Loading...
City Council Packet - 12/11/1989 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item should sign on the appropriate DECEMBER 11, 1989 5:30 EN sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, TIGARD CIVIC CENTER ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD beginning of that agenda item. visitor's TIGARD, OREMON 972223 Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Administrator. o COUNCIL STUDY SESSION (5:30 p.m.) - Agenda Review o WORKSHOP MEETING WITH LIBRARY HOARD (6:30 p.m.) o WORKSHOP MEETING WITH METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS REPRESEIITATIVE- Bruce Crest (7:00 p.m.) 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 p.m.) 1.1 Call to order 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve City Council Minutes - November 6, 1989 3.2 Amend the Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement of the Metropolitan Area cc muAcations Commission (MACC) - Resolution No. 89-3~1- 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Ab 1T TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTERS 7.40 AND 18.90 - Amendments to the Noise ordinance provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations or challenges o Summation by Community Development Staff o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation by Coammxnity Development Staff o Council Questions or Cents o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration by Council 5. FINAL ORDER - CCMpRMENSIVE PLAN MMMMU CPA 89-07 ZONE CEMNGE 89-07; MMZGER-EMS/ROCKWEIZ NPO #5 - ORDINANCE NO. 89-30 COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 6, 1989 - Page 1 j r - 6. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: Frown Council and Staff 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 8. ADJOUFdZffW cca1120 i e E t { t 1 i G COUNCIL AGENDA - NOVEMBER 6, 1989 - Page 2 3,) T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MMi'.IIM MDKFIES - DDCff2 11, 1989 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Council President Valerie Johnson; Councilors: Carolyn Eadon, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Community Involvement Coordinator; Tim Ramis, City Attorney (arrived at 7:00 p.m.) Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder. 2. STUDY SESSICN: Space Needs - Tigard Civic Center Community Development Director advised Council of the space and interior evaluation study being conducted for the City Hall by Andrea Bainbridge Design. The primary issues identified were: o General atmosphere and interior image to public and to employees. o Space o Lighting Ms. Bainbridge summarized her preliminary findings. In her report, she f stated that: 1 l "We were asked to analyze all of the Tigard Civic Center, including City Hall, the Police Department and the Library and evaluate the overall interior design and planning of the facilities. Since the complex is relatively new and has proven to be a fairly successful design, we have ' focused on problems requiring relatively minor modifications that would improve on or maintain the integrity of the existing facilities." Community Development Director reported that the modular office building, after review of the Development Code, appeared to meet most code criteria and could stay on site indefinitely if certain landscaping and other minor improvements were completed. This should go through the site design review process. He noted that even with the additional office space provided by the modular unit, space requirements for the I City still would not be adequately addressed. Ms. Bainbridge identified square footage deficits and pointed out that conference areas were too few in number and storage space was inadequate. City Administrator advised longer-term direction was necessary for City- wide space needs, including the City Hall, Library, Police, and operations offices. He said the purpose of presenting the information t to Council at this time was to advise them of findings to date. The s next step will be to identify future space requirements; identify which E items can be addressed now in a law-cost effective manner; and put together cost information on the longer-term solutions. CITY COUNCIL METU'ES - DECEMBER 11, 1989 - PAGE 1 Council directed staff to identify cost-effective measures to correct minor deficiencies and to continue to work on the overall space and interior needs of the city. 3. V P InE.TING WrM IaERARY BOARD Library Board Chairman, Amo DeBernardis, review several items of interest concerning Library operations including the following: o Circulation continues to grow 27% a year; there has been a like increase each year for the past 4 - 5 years. o The Library could not function nearly as well without the 50-60 volunteers who regularly offer their services. o He noted the contributions of Friends of the Library who donate time, money, and resources. o He noted the need for increased hours on Saturdays and Sundays. o He noted the use of new technology and commented on the possibilities in the future. o The Library facility was too small and noted the need to study ( alternatives for better space utilization. o Costs have increased and the Library Board will try to keep up with inflation through exploration of better ways to purchase. Council, Library Board and Staff discussed the Washington County Cooperative Library Service (WCCLS) levy proposal which would be submitted to the Washington County Board of Commissioners by the Cooperative Library Advisory Board (CI-AB) on December 12. Tigard has been monitoring this issue very closely as we are concerned with the distribution formula proposed by CLAB calling for allocation of funds based on circulation figures. Council consensus was to discuss this issue in more detail after the Business Agenda. 4. AIM CCM+ MCATICNS CMSSIQ[d MCJC) Bruce Crest, Administrator, and Paula Manley, Community TV Manager, for MACC were present to visit with Council about a proposed amendment to the Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement. This amendment, if approved by all sixteen jurisdictions, would change the distribution of franchise fees for the next several years to provide additional support to MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - DECEKBER 11, 1989 - PAGE 2 5. VISTTURIS AGENM• a. Wilbur Bishop distributed material to City Council concerning a Director's interpretation which supported the placement of a manufactured home on a residential lot at 10675 S.W. Cook Lane. Mr. Bishop requested that his letter be read into the record by the city Recorder. Council President declined the request noting the council would review all material submitted by Mr. Bishop and then discuss the issue at their next Council meeting. Council also requested a transcript of the Planning commission appeal hearing. b. Martha Bishop also testified concerning the manufactured home issue noted above. Mrs. Bishop read a prepared statement into the record. One of the issues she raised was whether there existed a conflict of interest because the City Attorney has represented manufactured-housing clients in the past. City Attorney noted he also has represented the Home Builders' Association in several instances; he advised he felt there was no conflict of interest. C. Bob Burness advised that he has contacted Community Development Staff with regard to a lot-line adjustment on a parcel of land. He was told the process would take up to six weeks; however, staff recently indicated they would expedite the process as much as possible. He noted he would like to complete the transaction by i the end of the year. He also noted his dissatisfaction over the $210 application fee. Community Development Director confirmed that staff would try to accommodate Mr. Burness's request; however, the application for the lot-line adjustment had not been submitted as of this date. In response to Mr. Burness's comments, Council consensus was to direct staff to look at the process to determine if it could be streamlined. 6. CONSENP AGENDA: 6.1 Approve City Council Minutes - November 6, 1989 6.2 Amend the Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) - Resolution No. 89-92 k: Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council j:. present. t, 7. PLIBT TC HEARING - ANENIDMEPTr TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL OODE CHAP` E]RS 7.40 AND 18.90 - (Amendments to the Noise ordinance provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code). 1 a. Public Hearing was continued to January 22, 1990. e CITY COUNCIL MLNUI'ES - DECEMBER 11, 1989 -PAGE 3 1 i fi . 8. mm ORDER - C CMpRERENSIVE PLAN AMENEMENI' CPA 89-07 ZONE CHANGE 89-07; F PZ EMSLR~ NPO 15' a. ORDINANCE NO. 89-30 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A CONE'REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE REQUESTED BY METZGER AND EMS (CPA 89-07/ZC 89-07) b. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Eadon, to adopt Ordinance No. 89-30. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 9. NCI -A~ ITEMS: None. 10. FIVE SESSICN: Cancelled. 11. CCNTINUFD DISCUSSION CST WC= Council consensus was that Councilor Easdon should attend the County Commission meeting on December 12 to conmiunicate Tigard's concerns with the CLAB funding proposal, while at the same time noting Tigard's support of WCCLS overall. 12. ADJOLUaRMU: 8:41 p.m. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder 1 Edwards, Mayor ccm1211 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - DECEMBER 11, 1989 - PAGE 4 f s TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal 7-6434 P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 884.0360 Notice BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising €tECOVED DEC p 81989 • ❑ Tearsheet Notice City pf Tigard CITY OFTIGRRD ii • P. O. Box 2 3 3 9 7 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit f Tigard, OR 97223 i f { AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )'s- 1, A l i rP Ml i rAtmn E being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard Times a newspaper of general cir ulation s defined in ORS 193.010! and 193.020; published at igarda in the aforesaid county and state; that the Ci-FCouncil Meeting a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and consecutive in the following issues: December 7 , 1989 t Subscribed and sworn o before me this St:h of r , 1989 V Notary Public for Oregon My Commissio xpires: 6 - 9 - 9 3 AFFIDAVIT _ 6`,1 Y 11 T r+ Act 4 ~ ~ { y ~ 6 i 4 ' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In the Matter of the Proposed G/ 0,7011ntnce lVe. S71?-:3 STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss City of Tigard ) r I, being first duly sworn, on oath, dep a and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) get---3 v which were adopted at the Council Meeting dated a copy(s) of said ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the 1 ~3 day of p-~nrn Q . 1987• 1. Tigard Civic Center, 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. 2. U.S. National Bank, Corner of Main and Scoffins, Tigard, Oregon 3. Safeway Store, Tigard Plaza, S.W. Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 4. Albertson's Store, Corner of Pacific Hwy. (State Hwy. 99) and S.W. Durham Road, Tigard, Oregon u1a'scrlbed and sworn to before me this ! b - day of _I !/('OAn,\ b~eA 1 t _ Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: CITY OF TIGARD OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 89-31D AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE REQUESTED BY METZGER AND EMS (CPA 89-07/ZC89-07). WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Commercial Professional to Medium High Density Residential on approximately 5.03 acres and a zone change from C-P (Commercial Professional) to R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre); and WHEREAS, the Planning staff made recommendation of findings to the City of Tigard Planning Commission at a public hearing on October 3, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on the proposed changes on November 20, 1989 to review Planning staff and Planning Commission recommendations as well as public testimony. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The proposal is consistent with all relevant criteria based upon the facts, findings, and conclusions noted below: A. FACTS 1. Location 13265 SW 72nd Avenue. Approximately 5.03 acres located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue, between SW Varns Street and SW Fir Street (see vicinity map, Page 10) WCTM 2S1 1DB, Tax Lots 800 and 801; WCTM 2S1 1DC, Tax Lot 3600 (portion). 2. Background Information Creation of tax lots 800 and 801 from a single parcel was approved through Minor Land Partition MLP 1-81. The Plan and zoning designations for these parcels were changed from R-7 (Residential, 7,500 square feet minimum lot size) to their current Commercial Professional/C-P designations during city-wide Plan and zoning map revisions in 1983. No other previous land use or development applications regarding these properties have been reviewed by the City. 3. Vicinity Information Adjacent properties to the north, west, and southwest are zoned R-3.5 (Residential, 3.5 units per acre) and are developed with single family residences. Properties directly south of the site are zoned C-P and are presently vacant or occupied by single family residences. Properties across SW 72nd Avenue from the site are also zoned C-P. These properties are developed with a number of office buildings containing a variety of commercial and professional uses. ORDINANCE NO. 89-,'_A~> Page 1 The subject site has 367 feet of frontage on SW 72nd Avenue. SW 72nd Avenue is functionally classified as a major collector street on the City's Transportation Plan Map. SW 72nd Avenue is developed with 44 feet of pavement, curbs, storm drains, streetlights, and a sidewalk along the site's frontage. The site has slightly more than 600 feet of frontage along SW Fir Street. SW Fir Street consists of 20 feet of gravel covered right-of- way which dead ends into the driveways of residences to the south of the site. The Transportation Plan Map designates SW Fir Street as a local street. Fully developed local streets typically consist of 50 feet of public right-of-way improved with full street improvements. 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject property consists of three parcels totalling approximately 5.03 acres, including a 16.5 foot by 630 foot section of tax lot 3600 between SW Fir Street and the other involved parcels. The remainder of tax lot 3600 is not included in the proposed Plan Map Amendment and z Zone Change proposal. k Tax lot 800 contains a house in its northeastern corner. The other parcels are vacant. The site contains a grove of trees in the northeastern corner of the site. The remainder of the site is mostly open and covered with grasses, weeds, and fruit trees. The parcels are i relatively flat with a slight slope towards the east. The applicants request a Plan Map Amendment from Commercial Professional to Medium High Density Residential and a zone change from C-P (Professional/Administrative Office Commercial) to R-25 (Multiple- Family Residential, 25 Units Per Acre) for the subject parcels. Although a development plan for the parcel need not be submitted for a t proposed plan/zone change, a conceptual site plan illustrating how the site might be developed with a multiple-family residential development i has been provided by the applicants. The applicants' intent in c providing the conceptual site plan was to illustrate that a multiple- r family development which would comply with the Community Development Code's density transition requirements could be constructed on the site. Code Section 18.40.040(A) requires that area within 100 feet of an established area not be developed at a residential density greater than 125 percent of the allowed density (as specified by the Comprehensive Plan designation rather than the current zoning designation) of the adjacent established residential area. For the subject properties, areas within 100 feet of the Rolling Hills Subdivision to the north and west could not be developed at a density greater than 6.25 units per acre because the maximum density allowed by the Plan's Low Density Residential designation applied to Rolling Hills is 5 units per acre. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 12, and 13; Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 6.1.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3, 6.5.1, 6.6.1, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 7.8.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.2, 9.1.2, ORDINANCE NO. 89-.,30 Page 2 and Chapter 12, Locational criteria; and the change or mistake quasi-judicial map amendment criteria of both the Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code. The City Council concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines based upon the following findings: 1. Goal #1 (Citizen Involvement) is met because the City has adopted a citizen involvement program including review of all development applications by Neighborhood Planning Organizations (NPO). In addition, all public notice requirements have been satisfied for this application. 2. Goal #2 (Land Use Planning) is met because the City has applied all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies, and Community Development Code requirements to the review of the proposal. 3. Goal #9 (Economy of the State) is satisfied, although the proposal would reduce the City's inventory of developable commercial land, because 1) the reduction of C-P zoned land proposed is not a large amount compared to the total amount of developable C-P zoned land in the immediate area and the Tigard Triangle area; and 2) allowing multi- family development near C-P and I-P zoned developable properties may provide an attractive mix of land uses thereby helping spur commercial l and industrial development in the area. Other communities have shown that such a mix of land uses can successfully co-exist without adversely affecting commercial or industrial growth. The applicants have pointed to the neighboring Kruse Way area of Lake Oswego where such.a mixture of land uses exists. 4. Goal #10 (Housing) is satisfied because the proposal will provide for additional housing opportunities as promoted by the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Metropolitan Housing Rule (Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660, Division 7). Approval of the proposal would increase housing opportunities on the City's developable residential lands by a total of 125 dwelling units. Approval would also provide increased opportunities for multi-family development. The . Metropolitan Housing Rule requires that the City maintain a minimum housing opportunity rate for developable land of 10 units per acre and a minimum 50/50 opportunity mix for single family and multi-family housing. S. Goal #12 (Transportation) and Goal #13 (Energy Conservation) would be satisfied through providing the opportunity for an intensive land use near major transportation corridors (Highway 217 and I-5) as well as near employment centers. This promotes efficient use of the transportation system thereby promoting energy conservation. The City Council has determined that the proposal is consistent with applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: ORDINANCE NO. 89--, Page 3 _ 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because Neighborhood Planning organization #5 and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the proposal. In addition, the applicants have met with the immediate neighbors of the site to present their proposal in advance of the public hearings. 2. Plan Policy 6.1.1 is satisfied because the proposal would provide the opportunity for additional multi-family development and would increase the net housing opportunity on buildable lands in the City. This is detailed in the discussion for Statewide Planning Goal 10 above and the attached memo regarding the effect of both current plan/zone amendment proposals on the City's compliance with the Metropolitan Housing Rule. 3. Plan policies 6.3.2 and 6.3.3 will be satisfied because the proposal would allow for development of the properties in ways that may be more compatible with adjacent established low density residential areas than the currently permitted uses of the C-P zone would be. Future residential development of the parcels will be subject to density transition limitations within 100 feet of the Low Density Residential Plan designated areas to the north and west of the site. These limitations would tend to lessen impacts on adjacent properties to a greater extent than Code requirements applicable to development proposals under the current Plan and zone designations. Both the existing C-P zoning designation and the proposed R-25 zoning designation allow a maximum building height of 45 feet. The C-P zone requires 20 foot side yard and rear yard setbacks from residential zones and thus under the current zoning designation, a 45 foot tall building could be constructed within 20 feet of the abutting developed residential parcels. Because the density transition requirements of Policy 6.3.2(a) and Community Development Code.Section 18.40.040(A) would apply if the properties were zoned R-25, it is unlikely that multi-family residential buildings taller than two stories tall would be built within 100 feet of the properties' boundaries with adjacent developed residential parcels - much less within 20 feet of those properties. The applicants' conceptual site plan illustrates how development of the site might occur in light of the density transfer requirements. While the housing types allowed in the adjacent R-3.5 zone and the R-25 zone proposed for this site may be substantially different, the density transition requirements along with Code requirements regarding landscaping and buffering can be used to make the differing housing types compatible. 4. Plan Policy 6.5.1 will be satisfied through review of a development proposal for the site through the Site Development Review and building permit review processes to assure that developments on the site will not create nuisances and that all buildings will comply with the uniform Building Code. 5. Plan Policy 6.6.1 will be satisfied through the imposition of buffering and screening requirements of the Community Development Code to any future development proposal for the properties. ORDINANCE NO. 89-_0 Page 4 R 6. Plan Policies 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, and 7.6.1 are satisfied because adequate public service capacities are available to serve potential ` development on the properties. 7. Plan Policy 7.8.1 is satisfied because the Tigard School District was informed of this proposal. The School District has not commented that the proposed addition of housing opportunities within the District would cause exceeded capacities in the District's schools. The School District has been making plans for increased school capacity through several preliminary school construction and expansion proposals for which funding has been approved through the recent school funding tax levy request. 8. Plan Policy 8.1.1 commits the City to plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future development. This policy would be satisfied because development resulting from the proposed redesignation of these parcels would tend to reduce the anticipated traffic onto SW 72nd Avenue and other nearby streets as compared to development under the current zoning. SW 72nd Avenue is a major collector street developed with primarily commercial and industrial uses and with good connections to several arterials. Although residential use of the site would be anticipated to generate more nighttime and weekend traffic than most of the permitted uses in the current C-P zone, that traffic would be expected to be on SW 72nd Avenue and not on local streets in the adjacent residential neighborhood. The Engineering Division will review any future development proposal for the property and may require improvements to affected public streets to reduce impacts resulting from future developments. 9. Plan Policy 8.1.3 will be satisfied as a condition of approval of any future development of the properties. Necessary street improvements would be required at the time of development. The City's Engineering Division will review any future development proposals for the properties. 10. Plan Policy 8.2.2 is satisfied because Tri-Met offers bus service on SW 72nd Avenue on which the parcels have frontage. Therefore, the proposed redesignation would locate an intensive type of development within close proximity to an existing public transit route. 11. Plan Policy 9.1.2 is satisfied because the proposed redesignation would provide the opportunity for high density residential development in proximity to transit routes, major highways, and employment centers thereby promoting efficient use of the transportation system and reduced energy consumption. 12. The Locational Criteria specified in Chapter 12 of the Plan for Medium- High Density Residential use are satisfied for the following reasons: a. The subject properties are not committed to low density development. b. Density transition, buffering, and screening requirements of the ORDINANCE NO. 89-30 Page 5 _ Community Development Code may be used to help make future ( development on the subject properties compatible with neighboring low density single family residences to the north and west. C. The subject parcels have direct access to SW 72nd Avenue, a major collector street, and are in close proximity to Highway 217 and I- 5, both which are functionally classified as arterials. d. Serious development limitations affecting the properties, such as steep slopes or poor drainage, are not evident. Essential public facilities are present to serve future development on the properties and have sufficient capacity to serve any increase in demand caused by development of the site. e. Public transit is available on SW 72nd Avenue in front of the site. f. The properties are located within one quarter mile of a business and office center across SW 72nd Avenue from the site. The site is also relatively close to the under-developed Tigard Triangle area which is anticipated to be a major employment center in the future. The applicants point out that there are few multi-family housing opportunities, developed or undeveloped, within close proximity to this future major employment center. Development of additional housing near the Triangle may result in reduced needs for automobile commuting between home and work. The applicants point to the successes of the Kruse Way corridor to the east as an { example for the Triangle area of a successful mix of new, high quality office development, mixed density residential development; and limited retail development. Although the site is some distance from convenience retail services at this time, it is quite possible that convenience retail uses may become available as adjacent properties and the Triangle are developed. g. The applicants anticipate that private open space as well as recreational facilities will be provided as part of development of the site. 13. The Locational Criteria for the Commercial Professional Plan designation include a policy of not locating this use type on property which abuts residential districts on more than two sides. The subject property is adjacent to the R-3.5 zone on two and one half sides and therefore the present designation is not in total compliance with this criteria. In order to approve a quasi-judicial amendment to the Plan and zoning maps, the City must also find that there is evidence of a change in the neighborhood or community which affects the subject parcel. Alternatively, the City must find that there has been a mistake or inconsistency made in the original designation of the parcel (Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2,Policy 1.1.1, Implementation Strategy 2; Community Development Code Section 18.22.040(A)). ORDINANCE NO. 89-15) Page 6 The applicants assert that a change in circumstances has occurred in that there is now a significant demand for housing opportunities within close proximity to employment centers. This sort of demand was not as evident just a few years ago. Substantial recent growth in the region has led to increased traffic congestion and increased commuting times. Proximity to one's place of employment is now a major factor in deciding where to call home. The housing industry has responded by developing all densities of housing close to employment centers. The applicants point to the neighboring Kruse Way area as an example of such a mixed use, mixed residential density area that has developed in recent years. Opportunities within the City of Tigard within one mile of the Triangle area for developing any type of housing, especially multi-family housing, are extremely limited except for multi-family development above the first floor in mixed use developments within the Triangle. The City Council concurs with the applicants, assessment of the increased demand for housing opportunities near employment centers. This assessment is based not only upon discussions with potential developers but also on discussions with potential residents of the City looking to live nearby their places of employment and with current residents who are concerned with their increased commute times. The Council also has noticed an increase in mixed use developments and less strict segregation of land uses in other cities. Primarily because such mixtures of uses can result in decreased traffic and fuel consumption, the Council supports integration of land uses where it is possible for the uses to harmoniously co-exist through proper site planning. The City Council also believes that a mistake in the original Plan designation for this site in particular as well as mistakes in the Plan Map city-wide exist that the proposed action can help to rectify. It is difficult to assert that a mistake was made in the Professional/Commercial designation of this particular site in 1983 because of the extensive discussions and deliberations regarding this site that occurred at that time. Nevertheless, the Council believes that the mistake which was made here, and in other locations throughout the City, was that not enough attention was paid to the need for multiple family residential opportunities at locations such as this that are near major employment centers, near commercial centers, near major highway corridors, and near public transit corridors. By locating higher density residential opportunities near employment/commercial centers and with respect to transportation opportunities, reduced dependence on automobile transportation could have been promoted and some of Tigard's present traffic congestion could have been avoided with positive impacts for the entire City. Instead, the current Plan Map designates the majority of areas available for new multiple family residential development far from employment and commercial centers. The primary areas that are designated for multi-family housing opportunities are at the far western and southwestern edges of the city. The City Council and Planning Commission are well aware of the difficulties that have arisen as these areas have developed and as rapid growth has hit the city in general. A common complaint in recent years has been the great increase in traffic in the newly developing areas and in developed areas through which the new residents must pass in their travels to I-5, Highway 217, and local employment and commercial centers. Providing multi-family housing opportunities nearer the Triangle, the SW 72nd Avenue Corridor, ORDINANCE NO. 89-31) Page 7 Washington Square/Lincoln center, the central business district, and near I-5 and Highway 217 can help correct the mistakes of current Plan designations and minimize future traffic congestion. The Council therefore finds that the current designation of this site can be categorized as a mistake in that it represents a lost opportunity to serve the City as a whole through locating multi-family housing opportunities close to typical traffic attractors. Such a redirection will require difficult decisions regarding existing neighborhoods, such as the Rolling Hills neighborhood, but the Council believes that the density transition requirements of the Community Development Code and careful site selection and site plan scrutiny can be utilized to afford compatibility between housing developments of differing intensities. The Council finds that the subject site is ideally located with regard to the Plan's locational criteria for multiple family residential opportunities, especially with respect to proximity to employment centers and highway and transit access. The Council also find that the applicants' conceptual site plan illustrates how the density transition requirement and careful site planning could make high density residential use of this site largely compatible with the adjacent low density residential development. SECTION 2: The City Council reverses the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial and approves the request as illustrated on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map as set forth in Exhibit "A" (map). SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 31st day after its passage by council, and approval by the Mayor. PASSED: By u N la wL1Y ows vote of all council members present after being read by number and title only, this ilLh day of December, 1989. / ader APPROVED: This day!of December, 19 Approved as to form: City Attorney l 2--1 1 U Date CPA89-07.ord/kl ORDINANCE NO. 89.-30 Page 8 .may xer.:a.~~.,..- s 10 At Tr°et v loo' r 0 t S 2 8 INITIAL POINT `b . 1 ' X705 704 703 702 701 6 .3 5 J 4 J`l 3 LJ 2 1 = I -N- .Q of Z 125.98' 123.98' 123.98' 12b.98' 126.16' / I Or, m o SW YARNS STREET CO.Rd. No. 1902 ; _ ~ Sc V„ - yoo N 123.43 123.43' 1 23.43' 123.43' b69°O5'W 165' R) r " T1 J >C a 706 707 708 709 N 710 2047 uj M a >r ILI 4 0 I. ! 0 0 INm ,901 22 to W e 0 . 30 B9 Ac. N IVY 28 Y 29 M 01 26 ° 27 0 1 m ° 202.63 z 0 32 6 70.0 , S W. YARNS STREET 1 69°05 23 N• a0 105 N89° 20' 30"E N n 800 N 1000 m .66Ac. -D U -I JN L() 0 12 0 N N V= ~ N 2 4 L Q' m "v 4 125 ~ E.. C _ 11 Z 801 rte cL .54A c. 4.33' o P.40Ac. L. LOOP ♦e 0 1 13' :s N rr JNrrree55,~ N N 20 40 ROO R=10 ~,l ~ 140 ~ ~ 9* CE SW~ FIR ST' SEE MAP 2s 1 ioc r~ TIGARD 2S IDB t r E I AGENDA LTEM 2 VISIT.; AGENDA GATE 12/13/_89' (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council " wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you s' first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City E; Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. t L NAME 6 ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED lbs~b sw Ca©/ Ll~~vf- /(v-9 I> i F t~ tr' t c c L t E . 1, L t Now= op Ile NAP ~ I NJ}LF~UR B}5 97223 t t o 639OftVG.105Ot4 LANE #,TIGASO, s.W. COOK i 10590 PHONE 15031 -PAR i ,k Vl S/4or 'S C,,im de, . . 6t/tt l8~ WILBUR BISHOP 10590 S.W. COOK LANE' • TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PHONE 15031 639.1052 December 5, 1989 City of Tigard Fj==i~ta C- ~s==s~~ zM^- - c • You have in front of you Mir. Dennis Moonier's letter for appeal of Community Development Director, Ed 111urphy's interpretation of the reasons for the approval of a manufactured/mobile home sited on a residential lot at 10675 S.;!. Cook Lane in Tigard. I have gone over 1.1r, I:oonier's letter a nu_-nber of times and find it completely factual and correct in every respect. In carefully reviewing the problem, I have also gone over Fd Yurphy's letter to Y-oonier dated October 10, 1989 and find that it has at least one glarin[r error in numbered item (5) contained in Mr. ]Murphy's letter. Aen the manufacture /mobile home N•ras transported in on wheels in two parts and parked on the lot, I was there observing. Later when the two sections on wheels were maneuvered over a couple of pre poured concrete slabs that 1-sere level vith the ground into position to join the two sections of the mobile home together I was there observing the action. Blocks of good were placed under the two sections and then they were jacked up so that the ti•rheels could be removed from the travel frame which remains under the two sectional structure.- Tie tti,,o sections were then lowered to rest on the blacks of wood. There was no elevated foundation around the perimeter of the house or any concrete blocks or foundation for the anchoring do-,.,m of the home as required in the Unified Building Code (enc.) in 1•!oonier's appeal or as shown in the manufact- ured home's directions. To my knowledge this home is not anchored to nor rests on any perManert found- ation as required in the Uniform Building Code. It has no outside perimeter found- ation and is completely open underneath except for a thin plywood skirt that sur- rounds the home and is painted to look like concrete. It serves no purpose for anchoring or holding up the hole. The front porch is a 4'x4' frame that can be removed at any time. There is no overhang over the porch for the protection of incoming visitors. Now for a little firsthand history on the subject of manufactured/mobile homes. ?n the Fall of 1983 when the Tigard City Council was struggling to get its Compre- hensive Plan finishes; and delivered to the State L.C.D.C. It was a time when the L.C.D.C. was holding a gun to the heads of the Mayor and Councilors demanding that they include 10 units per acre for the City of Tigard's Flan to provide for af'f'ord- able housing for all people OR have a building moratorium placed on all City building. Z was there at the time and forced to comply with their demands. I'lanufactured/mobile homes were mentioned in the text of the Plan but only with the intention of fine tuning their conditions for ulacement in mobile parks within the city to be designated at a later date. There was no agreement that they could be placed on any lot in the city. WILBUR BISHOP 10590 S.W. COOK LANE • TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PHONE (503) 620.5399 or 639.1052 Pir. I,iurphy's interpretation allows manufactured/mobile homes to be placed on any lot in the city even next to your home if a lot is available. This manufact- ured/mobile home has been placed on a lot within 2 lots from a beautiful stone home assessed at $959000.00 and 3 lots from a home assessed at 8110,000.00. So now a 820,000.00/330,000.00 manufactured/mobile home can be rolled in on a lot next to your home or any other home in the City? Is this what the Tigard Planning Commission and City of Tigard "..uncil wishes? Sincerely yours, Wilbur A. Bishop tJ 11AB/meb C CITY OF TIIFA RD OREGON October 10, 1989 Mr. Dennis Moonier 10634 SW Cook Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Directors Interpretation Manufactured home at 10676 SW cook Ln. Dear Mr. Moonier: After reviewing the issues surrounding the placement of a manufactured home at the above referenced address, I have decided to allow the structure to remain as it is. In my opinion, the Community Development Code as it is now written allows for the placement of a manufactured home on a single family lot, and this building as placed meets the intent of the code. The justification for this decision is as follows: 1 1. The municipal code allows placement of a manufactured home on a single / family lot. 4 The building is a manufactured home. By the City Development Code, a "manufactured home" is similar to a "mobile home", except that it meets both the National Urban and Housing Development standards, and the Uniform Building Code. E e 2. The municipal code defines a "manufactured home" as a factory fabricated transportable building designed to meet the Uniform Building Code. a E' k In my opinion the home complies with the intent of the municipal code. There are some differences in the construction of the building from the Uniform Building Code (such as the insulation and plumbing), but those differences are not outwardly visible, and are suitable for this type of } structure. Changing those items to meet the Uniform Building Code would not change the appearance of the building, or provide any real benefit to either the owner or the neighbors. The structural frame of the building is the same as a site built home (2x6 wood stud walls, manufactured roof trusses, 2x6 wood floor joists). 3. The municipal code requires a manufactured home conform with all zoning regulations applicable to a site built home, including minimum lot size, building set-backs, building height, utility availability, off- street parking, and other applicable standards. i The home complies with these regulations. e 13125'8W Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 2335 7, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 4. The municipal code requires that the home is larger than 950 square feet. The home complies, it is 1,280 square feet.. 5. The municipal code requires that the home is placed on a permanent, elevated foundation and anchored in accordance with the regulations adopted by the Oregon Department of Commerce and the manufacturer's installation specifications. The home complies. Please note that the regulations do not require any anchorage of the building to the foundation. 6. The municipal code requires that the exterior walls and roof of the home be covered with materials customarily used on site built homes. The home complies. The building is covered with hardboard panel siding, which is typical material used in site built homes. The roof covering is fiberglass composition, a typical roof covering used in site built J construction. i My staff, the City Attorney, and myself have researched this issue thoroughly, r including calling the manufacturer of the house in question, and have come to the conclusion that the structure meets the definition of a manufactured home / in the Community Development Code. This decision is being issued pursuant to f Tigard Municipal Code 18.12.010 as a Director's Interpretation. Any party may appeal this interpretation in accordance with Sections 18.32.290(A), 18.32.310(A) and 18.32.348 of the Community Development Code. The appeal must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($55.00) and include the r' following information: 1) a description of the interpretation being appealed, j 2) the appellant's qualifications as a party, 3) the specific grounds for appeal, 4) the scheduled date the interpretation is to be final (see below), 5) the date the interpretation was given, and 6) the signature(s) of those appealing the interpretation. This interpretation will be final on October 24, 1S89 unless an E appeal is filed.. 4 The deadline for filing an appeal is October 24, 1989 Y Sincerely, - Ed Murph~ Community Development Director x s x~ Chairman, Planning Commission City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr Chairman, 4 BACKGROUND i In the Spring of 1989, Mr. Clyde Johnson bought the vacant residential lot adjacent to my home on Cook Ln. He immediately began site preparation for what the rest of the neighborhood assumed would be the construction of a new home. I must admit that very early in the site prep process we had warnings of the I impending problem we now have. On two occasions, I was informed that Mr. i Johnson was putting a manufactured home on this site; once by David Nicoli, previous owner of the site, who told me Mr. Johnson had a custom designed i $60,000 modular home, and once by Bob Bledsoe, NPO #3 member. who stopped by one day to express suprise that I was not upset with the development next door. j i I bring these two occasions to light, because they illustrate my complete suprise, and apparent ignorance of our land use processes, that in the City of Tigard a mobile home can be defined as a manufactured home and then placed on a 1 residential lot. With clear disregard to the plain meaning of every applicable code on residential structures and with complete disdain for the citizens of this communuty, City employees are willing to allow the placement - without notice or consultation - of a non-permitted structure in our neighborhood; and then, upon objections from the existing residents, feel the need to bluff, bully, and obfuscate the issue. I THE ISSUE Let's be clear: the issue before us is whether the City Municipal Code allows mobile homes - not meeting the Uniform Building Code(UBC) and not meeting the zoning code - are allowed in residential neighborhoods. The issue is not whether or not the neighbors like the appearance of a home that "substantially meets the intent of the Tigard Municipal Code." t I was utterly astonished the day the mobile home was delivered to Mr. Johnson's i property. It arrived in two pieces, visquene covering the openings in each side. You have all seen them rolling down HWY 99 - first the right side, then the left - two trucks pulling two trailors, each with its own tongue, chassis, and wheels. The only positive thing I can say about that sight was that, at least, I then understood all the unorthodox site work and the conversations with Mr. Nicoli and Mr. Bledsoe that, heretofor, had been quite a mystery to me. i I Maybe I am naive, or even stupid, but who among us here tonight would have thought, or now does not believe, that according to the Director's October 10 i Interpretation, Attachment #1, a mobile home can be placed in any residential neighborhood in the City. Immediatly upon seeing the mobile home parts sitting next to my'house, I called the City Building Department. I talked with Mr. Brad Roast initially and, in susequent conversations the following week, talked with other city employees. The results of these conversations precipitated my initial protest letter dated July 5, 1989, Attachment #2. The importance of these conversations is that the employees with responsibility for the permit issuance and inspection were thoroughly confused on what authority the Johnson permit was issued under. Illustrative statements are: 1. Mr. Roast stated, the only applicable code to this structure was the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. If the mobile home had a HUD sticker affixed, it was approved. 2. A female employee, name unkown, stated, recently passed State legislation concerning manufactured/mobile home required the City to allow the structure's placement. 3. Both employees stated, the structure did not have to meet the UBC. The facts relating to these statements are: 1. The HUD regulations are clearly intended to concern mobile homes as defined by Tigard's Municipal Code, not manufactured homes. 2. The State legislation referred to, House Bill 2863, was not even signed into law until July 27,1989 - a full two months after the permits were issued - and it does not mandate mobile/manufactured home sitings as the building department stated. 3. Manufactured homes clearly have to meet the UBC to be allowable structures under the Tigard Municipal Code. The point of this discussion is to illustrate the confusion and misunderstandings of the City Staff during the initial permitting of this structure. They did not seem to know what they were permitting or why they were permitting it. However, contrary to the Director's later assertions, they clearly stated to me that the UBC had nothing to do with it. APPLICABLE CODES AND DEFINITIONS The following are specific municipal codes, regulations, and definitions applicable to this appeal ( some are synopsized and some are only recited by reference): A. Tigard Municipal Code 18.08(c) - " Where the Code imposes greater restrictions than those imposed or required by other rules or regulations, the most restrictive or that imposing the higher standard shall apply." i i i 18.26.030 - " Manufactured Home - A factory fabricated transportable building designed to meet the Uniform Building Code " Mobile Home A structure transportable in one or more sections, each built on a permanent chassis 18.30 thru 18.32 - All sections concerning public notice and appeal j. i 18.94.040(a) (1) - " The home shall meet all requirements applicable to single t family dwellings and posess all permits and certifications required by the Code." 'r (2) - " The home shall be attached and anchored to a permanent foundation in conformance with the Oregon Department of Commerce regulations and the manufacturer's specifications." B. HUD Regulations f. i ANSI A225.1 , Attachment #3 - This is the regulation referred to on the HUD sticker affixed to the mobile home. Section 1-2.1, Types of Structures Covered, refers the reader to 24 CFR 3280 for a definition of the manufactured homes covered by the regulation. f 24 CFR 3280.2 Definitions, Attachment 414 - (16) " Manufactured Home means a structure transportable in one or more sections which is built on a permanent chasis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent. foundation note: please compare this to the definition of a mobile home in the Tigard Municipal Code Manufactured Homes For Title II Mortgage Insurance, Attachment 415 - This states in part, " This Department offers FHA Insurance on manufactured homes(mobile homes)", and under General Eligability Criteria: f (6) " A permanent foundation and perimeter footing and wall is required." f' C. Uniform Building Code(UBC) Specifically Section 2517 concerning foundations. Attachment 416 is two illustrations which depict the UBC requirements for foundations. E. b FINDINGS r r r. F From the previous listed codes and definitions, several statements can be made: f 1. The Tigard Municipal Code makes a clear distinction between mobile and manufactured homes. The HUD regulations seem to use the terms interchangably; e.g., manufactured homes(mobile homes). 2. The Tigard code defines mobile homes as structures on a chassis. The HUD regulations define manufactured homes(mobile homes) as structures on a chassis. 3. Both the HUD and Tigard codes require permanent footing and wall perimeter foundations with the structure firmly anchored thereto. The HUD codes at least implies that an FHA mortgage cannot be acquired unless the foundation is in place. In any case, the Tigard code requires the most restrictive code to apply. It should be noted that the UBC does allow alternative foundations if the proper design and structural certifications show they meet or exceed the perimeter foundation. 1 4. The Tigard code requires that the manufactured home placement meet all other municipal code and UBC requirements. Please note. I have not listed in the previous section the Oregon Department of Commerce regulations referred to in the Director's October 10 Interpretation. That is because there are no such regulations, The Department deleted, and ceased all activities regarding, regulations of manufactured homes over two years ago. E DISCUSSION t The photograph attached to the front of this letter is a picture of the structure in question. As described earlier, it was delivered in two pieces, each with its own chassis. The wheels and tongue have been removed from the chassis. Some other pertinent aspects in the picture are: ! 1. The grey strip along the bottom of the structure is painted plywood skirting. At the highest point, it extends approximately 24" below ground level. 2. ThA front porch is a stand alone platform. It is not attached to the home, nor is it anchored to the ground. y 3. The garage, to the right side of the picture, is attached to the house by a 2x4 (barely visible on the photo). There is a covered porch (similiar construction to the front porch) in the rear of the house. The 2x4 nailed to the garage is the support for the cover. As can be seen, this structure looks like a mobile home. As defined by the HUD and Tigard codes it is a mobile home. And, based on the apparent temporary placement on an unanchored foundation, and with porches and a garage that simply lift off, the owner appears to be treating it as a mobile home. The City, in the issuance of permits and in the subsequent defense of their actions, admit the structure does not meet the Municipal Code or the UBC. They j also state the foundation requirements are found, not in the UBC, but in the I Department of Commerce regulations and the manufacturer's instructions. I must say that it is incomprehensible that cognizant City Officials will admit they have allowed a sub-code structure within the community and then try to justify it based on the fact that you cannot see the problems. By this statement in the October10 letter, the Director is admitting that they are treating this structure differently than stick-built homes. They are, therefor, willing to have different standards for different lots within the same neighborhood. The issue of the foundation is even more paramount in this appeal.. In reading the Tigard Municipal Code, the HUD regulations, and the Uniform Building Code, f there can be no interpretation other than the structure is required to be C anchored on a permanent, wall and footing, perimeter foundation. As stated E earlier, there are no Department of Commerce regulations so they certainly do not justify the City's position. The only other defense the City has is the manufacturer's instructions. Attachment #7. is the manufacturer's design as submitted for the building permit. What do these instructions show: 1. They show a wall and footing perimeter foundation. 2. They show concrete block mortered together and filled with concrete. 3. They show iron reinforced footing and walls. is 4. They show the structure firmly anchored to the foundation. 5. They also show, and I quote from the title block, " The exterior walls must be solidly supported by the foundation wall. This system was not designed to have MOBILE HOME (emphasis added) frame supporting the exterior wall load. i Marlette Homes assumes no responsibility except for the method of support shown on this detail." CONCLUSION What more can be said? This mobile home should never have received a building permit; however, City personnel were confused on the issue. The City is now defending the permit and its subsequent approval of sub-municipal code, HUD/FHA requirements, and the manufacturer's design - why?: E: The residents of this neighborhood were entitled to timely notice that a p non-conforming structure was being proposed for placement on Cook Lane. P' c` Present and future landowners are entitled to know they are buying standard °i housing; not just housing that appears to be standard. e Most importantly, citizens of this communuty are entitled to thorough and honest code enforcement. t: a: Sincerely,` 6 Dennis Moonier k> 10634 SW Cook Ln Tigard, OR 97223 J 110 Contractor's Guide to the Building Code Foundu SIII 2" thick width not less than r t • _ ~ I t t Grade t 1 7,77 t__) :(Ill ft`.I( 6' 1 story 8 ' 2 story 12" + btnry 6' 1 story 12" 1 story F' tS ..,,uty~ b 11 story ~~15" 2 story story t Typical Footings and Foundation Walls Distance Ircm c,rant: fo bottom of footing will vary with area. Code ce!IS fur footing,, to be placed below frost level. I _77, 1 77 1( HI) Figure 6-9 Residential Foundations Vnderfloor Ventilation WIMIeser y'ou have an underfloor area created by a crawl space but which i,, not a basement or a usable space, or a ,pace that is not uvecl ffor habitation, you must provide ade- quate %entilation. hhi rnav be cork by cutting vent holes in the foundation stalls or by mechanical means such as a Itlesf dim, fan. Pent holes must have a net area of I square feet for each 25 linear test of exterior foundation wall. To reduce dry rot in the foundation, arrange the vents to give cross 6-11 %C11111ation to .111 areas of the unused space. ed FOUNDATIONS SECTION R-304-Foundation Walls. R-304.1-Concrete and Masonry. i 1 R-304.2-Backf Ill Damage. The floor framing system should be in place and anchored to the foundation wall as j shown in Figure No. 304.2 to minimize the chance of damage to the foundation watt resulting from placement of the backlill against the foundation wall. Also shown in the figure is the minimum distance above adjacent grade to which the foundation must be extended. Such extension is necessary to provide termite protection and minimize the chance of decay resulting from moisture migrating to the wood framing. A reduced foundation extension is permitted when masonry veneer is used. Finish grade 8- min. Foundation wall (masonry or plain concrete) Floors must be anchored and connected to restrain the top of the wall; the bottom must be restrained at the footing by concrete floor slab, keyed foundation or mechanical anchorage (reinforcing steel) a I' Basement floor stab or inside grade or crawl space • Watl footing 8elow frost depth i FIGURE NO. 304.2-BRACING FOUNDATION WALLS AGAINST LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE R-304.3--Foundation Studs. The requirement for foundation studs (knee-wall studs, cripple-wall studs) are contained within this section. The minimum length of 14 inches for foundation studs is intended to provide sufficient clear space by which required nailing of the framing may be accomplished. If the wood-framed foundation wall does not permit the installation of foundation studs of such a length, a solid blocking method of construction may be employed. Further restrictions of the section provide that when foundation studs exceed 4 feet in height, the partial-height wall shall for purpose of stud sizing be sized as if the partial-height wall were an additional story. Such a condition may occur in buildings of a split-level type, buildings with floor levels partially below grade or buildings with under-floor crawl spaces larger than the minimum specified within the code. The purpose for the treatment as an additional story is based upon the load-limiting capability of studs of a particular size as the stud's unsupported length is increased. In addition to the concerns for the vertical load-carrying capability of the studs and short foundation walls, a I concern for the transfer of lateral loads through such walls when acting as exterior walls and bearing partitions necessitates the bracing of such walls in accordance with Figure No. R-402.3.2 of the code. t R-304.4-Masonry or Concrete Foundations. Foundation walls using unreinforced masonry or plain concrete { are considered acceptable when such walls will not. be subjected to more pressure than would be exerted by backfill having an equivalent fluid weight of 30 pounds per cubic foot. Where unstable soil is present or the structure is located in Seismic Zone No. 2, 3 or 4, the possibility of additional lateral loading necessitates the use of foundation walls as prescribed in Table No. R-304.4.2. A review of the seismic risk map contained within Appendix A provides one with the necessary information to ascertain the seismic zone. If unstable soil or ; 3-7 Ell • ' .,rte a ,t.:.. , t.: : { .+j„r; {n~•A~!it;41~,i"y~,.J}:~~t~:~+~` ~::~f, • •r.jtir.•~:;'~+~ • -aa t• -a•... t ;•J ...r 'a+:i!l:•..t•• .:~j'n•~y~'~:tl.V':jt,?iJCi.yFF.(Y~°'r } '^y,+~•• .i t ,.1!4 Y+.~. iir1J•.~w r: q ~t~ Yy.~'/;H„~k) ~=h,,~';:. a• ~X: l.. '•t'. ~ ~,l ~ d : ,t:': 'V,j'j~•:::ir t ~ ti. ~.y,~.. •3 s. aeY , t, ,,.:...tom. 1 " o _ k~~ j 6. CONCRETE BLOCx a6 1 EXT ERiOR t SIOtNG BILCO 0 E x 801 Bd DOOR .019 FLASH j H" X6~ SUPPLIED q OR UNIT Rao r9, ~(Z Z SIDEWALL i X IEi ERR SS D lfREATE0 9-t5~~FT• g~i EXTERIOR SILL .%-BEAM URr SIDING ZXq MUD iREAXEO. II/'t NON' kXLER£R) ► SHRINKING SpriS,55E ?X2 BY INS'fALI .f• ~ GR R00 t C NCREYE' FILLED _ A19 FLAStwm YH gX 8 1AUD SILL a► CONOCK CRE TE pEI AIL S'jp Nl?LIED PRESSURE Ift BL ► BLOCK ~R N E EALER • ' •B• CONCRETE 2 SIDE U (SILL IASYAtI~R~ ' FILLED BLOCK 00~ BV . . I/2 X 16~ PRE' FOOD S. 'IttSUL (REAPED pEROA 9Y .INSTAL' 4ER tWNEN'REC'0) 2X4 OR 2x6 SICE u e CONCRETE SED-TIpN F 28 DAYS , BLOCK ' E ' COttCRESE TO 3000 SUMP IN OF ~A) SXa HOR Door gECT10N E POUR w11 Must BE REdD• 6• A. CONCRETE OPENINGS a-o oc. PENT BEAM SUPPORY ''1t0N OR AS £ NQATION YEN[ILAREA 7. ALL WINDOW Za' FROM GYP SILL OU 1, MINIMUM Of CRAWL SPACE pAMF£R, AT LEAST BE USED FOR tR£Atm Tvw 5 r slF A, VtSO LOCAL CODES. OPERABLE TA1LS MAY THE , X 4 cc; REOQ BY SH SNti CBE A CORitO SION LOCAL ~K SE DE WtYH 3~h vENTS W/ROQEN f+► 1401E. OUNOA~►ON5 i. cot BLOC-9 Z• 8X16 SCREEN M£ R BASEMENT CMNGES• 131 BLOCKS oo~ ~SCRIP1 RODENT WIRE },I~gSH piREC710N. f0 FOLLOWtNGIO BE A' MtN Of a coNC AE ILLEo RESISTANT BE pao\jDED A• WALLS FLOOR REa o• F OLOCK 3• 113 XZq~ ACCESS MUS PRES. IN HEIGHT BASEMENY YSIEM PER pAN SILL _ ` THE CRAWL SPACE AREA BEARING B• q' CONCRETE ORMH S &T~~ BLE INSTAt,LER' FOR C. A FOUNOA~IREaU1REMENT55 (AIRS REV D ANCN~RIN~ y.n A• 2500 pS BE ALLOWA iZEO BY ` LOCAL CODE OR TO RING PRES• GNED f BUILT 0. INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR ~ysvc ION jYpiCAL ACTUAL SOIL BU, T BE DESI UST BE i FOUND HASO►~E 5, THE f0UN0ACOD MU OROINAHCES LOCAL SUPPaRYEO THE CODES BY THE •l 6Y MOBLE TO LOCAL INSPECTED HAVE ASSUMES NO R METHOO WALLSMUST BE WAS N SO O ' DESIGNED YO NpuESFO ApPROYEO 1CIAL. EX LO AD. MA~LNTTE HO TERIOR BU1LQtNG OfF pATI Y►iEYSEXTERtOR WALL g FOIUINO RTN ATi r, OF THN ,-rr•-, THE THIS FO iNOR HE p£ St WA AME SUPP F N IN ppt"ttRING F " • R 5P0NSIBI'T AN H 1 Rj\ PP CORpORATt • , /Ylz'1 ~y ~nt r1o k • 2X4. OR 2XG ('2X4 OR (2X6) FLOOR SYSTEM 2 X 8 MUD SILL 2 X a) OR(2 ENOWALL 5101=WALL Sill SEALER SIOEWAL 2 X 8 MUD SILL BY INSTALLER 2X4' MUD SILL FLOOR 34X 3' WELD PRESSURE TREATED SYSTEM SILL SEALER OUTRIGGER 4 HALF BLOCK . SILL ---2 X•4 SHIM BY INSTALLER 4" CONCRETE T SEALER(BY PRESSURE TREATED , BLOCK I FT. INSTALLER) 8 HALF " BLOCK 8' CONCRETE 4 HALF CONCRETE IZ, PERIMETER BLOCK 24 BLOCK I--BEAM INSULATION (CONCRETE FILLED) 4" CONCRETE I ' /Z PARGING BY' INSTALLER BLOCK PERIMETER INSULATION (WHEN REQ~R) I " /Z 0 RE-ROD BY INSTALLER(WHEN W/ASPHALT VAPOR BARRIER 12 C 6' CONCRETE REQ'0.) (WHEN REQO.) SHRIN BLOCK VAPOR BARRIER a ` ' G ROu I!Z PARGING r 8 CONCRETE / SAND FILL BELOW LOCAL •,:r•; ,~:r 4 BLOCK • • 8, x IG' FROST LINE 0 1~/ASPHALT SAND FILL (2)1/2 .0 RE-ROD 8'' X i6 'WHEN REQ'D. .~v 8"X 16r CONCRETE CONCRETE FOOTING CONCRETE F001 (2)y2 RE-R00 FOOTING BELOW LOCAL FROST LINE BELOW LOCAL FROST LINE SECTION AA SECTION B B SECTION C C MUD SILL 4 'BLOCK MARRIAGE x I Iii SHADED IN " WALL WELD AREA x 3 WELD 1 ~'s TYPI I'-- ROD EACI ''r ' ' • 3/8 x I %2 SIDE, WELDED T t ~ I,•' 1 WELD ~ BEaM 1 3 X 7.5 ~FT POST 4• IN C R00 1 OF NON - GXGX;M STEEL PLATE 8'-15'/FT. I-BEAM N CONCRETE SHRINKING GROUT 'FILLED BLOCK (7YP.) e.pxg, 7rp5p8~' gFT. POT 3~g X3 WELD ~ 1. HEAT RODS t BEND DOWN ONTO BEAM Ft I; OWT BLOCKS A-F AT OF TRANSVERSE BEAM 4W OARR1ER5 CARS (4) §B X G 2, WELD ROOS TO FLANGE 2. ROLL HOUSE ONTO TRANSVERSE BEAMS ANCHOR BOLTS 3. INSTALL 4' BLOCKS A-F '4• SANO`,a,•;, Fltl ' ~ • a. IF CRANE IS USED, OMIT ABOVE STEPS FOOTING SIZED (4)IjZ 0 RE-ROD PER FOUNDATION TRANSVERSE BEAM SECURMENT BLOCK ELEVATION DRAWING EACH WAY REY DACE OESCRIPTION AT TRANSVERSE 117V( o.TT BEAM . SECTION 00 TYPi 1 COR"RATt tD+TI _T... ~yyq n I W i - V7 Sl 1~r 5 ~ ~ Dear Mayor Jerry Edwards and Councilmen: *Note attached flyer circulated in the neighborhood for an update on mobile home siting on Cook Lane. My short presentation is a direct question to City~Atty. Tim Ramis for the record and information as to lack of legal advice during our(,appeal process before the City of Tigard Planning Commission on December 53 Your law firm O'Donnell, Ramis, Elliott and Crew has owned and represented mobile home clients including mobile home associations. Don't you have a conflict of interest being you now represent individual clients who are associated with mobile home manufacturing presently? When NPO 3 met on December 5th here at City Hall for an~ appeal before the City of Tigard Planning Commission neither City Atty. Tim Ramis nor City of Tigard ,,yet they were the authors of the Director's Development Director were present Interpretation which was the subject of the appeal. Staff was represented only by Keith Liden who called on Brad Roast,,a dity of Tigard employees to answer questions directed by the Planning Commission and neighborhood. The neighbors feel it is not up to them to hire an attorney to interpret City of Tigard and State of Oregon Uniform Building Code enforcement which requires permanent foundations with anchoring of the home to the foundation. I'd now like to have City Atty. Tim Ramis answer the question as to having a conflicts- of interest? 9 ICI 633 December 11, 1989 TONIGHT, CITY HALL, CITY OF TIGARD COUNCIL N1E . NG 7:30 p.m. FOR ALL NEIGHBORS WHO WISH TO ATTEND AND GET AN UPDATE ON MOBILE HOME SIZING ON ANY RESIDENTIAL LOT. A signup sheet to speak on the 2 minute oral communication isour~final option according to Herm Porter, NP03 Chairman. City of Tigard planner A Goodman told Herm "we may not appeal to Council having had an appeal thru NPO 3 last Tuesday, December 5 before the City of Tigard Planning Commission." 11'any neighbors have attended these meetings to be informed and also letters from the City of Tigard in response to 86 signed petitioners wishing to be updated. Hope all of you attend tonight and participate if you iaish. It was suggested that we as a neighborhood take up a financial collection, hive a lawyer and proceed thru the City of Tigard Council for a redress of mobile homes sited on 1lgy residential lot in the City of Tigard and NOT meeting the Uniform Building Code. The City of Tigard Director's Decision and City Attorney Tim Ramis approved report of the Director's Interpretation of the City of Tigard's mobile/manufactured homes. Neighbors have appeared before the City of Tigard Uouncil under oral present- ation once before and also at JTP03 neighborhood meetings held at the Conference Room, pity Hall. We do not feel it is up to the neighborhood to hire a lawyer to interpret City of Tigard, State of Oregon, Uniform Building Code which'requires permanent foundations with anchoring of the home to the foundation. Hope you come tonight. Your neighbor i t C S-KAl j Sys; aY~ 12 1111 g CITY OF TIGARD SPACE & INTERIOR EVALUATION STUDY PRELIMINARY FINDINGS PREPARED BY ANDREA BAINBRIDGE DESIGN December 11, 1989 CITY OF TIOARD SPACE AND INTERIOR EVALUATION STUDY PRELIMINARY FINDINGS INTRODUCTION: We were asked to analyze all of the Tigard Civic Center, including City Hall, the Police Department, and The Library and evaluate the overall interior design and planning of the facilities. Since the complex is relatively new and has proven to be a fairly successful design, we have focused on problems requiring relatively minor modifications that would improve on or maintain the integrity of the existing facilities. The primary issues which we feel need to be addressed are as follows: General atmosphere and interior image to the public and to employees Space Lighting All of these issues are interrelated and affect one another so discussion of these factors must overlap. 1 GENERAL ATMOSPHERE: i City Hall: Public perception: Difficult for people unfamiliar with the facility to determine where tt take cape of their business. Nowhere at the counter area to discuss any questions\ problems with city staff either confidentially or at least free from distractions. Solutions: Through additional signage and graphics, identify reception desk at the end of the lobby as the information desk and draw newcomers to it. f i E If space can be found, create a few small interview rooms or areas with panels for private conversation. i. Employee perception: General office areas are too noisy, overcrowded and seem generally dreary and gloomy. Solution: (See also comments on lighting and space). 5. Reorganize space to create less visual clutter. Repaint walls with a warmer, brighter color. Replace all fluorescent tubes with color corrected ones. Often it is considered a luxury to provide attractive, well designed office space for employees. However studies have shown that there is a direct correlation between surroundings and productivity. is Estimates of the dollar value of productivity-enhancing physical changes in the office show that an annual benefit of 3 - 9% of payroll is reachable, with a payback period of one to five years. 2 GENERAL ATMOSPHERE: The LibraM. Public perception: Seems to be the most successful space in the Civic Center for creating an inviting and warm atmosphere. Inadequate lighting. Employee perception: Staff areas are overcrowded. Solution: See discussion on space and light. The Police Department: Public perception: The waiting\"reception" area is totally disconnected from the police staff creating a very unfriendly public first impression. Solutions: Rearrangement of front office and brighter color scheme. Minor reorganization of waiting area with more appropriate plants and art work. Employee perception: The long corridors with hard, glossy VCT the floors and gloomy grey color scheme create a cold and institutional atmosphere. Solutions: Carpet all current hard floor areas and a change of paint scheme to a warmer, brighter one. Change all fluorescent tubes to ones with better color rendition. 3 LIGHTING: With the assistance of a professional lighting consultant, we measured the light levels in all three buildings. CITY HALL AND POLICE DEPARTMENT: Problems: *Lamp(tube) quality is not of a high enough standard to project an efficient light. *Color quality of the lamps is a significant factor in projecting a dreary, under-lit space. *Paint color on surrounding walls also contributes to the problem by reflecting a grayed and gloomy hue. *Task lights are non-existent or a mix of incandescent lamps supplied by users. These incandescent fixtures create alot of glare since they typically have no diffusers. *Recessed fixtures in hallways are spaced too far apart and bulbs being used are not efficient. Solutions: *Replace all lamps(tubes) with higher quality and color corrected lamps. *Re-paint all surrounding walls in a warmer, brighter tone. *Provide task lighting at all open-area workstations. *Replace all A-lamp bulbs with higher quality and higher wattage ones. A high degree of lighting throughout an office is not a good solution. Glare can be a serious problem for computer users (which most employees are now). Instead of relying solely on overhead lighting, individual task lighting is the best solution. 4 LIGHTING: LIBRARY: Problems: *Light levels are particularly poor for small children and the elderly. *Additional fixtures are needed over those stacks that currently do not have them. *Lamp quality and color temperature are also not efficient or desirable. *Current table lamps are not appropriate for their intended purpose. Solutions: *All existing ceiling fixtures (except over stacks) should be replaced with new two-tube fixtures and lowered to the same height -as the other previously lowered fixtures. *If the above proves too costly, existing fixtures may be able to be lowered. *Additional fixtures should be provided over all stack areas not currently lit, particularly in large type area for the elderly. *All table lamps should be working and have appropriate bulbs supplied. 5 SPACE: Through departmental interviews and analysis of the existing site, we evaluated the current and future space requirements for city staff. Attached to this preliminary report is a summary of our findings for City Hall staff. Based on standards used throughout the industry, we found that the current general office space was significantly inadequate for the number of current employees. There was definitely no room for any future growth. Cites Hall: Problem: Space required for current and projected staff and equipment should total approximately 10,254 square feet. Current space available equals approximately 6,400 square feet (including the "modular office"). This is a deficit of 3,854 square feet. Conferencing areas are too few in number and storage space is inadequate. Solutions:* Increase size of the modular office space located adjacent to City Hall and relocate additional staff. OR: Lease additional space nearby and relocate any departments not requiring immediate public access. t 6 i f t' SPACE: i• i. The Police Department:' Problem: f r Overcrowded office space for detectives and lack of space for patrolmen to complete paperwork. _ w. Solution:: i jfAI.: Convert one evidence storage room into additional- office space. j Library ( Problem: Overcrowded staff space and not enough room to process books. No room for additional stacks or equipment for future growth. ~l. Solution:'' Locate some staff into new work areas created out in main library area. r Add additional stacks where ever possible; under windows and by tightening up some I open areas. *NOTE: All "solutions" above are temporary measures only. We recommend that the City develop a long range plan to determine future requirements with long range k' solutions. 7 t SUMMARY OF DEPARTMENTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS Current Future Sq ft\staff Sq Ft\staff Building Department 750 \ 7 950 \ 9 Engineering/Project 513 \ 3 613 \ 4 Engineering/Tech 2,592 \ 9 2,792 \11 Finance 1,277 \ 9 1,277 \ 9 Planning\Current 752 \ 4 852 \ 5 Planning\Long Range 336 \ 3 336 \ 3 T Clerical 680 \ 6 780 \ 7 Personnel 474 \ 3 674 \ 5 Admin Services 1,197 \ 8 1,197 \ 8 Admin Services\Records 783 \ 3 783 \ 3 SUBTOTAL 9,354 \55 10,254 \64 Central Support Space 1,697 1,697 TOTAL 11,051 \55 11,951 \64 Current space available 5,000 5,000 (approximate) Current space from mobile unit 1,400 1,400 8 r SPACE STANDARDS: The high cost of real estate, construction, furniture and equipment have forced all executives to look seriously at the efficient use of office space. Additionally, changes in technology, office products, and job activities have brought about the need to reevaluate the relationships between the work environment and employee performance. A six year study of 5,000 workers in 70 organizations nationwide shows that changes in office design have a direct impact on job performance, job satisfaction, and ease of communication. It also shows that the economic benefits of appropriately designed offices are substantial and conversely, that poorly designed offices involve substantial costs. Furniture systems maximize space utilization, preserve a degree of privacy, and maintain or improve productivity levels within crowded office environments. Studies indicate that even a 2% increase in employee output due to an appropriate furniture system, can measurably effect a company's bottom line. i SPACE STANDARDS FROM OTHER ORGANIZATIONS: s Portland General Electric. Vice President 195 sq. ft. Manager 130 Branch Manager 100 Supervisor 80 Professional 65 Secretarial 65 Nike. Inc. Vice President 300 sq. ft. Manager 225 Manager 140 Professional 100-120 Standard 80 Secretarial 80 i Bonneville Power Administration Division Director 150 sq. ft. l s Branch Chief 108 Section Chief 90 Professional 72 Secretarial 60 9 N Metropolitan Area MACCICommunications Commission Cable TV Franchise Regulation • Tualatin Valley Community Access (TVCA) • Public Communications Network (PCN) December 4, 1989 TO: Mayor & Members of the City Council City of Tigard RE: Amendment of Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement - Request for Consent The Board of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) is recommending that member jurisdictions give their consent to an amendment of the MACC Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement. That amendment, if approved by all sixteen jurisdictions, would change the distribution of franchise fees for the next several years to provide additional support to MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program. This packet of information contains a report on the recommended amendment and other supportive documentation on the subject. The packet also contains a copy of MACC Resolution 89-08, recommending the change and a "draft resolution" for your review and action. Paula Manley, Community TV Manager and I have arranged to appear before you soon to formally present this recommendation and answer your questions. Should you have any questions regarding this subject prior to that meeting, please do not hesitate to contact us. Thank you for your consideration of this important issue. :uce ' erely, Crest Administrator Attachments 1815 NW 169th Place, Suite 6020 • Beaverton, Oregon 97006-4886 • 629-8534 or 220-0689 • FAX: (503) 645-8561 Representing the communities of Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro, King City, Lake Oswego, North Plains, Rivergrove, Sherwood, Tigard, Tualatin, Washington County, and Wilsonville. i r i r I i i 1. i I. j'. Report to the Tigard City Council i on MACC Commission Recommendation for Access Funding t i i i Prepared by the I Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) i December 4, 1989 i f Et' k I i I f tit 1 k' f; BACKGROUND REPORT ON MACC COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR ACCESS FUNDING A Brief History MACC's community access television operation, Tualatin Valley Community Access, was formed on July 1, 1988. TVCA grew out of long-standing efforts on the part of the MACC Commission to improve community access TV services and local programming available in the Columbia Cable of Oregon franchise area which includes Tigard. With the recent addition of Gaston, MACC now has 16 member jurisdictions and covers the area bordered by Lake Oswego on the east; Banks, Forest Grove and Gaston to the west; North Plains to the north and Wilsonville to the south. When MACC assumed management of community access television, a budget for the new Access Program was projected based on a three- way partnership between MACC, Columbia Cable and the MACC jurisdictions. The scope of work, funding level and "Access Evaluation Criteria" for the new Access Program were based on providing two centers to serve all the communities within the franchise area, and an expanded mission to include management of public, education and government access (PEG Access) channels and programming. The budget originally envisioned for the new Access Program included a majority of funding from the cable company, a 7.5% franchise fee contribution from each of the jurisdictions and a 10% contribution from the MACC Commission. However, since the 7.5% franchise fee contribution was not approved by each of the jurisdictions as required by the MACC Intergovernmental Agreement (One jurisdiction voted "no"), the third leg of the proposed funding has not been available to the Access Program. This has meant that replacement of worn out access equipment has been postponed and that a budget shortfall for the Access Program is projected as of FY 1990/91. In addition, the continuation of substantial cable company support of the Access Program is tied to the Access Program's performance according to the Access Evaluation Criteria which were negotiated when MACC took over management of the Access Program. According to these Criteria, the base level of cable operator support will be increased or decreased as of FY 1992/93 depending on the success of the Access Program in meeting performance levels based on such things as the number of hours of community programming developed and the number of new community producers involved. The success of the Access Program in meeting the Access Evaluation Criteria--which will result in maintaining or increasing cable company support in future years--is critical to f the long-term survival of the Program and the availability of community programming on the cable system in the future In 1 order to meet the Access Evaluation Criteria maintaining the Access Program at its current service level is essential This includes the continued operation of the two Access Centers, located in Aloha and Tigard, and the continuation of outreach efforts and training in order to involve all of MACC's jurisdictions. MACC Commission Recommended Action At its November 15, 1989 meeting, the MACC Commission voted unanimously to recommend that all MACC jurisdictions reconsider the original concept of a the three-way partnership for funding the Access Program for the next four years. The Commission's recommendation includes: a 10% franchise fee contribution from jurisdictions for the next three years, followed by a contribution of 7.5% for the following year. During the fourth year, the Commission would review the funding requirements of the Access Program; any requests for additional franchise fee contributions beyond the four year period would be taken back to the jurisdictions at that time. With the proposed additional franchise fee contributions from jurisdictions for the next four years the Access Program will be able to maintain both centers replace much of its worn out e i ment and meet the Access Evaluation Criteria which will mean continuation of substantial cable company funding in future years. Most importantly, the funding from Jurisdictions will allow TVCA to maintain current operations while developing a more diverse funding base for the Access Program through grants corporate contributions, memberships etc This may result in less reliance on franchise fee funding in future years Without the Proposed additional franchise fee contributions from jurisdictions, budget Proiections indicate that the Access Program will soon need to make major service cutbacks This would include closure of the Tigard facility and reducing current staff and services by approximately one half. Accomplishments of the Access Program The new Access Program has achieved a great deal in its first year and a half of operation. Through TVCA, approximately 100 hours of local programming are now produced each month for the community access channels, including public affairs shows, music and entertainment shows, programs produced by senior citizens, youth, Spanish speakers, and members of the deaf and hearing impaired community. TVCA teaches television production workshops and makes equipment, facilities, and technical assistance available to the community volunteers who are involved with public access programming. TVCA also produces educational programming in cooperation with 2 i i f I I students and area schools, and government programming such as coverage of city council and County Board of commissioners meetings. One of TVCA's government productions, "Election y Coverage 188," was recently recognized with a national award. Community Access Television in Tigard TVCA's outreach efforts have created participation in the Access Program by individuals and organizations from throughout the franchise area. The newly-remodeled access center in Tigard ! serves individuals and community organizations in Tigard as well as nearby communities. Tigard residents involved with the Tetrapolitan Golden "K" Kiwanis Club recently graduated from TVCA television production workshops and are now working on "Tigard Tales,11 a program about the history of Tigard. Kiwanis members videotaped a talk by Grace Tigard Houghton and plan to videotape additional luncheon speakers in the future including former Secretary of State Norma Paulus. Tigard resident Jim Deere recently produced "Ayuda," a bilingual program providing information for those with alcohol and drug addiction problems. The program was a production of the Washington County Department of Health and Human Resources Substance Abuse Council. C.. Tigard youth involved with Junior Achievement, Cub Scouts, and the Tigard Enrichment Program have all been involved in TVCA training and access programming. In addition, Tigard High School students have been involved in TVCA's "Homework Hotline') homework assistance program, and "Metro League Sports" including coverage of the recent Tigard Tigers win over Beaverton High School. Tigard residents participated in TVCA's recent "Community Issues Survey" which will serve as a basis for additional outreach efforts. According to the survey, of those polled in Tigard, 58% reported that they watch community access programming; 43% of those who watch reported that they watch Tigard City Council Meetings. 3 FRANCHISE FEE DISBURSEMENT SUMMARY Fiscal Year 1987 Through Fiscal Year 1990 Table A Figures below show the amount of franchise fee revenues distributed to MACC member jurisdictions in the last three years, the projected amount this year and proposed amounts for the next three years. The current distribution ratio of the 5% franchise fee paid by Columbia Cable is 60% to jurisdictions and 40% to MACC. Columbia Cable revenue projections were used to determine projections for years 1989-1993. Revenue figures for years after 1993 were not available at this time. FY 86/87 FY 87/88 FY 88/89 FY 89/90 FY 90/91 FY 91/92 FY 92/93 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL PROJECTED PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED JURISDICTION DISBURSEMENT DISBURSEMENT DISBURSEMENT DISBURSEMENT DISBURSEMENT DISBURSEMENT DISBURSEMENT (50%) (60%) (60%) (60%) (50%) (50%) (50%) Banks $446.75 $647.09 $747.83 $881.17 $810.69 $857.23 $902.69 Beaverton 43,066.50 66,389.97 80,556.44 90,916.49 83,644.05 88,445.45 93,136.87 Cornelius 4,138.81 6,950.92 7,826.13 9,019.08 8,297.64 8,773.95 9,239.35 Durham 1,064.79 1,739.58 1,972.58 2,073.35 1,907.50 2,017.00 2,123.99 Forest Grove 12,055.01 17,386.87 19,727.76 22,288.53 20,505.67 21,682.75 22,832.87 Hillsboro 32,203.76 48,924.21 55,534.52 62,148.73 57,177.43 60,459.58 63,666.54 King City 2,145.33 3,732.54 4,416.63 4,768.71 4,387.26 4,639.10 4,885.17 Lake Oswego 42,925.26 67,300.82 78,271.40 86,510.61 79,590.60 84,159.33 88,623.40 North Plains 618.65 918.40 1,029.93 1,088.51 1,001.44 1,058.93 1,115.09 Rivergrove 751.45 1,348.68 1,592.37 1,658.68 1,526.00 1,613.60 1,699.19 Sherwood 2,722.52 3,844.43 4,353.61 5,079.71 4,673.38 4,941.65 5,203.77 Tigard 27,071.14 44,563.91 56,586.22 63,289.07 58,226.56 61,568.93 64,834.73 Tualatin 11,465.07 19,382.55 27,104.62. 31,359.45 28,851.00 30,507.13 32,125.32 Washington Cty 62,757.60 95,921.22 112,056.39 124,867.62 114,879.43 121,473.83 127,917.18 Wilsonville 4,621.54 7,913.64 10,485.11 12,440.11 11,445.02 12,102.00 12,743.93 TOTALS: 248,054.18 386,964.83 462,261.54 518,338.00 476,923.67 S04,300.46 530,050.09 * Figures for Gaston not available at this time i Recommended Additional 10% Franchise Fee Contribution From Jurisdictions to the Access Program Table B P r Figures below show the amount each jurisdiction would contribute f annually to support the Access Program as recommended by the MACC Commission. Amounts are determined from projections shown in Table A. i r Percentage FY 90/91 FY 91/92 FY 92/93 of Subscribers l Banks 0.17% $162.14 $171.44 $180.54 Beaverton 17.54% 16,728.78 17,689.09 18,627.31 Cornelius 1.74% 1,659.53 1,754.79 1,847.86 Durham 0.40% 381.50 403.40 424.79: Forest Grove 4.30% 4,101.12 4,336.55 4,566.56 Hillsboro 11.99% 11,435.46 12,091.91 12,733.26 King City 0.92% 877.45 927.82 977.03 Lake Oswego 16.69% 15,918.09 16,831.86 17,724.61 North Plains 0.21% 200.29 211.78 223.02 Rivergrove 0.3216 305.20 322.72 339.84 Sherwood 0.98% 934.68 988.33 1,040.75 Tigard 12.21% 11,645.29 12,313.78 12,966.90 Tualatin 6.05% 5,770.19 6,101.42 6,425.04 fi Washington Cty 24.09% 22,975.84 24,294.76 25,583.34 Wilsonville 2.40% 2,289.00 2,420.40 2,548.77 4 5 * Figures for Gaston not available at this time Ic. 5 RESOLUTION NO. 89-08 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (MACC) MEMBER JURISDICTIONS AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO THE MACC INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WHEREAS, current budget projections show that without an increase in financial support from its member jurisdictions, MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program will need to be drastically curtailed in future years; and WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the member jurisdictions make a 10% franchise fee contribution to the Access Program for three years, a 7.5% contribution for the following year, and that in year four the funding level for Access would be reviewed by the jurisdictions to determine future levels of support; and WHEREAS, a redistribution of the member jurisdictions' franchise fees requires the amendment of the MACC Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners of the Metropolitan Area Communications commission resolves and recommends to its member jurisdictions that they consent to and authorize the amendment of the MACC Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement to redistributed the member jurisdictions' franchise fees in accordance with the proposal as set forth in the second recital above. ADOPTED by the Board of Commissioners of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission this 15th day of November, 1989. /s/ Larry Cole Larry Cole, Chair C. 6 "MODEL RESOLUTION" RESOLUTION 89- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND ITS MEMBER JURISDICTIONS. WHEREAS, the City of is a member of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC); and WHEREAS, the members of MACC have entered into an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement (Agreement), and Section 9.E. of the Agreement requires that its terms shall not be amended without the written authorization of the governing bodies of all the member jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, current budget projections show that without an increase in financial support from its member jurisdictions, MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program will need to be drastically curtailed in future years; and WHEREAS, the City of desires that the Agreement be amended to provide that the Access Program receive funding from the member jurisdictions' franchise fees, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby consents to and authorizes the amendment of the Agreement as follows: 1. To reduce the distribution of franchise fees to the member jurisdictions from 60% to 5016 of the franchise fees collected within each member's jurisdiction, such reduction to be effective from July 1, 1990, through June 30, 1993, with the 10% difference in franchise fees to be contributed to MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program. 2. To provide for a 52.5% distribution of franchise fees to the member jurisdictions for the period from July 1, 1993, to June 30, 1994, thereby providing a 7.5% franchise fee contribution to MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program. 3. That subsequent to June 30, 1994 the member jurisdictions will review that portion of their franchise fee that funds MACC's Tualatin Valley Access Program to determine future levels of franchise fee contributions to the Access Program from the jurisdictions. 4. The Mayor is authorized to file an executed true and correct copy of this Resolution with MACC. INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1989. City of Mayor ATTESTED BY: 7 RESOLUTION NO. 89-08 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (MACC) MEMBER JURISDICTIONS AUTHORIZE AMENDMENTS TO THE MACC INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WHEREAS, current budget projections show that without an increase in financial support from its member jurisdictions, MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program will need to be drastically curtailed in future years; and WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the member jurisdictions make a 10% franchise fee contribution to the Access Program for three years, a 7.5% contribution for the following year, and that in year four the funding level for Access would be reviewed by the jurisdictions to determine future levels of support; and WHEREAS, a redistribution of the member jurisdictions' franchise fees requires the amendment of the MACC Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission resolves and recommends to its member jurisdictions that they consent to and authorize the amendment of the MACC Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement to redistributed the member jurisdictions' franchise fees in accordance with the proposal as set forth in the second recital above. ADOPTED by the Board of Commissioners of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission this 15th day of November, 1989. /s/ Larry Cole Larry Cole, Chair 6 "MODEL RESOLUTION" RESOLUTION 89- i A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND ITS MEMBER JURISDICTIONS. h WHEREAS, the City of is a member of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC); and i d WHEREAS, the members of MACC have entered into an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement (Agreement), and Section 9.E. of the Agreement requires that its terms shall not be amended without the written authorization of the governing bodies of all the member jurisdictions; and k: WHEREAS, current budget projections show that without an increase in. financial support from its member jurisdictions, MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program will need to be drastically curtailed in future years; and WHEREAS, the City of desires that the Agreement be t: amended to provide that the Access Program receive funding from the member Jurisdictions' franchise fees, s k. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby consents to and authorizes the amendment of the Agreement as follows: 1. To reduce the distribution of franchise fees to the member t jurisdictions from 60% to 50% of the franchise fees collected within each member's jurisdiction, such reduction to be effective from July 1, 1990, through June 30, 1993, with the 10% difference in franchise fees to be contributed to MACC's Tualatin Valley, Community Access Program. c 2. To provide for a 52.5% distribution of franchise fees to the member [y jurisdictions for the period from July 1, 1993, to June 30, 1994, thereby providing a 7.5% franchise fee contribution to MACC's Tualatin Valley Community Access Program. 3. That subsequent to June 30, 1994 the member jurisdictions will z review that portion of their franchise fee that funds MACC's Tualatin Valley Access Program to determine future levels of franchise fee contributions to the Access Program from the jurisdictions. 4. The Mayor is authorized to file an executed true and correct copy of this Resolution with MACC. INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1989. City of Mayor ATTESTED BY: 7 ~2 SS i ~L 1 )Z~tr l~9 /Yla ~G rucu JCT1®NSM December 6, 1989 City Council City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard,,-OR 97223 Dear City Council, I am writing you in regards to my support for the MACC Commission's proposal for additional franchise fee funding for TVCA community access. I feel strongly that the Tigard City Council and the other fifteen member jusrisdictions should contribute a percentage of their cable franchise fees to CABLE ACCESS for the next four years. These funds will help immensely for replacing worn out and or inadequate equipment, so that COMMUNITY PRODUCERS can offer professional quality productions to the community. I have produced the "STATE GAMES OF OREGON" (Winter and Summer) for the past three years. I use a crew of sixteen people who cover three days of competition in Washington, Clackamas, and Multnomah counties. The State Games of Oregon brings together athletes from all over the state, ranging from five years to ninty years of age, competing in twenty Olympic style sports. It's through events such as the State Games of Oregon, that are video taped for Cable Television, that enchance the liveability of our state, and that all Oregonians can work together to promote health and fitness. As an Independent Producer, I could not afford to produce over thirty hours of video footage without the free use of TVCA's equipment and crews. The costs would run into the thousands. Enclosed is a copy of the 1989 State Games ceremonies and competition. Note the City and State dignitaries who attentd. Community Access Television is extremely important to the communities, as it reflects the communties involvement in various activities, their city Council meetings, and import- ant issues that we as citizens have a voice in and participate in through Community Access Television (TVCA). , Sincerely, Rich Hanners Producer 12145 S.W. Summercrest Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-2549 T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L ME'EMIG MENUIFS - NOVEMBER 6, 1989 1. ROIL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Irene Ertell, Librarian; Ed Murphy, Comtminity Development Director (arrived at 6:10 p.m.); Liz Newton, Commmity Involvement Coordinator; and Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder. 2. STUDY SESSION: a. Library Discussion: City Administrator Reilly, Librarian Ertell, and Council discussed the upoomi_ng County Library Levy targeted for the March election. The City of Tigard participates in a county- wide cooperative library service; funding for this program is presently calculated through a formula based on each city's assessed valuation. The Cooperative Library Advisory Board (CLAB) has been considering reconmending to the County Board of Commissioners changing the formula to distribute funds based on circulation. This latter formula would significantly impact the City of Tigard - preliminary estimates indicate that the City would receive about $100,000 less than with the assessed valuation formula. Two main issues were discussed by Council: 1. Does the City support the proposed levy amount (approximately double the amount currently being collected)? 2. Does the City wish to pursue the concerns over the potential change in the distribution formula? Council consensus was that while they were disconcerted about the levy increase, the proposed change to the distribution formula was the primary concern. The philosophical question of marketing versus reference was noted; that is, should libraries be participating in programs such as video distribution to increase circulation numbers or should libraries be concentrating on providing reference services to their patrons. Librarian Ertell advised Tigard purposely limited their video selections to avoid competing with private video rental businesses. Mien other libraries stock a large video collection, with a three-day check- out time, the video circulation comprises up to 18 percent of total circulation. (Community Development Director arrived - 6:10 p.m.) City Administrator, Librarian, and Councilor Eadon will be attending the CIAB meeting on Wednesday, November 8, to represent Tigard Is position. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINIRES - NOVEMBER 6, 1989 - PAGE 1 communication from several residents in the area advising they were concerned about the type of buffering proposed. After discussion, Council consensus was to review this issue as a possible Community Development Code amerdment. Community Development Director advised such a change would take four to five months to implement in order to work through reviews with staff, NPO's, Planning Connnission and City Council. Council will note this as discussion topic during their January work session. Bull Mountain Transportation Study: Councilor Eadon noted that Bev Froude of the Bull Mountain CPO No. 4 has suggested the Bull Mountain Transportation Study be delayed for public release until January. This suggestion was made because of several issues being worked through by residents on Bull Mountain. Lengthy Council discussion followed. At issue with the delay was the concern that development was occurring without the Transportation Plan in place. Annexation requests were pending; however, City Administrator reminded council that annexation and development were two separate processes. Council consensus was to proceed with the Transportation Study as planned. 3. W WITH TUAIA`TIN VATZEY ECXNCHIIC DEVELOPNOU 00FTO2ATIC N: (Workshop was postponed-) 4. VISITURIS IY~IDA. No visitors present. 5. CCNSERr AGENDA: - 5.1 Approve Council Minutes: September 19, 25, 1989; October 9, 1989. 5.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 5.3 Approve Final Order - Couprehensive Plan Ameybe nt CPA 89-08 Zone Change 89-08 Gross; NPO #7 - Resolution No. 89-86 5.4 Authorize Issuance of General Obligation IuProvement Bonds- Resolution No. 89-87 Motion by Cbinncilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present- 6. PUELIC HEARING - C1CtFMMMW PIAN ANl "MU CPA 89-07 ZONE CMM 89- 07; MET7Cw3-EMS/ROQCWEEL NPO 15 A request for a ccuprehensive Plan Amendment from Commercial Professional to Medium-High Density Residential and a Zone change frcm C-P (Cc mercial Professional) to R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre) for approximately 5 acres. M= ON: West side of SW 72nd Avenue, between SW Varns Street and SW Fir Street (WCIM 2S1 1DB, Tax Lots 800 & 801, 2S1, 1DC, Tax Lot 3600). o Public Hearing Continued to November 20, 1989 CITY OOUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 6, 1989 - PAGE 3 8. PUBLIC HEMMU - PA=C ORATE CER= IOCAL Ma4OVEMENT DIS UCP Consideration of an amer1ment to Ordinance No. 89-14 creating the Pacific Corporate Center Local Improvement District. The purpose of the proposed amendment is to correct the legal description of the District boundaries as set forth in Exhibit "A" to said ordinance. More particularly, the proposed amendment • ill reduce the width of the norther 475 feet of the district immediately south of Bonita Road from 87.5 feet to 72.5 feet. This proposed correction of the legal description will be the sole issue for consideration and action by the Council. a. Public hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. C. Ca mmmLi.ty Development Director summarized this agenda item. The consultants on the Pacific Corporate Center Local Improvement District (LID) project discovered an error in the legal description of the boundaries of the LID. The legal description, as written, includes a small amount of land outside of the intended LID boundary. It was proposed to amend the boundary description to reduce the width of the northerly 475 feet of the District imT,ediately south of Bonita Road from 87.5 to 72.5 feet. This amerrhient will correct the description to conform with the right- of-way which was actually acquired from John Smets. legal Counsel has recoamended that this amen3ment be adopted in order to make it clear that the Smets' property is not to be assessed under the LID. d. Public Testimony - None. (Mrs. Mary Smets signed in as a proponent; however, declined to testify when it was noted there were no opponents to the proposal.) e. Staff rimed adoption of the proposed ordinance. f. Public hearing was closed. g. Consideration by council: ORDINANCE NO. 89-28 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PACIFIC CORPORATE CENTER LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND DECLARING AN IIMERS'IIJCY. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to adopt Ordinance No. 89-28. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 9. I IDA ZaM: None ' ' CI'T'Y COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 6, 1989 - PAGE 5 3.~ CITY OF TIGARD, ORM" COUNCIL AGENDA. I'I'FM SU MMY AGE M OF: December 11, 1989 DATE SLIM TM: December 1, 1989 ISSUE/A3ENDA TITLE: Amend the In - PREVIOUS ACIION: averimental Area Cbmmanications ment with MACC PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley DEPT HEAD OK CITY ALINIIN O REQUESTED BY: MACC FO CY ISSUE Should the Council amend the IntergovCY ISSUE1 Cooperation Agreement with MACC which would result in an increase in financial support to continue the Tualatin Valley Cmumunity Access Program? INFORMATION SUMMARY Bruce Crest of MACC has been scheduled to visit with the City Council on December 11 at 6:00 p.m. to review the proposed amendment to the Agreement. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED C 1. Adopt the proposed resolution as presented. 2. Adopt the proposed resolution with amendments. 3. Decline action at this time. FISCAL IMPACT' Estimates indicate additional expense to the City as follows: Fiscal Year 90/91 = $11,645.29 Fiscal Year 91/92 = 12,313.78 Fiscal Year 92/93 = 12,966.90 Without participation of all member jurisdictions, the Commmity Access Program cannot continue. SUGGESTED ACTION Adopt the proposed resolution as presented. cw.maccsum. i r ~ !i i E CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 11, 1989 NOTE CONCERNING AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: STAFF WILL BE RECOMMENDING THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE OPENED AND CONTINUED TO THE COUNCIL MEETING OF 00e BER 19, 19 .s a f C_ s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 12/11/89 DATE SUBMITTED: 11/30/89 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 89-07/ PREVIOUS ACTION: Council approval ZC 89-07 Metzger and Ems on 11/20/89 PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD QgMCITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: PO ICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The Council voted to approve the above application and ordered staff to prepare the final order. The final order is attached including findings and exhibits. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached ordinance 2. Modify and approve the attached ordinance FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the ordinance. CPA 89-07.ord/kl ORDINANCE NO. 89- Page 9