Loading...
City Council Packet - 08/08/2006 MEMO Agenda Item No. , For Agenda of Ci .I~.uc,, Tigard City Council, City Center Development Agency and Local Contract Review Board Meeting Minutes Date: August 8, 2006 Time: 6:30 p.m. Place: Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon Attending: Mayor Craig Dirksen Presiding Councilor Sally Harding Councilor Nick Wilson Councilor Tom Woodruff Absent: Councilor Sydney Sherwood Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Study Session The City Council Study Session was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Dirksen. Study Session - ➢ Oregon Business - Tour Host Proposal - September Administrative 2007 - Showcase Business Community Items Assistant City Manager Newton reviewed the Assistant City Manager information distributed to the City Council. The Newton will contact the Oregon Business Road Tour will occur next year about Chamber of Commerce to the time of the City's "birthday." This is an determine if they are opportunity for community's to showcase different interested in partnering or aspects. Staff would put together a proposal and taking the lead in the Oregon work on the event if selected. Due date for a Business Tour to be held in proposal is September 8, 2006. September 2007. Mayor Dirksen noted that during the League of Oregon Cities conference, the City of Tigard Downtown is one of the featured tour sites. Interim Community Development Director Coffee noted this is a four-hour event. Senior Planner Nachbar is coordinating this event. The Oregon Business Road Tour would be a citywide event and could include the industrial areas and Washington Square. Councilor Wilson said several businesses in the City of Tigard could also be featured. Mayor Dirksen suggested asking the Chamber of Commerce and Tigard businesses to partner on this or take the lead. Mayor Dirksen noted activities such as this are important, especially as Tigard tries to draw the attention of developers for the Downtown. August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page I Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u ➢ Oregon Consensus Program - Bull Mountain Assistant City Manager Convening Assessment Newton will respond and thank the Oregon Consensus Assistant City Manager Newton reviewed an e-mail Program for the report. distributed to the City Council. ➢ Fifth Tuesday Scheduled for August 29, 2006, 7-9 Staff has contacted Basil p.m. at the Water Building. Stacie Yost is unavailable Christopher to determine if he to facilitate; staff checking with another facilitator. would be available to facilitate. Deputy Recorder Carol Krager will take notes of the meeting. ➢ City Council received information for Agenda Item No. 7 regarding commercial signage at the Library. (This was the same information that was sent in last Friday's City Council newsletter envelope.) Study Session Public Works Director Koellermeier reviewed progress. Staff will update City Council Entryway Signs He distributed a photo of the Tigard Triangle Entryway at the end of October or early sign with the new City of Tigard logo. November on the status of entryway sign construction. Now that the Code Amendment has been approved by the City Council, it is possible to construct an entryway sign. Public Works Director Koellermeier has been soliciting landscape architects and noted that Councilor Wilson has assisted by identifying several firms capable of working on this type of project. Landscape architects are extremely busy and Public Works Director Koellermeier said two had agreed to prepare a proposal for entryway signs by the end of this week. Then, specific sites can be identified more definitively and the City staff can proceed with land acquisition and begin constructing the signs. In response to Councilor Woodruff, Public Works Director Koellermeier estimated that construction of sign(s) could begin within approximately three months unless there are issues with right-of-way acquisition. There was discussion about materials to be used in the sign construction with Mayor Dirksen noting the need to be flexible and to keep the costs reasonable. Public Works Director Koellermeier said $50,000 had been budgeted for entryway signs this year. In response to Councilor Harding, Public Works Director Koellermeier said the logo on the Tigard Triangle sign is made of plastic and is sealed with a clear plastic. The new logo was placed on top of the old logo. Mayor Dirksen suggested more signage into the Tigard Triangle area be constructed when August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 2 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u opportunities arise; i.e., the entrance from Hall to Dartmouth Street, the entrance at Pacific Highway and Dartmouth, and Pacific Highway and 72nd Avenue. Executive Session Mayor Dirksen announced read the announcement for an Executive Session. The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:37 p.m. to consult with legal counsel regarding litigation likely to be filed under ORS 192.660(2)(h). Executive Session concluded at 7:22 p.m. City Center Chair Dirksen called the City Center Development Development Agency meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Agency (CCDA) Meeting City Center Development Agency Board Members Present: Chair Dirksen; Directors Harding, Wilson, and Woodruff CCDA - Consider Senior Planner Nachbar presented the staff report. Motion by Director Woodruff, Adoption of the Minor changes to the Downtown Implementation seconded by Director Wilson, Tigard Downtown Strategy were made. to adopt CCDA Resolution Implementation No. 06-01. Strategy Senior Planner Nachbar said the document is intended to prioritize policy and actions for the downtown. The The motion was approved by current version was presented at the June 24, 2006, a unanimous vote of City workshop. The document has been endorsed and Center Development Agency recommended for adoption by the City Center Advisory members present. Commission at its June 14 meeting. The Strategy provides policy actions and a three-year action plan and a Chair Dirksen Yes one-year work program. The work program contains Director Harding Yes specific projects and actions that the staff will take to Director Wilson Yes carry out the Downtown Plan. CCDA adoption of the Director Woodruff Yes Strategy will set activities in motion. Some of the key projects for the year include developing a program for land assembly, marketing of the downtown, developing land use and design guidelines, preparing a Master Plan for Fanno Creek park and the public, determination of the feasibility of the Urban Creek Corridor, and refining the traffic circulation plan for the downtown. At the same time as work is being done on the above strategic planning projects, staff will be talking with property owners to build consensus on the overall strategy for the downtown. Chair Dirksen advised that the City Council, acting as the City Center Development Agency, has previously reviewed the Strategy and took part in earlier discussions. This is something the City Center Development Agency August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 3 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u has been reviewing for a considerable amount of time; tonight the Strategy is before the City Center Development Agency in its final form for approval. Director Wilson commented that in every endeavor that is as complex as this one is, there will be slightly different visions on how to approach a project such as this. Given the recent public issues regarding some of the conflicts experienced, Director Wilson pointed out that the issues were not with the substance of the program so much as it was management style. Director Wilson said he thought this was a good plan and that he hoped it is successful. Director Woodruff said it was great to see the substantive issues identified in the Plan. Previously, discussions have been in generalities; this Plan fleshes out some of the specific tasks and projects that can be done in the next one to three years. The Plan gives specificity and illustrations about what the Downtown could look like if everything comes to fruition. He urged people to view the Plan on the City's website. Councilor Harding concurred with comments already made. She said that the Community Development staff did a good job putting the document together. She encouraged the public to take a look at the Plan on the website to see how this will take shape. She also referred to previous public discussions regarding the Plan. Mayor Dirksen noted the Plan was posted online as part of the packet information for tonight's meeting. After adoption, the Plan will be posted on the City's website where it can be easily found. Assistant City Manager Newton said a few hard copies would be available for people who do not have access to the Internet and suggested they call and request a copy. Council considered CCDA Resolution No. 06-01: A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE TIGARD DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AS THE DOCUMENT TO GUIDE POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE DOWNTOWN Adjournment of Meeting adjourned at 7:36 p.m. Motion by Director Harding, CCDA Meeting seconded by Director Wilson, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a -unanimous vote of City August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 4 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Center Development Agency members present. Chair Dirksen Yes Director Harding Yes Director Wilson Yes Director Woodruff Yes City Council 1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the City Council and the Business Meeting Local Contract Review Board to Order at 7:37 p.m. 1.2 Council Present: Mayor Dirksen, Councilors Harding, Wilson, and Woodruff. 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports Councilor Harding reported that there was a Washington County Coordinating Committee Meeting on August 7, 2006. The County is discussing a Traffic Impact Fee. The City of Sherwood indicated the County was interested in possibly having their own Traffic Impact Fee in a different format. Several computation methods have been discussed. A gas tax has also been under consideration. The Corporate Business Alliance had a fairly successful trip to Washington DC as had, in the past, County Chair Brian and County Commissioner Rogers. The WCCC is discussing a two-day trip to Washington to DC as well as partnering with local businesses to lobby for transportation funds. JPACT will be meeting on Thursday, August 10. Mayor Dirksen advised that last week he attended an activity called "Envision Oregon" in downtown Portland. This workshop was hosted by a large group of organizations, which included the Oregon Homebuilders Association and 1000 Friends of Oregon. The workshop was put on for the benefit of the Governor's Task Force on Land Use. Mayor Dirksen noted that Steve Clark from Tigard and Lake Oswego Mayor Judie Hammerstad serve on this Task Force. Similar workshops are being hosted around the State of Oregon during this summer to gather input for the Task Force to use as they consider and make recommendations to the Governor and Legislature on land use, planning, and potential changes. This was a very "hands on" workshop whereby a lot of information, attitudes August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 5 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u and views were gathered for use by the Task Force. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None 2. Citizen - Mark Padgett, 12974 SW Princeton Lane, Tigard, OR Assistant City Manager Communications 97223, offered congratulations to the Mayor on his Newton advised staff would "imminent reelection." review the wording with regard to Planning Mr. Padgett said he wanted to mention an issue that has Commission membership and come to the forefront because of what is now occurring report back to City Council in the unincorporated area. He said that both he and within the next two weeks. Councilor Wilson are former members of the City Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is mandated by State law, but the membership and makeup of the Planning Commission is under the purview of the City Council. Mr. Padgett noted that current Planning Commission members can include up to two people who do not live inside the City of Tigard. Mr. Padgett said the theory behind this was to have people who live within the "area of interest" be able to have some say in how planning is coordinated since that area would likely come into the City of Tigard; however, this is probably no longer the case. In general, this means that there could be people on the Planning Commission who do not own property within the City and are not City residents, sitting in on quasi- judicial hearings, making what is, in effect, law for the City of Tigard. Mr. Padgett said these land use decisions go into the Code and include Comprehensive Plan Amendments, which become part of the City Code. He said he does not think he is the only one who now feels uncomfortable with having people from outside the City who will either be in another City or remain in an unincorporated area making law for the citizens of Tigard at a municipal level. Mr. Padgett suggested the City Council change the Planning Commission membership policy and limit membership to property owners and/or residents of the City of Tigard. He said the Council might want to "grandfather" in the people who are now serving on the Planning Commission. Mr. Padgett said he did not feel "too badly" about city- owned property possibly ending inside the new City, because this property will require their City services without "us" contributing to their tax base. "So, let them see how it feels for a change." August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 6 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Mayor Dirksen said he thought Mr. Padgett's point regarding Planning Commission membership was well taken. Councilor Wilson noted he wrote a letter recently to Representative Krummel and pointed out that Tigard has always had members from Bull Mountain on our Boards and Committees. He said he agreed with Mr. Padgett that it is inappropriate to have people from another City serving on our Planning Commission. Mr. Padgett noted he was especially concerned because the Planning Commission makes laws. Councilor Wilson said there has been a "sea change" in the Urban Services Agreement and a shift in 20 years of policy and it is time for us to catch up. - Gretchen Buchner, 13249 SW 136th Place, Tigard, Oregon, added to Mr. Padgett's comments that there are business and property owners within the City of Tigard who are not residents. She said that it was common for cities to allow people who own property who are not residents to serve on the Planning Commission. Ms. Buchner raised an issue regarding the Planning Commission. She noted that on tonight's Consent Agenda alternate Jeremy Vermilyea will be appointed to the Planning Commission. Mr. Vermilyea is the last alternate and it is likely the City will be losing one or two additional Commissioners by the end of the year. She recommended City Council direct staff to immediately begin looking for replacements. She added that it would be a good idea to name a couple of alternates so they can "get up to speed" before they are appointed. Mayor Dirksen said he has already started talking to the City's Volunteer Coordinator to publish an advertisement for applicants. Ms. Buchner suggested that membership be focused more on those who are "professionals" in the business. She noted the current public members are great members, but there is a need for members who have expertise in planning, legal, or architecture. Mayor Dirksen said he thought the Charter stipulates some requirements for membership and that the City Council would follow those guidelines. In response to a comment from Councilor Woodruff, Ms. Buchner said she would like to discuss how to retain Planning Commission members in a "different environment." August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 7 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u - David Mielke, 600 Hidden Ridge, Irving, TX 75038, National Municipal Affairs Manager with Verizon introduced himself and Mr. Richard Stuart, Associate General Counsel for Verizon. Mr. Mielke said they would like to provide public testimony on Agenda Item 5 regarding revisions to the Tigard Municipal Code for a right-of-way usage fee. After brief discussion with the Council, Mayor Dirksen advised Mr. Mielke that he would be given an opportunity to speak to the City Council. In response to a question from Legal Counsel Firestone, Mr. Mielke advised he would only like to speak during Agenda Item No. 5; Agenda Item No. 6 did not propose changes to the Tigard Municipal Code that were of concern to Verizon. Councilor Harding asked a follow-up question regarding Mr. Padgett's comments. She referred to his statement regarding the Planning Commission amending Code. Assistant City Manager Newton confirmed that amendments to the Development Code are placed before the City Council for final action; the Planning Commission forwards its recommendations on such amendments. Councilor Wilson noted the Commission does make quasi-judicial land use decisions, which are final unless appealed. 3. Consent Agenda Mayor Dirksen reviewed the Consent Agenda: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor 3.1 A pprove Council Minutes for June 20, 27, July 6 and Woodruff, to approve the 11, 2006 Consent Agenda. 3.2 R eceive and File: The motion was approved by a. Council Calendar a unanimous vote of Council b. Council Meeting Tentative Agendas present. 3.3 D esignate the Planning Commission as the Mayor Dirksen Yes Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee - Councilor Harding Yes Resolution No. 06-46 Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes A RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PROCESS 3.4 Appoint Jeremy Vemvlyea to the Planning Commission - Resolution No. 06-47 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JEREMY VERMII,YEA AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 8 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u 3.5 Approve Budget Amendment #1 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Sanitary Sewer Division for Purchase of a Replacement Backhoe - Resolution No. 06-48 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #1 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SANITARY SEWER DIVISION FOR PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT BACKHOE 3.6 A pprove Budget Amendment #2 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Parks Capital Projects for Purchase and Installation of a Play Structure at Northview Park - Resolution No. 06-49 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #2 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE PARKS CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM FOR PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF A PLAY STRUCTURE AT NORTHVIEW PARK 3.7 A pprove Budget Amendment #3 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Stormwater Capital Projects for Funding of the Water Building Remodel - Resolution No. 06-50 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #1 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE WATER, SANITARY SEWER, AND STORMWATER CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGETS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM FOR FUNDING OF THE WATER BUILDING REMODEL 3.8 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for Design Services for Phase 2 (Commercial Street Streetscape) of the Tigard Downtown Comprehensive Streetscape Design to OTAK, Inc. b. Award Contract for the Construction of the Tualatin River Trail to RC Landworks, Inc. C. Reject Bids for the Construction of Hall Boulevard Sidewalk 4. Public Hearin Ma or Dirksen opened the public hearing. Motion b Councilor August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 9 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u (Quasi judicial) to Woodruff, seconded by Consider the Legal Counsel Firestone read a prepared statement Councilor Wilson, to adopt Annexation of the regarding the quasi judicial procedure to be followed Ordinance No. 06-10, with the Rider Property for this hearing. Copies of this statement were amendments noted by staff. (ZCA 2006-00001) available at the entry of the meeting room and a copy is on file in the City Recorder's office. Discussion on the motion followed. Councilor Harding Mayor Dirksen asked for Declarations or Challenges. asked about whether there was Councilor Harding noted she has driven by the site. any way to prevent All members of City Council present indicated they development should the were familiar with the application. There were no property be annexed with the challenges from the audience pertaining to the zoning as it is now. Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter nor was there Community Development a challenge to the participation of any member of Director Coffee noted the Council. annexation was being done to facilitate prevention of a Community Development Director Coffee introduced potential health hazard on this Associate Planner Eng who presented the staff report property. The sewer to the City Council. Ms. Eng advised the applicants connection was made with the were the Tigard-Tualatin School District 23J and Mrs. understanding that the Alberta Rider, represented by Ivlilstead & Associates. property would be annexed. The applicants request annexation of 1.26 acres into the The development of the City of Tigard to connect to sewer. She referred to a property is separate from the map and noted the proposed territory, located on the act of annexation. It would be south side of Bull Mountain Road and east of SW 133,4 difficult to approve property Avenue, includes one residential parcel with the address limitations, which require 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road. The proposed negotiation with the property territory will be zoned R-7 upon annexation. The owner. Mayor Dirksen said he proposed territory is an island of unincorporated thought that because the territory contiguous to the City of Tigard on four sides. property was already inside the The territory is adjacent to SW Bull Mountain Road on Urban Growth Boundary and the northern boundary and borders the Alberta Rider already zoned for urban School on three sides. ORS Chapter 222 provides for development, whether it is annexation of contiguous territory and of islands. Staff annexed to the City or not notified all affected agencies and interested parties as would not impact the ability required, and received no objections to the proposal. for the property to be Affected agencies, including City departments, did not developed. Legal Counsel indicate that serving the proposed territory would Firestone agreed that the reduce their capacity to provide services to the entire Mayor's statement was City and to the unincorporated areas they already serve. essentially accurate; when annexed it will have the City's Ms. Eng advised that the applicable review criteria are zoning and arguably if it were ORS Chapter 222, Metro Code Chapter 3.09, City of left in the County it could be Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 10, Community developed "more densely." Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390. Once annexed and within the City's jurisdiction, the City Staff reviewed the proposal for compliance with the could participate in applicable review criteria and found the proposal meets discussions about preserving the criteria. Staff findings are detailed in the Staff the property as mentioned. Report, also referred to as Exhibit D. Mayor Dirksen noted the City would especially in a good August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 10 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Ms. Eng advised there were two scrivener's errors on position if it could obtain the Page 2, Section 1 of the ordinance. The word "parcels" "right to first refusal" and should be changed to "parcel." thereby gain direct control to prevent any kind of Public Testimony: Mayor Dirksen asked if there was a development. Councilor representative of the applicant present. A member of Wilson noted that this is the audience indicated they were representing the effectively the School applicant, but did not wish to speak. District's property. Legal Counsel Firestone said that if No public testimony was offered. the property is developed, it would likely be school Ms. Eng advised that the staff recommends approval of oriented. Mayor Dirksen said ZCA 2006-00001 by adoption of the ordinance Ms. it may well be that the School Eng advised she had a copy of the corrected version of District would be interested in the ordinance for the City Council regarding the entering to a partnership with scrivener's error she noted earlier in her verbal staff the City to create a historic site report to the City Council. She identified the as it would make an excellent corrections on Page 2, Section 1, where two uses of the educational tool. This would word "parcels" should be changed to "parcel." be something for a future discussion. Mayor Dirksen Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. said he thought the issue of development, whether the Council discussion followed. property is in the City or not, is moot as to its exposure to Mayor Dirksen said the subject property has a house on development. it. The lady who resides there is a long-time resident of the Tigard community; in fact, her residence pre-dates Mayor Dirksen asked if there the Tigard community and is a log cabin. Mayor was any further discussion. Dirksen suggested that if the annexation is approved, There being none, a roll-call the City approach Mrs. Rider to determine if she would vote was taken. consider having her residence named a historic building in the City of Tigard. He also said he would like to see The motion was approved by this home preserved in perpetuity and to ask her for a unanimous vote of Council right of first refusal if at any time she wishes to sell her present. property so the City could acquire it to maintain as a historical property. Councilor Harding said she also Mayor Dirksen Yes thought of this and said she wondered how much Councilor Harding Yes interest the School District has in the property. Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Harding said it was her understanding that Councilor Woodruff Yes Mrs. Rider sold her property so that homes would not be developed. Councilor Harding said she was not Mayor Dirksen welcomed really in favor of having this property zoned R-7. Mrs. Rider to the City. Mayor Dirksen asked if there was an alternative zoning that could be used, which would "come under the heading of preservation" to allow or require preservation. Community Development Director Coffee responded that if you get into historical designations for preservation you might encounter a problem, because you would deprive the owner of another use. Community Development Director Coffee said he would recommend the home be named August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 11 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u as a historic structure and to seek the cooperation of the owner to preserve it. Mayor Dirksen asked that if the zoning were to be changed, then this would be putting a burden on the owner? Community Development Director Coffee said, "Right, the R-7 zoning is a standard residential zone. We don't have zones per se for preservation this is probably the most efficient zone, given the circumstances. But, I think negotiations with the property owner would get you to where you want to go." Mayor Dirksen asked if the property owner were to consent to the historic overlay that in itself would preserve the property from development, would it not? Legal Counsel Firestone said it would not absolutely preclude development, but it would create a process for any changes. Mayor Dirksen said he would like to see the historic designation be pursued with Mrs. Rider's consent. Legal Counsel Firestone said it is his understanding that the School District would need to be involved in that Mrs. Rider retains a life estate. Mayor Dirksen recommended that a dialogue be begun immediately after the annexation is processed. Mayor Dirksen noted that Mrs. Rider is the namesake of the school property that surrounds her home and she is certainly a person of importance in the City of Tigard. Councilor Woodruff said that because annexation carries with it emotional tones these days, he asked for clarification from staff that this is a non-controversial annexation that has been requested by the owner and does not infringe on any other interests that people might have on this piece of property. Community Development Director Coffee said Mrs. Rider requested that her property remain outside of the City when the school property was annexed. Circumstances on the property have required her to request a sewer connection and that requires annexation. Mrs. Rider and the School District have consented to the annexation. Community Development Director Coffee noted the lack public comment tonight and no negative comments. Council considered the proposed ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 06-10 - AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING 1.26 ACRES, APPROVING RIDER ANNEXATION (ZCA2006-00001), AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 12 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT; WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT #1, AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT 5. Consider Right-of-Way Administrator Werner reviewed the staff Motion by Councilor Revisions to the report. Woodruff, seconded by Tigard Municipal Councilor Wilson, to adopt Code Incorporating The ordinance will incorporate a right-of-way usage fee Ordinance No. 06-11 as a Right-of-Way into the Tigard Municipal Code. The usage fee will be amended. Councilor Usage Fee a fee for maintenance of the right of way by utilities Woodruff clarified the where there is no franchise agreement in effect. The amendment is the amendment fee is set at the current franchise fee rate so it would be read by Legal Counsel revenue neutral. Therefore, if a utility has a franchise Firestone. fee it would be deducted from the right-of-way fee and no money would be owed. Exceptions would apply to City water and sewer, which are currently not paying a Mayor Dirksen said that he franchise fee; therefore, this will be a new fee. This thinks this ordinance will be of ordinance would ensure payment to the City in the great benefit to the City as a absence of a franchise agreement. Ms. Werner noted way to utilize our existing there now exists a couple of situations where there is rights of way in a more no franchise agreement in effect, so this is a way to efficient manner. clarify that fees are to be paid if a franchise agreement is not in effect. Motion was approved by a majority vote of City Council Ms. Werner advised of additional issues addressed in present. the ordinance: Mayor Dirksen Yes 1. The franchising and right-of-way use obligations - Councilor Harding No the current Code requires a franchise for utilities in the Councilor Wilson Yes right of way. The amendment will clarify that if the Councilor Woodruff Yes utility is in the right of way without a franchise, they are subject to the provisions of the Code. If the utility does enter into a franchise agreement, the terms of franchise may vary from the Code; the franchise will "control." 2. Permitting and construction requirements. Previously, the City had a telecommunications ordinance that had some permitting and construction standards within it, and there was also a "work in the right of way" section that applied more generally with some inconsistent standards. All requirements are now being moved into one chapter so it will be clear about work in the right of way. Ms. Werner advised that staff has talked with many utilities on this matter. A draft of the proposed changes was sent to all of the current franchisees and other users of the right of way. Comments were received from Verizon, MCI, NW Natural, and Clean August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 13 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Water Services. Ms. Werner referred to an e-mail communication from Bruce Griswold of Clean Water Services, which is on file in the City Recorder's office. The Clean Water Services e-mail said: "It is the understanding of Clean Water Services that adoption of the revised Franchise Utility Ordinance now under consideration by the Tigard city Council will in no way impact the remittances otherwise due from the City of Tigard to Clean Water Services, under the current Intergovernmental Agreement between the two parties. It is the District's further understanding that the Franchise Fee and Right-of-Way Usage Fee (specifically sections 15.06.090 and 15.06.100) do not apply and will not be applied to Clean Water Services." Ms. Werner said the reason this would not apply to Clean Water Services is because special districts and County service districts are not subject to the franchising or the developer usage fee portion of the Code. In response to a question from Mayor Dirksen, Ms. Werner said she was in agreement with the above statement made by Clean Water Services. Councilor Woodruff noted the previous discussions on this matter. He referenced that by applying this to City water and sewer would allow a way for those funds to be used for operational purposes and to have more flexibility. He said it was his recollection that he said he would be in favor of this if it did not result in a rate increase to residents. He said he did not see anything in the proposed ordinance that says anything about not increasing sewer and water rates. Ms. Werner said it was her understanding that there will not be a rate increase immediately; in the future, it is a possibility. She noted it was her understanding that when this went through the budget process, no rate increase was intended to occur immediately. Councilor Wilson asked if Ms. Werner was saying that ultimately we will have some substantial infrastructure needs such as new water sources, etc., which would require the City to raise rates sooner than we would have without what is, in effect, a transfer of money to the General Fund. Councilor Harding said she thinks this is confusing because what Councilor Wilson is referring to is a right- of-way fee on the water utility. She said the reason for the provision is to shift money to the General Fund, and it would not necessarily be used for water infrastructure. While she said she was not really in favor of it, this Council authorized three water rate August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 14 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u increases of 7 percent per year for the next three years. It does not appear that this will be enough and there will end up being water revenue bonding to pay for infrastructure needs. She says the way she looks at this ordinance is "when people say it frees up money, it doesn't free up money. What it does is add some fat or cream that we can move around in the General Fund. It wouldn't stay in the water fund; it wouldn't stay in these other funds. And, when we discussed it at this table before, I was concerned about water and sewer. And, I was told, `Well, it's going to be revenue neutral, it's not changing.' So, yes, on this paper that we have here, it shows it will add a substantial increase ...$287,000 a year ...it isn't necessarily a rate increase, but it is a fee on top of the rate, if you will. It goes to our constituency ...just like the franchise fee..." Mayor Dirksen observed that the money would transfer out of the fund, but people's bill would not be raised. Councilor Woodruff noted that Councilor Wilson's point was that as water expenses increase, this would "add to that pot" and at some point, there will have to be a rate increase. The question is, if we do this, will the rate increase have to come sooner than it would without it. Councilor Wilson noted we carry a surplus; we have a fund balance that is carried over from year to year in the water and sewer funds because we will eventually have increases in costs. On the other hand, our General Fund is in a tighter situation and we have taken steps to enhance the General Fund revenues through fees and charges over the years. Eventually we will have to have a local option levy. Councilor Harding agreed with Councilor Wilson and noted that a $287,000 increase will probably not negate the need for something "like that" and if we keep adding "all of these small little fees ...I'm told I can't call a tax, but to me it's a tax, then when it comes time when we do really need... say... the constituency or electorate wants to have something for parks more than what we have through SDC's...what position does that leave us in? We have to look at the overall big picture..." Councilor Harding pointed out the property tax limitations, which affects funding at the state level and also impacts schools. She referred to densities, lack of infrastructure in schools, and that new people are subsidizing old. She said she thought most taxpayers would be more in favor of bringing parity and fairness to the tax base than to keep adding a bunch of new little fees. It is not something that will be solved "overnight." She said she was not in agreement or a August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 15 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u "big fan" of this process - it's not as good as it could be. She also noted that Tigard is considering a gas tax. Mayor Dirksen said he thought there were several views on where revenue should come from. He noted the City convened a citizen task force several years ago to look at potential revenue sources. One of the questions we asked them first was, "Are we providing the right services - are we spending money where we shouldn't or are we spending money where we should?" The answer we got back was, "Yes, you are spending the money in the right places." And, when we asked them about when we do not have enough revenue for all those services, where should we go to get more revenue. When we suggested a bond or a levy, one of the things we heard from citizens was, "Before you go to that extent, look for other sources of revenue first and utilize all those sources first." Councilor Harding questioned whether they meant fees. Mayor Dirksen said this ordinance would allow transfer of money from funds to where those dollars can be used for right-of-way maintenance. Water and sewer activities have impact on streets and the right-of- way, but the money is tied up in those funds and is not usable for that maintenance. By charging our own utilities the same fee that we charge other utilities, it frees up that money so that it can be used to mitigate the impacts from those utilities. Councilor Harding pointed out that a lot of that will be passed back onto taxpayers and ratepayers. Councilor Woodruff asked if it was possible to separate the city utilities out from the ordinance to be considered separately and discussed. Mayor Dirksen and Councilor Wilson noted this has already been discussed. Ms. Werner said the discussion occurred during the budget meetings and the proposed ordinance is the means for implementing what was decided during the budget process. Legal Counsel Firestone affirmed for Ms. Werner that the two issues could be separated. Councilor Woodruff said he was in favor of doing this as long as it does not have a rate increase. He said, "I hear you say, `Not immediately,' but that creates a little concern about what that means. There is nothing in here at all that says anything about that." Ms. Werner said she thought that if got to a point where a rate increase would be required, part of the discussion about whether to raise rates might be, "Do we want to amend the Code again to eliminate this, or reduce this?" She said she could not say there won't be an rate increases, but if it does et to that August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 16 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u point there certainly is the ability to look at this and "lower it or eliminate it." Mayor Dirksen noted that when there are rate increases for water or sewer, the fundamental reason for those increases is because we are charged more for the sewer or water and we are forced to pass that cost through to our residents. The ability to utilize that money in a way that we need to use it in the City - that's the issue here. The issue is not whether or not people are paying more or less money. Mayor Dirksen said, "Whether you pay $5 into the water fee or you pay $5 into the General Fund for street maintenance, it's still $5...paying it in to one or the other, there's no net difference to our citizens..." Councilor Wilson noted, "Except in the sense that by keeping it in the water fund, you are effectively putting it in the bank in a savings account and it won't be spent this year." Councilor Harding said, "You still have to add to it. Because you cannot skim off what is already set in that water rate and what's being collected." Mayor Dirksen agreed, at present we cannot. He said what was stated during the budget process, "...at this point there would be no need to increase the rate to cover this fee." Ms. Werner reiterated she does not want to say, "There will be no rate increase, because when this went through in the budget process, part of it was that this will not lead to a rate increase. If that changes... then that is something we can all look at and decide, Do we want to approve a rate increase; is the rate increase caused by this or is it some other outside force...' This is, again, a means of implementing the decision that was made in the budget process." Councilor Woodruff said he thought there was going to be a budget note or something in the ordinance that would highlight the fact that before there would be a rate increase, we would consider this again to see whether or not we wanted to continue that five percent fee. If there is a different Council when this issue comes up then there should be a re-discussion triggered about whether or not the five percent fee continues to be appropriate. Mayor Dirksen asked if Councilor Woodruff was recommending that a statement be added to the ordinance. Councilor Woodruff said he would have no problem voting for the ordinance if a statement were added. August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 17 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Councilor Harding said the ordinance gives the Council the authority to change the fees and do "whatever" without a vote of the people. Legal Counsel Firestone said amendment language could be prepared tonight and added to the ordinance that is before the Council for consideration. Another option would be direct staff to prepare draft language and delay Council consideration. After additional discussion, draft language was prepared by the City Attorney and presented to the Council later in the meeting as it considered the proposed ordinance. Mayor Dirksen asked Mr. David Mielke, Verizon National Municipal Affairs Manager to address the Council (see Citizen Communications). Mr. Mielke said he was accompanied by Mr. Richard Stuart, Verizon Assistant General Counsel. He noted Verizon representatives have reviewed proposed changes to TMC 15.06 and have several comments. He thanked Nancy Werner, Gus Duenas and Gary Firestone for their efforts and professionalism in working with Verizon in development of the ordinance. He noted appreciation for all of the assistance staff has provided in the last two years for their project in the City of Tigard. Mr. Mielke said they had several concerns about the proposed ordinance. The concerns are of a legal, operational, and practical nature. He asked Council to postpone any decision on the ordinance to afford City staff, Verizon, and other utilities additional time to resolve the concerns. He said they have been working on resolution of these concerns with staff and have language to present. Mr. Mielke addressed the following specific sections of the ordinance: 1. Requiring a right-of-way user that has an expired franchise fee engaged in renewal negotiations to be subject to the terms of the ordinance. 2. The franchise application fee. 3. Lease capacity reporting requirements. 4. Audit, notice and fees. 5. Relocation. 6. Removal of facilities due to an expired franchise. 7. Notice for appeals in the curing of ordinance violations. Mr. Mielke said under Section 15.06.050 which speaks of the franchise required, Verizon requests subsection 1 August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 18 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u be clarified in the ordinance to apply to any new entrants that have not previously had a franchise with the City and to not be applicable to entities that have an expired franchise, which is actively engaged in negotiations. Verizon has an expired franchise with the City and is abiding by the terms and conditions of the franchise, including payment of fees. Also, Verizon is engaged in franchise renewal discussions with the staff. Mr. Mielke said with respect to Section 15.06.190, the franchise application fee, Verizon is not subject to the required application fee because Verizon pays a privilege tax to the City; such application is expressly not allowed under ORS 221.515, which provides that the telecommunications carrier shall not be required to pay fees in addition to the privilege tax. Therefore, Verizon requests an exemption from the application fee in accordance with ORS 221.518. Mr. Mielke referred to the proposed ordinance Section 15.06.160, leased capacity. With respect to this section, Verizon asks for this section to be deleted as Verizon cannot provide this information since it would violate the confidentiality requirements of open contracts. The requirement is unrelated to the management of the right of way and is an attempt to manage the business operations of a telecommunications provider, and the requirement may also be pre-empted by the Oregon Public Utilities Commission. Mr. Mielke spoke to the issue of the duty to provide information relating to audit fees. Verizon requests modification of this section to require actual receipt of notice prior to the time period beginning for provisioning of records. With respect to audit fees, under Section 15.06.170 3.: The audits should be conducted by a disinterested party, not an audit firm whose compensation is tied to the outcome of the audit. Requirement of an entity to pay audit fees due to an alleged underpayment of fees may also bias an audit, especially if the audit fees are based on a percentage of the findings. In addition, Verizon believes that any audit fees exceed the requirement of ORS 221.515 as previously discussed and, therefore, should not be applicable to telecommunication carriers. As a compromise, Verizon offered alternative language where repeat offenders will not be subject to audit fees and first-time offenders that are not negligent or fraudulent will also not be subject to the fees. Mr. Mielke then addressed 15.06.260, relocation or August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 19 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u removal of facilities. The requirements of this section are the most problematic to Verizon. Verizon has provided three alternatives to change this section. One alternative was based on a recently passed ordinance in Troutdale. Verizon recognizes its responsibility to relocate facilities for road grade, paving, repairing or improving. Verizon also recognizes responsibility to relocate its facilities for City-owned water and sewer facilities. However, under state statute and Oregon Public Utility Rules, Verizon does not relocate its facilities at its cost for aesthetic purposes or relocation for non-roadway structures, for relocations that are necessitated for the benefit of a private party or other proprietary nature - whether public or private - and for relocations resulting from the vacation of a right of way. As drafted, the City could request Verizon to relocate facilities at its cost, which Verizon has not previously been required. Verizon would have no choice but to oppose any such relocations. The requirement is unfair. Mr. Mielke said that under section 15.06.280, removal of abandoned facilities, Verizon and other utilities as providers of last resort are mandated by the Oregon Public Utility Commission to continually provide service whether or not a franchise has expired. Only the Oregon Public Utility Commission has the authority to require Verizon to remove their facilities in instances which would result in discontinuance of service within the City of Tigard. Any requirements of this nature by the City to remove facilities and discontinue service would be pre-empted by the Public Utility Commission's mandatory service requirements. Mr. Mielke referred to section 15.06.300, appeals, and 15.06.330, notice and cure. Verizon requests that these sections be changed by adding "receipt of prior to notice in order to ensure that a utility has received the notice prior to the start of any time period. Alternatively, Verizon has requested the City add a requirement that these types of notices be sent by certified mail to ensure receipt. Mr. Mielke requests that the City Council postpone any decision on the ordinance until City staff, Verizon, and other utilities resolve these matters. Councilor Woodruff asked if all the suggestions presented by Mr. Mielke been reviewed by staff? Ms. Werner advised that staff has seen these suggestions and reviewed them with Mr. Mielke and the City August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 20 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Attorney. Legal Counsel Firestone confirmed these same issues have been raised and reviewed. Councilor Woodruff asked if the areas where the attorney thought there was room for compromise available have already been incorporated into the proposed ordinance. Ms. Werner said, "yes." Councilor Harding asked if staff didn't think it was appropriate to send certified mail. Ms. Werner said that this would be a good practice to have; however, she questioned whether it would be desirable to have it mandated within the Code. Councilor Harding noted there was another project on a street near her where it was a "he said, she said" situation and she does not think it is unreasonable to include this language requiring certified mail. This way, there is proof that they have been given notice. Mr. Stuart, Assistant General Counsel with Verizon, addressed the City Council. He said he represents Verizon throughout the western region and has been involved in a lot of issues where notices have been sent. He advised that they are a big organization and receipt of notice is sometimes a problem in that notices have been sent to the wrong addresses. In the past ten years he said he has been involved in two significant disputes and both centered on whether or not they had received notice. He said that had not received notice in either situation. Both matters were litigated and cost the City and a PUD a lot of money; ultimately Verizon prevailed in these cases. He said they are good citizens and abide by the rules. If they receive a notice about an issue, they will correct it. If they disagree, then they will talk to "you." When something is mailed and it is not received - it is a problem. When you mail by certified mail and get a returned receipt, you know that someone has received it. If you do not get a receipt back, then you know there is a problem. For a very small amount of money, you can make sure that the notice is received and eliminate problems that will follow if the notice is not received. Legal Counsel Firestone said that he and City staff have been reluctant to start the time period from receipt because, "We know when we send it, we don't always know when it's received We've built in some additional time to the period so that it goes from the date the notice is sent, taking into account that it might take up to four days for it to be received." He said in his view it is problematical to start the period from receipt. If the Council wanted to required certified August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 21 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u mail, then that is a different issue. Mayor Dirksen said he agreed with Legal Counsel Firestone, since there is no way of the City knowing when the receipt took place. Councilor Harding suggested there be follow up; for example, if the City has not heard anything within ten days, then she hoped that staff would initiate a follow up. She said there are times when items are not received for some reason. Councilor Wilson said he thought the request for certified mail was reasonable. Mayor Dirksen asked whether certified mail should be part of the ordinance or should it be a policy. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said this a good practice to have with regard to sending certified mail, but by putting it into the Code then if something is sent by certified mail and received, it would then not be "proper notice." Contacts about any issue might be required to be sent as certified mail. Councilor Harding said she often sends items certified mail with a return receipt requested, so she then knows the item was delivered. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said her personal practice is to send a certified mail notice. Councilor Woodruff noted that Verizon has a number of other issues Mr. Mielke cited tonight. He noted City staff has indicted these issues have been reviewed and there is disagreement. Councilor Woodruff said he did not think each issue should be debated. In response to an inquiry from Councilor Woodruff, Mr. Stuart advised they did not travel to Tigard from out of state for this issue only; they were in the area for other business reasons. He said he appreciated the opportunity to participate in the discussion on the ordinance before it is considered for adoption. He said they wanted to make sure that the City Council knew that Verizon was not in agreement with the ordinance in its entirety. Councilor Woodruff said that to some degree the whole reason for the ordinance is because the City has not be been able to get a franchise agreement signed with Verizon. There are many complaints about contractors who do not do adequate work, which has led the decision to codify the requirements. Mr. Stuart responded that they had been involved with the discussions on this ordinance for quite some time. He said if there are problems with a contractor, Verizon wants to know about it. One way to assure they have been contacted is to send notice in a manner such as certified mail. Mr. Stuart said they were before the City Council tonight because the want to improve and August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 22 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u maintain relationships. Councilor Wilson noted there are two issues. One is the fiber optics installation, which is disruptive; however he noted his appreciation to Verizon for selecting Washington County as one its first areas to serve. The other issue, and the bigger issue, is the concept of franchise fees in general and Verizon, more than any other utility has opposed franchise fees on principle. He said he is trying to determine whether the objections that were listed tonight - are they fine- tuning requirements or are they attempts to be obstructionist? This is a case where the City is looking at this ordinance because franchise fees are, next to property taxes, our largest source of general fund revenue. There are efforts underway, even at the national level, to preempt cities' rights to collect franchise fees thereby necessitating changes such as this to the municipal code. Mr. Stuart said they if their presence tonight is being perceived as being obstructionist, then he apologized. The purpose for being before the Council is to make a better, workable franchise. He advised there were no issues about Verizon paying the fees. He noted similar concerns expressed about city taxpayers paying for the fees if water and sewer utilities are charged a fee insofar as they would pass along these costs to the customer. Legal Counsel Firestone advised one of the main purposes of the ordinance was to clearly provide that the ordinance would apply to an expired franchise because the status is unclear once a franchise has expired. Application of the ordinance can be avoided by an extension of the old franchise agreement. Right- of-Way Administrator Werner noted that Verizon has "come to the table" to negotiate its franchise agreement; however, another telecom company has not responded to calls or letters. Legal Counsel Firestone said he disagreed with Verizon's interpretation that an application fee places a limit on the percentage of tax on certain types of income. He said that Verizon has a lot of sources of income. Legal Counsel Firestone commented on abandoned facilities. He said he did not think there was any intent to require an actively operating franchisee to remove facilities that are in use or likely to be use in the future. August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 23 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u The removal of abandoned facilities provision was intended to apply when facilities are actually abandoned and will no longer be used. It might make a difference as to the specific location whether or not the City will require removal and there will be process in place for application of this section. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner advised an amendment had been made to this section in response to comments. Councilor Wilson asked for clarification in that he said it would probably be difficult to have a utility remove abandoned facilities since it is likely that the utility has gone out of business. He also asked why we would want to dig up roads to remove the facilities. Legal Counsel Firestone said it was understanding the City would have a different attitude - depending on whether the facilities were above ground or below ground. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said there is a potential circumstance where there is "so much stuff' in the right of way and there is a need to remove what is not being used. Councilor Wilson asked about the requirement to relocate facilities. He noted there is a process where developers are charged a fee to underground utilities. Would this new language give the City the authority to require existing utilities to be placed underground? Right-of-Way Administrator Werner advised the proposed language is the language being used in the telecom ordinance. She advised that "relocation" is slightly different than "undergrounding." Relocation is taking an aerial facility and moving it to another location where it still is an aerial facility or an underground facility is moved to a different underground location. There was discussion on relocation for aesthetic purposes. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said the Code says the utility must relocate at their expense when it is necessary for public improvements or when it is otherwise in the public interest. She said that aesthetics might not be construed to be in the "public interest." Mr. Firestone said, "Although that is usually the justification for undergrounding aesthetics. But my understanding of Verizon's concerns... `public interest' is not sufficiently narrow. I think the main concern has to do with when relocations are required associated with development and when it is simply a City project. If it is a City project, my understanding is that Verizon has absolutely no concerns with the fact that they will have to relocate facilities. Their concern, as I recall, was when a development comes in and there's also a City project and the two kind of happen together - question August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 24 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u whether that's at the request of the developer, in which case the developer is responsible, or whether it's a City project, in which case Verizon and other utilities would be responsible for the cost of relocation. And, the City's position has traditionally been, if it's a development project, development pays. But, there is a certain amount of gray area that the City and Verizon has not been able to come to full agreement as to how to express it." Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said that the Code does say that if it is a private development, private development pays and the utility does not have move anything until a deposit is received for those expenses. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner reminded the Council that if a franchise agreement is reached, the terms can vary from the Code. Therefore, a utility has the ability to come and negotiate for a different provision. Ms. Werner confirmed Councilor Wilson's observation that if the ordinance is adopted, then "they can still then negotiate different terms." The most onerous, therefore, would be the Code language. Legal Counsel Firestone said that any major decision can be appealed. Mayor Dirksen said it appears from the way the Code language is written, the City would have to have a demonstrable need to compel a utility to move their facilities or it would be subject to challenge. Mr. Mielke said it would be tough to negotiate "downward" from the "most onerous" - the Code provisions. Councilor Woodruff asked if comments were received from other utilities and did others have similar concerns as Verizon. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said MCI sent comments that were very similar to Verizon's comments. Comments were also received from NW Natural and some of those comments were incorporated in the language proposed in the ordinance. Ms. Werner said that she sent revisions of the language to all utilities that provided comments to give them a second opportunity to comment. Verizon was the only utility that "took advantage of that," which is why their comments were included in the City Council's packet information. Councilor Harding asked how much time the utilities had to respond. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner said she didn't remember the exact time. She asked Verizon if the had enough time to respond. August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 25 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Representatives indicated yes. Legal Counsel Firestone added that the process has been going on for a long time. Councilor Wilson agreed that this has been discussed for a long time, which is why he feels a little impatient. He said it might not be a bad thing to "try it out." Modifications can be made if something is not working. Councilor Woodruff urged the Verizon representatives to begin dialogue immediately to develop a mutually acceptable franchise agreement if the proposed ordinance is adopted. Mr. Mielke noted discussions have been started and then put on hold until after the modifications to be proposed to the right-of-way ordinance were made by the City. Mayor Dirksen advised this matter was now open for Council consideration. Legal Counsel Firestone suggested the following wording be inserted at the end of 15.06.100 2.: "The right-of-way usage fee percentage for water and sanitary sewer shall be reconsidered by City Council prior to any increase in City water or sanitary sewer rates." Councilor Wilson said that he would not vote "no" if the above language was added, but said these rates are reviewed each year during the budget process. Mayor Dirksen said he likes the idea of adding this language as said it would be a similar situation where a fee or tax is discontinued (sunset clause) or reviewed if it is to be retained. Councilor Harding observed fees rarely go away unless it is something like a bond measure that has been paid off. Mayor Dirksen noted his appreciation to the Verizon representatives for coming in to comment. If the comments were new and had not been considered previously and considered by staff and the City Attorney, then that would be worthy of further consideration. But, because this is not the case, the Mayor said he did not see any reason for the process to be delayed. Councilor Wilson said, It is immensely valuable to put a face behind the company... thanks for coming." Councilor Hardin thanked Verizon for August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 26 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u continuing paying the fee after the expiration of the franchise fee. ORDINANCE NO. 06-11- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RENUMBERING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.14 AND TITLE 15 TO INCORPORATE A RIGHT-OF-WAY USAGE FEE AND CLARIFY FRANCHISE AND RIGHT-OF-WAY USE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL UTILITIES. 6.Consider Revisions Right-of-Way Administrator Werner presented the staff Motion by Councilor Harding, to the Tigard report. seconded by Councilor Wilson, Municipal Code to adopt Ordinance No. 06-12. Incorporating a The proposed ordinance would incorporate a new policy Right-of-Way to limit street cuts on streets that have been newly Preservation and constructed, reconstructed, or improved within the last The motion was approved by a Restoration Policy four years. Some exceptions would apply including unanimous vote of Council emergency circumstances, when there is no other way to present. provide service to a customer, or when cuts are necessary to locate existing utilities when boring under the street. Mayor Dirksen Yes The ordinance could allow street cuts to be made in a Councilor Harding Yes protected street under compelling circumstances with Councilor Wilson Yes conditions imposed by the City Engineer. Another Councilor Woodruff Yes amendment to this section of the Code would improve coordination of construction and prevent multiple large projects on a street within a 12-month period by limiting street cuts on any street, regardless of age, within 400 feet of a major utility installation or upgrade. The City Engineer would be required to set up some guidelines for creating standards for restoring the street if a cut has to be made if an exception is granted. The City Engineer would also be responsible for setting up a list of all streets that are subject to the restoration policy. Staff met with utilities (including Verizon, MCI, NW Natural, Comcast and PGE) on this proposal and sent them a draft ordinance. Some of the utility companies' comments were incorporated into an amended draft. No comments were received on the amended draft. Councilor Woodruff noted he appreciated the work done by staff in response to community concerns. He said he would support its adoption. Mayor Dirksen said the proposed ordinance addresses an issue that has been a "thorn" for some time. He would support even stronger language, but this is a good place to start. Once it has been in place for awhile the City Council might want to revisit to determine if the August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 27 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u ordinance be strengthened without being overly restrictive. Councilor Wilson recalled the discussions about hiring a right-of-way manager. He told Right-of-Way Administrator Werner that he thought she has done a good job and noted his appreciation. Right-of-Way Administrator Werner advised the ordinance has a provision for a three-year review; therefore, after three years, the City Engineer will report on the implementation experience and whether it has been effective. Councilor Woodruff asked that this be monitored closely to determine if stronger wording is needed. ORDINANCE NO. 06-12 -AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.04 TO INCORPORATE A RIGHT-OF- WAY PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION POLICY 7. Continuation of Community Development Director Coffee presented Motion by Councilor Wilson, Public Hearing the staff report. He advised that the hearing was seconded by Councilor (Legislative) from continued from the July 11, 2006 meeting, so staff Woodruff, to adopt Ordinance July 11, 2006 - could visit with potential vendors who might provide No. 06-13. Incidental Uses in this service at the Library. This amendment will also Cultural Institutions apply to other uses within the community. Community Code Amendment Development Director Coffee said that they found out The ordinance was adopted by (DCA 2006-00002) that the Finance staff had negotiated a lease with a a majority vote of City Council vendor in late June. The vendor was aware of this present. proposed amendment and had no reservations about the sign limitations. The only question by the vendor Mayor Dirksen Yes was whether a temporary sign would be allowed during Councilor Harding No the opening days of the operation. Temporary signs Councilor Wilson Yes are allowed for 30 days. Councilor Woodruff Yes Community Development Director Coffee said staff and the Planning Commission recommend City Council adopt the proposed ordinance. In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff, Community Development Director Coffee advised the vendor was not concerned about a sign. Mayor Dirksen noted he needed to officially open the public hearing (continued from June 11, 2006). Community Development Director Coffee reported the coffee vendor is interested in having signage within the Libra lobby, which will be visible from the street August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 28 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u through the window. The vendor did not indicate any concern about signage near the road; although this would now be an option. Mayor Dirksen asked Legal Counsel Firestone a public hearing process question about declarations or challenges. Legal Counsel Firestone asked if there have been any changes since in conflicts or ex parte contacts since the previous hearing date. No conflicts or ex parte contacts were reported. Mayor Dirksen said that when he learned that the new vendor has no issue with the proposed ordinance he questioned whether there was a need to do the ordinance. The Mayor advised, however, there is another issue and noted that the Senior Center has a gift shop sign and this would now be in compliance if the ordinance is adopted. Community Development Director Coffee said the perception of the staff for Library and Finance is that this type of ordinance might be necessary to attract a vendor for this space. Legal Counsel Firestone said the provision is not specific as to what the sign says; it allows an additional sign on behalf of the lessee. There was no public testimony. Staff recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. ORDINANCE NO. 06-13 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LANGUAGE OF THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTERS 18.130 AND 18.780, TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE CULTURAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS AND TO CREATE A "CULTURAL INSTITUTION AUXILIARY SIGN" CATEGORY (DCA 2006- 00002) 8. Consider an Police Chief Dickinson presented the staff report. Motion by Mayor Dirksen, Amendment to the seconded by Councilor Tigard Municipal This originally came about because a Tigard police Wilson, to adopt Ordinance Code to Add a New officer encountered young people who were not in No. 06-14. Chapter 7.38 - school who were supposed to be in school. Most of Truancy the time, the young people willingly returned to school. However, increasingly students are choosing not to The motion was approved by return to school. Under state law, there is no fine or a unanimous vote of Council August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 29 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u penalty attached to a child failing to regularly attend present. school; the proposed ordinance would remedy this for the City of Tigard. The King City City Council passed Mayor Dirksen Yes this ordinance recently and the Tigard-Tualatin School Councilor Harding Yes District has adopted the language in the proposed Councilor Wilson Yes ordinance as district-wide policy. The City of Tualatin Councilor Woodruff Yes will also be considering this ordinance. The ordinance would allow police officers to take youth back to school or, if not back to school, the child would be returned to his/her parents or legal guardians. Police Chief Dickinson advised staff reviewed what other communities are doing to deal with this issue. Some communities have gone so far as to make an this an "offense"; however, in the City of Tigard the goal is to get children back into school or make sure their parents or guardians were aware of the situation. Councilor Woodruff said it seems reasonable to provide a tool to the police officers to help with truancy. He also noted that this is being responsive to the District who is partners with the City of Tigard. He noted his only concern was whether this would become a large part of the job that officers are doing and interfering with their ability to perform other law enforcement work. He suggested that the City Council receive a report on how this is working in the next several months regarding how much time is going into enforcing this ordinance. Police Chief Dickinson said it would be no problem to report this information to the City Council and added that the Police Department currently receives complaints from the neighborhoods if there are problems. He said enforcing the truancy ordinance would not be their first priority. This would be a tool used primarily by School Resource Officers. Assistant City Manager Newton said it may be that once it's a policy of the District and the parents and students understand that this will be enforced, voluntary compliance may come about. Councilor Harding inquired about additional staffing for School Resource Officers. Police Chief Dickinson confirmed that one School Resource Officer was added, which was primarily driven by the increase of referrals received from the state DHS; this is one of the highest priorities for the School Resource Officers. Councilor Harding suggested this also be monitored as to cost and impacts on staff. Police Chief Dickinson described what is meant b the August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 30 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u term "protective custody" in response to a question from Councilor Wilson. Some cities would make violation of the truancy ordinance an offense, which would technically give a child a criminal history. Protective custody is a non criminal holding that allows police officers to take custody of a youth, but not place them under arrest. This is used in circumstances including run-aways or if a child is found in a dangerous situation. If the child is not with a parent in a dangerous situation, then the child can be placed with the parent or guardian. In some cases, the child is in a dangerous situation with the parents and in that case the child is placed in a children's facility - not jail. Typically, protective custody is for a very brief time to place them in a facility where the child can be reconnected with their parents or to take the child to the parents. If it is a medical situation, a child could be taken to a medical facility. Protective custody is a "safekeeping" arrangement. Mayor Dirksen advised he was surprised to learn that a law such as this was not already in place and indicated he supported the proposed ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 06-14 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER - 7.38 - TRUANCY 9. New Funding Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force Source Members Present: Gretchen Buehner, Chair; and Joe Recommendations Schweitz Task Force Member from the Transportation City Engineer Duenas gave a brief staff report on this Financing Strategies agenda item. About a year ago, the Transportation Task Force Financing Strategies Task Force recommended a local gas tax be implemented to finance projects. The City Council asked for a project to be identified that would likely be supported by the community. Since then, the Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W Project was started by the County. There is an opportunity at this time to do the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection, which has been discussed with City Council. Costs for this project were estimated and presented to the Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force. Members of the Task Force were introduced. A PowerPoint presentation on a proposed 3 cent gas tax was reviewed with the City Council and a copy is on file in the City Recorder's office. Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force Chair Buehner advised that the Task Force has been meeting August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 31 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u for approximately two years to look at financing possibilities for transportation projects given the fact that gas tax revenues have been relatively flat. The cost of construction continues to go up. The Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force made a presentation to the City Council about a year ago recommending a local gas tax as probably the most fiscally prudent and logical method of raising a relatively small amount of money that could be used for a specific project. Ms. Buchner noted the City Council asked the Task Force to come up with a project. Ms. Buchner said the MSTIP project for Hall Boulevard is being engineered. The Task Force put together a proposal to add an additional turn lane coming from Greenburg Road to 99W that would separate the through and left-turn traffic. In addition the eastern-bound lane on 99W would be extended back beyond Main Street to allow easier right turns off of 99W onto Main Street. A separate left turn and through lane would be added for traffic coming from Main Street, turning onto 99W. It looks as if this project would be relatively cost effective and within the amount of money that could be raised with a local gas tax. This is also the project reviewed by DKS and OTAK and presented to the City Council. Ms. Buchner said that, as the Task Force had previously recommended, they were looking at the gas tax being modeled after the MSTIP process that has been so successful in the County. The funds from the gas tax would be used for a specific project. The tax would sunset in five years unless the City Council decided to extend it based on another project or series of projects. The gas tax would not raise sufficient funds to do a lot of projects. It will be an additional resource to do one or two very specific projects within a given time. Ms. Buchner said it would be clear as to the timing, the project and the amount of money for the project. In looking at nearby jurisdictions, Multnomah County has a much higher gas tax; therefore, the gas in Tigard is generally less expensive. Ms. Buchner said she did another survey around our area. A year ago, the variation between the 14 gas stations in Tigard was approximately 23 cents; it is now about 32 cents. The amount of the gas tax will not be that visible. Task Force Member Schweitz noted his support to go forward. Councilor Woodruff noted he appreciated the work the Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force has August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 32 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u done. From a recent citywide survey, it is very clear that traffic is the No. 1 concern that people have - and 99W is the No. 1 problem with traffic. The proposed projects would have some effect on the concern and problem identified. Councilor Woodruff said the only question he had was what have the service station owners said about this prospect? Ms. Buehner responded that the Task Force will need to survey the service station owners. She said she contacted the state organization for service station owners and they would prefer that there be no tax. City Engineer Duenas noted it is difficult to find people who are "accountable" working at the gas stations; "these are absentee owners." City Engineer Duenas said efforts would be made to contact the service station owners. Mayor Dirksen said that perhaps by bringing the issue forward, service station owners will come forward. Ms. Buehner pointed out that gas station owners need to get their customers into their stations. The more congestion that there is along 99W, Greenburg, etc., the less people there are likely to be to drive down the streets - they will look for other ways to travel. If the street is made better, she thought it would be "win- win" situation both for the driver and the businesses. She noted the timing issue with the Hall project going forward and it is possible that costs for the gas tax project could be reduced if it is done at the same time. Mr. Schweitz commented that the projects identified will improve the traffic situation and anticipates that we will gain citizens' respect as the City works towards resolving the traffic issues. The Task Force supports going forward to "get something going." In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff about process, Assistant City Manager Newton advised the next step will be for the Task Force to contact gas stations and discuss the proposed tax. City Engineer Duenas said a proposed ordinance will be brought back to the City Council for a Workshop discussion. He advised they will likely recommend an aggressive timeframe and targeting early October for City Council consideration. Councilor Wilson, who will be leaving office the end of this year, said that as a member of the Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force, he would like to be able to vote on this ordinance. Ms. Buehner also noted we did not want to miss the opportunity of coordinating the gas tax project with the County project at Hall/99W. August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 33 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Councilor Wilson said he enthusiastically supports the gas tax. He said his only concern is whether three cents is enough. At one time, it was calculated that 30 million gallons of gasoline are sold within the City annually. City Engineer Duenas noted the estimate was derived by reviewing what other cities have experienced and then going mid-range for anticipated revenue. Mr. Schweitz noted the station owners don't collect the tax at the station. The tax is collected by the wholesaler. Everyone using the roads will be helping to pay for the projects. While he would rather not have another tax, he thinks people will stand behind it because everyone has been talking about the traffic problems for years. Ms. Buchner reiterated funds would be dedicated to a particular project. This addresses a City Council goal. City Engineer Duenas said that rather than wait for the Highway 99 study to be completed, this obvious project would complement the whole 99W project and provide better traffic circulation. Mayor Dirksen said there is a case where we have Task Force members who have become educated into the process, it almost turns into a situation where you have the "choir preaching to us." This does not necessarily mean that the "man on the street" will agree with this but instead will say that it's another opportunity for the government to put its "hand in my pocket." Mayor Dirksen said he thought there were many good arguments that make sense for a gas tax. This type of tax would spread the burden not just to City of Tigard residents but also to those who use our streets. If this were just coming to the City Council as an ordinance now without any public input, there would be no way he could support it. But, he was in favor to take it from this point, gather more information, and go through a public process. In the end, it might be that he is not in favor of the ordinance. Mayor Dirksen said that we need to move forward from this point through the process to determine if there is support for it. He recommended as part of the public process to have at least two public hearings. Councilor Wilson agreed with Mayor Dirksen and further suggested that the gas tax proposal and the project be viewed as one thing: "This is the project and this is how we are going to a for it." August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 34 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Councilor Harding said there is a need to have all of the electorate looking at one project. She said we still need to try to think of what direction Washington County might be taking as far as a gas tax. It is still on the table for the County. Councilor Harding gave some information, based on a scientific survey of County residents. Most believe that funding should be sought to cover the anticipated debt between system use and available funding. She said 46 percent of the respondents recommended making up some of the shortfall and 35 percent recommended making up all of the shortfall. Ten percent of the respondents were opposed to seeking additional funding for transportation, but 60 percent believe there is already too much funding and 40 percent believe allocation of current funds should be shifted generally transit to roads or vice versa. Councilor Harding confirmed for Mayor Dirksen that the "40 and 60 percent" was of the 10 percent referred to above. Several people identified fees relating to new development as most attractive; however, she said this isn't likely to happen and added that new people are paying the "lion's share." People would consider benefits of a proposed funding package along with a proposed funding source to determine whether or not it is attractive. Councilor Harding said this is exactly what we are talking about. County and City governments need to coordinate on any efforts on any funding initiatives, which is important because you do not want to have two gas tax votes on the ballot. However, Councilor Harding noted there has been a generalized consensus among other cities in Washington County that they would prefer it if Washington County does not do a gas tax because local revenues generated would serve cities better than if it was applied throughout the County. The County is still working on a formula for distribution among cities. Councilor Harding said, "...that we need to keep in mind as we...go forward with anything like this ...we need to make sure we are coordinating and not...doing the same thing twice." She again noted the importance of sending representatives to Washington D.C. to lobby for transportation needs in this area as well as continuing to speak up for "our corner of the County." Mayor Dirksen noted his appreciation for Councilor Harding's work on the WCCC. He noted Councilor Harding made a good point about the need, through this process, to continue to coordinate with the County. The County has asked us the question, "Are people more interested in a local tax, or a County tax...we need to make sure we keep them apprised of what we August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 35 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u are doing here as well." Councilor Harding noted the need to keep track of the history of that Committee to maintain good representation of this area of the County. Councilor Wilson said another thing to consider is that Tigard has the burden of a major state highway running through our community - the Highway 99 strip - and its legacy, which is the downside. The good side is we have more gas stations and the most people. It is not fair for us to bear this burden without also benefiting from the fact that we have these gas stations. Insulated communities off of these strips don't have gas stations. In some ways, it is really only fair for us to go our own way on this issue. Councilor Harding said that Mayor Drake wasn't excited about another MTIP because he felt that Beaverton was contributing more than they were getting back. City Engineer Duenas said that studies have shown that about 50 percent of the traffic is regional traffic. It will not be just Tigard residents who will be asked to pay for the proposed intersection improvements. Councilor Harding noted that people do not realize they can take I-5 to the Salem Parkway to the coast. Ms. Buehner said there is also a need to make sure the citizens understand this is a project where the City can coordinate with the County and ODOT and also save some money by combining efforts on the two projects. Ms. Buehner advised that the Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force requests that they go forward with its plan and recommendations and come back to the City Council with a draft ordinance in late October. Mayor Dirksen said he heard general support for the process in moving forward to see where this leads us. He said he thought we would be remiss to stop it at this point and not follow through to see what we will find at the other end. Mayor Dirksen noted this would take selling to the public as well as the gas station owners and the Council will be looking to the citizen Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force members to be the "front-line soldiers" to get the word out. Councilor Woodruff noted the past recommendation to identify the problem, identify solutions - paying for it with the users who are "creating the problem." This August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 36 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u is all a package with a sunset provision. Mayor Dirksen asked City Council if there was general support to move forward with the process. No objections were raised. Assistant City Manager Newton said a Cityscape page could be devoted to this matter. 10. Code Community Development Director Coffee presented Motion by Mayor Dirksen, Amendments to the the staff report on this item. This is a request by seconded by Councilor Intergovernmental Washington County as they have proceeded with the Harding, to approve the Agreements with petition to incorporate a city on Bull Mountain. The proposed amendments and Washington County County staff has identified potential legal barriers with authorize the Mayor to sign (Urban Planning the Tigard Urban Service Agreement, which identifies the amended agreements. Area Agreement Tigard as the ultimate provider of urban services in the and Tigard Urban urban services boundary in the unincorporated area, The motion was approved by Services and the Urban Planning Area Agreement, which spells a unanimous vote of Council Agreement) out how the area will be planned for the eventual present. urbanization with Tigard. As the agreements now read, there is a potential legal challenge to the incorporation Mayor Dirksen Yes of Bull Mountain because of inconsistencies. The Councilor Harding Yes County has asked the City if it would amend the Councilor Wilson Yes agreements to indicate that should a city be Councilor Woodruff Yes incorporated within the urban services area, the City would be agree to amend the document to reflect that reality. Community Development Director Coffee advised that in previous communication with the County, we indicated we would be willing to do that. He referred to a letter from Mayor Dirksen, which was transmitted to the County on July 25, 2006. Councilor Wilson said it appears that the amendments have been written so that if Bull Mountain were to incorporate, this territory would be withdrawn from the existing agreements; however it doesn't terminate the agreements. Community Development Director Coffee affirmed the agreements would not be terminated. Councilor Wilson said it seems that there has been a "sea change" in the last six months in the thinking about the unincorporated areas of the County in general, which is independent somewhat from a Bull Mountain incorporation proposal. He said he wondered if it would make sense sometime near this juncture to reevaluate the entire agreements. Councilor Wilson noted the agreements are required, to some degree, by state law. This seems to be a worthy endeavor regardless of the outcome of the election to take up this issue with the County. August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 37 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Community Development Director Coffee responded to Councilor Wilson that this could be done. Mr. Coffee said this could be brought back before the City Council in the future with an overall assessment of the agreements. Community Development Director Coffee said he is not sure whether these agreements apply to Metzger and an area near King City; Assistant City Manager Newton said staff will need to review these agreements. Community Development Director Coffee clarified that the proposed amendments before the City Council tonight were drafted by the County. Mayor Dirksen noted the amendments address Bull Mountain specifically. Mayor Dirksen said he assumes that if the incorporation measure were to fail, then these amendments would "disappear." Community Development Director Coffee said the amendments would remain; however, they would not be relevant because they are applicable only if a new city is established. The City Council would not have to revisit the amendments for another decision. Mayor Dirksen said that, "It is perhaps beyond ironic that we be considering this tonight, when today was the day that the County made its final decision to place the incorporation on the ballot in November. And, in doing so, ignored the City of Tigard's request that city- owned and controlled property be removed from that boundary. As was noted earlier, the City's refusal to address these agreements could, in effect, legally stop the incorporation effort. The City would also be able to do so by claiming that the incorporation of the new City would place a burden upon the City of Tigard. We could also do so by appealing the boundary decision to Metro, which would stop the process at the present point, which would cause the deadline to be missed and it would not be able to be on the ballot in November. The City has that power at this point and has had it throughout the process. On the other hand the... Council has commented that in general we are in favor of the incorporation. In the face of this decision with regard to the boundary, it makes our cooperation more difficult. But, I think it is in our long-term best interests, and the best interests of all of the people involved, that we do not react in that way to cause that failure and that we move forward on the course that we reviousl told the County that we would take and that August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 38 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u we would agree to the changes in the agreements. It can sometimes be difficult to stay on the high road, when you feel like you may be the only one that's there. But, I think that we need to retain that position regardless." Councilor Wilson thanked the Mayor for his statement. He said that one of his main concerns is the ability to provide park land in his neighborhood. The County's decision makes it more difficult for the City of Tigard; however, he agreed that the City Council should not stop the process. Councilor Woodruff said the amendments appear to be technical, but it is another indication of the City's efforts to continue to be a good partner with the County. He added that he was disappointed with the decision that the County made about the boundary. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:07 p.m. Motion by Councilor Woodruff, seconded by Councilor Harding, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council Present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Harding Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Qa'therm'e Wheatley, City Rec rder Attest: Mayor, City of Tigard Date: I? , JC,) • D tp i:\adm\cathytccmt2006t060808.doc August 8, 2006 City Council Meeting page 39 • r TIGARD CITY COUN:NAND TER: DEVELOPMENT M LOCAL CONTRACT D MEETI~'`-- August 8, 2006 I DO TIGARD CI13125 SW HATIGARD, OPUBLIC NOTICE: To request to speak to the City Council: ➢ Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available for the agenda item you would like to address: o Sign the Citizen Communication sign-up sheet o During Citizen Communications ask the Mayor if you may speak when the agenda item is considered by the Council. o The Mayor will determine whether public comment will be accepted. ➢ Sign the Citizen Communication sign-up sheet if you would like to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Citizens are asked to keep their remarks to two minutes or less. Longer matters may be set for a future agenda by contacting the Mayor or the City Manager. ➢ If you need assistance determining how to sign in, please speak to the staff greeter who will be near the entrance to Town Hall before the Council meeting. 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 7:3012.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 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA - AUGUST 8, 2006 page 1 ' L AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETINGS AUGUST 8, 2006 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION ➢ Update on Entryway Signs • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to consult with legal counsel regarding litigation likely to be filed under ORS 192.660(2)(h). 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(4), 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. Recess Council Meeting and Convene the City Center Development Agency Meeting CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CCDA) MEETING 7:15 PM (Approximately) 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 2. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE TIGARD DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. CCDA Discussion C. CCDA Consideration: CCDA Resolution No. 06- b Q 3. ADJOURNMENT (The Tigard City Council/Local Contract Review Board Meeting follows.) TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order: City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA -AUGUST 8, 2006 page 2 r r 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Citizen Communications - Sign Up Sheet • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for June 20, 27, July 6 and 11, 2006 3.2 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Council Meeting Tentative Agendas 3.3 Designate the Planning Commission as the Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee - Resolution No. 06-q & 3.4 Appoint Jeremy Vermilyea to the Planning Commission - Resolution No. 06- y 7 3.5 Approve Budget Amendment #1 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Sa tary Sewer Division for Purchase of a Replacement Backhoe - Resolution No. 06- 1 3.6 Approve Budget Amendment #2 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Parks Capital Projects for P chase and Installation of a Play Structure at Northview Park - Resolution No. 06-q - 3.7 Approve Budget Amendment #3 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Stormwater Capital Projects for Funding of the Water Building Remodel - Resolution No. 06- Sy 3.8 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for Design Services for Phase 2 (Commercial Street Streetscape) of the Tigard Downtown Comprehensive Streetscape Design to OTAK, Inc. b. Award Contract for the Construction of the Tualatin River Trail to RC Landworks, Inc. C. Reject Bids for the Construction of Hall Boulevard Sidewalk • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed firm the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA - AUGUST 8, 2006 page 3 4. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TO CONSIDER THE ANNEXATION OF THE RIDER PROPERTY (ZCA 2006-00001) REQUEST: The applicant is requesting annexation of one (1) parcel containing 1.21 acres into the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S109AC, Tax Lot 02101. The subject parcel is located south of SW Bull Mountain Road and east of SW 133rd Avenue, on the site of the Alberta Rider School. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapter 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges c. Staff Report: Community Development Staff d. Public Testimony: Proponents Opponents e. Staff Recommendation f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 06- I y 5. CONSIDER REVISIONS TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE INCORPORATING A RIGHT-OF-WAY USAGE FEE a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 06--d- 6. CONSIDER REVISIONS TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE INCORPORATING A RIGHT-OF-WAY PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION POLICY a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 06- 2 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA - AUGUST 8, 2006 page 4 7. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) FROM JULY 11, 2006 - INCIDENTAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS CODE AMENDMENT (DCA 2006-00002) REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Code Amendment to amend the Use Classifications Chapter (18.130) and the Sign Chapter (18.780) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed amendment would amend the uses allowed under Civic Use Types (Section 18.130.020.B.4) to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses (such as a gift shop, bookstore, and limited food and beverage services). In addition, a new category "Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs" would be created in the Special Condition Sign Section (18.780.090). LOCATION: Within Cultural Institutions. ZONE: All zones where Cultural Institutions are an allowed use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130.020, 18.380.020, 18.390.060, 18.780.015 and 18.780.090; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1. a. Continue the Public Hearing, which was opened on July 11, 2006. b. Declarations or Challenges: Does any Council member wish to declare or discuss a conflict of interest or abstention. C. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony Proponents Opponents e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Questions g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 06- 13 8. CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 7.38 - TRUANCY a. Staff Report: Police Department b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 06-1-~- 9. NEW FUNDING SOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE TRANSPORTATION FINANCING STRATEGIES TASK FORCE a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Provide direction to the Task Force and City staff to develop an ordinance establishing a three-cent local gas tax for future City Council consideration. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA - AUGUST 8, 2006 page 5 10. CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY (URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT AND TIGARD URBAN SERVICES AGREEMENT) a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Motion to approve the proposed amendments and authorize the Mayor to sign the amended agreements. 11. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 12. NON AGENDA ITEMS 13. 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(4), 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. 14. ADJOURNMENT I:ladmtcathy\cca\2008I060808.doe TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA - AUGUST 8, 2006 page 6 I' City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Notification In the Matter of the Notification of a Change in the Start Time of an August 8, 2006, City Center Development Agency Meeting STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Cit ,being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I notified the following people/organizations by fax of- Meeting of the City Center Development Agency on August 8, 2006 CT' Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) C~' Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) CY Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) A copy of said Notice being he • to attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the r4 day of G , 20 . Signature of Person who Performigg Notification Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of U, 6~tr e atu Signature of Notary Public for Oregon notificationaff iAatlm\cathy\counci14neeting notices\2006\060808 aff of notification - ccda.doc y OFFICIAL SEAL CATHERINE D WHEATLEY NOTARY PUB COMMISSION 0.371G02 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG. 04, 2007 08/03/2006 09:13 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard IvUUl ~exe TX REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1441 CONNECTION TEL 5039687397 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID Regal Courier ST. TIME 08/03 09:09 USAGE T 04'01 PGS. SENT 7 RESULT -.OK V i CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START TIME FOR CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) ° Notice is hereby given that there is a change in the start time for the City Center Development Agency meeting on August 8, 2006. The meeting will start immediately after the City Council Study Session, which starts at 6:30 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. A meeting agenda is attached. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. % 011 Deputy City Recorder Date: .S o~ d D 6 08/03/2006 09:02 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard I N01 TX REPORT sss TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1439 CONNECTION TEL 15033712635 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID Valley ST. TIME 08/03 09:00 USAGE T 01'33 PGS. SENT 7 RESULT OK a CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START TIME FOR CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that there is a change in the start time for the City Center Development Agency meeting on August 8, 2006. The meeting will start immediately after the City Council Study Session, which starts at 6:30 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. A meeting agenda is attached. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. ~J Deputy City Recorder Date: o;2 d jO 08/03/2006 08:59 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard Ij001 TX REPORT sss TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1438 CONNECTION TEL 5039686061 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID Oregonian ST. TIME 08/03 08:58 USAGE T 01'23 PGS. SENT 7 RESULT OK V CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START TIME FOR CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that there is a change in the start time for the City Center Development Agency meeting on August 8, 2006. The meeting will start immediately after the City Council Study Session, which starts at 6:30 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. A meeting agenda is attached. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. ~I Deputy City Recorder Date: >41f a d d a CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START TIME FOR CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that there is a change in the start time for the City Center Development Agency meeting on August 8, 2006. The meeting will start immediately after the City Council Study Session, which starts at 6:30 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. A meeting agenda is attached. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. G%l Deputy City Recorder Date: add ~i Post: Tigard City Hall Tigard Permit Center Tigard Public Library iAadm\cathykcound1\meeting noticest2008W00221 coda meeting notice.doc n City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting In the Matter of the Notification of the August 8, 2006, City Center Development Agency Meeting Change in Start Time STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, D 1/-.C- , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in ➢ Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon ➢ Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon ➢ Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon a copy of Notice of the August 8, 2006, City Center Development Agency Meeting. A copy of said Notice being, hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the _ day of 200 Signature of Person who Performed Pos i g Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of &u 64~5~ , 20 06-'. OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS Si ature of Notary ublic for Oregon : % NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 381793 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 14,2M postingaff iA8dm\cathytcounci1\meeting noticest2006W60808ccda aff of posting.doc City of Tigard, Oregon BID Affidavit of Posting !I- In the Matter of the Notification of the August 8, 2006, City Center Development Agency Meeting STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, v\ , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath - a 14 z4 &Z ~xr- (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in ➢ Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon ➢ Tigard Public Libraryo, 13500 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon ➢ Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon a copy of Notice of the August 8, 2006, City Center Development Agency Meeting. A copy of said Notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the day of -)2006 Signature of Person o Performed Posting Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this ~(o day of 200. OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Signature of Notary ublic for Oregon COMMISSION NO. 381793 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 14, 2008 postingaff iladmtcathytcounciPmeeting noticest2006t060808ccda aff of posting.doc City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Notification In the Matter of the Notification of an August 8, 2006, City Center Development Agency Meeting STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, 4a", 0-r-10 '4 C~ ,being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I notified the following people/ organizations by fax of- Meeting of the City Center Development Agency on August 8, 2006 ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) A copy of said Notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the G f~ day of , 20 e6. Signature of Person who Performed otifica n Subscribe and sworn (or affirmed) before me this a6' day of 20~. OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS i~ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Signat re of Notary blic for Oregon COMMISSION NO. 381793 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 14,2M notificationaff iladm\cathytcouncifteeting noticest2008t080808 aft of notification - ccda.doc CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: ❑ Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that a City Center Development Agency meeting will be held on August 8, 2006, at 6:30 p.m. prior to the City Council Business meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. Deputy City Recorder Date: Post: Tigard City Hall Tigard Permit Center Tigard Public Library iAadmtcathylcouncilt,neeting notimst2000t000221 coda meeting notice.doc 07/26/2006 13:02 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard WjUUl m x TX REPORT xx TRANSMISSION OR TX/RX NO 1398 CONNECTION TEL 5032945035 SUBADDRESS ~~93:02 CONNECTION ID JA ST. TIME USAGE T 00'21 PGS. SENT 1 RESULT OR V CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: 0 Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that a City Center Development Agency meeting will be held on August 8, 2006, at 6:30 p.m. prior to the City Council Business meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. Deputy City Recorder G Date: 0;? 6 v-2 '06 Post: Tigard Citv Hall Uf/z0icuv0 11:44 r'AX 5036847297 City of Tigard 0 001 TX REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1394 CONNECTION TEL 5039687397 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID Regal Courier ST. TIME 07/26 11:43 USAGE T 00'39 PGS. SENT 1 RESULT OK CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: 0 Barbara Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that a City Center Development Agency meeting will be held on August 8, 2006, at 6:30 p.m. prior to the City Council Business meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. Deputy City Recorder Date: r/ V 07/26/2006 11:43 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard 10001 s~ TX REPORT ac TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1393 CONNECTION TEL 15033712635 SUBADDRESS CONNECTION ID Valley ST. TIME 07/26 11:43 USAGE T 00'17 PGS. SENT 1 RESULT OK V CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Please forward to: ❑ Barbara. Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724) ❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061) ❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397) Notice is hereby given that a City Center Development Agency meeting will be held on August 8, 2006, at 6:30 p.m. prior to the City Council Business meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy. For further information, please contact City Recorder Carol Krager by by calling 503-639- 4171, Ext 2419. -e Deputy City Recorder ' Date: 6_ oZ 4V W Post: Tigard City Hall City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) , M Q J I11 _ t t t VV .13, G.h~1 tit. • 1y STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, '6 01 A 0, i -C , 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) (94-- 69 - / - I ~ mo d- I y which were adopted at the City Council meeting of b ' 0 , with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made 7art hereof, on the day of , 200. 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon J4' 16/_ Signature of Person w o Performed Posting Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of (i?w5d4- , 20Q. c~ OFFICIAL SEAL Signa ure of Notary P blic for Oregon JILL M BYARS (*NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION SON EXPIRES JUNE 14, 2008 e STUDY SESSION AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING August 8, 2006 - 6:30 p.m. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION ➢ Update on Entryway Signs • ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS ➢ Oregon Business - Tour Host Proposal - September 2007 - Showcase Business Community ➢ Oregon Consensus Program - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment ➢ Fifth Tuesday Scheduled for August 29, 2006, 7-9 p.m. at the Water Building. Stacie Yost is unavailable to facilitate; staff checking with another facilitator. Carol Krager will take notes of the meeting. ➢ Attached is information for Agenda Item No. 7 regarding commercial signage at the Library. (This is the same information that was sent in last Friday's City Council newsletter envelope.) • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to consult with legal counsel regarding litigation likely to be filed under ORS 192.660(2)(h). 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(4), 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. Council Calendar August 8 Tues Business Meeting, 6:30 p.m., Town Hall and Red Rock Creek Conference Room 15 Tues Workshop Meeting, 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 22 Tues Business Meeting, 6:30 p.m., Town Hall and Red Rock Creek Conference Room 29 Tues Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting, 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 closed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.660 (2) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, If the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660(2) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660(2) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660 (2) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660(2) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660 (2) (f) - Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public inspection." These records are specifically identified in the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660 (2) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (2) (h) - Legal counsel - for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660 (2) (i) - 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 (2) 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 (2) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. 192.660 (2) (1)- Relates to State Landscape Architect Board. 192.660 (2) (m)- Relates to the review and approval of programs relating to security. hadm\o thy\c ss\2008t080808ps.doe Liz Newton - Put your community on our map! Page 1 From: <gillan@oregonbusiness.com> To: <craigd@tigard-or.gov> Date: 8/1/2006 9:38:10 AM Subject: Put your community on our map! <http://mediamerica.magazinemanager.com/intranet/ClientFiles/Client83/Pu blic/Images/OBM_logo_bw.jpg.jpg> July 31, 2006 Dear Mayor Craig, What's the buzz about the Oregon Business 25th anniversary "Good for Business" Tour? "YoushouIdknowthattheBoardman community - city, port,chamber, and parkandrecdistrict -areall working on a proposal foryour stop in.Boardman,themost excitingspotin all of Eastern Oregon." -MayorEd Glenn "Can you imagine we would NOT want to host you here in Condon?? We absolutely do!" -Judge Laura Pryor "Hope?Oregon'sOutbackisnottoofar off the beaten path. We aretalking about somereallyfunoptionstoshow off our area." -CaroJohnson, Lake County "Would you really consider Astoria?!" -Paul Benoit, city manager "Everyoneispleasedyouareconsidering Pendleton for a visit.We will make surethatyouwillleavewith some of the most fondmemories of our area."-MayorPhilipHouk "Onceasleepy little town, Madras isnow adynamo ofactivity,all of whichwewould love to showcase forOregonBusinessmagazine."-Mike Morgan,cityadministrator "lamgoing towork as hard as I can toenticeyou to visit ourfantasticcity.We havesome secrets up our sleeveand (believe youare going towant tovisit ourcity on your swing aroundthestate! Youcan count usin!"-DelphinePalmer, Milton-Freewater. Reminder! Commitments are due by August 18. Proposals due by September 8. Looking forward to seeing you on the road! Gillian Floren Publisher 503.223.0304 gillianf@oregonbusiness.com .TO- CELE RATE 4 - .a Ai 2 STH EFRE'H t.4 II ~ : ~'et, v~l I.1 'vl I) TE d« I •r (A T e c . WOW - A QUARTER-CENTURY OF OREGON BUSINESS' Oregon Business magazine is turning 25, and we're gearing up for a celebration. It'll be our birthday. But the spotlight won't be on us. We're shining it on the people, businesses and communities that have helped us reach that milestone. Instead of partying at the office, we'll be hitting the road to celebrate a quarter-century of business with communities all across the state. September 2007 may seem a long way off. But we're starting the planning now so that everyone has a chance to get involved. i _ h.. "'N NE Ia CIA CVA I _ ~ IIfNpNt FORES1 NAI NAL l n y v / R1r. n ~ .r p r HERE'S THE PLAN! On September 10, 2007, Oregon Business will roll out of Portland and hit the road for a two-week tour of Oregon, stopping at selected communities along the way to spend a day celebrating business with you. We'd like to meet your business leaders, tour your factories, sample your products, hear your success stories and challenges, and get a taste of your civic pride! Our editors will be with us, taking notes and Every host community, small or blogging on oregonbusiness.com, as well large, will also receive a birthday as covering the tour for the November 2007 gift from Oregon Business: an issue of Oregon Business. advertisement for your chamber or other civic organization, our Tentative tour dates are September 10-21, compliments. 2007. We hope you'll join the party! Business The specific itinerary will be developed is good - good for our communities, as host communities are confirmed. good for Oregon. And it's certainly been good for Oregon Business these We'd be delighted to spend a day with past 25 years. We look forward to the your community. As host, you will put on 25 to come! a business event - a lunch, a panel, a talk, a round table, a tour of highlights - for an afternoon. A reporter and a photographer will cover each community event. Be creative and show off to tour guests we bring along with us. (The governor and Senators Smith and Wyden have already expressed interest.) - ~l t i r'. r , i _ r. a 1'r , L% y i I t~ in-depth intelligent inspiring WANT TO HOST THE QUARTER-CENTURY OF OREGON BUSINESS TOUR? We will select up to 10 communities as tour hosts. (Small communities: Feel free to pool resources and partner with a neighboring community.) Hosts will put together an afternoon's program to showcase your business community. It's a great opportunity to: - INCREASE YOUR VISIBILITY STATEWIDE. Tour staff will be blitzing the media with progress reports as we go. - NETWORK with invited tour guests and Oregon Business editors and publisher. - SPOTLIGHT YOUR COMMUNITY by being part of the tour's editorial coverage in the November 2007 Oregon Business magazine. - RECEIVE A COMPLIMENTARY ADVERTISEMENT in Oregon Business. Step 1: By August 18, 2006, please confirm your community's commitment to submit a host proposal. Email publisher@oregonbusiness.com. Step 2: By September 8, 2006, your community must submit a proposal outlining your plan for hosting the tour. Assume the tour will spend a half-day in your community. Proposal must include this information: 1. City 4. Other organizations that will be involved 2. Contact person 5. A description of your tour host plan M1 3. Contact's organization Please give as much detail as possible to distinguish your plan from those of other communities. t. The Oregon Business editorial staff will choose the tour hosts based on the most compelling proposals, taking into account the tour route and schedule. Mail your proposal by Friday, September 8, to: Publisher, Oregon Business, 610 SW Broadway, Suite 200, Portland, OR 92005. Or email to publisher@oregonbusiness.com. ff' t 4 Page 1 of 2 Liz Newton - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment Report (draft) I -I From: "OR Consensus Program" <consensus@pdx.edu> To: <cao@co.washington.or.us>, <craigd@tigard-or.gov>, <ellen_conley@co.washington.or.us>, <franzkehill@comcast.net <hosticka@metro.dst.or.us>, <jarussel159@comcast.net>, <joanne_rice@co.washington.or.us>, <Lisa@HamiltonRealtyGroup.com>, <liz@tigard- or.gov>, <McVey.Family@verizon.net>, <nickw@tigard-or.gov>, <Patt.opdyke@oregonstate.edu>, <Rep.JerryKrummel@state.or.us>, <sallyh@tigard- or.gov>, <seltzere@pdx.edu>, <tom_brian@co.washington.or.us> Date: 8/3/2006 2:23 PM Subject: Bull Mountain Convening Assessment Report (draft) CC: "'Elaine Hallmark"' <elaineh@pdx.edu>, <todell@resolv.org>, <Consensus@pdx.edu>, <rwilliams@resolv.org> Dear Interviewees, Over the last several months, RESOLVE, Inc. has interviewed you and other stakeholders on behalf of the Oregon Consensus Program, regarding the possibility for collaboration related to governance, annexation, the provision of urban services, and other related issues and concerns in the unincorporated Bull Mountain area of Washington County. During the interview process, RESOLVE team members Turner Odell and Rob Williams indicated that we would share the results of the interview process with you. For your information we have attached a copy of the final draft of their assessment report. If you have any concerns or questions about the draft, or wish to advise us of any corrections that might be needed, please contact me at the Oregon Consensus Program. We recognize that stakeholders are currently engaged in a different approach, and we are not recommending a formal collaborative process at this time. We hope the report will suggest possible opportunities for collaboration in the future to resolve a number of the issues facing the area regardless of the outcome of the current incorporation proposal. Thank you again for your cooperation in this assessment. We will be happy to provide any further assistance toward collaborative efforts in the future. Our program evaluates all of our work, so you may be receiving a request to complete an evaluation form in the near future. We would appreciate your cooperation in helping us improve our services, as well. R. Elaine Hallmark, Director - OCP Oregon Consensus Program, National Policy Consensus Center Hatfield School of Government, Portland State University 670B Urban Center, 506 SW Mill St. PO Box 751 Portland, OR 97207 Phone: 503-725-9070 Direct: 503-725-9019 Cell: 503-781-0116 Fax: 503-725-9099 E-mail: elaineh@pdx.edu www.orconsensus.pdx.edu file://C:\Documents and Settings\Liz\Local Settings\Temp\GW100001.HTM 8/7/2006 tBULL MOUNTAIN CONVENING ASSESSMENT Draft Assessment Report July 2006 Prepared by: For the: RESOLVE, Inc. Oregon Consensus Program Portland Office Hatfield School of Government 720 S.W. Washington Street Portland State University Suite 710 670B Urban Center, 506 SW Mill St. Portland, Oregon 97205 Portland, Oregon 97207 503.228.8350 503.725.9070 www.resolv.org www.orconsensus.pdx.edu Turner Odell Robert Williams Elaine Hallmark Senior Mediator Facilitator Director IL - DRAFT 07-27-06 BULL MOUNTAIN CONVENING ASSESSMENT DRAFT ASSESSMENT REPORT I. Overview and Background RESOLVE, Inc., is a neutral, private, non-profit group that provides process support to help people address complex environmental and public policy issues. In late November 2005, the Oregon Consensus Program (OCP) of the Hatfield School of Government at Portland State University asked RESOLVE to conduct an independent assessment of issues and concerns related to governance, annexation, the provision of urban services, and other related issues in the unincorporated Bull Mountain area of Washington County, adjacent to the City of Tigard. The OCP is charged by the State legislature to provide neutral services to public bodies and their constituents to assist them in collaborating on public issues. The OCP initiated this convening assessment process as the first step toward providing such services to the City, County, and their constituents as needed. Prompting the assessment was a continuing set of challenging issues and concerns and a history of differences between the City of Tigard, the Friends of Bull Mountain (a citizen's group of Bull Mountain residents) and other related parties. The City attempted to annex the unincorporated Bull Mountain area in the November 2004 election but failed to win the needed double majority vote. The Friends of Bull Mountain initially contacted OCP in the spring of 2005 to request assistance in resolving the ongoing governance and urban services issues. OCP was subsequently in contact with the City of Tigard and Washington County in an attempt to assemble sufficient funds for a convening and assessment process. Funds did not become available until late 2005 at which point RESOLVE's involvement was initiated. The goal of the assessment process was (1) to identify issues and concerns, (2) to assess the potential for initiating a collaborative, consensus-based process to address the identified issues and, (3) if feasible, to recommend a process design. This assessment phase was intended first to answer the question of uhedxr a collaborative process may be appropriate or useful, and if the answer to the first questions were "yes," to answer the question of howthe interested parties might move forward with such a process. RESOLVE conducted a series of interviews with parties representing a range of perspectives related to issues of governance, annexation, urban services, and related issues in the Bull Mountain area. Parties interviewed included elected government officials and staff from the City of Tigard and Washington County as well as residents of the Bull Mountain area, some of whom were members of the Friends of Bull Mountain and some of whom were not. RESOLVE also interviewed other individuals with knowledge of or experience with the issues and concerns about governance, annexation and urban services in the Bull Mountain area. RESOLVE then analyzed the interviews to assess whether there was the opportunity to initiate a collaborative process to address the issues. R.ESOLVE's analysis suggests that a collaborative process would not have a substantial likelihood of success at the current time. The analysis also suggests, however, that there maybe opportunities in the future where a collaborative process maybe useful in helping the parties to resolve any remaining issues and concerns. RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 1 DRAFT 07-27-06 II. The Convening Assessment Process A convening assessment is a method to assess and potentially assist stakeholders in organizing or convening a collaborative process. An assessment provides the opportunity for a neutral third party to help the stakeholders to gather information, learn about each other's interests, better understand the varying perspectives on issues and concerns, test assumptions regarding the anticipated barriers or obstacles, and begin to develop a range of ideas and suggestions for addressing the identified issues and concerns. In consultation with OCP, RESOLVE crafted a set of interview questions and an initial list of interviewees. The interview list was not intended to include every individual with an interest or information related to Bull Mountain; rather, it was designed to obtain a cross section of the full range of perspectives related to these issues. Additions to the interview list were made based on suggestions from other interviewees. The assessment interview process took place between January and May 2006 with individual, group, phone and/or in-person interviews with the parties and other stakeholders. Interviews were completed with nearly twenty individuals. (See list attached as Appendix 1.) The process helped RESOLVE to understand stakeholder interest in finding collaborative solutions to identified issues and to assess the likelihood that a collaborative process could achieve success in resolving the issues. III. Interests, Issues and Concerns Interviewees represented a wide range of interests and expressed a diversity of concerns related to annexation, governance, and urban services in the Bull Mountain area. Several of the issues and concerns identified by the interviewees appeared to he at the heart of the disagreements or differences of opinion among the various parties. Some of these key issues are identified below. Interviewee Interests The interviewees represented a cross-section of interests including affected residents; state, regional, county and local government officials with relevant responsibilities; and outside observers with academic or outreach roles with respect to the issues more broadly. These interviewees described a variety of interests relating to urban services and governance in the Bull Mountain area that were both personal and professional in origin. For example, some interviewees had a deep interest in protecting their personal quality of life and the character of their neighborhoods. Others had professional interest in planning and providing for orderly development of land uses or simply in meeting the needs of their constituents in Bull Mountain neighborhoods, the City of Tigard, Washington County, or the region more broadly. Other interviewees were simply knowledgeable about the issues without having any particular interest related to the issues of concern. Interviewee Issues and Concerns Planning, Permitting and Enforcement. One significant set of concerns expressed by interviewees centered on the provision of urban services related to land use, development planning and permitting, and enforcement for the Bull Mountain area. This included concerns related to decisions on the RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 2 DRAFT 07-27-06 allowable density of residential development on Bull Mountain. A core issue identified by many interviewees was who should control land use decision making in the Bull Mountain area - Tigard, Washington County, or Bull Mountain residents themselves. Since the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) was drawn, and more recently in the wake of statewide legislation, the County position with respect to unincorporated urban areas generally has been that such developed areas should be planned and permitted by municipal authorities (not county planners). The county entered into intergovernmental agreements with Tigard beginning in 1997 under which Tigard was responsible for review and approval of development permits and the enforcement of development codes in the unincorporated Bull Mountain area. In brief, this led to concerns over. • the density of development allowed under the codes applied to Bull Mountain and their consistency with a Bull Mountain community plan completed for the area in the early 1980's; • the equity of enforcement and implementation of both density requirements and other development related requirements (e.g., requirements related to tree removal and slope restrictions); • the appropriateness, in general, of vesting land use decision making or enforcement authority in a government entitywith no electoral ties to some of the areas or citizens over which it has been given jurisdiction (creating, in the minds of some interviewees, an apparent conflict of interest). It now appears that Washington County (which does have direct electoral ties with all Bull Mountain residents) will be reassuming authority for development permitting in the Bull Mountain area in July 2006 (when the current intergovernmental agreement expires) pending the outcome of an ongoing effort to incorporate a new City of Bull Mountain. Other Urban Services. Also of concern to a number of interviewees were issues related to the provision of other urban services. In short, the interviews suggested that some parties seemed to feel that unincorporated Bull Mountain residents were receiving adequate urban services at a reasonable cost while others thought services were either not adequate or were being subsidized by Tigard taxpayers. For example, concerns were expressed over • the lack of parks in the Bull Mountain area as well as whether or not unincorporated Bull Mountain residents were using Tigard parks and, if so, whether they were providing a fair share of fiscal support for Tigard parks; • whether or not unincorporated Bull Mountain residents were using the Tigard library and, if so, whether they were paying a fair share in support of the library; • whether unincorporated Bull Mountain residents were paying a fair share of the costs for enhanced sheriff's patrol services. Governance and Annexation. Annexation has been a well debated subject in Oregon over recent years, and was an issue for the Bull Mountain area leading up to a vote on annexation in 2004. According to some interviewees, Tigard, Washington County and others have long contemplated (ever since the UGB was drawn to include unincorporated areas like Bull Mountain) that the Bull Mountain area would ultimately be annexed by Tigard. It was also suggested that annexing the area was an important growth objective for Tigard. However, in a "double majority" vote in November 2004, annexation was voted down by a majority of unincorporated Bull Mountain voters, thereby preventing the proposed annexation of Bull Mountain despite the support of a majority of Tigard voters. Some interviewees observed that most recent successful annexations have been driven bya need for urban services. In this case, however, interviewees suggested there was less incentive for Bull Mountain RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 3 DRAFT 07-27-06 residents to support annexation because most services were being provided at a reasonable cost through arrangements with Washington County or other providers or were otherwise available nearby. In short, some interviewees suggested, the vote came down to Bull Mountain residents not wanting to pay additional taxes if they were annexed to Tigard. Debate leading up to the vote, however, was more impassioned and centered around several of the issues and concerns described above. Some parties opposed annexation to Tigard because of these concerns while others suggested that the solution to these concerns was to annex and become involved in local government to make changes. Although the issue of formal annexation of the entire Bull Mountain area is, for the moment, "off the table," concerns remained over ongoing piecemeal annexations of sections of the Bull Mountain area currently under development. Some interviewees were concerned that in the past Tigard was able to accomplish annexation of individual properties under development during the permitting process. Some were also concerned that piecemeal annexation would continue even after Washington County resumed permitting responsibilities for development occurring near the Tigard city limits. Missed Opportunities. Some interviewees observed that there may have been missed opportunities in the past to either resolve some of these concerns or to avoid them in first place. For example, it was observed that if unincorporated residents had been more involved when the intergovernmental agreements for urban services were first being forged, there might have been an opportunity to build a more collaborative relationship and thereby to avoid some of the concerns related to how those agreements were implemented with respect to densities and code enforcement. Looking even further back, it was suggested that the destiny of unincorporated areas within the UGB could have been more clearly charted, and a process for achieving the desired result described, when the UGB was first drawn and before many of the unincorporated areas within it were actually developed. More recently, some interviewees believed that if the various parties had been able to enter into a facilitated collaborative approach earlier (following the annexation vote and before inter-party relationships had declined), there might have been an opportunity to address many of these issues and concerns. IV. Analysis and Recommendations RESOLVE has expertise in the assessment, design, and implementation of collaborative processes that provide the greatest opportunity for diverse interests to reach tangible results on complex natural resource and public policy issues. As neutral process experts, RESOLVE and the Oregon Consensus Program do not take positions on the substance of the issues on which we work. RESOLVE is providing its analysis and recommendations in cooperation with the Oregon Consensus Program. The Oregon Consensus Program is available to work with the parties in making decisions on whether and/or how to move forward with a collaborative approach. Essential Characteristics In assessing whether these issues related to governance, annexation, and urban services in the Bull Mountain area are amenable to collaborative resolution, it is important to identify whether the key elements or characteristics are present that are likely to make collaboration productive and successful. In RESOLVE's experience, a consensus-building or agreement-focused process is more likelyto succeed if it has the following characteristics: RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 4 DRAFT 07-27-06 • Clear Objectives. The parties can agree on the overall objectives for the collaborative process (whether it be an agreement on a course of action, the identification of new options, a joint fact finding on the impacts of various options) improved communication about interests and concerns, or another clearly articulated objective). • Manageable Issues. The parties can agree on a manageable number of interdependent or related issues. There must also be a sufficiently well developed factual basis on which to hold a meaningful discussion and resolution of the issues. • Identifiable Representative Parties. The parties interested in or affected by the outcome of the collaboration are readily identifiable, capable of identifying from among themselves participants that can adequately represent all affected interests, and few enough in number to allow for a manageable process. Participants are able to represent and reflect the interests of their constituencies. • Good Faith Participation. The parties can come to the table with genuine interest in participating in good faith. • No Preferred Alternative Forum. The parties feel themselves as likely, if not more likely, to achieve their overall goals using a collaborative approach as they would through whatever alternative forums are available to them. • Adequate Resources and Time. The parties can obtain adequate resources to participate, including technical support, and there is adequate time to conduct a meaningful and well- designed process. • Action-Forcing Deadline. There is some sort of legislative, administrative or judicial deadline or opportunity, or some other forcing mechanism requiring a decision within the foreseeable future. • No Delay. The collaborative effort will not cause unreasonable delay. • Implementation Mechanism. A mechanism exists to implement a consensus agreement, if . one is reached. RESOLVE considered the above elements as it analyzed the interviews and utilized these characteristics to help evaluate the feasibility or utility of a collaborative effort now, in the past, and in the future. Current Opportunities for Collaboration Key Characteristics. Many of the prerequisites to a successful collaboration are identifiable in the Bull Mountain controversy. For example, it appears likely that willing parties could identify clear objectives for a collaborative process (e.g., agreement on what entities would provide which urban services for Bull Mountain and how that could be accomplished) and a set of issues that are manageable in number even if challenging to resolve. In addition, there appear to be identifiable parties that are representative of the range of perspectives on the issues andconcerns (recognizing that it would be important to ensure that a full range of resident perspectives are in fact represented at the table). There also seemed to be sufficient impetus to keep a resolution process moving forward (even in the absence of some specific action-forcing deadline) and sufficient time to conduct a meaningful process, provided that the parties could agree to pausing their other efforts to achieve their objectives. RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 5 DRAFT 07-27-06 However, at the outset of RESOLVE's assessment process, it became clear that, in the opinion of several key parties, the opportunity for any collaborative process to address the issues of concern had passed, at least for the moment. In particular, the interviews revealed that some interviewees were determined to investigate the possibility of incorporating a separate City of Bull Mountain as a vehicle for resolving their concerns and achieving their goals. Similarly, other interviewees expressed an inclination to let the proponents of incorporation pursue their efforts and to see whether Bull Mountain residents in general supported the bid for incorporation and if it would make it to the ballot in an upcoming election. Consequently, with some of the parties believing that their best result is achievable in a different forum, a key characteristic needed to ensure a likelihood of successful collaboration appears to be absent at this point in time. Barriers to Collaboration. The interviews revealed other potential barriers to a successful collaborative effort, including a significant history of sharp disagreement among some of the parties. The interviews revealed that as differences of opinion over the issues evolved, the level of conflict among some of the parties increased and the relationship between the parties was significantly challenged. Some interviewees suggested that for some of the individuals involved, relationships were so damaged that it was difficult to envision any future opportunity to work collaboratively. In light of this history, at the immediate time it is questionable whether all of the parties could participate in a collaborative process in good faith without some significant preliminary efforts at reconciliation. Consequently, there maybe some advantage to the current "break" in the debate over these issues that has been afforded by the effort to investigate incorporation. It maybe that with some time, all the parties will be more interested in a collaborative approach, depending on how the process proceeds leading up to a vote on incorporation. Timing. As described above, the interviews suggested that the current timing was not supportive of a collaborative process for a variety of reasons including the availability of an additional forum and the status of the relationship between the parties. The interviews also suggested, however, that there may have been a window of opportunity to bring all the parties to the table and to have initiated some sort of process back in the Spring of 2005. At this point in time, when the OCR' was initially approached by the Friends of Bull Mountain and when OCR' had additional conversations with the City of Tigard, Washington County and other parties, incorporation was not being actively pursued and the relationships among the parties were not as challenged as they were to become several months later. The parties and OCP both seem to acknowledge that one significant reason that a collaborative process did not move forward at that time, despite the apparent interest of at least some of the key parties, was the lack of resources readily available to support such a process. Specifically, resources were not available to obtain the assistance of a professional neutral mediator or facilitator to conduct a convening assessment. The OCP had not yet received a legislative appropriation to provide these services, and the parties themselves were too unfamiliar with and skeptical of the implications of contributing to funding an assessment to be willing to do so. Future Opportunities for Collaboration While testing the assumption by many that the time was past for any collaborative process, RESOLVE asked interviewees whether they foresaw a need for or value in a potential collaborative RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 6 DRAFT 07-27-06 process in the future. Interviewees responses were varied, but many recognized several scenarios in which a collaborative process could be valuable. Following a vote on incorporation, there may be additional opportunities for collaboration regardless of whether the proposal to incorporate is approved or fails. If the bid for incorporation were to succeed, there may be a need for the parties, including the new city, Tigard, and Washington County as well as the various urban service providers, to reach agreement on various aspects of their new, post-incorporation relationship. If the bid for incorporation fails, the parties may find themselves in a situation where the issues regarding annexation and the provision of urban services that were the subject of disagreement before the vote remain to be resolved. At that point, some or all of the parties may feel that a viable alternative to resolve these issues is a collaborative process. In the very near future, before a vote and as the effort to incorporate moves forward, it is also conceivable that there may be a need for interactions among the parties to resolve issues relating to the incorporation process (e.g., boundaries of a new city or the disposition of current intergovernmental agreements). If the parties have to meet prior to an election to resolve issues related to incorporation, the use of a structured collaborative process may have some value to the parties. V. Conclusion It appears that unless there are some narrow issues that could benefit from collaborative action leading up to a vote on incorporation, there is not currently an opportunity to move forward with a collaborative process. For at least the next several months, several key elements for a successful collaboration appear to be missing, including the willing, good faith participation of all the key parties and the absence of a preferred alternative forum. It does appear that there maybe opportunities in the future, following a vote either for or against incorporation, when a collaborative process may have value in helping these parties resolve issues or concerns related to governance, annexation and urban services in the Bull Mountain area. Through the assessment process, RESOLVE and OCP gathered considerable additional information related to the history of these issues and the perspectives of the various parties as to their nature and potential resolution. While not currently relevant here given that a process is not likely to move forward at this time, this information may be useful in the future to help the parties and a third party neutral mediator or facilitator set the stage for a successful collaborative effort to resolve these issues in the Bull Mountain area. OCP remains available to the parties as a resource to help them evaluate the need for and potential success of a future collaborative effort. RESOLVE and OCP also gathered information that may prove useful in helping other communities tackle similar issues related to governance, annexation, and urban services in unincorporated urban areas. As noted above, however, a lack of quickly available resources to support a collaborative effort may have resulted here in a lost opportunity to address these issues in a more timely and collaborative manner. The experience with the Bull Mountain area suggests the importance of having readily available resources to support timely neutral third parry assistance to residents and jurisdictions involved in disagreements over governance and urban services in unincorporated urban areas. RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - Assessment Report July 2006 Page 7 DRAFT 07-27-06 BULL MOUNTAIN CONVENING ASSESSMENT DRAFT ASSESSMENT REPORT ATTACHMENT 1 List of Interviewees and Other Contacts RESOLVE contacted and interviewed the following individuals in the process of preparing this report: City of Tigard Government Friends of Bull Mountain • Craig Dirksen, Mayor • Lisa Hamilton-Treick • Liz Newton, Assistant to the City • Julie Russell Manager • Richard A. Franzke • Nick Wilson, City Councilor • Keshmira McVey • S ally Harding, City Councilor Other Interviewees Washington County Government • Katie Keen, Tigard/Bull Mountain • Tom Brian, Chair, Board of Resident Commissioners • Ethan Seltzer, Professor of Urban Studies • Roy Rogers, County Commissioner and Planning, PSU • Ellen Conley, Senior Deputy County • Patt Opdyke, Citizen Involvement Administrator Coordinator, OSU Extension Washington • Joanne Rice, Planner County • Jerry Krummel, Oregon State Metro Representative • Carl Hosticka, Metro Councilor RESOLVE also contacted, or attempted to contact, the following individuals who either declined to be interviewed, suggested an alternative, or did not respond to our inquiries: • Craig Prosser, Tigard City Manager • Tom Coffee, Interim Director, Tigard Community Development Department • Charlie Cameron, Washington County Administrator (retired) • Teddi Duling, Tigard/Bull Mountain Resident • Beverly Froude, Tigard/Bull Mountain Resident • Barbara Sherman, Tigard/Bull Mountain Resident RESOLVE - Bull Mountain Convening Assessment - List of Interviewees and Contacts July 2006 Page 1 - - -7 1 ? I tw t~ i J r hY 'if= 1 „t ~ OL p I~ h I~ f1 f / ,r t tti4 ,h 1 AGENDA ITEM NO.2 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: August 8, 2006 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) 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. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend orparticipate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meetrngminutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: MAr K PA-B 69.11 q/~nl~ CQrl~1~f CUa/ Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address (`Ll l rf' S VV IQ.VV fgN 14,416 city '(&Mfl State ok p Zip 1), Phone No. ro?• 1*44-a Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address 3oZ -4'LIJ 13 L i City State Zip Phone No,' 3 6 z, ::-z()22 Name:-66-110 1 V. 111L Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help e presiding f~ficer pronounce: Address City J,CJl-vc' _ Zip 7S 6~~G State is-( Phone No. 4 J-2--`jIES Y.? CITIZEN COMMUNICATION Agenda Item # Meeting Date August 8, 2006 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Adoption of Tigard Downtown Implementation Strategy Prepared By. Phil Nachbar Dept Head Approval G CityMgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Shall the City Center Development Agency approve a resolution adopting the Tigard Downtown Implementation Strategy? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Downtown Implementation Strategy as is, or with modifications as appropriate. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Downtown Implementation Strategy is the key document intended to organize and prioritize policies and actions for the Downtown. The need for a "Strategic Action Plan" for Downtown which could be tracked and updated annually was a recommendation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Adoption of the Downtown Implementation Strategy provides specific direction to staff and the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAQ with regard to a work program over upcoming fiscal year (FY 06-07), and an overall strategy for Downtown. City Council was provided a current version of the Strategy at its June 20 work session. Since then, additional modifications pertaining to wording or graphics only have been made. No substantive changes have been made since the June 20 version. The Strategy has been reviewed and modified with input from the CCAC, City Council, City of Tigard Executive Staff, City Planning Staff, and the current Chair of the Streetscape Working Group. The CCAC endorsed the Strategy and recommended its adoption by the City Center Development Agency at its June 14 meeting. The Strategy was developed by researching the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, the Tigard Urban Renewal Plan, and determining the key policies and projects within those documents that could be used to organize a strategy. There were also many discussions with the CCAQ, former Downtown Task Force members, and staff before devising the Strategy. The Strategy incorporates the policy objectives of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, adopted by City Council on September 25, 2005, into a Strategy and set of "near-term" and "long-term" actions the City should take to implement the Plan. It includes 3 key strategies with 30 supporting actions, a 3-year action plan, and a 1-year work program. I:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2006\8-8-06 CCCDA - Adoption of Impl Strategy AIS revised for Aug 8.doc OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Central Business District (CBD) # 1) Provide opportunities to work proactively with Tigard Central Business District Association (TGBDA) businesses and property owners and citizens of Tigard to set the course for the future of the central business district. Strategy# 3) Develop strategies for public improvements in Tigard's central business district area (this area includes Main Street) and adjacent areas. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Resolution adopting the Tigard Downtown Implementation Strategy as the document to guide policies and actions for redevelopment of the Downtown FISCAL NOTES Adoption of the Downtown Implementation Strategy does not obligate the City to the expenditure of funds for any particular project. Funding of projects identified within the Strategy will come from tax increment funds, other funding sources normally available for Capital Improvement Program projects (Crn), and grants. I:\LRPLN\Counca Materials\2006\8-8-06 CCDA - Adoption of Impl Strategy AIS revised for Aug 8.doc MEMORANDUM rRTIM3D TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council Agenda Item No. 3 e For Agenda of August 8.2006 FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder L( RE: Three-Month Council Meeting Calendar DATE: July 26, 2006 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk August 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 15* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 29 Tuesday Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting - 7-9 pm, Tigard Water Auditorium September 4 Monday Labor Day Holiday - City Hall Closed 12* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 19* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 26* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall October 10* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 19* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 24* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 31 Tuesday Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting - 7-9 pm, Tigard Water Auditorium 1:1admltlty councIM-month calendar for 8-8-08 cc mtg.doc Agenda Item No. • Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2006 Council Meeting of Q® Meeting Date: August 8, 2006 Meeting Date: August 8, 2006 Meeting Date: August 15, 2006 Meeting Typerrime: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Workshop/6:30 p.m. Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Greeter: B. Dickinson Greeter: Greeter: Materials Due @ 5: July 25, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: July 25, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: August 1, 2006 City Manager Prosser Absent City Manager Prosser Absent Study Session Workshop Agenda CCDA - Adopt Downtown Implementation Senior Center Remodel - Site Committee Update - Strategy - Tom C./Phil N. - RES - 15 min. Business Meeting (continued) Loreen M. - 20 min. Legis. Public Hearing - Incidental Cultural CCAC Roles and Responsibilities Discussion - Consent Agenda Uses in Commercial Institutions - Code Tom. C. - 30 min. Designate Planning Comm. as the Comp. Plan Amendment - Tom C.- ORD - 15 min. (Continued Discuss Town Hall Audio-Visual Upgrade Steering Committee - Beth S./Tom C. - RES from July 11) Gary E. - 20 min. Appointment to Planning Comm. - Tom C. - RES TMC Truancy Chapter - Dickinson-ORD -20 min. Discuss Quello House - Tom C. - 15 min. Approve Bud. Amendment #1 for Purchase of Trans. Fin. Strat. Task Force Rec. Gus - 20 min. PPT City Council Report Card - Liz N. - 30 min. Replacement Backhoe -Michelle W. - RES Amendment of IGA's (Urban Planning Area Approve Bud. Amendment #2 for Purchase & Agreement and Urban Services Agreement) with Installation of Northview Park Play Structure Washington County - Tom C. - 5 min. - MO Michelle W. - RES Approve Bud. Amendment #3 for Water Bldg. Remodel - Michelle W. - RES LCRB - Award Contract for Hall Blvd./Spruce St. Sidewalk - Vannie N. LCRB - Award Contract for Construction of Tualatin River Trail - Vannie N. LCRB - Award Des. Cont. for Ph. 2 (Commercial St) for Downtown Streetscape. Project - Gus. - MO Business Meeting Rider Annexation - Tom C. - PHJQ -ORD - 15 min. Approve TMC Revisions Incorporating a - Right-of-Way Usage Fee - Nancy W.-ORD - 25 min. Approve TMC Revisions Incorporating a ROW Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 125 min. Time Avail: 200 min. - Time Scheduled: 115 min. Pres.& Restor. Policy - Nancy W.-ORD - 25 min. Time Left: 10 min. Time Left: 85 min. 1 7/31/2006 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2006 Meeting Date: August 22, 2006 Meeting Date: August 29, 2006 Meeting Date: September 12, 2006 Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: 5th Tues./7 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Location: - City Hall Location: Water Building Aud. Location: City Hall Greeter: Greeter: Greeter: Materials Due @ 5: August 6, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: August 15, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: August 29, 2006 Study Session Fifth Tuesday Meeting Study Session Discussion of Citywide Employee Survey - Sandy Z. - 15 min. Consideration of COLA for Mgmt./Prof. Group Sandy Z. - 10 min. Consent Agenda Consent Agenda LCRB - Award Pavement Major Maint. Program Const. Contract - Vannie N. - MO Appoint Bldg. Appeals Board Member - Tom C. Adopt Revisions to Council Groundrules - Liz N. IGA with Tri-Met & CWS for Fanno & Summer Business Meeting Creek Wetland Mit. Sites - Brian R. Proclaim Sept. 17-23 Constitution Week - 5 min. Acceptance of $150,000 in Matching Funds to Business Meeting Construct the Jim Griffith Memorial Skate Park Proclaim September as National Drug Addiction Dan Plaza - 10 min. Recovery Month - Craig D. - 5 min. Recognize Jim Wolf - Bill D. - need RTS 2nd Quarter Goal Update - Liz N. - 5 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 5 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 15 min. Time Left: 130 min. Time Left: 120 min. 1 7/31/2006 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2006 Meeting Date: September 19, 2006 Meeting Date: September 26, 2006 Meeting Date: October 7 Meeting Type/Time: Workshop/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Special Joint Mtg. Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Location: Greeter: Greeter: Greeter: Materials Due @ 5: September 5, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: September 12, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: Workshop Agenda Study Session Joint Meeting with Budget Committee - Bob S. - 40 min. SI Special Joint Meeting - TTSD & Cities of Streetscape Plan - Tom C. - need RTS Tigard and Tualatin. Invitation to attend: GIS Implementation - Bob S. - need RTS King City & Durham Consent Agenda Business Meeting Quarterly Emergency Management Program Update - Mike L. 20 min. Update of Proposed WCCLS Operational Levy - Margaret B. - 15 min. Finalization of Sewer Reim. Dist. #32 (Fern St.) Info. Public Hearing, PPT, Gus D. - RES - 10 min. Time Avail: 200 min. - Time Scheduled: 40 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 45 min. Time Left: 160 min. Time Left: 90 min. 7/31/2006 Agenda Item # 3 Meeting Date August 8; 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Tide Designate the Planning Commission as the Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee Prepared By: Beth St. Amand Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approvalr- W(0~ CV ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council adopt a resolution designating the Planning Commission as the Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt resolution designating the Planning Commission as the Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • The City is updating its Comprehensive Plan. The Plan guides City decisions on land use, the provision of public facilities and services, and community livability for the next 20 years. • The proposed Comprehensive Plan work program was reviewed at the Council's Feb. 21, 2006, meeting, which included designating the Planning Commission as the Plan's Steering Committee. • This action is consistent with Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Comprehensive Plan Strategy #1, under Growth & Growth Management, and the Planning Commission's responsibilities as defined by the Tigard Municipal Code Section 2.08, which include making recommendations to the City Council regarding the City's Comprehensive Plan. • At the Planning Commission's June 19, 2006, meeting, the Commission requested that the Council formally designate the Commission as the Steering Committee by resolution. • At the Council's July 18, 2006, meeting, this agenda item was previewed briefly for Council's comment; no comments were made at that time. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not designating the Planning Commission as the Steering Committee. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Tigard Beyond Tomorrow: Growth and Growth Management No. 6: The City Comprehensive Plan shall be reviewed and revised to: • Accommodate growth while protecting the character and livability of new and established neighborhoods; • Provide for the preservation of the natural environment and open space throughout the community; • Provide for parks and alternative transportation (e.g., bike paths); • Create community gathering places. Strategy #1: The Planning Commission shall develop an update process, using community outreach. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Resolution FISCAL NOTES Not applicable. I:LLRPLMCoundl Matedals12008t8 8 06 AIS CompPlan.doc Agenda Item # / Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Appointment to the Planning Commission r' - Prepared By. T. Coffee Dept Head Approval a City Mgr Approvah ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should Council appoint Jeremy Vermilyea to the Planning Commission to fill the unexpired term of former Commissioner Teddi Duling? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends appointing Jeremy Verrnilyea, Planning Commission alternate, to fill the unexpired term of Commissioner Duling. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Teddi Duling resigned from the Planning Commission on July 18, 2006. Her term as a Planning Commissioner was scheduled to expire December 31, 2006. On April 25, 2006, Council appointed Jeremy Vermilyea as an alternate to the Planning Commission. If he is appointed to fill the vacant Planning Commission seat, his term will expire December 31, 2006. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Visioning Goal # 1- The City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed resolution appointing Jeremy Vermilyea as a Planning Commissioner. FISCAL NOTES N/A Agenda Item # ? Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title A Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #1 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Sanitary Sewer Division for Purchase of a Replacement Backhoe. Prepared By: Michelle Wareing Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval:ffl ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should City Council approve Budget Amendment #1 to increase appropriations for purchase of a replacement Backhoe, which was originally budgeted for in FY 2005-06, but won't be received until the end of July 2006? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #1. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In FY 2005-06, the Sanitary Sewer Division budgeted to replace a backhoe. The Backhoe was ordered in February 2006 and it was anticipated it would arrive in May 2006. Due to manufacturing problems, the backhoe delivery was delayed and is expected to be delivered by the end of July 2006. Under Generally Accepted Accounting Practices (GAAP), expenses are recorded when goods are received, not when orders are placed. Therefore, these expenses will be charged to, the FY 2006-07 budget. The Division did not budget for these expenses in FY 2006-07 as' it was anticipated that the backhoe would be received prior to July 1, 2006. Because the backhoe replacement appropriation was not spent in FY 2005-06, the ending fund balance carried into FY 2006-07 as a beginning fund balance includes those unused appropriations. Budget Amendment #1 transfers $84,899 from the Sanitary Sewer Fund contingency to the Sanitary Sewer operating budget. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not approve Budget Amendment #1. The Division will show a year-end over-expenditure in capital outlay. It may or may not overspend its budget COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. Memo from Eric Hand to Dennis Koellermeier FISCAL, NOTES The Resolution transfers $84,899 from the Sanitary Sewer Fund contingency to the Public Works, Sanitary Sewer Division budget. MEMORANDUM TO: Dennis Koellermeier, Public Works Director FROM Eric Hand, Wastewater/Storm Repair Supervisor RE: Budget Amendment for Replacement Backhoe DATE: 7/18/06 I am requesting a budget amendment to the FY 06/07 sanitary sewer division budget, (account 500-2120-703.000), to appropriate funds in the amount of $84,899.00. These monies will be used to purchase a replacement backhoe that has been ordered and is expected to arrive by the end of July 2006. The 05/06 sanitary sewer budget contained monies for replacement of this backhoe. The replacement backhoe was approved by Council and ordered using cooperative purchasing language in the State of Oregon bid specifications. This backhoe was originally due to arrive in May 2006 but was delayed due to a problem with manufacturing. See attached e-mail from Halton Inc. Please contact me at x2607 if you need additional information. Page 1 of 2 From: Grant McConchie/Halton To: kculligan@haltonco.com cc: Mike Misovetz/Halton@Halton Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 02:20PM Subject: Fw: E SERIES BHL - ALL DLRS - TEMPORARILY HALT DELIVERY OF 420E AND 430E FOR INSPECTION - MUST READ - ACTION REQUIRED!! Grant McConchie Halton Tractor Company. -----Forwarded by Grant McConchie/Halton on 05/10/2006 02:19PM To: From: "Jean S. Hurt" <Hurt_Jean_S@cat.com> Date: 05/10/2006 02:17PM Subject: E SERIES BHL - ALL DLRS - TEMPORARILY HALT DELIVERY OF 420E AND 430E FOR INSPECTION - MUST READ - ACTION REQUIRED!! o TEMPORARY HALT IN DELIVERY OF 420E AND 430E Attn: Dealer Sales Coordinators - Please share this message immediately with your Sales Management as well as Rental Personnel we have discovered a potential RODS weld problem on E Series BHL made in Clayton, NC. A weld may be missing or just not long enough on one or both of the front cab / canopy mounts. This is a different issue than the one that affects the front windshield. This problem is on a fairly small number of machines (3 - 5%) but all E Series machines must be inspected to determine if any rework is required. The problem is less severe on the 416E (we will address the 416E as well, but later) so we are giving the following advice regarding the 420E and 430E. Effective immediately, do not deliver any 420E or 430E BHL to customers or to your Rental Fleet until a RODS weld inspection is completed and documentation is provided to Cat. A similar note is being sent to Dealer TC's with inspection, documentation, and related information including go / no shipping parameters. Units that pass these dealer completed steps can be delivered to customers and rental fleets. A TIB will be available early next week with detailed instructions. Inspections at the plant have been completed with a small number being detained for rework. The affected orders and dealers will be notified individually. The issue is contained and shipments have resumed from the factory. We are devising a plan to inspect and rework units that are in customer hands. More information regarding that process will be forthcoming. We will provide additional details on the effect of this issue on factory shipments in another communication on Thursday, May 11. In the meantime, http://Iotbox/mail/mmisovet.nsf/($Inbox)/4D5B7378231074A28825716AO07537D8/?Ope... 5/15/2006 Page 2 of 2 we appreciate your patience and will continue to provide updates. Regards Jean Hurt Demand Planning 309/675-1265 a http://Iotbox/mail/mmisovet.nsf/($Inbox)/4D5B7378231074A28825716A007537D8/?Ope... 5/15/2006 Agenda Item # Meeting Date August 8. 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title A Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #2 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Parks Capital Projects Budget Within the Community Investment Program for Purchase and Installation of a Play Structure at Northview Park. Prepared By: Michelle Wareing Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: M/~ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should City Council approve Budget Amendment #2 to increase appropriations for purchase and installation of a play structure at Northview Park, which was originally budgeted for in FY 2005-06, but won't be received until after July 1, 2006? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #2. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In FY 2005-06, the Parks Capital Projects budget within the Community Investment Program included $25,000 for purchase and installation of a play structure at Northview Park. The structure was ordered early in 2006, but due to delays caused by transferring the state bid listing from the prior playground vendor to the current vendor, the structure will not be received nor installed prior to July 1, 2006. Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), expenses are recorded when goods are received, not when orders are placed. Therefore, these expenses will be charged to the FY 2006-07 budget. The Parks capital project budget for FY 2006-07 does not include appropriations for this project as it was anticipated that the play structure would be received and installed prior to July 1, 2006. Because the project appropriation was not spent in FY 2005-06, the ending fund balance carried into FY 2006-07 as the beginning fund balance includes those unused appropriations. Budget Amendment #2 transfers $25,000 from the Parks Capital Fund contingency to the Parks Capital Projects budget. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not approve Budget Amendment #2. The Northview Park Play Structure project will show a year-end over- expenditure. The Parks Capital Projects budget may or may not be overspent. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. Memo from Steve Martin to Dennis Koellermeier. FISCAL NOTES This resolution transfers $25,000 from the Parks Capital Fund contingency to the Parks Capital Projects budget. 41 MEMORANDUM 9 A TO: Dennis Koellermeier FROM Steve Mattmi, an Plaza RE: Northview Play Structure DATE: June 6, 2006 The Parks Division is requesting a budget amendment for the Northview Park play structure money to be carried to the 2006-07 budget. Currently the play structure is in the 2005-06 budget under 225-6400-754085. We would like to carry $25,000 to the CIP for 2006-07 to allow for the construction of this playground in the upcoming fiscal year. This action has come about because of the time lag in transferring the state bid listing from the past playground vendor to the future vendor of Natural Structures Playgrounds. The status of the listing transfer, started months ago, is still unfinished and has raised the probability that the structure will not be deliverable before the end of the fiscal year. This and the time needed to install the structure have prompted me to ask for a budget amendment to make the funds available in 2006-07. This will allow the transfer of the state bid listing or the purchase of a different structure on the list. It will also allow time for a contractor to finish the installation of the structure later this summer. Agenda Item # Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title A Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #3 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Stormwater Capital Projects Budgets within the Community Investment Program for Funding of the Water Building Remodel. C~ Prepared By: Michelle Wareing Dept Head Approval: Q.IJJ City Mgr Approval: I ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should City Council approve Budget Amendment #3 to increase appropriations in the Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Stormwater Capital Projects budgets for funding of the Water Building remodel? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #3. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Duruig the budget process, the Budget Committee removed funding for the Water Building remodel from the budget and instead placed the funds in contingency. Staff was directed to bring additional information to Council before funding would be appropriated. At the July 18, 2006 City Council Study Session, Dennis Koellermeier, Public Works Director, presented Council with additional information regarding the remodel project. After the presentation and Council discussion, Council directed staff to proceed with the Water Building remodel and to prepare a budget amendment to appropriate the necessary funds for the project. Budget Amendment #3 transfers $400,000 from the Water Fund Contingency to the Water Capital Projects budget, $130,000 from the Sanitary Sewer Fund Contingency to the Sanitary Sewer Capital Projects budget, and $100,000 from the Stormwater Fund Contingency to the Stormwater Capital Projects budget for funding of the Water Building remodel. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT 2006 Tigard City Council Goal #2: Implement Downtown Plan Implement catalyst projects including improvements to Burnham Street and identify and purchase land for a downtown public gathering place. ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. FISCAL NOTES This resolution transfers $400,000 from the Water Fund Contingency to the Water Capital Projects budget, $130,000 from the Sanitary Sewer Fund Contingency to the Sanitary Sewer Capital Projects budget, and $100,000 from the Stormwater Fund Contingency to the Stormwater Capital Projects budget for funding of the Water Building remodel. Agenda Item # - - - a- Meeting Date August 8, 2006 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Award of Contract for Design Services for Phase 2 (,Commercial Street Streetscape) of the Tigard Downtown Comprehensive Streetscape Project Prepared By: A.P. Duenas Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Should the Local Contract Review Board approve the contract award to OTAK, Inc., to provide design services for Phase 2 (Commercial Street Streetscape) of the Tigard Downtown Comprehensive Streetscape Project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to OTAK, Inc., in the amount of $89,919.00 and authorize an additional amount of $8,992.00 to be reserved for contingencies and applied as needed. The total amount committed to Phase 2 is therefore $98,911.00. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY At its meeting on November 8, 2005, the Local Contract Review Board approved the contract award to OTAK, Inc., to provide design services for Phase 1 of the Tigard Downtown Comprehensive Streetscape Project and authorized the City Manager to enter into a separate contract at a later date with the same consultant (assuming satisfactory negotiations and agreement on price) for the subsequent two phases, Commercial Street Streetscape (Phase 2) and Burnham Street Improvements (Phase 3). The Commercial Street.project is identified as a catalyst project to kickstart the implementation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and upon completion will provide pedestrian access to the downtown area and the commuter rail station from the residential area west of the Highway 99W overpass. In addition, through implementation of streetscape design elements and gateway treatment, it will become one of the enhanced gateways into the Tigard downtown area. The original Request for Proposal included design services for all three phases. However, because the streetscape design was expected to determine the design elements to be included in Phases 2 and 3, the contract award for those two phases were withheld with the intention of executing an additional contract for those two phases once the design concepts were established and the scope of work for the next two phases were better defined. Phase 3 (Burnham Street Improvements) was awarded by the LCRB at its meeting on July 18, 2006. After extensive negotiations, the City and the consultant have reached agreement on the fees for Phase 2 (Commercial Street Streetscape). The fees agreed upon are itemized as follows: Basic Design: $64,869.00 Gateway Design: $ 8,179.00 Reimbursables: $ 3,952.00 Total Design Services: $77,000.00 Additional Services: Public Involvement: $ 3,204.00 Engineering Services During Construction: $ 8,715.00 Reimbursables: $ 1,000.00 Total Additional Services: $11,919.00 Total Contract Amount: $89,919.00 Contingency amount: $ 8,992.00 Total funding commitment requested: $98,911.00 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Street and streetscape improvements, together with the gateway treatment, on Commercial Street meet the Council Goal to "Implement Downtown Plan." The project also meets the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goals of "Improve Traffic Safety," "Improve Traffic Flow," and "Alternative Modes of Transportation will be Available and Use Shall be Maximized." ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES The project is funded in FY 2006-07 from the Gas Tax Fund in the amount of $400,000 for the street project and $75,000 for the gateway treatment broken down as follows: CDBG grant: $91,300 Commercial Street Improvements including streetscape: Gas Tax dollars in the amount of $308,700 Gateway treatment: Gas Tax dollars in the amount of $75,000 The funding available is sufficient to allow award of the contract to OTAK, Inc., for the services as defined above. Contract award by the LCRB will allow Phase 2 of the Tigard Comprehensive Streetscape project to proceed into the design phase leading to construction. Because the project is partially funded by a Community Development Block Grant with an expiration date of December 31, 2007, it is essential that the design of the project begin as soon as possible so that the project design can be performed and construction completed prior to the expiration of the grant period. Y. teng%gus%council agenda summariesNew agenda summary formaM-08.00 award of contract for design services-commerclal street ais.doc Agenda Item # r~ Meeting Date August 8, 2006 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title: Award of Contract for the Construction of the Tualatin River Trail Pre aced B : Vannie N en Dept Head Approval: Ci M A roval: CT W- I ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve the contract award for the construction of the Tualatin River trail? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to RC Landworks, Inc. in the amount of $99,540.80 and authorize an additional amount of $9,954.00 to be reserved for contingencies and applied as needed as the project goes through construction. The total amount committed to the project is therefore $109,494.80. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • The project was advertised forbids on June 20 and June 22, 2006 in The Daily Journal of Commerce and The Timer respectively. Bids were opened on July 5, 2006 at 2:15 P.M. and the bid results are: RC Landworks Portland, OR $ 99,540.80 (low bid) Andersen Pacific Ridgefield, WA $104,773.50 D&D Concrete & Utiltilities Tualatin, OR $113,818.00 Capital Concrete Aumsville, OR $118,363.50 S-2 Contractors Aurora, OR $179,299.80 Engineer's Estimate Range $80,400 to $98,400 • This project will construct an 8-foot wide concrete multi-use trail beginning from an existing concrete path in Cook Park to the Portland & Western Railroad Underpass. This trail segment is part of a long standing three-city plan to construct a pedestrian bridge over the Tualatin River that will interconnect the trail systems and major parks of the adjoining cities of Tigard, Tualatin and Durham. The bridge is being constructed under oversight by the City of Tualatin. • The trail is 1,500 feet long of which 1,100 feet will be fully constructed by the City of Tigard. The remaining 400 feet will be constructed by the City after it has been graded and backfilled with rock by the bridge project. The trail is located entirely within the 100-year floodplain of Tualatin River, and the land through which the trail will travel is owned by Clean Water Services (CWS). • A Sensitive Lands permit has been obtained and a 25-foot wide trail easement has been granted by CWS. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The completed trail supports the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic goal of "Alternative modes of transportation are maximized". ATTACHMENT LIST Project location map FISCAL NOTES The project is funded by the Oregon Parks and Recreation District in the amount of $42,415.00 and the City's Parks Capital Fund in the amount of $55,115.00 for a total of $97,530.00. The total project cost is $125,000, which includes: - Construction: $109,494.80 - Wetland Mitigation: $10,000 - Construction Inspection: $5,000 Total: $125,000 (rounded) Available Budget: $97,530 Shortfall: $28,000 (rounded) The shortfall of $28,000 will be covered through a budget amendment request tentatively scheduled for August 22, 2006. The budget amendment will transfer $28,000 from the Parks Capital Fund contingency to the Parks Capital Projects budget to fund the additional amount needed. TUALATIN RIVER TRAIL t3 Exist concrete path N a 3 41 NO SCALE a 0 1100' to be completely i constructed by the My 1 i 400' to be I paved by the My 1 1 Exist path I ~ I 1 Hlbl WRIER LINE / , ~ 1 1 , % r~ ✓ Agenda Item # J Meeting Date August 8 2006 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title: Rejection of Bids for the Construction of Hall Boulevard Sidewalk li Prepared B : Vannie N en Dept Head Approval: City M Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Shall the Local Contract Review Board reject bids for the construction of Hall Boulevard Sidewalk (from Spruce Street to 850 feet south)? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, reject the single bid received. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • The project was advertised for bids on June 27 in Daily Journal of Commerce, June 28 in El Latino and June 29 and July 6, 2006 in The Times. The original bid opening was scheduled for July 11, 2006. However, since the plan holder list indicated the possibility that no bids would be submitted, Addendum No. 1 was issued to extend the bid opening to July 25 to allow contractors more time to prFpare their bids. Addendum No. 2 was issued on July 19, 2006 to provide bidders with current Davis-Bacon wage rates. The bid results are: All Concrete Specialties Portland, OR $ 343,959.41 Engineer's Estimate Range $210,000 to $256,000 • Because only one bid was received and the bid amount is almost 50% more than the average Engineer's estimate, rejection of the submitted bid is recommended. An analysis of the bid tabulation indicates that the unit bid prices are more than double those expected for "Roadway Excavation", "Concrete Curb & Sidewalk", "Asphaltic Concrete", "Manhole", and "Trench Excavation & Backfill" bid items. • Contractors, who registered their names on the plan holder list, specified that they were too busy during the summer to bid the project and extending the bid opening schedule would not help the City to solicit more bids. Upon Local Contract Review Board rejection of bids, staff plans to re-bid the project early in 2007 for the construction to begin in late winter or early spring next year. Since most contractors would not have committed to other projects early in the calendar year, this strategy should result in more bid submittals and hopefully lower bids. • The proposed project would have included construction of approximately 900 feet of concrete sidewalk on the west side of Hall Boulevard from Spruce Street to 850 feet south; reconstruction of eight concrete driveway aprons as required by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT); construction of drainage pipes and catch basins to collect water runoff, which currently flows into existing ditches; and construction of planter strips at locations where right-of-way acquisition is not required and impacts to existing properties are negligible. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS AND T'IGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The completed trail supports the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic goal of "Alternative modes of transportation are maximized". ATTACHMENT LIST Project location map FISCAL NOTES The project is funded by the Oregon Parks and Recreation District in the amount of $42,415.00 and the City's Parks Capital Fund in the amount of $55,115.00 for a total of $97,530.00. The total project cost is $125,000, which includes: - Construction: $109,494.80 - Wetland Mitigation: $10,000 - Construction Inspection: $5M0 Total: $125,000 (rounded) Available Budget: $97,530 Shortfall: $28,000 (rounded) The shortfall of $28,000 will be covered through a budget amendment request tentatively scheduled for August 22, 2006. The budget amendment will transfer $28,000 from the Parks Capital Fund contingency to the Parks Capital Projects budget to fund the additional amount needed. HALL BOULEVARD SIDEWALK INSTALLATION 90 TH A VE 89 TH A VE W ~ z ~ C HALL BL VD HALL BLVD 85 TH A VE PROJECT LOCATION 93RD A VE VICINITY MAP NO SCALE Agenda Item # Meeting Date 810812006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Rider Annexation (ZCA2006-00001) Prepared By: Emily Eng Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council approve annexation of 1.26 acres of land (Zone Change Annexation - ZCA2006-00001) located on the south side of SW Bull Mountain Road and east of SW 1334 Avenue? The proposed territory is an island surrounded by City limits and can be served by urban services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the recommended ordinance annexing the subject territory into the City of Tigard. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY State law (ORS 222.125) authorizes a city to annex contiguous land when owners of real property in the proposed annexation territory submit a petition to the legislative body of the city. The property owner and the resident/registered voter of 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road (WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 02101) have submitted a petition for annexation to the City of Tigard. Because all adjacent properties are within city limits, it was not necessary to invite adjacent owners to join the annexation. The proposed annexation territory (Rider Annexation) is a 1.26-acre island of unincorporated territory and contiguous to the City on four (4) sides. The proposed territory is surrounded by the Alberta Rider School on three (3) sides and is adjacent to SW Bull Mountain Road on its northern boundary. The proposed annexation does not include any right- of-way because the adjacent right-of-way is already within the City (ZCA91-00012 Foran Annexation). No Goal 5 resources, regionally significant habitat or other sensitive lands have been identified on the site. The Bull Mountain Community Plan does not identify any significant natural resources on the site. The applicant desires to annex the proposed territory so that it can receive sewer services.. Because of the failing onsite gray water disposal system, the proposed territory has been connected to the City sewer system; however, the connection is contingent upon annexation. State law (ORS 222.750) also authorizes a city to annex unincorporated territory surrounded by the corporate boundaries of that city with or without consent from property owners, voters or residents within the territory. While the proposed annexation could proceed in accordance with ORS 222.750, the City is processing the proposed annexation in accordance with ORS 222.125 because the property owner initiated the annexation request. The applicable review criteria for this application are ORS Chapter 222; Metro Code Chapter 3.09; City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10, and Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390. Staff finds that the proposed annexation (ZCA2006-00001) meets all the approval criteria and recommends that the Council approve ZCA2006-00001 by adoption of the attached ordinance. Key Facts: 1. The proposed territory is an island of unincorporated territory, surrounded by the City limits; 2. Urban services are available to serve the proposed territory; 3. The proposed territory is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary and Metro's Urban Growth Boundary; and 4. The proposed territory is within the City's Urban Services Area and Area of Interest. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not approving ZCA2006-00001 if it does not meet the applicable review criteria. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Growth and Growth Management, Goal #2: Urban services will be provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth boundary. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: An Ordinance Annexing 1.26 Acres, Approving Rider Annexation (ZCA2006-00001) and Withdrawing Property from the Tigard Water District, Washington County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District. Exhibit A: Legal Description of Proposed Annexation Territory Exhibit B: Washington County Taxation and Assessment Map for Proposed Annexation Territory Exhibit C: Petition for, and Consent to, Annexation to the City of Tigard Exhibit D: Staff Report to the City Council Attachment 2: Site Map of Proposed Annexation Territory. FISCAL NOTES If approved, the proposed annexation territory would not be transferred to the City's tax roll until July 1, 2007. Annexations must be final by March 31 of the same calendar year for the tax year beginning July 1. AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: August 8, 2006 cA b It C PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TO CONSIDER THE ANNEXATION OF THE RIDER PROPERTY (ZCA 2006-00001) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: REQUEST:- The applicant is requesting annexation of one (1) parcel containing 1.21 acres into the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S109AC, Tax Lot 02101. The subject parcel is located south of SW Bull Mountain Road and east of SW 133`d Avenue, on the site of the Alberta Rider School. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapter 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate m City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM NO.4 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Proponent (Speaking in Favor) Opponent (Spealdng Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Name: Name: Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address Address City City City State zip State Zip State Zip Phone No. Phone No. Phone No. Name: Name: Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address Address City City City State Zip State Zip State Zip Phone No. Phone No. Phone No. CITY OF TIGARD ; COMMUNITY = SPt11 A MEWS OREGON S ~ 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • PO PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: Box 22109 • Portland, OR 97269 The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on Phone: 503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 Tuesday August S. 2006 at 7:30 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Email: legals@commnewspapers.com Town Hall Room, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060E. I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division depose and say that I am the Accounting (Staff contact: Emily Eng) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, y g Oregon 97223, or by calling at 503-639-4171. Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2006-00001 Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of RIDER ANNEXATION general circulation, published at Beaverton, in REQUEST: The applicant is requesting annexation of one (1) the aforesaid county and state, as defined by parcel containing 1.21 acres into the City of Tigard. LOCA- ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that TION: 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map No. 2S109AC, Tax Lot 02101. The subject par- cel is located south of SW Bull Mountain Road and east of SW City of Tigard 1133rd Avenue, on the site of the Alberta Rider School. ZONE:_ R- Public Notice-Rider Annexation 7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district TT10835 is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residen- a copy of which is hereto annexed, was tial units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplex- published in the entire issue of said es, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home newspaper for parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic 2 and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLIC- ABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for successive and consecutive weeks in the annexations are set out in Community Development Code following issues Chapters 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and July 20, 2006 10; ORS Chapter 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. July 27, 2006 • ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE, ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION ~n ~y (o l~ ~q AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWEN- TY-FIVE CENTS (25¢) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE C1 Y 1 ali-4-11P CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Mana er) AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE F6R INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25¢) PER PAGE, OR THE CUR Subscribed and sworn to before me this RENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE July 27, 2006 REQUEST. INFORMATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE BY CON- TACTING THE STAFF CONTACT LISTED Publish 7/20, 7/27/2006 TT0835 OTAR PUBLIC FOR OREGON - " 'FJ I T-1 1f (J NM MY commission expires l7(JNM »AP ~g 1 7r i r RIDER Acct#10093001 . ; rf v:! I ~I7a 1 , i _ Patricia Lunsford OFFICIAL; SUZETTE I C F- ~ City I I Y of Tigard NOTARY PUBLIC. ) 13125 SW Hall Blvd. COMMISSION Nir_ Tigard, OR 97223 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES I ' _ mm SIze:2 x 10.5 _ Amount Due $350.70 I*..._ 'Remit to address above ~ -~-a- 1; ..I.. YID Rider Property - ZCA 2006-00001 Agenda Item #4 - August 8, 2006 Statement by City Attorney - Quasi-Judicial Land Use Hearing Procedures A copy of the rules of procedure for today's hearing is available at the entrance. The staff report on this hearing has been available for viewing and downloading on the City's website and a paper copy of the staff report has been available in the Tigard Public Library for the last seven days. The Council's role in this hearing is to make a land use decision under existing laws. The Council cannot change the law for the land use application now under consideration. Any person may offer testimony. Please wait until you are asked to speak by the Mayor and try to limit your remarks to the application standards for the application. Members of the City Council will be asked whether they have any conflicts of interest. If a Council member has an actual conflict, the Council member will not participate. Council members must declare any contacts about this case with a member of the public. Council members must also declare if they have independent knowledge of relevant facts, such as from a visit to the site in question. A Council member who describes ex parte contacts or independent information may still participate in the decision. After the discussion of conflicts and ex parte contacts, any person may challenge the participation of a Council member or rebut any statements made. The Council member in question may respond to such a challenge. Tonight, City staff will summarize the written staff report. Then the parties requesting annexation and those in favor of the proposal testify. Next witnesses who oppose the application or who have questions or concerns testify. If there is opposition or if there are questions, the proponents can respond to them. The Council members also may ask the staff and the witnesses questions throughout the hearing until the record closes. After all testimony is taken, including any rebuttal, the proponents can make a closing statement. After the record is closed, the City Council will deliberate about what to do with the application. During deliberations, the City Council may re-open the public portion of the hearing if necessary to receive additional evidence before making a decision. You may testify orally or in writing before the close of the public record to preserve your right to appeal the Council's decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals. You should to raise an issue clearly enough so that Council understands and can address the issue precludes an appeal on that issue. Please do not repeat testimony offered by yourself or earlier witnesses. If you agree with the statement of an earlier witness, please just state that and add any additional points of your own. Please refrain from disruptive demonstrations. Comments from the audience will not be part of the record. The point is, come to the microphone to get your comments on the tape, otherwise, they won't be preserved for appeal. When you are called to testify, please come forward to the table. Please begin your testimony by giving your name, spelling your last name, and give your full mailing address including zip code. If you represent someone else, please say so. If you have any exhibits you want us to consider, such as a copy of your testimony, photographs, petitions, or other documents or physical evidence, at the close of your comments you must hand all new exhibits to the City Recorder who will mark these exhibits as part of the record. The City staff will keep exhibits until appeal opportunities expire, and then you can ask them to return your exhibits. i:tadm%cathytccaNquasi judicial rules of procedureVules of procedure - city attorney qj statement 44 - rider property - 8.8-06.doc i. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 2006- r D AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING 1.26 ACRES, APPROVING RIDER ANNEXATION (ZCA2006-00001), AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT #1, AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(B) and 222.170 to initiate an annexation upon receiving consent in writing from a majority of the electors registered in the territory proposed to be annexed and written consent from owners of more than half the land in the territory proposed to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(5) and 222.520 to withdraw properties which currently he within the boundary of the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on August 8, 2006, to consider the annexation of one (1) parcel (WCTM 1S209AC02101) of land on the south side of SW Bull Mountain Road and east of SW 133rd Avenue and withdrawal of said property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.520(2) the City is liable to the Water District for certain debt obligations, however, in this instance the Water District has no debt for the City to assume, therefore, no option regarding the assumption of debt needs to be made; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Metro 3.09, ORS 222.120 and 222.524, notice was given and the City held a public hearing on the issue of the annexation into the City and withdrawal of the annexed property from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District on August 8, 2006; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District by Ordinance; and , WHEREAS, the Tigard Development Code states that upon annexation, the zone is automatically changed to the City zoning most closely conforming to the County zoning; and ORDINANCE NO. 2006- ZCA2006-00001Rider Annexation Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the zoning district at the time of application was R-7, an existing City zone that was adopted by the County, and the zoning after annexation would automatically become City of Tigard R-7, and by annexation the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Tigard goes into effect; and WHEREAS, the annexation has been processed in accordance with the requirements of Metro 3.09 and has been reviewed for compliance with the Tigard Community Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan and the.annexation substantially addresses the standards in Metro 3.09 regulating annexations; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of the annexed properties from the applicable service districts is in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby annexes the parcel described in the attached Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" and withdraws said parcel from the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District SECTION 2: The Tigard City Council adopts the "Staff Report to the City Council" as findings in support of this decision; a copy is attached hereto as. Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor and posting by the City Recorder. SECTION 4: City staff is directed to take all necessary measures to implement the annexation, including certified copies of the Ordinance with Metro for administrative processing, filing with state and county agencies as required by law, and providing notice to utilities. SECTION 5: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 6: Pursuant to ORS 222.465, the effective date of the withdrawal of this property from the " Tigard Water District shall be July 1, 2007. SECTION 7: In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation shall be effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. ORDINANCE NO.2006--,D_ ZCA2006-00001Rider Annexation Page 2 of 3 t~ PASSED: By UrP 1 M OU S vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this-`` day of )2006. athy Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of Y-to , 2006. 2-9, Craig Dir en, Mayor Approv as to form: r - OLP City Atto ey Date ORDINANCE NO.2006-tO ZCA2006-00001Rider Annexation Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A } 4 Alberta Rider "Life Estate Parcel" Milstead & Associates Project No. 333-06 May 11, 2006 Amended May 12, 2006 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A tract of land, described as "Exhibit 3" by Document No. 97-048724, Washington County Deed Records, situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 9, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being a portion of that property, conveyed to Tigard-Tualatin School District 23J as "Exhibit B" by Document No. 2005-161425, Washington County Deed Records, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of SUMMIT RIDGE; thence, along the west line of said "Exhibit B" tract, North 01 014'56" East, 887.87 feet to the southerly right-of-way line of S.W. Bull Mountain Road (Co. Rd, 147-1/2) being 35.00 feet southerly of, when measured at right angles to the centerline thereof, as dedicated for street by Document 2005-017573; thence along said right-of-way line, South 59020'02" East, 171.62 feet to the west line of said."Exhibit 3" tract and the True Point of Beginning of this description; thence continuing along said right-of-way line, South 59020'02" East, 124.04 feet to the beginning of a 445.00 foot radius curve to the left; thence continuing along said right-of-way line on said curve, through a central angle of 13000'36" (chord bears South 65050'20" East, 103.09 feet) an arc length of 103.32 feet to the east line of said "Exhibit 3" tract; thence along said east line, South 01°14'56" West, 216.23 feet to the southeast corner thereof; thence along the south line of last said tract, South 88045'33" West, 203.00 feet to the southwest corner thereof, thence along the west line of last said tract North 01014'56" East, 317.32 feet to the True Point of Beginning. The area contained within said tract being 1.222 acres, more or less. Bearings are based upon S.N. 29,834 Washington County Surveyor Records. C~,R.~rrF~~® Looll B 1 ~ ~pp6 C:\DOCUME-1\Jong\LOCALS-1\Temp\LD333-06ARLEP.doo ~PgN~NCp,C~~°~RPpN ~w ~ STN R \ o SCALE: 1' = 120' rcb sJ ' S.W. BULL MTN. ROAD (CO.,.RD.147 1/2) I M cb N ~0 • ~O. 41.00' a o I N I O' z d Li W ~Q O ry 6 C. O I Q Z I N M 3 I I "SUMMIT RIDGE" I DATE 5/11/06 EXHIBIT MAP DRAWN BY ''I ~ESTLAKE NORTHEAST 1/4, SECTION 9, GRA CONSULTANTS INC. T.2S., RAW., W.M. CHECKED BY DDL WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON REVISIONS ENGINEERING ♦ SURVEYING ♦ PLANNING PACIFIC CORPORATE CENTIiR' MILSTEAD & ASSOCIATES JOB NO. 15115 S.W. SEQUOIA PARKWAY, SUITE 150 503 684-0652 333-06 TIGARD, OREGON 97224 FAX (5033 624-0157 2S 1 09AC 2S 1 09AC .bt ♦ I - 'L-r'~4.~ .'ra-+-. wLrTV LT:~a~r•. ~.IIIII;,;," tm~ ~'I 'A.>t;iia :'...w:"i' .,,..i1N1v+•~M,lR4Mgt \'•,.r~.-. - 7777 7 -TR )rA IV'll .Ise., .Y R1 mp 1I u(JYAd1p:, ^GFA ,'no. W. q;4, It,' i6" Z )5(5,11•__ gip`. .r.;;.' -11 v•. II' vy •.n5' r* .d I I W a I t: I♦ ;;rr J I .w•, n. -'•4 I I 't• R 1 ~•L• I 7` ,5 ~ ~•r~ • xxoo 'I • 1 z a I I I r a 1 ' II .ASN••.•• 5Y iMK \ i1.~511• gN',r `.~me, - y`. ~ rnw.-. Atl,~-.~. , 'III 00 I r•~ I s I J 'tri ' Yier': ,•rsq• I r J _ 8: I a. I •Y, 2600 ~.y I 100 1 _ .~K irw.'•`:•: u9K WASHINGTON COUNTY. OREGON O :e~'•t~, SW7/4NE7/4SECTION 09T2SR1WW.M. CALEV- 100' S 23-74 SYww i;:Zli• A. L~~v 20o AIK -d. 2600 :.00 tl. SW BIRDSVIEW STR Z a., nroW 200 pp k;°"a~J+•..b„mero;.;~y • C9 y~•: 4DO 600.:' .2 > 1900 •,6d•..•`.v ~ 1mK a u.K +k♦'b0j5 qpo ~ $ r~~: ~ •'"ti . 23-74 r• ",i;;` i 2000 y?S` •'n' ; `'~~n •'110p FOR ADDITIONAL MAPS VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT 1.otoc /C♦T e. ,'20- a9 ' www.60.washh,ptow.or.U6 .54.: r, •9 .]eK . 4 1600 554.5, Nb w I t1;'~ :g:•. • r b~5 ' 'a :'~e ; ,;`$Q Ac . eP ~ • 5r,. ~ ~a ere .'b,oao It•I • Ws. r r. , r a. - ••d,j 2101 i . 72.'' ~ y'.~r, • 8.' L:'.;;. 700 O e n1 00 W M Vie•ur I C'. WAXK r~, 11 tSW :.'Y t. '."'•l'`: 23-78 2 I 46.5.6 q - S''p,0o0 .'CG :'G4 C::, ;•.ijD.:;. , • •m±P. 1500 , Wye 6 '1 IS~ a7 F~ e,. H I 5!'U: ,B 23-78 ' _ eao I :ImmI'wa .'~'reae~ ee u1K I I ,g9 'by, ~.{1JJ !~ere• 1500•• , >1 Ulu 'IS" p LLJ '\,Nw,,.y,w,vaw(,,,,wawy,75^'1,~•,^+~' ao.w n 2100 r !20~'. 'n1400 N wc2R v:, Y,2t I9 900 TWaM nMIATN K,t00t wtT ewlio•n b 5 _ C - .MK E mam- m uaar4 wow,tawn~am I ` • ' i d . t i l . Y a ' m ° " d • A S 3 ®3 3 M e n 1 se nAY, I ~K 6 1600 I pq,<mMD~pr. .f p/V(,Y'I•J;I,~--- SnaPO .f1K I I 116,4 4l~ Y ® ® Y I ~r I I ..e„ I ~c ° t:. PLOT DATE: February 09, 2006. m 1I7K e I " a • k• ` FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES X ':.r • 3 I a "b-s# ONLY - OO NOT i RELY ON f I ( ",,3= FOR OTNER USE 5 Ij 1100 .r i Abp enu eslmerie6yaeMrmq'Naeep ar.ama.eeMSa }~,9ee 177K W m '"155+0 •'n r. p5uAvp"b hft*& pfa" -or m ,mll0~''• mf • I C~~t~ ~/~'S f':: MMVOn,WrtYDnmCYha PINY OTf4RDN MpnpmMo mm \Y\i\ Q, • I V • b11M mN1 tl/,•m e,bmYOn, J W ~ ;r Yr. 1 .'der' ~u tt . s, J~ . ~ Sew a •r ~ ~ a ~•-j~-:~ 6i •~'•7('? • . ''?i"•a, A+ • S.F,...~ .....n ¢ n•{ >A:(... ~';A55J°~°` 60. S~ r. ' TIGARD d1oftlw09 2S 1 09AC 2S 1 09AC TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON: We, the undersigned owner(s) of the property described below and(or elector s) residing at the referenced location(s) hereby petition for, and give consent to, Annexation of said propertyto the (qty of Tigard. We understand that the City will. ret!iew this request in accordance with ORS Chapter 222 and applicable regional and-local policies prior to approving or denying the request for Annexation. LEGEND: PO - Pmperty O%lmer RV - Registered Voter PAGE a- OF OV - Pmperty Owner & Registered Vate r l AMA PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME PO RV OV ADDRESS Townships Map Tax Lot P(Med i DATE Section Number Number Number EcL x - X k60-60 SW Bull M+r% Rd of X 5101AC s6r4tdz t -41713/8/06 oS ~rS 9 O Sw A M k 2 -I n ~1C79 QL- C) Yoke. - e04 ~1p SL~e~ , islcvfplAlmasteisltevisedlanrpetn.mst 1S-hug-02 DOUBLE MAJORITY WORKSHEET FOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD Please fist A propertieskegistered -voters included in the proposal ( If needed, use separate sheet+ Ior additiaflal listings} "PROPERTIES" N CS) PROPERTY DESIGNATIDN gal lot Numbers) IANE OF PROPERTY OWNER TOTAL ACRES ASSESSED YALUE Of THE PROPERTY I tffON m a i a Acs~~ uos y 53 c, w N A w m co F+ "REGISTERED VOTERS** ADDRESS Of REGISTERED YOTER MANE Of REGISTERED VOTER S1 IO CUIT v Sw tiVN. RA lC H Q1 ' C H r ry H ' z d v *"SUMMARY" 1:lcurplo%mmtam'wevbeftnsw 3ht.mst 15-Aug-02 TOTAL NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS-IN THE PROPOSAL: NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS WNO SIGNED PETITON: PERCENTAGE OF REGISTERED VOTERS WHO SIGNED PETITION: I "/d TOTAL ACREAGE IN THE PROPOSAL: 1 fc ACREAGE SIGNED FOR. i . Z (a PERCENTAGE OF ACREAGE SIGNED FOR: .100 °/n D TOTAL NUAVER OF SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS: M TOTAL NUMBER OF MULTI-FAMILY UNITS: 0 CS) TOTAL NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES: 0 Z nn TOTAL NUMBER OF INDUSTRIAL STRUCTURES_ tD m w EXHIBIT D Agenda Item: Hearin Date: Au st 8 2006 Time: 7:30 PM 'STAFF REPORT TO THE a CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD OREGON . • ' 5 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: RIDER ANNEXATION CASE NOS: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) ZCA2006-00001 APPLICANT/ Milstead and Associates OWNER: Tigard-Tualatin School District OWNER'S REP: Attn: Nicole Stewart 23J 10121 SE Sunnyside Road, C/o Alberta Rider Life Estate Suite 335 Attn: Bradley Hoskins Clackamas, OR 97015 6960 SW Sandburg Street Tigard, OR 97223 RESIDENT & Alberta Rider VOTER: 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road Tigard, OR 97224 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting to annex one (1) parcel consisting of approximately 1.26 acres of land into the City of Tigard. LOCATION: 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road; WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 02101. The proposed territory is located on the south side of SW Bull Mountain Road, east of SWp133`d Avenue and west of Greenfield Drive. CURRENT ZONING DESIGNATION': R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. EQUIVALENT CITY ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and ' At the time of application.(May 3, 2006). RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 1 OF 10 1 subdivisions are also permitted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: ORS Chapter 222, Metro Code Chapter 3.09, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10, Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390. SECTION H. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends thatthe Council.find that fte,&uposed~annexation (tktw 06-00001)~meets all the approval cntena as,.ide e`d m;ORS; Chapter 222; Metro Code Chapter` 3.09, Comprehensives F; Plan Pohcie"s 2 and 10, Community Development"Code Chapters 18.320 ar}d 18 390 Therefore;rstaff: reeommericls APPROYAL'of ZCA2006=00041 by"adoption,of the attAched orduiance SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Information: The proposed annexation territory is 1.26 acres and located on the south side of SW Bull Mountain Road, east of SW 133`d Avenue and west of Greenfield Drive. It is made up of one (1) tax lot (WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 02101) and contiguous to the City of Tigard on all sides (4). The proposed territory is surrounded by the Alberta Rider School on three sides and abuts SW Bull Mountain Road on its northern boundary. The proposed territory is part of unincorporated Bull Mountain and the City's Urban Service Area, which means that the provisions of the City of Tigard's Urban Serrrice Agreement (TUSA) and Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) apply. One single family dwelling and one secondary dwelling exist in the proposed territory, which has a slope of approximately 8 percent. No Goal 5 resources, regionally significant habitat or other sensitive lands have been identified on the site. The Bull Mountain Community Plan does not identify any significant natural resources on the site. The applicant desires to annex the proposed territory so that it can receive sewer services. Because of the failing onsite gray water disposal system, the proposed territory has been connected to the City sewer system; however, the connection is contingent upon annexation. Because all adjacent properties are within city limits, it was not necessary to invite adjacent owners to join the annexation. The proposed annexation does not include any right-of-way because the adjacent right-of-way is already within the City (ZCA91- 00012 Foran Annexation). No previous land use decisions are related to the tax lot alone and there are currently no pending decisions related to the site other than the proposed annexation. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS State: ORS Chapter 222 Regional: Metro Code Chapter 3.09 City: Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10, Community Development Code Chapters 18.320 and 18.390. A. CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TITLE 18-) Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Community Development Code based on the following findings: RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 2 OF 10 1 1. Chapter 18.320.020: Approval Process and Standards. B. Approval Criteria. The decision to approve, approve with modification, or deny an application to annex property to the City shall be based on the following criteria: 1. All services and facilities are available to the area and have sufficient capacity to provide service for the proposed annexation area; and The City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan's Urbanization Chapter (Policy 10.1.1) defines "services" as water, sewer, drainage, streets, police, and fire protection. When the City received this application on May 3, 2006, the proposed annexation territory was zoned R-7, a medium-density single-family residential zone with a minimum residential lot size of 5,000 square feet. The proposed territory will be automatically zoned City of Tigard R-7 upon annexation. The property currently has water service, as well as access to water from an on-site well. The nearest sanitary sewer line is in SW 132nd Avenue. Because of the failing onsite gray water disposal system, the subject property has been connected to this sewer line prior to annexation. The continuance of this connection is contingent upon approval of the proposed annexation. Storm drainage is available on SW Bull Mountain Road. A fire hydrant is located on SW Bull Mountain Road less than 200 feet from the northwest corner of the proposed territory. For streets, the City's Transportation System Plan (TSP) standards apply. The proposed territory is located on SW Bull Mountain Road, which is designated a collector in the TSP. Currently, the proposed territory has direct access to SW Bull Mountain Road. The City of Tigard departments of Public Works, Engineering and Police have reviewed the annexation proposal and have not raised any objections or indicated that there would be a lack of service capacity for the proposed territory or a significant reduction in existing City service levels. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R), which currently serves the proposed territory, did not have objections to the proposal. Based upon this review, staff finds that all public services (as defined by the Comprehensive Plan) are available to the proposed annexation territory and all public services have sufficient capacity to provide service to the proposed annexation territory. 2. The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and implementing ordinance provisions have been satisfied. Three Comprehensive Plan policies apply to proposed annexation: 2.1.1, 10.1.1., and 10.1.2. Staff has determined that the proposal has satisfied the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies based on the following findings: Policy 2.1.1: Citizen Involvement. The City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program and shall assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The City maintains an ongoing citizen involvement program. To assure citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process, the City provides notice for Type IV land-use applications. The City posted, mailed and published notice of the public hearing as follows. The City posted the hearing notice at four public places on June 9, 20062: Tigard Library, Tigard City Hall, Tigard Permit Center, and in the public right-of-way at 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road. The City published notice of the hearing in The Tigard Tualatin Sherwood Times for two 2 Due to a scheduling change, notice was posted 15 days earlier than the required 45 days prior to the hearing. RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 3 OF 10 successive weeks Quly 20, 2006 and July 27, 2006) prior to the August 8, 2006, public hearing. The City also mailed notice to all interested parties and surrounding property owners within 500 feet on July 17, 2006. In addition, the City maintains a list of interested parties organized by geography. Notice was mailed to interested parties in the West area on July 17, 2006, which includes former Citizen Involvement Team contacts and CPO 4B, the citizen participation organization for the area. Staff finds that this policy is met. Policy 10.1.1: Urbanization. Prior to the annexation of land to the City of Tigard, a) the City shall review each of the following services as to adequate capacity, or such services to be made available, to serve the parcel if developed to the most intense use allowed, and will not significantly reduce the level of services available to developed and undeveloped land within the City of Tigard: 1. Water; 2. Sewer; 3. Drainage; 4. Streets; 5. Police; and 6. Fire Protection. As addressed under 18.320.020 above, adequate service is available to the proposed annexation territory. At the time of application, the proposed territory was zoned R-7, a medium-density single-family residential zone with a minimum residential lot size of 5,000 square feet. The proposed territory will be automatically designated the same zoning upon annexation. The site has an estimated maximum density of 8 units.' If it develops, it will be required to connect to public service facilities, which staff has found to be available to the proposed territory. The City of Tigard department of Public Works has reviewed the annexation proposal and states that the City's water system can provide the minimum State of Oregon water service requirements for the proposed territory based on the maximum density permitted. Public Works states that water is available in quantity and quality and has not indicated that there would be a reduction in its capacity to provide water to the proposed annexation territory or reduce the level of service to the entire City. The Police Department reviewed the proposal and has no objections. The Engineering Department reviewed the proposal and has no objections. The Engineering Department confirmed that sewer service, storm drainage and street access are available to the site. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R), the current provider to the proposed territory, did not raise any objections. Staff concludes that there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed territory (water, sewer, drainage, streets, police, fire protection if developed to the most intense use allowed, and will not significantly reduce the level of services available to developed and undeveloped land within the City of Tigard. b) If required by an adopted capital improvements program ordinance, the applicant shall sign and record with Washington County a nonremonstrance agreement regarding the following. 1. The formation of a local improvement district (L.I.D.) for any of the following services that could be provided through such a district. The extension or improvement of the following: a) Water, b) Sewer, c) Drainage, and d) Streets. 2. The formation of a special district for any of the above services or the inclusion of the property into a special service district for any of the above services. This criterion does not apply: No capital improvements program requires a nonremonstrance agreement for this area. Urban services are already available to the proposed annexation territory. c) The City shall provide urban services to areas within the Tigard Urban Planning Area or within the Urban Growth Boundary upon annexation. The Tigard Urban Planning Area (as defined in the Wasbington County - Tigard Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA), (adopted 1988, revised 2004) includes the proposed annexation territory. The City 3 Maximum density was calculated using formula provided in Code Chapter 18.715. RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 4 OF 10 is the designated urban services provider for the services defined in the Tigard Urban Service Agreement (USA) (adopted 2002) and subsequent operating agreements: police; parks, recreation and open space; roads and streets; sanitary sewer and storm water (through an operating agreement with CWS); and water service. Upon annexation, those services will be provided according to the City's current policies. Staff finds that this policy is met. Policy 10.1.2: Urbanization. Approval of proposed annexations of land by the City shall be based on findings with respect to the following: a) The annexation eliminates an existing "pocket" or "island" of unincorporated territory; or, b) The annexation will not create an irregular boundary that makes it difficult for the police in an emergency situation to determine whether the parcel is within or outside the City; c) The Police Department has commented upon the annexation; d) the land is located within the Tigard Area of Interest and is contiguous to the City boundary; e) The annexation can be accommodated by the services listed in 10.1.1(a). a) The proposed annexation territory is an island of unincorporated territory in Washington County, surrounded by the City of Tigard on all sides. Annexing the proposed territory would eliminate a 1.26-acre island of unincorporated territory. b) Annexing the proposed territory will not create an irregular boundary because it is already surrounded by the City on all sides. c) The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposed annexation and has no objections. d) The UPAA (1988; 2004) includes the proposed annexation territory within the City of Tigard Area of Interest. The proposed territory is contiguous to the City on all sides (4). e) As staff's response to Policy 10. 1.1 (a) demonstrated, the annexation can be accommodated by the following services: water, sewer, drainage; streets; police; and fire protection. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed annexation meets Policy 10.1.2. Policy 10.1.3: Urbanization. Upon annexation of land into the City which carries a Washington County zoning designation, the City of Tigard shall assign the City of Tigard zoning district designation which most closely conforms to the county zoning designation. Washington County previously adopted City of Tigard zoning designations for unincorporated Bull Mountain due to the Urban Services IntergovernmentalAgreement (adopted 1997; revised 2002; terminated 712012006) in which Tigard performed building and development services for the Bull Mountain Area on behalf of the County. The proposed annexation territory's Washington County designation was R-6 and was converted to Tigard's R-7 (Table 320.1 summarizes the conversion of the County's plan and zoning designations). As of July 20, 2006, the USIA will be terminated and zoning of unincorporated territory on Bull Mountain will revert back to its equivalent Washington County designation. At the time the application was received (May 3, 2006), the proposed territory was zoned R-7 and the proposed territory will be automatically zoned City of R-7 upon annexation. RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 5 OF 10 TABLE 320.1 CONVERSION TABLE FOR COUNTY AND CITY PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS Washington County Land Use City of Tigard Zoning City of Tigard Districts/Plan Designation Plan Designation R-5 Res. 5 units/acre R-0.5 SFR 7,500 sq. ft. Low density 1-5 unitslacre R-6 Res. 6 unitslacre R-7 SFR 5,000 sq. ft. Med. density 6-12 units/acre R-9 Res. 9 runts/acre R-12 Multi-family 12 unitslacre Med. density 6-12 rmitsiacre R-12 Res. 12 uuitsacre R-12 Multi-family 12 rmitstacre Med. density 6-12 units/acre R-15 Res. 15 units/acre R-25 Multi-family 25 unitsiacre Medium-High density 13-25 rmits/acre R-24 Res. 24 units-acres R-25 Multi-family 25 units acre Medium-High density 13-25 units/acre Office Commercial C.-P Commercial Professional CP Commercial Professional NC Neighborhood Commercial CN Neighborhood Commercial CN Neighborhood Commercial CBD Commercial Business CBD Commercial Business CBD Commercial Business District District District GC General Commercial CG General Commercial CG General Commercial Wl) Industrial I-L Light Industrial Light Industrials Chapter 18.320.020 C. Assignment of comprehensive plan and zoning designations. The comprehensive plan designation and the zoning designation placed on the property shall be the City's zoning district which most closely implements the City's or County's comprehensive plan map designation. The assignment of these designations shall occur automatically and concurrently with the annexation. In the case of land which carries County designations, the City shall convert the County's comprehensive plan map and zoning designations to the City designations which are the most similar. A zone change is required if the applicant requests a comprehensive plan map and/or zoning map designation other than the existing designations. (See Chapter 18.380). A request for a zone change can be processed concurrently with an annexation application or after the annexation has been approved. As the previous section demonstrated, no changes to the zoning designations are required for the proposed territory, as the designation at the time of application already reflects a City of Tigard designation. City of Tigard Community Development Code 2. Chapter 18.390.060: Type IV Procedure Annexations are processed by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Chapter 18.390 of the Community Development Code (Title 18) using standards of approval contained in 18.390.020(B), which were addressed in the previous section. Chapter 18.390 requires City Council to hold a hearing on an annexation. It also requires the City to provide notice at least 10 days prior to the hearing by mail and to publish newspaper notice; the City mailed notice on July 17, 2006, and published public notice in The Tigard Tualatin Sherwood Times for two successive weeks Quly 20, 2006, and July 27, 2006,) prior to the August 8, 2006, public hearing. Additionally, Chapter 18.390.060 sets forth five decision-malting considerations for a Type IV decision: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; The City's Comprehensive Plan has been acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission to be in compliance with state planning goals. As reviewed above, 'the annexation proposal meets the existing Comprehensive Plan policies and therefore is in compliance with state planning goals. RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 6 OF 10 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; ORS 222: State law (ORS 222.125) allows for a city to annex contiguous land when owners of real property in the proposed annexation territory submit a petition to the legislative body of the city.' ORS 222.120 requires the city to hold a public hearing before its legislative body (City Council) and provide public notice to be published once each week for two successive weeks prior to the day of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and shall cause notices of the hearing to be posted in four public places in the city for a like period. The property owner and the resident/active voter of 13030 SW Bull Mountain Road (WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 2101) have both submitted a petition for annexation to the City. The proposed territory (Rider Annexation) is an island of unincorporated territory, contiguous to the City on all sides (4). The City published public notice in The Tigard Tualatin Shenvood Times for two successive weeks Quly 20, 2006, and July 27, 2006,) prior to the August 8, 2006, public hearing and posted the hearing notice at four public places on June 9, 2006: Tigard Library, Tigard City Hall, Tigard Permit Center, and in the public right of way at the proposed territory. Staff finds that the provisions of ORS 222 have been met. 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; Chapter 3.09 of the Metro Code (Local Government Boundary Changes) includes standards to be addressed in annexation decisions, in addition to local and state review standards. Note that the report is available 15 days before the hearing Quly 24, 2006, for an August 8, 2006, hearing). Staff has determined that the applicable METRO regulations (Metro Code 3.09.040(b) &(d)) have been met based on the following findings: Metro 3.09.040 (b) (b) Not later than 15 days prior to the date set for a change decision, the approving entity shall make available to the public a report that addresses the criteria in subsections (d) and (g) below, and that includes at a minimum the following: (1) The extent to which urban services presently are available to serve the affected territory including any extra territorial extensions of service; As addressed previously in this report, urban services are available to the affected territory. (2) A description of how the proposed boundary change complies with any urban service provider agreements adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065 between the affected entity and all necessary parties; As addressed previously in this report, the annexation proposal complies with all applicable provisions of urban service provider agreements UPAA (1988, 2004); and TUSA (2002). (3) A description of how the proposed boundary change is consistent with the comprehensive land use plans, public facility plans, regional framework and functional plans, regional urban growth goals and objectives, urban planning agreements and similar agreements of the affected entity and of all necessary parties; As addressed previously in this report, the annexation proposal complies with all applicable policies of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan and urban service provider agreements (UPAA (1988; 2004) and TUSA (2002)). The proposed annexation territory is within the Urban Growth Boundary and subject to the Regional Framework Plan and Urban Growth Management Functional Plan provisions. There are no specific applicable standards or criteria for boundary 4 State law (ORS 222.750) also allows for the annexation of unincorporated territory surrounded by the corporate boundaries of a city with or without consent from property owners, voters or residents within the territory. While the proposed annexation could proceed in accordance with ORS 222.750, the City is processing the proposed annexation in accordance with ORS 222.125 because the property owner initiated the annexation request. RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 7 OF 10 changes in the Regional Framework Plan or the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. However, the City's Comprehensive Plan and Development Code have been amended to comply with Metro functional plan requirements. By complying with the Development Code and Comprehensive Plan, the annexation is consistent with the Functional Plan and the Regional Framework Plan. (4) Whether the proposed boundary change will result in the withdrawal of the affected territory from the legal boundary of any necessary party; and The proposed territory will remain within Washington County but will be required to be withdrawn from the boundary of the Tigard Water District, the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, Washington County Street Lighting District #1, and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation. (5) The proposed effective date of the decision. The public hearing will take place August 8, 2006. If the Council adopts findings to approve ZCA2006-00001, the effective date of the annexation will be September 7, 2006. Metro Code 3.09.040 (d) (d) An approving entity's final decision on a boundary change shall include findings and conclusions addressing the following criteria: 1. Consistency with directly applicable provisions in an urban service provider agreement or annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065; The TUSA (2002) includes the proposed annexation territory. The agreement specifies notice requirements for land use planning actions; the City provided notice of the proposed annexation to all applicable parties. The agreement states that the County and City will be supportive of annexations to the City, and the City shall endeavor to annex unincorporated territory in the Bull Mountain area in the near to mid-term (accomplished by 2005-2007, as projected in the TUSA). The proposed territory is an island of unincorporated territory in the Bull Mountain area. The proposed annexation is consistent with this agreement. 2. Consistency with directly applicable provisions of urban planning or other agreements, other than agreements adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065, between the affected entity and a necessary party; The UPAA (1988; 2004) includes the proposed annexation territory. The City has followed all processing and notice requirements in the UPAA, providing Washington County with 45-day notice prior to the public hearing. The agreement states that "so that all properties within the Tigard Urban Service Area will be served by the City, the County and City will be supportive of annexations to the City." The City also provided notice to the affected CPO (CPO 4B) per the agreement. The annexation proposal is consistent with this agreement 3. Consistency with specific directly applicable standards or criteria for boundary changes contained in comprehensive land use plans and public facility plans; As previously stated in this report, this proposal meets all applicable City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan provisions. This criterion is satisfied. 4. Consistency with specific directly applicable standards or criteria for boundary changes contained in the Regional Framework Plan or any functional plan; RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 8 OF 10 This criterion was addressed under Metro Code 3.09.040(6). By complying with the City of Tigard Community Development Code and Comprehensive Plan, the annexation is consistent with the Functional Plan and the Regional Framework Plan. 5. Whether the proposed change will promote or not interfere with the timely, orderly and economic provisions of public facilities and services; The proposed annexation will not interfere with the provision of public facilities or services because it is consistent with the terms of the TUSA, which ensures the timely, orderly, and efficient extension of public facilities and urban services. The proposed territory is an island surrounded by existing city limits and urban services are available to the site. Serving the proposed territory at maximum density will not significantly reduce existing service levels, as shown in staffs findings for Code Chapter 18.320.020 B(1) on page 3 of this report. 6. The territory lies within the Urban Growth Boundary; and The proposed territory is within Metro's Urban Growth Boundary. 7. Consistency with other applicable criteria for the boundary change in question under state and local law. In previous sections, this report reviewed the proposal's consistency with other applicable criteria and found it to be consistent. (Tigard CDC 19.390.060) 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and As demonstrated in previous sections of this report, the proposed annexation is consistent with, and meets, all applicable comprehensive plan policies. 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. There are no specific implementing ordinances that apply to this proposed annexation. Chapter 18 of the City Code will apply to development of the property. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Police and Public Works departments have reviewed the proposal and have no objections, and have not indicated that the proposed annexation would reduce their capacity to provide services to the proposed annexation territory or reduce the level of City services. The Long-Range Planning Division has reviewed the proposal and has no objections. The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, Clean Water Services, Metro, the Tigard/Tualatin School District, Metro Area Communications and the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation were provided the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 9 OF 10 2`l Zoo ~ P ARE ng DATE Assistant Planner ;7y,-676 REVIEWED BY: Tom C e DATE Community Development Director RIDER ANNEXATION ZCA2006-00001 PAGE 10 OF 10 Agenda Item # JP Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Approve Revisions to the Tigard Municipal Code Incorporating a Right-of-Wa:Usage Fee OV J Prepared By: Nancy Werner Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve amendments to Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 5.14 and Title 15 to incorporate a right-of-way usage fee and clarify franchise and right-of-way requirements for utilities? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the recommended Code changes. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In discussions with Council on December 13, 2005, May 16, 2006 and July 18, 2006, Council directed staff to draft amendments to the Tigard Municipal Code to incorporate a right-of-way usage fee and clarify franchise requirements for all utilities using the rights-of-way. The proposed amendments would: • Ensure that the City receives compensation for use of City rights-of-way when there is no current, valid franchise agreement. • Establish a right-of-way usage fee at the same rate as the current franchise fee, and thus is revenue neutral. Only utilities with no current franchise agreement will be subject to the new fee. • Apply to City water and sewer facilities, which will pay a fee of 5% of gross revenues. • Apply the explicit franchise requirements for telecommunications providers in Chapter 5.14 to all utilities using the rights-of-way by renumbering these provisions to Chapter 15.06, in Title 15 (Streets and Sidewalks). • Apply some of the right-of-way use requirements, including permitting and construction standards, for telecommunications providers in Chapter 5.14 to all construction in the rights-of-way by renumbering applicable provisions to Chapter 15.04 (Work in Right-of-Way). • Renumber the "Driveway Approaches and Curb Cuts" provisions, currently in Chapter 15.04, to a new Chapter 15.10 because they are not directly applicable to the right-of-way regulations in Chapter 15.04. These amendments should not have a significant impact on existing franchisees, which will continue to be bound to their franchise agreements. For those utilities with no current franchise, the amendments clarify the right-of-way regulations the utility must follow, including payment of the right-of-way usage fee and permitting and construction requirements. The proposed amendments were distributed to utilities for their review and the comments received by staff have been reviewed and incorporated where appropriate. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not amend the Code. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The right-of-way usage fee would contribute to the Council Goal to "Stabilize Financial Picture" and the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goal to "Identify and Develop Funding Resources" for Transportation and Traffic by ensuring continued payment for use of the rights-of-way and providing additional revenue (from water and sewer fees) that would be available to the General Fund, or which could supplement other funding resources for improvements to City streets. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Ordinance. Attachment 2: Proposed new TMC Chapters 15.04, 15.06 and 15.10. Attachment 3: Verizon Comments on Proposed Ordinance. FISCAL NOTES There are no costs associated with the amendments. Implementing the right-of-way usage fee could generate additional revenues estimated at $287,000 from water and sewer. ATTACHMENT 2 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 15.06 FRANCHISED UTILITY 15.06.270 Plan For Discontinuance Or ORDINANCE. Removal. 15.06.280 Removal Of Abandoned Facilities. GENERAL TERMS &CONDITIONS 15.06.290 Removal By City. 15.06.300 Appeals. 15.06.010 Short Title. 15.06.020 Definitions. TERMINATION/CURES 15.06.030 Purpose. . 15.06.040 Jurisdiction. 15.06.310 Revocation Or Termination Of A 15.06.050 Franchise Required. Franchise Or Authority To Use 15.06.060 Grant Of Franchise. Rights-of-Way. 15.06.070 Privilege Granted. 15.06.320 Standards For Revocation Or 15.06.080 Term. Termination. 15.06.090 Franchise Fee. 15.06.330 Notice And Cure. 15.06.100 Right-of-Way Usage Fee. 15.06.340 Penalties. 15.06.110 Application Standards For Joint 15.06.350 Other Remedies. Telecommunications/Cable Franchises. SEVERABILITY & APPLICATION TO EXISTING AGREEMENTS APPLICATION & RENEWAL PROCESS 15.06.360 Severability And Preemption. 15.06.120 Application. 15.06.370 Application To Existing 15.06.130 Denials. Agreements. 15.06.140 Renewal. GENERAL TERMS & CONDITIONS OBLIGATIONS OF FRANCHISE 15.06.010 Short Title. 15.06.150 Assignment Or Transfer Of Franchise. This chapter shall be known and referred to 15.06.160 Leased Capacity. as the Tigard Franchised Utility Ordinance. 15.06.170 Duty To Provide Information, Audit Responsibility. 15.06.020 Definitions. 15.06.180 Insurance. 15.06.190 Indemnification. 1. Emergency. As used in this chapter, "emergency" means a circumstance in which 15.06.200 Construction Permits. immediate repair to damaged or malfunctioning 15.06.210 Facilities. facilities is necessary to restore lost service or 15.06.220 Location Of Facilities. prevent immediate harm to persons or property. 15.06.230 Interference With Rights-of-Way. 15.06.240 As Built Drawings. 2. Franchise. As used in this chapter, "franchise" means the privilege conferred on a 15.06.250 Coordination Of Construction. person by the City to place and operate portions of 15.06.260 Relocation Or Removal Of a utility system in, over or under rights-of-way. Facilities. Franchises shall be conferred by ordinance and confirmed by a franchise agreement. 15-06-1 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 3. Gross Revenues. As used in this 7. Street or Alley. As used in this chapter, chapter, "gross revenues" means revenues earned "street" or "alley" means every way or place open within the City, less net uncollectibles, from the as a matter of right to the use of the public for sale of electrical energy, gas, telecommunications, vehicular or pedestrian traffic between right-of- water, or sanitary sewage disposal and treatment way lines. service, and for the use, rental, or lease of utility facilities of the utility engaged in such business. 8. Telecommunications facility. As used in this chapter, "telecommunications facility" Gross revenues shall not include proceeds means any physical component of a from the sale of bonds, mortgage or other telecommunications system located within or evidence of indebtedness, securities or stocks. attached to the rights-of-way. To the extent that the City's authority to tax 9. Telecommunications system. As used gross revenues of an entity is limited by ORS in this chapter, "telecommunications system" 221.410 through 221.655, the City shall apply the means a system of fibers, lines, cables, antennas, statutory limitations to the definition of "gross microwave links, or other conduit and supporting revenues." structures and equipment constructed or used for the purpose of transmitting audio, video, digital or 4. Person. As used in this chapter, other forms of electric or electronic signals or "person" means every natural person, firm, co- information. "Telecommunications system" does partnership, association, corporation or entity, but not include a cable communications system. not including special districts or county service However, if a portion of a cable communications districts. system is also used for telecommunications other than cable communications, the system is both a 5. Right-of-way. As used in this chapter, cable communications system and a "right-of-way" includes City streets, roads, telecommunications system. Telecommunications bridges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, paths, and all system does not include a system used for the other public ways and areas managed by the City. transmission of electric power solely for power "Right-of-way" also includes public utility purposes, even if a portion of the system is used to easements to the extent that the easement allows communicate information about the power system use by the utility operator planning to use or using for use by the system operator. the public utility easement. "Right-of-way" Telecommunications system does not include includes the subsurface under and airspace over mobile telecommunications equipment (e.g. these areas. "Right-of-way" does not include the cellular phones, hand-held or vehicle-mounted airwaves for purposes of CMRS, broadcast radios) but does include fixed antennas and other television, DBS and other wireless providers, or fixed equipment used to convey signals to or from easements or other property interests owned by a mobile telecommunications equipment. single utility or entity. 10. Utility facility. As used in this chapter, 6. Sidewalk. As used in this chapter, "utility facility" means any physical component of "sidewalk" means an area specifically delineated a utility system located within or attached to the and constructed for pedestrian use located behind rights-of-way. a curb but within the rights-of-way or within an easement specifically established for that purpose. 15-06-2 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 11. Utility operator. As used in this chapter, "utility operator" means any person that places or 15.06.040 Jurisdiction. maintains any portion of a utility system within the rights-of-way. The requirements of this chapter shall apply to all rights-of-way under the jurisdiction of the 12. Utility system. As used in this chapter, City of Tigard, dedicated by plat or deed, created "utility system" means a system owned and by user, or the use thereof controlled by the City operated by a person to deliver or transmit pursuant to agreements with Washington County electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, or the Oregon Department of Transportation. water, sewer, storm sewer or other goods or services by means of pipes, wires, transmitters, or 15.06.050 Franchise Required. other facilities permanently located within or attached to the rights-of-way to or from customers 1. Any person that places or maintains a within the corporate boundaries of the City of utility system in any portion of the right-of-way Tigard. "Utility system" also includes without a franchise is subject to all other transmission of these products or services through provisions of this chapter, including the payment the City of Tigard whether or not customers of the right-of-way usage fee pursuant to section within the City are served by those transmissions. 15.06.100. "Utility system" does not include any agency of the federal government. 2. The City may grant a franchise allowing use of any right-of-way for any portion of a utility system. 15.06.030 Purpose. 3. To the extent the terms of a franchise The purpose and intent of this chapter is to: are inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, the terms of the franchise shall prevail. 1. Permit and manage reasonable access to the rights-of-way of the City for utility purposes 15.06.060 Grant of Franchise. on a competitively neutral basis and conserve the limited physical capacity of those rights-of-way 1. The City Council shall grant by held in trust by the City; resolution a utility franchise to any person providing utility services which has submitted an 2. Assure that the City's current and application, meets the requirements of this ongoing costs of granting and regulating private chapter, and agrees to sign the City's standard access to and the use of the rights-of-way are fully franchise agreement without modification. The compensated by the persons seeking such access franchise shall not be effective until the applicant and causing such costs; signs the City's standard Utility Franchise Agreement substantially in the form approved by 3. Secure fair and reasonable the City Council. The City Council shall approve compensation to the City and its residents for the form of the standard Utility Franchise permitting private use of the rights-of-way; Agreement by resolution. 4. Comply with the provisions of the 2. The City Council may grant utility Communications Act of 1934 as they apply to franchises in any other circumstance by local governments. ordinance. Any franchise ordinance shall not be 15-06-3 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE effective until a franchise agreement is entered into by the City and the franchisee. 4. The franchise fee shall be payable semi- annually on or before March 15 for the six month 3. Nonexclusivity. All utility franchises period ended December 31, and September 15 for shall be nonexclusive. the six month period ended June 30, unless otherwise stated in the resolution authorizing the 15.06.070 Privilege Granted. franchise. The franchisee shall pay interest at the rate of nine percent per year for any payment The franchise shall grant a privilege to use made after the due date. (Ord. 02-05). rights-of-way consistent with the requirements of this chapter. The franchise does not convey any 15.06.100 Right-of-Way Usage Fee. right, title or interest in the right-of-way. 1. All persons using a utility system or 15.06.080 Term. facility in the right-of-way to provide service to customers within the City of Tigard shall annually Unless otherwise specified in the franchise pay a right-of-way usage fee calculated as a agreement and resolution or ordinance, franchises percentage of gross revenues, subject to any shall be in effect for ten years but in no case shall applicable limitations imposed by federal and exceed 15 years. state statutes, including the privilege tax limitations set forth in ORS 221.410 through 15.06.090 Franchise Fee. 221.655. 1. Any person applying for a franchise 2. The right-of-way usage fee percentage (including an application for renewal) shall pay an applicable to each class of utility shall be as application fee to cover the cost of processing the follows: application. The City Council shall establish the fee by resolution. Telecommunications: 5.0% Electric: 3.5% 2. The franchise agreement may provide Natural Gas: 5.0% for payment of a franchise fee as compensation Water: 5.0% for use of rights-of-way and reimbursement of the Sanitary Sewer 5.0% City's cost of administering the program created in this chapter. The franchise fee is separate and 3. Right-of-way usage fee payments shall distinct from any other legally authorized federal, be net of any franchise fee payments received by state or local taxes or fees, except to the extent the City, but in no case will be less than $0. that payment of a franchise fee shall count as a credit to the right-of-way usage fee. 4. Unless otherwise agreed to by the City, the right-of-way usage fee shall be payable semi- 3. The fees imposed by this chapter are not annually on or before March 15 for the six month subject to the property tax limitations of Article period ended December 31, and September 15 for XI, sections 11(b) and 11(19) of the Oregon the six month period ended June 30. The utility Constitution and are not fees imposed on property shall pay interest at the rate of nine percent per or property owners by fact of ownership and are year for any payment made after the due date. not new or increased fees for purposes of those subsections. 15-06-4 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 15.06.110 Application Standards For Joint 2. Information establishing that the Telecommunications/Cable applicant has obtained or is in the process of Franchises. obtaining all other required governmental approvals to construct and operate the system and Persons or entities providing cable television to offer or provide the services proposed, and telecommunications services over the same including, if applicable, any PUC filings or network under a franchise negotiated, approved approvals. and recommended by the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) and 3. The application fee. ratified by the City Council will be presumed to have met the application requirements for a 15.06.130 Denials. telecommunications franchise issued by the City. The telecommunications franchise and MACC Any denial of a franchise application shall be franchise will be of equal term and the franchisee in writing and state the reasons for the denial. can rely on the insurance certificates and surety The City may deny an application for a franchise: bonds pursuant to the MACC franchise. This provision does not exempt MACC franchisees 1. If the applicant has not complied with from the requirements to submit an application, all application requirements and standards; or obtain a franchise, pay the franchise fee, and otherwise comply with the requirements of this 2. If the applicant has a record of non- chapter. compliance. APPLICATION & RENEWAL PROCESS 15.06.140 Renewal. 15.06.120 Application. A franchisee that desires to renew a franchise shall submit a letter requesting renewal including Any person seeking a franchise shall submit the information set forth in section 15.04.120 to to the City Manager a letter of application the City Manager no less than 180 days before presenting the following: expiration of the franchise. 1. Information identifying the applicant OBLIGATIONS OF FRANCHISE and describing the utility system the applicant proposes to operate in the rights-of-way. The 15.06.150 Assignment Or Transfer Of initial application shall include engineering plans, Franchise. specifications and a network map showing the anticipated location and route of proposed A franchise may not be transferred or facilities in the right-of-way, including both assigned to another person unless such person is existing and proposed facilities. If any of the authorized under all applicable laws to own or facilities are owned by others, that information operate the utility system and the transfer or should be provided. assignment is approved by all agencies or organizations required or authorized under federal or state laws to approve such transfer or assignment. The franchisee shall provide the City with written notice of any transfer or assignment 15-06-5 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE within 20 days of requesting approval from any cost of the audit and shall pay interest as specified state or federal agency. in sections 15.06.090 and 15.06.100 from the original due date. 2. If a franchise is assigned or transferred, the assignee or transferee shall become 15.06.180 Insurance. responsible for all facilities of the existing transferee at the time of transfer. A transfer or All utility operators shall maintain in full assignment of a franchise does not extend the term force and effect commercial general liability of the franchise. insurance covering bodily injury and property damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or 15.06.160 Leased Capacity. equivalent) acceptable to the City. Such insurance shall cover all risks arising directly or indirectly A utility operator may lease capacity on or in out of the utility operator's activities or work its systems to others, provided that the utility under this chapter, including all subcontractors to operator provides the City with the name and any tier. The policy or policies of insurance business address of any lessee. All persons maintained by the utility operator shall provide at leasing capacity on or in a utility system and least a general aggregate limit of $5 million with a providing services to others using that capacity per occurrence limit of $3 million, insuring the are subject to the provisions of this chapter. utility operator and naming the City as an additional insured with respect to this chapter on 15.06.170 Duty To Provide Information, the policy. The utility operator shall cause a Audit Responsibility. certificate of insurance to be provided to the City Recorder. Within 30 days of a written request from the City, a utility operator shall furnish the City: As an alternative, a utility operator may provide and keep in force self-insurance in an 1. Information sufficient to demonstrate equal amount to the insurance required to be that the utilty operator is in compliance with this obtained from a third-party insurer. The utility chapter or its franchise agreement; operator shall provide proof of self-insurance acceptable to the City if it chooses to self-insure. 2. Access to all books, records, maps, and other documents, maintained by the utility The procuring of required insurance or self- operator with respect to its facilities in rights-of- insurance shall not be construed to limit utility way so that the City may perform an audit. operator's liability. Notwithstanding said Access shall be provided within the Portland insurance or self-insurance, the utility operator Oregon metropolitan area unless prior shall be obligated for the total amount of any arrangement for access elsewhere has been made damage, injury, or loss caused by negligence or with the City. neglect connected with this chapter. 3. If the City's audit of the books, records There shall be no cancellation, material and other documents maintained by the utility change, exhaustion of aggregate limits or intent operator demonstrate that the utility operator has not to renew insurance coverage without 30 days underpaid the franchise fee or right-of-way usage written notice to the City. Any failure to comply fee by five percent or more in any one year, the with this provision will not affect the insurance utility operator shall reimburse the City for the coverage provided to the City. A 30 days notice 15-06-6 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE of cancellation provision shall be physically In the event of an emergency, a utility endorsed on the policy. operator may conduct work in the rights-of-way after providing notice to the City. The utility The utility operator's coverage shall be operator shall apply for a permit for such work as primary to the extent permitted by law and soon as reasonably practicable, but not more than insurance maintained by the City is excess and not 48 hours after commencing work, and shall contributory insurance as to the insurance required furnish any required maps and materials within 30 by this chapter. days of commencing work. 15.06.190 Indemnification. 15.06.210 Facilities. Each utility operator shall defend, indemnify All utility facilities in the right-of-way shall be and hold the City and its officers, employees, constructed, installed, and maintained in agents and representatives harmless from and accordance with all applicable federal, state, and against any and all liability, causes of action, local statutes, codes, ordinances, rules and claims, damages, losses, judgments and other regulations. All facilities shall comply with costs and expenses, including attorney fees and applicable design standards imposed by regulation costs of suit or defense (at both the trial and or construction permit. No facility may be placed appeal level, whether or not a trial or appeal ever on any City facility without the express written takes place) that may be asserted by any person or consent of the City. The City may require entity in any way arising out of, resulting from, separate payment for rental of space on City during or in connection with, or alleged to arise facilities. For purpose of this section, a right-of- out of or result from the negligent, careless, or way, street or sidewalk is not a facility, but wrongful acts, omissions, failure to act, or other structures, including poles, conduit, boxes, and misconduct of the utility operator or its affiliates, equipment, are facilities. officers, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, or lessees in the construction, 15.06.220 Location Of Facilities. operation, maintenance, repair, or removal of its facilities, and in providing or offering services All facilities located within the right-of-way over the facilities, whether such acts or omissions shall be constructed, installed and located in are authorized, allowed, or prohibited by this accordance with the following terms and chapter or by a franchise agreement. Upon conditions, unless otherwise specified in a notification of any such claim the City shall notify franchise agreement. the utility operator and provide the utility operator with an opportunity to provide defense regarding 1. Whenever all existing electric utilities, any such claim. cable facilities or telecommunications facilities are located underground within a right-of-way of 15.06.200 Construction Permits. the City, the City may require a utility operator with permission to occupy the same right-of-way Except in the event of an emergency, no to locate its facilities underground. person shall construct or install any utility facilities within a right-of-way without first 2. Whenever all new or existing electric obtaining- a construction permit pursuant to utilities, cable facilities and telecommunications Chapter 15.04. facilities are located or relocated underground within a right-of-way of the City, the City may 15-06-7 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE require a utility operator that currently occupies information on plans for other construction the same right-of-way to relocate its facilities projects within rights-of-way. underground concurrently with the other affected utilities to minimize disruption of the right-of- 3. All construction projects within rights- way. of-way shall be coordinated as ordered by the City Engineer or designee, to minimize public 15.06.230 Interference With Rights-of-Way. inconvenience, disruption, or damages. No utility operator may locate or maintain its 4. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by utility facilities so as to unreasonably interfere the City, at least 60 days prior to the installation with the use of the rights-of-way by the City, by or upgrading of utilities that requires a cut or the general public or by other persons authorized opening in the street of 400 linear feet or greater, to use or be present in or upon the rights-of-way. the person intending to perform such work shall All use of rights-of-way shall be consistent with provide notice to the City and all other utilities City codes, ordinances and regulations. identified by the City as utilities that are franchised or permitted to place facilities within 15.06.240 As Built Drawings. the project area. The utility operator shall provide the City a. The notice must be provided in a with two complete sets of engineered plans in a manner which documents receipt of form acceptable to the City showing the location notice by utilities. of all its utility facilities within rights-of-way after initial construction of its system and, to the extent b. The notice shall state the available, shall provide the City two updated anticipated location, project schedule and complete sets of as-built plans annually, upon general description of the proposed work. request by the City. c. No permits for work shall be 15.06.250 Coordination Of Construction. issued until notice has been given. All utility operators shall make a good faith 5. All utilities performing work in the effort to coordinate their construction schedules rights-of-way subject to the notice requirement set with those of the City and other users of the forth in paragraph 4 of this section shall cooperate rights-of-way. with other utilities with permits to do work in the same location at or near the same time to 1. Prior to January 1 of each year, utility coordinate construction and colocate facilities. operators shall provide the City with a schedule of known construction work for that year in the 6. Nothing in this section shall require a City's rights-of-way or that may affect the rights- utility to reveal proprietary information. A utility of-way. shall signify any proprietary information as such and the City will protect such information from 2. Utility operators shall meet with the disclosure to the extent allowed by law. City at least once each calendar year, at the request of the City, to schedule and coordinate 7. The notification requirement set forth in work in rights-of-way. The City shall share paragraph 4 of this section shall not be required for the installation of facilities in new 15-06-8 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE developments that are being processed through the Engineer shall review the plan and issue an order private development review process. to the utility operator specifying which facilities are to be removed and which may be abandoned in place. The order shall establish a schedule for 15.06.260 Relocation Or Removal Of removal. The utility operator shall remain Facilities. responsible for all facilities until they are removed. The utility operator shall temporarily or permanently remove, relocate, change or alter the 15.06.280 Removal Of Abandoned Facilities. position of any utility facility within a right-of- way when requested to do so in writing by the Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City. The removal, relocation, change or City Engineer, within 30 days following written alteration shall be at the utility operator's expense notice from the City, a utility operator and any when the removal, relocation, change or alteration other person that owns, controls, or maintains any is needed because of construction, repair, unauthorized utility system or facility within a maintenance, or installation of public right-of-way shall, at its own expense, remove the improvements or other operations of the City system or facility and restore the right-of-way. A within the right-of-way or is otherwise in the utility system or facility that the City Engineer has public interest. In the event that the removal, approved to be abandoned in place is not an relocation, change or alteration is needed to unauthorized utility facility. A utility system or accommodate private development or other facility is unauthorized under the following private use of the right-of-way, the developer or circumstances: other private party requiring the action shall be responsible for the cost of removal, relocation, 1. The utility system or facility is outside change or alteration. The utility operator shall be the scope of authority granted by an existing under no obligation to remove, relocate, change or franchise. This includes systems or facilities that alter its facilities to benefit a private party unless were never franchised and systems or facilities and until the private party pays a deposit for costs that were once franchised but for which the to the utility operator. The City shall specify in franchise has expired or been terminated, unless the written notice the amount of time for removal, the utility operator pays the right-of-way usage relocation, change or alteration. In the event of fee and complies with the provisions of this emergency, the utility operator shall take action as chapter. This does not include any facility for needed to resolve the emergency, and the City which the City Engineer has authorized may use any form of communication to direct the abandonment in place. utility operator to take actions in an emergency to protect the public safety, health and welfare. 2. The system or facility has been abandoned and the City Engineer has not 15.06.270 Plan For Discontinuance Or authorized abandonment in place. A system or Removal. facility is abandoned if it is not in use and is not planned for further use. A system or facility will Whenever a utility operator plans to be presumed abandoned if it is not used for a discontinue any utility facility, the utility operator period of one year. A utility operator may shall submit a plan for discontinuance to the City. overcome this presumption by presenting plans The plan may provide for removal of discontinued for future use of the system or facility, or facilities or for abandonment in place. The City 15-06-9 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE demonstrating that the utility operator is capable of using the system or facility in the future. 4. Abandonment of facilities without approval to abandon in place. 3. The facility is improperly constructed or installed or is in a location not permitted by the 5. Failure to pay taxes, compensation, fees franchise or this chapter. or costs due the City after final determination of the taxes, compensation, fees or costs. 15.06.290 Removal By City. 6. Failure to restore rights-of-way after If the utility operator fails to remove any construction as required by this chapter or chapter facility when required to do so under this chapter, 15.04. the City may remove the facility and the utility operator shall be responsible for paying the full 7. Failure to comply with technical, safety cost of the removal and any administrative costs and engineering standards related to work in the incurred by the City in removing the facility and rights-of-way. obtaining reimbursement. 15.06.320 Standards For Revocation Or 15.06.300 Appeals. Termination. Unless another procedure is set forth in this In determining whether termination, chapter, any decision by the City Engineer or City revocation or some other sanction is appropriate, Manager pursuant to this chapter may be appealed the following factors shall be considered: to the City Council by submitting to the City Recorder, within 15 days after notice of the 1. The egregiousness of the misconduct; decision, a written statement setting forth the bases for appeal of the decision. The City 2. The harm that resulted; Council's decision shall be subject to judicial review under the writ of review process. 3. Whether the violation was intentional; TERMINATION/CURES 4. The utility operator's history of compliance; 15.06.310 Revocation Or Termination Of A Franchise Or Authority To Use 5. The utility operator's cooperation in Rights-of-Way. discovering, admitting and/or curing the violation. The City Council may terminate a franchise 15.06.330 Notice And Cure. or revoke other authority to use the rights-of-way for any of the following reasons: The City shall give the utility operator written notice of any apparent violations before 1. Violation of this chapter. terminating a franchise or revoking authority to use the rights-of-way. The notice shall include a 2. Violation of a franchise agreement. short and concise statement of the nature and general facts of the violation or noncompliance 3. Misrepresentation in a franchise and provide a reasonable time (no less than 20 and application, including a renewal application. no more than 40 days) for the utility operator to 15-06-10 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE demonstrate that the utility operator has remained remainder of this chapter shall not be affected and in compliance, that the utility operator has cured all remaining portions shall be valid and or is in the process of curing any violation or enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. noncompliance, or that it would be in the public In the event any provision is preempted by federal interest to impose a penalty or sanction less than or state law, the provision shall be preempted only termination or revocation. If the utility operator is to the extent required by law and any portion not in the process of curing a violation or preempted shall survive. If any federal or state noncompliance, the utility operator must law resulting in preemption is later repealed, demonstrate that it acted promptly and continues rescinded or amended to end the preemption, the to actively work on compliance. If the utility preempted provision shall return to full force and operator does not respond or if the City Manager effect without further action by the City. determines that the utility operator's response is inadequate, the City Manager shall refer the 3. The provisions of this chapter shall not matter to the City Council, which shall provide a be applied or construed to unlawfully abridge duly noticed public hearing and determine contractual or property rights of a utility operator whether the franchise or other authority to use the to occupy private property or the area of a utility rights-of-way shall be terminated or revoked. easement. 15.06.340 Penalties. 15.06.370 Application To Existing Agreements. Failure to comply with a provision of this chapter shall be a Class 1 civil infraction. This chapter shall be applied to all persons and activities, including existing franchisees, 15.06.350 Other Remedies. except that it shall not affect contract rights of existing franchisees. This chapter shall fully Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as apply to existing franchisees on termination of limiting any judicial or other remedies the City existing franchises. (Ord. 00-35) ■ may have for enforcement of this chapter. SEVERABILITY & APPLICATION TO EXISTING AGREEMENTS 15.06.360 Severability And Preemption. 1. The provisions of this chapter shall be interpreted to be consistent with applicable federal and state law, and shall be interpreted, to the extent possible, to cover only matters not preempted by federal or state law. 2. If any provision of this chapter is for any reason declared or held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction or superseded by state or federal legislation, rules, regulations or decision, the 15-06-11 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 15.04 WORK IN RIGHT-OF-WAY partnership, association, corporation or entity, or district. Sections: 3. Right-of-way. As used in this chapter, 15.04.010 Definitions. "right-of-way" includes City streets, roads, 15.04.020 Jurisdiction. bridges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, paths, and all 15.04.030 Permit Required. other public ways and areas managed by the City. 15.04.040 Permit Application. "Right-of-way" also includes public utility 15.04.050 Review By City Engineer. easements to the extent that the easement allows 15.04.060 Permit Issuance. use by the permittee planning to use or using the 15.04.070 Compliance With Permit. public utility easement. "Right-of-way" includes 15.04.080 Notice Of Construction. the subsurface under and airspace over these 15.04.090 Construction in Right-of-Way. areas. "Right-of-way" does not include the 15.04.110 As-Built Drawings. airwaves for purposes of CMRS, broadcast 15.04.120 Restoration Of Rights-of-Way television, DBS and other wireless providers, or And City Property. easements or other property interests owned by a 15.04.140 Financial Security. single utility or entity. 15.04.150 Unusual Conditions. 15.04.160 Repairs. 4. Sidewalk. As used in this chapter, 15.04.170 Inspection And Acceptance. "sidewalk" means an area specifically delineated 15.04.180 Barricades And Safety and constructed for pedestrian use located behind Measures. a curb but within the rights-of-way. 15.04.190 Liability for Accidents. 15.04.200 Option To City To Replace 5. Street or Alley. As used in this chapter, Pavement. "street" or "alley" means every way or place open 15.04.210 Violation--Penalty. as a matter of right to the use of the public for vehicular or pedestrian traffic between right-of- 15.04.010 Definitions. way lines or within an easement specifically established for that purpose. The following words and phrases when used in this chapter shall, for the purpose of this 6. Tunnel. As used in this chapter, chapter, have the meanings respectively ascribed "tunnel" means an excavation requiring the to them in this section, except in those instances removal of dirt or like material and does not where the context clearly indicates a different include driving or forcing of pipe through the meaning: ground. (Ord. 74-14 § 1, 1974). 1. Emergency. As used in this chapter, 15.04.020 Jurisdiction. "emergency" means a circumstance in which immediate repair to damaged or malfunctioning The requirements of this chapter shall apply facilities is necessary to restore lost service or to all rights-of-way under the jurisdiction of the prevent immediate harm to persons or property. City of Tigard, dedicated by plat or deed, created by user, or the use thereof controlled by the City 2. Person. As used in this chapter, pursuant to agreements with Washington County "person" means every natural person, firm, co- or the Oregon Department of Transportation. 15-04-1 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE b. That all work will be performed 15.04.030 Permit Required. and any facilities will be constructed by or for a franchisee in accordance with the franchise 1. It is unlawful for any person to cut upon agreement; or within, break, dig up, damage in any manner, undermine or tunnel under any public street or c. The location and route of all of public alley for the purposes of doing work in a applicant's new facilities to be installed as well as right-of-way or in a sanitary sewer, storm sewer all of applicant's existing facilities in the or water easement as described in this chapter, construction area, including a cross-section to without first complying with the provisions of this show the facilities in relation to the street, curb, chapter in regard to the obtaining of permits, sidewalk and right-of-way; depositing of securities and the making of applications to the City. Application for permits d. The construction methods to be shall be in the form prescribed by the City. employed for protection of existing structures, Permits shall be issued for a limited time and shall fixtures and facilities and a description of any specify the extent of the authority granted by the improvements that the applicant proposes to permit. temporarily or permanently remove or relocate. 2. No permit shall be issued to place or maintain a utility system in any portion of the 2. Applications for construction permits right-of-way unless the applicant has complied shall be accompanied by the following: with the provisions of chapter 15.06 of the Code. a. A verification that the drawings, 3. Any person who cuts upon or within, plans and specifications submitted with the breaks, digs up, damages in any manner, application comply with all applicable technical undermines or tunnels under any unimproved codes, rules and regulations. The City may public street or public alley for purposes other require that the verification be by a registered than those described in this chapter, must obtain professional engineer. an encroachment permit pursuant to chapter 15.16 of this Code. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 99-31, Ord. 74-14 b. A written construction schedule, § 2, 1974). which shall include a deadline for completion of construction. The construction schedule is subject 15.04.040 Permit Applications. to approval by the City Engineer. C. The permit fee in an amount to be 1. Applications for construction permits determined by resolution of the City Council. The shall be submitted on forms provided by the City fee shall be designed to defray the costs of City and shall be accompanied by drawings, plans, and administration of the construction permit program. specifications in sufficient detail to demonstrate: 15.04.050 Review By City Engineer. a. That all work will be performed and any facilities will be constructed in The City Engineer, after reviewing the accordance with all applicable codes, rules and materials submitted with the application, shall regulations; notify the applicant if changes in the construction 15-04-2 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE plans are needed and what City requirements must be met. The permittee shall complete all construction within the right-of-way so as to minimize 15.04.060 Permit Issuance. disruption of the right-of-way and utility service and without interfering with other public and Upon a determination that the application private property within the rights-of-way. All and supporting information complies with the construction work within rights-of-way, including requirements of this chapter, the City Engineer restoration, must be completed within 120 days of shall issue a permit authorizing construction in the issuance of the construction permit unless an rights-of-way, subject to conditions that the City extension or alternate schedule has been approved Engineer deems appropriate to ensure compliance by the City Engineer. The permittee shall comply with this chapter. In order to minimize disruption with City traffic control procedures and standards. to transportation and to coordinate work to be performed in the right-of-way, the permit may 15.04.110 As Built Drawings. specify a time period within which all work must be performed and require coordination of Upon request by the City, a permittee shall construction activities. The City Engineer may provide City with two complete sets of engineered impose conditions regulating the location and plans in a form acceptable to the City showing the appearance of facilities. location of the facilities the permittee installed or constructed within the rights-of-way pursuant to 15.04.070 Compliance With Permit. the permit. All construction shall be in accordance with 15.04.120 Restoration Of Rights-of-Way And the permit and approved plans and specifications. City Property. The City Engineer or designee shall be provided access to the work site and the opportunity to 1. When a permittee does any work in or inspect any work in the right-of-way. The affecting any rights-of-way or City property, it permittee shall provide, upon request, any shall, at its own expense, promptly remove any information needed by the City Engineer or obstructions therefrom and restore such ways or designee to determine compliance with applicable property to good order and condition unless requirements. All work that does not comply with otherwise directed by the City and as determined all permit requirements shall either be corrected or by the City Engineer or designee. removed at the sole expense of the permittee. The City is authorized to issue stop work orders to 2. If weather or other conditions do not assure compliance with this chapter. permit the complete restoration required by this section, the permittee shall temporarily restore the 15.04.080 Notice Of Construction. affected rights-of-way or property. Such temporary restoration shall be at the permittee's Except in an emergency, the permittee shall sole expense and the permittee shall promptly notify the City Engineer not less than two working undertake and complete the required permanent days prior to any excavation or construction in the restoration when the weather or other conditions right-of-way. no longer prevent such permanent restoration. Any corresponding modification to the 15.04.090 Construction In Right-of-Way. 15-04-3 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE construction schedule may be subject to approval estimated costs of construction in the rights-of- by the City. way prior to doing any work in any right-of-way. The financial security shall remain in force until 3. If the permittee fails to restore rights-of- 60 days after substantial completion, including way or property to good order and condition, the restoration of rights-of-way and other property, as City shall give the permittee written notice and determined by the City. The financial security provide the permittee a reasonable period of time shall guaranty timely completion, construction in not exceeding thirty (30) days to restore the compliance with applicable plans, permits, codes rights-of-way or property. If, after said notice, the and standards, proper location, restoration of permittee fails to restore the rights-of-way or rights-of-way and other property, and timely property to as good a condition as existed before payment and satisfaction of all claims, demands or the work was undertaken, the City shall cause liens for labor, material or services. such restoration to be made at the expense of the permittee. 15.04.150 Unusual Conditions. 4. A permittee shall use suitable The City Engineer may grant the permit even barricades, flags, flagging attendants, lights, flares if all the standards of this chapter are not met if and other measures as required for the safety of all the City Engineer determines that the following members of the general public and to prevent conditions are present: injury or damage to any person, vehicle or property by reason of such work in or affecting 1. There are peculiar physical conditions such rights-of-way or property. not ordinarily existing in similar districts in the City or the nature of the business or operation 5. The permittee shall restore all streets, makes compliance with all standards impossible alleys, roads and other public ways or places that or impractical; it disturbs to the same condition the area was in prior to permittee's work. The permittee shall 2. The public interest, particularly safety, perform all work in compliance with applicable health, and general welfare is not adversely rules, regulations, ordinances or orders. The City affected; Engineer may issue orders to ensure compliance with this chapter and proper protection of public 3. The granting of the permit will not and private property. If the permittee fails to adversely affect the rights of adjacent property make repairs or provide restoration in response to owners or residents; and any order within the time allowed under the order, City may make those repairs at the expense of the 4. The application of the standards of this permittee. chapter would work unnecessary hardship upon the applicant, property owner, tenants, or 15.04.140 Financial Security. residents. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §12, 1974). When the City, in its sole discretion, 15.04.160 Repairs. determines that a permittee's work or manner of performance warrants, the permittee shall provide The permittee shall, at its own expense, a financial security in a form acceptable to the repair and restore the area in which the work was City in an amount equal to at least 110% of the performed to as good or better condition then 15-04-4 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE before such work was undertaken. (Ord. 02-22, Every person having occasion to place any Ord. 74-14 §17, 1974). obstruction in the right-of-way or to make any excavation therein under the provisions of this 15.04.170 Inspection and Acceptance. chapter shall be responsible to anyone for any injury by reason of the presence of such The permittee must notify the City Engineer obstructions or excavation on the public highways or designee upon completion for inspection of the when the obstruction or excavation is the whole work to determine compliance with the proximate cause of the injury and shall also be requirements of this chapter, prior to final liable to the City, in the event that the City is held acceptance of the work. The permittee shall not responsible for any action or claims or otherwise be relieved of obligations under any security arising out of the presence of the obstruction or given pursuant to the provisions hereof until the excavation in the right-of-way. (Ord. 74-14 § 16, work is in accordance with the terms of the permit 1974). and has been accepted by the City. Acceptance by the City does not relieve the permittee of its 15.04.200 Option To City To Replace obligation to maintain, repair, or reconstruct the Pavement. site of the excavation so as to maintain a condition acceptable to the City Engineer until the right-of- The permittee shall replace or repair the way is reconstructed, repaved, or resurfaced by street surface or pavement cut, damaged, tunneled the City. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 § 14, 1974). under or undermined under the provisions of this chapter. If the permittee fails to restore the street 15.04.180 Barricades And Safety Measures. surface or pavement as required by this chapter, the City may replace or repair the street surface or Whenever any person, under authority of this pavement and either charge the permittee or chapter or otherwise, places any obstruction in a deduct the cost from the security deposited by the right-of-way or makes any excavation therein for permittee with the City. (Ord. 74-14 § 18, 1974). any purpose whatsoever, it shall be the duty of such person to keep the obstructions or excavation 15.04.210 Violation--Penalties. properly safeguarded by substantial barricades and display lighted red lanterns or other lights or Failure to comply with a provision of this flares from dusk until daylight in conformity with chapter shall be a Class 1 Civil Infraction. (Ord. such regulations as may be specified by the City 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §21, 1974).■ Engineer. Whenever, in the opinion of the City Engineer, the public safety is endangered by such cuts or excavations as to require constant supervision from dusk to daylight to insure that all barricades are in proper condition and location, all warning lights are burning and all traffic is properly routed around such barricades, the permittee shall be responsible for furnishing such supervision. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §15, 1974). 15.04.190 Liability for Accidents. 15-04-5 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 15.10 DRIVEWAY driveway approach which provide a transition APPROACHES AND CURB CUTS from the normal curb and sidewalk sloping surface or by means of a curb return together with Sections: the area between the projected tangents of the curb return. 15.10.010 Definitions. 15.10.020 Driveway Approaches and Curb 6. Person. As used in this chapter, Cuts. "person" means every natural person, firm, co- 15.10.030 Areas of Limited Street partnership, association, public or private Improvement. corporation or entity, or district. 15.10.040 Abandoned Driveway Approaches. 7. Right-of-way. As used in this chapter, 15.10.050 Sufficient Parking Required. "right-of-way" includes City streets, roads, 15.10.060 Penalties. bridges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, paths, and all other public ways and areas managed by the City. 15.10.010 Definitions. 8. Sidewalk. As used in this chapter, 1. Apron. As used in this chapter, "apron" "sidewalk" means an area specifically delineated means that portion of the driveway approach and constructed for pedestrian use located behind extending from the gutter flow line to the property a curb but within the rights-of-way. line. 9. Street or Alley. As used in this chapter, 2. Curb return. As used in this chapter, "street" or "alley" means every way or place open "curb return" means the curved-portions of a curb as a matter of right to the use of the public for in the end slopes of a driveway approach. vehicular or pedestrian traffic between right-of- way lines or within an easement specifically 3. Driveway. As used in this chapter, established for that purpose. "driveway" means an area designated for vehicular use, other than a designated parking 15.10.020 Driveway Approaches and Curb area, not dedicated or set aside for public use. Cuts. 4. Driveway approach. As used in this 1. The permit provided chapter 15.04 chapter, "driveway approach" means an area, authorizes relocation of any municipal facility, construction or improvement between the including any within the limits of a curb return roadway of a public street and private property which may be encroached upon or allowed, intended to provide access for vehicles from the providing that the applicant first notifies the roadway of a public street to a definite area, a appropriate authority, obtains the appropriate driveway, or a door at least seven feet wide, authorization and bears the cost of the relocation intended and used for the ingress and egress of of the municipal facility. vehicles. The component parts of the driveway approach are termed the apron, the end slopes or 2. Except for shared driveways, no the curb return. driveway approach or access shall be less than six feet from the side property line projected, except 5. End slopes. As used in this chapter, in cul-de-sacs, without written permission of the "end slopes" means those portions of the 15-10-1 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE City Engineer. End slopes shall not be considered part of the driveway approach or access. 15.10.040 Abandoned Driveway Approaches. 3. No portion of any driveway approach, including the end slopes, shall be located closer In the event a person makes an application to than thirty feet to an intersecting street right-of- relocate a driveway approach and abandons an way line. existing driveway approach, the applicant shall remove the existing driveway and replace the curb 4. Commercial or service drives shall not to a standard curb section at his own expense. be more than forty feet in width and if located on (Ord. 74-14 §10, 1974). the same lot frontage shall be separated by a minimum length of curb of thirty feet. 15.10.050 Sufficient Parking Required. 5. Each residential driveway shall not be No permit for the construction of new more than thirty feet in width including end driveway approaches shall be issued unless the slopes, and if more than one driveway is to be property served has the minimum parking constructed to serve the same lot, the frontage required by the Community Development Code. spacing between such driveways shall be not less (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §11, 1974). than thirty feet measured along the curb line. 15.10.060 Penalties. 6. Joint access driveways shall conform to the appropriate width standard for commercial or Failure to comply with a provision of this residential type usage. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 chapter shall be a Class 1 civil infraction.■ §8, 1974). 15.10.030 Areas of Limited Street Improvements. 1. Where standard gutter and curbs have been installed but where concrete sidewalks have not been installed, the applicant shall be required to construct the driveway approach from curb line to the applicant's premises. The cost shall be borne by the applicant. 2. Where standard gutter and curbs have not been installed, the driveway approach may be constructed of the same material used for surfacing the driveway. The applicant shall improve that portion between the property line and existing pavement in such a manner as to not impede surface drainage along the street. The cost of that portion of the improvement, between the property line and existing pavement, shall be borne by the applicant. (Ord. 74-14 §9, 1974). 15-10-2 ATTACHMENT 3 Nancy Werner - Fw: Verizon Comments to Tigard draft ordinance 15.04 and 15.06 Page 1 From: <david.mielke@verizon.com> To: <Nancyw@tigard-or.gov> Date: 7/25/2006 1:37:04 PM Subject: Fw: Verizon Comments to Tigard draft ordinance 15.04 and 15.06 2nd attempt David Mielke 972-718-3435 - Phone 972-719-7948 - Fax david.mielke@verizon.com Forwarded by David L. Mielke/EMPL/TX/Verizon on 07/25/2006 03:27 PM Your Verizon Comments to Tigard draft ordinance 15.04 and 15.06 document: Nancyw@ci.tigard.or.us The original message was received at Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:24:11 -0400 (EDT) from smtpftw.verizon.com [138.83.130.53] The following addresses had permanent fatal errors <Nancyw@ci.tigard.or. us> Transcript of session follows 550 5.1.2 <Nancyw@ci.tigard.or.us>... Host unknown (Name server: ci.tigard.or.us.: host not found) What should you do? You can resend the undeliverable document to the recipients listed above by choosing the Resend button or the Resend command on the Actions menu. Once you have resent the document you may delete this Delivery Failure Report. If resending the document is not successful you will receive a new failure report. Unless you receive other Delivery Failure Reports, the document was successfully delivered to all other recipients. Nanc Werner - Fw: Verizon Comments to Tigard draft ordinance 15.04 and 15.06 Page 2 FHSMTP04/SMTP/Bell-Atl, DWMAIL03/MSVRNerizon To: Nancyw@ci.tigard.or.us cc: Bob C. Wayt/EMPUORNerizon@VZNotes, Richard G. Stewart/EMPUTXNerizon@VZNotes, Kim A. Bump/EMPUORNerizon@VZNotes, David L. Mielke/EMPUTXNerizon@VZNotes Date: 03:23:34 PM EST Today Subject: Verizon Comments to Tigard draft ordinance 15.04 and 15.06 Nancy, Attached is the latest redline ordinances with Verizon's comments. Please send me the staff report and the latest draft of the ordinances at your earliest convenience after it is sent to (See attached file: Franchise Ordinance 0506 without TOC w VZ Comments 7-25-06.doc)(See attached file: Right of Way Ordinance 0506 without TOC W Vz Comments 7-25-06.doc)council. Thanks David Mielke 972-718-3435 - Phone 972-719-7948 - Fax david.mielke@verizon.com(See attached file: Franchise Ordinance 0506 without TOC w VZ Comments 7-25-06.doc)(See attached file: Right of Way Ordinance 0506 without TOC W Vz Comments 7-25-06.doc) CC: <david.mielke@verizon.com> Page 1 of 1 Bruce Griswold To: 'nancyw@tigard-or.gov' 7/45 Cc: 'Craig Prosser'; Bob Cruz; Gerald Linder D& Subject: Tigard Franchise Utility Ordinance (Revised 8/08/06) Nancy L. Werner Right-of-Way Administrator City of Tigard Dear Nancy, I request that the following language be entered into the record at the August 8, 2006 Tigard City Council meeting: It is the understanding of Clean Water Services that adoption of the revised Franchise Utility Ordinance now under consideration by the Tigard City Council will in no way impact the remittances otherwise due from the City of Tigard to Clean Water Services, under the current Intergovernmental Agreement between the two parties. It is the District's further understanding that the Franchise Fee and Right-of-Way Usage Fee (specifically sections 15.06.090 and 15.06.100) do not apply and will not be applied to Clean Water Services. Thank you and the Tigard City Council for your consideration of this important matter. Bruce Griswold, CPA Business Services Department Director Chief Financial Officer Clean Water Services 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, OR 97123 Ph: 503-681-3606 E-Mail: griswoldb@cleanwaterservices.org 3/8/2006 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 15.4406 8-FRANCHISED UTILITY ORDINANCE. 5.14.30-CO tMetieR Permits. 5.14.310 Facilities. GENERAL TERMS &CONDITIONS 5.14.320 Permit Applientions; 5.14.330 Review By City EngineeF. 154406.010 Short Title. 5.14.340 Permit issues 15.4406.020 Definitions. 5.14.350 15.4406.030 Purpose. 5.14.360 Netiee Of Construetien. 1_5.4406.040 Jurisdiction 5.14.370 COBStMetiOR in Right Of Way. 15.06.050 Franchise Required. 15.4406.380240 As Built Drawings. 15.41406.050060 Grant Of Franchise. . 15.4406.069070 Privilege Granted. ZWay And City PFOPeFty. 154406.070080 Term. 15.4406.089090 Franchise Fee. Bond. 15.06.100 Right-of-Way Usage Fee. 15.47106.440250 Coordination Of 15.47406.090110 Application Standards For Construction. Joint Telecommunications/Cable 15.4406.430260 Relocation Or Removal Of Franchises. Facilities. 15.4406.430270 Plan For Discontinuance Or APPLICATION & RENEWAL PROCESS Removal. 15.4406.440280 Removal Of Abandoned 15.4406.400120 Application. Facilities. 15.4406.440130 Denials. 15.4406.450290 Removal By City. 15.4406.430140 Renewal. 15.06300 Appeals. OBLIGATIONS OF FRANCHISE TERMINATION/CURES 15.4406.200150 Assignment Or Transfer Of 15.4406.500310 Revocation Or Termination Franchise. Of A Franchise. Or Authority To 15.4406.240160 Leased Capacity. Use Rights-of-Way. 15.4406.229170 Duty To Provide 15.4406.540320 Standards For Revocation Information, Audit Responsibility. Or Termination. 5.14.230 SeFviee To The City. 5#53015.06.330Notice And Cure. 15.4406.240180 Insurance. 15.06.340 Penalties. 15.4406.359190 Indemnification. 15.06.350 Other Remedies. • SEVERABILITY & APPLICATION TO 15.4406.288200 Construction Permits. EXISTING AGREEMENTS 15.06.210 Facilities. 15.06.220 Location Of Facilities. 15.06.360 Severability And Preemption. 15.4406.2)0230 Interference With Rights 15.4406.640370 Application To Existing Rights-Aof-Way. Agreements. 154406-1 Code Update: 930710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE statutory limitations to the definition of "g oss GENERAL TERMS & CONDITIONS revenues." 15.47406.010 Short Title. 4. Person. As used in this chapter, "person" means every natural person, firm, co- This Echapter shall be known and referred to partnership, association, corporation or entity, but as the Tigard Teleee nm unieatie Franchised not including special districts or county service Utili Ordinance. districts. 154046.020 Definitions. 35. Right -Riht-af-of way. As used in this chapter, "right way" includes City 1. Emergency. As used in this chapter, streets, roads, bridges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, "emergency" means a circumstance in which paths, and all other public ways and areas immediate repair to or damaged or malfunctioning managed by the City. "Right Right-of-mof way" facilities in necessary to restore lost service or also includes public utility easements to the extent prevent immediate harm to persons or property. that the easement allows use by the franshisee utility operator planning to use or using the public -22. Franchise. As used in this chapter, utility easement. "Right --Right-of-of-way" "franchise" means the privilege conferred on a includes the subsurface under and airspace over person er- et by the City to place and operate these areas. "Right-of-way" does not include the portions of a system airwaves for purposes of CMRS, broadcast in, over or under rights-rights-e€-of way. television, DBS and other wireless providers, or Franchises shall be conferred by ordinance and easements or other property interests owned by a confirmed by a franchise agreement. single utility or entity. 3. Gross Revenues. As used in this 6. Sidewalk. As used in this chapter, chapter, "gross revenues" means revenues earned "sidewalk" means an area specifically delineated within the City, less net uncollectibles, from the and constructed for pedestrian use located behind sale of electrical energy, gas, telecommunications, a curb but within the rights-of-way. water, or sanitary sewage disposal and treatment service, and for the use, rental, or lease of utility 7. Street or Alley. As used in this chapter, facilities of the utili engaged in such business. "street" or "alley" means every way or place open as a matter of right to the use of the public for Gross revenues shall not include proceeds vehicular or pedestrian traffic between right-of- from the sale of bonds, mortgage or other way lines. evidence of indebtedness, securities or stocks, or sales at wholesale by one utility to another utility 4. Competitive teleeemmunieation when the utility purchasing the service is not the previden Asr used in this-eiapter, "eempeRt-iv ultimate consumer. teleeemmunieatiens-sen,ieePreTidermeans -an operator- of a teleeemmunieations system that dees To the extent that the City's authority to tax of have ° elus ve fights to provide se ° to ° gross revenues of an entity is limited by ORS phie area under- state °r federal 1 221.410 through 221.655, the City shall apply the 15-1406-2 Code Update: 93071,0306 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE -58. Telecommunications facility. As used in this chapter, "telecommunications facility" means any physical . component of a 10. Utility facility. As used in this chapter, telecommunications system located within or "utility facility" means any physical component of attached to the rights-of-way. a utility system located within or attached to the rights-of-way. 4-39. Telecommunications system. As used in this chapter, "telecommunications system" 11. Utility operator. As used in this chapter, means a system of fibers, lines, cables, antennas, "utility operator" means any person that places or microwave links, or other conduit and supporting maintains any portion of a utility system within structures and equipment constructed or used for the rights-of-way. the purpose of transmitting audio, video, digital or other forms of electric or electronic signals or 12. Utility system. As used in this chapter, information. "Telecommunications system" does "utility system" means a system owned and not include a cable communications system. operated by a person to, deliver or transmit However-, it ^ ei4ien of ^ eable ^ ations electricity, natural gas, cable, telecommunications, stem also used for- teleeeniniunieatio„s othe water, sewer, storm sewer or other goods or than cableeeffimuriieatiens, the system is both ^ services by means of pipes, wires, transmitters, or eable eeniffluflieatiefis system and -a other facilities permanently located within or teleeefyffnunieatiefis Telecommunications attached to the rights-of-way to or from customers system does not include a system used for the within the corporate boundaries of the City. _of transmission of electric power solely for power Tigard. "Utility system" also includes purposes, even if a portion of the system is used to transmission of these products or services through communicate information about the power system the City of Tigard whether or not customers for use by the system operator. within the City are served by those transmissions. Telecommunications system does not include "Utility system" does not include any agency of mobile telecommunications equipment (e.g. the federal government. cellular phones, hand-held or vehicle-mounted radios) but does include fixed antennas and other fixed equipment used to convey signals to or from 15.04746.030 Purpose. mobile telecommunications equipment. The purpose and intent of this wee This change is necessary as the definition chapter is to: exceeds that which is provided under 47 U.S.C. 522(7)(0): a facility of a common carrier which is I. Cemply with the pr-wAsieiis of the 1996 subject, in whole or in part, to the provisions of title II Telecommunications ^ et as they apply to leeal of this Act, except that such facility shall be considered govemments, ' ' ^ ^ and the- a cable system (other than for purposes of section these ^^-w°r^ offer' 521(c)) TO THE EXTENT SUCH FACILTIY IS USED IN THE TRANSMISSION OF VIDEO PROGRAMMING DIRECTLY TO SUBSCRIBERS, nettfal-basis in the provision e€ unless the extent of such use is solely to teleeeinniunieatiens s interactive on-demand services. 154406-3 Code Update: 930710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 3. Eneeurage- the w idest " sible basis to business institution 15.1406.040050 Franchise Required. and residents of the City; - No pefsen shall place or- maintain any pei4ie 4-Permit and manage reasonable access to of ^ telee ^^tions system within right of the pub4e-rights--ef--of way of the City for way without a ffanehise. The Git~, may grant teleee ieatiens--utili purposes on a frane ise allowing use of any right of way for- competitively neutral and non-discriminatory pertisn-of a teleee unisationTsys basis and conserve the limited physical capacity eensis ent with the r° ul tiens established of those frights =-e of way held in trust by na°r the a, ^"'ty of this ehapt°,. the City; per-sen that i3lae-es or- inta' This change is necessary for the requirement to utility system in an ei4ien of the r- i t of y Lay be consistent with the authority as granted by section withetit f^~ehise-is anbieet to arl-ether 253(c) of the federal act. pr e~ris ertse€ this -e hapte , eludin . the a inert of the r-ieht of way tisgee fee i3ur-suant to serati 15.04. inn -52. Assure that the City's current and ongoing costs of granting and regulating private This change is necessary as the requirement access to and the use of the pulesrights- ef-of provides the city with the unfettered discretion to way are fully compensated by the persons seeking unilaterally determine the terms and conditions of a such access and causing such costs; franchise. In addition, Verizon's position is that since we have an expired franchise the provision is not 63. Secure fair and reasonable applicable and such requirement cannot be used to compensation to the City and its residents for leverage the city's franchise renewal requirements. permitting private use of the publie-rights --ef-of way;.. 2. The City may grant a franchise allowing use of any right-of-way or any portion of a utility 4. Comply with the provisions of the system. Communications Act of 1934 as they qpply_to local governments. 3. To the extent the terms of a franchise are inconsistent with the provisions of this 15.06.040 Jurisdiction. chapter, the terms of the franchise shall prevail. The requirements of this chapter shall apply 15.06.060 Grant of Franchise. to all rights-of-way under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard, dedicated by plat or deed, created by user, or the use thereof controlled by the City 1. Te--eempetiti• ° teleee immni^^tiens pursuant to agreements with Washington County service-prei derv. The City Council ma-y--shall or the Oregon Department of Transportation. grant by resolution a teleeemmunie tion utili franchise to any person providing eempetitive Please advise the extent to which Tigard controls teleee *nuni^^tion3 utili services wheich has the use of Washington County or ODOT ROW'S 154406-4 Code Update: 830710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE submitted an application, meets the requirements 15.4-406.080090 Franchise Fee. of this Ch>apt-,fchapter, and to the agfees sign Git~ds-s4anddffanehise- agreements 1. Any person applying for a franchise meson. The franchise shall not be effective (including an application for renewal) shall pay an until the applicant signs the Cis and application fee to cover the cost of processing the Teleeem ~„~;^^t:^~, Utili Franchise Agreement application: to the extent that the City's authoritx substantially in the form approved by the City to impose an application fee is not limited by Council. The City Council shall approve the €efm ORS 221.410 through 221.655. The City Council of the-standadT elesOwAnttnieafiens shall establish the fee by resolution. Franchise Agreement by 1=eselxtien0rdinance. This change _ is requested as the city does not have This change is requested as the requirement the authority to imposes such fees on unlawfully provides the city with the unfettered telecommunication carriers paying the privile a tax. discretion to unilaterally determine the terms and conditions of the franchise agreement to the extent a 2. The annual fee ineluded in the f arch se franchisee does not agree with agreem nt shall be the afflounnter amou eentained in the Master- Fee Resolution in effee 2. Te ethers. The City Council may grant ° t°a ..;tl t, teleeen" "m'a`le"s utility franchises in any other r^ r_-evenue ° circumstance by ordinance. Any franchise City ineludes monthly se a ,.1,.,,.ges paid b ordinance shall not be effective until a franchise eustemers- within the-Ci y,the fulll-amount e agreement is entered into by the City and the ehar-ges for separately-eharged tr-ansrnisrsions franchisee. - ling and r-eeeived within the City, half 3. Nonexclusivity. All either- 'i^inate or- a` r-eeeived within the City bu teleeem uni ..tions utili franchises granted to afe reeeived er- er te-eetside the City, an ..tom ,°,l Fe,- ~t.,l of 4:4..:l;t:°., ,;tl,:., the shall be nonexclusive. right the franchisee-for seiwiees(ineleding resale 15.06.070 Privilege Granted. ssi=viees) -previdedby the ffanehisee that f ..:1:ties w thin the right of way. The franchise shall grant a privilege to use rights- of-way consistent with the requirements of this In the °"°~t that a 4f °~t chapter. The franchise does not convey any right, e.' res. ved-by ^ mobile deviee(e.g. Mi ! title or interest in the right-of-way. phone), the ..,,,t,:l° ,l°..:,.° ..1..,11 be deemed to . in the jur-isdiratien "ere the bills for- use ef 15.4-406.070080 Term. der ° are sent, ° ral° of aetu l le „ti^ at the time oftm.° tFan Unless otherwise specified in the franchise agreement and resolution or ordinance, franchises -,2.--The franchise agreement may provide shall be in effect for ten years but in no case shall for payment of a franchise fee/privilege tax exceed 15 years. ("franchise fee") is-as compensation for use of rights -ri hts-ef-of way and reimbursement 154406-5 Code Update: 030710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE allowed by Oregon Revised Statutes and federal Electric: 3.5% law, of the City's cost of administering the Natural Gas: 5.0% program created in this chapter. The franchise fee Water: 5.0% is separate and distinct from any other legally Sanitary Sewer 5.0% authorized federal, state or local taxes or fees, except to the extent that payment of a franchise 3. Right-of-way usage fee payments shall fee shall count as a credit to the right-of-way be net of any franchise fee payments received bX usage fee or other fees/taxes as may be enacted the City, but in no case will be less than $0. under state and federal law. 4. Unless otherwise agreed to by the City, 43. The fees imposed by this chapter are not the right-of-way usage fee shall be payable semi- subject to the property tax limitations of Article annually on or before March 15 for the six month XI, sections 11(b) and 11(19) of the Oregon period ended December 31, and September 15 for Constitution and are not fees imposed on property the six month period ended June 30. The utility or property owners by fact of ownership and are shall pay interest at the rate of nine percent per not new or increased fees for purposes of those year for any payment made after the due date. subsections. 15.4-406.090110 Application Standards For -54. The franchise fee shall be payable semi- Joint Telecommunications/Cable annually on or before March 15 for the six month Franchises. period ended December 31, and September 15 for the six month period ended June 30, unless Persons or entities providing cable television otherwise stated in the resolution authorizing the and telecommunications services over the same franchise. The franchisee shall pay interest at the network under a franchise negotiated, approved rate of one-nine percent per year for any and recommended by the Metropolitan Area payment made after the due date. (Ord. 02-05). Communications Commission (MACC) and ratified by the City Council will be presumed to 15.06.100 Right-of-Way Usage Fee. have met the application requirements for a telecommunications franchise issued by the City. 1. All persons or entities using a utility The telecommunications franchise and MACC system or facility in the right-of-way to provide franchise will be of equal term and the franchisee service to customers within the Ci of Tigard can rely on the insurance certificates and surety shall annually pay a right-of-way usage fee bonds pursuant to the MACC franchise. This calculated as a percentage of gross revenues, provision does not exempt MACC franchisees subject to any applicable limitations imposed by from the requirements to submit an application, federal and state statutes, including the privilege obtain a franchise, pay the franchise fee, and tax limitations set for in ORS 221.410 through otherwise comply with the requirements of this 221.655. Ghaptef~ghater. 2. The right-of-way usage fee percentage applicable to each class of utility shall be as follows: APPLICATION & RENEWAL PROCESS Telecommunications: 5.0% 15.4-406.400120 Application. 154406-6 Code Update: 030710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE requires that such fees be publicly disclosed and Any person seeking a franchise shall submit 221.515 does not allow for such additional fees for to the City Manager a letter of application telecommunication carriers that pay the privilege tax presenting the following-#^r ^ ffane ise shall inelade: 5. h fmatien showing that ^ phew t ha the-€inaneial, teehaieal-andlegal -eapaeity 1. A eompleted City appheatien f4m. The py-evide the S-1.16-5 -11d BE)fHplj' With th City Manager- shall ~b° the f ~ to be used. requirements of this ehapten That infefmat n shall include of the-franehisee-Ls ~-Information identifying the applicant business histef and describing the teleeem rieatiens utili system the applicant proposes to operate in the " business plan showing the intention an rights- f way ights-of-way. The initial application ability -te-provide series-fer whieh the shall include engineering plans, specifications and a network.map showing the anticipated location request-hat-the business p! n be kept and route of proposed teleesenmRunieatien een€ideatizrl- facilities in the right of wayright-of-way, including both existing and proposed facilities. If 15.4406.0130 Denials. ally-ef the faeilities are a Arced by others, ha Any denial of a franchise application shall be in writing and state the reasons for the denial. This change is requested as the requirement is The City may deny an application for a franchise: unrelated to the management of the right-of-way and such information may be proprietary. In addition, it 1. If the franehisee applicant has not violates any non-disclosure requirements regarding complied with all application requirements and contractual proprietary information. standards; or 2. if the-&ai see-laeks~suffleient -32. Information establishing that the €inanei , applicant has obtained or is in the process of obtaining all other required governmental standards-, approvals to construct and operate the system and to offer or provide the teleeemmunieations 1-If the tee-applicant has a record services proposed, including, if applicable, any of non-compliance;. PUC filings or approvals. 4. ifother- -€aeters demeastrate that the 43. The application fee to the extent that the gfant of ^ pr-ivilege to use rights of way is of City's authority impose an application fee is not the publie interest of the City and its eitizens limited by ORS 221.410 through 221.655... 15.4-406.430140 Renewal. This change is requested as the city does not have the authority to impose such fee on telecommunication A franchisee that desires to renew a franchise carriers paving the privilege tax. shall submit a letter n application- fe}requesting What is the application fee? Section 253(c) 154406-7 Code Update: 030710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE renewal including the information set forth in 15.4406.248160 Leased Capacity. section 15.04.120 ^ ^ fefm „ fib , 4fto the City Manager no less than 180 days before A fr-anehisee-titility eper-ater may lease expiration of the franchise. eaparity or- bandwidth on or- in - its stem ethers, previded-- thathe-€ranehise ¢ OBLIGATIONS OF FRANCHISE eper-ate r-evides the City with the name an ~ business address of any lessee. All per-s 15.06.150 Assignment Or Transfer Of leasing-eapasiyy A-F 3andl4,* idth on a Franchise. teleeemmunieatienet- in _ ~systerx--and A franchise may not be transferred or usi n^ that ° eity bandwidth a ° assigned to another person unless such person is ef-~~hai)t-frequir-ed to obtain -a authorized under all applicable laws to own or operate the utility system and the transfer or assignment is approved by all agencies or This change is requested as the requirement is an organizations required or authorized under federal unlawful attempt to manage the operations of a or state laws to approve such transfer or telecommunications business and is unrelated to the assignment. The franchisee shall provide the City management of the right of way in violation of Owest v with without the express written ^ of the Auburn. C-i-ty- notice of any transfer or assignment within 20 days of eceiving_approval from any state or federal agency. 15.0446.MI70 Duty To Provide Information, Audit Responsibility. °~t in the „ hi see nt+ntt n .-.nti 4.,4° tfn„nf of the f n ,.t-.:n° Within 4-0-30 business days of receipt of a written request from the City, a n^„e-utili This change is requested as notice should only be required after approval has been granted. operator shall furnish the City: 2. If a franchise is assigned or transferred, This change is necessary to ensure that receipt of the assignee or transferee shall become notice is made prior to the start of any time responsible for all facilities of the existing requirements. transferee at the time of transfer. 1. Information sufficient to demonstrate ntt^.., the tfnnnfn.- °v.f if n Mn.-,nom inn that f-na e the utiltv operator is in compliance with this erase chapter and its franchise ,m the tfa-ns€eree of assignee meets all paidreq~tiremer~ts the ens -hisees, and agreement; harts€eree-e-assigr~e 2. Access to all books records maps, and --ting to be bound bathe--anehise agreement and all applicable regulations. A transfer or assignment other documents, maintained in the ordinary of a franchise does not extend the term of the course of business which is necessary for the franchise. utility operator to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this ordinance and the franchise.by-the f a„ e utility operator with respect to its facilities in rights of wa-y i hts- 15-1406-8 Code Update: 930710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE of-way so that the City may perform an audit. justification for any audit or other claim shall be Access shall be provided within the Portland provided within three years after the payment has been Oregon metropolitan area unless prior remitted by franchisee to the City; otherwise the City arrangement for access elsewhere has been made shall be precluded from reviewing or auditing the with the City. applicable privilege tax payment(s). This change is requested as the requirement as City. 15.406139180 c°,...,..,. To The is vague overly broad and Verizon can not agree to provide unlimited access to its books and 2€ the G i ty een ~ traets €e~ use ef records. teleeem.-Au}ieatiens f-aerlities, installation er-mamtenanse from- the f+anehisee-, 3. If the City's audit of the books, records the €ranehisee-shall eha-ge the City f anehisee'^ Fr, r of the and other documents maintained by teethe melt favor-able rate o erect at the t}ri~~~ utility operator demonstrate that the wee request tester-users withinOregon for- -a utility operator has underpaid the franchise fee or similar- vel-trme-e€ serviee, subjeet te-state !a:r With the City's per-mission, the fr-anehisee may right-of-way usage fee by five percent or more in deduct any ^Hphew le ehar-ges f em f anehise ° any one year, fr-anehisee utility operator shall Ti~el~*~--~3t~3er-terl~S-aF3a-vvidieiviro-i rseiv~rcc~ i.,,,.^° the r:«,. for- the of the ^„a;t and pay r provided b3=fr-anehisee to the-Cib, may be sha44-pay interest as specified in $sections eeifiea in ^ separate ^geeme 5.14.08015.06.090 and 15.06.100 from the original due date. 5.14.240 Insurance. This change is requested Verizon will not agree to All r~^ ~Tutility operators shall pay such audit fees as it violates state law and to the extent the auditors fee is based on a percentage of and maintain in full force and effect pubhe findings the results may be biased. commercial general liability insurance covering bodily injury and property damage on an Verizon proposes the follow audit reimbursement "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or equivalent) language: acceptable to the City. Such insurance shall cover all risks arising directly or indirectly out of the All costs and charges associated with a review or audit utility operator's activities or work under this or the franchise fee or right-of-way usage fee as chapter, including all subcontractors to any tier. specified in this Ordinance shall be the responsibility The policy or policies of insurance maintained by of the City. Any audit finding(s) that are mutually the utility operator shall provide at least a general agreed to by the parties shall be corrected within 180 days after mutual agreement. If the audit findings result ag rgregate limit of $5 million with a per in a significant shortfall and the findings are not occurrence limit trtli a^ ^ tiers corrected prior to commencement of a later audit elause, with a ee== binea singe limit of $3 million, Verizon shall be responsible for the actual cost insuring the fr-anehisee utility operator and naming incurred by the city to conduct the audit provided such the City as an additional insured with respect to costs are reasonable and not based on a percentage of this chapter on the policy. The utility operator findings arrangement. Reasonable justification for a fianehisee shall cause a certificate of insurance to review or audit must be provided and mutually agreed be provided to the City Recorder. The insur-anee upon by both parties. Written notice with reasonable shall indemi ify--and hold the City ies 15-4406-9 Code Update: 0330710206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE against liability -erdamage whieh -m^• contributory insurance as to the insurance required eer.uf ffem ^ ^'^;m r° idling f em f ^nehise°'^ by this chapter. operations under- this agreement and shall pr-evide for ^ def ase of the City against s eh ^'15.47406.M190 Indemnification. NOTE: City added notification and opportunity to defend NANCY WHAT IS AN OCCURRENCE FORM? language of the last sentence but did not add our VERIZON'S INSURANCE IS IN ISO MANUSCRIPT proposed language "If the City does not allow such FORM. VERIZON CAN ONLY ISSUE defense the utility operator shall not be responsible for CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE AND WILL NOT damages, losses, attorney fees or costs of suit or PROVIDE COPIES OF THE POLICY or ISO form. defense". As an alternative, a utility operator €ranehisee Each utility operator ffa e shall defend, may provide and keep in force self-insurance in an indemnify and hold the City and its officers, equal amount to the insurance required to be employees, agents and representatives harmless obtained from a third-party insurer. The from and against any and all liability, causes of ffanehisee-shall indemnify, defend and hold action, claims, damages, losses, judgments and hafmiess the City tlfeugh- its self insufane other costs and expenses, including reasenable pr-egfam against any and all elaims, , attorney fees and costs of suit or defense at both defaan`' and its ('"'hiding atte ey fees an trial and appeal level, whether or not a trial or rests) arising our- of of fesulting 4em thee appeal ever takes place that may be asserted by ffanehisee's aetii *des. -The utility operator any person or entity in an y, arising out of, 4 ^^e-shall provide proof of self-insurance resulting from, during or in connection with, or acceptable to the City if it chooses to self-insure. alleged to arise out of or result from the negligent, careless, or wrongful acts, omissions, failure to The procuring of required insurance or self- act, or other misconduct of the utility operator insurance shall not be construed to limit utilitv grantee or its affiliates, officers, employees, operator's liability. Notwithstanding said agents, contractors, subcontractors, or- lessees in insurance or self-insurance, utility operator shall the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, be obligated for the total amount of any damage, or removal of its teleeemmtmie tiers facilities, fury, or loss caused by negligence or neglect and , providing . offering teleeemmnun eatien^ connected with this chapter. se~vises ever-t# f eilit es of netwer-k, whether such acts or omissions are authorized, allowed, or There shall be no cancellation, material prohibited by this r-dinanee chapter or by a change, exhaustion of aggregate limits or intent franchise agreement. V Upon notification of any not to renew insurance coverage without 30 days such claim the City shall notify the utility operator written notice to the City. Any failure to comply and provide the utility operator with an with .this provision will not affect the insurance opportunity to provide defense regarding any such coverage provided to the City. A 30 days notice claim. If any aspect of this indemnity is held to be of cancellation provision shall be physically unenforceable or invalid by any court of endorsed on the policy. competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this chapter shall remain in full force and effect and The utility operator's coverage shall be shall in no way be affected or invalided by such primary to the extent permitted by law and finding. insurance maintained by the City is excess and not 154406-10 Code Update: 0307/0206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE This change is requested as Verizon should not be responsible for the acts of lessee's for which Verizon is fi: At +t.° ti ^ ffaneh se is ^..pked fo mandated by law to allow such lessees to lease such facilities. In addition Verizon does not make In the event of an emergency, a utility indemnifications for service outages or the operator may conduct work in the rights-of-way provisioning of telecommunications services. The utility 5.14.260 Damage To Grantee's Faeffities; operator shall apply for a permit for such work as soon as reasonably practicable, but not more than 48 hours after cessation of the The City shall not be liable fer- any damage to or- less of ^ telecom-„„„;oations faeilit-y a emergency, and shall furnish any required maps result or- eetion with a er-k by or- f' the and materials within 30 days of commencing Goy orf r- any ntial damages E)r losses work. fro r less ir-eet and esult ,sing the dm s eh „ _ unless r of , ; damage o This change is requested as notice should not be i-,n~ter}tiena}lytertiees, er-~'tlic~s--~~s~t13e required prior to addressing an emergency, especially if the emergency occurs during non-business hours of the city. In addition, the primary object should be 55..14.270 D°"for-manee Sur-et., addressing the emergency, therefore permit application should be required after cessation of the emergencL even if it is greater than 48 hours. (SPEAK WITH bend aeeeptable to the City „ ,.;t„ for- the full NANCY REGARDING WEEKENDS) and eemp}ete-per-fern e-a€-anyfr-amehise 15.06.210 Facilities. granted under- thisOr-dee, to eever- any , expenses, damages or- less the City pa) 13eeat~se - of any €ai~--~ik~trAll *°'°°e-~m~~„i°a*i°„s utility facilities in the beeaust le to the „ right of y ~.ght-of-way shall be constructed, n° + ,ure the atfibu eedes FUles,regulatiens Of pefits of the City-The installed, wand maintained in accordance bend shall be nt su ff4eient to „ for- the with all applicable federal, state, and local r-enaeval of ail of ffanehisee's f ,,,hies within the statutes, codes, ordinances, rules and regulations right of y. pertaining to the reasonable management of the 5.14.300-15.06.200 Construction Permits. right-of-way. All facilities shall comply with applicable right-of-way design standards imposed Except in the event of an emer ency_Ne-no by regulation or construction permit. No facility person shall construct or install any may be placed on any City facility without the teleeo-„munieations utili facilities within a express written consent of the City. The City may publie-right o€- ayright-of-way without first require separate payment for rental of space on obtaining a construction permit, and paying he City facilities. For purpose of this section, a ri& eenstFdetiepAtreet epen-ing-fee-established of wayright-of-way, street or sidewalk is not a pursuant to Seetiet+-Chapter 15.4404 20. No facility, but structures, including poles, conduit, permit shall be c8 he ~,_aetion vr boxes, and equipment, are facilities. be issued for- tiiscruccxvrr- installation of teleeemff ieations faeili ie within fight of way NANCY, HOW BROAD ARE THE DESIGN - unless T- +`I' ° teleesmmanieatierrs-eaffier- has obtained -a STANDARDS RE: TIME, PLACE AND MANNER V 154406-11 Code Update: 03071W,06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE NETWORK CONFIGURATION J TECHNOLOGY This change is requested to ensure that the City's REOUIREMENTS? PLEASE PROVIDE A COPY.) relocation requirements do not usurp the state statutes, OPUC rules and regulations or a utilities tariff. The This change is requested to ensure that any change is necessary for relocations to be business as requirements are for the reasonable management of the usual in Tigard for which Verizon is reimbursed for right-of-way, to ensure that the requirements does not relocation costs due to relocations necessitated for provide the City with the unfettered discretion to aesthetic purposes, relocations for non-roadway impose requirements unrelated to the management of structures, relocations that are necessitated for the the right-of-way and to restrict any authority regarding benefit of a private party (whether or not TIF is the operations, construction, installation or involved) or other proprietary nature whether public or maintenance of a telecommunications network. private and relocations resulting from the vacation of the right-of-way. 15.47406.3$0220 Location Of Facilities. 15.-1046.390230 Interference With Rights -0 W"Rights-of-way. All facilities located within the publie r-igh of wayright-of-way shall be constructed, installed No tee-utility operator may locate or and located in accordance with the following maintain, its utili facilities terms and conditions, unless otherwise specified so as to unreasonably interfere with the use of the in a franchise agreement. publie rights of wa- . * ghts-of-way by the City, by the general public or by other persons authorized 1. Whenever all existing electric utilities, to use or be present in or upon the p4he rights E)f cable facilities or telecommunications facilities wayrights-of-way. All use of publie rights --of are located underground within a rublie ri ght of wayrights-of-way shall be consistent with City wayright-of-way of the City, the City may require codes, ordinances and regulations. No wee a e e-utility operator with permission to utility operator shall engage in work in a right of occupy the same publie right of w sight-of-way wayright-of-way during any moratorium on right to locate its teleeemmunieations facilities of wayright-of-way work, except as permitted by underground-. the City in case of an emergency. 15.1406.380240 As Built Drawings. 2. Whenever all new or existing electric utilities, cable facilities and telecommunications The utility operator shall provide facilities are located or relocated underground City with two complete sets of engineered plans in within a publie fight of wa might-of-way of the a form acceptable to the City showing the location City, the City may require a 4an e-utili of all its teleee ie-ations utili facilities operator that currently occupies the same pub within rights of wayjrShts-of-way after initial right of a5qight-of-way to relocate its facilities construction of its system and, to the extent underground concurrently with the other affected available, shall provide the City two updated utilities to minimize disruption of the publie h complete sets of as-built plans annually, upon fright-of-way.- in accordance with state law, the request by the City. rules and regulations of the Oregon Public Utility Commission and the tariffs of a utility operator. 154406-12 Code Update: 8307192.06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 15.-1406.41E0250 Coordination Of b. The notice shall state the Construction. anticipated location, project schedule and general description of the proposed work. All ftenTutility operators shall make a good faith effort to coordinate their construction c. No permits for work shall be schedules with those of the City and other users of issued until notice has been given. the r-ights al . ghts-of-way. 5. All utilities performing work in the 1. Prior to January 1 of each year, the rights of way subject to the notice requirement set nsee- -A fall utility operators shall provide forth in para rgaph 3 of this section shall cooperate the City with a schedule of known construction with other utilities with permits to do work in the work for that year in the City's rights same location at or near the same time to frights-of-way or that may affect the rights e€ coordinate construction and colocate facilities. rights-of-way. 6. Nothing in this section shall require a 2. ;nsee-agrees --teUtility operators utility to reveal proprietary information. A utility shall meet with the City at least once each shall signify any_proprietM information as such calendar year, at the request of the City, to and the City will protect such information from schedule and coordinate work in rests--e€ disclosure to the extent allowed by law. frights-of-way. City shall share information on plans for other construction projects within 7. The notification requirement set forth in righ:ights-of-way. paragraph 3 of this section shall not be required for the installation of facilities in new 3. All construction projects within rights-e€ developments that are being processed through the frights-of-way shall be coordinated as ordered private development review process. by the City Engineer or designee, to minimize public inconvenience, disruption, or damages. 4. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by 15.4406.420260 Relocation Or Removal Of the City, at least 60 days prior to the installation Facilities. or upgrading of utilities that requires a cut or opening in the street of 400 linear feet or greater, The ffanehisee utility operator shall, in a like the person intending to perform such work shall manner, temporarily or permanently remove, provide notice to the City and all other utilities relocate, change or alter the position of any identified by the City as utilities that are teleeem " ieatio utili facility within a publ-ie franchised or permitted to place facilities within right of w~layri*ight-of-way when requested to do so the project area. in writing by the City. The removal, relocation, change or alteration shall be at the fan a. The notice must be provided in a utility operator's expense when the removal, manner which documents receipt of relocation, change or alteration is needed because notice by utilities. of any road grading, paving repairing, altering or improving to the extent such costs are not necessitated due to, or to accommodate, a development or for the benefit of a person other than the City, for aesthetic 154406-13 Code Update: 0307192.06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE purposes, for the City to compete as a utility structures, relocations that are necessitated for the provider or utility for profit or for the vacation of benefit of a private party (whether or not TIF is the right-of-way for a non-roadway purpose. involved) or other proprietary nature whether public or Requests to temporarily or permanently remove, private and relocations resulting from the vacation of relocate, change, or alter the position of a utility facility the right-of-way, from aerial to underground shall be in accordance with state law, the rules and regulations of the Oregon PUC Other alternatives to consider are as follows: and utility operator tariff. . , m~,t3ntet~-answer-insta~tien--~ OPTION 1. A. The City shall have the right to in~roTements---- require, in the public interest, the removal or relocation E)r- Qthet' oper-atiens of the --it) of facilities placed by the utility provider in any public within-the--fight of wa5Tight of Uay r -ts right-of-way, property or place. Prior to relocation the otherwise in the publie inter- In the event that City . shall provide a suitable location within a public the removal, relocation, change or alteration right-of-way, property or place for relocated facilities necessitated due to, or to accommodate, a development sufficient to maintain service. Where relocation is to or for the benefit of a person other than the City; for be temporary, the City and the utility provider agree to aesthetic purposes, for the City to compete as a cooperate to minimize its economic impact on each utility provider or utility for profit or for the party. The cost of removal or relocation shall be paid vacation of the right-of-way for a non-roadway by the company for relocations requested by the City purpose, is needed >:e asen t~private for road grading, paving, repairing, altering or -~,a^~ development or other private use of the right E) improving to the extent such costs are not necessitated fright-of-way, the developer or other private due to a development or for the benefit of a person party requiring the action shall be responsible for other than the City. the cost of removal, relocation, change or When facilities are removed or relocated due to private alteration. The utility operator yes shall be development activity, the cost shall be borne by the under no obligation to remove, relocate, change or developer. Private development activity include any alter its facilities to benefit a private party as activity conducted under a property or site outlined in this section unless and until the prat development issued to a private party pursuant to the party pays a deposit for costs to the utili city code. When facilities are removed or relocated operator4anehisee. The City shall specify in the due to any other reason the cost shall be borne by the written notice the amount of time for removal, utility provider or another party in accordance with the relocation, change or alteration. In the event of terms of the Company's tariff or state law. The utility anehisee shall provider, at its option, may require a sum equal to the emergency, the utilit~perator cost of such measures, as estimated by the utility take action as needed to resolve the emergency, provider to be deposited with the utility provider by the and the City may use any form of communication person, persons or entity requesting relocation. to direct the utility operator firsee-to take Further, all damages and claims, whether direct or actions in an emergency to protect the public indirect, caused by such measures shall be borne by the safety, health and welfare. person or persons requesting relocation. This change is requested to ensure that the City's relocation requirements do not usurp the state statutes, OPUC rules and regulations or a utilities tariff. The B. Conversion to underground facilities - The change is necessary for relocations to be business as utility provider shall convert its overhead usual in Tigard for which Verizon is reimbursed for facilities to underground facilities when notified relocation costs due to relocations necessitated for by the City to do so in accordance with this aesthetic purposes, relocations for non-roadway section. 154406-14 Code Update: 930718206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE is required to relocate its facilities from overhead to 1 Conversion shall not be required unless the underground the utility provider shall only be necessary vaults and conduits are paid for by responsible for the costs of relocating the facilities to someone other than the utility provider and another aerial location. The city shall be responsible are sufficient for the utility provider's for any incremental costs of placing the aerial facilities purposes. underground. The responsibility of costs associated 2 The cost of converting the utility provider's with relocations for other public purposes will be overhead facilities to underground facilities addressed on an individual basis taking into shall be paid by the utility provider, unless consideration all of the facts, state law, rules and such cost is chargeable by law or tariff to regulations of the Oregon Public Utility Commission another party. When facilities are converted and the utility provider's tariff. due to private development activity the cost shall be borne by the developer. Option 3: Utilize the language from the City of 3 Prior to conversion, the utility provider shall Troutdale ROW ordinance: be paid the reasonable cost of any guying of remaining overhead facilities which is City shall have the right to require User to change the necessary to adequately support those location of its Equipment or to remove its Equipment facilities from the Right-of-Wav. Costs for relocation or removal 4 The utility provider(s) and the City shall agree on a reasonable schedule for the conversion necessitated for anything other than City-funded 5 When facilities are converted from projects shall be borne by the Person requesting overhead to underground, the City shall (a) relocation or removal. User shall pay the costs for require that all existing overhead relocation of Users Equipment for City-funded telecommunication, CATV and electric distribution facilities in the affected are projects. When a project is funded with both private removed, (b) require each customer served and City funds, User shall pay the percentage of the from existing overhead facilities in the area to costs that is equal to the percentage of City funds that make all changes on the customer's premises, were spent on the project. Prior to relocation, the City in accordance with the utility provider(s) rules shall make a reasonable effort to find an alternative which are necessary to receive service from the underground facilities as soon as it is location within a public Right-of-Way for relocated available (c) authorize the company to facilities, If User shall fail to relocate or remove any discontinue its overhead service on Equipment as requested by the City by the date completion of the underground facilities, and established by the City, the City may cause the (d) prohibit future overhead facilities of any Equipment to be removed at User's sole expense. Upon sort in the affected area. receipt of a demand for payment from the City, Use Option 2 - The utility provider shall be responsible for shall reimburse the City for the costs the City incurred the costs of relocating; its facilities that are necessitated within sixty (60) days. due to the grading, paving, repairing, altering or improving of streets, alleys, avenues, throughfares and public highways and to the extent such costs are not necessitated due to a development or for the benefit of 15.4406.270430 Plan For Discontinuance Or a person other than the City. Prior to relocation the City Removal. shall provide a suitable location within a public right- of-way, property or place for relocated facilities Whenever a utility operator lans sufficient to maintain service. To the extent, for the P above roadway related relocations, the utility ptrovider to discontinue any teleeeffhmunioations utili 154406-15 Code Update: 0307192.06 L ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE facility, the utility operator ffan hisee shall submit facilities that were never franchised and systems a plan for discontinuance to the City. The plan or facilities that were once franchised but for may provide for removal of discontinued facilities which the franchise has expired or been or for abandonment in place. The City Engineer terminated and for which a court of competent shall review the plan and issue an order to the jurisdiction has mandated removal„ unless the utility utility operator fr-an°ehisee-specifying which operator pays the right-of-way usage fee facilities are to be removed and which may be eeffti3lies with the i3revisions of as provided in abandoned in place. The order shall establish a this chapter. This does not include any facility for schedule for removal. The utility operator which the City Engineer has authorized see-shall remain responsible for all abandonment in place; facilities until they are removed or abandoned in place.-. This change is requested as without a court order the requirement is unlawful in that it provides the city This requirement should be deleted as it will be with the unfettered discretion to impose requirements extremely burdensome because utilities do not provide unrelated to the management of the right of way on a for plans of discontinuance to any local governments. telecommunications utility in order for such utility to Also, the practicality of enforcing this requirement is renew an expired or terminated franchise. The extremely difficult if not impossible. requirement to comply with the provisions of this The change is requested as a utility operator should not be responsible for facilities which were chapter should also be deleted as it also provides the authorized to be abandoned in place. city with such unlawful unfettered discretion. 15.4406.280440 Removal Of Abandoned Facilities. 2. The system or facility has been abandoned and the City Engineer has not Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the authorized abandonment in place. A system or City Engineer, Within within 30 days following facility is abandoned if it is not in use and is not written notice from the City, a utility operator planned for further use. A system or facility will ffanehisee-and any other person that owns, be presumed abandoned if it is not used for a controls, or maintains any unauthorized period of one year. A fianehisee-utility operator telnieatiens utili system or facility may overcome this presumption by presenting within a right ~yrjpht-of-way shall, at its own plans for future use of the system or facility, or r eiliti°sT f~ty that demenstfat° demonstrating that the utility expense, remove the system or acilt and restore the right way-right-of-way. A operator is capable of using the system or facility utility system or facility that in the futureplenned-use within oneb ° the City Engineer has approved to be abandoned pefied. in place is not an unauthorized teleeemmunientiens utility facility. A 3. The facility is improperly constructed or teleeemm niea efts utili system or facility is installed or is in a location not permitted by the unauthorized under the following circumstances: franchise or this Or-dinaneechapter. 1. The teleeemmunieationi utili system or facility is outside the scope of authority granted by an existing franchise. This includes systems or 154406-16 Code Update: 03071,0306 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 15.47406.450290 Removal By City. 3. Misrepresentation in a franchise application, including a renewal application. If the fanehisee r- f ~°r f-aneh e°°utili operator fails to remove any facility when 4. Abandonment of facilities without required to do so under this 91-dinaneechapter, the approval to abandon in place. City may remove the facility and the ffa ee er €efmerutility operator shall be responsible for 5. Failure to pay taxes, compensation, fees paying the full cost of the removal and any or costs due the City after final determination of administrative costs incurred by the City in the taxes, compensation, fees or costs. removing the facility and obtaining reimbursement. 6. Failure to restore ri R'= is of ay i ht~ s-of- way after construction as required by this chapter 15.06.300 Appeals. or chapter 15.04. Unless another procedure is set forth in this 7. Failure to comply with technical, safety chapter, any decision by the City Engineer or City and engineering standards related to work in the Manager pursuant to this chapter may be appealed rights-of-way. to the City Council by submitting to the City Recorder, within 15 days after receipt of notice of 15.4406.54320 Standards For Revocation the decision, a written statement setting forth the Or Termination. bases for appeal of the decision. The City Council's decision shall be subject to judicial In determining whether termination, review under the writ of review process. revocation or some other sanction is appropriate, the following factors shall be considered: This change is requested to ensure that the notice is received prior to starting the 15 day 1. The egregiousness of the misconduct; period. 2. The harm that resulted; TERMINATION/CURES 3. Whether the violation was intentional; 15.4406.500310 Revocation Or Termination Of A Franchise Or Authority To Use Rights-of- 4. The ffanehisee's -utility operator's Way. history of compliance; The City Council may terminate a franchise 5. The €ranehisee's -utility operator's or revoke other authority to use the rights-of-way cooperation in discovering, admitting and/or for any of the following reasons: curing the violation. 1. Violation of this teleeemmunie tien 15.04746.530330 Notice And Cure. erdinaneechapter. The City shall give ff-anehisee utility operator 2. Violation of a franchise agreement. written notice of any apparent violations before terminating a franchise or revoking authority to use the rights-of-way. The notice shall include a 154406-17 Code Update: 930719306 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE short and concise statement of the nature and Pefmits shat be issued f " ° limited time and shall general facts of the violation or noncompliance speeif;• the e*tent of the authority granted by the and provide a reasonable time (no less than 20 and pefmit. no more than 40 days after receipt of notice) for the kanehisee-utility operator to demonstrate that 2. Any per-son whe euts upon er- within, the fiewAisee-utility operator has remained in breaks digs tip, domes manner-, compliance, that the tee-utility operator has undefmines or- tunnels under- any unimproved- cured or is in the process of curing any violation or noncompliance, or that it would be in the public tlian these-deserted in this t ob interest to impose a penalty or sanction less than termination. If the fianehisee-utility operator is in 15.16 of this Code the process of curing a violation or Ne per-son shall eenstrdet or- install an noncompliance, the utility operator franehisee teleeemmunieations f4eilities within ° ublie r-igh must demonstrate that it acted promptly and of way without first obtaining -a-eelsW-uetien continues to actively work on compliance. If the °fmi+, and paying the eefist-FtietiepAtfeet opening utility operator e-does not respond or if €ee-established -purl t to Seetien~14.320. Ne the City Manager determines that the 11 i pefmit shall be issued for- the eens4uetien -of o ep rator ee's response is inadequate, the installation of teleee unieatiensf6eilities City Manager shall refer the matter to the City within a right-a€-way tmless the Council, which shall provide a duly noticed public teleee atiens eafrier has obtained a hearing and determine whether the franchise or 4a+ielrise. EenstFuetien pefmits may be applied other authority to use the rights-of-way shall be for- at the same time a f anehise i plied for-. terminated or revoked. 524.310 FaeilitieS: This change is requested to ensure that the notice is received prior to starting the 15 day All t°1°°efrmunieations f eilities the fight of period. shall be ".,t`., eted installed, oper-ated -andmaintained in aeeefdanee with °n appheable-€ederal, states andleeal -statutes, oede CONSTRUCTION 18SAI erdinanees, miles-and fegcclattens. All aeflities shall eemply with appheable Elesip standa 5.14.300 0ORStFlAFtiOD PeFmits. imposed by f:egulatien er- eensti-detion pefmit. No e:lity may be placed on any City faraility ithetA or- within, br-eak, dig up, damage in any mannef, I . . sepafate payment fer- rental of spae ert-City+ facilities purpose of this seetie, a ptiblie alley for- the purposes of doing . eAE fight of way, stfeet-er-sidewalk is-not-ate right of way or- in a nitafy sewer-, s*^fm sewer- but stFuetufes, ineluding-poles, eenduit, bexes, water- easement as deser-ibed in this , equipment, and are faeilities-. ithe ,r first eemplying with the p of this ehapter-in regard to he obtaining of pefmits, 5.14.320 Permit . depositing of seeuFities and the making o appheatiens-te the City. Appheatieifor- pefmits 1. Appheati•ens for- nstFuefien pei:Fnit shall be in the-€erm-pfessr-ibed- lam-the--City. shall be stibmitted on f fms provided by the Gi., 154406-18 Code Update: 0-307102,06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE and shall be aeeempanied by dr-awings, plans, an ;fir.a4io ffi. ,.t detail to de ~t"at° a. That the f4eilities will be The City Engineer- after- r-eviewing the eenatfuete`i er-danee with all .,1;eabl° materials submi4ed with the appiieation, shall oodes, nales and , fianehisee if ehanges in the eonstmetio plans are needed and what City r- . i . b. That the aefl ties will be be met. if any wer4E 4-inafmally r-equir-i*g eenotrirste ordanee-vvith--the -use nst uetion ,..-...:t ; ..ducted . response to agreement; an ernergeney, the €ranehisee shall f;,,., sh th . i maps and materials within 30 days -of e. The leeation and r-oute of all new oommeneing wor4E. €aeilities- to be installed as well as all o appliewit's 5'z~ r 4 340 >oc 't issua i-i:i faeil;ties , elation to tl e ..tfeet, ,.1., side,...11 Upon a -detefminatteir that the plie ,tier and right „f•.,..,,, and s ting infofmatien -eemplies with the requi enients efthis -ehapter, the City Engine°'- €aeilities, subject to eenditiens that the G fixtures and fasilities-and a deseiiption of any Engineer- a°°ri ~te to ° ° plianee- iimpr-evements that -the-applicant-pfepeses--te with this ,.1, apt°_ and to p oteet the publie health, si1€ety,, wel€af:e-an inter-est. In eider" temiiiffliz-e disi=iptien to tFanspeftation and to eeer-di iate i. Applications for- nst.-uetion ,inits wor-k to be pef:fefmed in the fight ef , th-e wor-k must be per-femed and require eeefdinatie A e .:fie tion that the ,1...,,, inns, of eenswretien-aetivities. The En plansand speeifieationssubm tied smith the impose-eendi-tiens regulating ths-lesutie~-and ..1;""tien eemply :with all plieable to hmiea1 appear-ameoe of faeil.ties cedes, r:rlesand regulations. The City may require that -the-ver-i€ieatien be by a st°'-°a 54.350 Complianee With Permit. fo al All , nstf et;"" shall be in aeeer-danee wit b. A-vT44en-sens4uetien sehedule; the ..efmit ..n approved plans an s eeifie lions whieh shall inelude a deadline fef eonM34etion. of The Givy Engineef or- designee shall be pFoAde t eenstmstion The , nst.. et: sehedule ; subjee ass to the wer-k site and the oppet4tffi4y-to to approval by the Cit,. E inspeet-any-wefk in the right -a€way. The pef+nittee shall provide, upon r-equest, any e. The eenstfuetiofi/stFeet opening infefmatien-needed -by-the City -En „ginc°r er fee in an amount to be detefmined by r-esolutien ef designee to detefmine eemplianee with applieable the City Couneil. The fee shall be designed to c-cr cc~ requir-ements. All WOFIE that does not eemply with defray the Bests of r:t'• administ"^tion of th all requirements- shall -either be eerfeet°ed e rernei=ed at the sole expense of the pefmittee-'-he 154406-19 Code Update: 0307102.06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE City authorized to issoe step w A1'v _^fder-s to assufe eemplianee with this Chapter, 2. if weather- or- ether- renditions do no ,:fnit the oomplete restoration °`1 by t 5z4~0 NatieeOfConstmetien: seetion, the fr-anehisee shah-te r-i ester-e tine-a€€eeted r-}gi}ts of way of prePet-ty. E°eept : the r. .-m;ttee shall temper-ar- , "°ete"et;e" shall be at the F a ehisee'" et;fy the C:t,. Engi eer- not less than two „ ^,-Icin sole e)q3ense and the pefmit4ee shall prompt! days prior- toe .,t:e nstruetion in tb,e ,,.leftake n „lete the required pefmanent fight of way. restoration when the .,tl.,er• a og of a nd tion Aiij,-eeffespondi13g medifieatien-te t The fFmehisee shall es ete---alb mstn,nt;en se edule may be „>„ent to approval eenstFuetion within the fight of way se as te lithe City- minifnize disfuptien of the right of way and utili sef-viee ,,d without interfering with other- ptib.l:. 3 if the fiu ehisee f ils to `esto fe rights o and private pr-opefty. All nst, „ration or4 way or- pe .t<. to geed order- and eondition, the Coy shall give the f u-nehise° < T-itFen „et:e° an within rights of way, ineluding fester- be eompleted within 120 days ef issuanee of the provide the ffanehisee a reasonable p ea e f time not a edi a thin.. (30) days to ste a the rights elt°met° sehedul° has been , °a b y the C:tr, of way er-prepeftt`i€, after- said notiee, the Engineer, The, f erreb,;-s°° shall a rriy with, Gity €fanehisee-fails -to restore the rights of way or- r.efly to a °,-1 nd tion a existed befor- the ~i;e'er-k was undefta ien, the City" shall eatis 5.14.380 AS Bffilt DF nb, ester- tion to be faade at the &Tense of tb.e l slrise ;de City with two eomplete-sets of engineered plans in a fe~ 4. A ftane#iseeor- othe;•per-son -aetingin its- .t.,b.le to the City showing the lee.,tien of all 1 ehalf shall suitable baff1eade flags, flagging use its t°looom "mo"tions faoil;ties within rights o attendants, lights, €lar-es r and other- Ffl way after- initial eonstr-uetion of its system an required for- the sa€ety of all meffibeis of the shall „ ide the City two updated o plete sets general p b.l;e an to p nt injuf=y or- ,1,,,,. age to of as built plans ai+nually. any per-son, reason work in er--a€€eeting--sueh rights of way of 5.14.390 Restoration Of Publie Rights 0 pr-opefty. Way And City Py-oper-ty. 5. Ffane-iisee shall restore all acreets, 1. When a fy-a3elbise , or- any pefson aetifig alley r-oads and other- pub.l;e ways or- „leees tha its behalf-, .sees e or-L in or- "ff°eting . it disturbs to the same eendition the shall, }eF to €ranehisee's werk. r-anehisee shall its e%% expense, py-e;mptly remove --any per€efm all wef4E in eemplianee with , pplie°b.le eb1stmet1ens tb.er•ef e n fester- a eh ways o fules, regulations, or-dinanee-ef order's. The iy prepef4y-to geed -ender and -eend-itien-=unless Engineer- issue r.ae to e e eempliane „tb,ei=wise din-set°a b y the City and as deteFminea with this Ofdinanee and--properp~teetien of by the C:t , Engineer- " ,lee;ee public and private prep",. if the ffanehisee fails 154406-20 Code Update: 0307102,06 NTT NCHMENT N NICIPNL CODE 'TIG AWD MU Y 4~yb ~~yfl~ Y p e.-~[Il Gnu.. ~e~-8Y BOWL Pip le Y ) o a ) ) ..,gyp ) 4 { Qt" ~ Y Code Update: 0004g406 15.44(&21 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE The plan m ,:,1° f ..,1 of ` iseent;«„°Z The f °;l:t„ : improperly „ntmeted e faeilitien of f " abandenment in ,,1.,,.° The !`;t.. installed of is in a leeation net peffnitted by th Engi,'°°„ shall the plan and issue an e l°" ffane':n° of this Ofdiaaaee be r-efneved and whieh may be abandened in plar. 5.14.450 Removal By Qt-y-. TThefranehisee shad f Hil'l' f " all if the f aneh "r- f ^ of 4anehisee fails to this aiixirFro°c-crxc-City rn&y reiixvve crn~uvxrrcy 5.14.440 Removal Of Abandoned-F-aeilities. and the f;-anehin°° fb~ef shall be sibl° fef paying the full eest of the r-efneval and any Alithin 30 days fellewin Tian not:°° f e administrativeeests inetiffed by the Gi' reme~+ing-the--aeil-ai}d obtaining owns, een#els, of maintains an), unatither-ized ° - bur-n° .,t teleeefr.-mmieations system or- f6eility within right-ef way shall, at its own expense, ° the 6. Failure te restefe rights of way a=te f6eilifies and restore the right of way. ntF et'° t°leeenm uniea ens faeility theA tl ° City Enginee has approved to be abandoned place of " 7 Failt to , ply with teehni"" 1, safe a uaaua L lacxt~3(~r^rie~ telee ations il€ar y.z4 and engineering . telee atiens-system--err faeility is 15.4-406.340530 Penalties. Elie-- teleeemmunieations system e f thin > ailt to eemply with byan existing€r-anehise. This ineludes systems Ordinanee -e6a}>ter sly°lx~rl- a Class 1 eiV44 f:,°:l:t:°n that were never- fianeh:n°a and „item infFaetien. er €aeilitiesrthat -were enc° f;., ,.h;.,°a but fe w-hieh the €ranehise has expired er been Deletion of this section is requested in accordance e--~xoil=~7ity for teFn3inated. skis-c es t n any f with the determination as made in Auburn v. whieh the City Engineer has-authefiieQ west. abandonment in plaee-; 15.4-406.54350 Other Remedies. 2. The system -er faeilr , has been - - - abandened and the City Engineer- has not. Nothing in this Ghaptaaf-chhqtershall be autherized-abandonment in-plaee. A system E)r- construed as limiting any judicial or other f ,.:lit„ : .,1....,denea if it : not ; use and . °t remedies the City may have for enforcement of planned for- fufther use. A system or- faeilit„ will this 9r-dinaneechapter. be pr-estifned aban ened if it not e f peried-of one yeaf. A-franehisee-nay= evereeme SEVERABILITY & APPLICATION TO this ° ption by presenting plans ` r f; Owe EXISTING AGREEMENTS use of the faeil;ty that demenstf t° planned within , reasonable pe °a. 15.0146.600360 Severability And Preemption. 154406-22 Code Update: 0307102.06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 1. The provisions of this chapter shall be interpreted to be consistent with applicable federal and state law, and shall be interpreted, to the extent possible, to cover only matters not preempted by federal or state law. 2. If any provision of this wee chapter is for any reason declared or held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction or superseded by state or federal legislation, rules, regulations or decision, the remainder of this 9r-dinanee chapter shall not be affected and all remaining portions shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. In the event any provision is preempted by federal or state law, the provision shall be preempted only to the extent required by law and any portion not preempted shall survive. If any federal or state law resulting in preemption is later repealed, rescinded or amended to end the preemption, the preempted provision shall return to full force and effect without further action by the City. 3. The provisions of this chapter shall not be applied or construed to unlawfully abridge contractual or property rights of a utility operator to occupy private property or the area of a utility easement. 15.04-46.64-0370 Application To Existing Agreements. This cEhapter shall be applied to all persons and activities, including existing franchisees, except that it shall not affect contract rights of existing franchisees. This Echapter shall fully apply to existing franchisees on termination of existing franchises. (Ord. 00-35) ■ 154406-23 Code Update: 9307192,06 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 15.04 WORK IN RIGHT-OF-WAY where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Sections: 1. ApFen. As used in this ehapter-, „ 15.04.010 Definitions. 15.04.020 Jurisdiction. extending from the gutter- flow line to the p 15.04.030 Permit-Required. hnl_a 15.04.0340 Permit-Application. 15.04.0540 Peru C-end-itionsReview 2. Curbr-e°a this ehapt°r By City Engineer. "b -°*„rn" means the ° °a pei4iens of a 15.04.06-50 Permit Issuance.Seeufity: in the end slopes of a dfiveway . 15,0 A.0~n Eoduet owl. 15.04.070 Compliance With Permit. 3. Pr-iveway. As used in this , AdheFenee To And Exhibition Of Permits. "dr-iyewa y"i reai~sr-a„-aTe-a -designated fe 15.04.080 Notice Of Construction vehieulaf=use, ether than a designated par-kin Driveway Appr-oaehes And Curb Cuts-. ~3 net dedieated or- set aside for- publie use. 15.04.090 Construction in Right-of- Wav 4. D iveway-appreaeh. As used in this 15.04.100 As-Built Drawin zs.AhanA-ed ehapteF, "dr+r~ervn appreaeh" means an 15.04.110 Restoration Of Rights-of-Wav And City Property intended to p ide ° ° s for- ehie es fiem th Required. reader streetto a definite area, 15.04.120 Right-of-Way Preservation And driveway, or ° Beef at least seven feet wide, Restoration Policy. intended and used for- the ingress and egress of 15.04.130 jur-isdietionFinancial Security. 15.04.140 Unusual Conditions. appfeaeh are teFmed the , the end slopes e 15.04.150 Repairs. the-eufrb--fe afn-.Emergency. As used in this 15.04.160 Inspection And Acceptance. chapter, "emergency" means a circumstance in 15.04.4-50170 Barricades And Safety which immediate repair to damaged or Measures. malfunctioning facilities in necessary to restore 15.04.1860 Liability for Accidents. lost service or prevent immediate harm to persons 4-5. 00a. Il io . or property. 15.04.1980 Option To City To Replace Pavement. 6. End- slopes. As used in this chapter, 15.04.190 piieabiiity To City WOFIE. "end-Slopes" means these -pef4ions of the 15.04.200 Violation--Penalty. driveway- appreaeh -whiehprovide a tfansitien from the eur-b and -sidewalk slep1n9 15.04.010 Definitions. r-f ee er- by fneans of a e r-b rota m tegetheF with the -area between the pr-ejected tangents of ~nso~r-cna, The following words and phrases when used eur-; -etum. in this chapter shall, for the purpose of this 2. Person. As used in this chapter, chapter, have the meanings respectively ascribed "person" means every natural person, firm, co- to them in this section, except in those instances 154404-1 Code Update: 07-319206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE partnership, association, public or private with Washington County or the Oregon corporation or enti , or district. Department of Transportation. 3. Right-of-way. As used in this chapter, 15.04.0330 Permit--Required. "right-of-way" includes City streets, roads, bridges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, paths, and all 1. It is unlawful for any person to cut upon other public ways and areas managed by the City. or within, break, dig up, damage in any manner, "Right-of-wy" also includes public utility undermine or tunnel under any public street or easements to the extent that the easement allows public alley for the purposes of doing work in a use by the utility operator planning to use or using right ayjght-of-way or in a sanitary sewer, the public utility easement. "Right-of-way" storm sewer or water easement as described in this includes the subsurface under and airspace over chapter, without first complying with the these areas. "Right-of-way" does not include the provisions of this chapter in regard to the airwaves for purposes of CMRS, broadcast obtaining of permits, depositing of securities and television, DBS and other wireless providers, or the making of applications to the City. easements or other property interests owned by a Application for permits shall be in the form single utility or entity, prescribed by the City. Permits shall be issued on annual basis °r- for a limited time and shall 4104. Sidewalk. As used in this chapter, specify the extent of the authority granted by the "sidewalk" means an area specifically delineated permit. Pefffi is shall be issued on an 6nnu l bastis and constructed for pedestrian use located behind only if the p °a • er4E ubjeet to fianeh s° a curb but within Elie-the fight of - y fi hts- it the City. of-way. 2. No permit shall be issued to place or 445. Street or Alley. As used in this chapter, maintain a utility system in any portion of the "street" or "alley" means every way or place open right-of-way unless the applicant has complied as a matter of right to the use of the public for with the provisions of Chapter 15.06 of the Code. vehicular or pedestrian traffic between ayri>;ht-of-way lines. 3. Any person who cuts upon or within, breaks, digs up, damages in any manner, 6. Tunnel. As used in this chapter, undermines or tunnels under any unimproved "tunnel" means an excavation requiring the public street or public alley for purposes other removal of dirt or like material and does not than those described in this chapter, must obtain include driving or forcing of pipe through the an encroachment permit pursuant to Chapter ground. (Ord. 74-14 § 1, 1974). 15.16 of this Code. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 99-31, Ord. 74-14 § 2, 1974). 15.04.020 Jurisdiction. 15.04.040 Permit-Application. The requirements of this chapter shall apply to all publie rights of wa Tights-of-way under the 1. At the tifneof aPpheatien fer- pefmi* jurisdiction of the City of Tigard, dedicated by a limite l time and for- a speeifie eut or- break in_a plat or deed, created by user, or the use thereof stfeet or- alley, the applicant shall sp°°ifl hi controlled by the City pursuant to agreements name, telephone- number-, and address, the date e "Y , the name of the stfeet or- alley te--be 154404-2 Code Update: 07310206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE out OF t el er; the-flatuffe-ef the Stfee_ construction area, including a cross-section to ff ee or- of pavement involved; the pufpose of show the facilities in relation to the street, curb, the vvef the size, location, and naftffe of the cm sidewalk and right-of-way. er-e*eavatien; the number- of days required to d. The construction methods to be agreement to deposit stieh seemFities as required- employed for protection of existing structures, by the Git to ^^mply with the speeifeatio s e fixtures and facilities and a description of any the City peftaining to the ° nduet of the • er'E to improvements that the applicant proposes to save the City and its employees ha~less against temporarily or permanently remove or relocate. F damage whieh may result fr-ofn the aotiens ancaia~teti€txp 2. Applications for construction permits Engineer's shall be accompanied by the following: a. A verification that the drawings, eut of br-eak in the street or- alley shall be plans and specifications submitted with the aeeofnpanied by a fee set by the City Getineil application comply with all applicable technical ae,eer-ding to Chaptef 3.32 of this eede codes, rules and regulations. Except for 2. The applieation for- an annual pefmi Telecommunication Utility facilities, Tthe City shall ti e in f^fm as pr-esef bed by the City ^„a may require that the verification be by a registered shall speei T, the name and address of th professional engineer. appliesant, as r-equir-ed by the City, to oemply wit thepfavisiensof this ehapte agreement to This change is necessary as save the City and its efnpleyees hafmiess again telecommunication utilities have been exempt `'"'merge as a result of the aetienn of from PE certification. What plans does the city anticipate will need PE verification? 1. Applications for construction permits b. A written construction schedule shall be submitted on forms provided by the City _which shall include a deadline for completion of and shall be accompanied by drawings, plans, and construction. The construction schedule is subject specifications in sufficient detail to demonstrate: to approval by the City Engineer. a. That all work will be performed c. e--The permit fee in an amount to be and any facilities will be constructed in determined by resolution of the City accordance with all applicable codes, rules and Council subject to any applicable regulations; limitations imposed by federal and state statutes, including the b. That all work will be performed privilege tax limitations set for in and any facilities will be constructed by or fora ORS 221.410 through 221.655.- franchisee in accordance with any applicable The fee shall be designed to defray franchise agreement; the costs of City administration of c. The location and route of all of the construction permit program applicant's new facilities to be installed as well as all of applicant's existing facilities in the 154404-3 Code Update: 07-310906 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE This change is requested for the language to be E ngi ne°^ g Deputment and ubjeet to its final consistent with 15.06.100. appr-eval. (n,.a 02 22, n,.,l 74 14 §4, 1974). 050 See ff t., 1 c 04:-vv r~~ 15.04.050 Review By City Engineer. Before the iss ee of any pit, tie The City Engineer, after reviewing the Engineering lepaftment shall r-eq -tote materials submitted with the application, shall applicant or- his a ntfae+„r to rile with t 4e City, notify the applicant if changes in the construction , plans are needed and what City requirements must be met. requested, "°t'• bond the amount of five 15.04.060 Permit Issuance. thousana dollars, Mess the - heart air-ea y bound by the provisions of a ffanehise agreeme Upon a determination that the application and supporting information complies with the 2. In the event of a appheation for- ° requirements of this chapter, the City En ineer fm t for- one pai4ieula- a„t break in an ell°. or- shall issue a permit authorizing construction in the of street, a surety bond in an amount equal to the rights-of-way, subject to conditions that the City estimated eest of t 4e w o-1- to be perfe" ea Engineer deems appropriate to ensure compliance with this chapter. In order to minimize disruption 3. The eest upon which the afneunt of the to transportation and to coordinate work to be bon "°"„';ty shall be based shall be the eost °f performed in the right-of-way, the permit may the afk to be perf fined within the publie right specify a time period within which all work must of way, and net the eost of ,,.°_1_ to be pe .f -.-n° 1 be performed and require coordination of outside of "••"h right of way construction activities. The City Engineer may impose conditions regulating the location and 4. Seeiiri may be held on depesit by-the appearance of facilities. City- for- a per-ied of one year, The seear-it) ,.,t shall p .;ae that the a plioant h;a ugr-ee e c:v~~ n~~040 Permit -Conditions. eefitfaetof will, the , ^"1. be obligate to keep the . ""1• in a state ~Adl--❖ or-k-in stFeetss or- other „1.,1:" place" of geed repoif ire-e A% expense, and that he shall be done in the leeation appfeved by the shah „ti.,,,° to de so until f°leased F , the Engineering Depa ent-and in aeeor-dafiee witl3 Fflaintefianee obligation. In the event the applioan plans and eei fi ,ations p a ed or- a by o his eont,-aet'" fails to eaf -y out all pfevisiens z the depaFtment Sueh pefmit may incle thepefmitland the mainten~Te . . ement, an a eenditiens binding-upen the pefmitee-Sur. the City has anr-eimbufsedeestsor--expenses eenditiens may inelude r-ier filing of resulting€Fem sueh failure, the City may "all upe °r-f f anee bond °naler ° maintenanee bend a„a the-seeufit-y agreement er deposit der may--inelude sueh ether re emerits-as-the eimbur"emefit Engineering Depaftment finds appropriate in the publie inter-est. All W 04E `one shall he subj°"t t° S. In lieu of a " fet'• bend, the a „1;°°„t o the fejeetion Of "t; , e e e!fits of the his evutfa„te file as a e .:t'. ah, ei4ifi ] 154404-4 Code Update: 07310206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE eheek O ° ^ra°r The C ty shall held stle beaer eandition it was before. (Ofd. 02 22, seeuFity subjeet to the ° nditiens set ~ rth above. Ora 74 14 c6 1974) tl I the ease of ' ,°d stfeet°, z5 04.m07 ^0 Adher-eneee TeAnaExhibition ,;t", ..1'..11 h° required unless, in the opinion 0 Of Permits. the~GOy, suoh seeefity i. ~t ----y fef the_ pr-eteetion of the publ;..:"t°r°°t No ' ^rl. shall be , ndeftaken othef than th°t spesiifr°cc`'r-in the-appplioation and=p°efmitt--fvr-u 7. The r-equifements of this Beet;^" be partieular- e*eavatiefi. Upon ' em- a of rcity- fepfese ye er'- any poliee-offieer,-the and it provides the City with AT-it4en assufanee pefmit shall be pf:edtieed at the plaee whefe th ineludifig, but net limited to, the foliowi..,. werlr is in-pregressrer--, in the ease of an aiffma pefmit, shall be on display a4 the plaee of busin The ..1;°°"t agrees to ntain ; of the per-sen ,;t'':" the City. or- eh , ^rl. shall 4;,11 f r-ee and °#°..t all "°r{^rmane° an 1 s fi be stoppetl- until the pernxii is=pr-ed -'ce°ed anEVo bonds assw4ng °rf^rmanee of eontmet^r° for- th° authentieated. (Or-d. 74 14 §'7, 1974). benefit of the-appliea-mt i"ile-the . ^rl. is bein 15.04.070 Compliance With Permit. ismade; All construction shall be in accordance with 13 hi the eve t any ^r all of the ,,,^a. the permit and approved plans and specifications. not ° ..1°t°a , ^rdanee , ith the terms The City Engineer or designee shall be provided the peimt-the applio l-undertake to access to the work site and the opportunity to eemplete , °r'. and obligatiens to be per-fer.,,°a inspect any work in the right-of-way. The for the h°.,°4it of the City, permittee shall provide, upon request, any information needed by the City Engineer or g The City Engineer- shall a°t°. aine the designee to determine compliance with applicable ageq of, end-eerrsent-in vR4ting the requirements. All work that does not comply with °ltem tive . ° ;,1°a for ; ubseet;^n all permit requirements shall either be corrected or 15.04.050.7 of this seetien to ; sstia- off the removed at the sole expense of the permittee. The pefmit. (Or-d. 02 22, Or-d. 82 28 § 1, 1982; Ofd. City is authorized to issue stop work orders to 76 11 § 1, 1976; Ord. 7 4 14 § 6, 197 4). assure compliance with this chapter. c 04 060 O,.„a.,°+ cv=~crcc of T` or- 15.04.080 Notice Of Construction. --r V iic: z5vr.vvv All , or-k , der- „h pefm:ts shall be done ; Except in an emergency, the permittee shall n4^fmit„ , „th the provisions of this , ba pt°r, the notify the City Engineer not less than two working tefms of the appli°°t;^„ and ~°..m is and in the days prior to any excavation or construction in the right-of-way, Upon oempletion of the , eut or- , ell r..1.,,, eafth fubbish ^ ether- ~"°tefials shay 15.04.090 Construction In Right-of-Way, be r ed immediately and the "t`•°°t s ,r4:.°° pavement shall be r-epl ,,.°a in as ^a The permitee shall complete all construction within the right-of-way so as to minimize 154404-5 Code Update: 0731,0206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE disruption of the right-of-way and utility service construction schedule may be subject to approval and without interfering with other public and by the City. privates . gt:property within the rights-of- way. _ All construction work within rights-of-way, 3. If the permitee fails to restore rights-of- including restoration, must be completed within way or property to good order and condition, the 120 days of issuance of the construction permit City shall give the permitee written notice and unless an extension or alternate schedule has been provide the permitee a reasonable period of time approved by the City Engineer. The permitee not exceeding thirty (30) days to restore the shall comply with City traffic control procedures rights-of-way or property. If, after said notice, the and standards. permitee fails to restore the rights-of-way property to as good a condition as existed before the work was undertaken, the City shall cause such restoration to be made at the expense of the 15.04.100 As Built Drawings. permittee. Upon request by the City, a permitee shall 4. A permitee shall use suitable barricades, provide City with two complete sets of en ineered flags, flagging attendants, lights, flares and other plans in a form acceptable to the City showing the measures as required for the safety of all members location of the facilities the permitee installed or of the general public and to prevent injury or constructed within the rights-of-way pursuant to damage to any person, vehicle or property by the permit. reason of such work in or affecting such rights-of- way or property. 15.04.110 Restoration Of Rights-of-way And City Property. 5. The permitee shall restore all streets, alleys, roads and other public ways or places that 1. When a permitee does any work in or it disturbs to the same condition the area was in affecting any rights-of-way or City property, it prior to permitee's work. The permitee shall shall, at its own expense, promptly remove any perform all work in compliance with applicable obstructions therefrom and restore such ways or rules, regulations, ordinance or orders. The City property to good order and condition unless Engineer may issue orders to ensure compliance otherwise directed by the City and as determined with this chapter and proper protection of public by the City Engineer or designee. and private property. If the permitee fails to make repairs or provide restoration in response to any 2. If weather or other conditions do not order within the time allowed under the order, permit the complete restoration required by this City may make those repairs at the expense of the section, the permitee shall temporarily restore the permitee. affected rights-of-way or property. Such temporary restoration shall be at the permitee's 15.04.120 Right-of-Way Preservation And sole expense and the permittee shall promptly Restoration Policy undertake and complete the required permanent restoration when the weather or other conditions 1. Except as provided in paragraph 3 of no longer prevent such permanent restoration. this section, after any street has been constructed, Any corresponding modification to the reconstructed, paved or improved by any person, 15-4404-6 Code Update: 07-319906 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE the driving surface of the pavement shall not Engineer, compelling circumstances warrant the thereafter be cut or opened for a period of 4 years. cutting or opening of the street, a. The City Engineer shall make the a. In rig an exception, the City final determination on what construction Engineer may impose conditions or improvement will result in a limitation determined to be appropriate to set forth in paragraph 1 of this section and completely restore the street and provide shall create, maintain and make available equivalent surface quality, durability and to the public a list of the streets and street rideability. Conditions may include segments subject to the limitation. Only surface grinding, base and sub-base streets named on the list shall be subject repairs, or similar work, and may include to the limitation set forth in paragraph 1. up to a full-width surface paving of the roadway. b. The four year limitation period shall begin upon the Ci , 's acceptance of b. The City Engineer shall develop the completed street or street and maintain guidelines for use in improvements. determining the appropriate restoration conditions that may be imposed under 2. Except as provided in paragraph 3 of subparagraph (a), and shall consider the this section, after the installation or up ading of guidelines and any other relevant utilities that require a cut or opening in the street circumstances in imposing restoration of 400 linear feet or greater, the pavement surface conditions. within 400 feet of that cut or opening shall not be cut or opened for a period of 12 months, provided c. In the event that the City that the person requesting to cut or open such a Engineer requires the partial or full surface received notice of the prior street cut or repaving of a street segment, the City opening pursuant to section 15.06.260. The 12 Engineer may required that a financial month limitation period shall begin upon the security in a form acceptable to the City utility's completion of the restoration of the street. be provided to the City in the amount of the estimated cost of the repaving prior to 3. The City Engineer or designee shall performing any work in the City's rights grant exceptions to the prohibitions set forth in of way. paragraphs 1 and 2 of this section (1) emergency situations (as defined in paragraph 4), d. The denial of a request for an (2) when cutting or opening the street is required exemption or the conditional approval of to locate existing facilities when tunneling, an exemption under this section may be boring, or pushing under the street (e.g., appealed to the Ci Manager, who shall "potholing"), and 3) to provide or maintain utility have 15 business days to determine if the services to a property when no other reasonably denial or conditional approval complies practicable alternative exists within the right of with the terms of this chapter. Appeals way or existing utility easement. The City must be in writing and received by the Engineer or designee may grant exceptions to the City Manager not more than 15 business prohibitions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this days after the applicant's notice of the section when, in the sole discretion of the City 154404-7 Code Update: 07318206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE denial or conditional approval of the City in an amount equal to at least 110% of the request. estimated costs of construction in the ri htg s-of- way prior to doing any work in any right-of-way. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of this The financial security shall remain in force until section, in emergency situations, any person 60 days after substantial completion, including cutting or opening a street subject to the restoration of rights-of-way and other property, as limitations of this section shall, when reasonably determined by the City. The financial security feasible, seek verbal authorization from the City shall guaranty timely completion, construction in Engineer or designee for an exception. compliance with applicable plans, permits, codes Emergency situations are those in which and standards, proper location, restoration of immediate repair to damaged or malfunctioning rights-of-way and other property, and timely facilities is necessary to restore lost service or payment and satisfaction of all claims, demands or prevent immediate harm to persons or property. liens for labor, material or services. Whether or not verbal authorization was given, the utility operator shall apply for a permit for DRINTWAY APPROACHES AND CURB such work as soon as reasonably practicable, but rr [SECTION RENUMBERED TO 15.101 not more than 48 hours after commencing and the owner of the facility shall be subject to 15.04.080 Driveway Appreaehes and GHFb any restoration conditions imposed by the City Cuts. Engineer pursuant to Para rg_aph 3. 5. Within three years after this provision ut -izes Ye'eeation of any menieipal f eilit becomes effective, the City Engineer or designee shall review the application and effectiveness of ieh may bee ehea upen or- allowed this section and report the findings of the review providing that the appheant first notifie to the City Council. The review shall include ^*e aulhefit obtains the ^ ate measurement of its impact on the quality and u;],.- zatien and bears the ^est of the Yeleeatio surface life of City streets, City and utility of the munieipal f eilit compliance with this section, and the circumstances in which exceptions have been 2. Exeept €er- shared dfiveway , n- granted and conditions have been imposed under driveway ^ e e e shall be left than six. paragraph 3. The City Engineer or designee shall feet from the side p pef:ty line ^ e^*ea e provide all persons who requested permits to cut ul de saes, without ; ~tten po of t e or open a street subject to the limitations of this C}tyEngineer. Era " lopes shall not be eensider-ea section a reasonable opportunity to provide p^4 of the driveway ^ eh e e written comments and include in the report all comments received. 3. Ne pei4 en of ^ driveway appr-eaeh, ineluding the-end-slopes, shall ated-elese 15.04.130 Financial Security. than t iFty feet to ^ nteYOerating street i4ght of way line-. When the City, in its sole discretion, determines that a permitee's work or manner of 4. Gemmereiral or- seFviee drives shall- no performance warrants, the permitee shall provide h-e...,,,.e than, r -a-• feet in width and if l « a e.n a financial security in a form acceptable to the 154404-8 Code Update: 07-319206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE the same -lotfrentage shall be sepafated by a to a standard rufb seetion at his own expense. fninimum length of eur-b of thiiz~y feet. (QFd. 74 14 §10, 1974). 5. Each residential driveway shall not bee 15.04.110 S eicnt Dcz ar!dngzRequ fner-e than thifty feet in width ineluding en slepes, and if ° than one a..;.,°.. ay is to be -Nepeffflit for- the eenstl=uetiefi of fie eenstfueted-to sei3ve the same let, the frontage dr-iveway-appr-earahes shall be issued unless th sparaing bet~Aleen sueh dfivewa~,s shall be not less- pr-epef4y sef-ved has the minimum par-kin (Qd. 02 22, Ord 7 n 14 § 11, 197 -4T 6. joint . ° s dr-iy°. ays shall . n f fm to the appr-epr-iate width standard for- eemmer-eial e 15.04.140 Unusual Conditions. r-esidential t~Te usage. (Ord. 02 22, OFd. 74 14 4}. The City Engineer may grant the permit even if all the standards of this chapter are not met if 15.04.090 Areas of Limited StFeet the City Engineer determines that the following !Mffevemeconditions are present: 1. Whefe standar 1 gutter- and eur-bs hav 1. There are peculiar physical conditions been , stalled but her-° ° °t° sidewalks have not ordinarily existing in similar districts in the not been installed tl e ° ,.1 giant shall be require a City or the nature of the business or operation to ° nstpaet the dr-iveway ° rsh f e r-b hn makes compliance with all standards impossible to the applieant's=premises. The eest shall be or impractical; befne by the appheant. 2. The public interest, particularly safety, 2. Where-standard gotter-«oshav health and general welfare is not adversely not been installed, the driveway appr-eaeh may rbe affected; eensttpaeted of the af2~°e material used fe sit~nfaeing the dr-iveway- The -apph°3. The granting of the permit will not improve -that pertieri between the pfeper-ty line adversely affect the rights of adjacent property and existing Pavement in sueh a manner- as te met owners or residents; and impede -f ee drainage -along -the s $crccr.- c ^"t of that peAien of th t between 4. The application of the standards of this the pr-epefty line and &6s'' be- chapter would work unnecessary hardship upon erty owner, tenants, or - P~--~ 74 ~ r~~~ rxe by the app isa}3t. (Ofd. 1 ^ §9, 1 i~-r~T 974) the applicant, 1~ro1~~J residents. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 § 12, 1974). 15.04.100 Abandoned DFiveway Appr-oarehesw 15.04.150 Repairs. In the event ^ per-son makes ° phe tion to The permitee shall, at its own expense, repair r-elee t° driveway eh and aban ens and restore the area in which the work was e*isting-driveway-appreaeh, the-appheant-shall performed to as good or better condition than remove the a sting dr-iveway and °,.laee the , fb before such work was undertaken. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §17, 1974). 15-4404-9 Code Update: 07-310206 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE the per-sen to whom the it fef work h bee 15.04.160 Inspection and Acceptance. grantedpermitee shall be responsible for furnishing ° night watehman^ such suneryision-fof The permitee must apply tenoti the Qi1y that pur-pese. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §15, 1974). Engineering or designee on completion for inspection of the work to 15.04.180 Liability for Accidents. determine compliance with the requirements of this chapter, prior to final acceptance of the work. Every person or- ser--per-atien-having occasion The permitee shall not be relieved of obligations to place any obstruction in any stfeet he under any securi right-of-way or to make any excavation therein pestec1-given pursuant to the provisions hereof under the provisions of this chapter shall be until the work is in accordance with the terms of responsible to anyone for any injury by reason of the permit and has been accepted by the the presence of such obstructions or excavation on depaAment Acceptance by the City does not the public highways when the obstruction or relieve the permitee of its obligation to maintain, excavation is the whole proximate cause of the repair, or reconstruct the site of the excavation so injury and shall also be liable to the City, in the as to maintain an condition acceptable to the City event that the City is held responsible for any Engineer until the right-of-way is reconstructed, action or claims or otherwise arising out of the repaved, or resurfaced by the City.'T ee presence of the obstruction or excavation on-in the shall AH4h°r remain obligated thfo ,,.t, time fight-of--way. (Ord. 74-14 §16, period , hieh may be required by the City; via 1974). maintenanee bond, but not exeeeding one year- f--em the date of ° epta-.°° of the - °--k. (Ord. 15.04.170 . 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §-14, 1974). 11 per-sons to whem perms-are-granted 15.04.170 Barricades And Safety Measures. ^hall be pe ally s:, €er tl R VAAirttenanee and repair- of the street Whenever any person, under authority of this s,, s€~evert~errt sett, dug tip, damaged, chapter or otherwise, places any obstruction in a to ; neled under-, ndef ine under- the sheet-or- aUeyrght-of-way or makes any of the pefmit, in as °a bet4 ° ^aitien then excavation therein for any purpose whatsoever, it before sueh wer4E was tindeFtaken at their- own shall be the duty of such person oreerper-atierrto enYe use, and r s eh ° pef4ed of tim °a keep the obstructions or excavation properly by the Engine°"^g DepaFtmefit but not to ° °°a safeguarded by substantial barricades and display one year-(Ard. 02 22, Ord. 74 14 § 17, 1974). lighted red lanterns or other lights or flares from dusk until daylight in conformity with such 15.04.190 Option To City To Replace regulations as may be specified by the City Pavement. Engineer. Whenever, in the opinion of the Cith Engineering -Department, the public safety is Whenever,--in the-epinien of the Gi* y, endangered by such cuts or excavations as to Engineer, it would be to the best inte require constant supervision from dusk to daylight City -for- -the Qt-y itself be permitee shall- to to insure that all barricades are in proper condition replace or repair the street surface or pavement and location, all warning lights are burning and all cut, damaged, tunneled under or undermined traffic is properly routed around such barricades, under the provisions of this chapter,- 15-4404-10 Code Update: 07319306 ATTACHMENT A TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE shall beIf the permitee fails to restore the street surface or pavement as required by this chapter, the City may replace or repair the street surface or pavement and either charged te--the-per-sen to been gr-antedthe permitee or deducted the cost from the security deposited by hin+- he permitee with the City. (Ord. 74-14 § 18, 1974). 15.04.190 Applieability to City 3A'oFk-. The provisions of this d"a"te'. shall of be deemed to apply to eenstf:uetien or- maintenanee within stYeets or- all„ rights of way by the City, b5 its a pleyees "en a ndueting C;4y , ^..v of i,,. per-sons operating under- eenlfaet with the City; eentfaeter's perf w., and maintenane . responsibilities are not, though, r-elieved. 74 14 §19, 1W4. 15.1404.200530 Violation--Penalties. Failure to comply with a provision of this O anee-chapter shall be a Class 1 civil infraction. (Ord. 02-22, Ord. 74-14 §21, 1974).■ 15-1404-11 Code Update: 07-310J06 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RENUMBERING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.14 AND TITLE 15 TO INCORPORATE A RIGHT-OF-WAY USAGE FEE AND CLARIFY FRANCHISE AND RIGHT-OF-WAY USE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL UTILITIES WHEREAS, the City has the obligation to manage its rights-of-way for the benefit and protection of its residents; and WHEREAS, the City and most utilities that use the City rights-of-way have entered into franchise agreements that regulate use of the rights-of-way and require the payment of franchise fees as compensation for use of the rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, the "Telecommunications Franchise Ordinance" in Chapter 5.14 of the Code sets out the franchise and right-of-way use requirements for telecommunications carriers; and WHEREAS, recently several telecommunications carriers have refused to enter into new franchise agreements; and WHEREAS, it is important to have specific language in the Code to clarify the City's existing authority to receive compensation for use of the rights-of-way in the absence of a current, valid franchise agreement; WHEREAS, Chapter 15.04, "Work in the Right-of-Way," references a franchise requirement for other utilities using the rights-of-way, but does not specify the franchise and right-of-way use requirements; and WHEREAS, the City desires to adopt consistent standards and regulations for use of the rights-of-way and to place these standards and regulations in the appropriate Title and Chapter in the Code. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Chapters 5.14 and Title 15 of the Tigard Municipal Code are amended and renumbered as shown in Attachment A to, this Ordinance. (Strike-through text is deleted from the Code; underlined text is added to the 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. ORDINANCE No. 06- Page 1 PASSED: By Ci Qr `J- j vote of all Counc' members present after being read by number and title only, this day of .2006. s(A Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder t-A APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this ~ day of , 2006. Craig &14 en, Mayor Approved as to form: City A rney Date ORDINANCE No. 06- t Page 2 ,Deleted:5.1a.38o Deleted: 5.14.390... Public 2 DeletedL5.14.400...Performan 3 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Deleted: Deleted: 5.14.010 Deleted: 5.14.420 Chapterj5.06 RANCIHSED UTILITY 5,06.240 As Built Drawings. Deleted: 5.14.020 ORDINANCE. 5.04.120_ Restoration Of i hts Of Wa And Deleted; 5.14.030 City Property. GENERAL TERMS &CONDITIONS 5.04.140 financial Security. Deleted: 5.14.430 5.06.250 Coordination Of Construction. Deleted: .14.040 15.06.011) Short Title. 5.06.260 - Removal Ofr D___e_-fi__nitions Relocation Of-."""" Deleted: s.l4.aao Facilities. 5.06.020 15.06.03 0 Purpose------------- Deleted: 5.14.050 _ _ 5.06.270_ Plan ForD~scontinuanceOr „ . Deleted: 5.14.450 1.5.06.040 Jurisdiction. Removal. 5~ 06.050 Franchise Required. " , Deleted: 5.14.060 5.06.280 _ Removal Of Abandoned Facilities. - 5~ 06.060 - Grant Of Franchise. 5.06.290_ Removal B _Ci_ _ _ , Deleted: 5.14.070 5~ 06.070 Pr-ivilege Granted._______-__ 15.06300 Appeals. - Deleted: s.14.080 5.06.080 Term. Deleted: 5.14.090 506.090 Franchise Fee. - - TERMINATION/CURES 15.06.100 Right-of--Way Usage Fee. Deleted: 5.14500.... 4 5~ 06.110 Application Standards For Joint - - _ - - 5.06 Deleted: 5.14.510 310 Revocation - - Termination OfA Telecommunications/Cable Franchis Or Authori ' To Use Formatted: Bullets and Num n 5 Franchises. Rights-of-Way. Deleted: 5.14.100 5.06.320 Standards For Revocation OrDeleted: 5.14530 APPLICATION & RENEWAL PROCESS Termination. 15.06.330 Notice And Cure. 5.14.110 5.~ 06.120 Application------------------------------------ 5.06.340 Penalties. Deleted: 5.14540 5.06.130 Denials. J.1.06-350 Other Remedies. Deleted: 5.14.120 1---------------------------- 506.140 Renewal. _ Deleted:s.14.200 SEVERABILITY & APPLICATION TO to 0 Deleted: 5.14.600 OBLIGATIONS OF FRANCHISE EXISTING AGREEMENTS Deleted: 5.14.610 5.(1 )6.1_50 Assignment Or Transfer _Of 5.06.360 Sever abili And Preem tion. Deleted: 5.14.210 Franchise. 5,06.370 A ligation To_Existing , Deleted: 5.14.220 5.06.164 Lea- -sed C-apacity---- - - - - - Agreements , Deleted: 5.14.230 Service To e G 516.170 Duty To Provide Info rmati- -on, - - on sib Deleted: 5.14250 Audit Responsibility.- GENERAL TERMS & CONDITIONS - 5 ,06,180 Insurance------------------------------------------- Deleted: 5.14.010 5~ 06.190 Indemnification. 5.06.010- Short Title. - - Deleted: 5.14.260. Damage To 7 - - Deleted:5.14.280 . 5.06.220 Lgcation ocation Of Facilities. ThiskhaP ter shall be known and referred to iliti . _ Deleted: C...Telecommunicatio B 5 06 230 Interference With i hts- -Wa as the Ti azd ranchised Utility Ordinance. Deleted: s.las9o...lz:gbts... g --------ere 15~ 06.200 Construction Perm__it_s 5.06.210 - Deleted: Facilities 5.04.040 Permit 5.06,020 Definitions. I 10 Applications. - - Deleted: 5.14.020 5A)4.050 Review- By- City Engineer. 1__- Emergency. As used in this chapter Deleted:5.14.330 - 1.5.1)4.060 Permit Issuance, _ _ "emergency' means a circumstance in which Deleted: 5.14.340 5.04.070 Compliance With Permit. _ immediate repair to damaged or malfunctionine_-___ Deleted; s.la.3so 5.1 04.080 Notice Of Construction. facilities is necessary to restore lost service or - Deleted: 5.14360 5.104.09_0 Construc--tion-In- i ht-Of--Wa prevent immediate hann to persons or property. - - Deleted: 5.14.370...Right 11 Deleted:l4...03...01 12 15 06-1 Code Update: 0406 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE easements or other property interests owned by a 2. Franchise. As used in this chapter, single utility or entity. "franchise" means the privilege conferred on a person py the City to place and operate portions of 6. Sidewalk: As used in this chapter Deleted: or entity. a ttl~ 'lity system in, over or under _i hway sidewalk" means an area spectficallti delineated Deleted: telecommunications Franchises shall be conferred by ordinance or and constructed for pedestrian use located behind Deleted: rights resolution and confirmed by a franchise a curb but within the rights-of-way or within an agreement. easement specifically established for thatpurp( Deleted: of 3. Gross Revenues. As used in this 7. Street or Alley. As used in this chanter, chapter. "gross revenues" means revenues earned "street" or "alley" means eve way or place open within the City, less net uncollectibles, from the as a matter of right to the use of the public for sale of electrical energy, gas, telecommunications, vehicular or pedestrian traffic between right-of- water. or sanitary sewage disposal and treatment way lines. service. and for the use, rental, or lease of utility facilities of the utility engaged in such business.. Telecommunications facility. As used _ Deleted: a.. Competitive in this chapter, "telecommunications facility" telecommunications service provider. As used in this chapter, "competitive Gross revenues shall not include proceed s means any physical component of a telecommunications service provider" from the sale of bonds, mortgage or other telecommunications system located within or means an operator ofa evidence of indebtedness, securities or stocks. attached to the rights-of-way. telecommunications system that does not have exclusive rights to provide service to a geographic area under state or federal To the extent that the City's authority to tax Telecom_munications system: As used law.1 - - gross revenues of an entity is limited by ORS in this chapter, "telecommunications system" 1 s 221.410 through 221.655, the Citv shall Welly the means a system of fibers, lines, cables, antennas, statutory limitations to the definition of "gross microwave links, or other conduit and supporting Deleted' r revenues." structures and equipment constructed or used for the purpose of transmitting audio, video, digital or 4. Person. As used in this chanter, other forms of electric or electronic signals or "person" means ever natural person, firm, co- information. "Telecommunications system" does partnership, association, corporation or entity but. not include a cable communications system. not including special districts or county service However, if a portion of a cable communications Deleted: 3 districts. system is also used for telecommunications other Deleted: Right than cable communications, the system is both a 5. ti ht- rf-way. As used in this chapter, cable communications system and a Deleted: of "_j&:;pf-way" includes- City ___streets, roads,-------- _telecommunicationssystem. Telecommunications Deleted: right bridges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, path s, and all system does not include a system used for the Deleted: of other public ways and areas managed by the City. transmission of electric power solely for power Deleted: Right "2i ht- f wa -also includes public utilt purposes, even ifaportion ofthe system is used-to Y„ ty - easements to the extent that the easement allows communicate information about the power system Deleted: of use by - the'R : til-ity o gyrator aiming to useor usin for use bY s the stem o erator. Deleted: franchisee ~-p- = p - - g - y operator. e Deleted: Right f the ublic utility easement. i t- f-wa ' Telecommunications system does not icl p h - Y includes the subsurface under and airspace over mobile telecommunications equipment (e.g. Deleted: o. these areas. "Right-of-way" does not include the cellular phones, hand-held or vehicle-mounted Deleted: 14 airwaves for purposes of CMRSS, broadcast radios) but does include fixed antennas and other Deleted: 03 television, :D13S and other wireless providers, or Deleted: 02 ' 15 06-2 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE fixed equipment used to convey signals to or from Deleted: 6 mobile telecommunications equipment. Secure fair and reasonable compensation to the City and its residents for Deleted: public 10. Utility facility. As used in this chapter, permitting private use of the i h f-wa _ Deleted: - fig: yr "utility facility" means any phvsical component of Deleted: of a utility system located within or attached to the 4- Comply with the provisions of the Deleted:. rights-of-way. Communications Act of 1934 as they apply. to Deleted: 5.14.040 local governments. 11. Utility operator. As used in this chapter, Deleted: No person shall place or maintain any portion ofa "utility operator" means any person that places or 15.06.040 Jurisdiction. j telecommunications systemwithinaright maintains any portion of a utility system within of way without a franchise. The City tonseofany may grant ht of waay f foora any porrtny portion o of a therit=hts-of-way. The requirements of this chapter shall appiv rig right of w of a to all rights of--way under theiurisdiction of the telecommunications system, consistent hpter. ~'d'd'eregultythiss c chaapter. 12. Utilitv svstem. As used in this chapter. City of >f "i'i~tard, dedicated by plat or deed, created e authority of t under tho "utility system" means a svstem owned and by user, or the use thereof controlled by the City operated by a person to deliver or transmit pursuant to agreements with Washington County Deleted: s.t4.oso electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, or the Oregon Department of Transportation. Formatted: underline water, sewer, storm sewer or other goods or Deleted: ordinance services by means o pipes, wires, transinitters, or 550 Franchise Required. ; ; Deleted: Comply with the pro 13 other facilities permanently located within or rr Deleted: public attached to the rights-of-wav to or from customers Deleted: within the corporate boundaries of the Cites Tigard. "Utility system" also includes i . Any person that places or maintains a Deleted: of transmission of these products or services through utilitvstem in any portion of the right-of-way f Deleted: telecommunications the City of "Tigard whether or not customers without a franchise is subject to all other Deleted: public within the Citv are served by those transmissions. provisions of this chapter, including the paw Deleted: "Utility system" does not include any agency of of the right-of-way usage fee pursuant to section the federal govemment. 15.06.100. Deleted: of Deleted: 5.14.050 2. The City may grant a franchise allowing Deleted:I 5Z 06.030 Purpose. use of any ri ht-of-wa for any portion of a utili i Deleted: To competitive - ---g y---------- f 141 svstem. - Deleted: may - - The purpose and intent of thisF•h after is to. , ; - - Deleted: telecommunications 3. To the extent the terms of a franchise 1. ermd and manse reasonable access to are inconsistent with the provisions of this J Deleted: 5 the ,r pt ay of the City for ma •l I purposes chapter, terms of the franchise shall prevail. Deleted: competitive 15 on a competitively neutral basis and conserve the 1t` Deleted: U limited physical capacity of those fights tY-way 5.06.1 060 , Grant of Franchiser Deleted: public held in trust by the City; 1. The City Council Shall grant by : ;Deleted: resolution }ttilitk a _franchise to any, _person_ Assure that the City's current and providing till services w _ch has submitted. an Deleted: of - _ ongoing costs of granting and regulating private application, meets the requirements of this Deleted: Chapter access to and the use of the nghtSS~f-way are fully h apter, and agrees to sign the City's standard compensated by the persons seeking such access franchise agreement without modification- The Deleted: 03 and causing such costs; franchise shall not be effective until the applicant Deleted: 02 ' - 15-0b-3 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE signs the City's standard Jtilit-Franchise that payment of a franchise fee shall count as a- Deleted: Telecommunications Agreement substantially in the form approved by credit to the right-of-tvav usa~ e fee. the City Council. The City Council shall approve Deleted: Telecommunications the form of the standard lJtil, ity Franchise . The fees imposed by this chapter are not Deleted: a Agreement by resolution. subject to the property tax limitations of Article Deleted: To others. XI, sections 11(b) and 11(19) of the Oregon Deleted: telecommunications 2. The City. Council may grant _prti. Constitution and are not fees_ imposed on propert Del y Deleted: 5 franchises in any other circumstance by or property owners by fact of ownership and are ordinance. Any franchise ordinance shall not be not new or increased fees for purposes of those Deleted: telecommunications effective until a franchise agreement is entered subsections. Deleted: granted to competitive telecommunications service providers into by the City and the franchisee. 4. The franchise fee shall be payable semi- Deleted: 5.14.060 3. Nonexclusivity. All pU •lity franchises annually on or before March 15 for the six month Deleted: month - ~Shall be nonexclusive. period ended December 31, and September IS for;' Formatted: Tabs: 0.31", Left + Not - the six month period ended June 30, unless at 0.75- A5,06.070 Pnyileg,e Granted. otherwise stated in the resolution authorizing the Deleted; one - - - franchise. The franchisee shall pay interest at the , Deleted: rights The franchise shall grant a privilege to use rate of Mine percent per year for an y payment;; i has f-wa consistent with the requirements of made after the due date. Ord. 02-05 . Del of Fem.-'~ y this chapter. The franchise does not convey any Deleted: right right, title or interest in the _i t- f-way_ 15.06.100 Right-of-WaX Usage Tee. Deleted: of Deleted: 5.14.070 5.06.080 Term. 1. All persons usin . a to utility system or facility in the right- of=way prov - ide - serv ---ice-- to _ Deleted: 5.14.080 Unless otherwise specified in the franchise customers within the City of Tigard shall annually Deleted: The annual fee included in the franchise agreement shall be the amount agreement and resolution or ordinance, franchises pay a right-of-way usage fee calculated as a or amounts contained in the Master Fee shall be in effect for ten years but in no case shall percentage of trross revenues, subject to an y Resolution in effect at the time the exceed 15 years. applicable limitations imposed by federal and franchise agreement is adopted.1 state statutes, including the privilege tax ll Gross revenue generated within the 5 .06.090 Franchise Fee. limitations set forth in ORS 221.410 through City includes monthly service charges - paid by customers within the City, the 221.655. full amount of charges for separately 1. Any person applying for a franchise charged transmissions originating and (including an application for renewal) shall pay an 2. The right-of-wav usage fee percentage received within the City, halfthe amount of separately charged transmissions that application fee to cover the cost of processing the applicable to each class of utility shall be aR either originate or are received within the application. The City Council shall establish the follows: City but are received or originate outside fee by resolution. the city, any amounts received for rental of facilities within the right-of-way, and Telecommunications: 5.00/c. any other amounts received by the 2. The franchise agreement ma- provide Electric: 3.5o franchisee for services (including resale for services) provided by the franchi p~ payment of a franchise fee s compensation Natural Gas: 5.0% for use ofcights ~f-way and reimbursement of the Water. 5.0% Deleted: is City's cost of administering the program created Sanitary Sewer 5Deleted: rights in this chapter. The franchise fee is separate and Deleted; of distinct from any other legally authorized federal, The right-of-way usage fee percentage for Deleted: 14 state or local taxes or fees, except to the extent water and sanitary sewer shall be reconsidered by i: oa Deleted: 02 -.-4 Code Update: - - 1 5-0b08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE City Council prior to any increase in City water or 1. Jnformation_ identifying _ the applicant _ - Deleted: A completed city application sanitary sewer rates. and describing the s stem the IlCarlt form. The City Manager shall prescribe -_Y_-_ _----~p'""'--- the form to be used. 1) proposes to operate in the ~Jghts-of-wav_ The y 3. Right-of-way usage fee payments shall initial application shall include engineering plans, 2. . be net of anv franchise fee payments received by specifications and a network map showing the Deleted: telecommunications the Citv, but in no case will be less than $0. anticipated location and route of proposed Deleted: rights ofway facilities in the right-of-wy, including__b-otn 4. Unless otherwise agreed to by the Cily existing and proposed facilities. If any of the Deleted: telecommunications the right-of-way usage fee shall be payable semi- facilities are owned by others, that information Deleted: right ofway annually on or before March 15 for the six month should be provided. Deleted: s period ended December 31, and September 15 for the six month period ended June 30. The utility. Information establishing that the Deleted: s.14.ovo shall pay interest at the rate of nine percent per applicant has obtained or is in the process of l - , Deleted: telecommunications year for any payment made after the due date. obtaining all other required governmental Deleted: a approvals to construct and operate the system and Deleted: s.. Information showing that 5. 06.110 ApplieationStanda - rds - - to-_-offer"-or__provide_"the"-~services:_proposed. , applicant has thefinancial, technical and - For Joint - - Telecommunications/Cable including if applicable, any PUC filings or legal capacity to provide the services and comply with the requirements of this Franchises. approvals. chapter. That information shall include a summary of the franchisee's business' Persons or entities providing cable television The application fee. history.1 I and telecommunications services over the same 6. - A business plan showing the intention network under a franchise negotiated, approved and ability to provide services for which r the franchise is required. The franchisee and recommended by the Metropolitan Area 5~ 06.1.30 Denials. may request that the business plan be kept Communications Commission (MACC) and confidential-9 ratified by the City Council will be presumed to Any denial of a franchise application shall be Deleted: 5.14.110 have met the application requirements for a in writing and state the reasons for the denial. Deleted: franchisee telecommunications franchise issued by the City. The City may deny an application for a franchise: The telecommunications franchise and MACC Deleted: If the franchisee lac 17 franchise will be of equal term and the franchisee 1. If the ap pli cant has not complied with Formatted to can rely on the insurance certificates and surety all application requirements and standards; or Deleted: 3. - bonds pursuant to the MACC franchise. This provision does not exempt MACC franchisees 2 Deleted: franchisee Deleted: ; from the requirements to submit an application, jf_ thep _pplicant "h __a_s _a record _o__f _non- obtain a franchise, pay the franchise fee, and compliance,, " otherwise comply with the requirements of this " Deleted: 4..Ifotherfactors lg ha ter. Formatted: Indent: First line: 0" Deleted: 5.14.120 APPLICATION & RENEWAL PROCESS 5~ 06.140 Renewal. -"---------------------Deleted: 5.14.100 15,06.120 A lication. Deleted: n application for ..-------------__.Pp- - - -----_------A_franchisee_that _desires-to_renew_afranchis~_" shall submit a letter feduesting renewal LnCluding Deleted: on a form prescribed by Anv person seeking a franchise shall submit the information set forth in section 15.04.129-4_,-' Deleted: for a franchise shall include to the City Manager a letter of application the City Manager no less than 180 days before Deleted: la presenting the following; expiratiQao-fthe_franchisc-------- i Deleted: 03 Deleted: 02 15-06-5 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE OBLIGATIONS OF FRANCHISE 2. Access to all books,_records, maps, and Deleted: E other documents, maintained by the t~l 111tDeleted: franchisee rights o wa X5.06.1-50 Assig_nment Or Transfer Of o erator with res ect_ to its facilities in hts-of- 20 ~ p - --y Deleted: 5.14200 Franchise. way so that the City may perform an audit. eted: franchisee... franchisee Access shall be provided within the Portland f A franchise may not be transferred or Oregon metropolitan area unless prior chisee ...s...5.14.080 21 assigned to another person unless such person is arr an ement for access elsewhere has been made eted: without the express consent he City.... A transfer of ownership or authorized under al> plic~nble laws to owT! or with the Citrol of a majority interest in the operate the utility system and the transfer or chisee shall constitute transfer ofthe ass: nment is approved by all a>;encies or 3. If the City's audit of the books, records chise. 22 organizations required or authorized under federal and other documents maintained by hutlh leted: 5.14.230... service To The or state laws to approve such transfer or operator demonstrate that the tility o erator has y'9 assignment. The franchisee shall provide the Citunderpaid the franchise fee or right-ol=way usage e Citycontracts.foruseof with written notice of arl ' transfer or assignment fee b five ercent or more in an one ear, he communications facilities, services, allation or maintenance from the within 20 days of requesting approval from ally llhhty' UpeCatUi shall reimburse the City for the chisee, the franchiseshall charge the state or federal agency cost of the audit and shall a interest ass cified franchisee's most favorable rate in sections 15.06.090 and 15.06.100 from the red at the time of the request to ilar users within Oregon for a similar 2_If a franchise is assigned or transferred, original due date. ume of service, subject to state law. the assignee or transferee shall become th the City's permission, the chisee may deduct any applicable responsible for all facilities of the existing 5.06.180 Insurance. ges from franchise fee payments. transferee at the time of transfer. transfer or A_ _ Other terms and conditions of services the--------------------- II - - provided by franchisee to the City may be assignment of a franchise does not extend term A ~itility Aerators shall -maintain in full specified in a separate agreement.I of the franchise. force and effect •ommercigl -general liabili 1 insurance covering bodily injury and property 5.14240 23 506.160 Leased Capacity................. damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or Deleted: The City shall allow the - equivalent) acceptable to the City. Such insurance transfer or assignment ifa transfer fee in A ltilit ' operator may lease capaci n or in shall cover all risks arising directly Or indirectly an amount determined by resolution has ----Lp----------------------ty been paid, the transferee or assignee its systems to others, provided that the tilit out of the utility operator's activities or work meets all requirements imposed on operator provides the City with the name and tinder this chapter. including all subcontractors to franchisees, and the transferee or assignee agrees in writing to be bound by the business address of any lessee. All persons any tier. The policy or policies of insurance franchise agreement and all applicable leasing capacity n pr-in a utility system and maintainW b the utility operator shall rovide at regulations. providing services to others using that capacity least a general aggregate limit of 5 million with a Deleted: franchisees secure and jare subject to the provisions o.f this chapter, per occurrence limit f $3 million, insuring the public..., with a 30 day cancellation clause, with a combined single limit ltilit operator and gaming-the Ci as an franchisee franchisee ...The i sur 5.06.170 Du To Provide Information additional insured with res ect to this chi ter on 4 h p - Deleted: s.1a.z10 Audit Responsibility. the policy. The utility o erator hall cause a certificate of insurance to be provided to the City Deleted: franchisee... or bandwidth franchisee or bandwidth a Within 0 a s of a written re guest from the Recorder. telecommunication ...telecommu 25 City, a tili , o erator_shall furnish the Ci : Deleted: 5.14220 As an alternative, a utility operator .nay 1. Information sufficient to demonstrate provide and keep in force self-insurance in an Deleted: io ...business frig .5 5 that he utilt operator is in compliance with this e- t amount to the insurance required to be Deleted' franchisee ...The franchisee - - - ha ter r its franchise a cement; obtained from athird-insurer. The utilit shall indemnify, defend and hold ' harmless the City through its sel • 27 o erator hall rovide roof of self-insurance Deleted: franchisee ...ordinan acce ptable to the City if it chooses to self-insure. FFM Deleted: 14 ...03...02 29 15-06 6 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE are authorized, allowed, or prohibited by this Deleted: ordinance 111e procuring of required insurance or self= _h~, aster or by a franchise agreement.-..- Upon_,-- , Deleted: 5.14.260. Damage To insurance shall not be construed to limit utility notification of any such claim the City shall notii}' Grantee's Farilities.9 operator's liability. Notwithstanding the utility operator and provide the utility operator I The City shall not be liable for any insurance or self-insurance, the utility operator with an opportunity to provide defense regarding damage to or loss ofany shall be obligated for the total amount of any any such claim. telecommunications facility as a result or darnage, injury, or loss caused by negligence or in connection with any work by or for the neglect COnltfCtCd with this ChaptCT. City or for any consequential damages or losses resulting from such work unless 5.06.220 Location Of Facilities. the damage or loss is the direct and proximate result ofwillful,intenwn There shall be no cancellation, material change. exhaustion of aggregate limits or intent All facilities located within the i ht-of-way Deleted: 5.14.280 not to renew insurance coverage without 30 days shall be constructed, installed and located in Deleted: public right ofway written notice to the City. Any failure to comply accordance with the following terms and Deleted: public right ofway with this provision will not affect the insurance conditions, unless otherwise specified in a Deleted: franchisee coverage provided to the City. A 30 days notice franchise agreement. of cancellation provision shall be physically "r, Deleted: public right ofway endorsed on the policy. 1. Whenever all existing electric utilities, Deleted: telecommunications cable facilities or telecommunications facilities Deleted- s.r4sso The utility operator's coverage shall be are located underground within a right-of-way of ; f Deleted: franchisee primary to the extent permitted by law and the City, the City may require a i-ty Aerator i, D~ :public sight -sway insurance maintained by the Citv is excess and not with permission to occupy the same right of way contributory insurance as to the insurance require d to locate its acilities underground. Deleted: franchisee by this chapter. Deleted: public right ofway 2. Whenever all new or existing electric I•; , gDeleted: ed: public right -sway 55 06.190 Indemnification. utilities, cable facilities and telecommunications ed: reasonable facilities are located or relocated underground s.l4svo Each utility operator,shall defend, indemnify _ within a ~ht-of-wav_ of the City, the City_may and hold the City and its officers, employees, require a ,ptitrty operator that currently occupies Deleted: R;gLtaorway agents and representatives harmless from and the same light-of-way to relocate its facilities Deleted: , against any and all liability, causes of action underground concurrently with the other affected r, Deleted: franchisee claims. damages, losses, judgments and other utilities to minimize disruption of the ri h t~of- •;J I ; ; Deleted: telecommunications costs and expenses, including pu--- gmeyfees and way. ; - - - -------`------------------------------------------------------';11f;~'! Deleted: public rights of way costs of suit or defense (at both the trial and Deleted: grantee appeal level. whether or not a trial or appeal ever 15.06.230_ Interference With i hts-of-Wa . ; ; ; • , takes place) that may be asserted by any person or Deleted: public rights ofway entity in any way arising out of, resulting from, No `tility Oper m ator ay ocate or maintain its Deleted: public rishto ofway -l-- - r is p during or in connection with, or alleged to arise utility acilities so as to unreasonably interfere _ ; peleted: No franchisee shall 44.913111 out of or result from the negligent, careless, or with the use of the rights-of wU by the City, by Deleted: telecommunications wrongful acts, omissions, failure to act, or other the general public or by other persons authorized , misconduct of the utility op o erator r_its affiliates, to use or be present in or upon the_ r i hts-of-~~'a rDeleted: telecommunications - P officers, employees, agents, contractors, All use of rights-of-way shall be consistent with . r,r ONSTRUCTION subcontractors, or lessees in the construction, City codes, ordinances and regulations. r network operation, maintenance, repair, or removal of its acilities'and m providmg-- or Offering ces 5.06.200 C onstruction Permits. - over the facilities, whether such acts or omissions 1506-7 Code Update: 08104 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Except in the event of an emergency, o franchisee in accordance with the franchise Deleted: No person shall construct or install any tai lity agreement; Deleted: telecommunications facilities within a i Ir g ~t s~f-way- without first - Deleted. right - - obtaining a construction P t erml} T~ursuant to c. The location and route of all of _.t Deleted: of chaL ter 5.04: a lie ant's new facilities to be installed as well as . p p all of applicant's existing facilities in the Deleted: , and paying the In the event of an emergency, a utility operator construction area, including across-section to construction/streetopeningfee established may conduct work in the rights-of-way after show the facilities in relation to the street, curb, providing notice to the City. The utility operator sidewalk and tt- f-wa meted: section ---y3---------------------------- Deleted: 5. 14.320 shall apply for a permit for such work as soon as reasonably practicable, but not more than 48 hours d. The construction methods to be Deleted: No permit shall be issued for alter commencing work, and shall furnish any employed for protection of existing structures, the construction or installation telecommunications facilities within a required maps and materials within 30 days of fixtures and facilities and a description of any right of way unless the commencing, work. im rovements that the licant ro ses CO telecommunications carrier has obtained p-------------------------pp--------- p--po----- afranchise. Construction permits may be 15.06.210__ Facilities. - - - - - temporarily or permanently remove or relocate.- _ _ applied for at the same time a franchise is a - applied for. All tility facilities in the r1p~ht- f-wa shall 2. Applications for construction permits -'t,t PDe - be constructed, installed, operated and maintained shall be accompanied by the following: Deleted- of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes, codes, ordinances, rules and a. A verification that the drawings, regulations. All facilities shall comply with plans and specifications submitted with the ; applicable design standards imposed by regulation application comply with all applicable technical 31o or construction permit. No facility may be placed codes, rules and regulations. The City may mmunications on any City facility without the express written require that the verification be by a registered peleted: right consent of the City. The City may require professional engineer. separate payment for rental of space on City Deleted: of facilities. For purpose of this section, a i t- f- b. A written construction schedule, Deleted: right - way, street or sidewalk is not a facility, but which shall include a deadline for completion of Deleted:.of structures, including poles, conduit, boxes, and construction. The construction schedule is subject Deleted: 5.14.320 equipment, are facilities. to approval by the City Engineer. Deleted: s 5.04.040 Permit ApPlicatio C. The ~unit fee in an amount to be Deleted: ~ construction/street opening determined by resolution of the City Council. The Deleted: y 3.14330 1. Applications for construction permits fee shall be designed to defray the costs of City shall be submitted on forms provided by the City administration of the construction permit program. Deleted: the and shall be accompanied by drawings, plans, and 5, 04.050 Review By City Engineer. Deleted: franchisee specifications in sufficient detail to demonstrate: Deleted: if any wort otherwise The City Engineer, after reviewing the normally requiring a construction permit a. That all work will be performed materials submitted with the application, shall is conducted in response emergency, franchisee shall furnish and anv rfacilities will be constructed in notify they licant if changes in the construction . the required maps and materials within 30 accordance with all applicable codes, rules and plans are needed and what City requirements must days of commencing work. regulations; be met. Deleted: the Deleted: l4 b. That all work will be performed Deleted: 03 and an ac lities will be constructed by or for a Deleted: 01 - 15-06-8 Code Updale: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 5.04.060-- Permit Issuance. construction work within right - tf-wa , includin Deleted: I restoration, must be completed within 120 days of s.1a.34o Upon a determination that the application issuance of the construction permit unless an and supporting information complies with the extension or altemate schedule has been approved requirements of this chapter,. the City Engineer by the City Engineer. The rmittee shall com I shall issue a permit authorizing construction the with City traffic control procedures and standards. Deleted: of ...facilities 33 i is-of-wa , subject to conditions that the City Engineer deems appropriate to ensure compliance 5.06.240 As Built Drawings. _ Deleted: 5.14.380 with this chapter,[ In order to minimize disruption Deleted: and to protect the public to transportation and to coordinate work to be The utilitv__operator shall provide the City health, safety, welfare andinterest ...right performed in the is wa , the permit may with two complete sets of engineered lans in a of 34 specify a time period within which all work must form acceptable to the City showing the location Deleted: Franchisee be performed and require coordination of of all its ~1ti lily facilities within i ~hts-of=wa after telewmmunications._rightsof ;Y.:C:3 5 construction activities. The City Engineer may initial construction of its system and, to the extent impose conditions regulating the location and available. shall provide the City two updated appearance of facilities. complete sets of as-built plans annually, upon S,l 04070 Compliance With Permit. request by the Cih Deleted: y 5.14350 All construction shall be in accordance with 5~ 04.120 Restoration Of i hts-o -Wa And Deleted: 5.14.390...Public Rigbts - the permit and approved plans and specifications. City Property. W 3g The City Engineer or designee shall be provided access to the work site and the opportunity to 1. When a ,permitter does any work in or Deleted: franchisee, or any person inspect any work in the i tht- >f--wa . The affecting an Lights- tf-way or Ci roe it acting on its behalf,... public ri permittee shall provide, upon request; any shall, at its own expense, promptly remove any Deleted: right of... C gg information needed by the City Engineer or obstructions therefrom and restore such ways or designee to determine compliance with applicable property to good order and condition unless requirements. All work that does not comply with otherwise directed by the City and as determined all requirements shall either be corrected or by the City Engineer or designee. removed at the sole expense of the permittee. The City is authorized to issue stop work orders to 2. If weather or other conditions do not assure compliance with this ha ter. permit the complete restoration re uired b this A5.04.080__ Notice Of Cons- truction. section, the nermittee shall temporarily restore the Deleted: y affected right f-wa or property. Such 5.14360 Except in an emergency, the permittee shall temporary restoration shall be at the permittee's Deleted: franchisee of notify the City Engineer not less than two working sole expense and the permittee shall promptly franchisee's 39 days prior to any excavation or construction in the undertake and complete the required permanent i t_ &wa . restoration when the weather or other conditions Deleted: right of L~401 no longer prevent such permanent restoration. 5~~04.090_ Construction In i ht-Of--Wa . An corresponding modification to the _ Deleted: 5.14.370 construction schedule may be subject to approval Deli: Right ...of 41 The permittee shall complete all construction by the City. - Deleted: franchisee... right of within the ht- f-wa so as to minimize nght of of franchisee r4211 disruption of the i t- f-wa and utility service 3. If the ermittee fails to restore i hts- f- Deleted:franchisee rights... of and without interfering with other public and way or property to good order and condition, the franchisee 43 private property within the rikhts of=way. All City shall give the . ermittee written notice and Deleted: 14 03...02 44 - - 1544-9 Cte: 0406 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE provide the permittee a reasonable period of time permits, codes and standards,, proper location, Deleted: franchisee rights of not exceeding thirty (30) days to restore the restoration of i rhts- f-way and other property, franchisee rights of 45 i hts- f-way or property. If, after said notice, the and timely payment and satisfaction of all claims, ermittee fails to restore the . hts- f-way or demands or liens for labor, material or services. property to as good a condition as existed before the work was undertaken, the City shall cause 5.06.250 Coordination- - Of Construction- - - - - - Deleted: 5.14.410 - - - - such restoration to be made at the expense of the permittee. r All till ' o . orators shall make a good faith Deleted: franchisees rights 6 effort to coordinate their construction schedules 4. A permittee shall use suitable with those of the City and other users of the Deleted: franchisee or other person - barricades, flags, flagging attendants, lights, flares 1 YS-Ot-wa acting in its behalf.. rights of 47~ and other measures as required for the safety of all members of the general public and to prevent I . Prior to January 1 of each year, Jl Il l ltY Deleted: the franchisee will... rights of injury or damage to any person, vehicle or operators shall provide the City with a schedule of way... rights ofway 48 property by reason of such work in or affecting known construction work for that year in the such . hts= f-way or property. City'spig hts-of-wa or that may affect the i hts- of wav. 5. The permittee shall- -restore -all -streets'- alleys, Deleted: Franchisee ...franchisee's roads and other public ways or places that it 2. Utilito .rators shall meet with the Franchisee Ordinance franchisee - disturbs to the same condition the area was in City at least once each -calendar year, at -the franchisee 49 prior to ermittee's work. The ermittee shall request of the City, to schedule and coordinate Deleted: Franchisee agrees to...rights perform all work in compliance with applicable work in i hts-of--wav. The City shall share ofway... rights ofway 50 rules, regulations, ordinances or orders. The City information on plans for other construction Engineer may issue orders to ensure compliance projects within ' hts-of-wav. with this •ha ter and ro r rotection of ublic and private property. If the rmittee fails to 3. All construction projects within i hts- _ Deleted: rights ofway make repairs or provide restoration in response to of-wav shall be coordinated as ordered by the City any order within the time allowed under the order, Engineer or designee, to minimize public City may make those repairs at the expense of the inconvenience, disruption, or damages. ermittec. 506.260 Relocation- Or Removal Of Deleted: 5.14.420 n,4 140 ,Financial Security. - Facilities. Deleted: 5.14.400 Deleted: Performance And When the City, in its sole discretion- The ptility operator shall temporarily or _ Completion Bond determines that a permittee's work or manner of permanently remove, relocate, change or alter the Deleted: franchisee performance warrants, the permittee~hall provide position of any h}l 'lity facility within a light-of- % telecommunications public right of a financial security in a form acceptable to the wa y when requested to do so in writing b the way... franchisee's right ofwa 51 City in an amount equal to at least 110% of the City. The removal, relocation, change or _ Deleted: Prior to installing new estimated costs of constructio m e i ts- f- alteration shall beat the tiliLv o orator's ex ense telecommunications facilities in any right way. The €financial security shall remain in force when the removal, relocation, charg- or alteration ofway, the franchisee ...performance ------a bond or other surety...s...ofthenew until 60 days after substantial completion, is needed because of construction, repair, facilities within ...rights ...of r7f5_21 including restoration of i a and other maintenance or installation of ublic Deleted. surety ...public property, as determined by the City. The inaneial improvements or other operations of the Ci surety public rights of 53 security shall guaranty timely completion, within the i ht-of-wav or is otherwise in the construction in compliance with applicable plans, public interest. In the event that the removal, Deleted:.14...03...02 54 • 15-06-10 Code Update: 08/06 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE relocation, change or alteration is needed to unauthorized tili ' facility, A tiu lit`: system or Deleted: telecommunications accommodate private development or other facility is unauthorized under the following Deleted: telecommunications private use of the ~i ht-of-way, the developer or -circumstances: - - - - - Deleted: right of„ay other private party requiring the action shall be responsible for the cost of removal, relocation, 1. The _ h11 !I , system or facility is outside Deleted: telecommun;cations change or alteration. The utility operator~shall_be the_ scope of authority granted by__anexisting {petered; franchisee under no obligation to remove, relocate, change or franchise. This includes systems or facilities that alter its facilities to benefit a private party unless were never franchised and systems or facilities *DdE#ch e and until the private party pays a deposit for costs that were once franchised but for which the e to the utility operator, The_ City shall specify in franchise has expired or been terminated unless - - the written notice the amount of time for removal,the utility operator pays the right-of-way usage Deleted: franchisee relocation, change or alteration. In the event of fee and complies with the provisions of this Deleted: 5.14.430 emergency, the utility operator~shall take action as chapter. This does not include an X facility for needed to resolve the emergency, and the City which the City Engineer has authorized Deleted: franchisee may use any form of communication to direct the abandonment in lace Deleted: telecommunications utility operator So take actions in an emergency to Deleted, franchisee - protect the public safety, health and welfare. 2. The system or facility has been Deleted: franchisee abandoned and the City Engineer has not Deleted: that demonstrate 5~ 06.270 Plan For Discontinuance Or authorized abandonment in place. A system or _ Removal. facility is abandoned if it is not in use and is not rejetedted: ted: planned use within a • • nable period planned for further use. A system or facility will ; Whenever a utili operator tans to be resumed abandoned if it is not used fora franchisee discontinue anY7ilit , facili~the utility operator erid of one ear- A _ tility perator may ted: franchisee -------P -ye ` ,shall submit aplan for discontinuance to the City. overcome this presumption by presenting plans;';'; Deleted: rdinance The plan may provide for removal of discontinued for future use of the system or facility, oz 14.450 facilities or for abandonment in place. The City demonstrating that the utility operator is capable 14.440 Engineer shall review the plan and issue an order of using he system or facility in the futures Deleted* franchisee or to the utility operator specifying which facilities former 55 are to be removed and which may be abandoned 3. The facility is improperly constructed or rdinance in place. The order shall establish a schedule for installed or is in a location not permitted by the anchisee or former removal. The utility operator shall remain franchise or thisphanter: ; ithin responsible for all facilities until they are Deletes: fran chisee removed. 1506.290 Removal By City - - - e : telecommunications J5.06.280 Removal Of Abandoned Facilities. If the utility operator fails to remove an y Deleted: right of Way facility when required to do so under this _ha ter Formatted: Indent: First line: o" Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the the City may remove the facility and the [,~1 ilitX;' p~eted; facilities City twithin 30 days following written _ _ operator shall be_ responsible for paying the full : Deleted: right ofway notice from the City , a utility operator Arid any cost of the removal and any admlmstratlve costs ormatted other person that owns; ; , controls, or maintains any incurred by &c-it-y-- e City in removing the facility and F 56 unauthorized tili _ system or facility within a obtaining reimbursement. Deleted: telecommunications - ' i t of_wav shall at its own expense, remove th e Formatted: Indent: First line: 0" r - system or acili and restore the i-ht-of-way. A 15.06.300 A gals. Deleted: la ptility system or facility that the City Engineer _has Deleted: 03 approved to be abandoned in place is not an Deleted: 01 - 15-06-11 Code Update: 08/06 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Unless another procedure is set forth in this 15.06:320 Standards For Revocation Or chapter. any decision by the City Engineer or City Termination. Manager pursuant to this chapter may be appealed to the Citv Council by submitting to the City In determining whether termination, Recorder. within 15 days after notice of the revocation or some other sanction is appropriate, decision, a written statement setting forth the the following factors shall be considered: bases for appeal of the decision. The City Council's decision shall be subject to judicial 1. The egregiousness of the misconduct; review under the writ of review process. 2. The harm that resulted; TERMINATION/CURES 3. Whether the violation was intentional; A5.06.310_. Revocation Or Termination Of A Deleted: 5.14.500 Franchise Or Authority To Use Rights-of-Wav. 4. The ptilit2 operator's history of Formatted: Indent: Left: o" The City Council may terminate a franchise compliance; Deleted: franchisee's or revoke other authority to use the rights-of-way 5. The kgilij operator's cooperation in- I Deleted: franchisee's ---and/or- - for any of the following reasons: discovering, admitting curing-- the violation. 1. Violation of this,phapter_ - 5.06330 Notice And Cure. Deleted: telecommunications ordinance 2. Violation of a franchise agreement. Deleted: 5.14.520 The City shall give 4he utility. operator written- -----notice of any apparent violations before 3. Misrepresentation in a franchise terminating a franchise or revoking authoriri' to Deleted: franchisee application, including a renewal application. use the ri r is-of way. The notice shall include a short and concise statement of the nature and 4. Abandonment of facilities without general facts of the violation or noncompliance approval to abandon in place. and provide a reasonable time (no less than 20 and no more than 40 days) for the utility operator to Deleted: franchisee 5. Failure to pay taxes, compensation, fees demonstrate that the tili o erator has remained - Deleted: franchisee or costs due the City after final determination of in compliance, that the jttilitX operator has cured Deleted: franchisee the taxes, compensation. fees or costs. or is in the process of curing any violation or noncompliance, or that it would be in the public 6. Failure to restore ,rights-of-way _ after interest-to- impose- apenalty or sanction less than Deleted: rights of way construction as required by this chapter or chapter termination or revocation. If the ptility operator is Deleted; franchisee 15.04• in the process of curing a violation or noncompliance, the utility operator must Deleted: franchisee 7. Failure to comply with technical, safety demonstrate that it acted promptly and continues and engineering standards related to work in the to actively work on compliance. If the utili rights-of-way. o rator oes not respond or if the Ciry Maner Deleted: franchisee determines that the utility operato response- is _ - Deleted: franchisee -------inadequate,--the -City__Manager-.shall. refer- the Deleted: 5.14.510 matter to the City Council, which shall provide a Deleted: 14 duly noticed public hearing and determine Deleted: os Deleted: 01 15-06-12 Code Update: 08106 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE whether the franchise or other authority to use the to occupy private property or the area of a utility rights-of-way shall be terminated or revoked. easement. Deleted:I Sd,~, )6.340 Penalties. 506.370 Application To Existing 9 q Agreements. 6.. Failure to restore rights of way after Failure to comply with a provision of this construction.¶ h1 ? ter shall be a Class I civil infraction. This chapter shall be apPIled to all ersons F.=I -------------p , 7 Failure to comply with technical, and activities, including existing franchisees, safety and engineering standards. I '.15.06.350 Other Remedies. excet that it shall not affect contract rights of I _ existing franchisees. This Fhapter shall fully Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.3" Nothing in this c apter shall be construed as apply to existing franchisees on termination _ of Deleted: 5.1a.53o limiting any judicial or other remedies the City existing franchises. (Ord. 00-35) ■ ; Deleted: 5.14.610 may have for enforcement of this ~h<t. ter.__ _ , , , • Deleted: Ordinance SEVERABILITY & APPLICATION TO Deleted: c EXISTING AGREEMENTS % Deleted: 5.14 .540 Deleted: C J5.06.360._ Severability - And Preemption. Deleted: Chapter I. The. provisions of this chapter shall be Deleted: Ordinance interpreted to be consistent with applicable federal Deleted: s.la.6oo and state law, and shall be interpreted, to the extent possible, to cover only matters not preempted by federal or state law. 2If any provision of this h} a_pter is for - Deleted: Ordinance any reason declared or held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction or superseded by state or federal legislation, rules, regulations or decision, the remainder of this ha ter shall not be affected and Deleted: Ordinanee - all remaenforceableining portions shall be valid and to the fullest extent permitted by law. In the event any provision is preempted by federal or state law, the provision shall be preempted only to the extent required by law and any portion not preempted shall survive. If any federal or state law resulting in preemption is later repealed, rescinded or amended to end the preemption, the preempted provision shall return to full force and effect without further action by the City. 3. The provisions of this chapter shall not Deleted: 14 - be applied or construed to unlawfully abridge Deleted: 03 contractual or property rights of a utility operator Deleted: OT 15-06-13 Code Update: 08/06 Agenda Item # 6 Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Approve Revisions to the Tigard Municipal Code Incorporating a Right-of-Way Preservation and Restoration Poli Prepared By: Nancy Werner Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay l ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should Council amend the Tigard Municipal Code to clarify regulations for construction in the right-of-way and add a right-of-way preservation and restoration policy that would limit street cuts on newly constructed, reconstructed or improved streets and require complete restoration when protected streets have to be cut? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the recommended Code changes. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In a discussion with Council May 16, 2006, Council directed staff to draft amendments to the Tigard Municipal Code to incorporate aright-of-way preservation and restoration policy and to clarify the regulations for construction in the rights-of-way. The proposed amendments would: • Improve the service life and protect City streets by limiting street cuts for 4 years on newly constructed, reconstructed or improved streets. • Improve coordination of construction and prevent multiple large projects on a street within a 12 month period by limiting street cuts on any street, regardless of age, within 400 feet of a major utility installation or upgrade that occurred within the last 12 months. • Allow cuts on streets subject to the protections listed above for (1) emergencies, (2) small cuts necessary to locate existing utilities when boring under the street, and (3) when there is no other feasible way to provide service. • When cuts are made in a protected street, allow the City Engineer to impose conditions determined to be appropriate to completely restore the street and pavement surface. Conditions may include surface grinding, base and sub-base repairs, or similar work, and may include up to a full-width surface paving of the roadway. • Ensure that all construction in the right-of-way is regulated by the same provisions of the Code. The proposed amendments were distributed to utilities for their review. Staff met with several utilities to discuss the amendments, and made changes in response to comments from utilities, including changing the length of the cut limitation from 5 years to 4 years and requiring the City Engineer to develop guidelines for determining when an exception should be granted and what the restoration requirements should be. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not amend the Code. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The recommended Code amendments would contribute to the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goals of "Improve Traffic Safety" and "Improve Traffic Flow." The purposes of the right-of-way preservation and restoration policy and the other amendments are to improve the management of the City's rights-of-way, reduce the delays and safety issues associated with lane closures, and to improve the quality and service life of City streets. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Ordinance. FISCAL NOTES There are no costs associated with the amendments. ;Cathy Wheatley_ Re Ordinance No 06-11 rv Page 1. From: "Gary Firestone" <garyf@rcclawyers.com> i43ce To: <CATHY@tigard-or.gov> Date: 8/9/2006 2:03:06 PM Subject: Re: Ordinance No. 06-11 ► 1~ Looks OK to me. That is where I intended it to go. Thanks Gary This message originates from the law firm of Ramis Crew Corrigan, LLP. This e-mail message and all attachments may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you should immediately stop reading this message and delete it from your system. Any unauthorized reading, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. All personal messages express solely the sender's views and not those of Ramis, Crew, Corrigan, LLP. This message may not be copied or distributed without this disclaimer. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately at (503) 222-4402 or reply to the e-mail address above. "Cathy Wheatley" <CATHY@tigard-or.gov> 08/09/06 01:24PM Hi Gary, Here's the ordinance that was amended by Council. I inserted the new wording on starting at the bottom of Page 4 and finishing at the top of Page 5. Let me know if this looks ok. Thanks. Cathy Cathy Wheatley, Tigard City Recorder 639-4171 Ext. 2410 NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS: cathy@tigard-or.gov i . i`J-y! CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.06-I.;t AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.04 TO INCORPORATE A RIGHT-OF-WAY PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION POLICY WHEREAS, the City has the obligation to manage its rights-of-way for the benefit and protection of its residents; and WHEREAS, the cutting or opening of streets can have an adverse impact on the quality and service life of streets and can increase the cost and frequency of maintenance or repair; and WHEREAS, the City desires to preserve the quality and service life of City streets by ensuring that newly constructed, reconstructed or improved streets are not unnecessarily cut or opened for utility work, and are completely restored by a utility that cuts or opens a protected street. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Chapter 15.04 of the Tigard Municipal Code is amended as shown in Attachment A to this Ordinance. 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 0(3Lg1 MO-6 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this V~h da of 5 , 2006. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder E..h . APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 2006. Craig Dir sen, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 06- Page 1 ,11 ATTACHMENT A (New Text Underlined) 15.04.105 Coordination of Construction. 1. All vermittees shall make a good faith effort to coordinate their construction schedules with those of the City and other users of the rights-of-way. 2. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the City, at least 60 days prior to the installation or upgrading of utility facilities or a utility system (as defined in chapter 15.06) that requires a cut or opening in the street of 400 linear feet or greater, the person intending to perform such work shall provide notice to the City and all other utilities identified by the City as utilities that are franchised or permitted to place facilities within the project area. a. The notice must be provided in a manner which documents receipt of notice by utilities b. The notice shall state the anticipated location, project schedule and general description of the proposed work. c. No permits for work shall be issued until notice has been given. 3. All utilities performing work in the rights-of-way subject to the notice requirement set forth in paragraph 2 of this section shall cooperate with other utilities with permits to do work in the same location at or near the same time to coordinate construction and colocate facilities 4. Nothing in this section shall require a utility to reveal proprietary information A utility shall signify any proprietary information as such and the City will protect such information from disclosure to the extent allowed by law. 5. The notification requirement set forth in paragraph 2 of this section shall not be required for the installation of facilities in new developments that are being processed through the private development review process. 15.04.135 Ripht-of-Way Preservation And Restoration Policy 1. Except as provided in paragraph 3 of this section after any street has been constructed reconstructed, paved or improved by any person the driving surface of the pavement shall not thereafter be cut or opened for a period of 4years. a. The City Engineer shall make the final determination on what construction or improvement will result in a limitation set forth in paragraph 1 of this section and shall create maintain and make available to the public a list of the streets and street segments subject to the limitation. Onlv streets named on the list shall be subject to the limitation set forth in paragraph 1. b. The 4 year limitation period shall begin upon the City's acceptance of the completed street or street improvements. 2. Except as provided in paragraph 3 of this section after the installation or Lip grading of utilities that require a cut or opening in the street of 400 linear feet or greater, the pavement surface within 400 1 feet of that cut or opening shall not be cut or opened for a period of 12 months provided that the person requesting to cut or open such a surface received notice of the prior street cut or opening pursuant to section 15.04.100. The 12 month limitation period shall begin upon the utility's completion of the restoration of the street. 3. The City Engineer or designee shall grant exceptions to the prohibitions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this section: (1) in emergency situations (as defined in paragraph 4) (2) when cutting or opening the street is required to locate existing facilities when tunneling boring or pushing under the street (e.g., "Potholing"), and (3) to provide or maintain utility services to a property when no other reasonably practicable alternative exists within the right-of-way or existing utility easement The City. Engineer or designee may grant exceptions to the prohibitions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this section when in the sole discretion of the City Engineer, compelling circumstances warrant the cutting or opening of the street. a. In granting an exception, the City Engineer may impose conditions determined to be appropriate to completely restore the street and provide equivalent surface quality, durability and rideability. Conditions may include surface grinding base and sub-base repairs or similar work and may include up to a full-width surface paving of the roadway. b. The City Engineer shall develop and maintain guidelines for use in determining the appropriate restoration-conditions- that may be imposed under subparagraph (a) and shall consider the guidelines and any other relevant circumstances in imposing restoration-conditions. c. In the event that the City Engineer requires the partial or full repaving of a street segment, the City Engineer may require that a financial security in a form acceptable to the City be provided to the City in the amount of the estimated cost of the repaving prior to performing any work in the Ci 's rights-of-way. d. The denial of a request for an exemption or the conditional approval of an exemption under this section may be appealed to the Ci Manager, who shall have 15 business days to determine if the denial or conditional approval complies with the terms of this chapter. Appeals must be in writing and received by the City Manager not more than 15 business days after the applicant's notice of the denial or conditional approval of the request 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section in emergency situations any person cutting or opening a street subiect to the limitations of this section shall when reasonably feasible seek verbal authorization from the City Engineer or designee for an exception Emergency situations are those in which immediate repair to damaged or malfunctioning facilities is necessary to restore lost service or prevent immediate harm to persons or property. Whether or not verbal authorization was given the utility operator shall apply for a permit for such work as soon as reasonably practicable but not more than 48 hours after commencing work, and the owner of the facility shall be subject to any restoration conditions imposed by the City Engineer pursuant to paragraph 3 5. Within three years after this provision becomes effective the City Engineer or designee shall review the application and effectiveness of this section and report the findings of the review to the City Council. The review shall include measurement of its impact on the quality and surface life of City streets, compliance with this section and the circumstances in which exceptions have been granted and conditions have been imposed under paragraph 3 The City Engineer or designee shall provide all persons who requested permits to cut or open a street subject to the limitations of this section a reasonable opportunity to provide written comments and include in the report all comments received Item No. 7 Fc For Meeting of: August 8, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Coffee, Community Development Director 5~ RE: Commercial Signage at the Library DATE: August 3, 2006 On July 11, 2006, the City Council held a public hearing on DCA 2006-00002 Incidental Commercial Uses in Cultural Institutions. This Development Code amendment would establish incidental commercial uses as permitted uses in cultural institutions that may be located in residential areas. This amendment would also specifically allow limited signage at the Library for the coffee shop facility that was planned and included in the building at the public's request. The Council continued the hearing to August 8, 2006 to allow time for staff to contact the prospective vendor of the shop to determine if the proposed sign location and size limitations would be of concern to the new shop operator. Staff has learned that a lease agreement with the Fireside Coffee Lodge was signed on June 27, 2006. Staff who negotiated the lease reported that the proposed sign size and location limitations were not an issue for 'the Lessee. The Lessee did inquire about a temporary "opening" sign which is permitted for up to 30 days. Signage is also allowed within the building under current code provisions. Staff recommends that the subject Development Code amendment be adopted as recommended by the Planning Commission. Agenda Item # Meeting Date n,~ ~td~9A6LL COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Wn n L P~ TD City Of Tigard, Oregon g 1! I GYD Issue/Agenda Title Legislative Public Hearing- Incidental Commercial Uses in Cultural Institutions Code Amendment PCA 2006-00002) Prepared By. Sean Fanelly Dept Head Okay G OtyMgr Okay U1 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council approve the requested Development Code Amendment to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses in Cultural Institutions and create a category of Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the requested Development Code Amendment by adopting the attached ordinance and text amendments (Attachment 1), as recommended by motion of the City of Tigard Planning Commission. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed amendment would clarify the status of a cafe that occupies the space in the Tigard Library by allowing incidental and subordinate uses in Cultural Institutions. A new category of Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs would be created with strict limits. Only one sign is allowed and is limited to 4 square feet per face. The sign must be either within an existing free standing sign, or a wall sign, consistent in structure and materials with any existing wall sign on the Cultural Institution. Staff drafted proposed changes to amend the Use Chapter (18.130) and Sign Chapter (18.780) of the Tigard Community Development Code. Notice procedures in the development code, including publication of notice in the paper, and written notice to the appropriate agencies were met. On June 5, 2006, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed changes. They recommended approval of the amendment by a unanimous vote (Attachment 2). OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None were considered. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Not applicable. I:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2006\7 11 06 AIS Cultural Inst.doc 1 Attachment 1: Ordinance adopting the code amendments Exhibit A. Proposed Code text changes Attachment 2: June 5, 2006 Approved Planning Commission meeting minutes Attachment 3: Staff Report to the Planning Commission FiscAL NOTES Not.applicable I:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2006\7 11 06 AIS Cultural Inst.doc 2 ATTACHMENT 2 QTY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes June 5, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman, Commissioners Brown, Buchner, Caffall, Duling, Meads, and Munro. Also present was Jeremy Vermilyea, Commission alternate, Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Harbison and Walsh Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager, Barbara Shields; Long Range Planning Manager; Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner, Jerree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Commissioner Caffall reported that the Transportation Financing Task Force has been discussing the Hwy. 99W corridor improvements. When. the improvements are under construction, they will try to eliminate some of the entry and exit ways along 99W to help improve traffic flow. The system development program is moving quickly. The grant for the Hwy. 99W improvements is scheduled to be complete by June in, however it most likely will be delayed. The Task Force also discussed Greenburg Road and the proposal to realign Center Street. The Burnham Street projects are all funded and ready to go. The Task Force will approach Council for a 34 gas tax to help fund some of-the improvements. Commissioner Buehner advised that the. City received notice 8 months ago that. the federal - grant was approved. ODOT is just now developing the work program Evidently, this is the first time ODOT has done one of these grants and they have to create a process. The Transportation Financing Task Force has also been discussing the possibility of implementing a City Traffic Impact Fee. Commissioner Duling reported that members of the Committee for Citizen Involvement recently attended neighborhood workshops. Commissioner Duling attended the one at Tigard High School. She said the meeting was informative. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - June 5, 2006 - Page 1 Commissioner Buehner advised that there have been some changes with the City Center Advisory Commission. There have been issues with respect to leadership and micromanaging. The Commission went to mediation last fall to resolve issues with the boundaries for the Downtown area. Last week, the Commission called for a.vote of no confidence in the leadership. The Commission voted to replace the Chair and then elected Cad Switzer as the new Chair. Commissioner Buehner believes there have been some resignations of Commission members since then, however those that have stayed are very excited about continuing their work The Commission will hold 2 meetings within the next 2 weeks and report to Council on June 20th. Commissioner Munro advised that{SAC members had requested the resignation occur outside of the Commission. She regrets that members have resigned - they contributed a great deal of time and effort and were a resource that nobody wanted to lose. Commissioner Meads noted that the Park and Recreation Advisory Board has not met. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the May 15, 2006 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0. Commissioner Duling abstained. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00001 ENTRYWAY SIGNS CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Code Amendment to amend the Sign Code Chapter (18.780) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed amendment would amend Section 18.780.015 (Definitions).to add a definition of "Entryway Signs", and Section 1$.780.090 (Special Condition Signs) to allow Entryway Signs in all zoning districts.. LOCATION: C t}-wide. -ZONE: All zoning districts. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18380.020, 18.390.060, 18.780.015 and 18.780.090; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1 and 2. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly presented the proposal on behalf of the City. He advised that installing entryway signs is a part of the City's effort to enhance its sense of identity. Currently, there are no provisions in the Development Code allowing this type of sign. This proposal will amend the sign chapter of the Development. Code to add a definition of an entryway sign. It will also add a Special Condition Signs section, permitting entryway signs in all districts. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING' MINUTES - June S, 2006 - Page 2 Farrelly advised that the proposal is consistent with the stated purpose of the sign chapter. There will be a limited number of these signs and they are unlikely to distract motorists -or create sign clutter. The signs will be erected by the City along public roads at entrypoints into the City to promote the City's image and sense of identity. He said staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the proposal and make a final recommendation to Council. Staff provided the following answers in response to questions and comments from Commissioner Meads: ■ The City is not proposing to replace existing entryway signs. These will be additional signs. The entryway signs will be more like a monument style. ■ At this point, it's unknown how many signs will be installed. They will be installed . along roads at prominent entry points into the City. ■ Staff has not seen any plans yet for the signs. At this point, it is unknown how large the signs will be or what the graphics will look like. The signs will most likely have the City logo, with the words, "Now Entering the City of Tigard". ■ It is unknown what the exact cost will be. The signs will be paid from the Public Works budget. If there isn't funding for the signs, they won't be installed. Cost is not an issue with regard to changing the code. Commissioner Meads noted that all signs are a distraction - the point of having a sign is to draw people's attention to it.. She also believes that installing more signs is adding to the proliferation of signs. Staff responded that the plan is to just have them at prominent points in the City - it may just be a handful of signs. This is a part of the br-anding process for the City. Commissioner Caffall asked if this proposal wasn't premature.. We don't know the size, location, what the signs will look like, or how they will be paid for. He would prefer if staff came with more information - perhaps even a prototype. How can he justify voting for something that he hasn't seen? Staff. responded that the City just does not know the answers at this point, but the Public Works Department will come up with a design that's acceptable to City Council. Commissioner Duling asked about standards for the signs - will they be alike or similar? This is unknown at this point. Commissioner Buehner advised that she has attended Council meetings when this issue has come up. Council has general idea about the size of the sign and what it would say. She thinks Council plans to install signs at 5-6 locations. Council is still finalizing their plans. President Inman asked if the signs would be more of an entryway monument vs. a regular sign. Staff answered yes. It would require agreements from property owners to put them on PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - June 5, 2006 - Page 3 private property. President Inman asked if there would be any review process involved. Staff said. it would be a straight permit process. Commissioner Munro noted that the Planning Commission acts as an advisory board to Council. The brand name was adopted by Council. She supports trusting the City and agrees that the Council will make sure funding is available. She stated that the role of the Commission is to look at this in the context. of making an amendment to the Code, not to comment on the signs or the budget. PUBLIC TESTIMONY None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Buehner moved that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to Council to approve the amendment of the Development Code, DCA 2006-00001, to amend the sign code to allow for entryway signs, as presented in the staff report. Commissioner Munro seconded the motion. The motion.passed bya vote of 5-1. Commissioner Meads voted no and Commissioner Caffall abstained. 5.2 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00002 CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS CODE. AMENDMENT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Code Amendment to amend the Use Classifications Chapter (18.130) and the Sign Code Chapter (18.780) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed amendment would amend the uses .allowed under Civic Use Types (Section 18.130.0203.4) to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses (such as a gift shop, bookstore, and limited food and beverage services). In addition, a new category "Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs" would be created in the Special Condition Signs (Secuon:18 780.090). LOCATION: Within Cultural Institutions. ZONE: All zones where Cultural Institutions are an - allowed use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: CommunityDevelopment Code Chapters 18.130.020,18.380.020,18.390.060,18.780.015 and 18.780.090; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1 and 2. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly presented the proposal on behalf of the City. He advised that the new public library was designed with lobby space for a cafe to allow limited food and beverage service, mainly for library patrons and people attending events in the meeting room. The library is a cultural institution, which is allowed conditionally in the R- 12 zone. Eating and drinking establishments are not permitted in this zone. This proposed PLANNING CON NESSION MEETING MINUTES - June 5, 2006 - Page 4 amendment would clarify the standing of the hbrar/s cafe and any similar future situations by adding subordinate and incidental commercial uses to the definition of cultural institutions. The proposal would also call for a new sign category in the Special Condition Signs section of the Development Code. The new category would be called Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs and would allow the subordinating use to identify itself while restricting the size and placement of the sign. Farrelly reported that accessory uses in cultural institutions are fairly common in other localities. Amending the definition of cultural institutions to allow these incidental and subordinate commercial uses would be beneficial to the institutions and the community. Externalities, such as traffic, are unlikely to be much of an issue because the incidental uses will serve mainly the patrons of the institutions. Signs for the auxiliary use will be unobtrusive - the proposal has a limit of one sign per use, with an area of 4 square feet per face. No new freestanding sign will be allowed: The sign would have to be placed on an existing freestanding sign or on a wall if it is consistent in structure and materials. Staff finds that the amendment meets applicable review criteria and recommends the Planning Commission approve the proposal and make a final recommendation to City Council. Commissioner Duling asked if there was any liability to the Gty for food and beverage service. Farrelly noted that there would be a detailed contract involved with the vendor. Jeremy Vermilyea advised that presumably, there are indemnity and insurance requirements in the contract documents that would protect the City. Commissioner Buehner asked if this type of use would be allowed in other Qty-owned buildings. Dick Bewersdorff advised that there was a coffee stand at Gty Hall previously, but City Hall is in commercial zone. The proposed amendment applies to both commercial and residential zones. Commissioner Meads asked why this matter has suddenly come up. Staff answered that-the City has had problems keeping vendors at the library and they think that a sign will help. Commissioner Meads asked about the revenue. Staff responded that the City receives a base rent and a percentage of the profits. It was noted that the cafe is more of a service to patrons than a money maker for the City. Staff reported that no other libraries, in Washington County have a cafe, but the new library planned for Hillsboro will have one. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - June 5, 2006 - Page 5 Commissioner Caffall said no one wants to see a "McDonald's". sign hanging under the library sign. Staff said the signs would be strictly limited to 4 square feet per sign face. If it's going to be on the wall, it has to be of matching materials and structure. Commissioner Munro advised that TriMet has a number of areas where they would like to have concessionaires. She said that having a.sign is a common strategy and is needed in order to be competitive. President Inman asked if there were any other places in the City where this would apply and wondered if the City should be limiting this type of use. Staff answered that it would have to be a use that was definitely secondary to the.main. use as a cultural institution. At this time, this is the only facility involved. Also, cultural institutions are a conditional use in residential zones, so they would have to go through the conditional use process. PUBLIC TESTIMONY None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Munro moved to recommend to Council the amendment to the Development Code, DCA 2006-00002, to amend the Use Classification Chapter 18.130 and the Sign Code Chapter 18.780 of the Tigard CommunityDevelopment Code' as per the staff report and discussions. Commissioner Caffall seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. LONG RANGE PLANNING WORK PROGRAM Long Range Planning Manager Barbara Shields discussed the Long Range Planning program and the presentations planned for the Planning Commission for the rest of the year (Exhibit A). She noted that the presentations can be divided into three major groups: ■ Council goals: Comprehensive Plan Update and Downtown. - ■ Other programs, such as affordable housing, transportation, funding, environmental issues, parks and trails planning. ■ Overall/global context for city planning: what impacts urbanization in America and how. Tigard relates to the rest of the universe (demographics/immigration, new urban ideas) economic changes, social changes, sustainability, information; Think Globally/Plan Locally. The presenters will be City planners and invited guests. Commissioner Buehner suggested inviting other boards and committees to attend the presentations. Commissioner Munro suggested inviting someone from the TriMet Planning Department to speak Shields thinks this is a brilliant idea. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES -June S, 2006 -Page 6 Commissioner Buehner asked about the timeline for the Commuter Rail Station. Commissioner Munro believes the final funding for the project is set for September or October. Shields advised that the Planning Commission will be looking at specific design standards as part of the Downtown Involvement Program. Shields gave the Commissioners an assignment: between now and.August, take 5-10 pictures that identify what they believe Tigard's sense of place is. Include a short description with each picture. Commissioner Buehner suggested Tigard look at allowing taller buildings (3 or 4 stories) to make more efficient use of space, especially in the Downtown and other commercial areas. 7. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Meads asked about being able to hold discussions in the conference room rather than in the public setting, much like a jury would do during a trial. Commissioner Buehner advised that the public meeting law prevents holding discussions in private. Commissioner Meads would like to see more interactive discussion amongst the Commissioners during hearings. President Inman agreed that discussions should have a lot more interaction. Commissioner Duling expressed dismay at the approval of the Arlington Heights subdivision on Bull Mountain. This project has no parks, no open space, no Bull Mountain Community Plan, there are also tree removal, steep slopes, erosion, and traffic issues. She wonders how this . happened. Staff responded that straight subdivisions do not have to go through the Planning Commission. Commissioner Buehner advised that the PD Review Committee would like to incorporate a lot of the Planned Development code changes into the Subdivision code. Commissioner Duling considers this the "rape of Bull Mountain". 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:23.p.m. - - Jerre Plannin Commission Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - June 5, 2006 - Page 7 ATTACHMENT 3 Agenda Item: Hearing Date: June 5, 2006 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO. THE N P NING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIOREGON d' SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS FILE NO.:. Development Code Amendment (DCA) DCA2006-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Development Code Amendment to amend the Use Classifications Chapter (18.130). and the Sign Code Chapter (18.780) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed amendment would amend the uses allowed under Civic Use Types (Section 18.130.020.B.4) to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses (such as gift shops, bookstores, and limited food and beverage services) in Cultural Institutions. In addition, a new category "Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs" would be created in the Special Condition Signs section (18.780.090). APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: Within Cultural Institutions. COMP PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATION: All zones where Cultural Institutions are an allowed use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130.020, 18.380.020, 18.390.060, 18.780.015 and 18.780.090; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2. DCA2006-00002/ CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS PAGE I OF 5 6/5/06 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Y4 * _ ~ w y ~i a jt rf-.~.I S~ }~'Zc)°~' 3'~_{;K 4 .:.v.~ t }''sR° '3 d' .i ~ ~ t ~ S ~yW'+.r~y Mp !^5':-' ~ `S,d*' tit '~E _s` ro A , ~ y~ t £ •c fi't'.:."C ~lI<~k)C(..~ ~e, " RIX- 'i,.e : : %.Iv- nix ~r.'b'S,4"'.?',+e.~ ~'`..ta.:.','•3' ar,"". a t t~^. ["El;;,}'S"z+C,S,7?,'er-J#,.'S.t..y'.: wtt'1 _ SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The new Tigard Public library opened in 2004. As a result of feedback from citizen surveys, the new library building was designed with lobby space for a cafe to offer limited food and beverage services to patrons. The status of a cafe that occupies the space in the Tigard library needs to be clarified. Libraries are considered Cultural Institutions in the Civic Use category in the Tigard Development Code. Cultural Institutions are a Conditional Use in the R-12 Zone (which the library is within.) Eating and Drinking Establishments are Not Permitted uses in the R-12 zone (Table 18.510.1). However, a cafe in a library is an accessory use, open only during library hours and serving mainly library patrons and people attending events in the Community Room. This. proposed amendment would clarify the standing of this cafe as a subordinate auxiliary use to the main Cultural Institutional use of the library. A wider benefit of this amendment is allowing convenient services for patrons of Cultural Institutions, as well as supplemental income for public and non-profit entities. The externalities associated with commercial uses, such as increased traffic, are unlikely to be an issue because these incidental uses will serve mainly patrons of the institutions. Accessory uses in cultural institutions have become fairly common in other localities. The main branch of the Multnomah County library has a gift shop in its lobby. Many museums, such as the Oregon Historical Society, have gift shops and/or food service located within their buildings. A new classification, Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs, is proposed to be created in Chapter 18.780: Signs. This type of sign would be restricted in size, and would enable the subordinate use to identify itself. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS - Chapter 18.380 states that legislative text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. Chapter 18.390.060G states that the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197; Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. In addition; the Tigard Development Code and Comprehensive Plan have been acknowledged by DLCD. The following Statewide Planning Goals are applicable to this proposal: Statewide Planning Goal 1- Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and for DCA2006-00002/ CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS PAGE 2 OF 5 changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal has been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Cha ter 18.390. Notice has been ublished in the Tigard Times Newspaper rior to the public hearing. Two Tublic Hearings are being held one before the Planning Commissinnil the second before the City Council) in which public inut is welcome. Statewide Planning Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide plannin goals. The Development Code implements the Comprehensive Plan. The Development Code establishes a process for and policies to review changes to the Development Code consistent with Goal 2. The City's plan pprovides analysis and policies with which to evaluate a request for amending the Code consistent with Goal 2. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: There are no applicable Metro regulations that this amendment directly impacts. APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.1.1: General Policies This policy states that all future legislative changes shall be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Regional Plan adopted by Metro. As indicated above under the individual Statewide and Regional Plan goals applicable to this proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goals and the Regional Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.3.: Citizen Involvement These policies state that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program, provide opportunities for citizen involvement appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and that information on land use planning issues shall be available in understandable form for all interested citizens. This policy is satisfied because notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Tigard Times on May 18, 2006. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The written notices invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer any questions. The information was written in plain, understandable language that avoided jargon.' APPLICABLE PROVISION OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Sectiorrl8.130 This chapter classifies uses into a limited number of use types on the basis of common characteristics, to provide a basis for the regulation of uses in accordance with criteria which are directly relevant to the public. interest. Cultural Institutions is a classification under Civic Type Uses. Amending the definition to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses would be beneficial to the institutions and the community. The externalities associated with commercial uses (traffic, etc.) are unlikely to be an issue because the incidental uses will serve mainly patrons of the institutions. The uses will operate during the times the Cultural Institution is open. As Cultural Institutions are conditional uses in Residential zones any new public institution with a subordinate commercial use would have to address the impact on the surrounding neighborhood during the application process. DCA2006-00002/ CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS PAGE 3 OF 5 6/5/06 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Tigard Development Code Chapter 18380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this tide and zoningg district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type N procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type N legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures This chapter establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type N legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. Section 18.390.060G states that the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors (reviewed above), including- 1) Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, 2) applicable federal of state statues of regulations, 3) applicable METRO regulations, 4) applicable comprehensive plan policies, and 5) applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.780: Signs This chapter establishes procedures and criteria for erecting signage within the City. The purpose of the sign regulations is: 1. To protect the health, safety, property and welfare of the public; 2. To promote the neat, clean, orderly and attractive appearance of the community; 3. To accommodate the need of sign users while avoiding nuisances to nearby properties; 4. To insure for safe construction, location, erection and maintenance of signs; 5. To prevent proliferation of signs and sign clutter; and 6. To minimize distractions for motorists on public highways and streets. This proposal for Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs is consistent with the stated purpose. Such a sign would allow an incidental commercial use in a Cultural Institution to identify itself. It is possible that the sign could attract a passing motorist to the use. However, since the subordinate use is only open when the institution is open, significant additional traffic is not likely to be generated by such a sign. Any signs that are erected would be unobtrusive, since the proposal limits the sign area to 4 square feet per face. If a wall sign is erected it must be consistent in structure and materials with any existing wall sign on the Cultural Institution. SECTION V. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Long Range Planning Division, Building Division, Community Development Department, Police Department, and Public Works have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. SECTION VI. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Metro, Oregon Department of Transportation, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation, and the Planning Directors of the cities of Durham, King City, Lake Oswego, Portland, and Tualatin, were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. The Planning Director of the City of Beaverton responded and had no objections. DCA2006-00002/ CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS PAGE 4 OF 5 G AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: August 8, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: INCIDENTAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS CODE AMENDMENT (DCA 2006-00002) REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Code Amendment to amend the Use Classifications Chapter (18.130) and the Sign Chapter (18.780) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed amendment would amend the uses allowed under Civic Use Types (Section 18.130.020.B.4) to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses (such as a gift shop, bookstore, and limited food and beverage services). In addition, a new category "Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs" would be created in the Special Condition Sign Section (18.780.090). LOCATION: Within Cultural Institutions. ZONE: All zones where Cultural Institutions are an allowed use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130.020,18.380.020, 18.390.060, 18.780.015 and 18.780.090; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM NO.7 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate rn City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meetrngminutes, which is a public record. Proponent (Speaking in Favor) Opponent (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Name: Name: Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address City City Address State Zip State Zip City Phone No. Phone No. State Zip Phone No. Name: Name: Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address City City Address State Zip State Zip City Phone No. Phone No. State Zip Phone No. a QTY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD QTY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.06- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LANGUAGE OF THE .TIGARD GONM1NITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTERS 18.130 AND 18.780, TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND . SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUIIONS AND TO CREATE A "CULTURAL INSTITUTION AUXIUARY SIGN" CATEGORY (DCA 2006-00002.) WHEREAS, the applicant has requested an amendment to the Tigard GommunityDevelopment Code Chapters 18.130 and 18.780, to allow incidental and subordinate commercial uses in Cultural Institutions and create a new "Cultural Institution Auxiliary Sign" category, and WHEREAS, notice was provided to the Department of Land Conservation and Development 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public meeting on June 5, 2006, and recommended approval of the proposed amendment by motion with a unanimous vote; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has considered applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; any applicable Metro regulations; any applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies; and any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has found the following to be the only applicable review criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130, 18.3803, 18.390, and 18.780; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2. WHEREAS; the Tigard City Council has determined that the proposed development code amendment - is consistent with the applicable review criteria, and that approving the request would be in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW, THEREFORE, TIE QTY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: - SECTION 1: The specific text amendments attached as " EXHIBIT A" to this Ordinance are hereby adopted and approved by the City Council. 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. ORDINANCE No. 0& Page 1 IALRPr.N\Cound A&Wriak\2006\7 1106 ATTACH I Cuk I= Ordima .doc PASSED: By V ct- i ) r i 4 t vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this O L" day of 4:2s , 2006. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 2006. c Craig DA en, Mayor Approved as to form City orney Date 3 ORDINANCE No. 0& 12~ Page 2 I:\L"LMCow d 1%&Wjiak\2006\7 1106 ATTACH 1 Cult Inst Ordi mncedoc EXHIBIT A DCA 2006-00002 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE ADDITIONS indicated by Italics and Bold PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT CHANGES: Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS Section 18.130.020 Listing of Use Categories B. Civic use tales. 4. Cultural Institutions: Public or non-profit cultural facilities including libraries, museums and galleries. May include incidental and subordinate commercial uses such as a gift shop, bookstore, and limited food and beverage services. Chapter 18.780 SIGNS Section 18.780.015 Definitions 12. "Cultural Institution Auxiliary Sign" means a sign placed and maintained by, or on behalf of, a subordinate commercial use in a Cultural Institution. [Renumber definitions after No. 12 according to the above amendment.] Section 18.780.090 Special Condition Signs J. Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs 1. Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs shall be permitted in all zoning districts. 2. Cultural Institution Auxiliary Signs are limited to one sign and must be either within the same sign structure as another free-standing sign on the property where the Cultural Institution is located or on a wall of the - primary building of the Cultural.Institution. A wail sign must be consistent in structure and materials with any existing wall sign on the Cultural Institution. The sign area of a Cultural Institution Auxiliary Sign shall not exceed 4 square feet per face. . ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. May 24 , 2006 PREPARED BY: Sean Farrelly DATE Associate Planner May 24 , 2006 APPROVED BY: Tom Coffee DATE Interim Community Development Director g DCA2006-00002/ CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INCIDENTAL AND SUBORDINATE COMMERCIAL USES IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS PAGE 5 OF 5 6/5/06 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item # Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 7.38 - TRUANCY Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: GVWW City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council amend the TMC to add a new Chapter 7.38 - Truancy? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this amendment. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • It is in the interest of the City and the community to encourage regular school attendance by children 7 to 18 years old. • State law requires regular attendance; however, there is no fine or penalty attached to a child failing to regularly attend school. • The King City Council passed this ordinance last week, and the Tigard-Tualatin School District has adopted this language as a district wide policy. The Cities of Tigard, King City and Tualatin, as well as the Tigard- Tualatin School District agree that special circumstances exist that call for special regulation of minors in order to protect them from being victimized and to enhance the overall public safety of the community. • At this time, when an officer contacts a minor who should be in school, there is no authority for the officer to return the minor to school or to place the minor in the custody of his/her parents or guardian. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Not amend the Tigard Municipal Code. 2. Study the issue further. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Under "Other Important Goals for 2006" - Connect Council with students in schools. Council will be directly connecting with certain students by helping them complete their grade school and high school education. ATTACI- mENT LIST Attachment A - ORDINANCE FISCAL NOTES THERE IS NO COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ORDINANCE. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.06-IN, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 7.38 -TRUANCY WHEREAS, the City of Tigard finds that it furthers the interests of the City to encourage children to regularly attend school; and WHEREAS, children between the ages of 7 and 18 who have not completed the twelfth grade are required under state law to regularly attend school; and WHEREAS, under state law there is no fine or penalty attached to a child failing to regularly attend school; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard finds that special circumstances exist that call for the special regulation of minors within the City in order to protect them from being victimized and enhancing the overall public safety of the community; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Municipal Code is amended by adding a new Chapter 7.38 Truancy to read as follows: 7.38.010 - Regular School Hours Defined. For purposes of this Section, "regular school hours" are the hours of the full-time school that the minor would attend in the school district where the minor resides, on any day that school is in session, or, if the school in the school district of residence is unknown, "regular school hours" are the school hours of the Tigard- Tualatin School District on any day that school is in session. 7.38.020 - School-Aged Children to be in School During School Hours. A minor who is at least seven (7) years of age and under eighteen (18) years of age and who has not completed the 12th grade may not be upon any public property or public right of way during regular school hours except while attending school as required by ORS 339.010 to 339.065, unless the minor is: a. Absent from the school with the school's permission, but not including students who have been suspended or expelled; or CADOCUME-\Cathy.000LOCAL \Temp\tigardtruancyordinance.doc ORDINANCE No. 06- 14 Page 1 b. Engaged in a lawful pursuit or activity that requires the minor's presence somewhere other than school during regular school hours, and which is authorized by the parent, guardian, or other person having legal care and custody of the minor; or c. Lawfully emancipated pursuant to ORS 419B.550 to 419B.558; or d. Exempt from compulsory school attendance pursuant to ORS 339.030. 7.38.030 - Authority to Detain and Inquire If a police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that a minor is in violation of this Section, the officer is authorized to detain the minor and make reasonable inquiry regarding a potential violation of Subsection 2 of this Section. 7.38.040 - Child to Be Returned to School or Taken Into Protective Custody If a police officer has probable cause to believe that a minor is in violation of this Section, the officer is authorized to return the minor to the custody of the school. If the minor refuses to go to the school, the officer is authorized to take the minor into protective custody. 7.38.050 - Additional Authority. This chapter is not intended to in any way limit the authority of a police officer to take any other action authorized by law, including taking a minor into protective custody for reasons other than those stated in Section 7.38.040. 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 Ono nl rnM5 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and tide only, this t4? day of..us , 2006. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder (J APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of LJL. 1, )2006. c Craig 11/itksen, Mayor Appr ved as to form: City A ey Z Date: p C:\DOCUME- I \Cathy.000\LOCALS--1 \Temp\tigardtruancyordinance.doc ORDINANCE No. 06- 14 Page 2 Agenda Item # Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Transportation Financing Strate 'es Task Force New Funding Source Recommendations Prepared By: A.P. Duenas Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay C. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Task Force recommendations to Council are for establishment of a 3-cent local gas tax with the proposed improvements to Greenburg Road as the initial project for implementation. Council direction will be requested for the Task Force to proceed with development of an ordinance to establish the tax and to bring the ordinance back for Council review and approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That Council provide direction to the Task Force and City staff to develop an ordinance establishing a 3-cent local gas tax and to bring the draft ordinance back to Council for discussion and eventual adoption. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force is recommending establishment of a 3-cent local gas tax as a new funding source for major street projects. The improvements to the Greenburg Road/Highway99W/Main Street recommended in the Greenburg Road Alternatives Analysis Report presented to Council at the April 18, 2006 and May 16, 2006 Council meetings is recommended as the initial project for implementation. Attached is a memorandum from the Task Force recommending establishment of a local gas tax aimed at alleviating traffic congestion on Highway 99W and selecting the proposed improvements to the Greenburg Road/Main Street intersection with Highway 99W as the initial project. A 5-year sunset clause with option to renew prior to the end of that period subject to selection of other high priority projects for continuation of the tax. The Task Force requests Council direction to proceed with development of a draft ordinance with the intention of establishing the local gas tax by the fall of this year. If provided with that direction, the Task Force will contact the gas stations in Tigard to discuss the proposed local gas tax and to ensure that they are fully aware of the proposed action. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Traffic circulation improvements at the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection address the Council Goal to "Improve 99W Corridor." These improvements also support the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic goals of "Improve Traffic Flow" and "Improve Traffic Safety." ATTACHMENT LIST Task Force Memorandum to Council dated July 25, 2006 Attachment to the Memorandum: Report-SW Greenburg Road/Highway99W Intersection Improvement Project FISCAL NOTES A 3-cent local gas tax is expected to produce revenue of approximately $900,000 to $1,000,000 annually. The improvements to the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection are estimated at $3,500,000. Revenues of up to $5,000,000 over a 5-year period would be sufficient to fund the initial project, plus one or more smaller scale projects during the 5-year period. The Task Force recommendation is for a sunset clause to be included in the ordinance, with option to renew contingent upon selection of other high priority projects for implementation. i:lengNgus\coundl agenda summariesVim agenda summary format\8.08.08 transportation financing strategies task force recommendations ais.doc MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Mayor and City Councilors FROM: Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force *,9- Kew C RE: Task Force Recommendations for a Local Gas Tax and Initial Project for Implementation DATE: July 25, 2006 Background The Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force met with City Council on February 15, 2005 and again on July 26, 2005 to discuss the implementation of a local gas tax aimed at funding high priority major street improvements. At the July 26, 2005 meeting, the Task Force recommended establishment of a 3-cent local gas tax to alleviate traffic congestion on Highway 99W by design and construction of one or more high priority projects along the highway corridor through Tigard. A 3-cent gas tax is expected to produce revenue of approximately $900,000 to $1,000,000 annually and up to $5.0 million dollars over a 5-year period. Since then, the Greenburg Road Alternatives Analysis project has been completed with recommended improvements to the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection. The report was presented to City Council initially on April 18, 2006 with further discussion at the May 16, 2006 Council meeting. Improvement of the Greenburg Road intersection with Highway 99W makes a great deal of sense because of the Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W Improvement Project currently in the design stage. This project would complement the Hall/99W project to improve traffic circulation on both Hall Boulevard and Highway 99W and to enhance entry into the Tigard Downtown area. Council consensus at the May 16th meeting is that construction of the improvements in tandem with the Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W Intersection project would be extremely desirable and that the project is important enough to merit selection as the initial project funded through a local gas tax. Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street Intersection Improvements Attached is a report that summarizes the existing conditions, the proposed improvements on each leg of the intersection, and the expected impacts of the project. The report provides a cost estimate for project design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of the improvements. The total estimated cost is approximately $3.5 million in 2006 dollars. This project can be funded through a local gas tax and can be designed and constructed during the next 3 to 4 years. o Task Force Recommendations The Task Force recommends that Council establish a 3-cent local gas tax with improvements to the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection as the initial project. The Task Force further recommends that the local gas tax include a 5-year sunset clause, with an option to extend the tax term prior to sunsetting, contingent upon selection of additional high priority projects for implementation. The Task Force requests Council direction to work with City staff in the development of the proposed ordinance. The entire process can be scheduled during the next few months with the goal of having a local gas tax in place by the fall of this year. If Council direction is to proceed with the ordinance, the tentative schedule is to discuss the draft ordinance with Council at the September 19, 2006 workshop session, after which it would be submitted for Council consideration and approval at the October 10, 2006 business meeting. In addition, the Task Force will contact the gas stations in Tigard to discuss the proposed local tax and to ensure that they are fully aware of the proposed action and the tentative schedule for implementation. The Highway 99W Corridor Improvement and Management Plan is expected to produce a package of high priority projects for consideration during the next few years. Those projects and other major street improvement projects can be reviewed during the project selection phase for future implementation. The Task Force is prepared to take the lead in developing the public involvement plan for the project selection at the appropriate time when the high priority projects are identified and Council provides direction to move ahead with that process. Attachment: Report: SW Greenburg Road/Highway 99W Intersection Improvement Project c: Craig Prosser, City Manager Tom Coffee, Community Development Department Director Bob Sesnon, Finance Director Agustin P. Duenas, P.E., City Engineer Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force Members i:tengVusVnemorandumsVfslf recommendation for a local gas laxdoc Memorandum to Council Regarding Task Force Recommendation for a Local Gas Tax Page 2 of 2 City of Tigard Conceptual Design and Cost Estimates SW Greenburg Road/Highway 99W Intersection Improvement Project Prepared for the City of Tigard Engineering Department Agustin Duenas, City Engineer Prepared by Otak, Inc. Pamela Wiedemann, PE, Senior Project Manager June 27, 2006 Introduction This narrative describes the process and assumptions used to develop a conceptual plan and cost estimate for improving the Highway 99W/Greenburg Road intersection. The plan and estimate are based on the short term upgrades recommended in a Draft Memorandum titled "Tigard OR 99W/SW Greenburg Road Alternatives Study" prepared by DKS Associates dated December 15, 2006. The plan was further refined during a field visit with Randy McCourt, DKS, and a meeting with Gus Duenas held June 16, 2006. The proposed improvements are summarized as follows: • Additional eastbound through lane on Highway 99W that will connect to the 3rd through lane that will be constructed at the Highway 99W/Hall Boulevard intersection. The proposed work at the Greenburg intersection will extend this lane about 500 feet west of the intersection. • Greenburg Road approach conversion to include dedicated left turn lane. • Main Street approach conversion to add dedicated left turn lane. • Conversion of the traffic signal to protected phasing north/south on Main/Greenburg from split phasing. The area reviewed for this narrative consists of the portions of SW Greenburg Road, Main Street, Highway 99W, and adjacent properties that will be directly impacted by the proposed traffic lane improvements. This includes SW Greenburg Road beginning approximately 500 feet north of Highway 99W, Main Street between Highway 99W and Scoffins, and approximately 950 feet of Highway 99W, extending west from the end of the proposed lane addition for the Hall Boulevard Intersection Improvements. The following summarizes alignment alternatives that were reviewed, and lists existing and proposed conditions for each street. Drawings detailing proposed typical sections are included with this narrative. The budget level cost estimate for construction, preliminary engineering, construction engineering, and right-of-way acquisition is based on the entire project. Estimated costs for right of way acquisition were supplied by the City. Alignment Alternatives As part of the Traffic Analysis, DKS reviewed options for partially closing the Main Street/Highway 99/Greenburg intersection by extending Main Street to connect to Hall Boulevard. This option was rejected due to lack of capacity at the Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W intersection. Otak reviewed options for creating an intersection angle closer to 90 degrees by curving Greenburg toward Highway 99W. While this improved the Greenburg portion of the intersection, the corresponding realignment of Main Street shifted it significantly toward the west, substantially reducing the Gateway Area identified in the Downtown Streetscape Design Plan. This alignment also crossed a steep slope that would result in steeper roadway grades and driveway connections, as well as limit accessibility. This option was rejected due to impacts and grading issues. SW Greenburg Road/ Highway 99 2 otak V:\PROJECT\13300\13381A\Archives\Outgoing\to city 062706\99_Greenburg Narradves062706.doc The preferred option and associated cost estimates are based on the short term lane improvements as listed above from the DKS Memo, with little change to the general intersection configuration, as shown on the attached plan. OR Highway 99W Existing Conditions • Classification: Arterial (City and Washington County); State Highway (ODOT) • Lane Configuration, east of Greenburg: Northbound right turn, westbound bike lane, two westbound through lanes, left turn, and two eastbound through lanes. • Lane Configuration, west of Greenburg: Westbound bike lane, two westbound through lanes, left turn, two eastbound through lanes, east bound bike lane. • Design Speed: 35 mph • Sidewalks: o Primarily curbtight between Greenburg and Hall. o No sidewalk on south side of Highway 99 west of Greenburg. This area is curbed, with a guardrail installed above a steep slope. o Curbtight ending approximately 150 feet west of Greenburg on the north side of Highway 99. ~.w Proposed Improvements • Complete eastbound bike lane. • One eastbound through lane to be added. This lane to end approximately 500 feet west of Greenburg, and will be an extension of the proposed additional lane that will be constructed as part of the Hall Boulevard Intersection Improvements. • Curb on north side of roadway to remain. • All roadway widening to take place on south side. • Lane widths to match those proposed for the Hall Boulevard /Highway 99W Intersection Improvement. • Sidewalk on south side, east of Greenburg to be widened to twelve feet. • Sidewalk on north side, west of Greenburg, to be widened to twelve feet. Length of sidewalk to match existing condition. SW Greenburg Road/Highway 99 3 otak V:\PRO]ECT\13300\13381A\Archives\Outgoing\to city 062706\99_Greenburg Narratives062706.doc • A retaining wall to be constructed on south side of Highway 99W, west of Greenburg, to reduce impacts to the Gateway Area adjacent to Main Street and commercial buildings located near the west end of the proposed lane extension. Exposed height will vary between approximately 3 to 18 feet. A curb and guardrail, but no sidewalk, will be constructed in this area. • Right-of-Way: Acquisition area based on providing a 1.5 foot width behind sidewalks. Near the northeast corner of the intersection, it is assumed that a roof overhang on a commercial building will be modified or removed, and the sidewalk will be constructed against the building. • Pavement Section: 10.5-inches Level 3,1/2-inch HMAC over 13-inches Aggregate Base, on subgrade geotextile. This section matches what is proposed for the Hwy 99W portion of the Hall Boulevard Intersection Improvement. The cost estimate also assumes grinding and replacing existing remaining pavement for a 4-inch thick depth. West of Greenburg, grinding/replacement is assumed to extend between the centerline of the road for the length of the south side widening and north side sidewalk improvements. East of Greenburg, grinding/replacement is assumed to extend for the full width of Highway 99W for the length of the southside widening. SW Main Street (between Scoffins and Highway 99) Existing Conditions • Classification: Collector (City) • Lane Configuration: Right turn lane, combination left turn and northbound through lane, southbound through lane. There is one widened area in each direction for bus turnouts, and a raised median for access control. • Design Speed: 20 mph, with up to 4 percent superelevation. • Sidewalks: o Curbtight on south side. o No sidewalk on north side (a separated path crosses the Gateway Area between the intersection at Highway 99W and Scoffins). SW Green burg Road/Highiv ay 99 4 otak V:\PROJEM13300\13381A\Archives\Outgoing\to city 062706\99_Greenburg Narradves062706.doc Proposed Improvements • Add bike lanes in both directions, and extend to Scoffins. • Add dedicated left turn lane. • Curb on south/east side of roadway to remain. • All roadway widening to take place on north/west side. North half of roadway, including raised median, to be fully reconstructed • Sidewalk on south/east side to be curbtight, and widened to 12 feet with street trees. • Right-of-Way: Acquisition area based on providing a 1.5 foot width behind sidewalk. The current Main Street configuration and the Gateway Area appear to be within ODOT right of way. An interagency agreement between the City and ODOT will likely be needed for construction within this area. Purchase of right-of-way is anticipated to be limited to narrow strips on the south/east side of Main Street. • The widened roadway areas currently used for bus stops will remain. • Pavement Section: 8-inches Level 3,1/2-inch HMAC over 14-inches Aggregate Base, on subgrade geotextile. This section matches what is proposed for the Hall Boulevard Intersection Improvement. The cost estimate also assumes grinding and replacing existing remaining pavement for a 4-inch thick depth, for the entire length between Highway 99W and Scoffns. SW Greenburg Road Existing Conditions • Classification: Arterial (City and Washington County) • Lane Configuration: Right turn lane, combination left turn and southbound through lane, northbound through lane. • Design Speed: 35 mph • Sidewalks: o Curbtight on east side. o Separated with narrow planter on west side. • s i y j3 SW Greenburg Road/High may 99 5 otak V:\PROJEM13300\13381A\Archives\Outgoing\to city 062706\99_Greenburg Narradves062706.doc Proposed Improvements • Add bike lanes in both directions, and extend to match existing bike lanes approximately 500 feet north of intersection. • Add dedicated left turn lane. • Extend right turn lane to provide 500 foot total length. • Curb and sidewalk on east side of roadway to remain. • All roadway widening to take place on west side. • Sidewalk on west side between Center Street and Highway 99W to be curbtight, and widened to 12 feet with street trees. • Sidewalk on west side between Center Street and north end of improvements to be curbtight, and 8-feet wide with street trees. • Right-of-Way: Acquisition area is based on providing a 1.5 foot width behind sidewalk. In addition to this area to be acquired for the roadway, it is assumed that the eastern portion of the strip development building (approximately 44-feet long) located at the northwest corner of Greenburg/Highway 99W will be removed, and that the entire property located at the northwest corner of Greenburg/Center Street will be purchased. This property is occupied by a residential building that has been converted to commercial use. • Pavement Section: 8-inches Level 3, 1/2-inch HMAC over 14-inches Aggregate Base, on subgrade geotextile. This section matches what is proposed for the Hall Boulevard Intersection Improvement. The cost estimate also assumes grinding and replacing existing remaining pavement for a 4-inch thick depth, for the length of the proposed widening. General Items • Stormwater: New conveyance systems will be constructed within the widened roadway areas. Runoff collected in these systems will be treated within water quality manholes located behind the sidewalk, then will be discharged to existing systems adjacent to the project. It is assumed that detention will not be required, and that one treatment manhole will be located within the Gateway Area, and the other near the intersection of Greenburg Road and Center Street. • Landscaping will consist primarily of street trees placed within tree grates in 12-foot wide sidewalks and in open tree wells for 8-foot wide sidewalks. An irrigation system is not included. SW Greenburg Road/Highway 99 6 otak V:\PROJFM13300\13381A\Archives\Outgoing\to city 062706\99_Greenburg Narratives062706.doc Conceptual Cost Estimate: Plan Submittal June 2006 Estimator: Otak Inc. Date of Estimate: 6/26/06 Revised: Otak, Inc. Scope of Work: Conceptual Cost Estimate 700 Washington St., Suite 401 StreeUAvenue Greenbur Road/ Highway 99W Vancouver, WA 98660 Intersection Realignment 360 737-9613 ITEM TOTAL UNIT NUMBER QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE COST 1 1 MOBILIZATION 10% L.S. $118,400 $118,400 TRAFFIC CONTROL 2 1 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL 10% L.S. $118,400 $118,400 PREPARATION 3 1 CLEARING AND GRUBBING L.S. $30,000 $30,000 4 1 REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES AND OBSTRUCTIONS L.S. $40,000 $40,000 5 2 REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING EACH $50,000 $100,000 GRADING 6 1 500 GENERAL ROADWAY EXCAVATION C.Y. $15 $22,500 7 2,000 SUBGRADE GEOTEXTILE S.Y. $1 $2,000 STRUCTURES 8 530 RETAINING WALL CONVENTIONAL SEGMENTAL UP TO 6-FEET HIGH S.F. $20 $10,600 9 4.500 RETAINING WALL MSE OVER 6-FEET HIGH S. F. $50 $225,000 BASES 10 1 500 DENSE GRADED AGGREGATE BASE COURSE TON $22 $33,000 11 9.900 COLD PLANE PAVEMENT REMOVAL 4-INCHES DEEP S.Y. $4 $39,600 WEARING SURFACES 12 3,400 LEVEL 3,1/2-INCH, DENSE HMA MIXTURE TON $60 $204,000 STORM SEWER 13 1 010 12-INCH STORM SEWER PIPE L.F. $35 $35,350 14 4 STORM SEWER MANHOLES 48-INCH DIA. EACH $2,500 $10,000 15 1 STORM SEWER MANHOLES, 72-INCH DIA. EACH $6,000 $6,000 16 5 CONCRETE INLETS TYPE CG-3 EACH $2,000 $10,000 17 2 WATER QUALITY MANHOLES EACH $25,000 $50,000 EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPING 18 1 EROSION CONTROL L.S. $4,000 $4,000 19 22 STREET TREES, 3-INCH CALIPER EACH $350 $7,700 20 22 TREE GRATES EACH $1,250 $27,500 OTHER 21 2,900 CONCRETE CURB L.F. $11 $31,900 22 1 920 CONCRETE WALKS S.Y. $40 $76,800 ILLUMINATION SIGNALS SIGNING AND STRIPING 23 6 STREET LIGHTING EACH $3,500 $21,000 24 1 PERMANENT SIGNING AND STRIPING L.S. $22,000 $22,000 25 1 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION L.S. $150,000 $150,000 26 500 GUARDRAIL L.F. $50 $25,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,420,750 25% CONTINGENCY 355 88 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $1,555,933 PRECONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING 20% $355J90 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT/CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 20% $355,190 RIGHT OF WAY COSTS 11,700 RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION TO 1.5' BEHIND SWLK S.F. $25 $292,500 1 PROPERTY ACQUISITION (ENTIRE PROPERTY AT THE NW CORNER OF $350,000 CENTER/GREENBURG L.S. $350,000 1 DAMAGES ONE BUSINESS AT THE NW CORNER OF GREENBURG/HIGHWAY 99 L.S. $350,000 $350,000 GRAND TOTAL 2006 DOLLARS $3,478,818 NOTES: 1. Quantities based on conceptual plans dated June 26, 2006 1. Estimated right of way costs supplied b City H:\PROJECTS\13381A\REPORTS\Greenburg_hwy99concept_est062606t 6/27/2006 30~' *'.:s:~= < *4 't ' s' a~;:~-~'~,~0. s .d°K~: i ;°~,b~~t ~ "'te'a; 700 Wad*Xftm Street Suite 401 . 3 a' - .'.g .w., - • I a lE r veneower, WA 98660 4Y 4 '.s V a. ~R,., h,.4. C w 360.737.9651 Creenburg Rd/ Hwy 99W Conceptual Deslgn City of Tigard 5 _ • +J' to-* !i f ft ` "y, 0 w 100 y r l LEGEND PROPOSED PAVEMENT =er' • . ;k r WIDENING I As p*.• ~'1~ !t .`fit C;, W ` r r ,eji ; T.' t. °y O SIDEWALK AND MEDIAN .r > 'i. MI 14t 'ft _ ! . '._;'-.'.'C r• ° PROPOSED t, 1 RIGHT-OF-WAY June 26, 2006 ~ 0. ~T°~`i,°~ v ~ ~ ~ ge.ap"~a% ♦~4 .,T ~ .tl 'Y k e. v:.`~,_ e~.u~,n~.a.. `t ~ .wawab • '~~M l f .+3 ~ • ...°..~.-r...._ ,~..nx:.4~.....u+9:+r rt«..im.w •w.r~tly ~ 11 eu .~6 R/W R/W RIGHT-OF-WAY (VARIES) 1 5' 6' BIKE 11' RICHE TURN/ 5' BIKE =~{I 12' SIDEWALK 1µE 11 TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 12' LEFT TURN 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE LANE 2' CENTER MEDIAN GUARDRAIL RETAINING WALL EXISTING GROUND COLD PLANE PAVEMENT 05REAWNURB TYPICAL SECTION REMOVAL, 4' DEPTH HWY 99W CONCRETE CURB WEST OF GREENBURG ROAD 10.5' LEVEL 3, X2' HMAC V13' AGGREGATE BASE SUBGRADE GEOTEXTILE R/W R/W RIGHT-OF-WAY (VARIES) 6' 11' TRAVEL LANE 11 LEFT TURN LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 6' 12' RIGHT TURN LANE 12' SIDEWALK 1.5 BIKE LANE BIKE LANE 8' LEVEL 3, Xi' HMAC COLD PLANE PAVEMENT IXURB CONCRETE CURB REMOVAL, 4' DEPTH TO REMAIN ~14' AGGREGATE BASE SUBGRADE GEOTEXTILE TYPICAL SECTION MAIN STREET EXISTING R/W RIGHT-OF-WAY (VARIES) R/W 5' BIKE 1.5J 12 SIDEWALK' 15 RIGHT TURN LANE 5' BIKE 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' LEFT TURN LANE 12' TRAVEL LANE LANE B' LEVEL J, 1f' HMAC COLD PLANE PAVEMENT REMOVAL, E DEPTH TEXISTING CURB AND CONCRETE CURB SIDEWALK U REMAIN AGGREGATE BASE TYPICAL SECTION GREENBURG RD SUBGRADE GEOTE)LIILE '8' SIDEWALK NORTH OF CENTER ST. Oaf.: June 26. 2006 Otak Inc. Creenburg Rd/ W Drawn: GME Checked Bv: PKW H W y 99 700 Washington Street Ject Number: 13381A Suite 401Vancouver, WA 98660 Conceptual Design • ~ rmS Phone 360.737.9613 L Dr.wln. File Nam.: Tvoical_Sacflona.dwg Fax 360.737.96517;n:Y, City of Tigard June 26, 2006 io V1 42,0,0, ~K It AciG Task Force Task Force Recommendations Recommendations 3-cent local gas tax ❖ Expected revenue: $900,000 to $1,000,000 annually Transportation Financhg Up to $5,000,000 over a 5-year period Strategies Task Force 5-year sunset clause with option to renew d• Initial Project: Greenburg Road/Highway 99W Intersection Improvements August 8, 2006 Other pLQj_cts ca.n_be selected later Recommended Project Recommended Project Greenburg Road >Dedicated Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main left turns Street Intersection Improvements pits. added ❖ Project complements the Hall >Additional a+ WW Blvd/Highway 99W County project c through lane Estimated at $3.5 million on Highway •3 Can be designed in 2007 for A• 99W construction to begin in 2008 >Split Phasing N ain-Streeter eliminated • Complements Hall/Hwy 99W Suggested Time Frame ` ~ J Prepare draft ordinance -August 2006 s• Discuss draft ordinance with Council IF , %s y~ ,N September 19, 2006 workshop meeting d q ~ ~~`J` ~ ~ .,_;~,'ti _ Submit ordinance fnr Council consideration on October 10, 2006 n 't" ` ` Task Force will contact gas stations 5,a ; A' ❖ To inform about the proposed tax To discuss and receive input To provide Council with the results 1 Task Force Recommendations Provide Council direction to: ❖ Develop the draft ordinance ❖ Meet with the local gas station representative ❖ Bring back the draft ordinance for discussion and input ❖ Finalize the ordinance ❖ Submit the ordinance for Council consideration and adoption 2 Agenda Item # Meeting Date August 8, 2006 COUNQL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Amendment of Intergovernmental Agreements with Washington County (Urban Planning Area Agreement and Tigard Urban Services Agreement) j~ CI. Prepared By. Tom Coffee Dept Head Approval L~- City Mgr Approvah Y i ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve amendments to the Urban Planning Area and the Tigard Urban Services Agreements with Washington County? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the proposed amendments and authorize the Mayor to sign the amended agreements. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY During Washington County's review of the proposed incorporation of Bull Mountain, the County Attorney determined that provisions in the Urban Planning Area Agreement and the Tigard Urban Services Agreement could provide a basis for legal challenges to the incorporation process. As a result, City staff was asked if the City would support amendments to the agreements to remove the conflicting language. In study sessions and at its business meeting on July 18, 2006 the City Council indicated that, consistent with its position that it would not raise procedural objections to the incorporation process, it would approve the proposed amendments. The amendment of the Urban Planning Area Agreement adds a new Section IV. D. which states: In the event the urban unincorporated territory in the Bull Mountain area is incorporated into a new city, the COUNTY and the CITY will amend the language of the Urban Planning Agreement and revise the Urban Planning Area Boundary (Exhibit A) as may be necessary to exclude the newly incorporated city. The amendment of the Tigard Urban Services Agreement adds a new Section VIII. F. which states: In the event a new city is formed, the parties to this AGREEMENT shall consider any modifications or amendments to this AGREEMENT as may be necessary to assure ongoing compliance with ORS 195 and any other applicable state laws. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Council Goal: Clarify City's Position on the Provision of Urban Services to Unincorporated Areas and in the Best Interests of the Citizens of Tigard. ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FIscAL NOTES N/A