City Council Packet - 10/06/1975 SPECIAL MEETING
A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WILL BE HELD
AT 7:30 P. M. ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1975 IN THE LECTURE ROOM
AT THE NEW FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, 10865 S. W. WALNUT FOR
THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION - UTILITIES LOCATION - HUNZIKER L.I.D.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
7:45 P. M. , OCTOBER 6, 1975
AGENDA:
1 . GARBAGE FRANCHISE DISCUSSION.
2. COMPREHENSIVE LIABILITY INSURANCE RENEWAL.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION STRUCTURE - COUNCIL DISCUSSION.
4. RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN FEES FOR ZONING AND SUBDIVISION MATTERS -
DICK BOLEN
5. LIBRARY EXPANSION PROPOSAL - ANN HICKS
6. PARK AND OTHER PUBLIC DONATIONS - DISCUSSION.
7. OTHER
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
E'
STUDY SESSION - OCTOBER 6; 1975, 8:05 P. M.
ZOLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur A. Bishop; Councilmen Ralph C. Barkhurst, John E. Cook,
Alan W. Mickelson, Robert C. Moore; R. B. Adams, Chief of Police; Russel Austin,
Building Official; Joe D. Bailey, Legal Counsel; Dick Bolen, Planning Director;
Bruce P. Clark, City Administrator; Ann Hicks, Librarian; Doris Hartig, City
Recorder.
1. GARBAGE FRANCHISE DISCUSSION
City Administrator distributed copies of proposed amendments submitted by the garbage
franchise haulers along with City Administrator's proposals. City Administrator request-
ed Council concurrence as he synopsized the various proposals. Council reviewed and
requested City Administrator to come back with proposed ordinance for review and acceptance.
2. COMPREHENSIVE LIABILITY INSURANCE RENEWAL
City Administrator inquired if Council wished to request bids on renewal of the City's
comprehensive k..iability insurance. Policy cannot be renewed by the present agent, so
that if the City. wished to renew with the same company they would have to select a new
agent. City Administrator recommended Council authorize staff to attain an agent to
renew present 'policy at the best rates available.
Motion by Councilman Moore to authorize staff to attain agent to renew present policy at
the best rates available; seconded by Councilman Cook.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
3. LIBRARY EXPANSION PROPOSAL
City Librarian synopsized Tigard Jaycees proposal, to support the library's need for
added space by paying rent of $125 per month for additional 2500 square feet, for the
remainder of the fiscal year, provided the city would assure them that the additional
space will be included in the library's operating budget for future years. Council and
staff discussed the committment of funds to pay for expanded library.
Motion by Councilman Barkhurst to thank the J. C. for their offer; indicate to them
Council is committed to library program and will .make a committment to the J.C. 's to the
extent of including the proposal in first budget ,request. If the budget fails the
Council cannot guarantee to finance the expanded program; motion seconded by Councilman
Cook.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN FEES FOR ZONING AND SUBDIVISION MATTERS.
City Planner synopsized report on proposed amended fee schedule. Council and staff
discussed proposal and suggested various amendments. Council requested staff to prepare
for next council meeting amendment to ordinance which will allow for adoption of fees
by resolution.
S. Staff requested items 3, "Planning Commission Structure" and 6, "Park and Other Public
( Donations" be continued to another meeting. Council concurred.
l-
6. OTHER BUSINESS
City Administrator reported the City's tax rate for 1975-76 is 82o per $1000 valuation
and the. City's .total .valuation is,$187,368,142.
Councilman Mickelson commented he felt Council should recognize the years of service
performed by former City Attorney Fred Anderson.
No action was taken by Council in response to suggestion.
Chief of Police discussed copy of notice distributed to school bus drivers with respect
to violators of law governing stopped school busses. Police department will send
courtesy notice to violators calling attention to observance of the law and encouraging
safety of the school children.
Meeting adjourned 11:45 P. M.
C ty Recorder
ATTEST:
Mayor
?AGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 6, 1975
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING OCTOBER 6, 1975, 7:30 P. M.
ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur A. Bishop; Councilmen Ralph C. Barkhurst, John E. Cook,
Alan W. Mickelson, Robert C. Moore; R. B. Adams, Chief of Police; Russel Austin,
Building Official; Joe D. Bailey, Legal Counsel; Dick Bolen, Planning Director;
Bruce P. Clark, -City Administrator; Doris Hartig, City Recorder.
Special-meeting was called by the President with the common consent of the Council for the
purpose of discussion of utilities location with respect to the Hunziker Street Improvement.
Attorney Bailey and City Administrator discussed with Council the relocation of 11 utility
poles on S. W. Hunziker Street.
City has requested Portland General Electric and General Telephone Company to move the
utility poles from the edge of the curb to the edge of the street right-of-way. It is the
City's position the franchise states the poles must be moved at the franchisee's expense.
To date the utility companies : have not complied with City's request as it is their position
the franchise deals only with poles in the public right-of-way where they don't have a
private easement. P.G.E. has such an easement for four poles located at the east end of the
improvement and they are unwilling to relocate the remaining 7 poles. City staff requested
authorization to file a law suit to have the poles moved at the expense of the utility
companies.
Motion by Councilman Moore to authorize City Attorney to take appropriate action to cause
relocation of the poles on S. W. Hunziker Street; motion seconded by Councilman Barkhurst.
Approved by. unanimous vote of Council.
Meeting; adjourned: 8:05 P. M.
City Recorder rA
ATTEST:
Mayor
4 ® CITY OF TIGARD
P. O. Box 23557
12420 S. W. Main
Tigard, Oregon 97223
October 3, 1975
A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN
CALLED BY THE PRESIDENT WITH THE COMMON CONSENT OF THE
COUNCIL AT 7:30 P.M. ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1975, IN THE
LECTURE ROOM AT THE NEW FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH, 10865 S.W.
WALNUT, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION - UTILITIES
LOCATION - HUNZIKER L.I.D.
esi en
t of ttie Co ciTl
v"
PARK DONATIONS
Cook'Park Shelter Junior Chamber of Commerce
Tigard' Lions Club
Sand Box Jaycettes
Teeter Totter Kiwanis
Flag Pole & Planting American Legion & Auxiliary
Swing Set Junior Women
Woodard Park Bridge Lions Club
h
Y
Memorandum
To: City Council and Planning Commission
From: Planning Department
Subject: Fee Schedules for Zoning & Subdivision Items
Date: September 23, 1975
As a result of the financial situation that is presently afflicting
the City, it is necessary that every revenue source be examined to
see if a few extra drops can be squeezed out. The fees charged for
zoning and subdivision items have not been revised since 1972. As
a result, we find that Tigard has one of the lowest fee schedules
of the jurisdiction in Washington County. While it seems obvious that
the fees should be revised upward, possibly now is the time to re-
examine the basis for fees charged in order to ascertain that they
are properly related to the service provided.
The basis for the fees charged on zoning items has, in the past,
been related to the amount of staff time spent on a particular
category of request and the fees charged by other cities in Washing-
ton County. Traditionally the greatest emphasis has been on keeping
pace ;with the fee schedules of other cities. The intent is to re-
cover a portion of the cost of staff time expended in reviewing an
application. The question which is asked each time a revision of
fee schedules is considered is, how much of the cost of reviewing
an application should the City attempt to recoup in the form of
application fees? Should the applicant be required to cover the
entire cost of considering his request or should the taxpayer (the
public, whose interests are being protected) be required to bear
a portion of the cost?
Last year in a staff report to the Multnomah County Planning Com-
mission, the planners stated their opinion that the applicant should
bear the direct cost of considering his request. Their report
states, "In all publicly sponsored activities, those who receive
benefit from an activity are seldom paying for the full cost of
the activity that provides that benefit. This disparity, if overly
indulged in, can lead to an inequitable redistribution of public
funds and benefits. ,, In their staff report they go on to propose
a fee schedule based upon the direct cost of supplying service. This
direct cost includes only the time spent per application and not the
overhead costs of the department. In May of 1975 the County Com-
{
-2-
missioners adopted the proposed fee schedule, thereby accepting
this basis for fee scheduling. It is important to point out that
the large number of applications being processed by Multnomah County
made it possible to cover the direct costs of the Zoning Division of
the Planning Department. In other words, the volume served to keep
the individual application fee down. If in Tigard we attempted to
accomplish the same thing, our lower volume of applications would
require a much higher application fee.
The fee schedule proposed for Tigard in this report is based upon
the following objectives:
1. Match the fee to the size and complexity of the appli-
cation request with special consideration for individual
home owners and small businesses in need of a Planning
Commission decision in order that they may continue to
use or logically expand their present use.
2. Attempt to recover as much of the cost of considering
zoning and subdivision applications as possible.
3. Do not create too great a disparity between Tigard's fee
schedules and those of adjacent cities.
EXISTING FEE SCHEDULE
Estimated 175-'76 Revenue
Projected No. fee Revenue
of cases for
calendar year
1975
I. Zone Change 3
150 450
2. Conditional Use 25
100 2500
3. Conditional Use Renewal 1
25 25 _
4. Planned Development 6
250 1500
5. Home Occupation 1
25 25
6. Non-Conforming Use 2
100 200
7. Variance 11
50 550
8. Subdivisions
a) Minor land partitioning 11 50
550
b) Major land partitioning 0 50
C) Preliminary plats 6
50 plus 300
$100 for ea.
lot over 50
d)
lots
Variance
r 3 75 225
t TOTAL , $6,325.
-3-
PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE
Projected No. Proposed Revenue
of cases for fee
calendar year
1975
Zone Change
1. Residential
A. 1 acre or less 125
B. 1 acre plus 1 200 200
2. Apartment 1 300 300
3. Commercial & Industrial
A. Under 1 acre 300
B. 1-10 acres 1 400 400
C. 10 acres plus 700
4. Planned Developments 6 125 750
(including Chan a of
underlying zone Pre. Review
General Plan & Program
Review
A. 1 acre or less 175
B. 1-4 acres 3 275 825
C. 4 acres plus 3 575 1725
5. Conditional Use
A. Change in use of an 18 125 2250
existing structure
with total of site
utilized for use less
than 30,000 sq. ft.
B. Change in use of an 6 175 1050
existing structure
with total of site
utilized more than
30,000 sq. ft.
C. Outside storage 1 100 100
D. Request involving 7 275 1925
development of a
vacant parcel of
land
-4-
Projected No. Proposed Revenue
of cases for fee
calendar year
1975
E. Renewal 1 50 50
F. Home Occupation 1 50 50
6. Comprehensive Plan 2 500 1000
Amendment
'et n 5'1 e-
7.
7. Non-Conforming Use 2 150 300
8. Flood Plain
A. Area of flood plain 1 100 100
affected less than
7500 sq. ft.
B. Area of' flood plain 300
affected more than
7500 sq. ft.
9. Variance
A. Single family resi- 3 50 150
dential zone
B. All other zones 8 125 1000
10. Sign Code Appeal 3 25 75
11. Temporary Use
A. by City Administrator 4 50 200
B. By Planning Commission 1 50 50
for less than 6 months
C. By Planning Commission 100
for more than 6 months
12. Interpretation of Use 4 25 100
13. Subdivisions
A. ' Minor land partitioning
1. residential district 5 50 250
2. Apartments, commer- 3 100 300
�" cial & industrial
-5-
B. Major land par- 150
tition
C. Preliminary Plat 4 100 + 825
$5.00/
lot
D. Street Dedication 1 50 50
E. Street Vacation 1 50 100
F. Variance 3 100 300
Design Review Board
Project value rased upon 35 .1 of 1% of 3,500
building permit building
permit value
Total $17,925.
r s.
s
CITY OF TIGARD
9020 S.W. Burnham Street
P.O. Box 23557
POLICE DEPARTMENT Tigard, Oregon 97223
Our department received information this date from a school
bus driver that the below described vehicle, registered to you,
was in violation of state law, O.R.S. 485,020, "Duty to Stop
When Bus Loading or Unloading."
Oregon Lic. #
Location
Approx. Time
We are confident that the alleged violation was not intentional,
as we are all concerned with the safety of our school children
in the district, particularly when they are hurrying to and from
a school bus. With your understanding and observance of the law,
we can make every day a safe day in our school district.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT
fZ�✓G e
R.B. Adams
Chief of Police
NOTE:. .This is a courtesy notice only, and it will not affect
your driving record. Please see,reverse side for the -
definition of O.R.S. 485.020
Two or Three Lanes Two or Mort Lanes Each Direction
IWffi—
I II
tm
fit;;:.• # �#Ir�y.�"
I— WAIT1HERE I WAIT HEi
• I I 1 '
SCHOOL BUSES Drivers must stop for a school bu-,that has stopped to
load or unload students.On a two or three lane highway (see illustration)
moth following and oncoming traffic must stop and remain stopped as long
as red warning lights near the top of the bus are flashing.
On a highway with two or more lanes in each direction (see illustration)
you must stop if you are in the lane immediately behind or to the immediate
lett of the bus.If you are coming in the opposite direction from the bus,you
may proceed with caution.Flashing red lights also are permitted on certain
buses used to transport workers.When in use,other drivers must stop in the .
same manner as required for school buses.
U&G20 !fluty to stop whoa bus loadinx
i or aalsadbl. (1) (a) Except as provided in
ssbseetloa(2)of this section,when a driver <8) Overtaking a bus while proceeding in
of a saotor vehicle aneets or overtakes a bus the same direction as that of the bus.the rear
which is stopped on a public highway or a of the bus,'or any point in the highway ex-
susuidw thereof and on which is operating a tended from the rear of the bus serosa and ,t
17addeg M warning light that is visible to at right angles to the center line of the high-
the drivm.the driver shall stop the vehicle way
babas ssaehlng the point described In para- (2) The requirements of subsection (1)
of this section do not apply to a driver who
graph(e)of this subsection and shall remain meets a bus while proceeding in a direction
t stepped so long,as the flashing red warning opposite to that of the bus cn a highway that
li%t is operating. has two or more lanes for each direction.
;h).The point mentioned in paragraph (g) It shall be unlawful for the driver of
(a)of.thWoubseetion K in the case of: a bus to operate the flashing red warning
(Al:-Usetigg.s"while proceeding in a . ' lights except when the bus is stopping or
direction oppbsite to that of the bus,the front stopped for the purpose of loading or unload-
of the bin,or any point in the highway ex. Ing either school children or any worker as
leaded trona the trait of the bus across and defined in subsection (7) of ORS 495.310.
at MgM&asks to the anter line of the high- 11959 cJ04 i1:1961 c 54 15:7971 G907 to j -
WW-
to
TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT i
REPORT - SCHOOL BUS RED LIGHT STOP VIOLATION
Ore. License -
Make of Vehicle !
Color_
Type of Vehicle— Driver - Male
Female n
Place of Violation
t
Approaching BusI Overtaking Bus
Date—
Bus
ate __J
--- Time
Bus Driver's Name
-- – Bus Number
Reviewed by School District
Phone
t`
ti