z,~ w F+ f': ~ i~~ ✓ , ~ ,r a J ~ r;'= 'I~N 8 ,~~1,
Z , ~ ; ~ N ` , , + . r~ , ~ ' t ~ ~~'~i S~
C3 d' . ~ ~ t'A~t ca u~ i~ , ~ t~ ~ , ~ t m
~ , ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ r ; ~I t„ ~ ~ , _ . ~ ~ ,
~ ~ . ~ ~ , ~ j N ~ ► , s s : I'~= 'w
. ~r + ~I'~~ .~.M ~ ~ ! ~ ~ , . ~ ~ b ~ ~"~~it td 3 - ~ ~ . , y ~
w . ~ t~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ „
, ~ a ' ~ ~ ` . ~ r~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , a ~ ~ n _ . ; o ~e ,
~r . ~ t~ ~ ~ , ~ `~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~,tga
a~ , , ~~~a~ , a ~ , , ~ ~i~ ~ ~
, ♦ ( ~ ~ , ~ .Z ~ ~ f • ~ ~ ~ . . -~l ; . ~
. ty ~.'f ~i . ~ . • ~rt ,1 . Njj , . , . . ' M ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ' S.
i ;~n ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~p ~
~ ~ > . ~ ~ " i't' . - ~ ~~r ,~y ~ i~ a ~ ~ ~ s..,, a-.w T aw~, , >.s•
? ~ g ~ q ~ C ~ ~I q ( t '7" ° ~ . , p ~ ~ ~
' ~ ~ c:.
~ ' ~
~ - " ~ ' ~ , ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~~~I'~~~ ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~ r ~ s , ~ a~w.~,
~ ~ . ~ , , , 4. ' , ~ i . , ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ , • L . ° .
~ »
N _ ~ ~ , ~
~ ti . , ~ M ~ a a
W ~ . ~I . A .1~ . 4 a4.b i~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ , O J ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ a - .a. d ~ . p ; d d , , ~
- t ~ , v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ , w .j ~ o ~ i~ h
3 Y ~ . ~ ' , n:~~ii ~ N '~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~tr.~, ~ 6`y~ ~.~il p ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ . r~.;.~:. "W
_ . • , , ' . . ~a 0 ~ ~ . ~ . . i~ ~ a . ~ ° ~ ,
a , . ~ ~ ~ I ~ r
,o~aQO i ~i,al~ e~ N ~ ~ ~ . , _ ~ ~c ~
- . ~4'600i ~~G~ ,~DB . °i ~ ' ~ ~ , ~ - ~ ~ ~ yy, i; ~ M' . ; ~ , ' , 3 ~ L ~ 5 ` ' w. " . , t ~ ' ,
~ • ' , ' i~. ~ s<,s ~ ~ , . .a: . ~ . . i ~ s
` ~ * ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ 1, o¢_, ~u~~, ~ ~ ~ A~ ' ' ' I(.'1 f~- , ~ ~ 1 o ~ ~f- ~ -
a a~ t ~ r fi Q ~ • ~ N I~ if~~l N4~~e~N .
a ~ , ~ „ . t~.~. ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ' ~ _ , . I w
M ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ c~ t~ ~r ~ , ~ ~ ~ w - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,o , ,
. ~ ,,i ~ ~ ~ . ~s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r w ~ , , . . , . . . ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ - ,
- o o a , - , , , ~ ~ ~~~g ~ , ~ ~ _ ~ , ~ ~ , ~ w ~ ~ , ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ . , . ~ ~
N ~ ~ ° • , , a N~~ ~ ~ ~ ; pp~ d,
~ ` . ~a ~ d~ , ~ ~ ~ b9~ ►~,~.j ~ ~ _ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ 1~
Ip / ~ , m' ~p b ~ ~ ~ ~ i . , ~ . ' . . .
, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ + ~ ~~a) M 1~~~ ~ ~ ~ . ~j , 1 ~ . ~ ' ~ d4 ~ .
~
` ' ~~W ~b'~ 1 , ' ~ ~ ~
~ _ cl .~s~-? . ~ 0~ ~ ' (6• . ~ ~ . ~ . ~ . iv~~, , a. . . r ~ r , . .
. „ t
f~r t° ,'r ,~y ' 1~~'i~,f~, . ~ ~S.,R wi~ ~ , . W ' . ' ~E , , . --r
' , ' ~ ~
. , t C' . , ,•'t " t ~ ' '
' v i'~ , , ~,,..'t?' , . . , ' t
. . . , . , . ~ , ~ ; ~ i
s~ \ ! ~ ~
~
_ -