City Council Packet - 02/19/2002 i a
* Rl. EytV
+ I
I
r r +7 j't iv 1C r le ~~{at*'yF
v t ~fh,+~i~ q S r1 ~
R~ ~ I
:ACS Ct
' 1 p1} 1< y~o
pt ;j
• rJtr~r~~, ~t
Pt LS v~YS~i
hi
Y"r
e 'yCC ''rt~lmt[
Tr ?at r~y~'. }
CITE' COUNCIL ~
C r. .
7m
F ..r.~
Wv SHOP MEETING r ~ .
N
Y
1 1 S~
~Y e
s ~ ~t
Y 19, 2002`
Y
9 I
4ey,r
i PJ
UNIr-q WILL NOT.
` K
ISED s,
'r t
r
HAjeannieldocslccpkt2
•n.
AKWAM
ill", 46
'k WN,
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
8~,. Xc 7 4s. • : • z,n
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be
scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please
call 503-639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications
Devices for the Deaf).
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 bilingual interpreters.
Since 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 dateby calling:
503-639-4171, x309 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for
the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
COUNCIL AGENDA - February 19, 2002 page 1
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
6:30 PM
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council °
1.2 Roll Call
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items
6:35 PM
2. UPDATE ON THE PROPOSED LOCAL OPTION LEVY FOR WASHINGTON
COUNTY COOPERATIVE LIBRARY SERVICES
Staff Report: Library Staff
6:45 PM
3. JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
® Staff Report: Community Development Staff
Discussion Topics:
a. The Role of the Planning Commission
b. The Role of Board and Committee Members and Volunteers
C. Policy regarding Private Streets
d. Update on Commuter Rail
e. Urban Growth Boundary Expansion
f. City Affiliation regarding Ballot Measure Endorsement
7:45 PM
4. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED TITLE 3 CODE AMENDMENT
i O Staff Report: Community Development Staff
I 8:10 PM
i S. UPDATE ON METRO'S REGIONAL GOAL 5
e Staff Report: Community Development Staff
i
8:25 PM
6. DISCUSSION OF THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY
q Staff Report: Community Development Staff
8:45 PM
7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
COUNCIL AGENDA - February 19, 2002 page 2
8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If
an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be
announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and
those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news
media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3),
but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held
for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive
Sessions are closed to the public.
10. ADJOURNMENT
1AADMXCATHY\CCA\020219. DOC
COUNCIL AGENDA - February 19, 2002 page 3
Agenda Item No. i
Meeting of a 3 da
COUNCIL MINUTES
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Mayor Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
1.2 Roll Call: Mayor Griffith; Councilors Dirksen, Moore, Patton, and Scheckla
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Deports: None
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items: None
2. UPDATE ON THE PROPOSED LOCAL OPTION LEVY FOR WASHINGTON
COUNTY COOPERATIVE LIBRARY SERVICES
Library Director Margaret Barnes presented this agenda item. A proposed local
option levy may be on the ballot in 2002 for a countywide operational levy.
Concerns expressed previously by the City Council were relayed to the Cooperative
Library Advisory Board; similar concerns were also expressed by other jurisdictions.
A revised levy proposal and more information will be released in about a month.
Discussion followed about what cities and areas have new or renovated libraries. Also
discussed was the need to replace reserve funds that have been used to fund
operations.
If the proposed levy does not pass, then each city or jurisdiction will need to analyze
and prioritize services. This could affect hours or operation, new purchases to add to
collections, or programs offered.
There was discussion on the distribution of funds from WCCLS, which is now
determined by a formula based on circulation statistics.
3. JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
® Staff Report: Community Developm:,nt Staff
Planning Commission members pre3ent: Mark Padgett and Jodie Bienerth
Discussion Topics:
a. The Role of the Planning Commission
Mayor Griffith noted It would be helpful if there was an indication in
the minutes why the Commissioners ware casting their votes for or
against an issue.
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - February 19, 2002 page 1
There was discussion on the urban growth boundary and the Urban
Services Agreement with Washington County.
b. The Role of Board and Committee Members and Volunteers
Assistant to the City Manager reviewed staff's efforts to identify the
difference between city volunteers and community volunteers. This
becomes significant for worker's compensation matters since the City
pays worker's compensation for City volunteers.
There was brief discussion on Planning Commission membership. In
response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, staff will send out
information regarding Planning Commission rules regarding how many
Commissioners may live outside the City.
C. Policy regarding Private Streets
Planning Commission Chair Mark Padgett advised "private streets" have
been a "hot topic" for the Commission. He said the Commission does
not have much leeway with regard to Code specifications for private
streets. He noted the Planning Commission's reluctance to approve
private streets if the only reason is to allow a development of higher
density. The Fire Department reviews any requests for private streets
or gates.
d. Update on Commuter Rail
Mayor Griffith outlined his concerns about planning for the downtown
area, which has been identified as a site for a commuter rail station. He
would like one or two Planning Commissioners to serve on a committee
to review and make recommendations on this matter.
There was discussion about the possibilities and potential enhancements
that could be implemented with the coming commuter rail station in
the downtown area.
Community Development Director Hendryx said the County is applying
for a grant through the State Economic Development program. The
County is asking for $1.1 million to offset the local government match
for commuter rail construction.
The Washington Square station location has not been finalized.
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - February 19, 2002 page 2
e. Urban Growth Boundary Expansion (UGB)
Planning Manager Shields and Community Development Director
Hendryx gave an update on this item. Metro is beginning the Input
process to determine where the UGB should be expanded. Metro is
scheduled to make a final decision by the end of this year. It is possible
that the UGB may be expar,,:Pd in the Bull Mountain/King City area.
The City of Tigard wvald likely be the jurisdiction responsible for the
planning hi this area.
There was discussion regarding recent reports that Metro will propose a
ballot measure to counter a measure proposed by Oregonians In Action
regarding limiting density requirements. Community Development
Director Hendryx had distributed a memo to the City Council with
information about this Metro action. Discussion followed where it was
noted that Metro's proposed ballot title gave the appearance of
undermining its current density requirements. Assistant to the City
Manager Newton reported that Metro Presiding Officer Carl Hosticka
would be appearing at next week's Council meeting during the Visitor's
Agenda to clarify Metro's action.
f. City Affiliation regarding Ballot Measure Endorsement
Volunteers (including Board and Committee members) may not
identify themselves as affiliated with the City when endorsing (or
opposing) ballot measures.
4. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED TITLE 3 CODE AMENDMENT
Associate Planner Roberts presented the staff report on this item. The staff report is
on file with the City Recorder as are copies of the charts Mr. Roberts referred to
during his presentation. This presentation gave the City Council background
information about code amendments needed in order to comply with Title 3 of the
Urban Growth Management Functional Plan required by Metro. A formal public
hearing on the compliance amendments is set for March 26, 2002.
5. UPDATE ON METRO'S REGIONAL GOAL 5
Associate Planner Roberts presented the staff report on this item. The staff report is
on file with the City Recorder as are copies of the charts Mr. Roberts referred to
during his presentation. This presentation gave the City Council information on how
the City is participating in the regional Goal 5 planning process.
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - February 19, 2002 page 3
6. DISCUSSION OF THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY
Associate Planner Roberts presented the staff report on this item. The staff report is
on file with the City Recorder as Is a copy of the chart Mr. Roberts referred to
during his presentation.
Council determined they would delay a decision on whether or not to fund the
Countywide Housing Advocacy Group until after the Finance Director has an
opportunity to review.
There was discussion about allowing affordable housing requests to come in at other
times during the year than just during the budget cycle and to separate affordable
housing from other social service requests.
Sydney Sherwood advised that the County Advisory Board is may purchase Bonita
Villa and possibly partner with Community Partners for Affordable Housing.
With regard to setting a benchmark - a numeric housing production goal - some
Council members indicated that "100" could be an acceptable number; however, it
was noted that a benchmark would serve more as a political statement showing
others that the City is taking affordable housing matters seriously, but it does not
really matter whether there is a stated benchmark or not.
This agenda item will be dealt with during the budget process.
7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
Mayor Griffith has been selected as the Metro Policy Advisory Committee alternate
for Washington County.
8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled
10. ADJOURNMENT: 8:45 p.m. a4ile_ U r2-P (/~Ll-PGI--~~.
Catherine Wheatley, City Recordek
Attest:
yo Itty igard
Date: X12 a3 . Do
I:WDM\CATHMM020219.DOC
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - February 19, 2002 page 4
d
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF February 19 2002
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on the proposed local option levy for Washington County Cooperative
Librarv Services.
PREPARED BY: Margaret Barnes DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK iiQC G\( WOO
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Additional discussion of the proposed local option levy for Washington County Cooperative Library Services
(WCCLS).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of this presentation is to provide City Council information on the proposed local option levy.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
At the December 18 Council meeting, staff presented information to the Council summarizing the method of
funding WCCLS. To summarize: In 1998 the funding structure for WCCLS and the permanent tax rate for the
County was changed as a result of the passage of Measure 50. As a result of Measure 50, a five-year plan was
established to fund the operation of WCCLS for FY 1999 through FY 2003. Under this plan, funding operations
has been provided by the County's general fund and the Cooperative's reserve fund. When the plan was
implemented, it was understood that at the end of FY 2003 some other funding revenue such as a local option levy
might be necessary.
In December, staff reported to Council a preliminary outline of a proposed $50 million, five-year local option levy.
At that time, Council expressed some concern over the size of the levy, the criteria used to develop the levy
amount, and the level of handing proposed for WCCLS central services.
Council provided direction to staff to present these concerns to the Cooperative Library Advisory Board (CLAB)
and to continue to work with WCCLS and other member cities to develop a defendable levy proposal for
submission to the County Board of Commissioners. These concerns were expressed and are shared by other
member cities. Such a proposal is currently being developed.
At this time, staff is prepared to update the Council on this process.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
N/A
ATTACHMENT LIST
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF February 19, 2002
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Joint Meetin with Planni Commission
PREPARED BY: Jim Hendryx DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR OK
ISSUE EFORE THE COUNCIL
This is the regularly scheduled, annual joint meeting between City Council and the Planning Commission.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
N/A
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The City Council and Planning Commission meet annually to share information and discuss matters of interest.
The Planning Commission recently listed items they would like to discuss at this joint meeting:
o City Council's concept of the role they see for the Planning Commission
Future Council agenda item regarding review of proposed information on the role of board and committee
members and volunteers (from Cityscape)
® City Council policy and concern regarding private streets
® Update on Commuter Rail
s City's position regarding Urban Growth Boundary Expansion
® Identifying affiliation with the City when endorsing ballot measures
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Community Character and Quality of Life, Volunteerism - Goal #1, City will maximize the effectiveness of the
volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community; and Goal #2, Citizen involvement opportunities
will be maximized by providing educational programs on process, assuring accessibility to information, providing
opportunities for input and establishing and maintaining a program of effective communication.
ATTACHMENT LIST
Attachment 1: Memo from Jim Hendryx, dated February 7, 2002
Attachment 2: Chapter 2.08 of the Tigard Municipal Code
Attachment 3: Planning Commission Bylaws
Attachment 4: February Cityscape
Attachment 5: Agenda Item Summary from 1/15/02 Council workshop -Urban Growth Boundary Expansion
Attachment 6: PowerPoint presentation by City Attorney, "Who Is A Public Employee"
Attachment 7: Code Section 18.810.030.S of the Development Code
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
Attachment I
CITY OF TIGARD
De,velopwwmt
ShapaiIWA Betty
~AEOffln 0 RA0comma,
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
(503) 639-4171
Fax 684-7297
TO: City Council
FROM: Jim Hendryx
DATE: February 7, 2002
SUBJECT: Discussion Items - Joint City Council/PC Work Session
The Planning Commission was asked if there were any items the Commission wanted to
discuss with the City Council at their joint work session on February 19, 2002.
Since there are a number of new Commissioners, discussion of what the City Council views
as the Commission's role was thought to be appropriate. For your review is a copy of the
Municipal Code Section 2.08 (Attachment 2) which outlines the powers and duties of the
Commission. The Commission's bylaws are also attached (Attachment 3). The
Commissioners have been given both. Clarifying or defining any items from the Council
perspective would be appropriate.
The Commission also was interested in the City Council policy regarding private streets
and any concerns they may have. Generally, the City has chosen to limit private streets to
serve no more than six detached dwelling units. Code Section 18.810.030.S is attached
(Attachment 7). Approval for more than six dwelling units on a private street is allowed
within planned developments, mobile home parks, and multi-family residential
developments. The Council had previously been concerned about requests to take over
the maintenance of substandard private streets. Private streets are required to be
physically delineated by a commercial driveway apron at the entrance and signage that
indicates the street is a private street and it is not maintained by the City. The latter has
done much to reduce any misconceptions by the public regarding the nature of ownership
of the street and has reduced calls and concerns to the Engineering Department.
The Commission also requested an update on the status of the Commuter Rail project.
The Mayor recently attended a Commuter Rail Steering Committee meeting on February 6,
2002, and can provide an update. Generally, the project is continuing forward with an
opening date scheduled in September, 2005.
The Commission also asked about a recent item noted in Cityscape (Attachment 4), under
Future Agenda Items - "Review proposed information on the role of board and committee
members and volunteers". It is my understanding that this issue has been informally
discussed with Administration staff and will not be"scheduled for Council.
The Council discussed the Urban Growth Boundary expansion at its January 15t''
workshop. A copy of the staff report and notes from the meeting are attached (Attachment
5).
In relation to identifying affiliation with the City when endorsing ballot measures, the City
Attorney indicates that volunteers are considered public employees, and as such, cannot
promote or oppose ballot measures during working hours. He further indicates that "on the
job during working hours" includes situations in which the person's affiliation with the City is
identified. A PowerPoint presentation by the City Attorney is attached (Attachment 6).
I:curpln\dick\mem\pcccwrksess
Attachment 2
TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE
Chapter 2.08 PLANNING COMMISSION. 2.08.030 Commission removal.
Sections: A member of such a commission may be
removed by the appointing authority, after
2.08.010 Purpose. hearing, for misconduct or nonperformance of
2.08.020 Appointment-Membership. duty. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
2.08.030 Commission removal.
2.08.040 Vacancy. 2.08.040 Vacancy.
2.08.050 Voting members.
2.08.060 Election of officers. Any vacancy in such a commission shall be
2.08.070 Meetings-Quorum--Voting. filled by the appointing authority for the
2.08.080 Planning commission member unexpired term of the predecessor in the office.
conflict of interest activities. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
2.08.090 Disclosure of prehearing
contact. 2.08.050 Voting members.
2.08.100 Powers and duties of
commission. No more than two voting members of the
2.08.110 Hearings officer. commission may engage principally in the buying,
2.08.120 Hearing procedures. selling or developing of real estate for profit as
individuals, or be members of any partnership, or
2.08.010 Purpose. officers or employees of any corporation, that
engages principally in the buying, selling or
The purpose of the Tigard planning developing of real estate for profit. No more than
commission is to advise the city council on two members shall be engaged in the same kind of
general land use and transportation planning occupation, business, trade or profession. (Ord.
issues; longrange capital improvement programs; 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
and to act as a hearings body for applications of
permits, land use applications and land use 2.08.060 Election of officers.
appeals, or other matters as directed by the city
council. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992). The planning commission, at its first meeting
in each odd-numbered calendar year, shall elect a
2.08.020 Appointment-Membership. president and a vice president, who shall hold
office at the pleasure of the commission. The
The city planning commission shall consist president and vice president shall be voting
of nine members, not more than two of whom members of the commission. The vice president
may be nonresidents of the city, to be appointed shall preside in the absence of the president. (Ord.
by the council to serve a term of four years. No 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
person appointed after January 1, 1996 may serve
more than two full consecutive teens on the 2.08.070 Meetings-Quorum--Voting.
Planning Commission, notwithstanding prior
appointment to an unexpired term. Commission The commission shall meet at least once in
members shall receive no compensation but shall each calendar month or as necessary. A majority
be reimbursed for duly authorized expenses. (Ord. of the members of the commission shall constitute
95-26; Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992). a quorum. A majority vote of those members
present at an open meeting of the commission
2-08-1 Rev. 11114195
TIGARD MUNICIPAL, CODE
shall be necessary to legally act on any matter remaining members of the commission present at
before the commission. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh, a hearing when it appears that the impartiality or
A)(part), 1992). objectivity of any member has been compromised
by prehearing or ex parte contact. (Ord. 92-35 §2
2.08.080 Planning commission member (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
conflict of interest activities.
2.08.100 Powers and duties of
(a) A member of the planning commission commission.
shall not participate in any commission
proceeding or action in which any of the (a) Except as otherwise provided by the city
following has a direct or substantial financial council, a city planning commission may:
interest:
(1) Make and alter rules and
(1) The member or the spouse, brother, regulations for its government and procedure
sister, child, parent, father-in-law, mother-in-law consistent with the laws of the state of Oregon, the
of the member; City Charter, this chapter and other ordinances of
the city;
(2) Any business in which the member
is then serving or has served within the previous (2) Recommend and make suggestions
two years; or to the city council and to other public authorities
concerning:
(3) Any business for which the
member is negotiating or for which the member (A) The long range comprehensive
has an arrangement or understanding concerning land use plans for the city, as well as any land use
prospective partnership or employment. plans for specific areas within the city,
(b) Any actual or potential interest shall be (B) Plans for the city-wide
disclosed at the meeting of the commission where transportation system, including the laying out,
the action is being taken. (Ord. 92-35 (Exh. widening, extending and locating of public
A)(part), 1992). thoroughfares; relieving traffic congestion
conditions; bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
2.08.090 Disclosure of prehearing transit facilities and routes; design standards for
contact. transportation facilities; and parking lot
regulations,
(a) A member of the planning commission
shall disclose to the commission, prior to any (C) Any proposals to adopt or
hearing on a petition for a permit or with respect amend planning documents for the city-wide
to any contested case, any prehearing or ex parse transportation system, including the transportation
contacts with the applicant's officers, agents and map of the comprehensive plan and the
employees, or any of the parties to a contested transportation capital facilities program,
case concerning the permit sought or the question
at issue. (D) Establishment of districts for
limiting the use, height, area, design, bulk and
(b) A member of the commission shall other characteristics of buildings and structures
disqualify himself or be disqualified by the related to land development, including the
2-08-2 Rev. 11114195
TIG.ARD MUNICIPAL CODE
creation of and amendments to the Tigard 2.08.110 Hearings officer.
development code and the zoning map,
The council may appoint or designate one or
(E) Betterment of housing and more qualified persons as planning and zoning
sanitation conditions, hearings officer(s), to serve at the pleasure of the
city council. The hearings officer(s) shall have
(F) Protection and assurance of the power to conduct hearings on applications for
solar access; permits. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
(3) Recommend to the council and 2.08.120 Hearing procedures.
other public authorities plans for regulating the
future growth, development and design of the city (a) Procedures for the conduct of quasi-
in respect to its public and private buildings and judicial hearings as prescribed by Section
works, streets, parks, grounds and vacant lots; and 18.32.160 of this code shall apply with respect to
plans to secure to the city and its inhabitants the conduct of hearings by the planning
sanitation, proper service of public utilities and commission and hearings officer.
telecommunications utilities, and shipping and
transportation facilities; and appropriate measures (b) Procedures for the conduct of legislative
for energy conservation; hearings as prescribed by Section 1.3.30.100 of
this code shall apply with respect to the conduct
(4) Recommend to the council and of legislative hearings by the planning
other public authorities plans for promotion, commission. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part),
development and regulation of industrial and 1992).®
economic activities in the community;
(5) Do and perform all other acts and
things necessary or proper to carry out the
provisions of ORS 227.010 to 227.120, and
227.160 to 227.180;
(6) Study and propose such measures
as are advisable for promotion of the public
interest, health, morals, safety, comfort,
convenience and welfare of the city, including the
area that is expected to eventually become a part
of the city through annexation.
(b) The city council shall assign to the
commission such facilities and services as
necessary to enable the commission to hold its
meetings, transact its business and keep its
records. (Ord. 92-35 §2 (Exh. A)(part), 1992).
2-08-3 Rev. 11114195
C
Attachment 3
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISED BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE
ORGANIZATION OF AND CONDUCT OF BUSINESS BY THE TIGARD PLANNING
COMMISSION.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD,
OREGON:
The following bylaws, ::ales, and regulations are hereby adopted by the Planning
Commission for the transaction of its business:
ARTICLE I
General
Section 1. Explanation and Interpretation
A. A nine member City Planning Commission has been established Chapter 2.08 of the
Municipal Code. This chapter was enacted by the City Council pursuant to the authority of the
home rule Charter of the City of Tigard. The Council has also adopted other ordinances,
resolutions, and policy statements relating to the organization, powers, duties, and procedures of
the Commission. The Commission is empowered to adopt and amend rules and regulations, to
govern the conduct of its business consistent with the Charter and ordinances of the City, and
official policies promulgated by the Council.
B. It is the intention of the Commission to set forth in this resolution not only rules and
regulations governing its organization and procedures, but also certain other provisions relating
thereto, now contained in various ordinances, resolutions, and other documents. The intent is to
set forth in one document the essential information relating to the Commission's organization and
procedures for the benefit of the Commission, applicants, and the general public.
ARTICLE II
Responsibilities of Commission
Section 1. Responsibilities. The purpose, objectives, and responsibilities of the City Planning
Commission shall be as delineated in TMC Chapter 2.08.100, Powers and Duties of the
Commission and include:
i
i A. Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The Commission shall carry out duties assigned to it by the
Council relating to development, updating, and general maintenance of the Plan.
B. Capital Improvement Program. The Commission will assist the Council in the
formulation of a Capital Improvement Program and, after adoption of said Program, may submit
periodic reports and recommendations to the Council relating to the integration and conformance
of the Program with the Tigard Area Comprehensive Plan.
C. Application of Development Regulations. Except for those matters which may be
delegated to the Planning Director, the Commission shall review and take action on quasi judicial
and legislative matters, and other proposals which result from the application of development
-1-
regulations contained within the Development Code on specific pieces of property and uses of
land, buildings, etc. The Development Code shall be followed in holding hearings and taking
required action.
D. Coordination and Cooperation. The Commission shall endeavor to advance cooperative
and harmonious relationships with the City Council, Citizen Involvement Teams (CITs), other
Planning Commissions, public and semi-public agencies and officials, and civic and private
organizations, with a view to coordinating and integrating public and private planning and
developmental and policy conflicts. The Commission may, and is encouraged to, exchange
research, information, ideas and experiences, participate in joint meetings, develop programs and
undertake such other formal and informal actions to facilitate cooperation and coordination.
E. General Welfare. Upon its own initiative or direction of the Council, the Commission
shall study and propose in general such measures as may be advisable for promotion of the public
interest, health, morals, safety, comfort, convenience, and welfare of the City of Tigard and its
environs related to its particular area of responsibility.
F. Rules of Procedure. The Commission shall adopt and periodically review and amend
rules of procedure. Rules of procedure shall govern the conduct of hearings and participation of
Commission members on all matters coming before the Commission. These rules shall be
consistent with State law and City ordinances relating to the same matters.
ARTICLE III
Officers
Section 1. Officers. The Officers of the Commission shall be a President and Vice-President.
The City Community Development Director shall be the Secretary of the Commission. In the
event the Secretary is absent from any meeting, the Secretary may send a designee.
Section 2. Election.
A. The President and Vice-President shall be elected at the first meeting of each odd
numbered year, and shall serve until their successors are elected and qualified. The term shall start
with the first meeting in January, following election.
B. If the office of the President or Vice-President becomes vacant, the Commission shall
elect a successor from its membership who shall serve the unexpired term of the predecessor.
C. Nominations shall be by oral motion. At the close of nominations, the Commission shall
vote by voice vote upon the names nominated for the office. If requested by any member, written
ballots shall be used for voting purposes.
-2-
Section 3. President.
A. Except as otherwise provided herein, the President shall have the duties and
powers to:
1. Preside over all deliberations and meetings of the Commission;
2. Vote on all questions before the Commission;
3. Call special meetings of the Commission in accordance with these bylaws;
4. Sign all documents memorializing Commission action promptly after approval by
the Commission. The power to sign reports and other documents of the Commission
may be delegated, in writing, to the Secretary.
B. All decisions of the President as presiding officer shall be subject to review by a majority
of Commission members present upon motion duly made and seconded. Upon a majority vote of
the members present, the Commission may overturn a decision of the President.
Section 4. Vice-President. During the absence, disability, or disqualification of the
President, the Vice-President shall exercise or perform all the duties and be subject to all the
responsibilities of the President. In the absence of the President and Vice-President, the remaining
members present shall elect an acting President.
Section 5. Secretary.
A. The Secretary shall:
1. Maintain an accurate, permanent, and complete record of all proceedings conducted
before the Commission;
2. Prepare the agenda and minutes for all Commission meetings;
3. Give all notices required by law;
4. Inform the Commission of correspondence relating to Commission business and
conduct all correspondence of the Commission;
a
5. Attend all meetings and hearings of the Commission or send a designee;
i
6. Compile all required records and maintain the necessary files, indexes, maps, and
plans.
B. The Secret. ry shall maintain records indicating all applications, appeals, hearings,
continuances, postponements, date of sending notice, final disposition of matters, and other steps
taken or acts performed by the Commission, its officers, and the Secretary.
-3-
C. The Secretary shall perform such other duties for the commission as are customary in that
role or as may, from time to time, be required by the Commission.
ARTICLE IV
Meetings
Section 1. Regular Meetings. Regular meetings of the Commission shall be held in the
Council Chambers, City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, or at such other places as
may be determined by the Commission, at 7:30 p.m., or other time as determined by the
Commission. Meeting dates are normally chosen for timely action on applications submitted for
the Commission's consideration and are held at least once a month or as necessary. At regular
meetings, the Commission shall consider all matters properly brought before it without the
necessity of prior notice thereof given to any members.
Section 2. Special Meetings. The President of the Commission upon his or her own motion
may, or upon the request of a majority of the members of the Commission shall, call a special
meeting of the Commission. Unless otherwise specified in the call, all special meetings shall be
held at the regular meeting place and time of the Commission. Notice of special meetings shall be
given personally or by mail to all members of the Commission and the Secretary not less than
forty-eight (48) hours in advance thereof. In case of an emergency, a special meeting may be held
upon such notice as is appropriate in the circumstances; provided, however, that reasonable effort
is made to notify all members of the Commission.
Section 3. Open Meetings. All meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public,
except that the Commission may hold executive sessions, from which the public may be excluded,
in such manner and for such purposes as may be authorized by law. Representatives of the news
media shall be allowed to attend executive sessions under such conditions governing the disclosure
of information as provided by law.
Section 4. Notice of Meetinus.
A. In addition to notice required to be given to Commission members and the Secretary,
public notice of all Commission meetings shall be given in a manner reasonably calculated to give
actual notice to interested persons. The notice shall consist of the time and place of the meeting
and an agenda or summary of the subject matter to be considered.
B. Notice shall be posted on a bulletin board in the City Hall and disseminated to the City
Recorder, local news media representatives, and other persons and organizations as provided by
law. At the discretion of the Secretary, notice may also be provided to persons and organizations
known to have a special interest in matters to be considered by the Commission.
C. Notice shall be given not less than forty-eight (48) hours in advance of a meeting;
provided, however, that in case of an emergency, a meeting may be held upon such public notice
as is appropriate in the circumstances.
D. Failure to provide notice as specified in this section, shall not invalidate any decision or
proceeding of the Commission.
-4-
Section 6. Agenda: Order of Business.
A. The order of business at all meetings shall be determined by the agenda which shall be
composed generally of the following items:
1) Call to order;
2) Roll call;
3) Communications;
4) Minutes of previous meetings;
5) Old business - continuances;
6 New business;
7 Other business;
8 Adjournment.
B. Any item may be taken out of order by direction of the President.
C. Actions of the Commission are not limited to the prepared agenda.
D. Public hearings will be stopped at 11:00 P.M. unless there is a motion from the
commission to extend the time of the hearing in progress. In the absence of that motion,
the issue will be taken up at the following meeting.
E. The Commission shall not consider a new item after 11:00 p.m. unless there is a motion
by the Commission to extend the time for the agenda item.
Section 7. Attendance. If a member of the Commission is unable to attend a meeting, he or
she is expected to notify the Secretary. If any member is absent from 6 meetings within one calendar
year or three consecutive meetings without reasonable cause, upon majority vote of the Commission,
that position shall be declared vacant. The Commission shall forward their action to the Mayor and
Council, who shall fill the vacant position.
Section 8. Quorum. At any meeting of the Commission, a quorum shall be a majority of
the current members of the Commission. No action shall be taken in the absence of a quorum
except to adjourn the meeting and to continue public hearings to a time and place certain. For the
purposes of forming a quorum, members who have disqualified or excused themselves from
participation in any matter shall be counted as present.
In the event a quorum will not be present at any meeting, the Secretary shall notify the
Commission members in advance of that fact, and all items scheduled before the meeting shall be
automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting. The Secretary shall post notice
of the continuance on the door of the Council Chambers notifying the public of the continuance
and specifying the date and time when the matter will be before the Commission.
Section 9. Votine.
-5-
A. The concurrence of a majority of the members of the Commission present at an open
meeting shall be necessary to determine any question before the Commission. A tie vote causes
the motion to fail.
B. When a matter is called for a vote, the President shall, before a vote is taken, restate the
motion and shall announce the decision of the Commission after such vote.
C. Voting shall be by voice vote. All votes, whether positive, negative, or abstentions, shall
be recorded in the minutes.
D. Voting "in absentia" or by proxy is not permitted.
E. A motion to reconsider can be made only at the same meeting the vote to be reconsidered
was taken. Suspension of this rule is not permitted. Further, a motion to reconsider may only be
made by a member who voted on the prevailing side of the issue.
Section 10. Continuances, Remands.
A. Any item before the Commission may be continued to a subsequent meeting. A motion
to continue an item shall specify the date or event upon which continuation is to be based. If a
matter which originally required public notice is continued without setting time and place certain,
the public notification must be repeated when time and place are made certain. A list of continued
items, showing the date at which an item was continued, or the event upon which continuance is
based, shall be recorded and kept by the Secretary and made available to the public.
B. Unless otherwise provided by the Council upon remand, any item remanded by the
Council for reconsideration by the Commission shall be treated as a new item and proceedings
shall be provided for as if the matter were initially before the Commission.
C. A member absent during the presentation of any evidence in a hearing may not participate
in the deliberations or final determination regarding the matter of the hearing, unless he or she has
reviewed the evidence received.
Section 11. Rules of Procedure. All rules of order not herein provided for shall be
determined in accordance with the latest edition of "Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised".
However, the Commission has an obligation to be as clear and simple in its procedure as possible.
Section 12. Minutes.
A. The Secretary or a designee shall be present at each meeting and shall cause the
proceedings to be stenographically or electronically recorded. A full transcript is not required, but
written minutes giving a true reflection of the matters discussed at a meeting and the view of the
participants shall be prepared and maintained by the Secretary. Executive sessions are excluded
from published minutes.
B. Minutes shall be available to the public, upon request, within a reasonable time after a
meeting and shall include the following:
-6-
1) Members present;
2) Motions, proposals, measures proposed and their disposition;
3) Results of all votes, including the vote of each member by name if not unanimous;
and
4) Substance of any discussion of any matter.
5) If the minutes are not yet approved by the Commission, if requested, draft minutes, if
available, may be provided.
C. The Secretary may charge a reasonable fee for copies of minutes and other materials
relating to Commission matters.
D. Commissioners are expected to vote for approval of the minutes based on the accuracy of
representation of events at the meeting. If there are no corrections, the President may declare the
minutes approved as presented, without the need for a motion and vote. A vote in favor of
adopting minutes does not signify agreement or disagreement with the Commission's actions
memorialized in the minutes.
E. Any Commissioner not present at a meeting must abstain from voting on approval of the
minutes of that meeting.
ARTICLE V
Advisory Committees
Appointment. Advisory committees to the Commission may be appointed by the
Commission, with the concurrence of the Commission members, for the consideration of special
assignments.
ARTICLE VI
Publication and Amendment of Bylaws and Rules of Procedure
Section 1. Publication and Distribution. A copy of these approved bylaws and rules of
procedures shall be:
A. Placed on record with the City Recorder and the Secretary of the Commission;
B. Available at each Commission meeting;
C. Distributed to each member of the Commission; and
D. Available to the public for the cost of duplication.
Section 2. Amendment and Suspension.
A. These bylaws, rules, and regulations may be amended by approval of a majority of the
members of the entire Commission at a regular or special meeting, provided notice of the proposed
amendment is given at the preceding regular meeting, or at least five (5) days written notice is
-7-
a
delivered to, or mailed to the home address of each Commissioner. The notice shall identify the
section or sections of this resolution proposed to be amended.
B. Notwithstanding subsection A above, any rule of procedure not required by law may be
suspended temporarily at any meeting by majority vote of those members present and voting,
except the rule on reconsideration.
Adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard, Oregon, with a quorum in
attendance at its regular meeting of and signed by the President in authentication of its adoption
this day of
Planning Commission
City of Tigard, OR
Adopted by the Council this day of
Ayes: Nays:
i Acdadm\jerree\mst\bylaws.doc
-8-
Attachment 4
Here is a review o the City Council Meeting hi hli s for the past month:
Y Heard State of the City Address from Y Conducted a hearing on proposed Y Heard an update on the potential expansion
Mayor Griffith. Transportation System Plan amending the of the Urban Growth Boundary.
Y Heard Executive Summary from City Comprehensive Plan. Y Heard an update on the Washington Square
Manager Monahan. Y Considered an ordinance to amend Regional Center Plan Implementation
Y Heard the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Chapter 13.04 of the Tigard Municipal Strategy.
Vision 2001 Report. Code pertaining to Local Improvements, Y Heard an update on the Washington
Y Heard an update on the proposed new General Procedures. County Long-Range Transportation Plan.
library. Y Held joint meeting with the Y Conducted a goal-setting meeting and set
Y Conducted a hearing on proposed "Pacific Intergovernmental Water Board to discuss City goals for 2002.
regional drinking water proposal and
Crest" annexation of 28.83 acres. discussed City of Tigard's position. Y Conducted a hearing on Washington Square
Y Conducted a hearing on proposed Regional Center Implementation and Code
Y Discussed the transfer of juvenile cases to & Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
"Daffodil Hill" annexation of 3.16 acres. Municipal Court.
Y Conducted a hearing on proposed Y Conducted a preliminary evaluation of the
Y Heard an update on the Skateboard Park Wall Street Local Improvement District.
"Thornwood" annexation of 8.6 acres. Task Force.
Considered proposed assessments for the
69th Avenue Local Improvement District.
Future Council Agenda Items:
* Consider the "close out" of the 69th Avenue * Hold a joint meeting with the Planning * Consider an intergovernmental
Local Improvement District. \ + Commission. agreement regarding the Durham Quarry.
* Approve the preliminary engineering study y * Review proposed information on the role of * Hear an update on the new City web site.
for the Wall Street Local Improvement board and committee members and * Hear an update on Regional Goal 5
District. volunteers.
Foradditional information or if you have any questions about any of the items listed above, please contact City Recorder Cathy
Wheatley at 503-639-4171, ext. 309. A copy of Council packet information can be found on the City's 70eb site at
7v7vw.ci.tiZard.0r.1 5 or at the library. Audio and video tape recordings of most meetings are also available at the library.
6"Mwaf
All meetings are held at Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, unless noted.
Meeting dates are tentative. To confirm a date or agenda topics, please call City Hall at 503-639-4171.
The Tigard City Council meetings are City Council: Library Board: Intergovernmental
cable cast live at 7:30 p.m. on the February 12", 19, 26"
second and fourth Tuesdays of the I'uelt Roont - TPL Water Board:
month on Channel 22. Replays air at March 12', 19, 26* 21ld Thurs., 7 p.m. 2nd Wed., 5:30 p.m.
7 p.m. and I a.m. on Thursday and 6:30 p.m. unless otherwise Planning Commission: Tigard Water Building
10 a.m., 7 p.m. and 1 a.m. on Friday posted
((allowing the scccmd and fourth lst & 3rd Mon., unless a 8777 SW Burnham
Tuesdays) on Channel 21. `Cal,lecasr Nlectiny holiday, 7:30 p.m.
Paid for by: PRESORTED STANDARD
CITY OF TIGARD U.S. POSTAGE
13125 SW HALL BLVD. PAID
TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PORTLAND, OR
r" 7177tr7tr.ci.tigard.or•its PERMIT 2528
PHONE: 503-639-4171
CITY OF TIGARD FAX: 503-684-7297
POSTAL
CUSTOMER
Book Club discusses memoir by Anita Hill luppity 1,vo 'lee of l/
The New York Times Book Review torium (9000 SW Durham Rd.) at 7
described Speaking Truth to P070er (-t~CSt
\ p.m. Tickets are free and are avail-
as a " quiet, meticulous and convinc Award-winning Tigard ~t \
able from the'Tigard Tualatin School writer Susan G. Butruille
ing rebuttal." Read it and join the District. Please contact Pat Keller at resents "Uppity Women
discussion, Tuesday, Feb. 12, 7 to 9 503-431-4004 for information. Attend p
p.m. in the Puett Room. the lecture and participate in the of the West" in a
round-up of women who
Anita Hill will lecture Monday, Feb. book club discussion the following made their own way in the Old West.
11, in the Tigard High School Audi- night. Butruille explores western women's
journals, stories, songs,
lives through
Financial planning for Proposed new library poetry and recipes in the 1'uett Room
college community meeting on Saturday, February 9, 2 to 3 p.m.
Join David 1'oppe, Citizens wishing to provide input The program is sponsored by Live f7
investment represunta- r , about the design of the natural areas Your Library, an initiative of the
tive from surrounding the proposed new li- American Library Association with
Edward Jones, Thurs- brary are encouraged to attend a site major support from the National En-
day, February 5, ur master plan meeting on "Tuesday, I dowment for the Arts,
to 8:30 p.m. to learn about educa- March 5, 7 p.m. In Town Hall. Wallace-Reader's Digest 1=ands, and
tional IRAs, Coverdell Educational The City is seeking your ideas on the John S. and James L. Knight
+ Foundation. Registration is required.
Savings Accounts and 529 plans. Fu- landscaping and how to maximize Call 503-684-6537, ext. 276 to sign up.
hire collegians, parents and grand- greenspace on the site. You are in-
parents are all encouraged to attend. vited to ask questions and raise is-
Registration required. sues about transportation, parking or job searching strategies
6 other matters related to the proposed ! Join Jennifer Pranger, i13M Commu-
M'`' < < nit), Relations Specialist, for this edu-
' f library. To become a member of the
r Site Master flan Team, contact Paula cational series, "Tuesdays, February 26
Walker at pnula ci.tignrd.or.us or - March 12. Come to one, come, to all.
Have a heart-volunteer 503-684-6537, ext. 270. i Rcgistrationisrequircd.
at the library! ;p, i job Search Resources
VOILInteering can produce significant a&d AU e&d aE the P_ig Februarv 26, 3 to 5 p.m. in [lie I'uett
hcAth benefits-it's good for you, This month, the works of the Tigard Room. Learn about tools and re-
hc.u t and soul I-ind out if volunteer- Art Club will be on display in the li- ! sources to I•ind a job (e.g. internet,
ing mikes you feel more healthy. brary lobby. The show is eclectic and classifieds, networking, association
l r,iining and heart-felt appreciation will feature watercolor, oil, colored memberships, etc.). Use the tools in
.rec pn~vicied• pencil, acrylic and pastel artwork. class to gain hands-on experience.
\1p11v today. For more information, Find out about an employer
Sponsored by the Tigard branch of
L,J) rich Stormont, Volunteer Coor- the American Association of Univer before applying for a job.
dinator, 503-684-6537, ext. 269. city Women (AAUW). ! And join us in March for sessions on
Resume and Cover Letter Writing
History and Culture Lecture Series continues ! and Interviewing Skills.
Three more experienced travelers share their experiences and insights to de-
light and inform you. The lectures will be held in the Water Building, 8777 SW We need your help!
Burnham Street, 7 to 8:30 p.m. Co-sponsored by the library and Portland Com-
nnrnity College. Do you have a fond memory of the
j Tigard Library and what it has meant
H Tucs'3ay, February 12, Through the Arabian Peninsula to the Red Sea. Doro- to you or your children? Any old
thv Hirsch describes what it was like to be in Yemen during the Cole incident, i photos or drawings, library cards
m A guides you through Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Egypt. Join from before the days of automation?
us for this time]), discussion. Library staff is compiling a scrap-
? ! book of memories. We would love
Tuesday, February 19, Italy- Birthplace of the Renaissance. Karin Whalen Sour contributions. Jot down an an-
will immerse you in the art and architect-Lire of Italy. The historical focus of rcdote or send us your memorabilia
this program will be from Ancient Rome to the Renaissance period. . by February 15. Contact Trish
Tuesday, Feb. 26, Spain and the Czech Republic. Enjoy traveling with James Stormont at h•ish l1 cifigard.or•.us or
Williams through the small towns and villages of these two picturesque coun- 503-684-6537 ext. 269.
tries.
-7-
Attachment 5
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF Januaa 15, 2002
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on Metro Urban Growth Bound Expansion
PREPARED BY: Barbara Shields DEFT HEAD OK _ CITY MGR OK V~
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL,
Staff will update Council on Metro's approach in evaluating a regional assessment of the need for an expansion
of the Urban Growth Boundary and an Alternative Analysis Study to evaluate locations fe- 'he potential
expansion.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
N/A. Review only.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
As part of Metro's Periodic Review Work Program, Metro determined a classification of tiers of land to study
for expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Periodic review is a process by which the Oregon Land
Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) works with local governments and residents to review the
government's :=pork. The goal is to make sure Metro's land use work, specifically in regard to UGB, complies
with state land use planning goals. The UGB is required to have a 20-year supply of urbanizable land inside its
borders.
The Metro Council approved the Alternative Analysis Study, which includes the tiers of land for expansion, at
the meeting on December 13, 2001. Metro picked about 100,000 acres as potential study areas for possible
inclusion in the Urban Growth Boundary. The Metro Council is scheduled to make a final decision on the UGB
expansion by December 2002.
At the City Council meeting on January 15, 2002, staff will briefly discuss the approach taken by Metro in
evaluating locations for the potential UGB expansion.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\Metro\UGB\1-15ugbccreport.doc
Growth and Growth Management Goal #2, Urban services are provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth
boundary and recipients of services pay their share.
ATTACHMENT LIST
None.
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
I:\LRPLN\Barbara\Metro\UGB\1-15ugbccreport.doc
UGB -
Notes from 1/15/02 on discussion
Barbara reviewed the history of UGB and potential expansion. Metro has a complex
process where "tiers" of possible area for expansion has been identified; only certain
areas are now under review. Barbara reviewed potential impact to the City of Tigard.
She also referred to a public involvement process developed by Metro.
MADM\CATHYiCCO020116 - UGB EXCERPT.DOC
i
Attachment 6
=C
'.l
ff In
5fia~t%~+o
r n
A 'Publ'it;
+•r `rJr.,af ~`Z~ickf~ r:sr':yk
E 11aftim Midi& AM In IV
r« :r.
rr~r;:iffff.
;S;Fib:^..: .:.^:5..•.'€::.4'.::' r'''',
ti:',y'/.;f'•':'.~f<f:^.~xif.::5y.::3:rff:,.,:..::r2ax:.:~'.^,:f::, :':^•':i<:`
a" ar'::b».?fff:'rgg- rfr:.;;: rf::wy::h::Ef{<:`,,
Ff ~:iy±N;i: ~..rfx:'f::':
x } µs v : x. ® Elected officials are not public employees.
':'^'•.:A~fif~:S..f. f' .~~w ~i'~C€S €`:x$:;3`•iafi:^ ^•'J
f:nfrY«:tni^~>x_4f rx:;SA: ORS 260.432(4)(a)
z`?~»rfi s%fr.`%ssc' >f€r'}::f<fs,:
Y`:5ti::::•faf :::3:A:Sti r.S,'i:~ES';:?•~,{^::~;pi:4
i~'~vCVF:F}~
:;~~4{i'::t-0{r:vv\+%~\\E':}Y:i\i•~':r:;:,~•ti...: ~Ja.Jk~:
\;k*1i`•\:1?'Jf:'k~`%ti E;y`^~E•:}k <v:F•'i:.t}r:J:11 {rr :jv
s`~ff::i j4:,} •ri:~^~.'a:::E.':kfr,:J:~.: ,.:\kF,~+:
Everyone else performing work for the
.:.,:r::... ®
O:ti~t+): ~E
r;..:~. `::t:r•:„k^`.~~ ~tE:k!}~'"> vaEE~t\~'~~~ ~5~:\~~i< r,^ :•4:i
11
City, except for independent contractors
r ; : frrF 2Fr ~9k z i t0EE:
: = r E °°NF '
; » ik r 4> s 3F E f2
FI are public employees. Memo from Phil
f F 2 F F r k E E Ei~
: r E 7 i t E.i E~ fF >
r } ...;Ek, E ; - E3.} Keisling, Secretary of State to County &
City Governin Bodies, January 26, 1996.
Chief Counsel,
Donald Amold
Letter from
>>r>
General Counsel Division, Attorney Seaiock
Office, Colleen
ff
General's
1993.
October 5
Division,
Elections
and volunteers
members,
Staff7 board
are LLpubloc employees"
/d.
0 Pin
•i
•?'c"cK'" r•,yt7 kE:F'F>: 2`}~i 22 2'i Y22 E E22 ;Y2T 2iii2r• .kkY kYCtE]kYx:E C~?Y!"
::::•:::Y.• J r 3yry~3{{31~•`: •',»L. T,. ...Fq~ y,J R:....;
.....:t::t:;::• ~.Jki ~ •#i t¢ <~?'1' t:• .gkk~E 4..$fi3,~;4f •:Jkit'`
......:.c::: ~ r 3• { .3•.r..E)Y##2ii{ii:'S~t i{43 .,gi??I)':'° '?•dr
:.r~.k R6 ~ F { k{ r3i €r`3~,•YSE 3kk3'3i Y,Y"{? ..u '
r.Y'v ..V ':T•Ya!S S.7.7 ra.. T3{}..tQ:2 .T..:i...>\>:.TTi,v fQ:Frii?~":
, . Au ::F •.S,:k r 2 2 ;r:? 211.^^. y 22{{YiY:;p$,:C R.. ;~r.r:'S^f
2'r s :t .:.:La,;\ ; :.}k€ } { <s ?^£i S> i~i )R^Y ~QYac>!F..aY>L^:'
.
EYE
t?ET 2 `YEYt c. ,2•},r2r ri< :.;s.a`#,€{ru €€lion ``~?J;ka ,r vn..y4`:Y
S•':S .,E.ik£ € £,t •Rtr..S}r
{
. Y :?i.::.4:` tv".'• S r € . #rt_ € g Jn :
y:
i }
s ii!i3i' >7 3377: OM i3 ~t 2
rs:'C.Etk t Ei t kY 2E i{ki'{ `.;3...J}3,,~','.
t 2Ytka.~;fEi~ ;:.n..
i•• ja. F:F,„d nt • ir• Fk'E913 SE4 jQ?r`2t!}s~ : E2Y. • YtFIR
..f.•. >•$,I<.r. ~S#y2kf€.: ){i,}?i. t#,` .02F.n
R3 „^T.,R..#a•. J.1.fG 3:„cti? > ffr., 2?T }iv. '(tY;.r~:
..r
Rka ;.2~Y) : s T€t ,a1£ .sF i...i.sE EtG: .f.Yi,^;•:}t•;>.::
.k'k?k
id3r '##E{i~sytiif
^'i / tl rvY? 'fFCN.N i,, t` ! 3r 7 f~{
~.r:... L... r.. `k !kn,Y .,f:.r:: c•i ! F<`€YYt €a ..~'s u:c t'•.#,• :...r.>•:.d
3:Y.. ) S' rT J r.',S a,; € € - ,Y,EIi{ %ai} €#r3Y TSNi£ E # y c
-Hilli HE
..cbr . i:Y. 3}.. r .2E]S€T'.,•:..ik:,r;uy}:.:
"a.' a a< -iorrb f
iii:iir.iiiiif,x_:.:.L',!.'%:.• `;3:` ,.t...i i...:.a.
7 .3
i : { 2iv E
S7
} a. € ¢ {
< a t ,J.. ...:~..f:,#(J•SP' k:' ...23£ ti :ES€
rs'~ryY<,c fT? s~`ifi r• : 5r,<E>:#a }3>0`3` ;3'
•.S,^. yt: •}£kr:n,.>: .k #i 2 y.3.huaYiiS
7t4A11i11^'`i^ 1'HI •a1}~ E 2 y
ot<a)., ,:f(;C E37Y ,Yyy E, £ 2Y4:2;':4'ty
I~X
rn . r »
a,! S
.>f . s
' y C v:filg:#'t t
. c
x
af.
Ra.
r rJ w
AP Aft
.
r
r v•
3w
~-Ss' 3
® ErC~ van
eft
mn
a
~ ~
CD =3 CL
c ® x
cr CD Ia. '0 0' rr
M cr I ®
3 Cr CR x
0 CD
0 0
CD W ~
r
® 0 -0 ® 0
® W
=r CD
=r =r
0 CD CD 0 ® CD 0 0
CD Cr
® r-l- ---h CD c
CD
=r =
C® Q.
Kestrimutivilb ILE
Ad BV& o C; a Le
F w ® ORS 260.432(2) No Dublic employee shall
solicit any money, influence service or other
thin of value or otherwise promote or oppose any political committee or promote
15
`d.~.~:wa<;
•:,a• -:'y'am>k;:4~~~Qc:?
\Y...:J%:<i~;;:-3`:yv;~:J: _ ~:^?..:>Z.•.v.R:.~.v. vnv.•. ~v!.~.~~::ii>
oppose the nomination or election of a
l` >N
the gathering of signatures on an
candidate
_ ' x>, f
initiative, referendum, or recall petition, the
h adoption of a measure or the recall of a
public office holder while on the Lob during
weverf this section does w rkin hours. loo
0
public employee to
I restrict the
right of a
not
express personal
political views. MI'M
ARM fir-M
ubl'Ic F.111PIVYOUD
® Cannot advocate or solicit on the job during
working hours CRS 260.432 2
Cannot work for elected official acting in
v
.w.
H° _ M y advocacy role during working hours. See
Y Y Memo from Phil Keisling to County & City
at r
a,
Governing Bodies, January 28, 1998
® Can perform official duties, including
=
g
- - - _ - - r
r
t of neutral fact sheets
epara ion
ORS
260.522(3)(b) and preparation of neutral
explanatory statement. ORS 251.345
® Can wear political buttons, but cities may
prevent uniformed personnel from wearing
non-uniform items See Memo from Phil
Keisling to County & City Goveming Bodies,
January 28, 1998
T h b Dur i n
r: ::N
W Mg UU15
rk'I 1 H
'sr.•'t ss~.. ~ `sx'""Y.^.:'~,as."s~:f< ka~`' ~~::%z^:,.
:s:%'r;":,:^:;a•: s:.~'ss::,.ws:c:,Y^„s;:<<.,::~.mcx::a
'sizsr' j~,ia; ~ss:~s«~'s #sz NK`H's'<~.•.'`.Y~•~"•<~wr^;
F:X N n r.N..:.~ yx_ , ring working hours includes:
®n the job d
~~s::~~~~ ~~-r~.~...,y:• ~~;~~w:. ®
5,,.~`,.5:%Sa~v.:.'i~.M°j'%'~F:f~'m~°•1 ~5.,:bi~,.~~sitA~s~~~i:w
At work on a regular schedule
...v`?i~'::..:
#3'd%>::i.ii:`<>; ~:~tiY•:v\~R:2i~:'ytAi`i.`:~~.c..~\' ::~Z:~::~;:`:~ti:::::
:'•i:2:`.a:#JCE:h~ a:?J?,Y':is:ax:.;:.\r.~::r:~'.`.:%::Yl,:v:
At City meetings
:,>::::~;?y,?:gA,~.:°F:::1:4.:,:;>:\:.\ 22~j3i\.g~` :`:Y:i:`ca:,~~:::>:i.H:;:i%'•
At other meetings attended on behalf of the
y Y
2 Yj
yY City
y
a < Y
® other situations in which the person's
affiliation with the City is identified See
Memo from Phil Keisling, Secretary of State
to County & City Govenrng Bodies, January
Id Chief
Letter from Donald Arno
199
28
A ttorn
••n
Counsel
Div is a
eY General
Counsel, Sea
k
Ic
General's Office to Colleen
1
f
.
Electrons Division, October 5, 1993.
2
' M
Unregulated Act'iv*ities
N:YYysn n'n-:i:~:3'{.~'n;%2i i~'i..~{r:;n-~-:i{'.•i',.
:S k>r.:,:'i!f.5 Y-Y:::':::"~~`.~"'•~':75~•~'•~•':.~'f.•~.'~:..."f:;~: 2.
"On the job during working hours"
i_..~....N..: E:~ in
w 'fs µS.
___~rAf~N„fwswt£~~` does not in
IN - clu d e .
~5:7~^s~ ~:k;•,< :'-:Si:SS;i'.'~i
~~.~:,Ei~.;<~:>:sff:~«cs''it;:;is~~~::^':~x;:c~:'•s:;~ff:fww.w
~ r"~s:'iici':iNi:%~:•,~s?%: A::;i::sa.~w,,~:1" ..s::;a~'^:3.
%t=Activities : :Y.::~.:Y:.•. :YA::Y_f.: away from the work
~<fti`ti'2:s::;••.::: `.-:~:`-:-r..s,--s. xt::is'•~;i;:S :~~:r::,~.i;2:i>:Eq.
place, =;~34:.;: h
not during work ours
.
2....
y business
%E2t::iii::Y:+":::i::i;::.:.2:.'.:.2:..s
;:s: unrelated
22 ;
j Conversations between employees
during an official break and away
from workstation are probably not ':i'riiiSi@EEFEiiEi'rE3
subject to regulation See Memo
Y & Ct
from Phil Keisling to County & City
{
8
Bodies January
OCR
Overn
1998
TT1TTl1 T TTT!•Tr~lfiTT
Milk
i..~. M:
NMI'
lul d IVII V Mr's U
Ap&f 'a Oblimc
WIN
{ Y
- - OMNI' E 11, 11rV.1 F=
.:5+~.'7w:Sii)i•.wiii:wn"..~~......vw. }.M~„
3i^":;SS:V„•: '.5 N,`S:;'Ff^+,tx:A':
~ ~~f}Yx7ti'~H ~zvi::z,^:~^::>4".'~'':«,MC?.~'1:w:'•'':~.v.,.2{'.'r ~?~:v,
ORS 260.432\1/ No person shall
sw:"n>'•;xn«s:si~:5::><:i..;Sw: kA'S:'` ^?C:S,#:
x .ter Rggggl.g
attempt to or actually/ coerce command
vJ:!i<'•~''A','~f>jL\11~t::?'f.~:R:::~:::tiw:~n:::`:,'.:i:;\~:~i: iv:,v+~~ti:}`•?~+~ixv
?i•.
:::::a or require a
public employee to influence
:~\k:.V{'1.~.:< Y.4;f?\:Vn~~::iii::t`i;\::;:{n}i}:K}M}%:.:: }}:%?r;.5 }gy; ~;L%?;:t':;.:;:.ti • • •
:2v\{{{~;14yx%}:;1~<;..rv:}}:: ~%:s.%i': :ti~:C:: pZv:l•.5~:. n \
.C.?k.v}::C\J<is~:C.;:i:::iti%:`>:v~Y.i}<vi\'•:::h':\iY::%ti:\::v 4:\.44\
fk or ►ve money service or other thing of
....z2 t value to promote or oppose the
}
nomination or election of a candidate,
the atherin of signatures on an
initiative, referendum or recall petition,
•
the
of
a measure,
adoption
or the recall of a public office holder.
®
Applies
hours
beyond ::::::;:::::::::::::::::::working
Attachment 7
be determined with due consideration at cross streets or the minimum distance required for approach
grades and to provide sufficient depth to allow screen planting along the railroad right-of-way in
nonindustrial areas.
P. Access to arterials and major collectors. Where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or
proposed arterial or major collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection
for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic, or if separation is
not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the
following:
1. A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector;
2. Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with
frontage along another street;
3. Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a nonaccess reservation along
the arterial or major collector; or
4. Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection;
5. If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be from the
lower classification street.
Q. Alleys, public or private.
1. Alleys shall be no less than 20 feet in width. In commercial and industrial districts, alleys shall be
provided unless other permanent provisions for access to off-street parking and loading facilities
are made.
2. While alley intersections and sharp changes in alignment shall be avoided, the corners of
necessary alley intersections shall have a radius of not less than 12 feet.
R. Survey monuments. Upon completion of a street improvement and prior to acceptance by the City, it
shall be the responsibility of the developer's registered professional land surveyor to provide
certification to the City that all boundary and interior monuments shall be reestablished and protected.
S. Private Streets.
1. Design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer; and
2. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a
recorded maintenance agreeme it.
3. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned
• developments, mobile home parks, and multi-family residential developments.
T. Railroad crossings. Where an adjacent development results in a need to install or improve a railroad
crossing, the cost for such improvements may be a condition of development approval, or another
equitable means of cost distribution shall be determined by the public works Director and approved
by the Commission.
Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810-8 SFICode Update: 01/00
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF 2/19/02
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Proposed Title 3 Code Amendment
PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK
TY MGR OK
1A(AAff&±T&W ez~-r~
I OF
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should the City adopt certain code amendements in order to comply with Title 3 of the Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan as required by Metro? This is an information and discussion item. A formal
public hearing on the compliance amendments is set for March 26, 2002.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
No action is required.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
In mid-1998, the Metro Council adopted water quality and flood management performance standards, known as
Title 3 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. The title's intent is "to protect the beneficial uses and
functions and values" of streams and wetlands from the impacts of development activities. Tigard and the other
jurisdictions within Metro were given eighteen months to adopt code amendments that comply with these
standards. During 1999, the City participated with other Washington County jurisdictions and Clean Water
Services (CWS) in the development of a coordinated Title 3 response strategy that builds on the existing Storm
Water Management program.
In late 1999, CWS adopted the new water management rules implementing Title 3 in Washington County. As
detailed in the attached memo, the new rules impose wider buffers around most streams and wetlands and also
require the enhancement of the first 50 feet of disturbed or degraded buffer areas. Applicants are required to
prepare a site assessment and obtain a stormwater permit from CWS prior to submitting a land use application to
the local jurisdiction. Existing development located within a setback area is not required to be brought into
conformity with the new rules.
As CWS partners, all the jurisdictions within the County, including Tigard, are required to follow CWS
standards as a minimum. However, because of potential Measure 7 claims, Tigard did not amend its
Comprehensive Plan and Development Code to recognize the standards as required by Metro. Metro requires
the City to adopt or recognize the CWS standards in its code, because Metro has no legal authority over CWS
standards. A hearing to complete Title 3 compliance by adopting the required Code amendments is set for
March 26, 2002. The adoption ordinance will contain language, based on Measure 7-related case law, which
will better protect the City from Measure 7 claims.
6
Public involvement in the adoption process has included the sending of 1,600 notices to the owners of
potentially affected land and the holding of two open house meetings to discuss the amendments provide
examples of how they work. Existing development is not subject to the regulations and is not required to be
brought into conformity with the new rules.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
ATTACHMENT LIST
Attachment 1: Title 3 Code Amendments
Attachment 2: Chart I: Vegetated Corridor Widths
Attachment 3: Chart II: Main Title 3/CWS Requirements Compared with Pre-Existing City Standards
Attachment 4: Planning Commission minutes, November 6, 2000
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Growth Management Goal #1, Accommodate Growth while protecting the character and livability of new and
established areas (natural resource protection is identified as one of the action strategies under this goal).
FISCAL NOTES
No additional administrative costs are incurred by the amendments, since they are administered by CWS rather
than the City. The City potentially could be subject to Measure 7 claims should the Oregon Supreme Court uphold
the legality of Measure 7. To address this issue, the ordinance adopting the amendents will include language,
similar to that developed by the City Attorney's office and included in the recent Transportation System Plan
adoption ordinance, to better protect the City from such claims.
I:\cdadm\jerree\agenda sum\Title 3 agenda sununary.doc
Attachment 1
Title 3 Code Amendments
Introduction
On March 28, 2002, Council is scheduled to consider amendments to the Tigard
Comprehensive Plan and Development Code intended to bring the City into compliance
with Title 3 of the Metro Urban Growth Functional Plan. The purpose 'of the February 19th
Title 3 agenda item is to update Council on the title's key provisions and on the compliance
process followed to date.
Background
In mid-1998, the Metro Council adopted performance standards for the protection of
streams, wetlands, and floodplains, formally known as Title 3 of the Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan. Tigard and the other jurisdictions within Metro were
required to amend their comprehensive plans and development codes to comply with
these new standards within eighteen months.
In Washington County, the cities and the county have had a coordinated water quality
program since 1990. This program, called the Surface Water Management Program, or
SWM, provides one set of rules for all the jurisdictions to follow. Given the success of
this program and a common desire to maintain the consistency it provides, the
Washington County jurisdictions unanimously elected to meet Title 3 by building on the
existing Clean Water Services (CWS) storm water management program. In late 1999,
after a one-year, collaborative planning process, the CWS rules were revised to reflect
the Title 3 performance standards. The revisions were adopted by the CWS board after
public hearings and became effective countywide February 2000.
On November 6, 2000, the Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the proposed
amendments. In a five to zero decision, the Commissioners voted to abstain from
forwarding a recommendation to Council concerning adoption. According to
Commissioner comments, the main reasons were that the Metro standards were unduly
restrictive and that the CWS definition of "development" was too ambiguous and open to
interpretation by CWS permit coordinators (Attachment 4). At the same time, remarks
by the Commission acknowledged that the City is obligated to follow Metro planning
rules and to adopt the compliance amendments under consideration.
A Council hearing to adopt the standards originally had been scheduled for late 2000.
However, after the November 2000 passage of Ballot Measure 7, the City Attorney
advised the City to suspend adoption until the effects of the ballot measure were better
known.
The adoption process remained on hold until October 2001, when Tigard and other
jurisdictions received a letter from Metro directing the City to complete Title 3 adoption.
In response to this mandate, the City has resumed the adoption process and set the
date for the Council adoption hearing. Adoption of the amendments will bring the City
into full compliance status with regard to Title 3 of the Urban Growth Management
Functional Plan.
Public Involvement
In early January of this year, some 1,600 notices were sent to the owners of land
located within mapped Title 3 resource and associated buffer areas. The notices
informed owners that the City was considering code changes that potentially could
affect the use and value of their properties. The notices included summary information
on the code changes and the Council hearing date. Also included was information on
two open house meetings scheduled to discuss the code amendments and to give
examples of how they work.
The two informal meetings were held on January 16th and 17th and were attended by a
total of 25 people. Approximately 40 owners contacted staff before and after the
meetings with questions and comments about the proposed amendments. Ninety-five
per cent of those who contacted the City or attended the meetings were homeowners
with concerns about how the regulations apply to backyard development. The most
common question was whether homeowners would have to replant existing lawn areas
into native trees and groundcover.
Summary of Proposed Amendments
The purpose of the proposed City plan and code amendments is to add references to
CWS's Design and Construction Manual and to CWS's role as a service provider whose
storm/surface water management service is required as part of the land use review
process. The one and only policy change is the addition of CWS to the list of
government entities referenced in Water Quality Policy 4.2.1 whose standards apply to
development inside the City.
A related purpose of the amendments is to streamline the Sensitive Lands (18.775) and
Water Resources Overlay (18.797) Chapters of the code by eliminating conflicting
standards and by integrating into the Sensitive Lands Chapter portions of the Water
Resources Overlay Chapter that are more restrictive than CWS or Sensitive Lands
standards and deleting all other portions of the Water Resources Overlay Chapter.
The new CWS rules require wider buffers around streams and wetlands and also
require the enhancement to "good condition" of the first 15 to 50 feet of disturbed or
degraded buffer areas. The CWS rules limit development within sensitive water
resource areas and adjacent corridors. The corridors range in width from 15 to 200 feet
depending on the nature of the sensitive area and the slope of the surrounding terrain.
Very steep areas receive the widest corridors. A chart showing the standard vegetated
corridor widths is attached (Attachment 2). Also attached is a chart comparing the main
Title 3/ CWS standards to pre-existing City standards (Attachment 3). The key
differences include:
• wider buffers on some streams
• wider buffers around isolated wetlands larger than 0.5 acre
• the required preservation or restoration to good condition of the first 50 feet of
stream buffer
• the protection of intermittent streams with 15' to 50' buffers
To provide flexibility in the land use review process and also to avoid takings in specific
cases, the new standards allow for development to occur with appropriate conditions
through buffer averaging and reduction and though an alternatives analysis or variance
process. These provisions are described in Chart II.
The new regulations require that applicants for development near streams and wetlands
prepare a site assessment and obtain a stormwater permit from CWS prior to submitting
a land use application to the City. As presently administered, the City pre-screens
proposed site plans to determine which applications include development that intrudes
into the vegetated corridor and require CWS review. Proposals that include any
intrusion are required to obtain the CWS permit.
Water Resource Overlay Chapter
The existing Water Resource Overlay District Chapter of the Tigard Community
Development Code was adopted in order to comply with Statewide Goal 5 for streams
and wetlands. Many of its provisions are less stringent than the new CWS standards.
These lesser standards are proposed to be removed by the code amendments. In
order to maintain Goal 5 compliance, those standards that are more stringent than the
CWS standards are proposed to be retained and, for purposes of streamlining and
clarity, are integrated into the Sensitive Lands Chapter. As shown in Chart II, more
restrictive standards include a fixed 75-foot setback along the Tualatin River and the
stronger protection of good condition buffers and sensitive areas.
Along Fanno, the North Fork of Ash, and Ball Creeks, where the pre-existing buffer had
been 50' and gradients are low, the new regulatory buffers generally do not exceed the
pre-existing City Water Resource Overlay standards.
i
Who is Subject to the CWS Regulations
The new regulations apply to new "development" near sensitive water areas. The
definition of "development" generally includes the following activities:
s
• land division to create new lots
• construction requiring a building permit
• grading and excavation requiring a permit
• clearing of vegetation within a vegetated corridor area
Existing development located within a setback area is not subject to the new regulatory
setbacks and is not required to be brought into conformity with the new rules. However,
any proposed expansion of the existing use would be required to conform to the new
regulations. Maintenance and repair and roads and utilities, where no alternative
locations exist that cause less disturbance, also are exempt from the regulations.
Examples of typical activities within a Title 3 buffer, not involving the removal of native
vegetation, that generally do not require a permit include:
a redevelopment of existing impervious area, such as the conversion of a deck
area to a sunroorn
placement of a stone path
® establishment of a garden area
s installation of a clothesline pole
® construction of an arbor
o construction or installation of most outdoor play equipment
mowing of existing lawn area
I/cdadm/jerree/agenda sum/Title 3 Compliance.doc
Attachment 2
Chart
Vegetated Corridor Widths
Sensitive Area ®etinition Slope Adjacent to Width of Vegetated Corridor
Sensitive Area er Side
• Streams with intermittent flow draining: < 25%
• ' 10 to <50 acres 15 feet
• >50 to 100 acres 25 feet
• Existing or created wetlands < 0.5 acre 25 feet
• Existing or created wetlands > 0.5 acre <25% 50 feet
• Rivers, streams, and springs with year
round flow
Streams with intermittent flow draining
>100 acres
• Natural lakes and ponds
• Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25%
• 10 to <50 acres 30 feet
>50 to 100 acres 50 feet
• Existing or created' wetlands > 25% Variable from 50-200 ft
• Rivers, streams, and springs with year Measure in 25foot increments
round flow from the starting point to the top
• Streams with intermittent flow draining of ravine (break in > 25% slope),
>I 00 acres add 35 feet past the top of ravine
0 Natural lakes and ponds
Attachment 3
Chart 11
Main Title 3/CWS Requirements Compared with Pre-Existing City
Standards
With the more stringent standard highlighted
'T'itle 3/CWS Requirements Pre-Existing City Standards
Flood Management
Balanced cut and fill required Balanced cut and fill required in com & indus zones
Floodplain alteration prohibited in residential zones
Maintenance of 1' rise floodway required Maintenance of zero-rise floodway required
Floor elevation 1' above floodplain, measured from Floor elevation 1' above floodplain, measured from
bottom of floor beam top of floor
Storage of uncontained hazardous materials No local regulation
prohibited
Use of flood zone data newer than existing 1981-84 Fanno Creek basin floodplain updated 2000;
FEMA maps required, if available Tualatin River and tributaries not updated
Encourages bridges vs. culverts & stream crossing No local regulation
perpendicular to the stream
Water Quality Protection
Imposes variable 50-200' vegetated corridor around City imposes fixed 25-75' corridors:
perennial streams, wetlands, lakes, springs, & 75' along Tualatin R.
intermittent streams draining more than 100 ac.; 50' along Fanno, Ball, and Ash Creeks
25' along Summer, N Ash, Red Rock, D Dell Cks
Riparian slopes of 25% protected up to 200' from City limits but does not restrict development of 25%
stream edge slopes outside riparian buffer
Protects intermittent streams and imposes vegetated City does not protect intermittent streams;
corridor: replacement of intermittent streams by public
- those draining 10-50 acres get 15' buffer facility allowed
- those draining 50-100 acres get 25' buffer
Protects wetlands smaller than 0.5 acres and Same protection and buffer
imposes 25' buffer
Wetlands identified by definition Wetlands identified by map
Restoration to good condition of first 50' of Restoration of first 25' of vegetated corridor
vegetated corridor required required
Clearing or removal of vegetation within vegetated Clearing of area within 25', 50', and 75' corridors
corridor prior to development prohibited prohibited
x
Flexibility provisions include: Flexibility provisions include:
- averaging of 20% of frontage by 20% of width of - 50% reduction of degraded buffer along Tualatin
degraded buffer R., Fanno, N Ash, & Ball Creeks
- reduction by 20% of 125-200' degraded buffer - underlying zone adjustments up to 50%
- reduction to 15' of buffer extending 35' from top - hardship or taking variance
of ravine, with geotech report - comp plan amendment (ESEE analysis) for (a)
- Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis for degraded buffer sensitive area, (b) good condition corridor, or (c)
with encroach. up to 40% of length by 30% of width degraded buffer encroachment beyond 50% of
- Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis for (a) sensitive area, width
(b) good condition buffer, and (c) degraded buffer
encroachment beyond Tier I includes hardship
variance
Exception for roads, paths, utilities, hazards, safety Same exceptions relative to buffer encroachment,
violations, replacement of existing development - Comp plan amendment required for sensitive area
encroachment
Density transfer allowed for area within vegetated Transfer of residential units allowed for area within
corridor 25-75' corridor, plus 25% slope and floodplain, if
wider
Multiple lot development required to place buffer Same separate tract requirement for multiple lot
area in separate tract development
- Physical separation (fencing) may be required
- No-touch easement may be required vis-a-vis
buffers of all development types
Erosion control measures required Erosion control required
JAcdadm\jetree\agenda sum\Title 3 matrix.doc
Attachment 4
that replaces an older run-down building will be a disincentive to rebuild if additional
parking is required. He agrees that if an existing building adds square footage it
should also add more parking. However, if a new building retains the existing
square footage, then it should be exempt from coming up to current parking
standards.
President Wilson pointed out that there is already a serious disincentive to rebuild
because currently an existing building must comply if the use changes. This
ordinance gives more flexibility in that regard.
Commissioner Padgett noted that an important distinction is that the Central
Business District is a specially designated area of the City, and the City has
recognized that the purpose and intent of this area is different from other general
commercial areas. Because of the unique characteristics and designation of the
area, it is important to clarify that this amendment only applies to the Central
Business District and the same theory does not apply to other commercial areas.
Matt Scheidegger reiterated that this amendment only applies to property abutting
Main Street. A brief discussion followed regarding inclusion of these concerns in
the recommendation for approval.
Commissioner Topp moved to recommend approval to City Council of the
Downtown Parking Code Amendment, Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) 2000-
00004, as evidenced by Table 18.765.2 revised on 11/6/00 to include an
amendment to footnote #5 that existing buildings directly abutting Main Street are
not required to add additional off-street parking for a change of use or for
replacement of the existing square footage except for entertainment uses.
Commissioner Mores seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the motion
passed unanimously.
Commissioner Padgett left at 8:10 p.m.
5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2000-00001/ZONE
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA) 2000-00003 CODE AMENDMENT
INCORPORATING USA'S NEW WATER QUALITY DESIGN STANDARDS
The City of Tigard is proposing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Volume
II in order to recognize Unified Sewerage Agency's (USA) role in managing
water quality and to provide additional evidence of Metro Title 3 compliance. A
Zone Ordinance Amendment is requested with respect to Community
Development Code (Title 18), Chapters 18.370, 18.775 and 18.797, in order to
incorporate new USA Design and Construction Standards governing
development near streams, wetlands, and springs (collectively called Water
Quality Sensitive Areas). All lesser standards in the Community Development
Code that provide less protection than the USA standards will be deleted and a
requirement will be added that a USA permit be obtained. The USA
regulations have been put into place in response to Metro Stream and Wetland
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 6, 2000 - Page 4
Protection performance standards and the need to better protect streamwater
quality and fish habitat. LOCATION: Citywide ZONE: N/A. APPLICABLE
REVIEW CRITERIA: Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 6 and 7; Metro Urban
Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 3 and 8; Comprehensive Plan
Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 3.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.4.1,
3.4.2, 3.5.3, 4.2.1, 7.1.1, 7.1.2 and 7.2.1; and Community Development Code
Chapters 18.380 and 18.390.
STAFF REPORT
Duane Roberts presented the staff report on behalf of the City. In order to comply
with Title 3 of the Metro Functional Plan, the City is proposing to change the
Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code in three ways: 1) to
recognize USA's role in managing water quality within the City and to reference
USA's new Design and Construction Standards, 2) to add the requirement for a
USA Stormwater Connection Permit, and 3) to integrate the three layers of
regulations for federal, state, and regional standards into one section and make
them easier to understand and administer. Mr. Roberts explained the main
differences between the existing Code and the new requirements. Chart Ii in the
staff report explains the changes. There are two types of regulations, one pertains
to flood management and the other relates to water quality protection. Mr. Roberts
outlined the pertinent portions of the requirements and explained how Tigard's
existing flood management standards are generally more stringent than, and
therefore supersede, the USA standards. He also remarked on flexibility changes
in the regulations and alternative analyses provisions. Mr. Roberts stated that
Tigard's Code standards are also somewhat more restrictive or stringent than the
USA regulations for protecting resources such as wetlands and stream corridors.
Mr. Roberts stated that most people are concerned about existing single-family lots.
He explained that the rules apply differently to small development and existing
single-family lots than to large development. A single-family lot will not have to
submit a detailed. assessment or hire any consultants. The main requirements are
to provide a sketch plan of the proposed development, a measure of the distance
from the development to the edge of the water feature, and one or more
photographs of the site. A major development such as a subdivision will have to do
a very detailed assessment of the vegetated corridor, may be required to perform a
geotechnical study, hire consultants, and submit a very complete assessment.
Commissioner Topp asked if Tigard's more stringent regulations would be deleted
from the Code in favor of the less stringent USA regulations.
Mr. Roberts responded that most of the more stringent standards would supersede
the less stringent standards; things that could be allowed under the USA
regulations will continue to be disallowed under the Tigard regulations. Some of
the USA regulations will be adopted over existing regulations that are only slightly
more stringent. He pointed out areas on a map where the new regulations are the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 6, 2000 - Page 5
same or almost the same as the existing regulations. Changes to the existing
standards and affected areas were discussed.
These regulations have been reviewed and approved by the Department of Land
Conservation and Development, Metro, and the City Attorney's office. Any
development will require the approval of USA. USA worked with the Washington
County jurisdictions and developed the standards to comply with the regulations
mandated by Metro. They will be applied by USA, not the City. There is no
flexibility for the Planning Commission to adopt any changes to the new regulations.
Questions and lengthy discussion continued regarding the details of and areas
affected by the new regulations, the effect on the existing standards, and USA's
role in enforcing the regulations.
President Wilson pointed out that, as the Planning Commission does not have the
ability to change the standards mandated by Metro, the purpose of public testimony
on this matter is to alert Metro of public concerns.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR
Hazel Lyon, 10440 SW 87th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, advised that USA installed a
larger sewer line across back of her property along Ash Creek. USA brought in fill
that contained a lot of rock, which has caused a drainage problem resulting in
standing water. This is a serious problem that did not exist prior to the installation
and USA has not offered a satisfactory solution. She did not offer any comments
regarding the proposed regulations.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION
Eric Davison, 11205 SW Fairhaven Street, Tigard, Oregon, stated that he considers
the adoption of Title 3 a taking. He asked how this would affect his ability to make
modifications to his property. The fact that most of the requirements apply to large
developments instead of single-family homes is not made clear in the regulations.
He also discussed his concerns about inconsistencies in the new regulations with
current standards and whether there is actually any benefit to the changes. Mr.
Davison explained how these concerns specifically affect his property with regard to
inconsistencies in the implementation of buffers and noted that he has observed
inconsistencies affecting other development with no apparent benefit. He
expressed various other concerns and questions about the future affects of the new
regulations both on development and on property taxes. Specific issues regarding
his property were discussed.
Bob Vinatieri, 10440 SW Johnson Court, Tigard, Oregon, inquired about effects of
the regulations on structures and what things are considered to be structures in
terms of development of such things as arbors, walkways, play structures, etc. He
was advised that a development is something that requires a building permit.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 6, 2000 - Page 6
Discussion followed regarding different types of development and construction/re-
construction that would or would not require approval by the City and/or by USA.
Midge Finley, 11260 SW Gaarde Street, Tigard, Oregon, discussed drainage
problems on her property. She does not know how this proposal affects their
property. She was advised that Duane Roberts will call her after checking to see if
their property is affected.
Peggy Webster, 11895 SW 113t" Place, Tigard, Oregon, asked if the 50-foot
setback is measured from the creek itself or from the surrounding wetland area.
She was advised that it is measured either from the edge of the wetlands or from
the top of the bank of the stream. The 50 feet is not related to the floodplain. Ms.
Webster stated that she is in favor of preserving as much greenspace and natural
habitat as possible. Discussion also was held regarding old trees being cut down in
the Walnut Glen Development and problems involving the cost of planting new
trees in mitigation. Ms. Webster was advised to contact either Jim Hendryx or Julia
Hajduk for assistance in resolving the problems.
Ken Rea, 9570 SW Tigard Street, Tigard, Oregon, asked what criteria are used to
determine a major or minor development. He was advised that the determination
will be made by USA. A brief discussion followed regarding development of Mr.
Rea's property and the change of use from residential to commercial as the reason
for the assessment by USA that it is considered a large development. Although the
development was begun prior to the effects of the new regulations, the
intergovernmental agreement requires the current -enforcement of USA regulations.
Teri Brown, 11725 SW 116"', Tigard, Oregon, quoted from a notice stating that
adoption of the ordinance may affect the permissible uses and reduce the value of
a property. She asked how a reduction in property value is not considered a taking.
She was advised that the Supreme Court has ruled that regulations can reduce the
value of a property up to almost 100% without calling it a taking. The loss of all
economic value to the property is considered a taking. USA should be contacted to
determine if a property is affected.
Kevin Dung, 509 SW Sutherland Way, Beaverton, Oregon, commented about the
effects on property values if Measure 7 passes. Additional discussion was held
regarding the value and development of his property. He was advised to contact
USA to determine the specific effects to his property.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Commissioner Topp said his biggest concern is regarding USA's lack of definitions
for structures, gardens, lawns, and permitted uses. Ultimately USA will have to
address this issue so that the Planning Commission will know how to respond to
development requests that come before it. He is also concerned about the
floodplain alteration within residential zones.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 6, 2000 - Page 7
President Wilson said he shares the concerns about people being able to use their
property. He feels that this whole process is meaningless because the mandate is
already in effect and the Planning Commission has no control over the process. He
is therefore going to abstain from voting.
Further discussion was held regarding disagreements with certain aspects and the
inability to effect changes. Metro is insulated from the results and effects of its
mandates because it does not have to face the people who are impacted.
Commissioner Topp moved that the recommendation for approval of the proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2000-00001 and Zone Ordinance
Amendment (ZOA) 2000-00003 be forwarded to the City Council for approval with
two caveats: 1) that staff look at USA's requirements for structures, development
and construction activities for garden and lawns and developing lists with USA as to
what their intent is for that to apply to, and 2) that staff look at changing the existing
City standards to allow balanced cut and fill flood management to commercial,
industrial, and residential zones as opposed to excepting out residential zones.
The motion was not seconded.
Further discussion was held and it was agreed. that the Planning Commission
opposes changing the floodplain in residential zones. It is believed that Tigard's
existing protections for the floodplain are sufficient. Commissioner Topp amended
the motion to strike the portion regarding flood management in residential zones.
Commissioner Incalcaterra seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and
there were no votes in favor or in opposition to the motion. All five Commissioners
abstained from voting.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
None
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Jerree ayn , Plan nin omm' ron Secretary
ATTEST: resident Nick son
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 6, 2000 - Page 8
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
STRATEGIES
GOMMa
- • v
1A. Create set-aside or separate fund to offset fees and
charges on affordable housing development
. Pick set-aside or separate fund option.
. Set level of funding (as part of budget process)
. Establish review standards
1 B. Applications accepted any time during the year
2. Set benchmark of 100 new units by 2004
Do not revise upward based on Housing Authority
actions
3. Support making tax-foreclosed properties available for
affordable housing
Disposal process includes local government letter
of support
4. Provide $3,000 to reduce fees, charges on
Washington Square Estates
5. Fund HAG membership
500
Dues 5
METR® TITLE 3
BACKGROUND
1Metro adopts Title 3 standards to better protect streams and
floodplains
Requires local jurisdictions to amend codes to implement
Title 3
2000 CWS incorporates Metro standards into its Design &
Construction Manual along with additional standards
Enforced throughout Washington County since Feb. 2000
March Proposed City code amendments are intended to formally
2002 recognize new CWS standards
Will bring City into compliance with Metro Title 3 planning
rules
City adoption originally delayed due to Measure 7
Adoption ordinance will address Measure 7 liability
concerns
Consequences of not adopting amendments
BENEFIT'S of
STREAM PROTECTION STANDARDS
e
use •
MIAMI
Streams
Floodplains
Wetlands
Ponds
Springs
®e
Ism
Separate sensitive areas from development
® Maintain or reduce stream temperatures
Maintain natural stream corridor
Minimize erosion and pollution loading
Stabilize slopes and prevent landslides
Retain stormwater and reduce flooding
jgii~
o r e
III
Latest scientific information on stream protection
Best land-use management practices for preserving
streams and wetlands
APPLYING THE
"NEW" REGULATIONS
gee
All new "development" near sensitive water areas
Includes:
Land division to create new lot(s)
Construction requiring a building permit
Grading and excavation requiring permit
Clearing vegetation in vegetated corridor
Exempts:
Existing development
Maintenance and repair
Roads and utilities, if no alternatives to proposed
location
Does not include:
Redevelopment of existing impervious area
O Stone path
Garden area
Clothesline poles
® Arbor
Play equipment
Mowing existing lawn
KEY PROVISIONS
0 awl
0 ° 0 0
771. 15-200' buffer around sensitive water features
® Steeper slopes get wider buffer
® Buffers along Tualatin River; Fanno, Ash,
and Ball Creeks generally do not change
® In many cases, floodplain extends beyond
buffer
2. Protection of Intermittent Streams
Imposes 15-200' buffer
® Few long lengths of steep slope
3. Establishes "good condition" vegetated corridor
requirement
"Good condition" is 80% native ground
cover and 50% tree canopy within 3 ears
FLEXIBILITY PROVISIONS
s o
20% by 20% buffer averaging in degraded corridor
allowed outright
40% by 30% encroachment into degraded possible
with site-specific "alternatives analysis"
Justify need for intrusion
No practical alternative to proposed development
Site plan minimizes intrusion
® Greater than 40% by 30% encroachment into
degraded or good condition possible with "alternatives
analysis"
Greater burden of proof required
" o 0 0 o e
Adjust underlying zoning dimensions by 50%
Setback from street
Parking requirements
Height limits
Density transfer
a Hardship variance
APP OVAL PROCESS
® o
Clean Water Services administers directly
Prescreen by City
Prepare site assessment and obtain permit
- Complete prior to submitting land use
application
Simplified process for homeowner
Full blown process for developer
AGENDA ITEM # 5
FOR AGENDA OF 2/19/02
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Regional Goal 5 Update
PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK 11WAWY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
What is regional Goal 5? How is the City participating in the regional Goal 5 planning process?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational item.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
As part of a state-required periodic review update, Metro is preparing a plan for regional fish and wildlife habitat
protection in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 5. The planning process includes three phases: 1.)
determining which resource sites are significant; 2) determining whether to allow, limit, or prohibit conflicting
uses; and 3) developing a protection plan, which could include incentives, acquisition, public education, and/or
regulatory elements. So far, Metro has completed the first phase of the planning process, inventorying and
identifying significant resources. The target date to complete the second phase, or conflicts analysis, is August
2002. The target date for completion of the protection plan is less certain, but provisionally is December 2002.
The attached memo provides a thumbnail sketch of the regional Goal 5 process to date,, along with an overview of
the remaining steps.
In late January, Metro Council decided to allow groups of jurisdictions within stream basins the option of
completing the remaining steps in the Goal 5 process, including the development of a protection program. Turning
the protection program decisions over to the local jurisdictions, with Metro oversight, will allow a local
determination of what is developable. The main disadvantage of this approach is that the potential additional cost
and staff time required to do the work involved in developing a protection program. At this time, all of the
Washington County jurisdictions are strongly supportive of the basin option. Tigard is a partner with the other
jurisdictions in Goal 5 technical and policy committees following and informing the Metro process.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TACK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Growth Management Goal #1, Accommodate Growth while protecting the character and livability of new and
established areas (natural resource protection identified as one of the action strategies under this goal).
ATTACHMENT LIST
Attachment 1: Staff memo
Attachment 2: Metro's Fish and Wildlife Habitat Protection Plan
Attachment 3: Tualatin Basin Approach
FISCAL NOTES
The Goal 5 program is yet to be developed. Therefore, the local fiscal implications of regional fish and wildlife
habitat protection are unknown at this time.
I:\cdadm\jerree\agenda.sum\Goa15 agenda summary.doc
Attachment 1
Metro Goal 5
Introduction
During the past several months, as part of a state-required periodic review update, Metro •
has been developing a plan for regional fish and wildlife protection in accordance with
Statewide Planning Goal 5. The purpose of this memo is to provide a general sketch of
the regional Goal 5 process to date along with an overview of the remaining steps and
the timeline for Goal 5 completion.
Overview of Goal 5 Process
Statewide Goal 5 addresses twelve resources. The current Metro Goal 5 planning
process is limited to the fish and wildlife aspects of Goal 5. More specifically it deals
with:
• riparian corridors and wildlife habitat areas within the riparian corridor
• wildlife habitat within upland areas
Although they overlap to a significant extent, the technical difference between Metro
Title 3 and Goal 5 is that they address different statewide goals. The practical
difference is that Title 3 focuses on water and flood protection within the floodplain,
whereas regional Goal 5 focuses on wider areas along the stream as well as upland
wildlife areas located outside the stream corridor.
The Metro planning process follows the Statewide Goal 5 process and includes the
following steps and decision points (Attachment 2).
Step 1. Inventory
Determine significant resources and adopt a list of significant
resource sites.
Step 2. Environmental, Social, Economic, and Energy (ESEE) Analysis
Determine whether to allow, limit, or prohibit conflicting uses.
Step 3. Program to Achieve Goal 5.
Develop a protection program including possible incentives,
acquisition, public education, and regulatory elements.
So far, Metro Council has completed the Step 1 or Inventory stage of the Goal 5 Fish
and Wildlife Habitat Protection Plan. As indicated above, completion of this step
involved adoption of an inventory of significant resource sites. The inventory was based
on the attributes of a healthy stream as reflected in the scientific literature. In adopting
the inventory, Metro chose to designate all sites shown on the inventory map as
"regional resources" subject to further Goal 5 consideration.
Metro also has compiled a map of wildlife areas based .on the criteria used in the
Greenspaces Natural Areas model. When adopted by Metro Council, this map will be
integrated with the riparian map.
As shown in the chart, the next steps in the Goal 5 process are Step 2: indentifying
conflicts and completing an ESEE analysis for the regional resources, and Step 3:
developing a protection program.
ESEE Analysis and Protection Plan
As suggested, the inventory step establishes sites for the ESEE or trade off analysis.
The ESEE analysis involves identifying conflicts and how they should be resolved. The
final step is the establishment of the protection program for the riparian and the upland
wildlife areas. The level of this protection will depend on analysis and Metro Council
decisions yet to be completed.
Incentives, landowner education, acquisition and regulation are all potential tools in the
management toolbox. At the one end, the protection program could focus on protecting
functional hotspots and on upgrading other areas where functions have been lost or
degraded. On the other end, the program could affect how people living within a certain
distance of streams maintain their yards. It could include rules regarding the use of
pesticides. It may involve anything that has an adverse impact on stream water quality.
Since the program stage is some months away at this time, and because the political
process is involved, there is no way of knowing what the toolbox ultimately may include.
Basin Approach
Tigard is a partner with the other jurisdictions in countywide technical and policy Goal 5
committees. The main objective has been to advocate for the balancing of Goal 5
riparian and wildlife protection with other local and regional priorities and for giving local
governments wide flexibility to implement a regional Goal 5 program.
The most important accomplishment of this group to date is a recent Metro Council
decision to allow individual and groups of jurisdictions the option of completing the
remaining steps in the Goal 5 process for their respective basins. This delegation of
responsibility was proposed to Metro Council by the Washington County jurisdictions
and is referred to as the basin approach. Under this approach, Metro would establish
regional parameters for "conflicting uses and the ESEE decision process" along with a
timeline for the completion of the basin plan. Turning the protection program decisions
over to the local jurisdictions, with Metro oversight, would allow a local determination of
what is developable.
The scope and details of the basin approach have not been defined as yet beyond the
information contained in the Metro-prepared "Basin Approach Issues" paper
(Attachment 3). This paper is "intended to be the most general statement of what the
basin approach is, without going into all the details". No work program specifics are
available as of this writing, and many issues, such as the Metro review standard and
timeline, remain to be resolved.
The main pros and cons of the basin approach from a local point of view appear to be
the foliowing:
Pros
• Potential for greater local control and flexibility in the development of the protection
plan. Protection decisions made by the basin group.
• Allows for integration of regional Goal 5, Clean Water Act, and Endangered Species
requirements and for the avoidance of public confusion regarding the three separate
regulatory programs.
• Allows for the application of more detailed information than is available region-wide.
This mainly refers to the highly detailed data collected in the countywide CWS
inventory of streams and adjacent areas. This inventory was completed last year as
part of the Healthy Streams Project and is based on field investigations as opposed
to air photos and computer models.
• Leads to faster implementation of the protection plan.
Cons
• Gives up Metro paying for the work. Potential cost to City to be defined.
• Additional staff commitment required. Potential extent of this commitment unknown
at this time.
• Citizen involvement shifted to local jurisdictions.
• No certainty regarding what the basin approach will include. Many issues, including
the Metro review standards, remain unresolved.
Timeline
The target date to complete Goal 5 through at least the ESEE phase is August 2002.
The timeline is driven by the Metro Council's need to consider the capacity
consequences of a regional fish and wildlife protection plan in order to make decisions
about the region's Urban Growth Boundary by December 31, 2002. To accomplish
this, materials defining Goal 5's impact on the UGB buildable land inventory would need
to be readied by Metro staff by August 1, 2002.
I:\cdadm\jerree\agenda sum\Goal5 attachment 1.doc
ita$ proted'O" Plavt
and VOldr"'e dab
'Me$r®r S V:!s a Requirements to Achieve
State G *a `'mob zmmi 3. Program
Step Goa15
;ncludin9
E Analysis a~ri~6,n. Pu Gc
Step 2• E a~Envifonmental and A Develop Prop elemen - es ib~a tECO"'r ° y 'mPacts) Vs, . n a [egulalo[`!
step 1 toventory con tan
. {ticUn9 uses B AdoPtMe~ p
about Gaal 5 A,ldentifY
vernment
alion the act area l Go
YW4 uttarwn pete[m►ne e►mP [nplementation
Collettinfo IS Uo„des+ "
p
re, g, uences
eq
resource Sites 4(, or [esauces)•
ny cons ~i
.
focat'°"federa►a9s' C. Aal xe ibe ESEE mit, or
,ixh State uacy of informanon wtrether to 3110W.
adeA I). Deterrninebged connfcting uses
the sites
S_Dete[fn;ne „
Duct' proplb►t ►den Ollie ('Casks ead►
C. pete[n►ine ,.significant resource sites ubl►c 'view
Continued P
of sfgrijrcantresourae
F di ~ryEuftauon and
&fened wo steps 2
D. AdoPt a list onlalc' 00 Other Tasks of ESEE anahsis lim
(Vito ' m' -ftm may [['view each re4uestior
3 Ste ~,O and ontioued Public ee view
_ iso[y owilurity ;denld
Tasks Adv
Ogle[ °n
of scie►r►Cic tide A &e ['view rf [dinal►on
PfePafafioUoninegiodste[;nyowem l ea ncy ES.AcpO
draft aPPC►ca rid land own
Ea Y Public a tonal fesouff~s
Detefrn'?'e ientriicl►leratur card
r regrew of sc A s' '1
pee n meU,ods ipa'►darid anaHsrs e.
ap f►9local plan [ev1ew atbm as altenfI
afe h
IS
_ Consider slate [ev►ew Gmn«
_ Advisory [;om'in ESA ~otd►na
f ederal agency
tA vo only [e4uire rflerit
II
Duane Roberts - Tualatin Basin Approach011102c.doc Page 1
Attachment 3
Tualatin Basin Approach
1/11/02
What The basin approach is a proposal that local governments take primary
responsibility within the greater part of the Tualatin River basin for the next phases
(ESEE and program development) of the region's fish and wildlife habitat program,
subject to coordination with, and final product approval by, the Metro Council. Riparian
corridors and wildlife habitat identified consistent with State Goal 5, and Clean Water
Act requirements and Endangered Species Act listings would all have to be addressed in a
basin approach.
Where The basin proposal could apply to any large whole watershed within the region,
if approved by Metro. For the Tualatin Basin, the general geographic extent is that area
draining the Tualatin River. The basin consists of areas inside of the current Metro urban
growth boundary and Metro jurisdictional boundary, Metro UGB alteriatives analysis
areas and rural, farm and forest lands beyond. Regional resources determined by Metro,
potential regional resources identified in areas studied by Metro in its UGB Alternatives
Analysis and the rural, farm and forest lands beyond identified by Washington County as
significant resources shall be addressed in the Tualatin Basin Approach.
Who Currently, a consortium of local governments including the cities of Beaverton,
Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Sherwood, Tigard and Tualatin,
as well as Washington County, Clean Water Services and Tualatin Hills Parks and
Recreation District have expressed a willingness to address the Tualatin Basin. Inclusion
of, or coordination with, other jurisdictions with responsibilities within the Tualatin Basin
such as Clackamas County and the cities of Lake Oswego and Portland are underway.
Individual property owners, interest groups, local government advisory committees and
other interested parties would also be provided opportunities to participate during this
work effort. In addition, Metro, through Council representation on the Tualatin Basin
Coordinating Committee and through Metro advisory committees including the Natural
Resource Committee, MPAC, MTAC, Goal 5 TAC, WRPAC and Metro staff would also
participate. The Metro Council would make recommendations about the ESEE decision
to delineate areas to "prohibit" or "limit" conflicting uses and make the final decision
about whether a basin approach met regional standards after consultation with its
advisory committees.
I
Why The basin proposal has been made in part because of other, related efforts by these
agencies to address Federal Clean Water Act requirements and Endangered Species Act
listings that likely will affect the same areas as Metro's fish and wildlife habitat
protection plan. In addition to reducing the number of times that the same areas are
analyzed and public outreach provided and applying more detailed information than is
readily available region-wide, this approach allows for coordination among similar, but
distinct Federal, State and regional requirements. The basin approach can also provide
local governments with an opportunity to shape a program that is tailored to local
conditions within the Tualatin River basin. Because the Basin Approach is proposed as
being completed concurrently with Metro's regional tasks, the Tualatin Basin is most
I
Duane Roberts -Tualatin Basin Approach011102c.doc Page 2
likely to be implemented sooner than other portions of the region if the non-basin
jurisdictions wait for the Metro regional safe harbor to be completed and acknowledged
by the state before they begin local implementation tasks.
When The basin proposal would complete this work parallel to the rest of Metro's fish
and wildlife habitat program region-wide. Both the region's work effort as well as the
Basin Approach are proposed to be timed to allow for Metro Council consideration of the
data and likely capacity consequences of a regional fish and wildlife protection plan in
order to make decisions about the region's urban growth boundary by December 31,
2002. To accomplish this, materials defining the impact on the UGB buildable land
inventory would need to be readied by Metro staff by August 1, 2002. The Tualatin
Basin Approach has proposed to meet Metro's decision timeline. The Tualatin Basin
Coordinating Committee should formally provide a timeline and work completion
schedule.
How The basin approach will be accomplished by setting goals and standards',
providing legal structure for coordination, establishing a process and monitoring and
evaluation.
Goals. The adopted Regional Framework Plan states that the region shall manage
watersheds to protect, restore and ensure to the maximum extent practicable the integrity
of streams, wetlands and floodplains, and their multiple biological, physical and social
values. Metro's fish and wildlife vision states: "The overall goal is to conserve, protect
and restore a continuous ecologically viable streamside corridor system, from the
streams' headwaters to their confluence with other streams and rivers, and with their
floodplains in a manner that is integrated with the surrounding urban landscape. This
system will be achieved through conservation, protection and appropriate restoration of
streamside corridors through time." Improvement of habitat health within each of the 27
regional hydrologic units shall be a basic goal. Of the 27 hydrologic units within the
region, there are eleven in the Tualatin Basin. Metro's Fish and Wildlife Habitat Vision
Statement will represent the regional objectives. The Vision includes the following key
features of protecting the region's streams, wetlands and floodplains: to sustain and
enhance native fish and wildlife species and their habitats; to mitigate high storm flows
and maintain adequate summer flows; to provide clean water; and to create communities
that fully integrate the built and natural environment. The region-wide system of linked
significant fish and wildlife habitats will be achieved through preservation of existing
significant resources and restoration to recreate critical linkages. Avoiding any future
ESA listings is another goal of this work.
Leeal Structure. Intergovernmental agreements or resolutions of intent should be used to
ensure coordination among local governments and between the local governments and
Metro.
Process. The overall process would be to have a two-step process. The first step would
' A review standard needs to be established. It has been suggested that the vision statement, particularly
the excerpts quoted above, serve as the review standard. More analysis of this approach is being completed
by representatives of the Tualatin Basin.
2
Oslo
Duane Roberts - Tualatin Basin Approach011102c.doc Page 3
be a check-in by the Tualatin Basin Approach when they are ready to make an ESEE
decision for the Basin. The second step would be to have a review and decision by the
Metro Council after the Tualatin Basin has program recommendations. During this entire
process, continuous coordination between members of the Basin and Metro would occur.
A public involvement plan meeting the region's goals for providing substantial
opportunities for participationaby the public would be completed for the region (including
how the Tualatin Basin would be addressed) after coordination with the Metro
Committee on Citizen Involvement.
Step 1. The ESEE Decision. Metro, local governments and other interested parties will
work to establish a regional ESEE method. The expected outcome would be completion
of a regional program (regional safe harbor, riparian district plan and local discretionary
review options) for the whole 'region, except for the Tualatin Basin, which would have a
Basin Approach. One possible method would be to design economic, social and energy
parameters for a region-wide and 27 regional hydrologic units analysis. The Tualatin
Basin could develop basin-wide and local parameters. In turn, these parameters and a
framework for identifying areas for prohibiting, limiting or allowing conflicting uses
would be mapped. This map could be constructed for the entire region, using the selected
parameters, and for that portion of the region within the Tualatin Basin, further informed
by the basin and local considerations. This information would be used for two purposes.
First, it would provide the foundation of the ESEE decision. Second, the map could also
be used to estimate the influence of the region's fish and wildlife habitat program on the
housing and job capacity calculations for the region's periodic review of its urban growth
boundary. The decision about which areas to prohibit, limit or allow conflicting uses
within the Tualatin Basin would be made by the local participating governments after
consideration of public comments, including Metro Council recommendations.
Step 2 Program Design and Adoption. Regional and Basin program elements, including
incentives, acquisition, education and regulatory tools would then be prepared. The
region would prepare its regional safe harbor, riparian district plan specifications and the
local discretionary review options. The Tualatin Basin would design its program. More
specifically, the Tualatin Basin Approach could include the following:
• Revised and new land use "goal 5 overlay" mapped areas and new regulatory language
for all land use authorities within the Basin;
• Clean Water Services (CWS) Design & Construction standards (possible revisions);
• Review and possible revisions to CWS maintenance programs (possibly maintenance
programs for all jurisdictions including park district);
• Identification and prioritization of restoration sites and financial plan ("Environmental
CIP");
• Coordination with Metro Greenspaces program for targeted acquisitions; and
• Possible incorporation of "green street" optional standards into all local codes (project
currently underway being funded by Tualatin Valley Water Quality Endowment
Fund)
Afier taking public testimony, the Tualatin Basin would forward a recommended program
3
Duane Roberts - Tualatin Basin Approach011102c.doc rags 14
to Metro. After its own review process using agreed upon review standards, the Metro
Council would determine whether the Basin Approach substantially complies and
whether to approve the Tualatin Basin Approach.
Monitoring and Evaluation. Metro Code requires that performance measures be used to
evaluate the success and effectiveness of its functional plan to realize regional policies.
In addition, the National Marine Fisheries Service 4(d) rule calls for monitoring and
evaluation. After local programs have been enacted and some time period passes to allow
for programs to take hold, Metro should evaluate its policies and their implementation to
compare goals with actual outcomes. If a basin approach significantly lagged region-wide
efforts, as a last resort, regional safe harbor provisions could be applied to the basin area
until a basin approach is completed and approved by the Metro Council.
4
REGIONAL GOAL 5
FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
PROTECTION
A. Collect information about Goal 5 Resource Sites
Identify location, quantity, quality of resources
Consult with state and federal agencies
B. Determine adequacy of the information
C. Determine "significant resource" sites
D. Adopt a list of significant resource sites
Can be deferred until Steps 2 and 3 are completed
A. Identify conflicting uses
B. Determine the impact area
C. Analyze the ESEE consequences
D. Determine whether to allow, limit or prohibit identified
conflicting uses
[ME
A. Develop program
Includes possible incentives, acquisition, public education
and regulatory elements
B. Adopt Metro plan
C. Local government implementation
r
GOAL 5
r
17FFormed to pursue coordinated approach to Goal 5
Includes technical and policy committees
Main goal advocate for balancing priorities and local flexibility
® r ® o • r ® • 8 ~ ® o ° ~ ® r
Proposal that local governments responsible for next
phases
e Subject to Metro coordination and approval
Metro Council conceptual agreement
Fleshing out details underway
ESEE methodology, review standards
1. Among local governments
2. Between local governments and consortium and Metro
7-Mayorsc, chief officer primary representative
0 1 vote per member
racision about protection made by committee
ContrihLite to cost of planning work: $9,300 initially
Appoint staff to share work
. Conduct hearing
0 Time limit for local governments to implement plan
J
GOAL 5
T ust complete map of ESEE determinations
2002
October Begin hearings
2002
November Adopt map and submit to (Metro
2002
February Develop implementation program
2003
March Hearings on program
2003
May Adopt program and submit to Metro
2003
Aug-Sept Adopt local code amendments
2003
qij
Ilk
11
Built-out along streams
Existing standards higher than Metro Title 3
Vegetated buffer
Floodplain alteration, zero rise
46 Intermittent streams
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF 2/19/02
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Affordable Housing Policy
PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK Y MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should the City adopt additional strategies to encourage affordable housing production? This is a discussion item.
No formal Council action is required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Council consider the updated information provided in the staff report and decide on the need for any new strategies
as it seems fit.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
This is a continuation of a September 18, 2001, Council discussion of the City's affordable housing policy. The
discussion focused on particular new approaches to addressing affordable housing needs. These approaches
included: (1.) offsetting fees and charges on affordable housing development; (2.) setting a numeric housing
production goal; (3.) supporting the making of tax foreclosed properties available to non-profit housing providers.
A memo and other briefing material for this discussion is attached. A new strategy of paid City membership in the
Countywide Housing Advocacy Group is introduced in the memo.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Growth and Growth Management Goal #3 calls for the City to encourage and support "private sector programs to
maintain diverse and affordable housing."
ATTACHMENT LIST
Attachment 1 - Affordable Housing Workshop Meeting Report
Attachment 2 - Council meeting minutes for September 18, 2001
Attachment 3 - Overview of City Actions to Promote Affordable Housing
Attachment 4 - Washington County Amendment to the Real Property Management Guidelines - Transfer of
Property to Community Based Nonprofit Organizations, August 21, 1996
Attachment 5 - J.T. Engel memo, Strategic Investment for Housing Advocacy
Attachment 6 - City affordable housing mail-out survey
FISCAL NOTES
A strategy of creating a special fund to reduce fees and charges imposed on affordable housing development
through the creation of a separate fund would have budget ramifications. Adopting numeric goals and
supporting the transfer of tax foreclosed properties would have no such ramifications. The annual fee for
membership in the Countywide Housing Advocacy Group is $500.
Vcitywide/sum/aa .
Attachment 7
Affordable Housing Workshop Meeting
Background
At its regular workshop meeting on September 18, 2001, Council considered the adoption of new
incentives to help encourage the development of affordable housing in the community (Attachment
2, meeting minutes). This was the third in a series of meetings devoted to affordable housing
issues held over a several month period. The purpose of the upcoming February 19th affordable
housing agenda item will be to continue the discussion of particular approaches to meeting the
affordable housing needs of the community.
The framework for the present memo is the list of recommended actions considered by Council at
the September meeting. This list includes five actions and is reproduced below, along with one
new action. The previously provided list of existing City actions taken to support affordable
housing is included as an attachment (Attachment 3). In the case of both lists, the notations [9/18
Staff Report] and [Addendum], respectively, are used to identify previous staff report and new or
updated information. Also included in the memo are the results of a survey of the housing
promotion tools and strategies used by other area jurisdictions to make the development of
affordable housing more feasible in their communities.
One reason for the present focus on affordable housing is the Metro Affordable Housing Plan. As
an outgrowth of this regional plan, last year Metro adopted amendments to the Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan that set voluntary housing production goals for each jurisdiction in
the region. The amendments require jurisdictions to consider land use and non-land use
affordable housing tools and strategies that could be used to achieve the goals. The focus of the
goals is households earning 50% or less of median household income. Although the goals are
voluntary, Metro has designed a reporting schedule to monitor local goal progress. Council
consideration of local tools will assist the City in fulfilling its obligations under the Functional Plan.
Staff Recommendations
[9/18 Staff Report]
1 a. Annually identifying a set amount, initially $5-10,000 per year, that would be available to
reduce fees and charges imposed on affordable housing development. The funds would
come from the .5 % of the City budget annually dedicated for Social Services and
Community Events. Any unused housing incentive dollars would be carried over to the
following year.
The adoption of a housing set-aside will impact funding available for other non-profit social
service requests.
Page 1
EMMI
[Addendum]
According to the September 18th meeting minutes (Attachment 2), "Council members
discussed social service funding and the Council goal with regard to affordable housing.
There was also some discussion about setting funding that was targeted for affordable
housing opportunities rather than have these requests be combined with social service
funding requests during the budget process. Council indicated that affordable housing
contributions (whether it should be separated from social services when considering the
budget) should be discussed during the next goal-setting session."
Although other non-profit social service and event requests could be affected, using the
existing Social Service and Event Fund (fixed at 0.5% of budget) to provide fee reductions
for affordable housing would have no budget ramifications for the City. The same would
not be true should Council decide to establish a separate fund as part of a fee reduction
policy and add new general fund dollars. Should Council prefer this option, the main issue
to consider would be the City's capability to support such a fund. In order to address this
issue, staff would recommend that Council determine an appropriate level of support as part
of the overall 2002-03 budget process. Council involvement in this process will begin in
May when the proposed budget is scheduled to be considered by Council sitting as
members of the Budget Committee.
[9/18 Staff Report]
1 b. Requests for funds within the set-aside amount should not be required to follow the budget
cycle. Accepting such requests any time during the year would allow greater flexibility and
allow housing providers to take advantage of special loan or grant allocations or land
availability, which may not follow the budget cycle. Direct staff to develop procedures for
reviewing such requests.
[Addendum]
As highlighted above and in the meeting minutes, in the event Council decides to establish
either a set-aside within the Events and Social Services fund or a separate fee reduction
fund, standards for considering requests for available dollars would need to be established.
Possible standards and procedures to consider might include:
1. The proposed project must be owned and managed by an organization incorporated as
a private, non-profit 501(c) organization.
2. The proposed project must be consistent with City housing policies and applicable
planning and zoning requirements.
3. Only the portion of the project affordable to families earning at or below 50% of median
income is eligible for City funds. The reason for this criterion is that the 50% and below
group is the hardest population to serve and Metro housing production goals are set in
terms of this population. Affordability is defined as monthly rent plus utility costs that
does not exceed 30% of the household's monthly gross income.
4. The organization guarantees that the housing produced will remain affordable for the life
of the structure(s).
5. The organization guarantees that the project will maintain City Enhanced Safety
Program (ESP) certification for the lives of the structure(s) and of the ESP program.
6. Available funds will be awarded on a first come, first served basis.
7. Council review and approval of each separate award will be required. The review will
include an in-person presentation to Council by members of the organization requesting
the award.
Page 2
8. The time limit on the use of the funds is two years. It is anticipated that an organization
would desire to request the obligation of City funds at the beginning of the housing
development process. This would allow the organization to include the contribution in
the financial plan for its project and, most important, to demonstrate local support should
the organization apply for state or federal housing development funds as part of its
financial plan. The City dollars would be used at the time of the building permit. Two
years is a reasonable timeline for readiness to use the dollars.
Staff recommends the level of City support be standardized and set on a per unit basis.
The level should be based on the overall housing set aside or allocation, if any, decided
upon by Council.
Regarding the operation of the set-aside or fund, staff continues to recommend that
requests for any housing funds should be accepted outside of the City funding cycle. This
would recognize that time-limit options could be lost when application for funds can be
made just once per year. The timing of the housing set-aside or fund allocation itself would
follow the budget cycle. To provide needed flexibility, the available dollars, if any, could be
applied for at any time during the year.
[9/18 Staff report]
2. Set a numeric target for affordable housing creation at the 100-unit, or some other level, by
2004. This would provide a benchmark to measure progress toward meeting low-income
housing needs.
[Addendum]
At the September workshop meeting, a County Housing Authority Advisory Board member who
was in attendance, mentioned that the Housing Authority was in the process of purchasing the (96-
unit) Colonies apartment complex, located at Pacific Highway and 112th, and operating it as
affordable housing. Based on this new information, Council considered whether the
recommended goal of 100 new units by 2004 should be ratcheted-up.
As of this writing, staff has been unable to obtain specific information on the rent structure
proposed or likely to be proposed by the Housing Authority for this particular project. However,
according to the Housing Authority's Consolidated Plan, County-owned housing serves a mix of
income groups. The majority of its rental units are set to be affordable to households earning 50 to
80% of median.
Since the proposed 100-unit goal applies to units affordable to people at 50% of median, staff
recommends the goal not be revised upward based on this new project and Council adopt the
voluntary benchmark goal of 100 units by 2004, as originally proposed.
[9/18 Staff Report]
3. Direct staff to work with Washington County, which has statutory authority over all tax
foreclosed properties, and the other cities to make such properties available for affordable
housing development.
[Addendum]
Prior to 1996, the County used an annual auction to dispose of tax foreclosed properties, along
with a proactive marketing plan in order to generate interest and competition. In 1996, the County
Board of Commissioners approved an amendment to the County real property management
Page 3
guidelines concerning the transfer of property to community based nonprofit organizations for less
than current fair market value (Attachment 4). The new policy permits the sale of foreclosed
properties to qualified organizations, such as non-profit housing providers, at a reduced price if .
they are furthering the County 2000 agenda.
Although the County disposition policy seems to have been altered primarily to support affordable
housing, it appears that no effective implementation has occurred in the four years since the
policy's adoption. The three existing county-based affordable housing providers have never been
placed on the distribution list for foreclosed properties, and there are no instances to date of
properties having been sold at a reduced or market price to nonprofit housing providers.
In response to a City request, beginning this year, before the annual March-April auction takes
place, the list of foreclosed properties will be distributed to the three County housing non-profits,
who also recently have been provided a copy of the 1996 County policy relative to the disposition
of foreclosed properties.
In discussions, County staff have indicated that they plan to use the following procedures should
an affordable housing organization express an interest in a foreclosed property: (1) staff will pull
the property off the list of properties that go to auction; (2) staff will then attempt to reach
agreement on or negotiate a selling price with the organization - the selling price will be set on a
case by case basis and could include donation of the property; (3) staff will forward a
recommendation regarding the property to the County Commissioners who will make the final
decision.
County staff also have indicated that as part of their procedures, they intend to require the non-
profit organization to coordinate with and obtain a letter from the affected local jurisdiction in
support of the organization's surplus property request. This step is important because it will allow
the City to participate in and influence the disposition process.
In light of the County policy, CPAH has indicated it may consider expanding its services to include
acquiring and managing single family scattered site affordable housing.
[9/18 Staff Report]
4. Lastly, with regard to the CPAH project-specific request for a $10,000 fee waiver, consider
contributing $8,000. The $8,000 would offset the amount of the park SDC fee increase, which
was adopted after the financing plan for the Washington Square project was completed. Direct
staff to return to Council with a budget amendment to transfer funds from the general fund
contingency.
By way of explanation, effective May 10, 2001, the park SDC fee schedule was revised upward
to reflect the current costs of land and development. Under the new schedule, the multi-family
rate increased from $540 to $850 per dwelling unit. As applied to the 26-unit Village at
Washington Square project, the park SDC fee increase amounted to $8,060 ($310 unit x 26) in
additional charges.
[Addendum]
As noted, Council voted to award funds on a one-time basis to offset the increase in park fees.
Page 4
[Addendum]
5. As an additional strategy, staff recommends Council consider allocating $500 to continue the
City's membership in the Housing Advocacy Group (HAG).
The HAG was established in late 1999 and focuses on Washington County housing advocacy
issues. Present members include the three County-based low income housing corporations;
various other non-profit organizations, such as handicapped and elderly service providers; the
County Housing Authority; the State Housing Agency; HUD; and the cities of Beaverton and
Tigard. City staff have participated in the HAG monthly meetings since early 2000. These
meetings assist staff in staying abreast of County and regional housing issues and activities.
The HAG recently decided to transition to a dues-based organization. The main purpose is to
finance the hiring of a part-time intern to prepare and distribute meeting minutes, maintain an
intranet site, monitor affordable housing throughout Washington County, and assist with the
annual Housing Symposium. A letter from the City of Beaverton's Redevelopment Manager
supporting Tigard's continued membership in HAG is attached (Attachment 5).
[Addendum}
City Affordable Housing Survey
In early December 2001, staff conducted a mail-out survey of the affordable housing promotion
policies and incentives currently in use in other regional cities (Attachment 6). The list of policies
and incentives included in the survey was taken from Metro's "Regional Affordable Housing
Strategy Plan". Of the eleven cities contacted, six (Beaverton, Forest Grove, Cornelius, Lake
Oswego, Oregon City, and Gresham) provided responses.
The survey results indicate that five of the six cities responding have amended their codes to allow
accessory dwelling units. Additionally, Beaverton has waived building permit fees for affordable
housing development. Lake Oswego has waived the land use application fee for secondary
dwelling units and allows special density bonuses for senior housing. Gresham allows increased
density in transit corridors and has reduced parking requirements.
According to the survey, only Tigard offers property tax abatement for affordable housing.
The results also show that Tigard by adding additional incentives would be taking the lead in
supporting affordable housing.
I/Irpln/duane/affordable housing IV
Page 5
Attachment 2
City Council meeting recessed at 7:06 p.m. and the Budget Committee convened at 7:09
p.m. (See Agenda Item No. 3.)
S. DISCUSSION OF STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Community Development Director Jim Hendryx introduced this agenda item.
Associate Planner Duane Roberts presented the staff report and referred to a
PowerPoint presentation (both of which are on file with the City Recorder).
The issue before City Council was whether the City should grant Community Partners
for Affordable Housing's (CPAH) request for a $10,000 fee reduction.
Ms. ]III Sherman, representing CPAH, gave an overview of affordable housing
financing. Associate Planner Duane Roberts reviewed the staff recommendation as
contained in the Council Agenda Item Summary.
City Manager Monahan noted that the rent-free office space that the City donates to
CPAH will be made available through this year only. In response to a question from
Councilor Scheckla, Associate Planner Roberts noted that the City Attorney's advice
was to avoid waivers of fees; however, a potential option is that the City would give
money from the General Fund to CPAH for fees.
Discussion followed on what types of affordable housing is offered in other
communities in the area. It was noted that it was difficult to find projects that qualify
for affordable housing funding.
Council members discussed social service funding and the Council goal with regard to
affordable housing. There was also some discussion about setting funding that was
targeted for affordable housing opportunities rather than have these requests be
combined with social service funding requests during the budget process. City
Manager Monahan said that a Council decision should include setting standards for
funding criteria for affordable housing. He informed the Council that Hawthorne
Villa (a low-income housing center) will likely ask for a tax abatement from the City
of Tigard. He advised that the City Council should decide the level of contribution
for affordable housing from the City's budget. In addition, Mr. Monahan noted that
in a few years the City will need to determine whether the Tigard taxpayers should be
asked for a five-year operating levy in order to keep the General Fund at a level to
maintain current programs.
COUNCIL MINUTES - September 18, 2001 page 4
After discussion on the staff recommendation to provide $ 8,000 in fee relief to
CPAH, the Council consensus was that a budget amendment transferring $8,000
from the General Fund to CPAH should be placed on an upcoming agenda for
Council consideration. In addition, Council indicated that affordable housing
contributions (whether it should be separated from social services when considering
the budget) should be discussed during the next goal-setting session.
6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None.
7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None.
> City Manager Review Administrative Items:
® Mayor Griffith reported the success of a "walk" that occurred on Saturday,
September 15, as a memorial resulting from the tragic events of September 11.
This candlelight walk started at Main Street and ended at City Hall. The event was
well organized and well attended. There was also an event in memory of victims
and to show patriotic support last Friday at Cook Park.
Y An agenda was distributed to the City Council for the September 25, 2001, City,
Council meeting. Cable television coverage for the Council meeting will begin at
6:30 that evening. Tigard's 40' "Birthday" was on September 11, 2001, but
because of tragic events in New York the celebration planned for that day was
postponed to September 25, 2001.
C Information was distributed to the City Council in its mail distributed last week
regarding the League of Oregon Cities Conference, November 9-11, 2001, in
Eugene, Oregon.
• City Manager Monahan noted there was interest expressed by the downtown
merchants to conduct the holiday tree lighting on Main Street at Liberty Park.
After brief discussion, the consensus of City Council was to support the holiday
tree lighting at Liberty Park rather than hosting the tree lighting at the City Hall.
9 Community Development Director Hendryx distributed a memorandum dated
September 17, 2001, from Albert Shields to Bill Monahan regarding the house
that is to be moved to Cornelius but is now located on SW North Dakota
Street. A copy of this memorandum is on file with the City Recorder. This
structure should be removed from its current location this upcoming weekend.
Staff is working with Emmert Construction so that situations such as this are
avoided or are taken care of more quickly in the future.
Councilor Dirksen reported on a recent Water Consortium meeting. He advised
that Commissioner Sten was recommending moving forward with a regional
water provider. Future proposals discussed included a water maintenance
program and a potential water conservation rebate to customers.
COUNCIL MINUTES -September 18, 2001 page 5
Attachment 3
Overview of City Actions to Promote Affordable Housing
Following is a list of City of Tigard actions that directly or indirectly support the
development of affordable housing in,the community.
Financial Incentives:
• Since 1996, Tigard has provided a property tax exemption for low-income housing
owned and operated by Community Partners for Affordable Housing. In 2000, the
value of the waiver was approximately $9,000. Other non-profit housing providers
also are eligible. The waiver is automatically renewed each year provided the
organization continues to meet the criteria.
• The City financially supports the Good Neighbor (homeless) Center located on
Greenburg Road, contributing $15,000 annually to the agency's operating
budget.
• The City provides rent-free office space to CPAH in a City-owned building
located on Burnham Street. The value of the space, which CPAH shares with
Neighborshare, is estimated at $8,000 annually. [The rent-free space will be
provided through mid-2002 only.]
• In October 2001, Council contributed $8,000 to CPAH to offset park SDC fees
assessed against the Village at Washington Square affordable housing project.
Grants:
• During the mid- to late-nineties, the City applied for and received three Community
Development Block Grants (altogether $460,000) to improve the roads and
sidewalks around the CPAH-owned and -operated Villa La Paz low-income housing
project.
[Addendum}
• The Community Development Block Grant Policy Board has recommended the
City be awarded $140,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds
effective July 1, 2002, to develop a neighborhood park serving the residents of
the Bonita Road private, low-income apartment area. The City would contribute
$65,000 in hard dollars and in-kind services, such as design and construction
management, to the project.
Regulatory Changes:
• In 1998, the Community Development Code was revised to allow accessory dwelling
units, or so-called granny flats, and to allow for adjustments to parking requirements
Page 1
for special resident populations, including low income households, who as a group
tend to own fewer cars than do City residents generally.
• In the late nineties, the City created a housing maintenance code to protect the
quality of the City's existing housing stock and hired a housing inspector to be
responsible for its enforcement.
• The Washington Square Plan, scheduled to be considered for implementation by
early 2002, is supportive of allowing opportunities for a variety of housing types. The
justification is that additional housing options are needed to provide nearby housing
for shopping mall and nearby business center employees.
[Addendum]
Other Incentives
• Two years ago the City established the Enhanced Safety Program. This is a three-
phase program designed to reduce crime and increase the livability of rental
properties. The phases include landlord training, a security assessment, and tenant
crime prevention training. The CPAH-owned Villa La Paz Apartments participates in
this program. The City program coordinator estimates that he spends 6-12 hours
per year on walk-throughs and on trouble shooting at this complex
I/Irpin/duane/affordable housing Wa
Page 2
NJ
Mr-04-01 THU 11:04 AM WASH CO FACILI TES HOT FAX NO. 6038464851 Attachment 4
r
~ i
A G
AGENDA
BPASiiliNVxTOX COUNTY BOARD OF COMbUSSIONERS
Agenda Category C nsent A - rt Se ices '
Agenda Title AMENDMENT T THE REAL PROPERW MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
- TRA SFM- OF PROPER'T Y COMMIRM BASED NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
To be presented by Robert. De' r SupRgrt S ices
SUMMARY (Attach Supporting Documents if Necessary)
In November of 1991, and again in January of this year, your Board considered and adopted
guidelines for management of real property, including politics for disposition of surplus property.
Specifically, in January your Board asked for a policy revision permitting sale of surplus
properties to community based nonprofit organizations if they are fiirdwring the County 2000
agenda (i.e. affordable housing, eta.).
If a property is sold or transferred for less than the current fair market value, an identified public
purpose must be achieved through such sale or transfer. Tticrefore, it is recommended that the
Real Property Management Guidelines be further amended to direct that the Department of
Housing Services, on behalf of the Real Property Management Program, review proposals from
community-based, nonprofit organizations seeking to acquire residentially zoned surplus property
for affordable housing. The review will assure that the following criteria are suet:
1. The proposed use for the property is consistent with the County 2000 Plan and the
Housing and Community Development Plan, in addition to applicable planning and zoning
requirements.
(Continued on Next Page)
DEPARTMENT'S REQUESTED ACTION:
1. Recommend the Board amend the Real Property Management Guidelines to reflect
the criteria established for transfer of property to community based nonprofit
organizations.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S RECOMMENDATION:
I concur with the department's requested action.
APPROYEU WASHINOTON COUNTY Agenda Item No.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MINUTE ORDER U ....~....r.^ Date: August 20. 1996
bATE
®y ,riGtJ_4a •
TO (:I.tiNK 06 7ttP. ®
4435
- OCT--04-01 THU 11:05 AM WASH CO FAC I L I TES HGHT FAX NO. 5038464851 P. 07
Consent Agenda - Support Services
AMENDMENT TO THE REAP. PROPERTY MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES - TRANSFER
OF PROPERTY TO COMMUIyTTY RASED NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
Robert Deis, Director, Support Services
Page 2
2. (A). Tho proposed housing will be occupied by persons meeting minimum affordability
criteria concerning income level(s) to be served according to family sizo, pursuant to
"Income Limits for Portland Vancouver, OR WA PMSA,„ published by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. At a minimum, proposed occupants wiil
earn at or below 80 percent of area median incorno; preferably at least a portion of the
units will be affordable to persons earning at or below 60 percent of median. Affordability
is defined as a monthly rcct or house payment (including utility costs) that does not exceed
30 percent of the household's monthly gross inconw.
(B). The proposed housing will include a commitment by the nonprofit community
organization to guarantee that tho housing produced will remain affordable for the life of
the structure(s), including deed restriction or reversionary clause, unless otherwiso
approved by the County.
3. The prospective purchaser will provide appropriate community and neighborhood
information regarding the proposed project prior to transfer of title.
no above criteria will help the county ensure that any proposed transfer to community-based non-
profit organizations for affordablo housing purposes is consistent with the County 2000, County
Housing Policies, and zoning requirements. Time requirements will provide a vehicle to
communicate to the nonprofit organization tho county's expectations and the Department of
Housing Services role in this area.
Staffwill be available to answer any questions you may have regarding this roquest for an
amendment to the heal Property Management Guidelines.
j:\Shared\fae\wpshare\cditmem\rpmgid.add
0001.35
.•ui .ra a.~. a / sMrv.a uco L4/b lll1K1D N'LUUK NNAYN{~7YlN G'^^'
Attachment 5
AEMO NDU o
City of Beaverton
Redevelopment Office
To: Duane Roberts, Planner, City of Tigard
From: J.T. Engel, Redevelopment Managerq~
Date: October 3, 2001
Subject: Strategic Investment (or Housing Advocacy
(HAG)
Mr. Roberts:
As.I mentioned to you this morning, the reason the Mayor decided to fund (with General
Fund money) this very important membership was due to the increased need for the City
of Beaverton to play a major role in affordable housing advocacy throughout the County.
As the City's manager for both the federal housing programs and the redevelopment
program, I completely agree with the Mayor. It is my belief that the City's commitments
to strategic partnerships will not only assist low- and moderate-income families to own a
part of the American dream but stimulate and stabilize the local economy as well.
I t is my lope that Tigard would seriously consider a membership in this very important
advocacy group. I would be happy to answer any additional questions you might have. I
can be reached at 503-526-2559.
At`aV:':rnent 6
CITY OF TIG D
OREGON
December 4, 2001
Dear Director:
The City of Tigard is considering the adoption of new incentives to help
encourage affordable housing. As part of this review, the City is conducting a
,survey of the affordable housing promotion policies and incentives currently in
use in other metropolitan area jurisdictions. Your assistance will help us to
formulate appropriate housing promotion strategies for Tigard.
Please complete the enclosed survey and return by December 20th. We have
provided a pre-addressed envelope for your convenience. We will be happy to.
provide you with a summary of the survey results once we have completed the
survey analysis. A box is provided at the bottom of the questionnaire for you to
indicate if you are so interested.
The list of tools and approaches included in the survey is taken from the Metro
document "Regional Affordable Housing Strategy Plan". They include land use,
cost reduction, and funding tools. Please indicate under "other " if you are
using any tools or approaches to facilitate the development of affordable housing
that are not included in the printed list.
Should you have any questions, please contact Duane Roberts at 6394171 x347
or via email at duane@ci.tigard.or.us. Thank you for your contribution to the City
of Tigard's housing policy review.
Sincerely,
James N.P. Hendryx
Community Development Director
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Name of City:
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city? back of sheet]
Yes No
Accessory dwelling unit
Density transfer
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for
housing
Increase density in transit
corridors
Replacement housing
ordinance
Conversion of rental to
owner occupied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
sionary zoning
Programs for seniors and
disabled
Donate surplus land
Property tax abatement
SDC waivers/reductions
Tax foreclosed property
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Building & land use fee
waivers
General funds dedicated to
housing
Other financial incentives
Name of person completing questionnaire:
Phone number: Email address:
Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Name of City:
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city? back of sheet]
Yes No
Gsu► V~ i Vhe S
Accessory dwelling unit 41 Z&-ALV
Density transfer i.e. "1<e Y e r.r.~ Pw teaouvees
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for
housing
Increase density in transit
corridors
Replacement housing
ordinance
Conversion of rental to V
owner occupied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
sions zonm
~ o~ she,? Je,.d~
Programs for seniors and rao 4r.- St-najr
disabled
Donate surplus ]arid
Property tax abatement
SDC waivers/reductions \V
y
Tax foreclosed property
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Building & land use fee waivers ~V 24,
ly
General funds dedicated to
housing
Other financial incentives 44
Name of person com leting questionnaire: ^o '1'' J 1s
Phone number: 0eg 3'L - 0 ZA 0 Email address:
Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Ball Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Name of City: ?7 G
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city? back of sheet]
Yes No
/ fm;"t AT~il / Ret ~Ni s_F tA/H/s 1~'a~ N:1A
Accessory dwelling unit 7-Wes
t~vA r~-s f3~; ►Jc~
,mow t rtd~> M
Density transfer p"G' iq~
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for V/
housine
Increase density in transit
corridors
Replacement housing
ordinance
Conversion of rental to
owner occupied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
siona zoning
/ NtxY~rn.X= i~EN¢t(3 PRovf~~nti C.~~-r 2~NLY
Programs for seniors and Y q-0 1ro~ J tr,1c o^tC SEAAVoAS-
disabled
a►CY'N+AS 1-E~g4 t.4N TOtTS -PRo~.~
surplus Ladd f~EL°pm~ l'A~ ~WA~
Y
Donate
Property tax abatement "
SDC waivers/reductions
Tax foreclosed property
V
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Vzxli
Building & land use fee V R)2 -AF,oQ> P, P, "-r bt:-L`'/Ne -PAO l t;ZS ~Nt waivers i~'~ Tuc CrrvS NaN-ALcx,r 9JE, 1~}'M PAkTIN
t;CbreATB~ ~~rJ ►0~ vN S O A.
General funds dedicated to 0.004Jc~ -r-0 b---rV:Q'M'^3l5 T
housin NZ~E3) ~(L ht~2~a~r~ lYpJ rti
Other financial incentives 11
,1
Name of person completing questionnaire:
Phone number: 664-157 1o-372 ' Email address: RF~~l6glt~'Ok.L7S
Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
C-1h Tigard, OR 97223 ~
Name of City: f
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools City? back of sheetl
Yes No
Accessory dwelling unit
Density transfer
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for
bomine _
Increase density in transit
corridors
Replacement housing
ordinance
Conversion of rental to
owner occupied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
sions zonin
Programs for seniors and
disabled
Donate surplus land
Property tax abatement
SDCwaivers/reductions
Tax foreclosed property
donation
Other cost reduction tools l ,
Building & land use fee X
waivers
General funds dedicated to
housing
Other financial incentives
Name of person com letin nest' q airs: -i--+' T~^
Phone number: / Em- ail 'address: (Oj v° Illy, d" K.-'
Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 87223
Name of City: Ci T1/ a Fore rat C~ roves
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city? back of sheet]
Yes No I( A)
Accessory dwelling unit X e'rhl►t~t`0L u`L° tri a It re'sikx-hA)
Density transfer
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for
housing
Increase density in transit X
corridors
Replacement housing
ordinance
Conversion of rental to x
owner occupied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
siona zoning
Programs for seniors and
disabled
Donate surplus land
Property abatement y`
SDC waivers/reductions
Tax foreclosed property x
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Building & land use fee
waivers
General funds dedicated to
housing
Other financial incentives 1
Name of person co Ietit questionnaire: OV\ 0`a
Phone number: 508 3Email address: ' lnolayi
/ C'~, ve - d~.OY, u5
V Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Name of City: t~a~ ha
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city? back of sheet]
Yes No
Accessory dwelling unit
Our code um awenaic/
Density transfer X
Density bonus for affordable de✓P ltp vn ew t . Mb &wwseS
housing of- T)L6 00(h f- -
I
No net loss provision for G VCs h O VYL 'Vt
housing clOb5l hoU~Arj~ t' 0 LS ~•(~t..louwed- h f P~1!/vl
Increase density in transit )C ? 1 ~ t"' vy) Ljj S r U r ' Yom'
corridors
Replacement housing Gees her trn `s -fib sl6~au ~ v C1~O !S /
ordinance ~0litlQ Vn l~Q MA
Conversion of rental to {1 ~JQ k &wit cdice Q t.l meaP7
owner occupied unit `
Other land use tools
v rE kyl~
Incentive based inclu- X (Ac CY>66 /M0 ~n
siona zoning lv! ev)h < ho Credk !/V lxed /UIt(IYYI! Sr. ' .
Programs for seniors and X 20VIIn~ Pa rt vyU Cao be reauu
disabled Memagecl by lv) cll`- CO . -(5Ve<,(relyl 16M
Donate surplus land
Property tax abatement ~~`?Sstl"-G7G1ev1/~Q~TQ'X t~Clkl~tevll~
SDC waivers/reductions
Tax foreclosed property
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Building & land use fee x
waivers
General funds dedicated to
housing
c~ H ~J~ v,d s c.~r~
Other financial incentives
Name of person completing questionnaire:
Phone number: 5 03-Qt k - ZQ Q-1~, Email address: JUMd r e e. , Tre M a Lt 1 etZi C t .,JWV9 a,17
ON V$
✓ Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
PM
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Name of City: C O Y j~ Tigard, OR 97223
ll
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city?. back of sheet]
Yes No
~ ~c:. Y- S ati s a` a K.f
Accessory dwelling unit lit rt3,~tu$sa r ,zoas r 1 d F Coct~-
Densi transfer
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for
housing
we- ka,Je i ri cr~~sC ws ~ Wre
Increase density in transit eu,r, S+-ve_4- d,-s'41-e# & t1
corridors s e~ uecK-f- ~a -7'(~ I`fw Tv;uee-F l
Replacement housing
ordinance
Conversion of rental to
owner occupied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
siona zoning
Programs for seniors and /
disabled
Donate surplus land
Property tax abatement
SDC waivers/reductions V I
Tax foreclosed property
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Building & land use fee
waivers V
General funds dedicated to
housing
Other financial incentives
Name of person completing questionnaire: r `76~a yc( y nd` d S
Phone number: S-03 - 3 S - ?0 W Email address..--Zp EyMdL D S & e; • Cav oefi 0 k- u-S
Check here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results
City of Tigard
Attn: Duane Roberts
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Name of City: uju+'~
In use by If yes, please provide details [if needed, use
Policy Tools city? back of sheet]
Yes No
MA AA~se
Accessory dwelling unit X
N
Density transfer
Density bonus for affordable
housing
No net loss provision for
bousin ~~U~9JJ~9~ JVV1lAQ
Increase density in transit
corridors
Replacement housing
ordinance
W9L
Conversion of rental to x
owner occu ied unit
Other land use tools
Incentive based inclu-
sionarv zoning
W
(~s
JUxs~^ 6A
Programs for seniors and _ n n
disabled
Donate surplus land
Property tax abatement
SDC waivers!reductions
Tax foreclosed property
donation
Other cost reduction tools
Building & land use fee J~
waivers
General funds dedicated to V
housing
Other financial incentives
Name of person completing questionnaire: Q~
Phone number: 69 1-.3 t) AS Email address:
XCheck here if you would like to receive a copy of the survey results