City Council Packet - 03/08/1982 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA an agenda item needs to sign their name on
MARCH 8, 1982, 7:30 P.M. the appropriate sign-up sheet(s) . If no
FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL sheet is provided, ask to be recognized by �-
i
LECTURE ROOM the Chair.
m
1. REGULAR MEETING: N
1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call to Audience, Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items Under Open Agenda
2. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one
motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed for
discussion and separate action. Motion to:
2.1 Approve the Minutes: February 22 , 1982 & March 1, 1982.
2.2 Approve the Expenditures and Investments: $ 175,887.27
2.3 Receive and File Written Communications
• Report to City Council Regarding Tri-Met Transit Station
• Transmittal frons Jo- Bailey Regarding City of Tigard vs. J. A. Paterson, et al
2.4 Call Study Session/Spe .ial Meeting For 3/29/82
2.5 Approve OLCC Applications , Authorize Mayor to Sign and Forward To OLCC,
• Willowbrook Restaurant, 11525 SW Durham Road, Tigard, Or, Restaurant Application
• Webfoot Deli & Wine Co. , 13815 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, Or, Retail Malt
Beverage & Package Store Application
• The Pizza Merchant, 13066 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, Or , Retail Malt Beverage App.
• NEW OUTLET 7-Eleven Food Store , NW corner of Hall & Pacific Hwy, Tigard, Or,
Package Sales Application
2.6 Letter From Washington County Commissioners Regarding: Ballot Measure #13
Resolution No. 82- 19 A RESOLUTION DECLARING SUPPORT OF BALLOT MEASURE #13
3. SENIOR CENTER RECOGNITION - Keys to the City
• Presentation by Council
4 . GENERAL TELEPHONE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE No. 82-
4 Recommendation of Director of Public Works
5. TIGARD COMMUNITY YOUTH SERVICES FUNDING REQUEST - $ 76,311
• Presentation by TCYS
• Resolution No. 82- Calling For Election 5-18-82
6. LOAVES & FISHES FUNDING REQUEST - $12,500
• Presentation by Loaves & Fishes
o Resolution No. 82- Calling For Election 5-18-82
8:00 P.M. PUBLIC NOTICE MEETING
7. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL ASSESSMENTS
7.1 Hillview LID
7.2 Knoll Drive LID
8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING
8. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - ZOA 1-82 - City of Tigard
A request by the City of Tigard for an amendment to Section 18.72 of the Tigard
Municipal Code to allow for general and dimensional criteria for reviewing and
approving conditional use requests.
• Public Hearing Continued From 2-22-82 Meeting
• Motion To Discontinue Consideration At This Time
PUBLIC HEARING CONCLUDED
9. SITE DESIGN REVIEW SDR 26-81 - St. Anthony's Kelly Center - NPO #2
An appeal by St. Anthony's of the Planning Director's decision of approval with
conditions for construction of St. Anthony's Kelly Center located at 9905 SW
McKenzie (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2BD, Tax Lot 200) . The Planning Commission
has forwarded this action to the City Council, at Council's request, for
further consideration and action. The matter is referred to Council under
Section 18.84.250 (b) (3) . No new evidence or arguments will be allowed;
however, parties are invited to submit written evidence or arguments pursuant
to Section 18.84.290; however, during Council consideration, Council may pose
questions to staff and parties on policy issues.
10. 72ND AVENUE LID - REPORT
10.1 Apparent Low Bid
10.2 Financing and Timing
11. CHARTER REVIEW
11.1 Discussion & Resolution No. 82-
11.2 Election Filing Dates Information
12. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda items identified to the Chair under item
1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are encouraged to contact the City
Administrator prior to the meeting.
13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Per ORS 192.660 (2) (a) City Council will consider issues relating
to labor negotiations and Per ORS 192.660 (2) (d) Council will consider issues
relating to possible litigation.
14 . ADJOURNMENT
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL AGENDA - MARCH 8, 1982
i
T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 8 , 1982 - 7:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors Tom Brian, John Cook,
Kenneth Scheckla, Nancie Stimler; Chief of Police, Robert Adams;
Director of Public Works/Planning Director, Frank Currie; Finance
Director/City Recorder, Doris Hartig; City Administrator, Bob
Jean; Legal Counsel, Ed Sullivan; Office Manager, Loreen Wilson.
2. CALL TO AUDIENCE, STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS UNDER OPEN AGENDA.
(a) City Administrator requested the following items be considered under open
agenda.
.1 Communication from Planning Commission Chairman
.2 Civic Center Meeting date
.3 County correspondence re: annexations
.4 LOC newsletter
3. APPROVE THE MINUTES: February 22 and March 1, 1982.
(a) Councilor Cook requested that page 4 of the February 22, 1982, minutes be
corrected in Section 16 ( f) to show that the vote was approved by a 2-1
majority vote of Council with Councilor Cook voting nay.
(b) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve as
amended.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
4. APPROVE THE EXPENDITURES AND INVESTMENTS: $ 175,887.27
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
5. RECEIVE AND FILE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
o Report to City Council regarding Tri-Met Transit Station
o Transmittal from Joe Bailey regarding City of Tigard vs. J.A. Paterson, et al
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to receive and
file.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
6. CALL STUDY SESSION/SPECIAL MEETING FOR MARCH 29, 1982.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to call meeting.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
7. APPROVE OLCC APPLICATIONS & AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN AND FORWARD TO OLCC:
o Willowbrook Restaurant, 11525 S.W. Durham Road, Tigard, Ore. , Restaurant
Application
o Webfoot Deli & Wine Company, 13815 S.W. Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, Ore. , Retail
Malt Beverage and Package Store Application
o The Pizza Merchant, 13066 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard, Ore. , Retail Malt
Beverage Application
o NEW OUTLET 7-Eleven Food Store, NW corner of Hall & Pacific Hwy. , Tigard,
Oregon, Package Sales Application
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve and
authorize Mayor's signature.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
8. RESOLUTION No. 82-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING BALLOT
MEASURE #3 - CORRECTIONS FUNDING.
(a) Councilor Stimler requested that the typographical error in the title of
the resolution be amended by changing Ballot Measure # 13 to ;i3.
(b) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve as
amended.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
9. SENIOR CENTER RECOGNITION - Keys to the City
(a) Mayor Bishop and the Council expressed their appreciation to the followin,
volunteers for their involvement with the Tigard Senior Center and the lcn6
hours of work involved with fund raising to support the Center.
Al Boenninghausen Jessalee Mallalieu
*Tom Brian *Dick Mastbrook
Richard M. Brown "red Menzel
Lloyd Carroll *Clayton Nyberg
*C. Vern Christensen *Mary Robben
Robert Deuth *Cliff Speaker
*Art Hill *Nancie Stimler
Gar Hubble *Carol Weaver
Jim Kincaid Ida Wilks
*Irving Larson *Lynn Wortendyke
Carol Young
Graham Young (awarded posthumously
*indicates those receiving their keys to the City at the meeting.
10. ORDINANCE No. 82-12 AN ORDINANCE RENEWING THE FRANCHISE OF GENERAL TELEPHONE
COMPANY OF THE NORTHWEST, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, ITS
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS THE RIGHT TO PLACE, ERECT AND MAIN-
TAIN POLES, WIRES AND OTHER APPLIANCES AND CONDUCTORS AND
TO LAY UNDERGROUND WIRES FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY
FOR C010UNICATION PURPOSES IN, UPON, UNDER AND OVER THE
STREETS, ALLEYS, AVENUES, THOROUGHFARES AND PUBLIC HIGHWAYS
OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, AND TO CONDUCT A GENERAL
COMMUNICATION BUSINESS WITHIN THE CITY OF TIGARD; AUTHORIZ-
ING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO SUCH AGREEMENT; AND DECLARING
AN EMERGENCY.
(a) Director of Public Works reported that staff has approved the franchise
agreement and recommended approval.
PAGE 2 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8, 1982
(b) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
11. TIGARD COMMUNITY YOUTH SERVICES FUNDING REQUEST - $76,311
(a) Bill Knudsen, Director of TCYS, presented a fact sheet and budget request
for TCYS and expressed a desire to have adequate feed back for the Council
to develop accountability for the program. He formally submitted a request
for funding in the amount of $76,311 for the fiscal year 1982-83.
(b) Mayor Bishop requested the City Administrator report the status of TCYS
to Council before they come back for next year's annual report.
(c) RESOLUTION NO. 82-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CALLING FOR
A SPECIAL ELECTION TO SUBMIT TO THE REGISTERED,
QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY A TAX LEVY FOR TIGARD
COMMUNITY YOUTH SERVICES, INC.
(d) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
12. LOAVES AND FISHES FUNDING REQUEST - $12,500.
(a) Mr. C. Vern Christensen represented Loaves and Fishes and stated the request
for $12,500 was only $2,500 over last year's request. He stated that costs
were increasing due to the new center.
(b) City Administrator stated that both TCYS and Loaves and Fishes will be look-
ing for other sources of funding in the next few years since federal cut-
backs of funding will affect their revenue sources.
(c) RESOLUTION No. 82-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CALLING FOR
A SPECIAL ELECTION TO SUBMIT TO THE REGISTERED
QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY A TAX LEVY TO FINANCE
THE TIGARD LOAVES AND FISHES SENIOR CENTER.
(d) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council_
13. HILLVIEW LID - Consideration of Final Assessments.
(a) Director of Public Works advised Council of the method of distribution
of the assessment in the Hillview LID which comprised four lots.
(b) Mr. Tom Jurks, 10330 S.W. Hillview Street, questioned how the property
owners would be paying the assessments.
(c) Director of Public Works noted that this would be a ten year period of semi-
annual payments. After further discussion regarding the amount of time
available for payments, staff advised Council that bonds were not selling
at the present time for over ten years.
PAGE 3 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8 , 1982
(d) Mr. Jurks and Mrs. Lewis, property owner of tax lot 2900, questioned the
way to defer payments. She noted that her husband had passed away and
that she is not 65. Staff noted that they would check into this issue and
report back.
(e) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve the
spread of the assessment as presented by staff for a 10 year period.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
( f) Councilor Brian requested that Council discuss the issue of 10 vs. 20
year payments on LIDS.
14. KNOLL DRIVE LID - Consideration of Final Assessments
(a) Director of Public Works reported that Knoll Drive LID consists of eight
lots and total assessments of $26,385.07. The engineer's estimate had
been higher, but due to favorable bidding the job was less than originally
projected.
(b) Anne Craig, 12360 S.W. Knoll Drive, questioned the 10 vs. 20 year financing
period. She showed Council a letter received at the first of the LID pro-
cess which stated that they would receive bancroft funding over a 20 year
period.
(c) City Administrator reported that at this time it is difficult to sell bonds
for 20 years at this low dollar amount. He suggested that the City Attorney
might want to review the record.
(d) After further discussion regarding bond and warrant funding, Councilor
Stimler, moved to table the issue two weeks until the March 22, 1982,
meeting; motion seconded by Councilor Cook.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING
15 . ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS - ZOA 1-82 - City of Tigard
A request by the City of Tigard for an amendment to Section 18.72 of the Tigard
Municipal Code to allow for general and dimensional criteria for reviewing and
approving conditional use requests.
(a) Public Hearing continued from February 22, 1982, meeting.
(b) Staff reported that the Planning Commission has not finished deliberation
on this issue and requested Council not consider this any further at this
time.
(c) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Brian to discontinue
public hearing at this time.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
PAGE. 4 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8, 1982
16. SITE DESIGN REVIEW SDR 26-81 - St. Anthony's Kelly Center - NPO #2
An appeal by St. Anthony's of the Planning Director's decision of approval with
conditions for construction of St. Anthony's Kelly Center located at 9905 S.W.
McKenzie (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2BD, Tax Lot 200) . The Planning Commission has
forwarded this action to the City Council, at Council's request, for further
consideration and action. The matter is referred to Council under section
18.84.250 (b)\'3). No new evidence or arguments will be allowed; however, parties
are invited to submit written evidence or arguments pursuant to Section 18.84.290;
however, during Council consideration, Council may pose questions to staff and
parties on policy issues.
(a) Legal Counsel advised Council that this hearing was being held under the
new administrative procedures. He noted that Council could question staff
or the applicant during the proceedings, however, these must deal with
policy issues only.
(b) Mayor Bishop noted a change in condition #2 per the Planning Commission
minutes to include the non-remonstrance agreement.
(c) Councilor Scheckla expressed concern that the Planning Commission action
on 99W ingress/egress seemed to be inconsistent and sited examples of
actions from the Planning Commission meeting of March 2, 1982.
(d) Director of Public Works noted that 99W ingress/egress could be very
hazardous during the times school is in session at St. Anthony's.
(e) Discussion followed regarding making a right-turn only egress from the
property onto 99W or closing it off altogether.
(f) City Administrator noted that there seemed to be two policy issues involved
here:
(1) 1/2 street improvements - policy is to require improvement or a com-
mittment to an LID, or tied to phase two of the construction.
(2) policy to encourage use of signalized or controlled intersections and
discourage the use of 99W between signals or at uncontrolled intersec-
tions or sites.
(g) Councilor Stimler expressed concern with 99W access being at a school
play yard.
(h) Mr. Henninger, representative for St. Anthony's noted that they would pre-
fer not to close the access to 99W but would understand if Council felt
that this would be required to meet city policy.
(i) Councilor Cook questioned if the fire district needed the access for safety
reasons. Director of Public works noted that the fire district did not
object to the closure of the access to 99W.
(j) Councilor Cook expressed concern that the LID or one-half street improve-
ments be tied to phase II of the plan and a time frame of no longer than
four or five years.
(k) After further discussion regarding LID's, time frame for conditions to
be met, ingress/egress issues, and internal traffic patterns on the site;
PAGE 5 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8, 1982
Legal Counsel suggested the following findings based on Council 's dis—
cussion.
A new condition No. 10 be added to read as follows:
10. Internal Circulation: The applicants shall work with the City of
Tigard to establish an internal circulation plan to be submitted as a
design review application and acted upon by the Director no later than
December 1, 1982. If the access from the site to Hwy. 99W be closed under
condition 1(d) , above, additional access onto either S.W. Johnson or S.W.
McKenzie shall be provided as part of the site design review application
submitted to the director and shall specifically address issues of access—
ibility, safety, and aesthetics.
c' Corrd.7�r on s
c`' cgs- for Access and Improvements be as follows:
a
1- Access--
a That access to Hwy. 99W from the site be limited to right turns
only, both to and from that highway.
(b) That the Oregon Department of Transportation be requested to
install an island on Hwy. 99W to the same level of improvement
as that at the former Sambo's Restaurant on that highway.
(c) That the access requirements to the site be reviewed at the
earliest of the following periods:
1. The development of Phase II of St. Anthony's;
2. The improvement of S.W. Johnson Street; or
3. The end of five years from the grant of this permit.
(d) That unless an authorized representative of the Oregon Department
of Transportation commits to median island described in b. above
no later than September 1, 1982, the access to Hwy. 99W from the
St. Anthony's Church, school and Kelly Center shall be closed.
Thereafter, all access to such uses shall be from streets and
roads other than Hwy. 99W.
2. Improvements
(a) That the applicants shall petition the City of Tigard to form
a local improvement district for the improvement of S.W.
McKenzie Street from Hwy. 99W to S.W. Grant.
(b) That the applicant sign a nonremonstrance agreement to a local
improvement district on S.W. Grant, from S.W. McKenzie to S.W.
Johnson.
(c) That the applicant sign a nonremonstrance for the formation of
a local improvement district on S.W. Johnson Street from Hwy 99W
to S.W. Grant and that such improvement be initiated by the
applicant either as a part of Phase II of the St. Anthony Kelly
Center project or five years after the date of the approval of
of this permit, whichever is
PAGE 6 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8, 1982
(1) Legal Counsel suggested that Council set this issue over to
March 22, 1982, to allow him time to draft the final order with
the above noted conditions if they meet with Council's approval.
(m) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to set
issue over until March 22, 1982, for final order adoption.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
RECESS: 10:08 P.M.
RECONVENE: 10:22 P.M.
17. 72ND AVENUE LID REPORT
(a) City Administrator reported that this would just be an up-date for
Council.
(b) Director of Public Works distributed a copy of the bids received for
the improvements and reported that staff and the engineer are inves-
tigating the bid results and report back at a later date.
(c) City Administrator reported that the City's process in the LID hear-
ings has been correct, however, bond counsel has requested that a new
resolution be adopted to schedule a public hearing for March 29, 1982,
which will establish an estimated cost of the improvements.
(d) RESOLUTION No. 82-22 DECLARING AN INTENTION TO CONSTRUCT CERTAIN STREET
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN AN AREA DETERMINED TO BE A
STREET IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO BE KNOWN
AS SOUTHWEST 72ND AVENUE AREA LID No. 21 ; DESCRIB-
ING THE PROBABLE TOTAL ASSESSABLE COST THEREOF;
DEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT TO BE
BENEFITED AND ASSESSED; APPROVING AND ADOPTING
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE WORK AND
ESTIMATES OF THE CITY'S ENGINEER, AND SETTING
PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING THE GIVING OF NOTICE
THEREOF.
(e) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
18. CHARTER REVIEW
(a) Legal Counsel discussed the charter view resolution with Council and
noted there were two possible alternatives for language changes request-
ed by various Council members. These were for measure No. 54 & 59
(see attached language for measures and alternatives which were pre-
sented)
PAGE 7 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8, 1982
(b) After lengthy discussion, consensus of Council was that the original
proposals be placed on the ballot in May except for the inclusion of
alternate measure #59.
(c) RESOLUTION No. 82-23 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND REFERRING CERTAIN
AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER OF TIGARD TO THE
QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY OF TIGARD FOR
THEIR APPROVAL OR REJECTION AT A SPECIAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD AT THE SAME TIME AND PLACES AS THE MAY
18, 1982, STATEWIDE PRIMARY ELECTION; CALLING THAT
ELECTION; AND DIRECTING THE CITY RECOkDF.R TO DO
ALL ACTS NECESSARY AND CONVENIENT TO CARRY OUT
SUCH ELECTION.
(d) Motion by Councilor Cook to approve Resolution No. 82-23 and include
alternate Measure 459, add "Exhibit A" to the top of that exhibit,
and on Exhibit "D" add "& C" to be set out in the text. Motion
seconded by Councilor Stimler.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
19. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda items identified to the Chair under
item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are encouraged to con-
tact the City Administrator prior to the meeting.
18.1 Communication from Planning Commission Chairman
(a) City Administrator drew Council's attention to a letter from Chairman
Tepedino regarding the Skourtes' variance and noted that it requested
clarification on a policy issue.
18.2 Civic Center meeting date
(a) City Administrator noted that the civic center committee will meet at
Fowler Junior High School on March 9, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. and are
scheduled to select an option for the improvement proposal.
18.3 County Correspondence re: Annexations
(a) City Administrator stated that the County has sent a letter to the
Boundary Review Commission asking for the Bechtold Annexation to be
delayed. City Administrator suggested that since this issue .has been
considered for over one year and is within the City's active compre-
hensive plan area, that the City should not request removal of this
item from the Boundary Review Commission's agenda.
(b) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to send a
letter to the Boundary Review Commission noting that the City would
not recommend tabling the issue at this time.
Approved by 4-1 majority vote of Council, Councilor Scheckla voting nay.
PAGE 8 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; March 8, 1982
i
18.4 League of Oregon Cities Newsletter
(a) City Administrator drew Council 's attention to some articles in the
newsletter.
18.5 Councilor Cook asked if the 911 monies had been applied for at the
state level.
Chief Adams stated that the funds were applied for by staff on
February 17, 1982.
18.6 Councilor Cook expressed concerns regarding a recent hearing before
Planning Commission regarding Settlemire conditional use and re-
quested item be reviewed by Council.
(a) RESOLUTION No. 82-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CALL-
ING FOR REVIEW ON ITS OWN MOTION OF CONDITIONAL
USE CU 4-82, TIM SETTLEMIRE.
(b) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve
Resolution No. 82-24 and request issue be heard for public safety
issues at the March 22, 1982, meeting.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
20. ADJOURNMENT OF REGULAR MEETING - 11:25 P.M.
Executive Session 11.:26 P.M.
Council went into executive session under provisions of ORS 192.660(2)(a)
to discuss issues relating to labor negotiations and ORS 192.660(2)(d)
regarding possible litigation.
Meeting adjourned 11:50 P.M.
City Recorder - City of!i ' and
V
ATTEST:
President of council - Gity if Tigard
PAGE 9 - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, March 8, 1982
Date March 8, 1982
r
I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on
the following item: (Please print your name)
Item Description: 7.1 HILLVIEW LID
i'roponent (for) Opponent (against)
Jame, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
�y Yo Sw !ti C ,x-
Da to March 8, 1982
I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on
the following item: (P1.-Zse print your name)
Item Description: 7.2 KAJLL DRIVE LID
Proponent (for) Opponent (against)
Same, Address and Affiliation Dame, Address and Affiliation
i
t
i
Date March 8, 1982
I wish to testify before the Tigard City
Council on the following item:
(Please print your name)
1 .3 Call to Audience Staff and "unr;7 for Non- genda 7"tc-cmc 11n.,pr Qppn_Agnnda_
:7arie, Address & Affiliation Item Description
C
}
t
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER OF
TIGARD, OREGON
REFERRED TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF TIGARD
BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO BE VOTED UPON
AT THE MAY 18, 1982 PRIMARY ELECTION
NOTE - Material in brackets [ ] would be deleted from the Tigard
City Charter if the measure were approved and material
underlined would be added if such measure were approved.
Measure No. 52.
Paragraph 1 of Section 7 of the Tigard City Charter is
amended to read:
Section 7. MAYOR AND COUNCIL. The elective officers of
the City shall be a mayor and [four] six [councilmen] councilors
who together shall constitute the City Council . The mayor shall
be elected and hold office for a period of two years_ There shall
be elected in conjunction with the statewide general election in
November, 1972, a candidate to the office of mayor whose terms
shall begin on January 1, 1973.
.r.
• A
Section 8 of the Tigard City Charter is amended to read :
Section 8. [COUNCILMEN) . COUNCILORS. The [four] six council
positions are hereby designated as Positions Nos . 1, 2, 3, [and]
4 , 5 and 6 . The [councilmen] councilors shall be elected-and hold
office for a period of four years; provided, however, that the
officers holding office at the time of adoption of this amendment
shall hold their offices for the balance of the terms for which
they were elected or appointed and until their successors are
elected and qualified.
At each biennial general state election after this amend-
ment takes effect beginning in [1972] 1982, [two] three
[councilmen] councilors shall be elected, each for a term of four
(4) years. Candidates to fill Positions 1 [and] , 2 and 5 shall
be submitter' to the voters at the general election= in [1972] 1984 ,
and candidates for council Positions 3 [and] , 4 and 6 shall be
subject to election in [1974] 1982 . The candidate receiving the
highest number of votes for each of the numbered council positions
shall be deemed elected for a four-year term. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, council position 5 shall be elected for a two-year
term in 1982 only.
Measure No. 53.
Paragraph 3 of Section 7 of the§ Tigard City Charter is
amended to read:
In the event the office of mayor or [councilman]
councilor becomes vacant[180 days or more, before the normal
expiration of its term a special election shall be
held to fill the office for the unexpired term. Such
an election shall be held [within 45 days of the
occurrence of the vacancy. All nominating papers
comprising a petition shall be assembled and filed
with the recorder as one instrument not later than
20 days before the special election.] in accordance
with the election laws of the State of Oregon and
City ordinances not inconsistent with such election
laws. [If, however, a statewide primary or general
election falls within the 180-day period following
the occurrence of the vacancy, then no special
election shall be held. ]
Measure No. 54 .
Section 18 of the Tigard City Charter is amended to read :
Section 18. PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL. At [its first
meeting after this charter takes effect and thereafter at]
its first meeting of each odd-numbered year, the council
2
` T
by ballot shall choose a president from its membership.
In the mayor' s absence from a council meeting the president
shall 2erform the duties of the office of mayor and preside
over it. Whenever the mayor is physically or mentally
unable to perform the functions of [his] office, the
president shall act as the mayor pro tem.
Measure No. 55.
Section 21 of the Tigard City Charter is amended to read :
Section 21. MUNICIPAL JUDGE. The municipal judge
shall be the judicial officer of the City. [He] The judge
shall hold within the City a court known as the Municipal
Court for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon.
The court shall be open for the transaction of judicial
business at times specified by the [council] municipal
judge. All areas within the City shall be within the
territorial jurisdiction of the court. The municipal
judge shall exercise original and exclusive jurisdiction
of all crimes and offenses defined and made punishable by
ordinances of the City and of all actions brought to
recover or enforce forfeitures or penalties defined or
authorized by ordinances of the City or as otherwise
provided by state law. [He] The judge shall have authority
to issue process for the arrest of any person accused of an
offense against the ordinances of the City, to commit any
such person to jail or admit him to bail pending trial , to
issue subpoenas , to compel witnesses to appear and testify
in court on the trial of any cause before him, to compel
obedience to such subpoenas, to issue and process documents
necessary to carry into effect the judgments of the court,
and to punish witnesses and others for contempt of the court.
When not governed by ordinances or this charter, all pro-
ceedings in the municipal court for the violation of a city
ordinance shall be governed by the applicable general laws
of the state governing justices of the peace and justice
courts . Defendants in the municipal court charged with
violation of city ordinances shall be entitled to a trial
by jury as provided by state statutes .
Measure No. 56.
Section 31 of the Tigard City Charter is amended to read :
Section 31 . NOMINATIONS. A qualified elector within
the meaning of the State Constitution, who will have resided
continuously for a period of twelve 1%12) months or more
i
3
� a
immediately preceding the election in any area which is with-
in the corporate boundaries of the City as the same shall
exist as of a date one hundred twenty (120) calendar days
immediately prior to the date of the election (inclusive of
all territory previously effectively annexed to the City) ,,
may be nominated for an elective City position. [Nomination
shall be by petition specifying the position sought in a form
prescribed by the council. Such petition shall be signed by
not fewer than 25 electors. No elector shall sign more than
one petition for each vacant position. if he does so, his
signatures shall be invalid. The signatures to a nomination
petition need not all be appended to one paper, but to each
separate paper of the petition shall be attached an affidavit
of the circulator thereof, indicating the number of signers of
the paper and stating that each signature appended thereto was
made in his presence and is the genuine signature of the per-
son whose name it purports to be. with each signature shall
be stated the signer's place of residence, identified by its
street and number or other sufficient description.
All nomination papers comprising a petition shall be
assembled and filed with the recorder as one instrument not
earlier than 120 nor later than 90 days before the election.
The recorder shall make a record of the exact time at which
each petition is filed and shall take and preserve the name
and address of the person by whom it is filed. If the peti-
tion is not signed by the required number of qualified elec-
tors, the recorder shall notify the candidate and the person
who filed' the petition within five days after the filing.
If the petition is insufficient in any other particular, the
recorder shall return it immediately to the person who filed
it, certifying in writing wherein the petition is insuffi-
cient. Such deficient petition may be amended and filed
again as a new petition, or a substitute petition for the
same candidate may be filed, within the regular time for
filing nomination petitions. The recorder shall notify an
eligible person of his nomination, and such person shall
file with the recorder his written acceptance of nomination,
in such form as the council may require, within five days
of notification of nomination_ Upon receipt of such
acceptance of nomination, the recorder shall cause the
nominee's name to be printed on the ballots. The petition
of nomination for a successful candidate at an election
shall be preserved in the office of the recorder until the
term of office for which the candidate is elected expires. )
The procedures for nomination and election for elective
City positions shall be governed by the election laws of the
State of Oregon, or by City ordinances if such ordinances
4
4.
are not inconsistent with state law.
Measure No. 57.
Section 33 of the Tigard City Charter is hereby repealed.
Measure No. 58.
Section 42 of the Tigard City Charter is hereby repealed.
i
5
shall choose a president from its membership. In the mayor' s
absence from a Council meeting, the president shall perform the
duties of the office of mayor and preside over it. Whenever
the mayor is physically absent from the city or otherwise
unable to perform the functions of [his] office, the president
shall act as the mayor pro tem.
Measure No. 55
Section 21 of the Tigard City Charter is amended to read:
Section 21 . MUNICIPAL JUDGE. The municipal judge shall
be the judicial officer of the City. [He] The judge shall hold
within the City a court known as the Municipal Court for the
City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. The court shall be
open for the transaction of judicial business at times
specified by the [council] municipal judge. All areas within
the City shall be within the territorial jurisdiction of the
court. The municipal judge shall exercise original and
exclusive jurisdiction of all crimes and offenses defined and
made punishable by ordinances of the City and of all actions
brought to recover or enforce forfeitures or penalties
defined or authorized by ordinances of the City or as otherwise
provided by state law. [He] The judge shall have authority
to issue process for the arrest of any person accused of an
offense against the ordinances of the City, to commit any such
person to jail or admit him to _bail pending trial, to issue
subpoenas, to compel witnesses to appear and testify in court
on the trial of any cause before him, to compel obedience to
such subpoenas, to issue and process documents necessary to
carry into effect the judgments of the court, and to punish
witnesses and others for contempt of the court. When not -
governed by ordinances or this charter, all proceedings in the
municipal court for the violation of a city ordinance shall be
governed by the applicable general laws of the state governing
justices of the peace and justice courts. Defendants in the
municipal court charged with violation of city ordinances
shall be entitled to a trial by jury as provided by state
statutes.
Measure No. 56
Section 31 of the Tigard City Charter is amended to read:
Section 31. NOMINATIONS. A qualified elector within the
meaning of the State Constitution, who will have resided
continuously for a period of twelve (12) months or more
ALTERNATE 3
are not inconsistent with state law.
Measure No. 57.
Section 33 of the Tigard City Charter is hereby repealed.
Measure No. 58.
Section 42 of the Tigard City Charter is hereby repealed.
Measure No. 59.
Section 13 or the Tigard City Charter is amended to read:
Section 13. MEETINGS. The Council shall hold a regular
meeting at least once each month in the City at a time and at
a place which it designates. It shall adopt rules for
government of its members and proceedings. The mayor upon his
own motion may, or at the request of three members of the
council shall, by giving notice thereof to all members of the
council then in the City, call a special meeting the the council
not earlier than three (3) nor later than seventy-two (72) hours
after the notice is given. In the event of the physical absence_
of the mayor from the City, the council president shall_ be
empowered to call special council meetings in the same manner as
the mayor may call such meetings.
Special meetings of the council may also be held at anytime
by the common consent of all members of the council or by the
delivery of a request for a s ep cial meeting, signed by a
majority of council members , and delivered to the City Recorder
and to remaining council members and the mayor, if they are then
in the City. In either case, such special meeting shall not be
held earlier than three (3) nor more than seventy-two (72) hours
after the notice is given.
r
L
,ALTERNATE 5
EXHIBIT 111311
i
PRECINT NO_ POLLING PLACE
30 Fowler Junior High School - 10865 S.W. Walnut
31 Charles F. Tigard Grade School - 12985 S.W. Grant
32 Charles F. Tigard Grade School - 12985 S.W. Grant
33 Fowler Junior High School - 10865 S.W. Walnut
34 Twality Junior High School - 14650 S.W. 97th
35 Phil Lewis Grade School - 12615 S.W. 72nd
40 Twallty Junior High School 14650 S.W. 97th
41 Summerfield Club House - East Entrance
10650 S.W. Summerfield Drive
46 clary Woodward Elem. - 12325 S.W. Katherine
{
EXHIBIT "C"
BALLOT MEASURES
Measure No. 52.
COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP INCREASE
SHALL SECTIONS 7 AND 8 OF THE CITY CHARTER REGARDING THE
COUNCIL BE AMENDED?
PURPOSE
This measure will raise the number of Council members from four
to six: number five will be elected for a two-year term in 1982,
and every four years after that; number six will be elected in 1982
for a four-year term, and every four years after that.
Mark a cross (x) or check (a ) inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
Measure No. 53.
COUNCIL VACANCIES
SHALL THE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ALLOW COUNCIL VACANCIES TO BE
FILLED BY STATE LAW AND CITY ORDINANCE?
PURPOSE
Charter Section 7 now states that Council vacancies are filled by
special election held within 45 days, and it sets forth rules
for nominations. It also states that no vacancy may be filled if
it happens within 180 days or less of a scheduled election. This
measure would make this process subject to state law or, if
there is no state law, to City ordinance.
EXHIBIT "C" - 1
6
' Mark a cross (x) or check (f ) inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
Measure No. 54.
ROLE OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT
SHALL SECTION 18 OF THE CITY CHARTER IN WHICH THE COUNCIL
PRESIDENT'S ROLE IS DEFINED BE AMENDED?
PURPOSE
This measure makes clear the Council President 's role when the
mayor is not at Council meetings, and gives the President the
mayor's powers at that time. The measure also makes the President
the mayor pro tem if the mayor is out of the City or can not do
the job of mayor.
Mark a cross (x) or check inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
Measure No. 55.
MUNICIPAL JUDGE'S DUTIES
SHALL SECTION 21 OF THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO REVISE THE
CITY JUDGE'S POWERS?
EXHIBIT "C" - 2
PURPOSE
This measure lets the judge set the times for sessions of the City
Court. This measure also changes references to the Judge to
gender-neutral terms and makes the Powers of the court subject
to state law.
Mark a cross (x) or check ( ) inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
Measure No. 56.
ELECTION PROCESS FOR CITY OFFICE
SHALL SECTION 31 OF THE CITY CHARTER IN WHICH REGULAR COUNCIL
ELECTION RULES ARE SET FORTH BE AMENDED?
PURPOSE
This measure would put the regular Council election process under
the control of state law and let the City make laws to govern such
elections if there are no state laws.
Mark a cross (x) or check ( ) inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
Measure No. 57
SPECIAL ELECTIONS
SHALL SECTION 33 OF THE CITY CHARTER BE REPEALED?
EXHIBIT "C" - 3
PURPOSE
Charter sections 7 and 33 both set forth rules for filling Council
vacancies. This measure repeals the old way, which is not now
needed, in that the voters set up a new way six years ago.
Mark a cross (x) or check (V/) inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
Measure No. 58.
TORT CLAIMS
SHALL SECTION 42 OF THE CITY CHARTER IN WHICH TORT CLAIMS ARE
LIMITED BE REPEALED?
PURPOSE
Section 42 of the charter is invalid under state law; hence, the
Council wants to repeal this section.
Mark a cross (x) or check ( ) inside the voting square to
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
r
EXHIBIT "Cn _ 4
t Measure No. 59 . (Alternate)
ADDS NEW WAYS TO CALL SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETINGS
SHALL SECTION 13 OF THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ADD NEW
WAYS TO CALL SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETINGS?
EXPLANATION
This measure would add to the ways a special Council meeting may be
called. Such meeting could be called if the mayor is out of the
City by: (1) action of the President of the Council; or (2) request
of a majority of Council members if they give notice to the other
members.
Mark a cross (x) or c ( ) inside the voting square to
heck
indicate your choice.
YES ( ) I vote in favor of the proposed Charter amendment.
NO ( ) I vote against the proposed Charter amendment.
EXHIBIT "C" -- 5
EXHIBIT "D"
PUBLIC NOTICE OF MEASURE ELECTION
CITY OF TIGARD
NOTICE OF SPECIAL ELECTION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER
OF THE CITY OF TIGARD TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE LEGAL VOTERS OF THE
CITY OF TIGARD AT A SPECIAL ELECTION ON MAY 18 , 1982.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to Resolution No. 82- ,
adopted by the City Council of Tigard on March 8 , 1982, at a
special election of May 18 , 1982, between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 8:00 p.m. at the polling places in the City of Tigard, there
will be submitted to the legal voters of the City for their
approval or rejection the following propositions:
[insert Exhibit "A"* d,`C- 3
The polling places in the City for the purpose submitting the
foregoing proposition will be the same as those designated by
the Washington County Director of Records and Elections for the
holding of the Primary Election that date.
The election will be conducted in all respects in accordance
with the election laws of the State of Oregon.
The full text of the proposed amendments to the Charter of the
City of Tigard and of Resolution No. 82- may be obtained
from the City Recorder' s office, City Hall, Tigard, Oregon,
and will also be available at each polling place during the
hours for holding the special election.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the City of Tigard this 8th
day of March, 1982.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DORIS HARTIG, City Recorder
PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
PROGRAM BUDGET
FEBRUARY 28, 1982
Community Protection
Police 12,302.70
Public Works 3,793.81
Municipal Court 1,707.23
Planning 836.21
Building 1 ,633.39
Total Community Protection 20,273.34
Home & Community Quality
Public Works 7,922.32
Social Services
Library 1,670.61
Aged Services
Youth Services
Historical
Total Social Services 1 ,670.61
Policy & Administration
Mayor. & Council 680.09
Administration 2,589.11
]Finance 4,374.51
Total Policy & Administration 7,643.71
City Wide Support Functions
Non-departmental 16,052.08
Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc.) 44,578.47
CAPITOL BUDGET
Community Protections
Road Acquisition & Dev.
.arks. Acquisition & Dev.
Storm Drainage
Total Community Protection
Support Services
Building Improvements Sr. Cit. Center 148.00
DEBT SERVICE
General Obligation Bond
Bancroft Bond & LID Expenses 2,760.29
UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY
Contract 74,838.45
TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 175,887.27
March 3, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Director
On March 2, 1982, Tri-Met made a presentation to the Planning Commission, re-
questing a Conditional Use permit to locate a timed-transfer center on SW
Commercial Street. The Planning Commission unanimously approved Tri-Met's
request. Attached are the staff's report and Tri-Met's report to the Commission
for your review.
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA 5.4
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
March 2, 1981 - 7:30 p.m.
Fowler Junior High
10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard
February 19, 1982
No submission of additional material by applicant shall be made at this
Public Hearing unless the applciant is requested to do so. Should this
occur, unrequested, the item will be tabled until the following hearing.
DOCKET: Conditional Use, CU 6-82 (Tri-Met) NPO 461
APPLICANT: Tri-Met OWNER: Dick Kadel
4012 SE 17th Avenue 8960 SW Commercial
Portland, Oregon 97202 Tigard, Oregon 97223
APPLICATION DATE: February 16, 1982
SITE LOCATION: 8960 SW Commercial (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 2AA,
lot' 4800) .
REQUEST: For a Conditional Use to locate a Tri-Met bus time-transfer
center in a C-3 General Commercial Zone.
PREVIOUS ACTION: None
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The site is zoned C-3 and is designated General Commercial on the NPO 461
Plan Map and the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan.
2. The City of Tigard Municipal Code allows governmental land uses as a _
Conditional Use in a 'C-3 General Commercial Zone. Tri-Met is funded primarily
with public money and was established to provide a public mass transit system
to serve the residents of the Portland Metro area. (Reference Code Section
18.28.020(16) )
3. Tri-Met is proposing to purchase the properties presently occupied by
Tigard Auto Body and the Greyhound Bus Depot. The owner of both parcels,
Richard Kadel, has agreed to sell the property to Tri-Met. Tigard Auto Body
is a nonconforming use in the C-3 General Commercial Zone. Mr. Kadel is in-
terested in relocating his business on property in Tigard appropriately zoned
to accommodate an Auto Body Shop.
4. Tri-Met is proposing to remove the existing Tigard Auto Body Building to
accommodate the transfer facility. The existing Greyhound building will re-
main to house restroom facilities and concessions.
t 5. The timed- transfer concept is designed to allow passengers to transfer
at the transit center without long delays. A maximum of 10 buses will meet
at the transit center every twenty to thirty minutes. This allows riders to
transfer from one line to another with a maximum wait of five minutes. The
service to and from Tigard will improve dramatically with this system. New
routes are planned to allow riders to go directly to Tualatin, Beaverton,
STAFF REPORT
CU 6-82
Page 2
Sherwood and Lake Oswego avoiding the unnecessary trip into Portland to
make transfers.
6. The proposed transit center will be located off-street. The buses will
park and load on the site, eliminating bus congestion on SW Commercial Street.
Under the timed-transfer system, buses arrive simultaneously which eliminates
a constant circulation of buses through the downtown area. There are adequate
sidewalks and crosswalks proposed on the site to insure the safety of passengers
transferring from one bus to another.
7. The proximity of this site to the railroad tracks would allow this facility
to serve as a transfer point for a lightrail system in the future.
8. Tri-Met made a presentation to NPO #1 on February 3, 1982. NPO #1 is in
support of the concept and the location of the timed-transfer ce,,ter. The
NPO X61 Report is attached.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The site. is zoned C-3 General Commercial in conformance with the NPO #1
Plan Map and the-City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map.
2. The proposed use seems appropriate in this location because of its
proximity to the downtown and the railroad tracks in the event lightrail ser-
vice becomes available to Tigard in the future. Further, a facility of this
nature should benefit the residents of Tigard by dramatically improving mass
transit service.
3. The traffic impacts on the downtown area should not be significant. No
automobile parking will be allowed on the site so increased automobile traffic
as a result of this facility should be minimal.
4. Staff feels that pedestrian safety has been adequately provided for. Cross-
walks will be needed on SW Commercial to allow for pedestrian access to ad-
jacent businesses.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use CU 6-82 based
on findings as follows:
1. This facility conforms to Goal 12, Transportation, of the LCDC Goals and
Guidelines.
2. After an anlysis of sites available in the Tigard area, Tri-Met, City
staff, and NPO #1 concur that this site is appropriate for the proposed
timed-transfer center.
3. Section 18.28.020(16) of the Tigard Municipal Code allows for governmental
land uses in the C-3 General Commercial Zone.
Staff further recommends the following conditions be placed on the approval
of CU 6-82:
STAFF REPORT
CU 6-82
Page 3
Y" 1. Tri-Met shall apply for site design review for this facility. At site
design review, the following shall be addressed to the satisfaction of City
staff: landscaping, signing, access, pedestrian safety and site improve-
ments.
Prepared by: Approved b � -
pl
E4Z-
Associate
eth A. Ne n Frank A. Currie
Planner Planning Director
Neighborhood Planning Organization fel
Tigard Plannint' Stafl
Tigard Planning Commission
Tigard City Council
Tigard, Oregon
Concerning; Tri-Met proposal to built a transit station in
downtown Tigard at the location of Tigard Auto Body.
On 3 February 1982 Tri-Met presented their transit station
proposal to the NPO. After the presentation the proposal was
discussed and the "Alternatives Analysis Summary-Tigard Transit
Center"document discussed. The NPO has come to the follc%Ving
conclusions and wish to offer them to the city for their con-
sideration when the issue is taken up. .
1) The NPO supports the proposed site on Commercial just
off of Main at the present Tigard Auto Body location.
2) The NPO supports the concept of the transit station and
believes it will offer the citizens of Tigard better local
and cross-town public transportation than is now avail-
able.
3) The NPO suggests the investigation, if possible, of
dual development of the site to enhance its value to the
community.
4) The NPO believes that this project be expedited in
order to assure appropreate federal funding.
Please, enter this policy statement into the public record
in all phases of this project as they occure. Thank you.
S c atary- vice President
o
02
o
cc
1
Lij
LU
cr-
us
Gt° x Q
Ir
o
W
WEu
o =__= _� (f) CC
___— 02
o i==___� .j'' _ CL
CLP.
y n
TIGARD TRANSIT CENTER IMPACT ANALYSIS
This report will briefly evaluate the air quality, parking, traffic, economic and
pedestrian impacts of the- proposed transit center for downtown Tigard.
Air Quality
Duringthe
morning (lam - 9am) and afternoon (4pm - 6pm) rush hours there will
ultimately be ten buses scheduled to meet at the transit center every twenty
minutes. During midday and evening hours the ten buses will meet at the transit
center every thirty minutes. These buses; once at the transit facility,will shut
their engines off for the duration of their layover, usually about five minutes.
The impact on air quality created by the transit center in central Tigard would be
very negligible. In fact, it has the potential of improving air quality by
removing a good number of cars from the streets, by virtue of encouraging those
drivers to use transit. The air quality in downtown Portland, even with over 300
buses passing through it per rush hour, ha, improved due to an overwhelming
reduction in auto travel .
Parking
The impact of the transit center on parking in the vicinity will be negligible if
parking restrictions on nearby parking are enforced by the city. Initially,
some will drive to the transit center to park-and-ride. However, if parking is
not provided for that purpose, and time limits are imposed on adjacent parking,
the impact on parking will be very minimal . This was proven to be the case for
Beaverton, Cedar Hills, Milwaukie and Gresham Transit Centers.
It is also important to note that improved local transit access to the transit
center shall be provided that will reduce the number of riders needing to drive to
a bus stop. For those not living within walking distance of a bus route, many
park-and-ride lots are provided in this area.
Traffic
Because the proposed transit center would be located off-street, the potential
ramifications on traffic circulation for the central Tigard area are minimized. Also,
in a timed transfer system all buses are scheduled to arrive simultaneously. This
means there would not be a constant circulation of buses through central Tigard.
Once the "meet" had been accomplished, buses 'Would leave and not reappear until
twenty or- thirty minutes later. lasing the same concept in transit service, the
areas around transit centers in Beaverton, Cedar Hills, Milwaukie and Gresham
have not experienced traffic problems resulting from those transit centers. The
transit center prcposed for downtown Tigard actually has the potential of ,reducing
traffic congestic:. in central Tigard if enough drivers can be encouraged to use
transit. With the improvements in service planned for the Tigard area to coincide
with the' construction of the transit center, encouraging present automobile
drivers to use-transit will be easier to accomplish.
Economic Development
The transit center will provide a positive incentive for economic development for
the central Tigard area. Routes will radiate to the facility from-all areas on
the Westside; increasing the' transit 'accessibility of central Tigard substantially.
Many businesses, when evaluating potential site locations, are very much influenced
by the transit accessibility of a given area. Commercial and retail enterprises in
the vicinity would also benefit from transferring riders who chose to shop before
catching a connecting bus. , In Beaverton, upwards of 7200 riders are moved through
the facility on a typical weekday. This kind of movement through a transit center
generates substantial retail pota:ntial for shops and stores in the. near vicinity.
Pedestrian•Safety
Because the proposed transit center would be situated off-street, with island
platforms around which buses would park, riders transferring from.one bus to
another would not experience any problems -crossing streets to change buses. Riders
walking from the transit center to adjacent businesses, etc. would be provided
with- crosswalks and sidewalks connecting the transit center to those activities
whenever feasible.
A L T E R N A T I V E S A N A L Y S I S
SUMMARY
T I G A R D T R A N S I T C E N T E R
FEBRUARY 1, 1982
TRI-MET, SERVICE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
The Tri-'Set Transit Development Program has identified central Tigard
as the location of a key transit center in the southwest area of Tri-Met's
service region. The transit center would be designed to serve two primary
functions: the first being to provide a convenient and safe place for riders
to transfer buses, and the second to provide a focus for a good level of service
to central Tigard. This facility would be one of five transit centers planned
as integral parts of the Southwest Service Improvement Program. (See Figure 1.)
Some two years ago an alternative site location analysis was conducted with
staff members from Tri-Met and the City of Tigard reviewing a variety of sites
within the central Tigard area. A series of locational criteria were developed
to aid in the site selection process (see Figure '2) .
From this analysis a preferred site was identified on Commercial Street,
about 200 feet east of Main Street (see Figure 3) . The site selected lies between
Commercial and the Southern Pacific Railroad and covers an area of about .83 acres.
Two structures are presently located on this site, an auto body shop and a newer
small commercial building occupied by a Greyhound Bus Depot and a barber shop.
For this property to be developed into a transit center, the auto body shop would
have to be torn down, however the bus depot building and barber shop would be
retained for joint use with Greyhound and later expansion of the transit center.
Some key advantages of the Commercial site can be summarized as follows:
close proximity to Main Street (200 feet)
sidewalks in place betweelr. Main Street nii l l:rans:it center site
. good proximity to activities on Commercial Street
. Sood bus access to Commercial from Hall and Main Streets
. property dimensions well suited to the needs of the transit center
. property is adjacent to the Southern Pacific right-of-way for
future light rail alignment
. requires minimal deviation from 99-W corridor for trunk routes
The major disadvantages of the Commercial site can be summarized as follows:
sidewalks do not exist east of the site
requires demolition of a building
Site is somewhat separated (by Southern Pacific right-of-way) from
the proposed Civic Center, City Hall, and a planned shopping center.
t
At a recent meeting of the Tigard downtown redevelopment committee an
alternative site for the transit center was proposed. This location is on Burnham,
between the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way and Burnham. (see Figure 3)
The property covers 1.48 acres and is roughly 350 feet from 'Main Street.
,�J A
L 1
. y -
{
b
• T;
aK
i.
t
ro
s t
�k
t'
rt�.
TIGARD TRANSIT CENTER
Key Locational Criteria
. Adequate space for 10 bus bays
. Proximity to major radial corridor (Hwy, 99W-Barbur Blvd.)
. Proximity to business and commercial activities
. Linkage to pedestrian walkways
. Minimize walking distances between buses for transferring riders
. Minimize adverse impacts on traffic circulation
. Maximize safety of bus access
. Integration with character of downtown
. Capital costs of construction
. Capital costs of right�rof—way
. Potential for integration with other modes of transportation (light rail
and Greyhound)
. Layout efficiency and flexibility for expansion
. Visibility of the transit center to the public
Compatibility of adjacent land uses with transit center
Proximity to residential units
t
04
77,
vi,
The Burnham site was proposed as a potentially good location for a transit
center because of its proximity to a planned shopping center and civic center,
both to be located south of Burnham. Essentially, this site could offer better
integration of a transit center with the future growth plan for downtown Tigard.
Some key advantages of the Burnham site can be summarized as follows:
proximity to planned shopping center and proposed civic center
proximity to Main Street (350 feet)
land is predominantly vacant (little demolition required)
. proximity to City Hall, if expanded
. property borders Southern Pacific right-of-way for future light rail
alignment
The key disadvantages of the Burnham site can be summarized as follows:
. dangerous bus access to Bvirnham Street from Main Street; i.e. : right
turning movement from Burnham onto Main
. dangerous bus access from Burnham to Hall Boulevard; i.e. : left
turn from Burnham onto Hall has poor sight clearance for northbound
Hall traffic
. no sidewalks on Burnham to link the transit center with Main Street
or other activities
. If Tigard Street is extended it would basically separate the transit
center from the Southern Pacific right:-of-way.
. Existing development on Burnham is devoted primarily to industrial
and light manufacturing uses, which are not transit supportive.
. The major advantage of this site, its proximity to planned and
proposed developments, is very tenuous as future development plans
for downtown Tigard have yet. to be fully -completed in terms of a site
.location and timeline determination_
After closely examining the advantages and disadvantages of the alternative
transit center sites, the City of Tigard and Tri-Met have reached an agreement
to pursue the Commercial Street site as the preferred alternative.
The Commercial site was determined to be preferrable for the following reasons:
{ Better pedestrian access to Main Street (proximity and existing
sidewalks)
. Better proximity to existing transit supportive activities (If
proposed developments for central Tigard urban renewal do not
materialize, or require an extensive period of time to come to frusta-
•tion, the Burnham site would offer very little in the way of advantages.
e
Safer bus movements to and from Commercial Street, from Hall Boulevard
and Main Street.
Commercial property is better located with respect to the Southern
Pacific ri8ht,of.way(Tf Tigard Road is extended on the south side of
the Southern Pacific right-of-way,this effectively separates the
transit center from a potential light rail alignment.)
The dimensions of the Commercial property are better suited to
Tri-diet's needs and offer better bus access and egress to and from
the property.
Figure 4 shows a plan view of a proposed transit center design for Tigard.
Adequate layover space for ten buses is illustrated in the figure, with one
space possibly devoted to a Greyhound bus and another to a rider drop-off area.
Finally, Figure 5 illustrates how a transit center was integrated into a
downtown area in Bellingham, Washington. This represents the very kind of design
integration within a downtown area Tri-Met would pursue in central Tigard. Rider
amenities that would likely be incorporated into the design of a Tigard Transit
Center would include:
Shelters - (or sheltered area)
Benches
Information Displays
. Telephones
. Trash Receptacles
. Restrooms
. Small Concessions Kiosk '
LANDIS, AEBI & BAILEY, P. C.
LAWYERS
1516 GEORGIA-PACIFIC BUILDING
PORTLAND. OREGON 97204-1276
DAVID C.LANDIS TELEPHONE:(503)2Z4-6532
FRED M.AEBI
JOE D.BAILEY
JOHN C.MERCER
JAMES M.CALLAHAN February 23, 1982
ANNA M.MORAN
DAVID R.FOSTER
E.
Circuit Court
Washington County Courthouse
Hillsboro, OR 97123
Gentlemen:
City of Tigard v. J. A. Paterson, et al
Case No. 42-368 - Our file 12, 836-41
I enclose for filing and the court ' s consideration
our brief in support of the plaintiff ' s position.
Very truly yours,
Joe D. Bai!Gy
Joe D . Bailey
JDBfmr
Enclosure
cc: The Honorable Alan C. Bonebrake
George E. Birnie, Esq.
V�c: Mr. Bob Jean, City of Tigard
l
r`
I IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF -OREGON
2 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
3 CITY OF TIGARD, an Oregon )
Municipal Corporation, )
4 )
Plaintiff, ) No. 42-368
5 )
VS. ) TRIAL MEMORANDUM
6 )
J. A. PATERSON and LERON )
7 HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR, INC. , )
an Oregon corporation, )
8 )
Defendants. )
9
10 I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
11 In 1964 the City of Tigard and J. A. Paterson entered
12 into an agreement concerning the construction of a sewer line (the
13 Leron Heights Interceptor) . Mr. Paterson was engaged in subdividing
14 and developing land at the edge of the City, and needed to extend
15 a line to serve some of that land. The City had available capacity
16 in its sewer treatment facilities, and made the agreement with
17 Mr. Paterson allowing him to build the line and deliver sewage for
18 treatment at the City ' s plant. The agreement had the following
19 basic elements :
20 1 . Mr. Paterson was to build the line at his expense and
21 connect it to the City' s main. (Agreement, Exhibit A to Complaint,
22 Paragraph (1) )
23 2 . In addition to the standard sewer connection charges,
24 which Mr. Paterson was to collect and pass on to the City, Mr.
25 Paterson was to be permitted to collect up to $150 for each
26 service connection . (Exhibit A, Paragraph (1) d. ) The controversy
Page TRIAL MEM101,ANDLIM
LAh D15, AEBi & BAILEY
5516
C,Po-jia-Poca.c Budding
P-0tl - ,O-Non 97204
4,pbone 15031 224-6532
I which has resulted in the present litigation arises out of Para-
2 graph (1) d. and its relationship to the balance of the contract.
3 The language of Paragraph (1) d, of the contract is as follows:
4 "To amortize Contractor' s investment in
said interceptor sewer line, Contractor shall
5 be entitled to assess and collect not to
exceed $150. 00 for each service connection
6 authorized hereunder during Contractor' s
7 ownership of the interceptor sewer line. "
8 3 . Mr. Paterson was to keep detailed records of the cost
9 of construction of the line and report that cost to the City. An
10 addendum was anticipated. The addendum was to record the cost of
11 construction and incorporate it into the contract. (Exhibit A,
12 Paragraph (2) )
13 4 . The City was to have the right to buy the line at cost
14 less depreciation. The contract provided for depreciation at the
15 rate of one-third of one percent per calendar month (four percent
16 a year) . (Exhibit A, Paragraph (2) )
17 5. The addendum, dated April 22, 1968, recited that Mr.
18 Paterson had assigned his interest in the contract to Leron Heights
19 Interceptor, Inc. The addendum identified the cost of the project
20 as $84 , 431 . 32 . (Exhibit B, Paragraph (2) )
21 6 . The addendum also amended Paragraph (7) of the original
22 agreement, and in the course of that amendment the addendum re-
23 peated the language quoted above from Paragraph (1) d:
24 "The sewer connection charge to be paid
to the City and the additional charge here-
25 inabove authorized to be collected by the
contractor to amortize the cost of the con-
26 struction shall be applicable only to single
family or duplex residential connections ***. It
Page (Exhibit B, Paragraph (3) )
2 - TRIAL MEMORANDUM
LANDIS. AEBI d BAILEY
to vycn
1516 Georggio•Pocific Building
Fo:tland,Oregan 97204
Telephone(503)224.6532
1 The area around the Leron Heights Interceptor grew
2 rapidly. By the end of 1973 approximately $90, 000 had been col-
3 lected by the defendants pursuant to Paragraph (1) d. of the
4 agreement. That is, some time in 1973 the defendants finished
5 recapturing the cost of construction. The City has reviewed the
6 defendants ' financial records with resepct to money collected from
7 the administration of the contract. There are a few ambiguities,
8 but none which have a substalitial effect on the present litigation.
9 For the purpose of having concrete figures to discuss the following
10 schedule is proposed. If the defendants disagree with this schedule
11 the disagreement should be set forth in their answering brief_
I2 Year
$ Paid/Year Cumulative Total
13 1967
12, 750
14 1968 8, 430 12, 750
1969 13 21, 180
15
1970 , 150 34, 380
1971 6, 400 40, 530
16 1972 19, 170 46, 930
1973 23, 385 66, 100
17 1974 4 , 350 89, 485
1975 6, 300 93, 835
1976 Q 100, 135
18 1977 5, S50 108, 115
19 1978 -' 100 113, 965
1979 � � 050 121, 165
20 1980 14, 750 125, 215
137, 965
21 (There is a record of thO collection of
22 $4 , 500 during the
year 1966. It appears t.1l3t figure may be included in the
23 $12, 750 shown for 1967, ;o for the
24 purpose of this chart
and the present case it is not shown as having been
2� received in 1966, that j s, it is tre�3ted as
part of the
26 $1'. 750 shown for 1967 . )
Page 3 - TRIAL MEMORANDUM
to\: . AF31 S 0.LIl EY
I t I a
0-77 97:JJ
^' ''• ••M131 2:4.6532
MIR
1 II. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES
2 The defendants have continued to assert that they have
3 a right to collect $150 for each connection bringing sewage into
4 the Leron Heights Interceptor. They point to the fact that the
5 Agreement (Exhibit A) provides for depreciation at the rate of
6 four percent per year, and says that so long as the City does not
7 exercise its option to buy at the depreciated price, the defendants
8 are entitled to keep collecting.
9 It is the position of the City that when the Agreement
10 says that its purpose is to permit the defendants "to amortize
11 contractor ' s investment in said interceptor sewer line" (Exhibit A,
12 Paragraph (1) d. ) and "to amortize the cost of the construction"
13 (Exhibit B, Paragraph (3) ) , it makes $84, 431.32, the agreed cost
14 of the construction, the maximum recoverable.
15 III . CITY'S ARGUMENT
16 A. The meaning of the contract of September 14 , 1964, is
17 clear on its face.
18 The words "to amortize" and "amortization" have never
19 been judicially interpreted, but have been discussed numerous
20 times in case law without definition. Hanover Bank v. Commissioner
21 of Internal Revenue, 369 US 672, 673 (1962) ; U.S . v. Dwyer Lumber &
22 Plywood Co. , 353 F2d 351, 352 (9th Cir 1965) ; Art Neon v. Denver,
23 488 F2d 118, 122 (10th Cir 1973) , cert den 417 US 632; and WDEF
24 Broadcasting Co_ v. U.S . , 215 F Supp 818, 820 (ED Tenn 1963) .
25 The clear meaning of the word "amortization" in all these
i
26 cases is the spreading of the cost of something over a period of
Page 4 - TRIAL 1,1EM:)RANT DU:d
LANDI3,AEBI & BAILEY
Lo-yen
1516 Georgia-Po.if:c Budding
Portland,C-egan 97204
Telephone(503]224.6532
I time. Only costs are involved; profit is not amortized. Diction-
2 ary definitions are consistent with this interpretation. The
3 American Heritage Dictionary cf the English Language defines "to
4 amortize" as:
5 "l . To liquidate (a debt) by installment pay-
ments or payment into a sinking fund.
6 2. Accounting. To write off (expenditures)
by prorating over a certain period. "
7
Black' s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, states that:
8
" [I] n its modern sense, amortization is the
9 operation of paying off bonds, stock, a mort-
gage, or other indebtedness, commonly of a
10 state or corporation, by installments, or by
a sinking fund. An ' amortization plan' for the
11 payment of an indebtedness is one where there
are partial payments of the principal, and
12 accrued interest, at stated periods for a
definite time, at the expiration of which the
13 entire indebtedness will be extinguished. "
14 Words used in a writing which have a well-known meaning
I5 in the law at the time of the writing are used in that sense
16 unless the context clearly states that a contrary use of the word
17 is intended. Giustina v. United States, 190 F Supp 303 (DC Or 1960) .
18 Based on the commonly used definition of "amortization, " the pur-
19 pose of the amortization clause in the 1964 contract was to allow
20 Paterson to recoup only the cost of the sewer line.
21 Parties to business transactions are usually sophisti-
22 cated business people who write carefully and clearly express
23 themselves . Oregon Surety and C. Company v. U.S . National Bank,
24 300 P 336 (Or 1931) . Therefore, there is serious doubt of ambiguity
25 in business contracts. Id. If Paterson intended to be paid $150
26 Per sewor connection even after he had recouped the total cost of
Page 5 — TRIAL ASE�lOR1NDUDi
LANMS, nfnf s SAILEY
t`7 r
1516 CI-110" .
T.1oph m;1 0_!224-6532
1 his investment, he should have expressly provided for it in the
2 contract. Harty v. Bye, 258 Or 398 (1971) .
g Oregon, moreover, adopts the objective theory of con-
4 tracts. Springer v. Powder Power Tool Corporation, 348 P2d 1112
5 (Or 1960) . In the Springer case, the court cites the Restatement
6 of Contracts § 230 and states:
7 "The standard of interpretation *** is the
meaning that would be attached to the inte-
8 gration by a reasonably intelligent person
acquainted with all operative usages and
9 knowing all the circumstances prior to and
contemporaneous with the making of the
10 integration, other than oral statements by
the parties of what they intended it to mean. "
11 Springer at page 1116.
12 If the court looks to the surrounding circumstances, the situation
13 of the parties and the subject matter of the contract for aid in
14 construing the contract, the court should find that Paterson is
15 no longer entitled to collect connection fees. Upper Columbia
16 River Towing Co. v. Glens Falls Insurance Co. , 179 F Supp 705
17 (DC Or 1959) .
18 B. A municipal contract should not be construed against
19 the public interest.
20 A municipal contract should not be construed against the
21 public interest. Borough of Bridgeville v. Valsi, 178 A2d 826
22 (S Ct Pa 1962) . This is true even when the sewage company is a
23 private corporation and no one else has a right to connect the
24 sewer. Pulaski Heights Sewerage Co. v. Loughborough, 129 SW 536
25 (Ark 536 1910) . In Pulaski the court stated:
26 "Property does become clothed with a public
interest when used in a manner to make it of
Page 6 - TRIAL MEMORANDUM
LANDIS,AEBI & BAILEY
L.,,yers
1516 Georgia-Pacific Building
Ponland,Cregon 97204
Telephone(503)224-6532
1 public consequence and affect the community
at large. When, therefore, one devotes his
2 property to a use in which the public has an
interest, he in effect grants to the public
3 an interest in that use, and must suY-rit to
be controlled by the public for the common
4 good, to the extent of the interest he has
thus created. He may withdraw his grant by
5 discontinuing the use; but, so long as he
maintains the use, he must submit to the
6 control. " (Citations omitted) Pulaski at 536.
7 In Pulaski the court held that the public cannot be subjected to
8 unreasonable charges in order that the sewage company may make
9 a profit. "The rights of the public are not to be ignored. "
10 Pulaski at 537 .
11 CONCLUSION
12 The City does not seek to recapture overpayments since
13 1973 , but only to have the court declare the defendants ' collec-
14 tion rights at an end. The public should not be required to
15 furnish profits to the defendants. The defendants agreed to build
16 the line at their expense, and the City agreed to assist them in
17 recapturing the cost of the line. It would be wrong for the City
18 to permit the use of public facilities for defendants ' private
19 profit.
20 respectfully submitted,
21 LANDI , E$I & BAI Y, P.C.
22
By
23 Bailey
24
(� 25 Vicki Hopman ' tes
26 Attorneys for Plaintiff(,
Page 7 - TRIAL MEMORANDUM
LANDIS, Alta C FAtLEY
l+ta i•o.•, ;,,x;.;,14:6u�td+np
C7204
TC*rh'0031 2234532
V _
March 4 , 1982
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and Council /
From: Doris Hartig, Finance DirectoAkl,�/
Subject: OLCC Applications !(
The Chief of Police has reported that all of the applications for OLCC permits
in this week's packet have been investigated. The Chief would recommend Council
approval of the applications based on the investigation results.
Avoid Verbal Messages
A-1
CITY OF TIGARD
To: CH From:— UORTS HARTIG
Subject:
OJ,CQ , RENEWAL APPLICATION Date:__ March ! 1982
Please investigate and have recommendation ready for March 8, 1982 council meeting.
WEBFOOT DELI & WINE CO.
13815 S.W. Pacific Hwy
Suites I & J
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Type of application: Retail Malt Beverage and Package Store
Avoid Verbal Messages A-1
CITY OF TIGARD
To:- CHIEF ADAMS From: DORIS HARTIG
Subject: OLGG
LfIITTE;M ADOT TCAT-10 j1 Date:_ March 2 1982
Please investigate and have recommendation ready for March 8, 1981, Council
meeting.
Willowbrook Restaurant
11525 S.W. Durham Road
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Type of Application: Restaurant �•S - G/
C
i'
t
Avoid Verbal Messages A-1
CITY OF TIGARD
To: CHIEF OF POLICE From :--DORIS HARTIG
Subject: OLCC RENEWAL APPLICATION Date:— March 3, 1982
PLEASE INVESTIGATE AND HAVE RECOMMENDATION READY FOR March 8, 1982,
COUNCIL MEETING.
The Pizza Merchant
13066 S.W. Pacific Hwy
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Type of Application: Retail Malt Beverage
Ike
i,
Avoid Verbal Messages A-1
CITY OF TIGARD
To: CHIEF OF POLICE From: DORIS HARTIG
Subject: OLCC Application Date: March 1, 1982
Please investigate and have recommendation ready for March 8, 1982
Council meeting.
7-Eleven Food Store
NWC Hall & Pacific Hwy ; 0 14S-
Tigard,
4STigard, Oregon 97223
Type of Application: New Outlet
f
MEMORANDUM
March 4, 1982
TO: City Administrator
FROM: Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Correction Facilities
RE: Ballot Measure #3; To Fund Corrections
Facilities
Sir:
There is a clearly identified need to expand corrections
facilities in the metro area, as well as statewide, to avoid
the revolving door problem generated by overcrowded jail popula-
tions.
Therefore, it would be my recommendation to the City Council
that they join the County in support of Ballot Measure X63.
Respectfully,
L
R.B. Adams
Chief of Police
RBA:ac
i
t
WASHINGT®N COUNTY
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING--150 N. FIRST AVENUE
HILLS40RO, OREGON 97123 .
(503) 648-4681
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ROOM 418
VIRGINIA DAGG,Chairman
LYELL GARDNER,Vice Chairman
JIM FISHER
BONNIE L.HAYS
LUCILLE WARREN
February 16, 1982
The Honorable Wilbur Bishop
Mayor of Tigard
P. O. 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mayor Bishop;
As you no doubt are aware, Washington County has taken a
lead in support of the May 18, 1982 Ballot Measure #3 which would
create a $60 million fund for correction facilities of various types
throughout the State, including the State-run 250-bed medium security
"hard bed" prison available for sentenced felons, to be supplemented
by 150 beds available for the three Metropolitan Counties. In addi-
tion a 70-bed women's correction center, a permanent facility for a
40-bed Washington County Restitution Center, a 50-bed work release
section in the Washington County Public Safety Building, a 40-bed
Restitution Center in Multnomah County, and a 75-bed regional work
center are anticipated.
The above requests were made in a joint application to
the State Corrections Division by Washington, Multnomah and Clackamas
Counties.
Washington County's needs and the Cities within
Washington County can be categorized in the four following areas:
1. The 123-bed Washington County Jail was built in 1971 and
is presently dangerously crowded and inadequate to
, incarcerate adults who are a danger to the public or who
must be detained prior to trial.
2. The judges ' use of the Jail in sentencing is increasing
due to the revolving door and lack of space at the State
institutions.
3. The population of Washington County has increased by
over 60,000 persons (30% increase) since the Jail was
built; arrests for violent crime have increased 136% and
50% for property crime since 1975; the average daily
population of the Jail has increased 101% and total
reported crime has increased 35% since 1975.
an equal opportunity employer
a
February 16, 1982
Page 2
4. Washington County needs more space to incarcerate
dangerous offenders and to provide structure and work
opportunities in restitution centers and work release
centers for those inmates who don ' t need long periods of
time behind bars.
The plans submitted by the Metropolitan Counties are
expensive (approximate total $20 million) to build and operate. Thus,
the voters must decide whether to have more space to punish and pro-
vide rehabilitive services to convicted offenders is worth the invest-
ment.
Washington County has a highly respected and cost-
effective corrections system. The Washington County Board of
Commissioners, the Corrections Advisory Board, members of the public
and law enforcement community have been involved in preparing this
application. We think it represents a balanced and sensible approach
to a critical situation in our County.
As you no doubt know, some of the Cities in Washington
County have holding areas where arrested persons can be held for a
short period of time but must be transferred to the Washington County
Jail for further incarceration.
I was surprised to learn that a high per cent of the
people committed to the County Jail are arrested by City Police. I
asked Captain Gerry Sargeant, Corrections Administrator, to take a
random analysis and learned that in February, 1981, a total of 564
persons were lodged in the Jail, of which 187 or 31. 1% were arrests
made by City Police; in July, 1981, the total was 617, 214 being City
arrests, and in October, 1981, a total of 524 were detained, 181 of
whom were results of City arrests or 34. 5%. The average of these
three months shows that the County provides facilities for 34. 1% of
those arrested. During this same period of time, 12. 3% were lodged as
a result of arrests by the Oregon State Police and the balance were
those detained as a result of County Sheriff arrests.
The County Jail is constantly overcrowded with early
release mandated to make room for more arrests. On a typical day some
50 convicted felons are in the County Jail when in actuality they
should be in Salem in the State penitentiary where over-crowding is a
monumental problem. The local judges in many cases elect to have cer-
tain prisoners sentenced to the County Jail for a one-year sentence
where the judge can prevent an early release. The same felons, sent
to Salem, stand a much greater chance of early release. As you can no
doubt see, the needs are critical and the Washington County Board of
Commissioners voted unanimously to support Ballot Measure #3 and also
to solicit endorsements by all the Cities, including yours, in
Washington County.
February 16 , 1982
Page 3
In addition to the facilities which would be constructed
in the Tri-County area, other Counties throughout the State have
applied for similar programs. Also, the State would construct a
150-bed forest camp and approximately 70 more segregational units
in the State penetentiary in Salem.
There is an overall program to provide a variety of
solutions for a variety of convicted felons , such as maximum
security for the hard-core, medium security for non-violent ,
rehabilitive programs , work release nrograms , restitution
centers, etc.
Enclosed you will find a suggested resolution and order
which your City Council will honefully adopt . Upon adoption ,
please send a copy of resolution to me so that groper notification
can be made to the media.
I have been designated by our Board as a representative
to our local Washington County Corrections Facilities Support
Committee and was appointed by the Governor to the Bonds Steer-
ing Committee for the State, thus the reason for my solicitation
on behalf of our Board from your Council .
Thanking you for your consideration , I remain,
Sincerely, f �
J m Fisher, Commissioner
oard of Commissioners
. oiY Washington County
J
JF: crm
Enclosure
f
March 8, 1982 -!
RECOGNITION OF SENIOR CENTER VOLUNTEERS
The Tigard Senior Center is now a vital part of our community. This facility and
its program would not have been a reality without countless hours of effort and
sacrifice on the part of a number of hard-working, dedicated volunteers.
I now hereby proclaim the grateful appreciation of the Tigard City Council to
these volunteers for the services they have performed and bestow Keys to the City
with all rights and privileges of honor pertaining thereto to the following citizens:
(Please come forward as I call your name)
Al Boenninghausen
Tom Briant
Richard M. Brown
Lloyd Carroll
C. Vern Christensen ,
Robert Deuth
Art Hill , '
Gar Hubble
Jim Kincaid
Irving Larson,/
Jessalee Hallalieu
Dick Mastbrook✓
Fred Menzel
Clayton Nyberg,,;'
Mary Robbenl
Cliff Speaker
Nancie Stimler✓
Carol Weaver,
Ida Wilks
Lynn Wortendyke •%
Carol Young
Graham Young (awarded posthumously)
TIGARD LOAVES & FISHES CENTER DRAFT
FY 82-83 Operating Budget
July 1, 1982 - June 30 , 1983
DESCRIPTION NOTES TOTAL
Center Manager 40 @ 6 . 25 16 , 764
Caterperson 27 @ 4 . 85 8 , 781
Assistant Center Manager 40 @ 4 . 88 12 ,635
Outreach 20 @ 3 . 50 4,531
Info. & Referral Worker 17. 8 @ 3. 50 4, 105
Center Assistant 3 mo GT/9 no @ 20 4,059
Meal Cost 1. 592 32 , 318
Center Purch. Raw Food @ . 425 863
Small Equipment 100
Mileage 1, 340
Rent & Utilities @ 400/mo 4, 800
Telephones 250/mo 3 ,000
OW Containers . 193 1 , 351
Consumables & Supplies . 07 1 , 500
P
Repairs & Maint. - Equip 500
Office & Prog. Supplies Office 500/Recr. 150 650
Fundraising Costs 2 ,500
Training 200
Central Proj . Oper. 5 , 102
Central Proj . Admin. 4, 255 i
TOTAL EXPENSES : $ 109 , 354
Federal Title III 32 ,236
Meal Don. : Congregate 1 . 30 17 ,290
MOW 1 . 25 8 , 750
Gifts , Don. & Pledges 7 ,500
Green Thumb 1 ,015
Rev. from Pub . Sources (City) 12 ,500
USDA . 515 10 , 300
Interest 1 , 200
Center Projects 2 , 200
King City 1,000
Funds to be identified 15 , 363
TOTAL INCOME : $ 109 , 354
NOTE: This budget is a draft estimate of the center oper-
ating budget for FY 82-83. It is subject to change.
FOOTNOTES : 1) Personnel includes salary, taxes & all fringe
benefits . 2) Projected meals : Congregate 13 ,000 ; Home
delivered 7 ,000 ; Other -60 meals 300 ; for a total of 20 , 300 .
3) Funding from Washington County Area Agency on Agging are
estimates. Final allocations have not been made. 4) Funding
from City of Tigard requires approval of City Tax Levy.
tgard community youth services 620-2621
FACT SHEET - FEBRUARY 1, 1982
Budget Information
The dollar amount sought by TCYS for FY82-83 is $69,946, 11.3% above last year's fig-
ure. Adding the uncollected tax rate brings the total levy amount to $76,311. The
millage rate by the end of June, including annexations but excluding Tigard's growth last
year, would be .112, .011 below last year's rate of .123.
Budget includes 7% merit system increase; no cost of living.
Operations costs reduced by 9.8% from last year.
Tigard levy supplies 42% of agency budget; Tigard residents get 66% of services.
Service Information July 1, 1981 - Jan. 31, 1982
223 youth referred 16% under 12; 35% 13-15
42% live with both parents 42% 16-18; 7% 18+
70% attend school full-time 586 hours of counseling
65% male / 35% female 1624 services other than counseling
73% have no police record 2494 people contacts
66% Tigard 28% Tualatin 367 job placements
50% self or family referred; 50% agency 31 volunteers gave 700 hours
56% family, school, drug problems; 636 class hours to 87 parents of 150 kids.
44% unemployrvant 870 hours of training and consultation
1669 Information / referral contacts
Key comparisons to first seven months of last year:
Youth referred up 23% Job Placements up 116%
Counseling sessions up 24% Parent Ed. enrollment up 256%
DM�Ict
Juvenile Department reports fewer referrals from Tigard since ZCYS opened.
90% parents found parenting classes helpful.
80% parents still using skills learned in parenting class up to 3 years later.
Delinquent youth getting jobs at 'ICYS show significant reduction in justice system contact
afterward. Recent research shows youth perceptions of parental behavior accurately pre-
dict. problem behavior - drugs, alcohol, crime.
Miscellaneous
TOYS provides the only ccummity-wide free personal/family counseling, employment services,
and drug/alcohol counseling in the area.
Counseling, employment, and parent education programs have a county-wide reputation for ex-
cellence; parent education and employment are models for the metro area.
Of 7 staff, 5 hold MA's; 62 total years experience working with youth.
11981 S-W. Pacific highway e tgard, oregon 97223
CO
N O O O V' O L f) O M O O O O C) 0 0 0 0
rM .0Cp000C0� 111 rl 00 NO�000000
OOOC� OwO to to M OoOoOC� 00toorno000o °Dr�I
1� NN tf1NtOOl- V' 000� .-i OONN V' �O BOJ
N M tD t0 tG 1- tD N CO �. N M
N r-i r-1 ,--1 r-i .-7 ,-� .� c..l N •-� V• N N .-I t0 to
N �I
V � � o
C) 0o iLO o 0 0 0 0 0 CD O O
ddii d N �. q, �O L'4 O O O O Ln•-- N Ln Lr) N C
U �
�-1 O O O O C
C II
O M C104, 1 N�
t� f,9 CN
O
3 h N N 1 ,
f
C
O C', COI O
O tp N CD
MIN
O �'•� 'c7' 01
.88
ao
O � m O O O O O O O O O
�� .0.N � 00 N O �O Ul O O O to to to �I+
}}}.;��� N O 00 00 Ol V' .-i N C •cF N to MO � CDJ
M
N r--1 M N II
W
O
co rn M
M lMC
U to •-i r-1 rn I
CD O 'cf' '-i '-i O tD 0 O O N O N O O O
CST a1 ^ COO pko co CN I- MM OOCI Mw -1 CTOO � �
t-a N N f- N LO M V' cn to 00 Ln O
NillCT1
.-1 Vt0
r-1
r� O
U v EnC 4
F i U td
_r in c93
49 m a,
•.i
4-1a U An
En 1 44
i , -- $4
49
11-4
Reg 4-4 I oaF l wa44
U1LIJ w
,art
0 0
-. - 0 ® >- W
CC C
W
All
Tigard Community Youth Services
11951 SW Pacific Highway
Tigard, Oregon 97223
v
cc
00
v
a
T
C
O
U
r o
r;a
CD ufE �oc E •E Seoa5E E = aV�E
cE
V-UxzE � I=- y w- c
d E. t � = o °
A o•E fi., p _i
00 8' E ��o
o moo.
VEo-
r.
WceoZ_f��mE= oF �Eno���p.LE c
soagp O[^ v a v =I _u p c L'1 u u C H
sow � CM O U 3 ^`r ,v � > E o a yt _uEYEo
�� NCD � Vca il�vo o�VEoo� ��t�uomaEa3.2t;
®� WC®N ",r' �x�yai,� aV a3uu �(7� Ee° �uEFco � ' E
mor® �Qj® W W EO _ m eo ;? d Y „ o m 0 a = v
F—e�-tD F�-F=—c�D i— =;�;ac7np: C7r rnz� ��aF¢xazW0.W-'ca3
u R
CVS
no cd •C p- i oc C G .— v C O =� u
CD 73
OCz � ci G v 'i .� •� C � — A s r
y v`vi O C 7 O =
Com• O O 7 O O C C p_ E O = J y JU C J
�' 4-. «f T = v t3 v r u cd K� h _>. V � _ ` _ •7 � _ G'J ! ' _ v
to o v 3 c o F N (n 'u on >. >, n +d cr
E v 9" o •o " s '- N �' - :, ._.. c v C _v
oD C L H L vCs
Ct) cf)
"ll C ALJ YC L � cd � j =0 F `` � J1 .� O � v c. .•• G •J � —_ �
U y E C v ._ -O c C .n a' _ O C �. U _ G � -� •'• —
h
~ " o 'v ❑ �N � a c oo u G ® U� r U U �- r � ,� y c E V y ., •rJ —
F ou 5 oT N O u cl o
on iv�
-o — 73
Out ..• > G
-J
R n >
v O G O C ... p r.0 C L C G• _'' 3 "' ✓. L •-� O c7
Lnwj
nj
o N y o C%.
'a v ' ["' ^ ✓
_�
c o n -73
E V2 s v c > = c y oEi
_
29
m O G O
-2 ILI
:Ir cj
Lt_! ` 3 v " " G —
I
C O ' v •O v G CD - t
mo
el
® v L u n E an = oi
C O
Pte.
b V/ V V L u Cl-'
v O c7
'-00r E 73
' CJ
�'�Gk''. •D f]0 :'S V Cf) 7 C3 cC N >' G r •� > G v
�—– E c .c U 3 a 'u a oo
cc
C p y > n C O Oto
^ N C C E y c7
G _
AM
ca 3 b c -- •;�, y v EIz '--• •O
CS
U a G y > - n 'u
F a ° F ❑ �� F I .�' I aE, o I - pmt
`7
March 4 , 1982
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor
From: Frank Currie, Public Works Director
Subject: LID Final Assessments Consideration
The citizens may need to be reminded at the beginning of consideration of
agenda item No. 7 that the procedure for this meeting with Council to for
them to have an opportunity to speak regarding the method of distribution
of the assessement costs only. Council would then need to levy the assessment
against the benefited properties.
s"
C1` 'OF 70 t
WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON
Dear
The purpose of. this letter is to inform you of a public meeting to be held
before the Tigard City. Council at 8:00 p.m. on Monday, March 8, 1982,
at Fowler Junior High, 10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, for the purpose
of levying final assessments against properties within the assessment district
boundaries of the Hillview Avenue Sanitary Sewer Local Improvement
District (L.I.D. ).
An assessment roll showing the distribution procedure and the amount proposed
to bd .assessed against each property within the district is enclosed.
The purpose of this public meeting is to hear comments relative to the assess-
ments proposed to be levied. If you cannot attend this public meeting, or do
not wish. to appear, you. may file a written objection with the City Recorder
prior to the public meeting. Objections must state the reason for the objection
The Council may (1) return the assessment roll to staff with or without recom-
mendations, (2) change the assessment roll, or (3) approve the assessment roll
as. proposed. The approved assessment roll will be levied against the
properties within the district.
In the probable event that the Council approves the assessment roll as proposed,
or if the Council. changes the assessment roll, you will be mailed an Assessment
Notice reflecting the Council's decision.
Assessments are due and payable upon receipt of that Assessment Notice.
If you wish -to pay the assessment in semi-annual installments, you must file
an P1Application for Installment Payment of Assessment" within 10 days of the
date of the Assessment Notice. If you do not file this form within the pre-
scribed time, you cannot pay the assessment in installments. An installment
application will be enclosed at that time.
If you have any questions, please contact me at City Hall, 12755 SH Ash,
Tigard, Oregon, or phone 639-4171.
Yours truly,
Frank A. Currie, P.E.
Director of Public Works
cmv
12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
HILLVIEW AVENUE
j SAN. SEW. L.I.D. #19
t ,
Map #
2S1 2CC Final
Name & Address Tax Lot # Assessment
Thomas A. Jurhs 2800 $ 3,878.58
10330 SW Hillview St.
Tigard, OR 97223
Verl S. & Evelyn Lewis 2900 $ 3,916.07
10290 SW Hillview St.
Tigard, OR 97223-
Eldon
7223Eldon L. & Mae K. Kellas 3000 $ 4,432.57
10360 SW Hillview St.
Tigard, OR 97223
Philip S. & Christine M. Westover 3200 $ 3,878.58
10340 SW Hillview St.
Tigard, OR 97223
*includes nondistributal costs.
Feb. 23, 1982
Page 1 of 2
HILLVIEW AVENUE
SAN. SEW. L.I.D. #19
Assessment Method:
1. Total Project Cost - Total Nondistributal Costs = Total Distributal Cost
($18,620.80) - ($3,106.50) = ($15,514.30)
2. Total Distributal Cost + Total Lots = Distributal Cost per Lot
($15,514.30) (4) = $3,878.575
Non-distributal Costs Summarv:
a) City Participation:
$1,050.00 Special Storm Manhole - To allow for passage of upstream storm
water.
830.00 San. Sew. Manhole - To allow for future mainline extentions.
+ 635.00 Storm Sew. Manhole - 'Contractual Service' Reconstruction.
$2,515.00 Total City participation
b) Individual Responsibility:
$554.00 T.L. #3000 - Provision of extra service lateral
+ 37.50 T.L. #2900 - Provision of extra service "T"
$591.50 Total Individual responsibility
c) City participation + Individual responsibility = Nondistributal Costs
($2,515.00) + ($591.50) = ($3,106.50)
Page 2 of 2
:i
p5p
COOF TIV
WASHINGTON COUNTY•OREGON
FDear
The purpose of. this letter is to inform you of a public meeting to be held
before the Tigard City Council at 8:00 p.m. on Monday, March 8, 1982,
at Fowler Junior High, 10865 SW 11alnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, for the purp *
of levying final assessments against properties within the assessment district
boundaries of the Sw Knoll Drive. Sanitary Sewer Local. Improvement
District (L.I:D. ) .
An assessment roll showing the distribution procedure and the amount proposed
to be assessed against 'each property within the district is enclosed.
The purpose of this public meeting is to hear comments relative to the assess-
ments proposed to be levied. If you cannot attend this public meeting, or do
not wish to appear, you- may file a written objection with the City Recorder
prior to the public meeting. Objections must state the reason for the objection
The Council may (1) return the assessment roll to staff with or without recom-
mendations, (2) change the assessment roll, or (3) approve the assessment roll
as. proposed. The approved assessment roll will be levied against the
properties within the district.
In the probable event that the Council approves the assessment roll as proposed,
or if the Council. changes the assessment roll, you will be mailed an Assessment
Notice reflecting the Council's decision.
Assessments are due and payable upon receipt of that Assessment Notice_
If you wish to pay the assessment in semi-annual installments, you must file
an "Application for Installment Payment of Assessment" within 10 days of the
date of the Assessment Notice. If you do not file this form within the pre-
scribed time, you cannot pay the assessment in installments. An installment .
application will be enclosed at that time.
If you have any questions, please contact me at City Hall, 12755 SW Ash,
Tigard, Oregon, or phone 639-4171.
Yours truly, .
Frank A. Currie, P.E.
Director of Public Works
cmv
12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
OWNERSHIP REPORT
S.W. KNOLL DRIVE
SANITARY SEWER
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
TAX MAP FINAL
TAX LOT NAME & ADDRESS ASSESSMENT
2S1-1BC Warren & Ann C. Craig 3,298.13
301 12360 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
400 Ivan & Betty Jack 3,298.13
12330 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
500 Monte & Kyong S. Snyder 3,298.13
12300 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
1300 Ray Paul & Fay Hass 3,298.13
12435 SW Knoll Dirve
Tigard, OR 97223
1400 Knoll Drive Corporation 3,298.16
12360 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
1500 Portus & Sarah Williams 3,298.13
12390 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
1600 T.A. & Maxine Williams 3,298.13
12430 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
Chas. Houston & Esther Mayes 3,298.13
12450 SW Knoll Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
TOTAL $26,385.07
METHOD:
Total Cost + total lots = Cost per lot
(26,385.07) ¢ (8) _ ($3298.1338 M/L)
March 4 , 1982
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Frank Currie , Planning Director
Subject: ZOA 1-82 Public Hearing
Since the Planning Commission did not finish their consideration of this issue
at the 3-2-82 meeting, and continued it until their April meeting, staff would
respectfully request that Council discontinue consideration of this matter at
this time.
March 3, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Director
RE: Conditional Use Standards
On March 2, 1982, the Planning Commission reviewed conditional use standard
revisions proposed by staff. The Planning Commission will consider the standards
for adoption in a public hearing at their regular meeting on April 6, 1982. At
this time, we are submitting the staff's proposed revisions for conditional use
standards for _ cur review. After the Planning Commission takes action on the
standards we will ask the Council to approve a zone ordinance amendment establishing
new conditional use standards.
S - c
� - O
February 18, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Departure , _.
SUBJECT: 1. Revision of Section 18.72 - Conditional Use; 2. Revisions of
Permitted and Conditional Uses in Each Zoning District; and 3.
Definitions of Use Classification (ZOA 1-82)
1. In reviewing the existing procedures in Section 18.72 and numerous con-
ditional use applications, staff found that it was necessary to incorporate
review criteria in which to adequately evaluate and approve conditional use
application requests. Additionally, the existing conditional use procedures
are not in compliance with the recently revised and approved Administrative
Procedures section of the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed conditional use criteria is divided into two types: the. first
set of criteria are general in nature, and address the overall complince
of the conditional use proposal with existing city policies and ordinances;
the community need; and the project's overall impacts to the site; the
physical systems (e.g. , sewer & water, etc. ) ; and the surrounding areas.
The second set of criteria address the dimensional requirements for specific
use types. For example, the lot area needed to adequately accommodates a
school or hospital, etc. It is the intent of these criteria to ensure that
the use proposed will be adequately located and sited on the property in a
manner that will minimize any negative impacts on abutting properties.
2. Along with the proposed revisions to the conditional use section of the
ordinance, staff found that it was necessary to consolidate and define what
types of uses should be permitted outright and what use should be considered
conditional uses.
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance has a list of specific uses that are per-
mitted outright and a list of those uses that are conditionally permitted.
In many zones, the permitted uses and conditional uses are similar types of
uses, causing inconsistencies in Tigard's land use administration. For
example, in a C-3 zone sporting goods stores are permitted outright, yet,
pet stores are only permitted conditionally. Both of the uses are general
retail in nature, and the development standards, e.g. , parking & lot area
requirements, etc. , are exactly the same.
Staff is proposing to consolidate all of these specific uses into more general
use type categories, e.g. , general retail or research services, which staff
believes allows for more consistent and equitable land use decisions.
Those uses that are compatible with other uses within the various zonir_
districts, yet will have more impacts on the surrounding area, e.g. ,
hospitals, etc. , are listed as conditional uses.
Conditional Uses
Page 2
3. To clarify these use types, staff is also proposing to include a Use
Classification definition section within the Zoning Ordinance. This
section will list each use type specified with any given zoning district,
both permitted and conditional uses, and a definition with examples, when
needed, of what sort of specific uses would be defining the general use
type.
Planning Commission Action:
The three proposed text changes to the Zoning Ordinance require the Planning
Commission's recommendation to the City Council.
SECTION 18.72
CONDITIONAL USE
18.72.010 - Purpose
18.72.020 - Pre-Application Conference
18.72.030 - Application Procedures
18.72.040 - Authority and Planning Commission Action
18.72.050 - General Criteria for Conditional Use
18.72.060 - Standard Dimensional Requirements for Conditional Use
18.72.070 - Effective Period for Conditional Use Approval
18.72.080 - Modification
18.72.090 - Appeal
18.72.100 - Concurrent Application with Site Design Review
18.72.010 - Purpose
Each zoning district excludes certain types of uses which are not permitted
outright because of inherent characteristics which may have an adverse
effect on the immediate area or the larger community. However, under certain
circumstances, it may appropriate in a particular area, because of social or
technical need, to permit these excluded uses, provided their potential adverse
effects can be mitigated.
It is the intent of this section to permit such uses where it
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan subject to procedures and criteria
which are intended to mitigate potentially negative impacts.
18.72.020 - Pre-Application Conference
In accordance with Section 18.84.030.02(b) , Pre-Application Conference, the
applicant is required to meet with the Planning Director or his designee(s)
for a pre-application conference prior to submitting an application for con-
ditional use.
18.72.030 - Application Procedure
An application for a conditional use shall be made by- the owner of the property,
or his authorized agent, on a form prescribed by the Planning Director or his
designee(s) , and shall be submitted to the Planning Office by 5:00 p.m. on the
date prescribed by the Planning Director.
f
18.72.031 - Application Information
An application for conditional use shall include the following where applicable:
Page 2
a. The applicant's and property owner's name, address and telephone
number.
b. A description of the land on which the proposed development is to
take place by address, lot block, tract, or similar description.
C. A site plan drawn to scale showing existing lot line dimensions,
the location of all structures, accessways, pedestrian ways, land-
scaped areas, service areas, fences, walls, and all parking,
maneuvering, loading, and refuse areas. The site plan shall indicate
all vehicle and pedestrian access points and the direction of traffic
flow on the property as well as how utility service and drainage are
to be provided. The site plan shall show proposed modifications to
existing grades. The site plan shall also show the relationship of
the site to adjoining properties, streets, alleys, structures, public
utilities and drainageways.
d. The exterior lighting plan, which may be shown on the site plan,
indicating the location, size, height, typical design, material, color
and method of illumination.
e. Plans and elevations of structure(s) to scale indicating heights
of structure, entrances and exits of proposed structures, as well as
architectural drawings or sketches, including floor plans, in suf-
ficient detail to permit computation of yard requirements.
f. A landscape plan drawn to scale showing the location of existing
trees and vegetation proposed to be removed and to be retained on the
site, the location and design of landscaped areas, the varieties and
sizes of trees and plant materials to be planted on the site, other
pertinent landscape features, and irrigation systems required to main-
tain plant material:.
g. Data indicating square footage of site and structure, building
coverage, landscaped area, amount of parking provided, building
materials to be used with specifications as to type, color, and texture
of exterior surfaces of proposed structures.
h. Any additional information which may be required by the Planning
Director to properly evaluate the proposed site plan. Such additional
information may only be required where the need for it can be justified
on the basis of special and/or unforeseen circumstances. The Planning-
Director may also waive any of the above requirements where•he finds
that the information required by this section is unnecessary to properly
evaluate the proposal.
i. No plan sheet shall exceed dimensions of 24 inches by 36 inches.
Where necessary, an overall plan with subsequent detail sheets shall
be submitted.
j_ An applicable fee, in accordance with Resolution #79-7.
18.72.040 - Authority
The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing in accordance with the
provisions of Section 18.84.070(b) and 18.84.100 for purposes of reviewing the
Page 3
proposed conditional use. Following the close of the public hearing, the
Hearings Officer shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the con-
ditional use proposal.
18.72.041 - Findings
In making its decision, the Hearings Officer shall consider the require-
ments of this Ordinance and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and other
applicable policies and standards as adopted by the City, and it shall specify
such considerations as findings in support of its decision in accordance with
Section 18.84.100(d).
18.72.050 - General Criteria for Conditional Use
A conditional use permit shall be issued by the Hearings Officer if it is
determined to conform to the following criteria:
a. The use requested would conform with maps, goals and policies of
the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and is listed as a conditional use in
the underlying zoning district.
b. The granting of the proposal would provide for a facility that is
consistent with the overall needs of the community.
c. The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use
considering size, shape, location, topography, existence of improve-
ments and natural features.
d. The site and proposed development is timely, considering the
adequacy of transportation systems, public facilities and services
existing or planned for the area affected by the use.
e. The proposed use will not alter the character of the surrounding
area in a manner which substantially limits, impairs, or precludes the
use of surrounding properties for the primary uses listed in the under-
lying zoning district.
18.72.060 - Standard Dimensional Requirements for Conditional Use Types
A co:-!-;itional use shall comply with the standards of the zone in
which it is located, or as otherwise provided in standards that follow. A
conditional use permit shall not grant variances to the regulations otherwise
prescribed by this Ordinance, unless such variance is applied for in same
application.
Standard Requirements:
a. Schools
I. Applicable zones: Single family residential multiple family
residential. .
2. Minimum lot size: Elementary - 5 acres plus 1 acre per 100
pupils.
Junior & Senior High - 10 acres plus 1 acre
per 100 pupils.
3. Setbacks: Front and rear yards - 30 feet
Sideyards - 20 feet
Page 4
4. Height limitation: In accordance with Section 18_12.110.
5. Off-street parking requirements in accordance with Section
18.60.120(3)(d-f).
6. Loading and unloading school children as provided in Section
18.60.130.
b. Religious Assembly and Accessory Uses:
1. Applicable zones: Single family residential, multiple family
residential and general commercial areas.
2. Minimum lot size: 20,000 square feet.
3. Setbacks: Front yards - 30 feet
Side and rear yards - 20 feet
4. Maximum lot coverage: 40%, structure only.
5. Minimum street frontage: 100 feet.
6. Height limitations: In accordance with Section 18.12.110.
7. Off-street parking required as set- forth in Section 18.60.120(3) (b)
8. Access and egress from street as set forth in Section 18.64.
.c. Hospitals:
1. Applicable zones: Single family residential, multiple family
residential and general commercial.
2. Minimum lot size: 20,000 square feet.
3. Setbacks: Front, side and rear yards - 25 feet_
4. Height limitation: In accordance with Section 18.12.110.
5. Maximum lot coverage: 4076, structure only.
6. There must be primary access to the hospital from major ar-
terial street.
7. Off-street parking required as set forth in Section 18.60.120(2) (b )
8. Off-street loading berths are required in accordance with
Section 18.60.140.
d. Funeral and Interment Services (interring and cemetaries only) :
1. Applicable zone: Single family residential, multiple family
residential and general commercial.
2. Minimum lot size: 5 acres.
3. Setbacks: Front, side and rear yard - 30 feet, for graves only.
100 feet for any structure. ;
4. Height limitation: 35 feet.
5. Adequate irrigation must be provided approved by the City
Engineer.
6. Adequate fencing must be provided; located at least- 212 feet
from any sideyard or right-of-way, outside visual clearance
areas, and at least four feet in height.
7. Off-street parking requirements: exempt.
e. Cultural Exhibit and Library Services: •
1. Applicable zones: Single family residential,. multiple family
residential and residential commercial.
2. Minimum lot size: see applicable zone.
3. Setbacks: see applicable zone.
4. Height limitation: In accordance with Section 18.12.110.
5. Off-street parking in accordance with Section 18.60.120(3) (c) .
f. Sports and Recreation (participant and spectator-general) :
1. Applicable zones: Single family residential, multiple family
residential, general commercial.
Page 5
2. Minimum lot size: 2 acres.
3. Setbacks: Structures on site must meet requirements of
applicable zone.
4. Height limitations: In accordance with Section 18.12.110.
5. Off-street parking requirements: Exempt, unless they are con-
structed in conjunction with another use, then parking shall
compile to the requirements of that other use.
g. Lodges, Fraternal and Civil Assembly:
1. Applicable zones: Multiple family residential and residential
commercial.
2. Minimum lot size: see applicable zone.
3. Setbacks: see applicable zone.
4. Height limitations: . In accordance with Section 18.12.110.
5. Off-street parking: see Section 18.60.120(3) (b) .
h. Day Care Center (6 or more children) :
1. Applicable zones: Single family residential, multiple
family residential.
2. Height limitation: 35 feet.
3. Subject to site design review as set forth in Section 18.59.
4. Facilities that must be licensed with the state in accordance
with ORS 418.805 - 418.885.
5. Off-street parking: Section 18.60-120(3) (d) .
JL. Major Impact Services and Utilities and Minor Impact Utilities:
I. Applicable zones: . single family residential, multiple family
_ residential, general commercial, highway
commercial, liFht, and heavy industrial.
2. Minimum lot size: 5000 square fecsr:j
3. Setbacks: see applicable zone.
4. Height restrictions: In accordance with Section 18.12.110.
5. Off-street parking and loading requirement: see Section 18.60
for applicable use.
6. Screening and site design review in accordance with Sections
with Section 18.12.080 & 18.59.
J. Heliports:
In accordance with the ODOT Aeronautics Division requirements
and the FAA recommended design guidelines.
k. Fuel Sales:
1. Applicable zones: general commercial, commercial/residential,
highway commercial, light industrial, heavy
industrial.
2. Minimum lot size: 10,000 square feet
3. Setback: front yard - 40 feet
rear and side yards - none, except where the use abuts a
residential zonethen 15 feet with screening.
4. Fuel tank installation: In accordance with Section 18.12.120.
5. Height limitation: see applicable zone.
6. Off-street parking and loading requirement: see Section 18.60.
{ 7. Landscaping and site design review in accordance with Section
18.12.0£30 & 18.59.
Page 6
1. Parking Services:
1. Applicable zones: all zoning districts.
2. Minimum lot size: 5000 square feet.
3. Minimum setbacks: for structures - see applicable zone.
for parking area - 5 feet.
around perimeter of paved area for
landscaping and screening purposes.
4. Height limitations: see applicable zone.
5. Off-street parking requirements: see Section 18.60 for
applicable use.
6. Screening and site design review in accordance with Sections
18.60.200 & 18.59.
m. Automobile and Equipment, Sales and Rental: equipment and
repair - light
1. Applicable zone: general commercial.
2. Minimum lot size:• see applicable zone.
3. Minimum setbacks: see applicable zone, and a 5-foot landscaping
strip between right-of-way line and auto
display area.
4. Height limitation: see applicable zone.
5. Off-street parking and loading requirements: see Section 18.60
for applicable
use.
6. Screening and site design review in accordance with Sections
18.12.080 & 18.59.
n. Eating and Drinking Establishments with Drive-through Facilities:
1. Ap{lcable zone: general commercial, residential• commercial.
2. Mi4;�;:aum lot size: see applicable zone.
3. Minimum setbacks: see applicable zone.
4. Height limitations: see applicable zone.
5. Off-street parking and loading requirements: see section 18.60
for applicable
use.
6. Site design review in accordance with Section 18.59.
18.72.070 - Effective Period for Conditional Use
The decision of the Planning Commission shall become effective in accordance
with Section 18.84.240.
18.72.071 - .Conditional Use Approval
Conditional Use approval shall be effective for a one-year period from the date
of approval. In the event that the developer has not commenced the conditional
use or phases thereof, prior to the expiration of the established
effective period, all approvals are null and void. At its discretion and for a
good cause, the Hearings Officer may extend the effective period.
18.72.080 - Modification
A request to modify an existing conditional use permit beyond 20%
of the standards prescribed in Section 18.72.060, (a major modification), shall be
processed . through the variance procedure. Minor modifications of an existing
conditional use permit may be approved by the Planning Director. Written re-
quests for a minor modification shall include the following:
Page 7
a. A site plan which shows any proposed modification.
b. A narrative which explains the applicant's justification for
those modifications.
c. Any other information required by the Planning Director.
18.72.090 - Appeal
The decision of the hearing authority may be appealed in accordance with the
provisions of Sections 18.84.250 - 18.84.310 and Resolution 79-9-
18.72.110 - Concurrent Application with Site Design Review
In accordance with Sections 18.59 and 18.84.060 of the Zoning Ordinance, the
applicant may apply for Site Design Review concurrent with any conditional use
application.
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 'ZONES
R-30, R-20, R-10, R-7, R-5
Section 18.20.010 - permitted Uses
(1) Residential Use Types
- Single family dwelling each on a separately described lot*of record.
(2) Accessory Use Types
- Horticultural and agricultural uses (personal use)
` a. no retail or wholesale business sales conducted on site_
- Normal household pets only (e.g., dogs, cats)
Sports and Recreation (personal use)
- Home.Occupations, in accordance with Section 18.25.250. _
Section 18.20:020 - Conditional Uses
- Duplex residential, with a minimum lot of ten thousand square Feet, o
duplex per lot; or two single family units with a minimum lot- area o "'e
f;a.ve
thousand square feet -per unit. In the event it appears that it is not
practical to divide a legal lot into two lots of five thousand square feet
each, the planning director may approve the division notwithstanding t:he
fact that one lot is less than five thousand square feet; provided, how-
ever, that no such lot shall be smaller than four thousand two hundred
fifty square feet;
Cemeteries;
- Churches and accessory uses;
- Colleges;
- Community buildings (public) ;
- Governmental structure or land use including public park, playground,
recreation building, fire station, library or museum;
convalescent home;
- Hospital, sanitarium, rest home, home for the aged, nursing home or
Heliports, in acorclance with the Aeronautics Division (ODOT) ,;d
- Railroad right-of-way; the FAA. .
-- Schools Nursery, primary, elementary, junj-or high or senior- high, co33.ego
or university, private, parochial or public;
DSajox impact services and utilities
Golf course, country club
Children's day care. (Ord. 80-36 Exhibit A(part) , 1980: Ord 79-92 §2,
1979;
Ord. 79-45 §1(part) , 1979= Ord. 77-90 §4, 1977= Ord 74-5 §1, 3.974;
Ord. 70-32 §110-2, 1970) ;
- Parking services.
3
CHAPTER 18.24
MULTIPLE FAMILY ZONES
A-12, A-20, A-40
18.24.010 - Permitted Uses
(1) Residential Uses Types
- Single family attached dwelling unit or townhouses
- Duplex
- Attached
Multiple dwelling
-Mobile Home (Subdivision or Planned Development and Pa
or more rks if S acres
)
(2) Accessory Use Types
Horticultural and agricultural uses (personal use)
a. no retail or wholesale business sales conducted on szte..
-- Normal household pets only (e.g.,. dogs, cats)
Sports and Recreation (personal use) '
Rome-Occupations, in accordance with Section 18.25.250-
(3) Civil Use Types
- Community recreation
- Public safety services
18.24.020 - Conditionals Use (see Section 18.72 & 18.84)
- Cemeteries
- Churches and accessory uses
- Colleges
Community buildings (public)
- Governmental structure or land use including public park, playground,
recreation building, fire station, library or museum
- Hospital, sanitarium, rest home, home for the aged, nursing home or .
convalescent home
- Railroad right-of-way
- School: nursery, primary, elementary, ,junior high or Senior high,
college or university, private, parochial or public
- Golf course, country club
- Children's day care. (Ord. 80-36 Exhibit A(part) , 1980: Ord 79-92 §2s
1979; C -d. 79-45 §l(part), 1979: Ord. 77-90 '§4, 1977: Ord. 74-5 §1,
1974; Ord. 70-32 §110-2, 1970)
- Parking services -
-- Minor impact utilities
CHAPTERS 18_28 & 18. 30
GENEIZAL COMMERICAL
C-3 , C-3M
Section 18.28.010 - Permitted Uses
(1)Commercial Use Types
- Professional and administrative services
- Business support services
- Financial and real estate services
- Food and beverage retail sales
- General retail sales
-- Medical and dental services
• - Convenient sales and personal services
Repair services - consumer
- Transcient habitation
- Eating and drinking establishments
-- Animal sales and services -
a. grooming
b. veterinary - small animals . -
- Participation sports and recreation - indoor
.(2) Civic Use Types .
-Administrative services
-- Cultural exhibits and library services _
Lodge, fraternal and civic assembly
- Postal services
- Public safety services
Section 18.28.020 - Conditional Uses See Section 18.72
--Major impact services and utilities
-- Eating and drinking establishments with drive through facilities
-- Fuel sales-
-
ales--- Parking services
- Sports and recreation (participant and spectator general) -
t
- Hospitals
- Heliports , in accordance with the Aeronautics Division oan) the
- Religious assembly and accessory uses FAA;
- Automobile and -equipment
a. Sales and rental - light equipment
CHAPTER 18.3 2
RESIDENTIAL COMMERICAL
C-4
Section 18.32.010 - Permitted Uses
(1) Civic Use Types
- AdministraLive Services
- Postal services
- Public safety services
(2) Commercial Use Types
- Convenience sales and personal services .
-- Food and beverage retail sales
—Laundry services
- Professional and administrative services
Repair services - consumer .
- Retail sales - general
Section 18.32.020 - 'Conditional Use See Section 18.72.
- Cultural exhibits and library services.
Eating and Drinking establishments - all
- Fuel sales
- Hospitals
- Lodge, fraternal and civic assembly
- Major impact services and utilities
- Religious assembly and accessory uses.
Heliports, in accordance with the Aeronautics Division
the FAA . (ODOT) ai:
C1[APTER 18 -36
.-RIC-BAY CO,MMERICAI,_•
<Section 18-36.01.0 - Permitted Uses�
(1) Civic Use Types
- Administrative services
- Clinic services
- Cultural exhibits and library services
- Lodges, fraternal, and civic assembly
- Parking services
- Postal services
- Public safety services -
(2) Commercial Use Types -
- Agricultural sales
: - Animal sales and services:
a. Grooming
•b. _Kennels
C.. Veterinary - large-and small animals
Automotive and Equipment:
a. Cleaning
b. Fleet Storage
c. Parking
d. Repairing, Light Equipment
e.' . Sales/Rental: Farm Equipment
f. Sales/Rental: Heavy Equipment
g. Sales/Rental: Light Equipement
- Building maintenance services
- Business equip ment sales and services '
- Business support services
- .Communication services
- Construction sales and service
- Convenience sales and personal services
- Eating and drinking establishments - all use types
- Financial, insurance, and_ real estate services
- Food and beverage sales
- Fuel sales
- Funeral and interment services:
a. Undertaking
Laundry services
- Medical services
- Participant sports and recreation:
a. Indoor and outdoor
- Personal services - general
- Professional and administrative services
- Repair services - consumer
- Retail sales - general
- Spectator sports - entertainment, limited
- Swap meets
- Transient habitation - lodging
- Wholesaling, storage and distribution:
a. _ Mini-warehouses
.Light
(3)Industrial' Use Type
1Limited manufacturing
Section 18.36_020 - Conditional I1seS SPP Section 7 ' 7
- Major impact services and utilities
- Heliports, inaccordance with the Aeronautics Division (ODOT)
and the FAA
CHAPTER 18.44
t
HEAVY INDUSTRIAL `LOQ?E (M-2)
18_44.010 - Permitted Uses
(1) Civic Use Types
-- Parking services
-- Public safety services
- Minor impact utilities
Major impact services. and utilities
(2) Commercial Use Types
Agricultural sales
- Agricultural services
Kennels
Auctioning
•- Automotive and equipment
.. Fleet storage =
Repairs: light, heavy
-' Building maintenance services
-' Construction sales and services
-- Eating and drinking establishments (when related to the other
heavy industrial uses)
Explosive storage
-- Fuel sales
-- Laundry services '
-- Research services
` - Wholesaling, storage and distribution
Mini warehouses
. -Light
Heavy
Scrap operations
(3) Industrial Use Types
-. Light industrial
- Heavy industrial
(4)Extractive Use Types
Mining and processing
18.44.020 - Cond:i.t _onal nseG (Gee cection 18.72)
- Heliports -
e
i
CHAPTER 18.48
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 'LONE (M-3)
18.48.010 - Permitted Uses
(1) Civic Use Types
- Parking services
- Public safety services '
(2) Commercial Use Types
- Agricultural sales
•- Agricultural services
- Animal sales and services '
Kennels
Auctioning
Automobile and equipment
Fleet storage
Repairs
Sale and rental
- Building maintenance services
- Construction sales and service
-"-Laundry services
-- Research services
-- Fuel sales
- Wholesaling, storage, and distribution '
Mini warehouse
• - Light
(3) Industrial Use Type
- Light industrial
18.48.020 - Conditional Uses (See Section 18.72)
Heliports
Major impact services and utilities
Minor impact utilities
CHAPTER 18_52
INDUSTRIAL PARK. ZONE (f•I-�!
18.t�8.010 - �'ermitLed Uses _
(1) Civic Use Types '
Parking services -
- Public safety services
(2) Commercial Use Types -
_ Agricultural sales
Agricultural services -
- Animal sales and services
Kennels
Auctioning
-.Automobile and equipment
Fleet storage
Repairs
Sale and rental
- Building maintenance services
Business support services
Construction sales and services
Essential services
-- Laundry services
Research services
-- Fuel sales
Wholesale, storage and distribution
Mini warehouse
Lightwhen incidental to
Eating and drinking establishments, only
the permitted primary use.
- Personal services, only when ..incidental to the permitted
primary use.
Professional and administrative services
(3) Industrial Use Type '
Light industrial
18.48_020 - Conditional Uses (See Section 18 -72) _
- Heliports
- Major impact services and utilities
- Minor impact utilities
SECTION 18.17. - USE CLASSIFICATIONS
18.17.010 - General Intent of Use Classifications
18.17.020 - Listing of Use Classification
18.17.030 - Classification of Uses
18.17.040 - Classification of Combination of Principal Uses
15.17-010' - General Intent of Use Classifications
The provisions of Section 18. 17 shall be known as the Use Classifica-
tions. The purpose of these provisions is to classify uses into a
limited number of use types on the basis of common functional, product,
or compatibility characteristics, thereby providing a basis :for the
regulation of uses in accordance with criteria which are directly
relevant to the public interest. These provisions shall apply through-
out the• Land Development Code.
18.17.020 - Listing of Use Classifications
All uses are hereby classified into the following use types:
-RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES
Residential use types include 'the occupancy •of living accommoda-
tions on a wholly or primarily nontransient basis. They also in-
clude' certain development accessory to the above , as specified ire
Section 303, Accessory Development Regulations.
a. Family Residential
Refers to the residential occupancy of living units by
iEamilies and excludes transient habitation and group care.
b. Group Residential
Refers to the residential occupancy of living units by groups
of••more than 5 persons who are not related _by blood, marriage,
or adoption, and where communal kitchen/dining facilities .are
provided. Typical uses include occupancy of fraternity and
. sorority houses, retirement homes, boarding houses, cooper-
atives, halfway houses, and intermediate care facilities but
excluding group care facilities as specified below.
Group Residential/Group Care
Refers to services provided in facilities authorized,
certified , or licensed by the State to provide board,
room, and personal care to seven or more physically dis
abled , mentally disordered , handicapped persons, or
dependent or neglected children; or in facilities auth
ized to provide supervisory or day-care services to seven
or more persons, but excluding those uses classified
under Major Impact Services and Utilities and where com-
munal kitchen/dining facilities are provided. Typical
uses include halfway houses and intermediate care
facilities, or day care centers.
C. Mobile Home Residential
Refers to the residential occupancy oC mobile homes. Typical
uses include mobile home parks, subdivisions, or mobile home
condominiums.
(7) CIVIC USE TYPES
Refers to the performance of utility, educational, recreational,
cultural, protective, governmental, and other uses which are
strongly vested with public or social importance. They also
include certain development accessory to the above, as specified in
Section 303, Accessory Development .Regulations._
a. Administrative Services
Refers to consulting , record keeping, clerical, or public
contact services that deal directly with the citizen, together
with incidental storage and maintenance of necessary vehicles,
and excludes commercial use type, "professional and Admini-
strative Services. " Typical' use types are associated with
governmental offices.
b. Community Recreation
Refers to recreational, social , or multi•-purpose uses
typically associated with .parks, -playfields, golf courses, ol(
community recreation -buildings:.
C. Cultural Exhibits and Library Services
Refers to museum-like. preservation and exhibition of objects
in one or more 'of the arts and sciences, gallery- exhibition of
works of art, or library collection of books, manuscripts,
etc: , for study and reading.
d. Essential Services
Refers to services which are necessary to support principal
use type development and involves only minor structures such
as lines and poles, phone booths, fire hydrants, as well as
bus stops, benches, and mailboxes, which are necessary to sup-
port principal development.
e. Lodge, Fraternal, and Civic Assembly
Refers to meetings and activities primarily conducted for
their members. Excluded from this use type are uses class-
ified as group residential, group care , and transient habita--
tion (all types) . Typical uses include meeting places for
civic clubs, lodges, or fraternal or veteran organizations.
f. Major Impact Services and Utilities
Refers to services and utilities which have substantial.
impact. Such uses may be permitted in any district when the
public interest supercedes the usual limitations placed on
land use and transcends the usual restraints of the district
for reasons of necessary location and community wide
interest. Typical places or uses are sanitary landfills, air-
ports, idetention and correction institutions, mass
transit waiting stations or turnarounds, land includes
spectator sports and entertainment with a capacity for 300 or
more such as large exhibition halls or sports stadiums; and
excludes University services and facilities.
g. Minor Impact Utilities
Refers to public utilities which have a local impact on sur--
rounding properties -and are necessary to provide essential.
services. Typical uses are electrical and gas' distribution -
substations, and radio, microwave, and telephone. transmitters.
h. Parking Services.
Refers to parking services involving garages and lots.
i. Postal Services
' Refers to mailing services and processing as traditionally
operated or leased by the United States Postal Service and
includes United Parcel Service facilities.
j .. Public Safety Services
Refers to the providing of protection by a district or entity
pursuant to Fire, Life, and Safety Code Sections together with
the incidental storage and maintenance of necessary
vehicles. Typical uses include fire stations, police -
stations, ambulance services.
k. Religious Assembly "
Refers to religious services involving public assembly such as
customarily occurs in synagogues, temples,- and churches.
1. University Services and Facilities
Refers to services and facilities customarily associated with
a major university. Typical uses include housing facilities
classrooms, research services, recreational amenities, an-
parking facilities.
(3) COMMERCIAL USE TYPES
Commercial use types include the distribution and sale or rental or--
goods; and the provision of services other than those classified as
Civic Uses.
a. Agricultural Sales
Refers to sale from the premises of feed, grain, fertilizers,
pesticides, - and similar goods. Typical uses include nur-
series, hay, feed, and grain stores.
b. Agricultural Services
Refers to establishments or places of business engaged in the
provision of agriculturally related . services with incidental.
storage . on lots other than where the service is rendered .
Typical uses include crop dusting or .tree service firms.
C. Animal Sales and Services
_Refers to- establishments or places of business primarily en---
gaged in animal related sales and services. - The following- are
animal sales and services use types:
Jf .. Animal Sales and Services: Auctioning. Auctioning ot`.
livestock on a wholesale or retail basis with incidental_
storage of animals produced off property not exceeding a
48-hour period. Typical uses include animal auctions or
livestock auction yards.
2. Animal Sales and Services: Grooming. Grooming of dogs,
cats, and similar small animals. Typical uses include
dog bathing and clipping salons or pet grooming shops.
3. Animal Sales and Services: Horse Stables. Boarding,
reeding, -err rales-inq of horses not owned by the occupants
of the premises or riding -of horses by other than the
occupants of the premises or their nonpaying guests.
Typical uses include boarding stables or public stables.
4. Animal Sales and Services: Kennels. Kennel services for
dogs, - cats, and similar small animals. Typical uses
include boarding kennels or dock training centers.
5. Animal Sales and Services: Stockyards. Stockyard ser-
vices involving the temporary keeping of transient live-
stock for slaughter, market, or shipping. Typical uses
include stockyards or animal sales yards.
6. Animal Sales and Services: Veterinary (Large Animals) .
Veterinary services for large animals. Typical uses
include animal hospitals (large animals) or veterina
hospitals (large animals) .
7. Animal Sales and Services: Veterinary ( Small Animals) .
Veterinary services for small animals. Typical uses
include pet clinics, clog and cat hospitals, or animal
hospitals (small animals) .
d. Automotive and Equipment
Refers to establishments or places of business primarily en-
gaged in motorized vehicle-related sales or services. The
following are automotive and equipment use types:
1. Automotive and Equipment: Cleaning. Washing and
polishing of automobiles. Typical uses include auto
laundries or car washes.
. 2. Automotive and Equipment: Fleet Storage. Fleet storage
of vehicles used regularly in business operation and not
available for sale -or long term storage • of operatinq
vehicles. Typical uses include taxi - fleets, mobile-
catering truck storage, or auto storage garages.
3. Automotive and Equipment: Parking. Parking of motor
: vehicles on a temporary basis within a privately owned
off-street parking area with or without a fee. Typical
uses include commercial parking lots or garages:
4. Automotive and Equipment: Repairs, Heavy Equipment.
Repair of trucks, etc. , as well as - the sale,. installa-
tion, - or servicing of automotive equipment and parts
together with body . repairs, painting, and steam
cleaning. Typical uses include truck transmission shops,
body • shops, or motor freight maintenance groups.
5.- Automotive and Equipment: Repairs, Light Equipment.
Repair of automobiles and the sale, installation, and
servicing of automobile equipment and parts but excluding
body repairs and painting. Typical .uses include muffler
shops, auto or motorcycle repair garages, or auto glass
shops.
6. Automotive and Equipment: Sales/Rentals, Farm
Equipment. Sale, retail or wholesale, and/or rental from
the premises of farm equipment together with incidental
maintenance. Typical uses include farm equipment
dealers.
7. Automotive and Equipment: Sales/Rentals, Heavy
Equipment. Sale, retail or whole-sale, and/or rental_ from
the premises of heavy construction equipment, trucks, and
i aircraft together with incidental maintenance. Typical
`. • .
uses inclurle aircraft dealers, boat dealers, heavy con-
struction equipment dealers, or tractor trailers.
$. Automotive and Equipment: Sales/Rentals, Light
TE.quitpment. Sale, retail or wholesale, and/or rental from
the premises of autos, noncommercial trucks, motorcycles,
motorhomes, and trailers with less than a 10,000 gross
cargo weight together with incidental maintenance.
Typical uses include automobile dealers, car rental
agencies, or recreational vehicles rales and rental
agencies.
g. Automotive and Equipment: Storage, Nonoperating
Vehicles. Storage of nonoperating motor vehicles. Typi--
• cal uses include storage of private parking towaways or
impound yards.
10. Automotive - and Equipment: Storage, Recreational Vehicles
and Boats. Storage of recreational vehicles and boats.
Typical uses include the collective storage of personal
recreational vehicles or boats.
e. Building Maintenance Services
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of
maintenance *and ' custodial' services * to f firms rather than indi-
viduals. -Typical uses include janitorial , landscape mainte �
nance, or window cleaning services.
f. Business Equipment Sales and Services
Refers to establishments or places of business primarily en--
gaged in the sale, rental ; or repair of equipment 'and supplies
used by off ice, professional, and service establishments to
the firms' themselves rather than to individuals, but excludes
automotive, construction, and farm equipment. Typical uses
include office equipment and supply firms, small business
machine repair shops, or hotel equipment and supply firms .
g. Business Support Services
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of:
services "of a clerical, employment, protective, or minor pro-
cessing nature to firms rather than individuals and where the
storage of goods other than samples is prohibited. Typical
uses i.nclude secretarial services, telephone answering ser-
vices, or blueprint services.
h. Communications Services
Refers to establishments primarily engagea in the provision of-
broadcasting and other information relay .services accomplished
through the use of electronic anri telephonic mechanisms but( It
excludes those classified as Major Impact Services and
t
t
Utilities. Typical uses include television studios, t(.le-
3` communication service centers, or telegraph service office:
i. Construction Sales and Services
Refers to establishments or places of busines primarily en-
gaged in construction activities and incidental storage on
lots other than construction sites as well as the retail or
wholesale sale, from the premises, of materials used in ti:.
construction of buildings or other structures other than
retail sale of paint, fixtures, and hardware; but excludes
those classified as one of the Automotive and Heavy Equipment
use types. Typical uses include building materials stores,
tool and equipment rental or sales, and building contracting/
construction offices.
j . Convenience Sales and Personal Services
Refers to establishments or places of business primarily eii=-
. .gaged in the provision of frequently or recurrently needed
small personal items or services. These include various
general retail sales and -personal services of an appropriate
size and scale. to meet the above criteria. ' Typical uses
include neighborhood grocery, drug stores, laundromat/dry
cleaners,. or barbershops.
k. Eating Establishments
Refers to establishments or places o£ business primarily en-
gaged in the sale of prepared food and beverages for on-
premise consumption. The following are eating establishment
use types:
Fast Order Food Establishments: An establishment whose
primary business is the sale of food which is a) pri-
marily intended for immediate consumption; b) available
upon a short waiting time; and c) packaged or presented
in such a manner that it can be readily eaten outside the
premises where it is sold, but excluding drive-in fast
order food establishments.
Fast Order Food Establishment - Drive-in: A business
establishment so developed that its retail or service
character is dependent on providing a driveway approach
so as to serve patrons while in the motor vehicle, or
within a building on the same premises and devoted to the
same purpose as the drive-in service.
Easting Bstablishment - Sit-down : An establishment whose
primary business is the sale of food which is prepa- i
and served in such a manner that it is generally consujI,_.j
on the premises, and typically does not have a rapid
turnover of clientele.
1 . Explosive Storaqe
Refers to the storage of any quantity of explosives in accord- !
ance with ORS 57. 21. Typical uses include storage in the
course of manufacturing , selling, or transporting explosives
or in the course of blasting operations.
M. Financial , Insurance, and Real Estate Services
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of
financial, insurance, real estate, or securities brokerage
services. Typical uses include banks, insurance agencies, or
real estate firms.
n. Food and Beverage Retail Sales
Refers to establishments or places of business primarily en'-
gaged in the retail sale of food and beverages 'for home con-
sumption. Typical uses include groceries or delicatessens.
o. Funeral and Interment Services
Refers to. establishments .primaril_y engaged in the provision of
services involving the care, preparation, or disposition of
human (lead . The following are Funeral and interment services
use types: .
1. Funeral and Interment Services: Cremating.
Cremator(
services involving the puri icata.on and reduction of the
human body by fire. Typical uses include crematories or_
crematoriums. .
2. Funeral and Interment Services: Interrinq. Interring
services involving the keeping of human bodies other than
in cemeteries. Typical uses include columbariums or
mausoleums.
3. Funeral and Interment Services: Undertakinq. Under.-
taking services such as preparing the dead for burial and
arranging and managing funerals. Typical uses include
funeral homes or mortuaries.
4. Funeral and Interment Services : Cemeteries.
P_ Fuel _Sales
Refers to establishments or places of business primarily en-
gaged in the retail sale, from the premises, of petroleum
products with incidental sale of ' tires, batteries, an6
replacement items, lubricating* services, and minor repair
_ services. Typical uses include automobile service stations,
filling stations, or truck stops.
cl. Laundry Services
• Refers to establishmentsrimaril in the
T� Y enq a ed�! provision of
laundering , dry cleaning, or dyeing services other than those
classified as Personal Services, General . Typical uses
include laundry agencies, diaper services, or linen supply
services.
r. Medical Services
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in. the provision of
personal health services ranging from prevention, diagnosis
and treatment, or rehabilitation services provided by
physicians, dentists, nurses, and other health personnel as
well as the provision of medical testing and analysis
services, but excludes those classified as any civic use or
group residentia"(group care) use type. Typical uses include
medical offices, dental laboratories, or health maintenance
organizations.
S. Participant Sports and Recreation
Refers to establishments or places primarily engage;l in the
provision of sports or recreation by and for participants.
Any spectators would be incidental and on a nonrecurring
basis. The following are participant sports and recreation
use types ( for either general or personal use) :
1. Participant Sports and Recreation: Indoor. Those uses
conducted within an enclosed building, Typical uses
-include bowling alleys, billiard parlors, swimming pools,
or physical fitness centers.
2. Participant Sports and Recreation: Outdoor. Those uses
conducted in open facilities. Typical uses include
driving ranges, miniature golf courses, or swimming
pools.
t. Personal Services, General
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of
informational, instructional, personal improvementr and
similar services of a nonprofessional nature but excludes
services classified as Spectator Sports and Entertainment,
Participant Sports and Recreation, or Transient Habitation.
Typical uses include photography studios, driving schools, or
reducing salons.
u. Professional and Administrative Services
Refers to offices of private firms or organizations which are
primarily used for the provision of professional, executive,
management, or administrative services . Typical uses include
administrative offices, legal offices, or architectural firms.
V. Repair Services, Consumer
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of
repair services to individuals and households rather than
Eirms, but excluding Automotive and Equipment use types .
Typical uses include appliance repair shops, apparel repair
firms, or musical instrument repair firms.
W. Research Services
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in - research of an
industrial or scientific nature which is generally provided as
a service or which is conducted by and for a private firm, but
excludes medical testing and analysis, and product testing.
Typical uses include electronics research laboratories,
environmental research and development firms, or pharma-
ceutical research labs.
X.- Retail Sales, General
Refers -to the sale or rental of commonly used goods ,-- and mer-
chandise for personal or household use, but excludes those
classified as Agricultural Sales, Animal Sales and Services,
Automotive and Equipment, Business Equipment Sales an(:1
_ . Services, Construction Sales and Services, Food and 13eve)-.age
Retail Sales, Gasoline Sales, and Swap Meets. Typical uses
include .department stores, apparel -stores, or furnitul �
stores.
Y. -Scrap Operations .
Refers to places of business primarily engaged in the storage ,
sale, dismantling, or other processing of used , source separ-
ated, or waste materials which are not intended for reuse in
their original form. Typical uses include automotive wrecking
yards, . . junk yards, paper salvage yards, or recycling
facilities.
�. Spectator Sports and Entertainment
Refers to establishments or places primarily engaged in tl)e
provision of cultural, entertainment, athletic, and other*
to spectators as well as those involving social
fraternal gatherings. The following are spectator sorts or
and
entertainment use types: p
I. Spectator Sports and Entertainment; Limited. Those uses
conducted withi-n an enclosed building with a capacity of
299 or less people. Typical uses include small theaters
or meeting halls.
2. Spectator Sports and Entertainment:- Other. Designate'
as a Major Impact Facility and Service use type„
aa. Swap Meets
Refers to the display, exchange, barter, or sale of new or
used common household items or office equipment and fur-
nishings, provided that such activity being carried on is not
a temporary use. Typical uses include flea markets where.
clothing, personal effects, household furnishings, and house-
hold appliances are sold or otherwise exchanged.
bb. Transient Habitation
Refers to establishments primarily engaged in the provision of
lodging . services on a temporary basis with, incidental food,
drink, and other sales and services intended for the con-
venience of guests. The following are transient habitation
use types:
1. Transient Habitation: Campground. Campground
services
involving transient habitation areas for travelers in
recreational vehicles or tents. Typical uses include
recreation vehicle parks.
2. : Transient- Habitation: Lodging. Lodgi-nq services in--:
volving the provision of room and/or board. Typical uses
include hotels, motels, or transient boarding houses.
cc. Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution
Refers to establishments or
places of business primarily en--
gaged in wholesaling, storage, distribution, and handling of
materials and equipment other than live animals and plants.
The following are wholesaling, storage, and distribution use
types:
1. wholesaling, Storage, and Distribution: Mini--
Warehouses. Storage or warehousing service within a
building(s) primarily for individuals to store personal
effects and by businesses to store materials for oper-
ation of an industrial or commercial enterprise located .
elsewhere. Incidental uses in a mini-warehouse may
include the repair and maintenance of stored materials by
the tenant but in no case may storage spaces in a mini--
warehouse - facility function as an independent retail,
wholesale, business, or service use. Spaces shall not be
used for workshops, hobbyshops, manufacturing, Or similar
uses and human occupancy of said spaces shall be limited
to that required to transport, arrange, and maintain
stored. materials.
2. Wholesaling, Storage, and Distribution : Light. Who. _
Ealing, storage, and warehousing services within enclosed
structures. Typical uses include wholesale distributors,
storage warehouses, or moving and storage firms.
3. Wholesaling , Storaqe, anr3 Distribution : Meavy. Open-aiz�
storage, distribution, and handling of materials an..-
equipment.
n:.equipment. Typical uses include monument or stone yards,
-o- grain elevators.
(4) - INDUSTRIAL USE TYPES
industrial use types include the on-site production of goods by
methods not commercial, agricultural, or extractive in nature.
b. Light Industrial -
- Refers to the:
- -Production, processing, assembling, Packaging, or treatf
ment of food products from previously. processes?
. materials; or . .
Production, processing, assemblinq, and packaginq of
finished products from previously prepared -materials; or.
Manufacturing and *assembly of electronic instruments an:a
equipment and electrical devices. .
C. _ Heaves. Industrial
Refers to the manufacturing, processing,. Or assemblinq of
semi--finished or finished products from- raw materials.
(5) 'AGRICULTURAL USE TYPES
Agricultural use types include 'the on-site production of plant ana
animal products by agricultural methods.
a. Animal Husbandry
Refers to the raising and breeding of livestock.
b. Animal Waste Processing
`' �• Refers to the processing of animal waste and by-products,
including, but not limited to, animal manure, animal beddinc-j
waste, and similar by-products of an animal raising agri.-
cultural operation, for use as a commercial fertilizer or soil
amendment and including composting For commercial purposes.
C. Aquaculture
'Refers to' the premises primarily devoted to aquacultural
research and specialties.
d . "Horticulture
Refers to premises primarily devoted to horticultural and
floracultural specialties such as flowers, shrubs, and trees
intended for ornamental or landscaping purposes. The fol-
lowing are horticulture use types:
1. * Horticulture: Cultivation. Cultivation of plants.
2. Horticulture: Storage. Storage of plantsr primarily *in
containers.
e. Packing and Processing
Refers to packing or processing of agricultural crops,
animals, and their by-products which entails - more than
picking, cutting, sorting, and boxing or rating but. does not
include canning, rendering, tanning, or reduction of meat.
The .following are packing and processing use types:
1. . Packing and Processing: Limited. Packing or Processing
of crops grown on the premises.
2. Packing and Procgssing: General. Packing or processing
of crops, animals, or their by-products regardless of-
where they were grown.
€. Row and Field Crops
Refers to premises primarily devoted to the cultivation Of
agricultural products grown in regular or scattered patterns
such as vines, field, forage, and other plant crops intended
to provide food or fibers.
q. Tree Crops
Refers to premises primarily devoted to the cultivation f_or.
personal use of tree-grown agricultural products such as
_ orchards for applies and cherries.
(6) - EXTRACTIVE USE TYPES
Extractive use types include the on-site production of minerar
products by extractive methods.
a. Mining and Processing
Refers to places or plants primarily devoted to surface or
subsurface mining of metallic and nonmetallic minerals, oil,
or gas together with essential on--site processing and Produc-
tion of . only nonmetallic mineral products. Typical places ai:e-
borrow pits, oil and gas drilling rigs, or concrete batch
plants.
18:17.030 - Classification of Uses
Uses will- be classified into use types based upon the description of
- the use types and upon common functional,
product, or compatibility characteristics with other uses already clas-
sified within the- use type. ' A list- of common uses and the use typzs
into which - they are classified shall be ' maintainedby the Planning
Director. . The Planning Director shall* have the authority to classify
common uses according to use type. The classification of a use is su)D-
ject to the right of appeal in accordance with the provisions of
Section 184.84.150,
lfi.�-7.n40 Classification of Combination of Principal Uses
The following ..rules shall apply where a lot " contains ' Uses- which re-
semble two -or more different use types and which are not classified
either special -development or as accessory uses _
a. Separate Classification of • Several Establishments. The principal
uses conducted on a lot or development site by two or. more , indi-
vidual establishments, managements, or institutions shall- be clas-
sified separately into use types.
b. Classification of Different Uses Conducted by Individual
Establishment. If principal uses conducted on a lot or development
site by an individual establishment, management, or :i»stitution
resemble two or more different use types all such principal use's
shall be classified in the use types whose description most closely
portrays the nature of such uses.
1
March 3, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Director
On March 2, 1982, the Planning Commission heard an appeal on St. Anthony's
Kelly Center. The applicant objects to conditions for public improvements
placed on the project by the Planning Director.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward the issue to the City
Council with the following recommended conditions:
1. 99W ingress/egress be eliminated and moved to SW Johnson Street.
Plans for these changes shall be reviewed by the Public Works Director.
2. St. Anthony's Church shall petition the City of Tigard to form a
Local Improvement District for the improvement of SW McKenzie Street,
and SW Grant Avenue. Improvements to SW Johnson shall be considered
with approval for Phase 2 of this project.
3. Applicant shall submit detailed parking computations to the Planning
Director. Note the "improved" conditions of each existing parking lot.
Reference the Tax Lot and existing use in relation to Code Parking Re-
quirements.
Conditions 4 through 9 remain as recommended by staff.
7
REVISED
FINAL ACTION STArY R=PORT r
TI%ARD PLINNIZIG DEFART4ENT
12420 S.W- Main Street, TigardC® RD
M� OA-
DECEMBER 14, 1981 WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON
DOCKET: St. Anthony's Kelly Center SDR 26-81
APPLZC_`NT: Larry D. Nicholson, Architect for St. Anthony's Church
113 S.W_ Front Avenue
Portland, Oregon 9:204
SITE LOCATION: 9905 S.W. McKenzie NPO 3t 2
Washington County Tax Map 2S1 2BD lot 100, 200, 300 S 400
SITE DESIGNATION: A-12 Multi-Family Residential on the Comprehensive Plan.
Churches and Schools are Conditional Uses in the A-12 zone. Lots 100, 300 and
400 are designated C-5 Highway Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Proposed
development i.12. take place only on Tax lot 200.
PP_RKING REQUIREMENTS: Adequate parking exists. on site.
SIAFF COMI-ENTS: The City Council policy is to require half-street improvements
as a condition of all development. In this case the Church
o"ms cczsiZsrable property abutting public streets, all of which are substandard.
I;: a Isocal Improvement District is formed in the area surrounding this project
it ootid �1- possible to make full street improvements to S.W. Johnson Street,
S.W. Grant avenue and S.W. McKenzie Street.
'"he ex-I.ting ingress/egress from the present school site on 99W is unsafe and
should he eliminated at this time.
STAT. ACTION: Staff APPROVES this Site Design Review application if the following
conditions are met:
1. 99W ingress/egress be eliminated and moved to S.W. Johnson Street, Plans
for these changes shall be reviewed by the Public Works Director_
2. St, Anthony's Church shall petition the City of Tigard to form a Local
Improvement District for the improvement of S.W. McKenzie Street, S.W.
Grant Avenue and S.W. Johnson Street. If this effort_ is unsuccessful
St. Anthony's shall make half-street improvements to acceptable standard;
as indicated by the Public Works Director to S.W. Johnson from 99W to
S.W. Grant and S.W_ McKenzie from S-W. Grant Southerly adjacent to tax
lots 200, 400 and 800. A non-remonstrance agreement for the futu---e
improvement of S.W_ Grant Street shall be signed and recorded prier to.
the issuance of Building Permits for the Kelly Center.
3. Applicant shall submit detailed parking computations to the Planning Director_
Note the 11-improved" conditions of each existing parking lot. Reference the
( Tax Lot and existing use in relation to Code Parking Requirements,
12420 S.W. MAIN P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH; 639-4171
STAFF REPORT
FINAL ACTION SDR 26-81
PAGE 2
4. No Occupancy Per'-nits shall be issued until all conditions upon this
development by the City of Tigard have been satisfied and inspections
verifying this have been carried out by the appropriate Department.
5. No changes will be made to approved plans or specifications unless formal
application is made to the appropriate City Department and changes are
approved by that Department. Application for changes will be made in
writing and shall include applicable drawings.
6. Grading and construction plans for all work in public right-of-way and
and all other public improvements shall be prepared by a registered
professional engineer in accordance with City standards, and shall be
submitted to the Public Works Department for review.
All public improvements specified above will require a Compliance Agreement
and must be (design) approved by the Public Works Department. Said
improvements shall be either (1) fully and satisfactorily constructed
prior to issuance of Building Permits; or (2) bonded to the City for 100%
of the estimated cost thereof prior to issuance of Building Permits.
7. All street and parking areas shall be concrete or asphalt. A11 sidewalks
shall be concrete.
B. No minor land partitions shall be made in reference to this project unless
formal application is made to the city of Tigard Planning Department and
the Minor Land Partition is approved and recorded.
9. Necessary dedications of property along the Rights-of-way of abutting streets
shall be made as follows:
S.W. Johnson additional Five feet from tax lots 100 and 200
providing 25 feet from the centerline
S.W. McKenzie Additional five feet from tax lots 200, 400 and 800
providing 25 feet from centerline -
S.W. Grant Additional ten feet from tax lot 200
providing 30 feet from centerline
APPROVED BY: FRANK cuR-,uk;, Pl3-nning Director
L
NOTE. Sign below to acknowledge conditions set forth for this project and
return to the City of Tigard Planning Department. Failure to acknowledge
will result in no further action on this project with regards to issuance
of Building Permits or Engineering approval.
�' .� �_�,/�'� /,yam •%j ,� ��1�.�r�2� •� � �$�
rt2f
February 23, 1982
FOR THE RECORD
Submitted for design review in October, 1981, was a 2 phase
project of approximately 13,000 square feet, consisting of a
6000 square ft. multipurpose meeting room and kitchen to be
built at this time and, when funds permit, a 7160 square foot
meeting room/gymnasium, all located on tax lot 200 of the
church property.
The budget available from all sources for the building and
municipal improvements is very close to $400,000. Construction
bids for Phase 1 ranged from over $450,000 to below $390,000
for the project as submitted for review.
It is estimated, using the figures supplied by the Tigard City
Planning Director, that cost of the half street improvements
by LID, as demanded by the Director, to include S.W. Johnson,
S.W. Grant and S.W. McKenzie, including curbs, sidewalks,
storm sewers and widened to standard streets, would be
approximately $235,000. This requirement would increase the
cost of the project by 60%, and effectively kill it because of
financial restraints.
In similar cases the City has allowed applicants to make
partial municipal improvements at the time of construction,
completing the required improvements over a period of several
years. We therefore request to be allowed to make a LID
improvement to S.W. McKenzie and to bring the main parking lot
on that street to City standards for the Phase 1 portion of
this project.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis Henniger
for
The Facilities Committee
St. Anthony's Church
Ref: Record
FOR THE RECORD
March 4, 1982
Kelly Center of
St. Anthony' s Church
The Planning Commission of the City of Tigard, in its meeting
and public hearing on the night of March 2, 1982, is making a
number of recommendations regarding the municipal improvements
needed for St. Anthony's Church to obtain a building permit
for the construction of the proposed Kelly Center. The
Facilities Committee of St. Anthony' s Church agrees with the
recommendations of the Commission, but would like to point out
two possible problem areas. They are:
1. The closure of the access to highway 99W will double the
traffic on the present exit to Johnson Street. We feel that
this exit will not be sufficient for the needs of the school,
and is not as safe an entrance as the highway entrance, even
with its problems. We feel that closure of the present 99W
entrance can be successful only if the following measure is
taken:
Opening a new entrance to Johnson Street in
addition to the present one. This may be done by
improving a gated and gravelled entrance located
northwest of the beforementioned Johnson Street
exit.
This measure is necessary to insure that vehicles moving at a
moderate speed are not entering the school grounds at a point
IBM of limited visibility, a problem which does not exist with the
present 99W entrance. Another reason is to allow for good
access of fire equipment, should it be necessary.
A further improvement may be made by widening the present
Johnson Street exit. It is felt, however, that this
improvement alone will not solve the need for good access to
the school facility.
It is also hoped that if the addition of one of these
asked-for larger entrances is approved that significant
further requirements of improvements to adjacent streets can
be avoided.
2. One of the requirements for the building permit was the
signing of a non-remonstrance agreement as regards future
improvements to Grant Street. We would like to point out that
we in the parish are not in the position to sign such an
( agreement, since we do not hold title to or have direct
ownership of the parish property. We would like Council
members to note, however, that we are making an attempt to
make improvements to the property as we are able, and have as
our goal facilities that the members of the church and the
people of the City of Tigard can view with pride.
Respectfully submitted,
i
George J. Frye
Chairman,
The Facilities Committee
St. Anthony' s Church
i
1
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
March 2, 1982 - Agenda Item 5.8 - St. Anthony's Kelly Center
Appeal of Planning Director's Decision
Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room
10865 SW Walnut Street - Tigard, Oregon
Present and participating in this hearing: Commissioners Bonn,
Christen, Herron, Kolleas, Moen, Owens and Speaker. President
Tepedino opened the hearing and then withdrew from participation.
Staff participating in this hearing: Planning Director Frank
Currie, Associate Planner Liz Newton, and Ken El�_Lott for City
Counsel.
Tepedino: May I have the staff report and recommendations, please, on 5.8?
Newton: (She read the momorandum of Feb. 199 1982, from Planning Staff
to the Planning Commission, to which was attached the staff report
dated December 14, 1981, by Frank Currie, Planning Director,
setting forth the conditions for approval of the site design
review application for this project. She did not read this
Final Action Staff Report, but it was included in material given
to the Planning Commissioners.)
Tepedino: Thank you, Staff. Let the record reflect that I was actively
Involved as a member of the church council at the time this issue
was being decided at that church, and therefore will withdraw
from activo participation on this issue; and I will turn the
moeting over to the Vice President, Commissioner Speaker.
Speaker: Do we have an applicant's presentation on this?
Henninger: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dennis Henninger. I am a member of
St. Anthony's Church and have worked on the project that is before
you now. Let me explain briefly what we have, and by way of
making the record so anyone who might review it would know what
the scope of the project is, let me explain what we have here is
a 13 hundred square foo.t multi-purpose building to be built in
two phases, the first of which is an approximately 6,000 square
foot building which would have a kitchen and meeting rooms, the
second about 7,000 --
Speakbr: Pardon me; you said 1300 square feet, and then you talked about
6,000 square feet --
Henninger: It will be 13,000 square feet -- 6 and 7.
Speaker: Okay; I thought you said 1300.
Henninger: 6,000 in phase 1, and that is what is before us now; and 7,000
is a gymnasium with multi-purpose capabilities for housing numbers
of people and larger gatherings. Basically what we have here now
TP.ANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Henninger: is design review recommendations on phase 1, which is a kitchen
(Cont.) with small meeting rooms or capability of housing up to approxi-
mately 200 people in meeting rooms off the kitchen area. We
recognize that as a parish we have to do certain municipal Improve-
ments, but we are here appealing the scope and nature of the ones
that were requested here.
As indicated in the material which we sent here, that our budget,
top end, is around $400,000; our lowest bid on the project is
around $390,000; and it appears to us -- Mr. Nicholson, the
architect on the project will speak briefly -- that the municipal
improvements which are contemplated here are going to run_ some-
where in the neighborhood of between two and three hundred thousand
dollars, depending on what finally is decided by the city as
"street specifications" because there are very few, if any, street
standards over in that general area.
The project itself is on one lot. It is on Tax Lot 200, and I
have a schematic of that area -- it's not very large -- but let
me show you;the church property is circumscribed by SW Johnson,
generally running in this direction, SW Grant Avenue, and SW
McKenzie Street here. Those three streets; the project is situated
on Tax Lot 200 -- it's a 4.2 acre lot. It isn't situated on Tax
Lot 100, which was commented on in the Planning Director's memo-
randum, and it's not situated on 300, nor is it situated on Tax
Lot 800, which is southerly of McKenzie. Only the 4.2 acres is
involved, and only a portion of the 4.2 acres.
It was felt by the committee that I was on that certainly there
is going to be some impact with respect to the people that will be
coming in and off the property; but the primary impact will be on
SW McKenzie Street and through parking. Tax Lot 800, Which is
4/10 of an acre, is unimproved--it has some fill gravel and it has
some drainage on it--but it has not been improved for parking.
There is no asphaltic paving or parking stalls on it. And it was
because of this that we recommended and acquiesced in the concept
of putting a local improvement district on McKenzie, the southerly
border of the project from Tax Lot 400 over to Grant Avenue, and
then supplying parking by way of putting asphalt pavement on Tax
Lot 800 and putting in curbs and apron approaches on and off
McKenzie.
Now may I mention that the way that this was approache '. _n the
memo out of the Planning Director's office was that the parish
would, as a first option, form a local improvement district--that
Is, we would petition for the formation of an LID. The LID would
be from Johnson to Grant and McKenzie back to what is generally
the southerly border of Tax Lot 400. That's approximately 1600
-2-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Henninger: lineal feet of improvement that would include curbs, sidewalks,
(Cont.) drainage, storm sewers together with -- I should say, in addition
to -- the parking, which is admittedly a requirement, and a reason-
able one, of the project. We are talking about a very ambitious
undertaking of municipal improvements. They would, I think, by
any estimation be about two-thirds of the value of the project,
which we felt was both burdensome and unrealistic. If in fact
we hold on that position--that is to say, form a local improvement
district on three perimeters of the property--then there is no way
the project can go; so we both lose. And we are here to try
and see if there is some reasonable middle ground where the project
can go, where we can do some of the admittedly desirable improve-
ments now, and do the balance of them at a time when circumstances
and finances permit.
As you know -- you have been patient in listening to other peti-
tioners before you -- a local improvement district can only be
stopped if two-thirds of the affected property owners vote--on a
geographic basis--two-thirds of them vote to stop the project.
Well, it doesn9t take much of a mathematician to see there is no
possible way--if we own everything on the inside of the circle--
that there could possibly be two-thirds left on the outside.
So it's academic to say that we will petition for an LID, and if
successful then we will go the three-street improvement. It's
a foregone conclusion if we petition there will be an improvement.
So with that general format, I would comment before I turn it
over to Larry Nicholson, the architect, that we feel that the
99-W ingress-egress issue -- 99-W again is here, and passes
by the church property, by the school -- it has no relationship
to this project in any way that we can see, and we do not feel
that that ought to be eliminated. We feel it is not responsive
to anything we are doing on this property. So we ask that, in
responding to the order in which he listed them, No. 1, that the
99-W ingress-egress elimination not even be considered, because
It doesn't affect this project; No. 2, with respect to the first
option, petition for the formation of the LID, we say alternatively
allow us to put an LID on McKenzie Street from the southerly
border of 400 over to Grant Street, allow us to pave the parking
lot on Grant Street and to stripe it, and I think as phase 1
that will reasonably respond to the needs that we have.
Grant Street, as you probably know or may know, has a bicycle path
on it--it's reflectorized and it's a recent part of the city
bicycle pathway project, and we feel that to put curbs in there
would be disruptive to that area; and again, it isn't an area on
Grant Street impacted by the location of this building, which
to primarily on quadrant 49--I believe those are lot and block
numbers--but this project goes primarily on quadrant 49 of North
Tigardville plat. .
-3-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Henninger: I believe we have some blue prints here, Liz you have a blue
(Cont.) print? (Business of getting correct prints.) I will turn it over
to Larry Nicholson--I will assist him here. He can tell you a
lot more about the location of the project and about some of the
costs that we are dealing with--the hard costs of the suggested
first option--and that is the three-street LID.
Nicholson: Basically what we are talking about here is (some lost in
change of tapes) . . . room for a place to meet for the different
user groups that they have in their organization. We are talking
about some 40 to 50 user groups within this specific church, as
It will b, used in this complex.
We can see how it is divided up into phases. This is the first
phase we are talking about at this point in time. In terms of
the effect on the surrounding area by this building, we envision
this building only being used basically at night--I would say
95 per cent of the time the building will be used at night, and
at the same time church is going on, the building probably will
not be used. So in terms of the use of the parking lot, we want
to use the parking lots to supply the building.
As you can see by the heavy black lines around here, we are talking
about an overdose of perimeter streets for improvements. And I
have got costs--we have checked with the Multnomah County Design
and Construction supervisor for current costs for street improve-
ments, and this just happened today, so these are very current.
And he gave us costs of curbs at $3.75, a five foot sidewalk at
89.00--I talk of total installation. New storm sewers, 12 inch
diameter, $24.00 a lineal foot, and it's larger than that, it's
approximately $2.00, so that's $26.00 a lineal foot for anything
larger than 12 inches diameter. Paving, base and rock at approx-
imately $3.30 a square foot. And if we take all that perimeter
and that black line and add that up--that being 481 feet on
McKenzie, 708 feet on Johnson and 488 on Grant, and then the
parking lot adjacent to the church, those perimeters as well,
being on McKenzie and Grant--we come up with some 2,035 lineal
feet. And taking those costs and projecting those or applying
those back into that perimeter area, we come up with 8234a800
for improvement costs. So we feel pretty good where these costs
are and their accuracy.
Henninger: I think you can see we have a real dilemma. We are here to ask
some rational method of compromises. We do recognize that we
have an obligation to put some municipal improvements in, and are
willing to do that. But if we are simply overwhelmed with the
scope of them, then the project will not go. if we can work out
something like the solution we have offered, it will go and
we can all live with it, and on phase 2 we are probably going to
—4—
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Henninger: be in a poaition to do some more. But to do -- to buy the entire
(Cont.) horse now -- we will not even get in the race. So we ask your
ce::oideration on that. Thank you.
Speaker: Thank you. Is there any public testimony in favor of this project?
Any public testimony in opposition? If not, we can go to cross-
examination and rebuttal, and I have a question--I have two or
three questions. One of Staff: the Planning Director approved
site design review on December 14, and on February 3 the pariah
filed an appeal to conditions. Is that a timely filing of an
appeal?
Currie: The parish did that on the advice of the city attorney because
at the time, the city had no appeal process--on February 3 no
legal appeal process. We had been conducting appeals, but there
was no provision for it in the Code. And those provisions were
adopted, I believe, at the February 2 Council meeting; on February
third they came in with their appeal; so I would have to say
Yes, it was very appropriate.
Speaker: (Amid chuckling by Commissioners) Yes, it looks like it is timely.
(Addressed to Mr. Henninger) Now I suspect that there Is a rather
high degree of sophistication in your parish organization, and
you know that the city has a policy that public improvements
shall be--or, public improvements are mandated--when there is
development; and the rationale for that is that there is, and
In a community like this that has gone from essentially rural
to urban, It's the only way they can get improvements--at least
itis the only way they have figured out yet. Now, did this--
did the conditions mandated by the Planning Director--did that
catch you by surprise?
Henninger: Well, certainly the size of them did. We anticipated that there
would be some public improvements. We were given--addressed by
the former Planning Director, we were led to understand that it
had been the city policy in similar situations--not identical--
I don't think there has been an identical situation where this
amount of perimeters owned by an eleemosynary or charitable
organization--that they have allowed stages, where A would be
done with staged construction B, and C would be done with staged
construction D, etc. We never in our wildest dreams anticipated
we would be looking at over a quarter of a million dollars of
streets, sewers and curbs on a project roughly the sane size.
Speaker: Okay. Now what I an wondering is, as part of the phase 2, if the
Planning Commission and Council goes along with your request for
- • . . would your phase 2, would you be prepared and willing
tO complete the public improvements that are requested in this?
Henninger: Well, we recognize that staged development would be something
-5-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Henninger: that would lend itself to solving the present impasse. I must
(Cont.) say in all candor also that we don't have the authority to bind
that parish, because the property is actually owned by the arch-
diocese; so I am sure they are familiar with that type of procedure
that would perhaps obviate a problem. But I couln't, certainly
at this meeting, anticipate. We understand what you are saying,
and certainly would be receptive to that approach. I understand
what you are saying--it is that assuming that in two or thre
years,• when we are ready for phase 2, then would we be willing
at that time to LID it or to half-street, or etc. And as a general
statement, yes; but as to specifically bind us, I couldn't do
that.
Speaker: Well, I can appreciate that. Now another thing that I would ask
Of Staff: If a LID were formed, would it be possible to spread
Payments over a period of time?
Currie: Yes; that's the purpose of forming an LID, is to spread those --
Speaker: In other words, to get the improvements now and pay for it --
Currie: I don't know how attractive that might be to the archdiocese;
I don't know whether you have other financing methods that might
be more attractive to you. The financing method through the LID
Is to spread the cost of the improvements over -- well, according
to ORS -- a 10, 20 or 30-year period. The city is leaning toward
a 10-year period at this time just because of tha interest rates
YOU get on the bonds--they are more favorable for the 10-year
period. So the costs of the improvements can be spread over a
long period of time.
Henninger: Well, the LID is definitely attractive.
Currie: If I can give you a little bit of a background on Item 2, which
Is the requirement fqr the street improvements: It starts off
saying, 1°St. Anthony's Church shall petition the City of Tigard
to form a Local Improvement District for the improvement of" the
three streets. If that effort fails--and I think you said the
only way that can fail is if there is 60 per cent. By making a
petition to the City Council, it was our intention to get this
In front of the City Council in that manner. The City Council
can then evaluate the petition on its merit, which they do with
all petitions, and they can turn that down, accept it, or change
It in any manner they wish. So there are other methods. This
Is one we are considering.
We want to offer another option if the Council felt that was not
appropriate, or if you felt that was not appropriate, considering
whatever you other financing methods might be. And the second
option, of course, is to improve only McKenzie and Johnson to
-6-
4
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Currie: half-street improvements, and to limit Grant, peryaps, to some
(Cont.) other time in the future. So I think that is a viable option,
although it may have seemed on the surface that that was not a
viable option. It is also a viable option, depending on what
attitude the City Council takes.
So I guess I might further comment on the costs of the improve-
ments. I copied down some of the numbers as you read them.
More than two-thirds of the costs you have attributed on a lineal
foot basis to storm drainage, which more than likely would take
up less than 25 percent--not 100 per cent--of the frontage that
you are talking about. Based on the estimates--and I think I
gave you figures earlier--based on the estimates and the . . . .
price that we have on Hampton Street that was done last year,
the cost for the improvements to the church, not including the one
on the parking lot site (I failed to do those) was somewhere
between 75 and 100 thousand dollars. We got the bids on 72nd opened
today, and they are almost 30 per cent less. So I suspect there
Is a big difference between my low end of $75,000 and your upper
end of $288,000.
F,nninger: Of course at this time we don't know what the engineering is and
required--we don't know where you are going to require storm
draingge --
Currie: I might add that the Hampton Street project included some 30-inch
storm drainage the full length of the project. I
think that the prices that we have are extremely inflated. I
don't question the unit prices--the unit prices look appropriate--
but the application to the whole 2,000 foot length of the project
seems inappropriate. I guess I didn't want to get into an argument
situation, although I did feel that those things sort of related
to the questions you asked.
Speaker: Okay. Now there is one other question I would like to ask of
Staff, and that is in our August meeting last year, another church
Off of Gaarde Street had a somewhat similar request, and about the
same sort of rationale that you did--that this is only the first
phases why soak us with public improvements around the perimeter,
particularly on this first phase. What was it--the Apostolic
Church?--jxeferring to minutes) The Tigard Assembly of God; and
the Commission action was not, should we say very definitive:
(reading) "Moen moved aproval of Conditional Use based on staff
findings and recommendations, with the direction that the Planning
Director negotiate with the City Council for mitigation at this
time of part of the impact of the half-street improvement on the
church." And the motion carried unanimously. Now, Staff, can you
tell us what Aldie Howard and the Council worked out on that?
Currie: S think at that time the Planning Commission's posture on the
City Council's policy of half-street improvements was that it was
—7—
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Currie: the Council's policy and not yours, and you didn't necessarily
(Cont.) always agree with it. And I think that that's basically the
reason why you made that request. The negotiation that the Staff
had with the City Council basically was based on my recommendation
that they be required to sign a nouremonstrance agreement against
the formation of a future local improvement district for the
improvement of the streets on Gaarde, because the improvement,
first of all, would not make any -- would not improve Gaarde any
because it is unimproved on both sides of this, and it was so
small it would not add to the value of Gaarde Street; and secondly,
the terrain in that area is such and the drainage is such that
it would be very difficult to design a small section like that
so that you could be assured it would be still usable when you
went to do the rest of the street. And it has been the Council's
direction of Staff that we dould make that kind of a decision each
time.
Their policy, basically, is for half-street improvements whenever
a change in use, or whatever, occurs, and that it is at the
Staff's discretion--we can recommend either a nonremonstrance
agreement be signed or some other method of assuring that those
might be done some time in the future. So quite often on the basis
of topography we would not require a half-street improvement
be done unless :9e know what the design was going to be.
Speaker: But I presume this is in an area that the topography is not an
Issue, and you know what the ultimate improvements are going to be?
Currie: Since they are going to be doing under our request all of them,
there would be no question--those questions would not be the same.
Speaker: Right.
Currie: The improvement would be total.
Speaker: Now at that time you were Public Works Director. You are still
that, but you are also Planning Director. Would you be receptive
to--should we say--getting part of a loaf now, and the waole loaf
through a nonremonstrance agreement?
Currie: I think that is reflected in our Item 2, where we said that
another possibility would be to do half-street improvements on
McKenzie and Johnson, and not on Grant. Grant has been brought
up, as has been mentioned, to an interim standard w-Ith some space
for pedestrian and bicycle usage; so it has had some improvement.
Both the other streets have been overlaid, but there hasn't been
any provision for widening on them. I think certainly we would be
receptive to that. I think it's outlined in the second paragraph
of conditions that we requested.
In fact, there are three things in there. The other one is a
nonremonstrance agreement against I guess that's not a part of
-8-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Currie: the package. The half-street improvement of Johnson and McKenzie
(Cont.) and a nonremonstrance agreement on Grant.
I would like to add one other point, I guess, and that is that
our ordinance does consider that adjacent tax lots under one
ownership are considered as a single entity and a single use.
That's the reason why we have gotten into the Whole picture.
Speaker: Yeah; in other words, the archdiocese or whoever owns that, owns
that whole property, regardless of the--it's several tax lots.
Currie: Yes, we are looking at the use--it isn't a subdivision--it's a
single use--let's face it. I guess you could argue that point,
but probably --
Moen: Could I ask a question? If I read this right, the real difference
between where the city stands right now and whe-e the church
feels they are at is whether there be improvements made on SW
Johnson. Is that not the case? Because here we are asking for
a nonremonstrance agreement on future improvements on Grant,
because everyone says that Grant can stay the way it is for a
while.
Currie: True.
Moon: On McKenzie you say that's fine--you think that McKena ought to
be improved too, so really the question boils down toffohnson
situation.
Henninger: Definitely, yeah.
Moen: Let me ask a couple of other questions --
Henninger: We are suggesting a LID. And we would go ahead with the parking
lot.
Moen: A.LID, okay, which would allow -- you do the parking lot, but the
LID would allow you special financing for it.
Henninger: Correct.
Moen: Okay. The Staff here asks in the last paragraph: The policy of
requesting street improvements at the time of development is a
City Council initiated policy. Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission open a planning hearing, accept public testimony, and
forward the matter to the City Council. Are you suggesting in
effect that we would gather information and maybe make suggestions--
not necessarily vote yea or nay?
r Currie: I guess I wouldn't want to put it that strongly. I think that if
you wish to make a recommendation to the City Council, that's
-9-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION BEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Currie: the way the system is set up, and they would appreciate a recom-
(Cont.) mendation from you. As I mentioned before, it is my understanding
that your posture has been in the past that you really cared to
deal with these half-street improvement type issues without some
more specific direction as to how to accommodate them in matters
like this.
Moen: Well, it seems to me that there's some times when there seems
to be economic hardship because of following city council policy,
and I don't know I have a problem with the Planning Commission--
we have tried to stay away with the economic end of it, and maybe
the political end of it a little bit, and tried to pass it on to
the City Council, where it is probably better addressed than in
this forum.
Speaker: Well, that's where the buck stops.
Moen: Well, every time we get into one of these, if we have a very
pleasant decision it sails right through; if we make an unpleasant
one it is appealed anyway. (Laughter.)
Currie: I think the Council has directed that they want you to hear
this, and that was the purpose of that last statement.
Moen: I personally would like to see something worked out on a phased
development, where the church understands that the city certainly
wants the whole perimeter improved eventually, and maybe with the
understanding that the next phase may--I don't think we can write
a specific requirement for that to burden the property like you say--
but when we come to the next phase one might expect the remainder
to be handled. I think from an action standpoint here, I think
we should gather opinions of the Commission and then forward
on--I don't even know, I would say that we would have to vote
here. We have done that before.
Speaker: There has been no public testimony; I presume there is none
forthcoming now. Any other questions that the Commission has of
the applicant? Mr. Christen?
Christen: I think there is a little bit of confusion about what it is going
to cost for these improvements, and who is going to pay for them
and when they are going to be paid for --
Speaker: Now is this question of the applicant, or is this Commission
discussion? I haven't closed the public testimony.
Christen: I just wonder what their thinking is. Do they think they have to
pay for this right now--I mean, you know, before the building is
built? That apparently is the reasoning of this letter here,
and I .dontt think that is the way it is.
-10-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Currie: I think With the LID policy it would not be that way. Under the
LID policy the property owner has the option of signing up for
Installment payments through state Bancroft bonding.
Christen: But what they are stating in their letter is they think it is
going to cost them $235,000 out of what they've got allotted for
their building program, and that is not the way it is going to be.
Henninger: If you take the second option, then you go ahead and make the
half-street improvements. What we are talking about, is the
possibility of the LID, which is the first option. If the LID
fails, then we have to go to the half-street improvements
• . . if I read that . . . .
Christen: But you said the LID really could not fail, so in effect you
would be committing your parish for an obligation over ten years;
and you feel comfortable with that as long as the full obligation
doesn't fall all at ono;?
Henninger: Yes, even if we spread the 235 over 10 years, it still on a monthly
basis • • • (would be something they could assume) . . .
Christen: My suggestion would be that Staff maybe do a little study here
and come up with some alternative estimates, and that this whole
matter be brought before the City Council.
I have one question: Staff, do you have any feel for the 99-W
issue? This is another ingress and egress thing. How strongly
do you feel --
Currie: . . . based on the fact that it wasn't the same piece of property.
I don't know whether they would object to closing it or not.
What is your question?
Christen: Well., okay, what is the problem in closing it? Would it create
a hardship --
Henninger: It•s used for school ingress; we have buses that turn in there
Off of 99. There has never been a traffic congestion problem
that I know of there. And the school is not involved in this
project--it's situated several hundred feet from the school--
200 feet or so from the school, and really would have a minimal
Impacts if any, on 99-W.
Currie: Our position, of course, is that, No. 1, it is an adjacent tax
lot under a single ownership, and therefore it would fall in the
realm of "If we are going to get you, now is the time to get
You." (Laughter.)
Henninger: Why do you want to close that access--I don't understand.
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthonyls Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Currie: As a school access, we think it is extremely unsafe --
Henninger: Is there any record of a collision there that you know of?
Currie: Not that I know of offhand.
Henninger: Then why make a statement that it is unsafe?
Currie: I would hate to fall back on the excuse that we don't want to
wait until there is one--that's what we hear from the other side.
There is going to be a major intersection right at that location--
right close to that location with the development across the street
Henninger: And that's the real reason --
Currie: And that's one of the real reasons; but there is also an existing
traffic signal at Johnson that a lot of the traffic that turns
out into that left turn lane to go inbound, I guess, to Portland,
go illegally, because that is a left turn lane--it isn't a dual
left turn pocket as you find along most of the street. Any left
turn leads out of that driveway are illegal--and dangerous.
Henninger: I will grant you that.
Currie: A great many of them go that way.
Henninger: You can put a right turn only there but still drop it. Some of
the southeastern bound traffic would still turn off there.
Speaker: Just as a suggestion, might it help to have a right turn only
off 99 into the parking lot, and a right turn only out so that
there is no left turns out from the lot, and there is no left
turns into the lot? Would that be practical?
Currie: I would have the same opinion I have on that last one. (Laughter.
He referred to the previous hearing at Greenburg with the same
problem.) I dontt Mink ites appropriate. No. I don't think
Putting a sign up there is going to prohibit people from doing
what they want to do. And I guess our job is to try to anticipate
those things and design it so it cannot be done. It is the same
question we had on the last one on the corner of Greenburg.
Speaker: Is there any other question on the part of the Commission of the
applicant?
Herron: I have a question, Mr. Speaker: In regard to that particular
parking lot opposite 99_%--is that parking lot used when services
are being held at the church?
Henninger: Yes.
-12-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Herron: And that parking lot would also probably be used when activities
would be going on in the auditorium?
Heninger: Could be.
Speaker: Ken (Elliott)?
Elliott: Mr. Speaker, just as a procedural point at this time, I understand
that the applicant has been advised prior to the hearing that this
will be the only hearing to establish the record, and that the
City Council review of this matter will be based on the record
established at this hearing. I just wanted to make that point
clear on the record, that the record that is being established
right now is --
Speaker: This is the public hearing on this issue?
Elliott: Yes. The City Council review will be on this record only.
Henninger: We have offered the blue prints; if they haven't been received
yet--we understand they have been--we would like to offer those,
and also our February 23rd for the record transmittal .
Speaker: Okay; I close the public hearing, and open if for Commission
discussion and action.
Bonn: Shall I open it up, then?
Speaker: Commissioner Bonn?
Bonn: Okay; we have several points here on -- let's go for instance on
No 11 the 99-W ingress and egress. Well, I think we covered it
basically down the street a little way, and I think my recommenda-
tion on that would be to have them install a right turn only
sign at that particular egress, and I don't know how you could
do anything on the ingress coming in and making a left hand turn;
But I believe we could reduce the number of people who are making
left hand turns out of that particular site.
On No. 2, there are three streets here; they have formed a LID
for improvements of McKenzie--they have already accepted that
proposal; that portion of it, and they have accepted the proposal
to pave the parking lot. On Grant, that has been partially
Improved already, and they would sign a nonremonstrance agreement
on that. So basically what we are talking about is one street--
Johnson. I would make this comment, that because this is a
two-step process and we have on other occasions modified it so
they don't have all the money up front, that we accept this
particular recommendation there, and then when they come back for
the second half of the project we can get SW Johnson at that time.
-13-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEAPING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
Mauch 2, 1982
Speaker: Is that it? Thank you. Mr. Christen?
Christen: Well, I have no further questions.
Speaker: Commissioner Owens?
Owens: Well, I would rather see the 99-W ingress/egress be closed. It
is a very poor thing to have a way to get in and out right near
what is used as the main door of the school building -- have a
driveway that exits onto a major highway. And there is another
entrance on Johnson that is probably more than 30 feet from the
intersection--I don't know exactly, and I think that that is much
safer and it serves that parking area and the school much more
safely . . . . I think it could perhaps be improved a little--
there are some very large, tall bushes there that would need to
have something done about for visibility; but other than that
I would much rather see that thing be closed. The rest of these
things sound good.
Speaker: Thank you. Commissioner Moen?
Moen: I guess what Commissioner Bonn had to say about item 2 sounds
fine by me; and as far as ingress and egress on 99, if there is
another.way to do it I think it would be appropriate. I would
suggest that we suggest closure, and if they want to take it up
with the City Council, so be it.
Kolleas: I agree with that.
Herron: 99-W to me needs to be closed off.
Speaker: I would ask Staff: Is a motion in order from us? Because it is
going to go to the Council anyway?
Moen: A motion forwarding it to the Council?
Currie: As I mentioned before, I think the Council would appreciate an
action by you. If you dontt wish to give an action, then I think
the motion obviously should be to forward this on to the Council.
Moen: Is a motion suggested?
Currie: It depends on how the Commission feels, I guess.
Speaker: Well, we seem to have, I think, a majority that would like to see
the highway entrance closed. I think that certainly is something
that we could agree on. I know for myself I would favor at least
a two step approach, either through LID or a nonremonstrance
{ agreement, or something. And perhaps it should not be determined
-14-
TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COI-IMISSIO14 HEARING
St. Anthony's Kelly Center
March 2, 1982
Public Works Director can get a little
Speaker: until the applicant and the
closer feel for what the financial obligation is going to be.
(Cont.) --
Moen:
that�s kind of hard to work a motion around, but -
Moen: well, my suggestion is that we make a motion that forwards this
apealIpthinktthere City Couilwith the
sort of, recommendation
o the consensus astmwhatwells
we recommend be
the solution.
Speaker:
Can you frame a motion for that?
Moen: I can try.
Speaker: Okay.
I would make a motion that we forward the appeal regarding the
Moen:
5t. Anthony's Kelly Center to the City Council
dtegresslowing
recommended solution: that tItem hat 111 99 beingressess to reflect what
remain eliminated; Item 2,
Commissioner Bonn said, that we would have a LID formed for SW
McKenzie and Grant; that the parking lot be taken care of in
Item j; SW Johnson to be considered a part of the next phase of
construction, and that it be considered at that point, or when
the applicant came for any other -- phase2 or whatever. And
I think the rest of the conditions are s
Currie:
I think you want a nonremonstrance agreement.
Moen: And a nonremonstrance agreement as a part of that.
Currie: On SW Grant?
hange
Moen: On SW Grant, yes. Include that part of it.
eandlc
be considered
to be made there is SW Johnson become a part
of
as phase 2. That's a confused motion. I am hoping our fine staff
will get that.
Speaker: Is there a second?
ovens: I second that.
Speaker: The motion has been made and seconded, whlshtthere will
any further
repeat short of taking it off the tapd..
discussion? Are you ready for the question? A11 in favor of the
motion say Aye.
Chorus: Aye.
Speakers Opposed, No. (No response.) The motion carries. e(tote: President
Tepedino should be listed as abstaining,
becausepart in the hearing or the vote-)
February 18 , 1982
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Finance Director od
Subject : GTE Franchise Renewal
This department has contacted the Public Utility Commissioner's
office regarding the limit on franchise fees . They reported that
any fee above 3% of the gross revenue would be considered a city
tax.
lw
x
121/O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MARK P.O'DONNELL BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING CANBY OFFICE
EDWARD J.SULLIVAN
TIMOTHY RAMIS 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET '-
KENNETH M.ELLIOTT PORTLAND.OREGON 97209
1131 N.GRANT. SHITE 202
CORINNE C.SHERTON (503) 222-4402 -
CANBY.OREGON 97013
STEPHEN F.CREW
(503) 266.1149
STEVEN L.PFEIFFER PLEASE REPLY TO
THOMAS L.MASON
PORTLAND OFFICE
February 19 , 1982
Mayor Wilbur Bishop
City of Tigard
P. O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mayor Bishop:
Please find enclosed a copy of a memorandum prepared for me by
my law clerk indicating the deadline for submission of initiative
petitions for the May 1982 primary election. The memo also
indicates the portions of the City Code which permit the City
Council to submit items to the voters without going through the
initiative petition process.
I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincer y,
Ed J. Sullivan
.EJS:s
Enclo Iure
I
O'DONNELL. DATE: February 18 , 1982
S!JLLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1727 N.W. HOYT STREET To: EJS
PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
(503) 222-4402 FROM:
RE:' City of Tigard - General
Date for Initiative Petitions
The City of Tigard City Council wants to know the last date for
filing of initiative petitions for the 1982 May primary election.
The City Charter of the City of Tigard, Section 26 provides that:
Unless otherwise provided by ordinance
"the general laws of the state shall apply
to the conduct of all city elections. . . " .
However, there are provisions in the Tigard Municipal Code for
initiative and referendum petitions. They are contained in Chapter
1. 12.
"Not less than . . . forty days before a general
election at which the petition is to be submitted
to the- voters , the city clerk shall accept for
filing any petition for the initiative or
referendum, subject to the verification of the . . .
signatures and voting qualifications of the persons
signing . . . (the clerk) shall file it as of the date
of presentation to him. " TMC 1. 12. 070.
Since the primary election is a general election for these purposes ,
this section is applicable to petitions to be filed for this May
election which will be held the 3rd Tuesday in May. The 3rd Tuesday
of May, 1982 is May 18th. Counting backwards from May 18th, including
the day of the election and the day of the act, puts the deadline
at April 9th, 1982 . Therefore , all petitions must be filed by
the close of business on April 8 , 1982 , for purposes of this section.
There is another section of the Charter which permits the City Council
to refer items to the voters without going through the initiative
petition process.
"An amendment to the City Charter . . . may be
proposed and submitted . . . to the legal voters of
the city by resolution of the city council without
an initiative petition . . . not later than twenty-five
days before a general election" . TMC 1. 12.100.
If the City Council chose to refer items to the voters through this
method, the deadline would be April 23 , 1982.
l Charter amendments could be handled by the City Council under either
y of these provisions of the City Code. The resolution is , of course,
the least expensive for the taxpayers of the county. If the initiative
petition is used, the number, genuiness and qualifications of the
signers must be checked by the County Clerk all of which takes time.
The petition must be properly signed by at least fifteen percent of
DONNELL. DATE: 2/18/82
-ULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO: EJS
1727 N.W. HOYT STREET
PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
(503) 222-4402 FROM: SKS
RE: City of Tigard - General
Date for Initiative Petitions
Page 2
the number of voters in the last regular municipal election.
TMC 1. 12. 080.
SKSssw
2/18/82