Loading...
City Council Packet - 05/09/1995 F; 1 "TV k,,Y iia,% j f: PUBLIC NOTICE. Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet Is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor f at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's 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 7 the City Administrator: Times noted are ~t~.s ma# it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7.15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. ~a~~lness s , items h in arnv e r . p.saa. f Assistive Listening Devices are a!railable for persons with Impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 539-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2072 (TDD, - Telecommunications Devices for the Dean. f Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services. Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments, and Qualified bifinguaaf interpreters. I Vince these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5.00 p.m. on ' the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above. --4171, Est; 309 (voice) or 584-2772 (f0D - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED ADEN 1 j COUNCIL. AGENDA -PRY 9, 1995 - PACE 1 i Y. i TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 9, 1995 AGENDA ® STUDY MEETING > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council wits go into Executive Session under the p:°ovisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. A.l discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. > DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CITY'S INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM PROCESS ~ ,f ' > AGENDA REVIEW 1. BUSINESS MEETING (6; 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board ` 1.2 Roll Call F a 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications/Lialson Reports t 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items F 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 I item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve City Council Minutes: April 13 and 25, 1995 I 4 3.2 Receive and t=ile: a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda 3.3 Authorize Right-of-Way Acquisition for Burnham Street Widening Project at Main Street - Resolution No. 95-~ s Hms iequessmd f to be Co sqw&e di-scumon will cm&dansd imumdAdefy after Me r=1 which do da cn i 4. PRESENTATION OF DISTINGUISHED BUDGET AWARD • Finance Director 5. REPORT ON F.W IC IN E PARK ! • City Administrator I COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 9, 1995 - PAGE 2 I . i d j ~ 6. NOWAGEN ITEMS 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard Cif Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.E (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. All discussions -a within this session are confidential, therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the nears media are allowed to f attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. t 8. ADJOURNMENT i 1 f E ti A 1 l: f 7 ~ r i V i i i i s 4 COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 9, 1995 - PACE 3 '1 - i 1 , 1 3 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, I NC. Legal i P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT S 181 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 E Legal Notice Advertising ®City of Tigard o ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd, +Tigard,Oregon 97223 ® ❑ Duplicate Affidavit '-i s j AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. j i, Kathy Snyder r being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of theTiQard- T'na7 ai-i n T; mes a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.050 - and 193.020; published at Tigard in the ag~r said county ~ d state; toat the } CI y Counci3 Meeting-May .9th a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for- LINE. -successive and consecutive in the following issues: r May 4,1995 Subscribed and sworn to b re me this4 t h- m_=-o1995 ~ OFFICIAL StAI i ROBIN A. BURGESS f Notary publ' r or Oregon ' NOTARYPUBLIC - OREGON COMa! ISSION NO. 024552 My Commission Expires: MY COMMISS10t. EXPIRES MAY 16,1997 AFFIDAVIT 1 ' f f i i d f J i l J 'J rneeting higblights are published, for your I. F, a n ul c c .y be obtained-from the City Recorder, 13125 S. . I:ail ~ .I3otdevzfl, i'igard, Aragon 97223, or by calling 639=4171. CITY 661Jle 61, DUSIIESS MEETING MAY 9, 1995 . I IGARD CITX• HALL TOWN HALL 13125 S.W.. HALL BOULEVARD, nGARD, OREGON Svu iy~M etifig (Red R6ck Craetc Confcxepc& Room, fonr,.erlyTown Fail ColAf~reree: Room) (6.36 P14.) j a vlltlYL' SStC1r!: fl ~ i A*f C1;y i r vlcil in go into Exeeu C Fi c Session under-txtt Pe wlsioas of op "S 192. 660 (I) d), (e), 1 di na a _ fal tiorss, real propeily tcutt~actizstts, current t% p _'d Q stdjng litig Gn issues. ~ n i)I&CU~3I4~IF: ~lfltt2sti?~ kinf~. :tef r~lRdtt:n PSt~~i$5+ Agenda R vte Ousiness Mee€in9ff6 Wn Nally (7;36 P.M.), . i i ® Presentation: Distinguished Budget Award e Update: Music in the Park. " Loc.? Contract Review Board Me'efing. x 1.: .;:.ish .alay4, 1995 i 1 e 1 i j i V ~ i Council Agenda j( Item SCI L. ' TIGAR D CITY Q 0 U i MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 1995 j • Meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m, by Mayor Nicoll. k I 1. RILL ALL i Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli; Councilors Wendi Conover Hawley, Paul Hunt, Bob Rohll:, and Ken Scheckla. Staff Present: Bill Monahan, City Administrator; Dick Bowersdorff, Senior Planner (arrived at 7:00 p.m. and stayed for Study Session only); Chuck Corrigan and Pam Seery, Legal Counsel; Catherine r Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer. y • STUDY SESSIQN ` 1 > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The -tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:35 p.m. under the provisions of CRS 192.660 (1) (d), (s), & (h) t i to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. i Executive Session recessed at 7:25 p.m. Council convened into open session - > REVIEW CP LAND USE DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE: Council discussed whether they wanted to call up Site Development Review SDR 95- , Hillview Terrace Apartments. After discussion, it was noted it looks as it the development met criteria and would not be called up by Council for review. (Dote: Discussion on proposed changes to the City's initiative and referendum process were discussed after the Business Meeting due to length of time needed for the Executive I` Session during the Sturdy meeting). i 131.1SINESS MEETING 1.5 Call for Edon-Agenda Rams. Mayor Nicoli noted he had several items for discussion under Nora-Agenda. See Agenda Item No. 6 for discussion. i _t CITY CQLI~ICIL MEETING N91~9LfTIrIS - MAY 9, 1995 - PAGE 1 1 -S • 2. C' 2. II_ R'S AGENDA. 1 Gone McAdams, 13420 SW Brittany Drive, Tigard, Oregon, 97223, distributed information noting concerns with emergency services access for r his neighborhood as it relates to the 130th and Winterlake Capital improvement Project. (A copy of Mr. McAdams' Information that was distributed is filed with the Council packet material). Awry Wayne, Tigard resident, testified in support of "Music in the Park." She j. noted these events are envisioned to be held in Cook Park and would be j supervised by the Police Department. She reported the high school offered to let therm have extra parking at this high school, and there would be a shuttle bus from the parking lot to the park provided by a church. She i referred to the need to publicize meetings and that the "kick-off event" was planned for the week after labor Day. She noted the need for volunteers in the areas of security, lighting, sound, and publicity. These events would be free to the public, but they world be asked to bring their own chairs. • Martha Bishop, 10590 SW Cook Lane, Tigard, Oregon, testified with regard ~ to Music in tie Park. She noted the opening event was planned to be in l conjunction with T igard's 34th Birthday. She envisioned that a stage area i - could be completed by that time. She also noted the need to get j information out to the public, including several different kinds of events, especially those directed towards the seniors. z ' (City Administrator Monahan advised Council this item was on the Council Agenda; additional information would be presented to Council on Agenda item No. 5.) N 'ENT AGENDA _QD ' Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to approve the following Consent Agenda items: h - 3.1 Approve City Council Minutes: April 18 and 25, 1995 3.2 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda i 3.3 Authorize Right-of-Way Acquisition for Burnham Street Widening Project at Main Street - Resolution No. 95-21 Motion was approved by unanimous `rote of Council present. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MlNtiTES - MAY 9, 1995 - PAGE 2 3 a v 4. PREaEIvIT'AT Q?4 C CIS! llefGUlSI IED Rl1DCl°i ~4/AD r4 - Finance Director Wayne Lowry Introduced Mr. Dave Boyer, Finance Director of Multnomah County and past president of the Oregon Municipal Finance Officer' Association. Mr. Boyer presented to the City of Tigard the Distinguished Budget Award. This award is the ninth consecutive award received by the City of Tigard ' and was for the fiscal year 1994-1995. Mayor Nicoli and Council congratulated the Finance Department and Mr. Lowry for this achievement. k s 5. REPORT ON MUSIC IN THE EARK f City Administrator Monahan gave the history behind this agenda item. He referred to an effort in the early 1980's where there was a plan to construct a music facility with some funding set aside. Subsequently, the Park Board elected to use that r funding for a soccer field. Recently the City received requests to review the issue r again and to determine what City support would be available. Recently staff met with several persons interested in providing a summer-event f facility for Music in the Park. Since the original proposal in the 1980's, additional i requirements are now imposed for a stage/bandshell (i.e., ADA regulations). Mr. ` Monahan noted funding consideration should take place during the Capita! Improvement Program process. It was the supporters' hope that there could be some type of facility constructed by the second week of September, in time for "Iigard's 34th Birthday (September 11). Staff member John Acker drafted a memo outlining the group's proposal (see - ' Council packet). There was discussion on location and the need to situate the stage so that it would not conflict with other uses in the park and to avoid noise problems for the neighborhood. Mr. Monahan advised a temporary stage had been considered. Based on past r 3 experience, it was estimated that about $10,000 would be needed for a temporary facility. It was determined that a temporary facility might not be worth considering r because the $10,000 would go a long way toward funding a permanent facility. It was noted the committee has been through the CIT process and has received favorable support from the CIT groups. Mr. Acker recommended that if a permanent structure was built, it should be designed for multiple uses (i.e. picnic facility). In response to a question from Councilor Rohlf, it was noted that Summerlake Park was given brief consideration; however, it was decided the houses may be too close to the parr (noise concerns). CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 1995 - PAGE 3 ' .i i n F j -I There was discussion of other means to obtain a temporary stage, and the ' different options considered by the committee; i.e., using a flatbed truck or a portable stage of some type. Councilor Hunt noted he would prefer a design that J would be multi-uso. Mayor Nicoll expressed concerns that the Cookin' in the Park event, attempted a few years ago, was not successful. He questioned the advisability of proceeding G until it was determined how much support there was for such a venture. He noted he would prefer that one or two years of successful concerts be experienced before investing dollars. He also noted he would like to see a volunteer base established. He pointed out that the City was being asked to finance 1 of the 4 J effort. t Councilor Scheckla said it would be difficult to determine the potential success based on past experience when there had only been one event per year planned. While there were no letters of support from the CIA's, City Administrator Monahan reported he had heard there was support from all the CITs. Councilor Rohlf advised he attended the `west CIT and there was a unanimous vote of support for this idea. He agreed that the City would probably want to see a good show of support in the community. i; Mr. Monahan noted the difference between this group and a non-profit organization that has an established track record. He advised he had suggested to the group that they look at forming as a non-profit organization to enable them ` to pursue fund-raising opportunities. The Music in the Park effort differs from Cookin' in the Park in that "Cookie'" sponsors hired professional musicians. Music in the Park advocates are not proposing to hire musicians, but rather make the opportunity for musicians to have a place to play. Cook Park is reserved by groups throughout the coming summer. A new use such as this could conflict with other uses. It was suggested that the event be held at the high school football stadium on a temporary basis to determine its potential popularity. More discussion followed. The City Administrator will meet again with the "Music J in the Park" group to discuss what a temporary stage could look like, where such r a stage could be located, and how the community's support could be gauged. i CITY COUNCIL. MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 1995 - PACE 4 r i 6. ¢StEf~3A ITEMS Mayor Nicoli advised of several items he would like to present for Council discussion: i A. Traffic Impact Fees are increasing as of July 1. He requested that developers be made aware of the upcoming July 1 increase and to give them fair warning if turn-around time is needed by staff for permit issuance, if permit issuance is a contributing factor for payment of this fee. ` i B. Communications with Metro. Mayor Nicoli noted a letter was received recently from the MPAC representative to communicate with Metro on issues. He noted he had also received a communication from Executive F { Officer Mike Burton to meet directly With the Metro Council. After discussion, Councilors noted it may be advantageous to utilize both methods of communication. Councilor Scheckla noted he was acquainted with the MPAC representative, and said she would represent the cities well. F C. Mayor Nicoli referred to a recent situation where a development along Highway 99 was approved with conditions imposed by ODOT. ODOT was requiring medians be placed on Highway 99 which may affect access to some businesses. Mayor Nicoli noted concerns with impacts to these , businesses and the fact that they were not notified when conditions were imposed by ODOT. He requested that in the future, when ODOT places restrictions affecting 99W because of a development, the Council and 99W Task Farce be notified. There was also discussion on the fact that there is an agreement with a ODOT and the City with regard to 99W. (This was reached by the 99W Task Force and ODOT.) Councilor Hawley referred to this agreement and advised she was uncertain whether it only applied from the 1-5 interchange to Hall and Greenburg, or whether it extended the entire length of the City limits. Staff will look into this issue. i D. Mayor Nicoll discussed a letter received from the Boundary Commission concerning whether hook-up to a sewer would trigger an annexation request or non-remonstrance agreement. It is apparent that there is some confusion about the Walnut Island; Tigard needs to notify the County that -the City is not at this time considering an island annexation for Walnut Island. E. Mayor Nicoli reported on a citizen concern (Bonnie Goldsmith) regarding water quality treatment ponds. Mrs. Goldsmith is worried about children's safety, advising that these water-filled ponds are an attractive nuisance. { CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 1595 - PAGE 5 F i , f I ri t, Mayor Nicoli advised he has looked at these ponds and described them for 7 Council. The ponds are required (newly instituted) by Unified Sewerage A Agency (LISA), but are maintained by the City. The ponds, located it ! the Castle dill development, will remain the maintenance responsibility of the developer for three years. Apparently USA is reconsidering the use of these r ponds. Mayor Nicoli asked Council to think about the issue and requested K. i the matter be reviewed again at a later time. F. Mayor Nicoll noted he had recelved a letter from Metro Executive Officer Mike Burton regarding planning services for Tigard. It had come to his attention that Metro staff advised they would not be willing to help Tigard with their planning in the Triangle area as previously offered because of concerns expressed by the City with the 2040 planning process. Mr. Burton k assured Mayor Nicoli that planning assistance would be available to the City of Tigard. f G. Mayor Nicoli requested discussion on the 130th/Winteriake connection issue. He noted he would like to discuss whether there was a way to s resolve this issue, advising of his concern for the division it has created in the neighborhood. Council discussed the history of this issue with the Mayor, noting the connection is on the Comprehensive Plan. Until there is a proposal to remove this from the Comprehensive Plan, the only decision left to Council is assigning the priority for constructing the connection during the Capital e Improvement Program process. It is anticipated that two groups, representing both sides of the issue, will be presenting information to Council to support their position as to whether or not the connection shou!d be built. i Council discussion followed. Staff was asked to provide Council with traffic count information. Mr. Gene McAdams commented he also thought the prioritization of the project was at this time "the game." CONTINUATION OF STUDY SESSION: > DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CITY'S INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM PROCESS: Council briefly reviewed the agenda packet information with Legal Counsel Pam Beery. After discussion, Council consensus was to ask Legal Counsel to prepare a proposed ordinance repealing the current code language and replacing it with state statute, with the exception that related appeals be heard by the City Council rather than Circuit Court. 1. 1 C17Y COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY 9, 1995 - PAGE S i s t _a j NON-AGENDA ITEM: City Administrator Monahan noted there was an opportunity for the City to purchase a hot air balloon. He had been € j approached by the Rex Hill Winery, advising their balloon equipment was E :a for sale. It was estimated the entire system would cost about $35,000. At this time, there was no interest by the Council to consider the purchase of a balloon. 7. ADJOURNMENT: 10:02 p.m. z Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder 6 ~ mayor, C' Tigard t F ' Cate: i 3 /CS 3 h:\rewrd 9r\ccm\ .G5 f 's k f I E i i I i 1 f l i I CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - MAY J, 1995 - PAGE 7 ~ f i I 1 ~ 1 :j AGENDA rrEM NO. VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE: May 9. 1995 (Umited to 2 minutes or less, please) f Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on 4 other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. ~ j Please contact the Cite Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. f STAFF ! NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC CONTACTED F f 2 , W *3 'D ~ S i I I 1 = (~6n~jo vi¢ita~rs.stM i I ' THIS IS A REISSUE) NOTICE. THE PREVIOUS F 3 NOTICE WAS INADVERTEDLY SENT TO V' 5C u SseC~ Inc ` THE INCORRENT OWNERS. LeC?~ r CITY OF TIGARD t NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 95-0006 HILLVIEW TERRACE APARTMENTS i f APPLICATION: A request for the following development applications: 1) Site Development Review E approval to allow construction of a seven building, 90 unit apartment complex with an office and 3 swimming pool. Zoning: R-25 (Residential, 25 units per acre). Location: (WCTM 2S1 10AC, tax lot 1200). South of SW Bull Mountain Road, west of SW Pacific Highway, north of SW Beef Bend Road and east of SW 116th Place. r ` ~ L 4. SECTION 1 =DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has a APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the I decision is based are noted in Section 11. Recommendations: PRIOR_TO_ THE iSSUANCI ©F_A BUILDING PERMIT THE FOLLOINING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED OR FINANCIALLY SECURED: ' 1. Right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the SW Bull Mountain Road frontage to increase the right-of-way to 33 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the proposed right-of ' way centerline as approved by the Engineering Department, The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Public Counter and the Engineering Department. STAFF CONTACT: Diane )elderks, Engineering Department. 2. Standard one-half street improvements, including concrete sidewalk, driveway apron, curb, asphaltic concrete pavement, storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the SW Bull Mountain frontage. Improvements shall conform to the alignment of i existing adjacent improvements, as approved by the Engineering Department and Washington i County. STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. 3. The applicant shall submit a striping plan of SW Bull Mountain Road detailing the location of the i j westbound left-turn lane refuge and lane transitions for approval by the City Engineer. E STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. 4. The applicant shall submit the final site plan showing the provisions for inter-connection of driveways for secondary emergency access between adjoining parcels and the alignment of the east } driveway with respect to the driveways on the northerly side of SW Bull Mountain Road to the Engineering Department for approval. STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. t - 1 + k r 3 NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE APARTMENTS SDR 95-0006 PAGE 1 5. Three (3) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (14`'. s itemized construction cost estimate, all prepared by a Professiona,--' Engineer, shall be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these ` plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department. 6. The applicant shall obtain a facility permit from the Department of Land Use and Transportation of Washington County, to perform work within the, right-of-way of SW Bull Mountain Road. A copy shall be provided to the City Engineering Department prior to issuance of a Public Improvement Permit. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department. l 7. The applicant shall provide for water quality treatment, as required by - Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Design calculations shall be in conformance with the general requirements of Surface Water Ouality Facilities Technical Guidance Handbook, USA, 1991. The design report and calculations shall be approved by the Engineering Department prior to construction. The location of the facility shall be approved by the Engineering Department. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, { Engineering Department. 8. The applicant shall provide for roof and pavement rain drainage to the public stormwater drainage system or by an on-site system designed to prevent runoff onto the adjacent property. STAFF CONTACT. Greg Berry, Engineering Department. 9. The applicant shall demonstrate that storm drainage runoff can b:.r I discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly` impacting properties downstream. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, Engineering Department. 10. The applicant shall provide a hydrology and hydraulic study of the affected basin. Storm water detention may be required to protect the downstream King City system. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, Engineering Department. a r` 11. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the State of Oregon Highway Division, to perform work within the right-of-way of SW Pacific Highway. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department prior to issuance of a Public Improvement Permit. STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. 12. Washington County has established and the City has agreed to collect Traffic Impact Fees in,accordance with Resolution No. 94-18. The 1 applicant shall pay the fee established for the proposed use. s 13. The applicant shall place the existing overhead facilities underground or pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. NOTICE OF DECISION - EILLVIEW TERRACE APARTHENES - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 2 j i i 14. The applicant shall provide a final grading plan, that includes the recommendations of the geotechnical engineer, prepared in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 70 of the UBC and under the supervision of a Professional Civil Engineer, for approval by the Engineering y Department, prior to construction. STAFF CON'T'ACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. E I 15. Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the k" 1 Planning Division, Staff Contact: Mark Roberts. The revised plans r shall include the following: a. The ground floor units be provided with fencing or masonry walls of ` complimentary materials to further buffer the patio areas from SW j ' Pacific Highway and the existing or proposed multiple family residential uses. F` ~ L b. The separation between buildings 4A and 6D are not in compliance F 3 with this section. As indicated on the site plan, the remaining f' buildings are in compliance. A revised site plan shall be submitted which provides for a 32 foot separation between buildings rather than the 26 feet shown. C. The applicant shall verify the setback of buildings 2A, 3C, 4A, 5B, 6D, & 7A meets the 10 foot sideyard setback requirement. As shown these buildings appear to be at 8 to 9 feet from the property line.' r 1 d. Buffering and screening within the westerly buffer area adjoining the existing single family residence. This buffer shall consist of at least one row of trees not less than 10 feet high for deciduous f' trees and 5 feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting, with the spacing of the trees depending on the size of the tree at maturity. The site and landscape plan shall be modified to provide a 10 foot buffer of approximately 1,150 square feet of area. This buffer shall contain a minimum of 12 five gallon or 23 one gallon shrubs, in addition to a row of trees. The remaining area shall be planted in lawn, groundcover•or spread with bark mulch. In addition, the following screening is required: 1) a hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs which will form a 4 foot continuous screen within 2 years of planting, or; 2) an earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials which will form a continuous screen six, feet in height within two years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn, ground ' cover or bark mulch, or; 3) a five foot or taller fence or wall shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring 1 screen. e. To comply with the line of site visibility the trash enclosure proposed at the south westerly end of Building 1B shall be t relocated away from the intersection of two private driveways. f. Due to daily site servicing needs it is suggested that the applicant comply with these provisions through Franchise Hauler Review and Sign Off. j NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIESV TERRACE APARTMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 3 S 1 P ~ g. The plan shall be revised to provide an additional 24 visitor parking spaces. h. The site and landscape should be revised in order to provide sidewalk along the easterly driveway into the site. r: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPA14CY E PERMITS: i 16. The applicant shall contact the Tigard Police Department for review and approval of the address signage of this development and also for approval of the exterior lighting plan for this development. ' 17. All site improvements shall be installed as per the approved revised site plans. ' IN ADDITION 'i'_ H_EAPPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE• THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST_ 18. SECTION 18.120.060 BONDING AND ASSURANCES _i A. On all projects where public improvements are required the Director shall: ! 1. Require a bond in an amount not grater than 100 percent of other adequate assurances as a condition of approval of the site development plan in order to ensure the completed project_ 'j is in conformance with the approved plan; and 2. Approve and release such bonds. B. The bona shall be release when the Director finds the completed { project conforms to the approved site development plan and all conditions of approval are satisfied. i. 19. SECTION 18.164 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMEN'T' STANDARDS. Section 18.164.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. i THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE DATE OF THE FINAL DECISION. i SECTION II. FINDINGS OF' FACT i 1. Background: This site was the subject of a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map - Amendments which rezoned the property from Commercial Professional t-~- NOTICE OF DECISION - BILLVIEW TERRACE AP,ARTbMITS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 4 j i 1 t . f r Medium High Density Residential (R-25). The property is vacant and no ~ other previous land use applications have been made concerning this site. 1 ~2. vicinity Information: ~'0 The site is has direct frontage on SW Bull Mountain Road and is adjoined by a vacant restaurant to the east, the Wellington Condominiums to the ` south The site is adjoined by a single family home and a vacant multiple family residential site to the west. The site is also adjoined by residential uses and a church along the north side of SW Bull Mountain Road. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description: r a ' Approximately a third of the site slopes at about 10% towards SW Pacific { Highway. The site is vacant and vegetated with grasses and large piles of brushes which were recently cleared on the site. 4. Other Department and Agency Comments: .j The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this proposal and has E offered the following comments: 1) It is not clear where the storm drainage system is connecting. 2) All impervious surface drainage shall be conveyed to the public storm sewer system. General Telephone reviewed this application and stated that the developer was to provide trenches and conduit to GTE Specifications. The Maintenance Services Department has reviewed this proposal and s stated that provision for on-site water quality and -quantity detention and treatment may need to be provided. F The City of Tigard Water Department has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Although we do not object to the development concept, we do have the following comments: 1) Water meters and fire hydrants must be located within landscaped areas. 2) All water meters need to have double check valve assemblies installed (by owner) on the customers side of the meter. The water meter for Building 1B shall have a reduced principle assembly device instead of a double check assembly device due to the connection with the swimming pool. The developers engineer shall submit the appropriate plans. 1 The Tigard Police Department has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: The applicant will need to provide exterior lighting plans for the stairwells, front door entry areas and the parking lots. The plans note that a. wall mounted HPS at 12 feet above grade is to be provided but no l 'i indication is provided as to the locations on the buildings. The landscape plan is acceptable as proposed in terms of security issues. NOTICES OF DECISION - BILLVIEW TERRACE APARTMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 5 i T The Unified Sewerage Agency, the Washington County Department of Land y Use and Transportation, the Tualatin Halley Fire District, Portland General Electric and the United States Postal Service have reviewed thi-~ 4 application and have offered no comments or objections. No othe!-. f comments have been received. SECTION III. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION pp A. COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: f { Use Classi-fication_: The applicant is proposing to build a twelve building, 90 unit apartment complex. This proposal is classified in Code Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as Multiple-Family Residential Units. Code Section 18.56.030 allows Multiple-Family dwellings as a i permitted use in the R-25 zoning district. Minimum Lot Area: Section 18.56.050 states that the minimum lot area for each multi-family unit in the R-25 zoning district is 1,480 square f feet. There is no minimum lot width requirement in the R-25 zone. The proposed 90 units require a site size of 133,200 square feet. The net f site area is approximately 159,120 square feet thereby meeting this standard. Developments within the R-25 zone are required to provide a minimum of 2026 landscaping. The applicant provided preliminary [ calculations which indicate that 480 of the site is to be developed with 4,:,- =j landscaping in satisfaction with this requirement. Setbacks: Section 18.56.050 states that for multi-family dwellings the E setbacks are as follows: front yard - 20 feet; side yard - 10 feet, side yard which abuts a more restrictive zone - 30 feet; rear yard - 20 feet' C As indicated on the site plan, the proposal appears to meet the setback--l"' requirements. The applicant shall verify the setback of buildings 2A, - ' 3C, 4A, 5B, 6D, & 7A meets the 10 foot sideyard setback requirement. As _ shown these buildings appear to be at 9 to 10 feet from the property line. The maximum building height is 45 feet. As shown. on the exterior elevation plans (A-1 through A-10), the proposed buildings are approximately 26 feet in height which is under the maximum allowed. Section 18.120.180(A)(1) (Site Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code Sections. The applicable criteria in this case are chapters 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, and 18.164. The proposal is i> consistency with these sections has been reviewed elsewhere. ~ The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.94 (Manufactured/ Mobile Home Regulations), 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), 18.134 (Variance), 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures), 18.150 (Tree Removal) which are also listed under section 18.120.180.A.1. These sections are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Section 18.120.180.A.2 provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These standards are addressed immediately below. i NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE APARTMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 6 4 v E_ i . Relationship to the Natural and physical Environment: Section f 18.120.180.2 states that buildings shall be located to preserve existing trees and that trees having a six inch caliper or greater shall be preserved or replaced by new plantings of equal character, The + applicant proposes to preserve trees in place except for one Oak tree F` which is to be removed to construct necessary street and driveway q improvements. Exterior Elevations: Section 18.120.108.3 states that along the vertical face of multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of F every 30 feet by providing any two of the following: a) Recesses (decks,patios, etc.) ; b) Extensions (decks, patios, etc.) ; or c) Offsets or breaks in roof elevations. As indicated on the preliminary building elevations plans (Sheets A-1 through A-10) the design shows both recesses and roof elevation offsets, in accordance with this section. F Buffering Screenina and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section ~ 18.120.108.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. This criteria shall be satisfied as addressed in the Buffer Matrix (18.100.130) section below. Section a 18.120.108.4(B) states that on-site screening from view of adjoining E' properties of such things as service and storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided. This criteria is addressed in part because the site and landscape plan provides screening around the parking area adjacent to SW Bull Mountain _ Road and within the required buffer area. The site and landscape plans do not presently provide a buffer between the existing home to the west of the site and the principal driveway entrance to the apartments. The site and landscape plan shall therefore be modified to address these requirements. Privacy and Noise: Section 18.120.180.5 requires that structures which include residential dwelling units shall provide private outdoor areas for each ground floor unit which is screened from view by adjoining units, that the buildings shall be oriented in a manner which protects i private spaces on adjoining properties from view and noise, and on-site uses which create noise, lights, or glare shall be buffered from adjoining residential uses. [ A total of three residential parcels directly adjoin the proposed development site. Due to the building orientation the open space areas appear to adequately screened from view existing and potential adjoining residential uses. The patio areas have direct visibility from SW F 'i Pacific Highway. It is recommended that all of the ground floor units be provided with fencing or masonry walls of complimentary materials to buffer the patio areas from SW Pacific Highway and the existing or t proposed multiple family residential uses. On-site private space has been satisfied through the use of ground floor patios and balconies. The building design also provides for off-sets or staggering of the patios so that a direct line of site between patios is limited. p NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE APAPTI TS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 7 i _i i Private Outdoor Areas: Section 18.102.108.6. requires that private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be provided and shall be designed f for the exclusive use of individual units and shall be at least 4^ square feet in size with a minimum width dimension of four feet. Thi__ ) criteria is satisfied as the applicant is proposing balconies or patios for each unit in excess of 48 square feet. E Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Section 18.102.108.7 states that in addition to subsections 5 and 6 above, usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in residential developments for the shared or common use of all the residents in the amount of 200 square feet per unit for studios to two-bedroom units and 300 square feet per unit for three or f more bedroom units. The required recreation space may be provided as follows: 1) all outdoor space; 2) part outdoor and part indoor space; 3) ' all public or common space; 4) part common and part private, for .i example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room and ' balconies on each unit; 5) where balconies are added to units, the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet. Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable for reasons of crime prevention and safety. This development requires a total of 18,900 square feet of shared outdoor recreation area (81 units @ 200 s.f. and 9 units @ 300 s.f.). A swimming pool has been proposed for on-site shared recreation purposes. The applicant also proposes extensive landscaping over 480 of the net lot area or 77,234 square feet with a mixture of walkways, passive enjoyment areas and common outdoor lawn areas. The larger areas' to be provided for the shared outdoor recreation are centrally located `j and readily observable by the residents of several dwelling units. The__. Police Department has reviewed the landscape plan and have recommends; approval of the plan as proposed. - i Demarcation of spaces: crime prevention: Section 18.102.108.9 states that structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas, semi-public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined in order to establish persons having a right to be in the space, in 1 order to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility. The Tigard Police Department has requested, in similar developments, that appropriate signage be placed at entrances to apartment complexes and that adequate addressing be placed on unit entrances so that emergency service providers can locate units quickly. The developer + should therefore be required to contact the Police Department prior to r obtaining occupancy permits for the complex for review and approval of ` the address signage of this development. f Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.102.108.10 requires that windows be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can, be surveyed by the ` occupants; interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that can be observed by others; mail boxes located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; exterior lighting levels selected and angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and light fixtures shall be provided in areas having pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas. t: NOTICE OP DECISION - BILLVIEW TERRACE APARTZ1ENTS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 8 , i 3 y t Separated laundry areas are not proposed for this development but based on a preliminary review of the plans it is recommended that the ! developer contact the Police Department prior to the issuance of building permits for the complex, for review and approval of the 1 exterior lighting plan for this development. - 1 1 Rgnaity Como9tation: Section 18.92 establishes the criteria for ' determining the number of dwelling units permitted. In determining the net acreage, the following are subtracted from the gross acreage: sensitive land area; park dedication; dedicated public right-of-way and private streets. only land dedicated for public right-of-way is, applicable to this proposal and need be subtracted. To calculate the net units per acre, it is necessary to divide the net acreage by the minimum number of square feet required for each lot by the applicable zoning district. The property contains approximately 4.14 gross acres or approximately 180,338 square feet. Section 18.92.020(3) (b) requires the subtraction of IS of the gross area for public facilities, or 27,051 square feet. The f resulting net acreage is 153,287 square feet. By dividing this area by 1,480 square r"eet per unit results in the potential for 103 net dwelling units. The applicant is proposing 90 units in compliance with this criteria. Additional Yard Setback Reg irements: Section 18.96.020 requires that the building setback on SW Bull Mountain Road (a Major Collector) shall A be the setback distance required by the zoning district plus 30 feet measured from the centerline of the street. The front yard setback of closest adjoining structure is at 45 feet from the street in compliance - with the standard. Distance Between Multiple-Family Structures: Section 18.96.030 states ' that buildings with windowed walls facing buildings with windowed walls shall have a 25 foot separation, buildings with windowed walls facing, buildings with a blank wall shall have a 15 foot separation, buildings with opposing blank walls shall have a 10 foot separation. Where buildings emceed a horizontal dimension of 60 feet or exceed 30 feet in height, the minimum wall separation shall be one foot for each 15 feet of building length over 50 feet and two feet for each 10 feet of building height over 30 feet. This section is applicable to each of the proposed buildings. The r building lengths vary from 75 to 135 feet. The building elevation plans (Sheets A-1 through A-10) show that these buildings have windowed walls facing windowed walls. The required separation is therefore 25 feet. There is an additional 7 foot separation required because the lengths are greater than 50 feet long. The total building separation required 's for these building therefore is 32 feet. The separation between buildings 4A and 6D is not in compliance with this section as shown. The remaining buildings comply with this requirement. A revised site f, plan shall be submitted which provides for a 32 foot separation between f Buildings 4A and 6D rather than the 26 feet shown. { Driveways, parking lots and walkways shall maintain the following NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVZEW TERRACE APARMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 9 j ~ i separation for dwelling units within eight feet of the ground level: 1) driveways and parking lots shall be separated from windowed walls by at k least eight feet; walkways running parallel to the face of th structures shall be separated by at least five feet; and 2) driveway I' and parking lots shall be separated from living room windows by at least E ;j 10 feet; walkways running parallel to the face of the structure shall be separated by at least seven feet. As indicated on the site plan, all `i buildings satisfy the parking lot and walkway separation requirements. 1 l,andscanincs Plan: Section 18.100.015 requires that the applicant submit a landscaping plan. This requirement has been satisfied as the applicant has submitted a.plan indicating the number, type and location of trees and shrubs. The landscape plan provides 48t of the site with landscaping. Parking lot trees have been provided at a ratio of one space for each seven uncovered parking spaces in compliance with this requirement. Street Trees: Section 18.100.033 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in i accordance with section 18.100.035. Section 18.100.035 requires that 4 street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The landscape plan shows the planting of six Scarlett Oaks and preservation of one existing Oak tree along the SW Bull Mountain Road „ ` frontage. Based on their size of 60-80 feet at maturity these trees are considered a large species and may be planted at 40 feet on center. Screening: Special Provisions: Section 18.100.110(A) states that trees, shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas and shall b' equally distributed and on the basis of one tree for each seven parking i spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension of j the landscape islands shall be three feet and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. As indicated on the -s site plan, parking lot trees and landscaping have been provided in accordance with this section. j Screenina of Swimmi.na Pools: Section 18.100.110(C) states that all swimming pools shall be enclosed as required by Chapter 14.20 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The enclosure shall be provided by a fence or wall with a minimum height of four foot with a self-latching door or { gate. The elevations provide details for a five foot high steel tube enclosure around the pool. t Screening of Refuse Containers: Section 18.100.110(D) states that any refuse container or disposal area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall he contained within the screened area. The site plan as proposed provides three trash and recycling enclosures with 576 square feet of total area with screening in accordance with this section. Due to daily site servicing needs it is suggested that the applicant comply with these provisions through Franchise Hauler Review and Sign Off. j NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE APART23=S - 3DR 95-00006 PAGE 10 i a- I Buffer Matrix: Section 18.100.130 contains the buffer matrix to be used j in calculating widths of buffering and screening to be installed between proposed uses. The Matrix indicates that where a multi-family F development abuts a residential zone with a single-family use, the required buffer and screening width shall be 10 feet. Section 18.100.080.D contains the minimum improvement standards for the j buffering area. The minimum Lmprovements within a buffer area shall consist of the following: 1) At least one row of trees shall be planted. F, The trees shall be not less than 10 feet high for deciduous trees and 5 feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing of the tree depends on the size of the species at maturity; 2) In addition, at least 10 five gallon shrubs or 20 one gallon shrubs shall be planted for f 1 each 1000 square feet of required buffer area; 3) The remaining area shall be planted in lawn, groundcover or spread with bark mulch. ! The site and landscape plan doesn't presently provide a buffer between the site and an adjoining residence to the west. The site and landscape plan shall be modified to provide a 10 foot buffer of approximately k 1,150 square feet of area. This buffer shall contain a minimum of 12 - five gallon or 23 one gallon shrubs, in addition to a row of trees. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted indicating landscaping and r screening along the east buffer area in accordance with this section. Section 18.100.080.E states that where screening is required the k ? following standards shall aPP1Y in addition to those required i` for buffering; 1) a hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs which will form a 4 foot continuous screen within 2 years of planting, or; 2) an _ earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials which will form a E< continuous screen 6 feet in height within 2 years. The unplanted v' portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn, ground cover or bark @ mulch, or; 3) a 5 foot or taller fence or wall shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted indicating landscaping and screening along the east buffer area in accordance with, this standard. r 1 Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision + area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. 1 r The code provides that obstructions which may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three and eight feet in height (trees may be placed within this area provided all branches below eight feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30 foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway and then connecting these two 30 foot distance points with a straight line. To comply with the line of site visibility the trash enclosure proposed at the south westerly end of Building 1B shall be relocated away from the intersection of two private driveways. NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE AP .THMIT'S - SDR 95-0005 PAGE it { Minimum Off-Street Parkincr: Section 18.106.030(A)(3) requires a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces for 1 bedroom units and 2 spaces for units with more than 1 bedroom. The applicant is proposing 57 one bedroom unit;,, and 43 units in excess of one bedroom which requires a total of ? parking spaces. In addition, section 18.106.020(G) states that multi-`- dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide shared parking for the use of all of the guests of all of the residents of the complex. r The shared parking shall consist of 15 percent of the total required parking spaces and be centrally located within the development. The required number of visitor parking spaces is 24. This requirement has not been addressed, the site and landscape plan shall be revised to t provide an additional 24 visitor parking spaces for a total of 181 parking spaces. - The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires five disabled i_ parking spaces if 151 to 200 parking spaces are provided. The proposed site plan appears to show the provision of four disabled person parking spaces distributed throughout the site. A minimum of one additional handicapped parking space shall be provided to comply with ADA F requirements. A revised plan shall be submitted which complies with Uniform Building Code Chapter 31.04G. it is suggested that several of these designated handicapped parking spaces be relocated under cover to better serve the needs of both handicapped residents of the proposed development and handicapped visitors. Bicycle Parkina. Section 18.106_020(P) requires one bicycle parkin rack space for each 15 vehicular parking spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. Based on the provision of 181 parking spaces, 12 bicycle parking spaces will be required for this development. The site plan shows the provision of approximately 12 bicycle racks, thereby satisfying this requirement. , Access: Section 18.108.070(D) requires that multiple-family residential uses provide a minimum of two driveways plus one additional driveway to a public street for every 200 units or portion thereof in excess of 100 units. The minimum access width shall be 30 feet, with. 24 feet of pavement, curbs and a five foot sidewalk. The site plan indicates the provision of 90 units, therefore two accesses shall be required for this development. This section is i partially satisfied as the site plan shows the provision of two access = drives with pavement widths of 24 feet or more. A sidewalk was provided along the westerly access driveway but not the easterly driveway which j leads into the development. The site and landscape should be revised in order to provide a sidewalk along the easterly driveway into the site. NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRJ CE APARTMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PAGE 12 i I S Walkwavs: Section 18.108.050(B) rewires that within multi-family developments each residential dwelling shall be connected to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities r' shall be connected by a walkway system having a minimum width of four feet and constructed of an all weather material. As indicated on the site plan, walkways are satisfactorily provided. Signs: Section 18.114.130 (B) lists the type of allowable signs and G sign area permitted in the R-25 zone. All signs shall be approved f through the Sign Permit process as administered by the Planning Division. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage: Section 18.116 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site r storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant shall choose one of the following four methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum standard, Waste assessment, Comprehensive recycling plan, or Franchised hauler review and sign-off. The applicant will need to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this c section. The applicant shall also obtain from the disposal hauler a written sign-off on the location of and the compatibility of facilities. B. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 64. ®30 (E) 1) (a) (Streets), 18. 164-090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) shall be satisfied as specified below: s Findings: 1_ TRAFFIC: The applicant has submitted a traffic report entitled "Hillview Commons - Traffic Analysis Report", dated February 15, 2995, as prepared by Keech Associates, Inc., Consulting Traffic Engineer. The report includes traffic counts on SW Bull Mountain Road and at its intersection with SW Pacific Highway. An estimate of the project traffic is made and the effects of the project traffic, together with provisions for contiguous proposed projects and future growth, is analyzed with respect to the project driveways and the signalized intersection of SW Bull Mountain i Road and SW Pacific Highway. The report concludes that the project driveways will operate with a satisfactory Level of Service "B", and recommends that a west bound left-turn refuge be included in the construction for the project, for the east driveway. The east driveway location should align with the ' driveway on the opposite side of the street that provides one of two access driveways for the church on the north side of SW Bull Mountain - Road. As an alternative, the traffic report should be amended to include a study to demonstrate how the offset driveways could function satisfactorily. ! is NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE AFAR-La N S - SDR. 95-0006 PAGE 13 i ,3 With respect to the intersection of SW Bull Mountain Road and SW Pacific highway, the report indicates that a Level of Service of "D" will be maintained with the addition of the project traffic to the existing y traffic. t ; { In discussions with the applicant and the proponents of the project on the contiguous property to the west, provisions for emergency access between the sites is planned and will be included in the final building application. The private driveways will be designed to connect within the properties at locations to be determined. The final site plan 1 should be approved by the Engineering Department. 2. STREETS: E As indicated above, the applicant-'s site plan shows two driveways connecting to SLR' Bull Mountain Road, a Major Collector street as shown on the City Comprehensive Plan. SW Bull Mountain Road is also a F Washington County road and the proposed driveway construction will require a County Facilities permit. E The existing right-of-way for SW Bull Mountain Road, as measured from the centerline of street, is 20 feet wide. The right-of-way required to match the existing dedications to the east is 33 feet. The applicant should be required to dedicate the additional street right-of-way. The existing roadway consists of a 32 foot wide asphalt concrete pavement that provides one 11 foot wide vehicular and a 5 foot wide paved shoulder in each direction. The standard condition of approval for this type of development is to require one-half street improvement,' along the entire frontage. To implement the traffic reports recommendation for a west-bound left turn lane, it may be necessary to construct widening on the opposite side of the street to provide a safe transition from three lanes to two lanes. The applicant should submit ' I a striping diagram with the construction plans for approval by the City Engineer in order to determine the exact limits of the street construction. Power poles and overhead lines are existing on both sides of the street, and the applicant should be required to place the facilities underground along the southerly frontage, or pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. 3. SEWER: i j The site is served by the existing 8" public sanitary sewer located in an easement across the property to the west and south. The applicant shall extend the main line sewer to the site property and provide an easement to the City of Tigard between the existing and proposed construction. The sewer has sufficient capacity for the proposed addition. i NOTICE OF DECISION - HILLVIEW TERRACE APARn1EUTS - SDR 95-0005 PAGE 14 s I . S • ♦ G: 4. STORM DRAIN: t The site slopes in a southeasterly direction toward the adjacent frontage road within the contiguous SW Pacific Highway right-of-way, j along the southeasterly site property line. The applicant's storm drain plan proposes an on-site underground system connecting to the State t Highway and will require a permit from ODOT. The drainage from the additional impervious area created by the new ` j construction should to be directed to an on-site water quality facility prior to being transported to the downstream drainage system. In ; addition, this project is located within the drainage basin connecting to King City and provisions for storm water detention should be included in the project drainage system. The applicant shall provide a hydrology and hydraulic study of the affected drainage basin prepared under the supervision of a Civil Engineer for approval of the Engineering Department. ; The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce (Resolution and Order No. 91-47) Surface Water Management Regulations requiring the construction of on-site water quality facilities or fees in-lieu of their construction. The project should be re-designed to include a water quality facility as a part of the proposed construction. 5. GEOLOGY: The applicant has submitted a geotechnical report entitled "Geotechnical t.' Investigation - Hillview Commons Apartments", dated January 30, 1995, as i prepared by Carlson Testing, Inc. The report provides a discussion of the existing geology and the effects of the proposed grading of the site with respect to the subsurface conditions. ` The report concludes that the proposed development is compatible with the site conditions and includes recommendations relating to the potential hard rock conditions to be encountered and to the disposition ' of a small spring that crosses the site. The applicant shall submit the final grading plan to the Engineering Department for approval prior to construction. The plan shall be prepared under the guidelines of Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code and with the supervision of a Civil Engineer. The plan shall also ,i include the recommendations of the geotechnical report and the final grading construction shall be certified by both the Geotechnical and Civil Engineers. - f i i 140TICE OP DECISION - FHILLVIEW TERRACE APARTMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PACE 15 1 SECTION V, PROCEDURE { 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hal;'.:-" and mailed to: r XX The applicant and owners XX Owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Citizen Involvement Team Representative XX Affected government agencies j 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON 5/10/95 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3. ApMx)eal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32_.-390(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal C must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. Appeal wee schedule and forms are available at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 p.m. 5 10 95 , 4. Questions: If you have questions, please call City of Tigard, Planning Department (639-4171), City of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223 a F 11Z-!5 A I PREPARED BYE: Mark Roberts ATE Assistant Planner APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Senior Planner i 1 F r' r- - ~ f i I NOTICE OF DECISION - HILT-VIEW TERRACE APARTMENTS - SDR 95-0006 PACE 16 - i 1 f i Irj I 1 AF P,~ ( Y n ~ yr , -1 w - gF! S A't'' s I w s k T i L ` m °VI La pn -DRIFT E,. ~ ~ lJ 1.N > 3.5 f `l Y a CT Y A e L r CT 1 VI u i SITE a K ~ (PD) ) fal- (PD) -LLj. k6j _j i CASE NO. VICINITY EXHIBIT MA SITE PMENT REVIEW (SDR) 95-IW06 ANDREWS MGM., LTD.-APTS. is i - 7 , ~ ~ ewer. F r 3T / 40, =a i mwm s wsa s- cRO~e ~ ',,G t ~f e',w 2'8•~ 19 ,9'D•3~I~'~ aza o W4?_ r~®•.~. A s ~ 8 • ,p s s • arc i J CASE O. EXHIBIT MAP SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) { 95-O006 ANDREWS MGMT.~ LTD.--APTS. =r _i 1 AGENDA ITEM S+(L64 c~ S5 i i3'Yl_ For Agenda of -1VG t 4 !5 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMSUMMARY r c ti and Replacing Tigard Code ISSUE/AGENDA 'T'ITLE Sect$an 1. Tn3t at we and Referendum PREPARED BY: C.Wheatlev DEPT HEAD OK _ ice" CITY ADMIN OK j ISSUE $EI'ORIE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council replace existing Initiative and Referendum language in the Tigard Municipal Code with state statute? S'Q'~11FF RECC3NDATIOP3 Hold Council discussion on whether Council would like to replace the current k Code language with the initiative and referendum process provided by state statute. E Then, direct staff, by motion, to prepare an ordinance updating the initiative and referendum provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code for Council consideration to reflect consensus reached during the discussion. -1 TNFORMATION SUMMARY e City Attorney and City Recorder recently assisted citizens through an )Th initiative process to place a measure on the ballot up to the point of collecting signatures. During this process, it was apparent that the current - Code provisions for the initiative and referendum process are outdated and, in some instances, preempted by state law. The current TMC language has not been updated since 1962. F -j If the Council decide] to repeal the current ordinance and replace it with state statute, the following represents the primary changes from our current practice: i • Prospective petition must be submitted to the City Recorder and approved by the City Attorney before signatures are collected. Currently the code says these reviews occur after the signatures are collected. • Changes the number of signatures required on the petitions. The primary Council policy choice deals with the number of signatures to be required to place an initiative or referendum measure on the ballot. State statute requires the following number of signatures: l Initiative petition: 15% of the electors registered at f the time the petition is filed. • Referendum petition: 10% of the electors registered at the time the petition is filed. - - T- - r. As of March 28, 1995, the City has 20,960 voters. Therefore by i state statute, the number of signatures for initiative petition would ha 3,144« for referendum, 2,090. As a comparison, under the current Code language, the initiative petition filed in January regarding the 130th/Winterlake issue, would have needed 1,848 signatures. This number is substantially less than what would be required with state statute. As explained in the attached memorandum from Pam Beery at the City Attorney's office, the current wording in the code with regard to k the number of signatures required is unclear. 7 • City attorney review period lengthened from five days to five R business days. a Appeal period lengthened from two days to seven business days. Ballot tide appeal would be held by Circuit Court rather than by ' Council. Notice of election shall be the responsibility of the County as is currently required by state law. The City would rely on this .;j notice as the only notice of election. ALTERNATIVES TO CONSIDER -j J'1. Repeal the current ordinance and use state statute. 2. Repeal the current ordinance, use mostly state statute and adopt a new ordinance which addresses only those warts of the process which differ from state statute. 3. Repeal the current ordinance and adopt a new ordinance which sets out the entire process for initiative and referendum FISCAL NOTES Initiative and Referendum costs are borne by the City. This includes attorney review of ballot title, staff time in the City Recorder's office, and the cost of the election. h:\recorder\init.sum s i I i O'DONNELL RANIIS 1- ZEW F CORRIGAN & BACHRACH ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 j TELErPHON& (503) 222-4402 FAX (503) 343-2944 1 DATE: April. 4, 1995 F _ TO: Tigard City Council t a William A. Monahan - City Administrator a FROM: Pamela J. Beery - City Attorney's Office t RE: Initiative and Referendum Process We have been working with the City Administrator and the City Recorder on updating the City's initiative and referendum process. Because them are no active initiatives or referendums in the City, we felt that now would be a good time to review the process. In our June 17, 1994 a?' memo, we compared the City's current initiative and referendum process (TMC Chapter 1.12) ' t to state statute (OILS 250.255 to 250.355). The City Council essentially has three options: 1) repeal the current ordinance and use state statute; 2) repeal the current ordinance, use mostly state statute and adopt anew ordinance which addresses only those parts of the process which differ from state statute; and 3) repeal the current ordinance and adopt a new ordinance which sets out the entire process for initiative and referendum in the City of Tigard. We are recommending that the City repeal its currivent process and use state statute. However, there are two significant policy choices associated with that change. Signature Requirement I The first policy choice concerns the number of signatures required for an. initiative or referendum. The City Council may set any'signature requirement that it finds reasonable. Currently, the City reluims that initiative petitions be sign.; ed by "a number of legal voters equal to fifteen percent of the votes cast at the last preceding regular municipal eleedon. " referendum petitions must be signed by "a number of legal voters equal to ten percent of the votes cast at the last preceding regular municipal election." These signature requirements are somewhat unclear. If the City Council wishes to adopt a signature requirement which is different than state statute, the requirement should be one which is clear and easily determined. At a minimum, if 1 the current language is retained, we need to clarify what is meant by a "regular municipal E election. { E ,a 3 O'DONN ELI, RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH a ]Memo re: Initiative and Referendum ]Process April 4, 1995 Page 2 _i 1. j i ORS 250.305 provides that an initiative petition must be signed by "not less than 15 percent of the electors registered in the city at the time the prospective petition is filed." It also provides that a referendum must be signed by "not less than 10 percent of the electors registered in the city at the time the prospective petition is filed." These are very clear signature requirements. ! The information can be easily obtained from the County Elections Department. Elections can be expensive for the City. Therefore, the City may wish to use the statutory signature requirements. They are high enough to ensure that there is a legitimate interest in having the 1 measure on the ballot. However, this is clearly a policy choice for the City. j Ballot Title Appeal Process and Timeline tom: + The second policy choice concerns the process for appealing a ballot title. A related policy choice concerns the timeline for such an appeal. Currently, any person dissatisfied with the ballot title has two days to appeal to the City Council. The City Council may then modify or approve the ballot title. The ballot title approved by the j City Council shall be the ballot title placed on the ballot. By comparison, ORS 250.295 provides that a person dissatisfied with a ballot title has seven business days to file a petition in circuit court seeking a different ballot title. The court will hear arguments and certify a ballot title to the city elections officer. t It is a policy choice on the part of the City as to what process to use. The advantage of having the City Council hear the appeal is that it is mach less expensive for both parties than a court hearing. The disadvantage is that the City Council may not want to be the body hearing the j appeal for a number of reasons. Also, it is unclear whether an appeal to the City Council would be final. There is an argument that the decision of the City Council could be appealed to the circuit court. The udwantage to having the circuit court hear the appeal is that it is a neutral body. Furthermore, the expense of filing a: petition in circuit court and participating in a hearing may j prevent ffivolous challenges to the ballot title. i _i L E I f k. i O'DONNHLL RAb4IS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH i Menlo re: Initiative and Referendum Process April 4, 1935 Page 3 j i r F If the City decides to have the City Council continue to hear the appeal, we would suggest that a provision be added for publication of a notice of receipt of ballot title which alerts interested - j parties that a ballot title has been prepared by the city attorney. See ORS 250.275(5). We would also suggest that the time to file an appeal be extended in order to allow for publication of such a notice. Conclusion Once the City Council makes the necessary policy choices, the City Attorney's office and the i City Recorder will work together to prepare an ordinance for the City Council's approval. In i the meantime, if you have any questions, please give me or Cathy Wheatley a call. 'a i 1 ] 1F I! 1 R i ' j i IN[[IATIVI A.DD RPF.ERF MIU 1.12.010 Constitutional authority. 1.12.020 Form of petition; numbering of signature sheets t 1.12.030 Applicability of ORS 251.005 to 250.039 to counties and cities 1.12.040 Signatures i 1.12.050 Election dates j 1.12.060 City elections officers" statements of measures 1.12.070 Submitting prospective petition; form of petition; statement regarding ' payment of petition circulators; information required on signature sheets; annual statement 1.12.080 Required number of signatures 1.12.090 Ballot preparation 1.12.100 Preparation of ballot title for certain measures; notice r 1.12.110 Form of ballot title 1.12.120 Procedure for elector dissatisfied with title of city measure a 1.12.130 One subject determination; notice; appeal i 1.12.0.10 Constitutional auth r' . The initiative and referendum powers reserved to the legal voters of municipalities by Section 1 (5) of Article 4 of the constitution of the state of Oregon, and the powers granted to the legal voters of the cities and towns by j Section 2 of Article XI of the constitution of the state of Oregon to enact and arnend their municipal charters, shall be exercised in the city as provided in this chapter and applicable provisions of state law. (Ord. 62-20 §1, 1962). { j E 1 12 020 Form of petition• numbering of signature sheets The Secretary of State by rule shall: (1) Design the form of the prospective petition, and the initiative and the referendum petition, including the signature sheets, to be used in any initiative or referendum in this state. (2) Designate the quality of paper to be used for signature sheets in order to assure the legibility of the signatures. s (3) Prescribe by rule a system for numbering the signature sheets to be used in any initiative or referendum in this state. M - page 1 i E_ 1.12.0M_ Agapl; bio,i of QRS 250.005 to 2fQ 039 to the City. ORS 250.005 to 250.039 apply to the exercise of initiative or referendum powers regarding a city measure, regardless of anything to the contrary in the city charter or ordinance. k 1.12. Date of election in molution. When an amendment to the city charter or a new charter is proposed and submitted or an ordinance is referred to the legal voters thereof by resolution of the council without an initiative petition, the resolution shall therein F state the date of the regular municipal election, or the date of a special election at which the measure will be submitted to a vote (Ord. 62-20 §11, 1962). i 1 12 050 Election dates: orocedure for emergencv elections. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, no election on a city measure or for a city office shall be held on any date other than: i - (a) The fourth Tuesday in March; j (b) The third Tuesday in May; (c) The third Tuesday in September; or 3 E: (d) The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. (2) An emergency election may be held on a date other than those provided in subsection (1) of this section, if the city governing body by resolution finds that an emergency exists that will require an election sooner than the next available election date to avoid extraordinary hardship to the community. A determination ur.d- er this subsection j as to whether an emergency exists is within the sole discretion of the city governing body. (3) A city governing body, with adequate notice, shall hold a public hearing, on { a date other than a regularly scheduled council meeting, for the purpose of making findings substantiating the fact that an emergency exists before scheduling an election on a date other than those specified in subsection (1) of this section. i (4) Notice of a city's intent to hold an emergency election shall be filed with the county election authority no later than 47 days preceding the desired election date. At the time the notice of election is given to the county election authority, the city shall also file with the election authority a certified copy of the ballot title and a copy of the E resolution and findings adopted by the city governing body to authorize the emergency election as required under subsection (3) of this section. i - Page 2 i { ectlor 1 12.( City elections officers' statements of m i (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the chief elections officer of any c1ty shall file with the county clerk of the county in which the city hall is located, a statement of the city measures to be voted on, Including the ballot title for each measure, not later than the 61st day before the date of the election. s (2) If a measure to be submitted to the electors of a city at an election held on the third Tuesday in May or the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November was t submitted can the election date in ORS 221.230 (1) immediately preceding the third Tuesday in May or the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, the chief elections officer of the city shall file the statement required for that measure in subsection t (2) of this section on the 47th day before an election held on the third Tuesday in May or the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. (3) The chief elections officer of the city shall keep a coley of each statement filed under this section. k 3 e j ~seflon 1 12 070 Submitting_pro,-;oective petition: form of petition: statement dirk vmnt of petition circulators: information required on signature sheets: annual i (1) Before circulating a petition to initiate or refer a city measure, the petitioner j shall file with the city elections offices a prospective petition. The officer immediately shall r- date and time stamp the prospective petition, and specify the form on which the petition shall be printed for circulation. The officer shall retain the prospective petition. (2) An initiative or referendum petition shall designate the name and residence address of not more than three persons as chief petitioners. The cover of a referendum j petition shall contain the title described in ORS 20.275 (1). If the circuit court has not reviewed the ballot title under ORS 250.296, the cover of an initiative petition shall contain the ballot We described in ORS 250.275. (3) If the circuit court has reviewed the ballot title, the cover of the initiative petition ! shall contain the title certified by the court. (4) The chief petitioners shall include with the prospective petition a statement 4 declaring whether one or more persons will be paid money or other valuable consideration for obtaining signatures of electors on the initiative or referendum petition. After the prospective petition is filed, the chief petitioners shall notify the filing officer not later than the 10th day after any of the chief petitioners first has knowledge or should have had knovWedge that: ' Page 3 i j _ j J (a) Any person is being paid for obtaining signatures, when the statement j included with the prospective petition declared that no such person would be paid. (b) No person is being paid for obtaining signatures, when the statement ' included with the prospective petition declared that one or more such persons would be paid. (5) Each sheet of signatures on an initiative petition shall contain the caption of the ballot title. Each sheet of signatures on a referendum petition shall contain the number of the ordinance or resolution to be referred, if any, and the date it was adopted r by the city governing body. Each sheet of signatures shall be attached to a full and f correct copy of the measure to be initiated or referred. (5) If the person obtaining the signatures on the initiative or referendum petition is being paid, the signatures shall be collected on a signature sheet that contains a notice stating that the person obtaining the signatures is being paid. The notice shall be in boldfaced type and shall extend across the signature area of the petition. (7) The reverse side of the cover of an initiative or referendum petition and both sides of a signature sheet may be used for obtaining signatures on an initiative or i referendum petition. If both sides of a signature sheet are used, each side shall contain the information required on a signature sheet under subsections (5) and (8) of this _ a section. (8) Not more than 20 signatures on the cover or on each side of each sheet of the initiative or referendum petition shall be counted. The cover of the initiative or referendum petition, if the cover is used to gather signatures, and each signature sheet shall be verified on its face by the signed statement of the circulator that the individuals signed the cover or sheet in the presence of the circulator and that the circulator believes each individual is an elector registered in the city. l (9) If the gathering of signatures exceeds the period of one year from the time the j petition is approved for circulation, any of the chief petitioners, on or before the t anniversary of approval of the petition for circulation: 1 (a) Shall file annually, with the city elections officer, a statement that the initiative petition is still active; and (b) May submit to the city elections officer for verification any signatures gathered on the petition in the preceding year. Page 4 f I t i j (10) Not later than 30 days before the date that the chief petitioners roust file a statement and submit signatures under subsection (9) of this section, the city elections officer shall notHy the chief petitioners in writing of the requirements of subsection (9) of this section. The notice shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. i (11) A city elections officer shall not accept for filing any petition which has not met the provisions of subsection (9) of this section. I 1.12.x? Reguired, O nbgr of slgnatures. j (1) A petition to refer a city measure must be signed by not less than 10 percent of the electors registered in the city at the time the prospective petition is filed. The petition must be filed with the city elections officer not later than the 30th day after adoption of the city legislation sought to be referred. t (2) A petition to initiate a city measure must be signed by not less than 15 percent of the electors registered in the city at the time the prospective petition is filed. 1 1209® Ballot ore aration Filing officer film Peo~iireme s; signature verification. (1) An initiative or referendum petition relating to a city measure shall be filed with the city elections officer for signature verification. The filed petition shall contain only original signatures. (2) An initiative or referendum" petition relating to a city measure; shall not be accepted for filing If it contains less than 100 percent of the required number of signatures. (3) For any petition requiring a number of signatures exceeding 4,500, the Secretary of State by rule shall designate a statistical sampling technique to verify whether a petition contains the required number of signatures of electors. A petition may not be rejected for the reason that it contains less than the required number of signatures unless two separate sampling processes both establish that the petition lacks the required number of signatures. The second sampling must contain a larger number of signatures than the first sampling. (4) The city elections officer may employ professional assistance to determine the sampling technique referred to in subsection (3) of this section. _i p Page 5 I ~ F: 1.12.100 Pre ra e1 ballot title fr - __.~R..4f ..S? certain rneures: notice. ~ (1) When a prospective petition for a city measure to be referred is filed with the ~ city= elections officer, the officer shall authorize the circulation of the petition containing the title of the measure as enacted by the city governing body or, if there is no title, the title i supplied by the petitioner filing the prospective petition. The city elections officer Immediately shall send two copies of the prospective petition to the city attorney.• (2) Not later than the sia,-th business after a prospective petition for a city measure to be initiated Is filed with the city elections officer, the officer shall send two copies of it to the city attorney if the measure to be initiated has been determined to be in compliance with section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution, as provided in ORS 250.270. 4 (3) Not later than the fifth business day after receiving the copies of the prospective petition, the city attorney shall provide a ballot title for the city measure to be initiated or referred and return one copy of the prospective petition and the ballot title to the city elections officer. Unless the circuit court certifies a different title, this ballot title shall be the title printed on the ballot. (4) A copy of the ballot title shall be furnished to the chief petitioner. i i (5) The city elections officer, upon receiving a ballot title for a city measure to be referred or initiated from the city attorney or city governing body, shall publish in the next r available edition of a newspaper of general distribution in the city a notice of receipt of the ballot title including notice that an elector may file a petition for review of the ballot title not later than the date referred to in ORS 250.296. 1.12.110 Form of ballot title. (1) The ballot title of any measure to be initiated or referred shall consist of: (a) A caption of not more than ig words which reasonably identifies the subject of the measure; (b) A question of not more than 20 words which plainly phrases the chief purpose of the measure so that an affirmative response to the question corresponds to an affirmative vote on the measure; and (c) A concise and impartial statement of not more than 85 words summarizing the measure and its major effect. (2) The ballot title shall not resemble, so far as probably to create confusion, any title previously fled for a measure to be submitted at that election. E i s Page 6 F' t 3 Note: Section 11, chapter 395, Oregon Laws 1991, provides: Sec. 11. Form of ballot title for measure proposing new or increased tax before i January 1, 1995. (1) As used in this section, "unit of local government' has the meaning given the term in ORS 310.150. 4 (2) Notwithstanding OILS 250.035 or 310.390, whichever is applicable, the ballot explanation for a measure proposing a new or increased tax shall contain F- statement that indicates whether or not, pursuant to section 11 b, Article Xi, Oregon Constitution, and implementing legislation, the proposed tax measure would reduce property tax collections - for other units of local government. The statement shall not be considered a part of the ballot explanation for purposes of determining if the explanation exceeds the 85-word limitation of ORS 250.035 or the 175-word limitation of ORS 310.390. i (3) This section applies to measures submitted to the electors for approval or rejection at an election held on or after September 29, 1991, and before January 1, 1995. 1 12 120 Procedure for elector dissatisfied with title of city measure. E (1) Any elector dissatisfied with a ballot title filed with the city elections officer by the city attorney or the city governing body, may petition the circuit court of the judicial e district in which the city is located seeking a different title and stating the reasons the title filed with the court is insufficient, not concise or unfair. The petition shall name as respondent the city attorney or city governing body, depending on who prepared the ballot title, and must be filed not later than the seventh business day after the title is filed with the city elections officer. The court shall review the title and measure to be initiated or referred, hear arguments, if any, and certify to the city elections officer a title for the I measure which meets the requirements of ORS 250.035 and 250.039. (2) An elector filing a petition under this section shall notify the city elections officer in writing that the petition has been tiled. The notice shall be given not later than 5 p.m. l on the next business day following the day the petition is filed. (3) The review by the circuit court shall be the first and final review, and shall be a conducted expeditiously to insure the orderly and timely circulation of the petition or conduct of the election at which the measure is to be submitted to the electors. 1 Page 7 q 1il 1 f lt.f 12 .180 One sublet determination: notice: aDneal• (1) Not later than the fifth business day after receiving a prospective petition for E° an initiative measure, the city elections officer shall determine in writing whather the initiative measure meets the requirements of section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution. (2) If the city elections officer determines that the initiative measure meets the a< requirements of section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution, the city elections r. 1 officer shall proceed as required in ORS 250.275. The city elections officer shall include € in the publication required under OIL 250.275 (5) a statement that the initiative measure i j has been determined to meet the requirements of section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution. (3) If the city elections officer determines that the initiative measure does not meet the requirements of section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution, the city elections officer shall immediately notify the petitioner, in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested, of the determination. (4) Any elector dissatisfied with a determination of the city elections officer under subsection (1) of this section may petition the circuit court of the judicial district in which the city is located seeking to overturn the determination of the city elections officer. If the elector is dissatisfied with a determination that the initiative measure meets the requirements of section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution, the petition must t be filed not, later than the seventh business day after the ballot title is filed with the city elections officer. If the elector is dissatisfied with a determination that the initiative measure does not meet the requirements of section 1 (2)(d), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution, the petition must be filed not later than the seventh business day after the written determination is made by the city elections officer. (5) The review: by the circuit court shall be the first and final review, and shall be conducted expeditiously to insure the orderly and timely circulation of the petition. (1991 c.719 §36) i i ' r j ml ogin\1ovnitiatref f j Rage 8 e 'a 1.12.010--1.12.020 3 ~Gurrent Lar gt4iak _.g. i Chapter 1.12 C INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM i f ' Sections: 1.12.010 Constitutional authority. 1.12.020 Initiative petition form. 1.12.030 Referendum petition form. i 1.12.040 Verification of petition form. 1.12.050 Forms not mandatory. 1.12.060 SignatiL es and copy of measure attached to petition. 1.12.070 Petition to city clerk. 1.12.080 Required number of signers. 1.12.090 Time limit for referendum of ordinance. 1.12.100 Referendum by council. 1.12.110 Date of election in resolution. 1.12.120 Ballot preparation. 1.12.130 Publication and notice. 1.12.140 Petition signer and penalty. 1.12.150 Voting on measure. r 1.12.160 Result of election. 1.12.010 Constitutional authority. The initiative and referendum powers reserved to tIe legal- voters of municipali- ties by Section S W of Article 4 of the constitution of the state of Oregon, and the powers granted to the legal voters of the cities and towns by Section. 2 of Article XI of the constitution of the state of Oregon to enact and amend their municipal charters, shall be exercised in the city as provided in this chapter. (Ord. 62•-20 51, 1962) 1.12.020 Initiative petition form. The following shall be substantially the form of a petition for any ordinance or amendment to the Charter proposed by the initiative: "WARNING "It is a felony for a person to sign an initiative or referendum petition with any name other than his own, or to knowingly sign his name more than once for the same measure, or to knowingly sign a petition when he is not a legal voter. "INITIATIVE PETITION i "To: Clerk of the city of Tigard, Oregon 1 We, the undersigned, citizens and legal voters of the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, respect- 4 1 j I 1.12.030 i' l fully demand that the following proposed ordinance (or, amendment to the city charter) shall be submitted to the legal voters of the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, for their approval or rejection at the regular (or special) election to be held on the day of , 19 , and each for himself says: Z have personally sign=this petition; I am a legal voter of the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and my residence and street number are correctly written i- after my name. i ; { Name Residence Street Number i (Here follow 20 numbered lines for signatures.)" (Ord. 62-20 92, 1962). 1.12.030 Referendum petition form. The following shall be substantially the form of petition for referendum to the F people on any ordinance passed by the city council: f "WARNING "It is a felony for a person to sign an initiative i or referendum petition with any name other than his own, or to knowingly sign his name more than once for the same measure, or to knowingly sign a petition when he is not a legal voter. "REFERENDUM PETITION I 1 "To: Clerk of the city of Tigard, Oregon We, the undersigned, legal voters of the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, respectfully demand that Ordinance No. entitled (the title of ordinance on which the referendum is sought , passed by the council of the city of Tigard, at its meeting on the day of 19 shall be submitted to the legal voters of the city of Tigard for their approval or rejection at the regular (or spe- cial) election to be held on the day of , 19 , and each for himself says: I have personally signed this petition; I am a legal voter of the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and my residence and ' street number are correctly written after my name. i Name Residence Street Number Here'--foTlow 20 numbere lines or signatures. `A (Ord..62-20 §3, 1962). 5 1.12.040--1.12.070 6 + 1.12.040 Verification of petition form. Each sheet of every petition containing signatures for either initiative or E ' referendum shall be verified by affidavit on the back thereof in substantially the following form by the person who circu- lated the sheet of the petition: i F- + E "State of Oregon ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard } I, being first duly -i sworn, say that (here shall be legibly written or type- written the names of the signers of the sheet) signed this sheet of the foregoing petition and each of them signed his name thereto in my presence; I be- lieve that each has stated his name, residence and E street number correctly, and that each signer is a legal voter of the city of Tigard. i (Signature and post office of affiant) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of A.D., 19 ! Signature- and title of officer and - his residence) (Date of expiration of official commission.)" (Ord. 62-20 §4, 1962). J r 1.12.050 Forms not mandator. The forms given herein are not mandatory and it substantially followed the petition is sufficient, disregarding clerical and technical errors. (Ord. 62-20 95, 1962). i 1.12.060 Signatures and co 2y of measure attached to j petition. Not more than twenty signatures shall be signed to one sheet of a petition, and a full and correct copy of the title and text of the measure demanded for submission by the initiative or referendum petition, as the case may be, shall be attached to each sheet or aggregate of sheets circulated for signature, and the full and correct copy of the title and text shall be shown to the voter before his signature is attached. (Ord. 62-20 §6, 1962). 1.12.070 Petition to city clerk. Not less than fifteen days before a special election or forty days before a general C i election at which a petition is to be submitted to the voters, the city clerk shall accept for filing any petition for the 6 6 G I 1.12.080--1.12.120 7 initiative or for the referendum, subject to the verification E. of the number and genuineness of the signatures and voting qualifications of the persons signing the same by reference to the registration books in the office of the county clerk of Washington County, and if a sufficient number of quali- fied voters be found to have signed the petition, he shall file it as of the date of presentation to him. (Ord. 62-20 F §7, 1962). 1.12.080 Required number of signers. Initiative peti- tions for any proposed ordinance, charter amendment or mea- sure shall be signed by a number of legal voters equal to k- fifteen percent of the votes cast at the last preceding regular municipal election. Referendum petitions against any ordinance or measure enacted by the city council shall be signed by a number of legal voters equal to ten percent of the votes cast at the last preceding regular municipal election. (Oral. 62-20 §8, 1962). 1.12.090 Time limit for referendum of ordinance. Where a referendum petition is signed by the required number of legal voters, against any ordinance passed by the council l and approved by the mayor, it shall be filed with the city clerk within thirty days after the mayor approves the ordi- i nance in question. (Ord. 62-20 §9, 1962).` 1.12.100 Referendum by council. An amendment to the city charter or a new charter may be proposed and submitted ` and an ordinance may be referred to the legal voters of the city by resolution of the city council without an initiative petition; this resolution shall be filed with the city clerk for submission not later than twenty-five days before a general city election and not less than fifteen days before any special city election at which it is to be voted on, and no such measure shall be effective until it is approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon by the legal voters of the city. (Ord..62-20 §10, 1962). j 1.12.110 Bate of election in resolution. When an amend- ment to the city charter or a new charter is proposed and submitted or an ordinance is referred to the legal voters thereof by resolution of the council without an initiative petition, the resolution shall therein state the date of the regular municipal election, or the date of a special election at which the measure will be submitted to a vote. (Ord. 62- 20 §11, 1962). f 1.12.120 Ballot preparation. When a measure for initia- tive or referendum legislation is filed by the city clerk i after the number and genuineness of signatures thereto, as provided by Section 1.12.070 has been ascertained, or when a i i 7 i 1.12.120 i resolution of the council is filed with the city clerk as t provided in Section 1.12.090, the city clerk shall transmit to the city attorney a copy of the measure, and the city at- f torney shall within five days provide and return to the city clerk a ballot title for the measure. The ballot title shall be printed with the number of the measure on the official ballot. In making the ballot title the city attorney shall to the best of his ability give a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the measure and in language that the bal- lot title shall not be intentionally an argument or likely to j. create prejudice either for or against the measure. Any per- son who is dissatisfied with the ballot title provided by the } city attorney for the measure may within two days after the ballot title is returned to the city clerk appeal to the council asking a different title, and giving the reasons E therefor, and stating why the title prepared by the attorney is improper; and the council shall by resolution approve the ballot title prepared by the attorney, or shall by resolution € prescribe another ballot title therefor, and the ballot title -1 so approved or so prescribed by the council shall be the title placed on the ballot. The ballot title shall consist of a caption not exceeding six words in length by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of, followed by an abbreviated statement not exceeding twenty-five words in length of the chief purpose of the measure, and shall not - resemble insofar as possible any other ballot title filed j 1 for any measure to be submitted at the same election. The city clerk shall number the measures and ballot titles in the most convenient and consecutive manner. The first measure { shall be numbered fifty-one in numerals. The succeeding 5 measures shall be numbered consecutively fifty-two, fifty- three, fifty-four and so on, to and including one hundred, at each election. For special city elections the city clerk shall have the ballot titles and numbers printed upon the official ballot. Measures referred to the voters b E Y Peti- tion shall be designated "Referendum ordered by petition of the people." Measures proposed by the initiative petition shall be designated "Proposed by initiative petition." Charter amendments or a new charter submitted by the council without initiative petition shall be designated "Charter (charter amendments) submitted to the voters by the City Council." Provided, however, that when charter amendments or a new charter are to be submitted to the voters by resolution of the council as provided in this chapter, the council may provide in the resolution for a ballot title for the measure so to be submitted, and in the event of such provision being made by the council the provision of this section relative to the filing of the measure with the city attorney, the 1 8 1.12.130---1.12.160 h E: preparation by the attorney of a ballot title therefor, and the appeal to the council from the ballot title so prepared shall not apply. (Ord. 62-20 512, 1962), E 1.12.130 Publication and notice. The city clerk shall ~ publish any propose ordinance, referendum measure, charter, charter amendment, or other measure together with the ballot title and number in full, when referred to the voters at any election, in a newspaper published in the city for one issue of the newspaper within twenty days immediately prior to the election. The.city clerk shall also give notice of any gen- eral or special election by posting notices thereof, one in each precinct of the city, not less than ten days prior to the date of election and also by publishing notices in one or more newspapers published in the city, once each week for two consecutive weeks, the first publication of the election notice to be not less than ten days prior to the date of election. (Ord. 62-20 §13, 1962). ' 1.12.140 Petition signer and penalty. A legal voter { of the city is qualified to sign a petition for the referen- dum, initiative or for any measure on which he is entitled, 9 to vote. A person signing any name other than his own to a petition, or knowingly signing his name more than once for 6 the same measure at one election, or who is not at the time of signing a legal-voter of the city, or any officer or other person violating any of the provisions of this chapter, shall upon conviction thereof be punished by a fine not ex- ceeding_fifty dollars or by imprisonment in the city jail ' not exceeding twenty-five days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 62-20 §14, 1962). k 1.12.150 Voting on measure. The manner of voting upon measures submitted to the legal voters shall be the same as now is or may hereafter be provided by law. The votes on measures and charter amendments shall be counted, canvassed and returned as votes for candidates are counted, 1 canvassed and returned. (Ord. 62-20 §15, 1962). 1.12.160 Result of election. A measure shall be adopted if it receives an affirmative majority of the total number -j of legal votes cast on such measure and entitled to be counted thereon. If two or more laws on the same subject or contain- ing provisions that are conflicting, are approved by the voters at the same election, only that measure receiving the F greatest number of affirmative votes shall be adopted and the mayor shall proclaim the election results in this regard. In cases of ordinances which have been passed by the council and voted upon the referendum, such ordinance shall continue i 9 j ~_l L t'~~J II rr f 7 o`t h f -;i.9C,4Li9~ ~m a f o° Dar C j - IL LL-L C - IM (jam x'lI€4 l; MARY - - - - U000 RC L cxraT.. = ELEM T " -BLVD. r - _7 r- -Jw ~ -P t 1 s ( ~ t U5 i vas ~ -4 1W MAY 9, 1995 YOUR HONOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: ! i MY PURPOSE HERE TONIGHT IS TO SHARE MY CONVERSATION WITH CHIEF JOHNSON, HIS ~ 'j ASSISTANT, DAVE AUSTIN AND BATTALION COMMANDER ROB SCHNEIDER, OF TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE AND RESCUE, REGARDING THE 130THANINTERLAKE CONNECTION CAPITAL PROJECT. 3 THEY EXPLAINED THAT A FIRE DOUBLES IN VOLUME EVERY 45 SECONDS AND THAT HUMANS ? SUSTAIN IRREVERSIBLE BRAIN DAMAGE AFTER 4 TO 6 MINUTES. (DEPENDING UPON THE DEGREE OF BLOOD CIRCULATION LOSS.) e THEY DO NOT WANT TO BE THE FOCUS OF, OR IN THE MIDDLE OF A CITY FUSS. BUT, THEY ENDORSED THE STREET PROJECT WITH A REVIEW OF THE FACTS. THEY SAID: 3 "--STATIONS ARE LOCATED TO ACHIEVE A 5 MINUTE OR LESS RESPONSE TIME. --MORE THAN ONE ROUTE SHOULD BE AVAILABLE. i --A SPEEDY DIRECT ROUTE IS PREFERRED. WHEN A CALL IS RECEIVED FROM SUMMER LAKE PARK (SOUTH OF THE CREEK) OR FROM ANY RESIDENCE IN THAT LARGE GENERAL AREA,THE PRIMARY RESPONSE IS: 'a ---FIRE TRUCK FROM 13900 SW BROCKMAN, (BEAVERTON) ! --ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT UNIT (ALS)---FROM 8480 SW SCHOLLS FERRY, (PROGRESS)- IF YOU LOOK AT THE ATTACHED MAP, SIMPLE INSPECTION WILL CLEARLY SHOW THE NEED FOR THE STREET CONNECTION: THE TIME LOST" IN DRIVING THE PRESENT ROUTE IS READILY { OBVIOUS. THE FIRE TRUCK PROCEEDS SOUTHERLY FROM BEAVERTON DOWN TO SCROLLS FERRY ROAD ON 130TH. THE ALS UNIT TRAVELS WESTERLY FROM PROGRESS ON SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD. THEN EACH VEHICLE "DETOURS" TO 135TH STREET. SECONDLY, THE PRIMARY ACCESS ROUTE IS NOW BRITTANY DRIVE. THIS IS A CURVY, NARROW, NEIGHBORHOOD STREET WITH POOR VISIBILITY. WHEREAS, THE PROPOSED 130TH/WINTER- LAKE CONNECTION IS DESIGNATED AS A MINOR COLLECTOR WHICH IS WIDER AND SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED AND PLANNED TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE EMERGENCY VEHICLES. AT THE LAST MEETING OF THE WEST CIT, THE GROUP LISTED SAFETY AS A TOP ' CONSIDERATION WHEN ASSIGNING CAPITAL PROJECT PRIORITIES. THE 130THANINTERLAKE ' PROJECT CERTAINLY QUALIFIES.... FOR VITAL LIFE AND PROPERTY PROTECTION. THIS ACCESS WAS ENVISIONED WHEN THE PARK PLAN WAS DEVELOPED. JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS CONNECTION HAS BEEN CONTINUALLY AND REPEATEDLY REINFORCED BY THE CITY. DEVELOPMENT AFTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT HAVE BEEN APPROVED OVER THE YEARS IN i THE AREA SOUTH OF THE PARK. THESE APPROVALS WERE BASED UPON THE CONTENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE STREETS WOULD EVENTUALLY CONNECT. { WE ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THIS IMPORTANT INFORMATION AS YOU PREPARE YOUR 1995-96 CITY BUDGET. REMEMBER, IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO PROVIDE REASONABLE EMERGENCY SERVICES COVERAGE FOR PARK PATRONS. -i THANK YOU e I F i i E' r.: P Council Agenda Item., , ~ MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON t TO:' Honorable Mayor and City Council ~ r F'RO13: Bill Monahan, City Administrator i i DATE : May 3, 1995 SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, May July, 1995 i Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk ~ If generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly Council Calendars. May f 3 Wed Council Meeting - (7:00 p.m.) E: Executive Session 4 Thurs Budget Committee Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) i *9 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session Business Meeting A Y 13 Thurs Budget Committee meeting - (6:30 p.m.) a *16 Tues Council Study Meeting (6:30 p.m.) i 18 Thurs Budget Committee Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) 22 Mon Metzger Park Advisory Board Fleeting - (7:00 p.m.) *23 Tues Council Meeting (6:30 p.m.) ' Study Session t Business Meeting E 29 Mon Memorial Day Holiday - City Offices Closed i 30 Tues Tentative Council Meeting 1 June I 6 Tues Tentative Council Meeting r { *13 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session Business Meeting *20 Tues Council Study Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) *27 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session ,Business Meeting -i ,a July 'j 4 Traces Independence Day - City Offices Closed -1 *11 Tues Council Meeting (6:30 p.m.) Study Session Business meeting *18 Tues Council Study Meeting (6:30 p.m. *25 Tues Council Meeting - (6:30 p.m.) Study Session i Business Meeting s ,a t j h:\iogin\cathy\cccal i ii ~ f 1 4 { 1 t 1 i k 1 F I F t f ' i Council Calendar - Page 2 ~.3 L Agenda Item No. ~ F. Council meeting of z.f 3 1 BELOW IS A TENTATIVE SCHEDULE OF COUNCIL AGENDAS FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS . PLEASE CONTACT CATHY IF 'YOU HAVE CHANGES, COUNTS, OR QUESTIONS... s a Updated: May 2, 1995 TENTATIVE SCHEDULE -'CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS May 9 - July 25, 1995 - ---_------a-° May 9 No TV STUDY NZETING (6:30 P.M.) > Executive Session > Initiative and Referendum Discussion- Ordinance Amendment > Agenda Review z:. BUSINESS ING (7:30 PEA) i 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) f t 3. CONSENT AGENDA f >Approve Minutes >LCRB >Property Acquisition 4. DISTINGUISHED BUDGET AWARD PRESENTATION i 5. REPORT: MUSIC IN THE PARK ( ;May 15 No TV 9 i STUDY ING (6-.30 PST) > Executive Session 111 > Agsnd.a Review > Focus Payment r • BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 PH), 4 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 3. CONSENT AGENDA >Approve Minutes >LCRB >Property Acquisition 4. TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT JOINT MEETING 5. PUBLIC HEARING - SOLID WASTE RATES i i i S May 23 - • STUDY MEETING (6:30 p.m.) i > Executive Session > Agenda Review BUSINESS FXETING (7:30 PM) 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) `j 3. CONSENT AGENDA ~ j >Approve Minutes i >LCRS 4-_~PUBLIC -NEARING-_-DOLAN -(Continued -from r4/25/95) - --Nr-____ 3 May 30 or June 6 No TV } STUDY MEETING (6.30 p.m.) > JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING REGARDING TRIANGLE AREA a INFORMATION PRESENTATION + TRAFFIC STUDY (1-1/2 HOURS) > DISCUSSION: RECYCLED WASTEWATER - COOK PARK IRRIGATION: DOES COUNCIL WANT TO PROCEED? i > AGENDA REVIEW • BUSIV-ESS IMETING (8:00 PM) 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA >Approve Minutes >LCRB 4. PUBLIC HEARING ZOA ROBINSON (DICK B.) 5. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 95-0001; ZON 95-002 ANDREWS (DICK B.) June 13 • STUDY MEETING (6:30 PM) • 13USIIIESS MEETING (7:30 PM) 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA >Approve Minutes >LCRB 4. ADOPT BUDGET (Wayne L.) 5. PUBLIC HEARING STATE SHARED REV (Wayne L.) 6. PUBLIC HEARING - CAPITAL IMPROVE14EENT PROGRAM (Randy W.) 7. PARKING ORDINANCES (Randy W.) June 20 NO TV { F; t WORKSHOP MEETING (6:30 p.m.) 1. TREES (REVIEW OF TASK FORCE PROPOSAL) (CAROL L.) a ~1 :i June 27 STUDY MEETING (6:30 PH) ° BUSIMSS MEETING (7:30 PM) 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA ~ 3. CONSENT AGENDA ' >Agsprove Minutes I >LC ` k July 11 j STUDY MEETING (6:30 PM ) o BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 PM) 1. ROLL CALL 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA G >Approve Minutes f >LCRB 4. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 95-0002/Z0N 95-0003 (Pacific Crest) (Rey) f July 18 No TV WORKSHOP MEETING (6:30 PM) ! 1. NATURAL RESOURCE COMP PLhN CHANGES - FORESTS, PARKS 2. SCHOOL CAPACITY 3. TRANSPORTATION - 99W L 'j July 25 ® STUDY MEETING (6:30 PTA) ` BUSINESS MEETING { j E t' - 7 1 I 11 F 1. 3 I To be scheduled: • Tree ordinance (hearing date TBA) t • "Alcohol" ordinance e • Planned Development Ordinance ' • Update on Notification process proposed 3 amendments to land use notification procedures I • Community Development Fee Increases - Resolution • Policy on carrying weapons on public property • Board and Committee Mules (i.e., term limits?) • Dolan responses - Code amendments necessary to comply with the court decision • Council's philosophy on who should pay for growth • What is Council's policy on half-street improvements? • Discussion of restrictions placed on the City by State law • Terrace Trails Pathway Discussion 6 • Ordinance amending underground utilities ordinance • Proposed changes in utility billing • TY.C conversion to CodeMaster Initiative and Referendum Ordinance • Triangle - Workshop Meeting: September (Carol) • Transportation Systems Study - Workshop Meeting: f September (Carol) • Annexation Comp Changes - Workshop Meeting: f November (Carol) • Transportation Comp Changes - Workshop Meeting: November (Carol) • Council Groundrules j • Planning Fees (Bill, Dick) { h:\login\cathy\tentagen s j i k E k s f- t i AGENDA ITEM 33 For Agenda of May 9, 1995 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY i } ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Authorization for right of way acgMisition for Burnham Street widening at Main Street. PREPARED BY: G Alfson DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL f. i -i Acquisition of right of way for the Burnham Street widening at Main Street. , STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adoption of the attached resolution. r INFORMATION SUMMARY Acquisition of the tavern property at the southeast corner of the Burnham Street/Main Street intersection is necessary for right of way in order to construct the proposed widening to Burnham Street at Main Street. The, resolution is a standard procedure for projects which require additional right of way. Council adoption of the attached resolution is necessary in "order to ensure that the project can be constructed in a timely manner. The formal offer of acquisition to the property owner was delayed pending the results of the Level 2 Environmental Site Assessment report. The report indicates that the site does not require any mitigation of any environmentally sensitive materials. An offer letter was sent to the property April 10, 1995. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FISCAL NOTES i The cost of the right of way and easement acquisitions is funded as part of the Burnham Street/Main Street CIP project. ga\bon-row. rec 7 j r: i 1 f 1 Agenft Rom No. Meeting of - GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION l 160 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800, Chicago. Illinois 60601 312/977-9700 • Fax: 312/977-4806 i t i :i March 21, 1995 i_ . c. Mr. Wayne Lowry Finance Director City of Tigard 3 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 9722..3 Dear Mr. Lowry: ~ I am pleased to notify you that the City of Tigard has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award from the Government Finance Officers Association (Ol~OA). This I award is the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting and represents a significant achievement by your organization. 4 We hope you will arrange for a formal public presentation of the award, and that appropriate publicity will. be given to this notable achievement. A press release is enclosed for your use. We appreciate your participation in GT'OA's budget awards program. Through your example, we hope that other governments will be encouraged to achieve excellence in budgeting. e Sincerely, I f j Jeffrey L. Esser i Executive Director JLE jaf Enclosure ! d s WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street, N.W., suite 650, Washington, DC 20006 i 202/429-2750 = Fax: 20P,429-2755 M1' GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60601 312/977-9700 • Fax: 3121977-4806 i f March 21, 1995 a PRESS RELEASE For Further Information Contact RELEASE IMMEDIATELY Stephen J. Gauthier (312) 977-9700 ~ aaaaaaaaaaaaasxsaaaacsaaaoffiaaaaaaasareaaasareaaaaaaaaaasaaomaaassaaaaaaaaaasaaas CHICAGO--The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) is pleased to announce that the City of Tigard, Oregon has received GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its budget. I The aviard represents a significant achievement by the jurisdiction. It reflects the commitment of the governing body and staff to meeting the highest principles of governmental budgeting. In order to receive the budget award, the jurisdictions had to satisfy nationally recognized guidelines for effective budget presentation. T'hese guidelines are designed to assess how well a government's budget serves as: a policy document a a financial Man an operations guide a communications device f Budget documents must be rated "proficient" in all four categories to receive the award. Since the inception of GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program in 1984, approximately 650 jurisdictions have received the Award. Award recipients have pioneered efforts to improve the quality of budgeting and provide an excellent example for other r governments throughout North America. j The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association serving 12,650 government finance professionals throughout North America. GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program is the only national awards program in governmental budgeting. Ii ' WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street, N.W., Suite 650, Washington, OC 20006 202/429-2750 • Fax: 202/429-2755 i ~ E . _s Agenda Item Roo. ~ MEMORANDUM Meeting of CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON r i TO: Bill Monahan i FROM: John Acker DATE: May 4, 1995 ' L SUBJECT: Music in the Park i After meeting with the Music in the Park group it is apparent that the group wants the City to consider two proposals. The first t' phase is to consider building a permanent music facility at Cook f,- Park. The second phase is to help coordinate and/or fund a continuing summer music program. I suggest that the City Council appoint a task force to look into options available to bring a summer music program to Cook Park. E..' The goal of this task force would be to develop a concept and cost. estimates for a music program, including capital improvements. This task force should report back to the City Council no later than mid-June. Phase 1 For 1995, the Music group would like the City to consider erecting a permanent band shell/stage. The idea is that the facility would be ready for a performance on the second weekend in September. f Structure The initial consideration is whether or not it is desirable to build a permanent structure to house a summer music program at Cook Park. An alternative choice might be to rent a temporary stage for.the first few performances to determine what would S be the best way to proceed. If the City decides to construct a permanent facility it will be located in a public park and be owned and maintained by the City. The City should participate in a preliminary design and cost estimate. Of course, there must first be an understanding of what is desired. The facility could be designed to accommodate multiple uses, designed specifically for use as a music "shell", or be a general purpose stage. There is also the decision of where to locate such a structure so that it accommodates music programming as well as other potential uses. The location must also fit with the existing park uses, such as the picnic, playground and sport v facilities. 1 j t Funding I If the facility is built as a band shell the only available j source of construction funding is the General Fund. Park SDC funds are not considered eligible for this project. Since there are presently no band shells in Tigard, building one would be considered an upgrade rather than a growth based expansion. If the building was a multi-use facility, part of it may be eligible for SDC funding. For instance, if the structure were built so that it could be used as a picnic shelter also, that portion considered a picnic shelter might be eligible for SDC funds. Timing If it is decided to construct a facility that would be ready for use in September, we must proceed quickly. Typically, it takes at least two months to design and bid a project such as this even when there is a clear idea of what is wanted, ' Construction would take another month at least. Even if we l had a good clear understanding of what is desired, the September deadline will be difficult to achieve. Phase 2 3 For 1996 the music group will be seeking monetary support from the `s City to assist in programming for a concert series in Cook Park. If the music group forms as a non-profit organization, the budget committee would balance this group's funding request with other such requests. The season's music programming and ' any funding request would be a year-by-year situation. Staff could be directed to assist the music group in whatever capacity deemed appropriate by the City Council. k k { i r I ` r I i E i i