The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 06/10/2003 X 7 M;- CITY OF TIG D OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 10, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED v I t I c 0fs%0o nWs\ccpkai I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 SqMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS Legal C~a►~ 2 P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 Notice TT 10242 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising • ❑ Tearsheet Notice pity of Tigard 3125 SW Hall B1-vd. • ❑ Duplicate At tigard,Oregon 97223 0 f°_.pop.J °q Accounts Payable • a:; o Z. a 8 U o DO ~j00 „ !U o ° ;sF ¢ o 00 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Is' O '`';a~~o"a:'> o y STATE OF OREGON, O a:. w 0 F' o Co COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) SS. O I, Kathy Snyder "'~t°~ 3 a a P being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising c Director, or his principal clerk, of the m; ga rA -T u a ; n Time s 0 a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 v z~.cn e° and 193.020; published at Tea -rd in the aforesaid county andd ftate; that the Public Hearing/ o,o Appeal of Billboard Signs Interpretation ►'~.o oM ¢ 44 a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the r'n o,E eoC7:0 °.,B. entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and. won A. Cc consecutive in the following issues: d May 22,2003V ytoa,n . °'A.~ ~F~F° ~3U.°aa' FAF i~ Subscribed and sworn to re me thisnrl riaY of May, 2003 OFFICIAL SEAL ROBIN A BURGESS Nota ublic for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON U'('M tIESION NO. 344569 My Commission Expires: AFFIDAVIT COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)6840360 Legs! BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Notice TT 10 2 5 0 Legal Not,` *City of Tigard CITY OF 'T~GA~~ 13125 SW Hall Blvd. eTigard,Oregon 97223 OREGON.' ccounts Payable Notice of PublitMearing the TIGARD CITY COUNCIL on June 10, 2003 at 7:30 PM_at the City.of Tigard Towri ,Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, will consider Plauriing'CommissionIs recommendation to adopt the Capital Improvement Program'recommended by Staff. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICA Copies of the proposed projects are available at City Hall, 13125 SW STATE OF OREGON, ) Hall Blvd:,.:Tigurd, ::Oregon 97223 'or on the web page at. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) h~+'w cLtiigs'd:orgsr`.Further information may be obtained from the Engineering' Department by call 503-718-2465. 1, Kat~~nyc3Pr PROPOSED.'CIP (Capital Improvement Program) Projects for being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am tt 2003-04 Director, or his principal clerk, of th C!ty','Council':wih.review planning Commission recommendation to a newspaper of general circulation adefined Tn ' adopt staffs recommendation for proposed CIP projects to be funded and 193.020; published at m, cJard for FY03,04.,; "t`!ea entire list of proposed project is available for aforesaid county and state; that the Public Hereview on;the'City of Tigard's web' page www.ci.tigard.orus. tore e c%A C T D P-- r 'Mir 2003_04 Comments. may be sent to the Agustin P. Duenas, P.E., City Engineer a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was u'at s@cLdgaird.orus or Vannie Nguyen, P.E., CIP Engineering p g ne@ei.tigard.or us. To obtain a copy of the proposed entire issue of said newspaper for ONE su projects you hay contact Diane Jelderks, Senior Administrative consecutive in the following issues: Specialist at 505-718-2465 or dianej@c1.tlgard.orus. TT 10250 --Publish May 29, 2003. May 29,2003 Subscribed and sworn t e e me thia?9th ray nf_ May. 2003 c OFFICIAL SEAL ary Public for Oregon: ROBIN A BURGESS F r, NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON r My Commission Expires: vu~ COn4MISSION NO, 344,989 IfTcS tisay 19, 2CC5 AFFIDAVIT u qjjm pomollo3 utnllog ~Ca►gsV TMq aay uo Ion dui M0.1 u paulwwoo uilulunl 1,1134m sum oql u! 1no auo gllm asuq 1sig paq=m ulisnv iziluuor Suluu, lsitg ag33o dol all ut a3ewup jimp anu0 rCPu I a41 JO llp P!P s1 will, sawuS lyorCuld ut aauauadxa Jo ;ol E anuq i1~P otim s]a C~►d r anuq aM pue weal 3unoX u 11ps oi,aM •snOAJau ool MM OM •wacl3, r ICI I 3o oBMuunpu ap l,up!p lnq `sag COMMU-tunuoddo peq aM„ 'p►us lndegD P.O. BOX 370 t S uoa; penut;uoo BEAVERTO ~ • g rN ~ im"r-r Legal Notts H4'vrt sin °City of Tigard ° ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. *Tigard,Oregon 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Accounts Payable AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, 1, Kathy_ Snyrjer being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of thdri gard-Tua 1 of i n i mes a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard i the aforesaid county and state; that the Public Hearingr Prnnnst--d CTP for FY 2003-04 a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: May 29,2003 _,0L.4.9- Subscribed and sworn t a e me thic29th day of Maw 2003 _ OFFICIAL SEAL iY v't ROBIN A BURGESS ary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ~i CO 'MISSION NO. 344589 My Commission Expires: nav co -i ~a k tf, _rc;5 AFFIDAVIT r, City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting CITY OF TIGARD OREGON In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) 1, Del J2 J2 A,-6 CQ being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) _ D3 -a which were adopted at the City Council meeting of with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the - day of ~,a o 20 L . 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Water Building, 8777 SW Burnham, Tigard, Oregon Signature of Person who Perform d Posting Su scribed and sworn 4Qr-affum4ed) before me this day of -t-~ - AKle 20-6-~L. Signa re of NQY~ry Public for Oregon OFFICIAL SEAL J BENGTSON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION N0.368086 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR. 27, 2007 UTIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\GREER\FORMS\AFFIDAVITSWFFIDAVIT OF POSTING - ORDINANCE.DOC A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 03- ,05 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3.44.005(A) OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF SUBSTANDARD UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY. WHEREAS, the City's definition for substandard undeveloped property currently does not line up with the City's Development Code WHEREAS, the City's definition for substandard undeveloped property is insufficient, and WHEREAS, the amendment to the definition will align it with the City's Development Code. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Section 3.44.005(A) of the Tigard Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: A. Parcels with. no structures thereon which are not of minimum buildable size for the zone in which located, and parcels that do not meet the City's existing Development Code. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By U n A~MV16 vote of all ouncil members present after being read by number and title only, this / C7 - day of 2003. a erine Wheatley, Ci corder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 1- day of , 2003. 0 r Ai4E!Q&tfi, Mayor i Approved as to fo City Atto y Date ORDINANCE No. 03- Page 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 03- Q mil' AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUES WHEREAS, State Revenue Sharing Law, ORS 221.770, requires cities to annually pass an ordinance or resolution requesting state revenue sharing money; and WHEREAS, the law mandates public hearings be held by the city and that certfication of these hearings is also required; and WHEREAS, in order to receive state revenue sharing in FY 2003-04, the City must have levied property taxes in the preceding year; and WHEREAS, the City did levy property taxes in FY 2002-03. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Pursuant to ORS 221.770, the City hereby elects to receive state revenues for the Fiscal Year 2003-04. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By IVAl )VO lS vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this LC~O day of toa , 2003. 1~ A?a Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this ID~~day of '2003. ILUIA Ines(E. G ffi ayor Approved as to form: A-~~ V City Attorney Co- 10 - 0-3 ORDINANCE No. 03- Page 1 44 I certify that a public hearing before the Budget Committee was held on May 19, 2003, and a public hearing before the City Council was held on June 10, 2003, giving citizens an opportunity to comment on the use of State Revenue Sharing. Catherine Wheatley, City Recor • Date ORDINANCE No. 03- Page 2 Mayor's Agenda Revised 6/10/03 SIR' ~ ~A y ~;x ft'++;+< CITY OF TIGARD +y y OREGON a ts: gg d I~ -P`rtr iw.i.t~l PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. 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. 2410 (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 by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503- 1 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). s i SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 10, 2003 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES ASSESSMENT FOR THE BULL MOUNTAIN AREA o Staff Report: Community Development Staff > CITY MANAGER'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW o Mayor Griffith • 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. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 8t Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 8t Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. PROCLAMATION: a. DECLARE JUNE AS TIGARD SAFETY MONTH Mayor. The National Safety Council is celebrating its 90' anniversary this year. Today safety is a way of life, not just on the job, but at home and on the road. Even with safety improvements and increased awareness, our country's death and injury rate is still too high. The summer season, when deaths and injuries increase, is a perfect time to focus our attention on the issue of safety. With the concurrence of this City Council, the City of Tigard proclaims June 2003 as Safety Month. COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 2 b. DECLARE JUNE 14TH AS FLAG DAY Mayor. June 14th was designated as Flag Day by an act of Congress in 1949. Flag Day celebrates America's symbol of unity, and stands for our country's devotion to freedom and to equal rights for all. In celebration of our flag and all that it represents, 1 encourage Tigard citizens to join their fellow Americans by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at 4 p.m. on Saturday, June 14'. With the concurrence of this City Council, the City of Tigard proclaims June 14, 2003 as Flag Day. 7:40 PM 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) e 7:45 PM 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes for May 13, 20, and 27, 2003 4.2 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Tentative Agenda 4.3 Approve Update of the City's Room Use Policies and Procedures - Resolution No. 4.4 Approve Revision to the Washington County Interagency Narcotics Team Intergovernmental Agreement 4.5 Approve Submittal of Fiscal Year 2002 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Grant 4.6 Local Contract Review Board: a. Approve Awarding of Purchase Agreement to Garten Mailing Services for Mailing and Barcode Services for Utility Billing and Other Special Mailings • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 7:50 PM 5. UPDATE ON THE NEW TIGARD LIBRARY • Staff Report: Library Staff COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 3 8:00 PM 6. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDER A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF TIGARD PROVIDES SERVICES QUALIFYING FOR STATE SHARED REVENUES a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Finance Staff C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. Councilor: 1 move for adoption of the proposed resolution. Councilor. 1 second the motion. Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder. (Reads as requested.) Mayor. Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. , please say "aye. " Councilors: Mayor: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. , please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor. Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. d COUNCIL AGENDA - ALINE 10, 2003 page 4 8110 pm 7. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUES a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Finance Staff C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed ordinance. Councilor: I second the motion. Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Ordinance. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council. City Recorder: Conducts roll call vote. Mayor: Ordinance No. (is approved or fails) by a (unanimous or however votes were split) vote. 8:20 PM 8. PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Engineering Staff C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: A motion to adopt the fiscal year 2003-2004 Capital Improvement Program and Projects. COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 5 8:35 PM 9. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE BUDGET, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, DECLARING THE VALOREM TAX LEVY AND CLASSIFYING THE LEVY AS PROVIDED BY ORS 310.060(2) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Finance Staff C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed resolution. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor. Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder. (Reads as requested.) Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. , please say "aye. " Councilors: Mayor: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. , please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 6 8:40 PM 10. PUBLIC HEARING (INFORMATIONAL) TO CONSIDER ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 28 - PORTIONS OF SW O'MARA STREET, SW FREWING STREET, SW EDGEWOOD STREET, SW HILL VIEW COURT, AND SW MCDONALD STREET a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Engineering Department C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Consideration by Council: Resolution No. Councilor. I move for adoption of the proposed resolution. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor. Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. , please say "aye it Councilors: Mayor: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. , please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. i i. i' COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 10, 2003 page 7 9:00 PM 11. PUBLIC HEARING (INFORMATIONAL) TO 'CONSIDER ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 29 - SW PARK STREET, SW DERRY DELL COURT, SW COOK LANE AND SW WATKINS AVENUE a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Engineering Department C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Consideration by Council: Resolution No Councilor. I move for adoption of the proposed resolution. Councilor. I second the motion. Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder. (Reads as requested.) Mayor. Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. _ , please say "aye " Councilors: Mayor. All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. , please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 8 9:10 PM 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO AMENDMENT SECTION 3.44.055(A) OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF SUBSTANDARD UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY a. Staff Report: Finance Staff b. Council Questions and Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. MEAN Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed ordinance. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor. Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Ordinance. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council. City Recorder: Conducts roll call vote. Mayor: Ordinance No. (is approved or fails) by a (unanimous or however votes were split) vote. 9:20 PM 13. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] UDICIAL) - APPEAL OF A DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION REGARDING BILLBOARD SIGNS; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 18.780 a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges Mayor: - Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? ? - Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? - Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation i of any member of the Council? i C. Staff Report: Community Development Department COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 9 7 1 d. Public Testimony Mayor. - For all those wishing to testify, please be aware that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence su, f, jicient to afford the Council and parties an opportunity to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on this issue. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described by staff or other criteria in the plan or land use regulation which you believe apply to the decision. Proponents Opponents Rebuttal e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Questions g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed resolution. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor. Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor. Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. , please say "aye. it Councilors: Mayor. All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. , please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor. Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. 9:50 PM 14. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:55 PM 15. NON AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 10 10:00 PM 16. 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. 10:10 PM 17. ADJOURNMENT CIAD WCATHYICCA1030610. DOC 1 COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 10, 2003 page 11 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING June 17, 2003 The Study Session is held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. Enter at the back of Town Hall. The Council encourages interested citizens to attend all or part of the meeting. if the number of attendees exceeds the capacity of the Conference Room, the Council may move the Study Session to the Town Hall. 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. • ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS o Indonesian Delegation o City tours for Councilors Sherwood and Wilson June 26, 8-10 a.m. Public Works and 8 a.m. - 12 p.m. - Engineering July 14, 15 or 16 Community Development 8t Library Tours - (afternoon) o Update on Martin court case o Health Insurance - Open Enrollment - Senior Human Resource Analyst Sherrie Burbank can be available for Council questions before the June 24 City Council meeting if needed o Street Maintenance Fee Update o Governance structure for proposed publicly owned electric utility o Questions on Bull Mountain Study Executive Session - The Public Meetings Law authorizes governing bodies to meet in executive session in certain limited situations (ORS 192.660). An "executive session" is defined as "any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body, which Is dosed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.660 (1) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, If the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660(l) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660 (1) (c) - To consider natters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660 (1) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660 (1) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660 (1) (f) - Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public inspection." These records are specifically Identified :n the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660 (1) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (1) (h) - Legal counsel - Executive session are appropriate for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660 (1) (1) - To review and evaluate, pursuant to standards, criteria, and policy directives adopted by the governing body, the employment-related performance of the chief executive officer, a public officer, employee or staff member unless the affected person requests an open hearing. The standards, criteria and policy directives to be used in evaluating chief executive officers shall be adopted by the governing body In meetings open to the public In which there has been an opportunity for public comment. 192.660 (1) Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (1) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. I:WDKCATHY\COUNCIL\CCLIST\030024.DOC k S~~ay Agenda Item No. 5eiD'~ Meeting of (o• ~O. 03 CITY OF TIOARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Jim Hendryx~. DATE: May 28, 2003 SUBJECT: Public Facilities and Services Assessment Report for the Bull Mountain Area At the June 10, 2003 Council study session, I will be providing an overview of the Public Facilities and Services Assessment Report for the Bull Mountain area. The report provides a template for evaluating the issues of how and when the City provides services to our Urban Services Area and, in particular, Bull Mountain. It provides a framework for further policy discussion on how and when this area is annexed and receives City services. Copies of the Assessment Report will be provided at the study session. 3 u "~~s~-~r buf-n c~ 71 6,4/ 1 D/,)3 *~~/%TY_OF YIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Bill Monahan FROM: Jim Hendryx DATE: June 3, 2003 SUBJECT: Bull Mountain Public Facilities Services Assessment Report Following is an outline for Council discussion on the'Bull Mountain Public Facilities Services Assessment Report. It should be noted that the Communication Plan is being developed and will be presented with the final report. June 10, 2003 Council Study Session Introduction of report - what was reviewed Objectives and findings Schedule for review and action June 17, 2003 Informal Council discussion if needed Policy discussions June 24, 2003 Z Department discussions r Policy discussions n ` July 1, 2003 Final draft published as part of Council packet "o U July 8, 2003 Optional City Council discussion July 15, 2003 Finalization of report Finalization of policy direction - 2 choices ➢ Annexation Plan ➢ Non-annexation Plan Policy/Comprehensive Plan Amendment July 29, 2003 Joint meeting with Board of County Commissioners August 26, 2003 Study session to finalize directions for proceeding September 9, 2003 Resolution for adoption to start implementation of preferred annexation strategy Should Council decide to proceed with the Annexation Plan, critical dates that need to be considered in an effort to take the issue to a vote in March 2004 are noted below. Properties placed on Tigard Tax rolls July 2004 • Filing with the Department of Revenue March 31, 2004 and Secretary of State O Council adopts ordinance proclaiming March 30, 2004 results of election - special meeting • County certification of election results March 26, 2004 normally 20 days • Election March 9, 2004 • Ballot filing with Washington County January 8, 2004 • City Council public hearing to December 9, 2003 approve the annexation plan and to place the annexation plan on the ballot • Completion of Staff report on Type 4 land use December 2, 2003 decision (7 days prior to hearing) Start legal description review Dept of Revenue December 1, 2003 for filing with the Department i i • Notice sent to applicant, any affected November 26, 2003 governmental agency, the individual recognized by the affected CIT as the official contact person and any person who requests notice in writing and pays a fee established by Council resolution. • Newspaper notice of Council ballot consideration November 20, 2003 and public hearing • Draft Annexation Plan/approach November 11, 2003 • Provide notice on proposed annexation October 24, 2003 to affected agencies per Metro requirements (45 days prior to hearing) • Resolution authorizing preparation on Annexation September 9, 2003 Plan I:\cdadm\jerree\jim\general\bull mt cc schedule.doc `r a • J ' {s4-I aAiC. lam' • 1,0 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE BULL MOUNTAIN AREA . 4i k CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community Community Development Department Long-Range Planning Draft - updated June 10, 2003 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Background P. 1 A. Scope and Objectives B. City/County coordination impact on service and development C. Relationship to Council annexation strategy efforts II. Methodology p.7 A. Area of Evaluation B. Range of Alternatives C. Overview of Evaluation Criteria 1. Fiscal 2. Service Provision Impacts 3. Relationship to UGB D. Analytical Approach E. Assumptions F. Relationship to Bull Mountain Study III. Analysis of Alternatives p. 12 A. Fiscal Analysis 1. General Overview/Approach 2. Analysis of on-going provision of services 3. Analysis of capital needs B. Analysis of Service Provision Impacts C. UGB IV. Summary of Conclusions p. 23 A. Timing and Sequence B. Policy Analysis Appendices Appendix A. Study Area Profile Appendix B. On-Going Service Costs and Revenues Appendix C. Growth Based Fund Descriptions Appendix D. Tigard Service Provision Impacts summaries by Department Appendix E. Change in Service Levels between County and City Appendix F. Evaluation Criteria Tables Appendix G. Chronology of coordination in unincorporated areas Appendix H. Evolution and Relationship of City/County coordination City of Tigard Public Facilities and Services Plan for the` Bull Mountain Area PRODUCED BY: THE CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IN COLLABORATION WITH THE FINANCE, ENGINEERING, POLICE AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS DIRECTOR, JAMES N.P. HENDRYX JUNE, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OR 97223 503/639-4171 i i i i Section I. - Introduction and Background A. Scope and Obiectives 1. Overview of the existing Bull Mountain development pattern and public service delivery system. With the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan in the early 1980s, the Bull Mountain area has been identified as within the Urban Growth Boundary of Tigard. Over the years, portions of Bull Mountain have annexed into the City. However, major portions (approximately 1,430 acres) remain outside the City limits. This area is developing rapidly at urban densities, with little difference to densities occurring within the City. Specific areas are nearing build out while other areas can accommodate considerable growth. As a result of on-going rapid development, there is only approximately 17% left for development in Bull Mountain. While a significant portion of Bull Mountain has developed to urban densities, the planning and development pattern in Bull Mountain has not taken into account the capital needs, including the open space and recreational needs of its residents. Given the existing development trends, portions of the Bull Mountain area are likely to reach build out in the next few years which would further exacerbate the open space/recreational opportunity deficiency. Unincorporated Bull Mountain currently receives its public facilities and services from Washington County and special service districts. The County is responsible for law enforcement, road maintenance, sanitary and storm sewer services, etc. Tigard, through an intergovernmental agreement with the County, provides development related planning, building, and engineering services to the area. Law enforcement and road maintenance services are provided at enhanced urban levels as compared to rural areas of Washington County. However, urban level of public facilities (e.g., roads, parks, etc.) and services are not occurring in the same way that it is in Tigard. In summary, Bull Mountain has evolved as a result of City's and County's response to the Oregon land use program which is predicated upon making efficient and effective use of land. The City and County provide differing levels of urban services. This in turn has created a conflict for Tigard since it will ultimately provide public facilities and services. Should this situation continue until the area is fully built out, Tigard will have fewer financial resources to address the areas needs. 2. Scope The analysis of public services and facilities contained in this report pertains to the "unincorporated" portion of the Bull Mountain area, adjacent to Tigard's City limits, i.e. the areas which are identified within the City of Tigard Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) but are presently located outside Tigard's limits, under Washington County jurisdiction. The methodology and analysis used for this assessment report can be used as a template for future analysis of the remaining unincorporated areas in Tigard's area of interest. Under the Oregon land use system, all cities need to establish an Urban Growth Boundary to separate urbanizable land from rural land. Establishment and development within the Urban Growth Boundary area must be based on several factors, including Page 1 orderly and economic provision for public facilities and services to support maximum efficiency of urban uses within the established boundaries. The existing land use system also requires that the establishment and development within the Urban Growth Boundaries be a cooperative process between a city and a county that surrounds it. The effectiveness of this City/County coordination process is largely dependent on (1) a range of implementation choices to assure the logical and efficient transition of public facilities to direct urban expansion; and (2) respective roles and responsibilities assigned to a city and a county within the unincorporated areas. The range of implementation choices may include a variety of growth management tools, including financial incentives, location of public facilities and local land use ordinances, which form a basis for a growth management program. As discussed further in this report, given the existing growth boundary/urbanization system, the effectiveness of the growth management program is dependent on a city's ability to impact growth outside its corporate limits. Consequently, the timing of annexation may be viewed as a growth management tool to ensure the efficient level of services to support urbanization within the UGB. In short, the timing of annexation is important since it factors into Tigard's ability to address the urban level of public facilities and service ultimately needed for this area. Should the area fully build out before annexation, Tigard will not have all the financial/growth management tools that exist today to address the needs of the area. 3. Objectives The analysis contained in this report addresses the relationship between the efficiency of service provision and annexation strategies and its impact on the efficient use of urbanizable land by addressing two major objectives. The objectives of the report are: • To provide a comprehensive analysis of public services and facilities needs for Bull Mountain, with the emphasis on the relationship between the timing of annexation and funding mechanisms for both on-going and one-time capital improvement projects. • To identify policy choices related to the provision of public services and needs upon annexation and to define a context for a non-island strategy by re-examining the City's Comprehensive Plan urbanization and annexation policies implementing the basic land efficiency elements of Oregon's land use planning program. B City/County coordination impact on service delivery and development 1. Evolution of City/County coordination efforts in Bull Mountain The existing coordination arrangement, which resulted in the above described situation, is a result of the City/County implementation choices which have evolved in the Bull Mountain area since the establishment of the Oregon land use planning system. The evolution of this model is analyzed briefly below. The analysis focuses on the Page 2 comprehensive planning, development, service delivery coordination, and annexation approach between the City and the County. Tigard's Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted in the mid-1980s, established the ultimate boundaries of the City. Subsequent legislation has further refined the process for planning and delivery of public facilities and services within urbanized areas. [A detailed chronology and relationship between the existing coordination agreements and the Oregon land use system are contained in Appendices G and H]. In general, the overall evolution of the City/County coordination efforts can be divided into two major phases: Phase 1. This phase reflects the Courity/City coordination initial response to the establishment of the Oregon land use planning program in the 1970s. Following the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in the mid-1980's, the unincorporated Bull Mountain area has been identified as the Primary Area of Interest in the Washington County-Tigard Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA). Based on the UPAA, the County was assigned to conduct comprehensive planning and development activities in Bull Mountain. The agreement also stated that the City shall not require annexation of lands as a condition to the provision of urban services. While the UPAA was later modified through the Urban Service Intergovernmental Agreement to transfer development and building review responsibilities to Tigard, the comprehensive planning responsibility remained assigned to Washington County. Subsequently, the Bull Mountain Master Plan was adopted by Washington County in 1984 and has remained the major comprehensive planning guide for Bull Mountain. Two facility plans adopted by Tigard (Parks Master Plan/1999 and Transportation System Plan/2002) included unincorporated Bull Mountain areas. Phase 2. This phase reflects the City/County efforts following Senate Bill (SB) 122 (codified as ORS 195.060 to 195.085) passed by the 1993 Legislature. Oregon's statewide planning Goals 14 and 11 require counties and cities to plan for and develop public facilities that meet the needs of the urban, urbanizable, and rural areas to be served. Local comprehensive plans include a public facility plan to describe the water, sewer and transportation facilities which are needed to support the land use designations. State laws envision local comprehensive plans that are coordinated with other plans, such as a special district's facilities plan. But, most special districts have stayed on the fringes of land use planning. This lack of coordination created problems with the extension and duplication of services. The 1993 Oregon Legislature addressed the need to provide more efficient, more coordinated urban services by passing SB122 (ORS 195.060-085). This legislation required the adoption of two types of agreements: (1) cooperative agreements and (2) urban service agreements. Cooperative agreements are planning oriented and are required between each City, County and service district that provides an urban service within a UGB. Page 3 These agreements create a way to coordinate planning activities and the review of development applications. Urban service agreements are required to establish long-term roles and responsibilities for providing urban services. Under SB 122, local governments and special districts that provide urban services to an area within a UGB with more than 2,500 people are required to adopt urban service agreements as part of the periodic review process. Following the 1993 passage of SB 122, the City and the County entered the following agreements: 1) Urban Services Intergovernmental Agreement (signed in 1997 and updated in 2002), which focused on transferring development and building review to Tigard; and 2) Tigard Urban Service Agreement (2002), which recognizes that Tigard will ultimately be the provider of most urban services for its Urban Services Area. Other parties to the agreement include Washington County, Clean Water Services, Tigard Water District, Tri-Met, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, and Tualatin Valley Water District. This report establishes a framework for evaluating how best to deliver efficient and effective public facilities and services to those areas currently outside Tigard's City limits. The Tigard Urban Service Agreement (TUSA) also constitutes a significant new step in determining the importance of annexation and ultimate service provision in the unincorporated Bull Mountain by emphasizing the following: • The City and the County will be supportive of annexation to the City over time; • Furthermore, the City shall endeavor to annex the unincorporated areas in Bull Mountain in the next 3-5 years; and • The County recognizes cities as the ultimate local governance provider to the urban areas, such as Bull Mountain. In short, the adoption of the TUSA marked a dramatic change in the City/County coordination approach and provided a needed regulatory framework to spark the annexation efforts in Bull Mountain. It moved the annexation discussion to a different level by focusing it on the specific time horizon (WHEN) and strategic approach to accomplish it (HOW) by recognizing the City as the ultimate service provider in Bull Mountain. Page 4 C. Relationship to Council annexation strategy efforts The significance of the TUSA also brings a new dimension to the Tigard City Council's efforts to address the City's role in the provision of urban services outside the City limits, and development of a non-island annexation strategy. 11. Summary of recent annexation efforts and impacts in Bull Mountain a. Non-island annexation policy/strategy development In 2001, the Council established a goal to develop an annexation policy/strategy for non- island areas, such as Bull Mountain. In 2001, Tigard developed a Bull Mountain annexation study to assess the feasibility of annexing the Bull Mountain area. The key conclusions and policy issues identified in the Bull Mountain Annexation Study centered on the capital needs and lack of funds to meet all the needs in the Bull Mountain area. After the Bull Mountain Annexation Study was published, a public opinion survey was completed to assess Tigard citizen and Bull Mountain resident opinions on the potential of annexing the Bull Mountain area. In fall 2002, Council considered a resolution to initiate an annexation plan for the Bull Mountain area; however, the resolution did not pass. While Council decided not to go further with an annexation strategy last year, its goals continue to involve the Bull Mountain area. Therefore, in order to develop a long-term strategy for providing services to the Bull Mountain area, a Public Facilities and Services Assessment Report has been developed. b. Urban Growth Boundary expansion impacts In December 2002, the Metro Council finalized the two-year process of reviewing the region's capacity for housing and jobs by expanding the urban growth boundary (UGB). As part of this decision, Tigard and Washington County will need to incorporate an additional 480 acres adjacent to the current unincorporated Bull Mountain area as part of the overall urban services provision/annexation strategy, which may ultimately result in approximately 15,000 new residents when combined with the projected Bull Mountain area population. Since the current Tigard population is approximately 44,000 (2002), the unincorporated portion of the Bull Mountain area will constitute approximately 21 % of the overall number of residents (59,000) living in this portion of Tigard's Urban Growth Boundary area at its estimated build out. If the existing development pattern progresses within the same City/County coordination and growth management model, the urban service and provision impacts will likely continue and further deteriorate the efficiency of the public facilities and services delivery in both unincorporated portions of Bull Mountain and the City of Tigard. In short, the development of the combined Bull Mountain/UGB strategy is emerging as one of the critical urbanization policy and land use development challenges for Tigard. 2. The scope of the report and its relationship to the Bull Mountain annexation strategy The analysis contained in this report centers on the two major annexation/service provision issues which are critical to the development of an non-island annexation Page 5 strategy. The report also provides a logical next step in the City/County evolution in service provision and lays out a foundation to implement the provisions of the recently signed TUSA by addressing the WHEN and HOW annexation questions. a. Sequence and timing of annexation ("When" question) One of the primary objectives of the Bull Mountain Public Facilities and Services Assessment Report is to evaluate the potential timing and sequence of annexation and its impacts upon the City's ability to provide efficient and effective public facilities and services to Bull Mountain. As extensively discussed in this report, the City has limited ability to manage growth outside its City limits to ensure that efficient and effective public facilities and services are provided. The timing of annexation is a major factor in addressing this issue. Development occurring outside Tigard's City limits, while subject to specific regulations, does not account for the City's ability to ultimately provide urban levels of public facilities and services. Annexation provides a growth management tool for ensuring that the City can provide adequate services. The Assessment Report provides a comprehensive analysis of the public services and facilities needs for Bull Mountain. It evaluates the relationship between timing of annexation and funding mechanisms for both one-time public facility projects and on- going services. It provides the framework for further policy discussion on how and when the area is annexed and receives City services. The report evaluates the issues of sequential annexation for Bull Mountain. From a fiscal standpoint, there is an optimal sequence of annexation in order for the City to provide efficient and effective public facilities and services. Sequential annexation creates a relationship with the recent UGB expansion adjacent to Bull Mountain. b. Policy choices ("How" question) The report also identifies a range of policy choices related to the provision of public services and needs upon annexation and lays out foundations to re-examine the City's Comprehensive Plan urbanization and annexation policies implementing the basic land efficiency elements of Oregon's land use planning program. c. Relationship to the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study In response to a Council goal, in 2001, the City completed a study of the Bull Mountain area to evaluate the financial costs and benefits if the area were to annex in 2001. It did not, however, factor in the dimension of time, which provides information on how delaying annexation might impact the financial picture, which in turn, may affect the ability to efficiently and effectively provide urban levels of services. The 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study also placed most of its emphasis on the capital needs of the area instead of addressing in detail the on-going service provision issues and identifying that capital needs must be prioritized. The 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study evaluated three potential growth scenarios: no growth (scenario 1), full build-out at maximum densities (scenario 2) and moderate growth (scenario 3). This document builds upon the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study. It uses the financial findings from Scenario 3 (moderate build-out) and has refined them through more detailed analysis and a more thorough assessment of need. This assessment report also differs from the Bull Mountain Annexation Study in that it makes specific projections on when services and revenues will be available and needed. Page 6 Section 11 - Method A. Area of Evaluation The area evaluated for this assessment report, commonly referred to as Bull Mountain, is generally comprised of all the unincorporated area north of Beef Bend Road, east of the Urban Growth Boundary, south of Barrows Road and west of 99W. According to the 2000 census, there are 7,300 people in the study area. The area consists of a mix of larger undeveloped lots, large developed lots, and smaller lots built to the minimum densities (generally R-7). The study area was defined in the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study and consists. of approximately 1,430 acres. B. Range of Alternatives Due to the size of the area, growth potential and nature of existing development, the study evaluated nine alternatives: four sub-areas, four combinations of sub-areas and the entire area as a whole. The entire area was divided into the same four sub-areas utilized in the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study (see Figure 2, next page). Because this report utilized the previous work conducted, the projected population and housing units for each sub-area over time is known and was used in the evaluation. The following is a brief summary of what is known about each sub-area: North - This area consists of approximately 383 acres and a population of 3,001. It is largely built out with only about 10% of the area identified as vacant or redevelopable. Based on the household growth rate of 2.2% identified by Metro, the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study estimated that this area will be built out in 4.5 years. West - This area consists of approximately 259 acres with 944 people. The majority of the area has been developed with large lot subdivisions, which are not expected to be divided further. However, 15.3% of the land in this area is identified as vacant or redevelopable. Based on the 2.2% household growth rate identified by Metro, the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study estimated that this area will be built out in 6.9 years. South - This area consists of approximately 507 acres of land and 3,196 people. Many of the subdivisions were developed with large lots that are not expected to be divided further; as a result, this area has about 10.6% vacant or redevelopable land. Based on the 2.2% household growth rate identified by Metro, the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study estimated that this area will be built out in 4.8 years. East - This area consists of approximately 282 acres with 544 people. This area has most of the area's growth potential, with almost 40 percent of the land identified as vacant or redevelopable. Based on the 2.2% household growth rate identified by Metro, the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study estimated that this area will be built out in 18 years. However, recent land purchases in this area and initial discussions with developers indicate that this area could develop much sooner than projected. Page 7 MOU" ® Sub Areas t w a ~ N T R 800 F aa{ 0 g0~® 10P{ xo ~,ner Stn. 'Ion 03 The information provided for each sub-area from the 2009 Bull Mountain Annexation Study was utilized to make financial and service need projections to meet the objectives of this assessment report. In addition to the four sub-areas evaluated in the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study, this report also looked at combinations of 2 areas in order to evaluate impacts to the City to serve larger areas and also to identify if strategic combinations of areas created a more optimal provision of services than single areas alone. Because the possible combinations were countless, combinations were only considered if the areas were contiguous to one another. Four combinations of areas were contiguous: • South and East • South and West • North and South • North and West The report also looked at the entire area as a whole to determine the issues that may arise if the area were to annex at the same time. The end result is 9 alternatives. C. Overview of Evaluation Criteria To meet the objective of evaluating the efficient and effective provision of services to the Bull Mountain area over time, three criteria were developed: 1. Fiscal a. On-going provision of services - how much does it cost to provide on-going services over the long term (2015) versus the revenue that will be collected; and b. One-time capital facility needs - how much revenue can be expected to meet the capital needs. This analysis looks at the factor time (and continued development without annexation) has on the City's ability to collect fees to address the anticipated capital needs. Capital need estimates were based on existing Public Facilities Plans and Master Plans. 2. Tigard Service Provision Impacts a. Service provision impacts - What would the impact be on existing City services and their ability to meet the historically accepted service levels immediately upon annexation? - This factor is temporary in nature because, as funds are collected, additional staff and equipment will be obtained to bring each department up to the desired service levels. b. Proximity to City limits/require crossing unincorporated areas to serve - It is unquestionably more efficient to have service providers stay within the City limits than it is to have them leave the City limits to travel through unincorporated areas to then re-enter the City limits to provide service. This analysis looks at whether an alternative is adjacent to the City limits and whether service providers would be required to cross unincorporated areas to serve all or a portion of each alternative being evaluated. Page 9 3. Relationship to the UGB expansion area • Does the area or combination of areas provide a link to one or both of the UGB expansion areas. By providing a link to the UGB expansion areas, the provision of services to both the Bull Mountain area and the UGB expansion area is more efficient and effective. The remainder of this report provides more detailed analysis of the factors discussed in this methodology section. D. Analytical Approach Each section of the report addresses the two main objectives of the report: 1. Sequence and Timing In order to evaluate the effectiveness of providing public facilities and services to each alternative (sub-areas), points were assigned to the criteria (i.e., fiscal, service impacts, etc). This provided a method to analyze the effectiveness of providing facilities and services. Ranking resulted from this analysis indicating the most optimal sequenced to serve the areas. The "fiscal impacts" category was weighted most heavily with 45 possible points. "Tigard service provision impact" was allocated 30 possible points and "relationship to UGB expansion area" was allocated 20 possible points. An additional category was also included to capture additional considerations, such as publicly owned land with park potential, that didn't fit into the three main categories. The "Additional Factors" category was allocated 5 points. The scenario that ranked the highest (ALL) provides the most financial benefits, has limited impacts on existing services (none in the long term provided additional staff and equipment is obtained), and provides the greatest connections to the UGB expansion areas. 2. Policy choices identified The analysis includes identification of key policy decisions that Council will need to consider. Policy decisions are identified when there is a "gap" in funding of public facilities such as roads, or in providing on-going services, such as street maintenance or police services. E. Assumptions In the development of this document, projections were made that were based on the i following assumptions • Assumptions in the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation study for population and development were used to estimate the needs for on-going services and capital. • 2015 population estimates from the 2009 Bull Mountain Annexation Study were used for on-going services • All cost estimates are in 2002 dollars • It is assumed that the entire area would, at some point, annex • For analysis only, it was assumed that the revenue produced in the Bull Mountain area would go towards costs in the area and money for costs in the area would come only from the revenue generated from the area as opposed to Citywide funds. Page 10 Growth has occurred since the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study was complete. In an effort to continue building upon the original, the population numbers and growth projections were not updated. However, it is believed that the projections and information provided within this report represent an accurate picture of the issues. L r s a i =i Page 11 Section III - Analysis of Alternatives A. Fiscal Analysis 1. General Overview/Approach In order to evaluate how efficient service-provision will be provided over time, this report looked at the financial implications of annexation. The primary question asked is: Will the needs for public facilities and services in the Bull Mountain area create a financial burden on the City or will the revenues generated in the areas off-set the financial needs? There are two major funding considerations for the City to determine the financial implications of serving an area: • Projected impact on on-going provision of services and • Projected one-time capital investment needs (future/long term). Below is a brief summary of the two major funding considerations: • Projected impact on on-going provision of services Are the revenues projected to cover the costs or will the on-going needs exceed that of available funds? On-going services are services such as police service, street maintenance and other services that are not one-time investments. The on- going service provision needs are required to maintain newly annexed areas at the same level of service as historically provided to the City of Tigard. Revenues for on-going services are based on population and other factors, not directly to new development. If growth occurs prior to annexation, revenues will not be lost forever. For this reason, the long term impact of annexation was analyzed for on- going services to insure that annexation did not result in a burden on City services as the areas reach build out. • Projected one-time capital facilities needs (future/long term) This report identified the potential capital needs for this area utilizing existing Facilities Plan, Master Plans and/or known or anticipated capital needs. Capital facility needs include major one-time investments such as major road upgrades or park facilities. The capital needs are mostly medium to long term needs (6 plus years). Revenues for capital improvements come from the one-time costs associated with new development such as park SDCs, traffic impact fees and sewer connection fees. The Bull Mountain Annexation Study (November 2009) projected that revenues do not cover the total anticipated need, however, this analysis evaluated the factor of how time impacts the projected revenues. This report also re-evaluated the capital need assumptions by looking only at capital projects that are identified in existing Public Facility Plans or Master Plans. The revenue potential decreases over time if property develops prior to annexation. For this reason, the one-time capital needs analysis factors in the revenue lost over time if annexations are delayed. For analysis purposes only, potential annexations in 2005, 2010 and 2015 were evaluated. Page 12 2. Analysis of On-going provision of services a. Scope of Analysis This 'section is intended to evaluate if the projected revenues cover the projected costs for on-going services. Do some areas require subsidy from the City in order to service or are some areas able to provide ample revenue to cover service needs? On-going services are any service that requires yearly funding to maintain, such as police service, street maintenance and water. For the fiscal analysis, it was assumed that Tigard will provide services at historic levels. The following table (table 1) provides a brief summary of the assumptions used by each department liaison who participated in this assessment: Table 1 Sanitary Looked at existing and projected feet of sewer line and estimated needed staff and Sewer equipment based on the standard FTE per x feet of line. Also included pro-rated replacement costs forequipment. Water Currently providing service for this area so numbers are based on known costs. Road Looked at age of existing roads in the area and calculated needs based on Quality projected pavement condition indexes on a sub-area basis. Street Looked at existing lane miles and projected lane miles based on projected housing Maint. units in each area. Applied these numbers to the existing cost per lane mile to conduct street maintenance activities (sweeping, checking signs, dust abatement, crack sealing, etc. Also included pro-rated replacement costs forequipment. Street Looked at how much Tigard currently pays per month for lights and estimated that Lights the entire Bull Mountain area represents about 1/5 of the entire City. Each area allocated a certain percent of the estimated area costs. Parks Looked at parks planned for in the 1999 Parks System Master Plan. Cost estimates were from the Master Plan with an inflation factor applied. Also included ro-rated replacement costs forequipment. Police Assumed 1.5 police officers per 1,000 residents. Also included pro-rated replacement costs for 1 fully equipped vehicle for every 3 officers. Community Assumed one additional long range planner was needed for the entire area. Each Dev. sub-area was allocated .25 new staff. Storm Looked at existing and projected feet of sewer line and estimated needed staff and Sewer equipment based on the standard FTE per x feet of line. Also included pro-rated replacement costs forequipment. For on-going service cost projections and revenue projections, the 2015 population and dwelling unit estimates were used to determine what the long-term financial impacts would be for the City. In the East and West sub-areas, full build out is not projected to be reached by 2015, however, it provides a better picture of the service needs each area will bring and the ability of the City to fund those needs. The tables in appendix C show the 2015 projected service costs for each area and the 2015 revenues for each area. Table 2, below shows the difference between the costs and revenues for each area. Page 13 q Estimated 2015 Revenues versus Costs for on- oin services Table 2 North East South West Sanitary Sewer $41,600 $8,600 $49,700 $13,600 Water $70,900 $77,200 $69,600 $41,900 Gas Tax: ($1,200) ($19,600) ($70,500) ($236,400) • Road Quality Maintenance • Street Maintenance • Street Lights General Fund: $324,500 $474,500 $471,176 $330,744 • Parks and Open Spaces • Police • Community Development Storm Sewer $1,700 $300 00) 1 $1,200 Table 2 shows that, in all areas, several funds do not have enough revenues to cover the cost of providing service at current Tigard standards, however, the net result in each area is that the total revenues exceed the total on-going service provision costs. The Storm Sewer and Water funds are intended to be self-sufficient and fees can and should be raised to ensure that there are adequate funds to pay for on-going services. The current fund balances for storm sewer and water are healthy and fees would be raised in the future to ensure that the projected deficit is not realized. Gas Tax rates are set by the state legislature. Throughout the City, Gas Tax Fund revenues have not been keeping pace with service provision costs. This is the case in the Bull Mountain area as well. The Gas Tax funds pay for road maintenance (widening, re-pavement, etc.), street maintenance (sweeping, pot hole repairs, etc.) and street lights. The chart below (figure 3) shows that in all cases, there is ample General Fund revenue to subsidize the Gas Tax Fund deficiencies if Council chose to make the policy decision to do that. The West area results in the least General Fund revenues, the South results in greatest General Fund revenues and the North and East see the least change (the gas tax deficiencies are so low in the North that they do not show up on the chart). Further Council policy on this issue would be needed if subsidy of the Gas Tax Fund were provided. Figure 3 In 2015 the total General Fund Gas Tax and General Fund Balances balance for all areas combined is (Minus On-Going Service Expenditures) 1.74 million. Based on the 2015 projections, it could be concluded $800,000 $700,000 l4''.t.'nv ].''1i!a " that there would also be sufficient $800,000` $500,000 _ 15.6.ti 'L Fr?~' ' z~r.~-k_:C.I?' ,:a~i 33 revenues to provide for the on- going services if the area were to 00'000 a. °gaxtax $300,000 ■generalfund be annexed prior to 2015. If the $200,000 Ogeneral fuxiandgastax' area were annexed earlier than $~oo,ooo 2015, it may be possible to use ($100.00w the additional revenues to pay for ($200.000) anticipated capital needs. ($300,000) Page 14 b. Conclusions for on-going provision of services i. Time and sequence ■ For on-going services, the long term projections indicate that overall, the revenues exceed the costs for all areas. ■ There would also be sufficient revenue to provide on-going services if the entire (or portions) area were to annex prior to 2015 and it may be possible to use the additional revenues to pay for anticipated capital needs. ■ Water and storm funds do not cover the costs of providing on-going services based on current rate projections. Fees can and should be raised so that the funds are self-sufficient. ■ The Gas Tax Fund is projected to have a deficit in all areas and will not be able to provide Gas Tax Funded services. ■ The total 2015 General Fund revenue for all areas combined is 1.74 million (1.5 million if Council made a policy decision to utilize general funds to subsidize the Gas Tax Fund). H. Council Policy choices for on-going services The analysis shows that, with all funds combined, the projected 2015 Bull Mountain populations can be provided City of Tigard services at existing service levels. While some funds do see deficiencies over time, most are fee driven and the fees will be adjusted to accommodate the projected on- going service needs. A policy choice is needed related to the projected efficiencies in the Gas Tax fund. The choices identified include: • The General Fund surplus could be used to subsidize the Gas Tax needs; or • The Street Maintenance fee could be instituted which will provide needed funding which would help off-set the Gas Tax Fund deficit; or • The standards could be reduced for the Gas Tax Fund services citywide. Page 15 3. Projected one-time capital facility needs (future/long term needs) . a. Scope of Analysis This section looks at the anticipated capital needs (from existing Facility Plans and Master Plans) and the impact time has on the ability to collect funds to address those needs. While Facility Plans cover the entire UGB area and are used to calculate System Development Charges (SDCs), the City's Capital Improvement Plan does not include unincorporated areas. Capital projects are not included in Tigard's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) because the area is not in the City limits. To determine what the funding needs are for this area, department liaisons looked at existing plans and staff knowledge of the area to determine needed improvements, potential timing and estimated costs. Typically, through the Capital Improvement Program Table 3 process, priorities are made and funding is granted to the Estimated capital needs projects with the greatest need. The same process would be by sub-area used in the Bull Mountain area. Estimated capital short to long term improvement needs total almost $36 million, with the east North 5.2 Million section requiring the most improvements (it also has the East 13.3 Million greatest percentage of estimated revenue to cover the South 8.3 Million anticipated costs). Capital needs include park land West 8.9 Million acquisition, major road improvements, new storm sewer iJ'ot facilities to address capacity, etc. Water-related projects are not included in this total, as the Tigard Water Division already administers this area and will continue to, regardless of annexation. Table 3, to the right, shows the total estimated capital needs for each sub- area. The majority of funding for Capital Improvement Projects is tied to growth. Once growth subsides, growth-based capital funding mechanisms cease functioning, and alternative funding sources are required, such as utilizing the general fund, applying for grants, etc. There is a finite amount of growth that Bull Mountain can absorb, with the East having the most capacity remaining. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the capital needs and the impact the timing of annexation has on the ability to efficiently and effectively provide for those needs. System Development Charges (SDCs) are collected at time of development for things such as parks, roads, water and sewer. These SDCs are one-time capital revenues tied to growth. If growth occurs, prior to annexation, some of the one-time capital revenues will not be available to Tigard to provide for the needs in this area. While Washington i County and other service providers may collect funds, there is no guarantee that the funds collected will be used in the Bull Mountain area, with the exception of Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) funds, for two reasons: 1) the County and/or service district has a large number of projects from which to prioritize distribution of funds, and 2) many of the potential projects will not be needed until the future when the area will most likely be Tigard's responsibility to provide for. The table on the following page provides a summary of the capital revenue funds and the type of improvement that could be funded: Page 16 Table 4 Sanitary Sewer SDCs a for major new line and line replacement to increase the system capacity. Water SDCs pay for new line and major line replacement to pay for new capacity, revenues pay to re lace existing infrastructure. Traffic Impact Pays for TIF eligible arterial and collector road improvements to bring them up to Fee (TIF) standard. Also pays for traffic flow and safety improvements such as traffic signals, intersection improvements, etc. Park SDC Pays foracquisition and development. Storm Sewer SDCs are used for capacity improvements to the drainage system such as culverts for streets crossing streams and replacing bridges to increase floodwater capacity. Gas Tax If funds are available, they could be used to bring any road up to standard, pays for street lights, etc. Gas Tax Funds are very limited. Table 5 illustrates how each fund source Table 5 decreases over time. In addition, the North 2005 2010 2015 majority of capital improvements needed Sanitary sewer 190,200 0 0 in each area are projected to be needed Water 161,200 0 0 in the medium to long term (6 plus TIF 178,500 0 0 years). At issue is whether the City will Park SDCs 129,600 0 0 have the capital funds necessary to WACO street (12,500) (12,500) (12,500) address the area's long term capital CIP cost sharing needs. As the area continues to develop Storm Sewer 39,500 0 0 outside Tigard's City limits, the City loses the ability to provide urban levels East 2005 2010 ' 2015 Sanitary sewer 505,600 440,600 365,900 of capital needs. Water 428,600 373,500 310,200 TIF 474,600 413,600 343,500 It is important to note that parks are Park SDCs 344,400 300,100 249,300 urban amenities provided by Tigard. WACO street The County does not have a method for CIP cost sharing (12,500) (12,500) (12,500) addressing needed park facilities for the Storm Sewer 105,000 91,500 76,000 Bull Mountain area. Table 5 illustrates the potential park SDCs that would be South 2005 2010 2015 collected if the area develops in the Sanitary sewer 260,000 0 0 Tigard City limits. Water 220,400 0 0 TIF 244,100 0 0 Park SDCs 177,100 0 0 WACO street (12,500) (12,500) (12,500) CIP cost sharing Storm Sewer 54,000 0 0 West 2005 2010 2015 Sanitary sewer 363,500 262,400 151,700 Water 308,200 222,500 128,600 TIF 341,300 246,300 142,400 Park SDCs 247,600 178,800 103,300 WACO street (12,500) (12,500) (12,500) CIP cost sharing Storm Sewer, 75,500 54,500 31,500 Page 17 b. Conclusions for one-time capital needs L Time and Sequence • Based upon existing public facilities plans, the Bull Mountain Area has estimated capital improvement needs totaling approximately $36 million. • Some areas have greater capital needs than others, such as East which has 13.3 million in identified capital needs as compared to the North, which has only 5.2 million in capital needs. • In order for the City to maximize the available funds in the Bull Mountain area for capital needs, annexation of all areas should occur by 2005 to capture all potential financial contributions. With each incremental annexation delay, these contributions are lessened or eliminated entirely. After 2010, the North and South bring in no capital revenues. • Assuming annexation does not occur and current growth rates continue; by 2010, 25.6% of the capital funds projected for 2005 will not be available to Tigard. It drops to 45.6% if annexation occurs in 2015. H. Council Policy choices for one-time capital needs • As with existing capital needs in the City of Tigard, the potential funding does not cover all of the capital needs in this area, however, there are several options available to Council to consider which would help off-set the funding needs. There are options to address more of the capital funding needs: Modify existing plans to anticipated funding levels Raise fees (Increase fees like SDC's and/or apply for grant funds to help off-set park funding deficiencies) Use other funding source to off-set capital needs (General Fund) • Immediate policy action is needed to help ensure as much growth based revenue is collected as possible. Page 18 B. Analysis of Service Provision Impacts 1. Scope of Analysis Regardless of whether annexation is efficient from a fiscal standpoint, the annexed area must be able to be served by City services without a noticeable reduction in existing service levels, even in the short term, to Tigard residents. This report has identified in the fiscal analysis section that, over the long-term, service levels can be provided to the Bull Mountain area. The objective of this section is to analyze Tigard's initial ability to absorb portions of the unincorporated Bull Mountain area to provide services immediately upon annexation (assumes no upfront hiring and equipment purchases). This was done to understand the impacts of a phased/sequential annexation approach versus annexation of the total area. In order to do this, three factors were looked at: • Short term service provision impacts, • Proximity to the City limits, and • Need to cross unincorporated areas to serve. a. Service Provision impacts The City of Tigard service providers (Water, Sanitary Sewer, Street Maintenance, Parks, and Police) were asked which of the nine possible annexation scenarios could be absorbed with the existing staff and equipment until additional hiring and equipment purchases could occur. A summary of their reports is provided in appendix E. Based on the information provided by the service providers, the following is a summary of the impacts immediately upon annexation: • All service providers except Public Works -Streets Division and Police, with existing crews, could temporarily absorb any or all areas annexed until additional staff could be hired and additional equipment purchased. • The Police Department could absorb any or all areas with only a reduction in response time to priority 3 (lowest priorty, no one in danger) calls. • The Streets Department could absorb any one area (north, south, east or west) but could not absorb more than one area without additional staff being hired up front. As an alternative, major reduction in services would be necessary until additional staff could be hired and equipment purchased. • Additional funding would be necessary to provide for all the Gas Tax Fund services (street maintenance, road maintenance, and street lights). Some sub-areas have less Gas Tax fund deficits than others. North has the least deficit in Gas Tax Funds ($1,200 deficit), and West has the largest deficit ($236,400). b. Proximity to City Limits In providing service to an area that is not adjacent to the City limits, it creates confusion and can result in longer response times in emergency situations. If an area is not adjacent to the City limits, under current Comprehensive Plan standards, the area can not be annexed into the City. Cherry stem annexations (annexing the right of way to get to a non-contiguous parcel) may be an option, however, it would likely result in a boundary Page 19 that is not uniform and could cause confusion regarding who the service provider is and could cause service delays in an emergency situation. • All areas and combinations of areas, except West, are adjacent to the City limits. c. Require crossing unincorporated areas to serve In order to provide service to an area that requires crossing unincorporated areas, efficiency is lost and the potential for confusion to the service provider and potential of reduction in response times in emergency situations increases. Therefore, it is preferable to avoid primarily traveling through an unincorporated area to serve parcels in the City of Tigard. • North, East, South & East and ALL areas do not require crossing through unincorporated areas to serve. • South, North & West, North & South and South & West require crossing unincorporated areas to serve some portions. • West requires crossing unincorporated areas to serve. 2. Conclusions for Service Provision Impacts a. Time and sequence • Because of the limited impact on services and the proximity to the City limits, the North area (based on the technical ranking scores discussed further in this assessment report) provides the least impact on service provision immediately upon annexation. • The West area appears to provide the greatest impact on service provision because it is not adjacent to City limits, would require crossing unincorporated areas to service, and has limited gas tax funds projected to serve the gas tax needs. • The following is a list of all scenarios evaluated in order from least impact to greatest impact on service delivery: - North - East - South - All areas/South & East - North & South L - North & West/South & West, and r - West b. Council Policy Choice Because of the potential service provision impacts if the entire area were annexed 13 at one time, Council must make a policy choice if that option is desired. There are several options to address the efficiency of service issues: 'r Delayed effective date for portions of the area. • Authorize funds up front to hire staff and purchase equipment prior to the effective date. • Negotiate agreements with the County to provide short-term assistance until Tigard service providers are fully staffed. • Accept citywide reduction in service levels for a period of time. Page 20 C. Relationship to the Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 1. Scope of Analysis Metro is charged, in the Portland Area with establishing the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to accommodate the projected housing and employment needs in the region. After much research, public involvement and analysis, the Metro Council adopted an expansion to the UGB that included several specific areas throughout the region. Two areas adjacent to the Bull Mountain area (63 and 64) have been determined to be suitable for urban development and inclusion within Tigard's Urban Growth Boundary. Both areas are approximately 480 acres in size. Figure 3 identifies the UGB expansion areas. Metro estimates 1,735 residential units can be accommodated in this area and can receive urban levels of facilities and services. Because the development of this area will impact Tigard and the Bull Mountain area and the development in the Bull Mountain area impacts how and when the UGB expansion areas can develop, this evaluation cannot be thorough without consideration of expansions of the Urban Growth Boundary. Because these two areas are not connected to one another and do not have extensive road and other infrastructure networks, and given the size, configuration and location of the proposed UGB areas in relation to the existing and planned transportation system network, neither area is likely to develop as "balanced" and distinct communities. Integration with the existing Bull Mountain areas will be necessary so that they can be planned to complement and enhance the Bull Mountain community and each other. For these reasons, the evaluation of the relationship between the Bull Mountain area and the Urban Growth Boundary expansion areas looks at whether the sub-area or combination of sub-areas provides a link between the City and one or both of the UGB expansion areas. For example: The West sub-area is adjacent to both UGB expansion areas but is not adjacent to the City limits. When combined with the South, however, it is adjacent to both UGB expansion areas and, together, there is a link to the City limits, even though it is adjacent to the City limits. 2. Conclusions for relationship to the UGB a. time and sequence • A combination of areas including the North and West, North and South, South and West, or All sub-areas provides connections to both UGB expansion areas. • No single area alone provides adequate connections to both UGB expansion areas. The north sub-area provides connection to the northern most UGB expansion area. e The south sub-area provides a connection to the southern most UGB expansion area. b. Policy choices • Should the UGB expansion areas develop as two distinct, separate communities? or • Should the UGB expansion areas be integrated with Bull Mountain? • How do we ensure that we can provide efficient and effective services to these areas? Page 21 N N to t6 Nit 1f.fRf►t,fN fY•T•Y POPOV gait IA b cry ~ i . , ~~~~"~"y{ 1+ t r {a s < ales di ums- mfg. 060 Bet&*°" OQdty N ti: of 6 ~ ty~~ 1 ('ity CA ~ty► UU rN}I 1~` 111"IiQI~'~1 Section IV - Summary of Conclusions A. Timing and Sequence Regardless of how and when annexation occurs, there will be gaps in certain funds compared to the on-going service and capital needs. The longer the time before annexation, the less capital revenues are available to Tigard. Based on the analysis in this report, the following was concluded: 1. Summary of analysis The previous sections discussed the evaluation factors in detail and the information from those sections was used in the analysis to apply point values to each alternative as it relates to the criteria. A copy of the detailed evaluation chart is provided in Appendix G, however a summary of the results is provided below: The following is a summary of how each individual sub-area ranked: Table 6 Financial Tigard Service Relationship to Additional 14II,O torla Impacts Provision Impacts the UGB Factors considered (45 possible (30 possible pts) (20 possible (5 possible pts) . ('tO0_-po5sibla-pfs)is is ~~..r ~.s~ 25 is East 30 is North (tied 10 pts each) (tied 5 pts each) 60:0s TO, F c 20 is South 28 is East North and South North and East 58'" Y 15 is West 25 is South (tied 0 pts each) (tied 0 pts each) 55"Ofs ±NQ, N_ c cu (10 pts) North (10 pts) West West and East West and South :(25 pt"s)~Vt est". , The following is a summary of how each combination of areas ranked Table 7 Financial Tigard Service Relationship to Additional -Alkctiteria Impacts Provision Impacts the UGB Factors considered" (45 possible (30 possible pts) (20 possible pts) (5 possible pts) Ct00 possible is (35 pts) (23 pts) (tied 20 pts each) (tied 5 pts each) '(7`~ PS; ` South & East South & East North & West, North & West, hfoitfi&:S`oufhY South & West, and South & East and (73, is (30 pts) (32 pts) . P_ , L North & South North & South North & South North & South $outt:atacl;East- C (25 pts) (tied 20 pts each) (tied 65 pts each) Y South & West North & West and North'&Vl/esf and ccs (20 pts) South & West (10 pts) (0 pts) South S~ Wesf' 3 North & West South & East South & West 4 u The following is a summary of how the alternative "All areas" combined ranked Table 8 Financial Tigard Service Relationship to Additional Alll=critera Impacts Provision Impacts the UGB Factors considered (45 possible (30 possible pts) (20 possible (5 possible pts) (100 possible pts); is is 40 23 20 5 88 Page 23 2. Summary of Conclusions for Timing and Sequence • The South area ranked highest of the single sub-areas with 60 points primarily because it provides revenues with minimal costs and creates a link to the UGB expansion areas. • The West area ranked the lowest of all scenarios with 25 points primarily because, if annexed alone, it would create impacts to the provision of services and would not have provided a link to the UGB expansion areas. • North and South is the combination that received the highest ranking with 77 points. Together they provide revenue with minimal costs, have park land potential, create few service provision impacts, and provide a link with both UGB expansion areas. • The alternative "All areas" combined received the highest points and was ranked the highest in each category except "Tigard Service Provision Impacts". B. Policy Choices 1. Council policy choices for on-going services Prior to annexation, the Gas Tax Fund deficit issue must be addressed. The policy choices identified for Council include: • The General Fund surplus could be used to subsidize the gas tax needs; or • The Street Maintenance fee could be instituted which will provide much needed funding and would help off-set the Gas Tax Fund deficit; or • The standards could be reduced for the Gas Tax Fund services citywide. 2. Council Policy choices for capital improvements • As with existing capital needs in the City of Tigard, the potential funding does not cover all of the capital needs in this area, however, there are several options available to Council to consider which would help off-set the funding needs. There are options to address more of the capital funding needs: - Modify existing plans to anticipated funding levels; - Raise fees (Increase fees like SDCs and/or apply for grant funds to help off -set park funding deficiencies); or - Use other funding source to off-set capital needs. i • Immediate policy action is needed to help ensure as much growth based revenue is collected as possible i i Page 24 3. Council policy choice for service provision impact upon annexation Annexation of the entire Bull Mountain area at one time impacts service delivery due to increased staffing and equipment needs. To address this issue, several options exist: • Delay the annexation effective date for portions of the Bull Mountain area; • Authorize funds up front to hire staff and purchase equipment prior to-the effective date; • Negotiate agreements with the County to provide short-term assistance until Tigard service providers are fully staffed; or • Accept short-term, citywide reduction in service levels until staff and equipment are up to standard levels. 4. Council Policy choice for UGB Council must determine how the UGB will be integrated into the community and what approach should be taken: • Continue existing trend of County controlling development in unincorporated areas; • New approach using annexation and coordination as a growth management tool; • How do we ensure that we can provide efficient and effective services to the UGB expansion areas? Page 25 Appendix - Additional information A. Study Area Profile (from 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study) B. On-Going Service Costs and Revenues C. Growth Based Fund Descriptions D. Tigard Service Provision Impacts summaries by Department E. Change in Service Levels between County and City F. Evaluation Criteria Tables G. Chronology of coordination in unincorporated areas H. Evolution/Relationship of City/County coordination i Appendix Page 1 Appendix A Study Areas Profile from 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study The area identified in the Bull Mountain Study consists of approximately 1,440 acres of land located west of the City of Tigard (see map below) in Washington County, within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The Study Area abuts Beaverton and Tigard on the north and east, respectively, King City to the southeast, and unincorporated County land outside the Urban Growth Boundary to the south and west. Figure 1 The land in the Study Area is - sloped-steeply in some areas- Outt•Mt.Study;Area Vicinity Map ' allowing for views at higher elevations. Traditionally a farming ~oriian' area, the last decade brought Be veer o additional home developments to the area. Today, both farms and subdivisions co-exist here. Although the identified area is now outside the Tigard ( i City limits, the City of Tigard provides many urban services to residents. In 1997, the City of Tigard and Washington County entered into an Bull Mt Study Area swgo Urban Services Agreement, which transferred responsibility for land use decisions, building and development- ® l~iuala in , related engineering to the City of C17YOFno.RD- Pkftwd .I, Tigard. The County adopted the City of Tigard Community Development Code for the Bull Mountain area, which applies standards to any new development in the area.' At the time the Bull mountain Annexation study was completed (November 2001), approximately 7,300 people lived in the Study Area, according to 2000 Census data. There is no commercial or industrial zoned land in the Study Area. Most of the property is zoned R-7, a medium density residential zone requiring lots of a minimum of 5,000 square feet. The area consists of a combination of (1) a mix of larger undeveloped lots, (2) larger lots developed through the County under different standards, and (3) smaller lots that are built to the minimum density allowed under the current zoning regulations. The sub-area descriptions below represent the sub-area development assumptions utilized for this plan. North This sub area is located south of Barrows Road, north of Baker Lane and Roshak Road, east of the urban growth boundary and west of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) easement line. The North area consists of approximately 383 acres and a population of 3,001. This area has a combination of R-7, R-12 and R-25 zoning; however, all of the higher-density (R-25) residential lots were developed as single-family home subdivisions. While there are several larger Appendix Page 2 lots, there are very few redevelopable or vacant lots in this area due to steep slopes. This area is largely built out with only about 10% of the area identified as vacant or redevelopable. Based on the household growth rate of 2.2% identified by Metro, it is estimated that this area will be built out in 4.5 years. West The western sub area is bordered on the south and west by the Urban Growth Boundary. It is bordered on the east by SW 150th and to the north by Roshak Road and Baker Lane. The western area consists of approximately 259 acres with 944 people. The majority of the area has been developed with large lot subdivisions, which are not expected to be divided further. However, 15.3% of the land in this area is identified as vacant or redevelopable. The zoning in this area is R-7 (medium density residential). Based on the 2.2% household growth rate identified by Metro, it is estimated that this area will be built out in 6.9 years. South This sub area is generally located west of SW Peachtree, east of SW 150th, north of Beef Bend Road and south of High Tor Drive. The southern area consists of approximately 507 acres of land and 3,196 people. The zoning is primarily R-7 (medium density residential) with a small portion of R-25 (medium-high density residential) to the south between Foxglove #2 subdivision and Beef Bend Heights. Many of the subdivisions were developed with large lots that are not expected to be divided further; as a result, this area has larger lots with only limited infill potential. This area has about 10.6% vacant or redevelopable land. Based on the 2.2% household growth rate identified by Metro, it is estimated that this area will be built out in 4.8 years. East This area is generally located east of the Mountain Gate subdivision, south of Bull Mountain Road and north of Beef Bend Road. The eastern area consists of approximately 282 acres with 544 people. This area has most of the Study Area's growth potential, with almost 40 percent of the land identified as vacant or redevelopable. The zoning is R-7, which calls for a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. Based on the 2.2% household growth rate identified by Metro, it is estimated that this area will be built out in 18 years. However, recent land purchases in this area and initial discussions with developers indicate that this area will develop much sooner than projected. Appendix Page 3 On-Going Service Costs and Revenues Appendix B Estimated 2015 cost (in 2002 dollars) to provide services at City standards by sub area Table 1 North East South West Sanitary sewer $47,200 $13,600 $51,900 $20,000 Water $343,500 $145,500 $381,700 $145,200 Road quality maintenance $76,800 $15,600 $143,000 $240,000 Street Maintenance $47,900 $20,400 $66,900 $34,700 Street lights $20,200 $13,400 $20,200 $13,400 Parks and Open spaces $6,100 $57,600 $18,100 $18,100 Police $479,400 $166,100 $557,700 $244,400 Community Development $20,000. $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Storm Sewer $44,400 $11,000 $49,000 $17,400 The numbers in the above chart have been refined and updated from the estimates provided for in the Bull Mountain Annexation Study (November 2001). While the 2001 Bull Mountain Annexation Study provided broad brush estimates, the estimates provided here are based on detailed analysis of the population projections, and include staff, equipment and equipment replacement costs. In addition, the estimates from the Bull Mountain Annexation Study (November 2009) were based on 2000 population and did not project the financial implications time, and increased populations, had on the cost to provide services. Estimated 2015 Revenues to su ort on-going services Table 2 North East South West Sanitary sewer $88,800 $22,200 $101,600 $33,600 Water $272,600 $68,300 $312,100 $103,300 Gas Tax: $143,700 $29,800 $159,600 $51,700 • Road quality maintenance • Street Maintenance • Street lights General Fund: $830,000 $718,200 $1,067,000 $613,200 • Parks and Open spaces c. • Police • Community Development u~'~ Storm Sewer $42,700 $10,700 $48,900 $16,200 _J _m W J Appendix Page 4 7~ Appendix C New Development-Based Fund Descriptions Parks SDCs - Washington County does not provide park related services or facilities in the urban areas such as Bull Mountain. As a result, the County does not charge parks SDCs; although this issue has received more attention lately, no resolution has been achieved. The City can only levy the SDC within its boundaries. If the City were able to collect SDCs for parks, the funds could be utilized for park land acquisition and development. Traffic Impact Fee - The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee is levied on all new developments, with the funds going to the appropriate jurisdiction. That jurisdiction then applies those funds to their own CIP priority list. Prior to annexation, Bull Mountain funds go to Washington County and become part of the funding pool for County-wide projects. After annexation, those funds become part of the City's funding pool for city projects. As part of an annexation plan, there is a possibility that a certain percentage of funds could be earmarked for Bull Mountain-area projects. Note: The West sub area does not have any projects eligible for TIF, making additional funds available. Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees are collected for all new developments. Prior to annexation, Bull Mountain funds go to Clean Water Services (CWS). After annexation, those funds become part of the City's funding pool for city projects. Effective July 1, 2004, Tigard will take over sanitary sewer maintenance of this area. Per the agreement with Clean Water Services, Tigard would receive SDC funds for new development, even if the property is not in the Tigard City limits. Other Funds - The other primary fund is the Gas Tax. As a state source of revenue, the Gas Tax Funding has not kept pace with increasing needs of municipalities statewide. Tigard is no exception. Gas Tax proceeds actually will decrease per capita. In the Public Facilities and Services Assessment Report calculations, the Fund's limited resources will first be applied toward maintenance and ongoing services, thus leaving none of the Gas Tax eligible Bull Mountain CIPs funded. This touches on a larger issue that the proposed Street Maintenance Fee is attempting to address. The City Engineering Department has estimated that the street maintenance fee would generate $160,000 per year in the Bull Mountain area. If this fee were passed, it would help off- set the on-going Gas Tax Fund deficiencies which would help, but not eliminate, the funding gap issues i i i Appendix Page 5 Appendix D Tigard Service Provision Impacts Summaries by Department Police Urban Services currently provided by Tigard: Currently Tigard responds to 911 priority 1 and 2 calls if they have an officer closer than a Washington County patrol officer. In many cases, this means Tigard is the first responder, secures the scene and waits for a Washington County Officer to take over the scene. This agreement occurs between all law enforcement offices in the State. Tigard does not currently have data on the number of calls they respond to in the Bull Mountain area, because when any officer arrives on the scene, the 911 system does not distinguish what jurisdiction responded, only that an officer responded. Beginning in May, 2003 Tigard began tracking these calls as well, so that we will be able to compile data on the number and types of calls we respond to in this area. Bottom line is that this area is receiving some Tigard police services without paying City taxes. Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: The Police department has estimated that if any or all areas were annexed, the existing staff could absorb that area without a significant reduction in service levels until additional employees can be hired and fully trained to bring the department up to the standard of 1.5 officers per 1000 residents. The response time for priority 1. and 2 calls would not be noticeably reduced, however, until the department could be fully staffed, there would be a slight reduction in response times to priority 3 calls. Priority 3 calls are calls where no one is in danger (car broken into, loud noise, etc) but an officer is needed to take a report. The more people annexed at one time, the higher the demand on police services and the greater the chance that there would be a reduction in response time to these lower priority calls. Based on the baseline population, immediately upon annexation, the north would require 4.5 officers, east 1 officers, south 4.5 officers and west 1.5 officer. In addition, the Police Department would have to buy one new vehicle for every 3 additional officers that are hired. Parks Urban Services currently provided by Tigard: None Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: Tigard owns Cache Creek, however it is intended to be a nature park/preserve and is not developed. Because there are no developed parks in the Bull Mountain area, immediately upon annexation, there will be no requirement to provide park maintenance services. As parks are purchased and developed, equipment and staff will be acquired to insure that maintenance is provided in accordance with Tigard City standards. Water Urban Services currently provided by Tigard. See Below Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: The City of Tigard provides water service to the Bull Mountain area already through an intergovern mental agreement with the Tigard Water District. The only change Appendix Page 6 that will occur if the Bull Mountain area is annexed is that it will technically be withdrawn from the Tigard Water District and included in the City of Tigard Water Division. Because the area is already being served, there is no issue with when and how the Bull Mountain area annexes that would affect the efficiency or effectiveness of service. Sanitary and Storm Sewer Urban Services currently provided by Tigard. Tigard does not currently provide storm or sanitary sewer services to the Bull Mountain area. However, Tigard recently entered into an intergovernmental agreement with Clean Water Services that stipulates Tigard will begin providing maintenance services to this area effective July 1, 2004. Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: While these services are based in different funds, they utilize similar equipment and staff. The Public Works department has indicated that all areas alone or in combination with one other area could be maintained immediately upon annexation, by stretching the current work crew, until additional equipment and staff could be acquired. If the entire Bull Mountain area were to be annexed at one time, the Public Works department has stated that they would not be able to guarantee there would be no significant reduction in service level while additional staff and equipment were being acquired to meet the added demand. Street Maintenance Urban Services currently provided by Tigard: None Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: Street maintenance includes: sweeping 12 times per year, checking all signs annually, yearly dust abatement for gravel roads, 5 year cycle to replace street markings, 4 year cycle for crack sealing and road shoulders, and other maintenance as needed. Because of the equipment and staff needed to perform these tasks, the Public Works Department has stated that any area annexed alone could be absorbed by the existing staff and equipment. While services would be reduced, it would not be to the extent that roads would be neglected. However, if more than one area were annexed, service levels would be significantly reduced citywide until additional staff and equipment could be obtained to meet the added demand. Road Maintenance Urban Services currently provided by Tigard: None Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: Road maintenance includes things like overlay or slurry seal on roads with poor pavement condition, pavement widening, etc. Many roads in the Bull Mountain area are new and will not require road maintenance for many years. Per the Urban Services Agreement signed in 2002, prior to transferring roads to Tigard, the County shall make needed roadway improvements so that all individual roads have a pavement condition index (PCI) of 40 or greater and the average PCI of streets and roads in the area is 75 or higher. Finally, costs to do road Appendix Page 7 maintenance are programmed based on available funding and construction is contracted out. For these reasons, annexation of the entire area (or combinations) will not result in a reduction of services for Tigard residents and service will continue to be effectively provided. Street Light Maintenance Urban Services currently provided by Tigard: None Impact of providing services immediately upon annexation: Street light maintenance involves paying electricity, lamp replacement and pole maintenance for existing street lights. Service in the study areas is currently assessed to the property owner. Upon annexation, maintenance is provided by the City and the property owner assessment would go away. Engineering staff has estimated that it will cost approximately $5,600 per month for the entire Bull Mountain area. Street lights are funded through gas tax. Because street light costs are paid to PGE, there is no ability to reduce service levels (short of turning off lights) however, the need to fund this service will reduce Gas Tax Funds that could be used for other Gas Tax Funded services. Appendix Page 8 Appendix E Change in Service Levels Between County and City Police Washington County provides The City of Tigard would provide Yes 1.0 officers/1000 people 1.5 officers/1000 people There would (.5 standard; .5 from Enhanced be an increase Patrol) of approximately .5 officers/1000 people Fire/Rescue Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue No provides services. continues to provide services. Parks Washington County does not The Tigard Park Master Plan calls Yes provide parks services. for 2 neighborhood parks and 1 The City community park in the Bull . provides park Mountain area. The plan also services. calls for a small playground to be 'built adjacent to the Cache Nature Park. General Road Washington County through the The City's road maintenance Yes Maintenance Urban Road Maintenance District. performs maintenance,on regular The City General street maintenance by the schedules as well as on a provides County is primarily on a complaint- complaint-driven basis. Typical additional road driven basis. Typical maintenance maintenance activities include: maintenance activities include: services. pothole patching • pothole patching • grading graveled roads grading graveled roads . cleaning drainage facilities • cleaning drainage facilities . street sweeping. • street sweeping . mowing roadside grass and • mowing roadside grass and brush (shoulder strip + ditch brush (only the shoulder strip) line) • maintaining traffic signals • maintaining traffic signals replacing damaged signs • replacing damaged signs . installing and replacing street markings • crack sealing • • vegetation removal for vision clearance . street light tree trimming for ' light clearance i • dust abatement on graveled i roads i Sanitary Sewer Clean Water Services (CWS) The City of Tigard will meet the No same level of service as CWS. All service levels for CWS and surrounding jurisdictions must be uniform b Jul 2003. Storm Sewer Clean Water Services (CWS) The City of Tigard will meet the No same level of service as CWS. All service levels for CWS and Appendix Page 9 surrounding jurisdictions must be uniforn-'by July 2003. Water Intergovernmental Water Board Service remains the same. Tigard No contracts with the Tigard Water Water District will continue to District to provide water. provide water but will bill directly. Street Light Washington County administers The City of Tigard will assume all Service Maintenance Service Districts for Lighting for street light operations-and remains the PGE. Residents pay an annual maintenance for existing lights. same but operations and maintenance Residents do not pay a separate property assessment. assessment. owners are notassessed for the operation of the lights. Community The City of Tigard provides building The City of Tigard will continue to Only change Development and services-including land use provide building services to this in service is Building Services decisions, building and area. that the City engineering-under an reviews intergovernmental agreement with All land use decisions will legislative Washington County. continue to be reviewed under the matters. City standards and through the All land use decisions are reviewed City's hearing process. The City under the City standards; and would be the review authority for through the City's hearing process legislative actions as well (zone with the exception of legislative changes, comprehensive plan actions (zone changes, amendments; etc). Comprehensive Plan amendments,.. etc.) Library Washington County Cooperative The City of Tigard, which receives No Library Services (WCCLS) approximately 62% of its funding Consortium, which provides funding through the WCCLS. Bull. through the county tax to area Mountain residents would have libraries, including Tigard. influence on the library's services, and could advocate for the services they want. Schools Both the Beaverton School District Annexation does not change No and the Tigard School District school district boundaries. provide service based on district boundaries. Garbage Residents are charged rates The City franchises City garbage Service • Collection established by Washington County collection, and the Bull Mountain remains the for service provided by Pride. area would become part of the same, but i Residents pay the fee depending on franchised area. The service rates will the size of container they use. provider remains the same but differ. i residents would be charged the rates established by City Council based on the size of the container the use. i Appendix Page 10 &S S&Vol All wMMI st N&VV S& Yes ~ West South Ea Yes Yes Yes 100 pts) Criteria ~ Yes Yes Evaluation Nort Yes No ice Provision 1m act 30 is Yes Ti and $ervClt limits fullY Ad scent to can it be if area Is annexed alone' t qtly decreasing served Without siservice levels immediately City sewer and Yes sanitary serve this Yes Yes NO current ~ Meter. e already upon annexation N not included because major Yes ° 54° fo storm are not ev ce is n Since and ,it not be Yes No % sewer Road maintenance med into th 'a CIP rks maintenance is Y es No Q° fo 40 P ejects have to be Program tion. eloped Pais Yes No on annexa Y@s Yes % 67% elop 'Yes 45()/o needed $ [mmebcause there are no d Yes ev Yes 60% not eS omaintain. Yes 9% M No o 18% 6 pad. % police aintel ce pW 99% No part. Street rn ht mains. °f gas part. Street lig gas part No tax revenues that cover yes Yes-2 No Yes-2 tax needs Yes-1 Yes-2 ovision of this area j ,123,74$ Would service pr area that is 1 Yes-2 67,967 445,381 No 2 uire crossing an 1 Yes - 766,822 a 20 is reQ o UGB ex ansion are No unincor orated? Yes - 356,926 Sill it 380,711 386,111 3% 9.7% 9.5% Reiation area 64,670 provides link to acts g45 is 292,256 o 9,4% 8. Financial im (for 0 n-go1ng g% 9.6/° Revenues Ding costs - 0 9. 1210 Total Tax Total on -g ° 10.6% 8.6 488 424 $ervices)vs 7.8% 800 d by revenues 410 2Q15 covere 549 0%1 ital needs 2005 251 of cap ital funds} ` 173 77 (includes all cap 237 Yes d-1fferenCe Yes NO annexation rovuth potential ( units Yes Additional g dwelling s r88 units existing(baseline) Yes 65y between No 77, and ro ected build-out dwelhn Yes. NoS , pdd~tonal facto{s itn some Park 5a. page ned land w 25: . . publicly ow 65, otential °T.ota1`P°intis Point allocation sheet Evaluation criteria (100 pts) North West South East N&W S&E N&S S&W All asGd.Seln►sc~'roviso.:nam .acts 30 is • Adjacent to City limits -10 pts total 10 0 10 10 10 10 110 10 10 Yes=10 pts No=O is • If area is annexed alone, can it be fully served without significantly decreasing current City service levels immediately upon annexation? ? -water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer are not evaluated since they already serve this area. Road maintenance is not included because major projects have to be programmed into the CIP and will not be needed immediately upon annexation. Parks maintenance is not included because there are no developed arks properties to maintain. Police - 5 pts 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Street maintenance - 5 pts 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 Street light maint. - 4 0 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 because this depends on when funds are collected and what else the gas tax needs to be spent on , points will be distributed based on the % of gas tax revenues to pay gas tax needs (AKA - will there be money to pay the light bills). 0-25% = 0 pts 25-75% = 2 pt 75%+ = 4 is • Would service provision of this area 6 0 3 6 3 6 3 3 6 require crossing an area that is unincorporated? 6 pts total Yes= 0 pts Part. = 3 pts No= 6 is Subtotal > :,30:: 1.0 ; 25 28 :.;-20, . :23 22 20' 23= Relationstii :to-:UGBex an'sion`a'rea` 20''`ts • Provides link to UGB area - 20 pts 10 0 10 0 20 10 20 20 20 Yes-2 = 20 pts Yes 1 = 10 pts No=O is $ ribtotal 10 0t., . , 1;0'...., 0'' 20' 10, . 20 :2Q : 20 Appendix Page 12 LEGIBII.II"y STRIP S&Vv All west South fast 25 North .a ~ . ; 20 15 r► criteria 000 pis) 10 20 F.valuat~o 5 10 10 adt°S 45.: is oing 10 _ Cil t►n Revenues (for on-9 Total Tax oing costs services) VS. Total on-g 2015 - 25 pts total 5 is 5 '8001000 = 25p is 5 600,000-800,000 = 2()p is 5 5 4oo,oao-6oo,000 =15 p 5 5 204,aao-400,00() -10 pts 5 10 1-200,000 = 5 is vered o/a of capital ne des all capital unds) - 10 revenues (inclu 5 5 s 10 ation _ 10 p 10 2005 annex 5 8% pis 5 8.1010-10% = 5 pts 0 0 '10.10!0=10 is rowth potential (differencunits and Additional g baseline) dwelling between existing( 611ng units- pis rojected build-ouodW p < 250 d.u • ! pis 40 5 Pis 25 250-5 d .u 1() pts it areas build 20c ; :35 ; 30 will > 500 0 rowtt► prolectlons * based on 2.5 !0 g the actual lost revenue 1,5 20 5 out sooner than protected, 0 be different 5 5 5 ark potential 65 Additional fa~tots ;(S.PtSSOm awned land with 73 Publicly e p 77 .B.$ °6.5. Yes = 5 pis 60 No = 0 pis 25 Toalpoints. Page Appendix 13 Appendix G Chronology* of coordination in unincorporated areas 1973 Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines established, setting the foundation for land use planning in Oregon. 1986 Comprehensive Plan adopted with specific policies regarding annexation. Sets framework for all future annexation efforts. 1998 Urban Planning Area Agreement signed between Tigard and Washington County to ensure coordinated and consistent comprehensive plans. The UPAA defined a site specific urban planning area, a process for coordinating planning, and policies regarding comprehensive planning and development. 1993 Senate Bill 122 passed by the State Legislature, requires the coordination and provision of urban services for lands within the Urban Growth Boundary. 1997 Tigard and Washington County entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement that transferred land development, engineering review and building permit activity to the City. March 2001 The Tigard City Council establishes a goal to establish an annexation policy for non-island areas, such as Bull Mountain and began to study the feasibility of annexing the Bull Mountain area. July 2001 The City and County meet with Bull Mountain residents to identify questions which influence the scope of The Ball Mountain Annexation Study. Nov., 2001 City finalizes BuBMoUntain Annexation Study. Jan., 2002 Study cony clusions presented to a group of Bull Mountain residents. A survey is suggested as a means to get input from a representative sample of the area. July 2002 Public opinion poll conducted of Bull Mountain and Tigard residents by phone. August 2002 Tigard Council examines the survey results and considers three annexation policy alternatives. Council considers a resolution to initiate an Annexation Plan, however the motion does not pass. Oct 2002 - May 2003 Public facilities and Services Assessment Report I ` developed for Council to assist in making annexation policy decisions that come up. Nov, 2002 Council approves signing the SB 122 required Urban Service Agreements which spell out what urban services Tigard will be the ultimate provider of. Page 14 Appendix H Evolution/relationship of City/County coordination 6 i >i f Appendix Page 15 AGENDA ITEM # c3L FOR AGENDA OF 6/10/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Proclamation Declaring June as Tigard Safe Month ' ' 1 ~ PREPARED BY: Loreen Mil AD OK CITY MGR OK L4 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council recognize Tigard Safety Month in coordination with the National Safety Council's designation of June 2003 as National Safety Month? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Proclaim June 2003 as Tigard Safety Month. INFORMATION SUMMARY The National Safety Council has designated June 2003 as National Safety Month, an annual observance aimed at increasing public awareness of the dangers Americans face each day on the highways, in homes and communities, from environmental hazards, and in the workplace. Today safety is a way of life. Not just on the job, but at home, in public places, and on the road. People are taking personal responsibility for their own safety, and making plans to keep their families, communities, and workplaces safe. As our world changed on 9/11, so did our approach to creating a safe environment. Tigard doesn't look to "quick fixes" but to long-term solutions to those things challenging the safety of our community. With that in mind, Tigard's Safety Month 2003 will focus on various areas of safety and preparedness awareness as listed below. There will be weekly updates on the City's web site as well as at least one news release. Driving Safety Week June 1-7 - Focus: Driver Distractions. Nationally, approximately 12.5 million motor vehicle crashes in 2001 resulted in more than 1.5 million disabling injuries and 42,900 fatalities. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, some form of driver distraction is a factor in 20-30% of all automobile crashes. During the first week of National Safety Month, the City will describe safety measures that will help Americans avoid traffic accidents caused by driver inattention, fatigue, cell phone use and other distractions. Home and Community Safety Week June 8-14 - Focus: Elderly Falls. Falls account for more than 10,000 deaths each year to people aged 65 and, older. From June 8-14, the City will provide safety tips on its website to the elderly and those who care about them to decrease the incidence of these life-threatening accidents. Information will also be available at the Tigard Senior Center. Preparedness Week - June 15-21 - Focus: Emergency Preparedness. Preparedness is not just for disasters, terrorism or weather emergencies. Consider events that don't have widespread impact, but can have huge personal impact: a car accident, a fall in the home, a heart attack. An emergency can happen to anyone at any time. During this week, the City will stress the importance to individuals, families and organizations to prepare for emergencies by learning first aid, CPR and AED procedures and by developing emergency plans for homes, buildings and public facilities. Workplace Safety Week - June 22-30 - Focus: Safety Leadership. The final week of Tigard Safety Month will focus on helping organizational leaders, managers and supervisors to understand the important role they have in protecting the safety and health of their employees and their families on and off the job. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Proclamation declaring Tigard Safety Month. FISCAL NOTES There is no cost to this promotion other than some staff time to put material together for the website. i i i i i i AGENDA ITEM NO. - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : JUNE 10, 2003 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED L ~►'N~i'~~17a L n J 0 9 u VISITOR'S AGENDA Page 1 AGENDA ITEM # 14, 2 a FOR AGENDA OF: June 10, 2003 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Greer Gaston DATE: May 27, 2003 SUBJECT: Three-Month Council Calendar Regularly scheduled Council Meetings are marked with an asterisk June 10 * Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting with Study Session 17 * Tues Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 p.m. 24 * Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting with Study Session July 4 Fri Independence Day Holiday - City Offices Closed 8 * Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting with Study Session 15 * Tues Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 p.m. 22 * Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting with Study Session August 12 * Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting with Study Session 19 * Tues Council Workshop Meeting - 6:00 p.m. s 26 * Tues Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting with Study Session \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\GREERICITY COUNCIL13 MONTH CALENDAR.DOC COUIRO Tigard City enda .Greeter Tentative A9 118103 -Business TV 6124103 @ 5 P.M. .Greeter Due.. 6124103 Business N Study Session Attends Meeting` ' m• * city Attorney Cathy Due,. 611103 @ 5 P' at & Discussion . shOP Not Present M.R.O.G. New Form 6117103 -Wow Study * Session er City-cape m• City Manag 11 pue; 613103 @ 5 P' Ma 20 nagement min an Not Press nt* Solid Waste shop[oPics ~o on Tom . aha - of Mon tefrng Agree en m IS enda weeping Contrac - as City Man - 20 m consent Ag Street S meet - dim in Franch tse Fill Develop LGRB APProVe 5 year otti - Restrooms . Trends for In- Management Study ReP Howard is+ng Portable Right-ot-`Nay ent Agenda u ge s on rac - - rove $er4in Councilor Moore " Cons un+c-pa t GRg -APP Craig .15 m Festival - pprove galloon onstruction of Dan CID Update - Nadine rd Contract for C annte a 10 min P a e- +m " Gush v in u, +n9 es Schedute Update - LCRB - A Sewer District 2$ - Contracttor Constructi+on of and Chang SanitaN GuSNannie Master fees min LCR15 . Award eeting mm GraiglM - 20 Otstrtct 29. usan Business icheile M SanitaN Sewer A - Chamber argare P , raN ate - 9 Of pp • " omm PP • " , raN ec v+soN ew a _ s Meeting 1 hour - Cathy gusines Wilttams - Fee - JimJGus " $en Burdick, Rep Engtneen 9 Building, ptannI ~ RES .Craig & es - Update City Master Fe Manager in nce - G+~ t na Michelle - 15 m Ordi througho TMC . HOusekeePin9make consistent and Og+ciat Titles . m y code - Cath -5 in SI standing item I:ladml9reeritenta~ agltentattve.x s page 1 512912003 pop- Council -Greeter Business Tv LBCiB`i- gTRtp Tigard Ow w -~enta*Ve Agenda 81421p3 - rn. -Greeter Due. 7129103 @ P' Business Tv Study $ess,oo 7122103 - Due; 718103 @ 5 p.n► W°~ shoe Study Session 7115103 - pug; 714103 @ 5 P'rn. WorkshoPTOPics consent Agenda 'All e eview ~ ly pptions - unci noun Water Sup19min ennks - on Long " _ consent oxen p UPdate a e g ► ounc► xon . %scuss oun ~n u Meettn9 iness RecAveN BusChamber prug Addicfwn VA- m eetin9 s _ hour -Cathy Pr o- Alc Gmie Ga5 MM te 1 ?p Margaret nth - Businesa`M ReP Willia on New ~~brary UP SO but s nnexa re on Brad 30 ni+n e .)(Xs item agltentaCwls Si . l.,admigreerltentaty Page 2 512912p03 AGENDA ITEM # 3 FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE _ Update of the City's Room Use Policies And Procedures PREPARED BY: Nadine Robinson e DEPT HEAD OK -P CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the room use policies, rental procedures and fees associated with rental of meeting space be updated? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution approving the updated policies, procedures, and fees for reservation of the Tigard Senior Center, City Hall conference rooms and Water Building conference rooms. INFORMATION SUMMARY In 1995, City Council adopted resolutions allowing individuals and groups the opportunity to reserve the Tigard Senior Center and conference rooms in City Hall and the Water Building. At that time, user groups were identified and rental fees were established. While most user groups pay rental fees to use the Senior Center, the room use policy for City Hall and the Water Building rooms allow many users the opportunity to use the rooms without charge. Overall staff and citizens seem pleased with the way the room reservation process works. Feedback obtained through an annual customer survey has been very positive and many individuals and groups have had a chance to use City facilities. As time has progressed, we have found areas of the policies and procedures that need to be clarified. The primary language changes clarify the definitions of the user groups and the responsibilities the user groups have when using the rooms. We have also standardized much of the reservation processes to make the process easier for user groups. The most significant change being proposed is to standardize the user groups' payment of rental fees. Conference rooms in City Hall and the Water Building have been available to Tigard residents and non-profit organizations, for most uses, with no rental fee. (Rental fees have been charged for events that were for-profit events.) Most Senior Center use has required rental payment. It is proposed that individuals and groups pay a rental fee whether they use the Senior Center or City conference rooms. The proposed hourly rates are as follows: Senior Center upstairs - $15.00; Senior Center downstairs - $10.00; Water Auditorium - $12.00; Town Hall - $10.00; and small conference rooms $5.00. It is anticipated that these fees will offset the City's expenses for staff time, supplies, utilities and building maintenance. Other monetary changes include the addition of a security alarm charge related to use of the Senior Center. If a user ` group fails to de-activate or re-activate the alarm system at the Senior Center, and a City employee is required to respond to the alarm, the user group will be charged. Again, this charge is to offset City expenses. Finally, the refundable security deposit in both policies has been standardized at $100.00. In the 2002 room use customer survey, user groups were asked if they would continue to use the City rooms if a nominal i fee were charged. 64% indicated they would continue use, 11% indicated they might and 16% indicated they would not use the facilities. It is proposed that the policies and procedures become effective July 1, 2003. This will provide user groups, who choose not to continue using City rooms, an opportunity to find another meeting location. i The increased rental rates will be included in the master fee resolution being presented to City Council June 24, 2003 and, if Council adopts the resolution, the fees will go into effect July 1, 2003. User groups will be notified of the policy updates via letter; with copies of the updated policies included. Additionally, the updates will be posted on the City's website and staff will notify potential user groups of the changes in policy at the time reservations are being discussed. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Continue the program with the current policies, procedures and fees. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution City of Tigard Meeting Room Use Policies and Rental Procedures Tigard Senior Center Room Use Policies and Rental Procedures FISCAL NOTES No new costs are associated with updating the policies and procedures. It is anticipated the City will see an increase in revenue resulting from reservations of the Tigard Senior Center and City conference rooms. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Revision to Washington County Interagency Narcotics Team Intergovernmental Agreement PREPARED BY: William M. Dickinson DEPT HEAD OK 6-UyV CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The issue before the Council is to approve revisions to the Intergovernmental Agreement regarding the Tigard Police Department participation on the Washington County Interagency Narcotics Team. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the revisions to the Intergovernmental Agreement. INFORMATION SUMMARY This Intergovernmental Agreement was approved by City Council on February 11, 2003. Subsequently, two additions and one deletion were made as follows: On page one, the following language was added: ...and is made under the authority and in consideration of the provisions of ORS 190.003 to 190.110. The other additional language to this page is: 1.1 Authority for this Agreement is specifically found in ORS 190.010 (1), (2), (3), (4) and (6)... These changes are necessary to show the ORS provisions under with there is authority to enter into this agreement by the four government agencies. On page five, the following italicized language was deleted from Section 7 WIN FUNDING: 7.3 ...operating expenses including, but not limited to, office space rental, supplies... OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED No alternatives suggested. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This area is specifically addressed in our direction statement for the Public Safety Visioning Plan for the Police Department. ATTACHMENT LIST Attached is the Washington County Interagency Narcotics Team (WIN) Intergovernmental Agreement with changes highlighted. FISCAL NOTES The revisions to the Intergovernmental Agreement will have no fiscal impact. f o~-13IC~ CCIC- VIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Washington County, An Oregon County; Revised The City of Beaverton, Agreement An Oregon municipal corporation; The City of Hillsboro, An Oregon municipal corporation; and The City of Tigard, An Oregon municipal corporation. Together with such other entities as may hereafter become parties as provided in Article 10 hereof. This Agreement is made for the purpose of securing to each party the benefits of mutual assistance in addressing common problems and goals specifically related to the en orcement o state an a era rug aws, an is made under the authority an in consideration of the provisions of ORS 190.003 to 190.110 Terms and Conditions: [ ] =new wording 1. DECLARATIONS. This Agreement creates an interagency cooperative team for the purpose of sharing information and jointly managing resources for the enforcement of laws concerning trafficking in controlled substances. To that end the parties declare that: 1.1. Authority for this Agreement is specifically found in ORS 190.010 (1), [ ] = new wording (2), (3), (4) and (6),71 1.2. This Agreement does not create a separate intergovernmental entity; 1.3. Each party's participation herein is as an equal, and shall depend on separate adoption and administration of policies and procedures consistent with continued cooperation hereunder; and 1.4. The User Board herein created is not a governing body, but is a forum to promote the cooperation and coordination of drug law enforcement in and around Washington County, to resolve potential conflicts and to recommend appropriate operational procedures to the several participating agencies. 2. GOALS. The Westside Interagency Narcotics Team (WIN or WIN Team) shall have as its overall goals: 2.1. To detect and apprehend drug manufacturers and traffickers; 2.2. To gather and disseminate narcotics and related intelligence information within the participating entities and among other criminal justice agencies affected by that information; and 2.3. To enhance and maintain an effective spirit of continuing cooperative efforts among the area criminal justice agencies. 3. OBJECTIVES. WIN shall pursue the following objectives toward achieving its goals: 3.1. Identify and apprehend individuals responsible for significant criminal drug activity; 3.2. Suppress patterns of major criminal drug activity within the Washington County area; 3.3. Enhance cooperation among police and prosecuting agencies within the Portland metropolitan region; 3.4. Enhance the coordination of effort and resources of the participating criminal justice agencies; and 3.5. Establish a central collection point for information relating to criminal drug activity within the region, available to all law enforcement agencies in Washington County. 4. COOPERATION. Each participating agency assumes an obligation of good faith cooperation to provide all reasonable assistance and resources to and with other participating agencies in implementing the purposes of the Agreement. 5. STRUCTURE. 5.1 The administrators of each participating entity must respond to their respective governing bodies. To assure the activities of WIN are j responsive to the individual governing bodies of the participating i agencies, the parties hereby create the WIN User Board ("the Board"). The Board shall consist of the chief administrator of the law enforcement department of each participant, or the designee of such administrator in that administrator's absence. The Board shall meet at least monthly, and at any time upon request of a participating agency. Each Board member WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 2 OF 9 shall have equal voice in the conduct of the Board's business. A quorum is not required for the Board to conduct its business. 5.2 There shall be a Chair of the Board (WIN Chair). The WIN Chair must be a department head from a participating agency that has assigned a full- time investigator to WIN. The Chair shall serve for a term of one calendar year. Board members shall select the Chair by a majority vote of those Board members in attendance at the Board's last meeting before the start of a new calendar.year. 5.3 The Board shall coordinate development of operational procedures applicable to WIN. The Board may not make policy or administrative decisions, but may provide a forum for the discussion of such issues for benefit of the individual Board members. The individual Board members may independently make recommendations to their respective governing bodies on policy or administration that affect WIN. A policy or administrative recommendation of a Board member concerning WIN is not binding upon the Board member's participating agency. 5.4 The Board shall designate one Administrator (WIN Administrator). The WIN Administrator shall be a managerial member of a participating agency, but need not be assigned full-time to WIN. The WIN Administrator shall have the following responsibilities: 5.4.1 Attend and participate in the discussions of the Board; 5.4.2 Establish WIN operational procedures consistent with the direction of the Board and the policies and procedures of each participating agency; 5.4.3 Establish WIN operational priorities; 5.4.4 Evaluate WIN activities and WIN Team Members; 5.4.5 Prepare long-range plans and budget recommendations for the Board's consideration; 5.4.6 Allocate budgeted resources to accommodate personnel, equipment and WIN activities; and 5.4.7 Report to the Board on WIN activities and management functions as outlined above in this section 5.4. 5.5 The Board shall designate at least one Supervisor (WIN Supervisor). A person designated a WIN Supervisor shall be a supervisory member of a participating agency and shall be assigned full-time to WIN. The WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PACE 3 OF 9 supervisor's responsibilities shall be outlined in the operational procedures and shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 5.5.1 Plan and manage operational activities of WIN. 5.5.2 Direct the day-to-day activities of WIN, including: 5.5.2.1 Assign investigations and other tasks to WIN Team Members (A "WIN Team Member" is a law enforcement officer assigned by the officer's employing agency to WIN.); 5.5.2.2 Schedule WIN Team Members, including scheduling that may result in overtime eligibility under the applicable personnel rules and collective bargaining agreements of participating agencies; 5.5.2.3 Review and approve investigative reports; 5.5.2.4 Monitor personnel performance and make appropriate recommendations to the WIN Team Member, MUN A mini. trator or WIN Team Member's agency supervisor; and 5.5.2.5 Serve as a liaison with other law enforcement agencies concerning WIN. 5.5.3 WIN Team Members shall be subject to the internal policies and procedures of their own departments with respect to personnel administration, payroll reporting, overtime eligibility, off-duty conduct, discipline, internal affairs reporting, mandatory training and other like administrative matters not directly related to WIN operations. 4 5.5.4 The WIN Chair, WIN Administrator, and WIN Supervisor shall have no authority to discipline any WIN Team Member from an agency other than their own. The WIN Chair, Administrator and Supervisor shall follow the disciplinary policies and procedures of their own agencies with respect to WIN Team Members from their own agency. i 5.5.5 The WIN Administrator may summarily remove any WIN Team Member from active participation in WIN operations. Such removal is not discipline, but is an operational authority necessary to the effective and cooperative functioning of WIN. In such event, the WIN Administrator shall promptly notify the chief WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 4 OF 9 administrative officer of the participating agency that employs the removed WIN member. When reasonably practicable, the W114 Administrator shall confer with the affected WIN member's chief administrative officer before removing the member from active participation in WIN operations. 6. WIN EVIDENCE HANDLING. Evidence and seized property shall be handled through a mutually agreed upon participating agency. All reports shall be maintained by the mutually agreed upon agency under its policies and procedures. This provision does not apply to cases in which WIN serves in an advisory capacity to another law enforcement agency. 7. WIN FUNDING. 7.1 All personnel costs, including wages and benefits, and incidental items of personal equipment, shall be the responsibility of the participating agency assigning a person to the team. 7.2 Any participating agency may assign to its participating WIN Team Members such capital equipment, for such times and under such restrictions, as it deems appropriate: Such equipment shall not be considered assets of WIN, and are not subject to distribution as provided in Paragraph hereof. 7.3 WIN operations may involve certain operating expenses including, but not limited to„ supplies and consumables, "buy money," and informant compensation. The Board shall annually, at a time consistent with the requirements of the various participating agency's budgeting process, meet and confer regarding projected operational expenses for the ensuing Removed "office fiscal year. Board members shall attempt to reach a consensus regarding Space rental" projected operational expenses for the ensuing fiscal year, but in case of impasse, the estimation of a majority of the Board shall be considered the best estimate of projected operational expenses for the ensuing fiscal year. 7.4 The Chief Administrative Officer of each participating agency shall be notified of the Board's best estimate of projected operational expenses for the ensuing fiscal year. The Chief Administrative Officer shall consider the estimate in preparing and recommending to the agency's governing body that agency's future budget. The respective fractional share of the projected operational expense for each participating agency shall be equal to the ratio of that agency's assigned WIN Team Members to the total number of WIN Team Members. In making this calculation, the number of WIN Team Members shall be the average number of WIN Team Members per month since the beginning of the current fiscal year, and the number of an agency's WIN tam members shall be the average number of WIN Team Members from the agency over the same period of time. The WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 5 OF 9 amount determined under this section 7 is a suggested budgetary amount, not a mandatory amount. 7.5 If a participating agency is unable to appropriate its full share of WIN operational expenses, the agency shall be deemed to have failed to cooperate as required by section 4 of this Agreement. Breach of this Agreement by a failure to cooperate for reasons of an agency's non- appropriation or substantial under-appropriation of funds for the operation of WIN shall be grounds for the removal of the uncooperative agency from WIN. 7.6 The Washington County Finance Department shall serve as Fiscal Agent for the purposes of this Agreement. 7.7 The WIN Administrator shall ensure that an audit is conducted at least annually on the expenditure of confidential funds and the record keeping of the WIN Team, to assure that accounting and expenditures are in accordance with legal and contractual obligations, and to assure that receipts and disbursements are documented and accounted for in accordance with generally acceptable accounting practices for government agencies. 8. RISK ALLOCNI ION. Each party shall a independently anseverally liable or the acts, errors and omissions of its employees and officers, and there shall be no right of indemnity between the parties, but they shall be entitled to assert rights to contribution under ORS 18.430 to 18.460. 9. EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS. Each party shall be solely responsible for providing compensation to its employees, payment of employment-related taxes and insurance, and for provision of mandated and contracted benefits, to the same extent as though the employee was not assigned to WIN. Each party shall be responsible for satisfying Workers Compensation requirements for its own employees. 10. ADDITION OF OTHER ENTITIES. Any other law enforcement agency with jurisdiction in Washington County may, with approval of a majority of the Board, L become party to this Agreement upon providing to the WIN Administrator a written, unconditional acceptance of all of the provisions of this agreement in the form set forth as Appendix 1. Upon addition of another entity under this Article 10, the WIN Administrator shall promptly notify all other parties. Each such new entity shall have full rights of participation on the User Board from and after the date on which its written acceptance of this Agreement is filed with the WIN Administrator. i 11. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall be perpetual, until terminated as provided in Article 16. WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 6 OF 9 12. NOTICES. Any notice required by or relating to this Agreement by one party to another shall be sufficient if given in writing by regular mail or personal delivery addressed to the chief law enforcement officer of the party to be notified by the chief law enforcement officer of the party giving the notice. 13. AMENDMENT. This Agreement may be amended by the mutual written agreement of the parties, signed by the duly authorized representative of each. Each party may have and shall follow its own applicable procedures and prerequisites as set forth in its charter, controlling statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, custom or usage with respect to amendment of agreements. Signature on behalf of a party is a representation by the party that all such procedures and prerequisites have been met, and that the person signing is duly authorized to act on behalf of the party. 14. WAIVER No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall operate as a waiver of any other provisions hereof (whether or not similar), nor shall such waiver constitute a continuing waiver. Except as specifically provided herein, no failure to exercise or any delay in exercising any right or remedy hereunder shall constitute a waiver thereof. 15. SEVERABILITY. If any provision, or portions thereof, of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or otherwise unenforceable, the remaining provision shall remain enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. Furthermore, to the fullest extent possible, the provisions of this Agreement (including, ~without ortinvalid, void, or otherwise unenforceable, that is not itself invalid, void, or unenforceable) shall be consti-tied so as to give effect to the intent manifested by the provision held invalid, void, or unenforceable. 16. TERMINATION. Any party to this Agreement may withdraw at any time by giving all other parties 30 days prior notice in writing of its intention to do so. In the event of such withdrawal this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as to all remaining parties. In the event the team is disbanded, or a participating agency withdraws, the Board shall determine by majority vote of the affected agencies the disposition of equipment and moneys derived from WIN activities and not previously distributed to participating entities. Withdrawal of a party to this Agreement constitutes a release of any and all claim of right, title and interest in and to any and all assets acquired with WIN funds, and any and all assets acquired with proceeds of civil forfeitures generated by WIN activities, save and except for any equipment and moneys distributed as provided in this paragraph. i i i i WIN INTERGOVE ENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 7 OF 9 WITNESS: The parties have caused this Agreement to be signed in their respective names by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates set forth below, and by those signatures each party represents that this Agreement has been authorized according to applicable Oregon law, and its charter, ordinances and regulations. WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON CITY OF B AVER N, OREGON By:m By. Chair, Board of Commissioners Mayor Date: _ I ' oL 1- D Date: 3 Attest: - Approved as to form: Clerk of a Board APPROVED W»SHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COi{-u.iiSSIONERS MINUTE ORDER x ....P.. .'~c City Att rney DATE ....................se..... Approved: Approved: C Sheriff Chief of Police Approved as to form: rA 1)4- Asst. County Counsel i WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 8 OF 9 CITY OF HILLSBORO, OREGON CITY OF TIGA.RD, OREGON By: da3d -Tl/ By: Mayor 0 Mayor Date: (5-dJ64rISW Date: Attest: City Recorder Approved to form: Approved as to form: City Attorney City Attorney Approved: Approved: of of Pol' a Chief of Police i WIN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PAGE 9 OF 9 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Ellen Fox FROM: Cathy Wheatley U"' DATE: June 11, 2003 SUBJECT: WIN Intergovern mental Agreement The above-referenced IGA was approved by the Council at its June 11, 2003 meeting. Attached are three originally signed copies. When all signatures have been obtained, one original should be transmitted to the central Records Division. Thanks Ellen! I:WD%CATfffiMTG-DIS'RMEM0 - TRANSMITTING IGA WKDOC AGENDA ITEM # --4 °-5 FOR AGENDA OF (p, I D- 03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approval of FY 2002 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Grant PREPARED BY: Ofc. Dennis J. Duren DEPT HEAD OK 41- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL This is a presentation of the FY 2002 Domestic Preparedness Equipment Grant application for approval per City of Tigard's Grant Writing Policy. This grant has been compiled and will be submitted to the State of Oregon to receive federal funding earmarked for HAZMAT/Weapons of Mass Destruction/Terrorist response & preparedness. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Tigard Police Department respectfully requests that this rant application be approved so that submission to the granter (State of Oregon) can take place on or before June 13 , 2003. INFORMATION SUMMARY As you may recall, our application for the FY 2003 Domestic Preparedness Grant was submitted for Council approval last month. This current application is similar, however is earmarked for FY 2002 and is due by June 13`h, 2003. Attached is a draft copy of the grant application. This grant allows agencies to request funding for proper HAZMAT/WMD/terrorist response & preparedness equipment so that officers will be able to more effectively, and safely respond to any such incident. Items requested by Tigard Police Department are included in the Washington County Needs Assessment that has been compiled by the Oregon Office of Emergency Management. The funding request is also consistent with a coordinated statewide needs assessment, and therefore multi-agency response is possible. Items requested in this grant round include Automatic External Defibrillators (AED's), a video forensics system, and a radiological detection device. Complete details regarding equipment requested and justification are included within the grant narrative. i p OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i i i VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Grant Program Narrative (DRAFT) FISCAL NOTES Total federal funds requested = $106,156.00. There is no local match required for this grant. Detailed listing of budgeted items to purchase is included within the attached grant narrative. FY 2002 STATE DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS EQUIPMENT GRANT COVER SHEET Program Title: FY 2002 Domestic Preparedness Equipment Grant Grantee Agency: Tigard Police Department Collaborating Agencies: None (Needs Assessment via Washington County) Federal Funds Requested: $106,156.00 Program Start Date: August 1, 2003 Program End Date: June 30, 2004 D#A Program Agency: Tigard Police Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-6168 Program Director: Chief Bill Dickinson / ChiefBill@ci.tigard.or.us (503) 718-2572 office / (503) 670-1561 fax Program Contact: Officer Dennis Dirren / 28944 ,ci.tigard.or.us (503) 718-2556 office / (503) 684-5654 fax Fiscal Contact: Roger Dawes / Roger@ci.tigard.or.us (503) 718-2493 office Program Agency Federal ' Tax Identification Number: 93-0503940 i i i Authorized Official for the Program Agency: Bill Monahan, City Manager i Signature of Authorized Official: Program Narrative Section Part One: Coordination with Statewide Needs Assessment Washington County's terrorism needs assessment was completed by a multi agency, multi discipline team of public safety and public health personnel and was reviewed by the county's Anti-Terrorism Advisory Committee and public safety agency heads. The team, or elements of the team, met over the course of a year to identify the county's threats and vulnerabilities, assess its public health preparedness, and determine its first responder equipment, training, exercise, and technical assistance needs. The results of the team's efforts were submitted to the state Office of Emergency Management for entry into the statewide needs assessment database. Several members of the county team were also participants in development of the Portland Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) Plan and one member of the team represented Regional HAZMAT Team number 9. Together, these members provided critical input into the county's needs assessment process. More importantly, they ensured consistency between the county's needs assessment and the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) equipment standards and response protocols being adopted by the regional HAZMAT teams and the MMRS. The original team members were joined by hospital, technical rescue, and public safety communications representatives to complete the FY02-03 update of the needs assessment. The 6 team make-up was expanded to include participation from organizations and disciplines that i. became eligible for grant funding under the federal FY02 or FY03 grant programs. Several of i the new team members provided critical linkages between the Washington County effort and other regional and statewide initiatives. For example, several of the hospital representatives also City of Tigard, Oregon 1 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 participated in the development of hospital equipment standards with the Portland Metropolitan Hospital Emergency Management Committee and the technical rescue representatives also chaired a task force working to create a statewide technical rescue capability. The teams' public safety communications representatives were also involved in regional communications planning efforts with the 9-1-1 centers in Multnomah, Clackamas, and Clark Counties. As a team, this group reviewed and updated the original needs assessment and developed countywide standards for the newly eligible equipment. The process was expedited to ensure completion of the needs assessment in time for local agencies to use it as a basis for seeking funds under both the FY 02 and FY 03 grant programs. Taken in total, the Washington County terrorism needs assessment reflects a coordinated and integrated local and regional approach to WMD response. All public safety and public health agencies as well as public and private hospitals must be involved and all must operate in new and more challenging ways than has been expected in past emergency response operations. While reflecting an integrated response, the needs assessment nonetheless identifies a number of gaps in the ability of the county's first responders to perform specific WMD operations. These gaps include: • Personal protective equipment (PPE) for designated law enforcement, fire, public health, public works, and hospital personnel; • Communications equipment to enhance interoperability and support system and individual needs; • Chemical, biological, and radiological detection equipment for all agencies; • Mass decontamination equipment for all agencies; City of Tigard, Oregon 2 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 • Self decontamination supplies (i.e., auto injectors) for personnel exposed to certain chemical agents; • Search and rescue equipment and supplies for the county's fire service agencies; • Bomb diagnostics and mitigation equipment for law enforcement agencies; • Vehicles and trailers to store and transport WMD equipment and supplies and to provide suitable facilities for on-scene incident management; • Medical supplies and pharmaceuticals for local hospitals; • Security enhancement equipment for the county's critical facilities; • Terrorism incident prevention equipment for the county's law enforcement agencies; • Logistics support equipment to assist all eligible organizations with conduct of their identified WMD responsibilities; and • Reference materials to enhance first responder effectiveness. The Washington County terrorism needs assessment outlines a countywide approach to closing these gaps through the following actions: • Provision of appropriate PPE to designated first responders and hospital personnel to deal with likely chemical, biological, radiological, and explosive incidents within the county; • Provision of individual radiological dosimeters to appropriate first responders and hospital personnel and placement of dosimeter chargers at all of the county's first response agencies and hospitals; i • Placement (pre-positioning) of mass and self decontamination equipment and supplies and chemical, biological, and radiological detection equipment at fire agencies and hospitals throughout the county; • Expanding the reach, survivability, and capacity of the public safety communications system; City of Tigard, Oregon 3 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 • Enhancing the communications capabilities of the county's hospitals; • Placement (pre-positioning) of search and rescue equipment and supplies at fire agencies throughout the county; • Placement of bomb diagnostics and mitigation tools at law enforcement agencies throughout the county; • Stockpiling of medical supplies and pharmaceuticals at county hospitals; • Hardening of critical facility security systems; • Ensuring the mobility of all stockpiled supplies for mutual aid response; and • Improving the incident management skills and capabilities of the county's first response and hospital personnel. To meet one of the needs outlined in the countywide needs assessment, the Tigard Police Department is requesting funding to purchase radiological detection equipment, security enhancement equipment (forensic video assessment system), and automatic external defibrillators (AED). Part Two: Identification of Equipment Needs A. Briefly identify the equipment and/or supplies being requested and identify the specific staff/position, function, or facility within your agency that will receive the equipment and/or supplies. Equipment requested Staff/Position Function/Facility Detection Equipment The Radiation Alert Monitor will aid the Tigard (1) Radiation Alert Police Department with the detection of alpha, Monitor beta, gamma, and x-rays. i Physical Security This equipment will aid the Tigard Police Enhancement Department with the identification of persons Equipment - who commit crimes or threaten Homeland Surveillance, Warning, Security. The system is also designed to provide Access/Intrusion this agency with computer-based analysis tools to Control package the evidence as presentations for court. The ability to successful) prosecute will be City of Tigard, Oregon 4 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 (I)AVID Forensic significantly enhanced. Video Assessment System w/ software Medical Supplies & This equipment will This equipment will assist the Tigard Police Pharmaceuticals be available in all Department increase the survival rate of the patrol vehicles individuals that suffer sudden cardiac arrest. (30) Medtronic as well as the Automatic External detective's Defibrillators (AED) vehicles. All officers will be trained in the proper use of this e ui ment. B. Provide a brief justification for the equipmendsupplies being requested. Include information regarding agency needs and gaps with respect to equipment, training, exercises, and technical assistance. AVID Forensic Video Assessment System w/software The Tigard Police Department is seeking funding to purchase an AVID/Ocean Systems "dTective" forensic video analysis system. The fear of terrorism, coupled with our state's Homeland Defense initiatives, has spawned the proliferation of surveillance cameras used to protect public buildings, our transportation infrastructure and other public resources. As a result, it is estimated that the average person is now captured on videotape countless times each day. These videotapes provide a rich source of information and evidence concerning criminal cases, and often offer our first line of defense in our fight against terrorism. Among the most compelling sources of evidence helping to provide an early identification of the 9/11 hijackers, were the images of Mohamed Atta as he traveled through the Portland, Maine, airport on the morning of September 11, 2001; images processed and analyzed by the 'Wective" system our agency is attempting to purchase. It is the goal of this agency, as a first responder, to implement a program designed to respond appropriately to incidents of terrorism or threats of terrorism that may have been City of Tigard, Oregon 5 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 captured on videotape, and to prevent acts of terrorism by providing timely and accurate analysis of videotaped images that contain suspicious activity. In addition to visual security systems guarding the state's physical infrastructures, police departments are arming their vehicles with on-board video cameras. The resulting videotapes provide a lasting record of vehicle stops and could provide historical intelligence re'_ating to terrorist events when a suspect is later identified. The International Association of Chief's of Police is currently evaluating in-car camera systems and is expected to recommend agencies must also employ video assessment tools in order to obtain the full value from the video evidence. The Tigard Police Department is part of a suburb that borders on the southwest of the state's largest populated city: Portland. Approximately 45,000 people live in the City of Tigard, however because of a large commercial and corporate base, the population increases almost twofold during business hours. Tigard has several areas, which could be considered in today's heightened sense of security as "vulnerable soft-targets." Washington Square Mall is the largest indoor shopping mall on the west side of Portland and includes a public transportation transit center. Tigard is also the home to FUR Systems Incorporated, which is a known military contractor for infra-red tracking and weapon targeting systems used on military jets and helicopters. Anti-war protestors have targeted this company in the past and hand-held video cameras were used to identify potential lawbreakers during their demonstrations. Additionally, i the city contains an Army National Guard Armory, which for obvious reasons may be targeted i i i on a terrorist level. All of these locations and infrastructure, and more not listed, are covered by i i video surveillance and would benefit by the use of a forensic video analysis system. City of Tigard, Oregon 6 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 The Tigard Police Department's current ability to process and analyze videotaped evidence is not consistent with the requirements needed to meet Oregon's goals for its Homeland Security Strategy. As more video cameras are installed in public buildings, transportation systems and even in private businesses, the demand on the Tigard Police Department to provide adequate and professional examination of the video evidence will continue to increase. Due to our currently limited tools, some investigators are forced to use non-law enforcement resources to examine video images. These resources often include the actual businesses where the event was recorded, a commercial television station or a community college. 'these venues are not conducive to the confidential nature of an investigation, especially one with possible terrorist implications. Furthermore, these resources do not employ forensically competent video assessment systems, often resulting in the loss of potentially significant evidence. Many problems arise with video images that come from such diverse locations. Often the images, either analog or digital, are unclear, dark or otherwise provide unidentifiable pictures. The use of specific tools designed specifically for forensic video analysis is imperative to achieve a reliable outcome. Rather than purchasing a host of systems to ensure compatibility with the majority of camera recorders in our community, 'Wective" provides advanced forensic video assessment tools that work with all visual security systems. Radiation Alert Monitor C The purchase of the hand held Radiation Alert Monitor will aid the Tigard Police i Department with the detection of alpha, beta, gamma, and x-rays. This equipment will assist i i police officers with the safe extraction of victims during a radiological emergency. i t City of Tigard, Oregon 7 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 Medtronic Automatic External Defibrillators (AF.)) The Tigard Police Department plans to place an AED in each of the patrol cars. The placement of AEDs in the hands of large numbers of people trained in their use may be the key intervention to increase the survival chances of out-of=hospital cardiac arrest patients. Without warning, sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) can afflict anyone, anytime. SCA kills 350,000 people in the U.S. alone each year. The evidence is well defined that the chance of surviving a cardiac arrest declines by approximately 10 percent for each minute without defibrillation. Beyond 12 minutes, the chance of survival is two percent and five percent. Part Three: Identification of Current Capabilities A. Equipment and supplies the agency has already acquired to respond to a WMD incident. The Tigard Police Department does not currently own any WMD incident equipment. With the purchase of this equipment the department will greatly increase officers' safety and protection, increase the safe extraction of victims during tin emergency and bolster local and regional responses. B. Training agency personnel has received to respond to a WMD event. Be specific as to the type of training and the approximate number (or percentage) of individuals that have attended. Very limited WMD training has been available far the county's first response agencies and hospitals. Some training has been provided by SBCCOM (formerly CBDCOM) [fire, law enforcement, HAZMAT], Texas A&M [public works], DPSST [fire, law enforcement, HAZMAT], and the state Office of Emergency Management [senior officials], but only limited numbers of agency employees were invited or able to attend. However, significant training on use of the incident command system in the field and in emergency operations centers has been provided. Within the Tigard Police Department, one sergeant is currently attending Weapons of City of Tigard, Oregon g State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 Mass Destruction Law Enforcement Protective Measures training course offered by the Center for Domestic Preparedness. The goal of the Tigard Police Department is to have the remaining six sergeants attend this training course within this year. C. Any WMD exercises the agency has conducted or participated in. Identify the exercise date, type (tabletop, functional, orfull scale), and incident type (biological, chemical, etc). Several of the county's public safety agencies and hospitals participated in exercises hosted by the city of Portland. Those exercises included a full-scale exercise focused on a chemical incident at the Expo Center, a tabletop exercise focused on a biological incident at the Rose Garden, and a full-scale exercise focused on an explosion and chemical incident at the Convention Center. Members of the county's Anti-Terrorism Advisory Committee also conducted a small tabletop exercise that worked through management of two possible biological scenarios. In addition, a large, multi agency tabletop exercise was conducted to discuss response to a school shooting incident and a series of tabletop exercises for the county's fire, law enforcement, public works, and public safety communications staffs were conducted to focus on use of the incident command system. The Tigard Police Department participated in the tabletop exercise in response to a school-shooting incident. D. Incident or Unified Command System availability. All of the county's first response agencies and hospital staffs are trained in the Incident Command System (ICS) and the concept of unified command and use them when responding to multi agency incidents. s Part Four: Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures i I f Goal 1: To improve the ability of emergency first responders to respond to radiological acts of terrorism by purchasing a Radiation Alert Monitor. Objective 1: Procure equipment and train all users on the appropriate use and maintenance of the equipment. City of Tigard, Oregon 9 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 Performance Measure: Tigard Police Department is supplied with grant-funded equipment. Goal 2: To improve the identification of persons who commit crimes or threaten Homeland Security. Objective 2: Purchase forensic video analysis equipment to enhance our efforts to support Oregon's Homeland Defense Strategies. Performance Measure: Once this program begins, the police department will be able to review evidence previously lost. The arrest and conviction rate will rise as a result. The quantity and quality of intelligence gathered will also rise. The increased rate of identification, arrest and conviction will be the true barometer of the overall success of this program. Goal 3: Increase survival rate of individuals who have suffered cardiac arrest. Objective 3: Purchase Medtronic Automatic External Defibrillators and place them in every patrol vehicle as well as the detective's vehicles. Performance Measure: 100 percent of officers have access to the equipment and receive the necessary training. Part Five: Implementation and Evaluation Plan The Tigard Police Department proposes to improve the ability of police officers response to acts of terrorism. Under the management of Officer Dennis J. Dirren, the program will accomplish the following tasks. Task Year One Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1. Inform the city of the X grant award and begin detailed implementation planning. 2. Purchase equipment X X 3. Provide Training on the X X proper use of the equipment on a continues basis) 4. Drill exercises (on a X X continues basis) 5. Collect data for project X X X evaluation 6. Analyze project data X X City of Tigard, Oregon 10 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 7. Complete semi-annual X X progress report 8. Provide a copy of project X evaluation to fonder 9. Continue training and drill X X exercises 10. Collect data for X X evaluation 11. Complete second X X progress report 12. Provide a copy of X progress report to funder Management of the project evaluation process will be the responsibility of Officer Dennis J. Dirren, training and accreditation coordinator. Success will be accomplished with step-by-step measurement on the department's effectiveness in meeting the established goals. Each officer will receive training on the appropriate use of the Automatic External Defibrillators. After the training is completed drill exercises will be conducted to test officers' effective use of the equipment. This agency will maintain the AVID Forensic Video Assessment System and will keep trained operators available to run it. The evaluation process will track the achievement of milestones, within six months, and review each step of the implementation plan with the project staff. The success of this project will be measured through the evaluation of the following factors: 1. Was the equipment purchased within the time outlined? i 2. Have all the officers received the appropriate training? r 3. Was the training completed within the time established? 4. Have the drill exercises demonstrated that 100 percent of officers know how to properly use the equipment? City of Tigard, Oregon 11 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 The evaluation report will integrate the findings of the program and summarize the project performance. Part Six: Identification of Available Funds and Equipment A. Other federal grants or state or local funds currently earmarked for agency use to purchase WMD equipment and/or supplies. Identify the funding source and the equipment/supplies to be purchased. MMRS funds are being used by the city of Portland to purchase some communications and personal protective equipment as well as some pharmaceutical supplies. Most of this material is being distributed to and maintained by regional HAZMAT teams in the Portland metropolitan area. The MMRS program is also purchasing two mass decontamination trailers that will be pre-positioned for use in the region. Grant funds from the CDC and HRSA are being made available to public health agencies and hospitals. However, all funds thus far have been dedicated to planning or vaccination activities. In the future, funding may become available for the purchase of WMD equipment and training. B. Equipment available that may be used to respond to acts of terrorism involving BNICE (biological, nuclear/radiological, incendiary, chemical, and explosive devices). Include equipment available through mutual aid and equipment available from state or federal sources in the local area. As previously mentioned the Tiger Police Department does not own any of the equipment i being requested under this grant. Additionally, the department does not currently own any i equipment that can be used to respond to acts of terrorism involving CBRNE. Under a mutual r aid agreement Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue is able to assist the Police Department with only basic equipment such as protective gloves and with decontamination when necessary. C. Other grant programs you are applying for to obtain WMD equipment, training, exercises or technical assistance. City of Tigard, Oregon 12 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 The Tigard Police Department has applied for FY03 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program to acquire personal protective equipment, M9 Chemical Detection Card for first responders and Second Chance Level IIIA ballistic threat helmet w/ face shield. This equipment will put Tigard Police Department one step closer to being able to fully respond to domestic preparedness incidents. Part Seven: Budget Equipment Category Item Unit Cost Quantity Total 5. Detection Radiation Alert Monitor $308.00 1 $308 Equipment 7. Physical Security AVID Forensic Video $24,998 1 $24,998 Enhancement Assessment System Equipment w/software 9. Medical Supplies & Medtronic Automatic $2,695 30 $80,850 Pharmaceuticals External Defibrillators (AED) Subtotal $106,156 B. Which discipline will receive the equipment? The Tigard Police Department will be the recipient of the above equipment. C. Whether training is needed for the proposed equipment. The maintenance of this equipment and the training of officers will be absorbed by this agency and is not included in the proposed budget for the purchase. City of Tigard, Oregon 13 State Domestic Preparedness Equipment Program FY02 AGENDA ITEM # I. CD Gt. FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approve awarding of Purchase Agreement to Garten Mailing Services for Mailing and Barcode Services for Utility Billing and other special mailings. PREPARED BY: Terry Muralt DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Local Contract Review Board approve the award of a Purchase Agreement for mailing and barcode services for utility billing and other special mailings? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the award of a Purchase Agreement for Mailing and Barcode Services to Garten Mailing Services for one year, unless otherwise terminated, with the option to renew up to four (4) additional twelve-month periods. INFORMATION SUMMARY ORS 279.835-279.855 Products of Disable Individuals requires all state and local governments, school districts and other tax-supported political bodies in Oregon, to purchase goods and services from Qualified Rehabilitation Facilities (QRF's) when the product or service meets their requirements. The City has determined that Garten Mailing Services meets the City requirements for this service. The City prepared the required specifications and contacted other QRF's that provide mailing services. Garten was the only QRF that met all the requirements. The City uses this service for the mailing of utility bills and other special mailings. Estimated usage just for utility bills alone is approximately 112,000 mailings in FY 2003-04. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1 - "Agreement for Services Contract" - 2 Originals FISCAL NOTES Funds were budgeted this fiscal year for mailing and barcode services as well as in the FY 2003-04 Approved Budget. The annual expense for these services is estimated at $46,000. City Council Document Transmittal A4. CITY OF TIGARD To: --rcrjr OREGON From: ract'ju A CA-) Date: °Y l eya I'm sending you: Document Type: ❑ IGA Contract ❑ Other Document Name O+01 WE aA4P-e4!n Approved at the Council Meeting of: & -ly-0a Number Copies Included: ❑Your document(s) have been signed by the Mayor C Your document(s) have been signed by the City Manager 2 ❑ Your document(s) requires an additional signature(s) ❑ When all signatures have been obtained, file an original document with City of Tigard Records ❑ Additional instructions: I;\ADM\CITY COUNCIL\CITY COUNCIL DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL.DOC CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES RELATED TO MAILING AND BARCODE THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 4`h of August, 2003 by and between the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called City, and Garten Mailing Service, hereinafter called Contractor. RECITALS WHEREAS, Contractor has submitted a bid or proposal to City to provide certain services; and WHEREAS, Contractor is in the business of providing certain services and is aware of the purposes for which City requires the services; and WHEREAS, City and Contractor wish to enter into a contract under which City shall purchase the services described in Contractor's bid or proposal; THEREFORE, The parties agree as follows: 1. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED Contractor agrees to provide services related to Mailing and Barcode as detailed in Exhibit A - Scope of Services and by this reference made a part hereof. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION Contractor shall initiate services immediately upon receipt of City's notice to proceed, together with an executed copy of this Agreement. This Agreement shall become effective upon August 4, 2003 and shall expire, unless otherwise terminated or extended, on August 3, 2004. All services under this Agreement shall be completed prior to the expiration of this Agreement. 3. COMPENSATION City agrees to pay Contractor an amount not to exceed as detailed in Exhibit B - Contractors Proposal for performance of those services described herein, which payment shall be based upon the following applicable terms. Compensation over the life of this Contract is estimated at $234,275 Dollars. a. Payment will be made in installments based on Contractor's invoice, subject to the approval by the City, and not more frequently than monthly. Payment shall be made only for work actually completed as of the date of invoice. b. Payment by City shall release City from any further obligation for payment-to Contractor, for services performed or expenses incurred as of the date of the invoice. Payment shall not be considered acceptance or approval of any work or waiver of any defects therein. C. Contractor shall make payments promptly, as due, to all persons supplying labor or materials for the prosecution of this work. d. Contractor shall not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against the City on any account of any labor or material furnished. J e. Contractor shall pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees pursuant to J ORS 316.167. f. If Contractor fails, neglects or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim for labor or services furnished to Contractor or a subcontractor by any person as such claim becomes due, City may pay such claim and charge the amount of the payment against funds due or to become due the Contractor. The payment of the claim in this manner shall not relieve Contractor or their surety from obligation with respect to any unpaid claims. Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode I g. Contractor shall pay employees at least time and a half pay for all overtime worked in excess of 40 hours in any one week except for individuals under the contract who are excluded under ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or under 29 USC sections 201 to 209 from receiving overtime. h. Contractor shall promptly, as due, make payment to any person, co-partnership, association or corporation, furnishing medical, surgical and hospital care or other needed care and attention incident to sickness or injury to the employees of Contractor or all sums which Contractor agrees to pay for such services and all moneys and sums which Contractor collected or deducted from the wages of employees pursuant to any law, contract or agreement for the purpose of providing or paying for such service. i. The City certifies that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this contract. 5. ASSIGNMENUDELEGATION Neither party shall assign or transfer any interest in or duty under this Agreement without the written consent of the other and any attempted assignment or transfer without the written consent of the other party shall be invalid. 6. SUBMITTING BILLS AND MAKING PAYMENTS All notices and bills shall be made in writing and may be given by personal delivery, mail or fax. Payments may be made by personal delivery, mail, or electronic transfer. The following addresses shall be used to transmit notices, bills, payments, and other information: Contact Manager for City: Contact Manager for Contractor: City of Tigard Company: Garten Mailing Services Attn: Tom Imdieke Attn: Creg Arnold, Diwision Manager 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223 Address: 2455 McGilchrist SE Phone: 503-639-4171 ext. 2488 Phone: 503-581-1984 Fax: 503-639-1471 Fax: 503-589-3119 Email Address: tomi@ci.tigard.or.us Email Address: camold@garten.org 7. TERAIUNATION The parties agree that any decision by either party to terminate this Agreement before 3rd of August, 2004 shall be accompanied by thirty (30) days written notice to the other party prior to the date termination would take effect. There shall be no penalty for early termination. If City terminates the contract pursuant to this paragraph, it shall pay Contractor for services rendered prorated to the date of termination. 8. ACCESS TO RECORDS City shall have access to such books, documents, papers and records of Contractor as are-Uirectly pertinent to this Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts and transcripts. 9. FORCE MAJEURE Neither City nor Contractor shall be considered in default because of any delays in completion and responsibilities hereunder due to causes beyond the control and without fault or negligence on the part of the parties so disenabled, including but not restricted to, natural disaster, war, civil unrest, volcano, earthquake, ! fire, flood, epidemic, quarantine restriction, area-wide strike, freight embargo, unusually severe weather or delay of subcontractor or supplies due to such cause; provided that the parties so disenabled shall within ten (10) days from the beginning of such delay, notify the other party in writing of the cause of delay and its probable extent. Such notification shall not be the basis for a claim for additional compensation. Each party shall, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and shall, upon cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligation under the Agreement. Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 2 10. NON-DISCRIMINATION Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statues, rules, and regulations. Contractor also shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, ORS 659.425, and all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to those laws. 11. CONTRACTOR AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Contractor acknowledges that for all purposes related to this Agreement, Contractor is and shall be deemed to be an independent contractor as defined by ORS 670.600 and not an employee of City, shall not be entitled to benefits of any kind to which an employee of City is entitled and shall be solely responsible for all payments and taxes required by law. Furthermore, in the event that Contractor is found by a court of law or any administrative agency to be an employee of City for any purpose, City shall be entitled to offset compensation due, or to demand repayment of any amounts paid to Contractor under the terms of this Agreement, to the full extent of any benefits or other remuneration Contractor receives (from City or third party) as a result of said finding and to the full extent of any payments that City is required to make (to Contractor or to a third party) as a result of said finding. Contractor acknowledges that for all purposes related to this Agreement, Contractor is not an officer, employee, or agent of the City as those terms are used in ORS 30.265. 12. INDEMNITY/HOLD HARMLESS Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, City's officers, employees, agents and representatives from and against all liability, claims, demands, judgments, penalties, and causes of action of any kind or character, or other costs or expenses incidental to the investigation and defense thereof, of whatever nature, resulting from or arising out of the activities of the Contractor or its subContractors, agents, or employees under this contract, except, however, that the foregoing shall not apply to liability that arises out of City's negligence. 13. INSURANCE Contractor shall maintain insurance acceptable to City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract. Such insurance shall cover all risks arising directly or indirectly out of Contractor's activities or work hereunder. The policy or policies of insurance maintained by the Contractor shall provide at least the following limits and coverages: a. Commercial General Liability Insurance Contractor shall obtain, at contractor's expense, znd keep in effect during -the term of this contract, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or equivalent). This coverage shall include Contractual Liability insurance for the indemnity provided under this contract. The following insurance will be carried: Coverage Limit General Aggregate 1,000,000 Products-Completed Operations Aggregate 1,000,000 Personal & Advertising Injury 1,000,000 Each Occurrence 1,000,000 Fire Damage (any one fire) 50,000 Medical Expense (any one person) 5,000 b. Business Automobile Liability Insurance If Contractor will be delivering any goods, Contractor shall provide City a certificate indicating that Contractor has business automobile liability coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. Said insurance shall name City as an additional insured and shall require written notice to City thirty (30) days in advance Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 3 of cancellation. If Contractor hires a carrier to make delivery, Contractor shall ensure that said carrier complies with this paragraph. C. Workers' Compensation Insurance The Contractor and all employers providing work, labor or materials under this Contract that are either subject employers under the Oregon Workers' Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage that satisfies Oregon law for all their subject workers or employers that are exempt under ORS 656.126. Out- of-state employers must provide Oregon workers' compensation coverage for their workers who work at a single location within Oregon for more than 30 days in a calendar year. Contractors who perform work without the assistance or labor of any employee need not obtain such coverage. This shall include Employer's Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 each accident. d. Insurance Carrier Rating All coverage provided by the Contractor must be underwritten by an insurance company deemed acceptable by the City. The City reserves the right to reject all or any insurance carrier(s) with an unacceptable financial rating. e. Certificates of Insurance As evidence of the insurance coverage required by the contract, the Contractor shall furnish a Certificate of Insurance to the City. No contract shall be affected until the required certificates have been received and approved by the City. The procuring of such required insurance shall not be construed to limit contractor's liability hereunder. Notwithstanding said insurance, Contractor shall be obligated for the total amount of any damage, injury, or Joss caused by negligence or neglect connected with this contract. 14. ATTORNEY'S FEES In case suit or action is instituted to enforce the provisions of this contract, the parties agree that the losing party shall pay such sum as the court may adjudge reasonable 'attomey fees and court costs, including witness fees (expert and non-expert), attorney's fees and court costs on appeal. 15. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS/RULES Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, the requirements concerning working hours, overtime, medical care, workers compensation insurance, health care payments, payments to employees and subcontractors and income tax withholding contained in ORS Chapter 279, the provisions of which are hereby made a part of this agreement. 16. CONFLICT BETWEEN TERMS It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should there be any Conflict between the terms of this instrument in the proposal of the contract, this instrument shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the terms of proposal conflicting herewith. 17. SEVERABILITY In the event any provision or portion of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected to the extent that it did not materially affect the intent of the parties when they entered into the agreement. Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 4 18. COMPLETE AGREEMENT This Agreement, including the exhibits, is intended both as a final expression of the Agreement between the parties and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms. In the event of an inconsistency between a provision in the main body of the Agreement and a provision in the Exhibit, the provision in the main body of the Agreement shall control. In the event of an inconsistency between Exhibit A and any other exhibit, Exhibit A shall control.. In the event of an inconsistency between Exhibit C and Exhibit B, Exhibit B shall control. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until it is made in writing and signed by both parties. No waiver, consent, modification, or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both parties. Such waiver, consent, modification, or change if made, shall be effective only in specific instances and for the specific purpose given. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. Contractor, by the signature of its authorized representative, hereby acknowledges that Contractor has read this Agreement, understands it and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized undersigned officer and Contractor has executed this Agreement on the date hereinabove first written. CITY OF TIGARD Approved by Tigard's Local Contract Review Board on: June 10, 2003 Bill Monahan, City Manager Signature Date CONTRACTOR Company Name Print Name & Title of Authorized Representative Signature Date 1 I I 1 I I . Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 5 EXHIBIT `A' SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS 1. City of Tigard will print statements and provide the envelopes for mailing. 2. Quantity of utility statements will be approximately 2,200 weekly. 3. Utility statements are printed in zip code order. 4. Listed below is a schedule of services that the Contractor will be expected to do: Pick up statements each Friday by 10:00 AM. • Fold and insert statements with #9 return envelopes into a #10 window envelope. No labeling is required on envelopes. • Print Bar code onto envelopes. • Take mailing to Post Office - To be mailed no later than Monday for statements picked up on the previous Friday. 5. If something happens on the City's end and the statements are not ready for contractor to pick up on Friday, the City will notify contractor and reschedule at a later date. 6. There will be additional "Informational" inserts with the statements 2-3 times a year. At times there could be two (2) or more inserts with a mailing. 7. There are several accounts that receive multiple statements. Multiple statements are printed together and would be mailed together 8. A few times a year the contractor will be requested to do "special mailings" not related to Utility Billing. These mailings will be printed in zip code order. 9. Contractor shall store several cases of #9 and #10 envelopes on site. BILLING REQUIREMENTS: Billing statement shall be itemized to show quantities per each individual billing rate. See example below. Postage Costs: 1. Number of pieces multiplied by current bulk mailing postage rate. 2. All other individual pieces listed and multiplied by applicable rate. Additional Insert Costs: 1. Insert No.l - number of inserts multiplied by rate. 2. Insert No.2 - number of inserts multiplied by rate. Each service that is billed at a different rate needs to be itemized on the billing statement as shown in the example above. TERM OF CONTRACT: Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 6 The initial term of the contract shall be one (1) year with four (4) additional one-year options to extend. The maximum duration of the contract may not exceed five (5) years. The City may exercises its renewal options upon written notice provided to Contractor at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the then current term. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR: The City Contractor Administrator shall be Tom lmdieke, 503-639-4171 ext. 2488. i _ i i i P I I Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode EXHIBIT `B' CONTRACTOR'S PROPOSAL FOR MAILING AND BA.RCODE SERVICE Unit Item Description Price 1. Fold single statement .02 2. Insert statement and return envelope .0225 3. Seal/meter envelope ' 0 4. Barcode & sort for automated postage rate .03 5. Cost of one (1) insert other than bill .0225 6. Additional cost if two (2) or more inserts other than bill .003 ea 7. Set up fee, if any 0 8. Pickup and delivery fee, if any 10.00 9. Storage of City envelopes 0 10. Postage rate .309 1. Margin of error in return mail, double stuffed envelopes etc. 1 % 2. Payment Capability - Accepts Mastercard. Yes X No t. - a a Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 8 EXHIBIT C CITY OF TIGARD (Buyer) STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Packing & Shipment. Deliveries shall be made as specified, without charge for boxing, crating, carting or storage. Material shall be suitably packed to ensure against damage from weather or transportation and to secure lowest transportation costs, and in accordance with the requirements of common carriers. Buyer's Order number and symbols must be plainly marked on all invoices, packages, bills of lading and shipping orders. Packing lists shall accompany each box or package shipment. Buyers count or weight shall be conclusive on shipment not accompanied by packing lists. Unless otherwise specifically agreed on the reverse side of this Agreement, all costs of packaging and shipment are included in the purchase price and all goods will be shipped, with all costs prepaid. Risk of loss to goods in shipment (including damage, destruction, theft, or loss) shall be bome by the Contractor. Risk of loss shall not pass to Buyer until the goods are delivered to and checked in at the location specified by Buyer in this Order. 2. Warranty. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, Contractor warrants that the products ordered will conform to the specifications herein and to any drawings, samples, or other description furnished or adopted by Buyer. All products are wan-anted to be merchantable, to be of the highest quality design, material, and workmanship and free from defect and to be fit for purpose intended. All warranties shall survive inspection or test, acceptance and payment. Warranties shall run to Buyer, its successors, assigns and customers. Warranty period shall be (1) year from date of acceptance by Buyer. 3. Inspection and Acceptance. At Buyer's request, Contractor shall provide a complete inspection program; satisfactory to Buyer, for Buyer's inspection of all materials, fabricating methods, equipment in process work and finished products. If this Order provides for inspection of the work by Buyer on site during the period of manufacture, Contractor agrees to provide Buyer's inspectors with reasonable facilities and assistance during such inspection. Inspection by Buyer shall not unduly delay the work Buyer may charge Contractor any additional cost incurred by Buyer if the work is not ready in accordance with the inspection schedule. Any inspection made or Waiver-of-Inspection-Notice given by Buyer will not relieve Contractor from its responsibilities for delivering products and work hereunder. Acceptance or rejection of the products shall be made up to 10 days after delivery and inspection by Buyer except as otherwise provided herein. Failure to inspect and accept or reject products shall neither relieve Contractor from responsibility for such products, which do not meet the requirements herein nor impose liability on Buyer therefore. 4. Delivery. If Contractor fails to meet the delivery schedule provided herein, Buyer may require Contractor to deliver the products, or any portion thereof, in any manner commercially necessary to speed delivery, all at the Contractor's sole expense. Unless otherwise agreed upon in writing by Buyer and Contractor, Contractor shall be required to pay the normal freight weight plus any premium rate required. Invoices covering products shipped in advance of the date specified will not be paid until after the date specified for delivery and are subject to rejection, as provided in this paragraph immediately below, if shipped too early. Neither party shall be liable for delays or defaults due to strike, fire, windstorm, riot, natural disaster, war, civil unrest or other similar unforeseeable cause beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the party incurring such delay. Contractor shall notify Buyer in writing of the existence of such cause within five (5) days after the commencement of the delay or default giving pertinent infomnation concerning such cause. No delivery shall be made more than seven (7) days prior to the applicable delivery date, and Buyer shall have the right to return earlier deliveries at Contractor's risk and expense or charge to Contractor any additional costs sustained because of the same. 5. Buyer-Furnished Materials. Contractor shall assume all risk of loss of any material furnished by Buyer to Contractor for use in performance of this Order. 6. Taxes. Contractor shall not invoice Buyer for any taxes nor include in Contractor's price any federal excise, state, or city tax or any other tax, unless Contractor has first asked Buyer for Buyer's tax exemption number and it has been agreed upon between both parties that Buyer is not exempt from the tax. 7. Change . Buyer may, by written order, make changes including changes in drawings or specifications. Buyer will equitably adjust any difference in cost or time for performance resulting from such change and the Order modified in writing accordingly. ANY CLAIM BY CONTRACTOR UNDER THIS CLAUSE MUST BE ASSERTED IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF CON'TRACTOR'S RECEIPT OF THE CHANGE ORDER OR THE CLAIM WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. In the event that Buyer proposes any change prior to making such change by written order and such change will have an effect on the warranty of the products procured by this Order, Contractor shall notify Buyer in writing of such effect within 10 days of receipt of such proposal. 8. Advertising. Contractor shall not, without the written consent of Buyer, in any manner advertises or publish the fact that Contractor has furnished or contracted to furnish to Buyer the products herein. 9. Cancellation for Cause. Buyer may cancel all or any part of the undelivered portion of this Order if Contractor breaches any of the terms hereof or in the event of any of the following: Insolvency of Contractor, a voluntary or involuntary petition in bankruptcy for, by or against Contractor; the appointment of a receiver or trustee for Contractor, or an assignment for the benefit of creditors by Contractor or if Buyer has reasonable cause to believe Contractor will become insolvent, file for bankruptcy, go out of business or drat the products being shipped may be subject to lien, claim or attachment by a creditor of Contractor. Any such cancellation under Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 9 this section shall be cancellation for cause and in the event of such cancellation, Buyer shall have the right to complete, or cause to have completed, this Order including the right to cause Contractor to produce, without liability of any kind to the Buyer, proprietary items of the Contractor as necessary to complete the Order. The remedies and damages in this section shall be cumulative and in addition to any other or further remedies provided at Law or in Equity, including reasonable and necessary attorney's fees and other costs of litigation. 10. Termination. City has the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate without cause or for no cause, to termination this Agreement at any time by giving notice to Contractor. If City terminates the contract pursuant to this section, it shall pay Contractor for goods shipped by Contractor prior to receipt by Contractor of the notice of termination. City may deduct the amount of damages, if any, sustained by City due to any breach of contract or warranty by Contractor. Damages for breach of contract or warranty shall be those allowed by Oregon law, reasonable and necessary attorney fees, witness fees (expert and non-expert), and other costs of litigation at trial and on appeal. 11. Assignment and Subcontracting. Contractor may not assign or subcontract any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written approval of Buyer. Any unapproved assignment shall be void. Contractor shall be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any subcontractors and all persons employed by them, and neither the approval by Buyer of any subcontract nor anything contained herein shall be deemed to create any contractual relation between the subcontractor and the Buyer. Buyer may assign its rights under this Order. 12. Work on Buyer's Premises. If Contractor's performance of this Order involves operations by Contractor on Buyer's premises, Contractor shall (a) provide all necessary and sufficient safeguards and take all proper precautions against the occurrence of injury to any person or damage to any property, and shall be responsible for and shall indemnify and hold harmless Buyer, its representatives, officers, employees, and agents from any and all loss, suit, action or claim, including cost and attorney's fees, by reason of injury, including death, to any person and carry public liability and property damage insurance with limits of liability of not less than $300,000 each, unless higher limits are required by a signed purchase agreement, with contractual liability endorsement and such insuranceof employees as may be required by any workmen's compensation act or other law, regulation or ordinance which may apply in the premises. Such public liability and property damage insurance shall also cover the operation of Contractor's vehicles used in the performance of Contractor's operations. Any policy of insurance written in accordance with the foregoing shall be appropriately endorsed to named Buyer, it's officials, employees and agents as additional insureds, with provisions that such insurance is primary insurance with respect to their interest, and that any other insurance maintained by Buyer is excess and not contributory insurance with the insurance required hereunder, with cross-liability or severability of interest provisions, and shall fiMher provide that the coverage provided thereby shall not be modified or discontinued or terminated except upon 30 days prior written notice to Buyer. Compliance shall be verified by Certificate of Lsurance with appropriate endorsements sent to Buyer prior to Contractor commencing work on Buyer's premises. Any work performed on Buyer's premises must be done pursuant to all OSHA standards, all applicable State and Federal health and safety laws, rules and regulations and all workers must be covered by workers' compensation insurance finnished through and paid for by Contractor. 13. Stop Work Order. Buyer may, at any time by written order to Contractor, require Contractor to stop all, or any part of the work called for by this Order for a period of 90 days after the written order is delivered to Contractor, and for any fiuther period to which the parties may agree and for any other period to which the parties may have agreed or as provided in Section 4, 10, and/or 11. Within the period of 90 days or less or within any extension of that period, Buyer shall either: (a) cancel the "Stop Work Order" and direct Contractor to resume work; or (b) terminate the work covered by this Order. If Buyer orders Contractor to resume work, Contractor shall be entitled to any equitable adjustment pursuant to Section 8 provided a claim for such an adjustment shall be submitted by Contractor within 30 days after the end of the period of work stoppage. 14. Payment Payment date and cash discount period shall be calculated from the date of Buyer's receipt of an acceptable invoice and Buyer's acceptance of the products and supporting documentation at destination. 15. hmformation/Data. Unless otherwise agreed in writing any designs, drawings, specifications, or other manufacturing information furnished by Buyer to Contractor shall be confidential to Buyer and is furnished solely for the performance of this Order. All copies t of such information shall be returned to Buyer upon completion of the Order. Any designs, drawings, specifications, or other manufacturing information delivered by Contractor to Buyer may be used for any purpose whatsoever. The foregoing shall apply notwithstanding the presence or absence of any contrary legend or statement on any of such information. All business and governmental information materials containing business and governmental information provided by Buyer to Contractor shall be treated as confidential. 16. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. Contractor warrants that all products, goods, or work delivered and performed shall comply with all applicable Federal, State or Local Laws or Regulations including without limitation The Occupational Safety and Heath Act (29 USC. Chapter 15); Federal Hazardous Material Transportation Act (49 USC. Chapter 27); Equal Employment Opportuuiity; E.O. 11246 and 41 CFR Sections 60-1.4 and 60-1.7; Employment of the Handicapped E.O. 11758 and 41 CFR Section 60-7414; Utilization of Minority Enterprises E.O. 11625 and 41 CFR Subpart 1-1.13; Age Discrimination E.O. 11141, Employment of Veterans E.O. 11701 and 41 CFR Section 50-250.4 and all rules, regulations and amendments issued pursuant to the foregoing. Contractor shall indemnity Buyer, its officers, employees and agents against any damages, penalties, costs or expenses incurred in connection with any alleged violation of any Federal, State or Local Law or regulating the manufacture or sale to the Buyer of any Item covered by this Order. Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 10 17. Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks. Contractor warrants that no products will be furnished hereunder, which infringe or contribute to the infringement of any letters patent, copyright or trademark. Contractor agrees to immediately replace at its sole cost any products famished hereunder which infringe or contribute to the infringement of any letters patent, copyright or trademark or to take all steps necessary at Contractor's sole expense to remove such infringement. Contractor will indemnify and hold harmless Buyer, its representatives, officers, employees and agents from and against any and all costs, royalties, damages and/or expenses which may arise out of or result from, or be reasonably incurred in contesting any claims that the methods, processes or acts by the Contractor or its employees or the products famished hereunder, infringes or contributes to the infringement of any letters; patent, copyright or trademark. 18. Waiver. The failure of Buyer to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Order or to exercise any option herein provided, shall not be a present or future waiver of such provisions, nor in any way affect the validity of this Order or any part hereof, or the right thereafter to enforce each and every such provision. The express waiver (whether one (1) or more times) of any provision, condition or requirement shall not constitute a waiver of any future obligation to comply with such provision, condition or requirement. 19. Independent Contractor. Contractor is an independent contractor and persons employed by Contractor shall be employees of Contractor and not employees of Buyer. 20. Complete Agreement. The Purchase Order and any referenced attachments constitute the complete agreement between the parties. Except as otherwise provided herein, it is subject to change only by an instrument signed in writing by both parties. 21. Acceptance by Performance. If Contractor fails provide to Buyer with a signed copy of this order, but delivers product or performs the services specified in this agreement, then Contractor agrees that the Contractor shall be deemed to have accepted the terms and conditions of this order, as provided on both the front and this reverse side of the order. Buyer must agree any changes or modifications to this order by Contractor to, in writing, or they shall not be deemed accepted by Buyer and if the Contractor delivers the products nonetheless, then the original terms and conditions of this order shall govern. 22. Mandatory Mediation and Binding Arbitration. If there is a dispute concerning any of the terms, conditions or the performance of this order, then it is hereby agreed by both Buyer and Contractor that the dispute shall be submitted fast to non-binding mediation, to be performed by a sole mediator to be agreed upon between Buyer and Contractor. If a mediator cannot be agreed upon, then the parties agree that any Circuit Court judge for the State of Oregon, County of Washington, shall be authorized to appoint a mediator for the parties. Should the parties fail to reach an agreement through mediation, then the parties shall submit to binding arbitration, which shall be governed by the rules of the Arbitration Service of Portland, and shall be conducted within Washington County. The arbitration shall be conducted by a single arbitrator chosen by mutual agreement of the parties. If the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator, the parties shall ask the Presiding Judge of the Circuit Court for Washington County to select the arbitrator. If the arbitrators determine that one party is the prevailing party, then the losing party shall be required to pay all fees and costs of the arbitration. On the other hand, if the arbitrators determine that neither party is to be considered the prevailing party, then the fees and costs of the arbitration shall be divided equally between the parties. The parties knowingly and voluntarily waive their rights to have their dispute tried and adjudicated by a judge or jury. In the event a party fails to proceed with arbitration, unsuccessfully challenges the arbitrator's award, or fails to comply with the arbitrator's award, then the other party shall be entitled to costs, including reasonable attorney fees, for having to compel arbitration or defend or enforce the award. The parties agree to defend the arbitrator and any individual engaged in the administration of an arbitration proceeding from any subpoenas or claims from third parties arising out of this order or the arbitration. 23. Jurisdiction and Attorney Fees. This order shall be governed and construed according to the laws of the State of Oregon. If a dispute shall arise under this order necessitating the services of an attorney, then the prevailing party shall be entitled to collect from the losing party all of its/his/her reasonable costs and attorney fees, either in arbitration (if awarded by the arbitrator as provided above), or by a court before which any matter concerning this order may be heard, both at trial and on appeal. _ 24. Neutral Interpretation. This order constitutes the product of negotiations between the parties hereto. Any enforcement hereof will be interpreted in a neutral manner and not more strongly for or against any party based upon the source of draftsmanship. 25. Severability. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require the commission of any act contrary to law, and wherever there j is any conflict between the provisions contained herein and any present or future statute, law, ordinance or regulation contrary to 1 which to the parties have no legal right to contract, the latter shall prevail. The provision of this Agreement, which is affected, shall i be curtailed and limited only to the extent necessary to bring it within the requirement of the law. 26. Calculation of Time. All periods of time referred to herein shall include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays in the State of Oregon, except that if the last day of any period falls on any Saturday, Sunday or such holiday, then that period shall be extended to include the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or holiday. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be given by either party to the other shall be deemed to have been given when sent via telecopy, overnight air courier, or deposited in the United States mail certified, retum receipt requested, with first class postage prepaid, addressed as indicated on the front of this order, or addressed to either party at such other address as such party shall hereafter furnish to the other party in writing. Notice shall also be considered effective upon delivery if personally delivered. 27. Conditions of Supplying a -Public Agency. Where applicable, Contractor must make payment promptly as due to persons supplying Contractor labor or materials for the execution of the work provided by this order. Contractor must pay all contributions or amounts due from Contractor to the industrial accident fiend incurred in the performance of this order. Contractor shall not permit any lien or Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode 11 claim to be filed or prosecuted against Buyer or any subdivision of Buyer on account of any labor or material to be furnished. Contractor further agrees to pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees pursuant to ORS 316.167. 28. Payment of Claims by Public Officers. In the event that Contractor fails, neglects or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim for labor or services furnished to Contractor or a subcontractor of Contractor by any person in connection with the performance of this order when such claim becomes due, then the proper officer or officers representing the Buyer hereunder may pay such claim to the person furnishing the labor or services and charge the amount of the payment against the funds due or to become due to the Contractor by reason of this order. The payment of a claim in the manner authorized by this provision shall not relieve the Contractor or any of the Contractor's surety from obligations with respect to any unpaid claims. 29. Health Care Benefits for Contractor's Employees. If this order involves public service, then Contractor must provide health care benefits to all employees who are performing services previously performed by public employees performing similar duties under this order. 30. Hours of Labor. If labor is performed under this order, then no person shall be employed for more than eight (8) hours in any one day, or forty (40) hours in any one week, except in cases of necessity, or emergency or where the public policy absolutely requires it, and in such cases, except cases of contracts for personal services as defined in ORS 279.050, the labor shall be paid at least time and a half for all overtime in excess of eight (8) hours a day and for all work performed on Saturday and on any legal holidays as specified in ORS 279.334. In cases of contracts for personal services as defined in ORS 279.050, any labor shall be paid at least time and a half for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours in any one week, except for those individuals excluded under ORS 653.010 to 653260 or under 29 USC SS 201-209. 31. Medical Care and Workers' Compensation. Contractor shall promptly, as due, make payment to any person, co-partnership, association or corporation, furnishing medical, surgical and hospital care or other needed care and attention incident to sickness or injury, to the employees of such Contractor, of all sums which the Contractor agrees to pay for such services and all moneys and sums which the Contractor collected or deducted from the wages of the employees pursuant to any law, contractor agreement for the purpose of providing or paying for such service. >L - r - JJ D u J Purchase Agreement for Services for Mailing and Barcode t AGENDA ITEM # J FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on the New Tigard Library PREPARED BY: Margaret Barnes DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ~s ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Presentation by staff to update the City Council about the new library. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The purpose of this presentation is to communicate recent events and accomplishments related to the new Tigard Public Library. INFORMATION SUMMARY On May 21, 2002, Tigard voters passed a $13 million bond measure for the construction of a new library of approximately 47,000 square feet. This amount will pay for land acquisition, the design, construction and furnishing of the new library, parking and related street improvements. The site of the new library is a 14.7-acre property located along Hall Boulevard near O'Mara Street. The library building and parking will occupy about 5 acres of the site. The design is completed and construction is scheduled to begin in July. The project remains on schedule and within budget. The focus of the monthly update at this meeting will be a report on the groundbreaking ceremony on Saturday, May 17 at 10 a.m. as well as an update on the construction schedule. The continuing need for fundraising to adequately equip the new library also will be discussed. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal #3: Adequate facilities are available for efficient delivery of life-long learning programs and services for all ! ages. i i i ATTACHMENT LIST f 1. Set of PowerPoint Slides FISCAL NOTES N/A l 1 } ` Tigard library - s what' New on the New Library? ~ , •S •`6 17 _ ry u+a •r,' 7.2 ~ f~~.,.: ( •.~~!~,~~ra 5 . ~ 7.2003 1 ..w ~ iii'' a 4 -Ir iLN•v Or 2T~;Tta its acre ~Z CL 'n r"+f'~ ^~•'jl "~'~1 "ty~,'~ ~ ~ ',tiiMd"?K } t ti t t' ,~.5•„;. 1 yti LLI 7. ;a- 03 2 Timeline... countdown to a New Ubrary For More Information on Bond Meuurs PUSU gpr ° Library Project... Adverdu for Architect Summmrma'0 2 %I Select Architect Surmna/Fall'02 ✓ Select General Contractor Fa11'02 Contact Sell Bonds Fall'02 ✓ paulaaci.tigard.or.u5 oCry -Daimu ty ►fettin;son FBII b2 ✓ T- ~ 503-684-6537, ext 2508 Purchase Property Fall'02 ✓ Deign Ubnry Fall '02/ Winta'03 ✓ or check out the Public Meetings on Site Master Plan tanca/Sprtng'03 ✓ New Library web pages at for Fenno Creek E union Groundbrteking May 17.2003 ✓ wyywxi tigard.or.us Ubrery Corotruction Spring '03rO4 Library Opens) Surn '0+ 3 AGENDA ITEM # D FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COI JNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF TIGARD PROVIDES SERVICES QUALIFYING FOR STATE SHARED REVENUES PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK_ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve a resolution certifying that it provides certain services making it eligible to receive state shared revenues? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City has estimated the receipt of the following state shared revenues: FY 2003-04 FY 2002-03 Cigarette Tax $ 87,400 $ -0- Liquor Tax $ 350,000 $ 381,386 State Gas Tax $1,610,201 $1,686,559 The state requires the City to certify its eligibility to receive these revenues by stating that it provides more than four of the services listed in ORS 221.760. The City does provide a sufficient number of required services and is therefore eligible for these receiving the state shared revenues. The services the City provides include Police protection; street construction, maintenance, and lighting; sanitary and storm sewers; planning, zoning, and subdivision control; and water utility. Approval of the attached resolution will meet the state requirement of certification. The Oregon State Legislature voted to discontinue the sharing of cigarette tax revenues with cities and counties. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not accept the revenues from the State of Oregon. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Acceptance of these revenues will assist in funding City goals and strategies. ATTACHMENT LIST Certifying resolution. FISCAL NOTES Approval of the resolution would secure $2,067,945 AGENDA ITEM # `-J FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUES PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK _ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve an ordinance declaring the City's election to receive state revenue sharing funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the attached ordinance. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City has estimated the receipt of $211,360 of state revenue sharing in the FY 2003-04 budget. Such funds are available from the state for those cities that meet certain requirements. The requirements include having a public hearing before the Budget Committee and a public hearing before the City Council. The hearing before the Budget Committee was held May 19, 2003. Approval of the attached ordinance will meet the state requirements for the City's election to receive these funds. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not accept the revenues from the State of Oregon. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Acceptance of these revenues will assist in funding City goals and strategies. ATTACHMENT LIST Ordinance declaring City election to receive state revenue sharing funds. FISCAL NOTES Approval of the ordinance would secure $211, 360 of revenue for the General Fund. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUEIAGENDA TITLE FY 2003-04 Ca ital Im rovement Pro am PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Adoption of the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program and approval of the FY 2003-04 projects. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council, by motion, adopt the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program and projects as described in the attached memorandum dated May 27, 2003 with appendices A, B, B-1 through B-6, and C. INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is a memorandum dated May 27, 2003 transmitting the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). This memorandum, with appendices, presents the recommended projects for FY 2003-04 and a tentative list of projects for the following four years. The FY 2003-04 CIP was presented to the Budget Committee on May 12, 2003, and to the the Planning Commission at its meeting on May 19, 2003. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed program with minor revisions as recommended by the City Engineer. The FY 2003-04 CIP, with all revisions incorporated, is submitted to City Council for review and approval. The adopted program would be the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 2003-04. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Adopt the FY 2003-04 CIP with further modifications. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMN91 TEE STRATEGY The FY 2003-04 CIP supports the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic goals of "Improve Traffic Safety" and "Improve Traffic Flow." ATTACHMENT LIST Memorandum dated May 27, 2003 with appendices A, B, B-1 through B-6, and C. FISCAL NOTES The FY 2003-04 CIP system amounts are based on the Finance Director's funding projections for FY 2003-04. I:\Eng\Gus\Council Agenda Summaries\Agenda Summary-FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program.doc CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Phone (503) 639-4171 Fax (503) 624-0752 TO: City Council FROM: Agustin P. Duenas, P.E. City Engineer DATE: May 27, 2003 SUBJECT: FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program This document presents the proposed FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for review and approval. The proposed CIP was presented to the Budget Committee on May 12, 2003, and to the Planning Commission on May 19, 2003 for review and recommendation to City Council. The Planning Commission approved the FY 2003-04 CIP as submitted with revisions as recommended by the City Engineer. This document reflects all changes, including revisions approved by the Budget Committee on May 19, 2003. Background The Capital Improvement Program includes improvements to the streets, storm drainage, sanitary sewer, water, parks, and city facilities systems. The Engineering Department manages the street, storm drainage, and sanitary sewer CIP's. The Public Works Department manages the Water System CIP and the Parks CIP, and the City Facilities System is jointly managed by the Engineering and Public Works Departments. The Capital Improvement Program is reviewed and approved each year by the City Council. The CIP is developed through a process separate from, but parallel to, the City's Operating Budget formulation process. The CIP is developed in close coordination with the City's Finance Director and is eventually integrated into the City's overall budget for approval. The program submitted to the City's Budget Committee, the Planning Commission and City Council is a 5-year program with the first year's program described in detail. While the program lists projects for subsequent fiscal years, the projects shown are tentative and are subject to change during the formulation process for each specific budget year. The CIP, through the adoption process, establishes the budget and projects for the upcoming fiscal year and serves as a planning document to guide the infrastructure improvements over the following 4 years. During each budget year's update, the revenue estimates are adjusted, the project cost estimates are reviewed, and the program and project priorities are re-evaluated based on changes in City plans, citizen input, and additional data which may become available. Process The Capital Improvement Program update process begins with citizen involvement through the Citizen Involvement Teams. To ensure coordination with the annual operating budget process, the CIP formulation needs to begin late each calendar year for the following fiscal year, which begins July 15` of the next calendar year. The CIP overview was presented during the November 2002 CIT meeting. The CIT meeting in December provided the CIT members with the opportunity to provide input into the process and to nominate projects for evaluation and possible inclusion into the program. The final meeting in January 2003 completed the CIT process for the FY 2003-04 CIP. After that, the program submittals would be to the City's Budget Committee, the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption and implementation beginning July 1, 2003. The Planning Commission review typically provides another opportunity for public comment on the proposed plan. After review by the Planning Commission, the plan with subsequent modifications, if any, is submitted, with Commission recommendation, to the City Council for review and approval. Council may make additional modifications to the plan during its review and approval process. The approved plan would be the approved Capital Improvement Program for the next fiscal year. FY 2003-04 Projects The Capital Improvement Program includes projects under the following system programs: 0 The Street System Program 6 The Park System Program o The Sanitary Sewer System Program o The Storm Drainage System Program e The City Facilities System Program The Water System Program Appendix A describes the projects and funding sources under the various programs for FY 2003-04. The Five-Year CIP Appendix B provides an introduction to the 5-Year CIP. Appendices B-1 through B-6 present the 5- Year CIP projects beginning with FY 2003-04 and ending with FY 2007-08. Memorandum to City Council FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 2 of 3 Unfunded Street System Projects The failure of the proposed Transportation Bond (Ballot Measure 34-20) in the November 2000 election means that no funding is available to construct some greatly needed street reconstruction and expansion projects during the next few years. In addition, the State Gas Tax has not been increased during the past decade. The amount available from those revenues for corrective and preventative maintenance is highly inadequate to address the $4 million dollar backlog of maintenance needs. As operating and materials costs increase, the amount available from the Gas Tax Fund is expected to decrease each year. Appendix C shows a few of the preventative/corrective maintenance funding requirements, and some of the major street projects that will not have adequate funding over the next few years. The list provided is not all inclusive but provides an indication of the level of funding needed to address some of the projects needed over the next few years. Appendices ■ Appendix A: FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Projects ■ Appendix B: Five-Year Capital Improvement Program Plan ■ Appendix B-1: Street System Program • Appendix B-2: Park System Program • Appendix B-3: Sanitary Sewer System Program ■ Appendix B-4: Storm Drainage System Program ■ Appendix B-5: City Facilities System Program ■ Appendix B-6: Water System Program ■ Appendix C: Unfunded Street System Projects c: William A. Monahan, City Manager Craig Prosser, Finance Director Ed Wegner, Public Works Director Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director Vannie T. Nguyen, CIP Division Manager Tom Imdieke, Finance Operations Manager 1:1ENMOUS12003-04 CLPIFY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program - City Council.doc i I I I I I Memorandum to City Council FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 3 of 3 Wwlh~.l L cs~ U . 0 CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Phone (503) 6394171 Fax(503)624-0752 TO: City Council FROM: Agustin P. Duenas, P.E. City Engineer DATE: June 6, 2003 SUBJECT: Revisions to the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program We have made some revisions to the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) documents transmitted via memorandum dated May 27, 2003. These revisions were made to conform to the CIP budget and budget numbers approved by the Budget Committee and to correct some discrepancies in the original submittal. The documents affected are Appendices A and B1 through B6. Attached are revised appendices to replace the corresponding appendices transmitted in the original submittal. These revised documents, together with the original documents submitted by memorandum dated May 27, 2003, represent the CIP program projects and budget to be considered for approval at the Council meeting on June 10, 2003. Attachments: Revised Appendix A Revised Appendices B-1 through B6 c: William A. Monahan, City Manager Craig Prosser, Finance Director Ed Wegner, Public Works Director Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director Vannie T. Nguyen, CIP Division Manager Tom Imdieke, Finance Operations Manager FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STREET SYSTEM PROGRAM The Street System Program contains projects to construct, maintain, and improve Tigard's street system. Projects are accounted for in the State Gas Tax Fund, the Traffic Impact Fee Fund, the Urban Services Fund, the Underground Utility Fund, the Dartmouth LID Fund and the Wall Street LID Fund. Gas Tax Fund State and County gas tax revenue can be used for upgrading the collector and local streets within Tigard without restriction. This revenue is limited, however, and is not sufficient to fund all the street improvement needs of the City. In addition, the state gas tax has not increased in a decade. As expenses increase and operational costs rise, the amount available for projects will continue to decrease in the coming years. The Gas Tax Fund will soon cease to be a viable source of funding for street-related maintenance projects. Traff c Impact Fee Fund Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) funding can be used only for highway and transit capital improvements that provide additional capacity to major transportation systems. This funding is limited to collector and arterial streets, and 50% must be spent on arterial streets. The transportation planning effort for the City was recently completed with the adoption of the Tigard Transportation System Plan. There will not be sufficient funding in the TIF Fund, however, to complete all the projects that are envisioned over the next 5 to 10 years. Dartmouth LID Fund The Dartmouth LID Fund was established to account for the construction of a local improvement district (LID) on Dartmouth Street. The source of funding is assessments against benefiting properties within the LID. Wall Street LID Fund The design and construction of Wall Street from Hall Boulevard to Hunziker Street is proposed for funding through formation of a local improvement district (LID) supplemented by Traffic Impact Fee funding for engineering design and construction management. The entire project is anticipated to span several fiscal years. The Preliminary Evaluation Report for the proposed LID has been presented to City Council. Council has authorized the preparation of the Preliminary Engineer's Report, as the next step in the process to determine if the LID should be formed. Urban Services Fund The Urban Services Fund was established to track revenues and expenses associated with the provision of services in the areas outside the City limits but within Tigard's urban services area. Tigard provides current planning, development review, and other services in this area under contract with Washington County. The City collects building and planning-related fees to pay for these services. In addition, the County pays the City to provide major road maintenance. The County has recently indicated that they Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 1 of 14 would perform the major road maintenance projects within the Urban Services Area for FY 2003-04. Hence, that maintenance work has not been included in the City's CIP budget for FY 2003-04. Underground Utility Fund This fund receives payments from developers in lieu of installing utilities underground. Funds are then used to place utilities underground typically in conjunction with major roadway projects. Traffic Impact Fee - Urban Services These are Traffic Impact Fees collected within the Urban Services Area. At the time Walnut Island and ancillary islands were annexed into the City, County officials authorized the use of County TIF funds collected within the Urban Services area for TIF-eligible improvements to the major roads within the annexed areas. Those major roads were not transferred to the City as part of the annexation. The jurisdictional transfer occurred later through City Council request by resolution and County Board of Commissioners action to approve the transfer. The following are the proposed projects for FY 2003-04: Project Funding Source Amount Pavement Major Maintenance Program (PMMP) Gas Tax $120,000 Pavement Major Maintenance Program (PMMP) - This is a program of corrective and preventative maintenance on all paved streets in Tigard. The program is designed to provide additional service life to the streets and to keep them safe and serviceable. Streets included in this year's program are: Errol Street (between 112th Avenue and Fonner Street), Walnut Street (from Grant Avenue to Hwy 99W), Greenburg Road (between Center Street and Hwy 99W), and Summerfield Drive (200 feet north of Durham Road to 200 feet west of 116`h Ct.) Traffic Calming Program Gas Tax $10,000 This program provides funding for traffic calming measures Citywide. In the last few years, much of the funding was used to place speed humps on streets that clearly demonstrated the need for installation of these traffic-calming devices. A portion of this fund is used on a 50-50 cost sharing basis with residents for placement of speed humps on streets that do not make the year's list. This year's program includes installation of 3 speed humps on Park Street (between 110th Avenue and Watkins Avenue), 2 speed humps on 95th Avenue (between Shady Lane and North Dakota Street) and 1 speed hump on 130th Avenue (south of Hawksbeard Street). Other streets may be added depending upon neighborhood interest and the street ranking in the speed hump criteria rating system. Street Striping Program Gas Tax $18,000 This is an annual program that provides funding for installation of new striping on streets that demonstrate the need for replacement of existing stripes, pavement markings and pavement markers. This year's program includes new striping at the 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street intersection, Greenburg Road (from 100 feet north of Shady Lane to 100 feet south of Cascade Avenue), Pfaffle Street (from Hall Boulevard to Hwy 99W), and Durham Road (from Upper Boones Ferry Road to 72nd Avenue). Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 2 of 14 Project Funding Source Amount Bonita Road (Hall Blvd. to Fanno Creek Bridge) Gas Tax $260,000 This segment of Bonita Road underwent major reconstruction in 1991. However, due to loss of subgrade support, the pavement surface has failed prematurely. Since correction of the failure requires more than normal maintenance effort, reconstruction of the street, including removal and replacement of the existing aggregate base and AC surfacing, is required. Construction of the project will begin in June and will be completed in the summer of this year. The total construction cost is $260,000. Walnut Terrace (69« Ave to City Limits) Gas Tax $80,000 Storm Drainage $45,000 This completes the project initiated in FY 2002-03 by installing AC pavement on the existing unpaved street and constructing new curbs and driveway aprons. This project also upgrades the existing pipes and catch basins to divert the storm runoff into a proper drainage system. The scope of drainage work includes installation of approximately 750 feet of drainage pipe and construction of new manholes and basins. SW Nimbus Avenue Extension (Land Acquisition) Gas Tax $30,000 The Washington Square Regional Center Plan identifies the extension of SW Nimbus Avenue to connect with Greenburg Road as a high priority project for future implementation. This provides funding for the land acquisition of approximately 8 acres of property within the corridor established for the road extension. This property is currently being marketed for sale. Purchase by the City at this time would ensure that the property does not become a future obstacle to the proposed road extension. Embedded Crosswalk Lights - (Walnut Street/Grant Gas Tax $10,000 Ave intersection - Flashing Beacons) A pilot program began in FY 1999-2000 to install four crosswalk lighting systems at existing marked crosswalks in the City. This year's program provides funding to install a pole-mounted flashing light in each direction of travel for the crosswalk lights that were previously installed at the Walnut Street/Grant Avenue intersection. This safety enhancement to the lighted crosswalk is necessary because of the slight hump in the center of the intersection that may interfere with visibility of the embedded flashing lights. Tiedeman Avenue Railroad Crossings (south of North Gas Tax $28,000 Dakota Street) This is another joint project between the City and Portland & Western Railroad, Inc. to repair deteriorated railroad crossings at various locations Citywide. The crossings at Main Street, 72nd Avenue and North Dakota have been previously repaired through joint efforts with the railroad company. This project addresses the deteriorated crossings at Tiedeman Avenue. The project will reconstruct approximately 200 feet of existing aggregate base and AC pavement and adjust the railroad tracks to match the new pavement. The City will pay for the construction of the roadway approaches. Portland & i Western will manage the project and will pay for all the work related to the adjustment of the tracks. ii I Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 3 of 14 Project Funding Source Amount Commercial Street Sidewalk (95th to Main Street) Gas Tax-$26,600 $117,900 CDBG-$91,300 This project involves pedestrian improvements in the Ti and Town Center to support the commuter rail project. Sidewalks have been previously installed on 951 Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. This project closes a portion of the gap by connecting Lincoln Avenue to Main Street. This project has been submitted for funding under the MTIP Priorities 2004-07 project solicitation process. If the grant is not approved, the project will not be implemented. The project scope is widening of Commercial Street on the north side to provide a sidewalk connecting Lincoln Avenue to Main Street at the planned commuter rail station. It includes the realignment of Commercial Street underneath the Highway 99W overcrossing to provide space for the sidewalk. The gap between 95th Avenue and Lincoln Avenue will be programmed in a future year. Hall Blvd Sidewalks @ Highway 217 Gas Tax $12,036 $83,994 CDBG $71,958 This would alleviate unsafe pedestrian conditions along Hall Boulevard by installing sidewalks within three gaps in the existing sidewalk system. Gaarde Street Improvements-Phase 2 TIF - $977,700 $977,700 Property Owner $264,317 Traffic Impact Fee - US $600,000 Underground Utility $105,000 Water $162,622 Sanitary Sewer $62,300 Total Project Cost $1,907,622 The extension of Gaarde Street from the Quail Hollow-West subdivision north to Walnut Street (Gaarde Street Improvements-Phase 1) was completed in August 2001. The second phase of the project is the widening of Gaarde Street between 121st Avenue and Highway 99W and the improvement of approximately 1,000 feet of 121st Avenue north of the Gaarde Street/121 st Avenue intersection. Funding for this project includes a payment of $264,317 made by Venture Properties, Inc. This payment is in lieu of constructing the road improvements as required for the development of the Whistler's Walk subdivision located west of 121 st Avenue. Construction of this project began in early 2003 and will be completed by the end of calendar year 2004. The Gaarde Street Phase 2 improvements impact the existing water infrastructure. Funding for the water-related improvements had been budgeted for FY 2002-03 with the project anticipated to begin in the fall of 2002. Because the project actually began in early 2003 and spans two fiscal years with L completion in calendar year 2004, funding is also allocated for FY 2003-04. Approximately 1,500 !C lineal feet of water line will be relocated. 1215` Avenue (Right-of-Way) Traffic Impact Fee $100,000 j Traffic Impact Fee - US $100,000 121st Avenue between Gaarde Street and Walnut Street is proposed for widening to the ultimate width of a collector street. Although the project design is still in progress, the required rights-of-way have been identified for the improvements. The City TIF Fund and the TIF-Urban Services Fund will be utilized to purchase a portion of the land acquisition needed for the project. Construction and the remaining rights-of-way acquisition will be programmed in future budgets. Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 4 of 14 Project Funding Source Amount Walnut Street (Right-of-Way) 'traffic Impact Fee $200,000 Traffic Impact Fee - US $100,000 Walnut Street between 116th Avenue and the Tiedeman Avenue/Fonner Street intersection is proposed for widening to its ultimate width using collector standards. Although the project design is still in progress, the required rights-of-way have been identified for the improvements. The City TIF Fund and the TIF-Urban Services Fund will be utilized to purchase a portion of the land acquisition needed for the project. Construction and the remaining rights-of-way acquisition will be programmed in future budgets. Greenburg Road (Washington Square Drive to TIF - $85,000 $745,000 Tiedeman Avenue) Federal - $660,000 This project improves Greenburg Road from Washington Square Drive to Tiedeman Avenue. The bulk of the work will be to widen Greenburg Road between the Highway 217 overcrossing and Tiedeman Avenue to a 5-lane facility. The completed improvements would enhance movement into and out of the Washington Square Regional Center. The project design and land acquisition are funded through the Priorities 2000 & 2002 MTIP funds of $660,000 with Tigard providing $85,000 in matching funds. The total amount of $745,000 reflects the entire amount needed for the project (both federal funding and the local matching funds). The project agreement for the project design and rights-of-way acquisition has been executed. The federal funds for the preliminary engineering work have been obligated and the design of the project is ready to begin. This project has been submitted and is still in contention for construction funding under the MTIP Priorities 2004-07 project selection process. Bull Mountain/Roshak Road Intersection Traffic Impact Fee - US $150,000 This project widens Bull Mountain Road to add turning lanes at that intersection. The project should enhance safety by providing safer turning movements. The project includes minor drainage work and requires some land acquisition to accommodate the widened road. The preliminary design concept has been proposed to and approved by Washington County. Wall Street Local Improvement District TIF - $ 150,000 $150,000 LID - None at this time This project was initiated in FY 2002-03. The TIF Fund provides a total of $250,000 for engineering design costs leading to completion of the Preliminary Engineer's Report. $100,000 has been allocated for FY 2002-03 and $150,000 for FY 2003-04. Any funding for work beyond the Preliminary Engineer's Report will be provided primarily through the Local Improvement District, if it is formed. Hall Blvd/Wall St Intersection and Approaches TIF- $600,000 $1,286,466 Library - $568,000 Property Owner- $118,466 This project is the design and construction of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection and approaches. It includes widening of Hall Boulevard to provide a 3-lane facility, construction of 425 feet of Wall Street, and signalization of the intersection. Funding for this project includes payments made by the Library Project and Polygon Northwest Company, the Fanno Pointe Condominiums developer. The payments are in lieu of constructing half-street improvements as required for the development of their respective properties. Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 5 of 14 Project Funding Source Amount PARKS SYSTEM PROGRAM The Parks System Program contains land acquisition for new or expanded parks and open spaces and improvements to existing parks. The primary source of funding for these projects is the Parks CIP Fund. The Metro Greenspaces Fund and the Tree Replacement Fund provide additional funding. The funding available from these funds are transferred into the Parks CIP fund for implementation of the projects in the CIP. Parks CIP Fund The Parks CIP fund is the City's primary and most consistent funding source for park improvements. The amounts available from the various other parks-related funds will be consolidated under this fund. The fee schedule was adopted in 1996 and applies to new development within the incorporated area. Metro Greenspaces Fund The Metro Greenspaces Fund is used for purchases of open spaces using Tigard's share of the Metro Open Spaces, Parks, and Streams bond proceeds. Funds are provided on a reimbursement basis and can only be used for purchase of open spaces and limited capital improvements. Tree Replacement Fund Developers in Tigard are required to protect as many trees as possible when property is developed. They are given the option, however, when it is not feasible to protect all trees, to pay a fee to the City. This fee is used to plant trees in other areas of the City requiring more trees. These fees are accounted for in the Tree Replacement Fund. The following are the proposed projects for FY 2003-04: Fanno Creek Trail/Grant to Main Street Trail Parks Capital $100,000 SDC - $47,808.00 segment ORPD Grant - $ 52,192 This is part of the Fanno Creek Trail System. This segment connects Main Street to Grant Avenue. Bonita Park @ Milton Court Park SDC -$50,000 $105,400 CDBG Funds - $552400 This project will construct a neighborhood park, which includes a basketball court, playground equipment, trails, and open space. Embedded Crosswalk - Bonita Park @ Milton Court Park SDC $60,000 CDBG Funds - $35,000 Gas Tax - $25,000 Bonita Park will include a basketball court, playground, and sidewalks with greenspace. To enhance safe crossing of Bonita Road for those wishing to access the park, an embedded crosswalk lighting system will be constructed at the Milton court intersection. Fanno Creek Trail Extension - Library Site Parks SDC $50,000 $101,486 RTP Grant - $51,486 Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 6 of 14 NNW Project Funding Source Amount This continues the Fanno Creek Trail System through the new Library site. Summerlake Park Development (Shelter for dog Parks SDC $20,000 $20,000 park) The shelter for the Summerlake off leash area will be a small 16 f3. by 16 ft square shelter. The posts and support structure will be steel beams. The roof will be green metal like the buildings at Cook Park. The shelter will be permanent either mounted on the cement pad or with the posts buried in the concrete. The structure may be either a kit or stick built on site. This structure was identified in the original money set aside for the off leash area in 02-03. This is intended as a place to get out of the rain or sun. Skate Park Development Park Capital $390,000 Private funds $390,000 This project will construct a new skate park, parking and landscaping. Tree Planting Tree Replacement $50,000 This continues the yearly program to plant new trees, remove old and hazardous trees, and maintain and protect existing trees. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PROGRAM The Sanitary Sewer System Program contains projects to construct, maintain, and improve the sanitary sewer system in Tigard. The Clean Water Services Agency of Washington County (CWS) and the City of Tigard have entered into an agreement for cooperative operation of the Sanitary Sewer System. The City owns, maintains and operates the system within certain limits in a defined service area under that agreement with CWS. Projects are accounted for in the Sanitary Sewer Fund. Sanitary Sewer Fund The Sanitary Sewer Fund resources are reserved for maintenance repairs on currently unknown projects, for capacity upgrades as recommended from the CWS Master Plan, and for the Neighborhood and Commercial Area Sewer Extension Programs. The unrestricted portion of the Sanitary Sewer Fund can be used for repair and maintenance projects Citywide and for extension of the existing system to unsewered areas. The establishment of the 5-year Citywide Sewer Extension Program by City Council provides for the installation of sewer service to all developed but unserved areas Citywide. The funding for these projects will be recouped through the formation of reimbursement districts for the installation of the sewer lines. C A i ti s Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 7 of 14 110th Avenue (at Derry Dell Creek) Sanitary Sewer $70,000 This project will relocate an existing pipe that runs in the back of two private properties on 110th Avenue. The grade of the existing pipe is extremely poor and there is evidence of severe bellying. The existing pipe will be abandoned and the new pipe will be installed under the creek. Construction of this project will need to be from July 1 to September 30 to meet to the in-water work window required by environmental permits. Citywide Sewer Extension Program Sanitary Sewer $750,000 The Citywide Sewer Extension Program is a long-term program to extend sewers to all developed but unserved areas Citywide. The City uses the formation of reimbursement districts to construct the sewers. On the average, the City constructs five reimbursement districts a year to provide approximately 120 to 130 connections to existing homes. The Commercial Area Sewer Extension Program is also funded from the Sanitary Sewer Fund and offers the same opportunity to commercial entities that may wish to participate in a reimbursement district for extension of sewer service to a commercial area. Sanitary Sewer Major Maintenance Program Sanitary Sewer $40,000 These funds would be used to contract out sewer repair projects that are beyond the repair capabilities of the Public Works Department. This program is expected to be a continuing program in future years. The Sanitary Sewer Major Maintenance Program in FY 2003-04 will include sewer repair projects located at various locations in the City. STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM PROGRAM The Storm Drainage System Program contains projects to construct, maintain, and improve the storm drainage system in Tigard. The Clean Water Services Agency of Washington County (CWS) regulates the storm drainage system, but Tigard owns, maintains and operates the system within the City limits. Projects are funded from the Storm Sewer Fund and the Water Quality/Quantity Fund. Storm Sewer Fund The Storm Sewer Fund CIP is supported from storm drainage charges and Systems Development Charges (SDCs). SDC funds must be used for projects designated in the CWS master plan. Water Quality/Quantity Fund Water Quality/Quantity fees are collected by the City on certain development activities in the City. These charges, which were instituted by CWS, are used to fund offsite surface water system improvements, water quality enhancement projects, and capacity improvements to the storm drainage system. The following are the proposed projects for FY 2003-04: Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Storm Sewer $100,000 Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 8 of 14 The Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program was initiated in FY 2001-02. Since then, approximately 1,500 feet of existing pipes have been rehabilitated using a trenchless construction method that prevents damage to the existing pavement. The City's television inspection reports identify 4,500 feet of storm drain pipes that are seriously damaged and need to be repaired or replaced. This project continues the program by rehabilitating 1,000 feet of pipes through installation of cured-in-place pipes inside the existing pipes utilizing the trenchless construction method. Storm Drainage Major Maintenance Storm Sewer $80,000 Program This program addresses minor storm drainage problems requiring more than normal maintenance effort. One of the projects of this year's program includes erosion control along Fanno Creek at DeAnn Court. Fanno Creek Trail Wetland Mitigation Storm Sewer $10,000 Monitoring For construction of the Fanno Creek trails, the permit issued by the DSL and the Corps of Engineers requires that the mitigation area be monitored for a period of three years. An environmental consultant has monitored the success of the wetland enhancement and prepared an annual report to be submitted to the agencies. The first and second monitoring reports were submitted in 2001 and 2002 respectively, The final monitoring report is due by December 1, 2003. Gaarde Street Phase 2 Wetland Mitigation Storm Sewer $6,000 This project provides mitigation measures that were required by the DSL, the Corps of Engineers and CWS to offset the loss of 0.009 acres of wetland associated with the widening of Gaarde Street. The offsite mitigation area is along the Fanno Creek Greenway immediately north of Tigard Street. The vegetated enhancement area is located along the Fanno Creek trail south of the Burnham Business Park. The project will provide initial vegetation management and plant installation during the summer and fall of 2003. Storm Debris Processing Center Storm sewer $37,500 This project is for the establishment of a storm debris processing center. Summer Lake Improvements Water Quality/Quantity $10,000 This continues the flow monitoring of Summer Lake. The City has a contract with the County Watermaster to perform the flow-monitoring work. Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 9 of 14 WATER SYSTEM PROGRAM The Water System Programs contains projects to construct, improve, maintain and replace Tigard's water system. The Tigard water service area provides water to two-thirds of Tigard, the City of King City, the City of Durham and an unincorporated area under the jurisdiction of the Tigard Water District. In May of 2000 a 20-year CIP schedule was completed. This document was updated in September of 2002. This document serves as the backbone for the CIP projects. Not included in this document, however are capital maintenance projects or projects needed to coordinate with other City CIP projects such as street improvements and possibly LID'S. Projects are funded by three main funds: the Water Fund, the Water SDC Fund and Water CIP Fund. Water Fund The Water Fund is the primary operating and maintenance fund of the water system. Revenues come from water sales and connection fees. This fund supports operation, major capital maintenance and some system improvements not eligible for funding from System Development Charges (SDC's). Water SDC Fund The Water SDC Fund receives revenue from System Developments Charges (SDC's) charged to new development. This fund can only be used for improvements to expansion of the current water system needed to support new customers. Water CIP Fund The Water CIP Fund is presently reserved for projects to develop a new long-term water supply for the system. An example of a project previously paid for by this fund is the Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) well. The following are the proposed projects for FY 2003-04: On-Going Projects For Water Fund Funding Source Amount I %-inch and Larger Water Meter Water $40,000 Replacements The large meter replacement program is for the systematic testing, repair and/or replacement of all 1 V2- inch and larger water meters. Testing and or replacement of this size water meters have been shown to make financial sense in that the investment is recouped by the additional revenues received by accurate meters. 1-inch and Smaller Water Meter defective or Water $15,000 malfunctioning Meter Replacements Eighty percent of the existing water meters fall into this category. Demographics of this group include predominately residential meters, irrigation meters, small businesses and restaurants. This will be the program's sixth year. These size meters do not warrant testing, and defective meters are replaced. Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 10 of 14 On-Going Projects For Water Fund Funding Source Amount New Water Meter Installations water $60,000 Meter installation represents the cost to install new water meters in subdivisions, minor land partitions and commercial properties. Water connection fees recover these costs. New Water Service Installation Water $30,000 Funding covers direct taps into existing water main lines. A typical use would be minor land partitions, inf ll developments, etc. Water connection fees recover these costs. 2-inch Service Line Replacements Water $60,000 This program replaces existing 2-inch galvanized service lines with new copper service lines. There has been an observed increase in leaks on galvanized service lines. This program upgrades existing service lines and minimizes water loss due to leaks. Fire Hydrant Replacements Water $50,000 This project replaces older fire hydrants in the service area. The focus is to update all 2-port 2 '/2-inch fire hydrants to 3-port 5 '/4-inch fire hydrants. This is expected to be the last year needed to complete this project. New Projects Water Main Replacements Water $78,750 This program is based on the needs identified in the "Water Distribution System Hydraulic Study." As an example, piping replacements would coincide with Street Improvement Projects, looping of pipe, etc. Security Vulnerability Evaluation and Water $100,000 Upgrades This is an EPA-mandated program to evaluate and mitigate security vulnerabilities. SCADA System Water $175,000 In 1993, the Water Division installed a Supervisor Control and Acquisition Data Advisor (SCADA) system to monitor the 13 reservoir, 7 pump stations (which include 15 pumps and motors), 4 wells, 4 backup emergency generators, 4 meter vaults (with flow readings) and reporting capability. Since the installation, our current water system needs have approached the capabilities of the system and technical support is not supported on the West Coast. During the upgrade/replacement we will be evaluating better/quicker means of communicating (land lines, radio, DSL, etc.), installing industry standard equipment and providing better means of monitoring all of our water system with room for future system expansion. Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 11 of 14 On-Going Projects For Water Fund Funding Source Amount Master Pressure Reducing Valve Water $8,000 Installations Master PRV installations, location and frequency are dependent on the location of new developments. Most installations are made in the service area on and around Bull Mountain. The City installs master regulator stations to control high pressures. On-going Projects Water Main Line Oversizing Water SDC $50,000 During the course of the year the City may find the need to upsize a planned pipeline through a new development, thus accomplishing an identified capital improvement as listed in the "Water Distribution Hydraulic Study." Alberta Rider School Improvements The City has found in necessary to make adjustments in the CIP schedule to accommodate the schedule for the construction of a new school. The School District and the City have agreed to locate a new reservoir on a school site located near the intersection of SW Bull Mountain Road and 13151 Ave. This project will plan, design and construct reservoir, piping and pump station improvements in the 550-foot service zone concurrent with the construction of the school. New Projects 550-Foot Service Zone Reservoir #2 (3.0 Water SDC $1,228,500 million gallon), construction spans through Water Fund $588,000 FY 04/05 Total Project Costs $1,816,500 This reservoir will be located on the school district site (Rider School). Constructing this reservoir will eliminate some of the demand currently supplied by the Hi-Tor (713-foot service zone). Supply to the reservoir will be provided through the transfer pump station upgrade listed below. Transfer Pump Station Upgrade, Water SDC $617,400 construction spans through FY 04/05 Water Fund $485,010 Total Project Costs $1,102,410 Construction of this improvement increases pumping capacity from 2,000 gpm to 3,300 gpm at the 713- Foot Service Zone and 3,900 gpm to the reservoir listed above. Along with the piping improvements listed below, the existing pump station at the Canterbury site will be abandoned. i Reservoir #2 supply Piping Improvements, Water SDC $74,692 i construction spans through FY 04105 Water Fund $52,987 i Total Project Costs $127,679 1 This is needed for existing and future needs in both transmission and distribution to serve the new i reservoir and pump station upgrade listed above. Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 12 of 14 On-Going Projects For Water Fund Funding Source Amount Canterbury Hill Supply Piping, construction Water SDC $126,044 spans through FY 04/05 Water Fund $89,416 Total Project Costs $215,460 Various piping will be needed for increased transmission capacity to the Canterbury site from the new reservoir and pump station upgrade listed above. Piping improvements will allow abandonment of existing Canterbury Site Pump Station Canterbury Looped Piping Improvements, Water SDC $84,029 construction spans through FY 04105 Water Fund $59,610 Total Project Cost $143,639 Piping improvements will create better fire flow, provide for future growth and remove dead end water quality problems Secure 550' Reservoir - two sites (land Water SDC 175,000 purchase) Aquifer Storage and Recovery(ASR) Water CIP $670,000 Last year, Tigard completed the pilot phase of the ASR program. With the positive results of the pilot, an additional ASR well is scheduled for this year. ASR provides the ability to inject water during the winter months in the aquifer (when water is plentiful), store the water in the aquifer for a few months, and then withdraw that same water in the summer months to help manage higher water demands. Feasibility Report, Phase II - Scoggins dam Water CIP $230,929 raise As part of obtaining a long-term water source for the Tigard service area, the City is partnering with other Joint Water Commission owners (JWC) on the Scoggins Dam Raise feasibility report. Hillsboro Raw Water Pipeline Pre-Design Water CIP $134,240 This project will connect the JWC treatment plant to headworks at Scoggins dam via pipeline. The purpose of the pipeline is to reduce evaporation and hence water loss from the existing waterway. It is estimated that 20% of the water from Scoggins dam is lost prior to the treatment plant. Bull Run Regional Phase III-Report Water CIP $50,000 Phase III gives each agency the cost for the formation of the Proposed Bull Run Regional Drinking Water Agency. CITY FACILITIES SYSTEM PROGRAM The City Facilities System Program contains projects to maintain, improve or expand general purpose city facilities (such as City Hall) or facilities which do not fit into any of the other CIP Programs (such as the Library). Funding for these projects comes from the General Fund or from the Facility Fund. General Fund Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 13 of 14 The General Fund supports CIP projects of a general nature or which serve operations budgeted in the General Fund. The primary source of revenue is the property tax. Facility Fund The Facility Fund provides funding for major capital projects supporting General Fund programs. The primary sources of revenue for this fund are transfers from the General Fund or donations for specific projects. The following are the proposed projects for FY 2003-04: Library Construction Facility Fund $7,038,000 This funding continues the new Library construction through FY 2003-04. The library project is expected to be completed by August 2004. HVAC Replacements - Senior Center Facility Fund 50,000 Access Control @ Water Building/ Facility Fund $90,000 Canterbury/WB Gates & PW Annex Seismic Upgrade @ Police Department Facility Fund $40,000 Space Planning for Water Building Facility Fund $30,000 Construction Drawings & Construction Facility Fund $139,380 Administration for Library/City Hall Remodel This sets aside funding for the preparation of construction drawings and for administration of the Library/City Hall remodel project. I:1englpua=03-04 CIPWp pendix A - Capital Improvement Program for FY 2003-04.doc Appendix A FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program Page 14 of 14 ■wos STREET SYSTEM PROGRAM Total costs Underg*ou°d Federal Funding 00009Im0000 Utility ST1P City T F Gas Taz LID Funding RoadNRr4D County TV 51,682,700 FR038Cr $600,000 $105,000 $200,000 5100,000 $300,000 FY 2003-04 $977,700 $100,000 $120,000 t Improvements Phase 2 $100,000 S10,000 Gaarde Street $200,000 518,000 121st Avenue ROW S120,000 5260,000 Walnut Street ROW program $10,000 S80,000 pavement Major Maintenance $18,000 Traffic Calming program 5 00 $260,000 52828, ,000 Street Striping Program $80,000 Hall to Bridge $83,994 Bonitz Rd from City Limits) $10'000 Walnut Terrace (69th - to t Flashing Beacons-Embedded X-walk $28,000 $660,000 S745,000 Walnut at Grant $93,994 $150,000 Tiedeman Ave Railroad Crossing near Pfaffle/217) $150,000 S150,000 Hall Blvd. Sidewalk Imp. Washington Square Drive to $85,000 51,286,466 Greenburg Road Design ( $117,900 Tiedeman Avenue) S150,000 $91,300 Bull Mountain RdlRosbak Rd Intersection $1,286,466 $30,000 Wall Street LID roaches $26,600 $8,319 Hall Blvd/Wall St Intersection & APP Commercial St Sidewalk (95h-Main St) $30,000 00DID00 CCU all Dartmouth LID - Final Cost Acquisition) DD 0000tE13 SW Nimbus Ave. Extension (Land 03000, 33 T.rDEDD Ct~~~p or ,MUZUaoi D 0 5100,000 S10,000 S15,000 S100,000 $55,000 pp S10,000 Major Maintenance Program $50,000 pavement Maj $15,000 5750,000 Traffc Calming program $55,000 S50,000 S900,000 Street Striping Program $50,000 6300,000 000 $200,000 Embedded Crosswalk 5100, $d0Q 000 $20,000 Pedestrian Improvements 5100,000 Improvements Phase 2 $800,000 S%000 Gaarde Street S100,000 S100,000 121st Avenue ROW $20,000 50,000 Walnut Street ROW Design 00 offToom Hall BIvdIMoDonald St. Intersection Imp 6100,000 or Maintenance - Urban Services OT-0 Pavement Mal C C a OT-E Wall Street LID page B-1-1 oo0o0am®m FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM lune6.2003 -.00110 Kill won a® ppppp ®ppp°°p mm amppa4a~a a~aQ a $100,000 a®m Slp Ooo m 5150 S30,000 S1000,000 Damao 5100 00° Sloooo0 554 000 Slp 000 5100,004 $50,000 ~sct~~ psog $15,000 ~p1~"'- rMaintettan 530,400 pavemc C~►~gpsog~ 1,000000 000 ~ SueetStr<pmgpsog~' 550, r~~~~ 1snPs0vements CD pedestn2a t co uction Future Projects $50440 fl 104000 W C~ 10040 Walnut o~ Utility ReseNe f~ctionlmP RU Ac UnderB Wald St.Inte 15440 Service Na11131vd1M Maintence "Urban 555 000 PaVesnentM l []C~'E~SU~p~~ 534040 5100,000 5500,440 510,440 512504Q 515,444 5125 000 Ca~ Nlaintenas+ce prog~ 555,404 4 p00 pavementMaPt 530,400 513 , sc Calm~g pr°g~ 5540,444 580 000 Trot StsiPmgProgsam 554000 sucet w tided CsOSSalk ianlmPiOVemen~ ent 5125000 pedests tsuction ,all Sueet Cons Realignm unz-VT lntessection 5125,440 554 400 s,,iTMs111a1UH 5134000 Hall to Genblop Const. 580000 Design se peB'%T ction Locust Street St.lntesse to City Nall But Hall glvdlMcQOnald im 13ridgeN eN Ha11 Blvd half-suee ain enanCe - Urban S ices pavementr'IaS°s M ~aC~~ page 13-1"2 slow ppooo~m®m 3 OA CAPITAL IMPRO~MENT PROGRAM FY_P& joO3 v,~,r■ ■ ■ v ■ nor 000000M00000 moo 0000 000000 ®®m 00oM00 0m®00o®o 000000®0000 0000=00 0=000®0 00M OOT]®oo 0 00000MIM 0® 0007 00 ®000000 Pavement Major Maintenance Program $70,000 70000 Pedestrian Improvements $30,000 30000 Traffic Calming Program $10,000 10000 Street Striping Program $15,000 15000 Greenburg Road Construction $1,989,000 $1,989,000 121 st Avenue Construction $800,000 $100,000 $900,000 Scoffins/HaIVHunziker Intersection Realignment Design $125,000 $125,000 Locust Street Design (Hall to Greenburg) $125,000 $125,000 Pavement Major Maintenance - Urban Services $50,000 $50,000 00=9M0a:,00, a (]DEC= Q00(J®-0 DOD= 00000M $0 fDi1b= FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Page B-1-3 June 6, 2003 0 0000 m ®m d Total ~ST~M pRO~LIF"' ponations p ~>S S parks SDC _ C1Y $100,000 $105,400 PROACT $100,000 $60,000 $390,000 ain SaeetTxail $101,486 $105,400 y 2003a0o Cxeek'Txail - Grant to M $60,000 $390,000 $50,000 Segment $101,486 $20,000 ga itaPaxk@Milalk-BOXIOyaxk@M dded CrOSsw $50,000 $826,886 Embe Development LibTaT'J site $20400 Skate Park - X390,000 FannO CCeekTxailEXtension k ents elopment (shelter for dog Par $436,886 $200,000 lacem ) TxeeRep $50,000 SummexlakeParkDev Y 2003-04 Totals for $240,000 $31,000 $50,040 $281,000 gY 2004-05 v?axkDevelopmentPhaseYi $31,000 $O summer laming X281,000 TxeeReplaceroen meta $100,000 laej%,,,Develop FY 2004.05 Totals for $40,000 $140,000 yhase 1 40' 0 $100,000 FY 2045-06 xeekFaxkr`jevelopmi Cen er (loop nail, $ 00 FannoC S uaLeRegiona washington Q3,000feet) all Blvd. to $45000 ately m nt Pbgnage public $100,000 $50000 appxoximpack Develop PannOCreek trails,landscapt gshings $45,000 and Library site - ens, furn layg'OUttd $50,000 $335,000 laces, gard ent (install p gathering p park developm NOrthview - $335,000 field) Fage B-2 l soccer lacements VY 2005-06 Tree Rep Totals for AppE~DIX B 2 APITAL IMpRCVEMENT pRpGRAM FY 2003-0~ C June 6,20 LEGIOW"y STRAP Total ~~~EN1 p.R~GgAl~ Dona~O°s p ~S S parks SUC - CIP $100,000 $50,000 pROACT $1(J0,000 $45,000 $50,000 d acquisition laygtound and $45,000 $195,000 py 2006-01 lan Ash Creek Trail e lacements install p $100,000 Tree R P k development $195,000 ~orthvlew Pat $50,000 field) Totals for Fy 2006-01 $100,000 soccer $150,000 $50,000 Fy 2001-08 evelopment x,150,000 3ackpatk~ ents Tree RePlacem 2006-01 Totals for Fy Pase g 2 2 M AppENDIX g 2 AY1TALlMYR~VEMENT YRCGRA py 2003-04 C t,me 6, 2003 6E~I~ii"iT~ ST~~ YSTE~pR~G~ SNIT ~Y SEAR S Saniwry Sealer Funa SO,ooo s~54,aoa Cgp3E~T $40 Qp0 Dell Creek S62,300 Fy 2003-04 eve at Decoy cam tlOd' xt'OslonPc°g 8922,300 Citywide Sewer Major Maintenanc ementDistricts Sanitary tceet Phase 1[ - lteimb Fy 2003-04 Gaacde Totals for SOP(' 5750,000 $40,000 Fy 2004-05 $830,p00 Ser Ma)°c Mampcog am Districts Sanitary sewec Extension ent C~tyw~d Street Phase ll - Reimbucsem C,aacde Totals for FY 2004-as S40,000 5.150,000 890,000 Major Maintenance Fy 200 Sa itacy Sew pcogcam er Fy 2005-06 C►tyw.lde sewer Extension Totals for $40,000 S 150,000 Fy 2046-01 ance 8990'p00 Sewer Malor Mainten Sanitary ecBxtensionprogcam Fy 2006-0'! $40,p40 0 riide Sew Totals for $150,p00 890,000 Major Mainpco Sealer E gam Fy 2p0~ OS Fy 2007.08 Sanitary Sevier xtension Citywide Sew Totals for Page g-3-t GSM xv-PODIXB3 APITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO Fy 2003.04 M000000000 June 6, STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM PROGRAM PROJECT Storm Sewer Fund Water Quality Fund Total Costs FY 2003-04 Storm Drainage Major Maintenance $80,000 $80,000 Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation $100,000 $100,000 Fanno Creek Trail Wetland Mitigation Monitoring $10,000 $10,000 Gaarde Street (Phase 2) Wetland Mitigation $6,000 $6,000 Storm Debris Processing Center $37,500 $37,500 Walnut Terrace Storm Drainage $45,000 $45,000 Summer Lake Impovements/Monitoring $10,000 $10,000 Totals for FY 2003-04 $278,500 $10,000 $288,500 FY 2004-05 Clean Water Services Master Plan Projects $150,000 $150,000 Summer Lake Improvements/Monitoring $10,000 $10,000 Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation $100,000 $100,000 Storm Drainage Major Maintenance $60,000 $60,000 Fanno Creek Trail Wetland Mitigation Monitoring $6,000 $6,000 Gaarde Street (Phase 2) Wetland Mitigation 5,000 $5,000 Storm Drainage Improvements 100,000 $100,000 $271,000 $160,000 $431,000 FY 2005-06 Clean Water Services Master Plan Projects $150,000 $150,000 Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation $100,000 $100,000 Storm Drainage Major Maintenance $60,000 $60,000 Fanno Creek Trail Wetland Mitigation Monitoring $6,000 $6,000 Gaarde Street (Phase 2) Wetland Mitigation $5,000 $5,000 Storm Drainage Improvements $100,000 $100,000 Totals for FY 2004-05 $271,000 $150,000 $421,000 FY 2006-07 Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation $100,000 $100,000 Storm Drainage Major Maintenance $60,000 $60,000 Gaarde Street (Phase 2) Wetland Mitigation $5,000 $5,000 Walnut St Wetland Mitigation $10,000 $10,000 Storm Drainage Improvements $100,000 $100,000 Totals for FY 2004-05 $275,000 $0 $275,000 FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM June 6, 2003 APPENDIX B4 Page B-4-1 t,~Gl~ll>1TY M SYSTEMpTttOG~' z°,a~c°sts AQE water Quality Fund STQ SewerFnnd $100,000 Storm SOP" $5,000 $100 400 55 000 pRO~G'~ Sg0,000 $100,000 200'1.0$ 55 000 $250,000 e Rehabilitation 55 000 stocn►~~d1nP~4 ocMaintenance SO D1.ainageMaJ ~etlandM~tigation $100 000 Stone gulag (Phase 2) anon 5250,000 Gaatde twetlandM't'g FF 200q.05 walnuts etm4L0veme ~otalsior StormDn"nag 100000 Page E.q-2 AppENDYX B.4 MPRpVEMENTPRGGRAM FY 2003-p4 CAPITALI y nP 2003 LEGIBILITY STRIP FA PROG~ TIES SYSTEM CI~'I city Totalprojectcost CITY Water Fnnd City Facility Fund Facility $7,038,000 PRp~cT $90,000 $7,038,000 $50,000 Fy 2003.04 $90,000 $40,000 Construction Canterbury Gates, & Public $501000 clew Library $30,000 Water Building, $40,000 Access control at ours Works AdMinistration D Replacements $139,380 Senior Center- HV AC ReP Costs split with W ater, Storm, & $30,000 ent - Seism ic Upgrade policeDepa. for Water Building- gall Sa $139,380 $7,387,380 Space planning !City nitary dministration for Library 80 $2,932,000 Cllitaq tionDrawings & $1,391,3111 2003 Remodel Totals for Fy -04 $580,760 $2,932,000 Fy 2004-05 $580;160 $3,512,160 ibrary Construction New L !City gall Remodel (Construction drawings $3,512,760 Old Libraryy 2004-45 administration) Totals for I $413,586 $413,586 $413,586 Fy 2005-06 $413,586 ibrarylC'ry Hall Remodel (Construction drawings Old L administratiFon 2005-06 Totals for Page B-5-1 APPENDIX'B IMPRgV6MBK~ PROGRAt`'t py 2003_04 CAPITAL June 6,2003 Salim U001010J j ~,Erc~r .,EIS pgOG~~ Y FA~YLITIES SY5T water city ~,otatproiect cost cq Fuud Fund Facility city Fad Ity 45,000 $2p0,0p0 $45,000 5245,000 pgOSECT $200,000 Fy 2006-07 5245,000 $200.000 enter Seismic UPcts Tatals 2006.07 C facility pro', for 5200,0p0 Senior City Miscellaneous S200,000 $200,000 FY 2001-08 njects 2006-0'1 Miscellaneous City facility Pi Totals for FY Page B-5'2 ApPEN~IX B"5 CAPITAL LMPRMENT YRC'~'M CVE FY 2003 04 3une 6, 2003 WATER SYSTEM PROGRAM 1PROJECT Water Fund Water SDC Water UP Total Project Cost FY 2003-04 Program 1 1/2+ Meter Replacements $40,000 $40,000 Replacement of Defective Meters $15,000 $15,000 New Meter Installations $60,000 $60,000 New Water Service Installations $30,000 $30,000 Master Pressure Reducing Valve Installations $8,000 $8,000 Fire Hydrant Installations $50,000 $50,000 24nch Service Line (Replacement) $60,000 $60,000 Security Vulnerability Evaluations Upgrades $100,000 $100,000 Water Main Replacement $78,750 $78,750 Gaarde Street Phase If - Water Relocate $162,622 $162,622 Water Main Oversizing Program $50,000 $50,000 Secure 550' Reservoir 2 sites (land purchase) $175,000 $175,000 ASR (Aquifer Storage and Recovery) Phase II $670,000 $670,000 Feasibility Report, Phase II Scoggins Dam Raise $230,929 $230,929 Bull Run Regional Phase II Report $50,000 $50,000 Hillsboro Raw Water Peipline Pre-design $134,240 $134,240 Alberta Rider School Impovements $3,405,688 $3,405,688 SCADA System $175,000 $175,000 Totals for FY 2003-04 $779,372 $225,000 $4,490,857 $5,495,229 FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM June 6, 2003 APPENDIX B-6 Page B-6-1 WATER SYSTEM PROGRAM IPROJECT Water Fund Water SDC Water CIP Total Project Cost FY 2004-5 Program 1 1/2+ Meter Replacements $40,000 $40,000 Replacement of Defective Meters $15,000 $15,000 Meter Installations $60,000 $60,000 Water Service Installations $10,000 $10,000 Fire Hydrant Installations $50,000 $50,000 2-Inch Service Line (Replacement) $60,000 $60,000 Gaarde St. Phase II Water Relocate $50,000 $50,000 Water Main Replacement $78,750 $78,750 Security Volnerability Evaluations & Upgrades $50,000 $50,000 Water Line Replacement - SW Walnut (Bill Hunter 11/25/02) $359,100 $359,100 $718,200 Replace Well House # 2 (Gaarde Site) $35,000 $35,000 Water Main Oversizing Program $50,000 $50,000 Secure 550' Reservoir 2 sites (land purchase) $175,000 $175,000 ASR Phase II $404,000 $404,000 Feasibility Report, Phase II Scoggins Dam Raise $160,000 $160,000 Bull Run Regional Phase II Report $25,000 $25,000 Alberta Rider School Impovements $4,866,029 $4,866,029 Totals for FY 2004-05 $807,850 $584,100 $5,455,029 $6,846,979 FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM June 6.2003 APPENDIX B-6 Page B-6-2 Jim WATER SYSTEM PROGRAM IPROJECT Water Fund Water SDC Water CIP Total Project Cost FY 2005-6 Program 1 1/2+ Meter Replacements $40,000 $40,000 Replacement of Defective Meters $15,000 $15,000 Meter Installations $60,000 $60,000 Water Service Installations $10,000 $10,000 Fire Hydrant Installations $50,000 $50,000 2-Inch Service Line (Replacement) $40,000 $40,000 Water Main Replacements $78,750 $78,750 Water Line Replacement - SW Walnut (Bill Hunter 11/25/02) $359,100 $359,100 $718,200 Menlor Pump Station (41.5% existing capacity $280,125 $280,125 Menlor Pump Station (58.5% future) $394,875 $394,875 Water Main Oversizing Program $50,000 $50,000 Totals for FY 2005-06 $933,975 $803,975 $0 $1,736,950 FY 2006-7 Program 1 1/2+ Meter Replacements $40,000 $40,000 Replacement of Defective Meters $15,000 $15,000 Meter Installations $60,000 $60,000 Water Service Installations $10,000 $10,000 Fire Hydrant installations $50,000 $50,000 Water Main Replacements $78,750 $78,750 550# I Reservoir Design $612,125 $862,850 $1,474,975 Abandonment of #1 Pump Station $52,500 $52,500 Water Main Oversizing Program $50,000 $50,000 ASR Phase II $701,000 $701,000 Totals for FY 2006-07 $918,375 $912,850 $701,000 $2,532,225 FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM June 6, 2003 APPENDIX B-6 Page 8-6-3 WATER SYSTEM PROGRAM IPROJECT Water Fund Water SDC Water CIP Total Project Cost FY 2007-08 Program 1 1/2+ Meter Replacements $40,000 $40,000 Replacement of Defective Meters $15,000 $15,000 Meter Installations $60,000 $60,000 Water Service Installations $10,000 $10,000 Fire Hydrant installations $50,000 $50,000 Water Main Replacements $78,750 $78,750 550 #1 Reservoir Design (42% existing capacity) $612,125 $862,850 $1,474,975 150th Ave 12" Improvements (77.4 existing capacity) $132,354 $38,646 $171,000 Water Main Oversizing Program $50,000 $50,000 Totals for FY 2006-07 $998,229 $951,496 $0 $1,949,725 FY 2003-04 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM June 6, 2003 APPENDIX B-6 Page B-6-4 LEGI®Itfr' SYR~p Totai M pgp M Donatious G~ Y ~gK5 SY5TE parks svc _ cv $loo,oox $lo5,A04 $60,000 PROACT $100,0x0 $390,400 Street"frail $105,400 ,101,486 t to Main 390,x00 $50 p00 titan $60,x00 ~ FV 2003-OA 'Trail " Faso Creek $20,400 gegme"t iltor► Milton $101,486 ark @ M BonitaPark $50,000 Bonita pCrosswalk - 5826'g8b Embedded site $20,000 Skate Park Development lion - Library $390000 Fam'oCree Vail EXten $200,000 c,beltei for dOg paTk) $436,8g6 eats $50,040 'Treev jAe'VarkDevelopment~ FY 2003-04 $31,040 gumm Totals for $200 QOa $50,000 $281,000 $31,000 s0 mentPha$e 11 ParkDevelop ,Fy 200A-OS lanting ~Zg1,000 $100,000 gummerlake Ttee Replacemea jack Park Development Totals for F~ 2004-05 000 $44000 $100, base 1 $4o,p00 $1p4,040 evelopment p base nail, F~ 200Fanno Creek Park D Regional Center ~ $45,000 W ashington SA3,Qp0 f eet~ Prase 1 tKall Blvd to $100,004 $50,000 approximately signage, public park~evelopn'ent Palo Creek dscaping' $45,000 $335,000 site - ttatls,a dens, fulmiswi,gs lay$round and $50,000 $0 Library laces, g tnstatl p gatheimg p at development No~hview P $335000 page B'2-1 soccer field) eats Tree Replacem Totals for FY 2x05-0 ApFEN~IXB 2 L1MPRpV6M~NTPRQGRAM Ap1TA FY 2o03,04 UNFUNDED STREET SYSTEM PROGRAM PROJECTS Preventative and Corrective Maintenance Projects The following are brief descriptions of some of the unfunded Street System projects considered for Gas Tax Funding in FY 2003-04. • A large number of streets are in need of preventative and corrective maintenance, $750,000 but were not included in FY 2003-04 because of funding limitations. Segments of 72nd Avenue, Durham Road, Ross Street, 67th, 69th (North of Dartmouth), Thorn Street, 121" Avenue, North Dakota Street (north of Greenburg Road), Greenburg Road, and others are currently in need of reconstruction, repair or pavement overlay to improve pavement condition and rideability. • 98 h Avenue (Greenburg Road to Pihas Court) - This project will acquire right-of- $220,000 way and widen approximately 750 feet of 98th Avenue on the west side of the street, construct curb and sidewalk and connect to an existing sidewalk on 98th Avenue at Pihas Court. Minor drainage improvements are also included in the project. • Mapleleaf Street - This project will widen the existing pavement on the north side of $65,000 Mapleleaf Street (east of 72"d Avenue) to the standard width of a typical local street and extend the existing curb and sidewalk to 72"d Avenue. Totals $1,035,000 The following unfunded projects are some of the major reconstruction and widening projects that are needed to accommodate the existing and future traffic on the City's arterials, collectors, and neighborhood routes: Street Major Reconstruction and Expansion Projects Category Project Project Cost Collectors and Arterials 121 st Avenue - Walnut to North Dakota $2,030,000 Walnut Street - Tiedeman to 121st $4,990,000 121 st Avenue - Gaarde to Walnut $3,760,000 Burnham Street - Main to Hall $1,570,000 Tiedeman Ave. - Greenburg to Tigard St. $860,000 Greenburg Road Construction (Shady Lane to Tiedeman Avenue) $2,000,000 72nd Avenue - Hampton to Dartmouth $1,500,000 72"d Avenue - Dartmouth to Highway 99W $2,200,000 Neighborhood Routes Former Street - Walnut to 115th Avenue $1,570,000 Tigard Street - Main to Tiedeman (south side) $990,000 Commercial Street (North side, Main St. to Lincoln St.) $460,000 Totals $21,930,000 I:%Fng%Gu%%2002-00 CIPUnfunded Stnat Sysbm PM@cts- 200104.dx APPENDIX C Unfunded Street System Projects Page 1 of 1 • Cz - (01 )0.03 r City of Tigard Program Overview • Process FY 2003-04 0Program Areas Capital • FY 2002-03 Project Highlights Improvement Projects for FY 2003-04 • Funding Issues Program *Unfunded Projects f.< June 10, 2003 .:l t Process Process • Adopted each fiscal year (July thru a Incorporation into the City's overall June) budget process • Planning Commission hearing (May) vFormulation begins with presentation (to Citizen Involvement Teams ity Council hearing and approval (June) (November) *Effective July 1 (beginning of new *Project Input from citizens (November and December) fiscal year) a r ' i. Program Areas Program Areas S Street System Program o Sanitary Sewer System Program ► Traffic Studies ► Sanitary Sewer Major Maintenance ► Traffic Safety-Related Projects ► Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvements ► Pavement Major Maintenance C► Sewer Extension Program ► Traffic Calming Program ~ Storm Drainage System Program ► Major Street Capital Improvements ' ► Storm Sewer Major Maintenance ► Bridge Replacements ► Storm Drainage Capital Improvements s a ) Program Areas Status • Parks System Program • CIT Presentations - November 2002 ► Citywide Parks through January 2003 ► Trail Systems • Budget Committee Presentation - Water System Program CMay 12, 2003 a City Facilities System Program 0 Approved by Planning Commission - May 19, 2003 40 City Council Review and Approval - June 10, 2003 M 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights _ SPE[ 2° w L - - d' P J North Dakota Street r 7 Railroad tracks and*' T approaches North Dakota (121" to 1151^) o to 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights ~ I I North Dakota 1 Railroad Track Repair andg o ^ikt. Overlay Project ~ ;4 - n n 2 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights s t` - s d• Rose Vista Sewers L" and Slurry Seal Projects u 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights Walnut Street After paving Locust fw Street Before paving Striping Street - Project u m 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights _ i Sr,Sia• m~n`S v t r~ t.. -'k~'~ . -Vd ~ t YM. yI9 ~y '>en<•1. 1.: 4. f 1T ~ L1i• - ~ ~y UCt~'C~ pIO~CCt y"i i r { . < r ~ yM7 = JS F~ ~ .z~.- n 3 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights t Gaarde Street Phase 2 s -t Improvements .o iv i 207Projectighlights 2002-03 Project Highlights t .I 2002-03 Project Highlights 2002-03 Project Highlights 98'^ Avenue/Durham Road - Intersection Signalization 98th Avenue & Durham Road 1 Intersection Signalization a 1 ' j Vii.. 1 Work in Progress) 4 2002-03 Project Highlights Projects In Progress 98th Avenue/Durham Road Intersection 7 1 t l :S 'b Projects In Progress , Walnut Street and 121st Avenue (Design only) 0 e project Status ► Project design nearing completion Rights-of-way acquisition underway ► Completed projects will be ready for any future funding opportunities ~ISI } aar e o r nu M 27 Proposed Projects Proposed Projects FY 2003-04 *Major Projects 0 Pavetnent Overlays ► Continuation of Gaarde Street Phase 2 r ► Walnut (Grant to Highway 99W) Improvements ► Greenburg Road (Center St. to 99W) ► Complete New Library Construction Cl, 1141h Avenue ( Gaarde St. to Bull ; C ► Wall Street/Hall Boulevard Intersection Mountain Rd.) and approaches ► Errol Street (112'h to Fonner St.) ► Bull Mountain/Roshak Road Safety Improvements 0 Reconstruction ► Greenburg Road (Shady Lane to ► Bonita Road - 8151 Avenue to Bridge Tiedeman) PE only w ~o 5 Proposed Projects FY 2003-04 Projects •Railroad Crossing Repair ► Tiedeman Avenue (Greenburg to Tigard Street) at RR tracks 40 Proposed Wall Street LID a C ► Complete Preliminary Engineer's ( e a Report - - `1t 7. ► Receive Council direction on next step + :I ,~nili f R OTrail Projects ► Fanno Creek Trail: Grant to Main and i. Hall to new Library site Bonita Road Reconstruction A FY 2003-04 Projects FY 2003-04 Projects ~r I z..r Bonita Road Bonita Road Reconstruction Reconstruction )J as FY 2003-04 Projects Proposed Wall Street Local BALL BLVD I WALL STREET Improvement District I Hall Blvd/Wall Street • LID formation process underway f intersection and ► Preliminary Evaluation Report --J ra Approaches reviewed by City Council Council has directed preparation of a T:;w `Preliminary Engineer's Report _ ► Interim Report was presented to Council on March 11, 2003 ► Consultant working to complete the Preliminary Engineer's Report +s ~e 6 s FY 2003-04 Projects Citywide Sewer WADI. STREET LID Extension Program e Established a five year program to provide sewer service to all residential areas within the City 'Uses City-initiated reimbursement Station 4 + 25 to districts Hunziker Street *Includes an enhanced incentive ' T program to encourage residents to connect I )1 ]M f Reimbursement Districts Reimbursement Districts *Reimbursement Fee- limited to ®City installs a line and sets a $6,000 (up to $15,000) for owners reimbursement fee connecting within three years ` *Owner pays the reimbursement fee at Connection Fee- currently $2,335 Cime of connection ,but increases to $2,435 July V 0 No obligation to connect or pay fees *Plumbing required to connect house > until connection to sewer S 31 Program Status ; ' New Tigard Library e Four reimbursement districts formed r • New library details e Two more submitted for Council action ` ► ► 47,000 square feet tonight k r ► two story building fl i02 new laterals installed in last 6 months ► Site selected is a e`Project designs in progress east of flail Blvd e Goals for 2003-04 near City Hall ► At least 5 new reimbursement districts formed ' } ► 130 new sewer service laterals installed t J$ 41 7 New Library Site Plan Project Team C- • Construction Manager/General Contractor process selected • SRG Partnership selected as the (project designer city's Project Manager - Shiels . Obletz Johnsen • CM/GC - Hoffman Construction 77 J Project Status Funding Issues *Construction drawings completed s Lack of funding for adequate • Groundbreaking May 17, 2003 • Guaranteed Maximum Price preventative and corrective pavement ubmitted by Hoffman maintenance r;. = Construction C► State Gas Tax will not be a viable source •Projected Schedule: Begin in the next few years construction July 2003 ®Alternative funding sources for • Complete construction by 2004 maintenance will have to be A Open new library late summer 2004 established soon. ,3 i6 Funding Issues Alternative Funding O The Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) funds s Transportation Financing Strategies ;t can only finance one major project Task Force formed by City Council to each year ► Determine funding strategies for he TIF revenue will decrease as • Corrective and preventative maintenance of City Streets 'development slows • Reconstruction and widening of collector • Other funding sources are needed to streets to meet current and future traffic g demands i accelerate needed major street *Recommended the Street improvement projects Maintenance Fee to City Council ,7 lX g Street Maintenance Fee Street Maintenance Fee • User fee based on trip generation rates 0 Can be initiated by Council action 0 Public Hearing conducted April 22, • Task Force recommends 4 maintenance 2003 elements • Council delayed implementation for C ► Street Maintenance C60 days ► ROW Maintenance ► Task Force will work with businesses to ► Sidewalk Maintenance possibly establish a more equitable split ► Street Light and Signal System Energy Costs and Maintenance ► Report due back to Council in August • Would supplement gas tax and allow for major street improvements tV 10 Funding Issues Unfunded Projects • 121st Avenue (Walnut to North Dakota) • The Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force • Walnut Street (Tiedeman to 121st) • 121st Avenue (Gaarde to Walnut) 1, Will be reconstituted to add new members 0 urnham Street (Main Street to Hall) ► Will continue to evaluate new revenue Mnner Street (Walnut to 115th) sources for major street improvements • Tigard Street (South Side-Main to ► Will be making further Tiedeman) recommendations to City Council VIE Recommendation City of Tigard *Approve the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program ; FY 2003-04 ® ,Approved CIP will become Capital (ffective July 1, 2003 Improvement Program f June 10, 2W3 v 9 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD ADOPTING THE BUDGET, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, DECLARING THE VALOREM TAX LEVY AND CLASSIFYING THE LEVY AS PROVIDED BY ORS 310 060(2) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK_ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Oregon Local Budget Law requires that a budget for the following fiscal year be adopted by the City Council prior to July 1, after approval by the Budget Committee and after a public hearing has been held before the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the FY 2003-04 Budget and approval of the Police Department to apply for two Domestic Prepardedness Equipment Program Grants. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Budget Committee (comprised of the City Council plus five citizens) held four meetings on the City Manager's Proposed FY 2003-04 Budget in April and May, 2003. On May 19, 2003 the Budget Committee approved the Proposed Budget with amendments and forwarded the Budget to the City Council for adoption. Oregon Local Budget Law gives the governing body of the jurisdiction authority to a make certain changes in the Approved Budget prior to Adoption. The City Council may adjust resources or expenditures up or down as long as the increase in a fund does not exceed 10% of the fund total. No adjustments to the Approved Budget have been proposed. The total FY 2003-04 City of Tigard Budget will be $71,558,606. It is also the intent of the City's Police Department to apply for two Domestic Prepardedness Grants for a combined estimated total of $149,244. These federal dollars are available through grants from the State of Oregon. The • grants funds would be used to purchase 30 automatic external defibrillators and a forensic video assessment system. The Police Department is requesting approval from the Council to apply for these two grants. i OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i Since no amendments have been proposed, no other alternatives are being considered. By Oregon law, the FY 2003-04 Budget must be adopted by the City Council prior to July 1, 2003. VISION TASK FURCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY The Approved Budget reflects the Vision Task Force Goals. ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution Adopting Budget Exhibit A (Schedule of Appropriations) FISCAL NOTES The Approved Budget includes total appropriations of $71,558,606. The resolution also levies general property taxes at the City's permanent rate $2.5131 per thousand and levies general obligation debt service property taxes in the amount of $619,727. VISe_ cQ Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved General Fund Community Services $9,217,266 $220,746 9,438,012 Public Works 2,465,760 4,240 / ' 2,470,000 Development Services 2,362,362 466 2,362,828 Policy and Administration 301,385 9,39 310,775 General Government 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 3,901,507 2 ,609 3,931,116 Capitallmprovemen't 0 0 0 Contingency 1,000,000 0 1,000,000 Total Fund $19,248,280 64,451 $19,512,731 Sanitary Sewer Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 626,388 1,495 627,883 Development Services 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 89,60 745 290,353 Capital improvements 922,300 0 922,300 Contingency 282,000 0 282,000 Total Fund $2,120,296 $2,240 $2,122,536 Storm Sewer Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 592,077 48 593,025 Development Servi es 0 0 0 Policy and Admin' tration 0 0 General Govern 7 ent 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 456,304 1,021 457,325 L Capitallmprpvements 278,500 0 278,500 2 Contingency 200,000 0 200,000 0 0 Total Fund $1,526,881 $1,969 \4,8,819 Water Fund Community Services $0 $0 0 Public Works 4,875,443 4,376 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 2,770,799 2,033 2,772,832 Capital Improvements 526,750 252,622 779,372 Contingency 1,086,000 0 1,086,000 Total Fund $9,258,992 $259,031 $9,518,023 1 Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Water SDC Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 392,578 0 392,578 Capital Improvements 225,000 0 225,000 Contingency 203,500 0 203,500 Total Fund $821,078 $0 $821,078 Water CIP Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 1,929,032 0 1,929,032 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 4,086,617 404,240 4,490,857 Contingency 902,000 0 902,000 Total Fund $6,917,649 $404,240 $7,321,889 Water Quality/Quantity Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 1,079 1 1,079 Capital Improvements 10,000 0 10,000 Contingency 1,660 0 1,660 Total Fund $12,739 $1 $12,739 Criminal Forfeiture Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 62,220 0 62,220 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $62,220 $0 $62,220 2 Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Gas Tax Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 418,000 0 418,000 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 1,357,495 2,258 1,359,753 Capital Improvements 687,894 70,000 757,894 Contingency 154,000 (30,000) 124,000 Total Fund $2,617,389 $42,258 $2,659,647 Parks Capital Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 278,075 0 278,075 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 806,886 20,000 826,886 Contingency 162,000 0 162,000 Total Fund $1,246,961 $20,000 $1,266,961 Traffic Impact Fee Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 240,808 82 240,890 L Capital Improvements 3,309,166 0 3,309,166 Contingency 495,000 0 495,000 Total Fund $4,044,974 $82 $4,045,056 _J >0 9 U J 3 Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Traffic Impact Fee Urban Services Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 40,013 36 40,049 Capital Improvements 950,000 0 950,000 Contingency 148,000 0 148,000 Total Fund $1,138,013 $36 $1,138,049 Building Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 1,190,263 0 1,190,263 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 484,426 720 485,146 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 250,000 0 250,000 Total Fund $1,924,689 $720 $1,925,409 Electrical Inspection Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 190,553 141 190,695 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 28,000 0 28,000 Total Fund $218,553 $141 $218,695 Underground Utility Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 105,000 0 105,000 Contingency 15,000 0 15,000 Total Fund $120,000 $0 $120,000 4 Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Insurance Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $0 $0 $0 Urban Services Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 512,391 419 512,810 Capital Improvements 238,763 (238,763) 0 Contingency 111,000 0 111,000 Total Fund $862,154 ($238,344) $623,810 Tree Replacement Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services. 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 30,000 0 30,000 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $30,000 $0 $30,000 i i i r r 6 5 Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved SW Dartmouth LID/CIP Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 9,319 0 9,319 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $9,319 $0 $9,319 Facility Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 568,000 0 568,000 Capital Improvements 7,387,380 0 7,387,380 Contingency 1,190,000 0 1,190,000 Total Fund $9,145,380 $0 $9,145,380 Wall Street LID Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 150,000 0 150,000 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $150,000 $0 $150,000 Central Services Fund a Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 3,562,471 37,986 3,600,457 General Government 394,920 0 394,920 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 73,612 2 73,614 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 249,000 0 249,000 Total Fund $4,280,003 $37,988 $4,317,991 6 Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations Fiscal Year 2003-04 Resolution No. 03- Budget Committee Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Fleet/Property Management Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 806,100 268 806,368 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 Transfer 74,319 322 74,641 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 60,000 0 60,000 Total Fund $940,419 $590 $941,009 G/O Bond Debt Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 1,014,395 0 1,014,395 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $1,014,395 $0 $1,014,395 Bancroft Bond Debt Fund Community Services $0 $0 $0 Public Works 0 0 0 Development Services 0 0 0 Policy and Administration 0 0 0 General Government 0 0 0 Debt Service 3,052,820 0 3,052,820 Transfer 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 Total Fund $3,052,820 $0 $3,052,820 Total Appropriations $70,763,203 $795,403 $71,558,606 i i i i 7 Item No. 2 For Council Newsletter dated. V MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Jim Griffith Tigard City Council FROM: Craig ProssJVinance Director RE: FY 2003-04 Budget Amendments DATE: June 6, 2003 The City Council is scheduled to adopt the FY 2003-04 City Budget on June 10. This budget was approved by the Budget Committee on May 19. Under Oregon Local Budget Law, the City Council may modify the budget approved by the Budget Committee as long as those modifications do not exceed 10% of the appropriations within an affected fund. Staff is recommending three amendments to the Approved Budget prior to adoption by the Council: 1. Library Book Budget - $21,850 (General Fund) The FY 2003-04 Approved budget reduces the amount of money for the Library to purchase new books, periodicals, and electronic media by $21,850. While not ideal, staff originally felt that this reduction was appropriate given tight funding in the General Fund. Since the Budget Committee approved the FY 2003-04 budget, however, staff has become aware of a proposed change to the Washington County Cooperative Library Service (WCCLS) funding formula which has prompted a rethinking of this reduction. Under the WCCLS proposal, future WCCLS funding will in part match past library expenditures for new books and materials on a dollar for dollar basis. The City of Tigard advocated for other changes to the formula, not this one. We were unsuccessful, and it appears that WCCLS will choose a formula heavily weighted towards circulation and acquisition of library materials. Reducing this item in the budget now, given this likely change, will serve to reduce the amount of funding that Tigard will receive from WCCLS in the future. Because of this, staff is recommending that the FY 2003-04 budget be amended prior to adoption to reduce General Fund ending fund balance by $21,850 and to increase appropriations in the Library, Readers' Services Division to restore the book budget to the FY 2002-03 levels. 2. Cityscape Printing - $4,013 (Central Services Fund) The FY 2003-04 Approved Budget assumed that Cityscape would be printed in black and white, rather than two-color printing as is currently done. This was a way to save money in the printing of Cityscape. During the discussion at the Budget Committee about the proposed reduction in the number of issues of Cityscape (from 12 issues to 6), staff never clearly identified the change in the color printing. When the Committee voted to restore three issues (from 6 to 9), the remarks by various committee members clearly indicated that the Committee assumed that the issues would continue to be printed in two colors. This suggested amendment adds $4,013 to the City Administration budget to allow the 9 issues of Cityscape to be printed in two colors rather than just black and white. This amendment also reduces the undesignated ending fund balance in the Central Services Fund to avoid re-running the cost allocation plan for this small amount. This limits this change to one fund, rather than allowing it to ripple to all funds which contribute to the Central Services Fund. 3. Building Division Temporary Staffing - $10,957 (Building Fund) The Building Division is continuing to experience a higher number of building permits than anticipated for the FY 2003-04 Budget. These permits are generated by building projects, which must be inspected. Since the FY 2003-04 Budget did not assume this higher level of activity, A does not contain sufficient appropriation for temporary inspectors to handle this heavy workload. This proposed amendment will reduce the Building Fund ending fund balance by $10,957 and increase the appropriation for temporary staffing by the same amount. (The higher number of permits will produce additional revenues which will offset this cost. Staff is not suggesting adjusting revenues in the budget because the number of changes this would require in the budget document would preclude meeting the July 1 publication deadline.) If Council chooses to adopt any or all of these amendments, the Council should move the amendment(s) prior to the final motion to adopt the FY 2003-04 Budget. Staff will be available at the June 10 meeting to provide any additional information required. cc: Bill Monahan, City Manager Margaret Barnes, Library Director Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD ADOPTING THE BUDGET, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, DECLARING THE VALOREM TAX LEVY AND CLASSIFYING THE LEVY AS PROVIDED BY ORS 310.060(2) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-04. WHEREAS, the budget for the City of Tigard for the year beginning July 1, 2003 was duly approved and recommended to the City Council by the regularly constituted Budget Committee at it's meeting on May , 2003, after proceedings in accordance with Chapter 294, Oregon Revised Statutes; and WHEREAS, a summary of the budget as required by Chapter 294.416 was duly published in the Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City accordance with Chapter 294.421; and WHEREAS, a hearing by the Tigard Ci Council on the budget document, as approved by the Budget Committee, was duly called and held on a 10, 2003, where all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to appear and be heard with respe to the budget; and WHEREAS, certain City funds have either been onsolidated or the projects associated with some funds have been completed and the fund is no longer need ; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City's Police Dep ent to apply for two Domestic Prepardedness Equipment Program Grants for a combined estimated tota f $149,244. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City uncil that: SECTION 1: The Council adopts the budget for FY 2003-04 in th total amount of $71,558,606. SECTION 2: The appropriations for the fiscal year beginning July , 2003 are established as shown in attached Exhibit A. SECTION 3: The County Gas Tax, Metro Greenspaces, Park Levy Im ovement, and 69`h Avenue LID Funds are dissolved. SECTON 4: The Council approves the Police Depaitment applying for the o Domestic Prepardedness Equipment Program Grants. SECTION 4: The City of Tigard City Council hereby levies property taxes for a General Fund at the City's permanent rate of $2.5131 per thousand dollars of asse sed value. The City Council also hereby levies $619,727 for general obligation debt se ice. These taxes are hereby levied upon all taxable property within the district as of my 1, 2003. The following allocation and categorization subject to the limits of section l lb, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution constitute the above aggregate levy: SECTION 5: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page 1 PASSED: This day of 2003. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page 2 . 4. AGENDA ITEM No. 10 Date: June 10, 2003 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: PUBLIC HEARING (INFORMATIONAL) TO ESTABLISH SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 28 - PORTIONS OF SW O'NlARA STREET, SW FREWING STREET, SW EDGEWOOD STREET, SW HILL VIEW COURT, AND SW MCDONALD STREET Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony I I 1:NADM\GREER\CCSIGNUP\PH TESTMNY FORM SAN SEWER DIST.DOC AGENDA ITEM No. 10 Date: June 10, 2003 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - S eakin In Favor Opponent - S eakin Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. ~y1l~( M©y21)(e q'715" S W 011&.Ve, !per I S>?8 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. SO M9ocAj Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. so 3 &-!; - 1 l s7 ee-11 so ss~ Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name,,Adddrjess & Phone 4'~-- Grp z sv~-6a o- p63 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. i I Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. I I I ~(7 AGENDA ITEM It FOR AGENDA OF Juno W. 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Formation of Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 28 (SW O'Mara, McDonald Streets) 8 PREPARED BY: G. Berry DEPT HEAD OK `d CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Formation of a sewer reimbursement district to construct a sanitary sewer project as part of the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the attached Resolution forming the Reimbursement District. INFORMATION SUNLMARY The proposed project would provide sewer service to thirty six lots along SW O'Mara Street and adjacent portions of SW Frewing Street, Edgewood Street, Hill View Court, and McDonald Street. Through the City's Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program, the City would install public sewers to each lot within the Reimbursement District and the owners would reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, each owner would be required to pay a connection fee of $2,335 ($2,435 after June 30, 2003) before connecting to the line and would be responsible for disconnecting the existing septic system according to County rules and any other plumbing modifications necessary to connect to the public line. Each owner has been notified of the hearing by mail. The notice, mailing list and additional details are included in the City Engineer's Report attached as Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. If Council approves this request to form the Reimbursement District, bids from contractors to construct the sewer will be requested. Another resolution to finalize the formation of the Reimbursement District, with cost adjustments, will be submitted for Council action after construction is completed and actual construction costs are determined. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. ATTAUMIENT LIST Proposed Resolution Exhibit A- City Engineer's Report Exhibit B- Map Vicinity Map Notice to Owners Mailing List Resolution 01-46 FISCAL NOTES Funding is by unrestricted sanitary sewer funds. 1:1ENG12002-2003 FY CIMO'Ma McDonald Reimbursement Dist No. 28\City Council Agenda of 6-10-3tAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY est.doc CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 28 (SW O'MARA, MCDONALD STREETS) WHEREAS, the City has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers and recover costs through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, these property owners have been notified of a public hearing in accordance with TMC 13.09.060 and a public hearing was conducted in accordance with TMC 13.09.050; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has submitted a report describing the improvements, the area to be included in the Reimbursement District, the estimated costs, a method for spreading the cost among the parcels within the District, and a recommendation for an annual fee adjustment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the formation of a Reimbursement District as recommended by the City Engineer is appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1 The City Engineer's report titled "Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 28", attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby approved. SECTION 2 A Reimbursement District is hereby established in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09. The District shall be the area shown and described on Exhibit B. The District shall be known as "Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 28, SW O'Mara, McDonald Streets." SECTION 3 Payment of the reimbursement fee as shown in Exhibit A is a precondition of receiving City permits applicable to development of each parcel within the Reimbursement District as provided for in TMC 13.09.110. SECTION 4 An annual fee adjustment, at a rate recommended by the Finance Director, shall be applied to the Reimbursement Fee. SECTION 5 The City Recorder shall cause a copy of this resolution to be filed in the office of the County Recorder and shall mail a copy of this resolution to all affected property owners at their last known address, in accordance with TMC 13.09.090. SECTION 6 This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2003. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard I:\EN(12002.2001FYCIPW)Vff WMcDor4WReimbursementDinNo.2MCiryCounclAgendaci W0.3Utoolutioneadoc RESOLUTION NO. 03- Page 1 Exhibit A City Engineer's Report Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 28 (SW O'Mara and McDonald Streets) Background This project will be constructed and funded under the City of Tigard Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program (NSEP). Under the program the City of Tigard would install public sewers to each lot within a project area. At the time the property owner connects to the sewer, the owner would pay a connection fee of $2,335.00 ($2,435 after June 30, 2003) and reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. Proiect Area - Zone of Benefit An existing sanitary sewer line in SW O'Mara Street would be extended west from between SW Hill Street and SW Frewing Street to serve thirty six lots as shown on Exhibit Map B. Cost The estimated cost for the sanitary sewer construction is $375,460. Engineering and inspection fees amount to $50,690 (13.5%) as defined in TMC 13.09.040(1). The estimated total project cost is $426,150. This is the amount that should be reimbursed to the sanitary sewer fund as properties connect to the sewer and pay their fair share of the total amount. However, the actual amount that each property owner pays is subject to the City's incentive program for early connections. In addition to sharing the cost of the public sewer line, each property owner will be required to pay an additional $2,335 ($2,435 after June 30, 2003) connection and inspection fee when connection to the public line is made. All owners will be responsible for all plumbing costs required for work done on private property. Reimbursement Rate All properties in this area are zoned R-4.5 but vary in lot size from about 14,000 square feet to over 38,000 as can be seen on the attached list of owners in. Therefore, it is recommended that the total cost of the project be divided among the thirty six properties proportional to the square footage of each property. Resolution 01-46 limits this fee to $6,000 to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000 per owner for connections completed within three years of final approval of the City Engineer's Report. Other reimbursement methods include dividing the cost equally among the owners or by the length of frontage of each property. These methods are not recommended because there is no correlation between these methods and the cost of providing service to each lot or the benefit to each lot. Each property owner's estimated fair share of the public sewer line is $0.60 per square foot of the lot served. Each owner's fair share would be limited to $6,000 to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000, for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction in accordance with Resolution 01-46 (attached). In addition to paying for the first $6,000, owners will remain responsible for paying all actual costs that exceed $15,000. Annual Fee Adiustment TMC 13.09.115 states that an annual percentage rate shall be applied to each property owner's fair share of the sewer line costs on the anniversary date of the reimbursement agreement. The Finance Director has set the annual interest rate at 6.05% as stated in City of Tigard Resolution No. 98-22. Recommendation It is recommended that a reimbursement district be formed with an annual fee increase as indicated above and that the reimbursement district continue for fifteen years as provided in the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 13.09.110(5). Fifteen years after the formation of the reimbursement district, properties connecting to the sewer would no longer be required to pay the reimbursement fee. Submitted June 3, 2003 P. A tin P. Duenas, P.E. Ci Engineer IAFNG~2002-2003 FY CIMUMara-McDonald Reimbursement Dist No. 2MCity Council Agenda of 6-10.3kReport Establish.doc NEW- Reimbursment District #28 Estimated Cost to Property Owners ESTIMATED OWNER SITE ADDRESS AREA (S.F.) COST TO PROPERTY OWNER 1 BAYARD LAUREN & 9620 SW FREWING ST 20637.64 $13,626 2 DOWD LARRY & LAURA 9600 SW FREWING ST 21361.74 $14,104 3 BOYDSTUN DENNIS GREGORY 9585 SW O'MARA ST 30515.00 $20,147 4 FUCHS ARNOLD C & SHIRLEY K 9530 SW O'MARA ST 38692.36 $25,547 5 DURFEE STANLEY D & CYNTHIA A 9580 SW O'MARA ST 18304.62 $12,086 6 BATES VIRGINIA A 9680 SW O'MARA ST 35470.82 $23,419 7 MCDILL STEVEN J & KIMBERLY C 9630 SW O'MARA ST 25842.80 $17,063 8 WHITEMAN TEX R LEWAHNA 9530 SW EDGEWOOD 35818.39 $23,649 9 GITHENS WANDAMA TRUSTEE 9675 SW HILLVIEW CT 15689.58 $10,359 10 NEVILLE THOMAS A & 9635 SW HILLVIEW CT 15244.34 $10,065 11 BROWN ROGER A & JENNIFER A 9605 SW HILLVIEW CT 14935.36 $9,861 12 SHIRLEY JULIA A 9610 SW HILLVIEW CT 16247.55 $10,727 13 BHATTACHARYYA KEYA 9608 SW HILLVIEW CT 16188.05 $10,688 14 WILSON LELAND J & TAMMIE L 9670 SW HILLVIEW CT 15550.98 $10,267 15 NIRANJAN RAMAKRISHNAN & 9760 SW OMARA ST 18010.91 $11,892 16 JOHNSON EDITH L TRUSTEE 9800 SW O'MARA ST 14850.93 $9,805 OWNER ADDRESS 17 WILSON WILLIAM D JR AND 9840 SW O'MARA ST 20431.40 $13,490 18 PARKER WALTER J & LOLA B 9615 SW O'MARA ST 13803.70 $9,114 655 Stone Creek Dr. LA Center Wa, 98629 19 SHEHORN STEPHEN LEE 9765 SW O'MARA ST 15382.78 $10,156 20 ANDERSON CLARENCE N TR 9735 SW O'MARA ST 24166.33 $15,956 21 PARKER WALTER J & LOLA B 9615 SW O'MARA ST 28910.26 $19,088 655 Stone Creek Dr. LA Center Wa, 98629 22 GARNANT DAVID G & JOYCE 9625 SW O'MARA ST 16551.32 $10,928 23 WORLEY MARTHA W 9695 SW O'MARA ST 16608.92 $10,966 24 MONNIE HELEN C & MICHAEL D & 9715 SW OMARA ST 15266.46 $10,080 25 KOLB DAVID & JANE F TRS 9645 SW O'MARA ST 17259.97 $11,396 26 STRAND DAVID E 9675 SW OMARA ST 16235.91 $10,720 27 MCDONALD TERRY L/DIANE L 9865 SW OMARA ST 15547.83 $10,265 28 RAY STEVEN A & DEBORAH M 9845 SW O'MARA ST 17039.10 $11,250 29 SPIAK ANDREW JOEL 9825 SW O'MARA ST 22452.38 $14,824 30 MCPHAIL JOHN R & LEANN 9935 SW MCDONALD ST 14429.69 $9,527 31 OTTOMAN NORMAN R TRUSTEE 9905 SW MCDONALD ST 15548.13 $10,266 32 MCCORD GLEN A & ELIZABETH A 9965 SW MCDONALD ST 20566.85 $13,579 33 CLAYTON MARLIN L 9777 SW O'MARA ST 16340.51 $10,789 34 COOK DOREEN M 9815 SW O'MARA ST 18182.66 $12,005 35 HAMPTON CLAUDE H 9960 SW MCDONALD ST 15038.60 $9,929 36 MILLER PHILLIP R 9940 SW MCDONALD ST 15038.33 $9,929 Totals 708162.22 $467,561.83 ~wio~~i ~ r a ~ nor 0' MARA, MCDONALD REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT #28 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS SECTION 2 T2S RI W W.M. A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF ?SjD? -q ~A CDO A PPS gg?S AND,q£wD5 ti ~ Rts 'uaRq~ B~oO~EF~ ~0 0 Sp N tihGG~S~~~F ~ vo Rqs 'SARAd/ z C50 N 2 ~ V p~ ~a NCI o ru ~n 2~ •eO N N y NwUI~ ,~V ~A9 ~h ry`~1~dF'y ,~Q osooh h 2g, '10 '~Qo~Q~~ C~aOQ~~ p~pAQy Ngv3iC ne o v3i~ NQw N ~ & `A cyv ~ m c~v Q ^ N w ~ Q 5 ~ 9 O2MARA ST e~~ N2z~ r s's~~,~ '~'s s P b h h a 'os~~.coo.~~o o y Ran 9 , tip dl~ C,pMp~ P ~ 's h y~os r~` * F ~T9 ` ryy~o~~~~ g 0y ~ 60 s~os~~}moo 1 EXH1131T 13 N0~ NTS ernes in the reimbursement All prop district are zoned R4.5 MG,plot% ~~r TRk~T #28 _ A~ M~ppNAL RSE~EN~ p1S 0' MAREN.~S RE~MgU ER IMPRQVE~ pN11 pR~ SEV~ 0`~' S g~~ ? 0 3 ~ S'02COOp300 p Y H 9&20 45 fNC ~V N x VILLAGE t 2Sr02CO004~ ~l ti Dol LARRY 9600 s w FR£!ltNC Rs.5 T Q a Q 2 0 S '02 DOO_V0 ' l n° S Q 3 O h 9585 SWN OftS Nn. b3a Ewa hi 4(ziQ R4$ VARNNA pQ 0b OQb NWT „OZ h 4 N~ V1 wi O~j ~ ~ ^ N q N~~ Nyobi S'~ s F ~ s~ 9 4? 6 tb 4 A ?sy ,Q pN~i ti,~~~P1t' ~oO© P reimbursement H~g~1 g 2 EX N~5 erties in R4.5 pl p op are Zone districl LEGIBILITY STRIP O'MARA, MCDONALD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT #28 A PORTION OF THE SW 1 /4 OF SECTION 2 T2S R1 W W.M. ASH AVE ~ J~ Pg~ pR O'MARA ST O - O VICINITY MAP NTS May 27, 2003 NOTICE Informational Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, June 10, 2003 AT 7:30 PM IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 28. (SW O'Mara and McDonald Streets) The Tigard City Council will conduct an informational public hearing to hear testimony on the proposed Reimbursement District formed to install sewers in SW O'Mara and McDonald Streets. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. CL it The public hearing on this matter will be conducted as required by Section 13.09.060 of the Tigard Municipal Code. 0 U Further information and the scheduled time for this item during the Council meeting may be obtained from the Engineering Department, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503 718-2468 or at www.ci.tigard.or.us. f:tENGi2002-2003 FY CIPOMara-McDonald Reimbursement Dlsl No. 28lCity Council Agenda of 610-3WoUce 1- FortreUon Hearing.doc Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 28 (SW O'Mara and McDonald Streets) At this meeting, City Council will be requested to form a sewer reimbursement district to provide your neighborhood with sewer service. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. Each property owner's estimated fair share of the public sewer line is based on the area of the lot served and is summarized in the attached table. This amount will be revised once construction is completed and final costs are determined. An annual increase of 6.05% simple interest will also be applied to this amount. The amount each property owner will be required to pay will be limited to $6,000 for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction, in accordance with Resolution 01-46. Please note that this resolution also requires the owner to pay any fair share amounts that exceed $15,000. Consequently, if the final fair share for an owner exceeds $15,000, the owner would be required to pay $6,000 plus the amount the fair share exceeds $15,000. The owner would also be required to pay a connection fee of $2,435 at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. O'MARA, MCDONALD y SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT X128 A PORTION OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 2 T2S R1W W.M. P~ Q4 o IAARA VICINITY MAP NTS 1.\ENO\20D2.2001 FY CI%O'Mara•McDonald Reimbursement Dist No. 28\City Council Agenda of 6-10-Motice I Inter doe M7 2S102CD-02702 2S102CD-00600 ANDERSON CLARENCE N TR FUCHS ARNOLD C & SHIRLEY K ANDERSON ANN K TR 9530 SW O'MARA 9735 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02000 2S102CD-02705 BATES VIRGINIA A GARNANT DAVID G & JOYCE 9680 SW O'MARA ST 9625 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-00300 2S102CD-02601 BAYARD LAUREN & GITHENS WANDAMA TRUSTEE BILLICK KEVIN 9675 SW HILLVIEW CT 9620 SW FREWING ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02805 2S111BA4)0803 BHATTACHARYYA KEYA HAMPTON CLAUDE H 9608 SW HILLVIEW CT MARGARET T TIGARD, OR 97223 9960 SW MCDONALD ST TIGARD, OR 97224 2S102CD-00500 2S102CD-02608 BOYDSTUN DENNIS GREGORY JOHNSON EDITH L TRUSTEE 9585 SW OMARA ST 9800 SW OMMARA TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02603 2S102CD-02712 BROWN ROGER A & JENNIFER A KOLB DAVID & JANE F TRS 9605 SW HILLVIEW CT 9645 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102C0-04900 2SI02CD-03005 CLAYTON MARLIN L MCCORD GLEN A & ELIZABETH A 9777 SW O'MARA ST 9965 SW MCDONALD ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S102CD-05000 2S102CD-02001 COOK DOREEN M MCDILL STEVEN J & KIMBERLY C 9815 SW OMMARA 9630 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-00400 2S102CD-02802 DOWD LARRY & LAURA MCDONALD TERRY UDIANE L 9600 SW FREWING 9865 SW OMARA TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-01101 2S102CD-03000 DURFEE STANLEY D & CYNTHIA A MCPHAIL JOHN R & LEANN 9580 SW O'MARA ST 9935 SW MCDONALD ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S111 BA-00804 2S 102CD-02805 MILLER PHILLIP R SPIAK ANDREW JOEL 9940 SW MCDONALD ST 9825 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CO-02709 2S102CD-02715 MONNIE HELEN C & MICHAEL D & STRAND DAVID E MONNIE DEBRA L 9675 SW OMARA ST 9715 SW OMARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2SI02CD-02602 2S102CD-02100 NEVILLE THOMAS A & WHITEMAN TEX R LEWAHNA SUSANA A 9530 SW EDGEWOOD 9635 SW HILLVIEW CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02607 2S102CD-02606 NIRANJAN RAMAKRISHNAN & WILSON LELAND J & TAMMIE L RAM SHAILAJA 9670 SW HILLVIEW CT 9760 SW OMARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2SI02CD-03002 2S102CD-02609 OTTOMAN NORMAN R TRUSTEE WILSON WILLIAM D JR AND cJo GORDY BRIAN V & MARIE E ELIZABETH A 9905 SW MCDONALD ST 9840 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02700 2S102CO-02706 PARKER WALTER J & LOLA B WORLEY MARTHA W 9615 SW OMMARA 9695 SW O'MARA TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02703 PARKER WALTER J & LOLA B 655 STONECREEK DR LA CENTER, WA 98629 2S102CD-02803 RAY STEVEN A & DEBORAH M 9845 SW O'MARA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 J p 2S102CD-02701 SHEHORN STEPHEN LEE u a 9765 SW O'MARA TIGARD, OR 97223 2S102CD-02604 SHIRLEY JULIA A 9610 SW HILLVIEW COURT TIGARD, OR 97223 a CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 01- ZAP A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 98-51 AND ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND ENHANCED NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998, the City Council established The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program through Resolution No. 98-51 to encourage owners to connect to public sewer. The program was offered for a two-year period after which the program would be evaluated for continuation; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 2000, the City Council extended The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program an additional two years through Resolution No. 00-60; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that residential areas that rcmain without sewer service should be provided with service within five years; and WHEREAS, Council has directed that additional incentives should be made available to encourage owners to promptly connect to sewers once service is available and that owners who have paid for service provided by previously established districts of the Neighbc:hcW Sewer Extension Program should receive the benefits of the additional incentives. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Resolution No. 98-51 establishing the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: A revised incentive program is hereby established for the Neighborhood Sewer Extcnsion Program. This incentivc program shall apply to scrvcr conucctions provided through the sewer reimbursement districts shown on the attached Table 1 or established thereafter. All connections qualifying under this program must be completed within three years after Council approval of the fa-.al City Engineer's Report following a public hearing conducted in accordance with TMC Section 13.09.105 or by two years from the date this resolution is passed, which ever is later, as shown on the attached Table 1. SECTION 3: To the extent that the reimbursement fee determined in accordance with Section 13.09.040 does not exceed $15,000, the amount to be reimbursed by an owner of a lot zoned single family residential shall not exceed $6,000 per connection, provided that the lot owner complies with the provisions of Section 2. Any amount over $15,000 shall be reimbursed by the owner. This applies only to the reimbursement fee for the sewer installation and not to the connection fee, which is still payable upon application for RESOLUTION NO.01-1AP Page 1 sewer connection. SECTION 4: The City Engineer's Report required by TMC Chapter 13.09 shall apply the provisions of this incentive program. Residential lot owners who do not connect to sewer in accordance with Section 2 shall pay the full reimbursement amount as determined by the final City Engineer's Report. SECTION 5: Any person who has paid a reimbursement fee in excess of the fee required herein is entitled to reimbursement from the City. The amounts to be reimbursed and the persons to be paid shall be determined by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager. There shall be a full explanation of any circumstances that require payment to any person who is not an original payer. The Finance Director shall make payment to all persons entitled to the refund no later than August 31, 2001. SECTION 6: The Sanitary Sewer Fund, which is the funding source for the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Program, shall provide the fimding for the installation costs over $6,000 up to a maximum of $15,000 per connection. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 10, 2001 bix- PASSED: This day of 2001. ayor Ci of and ATTEST: Recorder - City of 'hgard r 3 a 1Xitywide\RrsTeso1udan Revising the NeighboftW Sewer Incentive Pmgmm J RESOLUTION NO.01-.~Z& Page 2 LEGIBILITY STRCP TABLE Reimbursement Districts with Refunds Available DISTRICT FEE PER LOT REIMBURSEMENT AVAILABLE INCENTIVE PERIOD ENDS 'TIGARD ST.No.8 5,193 No reimbursement available FAIRHAVEN ST/WYNo.9 4,506 No reimbursement available HILLVIEW ST No. 11 8,000 -----,2003 106T" & JOHNSON No.12 5,598 No reimbursement available 100T" & INEZ No.13 8,000 -----,2003 WALNUT & TIEDEMAN No.14 8,000 ----,2003 BEVELAND&HERMOSA No.15 5,036 No reimbursement available DELMONTE No.16 8,000 -----,2003 OWARA No. 17 8,000 ----,2003 2-WALNUT & 121ST No-18 - Amount to be reimbursed will be Three years from service availability 2"ROSE VISTA No.20 - determined once final costs are determined. * Currently being constructed Reimbursment District #28 Estimated Cost to Property Owners ESTIMATED OWNER SITE ADDRESS AREA (S.F.) COST TO PROPERTY OWNER 1 BAYARD LAUREN & 9620 SW FREWING ST 20637.64 $12,419 2 DOWD LARRY & LAURA 9600 SW FREWING ST 21361.74 $12,855 3 BOYDSTUN DENNIS GREGORY 9585 SW O'MARA ST 30515.00 $18,363 4 FUCHS ARNOLD C & SHIRLEY K 9530 SW O'MARA ST 38692.36 $23,284 5 DURFEE STANLEY D & CYNTHIA A 9580 SW O'MARA ST 18304.62 $11,015 6 BATES VIRGINIA A 9680 SW O'MARA ST 35470.82 $21,345 7 MCDILL STEVEN J & KIMBERLY C 9630 SW O'MARA ST 25842.80 $15,551 8 WHITEMAN TEX R LEWAHNA 9530 SW EDGEWOOD 35818.39 $21,554 9 GITHENS WANDAMA TRUSTEE 9675 SW HILLVIEW CT 15689.58 $9,442 10 NEVILLE THOMAS A & 9635 SW HILLVIEW CT 15244.34 $9,174 11 BROWN ROGER A & JENNIFER A 9605 SW HILLVIEW CT 14935.36 $8,988 12 SHIRLEY JULIA A 9610 SW HILLVIEW CT 16247.55 $9,777 13 BHATTACHARYYA KEYA 9608 SW HILLVIEW CT 16188.05 $9,741 14 WILSON LELAND J & TAMMIE L 9670 SW HILLVIEW CT 15550.98 $9,358 15 NIRANJAN RAMAKRISHNAN & 9760 SW OMARA ST 18010.91 $10,838 16 JOHNSON EDITH L TRUSTEE 9800 SW O'MARA ST 14850.93 $8,937 OWNER ADDRESS 17 WILSON WILLIAM D JR AND 9840 SW O'MARA ST 20431.40 $12,295 18 PARKER WALTER J & LOLA B 9615 SW O'MARA ST 13803.70 $8,307 655 Stone Creek Dr. LA Center Wa, 98629 19 SHEHORN STEPHEN LEE 9765 SW O'MARA ST 15382.78 $9,257 20 ANDERSON CLARENCE N TR 9735 SW O'MARA ST 24166.33 $14,543 21 PARKER WALTER J & LOLA B 9615 SW O'MARA ST 28910.26 $17,397 655 Stone Creek Dr. LA Center Wa, 98629 22 GARNANT DAVID G & JOYCE 9625 SW O'MARA ST 16551.32 $9,960 23 WORLEY MARTHA W 9695 SW O'MARA ST 16608.92 $9,995 24 MONNIE HELEN C & MICHAEL D & 9715 SW OMARA ST 15266.46 $9,187 25 KOLB DAVID & JANE F TRS 9645 SW O'MARA ST 17259.97 $10,387 26 STRAND DAVID E 9675 SW OMARA ST 16235.91 $9,770 27 MCDONALD TERRY L/DIANE L 9865 SW OMARA ST 15547.83 $9,356 28 RAY STEVEN A & DEBORAH M 9845 SW O'MARA ST 17039.10 $10,254 29 SPIAK ANDREW JOEL 9825 SW O'MARA ST 22452.38 $13,511 30 MCPHAIL JOHN R & LEANN 9935 SW MCDONALD ST 14429.69 $8,683 31 OTTOMAN NORMAN R TRUSTEE 9905 SW MCDONALD ST 15548.13 $9,356 32 MCCORD GLEN A & ELIZABETH A 9965 SW MCDONALD ST 20566.85 $12,377 33 CLAYTON MARLIN L 9777 SW O'MARA ST 16340.51 $9,833 34 COOK DOREEN M 9815 SW O'MARA ST 18182.66 $10,942 35 HAMPTON CLAUDE H 9960 SW MCDONALD ST 15038.60 $9,050 36 MILLER PHILLIP R 9940 SW MCDONALD ST 15038.33 $9,050 Totals 708162.22 $426,151.46 AGENDA ITEM No. 11 Date: June 10, 2003 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEET Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: PUBLIC HEARING (INFORMATIONAL) TO ESTABLISH SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 29 - SW PARK STREET, SW DERRY DELL COURT, SW COOK LANE AND SW WATKINS AVENUE Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony I:WDM\GREER\CCSIGNUP\PH TESTMNY FORM SAN SEWER DIST.DOC AGENDA ITEM No. 11 Date: June 10, 2003 PLEASE PRINT Proponent - (Speaking In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. S-kVe, l Colisimect t137sS sw A --T-;6 a'4 5a 3 y'/3 -36 8 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 11 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. w7mml -u-=d Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Formation of Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 29 (SW Park Street and Derry Dell Court) PREPARED BY: G. Berry h~ DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Formation of a sewer reimbursement district to construct a sanitary sewer project as part of the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the attached Resolution forming the Reimbursement District. INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed project would provide sewer service to forty seven lots along the entire unserved portions of SW Park Street, Derry Dell Court, Cook Lane and Watkins Avenue. Through the City's Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program, the City would install public sewers to each lot within the Reimbursement District and the owners would reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, each owner would be required to pay a connection fee of $2,335 ($2,435 after June 30, 2003) before connecting to the line and would be responsible for disconnecting the existing septic system according to County rules and any other plumbing modifications necessary to connect to the public line. Each owner has been notified of the hearing by mail. The notice, mailing list and additional details are included in the City Engineer's Report attached as Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. If Council approves this request to form the Reimbursement District, bids from contractors to construct the sewer will be requested. Another resolution to finalize the formation of the Reimbursement District, with cost adjustments, will be submitted for Council action after construction is completed and actual construction costs are determined. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. i ATTACHMENT LIST Proposed Resolution Exhibit A- City Engineer's Report Exhibit B- Map Vicinity Map Notice to Owners Mailing List Resolution 01-46 FISCAL NOTES Funding is by unrestricted sanitary sewer funds. BEN02002-2003 FY CIP\Puk St Deny Dell Ct k Watkins Ave Reimbursement Dist No. 29\0ty Council Agenda oRAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY est.doc CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 29 (SW PARK, DERRY DELL STREETS) WHEREAS, the City has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers and recover costs through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, these property owners have been notified of a public hearing in accordance with TMC 13.09.060 and a public hearing was conducted in accordance with TMC 13.09.050; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has submitted a report describing the improvements, the area to be included in the Reimbursement District, the estimated costs, a method for spreading the cost among the parcels within the District, and a recommendation for an annual fee adjustment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the formation of a Reimbursement District as recommended by the City Engineer is appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1 The City Engineer's report titled "Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 29", attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby approved. SECTION 2 A Reimbursement District is hereby established in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09. The District shall be the area shown and described on Exhibit B. The District shall be known as "Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 29, SW Park and Derry Dell Streets." SECTION 3 Payment of the reimbursement fee as shown in Exhibit A is a precondition of receiving City permits applicable to development of each parcel within the Reimbursement District as provided for in TMC 13.09.110. SECTION 4 An annual fee adjustment, at a rate recommended by the Finance Director, shall be applied to the Reimbumement Fee. SECTION 5 The City Recorder shall cause a copy of this resolution to be filed in the office of the County Recorder and shall mail a copy of this resolution to all affected property owners at their last known address, in accordance with TMC 13.09.090. SECTION 6 This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. r PASSED: This day of 2003. i ! Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard I:tENCn0M.2003 FY CIMPzk St Dmy Dell Ct A. Watkins Ave Rehrbm rmnt Dist No. 2%City C==1 Agenda oftR=?ution w.doo RESOLUTION NO. 03- Page 1 Exhibit A City Engineer's Report Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 29 (SW Park and Derry Dell Streets) Background This project will be constructed and funded under the City of Tigard Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program (NSEP). Under the program the City of Tigard would install public sewers to each lot within a project area. At the time the property owner connects to the sewer, the owner would pay a connection fee of $2,335.00 ($2,435 after June 30, 2003) and reimburse the City for a fair share of the cost of the public sewer. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. Proiect Area - Zone of Benefit An existing sanitary sewer line in SW Watkins Avenue would be extended south and a sewer in SW 107th Avenue would be extended east along Park Street and Cook Lane to serve forty seven lots as shown on Exhibit Map B. The proposed project would provide sewer service to forty seven lots along the entire unserved portions of SW Park Street, Derry Dell Court, Cook Lane and Watkins Avenue. Cost The estimated cost for the sanitary sewer construction is $471,390. Engineering and inspection fees amount to $63,640 (13.5%) as defined in TMC 13.09.040(1). The estimated total project cost is $535,030. This is the amount that should be reimbursed to the sanitary sewer fund as properties connect to the sewer and pay their fair share of the total amount. However, the actual amount that each property owner pays is subject to the City's incentive program for early connections. In addition to sharing the cost of the public sewer line, each property owner will be required to pay an additional $2,335 ($2,435 after June 30, 2003) connection and inspection fee when connection to the public line is made. All owners will be responsible for all plumbing costs required for work done on private property. Reimbursement Rate All properties in this area are zoned R-4.5 but vary in lot size from about 10,000 square feet to over 22,000 as can be seen on the attached list of owners. Therefore, it is recommended that the total cost of the project be divided among the forty seven properties proportional to the square footage of each property. Resolution 01-46 limits this fee to $6,000 to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000 per owner for connections completed within three years of final approval of the City Engineer's Report. Other reimbursement methods include dividing the cost equally among the owners or by the length of frontage of each property. These methods are not recommended because there is no correlation between these methods and the cost of providing service to each lot or the benefit to each lot. Each property owner's estimated fair share of the public sewer line is $0.71 per square foot of the lot served. Each owner's fair share would be limited to $6,000 to the extent that it does not exceed $15,000, for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction in accordance with Resolution 01-46 (attached). In addition to paying for the first $6,000, owners will remain responsible for paying all actual costs that exceed $15,000. Annual Fee Adjustment TMC 13.09.115 states that an annual percentage rate shall be applied to each property owner's fair share of the sewer line costs on the anniversary date of the reimbursement agreement. The Finance Director has set the annual interest rate at 6.05% as stated in City of Tigard Resolution No. 98-22. Recommendation It is recommended that a reimbursement district be formed with an annual fee increase as indicated above and that the reimbursement district continue for fifteen years as provided in the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 13.09.110(5). Fifteen years after the formation of the reimbursement district, properties connecting to the sewer would no longer be required to pay the reimbursement fee. IL Submitted June 3, 2003 J Ag stn P. Duenas, P.E. W City Eafigineer ~ i I:IENG12002.2003 FY CIP\Park St Derry Dell Ct & Watkins Ave Reimbursement Dist No. 29%City Council Agenda oitReport Establish.doc Reimbursment District No. 29 Estimated Cost to Property Owners ESTIMATED OWNER SITE ADDRESS AREA (S.F.) COST TO PROPERTY OWNER 1 MILLER ALLAN S DOREEN J 10665 SW DERRY DELL COURT 15365.72783 $12,034 2 MOELLER JOHN C & NANCY A 10695 SW DERRY DELL CT 15366.95090 $12,035 3 FRAINEY BRIAN A & ABIGAIL J 10725 SW DERRY DELL CT 15366.98757 $12,035 4 COUSINEAU STEVEN B 10755 SW DERRY DELL CT 15367.02424 $12,035 5 HEINTZ BARRY E 10700 SW DERRY DELL CT 19537.74845 $15,301 6 GROENLUND DAVID R AND 10730 SW DERRY DELL 19533.50173 $15,298 7 WATSON GARY D 13120 SW WATKINS AVE 13916.56716 $10,899 8 BARRETT HARLEY E 13150 SW WATKINS AVE 13926.64909 $10,907 9 NOLES DAVID R AND 10630 SW PARK ST 14667.82779 $11,487 10 W ILLIAMS DAVID S 10635 SW COOK LN 14467.42728 $11,330 11 LEPPER CHAD & MI YOUNG 13060 SW WATKINS AVE 14195.40658 $11,117 12 TIPTON TROY P & MICHELLE J 10785 SW DERRY DELL CT 15367.06091 $12,035 13 SAWKINS DOUGLAS S 10815 SW DERRY DELL CT 16763.55464 $13,129 14 MENDEZ JUDITH A 13090 SW WATKINS AVE 13905.98901 $10,891 15 HAMMES ALFRED J HELEN L 13115 SW WATKINS AVE 14471.49969 $11,334 16 HANSEN HARRIS H SARA J 10610 SW DERRY DELL 17986.13480 $14,086 17 PHAM SIMON C & REBECCA T 10640 SW DERRY DELL CT 19538.24056 $15,302 18 GUSTIN RONALD L & TAMMY G 10670 SW DERRY DELL CT 19537.91667 $15,301 19 STOUDER CHARLES H TR 10760 SW DERRY DELL CT 19537.06360 $15,301 20 BORCHERS VELLA M 10790 SW DERRY DELL CT 22358.89852 $17,511 21 BROWN HUBERT A 10820 SW DERRY DELL CT 16724.83997 $13,098 22 TESSMAN OWEN H 10865 SW DERRY DELL CT 16199.23647 $12,687 23 HARMON KATIE 13145 SW WATKINS AVE 14429.56599 $11,301 24 MCCUTCHAN ALBERT 10880 SW DERRY DELL 15118.21956 $11,840 25 KOOL SCOTT D & CELIA C 10885 SW DERRY DELL CT 16201.93421 $12,689 26 WINTERS GERRY L (Existing) 10625 SW PARK ST 14687.80616 $11,503 27 WINTERS GERRY L (Back Lot) 10625 SW PARK ST 14687.80616 $11,503 28 BRADEN ROBERT W & KATHLEEN J 13175 SW WATKINS 14429.44431 $11,301 29 KRAGER ROBERT WARREN 10655 SW PARK ST 20861.07951 $16,338 30 FURRER ROSMARIE 10685 SW PARK ST 19762.54608 $15,477 31 MCGRIFF JAMES E/SHEILA M 10735 SW PARK ST 19211.32816 $15,046 32 MIGUES RONALD P & DEBORAH R 13180 SW WATKINS AVE 13936.73103 $10,915 33 HATCH JAMES S/MARCIEL J 13205 SW WATKINS AVE 14347.22665 $11,236 34 MEYER DUANE FRANCIS 13210 SW WATKINS AVE 13934.27425 $10,913 35 GRAY GAYLE R 10660 SW PARK ST 14573.06828 $11,413 36 WEESE TERRY & DORI 10600 SW PARK ST 14764.34445 $11,563 ' 37 PUGSLEY CLAYTON A 10570 SW PARK ST 14778.43789 $11,574 38 PONIATOWSKI-D'ERMENGARD 10665 SW COOK LN 14468.20714 $11,331 39 ROSSBERG STEPHEN A 10605 SW COOK LN 14465.75477 $11,329 40 MURFINSIMMONS MATTHEW T 13365 SW WATKINS 14375.98869 $11,259 41 PHILLIPS RICHARD F 10676 SW COOK LN 9993.93370 $7,827 42 SHOLES LANCE M 10634 SW COOK LN 19572.73686 $15,329 43 RESLER MICHAEL D & BARBARA S 10620 SW COOK LN 19574.84873 $15,330 44 BISHOP WILBUR A AND MARTHA E 10590 SW COOK LN 14646.50836 $11,471 45 HOLCOMBE GERALD A 13485 SW WATKINS ST 14726.18773 $11,533 46 JENSEN RONALD M 13000 SW WATKINS AVE 20738.95548 $16,242 47 GROAT RANDALL S & CAROLYN J 13010 SW WATKINS 15404.02471 $12,064 Totals 757793.21 $593,477.60 _CL DZ z- N=0 n o Q O N M. 0 V) $ 80 N . 3 s ;;0 CD c (D ob, ob, WINS DOUGLAS e P 0 2 0 0 o DERRYI DELL CT P F 2SY03DA0IB00 ~ 25 77P70N IRDY P lD BORCHERS VELLA M 10785 SW y 10790 SW DERRY DELL CT DERRY DELL CT 2SY03DA02500 2SIOMA01700 fz) fn Z D S70UDER CHARLES H OUSINEAU S7EVEN 10760 SW DERRY DELL CT 10755 SW 2SY03DA02600 DERRY DELL CT 2SIOMA01600 D C MCCRIFF JAMES £ CROENLUND DAVID R ai 10735 SW PARK T 10730 SW DERRY DELL CT FRAINEY BRIAN A m _ 2SIOMA02700 10725 SW P2 DERRY DELL CT z r 2SIOMA01500 HEINIZ BARRY E N FURR£R ROSMARIE 10700 SW DERRY DELL Cr z ITI 10685 SW PARK 2S70JDA0280O MOELLER JOHN C 2SI03DAOJ300 10695 SW DERRY DELL CT OUS77N RONALD L cl) 2SIOMA01400 _Q KRACER ROBERT WARREN f0670 SW DERRY DELL CT -O 10655 SW PARK STREET 2S103DA02900 ---J cD 251030A01290 MILLER ALLAN S 10665 SW k 10640 SW DERRY DELL CT DERRY2SfOMAOf COURT WIN7£RS C£RRY L 2S10JDA03000 O 10625 SW PARK Sr 2SlOJDA032Of HANSfN HARRIS H ~ C 100 sw DERRY DELL CT 1S10DA03100 CD --i b Z N PUR IR 11.1 S? g o v~ ~a N r WA z rKin~s 02E P, t;?Xx -t di~~2 giq~ '`2'~Nyz poi age ' CAM i 7~ r■..V■Y■r■ ■ ■ V ■ DERRY DELL CT & WATKINS AVE SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT #29 See Exhibit B (pg 1) PARK ST ti y h N Rfl ag ~bN 2~N 8~v t~~`a 038 038 a3 y i Q y t2z ~yo !lyg 3~ ~~yp 6qg" ~~N IT COOK IN 0 ti X38 3 p CL NOTE: All properties in the reimbursement EXHIBIT B .~p~ district are zoned R4.5 NTS ~Kr T~rNs AvE 15T~~DT X29 `~~rse.T N A r1RSEgEW D W • DE~E~ pE1L . ENTS R1EeMR raN 3 -T-2s RA SEGT IMPRD~EI~ Of NE 1 14 SERER HE SANIS .~,O~ of T G~ A POR ism I •y cr 4 M M w vrcrNr'~ ~AR tAT5 May 27, 2003 NOTICE informational Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, June 10, 2003 AT 7:30 PM IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 29. (SW Park Street and Derry Dell Court) The Tigard City Council will conduct an informational public hearing to hear testimony on the proposed Reimbursement District formed to install sewers in SW Park Street and Derry Dell Court. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted as required by Section 13.09.060 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Further information and the scheduled time for this item during the Council meeting may be obtained from the Engineering Department, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503 718-2468 or at www.ci.ticiard.or.us. I: IENGIGREG1Reimbursement gstricts129 Derry DO, Wa9dnsl ormaUonWobce I. Formation Hearing.Coc Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No. 29 (SW Park Street and Derry Dell Court) At this meeting, City Council will be requested to form a sewer reimbursement district to provide your neighborhood with sewer service. There is no requirement to connect to the sewer or pay any fee until connection is made. Each property owner's estimated fair share of the public sewer line is based on the area of the lot served and is summarized in the attached table. This amount will be revised once construction is completed and final costs are determined. An annual increase of 6.05% simple interest will also be applied to this amount. The amount each property owner will be required to pay will be limited to $6,000 for connections completed within three years of City Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following construction, in accordance with Resolution 01-46. Please note that this resolution also requires the owner to pay any fair share amounts that exceed $15,000. Consequently, if the final fair share for an owner exceeds $15,000, the owner would be required to pay $6,000 plus the amount the fair share exceeds $15,000. The owner would also be required to pay a connection fee of $2,435 at the time of connection to the sewer. In addition, property owners are responsible for disconnecting their existing septic system according to Washington County rules and for any other modifications necessary to connect to the public sewer. PARK STREET & DERRY COURT SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT #29 A PORTION OF THE NE 114 OF SECTION 3 T2S R1W W.M. R ' r N E TI VICINITY MAP NTS 2S103DA-00400 2S103DA-02700 BARRETT HARLEY E GROENLUND DAVID RAND 13150 SW WATKINS AVE CONSTANCE J M TIGARD, OR 97223 10730 SW DERRY DELL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-05900 2S103DA-02900 BISHOP WILBUR A AND MARTHA E GUSTIN RONALD L & TAMMY G PO BOX 23832 10670 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97281 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-02500 2S103DA-01000 BORCHERS VELLA M HAMMES ALFRED J HELEN L 10790 SW DERRY DELL CT 13115 SW WATKINS AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-00800 2S103DA-03100 BRADEN ROBERT W & KATHLEEN J HANSEN HARRIS H SARA J 13175 SW WATKINS 10610 SW DERRY DELL TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2SI03DA-02400 2S103DA-00900 BROWN HUBERT A HARMON KATIE 10820 SW DERRY DELL CT 13145 SW WATKINS AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-01600 2S103DA-00700 COUSINEAU STEVEN B & HATCH JAMES S/MARCIEL J & COUSINEAU JESSICA L HATCH KEVIN SCOTT TRUSTEES 10755 SW DERRY DELL CT 13205 SW WATKINS TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-01500 2S103DA-02800 FRAINEY BRIAN A & ABIGAIL J HEINTZ BARRY E 10725 SW DERRY DELL CT TAMARA R TIGARD, OR 97223 10700 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 2SI03DA-03300 2S103DA-06000 FURRER ROSMARIE HOLCOMBE GERALD A & 10685 SW PARK BELINDA M TIGARD, OR 97223 13485 SW WATKINS ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S703DA4)4300 2S102BC-03500 GRAY GAYLE R JENSEN RONALD M & I 10660 SW PARK ST JENSEN ERI K TIGARD, OR 97223 13000 SW WATKINS AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 2S10213C-03400 2S103DA-02100 GROAT RANDALL S & CAROLYN J KOOL SCOTT D & CELIA C 13010 SW WATKINS 10885 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-03290 2S103DA-04400 KRAGER ROBERT WARREN NOLES DAVID R AND 10655 SW PARK STREET MARGARET L TIGARD, OR 97223 10630 SW PARK ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-00100 2S103DA-03000 LEPPER CHAD & MI YOUNG PHAM SIMON C & REBECCA T 13060 SW WATKINS AVE 10640 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-02300 2S103DA-05603 MCCUTCHAN ALBERT PHILLIPS RICHARD F 10880 SW DERRY DELL 10676 SW COOK LN TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-03400 2S103DA-05200 MCGRIFF JAMES E/SHEILA M PONIATOWSKI-D'ERMENGARD 10735 SW PARK ST MARIE LORRAINE TIGARD, OR 97223 10665 SW COOK LN TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-00200 2S103DA-04600 MENDEZ JUDITH A PUGSLEY CLAYTON A & 13090 SW WATKINS AVE FREEMAN-PUGSLEY CAMIE TIGARD, OR 97223 10570 SW PARK ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-00600 2S103DA-05800 MEYER DUANE FRANCIS RESLER MICHAEL D & BARBARA S ANNIE ELIZABETH 10620 SW COOK LN 13210 SW WATKINS AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-00500 2S103DA-05000 MIGUES RONALD P & DEBORAH R ROSSBERG STEPHEN A 13180 SW WATKINS AVE 10605 SW COOK LN PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-01300 2S103DA-01800 MILLER ALLAN S DOREEN J SAWKINS DOUGLAS S & 10665 SW DERRY DELL COURT CAROLYN M TIGARD, OR 97223 10815 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-01400 2S103DA-05700 MOELLER JOHN C & NANCY A SHOLES LANCE M & 10695 SW DERRY DELL CT ALFANO KRISTEN A TIGARD, OR 97223 10634 SW COOK LN TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-04900 2S103DA-02600 MURFINSIMMONS MATTHEW T & STOUDER CHARLES H TR & MICAHLE SUSAN K 13365 SW WATKINS 10760 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-02000 TESSMAN OWEN H 10865 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-01700 TIPTON TROY P & MICHELLE J 10785 SW DERRY DELL CT TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-00300 WATSON GARY D & KEENER SANDRA S 13120 SW WATKINS AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-04500 WEESE TERRY & DORI 10600 SW PARK ST TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-05100 WILLIAMS DAVID S 10635 SW COOK LN TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DA-03201 WINTERS GERRY L 10625 SW PARK ST TIGARD, OR 97223 I I I I I I CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 01- 4 P A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 98-51 AND ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND ENHANCED NEIGHBORHOOD SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program to extend public sewers through Reimbursement Districts in accordance with TMC Chapter 13.09; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 1998, the City Council established The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program through Resolution No. 98-51 to encourage owners to connect to public sewer. The program was offered for a two-year period after which the program would be evaluated for continuation; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 2000, the City Council extended The Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program an additional two years through Resolution No. 00-60; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that residential areas that remain without sewer service should be provided with service within five years; and WHEREAS, Council has directed that additional incentives should be made available to encourage owners to promptly connect to sewers once service is available and that owners who have paid for service provided by previously established districts of the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program should receive the benefits of the additional incentives. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Resolution No. 98-51 establishing the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Incentive Program is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: A revised incentive program is hereby established for the Neighborhood Sewer Extension Program. This incentive program shall apply to sewer connections provided through the sewer reimbursement districts shown on the attached Table 1 or established thereafter. All connections qualifying under this program must be completed within three years after Council approval of the final City Engineer's Report following a public hearing conducted in accordance with TMC Section 13.09.105 or by two years from the date this resolution is passed, which ever is later, as shown on the attached Table 1. i SECTION 3: To the extent that the reimbursement fee determined in accordance with Section j 13.09.040 does not exceed $15,000, the amount to be reimbursed by an owner of a lot zoned single family residential shall not exceed $6,000 per connection, provided that the lot owner complies with the provisions of Section 2. Any amount over $15,000 shall be reimbursed by the owner. This applies only to the reimbursement fee for the sewer installation and not to the connection fee, which is still payable upon application for RESOLUTION NO. 01-J-41-170 Page 1 sewer connection. SECTION 4: The City Engineer's Report required by TMC Chapter 13.09 shall apply the provisions of this incentive program. Residential lot owners who do not connect to sewer in accordance with Section 2 shall pay the full reimbursement amount as determined by the final City Engineer's Report. SECTION 5: Any person who has paid a reimbursement fee in excess of the fee required herein is entitled to reimbursement from the City. The amounts to be reimbursed and the persons to be paid shall be determined by the Finance Director and approved by the City Manager. There shall be a full explanation of any circumstances that require payment to any person who is not an original payer. The Finance Director shall make payment to all persons entitled to the refund no later than August 31, 2001. SECTION 6: The Sanitary Sewer Fund, which is the funding source for the Neighborhood Sewer Reimbursement District Program, shall provide the funding for the installation costs over $6,000 up to a maximum of $15,000 per connection. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 10, 2001 PASSED: This day of 2001. ayor Ci of azd ATTEST: ti1yRedorder - City of 'hgard i i 1ACirywWRzsUt 1udon Revising the Neighbodiood sewer Incendve Program I I RESOLUTION N0.01-(1 Page 2 TABLE Reimbursement Districts with Refunds Available DISTRICT FEE PER LOT REIMBURSEMENT AVAILABLE INCENTIVE PERIOD ENDS 'TIGARD ST.No.8 5,193 No reimbursement available FAIRHAVEN ST/WYNo.9 4,506 No reimbursement available HILLVIEW ST No.11 8,000 -----,2003 106TH & JOHNSON No.12 5,598 No reimbursement available 100TH & INEZ No.13 8,000 -----,2003 WALNUT & TIEDEMAN No.14 8,000 -----,2003 BEVELAND&HERMOSA No.15 5,036 No reimbursement available DELMONTE No.16 8,000 -----,2003 OWARA No. 17 8,000 -----,2003 2-WALL NUT & 121sT No.18 - Amount to be reimbursed will be Three years from service availability 2 ROSE VISTA No.20 - determined once final costs are determined. * Currently being constructed i June 8, 2003 L~ ~ r Tigard City Council p~~R'1NC/EN~~'~e RIIV , C 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 Regarding: Proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No 29 Dear City Council Member and City of Tigard Engineering Staff: As a homeowner within the area considered for the propose sewer reimbursement district I acknowledge that there may be a select few residents in the neighborhood who either have problems with their septic systems or stand to benefit financially from connection to sanitary sewer so they llay Silbdivide t1leir IOL LiOwcV2r, WG aIC not a111Vl1g L1VJG 1c w. Bearing the price of sanitary sewer construction and monthly fees is not in our financial plans, and we do not support forming proposed Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement District No 29. We also concerned with degradation of livability AM.. to residential infillina, which wollid occur with sanitary sewer construction. The neighborhood was designed with relatively low housing density on large lots to accommodate septic systems. The undisturbed soils in most of the area are reasonably permeable and provide for adequate septic treatment/disposal. Well designed, constructed, and maintained septic systems function for many decades with proper care. The system at our residence had recently been pumped and inspected after 13 years since the previous service and was observed to be in good condition. We have never experienced poor drainage, and expect to receive many more decades of service from our existing system. We are not interested in sanitary sewer service at this time, particular not in consideration of the financial burden under which it would place us, and the resultant degradation of neighborhood livability, crowding, and increased traffic from future infilling. Respectfully, R. Warren & Carol Krager 10655 S.W Park Street Tigard, OR 97223 Reimbursment District No. 29 Estimated Cost to Property Owners ESTIMATED OWNER SITE ADDRESS AREA (S.F.) COST TO PROPERTY OWNER 1 MILLER ALLAN S DOREEN J 10665 SW DERRY DELL COURT 15365.72783 $10,849 2 MOELLER JOHN C & NANCY A 10695 SW DERRY DELL CT 15366.95090 $10,850 3 FRAINEY BRIAN A & ABIGAIL J 10725 SW DERRY DELL CT 15366.98757 $10,850 4 COUSiNEAU STEVEN B 10755 SW DERRY DELL CT 15367.02424 $10,850 5 HEINTZ BARRY E 10700 SW DERRY DELL CT 19537.74845 $13,794 6 GROENLUND DAVID R AND 10730 SW DERRY DELL 19533.50173 $13,791 7 WATSON GARY D 13120 SW WATKINS AVE 13916.56716 $9,826 8 BARRETT HARLEY E 13150 SW WATKINS AVE 13926.64909 $9,833 9 NOLES DAVID RAND 10630 SW PARK ST 14667.82779 $10,356 10 WILLIAMS DAVID S 10635 SW COOK LN 14467.42728 $10,215 11 LEPPER CHAD & MI YOUNG 13060 SW WATKINS AVE 14195.40658 $10,022 12 TIPTON TROY P & MICHELLE J 10785 SW DERRY DELL CT 15367.06091 $10,850 13 SAWKINS DOUGLAS S 10815 SW DERRY DELL CT 16763.55464 $11,836 14 MENDEZ JUDITH A 13090 SW WATKINS AVE 13905.98901 $9,818 15 HAMMES ALFRED J HELEN L 13115 SW WATKINS AVE 14471.49969 $10,217 16 HANSEN HARRIS H SARA J 10610 SW DERRY DELL 17986.13480 $12,699 17 PHAM SIMON C & REBECCA T 10640 SW DERRY DELL CT 19538.24056 $13,795 18 GUSTIN RONALD L & TAMMY G 10670 SW DERRY DELL CT 19537.91667 $13,794 19 STOUDER CHARLES H TR 10760 SW DERRY DELL CT 19537.06360 $13,794 20 BORCHERS VELLA M 10790 SW DERRY DELL CT 22358.89852 $15,786 21 BROWN HUBERT A 10820 SW DERRY DELL CT 16724.83997 $11,808 22 TESSMAN OWEN H 10865 SW DERRY DELL CT 16199.23647 $11,437 23 HARMON KATIE 13145 SW WATKINS AVE 14429.56599 $10,188 24 MCCUTCHAN ALBERT 10880 SW DERRY DELL 15118.21956 $10,674 25 KOOL SCOTT D & CELIA C 10885 SW DERRY DELL CT 16201.93421 $11,439 26 WINTERS GERRY L (Existing) 10625 SW PARK ST 14687.80616 $10,370 27 WINTERS GERRY L (Back Lot) 10625 SW PARK ST 14687.80616 $10,370 28 BRADEN ROBERT W & KATHLEEN J 13175 SW WATKINS 14429.44431 $10,188 29 KRAGER ROBERT WARREN 10655 SW PARK ST 20861.07951 $14,729 30 FURRER ROSMARIE 10685 SW PARK ST 19762.54608 $13,953 31 MCGRIFF JAMES E/SHEILA M 10735 SW PARK ST 19211.32816 $13,564 32 MIGUES RONALD P & DEBORAH R 13180 SW WATKINS AVE 13936.73103 $9,840 33 HATCH JAMES S/MARCIEL J 13205 SW WATKINS AVE 14347.22665 $10,130 34 MEYER DUANE FRANCIS 13210 SW WATKINS AVE 13934.27425 $9,838 35 GRAY GAYLE R 10660 SW PARK ST 14573.06828 $10,289 36 WEESE TERRY & DORI 10600 SW PARK ST 14764.34445 $10,424 37 PUGSLEY CLAYTON A 10570 SW PARK ST 14778.43789 $10,434 38 PONIATOWSKI-D'ERMENGARD 10665 SW COOK LN 14468.20714 $10,215 39 ROSSBERG STEPHEN A 10605 SW COOK LN 14465.75477 $10,213 40 MURFINSIMMONS MATTHEW T 13365 SW WATKINS 14375.98869 $10,150 41 PHILLIPS RICHARD F 10676 SW COOK LN 9993.93370 $7,056 42 SHOLES LANCE M 10634 SW COOK LN 19572.73686 $13,819 43 RESLER MICHAEL D & BARBARA S 10620 SW COOK LN 19574.84873 $13,821 44 BISHOP WILBUR A AND MARTHA E 10590 SW COOK LN 14646.50836 $10,341 45 HOLCOMBE GERALD A 13485 SW WATKINS ST 14726.18773 $10,397 46 JENSEN RONALD M 13000 SW WATKINS AVE 20738.95548 $14,642 47 GROAT RANDALL S & CAROLYN J 13010 SW WATKINS 15404.02471 $10,876 Totals 757793.21 $535,029.81 AGENDA ITEM # o~ FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 200,3 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE An Ordinance amending Section 3.44.005(A) of the Tigard Municipal Code relating to the definition of Substandard Undeveloped Property. PREPARED BY: Terry Muralt, Buyer DEPT HEAD OK _I CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve the amendment of the definition of "Substandard Undeveloped Property" to include parcels that do not meet the City's existing Development Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve amendment of the definition of "Substandard Undeveloped Property". INFORMATION SUMMARY In a recent attempt to sell City owned "Real Property" it was discovered that the definition of Substandard Undeveloped Property in the TMC 3.44 Sale of Surplus Property did not line up with the City's Development Code. This amendment of the definition of Substandard Undeveloped Property will align it with the City's Development Code. List below is the requested amendment of TMC 3.44.005 (A) - Addition is in BOLD lettering Parcels with no structures thereon which are not of minimum buildable size for the zone in which located, and parcels that do not meet the City's existing Development Code. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Leave definition as is. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES N/A MMUNITY NEWSPAPERS PHONE ( ' ~ g i ~'~p►'~ ~ 2 P.O. BOX 370 TON, OREGON59706884-0360 Notice TT 10242 BEAVER Legal Notice Advertising City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ~igard,Oregon 97223 • 13 Duplicate Af a oaf; a R ay v. ; o s~eq i Accounts Payable • • v tic :°~a ; - o IF, 00 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION > C7 °.c v STATE OF OREGON, (D L11'. a4 vi COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) SS' O n p~, 1, Kathy Snyder ~ 3;y;~.::°-~.n,..s!'•,~,-7 being first duly sworn, depose and say that 1 am the Advertising o~ry.~. Director, or his principal clerk, of theTigard-Tualatin !Mmes V ~0 3'ctc~i r a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county a i1(gate; that the Public Hearin AApeal of Bi oard Signs Interpretaty J.N yi N?tr of ~!y ; 04, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: {FI✓Y ar U May 22 2003 ° IL a ~ Subscribed and sworn to ore me this 2 2 n ra r1 a Y o f M T, 2 0 0 3 N _ OFFICIAL SEAL Nota ublic for Oregon ROBIN A BURGESS t sOTAHY PUBLIC-OREGONI My Commission Expires: `SIO^ NO. 344 1 AFFIDAVIT AGENDA ITEM No. 13 Date: June 10, 2003 PUBLIC HEADING (QUASI-] U DICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: APPEAL OF A DIRECTOR`S INTERPRETATION REGARDING BILLBOARD SIGNS; COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 18.780 Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony I:W,DM\GREER\CCSIGNUP\PH TESTIMONY QJ.DOC AGENDA ITEM No. 93 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - (Speaking In Favor opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. M d t,Ae. Rudd 5-hzf RI 2- C; C' 0 Por-+landl oe q 722- i/ Qi sf ;n r Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Y h Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. G 9 u J AGENDA ITEM # 3 FOR AGENDA OF June 10, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Appeal of a Director's Inte retation Regarding Billboard Signs PREPARED BY: Brad Kilby DEPT HEAD OK Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE OUNCIL Should Council approve a resolution affirming a Director's Interpretation of language in the Tigard Community Development Code, Chapter 18.780, regarding prohibition of "Billboard signs" within the Tigard city limits? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution affirming the Director's Interpretation of language in the Tigard Community Development Code regarding prohibition of Billboard signs. INFORMATION SUMMARY On April 13, 1993, the Tigard City Council, by majority vote, agreed to prohibit billboard signs in the Tigard city limits, and to remove the approval criteria for billboard signs from the Special Condition Signs section of then TDC Section 18.114.090. Earlier this year, West Coast Media, LLC, and later Media Arts, Inc. applied for building permit approval to construct "freeway oriented" signs under the premise that if they received approval from ODOT and pursuant to the Oregon Motorists Information Act (OMIA) they would not be subject to separate review from the City of Tigard. City planning staff recommended to the Building Official that the building permits for the signs be denied after finding that the signs that were applied for exceeded the maximum allowable size and height for "freeway oriented" signs, and that in fact, the signs that were applied for appeared to be billboards. The Building Official denied approval of the permits, and the two companies filed appeals with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. The appeals were based on language in Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.780. Z Staff requested that the language be clarified by the Community Development Director. On May 16, 2003, the Community Development Director issued his interpretation, and the City Manager appealed the decision to Council ~ seeking affirmation. A separate appeal was filed on behalf of Media Arts, Inc. by Michelle Rudd of Stoel Rives o LLP. The Director's decision is partly based on Ordinance 93-12 that was passed by the City Council in April of g 1993 to prohibit Billboards in the City of Tigard. U J OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Council could disagree with the Director's Interpretation. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not Applicable ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Staff recommendation to the City Council Attachment 2: Resolution affirming the Directors Interpretation of Billboard signs in the City of Tigard. Exhibit A: Director's Interpretation of language regarding billboards in the Tigard Municipal Code and Ordinance 93-12 Attachment 3: City Council Hearing Minutes for April 13, 1993 Attachment 4: Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 1993 Attachment 5: City Ordinance 93-12 Attachment 6: Addendum to the staff recommendation to the City Council FISCAL NOTES The cost of the appeal is $250.00. i i Attachment 1 KIM CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Members of the Tigard City Council FROM: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner DATE: May 28, 2003 SUBJECT: Staff recommendation regarding the appeal of MIS2003-00021 The Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.340 affords the Community Director the discretion to interpret any terms or phrases within the Tigard Development Code that may be ambiguous or subject to two or more reasonable meanings. In December of last year, I was approached by Chris Carlisle of West Coast Media, LLC to sign some zoning affidavits for several properties within the City of Tigard. He indicated that he was intending to apply for sign permits from ODOT under the Oregon Motorist Information Act. I wrote a memo to ODOT regarding Freeway Oriented signs, and indicated in my letter that as long as they received OMIA approval for the signs, the freeway-oriented signs would not need separate permits from the City. I indicated to Chris that he would still be required to attain building permits for the signs, and expressly stated to him as did the counter staff, that Billboards were prohibited in the City of Tigard. Earlier this year, West Coast Media, LLC and Media Arts, Inc. applied for building permits for signs that exceeded both the maximum allowable height and size of freeway oriented signs. At my direction, the Building Official denied the permits, and refunded the review fees for those permits that were not structurally reviewed. Both companies filed appeals to LUBA. As a result, I requested that the Community Development Director issue a formal Director's Interpretation regarding language that mentions Billboards in Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.780. On May 16, 2003, the Community Development Director did issue a formal interpretation that substantiated my letters. The Director's decision is partly based on Ordinance 93-12 that was passed by the City Council in April of 1993 to prohibit Billboards in the City of Tigard. The City Manager appealed the interpretation to allow the City Council to review the interpretation to affirm that his interpretation is correct. Subsequently, the City Attorney's Office has withdrawn the decisions in order that we may reissue the decisions with findings. Staff review of the pertinent materials that are enclosed as part of your record, indicates that the intent was to expressly prohibit billboards within the Tigard City limits, and concurs with the Community Development Director's Interpretation. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the Director's Interpretation. Attachment 2 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION TO AFFIRM THE COMMUNITY DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION OF LANGUAGE REGARDING BILLBOARD SIGNS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.780. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director is charged with making interpretations based on the best available information for any ambiguities or words having multiple meaning in the Tigard Development Code; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director's Interpretation is supported by past Planning Commission and City Council actions to expressly prohibit billboards in Tigard; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council passed Ordinance 93-12 to expressly prohibit billboards in the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on the matter on June 10, 2003, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby expresses its affirmation that the interpretation (Exhibit A) made by the Community Development Director is in keeping with the intention of the Tigard City Council and the purpose of the Tigard sign regulations of the Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.780. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2003. C Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: i i i City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page 1 EXHIBIT "A" DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION REGARDING BILLBOARDS TMC 18.780.015.A.8 and .9, TMC 18.870.070.M TMC 18.780.090.E.1 and TMC 18.780.090.E.6 1. INTRODUCTION This interpretation is intended to clarify certain provisions of the Community Development Code regarding signs. 11. INTERPRETATIONS A. TMC 18.780.015.A.8, 18.780.015.A.9 and 18.780.070.M Code Language TMC 18.780.015.A.8: "Billboard" means a sign face supported by a billboard structure. TMC 18.780.015.A.9: "Billboard structure" means the structural face which supports a billboard. TMC 18.780.070.M: "Billboards. Billboards are prohibited." Interpretation As applied to freeway-oriented signs, a billboard is a sign with any one sign face greater than 200 square feet or with a total sign area greater than 400 square feet. As applied to freeway-oriented signs, TMC 18.780.070.M prohibits signs with any one sign face greater than 200 square feet or with a total sign area greater than 400 square feet Discussion The two definitions (of "billboard" and "billboard structure") are circular and provide little guidance as to what constitutes a billboard or a billboard structure. Dictionary definitions are not very helpful. For example, the most relevant definition in Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary is "a large panel designed to carry outdoor advertising." This definition does not provide much detail but is in accord with the common conception of a billboard as a very large sign. TMC 18.780.070.M prohibits billboards. Before billboards were prohibited, they were allowed only in certain zones and only if within 660 feet of Highway 217 or Interstate 5. (See Ordinance 93-12). However, it is clear that when the Council prohibited billboards, it did not prohibit all freeway-oriented signs because freestanding freeway oriented signs are expressly permitted, subject to certain standards. TMC 18.780.090.E. Given the dictionary definition and common understanding of billboard as a very large sign and that the Council's obvious intent as to freeway-oriented signs was to prohibit certain signs while allowing others, it appears that the Council intended the term "billboard" in the context of freeway oriented signs to mean a sign that is larger than the maximum size allowed for a freeway-oriented sign. The normal maximum area for a freeway-oriented sign is 160 square feet per sign face and 320 square feet for a two-sided sign. TMC 18.780.090.E.6. However, provided an application can meet all of the applicable review criteria for an adjustment, the code allows adjustments of up to 25 percent in sign area. TMC 18.780.140.A, TMC 18.370.020.0.6. Therefore, a freeway-oriented sign that does not exceed 200 square feet per side and 400 square feet total may be approved through the adjustment process and would not be a billboard. In the context of freeway-oriented signs, a billboard therefore is a sign with any one sign face greater than 200 square feet or with a total sign area greater than 400 square feet. As applied to freeway- oriented signs, TMC 18.780.070.M prohibits signs with any one sign face greater than 200 square feet or with a total sign area greater than 400 square feet Page 1 of 4 B. TMC 18.780.090. E.1 Code Lanyuaae TMC 18.780.090.E.1: Anyone who qualifies for a permit from the State of Oregon under the provisions of the Oregon Motorist Information Act (OMIA) need not seek separate approval from the City of Tigard. Interpretation The "separate approval" provision of TMC 18.780.090.E.1 distinguishes the City's sign permit process set out in Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18 from the state permitting process, which includes a requirement to obtain an affidavit from the City. ORS 337.723. A person qualifies for an OMIA permit only if that person has obtained an affidavit from the City that the proposed sign complies with all applicable City regulations and the state determines that the other OMIA standards are satisfied. If a person has not obtained an ORS 337.723 affidavit that the City standards have been met, the person has not "qualifie[d] for a permit from the State of Oregon under the Oregon Motorist Information Act." To demonstrate that a person has qualified for an OMIA permit, the person must provide evidence the OMIA permit has been issued. This section does not exempt a person from obtaining building permits, only from obtaining the sign permit required under Chapter 18.780. Under the building code, the building official is to deny permits for failure to meet building code standards or other applicable laws and ordinances. The City's prohibition on billboards is an applicable law or ordinance preventing issuance of building permits for billboards. Discussion This provision is ambiguous because it does not clearly define what "qualifying for a permit" means. The provision could be interpreted to mean that the City should make an independent evaluation in each case whether a person meets all the qualifications for a permit from the State under the Oregon Motorist Information Act. This interpretation is unacceptable and unreasonable because it would have the City make an independent evaluation of a decision that only the Oregon Department of Transportation has authority to make. See ORS 377.725. That interpretation could result in an avoidance of the City process in cases in which the state denies the OMIA permit. This is clearly not what the Council intended in passing this provision. It could also be interpreted as meaning that a person does not need to seek separate City approval if the person has obtained an OMIA permit for a location in the City. This is a reasonable and acceptable interpretation of the code provision. TMC 18.780.090.E.1 must be read in context of the OMIA. A person can qualify for an OMIA permit only if that person obtains an affidavit from the City that the sign is permitted under the City codes. ORS 337.723. The provision that a person need not obtain a "separate approval" from the City makes sense when interpreted in light of the provision in ORS 337.723, which includes the City as part of the OMIA process. If the City issues an affidavit certifying compliance under ORS 337.723, it L will have verified that the applicant meets City standards, and a second City process would be r superfluous. However, if no affidavit certifying compliance is issued, then the City would not have determined whether its code has been complied with and a separate City process is needed. The intent of the provision is to avoid two separate City processes for a single sign, while requiring at least one City process to determine whether a sign complies with City standards. 1 Therefore, TMC 18.780.090.E.1 should be interpreted as meaning that a person may avoid obtaining a City permit (the "separate approval") if the person has obtained an affidavit from the City under ORS 337.723 stating that the proposed sign complies with all applicable City regulations. If a person has not obtained the ORS 337.723 affidavit indicating compliance, the person has not "qualifie[d] for a permit from the State of Oregon under the Oregon Motorist Information Act." If a person does obtain an affidavit from the City verifying compliance, the person could proceed with the billboard construction only if the person satisfies the state that all other OMIA permit requirements are met. The only way for the City to determine compliance with other OMIA standards is by verifying whether an OMIA permit has been issued. A person seeking to avoid the City permit process must provide evidence that the OMIA permit has been issued. Page 2 of 4 If a person has received an OMIA permit for another location, the person has not qualified for a permit for an OMIA permit for a location in the City until the person either obtains a City permit or an affidavit of compliance from the City under ORS 337.723. Furthermore, the only exemption provided for by this section is an exemption from the City's sign permit requirements in Chapter 18.780. A building permit, if otherwise required, still must be obtained. TMC 18.780.010.E.1 is in the context of the sign permit regulations in the Community Development Code. It is clear from the context that the "separate approval" refers to a sign permit, not a building permit. Indeed, the City does not have authority to state that a building permit is not required if state law requires a building permit, which it does for most sign structures. The building official cannot approve a building permit unless the application conforms to the requirements of the building code "and other pertinent laws or ordinances." OSSC (UBC) 106.4.1. The prohibition on billboards imposed by TMC 18.780.010.E.1 discussed in this interpretation is a "pertinent law" that prevents the issuance of a building permit for billboards. C. TMC 18.780.090.E.6 Code Provision TMC 18.780.090.E.6: For freestanding signs, a total maximum sign area of 160 square feet per fact (320 square feet total) shall be allowed. If the sign is a billboard, then the provisions of Subsection 18.780.090 shall apply. Interpretation The second sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E is interpreted to mean that signs with billboard structures that are greater than the maximum allowed by the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6 (plus any adjustments allowed by code as discussed above) are not permitted. Discussion The first sentence of this section is clear and unambiguous. The second sentence is confusing and ambiguous. That sentence states that if a sign is a billboard, the provisions of subsection 18.780.090 apply. This statement is ambiguous for two reasons. Most importantly, any reference to standards being applicable to billboards is confusing, given the express prohibitions on billboards in TMC 18.780.070.M. Second, there may be some possible ambiguity as to whether the "provisions of Subsection 18.780.090" includes the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6. Dealing with the second possible area of ambiguity, the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090E.6 is one of the provisions of Subsection 18.780.090. There is no language in the second sentence that would exclude the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6 from being applicable. It would have been easy to include an express provision stating that the first sentence did not apply to billboards, or to add the word "but" between the two sentences. The Council in adopting the provision did not do that. To interpret the second sentence of TMC 18.780.090E.6 in a way that would make the first sentence not L applicable to billboards would be to insert a provision that is not there. The second sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6 should therefore be interpreted as making the size limitation of the first sentence of that subsection applicable to billboards. In interpreting this provision, it should be noted that the code definition of billboard -a sign supported by a billboard structure- applies to this provision. The apparent intent was therefore that any sign that had a billboard structure could not exceed the other requirements of freeway-oriented signs, including 9 the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6. The best interpretation of the second sentence of TMC a 18.780.090.E is therefore that signs with billboard structures that are greater than the maximum allowed by the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6 (plus any adjustments allowed by code as discussed above), are not permitted. Page 3 of 4 This interpretation also resolves the possible inconsistency with prohibition on all billboards in TMC 18.780.070.M. As properly interpreted, TMC 18.780.090.E.6 prohibits all signs greater than a certain size, including those that are supported by a billboard structure. Given the interpretation of "billboard" discussed in Section A above, the structure of a smaller sign would not be a "billboard structure" because it would be for a sign that is smaller than a billboard and the prohibition on billboards would not apply. Therefore, there is no inconsistency between TMC 18.780.090.E.6 and TMC 18.780.070.M because TMC 18.780.090.E.6 does not allow any billboards prohibited by TMC 18.780.070.M. III. APPLICATION OF THIS INTERPRETATION This interpretation applies in all situations in which the code sections discussed in this interpretation are applicable. Because this is an interpretation and not a regulation, it is to be applied by all City staff in all situations, even as to applications that have been filed. IV. FINALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS This decision is final and effective upon mailing. It may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to TMC 18.340.020.E and F. James N.P. a ryx, ommunity pment Director DATE: S Page 4 of 4 no-WE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 93- a AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 18.114.070 TO ADD SUBSECTION N. TO PROHIBIT BILLBOARDS AND TO REPEAL SECTION 18.114.090 A. SUBSECTIONS 1-4 WHICH PROVIDES FOR BILLBOARDS. WHEREAS, The City of Tigard finds it necessary to revise the Community Development code periodically to improve the operation and implementation of the Code; and WHEREAS, The City of Tigard Planning commission reviewed the staff recommendation at a public hearing on March 8, 1993 and voted to recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council; and WHEREAS, The City of Tigard finds that the amendment does not affect City Comprehensive Plan Goals or State Planning Goals; and WHEREAS, The City of Tigard finds that there has been a public outcry concerning the proliferation, number, spacing and aesthetics of billboards; and WHEREAS, The City council held a public hearing on April 13, 1993 to consider the amendment. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Community Development code shall be amended as shown in Exhibit "A". Language to be added in tnmERLUM., Language to be deleted is shown in [BRA RE. TS]. This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the council, approval by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By C4-; 0r J vote of all Council members Ares t after belft read by number and title only, this day of~ 1993. Ca erine Wheatley, City F#--order L APPROVED: This O ti' day o , 199 . e d dw , Mayor J Approved An to fora:: ~ City Attorney { Date ORDINANCE No. 93--L-L- Page 1 C EMBIT •A" 18.114.070 CAr a{n Sig _PL'ohibi ted IE, g41 boards are nrohjhI&ed. 1a-114.090 Special ndiition Siems A. Special condition signs shall have special or unique dimensional, locational, illumination, maximum number or tber requirements imposed upon them in addition to the regulations contained in this chapter. Al. Billboard: a. Billboard sign regulations shall be as follows: (1) Zones Permitted: (1) Billboard signs shall be permitted only in a C-G commercial zone or I- C P, I-L and I-H industrial zones and then only within 660 feet of Oregon State Expressway No. 217 and/or Interstate Frosway No. 5 right-of- ways: 2. All now proposed billboard sign(s) within 660 fast of the public right-of-way of a state highway must obtain the necessary permit(s) from the State Highway Division and all billboard sign(s) aust be maintained to conform with applicable state requirements pertaining to billboards; 3. All signs, together with all of their svpporta, reps ri braces, and nhall be maintained in a safe co indin tiion: ' a. All signs and the site upon which they are j located ahall be maintained in a neat, clean, and attractive condition; b. Signs shall be kept free from excessive rust, . anted paint, or other surface J deterioracorrosion,tionpool C. The display surfaces of all signs shall be kept neatly painted or posted; 4. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, I C existing billboards which do not conform to the provisions of this title shall be regarded as nonconforming signs and shall be subject to the provisions of subsection 18,114,110.] 18,114,130 zonJIM District Regulations •C. Coaaericial zones: 1. [f. Billboard signs in the C-G sons only in accordance with Section 18.114.090.A;] F. Industrial Zones: 1. [e. Billboard Signs in accordance with Section 18.114.090.A;] L n _J 0 u ,i =77 "F Attachment 3 :t s . ~ 1 i Council Agenda Item i TI GARD CITY COTINCI L j MEETING ft- 'ITES - APRIL 13, 1993 • Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Edwards. i . BOLL CALL Council Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Judy Fessler, Wendi Conover Hawley, Paul Hunt, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, city Administrator; Dick Dewersdorff, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Lis Newton, Community Relations Coordinator; Michael Robinson, Legal Counsel; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer. am= SESSION ram leak - City administrator reported that there was a gas leak in the service line to City Hall last week. A temporary repair was done; he will report to council on the proposed permanent solution. - volunteer Dinner - Reminder - Next week on Thursday, April 22. Goal setting session - tentatively set for May 15. (Note: Changed later in week to tentative date of May 22.) Library Eoard aubcom jtt" - City Administrator advised the Library has a subcommittee for future strategic planning. They said it would be useful if a Council person would attend the subcommittee meetings (4/26 and 5/3, 8-9:30 a.m.). Mayor Edwards advised he would like to attend, but could only go if they hold the meeting in the evening. Main Street - Councilor Fessler reported that no agreement has been reached on a project for the Main Street area for the $50,000 available. There was brief discussion on priorities of spending dollars. A=Wity Center Cosmittes - Tentatively will be asked to meet with City Council on 4/27 to discuss "what next" on Community Center idea. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGN 1 R ;rh' `5riU~ #W e°'; KrrW aKra~ a'y 4 to:~KT'~ it t.'0 1 i k ,.f t r' 9 Hf w~ + 7`k ...c alai 'a.4 tK~#}` h~, s rr. Ida v 4 ~~r +~r r a /-:K +v : Council discussed thn passibility of sQ"'ing the ue~ibmr of t t the each that flea aumdbar r month. After disaussiel,. cwm>wenss low of meetings world not be autooatiaallyagn reduced to two that City Council " instead of three asatiDg& Administrator would mo^stor schedule and isons to come before Council and make e meeting is nsc:essarY • _ - Councilor Hunt noted that he and Councilor Hawley attended meeting of NPO•s 3, 7, and g. Bs sought clarification of whether it was Council's intention to have a Council member be at each of the cIT meetings. After discussion. Council decided that they would not plan to attend a CIT meeting as a regulars assignment; howiever, if a councilor attends needed for particular issue, a member There was some discussion on details of cIT structure and Councilor Hunt suggested a staff person be process. provided for minute taking. Cossunity Relations coordinator Newton will research the costs of mailing agendas of CIT mestings on a monthly basis through a bulk mailing or incorporating into cityscape. a RAVisw - Consent Agenda Item 4.6a. - Councilor Schwarts questioned the merits of concrete versus asphalt with regard to the bid award for the Dartmouth threat paving. advised from the co r this item be pulled separate discussion. The following agenda items were also identified by council mambo" as its= which will be asked for clarification on by staff: Item 4.4, 4.5, and 7. 2. PROCLAMATIONS i SPECIAL RSCOGNITION 2.1 PROCLa1MATION: APRIL 1993 - FAIR HOUSING mWM Mayor Edwards 2.2 SPECIAL PRESjMTATION - STATE S YOs LL HIDE SCHOOL TZ M9: GIRLS SOCCER TE TZM ' Mayor Zdwards CITY COUNCIL MEWING MINUTES - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGE 1 '°'r'.»r...i a ~ 'r`BHs=_1~: reift~6.:..4?l.,ti~ •F. 3. VISITOR'S Jack Polans, 1600o S.N. Queen Victoria, Nina City, OR 97224 requested that Consent Agenda Items 4.2b and 4.3 be pulled from the Consent Agenda Items to be discussed separately. • Mark Link, 13050 b. Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon 97223 testified that he and his family were greatly impacted by the ordinance approved by the City Council on March 23, 1993. This ordinance approved a specific plan to build a major collector through their property at some point in the future. Mr. Link requested that Council consider directing staff to begin negotiations for the purchase of his property. Mayor advised that council would discuss this issue later in the meeting under "Non-Agenda." 4. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Fessler, seconded by Councilor Hawley, to remove Items 4.2 b. and 4.3 for further discussion. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Notion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Fessler, to remove Item 4.6 a. for further discussion. The notion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Discussion on Item 4.2b: City Administrator Reilly advised that an annual review of the solid waste haulers' statements of income and expenditures was conducted. The rate of return experienced by each of the haulers was sufficient as specified in their agreements with the City. No adjustment to the solid waste rate is needed. However, if the "tip fee" charged by Metro is raised, then the city will have to pass through the increase at a later date. Discussion on item 4.3: Councilor Fessler clarified that the policy to provide duplicate tape recordings of council meetings at the Library would be done on a six-month trial basis. After brief discussion, council consensus was to have staff keep records of time expended to prepare tapes to determine the cost to City. Discussion on Item 4.6a: Councilor Schwartz asked city Engineer questions on the merits of asphalt versus cement. i After discussion, City Engineer was asked to prepare a report outlining fiscal impact information relating to asphalt and cement. Also, Councilor Schwartz named several roads in other cities which were constructed with concrete and he suggested these cities be asked why they decided to use concrete. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGE 3 li I i Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to remove Consent Agenda 4.6a. for consideration at the April 27,, 1993, Council meeting. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Notion by Councilor Fesslt seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to approve the consent Agana... less item 4.6a. The notion was approved by a unanimous vote o. Council present. 4.1 Approve Council Minutes: !larch 16 and 23, 3993 4.2 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Solid Waste Rate Review - lurch 25, 1993, Memorandum from Acting Public Works Director to City Administrator C. Purchase Using Forfeited Assets - April 2, 1993, Memorandum from Chief of Police to Mayor and City Council 4.3 Approve Policy Making Tape Recordings of Council Business Meetings Available in the Tigard Public Library on a Six- Month Trial Basis 4.4 Approve Agreement Accepting U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Grant Funds (Administered through Metro Greenspaces Grant) and Authorizing the Mayor to Sign 4.5 Approve Resolution Recognizing Grant Revenue (Metro Greenspaces) and Increase Appropriations to Permit Expenditure of Grant Funds - Resolution No. 93- 14 C 4.6 Local Contract Review Board: a. Bid Award - Dartmouth Street (Set over to 4/27/93) b. Bid Award - Vehicle Purchase of Cab and Chassis to Guaranty Chevrolet and Service Van Body to Commercial Body Builders 5. S093M ORDIUQCS A 'P FOR 93-0002 BILLSOMM (ALL JMOS) A proposal to amend sections 18.114.070 and 18.114.090 of the Community Development Code to list billboards under the category of signs prohibited (18.114.070.N) and repeal provisions allowing construction of billboards (18.114.090.A.1). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.2.a, 1.1.2, 2.1.1, and 2.1.3; Community Development Coda Chapters L 18.30 and 18.114. DC n a. Public hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. 0 c. Sonior Planner Bewersdorff presented the staff report. 9 The potential for additional billboards exists under ' current code provisions. CITY COUNCIL NESTING MINUTES - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGE 4 r d. Public testimony: ` D.K. Paul advised he represented the Colony Creak Neighborhood Association. Be testified against the use of billboards noting objections to smearing the landscape with billboards and advised they vets harmful to t - aesthetics and attractiveness of the City. Additic..-12y, he commented that billboards do not increase y.sin*" but that, in fact, prices are raised because of their use. The free speech argument used to continue to utilise billboards was argued by Mr. Paul to be "legalism" and "legal jargon." He advised that billboards were a "blight" and existing signs should be torn down. • William Denecke, resident of Lake Oswego and business owner at Highway 217 and Seholls advised he agreed with Mr. Paul. Be advised of his surprise that the Tigard Code allowed billboards. He said that Tigard had an image problem to overcome and that billboards were one more detraction. Mr. Denecke compared the 217 area in Tigard unfavorably to the Kruse Way area in Lake Oswego. • Chris Hartman of Ackerly Signs suggasted that the Tigard Code be changed to "cap and replace" language. This would mean that the existing number of signs would be allowed to remains however, the signs could be moved to another Tigard location or altered. • Brian Obie of Obie Signs noted his family business had existed for many years. Be advised he has worked with the City when objections were raised on the orientation of one of his signs. Mr. Obis said he was trying to build credibility as being cooperative with Tigard. He referred to the Federal government beautification act and advised that billboards signs are allowed in certain zones. In response to the staff report, he said he did not see the potential for 26 additional signs in Tigard. Mr. Obie said that there is a large investment, hundreds of thousands of dollars, in the five signs he has. He said this represents significant income to the City as assessed on the property tax rolls. Mr. Obie reported that 90 percent of the businesses which use his billboards have Tigard addresses. C CITY COUNCIL M88TING MINUTE8 - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGE 5 ,t. y p 5r 51fi ]f't r~ rip-,`4 n t2t~aJ ~x~v fi~yV 49'+' tF~ ..r t .ra?GteT `!<x..: 5J t .J f I~~ kn J (`Vttfs "ar?s'.a:. s _.:``ttiead+~i~^•~>~`':~F.l .~V_R~~•~'e~aciFmcF "A no advised that he supports the "cap and s1splacs" Proposal suq~ssted from tb* Aclcsrly dign reprsssntatiw. With regard to the unity objections to billboards ^ f 9ns , Kr • Obis said there were only two la pres. t to testify at the planning omission aee.'1g+ Thers has been no great community response of concern. Mr. Obis said he vas willing to cooperate with the city. e. Council comments: - Councilor Fessler asked for clarification of number the Pl in~the City of Tigard. signs present Mayor Edwards objected to the comparison of Kruse Way and 217 in Tigard advising this was like comparing "apples and oranges. The Mayor cited Tigard's economic vitality in rsfersncs to the comment during testimony about the wizage problem." He also advised that he had received two telephone calls concerning the billboard issue; the callers dlidnot~~r to billboards. The yAl goest the majority of residents had any problems or C strong opinions with regard to billboards. Councilor Psssler received clarification from Legal Counsel Robinson on orient distinction between billboards and freeway Councilor Schwartz received confirmation from senior planner ewersdorft~~ai 16-20 TWO billboard PerRits under have construction. billboards ars currently o i weld Approval of the Proposed prohibit any additional signs. There was discussion on the "cap and rsplaoa" Proposal presented by the sign eompan_ _ ]j owns" • Senior planner Hewrsdorff advised ttth~iia option i was not covered under the proposed ordinance. 1 This option, advised Legal Counsel Robinson, would need more study should the council decide to pursue. C` CXTy COUNCIL IINS°PINa Va - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGE 6 77 a ...rx.._.., a. ._.i ..u ..u r. ...a,,.....r ter. "D.«X Y r. y.D An ..:Say. 4 A:::r/: f- Staff the Development Cods be amended to repeal the provision in Chapter 18.114.070 A.1-4 that allows billboards and to list billboards uaufer Chapter 18.114.070 N. as a sign prohibited. q. Public hearing was closed. h. Counci_ -onsideration: • Councilor Bunt advised he would support the proposed ordinance amendment. Be said he would be willing to explore the *cap and replace" proposal at a later date. • Councilor Fessler said she also supported the proposed ordinance amendment. She advised she has heard from a number of citizens who objected to billboards. Councilor Fessler ` said she would be willing to investigate the "cap and replacew proposal as well. • Councilor Hawley advised that she would support the proposed ordinance amendment. She commented that it was not necessary to receive testimony from a great number of people with regard to the representative testimony given by Mr. Paul. Councilor Hawley said changes in addressing planning issues were being made and would be noticed over time. She referred to planning efforts in the Tigard Triangle area with regard to design standards. • Mayor Edwards advised he had no problem with the existing ordinance. He noted concerns with spending too much time accommodating and addressing concerns and comments received from a minority viewpoint in the community. i. ORDINANCE NO. 93-12 - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE COMWNITY DEVELOPMENT CODS SECTION 18.114.070 TO ADD SUBSECTION N. TO PROHIBIT BILLBOARDS AND TO REPEAL SECTION 18.114.090 A. SUBSECTIONS 1-4 WHICH PROVIDES FOR BILLBOARDS. J. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to approve Ordinance No. 93-12. The notion was approved by a majority (4-1) vote of Council present. (Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt, and Schwartz voted way**; Mayor Edwards voted "NO.w) CITY COUNCIL MsETING MINUTES - APRIL 13, 1993 - PAGE 7 ~ Attachment 4 ( TYCAi~ zsa.A~a oorasiuceI 72MU l2 = - Nazvh 1913 1. CALL TO 0 0 President Pyre Called the meeting to order at 7:30 Pll:. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center - i TOM HALL - 13125 SW Hall Boulevard. 2. vxzz CALL: PRESENT: President Pyre; Commissioners Boone, Castile, Holland, Moore, and Schweitz. ABSENT: Commissioners Saporta, Saxton, and Schwab. STAFF: Senior Planner Dick Bewersdorff, Senior Planner Carol. Landsman, Assistant Planner Jerry Offer, and Acting Planning Commission Secretary Diane Jelderks. 3. 7sPPibO~ IQI40TlRS C Commissioner Castile moved and Commissioner Boone seconded to approve the minutes for February 22nd meeting as written. !lotion passed by majority vote of Commissioners present. Commissioner Schweitz abstained. 4. PLA~IZ 19, COMMSSZON CONNOWCATXOM There were no.comemunications received for this meeting. 5. Pus= ZZAStXW 5.1 MEM OADI E SM 93=0002 &ZZUIMMS (ALL NPO' S) A proposal to amend sections 18.114.070 and 18.114.090 of the Community Development Code to list billboards under the category of signs prohibited (18.114.070.N) and repeal provisions allowing construction of billboards (18.114.090.A.1). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2; Comprehensive Plan Policies l.l.l.a, 1.1.2, 2.1.1, and 2.1.3; Community Development Code Chapters 18.30 and 18.114. • Senior Planner Dick Bewersdorff reviewed staff's proposed amendment to the Development Code which would prohibit further billboard construction in the City while leaving in place those billboards already constructed. PUNNING COMISSION MINUTES - March 8, 1993 Page 1 ( PUBLIC TESTIMONY • Brian Obie, 2081 Musket, Eugene, OR 97401, explained that his company constructed six billboard signs along Highway 217. He felt the signs were of value to the community. He stated that this proposal is a result of an article in the Tigard Times and not necessarily a concern of the business community and citizens'. He supported regulating billboard signs but not prohibiting them. He favored a moratorium on construction until regulation for spacing, size, and location could be proposed. • will Denecke, 2665 SK Glen Eagles Rd., Lake Oswego, OR 97034, works in the Trammel Crow office off Highway 217 and travels r Highway 217 regularly. He strongly supported staff's recommendation to prohibit any more billboard signs. He felt they were a horrendous sight. He stated that other jurisdictions such as Lake Oswego and Wilsonville prohibit billboard signs. He felt billboard sign detract from the image of Tigard. He supported taking action to have existing billboard signs removed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED • Commissioner Moore stated that he has been approached by numerous individuals about the ugly billboard signs going up along Highway 217. If he would have known they were permitted by Code he would have done something sooner to prohibit them. W Commissioner Castile agreed. He felt that once the billboard companies found out billboard signs could go in, they decided to stick it to Tigard. Now we need to stop construction then deal with the ones that have been constructed. • Commissioner Fyre, Holland, Boone, and Schweitz all. supported staff's recommendation. * Commissioner Holland moved and Commissioner Boone seconded to forward Zone Ordinance Amendment ZOA 93-0092 to City Council supporting staff's recommendation. n' Further discussion followed regarding removal of existing billboard signs. N 5.2 BM Pldiw ' CP, 93-0004/ZCM M MM M m A staff initiated amendment package intended to address State J I of Oregon mandates related to development standards related to transportation facilities. Proposed amendments are nuieet as and therefore will not be listed in detail. Comprehensive Plan Volume I (Transportation Inventory Report) is proposee Lv PLANNING COMPASSION MINUTES - March 8, 1993 Page 2 L NEW ( be amended to allow a greater variety of improvement standards for. local streets. Amendments are also proposed. to the following Community Development Code Chapters: Chapter 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions); Chapter 18.106 (Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements); Chapter 18.108 (Access; Egress, and Circulation); Chapter 18.120 (Site Development Review); and Chapter 18.164 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). In addition, the Planning Division staff has proposed several other amendments within these affected Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code chapters. These other amendments relate to minimum parking space requirements for various land uses, parking space dimensional standards, drive-up service window stacking requirements, local street- improvement standards, and housekeeping amendments. The March 8, 1993, Planning Commission hearing is intended as the initial Planning Commission hearing on the proposed amendments. At .least one additional Planning Commission -hearing will be. held prior to the Commission forwarding a recommended package of proposed amendments to the City Council. for a hearing on adoption of the amendments. These additional hearings are not yet scheduled. APPLICABLE REVIEW STANDARDS: Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, and. 12; Oregon Administrative Rules OAR 660-12 (Transportation Planning Rule); Comprehensive Plan Policies 8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.1, 8.2.2, 8.3.1, 8.4.1, 9.1.1, 9.1.2, and 9.1.3 • Senior Planner Dick Bewersdorff, reviewed portions of the Code that staff is recommending to amend. • Assistant Planner Jerry Offer, explained that there is a second hearing scheduled for April 5th and this is more of a work-study session with public testimony. PUBLIC TESTI14ONY • Anthony Bonforte, 14675 SW Osprey # 413, Beaverton, OR 97007, explained that he is currently proposing a subdivision that has approximately four acres of wetlands an approximately five acres would be dedicated as open space. He favored the new i street design standards. They are flexible and would be j helpful in designing subdivisions without compromising the j quality of the subdivision. In addition they would decrease surface run-off (impervious surface). • David Banta, OTAR, 17355 Boones Ferry Road, Lake Oswego, OR 97035, asked for staff°s clarification on different sections PLANNING COMISSION MINUTES - March 8, 1993 Page 3 i of Chapter 18.164. He suggested that 18.164.060 C be removed, Commissioners agreed. • Discussion followed regarding different street widths, residential streets, sidewalks, planter strips, parking along the street, and criteria for variances. • Assistant Planner Jerry Offer explained how a design standard manual would work in conjunction with the Code. Discussion regarding processing the design standard manual along with Code revision and the difficulties involved in doing that. • Discussion on how to handle. Consensus of the Commission was that there needs to be flexibility in the Code. Further discussion on street widths, how they work in conjunction with parking, and the width of travel lanes. Discussion on width of parking spaces and layout of the spaces. • Further discussion on how to handle. Senior Planner Carol Landsman explained that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is scheduled to be heard before City Council on May 3rd. Consensus of the Commission is that they need more time to review. Commissioners are to review the proposed changes and return their marked up copies to Senior Planner Carol Landsman as soon as possible. • Further discussion regarding standard design manual, variances, parking spaces changes proposed for specific uses, and ADA requirements. * Meeting continued to April 5th. 6. OVZRR BDST1SS • Planning Commission requested staff investigate what could be done about getting existing billboard removed. • Discussion on RV parking article in the Tigard Times. • Discussion regarding upcoming annexation. 9. ' 7. 9:06 P.M. Diane M. Jel ks n Acting Come ion Secretary ATTES L r , esident l PLAMING f:0WISSION MINUTES March 8, 1993 Page 4 Attachment 5 CITY OF Tick, owman ORDINANCE NO. 93--I AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE CC1BWINITY DEVEI®BNENT CODE SE'C'TION 18.114.070 TO ADD SUBSECTION N. TO PROHIBIT BILLNGAI S AND TO REPEAL SECTION 18.114.090 A. SUBSECTIONS 1-4 WHICH PVjOVIDSS FM BILLBOARDS. WHEREAS, The City of Tigard _'+:ds it necessary to revise the Co®mmity Development code periodicai_ to improve the operation and implementation of the Code; and WHEREAS, The City of Tigard Planning Commission reviewed the staff recommendation at a public hearing on March 8, 1993 and voted to recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council; and WHEREAS, The City of Tigard finds that the amendment does not affect City Comprehensive Plan Goals or State Planning Goals; and NHERgRS, The City of Tigard finds that there has been a public outcry concerning the proliferation, number, spacing and aesthetics of billboards; and WHEREAS, The City Council held a public hearing on April 13, 1993 to consider the amendment. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Community Development Code shall be amended as shown in Exhibit "A". Language to be added in 3NDBRUIRIP-.. Language to be deleted is shown in [BRACKETS]. This ordinance shall be affective 30 days after its passage by the Council, approval by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By a;Ori~' vote of all Council members pram t after be ft read by number and title only, this ~ day of (~t~Pie,c , 1993. -JgL4Y~ tV4QbMtA,_ Ca rive Wheatley, City F@border APPROVED: This ~h day o , 19 i d j Approved s to form: Mayor City Attorney H. 10j-11b Date ORDINANCE No. 93-_.Q_ Page 1 ' . fi.7 ...7 rig: gym, r.1 J 18.114 070 bmWtain SiMS Prnbib tjd • e~ ~ ~ s.,.~,.~ arw ~i 18.11.090 8astcial Lion Sions A. Special condition signs shall have spacial or unique k dimensional, locational, illumination, maximum umber or Hier rWQSuiremants imposed upon them in addition to the regulations contained in this chapter. ~v i~[1. Billboard: a. Billboard sign regulations shall be as follows: (i) Zones Permitted: S (1) Billboard signs shall be permitted only in a C-G commercial sane or I- P, I-L and I-8 industrial zones and than only within 660 feet of Oregon State 'Clograssway No. 817 and/or interstate Freeway Mo. S right-of- ways; 2. All now proposed billboard sign(s) within 660 feet of the public right-of-way of a state highway must i obtain the necessary permit(s) from the state Highway Division and all billboard sign(s) avast be maintained to conform with applicable state requirements pertaining to billboards; 3. All signs, together with all of their supports, braces, guys, and anchors shall be kept in good repair and shall be maintained in a safe condition: a. All signs and the site upon which they are located shall No- maintained in a neat, clean, and attractive condition; J `p b. Signs shall be kept free from excessive rust, . ling paint, or other surface U COMM orui4l®aae a c. The display starfacss of all signs shall be kept neatly painted or posted; (4. Swept as otbsrnise provided in this section, ~ ~.,✓'tk'S.d![ tF y • ^t x~.: `^0 5 F~~Ls tj'~.r...i h.•: r existing billboards which do not C=IIfOra to tb® ( pCorvisiom of this title shall be regarded as nonconforming signs and shall be subject to the provisions of Subsection 18,114,110.1 h 1 t ~Q 5 La A C. ccmmericial Zones. 1. [f. Billboard Signs in the C-G :one only in accordance with Section 18.114.090.A:] F. Industrial Zones: 1. [e. Billboard Signs in accordance with Section 18.114.090.L;1 I ATTACHMENT 6 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Members of the Tigard City Council FROM: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner 89 DATE: May 30, 2003 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Director's Interpretation regarding "Billboard" in the TMC Chapter 18.780 A second appeal has been filed in the matter that will come before you on June 10, 2003. The appeal was filed by Michelle Rudd, an attorney representing Media Arts, Inc. on their behalf. In a conversation with Mrs. Rudd this afternoon she agreed to have the Media Arts appeal heard at the same time as the appeal filed by the Tigard City Manager. Media Arts, Inc. has appealed the Community Development Director's interpretation on the basis of the following statement. "Disagreement with interpretation of sign ordinance issued by Community Development Director; Director's interpretation of the sign code is unconstitutional, violating State and Federal constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech, privileges and immunities and due process; Director's interpretation violates 42 USC § 1983; City Manager does not have standing to appeal, other constitutional and procedural issues to be identified at hearing." The staff recommendation remains the same. Staff review of the pertinent materials that are part of your record, indicates that the intent was to expressly prohibit billboards within the Tigard City limits, and concurs with the Community Development Director's Interpretation. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the Director's Interpretation. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - APPEAL FILING F ORM FORLAN® USE DECISIONS CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hap Blvd., Tigard, 0R 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX. (563) 684-7297 %AI '.oy P The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate In local government. Tigard's hand use code, therefore, sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certaln land use decisions: The following form has been developed to assist you In filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what firing fees will be requited -or to answer any questions you have regarding the. appeal process; please contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at the phonelfax listed at the top of this form. GENERAL INFORMATiOt~ FOR STAFF•USE ONLY ' Property Address/Location(s) and Name(s) of the Case'No.(s): IYl 15 Z,-)Q.3 Coo Application Being Appealed: Director's Interpretation Case Name(s): Regarding Billboard TMC 18.780-015.A.8 and . 9, TMC Receipt No. :z v~~ 3 ~-n- 18.870.070M, TMC 18.780.090.E.1 and TMC 18.780.090E6 : How Do You Qualify AsAPaV.:.Media Art, through its attorney requested a copy of the Director's Application Accepted B Interpretation and has standing under 18.340.020 D Date: and E. Approved As To Form By: Appellants Address:. Media Art c/o Michelle 'Rudd, Stoel Date: Rives, '90D 5th Avenue, Su e 2600 Denied As To Form By: CitylState: Portland, OR 97204 Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached (503) 294-9390 Date: Rev. 45-Aug-02 i.Acurplnwastars\re Asedtaopeal.doc Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final: May 16, 2003 Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given: May 28, 2003 Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review: RE:.tl ED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Disagreement with interpretation of -sign ordinance Aation Elements Submitted: issued by Community Development Director; Director's interpretation of the sign code is unconstitutional, 'Filing Form (completed) violating State and Federal constitutional guarantees Fee (based on criteria below) of freedom of speech, privileges and immunities and y MtesiontoPlarwuvCommieaion s 250.00 due process; Director's interpretation violates > p, iewtdepoalti s 300.00 42 USC § 1983; City Manager does not have standing PI=dssioNHaau,9•somcerto $ goo.oo Chy Caunad" 500,00 to appeal; other constitutional and (*r'~r„mpq • procedural issues to be identified at the hearing. Signature(s) of Appe {ant(s): Media Art's mailing address is: 1923 Broadway Street Michelle Rudd, Stoel Rives, LT.p Vancouver, WA 98663 on behalf of Media Art 'OVER FOR ADDITIONAL WRITING SPACEi - 900 S.W. I uu, Avenue. Suite 2600 S-rO\'E L Portland. Oregon 9720•1 R ( V E S main 503.22.14..338338 j 1 main 0 con, S L L P l / lj503.220.2480 ,anr.,l"cl.ann ATTORNEYS AT LAW STEVEN W. ABEL Direct (503) 294-9599 June 10, 2003 swabcl@stoel.com VIA HAND DELIVERY City Council City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Appeal of Director's Interpretation Dear City Councilors: This letter is submitted to address issues raised by the May 16, 2003 Director's Interpretation of portions of the City's sign ordinance. 1. The Director erred in interpreting the code provisions TMC 18.780.015.A.8, A.9, 18.780.070.M and 18.780.090.E.6. In his decision dated May 16, 2003, the Director opined that: "As applied to freeway oriented signs, a billboard is a sign with any one sign face greater than 200 square feet or with a total sign area greater than 400 square feet. As applied to freeway oriented signs, TMC 18.780.070M prohibits signs with any one sign face greater than 200 square feet or with a total sign area greater than 400 square feet." These interpretations are in error. Evaluating the interpretations requires review of several definitions found in city code, state law and a dictionary. Billboard is defined in the code as "a sign face supported by a billboard structure." TMC § 18.780.015(A)(8). Billboard structure is defined as the structural framework which supports a billboard. TMC § 18.780.015(A)(9). The definition of billboard in the code is circular since it includes the word "billboard" in its definition. The code provides that common dictionary definitions apply unless defined in the code or context requires otherwise. TMC § Orcgon %Va,h 1 nglnn C a I i I o r n i a Utah Portlnd1-2141370.1 0053401-00003 1 d a I," City Council June 10, 2003 Page 2 18.120.010.' Billboard is defined in Webster's as "a flat surface (as of a panel, wall or fence) on which bills are posted; spec. a large panel designed to carry outdoor advertising." Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Outdoor advertising is not defined in Tigard's code but Tigard's sign ordinance adopts by reference the provisions of the Oregon Motorist Information Act (OMIA), ORS Ch. 377. While the Act does not define billboard it does define outdoor advertising as a "sign designed, intended or used to advertise, inform or attract the attention of the public as to: (a) Goods, products or services which are not sold, manufactured or distributed on or from the premises on which the sign is located, (b) facilities not located on the premises on which the sign is located, or (c) activities not located on the premises on which the sign is located." ORS 377. 710(23). The maximum dimensions for an outdoor advertising sign are established in the Act. ORS 377.745. Sign is defined in the code as materials placed or constructed primarily to convey a message or other display and which can be viewed from a right of way, another property or from the air. TMC § 18.780.015(A)(48). Section 18.780.015(A)(23) of the TMC defines freeway oriented sign as "a sign primarily designed to be read by a motorist traveling on a highway designated by the Oregon State Highway Department as a freeway or expressway; specifically these shall be Interstate 5 and Oregon State Highway #217 and shall not include Highway 99W.s2 The 1 TMC section 18.780.015A states that the definitions to be used in the sign ordinance are in addition to Chapter 18.110, Definitions. No definitions are provided in Ch. 18.110. 2 TMC section 18.780.090(E) provides that for free standing freeway oriented signs 1. Anyone who qualifies for a permit from the State of Oregon under the provisions of the Oregon Motorist Information Act (OMIA) need not seek separate approval from the City of Tigard; 2. Freeway oriented signs shall be permitted only in the CG, I-P, IL and I-H zoning districts; L 3. Freeway oriented signs shall be pemutted to be located within 200 feet of Highway 217 and/or C Interstate Freeway No. 5 rights of ways as shown in the Freeway Oriented Sign (FOS) overlay zone maps in Figure 1; (Figure 1 is on file in the City Recorder's office.); 4. One free standing freeway oriented sign shall be allowed per premises; 5. The maximum height of a freeway oriented sign shall not exceed 35 feet from the ground level at j its base; 6. For free standing signs, a total maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face (320 square feet total) shall be allowed. If the sign is a billboard, then the provisions of Subsection 18.780.090 shall apply; Portind 1-2 1 4 1 370.1 0053401-00003 City Council June 10, 2003 Page 3 definition of billboard and free standing freeway oriented sign are not inconsistent and may overlap. Given that TMC § 18.780.080(M) states that billboards are prohibited, the Director has concluded that "the Council's obvious intent as to freeway oriented signs was to prohibit certain signs while allowing others" and that "it appears that the Council intended the term `billboard' in the context of freeway oriented signs to mean a sign that is larger than the maximum size allowed for a freeway oriented sign." As discussed below, adopting this interpretation requires ignoring other provisions in the code and constitutional issues. As discussed below, the billboard prohibition in TMC § 18.780.070.M. violates the state and federal constitutions and may not be enforced. Further, the code and legislative history does not evidence the alleged intent. The applicability of the prohibition on free standing freeway oriented OMIA signs was never raised in the legislative history. Properly interpreted, the code allows billboards which are freeway oriented signs, at dimensions set forth in the OMIA, where a party qualifies for an OMIA permit. Despite the fact that TMC § 18.780.080(M) states that billboards are prohibited, the remainder of the code makes it clear that billboards are in fact allowed in some circumstances. TMC § 18.780.090(E)(6) provides that if a freestanding freeway oriented sign is a billboard, TMC § 18.780.090, which permits freeway oriented signs, applies. Given that (1) the code expressly allows certain signs that would arguably be considered billboards, (2) TMC 18.780.090(E)(2) allows freeway oriented signs and (3) TMC 18.780.090(E)(6) expressly states that TMC § 18.780.090 applies to billboards, the most reasonable interpretation of the code is that it allows signs which meet the definition of a permitted sign, even if they might be characterized as billboards as well. 7. Freeway oriented signs shall be oriented to be viewed from the freeway; 8. In addition to a freeway oriented sign, each parcel, development complex or premises shall be allowed one freestanding sign provided all other provisions of this chapter can be met and both signs are located on separate frontages with different orientations; 9. Freeway oriented signs are not permitted as roof, tenant, temporary, balloon, wall and awning signs; 10. Freeway oriented signs shall be allowed only by administrative approval of a sign permit application or by approval of a sign code exception by the Commission. Portlnd 1-2141370.1 0053401-00003 City Council June 10, 2003 Page 4 TMC § 18.780.090.E.6 provides that "[fJor free standing signs, a total maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face (320 square feet total) shall be allowed. If the sign is a billboard, then the provisions of Subsection 18.780.090 shall apply." The Director interpreted TMC § 18.780.090.E.6. as follows: "The second sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E is interpreted to mean that signs with billboard structures that are greater than the maximum allowed by the first sentence of TMC 18.780.090.E.6 (plus any adjustment allowed by code as discussed above) are not permitted." This section does not cross reference TMC § 18.780.070.M. which prohibits billboards. Rather, it cross references TMC § 18.780.090 which allows freestanding freeway oriented signs. This language supports an interpretation that TMC § 18.780.090(1)'s exemption for OMIA signs applies to billboards since it is part of TMC § 18.780.090. Since language will not be omitted when interpreting a statute, this language should not be considered surplusage. ORS § 174.010. Rather, this language supports a construction that the code intends to prohibit billboards in locations and of a type other than those allowed in .090 and .090 exclusively governs freeway oriented billboards. TMC § 18.780.090 delegates approval of OMIA signs to the state. Therefore, the billboard prohibition cannot be reasonably construed to apply to freeway oriented OMIA signs. TMC § 18.780.090(E)(10) directly contradicts the statement in TMC § 18.780.090(E)(1) that separate approval is not required. The rules of statutory interpretation provide that nothing will be omitted or inserted and that where there are several provisions ".`such construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all." ORS 174.010. The only interpretation of the code that does not require omitting standards is one that concludes that the remainder of TMC § 18.780.090(E) does not apply where an OMIA permit exists. The code should therefore be read such that (E)(2) through (10) do not apply to OMIA signs. The portion of the code addressing the zoning regulations applicable to signs identifies special condition signs separate from freestanding freeway oriented signs, lending further support to the argument that freeway oriented signs may be subject to conditions other than those generally applicable to special condition signs and that the remainder of the section does not apply to i OMIA signs. TMC § 18.780.130. Also, while TMC § 18.780.090(E)(2) states that freeway oriented signs are only permitted in the C-G, IP, IH and IL zoning districts, TMC § 18.780.130(C)(9) provides that freeway oriented signs are also permitted in the CBD zone. This contradicts an interpretation that E(2) is intended to apply to OMIA signs since if it does, the provision allowing freeway oriented signs in the CBD never comes into play. Given these Pordnd1-2141370.1 0053401-00003 City Council June 10, 2003 Page 5 considerations, an interpretation of the code that (E)(2) through (E)(10) do not apply to OMIA signs is the construction which is consistent with all the identified code provisions. If the City intended for the requirements of (2) through (10) to apply to OMIA signs, it would have expressly said so. Balloons are another "special condition sign" under Tigard's code. TMC § 18.780.090 provides that one inflatable, stationary balloon or one cluster of children's balloons firmly secured shall be allowed only if all of the "listed conditions" are met. The city clearly knows how to make all of a section applicable to a sign type and chose not to do so for OMIA signs. TMC § 18.780.090(E)(1) provides that for free standing freeway oriented signs, anyone who qualifies for a permit from the State of Oregon under the OMIA need not seek separate approval from the city. TMC § 18.780.090(E)(10) provides, however, that freeway oriented signs are only allowed by administrative approval of a sign permit application or by approval of a sign code exception by the Commission. As discussed above, sections (1) and (10) are in direct contradiction and given the code as a whole, the most reasonable interpretation of the code is that where section (1) applies, the remainder of § 18.780.090(E) is not applicable. Attached is a copy of a memo previously issued by the city stating that no land use regulations apply to freeway oriented sign permits within the city of Tigard. This is the city's former and correct interpretation of its code. III. The Director's interpretation of TMC § 18.780.090.E1 is incorrect. The Director's interpretation states that: "The `separate approval' provision of TMC 18.780.090.E.1 distinguishes the City's sign permit process set out in Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18 from the state permitting process, which includes a requirement to obtain an affidavit from the City. ORS 337.723. A person qualifies for an OMIA permit only if that person has obtained an affidavit from the City that the proposed sign complies with all applicable City regulations and the state determines that the other OMIA standards are satisfied. If a person has not obtained an ORS 337.723 affidavit that the City standards have been met, the person has not `qualifie[d] for a permit from the state of Oregon under the Oregon Motorist Information Act." To demonstrate that a person has qualijied for an OMIA permit, the Portlndl-2141370.1 0053401-00003 City Council June 10, 2003 Page 6 person must provide evidence the OMIA permit has been issued. (emphasis added.) "This section does not exempt a person from obtaining building permits, only from obtaining the sign permit required under Chapter 18.780. Under the building codes, the building official is to deny permits for failure to meet building code standards or other applicable laws and ordinances. The City's prohibition on billboards is an applicable law or ordinance preventing issuance of building permits for billboards." The code specifically states that "all words used in the present tense include the future tense." TMC § 18.120.020(A). There is no provision for replacing the present tense "qualifies" with the past tense "qualified" as the Director has done. The Director's interpretation ignores the definition of the word qualifies. To qualify is to meet the required standard. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. A billboard meets the required standard if it is consistent with the OMIA. This could be shown by presenting an OMIA permit. It may also be shown, however, by establishing that the proposed site is along Highway 217 or I-5 as required by the definition of freeway oriented sign and that the applicant has a relocation permit. In reality, the Director has interpreted the code to say "Anyone who obtains a permit from the state of Oregon under the provisions of the Oregon Motorist Information Act (OMIA) need not seek separate approval from the City of Tigard." While the city might choose to amend its code at some later date to address the Director's concerns about administering the current code, the city may not do so through an interpretation that ignores the plain meaning of the words chosen. The Director is simply incorrect in arguing that the only way for the City to determine if an applicant qualifies for an OMIA permit is by verifying whether a permit has been issued. An example of a letter that an applicant could submit as part of a package to show that he or she qualifies for OMIA permit is attached. IV. The billboard prohibition in the sign ordinance is unconstitutional as adopted, as interpreted and as applied under both the federal and state constitutions. No consideration should be given to the prohibition of billboards in TMC § 18.780.070.M. Given that the sign ordinance states at one point that billboards are prohibited and at another place that they are allowed pursuant to TMC § 18.780.090, the billboard prohibition is unconstitutionally vague in violation of both the state and federal constitutions. TMC 18.780.090(E)(6), 18.780.070(M). An applicant cannot tell from the text what is prohibited, resulting in unreasonable government discretion in the enforcement of the regulations. Portlnd 1-2141370.1 0053401-00003 City Council June 10, 2003 Page 7 Accordingly the billboard prohibition is void in violation of both the state and federal constitutions. The billboard prohibition is also overbroad, regulating more speech than necessary to meet any legitimate government concern. Billboard is defined in the code as a sign face supported by a billboard structure." TMC § 18.780.015(A)(8). Billboards structure is a "sign face supported by a billboard structure." TMC § 18.780.015(A)(9). Sign is defined as materials placed or constructed primarily to convey a message or other display and which can be viewed from a right of way, another property or from the air. TMC § 18.780.015(A)(48). With these definitions, all materials placed or constructed on a structure to convey a message or other display which can be viewed from a right of way, another property or the air are prohibited. This is a prohibition of any and all signs external to a building or which can be seen through a building window. This is clearly an overbroad regulation of speech in violation of both the state and federal constitutions. Under this interpretation of the code, appellants are also denied equal protection and privileges and immunities guaranteed by the state and federal constitutions because they will be treated differently than other applicants whose signs fall within the plain meaning of the broad definition of sign in the code. Accordingly, the billboard prohibition is void in violation of both the state and federal constitutions. The billboard prohibition is also unconstitutional in violation of both the state and federal constitutions because it lacks narrow, objective and definite standards to guide the licensing authority. As the Director admits throughout the interpretation, the code is ambiguous. The billboard prohibition is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech and unreasonable as a time, place and manner restriction in violation of both the state and federal constitutions. The billboard prohibition does not further a legitimate government interest and is therefore a constitutionally prohibited restriction on speech in violation of both the state and federal constitutions. The only rationale for the billboard prohibition in the enacting ordinance is that, allegedly, in 1993 people didn't like billboards. The ordinance is constitutionally defective in violation of both the state and federal constitutions because it does not identify a government interest sufficient to justify the restriction of free speech. The code interpretation violates appellant's constitutional rights in violation of both the state and federal constitutions and therefore its civil rights under 42 USC 1983. i As indicated in the staff memo requesting the interpretation, the purpose of the Director's ' I interpretation was to obtain a decision to be applied to pending LUBA cases. The purpose for the City Manager's immediate appeal of the Director's interpretation, without any challenge to the content of decision, was in order to get council approval of standards to be applied in pending Portlnd 1-2 1 4 1 370.1 0053401-00003 City Council June 10, 2003 Page 8 LUBA cases as indicated in the staff memo requesting the interpretation. This process violates appellant's due process rights under the federal constitution by utilizing an "appeal" procedure where there is no challenge to the Director's interpretation in order to cloak the staff decision with deference. The appellant Media Art was not provided with a copy of the interpretation until it requested a copy on May 28, 2003. This was 12 days after the interpretation was made. Despite the fact that Media Art was clearly affected by the decision, staff did not provide a copy of the decision to Media Art until Media Art specifically requested copies of whatever was in the "appeal file" in order to understand what the mysterious public hearing notice received on May 23, 2003 concerned. This is not a true interpretation decision because it inserts terms into the code and ignores the plain meaning of words in the code. This is an attempt to amend the zoning code without complying with the substantive procedures for amendment of the zoning code, in violation of appellant's substantive and due process rights. V. Use of the Director's Interpretation process to revise the ordinance violates TMC § 18.380 and Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 2. Legislative zoning text amendments must be undertaken through a Type IV procedure as governed by TMC § 18.390.060G. As discussed above, the proposed interpretations are not consistent with the language of the code and in fact act as zoning text amendments. Accordingly, the city was required to use the zoning text amendment process set forth in its code and may not make any zoning text amendments adopted after appellants submitted their applications applicable to those applications. This form of zoning text amendment also violates Statewide Planning Goal 2 which requires a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the land use planning process. VI. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the city council should reject the Director's Interpretation and reaffirm that interpretation formerly used by the city which provided that there are no applicable ordinances, plans, rules, or other requirements with the exception of building permits that would be imposed by the city of Tigard in regards to permits requested under the OMIA. V u Y ours, teve Wbe SWA/pjn Ponlnd 1-2141370.1 0053401-00003 RECEIVED APR 01 2003 CITY OF TIGARD CITY OF TIGARD Common *Deuelopment BUILDING DIVISION SbapingA&tterComraumty MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: ODOT Permitting Agent FROM: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner DATE: January 14, 2003 SUBJECT: Freeway-oriented signs Pursuant to the Tigard Development Code, Section 18.780.090(E)(1), "Anyone who qualifies for a permit from the State of Oregon under the provisions of the Oregon Motorist Information Act need not seek separate approval from the City of Tigard." Therefore, there are no applicable ordinances, plans, rules, or other requirements with the exception of building permits that would be imposed by the City of Tigard in regard to the permits being requested by West Coast Media under the OMIA. I If you have any questions, call me at 503-639-4171 ext. 2434. y 1 2 3 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 4 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 MEDIA ART, INC., 6 Plaintiff, LUBA No. 2003-068 & 2003-069 7 v. AFFIDAVIT OF LINCOLN BERMAN 8 CITY OF TIGARD, 9 Defendant. 0 N 10 O~ O OG 0 ° 11 STATE OF OREGON ) ,,w^ )ss. E ; 12 County of Multnomah ) tea.. 13 I, Lincoln Herman, state the following under oath: N ,.a :9 14 1. I am project staff at Stoel Rives, LLP; W ~ M 15 2. On May 6, 2003 at approximately 2:00 p.m., I presented the Notice of Appeal L G 16 letter attached hereto as Exhibit A to the City of Tigard's Community Development w 0 17 Department along with two appeal filing fee checks in the amount of $250.00 each. 0 18 3. I gave the appeal materials to Brad Kilby, Planner with the City of Tigard. 19 4. Mr. Kilby took the appeal materials and went to an area behind the counter to 20 confer with the city attorney. 21 5. When Mr. Kilby returned to the counter he told me that the city would not ! 22 accept the appeal because it was a Type I decision per the appeal letter and was a final i 23 decision of the city and to appeal to LUBA. Mr. Kilby stated that the Applicant could either 24 consider the permit denial a Type I decision or seek a Director's Interpretation. The 25 Director's Interpretation would be the same as the existing decision but would be appealable 26 to the city council. Page 1 - AFFIDAVIT OF LINCOLN BERMAN Partlnd 1-2138510.10053401-0(3 i 1 2 DATED: May 2003. 3 4 Lmcoln Herman 5 y- X03 6 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me on 7 8 OFFICIAL SEAL Notar7y Public for egon .L -Zr' egEikN O MARY BOWDEN Commission Tres: 9 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 3(12144 'a V 10 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC2, 2006 o+ o ~ Q ~0 11 ~ N Y~. N 12 teC2.` cn13 N ~~WWWJJJ aa. ° 14 ~N 15 Sao 16 w cn:; 17 0 0 o~ 18 19 20 21 n 22 23 j 24 25 26 Page 2 - AF'IDAviT OF LINCOLN HERMAN Portlnd 14138510.1 0053401-00003 May 6, 2003 C ~J City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223-8144 Re: Notice of Appeal(s) - Media Art, Inc.. Sign Permit Applications Dear Clerk: On April 22, 2003, the City of Tigard issued the letter attached hereto as Exhibit A. On April 25, 2003, the City of Tigard issued the letter attached hereto as Exhibit B. We believe that the positions taken in these letters are incorrect and will be filing appeals with LUBA. I am filing this appeal as an authorized representative of the Applicant. Our review of Tigard's code indicates that a local appeal is not required in this case for the reasons set forth below. In an abundance of caution and to protect our rights to have the decision reviewed, however, we have decided to file this notice of appeal(s). As noted above, a local appeal is not required. A land use application was not submitted because Tigard's code provides that an applicant who qualifies for a sign permit under the Oregon Motorist Information Act need not seek separate approval from the City. TDC § 18.780.090(E)(1). Accordingly, only building permit applications were submitted. If, however, the building permit application is properly treated as a land use application, it is a Type I application. "Type I procedures apply to ministerial permits and actions containing clear and objective approval criteria. Type I actions are decided by the Director without public notice and without a public hearing." (TDC § 18.390.020(B)(1)). The denial of the building permits was not based upon clear and objective approval criteria but rather resulted from an interpretation of the city's code at odds with previous interpretations issued by the City. Of the types of land use decisions available, however, Type I is the most similar to the decisions here because the decisions are for signs and were made without notice or hearing. TDC § 18.390.020(B)(1). Under these circumstances, the City Code provides: "The Director's decision is final for purposes of the appeal on the date it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. The Director's decision is not appeallable locally, and is the final decision of the City." TDC § 18.390.030CD). This is not a Type II decision because no public notice or opportunity for a hearing was given. TDC § 18.390.020(13)(2). This is not a Type III action because it was not decided by the Hearings Office or the Planning Commission. TDC § 18.390.020(B)(3). This is not a Type IV decision because it is not a legislative matter involving the creation, revision or large scale implementation of public policy and was not considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decision by the City Council. TDC § 18.390.020(B)(4). Portindl-2137928.1 0053401-00003. ~x This letter contains the content required by the code for anneals. Assuming that these decisions are appealable to the City Council the Notice of Appeal should contain: • An identification of the decision being appealed including the date of the decision. o April 22, 2003, "Billboard denial" letter attached as Exhibit A. o April 25, 2003, "Freeway Oriented Signs" letter attached as Exhibit B. • A statement demonstrating that the party filing the Notice of Appeal has standing to appeal. o The appellant is the applicant for the denied building permits and therefore has standing. • A detailed statement of the specific issues raised on appeal. o The City's code provides that anyone who qualifies for permits under the Oregon Motorist Information Act is not required to seek separate approval from the city. The signs at issue qualify for permits under the Oregon Motorist Information Act. o The sign ordinance generally and as applied to applicants is an unreasonable time, place and manner restriction on freedom of speech under the state and federal constitutions. o The sign ordinance generally and as applied to applicants is unconstitutional under the state and federal constitutions because it is void for vagueness and overbroad. o The sign ordinance generally and as applied to applicants is an unconstitutional content based restriction on freedom of speech. o The City has denied applicant equal protection under state and federal law in that it has acted arbitrarily and treated applicant differently from other similarly situated persons. A statement demonstrating that the,specific issues raised on appeal were raised during the comment period, except when the appeal is filed by the applicant. o There was no comment period and the appeal is filed by the applicant. U .j • Filing fee. o The amount of the filing fee shall be established by the Director. The maximum fee for an initial hearing shall be the cost to the local government for preparing and for conducting the hearing, or statutory maximum, whichever is less. Pordndl-2137428.10053401-00003 GX A ExA poE- This Notice. of Appeal(s) is filed as a precautionary matter to protect applicant's rights. As noted above, appeals will be filed with LUBA. Filing fees in the amount of $500 are enclosed. Again, these appeals are being submitted in an abundance of caution. If you determine that only one appeal, or no local appeals are required, please return the appropriate funds. Very truly yours, Media Art, Inc., by Chris Daugherty cc: Steve Abel and Tim McMahan, Stoel Rives, LLP i j I j I I Porftd 1-2137928.1 0053401-00003 wJVV Uv~ vair. UUL/ VUU I 1 April 22, 2003 Media Art, Inc. CITY OF TICa D 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 913663 0 1REG®N Re: Billboards In the City of Tigard Gentlemen: It has come to my attention that you have made application to place billboards with! n the City of Tigard. Unfortunately, the City of Tigard expressly prohibits billboards within the City Limits, I have had several conversations with representatives of sign companies to place free-standing freeway oriented signs within the City, Free-standing freeway oriented signs are permitted within the City of Tigard, and while It Is true you do not need a separate sign permit for thA sign when you have approval through the Oregon Motorist Information Act, you still must meet the standards of what constitutes a free-standing freeway oriented sign. The permits that you have requested exceed the maximum dimensional standards of free- standing freeway oriented signs. Under the regulations of the Tigard Development Code (TDC) section 18-.780.090, the permits that you have applied for exceed the maximum height of 35 fast from the ground level at Its base, and the maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face. There has been some confusion in that the regulations state that, "if the sign Is a billboard, then the provisions of subsection 18,780.09b shall apply." While It may appear that the * code allows billboards, it does refer you to the section that speclficaily includes the maximum square footage and heights for all free-standing freeway oriented signs. More importantly though, I refer you to TDC section 18.780.070(M) which specifically prohibits billboards, and to TDC sectlon 18.21D.020(C) which states that, "where this title imposes greater restrictions than those imposed or required by other rules or regulations, the most restrictive or that imposing the higher standard shall govern." As you may know, the Oregon Motorist Information Act does not preempt local regulation of signs along highways, Additionally, It Is clear that the intent of the Tigard City Coun cil under Ordinance No. 93-12 was to specifically prohibit billboard signs, a copy of this ordinance has been enclosed for your review, At your -request, the commercial plans examiner has reviewed the plans for structural i compliance with the Uniform Building Codes, but compliance with those standards does not preclude you from, meeting all applicable state and local regulations. It Is for these reasons that your building permits cannot be issued and have been denied. If you have any further questions, contact me at (503)639-4171 ext. 2434, or stop by my office between the hours of BAR and 4PM Monday through Friday, Our office is located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd, in Tigard. 9 U Sincerely, Brad Kilby, AICP Associate Planner 13125 SW Hall Blvd„ Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 664-2772 Exhibit A a F eJVV VVV W7141 itA-GJ GtlUJ 11.ZJi UJ. UJ im 1u~u ~ a nL • quo CITY OF TIM0, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 93-_La_,_,,, ax oRUZNAwca TO. Am= PAOVI8IONs OF THE commmmy DEVSLOPI[ExT CODE sSCTxnx 16.114.070 TO ADD SUBSECTION N ► TO PROHIBIT BILLBOARDS AND TO REMAL SECTION 18.114.090 A. SUBSECTIONS 1-4 WHICH PROVIDES rOR BXLLBOARDS. WH3MM j The City of Tigard finds it necessary to ravine the Comunity Developsent Code periodically to improve the operation and implementation of the coder and "HZREAB, The City of Tigard PlannimW Commission raviavad the staff rGOONOandatian at a public hearing on karah 8, 1993 ana voted to recousend approval, of the amendment to the City' Council r and SAS, The City of Tigard finda that the amendsont caws xiot affect s City Couprothensive Plan Goals or stets Planning Gotalrr and ARRAS, The City of Tigard finds that there has been a publio outcry Concerning the proliferation, number, spacing and aestlastias of billboardsi and '7tf`s, The City Council bald a public hearing on April 13 , L993 to ,y ==wider the asandment. TSS CITY OF TIGARD OFUWNS AS FOLtTaD S UNCTION 1: The Community Davelopaant Code shall be amended am shown i1' Mxhibit "A". Lanquage to be added in LanquaLge to 'be deleted is shown i.z, [BR&CIMTS]. This ordinance shall be affective 30 days after its passadge by tha Council, approval by the Mayor; and posting by,the City Recorder. PA,SSEM By Gt,t~ri vote of all CouboLl meters pros~t after beig rand by number and title only, this day of C.t.QiLi 1 , 1993. C Marina Wheatley, City P#mox r APPROVED: This h day o r 19 ' d ar , ~tayar Approved a to 2orst city Attorney !A-1_1~13 C Data ORMNANCE No, 93--Q- Page 1 :c Lt LJ, LilUJ 1111E VJ1VJ 111 IMYY111 1111 IIIV , 1 J V V ~ ~"•i1i • •..rrr r r .o~ rr.r - r r. vV.1 VVV ••M . h 1 i xxxzaxz "AN , 3 .'1_j 4 . n°7n eartain Rims Probjbikad stiff 14 bew~,da • • H~+.~~rds~o're~ ~1~•~ tsp. 38.224.nno _a,aMI&I Condition slay. he special condition signs shall bane special or unique d va ssional I loaatiaml, illumination, ssrisewa number or tbar requisemsnts isported upon thou in addition t:ca the .4requistiond contained in this chaptar. ~Al. Billboards a. billboard sign regulations shall. km as follow% (i) bones Permitted& (1) Billboard stigma shall be permitted Orly in a C-3 caanar.aial sorm or x - P, I-L and X -U industrial sonas and then only within 660 foot of Cregon State Upmasswuy No. 217 and/or Xot rotate 'Lr"way No. 6, rigrbt-ot- ways; 2. All new p billboard mign(sa) within 660 f+*t of tba pubblia sigbtro!-imy of a. state hightraay ==t obtain the neoessary permit(s) troy the -state ntraayy~ vis'an and all billboard, sign (a) wmat be saisttaained to conform with applicable at"tas raguirom-nts pertaining to. billboards f ; 3. All sign # taqather with all Qf their supportm broom, goys, and ancho s stall be leapt Im good re"ir and shall be maintained in a sets oaralitiont a. &%I ■igns &ad tb a site upon which tbaay are located shall be saintain6d in a nikatr, clean, i and attractive condition= b. Signs shat) be kept free fron eraossiara rust, aars~osioan r poolirm paint, or other 'AUs fame detarioratimr and. as Ma display susfaoss Of Is11 signa 22=11 be C leapt neatly painted or post&dF k 4, ixcspt. as otbAwwise provided in this stbWeoti0n, Ex A . p.bcf8', \I i\ bJ, L uJ nuu uJ, uJ IA1 1Ubu, a At ~ to 4JVV wv v=zL t + VUJi VU.) 71, i axistinq billboards which do not =nfors to the l provisions of this title shall be regard" sas nonconforming signs and shall be subl sat to the provisions of Subsection 18#2.14,110.y ~ 11,.,„3,4.±30 zoning nintriat ma"lafi once ~ ,C. Cosssriaial 8onass Z.. [t. Billboard signs in the C-G zone only it: sacordanae with section 1.8.114.090.AO F. 2naustrial $orr. m ` i, [a. Billboard Signs in nacordance vith SsvtLon iB.114.090.A;] C w..... r ~r.s• r--7x . UX Z-ZUU3 '1'UL lU; U3 AM Media Art i nc 2360 906 0442 P.002/002 CITY OF T'IGAR® ORE GON April25, 2003 John Fitzmaurice Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663 Re: Freeway Oriented Sighs Dear Mr. Fitzmaulice: -The City of Tigard Building Divisioni has received applications for four (4) freeway oriented signs. Although-they may meet design specifications in accordance with the State of Oregon Structural Speciaht j Code (OS SC), they are prohibited by the Tigard Municipal Code•(TMC) due to size and height restrictions. The Plaiuung Division has determined these signs do not comply with the provisions of the TMC and cannot be approved for constxuctiou. Therefore, the Building Division is refunding all fees that have been prepaid. The refund is being processed and you should roceive it within the next two weeks. If you have any questions, please call ine at (503) 718-2448. Sincerely, Gary Lampells, Building Official co: Brad Mby, Associate Planner Jim Hendiyx, Director of Community Development Brian Blalock, Swdor Plans Examiner 13125 SW Hall Blvd„ Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639.4171 TDD (608) 654-2772 Exhibit g A a RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH~ LLP • ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 Telephone: (503) 222-4402. Fax: (503) 243-2944 www.rccb.com May 28, 2003 Land Use. Board of Appeals 550 Capital Street, NE Suite 235 Salem, OR 97301 Re: Media Art, Inc. v. City of Tigard, LUBA No. 2003-085 Dear Board Clerk: On behalf of Respondent City of Tigard, enclosed please find an original and one copy of Notice of Withdrawal of Decision for Reconsideration in the above-referenced matter. Thank you for your courtesies. Sincerely, Sharon R. Beisley, (J Legal Assistant SRB/ Enclosures gf ftigardAuba-mediaaruLUBAU3 cc: Steven W. Abel, Esq. Timothy L. McMahan, Esq. _ Michelle Rudd, Esq. Mr. Brad Kilby RECEIVED CT/~CI I'1 ~\!rn I 1 6 M 2 9 2003 BY TRUE COPY 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 MEDIA ART, INC. ) 4 Petitioner, ) LUBA No. 2003-085 5 CITY OF TIGARD ) 6 Respondent. ) 7 8 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DECISION FOR RECONSIDERATION 9 10 Pursuant to ORS 197.830(13)(b) Respondent City of Tigard is withdrawing for 11 reconsideration its decision of May 8, 2003, entitled "Permit Nos. BUP 2003-00181, BUP 2003- 12 00182, BUP 2003-00183, and BUP 2003-00184." The decision was appealed to LUBA (No 13 2003-085) on May 23, 2003. The record is currently due on June 13, 2003. 14 d x~ 15 DATED this ~J day of May, 2003. 16 17 Timoth . Ramis, OSB #75311 18 Gary F tone, OSB #87221 Of Attorneys for Respondent, 19 City of Tigard 20 21 gff/tigard/tuba-mediaartfWithdrawal3Mot(srb) i 22 i 23 i j 24 i 25 26 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503)243.2944 1 CTIFICATE OF FILING 2 I hereby certify that on May 2f~ • 2003, I filed the original and one copy of this Notice 3 of Withdrawal of Decision for Reconsideration with the Land Use Board of Appeals, 550 Capitol 4 Street NE, Suite 235, Salem, Oregon, 97301, by first class mail. 5 DATED this ~ day of May, 2003. 6 7 Timothy. Rams, OSB #75311 8 Gary Firestone, OSB #87221 9 Of Attorneys for Respondent, City of Tigard 10 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 12 I hereby certify that on May 4? , 2003, I served a true and correct copy of this Notice 13 of Withdrawal of Decision for Reconsideration by first class mail on the following persons: 14 Steven W. Abel Timothy L. McMahan 15 Michelle Rudd Stoel Rives LLP 16 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, 01,2 97204 17 •fZ DATED this 27 day of May, 2003. 18 / 19 > ; Le- 20 Timothy V Ramis, OSB #75311 Gary Fir one, OSB #87221 21 Of Attorneys for Respondent, City of Tigard 22 23 gffltigard/luba-MediaArt/Withdrawal3CFS(srb) 24 25 26 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH. LLP 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE Fax: (503) 243-2944 CITY OF TIGAR D OREGON May 8, 2003 NABLO,LLC c/o Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663 Attn: John Fitzmaurice Re: Permit No. BUP2003-00181, BUP2003-00182, BUP2003-00183, BUP2003-00184 Dear Mr. Fitzmaurice: We have canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 9785 SW Shady Ln., 12000 Garden Pl., 6713 SW Bonita Rd., 12100 SW Garden Pl. Project Name: Media Art Refund: Check #26374 in the amount of $1,662.36. Notes: Refund for building permits for 4 freeway signs not approved by the planning department due to height and size requirements. If you have any questions please contact me at (503) 639-4171, x2430. 01 Sincerely, Dianna Howse i Permit Specialist Enc. 13125 SW 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 May 6, 2003 5 C e City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223-8144 Re: Notice of Appeal(s) - Media Art, Inc. Sign Permit Applications Dear Clerk: On April 22, 2003, the City of Tigard issued the letter attached hereto as Exhibit A. On April 25, 2003, the City of Tigard issued the letter attached hereto as Exhibit B. We believe that the positions taken in these letters are incorrect and will be filing appeals with LUBA. I am filing this appeal as an authorized representative of the Applicant. Our review of Tigard's code indicates that a local appeal is not required in this case for the reasons set forth below. In an abundance of caution and to protect our rights to have the decision reviewed, however, we have decided to file this notice of appeal(s). As noted above, a local appeal is not required. A land use application was not submitted because Tigard's code provides that an applicant who qualifies for a sign permit under the Oregon Motorist Information Act need not seek separate approval from the City. TDC § 18.780.090(E)(1). Accordingly, only building permit applications were submitted. If, however, the building permit application is properly treated as a land use application, it is a Type I application. "Type I procedures apply to ministerial permits and actions containing clear and objective approval criteria. Type I actions are decided by the Director without public notice and without a public hearing." (TDC § 13.390.020(B)(1)). The denial of the building permits was not based upon clear and objective approval criteria but rather resulted from an interpretation of the city's code at odds with previous interpretations issued by the City. Of the types of land use decisions available, however, Type I is the most similar to the decisions here because the decisions are for signs and were made without notice or hearing. TDC § 18.390.020(B)(1). Under these circumstances, the City Code provides: "The Director's decision is final for purposes of the appeal on the date it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever s occurs first. The Director's decision is not appeallable locally, and is the final decision of the City." TDC § 18.390.030(D). This is not a Type II decision because no public notice or opportunity for a hearing was given. i TDC § 18.390.020(B)(2). This is not a Type III action because it was not decided by the Hearings Office or the Planning Commission. TDC § 18.390.020(B)(3). This is not a Type IV decision because it is not a legislative matter involving the creation, revision or large scale implementation of public policy and was not considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decision by the City Council. TDC § 18.390.020(B)(4). Portlnd 1-2137928.10053401-00003 This letter contains the content required by the code for appeals. Assuming that these decisions are appealable to the City Council the Notice of Appeal should contain: • An identification of the decision being appealed including the date of the decision. o April 22, 2003, "Billboard denial" letter attached as Exhibit A. o April 25, 2003, "Freeway Oriented Signs" letter attached as Exhibit B. • A statement demonstrating that the party filing the Notice of Appeal has standing to appeal. o The appellant is the applicant for the denied building permits and therefore has standing. • A detailed statement of the specific issues raised on appeal. o The City's code provides that anyone who qualifies for permits under the Oregon Motorist Information Act is not required to seek separate approval from the city. The signs at issue qualify for permits under the Oregon Motorist Information Act. o The sign ordinance generally and as applied to applicants is an unreasonable time, place and manner restriction on freedom of speech under the state and federal constitutions. o The sign ordinance generally and as applied to applicants is unconstitutional under the state and federal constitutions because it is void for vagueness and overbroad. o The sign ordinance generally and as applied to applicants is an unconstitutional content based restriction on freedom of speech. o The City has denied applicant equal protection under state and federal law in that it has acted arbitrarily and treated applicant differently from other similarly situated persons. • A statement demonstrating that the specific issues raised on appeal were raised during the comment period, except when the appeal is filed by the applicant. o There was no comment period and the appeal is filed by the applicant. • Filing fee. o The amount of the filing fee shall be established by the Director. The maximum fee for an initial hearing shall be the cost to the local government for preparing and for conducting the hearing, or statutory maximum, whichever is less. Pordnd1-2137928.10053401-00003 This Notice of Appeal(s) is filed as a precautionary matter to protect applicant's rights. As noted above, appeals will be filed with LUBA. Filing fees in the amount of $500 are enclosed. Ag these appeals are being submitted in an abundance of caution. If you determine that only one appeal, or no local appeals are required, please return the appropriate funds. Very truly yours, Media Art, Inc., by Chris Daugherty cc: Steve Abel and Tim McMahan, Stoel Rives, LLP PorNndl-2137928.1 0053401.00003 h1 n t.1 1,UU.1 ttZIJ UJ. UJ 1m mcu 1'a hit IOU AJDU duo U44L r, UUL/uub April 22, 2003 Media Art, Inc. CITY OF TIGARD 1823 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663. OREGON Re: Billboards in the City of Tigard Gentlemen, it has come to my attention that you have made application to place billboards within the City of Tigard. Unfortunately, the City of Tigard expressly prohibits billboards within the City Limits, I have had several conversations with representatives of sign companies to place free-standing freeway oriented signs within the City. Free-standing freeway oriented signs are permitted within the City of Tigard, and while it Is true you do not need a separate sign perhilt for the sign when you have approval through the Oregon Motorist Information Act, you still must meet the standards of what constitutes a free-standing freeway oriented sign. The permits that you have requested exceed the maximum dimensional standards of free- standing freeway oriented signs. Under the regulations of the Tigard Development Code (TDC) section 18'.780.090, the permits that you have applied for exceed the maximum height of 35 feet from the ground level at Its base, and the maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face. There has been some confusion in that the regulations state that, "if the sign Is a billboard, then the provisions of subsection 18.780.090 shall apply," While it may appear that the code allows billboards, It does refer you to the section that specifically includes the maximum square footage and heights for all free-standing freeway oriented signs. More importantly though, I refer you to TDC section 18.780.070(M) which specifically prohibits billboards, and to TDC.sectlon 18.210.020(C) which states that, "where this title imposes greater restrictions than those Imposed or required by other rules or regulations, the most restrictive or that Imposl ng the higher standard shall govern." As you may know, the Oregon Motorist Information Act does not preempt local regulation of signs along highways. Additionally, It Is clear that the Intent of the Tigard City Coun cil under Ordinance No. 93-12 was to specifically prohibit billboard signs, a copy of this ordinance has been enclosed for your review. At your -request, the commercial plans examiner has reviewed the plans for structural z compliance with the Uniform Building Codes, but compliance with those standards does not preclude you from. meeting ali applicable state and local regulations. It Is for these reasons that your building permits cannot be Issued and have been denied. If you have any further questions, contact me at (503)639-4171 ext. 2434, or stop by my office e between the hours of SAM and 4PM Monday through Friday. Our office is located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. In Tigard. J Sincerely, Brad Kilby; AICP Associate Planner 13125 9W Hall Blvd„ Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 6394171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Exhibit A NNIN AM JUU U144 r, UUJ/ UUJ il'H-LJ-LUU3 rinll Ua: UD rm mea i a H[ t I IlL' r~ I ;JjJ CITY OF TIGMW, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 93--L&- AN 03MINANCR TO AtRF.ND PROVISIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPKRXT CODE SHCTInF 18.114.070 TO ADD SUBSECTION N. TO P1toHIBIT STLLBOAVD8 AHD TO REPUL SUCTION 18.114.090 A. SUBSECTIONS 1-4 WjjXCH PItOVID8S FOR BILLBOARDS. CAB, The City of Tigard finds it necessary to revise the community Devetop"nt Code periodically to improve the operation and Imp,lemantation of the Code i and >i BXRSAS, The City of Tigard Planning C-4 asion revieved the staff roaolmendation at a public hearing on Aarch 8, 1993 and voted to recommend approval of the amendment to the city, Council s and i ' MIUREAB. The City of Tigard finds that the amendment does not effect City comprehensive Plan Coals or Steitz Planning Goals and WBNRSAB, The City of Tigard finds that there has been a public outcry mono*rning the proliferation, nuW;er, spacing end aesthetics of bi l3,bmardis i and 1 8118, The City council hold a public hearing on April 13, 1,993 to consider the amendment. THE CITY OP TXGARD ORDAINS As FOLLOi9S 88GTION 1. The Community Developeant Code shall be amended an shavn in xUbibit "A". Language to be added in 1Amquage to be deleted is shown in [BRACIPM3. This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the council, approval by the Mayor,* and posting by,the City lWoordwr. PASSED: BY ajor4 vote of all Council members pro a tar be n-101.1 ~ read by number and title only, thin y I_ r l9 S 3 . C Marina Wheatley, city F#izorder t r ABPROVEDr This I l h day o Ode d w - Approved An to rora: Fiayor city Attorney i W'I~i•1~ Date oswumcz No. 93--L~L, Page 1 irA-LJ"LUUJ ttEU UJ• U:1 rm MCU I a AI i Ur AJUU wU uT=c i, UUV UUJ e r HXI!'IBIT "11" i8.,,'j,14 070 mein clans. Prari3tii4.~d 2(s. ~3).Z)iRIN:~. • mi, ~ ~->~t~' 4 bated. ],10.1~~ . 0 0 p~~,e►71, coadltiea _ siemo• ' Ae. Spacial Condition signs shall have spacial or aaaiqua dimensional, lo"tiamal, illumination, maxim nunkmr or ttssr rrquiz^ase~ats iaposereih them in addition to the ;zagaciatiotus oon~i~nad in thi.ae eahaptar. 1. Billboards a. Billboard sign regulations shall bm as ; follows? (i) Bones Permitted: (1) aill.bcowd signs shall be pearnitted Cray in a d-O osa>♦a-cial aeuea or I•- V, I-L and 1 -ii industrial :ones and these way wi.tlin 660 feat of Oregon State ticpracinnray IWo. 237 and/car MMtA--Mtata rrsaway No. s, right-of- Vaym t 2. All now billboard sign(s) Mitbin 660 feet of the pi~ght-of-tay of a state highway asset obtain the necessary parait(a) host the State nigghhwaayy Division a" all billboard sign(s) mmat be aaianta3lped to oonform with appliooible state requirements pertaining to.bill.boardar i~ 3. All coigns, tesgethar with all of fir a;e , shah ba maintained in aoift ; o~ repo ri a loco= m. All signs and the site upon Which they are lei cated avail be maintain*d in a neat, clean, and attractive oondi.tions b. signs shall be kept free from excessive rust, c o=mLea, p mlbq paint, or other surface date riarst.ioni oatd c, Tis display surfaces 62 All signs sh&IL be C kept neatly paixteed or gostedi 4. Mwept. as otha'raisbs provided in this suboacrtion, 1r,K%3 ZUUJ 1f8L UL), UL) rm jaCU 1 a At 1 uc . NJUU ODU V11L r, UUJ/ UUU , " r existing billboards which do not conform to the provisions of this title stall be regarded as nonconfarsing signs and shall be subject: to the ~ provisions of subsection 18,114,120.] 2.8-114-3-30 Z,Qp JMg Rietrict Pweula ons ,ce eosaerieial sasses 2. (t. Billboard Signs in the C-c zone only in accordance vith Section Z8.114.09a.7Ul F. Industrial Sonea: i. ie. Billboard Signs in accordance vith section 18.114.a9a.1►; t'•«SS•f.YF3%.~+~,11i~T~1.••S~r~~.i'~•~...~,n,....i w+.v...m...e..... I 1PR-29-2003 TUE 10:03 AM Media Art inc 2360 906 0442 P,002/002 CITY OF TIGAR® OREGON .April 25, 2003 John Fitzmaurice Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663 Re: Freeway Oriented Signs Dear Mr. Fitzmauiice: The City of Tigard Building Divisioli has received applications for four (4) freeway oriented signs. Although-they may meet design specifications in accordance with the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC), they are prollibited by the Tigard Municipal Code-(TMC) due to size and height restrictions. The Plain-ling Division has determined these signs do not comply with the provisions of the TMC and cannot be approved for construction. Therefore, the Building Division is refluiding all fees that have been prepaid. The refund is being processed and you should receive it within the neat two weeks. If you. have any questions, please call me at (503) 718-2448. Siulcerely, Gary Larnpella Building Official cc: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner Ails Hendiyx, Director of Community Development Brian Blalock, Senior Plans Examiner 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tlgard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Exhibit 18 V J.. f~VV J' VJ. VJ uv XJUU JUU U11L r. UUL/UU0 1 April 22, 2003 Media Art, Inc. CITY OF TIGARD 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98653. OREGON Re: Billboards in the City of Tigard Gentlemen, it has come to my attention that you have made application to place billboards within the City of Tigard. Unfortunately, the City of Tigard expressly prohibits billboards within the City Limits, I have had several conversations with representatives of sign companies to place free-standing freeway oriented signs within the City. Free-standing freeway oriented signs are permitted within the City of Tigard, and while It Is true you do not need a separate sign perhilt for the sign when you have approval through the Oregon Motorist Information Act, you still must meet the standards of what constitutes a free-standing freeway oriented sign. The permits that you have requested exceed the maximum dimensional standards of free- standing freeway oriented signs. Under the regulations of the Tigard Development Code (TDC) section 18•.780.090, the permits that you have applied for exceed the maximum height of 35 feet from the ground level at Its base, and the maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face. There has been some confusion In that the regulations state that, "if the sign Is a billboard, then the provisions of subsection 18,780.090 shall apply." While it may appear that the code allows billboards, it does refer you to the section that specifically Includes the maximum square footage and hsights for all free-standing freeway oriented signs. More importantly though, i refer you to TDC section 18.780.070(M) which speoifically prohibits billboards, and to TDC section 18.210.020(C) which states that, 'where this title imposes greater restrictions than those imposed or required by other rules or regulations, the most restrictive or that Imposing the higher standard shall govern." As you may know, the Oregon Motorist Information Act does not preempt local regulation of signs along highways. Additionally, It Is clear that the Intent of the Tigard City Coun cil under Ordinance No. 93-12 was to specifically prohibit billboard signs, a copy of this ordin ance has been enclosed for your review. At your request, the commercial plans examiner has reviewed the plans for structural compliance with the Uniform Building Codes, but compliance with those standards does not preclude you from. meeting all applicable state and local regulations. It Is for these reasons that your building permits cannot be Issued and have been denied. If you have any further questions, contact me at (503)639-4171 ext. 2434, or stop by my office between the hours of SAM and 4PM Monday through Friday, Our office is located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. In Tigard. Sincerely, pf~ Brad K(Iby; AICP Associate Planner 13125 SW Hall Blvd„ Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Exhibit A , VVJ/ VVJ BJVV JVV VTTL trE'La''LUUJ 11r,U U3. u 1 rare ancu n ni ► i u~ , ,y~, "7 CITY OF TIGd1W, OREGON ORDZK.WCE NO, 93•--J-&- Jm ORDYNANCR To A1tw PI bvxsxoNfi of M CommoxxTX M=WPHMM CODE SEpCTtrW 18.114.070 TO ADD SM38NOTION N. TO PROHIBIT 81080AMS AND TO REP"L SECTION 18.114.090 A. SUBUCTIONS 1-4 WHICH PROVIDES "R BILt.BOARDB . W93MU S, The City of Tigard finds it necessary to revise that community Daaveloymant Code periodically to improve the operation and iviplemntaation of the Coder aind HHZRRAB, Thee City of Tigard Plannknq Commission reviewed the staff roconmendattion at a public hoaxing on Warch 8, 1993 and voted to recomm Band approval of the amendsaent to the City' Council I and i , The City of Tigard finda that the amendmatrit does not aaffeot a it_-y compraa haansive Plan Goals; or State Planning Goala r and W8E' UW-, The City of Tigard rinds that there ham been aa. public outcry .e ccncm=ing the proliferation, number, spacing and asesethaatics of billboards 1 and SRS, The city council bald as public hearing on April 1.3 , 199+3 to i consider the asandmant. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS As FOLIOWS: SNaTION 1: The Community OevalopffimAt Codes shell be amended am shown im IL_ T hibit "A". Language to be added in Mgp$==N Language to -be deleted is shown in [BRACIPfi8). Thine ordinaarace shall be *Efeaatfva 10 days after its paasentga by the council , approval by the Mayor, "d posting by the City Record+taz. phs SED: BY Gt,' O r 4 vote of all Council members pres t a; r beast read by number mind title crraly, this day of .e 1 , b993 . C erina. Whamtley, City jt?oorder APPl2aVStit This l day o 10 a~ d w , FAyor approved An Ito _ . City Attorney H. IV; Daats oP.DtNAxcx no, q3- la Pangs 1 aft-LJ •LUUJ ItGU VJ.UJ llll aut.uta nth tat, w.rVV VUV Vria VVSi VVO . I a t "~A f , pXliTH2T 18,114,070 bortain 64=m Prop bites et117 .r o are jWM _ 3 Zta~d. y&, ;sit . oso ~,soe<_e~l co tim Simi • A. Special condition signs shall bake special or unique ional, looaticataal, il.letsiniLtion, wxiw= nuSk mr or tbar raquiremants imposed span then in addition to than regulations aomtainod in this chapter. P. Billboard: a. Billboard sign =sgulutianx shall be so followsz (i) Sonex Permittedt (1) Hfllbaw.d Aigns ebail be permitted only in a C-0 ocamaaaial axons ar 1- 7P, I-L and T-H industrial zones and tbeaa onLy Within 660 gsaat - Of Q=ftgom state tnc*Aswuy No. 217 and/or Intautstate Y s sway No. 6 right-ot- nays f 2. All nee billboard sign(s) within 660 feet of tbo ~ght-of-my of a state bighlmmy WIst obtain the neoassaacy gaarmit (aa) ttota the 'St uto Hig'k"ax Division and all billboard sign(s) wmat be naintain" to oontarn with applicable state, requireaoarsrts pertaining to,billbmardsl 'j 31 427; signs, tegatbar with &.13. of their Supports. brae, guys, and asnobors shall be kept n good r*pai.r and sbull be maintained in a safe conadit ont A. All. signs mad Uke amts upon Whi.ah they are 3 ifx mtad shall bat laaaintai ned in a meat, claan, and attractive nonditionf b. Signs sba27 b a leapt free from excHweiv+ee zest, corroaeion, pealinq paint, or otbor surTacre deter'iorationT and ate. The display surfaaea rat all atigraa: aball be kept neatly painted or poastedi 4. S=ept. Qi N provided in this oaa8btf OR, t ~PA"GJ• LUUJ IIDLI uj. -.JJ I= tutu i a nit 111%, • ■JVV VVV V77L VV.0/ VVJ i • ti '•St 4 • r existing billboards which do nor. conform to the provisions of this title shall be regarded as nonaor tarminq signs and shall be uub j act to the provisions of subsection 11313.14,110.3 i ,C.. Caamsricial zones 1. (f. Billboard signs in the C-G zone only in accordance vith Section is.114.090.At3 r. Indixxtrial zomm: i. [a. ]Billboard Signs in aaoordance with $aatIon I8.114.Q9b.A,~ UR-29=20H 'NE 10:03 AM M e d i a A0 i n c VqO 906 0442 P.002/002 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON April 25, 2003 John Fitzmamice Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St, Vancouver, WA 98663 Re: Freeway Oriented Signs Dear Mr. Fitzmamice: •The City of Tigard Building Divisimi has received applications for four (4) fieeway oriented signs. Although- they may meet ddsign specifications in accordance with the State of Oregon &ructural Specialt; Code (OSSC), they are prohibited by the Tigard Municipal Code•(TMC) due to size and height restrictions. The Plamiing Division has detemnined these signs do not comply with the provisions of the TMC and cannot be approved for colnstraction. Therefore, the Building Division is ref=ding all fees that have been prepaid, The refund is being proc-.sled and you should receive it within the next two weeks. If you have any questions, please call me at (503) 718-2448. Sincerely, Gary Lampella Building Official ce: Brad Trilby, Associate Planner Jim Hendiyx, Director of Conununity Development Brian Blalock, Senior Plans Examiner 13125 SW Hall Blvd„ T Bard, OP 97223 (503) 639.4171 TDD (603) 684-2772 ]Exhibit Z May 2, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD John Fitzmaurice OREGON Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St Vancouver, WA 98663 RE: FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN @ HWY 217 & SW 95" Proiect Information Building Permit: BUP2003-000160 Construction Type: VN Tenant Name: POLE SIGN Occupancy Type: U2 Address: 217 & 95" Occupant Load: NA Area: 77 Feet Height Stories: 1 The plan review was performed under the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) 1998 edition. The submitted plans are approved subject to the following but cannot be issued at this time per the attached letter dated April 25, 2003. • Footings shall be inspected by City of Tigard Building Inspector prior to the placement of any concrete. Special Inspection shall not waive any city required inspection. Special Inspection: Special inspection is required for Drilled Pier Footings, Structural Welding and High-strength Bolting. The special inspection agency of record shall furnish inspection reports to the Engineer of Record, Jefferey A. Chapman, the General Contractor, Obie Construction and the City of Tigard, Building Division, attention Hap Watkins. All discrepancies shall be brought to the immediate attention of the general contractor for correction. The special inspector shall submit a final signed report stating whether the work requiring special inspection was, to the best of the inspector's knowledge, in conformance with the approved plans and specifications and the applicable workmanship provisions of the code. 1701.3 OSSC Approved Plans: 1 set of approved plans, bearing the City of Tigard approval stamp, shall be maintained on the jobsite. The plans shall be available to the Building Division inspectors throughout all phases of construction. 106.4.2 OSSC When submitting revised drawings or additional information, please attach a copy of the enclosed City of Tigard, Letter of Transmittal. The letter of transmittal assists the City of Tigard in tracking and processing the documents. Respec Bria Ial Senior PI s Examiner 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS .2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 MEDIA ART, INC. ) 4 Petitioner, ) LUBA Nos. 2003-068 and 2003-069 5 CITY OF TIGARD ) ) 6 Respondent. ) 7 8 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DECISIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION 9 10 Pursuant to "ORS 197.830(13)(b) Respondent City of Tigard is withdrawing for 11 reconsideration its decisions of April 22, 2003, entitled "Billboards in the City of Tigard," and 12 April 25, 2003, entitled "Freeway Oriented Signs." These decisions were separately appealed to 13 LUBA (Nos 2003-068 and 2003-069), but have since been consolidated by the Board on its own 14 motion. The consolidated record is currently due on May 27, 2003. 15 16 DATED this 2.7J z~ day of May, 2003. 17 18 Timothy . Ramis, OSB #75311 19 Gary FiYe one, OSB #87221 Of Attorneys for Respondent, L 20 City of Tigard 21 22 gff/dgard/Iuba-mediaart/WithdrawalNotice(srb) 23 ' 9 u 24 RECEI\IED 2S STf?Cl R 'Tr ! • . 26 2 I L1113 sir. RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 F,2 (503) 243-2944 1 CTIFICATE OF FILING C~ ~ ? I hereby certify that on May. , 2003, I filed the original and one copy of this Notice 3 of Withdrawal of Decisions for Reconsideration with the Land Use Board of Appeals, 550 4 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235, alem., Oregon, 97301, by first class mail. 5 DATED this 27- h day of May, 2003. 6 7 Timoth V. Ramis, OSB #75311 8 Garylrestone, OSB #87221 Of Attorneys for Respondent, 9 City of Tigard 10 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .12 I hereby certify that on May Z Z , 2003, I served a true and correct copy of this Notice 13 of Withdrawal of Decisions for Reconsideration by first class mail on the following persons: 14 Steven W. Abel TimothyL. McMahan 15 Michelle Rudd Stoel Rives LLP 16 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204 17 ;tic0 p DATED this ZZ. day of May, 2003. 18 ~r 19 L 20 Timothy . Ramis, OSB #75311 r Gary ' stone, OSB #87221 21 Of Attorneys for Respondent, City of Tigard _ 22 0 • 23 gfVtisard/luba MidiaArt/WithdrawalCFS(srb) u 24 25 . 26 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND SERVICE F.2 ((503) 243 2944 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAIN & BACHRACH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 Telephone: (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 www.rccb.com May 22, 2003 Land Use Board of Appeals 550 Capital Street, NE Suite 235 Salem, OR 97301 Re: -Media Art, Inc. v. City of Tigard, LUBA Nos. 2003-068 and 2003-069 Dear Board Clerk: On behalf of Respondent City of Tigard, enclosed please find an original and one copy of Notice of Withdrawal of Decisions for Reconsideration in the above-referenced matters. Thank you for your courtesies. Sincerely, • i~l~u . Sharon R. Beisley, Legal Assistant SRB/ Enclosures gff/tigard/luba-mediaart/LUBALt2 cc: Steven W. Abel, Esq. Timothy L. McMahan, Esq. _ Michelle Rudd, Esq. Mr. Brad Kilby 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 MEDIA ART, INC. 4 Petitioner, 5 6 V. LUBA No. CITY OF TIGARD, 7 Respondent. 8 9 0 10 NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL 62 11 0" N a o 0 12 I. teZ` N , w 13 Notice is hereby given that Petitioner intends to appeal that land use decision of 14 Respondent entitled, W ~ A 15 ¢ o "PERMIT NO. BUP2003-00181, BUP2003-00182, BUP2003-00183, 16 BUP2003-00184" w 17 The subject decision is a cancellation of four building permits. It became final on May 8, 18 2003 and was mailed to the parties entitled to notice on May 8, 2003. The decision cancels 19 building permits to construct signs qualifying for permits under the Oregon Motorist 20 21 Information Act. A copy of the decision, as it was sent to the Petitioner by Respondent, is 22 attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. 23 II. 24 Petitioner, Media Art, has standing to appeal Respondent's land use decision because 25 they are the applicant for the building permits identified in the City's decision (Exhibit A). 26 Page 1 NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Pordnd 12139900.10053.401.00003 1 The Petitioner is represented by: 2 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 3 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 Stoel Rives LLP 4 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204-1268 5 Phone: (503) 294-9490 6 7 Respondent, Tigard, Oregon, has the following mailing address and telephone 8 number- 9 City of Tigard U 0 10 13125 SW Hall Blvd. o ry Tigard, OR 97223 -62 11 Phone: (503) 639-4171 td N h 12 Respondent's legal counsel is: 13 Timothy Ramis, OSB No. 75311 1 .2 • o a M 14 Ramis Crew Corrigan &Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street O G H Portland, OR 97209 M 15 Phone: (503) 222-4402 16 IV 3 17 The decision of Respondent, City of Tigard, does not indicate that written notice of 18 the subject land use decision was mailed to anyone other than Petitioner. 20 L r 21 22 0 23 u 24 J 25 26 Page 2 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Portlndl-2139900.1 0053401-00003 } I 1 NOTICE: 2 Anyone designated in paragraph IV of this Notice who desires to participate as a 3 party in this case before the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals must file with the Board a 4 Motion to Intervene in this proceeding as required by OAR 661-010-0050. 5 DATED: May?~3 2003. 6 STOEL RIVES up 7 8r~ e 0 Oo 1~k~1 / Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 9 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 ° 10 Attorneys for Petitioner O N ,d. N 11 N r' O 12 ~w 13 N ° A te 14 , rr3 ~N 15 ~ Q M O 16 17 0 0 a 18 19 20 21 n ' 22 3 m 23 Ur 24 25 26 Page 3 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Portlndl-2139900.1 0053401-00003 j i ~7 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on May' 2003, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, I served a 3 4 true and correct copy of this Notice of Intent to Appeal on all persons listed in paragraphs III $ and IV of this Notice pursuant to OAR 661-010-0015(2). 6 DATED: May 73 2003. 7 STOEL RIVES 1.1.3• 8 9 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 8,3137 a o 10 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 ° N 11 Attorneys for Petitioner a o0 12 tea` 0 13 • o 14 ~N 15 ~ Q o 16 y 17 O 0 o. 18 19 20 ti 21 22 23 U 24 J 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Portlndl-2139900.10053401-00003 . 1 i 1 CERTIFICATE OF FILING 2 3 I hereby certify that on May23 2003, by certified mail, I filed the original and two 4 (2) true copies of this Notice of Intent to Appeal with the Oregon Land Use Board of 5 Appeals, 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235, Salem, OR 97301-2552. 6 DATED: May 2003. 7 STOEL RIVES LLP 8 . 9 Steven W. Abel, OS No. 83137 0 10 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 0 N 11 Attorneys for Petitioner N a o 0 12 w 13 N a~ 14 ova "'ao w .s 16 17 o . 0 a 18 19 20 L 1C 21 22 4 23 ' 24 25 ' 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF FILING Portlndl-2139900.10053401-00003 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON May 8, 2003 NABLO,LLC c/o Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663 Attn: John Fitzmaurice Re: Permit No. 13UP2003-00181, BUP2003-00182, BUP2003-00183, BUP2003-00184 Dear Mr. Fitzmaurice: We have canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 9785 SW Shady Ln., 12000 Garden Pl., 6713 SW Bonita Rd., 12100 SW Garden Pl. Proj ect Name: Media Art Refund: Check #26374 in the amount of $1,662.36. Notes: Refund for building permits for 4 freeway signs not approved by the planning department due to height and size requirements. If you have any questions please contact me at (503) 639-4171, x2430. z Sincerely, n 0 Dianna Howse a Permit Specialist Enc. 13125 SW HCl4L~~(oi,~@nQ~~03) 639-4171 ADD (503) 684-2772 EXHMIT 1 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 MEDIA ART, INC. 4 Petitioner, 5 V. LUBA No. 6 CITY OF TIGARD, 7 Respondent. 8 9 ° 10 NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL x~ N 11 N 12 I. 13 Notice is hereby given that Petitioner intends to appeal that land use decision of ° 14 M Respondent entitled, o O N H;N 15 `n ¢ o "FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN AT HIGHWAY 217 & SW 95TH" 16 w r 17 The subject decision is a denial of an application for refusal to issue a building permit. The 0 18 decision became final on May 2, 2003 and was mailed to the parties entitled to notice on 19 May 2, 2003. The decision denies an application for building permits to construct signs 20 qualifying for permits under the Oregon Motorist Information Act. A copy of the decision, 21 as it was sent to the Petitioner by Respondent, is attached hereto as Exhibit A and i i 22 incorporated herein by this reference. i 23 i H. i 24 i 25 Petitioner, Media Art, has standing to appeal Respondent's land use decision because 26 they are the applicant for the building permits stated in the City's decision (Exhibit A). Page 1 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Pordndl-2139898.1 0053401-40003 1 The Petitioner is represented by: 2 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 3 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 Stoel Rives LLP 4 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 5 Portland, OR 97204-1268 Phone: (503) 294-9490 6 ffi. 7 Respondent, Tigard, Oregon, has the following mailing address and telephone 8 number: 9 City of Tigard 10 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 0 H Tigard, OR 97223 °a N 11 Phone: (503) 639-4171 N w , 12 Respondent's legal counsel is: g w 13 Timothy Ramis, OSB No. 75311 ;9 ° 14 Ramis Crew Corrigan & Bachrach W d M 1727 NW Hoyt Street N 15 Portland, OR 97209 v~ a o Phone: (503) 222-4402 w .a 16 IV. 17 The decision of Respondent, City of Tigard, does not indicate that written notice of 18 19 the subject land use decision was mailed to anyone other than Petitioner. 20 21 22 23 24 - - - - - - 25 26 Page 2 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL PorUndl-2139898.1 0053401-00003 1 NOTICE: 2 Anyone designated in paragraph IV of this Notice who desires to participate as a 3 party in this case before the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals must file with the Board a 4 Motion to Intervene in this proceeding as required by OAR 661-010-0050. 5 DATED: May7,3 2003. 6 STOEL RIVES 1.u 7 8 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 9 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 ° 10 Attorneys for Petitioner xa °N 11 9N oh 12 rn ° 14 Hry 15 ~Qa g 16 A 17 0 a 18 19 20 21 22 23 U 24 r- 25 26 Page 3 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Porand1-2139898.1 0053401-00003 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on May 2003, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, I served a 3 4 true and correct copy of this Notice of Intent to Appeal on all persons listed in paragraphs III 5 and IV of this Notice pursuant to OAR 661-010-0015(2). 6 DATED: May 23 2003. 7 STOEL RIVES up 8 9 Steven W. Abel, OSB N4.8 3 10 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 ° 0 11 Attorneys for Petitioner ;R_ 12 ~N~ 13 ° 14 o =4. 0 P. 15 ~ Q M 16 17 0 0 18 19 20 21 22 23 - 24 i 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE PoTOndl-2139898.10053401-00003 1 CERTIFICATE OF FILING 2 I hereby certify that on MayV, 2003, by certified mail, I filed the original and two 3 ' 4 (2) true copies of this Notice of Intent to Appeal with the Oregon Land Use Board of 5 Appeals, 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235, Salem, OR 97301-2552. 6 ' DATED: May ~ 2003. 7 STOEL RIVES up 8 b 9 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 8 137 10 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 0 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 °a ry 11 Attorneys for Petitioner N O 12 ~Nw 13 ' ° 14 M do 15 ~ s 16 17 0 0 18 19 20 21 0 22 23 i 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF FILING Porftdl-2139898.10053401-00003 • a, May 2, 2003 CITY OF 71GAD John Fitanaurice Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St Vancouver, WA 98663 RE: FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN @ 14WY 217 & SW 95' Proiect Information Building Permit: BUP2003-000160 Construction Type: VN TenantName: POLE SIGN Occupancy Type: U2 Address: 217 & 95`x' - Occupant Load: NA Area: ' 77 Feet Height Stories: 1 The plan review was performed under the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) 1998 edition. The submitted plans are approved subject to the following but cannot be issued at this time per the attached letter dated April 25, 2003. • Footings shall be inspected by City of Tigard Building Inspector prior to the placement of any concrete. Special Inspection shall not waive any city required inspection. ' Special Inspection: Special inspection is required for Drilled Pier Footings, Structural Welding and High-strength Bolting. The special inspection agency of record shall furnish inspection reports to the Engineer of Record, Jefferey A. Chapman, the General Contractor, Obie Contraction and the City of Tigard, Building Division, attention Hap Watkins. All discrepancies shall be brought to the immediate attention of the general contractor for correction. The special inspector shall submit a final signed report stating whether the work requiring special inspection was, to the best of the inspector's knowledge, in conformance with the approved plans and specifications and the applicable workmanship provisions of the code. 1701.3 OSSC Approved Plans: 1 set of approved plans, bearing the City of Tigard approval stamp, shall be maintained on the jobsite. The plans shall be available to the Building Division inspectors throughout all phases of construction. 106.4.2 OSSC L 2 When submitting revised drawings or additional information, please attach a copy of the enclosed City of Tigard, Letter of Transmittal. The letter of transmittal assists the City of Tigard in tracking and processing the documents. Respec Bri lalo Senior PI Examiner 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503),639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 EXHIBIT A . CITY OF TIGAR® OREGON April 25, 2003 Sohn Fitzmaurice Media Art, Inc. 1923 Broadway St. • Vancouver, WA. 98663 Re: Freeway Oriented Signs 'Dear 1&. Fitzmaurice: -The City of Tigard Building Division has received applications for four (4) freeway oriented signs. Although they may meet ddsign specifications in accordance with the State of Oregon'Structural Specialty Code (OSSC), they are prohibited by the Tigard. Municipal Code (TMC) due to size and height restrictions. The Planning Division has determined these signs do not comply with the provisions of the TMC and' cannot be approved for construction. Therefore, the. Building Division is refunding all fees that have been prepaid. The refund is being processed and you should receive it within the next two weeks. If you have any questions, please call me at (503) 718-2448. Sincerely, s Gary Lampella Building Official i cc: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner Jim.Hendryx,.Director of Community Development Brian Blalock, Senior Plans Examiner - 13125 SW Hall Blvd„ Tigard OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 MD (503) 684-2772 K..,: /811.- f. April 22, 2003 Media Art, Inc. CITY OF TiGARD 1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663 OREGON Re: Billboards In the City of Tigard Gentlemen: it has come to my attention that you have made application to place billboards within the City of Tigard. Unfortunately, the' City of Tigard expressly prohibits billboards within the•City Limits. I have had several nversations with representatives of sign companies to place free-standing freeway oriented signs Within-the City. Free-standing freeway oriented signs are permitted within the City of Tigard, *and while it is true you do not need a separate sign permit for the sign when you have approval through the Oregon Motorist Information Act, you still must meet the standards of what constitutes a free-standing freeway oriented sign. The permits that you have requested exceed the maximum dimensional standards of free- standing freeway oriented signs. Under the regulations of the Tigard Development Code (TDC) section 18.780.090, the permits that you have applied for exceed the maximum height-of 35 feet from the ground level at its base, and the maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face. There has been some -confusion in that the regulations state that, "if the sign is a billboard, then the provisions of subsection 18.780.090 shall apply." While it may appear that the code allows billboards, it does refer you to the section that specifically includes.the maximum square footage and heights for all free-standing freeway oriented signs. More importantly though, I refer you to TDC section 18.780.070(M) which specifically prohibits billboards, and to TDC section 18.210.020(0) which states that, "where this title imposes greater restrictions than those imposed or required by other rules or regulations, the most restrictive or that imposing the higher standard shall govern." As you may know, the Oregon Motorist Information Act does not preempt local regulation of signs along highways. Additionally, it is clear that the intent of the Tigard City Council under Ordinance No. 93-12 was to specifically prohibit billboard signs, a copy of this ordinance has been enclosed for your review. At your request, the commercial plans examiner has reviewed the plans for structural L ' compliance with the Uniform Building Codes, but compliance with'those standards does not r preclude you from meeting all applicable state and local regulations. It is for these reasons that your building permits cannot be issued and have been denied. 3 if you have any further questions, contact me at (503)639-4171 ext. 2434, or stop by my office between the hours of 8AM and 4PM Monday through Friday. Our office is located at 13125 SW a Hall_Bivd. in Tigard. u , Sincerely, Brad Kilby, AiCP Associate Planner 13125 SW Hall Blvd., 11gard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 I I FILE 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 MEDIA ART, INC. 4 Petitioner, 5 6 v. LUBA No. CITY OF TIGARD, 7 Respondent. 8 9 oNM1, 0 10 NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL ~ N N 11 G ry ' W a h 12 I. w 13 N Notice is hereby given that Petitioner intends to appeal that land use decision of d O -.14 Re -sp - - - ondent eiititred, - ry a 15 "FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGNS" 16 w 17 The subject decision is a denial of an application for building permits. It became final on 0 0 18 April 25, 2003 and was mailed to the parties entitled to notice on April 25, 2003. The 19 decision denies an application for building permits to construct signs qualifying for permits 20 under the Oregon Motorist Information Act. A copy of the decision, as it was sent to the 21 Petitioner by Respondent, is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this 22 reference. 23 II. 24 25 Petitioner, Media Art, has standing to appeal Respondent's land use decision because 26 they are the applicant for the building permits stated in the City's decision (Exhibit A). Page 1 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Pcrtlndl -2137948.1 0053401400003 1 The Petitioner is represented by: 2 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 3 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 Stoel Rives LLP 4 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204-1268 5 Phone: (503) 294-9490 .6 7 Respondent, Tigard, Oregon, has the following mailing address and telephone 8 number: 9 N City of Tigard 0 10 13125 SW Hall Blvd. o N Tigard, OR 97223 ry 11 Phone: (503) 639-4171 b N 12 Respondent's legal counsel is: N 13 Timothy Ramis, OSB No. 75311 o Ramis Crew Corrigan & Backrach ►a._.~m.~_14_.....-._ 1-737-NW-HoytBtreet-_ O [ 15 Portland, OR 97209 o Phone: (503) 222-4402 16 LT. e IV. 3 ~ 17 The decision of Respondent, City of Tigard, does not indicate that written notice of 18 the subject land use decision was mailed to anyone other than Petitioner. 19 20 21 H m 22 m 23 24 J 25 26 Page 2 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Portindl-2137948.1 0053401-00003 1 NOTICE: 2 3 Anyone designated in paragraph IV of this Notice who desires to participate as a 4 party in this case before the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals must file with the Board a 5 Motion to Intervene in this proceeding as required by OAR 661-010-0050. DATED: May fp, 2003. 6 STOEL RIVES lrx 7 8 9 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 10 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 a Attorneys for Petitioner xa °N 11 ~ N a oh 12 . 13 N a O 14-- O >ry 15 rn > 16 17 0 0 18 19 20 21 22 ! 23 1 i. 24 1 25 26 Page 3 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Porgadi-2137948.1 0053401-00003 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 3 I hereby certify that on May (p, 2003, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, I served a 4 true and correct copy of this Notice of Intent to Appeal on all persons listed in paragraphs III 5 and IV of this Notice pursuant to OAR 661-010-0015(2). 6 DATED: May 2003. 7 STOEL RIVES uY 8 9 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 8 137 10 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 x Q Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 0 11 Attorneys for Petitioner C~. N a o 0 12 13 N L4_ H >N 15 X60 16 w Cn 17 0 0 18 19 20 L_ r 21 22 5 23 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Pwtlndl -2137548.1 0053401-00003 1 CERTIFICATE OF FILING 2 3 I hereby certify that on May /c_, 2003, by certified mail, I filed the original and two 4 (2) true copies of this Notice of Intent to Appeal with the Oregon Land Use Board of 5 Appeals, 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235, Salem, OR 97301-2552. 6 DATED: May 6 , 2003. 7 STOEL RIVES l.iP 8 9 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 8 137 .10 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 0 o Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 G N 11 Attorneys for Petitioner m _ 0 12 Cn 0 13 N O H N 15 ~'Qo 16 iz 17 0 0 a 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF FILING Portlndl-2137948.1 0053401-00003 11111 L'J LUUJ AVAI 1V WJ u.u u.ow.a .n+ - - - CITY OF TIG D OREGON April 25, 2003 John Fitzmaurice Media Art, lnc. 1923 Broadway St. Vancouvar, WA 98663 Re: Freeway 0Aeuted Signs Dear Mr. Fitzmauriee: The City of Tigard Building Division has received applications for four (4) freeway oriented signs. Although-they may meet design specifications in accordance with the State of Oregon Structural Specialt ; Code (OSSC), they are prohibited by the Tigard Municipal Code•(TMC) due to size and height restrictions. The Planning Division has determined these signs do not comply with the provisions of the TMC and cannot be approved for construction. Therefore, the Building Division is refiuiding all fees that have been prepaid. The refvud is being processed and you should receive it within the next two weeks. If you have any questions, please call me at (503) 715-2448. Sincerely, 6 Gary Lampella Building Official i cc: Brad Kilby, Associate Planner Jim Henchyx, Director of Community Development Brie. Blalock, Senior Plans Examiner I 13126 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (603) 639-4171 TDD (603) 684-2772 Exhibit A o~ $ . _ Postage I US. P6stal Service . Recibi ~v rn • • Certified Fee C~j - • c~ N C3 Return Receipt Fee Ir a (EndorsementRequlred) r t~Ay Pdi[rfi3rk rfrarK Wail Here ri t Restricted Delivery Fee ~Q NU trisur"Incr, (Endorsement Required) m nj Total Postage & Fees Ir rA S8rtzgon, Land Use Berard of Appeals Ln 550 Capita! Straet NE, Suite 235 t` Salem, OIL 97301-2552 Ln 0 teen 53401-3 PS Form 3800, ,June 2000 US Postal Service Certified Mail Receipt 2. Article Number cbr.,1'PLETETHIS • • e Received by (Please Print Cleary) 8. Dl et of De ry I i A: l a s i J t O C. ' signature i d e Agent } x ❑Add asses f D. yes 71r ❑ 6 4`57 129 2 9 7 A IIs delivery t YES, enter delivery address below; 14 O No j J 3. Service Type CERTIRED MAIL I t 4. Restricted DelWrr (Extra Fee) ❑yes I 1. Article Addressed 1o: rs~} ::..~zicr uwe i.ax t . v ASpe~ cti - OD 6 ! M17..~ Cht 97301-2.552 14Ar ! 0729 mxr 53901-3 i'P6 Form 381'(„. iit ~'~000`• E ' i'{,i j i { i ; s i t iii 't k ! iDomestid Retum Receipt ARTICLE 7106 4575 1292 3937 0803 NUMBER LINE 1• Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235 Salem, OR 97301-2552 WALZ M A I L E R. mxr 53401-3 Moo E 1-800-882-3811 ryrZ - .a zrK^rc,+ : r- vrr FORM #35882 ! 5~.5 "~y1~y ~{>YS ~~kr t.~ iv>•r~Q~Sy s lu~?;-vi31 ~,,2,{Sjl' y£ri 117/+ fr ; sif ~~l`~ L~'>rZ ~~`M1~ U REFERENCE: r~~~~ w j ,1~ i `rl; s& A 5 tiJ pia~~t 4 }zS ~'ii d r ayd (1 t ^ SQ _ 4'. t~k.y.~.,...s. lrt. Y,,.~,_~rn...kJjwr«.,l..d<r d,. ..y«~ zl.yuw-.t .s...,.,,u,.r^-t. .I~S~.L..~.~,~i...•..,. STOEL RIVES LLP LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 * Portland, Oregon 97204-1268 (503) 224-3380 ?<:;:&UP,.?ti~RNtt1NRFR::`:.:?' sCHkCKiiy.UMSEFtz <•'<CHBRK€G1AiCE'>.s. 20114 685046 05-06-03 ::::.::::fNVAlOE°NtJNFBEk:':..:: ":::INV9IGEAA7E s<, iOE6CfUPTION: ' •r 050503 05-05-03 3/5/03 Filing Fee/MXR 325.00 TO L 325.00 Please detach at perforation before depositing check STOE. - KeyBank 52.60 R l ! LLS National Association 1 '12 s.:CH. i;GK NO " CWECK DA 's': E ; i 685046 05-06-.03, ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1 '-•900 SVIiifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland OR 97204 ' CH>:ClC AMdfiNC.., . • :i z» w $325. PAY THREE` ;H7 RED TWENTY -FIVE. 'AND ,0/100 LAND' U8E -BOARD ,OFL"APPEALS TO THE ORDER OF r . '~r' 4 .~krr r~. ~..:i Cam, A^r :~'t:(n~`~ ' MTRIM, 068 5046no 40 ~ 1 2006080: 6 190900004 20u' FILE 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 MEDIA ART, INC. 4 Petitioner, 5 6 v. LUBA No. CITY OF TIGARD, 7 Respondent. 8 9 9 10 NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL a 0 H 0 11 ~ N a o 0 12 I. 13 Notice is hereby given that Petitioner intends to appeal that land use decision of N W „M Respori3enfenfifled;--- - 7 Q q N Cn 15 a o "BILLBOARDS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD" 16 w 'a 3 17 The subject decision is a denial of applications for building permits. It became final on to 0 18 April 22, 2003 and was mailed to the parties entitled to notice on April 22, 2003. The 19 decision denies an application for building permits for signs qualifying for permits under the 20 Oregon Motorist Information Act. A copy of the decision, as it was sent to the Petitioner by 21 Respondent, is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. 22 II. 23 Petitioner, Media Art, has standing to appeal Respondent's land use decision because 24 25 they are the applicant for the building permit as stated in the decision (Exhibit A). 26 The Petitioner is represented by: Page 1 = NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL Portlndl-2137953.10053401-00003 i , 1 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 2 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 Stoel Rives LLP 3 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204-1268 4 Phone: (503) 294-9490 5 6 Respondent, Tigard, Oregon, has the following mailing address and telephone 7 number: 8 City of Tigard 9 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 10 Phone, (503) 639-4171 00 ° N 11 Respondent's legal counsel is: 4 0 12 Timothy Ramis, OSB No. 75311 Ramis Crew Corrigan & Backrach 13 1727 NW Hoyt Street v o Portland, OR 97209 L4---------P-hone:-(503)-222-4402-- - 15 IV. ao 16 The decision of Respondent, City of Tigard, does not indicate that written notice of w 3 17 the subject land use decision was mailed to anyone other than Petitioner. 18 NOTICE: 19 20 Anyone designated in paragraph IV of this Notice who desires to participate as a 21 pat'h' in this case before the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals must file with the Board a 22 Motion to Intervene in this proceeding as required by OAR 661-010-0050. 23 J 24 25 26 Page 2 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL PorlndI4137953.1 0053401-00003 1 DATED: May 2003. 2 STOEL RIVES u -P 3 r 4 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 5 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 6 Attorneys for Petitioner 7 8 9 10 00 ON. ,d. N I 1 eti ry O 12 N w 13 tit G °r 15 Q o 16 a 17 0 0 18 19 20 CL 21 22 23 .U 24 J 25 26 Page 3 - NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL PorHndl-2137953.1 0053401-00003 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 3 I hereby certify that on May 2003, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, I served a 4 true and correct copy of this Notice of Intent to Appeal on all persons listed in paragraphs III 5 and IV of this Notice pursuant to OAR 661-010-0015(2). 6 Dated: May 2003 7 8 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 9 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 $ Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 a 10 Attorneys for Petitioner a N rv 11 N 12 o °LZ 13 0 15 ~ 6 0 16 w' 17 0 0 o, 18 19 20 CL 21 22 23 9 ' 1 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE PoTdndl-2137953.1 0053401-00003 1 CERTIFICATE OF FILING 2 3 I hereby certify that on May k, 2003, by certified avail, I filed the original and two 4 (2) true copies of this Notice of Intent to Appeal with the Oregon Land Use Board of 5 Appeals, 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235, Salem, OR 97301-2552. 6 ' Dated: May, 2003 7 8 Steven W. Abel, OSB No. 83137 9 Timothy L. McMahan, OSB No. 98462 Michelle Rudd, OSB No. 00095 a 10 Attorneys for Petitioner off N I1 a o 0 12 w~ o °w 13 s~ _..n__ _1_4 0 ;ry 15 16 3 17 0 o a 18 19 20 r: 21 7 22 23 i 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF FILING Portindl-2137953.1 0053401-00003 April 22, 2003 Media Art, inc. , OF °~1~ARD '1923 Broadway St. Vancouver, WA 98663 OREGON Re: Billboards in the City of Tigard Gentlemen., it has come to my attention that you have made application to place billboards within the City of Tigard. Unfortunately, the City of Tigard expressly prohibits billboards within the City Limits, I have had several conversations with representatives of sign companies to place free-standing freeway oriented signs within the City, Free-standing freeway oriented signs are permitted within the City of Tigard, and while It Is true you do not neod a separate sign perrin)t for the sign when you have approval through the Oregon Motorist Information Act, you still must meet the standards of what constitutes a free-standing freeway oriented sign. I I The permits that you have requested exceed the maximum dimensional standards of free- standing freeway oriented signs. Under the regulations of the Tigard Development Code (TDC) ' section 18.780.090, the permits that you have applied for exceed the maximum height of 35 feet from the ground level at Its base, and the maximum sign area of 160 square feet per face. There has been some confusion in that the regulations state that, "if the sign Is a billboard, then the provisions of subsection 18.780.090 shall apply." While it may appear that the code allows billboards, it does refer you to the section that specifically includes the maximum square footage _ ___sad_bsights-for allJFE -s#anding-#r~eway oriented signs =tVto7e~trrip~t#a~itl~ though; =lTefer j 616 tb J TDC section 18.780.070(M) which specifically prohibits billboards, and to TDC section 18.210.020(C) which states that, "where this title imposes greater restrictions than those Imposed or required by other rules or regulations, the most restrictive or that imposing the higher standard shall govern." I ' As you may know, the Oregon Motorist Information Act does not preempt local regulation of signs along highways. Additionally,, It Is clear that the Intent of the Tigard City Council under Ordinance No. 93-12 was to specifically prohibit billboard signs, a copy of this ordinance has been enclosed for your review. At your request, the commercial plans exam. inar has reviewed the plans for structural compliance with the Uniform Building Codes, but compliance with those standards does not preclude you from, meeting all applicable state and local regulations. It Is for these reasons that your building permits cannot be issued and have been denied. I If you have any further questions, contact me at (503)639-4171 ext. 2434, or stop by my office between the hours of SAM and 4PM Monday through Friday, Our office is located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd, In Tigard. I Sincerely, O~ Brad Kllby, AICP Associate Planner 13125 9W Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Exhibit A 1 wpm _ ;x l . v. .w .lA 1 j CITY OF TIGMW, OREGON 1 ORDINANCE, NO. 93--L&- AX ORDINANCE TO AM= PROVISIONS 'OF OM CO1KMITY Drip OPHENT CODE SBMXnw 18.114.070 TO ADD SUB410TION N. TO PROHIBIT BILLBOARDS Alm TO REPEAL SECTION 18.114.090 A. SUMCTIONB 1-4 VAICH PIMIMS rOR BILLBOARDS. WHffi2SAS, The City of Tigard finds it necessary to revise tlu Cosnunity Development Code poriodioally to ixprova the operation and imple~eantation of the Coder and ! Mi3WYJW, The, City of Tigard Plannirq couni.ssiasn reviewed the staff r9aomomndation at a public hearing on March 8, 1993 and voted to ` rooommewd approval of the omendasant to the city, Councill and ; WHEREAS, The City of Tigard fincds tbet the aaandmant• doom not affect i city compraheanssive Plan coals or State Planning Goalar and V 1BNR hs-, The city of Tigard finds that there ban boon a. public oratory concerning the, proliferation, number, spacing and nestlsatins of biMamrdm j and P.RS , The City council held a public hoa=ing on April. 3.3, 1993 to i consider the am ndnant. THE CITY OF TlaARD aMUMB AS r0LUYWS : C BSCTIOIff 1: The community Development Cvde nhelt -smdaWeod==sue ~sha~CF =i:rr vjMibit "A"_ .1,anquet{ps~-'tire= i~► ~lds~=is~~ Language to be __...:._:-:~~a-3.~~a--fps sown ir► [BRltc1~.`sl. This ordinance shall be offooti.ve 30 dabs after its ipassmis by the Council, approval by the Mayor, end posting by 'the City PAcorder. P"SEp : By r l aG O r J 7 vote of all CounC i 1 sags p±-saj~nt after beifia read by number and title only, this f day of C arina ftentley, city F@oo=der r APPROVED: This. day oe"i L r d w , i~tayor Approved s to fort! a city Attorney j ( Data 1 ORDMANCE No. s3- LL . Page 1 i lit ~r r` ,I MUXT 11Aa i Sit7b!rdg are jZlg 6~ted, ~-s . ~ ~ ~ .090 ate~s w 7 4.tfei,,,,,6i.a~ • Bpetiie2 condition signs shall have special or unique iaeal, 1.00 t3.0oal, i.llunift'L ,o8, sexigann hUmber or ~tbsa~ regniraeetsts iapoc ad upon them in addition 'to tb+a j regul,atimm contained in this ahapter. j/C3. Billboard: a. Billboard sign zmgttlatiCns shall be ar. rallowa t ~3) zonam Permitt edt (l.) E:LI2ba rd sigma shalt be peraaittwd aatly in ft b-0 co=W-.vial conga c,r I: - P_,_._L-~_asrd_Ttd_u_strial uarias and .--tState o~ert-tit-ite~sao-~f~t S'essoaay Na. 217 land/or Itdtffmtate rmaway No. 5. rigut-oE- WaysD 2. All v billboard sign(s) mitbin s6o faat Dt t~aa p"g t-cf-Way at a State highway must obtain tb* neoe sary parmit (s) f rate the, - St at e Hi9h3ray Division and all billboard sign(m) least be Vaintainad to conform vLtb applicable statat requiremantra pertaining to. billboards t ' 3• A12: sigaa, together with an of their s rts' braoas, guys # and ambors sbail be kept. i.ri repair and shall be maintained in a safe cone'ditioat t ra. All. signs and the rite upon `ahimh 't:bay are ` lQaatadt shall be maaintain6d in a nQat., clemn, and attrautive condition= b. signs shall be kept free fresa e="nive rust, cortoaaioan, peeling paint, or other surfaos lattarioratiottt and c. Tha display surfaces of all signs sbail be kept gently painted or postmtl i;, xxcspt • as o iss provided in this subsetstion, existing billboards which donor eon£oz-a to t ho I provisions of this title shall be rsgarded as nunaonforming signs and shall, be subject to the provisions of Subsection l8,tlarll0.~ g , •e ~ 4 ~ + inni~tfCl district Rtas!}.e ens ~ , c. coaoeeriaiai Sons:a: z. [f. sil.lboard Signs in the. C-G zone only- in accordance with sootion 18.114.090.Af~ F. tndumtri:al Soma: i. Is. Billboard 8igas in anoordtmce vith Ssation I w.... Y•.... • ♦ . ' .J4~.v.."J/.•YVriUMT IM'rT•L`.(w~..♦,.!. EMI •1.•.IY •r~1 n.M. • . US PostaV-Service Postage $ ° • • Certified Fee N • Return Receipt Fee 17~ Mail,: • (Endorsement Required) Q Po mark M Restricted Delivery Fee Hera m (Endorsement Required)Q provided. ~ Total Postage & Fees a ru Sent To: rq Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals N 550 Capitol Stroat PTE, St to 235 Ln Salem, OR 97301-2552 0 mx-- 534013 PS Form 3800, June 2000 US Postal Service Certified Mail Receipt 2. Article Number i • • i A' Received by (Please Print Clearly) B. D to o Delivery 4. I _ r C. Signature i ❑Agent i R ❑ Addressee a - D Is delivery address diNarenl from Item 19 Yes i 7~,Q6 1292:' 3937 ❑797 11 YES, enter delivery address below. ONo i 3. Service Type CERTIFIED MAIL at , 14. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) D Yes ODOT MCTD RanalVAtj 1. Article Addressed to r._~~~...~,r~l.a~►~a ..MAY _0 7 .~1)t 00 Capitol strea' 43E`, S~it:o 2'35 . 9"I, t, OR 97301-2352 ! a •;f t 1 i mxr 5314( PS Fgrm i l3811,(~unle t20"00 i Hi. z DomAstlc %lurn Receipt I j ARTICLE 7106 4575 1292 3937 0797 NUMBER LINE1• Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals 550 Capitol Street NE, Suite 235 Salem, OR 97301-2552 v WALZ FROM mkr 53401-3 1-BOD-882-3811 FORM 036B62 .3 . 7i 'r d ti f deww~ ~~r ,nr t~ „ S ~ xw ~5 n a.z ' s Up h !1 R r P t f r >Y L i+~~ l) ; N 154 A y 5 REFERENCE: 4 FILE STOEL RIVES LLP LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, Oregon 97204-1268 (503) 224-3380 : Sppl?%i.q NS7.NIBR CHBGK;~S►UIYIBERsss >;<>'.CHEGK>QAi F>~<<€%; 20114 685047 05-06-03 +rruolos :nwMSefi.t:. awvntce•:oarE.>:: 050503 05-05-03 3/5/03 Filing Fee/MXR 325.00 iOTL1L . Please detach at perforation before depositing check 325.00 ' . Elm - STOE'L KeyBank s2-60 _ 12 LLP National AssociationK NO's ;"CHECM<Cq3$ A179RNLYS"'AT, LAW' 68 i '900 SW Fifth Avenue, Stine 2600 0 5-06-03 Portland, OR 97204 CHECK AiV(OONT { PAY $325.0 0 THREE:'_HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE',-{AIMD '3.0/100 LAND USE BOARD OF `APP,EAI;S ` TO THE x, i r. ORDER ,y. OF x,. ixi I • ti■68SO 47ii% 1:0 h 5 2006081: 6 190900004 2011' 1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 4 MEDIA ART, INC., 5 Petitioner, 6 7 vs. 8 9 CITY OF TIGARD, 10 Respondent. 11 12 LUBA Nos. 2003-068 and 2003-069 13 ORDER ON CONSOLIDATION 14 Under OAR 661-010-0055, LUBA: 15 * * may consolidate two or more proceedings, provided the proceedings 16 seek review of the same or closely related land use decision(s) or limited land 17 use decision(s)." 18 LUBA Nos. 2003-068 and 2003-069 seek review of closely related decisions. 19 Accordingly, LUBA Nos. 2003-068 and 2003-069 shall be consolidated for LUBA 20 review, and respondent City of Tigard shall submit a single consolidated record. The record -21 in t1iis donsolidated proceeding shall be transmitted to the Board on or before May 27, 2003. 22 Dated this 13a' day of May, 2003. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Tod A. Bassham 30 Board Chair i i i STOEL, RIVES RECEIVED Page 1 MAY 14 2003 , r C~5 cc = ~OcK~ t4nl! Certificate of Mailing I hereby certify that I served the foregoing Order on Consolidation for LUBA No. 2003 - 068/069 on May 13, 2003, by mailing to said parties or their attorney a true copy thereof contained in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid addressed to said parties or their attorney as follows: Michelle Rudd Stoel Rives LLP 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204-1268 Timothy V. Ramis Ramis Crew Corrigan & Bachrach LLP 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 L C J 0 u 1 Dated this 13th day of May, 2003. lly urges Kristi Seyfried 'strati a Speci . Administrative Specialist 05/28/2003 15:45 FAX 5U3U847297 UlTY oI 'rigura %W VW.L Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4971 CITY OF TI GARD Tor Lincoln ypiVt9'r rW Z3. Franz Brad My, Associate Planner Fam 503-220-2480 Pages: 2 including cover Phone: 503-294-9530 Dates 5/28/03 Re: Request for a Director's Interpretation CC: [Click here and type name] -El Urgent M For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Ple 9 Reply ® Please Recycle • Comments: Per your request k 05/28/2003 15:48 M 5038847297 City of Tigard 9002, CITY OF TICARD Cormunity Development Shaping A Better Community, MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Jim Hendryx FROM: Brad Kilby DATE: May 8, 2003 SUBJECT: Request for a Director's Interpretation Jim, if you have not heard, we have been appealed to LUBA for denying p6 m)ts for w -at ave - determined to be Billboard signs for Media Arts, Inc. We anticipate that West Coast Media LLC will follow suit if they have not already. I have included a copy of the letter that 1 sent to Media Arts, Inc. with regard to the permits, and.a copy of the ordinance 93-12 that was passed by the Tigard City Council in April of 1993. Would you please provide me with a formal interpretation for any and all language that makes reference to billboards in TMC Chapter 18.780.