Loading...
City Council Packet - 03/05/1990 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item should sign on the appropriate MARCH 5, 1990 5:30 PM 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, OREGON 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 STUDY SESSION (5:30 p.m.) 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 p.m.) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 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 Council Minutes: Feb. 5 and 19, 1990 3.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 4. PUBLIC IMUUNG - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0001; PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY NPO #8 A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Map designations from Medium Density Residential (approximately 7 acres) and Low Density Residential (approximately 90 acres) to Professional Commercial. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan text is proposed to be amended to add criteria for determining the timeliness of future rezoning for these and other properties. The proposed amendments are intended to be the first step in establishment of an urban renewal district for these parcels and adjoining area and the development of a mixture of office and commercial uses. ZONE: R-12 (Residential 12 units/acre) and R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations or Challenges o Summation by Community Development Staff o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation by Community Development Staff o Council Questions or Comments o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration by Council - Ordinance No. 90- COUNCIL AGENDA - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 1 5. PUBLIC HEARING - PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT The Tigard city Council will review a proposal to adopt an urban renewal plan for the South Metzger area. The proposed urban renewal district is generally bounded by S.W. Greenburg Road, Locust Street, Hall Boulevard, and Highway 217 with extensions incorporating sections of the Highway i 217 right--of way. o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations or challenges o Summation by Community Development Staff o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation by Community Development Staff o Council Questions or Comments o Public Hearing Closed 4 o Consideration by Council: Ordinance No. 90- Resolution No. 90- 6. CONSIDERATION OF PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BALLOT TITLE r - RESOLUITON 90- C. k 7. CONSIDERATION OF CHARTER A4ENDNENT BALLOT TITLE CHANGING MAYOR'S TERM OF OFFICE TO FOUR YEARS - RESOLUITON NO. 90- 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 9. EXECUITVE 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. s- 10. ADJOURNMENT cca35 s, F: i i A f' ~i COUNCIL AGENDA - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 2;' 1 , J T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - 5:30 PM 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Ron Goodpaster, Chief of Police (for Study Session only); Keith Liden, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Community Involvement Coordinator; Tim Ramis, City Attorney; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer. 2. STUDY SESSION - AGENDA REVIEW a. PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL Community Development Director and consultants John Spencer and Ollie Norville reviewed key issues and the hearing process for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Development Plan for the proposed President's Parkway urban renewal. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Mr. Spencer reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment recommendation. This amendment would require that a detailed Master Plan be prepared for the entire area. The Master Plan would provide for evaluation of transportation issues with impacts to the surrounding areas also considered. Part of the analysis to be completed was the identification of the funding mechanism to be utilized for improvements at the time the development application was granted. The Master Plan would provide for more study and outline procedures for development implementation; concerns would be addressed through a planning process. Developer Agreement The Developer Agreement would be a contract between the developer and the Development Agency. The contract would be drawn up as the next step once the Development Plan was in place. At that time, careful negotiation of the relationship with the developer would occur. Items included in the agreement would include a timetable for public and private improvements; extent of land acquisition; and the extent of public funding CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 1 participation. This agreement would be subject to independent review by-an outside consultant. . School Relocation Mr. Norville outlined the school relocation history; his comments included the following: o The developer and school were unable to reach an agreement on a purchase price. (Issue: Fair market value versus replacement cost.) o Development could occur without the removal of the school. o Acquisition of the school could be accomplished through a voluntary agreement with the School District. Fair market value would ordinarily determine the price; however, no comparable sales were found within the state. Furthermore, there may be precedence set in other states, in similar circumstances, where the price could be that of "substitute value." The Development Agency, however, would not be able to fund growth capacity for a new school. Need for Public Incentive Funding Y The need for public incentive funding must be determined. It was noted that it was not uncommon to be dealing with just one developer; however, to what extent public expenditures for improvements were utilized would be carefully administered. The Development Agency must retain their own independent advice. The pro forma from the developer would be analyzed by an independent consultant; i.e., real estate economists. The developer would be entitled to a "fair return" on investment, but the public agency would need to protect taxpayers against a developer benefiting a "windfall profit." It was noted the Developer Agreement would also play a role in determining the need for public-incentive funding. Mr. Norville reviewed some of the elements of the Development Report. He assured Council there was presently no risk to the City. He also noted that if it appears, upon completion of analysis by the real estate economists, that the project could be completed through use of private funding and provide a fair return on investment, then the public improvement funding would be pulled back. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 2 I Ago, Mr. Norville explained how the City would be protected through financing measures and noted there appeared to be some flexibility in the financing schematics. Property Acquisition The Development Agency would have the authority to acquire property through condemnation; however, the developer would be encouraged to assemble the land on their own through voluntary purchases. Condemnation procedures would be more costly in both time and money. The City of Tigard could stipulate that land assembly was to be completed within a certain time period; if not finished, the City could withdraw from the project. This way, property owners would not be left to wait over a long period of time as development takes place. Property acquisition by the Agency should be minimal; the Agency was not planning to acquire any property with the exception of the school. City Administrator advised that there would be a meeting with the School District Board on March 8th. Representatives from the City would include a member of Council, City Attorney, and Community Development Director. The school site may not be needed for up to five years; however, acquisition could take place sooner. City Attorney advised work was being done to determine how much property was currently under the developer's control (i.e, options on property). Community Development Director clarified that the Agency could acquire property for public improvements, but acquisition for development must be done through a Plan amendment process. Housing Inventory Mr. Spencer noted Washington County originally indicated none of the land was considered buildable residential land; however, since then the County has advised there was a probability that this would affect housing- inventory density requirements. Verification of the number of units involved would be determined next week. City Administrator advised this was an issue which could be managed; i.e., amendment of the Development Code to allow housing in this area. s ( S CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -MARCH 5, 1990 -PAGE 3 Planning Commission Recommendation Council received the recommendation from the Planning commission; said recommendation was included in the material submitted for Council review. Hearing Process After discussion, consensus of Council was to combine the public hearings on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Development Plan. The Mayor would call for public testimony by alternating proponent and opponent speakers. Additionally, it was noted the Council could set a time limit on the testimony. other Issues Community Development Director reviewed the following side issues: - Noticing: LCDC has been notified. - Dr. Davis' fill permit was not an element of these proceedings. - Metzger Park was not a taxing district; therefore, the urban renewal proposal could be of benefit. - Historic homes would be dealt with in the same manner as they would anywhere else in the community. Several other issues were also discussed briefly. Mr. Norville summarized by saying the City/Agency has made no commitment to the developer at this time. Questions to be considered by Council included: - Is this the right time for this urban renewal? - Would this be of benefit to the community? - Would this solve more problems than would be created by controlling design and specifying uses? Council meeting recessed: 7:10 p.m. Council meeting reconvened: 7:25 p.m. b. UPDATE - REQUEST BY RESIDENTS IN ANTON PARK FOR CLOSURE OF S.W. NORTH DAKOTA STREET City Engineer reviewed aerial photographs from prior years. In September 1984 there was no Anton Park CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 4 neighborhood or apartments in the area. 1986 photographs C illustrate that there were about 18 homes in the area; a through-street was under construction. Chief of Police reviewed traffic statistics recently completed in the area. Over a two and one-half day period, traffic flow was 3,200 to 3,300 cars per day. of this traffic, approximately 75% were travelling in excess of 25 mph. Chief noted that street design, volume, traffic speed, and continued construction posed safety problems. This issue would be reviewed again at the March 12, 1990, Council Study Session. BUSYNESS MEETING 3. NON AGENDA ITEMS - None 4. VISITOR'S AGENDA a. Ted Fullmer, representing St. Anthony's Grade School, 12645 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard, Oregon, requested a waiver of Tigard's processing fee for a liquor license. The school holds an annual auction; they consistently donate over $1,000 to good causes for the City of Tigard. This year they plan on donating over $1,000 to the Senior Citizens' Center. On March 16 there will be a St. Patrick's Day Celebration in the gymnasium; they requested a waiver of that fee also. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to approve the fee waiver for the two events as requested. The motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. 4. CONSENT AGENDA 4.1 Approve Council Minutes: Feb. 5 and 19, 1990 4.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Eadon, to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Note: The following two Public Hearing items were combined; £ testimony was accepted on both subject matters.) CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 5 5. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0001; PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY NPO #8 A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Map designations from Medium Density Residential (approximately 7 acres) and Low Density Residential (approximately 90 acres) to Professional Commercial. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan text is proposed to be amended to add criteria for determining the timeliness of future rezoning for these and other properties. The proposed amendments are intended to be the first step in establishment of an urban renewal district for these parcels and adjoining area and the development of a mixture of office and commercial uses. ZONE: R-12 (Residential 12 units/acre) and R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) PUBLIC HEARING - PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT The Tigard City Council will review a proposal to adopt an urban renewal plan for the South Metzger area. The proposed urban renewal district. is generally bounded by S.W. Greenburg Road, Locust Street, Hall Boulevard, and Highway 217 with extensions incorporating sections of the Highway 217 right-of-way. a. Public hearing was opened. b. Mayor declared he has had business dealings with Trammell Crow Company. He advised he rents space from the Company, but this would not affect his decision on this issue. C. Mayor advised Council would receive testimony until 10:00 p.m. He asked that those persons who signed in to testify to keep their testimony to two or three minutes in order to allow time for others to testify. d. Community Development Director overviewed the proposal before Council. Basically, there were three items: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment a. Change to Map b. Change to Text 2. Urban Renewal Plan (Financial Plan) 3. Report on Urban Renewal Plan Staff would be recommending that Council receive oral testimony at this meeting and delay making a decision on the above items until their March 12, 1990, meeting. In addition, staff was recommending the Council hold open the opportunity to submit written comments until y CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 6 r; k i Thursday, March 8, 1990, 5:00 p.m. s If Council chose to adopt the Urban Renewal Plan, the decision would be referred to the Tigard voters. The Urban Renewal Plan calls for utilization of tax increment financing and, according to the City Charter, this financing mechanism must be approved by the voters. The City has been working with a group of consultants on this project. In addition, the Planning Commission, NPO 8, CPO 4, Transportation Advisory Committee, Parks Board, and Economic Development committee have all had an opportunity to review the proposal. Mr. John Spencer, Planning Consultant, then reviewed issues before Council. He reviewed the relationships among the elements of the proposal and how they comprised an overall general planning framework. There have been numerous meetings with advisory groups throughout the City; concerns expressed by these groups were, in many instances, shared by the staff and consultants. These concerns included: o How would this work? o Was this the right thing for Tigard? o What were the impacts to Tigard and the adjacent community? o How would the City deal with the impacts; what process could be developed to fairly analyze the concerns? Mr. Spencer advised that the following represented the major issues: o Public involvement in developing the detailed master plan for the area. o Traffic impacts; i.e., how much would be generated and what would the impact be on neighboring communities? o Mass transit. o Buffering of adjacent neighborhoods o Relocation of Metzger Elementary School; i.e., how and when? o Wetlands; i.e., how would this area be dealt CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 7 with; how could the area be used as an amenity. Could wildlife enhancement be built into the Plan? o Metzger Park Assessment District Mr. Spencer reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The proposed amendment to the Map would change approximately 66 acres of land currently designated for low density residential to commercial professional. About 10 acres of land currently designated for multi- family development would be changed to commercial professional. It was proposed that the zoning would not be changed at this time. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment, which included a number of criteria and additional studies, was to ensure that when detailed zoning changes were made (when development was imminent) , all impacts could be addressed in a practical way including the identification of financing and transitioning from residential to commercial, minimizing the community impact. The Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment would adopt policies which would assist in dealing with the issues mentioned above. A primary part of the Text Amendment was the requirement that a detailed Master Plan be prepared for the entire area. The Master Plan would be adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan and would, essentially, replace the standard zoning for this area. The Master Plan would outline process to consider the specific arrangement of land uses; identify the specific location of streets and public facilities; set forth provisions dealing with the wetland area; require a transportation study taking into consideration this area and the surrounding areas and impacts projected for now and in the future; determine the kinds of improvements necessary to accommodate growth in the urban renewal and surrounding areas. The transportation study would be, if the urban renewal plan was approved in May, one of the first items undertaken. Other elements of the Master Plan would be a phasing plan which would indicate timing of development of different sections. Part of the phasing plan would include provisions on how areas which would not be developed would be protected/buffered from those areas under construction. Additional comments on the Master Plan included: CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 8 M - Creation of Public Facilities' Plan (sewer, water, drainage, etc.) Flood Control and Enhancement Plan (dealing with wetland areas) Specific Design Guidelines addressing specific requirements for private development (architectural standards for buildings; site planning standards in addition to the standards the City had in place). Public involvement in creating the Master Plan would be necessary. Once completed, any additional request for a zone change, building permit, or any permit requested in this area would have to meet the requirements of the Master Plan. Mr. Spencer advised that the proposal, as presented by Trammell Crow, would most likely undergo extensive revisions as development occurred. The Master Plan would also contain an analysis of public improvements necessary to serve the development, both internally and externally, and to address funding for impacts created. A policy which would become part of the Comprehensive Plan states as follows: "In order to approve applications for plan amendments, subsequent to adoption of this policy and other applications referred to in this subsection, adequate funding for public improvements found to be needed by the City, during the preparation or update of the Master Plan, must exist prior to, or concurrent with, approval of the application." The Urban Renewal Plan (Plan) creates a funding mechanism, through the use of tax increment financing to pay for some of the public improvements which would be necessary within the subject area. Preliminary studies were done reviewing elements of traffic, sewer, and water; about $44 million worth of improvements have been identified. Mr. Spencer listed the major projects identified in the Plan. The acquisition (i.e., funding) of the relocation of Metzger Elementary School was identified in the Plan. The School District must define their needs with regard to facility, timing, and relocation specifics. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 9 had been identified in the Plan as the developer's W responsibility. An addendum to the Urban Renewal Plan would enable the Urban Renewal Agency to place time limits on the acquisition of private land so that people would not be left to wait for a long period of time if their property was scheduled for development at a latter stage. Mr. Spencer reviewed some of the specifics which would be outlined in the Developer Agreement. Said agreement would be a very detailed document, but would not be put together until after the voters have had an opportunity to review the proposal at the polls. He advised that, with regard to concerns over the Metzger Park District, funding for maintenance is accomplished through a fee, not a tax. Therefore, the urban renewal program, by "freezing" the tax base, would virtually have no effect on the ability of the Metzger Park District to levy fees on assessed values within that District. If there was added value to the District as the result of the urban renewal effort, then that value would be subject to whatever assessment the Metzger Park District placed on property. Councilor Johnson noted that the Master Plan outlined a r specific process of public hearings and public s involvement before development could occur. Mr. Spencer i added that the Master. Plan would be adopted as part of the Zoning Ordinance for the City. t e. Marilyn Hartsell, 10285 S.W. 70th, Tigard, Oregon, advised she was representing NPO #8 as chairperson. On January 17, a vote taken at an NPO 48 meeting to unanimously support the referral of the urban renewal development project to the May ballot as proposed. On February 14, five of the eight NPO members were present: three voted in favor, one opposed and one abstained, with regard to the endorsement to the changes of the ` Comprehensive Plan Amendment. In response to a question by Councilor Schwartz, Ms. Hartsell advised she thought seven members were present at the January 17 NPO 8 meeting. f. David Blake, Trammell Crow Company, testified on the proposal as endorsed by his company. His remarks are summarized as follows: He reviewed an architect's rendering of what the subject area would look like if the Comprehensive Plan were - CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 10 adopted, the Master Planning was finished, and the funding mechanism was put in place to make the "vision" a reality. He advised acceptance of the Development Plan would initiate a 20-year planning process which represented substantial change. Persons have identified concerns to be addressed on both sides of the issue; however, it was his hope that the Plan would solve more problems than it would create. - The Plan would deal with the issue of development continuing to encroach upon the elementary school. He advised he has had a year-long dialogue with those concerned with the school issue; the result of those discussions was the proposed Urban Renewal Plan. He outlined traffic issues. There was already severe traffic problems with Highway 217, Greenburg Road and adjacent neighborhoods. He reviewed the history of development in the area from farmland, to residential, to construction of a freeway and a large commercial shopping center. The transitional phasing to accommodate the changes had not been done well. He offered that the Development Plan process, through planning, would create solutions to the problems. He reviewed Trammell Crow's proposal with regard to types of structures to be built. He advised they proposed to solve the wetland area problems. The solution would be in conformance with the Corps of Engineers requirements, the Sensitive Lands provisions, and environmentalists who were concerned with the area. Individual property owners would not be able to afford required mitigation efforts or be willing to combine their efforts to facilitate a master plan solution to the problems. He noted Trammell Crow Company has a substantial investment in the area, and their efforts in proposing the urban renewal plan represent their interest in protecting and enhancing this investment. Existing homes have declined in value over the last ten years which was shown in the resale values of homes sold in the open market. The congregate tax base of the area was far less than what would be required as an investment by the City of Tigard to bring the area up to a standard typical of any residential development. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 11 ' az.Ar`Jea r1b ,._i D , a . . ~i He advised a planning process was being proposed; to 'V . , stop this process would only stop planning, but would not stop the inevitable change of the area., g. Public Testimony o Mike Scott, President, Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, 9185 S.W. Burnham Road, Tigard, Oregon, presented a letter on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce. At the Board's February 28th meeting, the members unanimously adopted a resolution by t: which it specifically took no position for or against the Presidential Parkway development. Further, the Tigard Chamber would continue to review the Presidential Parkway development issue and has requested representatives of Trammell Crow discuss this with the Board. C The Tigard Chamber Board remains concerned about the viability of Tigard downtown development and that the t. growth of Tigard business and residential communities commence in an orderly and structured fashion which will ultimately benefit all of the Tigard community, while preserving the uniqueness of Tigard. o Louise Beck, 8820 S.W. Thorn, Tigard, Oregon, testified she lived in the City of Tigard. She advised this s proposal has presented total disarray to her and her husband with regard to their home and plans for their financial future (i.e., retirement). She said the plan itself was good; unfortunately, her home was located within that plan. o Marjorie Haglund, 11075 S.W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon, advised she was a member of NPO #8. She said the plan was well done and would provide an opportunity for Tigard which would not happen again for a long time. She advised this was a proposal for a complete development suitable for the area which would also solve some of the problems. Ms. Haglund noted there were people on both sides of the issue with regard to relocation of residential area; some people wanted to move while others did not. She said Trammell Crow has been working with people in the area to the best of their ability to meet needs;. however, they would not be able to meet the needs of everyone. Ms. Haglund recalled a similar situation with the Fowler Jr. High which was relocated some years ago and noted CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 12 .f this could also have good results for the Metzger Elementary School without impacting taxpayers a great deal. She referred to complaints that the CPO people would not be able to vote on this issue. She said she thinks this proves how interrelated the community was on issues in the area. She noted CPO residents had had the opportunity to come into Tigard and it would have been better if they had. Ms. Hagland advised that the NPO recommended the project be submitted to the voters for a decision. o Gary Ott, 9055 S.W. Edgewood Street, Tigard, Oregon advised he has been involved at the NPO level for about ten years and was a participant in the formulation of the original Comprehensive Plan Map. He said he opposed the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. He referred to the Code wherein it stated the Director shall make the Staff Report and all materials available five days prior to a public hearing. He said he was not able to obtain a Staff Report until last Friday. In response to Mr. Ott's statement, City Attorney advised that in order to determine if there was a procedural violation, the Land Use Board of Appeals would apply the test to determine if* there had been actual prejudice. If a report was out late, but people had the opportunity to come to a hearing and express their views, then any problem was cured. Mr. Ott alleged the Planning Commission hearings were flawed for the following reasons: The Planning Commission failed to follow the Development Code, Chapter 8, which outlined the criteria for decision making. He said goals were inadequately addressed in the Staff Report or ignored. The Staff only addressed Goals 5, 6, 7, and 8. Federal Regulations were completely ignored by the Planning Commission, especially in the area of wetlands and pollution of Fanno Creek and the Tualatin River. Also the designation of commercial lands against the existing low density residential development needed review. He said he questioned the conduct of the City Attorney during the hearing. Mr. Ott said he had CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 13 asked staff if there was a need for Commercial AW' Professional land (i.e., TMC Chapter 18.22.010). The attorney present interjected that the staff did not have to respond. Mr. Ott said, this biased the proceedings and his testimony. Based on the above, he requested Council refer the Plan Amendment back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Ott referred to the Comprehensive Plan Map and the areas designated for Commercial Professional development. He said Commercial Professional activity should be placed in existing zoned land. There was no need to take residential land and change it to a CP designation. In looking at the LCDC goals, he said he did not believe the staff adequately addressed the goals other than to state that they would be addressed later. He said he failed to understand how staff could recommend amending g a major portion of the land without knowing what the F impacts of that change were going to be. The time to address the goals would be before the major change was made to the land-use designations. R Mr. Ott stated that traffic impacts have either been ignored or it had been stated that they would be studied later. He said the studies were needed. He reported t Washington County had expressed concern about the 4 traffic, and the State of Oregon Department of ' Transportation testified to their concern about the traffic and questioned the interchange arrangement. Furthermore, an additional 17,000 trips would affect the air and water quality in the area. Additional development, without knowing the impact, would only worsen the situation. He challenged the Council to review the impacts of this major land use change advising that the time to plan was now, not after the change was made. He said he did not believe the Council could proceed with the proposal until all of the questions had been answered. Mr. Ott made two suggestions: 1. Review the Comprehensive Plan Map as a whole. If, in fact, the CP should be moved from the Tigard Triangle area into the Washington Square area, then this should be done in a comprehensive manner. :K 2. Continue the hearing for 30 days until Washington j CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 14 County, the Oregon Department of Transportation, ' and City staff can get together to look at whether traffic mitigation was possible in the area. Mr. Ott referred to Senate Bill 2288 and requested the Public Hearing be held opened so that written response to the Staff Report could be made. Mayor advised that written testimony would be received until March 8, 1990. Mr. Ott said that the Development Plan showed the Greenburg Road/Highway 217 Interchange was within the boundary. Clearly, the assessed value of the interchange would not increase. He noted this improvement had been-removed from the State Six-Year Plan and that it was inappropriate to ask Tigard citizens to pay for the interchange. Mr. Ott advised that tax increment financing clearly had a purpose, but to provide assistance to a developer was not a wise use of taxpayer money. Community Development Director clarified the issue with regard to availability of the staff report. He advised the Council had received two staff reports. One dealt with the Urban Renewal Plan and Report; the other staff report summarized the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) proposal. He advised the staff report had not substantially changed IL since the Planning commission hearing and had been available since council received the packet. There had been a series of errata sheets issued based on comments heard at NPO meetings, CPO meetings, and from State agencies. These errata sheets addressed both the CPA and the Urban Renewal Plan and Report to assure the intent was clear. This material was delivered to Council last Friday and was made available to the public at that time. City Attorney responded to Mr. Ott's testimony concerning comments made by Mr. Phil Grillo, Assistant City Attorney, at the Planning Commission Hearing. City Attorney noted it was his understanding that Mr. Grillo advised that the legal standard was for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and not public need. This was a correct statement of the law. o Reid Iford, 10275 S.W. 85th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, testified he has lived in the Tigard/Metzger area for over 20 years; he was a former chairperson of CPO 4 Metzger. He said the Metzger grade school was built many years ago in a quiet neighborhood and was centrally located on a quiet street. None of the above statements about the school were true today. The school was no longer centrally located; it was adjacent to a large, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 15 r r commercial development; and it was located on a heavily travelled commercial street. Besides trading an old school for a new school, the residents would be getting the neighborhood school back into the neighborhood where it belonged. He said the development should be planned, not piecemealed. Development was going proceed on its own and he suggested that people should not pretend that it would not occur. He stated that the Plan would allow the management of the development, define the limits, and assure adequate compensation for the property owners. o Clifford Epler, 8845 S.W. Spruce, Tigard, Oregon said his residence was within the proposed Plan. He said he purchased his home in October 1989 and outlined his search for a suitable home. He noted the amenities of living along Ash Creek, which included the openness, the wildlife, and the water. Mr. Epler advised that, before purchasing his home, he reviewed the Metzger Progress Community Plan at the City offices. Special Area of Concern 8 appeared to describe his home and the property around him. He advised Trammell Crow contacted him in January concerning the proposed development. Since this time, Mr. Epler said he has been catching up with the issues and educating himself on the process. Mr. Epler said he disputed that the value of property was going down in this area. The people from which he purchased his home made a profit of about $10,000 after living there for 3-1/2 years. Mr. Epler noted his concerns with developing the area commercially threatening wildlife and replacing natural areas with commercial structures, parking lots, and water fountains. Mr. Epler noted his concern over public involvement in the proceedings and advised he recently applied for NPO 8 membership. Mr. Epler advised he lived in an area with 15 other houses. There was no commercial activity in the area; therefore, he asked what justification di.d the City have to change his land from residential co commercial. o Jack Steiger, 10250 S.W. Greenburg Road, Tigard, Oregon (office address) advised he did not live in Tigard; CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 16 however, he owned land within the affected area. He urged the City to not let this opportunity pass by. He said he believed the proposal was an example of land use planning which would be good for the City of Tigard. He urged that the issue be forwarded to the voters in May. o Nancy Tracy, 7310 S.W. Pine Street, Tigard, Oregon, advised she was not in the City of Tigard. Ms. Tracy testified that the size and scope of this project was almost beyond imagination. The development proposed would be put into a very quiet, small residential community. Ms. Tracy referred to the map of the area. She said development would not stop here. There was no buffer for the neighborhood; she pointed out that the adjacent community areas were not shown on the map. It was difficult to imagine an additional 15-17,000 cars in the area per day. With reconstruction of traffic lanes, this would be an invitation for additional impact through the Metzger area by attracting business despite assurances of buffering. She noted concerns with the Metzger historic areas. She said that the school and the community matched one another; but, the school was going to be moved and so, she asked, what was left for the integrity of this neighborhood. She said it was deception for adjacent areas to be told they would be left alone. Eventually, she warned, there would not be one residential street in the Metzger area. She listed the streets in the vicinity and predicted the impacts the new development would have on the neighborhood. She noted pedestrian/traffic accidents which have occurred and said this would also be part of the impact felt throughout the area. She said the development was just too much for the area. If it was scaled down, there may be a whole different way of viewing the project. The proposal represented exploitation of resources and every square foot of land. She noted there would be no safe place to relocate the school within the neighborhood if this development plan was implemented and challenged that there was no suitable land available in the Metzger area for the school. The City should be dealing with the residents as a resources with value instead of just looking at the commercial, monetary side of things. The residents: a, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 17 ` I' contribute another value to the community, other than money. They contribute enthusiasm, energy, professional expertise, time, and leadership. The needs of the residents must be addressed in present planning. She noted Statewide Planning Goal 10 required more far- sighted assessments than were being made. She noted in the effort to finalize all of the thinking for this development for the May election, the very real impacts and the continued commercial growth of this community must be part of the public dialogue. She did not accept Trammell Crow's argument that a November vote on the issue would be too late. She advised that the City of Tigard Planning Commission voted unanimously to delay the vote until November. Their concern was that many questions must be addressed. She said if this was a good plan, then it would hold up to public scrutiny. Councilor Johnson suggested a ten-minute recess noting that, at the rate of testimony, time would run out before a good share of the people wishing to testify would have the opportunity. Mayor said he appreciated Ms. Tracy's testimony, but noted many of her concerns should be discussed at the County level since they were County issues outside of Tigard's jurisdiction. He urged Ms. Tracy to stay involved. Mayor noted written comments would be received until March 8, 1990; however, oral testimony at this meeting would be allowed until 10:00 p.m., as stated at the beginning of the meeting, and was why he had asked persons to keep testimony to three minutes. There was discussion with several people from the audience concerning process on testimony after which Mayor advised that when Council returned to the bench, he would allow one full additional hour of testimony. The sign-up sheet was made available for persons to review. Recessed: 9:10 p.m. Reconvened: 9:20 p.m. Upon return to the bench, Mayor announced Council consensus was to allow persons three minutes for oral testimony. For those persons who were not able testify tonight because of time constraints, Council had agreed to come back tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. to receive more testimony from those who were signed up at this meeting. Public Testimony continued: CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 18 o Ann Creswell, 10620 S.W. 90th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, advised she lived in Tigard, has three children who attend Metzger Elementary School, and was also employed ) by Trammell Crow Company. She read two letters from residents in the area who were in favor of the project. (These letters are on file with the Council meeting material.) Michael E. Mills, 10211 S.W. Jefferson Street, Tigard, Oregon Wayne Summit (no address given). o Kerry Standlee, 10285 S.W. 70th, Tigard, Oregon, advised he had spoken at the Planning Commission hearing. He said Council should resubmit the proposal to the Planning Commission because it had not been shown that Code requirements were met. Mr. Standlee reviewed portions of Chapter 18.22 of the Development Code which addressed standards for decision making on a Comprehensive Plan change. Mr. Standlee alleged that there was documentation submitted showing that there would be adverse effects with implementation of the Development Plan. The County and State have noted concerns. Mr. Standlee advised the Plan proposed that these concerns be studied later; but, he stated it was his understanding that these issues must be addressed before a Plan change was made. Mr. Standlee read from the Comprehensive Plan: "The Comprehensive Plan is the document through which the citizens of Tigard have made the basic choices on how land development and redevelopment should occur and how it will be managed. The purpose of the Plan is to maintain and improve ' the existing quality of life for residents by: 1) prohibiting development which will cause diminution in the existing quality of life for the residents of Tigard. . Mr. Standlee said he did not believe there had been any inventory of the property in the area to determine what kind of lands were parks, residential and commercial development. o Gus Anderson, 9135 S.W. 80th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon testified he has lived in the Metzger area since 1950 (his home is in the unincorporated area). He noted his concern was with traffic impacts. He said the people in Metzger, still in the unincorporated area, were not getting a good opportunity to challenge the Plan. He CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 19 asked that the people in Tigard listen to the concerns of the Metzger residents. o Pat Whiting, Chair of CPO No. 4, 8122 S.W. Spruce, Tigard, Oregon (residence is in unincorporated area). Ms. Whiting registered her concerns with the limited amount of time for public testimony. Mayor clarified that Council had determined they would return the next evening to receive testimony of those persons who were unable to testify. Ms. Whiting advised she had not heard this and thanked the Council for allowing additional testimony. Ms. Whiting advised each CPO (Community Participation Organization) in Washington County was made up of all of the residents, landowners, and businesses located in the prospective CPO areas. Consequently, anyone in a given community could participate in voting on CPO issues at the CPO level. She commented on the public meeting process, noting the CPO had requested a delay of the Planning Commission Hearing to give them additional time to educate themselves on the issue. While efforts were made at the City staff level to change the meeting day, the request was denied. She acknowledged that notice was sent out by the City to inform Metzger area residents of the Planning Commission hearing. She advised the developer gave his presentation on the proposal to the CPO on February 21. Ms Whiting testified that the Planning commission hearing revealed there was a lack of study data and public involvement around many issues. Issues, such as relocation of the Metzger School and the impact of commuter traffic on the surrounding areas, were noted. After the developer made his presentation at the CPO meeting, Ms. Whiting said the CPO reacted as follows: "It was moved and seconded by the members of CPO 4 Metzger of Washington County to recommend that the City Council of Tigard be notified that CPO 4 Metzger of Washington is in favor and supports maintaining the June 1984 amended Metzger Progress Community Plan and zoning designations of this area. Therefore, as members of CPO 4 Metzger, we are against the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 90- 0001 that would change the existing single-family residential area of 78 acres of low and medium density residential to professional zoning south CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 20 of Locust and west of Hall Boulevard, known as the Metzger School subarea. The motion carried unanimously." The Steering Committee of CPO 4 and members of the community have expressed concerns on the following issues: - criteria for designating a residential area as blighted - school relocation and timing of relocation - impacts of transportation to and from the proposed complex - meeting of Statewide goals which have not been fully addressed - design elements of the development addressing the issues of buffering - alternatives to the proposal and the proposal site (i.e., the Tigard Triangle or Kruse Way which was already zoned commercial) - wetlands and flood plain preservation - issues of additional helicopter pads Ms Whiting advised the area of 84 homes had been identified as blighted; these were not blighted. The criteria used were: no sidewalks, open ditches, and odd lots. She offered that this could be applied to almost any area of the City of Tigard and the surrounding area of Washington County. Ms. Whiting asked that the school be given priority in the decision-making process. She noted concerns over the length of time it would take to address the school relocation proposal. Mayor responded to portions of Ms. Whiting's testimony. He advised, while he appreciated the CPO input, the City of Tigard was charged with the responsibility of making the decision on this issue. He advised, with regard to the school concerns, that even if the money was available immediately and the land was purchased, a school could not be built, or the children moved, in less than two to three years. These time estimates were submitted by the School District. Ms. Whiting submitted additional written testimony from other individuals which included letters from Henry Kane, Darrell Barr, Donna Nesbitt, and Charles Britton. These letters are on file with the meeting material. o Ruth McWayne, 10200 S.W. 90th, Tigard, Oregon, advised CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 21 her home was directly across the street from the Metzger School and she was in the affected area. She noted she was in favor of the Plan. A new school, at no cost to the taxpayers, would be beneficial. She said Trammell crow was proposing a well-planned development which would allow for public use by Tigard and other residents. She advised Trammell Crow extensively publicized the proposal and there have been many public meetings. She noted there would be nine more weeks until the election to allow time for people to seek answers to their questions. She urged the Council to allow the Urban Renewal Plan to be placed on the May ballot. o Michael C. Houck, representing the Audubon Society of Portland, 5151 N.W. Cornell Road, Portland OR 97210 advised he received telephone calls from citizens who thought the Society was in favor of the proposal. This was not the case; he said he did not have a position on the proposal. Mr. Houck advised he met a few weeks ago with Mr. David Blake of Trammell Crow and Nancy Tracy. He reviewed the plans at that time. He said they would be happy to make sure that the appropriate natural resource personnel were involved in any kind of plans involving the wetlands. The Society's greatest concern was that there was a great amount of unfinished business on that property. He referred to a situation involving Mr. Gene Davis with regard to a project started five years ago. There were mitigation requirements stipulated for wetland fill on the site that were, in Mr. Houck's opinion, a long way from being completed. When additional work was now being discussed for this area, Mr. Houck advised there were skeptics in the conservation agencies because of past history. The City of Tigard has a job ahead of them to take care of unfinished business. There were major concerns for the wetland area. o Alice Juve, 10655 S.W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon (lives in the City limits) advised she has lived in the Metzger area for 44 years and she did not want to leave her home. She said this was not a blighted neighborhood. With regard to the issue of declining property values, she reported her taxes had increased annually. She advised she thought the procedures for this development were not sequentially logical. She said CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 22 Trammell Crow should be determining whether or not they could secure all the property prior to asking for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. o Timothy Moore, 8910 S.W. Oak Way, Tigard, Oregon,` advised his home was in the middle of the redevelopment 4 district. He said. he was in favor of the urban redevelopment plan because livability in his area had been declining. In the last three years, he had noted encroachment of commercialization with no buffering. He said there have been traffic increases with no means for handling the traffic. Piecemeal commercialization has occurred around his home which has detracted from the value. 1 He advised of his concerns for the future, noting that if the development was not approved now, then he envisioned similar efforts in the years to come with the E' same arguments being presented over and over from I' environmental groups, land use groups, legal concerns, etc. He said he would like to see the issue resolved in a timely manner and urged Council to place the proposal on the May ballot in order to determine what the community wanted. t o John Blomgren, 9460 S.W. Oak, Tigard, Oregon submitted a letter for the record which has been placed on file with the Council packet material. Mr. Blomgren gave some history of the area and noted how the commercial ractivity has increased over the years. Despite assurances that there was to be no further commercial development at different times, the commercial uses have increased. He noted his concerns with residential displacement, traffic congestion, and additional parking spaces (with a total of over 14,000 parking stalls). He noted there was a need for traffic studies; no further development should be permitted. Furthermore, Mr. Blomgren advised, no development should be allowed in the floodplain. This was the holding pond for all of the drainage from surrounding areas. o Connie Middleton, 8415 S.W. Cedar Crest Street, Tigard, Oregon advised she was on the local school committee for Metzger School. She said her main interest was with the disposition of the school. She asked that there be no zone changes until the timing was set for relocation of the school so they were not "stuck" in a commercial area. Also, if the Plan was voted down, she asked' Council to consider a process to assure that the zoning remained as it was now so that the school would not be CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 23 , A r.2 :t, in a commercial zone. l Ms. Middleton advised she was very interested in having a new, safe school in a better area. i o Dave Mazza, Vice Chairman of the Columbia Group of the Sierra Club, 9300 S.W. 88th, Tigard, Oregon advised he was the Urban Issues Coordinator for the Club dealing with various land use issues. He said he was concerned to learn from a couple of citizens that they were informed by Trammell Crow employees that the Sierra Club had participated in the process and had given approval. The Club has not been involved in any way. Concerns of the Club with this project included the manner in which wetlands in the area were being handled. There was a tremendous backlog in dealing with wetland i problems in the area. He said it was not appropriate to say additional land would be mitigated when there was a backlog. He said he hoped that further study would be done before any sort of approval was made about dealing ! with the wetlands. He said the public must be able to see which wetlands were involved. Also of concern to the Club, was the issue of transportation. This project would infuse thousands of individuals into an area which was already seriously ` suffering from residential infiltration and congestion. He said he was a member of the Citizens' Advisory Committee of the Highway Department Study which was being conducted for the Westside Bypass project. He said they were currently attempting to identify alternatives to deal with an unacceptable transportation situation. He suggested it was foolish to encourage further use of the automobile in an area which had reached saturation. Mr. Mazza advised that, based upon the information available from testimony, City Planners and LCDC, it appeared that little or no attention had been paid to addressing the land use goals. He noted he did not feel the analytical process required to meet land use goals had been completed and requested that this be done before determining development. o Louise Shaw, 6735 S.W. Ventura Drive, Tigard, Oregon, advised her residence was in the Washington Square Estates; she was the chairman of the homeowners' association. She said she supported the proposed changes and would be working in a public-relations capacity if approval was given to placing the issue on CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 24 the ballot. The area needs the improvements; Metzger was not rural but in the middle of an ever-growing Portland Metropolitan area. She said Tigard should take advantage of the growth noting the proposal represented an opportunity to centralize development. The proximity and popularity of the Washington Square mall made this a natural center for the area's business and commercial uses. She said it was unfortunate that people had to be relocated, but noted no improvements were realized without these kinds of changes. Ms. Shaw advised she supported the use of tax increment financing to fund improvements. She said such financing had been used successfully for over 30 years in Oregon and was now being used in about 20 communities. Urban renewal, she advised played an important role in aiding Oregon communities fulfill their ultimate potential. She contacted several communities where this funding method was utilized; she recited comments from officials in these cities who praised tax increment financing. Ms. Shaw urged Council to place the issue on the May ballot. o Terry Moore, 8440 S.W. Godwin Court, Tigard Oregon, (outside City limits) entered several letters into the record. The letters were from Dick Eckert (CPO #3), 1000 Friends of Oregon, and one from Mrs. Moore and her husband. Said letters are on file with the meeting material. Ms. Moore advised that the CPO contested findings in the Staff Report with regard to Statewide Planning Goals and specified there were issues with Goal 1 (Citizen Involvement) as well as the Transportation and Energy Goal. She noted there were problems with follow-through on promises made to the area after annexation, especially with the Metzger school area. Ms. Moore submitted several newspaper articles which have been filed with the meeting material. The articles dealt with the problems and consequences of rapid growth. One article also dealt with the issue of tax increment financing. Ms. Moore urged that the residential area be protected and become an example of how development could be done Y CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 25 F r correctly. She requested more time to review the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. o Lowell Haeffele advised he was speaking for his mother, Cloy Haeffele, who was a resident of Tigard living on S.W. Hall Boulevard. He advised she owned 2.3 acres and had 375 feet facing the east side of Hall Boulevard. He noted the concern she has had with the Plan was that she would be required to contribute to traffic improvements on Hall Boulevard by widening the road for additional traffic. Another concern was the surface drainage which could affect her property. Mr. Haeffele said his mother would like to be included in any change; Mr. Haeffele requested that his mother's property be included in the Urban Renewal Plan area. o Randall Jones, Scientific Resources, 11830 S.W. Kerr Parkway, Lake Oswego, Oregon advised his company was an environmental consulting firm. He said they had been asked by the Trammell Crow Company to assess and protect wetland resources and review the Company's Development Plan. He noted they recently completed the wetland inventory and assessment for the City of Tigard; that report and associated. atlas of maps were on file in the City Planning Department. Mr. Jones advised of the following points: 1. Wetlands exist on the site. 2. Wetland impacts have occurred in the past. 3. Major wetlands that remain were relatively low quality. 4. Some opportunity exists for enhancing and creating aesthetically valuable and ecologically functional wetlands on the site and adjacent areas. o Delores Luberto, 8080 S.W. Spruce, Tigard, Oregon (unincorporated area) submitted a letter with 24 signatures. Ms. Luberto advised she was opposed to: - Commercial building in the Metzger area. - Impactd that such building would bring to the community. - Uprooting of families from their homes and children from their school. - Strangers coming to the area telling them how they should live. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 26 } t } She asked that the City not "do this to our people." o Steve Perry, 9885 S.W. 92nd Street (outside of City limits), Tigard, Oregon advised he has lived in the Metzger area for 36 years. He noted the problems with large volumes of traffic. Mr. Perry compared this growth to the serious traffic congestion conditions in Orange County, California. He cautioned the Council to take a hard look at the overall community to determine whether this development would be beneficial. He said this proposal was not the solution to the problems. o Mike Schreck, 10617 S.W. Windsor Court (in City limits), Tigard, Oregon, advised he worked for the Trammell Crow Company as the Project Director for the Lincoln Center. Also, he noted, he was a citizen of Tigard. The development done to date by Trammell Crow represented some of the best in the Portland area. A lot of jobs and good people have been brought into Tigard. Mr. Schreck advised Trammell Crow, via the proposal, was attempting to address some of the problems by offering some possible solutions. He said that a plan had been created with substantial input from people in and around the area. o Sharon Jones, 9240 S.W. 88th, Tigard, Oregon, advised she was speaking on behalf of her husband, Allan Jones, as well. She said they were both opposed the President's Parkway development. They have been working to maintain the livability of the area since 1973. She also noted they both had been active in the CPO 4 and helped write the comprehensive framework plan for the Metzger area. It was frustrating to see the integrity of the Plan changed once again. She said that Trammell Crow has represented that commercial retail development was associated with progress and was inevitable. She expressed concern with this philosophy; she said the "American Dream" had been distorted with visions of wealth with little or no concern about the impact upon others or future generations. The project and its 10,000 employees would have a horrendous ripple effect throughout the whole area. Problems cited were traffic congestion, air pollution, and adding to the "green house effect." She questioned the need for additional office buildings noting there was much office space available in the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 27 surrounding area. Aff~ Ms. Jones advised the Urban Renewal Plan created more problems: traffic, loss of livability, and relocating wetlands. The time for planning was prior to development and she urged Council to vote against the urban renewal development and against the changes to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan Map to convert existing residential area to commercial. o Troy Vanderhoof, 10181 S.W. Jefferson (within City limits), Tigard, Oregon, said he believed the urban renewal district .would be of benefit to the City of Tigard as it would help increase the tax base and lower taxes to individual homeowners. He advised Trammell Crow had been and would continue to be an "up-front" company and make every effort to work with the people within the affected area. It said it was a good idea to centralize the commercial land and noted with, the Washington Square Shopping Center already in existence, it made sense to put another commercial piece of property next to it. Traffic was of concern and should be studied as a whole. He concluded by saying the urban renewal district should represent a positive impact to the City of Tigard. o Larry Bissett, 2004 N.W. Irving Street, Portland, Oregon, testified, as a planning consultant, he was involved in the early planning for Tigard, Beaverton, and Washington County. He noted he was also involved with the acquisition of right-of-way for Highway 217 and was familiar with the transitions planned at the time Highway 217 was constructed over 25 years ago. Tigard made many adjustments to the Comprehensive Plan to allow for the differences in land use that would be induced by the development of a freeway of that magnitude. He said the "dye was cast" for the area when the freeway was built. He said, in his opinion, it was virtually inevitable that the area would develop to a different use other than single family residential and this should be recognized to facilitate planning. o Frances Baynham, 10495 S.W. 71st (within the City limits); Tigard, Oregon, read a letter into the record (a copy of this letter is on file with the meeting material). She noted many questions were raised at the Planning Commission hearing with regard to the school construction; traffic congestion and safety; and increased air pollution. She also noted concerns with the impact on trees. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 28 She advised the Planning commission correctly approved a motion calling for a November election. She cited the lack of information for the school relocation, wetland issues, and traffic-impact problems were questions which supported a delayed- November vote. She concluded by saying she was against the proposed President's Parkway and the proposed Comprehensive Plan change from Residential to Commercial in the Metzger School area. (Note: Oral testimony from the audience concluded at this point in the meeting.) h. Community Development Director reminded everyone written testimony would be accepted until 5:00 p.m., Thursday, March 8, 1990. Information prepared to date by staff would be available at the City Hall for public review. He advised several issues had been brought up during testimony. issues with traffic and wetlands were also concerns expressed by the Council. An urban renewal plan represented an opportunity to resolve issues in a comprehensive manner with the funding identified. Community Development Director said he agreed with testimony from Terry Moore that mixed-usage for the area should be provided. This would be provided for in the Master Planning process. The appropriateness for use of public-incentive money would be addressed in the Developer's Agreement which would be drawn up later if approval was given by the voters to proceed. The City would utilize the advice from independent experts to determine the exact amount of public-incentive money necessary. Community Development Director advised that, as Randall Jones said, there was potential for enhancement of the wetland area. This could be better accomplished in a comprehensive fashion; the plan would also identify how to secure the necessary funding. Community Development Director said during testimony it had been stated that the time for planning was before development. He concurred with this statement, which was also a part of the Comprehensive Plan text which says no development would occur until the planning was properly CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 29 done. Community Development Director advised that most of the concerns were addressed in the errata sheets prepared by staff. He noted, additionally, that the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) had indicated that they were much more comfortable with the language as it was now before Council. Language for items providing for the traffic study was stronger; for example, it was specified that a traffic study shall be done before development commences. Community Development Director reviewed some of the most recent comments from Mr. Jim Sitzman of LCDC. Mr. Sitzman had indicated he was more comfortable with the Goal 10 requirements now that he understood how the inventory was done and what might have to take place to satisfy Goal 10. The school issue was addressed in the Master Plan. It would be up to the School Board for final determination on the disposition and whether to build a new school. The Plan provided a mechanism for a true public-private partnership to put together a package which would move the school (if this was the desire of the School District). The Urban Renewal Plan and Report and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment addressed many of the concerns raised and established a framework to resolve other issues. From a planning standpoint, the urban renewal proposal was attractive because it not only was it a planning tool, but it also provided the financial tools to carry out the plan. Community Development Director advised there was no final staff recommendation to Council for a decision at this time. A recommendation would be forthcoming once all of the written comments were received and the findings prepared. f. Mayor called for Council questions and comments. o Councilor Eadon asked the City Attorney to review the Planning Commission hearing process to determine if the necessary procedural elements were followed. o Councilor Johnson noted she was aware of the concerns over the pressure of growth. She explained the dynamics created by the "urban growth boundary" which contributed to the compaction of people and traffic within that boundary. o Councilor Schwartz had no comment at this time. o Mayor Edwards reiterated that there would be no decision at this meeting. He advised Council would conclude deliberations next Monday (March 12, 1990) once Council CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 30 v had benefit of all of the written testimony to be submitted by Thursday, March 8, 1990. Mayor thanked the audience for their testimony. He also noted if there was anyone who wished to enter a document to please do so. He noted the issues of concern to the citizens, were of concern to Council. Council was charged with the responsibility of making the best decision possible for the entire community. o Mayor closed the oral testimony portion: of the hearing; written testimony would be received until 5:00 p.m., March 8, 1990. Council would reconvene on the issue on March 12, 1990. 6. NON AGENDA ITEMS o City Administrator reviewed calendar items with the Council in the Town Hall Conference Room. 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Cancelled 6. ADJOURNMENT: 10:56 p.m. Catherine Wheatley, City ecorder ATTE - ti erald R. hdwai-dsT Mayor Date:. ccm3590 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 5, 1990 - PAGE 31 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY JNZ gal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 t ice BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising s City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice P.O. Box 23397 _ Tigard, OR 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit } ' CITYC)I= TIA f OREGON r. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss The following selected nda t , Judith Koehler g 8e terns are published. for yoto info I rmation Further information andafull agendas may be obtained lrom ttie;City Re being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising corder, 13125 S,W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard,;0iegon 97223, or by calligJ Tiaard Ti Director, or his principal clerk, of the TAPS 6394171 a newspaper of general circulation as de fined in ORS 193.010 CITY COUNCIt:tITY CENTER and 193.020; published at m iqp rrl in the DEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING'- aforesaid aforesaid county and state; that the MARCH 5,1990 Council Development Agency Regular Meeting 5:30P.MWORKSHOP; 7:30P.M.BUSINESSMEETING a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, TOWNHAII% entire issue of said newspaper for one successive and 13125 S.W;,HALI: BOULEVARD, TIGARD; QREGON consecutive in the following issues: • Public Hearings, Comprehensive Plan Amendment 90-0001 President's March , 1990 Parkway;-NPO#8 r;, President's Parkway Urban.Renewal District • Consideration of Resolutions RefeiY ni Baliof Memures to Voters for the May ;15 Election: DeVclopmciiPi, lfdrT4rWRcnewal~=President's ' Parkway Charter Amendment Eztending'Mayor's.Tdrin of - s S Subscribed an+Expl: fore met is March 1 19 9 0 Office &m.-Two Years I Four Years;._ 9 Executive Session -.under the provisions of ORS' 192 660(1) (d); (e)' & (h) to discuss Jabot, , Notary Public for Oregon relations, real property transactions; and current & pendiag litigation-issues. My Commis r 6/9/93 7T64 99 Publish-March-1,111990. AFFIDAVIT E r TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 Notice 76496 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 RECEIVED Legal Notice Advertising MAR 1990 • • ❑ Tearsheet Notice City of Tigard MY 0 F Ti ' PO Bosx 23397 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit r $ 4 ' ' f Tigard, Or 97223 • e PO # E05692 f~ollo candetcd`t+jr the,. PO # E05991 1~99G at an: Ttgard Civcc:Center,t Hap ?Q! Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon Further , on , from theComm>uuty Developa}en[ D^irecooc il<t location by ca1Ln, 639.417 Yon aEes tt~vnttenatcs- tunany mtadvance"o the:~blrc:tiea ng` AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION _ beconsenod`at°thehesnng~'Thegubi~'lieann' ~pac et tr;a t r r~ ,sgi;: STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON,) Linda L. Maris $ r F being first duly sworn, depose and say that ~m th6Q~ vertising gµ f.' Director, or his principal clerk, of the ~1Qarcl Mmes r "Itt t: sr ; f'^~YJ`a a newspaper of general circulat in as ~9efined i1 ORS 193.010 H x _ ~x} and 193.020; published at Tigard in the afore d cogmy and state; that the -PutTic gtar ng k >K c"Yt. s ? e ~ ~ a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in thus entire issue of said newspaper for 1 successive and consecutive in the following issues: ; F ` ik x kt£~ February 22, 1990 `l t` kk -ip EM ko i 71 tX; ja*YS isi ` ssf a l~ . Subscribed and swor to before me this February 27m, 1990 " • ~ i ' ~a , stt~. ^ f N 5 *y'~Atk mat'," al s Y ~ . Notary Public for Oregon My Commissi Expires 6/9/93 ty- AFFIDAVIT ..H may' ` ~ 2 ~ s~~y`'•nymod' Tigard Quarterly October-December 1989 Report CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Po Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-417] 'LL Topics of interest from the City of Tigard Community Development Department New Projects in the Planning. Stages Commercial and Industrial Product/Service Size (SF) BP Oil Carwash & conv store 1,152 & .Greenburg & Cascade 750 BP Oil Carwash & conv store 1,152 & 12825 SW Pacific Hwy 750 Ferryman Enterprises Sherwood Inn Motel 24,520 15700 SW Upper Boones Rd C Multi-Family No. Units Metzger/Ems 100 13265 SW 72nd Ave Criterion Equities Subdivisions No. Lots Lot Size(SF) Alderbrook Farm 11 10,000-15,605 SW Sattler between SW 98th and SW 100th Aves Fyrestone 18 7,981-15,022 SW 121st at Tibbet P1 Building Permits Issued Commercial: New and Major Additions (Estimated value $25,000 or more) Firm Proposed Use Size (SF) value Albertson's Commercial NA 32,750 12060 SW Main Fq.rm Proposed Use Size (SF1 Value Boston Sox Retail 622 60,000 9520 SW Wash Sq Rd (ten mod) GVNW Commercial 5,320 50,000 7125 SW Hampton St Good Samaritan Hospital Medical Clinic 4,192 85,000 9735 SW Shady Ln (ten mod) Pacific Realty 7233 SW Rable Ln Office 21,900 363,600 Pacific Realty Office 37,850 683,280 7257 SW Rable Ln PacTrust office 48,980 138,000 15055 SW Pacific Pkwy (foundation) PacTrust Office 60,370 138,000 15115 SW Pacific Pkwy (foundation) PacTrust office 21,092 75,000 15845 SW 72nd Ave (ten mod) Sentrol Industrial 2,588 56,000 10575 SW Cascade Blvd (ten mod) Sentrol Industrial 8,260 55,000 10575 SW Cascade Blvd (ten mod) Spieker Partners commercial 29,490 100,000 12000 SW Garden P1 (ten mod) Spieker Partners office 15,288 43,000 7550 SW Tech Center Dr (ten mod) Trammel Crow Parking Garage 145,413 987,000 10200 SW Greenburg (foundation) Residential Single-Family 1989 1988 Fourth Quarter Fourth Quarter Number of Units 72 74 High Unit Value $185,076 $137,838 Low Unit Value 51,812 49,847 Largest Unit Size (SF) 4,090 3,215 Smallest Unit Size (SF) 1,104 1,050 Multi-Family 1989 1988 Fourth Quarter Fourth Quarter Number of Units 0 0 Total Value 0 0 Largest Building (SF) 0 0 Smallest Building (SF) 0 0 New Business Taxes Total New Bisi.nesses Registered This Quarter: 34 Total Business Taxes Active to Date: 2,984 Name Address Product/Service Employees Ace Northwest 12665 SW Hall Blvd Construction & 8 Painting American Trans 9570 SW Tigard St Transportation 3 Resources broker Amerishare-Inves- 11825 SW Greenburg, Financial Services 5 tors Suite 1-C Bostorn Sox 9585 SW Wash Sq Rd, Hoseiry store H-6 Blockbuster Video 13500 SW Pacific Hwy Videocassette sales & 11 rental Clark, Andy Plumb- 8900 SW Burnham, Plumbing contractor 2 ing Unit F-3 Clark's Beauty 12290 SW Main St, Beauty salon 1 Salon Suite 2-A Daybreak Designs 10050 SW Riverwood Graphic & clothing 1 Ln dsign home occuptn Eakie, L Britton 10300 SW Greenburg Attorney 2 Rd Express Graphics 7805 SW Hunziker St Printing 30 Printing Final Clean 10355 SW Kable St New const cleaning 2 home occup HJ Arnett Indus- 7500 SW Tech Center Mfg small instrumts for 12 tries Dr, Suite 130 elec utility industry Joe's Car Sales 12435 SW 121st Ave Car wholesaling home 1 occup Kimberly's Klean- 8639 SW Hamlet Ct Housekeeping 1 ing Kimpete 12585 SW Pacific Hwy Heating & Air Cond Serv Laser-Technical 7409 SW Tech Center Mfg laser guidelines 5 Instruments Dr, Suite 125 & allignmt systems Little Caesars 12950 SW Pacific Pizza parlour 7 Pizza Hwy Micro Business Serv 10450 SW McDonald Bookkeeping/comp serv 0.5 St, # 4 home occupation Mitchell & Co, 9730 SW cascade CPA firm 2 CPA's Blvd, Suite 205 National Consumer 10220 SW Greenburg Financial services 10 CrF_dit Guarantee Rd, Suite 500 Northwest Notes 12165 SW Merestone Ct Graphic print & note- 1 card sales home occp Nu-Skin Independent 9730 SW Cascade Blvd, Skin & hair care 2 Sales Suite 212 product sales Pak-Best 7333 SW Bonita Rd Mfg paper bags & paper- 12 board boxes Photography by 11654 SW Pacific, Wedding & family photo 1 Matt Suite 10-A Name Address Product/Service Employees Payless Drug Store 16200 SW Pacific Drug & variety store 12 Hwy, Suite E Portland Insur & 11959 SW Garden Pl Private voc school 6 Real Est School The San Francisco 9508 SW Wash Sq Rd, Music box store 9 Music Box Cc Space J-1 Sears Product Svcs 11844 SW Pacific Hwy Appliance srvc & 40 parts sales Sleep-N-Air 11567 SW Pacific Hwy Mattress store 1 Mattress Ted's Computer Por- 6493 SW Southwood Computer portraits 4 traits Dr, Port 97219 Trans Union Credit 10220 SW Greenburg, Credit bureau 5 Information Suite 340 A Unique Flowers & 12555 SW Main St Flower & gift shop 1 Gift Shoppe Willowbrook Chrio- 11545 SW Durham Rd Chiropractic offc 1 practic Clinic zerba Chiropractic 9804 SW Shady In Chiropractic offc 2 Clinic Note: Any person transacting or carrying on any business within the City is required to register and pay a business tax. This includes businesses located inside or outside the City. The amount of the tax is based on the number of full time equivalent employees working inside the City. In an undertermined number of instances, businesses have been transacting business in the City, for several years, and this is the first time for lisitings to appear for them in City Business Tax Files. Bits and Pieces LOCBL BUSINESS PROFIIX: COE Coe Manufacturing, located at 7930 SW Hunziker, is a privately held company that provides a broad range of products and services to the forest products industry. Its products include a complete line of heavy duty machinery for the high speed processing of logs into lumber, plywood, and composition board panels. At present Coe's Tigard sales, warehouse, and manufacturing facility employs some 270 and counts as Tigard's second largest manufacturing employer. Worldwide, the company employs some 650, including a large number in its Painesville, Ohio, headquarters-office and plant. Cools Tigard facility specializes in the design and manufacture of high tech electronic process controls. These units enable more wood to be salvaged from logs. Increased utilization is particularly important with regard to the processing of second growth , logs, which have assumed greater economic importance as supplies of (the generally much larger) old growth logs have dwindled. one of the company's biggest innovations is the development of high tech equipment that precisely centers a log in a lath machine. Highly precise centering permits maximum veneer recovery for plywood and lamination construction. In quantitative terms, this unit increases recovery from 5 to 108 compared with other techniques. Innovations such as this have helped to make Coe an acknowledge world leader In the application of laser and computer technology in the wood products industry. The owner-president of the 138-year-old company is design engineer Fred Fields. Mr. gields maintains homes in Portland and Painesville. Active in community affairs, he is a trustee of Lewis and Clark College and a member of the us Bank Board of Directors. STAFF PROFILE: MARCIA CRAWFORD ' It is rather unusual to find someone who combines vocational skills in both engineering and art. One who does combine both and practice both in her work program is City Mapping/Graphics Technician Marcia Crawford. In her City position, Ms. Crawford's responsibilities include the more technical and prescribed tasks of drawigg and revising maps and compiling map-related data. In a distinctly more inventive mode, she also is responsible for designing and producing a variety of graphic and artistic materials for the Engineering and other divisions within the Community Development Department. In keeping with her dual or two-track vocational focus, Ms. Crawford has an academic training in civil engineering and is a few courses away from a college degree in that discipline. Although she claims no formal training in graphics, she presently is the Production Director for. NW Gallery Art Magazine, a new, bimonthly magazine covering the visual arts of the Pacific Northwest. The 56-page magazine, featuring high-quality color reproduction, debuted in November. As Production Director, Ms. Crawford is responsible for design, layout, and copy editing. She describes her work on the magazine as "practically" a second full-time job, but at the same time one she finds thoroughly enjoyable. The obvious disadvantage of having two jobs, however enjoyable both may be, is that there is little time left over for anything else. In Ms. Crawford's case, the "anything else" includes reading, art gallery visits, watching video tapes, fishing, and spending "quality time" with Bow, her pet rat. Other aspects of her work experience she sums up as having "done everything", ranging from working as a sales coordinator for an independent (folk, rock, reggae) record company in Connecticut to hiring and assigning musical and visual artists to perform, exhibit, and work with students on Connecticut school campuses under the sponsorship of the Eugene O'Neill Theater Center's Creative Arts in Education Program. An afficionado of Portland Petropolis and local culture, Ms. Crawford moved to this area two years ago from Houston. At present she lives with her husband, Rene, in Northwest Portland. She was born and grew-up in Mystic, Connecticut, the setting and namesake for the movie "Mystic Pizza". She comments that pizza quality at the real life pizza parlor portrayed in the, movie depended on the cook's mood, and, unfortunately, he was a moody cook. CITY POPULATION AND LAND AREA Listed below are land area and estimated population figures for the City as of December 31, 1989. Estimated population was derived from statistics on building permits, annexations, and average persons per housing unit. Land Area: 10.30 square miles 6,592.24 acres Estimated Population: 27,892 Tigard Quarterly Report is published by the Tigard Community Development Department in January, April, July, and October. It is intended to provide information on business and development activity occurring within the corporate limits of the City. You may have your name placed on the mailing list by calling Duane Roberts in the Planning Projects Division, 639-4171. Comments and inquiries are welcome. DATE 3/5/90 (Limited'to` 2•minutes'or leas, pleafse-"''" 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 first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please'contact the City Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED J i _ r E s [r A i Y t k i e, YOU ,P\Rrr, II ICI F U T V-A L`~ `J l c N 11\4 /2~N1 MATE March 5 1990 ~ v VV I wish to tesJtifyb before the Tigard City Council on \~Q ~j. the following item: (Please print the information) G ` v 1 7~' PERSONS WILL BE ALLOWED 10 MINUTES FOR PRESENTATIONS. f,. Item Description: Agenda Item Nos. 4 and 5 Public Hearings: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-0001; President's Parkway AND President's Parkway Urban Renewal District Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) -_Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation M~~C~S~ocr '("'ICG ei t,At~~2 P- RTfl7' K mac;,, ,-r ~~,2D Sll) c;S sad s,~ c~ x o ,7 • w.+~~~ ► y UIT 1 -2 1c 2,/ ,~S /S ScJ SP~u.r r. 5 v e -C -x to L4 c17.12 Jo . 7 h ~l C° r-~ 5 co e-- < 1 vat. ~ 4`4~ ~1t' ' . ~ i7 bra ZG ~ CI Y c`' t, ' ~7~' ,:C/,' c%G:> >~./-•"C. •7,"t /C U c ~ SGl'J ~ ~ CZ-1 ~ ~ ~ !~I Rv(c s 1.4- . r- • 7 oSS (ti. Oki v PIT % ~V~l~ US>~ ~V -5 C ~L S L v Lcic c.~ i Bled .Gu,Q~ S G✓ s. h 1,'7 3S sw v,,,4-, D--- ? ( W cl - Q7 ~3 ' 1. c 1 yh l 4 4- ! ' DATE March 5, 1990 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) PERSONS WILL BE ALLOWED 10 MINUTES FOR PRESENTATIONS. Item Descriptions - Agenda :Ltem" Nos: 4`'arid'`5 Public Hearings: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-0001; President's Parkway AND President's Parkway Urban Renewal District Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation h? C 171n SC~''`U•t'~ IAA RR F_ L L 13S XA D to191 Sav J o L ! t E la-YL t o Win(? _ t~ E-la r k Por4tALiJ AUAu-6ex&30L• fit J 515 ,1 (~~K s j, i \ N`! V MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council February 23, 1990 FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, Mar. - May 190 Official council meetings are marked with an asterisk If generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly Council Calendars. March '90 * 5, Mon Council Business Agenda (Urban Renewal) (5:30/7:30) *12 Mon Council Business Agenda (5:30/7:30 - Workshop Meeting with MWPD @ 6:30 p.m.) Note: Spring Vacation is Week of March 19-23 21 Wed Legislative Breakfast (Eggs & Issues, Elmer's, 7:15 a.m.) *26 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) April ' 90 * 9 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) *16 Mon Council Study Agenda (6:30) (Workshop Meeting with Richard Devlin of MFG) 18 Wed Legislative Breakfast (Eggs & Issues, Elmer's, 7:15 a.m.) *23 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) 24 Tues Volunteer Dinner (Time and Location TEA) May '90 *14 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) 16 Wed Legislative Breakfast (Eggs & Issues, Elmer's, 7:15 a.m.) *21 Mon Council Study Agenda (6:30) *28 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) cw/cccal Council Calendar - Page 1 L~ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: March 5, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: 2/22/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Comprehensive PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission I Plan Amendment CPA 90-01 recommendation PREPARED BY: Keith Liden I. /I DEPT HEAD O ITY ADMIN OKZWZ REQUESTED BY: Wy. POLICY ISSUE Should the City amend the Comprehensive Plan Map and Text as a first step to allow the creation of an Urban Renewal District in the south Metzger area? INFORMATION SUMMARY The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at a public hearing on February 20, 1990. NPO 8 appeared at the hearing and testified in favor of the proposal. With a 3 to 2 vote, the Commission recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map and Text amendment. Attached is a copy of the proposed ordinance to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Map and Text amendment that includes exhibits of the planning consultant/staff report, written comments, the map revision, and the amended Plan text. Also attached is a copy of written comments and the minutes of the Commission which include testimony regarding both this proposal and the Urban Renewal District. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached ordinance 2. Modify and approve the attached ordinance 3. Deny the request and direct staff to prepare a corresponding resolution. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the attached ordinance CPA90-01.SUM CITY OF TIGARD, ORBMN ,i ORDINANCE NO. 90- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCIxJSIONS TO APPROVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENT (CPA 90-0001) INITIATED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD WHEREAS, the City of Tigard initiated the review of a comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential (approximately 68 acres) and Medium Density Residential (approximately 10 acres) to Commercial Professional and a Comprehensive Plan Tent Amendment to add Section 11.8 related to the south Metzger area; and WHEREAS, the City's planning consultant and staff presented recommended findings to the City of Tigard Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 20, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on the proposed changes on March 5, 1990 to review the Planning C u nission recommendations as well as public testimony. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOILOWS: SECTION 1: The Comprehensive Plan Map and Text amendments are consistent with all relevant criteria based upon the facts, findings, and ! conclusions noted in Exhibit "A." SECTION 2: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map is amended as shown in Exhibit "B" (map) . SECTION 3: The Comprehensive Plan text is amended as set forth in Exhibit "C." SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 31st day after its passage by Council, and approval by the Mayor. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 1990. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: This day of , 1990. Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date: ORDINANCE No. 90- Page 1 V AGENDA ITEM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: February 20, 1990 - 7:30 PM ; HEARING LOCATION: Tigard City Hall - Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR-97223 A. FACTS i 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-00001 REQUEST: 1) Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential (approximately 68 acres) and Medium Density Residential (approximately 10 acres) to Commercial Professional. 2) Plan text amendment (Policy Document) to add Section 11.8 related to the south Metzger area of special concern (Neighborhood Planning organization #8). The text amendment outlines a process for development and approval of a master plan for the area, future rezoning, and provision of necessary public facilities through an urban renewal plan or alternative means. _ APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNERS: Several " LOCATION: See attached Map one 2. Proposal Description See attached Map One regarding the area proposed for redesignation and Appendix one for the text of the proposed text amendment . The proposed amendments are intended to be the first step in the establishment of an urban renewal district for the subject properties and surrounding area. 3. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division, Building Division, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation, and Tigard School District 231 have provided comments on the proposal which are included in Appendix Two. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District, Metzger Water District, and Portland General Electric have reviewed the proposal and returned the request for comments form noting "no objections". The City of Tigard Police Department, the Parks and Recreation Committee, the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon State Highway Division, NPO #8, CPO #4(Metzger), Tri-Met, STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 1 Xl~l$rr I~1 M Q ` O t V¢ zi • y. e~VQ a CT MAR / ; BIRC~zo ' BIRCH S ! ` o co = l CEADERCREST c m tai = `r 1 a 3 J CHESNUT WASMAFcrOA w Aunt ma BORDERS J LELMV ! ST. CRESCENT ER CEMETERY Y O. LEHMANN ST. HEMLOCK S' m , :E tE 2 v CORAL 0 ST, r' m LARCHO S7 NE72GEN E~EA?ARYI .•76 2 LAND/ SCHOOL pj Q IOCU' MAPLELEAF 2~? ST D y MAPL to c D O m OAf m - / PINE na m SHADY LN ~ SP swo. --A a THORN ST. OR 11 . ! w :T STEVE- a L.) - tai co ST. tai a D v v Q c " J DAKOTA m ST. tai m 4i 41 U _ a a e IPFA FLE m w 5 v Q F RC N Q Q hi a m ~w H m w S~rT LEWIS a °m C. ` LN ANGEL w y~ ; co ST °i LONDON V) S.W. -t W i CT. rn TANGECT M Z j 9~ 5^ a VICINITY MAP Northwest Natural Gas, and US West Telephone Company were also asked for comments on the proposal. No comments have yet been received from these agencies and organizations. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The applicable criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, and 12 City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 4.3.1, 5.1.1, 5.1.4, 6.1.1, 6.3.3, 6.6.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 7.5.1, 7.5.2, 7.6.1, 7.7*.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.2, and 12.1.2 (locational criteria for commercial Professional Plan designation) and the Metzger-Progress Area Plan. The Planning Division concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines based upon the following findings: Statewide Planning Goal 1 (Citizen involvement) The City of Tigard ensures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in the review of land use and development applications through the referral of all development applications to neighborhood organizations for comment, through the review of certain types of land use and development actions through public hearing processes; and through following prescribed notification requirement for public heaz-ngs and for notices of decisions. Notice of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map and text amendment was provided to Neighborhood Planning Organization NPO #8 on January 29, 1990. NPO #8 reviewed the proposal at its meetings on January 17, 1990 and February 14, 1990. In addition, NPO #1 and NPO #2 also reviewed the proposed amendment on February 14, 1990. Other neighborhood planning organizations as well as other City of Tigard boards and committees were notified of the proposed amendment at a meeting on February 1, 1990. The City's Park Board reviewed the proposed amendment on February 6, 1990. The City's Transportation Committee reviewed the proposal on February 8, 1990. In addition, a number of community meetings regarding the proposed amendment and urban renewal plan were held on various dates that were open to members of the Metzger community. The City of Tigard Planning Commission will receive public written or oral testimony on the proposed Plan amendment at their public hearing on February 20, 1990. The City Council will receive public testimony on the proposal at the public hearing scheduled for March 5, 1990. The City of Tigard provided mailed notice to property owners within 250 feet of the properties subject to the Map amendment twenty days in advance of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings on the proposed action. Notice was published in the Tigard Times newspaper on February 8, 1990 and February 22, 1990. Statewide Planning Goal 2 (Land Use Planning) is satisfied through City procedures and measures which call for the City to apply all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies, and Community STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 2 Development Code requirements to the review of the proposal being presented. Statewide Planning Goal 9 (Economy of the State) is satisfied because the proposed Plan Map amendment would substantially increase the City of Tigard's inventory of commercially designated land. If the proposed Plan text amendment to Section 11. is adopted, this land would become available for development through rezoning only when policies requiring an overall development plan and provision of necessary public facilities are satisfied Future commercial development of this area would be anticipated to create substantial employment opportunities, both permanent jobs and temporary construction jobs, as well as increase the assessed value of the involved properties. The-Trammell Crow Company has presented a preliminary conceptual plan for development of the subject properties as well as adjacent properties. Trammell Crow Company projects an increase in value for these properties from the current .$5 million assessed value to $400 million. Ten thousand permanent jobs and 2.5 million square feet of professional office and commercial space are projected along with 4,000 construction jobs. With roadway improvements necessary to develop these properties, it is anticipated that nearby under-utilized properties will become more attractive for potential development thereby furthering positive impacts on the City of Tigard's employment base as well as the City's total assessed property valuation. ( Statewide Goal 10 (Housing) The subject area currently contains 87 dwelling units. Current Plan designations provide for a maximum housing opportunity for 475 dwelling units for the subject area without a full analysis regarding how much of this land is unbuildable because of wetlands and floodplain area or unattractive for development for other reasons. Although redesignation of this area from residential to commercial designations will remove existing housing as well as possible future housing opportunities from the city based only upon a simple analysis, the area to be redesignated has already been adversely affected by the impacts of adjacent commercial development to the west as well as nearby busy roadways and therefore is not well suited for continued residential use or additional residential development. The area is generally bounded by two busy arterials - Highway 217 and SW Hall Boulevard, as well as two major collector streets - SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street. Even without redesignation of the subject properties, traffic on these roads is anticipated to increase with attendant increases in noise and congestion effects on the neighborhood. The general area is characterized as transitional, that is, it is an existing single family district that is converting to commercial use. Characteristics of the area which support this conversion and contribute to the decline in livability for single family residents include: STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 3 Poor condition of residential streets not built to City standards, Lack of sidewalks, parks and other recreational facilities, Poor drainage conditions and occasional flooding, High traffic volumes on residential streets causing congestion and safety problems, An elementary school in the area which is at the very edge of its service area, is inappropriately located, and is in proximity to congested streets with high traffic volumes, overall noise, congestion, and high levels of activity in residential areas caused by the proximity of commercial and office uses, Declining residential land and property values. Commercial redesignation of the subject area will not affect the City of Tigard's compliance with Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660, Division 7 -the Metropolitan Housing Rule's housing opportunity requirements for single family multi-family mix and minimum residential density for developable residential properties since the properties are largely developed and therefore are not considered buildable land by the Comprehensive Plan's buildable lands inventory. The City's housing opportunity index currently provides an opportunity for 10.22 dwelling units per buildable acre on 1,295 vacant buildable acres. Statewide Planning Goal 11 (Public Facilities) is satisfied by the anticipated infrastructure that must accommodate future development. A timetable for orderly and timely development of necessary public facilities has been developed as part of an urban renewal plan for the area. Domestic water, fire, sewer, storm drainage, roads and other important services, (i.e. police, fire, and additional general services) will key all future development in the area. In addition, the companion text amendment would require that an overall development plan, zone change, infrastructure plan, and implementation plan be adopted before development can be approved. Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation) will be satisfied through needed transportation improvements to be constructed by implementation of an urban renewal plan, and through additional planning requirements to be established through the proposed plan amendment that must be satisfied prior to the properties being made available for development. A Preliminary Traffic Analysis has been completed which analyzed transportation conditions in and around the subject area, and identified needed transportation improvements. The analysis found that the existing road network system within the area is currently operating at less than acceptable levels of service at specific intersections and will continue to be over capacity without major improvements. Capacity deficiencies exist during the p.m. peak period at all of the intersections along Greenburg Road and at the Highway 217 on and off ramps. This capacity deficiency STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 4 pertains to the through movements along Greenburg Road. This makes motorists making left turn movements from side streets experience long delays waiting to exit onto the main street. Traffic volumes in the Greenburg Road area have increased dramatically over the past six years without significant improvements to the surrounding street system. Intersection and roadway improvements are required to accommodate the existing development in the area. In addition, further intersection improvements are required to accommodate the development of the subject area under the proposed land use designations and conceptual development plan proposed per the Trammel Crow Company. A preliminary list of transportation improvements are identified in the Preliminary Traffic Analysis Report. Necessary transportation improvements (or similar improvements) as identified in the Preliminary Traffic Analysis report will be constructed through implementation of the proposed urban renewal plan, or else will need to be constructed by future developers through a development agreement with the City. The companion Plan text amendment to Section 11 would require that an overall development plan, infrastructure plan, and implementation plan be adopted before development approvals can be granted by the City. Statewide Planning Goal 13 is satisfied partly due to the expanded and efficient use of the transportation system, thereby in itself promoting energy conservation. The use of modern technologies in the building designs will further save our natural resources. New building systems are designed to conserve not only energy but also enhance the effective use of building materials, site design, water and sun management, to name but a few. The planning staff have determined that the proposal is consistent with applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: Plan Policy 1.1.1 a) The proposed development is consistent with applicable plan policies as demonstrated in the following text and is consistent with the growth patterns and physical changes in the fabric of the City. b) Because of continued increases in traffic and noise impacts upon the subject neighborhood from nearby roadways and non-residential uses, the neighborhood has experienced a change of physical circumstances affecting its long-term suitability for continued low and medium density residential use. One of the primary reasons for choosing to live in a single-family residence or a medium density multi-family residential development is that such developments provide yard areas in which residents may relax, garden, and let their children play. Present noise and other traffic impacts upon the subject neighborhood undoubtedly have reduced the desirability of these properties for such pursuits. STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 5 l The poor condition of residential streets, lack of sidewalks, parks and other recreational facilities, poor drainage conditions, declining residential land and property values, and an overall increase in noise, congestion and high levels of -activity in the single family residential area caused by the proximity of commercial and office uses have contributed to the area's decline in livability. A degree of mistake can be therefore be seen with regard to the existing Plan designations. It is assumed that the current designations were intended by Washington County to reflect existing levels and types of development and protect existing uses from dissimilar, incompatible uses. However, because the area is roughly bounded by two arterials and two major collector streets and abuts intensive commercial uses to the west, Washington County's plan for this area should have recognized that increasing noise and traffic would affect the suitability of the area for single-family use and plan accordingly for conversion of the area to more suitable uses. The present proposal attempts to accomplish that conversion. Plan Policies 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1 and 3.4.2_ will be considered through the review of any future development proposals for the subject area that may have impacts on the designated 100 year floodplain of Ash Creek and associated- wetlands. Any subsequent development proposals affecting these resources will need to be reviewed through the City of Tigard's Sensitive Lands review process and referral of wetland modification requests to the Oregon Division of State Lands, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and other interested agencies for their review, comment, and applicable permitting processes. The proposed redesignation of this area to Professional Commercial currently under review presents no direct conflict with these Plan policies. Plan Policy 4.3.1 will be considered fully through the review of noise impacts of development proposals in the subject area with regard to the location of roadways, parking areas, and mechanical equipment in relation to surrounding uses. The currently proposed Plan redesignation does not by itself affect noise congestion levels in the area and in fact may provide opportunities for mitigating noise impacts through the required review of development applications or a master plan for the area. Plan Policy 5.1.1 is satisfied because redesignation of the subject area would increase the opportunities for commercial development with attendant growth of the local job market. The City's inventory of available developable commercial property would increase upon later rezoning of these properties in association with the provision of appropriate levels of public facilities and services as required by the proposed amendments to Section it of the Comprehensive Plan. (See also the response to Statewide Planning Goal 9.) Plan Policy 5.1.4 states that commercial and industrial development shall not encroach into residential neighborhoods. The proposed map redesignation would not encroach or make inroads into an established STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 6 residential neighborhood but instead would entirely replace an existing neighborhood that has already been severely impacted by adjacent commercial development and nearby roadways. The proposed redesignation would convert all properties bounded by Highway 217, Greenburg Road, Locust Street, and Hall Boulevard to Commercial Plan designations except for the parcels which includes the Deodar Condominiums on SW 87th Avenue and several parcels in the southeast corner of this area. The condominium owners reportedly do not wish their development to be included in the area proposed for redesignation. The properties in the southeast corner of the area are all oriented to SW Hall Boulevard rather than to internal streets and therefore do not function as a neighborhood with the area proposed for redesignation. Commercial redesignation of the subject area would be anticipated to increase values of these neighboring properties to the southeast which are designated Medium Density Residential and may help spur redevelopment of some underdeveloped parcels in this area. Redesignation of the subject area and later development will undoubtedly result in additional traffic on adjacent streets and potential impacts on neighborhoods to the east of Hall Boulevard and north of Locust Street. -The proposed plan text amendment requiring detailed public facility planning and provision of necessary improvements concurrent with development is intended to mitigate impacts of any increased development upon these adjacent neighborhoods so that no commercial encroachment into neighborhoods will occur beyond the boundaries formed by the collector and arterial streets. The master plan for the area should endeavor to direct _ traffic from the future commercial development away from these neighborhoods. Plan Policy 6.1.1 is not at issue with the proposed redesignation. The proposed redesignation would remove the opportunity for approximately 475 dwelling units based on gross acreage and current Plan designations. These properties are significantly impacted by noise, congestion, and lack of adequate public facilities and thus would not be anticipated to develop in accordance with current opportunities. Offsetting any loss in housing opportunities for the subject parcels may be the increased attractiveness of neighboring underdeveloped Medium Density Residential properties along Hall Blvd. for residential redevelopment because of commercial development of the subject parcels. (See also the preceding discussion of Statewide Planning Goal 10 and Plan Policy 5.1.4). Discussion of possible lost housing opportunities within this area may be moot depending upon future application of zoning to the subject area, possible changes in the Community Development Code, and the development of a master plan for the area. Plan Policy 5.1.5 permits high density residential development above the second floor in areas designated Commercial Professional. The Community Development Code currently allows residential development in the C-P zoning district (the zoning district which ultimately implements the Commercial Professional Plan designation) in only the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Roar' C-P districts. This could be expanded in the future to allow / f STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 7 r high density residential development above the second floor in the subject ( area. Plan Policy 6.3.3 is satisfied because the proposed map redesignation would provide for replacement of an established, but somewhat deteriorated, neighborhood to more logical boundaries between residential and commercial developments than currently exists. The proposed amendment to the text of Section 11 of the plan is intended to assure that adequate levels of public facilities are provided and that detailed site plans are developed with the intent of mitigating or eliminating impacts of future development of the area upon other adjacent neighborhoods so as to preserve and enhance the character of those neighborhoods. Plan Policy 6.6.1 is satisfied because the Community Development Code requires buffering between different types of land uses and screening of service areas, storage areas, and parking lots. These requirements will be imposed upon any subsequent development proposal within the area proposed for redesignation through the Planned Development and Site Development Review processes. Plan Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 7.4.4, 7.5.1, 7.5.2, 7.6.1, 7.7.1 are satisfied because the City of Tigard Engineering Division, Police Department, Metzger Water District, Tualatin Valley Fire District, PGE, U.S. West Telephone, and the Northwest Natural Gas Company were notified of the proposed plan amendments; several of these agencies have submitted comments which are attached to this report as Attachment A; and none of those agencies or public utilities have raised concerns at this time with their abilities to provide storm drainage, police, water, sanitary sewerage, fire protection, electricity, telephone, and natural gas services to future commercial development of the area. Several agencies have noted that additional details regarding their public services and utility networks will need to be worked out through the urban renewal plan, master plan, zone change, and Site Development Review processes that will need to occur prior to any commercial development in the area proposed for redesignation. The text amendment proposes zoning conversion criteria to assure that public utility and service needs are satisfied prior to rezoning the properties to a commercial zoning designation. Plan Policy 8.1-.1 is satisfied because the proposed redesignation would provide for future commercial development of an area bounded by -two arterials (Hall Boulevard and Highway 217) and two major collector streets and therefore is a logical location for intensive commercial usage. Although all of these streets are currently underdeveloped for anticipated traffic levels generated by development of the subject area in addition to existing traffic, needed traffic improvements have been identified and are planned for construction prior to or concurrent with development. See discussion under Statewide Goal 12. The intent of Plan Policy 8.1.3 is satisfied by the implementation of an urban renewal plan for the area which will construct needed transportation and other infrastructure in advance of development. In addition, the STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 8 E x proposed Plan text amendment requires that an overall development plan, infrastructure plan, and implementation plan be adopted before specific development can be approved. The City also intends to enter into a development agreement with the Trammell Crow Company. That agreement will identify the improvements needed, timing, financing, responsibility and other conditions which will satisfy this policy,. Plan Policy 8.2.2 is satisfied because Tri-Met offers bus service to the entire Washington Square area. Therefore, the proposed development would locate an intensive type of development in close proximity to existing public transit route. Further, the intensity of the proposed development will create a greater source area for Tri-Met, thereby enhancing service to cover a larger geographical area. Plan Policy 12.2.1 The applicable locational criteria for Commercial Professional development (12.2.1 (c)(3)) are satisfied for the following reasons: a. Spacing and Location The locational criteria require that a Commercial Professional area not be surrounded by residential districts on more than two sides. The entire west and southwest sides of the subject area abut an existing Commercial Professional area. The northern boundary of the subject area is SW Locust Street. This street will provide a bounderary between the Commercial Professional area to the south and Lower Density Residential areas to the north. This area north of SW Locust Street is in the Metzger area of unincorporated Washington County. The eastern boundary of the subject area is adjacent to a mix of Medium Density Residential areas, Commercial Professional and commercial General areas. The southeast corner of the area is adjacent to a medium density residential are. The proposed Plan Map amendment meets this criteria. No individual parcel within the subject area is surrounded by residential districts on more than two sides. Furthermore, the proposed amendment will result in a rational boundary for the Commercial Professional district, with SW Locust Street to the north, a buffer of medium density residential to the east, (which lies between the-commercial professional area, SW Hall Boulevard and a single family are to the east of SW Hall). Highway 217 is the boundary of the commercial professional district to the south and southeast. The western boundary for the entire Commercial Professional district is SW Greenburg Road. b. Access A "Preliminary Transportation Analysis for President's Parkway", ATEP, 1990 has been submitted to the City to support the preparation of the President's Parkway Development Plan (urban renewal plan). Assuming a { STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 9 concept plan proposed by Trammell Crow Company is realized for the subject area, the transportation analysis preliminarily identifies transportation improvements which are needed in order for the existing street system to operate at acceptable levels of service, and additional transportation improvements which are needed to accommodate traffic generated by the development assumed in the concept plan. These preliminary transportation improvement projects (or similar projects) are to be implemented through the proposed urban renewal plan and through a development agreement to be negotiated between the City and the Trammell Crow Company. The City recognizes that the concept plan is preliminary and subject to change, and that the proposed transportation improvements are also preliminary and subject to change. The City also recognizes that the Trammell Crow Company is acting in good faith to identify transportation needs based on the information available today. A. companion Comprehensive Plan text amendment is proposed which requires the City to adopt a Planned Development district for the area and to adopt conceptual and final development plans which outline { specific uses, densities and improvements within the district. The amendment also requires that more detailed transportation, ` infrastructure, implementation/financing, and design guidelines be adopted as part of the conceptual development 3 plan. The amendment requires that all development permits and other major land use actions be consistent with an adopted conceptual development plan. The urban renewal plan anticipates that amendments to projects carried out by the urban renewal agency will be made based on the results of this i more detailed planning process. Therefore, this criterion has been met. Staff finds that the process proposed in the Plan text amendment i is sufficient to ensure that specific access and transportation needs can be identified, projects defined, and implementation programs established in order to meet the access criteria. C. Site Characteristics i s The site characteristics criteria require that the affected site be of a size which can accommodate present and projected needs and that the site have high visibility. The subject action applies-to a total of approximately 78 acres, creating a total. Commercial Professional district approaching 100 acres. The subject site, together with lands already designated Commercial Professional, have visibility from Highway 217, SW Greenburg Road, SW Locust Street and SW Hall Boulevard. The proposed action meets the site characteristics criteria. d. Impact Assessment Without an actual detailed development proposal, it is difficult to assess whether the scale of development will be compatible with STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 10 adjacent uses. However, the proposed Plan text amendment provides a process in which such detailed considerations can be incorporated into a Planned Development District. In addition, the companion Plan text amendment requires that phases be identified within an overall development plan, and that measures be defined to reduce construction impacts and on-going impacts to adjacent areas. Staff finds that the process proposed in the Plan amendment is sufficient to ensure that specific impacts can be identified, projects defined, and implementation programs established in order to meet the impact assessment criteria. Metzger-Progress Community Plan. The Metzger-Progress Community Plan, developed while this area was still under the jurisdiction of Washington County, contains general and specific guidelines for the area generally bounded by SW Scholls Ferry Road, Taylors Ferry Road, Highway 217, and Pacific Highway. The Metzger-Progress Plan designates the subject area for low and medium density residential use as well as institutional use for the Metzger School property. When the subject properties were annexed into the City of Tigard in 1987, the city applied Plan and zoning designations comparable to the Washington County designations. The proposed Plan map amendment would also change the Metzger-Progress Plan Map designations. The Metzger Plan states that "the area between Metzger and Washington Square/Progress, along Greenburg Road.... serves as an area of transition between intensive uses to the west and lower density uses on the east.... The area is not intended to be expanded to the east." As previously noted, this area has been significantly impacted by adjacent intensive uses and by major roadways and staff therefore finds that the area's long-term suitability for residential use has been diminished thereby making expansion of commercial uses to the east appropriate as long as the master planning concept outlined in the proposed Plan text amendment is employed. This report, at Policy l.l.l.b, explains why the prior decision by Washington County can be considered to be a mistake with respect to the long-term suitability of the area for residential use. Two areas of special concern are identified in the Metzger Plan'for the subject area. Area of Special Concern 7 includes several properties west of SW 87th Avenue and south of SW Locust Street. The Metzger Plan calls for development within this area to pay special attention to efficient access to the area, impacts on local streets, and other design considerations which will help make future development compatible with adjacent residential property. Area of Special Concern 8 includes the area of wetlands and floodplain adjacent to Ash Creek as well as other adjacent properties. The Plan calls for development within this area to maintain floodwater storage capacity and wildlife habitat through minimizing the area to be disturbed. The Plan also calls for access to this area to be provided only from SW 89th Avenue and for development to be buffered from the traffic noise from Highway 217. :y F STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 11 The proposed Plan Map redesignation does not conflict with the special concerns expressed for these areas. The proposed Plan text amendment is supportive of these concerns because the text amendment would call for a master planning effort for the entire area. Master planning should make it easier for these special concerns to be addressed than would be possible in the absence of a master plan with piece-by-piece development. C. RECOMMENDATION Forward a recommendation for approval of the proposed Plan Map amendment (Map One) and Plan Text amendment (Appendix One) to the City Council. Prepared by: Spencer &,Kupper, Planning Consultants Jerry Offer, Development Review Planner R-PresPk.JO STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0001 - METZGER SCHOOL AREA CPA PAGE 12 4 INSERT INTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME TWO-POLICIES, SECTION ELEVEN SPECIAL AREAS OF CONCERN 11.8 N81GHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION # 8 In 1989, a major real estate development company, together with interested residents and property owners, proposed to the'city a redevelopment concept for the area generally bounded by SW Locust..SW Hall Boulevard. Highway 217 and SW Greenburg Road. The development concept would require the redevelopment of an existing single-family area to a commercial office campus, and ' would require that the city establish an urban renewal plan to help fund needed public improvements and other projects. The development concept would also require that the Comprehensive Plan designations for portions of,the area be changed from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional, and subsequently, zone changes would also be needed from R-4.5 to C-P. FINDINGS o The City of Tigard together with a major real estate development company recognize the potential for a major planned commercial and office development in the area. A public/private partnership has been established, and an urban renewal plan, entitled the President's Parkway Development Plan, has been prepared in order to implement the commercial development concept. o Preliminary studies completed for the President's Parkway Development Plan have identified needed transportation, public facility, flood control, and other improvement projects which will be necessary to serve commercial and office development expected for the area. o Additional studies will be needed as more specific development plans are approved which refine projects which are already identified, and identify other projects which are not now known. i o The area is characterized as transitional, that is an existing single family district that is converting to commercial use. Characteristics of the area which support this conversion and contribute to the decline in livability for single family residents include: Poor condition of residential streets not built to city standards, Lack of sidewalks, parks and other recreational facilities, poor drainage conditions and occasional flooding, APPS Dut"NIE High traffic volumes on residential streets causing congestion and safety problems, An elementary school in the area which is at the very edge of its service area, is inappropriately located, and is in proximity to congested streets with high traffic volumes, overall noise, congestion and high levels of activity in residential areas caused by the proximity of commercial and office uses, Declining residential land and-property values. o xn order to obtain a sound, unified development of high quality, an overall development plan for the entire area is needed. A comprehensive Plan map amendment or zone change will not apply an overall development plan to all properties within the area unless each individual property owner agrees. An instrument other than a simple zone change is needed- 0. The most appropriate.method to realize an overall development plan is through the use of the Planned Development Overlay District, City of Tigard Community x Development Code. o A Comprehensive Plan map amendment changing much of the area from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional is needed. This map amendment must precede any zone change. This area is shown on Map I. o Changing the zoning to C-P in advance of redevelopment and conversion from existing single family uses to commercial uses may cause problems for the city and for property owners. single family properties would likely be assessed for their zoned office potential, thereby increasing property taxes. it is not necessary or desirable to change the existing zoning until the land is needed for redevelopment consistent with an adopted Planned Development Overlay District. o Necessary public improvements should be in place or planned to be constructed in time to support each phase of development, and to offset impacts caused by each development phase. Development should not proceed until necessary funding for these public improvements is available and secured. k: 2 ~r ~i POLICIES 11.8.1 A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL SHALL BE APPROVED BEFORE THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS ADOPTED MY THE CITY COUNCIL. MAP ObIR snows T_.HF. MAP AMENDMENT. 11.8.2 A COMPREHENSIVE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED FOR THE ENTXRE AREA SUBJECT TO THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SHOWN AS MAP 2. THIS CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED AND ADOPTED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 18.80 OF THE CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC). 11.8.3 WITHIN THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. ALL APPLICATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENTt ZONE p CHANGE, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (18.120, CDC), CONDITIONAL USE (18.130. CDC) AND LAND DIVISION (18.160-162, CDC) SHALL BE FOUND TO CONFORM TO THE APPROVED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (18.80.110, CDC). APPROVAL OF A DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR EACH PHASE IDENTIFIED IN THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 18.$0 OF THE CDC AND OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY TO THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED. IN ADDITION. THE CITY MAY REQUIRE A MORE DETAILED ASSESSMENT. OR UPDATE OF AN EXISTING ASSESSMENT FOR ANY ITEM OUTLINED IN POLICY 11.8.5- 11-8.4 APPLICATIONS WHICH ARE MINOR IN NATURE RELATED TO THE ON-GOING MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AND WHICH WILL NOT. IN THE OPINION OF THE DIRECTOR, JEOPARDIZE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPROVED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAY BE EXEMPT FROM POLICY 11.8.3. 11.8.5 THE CONTENTS OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL INCLUDE THE ITEMS LISTED IN 18.80.110 OF THE CDC. IN ADDITION, THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL STUDIES AND OTHER NECESSARY ITEMS SHALL BE ACCEPTED OR ADOPTED AS APPROPRIATE AS A PART OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN_ A. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: THE TYPE, AMOUNT AND LOCATION OF VARIOUS USES. THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SHALL BE IDENTIFIED FOR THE AREA AS A WHOLE, AND FOR VARIOUS PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT- s q. B. PHASING PLAN: THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BY PHASE ALONG WITH THE NECESSARY PUBLIC FACILITIES. UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, BOTH ON AND OFF-SITE. WHICH ARE NEEDE6" FOR EACH-PHASE. THE PHASING PLAN SHALL ALSO INDICATE MEASURES PROPOSED TO REDUCE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS AND ON- GOING IMPACTS TO AREAS NOT BEING REDEVELOPEDi'AND TO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS. C. TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ON AND OFF-SITE TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS RESULTING FROM AND RELATED TO EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. D. PUBLIC FACILITY AND UTILITY ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ON AND OFF-SITE WATER. SEWER. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY REQUIREMENTS RESULTING FROM AND RELATED TO EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. E. FLOOD CONTROL AND FLOOD PREVENTION ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT. MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THE WETLAND PONDS AND LAKE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD ADDRESS THE FEDERAL. STATE AND LOCAL PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES. THIS ASSESSMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED BEFORE ANY PHASE WHICH MAY IMPACT THE WETLAND LAKE AND POND. OR WOULD REQUIRE THESE IMPROVEMENTS IN ORDER TO HANDLE STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS. F. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING ASSESSMENT: SHOWING TRANSPORTATION. PUBLIC FACILITY AND OTHER PROJECTS REQUIRED BY PHASE. COSTS. FUNDING SOURCE AND FUNDING RESPONSIBILITY. G. DESIGN GUIDELINES AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: SHOWING DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING HEIGHT. BULK. ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND OTHER FEATURES. AND STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS STREETS. STREETSCAPE. LANDSCAPING, SIGNAGE. ETC. IMPLEMENTATION_STRATEGIES 1. The Tigard Community Development Code shall be amended as needed to reflect the policies noted above. 2. The city# through its urban renewal agency, shall enter into a development agreement in order to ensure implementation of the policies noted above. 4 • r,l ~W~I ~ ~W.~i.J l_.-L~J ~31~7~J U U~ 1 1 1 1 1 1,~1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 •Ar Y 1 1 0. 1 ~ 1 471 t ' ' i K tf r w ` • N. Q k338~`' to f0 N M nr Kilo ► O In ' ~ Yr ' 1 M IYMIKf►w h O 1 P y h 6,140 tl •J` ~ y v ~ ' ~1 S$ : M G 1 w~.l MY 4111 'w{ {L t7 % ♦ )nr 7 K t r f nr It I V Nu 1i L '7Ar 4101 'w'1 0010 Ar W f KOS LU wt 7 7 r vl ~ I nr I i 'rt IN n ~ O ,wi ~ '17 1 If NII ~t O 7A► r2/ 1 'lA► /ril 'w' IM a )y ~ '1 Ntf 'r't '7 r of r{ L / Y Y Ar 'JAY II II / i : a, a r- - ----I m cr It ; s f I Q I 2 rl / l It/ 21 1 Z 1 r~ M i / ' (JI'QI 1 w'"".'UCY it ~ tam N • 1 rn t1 1~. Z 1 trt• 1 / I.t trl .A 1 m m 1_--- f r RV[ .f M 04 la R t. tt I ^,1 _ r. 92. RVt. It• Rvt. I 110 !.r /11t Ct. 7 0 V.1', r 101► r ' ~ ~ I i;J y h IS. 1 1 RYC. Y.1 ^ i for V -H I 111 RVt. L Y fR RVI trot 011 a 1~. 1111 lVt ~ e ~ • t.► ~IIY1w01 t f! 4t prp },h~\ I sV W ! 1 1 r Rv 1.... ?Sy J R II l.11 Ilr w A ! Jf I If•\ Rv OtA rfr • 1 cycsr Iw+ tl - - - l w- i / s~ - - s x' ~ ~ . 1 1 1..~ L 4 l ~.L t r± ,cc* r - L r ! t.. - - t l,cr~oc 1 t ~ t t sr t t . t o t+ t . fit wyt~gHGt _ 4 ~ ~cT t ! t ~ 9 11171 _ t rt ucr+•" 1 A s~ OV£ ; w s111cc+ =26 25 s.. 11t t CSC£KT GI ,a _35 6 ,--C£M E t £Y - : crw 3 tcnu- t t r _ ~ t t a ~„T/ t t t` 1 ,r- ~ t r• ' ~ 1 sT• t It 1 s 1 _ . J ® Twcc+ s r. w t s }r-_ ~TM Waos~ 1 ~ ~ 1 K ~ tAAP f _ LAND V PROMSS1014AL RO9At- of Dt1t1~NT' -TO COMME ~~,8t1 8 PROPOSED MAP AMEN MAP Of4 POWWOW- INSERT INTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME TWO-POLICIES, SECTION ELEVEN SPECIAL AREAS OF CONCERN 11.8 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION # 8 In 1989, a major real estate development company, together with interested residents and property owners, proposed to the city a redevelopment concept for the area generall.;/ bounded by SW LOCUSt,.SW Hall Boulevard, Highway 217 and SW Greenburg Road. The development concept would require the redevelopment of an existing single-family area to a commercial office campus, and would require that the city establish an urban renewal plan to help fund needed public improvements and other projects. The development concept would also require that the Comprehensive Plan designations for portions of the area be changed from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional, and subsequently, zone changes would also be needed from R-4_5 to C-P. FINDINGS o The City of Tigard together with a major real estate development company recognize the potential for a major planned commercial and office development in the area. A public/private partnership has been established, and an urban renewal plan, entitled the President's Parkway Development Plan, has been prepared in order to implement the commercial development concept. o Preliminary studies completed for the President's Parkway Development Plan have identified needed transportation, public facility, flood control and other improvement projects which will be necessary to serve commercial and office development expected for the area- 0 Additional studies will be needed as more specific development plans are approved which refine projects which are already identified, and identify other projects which are not now known- 0 The area is characterized as transitional, that is an existing single family district that is converting to commercial use. Characteristics of the area which support this conversion and contribute to the decline in livability for single family residents include: Poor condition of residential streets not built to city standards, Lack of sidewalks, parks and other recreational facilities, Poor drainage conditions and occasional flooding, APPENf 1~ONE High traffic volumes on residential streets causing congestion and safety problems. An elementary school in the area which is at the very edge of its service area, is inappropriately located, and is in proximity to congested streets with high traffic volumes. Overall•noise, congestion and high levels of activity in residential areas caused by the proximity of commercial and office uses, Declining residential land and property values. o In order to obtain a sound, unified development of high quality, an overall development plan for the entire area is needed. A Comprehensive Plan map amendment or zone change will not apply an overall development plan to all properties within the area unless each individual property owner agrees. An instrument other than a simple zone change is f needed- 0 The most appropriate-method to realize an overall development plan is through the use of the Planned Development Overlay District, City of Tigard Community r` Development Code. o A Comprehensive Plan map amendment changing much of the area from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional is ! needed. This map amendment must precede any zone change. f This area is shown on Map 1. o Changing the zoning to C-P in advance of redevelopment and conversion from existing single family uses to commercial uses may cause problems for the city and for property owners. single family properties would likely be assessed for their zoned office potential, thereby increasing property taxes. It is not necessary or desirable to change the existing zoning until the land is needed for redevelopment consistent with an adopted Planned Development Overlay District. o Necessary public improvements should be in place or planned to be constructed in time to support each phase of development, and to offset impacts caused by each development phase. Development should not proceed until necessary funding for these public improvements is available and secured. 2 r; z POLICIES 11.8.1 A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL SHALL 8E APPROVED BEFORE THE PRESIDENT'S PAIlKWAY' DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS ADOPTED MY 'rs3E Cl'rY COUNcln. M" 01-1£ SHOWS '_i`HP. MAP AMENDMENT. 11.8.2 A COMPREHENSIVE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED FOR THE ENTIRE AREA SUBJECT TO THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SHOWN AS MAP 2. THIS CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED AND ADOPTED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 18.80 OF THE CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC). 11.8.3 WITHIN THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ALL APPLICATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENOMENTi ZONE CHANGE, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (18.120. CDC), CONDITIONAL USE (18.130. CDC) AND LAND DIVXSION (18.160-1621 CDC) SHALL BE FOUND TO CONFORM TO THE APPROVED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (18.80.110, CDC). APPROVAL OF A DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR EACH PHASE IDENTIFIED IN THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 18.80 OF THE CDC AND OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY TO THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED. IN ADDITION, THE CITY MAY REQUIRE A MORE DETAILED ASSESSMENT. OR UPDATE OF AN EXISTING ASSESSMENT FOR ANY =EM OUTLINED IN POLICY 11.8.5. 11_8.4 APPLICATIONS WHICH ARE MINOR IN NATURE RELATED TO THE ON-GOING MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AND WHICH WILL NOT. IN THE OPINION OF THE DIRECTOR, JEOPARDIZE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPROVED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAY BE EXEMPT FROM POLICY 11.8.3. 11.8_5 THE CONTENTS OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT.PLAN SHALL INCLUDE THE ITEMS LISTED IN 18.80.110 OF THE CDC. IN ADDITION, THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL STUDIES AND OTHER NECESSARY ZTEMS•SHALL BE ACCEPTED OR ADOPTED AS APPROPRIATE AS A PART OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: A_ DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: THE TYPE, AMOUNT AND LOCATION OF VARIOUS USES. THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SHALL BE IDENTIFIED FOR THE AREA AS A WHOLE, AND FOR VARIOUS PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT- 3 ' h' H~ . Jy~• jj , s s B. PHASING PLAN: THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BY PHASE ALONG WITH THE NECESSARY PUBLIC FACILITIES. UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, BOTH ON AND OFF-SITE, WHICH ARE NEEDED FOR EACH-PHASE. THE PHASING PLAN SHALL ALSO INDICATE MEASURES PROPOSED TO REDUCE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS AND ON- GOING IMPACTS TO AREAS NOT BEING R£DEVELOPED,'AND TO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS. C. TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT: AW ASSESSMENT OF THE ON AND OFF-SITE TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS RESULTING FROM AND RELATED TO EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. D_ PUBLIC FACILITY AND UTILITY ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ON AND OFF-SXTE WATER, SEWER. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY REQUIREMENTS RESULTING FROM AND RELATED TO EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. E. FLOOD CONTROL AND FLOOD PREVENTION ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THE WETLAND PONDS AND LAKE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE.PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD ADDRESS THE FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES. THIS ASSESSMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED BEFORE ANY PHASE WHICH MAY IMPACT THE WETLAND-LAKE AND POND, OR WOULD REQUIRE THESE IMPROVEMENTS IN ORDER TO HANDLE STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS- F_ IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING ASSESSMENT: SHOWING TRANSPORTATION. PUBLIC FACILITY AND OTHER PROJECTS REQUIRED BY PHASE. COSTS. FUNDING SOURCE AND FUNDING RESPONSIBILITY. G. DESIGN GUIDELINES AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: SHOWING DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING HEIGHT, SULK. ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND OTHER FEATURES, AND STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS STREETS, STREETSCAPE, LANDSCAPING, SIGNAGE, ETC. IMPLEMENTATION_STRATEGIES 1- The Tigard Community Development Code shall be amended as needed to reflect the policies noted above. 2. The city, through its urban renewal agency, shall enter into i' a development agreement in order to ensure implementation of f the policies noted above. 4 • e J+f~ ~ s O OO~.r.Y•. G{f~ O S+I T2 ♦ yM v s t tL' C t sr. I t t L)/1'J• isa NS GRpVE_.° y~ yT)cr 2B 25 1 t r CE 1 EgY X V ~ fdA1.t. 1 i M~~ a aas ~s+ + r 1 w + ' L s . ti {LtlL v. © ycc+c ~ oi' usf MAP LAW _ IAL pFtG~ S?,N AMENDMEW T4 COMMERG. pt oposeo MAP MAp ONE r r ' • s~ --~''-q~~ ~ M r 1 J ~ L7 . 1f"lattr •'t ~ w ~ WI 1/q 7st N a t ' i W°f .1 / at ~Y 'iat \'t I i 1 '17 1111 a't Mrf 'tl a iAt llif 'p , 1A° tff 1 JA 7/ told 'r' .t fIN r SAT ~Yil~ p , • C, IV A i~ I I 1 i7 W~I f•t i I 1 A, ~ ~ •~7jt S' r it ~ ,I'. to in .tr D R A F T TIGARD PI.A1nn3G COMZSCSSION REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 20, 1990 1. President Moen called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. The meeting was held at the Tigard Civic Center - TOWN HALL - 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: President Moen; Commissioners Barber, Castile, Fessler, and Saporta. Absent: Fyre, Leverett, and Peterson. Staff: Community Development Director Ed Murphy; Senior Planner Keith Liden; Legal Counsel Phil Grillo; Consultant John Spencer; Planning Commission Secretary Diane M. Jelderks. 3. APPROGAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Barber moved and Commissioner Fessler seconded to approve the minutes as corrected. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioner Saporta and Castile abstained. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION C024KUNICATION ~r. o There was no communication. 5. PUBLIC BEARINGS 5.1 REVIEW OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION APPOINTMENTS 5.2 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 90-01 VARIANCE V 90-01 MCDONALDS/BATES NPO #6 A request for approval of a Sign Code Variance to allow additional freestanding sign area beyond the allowed 210 total square feet per roadway t frontage permitted by the Community Development Code. Two existing freestanding signs each contain 210 square feet of sign area. The applicant has proposed alternative sign designs and areas for a possible third freestanding sign. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) LOCATION: r Tigard Towne Square, 16200 SW Pacific Highway (WCTM 2S1 15BA, tax lotl02) r 5.3 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 90-0002 VARIANCE 90-0003 RIM/KOLVE NPO #3 A request for approval of a Sign Code Variance to allow placement of a sign above a roof line. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) LOCATION: 14463 SW Pacific Highway (WCTM 2S1 10AB, tax lot 200) t• C PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 1, ~f 5.4 C011PREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0001 (PRESIDENTS PARKH" PLAN AMENDMENT) NPO #8 A request to change the Comprehensive Plan Map designations from Medium Density Residential (approx. 10 acres) and Low Density Residential (approx. 68 acres) to Professional Commercial. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan text is proposed to be amended to add criteria for determining the timeliness of future rezoning for these properties. The Planning Commission will be making a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendments. The City Council will be holding additional public hearings on this proposal before making a final decision on the application. The proposed amendments are intended to be the first step in establishment of an urban renewal district for the area and the development of a mixture of office and commercial uses. (Agenda item 5.51) ZONE: R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) and R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: Within an area bordered by Highway 217, Greenburg Road, Locust Street, and Hall Boulevard. 5.5 PRESIDENTS PAREMBY URBAN RENEWAL PLAN To review a proposal to form an urban renewal district in an area bordered by Highway 217, Greenburg Road, Locust Street, and Hall Boulevard for the purpose of redeveloping the area with a commercial office complex and ancillary uses. The Commission will forward a recommendation the city council. Community Development Director Ed Murphy reviewed the process of the applications and the types of plans being proposed. He explained why the City is that applicant and that the City hired John Spencer as a consultant who will be giving staff's presentation. Because agenda item 5.4 and 5.5 are interrelated and the number of individuals who had signed up to speak for both items, testimony will be accepted on both issues at the same time. The Commission will make their decision on each item at the close of the public hearing. John Spencer, Spencer and Kupper, reviewed the area being proposed for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map and text (Chapter for areas of special concern). He addressed applicable goals, policies and the livability of the area. He elaborated on the conceptual and detailed plans. He explained that Urban Renewal is a financing mechanism for public improvements and reviewed the aspects of the Urban Renewal Plan. Discussion followed how the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is needed in order to proceed with the Urban Renewal Plan. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Margory Haglund, 11075 SW Hall Boulevard, representing NPO # 8, stated that they had a meeting for the people in the area and that a majority of the people were in favor. The NPO favored the plan shown by David Blake, Trammell-Crow. The NPO had voted in favor of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 2 o David Blake, Trammell Crow, reviewed the current zoning and existing uses in the comprehensive Plan Amendment area. They are proposing a master plan with a financing method versus allowing piecemeal development. He offered to stay after the hearing to show slides of the master plan. o Patricia Whiting, 8122 SW Spruce, Metzger, 97723, representing CPO 4M submitted written testimony. The CPO has not taken a position as they have not had an opportunity to review the proposal. She stated that they i already have planning for this area. i f o Terry Moore, 8440 SW Godwin Ct., representing CPO # 3, was concern how the proposal would impact the property owners along Olsen Road. She stated that commercial vacancies are approximately 18 to 25 percent while residential vacancies are only 5 percent. This proposal is eliminating residential property. Other concerns are that the transportation and energy goals are not met, that Tigard's city center would be moving to this area, the school would be moved outside of the Urban Renewal area, and that tax increment financing is much more complex than staff makes it sound. She submitted and read portions of an article from the APA magazine on "The Giveaway Game Continues". She concluded that the plan for this area was acknowledged in 1983 and this is not part of their plan. RECESS 10:00 RECONVENE 10:15 S Agenda Item 5.6 postponed. i 0 Jack Steiger, 10250 SW Greenburg Road, owner of property in the Urban Renewal Area supported the proposal as being sound planning. i o Patricia Whiting, 8122 SW Spruce, Metzger, representing herself had submitted written testimony. She felt the process needed to move slower so that more people who live in adjacent area can participate in the process. o Delphia Redford, 9200 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, representing Cloy Haeffele, who live on the opposite side of Hall Boulevard, favored the proposal. She had concerns about the vacant residential property that is adjacent to the commercial area. When Hall Boulevard is improved, how much of their property will be taken. She felt they should be included in the Urban `t f Renewal District or compensated by allowing them to increase the density on their property. F o Nancy Tracy, 7310 SW Pine Street, Portland, 97223, east of the proposed site was undecided. She felt Trammell -Crow could do a quality development but was concerned that natural values would be lost. o Thomas Ashloch, 9200 SW Oak, favored the proposal. He did not want to see piecemeal development and felt this development would solve transportation and drainage problems. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 3 o Penny Nash, 10231 SW Jefferson, lives in the Urban Renewal District. She felt the proposal looked good on paper. She would rather see the proposal happen quickly or not at all. o Cathy Chase, 8365 SW Steve, 97223, lives in a development with approximate 120 homes which usually has 36 children at the bus stop. She felt the development would help the whole community. She opposed piecemeal development and felt the City should go for it. o Harry Chase, 8365 SW Steve, 97223, favored both the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Urban Renewal Plan. The proposal meets most of the concerns of most of the people. Urban Renewal has proven to be effective. This is good planning. Issue will come up that will need to be dealt with whether this proposal is approved or not. o Margory Haglund, 11075 SW Hall, felt this proposal would solve neighbors concerns regarding flooding. She would like to see the area nicer than it is now. o Troy Vanderhoof, 10181 SW Jefferson, 97223, lives on the inside edge of the Urban Renewal District. On the whole in favored the proposal. His concern were for livability during construction. He would like to see wording in the master plan that would require residents to be moved as quickly as possible. He questioned what would happen if the election should fail, would they be able to make improvements on their property? o Leo Huff, O.D.O.T, Milwaukie, has seen the preliminary drawings and there is a lot of work that needs to be done to avoid a gridlock, which they are close to now in that area. This is great opportunity for the City, County, and State to get together to resolve transportation problems in that area. He was concerned what would happen to the Plan changes if the Urban Renewal Plan fails. He felt a financing mechanism is needed to construct the public improvements. o Ed Murphy, Community Development Directed, explained that if the Urban Renewal Plan fails the area would need to be developed as a master plan or the City Council could change it back to the way it is now. o Commissioner Moen questioned the concerns that this proposal would allow 8000 more cars in the area. Mr. Huff stated that a circulation plan is needed for the whole area not just the within the Urban Planning Area. With some work, study, and money the problems could be solved. o Jim Everitt, 8900 SW Oak, representing four property owners, felt that this appears to be a good plan if managed well. They are all in favor. o Mike Schreck, 10617 SW Windsor, 97223, favored both the Plan change and the Urban Renewal Plan. This plan could bring businesses into the area to improve.the tax base. o Lin McAtee, 7039 SW Pine, 97223, lives a few blocks outside of the proposed area. She favored the Plan. She is an employee of Trammell Crow and PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 4 f stated that this is a local company which hire local people, and has the same concerns as people who live in the area. She read letters from Fred Fields, Coe Mfg. and Randy Shelton, President Architectural Images Photography, Inc. who supported the proposal. o President Moen stated that Fred Field of Code Manufacturing is his employer, however, he did not feel that would impact his decision. o Louise Shaw, 6735 SW Ventura Drive, Washington Square Estates, support the proposal. She is working in a PR capacity for this proposal. She felt the school needed to be relocated. She noted other jurisdictions that have used Urban Renewal successfully. o Roger Smith, 8935 SW oak, lives within the Urban Renewal and Comprehensive Plan Amendment area, favors the proposal. Resident for 20 years. He felt this was a good plan that was well though out. He would support the proposal even if he didn't live within the area proposed for change. o Kevin Lapp, 8310 SW Pine, Metzger, 97223, lives-600 feet east of proposed plan, agreed with most of the people who spoke in favor, however, he was concerned about the impact to his property value. He was not opposed if this goes through in a sensitive manner, but was concerned. about the creditability of the developer. He felt it was up to the Planning Department to save the neighborhood from piecemeal development. He felt that traffic concerns had not been addressed, that Metzger School was given to the school district and it was his understanding that if the property sells the money would be given back to the heirs of the property and not to the school district. His final concern was the overlapping of taxing district such as the Metzger Park LID. o Darrell Barr, 8118 SW Pine, Metzger, 97223, lives three blocks east. He was concerned about traffic being grid-locked and the amount of traffic using the residential areas to get in and out of the site. He wanted to maintain the rural atmosphere of the area. o Gary Ott, 9055 SW Edgewood, opposed the proposal. He questioned why this proposal is being considered. He stated that there is no need for any more land to be zoned commercial. He felt staff had not addressed specific sections of the Code and several goals or they were inadequately addressed. He questioned what impact this proposal would have on, the livability of the area outside the boundary of the proposal. He did not feel that Urban Renewal is justified in this case and that the private developer should provide the finance mechanism with a local improvement district. He felt the Urban Renewal District would affect taxes.on people outside the area. o Charles Britton, 7885 SW Oak, 97223, resident for three years, lives 1 1/2 blocks east of the proposal. He was concerned that the value of his home would decrease and that Oak Street will be greatly impacted. He felt the proposal should be put on hold until consideration is given to the property owners who live east and north of the proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 5 o John Middleton, 8415 SW Cedarcrest, lives north of the proposal. His major concern was where the money would come from to relocate the school. He stated that Tigard doesn't usually pass Urban Renewal Plans and was concerned that the school would be stuck in a commercial area if the Urban Renerdial fails. Discussion follow regarding moving the school. o Gene Davis, 10875 SW 89th, 97223, opposed the Comprehensive Plan Amendment at this time. He did not feel that the transportation concerns could be resolved economically and that Washington Square needed to be included. He was concerned that this proposal would jeopardize existing property that is zoned commercial. o Tom Smith, 9930 SW 77th, Metzger, 97223, opposed the proposal. He felt it was a prime example of piecemeal planning. He felt the proposal would increase traffic and decrease the value of his home. He doesn't believe there is a need for more commercial land. He didn't like the way the school and Metzger park would be affected by this proposal. He was upset that many people who live in Metzger who will be impacted are not able to vote on the Urban Renewal District. o John Blomgren, 9460 SW Oak Street, 97223, felt the area needs a thorough traffic study, that there is a major drainage and flood plain area that needs to be addressed. He suggested that a six month moratorium be placed on the area. o Kerrie Standlee, 10285 SW 70th, 97223, opposed the proposal as submitted. He did not feel that it was thought out, that there are considerable traffic problems in the area, and that the area should be extended east and north. He suggested closing off Oak and Locust Street in order to separate the commercial area from the residential. He stated that the park proposed in the master plan is not easily accessible to the residential area. He resented the justifications in the staff report as he felt they could apply to any piece of property in the City of Tigard. REBUTTAL o John spencer responded to public testimony as follows: School, not all of the details have been worked out. They do have a understanding that the Urban Renewal will defray some of the cost. Transportation, there is a need for a more comprehensive study which is exactly what they are intending on doing. Wetlands, will need to go through the State process. Impact to adjacent neighborhood or people who have to wait, these will need to be defined and they will try to mitigate. Some thing they will not be able to be mitigated. r .j f' PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 6 t' T+ i, Fast pace, this has been moving fast, however, there have been a number of opportunities for the public to get information and for public input. Detail issues will be dealt with later. Urban Renewal Plan - unfair taxation on residents who are not a part of the City. Every Renewal Plan affects taxing districts outside of the plan. This is still a democratic process. Discussion followed regarding purchasing and moving the school. o Ed Murphy stated that choice number one is, should the area outlined in red be changed from residential to commercial? He added that the zone changes will not be done until after the study has been completed. Also, there will be no development in the area outlined in orange until the master plan is completed. Second choice, is to make a finding whether the Urban Renewal Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He responded to concerns present from the public. Housing goal, this area is considered developed and is not counted in the housing goal. Transportation goal, this should include light rail. Energy goal, could be argued on both sides, it does create jobs and can you live close to those jobs. Air quality, will have to be address. Wetlands, are still being addressed. Remodeling existing homes within the area, this could still be done, however, no additional units or new homes could be built. Goal # 5, will need to be addressed when or before development takes place. With regard to the Urban Renewal Plan, the school and the City do not have an agreement. The developer and school have been negotiating, but no price has been stated. There may be other ways to finance. The intent is to move the school as quickly as possible. Regarding deals going sour for other jurisdiction, the example of Sherwood had to do with Bancroft bonds which are charged back to the tax payer in case of default. These bonds don't work that way. They would be charged back to the bondholder in case of default. Regarding public subsidiary, the City consultant will help determine how much is needed and this will be negotiated at a later date. The City cannot have the entire City be an Urban Renewal District because you cannot have more that 25 percent of the land or assessed value in an Urban Renewal District. They did look at including Washington Square, however it did not seem appropriate. Other boundaries can be recommended by the Planning Commission. Staff still recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Urban Renewal District. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 7 o Phil Grillo, Legal Counsel, stated that the issue of whether commercial ( land is needed or not is not a part of the approval criteria. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Saporta stated that the question is what to do with the area marked in red on the map. He felt the commercial area- is already encroaching into the residential area. The change is appropriate because the boundaries of the roads appear to provide a natural buffer for the area. With regard to livability, presently, he it wasn't sure of. He liked the concept of controlled and planned growth. The Plan has a lot of merit, but we need to be cautious through the process. He realized the thing are moving fast, but the process would deal with impacts. He was uncertain about the school, but felt we needed to start some place. o Commissioner Barbur stated she had attended a workshop prior to the hearing as well as a presentation on February 13th by David Blake. They have a choice between doing nothing or something. She favored choosing something that is a mechanism that would prevent piecemeal development. She felt the City was fortunate to have a developer available to construct a project like this. She felt a Urban Renewal District would increase the tax base and decrease individuals taxes. That the public should be allowed to vote on the Urban Renewal Plan and they couldn't do that if they didn't change the Comprehensive Plan. She supported the change. o Commissioner Castile main question was, can we do it? He was excited that a project like this is being proposed in our backyard. He did not feel we were running a risk at this time. He favored both the comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Urban Renewal Plan. o Commissioner Fessler, stated she has not seen a formal presentation for the project and the plan take a lot of time to read. The plan doesn't answer a lot of questions. She thought it might be better to do more education regarding the plan. She asked why the Urban Renewal Plan couldn't be present on the September or November ballot. o President Moen had same concerns as Commissioner Fessler. He was concerned whether this is an area "of transition" or "in transition". He had real concerns regarding the School. He agreed with the community that the process was moving to fast and didn't give the community an opportunity to provide and alternative. o Discussion followed regarding the best time to go for an election on the Urban Renewal Plan and what would happen if they waited. Discussion of options followed. * Commissioner Barber moved and Saporta seconded to recommend approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-01 as submitted by staff. Motion carried by majority of commissioners present. Commissioners Moen and Fessler voting no. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 8 ti r: e &t * Commissioner Barber moved and Commissioner Castile seconded to recommend to City Council that they go forward with the Urban Renewal Plan based on the finding that it conforms with the Comprehensive Plan as amended and also for the City Council to consider a November election in lieu of a May election. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 5.6 SUBDIVISION S 90-01 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 90-01 SENSITIVE LANDS 90-01 BURTON/ROUZAI NPO #3 A* request for preliminary review of a proposal for approval to divide 39.2 acres into 120 lots between 7,000 and 14,589 square feet. Also requested is a sensitive lands permit to allow placement of a sanitary sewer line in a drainageway. ZONE: R-7 (PD) (Residential, 7 units/acre, Planned Development) LOCATION: South of SW 135th Avenue, Northwest of Benchview Estates Subdivision (WCTM 2S1 4, tax lot 700) * Commissioner Fessler moved and Commissioner Saporta seconded to table S 90-01, PD 90-01, and SL 90-01 to February 27th at 7:30 PM. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT - PH Diane M. Jelderks, Secretary ATTEST: A Donald Moen, President dj/pcm2-20 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - February 20, 1990 PAGE 9 F V~Ir; 4--P> iMUV(1 February 8, 1990 .31 ~5 lC10 MEMORANDUM To: Jerry Offer From: Randy Wooley ell Engineering ~j6j'' Re: CPA 90-0001, President's Parkway Plan Amendment we understand that the requested action will change only the land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Map and that actual zone changes will not occur until sufficient master-planning of the area has been completed. with this understanding, we have no objection to the proposed comprehensive Plan amendment. This process can provide an excellent opportunity to jointly plan the land uses, the public facility needs, and the property layout of the area. The city seldom has such an opportunity for truly comprehensive planning. A number of items will need to be considered during the next step in the process, the preparation of the master plan. The Plan text will need to assure that these items are considered prior to approval of a zone change. (Note that the detailed planning is not necessary prior to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, as long as we are assured that the detailed planning will be completed prior to approval of zone changes and prior to issuance of permits for actual construction.) The planning items important to Engineering review are discussed below. Transportation: A preliminary transportatian analysis has been submitted for the proposed President's Parkway development. The preliminary analysis estimates that approximately 17,600 daily vehicle trips will be generated by the development. The analysis suggests that substantial improvements will be needed on Greenburg Road, Hall Boulevard, and Highway 217 to accommodate this increased traffic. More detailed traffic analysis and preliminary engineering work will be needed in order to determine more precisely the transportation improvements that will be needed. Special attention will need to be given to the access to and from Highway 217 to assure that any adopted transportation plan satisfies the State's freeway design requirements. Coordination with Washington County will be needed to assure that proposed improvements to Greenburg Road are consistent with the County's plans. The analysis also indicates that the development will cause some increase in the traffic volumes .:in the residential areas to the east of Hall Boulevard. The traffic increases in the residential areas are not likely to cause capacity problems. However, any increase in traffic may raise objections from residents of the area. During preparation of the master plan, alternative transportation modes should be considered. Alternatives might include transit, future light rail service to the area, facilities for pedestrians and bicycles, and demand management techniques. The master plan should include a detailed layout of the needed transportation z' APPS --fW'® • i. v improvements. It should include a schedule showing how the timing of transportation improvements relates to proposed building construction. It should also detail which of the transportation improvements will be constructed or funded as conditions of development and which are to be funded by the public as part of the continuing capital improvement program in response to areawide growth. Utilities: The applicant has stated that, based on preliminary review, adequate utility services are available nearby and can be. extended to serve the proposed development. As part of the master plan, a detailed plan for extension of water lines, sanitary sewers, power, telephone and other utilities should be developed. Construction of the necessary utilities. will need to be coordinated with the schedule for transportation improvements. Storm drainage: The proposed development contains a significant area of wetlands and floodplain. Local, state and federal requirements for flood control, water quality protection, and habitat protection will need to be addressed. The master plan should detail how these requirements will be met. Prior to approval of the master plan, the City should require evidence that the.various regulatory agencies will approve the permits necessary for construction of the plan. A schedule for construction of the storm drainage improvements should be tied to the schedule for phasing of the development. Comprehensive Plan amendments: The master plan will need to be reviewed for conformance with other adopted plans such as the Metzger-Progress Circulation Plan, the City's master drainage plan, and the Ash Creek drainage study. Some amendments to existing plans may be appropriate. Any such-amendments should be adopted prior to approval of a master plan for the President's Parkway development. rw/PP-CPA.rw 9 'w A RECEIVED WASHINGTON FEB 1 3 1990 COUNTY' February 8, 1990 OREGON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ed Murphy, Planning Director City of Tigard Planning Department P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 SUBJECT: Comments on CPA 90-0001 (Presidents Parkway Plan Amendment) As requested, our staff has reviewed preliminary information per- taining to the Presidents Parkway Plan Amendment, including a preliminary submittal for Comprehensive Map Amendment (plan and zone change by Trammel-Crow, and -a Preliminary Transportation Analysis by Associated Transportation Engineering and Planning (ATEP). In addition, our staff has had a preliminary meeting with ODOT and Trammel-Crow representatives, and we have had preliminary telephone conversations with Tigard's planning and.engineering staff. Our understanding is that proposed plan amendments will be considered by the Tigard City Council on March 5, 1990, and that with council approval an urban renewal plan could go before Tigard voters in May. The project presents a good opportunity for this area to develop under a master planning process rather than in a piecemeal fashion. We anticipate the public facility impacts of the development to be multi-jurisdictional, reaching beyond the boundaries of the Tigard urban renewal district, as proposed, to include residential areas in unincorporated Washington County north and east of the development and perhaps even Portland neighborhoods across the County line. The most substantial traffic impact of the project would affect the State Highway system, including Highway 217 and associated inter- changes at Greenburg Road, 99W and I-5, Hall Boulevard and Highway 99W. Careful additional analysis must be done to assess the traffic circulation and land use impacts of the development. ATEP has done a good job in preparing a preliminary traffic analy- sis. We agree with the assessment by ATEP that the analysis does not address the total impact of this development. Also, the ATEP report does not take into consideration other projects currently under development in this rapidly growing area. our staff would argue that the development would impact a larger area, and that a more detailed traffic and land use impact analysis will be necessary to determine specific impacts, and estimate costs of infrastructure improvements. The County is concerned about the transportation circulation and land use impacts for an area that would extend beyond the urban renewal district. Even without the proposed development, Highway 217 and the surrounding arterial roads are becoming seriously con- gested. A development of the magnitude of Presidents Parkway maylead to serious neighborhood traffic infiltration problems without extensive improvements to Highway 217, nearby interchanges Department of Land Use And Transportation, Administration s 150 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Phone: 503/648-8761 } x CPA 90-0001 February 8, 1990 Page Two and the arterial system. In some respects, adding 2.5 million square feet of development in this area is comparable to adding a Clackamas Town Center size development (over two million square feet) next to Washington Square. An even-better analogy might be that the area has the potential to be an activity center similar to Bellevue, Washington. Each of the above examples has suffered serious traffic circulation problems. Perhaps we can learn from their failures and successes. We would recommend a joint master planning effort for the area be undertaken by the County, City of Tigard, ODOT and Trammel Crow. As a condition for approval of the plan amendment, Trammel Crow would be required to finance the master planning effort and more detailed impact analysis. We see this as taking a minimum of three months, most likely beginning after July, 1990. Traffic management, safety and capacity issues addressed in the 1985 Metzger-Progress circulation study should be revisited. This study addressed neighborhood traffic infiltration, pedestrian and bicycle access and transit issues and recommended a number of road- way improvement projects that were incorporated in the County's 1988 Transportation Plan. Also, given the importance of water quality issues within the Tu- alatin River Basin, the Ash Creek floodplain should be given spe- cial attention. My staff has indicated that the City's intention is to withhold further development approval in this entire area until all of the above mentioned concerns are addressed to the satisfaction of the City, County, and ODOT. I strongly recommend that those conditions are, in fact, included in any approvals granted for the Plan Amend- ment. Approval of the concept for President's Parkway should not imply approval of a particular site plan, circulation plan or ac- cess to any County Road or State Highway in the area until the traffic analysis is completed, and agreement is reached on neces- sary improvements, and whose responsibility it will be for funding those improvements. Please feel free to call me at 648-8761, or Frank Angelo, Principal Planner, at 640-3519 if you have any questions, or need any addi- tional information. Sincerely, Bruce A. Warner, P.E. Director BAW:BB/pf c: Tom Schwab (doc: Barber-3) Brent Curtis F REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TO: DATE: January 29, 1990 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: CPA 90-0001 (PRESIDENTS PARKWAY PLAN AMENDMENT) A request to change the Plan Map designations from Medium Density Residential (approx. 7 acres) and Low Density Residential (approx. 90 acres) to Professional Commercial. In addition, the Plan text would be amended to add criteria for -determining the timeliness of rezoning these properties. The proposed amendments are intended to be the first step in establishment of an urban renewal district for the area and the development of a mixture of office and commercial uses. The location is shown on the attached map. Additional information will be coming. Please comment on the effect this proposal would have on your ability to serve the proposed change in development type and intensity. ZONE: R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) and R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to 'our staff, a report and recommendation will be i. prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. ggo0•Ac92 If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by Feb_ 8, 1990. You may use the space, provided below or attach a separate letter to HO REt A return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please - phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact BUD 111A AWN of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. i, Written Comments: JiO 06JECTI01V5PROVIDING 506451CM07- FUNOS 14RE GF1Y4"19nD M PURC//ASE A S19B j9AIV C&VSrRVr-r 14 NEW SCHaO 1 IN ACCOJUMVCE W17*1I DISTRICT SPEC1F/C9T16WS - f Name of Person Commenting: 1300 HI.(IU MA-1 Phone Number: Xgy-o222-I REECEM WANING FEB 2 1990 3 February 20, 1990 To: Tigard Planning Commission/Tigard City Council Re: CPA 90-00001 We are residents of the area proposed for the future President's Parkway Development Plan, living on the corner of Spruce Street at 89th Avenue. We have read a copy dated 2/1/90 of Trammel Crow's "Report on President's Parkway Development Area" and wish to comment upon several points in this report. Under the Section INTRODUCTION Section 102 Social and Economic Conditions, 102.2 Income gives a false impression of economic conditions using a 1979 income table. 102.3 Housing states that 67% are duplex and multi-family. In the neighborhood of Spruce Street. 89th Avenue. and Thorn Street 13 homes are owner occupied, one home is a duplex, and one single family home facing Hall Blvd is a rental. This is not the 33% single family in their report. Only two homes ! in this area are very old. One is owner occupied by a young family who have been working like beavers to upgrade the house, and the other is the rental facing Hall Blvd. Section 104 states that an area not densely populated is an E attractor of crime and that adding commercial buildings to this area would relieve demands on the Tigard Police for patrol of the area. Section 200 states that our land has a prevalence of non-conforming uses and improper utilization. We feel this land has been well utilized as a comfortable residential neighborhood. Non-conforming to what?? Reference to inefficient lotting patterns is of course the result of owners purchasing extra property for their own privacy and pleasure. We feel that this report promotes false assumptions for the economic good of Trammel Crow should they be allowed to purchase our property--that there is an effort to reduce the value of our homes. This is also a prevailing theme in their CITY OF TIGARD PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (especially pages 4 and 5). Constant referral to "blight" of our area is made to appear from the inside out rather than something being imposed upon us by the surrounding commercial use and new volumes of traffic. Finally, we have not read on any report what will be done for the residents that may be held here by Trammel Crow's "exclusive" purchase contract for as long as five years. We had a taste of the extreme inconvenience (noise and dirt) brought to us by bulldozing a lake/pond on the floodplain belong to Dr. Gene Davis. Mr. and Mrs. Edward Hannevig 8840 S.W. Spruce Street i ~ J ~~G . Qra r° Q~ OC, 1-31-90 To: The City of Tigard Lady's and Gentlemen: This letter is to document that as a small business owner and a citizen of our city, I support the proposed Presidents Parkway development. This progressive move forward would bring many new jobs to our area and help bolster our growing economy. We have always had a small town image here and I for one would like to see Tigard "put on the map". I have heard many say that they would hate for this area to become another Bellevue, Wash.. However; I have done a fair amount of work in that area and to be reall- honest, it's a great place to be. It feels alive! It has progressed, not' regressed. As you consider all the ramifications involved here please remember that all of us as human beings have been put here to progress. It's our nature and I am very confident that all of us here in Tigard have the smart's and determination to help this area grow and better our lives without turning our community upside down. Please Join me in supporting this project. It's something we must do, unless we just want to sit back and let the Seattle area enjoy all the recent fruits of growth in our beautiful Pacific Northwest. Thank you for taking the time to listen. Since Randy L. Shelton President, Architectural Images Photography, Inc. F. r~: CPO 4-M Steering Camdttee Patricia Whiting, Chair 8122 S.W. Spruce Metzger, Oregon 97223 February 20, 1990 City of Tigard Planning Commission 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-0001 Agenda Item 5.4: City Hall, 7:30pm 1. Plan Map Amendment 2. Plan text amendment outline process for development and approval of a master plan for the subject area, future rezoning, and provision of necessary public facilities through an urban renewal plan or alternative means. Dear Planning Commission: My name is Patricia Whiting. I am representing our CPO 41 Steering Committee. We are not taking a position at this time on the proposal before you. There will be a statement forthccadng from CPO 4 Metzger membership regarding the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment and urban renewal proposal following our regularly scheduled meeting which is tomarrow evaiiT, February 21, at the Metzger Clubhouse. For the record we are submitting the following statement for your review. T"*e have cited discriptions and objectives from our CPO Community Plan which is part of Washington County's Comprehensive Plan. O G-SH • . Ll T, , • ,.h jn,,, , , i_ . :;=~h comprehensive ~ plan amendment from Low Density Residential (approximately 68 acres) and Medium Density Residential (approximately 10 acres) to Cannercial Professional between S.W. Greenburg Road and Hall Blvd. and I3wy 217 and S.W. Locust street (now within the City of Tigard) will eliminate single- r 2 Tigard Planning Cam fission CPO 4M Steering Committee family residential zoning within our area of concern given the proximity of the adjacent areas and the issues of concern to Tigard residents and Washington County residents. 1. iashington County's Comprehensive Plan for the Metzger/Progress area identified Progress as compact and diversified center of conarnrical and high density residential uses. 2. The Washington Square area was intended to continue developing as a regional camnercial center with orientation of the uses in this area to go toward Hwy 217--the regional travel corridor. 3. The area between Metzger and Washington Square Progress, along Greenburg Road and the intersection of Hall and Gmexbirg and Olson serves as an area of transition between intensive uses to the west and lower density uses to the east. 4. It is a mix of office, institutional and mere medium density residential uses to both support the Progress washington Square co mierical center and also be conpatible with Metzger residential uses. 5. To quote the adopted Washington County Plan for this area, "The area is not intended to be expanded east into the ajacent residential area." 3 Tigard Planning Commission CPO 4M Steering Camlittee 6. It is an objective of the C nninity Plan, in conjunction with the County Transportation Plan and Ccnrmity Development Code, to seperate local street functions from the through traffic activity more appropriate for major roads, while generally reducing traffic congestion. 7. Commerical uses are also planned in concentration along Pacific Hwy, primarily because that is the location of existing commerical uses. Office commerical uses are planned mainly at Hall Blvd. and Oleson Road along the east side of Greenburg to "serve both in support of and as a transition from the major retail uses to the west. "The orientation of 5 these regional co~m~erical'uses is intended to be toward Highway 217 and r Pacific Highway and'riot toward the lletzger residential area." 8. "A continuation of the strip commerical development pattern along major thoroughfares is not intended." Our Plan states that "Implicit throughout the Metzger-Progress Conmunity Plan is the assumption that policies in the Comprehensive Framework Plan will be implemented through the Community Development Code, the Unified Capital Improvement Plan, the Transportation Plan and other functional plans. This is particularly important with regard to the county policies on growth management and code standards on public .facilities, which mandate the provision of adequate services before development is permitted. Adherence to this policy is critical to preserving the liMability of the Planning Area over time." ..:.a.._.._. - 4 Tigard Planning Commission CPO 4M Steering Ccmnittee As you consider the Comprehensive Plan kwzi rent before you and the urban renewal project concept or alternative plans, we ask that you consider design elements that will not adversely impact on the adjacent residential contrnuiities to the north and to the east of the subject area. We also ask that you consider the importance of existing single-family neighborhoods, the lives of people that will be affected by this action, and the importance of the floodplain and wetlands. The issues of importance, not necessarily in this order, as they are all important are: 1. The-relocation of the school and the prioritizating of the relocation of the school in construction scheduling, 2. Commter traffic of 8,000+ automobiles from and to the proposed Presidents Parkway trying to-use residential streets and roads, 3. The relocation of people who live in the subject area, 4. Preservation of the 100-year floodplain and the wetlands and wildlife habitat areas, and 5. The need to adhere to statewide goals and guidelines. Thank you for allowing ras to speak on this important issue. Patricia Whiting 8122 S.W. Spruce Metzger, Oregon 97223 February 20, 1990 City of Tigard Planning Department Planning Commission 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Addendum to my February 13, 1990 letter to the Planning Dept. re: 90-0001 Dear Planning Commission: Regarding reference to Plan Policy 6.3.3 of my paper, page 5, pertaining to the draft data sentence in development papers: The issues pertaining to residential interface to the south, east, or west are not viable due to the decay of the existing residential framework. has been eliminated from the data developed in the staff report before you on the proposed project. The above interpretation of our area is not awmte and I am grateful to your staff for deleting such reference from updated reports. Please add this com=ique to my February 13th letter submitted for the record. The other issues I raised as a resident of Fast Metzger are still inportant. Cordially, PATRICIA WH ING a Patricia Whiting 8122 S.W. Spruce Metzger, Oregon 97223 February 13, 1990 City of Tigard Tigard Planning Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: CPA 90-0001 (Presidents Parkway Plan Amendment & Urban Renewal District) Please have my letter entered as testimony in the record for the hearing of file number CPA 90-0001 ]mown as Presidents Parkway-- an application by the City of Tigard to amend the comprehensive plan thereby changing the Comprehensive Plan Map designations from Medium Density Residential and Low Density Residential to Professional Commercial for the purpose of an "Urban Penewal Project" as proposed by Trammell Crow. Vy testimony is given representing myself and my immediate family as residents and property owners in the Metzger Community of. Washington County and does not constitute a conflict with any position I may currently be holding in any community organization as an officer or as a member. Re: The proposal to change the Tigard Comprehensive Plan map designations in the majority or an area bordered bn, T-ocust street, Hall Blvd., Jlwy 217, and Greenburg Road from Low and `Tediinn Density Residential to Commercial Professional--the first step in the establishment of an urban renewal district. Re: The City of Tigard President Parkway Development Plan as proposed by Trammell Cray Development Company. The reference materials to w?zi.ch I refer are as follows: a Development Plan Draft dated 2/1/90 'herein referred to as 'xhibit A, the Support Report dated 2/1/90 herein referred to as Exhibit B, and a nine-page pA -_aith a=.titlb of Comprehensive Map .?amendment (Plan and zone Change) by Trammell Crow which cites some Statewide Goals and City Plan Policy codes herein referred to as Exhibit C. The proposal to change the Comprehensive Plan reap designations in the subject area is premature. Attempting to convert existing low and medium desity residential neighborhoods to professional/commercial with- out greater general public interaction and public meetings as well as in depth analysis of the area and plan will not enhance your endeavors. It may result in less than desired results. The City of Tigard/Trammell Crow Plan for a redevelopment district and urban renewal commercial development is a project that may have regional consequences. It is a major undertaking affecting not only the people and the wetlands and the school within tl+e subject area, but also businesses in the general area and adjacent residential comma- ities of Metzger and Garden Name. Tigard: CPA 90-0001 2 Whiting Given the magnitude of this plan, the professional/comnercial development will impact quality of life in the surrounding residential communities and it will impact residential streets to the east of the project and north of the project in Metzger, Garden Home, and all the way to Raleigh Hills. These communities are in Washington County. The influx of 8,000+ commuting automobiles will increase ainto=Emmtssion exhaust in this area's air shed, heavily impact Iiashington County streets and roads, route 1,3usiness commut- ing through residential areas increasing noise, road use, traffic hazard levels, and furthur impacting the quality of life in a well-established and. desireous residential community. Tls.s project has far reaching consequences and yet there have been no public meetings held in the surrounding residential communities to the north or to the east of the proposed development site adjacent to S.W. Locust and S.W. Hall Blvd. Your city plan in 5.1.4 states that the city shall ensure that new commercial and industrial development shall not encroach into residential areas that have not been designated for commercial or industrial uses. Ih=assessing their compliance with city guideline and codes, the development firm does not feel this is an issue as stated in their paper, Exhibit C, page 4, para. 4. PZerely stating in writing that this proposal considered for commercial redevelopment is a"natural and logical expansion" of the commercial activity to the west does not make it so. This site is not surrounded by major traffic thoroughfares. We have S.W. Locust on the north which is a street from Greenburg through Hall Blvd. to residential streets. Fall Blvd. is now heavily impacted and irprovement ::will meet current need not the additional traffic load that is anticipated if this project transpires. The proposal calls for commercialization of the school site and, therefore, relocation of the elementary school to another site. The plan developmental timetable, I understand, puts the school down the list in priority and is preceded by expanding and rebuilding major roads and inner streets, convert- ing the wetland/flood plain to a lake, and building two 15-story office complexes. Supposidly, money to move the school at the onset of the project is not available. There is a major problem here. Dialogue has not been developed. A plan of relocation has not been made available. A new site has not been found and the Metzger Elementary Schoolchildren will be inundated for 2 to 4 years by construction activity, soil movement, drilling work, noise, transport trucks, construction workers and their rigs traversing the area on all sides of the school. That is 2 to 4 years before tax and bond monies can Isck into the system to pay for the school removal and relocation. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 309 through the EPA for environmental impact statements must be addressed. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has the authority to review permits. The Oregon Division of State lands under ORS 541 has jurisdiction in wetlands and Oregon's Statewide Land Use Planning G3oal #5 and Administrative Rule defines specific procedures that local governments must follow regarding wetland areas. x~, Tigard: CPA 90-0001 3 whiting In Fxhibit C there is no reference to complying with LCDC Goals #3 through #8. Goal # 5 addresses conservation and protection of natural areas. Regarding the importance of wetlands, wetlands provide nesting and wintering for varies species and the help maintain ground water supplies and store floodwaters. Goal #6,which is not mentioned at all in Fzhi.bit C of their plans,must be applied. Goal #6 addresses carrying capacity of air, water, and land resources. Goal #7, a statewide planning goal, should also have been identified. It was not. #7 speaks to areas subject to natural disasters and hazards. From the recent information I have been able to acquire, there is no legal commitment by the firm desiring to develop this area prior to a zone change. There are wetland laws, air quality standards, transportation requirements and limitations and land use planning laws to which this proposal is subject.., This very fact beds the question as to how you can consider passing it on to the Council when state, federal and other local jurisdictions are not prevy to what you intend to do, when and how. To push quickly for a plan amendment subjecting all those people in the imm-diate area and residents to the north and east to unccmni.tted concepts is not good governing. If you are considering passing this proposal onto the City Council for a couprehensive plan amendment triggering a governing mechanism to convert existing residential area to commercial for urban renewal development, I request the following changes be considered and adopted prior to placing it in the hands of the Council who are considering adoptinq it for a position on the May 15th ballot to be voted on by city residents. 1. In MdUbit C, page 1, regarding LCDC Goal #1: Citizen involvement in this statewide goal is not limited to city residents only. Metzger to the north and east of the proposed project will be heavily impacted. Public meeting are necessary in CPO 4M and CPO 3 areas, for example. Therefore, Goal #1 has not been met.and should be met.before making decisions of great magnitude affecting the whole Metzger community and Garden Home. Therefore, I urge you not to rush this through to a quick election, but rather take greater care and time to examine what this project should be. 2. Fxhibit C, page 1, LCDC Goal #2: An adequate factual data base has not been substantiated. LCDC Goals #5, #6, and #7 have not been mentioned or researched. At issue is the wetlands and floodplain as a natural resource, auto emission impact on the air shed we all share, and the impact on water and land resources. . Therefore, I urge that you re-evaluate this project response to the Statewide goals and address the goals overlooked. They need to be included. Tigard: CPA 90-0001 4 Whiting 3. Exhibit C. page 1, Goal #9. The response to Goal #9 suhnitted to the City: With- the new infrastructure, it is anticipated that adjacent underutilized properties will be developed, thusly encouraging further development and cause the appropriate transition between zones. What underused properties? What further development? What transition zones between what? And where? I--am not sure what this means. I would like a clarification. If it means that the City and or Trammell Crow or another firm is recommending commercialization into the residential area east of Hall Blvd where I reside, to justify the state goal #91'encouraging additional economic activity in chronic unemployment or narrow, economic base areas,"they are gravely mistaken.in their evaluation. I do not support the concept of converting part of our residential community to a "transition zone" between 15-story building complexes and hones. The development interests under the direction of the city should establish their own transition zones within their redevelopment area west of Hall and south of locust and refer to 5.1.4. Exhibit C: page 2, para. 2: The proposed development as currently presented is not compatible to the existing areas. Plans should be made compatable prior to further governing decisions such as conversion of existing residential areas to commerical areas. 4. Exhibit C: page 2. Goal #12: Transportation. The proposed highway and street changes will not releave pressure on surrounding roadways. 8,000+ comTunter cars and trucks are not all going to use Hwy 217 and I-5. They are going to use Hall, Greenberg, locust and other residential streets north and east. To my knowledge no studies have been made by this proposal on Metzger residential streets to the north or to the east. Impact studies have not been made on Taylors Ferry Road, 80th through Garden Home or Olson Road toward Raleigh Hills. Studies should be made before a comprehensive plan amendment is adopted. 5. The City Plan states that, "The City shall ensure that new commercial and industrial development shall not encroach into residential areas that have not been designated for commercial or industrial uses." 5.1.4. Tigard: CPA 90-0001 5 Whiting Fxhibit C: page 4, para. 4: The developer states that this is not at issue with this particular proposal: Quote: The residential areas that are being most impacted are no longer viable as neighborhoods. and lack those certain amenities such as sidewalks, adequate storm drainage systems, to be considered viable residential areas. If this statement is refeiL~ng to the subject area proposed for commercialization this may be an encrouchment into an existing Tigard residential area. I wonder what the residents who live in the area considered for a zone change think of this evaluation. Amenities are in the eye of the beholder. If this paragraph' quoted refers to established neighborhoods north and east of the project, I request a change in discriptive language. Sidewalks are not a high priority in our residential area. The open ditches are, in fact, facilitating the percolation into the soil of rain and run-off which compliment the marvelous growth and variety of greenery and trees and wildlife habitat in our area. At the county level, we are working on enhanced bicycle paths which will be more in keeping with our urban-country lifestyle a lifestyle my family and I consider an amenity. 6. F-Iiibit C: page 4, refer: 6.3.3: In all phases of the development approval process in a residential "established area," primary consideration of the City shall be to preserve and enhance the character of the adjacent established areas. (Tigard Plan Policy). On page 5 of Exhibit C, the developer has stated that: The issues pertaining to residential interface to the south, east, or west are not viable due to the decay of the existing residential framework. The composer of this assessment has labelled my community as "decayed--not viable due to the decay of the existing residential framework." We are not decayed and we are a viable com unity. Whoever drafted this not only needs a course in communications, they also need to study an area before labeling it. Puny new homes have been built and are being built in Metzger. Many existing established homes have or are remodeling. I just added on over 600 square feet to my home and my taxes are up over 60% this last year. I am proud of this com=ity and I choose to live here. Is"blaghted"and "decayed" necessary criteria for urban renewal district justification? Is this why our residential areas have been identified in development reports a.11blighted" or "decayed?" Tigard: CPA 90-0001 6 Whiting We have our own LID by vote of the residents to support our Metzger Park and Clubhouse. We supported the Washington County aihanced Sheriffs Patrol. We are part of an excellent land use planning program in wtashington County and we have active :POs. The open-space of large-lot hones is considered quality living. Therefore, I request that you eliminate paragraph 3 on page 5. First, to the west is Washington Square. That is commercial not residential. Second, to the south there are some residences, and third, to the east is a very viable, established and growing residential community. Fourth, the reference, "not viable due to the decay" is totally inaccurate. It should he corrected. Upon eliminating paragraph 3, I request that new language be added to the preceding paragraph, paragraph 2 on page 5 to the effect of including design of site features articulating a transition through the use of landscape buffers and a limitation on heights of development and restriction of development within 250 feet of the Hall Blvd right-of-way to the east to protect the adjacent residential community east of Hall Blvd. 7. Exhibit C, page 5, policy 8.1.1 regarding roadway and street systems. I propose a plan change that would eliminate street routing for vehicular traffic from anL4 to the proposed project via Hall Blvd. and no more additional streets exiting off Locust other than current exits from the Lincoln Tower complex. All new exists in the redevelopment district would exit and enter from Hwy 217 or/(zreenburg Road. This change in your plan would reduce the traffic impact on adjacent residential streets and would help satisfy city plan policy 6.3.3 and 5.1.4. 8. -ridiihit C, page 7--Location Criteria. Tould you please clarify the information in (1) b. It states that residential districts are on two sides. Actually, residential is to the North, Fast and part of the South sides. 9. Exhibit C, page 8--(4) Impact Assessment: a.,b.'& c. and anyother city policy reference that would address the following: I recommend for your consideration that any additional Office 'tower complexes over 6 stories such as the Lincoln Tower he located in the center of the redevelopment project--Presidents Parkway--to reduce their impact on the adjacent residential communities to the North and to the Fast. Tigard: CPA 90-0001 7 Whiting 10. I recommend that provisions be developed to inventory and conduct humane live-capture and relocating of wildlife in the wetland/flood plain area prior to re-development construction activity if this project reaches the stage of planned development. 11. I propose that a provision prohibiting the use of any new office tower complex other than the existing Lincoln Tower by helicopters be included in the plan and that helicopter pads not be allowed on such buildings. 12. I recenriend that a provisionvbe adopted prioritizing the relocation of the Metzger Elementary School prior to any new construction or road TAork in the urban renewal district project for the protection of the school children and to.prevent the delay of moving the school for 2 to 4 years as may occur under the current preliminary plan,prieritizing of jobs to be accomplish-d. In conclusion, I personally urge this Commission to seriously consider delaying this application to amend the comprehensive plan of the City of Tigard which is trying to secure a position on the Play Primary ballot. The people who will be voting on the question of approving an amendment to the city comprehensive Plan--changing the Plan Map designations in the residential area between Greenburg and Hall Blvd and Hwy 217 and S.W. Locust from Medium and Low Density Residential to Professional/ Commercial for the purpose of an "Urban Renewal Development"--have to know what the impact is first before approving such a major project. All the facts and data are yet to be xenpilated. Greater public involvement is required. And, an environmental impact statement must be made. To make an intelligent decision on a ballot issue, the voting public has a right to know the impact of the proposal. Thank you for your consideration. Cordially, PATRICIA WHITING 'mote: I respecftully request that my name be added to your list of speakers for the 2/20 hearing. o " Mr. Jerry Offer FEB 20 Planning Dept. City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Offer: I do not reside within the city limits of Tigard, but I am within the Tigard School District and very close to the "President's Parkway" development currently being proposed by Trammell Crow Co. Unlike many in my neighborhood of Metzger, I am not generally opposed to development in this area, as long as the rights of adjacent and nearby property owners and residents are taken into consideration. Several things about this proposal are bothersome to me, how- ever. I guess my greatest objection is to the estimated 8000 cars coming into this area on a daily basis. The traffic prob- lems are-already intractable. The Westside Bypass is by no means a certainty. Schol.ls Ferry Rd. is a disaster and 3000 new residences will be coming on line in the Murrayhill area over the next 2-3 years. Sunset Hwy. is at and over capaci- ty during rush hour. Hwy. 217, even with extra lanes all the way from Sunset to I-5 won't be able to handle the extra load. This says nothing about all the other residential streets in the area that will be used by DeoDle trying to avoid all the other con ested streets, not to mention the incredible amounts of exhaust fumes generated by all those cars. I could support the proposal if, instead of spending money to improve Hwy. 217, they.would build a light rail line to service the development. It could possibly be the Portland to Tigard line. Incidentally, the remains of an old railroad grade run through the center of the proposed development. I suspect they may have, at one time, come all the way from downtown Portland, since they generally go towards Garden Home. Some older people in the area would know that, and someone would certainly know how much, if any, of it is still unused. It may be worthy of consideration. Sincere ours Marten 4 K~rig 9403 S.W. 80 9.7223 r R" i Planning Department February 10,1990 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or 97223 I am a resident of Tigard and directly affected by the proposal to change the Comprehensive plan map designating my residential area to be a Professional Commercial area. Reference CPA 90-0001 (Presidents Parkway Plan Amendment). I REQUEST TO BE HEARD IN OPPOSITION TO THIS AMENDMENT AT THE PUBLIC MEETING OF THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISION FEBRUARY 20, 1990 or any other date set for this public hearing. Please notify me of any change as to the date of this meeting. Respectfully Clifford F. Epler 8845 SW Spruce St Tigard, Or. 97223 FEB 14 1990 Planning Department February 10,1990 Alp* City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or 97223 Prior to purchasing my home I went into the Tigard planning and asked what was the long range plan for this wetland area. I was shown a very detailed Metzger-Progress comunity plan. I purchased one by ordering it from Washington County. The city of Tigard now feels this "area of interest" is feasible for "active planning" I do not agree with this and remind the City that: On May 18, 1987 an application for a sensitive lands permit and variance was granted (ref:No. SL 1-86, V 87-02) pertaining to conclusions and policy from that hearing. Policy 3.2.4, 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 and Section 18.84.010(c) of the Code call for the protection of significant wetlands and wildlife habitat. The Metzger-Progress Comunity Plan, developed by Washington County, designated the western portion of the property as a potentially significant wildlife habitat. When the property was annexed into the city, a significant wetlands designation was applied to the same area. The hearings officer concluded that all the wildlife mitigation work which is proposed in this area should be done in Phase I of the development, including that there should be no grazing for five years or more. As a resident I can state that although the ponds have been built, that after heavy rains such as that of January 26th and January 27th 1990 the berm holding the water in the Northeastern pond was breached allowing'a spillway into the Ask Creek and causing erosion of this berm and pond. Also Cattle are grazing around the pond and walking along its crest, packing it down in direct violation of hearing policy. I suggest that the City look into these damages, and to also ask why there has been no planting and fencing in conjunction with Phase I. ( Recomendation 6.) Tigard has taken responsibility for this area of wetland by expanding the "active planning area" to include this area of interest" the City should also be interested in how s the area is presently being maintained thru compliance to this areas existing use. Thank you for your attention into this matter. 6VAz?~ Clifford Epler 8845 SW Spruce St Tigard, Or. 97223 FW670R6 FEB 14 1990 Planning Department February 10,1990 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or 97223 I am a resident of Tigard and directly affected by the proposal to change the Comprehensive plan map designating my residential area to be a Professional Commercial area. Reference CPA 90-0001 (Presidents Parkway Plan Amendment). I REQUEST TO BE HEARD IN OPPOSITION TO THIS AMENDMENT AT THE PUBLIC MEETING OF THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISION FEBRUARY 20, 1990 or any other date set for this public hearing. Please notify me of any change as to the date of this meeting. C Respectfully . Chic. ~ :fJ-~~Z ! ~ i Kaye V. Epler 8845 SW Spruce St Tigard, Or. 97223 FEB 14 1990 THE COE MANUFAC;TURZNG COMP'AWY LUMBER • PLYWOOD • COMPOSITION BOARD GYPSUM WALLBOARD MACHINERY 1939 SW HuNmF.R.P.O, pox vmw PORTLAND, ORECON. U.S.A. 97122 5031639.9121 January 30, 1990 City Council Members City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Members: As a citizen with a business interest in the City of Tigard, I fully support the President's Parkway Urban Renewal District. The City should support; the plan because of the improvements that will be made to Highway 217, including widening the highway and adding loops to Greenburg Road. This should dramatically reduce traffic congestion along the highway. ' Recognizing the importance of Highway 217 to the City's economic vitality, the City should be making every effort possible to focus attention on encouraging its expansion. The City should be actively supporting alternatives besides taxes for paying for necessary public improvements. President's'Parkway "creates" a viable self-funding addition to Tigard's tax base. This will benefit adjacent business as well as lessen the future tax burden on all the citizens and businesses in Tigard. E Thank you, Fre W. Fields President FWF(ad t f TH.i~ CoE N A>; ur-AC'i`uniNG CUMPANw esrAe USUID a.• LUMBER • PLYWOOD • COMPOSITION BOAeb i G: -PSII[tI WALLIJOARD MACHINERY i PAINESVILLE, OHIO U.S.A. 44077 215/352.0791 t FACSLV=- NO. 216-352-1487 R TO: MR. WILLIAM SWINDELLS sU87k]M LETTER TO CITY OF TIGARD t7Ct4PANY: FACSIMILE NO.: 503/293-9409 s, CITY, COUNTRY: PORTLAND, OR FRROM: FRED W. FIELDS 4'. DA!M JANUARY 30, 1990 kvisim. PAINESVILLE, OHIO ' r, In accordance with your request, attached you will find Alp r-9 the letter addressed to the City of Tigard, and I hope s' this will serve the purpose. Presumably, you could use F this facsimile to make a Xerox copy and explain to thdm. f that this was sent to you from my office in Ohio. Please is let me know if this is unsatisfactory. c (4(. i' Fred' F Fwr•/gd i k G% are transmitting 1 page (9s~ along with this meino. iA there is a problem with thin transmittal, please -c-a--Y-1- a l-(216) 352-9381 and ask for .Vi✓ L%-ctension O 9- 4 -Planning February 1990 Submitted to Tigard Planning Commission on 2/20/90 by Terry Moore, 8440 SW GO&w1n Ct., CPO # 3 representative. Article is from the APA Journal. The Giveaway .00 Game Continues ~j , When jobs are at stake, state and local governments still dole / out the goodies with abandon. By Robert Guskind llinois officialdom breathed a collective I sigh of relief last June when word came 1 that Sears, Roebuck and Company had cho- / i sen the Chicago suburb of Hoffman Estates l t as the new location of its 6,000-worker mer- chandise group. Sears had announced earlier in the year that it would leave its \ e landmark building, the Sears Tower, in \ downtown Chicago. ` Although keeping Sears cost the state i~ some $178 million and didn't create a single 0 new job, Gov. James R. Thompson hailed the decision as "a great victory" for his state. • ` . s To keep Sears, Illinois beat out offers r - from dozens of cities and states, including 400 acres and a permanent lid on property taxes from Dallas and 300 acres for $1 in \ Charlotte. Illinois countered with a 361.1 ` million package: $20 million in highway 1 I improvements, $33 million for on-site _ 1 t 1 infrastructure improvements, 36 million in state tax breaks from a newly created enter- prise zone, 31.1 million in job training . funds, and a $1 million interest-free loan to I• allow Sears to build a child care center. Hoffman Estates threw in the 786-acre site, worth $86 million. Sears will occupy only part of the site but is free to develop the rest. 11~ \ And that's not all. To buy Chicago's ac- 1\\\ ~ quiescence to the Hoffman Estates pack- , age, Thompson reportedly committed himself to backing a number of projects in i►~ the city-including an annex to the McCor- mick Place convention center, a subsidy for 1 renovating Navy Pier, and infrastructure improvements for one of the sites the city to Z=;;o had tried unsuccessfully to sell Sears.5 Drawings by Patti Green 5 Big as the Sears deal was, it wasn't the Illinois champion. To win a Chrysler- Mitsubishi Motors plant in 1985, Illinois put together a package worth S 183 million, ` and during the circus-like competition for the General Motors Saturn plant that tions, and job training subsidies routinely ( ultimately went to Tennessee in 1985, Il- run into tens of millions of dollars. linois offered a $200 million package. All told, for instance, New York has l~~ O\ Such packages are now commonplace. shelled out more than $600 million since \ \ According to a recent survey by the Federal 1983 to keep just six firms from moving out: Reserve Bank of Chicago, 38 states offered Chase Manhattan Bank ($235 million), Na- construction loans in the 1980s, and nearly tional Broadcasting Company (S98 mil- \ 1 40 offered some kind of tax break, up from lion), Shearson Lehman Hutton ($74 23 in 1970. million), Drexel Burnham Lambert ($85 ~ti \ A "war of all against all" is how North million), Citicorp ($97 million), and the 'I western University management professor Dreyfus Corporation ($4 million a year). wry \ Donald Haider describes the current com- Austin, Texas, forked over S 1.3 million petition for economic development. worth of tax abatements to get Conquest 1 . Haider, who is writing a book tentatively Airlines, a small regional carrier, to move i ) titled Place Wars, estimates that state and its headquarters from Beaumont. The air- ( local business incentives now exceed $30 line will relocate 78 employees to Austin ? billion a year. and add another 25 workers. It promises to I "It's corporate blackmail;' says Ted stick around for 14 years. Anders, who was mayor of the Detroit sub- Louisville went after the headquarters of I ' urb of Flat Rock, Michigan (pop. 7,000), the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. with a $30 when it began courting a Mazda Motor Cor- million (mostly private funds) package. The "rte poration auto plant in 1984. Upping the city's next target is the Methodist Church, 11 stakes, the state simply announced that Flat currently headquartered in New York City. l Rock was obliged to offer a 15-year, S40 mil- Louisville mayor Jerry Abramson says the t lion property tax break to the Japanese auto city is following a "planned strategy" in 3 maker as part of a S 120 million incentive deciding which businesses, developments, package. - and organizations will be wooed and how As it turned out, Mazda did choose Flat big the subsidies will be. "We're not doing Rock, but the plant imported most of its anything by chance;' Abramson says. workers from elsewhere in Michigan. At some point, though, even the most Angered by the lack of jobs-and by eager go-getters call it quits. Fort Wayne, In- skyrocketing property tax bills-local resi- diana, invested $15 million to lure a Bur- dents voted Anders out of office in 1985. lington Air Express hub in 1985. But then, "Corporations are playing cities like a last February, when the time came to sign piano" says Louis Masotti, a Northwestern a permanent lease, Burlington asked for University business professor. "Everybody more money. Fort Wayne said no. So Bur- is using the same basket of tools. The real lington looked elsewhere, finally coming I winner is the company that gets the incen- up with a generous offer from Toledo, Ohio. t tives.They're getting something they don't Toledo's subsidy amounted to some _ need to do something they would have $125,000 per job. "We're players in develop- done anyway" ment but we're not suckers;' says Fort ® Economic development specialists have Wayne Mayor Richard Helmke of the deci- / railed against business incentives for many sion not to match the offer. / years. Public officials say they dont like New York City got even-at least a them. As more and more cities have little-when Merrill Lynch announced last stepped up to the deal-making table, local June that it would move 2,500 back-office f antitax groups and community coalitions workers to Jersey City (lured by $13 million have joined forces to oppose them. Still, a in low-cost financing, property tax few decades after the first "smokestack abatements, and utility discounts). Former P chasing" war erupted between state govern- New York Mayor Edward Koch countered ~l ments, juicy incentives are as popular as by yanking Merrill Lynch as senior under- ever-except in the very few communities writer of the city's municipal bonds, an ac- whose economic health allows them to say tion that will cost the company $4 million 1 no. a year. 1 l Increasingly, economic development The deals pros are questioning the Faustian bargains Around the U.S., inducement packages in- that lure corporations and that com- eluding low-interest and interest-free loans, munities are making with the big corpora- tax abatements, outright grants, land dona- tions, trading outright government 6 Planning February 1990 questing a tax abatement is what we now everyone in the city-except for the normally do in our manufacturing plants developers and tenants of tax-abated ( around the country." Then he added, "That's projects-got huge increases in their prop- not to say we wouldn't go ahead with [the erty tax bills. Taxes on a $250,000 apart- Wayne] project if we did not get the abate- ment in the heavily tax-abated, waterfront investments and loans for the promise of ment. It's very likely we'd do it anyway" Newport project were fixed at $3,300, . jobs and future growth. "The tendency to while the owners of a $250,000 home pile incentive on top of incentive is not in When tax elsewhere in the city got a bill for $7,500. the public sector's interest;' says Rick abatements aren't The tax-abated projects represent "gross Cohen, until last July director of develop- enough, cities must municipal mismanagement;' says Mia f ment for Jersey City and a veteran of some come u with more Scanga, a member of the Jersey City Coali- of the most heated skirmishes of the New p tion for Fair Taxation. York-New Jersey border wars. (Cohen has tangible incentives. Detroit will lose about $100 million in also defended the generous abatements That means heavy revenue from tax abatements it gave out in given in Jersey City, noting that they gave borrowing and the the 1980s-the bulk of it to automakers. F the city leverage to demand linkage hope that tax "We have taken hundreds of millions of payments for housing, priority in hiring revenues will cover dollars that could have gone for services to local residents, and adherence to water- the neighborhoods and devoted them to the r front design guidelines.) loan payments. care and feeding of large corporations that s The big danger is that the deals will go haven't delivered;" says city council sour, and taxpayers will be stuck with the "Once it starts, everybody has to up the member Mel Ravitz. Only a third of the jobs bill. Says Richard T. Anderson, the presi- stakes;" says Robert Friedman, director of promised by such corporations as General : dent of the Regional Plan Association in the Washington-based Corporation for Motors and Chrysler in return for tax New York City: "Some communities have so Enterprise Development. A case in point is breaks, loans, and other subsidies have ac- heavily subsidized economic activity that Cleveland, where, late last year, the city tually materialized. they will never be able to recover the sub- council finally approved a $122 million tax Indianapolis Mayor William H. Hudnut sidy" break for the 60-story Ameritrust Center III calls his city's tax-break policy-part of project, which will include a much-desired what is widely regarded as one of the na- Time-honored practice Hyatt Regency Hotel. The developer of the tiods most aggressive development and Local governments in the U.S. have always project had earlier gotten a similar tax business recruitment programs-'creative given financial incentives to business. In break on another office-hotel project. leveraging" While the Lilly Endowment the 1870s, for instance, the zigzagging route This time, when the concession seemed (assets $1.9 billion) has underwritten much of the New York and Oswego Railroad was slow in coming, city officials received an of the municipal benevolence with some determined by 50 cities that put up a total ominous letter from Nicholas J. Pritzker, $30 million a year in grants, the standard of $5.7 million. Unfortunately, the line the president of Hyatt. If the tax breaks tax concessions have been costly. More went belly-up shortly after completion, weren't enacted by year's end, he wrote, than $1 billion worth of new offices, shops, leaving the cities holding the bag. The orgy Hyatt would pull out of the project. And and hotels have been built downtown since ' of public subsidies came to a halt-at least without the hotel, said Ameritrust ex- 1980. Yet potential tax revenues on the ven- temporarily-when hundreds of cities ecutives, the whole project was dead- tures have been deeply slashed because of began defaulting on their obligations. which meant that Ameritrust might leave the $155 million worth of tax abatements In this century, incentives were less an Cleveland. granted between 1984 and 1987. issue when federal money was more "Everywhere you turn there's growth;' readily available. But as the funds dried up The real cost says Carl E. Moldthan, head of the In- in the 1980s cities and states were back Former Cleveland Mayor George dianapolis'Iaxpayers Association. "But on playing "Let's Make a Deal" Today, says Voinovich-who in the late 1970s clamped paper there's nothing" Rutgers University urban affairs professor down on Cleveland's notoriously lucrative George Sternlieb, "it's every community for tax breaks-defended the huge Ameritrust Gambling itself; the mayor has gone from the guy who abatement as a loss leader. "Later on;' he When tax abatements aren't enough,.cities delivers services to the merchant-in-chief" said, "hotels will be coming in here without must, of course, come up with the cash for Mayors and economic development of- needing abatements" Voinovich noted that more tangible incentives. That means ficials say that despite countless studies even with the tax breaks the project will net heavy-duty borrowing and the hope that showing that financial "incentives" the city $4.2 million annually. The tax revenue or rents will eventually return generally don't determine private invest- downside: The hard-up Cleveland school enough money to cover loan payments. ment decisions, any town or city that system will lose an estimated $48 million in Sometimes that doesritwork. Fort Wayne stonewalls the bidders does so as its peril. revenue over the life of the tax break. was chastened after it loaned a computer Holding out inducements is 'a standard part The public costs of business and develop- firm $ 1.1 million, and the company went of the offering;' says Robert Peche, vice- ment incentives can, in fact, be staggering. belly-up before it ever got to town. To get a president of the San Antonio Economic De- By conservative estimate, New York City's private race track built near Des Moines, ( velopment Foundation. various incentive programs have cost at Polk County, Iowa, guaranteed $42 million \ The firms themselves are not shy about least $2 billion in public revenue in the last in industrial development bonds. The track asking. When the Ford Motor Company ap- 10 years. Across the Hudson in Jersey City, has lost $6.5 million so far. The debt pay- plied for a tax abatement in 1989 to upgrade the valuation of real property skyrocketed ment over the 28 years of the bonds is $100 its Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, a com- to $5.6 billion in last year's reevaluation- million, $10 million more than the county's pany representative admitted that "re- up from $800 million in 1972. Nearly annual budget. s• t 7 25-year period, and then borrows against the future revenue projection. When the tax money starts rolling in, it's used to pay off the bonds. Not a penny goes into the city treasury until the bonds are paid off. Invented in California in the 1950s, tax increment financing now figures in vir- tually all big city development projects. A 100 • j ~~r...~; few cities are even experimenting with "STIF" which dedicates the sales tax reve- l j ~1• i^~ nue a project generates to underwriting the borrowing costs. In Detroit, for example, tax increment fi- nancing was used to underwrite the initial costs of demolishing part of the Poletown 1 1 neighborhood for a General Motors plant, with the cleared land donated to GM-at a costof over $300millionand anadditional I $10 million a year in interest on the loans I, 1 1~ _ ( the city took out to finance the deal. Tax increment financing also figured in C I _ ► 11 the deal Illinois used to sell Sears on its new suburban Chicago location. The catch in t ` I i ~r I ) this case is that Hoffman Estates was not V I fJ 1 I t "blighted;' as an area is supposed to be in order to satisfy state and federal TIF regula- tions. To get around that hurdle, the state created a new TIF category-"economic de- velopment zones"-for areas like Hoffman Estates. 1 Indianapolis has created a huge, 192- _ j - r• ` \ I ` block TIF district to help finance construc- tion of the Circle Center Mall, a three-and- 1 a-half-block downtown shopping, office, and entertainment complex. The city bor- rowed $200 million to underwrite con- '`i _ struction of the $640 million project and will use the TIF funds to pay off the debt. ✓ Because the project is also heavily tax abated, it can't count on the normal source _ of debt service, property tax revenue. Just say no A handful of cities-particularly those fac- J `,I.li,l . l ►~y. ~l i ing growth pressurehave learned to say no to the pressure. In 1988, after a high- profile search of the mountain and plains states that featured incentive packages ap- A handful of cities - particularly those proaching $100 million, U.S. West finally settled on Boulder, Colorado, as the loca- facing growth pressures - have learned to tion of its research division. This time, the say no to the incentives game. Among city wasn't offering any incentives. In fact, them are Boulder and Philadelphia. it asked the company to think about a loca- tion other than the one it originally settled on, because that site was to be kept as open Some towns have become equity part- out failed festival marketplaces that they space under Boulder's growth-management ners in projects. If the project makes bankrolled in full. plan. U.S. West finally settled on the money, they get a cut of the profits. If the One of today's most popular borrowing University of Colorado research park. U.S. -tnture is a turkey, they foot part of the bill. tools is tax increment financing, which lets West "gave a shot in the arm to sensitive in particularly risky projects, some cities cities circumvent the federal restrictions on land-use planning;' says John Fernandez, have taken on 100 percent of the financing using tax-free financing for private busi- assistant planning director in Boulder. "It and assumed the full risk of development. ness ventures. To use TIF, a city sets up a re- was an endorsement of our approach." Now such cities as Richmond, Toledo, and development district, estimates the tax Philadelphia, which has abated some Flint, Michigan, are responsible for bailing revenue a project will generate over a 20- or $500 million in downtown taxes in recent 8 Planning February 1990 towers, part of a long-stagnant redevelop- ment plan. New York also gave the go- ahead-and a $47.3 million tax abate- ment-recently to a controversial project at Columbus Circle that was first denied be- cause of its size. But the break is $300,000 ( less than originally requested, and even though he opposed the original deal, \Dinkins voted in favor of the revised arrangement. N~ I Several jurisdictions have sought truces to the bidding wars-or as former Michi- ^15 gan Republican Governor William G. / / . - y. • • > Milliken put it in the 1970s, a SALT pact" for states and cities. But so far such pro- I posals have fallen flat. Last year Michigan held a "Midwestern summit" meeting in an 1 t f ! ,I t effort to get its neighbors to stop handing l i ,r/ f out tax breaks. One of the states balked- , 1\ _ r tI reportedly Illinois-and the idea was j • r dropped. In the interim, more and more jurisdic- tionsare routinely demanding their own quid pro quos from businesses and developers before handing out public sub- sidies. For example, New York's $235 mil- l 1 lion Chase Manhattan agreement included t / ~.-s r a proviso: Should the bank decide to leave \ - ) town before the 22-year deal expires, it will be liable to reimburse the city retroactively )with interest) for all the benefits it got. In Michigan a huge court battle has been to t launched by local governments trying to f `.o ' • stop General Motors from getting $100 mil- 1 lion in property tax refunds on existing auto k ° _ _ _ plants. Some of the towns say they'll be driven into bankruptcy if GM wins the tax i 1 ~V.. , ,r` . s breaks. °~1 J • . A few companies that reneged on their ; deals have even been dragged into court. e ° o Chicago got tough with Playskool, Inc., a _ to manufacturer which received a $1 mil- l ( lion city loan in 1980. In 1984, the company announced it was shutting down, and the city sued. It won an out-of-court settlement t - v . ✓ requiring Playskool to stay open an extra 10 months and set up a job placement program and a $50,000 fund for laid-off workers. Cities are routinely demanding quid pro Significantly, Playskool made no pro- quos before handing out public subsidies mises that it would stay in business-or in 'r like tax breaks and free land. town when it got its loan. In fact, many of the jurisdictions mentioned here seem to be operating on faith that the companies they are being so generous to will act in kind. Il- years, has let it be known that it's short on packages if Mayor David Dinkins follows linois, for example, didn't require Sears to cash and isIlt going to be playing the incen- through on campaign promises and re- commit itself to a long tenure in the state, tives game anymore. Says city finance stricts the city's economic development let alone in Hoffman Estates. Nor did it re- director Elizabeth Reveal: "We're making a programs to truly needy parts of town. In quire that Sears keep a certain number of s,. !~~d conscious policy decision right now to get the past, tax breaks flowed freely to such jobs in return for the subsidy. Said Gov. out of the business of incentives. Com- upper-crust Manhattan projects as AT&T, Thompson in announcing the deal: "I am panies should not look to us for large incen- which got a $42 million abatement for its sure Sears will do the right thing:' tives. It is simply not affordable." Madison Avenue tower in 1978. The city is The new year might even see New York still considering abatements upwards of $1 Robert Guskind is a contributing editor of City contain its generous financial ls::lion for several Times Square office Planning.;, I~ubhG -44i ~mo~ Y 31 V40 Department of Land Conservation and Development NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT 1175 COURT STREET NE, SALEM, OREGON 97310-0590 PHONE (503) 373-0050 GOVERNOR February 23, 1990 Jerry Offer, Development Review Planner City of Tigard Planning Department PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Offer: We have received the City of Tigard's proposed amendment CPA 90- 01 (DLCD File No. 001-90). The proposal, as submitted to the Department, would change the plan designation for 97 acres from LDR to Commercial Professional (90 acres) and MDR to Commercial Professional (7 acres). Conversations with you indicate that the true acreage involved is 78 acres. This letter is to inform the city that the Department of Land Conservation and Development has concerns with the proposal. DLCD CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. This amendment dramatically changes the potential use of the area, from a maximum 475 dwelling units to 2.5 million square feet of professional office and commercial space. Such an increase in development potential may be a very positive addition to the city and metropolitan area. However, as the city documents indicate, more needs to be known about the full impact and service demands of such intensive development. The requirements for transportation and some other public facilities and services likely will exceed current capacities and projected improvements. The materials submitted to us neither fully document these changed requirements nor definitively assure that future steps in the decision making process will be conditioned upon identification of facility and service requirements and adequate mechanisms to fund these improvements. These planning steps should include assessment of traffic likely to infiltrate surrounding neighborhoods and adoption of measures designed to limit such impacts to reasonable levels. If the proposed plan amendment is approved, the city will have plan and zoning conflicts in which the zoning does not adequately implement the plan. This condition is acceptable, i if the plan policies governing this renewal area require that future zone changes implementing the plan designation are FEB 261990 City of Tigard 001-90 Page 2 conditioned on the ability to provide all the necessary facilities and services. However, the proposed amendments at 11.8 Neighborhood Planning Organization #8, does not clearly provide for such a condition. For example, the lead paragraph states that "The development concept would require... that the city establish an urban renewal plan to help fund needed public improvements and other projects." Proposed Policy 11.8.3 says that the city may require "more detailed assessment" of matters outlined in Policy 11.8.5, which includes transportation, public facilities and utilities and financing of same. This discretion is appropriate, but it lacks the force of a policy requiring ability to fund needed improvements as a condition of the zone change. The proposed policy should be amended to make it clear that the zone changes cannot occur unless the urban renewal plan, or perhaps other measures, are in place to fund the improvements. The city should also recognize that more thorough analysis of transportation and public facilities and services, and the ability to fund them, may eventually lead to the need to reestablish less intensive plan designations in this area. 2. Based upon the staff report and discussion with Tigard staff, it is unclear whether the loss of housing units affects compliance with the Metro Housing Rule and Goal 10, Housing. The question here is tied to assumptions made by Washington County regarding this property at the time it was planned by the county and submitted to LCDC for acknowledgment. This analysis should be completed and responded to prior to adoption of the amendment. Please include this letter in the city council proceedings regarding case file number CPA 90-01. Sincerely, S san Brody Director SB/JS/tl <pa> cc: Jim Sitzman, Field Representative Tony Lawrence, Review Coordinator DLCD PA Files (Ptld, Libr) r: TPs4;ny) on CPO 4-Metzger c/o Patricia IvIdting, Chair 8122 S.W. Spruce Metzger, Oregon 97223 February 19, 1990 City of Tigard Planning Department 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Staff report to the Planning Coundssion Plan Policy 12.2.1 Spacing & Location Section: Plan Policy 12.2.1 - Location Criteria a. Spacing & Location: paragraph 2. Quote: The eastern boundary of the subject area is adjacent to a mix of Medium Density Residential areas, Ccxmnerical Professional and Commercial General area. The southeast corner of the area is adjacent to a medium density residential area. f . r The Steering Committee of CPO 4 Metzger herein proposes an amendment to the above paragraph to reflect the Comprehensive Plan of Washington County C for trn unincorporated area east of the proposed subject area under consideration for a Comprehensive Zone AmendmentAJrban Renewal Development '",roject. 4 { Washington County's Comunity Plan for CPO 4 Metzger contains Commmity Design Flements identifying particular areas. Within our planning area the residential area north of S.W. Locust to Hall Blvd. is known as the "Metzger School Subarea." The subarea east of Hall Bvd. is knam as "East Metzger." The south east corner is the Phaffle Subarea. (naw within the City of Tigard). First, the commerical uses cited in the above quoted paragraph refer to Professional Commerical and Commercial General. In our Metzger-Progress C.onmunity Plan the commerical uses along the west and east side of 2 City of Tigard CPO 4M Planning Dept. Hall Blvd. are: "Office Commerical" and "Neighborhood Camrn_rcial" Second, paragraph 4 on page 9 of P.P. 12.2.1 identifies the area north of the subject area as "Metzger area of Unincorporated Washington County," with a density of "Laver Density Residential areas." However, the very next paragraph (page 9, para. 5) does not identify the existing zoning designation or the fact that it is identified as "Fast Metzger" in unincorporated Washington County. In that there is a mix of office and neighborhood commerical along Hall Blvd. as well as Residential 9 and Residential 15 units per acre--mixed residential--to part of the next parallel street which is S.W. 85th with single-family low density due east to the City of Portland boundary, the Staff Report reference to this area should reflect these designations. The proper density designations for Fast Metzger is identified in our Commmity Plan under Com=ity Design, Fast Metzger : "Most of the subarea is designed low density residential, R-5." If you have a copy of the Ccmmmity Plan, you will see subarea Fast Metzger is all ijuw Density (in light yellow) except along Hall Blvd, the Metzger Park, and medium density next to our cmutunity grocery story on S.W. 80th. 3 City of Tigard CPO 4tj Air, Planning Department We suggest language in Plan Policy 1.2.2.1, a. paragraph 2, be changed to reflect the Ccn mity Plan designations: We are offering the following language: The eastern boundary of the subject area is adajacent to to unincorporated Washington County area known as "east Metzger." There is a mix of office Ccamierical and Neighborhood Ccnvierical along Hall Blvd. There is a mix of Residential 9 and Residential 15 (medium density) along part of Hall Blvd and immidately behind sane commercial zoning. However, East Metzger is predominantly a single-family low density residential area. Thank you for your consideration. We appreciate the cork you have put into this most recent revised Staff Report updating language from a previous draft report. Cordially, v~ PATRICIA WfiITING, Chair r i de o" d MEMO 3/i 1~ro TO: Mayor Edwards and members of the City Counci FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Developme RE: President's Parkway Urban Renewal Plan and port, and Comprehensive Plan change DATE: March 2, 1990 In final preparation for the hearing next Monday evening on President's Parkway Development plan and related matters, I am sending you the following for your consideration: 1. A memo containing "errata" items for the Urban Renewal Plan and Report. 2. A second memo containing "errata" items for the comprehensive plan text and map change proposal. Both of the above were prompted by suggestions made at citizen meetings or at the planning commission hearing, or by state agencies. 3. A letter to Gary Ott from me date March 2, 1990 in response to his request for information. 4. A letter from the Department of Land Conservation and Development dated February 23, 1990. (Jim Sitzman has received copies of the proposed revisions, which respond to the concerns he has raised). 5. A letter from Ina Walker, dated February 22, 1990. 6. Two letters from Nancy Lou Tracy, one dated February 9, 1990. She references items related to Dr. Davis's sensitive lands permit. I did not forward this material to the Council, as most of it was copies of Beth Mason's decision and testimony given related to that decision. I will bring the material Mrs. Tracy submitted to the Council workshop, in case any of the Council members wish to see it. A second letter dated February 20, 1990. 7. A letter from KeyserMarston Associates, Inc. dated March 2, 1990 regarding the analysis that they have undertaken relating to the degree of public incentive funds that may ultimately be required to make the whole project work financially. 8. Some materials submitted by David Blake of Trammel-Crow indicating the current market conditions for the type of development envisioned by his company. i t r 9. A letter from Patricia Whiting, Chair CPO 4-Metzger, date February 19, 1990. 10. A letter from Doris Hitch, 10387 SW 87th Avenue. 11. A letter from Alice Juve, dated February 19, 1990. The schedule for review is as follows: March 5th, 5:30 p.m. Workshop March 5th, 7:30 p.m. Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan map and text amendment; public hearing on the Urban Renewal Plan and Report. It is anticipated that the Council would adopt the two ordinances and the Resolution as amended by the errata sheets, and subject to the adoption of written findings. It is also anticipated that the public hearing would be closed. March 12th, 7:30 p.m. Council meeting. The council would adopt findings relating to both the Comprehensive Plan change, as well as the Urban Renewal Plan. After adopting the findings, the ordinances would be signed. In addition, the Council would adopt a resolution placing the urban renewal measure on the May ballot. The City Council will receive the necessary materials for the March 12th meeting on March 8th or 9th. NOTE: The one missing piece of information that the Council can expect (hopefully by Monday evening) is an outline of the type of development agreement that will eventually be entered into between Trammel-Crow and the Development Agency. Tim Ramis and Ollie Norville are currently drafting that outline. Nothing has been received from Trammel-Crow on the subject as of this date. Please do not hesitate to call me (639-5361) or Pat over the week-end or Monday at work if you have any questions or comments. prespark.ml0 Memo to City Council Re: Urban Renewal March 2, 1990 Page 5 Additions to true cash values in the renewal project area will be available for the Metzger Park Assessment, and will be utilized in calculating the annual percentage schedule. In the period 1991-2001, it is estimated that the renewal project alone will add almost $400 million in new values to the Metzger Park Assessment District. This is more than the current total of true cash value in the entire district. The values added by the renewal project should act to stabilize, or reduce the current percent schedule. URBAN RENEWAL PLAN: CHANGES The following items refer to Section 601: Development Plan Projects and Improvement Activities (29) Pages 16 thru 18, add the following as a last sentence to each project description noted below: A. Northbound Highway 217 Off-ramp D. Internal streets for Phases I, II and III E. Highway 217 and Greenburg Road Intersection, Phases I and II F. Greenburg Road Improvements G. Highway 217 Improvements H. Internal Streets for Phases IV and V I. Highway 217 and Greenburg Road Intersection, Phase III J. Hall Boulevard and Locust Street Improvements Add as a last sentence: "Public transit improvements will also be considered as needed." (30) Add the following new project on page 19: "M. Light Rail Transit and Other Transit Improvements Planning and development of light rail transit and/or other transit improvements will be undertaken as needed to serve the Development Area." MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Edwards and Members of the City Council FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Development DATE: March 1, 1990 RE: President's Parkway Development Plan Below is an errata sheet for the urban renewal report and plan. URBAN RENEWAL REPORT: CHANGES (1) Page 29, Section 501, last paragraph. Add second sentence which reads: "The agency is relying upon estimates provided by Trammell Crow in developing the preliminary estimated costs shown here." (2) Page 29, Section 501. Amend last sentence to read: "This process, in many cases, will lead to minor changes in design and consequent changes in the cost estimates shown.: (3) Page 30. Remove "clarifications" numbered 1 through 4 at the bottom of the page. Replace with paragraph that reads: "Estimates of project costs have been provided by Trammell Crow and consultants. These estimates have not been verified by the Agency. Preliminary engineering costs will be prepared by the Agency prior to building the project. These estimates do not reflect any commit- ment of funds by the Agency." (4) Page 31, Item No. 2. Add the word "wetland" between the words "primary" and "flood." (5) At the end of the first line in item 2 on page 31, add a comma, then the phrase "potential wetland mitigation matters" after the word "habitat." The following items refer to Section 400 found at pages 21 through 29, Consistency with City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Changes include: (6) Page 21, beneath the section on citizen involvement (2.1.1), add a section labeled "Compliance": "Prior to the adoption of the Plan, the city held meetings before the planning commission, neighborhood groups, CPOs and business organizations." e Memo to City Council Re: Urban Renewal i March 2, 1990 Page 2 (7) Page 21, 100-Year Floodplain (3.2.1). Change the word "Explanation" to "Compliance:". Add a last sentence to that section as follows: "Any and all development within the floodway is subject to state and federal wetland permitting processes. (8) Page 22, Protection of Wildlife Habitat (3.4.2). Change the word "Explanation:" to "Compliance:" and, after the first sentence, add a comma and the following phrase, "as part of the city's development review process." (9) Page 23, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (3.6.2). Change the word "Explanation:" to "Compliance:" and, after the first sentence, add the following sentence: "The use of a master planning concept will likely provide more and larger open space than would be possible if the properties were developed on a lot-by-lot basis, or not developed at all." (10) Page 23, Noise Pollution (4.3.1). Change the word "Explanation:" to "Compliance:" and change the explanation as follows: "Master planning of the entire development area will permit greater opportunities to mitigate potential noise conflicts than if the property were developed in piece- meal fashion. The development is subject to state and city noise regulations." (11) Page 23, Economy (5.1.1). Change the word "Explanation:" to "Compliance:". (12) Page 24, Section 6.3.3. Change the word "Explanation:" to the word "Compliance:". (13) Page 25, Buffering (6.6.1). Change the word "Explanation:" to the word "Compliance:" and add the following sentence: "The conceptual master plan prepared by Trammell Crow contemplates density and height buffers on the fringe of the commercial zone and flexible development patterns to insure the maximum amount of buffering." (14) Page 25, Adequacy of Services (7.1.2). Change the word "Explanation:" to the word "Compliance:". a • d Memo to city council Re: Urban Renewal March 2, 1990 x Page 3 (15) Page 26, Pre-Conditions to Development (7.4.4). Change the word "Explanation:" to "Compliance:". (16) Page 26, Transportation (8.1.1). Change the word "Explanation:" to "Compliance:". (17) Page 27. In both instances, change the word "Explanation:" to the word "Compliance:". (18) Page 28. Change the word "Explanation:" to the word "Compliance:". (19) Page 29. Change the word "Explanation:" to the word "Compliance:" i. The following item refers to Section 200: Reasons for Selection of President's Parkway as the Development Area t (20) Item 5, page 18, change the third sentence to: "Additional traffic safety issues include:" The following item refers to Section 500: Project Activities (21) Table 6, Projects, Costs and Funding sources, page 30 "Project Activity Funding Sources Total Cost t. 4. Property Acquisition Tax Increment $8,250,000 Contingency Funding $8,000,000 9. LRT/Transit Improvement Tax Increment $ 250,000" (22) Add item 9, bottom of page 32: "9. Light Rail Transit and Other Transit Improvements Planning and development of light rail transit and/or other transit improvements will be undertaken as needed to serve the Development Area." Change Section 900: Citizen Involvement: (23) Delete the third paragraph on page 55 beginning "As the President's Parkway plan....", and the studies numbered one to five. Memo to City Council Re: Urban Renewal March 2, 1990 Page 4 (24) Add to the last paragraph, page 55 beginning "Other activities..." the following: * Public meetings with NPO 8, NPO 1&2, and CPO 4B * Public hearing by the Planning Commission on February 20, 1990. At the hearing, the Planning Commission found that the Development Plan is in conformance with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission also recommended approval of the Urban Renewal Plan and Report. (25) Insert on p. 35 after the first paragraph: "These figures demonstrate the financial feasibility of the Plan by indicating that there will be sufficient revenues from tax increment funds to carry out the projects and activities proposed in the Plan. The Agency will, however, seek alternative funding from other available sources, public and private, and the Agency will not utilize tax increment funds to assist in private development until the Agency is satisfied that such funds are necessary to achieve that development. (26) P. 18 - 2nd paragraph, line 3 - Change "eight" overlapping taxing bodies to eleven". 3rd paragraph, line 5 - Change $74,032.700 to $74,791,568 3rd paragraph, line 5 - Change 5.2% to 5.25% (27) Pages 53 and 54: Remove the tables for Unified Sewer Dist., and ESD. (28) Add a new section: 703 - Metzger Park Assessment - The renewal project ara lies within the boundary of the Metzger Park Assessment District. This assessment is for the purpose of providing an increased level of service to Metzger Park. A recent history of the amount raised by the assessment, and the percentage schedule, is shown below.* Year Amount Percent Schedule Assessed (per thousand) 184-85 $27,011 .1344 186-87 $28,460 .1218 188-89 $40,486 .1392 * Source - Washington County Assessment and Tax Roll Summary f is Memo to City Council 071 Re: Urban Renewal March 2, 1990 Page 5 Additions to true cash values in the renewal project area will be available for the Metzger Park Assessment, and will be utilized in calculating the annual percentage schedule. In the period 1991-2001, it is estimated that the renewal project alone will add almost $400 million in new values to the Metzger Park Assessment District. This is more than the current total of true cash value in the entire district. The values added by the renewal project should act to stabilize, or reduce the current percent schedule. URBAN RENEWAL PLAN: CHANGES The following items refer to Section 601: Development Plan Projects and Improvement Activities (29) Pages 16 thru 18, add the following as a last sentence to each project description noted below: A. Northbound Highway 217 Off-ramp C D. Internal streets for Phases I, II and III E. Highway 217 and Greenburg Road Intersection, Phases I and II F. Greenburg Road Improvements G. Highway 217 Improvements H. Internal Streets for Phases IV and V I. Highway 217 and Greenburg Road Intersection, Phase III J. Hall Boulevard and Locust Street Improvements Add as a last sentence: "Public transit improvements will also be considered as needed." r (30) Add the following new project on page 19: "M. Light Rail Transit and Other Transit Improvements Planning and development of light rail transit and/or other transit improvements will be undertaken as needed to serve the Development Area." i { t r Memo to City Council Re: Urban Renewal March 2, 1990 Page 6 (31) Insert on p. 20, Section "C," on the third line after the first sentence, the following: "Developers will be encouraged to assemble property for private development through voluntary negoations with owners. The Agency may limit its acquisition to those properties required to complete land assembly for purposes of developing the proprty to achieve the goals of this plan." (32) Insert on p. 23 on line 7 after "Plan," the following: "The Agency may impose land assembly requirements on a developer as a condition of land acquisition by the AGency for such private development and may impose time limitations for such land assembly by the developer." murphy.me i MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Edwards and Members of the City Council FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Development DATE: March 1, 1990 RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-00001 Below is an errata sheet for the staff report. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. STAFF REPORT: CHANGES Beginning on page 2 of the staff report that was prepared for the February 20, 1990 planning commission hearing, I recommend the following additions and changes: (1) The first paragraph should read: "The applicable criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Statewide Goals 3, 4, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 do not apply " The rest of the information in that paragraph can remain. (2) Add: Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Open Space and Natural Resources). This Goal is satisfied because any commercial uses in the area will be developed according to a master plan and provides greater opportunities for creating open space and protected natural resource areas. The developers and the Agency that will be responsible for the redevelopment in this district will work with regional, state and federal agencies to protect the existing wetlands, watersheds and natural resources in the area in conjunction with the development plans of the district. The Jenkins House, 10675 SW Hall Blvd., has been identified as a Goal 5 cultural resource through earlier planning work conducted by Washington County. The site was listed on the draft Washington County Cultural Resource Inventory (1983). The draft Inventory collected information on a number of potentially significant cultural resources throughout the County. No action was taken by the County at that time to assess the quality and quantity of these cultural resources or to provide interim protective measures. Washington County elected to delay the Goal 5 assessment process for these cultural resources until periodic review of the county's Comprehensive Plan. The Jenkins site was annexed to the City of Tigard in 1987. Subsequently, the Jenkins site was removed from the county's inventory. The city, hence, assumes the obligation for completing the Goal 5 analysis for this and other sites and other Goal 5 resources in the Metzger area Memorandum to City Council Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-00001 March 2, 1990 Page 2 through the city's periodic review of the comprehensive plan, now underway. The city anticipates completion of periodic review by August, 1990. The city is not obligated to complete the Goal 5 analysis for this or any other resource site as part of the current proposal. It is anticipated that the Goal 5 analysis will be completed prior to a possible application for rezoning the property or prior to review of a master plan for the area. (3) Add: Statewide Planning Goal 6 (Air, Water and Land Resource Quality). This Goal is satisfied because the change from residential to commercial use will enable the district to develop according to a master planning concept with a finance mechanism that will assist in financing improvements to protect the water shed from discharges that might otherwise further encumber the Tualatin River basin. Any development within this district will coordinate with local, regional, state, and federal agencies to comply with applicable air, shed and river basin regulations. (4) Add: Statewide Planning Goal 7 (Air is Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards). This Goal is satisfied because any development proposals affecting the 100-year flood plain of Ash Creek and the associated wetlands will be reviewed in the city of Tigard's sensitive lands review process and the referral of wetland modification request to the Oregon Division of State Lands, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and other interested agencies for the review, and applicable permitting processes. (5) Add: Statewide Planning Goal 8 (Energy Conservation). This Goal is satisfied by creating additional commercial uses near the existing Washington Square development in order to maximize energy conservation and decrease vehicle trips by creating a more complete commercial and office complex in the vicinity of Washington Square. Opportunities for housing within this commercial area exist by virtue of the city's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances applicable to commercial zones. (6) Add: Plan Policy 12.2.1, a. Spacing and Location, page 9: Add the following after the second paragraph; "East of SW Hall Boulevard is a district known as East Metzger in unincorporation Washington County. There is a mix of Office Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial along Hall Blvd. There is a mix of Residential 9 and Residential 15 (medium ~r Memorandum to City Council Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-00001 March 2, 1990 Page 3 density) along part of Hall Boulevard and immediately behind some commercial areas. However, East Metzger is predominantly a single-family low density residential area." (7) Amend Statewide Goal 10 - Housing, page 4, replace second L paragraph with: "Commercial redesignation of the subject area will not affect the City of Tigard's compliance with Oregon Administrative ' Rules, Chapter 660, Division 7 -the Metropolitan Housing Rule's housing opportunity requirements for single family 5 multi-family mix and minimum residential density for developable residential properties. Housing at a maximum r density of 40 units pr acre is allowed above the second floor in the C-P designation. It is anticipated that the master r plan required for this area will include opportunities for high density multi-family development. The City's housing opportunity index currently provides an opportunity for 10.22 dwelling units per buildable acre on 1,295 vacant buildable ' acres." t t dj/cc-cpa-a H:\login\Billie i 4 f. Z; ~x :.S March 2, 1990 (clY ~F T ` RD Mr. Gary Ott 9055 SW Edgewood Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Ott: This is to respond to your request for detailed information regarding the City's inventory of Commercial-Professional (C-P) land. A point by point response is given below. The data is current as of late last year. The data source is the City's parcel based inventory. It is important to note that because certain flood plain and acerage information has not been calculated and entered into the inventory as yet, the words "general", "approximate", and "rough" apply to some of the numbers. 1. Total area of Commercial Professional designated land within the City? The total area zoned C-P is 236. 2. Total area of C-P designated land that is developed or used for C-P activities? The city-wide total of C-P that is used for permitted C-P uses is 110 acres. The total area of vacant C-P zoned land is 86 acres, of which some as yet undetermined portion of parcels totalling 11 acres is in floodplain. -3. Total area of available of C-P designated land (land that is currently underutilized or not utilitzed for C-P activities)? Information available relating to the underutilization of C-P land indicates the following: Some 32 acres of C-P designated land, most of it located in the Tigard Triangle area, is in residential uses. Among other use categories, schools occupy 35 acres of C-P land; agriculture, 2 acres; and industry, 0.3 acres. Additionally, 1.4 acres of C-P is classified as being in uses unknown. This gives a total of 39.80 acreas designated C-P that are not utilized for C-P activities. No inventory information is available addressing "underutilization". 4. Staff reports or reports to Council indicating a need for additional C-P land. I am advised that there are no staff reports or reports to Council indicating a need for additional C-P. The main reason is that need or market demand is not an approval criterion.under the comprehensive plan ammendment process. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. $ox 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 LCDC requirements concerning the zoning of non-residental categories of land are vague. As implied in the answer to question number four, there are no established quantitative standards with which jurisdictions are required to comply. The adopted City Comprehensive plan includes the finding that "a significant amount of commercial and industrial buildable land is available in areas where all services are provided making it suitable for development." Information included in the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the amount of buildable acreas of available land designated C-P in 1981 was 109. Please let me know if we may be of further assistance. 4Murp rel y Directo o Community Development dr/ott ' f m CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON . COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: March 5. 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: February 22. 1990 Y ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: President's PREVIOUS ACTION: -Parkway Ordinance and Urban Renew PREPARED BY: Ed Murphy Resolution 11 DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OX/Iffl REQUESTED BY: saaasaaasaaa IF% asavaaaaa=s=a=asaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasavss yfllo PO ICY ISSUE Should the City Council, acting as the City Development Agency, adopt the President's Parkway Development Plan, which creates an urban renewal district, and authorizes the use of tax increment financing to fund a portion of the public projects proposed for that area? aaasaaaasaaaaaaaaaaavavavvaaaaaaaaaaaaaaavaaaaaaaa=aaaaaaao=asaaaaaasaaaaaassa INFORMATION SUMMARY At the direction of the City Council, acting as the City Development Agency, an urban renewal plan and report was prepared for an area of the city generally bordered by Highway 217, Greenburg road, Hall Bvld., and Locust street. The Presidents Parkway Development Plan establishes an urban renewal district. It sets the boundaries, outlines the projects to be undertaken by the agency, authorizes the use of tax increment financing as a method of funding needed public improvements in the area, and establishes procedures for amending the plan. The Report is a companion document to the Plan. It further defines the existing conditions in the area; the reasons for the selection of this particular area as an urban renewal areal the renewal plan's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; the timing, description and estimated cost and funding source for the project activities; the tax increment financing impacts on overlapping taxing jurisdictions; the relocation methods and the citizen participation efforts undertaken. aaaaaaavaaavaacaanaaavvaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasasaasaaaaaaaaaa=aasaaa=as=aaaaaaaaamav , ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the Plan and report as presented, or as amended at the Council hearing. 2. Postpone action until March 12, if additional information is needed and can be obtained within that time period. 3. Postpone adoption until a later date (and consequently, postpone the election on the plan until a later date). asaaaaaaaasaaa=aaa=aaaaa==aaaaaa=aaaaaasaasaaaaaaeaaaaaaaa=a=a=a===saasa=assays a FISCAL IMPACT The primary fiscal implication is that adoption of the Plan, if ratified by the voters, would allow the use of tax increment financing to fund a portion of the public projects within the President's Parkway development area, thereby stimulating potentially significant private investment. No other City funds are projected within the development report for any purpose at this time. In addition, should the City Council choose to utilize tax increment bonds, the entire risk is to the bondholder, not to the general property taxpayers of the City of Tigard. Ultimately, the effect of the successful implementation of the Development Plan would to lower the composite tax rate by creating new assessed value that would otherwise not be there. The full financial analysis is contained in the Development Report. aa=sass=aaaaaaaaaaa=aaasaaaaaaaaavaasasaaasaaaaas=asaaaa=aaaaaaaaaasaaavaavaaaa SUGGESTED ACTION It is recommended that the City Council, acting as the City Development Agency, adopt the Plan by ordinance and accept the Report by resolution, either as submitted or as the agency may wish to modify it after the public hearing. br/PresPark.Sum i ::'arias CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 90- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. WHEREAS, on February 13, 1989, the City Council adopted ordinance No. 89-05, establishing the City Development Agency; and WHEREAS, an urban renewal plan has been prepared, entitled President's Parkway Development Plan, for that area of the City of Tigard generally bounded by Highway 217, Greenburg Road, Hall Blvd., and Locust Street; and WHEREAS, on February 20, 1990 the Tigard Planning Commission recommended approval of the President's Parkway Development Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable State and local law, the City of Tigard has provided public notice and considered public testimony regarding the President's Parkway Development Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 457.095, the City Development Agency has reviewed the President's Parkway Development Plan and therefore, THE CITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION l: There are conditions existing in the area referred to as the President's Parkway Development Area that qualify as "blighting conditions" under ORS Chapter 457. SECTION 2: The redevelopment of the President's Parkway area is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the municipality. SECTION 3: The President's Parkway Development Plan conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 4: Provisions have been made to house displaced persons within their financial means in accordance with ORS 281.045 to 281.105 and ORS 457.095(4). SECTION 5: The acquisition of real property provided for is necessary to implement the plan. SECTION 6: The adoption and implementation of the President's Parkway Development Plan is economically sound and feasible; and SECTION 7: The City Development Agency shall assume and complete any activities prescribed it by the President's Parkway Development Plan. ORDINANCE NO. 90- Page 1 SECTION 8: The City Development Agency hereby incorporates by reference the President's Parkway Development Plan. 1-1 -1P SECTION 9: The City Development Agency hereby adopts the President's Parkway Development Plan, pursuant to the provisions of ORS Chapter 457, and directs the City Recorder to publish notice of the adoption of this ordinance in accordance with the requirements of ORS 457.115. SECTION 10: The City Development Agency further directs the City Recorder to record a copy of the ordinance approving the President's Parkway Development Plan with the recording officer of Washington County, Oregon, pursuant to ORS 457.125, and directs the City Recorder to send a copy of this ordinance to the Tigard City Center Development Agency. SECTION 11: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council approval by the Mayor. PASSED: By vote of the Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 1990. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: THIS day of , 1990. Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date br/Ord.ejm r ORDINANCE NO. 90- Page 2 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 90- A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT REPORT. WHEREAS, on March 5, 1990, the City Council adopted the President's Parkway Development Plan by Ordinance No. 90- WHEREAS, the President's Parkway Development Report was prepared in conformance with ORS Chapter 457 as a companion document to the President's Parkway Development Plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard Development Agency that: i The Development Agency hereby accepts the President's Parkway Development Report attached as Exhibit "A". PASSED: This day of , 1990. f Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard br/PPRes.ejm s RESOLUTION NO. 90- Page 1 r 211 10655 S. W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 9722: February 19, 1990 Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Hall 13125 S. T. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Gentlemen: I do not approve of the property along S. T. Hall Blvd. being included in the urban renewal plan. There are a number of factors that are not as stated in your report: 1. property awners alonk S. Hall have no problems with congested streets. We live on a state highway. 2. As for flood control - no problem as long Es you leave the flood plain alone. The bunks of the cree':c arahigh enough on the South end East to prevent water flooding to the re- sidential area. 3. Declining property values. Not so, for property evaluations goes up nearly every year. 4. Livability of property-- I have lived on Hall since 1946 and see no decline in livability of my property. 5. "Neighb.-rhood has not been "severely impacted be adjacent commercial develooment" for there has been no commercial develop- ment along Hall. I again state that I do not ap;)rove of the property along S. Hall Blvd. being included in the urban renewal plan. Very truly yours, (?,4rs. P. 0. uve) JAECEIV E® 3 1990 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 7900 SW Landau Tigard, OR 97223 February 22, 1990 Mr. Ed Murphy and City Councilmen Tigard City Council Tigard, OR 97223 RE: NEW DEVELOPMENT URBAN RENEWAL Dear Mr. Murphy and Councilmen of Tigard: Confirming our conversation last night at the Metzger Clubhouse Meeting in reference to the above New Development Urban Renewel, I URGE ALL of the COUNCILMEN to vote AGAINST this Renewal Development. I, as a property owner, am not right in this section to be used for this purpose, but am close by. My reasons of course, are based on my personal be- liefs plus each and everyone of the reasons that you heard last night from the people of this area: namely, the tax base would RAISE in the future no matter what Mr. Blake tells us, the congestion, noise and influx of people, auto carbon monoxide from these 8000 cars AM and PM, the TALL buildings close by to homes across the way, the movement of the Metzger Elementary school and, in general, the nonsense of the entire project. Metzger people are working on their own plan which was formed in 1983 and will work amongst themselves to take care of any problems in the future. WE DO NOT need other people coming in to tell us what we should or what we should not do. We at this time have sufficient restaurants and roads to take care of the population. I have lived in this area since 1932 walking to Metzger Elementary from 80th avenue, using the park, small stores, and streets in the area. Why should any of this be changed for a Corporation who owns 3/4 tall buildings. Why do they not take this plan to the Beaverton area wherein it is really needed. I do volunteer work in the office at the Senior Center beside you, attend games & other functions at the Senior High School and am very interested in both Tigard and Metzger. I love the quiet atmosphere of the entire area and my roots are here even thoVgh most of my family live in Portland fighting the crime areas congestion and busy streets. I will only move when I have to or when I am unhappy in this area, but not before. Thanking all of the Councilmen in advance for voting against this development in advance, I remain Sincerely, Ina M. Walker PS I especially admired the lady who had the "guts" to ask David Blake "How would you like to live or your family right next to tall buildings?" Of course, he did not answer and ignored her completely. RECEIVED t FLB 2 2 1990 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT February 20, 1990 City of Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Hall - Town Hall 13125 S X . Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 No explanation that I have yet heard satisfies me as to why Metzger School has yet to remain in the area of heavy con- struction for 3-4 year upon commencement of this urban renewal project. The answer I am given is that this is the way that urban renewal financing works. I still cannot accept that this is something that must be. The children deserve a better break. Some creative fin- ancing is in order, and perhaps some better options from Trammell Crow. As it is, the infiltration of traffic into areas of sin- gle family homes off Hall blv. onto Oak, Pine, And Locust streets is going to leave many families with feelings that the present deal to move ,the school is going to make the is- sue of child safety go from bad to worse. is it going to be unsafe soon for a child to walk or ride a bike to a friend's, or to a neighboring store, or even to a newly relocated school at a future timer Many who dream of having the school and its residential neighborhoods safe from the noise and hazards of commercial traffic, may find that they have traded a dream for a nightmare. For those of us who have trouble conceiving of the size of the proposed development, Bruce Warner, Director of the Wash. Co. Dept. of Land Use and Transportation, provides two analogies. I quote from his Feb. 8, 1990 letter to Ed blurphy t Tigard Planning Director: "In some respects, adding 2.5 mil- l Feb. 20, 1990 Nancy Tracy 2 Hearing, City of Tigard Planning Commission lion square feet of development in this area is comparable to adding a Clackamas Town Center site development next to Wash- ington Square." "An even better analogy," he writes, might be that the area has the potential to be an activity center similar to Belleview, Washington." He adds that each of these has serious traffic circulation problems. Are we to learn from their failures and successes? The full estimate of vehi- cles coming into the proposed area each day will be from 13 to 15 thousand. All of this traffic in a low area next to a floodplain and encircled by higher ground Is going to seriously affect air quality. 4aater quality affected by runoff from land- scaping, parking lots, and the network of roads and trails that encircle the waterway, will also be seriously impacted. Yet State Planning Goal 6 which deals with air and water qua- lity, has been left out of Trammell Crow's and the City of Tigard's planning papers, the reason being that it was not re- levant. Two other omissions from the planning to date, that are of tremendous importance are Statewide Planning Goals 5 and 7, dealing with preservation of natural resources and hazards. Preservation involves the floodplain and its wetland resources. The hazard is the very real threat of flooding of commercial and residential property both upstream and down from the flood- plain. For one, the size of the development and its planned de- pendence upon gas-powered vehicles --assures air quality pro- blems. Ten to 15 thousand cars will be spewing tons of darbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day - the atmosphere where thousands of people live. Smog, due to the geography of the area, will be a natural consequence. Carbon dioxide is a major greenhouse gas and a major 1 Feb. 20, 1990 Nancy Tracy 3 / Hearing, City of Tigard Planning Commission cause of global warming. Dispite warnings that we are caus- ing serious climate change, we build bigger highways to ac- commodate bigger and more gas-powered vehicles. 1988 was the warmest year of the entire 20th century. Averting the trend toward serious global warming in the coming century is going to have to be up to each of us as citizens of a world community. The 21st century may find values very much changed from those of present-day heavy con- sumption of fossil fuels,- values that cause us today to keep planning improved roadways for more and more vehicles - and cause Trammell Crow to plan for thousands of parking spaces. Regarding Goal 7 - Natural Hazards - leople who live up- stream adjacent to the floodplain, and those who live at its lower end to the north, can attest to flood problems. I am told that the map plan amendment changing the entire flood- plain to C-P zoning is part of the urban renewal process and does not mean that this area is to be developed. I hope that this is so, for the value of this basin for retention of flood waters increases with every loss of open space to development to the east and to the north. Goal 5 refers to wetlands. Within the floodplain the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife has registered signifi- cant wetland resources. Restoration of lost wetland values, due to the restructuring of the entire area into cow pasture, was begun under mitigation in the summer of 1987. Since the establishment of two ponds, little or nothing has been follow- ed through of the mitigation, due to a lack of monitoring and enforcement by the City of Tigard. Beth Mason, Tigard Hearing Officer, drafted carefully research directives regarding the restoration of wetlands on this site, and received commenda- tion from James F. Ross, Director of the Dept. of Land Use and Development. I quote from paragraph- 3 of his June ~1 , 1987 Feb. 20, 19')0 Nancy Tracy 4 Hearing, City of Tigard Planning Commission letter to the mayor of Tigard. "The hearing officer's decision carries out the intent of both Goal 5 and Goal 9, natural re- source protection and economic development, and is consistant with Tigard's comprehensive plan. I encourage you and the city council to support and enforce the hearing officer's recommen- dations for approval of this development......" Bruce Warner recommended in his Feb. 8, 1990 letter to Ed Liurphy that the City and Trammell Crow combine their efforts and expertise with those of the county and GDGT. In addition, to assure compliance with Goals 5,6,and 7, I hope that all the following agencies will be invited to participate fullyc COE, DEQ,.EPA, Oregon Divisions of State Lands, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, and the U.S. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. Mike Houck, Wildlife Naturalist_ with the Portland Audu- bon Society, is an excellant resource. He spoke with David Blake on Feb. 15, and suggested some first steps on the road toward satisfying Goals 5 and 9. Jeffry Gottfried, a science professional at ONSI and chairman of Friends of Fanno Creek, is another excellant community resource. Friends of Fanno Creek is an organization working with USA and neighboring communities to upgrade water quality of the Tualatin River and its tributaries. Many of us fear that this huge project is being pushed too fast. Tigard does not want to lose this commercial center -to another community - but it will be a.dragon for the citi- zens of Tigard to co-exist with if we do not decide now to make haste slowly. I thank you for removing any planning designations or descriptions that disparage the solid residential values of properties in the unincorporated areas of Metzger. We are alive and involved citizens, and we care very much for our homes and community. Thank you very much, Sincerely, be Nancy Tracy 7310 S.W . Fine St. 97223 I1jGC-l LC4j ~L4LL I ~GG~ 4' MAR 02 '90 13:13 F-2 Keyser nAssocia Timothy C. Kelly Golden Gateway Commons A. Jerry Keyser 55 Pacific Avenue Mall Kate Earle Funk San Francisco. California 94111 Robert J. Wetmore 415/398.3050 flax 415/397.5065 Michael Conlon Denise E. Conley LOS ANGELES 213/622.8495 Richard L. Botti Calvin E. Hollis, II Kathleen H. Head SAN DIEGO 619/942-0380 Heinz A. Schilling March 2, 1990 VIA FAX Mr. Patrick Riley City Manager City of Tigard 13125 S. West Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc (KMA) is now in the process of reviewing the development, economics of the proposed President's Parkway project. We received the developers submittal on Wednesday February 29, and thus, our analysis is underway. This memorandum outlines the approach we are undertaking. As we understand it, the proposed project is a commercial development on a 70-acre site near the intersection of Highway 99 and 217. The development program includes a office buildings in both highrise and low rise configurations, a hotel, and retail uses. Highrise office is to be located along a newly improved wetlands/water feature. As we understand the deal structure as proposed, the developer is requesting financial assistance in funding road and utility infrastructure and wetland improvements. Total infrastructure improvement costs are estimated by the developer at nearly $37 million. It is proposed that these costs be financed by the property tax increment generated from the project. The use of the property tax increment is a common financing vehicle a redevelopment agency may use to assist a project that warrants a subsidy. All other development costs including land acquisition would be borne by the developer. It is clear that some level of public assistance is required, given that the infrastructure cost equal approximately $18 per square foot of proposed building area. When combined with the land acquisition costs borne by the developer, these costs are in excess of the cost levels supported in thi£ market. The major emphasis of KMA's analysis is to determine what level of public assistance is warranted given the project's development economics. One key outcome from the analysis will be to ascertain whether financial assistance is warranted during all project phases or just in the initial years when project risks tend to be the greatest. Real EstatePtr,development&Evaluation Services MAR 02 190 13:14 P,3 Mr. Patrick Riley March 2, 1990 City of Tigard Page 2 BACXGROUND Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA), founded in 1973, is a real estate consulting firm providing predevelopment and evaluation services. Since our founding in 1973, we have become one of the leading development economics firms in the western United States. KMA has a special expertise in structuring public-private partnerships, and has been involved in more downtown projects on the West Coast than any other firm. The firm has been involved in many landmark quality projects from initial conceptualization on through to developer selection, negotiations, and site disposition. This expertise includes Morrison Street in Portland, Horton Plaza in San Diego, Lake Street in Pasadena, California Plaza in Los Angeles, and Yerba Buena Center in San Francisco. APPROACH Our approach to structuring public-private transactions is to develop a deal which recognizes the public development objectives in the context of the private sector's requirements to make fair rate of return. In these transactions, we are careful to note the distinction between providing the necessary stimulus to achieve the public goals (which would often not be realized from purely private market activity sans public intervention) and providing an unwarranted subsidy to the developer. Based on our extensive experience with private and public-private transactions, we are well versed in the reasonable return levels necessary to make a project feasible for the private sector. In evaluating a public-private transaction, we look first to whether the deal E structure provides for a reasonable level of return to the developer. Extraordinary levels of return to the developer, when generated in whole or in part by public investment, would indicate that a proposed deal falls in the realm of an unwarranted subsidy. Additionally, we look at whether the return to the public party is reasonable. These returns include the benefits of achieving development goals, and, increasingly, the financial 4 return to the Agency. TK AR OUTR MAR 02 190 13:15 P.4 Mr. Patrick Riley March 2, 1990 City of Tigard Page 3 NEXT S'T'EPS We have begun the process of analyzing the developers submittal. With close cooperation from the developer (per our conversations with David Blake), we should be able to complete a preliminary assessment by the end of next week. We will convey our findings to you at that time, and suggest the need for any follow-up analysis that may be needed Very truly yon, KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC. q . Denise E. Conley Mark J. Callan cc: Oliver Norville David Blake DEC/MJC/am r i i TK1AFWi XTR LINCOLM CENTER 03PVXCX KRRMT • The Lincoln Center office market has been one of the most 4 successful and fast 'growing suburban office markets in Portland. This has been fueled by migration of new tenants from downtown and other Portland submarkets, from new companies moving to Oregon and choosing this central location, and finally, from the tremendous growth of existing companies in the Lincoln Center office market. Since 1987, there has been both strong pre-leasing and high occupancy levels. For example, 95,000 square foot Two Lincoln Center North was 69% pre-leased and 95% leased in only seven months after the first tenants moved in. Lincoln Tower, a 225,000 square foot 12-story structure completed in 1988 was 74% pre-leased and 100* leased only six months after completion. %n the last two years, there has been an average of over 10,000 square feet per month in new leases in the Lincoln Center office market. The main reasons for the strong demand are the following: 1. U.S. West phone service versus GTE which gives companies toll free dialing in the metro area. 24 Central location adjacent to Hwy 217 and half way between I-5 and the Hwy 26 corridor. 3. shared Tenant Services on site at Lincoln Center. 4. Existing amenities available in Lincoln Center such as conference rooms, health clubs and beautiful lobbies with water features. 5. Excellent services in the area such as restaurants, retail, banks, hotels, snail service, bus service and secretarial service. 6. Companies prefer to locate where so many other top national companies have already moved to. 7. Plenty of free covered parking. 8. There in a lack of Class A office land along Hwy 217. Only Class A competition its along Kruse Way. Post-It'brand fax transmittal memo 7671 Not P"95 ► Co. Co. ~ ept, orre FsxN NX# T J AV VJ/ VL L10-10V VJVV i•JJ V'1VV •..•••••••..r•...•..r • METROPOLITAN PORTLAND SUBURBAN R1AL ESTATE MARKET FALL 1989 UPDATE Contrary to predictions of moderate suburban office growth, 1989 will close with the most rapid not absorption ever recorded within the Portland marketplace. Absorption Vacancy and Availability At the and of the third quarter of 1989, tenant expansions and relocations took over 528,300 previously vacant square feet within the west side suburban marketplace and an additional 176,146 square feet, This year-to-date rate of growth of 9.831 almost doubles the last five-year average of 5.66%. The era of f over increasing availability and high vacancy rates which extended from 1983 through 1988 has reversed. Vacancy and Sauare Feet Available - Suburban 1989 3RD QTR/89 VACANCY RATE 15.4 S4•FT. AVAILABLE 11,1101 11,1111 1,100,059 .2ND QTR/89 VACANCY RATE 17.8 sQ.Fr. AVACABLE 1,262,483 1 ST QTR/89 VACANCY RATE 20.4 ` SQ.FT. AVAA.ABLf 1,438.957 BEGINNING OF 1989 VACANCY RATE 21.6 SQ.FT. AVAIABLE 1,515.223 Demand and Mental Rues As projected, because of the continued strong demand for Class "A" office space, rental rates have firmed. The most active submarket has been the Kruse Way Corridor, with over 192,000 square feet absorbed year to date. Thirty-six percent of this year's total growth has been along this one and one-half mile corridor. Rental rates wiLhin the Kruse Way submarket have increased six percent since the end of 1988. '10 03/01 23:32 0503-293-9409 TRAMMELL PDX X1001 The Office. Market MURE A CLASS A SUBURBAN OFFICE RATES Full cuarvIce Rental Rate/O/yr.' $17 S18 515 S14 Brooke IL Myers tit3 Senior Sales Consultant S+z Coldwell Banker Commercial Group Sn 'S9 '90 ® s+o ® _ The Portland office market is on a -Class A roll! A Portland tri-county market of class a 337 competitive office buildings total- ing 20,400,000 rentable square fret has strengthened again during 1989 and will grow in 1990 and beyond Over 985,000 square feet of Class A• office space construction is planned or FIGURE B underway downtown for 1990-1991. SUBURBAN OFFICE RATES By year's end, 125,000 square feet of Full Service Class A suburban office space will' Rental Rate/glyr. - open, with another 470,000 square feet planned for 1990-1991. 3+e - Portland has sustained strong S+~ expansion in the last 10 years. Since 1979, Portland's Central Business sts 'District has doubled in size. The sub. 315 NNJ urban oft'icc market has quadrupled. NN In Downtown Portland, almost 11.2 $14 million square feet constitute nearly s,3 55% of the office market. Some 30%, s+x - as approximately 6 million square feet, is in the southwest suburbs, and about s+' Johns Kruse Washington - eo 1.2 million square feet (5.88%) is in Landng Way Square the Lloyd area, which is becoming a • -Efleative" Rates. after concessions downtown extension, through devel- opment and renovation. The Clackamas and Vancouver sub-mar- kets again expanded in 1989, to 391,000 and 774,000 Square feet. Pioneer Place, a 284,000 square- break ground in 1990, with 420,000 Downtown foot tower, opens this year, while the square feet. The downtown market is as active 535,000 Morrison Tower is scheduled Overall market vacancies and strong as it has been in the past to begin construction in mid-1990. decreased to 15.6%, approximately decade. Offering 112 competitive 1000 Broadway, a 240,000 square- 1.7 million square feet, by late 1989. office buildings, it no longer suffers foot tower, will be completed in 1991 Downtown absorbed over 450,000 from the over-built conditions of with 252,000 square feet. Pacific square feet annually in ft past seven 1982-1987. Center Tower also is expmed to years. In 1990, an absorption of Post-It" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 of P"" ► / A '10 03/01 23:32 %P503-293-9409 TRAMMELL PDX 10002 I 485,000 square feet is expected. Absorption presently outweighs sup- ply. However, vacancies will increase over the next two years as planned FIGURE D projects come on line. PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING PROJECTS f=irst-generation Class A buildings site in ruprosent one-third of the downtown Peoi6a squara Foot status market base and square footage of the MOrrlSOn Tower 05. PinnnBd total Class A vacancy. lute 1989 1000 Broadway 2521000 Under construction Y. Y Padfiic center 420.000 scheduled the downtown Class A vacancy rate KOIN Phase 11 Za0.0o0 Plsnnud tumbled to a new low of 9.78%. or Thm Paaifio Square 90,000 scheduled . about 750,000 square feet. 1990 Class GGvSeAmrntiM PrpJ9Cta U0,000 A vacancy rates will dip to 9.5%, and state omce Biog. 2W,000 then will increase to 12.7% as new projects are completed. lbo down- town Class B vacancy rate reached 17.7% in late 1989, a decline from 18.3% in 1988. Effective rental rates (the average rates, after concessions) during 1989 FIGURE E for downtown Class A space ranged STRATEGIC UNDEVELOPED BLOCKS Potential from $14.50 to $22.00 per square Protect square rootage foot, up $2.00 from 1988. Tbcsc rates Two Main Place - .360.000 Will rise approximately 7-12% in winningated Block ar'0,000 1990, and then another 5-10% in GreyhounddeBlock 4420,000 1991. Effective downtown Class B Ro"a 400,000 rentals ranged between $9.00 and Selm & Jamas 020,000 $12.00 per square foot in 1989, up Fox Block 480.000 slightly from 1988. Suburbs The suburban office market contin- ues its impressive growth. New Class A buildings will add 125,000 squarc FIGURE F feet by year end, with another 470,000 OFFICE TENANCY BY square feet planned for 1990-1991. STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION CODE The suburban office base of 9.2 mil- lion rentable square feet, in 225 com- petitive buildings, represents a -4217v footage incrcasc since 1983. ManuracMing Annual suburban absorption aver- aged 425,000 square feet since 1985. ++x~pOf Sp°0n 1989 became the third consecutive 2% year that suburban office absorption, Gammmoni primarily in master-planned Washing- 6% ton Square and Kruse Way Class A w1104806 & nerw 10% buildings, surpassed downtown's. The BuMr*n a Paisonal smiw6 suburbs will absorb over 500,000 6 square feet for offices during 1990. ~ 'f ~ and Due to new construction, the subur-NqlW ban office vacancy rate rose slightly to 19.4% at year's end. In 1990 it will peak at 23%, before a decline to under 20`36. With the strong demand, we expect r(Auc ed contx ssions, produc- ing higher effective rental rates, pri- C w '10 03/01 23:33 x'503-293-9409 TRAMMELL PDX X1003 i,: jP' •7iZ aararily in the three most active subur- areas - John's Landing. Kruse j y and Washington Square. Effective Mental rates in Class A F1ouRe v xJµlbrubari buildings will range from "W SUBURBAN OFFICE BUILDING PROJECTS, x13.00 to $16.50 per square foot READY FOR OCCUPANCY IN 1600 `Ehrottglt 1989, and between $13.50 r9lact Square feet rtd $17.00 in 1990. 't'hrough 1989, ons Embassy Centre W"a SIM II II Gterpowe Class B suburban rates ranged V g entetpolme 9~0,0~00 'fin $10.00 and $12.50, an wlUameue oaks 37,000 ;increase of about 5% over 1988. "V LlnWn center 126,000 (Ratrs will flatten or slightly increase in 1990 for Class A. and remain about the same for Class $ buildings- During 1989, John's Landing rents rose about $1.00 per square foot; those in Kruse Way and Washington The The high technology and eIextroat- Square, by $1.00-$2.00 per square ics area continues to be a tenant's foot.) Industrial Market market with an abundant supply and ttriROFIrfANT NEW SUBURBAN OFFICE little now construction. Total vacancy - f.7. BUILDINGS OPENED IN IM INCLUDED: is 1,332,000 square feet, or 26%, repre- 47.000 n it. Kos Creeksida t;eavenon stinting a 3.5 year supply little 60.000 aQ. Iti RWw Forum tl John's Landing ~ improvemeitt over last year. Lease ?ZGW sq. R NJ Town Center Geckamn rates for flex space remain at an aver- 72 000 w• It. Park Patlc Plaae Vuver G Z000 of 65o/squaro foot with $14/square SO Jx10 egq. R First Parkway Plaza aza III w= Plaza Vancmmr foot tenant improvement ,,,•F:. ~1 y,~~,y~allowances. • In 1990. construction ■etion .ao begins ~ on a Significant landlord concessions are ' 100,000 square feet Kruse Way high- available to attract tenants. Sire and potentially 300,000 - 500,000 - The I-5 Corridor from south more square feet of other office pro- Portland to Wilsonville experienced an infitt of new tenants in projects mss' built last year, as well as several new 1989 suburban land values ranged Allen C- Patterson projects underway in 1989. Coca Cola between $4.00 and $12.00 per square Sales Consultant purchased a 10-acre site.for anew dis- foa~- Average land costs will remain Cokiwell Banker Commercial Group tribution plant. Larger distribution the aarrre or slightly increase in 1991). users such as Payless Drug Stoms Summary The Portland industrial real estate continue to absorb space in this mar- Downtown Portland's office mar- base is 123,500.000 square feet, with ken. Mentor Graphics plans to relocate ket will amain robust, and suburban 107,000,000 square feet in buildings their corporate headquarters to a new areas will further expand. Rental rates of 10,000 square feet and 1roger. The 90-acre Wilsonville headquarters. in both will trend upward. mix of industrial users, as determined Phase One will consist of 526,000 by SIC codes in the market, remains square feet of buildings, with a total strong with 37% in the wholesale sec- of 868,000 square feet platuied over tor, 45% in manufacturing (including the next several years. Also under high technology and eiecwnics) and construction is the 62-acre Pacific 109b in transportation, Corporate tenter, which will be a At 5%, the total overall industrial mixed-use office, flex and retail center vacancy in the Portland muukct is at a of 80.000 square feet just south of ten-year low. As a result of a strong Kruse Way on I-5. ( year in the traditional sector, the over- . The Southeast sector remains all Portland Industrial Market in 1989 strong, with less than 5% overall enjoyed its best year in the last 10 vacancy. years. Overall net absorption for 1989 -As a result, developer interest in was an ail-time high of 4,200,000 sq. land for additional projects in this area ft,, a substantial increase over 1988. is the highest it has been in four years. w 0 03/01 23:34 '0503-293-9409 TRAMMELL PDX Qd004 Portland Area Office Mastro Report October 12, 1989 ~tiltee_~utt 1Oat 6~bairlvar Total Taal Rentable : Arallable % No. alt 3rd - September 99 0,206,757 11,110,904 28.10 IS 2nd -,tune 8A 1%942,662 ; /,797,3$3 20.10 219 18t • March 89 8,767,980 1,630,189 18.60 217 4th - December 88 - 8,801,980 1,795,520 20.29 218 3rd • September 88 8,6540315 ;1,606,760 18.56 204 2nd - Jaa c 88 799691707 1,941,979 19.35 208 laic - Mauch 88 7045,219 1,711" • 21.54 206 4th - December 87 7.756,919 11,445,740 18.64 201 • 3rd - September 117 7,608,019 : 9,430,332 18.50 200 2nd - June 87 7,473,QXy :1,328,233 17.80 199 1st - March $7 7,357,255 1,332,369 11.10 198 4th - December 86 7,329,255 1,3999377 1PAP 196 3rd September 86 71213,805 1,00,370 7,9,10 193 tad - Jame 96 2,213,895 11,606,966 22.27 193 III - mareh 55 7,007,536 ;1,579,300 22.29 190 4th - December 05 6,$24,130 19,480,305 21.3# 187 3rd - September 85 6,882,136 ; 1,489,599 21.64 186 22d - Jade as 6,060,300 :1,014,895 16.70 175 1st - March as 6,043,301 968,177 16.02 174 4th - December 84 6,043,300 885,040 14.67 174 3rd - September 84 5,$95,06S i 853,679 ISAS 166 2n6 • June 84 5,801 222 902,643 15,54 165 -Marcie 84 6,831,041 943,161 36.17 itt 166 4th - December 83 - 5,785,541 11,029,606 17.90 164 Olren the criteria discussed ia."The lavs0tory", the Vactiney index is affected by the following factors: Itebabbed buildings enter the market. obsolete buildings are dtelstod, now construction, demalitibb of properties, multi-tenant baaifdlags become single-te®ant facilities or public buildings. ptad46aq.«r ~ ' OFFICE-OUTLOOK 1990 PORTLAND OFFICE MARKET OVERVIEW THIRD QUARTER - 1989 PREPARED BY DAVID R. GILLEY, VICE PRESIDENT CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD OF OREGON, INC. 111 SW FIFTH AVENUE, #2400 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 279-1720 David B. Gilley, Vice President, Cushman & Wakefield of Oregon, Inc.: He has been with Cushman & Wakefield since 1982. Mr. Gilley specializes in CBD office leasing and sales. Mr. Gilley holds membership in the Building, Owners and Managers Association, Association of Realtors, Oregon Mortgage Bankers, and the Portland Chamber of Commerce. '10 03/01 23:36 12503-293-9409 TRAMMELL PDX 10007 • - METROPOLITAN PORTLAND . SUBURBAN REAL ESTATE MARKET FALL 1989 UPDATE Contrary to predictions of moderate suburban office growth, 1989 will close with tho moat rapid not absorption ever recorded within the Portland marketplace. Absorption. Vacancy. and Availability At the and of the third quarter of 1989, tenant expansions and relocations took over 528,300 previously vacant square feet within the crest side suburban marketplace and an additional 176,146 square feet, This year-to-date rate of growth of 9.83% almost doubles the last five-year average of 5.66%. The era of ever increasing availability and high vacancy rates which extended from 1983 through 1988 has reversed. Vacancy and Saur-e Feet Available Suburban 1989 3RD QTR/89 VACANCY RATE 15.4 SQ.FT. AVALABLE 1,100,459 .2ND QTR/89 VACANCY RATE 17.8 SQ.FT. AVANABLE 1,262,483 1ST QTR/89 _ VACANCY RATE 20.4 SQ.FT. AVAILABLE 1,438,957 BEGINNING OF 1989 VACANCY RATE 21.6 SQ.FT_ AVAILABLE 1,515.223 Demand and Rental Ralies As projected, because of the continued strong demand for Class "A" office space, rental rates have firmed. The most active submarket has been the Kruse Way Corridor, with over 192,000 square feet absorbed year to date. Thirty-six percent'of this year's total growth has been along this one and one-half mile corridor. Rental rates wiLhin the Kruse Way submarket have increased six percent since the end of 1988. '10 03/01 23:36 'x'503-293-9409 TRAMMELL PDX Q1008 Demand for space on the east side echoes the west side experience. The first three quarters of 1989 recorded 178,900 square feet of net absorption. Suburban Vancouver is the east side's fastest growing submarket, having experienced 78,400 square feet of growth in the third quarter alone. 1990 Construction Currently, in the west side marketplace, Hillman Properties Northwest's 5000 Meadows structure, Grayco's Willamette Oaks, Trammell Crow's Lincoln Five, and Nesbitt & Associates' One Embassy Center are the only west side suburban office buildings under construction. Completion of these structures in the first half of 1990 will add approximately 337,000 square feet. This one-year supply of west aide space will only temporarily alleviate current market conditions. In the cast side marketplace, Koll's Ambassador Business Center, scherser Partners' Corporate Center One, and the FABA Building will add 147,000 square feet. 1990 suburban-wide construction will only match average historic demand. if rapid growth continues, said construction will only meet 67% of current demand. Accordingly, should our local economy continue to grow at a rapid rate, rental rates will continue to increase by 5% - 6% per annum. Conversely, should economic growth slacken, rental rates are not likely to decrease since office space currently under construction will not measurably exceed historic average demand levels. Conclusion The era of over increasing availability of-Class "A" suburban office space, which extended from 1983 to present, is drawing to a close. In response to this market change, rental rates have, and will continue to, increase. For large tenants, preleasing prior to completion of construction will likely secure the most favorable economic transaction. Generally, given the construction described above, the most advantageous relocation opportunities will occur in the first half of 1990. Author Gordon D. King Assistant Vice President Cushman & Wakefield of Oregon, Inc. III SW Fifth Avenue, ,2400 Portland, OR 97204 (503) 279-1720 . - r f y , W \ aQg1~`S LAG w ~mom SR~A~ ' Nt* C~~at~oa t$~~ 1I~~tGTGN ~ ~n°0 ~ US n~ fan t s toms o V*c to IaQ.~ lilac 19~ 196s SQ,GCID 19 ISO ita•~ t a t9b3 1964 S96S -jeer tGa.~ logo 190 Ise 1468 70 a t96" i964 1lts Yew S~BANR r Aft x YC~ jaw Con man t3B? 6oQ, ~,aoo 4GR.~ za4~ ~ga4a i9M 196's Ism t96' imam ~ 1983 198+1 1so jeer taam list tsss i98a 541 tD a t03 1st 1s>3~ Yeas 10 03/01 23:38 'x'503-293-9409 TRAMMELL ADX 91010 2ushma n At Wakefield of Qregon, Inc. C SUBURBAN OFFICE MARKET SVRVSY CUSHMAN h WAK9FIRLD 1'ORTLANDs OREGON STATISTICAL 6064ARY $1RD QUARTER 1980 3. NIT ADS01s1rTION (SQ.FT.) >d Quallor_ 2eB-Slusrter Ard uvter Class A 47,340 167,729 131,634 356,611 Class R 44,176 340701 8078 1630362 Rehab 132.2n) Total Jlbsorptlon Si 197,410 249,674 52837aI 2. OFFICE VACANCY Ofaerter Jud Quit $L4 q rta tat T Clan A 21.5% 17.7% 36.7% Class a 19.2% 18.29 1743W Rehab wAh 2LVA AM Overall 20.4% 17.0° 3SA% ASKING RENTAL RANOX Class A S1Z.00 - $19.50 Class N $ 7.50 - $17.90 Rehab $10.00 - $13.00 4. MVRNTORY ADJUSTMENTS, I.E., NEW CONSTRUCTION ADDED (TOTAL SQ.FT. ADDED 6/31/89 - 9130189) 1st Quarter 0 Mad Quarter 370500 3rd Quartsr N Year tB Data 124,750 2 NO -t-nty or repra.entACION expre.a or Implied. I. meal at to ttu aeturacr of the tetarmaden eontelpad hemn. am same Is soumland subject to REAL ESTATE Suburban development to continue strong 1 1990 will see a continuation of the strong Pacific Wang, PacifiCare and others in Five Frank motes there are four new office build- suburban developing and leasing activity that Centerpointe are all tenants who have ings totaling nearly 350,000 square feet of began in the '80s. expanded their operations and moved to larger space under construction now or scheduled to Since 1984, Birtcher Frank Properties deve- suburban market office spa , ' he adds, begin construction soon in the suburbs. loped its Centetpointe Office Park in Lake Birtcher also foresees con iumg develop- "Approximately 25 percent of this space is Oswego at Interstate S and Kruse Way Boule- ment of more support services in the suburbs, already preleased by large, key business vard and SouthCenter Business Park in Tuala- including restaurants, banks, shopping cen- tenants." tin just off 1-5 at Martinazzi Street addition, tors, hotels, athletic clubs and other services to Track the movement of new companies t acquired and redeveloped the To square support the increasing business ty• coming to Portland and see how many of them office and shopping center on Boones Ferry Howard Johnson, Marriott, the new Stan- are choosing to locate in these new suburban Road in Lake Oswego. fords restaurant on Kruse Way and others are office building locations, both Frank and All of these developments are leasing well, rapidly moving to do business in Portland's Young note. This trend will continue, and says Randy Young, Birtcher vice president, growing suburban areas,-" Frank says. "And Portland's suburban e office market will con- adding Portland's southwest suburban market we're going to continue to see this happen." Pond to develop. j will continue to be active. Preleasing activity also is occurring in the _ "Over 2.5 million square feet of Class A and suburban office market. Kruse Way Boulevard and the Highway B office developments have been built in this "Preleasing during construction used to be 217/Washington Square area dominate the southwest suburban market since 1984, and 90 the exception, as tenants would have a wait- suburban office building market today, and percent of that is leased today," he says. and-see attitude about leasing office space in that trend will continue, they predict. Hillman Properties, Trammell Crow and the suburbs," Young notes. "But competition Portland's suburban market indeed is Birtcher Frank Properties built nearly 90 per- for premium office space has dramatically healthy as we head into the 190s. cent of all Class A space in the southwest sub- increased, and tenants are realizing that they urban office market since 1985, representing can't wait long to get the office space they real- This article was submitted by Birtcher Frank more than 1 million square feet in 10 buildings, ly want and need for the best exposure." Properties. Young adds. About 95 percent of this space is leased. Various trends affecting commercial deve- lopment activity are continuing to emerge in e the suburbs, but all are centered on one rapidly increasing trend -jobs, says Mason L. Frank, 0 Birtcher general partner. "Jobs are migrating to where people live, and since a lot of people live in the growing Portland suburban market, their jobs are mov- Quality Mobile RelBte'~~~ ing out closer to home, " Frank says. "People are driving less distances to work as this trend from a creek to a year. continues, and thus we'll continue to see more work places, office buildings, etc. built in the suburbs..' c I Other trends Birtcher officials see continu- • 20kgyp/ ry - 600L~A~ k r~ ingthroughout the'90sinclude themovetnent • Unit Mounted Breaker larger tenants and businesses to the subur- ban the ex ion of existing • ban marketplace, , trailers or vans tenants, and the development of support set- Heavy Duty Batteries vices to help make these suburban office lo- tions stronger and more attractive. Variable voltage to 480 VAC "The average size tenant leasing space in the • Residential Silencing Portland office market is approximately 5,3Q square feet, and in the past the suburban mark- 24 hour Parts and Service ageorf2,5Wsquare feet ofspace"Young says. ° Cummins & Onan Products "But that's changing now in the suburbs. Our average size tenant at the Five Centerpoiute Building is 7,800 square feet" Cummins Portland 289-0900 Businesses and tenants moving to the sub- urbs are larger in size, and they are highly rec- Northwest, or 1-800-283-0336 ognizable business names locally, regionally 14 full service locations and nationally. Frank adds. Inc. Qlan throughout the Northwest _ . Another healthy trend is that existing ten- ants are expanding, Young says. "Southern Daily journal of Commerce, Thursday, February 22, 1990 Page 87 CPO 4-Metzger c%o Patricia Whiting, Chair IM: 8122 S.W. Spruce Metzger, Oregon 97223 February 19, 1990 City of Tigard Planning Department 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Staff Report to the Planning Commission Plan Policy 12.2.1 Spacing & Location Section: Plan Policy 12.2.1 - Location Criteria a. Spacing & location: paragraph 2. Quote: The eastern boundary of the subject area is adjacent to a mix of Medium Density Residential areas, Commerical Professional and Commercial General area. The southeast corner of the area is adjacent to a medium density residential area. The Steering Committee of CFO 4 Metzger herein proposes an amendment to t the above paragraph to reflect the Comprehensive Plan of Washington County for the unincorporated area east of the proposed subject area under consideration for a Comprehensive Zone Amendment/Urban Renewal Development ''roject. Washington County's Community Plan -for CPO 4 Metzger contains Community Design Elements identifying particular areas. Within our planning area the residential area north of S.W. Locust to Hall Blvd. is known as the "Metzger School Subarea." The subarea east of Hall Bvd. is known as "East Metzger." The south east corner is the Phaffle Subarea. (ncxv within the City of Tigard). First, the commerical uses cited in the above quoted paragraph refer to Professional Commerical and Commercial General. In our Metzger-Progress C'.ommunity Plan the commerical uses along the west and east side of 2 City of Tigard CPO 4M AF, Planning Dept. Hall Blvd. are: "Office Commerical" and "Neighborhood Cormtiercial" Second, paragraph 4 on page 9 of P.P. 12.2.1 identifies the area north of the subject area as "Metzger area of Unincorporated Washington County," with a density of 111a%kax Density Residential areas." However, the very next paragraph (page 9, para. 5) does not identify the existing zoning designation or the fact that it is identified as "Fast fietzger" in unincorporated Washington County. In that there is a mix of office and neighborhood com¢nerical along Hall Blvd. as well as Residential 9 and Residential 15 units per acre--mixed residential--to part of the next parallel street which is S.W. 85th with single-family low density due east to the City of Portland boundary, the Staff Report reference to this area should reflect these designations. The proper density designations for Fast Metzger is identified in our Ccsmnmity Plan under Community Design, East Metzger: "Viost of the subarea is designed lav density residential, R-5." If you have a copy of the Ccmm mity Plan, you will see subarea Fast Metzger is all Low Density (in light yellow)'except along Hall Blvd, the Metzger Park, and medium density next to our community grocery story on S.W. 80th. 3 City of Tigard CPO 414, Planning Department We suggest language in Plan Policy 1.2.2.1, a. paragraph 2, be changed to reflect the Camtunity Plan designations. We are offering the following language: The eastern boundary of the subject area is adajacent to to unincorporated Washington County area known as "east Metzger." There is a mix of Office Ca -exical and Neighborhood Commerical along Hall Blvd. There is a mix of Residential 9 and Residential 15 (medium density) along part of Hall Blvd and immeidately behind some commercial zoning. However, East Metzger is predominantly a single-family low density residential area. Thank you for your consideration. We appreciate the work you have put into this most recent revised Staff ?report updating language fran a previous draft report. Cordially, / PATRICIA WHIT j , Chair ~Or r /1UL f-71 PLY 2) A, 2 r 0 7L zv- ,J _ ~ 'dom.. ~ /plc 'A,0;;j~' X ! -7/e I~Ae- .*,*i Jv JJ n.Y J .7 7127al ' /6,?SR7 ACC/ 7ry``iF 7900 SW Landau Tigard, OR 97223 February 22, 1990 Mr. Ed Murphy and City Councilmen Tigard City Council Tigard, OR 97223 RE: NEW DEVELOPMENT URBAN RENEWAL Dear Mr. Murphy and Councilmen of Tigard: Confirming our conversation last night at the Metzger Clubhouse Meeting in reference to the above New Development Urban Renewel, I URGE ALL of the COUNCILMEN to vote AGAINST this Renewal Development. I, as a property owner, am not right in this section to be used for this purpose, but am close by. My reasons of course, are based on my personal be- liefs plus each and everyone of the reasons that you heard last night from the people of this area: namely, the tax base would RAISE in the future no matter what Mr. Blake tells us, the congestion, noise and influx of people, auto carbon monoxide from these 8000 cars AM and PM, the TALL buildings close by to homes across the way, the movement of the Metzger Elementary school and, in general, the nonsense of the entire project. Metzger people are working on their own plan which was formed in 1983 and will work amongst themselves to take care of any problems in the future. WE DO NOT need other people coming in to tell us what we should or what we should not do. We at this time have sufficient restaurants and roads to take care of the population. I have lived in this area since 1932 walking to Metzger Elementary from 80th avenue, using the park, small stores, and streets in the area. Why should any of this be changed for a Corporation who owns 3/4 tall buildings. Why do they not take this plan to the Beaverton area wherein it is really needed. I do volunteer work in the office at the Senior Center beside you, attend games & other functions at the Senior High School and am very interested in both Tigard and Metzger. I love the quiet atmosphere of the entire area and my roots are here even though most of my family live in Dortland fighting the crime areas con§estion and busy streets. I will only move when I have to or when I am unhappy in this area, but not before. Thanking all of the Councilmen in advance for voting against this development in advance, I remain Sincerely, ~ Ina M. Walker PS I especially admired the lady who had the "guts" to ask David Blake "How would you like to live or your family right next to tall buildings?" Of course, he did not answer and ignored her completely. RECEIVED FEB 2 2 1990 COMMUNITY D&MOPMEar NMI • W r i '~'eS~ i M on, c~ ~ , Tt~m _:Pu b I i L HQ CLr i -1 C) f 5 3/Sc_A O HENRY KANE ATTORNEY AT LAW 12275 $.W. 2ND P. 0. BOX 510 AREA CODE 503 BEAVERTON• OREGON 97075 TELEPHONE 646-0566 FAX 644-9574 March 3, 1990 • .T Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor, and Councilors << ~fARR , City of Tigard Tigard City Hall U L= PO Box 2 3 3 9 7 Tigard, OR 97223 Re: March 5, 1990 public hearing on urban renewal proposal to finance "Presidents Parkway" development Dear Mayor Edwards and Councilors: This letter is written in my capacity as a Washington County taxpayer who will pay more property taxes if City of Tigard taxpayers adopt the above-identified urban renewal proposal. The reason is that so-called tax increment financing is double taxation. New taxable property under the plan is taxed, but the new taxable value-is not available to Washington County and other county-wide taxing bodies. That means the County, etc. must raise property tax rates to make up for the lost tax base. Therefore, property taxpayers outside the proposed Tigard urban renewal plan area subsidize the development. To state the obvious, the land in question would develop and increase the area's property tax base if the plan were rejected. Perhaps the developer will explain the reason, if any, property taxpayers outside Tigard should subsidize improvements the developer could obtain and finance through a local improvement district. The newspaper articles on the issue appear silent on whether the Tigard urban renewal agency will use the power of condemnation to acquire privately-owned homes and businesses for the benefit of the favored developer. Persons and businesses whose property is condemned rarely, if ever, are fully compensated for the loss of their homes, property and businesses. And some businesses are put of business permanently. And the residence that replaces the one lost through condemnation usually costs more than the price the urban renewal agency paid for the lost home. L f r Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Two The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard voters, taxpayers and property owners whether the plan calls for exercise of the power of eminent domain or condemnation - the legal authority to take private property on payment of compensation. The Tigard City Council also should inform Tigard voters of the reason, if any, the property cannot be assembled for development without urban renewal and without the taxpayer paying the cost of the improvements that will make the property more valuable. The Tigard City Council also should inform Tigard voters of the extent of commitment, if any, and the extent of financial resources to start and then complete the project the developer will invest. The Tigard City Council also should inform Tigard voters of the facts, if any, on which the proponents believe the property complies with ORS chapter 457, relating to urban renewal: (1) which parts, if any, are ORS 457.010(1) "Blighted areas"? (2) which affected buildings, if any, are ORS 457.010(1)(a) "unfit or unsafe to occupy" for living, commercial, industrial or other purposes?" (3) which buildings or structures are of ORS 457.010(1)(A) "Defectuive design and quality of physical construction?" (4) which buildings and structures are of ORS 457.010(1)(B) "Faulty interior arrangement and exterior spacing?" (5) which parts, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(C) "Overcrowding and a high density of population?" (6) which buildings, structures and geographic areas, if any, have ORS 457.010(l)(D) "Inadequate provision for ventilation, light, sanitation, open spaces and recreation facilities?" (7) which buildings, structures and geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(E) "Obsolesence, deterioration, dilapidation, mixed character or shifting of uses?" (8) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(b) "economic dislocation, deterioration or disuse of property resulting from faulty planning?" (9) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(c) "division or subdivision and sale of property or lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size or dimensions l for property usefulness and development?" Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Three (10) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(d) "laying out of property or lots in disregard of contours, drainage and other physical characteristics of the terrain and surrounding conditions?" (11) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(e) "existence of inadequate streets and other rights-of-way, open spaces and utilities?" (12) which geographic areas, if any evidence ORS 457.010(1)(f) "existence of property or lots or other areas which are subject to inundation by water?" (13) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(g) "prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments and social and economic malajustments to such an extent that the capacity to pay taxes is reduced and tax receipts are inadequate for the cost of public services rendered?" (14) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(h) "growing or total lack of proper utilization of areas, resulting in a stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to the public health, safety and welfare?" (15) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(i) "loss of population and reduction of proper utilization of the area, resulting in its further deterioration and added costs to the taxpayer for the creation of new public facilities and services elsewhere?" If the voters approve the proposed plan and the matter is challenged in court, will the City of Tigard be able to present evidence to support any claim that the geographic area is "blighted?" The Tigard City Council is aware of the sad experience of the nearby City of Sherwood, which must levy a property tax to pay for defaulted Bancroft land improvement bonds. The improvements cost more than the land value, developers did not develop the land, and Sherwood is making up the difference. Expensive! The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the "safety" procedures of the plan, if any, designed to avoid saddling Tigard taxpayers if the developer defaults. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the first year, this century or the next, that the anticipated new urban renewal property tax base will be subject to taxation by affected public bodies. Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Four The Tigard City Council is aware of the sad experience of the nearby City of Tualatin and its collapsed urban renewal plan, which never developed. I recommend that the Tigard City Council travel in the near future through the urban renewal area adjacent to Emanuel Hospital in Northeast Portland. Hundreds of blacks and others lost their homes in the name of "urban renewal" to benefit expansion of Emanuel Hospital. Much of the land acquired by condemnation or sale for urban renewal is parking lot or empty! Emanuel Hospital, of course, did not use the acquired land except for parking lots, to my knowledge. I stand to be corrected. The Tigard City Council should explain to Tigard voters the "advantages," if any, of the proposed urban renewal plan and development. Will the development mean lower property taxes? I doubt it, based on the urban renewal experience of the City of Portland, which has one of the highest property tax rates in Oregon. The per $1,000 tax rate levied by the City of Portland for municipal services is, if my memory is correct, between $7 and $8 per $1,000 assessed valuation! The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the dollar amount of the deposit, if any, the developer proposes to pay the City of Tigard to guarantee that it will develop 100% of its plan. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers if any of the developer's properties have been foreclosed, and if so, the dollar value of the foreclosed property and foreclosure reasons. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of (a) the number of acres and location of the geographic areas included in the urban renewal plan, and (2) how much of the total urban renewal district would be developed by the developer. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the estimated cost of (1) land acquisition, (2) utility, road and other improvements, (3) fees to consultants, (4) fees to attorneys, and (5) all other estimated costs by category or classification. of The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers/the "firmness" or reliability of the cost estimates. This Beaverton resident since 1973 knows that the City and its urban renewal agency estimated costs at $10 million. The last time I looked it was about $35 million. And that doesn't count interest. Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Five And most, if not all, of the developments such as the Fred Meyer shopping center would have occurred without "urban renewal." The March 2, 1990 Oregonian article titled "Tigard council to wrestle with Presidents Parkway plan" reports: "The developers say the project must move forward now or never * * * * * * But David Blake of Trammel Crow said that delay might be deadly to his proposal. "'I don't think it's possible to delay it,' Blake said. 'I think the council either needs to do it now or wait an entire year to the next May. My gut feeling is, they need to do it now, or it may never happen.'" The late Will Rogers is supposed to have said that God keeps increasing the number of people, but doesn't increase the amount of land. What is the need for "instant" decision? If the land is to develop, it will do so, with or without Trammel Crow. The Tigard City Council should identify which, if any, geographic area in the proposed urban renewal district is owned by or under option held by Trammel Crow, and if there are options, when each option expires. The Tigard City Council should identify by at least street address and owner of record each residence and other property that would be acquired to implement the proposed urban renewal plan. Finally, the Tigard City Council should explain the reason, if any, for giving what appears to be an exclusive contract to Trammel Crow instead of calling for bids and proposals from all interested developers, plus the extent, if any, Trammel Crow has lobbied, wined and dined or paid travel expenses in whole or in part to the mayor and councilors and officials of the City of Tigard, including but not limited to the chairman and members of the Tigard Planning Commission and the Tigard community involvement directo . Ve t e a e / cc: Citizen Participation Organization 4 Neighborhood Planning Organization 8 Tigard Planning Commission/City Administrator media hard die k v"44 'Io Cek WiG L L/ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Edwards and Members of the City Council FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment DATE: March 4, 1990 Below is the Errata items for the Comprehensive Plan text change: 11.8 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION # 8 In 1989, a major real estate development company, together with interested residents and property owners, proposed to the city a redevelopment concept for the area generally bounded by SW Locust, SW Hall Boulevard, Highway 217 and SW Greenburg Road. The development concept would require the redevelopment of an existing single family area to a commercial office campus, and would require that the city establish an urban renewal plan to help fund needed public improvements and other projects. The development concept would also require that the Comprehensive Plan designations for portions of the area be changed from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional, and subsequently, zone changes would also be needed from R-4.5 to C-P. FINDINGS o The City of Tigard together with a major real estate development company recognize the potential for a major planned commercial and office development in the area. A public/private partnership has been established, and an urban renewal plan, entitled the President's Parkway Development Plan, has been prepared in order to implement the commercial development concept. o Preliminary studies completed for the President's Parkway Development Plan have identified needed transportation, public facility, flood control and other improvement projects which will be necessary to serve commercial and office development expected for the area. o Additional studies will be needed as more specific development plans are approved which refine projects which are already identified, and identify other projects which are not now known. 1 o The area is characterized as transitional, that is an existing single family district that is converting to commercial use. Characteristics of the area which support this conversion and contribute to the decline in livability for single family residents include: Poor condition of residential streets not built to city standards, Lack of sidewalks, parks and other recreational facilities, Poor drainage conditions and occasional flooding, High traffic volumes on residential streets causing congestion and safety problems, An elementary school in the area which is at the very edge of its service area, is inappropriately located, and is in proximity to congested streets with high traffic volumes, Overall noise, congestion and high levels of activity in residential areas caused by the proximity of commercial and office uses, Declining residential land and property values. o Adiacent neighborhoods north of SW Locust and east of SW Hall are Predominantly single family residential. Residents of these areas have expressed concern about the potential traffic, noise, visual and other impacts which may result from the redevelopment of the subject area. Detailed planning and impact assessment is needed to ensure these neighborhoods are adequately buffered from these potential impacts. o In order to obtain a sound, unified development of high quality, an overall development plan for the entire area is needed. A Comprehensive Plan map amendment or zone change will not apply an overall development plan to all properties within the area unless each individual property owner agrees. An instrument other than a simple zone change is needed. o The most appropriate method to realize an overall development plan is through the use of the Planned Development Overlay District, City of Tigard Community Development Code. 2 1 o A Comprehensive Plan map amendment changing much of the area from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional is needed. This map amendment must precede any zone change. This area is shown on Map 1. o Changing the zoning to C-P in advance of redevelopment and conversion from existing single family uses to commercial uses may cause problems for the city and for property owners. Single family properties would likely be assessed for their zoned office potential, thereby increasing property taxes. It is not necessary or desirable to change the existing zoning until the land is needed for redevelopment consistent with an adopted Planned Development Overlay District. o Necessary public improvements should be in place or planned to be constructed in time to support each phase of development, and to offset impacts caused by each development phase. Public improvements and other measures should address impacts within the redevelopment area and in adjacent neighborhoods. Development should not proceed until necessary funding for these public improvements is available and secured. POLICIES 11.8.1 A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL SHALL BE APPROVED. (BEFGRE THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN !S AP9PTED BY THE GITY GO-UNGIL) ONCE APPROVED, THE CITY SHALL IDENTIFY NEEDED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND FUNDING SOURCES AND SHALL APPROVE ANY ADDITIONAL LAND USE ACTIONS BASED ON THE AVAILABILITY OF THE NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS AND FUNDING SOURCES. MAP ONE SHOWS THE MAP AMENDMENT. 11.8.2 A COMPREHENSIVE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED FOR THE ENTIRE AREA SUBJEGIR TO THE PRESIDENT'S DEVELOPMENT PLM, SHOWN AS MAP 2. THIS CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PREPARED AND ADOPTED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 18.80 OF THE CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC). 11.8.3 WITHIN THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ALL APPLICATIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (18.120, CDC), CONDITIONAL USE (18.130, CDC) AND LAND DIVISION (18.160-162, CDC) SHALL BE FOUND TO CONFORM TO THE APPROVED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (18.80.110, CDC). APPROVAL OF A DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR EACH PHASE 3 IDENTIFIED IN THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 18.80 OF THE CDC AND ' OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY TO THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED. IN ADDITION, THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE A MORE DETAILED ASSESSMENT OR UPDATE OF AN EXISTING ASSESSMENT AS NECESSARY FOR ANY ITEM OUTLINED IN POLICY 11.8.5. IN ORDER TO APPROVE APPLICATIONS FOR PLAN AMDENDMENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE ADOPTION OF THIS POLICY AND OTHER APPLICATIONS REFERED TO IN THIS SUBSECTION, ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOUND TO BE NEEDED BY THE CITY DURING THE PREPARATION AND SUBSEQUENT UPDATE OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (11.8.5) MUST EXIST_ PRIOR TO OR CONCURRENT WITH APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION. 11.8.4 APPLICATIONS WHICH ARE MINOR IN NATURE RELATED TO THE ON-GOING MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AND WHICH WILL NOT, IN THE OPINION OF THE DIRECTOR, JEOPARDIZE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPROVED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAY BE EXEMPT FROM POLICY 11.8.3. 11.8.5 THE CONTENTS OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL INCLUDE THE ITEMS LISTED IN 18.80.110 OF THE CDC. IN ADDITION, THE FOLLOWING TECHNICAL STUDIES AND OTHER NECESSARY ITEMS SHALL BE ACCEPTED OR ADOPTED AS APPROPRIATE AS A PART OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: A. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: THE TYPE, AMOUNT AND LOCATION OF VARIOUS USES. THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SHALL BE IDENTIFIED FOR THE AREA AS A WHOLE, AND FOR VARIOUS PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT. B. PHASING PLAN: THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BY PHASE ALONG WITH THE NECESSARY PUBLIC FACILITIES, UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, BOTH ON AND OFF-SITE, WHICH ARE NEEDED FOR EACH PHASE. THE PHASING PLAN SHALL ALSO INDICATE MEASURES PROPOSED TO REDUCE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS AND ON- GOING IMPACTS TO AREAS NOT BEING REDEVELOPED, AND TO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS. C. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ON AND OFF-SITE TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS RESULTING FROM AND RELATED TO EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. THE ASSESSMENT SHALL IDENTIFY TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. INCLUDING TRANSIT TO REDUCE POTENTIAL TRAFFIC IMPACTS ON ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE DEVELOPMENT AREA. 4 . E D. PUBLIC FACILITY AND UTILITY ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ON AND OFF-SITE WATER, SEWER, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY REQUIREMENTS RESULTING FROM AND RELATED TO EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT. E. FLOOD CONTROL AND FLOOD PREVENTION ASSESSMENT: AN ASSESSMENT, MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THE WETLAND PONDS AND LAKE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD ADDRESS THE FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES. THIS ASSESSMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED BEFORE ANY PHASE WHICH MAY IMPACT THE WETLAND LAKE AND POND, OR WOULD REQUIRE THESE IMPROVEMENTS IN ORDER TO HANDLE STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS. F. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING ASSESSMENT: SHOWING TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC FACILITY AND OTHER PROJECTS REQUIRED BY PHASE, COSTS, FUNDING SOURCE AND FUNDING RESPONSIBILITY. Y G. DESIGN GUIDELINES AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: SHOWING DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING HEIGHT, BULK, ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AND OTHER FEATURES, AND STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS STREETS, STREETSCAPE, LANDSCAPING, SIGNAGE, ETC. GUIDELINES SHALL ALSO INCLUDE METHODS TO ADEQUATELY BUFFER ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS. S 11.8.6 IF FOR ANY REASON THE PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS NOT ADOPTED OR APPROVED, WITHIN 90 DAYS OF SUCH ADECISION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL SHALL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING IN ORDER TO RE-EVALUATE THE POLICIES NOTED ABOVE, AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT NOTED IN POLICY 11.8.1. IMPLZMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The Tigard Community Development Code shall be amended as needed to reflect the policies noted above. 2. The City, through its urban renewal agency, shall enter into a development agreement in order to ensure implementation of the policies noted above. A:\Planll.8 5 WRITTEN TESTIMONY SUBMITTED AT THE 3/5/90 COUNCIL MEETING ?u- b TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 12420 S.W. MAIN ST., TIGARD, OR 97223 (503) 639-1656 HAND DELIVERED March 5, 1990 Mayor Edwards and City of Tigard Council Members 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Presidential Parkway Development Dear Mayor Edwards & City Council Members: At its February 28, 1990 meeting the Board of Directors of the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce unanimously adopted a resolution by which it specifically took no position for or against the planned Presidential Parkway Development at this time. Further, the Tigard Chamber Board will continue to review the Presidential Parkway development issue and has requested that representatives of Trammell Crow discuss these issues with the Board. Finally, the Tigard Chamber Board remains concerned about the viability of the Tigard Downtown Development and of the planned "growth" of the Tigard business and residential communities in an orderly and structured fashion which will ultimately benefit all of the Tigard community while preserving the uniqueness which makes Tigard... Tigard. Very 'TTrul , Michael J. Scott President C 1~u,b(1C f-PS~: Liarch 1990 Tigard City Council Tigard Civic Center 13125 SA.- Hall Blvd. Tigard, sit 57221 Dear Council 1;,emberss The residential area that is my home will cease to exist if the rresidents larkway commercial center becomes my neigh- bor across Hall blvd. to the viest. One of the premise of tax-increment financing is that it will raise "property" value in the area surrounding the urban renewal. that this means is that as the value -of my home becomes degraded by increased traffic congestion, noise, safety and health ha- zards, and poor air quality, its land value for more inten- sive uses will go up. The subject area in Letzger's Comprehensive Klan was to serve as a buffer for residential areas to the east. i:ow we are told that Hall blvd. slated in the plan to be widened to 4 lanes, is to serve as the buffer. In truth the newly en- larged state highway will serve just the opposite - that of marching intensive uses to the doorsteps of the residential areas and eventually encroaching on them. To me this is irre- sponsible planning that reflects strong bias toward commer- cialization of the area, and a disdain of the smaller, older Metzger homes, as well as a disregard for newer homes in the area. An est. 16,000 additional vehicles will be traveling our roads - hall, Locust, Cak, line, Taylor:, Ferry, 80th, and Vdashington Drive. Cur neighborhood roads will become the prime detour routes once any planned reconstruction be- gins on Greenburg, hall, Locust, and 217. Nothing assures that this will not continue after these roads are opened. By then buyers will be after our land, not our houses. V~hole areas off of hall east would be going from i•.onopoly-board green houses to red hotels, but it will be the developers, not the home owners who will benefit, just as Trammell Grow now stands to profit by cheap land acquistion within its pro- posed site. I have no intention of selling my home, nor do most of the residents east of hall Blvd. t:.any of us would have trou- ble finding affordable housing to replace what we value - the simplicity, privacy, huge shade trees, large lawns and gardens. Trammell Crow has said that it will relocate the school C._ Tigard City Council '.°iearint page 2 Tracy I..arch 5, 1 oc0 to a location of the school district's c! cosinE;, eP.st of hall. Trammell Crow identifies the area east of -Fall as the,'coMrruni- ty's safe area.. Ps a giant real estate developer, it knows only too well that, once they have a foothold, commercial ac- tivity is going to march across hall. ;.hat is there to stole it when 4 lanes of a state highway are there to serve its in- terests'i The truth is that l2ram.mell Grow's huge commercial center will generate so much traffic on our streets, that an excellant alternative s:rcol site simply will not exist. 1 challenge anyone-to show me a flat, open, 10-acre site that will not be impacted by traffic. What will its walker radius be, or are we going to have to r.,ake yet another concession to the fact that commercial values override the human ones, and never let ,ur children walk to school anymore, or ride bikes, or walk the dog? A woman was killed crossing 80th by the Community Grocery, on Dec. 26th; a child was hit on Lashington Drive. How much more is this community going to be asked to give in order that Trammell Crow gets what it wants? Housing in the 1,etzger area is comprised of low, medium, and high value houses. Infilling on large lots has gone on in past years in accordance with i.ietzger's Comprehensive Ilan. How many more single-family homes can the community east of Hall absorb? How soon will the commercial real estate brok- ers be be canvassing the area north of Locust? Speculators ff are already knocking on doors east of Hall. Residents have been given misinformation, false assurances, and ignored as very valid cor:ponents of current planning. *Goal 10 will not be satisfied when the social/psychological well-being of re- sidents is so disregarded in land use decisions that look to maximizing ccrz•:.rate profits and tax monies. Residents of a community contribute enerCy,er,thus iasm, time, expertise, and leadership to school and community. For Tigard planners to write off a potential 200 to 300 single-fwr.ily homes as the necessary price of desired commercial growth, is a tra- gedy. The needs of these residents must be addressed in the present planning. Statewide Planning Goal. 10, housing, re- quires more far-sighted assessments than are now being made in this race to finalize thinking for a 'i,is.y election. The very real impacts of present and continued commercial growth to this community must be part of a public dialogue. I can- not Gccept Trammell Grow's argu:ient that a rlovet,iber vote on this issue would be too late, master plannin;; would be lost, and other things on the ballot would detract. The City of Tigard Ilanning Commission voted unanimously to recommend a delay until November. To my mind this should give the resi- dents more time to become involved in a meaningful dialogue. {~~L(~1YtCI Fill il-1-6-IIJ 11n 39560 b~r,aG1 ~d Tigard City Council rearing page 3 Tracy Larch 5, 10,90 L.any essential questions remain to be answered regarding finance, transportation, housing, & natural r?~ources. These need to be addressed before the urban renewal district is made. I want to make it clear that I am against first the s ze of the proposed development. It is simply too big for our resi- dential community to coexist with. I would be looking at the master planning with much interest if the development were half its size. This way a prize wetland restoration could take place, of benefit to dwellers therein and viewers. A generous true buffer could be established on the west side of Hall Blvd. And traffic impacts would be cut in half. Access could be only from the Hwy. 217 side. Then the whole picture stops taking on such alarming proportions. If the size of the present plan were cut in half, our residential streets would not be so seriously impacted. Then the findin6 of a safe residential school site could be a rea- lity. Traffic and housing remain serious problems that must be dealt with with a master plan for the whole area, with the protection of the community rather than the accommodation of the developer in mind. It~is time for the City of Tigard also to stand up and be f counted long the cities of the nation who value wetlands for the eco ogical wonders that they are. An excellant mitigation, drafted by Tigard hearing officer, Beth Mason, failed because of a lack of supervision by the City of Tigard. In the light of species extinction, which is now a world-wide daily occur- ance, better protections for Tigard's wetlands and wild spaces need to be spelled out to insure that they do not get barter- ed away at any future tirie. I refer now specifically to the apx. 9 acres of wetland values on the present development site. I hope you will see fit to delay a vote on this proposal until the November election. I feel that it is imperitive that the school be moved be- fore any on-site construction begins. Thank you for your consideration of all the issues of this very complex proposal. j ~v~i~(~s~ 1 ~2cc~ Nancy eeaper Trac 7310 S line St . Portland, GR 97223 J~ h n ~ lv m ~.~..p~ i-P sk CCD March 5, 1990 .3/5/40 Tigard City Council If!ember. s cc - ham, QP~ 7v . l i ;ard City Hall Cvu,, n'L 13125 S. W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Gregor. 972.23 CASH: Comprehensive Plan :amendment CPA 90-0001: A&B ,Ve, the property owners ir: -the core area of the proposed development, are for a moratorium until. 1hlcrember 1990. The owners feel that -there has not been sufficient time to study the proposal and information, or clarification as to how the flood plain, wet- lands, traffic problems will affect the surrounding; areas. There must be positive action how these problems will be solved., before any urban renewal plan is passed. The impact of -this proposal will lower the land values of adjoining are-as. The construction process of this proposal will have a disastrous affect on the neighborhood area:~ for 12 ,years. Property owners throughout the iiietzger area feel that they,have built zp residential areas and have paid their share of taxes. A moratorium will -give them time to study the plan and decide whether or not they want to live in a congested commerc_Lal area. Owners have been offzred o Lions to sign anytime from 6 months to 3 years. If they do not sign, :it .as said, the development agency of Tigard would use " MINTEI'! r;. Iti to obtain the property, in turn sell it to the developers for commercial use. We are opposed to rushing this proposal to an early election in May. ile wholly support our Tigard Planning Commission recommendation that the urban renewal proposal be placed on the ballot at the November General Election. _-)..J- i~ - - - - - _ - - _ - _r_7 94 40 V x l .s ,6v sr Rate,: ='-~u - ~l - ---`~--`t _ J Vk-y- /r' V - t~ C~'~N°?C Gca.~s y _ s1 _ c<<--,~ 2? q4- pqA Feb. 5, 1990 3 /S Aq b j Tos Tigard City Council I attended the Tigard Planning Commiftions hearing on Febo 20, 1990 4 After a lot of testimony that lasted way past midnight, the Commi*tlsion members discusses the proposal for a Plan Amendment and the Urban Renewal Proposalo Testimony from many people raised major questions that could.not be answerede How is the school going to fair in all of this??? It may take years after construction begins before it is movedo The Construction noise will behard on their tender ears, & the instructors may have a hard time being heardo There are major concerns about traffic congestion and safety, Increased auto polution with 16,000 car trips gvery AAy , Some of these being through residential neighborhood* You say the traffic will travel Hwy 217 or Hall Blvd, YOU ARE WRONG It was promised when Washington Square's Meier Frank was built that traffic would not come into the residential area„ IT DID & IT DOES Now I wait for 15 to 20 oars to go by before I can cross Oak to get my mail, & that is before working kmx= people are on the road. If I am working in the yard I often am asked if Oak will lead them to Washington Squared Because they do not like freeway traffic. YET YOU CLAIM EVERYONE TRAVELS HALL BLD. & HWY 2170 This is a worry with our School Children going to & from School. The school bus may stop as they make a right turn to the South but cars going South don't stop if the want to go right "West" , Yet there are stop signs on the road. Many don't even slow down. Yes this is in the City of Tigardo If the Metzger school is to be moved. It should be done first as a protection for our children, who will govern our country in the future* (Not only will traffic be bad with trucks & Heavy Equipment 'loud noise level) < Page 2 If the School is moved the children will miss the wet lands & & tneir walks to see & study the wild life living there. (South of Oak & North of Hwy. 217) You say you will leave the trees. You have not done so. & if your trucks,Bulldozers & other equipment do not stay at least 50 feet from the trees you will kill them. As a long time resident of Metzger and as a taxpayer in the City of Tigard, I think it is terrible to push this whole proposal quickly without extensive studies and public information ktkad being developed first. The Planning Commit.tion rightly appoved a motion calling for a November election regarding an urban renewal district vote. The lack of information offi the school location; when the school will be transferred, What will happen to the Wetlands, and traffic impact problems aQ that will affect me and my neighbors are questions that-AL- support a delayed dote until November, Yes I amegainst you building what you call President Park. & if you would look at CPO** I 4's Comprehensive Plan you will see you all ready have gone to far. I want to go on record as opposing the change from residential to commercial in theMetzger School area. I support being able to vote on the urban renewal issue in November after we can see what the proposal will do and what it won't do. Thank you Frances Baynham 10495 S.W. 71st. C-- Tiolvres ~/vl. 3/5/40 '..E THE vEOi,LE OF METZGER OUTSIDE THE TIGARD CITY LIMITS :w POPE OF ANY FURTHER COMMERCIAL DEVEOI•MFNT -a71ITHIN THE METZGER COr:MUNITY, INCLUDING THE PORTION NOW INSIDE THE CITY OF TIGARD. f~ (I 7,40 'X,1 Imqf lelek f C~"Ao~ GL... ` ~ :J C-` 7) i rte' .r ~c ~ •f• , ~ C °r J 2 ZZ ~ + r;! 77 'i72e 7 j„10• Lam- q1 4. 7 7 V, 7 2,20 yyr' / l . V ~ 5 S' (J (J,/~'~ .~N L C f r f~ • c r 1( •1 .Z .7. J rj'~r~r,,,,4,•. ✓ /~7~'yGl. (y~am _r4~" J, ,~ry'~,~` ~/-~z.l ~7 ~:if•Jri March 5, 1990 Cloy Haeffele requests that her property at 10900 S.W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, (Township, Range and Section--ISI35AD--033.00------- Lot 4, 5 Block 0 Pt. Lot 8 of the Metzger Acre Tracts) be included in the Comprehensive Plan to be placed on the May, 1990, ballot. Cloy Haeffele feels that this property should be included for the following reasons: 1. The proximity of the property to the proposed plan area (just across Hall Boulevard). 2. If the Comprehensive Plan is approved as it now stands and Hall Boulevard is widened in the future, some of the property needed for the highway would, no doubt, be taken from these lots. This would reduce said property, and the property would be of lesser value than at present. 3. Said property is of no value as a residential property not now nor at any time in the future. 4. As the Comprehensive plan now reads, the commercial property would end near the Northwest corner of said property-----thus further lessening the value of said property. With the proposed access and exit of this development on Hall Boulevard as proposed, this would deem the above- mentioned lots actually worthless as they are now zoned. 5. Property on Hall Boulevard from Pfaffle Road south to Highway 99W is now commercial, and the property on Hall Boulevard beginning at Spruce Street and continuing north is commercial property, leaving only a small portion in this area as residential (actually the portion right in the middle of this area)-----then, only the portion on the east side of Hall Boulevard. (Cloy Haeffele questions why this small portion has been omitted.) 6. The creek running through the middle of this property flows into the wetlands of the proposed development. If this property is not included in the proposed Comprehensive Plan, Mrs. Haeffele questions what pro- tection will be guaranteed to her that there will be no future flooding problem on her property.Neither the City of Tigard, Washington County nor the State of Oregon has done much to protect this from occurring in the past. Based on the foregoing, Cloy Haeffele formally requests that the City of Tigard and the Tigard City Council include the above-mentioned property in the proposed Comprehensive Plan. ccf 3/S/g0 TO Xarch 5, 1990 4-PS-t. To Tigard Pi.annins*. Comwission if Ty ef ou/-) G l Re: CPA 90-00001 I have an 1? yr. old duplex vwithin the renewal boundary, located at 8770-8780 S.W. Spruce. I lived ti-,ere for over three years and know Metzler to be a pleasant and livable area. I frequently wallced and bicycled all t>>ose streets. I strongly oppose the comprehensive "."..an for the follouing reasons: 1. There is no proof that more professional space is needed; especially considerin.~x the tremendous amount of office space that has been added near-by along Kruse Way. 2. Yletz,ger Is a convenient desirable living area, some- - ~ thin- needed in Ti.s*.ard. Sncoura•ce more high-density attractive housing there instead of d('Iroyi.ng it. 6 j. The negative impact of this proposal far outs^avs the f positive. It coill disrupt thousands of lives , leaving what is left of I,;etzger in a turmoil, doubtful of x its future. 4. If there is a down turn in the economy, anfl it is i likely, w',o will be left lholdin-* the base on this grardi.ot\se developement? It is not fair to those who live tbere. -lease be sensitive to z:i~r L the home owners are saying and not be sucked into ,'lamorous plan ( On paner) . I'm si.cl. of detelopers calling the shots; as if money alone talks. t Sincerely yours c-4I Ann Landholm 19599 S. Central a't. Rd. Oregon City, Or. 97045 7 ,ate ~ ~ C~• ~ ~ n ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ fit, ~ ~ , c • t1 ~ ~ ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ l1, ~ ~ 1 -Z /Y)ov r e 3 /S111 o March 5, 1990 Tigard City Council City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Comprehensive Plan and `Lone Change from Residential to Commercial Professional for 78 acres, DLCD File No. 001-90 Dear Council Members, 1000 Friends of Oregon has reviewed the February 20 staff report regarding the comprehensive plan change identified above, referred to as the "President's Parkway Plan Amendment." We have a number of concerns with the proposal, including the timing of the proposal, need for commercial lands, and housing, public facility and neighborhood impacts. Please include this letter in the record of proceedings. Timing of Proposal The proposal represents a major change to the comprehensive plan, which if adopted, would mean the destruction of an established single family neighborhood and the establishment of a major commercial facility with regional impacts. It seems to us that the public review period has been far too compressed to address the many significant planning issues raised by this proposal (see letters from Susan Brody, Director of DLCD and from Bruce Warner, Director of Planning, Washington County). The City is currently undergoing Periodic Review, with a proposed order due to DLCD by the end of April. It appears premature to us to consider the President's Parkway Plan Amendment before the Periodic Review process is completed. The Periodic Review process offers an excellent opportunity to analyze housing, commercial, and public facilities needs in a comprehensive and logical manner. Periodic Review also is an opportunity to address improvements in the City's plan. For example, the Commercial Professional zone allows multifamily housing, but experience has shown that little multifamily development has occurred in other areas zoned CP (such as the Tigard Triangle). The subject 78 acres offers an excellent opportunity to develop more multifamily 300 WILLAMETTE BUILDING 534 S.W. THIRD AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 223-4396 Tigard City Hall March 5, 1990 Page 2 housing in the core area of Tigard, which has obvious benefits for transit planning and housing close to work places. The CP zone could be amended to provide more support for multifamily housing in conjunction with commercial developments. The City, however, is missing these opportunities by hurrying this major plan change through the public review process. Need for Commercial Development The staff report fails to address the need to provide for more land in the professional commercial category. It only addresses how the economy will benefit by zoning yet more land professional commercial. If the City's current inventory of commercial lands is insufficient to meet needs, this should be documented. Impacts on Housing The staff report concludes that the subject 78 acres are "severely impacted by adjacent commercial development and nearby roadways" (p. 7), and that the neighborhood is "somewhat deteriorated" (p. 8). These conditions are used as justification for the conversion. What standards are used by the city to judge "severely impacted" and "deteriorated"? The conclusions in the staff report need to be buttressed by facts and evidence. The City concludes that the conversion of 68 acres of low density residential and 10 acres of medium density residential to commercial will not violate Goal 10 or the Metropolitan Housing Rule. The housing rule applies as follows: "For plan and land use regulation amendments which are subject to OAR 660 Division 18 (Plan Amendments), the local jurisdictions shall either: (a) Demonstrate through findings that the mix and density standards in this Division are met by the amendment; or (b) Make a commitment through the findings associated with the amendment that the jurisdiction will comply with provisions of this Division for mix or density through subsequent plan amendments." This findings are glaringly deficient with regard to Goal 10. To justify the plan change, there must be a numerical analysis that shows this land is not needed in order to meet the City's regional housing responsibilities. Tigard City Hall March 5, 1990 Page 3 Public Facility Impacts There is inadequate analysis of traffic impacts generated by this massive commercial development. How does the master planning process propose to deal with off-site traffic impacts? It it clear the the State Highway system must bear the greatest burden for this proposed development. Is it equipped to handle it? Are the necessary improvements to Highway 217 (additional lane and ramp improvements), Hall Blvd., and Highway 99W part of ODOT's Six Year Highway Improvement Program? Are these improvements funded? Will they be provided for concurrent with Trammel-Crow's development? Does the traffic analysis account for the cumulative traffic impacts of other projects in Tigard which will also burden the road system? These fundamental Goal 11 questions must be addressed before the city approves the plan change. They would most logically be addressed as the city updates its public facilities plan during periodic review, as required by OAR 660-11-040. Neighborhood Impacts It is clear that the massive commercial development will significant impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, including noise, congestion, and diminishing property values. The city needs to do more than "endeavor" to mitigate these impacts. There must be binding conditions on the developer to provide adequate buffers, landscaping, traffic diversions, at a minimum. These conditions should be developed in conjunction with neighborhood representatives. DLCD Notice The February 2 DLCD Notice indicates that March 12 is the final hearing. Oregon administrative rule (OAR 660-18-025) requires local governments to notify DLCD at least 45 days in advance of the final hearing from the date the state was notified (which was January 29). The final hearing is the last opportunity to submit evidence. Conclusion We recommend an extended hearing process to address the above issues in context of the city's Periodic Review. We also support the Planning Commission's recommendation to not place the urban renewal district on the ballot until the November, 1990 election. Tigard City Hall March 5, 1990 Page 4 _ Thank you for consideration of our concerns. Sin a y, Paul Ketcham Senior Planner cc: DLCD L 1. 1 8440 SW Godwin Court v Portland, Oregon 97223 March 5,1990 Mayor Jerry Edwards Members of the Tigard City Council Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mayor Edwards and City Council Members: This letter is in response to case #CPA 90-01, a request to change the comprehensive plan map designations in the Metzger School area from low- density residential (approximately 68 acres) and medium-density residential (approximately 10 acres) to a commercial/professional designation. We feel the rationale of the staff report provides inadequate justification for the plan amendment, as required by state land use law and the city of Tigard comprehensive plan goals and policies. We are very concerned about the citizen participation process that is being used in the review of this plan amendment request. Because of the short time between notification of the proposed amendment and this hearing, our first opportunity to review the proposal was February 21, 1990 at a joint meeting of CPOs 3 and 4, w which was one day following the hearing by the Tigard Planning Commission on the proposal. We question whether the amendment request, as proposed, supports statewide planning Goal 1 for citizen involvement. The added intensity of development that would result from the plan amendment and envisioned subsequent urban renewal district would greatly impact our neighborhoods, and we concur with the comments submitted by Washington County in a letter dated February 8, 1990 that "the impacts of the development (are) multi-jurisdictional, reaching beyond the boundaries of the Tigard urban renewal district, as proposed, to include residential areas in unincorporated Washington County north and east of the development and perhaps even Portland neighborhoods across the county line." One of our main concerns is the amount of automobile traffic that would be generated by the proposed office/commercial development and the effects that would have on the livability of the many residential neighborhoods adjacent to and nearby the development area. The county letter also noted that "Even without the proposed development, Highway 217 and the surrounding arterial roads are becoming seriously congested." We agree with that assessment and feel the report of the Tigard city staff errs in its analysis and findings related to the transportation goals of both the state and the city of Tigard. Specifically, the mandates of statewide planning Goal 12 (transportation) and city of Tigard policies 8.1, 8.2, and 8.4 will not be met by the comprehensive plan amendment as proposed. Our neighborhoods are already adversely impacted by the nearby development of other regional facilities: Washington Square, Washington Square II, Lamonts, Target, Embassy Suites Hotel, the existing Lincoln Center office towers, and other intense office/commercial uses near Hall Blvd. and Oleson Road. Tigard City Council March 5, 1990 Page 2 We are also concerned about the statement on page 3 of the report that roadway "improvements" in the subject area will help "nearby underutilized properties (to) become more attractive for potential development..." means that further erosion of residential neighborhoods will be justified by the plan amendment. Increased automobile traffic generated by the envisoned development of the residential areas with high-density office/commercial uses could thus continue to eliminate housing, neighborhoods, and schools if the rationale of the staff report is accepted and the plan map change approved by the city of Tigard. We are concerned, too, that the kind of regional facility envisioned for the area has not been adequately evaluated by your staff in its support for the plan amendment. Land use planning in Oregon requires that a "need" test be met before comprehensive plans can be amended. The staff report does not address at all the need for 78 additional acres of office/commercial designated land in the city of Tigard, nor does it provide adequate findings that 78 acres of residentially- designated lands are no longer needed. Indeed, because of the regional scope of the envisioned development in the subject area, the staff report should also address the potential need for office/commercial designation regionwide, which it does not do. Given current office/commercial vacancy rates of between 18% and 25% in the Portland area and housing vacancy rates in the 3% to 5% range, we feel the proposed plan amendment that eliminates 475 existing and potential housing units is premature, at best, and does not meet state Goal 10 (Housing). Other reasons the proposed plan amendment is in direct conflict with Goal 10 (housing) are: • Page 3 of the staff report says that "even without redesignation of the subject properties, traffic...is anticipated to increase with attendant increases in noise and congestion effects on the neighborhood." We do not understand how the city can ignore its responsibility to assure that such neighborhood degradation does not happen as is called for in the existing comprehensive plan for the Metzger- Progress area. • Page 3 of the staff report also states that the area is "characterized as transitional, that is, it is an existing single family disrict that is converting converting to commercial use." This statement is untrue; the area is, in the comprehensive plan, characterized as an area "of transition", that is, one that provides a transition of intensity of use between the commercial and office uses to the west and the single-family neighborhoods within it and to its east and north. It is not planned nor is it now an area changing from residential to commercial uses, unless the city amends its plan. • Page 4 of the staff report says the area lacks parks, has poor drainage and occasional flooding, and an inappropriately-located school. In fact, the area has a major park within walking distance of the school and surrounding residential neighborhoods. The important wetland and floodplain areas are a natural resource that should be protected and enhan^ed, not neglected, filled, or otherwise ( allowed to deteriorate, as is required by federal and state mandate. The school is on the western edge of its service area, but could exist quite well with the adjacent office uses if the appropriate buffering and street improvements were made. Such Tigard City Council March 5, 1990 Page 3 was promised two years ago when the residents were persuaded to annex their properties to the city of Tigard. We believe Goal 11 for public facilities has not been met because the public facilities that will be necessary to accomodate the envisioned office/commercial expansion in this area are not now in place and have no method of funding unless a proposed urban renewal district is created. The residents of the city of Tigard only recently defeated a similar measure to create an urban renewal district and there is no certainty that they will not repeat that defeat. We further question the total lack of justification in the staff report for the change as it relates to statewide Goal 13 for energy conservation. To say, as does the staff report on page 5, that this goal is met because more cars will use the existing road system (one that is already used past its capacity) is absurd. The findings of the Tigard comprensive plan in section 9 Energy include the following statement: "Conservation of energy at the local level is best achieved through programs aimed at energy efficient transportation modes and land use patterns, reducing travel distances between residential and work areas, infilling vacant land, increasing densities of land use as a whole, and encouraging alternative energy uses." Implementation strategies associated with Tigard comprehensive plan policies 9.1.1 through 9.1.3 include the following: "T The Tigard Community Development Code shall allow for mixed use developments which will support a reduction in traffic trip generation. 8. The city shall coordinate with and support public and private planning efforts that advocate alternative forms of transportation such as mass transit, carpooling, ride share, bicycling and walking for commuter purposes. 9. Locational criteria shall be established to minimize vehicular travel in order to conserve energy." The proposed change from residential to office/commercial uses which would depend heavily on the automobile does not support these goals. Rather, maintenance and enhancement of housing in the plan amendment area, and building to planned residential densities would directly support the energy conservation goals of the state and the city of Tigard by affording the opportunity for people to live in an area near where they could work and attend school. We believe the planning found in the Metzger/Progress and Raleigh Hills-Garden Home community plans to be valid and are concerned that the livablity of these areas is being sacrificed by this proposed plan amendment. We do not believe statewide planning Goal 5 for natural resources has been met because the staff report does not address it in the context of the proposed plan amendment. There are in and near the subject area a stream, floodplain and extensive wetlands that would be adversely impacted by the development envisioned by the plan amendment and urban renewal district. The city of Tigard should ensure zoning for this land that protects the resource by avoiding conflicting uses and the staff report does not consider this. Our concerns relate to the inadequacy of facts and findings to support statewide goals 1 (citizen involvement), 2 (land use planning), 5 (natural resources), 6 (air t and water quality), 10 (housing), and 11 (public facilities), 12 (transportation) and 13 (energy conservation), as well as their companion comprehensive plan policies for the city of Tigard. We request that you delay the final hearing and action on fr Tigard City Council March 5, 1990 Page 4 this proposed comprehensive plan map amendment for at least two months to allow us the necessary time to adequately review and comment on its potential effects on our community. Sincerely, F vV ' ~ 1 Mr. and Mrs. William J. Moore E' G F f t S a j~ si P t i C 7 1 l 4 r1anning February 1990 ,316-AF0 The Giveaway Game Continues ~j When jobs are at stake, state and local governments still dole out the goodies with abandon. By Robert Guskind s T llinois officialdom breathed a collective } $ sigh of relief last June when word came that Sears, Roebuck and Company had cho- sen the Chicago suburb of Hoffman Estates as the new location of its 6,000-worker mer- chandise group. Sears had announced earlier in the year that it would leave its \ - landmark building, the Sears Tower, in downtown Chicago. t ~ Although keeping Sears cost the state some $178 million and didn't create a single new job, Gov. James R. Thompson hailed the decision as "a great victory" for his state. . To keep Sears, Illinois beat out offers from dozens of cities and states, including 400 acres and a permanent lid on property taxes from Dallas and 300 acres for $1 in 1 Charlotte. Illinois countered with a $61.1 _~.•1 million package: 520 million in highway improvements, $33 million for on-site infrastructure improvements, $6 million in state tax breaks from a newt created enter- Prise zone, $1.1 million in job training _ • O ' 1 ~funds, and a $1 million interest-free loan to allow Sears to build a child care center. Hoffman Estates threw in the 786-acre site, worth $86 million. Sears will occupy only 1 ^ f part of the site but is free to develop the rest. ~ And that's not all. To buy Chicago's ac- I quiescence to the Hoffman Estates pack- age, Thompson reportedly committed himself to backing a number of projects in 1 i~~ the city-including an annex to the McCor- mick Place convention center, a subsidy for till renovating Navy Pier, and infrastructure / - improvements for one of the sites the city IM, had tried unsuccessfully to sell Sears. Drawings by Patti Green P.'. sV. 5 Big as the Sears deal was, it wasnt the Illinois champion. To win a Chrysler- Mitsubishi Motors plant in 1985, Illinois put together a package worth $183 million, and during the circus-like competition for the General Motors Saturn plant that tions, and job training subsidies routinely i t ultimately went to Tennessee in 1985, Il- run into tens of millions of dollars. linois offered a $200 million package. All told, for instance, New York has r Such packages are now commonplace. shelled out more than $600 million since \ According to a recent survey by the Federal 1983 to keep just six firms from moving out: ` Reserve Bank of Chicago, 38 states offered Chase Manhattan Bank ($235 million), Na- 1 construction loans in the 1980s, and nearly tional Broadcasting Company ($98 mil- 40 offered some kind of tax break, up from lion), Shearson Lehman Hutton ($74 \ 23 in 1970. million), Drexel Burnham Lambert ($85 ` A "war of all against all" is how North- million), Citicorp ($97 million), and the ` western university management professor Dreyfus Corporation ($4 million a year). ~O~ . • Donald Haider describes the current com- Austin, Texas, forked over $1.3 million petition for economic development. ' worth of tax abatements to get Conquest 1 Haider, who is writing a book tentatively Airlines, a small regional carrier, to move I ) titled Place Wars, estimates that state and its headquarters from Beaumont. The air- local business incentives now exceed $30 line will relocate 78 employees to Austin billion a year. and add another 25 workers. It promises to "It's corporate blackmail;" says Ted stick around for 14 years. Anders, who was mayor of the Detroit sub- Louisville went after the headquarters of ' r l urb of Flat Rock, Michigan (pop. 7,000), the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. with a $30 1 when it began courting a Mazda Motor Cor- million (mostly private funds) package. The ~r poration auto plant in 1984. Upping the city's next target is the Methodist Church, stakes, the state simply announced that Flat currently headquartered in New York City. Rock was obliged to offer a 15-year, $40 mil- Louisville mayor Jerry Abramson says the lion property tax break to the Japanese auto city is following a "planned strategy" in maker as part of a $120 million incentive deciding which businesses, developments, package. and organizations will be wooed and how As it turned out, Mazda did choose Flat big the subsidies will be. "We're not doing Rock, but the plant imported most of its anything by chance" Abramson says. workers from elsewhere in Michigan. At some point, though, even the most Angered by the lack of jobs-and by eager go-getters call it quits. Fort Wayne, In- skyrocketing property tax bills-local resi- diana, invested $15 million to lure a Bur- \ dents voted Anders out of office in 1985. lington Air Express hub in 1985. But then, E / "Corporations are playing cities like a last February, when the time came to sign piano" says Louis Masotti, a Northwestern a permanent lease, Burlington asked for 1 University business professor. "Everybody more money. Fort Wayne said no. So Bur- is using the same basket of tools. The real lington looked elsewhere, finally coming winner is the company that gets the incen- up with a generous offer from Toledo, Ohio. ~t tives.They're getting something they don't Toledo's subsidy amounted to some need to do something they would have $125,000 per job. "We're players in develop- done anyway" ment but we're not suckers;' says Fort / Economic development specialists have Wayne Mayor Richard Helmke of the deci- railed against business incentives for many sion not to match the offer. 1 years. Public officials say they don't like New York City got even-at least a them. As more and more cities have little-when Merrill Lynch announced last stepped up to the deal-making table, local June that it would move 2,500 back-office antitax groups and community coalitions workers to Jersey City (lured by $13 million have joined forces to oppose them. Still, a in low-cost financing, property tax few decades after the first "smokestack abatements, and utility discounts). Former chasing" war erupted between state govern- New York Mayor Edward Koch countered / ments, juicy incentives are as popular as by yanking Merrill Lynch as senior under- ) ever-except in the very few communities writer of the city's municipal bonds, an ac- whose economic health allows them to say tion that will cost the company $4 million no. a year. 1 Increasingly, economic development The deals pros are questioning the Faustian bargains Around the U.S., inducement packages in- that lure corporations and that com- 1i~ cluding low-interest and interest-free loans, munities are making with the big corpora- tax abatements, outright grants, land dona- tions, trading outright government 6 Planning February 1990 questing a tax abatement is what we now everyone in the city-except for the normally do in our manufacturing plants developers and tenants of tax-abated around the country." Then he added, "That's projects-got huge increases in their prop- not to say we wouldn't go ahead with [the erty tax bills. Taxes on a $250,000 apart- Wayne] project if we did not get the abate- ment in the heavily tax-abated, waterfront investments and loans for the promise of ment. It's very likely we'd do it anyway." Newport project were fixed at $3,300, jobs and future growth. 'The tendency to while the owners of a $250,000 home pile incentive on top of incentive is not in When tax elsewhere in the city got a bill for $7,500. the public sector's interest;' says Rick abatements aren't The tax-abated projects represent 'gross Cohen, until last July director of develop- enough, cities must municipal mismanagement;' says Mia ment for Jersey City and a veteran of some come up with more Scanga, a member of the Jersey City Coali- of the most heated skirmishes of the New tion for Fair Taxation. York-New Jersey border wars. (Cohen has tangible incentives. Detroit will lose about $100 million in also defended the generous abatements That means heavy revenue from tax abatements it gave out in given in Jersey City, noting that they gave borrowing and the the 1980s-the bulk of it to automakers. the city leverage to demand linkage hope that tax 'We have taken hundreds of millions of payments for housing, priority in hiring revenues will cover dollars that could have gone for services to local residents, and adherence to water- the neighborhoods and devoted them to the front design guidelines.) loan payments. care and feeding of large corporations that The big danger is that the deals will go haven't delivered;' says city council sour, and taxpayers will be stuck with the "Once it starts, everybody has to up the member Mel Ravitz. Onlya third of the jobs bill. Says Richard T. Anderson, the presi- stakes;' says Robert Friedman, director of promised by such corporations as General dent of the Regional Plan Association in the Washington-based Corporation for Motors and Chrysler in return for tax New York City: "Some communities have so Enterprise Development. A case in point is breaks, loans, and other subsidies have ac- heavily subsidized economic activity that Cleveland, where, late last year, the city tually materialized. they will never be able to recover the sub- council finally approved a $122 million tax Indianapolis Mayor William H. Hudnut sidy" break for the 60-story Ameritrust Center III calls his city's tax-break policy-part of project, which will include a much-desired what is widely regarded as one of the na- Time-honored practice Hyatt Regency Hotel. The developer of the tion's most aggressive development and Local governments in the U.S. have always project had earlier gotten a similar tax business recruitment programs- creative given financial incentives to business. In break on another office-hotel project. leveraging" While the Lilly Endowment the 1870s, for instance, the zigzagging route This time, when the concession seemed (assets $1.9 billion) has underwritten much of the New York and Oswego Railroad was slow in coming, city officials received an of the municipal benevolence with some dr..;.:mined by 50 cities that put up a total ominous letter from Nicholas J. Pritzker, $30 million a year in grants, the standard of $5.7 million. Unfortunately, the line the president of Hyatt. If the tax breaks tax concessions have been costly. More went belly-up shortly after completion, weren't enacted by year's end, he wrote, than $1 billion worth of new offices, shops, leaving the cities holding the bag. The orgy Hyatt would pull out of the project. And and hotels have been built downtown since of public subsidies came to a halt-at least without the hotel, said Ameritrust ex- 1980. Yet potential tax revenues on the ven- temporarily-when hundreds of cities ecutives, the whole project was dead- tures have been deeply slashed because of began defaulting on their obligations. which meant that Ameritrust might leave the $155 million worth of tax abatements In this century, incentives were less an Cleveland. granted between 1984 and 1987. issue when federal money was more "Everywhere you turn there's growth;' readily available. But as the funds dried up The real cost says Carl E. Moldthan, head of the In- in the 1980s cities and states were back Former Cleveland Mayor George dianapolis Taxpayers Association. "But on • playing "Let's Make a Deal" Today, says Voinovich-who in the late 1970s clamped paper there's nothing" Rutgers University urban affairs professor down on Cleveland's notoriously lucrative George Sternlieb, "it's every community for tax breaks-defended the huge Ameritrust Gambling itself; the mayor has gone from the guy who abatement as a loss leader. "Later on, he When tax abatements aren't enough, cities delivers services to the merchant-in-chief" said, 'hotels will be coming in here without must, of course, come up with the cash for Mayors and economic development of- needing abatements" Voinovich noted that more tangible incentives. That means ficials say that despite countless studies even with the tax breaks the project will net heavy-duty borrowing and the hope that showing that financial "incentives" the city $4.2 million annually. The tax revenue or rents will eventually return generally don't determine private invest- downside: The hard-up Cleveland school enough money to cover loan payments. ment decisions, any town or city that system will lose an estimated $48 million in Sometimes that doesn't work. Fort Wayne stonewalls the bidders does so as its peril. revenue over the life of the tax break. was chastened after it loaned a computer Holding out inducements is "a standard part The public costs of business and develop- firm $ 1.1 million, and the company went of the offering, says Robert Peche, vice- ment incentives can, in fact, be staggering. belly-up before it ever got to town. To get a president of the San Antonio Economic De- By conservative estimate, New York City's private race track built near Des Moines, velopment Foundation. various incentive programs have cost at Polk County, Iowa, guaranteed $42 million The firms themselves are not shy about least $2 billion in public revenue in the last in industrial development bonds. The track asking. When the Ford Motor Company ap- 10 years. Across the Hudson in Jersey City, has lost $6.5 million so far. The debt pay- plied for a tax abatement in 1989 to upgrade the valuation of real property skyrocketed ment over the 28 years of the bonds is $100 its Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, a com- to $5.6 billion in last year's reevaluation- million, $10 million more than the county's pany representative admitted that "re- up from $800 million in 1972. Nearly annual budget. i 7 25-year period, and then borrows against the future revenue projection. When the tax money starts rolling in, it's used to pay off the bonds. Not a penny goes into the city treasury until the bonds are paid off. Invented in California in the 1950s, tax J ( increment financing now figures in vir- tually all big city development projects. A few cities are even experimenting with "S IF," which dedicates the sales tax reve- nue a project generates to underwriting the / / r ^1 \ borrowing costs. d L A,` \ 1 In Detroit, for example, tax increment fi- + nancing was used to underwrite the initial tZ 3$ - costs of demolishing part of the Poletown ; '/.d 1 J neighborhood for a General Motors plant, I ! 1 t' i with the cleared land donated to GM-at a \ cost of over $300 million and an additional 510 million a year in interest on the loans the city took out to finance the deal. I ►1 , e - Tax increment financing also figured in the deal Illinois used to sell Sears on its new I I / 1 suburban Chicago location. The catch in this case is that Hoffman Estates was not 1J o I , "blighted;' as an area is supposed to be in order to satisfy state and federal TIF regula- tions. To get around that hurdle, the state 1 - = created a new TIF category-'economic de- velopment zones"-for areas like Hoffman 1 ad ! ► Estates. Indianapolis has created a huge, 192- 1 block TIF district to help finance construc- tion of the Circle Center Mall, a three-and- a-half-block downtown shopping, office, ) and entertainment complex. The city bor- rowed $200 million to underwrite con- struction of the $640 million project and will use the TIF funds to pay off the debt. Because the project is also heavily tax I••\ abated, it can't count on the normal source of debt service, property tax revenue. ,il _ ,I r 11~ I Just say no A handful of cities-particularly those fac- ` 1i`~ ` t ~I • i ing growth pressurehave learned to say / ~.i ✓ ~~v - no to the pressure. In 1988, after a high- profile search of the mountain and plains states that featured incentive packages ap- A handful of cities -particularly those proaching $100 million, U.S. West finally settled on Boulder, Colorado, as the loca- facing growth pressures -have learned to tion of its research division. This time, the say no to the incentives game. Among city wasn't offering any incentives. In fact, them are Boulder and Philadelphia. it asked the company to think about a loca- tion other than the one it originally settled on, because that site was to be kept as open Some towns have become equity part- out failed festival marketplaces that they space under Boulder's growth-management ners in projects. If the project makes bankrolled in full. plan. U.S. West finally settled on the money, they get a cut of the profits. If the One of today's most popular borrowing University of Colorado research park. U.S. ienture is a turkey, they foot part of the bill. tools is tax increment financing, which lets West "gave a shot in the arm to sensitive On particularly risky projects, some cities cities circumvent the federal restrictions on land-use planning" says John Fernandez, have taken on 100 percent of the financing using tax-free financing for private busi- assistant planning director in Boulder. "It and assumed the full risk of development. ness ventures. 7b use TIF, a city sets up a re- was an endorsement of our approach" Now such cities as Richmond, Toledo, and development district, estimates the tax Philadelphia, which has abated some Flint, Michigan, are responsible for bailing revenue a project will generate overa 20-or $500 million in downtown taxes in recent mii 8 Planning February 1990 towers, part of a long-stagnant redevelop- ment plan. New York also gave the go- ahead-and a $47.3 million tax abate- ment-recently to a controversial project at Columbus Circle that was first denied be- - cause of its size. But the break is $300,000 ` less than originally requested, and even j -/ice though he opposed the original deal, Dinkins voted in favor of the revised arrangement. e Several jurisdictions have sought truces ~ r ~ ~ ^1 ~ ~ to the bidding wars-or as former Michi- gan Republican Governor William G. > Milliken put it in the 1970s, a "SALT pact" 3 - for states and cities. But so far such pro- posals have fallen flat. Last year Michigan C / . + held a "Midwestern summit" meeting in an effort to get its neighbors to stop handing I I C ~ i • ,r/ r out tax breaks. One of the states balked- -reportedly Illinois-and the idea was (t dropped. In the interim, more and more jurisdic- tionsare routinely demanding their own quid pro quos from businesses and developers before handing out public sub- sidies. For example, New York's $235 mil lion Chase Manhattan agreement included - C a proviso: Should the bank decide to leave ) town before the 22-year deal expires, it will be liable to reimburse the city retroactively (with interest) for all the benefits it got. l..)~ - In Michigan a huge court battle has been launched by local governments trying to czx~ stop General Motors from getting $100 mil- x,4.,1, , : • 1 / 1 r lion in property tax refunds on existing auto plants. Some of the towns say they'll be driven into bankruptcy if GM wins the tax b ~V.. breaks. A few companies that reneged on their deals have even been dragged into court. Chicago got tough with Playskool, Inc., a O J toy manufacturer which received a $1 mil- t lion city loan in 1980. In 1984, the company announced it was shutting down, and the city sued. It won an out-of-court settlement / - ✓ ` requiring Playskool to stay open an extra 10 months and set up a job placement program and a $50,000 fund for laid-off workers. Cities are routinely demanding quid pro Significantly, Playskool made no pro- quos before handing out public subsidies mises that it would stay in business-or in like tax breaks and free land. town when it got its loan. In fact, many of the jurisdictions mentioned here seem to be operating on faith that the companies they are being so generous to will act in kind. II- years, has let it be known that it's short on packages if Mayor David Dinkins follows linois, for example, didn't require Sears to cash and isn't going to be playing the incen- through on campaign promises and re- commit itself to a long tenure in the state, tives game anymore. Says city finance stricts the city's economic development let alone in Hoffman Estates. Nor did it re- director Elizabeth Reveal: "We're making a programs to truly needy parts of town. In quire that Sears keep a certain number of conscious policy decision right now to get the past, tax breaks flowed freely to such jobs in return for the subsidy. Said Gov. out of the business of incentives. Com- upper-crust Manhattan projects as AT&T, Thompson in announcing the deal: "I am panies should not look to us for large incen- which got a $42 million abatement for its sure Sears will do the right thing." tives. It is simply not affordable" Madison Avenue tower in 1978. The city is The new year might even see New York still considering abatements upwards of $1 Robert Guskind is a contributing editor of City contain its generous financial billion for several Times Square office Planning. f.. Ville restaurants., Map; ; t It was the first honorary franchise that George Propsta, owner of the fast-food chain, "t 0 ever had given to anyone, and it went spe- cial delivery: He brought it himself.' f "This is. a delightful class, these are delightful students," Propsta said. "This is a ' x class that I would want to be in. It looks like fun." For three months school administrators and company officials had planned the sur- prise for Burger, who has set up his class room to resemble a small town - complete with park benches and study cubicles that Tigard Elementary School teacher Wait Burger (seated, center), Inc., which owns E look more like apartments. founder of a classroom community called "Burgerville," is Klinger, company At the entrance to his room is a sign that given posters by George Propsta (left), chairman of Holland students also receh says, "Welcome to Burgerville." n Burger, 44, a portly man with a long beard and ruddy cheeks, was surprised by the visit. "We all have to live in the room; we have a job to do. 4 I am just amazed," he said. "I don't know 4 what to say. "It has been fun doing all of this, We might as well make it fun," N but it wouldn't have been possible without -Walt Burger, the class I have." y Burger's students crowded around to con- Tigard sixth-grade teacher ti gratulate him as Propsta and the company's vice president, Patrick Klinger, presented ner next to the blackboard. Attached to that District for 13 years, practices "cooperative' } the teacher with a franchise certificate and is a mood chart that tells students whether education in which students work in group; some posters. Burger is in a "cool" mood (everything is to solve problems Burger presents to them. But where the posters will hang is any- great), "moderate" (good day, but could be The study cubicles, containing desks anc a body's guess. better) or students should evacuate the chairs and curtained off from the center o: Students' creative drawings of U.S. presi- school and nearby property. the room, are earned by students when the} dents hang from a clothesline running In another corner is a sketch of a man complete assignments and can work witl; through the middle of the room, and brightly resembling Burger, who says, "Be quiet or each other as well as independently. colored drawings of geometrical patterns are I'll eat you." "It has been fun in the creation," Burgei v' on every wall. A puppet theater is in the cor- Burger, who has been in the Tigard School said about his room. "We all have to live ir' ~'lh. Jy~ ?1 l vW lsuns t suburbs warned of Construction OREGON CITY - A I By STEVE KADEL acteristics of New York in the late must provide educated workers man was taken to Eman Correspondent, The Oregonian 1970s," Higgerson said. "It has the capable of performing demanding & Health Center by Life same kind of congestion." jobs. There must be opportunities copter Thursday after t • Washington County will benefit for continuing education so workers 25 feet onto concrete a' Us low- a Washington County can profit p y'mg production jobs in the can "keep expanding their knotvl- City construction site. from the situation if it grows cau high-technology industry continue edge base," he said. Fred Gilmore, 55, wa to move overseas while more desir tiously enough to preserve a quality "If you can only have a finite condition with a head of life "the rest of the country would able "knowledge-based" jobs remain die for," he said. number of people in an area it Thursday afternoon, act in this country, a California venture makes sense to get knowledgeable, hospital spokeswoman. papitalist says. Noting a rebirth of the visit-but- value-added people," he said. i But Cliff Higgerson warns that don't-stay attitude in Oregon, Hig- William Conerly, economist for Washington County's bright future Berson said: "That's probably a good First Interstate Bank of Oregon, is threatened by ill effects of rapid idea, having seen the Silicon Val- agreed that rapid growth could kill I.OBITUA growth already evident locally. ley's growth and problems we have Washington County's economic Higgerson, a general partner with there now." boom. Communications Ventures of Palo Higgerson said local companies "It has surprised me for a while Alto, Calif., spoke Wednesday dur- such as Lattice Semiconductor Corp. that the Sunset Corridor and Bonnie Lee McPhen ing the Sunset Corridor Associa- and Mentor Graphics Corp. are ex- Washington County has done as well A memorial service fo tion's annual meeting at the Cornell amples of the American high-tech- as it has, given the fact that travel is McPheron of Cornelius w Oaks Corporate Center. nology industry's changing face. easier on the east side" of the metro Monday in St. Anthon "There can only be so many peo- They are "the wave of the future in area, Conerly said. Churrlt in Forest Grove ale and so many companies in an the semiconductor industry," he "I find it difficult to drive the her home Saturday of ca: Area before you see a significant said, replacing the 1980s-style plant streets west of Highway 217," he 42. deterioration of the standard of liv- that employed a thousand workers said. "It reminds me of being in Mrs. McPheron, who ing," he said. "The thing to do, as I in production facilities. Orange County (California) or Palo nie Lee Leydecker on De See it as an outsider, is to maintain All Lattice does is Alto. Buffalo, N.Y., received l What you already have." design semi- "The issue is, how much growth? in California and had wo . The Beaverton area will increas- conductors and have other people We are going to argue about that 10 taurant manager in Lakc ingly be a haven for Californians sell them," Higgerson said. It's times more next year than we are lived in Cornelius sir tired of mile-long bumper-to-bumper called the Tab-less' semiconductor this year." worked as a teller in the traffic and high housing costs, Hig- industry, with production done in Conerly predicted Oregon's econ- Merchants Banks in Forc' Berson said. One-way commutes in other people's plants - usually omy will continue to do better than 1980-84. Califot nia's Silicon Valley common- overseas.,, the national average during the next Surviving are her lit ly take 90 minutes or longer, he said. To cash in on the trend, however, few years. "But not by as much as in sons, James Morgan of S "The Silicon Valley has the char- Higgerson said Washington County recent years," he said. John Jr. and Robert, bott r, . 0^ . W IPP scent'. nee effect on the adl consider the rb~ir1. ent;of stem as d Departm land-uses y ied fox fan °a4d they woxkizig Oregon. reoccuP :LCI3 been been unavoidablY- P . Ong; rur TransPCrtaon have g het; .the e one witY tha a dsecondaxY. er on legit Pee:oriLand. tligw togeth Gomm som..... es an ues cry fat xp t stall better issues of foxes,span 3ointLeld Monday Clacks as- But feSg.:. _ s..... - Use was needed. ' to. area, fan too =tjaDevel, dlx►officon !S. o~nted . ; . out for a..... exvation xopriately.' COOrials F boundary . n CO le, Col sinty the. growth.'..., ComoS!P ~s for TbeLa app a a, coup oplnent riority:. s orta ln tela'~aubupthe tiansP°x n, given;ahigh. p txan p where has ban blockbusters einent for eater deASitY+ povide fox of ur inaaag „ fan does, n°t Bon w s 1,ed, not"stop bl... tote c ante elo Pointto' W can on Go its Su1?urban:sprawl die end of spravul.. Mckama ~ Blt did,, Road as ~Nd o,, of 1~po ng'pxessure . itself:Eyen... eex►d ofodated t y~aikex •Roa utti axe would not be. the acSA to, ; : Gxowd?x°us=,'d'evelop~ent' lation gr0' P Left~one~;~ey the ds . . Wing reYenti g= a coup t" uUZ roa us a for tY. old c9.. de {hey wb}le P ers~n s stem t' erousi Ana arddle reach evexstion Y Bang of travel option is {he where it.. e'. ten`, side, ,aa dense:'°p`taen.p paw : volu did; hey . 110,W ust d parks to n~ xb9 neighb°xroods established hove.. ' hoofs m ; t;e wislies to g9! entl?Tessure, or city is vs. Bi:enrallm. -:break issue of Ile"' odxesolved? . meted neigh is eonn. must provide well rtatlon• fits ansp° • ` • r Q~th• But`:` . Tr dwellers. study . urban g oes`_06 C's growth lanngw- ects:`Qi°.._ ,.all'asP -,gxowB? es emir°f LCD C's Mau* . stry and , wiBi a gx0wthmd by the ~tletxQPa.. ,~?e.:,.; riOg , .Or -L. also • . . loll beuig develope d should,.; t trans►Q.. nehts d ~iStrict an the state: • housing, :locaf the bs an . Sergice toothercities..m.the tame is `orial. sha? 'well; as schools helpful clearer,,a11 ::.regi. owth, aseseb~ issues t need,for .cl wose coordB?a s ace.,Th, . on the G BBecolnn~g ith land use cost o e P lace ortation the,:: ;and . rominent. P G the urgen ansp over;-, Bon °f contxoversY demon'. iteserv D~ agenda "S y dust . net tp planning ,way b " ass has westside. ass fox: a g Q strated, P tn e 31.1'10 ® C5 Y 23.1990 ~ THE ORLGONIAN, FRIDAY. gRUAR C ■ v ■ ■ 0 ~u~th C cha~ neVV direction ais for new develop ems State lan to submit proPos ti as ught rau sY .:f firms p halterna ves ••r~ ~~:l4'~'~ d ow a real, if `t,, t wIIl include suc E roaches • •K{: ~a,,s~tra , rri1X a commute Anggs is beginning eve has app } stem, ns sY Los ,inter~oroBradleyb°m r.-Y.•_,,." p(~ ters in the W°krs t city pewhat anning. overdue Mae projects" that cow de busj velop- used CIuS advocate of ,mi He recently sap, er Rauch, by t3E.M AHp£RSOtm nesses and residences. suburban PTOJ~' P construction {£R TR of the a news eduse d g WAL much of ahu6 soma mix to et aroua. eTS at they add blepeople America an ngtolead d it in fisting th ich led Am t g lama°ana . „9'., ; •'~waEC°°T" California, wh a+ 15 6eglmii mars ins ttiebussYs n theircars- strict, Calif omobile ag ong estion, and ashu out usi g ameba Di dswith ag connections world into the aut t with smog, c highway for local err an Quallty ManOrange cep" mical er direction Beset and astrono 'i?y`::':'__.`i_'; Its ts that there are many and virthe way another on a new f° Thu South Coast Aix overs Los Angeles and centiy adopted l7 onmenL anon co oRegister insis and the global en utCosts distances are working urban mng • , 11 the major ' will be re away plancoon one~giot much less tike whose aut, as nearby Wand regions, Washington state. a een constru ties as welt as that calls for a radical shift a way uvie rban o hies and a tovms', vision of the future - ant equated transpor a Clean Air Plan es. Over the next Call 20 communities built in Florida, or caul per abet combustion getable, an rado. o lurningihe world into a P rnm Southc~ ern et some ec For decades the state gave wa s Now it is Conn stuff for California, doing Y can to we taus live - in them, is a m cal city„ on on to the plan ecticut and COW wlibbuild>ngmorefree freeways ' trapsat from internal to 'clean g oima is heady all they of environmental degradatilogi ~ lann>ng interest m m years. according t get used around in Ali tile first " talion P rlsingiy strong fornians will firs le drive logically minded activists are The basic design PrEarth Ecology of taking a surf California s batteries or fuel cells. es even further. Zer Richard Register. urban is h to bring ng together city planne alternaKve fuels awereredbYnnand developers are ush the chang uue wo to d u development. tee to four Y t star work on a electric vehicles P° ass transit. P to political organizer hoar here there, conference in Bette el~ aro rl ties based on ra sportation and: city stems some of some California trdesig~evs oun eda Pear, according t is not how we o et sourbamewhera e. and urban a `ns Within the next three meat of Dransp° ass transit systems commtmi has design i a Berkeley arm + to be g n Ecology, is roaches to integraimg rs new e i Peter Ca]• Depart ~nleTs andsome of already np~ ug to Peter Calth rPthe sitca4 ' but why we always need oup, new app One of the featured s~ such huge network ° suburbs to urban Francisco and Sacramento, eat in the s plarming. ti n. these connectin ban Centers such as San ~mat these San built near development Mead The model of Register not transform ° Ao hiB with town to be or urban tY _ vate auto uunlY thorpe. h the state is currently a is not ke them linking and Los Ang will he light rail new will be the first mAl around mass transit ,access by proximi ndence on the Prithat the u8 the coMingch the Salt Jose. Orange ay COeWwhethar they combi• mi it specifically The cause of depe assume industry and The private automobile and the olled lion look like'" or various state planned sl>e he said, is an uncluesi to business, one another. anti automobile activity, of the automobile. se p from ,Zoning o with it are built the on ng lintoaws and systems rag or overheads ban design is whatin e~ may to plan cities is to keep. for lY to be a U-turn. or heavy + subways er said, The keY to the new ur This is an °f cities, ' les that g it will laws probably isYellobadetetmine~i• s about cket and businesses. eas strictly p lifesty the sprawling suburbs iforblabs. to get P~tphl er we c reshaP nations - astate Pl cans the "pedestrian Po ends an ecl to a residential ha Put freeways m mentnow, build, not wheth of homes, ap a traa s that cone lie favors a drare more neig egister tCalhb e Tds t ti IS ThearBu ass transit we neighborhood recessed to create m e so Pe' the attitude~Of VVLcone edof m trait landscaped s arag~ a diversityresidences close tog ruble the bicycles or even on foot- take a long y a serious p laces and once proposed a that there Mud automobiles with mass c clustered along a houses nave g give what to wok on bull he n ml% Of tThe aflame workP The new mix of Pri private is p ' transit station. Tb feel to tlii 2I tcntury pie can get Bliss' m realize tomobile:' r sa au of one ' bser Hx• to ervaance~l . New York city a into the sides °smallse tos. wn work Passed a vat sit may also bring a m filatpublic l egi recently ble for pri drive to if An old foe of the al o on a ronational memori down by killedbY acar• ing•'f ti California make it !2t: pre automobile "Small vatization bill that will Own ce, develop trans suburb- Laguna Creek Ran but theych residents can ding anwho was rune the first pedestrian their the at a P fit. About &5 have the oPl, 1 of t ail sys. entrepreneurs to raised run ro ana tall o, extension o Sam~ng his dens: similar' 1 andliecem portation systems titical scientist and they dy exP° TrueK Anderson is a Po Evolution: buses is alrea iyatter a latest book is "To GAove Calthort>e author why OrthepoitNeal Further Adventures March 5, 1990 Mayor Jerry Edwards Members of the Tigard City Council Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mayor Edwards and City Council Members: This letter is in response to case #CPA 90-01, a request to change the comprehensive plan map designations in the Metzger School area from low-density residential (approximately 68 acres) and medium-density residential (approximately 10 acres) to a commercial/professional designation. Community Participation Organization 3 (CPO 3) represents the people working and living in the Garden Home-Raleigh Hills plan area, just to the north of the land comprising the Metzger- Progress plan area. The executive committee of CPO 3 met on March 1, 1990 to discuss this proposal and has grave concerns as to the wisdom of the requested change. We feel the rationale of the staff report provides inadequate justification for the plan amendment, as required by state land use law and the city of Tigard comprehensive plan goals and policies. We are very concerned about the citizen participation process that is being used in the review of this plan amendment request. Because of the short time between notification of the proposed amendment and this hearing, the full membership of our CPO could not meet to discuss and take a position on it. Our first opportunity to review the proposal was February 21, 1990 at a joint meeting of CPOs 3 and 4, which was one day following the hearing by the Tigard Planning Commission on the proposal. We question whether the amendment request, as proposed, supports statewide planning Goal 1 for citizen involvement. The added intensity of development that would result from the plan amendment and envisioned subsequent urban renewal district would greatly impact our neighborhoods, and we concur with the comments submitted by Washington County in a letter dated February 8, 1990 that "the impacts of the development (are) multi jurisdictional, reaching beyond the boundaries of the Tigard urban renewal district, as proposed, to include residential areas in unincorporated Washington County north and east of the development and perhaps even Portland neighborhoods across the county line." One of our main concerns is the amount of automobile traffic that would be generated by the proposed office/commercial development and the effects that would have on the livability of the many residential neighborhoods adjacent to and nearby the development area. The county letter also noted that "Even without the proposed development, Highway 217 and the surrounding arterial roads are becoming seriously congested." We agree with that assessment and feel the report of the Tigard city staff errs in its analysis and findings related to the transportation goals of both the state and the city of Tigard. Specifically, the mandates of statewide planning Goal 12 (transportation) and city of Tigard policies 8.1, 8.2, and 8.4 will not be met by the comprehensive plan amendment as proposed. Our neighborhoods are already adversely impacted by the nearby development of other regional facilities: Washington Square, Washington Square II, Lamonts, Target, Embassy Suites Hotel, the existing Lincoln Center office towers, and other intense office/commercial uses near Hall Blvd. and Oleson Road. We are concerned, too, that the kind of regional facility envisioned for the area has not been adequately evaluated by your staff in its support for the plan amendment. Land use planning in Oregon requires that a "need" test be met before comprehensive plans can be amended. The staff report does not address at all the need for 78 additional acres of office/commercial designated land in the city of Tigard, nor does it provide adequate findings that 78 acres of residentially-designated lands are no longer needed. Indeed, because of the regional scope of the envisioned development in the subject area, the staff report should also address the potential need for office/commercial h Tigard City Council March 5, 1990 Page 2 designation regionwide, which it does not do. Given current office/commercial vacancy rates of between 18% and 25% in the Portland area and housing vacancy rates in the 3% to 5% range, we feel the proposed plan amendment that eliminates 475 existing and potential housing units is premature, at best, and does not meet state Goal 10 (Housing). We further question the total lack of justification in the staff report for the change as it relates to statewide Goal 13 for energy conservation. The findings of the Tigard comprensive plan in section 9 Energy include the following statement: "Conservation of energy at the local level is best achieved through programs aimed at energy efficient transportation modes and land use patterns, reducing travel distances between residential and work areas, infilling vacant land, increasing densities of land use as a whole, and encouraging alternative energy uses." Implementation strategies associated with Tigard comprehensive plan policies 9.1.1 through 9.1.3 include the following: "7. The Tigard Community Development Code shall allow for mixed use developments which will support a reduction in traffic trip generation. 8. The city shall coordinate with and support public and private planning efforts that advocate alternative forms of transportation such as mass transit, carpooling, ride share, bicycling and walking for commuter purposes. 9. Locational criteria shall be established to minimize vehicular travel in order to conserve energy." The proposed change from residential to office/commercial uses which would depend heavily on the automobile does not support these goals. Rather, maintenance and enhancement of housing in the plan amendment area, and building to planned residential densities would directly support the energy conservation goals of the state and the city of Tigard by affording the opportunity for people to live in an area near where they could work and attend school. We believe the planning found in the Metzger/Progress and Raleigh Hills-Garden Home community plans to be valid and are concerned that the livablity of these areas is being sacrificed by this proposed plan amendment. We do not understand why you have rushed the process and afforded us so little time to review ! and comment on a change of such great magnitude. Our concerns extend to the inadequacy of facts and findings :o support statewide goals 2 (land use planning), 5 (natural resources), 6 (air and water quality), 10 (housing), and 11 (public facilities), as well as their companion comprehensive plan policies for the city of Tigard. We respectfully request that you delay action on this proposed comprehensive plan map amendment for 60 days to allow us the time necessary to adequately review and comment on its potential effects on our community at a later public hearing. Sincerely, 1 Cf D3 Juc:e-C~Aire Richard P. Eckert, Chairman Executive Committee of CPO 3 8975 SW Jamieson Road Portland, Oregon 97225 wh ti, 3 J s/~a aAA Zl7 -fie IY S.t,,). Sf. - 0k. 9722.3 ~r March , . 199() 3l5 ~o To the Tigard City Council: I would like to enter the following testimony to the record for the March 5 meeting discussion of the proposed amendment CPA 90-01, commonly known as the "President's Parkway" development. I would first like to briefly address the increased load on the fire department. Who is going to pay for the increased hydrants, manpower, and equipment needed to service a complex that houses over 5,000 people daily? These things will have to be in place BEFORE the complex is done and generating any revenue to pay for their updating, let alone upkeep. In addition, in May 1985, Washington County stated that their law enforcement county-wide is .5 officers/1000 residents. Considering the_ increased people traffic in the area not covered by Tigard Police, who is going to pay for the needed traffic enforcement and accident coverage officers that will be required due to this "neighboring" development. I think a comment about the traffic problems on Taylors Ferry and Washington Drive due to the fast-growing development is in order. We purchased our home in 1'367 after talking to county planners who assured us that we were purchasing in a residential area and that the zone would not be changed unless it was upgraded to duplex or four-plexes at most. Our son was born and in 1969 as a three year old he could safely walk down our street as I watc=hed out the window and when he got to Washington Drive, cross when given the signal by his friend's mom and walk the block up Washington Drive to his friend's house. Today, even an adult is taking a serious risk: by walking down the same street due to the increased and speeding traffic. When Washington Square was forced upon us, the representative for Winmar said they would put a sign at the corner of 80th and Taylors Ferry direc=ting traffic= to turn right and go to Olson Road where they would find another sign directing them to turn left to Washington Square. This would alleviate neighborhood traffic and keep it on semi-main arteries. When the signs did not materialize after about a year, I went over personally to see Marvin Blum, Washington Square's manager at that time, who promised to look into the matter. His later reply was that the intersection of Oleson and 80th needed a signal to handle the added traffic since it was such a bad intersection and therefore they couldn't put the signs up. They were not willing to put up a signal to handle the traffic they were responsible for! It didn't matter that the same amount of traffic was instead funnelling down to Hall and Washington Drive, which is also a dangerous corner. The, slope of the hill, the angle of the turn, and the curve less than a block away are all contributors to the problem. People contir.ue to cut the corner meeting people head-on even after large lane-marking bumps were placed in the road due to resident pretesting. An even more frightening problem is that Tri- Met's bus step is across the street from Washington Drive and when a car is turning left, the following traffic= immediately passes it on the right without slowing or loot::ing at what is in the path. The Tri-Met sign is constantly being laid • giver by some one who "misjudges" the space. Anyone waiting for a bus has no place to jump out of the way as there is no ditch there, only a steep sloping bank of greenery that is impossible to s=ale quickly. On the Washington Drive side, the Tri-Met stop is on the corner 7'. 1.: 4` i where g=ars cut sharply to turn at high rates of speed. One woman I picked up on a rainy day said she hates to wait there and often walks down to the stop near Metzger Park because of how close the cars come to hitting her. The residents have continued to request directional signs from Washington County since Washington Square won't put them up. On May 24, 1989, Gregory Clemmens, Operation Engineer for Washington County replied that, "Due to a substantial backlog of requests, a specific completion date c=annot be guaranteed at this time." Traffic has become a nightmare. The neighbors hold the traffic directly responsible for the death of one of our residents. Mr. Shirley lived on the corner of Washington Drive and Taylors Ferry. Cars continually took out his front yard and planter as they sped too fast around the corner. The last straw came when, right after repairing his planter, another car sped around the c=orner and took it out again. Dismayed at the damage, Mr. Shirley, shortly thereafter, suffered a fatal heart attack. There have been two children hit, numerous animals killed, c=hildren and adults telling tales of having to jump into the ditch to miss being hit by speeders passing other g=ars (yes, 'passing in a 5 mph zone), and at times people living on Washington Drive must wait long periods to even back out of their own driveway. The Washington County polic=e who radar have told me on many occasions of drivers going at speeds up to 70 mph. This despite radar warning signs, 25 mph signs posted frequently, double stripping of the street (this seems to signify "thoroughfare" to some people), and frequent radar patrols. A count done by locals living on Washington Drive last summer showed that the count is now twic=e what was projected during the studies done for the Washington Square plan and increasing. It rose at least 40% after Target and Lamonts, etc. opened. Cutting Taylors Ferry through to Oleson is not an option at this time. In an August 1988 letter to ripe, Mike Maloney Washington County Operations Division Manager said, "no funds are currently available for this project and our c=urrent level of funding for capital improvements prohibits further consideration of this project. It remains on our map as a needed improvement along with many other unfunded projec=ts." Even if this improvement was accomplished, most people would be creatures of habit and still turn on Washington Drive. The horrible reality of this proposal is that these living on Taylors Ferry between Beth and Washington Drive and those on Bomar Court would then have a horrendous traffic problem, while Washington Drive's would still worsen. There is no panacea! In a letter to the concerned residents on Washington Drive, on August 5, 1988, Dean Frazier of Washington County's Traffic Operations said, "I intend to do everything possible to help reduce the impact of through traffic in every neighborhood." I wonder what his stand is on this traffic-generating projec=t. If people are travelling from Portland, they ARE NOT going to drive to the HWY 217 exit and backtrack to Washington Square when they can take the Capital Highway exit and be there 5 minutes and many miles sooner. There is no way that the developer can promise that our traffic won't be severely impacted. Already traffic backs up to a complete stop in the morning and afternoon as commuters on Hall try to get to their destinations. During the t holidays, Hall Blvd. traffic often came to a complete halt all day long, backed up to Pfaffle as people went to Washington Square. How can the developers think: of adding more traffic? If we can't handle simple holiday shoppers, how can we support 20,000 plus more car trips a day every day'? The wait at Hall and Pacific during "rush" hours is already horrendous both directions! It often takes 5 or more lights to get through during peak times! How can Pacific Highway and Hall Blvd. possibly handle the added traffic that would get off of HWY 217 at Tigard to avoid the construction on 217 for over a year?- In addition, anyone c=oming from Beaverton via-Hall Blvd. in the morning to the Progress area already knows what a "New York gridlock" is. You creep from Allen avenue at 5 mph and never gain speed until you are past Washington Square. How will many of the 8,000 projected new employees living in areas not convenient to HWY 217 get to the new development? GRIDLOCK!!! Another gridlock occurs on Scholls Ferry every morning. Don't plan on driving over 5 mph from 145th/Murray to Washington Square. (visa-versa at night!) Greenburg road from about Tiedemann is also backed up as is Oleson Road from the Multnomah Blvd. intersection. But the planner says access will be from HWY 217, right? Oh, that's OK, if you don't mind sitting on 1-5 to get off onto 217 in a several block long line BEFORE the offramp and then again sitting on 217 in another block long line BEFORE the Washington Square offramp. This has GOT TO BE DANGEROUS! Of course, 217 itself forms a "traffic turtle" with the load it already has. It would have to be upgraded BEFORE the development and BEFORE the development's taxes would pay for it....and we all know who will really end up footing the bill! But then, what does the developer care about gridlock, increased taxes, etc., he'll be long gone. (unless the property he's secretly (he thinks) buying up on the OTHER side of Hall turns into his next wonderful idea for our area) Only someone who is looking.at our traffic on paper from a statistical standpoint, and not sitting in it twice a day, can say this development won't cause a SERIOUS TRAFFIC problem! ' n~=erely, Donna Nesbitt 8900 SW Birch St. Tigard, Or. 97223 246-8728 _....~_..-..w.....~._...r._~...._....•..._..-.ee...-..:...~v-w.v.:iU..~++,::J..~tY.'e~.•Y'+i~:..a+,t,+e1.~'Yael.G~~u.J.von.,u.v..::Jii•i~A~~..+,..i+++w:.~...r.~ 'r..~c,.~u.i.'w 1.--"- _.~.,r.. .......a.. -44 46 Not elverYbothYlikes Metzger project in 1973, 500 people gathered at streets) and listening to more helicop- catod before construction begins. The } Metzger School to voice their objet- ten larding on the new helipads on noise level during the years of can, r lions to a proposed complex called the two 15-stay buildings. In addi- struction (16 years was die estimated Washington Square. They were con- tion, the following concerns were time given) would cause untold t I eerned that it would change the iden- c voiced at the Feb. 21 CPO 4 meeting damage to tender ears, not to mention dty of this family-oriented, peaceful Soapbox u Metzger Pa& make it hard to hear the teacher. The j community.'Dar't wary;' they were The proposal sates that there will menu) damage of ernrstent back-4f promised by Washington County plan- Donna j be 8,000 can commuting to the ground noise is a well-known fact. F net, "we won't allow any strip cam Nesbitt ' r t development each morning and leav- Safety factors for walking children is p r mer clafizadon to go inl Your can-' ing each afternoon. That's 16,000 also a coxern Numerous loge trucks f munity will not change The shopping they cried vehicle tripsl Add to that the daily in. bearing supplies and gravel will be center will not Impact an you; it will What was Tigard's tint move? The ! flux of traffic to the complexes in the daingcrous to our walking children as t f only be a wonderful blessing to the. addition or Target, Lannont's, eta with i area and you have 25,000-plus more they travel to and from school. It was i area " the added traffic and noise Well, at ears daily than at present. also asked who would pay for addi- " t ' The traffic increased in volume and least the area near Lincoln Savings L As everyone is aware, we live in a lional busing costs if the "new" school speed, the noise from perking lot finally safel" Wrongl ' valley, and the stagnant air pollution is built away from our area. The sweeper tilled the night air, and mono caused by these vehicles will definite- developer had no concrete answer. mereW strip zoning along Hall Tigard has decided to recommend i ly affect the quality of life in Metzger. When asked where it could be built. in metzg,s Boulevard began. Soon Lincoln changing that area because. &ne a Com- While the developers claim they can he replied Onat that was a closely savings and Loan plan raised Its head and the h said, "You're already commercialized plan is row Invalid since titatr a area is I Control traffic flow to Highway 217, War LLed secret that he could not share t with Washin8ton Squu% ere let me in, now part of Tigard. This decision has i they had no concrete answer as to how we prepared to put up with 16 they would keep can from Are tool" ' opened the doerd i fa the new proposed Washin gton Drive,aTaylors Feerrry, yeas of coprear d t equipment r Again them was a large public out- redevelopment strict 11ne spokes- , Locust HaB, Pine any oth foal generating noise and tearing up our cry, followed by a court battle In man for the development kept repeat- ; street sucets? Thcy plan to reconstruct all r f which residents were out-moneyed by ing Wednesday night, "Commercial Dos Metzger really want two I5• perimeter streets and rchicate streets Lincoln Savings and loan. Lincoln growth is inevitable, you might as story buildings in the area? We do within the development, including a S not only built, but continues to spread well accept id" The people angrily know that we definitely don't want $9 million, eight-lane reconstruction I tentacles and grow. "A Metzger Plan replied, "You don't have to live hazel i them to have helicopter pads on top of of highway 217. f, will save asst" said • vales You don't care about our homes, Ocm We hope to propose a provision What is going to happen to the ex. So they did studies, held mecdngs, children and community. Our area be adopted by the Tigard City Council isting wetlands and wildlife On6re7 1 wrote, termed, met with Washington only has to go commercial if we let it, These have been carcfull rotcctcd e County and finally after yeah of and we don't want i!!" prohibiting any ere hclipads in the Y P arts. The development plan calls for for years, yet are they to be sacrifices i work, the plan was pronounced done. Unfortunately, many of the people ii "buffers" developed by the county be- for tax dollars from a commercial But wait) Frnter annexation to Tigard who will be the most severely im- I tavern these buildings and area development? We did not gel satisfu• of ■ portion of Metzger abutting Llo- patted by this change are people who residences. How do you buffer a 15- tory answers at our CPO 4 meeting on coin Savings and Loan. "Sounds will have no vote in the development I story building and who will pay for the subject. y wonderful) We have a traffic mess and of this project but will still find them- this shrubbery, etc. they have On March 5 at 7:30 p.m. at the too much commercialization alrmadyl selves paying more on their Metzger proposed be used as the buffer area? Tigard Civic Center, this proposed The backup of a city like Tigard is Park LID because of it, watching in- redevelopment district will again be N what we need to make sure the area is creased traffic flow by (including con- If Tigard goes ahead with this plan, discussed. Any person who has an developed according to our wishes," stmetiou vehicles tearing up county it is imperative that the school be telo- opinion on Orris development is urged . J p to attend or to send a written letter V before that date to the above address. C CPO 4 will read into the record the resolution unanimously passed by the t' 78 people in attendance at the Feb. 21 meeting which states that they don't want the present zoning designations in the Metzger plan changed and i tCCOnMnd that the Tigard City Counciltenot allow any change of ! zoning to commercial in the proposed area. While this will be helpful, the voices of the community arena an . absolute necessity. If you live in proximity to the development but not in the city of Tigard, you will have no better oppor- tunity to make your wishes known. ^ You will not be allowed to vote an it if \\CI, you do not live in Tigard, but you will C get to experience the increased traffic, ~j noise and encroaching commercializa- tion of Dietrger. CPO 4 strmgly urges interested parties to make an effort to attend. Your property's future and the future f Page 4A a TIGARDNALATIN TIMES a Vlkek 01 March i - 7. 1990 o the area is a alike. Don't assume you crn't make ■ difference. l Donna Nesbitt lives on Southwest Birch Strut, in unincorporated Metzger, outside she proposed-"n renewal district b mdaarnu- ?r:.%A`N-T 4M THE OREtiMAN. THURSDAY, AUGUST 4, 1988 •t it N. yyy~pyX:. . I` f l pp i T4.nM .i •t, ' ttK+w. _ ~x ~ Cd s •is .f " ' a. in. ly . The Oregonian/ROBERT BACH Children gather at a sign put up- by residents on Southwest Washington Drive In an effort to slow drivers on a route on which, residents say, children and pets are endangered by speeding cars. Washington Drive residents petition. for means to slow down area traffic V h i -ko5 319Iq o March 5, 1990 Tigard City Council City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: City of Tigard Council Members Re: CPA90-0001: Public Hearing, March 5, 1990 After attending in person until after 1:00 a.m., the February 20, 1990, City of Tigard Planning Commission meeting of which the Comprehensive Amendment change received testimony, I submit you review in detail the entire record. The City of Tigard's Planning Commissions' recommendation to postpone the election until November is sound. Being a taxpayer in the Metzger community, without the ability to vote in the Tigard election on the Presidents Parkway development, I am disgusted with the lack of attention the City of Tigard is requiring of Trammel Crow regarding the studies impacting the surrounding neighborhoods outside the development area. Trammel Crow is a merchant builder today. They are interested in generating profits through building and subsequent selling of their developments. As evidenced in the attached May 1, 1989 Forbes Magazine article which highlights the firm facing annual cash flow deficits in the hundreds of millions of dollars. This issue alone demands serious attention. Until you are 100% confident in Trammel Crow's ability to see this development through over the long term, I suggest you don't allow a fast, talking salesman push the city of Tigard into believing the "delay might be deadly to the proposal". It's more a matter of more profit. The sooner Trammel Crow moves ahead, the more profit to the developer, because of costs associated with acquisition of the land, labor costs, interest rates, and a number of additional unknown factors. Statements by the Oregon Department of Transportation, Washington County, CPO Groups, individuals, all say more study needs to go into the proposed development before this matter is put to a vote. Even the City of Tigard Planning Commission agrees this issue should be postponed until the November election. If you move ahead. you are not meeting State of Oregon requirements of allowing adequate public hearings to take place in order to review updated City of Tigard staff reports. This is evidenced by documents being introduced tonight, the same night you plan to make a decision on placing the issue on the May ballot. You must hold back and not allow the influence of this developer to make your decision without legal, moral and ethical obligations. -1- As a resident of Metzger, living at 7886 S.W. Oak Street, which happens to be the most direct route between the proposed development and Highway 99 Northbound, the neighborhood has seen a steady increase of commuter traffic. Without additional and proper study, the neighborhood cannot handle the increased proposed traffic. Those residents in Metzger enjoy the rural community, and have chosen to raise families in this environment. By adding an additional 10,000 workers, 17,600 average daily trips to the surrounding communities, the streets cannot meet this increase. I know the speeds commuters travel today through these residential neighborhoods because they will not put up with the parking lots on Highway 217 and Highway 99. People put their lives on the line when they cross Hall Boulevard today. Children are in danger because of the speeds commuters travel on Oak, Locust and Pine today, not to mention to potential problems which will exist as the next ten years of development occur. I am completely opposed to additional commuter traffic through the residential neighborhoods. The world does not end north of Hall Boulevard. I submit you postpone the decision and not make the March 16 deadline a key facto- in your decision. If this developer today doesn't do the project, the next developer will, otherwise why are they trying so hard to push things through so fast today. Don't break the law by moving ahead today. Don't surrender your ethical and moral values to the greed of a national developer who is focused only on the profit to be gained through the development in question. Respectfully submitted, ` Charles A. and Genee' M. Britton 7885 Southwest Oak Street Metzger (Tigard), Oregon 97223 (503) 245-9093 Attachment: Forbes, Magazine Amides " The dinosaurs are dying" May 1, 1989 Issue -2- i SHY-2b-1yt37 e'? ~4 TO 2?3922? P. 02 Linu~fn Properiry's jalJed $22 million LJrtcoln Pointe off ice ceruer in Tampa " y'ileae goye~ am sefa..a derm&ter that iher+a's no equity i,e,tw"t tf th*** dea[a-" y- '4. •.Y1" Y. ~ ~j. :4ar -ra •aylx:Dyx,,,w ~~tie • tic fir. shopping centers to skyscrapers, from Flush with oil-boom ofitimism three Texas Charlotte to Seattle. By 1986 the three`.: }r: • . develo ers went national in a bi wa ranked among the country's seven largest developers They ended up axporting• overdevelopment . Executives at Trammell Crow, Lin- i,fac coin and some of the major zeal estate = ~h to other•parts of the country. investors like Met Life and Travelers declined to talk with FORBES. But we rc+ i~ ► had no trouble finding many former partners willing to speak. Most re. quested anonymity because they still "The , 1 have partnership interests in various projects. Universally, they say today's ' • " problems are as serious as those of the Fti,? -;:pa Ema Am mid-1970s, when Crow and Lincoln Y01 rv-dyu~g came within a whisker of extinction. The collapse of the Southwest real `hp: estate market is just one part of this. ~ art Many of the troubled properties are situated elsewhere in the U.S. More: r ':':'~fl 1 Many of the projects, big and small, +.!SeE gy John H. ting half its staff. made no financial sense in the best of "What you are witnessing is the times. Some of the most spectacular 4'an( Q VIETLY, ALMOST INVISIBLY, dinosaurs dying," says a former Lin- failures have been in cities like Tam- ' three of the nation's largest coln executive. ' • pa and Minneapolis, where rcal estate property developers are disin- It is no accident that all thiee are is by no means depressed. tegrating, victims of an oversupply of Dallas-based, largely local outfits that Too many ill-conceived projects ~~r-.wCO( buildings. They have dramatically . went national in the days when the were built for fees rather than the ~^e+ `•tha slashed staff, cut back on construc• oil boom was creating the illusion profits the buildings would generate 1, tion, restructured debt and are strug- among sorne Texans that they were once the projects were completed and • filing desperately to survive. Tram- supermen. Nourished by dreams of subsequently sold. As on Wall Street, are moll Crow C9. and Lincoln Property national glory, Crow, Lincoln, Van- there's been too much money chasing Co- today face annual cash flow defi• cage and others embarked on an un- too few deals. .Of. t cits totaling hundreds of millions of precedented expansion in the early A Trammell Crow partner recalls p`Aifurt doliars. Vantage has already under- 19806. Their staffs more than doubled that pro formes--the basic develop- gone a massive reorganization, cut- as they built everything from strip ment documents that justify the proj• h~ DO FORBES, MAY 1, 1989 HHY-26,1985 147:55 TO 2739227 P.03 F LORI DA TOPS nm s;00 million L nwit C4n&e in Mimw4olis THE U.S. IN NEW 0" sow met zvsf 'OAS' "'a eteutan. PLANTS AND EXPANSIONS* nWesln :°'~'l~{~9~~p~r1lS„YQ11dEXp0115~01~5••' ..r. r.+" C11. + i'~~~1313 • rG' ' r 747 ..{NC k.8:e,NC~z r;•;. 629 • ~.Qi{' 2 't8 KY;~ 'tbji214~c:•:~'.~N1t:.,_ :r;ti517 "GA;'`'204 ;C► ;:505 484 ;161` • 1` 174•,• 4 ,~~Iw :•..:•M~,~'`3; souroa' cOnwoy,~oap swvoy''.:; eet economically-in almost all mar- Payoff, of course, occurs when a prof- : • kets were based on the assumption ect is sold at a huge.profit. ' : ~+'r ` : ' ' ' that each market, regardless of loca- Th most cases that never happened. tion, would perform as Texas had be- "These guys are so far underwater According to a recent tween 1978 =4 1982. The developers that theze's no equity in most of these survey, Florida has now had forgotten that what can go up can deals," says Samuel Zell, a savvy Chi- climbed to number one in also go down sago real estate investor who has new plants and expansions So, where a deal didn't at first make raised $400million to buy problem BL ft unlike many surreys, sense, the developers would often properties. "There's debt on these change their assumptions to make it things of 120% of value. You can't get this one isn't based on stcrfisll- stem to make sense. For example, your money out." cal compilation or hypothe- Liucola►'s way of coping with inflated many of the big lending irxstitu- sis. Instead it's based on the land prices for Dallas retail projects tions urged the builders on. Despite actual number of significant was to build two-story shopping cen- evidence of severe overbuilding, the COrporQt91nv9strY1@nt5that ' tens like Stratford Court and Friday's life insurance companies poured Court. Ever been on the second floor money into real estate until 1985.1n took place, of a strip mall; Neither have most many cases they were investing for That kind of dollars and people. The second floors of both proj- pension funds in return for a fee par- Dents oommtiment doesn't ects are still largely vacant. tially based on how much they put p just happen, In any one, the developers them- out. "1 can zecall meetings with an There are reasons. selves frequently had little invested insurance company when we had rent in the outcome. Since most of the projections of, say, $24 a foot on a The same ones, in part, larger projects were being financed on project," says a former Lincoln offi. that ham made the Sunshine a nonrecourse basis--meaning the de- cial. "The insurance guys told us to State number one in the veloper was not personally obligated change to projections of $28 so they for any losses on the project-the de- could get the loan through their com- SOtlttleast in virtually every veloper had little personal risk. mittee. That was common then." manufacturing category Regardless, the builder collected de- Those days are gone. These days at The information is avail- velopment fees ranging from 2% to Trammell Crow, former partners say, _ able that explains these 5% of the construction cost. In 1986, the annual cash flow deficit is some- reasons in detail, for instance, Lincoln and Trammell where between $100 million and $30o Cali 7-904-488-5507 or Crow had a total of $3.5 billion in million. For example, Crow's $40 mil- Wftt@ the Florida Uepartrrlertt construction under way. Total devel- lion Dallas office building called Pres. opment fees: about $120 million. ton Commons is only 57% occupied Of Commerce. Division of • In their haste to expand around the after nearly three years. '"they are Economic Development, country, these companies bared n host already starting to pass the hat among 501 Collins Building, Suite FB, of young partners, often M.B.A.s or the partners," a former partner says, Tallhassee, Florida former leasing agents with no devel- "but there are no sources of cash flow 32399-2000. opment experience. These partners anywhere that can pay for these kinds knew they had to build to make noon- of deficits." Lincoln, said to face a ey because, by tradition„ they are paid cash flow deficit of around $75 mfl- paltry base salaries, $18,000 to lion, has handed back office and retail t u $24,000 a year. Their income picks up projects in Dallas, Austin, New Or- People like to. work where only when and if the project gets un- leans, Minneapolis and Miami. In they like to live. der way and development and leasing some cases it got a small amount of fees start pouring in. The ultimate cash for its equity. *The • Ao~oi 94 FORM, MAY 1, 1989 I'Im 1-26-19oy ri 15o TO 2?x6227 P. 04 All this is getting remarkably little routine sale. take back the properties and run ' publicity. Why? When a property Typical is the $100 million Energy them. But their mandate is, 'For God's failed in the mid-1970s, the lender Center in New Orleans, which Lin- sake, keep this out of the news.' 11 went through a public foreclosure to coln gave back to Met Life. No money With development at a standstill, s get it back. But the real estate boons of changed hands. Same thing on Lin- how are the big three faring? Vantage ~ the early 1980s was fueled by complex coln Pointe, a $22 million Tampa of- Chairman John Eulich recoguized partnership deals between developers Tice project that went back to Aetna. that his company was in peril in 1986 and life insurance companies or pen- Both insurance companies art proba- when Congress eliminated tax loop- Sion funds. Now, when a property bly sitting on substantial u prealized holes for real estate losses, effectively nosedives, it rarely is foreclosed on. losses. Says a former Lincoln execu• removing the free-spending real estate Instead it returns quietly to the finan- tive: "The insurance companies are syndicators as buyers of property. cial partner, most often disguised as a paying huge fees to asset managers to Leasing was already drying up and I could see the tax law changes would O'kNo WIwlcost us milli and millions of dol- hors of new e~r~lquitYI he recalls. B Y.Y•!Y ~i,T,~.4\~(1, p'f,;•;.:i~t`n'.,~:'i.r;i.;;rE:~:.~i. r`•~K':.`•a,`.S early 1987 we went to the banks and .a i.. oc:u:iu~. ~7r,.-t.+ :,:NN.' ~F\•• F,i~Y IJI~I:~;:r .t:;,;.,:c~ r ~a,;Ki~. ; : said, Boys, we got a big problew., Because,Vantage is a corporation rather tban a series of partnerships tu: like Crow and Lincoln, it had to deal"'' ' with its problems all at once. It re- structured more than $2 billion and reduced its portfolio by 25%, to about $3 billion. Today it is essentially a . manager of assets, collecting fees for managing and leasing projects, build- ing projects for others and occasional- ly putting together deals for investors. The problems at Crow and Lincoln are just as serious, though more se- r" tree. Without the development fees' both companies are in some cases 1j ;fir Simply giving back properties to lend- =s. For instance, Lincoln and Imz Re- jZ alty recently allowed Equitable to foreclose orx its $60' million Turtle Creek Centre now the tony Dallas suburb of Highland Park rather than t:v continue to make mortgage pay- ments. Lincoln has sold some of its most valuable assets well below their potential value, such as its half-inter- cat in the $100 million Lincoln Cen- tre in downtown Minneapolis for a paltry $6.5 million. 7Yammell Crow with models ofa couple of blsprojecrs in dye background Interestingly, though., the most se. An trVVhV llwVDr ttgcaereaen of T"m developers. rious problems are riot with the large .eao AV V ~7 office projects, which were backed by S•. s debds' in his pocket: nourccourse financing, but with the supzttideLy~ dell-confideatf d . ' :.His.,;boundless... optuoasm:::and smaller projects where the developers TLI blessed' :lth;a.xenrarlcable- skill flalouboyaat: style: set, rple.did personally guarantee the loan. On fort Z}ruiagr~~'oyaI Y vliq :model„ for a :generation of ' Terms a $20 million office-warehouse build- 's He built the < level Mack Lin 8, for examp le the developer might t;ve~ ax ;tlist` btais.?. iis~Nkwme,_oolufS., <formed a•,. have projected amnuai cash flow of a.Ok11yy', w.aiehous_e ma~{ifac~ ' ners)lip' wielx; ,Crow.' iq..'1965:-io r $2.2 million. Say the project is only i~zriigo iapazvrieixs''irlj Dolls: kicking off $200,000. That's negative t. out Croaria ;19X7 cash flow i.-..,.,.' of $2 million. "That doesn't ? y ;(one tarn c ugly atbodies'~th~.ACrow Vauoitage':;r~+~r++t►A*+r; jobif"EutiW , sound like much. but you multiply 'n'eal'rl~ ~';tbta,~cori})pauy': a]so:builE:'apartments: wiifi''CYawA that by 40 projects and you have nega- baala~upt is ,1,4751q rows"ins e hilt-1460s:~Once,.ou;':tliar;I tive cash flow of $80 million," says a day aieiiitvis! • mei'~tizig;,....owt% ,both, men; ii1i&-•rio,- secret;; ; former Lineola executive. "That's ~'of'the' fact'theywould': one; da .;r what's killing these guys.,, _ Crow ;ercdtb 6-rs'*°tbie boptiorl~~'gf v athe><_; blike their ig as Crow' ~m~~ ''t4: in the Soucheast~Mt~dwest sndWest pi takiiag hi 'the ' Z,aropcrt es'' or Crow;' 74, no Lomgtic''i,vctaees' departed over the last two years, fear- sticking witli;;.Crow; ;swsg- ':the day-today operations of .his. irtg their profitable deals would be ti°'gerred =,o1tt"'of the' 'riaeetiiiE now-ehrinkrng company.--T.N.T. tapped to prop up problems else- ,:.:~t':.' :ail.,. •..~,•:r,;~* ;.:tj=' where. Among the departed, Allan P Hamilton in C-Neago, warren E. 98 FORRES, MAY 1, 1989 , I h i-~c-lycl~ TO 2'73921 2'7 P.05 A two-story sbopping center in Dallas The , thAp ;of ~TS 'THE ONLY HOTEL IN NEW YORK project second nsain J%oore tarn, Largonsry vacant. ?O2. PEOPLE WHO DON''P LIKE ` HOTELS. On the eccrrtr of Nik Avmue and 65th Sweet AW-4 s 71w May+a;r Ittj ent. 'I he Chown Ntw Yolk lxrmt for avvle who are used to~awi~ta livo~. the SpLekcr in Menlo Park, Glif. acrd J. Donald Childress in Atlanta. 1 j~~ f.7 Besides the developers and insur- ance companies, who else has been badly hurt? The big Texas banks, r~w,v.K nearly all of which have conic under w tH;rXt~iM eKru rMT..nL w~ru lcdcral protection, and which were big supporters of the local boys when they went national. But while the nwa0.40 wr+► C 6evnLLx eau 04&;c a #ul I. ru .uu. I.V W-41- O'.M-n S 'EW TM VW4rm iw a rwrm. Texts banks were inclined to work (8)0)545.4000 with the Texas developers in time of rt~rcaer,nruwu trouble, the fcds feel no such obhga- tion. "Their attitude," says a foruru Crow partner, "is, 'You guys signed a guarantee. Now step up and pay it. } We're not interested in relationships; 't_ '~ts~~~ i wC're liquidutols., Can Crow or Lincoln survive? Prob- obly, but not in the form they are used to. They can't grow their way out of problems as they did in the mid- 1970s. Most markets already have a 0-17 " tluee- to five-year oversupply. So de- velopment fees will never make up for cash flow shortages. Instead, Crow and Lincoln are tout- ing themselves as asset manager.;, be£.• "ntokec m• ~ b p the azrageraerut cou• tracts on the very office builduugs • , ' i they are giving back to the lde insur- Onhnnvl piloto L'nrE•1 Y, I ance companies. Lincoln and Cmw ouclre~ ftx arc also putting together so-called vulture funds, where they receive a fee as general partner for the acquisi- tion and management of distressed prol)erry. Lincoln is said to be negotiating for a capital infusion frour a General Elec- tric subsidiary or a pension fund to prop up its retail projects. „ hideed, the most pcouusing future for Crow or Lincoln seems to be as merchant builders for the insurance companies or pension funds. -12nat is, i! they have a future at all. Because real eate seems to be getting back to what it really always has been-. a focal busuicss. N 4 Ili FORIIES, MAY 1, 1999 vw~~ L glvh ~ HENRY KANE ATTORNEY AT LAW 12275 S.W.2NO P.O. BOX 518 AREA CODE 503 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 TELEPHONE 646.0566 FAX 644-9574 March 3, 1990 Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor, and Councilors City of Tigard Tigard City Hall PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Re: March 5, 1990 public hearing on urban renewal proposal to finance "Presidents Parkway" development Dear Mayor Edwards and Councilors: This letter is written in my capacity as a Washington County taxpayer who will pay more property taxes if City of Tigard taxpayers adopt the above-identified urban renewal proposal. The reason is that so-called tax increment financing is double taxation. New taxable property under the plan is taxed, but the new taxable value-is not available to Washington County and other county-wide taxing bodies. That means the County, etc. must raise property tax rates to make up for the lost tax base. Therefore, property taxpayers outside the proposed Tigard urban renewal plan area subsidize the development. To state the obvious, the land in question would develop and increase the area's property tax base if the plan were rejected. Perhaps the developer will explain the reason, if any, property taxpayers outside Tigard should subsidize improvements the developer could obtain and finance through a local improvement district. The newspaper articles on the issue appear silent on whether the Tigard urban renewal agency will use the power of condemnation to acquire privately-owned homes and businesses for the benefit of the favored developer. Persons and businesses whose property is condemned rarely, if ever, are fully compensated for the loss of their homes, property and businesses. And some businesses are put of business permanently. And the residence that replaces the one lost through condemnation usually costs more than the price the urban renewal agency paid for the lost home. Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Two The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard voters, taxpayers and property owners whether the plan calls for exercise of the power of eminent domain or condemnation - the legal authority to take private property on payment of compensation. The Tigard City Council also should inform Tigard voters of the reason, if any, the property cannot be assembled for development without urban renewal and without the taxpayer paying the cost of the improvements that will make the property more valuable. The Tigard City Council also should inform Tigard voters of the extent of commitment, if any, and the extent of financial resources to start and then complete the project the developer will invest. The Tigard City Council also should inform Tigard voters of the facts, if any, on which the proponents believe the property complies with ORS chapter 457, relating to urban renewal: (1) which parts, if any, are ORS 457.010(1) "Blighted areas"? (2) which affected buildings, if any, are ORS 457.010(1)(a) "unfit or unsafe to occupy" for living, commercial, industrial C or other purposes?" (3) which buildings or structures are of ORS 457.010(1)(A) "Defective design and quality of physical construction?" (4) which buildings and structures are of ORS 457.010(l)(B) "Faulty interior arrangement and exterior spacing?" (5) which parts, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(C) "Overcrowding and a high density of population?" (6) which buildings, structures and geographic areas, if any, have ORS 457.010(1)(D) "Inadequate provision for ventilation, light, sanitation, open spaces and recreation facilities?" (7) which buildings, structures and geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(E) "Obsolesence, deterioration, dilapidation, mixed character or shifting of uses?" (8) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(b) "economic dislocation, deterioration or disuse of property resulting from faulty planning?" (9) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(c) "division or subdivision and sale of property or lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size or dimensions for property usefulness and development?" E i Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Three (10) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(d) "laying out of property or lots in disregard of contours, drainage and other physical characteristics of the terrain and surrounding conditions?" (11) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(e) "existence of inadequate streets and other rights-of-way, open spaces and utilities?" (12) which geographic areas, if any evidence ORS 457.010(1)(f) "existence of property or lots or other areas which are subject to inundation by water?" (13) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(g) "prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments and social and economic malajustments to such an extent that the capacity to pay taxes is reduced and tax receipts are inadequate for the cost of public services rendered?" (14) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(h) "growing or total lack of proper utilization of areas, ( resulting in a stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to the public health, safety and welfare?" (15) which geographic areas, if any, evidence ORS 457.010(1)(i) "loss of population and reduction of proper utilization of the area, resulting in its further deterioration and added costs to the taxpayer for the creation of new public facilities and services elsewhere?" If the voters approve the proposed plan and the matter is challenged in court, will the City of Tigard be able to present evidence to support any claim that the geographic area is "blighted?" The Tigard City Council is aware of the sad experience of the nearby City of Sherwood, which must levy a property tax to pay for defaulted Bancroft land improvement bonds. The improvements cost more than the land value, developers did not develop the land, and Sherwood is making up the difference. Expensive! The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the "safety" procedures of the plan, if any, designed to avoid saddling Tigard taxpayers if the developer defaults. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the first year, this century or the next, that the anticipated new urban renewal property tax base will be subject to taxation by affected public bodies. f Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Four The Tigard City Council is aware of the sad experience of the nearby City of Tualatin and its collapsed urban renewal plan, which never developed. I recommend that the Tigard City Council travel in the near future through the urban renewal area adjacent to Emanuel Hospital in Northeast Portland. Hundreds of blacks and others lost their homes in the name of "urban renewal" to benefit expansion of Emanuel Hospital. Much of the land acquired by condemnation or sale for urban renewal is parking lot or empty! Emanuel Hospital, of course, did not use the acquired land except for parking lots, to my knowledge. I stand to be corrected. The Tigard City Council should explain to Tigard voters the "advantages," if any, of the proposed urban renewal plan and development. Will the development mean lower property taxes? I doubt it, based on the urban renewal experience of the City of Portland, which has one of the highest property tax rates in Oregon. The per ( $1,000 tax rate levied by the City of Portland for municipal t services is, if my memory is correct, between $7 and $8 per $1,000 assessed valuation! The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the dollar amount of the deposit, if any, the developer proposes to pay the City of Tigard to guarantee that it will develop 100% of its plan. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers if any of the developer's properties have been foreclosed, and if so, the dollar value of the foreclosed property and foreclosure reasons. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of (a) the number of acres and location of the geographic areas included in the urban renewal plan, and (2) how much of the total urban renewal district would be developed by the developer. The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers of the estimated cost of (1) land acquisition, (2) utility, road and other improvements, (3) fees to consultants, (4) fees to attorneys, and (5) all other estimated costs by category or classification. of The Tigard City Council should inform Tigard taxpayers/the "firmness" or reliability of the cost estimates. This Beaverton resident since 1973 knows that the City and its urban renewal agency estimated costs at $10 million. The last time I looked it was about $35 million. And that doesn't count interest. Tigard Mayor and Councilors March 3, 1990 Page Five And most, if not all, of the developments such as the Fred Meyer shopping center would have occurred without "urban renewal." The March 2, 1990 Oregonian article titled "Tigard council to wrestle with Presidents Parkway plan" reports: "The developers say the project must move forward now or never * * * But David Blake of Trammel Crow said that delay might be deadly to his proposal. "'I don't think it's possible to delay it,' Blake said. 'I think the council either needs to do it now or wait an entire year to the next May. My gut feeling is, they need to do it now, or it may never happen."' The late Will Rogers is supposed to have said that God keeps ' increasing the number of people, but doesn't increase the amount i of land. What is the need for "instant" decision? If the land is to develop, it will do so, with or without Trammel Crow. The Tigard City Council should identify which, if any, geographic area in the proposed urban renewal district is owned by or under option held by Trammel Crow, and if there are options, when each option expires. The Tigard City Council should identify by at least street address and owner of record each residence and other property that would be acquired to implement the proposed urban renewal plan. Finally, the Tigard City Council should explain the reason, if any, for giving what appears to be an exclusive contract to Trammel Crow instead of calling for bids and proposals from all interested developers, plus the extent, if any, Trammel Crow has lobbied, wined and dined or paid travel expenses in whole or in part to the mayor and councilors and officials of the City of Tigard, including but not limited to the chairman and members of the Tigard Planning Commission and the Tigard community involvement directo . Ve t , e a cc: citizen Participation organization 4 Neighborhood Planning Organization 8 { Tigard Planning Commission/City Administrator g media To whom it may concern: My name is Michael E. Mills. I live with my wife Bev and our four daughters at 10211 S.W. Jefferson Street, Tigard, OR. We have lived in our home for II years and had planned on living there until our children were raised. We have two children currently in the Metzger School and two more waiting in the wings. To that end we had made a sizeable financial investment in our home. I will bethefirstto admitthat upon first hearing Trammel Crow's proposal, was not aVall interested because of my own personal commitments in this area. But upon closer examination, I feel that I must give it my full support. It is the best thing that I can do for the city of Tigard. This plan is well thought out and will not only keep taxes as low as possible for everyone in the city, but is beautiful as well. Trammel Crow has made me a very fair offer on my home and I have signed an option agreement with them. feel that it says a lot that I am willing to give this my full support considering had no intention of leaving my home, an elementary school that my children are well-established in and all the wonderful people that live in this area. I would urge you to put this proposal on the May ballot so that not only the city will reap the benefits from this proposal sooner but so that I and all of the other families affected by this can get on with our lives. g 3 /moo Issues Before. City Council 1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENrH NT a. Map b. Text 2. URBAN POUN L PLAN 3. URBAN RENEWAL REPORT Decision will be made March 12. Urban Renewal Plan must be referred to voters. 3/5/90 f 1 r S r.; 44- r ~Y t Key Issues PUBLIC nMLVEM]3J'I' IN "Mg= PLA WT f TRAFFIC MASS TRANSIT BUFFERIM ADJOINING NEIGHBO100ODS SCHOOL RELOCATION WETLANDS TREA'IlIONT METZGER PARK ASSESSMENT 3/5/90