ZCA1996-00006
AIL
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City of Tigard have now been officially withdrawn from the Tigard Water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 time on this matter. If you have any questions or
comments, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x407.
Sincerely,
Julia Powell Hajduk
Associate Planner
is\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
" ORDINANCE NO. 99- CJ v.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD DECLARING THAT PROPERTIES THAT HAVE RECENTLY
BEEN ANNEXED TO THE CITY ARE WITHDRAWN FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT.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WHEREAS, property within the Tigard Water District annexed into the City after March 23, 1993, must be withdrawn from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 District 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
WHEREAS, 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 District on February 23, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of
an
the annexed properties from the Tigard Water District is in the best interest of the City f Tigard; d
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:
SECTION 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 District.
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 U nct n t mUuS vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this
day of ~hw '1999.
h.e ~itJ
Catherine Wheatley, City Recor
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 99.
1&4 ,
a s Nicoli, Mayor
Approved as to form:
i Attorney
Date
ORDINANCE No. 99-_ Tigard Water District Withdrawls from 3/23/93 to 12/31/98
Page I of I i:\citywide\ord\wdwithdr.ord.doc Julia li. 11-Feb.-99
CITY OF TIGARD WATER DISTRICT WITHDRAWAL
Boundary Commission
' Final Order No. w36.sg
EXHIBIT 40 ZCA No. 96-oao6
_J1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA
Parcel 1
Lots 17, 18 and the south 100 feet of lots.l9 and 20, Cole's Acres, Washington
County, Oregon
Parcel 2:
Beginning at the northeast corner of the northwest 1 /4 of Sec. 10 T2S R 1 W W.M.,
thence south 89 degrees 41' west 426.5 feet, thence south 0 degrees 26' west 20.0
feet to the true point of beginning of the tract herein described. Thence continuing
south 0 degrees 26' west 160.38 feet to the point of a curve to the right (having a
radius of 65.0 feet and a central angle of 34 degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc
of said curve 39.43 feet, thence south 35 degrees 11' 35" west 32.92 feet to the
point of a curve to the left (having a radius of 120.0 feet and a central angel or 34
degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc of said curve 72.80 feet, thence south 0
degrees 26' west 344.54 feet, thence south 89 degrees 41' west 50.0 feet, thence
north 0 degrees 26' east 348.65 feet to the point of a curve to the right (having a
radius of 170.0 feet and a central angle of 34 degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc
of said curve 103.13 feet, thence north 35 degrees 11 e 35" east 32.92 feet to the
point of a curve to the left (having a radius of a 15.0 feet and a central angel of 34
degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc of said curve 9.10 feet, thence north 0
degrees 26' east 160.0 feet thence north 89 degrees 41' east 50.0 feet to the point
of beginning.
Containing .76 acres more or less.
VICINITY MAP OF THE AREA
'i _ _ S •T'~T - •iMN06 STREET
23-7
AREA TO BE
ANNEXED
a.c r.]auo clew - - - - - I=
w < - E MARD
- K! I 3
t,
_ sracr•
•T]C~N]
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 96-0006).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider the annexation of
four parcels consisting of 2.52 acres located south of Gaarde Street and west of 114th.
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 Government Boundary Commission at once.
PASSED: This oday of
Mayes - City of Tigard
C~.nal P.~eS;~
TT ST:
. .i eu QN-e-
'Cify ecorder - City of Tigard
a 4t Certified to be a True Copy of
Date ~-7
Original on file
1ACITYW IMIREWCA96-05.RES
By
City R~ ot4l~ of Tiger
RESOLUTION NO. 96-~ Date: (~l
Pagel
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 96-0006
REQUEST: To annex four parcels of land totaling 2.52 acres from
unincorporated Washington County to the City of Tigard and
to change the zone from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard R-4.5.
APPLICANT: Nick Steams & Alan Deharpport
4035 Douglas Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
OWNERS: Lynn & Sharon Hatch
14135 SW 114th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97224
LOCATION: Located West of 114th Avenue and South of Gaarde Street
WCTM 2S110 AB, lots 3700, 3800, 3900, and 4300 (see
vicinity exhibit map).
2. Vicinity Information
There are three properties to the north of the site, two of which are in Washington
County developed with single family residences. The third property is within the
City of Tigard. To the west is a large property with a Christmas tree farm and a
small lot with a single family residence. To the east are three properties with single
family residences, one of which is in Washington County. To the south are three
flaglots which are within the City of Tigard with single family residences.
1
3. Background Information
The applicants 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
I
The site is sloped to the east with a slight depression towards the center of the
property. The site is developed with a single family residence on the larger middle
parcel. There are several outbuildings on the rest of the site. The site is located
south of Gaarde St and has approximately 361 feet of frontage on 114th Avenue.
Gaarde Street is classified as a major collector and 114th Avenue is classified as a
local street.
The applicants have 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 applicants have initiated this action through written consent. The
applicant intends to obtain sewer service and subdivision 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. Agency Comments
The Engineering Division, Tigard Police, Water and Public Works 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:
2
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.
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
3
•
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 96-0006.
1ALRPLNW ELS\ZCA96-05.STF
4
,
'YY "71
1. r ~ jT~ r + 'O'd' a
- f;•w-• ~ ' ~ ~i - '3-S•`-5 _ •N "3. ~ ~ a+ 'td ' ~•+';~y~,ii ~~t,_ s C c ~ l~ ~f</r- a. , d~ ~ S .r..+ t #fh' ' ~ aY ~fl '>r ti,. -.A~ i' y i sFaa.,ta: ~ Dili • ~A ' h~fi ,R;r, t .
t Y ti,,, ~ .it 1, J tse ~ _i y. { R~ x 1 S J 1 ~r s SJ irid
F _ L w~ y_r t1 .-pL t r in- '1, na aa.~. y. \•+A41{,I.~ 'it :.a
J tr ~ ~ s \ r •~ry,ti ~ ti-a ~ ~ \ { Ls Y ..yr t , i1 !~C •
='a~•': ~a - 1 ,,y .i +f~ ~ ~ • r.a rv..h: -d4. .:.a.. 3«7 ,7 rtixw ~~w. ,M I ; ~6
a I
t F. . r7.. A six...:.. r,'•s• f-_ r .SAS "~'('.7't,-~ .r=Kr• r
vt r ♦ !r r„ d i. a 1 'f S L
MI.
t • ~ - tl- .V' -Yep r 1 i _ 1SC - f 7•i^ - .3' _S , `l. t 1~ r ..+a ,5~+ R
r / r~ a -}at: * ~ ~1 to ~ ~ 4~ ' r
-~I ,t r ti.d w x f y,t,~..r- ~ ~ t ':tY r f . . ~ .7
i.'r b ~ i s kY S x c t ~ ~••.r. t -r -'cS; ~ d a S '.t ~ P y v. ~ d d!} ~ Iw usl t
t < 4tN1'~'rt ! l ! J4 t mil, " .1 _ yM1•t't *P' 1' " v. fi rt 5+ ± r t
^r ~ /,3.~4 r_.y Yl' ..U'4~ ~ r`c 3.f L♦ l < '"If" _ \ S`A- t ~
\1 + Y Y+c'F - ~r.,. }'7 4 " S~ 1y +c' f gtt.cY~ t r•.. n. . i \
41 C 1•.\cl ~ r " F t ~i ~e ~ i.}c+- ~1 5 ~ T t F~,~i •i 3
~.t. t _ C? V~ ~fit- . ~t •4 aS'i",}iv, u' -r: S - `F~ } rw. t
L w • ...-...a .a,_."___.. s : s • - ~ ti.-rV••-' 7 a• f q i^a p . ~ _u'i~y t
- x'4-_.. .4.'StlSt'?~r ~7~ C- +t: ``»v:'C~ ?~aM&d S $-u { rS - 'ftri ~i 5 r
i?' ;a'ws.R~, ~ t sz41 ':'}i` a 1 t. N`ti.1 ~C. •~IiA~., ' Qs,C~..,, a+1~
y.. \ ~ r^.1_ 't.~C .L .dz: i'x i:,~r'- } ~?k w<`'i7 Li w "'aL`.~i+~•1 ri.'. ~C r 1. Hu. r S, ' ~ +_.i rtta
z c . Y .cam a? ~ z,, _ t 1 v~l a .~-a r : ara•;a ~ 1
hb rie a L 5 t
x t : 2 .:s S .a._t cr"'f..s+ ~ . _z C y. t ~ *t ti` res 1F a \
c e. • i _ F b
u ' ~ 3 v' 0.l -ray ; : ~ e5~ ati.t'•~•;-1 r 6 ~t- ~~~v-..a. ~r+ .Y i f \ is
't ~ Y i 1 Y. x -^Y S.rn L4t^ Sr Y~},tti .Y l I•!
? 4 fL eM
~ ~ S ~ a. &1 Y S_Z'.., ~..'S;;, rt ?~L K. a~ •ir.. f ti . _ ' i'~ ter.
Y . ,C t xnS.f A.. I .L 'i1 +s»~ I K t.' r
~ •~t .•Y-; 1,.r, a ~ rat 3 > : a' T •i x Sy ~ E :p L FS. x~ i.
1 ~,.3 x._f. £ .:z -r?+~+ N' :t 'r _ s t. r~_~ -a~.u+7s_...1 K« -t~` •a' 4 ~ r/
4 },h• 7 _ ~ F. \3. _ "'am a s..y` i S •s L,4. c~ a". t-K 1'Y ~,.v
- Y ^t z -,r tr - ,t. t t:' V rtt ti. ~
77
' ice: _ '..t' _.I _,x.e_...,n t` '?u• t - a
1
, r
I w,;- n 1Lyr- - ^r
_ _ = ...wr t_ .a + -r w _•..zc__._.ig.. = ,d- - ~ ~ S ~ y 1 ~ ~7^' ~ r ~ 1.. '
EXHIIBr "B" ANNEXATION AND ZONE CHANGE FROM
Zr 96 ~L COUNTY R-5 TO CITY R-4.5
Hatch Annexation N WTHIN TIGARD CITY UNT5
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
In the Matter of the Proposed
Q r-o 7 --sc TL. 3"1 cc, 3g 00i '69 0 4-Z
STATE OF OREGON
County of Washington ) ss.
City of Tigard )
I, 01 being first
duly sworn, on -oath depose and say
That I posted in the following public and conspicuous
places, a copy of Notice of Public Hearing of the
C ONVW SSICjA , a copy of said
notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof,
on the '~yC7 day of O t r7f19 °l (e .
~'4
Name of Person Wtxo Performed Posting
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of L~`L
146
OFFICIAL SEAL otary Public for Oregon
CATHERINE WHEATLEY
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 042176 My Commission Expires:
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 10. 1999
I
affpost
MULTNOMAH
WASHINGTON
PORTLAND METROPOLITAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION.
000 NE OREGON STREET H 16 (SUITE 540) PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 PHONE: 731-4093
PUBI~IIIIII(;
J()TICE
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 NO. 3658 - ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD of territory located generally in
the central part of the City, on W edge of SW 114th Ave. & S of SW Gaarde St.; more particularly
TLs 3700, 3800, 3900 & 4300, NW 1 /4 NE 1 /4 Sec. 10, 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
STAFF COMMISSIONERS
KENNETH S. MARTIN, Executive oiiicer RAY BARTEL, Chair MARILYNN HELZERMAN
DENIECE WON, Executive Assistant TOM WHITTAKER, Vice-Chair SY KORNBRODT
LANA RULIEN, Administrative Assistant BOB BOUNEFF STEVE STOLZE
NATHALIE DARCY
r I
PROPOSAL ■ 3658
NW1 /4 NE1 /4 SECTION 10 T2S R1 W W.M. 2S 1 10AB
Washington County
Scale: 1 200'
w Stt o+wr
25 1 3DC
>i Q
q..:.•., GAARDE ; r tee zz251 STREET
4200 ry. ne.w w n 1400 ' i~ fr
4100 ~ 1500 1 .
JO AG .7J.,G Z .JO AC I. J7A[.
w I J! \
Q b 1
?::i.:i:: tGe.r. ~I
:::.4300 ti::;: J900~:•`:: •
::•:JJAG:.::~• ~.J .4 / a I ,`•\[e
10, 010C. 2 3
3t;ik" to
AREA TO BE
1300 or a : it 400 Zoo
/
ANNEXED
700 ?!iii' .,e Ac w 4.61 AC c.c. na
:
":9t A JJ A
A C
17 4
1 - 12 Z '
C w
eAC
x ~
.r
,on
''•3600.••. 00 too
J1AC . .•..r ••••r; - •ni A
A
r -
p V
3300 A .1 _
Iw
G .J♦AC• 1000 4~ 1
zJ AC. /
c.
32 ro)p w A . 0 1900 900 r /
r r' r rl r)
JJ Ac •p 3100 s Ac r, zJ Ac A . ill 1 E f ~J f \
A 9 .Je K, R G ,
1S R B°°
AG
SJ
=TIGARD
n[.f° 3 2000 700.. - - -
2 .es Ac .13 AC . y
R.u i4 7 .rJA 1] v I 3,o /r
2100 fO .2202 r I
00
.4 .11A,
q J r 1
R ` + 13 Jz AC B 2200
A 8 - 0A[, n w0
2zot <
\AC .JJAe.
^22300 I t9 ,p!p'.• ~~~b
12
• fa e~y' ~r.. P' 'r
b • by
2500 2400 ' $ „'•,r r,
/AC .40AC '•v5 fuo ' tab'
I I i )O a 0 , .2 GJ.
fn ir' ro b
10-d k
PROPOSAL NOo.3658
CITY OF TIGARD
ANNEXATION
FIGURE 2
1
• ~ 1
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington )
City of Tigard )
I, Nt)W-eri rle- LV , hereby certify:
Please Print
That I am a ek_:H _6_' YLk N . for the City of Tigard, Oregon.
That I served notice of the Tigard qity Council /V b hCe. a Fi na
(or& Aq&•3ev •
0CtLx • 000& 0-41d &V_9~9~ JVU
A i n uak~ &3) bhaA.~~-
of which the attached is a copy (Marked Exhibit A) upon each of the following named
persons on the 7 HA day of 06-40 ben , 19 by mailing to each of
them at the address shown on the attached list (Marked Exhibit 13), said notice is hereto
attached, and deposited in the United States Mail on the day of Ocrob t' ,
19 . postage prepaid.
eA_j At
G(>
Prepared Notice
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of C)AA ti.. 19 °1 L
OFFICIAL SEAL ` N
M JO ANN HAYES
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Notary blic of Orego
COMMISSION NO. 042148 M Commission ~v,.~IreS: nuu. ~ Qq
PAY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 05, 1999 y Expires: ' `
h:\login\cathy\afofmail
CITY OF TIGARD
Washington County, Oregon
NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY CITY COUNCIL
Concerning Case Number(s): ZCA 96-0006
FILE NO: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006
FILE TITLE: HATCH ANNEXATION
APPLICANT: Nick Stearns & Alan Deharpport OWNERS: Lynn and Sharon Hatch
4035 Douglas Way 14135 SW 114th Ave.
Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Tigard, OR 97224
REQUEST: 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 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
rrequirements; and 18.138, land classification of annexed territory.
ZONE: Presently, Washington County R-5.
Action: Approval 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) ® Owners of record within the required distance
® The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator ® Affected governmental agencies
I
Final Decision: THE DECISION WAS SIGNED ON 9 Q4 , 1996, AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON ID d , 1996. P~
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.
1
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 96- 3(0
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-0006).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City and C'Y Council held a public hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider a zoning
designation for four parcels of land totaling 2.52 acres, located south of Gaarde Street and west of 114th
Avenue.
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1996, the Tigard City Council approved a resolution forwarding the
proposed annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government 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 properties shall be designated as follows:
Tax MaD. Lot-Number Current Zoning New Zoning
2
2S1 10 AB, lot 3700 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 10 AB, lot 3800 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 10 AB, lot 3900 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 10 AB, lot 4300 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 I)6jA!Md0 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title
only, thisa4 day of ~*+►1~1996.
a-U nR
thenne Wheatley, City Recorder
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this!!!+ day of 1996.
James Nicoli, Mayor
pprQv as t o
!!-1YA
Date
IACITYIMDEXORMCA96-06.011D
ORDINANCE No. 96-3&
Page 1
, h
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 96-0
A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT B (ZCA 96-0006).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider the annexation of
four parcels consisting of 2.52 acres located south of Gaarde Street and west of 114th.
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 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.
PASSED: This o L day of
Mayes - City of Tigard
_ATTEST: Cavnal PiLQs;&41+
ecorder - City of Tigard
a 4G
Date
1 ACITYWI DBREWCA96-05. RES
RESOLUTION NO. 96-
Pagel
i
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 96-0006
REQUEST: To annex four parcels of land totaling 2.52 acres from
unincorporated Washington County to the City of Tigard and
to change the zone from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard R-4.5.
A14JUGAN 1: Nick Stearns & Aian Dei wi ppui i
4035 Douglas Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
OWNERS: Lynn & Sharon Hatch
14135 SW 114th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97224
LOCATION: Located West of 114th Avenue and South of Gaarde Street
WCTM 25110 AB, lots 3700, 3800, 3900, and 4300 (see
vicinity exhibit map).
2. Vcinb Information
There are three properties to the north of the site, two of which are in Washington
County developed with single family residences. The third property is within the
City of Tigard. To the west is a large property with a Christmas tree farm and a
small lot with a single family residence. To the east are three properties with single
family residences, one of which is in Washington County. To the south are three
flaglots which are within the City of Tigard with single family residences.
3. Background Information
The applicants 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 east with a slight depression towards the center of the
property. The site is developed with a single family residence on the larger middle
parcel. There are several outbuildings on the rest of the site. The site is located
south of Gaarde St and has approximately 361 feet of frontage on 114th Avenue.
Gaarde Street is classified as a major collector and 114th Avenue is classified as a
local street.
The applicants have 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 applicants have initiated this action through written consent. The
applicant intends to obtain sewer service and subdivision after annexation to the
ci y.
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. eaenoy Comments
The Engineering Division, Tigard Police, Water and Public Works 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:
2
•
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
:1.1.1. J
proposal and flidl:aie' 66th aucyuaic aci vii.c~ aic a'va~loulc al...l,. inlay L
extended to accommodate the affected property.
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
riAsigna±ion to the existing Washington County zonino 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
3
i
w
established area on the development standard areas map of the
comprehensive plan.
i
C. RECOMMENDATION
i
Based on the findings noted above, the planning staff recommends approval of
ZCA 96-0006.
I:U.RPLNW ELS\ZCA96-05.STF
4
S t-3: .fTi: 4. ~ - ~M-.. _ .L..• ~ y~'t ~T}1~N~~ r.J,A. x' I :
i
I
^T E
}tom "~[M ,
C+f
m r-T~ A01
P-i
p X53. L~ 'x. - ~r.. - v , 1 ,ji'n ,
IQ
~•t _ _ y''+~-.• ~v, . o~ r . yy- +►~`~'4~' j L ~4.~ f'L - ~ rY hi.., ~4`w~ is ul.
l CD
~i: ~~k L!~!rv~' `t ~ c~w~i~ : •~.¢f~y ' -ham iela.. ! ,.y.... I ~
• - _ / -
IM,
4, +sa fir. ~~+~i~-, v. ~i.i.t~ 3:~r.Nra -:re•
r. .X..1. .^.4S a, K1 c...k T Tv-ir 4•~ . ~:,`b~ .t - r
cu.
.v• N ~ T W4'.. 1' .1 :L~~~;.:. L ~ `~J•'.'`' _ ..;.c r.: ' (slL;! -•c rr•u rCr'.. I~
x : S~1t~' r ,~3i? r ' "R :tTs t. - !.1T t.A1+.. ; a~ `5K• -a. r,
cu
O
.,B., AMEXATM AM ZO E CMNM FROM
COUNTY R-5 M CITY R-4.5
Hatch Annexation N NUITHN TIGARD CITY UMTS
SARON HATCH
NICK STEARNS & ALAN DEHARPPORT LYNN YNN & SW 114TH AVE
4035 DOUGLAS WAY TIGARD, OR 97224 14135 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035
.AGENDA ITEM #
For Agenda of September 24. 1996
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ,
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Zone Change Annexation ZC -
Hatch
PREPARED BY: Nels Mickaelson DEPT HEAD OK f1l 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 four parcels consisting of 2.52 acres located south of
Gaarde Street and west of 114th Avenue?
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
The proposed annexation consists of territory comprised of four parcels of land totaling 2.52 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 properties. Attached is a resolution initiating annexation and an
ordinance to change the zone 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.
IACITYWI DEISUM\ZCA96-06. SUM
STAFF REPORT EXHIBITA
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 96-0006
REQUEST: To annex four parcels of land totaling 2.52 acres from
unincorporated Washington County to the City of Tigard and
to change the zone from Washington County R-5 to City of
Tigard R-4.5.
APPLICANT: Nick Stearns & Alan Deharpport
4035 Douglas Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
OWNERS: Lynn & Sharon Hatch
14135 SW 114th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97224
LOCATION: Located West of 114th Avenue and South of Gaarde Street
WCTM 25110 AB, lots 3700, 3800, 3900, and 4300 (see
vicinity exhibit map).
2. Vicinity Information
There are three properties to the north of the site, two of which are in Washington
County developed with single family residences. The third property is within the
City of Tigard. To the west is a large property with a Christmas tree farm and a
small lot with a single family residence. To the east are three properties with single
family residences, one of which is in Washington County. To the south are three
flaglots which are within the City of Tigard with single family residences.
3. Background Information
The applicants 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 east with a slight depression towards the center of the
property. The site is developed with a single family residence on the larger middle
parcel. There are several outbuildings on the rest of the site. The site is located
south of Gaarde St and has approximately 361 feet of frontage on 114th Avenue.
Gaarde Street is classified as a major collector and 114th Avenue is classified as a
local street.
The applicants have 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 applicants have initiated this action through written consent. The
applicant intends to obtain sewer service and subdivision 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. Agency Comments
The Engineering Division, Tigard Police, Water and Public Works 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:
2
0 •
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.
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
3
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 96-0006.
1:\LRPLN\NELS\ZCA96-05. STF
4
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i 4.a
i
i
i
i
i
i
G DES .
cy)
❑ c:
_ CCU
Cu
F
u
;~E= U
EXH[B11 "B" ANNEXATION AND ZONE CHANGE FROM
7r A 96-0006 COUNTY R-5 TO CITY R-4.5
Hatch Annexation N WTHIN TIGARD CITY WITS
I
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 96-0006).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider the annexation of
four parcels consisting of 2.52 acres located south of Gaarde Street and west of 114th.
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 Government Boundary Commission at once.
PASSED: This day of , 1996.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
Date
1 ACITM1DE\RES\ZCA96-05. RES
RESOLUTION NO. 96-_
Pagel
i
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON •
ORDINANCE NO. 967--
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-0006).
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on September 24, 1996, to consider a zoning
designation for four parcels of land totaling 2.52 acres, located south of Gaarde Street and west of 114th
Avenue.
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1996, the Tigard City Council approved a resolution forwarding the
proposed annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government 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 properties shall be designated as follows:
Tax Map. Lot Number Current Zoning New Zoning-
2S1 10 AB, lot 3700 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 10 AB, lot 3800 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 10 AB, lot 3900 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 10 AB, lot 4300 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 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 form:
City Attorney
Date
1 AC I TY W I D E10 R D\Z CA96-06.0 R D
ORDINANCE No. 96--
Page 1
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Mike Miller. Water Dept. DATE: August 28. 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: _Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9. 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: UJOE Ic,l.yZ1
Phone Number: Y N,5--
14 wa-+a~K ae .-0s.+' Y - alrlx.• ~.~~c'irF+ A ' z Y t
y~ '`~C T ~ 1 SLY. 1 ~
DES
• z r t' r
i
s
ca
Q_
:1. 7
- _
o µ
.
TT=
1
I
I
ANNEXATION AND ZONE CHANGE FROM I _ I
® COUNTY R-5 TO CITY R-4.5 ZCA96 0006
WITHIN CITY LIMITS HATCH ANNEXATION
0 N
• •
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Brian Moore, PGE DATE: August 28, 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9, 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: '!51~-t~~vl
•
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS A4~
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Kelley Jennings. PD DATE: August 28. 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9, 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:
0 __FP
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Brian Rager, Engineering ?n' TE: - _ u s 9
FROM: Tigard Planning Division =(503)639-4171 e s c es
(Phone: x: (503) 684-7 7
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9. 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:
-,g 2Phone Number: \e
TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE
FIRE PREVENTION
.4755 S.W. Griffith Drive . P.O. Box 4755 . Beaverton, OR 97076 . (503) 526-2469. FAX 526-2538
To: Ism L,~ f r l 1F L ~I~ Date: Z 9 47(,
❑ WC ❑ CC MC 0 BV q T1 C] TU C] DU ZQ SH _(1 K diction File Number: O~ G
Project Name: ~r ~►caC/6rrJ Project Address: hf a
TVF&R File Number. 10 48 7 - 9(0 (Whenever referring to this project please include the TVFBcR Fk~ile D b
Project approved 1.) '9 -5
Project not approved - Please address items checked below and re-submit plans for review and approval to the:
❑ TVF&R Fire Marshal's Office
Planning Department having jurisdiction for routing to the TVF&R Fire Marshal's Office
Project conditionally approved subject to correction of items checked below.
This is a Fire and Life Safety Plan Review and is based on the 1994 Editions of the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) and those sections
of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) specifically referencing the fire department, and
other local ordinances, regulations and guidelines.
1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUE DIN AND TURN ROUND Access roads shall be
within ISO feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the
exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as
measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than ISO feet. (UFC Sec. 902.2. 1)
2) FIRE APPARATUS AC qq ROAD EX FPTION FORA ATI Sp ENIK R PROT CTION When buildings
are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fine apparatus access may be
modified as approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 902.2.1 Exception 1)
3) ADDITIONAL AIYMS ROADS: Where there are 20 or more dwellings, an approved second fire apparatus access roadway
must be provided to a city/county roadway or access easement. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2)
4) FIRE APPARATUS a S ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE* Fire apparatus access roads shall have an
unobstructed width of not i;:ss-than 20 feet (15 feet for not more-than two dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance
of rot less than 13 feet 6 inches. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2. 1)
5) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads'shall be of ari all-weather surface that is easily
distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and
50,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.2)
Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading.
Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the
approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code.
6) TURNING RADIUS* The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall not be less than 25 feet and 45 feet
respectfully, as measured from the same center point. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.3)
7) DEAD END ROAD.! Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess orl'50 feet in length shall be provided with an approved
turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4)
8) BRIDGES: Bridges shall be designed, inspected and final construction approved by a registered engineer. The bridge shall be
designed in accordance with the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials "Standard Specifications for
Highway Bridges. " The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry 50,000 pounds. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.5)
9) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles,
"No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway an;' L turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4)
Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS y8.810" and shall be installed with a clear space
above ground level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a
white background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1) (2) & (3))
"Working" Smoke Detectors Save Lives
Pagc I of 2
0 • TVF&R File Numbm
10) GRARE; Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed an average grade of 10 percent with a maximum grade of 15;
percent for lengths of no more than 200 feet. (UFC Sec. 9022.2.6). Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 501o) "
with the exception of crowning for water run-off.
11) PAINTED CURBS: Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at
each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. (UFC Sec. 901.4.52)
12) COMMERCAAi. BUiL.DINGS - MDMHJM NUMBER OF FIRE HYDRANTS: The minimum number of fire hydrants for
a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less
than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 gallons per minute (GPM) required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for
each 1,000 GPM or'portion thereof over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their
locations shall be approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2. 1)
13) COMMERCIAL BUIIDINGS - FIRE HYDRANTS: No portion of the exterior of a commercial building. shall be located
more than 250 feet: from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an
approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2. 1)
14) SINGLE FA_MiLY DWEL•L.INGS . F ME HYDRANTS: Fire hydrants for single family dwellings and duplexes shall be
placed at each intersection. Intermediate fire hydrants are required if any portion of a structure exceeds 500 feet from a hydrant
as measured in an approved manner around the outside of the structure and along approved fire apparatus access roadways.
Placement of additional: re hydrants shall be as approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 903.422)
15) FiRF. HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM N ACCESS RO : Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an
approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.42.4)
16) FIRE HYDRANT / F. D .P R NT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 70 feet of a fire
department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway.
(UFC.Sec. 903.42.5) FDC locations shall be as approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1)
17) FIRE DEPARTMENT CO CTION ON B M. INFire department connections shall not be located on the building
that is being'prbteoted. (UFC Sec. 903.42.5)
18) COMMERCIAL: BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000
gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required
fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's office. (UFC Sec. 903.3)
19) SINGLE F Mii.Y D IN - F.QUIMFD FIR_F. FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings
and duplexes shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) are 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be
determined according to UFC Appendix Table A-III-A-1. (UFC Appendix III-A, Sec. 5)
20) RURAL B iii.DIN = •EQ IRRD FiRF. Fi OW- Requite fire flow for rural buildings shall be calculated in accordance
with National Fire Protection Association Standard 1231. Please contact the Fire Marshal's office for special help and other
requirements that will apply. (UFC Sec. 903.3)
21) ACCESS AND FIREFIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access
roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or
subdivision. (UFC Sec. 8704)
22) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an
application and instructions regarding installation and placement.
23) RF UIRED INSPECTIONS: Please contact the Fire Marshal's office at the appropriate times for inspection of the following:
24)
25)
~~j P, (~R-L-J-z e- (44 PC, ee~ E:z
Pla Reviewer Signature Title
cc:
Page 2 of 2
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
I
TO: Elaine Self. GTE DATE: August 28. 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9, 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: Operations DATE: August 28, 1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9, 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:
o~ i6r-5a5
(Please provide the following information)
Name of Person Commenting:
Phone Number: 32&
~UBLIC HEARING If F
N O T I C E (HIBTT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL,
AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, September 24, 1996 AT 7:30 PM,
IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER,
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223
WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION:
ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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.
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 September 3, 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
CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS
RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED.
FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN WSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME PAW 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 ~
EST
I c~
B L
U
® ANNEXATION AND ZONE CHANGE FROM n ZCM6-0006
COUNTY R-5 TO CITY R-4.5 ~.1
1 HATCH ANNEXATION
N
• • EX Harr
2S110AB-01100 2S110BA-00100
PERO, CHRISTINE ELISE QUANDT, LINDA J
14215 SW 112TH AVE 14165 SW 115TH
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103DC-01500 2S103DC-01600
SCHROEDER, DONALD A & MARGO A SCHROEDER, DONALD A & MARGO A
19475 SE DEBORA DR 19475 SE DEBORA DR
BORING,OR 97009 BORING,OR 97009
2S103DC-01400 2S110AB-04400
SCHROEDER, DONALD A & MARGO A SCOTT, SHANNON &
19475 SE DEBORA DR SMITH, KELLY A
BORING,OR 97009 11370 SW GAARDE ST
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S110BA-03400 2S110AB-01700
SHADOW HILLS SMITH, LEONARD E AND MARTY
OWNERS OF LOTS 14220 SW 114TH
00000 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110AB-04000 2S103DC-01700
SNOOK, RICK Q AND PAULA D SOBERG, RONALD D & MARY M
11430 SW GAARDE ST 11333 SW GAARDE ST
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110BA-03500 2S110AB-01000
STOHR, PENN RAND STRATEGIC INVESTMENT
SYLVIA LYNN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
11575 SW CLOUD COURT 20861 SW 103RD
TIGARD,OR 97223 TUALATIN,OR 97062
2S110AB-01200 2S103DC-01000
SULLIVAN, ROBERT W & HELEN M TIGARD ASSEMBLY OF GOD
9079 SW WAVERLY DR 11385 SW FAIRHAVEN ST
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110AB-01600 2S110BA-03300
WAGNER, MICHAEL A & DONNA M WALSH, ROBERT E AND
14070 SW 114TH AVE SHARLA J
TIGARD,OR 97224 11545 SW CLOUD CT
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S103CD-03300 •
2S110A6-03600
ANDERSON, TIM C/BECKIE L ARCHDIOCESE OF PORTLAND
14245 SW 114TH AVE ST ANTHONYS CEMETERY
TIGARD,OR 97224 2838 E BURNSIDE
PORTLAND,OR 97214
2S110AB-00900 2S110AB-01300
BANKSTON, PAUL D & CHARLENE BENAGNI, JOHN M/CARLA A
14255 SW 112TH ST 14175 SW 112TH ST
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110AB-01800 2S110AB-03100
BLANK, ARDITH M AND KEVIN R BURNETTE, DAVID G & THERESA AN
14260-62-64 SW 114TH AVE 14305 SW 114TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S110AB-03500 2S110AB-01400
CAYTON, CHRISTOPHER L & FINLEY, CARL L/MARGARET E TRS
FRANCOISE M 11260 SW GAARDE
14255 SW 114TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S103DC-01300 2S110AB-04300
GOECKS, MICHAEL RAY HATCH, LYNN A & SHARON K
11492 SW VIEWMOUNT LN 14135 SW 114TH
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110AB-03900 2S110AB-03800
P HATCH, LYNN A & SHARON K d HATCH, LYNN A & SHARON K
14135 SW 114TH 14135 SW 114TH
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110AB-03700 2S110BA-00200
e HATCH, LYNN A & SHARON K HIGGINS-FUDGE, KITTY CARLENA &
14135 SW 114TH FUDGE, BRADLEY PETER, TRUSTEES
TIGARD,OR 97223 14235 SW 115TH
TIGARD,OR 97224
2S110AB-04100 2S110AB-01900
HODAPP, ELDON J JUDITH L LEFFLER, RICHARD D
11460 SW GAARDE ST 14292 SW 114TH AVE
TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224
2S110AB-03300 2S110AB-03200
MACK, JOSEPH P AND MARTIN, VERNE ELLEN
KAY D 14285 SW 114TH AVE
14265 SW 114TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97224
TIGARD,OR 97223
2S110AB-04500 2S110AB-04200
MORAN, DAVID K OREGON, STATE OF DEPT OF VETS
11320 SW GAARDE ST c/o SHUEY, NEIL F & DONNA M
TIGARD,OR 97223 157 NE SHANNON
HILLSBORO,OR 97124
1C{~ Cry'
.Agenda Item No.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Meeting of C d J ou
MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996
STUDY SESSION
> 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 Development 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 Annexation 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. He 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. Hendryx explained Option B which involved a larger area of 49
acres with just under 100 parcels (all the developed land west of SW
121st). 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 Engineer Greg Berry commented that the cost estimates in
the staff ret)ort were the overall costs that could be expected; they
did not include any potential challenges. Mr. Hendryx noted the
estimated costs for each annexation: Option A - $600,000; Option B
- $860,000; and Option C - $3,900,000.
Finance 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 svstem 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 MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 1
Mr. Berry said that all the options 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
feasible. 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. Berry
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 storm system without street improvements, especially curbs,
whereas a sanitary sewer system could be put in at any time. Mr.
Hendryx noted that a substantial cost would 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 Administrator Bill Monahan suggested starting with Option A,
since they did not have evidence of 50% support in Area B, 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
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 Scheckla 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
unlimited 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 homeowners. He concurred with starting with Option A and moving
on to Cption 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 authorized
by statute to allow an annexation to take place because of a health
hazard, and therefore could apply for a health hazard annexation.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 2
Mr. Berry explained 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 suggested asking Mr. Mathias for
background information at the neighborhood meeting.
Councilor Rohlf stated that he was biased in favor of bringing in
bigger chunks of the island at a time and encouraged the James and
Marion Streets neighbors to work with those on Alberta and Tibbett
Place to bring 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 Mills, Administrative Analysis, referenced the September 26
staff memo. 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 commented 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 problems the haulers dealt with,
then Council could better answer citizen 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 will be placed on the
October 8 Consent Agenda.
> Agenda Review
Mr. Monahan reported on the vandalism by juveniles at the windmill
on Friday. He said that the fire damage was limited; the City had a
$1,000 insurance deductible but the insurance company should pick up
the rest.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 3
~ •
Mr. Monahan noted that the Council needed to elect a voting delegate
and alternate to the National League of Cities Conference in
November.
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
review.
I
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 streets. 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.
1. BUSINESS MEETING
• Call to order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
Council President Hunt called the business meeting to order at 7:40
p.m.
• 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. Hendryx 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
Hollow subdivision for review.
> Council President Hunt noted three proclamations: October 1996 as
Crime Prevention Month, October 1996 as Disability Employment
Awareness Month, and Recycling Awareness Week.
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA
John L. Cook, 12314 SW Millview Court, Chamber of Commerce representative,
exmressed 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.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 4
Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Administrator, reported on the status of
the presentation phase of the visioning process, noting that they had 30
presentations scheduled for the next month 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 people involved who have not been involved before.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Council President Hunt asked for confirmation that the approval of the
Planning Commission bylaws would not negatively affect the issue of the
roles of the CITs and the Planning Commission in the CIP process. Ms.
Newton reviewed the process whereby that issue was being resolved, noting
that the CITE wanted to report their comments directly to Council, and not
go through the Planning Commission.
Motion by Councilor Rohlt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to approve the
Consent Agenda.
Motion was approved by 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 SW Burnham Street and SW Main
Street to the Public as Right of Way - Resolution No. 96-59
3.5 Approve the Interest Rate for 196/97 to be Applied to All
Reimbursement Districts Formed During the Year - Res. No. 96-60
4. PUBLIC FEARING - FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER RRIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 8
a. Council President Hunt read the hearing title and opened the public
hearing.
b. Staff Report
Greg Berry, Acting City Engineer, 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 approval.
Mr. Berry explained that in this Reimbursement 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 connect to the sewer once it was installed or pay any
fee until connected. He reviewed the 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 delay 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 there were other sewer extension
requests waiting to be processed. Mr. Berry said that staff was
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 5
working on two others at this time and talking to other interested
property owners.
C. Public Testimony: None
d. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Berry recommended approval of the Reimbursement District and
direction to proceed with the construction.
e. Council Questions: None
f. Council President Hunt closed the public hearing.
g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 96-61
RESOLUTION NO. 96-61 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER
DISTRICT NO. 8.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt
Resolution 96-61.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
„yes.")
S. PUBLIC HEARING - (QUASI JUDICIAL) - 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 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 19.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land
classification of annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County
R-5.
a. Council President Hunt read the hearing title and opened the public
hearing.
b. Declarations or Challenges: None
C. Staff Report
Nels Mickaelson, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He
reviewed the specifics of the annexation request, noting the parcel
location on the map and the single-family house located on the
southern portion of the lot. He said that the owners were
requesting annexation by double majority to obtain sanitary sewer;
their request met all the applicable annexation criteria of the City
and the Boundary Commission. He noted a correction to an error in
the original proposal; the parcel already had a Comprehensive Plan
designation of low density residential.
Mr. Mickaelson stated that the parcel was adequately 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.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Mickaelson
stated that the application for annexation came from the new owner.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 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 recently
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 $225, 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. Hendryx 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 approach.
g. Council President Hunt closed the public hearing.
h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 96-62 and Ordinance No. 96-3S
The City Recorder read the number and title of Resolution No. 96-62.
RESOLUTION NO. 96-62, A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY
OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT AND ILLUSTRATED
IN EXHIBIT B (ZCA 96-0005).
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt
Resolution No. 96-62.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
"yes.")
The City Recorder read the number and title of Ordinance No. 96-35.
ORDINANCE NO. 96-35, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-
0005).
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt
Ordinance No. 96-35.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 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. PUBLIC HEARING - (QUASI JUDICIAL) - ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006
HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 City of Tigard R-4.5.
LOCATION: West of 114th Avenue and South of Gaarde Street. 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. Council President Hunt read the hearing title 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.
He said that the owners were requesting annexation by double
majority to obtain sanitary sewer; their request met all the
applicable annexation criteria of the City and the Boundary
Commission.
Mr. Mickaelson stated that the parcel was adequately 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.
PROPONENTS
Nick Stearns, 4035 Douglas Way, Lake Oswego, 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. Stearns
said that he did not know but that he understood they refused
annexation opportunities before.
In reseonse to a comment from Council President Hunt, Mr. Monahan
said that the Council could discuss forced annexation of those two
properties and add them to the recommendation they send to the
boundary Commission; the property owners would have the opportunity
at the Boundary Commission hearing to object. Council could also
forward the request cn without adding the properties and the
Boundary Commission cn its own motion could decide to include them.
Brad Wright, 14235 SW 115th, spoke to the Council discussing a more
aggressive annexation policy to bring in the Walnut Island, pointing
out that piecemeal annexation led to a scattered service area for
police.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 8
e. Staff Recommendation
Mr. Mickaelson recommended annexation of the parcels.
f. Council Questions
Councilor Scheckla asked the City Attorney for his opinion on the
ramifications of forced annexations. 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
relations, pointing out that citizens forced into the City could be
unhappy citizens who expressed their discontentment at the ballot
box.
Councilor Scheckla commented that while the City might win in the
short term over forcing annexations, it could lose in the long term
if unhappy citizens voted down city ballot measures.
Mr. Hendryx zommented that there were statutes and procedures that
governed the annexation process, pointing out that while the City
could initiate an annexation request, the Boundary 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 regarding
forced annexation 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 City Recorder read the number and title of Resolution No. 96-63.
RESOLUTION NO. 96-63, A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY
OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT AND ILLUSTRATED
IN EXHIBIT B (ZCA 96-0006).
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to adopt
Resolution No. 96-63.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
"yes.")
The City Recorder read the number and title of Ordinance No. 96-36.
ORDINANCE NO. 96-36, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (ZCA 96-
0006).
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt
Ordinance No. 96-36.
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of Council present.
(Council President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted
eves.")
> Mr. Monahan announced that Mr. Mickaelson has accented a position with
Washington County to work on their GIS system.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 9
7. PUBLIC HEARING - (QUASI JUDICIAL) - ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 96-0006 TIGARD FEED
STORE
A request to remove the historic overlay designation and permit the
demolition of the Tigard Feed and Garden building, designated as
historically significant by the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 1 355 SW Main
Street. APPLICABLE REVIEW 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
explained how the passage of ORS 197.772(3) by the legislature in 1995
preempted the cities' authority in the historic designation process; if a
property owner requested removal of the historic designation, the City had
to grant it. He cited the City Attorney's opinion given to the City of
Milwaukee.
Mr. Monahan said that he explained 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 at
the Planning Commission 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 old
rules.
Mr. Monahan 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 suggestion that the Chamber bear the full cost of demolition
following the 120-day waiting period, he commented that the City has
alwavs understood that the Chamber would pay full cost of demolition in
any 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 110+ days for someone to come up with
another solution.
Mr. Monahan reviewed the agreement between the City and the Chamber,
noting that the Chamber agreed to remove the building within six months of
purchase or the City would have the option of buying the building and
removing it. He recommended that the Council direct staff to amend the
agreement to allow the Chamber the time it needed to comply with the
statute, but noted that the City could exercise its option to buy the
building 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 citizens
in saving the building as justification for spending a little taxpayer
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
building 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
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 10
to another site. He noted that the Chamber has been accepting inquires
from people interested in saving the building.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Moore, to accept the
staff recommendation that because of the existence of ORS 197.772(3) and
the advice of the City Attorney that the City discontinue the process of
the land use hearing at the request of the Chamber of Commerce.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Council
President Hunt, Councilors Moore, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.")
Councilor Rohlf asked John Cook, Chamber representative, if anyone was
interested in the building. 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 privately with some interested groups. He
noted 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 uestion but that they would entertain the idea. He said that they
have q discussed writing a press release to advertise the building's
availability, noting that physical possession could not occur until after
120 days.
Mr. Cook explained 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 up 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 property
prior to its involvement in the purchase; the consultant reported that the
ground was fine but expressed 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
explained 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 building about a year ago. 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 speak at the hearing in opposition,
Jim Griffith and Gary Lass. Both stated that in light of the new
information they had no comments.
Mr. Monahan suggested that staff work with the Chamber to write something
up for the Ci:yscape and possibly share the costs of advertising
elsewhere. The Council concurred.
Council President Hunt asked if the Courc a established an historic
designation, did they then have the authority to make the owners maintain
the property in a presentable condition, citing the peeling paint on the
Tigard house. Mr. Monahan pointed out tha- 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
liaison to TAHPA was Kathy Davis, City Librarian; this budget cycle
included money to repaint the structure.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 11
8. NON AGENDA ITEMS
> Hillshire Hollow subdivision.
Mr. Monahan reviewed that Councilor Rohlf requested discussion of calling
this property up 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
wanted the policy reviewed in conjunction with the Code update. Mr. Ramis
confirmed that the Council could legally call this application up for
review but advised them that their discussion would be limited to
interpretations under the existing rules referencing the question of
private streets. Concerns noted could provide the basis for future
discussions possibly leading to Code amendments.
i
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. Hendryx'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
mandating particular actions. Mr. Ramis concurred.
Councilor Rohlf asked that the applicant come prepared to speak to the
issue of private streets.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to pull up the
Hillshire 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 oppose 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. EX13CUTIVS SESSION: None
10. ADJOURNMENT: 9:05 P.M.
? CC'
Atfs: ne at ey, it ecor er
y City Tigard
C17Y COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1996 - PAGE 12
I\
ICITY OF TIC
ARD
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 I 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 DECISION 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) s own on the attached list(s), marked
Exhibit "B", on the* rd day of , 1996; said PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE as hereto attached, wa pos ed on an appropriate bulletin bo don the n/a day
of n/a and deposited in the United States Mail on the_31cl- day of ,
1996, postage prepaid.
LPpared Notice
Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of , 16
OFFICIAL SEA: NO ARY PUBLI F OREG
DIANE M JELDEAK"
NOTARY PUBUC•OREuOr• My Commission pires:
COMMISSION NO.04611 c
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES CCPTEMBE''
qtr
OFFICIAL SEAL
DIANE M JELDERKS
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 046142
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07, 1999
DOR 34-1175-96
Notice to Taxin iStrictS Orego Department of Revenue
g
ORS 308.225 Cartographic Unit
955 Center St. NE
Salem, OR 97310
(503) 945-8297, fax 945-8737
CITY OF TIGARD Description and Map Approved
FINANCE DIRECTOR December 19,1996
13125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223 As' Per ORS 308.225
® Description ® 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 WASHINGTON CO.
ENHANCED SHERIFFS PAT.
FINAL ORDER # 3658
has been: ® Approved 12/19/96
❑ Disapproved
Notes:
Department of Revenue File Number: 34-1175-96
Prepared by: Michael Hughes, (503) 945-8287
Boundary: ® Change ❑ Proposed Change ❑ Planned Change
The change is for:
❑ Formation of a new district
® Annexation of a territory to a district
® Withdrawal of a territory from a district
❑ Dissolution of a district
❑ Transfer
❑ Merge
Taxing District copy - Copies to: County Assessor, Department of Revenue, County Commissioners or County Court/Boundary Commission (if appropriate)
ZcA qG-o~~~
Name Final Order Number '
ANNEXATION FOLLOW-UP PROCEDURE
1. Receive Final Order from Boundary Commission. Date 2-6
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 2 - Z -
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 l~
5. Notify agencies of annexation (see list attached). Letters must
be sent by certified mail to:
General Telephone Co.; Pacific NW Bell Telephone; NW Natural Gas;
Unified Sewerage Agency; MACC; Portland General Electric;
Tualatin Valley Water District; Pride Disposal; Miller's Sanitary
Service, Inc.; Schmidt's Sanitary Service.
Only send letter to OLCC if a liquor license outlet is involved. Date / - z7-
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. If the area being annexed has a hotel or motel, 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:\1ogin\jo\annexpro.1
Revised 03/95
- PLEa~~ C oM`~~;F
Return completed questionnaire to:
Center for Population Research and Census
Portland State University
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
City of County of \,~Jf cING-aJ
Annexation Ordinance Number or Final Order Number AN 1rj46-017e
Effective Date of Annexation 6
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 occupied. There must be one sheet for each
inhabitable housing unit.
HOUSING UNITS AND POPULATION AT TIME OF ANNEXATION
TOTAL OCCUPIED VACANT PERSONS
UNITS IN SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES
UNITS IN MULTIPLE FAMILY STRUCTURES
MOBILE HOMES OR TRAILERS
TOTAL POPULATION OF ANNEXED AREA DATE OF ENUMERATION / -
ENUMERATED B POSITION
J
TELEPHONE NUMBE
This questionnaire and the completed census schedules are the only
data used to certify annexed population. Please DO NOT send maps,
cocies of the final ordinance, lists of addresses, etc. to our office
unless you are requested to do so.
If there are any questions, or to schedule a census, contact Howard
.Wineberg at the Center fer Population Research and Census (503) 725-
3922.
THANK YOU.
CONFIDENTIAL
City of
l~Lt C,
Address y/ 3~'~C~~
S1 ILtff~'- U.3Sr0 o
HOUSING TYPE TENURE
Single Unit Structure p(f Owner Occupied (Xj
Multiple Unit Structure ( ) Renter Occupied ( }
Trailer or Mobile Hone ( ) Vacant ( )
RESIDENTS
Last Name First Name Sex Age
Respondent / R- L Lf N ltiL _ 15 6
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
9.
i0.
Portland State university School of Urban and Public Affairs
Center For Population Research and Census 725-3922
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 NO: 3658- Annexation of territory to the City of Tigard.
Proceedings on Proposal No. 3658 commenced upon receipt by the Boundary Commission of a
resolution and property owner/registered voter consents from the City on October 15, 1996,
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.
NO 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 priorities 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 local circumstances, conditions and limited financial
resources. A single governmental agency, rather than several governmental agencies is
Final Order - Page 1
I\
in most cases better able to assess the financial resources and therefore is the best
mechanism for establishing community service priorities.
10(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
r
"(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. 3658 as modified 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:
hit
ATTEST:
Final Order - Page 3
Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3658
FINDINGS
I
1. The territory contains 2.52 acres, 1 single family dwelling, an estimated population of two
and is evaluated at $241,820.
2. The owners desire City services to facilitate single family residential development.
3. A petitioner has requested that his property be included with the original application for
annexation. The modification pertains to a driveway (0.76 acres) that is contiguous to
property, owned by the petitioner, recently annexed to the City of Tigard.
4. 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.
5. The parcel has an easterly slope with a slight depression towards the center of the property.
The single family residence is on the middle parcel of the territory in question.
6. The territory is within the regional Urban Growth Boundary and the boundary of Metro.
7. The territory is located within Washington 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 allows for 5 units per acre.
8. Washington County reviewed its role in service provision in its County 2000 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.
Final Order - Page 4
Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3658
9. 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 sets out an "Active Planning Area" within which 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.
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 Planning Area means the incorporated area and certain unincorporated areas
contiguous to the incorporated area for which the CITY conducts comprehensive
planning and seeks to regulate development activities to the greatest extent possi-
ble.....
2. The CITY shall be responsible for comprehensive planning 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 within the CITY's Active
Planning Area."
10. 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. With 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:
Final Order - Page 5
Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3658
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.
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. drainage;
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;
Final Order - Page 6
Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3658
e. The annexation can be accommodated by the services listed in 10.1.1(a).
10.1.3 Upon annexation of land into the city which carries a Washington County zoning
designation, the City of Tigard shall assign the City of Tigard zoning district
designation which most closely conforms to the county zoning designation."
The City has analyzed the proposed annexation with regard to the above policies and
concludes that the policies are met. Because the parcel is within the City's Active Planning
Area, it has already been designated as Low Density Residential. Upon annexation, the
parcel will have a zoning change of R-4.5 (7,500 square feet or 5,000 square feet per unit),
which is most closely conforming to the Washington County zoning of R-5.
i
11. There is an 8-inch City sewer line located in SW 1 14th Avenue that can provide service to
the site.
The territory is within the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County as is the City.
The Unified Sewerage Agency has a standard agreement between the Agency and the large
cities within the Agency (Beaverton, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, Tigard, Tualatin and
Sherwood). In that agreement the Cities agree to: 1) comply with the Agency's construction
and maintenance standards for sanitary and storm water sewer facilities, 2) follow and
accomplish the Agency's work program for storm and surface water, 3) obtain the Agency's
consent before issuing construction permits within wetlands, floodways and floodplains. The
agreement provides that the city owns and is responsible for sanitary sewer lines under 24
inches in diameter within the City limits and for storm water facilities within the City limits as
identified on a map (virtually all facilities). The Unified Sewerage Agency is responsible for all
industrial waste discharges, both in and out of cities. The Unified Sewerage Agency agrees
not to extend sanitary sewer service to areas outside the City within the City's Urban
Planning Area (as identified in the City-County UPAA) unless the City approves.
Monthly sanitary sewer user charges are $14.55 per month Alus a consumption charge of
$1.00 per 100 cubic feet of water used by the customer. These City charges are the same
as those charged by U.S.A..
12. A 6-inch water line located in SW 1 14th Avenue serves the territory to be annexed.
The territory is within the boundary of the Tigard Water District. The City of Tigard, which
used to be served by the District, has withdrawn incorporated territory from the District and
established a Tigard Water Department. The Tigard Water District contracts with the City to
service customers within the Water District boundaries. The City intends to withdraw the
territory from the District pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement between the two
entities.
Currently the City charges $14.30 for the first 800 cubic feet of water and then $1.32 per
additional 100 cubic feet of water.
Final Order - Page 7
Exhibit A
Proposal No. 3658
13. 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.
14. The territory is within the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District. Annexation will not affect
.
this service because the City is in the District.
15. The Unified Sewerage Agency levies an annual assessment for storm drainage services of
836 per dwelling unit of which $24 goes to the City.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. 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 A
Proposal No. 3658
REASONS FOR DECISION
Based on the Findings, the Commission determined:
1. The proposal should be modofied to include TL 800 NE 1 /4 NW 1 /4 Sec. 10, T2S, R 1 W,
W.M., Washington Co., Oregon as requested by the property owner per Finding No. 3
2. The proposal is consistent with City, County, and Regional planning for the area, based on
Findings No. 6 - 10.
3. The City can provide an adequate quantity and quality of service, based on Findings No. 11 -
18.
4. The proposal is consistent with the Boundary Commission Policy On Incorporated Status
(OAR 193-05-005) and the Policy on Long Term/Long Range Governmental Structure (OAR-
05-015).
Final Order - Page 9
Exhibit B
Proposal No. 3658
I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ANNEXATION TO
City of Tigard
Parcel 1
Lots 17, 18 and the south 100 feet of lots 19 and 20, Cole's Acres, Washington
County, Oregon
Parcel 2:
Beginning at the northeast corner of the northwest 1 /4 of Sec. 10 T2S R1 W W.M.,
thence south 89 degrees 41' west 426.5 feet, thence south 0 degrees 26' west 20.0
feet to the true point of beginning of the tract herein described. Thence continuing
south 0 degrees 26' west 160.38 feet to the point of a curve to the right (having a
radius of 65.0 feet and a central angle of 34 degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc
of said curve 39.43 feet, thence south 35 degrees 11' 35" west 32.92 feet to the
point of a curve to the left (having a radius of 120.0 feet and a central angel or 34
degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc of said curve 72.80 feet, thence south 0
degrees 26' west 344.54 feet, thence south 89 degrees 41' west 50.0 feet, thence
north 0 degrees 26' east 348.65 feet to the point of a curve to the right (having a
radius of 170.0 feet and a central angle of 34 degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc
of said curve 103.13 feet, thence north 35 degrees 11' 35" east 32.92 feet to the
point of a curve to the left (having a radius of a 15.0 feet and a central angel of 34
degrees 45' 35") thence along the arc of said curve 9.10 feet, thence north 0
degrees 26' east 160.0 feet thence north 89 degrees 41' east 50.0 feet to the point
of beginning.
Containing .76 acres more or less.
Final Order - Page 10
PROPOSAL ■ 3658
2S 1 10AB
NW 1 /4 NE1 /4 SECTION 10 T2S R1 W W.M.
Washington County
Scale: 1 200'
W stt mwr Y
as 1 30C
NSW
.~a STREET2,.R
r) Icn xzxsl r
I500 IA00
°L 4zoo 410s
.30 -C rJ.tG Z .JOnG cnA°. I I Js
W
8 Q ~ g 1 y~ \ l u..r. fol,
s z 19 g K: mi U.
IGOO
t;.F 300: i''•' ii ? ii ^i'3900'i:: ;i: i?; .Je 4. •q / i
:93
3800 R ?4 R
A, 23
V1, 3
IN171111 P011. !j
AREA TO BE
i:J :i:'iii ),o W
ANNEXED 400 ' 200
<3700 1 100" a R x` csr Ac. C c. Ac.
u
R 4
17 / - 12 1z1.
.18 AC
_1 Q
d
ii::`i7 00 100
j C. AC
rG 1300 ! . I
S IG ,J-AC R 1000
nJ_(T c.
.23 AC.
rp lu - •
)o>R R r ? 1900 ddo. ' 900 C r~ r r f rl ,J Tl \
AJAC R 3100 R If AC. r~4 JAC R. rl
R g S .se a: .2 R ° 900
1 c TI G A R D % n,rc
R ! zJ AG N' ;
I r
^ .
2000 700
7f
R .tJ AC b - " ^I
2 ..6AC
.Il .II ~`l j 7 •C \
is G it I 3
.zJ _ C` ~•~l~
2tt)0 ~ 2202 lol. -
00 nr.,o .rr AC
.1 27 p B 2200 +.y,l: G\
3.J/Ac Q OAt. - I,u P 1 O
nT 2201 ~ul
13At
Ac I i
coo - .41-A[. - 17, - R 1 C9 d o,
22300 ,
I~ •~I V'
12 0 F
rte' t.7,
ii :i.i b ~ ra
+r' r•<
2400 8 •"~rJ
1 2500 ..0 A[ ' - r t.,o' ".d I
ie II _ i y~D 10 - b u ,
r~ LL
PROPOSAL 3658
CITY OF TIGARD
ANNEXATION
FIGURE 2A
•
PROPOSAL ■ 3658
NE1 /4 NW 1 /4 SECTION 10 T2S R1 W W.M. 2S 1 10BA
Washington County
Scale: 1 250'
2S 1 3CC a ter- 1 • Iw LS I !GD
r S.W. T AAROE T T T T T STREET i
:
1000 1600 1500, 1+00 1300 .e~' SOU ``~Qo
JJf+C .J•K /f1AC :.JJAC .NAG JJIG \ •.f + \
1700
\
.I
_ • 1200 +00
Soo
SEE MAP 1 2100 i 1100 '500.
2S 11088 ,J)AC. iJ~c. \
1 rJUr. -f l00
1 ..Ar. . f.r. S
100011 n 600 \ \ «
\ \ \
2200 1300
is-
+ 900, 700
JSAC. JjA
r~r'.i .aa is
61p"r . 00 II .30 1 1200 +000 3900 3 \ 380, 3300 '7.0
6000 0
II TRACT"C
45 6 J
+2 .C32 23 - 24 26 / 3600 9 0
6300 A D J \111 ;°llo
27 -0 0
s . cFARLANO
~G91 L~ S.W.
} J' ART
i
2900 h
6.00 7100 N I +500 0500 +)00 '
47 7.0 6 1•:200
M .600 2
2 00 19 16 •,1• 36
60 5 L L S
630 I TI I L „ )3 S
300„ , 4900 2700
720 7100`17 7 r
36 1700 5500 .1000 7100
0
6600 'L 39 9 ~QA 5600 5400 m , 7 ?
!7 36 - ) D 2600
.9 ..02 „
1 :1 9 5000 p 16
1 6700 • S.W. 2I w~~ , 6 .
00 .
1'. SEE MAP
QO S:U• 211 1000
6600 I 6900 r • 7000 I- • ' 1 5200
19
6 WASHINGTON COUNT
oxF,gimcmi or
SO 1j 5100• POBSEmomaSBSAEA1101
51. SL 33 ONLY.
3 5 00 F01
"41CTI~CRu t43l
' /24 FOR ssczsmfN; PURPOSI
ni - ON• T- 00 NOT REl70/1
fOR CTNER use
s6E MA. STREET' TIGARO
2s 1 R BC :CE MAP
PROPOSAL NO. 3658
CITY OF TIGARD
vG~ ANNEXATION
A/, FIGURE 2B
OCONFIDENTIAL4p
City of
Address
,2 o`9rg- 03 7 oo
HOUSING TYPE TENURE
Single Unit Structure Owner Occupied
Multiple Unit Structure ( ) Renter Occupied ( )
Trailer or Mobile Home ( ) Vacant
RESIDENTS
Last Name First 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 725-3922
$CONFIDENTIAL*
City of L
j Address ~ 9
a sIJ0 v3~~D
HOUSING TYPE TENURE
Single Unit Structure ( ) Owner Occupied ( )
Multiple Unit Structure ( ) Renter occupied ( )
Trailer or Mobile Home ( ) Vacant j- kI
RESIDENTS
Last Name First Name Sex Age
Respondent
2.
3.
4.
i
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Portland State University School of Urban and Public Affairs
Center For Population Research and Census 725-3922
*CONFIDENTIAL*
City of
Address GLGf,~/
, S2 D /76 - 041300
HOUSING TYPE TENURE
Single Unit Structure ( ) Owner Occupied ( )
Multiple Unit Structure ( ) Renter occupied ( )
Trailer or Mobile Home ( ) Vacant jt-t R1
RESIDENTS
Last Name First 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 725-3922
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
2S110AB-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.
ov~
Laurie Nicholson
Community Development Department
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Development
Shaping A Better Community
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
TO: Ron Goodpaster, Amanda Bewersdorff, Brian Embley, Cathy Wheatley, Greg Berry,
Jill 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
2S110AB-03800, 1 SF Dwelling
Site address: 14135 SW 114th Ave.
Est. population - 2
2S110AB-03900, Vacant lot
2S110AB-04300, Outbuildings only on site
No address
Estate of Ralph Flowers 2S1 1 OBA-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
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION
CITY OF TIGARD
FILE NO: ZCA 96-0006 OREGON
FILE TITLE: Hatch Annexation
APPLICANT: Nick Stearns and Alan Deharpport
4035 Douglas Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
OWNERS: Lynn and Sharon Hatch
14135 SW 114th Avenue
Tigard, OR 97224
REQUEST: 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
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.
CIT: West/Central CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request
PHONE NUMBER: (503)
DECISION MAKING BODY
STAFF DECISION
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30
HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00
X CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEA G: 9/24/96 TIME: 7:30
RELATIVE COMPONENTS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
VICINITY MAP X LANDSCAPING PLAN NARRA IVE -
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SITE PLAN OTHER
STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson (503) 639-4171 x321
r ~7
d
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT/ZONE CHANGE/ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT APPLICATION
CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Bog 23397
-igard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY
CASE N0. 2G►9'~-[(o - OOOG
OTHER CASE NO'S:
RECEIPT NO.
APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: P VVI
DATE: ~6 e 3 17G
1. GENERAL INFORMATION I c.113 S~ K l Application elements submitted:
'ROPERTY ADDRESS /LOCATION 144$-5 SW 114th (A) Application form (1)
Tigard, Oregon 97224 (B) Owner's signature/written
TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. 2S11OAB TL 3700,3800, authorization
3900 and 4300 (C) Applicant's statement
SITE SIZE Approx. 2.52 Acres k~ (pre-app check list)
?ROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* Lynn & Shar)(on Hatch (D) Filing fee )
IS IS
ADDRESS14+8-5 SW 114th Avenue PHONE 620-5660 Additional information for Compre-
CITY Tigard ZIP 97224 sive Plan Map Amendments/Zone Changes
APPLICANT* Mirk Rt,parnG K. Alan nmharp ort ~(E) Maps indicating property
ADDRESS 40'15 nm,gi as Ida PHONE 619-9660 location (pre-app check list)
CITY Lake Oswego, Oregon ZIP 97035 (F) List of property owners and
*When the owner and the 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 possession with written authorization (H) Title transfer instrument (1)
from the owner or an agent of the owner with written
authorization. The owner(s) must sign this
application in the space provided on page two or
submit a written authorization with this application. DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: 5 ~ 13 19 ~
2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY ~v GLIaAJC,~ AN^JC xATo~
The owners of recordXf the subject property FINAL DECISION DEADLINE:
rRquest a t (if COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION:
applicable) from to
End a Zone Change from WAsw. e6. X -S to
71,6^ &/N ,e- 14 N.P.O. Number:
OR
The applicant requests an am nt to the Planning Commission Approval Date:
following sections of Comprehensive Plan
or Community De pment Code
City Council Approval Date:
0737P/23P
Rev'd: 5/87
3. List any variance, conditional uses, or other land use actions to be considered
as part of this application: ,y(A
4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments
described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this
application.
5. THE APPLICANT(S),SHALL CERTIFY THAT: /
A. The above request does not violate 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 acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this
application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements 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 of19
SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property.
(KSL:pm/0737P)
Foaµ asea~
Go~yE~- 16
Bap td :E . G: R 97232
pa~TLi''.~ =093)
t731
D 7]
n
na 9p G
m IT,
m
ca v c o N
mZm q_ Zr T
p .4
t
s~
Oz n
s
~ m
cD
O
r
N O
cn '
• •
RIVERWOOD DEVELOPMENT LLC
4035 Douglas Way, Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL
August 1 1996
To: City of Tigard
From: Nick Stearns & Alan DeHarpport for Mr. & Mrs. Lynn Hatch
RE: Annexation Proposal
We propose to annex the property at 2S110AB Tax Lots 3700, 3800, 3900, 4300 into the
City of Tigard with as its designated zoning. It is our intention to submit an
application for develo f a high quality single family residential subdivision upon
annexation. ent o 9 _ 4,
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
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 96-0006, Hatch Annex) 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
r
• •
Annexations to C777ES - Double Majority dfethod
ORS 199.490(2)(a)(B)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING AMYOR BO UNDA.RY CHANGE PROPOSALS
PLEASE READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE FILING A PETITION WITH THE CITY
NOTE: The requirements of ORS 199.490(2)(b) must be considered before proceeding with
the following steps. That section (reprinted below) states that a governing body of
a city or district which intends to solicit statements of consent, must first file a
"notice of intent."
"ORS 199.490(2)(b) However, before soliciting statements of
consent for the purpose of authorizing an annexation under a
proceeding initiated as provided by this subsection, the
governing body of the affected city or district shall file a
notice of intent to annex with the boundary commission
having jurisdiction of the affected territory. The notice of
intent to annex shall name the affected city or district and
generally describe the boundaries of the territory sought to be
annexed, which territory must be contiguous to the city or
district or separated from it only by a public right-of-way or
a stream, bay, lake or other body of water. The notice of
intent to annex shall have attached to it a county assessor's
cadastral map showing the location of the affected territory
that the city or district proposes to annex."
Step 1. Petition
A "consent to annex" is necessary to initiate the annexation proceeding. The
consent to annex by a property owner and/or registered voter is in the form of a
petition. You may use PMALGBC FORM ::~1 5 or a form furnished by the city.
Please fill in all the blanks on the signature page of the petition. To give consent
for a particular piece of property, persons who own an interest in the property or
who are purchasers of property on a contract sale that is recorded with the county
must sign the annexation petition. If more than one person is shown as the
recorded owner or contract purchaser, all must sign. In the case of a corporation
or business, the person who is authorized to sign legal documents for the firm may
sign the annexation petition. To give consent as a registered voter you must be
currently registered to vote. :after completing the petition, have the County
--1--
Rev. 11/93
Assessor's Office certify the signatures and area by completing P,VtALGBC
FORM 916 and have the County Elections Department certify the signatures of the
registered voters by completing PMALGBC FORM F17.
Step Legal Description
A metes and bounds.leglal description of the territory to be annexed shall be
_ >
submitted. This description should be inserted in or attached to the Petition. In
addition, one separate copy of the metes and bounds description must be submitted.
(A lot, block and subdivision description may be substituted for the metes and
bounds description if the area is platted and no metes and bounds description is
available, and if this is acceptable to the County Assessor's Office.) If the legal
description contains any deed or book and page references, legible copies of these
must be submitted with the legal description.
After obtaining the legal description, take it and PMALGBC FORM 94 to the
County Assessor's Office, obtain the map(s) noted in Step 3, and have the
Assessor's Office complete PMALGBC FORM #4.
The County Assessor's Office will complete its certification process as
expeditiously as possible. However, this may not be done on the same day FORM
4 and the requested materials are submitted. At least one assessor's office has
indicated that the process may require one week. Therefore, petitioners are urged
to complete this portion of the application as early as possible and to check with
the appropriate Assessor's Office to determine the approximate necessary lead time.
Step 3. Map
Submit with the proposed annexation the latest county assessor's quarter section
map (or maps) which indicates the territory to be annexed. Outline the area to be
annexed on the map.
Step 4. List of Property Owners
If the proposed annexation involves 10 or fewer property owners and/or registered
voters, complete FORM T19 (please print or type). FORM T19 IS NOT A
PETITION-the purpose of this form is to give the Boundary Commission a legible
list of names and addresses of all property owners/registered voters in the area to
be annexed regardless of whether these owners/voters petitioned for annexation or
not.
Rev. 11/93
by mail. If the Commission denies a proposal, the proceeding terminates. If the
Commission approves the proposal, it is effective immediately. The Boundary
Commission then notifies the appropriate filing agencies- -i.e. Secretary of State, County
Recorder and County Assessor, State Revenue Department, and City Recorder.
Public hearings are generally held every four weeks and a schedule of these for the
current year is available. At the public hearings proponents of a proposal testify first
and opponents second. Rebuttal by proponents is allowed. All questions are directed
through the Chair of the Commission. The Chair of the Commission has authority to
limit the time allowed for speakers to present their views. In the past when the Chair
has chosen to limit time alloyed for testimony it has often been to 45 minutes per side.
What is, the proponents had 45 minutes and the opponents 45 minutes with additional
time allowed for rebuttal by proponents and questions from the Commission.
Rules of Procedure for the Boundary Commission are available upon request.
(Filing Fee required frith proposal submittaL See attached schedule)
Submit to:
PORTLAv-D METRO. AREA BOUINDAR"I' COi aUSSION
300 NNE Oregon ST (STE 540) (T16)
PORTLAND, OREGON c7232-2109
(Tel: (503) 731-4093)
9
Rev. 111,93
"(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
governmental 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
state-wide 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."
In general the staff review considers the following items:
• Reason for Action
• Land Use and Conformance to Applicable Planning and Zoning...LCDC
Goals if applicable...N1ETRO UGB...Counry Comprehensive Plan and/or
Neighborhood Plans ...City Comprehensive Plan and/or Neighborhood Plans
• Demography Population... Population Density... Growth Potential... Proximity
to Populated Areas--define populated area in terms of number of homes,
businesses, etc.... Relation of Growth and Density to _NlETRO and County
Plans
7
Rev. 11/93
• Adequacy of Public Facilities and Services Water... Sewer... Fire
Protection... Police Protection... Parks & Recreation... Streets and Traffic
Regulation... Street Lights...Storm Sewers ...Library Schools... Transportation...
Vector Control... Private Utilities--Electricity, Garbage, Telephone, Natural
Gas
• Public Economic Considerations Financial Integrity of Units of
Government--costs now vs. costs later..-Debt Structure Obligations
• Other Governmental Factors Logic of the Particular Expansion--should it
be enlarged or contracted? ...Contiguity Impact on Other Units... Relationship
of Property to Government Codes, etc.
• The Boundary Commission has three adopted policies (see attached) which
also will be considered in reviewing proposals. Also the Commission's Rules
of Procedure may provide some guidance on this matter.
The Boundary Commission staff notifies and considers response from all affected
governmental units, including state and federal agencies which may have an
interest in this proposal (State Highway Dept., US Forest Service, DEQ, etc.),
county departments (Building and Sanitation, Planning, etc.), and cities and
districts in the vicinity of the proposed change.
All known neighborhood groups, service and other organizations, and individual
citizens known to be interested in a proposal are also notified and their responses
considered as part of the staff review.
The staff reports will generally follow the outline above but may or may not
include analysis of all listed factors depending upon the factor's significance for the
given proposal. The reports are released approximately five days prior to the
public hearing and are available at that time to cities, counties, districts, petitioners
and other interested parties. If conies of the staff report are desired by someone
other than the chief petitioner or properrv owner, please so indicate at the time of
submission.
Step 14. Public Hearing
The Boundary Commission holds a public hearing. At the conclusion of the public
hearing the Commission may approve or disapprove a proposal. The Commission may
also modify a proposal to make it larger or smaller. If the Commission expands a
proposal, notification of the affected property owner is required at the public hearing or
Rev. 11/93
I
Additionally all petitions must comply with the requirements of ORS 222.173.
The Boundary Commission law (ORS 199.462) states that "In order to carry out the
purposes described in ORS 199.410 when reviewing a boundary change..., a boundary
commission shall consider local comprehensive planning for the area, economic,
demographic, and sociological projections pertinent to the proposal, and past and
prospective physical development of land that would directly or indirectly be affected by
the proposed boundary change..."
To assist in the review of the annexation proposal, the cities should address these same
issues during their review. City review should include Planning Commission review and
recommendation to the City Council. Staff notes (if any) and minutes of the Planning
Commission and City Council meetings on the issue should be forwarded to the
Boundary Commission with the city's resolution and attached consents (petition).
Step 9. Resolution
City adopts resolution (sample attached - PNiALGBC FORIM n13).
Step 10. Filing with Boundary Commission - Filing Fee
City files annexation proposal with the Boundary Commission. (See attached
schedule for filing deadlines.) Cities should forward the following documents to
the Boundary Commission:
A. Resolution--one original or true copy.
B. Petition(s) (consent(s) for annexation)--one original or true copy complete
with certification page. (The petitioners have filed two signed petitions with
the city. The city should retain one petition and use the other for Boundary
Commission filing.)
C. One copy of information sheet (PMALGBC FORM T19).
D. One copy of boundary change data sheet (P.NL-kLGBC FORM R6).
E. One County Assessor's map[s] showing area to be annexed (outlined in red
pencil) and its relation to the existing city limits.
F. Cemfication Forms T16, T17 and ;;-4-
5
Rev. 11/93
G. One copy of Double Majority Work Sheet (PMALGBC FOR~IM #20).
H. One set of city review data:
1. City" staff notes (if available)
2. Minutes of City Planning Commission and City Council meetings
3. Any department review reports, etc.
I. Filing fee (See attached schedule of fees) - The filing fee must be submitted
at the time the proposal comes to the Boundary Commission from the City.
Most cities require the cost of the filing fee to be borne by the applicants.
However, it is the City's responsibility to assure that the appropriate fee
accompanies the proposal and the proposal is incomplete without it. (See
OAR 193-10-000).
Step 11. Advertising Public Hearing
The Boundary Commission advertises its public hearing. The Boundary
Commission law requires a Notice of Public Hearin; to be published 15 to 25 days
prior to the hearing. A second publication 8 to 15 days prior to the hearing or
notification directly to the property owners completes the second notification
requirement. The publication must be in a newspaper serving the affected area.
Step 12. Location for Posting Notices
The Portland vfetropolitan area Local Government Boundary Commission causes
notices for public hearings to be posted in the affected territory, and in other places
determined necessary. The notice is posted at least 15 days prior to the public
hearing.
Step 13. Staff Study and Report
ORS 199.462 of the Boundary Commission Act states: "In order to carry out the
purposes of ORS 199.410 when reviewing a boundary change..., a boundary
commission shall consider local comprehensive planning for the area, economic,
demographic, and sociological projections pertinent to the proposal, past and
prospective physical developments of land that would directly or indirectly be
affected by the proposed boundary change..."
ORS 199.410 further notes:
6
Rev. 11/93
14- j S C V- 5 i E;a►-P' S lr,~ go J T 1 I-i-~
fiN P (4 G:.
i~ Fe-C)
- FAX TRANSMITTAL -
• PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD L*b
LEGAL NOTICE SECTION OF TIGARD TIMES
DATE: September 6, 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 24, 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) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
IIII
4-0
C
ES
I ~O CZ
i
I E-9
F9
Q O
AD
B 4 L ~ U
ITS
nwNExnn0N AND ZONE Gi414GE FROM n ZCA96-0006
®WUNiV RS70 G7V R..5 /^1 HATCH ANNEXATION
N
TT PUBLISH September 12, 1996 -
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
TO: Per Attached DATE: August 28.1996
FROM: Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Nels Mickaelson
Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297
RE: ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 96-0006 HATCH ANNEXATION
REQUEST: 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 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.
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: September 9, 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:
BEQUEST FOR COMMENTS
N TION LIST FOR LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT APPLIONS
CIT Area. ) (S) (E) U(C CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS ® Placed for review in Library CIT Book
CITY DEPARTMENTS
_ BLDG. DEPT./David Scott, mactivomoe X POLICE DEPT./Kelley Jennings. aYn.R...~nw on+cs _3L,OPERATIONS/Acting Person, Mont. SP-.
_ CITY ADMIN./Cathy Wheatley, cerR.,:.sw _(ENG. DEPT./Brian Roger, Dwefta tRe•ie.E,,q.- _ COM.DEV. DEPT./D.S.T,'S
ADV. PLNG./Nadine Smith, Ploly ip Alonopw WATER DEPT./Michael Miller, ooa %e MO.Foo.+o+bm MOi eo.
. SPECIAL DISTRICTS
FIRE MARSHALL _UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY U LATIN VALLEY WATER DIST.
Gene Birchell SWM Program/Lee Walker P7Box 745
Wo. County Fire District 155 N. First Street Beaverton, OR 97075
(pick-up box Hillsboro. OR 97124
AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS
WA. CO. DEPT. OF LAND USE L TRANSP. METRO 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 Borreson (Engineer) PO Box 25412 Mary Weber
_ Scott King (CPA's) Portland. OR 97225-0412 600 NE Grand Avenue
_ Tom Harry (Current Planning 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 Transportation Planning
Larry Conrad, Senior Planner 123 N.W. Flanders
PO Box 4755 _ CITY OF PORTLAND Portland. OR 97209-4037
1120 SW 5th
_ CITY OF BEAVERTON Portland, OR 97204 _ ODOT/REGION 1, DISTRICT 2-A
Mike Matteucci. Neighborhood Coordinator Bob Schmidt/Engineering Coord.
PO Box 4755 _ CITY OF DURHAM 2131 SW Scholls/PO Box 25412
Beaverton, OR 97076 Planning Director Portland, 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 _ fOTHER% Lake Oswego, OR 97034
_ CITY OF KING CITY
City Manager
15300 SW 116th
Kin City, OR 97224
SPECIAL AGENCIES
GENERAL TELEPHONE ELECTRIC PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _ COLUMBIA CABLE CO.
Elaine Self. Engineering Brian Moore Craig Eyestone
PO Box 23416 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Rd. 14200 SW Brigodoon Court
Tigard, OR 97281-3416 Beaverton, OR 97007 Beaverton. OR 97005
_ NW NATURAL GAS CO. ft.-: (031721.2«1 -METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _ TRI-MET TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT
Scott Palmer F= (50) 721-2M Jason Hewitt Kim Knox, Project Planner
220 NW Second Avenue Twin Oaks Technology Center 710 NE Holladay Street
Portland, OR 97209-3991 1815 NW 169th Place S-6020 Portland. OR 97232
Beaverton, OR 97006-4886
_ TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _ US WEST COMMUNICATIONS _ SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS. CO.
Linda Peterson Pete Nelson Clifford C. Cabe, Const. Engineer
3500 SW Bond Street 421 SW Oak Street 5424 SE McLoughlin
Portland, OR 97201 Portland, OR 97204 Portland. OR 97202
_ BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION _ BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD
PO Box 3621 Attn: Administrative Offices
Routing TTRC-Attn: Renoe Ferrero 1313 W. 1 1 th Street
Portland, OR 97208-3621 Vancouver, WA 98660.3000
STATE AGENCIES'.:.
.
FEDERAL AGENCIES
_ AERONAUTICS DIVISION (ODOT) _ DIVISION OF STATE LANDS _ US POSTAL SERVICE
-COMMERCE DEPT.-M.H. PARK _ FISH & WILDLIFE Randy Hammock. Growth Cord.
_ PUC _ DOGAMI Cedar Mill Station
_ DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY _ U.S. ARMY CORPS. OF ENGINEERS Portland, OR 97229-9998
OTHER
lh:\p01N\mo+ta+\hcnotk.m+1 August 27. 1 9961