Loading...
City Council Packet - 12/12/2006 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 12, 2006 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I:\Ofs\Donna's\Ccpkt 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 F\ VIEW BOARD FDDEEC:EEMBER UNCIL & LOCAL ING 2006 6:30 p.m. TY HALL ALL BLVD O R 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: To request to speak to the City Council: ➢ Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available for the agenda item you would like to address, sign the Citizen Communication sign-in sheet and ask the Mayor if you may speak to the Council when that agenda item is considered. ➢ For Citizen Communication items regarding items not on the agenda, citizens are asked keep their remarks to two minutes or less. Longer matters can 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 entry to the 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 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (fDD - 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 AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2006 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > City Attorney Review > Report on Gas Tax Town Hall Meetings > Review Reallocation of 72"d Avenue Culvert Project Funds Stormwater Treatment Facility • 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. 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 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Tigard High School Student Envoy Jasmina Dizdarevik • Webelo Boy Scouts • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 2 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 Receive and File: a. Canvass of Votes for City of Tigard Relating to the Election on November 7, 2006 b. Council Calendar C. Council Meeting Tentative Agenda 3.2 Approve Reallocation of Healthy Streams Project Funding from a 72nd Avenue Culvert Project for Design of the Proposed Commercial Street Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award of Contracts for Environmental Assessment and Remediation Services on an As-Required Basis to AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. and GeoEngineers b. Approve a Contract Amendment to the Commercial Street Design Contract to Create a Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility with OTAK, Inc. • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be rrmoved from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. QUASI JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING TOPPING KEMP ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2006-00003 REQUEST: Annexation of four parcels total containing 1.81 acres to the City of Tigard. Property owners Richard Topping and Katie Kemp request annexation of three parcels, with plans to build a pre-school on one parcel. The City invited owners of six adjacent properties to join the annexation. Property owners Charles and Christina Hanson accepted the invitation and request annexation of one parcel. All property owners and living residents have consented to the annexation. LOCATION: SW Spruce Street between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 75th Avenue; 7303 SW Spruce Street, 10735 SW 72nd Avenue, 10705 SW 72nd Avenue, 10670 SW 75th Avenue; WCTM 1S136AC, Tax Lots 2200, 2400, 2500 and 4700. COUNTY ZONES: Office Commercial District (OCR The intent of this District is to encourage office complex development of institutional, professional, medical/dental, governmental and other office business uses. The purpose is to accommodate the increasing office needs in complexes ranging in size from small to large-scale development. Office uses are the primary use of this District. To serve the employees of the office complex, some accessory commercial and high density residential uses may be permitted through the Planned Development process; AND R-5 District (Residential 5 units per acre). The R-5 District is intended to implement the TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 3 policies of the Comprehensive Plan for areas designated for residential development at no more than five (5) units per acre and no less than four (4) units per acre, except as specified otherwise by Section 300-2 or Section 302-6. The primary purpose is to protect existing neighborhoods developed at five (5) units per acre or less. Infill development on all parcels two (2) acres or less may occur only through application of the infill policy (Section 430-72). EQUIVALENT CITY ZONES: C-P: Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas; AND R- 4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are described 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 - Mayor b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure C. Declarations or Challenges Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony - Proponents Opponents - Rebuttal/Final argument by applicant f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 06- TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 4 5. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00005 - HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to amend various chapters of the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow meetings and events as a conditional use on properties with Historic Overlays and/or on the National Register of Historic Places in residential zones. The following is a summary of the proposed amendments including the affected code chapters: 1). Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS: Add a "Meeting and Event Use" category; 2). Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE: Add additional development standards for conditional use types to allow "Meeting and Event Uses" in residential zones with an Historic District overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places; 3). Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (Table 18.510.1 - Use Table): Add a use category for "Historic Place Meetings and Events" as a conditional use in all residential zoning districts that have an Historic Overlay and/or are on the National Register of Historic Places; and 4). Chapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY: Add a General Provision to the Historic Overlay chapter to include "Incentives for maintenance" provision. The full text of the proposed code amendment can be viewed at: htW://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall /departments /cd /code amendments /historic overlay.asp LOCATION: All residential zones with Historic Overlays. ZONE: All residential zones with an Historic Overlay Designation. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.120, 18.130, 18.330, 18.390, 18.510 and 18.740; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1. a. Open Public Hearing - Mayor b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure C. Declarations or Challenges Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony Proponents - Opponents f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 06- TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 5 6. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00001 /DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00004 - HABITAT- FRIENDLY DEVELOPMENT PROVISIONS REQUEST: Amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume I) and Community Development Code (Sections 18.360, 18.370, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775, 18.810) in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 5 and Metro Tide 13 (Nature in Neighborhoods) to adopt the Significant Habitat Areas Map and to implement the recommendations of the Tualatin Basin Fish & Wildlife Habitat Program aimed at encouraging the use of habitat-friendly development practices. The proposed amendments will not result in increased development restrictions but will give developers the option to take advantage of greater regulatory flexibility in exchange for the use of habitat-friendly practices. Amendments will remove barriers to, and provide code flexibility for development that incorporates habitat-friendly techniques. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed on the City's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code- amendments. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, I-H, I-L, I-P, MUC, MUE; MUE-1, MUE-2, MUR-1, MUR-2, R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R- 4.5, R-7, R-12, R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.380, 18.390, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775 and 18.810; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2, 3 & 4; Metro Functional Plan Tide 3 and 13; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5 and 6. a. Open Public Hearing - Mayor b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure C. Declarations or Challenges Do any members of Council wish to report any ex pane contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony Proponents Opponents f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 06- TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 6 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(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. 10. ADJOURNMENT I:taOm\cathylcca120061061212p.doc TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2006 page 7 i o CITY OF TIGARD CO~UNIT~ OREGON SPAPERS 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 - PO PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: Box 22109 - Portland, OR 9 Phone: 503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on Email: legals@commnewspapers.com Tuesday December 12, 2006 at 7:30 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall Room, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ; Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS ! this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, Fprocedure set forth information s maeCti 060E the Planning depose and say that I am the Accounting may obtained g Division Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, (Staff contact: Emily Eng) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling at 503.639.4171. Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of general circulation, published at Beaverton, in ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2006-00003 the aforesaid county and state, as defined by - TOPPING/KEMP ANNEXATION - ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that REQUEST: Annexation of four parcels total containing 1.81 acres to the City of Tigard. Property owners Richard Topping and Katie Kemp request annexation of three parcels, with plans to City of Tigard build a pre-school on one parcel, The City invited owners of six Public Hearing ZCA 2006-0003 adjacent properties to join the annexation. Property owners TT10891 Charles and Christina Hanson accepted the invitation and request annexation of one parcel. All property owners and living residents a copy of which is hereto attached, was have consented to the nnexation. LOCATION: SW Spruce published in the entire issue of said Street between SW 72na Avenge and SW 75t Avenue; 7303 SW Spruce Street, 10735 SW 72n Avenue, 10705 SW 72n Avenue, newspaper for 10670 SW 75th Avenue; WCTM 1 S 136AC, Tax Lots 2200, 2400, 2 2500 and 4700. COUNTY ZONES: Office Commercial District successive and consecutive weeks in the (OC. The intent of this District is to encourage office complex following issues development of institutional, professional, medical/dental, gov- November 23, 2006 ernmental and other office business uses. The purpose is to November 30, 2006 accommodate the increasing office needs in complexes ranging in size from small to large-scale development. Office uses are the primary use of this District. To serve the employees of the office ~j,~ „ 1(o complex, some accessory commercial and high density residential Y uses may be permitted through the Planned Development process; Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Ma ger) AND R-5 District (Residential 5 units per acre). The R-5 District is intended to implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan November 30, 2006 for areas designated for residential development at no more than five (5) units per acre and no less than four (4) units per acre, except as specified otherwise by Section 300-2 or Section 302-6. The primary purpose is to protect existing neighborhoods devel- oped at five (5) units per acre or less. Infill development on all NOTAR PUBLIC FOR OREGON parcels two (2) acres or less may occur only through application of a C) the infill policy (Section 430-72). EQUIVALENT CITY My commission expires®l f g I ZONES: C-P: Professional/Administrative Commercial District The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, Acct #10093001 e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close Patricia Lunsford SUZ proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. City of Tigard NOTM Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, resi- 13125 SW Hall Boulevard COMA dential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equiv- MY COMMISSION alent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with Tigard, OR 97223 a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Size:2 x 15.75 Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a Amount Due $526.05 buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial 'Remit to address above and industrial areas; AND R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residen- tial units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are described 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. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWEN- TY-FIVE CENTS (25¢) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25¢) PER PAGE, OR THE CUR- RENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. INFORMATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE BY CON- TACTING THE STAFF CONTACTS LISTED ABOVE. VICINI'1'\'h1AP ZCA2006-00003 er - _--v-oc TOPPING KEN11 sr ANNUATION I Publish 11/23, 11/30/2006. TT10891 City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) 06 - l 7 D O G -;20 STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, o 0111 o~4, being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in the followinng~ public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) U Co - / 9 ~C 06- -'~0 , which were adopted at the City Council meeting of with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the _ day of D--4 C 44 2 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 'Y:~ 1/1 Signature of Person A o Performed Posting Subscribed and sworn or affirmed) before me this ID om' day of OLf.&'- , 20 . OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M OYARS Si nature of Notary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 381793 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 14, 2008 iAadmtcathyJo"slpost ordinance 2000.doc CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 06-19 AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING 1.81 ACRES, APPROVING TOPPING-KEMP ANNEXATION (ZCA2006-00003), AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(b), ORS 222.125, and ORS 222.170(1) and (2) to annex contiguous territory upon receiving written consent from owners of land, residents and registered voters 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 Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on December 12, 2006, to consider the annexation of four (4) parcels (WCTM 1S136AC, Tax Lots 2200, 2400, 2500 and 4700) of land located between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 75th Avenue along the north side of SW Spruce Street and withdrawal of said property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Tigard Urban Services Agreement, the annexed properties would remain within the Tualatin Valley Water District, 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 Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District on December 12, 2006; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, 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- ZCA2006-00003 Topping-Kemp Annexation Page 1 of 3 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 parcels described in the attached Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" and withdraws said parcels from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District 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 "E" and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3: 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 4: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 5: In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation shall be effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. ORDINANCE NO. 2006- / ZCA2006-00003 Topping-Kemp Annexafion Page 2 of 3 PASSED: By 1//l1Q/I,Li~~d_ vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of )2006. Carol A. Krager, Deputy City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 2006. A proved as to fo Nick Wilson, Council President V City Attorney Date ORDINANCE NO.2006- f ZCA2006-00003 Topping-Kemp Annexation Page 3 of 3 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.06- 2 0 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS - CPA 2006-00001 AND DCA 2006-00004 - TO ADD A SIGNIFICANT HABITAT AREAS MAP TO VOLUME I OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HABITAT- FRIENDLY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE - CHAPTERS 18.360, 18.370, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775 AND 18.810. WHEREAS, the Portland Metropolitan Service District (Metro) decided, with participation of regional jurisdictions, to prepare a regional program to protect and restore riparian corridors and wildlife habitat; and WHEREAS, Metro's Nature in Neighborhoods Program was adopted by Metro Council as Title 13 of the Regional Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, and Metro area jurisdictions are required to comply with Functional Plan requirements; and WHEREAS, Title 13 of Metro's Functional Plan has been acknowledged by the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) as complying with statewide planning goals and administrative rules; and WHEREAS, Tigard and other jurisdictions and various service districts in Washington County entered into an intergovernmental agreement to jointly prepare and coordinate a natural resources protection program based on conditions and circumstances unique to the Tualatin Basin; and WHEREAS, the Tualatin Basin Fish and Wildlife Habitat Protection Program was approved by Metro Council as an alternative means to implement Metro's Nature in Neighborhoods Program; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2006, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend, with minor amendments, that Council adopt CPA 2006-00001 and DCA 2006-00004; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2006, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2006-00001 and DCA 2006-00004, hear public testimony and apply applicable decision-making criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan is amended to include the Tigard Significant Habitat Areas Map ("EXHIBIT A"). ORDINANCE No. 06-.28 Page 1 SECTION 2: The Tigard Municipal Code, Title 18 (Community Development Code) is amended per "EXHIBIT B" to include habitat-friendly development provisions. SECTION 3: The findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated October 16, 2006, the Planning Commission meeting minutes for October 16, 2006, and two memoranda to Council pertaining to Proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions and Response to October 161h Public Hearing Issues and Comments both dated November 7, 2006, are adopted by reference ("EXHIBIT C", "EXHIBIT D", "EXHIBIT E", and "EXHIBIT F" respectively). SECTION 4: 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 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this -12f-day of 1-2 z -r , /m ,.2006. A~A Carol A. Krager, Deputy City Recorder fd- APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this f a day of 2006. Nick Wilson, Council President proved as to form: V 41ity~Attomey is Date ORDINANCE No. 06- a~ Page 2 Agenda Item No. 3.d a- For Agenda of Oali. P3,RD D ~ TIGARD Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes Date: December 12, 2006 Time: 6:30 p.m. Place: Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon Attending: Council President Nick Wilson Presiding Councilor Sally Harding Councilor Sydney Sherwood Councilor Tom Woodruff Absent: Mayor Craig Dirksen Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Study Session ➢ City Attorney Review City Attorney Ramis thanked the Council for the opportunity to represent the City the past interesting and challenging year. He noted that there were no rate increases this year and said the major area of spending is in land use and development, about 30% of total costs. He said spending was within 20-30 hours of the historical average. He brought information about legal spending by other Oregon cities. He said significant matters were Billboards, LUBA Appeals, Bull Mountain Annexation, Urban Renewal and Real Estate. Future trends include Measure 37 claims and other related land use issues. Council President Wilson asked about the loss to the firm caused by Gary Firestone taking a job as Newport's City Attorney and how it would affect the City. City Attorney Ramis said it is an opportunity for him to work more directly with Tigard. He said they are recruiting for a replacement. Gretchen Buchner suggested getting someone who can translate legal terms into English for City board and commission members. Report on Gas Tax Town Hall Meetings Engineer Duenas reported there have been two lightly attended open houses. Good questions were asked by citizen attendees and his impression was that comments were enerallfavorable. One citizen commented that Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 1 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u the City might be short-sighted by not making the tax last as long as 20 years in order to take care of even more Highway 99 problems. Councilor Woodruff asked what the process would be if someone wants to take this to a vote. City Attorney Ramis said he would check the statute. Councilor Sherwood stressed the importance of getting the word out that this is targeted for specific projects in response to issues people often complain about. Gretchen Buehner suggested having someone report on the history of this strategy to make sure the public knows it came from citizens; it was not a top-down process. Council agreed to go ahead with the public hearing at the December 19, 2006 Council meeting ➢ Review Reallocation of 72,,d Ave. Culvert Funds for Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility Engineer Gus Duenas said that as part of the work OTAK is doing on the Commercial Street streetscape project there is an opportunity to do a regional stormwater treatment facility. He gave everyone a map showing the area under discussion. Within their existing contract OTAK must design stormwater treatment for Commercial Street but staff is suggesting, in order to treat as much stormwater as possible, they design a regional treatment facility. Engineer Duenas said $100,000 is budgeted for the 72nd Avenue culvert project but there is a timing issue and the City won't be able to use those funds by the end of the year. Engineer Duenas said staff proposes reallocating $35,000 to the Commercial Street project for OTAK to design a regional treatment facility. A regional facility will be able to handle much more water before it reaches Fanno Creek. He said this proposed reallocation is on the consent agenda tonight. ➢ Tree Board Discussion: City Manager Prosser gave a synopsis of correspondence received from two Tree Board members. Community Development Director Coffee said there was some confusion on a board's role and responsibilities. He noted that the position of Arborist was vacant and would be advertised after the holidays. He said it was the conclusion of both Community Development and Public Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 2 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Works that the position should be in Community Development. Councilor Woodruff said he wanted to avoid the public perception that the arborist is working too cozily with the developers. Administrative ➢ Council agreed that the January 9, 2007 Council Items meeting could have a consent agenda. ➢ Written testimony was received today from Cheryl Capelli for Agenda Item 5 - Legislative Public Hearing - Development Code Amendment (DCA) 2006-00005. Historic Overlay Conditional Use Code Amendment. Business Meeting 1.1 Council President Wilson called the City Council and the Local Contract Review Board to order at 7:35 p.m. 1.2 Council Present: Council President Wilson, Councilors Harding, Sherwood, and Woodruff. Council Absent: Mayor Dirksen 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports: Councilor Sherwood said she had communication about the National League of Cities but suggested postponing discussion until the end of the meeting. 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None 2. Citizen ➢ Tigard High School envoy Jasmina Disdarevik Communication presented an update on recent Tigard High School activities. A copy of her report is on file in the City Recorder's office. Councilor Sherwood expressed her thanks for all the cans of food collected by Tigard High School students for the food banks. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 3 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u ➢ Webelo Boy Scout Troop 232 was present at the meeting as part of their work on the Citizenship Badge. They asked Council three questions: 1) How does the City of Tigard government work and how many people work for the City? Council President Wilson responded that he hopes it is working well. He said there were 300 people working for the City, including police officers, librarians, public works people, planners, administrative people and others. Councilor Sherwood said the City Council meets together and makes policies for City staff to follow in order to meet our goals. She said the Council represents the people who live in Tigard. 2) Why is there so much development in Tigard? Council President Wilson said there has been a lot of growth in Tigard because there has been a lot of growth in the entire Portland area, and more people are expected to come. He said recent statistics show that 1/3 of all homes in Tigard were built since 1990. 3) What is the Mayor's most important responsibility? Council President Wilson said he feels the most important thing is representing the 45,000 people in Tigard. He said it is a serious responsibility to carry out their wishes. Councilor Sherwood said the Mayor is like their Scout pack leader, who keeps them in line and makes sure they are doing a good job. Council President Wilson presented each Scout with a City of Tigard pin. Follow-up on Previous Citizen Communication: Council President Wilson read a statement in response to a petition that was presented at the November 28, 2006 Council meeting regarding the Lukas Glenn incident. Council President Wilson said, "At the Council meeting of November 28, 2006, there were petitions presented to the Council requesting we hold a public hearing about the events surrounding the Lukus Glenn shooting. According to our practice, items addressed during the `open citizen communication' portion of the meeting are brought back to the next regular Council meeting for a report of the status of the communication. Tragic events of September 19th have touched many people in the community. We have reviewed the petitions and met with representatives of the petitioners along with the Chief of Police and our Assistant City Manager. This event Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 4 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u occurred outside the City limits of Tigard and Tigard Police were called in as backup. We have determined it is not appropriate for the City Council to hold a public meeting. We want to again extend our sympathy to the family and friends of Lukus Glenn." Council President Wilson noted that two people had signed up to speak during Agenda Item No. 2 - Citizen Communication but indicated they wished to speak on Agenda Item 4. He understands that their topic is traffic in general but advised them that speaking about Agenda Item 4 now instead of later means they would give up some rights to appeal because it would not be a part of the public record for Agenda Item 4. He called their names and asked if they still wanted to testify. ➢ Jim Long, 10230 SW 72nd, Tigard, OR 97223, spoke about a long -standing traffic issue near the corner of 72nd Avenue and Spruce Street. He said neighbors witness blatant disregard for traffic laws. The stop signs are not observed and residents have trouble getting out of their driveways. He invited City officials to observe this and do something about it. He suggested the City come up with a way to make a photo radar stop sign. ➢ Norma Harris, 10700 SW 72nd, Tigard, OR 97223, said, "Stop means pause" at the intersection behind Fred Meyer. She has lived in the area for over 15 years and has observed the problem getting increasingly worse. Councilor Woodruff asked if the citizens had brought this to the attention of the police directly. Mr. Long said there was a letter written a few years ago to the Police Chief and, he believed, the Mayor. Council President Wilson said they will come back with a response at a future Council meeting. City Manager Prosser said the Police Chief will be asked to contact them directly. Noreen Gibbons, 10730 SW 72nd Avenue, Tigard, OR, 97223, said she was the one who wrote the letter mentioned by Mr. Long and felt the response received from the police was unsatisfactory. With a daycare being proposed as part of a proposed annexation she is very concerned that it is a tragedy waiting to happen. Council President Wilson asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak on any issue not on the agenda. There was none. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 5 3. Consent Council President Wilson reviewed the Consent Agenda Motion by Councilor Agenda before the City Council: Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to 3.1 Receive and File: approve the Consent Agenda. a. Canvass of Votes for City of Tigard Relating to the Election on November 7, 2006 The motion was approved by a b. Council Calendar unanimous vote of Council c. Council Meeting Tentative Agenda present. 3.2 Approve Reallocation of Healthy Streams Project Funding from a 72nd Avenue Culvert Project for Council President Wilson Yes Design of the Proposed Commercial Street Councilor Harding Yes Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility Councilor Sherwood Yes 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: Councilor Woodruff Yes a. Award of Contracts for Environmental Assessment and Remediation Services on an As- Required Basis to AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. and GeoEngineers. b. Approve a Contract Amendment to the Commercial Street Design Contract to Create a Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility with OTAK, Inc. Council President Wilson asked if there were Council members desiring to remove any of these items for separate discussion. There being none he asked for a motion to approve the consent agenda. 4. Quasi-judicial City Attorney Rarris said hearings on annexation matters Councilor Sherwood moved for Public Hearing - are conducted as judicial matters and so anyone wishing to adoption of Ordinance No. 06- - Topping participate understands the process, he read through the 19 and Councilor Woodruff Kemp Zone rules. He noted that copies of the hearing rules of seconded. Change procedure were available at the entrance. A copy is also Annexation available in the City Recorder's office. City Attorney Ramis (ZCA) 2006- recommended Council 00003 Council President Wilson opened the public hearing. exclude the emergency clause from the Ordinance. City Attorney Ramis asked if any members of Council wished to report any ex parte contact or information gained Councilor Sherwood moved for outside the hearing, including any site visits. The Council adoption of Ordinance No. 06- indicated there was none. 19 without the emergency clause. Councilor Woodruff City Attorney Ramis asked if all Council members had seconded the motion. The familiarized themselves with the application. revised motion was approved The Council said they had. by a unanimous vote of Council present. City Attorney Ramis asked the audience if there were any challenges pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear Council President Wilson Yes this matter, or if there was a challenge to any Council Councilor Harding Yes member's participation. Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 6 ➢ James Riggs, 10655 SW 75th Avenue, Metzger, Oregon Councilor Wilson asked that said, "This notice of public hearing was delivered to my staff follow up on the question mail three days late, according to ORS land use planning about how this impacts the law guidelines. Therefore, this hearing is invalid. I wish local improvement district for you to adjourn until we have a representative of the park. Washington County. This is an issue that concerns a community outside the jurisdiction of Tigard." City Attorney Ramis asked him, "Your position is that the City Council cannot hold a hearing because of the notice issue and second, you have an issue relating to whether the county is present?" Mr. Riggs said, "I have an issue of protocol. In this matter, we have a park in consideration, Metzger Park. This park is supported by the community of Metzger, not by any other entity." City Attorney Ramis said, "My question is that, you're saying that someone from the County needs to be present?" Mr. Riggs said, "Yes, sir. The reason being is that there are a finite number of residents in our community that support this park. When you annex people from our community into the city of Tigard that removes that tax base and shoulders the burden to the remaining residents." City Attorney Ramis said, "We're straying from the substantive evidence, but if we could turn to the jurisdictional question for a moment, my recommendation is that you go ahead and conduct the hearing and take testimony and allow our staff to address the question of notice and its adequacy and if we don't happen to have that information here we can continue the proceeding until you can examine the notice question." He said, "The fundamental rule is that actual notice suffices. So if a person has actual notice, whether or not the actual number of days in the statute was satisfied is really not the question." Mr. Riggs said, "I object to your testimony, Mr. Attorney. I conferred with the County and they said it is very important that you comply with ORS." City Attorney Ramis said, "This is a City proceeding and I respect that. That's why I recommended to Council that we conduct the proceedings so that people who have come here tonight can offer their testimony. But we will then check the status of the notice." Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 7 Council President Wilson said, "The question here is, are there any challenges pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction?" Mr. Riggs said, "This is a challenge." Council President Wilson said, "Yes, but it's not about the jurisdiction of the Council to annex... This is an annexation to the City; it's not a withdrawal from the County." Mr. Riggs said, "When you annex to the City it removes property from the community of Metzger, am I wrong?" Council President Wilson said, "Well, yes, because there is no formal community of Metzger. It's not a jurisdictional boundary. You have a local improvement district that finances the park but I don't think that this annexation would withdraw it from the local improvement district." Planner Eng said she would check into whether this removes these properties from the LID. Council President Wilson asked the audience if there were any other challenges to the jurisdiction of the Council. There were none. Planner Eng gave the staff report. She said this annexation had nine petitioners and that all land owners are registered voters within the proposed territory and consented to annexation. She said the proposed annexation would add 1.81 acres of land to the City of Tigard. Three parcels are zoned Office/Commercial and one parcel is zoned R-5 through Washington County. Upon annexation three parcels will be zoned Professional/Commercial and one parcel will be zoned R-4.5. The proposed territory is contiguous to the City's boundary. She said staff notified all residents and interested parties and received no written objections. Applicants Topping and Kemp propose to build a preschool on one parcel. Existing single-family homes will remain on the other three parcels. She said the annexation is necessary for the site to connect to City sewer. Assistant Planner Eng said the applicants faced significant administrative obstacles in getting their project on schedule. On behalf of their clients, Westlake Consultants requested that this annexation, if approved, be adopted with an emergency clause so it takes effect immediately. Assistant Planner Eng said staff recommends approval of the annexation and that the ordinance be adopted with the emergency clause. She also noted that the notice was sent Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 $ within the state requirement of 20 days before the hearing. PROPONENT TESTIMONY - ➢ Lee Leighton, Westlake Consultants, 15115 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150, Tigard, spoke for his clients, applicants Richard Topping and Katie Kemp. He said the applicants began the process by setting up a pre-application meeting with Washington County. Months later it became clear it was a city sewer line on Spruce Street and City staff insisted that before anything further happened they would have to annex into the City. He said they worked quickly to prepare an annexation request in order to stay on track with their project. This is why they are requesting an emergency clause in the ordinance. NEUTRAL TESTIMONY - ➢ Jim Long, 10730 SW 72nd Avenue, Tigard OR. Mr. Long said he believed that one of the neighbors contiguous to the property, Nancy Tracy, did not receive a notice. He was also concerned about effects an emergency declaration would have on the ability to appeal a decision. He said he had concerns about the traffic as well as the process. City Attorney Ramis recommended Council not adopt the emergency clause. He said the City could work with the applicant to expedite applications and process. Noreen Gibbons had signed up to speak but declined to testify. Council President Wilson noted that he did not have anyone else signed up to speak but asked Mr. Riggs if he would like to speak at this time. OPPONENT TESTIMONY - ➢ James Riggs, 10655 SW 75th, Tigard, OR said the property owners near his property have raised their elevations, causing damage to his property. Mr. Riggs expressed concerns about "the continual chipping away of Metzger by annexation into the City Tigard limits." He said, "When you take property into your City it takes our tax base away from our park." Councilor Sherwood said, "I live in that area... and I think I continue to pay into the Metzger LID, even though I live in the city of Tigard." I will go back and check my tax statement but I don't think it has anything to do with the Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 9 legality of these people wanting to be in the City of Tigard." Council President Wilson said, "We're not withdrawing you from the County. We all are in the County, so it's hard for me to imagine that an LID that is valid may change by a change in the city boundaries." Mr. Riggs approached the Council and showed a map of the proposed annexation area. He indicated that his property is across the street from the proposed annexation property. He asked if the City of Tigard has jurisdiction on his street if the annexation is approved. City Manager Prosser said it didn't. Councilor Wilson said, "You'd have to annex the street too and we're not." Mr. Riggs said that is what he is worried about. He expressed concerns about annexation of his area by Beaverton, Portland and Tigard. He stressed that increased traffic coming through his neighborhood from local schools, Lincoln Center and Washington Square makes it an unsafe location for a preschool. Council President Wilson said no one else had signed up to speak and asked the audience if there was anyone else who would like to testify. There was none. APPLICANT REBUTTAL - Lee Leighton of Westlake Consultants said his clients worked hard to communicate with the residents affected by this project. He said a neighborhood meeting was held when they were embarking on the Washington County process. He said invitations were sent to neighbors within 500 feet regarding the meeting and that this was documented in the record. Referring to the Mr. Long's question about a neighbor not receiving notice, he said he'd verified with Associate Planner Eng that the name in question does appear on the mailing label file printout. Mr. Leighton said the City fulfilled its responsibility to put that item in the mail. Mr. Leighton said that Mr. Riggs mentioned problems with elevation changes in grading near his property that caused drainage problems. He said City of Tigard staff would allow the applicants to submit their site design for a courtesy review to obtain feedback so the applicants can turn in a complete application as soon as possible. He said Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 10 that on this (or any other project site development review) applicants have to demonstrate that they are not creating a downstream drainage problem, using engineering calculations and storm water treatment and detention on the property. He mentioned that the review of any development would have to go through such a City process. Council President Wilson asked for the staff recommendation. Assistant Planner Eng said staff recommended approval of the annexation. Council President Wilson closed the public hearing and asked the Council for any comments or discussion. Councilor Woodruff said, "This is the kind of annexation we are most interested in - where we have people who are contiguous and want to be part of the City." He said, "It seems like that is what state statutes are written to allow and there's no one that's being affected on this property against their will to become a part of Tigard so I am supportive of this." Councilor Sherwood stated that although annexation is an ugly word, a lot of people come into our city for different reasons, one of them happens to be sewers. She said no one was getting annexed against their will. Council President Wilson said he agreed with the other Council members. He said, "We always apply the zoning closest to the County's zoning designation so this will not make development happen that otherwise would not have happened. I am also in favor of this annexation." 5. Legislative City Attorney Ramis explained that this was a legislative Motion by Councilor Public Hearing public hearing and he would read, prior to the Sherwood, seconded by Development proceeding, a statement about the procedures the City Councilor Woodruff, to go with Code would follow, noting that these were slightly different the Planning Commission's Amendment than those used in a quasi-judicial case. He said a copy recommendation and deny the (DCA) 2006- of the rules and procedures was available at the entrance Conditional Use Code 00005 - Historic of the public hearing room. A copy is also available in amendment. Overlay the City Recorder's office. Conditional Use The motion was approved by a Code City Attorney Ramis asked the Council if any member 3-1 vote of Council present. Amendment wished to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing including site visits. Council President Wilson Yes Councilor Harding No Councilor Woodruff said he had a conversation with Mr. Councilor Sherwood Yes Quello last summer during his first visit to the property Councilor Woodruff Yes at a reception for Broadway Rose Theater. Councilor Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 1 1 Woodruff said he also talked with three neighbors who called to register their position on this. Councilor Harding said she attended the same reception as Councilor Woodruff. She reported that she received a phone call from Larry Galizio about this matter but did not recall the date. Councilor Sherwood said she visited the Quellos at their house in 2000 and was also at a prior public hearing. Council President Wilson said he was on the Planning Commission when the previous hearing was held and also attended an event held there years ago. He noted that Larry Galizio contacted him by phone recently regarding this matter. City Attorney Ramis asked if all members had familiarized themselves with the application. Council indicated that they had. He asked if there were any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter, or if there were any challenges to the participation of any Council member. There were none. Council President Wilson opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Farrelly gave the staff report. He described the eight Tigard historic properties located in residential zones. He said Council directed staff to explore ways owners of historic property could generate income to assist them in preservation, restoration and upkeep. He said one potential way to do this was to allow historic resources to be rented for events and meetings, subject to conditional use standards. He noted that the Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial of this proposed code amendment at a public hearing on November 22, 2006. PROPONENT TESTIMONY: ➢ Dan Quello, 16445 SW 92nd Avenue, Tigard, OR, 97224, testified on behalf of the proposed code amendment. He said a community needs places for its people to assemble and celebrate special events. He said if Tigard has a shortcoming, besides traffic woes, it would be a lack of the number of spaces, especially outdoors, available to hold functions and events. He said demand is strong for his award-winning historic home with two-plus acres of Victorian gardens. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 12 Mr. Quello noted that the format of the public hearing doesn't allow for rebuttal so he wanted to respond to prior comments made in the media and at the Planning Commission meeting. He said it is not just about one house - or about making money. He said the benefit would be for the whole community. He said it is about the preservation movement in Tigard and allowing an incentive to help maintain the few historical houses left. He disagreed with comments made about the lack of control over event spacing, noting the proposed use averages out to only 1 '/z events per month. Mr. Quello responded to Planning Commission public hearing testimony about police being summoned to garden weddings by saying that the only police officer to set foot on his property at a wedding was there as a groom. He remarked that Larry Galizio made an appeal during the Planning Commission hearing to have staff and planning commissioners come by and do an on-site inspection. He said, `But then, when he heard that Councilors Sherwood and Woodruff had already been on-site for the Broadway Rose party and were open to exploring ways to use this historic resource, he said, `Those commissioners should recuse themselves.' Why? Because they were on-site or perhaps because they held a different view than his own. Mr. Galizio cannot have it both ways." He said they've worked hard for 16 years to restore one of Tigard's treasures and would like to share it with the entire community. He said the historic preservation movement is not just about saving important structures; it's about opening them up. ➢ Bob Neithammer, 19855 SW Riverwood Lane, Tigard, OR 97224, said he supported this amendment. He said his daughter wanted to get married outdoors and Tigard doesn't offer many places for an outdoor ceremony. He said she was married at the Quello house and he thought it was a beautiful setting. He said he lives three or four blocks away and has never heard noise coming from the Quello House. ➢ Dan Mitchell, 16585 SW 92nd Avenue, Tigard, OR 97224, said he moved next door to the Quello's property in 1991, four months before Mr. Quello purchased his property. He said it was in shambles with rotting floors and a carriage house covered in blackberry vines and the Quellos worked hard to restore the property. He has Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 13 experienced no problem with noise. He said if you want to talk about noise, consider the Balloon Festival. He said his house shakes until 11:00 p.m. during the Balloon Festival and visitors to his house have to pay for parking, but he doesn't complain because it is an important Tigard event. He said he is totally for anything that encourages Dan Quello to maintain the property in its current beautiful condition. Cindy Lehman, 13170 NW Dumar St., Portland, OR 97229, testified in support. She read excerpts from a letter written by Karen Sigworth, an organizer of the Tigard-Tualatin School District's 1ti, Annual Garden Tour which included the Quello House as one of its destinations. She said one aspect of quality of life is preserving what is beautiful and unique in our community and there is no other property in Tigard like the Quello's. She entered photographs into the record. She said she hoped Tigard's elected officials could find a way to end the impasse that is both sensitive to the neighbors and allows the Quellos to preserve and share their bit of Tigard history. ➢ Jenni McGuire Legg, 17410 SW 135th Place, Tigard, OR 97224, testified that she was married at the Quello House and was honored to invite her friends and family to this beautiful home which is part of local history. She noted that her out-of-town wedding guests stayed and ate at local businesses which was good for the community. She added that she can now take her children to the Quello House and hoped the City could come up with a compromise so that other people could enjoy this property. Mark Dahm, 28357 SW Morningside Avenue, Wilsonville, OR 97070, testified. He held his son's wedding reception at the Quello House and said it meant a lot to his family to hold their event among the rolling lawns and ponds at such a serene setting. His guests stayed in local hotels and used local businesses. He complimented the Quello's hospitality and noted that family members still comment on their fond memories of the wonderful time they had on the property. ➢ Dan Murphy, 14070 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223, testified. He said the Broadway Rose Theater Company is proud to be a valuable part of Tigard, helping to build a sense of community by providing a gathering place for Tigard residents and beyond, to enjoy. He said the Quello House has the potential to provide Tigard residents a beautiful gathering lace to celebrate Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 14 special occasions. Mr. Murphy said the Quello's opened up their home last summer to host the Theater's cultivation event. He said it was a pleasure to hold such an event inside Tigard, as they have generally gone outside the city for cultivation events in the past. He said few homes in the area offer the same beauty, charm and lush landscaping as the Quello House. He asked that Council consider their request to allow meetings and events in their home as a conditional use. OPPONENT TESTIMONY: ➢ Cheryl Capelh holds interest in property at 16405 SW 93rd, Tigard OR 97224. Ms. Capelli gave six reasons to deny conditional use, as summarized below. She requested that the Council vote no on the proposed code amendment 1) Unfair advantage to one property over others. Conditional use events infringe upon normal use of nearby properties with noise, traffic and litter. 2.) A "Conditional Use Test" was tried at the Shaver-Bilyeu property for three years and failed to provide for the interests of the public. Public testimony before the Council in 2000 and before the Planning Commission in November 2006 highlighted that three years of "test" events clearly disrupted the home life of neighboring properties. 3) Conditional Use is a "sleeping dog." The school, a stadium and park are visible when buying a home in the area. But property use that appears normal, yet impacts neighboring property when summer arrives, impacts neighborhood desirability. 4) Current Oregon historical tax relief program has not been proven insufficient. According to Washington County, the Quellos receive special tax treatment since 1994 for the Shaver-Bilyeu House. Comparing market value to taxable value, the market value is $790,970, yet the frozen taxable value is only $166,060. It appears special interest to add an additional compensation program when the current program has not been proven insufficient. 5) Historical property requiring Conditional Use to pay for costs fails to show a need. Reasonable investment in maintenance activities is an expected cost that all homeowners accept. Maintenance of a home on large property with a garden can be expensive and is an assumed investment responsibility. Excessive historical costs have et to be shown and allowing Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 15 Conditional Use for profit appears as special interest. 6) Conditional Use profits are not required to be reinvested. The proposed code change fails to ensure that historic properties actually benefit from Conditional Use profits. ➢ Michael Brewin, 11225 SW Morgen Ct., Tigard, OR 97223, testified on behalf of himself and his business, Sou1jazz, LLC. In reference to Dan Quello saying earlier that this code amendment would be on benefit to the entire city, he disagreed, saying it would be a handout for one property. He said all testimony in favor has been about one property but that the code amendment would affect the whole city. He presented slides of historic properties in Tigard and discussed the disadvantages to applying this conditional use to them, including parking, neighbor proximity, and adequate space issues. Mr. Brewin stated a concern that the August 15, 2006 Council agenda referred to the "Quello House," which is not how the house is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. He also said that the public hearing notice sent out by the City didn't disclose enough details. Mr. Brewin noted that City code enforcement staff is unavailable on evenings and weekends to document abuse. He read a list of 45 reasons to reject the development code amendment, a copy of which is in the City Recorder's office. The Council took a brief break at 9:41 p.m. and reconvened at 9:48 p.m. OPPONENT TESTIMONY CONTINUED - ➢ Richard Smith, 16435 SW 93,a, Tigard, OR 97224, submitted photos for the record showing the view from his home towards the Quello property. He said he lives directly behind the Quello property. He noted that several trees were cut down by Mr. Quello and were left on Mr. Smith's property. He said he felt this proposed amendment was just to benefit Mr. Quello and turn his property into a commercial investment. He said the Quellos' have burdened the neighborhood with these parties and it is an annoyance. He expressed concerns about parking. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 16 ➢ Don Manghelli, 16415 SW 93,6 Avenue, Tigard, OR, 97224, lives behind the Quello House. He said he and his wife hear everything that goes on in the Quello House yard and he feels he can't mow his lawn or enjoy his own yard when events are going on. He reviewed the history of event use at the Quello House and the impact on the neighbors. He said even limiting events to twelve days a year would mean most summer weekends would be taken up with weddings because no one wants an outdoor wedding at other times of the year. He said this is not compatible with a residential neighborhood. ➢ David Otis, 16465 SW 93,a Avenue, Tigard, OR 97224, said he wants to enjoy his backyard in peace without all the chaos, noting that every sound carries across the gully from the Quello's yard. ➢ Larry Galizio, 16455 SW 93rd Avenue, Tigard, OR, 97224, pointed out that, except for the man testifying tonight who lives next door to Mr. Quello but has an acre in between, everyone testifying in favor of this change lives away from the area. He said the people who are speaking in opposition live closer to the Quello House and would have to live with these changes. He also said it was significant that the Planning Commission voted unanimously, 5-0 against the code changes. He responded to Mr. Quello's comments that this is not a benefit for himself. He said following that logic, one possibility to consider would be to put all the money earned at the Quello House into an account for all the historic properties to use, which would benefit the community, not just Mr. Quello. Mr. Galizio said Mr. Quello said this was needed to allow some incentive for his family to continue to live in and maintain this home. He said Oregon taxpayers subsidize them already so it would be redundant and unfair to provide another incentive. on top of what is already provided. Referring to Mr. Quello's earlier site visit comment, he said the site visit he had requested was not for Council to go to the Quello House, but for Council members to go to Mr. Galizio's or any other neighbor's house to experience what everyone is talking about. Mr. Galizio asked about accountability. He asked how citizens would know that these funds are being spent on historic preservation. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 17 He said, "Enough is enough. This is a residential area and I hope you heed the call of the Planning Commission which voted unanimously, 5-0, and oppose this change." Council President Wilson asked if there was anyone else who wanted to speak. There being none, he closed the public hearing. Staff recommendation: Associate Planner Farrelly said staff recommends that if the City Council can find that the proposal is compatible with surrounding residential uses, and provides adequate guidelines for approval, then Council should approve it. Councilor Sherwood said the property is gorgeous but if Council puts this commercial zone change in, the neighbors are not going to be able to live normal lives. She said she was not in favor of overturning the Planning Commission's unanimous vote against it. Councilor Woodruff said he felt Council failed the Community because they couldn't come to a compromise on this. He said both sides made valid points. He said he was taken aback by the strong objections of the neighbors. He said it was troubling that things that happened in the past are clouding the issue now. He said regardless of what decision is made at this point, it would injure people, so he was still deliberating. Council Harding said she was not aware of the issues from the past. It was through the Broadway Rose Theater that she was at an event at Quello House. She said there were very few jewels left in the community. She heard a lot of conflict in the testimony tonight. She said that maybe 200 people at an event may be too many, but 18 events out of 365 days a year is less than 5% of the year. She thought it ludicrous that it was suggested it would take a full-time code compliance officer. She said she feels for both sides. Councilor Sherwood said the difference between wedding events and school or sports events is that no one has to be quiet in their yard during school events. Councilor Harding said that's just the risk Mr. Quello takes. It's not an exclusive use requiring the neighbors to shut down their lives. Council President Wilson said he understands these issues. Just living next to people means you have to tolerate a certain amount. He thought he was the only Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 18 Planning Commissioner back when this came before them, to vote in favor of the Quello proposal. It's not just about historic preservation - it's also about people's ability to use a place that is unique. The Quello House is mostly about the grounds, not the interior. It is really about summer use and that is the difficult thing. This is one of the most difficult things he's had to address in his eight years on the Planning Commission and four years on the Council. If you want things to stay as they are, it helps to have a financial incentive. I understand this is about the houses immediately behind the Quellos. He personally would like to see Council send this back. As it is written, there are too many issues. He is not terribly worried about other properties; you could not fit 200 people into the windmill. Fire codes and parking are issues. Councilor Woodruff said the numbers that came up (18 a year, 200 attendees) were not set by the Council. He said he would be comfortable with less. Proceeds from this could pay for overtime for someone from the City to be right there to monitor things. Do whatever is required to send this back for review that makes it less onerous to the neighbors. Council President Wilson asked about the code enforcement issues that were raised, noting that we don't have night code enforcement officers. Community Development Director Coffee said the police could cite for various portions of the Code. There is also a provision in there that it could be revoked for violations and the police could document violations. Councilor Harding asked how it could be re-written without infringing on the Community Development Department's time, not doing a total re-write but adding more restrictions. City Manager Prosser said Council could refer it back to staff for more work but Community Development Director Coffee has identified that it will have an impact on the other priorities that Council has set. He asked, "If staff worked on it, increased restrictions and it was heard again, would there be a different outcome? Council President Wilson asked if Council would hear appeals of the Hearings Officer's decisions. City Attorney Ramis said the appeals would go to the Council first and then could go to LUBA. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 19 Council expressed disappointment that the opposing groups couldn't come together and work out a compromise prior to the proposed code amendments being prepared. 6. Legislative Council President Wilson opened the public hearing. Motion by Councilor Public Hearing Woodruff, seconded by Comprehensive City Attorney Ramis noted that everyone present in the Councilor Harding, to approve Plan room at this time was present for the preceding public Ordinance No. 06-20. Amendment(CP hearing. He stipulated that the Attorney Statement for A) 2006-00001/ Agenda Item 5 would be entered into the record as being The motion was approved by a Development the same for Agenda Item 6. unanimous vote of Council Code Present. Amendment Council President Wilson asked if there were any (DCA) 2006- challenges. There were none. No one had signed up to Council President Wilson Yes 00004- Habitat- speak on this item. Councilor Harding Yes Friendly Councilor Sherwood Yes Development Long Range Planning Manager Bunch gave the staff Councilor Woodruff Yes Provisions report. He said staff evaluated all the applicable criteria from the Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code and found that these amendments comply. He said the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 16, 2006, and recommended approval. Some changes were made to staffs original recommendation and these are now included. He noted that Council adoption of the proposal would 1) fulfill Tigard's agreements with the Tualatin River Basin Partners; 2) comply with Metro functional plan Title 18 and also comply with associated State regulations. He noted that this does not preclude the City from further protecting resources by going through statewide processes established by Goal 5. Council President Wilson opened up the hearing to public testimony. Planning Commission Member Gretchen Buehner said that the density transfer section was removed for further work and will be coming back to Council in early 2007. Councilor Harding noted that Council has discussed this before and while she would like it to be more restrictive, Council needs to move forward. Council President Wilson clarified a comment he made at the November workshop meeting. He said he is not opposed to conservation easements in general but is opposed to applying them to small, private lots, which developers will do to squeeze in another lot when they are otherwise required to have areas set aside for preservation. Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 20 ORDINANCE NO. 06-20 - AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS - CPA 2006-00001 AND DCA 2006-00004 - TO ADD A SIGNIFICANT HABITAT AREAS MAP TO VOLUME 1 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HABITAT-FRIENDLY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE - CHAPTERS 18.360, 18.370, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775 AND 18.810. 7. Council Council President Wilson asked if there were any Council Councilor Sherwood will give a Liaison Reports liaison reports. Councilor Sherwood said she would report on the NLC Conference defer her report. at a future meeting. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:57 p.m. Motion by Councilor Harding, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Council President Wilson Yes Councilor Harding Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Carol A. Krager, Deputy City Rec er Attest: Lam, Council President, City of Tigard Date: ` 0 iAadm%Cathyt =\200 1024.doc Tigard City Council Minutes - December 12, 2006 21 STUDY SESSION AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING December 12, 2006 - 6:30 p.m. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 6:30 p.m. • STUDY SESSION > City Attorney Review > Report on Gas Tax Town Hall Meetings > Review Reallocation of 72nd Avenue Culvert Project Funds Stormwater Treatment Facility • 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. • ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS ➢ Should the January 9, 2007 City Council Meeting have a consent agenda? ➢ Written testimony was received from Cheryl Cappelli regarding Agenda Item 5 - Code Amendment to Allow Meetings & Events as a Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Residential Zones Council Calendar December 19 Business Meeting, Reception for Councilor Wilson 6-7 p.m.; RRCCR & Town Hall 26 Council meeting cancelled. January 9 First meeting of the year: Oaths of office, elect City Council President, State of the City, new photographs, reception. 16 Workshop Meeting, 6:30 p.m., Town Hall 23 Business Meeting, 6:30 p.m., RRCCR & Town Hall 29 Joint Meeting with Tigard-Tualatin School District Board & Tualatin City Council Members, 6:30 p.m. at MD 30 Fifth Tuesday City 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%cathy%= ss - pink stamt120061061212ps.d= Agenda Item No. S by Se55%D -1 Meeting of l a / a •o!o RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 2224402 MEMORANDUM Fax: (503) 243-2944 TO: Liz Newton, Assistant City Manager, City of Tigard FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, Gary Firestone, City Attorney's Office DATE: November 22, 2006 RE: Information on Representation of City To assist the City with the performance review of the City Attorney, we are providing information on significant matters that we have been involved in since the last review in October 2003 and information as to trends that we see regarding the work we perform for the City, as you requested. Significant Matters Sign Code Matters Two sign companies challenged the City's prohibition on billboards at the same time they were challenging other billboard restrictions in other jurisdictions. We successfully defended the City's prohibition on billboards at LUBA and at the Court of Appeals as reasonable time, place and manner restrictions that regulated only the size of the signs, not their content. This is particularly significant in view of recent court decisions that invalidated other jurisdictions' regulation of billboards. The positive result was due in part to earlier efforts to develop a content-neutral sign code and in part to the strategy of having the Council adopt a written interpretation of the then-existing language. We have continued to work with City staff to assure that the City's sign code is effective in protecting the City's interests and defensible against constitutional challenges. LUBA Appeals The City has had a large number of LUBA appeals in the last few years. Many of the appeals have been by opponents of City-approved projects that raise issues related to tree protection or other environmental protection standards. We have worked with staff on deciding in which cases the City will participate and in which cases the applicant will defend. As a general rule, we participate when the appeal involves a challenge to the City's code or the City's interpretation of the code. Even if the City does not actively participate, it still has to prepare the record and we have to at least review the briefs to determine whether there is any issue the City should respond to. Memorandum re: Information on Representation of City November 22, 2006 Page 2 Bull Mountain Annexation We have been involved in litigation relating to annexations within the Bull Mountain area. The City's efforts to annex have been made more difficult by actions of the legislature and decisions from LUBA, but the City's authority is now more clearly established. Under the existing decisions, the City may annex territory but will have to apply the Bull Mountain Community Plan to annexed areas unless the City provides a justification for applying its own Goal 5 measure. One annexation matter, the Sunrise Lane annexation, has been remanded on a narrow range of issues. Other matters are either still pending or have been resolved in favor of the City. Urban Renewal We assisted staff and the City's consultants in developing the City's urban renewal plan. Our primary responsibility was to provide guidance so that the City complied with all legal requirements, including the City's charter provisions. The City charter provision requiring a vote on urban renewal creates issues that are unique to Tigard, and we were able to assist the City in making sure that the appropriate process, including voter approval, was followed. Real Estate We have assisted the City with the acquisition of several properties over the last three years. Recently, we have assisted the City in acquiring two major properties (Cach and Price) that will be used for water facilities and for park/open space use. Trends Bull Mountain The most obvious trend in our work for the City has been the large volume of work devoted to matters related to Bull Mountain. While we expect the pattern and type of work to change in the future, we anticipate that there will be continued legal disputes relating to Bull Mountain. In the near term, we anticipate continued opposition to any attempts to annex properties in the Bull Mountain area. In the longer term, there may be other issues, including responses to future attempts to incorporate a new city. If a new city is incorporated, revisions to IGAs and possibly new IGAs may be needed. Land Use Appeals As discussed above, the City has had an increased number of appeals to LUBA. Many of those Memorandum re: Information on Representation of City November 22, 2006 Page 3 appeals involve challenges by opponents of projects who often raise numerous issues, many of which are irrelevant or unsubstantiated. We expect this trend to continue as the number of infill projects increases. While the City can do little to decrease the number of appeals, it can increase the chances of prevailing on appeal by making sure that all decisions are supported by adequate evidence and findings. Measure 37 Sign (Billboard) Cases The city has recently received two Measure 37 claims from property owners who wish to place billboards on their property. We believe that future attempts to site billboards in the City will rely on Measure 37 claims. Given the highway frontages within Tigard, the City can probably expect to see additional Measure 37 sign claims. Tree Protection For a period of time, tree protection was the primary issue in most land use appeals. Although tree protection remains an issue, decisions from LUBA have clarified the standards and the City is applying its regulations consistent with the LUBA decisions. We anticipate that this will reduce the number of appeals related to trees and will make it easier to defend the City's decisions if and when they are appealed. G:\muni\Tigard\mc mo l 12206. wpd Liz Newton - Ramis Crew - Page 1 Item No. For Council Newsletter dated b From: Roger Dawes To: Craig Prosser; Liz Newton Date: 12/7/2006 1:28:29 PM Subject: Ramis Crew Here is a listing of the Ramis Crew charges from FY 03-04 to present FY 03-04 - Budget - $218,000 Actual amount spent - $182,907 Most items were close to budget except for CD, which was budgeted for $11,400 and $67,393 was spent. We spent $9,200 on Gaarde St. Phase 1 & 2, $4,770 on Wall St. LID and $1,676 on new Library. FY 04-05 - Budget - $143,000 Actual amount spent - $158,125 Again, most items were close to budget except for CD again, which budgeted $15,000 and spent $36,645. We spent $6,062 on new Library, $12,071 on Wall St. LID and $2,278 on Hall Blvd. FY 05-06 - Budget - $144,800 Actual amount spent - $217,850 Same as prior years with CD being the big spender. CD budgeted $25,000 but spent $112,011. We also spent $5,737 on Hall Blvd., $3,315 at the new Library and $2,174 on Wall St. LID. FY 06-07 - Budget - $143,400 Actual spent to date - $64,044 Most divisions look in pretty good shape except for CD, which budgeted $40,000 and has already spent $36,228. Hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you need something else. Roger Dawes Interim Financial Operations Manager City of Tigard Finance Department 503-718-2493 Direct Line 503-639-4171 Ext. 2493 roger@tigard-or.gov *'"NOTE: Our domain changed to www.tigard-or.gov; please note my new email: roger@tigard-or.gov Study Session one City of Tigard Billings 7/l/95-12/31/05 Fiscal Year Total Billed Hours Billed FY 95-96 $233,470 3,128.7 hours FY 96-97 $157,589 1,919.1 hours FY 97-98 $197,122 2,205.9 hours FY 98-99 $310,257 2,920.9 hours FY 99-00 $274,107 2,387.6 hours FY 00-01 $184,092 1,620.2 hours FY 01-02 $183,066 1,489.4 hours FY 02-03 $173,677 1,419.6 hours FY 03-04 $188,896 1,463.6 hours FY 04-05 $158,836 1,048 hours FY 05-06 $203,340 1,439 hours G:\muni\Tigard ten-year billings 95-05.wpd 4 PER CAPITA COMPARISON OF CITY ATTORNEY SERVICE COSTS (2006-07) (From most expensive to least expensive) CITY $ PER 1000 POP BUDGET POPULATION I or O Lake Oswego $31,573 $1,139,000 36,075 0- Wilsonville $24,185 $399,287 16,510 0 Sandy $19,461 $130,000 6,680,~ Portland $12,050 $6,704,170 556,370 EEL Medford $11,890 $842,500 70,855 0 Eugene $11,292 $1,650,450 146,160 Gresham $11,217 $1,075,731 95,900 DI Beaverton $10,356 $860,520 83,095 0 Salem $9,372 $1,380,080 147,250 0 West Linn' $9,326 $224,522 5 24,075 4 Milwaukie' $9,047 $186,8715 20,655 Oregon City $7,416 $214,800 28,965 0 Springfield $5,647 $315,440 55,855 Corvallis $5,173 $275,000 53,165 0 Tigard $5,131 $233,4425 45,500 ?F;A Hillsboro $4,267 $350,000 82,025 NOTES: 1. I = In house counsel. O = Outside counsel 2. Average Budget: $1,005,840 with Portland, Eugene & Salem $489,134 without Portland, Eugene & Salem 3. Average Population: 91,821 with Portland, Eugene & Salem- 47,643 without Portland, Eugene & Salem 4. Average Per 1000: $12,050 5. West Linn, Tigard and Milwaukie are actual billings 6. Milwaukie figure excludes a one time only plaintiff's case. 7. Represented by Ramis Crew Corrigan LLP 8. Certified population estimates, July 1, 2005 - PSU G:\muni\City attorney rates comparison color.wpd IS 0 • e . . ®I I_ • e~ me I •e e • ~ .r.....9..:.+,~Oh6 OLhh1 n 00 13699;0/ 0405 EXP SEP05 4-011 1021 ro, III~IIIIIIi'IIII'IIIII~II1111'1'II'IIIIIIIIIIIIIItII' 1727SNCREW CORS1R,IGAH & SAC PORTLAND HOYT OR 97209-2226 aue~uod'r,I 66'C $ ~ ^y ~v,vo r•• w II. I 1 11 aa,J{ r III ``Ili. ~y I r, tI ~ Y IPA 4A. ,S H{r i S I ttNY ~ b ~ ~ jq~ ,W lI YML• G c u lu ~ic~imoP ~ ~ 5 ~r fS3i ~~L r ' V Fy ?yl.. ~j ~ / t ..F A. I ~ ~ - { . E ipYt~~ A ~ i l~ M1 i.'v . tt~ A '^.C7 y1'l~y. j 5j d ~1ISS ~t ~ui~ r ~^li: Q h e: 00 • 1• 1 e e• • 1 1 11 1 1` o. i e e e, . 1 . . . > e :e e 1. ,e. I~ 1 - ~ _ . a ee •e . 1 : e 1 e~ .ee , I' • e ee .1 . •1. n ~ e e e e e. a 1 . - e gee e e e ee • e . 1 e e e ~ - e 'e ~ 1 a e e ..1 .I a .1 a e e :e ee e e . 1 e ~e 1 . ~ 1 • • a ~ i o l i , • l • 1 ' • _ e 6 tin • 4j !fit' .i ~ r i 5.it LJ r r { = a N ~ 4. f as N 47 P f C7 N OBE'' Meg r. y f ~ ad' ~rN„ ~ F f .y. P.. yew\y\vvy\vyy\yy~~ ~ . zoo r bo w a r . ~ tom' , . .l OREGON THETO_P The following is an alphabetical listing of the lawyers who received the highest point totals in the 2006 Oregon Super Lawyers balloting, research 1 and blue ribbon review process. 2006 Amburgey, Larry K., Amburgey & Hamden, Edwin A., Barran Liebman, Sand, Thomas C., Miller Nash, Rubin, Portland Portland Portland Mrb• Barran, Paula A., Barran Liebman, Hart, John E., Hoffman Hart & Shlachter, Robert A., Stoll Stott R. ) on Portland Wagner, Portland Berne Lokting & Shlachter, Barton, William A., Barton & Hewitt, Henry H., Stoel Rives, Portland Strever, Newport Portland Simon, Michael H., Perkins Coie, Barran, Paula A., Barran Batchelor, Jeffrey M., Markowitz Houser, Douglas G., Bullivant Portland Liebman, Portland Herbold Glade & Mehihaf, Houser Bailey, Portland Stahancyk, Jody L., Stahancyk Kent Ellis, Barnes H., Stoel Rives, Portland Janik, Stephen T., Ball Janik, Johnson & Hook, Portland Bocci, Mark R., Attorney at Law, Portland Stephens, Kenneth D., Tonkon Torp, Portland (3rd Top Point Getter! Lake Oswego Kirklin, George L, Kirklin Folawn, Portland English, Stephen F., Bullivant Booth, Brian G., Tonkon Torp, Portland Stoll, N. Robert, Stoll Stoll Berne Portland . Houser Bailey, Portland Busse, Richard C., Busse & Hunt, Kitchel, Chris, Stoel Rives, Portland Lokting & Shlachter, Portland Portland Larson, Eric C., Gevurtz Menashe Sullivan, Edward J., Garvey Schubert Hewitt, Henry H., Stoel Rives, Crow, William B., Schwabe Larson and Howe, Portland Barer, Portland Portland Williamson & Wyatt, Portland Liebman, Richard F., Barran Tongue, Thomas H., Dunn Carney Liebman, Portland Allen Higgins & Tongue, Portland Janik, Stephen T., Ball Janik, Ellis, Barnes H., Stoel Rives, Markowitz, David B., Markowitz Triplett, Thomas M., Schwabe Portland Portland, Herbold Glade & Mehihaf, Williamson & Wyatt, Bend English, Stephen F., Bullivant Markowitz, David B., Markowitz Portland Tucker, Roy W., Perkins Coie, Houser Bailey, Portland Herbold Glade & Mehlhaf, Fortino, Paul T., Perkins Coie, Menasha, Albert A., Gevurtz Portland Menasha Larson and Howe, Vilhauer, Jr„ Jacob E., Chernoff Portland (Top Point Getterl Portland Portland Vilhauer McClung & Stenzel, Gaylord, William A., Gaylord Richter, Peter C., Miller Nash, Eyerman Bradley, Portland Page, Thomas R., Stoel Rives, Portland Portland Gidley, James H., Perkins Coie, Portland Walters, Stephen S., Stoel Rives, Portland Palmer, Thomas P., Tonkon Torp, Portland Stephens, Kenneth D., Tonkon . i Portland Weaver, Jr., Robert C., Garve Glade, Peter H., Markowitz Herbold - y Torp, Portland Glade & Mehihaf, Portland Ramis, Timothy V., Ramis Crew Schubert Barer, Portland Greenman, Ronald L., Tonkon Torp, Corrigan, Portland 1z Williams, Michael L, Williams . Tongue, Thomas H., Dunn Carney Portland Rawlinson-Dennfs P.. Miller Nash, Love O'Leary Craine & Powers, Allen Higgins & Tongue, Guinasso, John D.,' Schwabe Portland Portland Portland 12nd Top Point Getter) Williamson & Wyatt, Portland Richter, Peter C„ Miller Nash, Wobbrock, D. Lawrence, Lawrence Haglund, Michael E., Haglund Portland Wobbrock, Portland Wobbrock, D. Lawrence, Kelley Horngren Jones & Wilder, Rosenthal, Elden M., Rosenthal & Zimmer, Gary J., Zimmer & Bunch, Lawrence Wobbrock, Portland Portland Greene, Portland Portland THE TOP OREGON The following is an alphabetical listing of the women lawyers who received the Q 1 . highest point totals in the 2006 Oregon 25 , Super Lawyers balloting, research 1 and blue ribbon review process. 2006 Barran, Paula A., Barran Liebman, Gordon, Corbett, Fisher & Phillips, Miller, Carolyn W., Carolyn W. Miller, Rosenbaum, Lois 0., Stoel Rives, ,.I Portland Portland Portland Portland Bernick, Carol J., Davis Wright Moriarty, Nancy J., Chernoff Rothauge, Ren6e E., Bullivant Tremaine, Portland Helmer, M. Christie, Miller Nash, Vilhauer McClung & Stenzel, Portland Houser Bailey, Portland Beyer, Ruth A., Stoel Rives, Portland Portland 1 Catzacorta, Carmen M., Schwabe Hindman, Kathryn M., Bullard Smith Muehleck, Donna M., Duffy Keket, Schroer, Janet Hoffman Hart & is Jernstedt Wilson, Portland Portland Wagner, Portland Williamson & Wyatt, Portland Stahancyk, Jody L., Stahancyk Kent Cow ill, Nancy L., Stoel Rives, Hoffmann, Margaret Ann, Schwabe Paulson, Jane, Paulson Law Firm, 9 Johnson & Hook, Portland Williamson & Wyatt, Portland Portland Portland Williams, Karen M., Lane Powell, phil ott, Claire J., FEI Company, .i Frantz, Mary Ann, Miller Nash, P Portland Kitchel, Chris, Stoat Rives, Portland Hillsboro Portland Glazer, Anne W., Lane Powell, Martin, Chrys, Bultivant Houser Radler, Barbara W., Ball Janik, Yelnosky-Smith, Maryann, Bullard Portland Bailey, Portland Portland Smith Jernstedt Wilson, Portland act i d Gre. La ers 26 superlawyers.com Emered into the Recd rd can ! u. I3y .\-enda Item No. Exhihi, Nox x { i d o §e... _ _ # L f. \ f< t g a ' ,s Y 4 y s' TIGARD HIGH SCHOOL LEADERSHIP 9000 SW DURHAM ROAD - TIGARD - OREGON - 97224 (503) 431.5518 - FAx (503) 431.5410 HTTP: HTHS.TTSD.K l2.OR.US/LEADERSHIP/HOME.HTML CITY COUNCIL STUDENT REPORT: DECEMBER 12, 2006 STUDENT ENVOY: JASMINA DIZDAREVIC 2006-2007 "Leaving a Lasting I. ACADEMICS Impression" a.) Progress reports coming up b.) Winter Break less than one week away! Judy Eieies Director: c.) End of semester will be in the middle of January President: II. ATHLETICS Jasmina Dizdarevic a.) Wrestling vs. Westview 7:00pm, December 13th at THS b.) Basketball vs. Jesuit 7:00pm at Jesuit, December 151H. Vice President: Hopefully they win it so they have a good welcome into Winter Lu Yang Break! Activities Officer: i.) Girls vs. McKay at Home, December 15th at 7:30pm. Will McLellarn III. ARTS Secretary: a.) Choir Kaity Haworth i.) Concert December 12th at the Deb Fennel auditorium (7:30pm-9:00pm). Choir member Matt Treasurer: Brown says that if the concert goes as well as the Grotto Mark Schleyer concert, we're in for a treat! Human Relations: b.) Band: Lisa Yanagawa i.) Marching Band: 2006 NWMBC Class A champions! ii.) December 8th: Jazz Band and Guitar Concert at Assemblies: Deb Fennel Auditorium. 7:30pm Kaitlyn Lange iii.) Concert/Symphonic/Wind Ensemble Concert Thursday the 14th. 7:30pm Spirit: c.) Theater Ben Murphy i.) Show: Much Ado About Nothing wrapped up. Publicity: ii.) Winter Formal Dance: December 10t . Raised Ariel Gruver a little more than $3000 iii.) Musical tryouts are under way for Grease Technology Coordinator: IV. ACTIVITIES: Justin Karr a.) Canned Food Drive i.) Exceeded our goal: 16, 600 cans raised! ii.) $1,600 donated (6 pounds of food per dollar) b.) Winter Week this week. c.) Planning for Human Rights Week (Jan. 8-13). Glenn Shooting Response to Petition for 12/12/06 Council Mtg Talking Points for Mayor At the Council meeting of 11 /28/06, there were petitions presented to the Council requesting we hold a public hearing about the events surrounding the Lukus Glenn shooting. According to our practice, items addressed during the "open citizen communication" portion of the meeting is brought back to the next regular Council meeting for a report on the status of the communication. ■ Tragic events of September 19th have touched many people in the community ■ I have reviewed the petitions and met with representatives of the petitioners along with the Chief of Police and our Assistant City Manager ■ This event occurred outside the City limits of Tigard and Tigard Police were called in as backup ■ I have determined it is not appropriate for the City Council to hold a public meeting ■ I want to again extend our sympathy to the family and friends of Lukus Glenn Loreen\H:\DOCS\Claims\Glenn Claim\Talking Points For Mayor 12-12-06 CCMtg.doc o~ur h~ J /em a V.; 2 ee December 12, 2006 Mayor, City Council, and Chief of Police City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor, City Council, Chief of Police and other readers: With the potential for increasing traffic, we continue to have a big concern regarding the safety of our families, neighbors, community, and ourselves. We live on or near the corner of SW 72nd and Spruce Streets in Tigard and Washington County. We have witnessed on many occasions, a blatant disregard of the law. Apparently S-T O-P does not really mean `stop' in Tigard. All four STOP signs do not work at this corner. Dozens of motorists per day do not stop fully on SW Spruce Street, if at all, as they drive out the back of the Fred Meyer parking lot and turn up SW 72nd Avenue without even pausing. Sometimes it's impossible to back out of our driveways. Some motorists slowly roll through the intersection, but many others barely slow down at all. Some drivers accelerate through the intersection and speed up the hill. This creates a potential for accidents, a tragedy waiting to happen. We have children, grandchildren, pets, and perhaps more important, there's heavy pedestrian traffic in the area also, due to both stores and Tri-met bus stops nearby. There are two big historic trees that obstruct part of the view for those who should be stopping at the east side of SW 72nd Avenue at Spruce Street. Monitoring this comer could be a possible source of increased revenue for the city. Again this year, we invite city officials to park in our driveways to observe the blatant disregard for the law. Please feel free to contact us. Yours truly, Noreen M G ons Norma Harris J Lo Nancy Naish 10730 SW 72nd 10700 SW 72nd 1073 72nd 10705 SW 72nd (503) 245-3999 (503) 244-6646 cc: Washington County Board of Commissioners Tigard Times, The Oregonian AGENDA ITEM NO.2 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: December 12, 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 or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: 414 .e~1 ~Gevo~- x fir Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: -rr Address City State (l ZipP7A~ 3 Phone No. 'Al A" -64 4 Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will ~T help the presiding officer pronounce: Address (,J ~~a-~~lC ~O✓lCe,~'6'LS Ciry (0,0- 3 State D Zip 97-22 Phone No. J3 0~• - ~q~ Name: G Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip c) Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION AI~ENbA ITEM NO.2 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: December 12, 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 or participate m City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: ~L.elC /110 5S S ~~aS Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Lv Address *Z-7 City State d Zip Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION CITY MANAGER Citizen Communication Follow Up at the December 12, 2006 Meeting i At the last City Council business meeting held on November 28, the following individuals testified during Citizen Communications to the City Council. • Chamber of Commerce President Ralph Hughes updated the City Council on activities at the chamber: o January membership drive event - it is hoped they can recruit 300 members. A Texas company will be assisting the Chamber in this membership drive. o Tree Lighting Event - December 1, 2006 o Leadership Institute is going well. Assistant City Manager Newton said the leadership group will be meeting at City Hall on December 20, and activities have been planned. • Jim Brickley, 8945 SW Greensward, Tigard, OR submitted a petition containing signatures of concerned citizens from this and other communities regarding the shooting death of Lukus Glenn on September 16, 2006. Mr. Brickley said they are asking that the City Council consider a public inquiry into the shooting and to take into account all of the details that happened. He said he believes there needs to be a public hearing setting so that "we can get all of the details out and restore faith and trust in our law enforcement agencies and our 911 system in this community." He noted behind him there were many supporters for "what needs to happen." He asked the City Council to seriously consider this request because it is of grave concern to many people in this community as well as of those who were here tonight. Mayor Dirksen asked whether that "most of the folks that I see in the audience are here in support of this?" Mr. Brinkley said, "Yes." The Mayor asked those in the audience who were here for this request to raise their hands. Mayor Dirksen said he appreciated Mr. Brickly coming to the City Council and the manner in which the petition and his friends were presenting this to the Council. Mayor Dirksen said the City Council had considered this previously and at the time decided there was no reason for a public inquest because it was not the City of Tigard's place. In light of the presentation from Mr. Brickley, Mayor Dirksen said "we will allot some time for members of Council to consider this request and, if it is brought up before the Council again by a Council member, we will consider it. Mayor Dirksen thanked Mr. Brickley again for coming. • John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, OR, identified to the Council a new citizen group that has formed: Friends of Tigard Bull Mountain Trails. He said they have met four times since late August. They have set bylaws. Mr. Frewing said there have been dozens of projects identified to be done. This group will be meeting November 29, 2006, at the Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Station 51 on Burnham Street. He noted the agenda for this meeting includes items such as asking for input to a Tigard Bull Mountain trails map. He noted City staff has been of assistance to this group. The Friends have submitted comments and support letters for two of the MTIP projects that affect Tigard: Downtown Green Street and Powerline Trail. He said they are organizing a December 9, 2006, litter pick up and exploration walk along the Powerline Trail corridor. He said Citizen Communications - November 28, 2006 Page 1 this group hopes to provide input to the Comprehensive Plan update effort. Mr. Frewing said they hope to complete a sidewalk survey and update the pedestrian and bicycle needs for the City through whatever outreach they could accomplish. Mr. Frewing requested that the City Council review its Street Maintenance Fee that was passed several years ago. The Friends'interests would be served by including some kind of sidewalk and pedestrian improvements within the fee, whether or not the fee is changed when it is reviewed next year. Mr. Frewing said he is letting the City Council know that this group exists, they intend to cooperate with the City where they agree with the City and "we will argue with the City where we don't agree with City." Mayor Dirksen said he has been following the activities of this new group with some interest. He said it is a great idea and that it is terrific when citizens come together with an idea like this and push forward with it. Mr. Frewing advised the Mayor that the Friends meeting will start at 6:30 p.m. on November 29. The Mayor said he was unable to attend the meeting on the 291h, but he would like to come to a future meeting to hear the plans they have. Councilor Wilson said he was interested in the Powerline walk that was scheduled for December 9. Mr. Frewing said he has walked along the line and that there is a significant amount of litter. He said he was hoping the City's Public Works Department would take the bags of litter they collect. Mayor Dirksen said he was sure "we could work something out." • Jeff Kallevig, 11305 SW Bull Mountain Road, Tigard, OR 97224, is Pastor of Christ the King Lutheran Church on the corner of Highway 99 and Bull Mountain Road and invited the Mayor, City Council, and the whole community to Christmas dinner. He said their church has decided that since Christmas Eve falls on a Sunday, oftentimes Sunday is a time when families gather together and they would like to open their congregation's building to host a dinner. He said they were specifically targeting two populations in the community: Those who are homeless or have a food shortage and the Seniors who might be alone during the holiday. He added, though, the dinner is for anyone. He said they are planning to feed 700 people and said he was asking as organizations to help them as well as speaking to get the word out about the dinner. Councilor Sherwood said she has been working with Mr. Kallevig on this, which she thinks is a great idea for the community. If this becomes an annual event, she said this is one way to reach out to those in our community who are alone or have food shortages. She urged for people to get the word out about this dinner. She noted a lot of people, including those who are not members of this church, have come together to help. She thanked Mr. Kallevig for doing this. The dinner will be served on December 24, from Noon - 5 p.m. Mayor Dirksen said this is a terrific idea, a great event, and that he would make every effort to be there. hadm1catftykcanXditen communication follow upt081128.doc Citizen Communications - November 28, 2006 Page 2 Agenda Item # - Meeting Date December 12, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Receive and File: Canvass of Votes for City of Tigard Mayor and Council Candidates - November 7 2006 Election Ir, Prepared By: Cathy Wheatley ept Head Okay City Mgr Okay ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND KEY FACTS Receive and File the official Mayor and City Council election results for the November 7, 2006, election. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A - Informational item only regarding the official results for the November 7, 2006, election. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • When the City Recorder canvasses the votes as required by the Washington County Elections Division, a copy is filed with the City Council at a Council meeting to officially "receive and file" the information. • As detailed in the attached "Official Final" Abstract of Votes the following people were elected to serve four - year terms as Mayor and City Councilors beginning January 1, 2007: Mayor: Craig E. Dirksen City Councilor: Gretchen E. Buehner City Councilor: Sydney L. Sherwood OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Washington County Elections Division Abstract of Votes FISCAL NOTES The City is not charged for expenses associated with a general election (ORS 254.046). Oadmtpacket'06t0812121canvass of votes ais - november 06 election.doc WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON November 27, 2006 City Recorder City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 Enclosed you will find a copy of the Abstract of Votes for City of Tigard relating to the election held on November 7, 2006. In accordance with ORS 255.295, please canvass the votes and notify the Washington County Elections Division within thirty (30) days of receipt by signing and returning the bottom portion of this letter to: Washington County Elections Division 3700 SW Murray Blvd. Suite 101 Beaverton OR 97005 Thank you very much. Sincerely, Mickie Kawai Elections Manager MK/jd o I have canvassed the votes for City of Tigard, relating to the election on November 7, 2006. By signing this canvass letter, I concur with the final results. AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE DATE Department of Assessment & Taxation, Elections Division 3700 SW Murrray Blvd. Suite 101 Beaverton OR 97005 Phone: 503/846-5800 Fax: 503/846-5810 SUMMARY REPORT Washington County Official Final General Election November 7, 2006 Run Date:11/27/06 03:49 PM VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT Mayor City Of Tigard Council City Of Wilsonville vote for 1 vote for 2 Craig E. Dirksen . . . . . . . . 10,588 97.40 Alan J. Kirk . . . . . . . . . 51 47.66 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . 283 2.60 Michelle Ripple . . . . . . . . 56 52.34 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 1 WRITE-IN. 0 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 6,294 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 0 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 103 Council City Of Tigard vote for 2 Director Zone 1 Soil And Water District Joshua Chaney . . . . . . . . . 3,991 19.73 vote for 1 Gretchen E. Buehner . . . . . . . 7,738 38.24 Gerald Ward. . . . . . . . . . 84,563 98.92 Sydney L. Sherwood . . . . . . . 8,308 41.06 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 924 1.08 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 196 .97 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 2 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 14 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 89,634 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 14,085 Director Zone 3 Soil And Water District Mayor City Of Tualatin vote for 1 vote for 1 NO CANDIDATE FILED . . . . . . . 0 Lou Ogden . . . . . . . . . . 4,697 96.51 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 8,539 100.00 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 170 3.49 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 0 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 0 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 166,585 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 2,417 Director Zone 4 Soil And Water District Council Pos 1 City Of Tualatin vote for 1 vote for 1 John A. McDonald . . . . . . . . 83,313 98.97 Don Funk. . . . . . . . . . . 952 19.48 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . 864 1.03 Jay Harris . . . . . . . . . . 3,909 79.97 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 3 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 27 .55 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 90,943 Over Votes . . . . . . . . 2 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 2,394 Director Zone 5 Soil And Water District vote for 1 Council Pos 3 City Of Tualatin Dan Logan . . . . . . . . . . 83,179 99.03 vote for 1 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 815 .97 Frank Bubenik . . . . . . . . . 2.582 48.29 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 5 Donna Maddux . . . . . . . . . 2,742 51.28 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 91,124 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 23 .43 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 1 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 1,936 Director At Large 2 Soil And Water District vote for 1 Craig Burnham . . . . . . . . . 82,075 98.98 Council Pos 5 City Of Tualatin WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 849 1.02 vote for 1 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 4 Chris Barhyte . . . . . . . . . 4,020 98.48 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 92,195 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 62 1.52 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 0 Under Votes . . . . . 3,202 Metro Councilor District 4 vote for 1 of CO MM/s~ Tom Cox . . . . . . . . . . . 24,756 43.98 ~a Kathryn Harrington . . . . . . . 31,328 55.65 ~pQ WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 210 .37 Over Votes 15 Under Votes 24,506 ~'y COU10 t NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Washington County Official Final General Election RUN DATE:11/27/06 03:47 PM November 7, 2006 REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0072 VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT Mayor City Of Tigard vote for 1 01 = Craig E. Dirksen 10,588 97.40 03 = OVER VOTES 1 02 = WRITE-IN 283 2.60 04 = UNDER VOTES 6,294 01 02 03 04 0400 400 WASHINGTON SQUARE 901 27 0 662 0402 402 TIGARD/WALNUT ST 407 18 0 261 0403 403 TIGARD/GAARDE ST 1607 42 0 960 0404 404 FOWLER SCHOOL 1011 47 1 632 0405 405 TWALITY SCHOOL 1601 43 0 894 0406 406 TIGARD CITY HALL 1214 37 0 663 0408 408 SUMMERFIELD 2176 30 0 1112 0409 409 SUMMERLAKE-WEST. 922 18 0 594 0416 416 SUMMERLAKE-EAST 637 14 0 422 0454 454 BULL MT SPLIT 106 7 0 93 0455 455 S TIGARD/PACIFIC HWY 6 0 0 1 NUMBERED KEY CANVASS Washington County Official Final General Election RUN DATE:11/27/06 03:47 PM November 7, 2006 REPORT-EL52 PAGE 0073 VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT Council City Of Tigard vote for 2 01 = Joshua Chaney 3,991 19.73 04 = WRITE-IN 196 .97 02 = Gretchen E. Buehner 7,738 38.24 05 = OVER VOTES 14 03 = Sydney L. Sherwood 8.308 41.06 06 = UNDER VOTES 14,085 01 02 03 04 05 06 0400 400 WASHINGTON SQUARE 382 682 716 14 0 1386 0402 402 TIGARD/WALNUT ST 179 288 337 14 0 554 0403 403 TIGARD/GAARDE ST 591 1235 1275 28 0 2089 0404 404 FOWLER SCHOOL 421 752 828 25 4 1352 0405 405 TWALITY SCHOOL 579 1141 1353 23 0 1980 0406 406 TIGARD CITY HALL 491 832 918 33 0 1554 0408 408 SUMMERFIELD 735 1619 1621 35 6 2620 0409 409 SUMMERLAKE-WEST 321 645 673 16 2 1411 0416 416 SUMMERLAKE-EAST 234 448 483 5 2 974 0454 454 BULL MT SPLIT 58 94 98 3 0. 159 0455 455 S TIGARD/PACIFIC HWY 0 2 6 0 0 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council Agenda Item No. For Agenda Of December 12, 2006 FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder 0 RE: Three-Month Council Meeting Calendar DATE: December 4, 2006 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk December 11 Monday Goal Setting Meeting -1-5 p.m., 14565 SW Klipsan Lane 12* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 19* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 25 Monday Christmas Holiday - City Hall Closed 26* Tuesday Council Business Meeting Cancelled January 1 Monday New Year's Day Holiday - City Hall Closed 9* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 15 Monday Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday - City Hall Closed 16* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 23* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 30 Tuesday Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting - Cancelled. February 13* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 19 Monday President's Day Holiday - City Hall Closed 20* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 27* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall OadmWty councIM-month calendar for 12-12-06 cc mtg.doc Agenda Item No. 3- ~o C Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2006 Meeting of ,Oe c - /.2, ~200o Meeting Date: December 12, 2006 Meeting Date: December 19, 2006 Meeting Date: December 26, 2006 Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Greeter: Greeter: Greeter: Materials Due @ 5: November 28, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: December 5, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: Study Session Study Session Study Session City Attorney Review - Craig P. - SI 6-7 p.m. Reception for Councilor Wilson Report on Gas Tax Town Halls -Gus D. - 15 min. Reallocate 72nd Ave. Culvert Project Funds to MEETING CANCELLED, 12/19 IS NOW A Stormwater Trmt. Facility - Gus. D. - 10 min. BUSINESS MEETING Consent Agenda Reallocate 72nd Ave. Culvert Project Funds Consent Agenda Consent Agenda to design of Commercial St. Stormwater Facility- MOU w/TVFR - Proposed Walnut St. Fire Healthy Streams Outfall Retrofit - Gus D. Station - Dennis K. LCRB- Award Environmental Assessment/Re- Budget Amend. #10 -Homeland Security Grant mediation Svcs. Contract - Tom C. Bob S. - RES LCRB-Amend Commercial St. Design Contract Business Meeting Business Meeting to Create a Reg. Stormwater Treatment Facility Chamber President Ralph Hughes - 10 min. - Gus D. Tigard-TriMet Focus Area Partnership - Exec. Business Meeting Dir. Fred Hansen to attend - Duane - 20 min. THS Student Envoy Jasmina Dizdarevik -10 min. ODOT Region 1 Manager Jason Tell - Gus Webelo Boy Scouts - 5 min. 15 min. Topping Kemp Annexation - ORD- PHQJ - Amend TMC to Bring Cross-Connection Tom C. - 30 min. Control Program in Compliance with New Code Amendment to Allow Meetings & Events State Regulations - ORD - Dennis K. - 10 min. as Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Gas Tax for Greenburg/99W/Main St. Imp. Residential Zones - Legis. Public Hearing - Public Hearing - ORD - Gus D. - 60 min. Tom C. - 60 minutes Council Goal 4rth Quarter Update - Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions - Com- Craig P./Joanne - 5 min. prehensive Plan Amend./Development Code Amend. - PP - ORD - Legis. Public Hearing - Tom C. - 30 minutes Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 135 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 120 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 0 min. Time Left: 0 min. Time Left: 15 min. Time Left: 135 min. 12/5/2006 1 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2007 Meeting Date: January 9, 2007 Meeting Date: January 16, 2007 Meeting Date: January 23, 2007 Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Workshop/6:30 Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Location: City Hall Greeter: Greeter: Greeter: Materials Due @ 5: December 26, 2006 Materials Due @ 5: January 2, 2007 Materials Due @ 5: January 9, 2007 Study Session Workshop Agenda Study Session 5:30 - Exec Staff and Council Photos Consent Agenda Appoint Planning Comm. Members - Dick B.RES Consent Agenda Business Meeting Business Meeting Oaths of Office - Judge O'Brien Chamber of Commerce Rep. - 10 min. Select Council President Tigard Vision - 2006 Accomplishments Update - Council Reception Liz and Loreen - 20 min. Council Photos Council Goal Adoption - 15 min. THS Student Envoy - SI - 10 min. Sunrise Lane LUBA Remand to revise ordinance re continued application of Goal 5 in Bull Mt. Community Plan - PHQJ -ORD -Tom C. 30 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 10 min. Time Avail: 200 min. - Time Scheduled: 0 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 75 min. Time Left: 125 min. Time Left: 200 min. Time Left: 60 min. 12/5/2006 1 Tigard City Council Tentative Agenda 2007 Meeting Date: January 29, 2007 Meeting Date: January 30, 2007 Meeting Date: February 13, 2007 Meeting Type/Time: Special Mtng./6:30 p.m. Meeting Type/Time: 5th Tues/7p.m. Meeting Type/Time: Business/6:30 p.m. Location: Tigard-Tualatin School Location: Community Room Location: City Hall Greeter: District Office Greeter: at the Library Greeter: Gus Materials Due @ 5: Materials Due @ 5: Materials Due @ 5: January 30, 2007 Joint Meeting with TTSD Fifth Tuesday Meeting Study Session The Tigard-Tualatin School District Office is located at 6960 SW Sandburg Street in Tigard Consent Agenda Business Meeting THS Student Envoy - 10 min. Time Avail: 135 min. - Time Scheduled: 10 min. Time Left: 125 min. 12/5/2006 1 Agenda Item # -3-2- Meeting Date December 12, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Reallocation of Healthy Streams Project Funding from a 72°`' Avenue Culvert Project for Design, of the Proposed Commercial Street Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility Prepared By: A.P. Duenas Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay FqM kr ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Council will consider reallocation of $35,000 in FY 2006-07 Water Quality/Quantity funds from a culvert project on 72°d Avenue to fund the design of a regional stormwater treatment facility along Commercial Street in the Tigard downtown area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the reallocation of $35,000 in Water Quality/Quantity funding from the culvert project to fund the design of the regional stormwater treatment facility. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY As part of the Healthy Streams Plan published in June 2005, each city in the Tualatin River Watershed seeks to develop projects that improve water quality. One of the high-priority goals for Tigard is the retrofitting of stormwater outfalls that were constructed prior to water quality treatment requirements. The design and construction of a regional stormwater detention facility (Outfall Retrofit) that would treat a significant portion of the existing downtown Tigard area (approximately 20 acres) and another 20 acres of an older developed area just north of Highway 99W has been identified as a potential project that can best be accomplished as part of the existing Commercial Street Improvement project. The existing project requires the design and construction of a stormwater treatment facility for the roadway and surrounding drainage area. Expansion of the treatment facility to accommodate a much larger area can be performed at much less cost than creating a standalone project to treat the additional area. Sufficient funds can be made available and transferred from a culvert improvement project on 72„ d Avenue that most likely will not be constructed until summer of 2007 or later. This agenda item requests the reallocation of $35,000 from that project to fund the design of the regional stormwater treatment facility. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Design and construct the project as a standalone project. This would increase costs significantly because the Commercial Street project will also be required to install a treatment facility to accommodate stormwater runoff from Commercial Street and vicinity. Enlarging that facility to accommodate additional acreage only makes sense if it is incorporated into the Commercial Street project. 2. Do not establish the regional facility. This will allow approximately 40 acres of stormwater runoff to continue to discharge directly into Fanno Creek without treatment. It does not support the Healthy Streams goal of the City to improve water quality. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The project supports the concept of the "Green Heart of Tigard" by capturing and treating a significant area of our downtown stormwater that is currently untreated and not so green. Urban and Public Services - Parks and Greenways Goal 2: "Openspace and greenway areas shall be preserved and protected" The project helps to improve the water quality of Fanno Creek, a greenway in the. heart of downtown. Urban and Public Services - Water and Stormwater Goal 3: "Stormwater runoff is effectively managed." The project would manage stormwater runoff from 40 acres of land in a much more effective manner by treating it before discharging it into Fanno Creek. ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES The costs to design the project if added to an existing contract would be $30,000.00. The construction costs for the project, which would be completed in 2007/2008, are estimated to be $180,000.00 or less depending on the final design chosen. Construction costs would be funded by the Water Quality/ Quantity Fund. Should the project be designed and constructed as a standalone project the design costs are anticipated to be $60,000 and the construction costs approximately $225,000. The expected increase in overall cost will be at least $75,000. i:lengVuslcouncil agenda summaries\12-12-06 reallocation of stom ualer funds for commercial street regional stormwater facility design.doc Agenda Item # 3. ~Meeting Date December 12, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Award of Contracts for Environmental Assessment and Remediation Services on an As-Required Basis / Prepared By: G. Berry Dept Head Approval: / City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve two contract awards for environmental assessment and remediation services on an as-required basis? STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Local Contract Review Board approve, by motion, the contract awards to the following environmental firms: - AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc., Tigard, OR - GeoEngineers, Portland, OR Staff also requests that the City Manager be authorized to execute contracts with the firms for projects up to and including $50,000. Projects exceeding $50,000 will be submitted for contract award by the Local Contract Review Board prior to commencement of work. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • To protect the City under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) innocent landowner defense, land acquisitions generally require an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to identify the actual and potential environmental issues that may be present at the property. An environmental services firm is typically contracted to provide the ESA and, depending upon the results of the assessment, may recommend further actions. • In the past, these environmental services firms have been hired for individual projects through a competitive proposal process. This has proven to be cumbersome, time consuming and expensive. The proposed as-required contracts will enable the selected firms to begin work on proposed acquisitions without the delay and expense of a separate competition for each project. On November 9, 2006, 12 firms submitted their proposals in response to a October 25, 2006 Request for Proposals to provide environmental services. Each proposal was separately evaluated by four staff members. The four highest-rated firms were invited to meet with the selection committee and further elaborate on their proposals. • After completion of the interviews, two firms were selected for contract award. The two firms were selected based on an evaluation of the firms' proposals, presentations, and the amount of work expected to be assigned to the firms. The selected firms were deterrnuled to have the capabilities, staffing, experience and compensation requirements best suited to perform the required services. • The contracts will be for an initial term of two years after Local Contract Review Board approval and may be renewed for two additional one-year terms. Projects assigned to the firms will be on an as-needed basis. Once a project is assigned to a firm, the firm will prepare and submit a cost proposal to the City for review and approval. To further streamline the process and expedite acquisitions, staff recommends that the City Manager be authorized to execute contracts with the firms for projects up to and including $50,000. Projects exceeding $50,000 will be submitted for contract award by the Local Contract Review Board prior to commencement of work. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Reject all proposals and prepare a Request for Proposal for each project. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The proposed contracts will facilitate the completion of street projects meeting the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic Goals of "Improve Traffic Safety" and "Improve Traffic Flow" and park projects meeting the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Growth and Growth Management goal of "Growth will be managed to protect the character and livability of established areas, protect the natural environment and provide open space throughout the community." ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES Award of the contracts will not require funding until projects are assigned to the selected firms. Funding for assigned projects will be through the respective project budgets. c:\docume-1Vnarco\locals^1\tempX12-12-06 environmental services award ais.doc Agenda Item # ' 3 • 4 Meeting Date December 12, 2006 LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Proposed Contract Amendment to the Commercial Street Design Contract to Create a Regional Stormwater Treatment Facility Prepared By: A.P. Duenas Dept Head Okay'C City Mgr Okay , ISSUE BEFORE THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Should the Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) approve a contract amendment to the design contract with OTAK, Inc. to provide design services for establishment of a regional stormwater treatment facility to be designed and constructed as part of the Commercial Street Streetscape Project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the LCRB approve an amendment to the existing contract with OTAK, Inc. for design of a regional stormwater treatment facility that would be constructed as part of that project. The proposed amendment in the amount of $30,000.00 increases the contract from $89,919.00 to $119,919.00. Staff further requests that the contingency amount of $8,992.00 allocated to the existing contract be increased by $5,000.00 to provide a new project contingency of $14,992.00 and a total project commitment of $133,911.00. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard seeks to support the Healthy Streams Plan published in June 2005 by developing projects to improve water quality before discharge to streams. One of the high-priority goals for Tigard is the retrofitting of stormwater outfalls that were constructed prior to water quality treatment requirements. The Commercial Street Streetscape Design Project, under design by OTAK, Inc., will include a stormwater treatment facility to address the stormwater runoff from the street and surrounding drainage area. An opportunity exists to size that stormwater treatment facility to treat an additional 40 acres, 20 of which is in the Tigard downtown area and another 20 acres just north of Commercial Street in an older, developed area. The design and construction of a regional stormwater treatment facility (Outfall Retrofit) to treat that additional 40 acres can best be accomplished as part of the existing design contract for the Commercial Street Improvement project. The existing project can efficiently expand the treatment facility required for the street project to accommodate a much larger area and can do so at much less cost than creating a standalone project to treat the additional area. This agenda item requests LCRB approval to amend the existing contract with OTAK, Inc. to include design of a regional stormwater treatment facility that would be constructed as part of that project. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Design and construct the project as a standalone project. This would increase costs significantly because the Commercial Street project will also be required to install a treatment facility to accommodate stormwater runoff from Commercial Street and vicinity. Enlarging that facility to accommodate additional acreage only makes sense if it is incorporated into the Commercial Street project. 2. Use an on-call consultant to design the Outfall Retrofit Project and coordinate with the design consultant on Commercial Street for connections to the facility. This not only would be more expensive overall, but would create the need for extremely close coordination and introduces issues of responsibility for completion of both projects. 3. Do not establish the regional facility. This will allow approximately 40 acres of stormwater runoff to continue to discharge directly into Fanno Creek without treatment. It does not support the Healthy Streams goal of the City to improve water quality. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT The project supports the concept of the "Green Heart of Tigard" by capturing and treating a significant area of our downtown stormwater that is currently untreated and not so green. Urban and Public Services - Parks and Greenways Goal 2: "Openspace and greenway areas shall be preserved and protected" The project helps to improve the water quality of Fanno Creek in the heart of downtown. Urban and Public Services - Water and Stormwater Goal 3: "Stormwater runoff is effectively managed." The project would manage stormwater runoff from 40 acres of land in a much more effective manner by treating it before discharging it into Fanno Creek. ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES The design of this regional facility would be funded through Water Quality/Quantity funds. The costs to design the project, if added to the existing design contract, would be $30,000 plus an additional amount of $5,000 reserved as a contingency amount for the design work. The availability of $35,000 to allow for this amendment is contingent upon reallocation of the funds from a culvert project on 72°`' Avenue. i:\engtgus\council agenda summades\12.12-00 contract amendment to the commercial street design contract to create a regional stomnvater treatment lacility.doc Agenda Item # y Meeting Date 12/12/2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Topping-Kemp Annexation (ZCA2006-00003) Ww Prepared By: Em4 Eng Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: t ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve annexation of 1.81 acres of land (Zone Change Annexation - ZCA2006-00003) adjacent to SW Spruce Street between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 75`h Avenue? Staff requests an emergency clause be adopted to allow the annexation to be effective immediately upon passage of the ordinance. The proposed territory is contiguous to 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 222.120(4)(b), ORS 222.125, and ORS 222.170(1) and (2)) authorizes a city to annex contiguous territory when owners of land and registered voters in the proposed territory submit a petition to the legislative body of the city. The owners of land and registered voters in the proposed territory have submitted petitions for annexation to the City of Tigard. The City also invited adjacent owners to join the annexation; two have accepted the invitation and joined this annexation. The proposed annexation territory (Topping-Kemp Annexation) includes four parcels of unincorporated territory in Metzger, totaling 1.81 acres. The proposed territory is contiguous to the City of Tigard along the City's north boundary. The existing single family homes will remain on three parcels. A pre-school is proposed for one parcel, Tax Lot 2200. If approved, Tax Lot 2200 will undergo a Site Development Review by the City. Because of time constraints, the applicant Westlake Consultants requests that an emergency clause be adopted to allow the annexation to be effective immediately upon passage of the ordinance, rather than 30 days after. 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 (ZCA2006-00003) meets all the approval criteria and recommends that the Council approve ZCA2006-00003 by adoption of the attached ordinance. Key Facts: 1. The proposed territory is contiguous to City limits; 2. Urban services are available to serve the proposed territory; 3. All owners of land and registered voters in the proposed territory have consented to the annexation; 4. The proposed territory is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary and Metro's Urban Growth Boundary; and 5. The proposed territory is within the City's Urban Service Area and Area of Interest. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not approving ZCA2006-00003 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 1.81 acres, approving Topping-Kemp Annexation (ZCA2006-00003) and withdrawing property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District. Exhibit A: Legal Description of Proposed Annexation Territory Exhibit B: Washington County Assessment & Taxation Map for Proposed Annexation Territory Exhibit C: Petitions for, and Consent to, Annexation to the City of Tigard Exhibit D: Vicinity Map Exhibit E: Staff Report to the City Council 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. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 06--/ AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING 1.81 ACRES, APPROVING TOPPING-1,EMP ANNEXATION (ZCA2006-00003), AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTY FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROADS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT AND THE WASHINGTON COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(b), ORS 222.125, and ORS 222.170(1) and (2) to annex contiguous territory upon receiving written consent from owners of land, residents and registered voters 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 lie within the boundary of the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on December 12, 2006, to consider the annexation of four (4) parcels (WCTM 1S136AC, Tax Lots 2200, 2400, 2500 and 4700) of land located between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 751h Avenue along the north side of SW Spruce Street and withdrawal of said property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Tigard Urban Services Agreement, the annexed properties would remain within the Tualatin Valley Water District, 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 Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District on December 12, 2006; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of annexed properties from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District, 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- ZCA2006-00003 Topping-Kemp Annexation Page 1 of 3 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 parcels described in the attached Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" and withdraws said parcels from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District 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 "E" and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3: 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 4: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property from the Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, Washington County Urban Roads Maintenance District and the Washington County Vector Control District shall be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 5: In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation shall be effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. or the e .et-y-vftlre-C~y; -therPf~nrP`~ an PmP~Pn~c } inanrP shall-take =effect eC~rti 9 1 ltc jv }.ctin (~nicni i~~cib .t . ~y ~L,o Tocnr Ana posting-by-thr-, ORDINANCE NO. 2006- ZCA2006-00003 Topping-Kemp Annexation Page 2 of 3 Agenda Item No. 4 Dec. 12, 2006 Quasi-judicial Public Hearing Attorney Statement Statement by City Attorney - 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 has two roles in this hearing. One is to make a land use decision under existing laws. The Council cannot change the law for the land use application now under consideration. The other role is to decide whether it is in the best interest of the City to annex the area in question. 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. G:\muni\tigard\attystatementannex.doc AGENDA ITEM No. 4 Date: December 12, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TOPPING KEMP ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2006-00003 REQUEST: Annexation of four parcels total containing 1.81 acres to the City of Tigard. Property owners Richard Topping and Katie Kemp request annexation of three parcels, with plans to build a pre-school on one parcel. The City invited owners of six adjacent properties to join the annexation. Property owners Charles and Christina Hanson accepted the invitation and request annexation of one parcel. All property owners and living residents have consented to the annexation. LOCATION: SW Spruce Street between SW 72"d Avenue and SW 75d' Avenue; 7303 SW Spruce Street, 10735 SW 72"d Avenue, 10705 SW 72"d Avenue, 10670 SW 75d' Avenue; WCTM 1S136AC, Tax Lots 2200, 2400, 2500 and 4700. COUNTY ZONES: Office Commercial District (OC. The intent of this District is to encourage office complex development of institutional, professional, medical/dental, governmental and other office business uses. The purpose is to accommodate the increasing office needs in complexes ranging in size from small to large-scale development. Office uses are the primary use of this District. To serve the employees of the office complex, some accessory commercial and high density residential uses may be permitted through the Planned Development process; AND R-5 District (Residential 5 units per acre The R-5 District is intended to implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan for areas designated for residential development at no more than five (5) units per acre and no less than four (4) units per acre, except as specified otherwise by Section 300-2 or Section 302-6. The primary purpose is to protect existing neighborhoods developed at five (5) units per acre or less. Infill development on all parcels two (2) acres or less may occur only through application of the infill policy (Section 430-72). EQUIVALENT CITY ZONES: C-P: Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas; AND R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are described 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. TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on this item. This is a City of Tigatd 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 ofpetsons 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.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 (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Name:- 4417-4 Name: Name: IM 444(- Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it O~jdD~ EIU l Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding" officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address. 10/D Address City S// Y SG~1 Se !!pI w y~ l / t o State / A7 Zip city ZZj State Zip Phone No. 71 D/Z- Phone No. Name: Name: 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: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address h I 04A-) r-Cv Address Address 1 Q-730 '7o2 City City City l State Zip State Zip State Zip o~3 Phone No. Phone No. Phone No. J~ ' AGENDA ITEM NO.4 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. AB written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend orpatticipate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, 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 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. Agenda Item # ' Meeting Date December 12, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Legislative Public Hearing- Code Amendment to Allow Meetings and Events as a Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Residential Zones (DCA2006-00005). Prepared By: Sean Farrelly Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: idn~ C f ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council approve the Development Code Amendment to add a definition of Meeting and Event Use to the Code and allow Meetings and Events as a Conditional Use in properties with a Historic Overlay and/or on the National Register of Historic Places, in Residential Zones? STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the proposed code amendment. At the hearing it was discussed that it was unlikely any additional revisions to the proposed amendment would result in language providing a better balance of the interests of owners of historic properties and their residential neighbors. If the City Council can find that the legislative amendment will ensure compatibility with the surrounding residential uses, and provides adequate guidelines for approval, the Council should direct staff to prepare an ordinance adopting the attached text amendments (Attachment 1). KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY To encourage the protection of Tigard's historic resources, the City Council directed staff to investigate ways in which owners of historic properties could generate income to assist in funding preservation and restoration, while balancing the interests of neighboring properties in Residential Zones. The proposed code amendment would amend the Use Classifications Chapter (18.130), Conditional Use Chapter (18.330), Residential Zoning Districts Chapter (18.510), and Historic Overlay Chapter (18.740) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The conditions to allow this use in Residential Zones would include limits on the number of events and attendees, noise, and parking. The proposed amendment would allow a total of 18 events could be held annually: 12 events with up to 40 attendees and 6 events with up to 200 attendees. All required notices, including newspaper publication and notices to properties within 500 feet of a historic resource, are complete. On November 20, 2006, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing to discuss the proposed changes. Public testimony is outlined in the Planning Commission minutes (Attachment 2). Written correspondence is found in Attachment 4. Based on the staff report and the testimony given before and during the public hearing, the Commission recommended denial of the amendment by a unanimous vote. Individual Commissioners gave different reasons for their recommendation, including the impact of the proposed use on noise level and parking in the surrounding residential neighborhoods; and the perception that this code amendment will benefit only one person. /A OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT Not Applicable. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Code Text Changes Attachment 2: Draft November 20, 2006 Planning Commission Minutes Attachment 3: Staff Report to the Planning Commission Attachment 4: Public Comment Correspondence FISCAL NOTES Not Applicable. Attachment 1 City of Tigard DCA 2006-00005 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Proposed Code Amendment to Allow Meeting and Event Uses as a Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Residential Zones ADDITIONS indicated by Italics and Bold PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT CHANGES: Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS Section 18.130.020 Listing of Use Categories C. Commercial Use types 9. Meeting and Event Use: Activities including parties, weddings, luncheons, meetings, charitable fund raising, or other gatherings for direct or indirect compensation. 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE Section 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types 21. Meeting and Event Uses in Residential Zones a. The property where the use will occur must be in a Historic Overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places. b. Yearly maximum number of events: A maximum of 18 meetings or events may be held per year. i c. Maximum number of persons attending a meeting or event: The maximum number of persons attending an event shall be 40, provided however, that up to 200 persons may attend up to 6 meetings or events per year. The number of persons attending an event shall include all persons present on the property and participating in any way in the meeting or event, including hosts, workers, volunteers, as well as the guests and invitees. d. Hours of operation: The meetings or events may be held between 7 AM and 9 PM. All activities related to the meetings or events, including clean-up must cease by 9 PM. e. Lighting: No light source used for the meetings or events shall be directed at another property. All light sources shall be screened, hooded, or covered. f. Sound systems: Outdoor amplified sound systems for the meetings or events shall not be permitted. shall not be permitted. g. Noise: For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Section 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. h. Parking: A parking plan for each meeting or event shall be submitted to the Community Development Department one week prior to the event. This plan shall include a description of the event, the number of expected guests, evidence of the availability of on- street and off-street parking, and signed agreements with any providers of off-street parking for guests. i. No signs related to the conditional use are permitted. j. The Hearings Officer may impose additional site specific conditions on the approval of the conditional use, as referenced in Section 18.330.30.B. k. Violations of the conditions of approval or code provisions could result in the revocation of the conditional use permit by the Director. 1. The conditional use is allowed to continue so long as the property retains its Historic Overlay and/or National Register of Historic Places designation. hapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY Section 18.740.030 General Provisions E. Incentives for maintenance. In an effort to assist in the upkeep and restoration of properties with a Historic Overlay designation and/or listing on the National Register of Historic Places, Meeting and Event Uses may be permitted, subject to Conditional Use approval, in all residential zones. Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (Add Historic Place Meeting and Event Use as a Conditional Use in all Residential Districts. Footnote to indicate applicable to Historic Overlay/National Register of Historic Places only.) TABLE 18.510.1 USE TABLE USE CATEGORY R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 RESIDENTIAL Household Living P P P P P P P P Group Living R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C Transitional Housing N N N N N C C C Home Occupation RZ RZ Rz Rz RZ Rz Rz RZ HOUSING TYPES Single Units, Attached N N N R8 R9/C P P P Single Units, Detached P P P P P P P P Accessory Units R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 Duplexes N N C C P P P P Multi-Family Units N N N N N P P P Manufactured Units P P P P P P P P Mobile Home Parks/Subdivisions N N C C P P P P CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 Colleges C C C C C C C C Community Recreation C C C C C C C C Cultural Institutions N N C C C C N N Day Care P/CS P/CS P/CS P/CS P/CS P/CS P/CS P/CS Emergency Services C C C C C N N N Medical Centers N N C C C C C C Postal Service N N N N N N N N Public Support Facilities P P P P P P P P Religious Institutions C C C C C C C C Schools C C C C C C C C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges N N N N N C C C COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging N N N N N N N N Eating and Drinking Establishments N N N N N N N N Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Outdoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Indoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Adult Entertainment N N N N N N N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented N N N N N N R" R" - Personal Services N N N N N N R" R" - Repair-Oriented N N N N N N R" R" - Bulk Sales N N N N N N N N - Outdoor Sales N N N N N N N N - Animal-Related N N N N N N N N TABLE 18.510.1 (CON'T) USE CATEGORY R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 Historic Place Meetings and Events C12 C12 C12 CJ2 C12 C12 Cr2 C12 Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N N N N N N N - Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair N N N N N N N N - Vehicle Fuel Sales N N N N N N N N Office N N N N N N N N Self-Service Storage N N N N N N N N Non-Accessory Parking N N N N N CIO CIO CIO INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N N N N N N N N Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial N N N N N N N N - General Industrial N N N N N N N N - Heavy Industrial N N N N N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N N N N N Research and Development N N N N N N N N Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N N N N N Waste-Related N N N N N N N N Wholesale Sales N N N N N N N N OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture P6 P6 P6 P6 P6 N N N Cemeteries N N C C C N N N Detention Facilities N N N N N N N N Heliports N N N N N N N N Mining N N N N N N N N Wireless Communication Facilities P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' Rail Lines/Utility Corridors C C C C C C C C P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'Group living with five or fewer residents permitted by right; group living with six or more residents permitted as conditional use. 2Permitted subject to requirements Chapter 18.742. 3Permitted subject to compliance with requirements in 18.710. 4Except water and storm and sanitary sewers, which are allowed by right. 5In-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right; freestanding day care centers which meet all state requirements permitted conditionally. 6When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. 'See Chapter 18.798, Wireless Communication Facilities, for requirements for permitted and restricted facilities. 8Attached single-family units permitted only as part of an approved planned development. 9Permitted by right if no more than five units in a grouping; permitted conditionally if six or more units per grouping. 10Only park-and-ride and other transit-related facilities permitted conditionally. "Limited to ground-floor level of multi-family projects, not to exceed 10% of total gross square feet of the building. 12 Limited to properties that have a Historic Overlay andlor are on the National Register of Historic Places. DRAFT DCA2006-00005 Proposed ADDITIONS indicated by Italics and Bold CHAPTER 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS Sections: 18.130.010 Purpose 18.130.020 Listing of Use Classifications 18.130.030 Unlisted Use: Authorization of Similar Use 18.130.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to classify uses into a limited number of use types on the basis of common functional, product or compatibility characteristics, thereby providing a basis for the regulation of uses in accordance with criteria which are directly relevant to the public interest. 18.130.020 Listing of Use Categories A. Residential use types. 1. Household Living: Living facilities for small groups (households) of people who are related or unrelated, featuring self-contained units including facilities for cooking, eating, sleeping and hygiene. Tenancy is longer than one month. Includes most types of senior housing, e.g., congregate care, assisted living, if residents live in self-contained units. The maximum number of people who may reside in any given dwelling unit shall be determined by the Uniform Building Code. 2. Group Living: Living facilities for groups of unrelated individuals which includes at least one person residing on the site who is responsible for supervising, managing, monitoring and/or providing care, training or treatment of residents. Larger group living facilities may also be characterized by shared facilities for eating, hygiene and/or recreation. Examples include nursing/ convalescent homes, residential care/treatment facilities; sororities/fraternities and convents/monasteries. Tenancy is longer than one month. Does not include detention and post- detention facilities (see 18.130.020 E.3., Detention Facilities). 3. Transitional Housing: Public or non-profit living facilities with same characteristics as Group Living but with tenancy less than one month. Examples include homeless shelters, women's/children's shelters, drug/alcohol treatment facilities. Excludes private, profit-making short-term housing (see 18.130.020 C.1., Commercial Lodging); and detention and post-detention facilities (see 18.130.020 E.3., Detention Facilities). B. Civic use types. 1. Basic Utilities: Community infrastructure, including water and sewer systems, telephone exchanges, power substations and transit stations. Use Classifications 18.130-1 Code Update: 09106 2. Colleges: Institutions of higher education with/without dormitories. Excludes private, profit- making trade and vocational schools (see 18.130.020 C.1., Personal Services). 3. Community Recreation: Public or non-profit recreational, social and multi-purpose facilities. Examples include: community centers, senior centers, indoor and outdoor tennis/racquetball and soccer clubs, indoor/outdoor swimming pools, parks, playgrounds, picnic areas and golf courses. Excludes commercial recreational facilities (see 18.130.020 3.C.3.c, Indoor Entertainment). 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. 5. Day Care: As defined by Oregon State Statute: a. Family Day Care: Provision of day care services for children, with or without compensation, in the home of the caregiver. May provide care for six or fewer children full-time, with an additional four or fewer full-time or part-time children. During the school year, a family day care provider may care for four additional children on days and during the hours that school is not in session. Such children must be as least an age eligible for first grade. During summer vacation, a provider may care for four additional day care children of any age up to a maximum of four hours per day. No more than a total of 10 children including the provider's own children may be present at any one time. b. Day Care Group Home: Day care facility in which care is provided in the home of the caregiver, with or without compensation, for 7-12 children. It is subject to certification by the Children's Services Division. c. Institutional Day Care: Day care facility operated with or without compensation that is certified by the state to care for 13 or more children, or a facility that is certified to take care of 12 or fewer children and located in a building constructed as other than a single-family dwelling. Typical uses include nursery schools, pre-schools, kindergartens, before- and after- school care facilities or child development centers. 6. Emergency Services: Public safety facilities including police and fire stations, emergency communications and ambulance services. 7. Medical Centers: Facilities providing inpatient, outpatient and emergency and related ancillary services to the sick and infirm. Usually developed in campus setting. Accessory uses may include diagnostic and treatment facilities, laboratories, surgical suites, kitchen/food service facilities; laundry, housekeeping and maintenance facilities; administrative offices and parking. Medical centers may also include free-standing offices for hospital-based and/or private-practice physicians and other allied health care professionals; these medical office buildings are regulated as Offices. 8. Postal Service: Refers to postal services and processing as traditionally operated by the U.S. Postal Service, United Parcel Service or other similar entities. Such facilities include customer sales, mail sorting and fleet truck storage. 9. Religious Institutions: Places of religious worship which may include related accessory uses such as offices, classrooms, auditoriums, social halls, gymnasiums and other recreational activities. Use Classifications 18.130-2 Code Update: 09106 10. Schools: Public and private elementary, middle and high schools. 11. Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges: Non-profit organizations with social, philanthropic and/or recreational functions and activities. C. Commercial use types. 1. Commercial Lodging: Residential facilities such as hotels, motels, rooming houses and bed-and- breakfast establishments where tenancy is typically less than one month. May include accessory meeting and convention facilities and restaurants/bars. 2. Eating and Drinking Establishments: Establishments which sell prepared food and beverages for consumption on site or take-away including restaurants, delicatessens, bars, taverns, brew pubs and espresso bars. 3. Entertainment-Oriented a. Major Event Entertainment: Facilities such as auditoriums, stadiums, convention centers and race tracks which provide athletic, cultural or entertainment events and exhibits for large groups of spectators. b. Outdoor Entertainment: Facilities with extensive outdoor facilities including outdoor tennis clubs, golf courses and shooting ranges. c. Indoor Entertainment: Commercial indoor facilities such as health/fitness clubs, tennis, racquetball and soccer centers, recreational centers, skating rinks, bowling alleys, arcades, shooting ranges and movie theaters. d. Adult Entertainment: Facilities including adult motion picture theaters, adult video/book stores and topless, bottomless and nude dance halls which include materials and activities characterized or distinguished by an emphasis on matters depicting specified sexual activities or anatomical areas. 4. General Retail a. Sales-Oriented: Establishments which consumer-oriented sales, leasing and rental of consumer, home and business goods including art; art supplies; bicycles; clothing; dry goods; electronic equipment; fabric; gifts; groceries; hardware; household products; jewelry; pets and pet products; pharmaceuticals; plant; printed materials; stationery and videos. Excludes large- scale consumer products (see 18.130.020 CAA); and those sold primarily outdoors (see 18.130.020 CA.e, Outdoor Sales). . b. Personal Services: Establishments which provide consumer services such as banks and credit unions; barber and beauty shops; pet grooming; laundromats and dry cleaners; copy centers; photographic studios; trade/vocational schools; and mortuaries. c. Repair-oriented: Establishments which engage in the repair of consumer and business goods including television and radios; bicycles; clocks; jewelry; guns; small appliances and office equipment; tailors and seamstresses; shoe repair; locksmith and upholsterer. Use Classifications 18.130-3 Code Update: 09106 d. Bulk sales: Establishments which engage in the sales, leasing and rental of bulky items requiring extensive interior space for display including furniture, large appliance and home improvement sales. e. Outdoor sales: Establishments which engage in sales requiring outdoor display and/or storage including lumber yards and nurseries. f. Animal-related: Animal breeding and boarding facilities. Excludes pet sales/supplies (see 18.120.030 CA.a, Sales-Oriented); animal grooming (see 18.130.20 CA.b, Personal Services); and veterinary clinics (see 18.130.020 C.6., Offices). 5. Motor Vehicle Related a. Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental: Includes car, light and heavy truck, mobile home, boat and recreational vehicle sales, rental and service. b. Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair: Free-standing vehicle servicing and repair establishments including quick and general vehicle service, car washes and body shops not an accessory to new vehicle sales. c. Vehicle Fuel Sales: Establishments engaging in the sale of gasoline, diesel fuel and oil products for cars, trucks, recreational vehicles and boats. 6. Office: Government, business and professional offices. Examples include local, regional, state and federal offices and agencies; medical, dental and veterinary clinics and laboratories; blood collection centers; offices for attorneys, architects, accountants, engineers, stockbrokers, real estate agents, mortgage bankers, insurance brokers and other consultants; headquarters offices; sales offices; and radio and television studios Also includes painting, landscaping, building and janitorial contractors where the indoor storage of materials and equipment are incidental to the office use. If this storage exceeds 50% of occupied space, such uses are classified as Industrial Services (see 18.130.020 D.1) Offices that are part of and are located within a firm in another use category are considered accessory to the firm's primary activity. 7. Non-Accessory Parking: Any private or public parking, either paid or free, which is not an accessory to a primary use; includes public and private parking structures and lots, and transit park-and-ride lots. May also include free-standing fleet vehicle parking lot. 8. Self-Service Storage: Commercial operations which provide rental of storage space to the public. The storage areas are designed to allow private access by the tenant for storing or removing personal property. Does not include moving and storage companies where there is no individual storage or where employees are primary movers of the goods to be stored (see 18.130.020 D.5, Warehouse/Freight Movement). 9. Meeting and Event Ilse: Activities including parties, weddings, luncheons, meetings, charitable fund raising, or other gatherings for direct or indirect compensation. D. Industrial use types. Use Classifications 18.130-4 Code Update. 09106 I. Industrial Services: Includes the repair and servicing of industrial and business machinery, equipment and/or products. Examples include welding shops; machine shops; repair shops for tools, scientific/professional instruments, and motors; sales, repair, storage, salvage or wrecking of heavy machinery, metal and building materials; towing and vehicle storage; auto and truck salvage and wrecking; heavy truck servicing and repair; tire recapping and retreading; truck stops; building, heating, plumbing or electrical contractors; printing, publishing and lithography; exterminators; janitorial and building maintenance contractors; fuel oil distributions; solid fuel yards; laundry, dry-cleaning and carpet cleaning plants; and photo-finishing laboratories. 2. Manufacturing and Production a. Light Industrial: Includes production, processing, assembling, packaging or treatment of finished products from previously prepared materials or components. All activities and storage is contained within buildings. Examples include the manufacturing and assembly of small-scale machinery, appliances, computers and other electronic equipment; pharmaceuticals; scientific and musical instruments; art work, toys and other precision goods; sign-making; and catering facilities. b. General Industrial: Manufacturing, processing and assembling of semi-finished or finished products from raw materials. All activities are contained within buildings although there may be some outside storage of raw materials. Examples include food processing; breweries, distilleries and wineries; production of apparel or textiles; woodworking including cabinet makers; production of chemical, rubber, leather, clay, bone, plastic, stone or glass materials or products; manufacturing and production of large-scale machinery. c. Heavy Industrial: Manufacturing, processing and assembling of semi-finished or finished products from raw materials. A substantial proportion of activities and storage may be undertaken outdoors with resulting noise, glare, vibration and other potentially adverse impacts. Examples include energy production facilities; concrete batching and asphalt mixing; production of metals or metal products including enameling and galvanizing; production of cars, trucks, recreational vehicles or mobile homes. 3. Railroad Yards: A terminus of several railroad lines where the loading, unloading, transshipment and switching of rail cars is undertaken. 4. Research and Development: Facility featuring a mix of uses including office, research laboratories and prototype manufacturing. If no manufacturing component, considered Office use (see 18.130.020 C.6). 5. Warehouse/Freight Movement: Uses involved in the storage and movement of large quantities of materials or products indoors and/or outdoors; associated with significant truck and rail traffic. Examples include free-standing warehouses associated with retail furniture or appliance outlets; household moving and general freight storage; cold storage plants/frozen food lockers; weapon and ammunition storage; major wholesale distribution centers; truck, marine and air freight terminals; bus barns; grain terminals; and stockpiling of sand, gravel, bark dust or other aggregate and landscaping materials. 6. Wholesale Sales: Involves sales, leasing or rental of equipment or products primarily intended for industrial, institutional or commercial businesses. Businesses may or may not be open to the general public, but sales to the general public is limited. Examples include the sale or rental of Use Classifications 18.130-5 Code Update: 09106 machinery, equipment, building materials, special trade tools, welding supplies, machine parts, electrical supplies, janitorial supplies, restaurant equipment, and store fixtures; mail order houses; and wholesalers of food, clothing, auto parts, and building hardware. 7. Waste-Related: Uses that receive solid or liquid wastes from others for disposal on the site or for transfer to another location, uses which collect sanitary wastes, or uses that manufacture or produce goods or energy from he composting of organic material. Examples include recycling/garbage transfer stations; land fills; composting, energy recovery and sewage treatment plants. E. Other use types: 1. Agriculture/Horticulture: Open areas devoted to the raising of fruits, vegetable, nuts, nursery stock and/or flowers; may include on-site sales of products grown on the site. Excludes nurseries, which are classified under Outdoor Sales (see 18.130.020 CA.e) 2. Cemeteries: Facilities for storing human remains. Accessory uses may include chapels, mortuaries, offices, maintenance facilities and parking. 3. Detention Facilities: Uses which have the characteristics of Group Living but are devoted to the housing, training and supervision of those under judicial detention. Examples include prisons, jails, probation centers, juvenile detention homes and related post-incarceration and half-way houses. 4. Heliports: Public or private facilities designed for the landing, departure, storage and fueling of helicopters. 5. Mining: Uses which mine or extract mineral or aggregate resources from the ground for off-site use. Accessory uses may include storage, sorting and transfer facilities. 6. Rail Lines/Utility Corridors: The regional corridors in public or private ownership dedicated for use by rail lines; above-grade or underground power or communication lines; water, sewer and storm sewer lines; or similar services. 7. Wireless Communication Facilities: Includes publicly- and privately-owned towers and related transmitting equipment for television, FM/AM radio, cellular and two-way radio and microwave transmission and related ancillary equipment buildings. Does not include radio/television transmission facilities which are part of the public safety network; see Basic Services. Does not include amateur (ham) radio antennas or towers. (Ord. 06-13) 18.130.030 Unlisted Use: Authorization of Similar Use A. Purpose. It is not possible to contemplate all of the various uses which will be compatible within a zoning district. Therefore, unintentional omissions occur. The purpose of these provisions is to establish a procedure for determining whether certain specific uses would have been permitted in a zoning district had they been contemplated and whether such unlisted uses are compatible with the listed uses. B. Process. The Director shall render an interpretation, as governed by Chapter 18.340 Use Classifications 18.130-6 Code Update: 09106 C. Approval standards. Approval or denial of an unlisted use application by the Director shall be based on findings that: 1. The use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the applicable zoning district; 2. The use is similar to and of the same general type as the uses listed in the zoning district; 3. The use has similar intensity, density, and off-site impacts as the uses listed in the zoning district; and 4. The use has similar impacts on the community facilities as the listed uses. Community facilities include streets, schools, libraries, hospitals, parks, police and fire stations, and water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems. D. Other provisions. 1. The Director shall not authorize an unlisted use in a zoning district if the use is specifically listed in another zone as either a permitted use or a conditional use. 2. The Director shall maintain a list by zoning district of approved unlisted uses and the list shall have the same effect as an amendment to the use provisions of the applicable zone.■ Use Classifications 18.130-7 Code Update: 09106 DRAFT DCA2006-00005 Proposed ADDITIONS indicated by Italics and Bold Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE Sections: 18.330.010 Purpose 18.330.020 Approval Process 18.330.030 Approval Standards and Conditions of Approval 18.330.040 Additional Submission Requirements 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types 18.330.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. 18.330.020 Approval Process A. Initial applications. A request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III- HO procedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.330.030A and subject to other requirements in this chapter. B. Major modification of approved or existing conditional use. 1. An applicant may request approval of modification to an approved plan by: a. Providing the Director with five copies of the proposed modified conditional use site plan; and b. A narrative addressing the proposed changes as listed in subsection B below. 2. The Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one or more of the changes listed below have been proposed: a. A change in land use; b. An 10% increase in dwelling unit density; c. A change in the type and/or location of access ways and parking areas where off-site traffic would be affected; d. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 10% where previously specified; Conditional Use 18.330-1 SE Update: 10104 e. A reduction of more than 10% of the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open space; f. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20%; g. An elimination of project amenities by more than 10% where previously specified provided such as: (1) Recreational facilities; (2) Screening; or (3) Landscaping provisions; and h. A 10% increase in the approved density; 3. Upon the Director determining that the proposed modification to the conditional use plan is a major modification, the applicant shall submit a new application in accordance with Section 18.390.050. C. Minor modification of approved or existing conditional use. 1. Any modification which is not within the description of a major modification as provided in Subsection B above shall be considered a minor modification. 2. An applicant may request approval of a minor modification by means of a Type I procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Subsection C3 below. 3. A minor modification shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied following the Director's review based on the findings that: a. The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title; and b. The modification is not a major modification as defined in Subsection A above. D. Phased development approval. As part of the approval process, the Hearings Officer shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases over a period of time of one year, but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than three years without reapplying for conditional use review. The criteria for approving a phased conditional use review proposal is that all of the following are satisfied: 1. The public facilities shall be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase. 2. The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard. 3. The phased development shall not result in requiring the City or other property owners to construct public facilities that were required as part of the approved development proposal. Conditional Use 18.330-2 SE Update: 10104 18.330.030 Approval Standards and Conditions of Approval A. Approval standards. The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a conditional use or to enlarge or alter a conditional use based on findings of fact with respect to each of the following criteria: 1. The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; 2. The impacts of the proposed use of the site can be accommodated considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; 4. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter; 5. The applicable requirements of 18.330.050; and 6. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met. B. Conditions of approval. The Hearings Officer may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other use in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Limiting the hours, days, place and/or manner of operation; 2. Requiring design features which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; 3. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area, and/or lot depth or width; 4. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, and/or location on the site; 5. Designating the size, number, location and/or design of vehicle access points; 6. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; 7. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas; 8. Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs; 9. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting; 10. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance; 11. Requiring and designating the size, height, location and/or materials for fences; Conditional Use 18.330-3 SE Update: 10104 12. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas; 13. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain; and 14. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. C. Exemptions. Manufactured home parks and manufactured home subdivisions are exempt from the provisions of Subsection B above. Manufactured home subdivisions are subject to approval under the provisions of Chapter 18.430, Subdivisions. Manufactured home parks are subject to approval under the provisions of Chapter 18.340, Site Development Review. 18.330.040 Additional Submission Requirements A. Additional submission requirements. In addition to the submission requirements required in Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for conditional use approval must include the following additional information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. The Director shall provide a list of the specific information to be included in each of the following: 1. Existing site conditions; 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. Architectural elevations of all structures; and 6. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants. 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types A. Concurrent variance application(s). A conditional use permit shall not grant variances to the regulations otherwise prescribed by this title. A variance application(s) may be filed in conjunction with the conditional use application and both applications may be heard at the same hearing. B. Additional development standards. The additional dimensional requirements and approval standards for conditional use are as follows: 1. Adult Entertainment: a. No adult entertainment establishment shall be permitted to locate within 500 feet of any: (1) Residential zone; (2) Public or private nursery, preschool, elementary, junior, middle, or high school; Conditional Use 18.330-4 SE Update: 10104 (3) Day care center, nursery school, resident care facility or hospital; (4) Public library; (5) Public park; or (6) Religious institution. b. Distance shall be measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, objects or roads, from the closest point of the structure or portion of structure containing the use, to the closest portion of the residential zone or property line upon which a use specified in paragraph (a) above is listed; c. Any sign shall comply with the sign requirements, Chapter 18.780; d. Hours of operation shall be limited to 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m.; e. All windows less than seven feet from the ground shall be covered or screened in such a manner that the sales area and inventory are not visible from the sidewalk adjacent to the use; f. Doors and windows shall at all times be closed except for normal ingress and egress; g. No amplified or mechanically reproduced sounds shall emanate from the confines of the structure or portion of the structure in which the adult business is operated; and h. All adult entertainment establishments shall comply with all applicable state laws. 2. Motor Vehicle Servicing and Repair: a. Setbacks: (1) A five-foot perimeter setback shall surround all outdoor parking and storage areas; (2) Buffer screening shall be provided along the perimeter of all outdoor parking and storage areas as required in Section 18.745.040; and (3) All repair work shall be performed indoors. 3. Fleet Storage: a. No buildings or structures are allowed; and b. Setbacks shall comply to those of the underlying zone. 4. Motor Vehicle Sales and Rental: a. Five feet of the perimeter setback shall be used for landscaping and screening purposes; 5. Community Recreation and Parks: a. All building setbacks shall be a minimum of 30 feet from any property line; Conditional Use 18.330-5 SE Update: 10104 b. There are no off-street parking requirements, except that five automobile parking spaces are required for a dog park or off-leash area with a fenced area of one acre or more, along with an approved parking plan for anticipated peak use periods. Off-site peak use or overspill parking shall require a signed agreement with the landowner providing the additional parking. Three automobile parking spaces are required for a dog park or off-leash area with a fenced area of less than one acre, along with an approved parking plan for anticipated peak use periods. Off-site peak use or overspill parking shall require a signed agreement with the landowner providing the additional parking. 6. Heliports: a. In all commercial and industrial zones, heliports shall be sited in accordance with the ODOT Aeronautics Division requirements and the FAA recommended design guidelines. 7. Vehicle Fuel Sales: a. Minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square feet; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be 40 feet; (2) On corner and through lots, the setback shall be 40 feet on any side facing a street; and (3) No side or rear yard setback shall be required, except 20 feet where abutting a residential zoning district; c. Fuel tank installation shall be in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code; and d. Building height shall be the same as applicable zone. 8. Schools: a. There shall be no minimum lot size requirements for schools other than what is required for the applicable zoning district; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet on any side facing a street, plus meet visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet; and (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet. 9. Religious Institutions: a. Minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet; Conditional Use 18.330-6 SE Update: 10104 b. Setbacks: (l) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet, plus meet visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet; (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet; and (5) Each setback shall be increased five feet for every 10 feet of building height over 45 feet. 10. Medical Centers: a. Minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet plus 1,000 square feet for each bed over 15 beds; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet, plus meet visual clearance areas requirements, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; and (5) Each setback shall be increased five feet for every 10 feet of building height over 45 feet. 11. Cemeteries: a. The minimum lot size shall be five acres; b. Setbacks: (1) For graves only: (a) The front yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet; (b) The side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet; and (c) The rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet. (2) For Structures Only: (a) The front yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet; Conditional Use 18.330-7 SE Update: 10104 (b) On corner lots and through lots, the setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet on any side facing a street, plus meet visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (c) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; and (d) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; c. Adequate fencing shall be provided. A fence of at least four feet in height located at least 2- 1/2 feet from any right-of-way shall completely surround the area and shall meet visual clearance areas; and d. There are no off-street parking requirements. 12. Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges: a. Minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. 13. Major Event Entertainment: a. The minimum lot size shall be two acres; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet on any side facing a street, plus meets visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet; and (5) Each setback shall be increased five feet for every 10 feet of building height over 45 feet. c. With regard to off-street parking: Exempt, if constructed with a school use. Otherwise, requirements shall comply with Section 18.765; 14. Duplexes: a. The minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square feet; and b. The remaining dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning district shall apply. 15. Group Living: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum setbacks shall be those in the applicable zone; c. Height limitation shall be that in the applicable zone; Conditional Use 18.330-8 SE Update: 10104 d. Compliance with all state requirements shall be required; and e. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765. 16. Emergency Services and Basic Utilities: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum setbacks shall be those in the applicable zone; c. Height limitation shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.730; d. Off-street parking and loading requirement shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765; and e. Screening shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.745. 17. Non-Accessory Parking: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum setbacks: for structures: shall be those of the applicable zone; for parking area: five feet around perimeter of paved area for landscaping and screening purposes; c. Height limitation shall be that of the applicable zone; d. Off-street parking requirements shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765; and e. Screening shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.745. 18. Manufactured/Mobile Home Parks (Also see Chapter 18.750): a. Minimum lot size shall be one acre; b. Minimum lot dimension: (1) Frontage: 100 feet; (2) Depth: 150 feet; c. Minimum setbacks: (1) Front yard: 25 feet; (2) Rear yard: 25 feet; (3) Side yard: 10 feet; (4) Corner yard: 25 feet. d. Height limitation shall be that of the applicable zone; Conditional Use 18.330-9 SE Update: 10104 e. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765; f. Landscaping shall be equal to 20% of the project area; g. Screening shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.745; h. Outdoor recreation shall equal a minimum of 60 square feet area, suitably improved for recreational use, for each unit exclusive of required yards. Each recreation area shall have minimum size of 2,500 square feet. 19. Children's Day Care: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum Setbacks shall be those of the applicable zone; c. Height limitation shall be that of the applicable zone; d. State certification shall be obtained in accordance with ORS Chapter 418; and e. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765. 20. Drive-Up Windows: a. Minimum lot size shall be as required in the underlying zone. b. Minimum setbacks: Where access to the drive-up windows is not separated from abutting properties or a public right-of-way by parking, structures or landscaping, visual screening shall be provided to screen headlights from abutting property and the right-of-way. c. Height limitation shall be in accordance with the underlying zone. d. Drive-up window reservoir requirement: All uses providing drive-up service as defined by this title shall provide on the same site a reservoir for inbound vehicles as follows in Table 18.765.1 contained in Chapter 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. e. Reservoir Parking: Restaurants providing drive-up window service shall provide at least two designated parking spaces immediately beyond the service window, or provide other satisfactory methods, to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive their food while parked. f. Hours of operation: Hours of operation shall be limited for the drive-up window when the property with the drive-up window facility abuts a residential use. In this case, hours of the drive-up window shall be limited to 7 AM to 9 PM. g. Walk-up service: Financial and other commercial establishments providing drive-up window facilities which do not provide for walk-in customer service (i.e., not allowing transactions within the structure) shall provide for safe, convenient and readily-accessible exterior walk- up window service, such as an automatic teller machine, at any time during regular business hours. Additionally, at a minimum, two parking spaces shall be provided allowing convenient access to the walk-up service window. Conditional Use 18.330-10 SE Update: 10104 h. Emergency exit: The design of the vehicle stacking area serving the drive-up window shall allow customers to leave the stacking line in their vehicle in the event of an emergency. i. Pedestrian access: On-site parking for walk-in customers shall be designed so that pedestrians do not have to cross drive-up window stacking lines to any public entrances into the building. j. Obstruction of rights-of-way: Establishments having drive-up window facilities shall have sufficient stacking area to insure that public rights-of-way are not obstructed. k. Sound systems: Communications sound systems shall not exceed a measurement of 55 decibels at the adjoining property line(s) at any time. 21. Meeting and Event Uses in Residential Zones a. The property where the use will occur must be in a Historic Overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places. b. Yearly maximum number of events: A maximum of 18 meetings or events may be held per year. c. Maximum number of persons attending a meeting or event: The maximum number of persons attending an event shall be 40, provided however, that up to 200 persons may attend up to 6 meetings or events per year. The number of persons attending an event shall include all persons present on the property and participating in any way in the meeting or event, including hosts, workers, volunteers, as well as the guests and invitees. d. Hours of operation: The meetings or events may be held between 7 AM and 9 PM. All activities related to the meetings or events, including clean-up must cease by 9 PM. e. Lighting: No light source used for the meetings or events shall be directed at another property. All light sources shall be screened, hooded, or covered. f : Sound systems: Outdoor amplif a`ed sound systems for the meetings or events shall not be permitted. g. Noise: For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Section 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. b. Parking: A parking plan for each meeting or event shall be submitted to the Community Development Department one week prior to the event. This plan shall include a description of the event, the number of expected guests, Conditional Use 18.330-11 SE Update: 10104 evidence of the availability of on- street and off-street parking, and signed agreements with any providers of off-street parking for guests. i. No signs related to the conditional use are permitted. j. The Hearings Officer may impose additional site specific conditions on the approval of the conditional use, as referenced in Section 18.330.30.B. k. Violations of the conditions of approval or code provisions could result in the revocation of the conditional use permit by the Director. 1. The conditional use is allowed to continue so long as the property retains its Historic Overlay and/or National Register of ffistoric Places designation. ■ Conditional Use 18.330-12 SE Update: 10104 DRAFT DCA2006-00005 Proposed ADDITIONS indicated by Italics and Bold Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 18.510.010 Purpose 18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts 18.510.030 Uses 18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities 18.510.050 Development Standards 18.510.060 Accessory Structures 18.510.010 Purpose A. Preserve neighborhood livability. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in residential zoning districts is to protect the livability of existing and future residential neighborhoods, by encouraging primarily residential development with compatible non-residential development schools, churches, parks and recreation facilities, day care centers, neighborhood commercial uses and other services at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scale. B. Encourage construction of affordable housing. Another purpose of these regulations is to create the environment in which construction of a full range of owner-occupied and rental housing at affordable prices is encouraged. This can be accomplished by providing residential zoning districts of varying densities and developing flexible design and development standards to encourage innovation and reduce housing costs. 18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts A. R-1: Low-Density Residential District. The R-1 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 30,000 square feet. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. B. R-2: Low-Density Residential District. The R-2 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. C. R-3.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-3.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Duplexes are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. D. R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-1 Code Update: 06102 E. 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. F. R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. G. R-25: Medium High-Density Residential District. The R-25 zoning district is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted conditionally. H. R-40: Medium High-Density Residential District. The R-40 zoning district is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing units with no minimum lot size or maximum density. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted conditionally. 18.510.030 Uses A. Tunes of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use: 1. A permitted (P) use is a use which is permitted outright, but subject to all of the applicable provisions of this title. If a use is not listed as a permitted use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted used under the provisions of Chapter 18.230; 2. A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with special requirements, exceptions or restrictions; 3. A conditional use (C) is a use the approval of which is discretionary with the Hearings Officer. The approval process and criteria are set forth in Chapters 18.310 and 18.320. If a use is not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted used under the provisions of Chapter 18.230; 4. A prohibited (N) use is one which is not permitted in a zoning district under any circumstances. B. Use table. A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in residential zones is presented in Table 18.510.1. Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-2 Code Update: 06102 TABLE 18.510.1 USE TABLE USE CATEGORY R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 RESIDENTIAL Household Living P P P P P P P P Group Living R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C Transitional Housing N N N N N C C C Home Occupation R2 R2 Rz Rz R2 R2 R2 R2 HOUSING TYPES Single Units, Attached N N N R8 R9/C P P P Single Units, Detached P P P P P P P P Accessory Units R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 R3 Duplexes N N C C P P P P Multi-Family Units N N N N N P P P Manufactured Units P P P P P P P P Mobile Home Parks/Subdivisions N N C C P P P P CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C4 C° C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 C4 Colleges C C C C C C C C Community Recreation C C C C C C C C Cultural Institutions N N C C C C N N Day Care P/CS P/CS P/CS P/CS P/Cs P/Cs P/CS P/C5 Emergency Services C C C C C N N N Medical Centers N N C C C C C C Postal Service N N N N N N N N Public Support Facilities P P P P P P P P Religious Institutions C C C C C C C C Schools C C C C C C C C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges N N N N N C C C COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging N N N N N N N N Eating and Drinking Establishments N N N N N N N N Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Outdoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Indoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Adult Entertainment N N N N N N N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented N N N N N N R" R" - Personal Services N N N N N N R" R" - Repair-Oriented N N N N N N R" R" - Bulk Sales N N N N N N N N - Outdoor Sales N N N N N N N N - Animal-Related N N N N N N N N Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-3 Code Update: 06102 TABLE 18.510.1 (CON'T) USE CATEGORY R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 Historic Place Meetings and Events C12 Cd2 C12 Ca2 C42 C12 Cd2 C d2 Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N N N N N N N - Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair N N N N N N N N - Vehicle Fuel Sales N N N N N N N N Office N N N N N N N N Self-Service Storage N N N N N N N N Non-Accessory Parking N N N N N CIO CIO CIO INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N N N N N N N N Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial N N N N N N N N - General Industrial N N N N N N N N - Heavy Industrial N N N N N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N N N N N Research and Development N N N N N N N N Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N N N N N Waste-Related N N N N N N N N Wholesale Sales N N N N N N N N OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture P6 P6 P6 P6 P6 N N N Cemeteries N N C C C N N N Detention Facilities N N N N N N N N Heliports N N N N N N N N Mining N N N N N N N N Wireless Communication Facilities P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' Rail Lines/Utility Corridors C C C C C C C C P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted Group living with five or fewer residents permitted by right; group living with six or more residents permitted as conditional use. 2Permitted subject to requirements Chapter 18.742. 3Permitted subject to compliance with requirements in 18.710. 4Except water and storm and sanitary sewers, which are allowed by right. SIn-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right; freestanding day care centers which meet all state requirements permitted conditionally. 6When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-4 Code Update: 06102 7See Chapter 18.798, Wireless Communication Facilities, for requirements for permitted and restricted facilities. 8Attached single-family units permitted only as part of an approved planned development. 9Permitted by right if no more than five units in a grouping; permitted conditionally if six or more units per grouping. 1OOnly park-and-ride and other transit-related facilities permitted conditionally. 'Limited to ground-floor level of multi-family projects, not to exceed 10% of total gross square feet of the building. 12 Limited to properties that have a ]historic Overlay and/or are on the National Register of Historic ]Places. 18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum and maximum densities in each residential zoning district. To ensure the quality and density of development envisioned, the maximum density establishes the ceiling for development in each zoning district based on minimum lot size. To ensure that property develops at or near the density envisioned for the zone, the minimum density for each zoning district has been established at 80% of maximum density. B. Calculating minimum and maximum densities. The calculation of minimum and maximums densities is governed by the formulas in Chapter 18.715, Density Computations. C. Adjustments. Applicants may request an adjustment when, because of the size of the site or other constraint, it is not possible to accommodate the proportional minimum density as required by Section 18.715020C and still comply with all of the development standards in the underlying zoning district, as contained in Table 18.510.2 below. Such an adjustment may be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Chapter 18.390, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.2. 18.510.050 Development Standards A. Compliance required. All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapters 18.370; 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. B. Development Standards. Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2. Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-5 Code Update: 06102 TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 Minimum Lot Size Detached unit 30,000 sq.ft. 20,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 7,500 sq.ft. 5,000 sq. ft. Duplexes 10,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. Attached unit 1 5,000 s q.11. Average Minimum Lot Width Detached unit lots 100 ft. 100 ft. 65 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. Duplex lots 90 ft. 90 ft. 50 ft. Attached unit lots 40 ft. Maximum Lot Coverage - - - - 80% 2 Minimum Setbacks Front yard 30 ft. 30 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. Side facing street on corner & through lots 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 10 ft. Side yard 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. Rear yard 25 ft. 25 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft. Distance between property line and front of garage 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Maximum Height 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 35 ft. Minimum Landscape Requirement - 20% [1] Single-family attached residential units permitted at one dwelling per lot with no more that five attached units in one grouping. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. TABLE 18.510.2 - (Cont'd.) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES R-12 R-25 R-40 STANDARD MF DU* SF DU** MF DU* SF DU** MF DU* SF DU** Minimum Lot Size Detached unit 3,050 sq.ft.per unit 3,050 sq.ft. per unit 1.480 sq.ft. 3,050 sq.ft. per unit None None Attached unit 1,480 sq.ft. None - Duplexes 6,100 sq. ft. or 3,050 sq.ft. per unit None Boarding, lodging, rooming house 6,100 sq. ft. Average Lot Width None None None None None None Minimum Setbacks Front yard 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. Side facing street on corner & through lots 20 ft. 10 ft. 20 ft. 10 ft. 20 ft. 10 ft. Side yard 10 ft. 5 ft. [1] 10 ft. 5 ft. [1] 10 ft. 5 ft. [1] Rear yard 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft. Distance between property line and garage entrance 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Maximum Height 35 ft. 35 ft. 45 ft. 45 ft. 60 ft. 60 ft. Maximum Lot Coverage 2 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% Mimimum Landscape Requirement 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% [1] Except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. ' Multiple-family dwelling unit Single-family dwelling unit Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-6 Code Update: 06102 18.510.060 Accessory Structures A. Permitted uses. Accessory structures are permitted by right in all residential zones subject to the following: 1. Dimensional requirements: a. On sites containing less than 2.5 acres, an accessory structure may not exceed 528 square feet. On sites 2.5 acres or larger, an accessory structure may not exceed 1,000 square feet; b. An accessory structure may not exceed 15 feet in height; c. In no case shall the primary structure and accessory structure(s) exceed the maximum lot coverage allowed in the base zone; d. An accessory structure may not be located within the front yard setback; e. An accessory structure must maintain a minimum side and rear yard setback of five feet; 2. Non-dimensional requirements: a. No accessory structure shall encroach upon or interfere with the use of any adjoining property or public right-of-way including but not limited to streets, alleys and public and private easements; b. An accessory structure shall comply with all of the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All accessory structures except those less than 120 square feet in size require a building permit; c. An accessory structure which is non-conforming is subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.760, Non-Conforming Situations, when an alternation, expansion or reconstruction is requested; d. The erection of television receiving dishes on the roof of a structure is not permitted in any residential zone. 3. All freestanding and detached towers, antennas, wind-generating devices and TV receiving dishes, except as otherwise regulated by Wireless Communication Facilities (Chapter 18.798), shall have setbacks equal to or greater than the height of the proposed structure. Suitable protective anti-climb fencing and a landscaped planting screen, in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall be provided and maintained around these structures and accessory attachments.■ Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-7 Code Update: 06102 DRAFT DCA2006-00005 Proposed ADDITIONS indicated by Italics and Bold Chapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY Sections: 18.740.010 Purpose 18.740.020 Applicability of Provisions 18.740.030 General Provisions 18.740.040 Approval Process 18.740.050 Application Submission Requirements 18.740.010 Purpose A. Purposes. The purpose of this chapter is to: I. Facilitate the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of such improvements and of such districts which represent or reflect elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political and architectural history; 2. Enhance any registered historic or cultural areas designated in the City; 3. Stabilize and improve property values in such districts; 4. Strengthen the economy of the City; 5. Promote the use of historic districts and landmarks for the education, pleasure, energy conservation, housing, and public welfare of the City; and 6. Implement the applicable provisions of LCD Goal 5 and the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 18.740.020 Applicability of Provisions A. Designated areas. The historic overlay district shall apply to the following sites and areas: 1. Historic sites and areas; 2. Cultural sites and areas; and 3. Landmarks. B. Designated activities. The provisions of this chapter apply to: 1. The demolition of structures within an historic overlay zone area, as governed by Section 18.740.030; and 2. The exterior alteration or new construction within the historic overlay zone area, as governed by Section 18.740.030. Historic Overlay 18.740-1 11126198 18.740.030 General Provisions A. Approval of exterior alterations. Except as provided pursuant to Subsection B below, no person shall alter any structure in an historic overlay district in a manner as to affect its exterior appearance, nor may any new structure be constructed in an historic district unless approved by the Director. B. Approval of demolition. No person shall demolish a structure located within an historic overlay district unless it is approved by the Director under the provisions of this chapter. C. Exemptions. 1. Exterior remodeling, as governed by this chapter, shall include any change or alteration in design or other exterior treatment excluding painting; 2. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance or repair of any architectural features which do not involve a change in design, material or the outward appearance of such feature which the Building Official shall certify is required for the public safety because of its unsafe or dangerous condition. D. Condition of approval. If alteration or demolition of the historic resource is intended, a condition of approval shall be that insofar as feasible and as funds are available, the Washington County Museum shall obtain: 1. A pictorial and graphic history of the resource; and 2. Artifacts from the resource it deems worthy of preservation. E. Incentives for maintenance. In an effort to assist in the upkeep and restoration of properties with a Historic Overlay designation aandlor listing on the National Register of Historic Places, Meeting and Event Uses may be permitted, smbject to Conditional Use approval, in all residential zones. 18.740.040 Approval Process A. Criteria for historic overlay district designation. 1. Approval of an historic overlay district designation shall be made by means of a Type 111-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, when the Historic Sites and Districts Committee finds that any of the following criteria have been met: a. The proposed district or landmark would serve the purpose of the historic overlay district as stated in Section 18.740.010, Purpose; b. The site or area proposed for the designation reflects the broad cultural or natural history of the community, state or nation; Historic Overlay 18.740-2 11126198 c. The site or area is identified with historic personages, or with important events in national, state or local history; d. The site or area proposed for the designation embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural specimen inherently valuable for a study of a period, style or method of construction; or e. The proposed site or area is a notable work of a master builder, designer or architect. 2. The age of a specific building is not sufficient in itself to warrant designation as historic. B. Criteria for removal of historic overlay district designation. Removal of an historic overlay district designation shall be made by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, when the Historic Sites and Districts Committee finds that any of the following criteria have been met: 1. The original historic overlay district designation was placed on the site in error; 2. The resource designated with the historic overlay district designation has ceased to exist; 3. The resource designated with the historic overlay district designation is no longer of significance to the public; or 4. The historic overlay district designation is causing the property owner to bear an unfair economic burden to maintain the property as an historic or cultural resource. C. Criteria for exterior alterations. Approval for exterior alterations of structures in an historic overlay district shall be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, by the Director using the following criteria: 1. The purpose of the historic overlay district as set forth in Section 18.740.010; 2. The economic use of the structure in a historic overlay district and the reasonableness of the proposed alteration and their relationship to the public interest in the structure's or landmark's preservation or renovation; 3. The value and significance of the structure or landmark in an historic overlay district; 4. The physical condition of the structure or landmark in an historic overlay district; 5. The general compatibility of exterior design, arrangement, proportion, detail, scale, color, texture, and materials proposed to be used with an existing structure in an historic overlay district; D. Criteria for construction of new structures. Approval for exterior alterations of structures in an historic overlay district shall be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, by the Director using the following criteria: 1. The purpose of the historic overlay district as set forth in Section 18.740.010; 2. The economic effect of the new structure on the historic value of the district; Historic Overlay 18.740-3 11126198 3. The visual effect of the proposed new structure on the architectural character of the district; 4. The general compatibility of the exterior design, arrangement, proportion, detail, scale, color, texture and materials proposed to be used in the construction of the new building or structure; and E. Criteria for demolition. Approval for demolition of structures in an historic overlay district shall be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, by the Director using the following criteria: 1. The purpose of this chapter as set forth in Section 18.740.010; 2. The criteria used in the original designation of the district in which the property under consideration is situated; 3. The historical and architectural style, the general design, arrangement, materials of the structure in question, or its appurtenant fixtures; the relationship of such features to similar features of the other buildings within the district, and the position of the building or structure in relation to public rights- of-way, and to other buildings and structures in the area; 4. The effects of the proposed work upon the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of the district which cause it to possess a special character or special historical or aesthetic interest or value; 5. Whether denial of the permit will subject the City to potential liability, involve substantial hardship to the applicant, and whether issuance of the permit would act to the substantial detriment of the public welfare and would be contrary to the intent and purposes of this title. 18.740.050 Application Submission Requirements A. Submission requirements. All applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director. In addition to the submission requirements required by Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for any action governed by this chapter, as defined by Section 18.740.020, must include the following information. Specific information to be contained in each of the following is available from the Director. 1. Site plan; 2. Architectural drawings; 3. Landscape plan; 4. Sign drawings.■ Historic Overlay 18.740-4 11126198 Attachment 2 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes November 20, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 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 Buehner, Caffall, Harbison, Meads, and Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Munro and Vermilyea Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Ron Bunch, Long Range Planning Manager; Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner; Jerree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS It was advised that the meeting with the Tree Board on December 11 thmight start later than 8:00. There are 2 public hearings that night with the Hearings Officer that staff needs to attend before the workshop with the Tree Board. Commissioner Walsh reported on the Tree Board. They held a follow up meeting after the last workshop with the Planning Commission. Dick Bewersdorff advised that staff will outline the issues brought up at the last workshop in preparation of the next workshop on December 11 d,. Commissioner Buehner advised that the Transportation Financing Task Force held an open house on November 91h to discuss the proposed gas tax. She noted that the meeting was well attended and lots of thoughtful questions were asked. There will be a 2nd open house on November 30th. Commissioner Buehner reported that the City Center Advisory Commission is beginning discussions on the Fanno Creek Park Master Plan. They hope to have it completed shortly after the first of the year. They are preparing a request for proposals for a consultant to work with a citizen committee to work through the details of the Master Plan. There will be a workshop with the Planning Commission probably in February. Commissioner Meads reported on the Park and Recreation Advisory Board. She advised that they are working with staff to request funding in the next fiscal year for start up of a recreation PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page I program in the City. She noted that the City is recruiting to fill 2 Park Board positions whose terms expire at the end of the year. Also, another Board member will be retiring In February. The Skate Park Committee is a little behind in their schedule. It is hoped to have the Skate Park completed by the end of next summer or perhaps the fall. Commissioner Meads also advised that the pedestrian bridge between Tigard and Tualatin is completed, but has not opened as yet. There is a trail from the Butterfly Pavilion at Cook Park down to the bridge. Commissioner Buehner noted that, with her election to the City Council, she would be resigning from the Planning Commission by the end of December. Commissioner Caffall reported on the Committee for Citizen Involvement. They met with Bob Roth, the City's volunteer program developer, who talked about the City's webpage and job descriptions for volunteers. The South Pacific Island representatives met with the CCI again. The CCI will try to find funds to help the group. The CCI will work with the schools to set up informational meetings with the South Pacific Island community and send home reports with the students to solicit parent participation. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the November 6, 2006 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. Commissioner Harbison abstained. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00005 HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to amend various chapters of the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow meetings and events as a conditional use on properties with Historic Overlays and/or on the National Register of Historic Places in residential zones. The following is a summary of the proposed amendments including the affected code chapters: 1). Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS: Add a "Meeting and Event Use" category; 2). Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE: Add additional development standards for conditional use types to allow "Meeting and Event Uses" in residential zones with a Historic District overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places; 3). Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (Table 18.510.1 - Use Table): Add a use category for "Historic Place Meetings and Events" as a conditional use in all residential zoning districts that have a Historic Overlay and/or are on the National Register of Historic Places; and 4). Chapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY: Add a General Provision to the Historic Overlay chapter to include "Incentives for maintenance" provision. LOCATION: All residential zones with Historic Overlays. ZONE: All residential zones with a Historic Overlay Designation. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.120, 18.130, 18.330, 18.390, 18.510 and 18.740; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES -November 20, 2006 - Page 2 STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly presented the staff report on behalf of the City. He gave a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibits A and B) to provide details of the proposed code amendment. The Planning Commission had the following questions and comments (staff responses are in italics): • Who reviews the parking plan? Farrelly answered that the parking plan must be submitted at the time the conditional use permit is requested. It is confirmation that adequate parking can be accommodated. He noted that of the 8 residential properties included in the proposal, 3 might be able to provide ofstreet parking for 200 attendees. • Which historical properties are currently private residences? Private residences include the Charles F. Tigard House, the Tigard Farmhouse, the Seven Gables Upshaw House, the Gaarde House, and the Shaver-Bilyeu House (Quello House). • Other than the Quello House, have any other residences been used for events? Farrelly answered, no, not to his knowledge. • Were the development standards developed by staff? Yes • If the proposal is turned down be the Planning Commission, what happens? Council will still hold a public hearing, and will be informed that the Planning Commission recommended denial. • The impetus is to generate revenue to offset costs of maintenance and upkeep. Is there anything in the proposal that requires the funds be used for maintenance? No • What was the basis for the recommendation of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. time period? Farrelly said this follows the current noise code. Planning Commissioners advised that the current noise code is 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. • What was the basis for the 40 and 200 numbers for attendees? Staff met with Code Enforcement and otherplanners and chose numbers that balanced interests and seemed plausible. • Was the Fire Marshall contacted to determine occupancy? -No. The Commission recommended soliciting input from the Fire Marshall. This could be made part of the conditional use permit process. • The proposal doesn't have any spacing requirements for the number of events. The events could all be held over a short period of time - all during the summer months with nothing during the winter. • What are the requirements for obtaining a conditional use permit and what methods are there to enforce the conditions? There would be a public hearing before a Hearings Officer. They would have to file a site plan showing how the conditional use would work and how they could meet the development standards. Each granting of a conditional use for a property would involve a public hearing. For each event, they would have to file a parking plan proving they are following the conditional use approval. The conditional use approval would only continue as long as the property is registered as a historicproperty. If the designation was gone, the conditional use would cease. • Is there a fee? There is a one time application fee of approximately $2,000-$3,000. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 3 • At the time they file a parking plan, would they be required to see if there are other events going on in the area? Yes. They would be required to file a parking plan one week in advance, so staff could check to see if there are other events going on in the area at the same time. The Planning Commission remarked that one week may not be enough time to review the parking plan; the review timeframe should be considerably longer. There could be conflicts with other events. Usually events are known about 3 months in advance. Parking plans could be submitted at least 2 months ahead. • There is nothing in the proposed amendment that requires notification of events to surrounding neighbors so they could be sufficiently prepared. That would require another permit process. • Commissioner Harbison didn't think parking would be that big of an issue. Parking- constrained sites can be addressed during the conditional use hearing. He doesn't believe there's a need to do something for each event. Other Commissioners disagreed. • Did staff consider charging a nominal fee to review the parking plans? It makes sense; staff will consider it. • What has been the request for this type of activity for properties other than the Quello house? None • What are the cost benefits for a historic overlay vs. historic register? The Tigard historic overlay is locally designated. It's voluntary for the property owners. After it's designated, any kind of exterior alterations have to be approved by the City to make sure it keeps in character with the period of the home. Its a much more rigorous process to get on the National Register. Specialists are hired to prove the structure is worth being approved by the National Register. Once it is on the National Register, property taxes are frozen for a period of time. • Has the City ever considered a tax incentive to defer maintenance costs? Not that staff is aware of. • Did the request for the City to be the applicant come from multiple owners of these homes? No, City Council directed staff to do the code amendment. • Are ADA facilities part of the permitting process? No, this was not included. Sometimes this is an issue for historic properties since they were built before there were ADA requirements. In the City s code, there is an exception for historicproperties. It was suggested the City pattern their code to what the federal program has done (wheelchair access ramps and lavatory facilities). • What about restroom facilities for 200 attendees? How many porta-potties, will there be on the site? This could be a concern. This is something that should be addressed before they receive a conditional use permit. • Has the Shaver-Bilyeau House ever been requested to be put on the local registry? Not that we know of. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR Dan Quello, 16445 SW 92nd Ave., Tigard, OR 97224 provided his personal history of the Shaver-Bilyeu House (aka Quello House) which he bought 16 years ago. He advised that the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 4 house has been used in the past for weddings, which eventually became an issue for some of the neighbors. A proposal to use the facility as a bed and breakfast as well as a place to conduct garden weddings was brought before the City Council a few years ago. The results of the hearing were mixed, and the request was denied. This last year, the Quellos have hosted some non-profit events. Two City Councilors attended one of the events and were impressed with the property. The Councilors came to the Quellos and said there ought to be a way that the facility could be used by the public. Mr. Quello sent a letter to Councilor Sherwood who shared the letter with Council. It was decided to start the process again. He believes staff has come up with suitable language that would allow historic facilities to host events for the public. Mr. Quello read an article from the Oregonian about a historic inn in the Corbett area which will now be able to re-open as a business after being a residence for several years. The Columbia River Gorge Commission adopted new rules allowing commercial use in some historic buildings. Mr. Quello believes the current request of 6 large events a year is modest and manageable. He advised he has 50 parking spaces in front of his house, as well as 250' of driveway, 1 acre of pasture, and a lawn which can provide additional parking. He also advised that the house has 5 bathrooms and 2 kitchens (1 for catering). He noted that a movie location scout approached him a year ago about filming a wedding on his property for a movie. They got approval from City staff and the wedding was held this past September. During the wedding, Mr. Quello walked around the neighborhood to check the noise level. He couldn't hear anything. Commissioner Walsh asked Mr. Quello if he had considered using a section of the property further away from the neighbors for hosting events. Mr. Quello said he has held events on a different section of the property. It is a possibility and he is open to it. President Inman asked Mr. Quello why he has not requested local historic overlay of the property. Mr. Quello answered that it seems there is no benefit. The property is already on National Registry. President Inman asked if Mr. Quello would be agreeable to a reduction in the number of attendees or the number of events. Mr. Quello said he is open to compromise. Mr. Quello reviewed the tax benefits of owning historic property. He advised that when he applied to the National Registry, he received a freeze in the tax assessment for the property. The freeze is good for 15 years, after which time he will need to reapply for another 15 years. The renewed assessment would be at the current appraised value. Commissioner Caffall believes the City needs to maintain and keep some of these older houses. He would prefer to see this type of house remain in perpetuity rather than selling it to developers. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 5 Jacque Quello, 16445 SW 92nd Ave., Tigard, OR 97224 signed up to speak, but did not speak. Ron Soberg, 11333 SW Gaarde Street, Tigard, OR 97224, testified that he is the current resident of the Gaarde House. He believes that a lot of the comments he has heard shouldn't hold true for just owners of historic properties; they should apply for all homes in Tigard. If someone is having 20-30 visitors to their home, they should go through the same process that is being requested of historic properties. The issues are the same. Living in a community requires the need for respect from neighbors and the need to respect neighbors in turn. He also advised that when he bought the Gaarde House from the City of Tigard, he paid for everything himself - he did not receive any support from the City. Commissioner Walsh agreed that if someone is having a private party, they should let the neighbors know. However, he sees a distinction when it comes to commercial use. Commissioner Meads brought up the number of events being proposed. Individual homeowners would not likely hold 6 large events in a year. Mr. Soberg said that, for him, the number of events in a year wouldn't make that much difference as would the number of attendees. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION Cheryl Cappelli, 16405 SW 93,d Ave., Tigard 97224 read a letter to the Commission (Exhibit C). Commissioner Meads asked when the 3 year period occurred. Ms. Cappelli answered it was from 1998 to 2000. She advised that she has also heard noise and has seen parking problems from the more recent events as well. She noted that there is a gully running along the properties that funnels the sound to the neighborhood. With regard to noise from the high school and Cook Park events, she said they live there knowing there would be that kind of use. President Inman asked if the number of attendees makes a difference. Ms. Cappelli said she hears the events that are held outside. President Inman asked if there were any pieces of the proposal that could be changed to make it more palatable. Ms. Cappelli thinks it's a commercial vs. residential issue. Mike Brewin, 11225 SW Morgen Court, Tigard 97223 showed pictures of the different historic properties impacted by the proposed amendment. He also provided a copy of his own recommended changes to the proposed code language (Exhibit D). He testified that he lives next to the Charles F. Tigard home. He noted that this proposal will impact the whole city. In the future, more properties will apply for historic designation and be able to have events that their houses were never designed for. Some of the issues he pointed out with the historic properties include having no sidewalks, not enough parking, gravel driveways between the houses, close-by neighbors, and busy streets. These homes were designed for domestic use. The Columbia Gorge Inn (mentioned by Mr. Quello) was designed as an inn. Mr. Brewin advised that the John F. Tigard House is owned by the City and is maintained by the Tigard Historical Association. They have meetings there once a month. Even though it's in a residential area, the house is used appropriately for historical purposes. It's a non- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 6 profit and serves the public 100%. He does not believe something commercial should be in a residential zone. Sharon Brewin, 11225 SW Morgen Court, Tigard 97224, signed up to speak, but did not speak. Caroline Holzwarth, 9240 SW Millen, Tigard 97224 advised that her property backs up to the Quello property. She advised that the Quello home is very close to the rest of the homes in the neighborhood. She said that she has been able to overhear vows being said and has changed her schedule so as not to interrupt weddings. She has been kept awake from the noise and has experienced increased traffic in the neighborhood. She does not believe that the Quello house can be guaranteed parking as needed. She believes changes in the neighborhood should be for the majority, not for one individual. President Inman asked if there was anything in the proposal that would make it more palatable. Ms. Holzwarth said maybe, if the weddings were held at a different location. She noted that there has been a big change in the traffic pattern. On Saturdays and Sundays throughout the entire summer, parking is very busy and it's sometimes difficult to get out from Millen onto 92°d Ave. It's busy from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Neighbors knew when they moved into their homes that there would be events at the high school and Cook Park. Adding just one more thing to the neighborhood is too much. Larry Galizio, 16455 SW 93rd, Tigard 97224, noted that his deck looks into the Quello backyard. When the weddings were happening in 2000, people would be looking down into his backyard. There was no privacy during that time. He is not in favor of moving the weddings closer to his yard. He said that the Quello house is in an area zoned residential, specifically in a R-4.5 low density zone. Under purpose in terms of such zoning designation, it states, "Preserve neighborhood livability as its primary purpose." Regulations should protect the livability of existing and future residential neighborhoods. Any non-residential use should be at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scale. He urges that the Commission not re-zone the whole area. There is one person who has gone to Council members proposing a change for the entire City. He thinks this is problematic. He asked if the Quello house would be able to accommodate 200 attendees in their back yard. The Commission answered yes. Mr. Galizio pointed out that a memo dated July 25, 2000 states, "Because weddings occur on weekends when no Code Compliance Specialist is working, enforcement of any conditions related to noise would be difficult." He asked if the City would be creating another FTE for Code Compliance or is the Planning Commission going to stipulate that the events cannot take place on weekends or whenever Compliance Officers are not available. He noted that in the same July 2000 report, the staff recommendation found it appropriate to allow historic sites to offer bed and breakfast facilities as approved by a conditional use, subject to certain conditions, such as 5 guest rooms, on-site parking of one space per room, and a City overlay designation. He asked what has changed in 6 years that we go from a B & B with a maximum of 5 parked cars to 18 events, 6 of which that can have up to 200 people. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 7 Mr. Galizio listed the many status quo events already taking place close to the neighborhood. With those events, there is illegal parking, noise, and trash. He believes it is also a safety hazard. He advised that on July 14, 1999, the municipal court found that Dan Quello was in violation of 4 sections of the Municipal Code by conducting weddings and receptions, events and meetings at the subject property without first obtaining a conditional use permit, zoning code amendment, or authorization from the City. Mr. Galizio thinks past behavior, should be taken into consideration. Mr. Galizio wonders why this is the only historical site in Tigard without a historic overlay zone designation. He wonders if it may be because of costs associated with the historic overlay and the requirement of a Type II review of exterior alterations. He believes that if the goal of the code change is to encourage the protection of historic resources, then it would logically follow that only properties within a historic overlay zone designation should fall within the parameters of the proposed code change. He notes that there is nothing in the proposed amendment that guarantees where money made from events would go. The State already gives a tax break. He believes that it should be non-profit status or the money should go into a pot and perhaps managed by a group for properties in most need of repair. Commissioner Walsh asked Mr. Galizio if he has seen anything in the State Legislature that addresses this in other jurisdictions. Mr. Galizio said he would be glad to work with Tigard and Mr. Quello to consider other ideas. He thinks historic preservation is significant. He would suggest looking first to areas within commercial zones for for-profit enterprises. Beyond that, he suggests looking at what other cities do and at the state level. Commissioner Meads asked what the Quellos' property taxes would be if they didn't have the freeze. It was estimated to be approximately $7,000 - $8,000. Mr. Galizio thinks this is a well-intentioned, misguided attempt to preserve historical integrity of the City. He thinks we can do a lot better. Mark Walker and Lisa Walker, 9174 SW Waverly Dr., Tigard 97224 left the meeting before speaking. Gail Dowler, 16515 SW 93rd Ave., Tigard 97224, testified that she lives about 8 houses down the gully from the Quello house. She believes that the 18 events allowed by the proposal will probably all occur during the summer months. With the last experience they had with an event, they weren't able to use their deck, were unable to barbeque, and were unable to open their windows to cool down. Even inside the house with the windows closed, they could still hear the noise because of the echo effect. She doesn't see why the neighbors should have to pay the price for Mr. Quello's decision to purchase his property. Her letter of testimony is attached as Exhibit E. Commissioner Meads asked if Ms. Dowler has experienced any noise from the more recent events. Ms. Dowler answered no, but they don't generally sit outside on the deck at that time of year. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 8 Richard Smith, 16435 SW 93,d, Tigard 97224 testified that he lives directly behind the Quello property. He stated that he can hear people speaking in normal voices from the Quello property, about 250'-300' away. He does not believe the Quello house is a historical house. It's been altered and moved from its original location across the street on the high school property. He noted that the property is a historical piece of land, but the house has nothing to do with it. The original house was a farm home, but it's been modified several times. In addition, the property was all part of one huge parcel at one time which included the property where the Durham School is located. Mr. Smith noted that if there will be public access to the property, then it has to meet ADA requirements. He also advised that during one of the more recent events at the Quello house, a complaint was called into the police about the noise. He urged the Planning Commission to not approve the proposal. Commissioner Caffall noted that the other properties on the list don't look like they would hold the kind of events that Mr. Quello would hold. He asked if the events were reduced to 3 or 4 a year, would it still be a big issue. Mr. Smith believes it would still be a big issue. In the past, there was no notification to neighbors about the parties. If there was notification, the neighbors could choose to leave. He thinks notification is very important. Carol Gifford, 9255 SW Millen Dr., Tigard 97224, testified that she knew about the park and high school when she bought her home, but the high school has since put in Astroturf and rents out the fields throughout the year. She notes that her neighborhood has become a rec center. Regarding compromise, the neighbors have been through this before. The previous decision was no, and yet, there have been events. The word "compromise" doesn't hold a lot with the neighbors. She advised that the selling of the Quello property to build houses has been held over the neighbors' heads. She thinks the neighborhood is overused and would like to see a traffic study done. Also, the only crosswalk from 92nd above the park is at the crest of hill. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED President Inman asked what options the Planning Commission had. Staff advised that the Commission can recommend denial, approval, or approval with changes. This is a legislative process where the Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council. Dick Bewersdorff recommended that the proposal not be sent back for more revisions. He thinks a decision needs to be made on the issues, relative to what's good for the community and the neighborhood. He doesn't think there's any way to further craft language to make it any better without having the same issues. Commissioner Harbison said that people know what to expect when they move next to a high school. When people moved into this neighborhood, weddings weren't being performed. That could be expected in a commercial zone. He believes 200 people are a lot of people to have next to you; 40 is also a lot. He confirmed that Mr. Quello could still hold events if they PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 9 were non-profit. Commissioner Harbison believes that this is the only property that's even feasible to hold a party. Commissioner Meads said that people running businesses in their home are not impacting their neighbors. When commercial endeavors are moved outside, where there's no constraint in a residential area, there's going to be an impact. From the testimony she's heard tonight, it's a substantial impact. She doesn't see that this is the avenue to take for generating money for the home. She also thinks the proposal seems like it's for 1 person; it's not a citywide benefit. Commissioner Buehner sees a number of issues which, according to staff, may not be able to be resolved with the proposed code. She believes it's in violation of the current noise code, there is no control over the spacing of events, it's too many people to have in a residential neighborhood, there's the issue of restroom facilities, how would neighbors get noticed, there are parking problems, insufficient lead time for review of parking, and requiring a contract to provide parking for events. She believes there are so many problems with the proposed ordinance that it's not going to make sense. Commissioner Caffall concurred. He doesn't believe there's anyway to adjust the code. Even having just 25 people would create an issue. He knows that we can't stop non-profit events, but thinks Mr. Quello should be a good neighbor and let the neighbors know what's going on. The real question is, if it was in your backyard, would you want it? If so, how would you want it? He doesn't think we can write a code for it and thinks it should be left status quo. Commissioner Walsh agrees with many of the comments. His primary issue is justification. Why was it brought forward; what is the driving force? He is sympathetic to need for upkeep and the cost involved, but he doesn't see that this is the solution. He doesn't see a linkage between the revenue raised through a commercial venture going back to the upkeep. This amendment is for everyone. The next person may have no intention of keeping up the facility. Also, he sees that this is primarily driven for 1 party. He doesn't want to see the code changed for 1 party. He agrees with staff that the Planning Commission needs to take action and not try to re-word the language. President Inman agrees with much of what's been said. It's a beautiful piece of property, but she doesn't see the justification for making a change to the City code. So much of it seems to be centered on this 1 particular piece of property. She agrees that parking is a huge issue and there are a lot of safety and noise issues as well. Commissioner Buehner moved that the Planning Commission recommend denial of Development Code Amendment (DCA) 2006-00005 Historic Overlay Conditional Use Code Amendment, based on the staff report, the testimony given tonight and provided prior to the hearing this evening. Commissioner Meads seconded the motion. Staff announced that the public hearing with City Council will be held on December 12th. 6. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES -November 20, 2006 - Page 10 Dick Bewersdorff distributed a copy of the proposed calendar for the Tigard Downtown Development Code Amendments (Exhibit F). Planning Commissioners can email any questions or comments to Ron Bunch. 7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE • ECONOMY REPORT Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint on the economy section of the Comprehensive Plan update (Exhibit G). The Planning Commission had the following comments/questions: • How many jobs were added with the Washington Square expansion? We will have to research that. • The Metro-assigned capacity of 17,000 jobs is a scary number. It will have to be in the service sector, there's no place to expand. • Will the Planning Commission have to look at expanding Commercial and Industrial zoning? If so, where? • What happens if we don't meet Metro's number? We would have to justify that we have the capacity for that many jobs We can't force people to bring jobs here. • Hopefully, there will be a lot more employment Downtown over the next 10 or 15 years. • Also, there are big chunks of land left in the Tigard Triangle. • It's surprising that Tigard does not have a formal Citywide economic development strategy. • It is thought that when the Downtown Plan is complete, that FTE position could possibly morph into an Economic Development Director. • Instead of throwing in industrial lands randomly, it makes more sense to ensure we keep what we have. • What are our strengths - proximity to Portland, I-5 Corridor and other huge assets. We should focus on those. • It would be useful to see what difference the Washington Square expansion has made. • One-third of Bridgeport Village is in the City. • There are 2 large office buildings going in at 72nd and Durham. • How about the land north of the Library site? Its not suitable for most industrial purposes because of the slope. • Most of our industrial land is based along the railroad line, but that's a descending way to transport goods. 8. OTHER BUSINESS The Commission held a short discussion about meeting protocol when there's a disagreement between Commissioners. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page I 1 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:21 p.m. Jerree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - November 20, 2006 - Page 12 Historic Overlay Conditional Use Code Amendment (DCA) 2006-00005 Planning Commission Presentation Sean Farrelly Associate Planner City of Tigard November 20, 2006 Historic Properties in Tigard • Represent surviving examples of architectural types or are associated with important figures in the history of the Tigard community. • There are ten designated historic properties in Tigard (nine with Tigard Historic overlay zone) • Two properties are on the National Register of Historic Places • Eight historic properties are in residential zones a<, CID I e 1 1. Durham Elementary School 8040 SW Durham Rd • Schooluse • Surrounding Zoning: _ R-12 2. John Tigard House • 10310 SW Canterbury Lane On National Register of Historic Places • Used as a museum • Lot owned by Tigard Water District • Surrounding Zoning: R-4.5 3. "Ye-Olde" Windmill :p^ J121 st Street and Katherine St. %"y+ .13 acre site Public park I Surrounding Zoning: R-4.5 2 4. Charles F. Tigard House 11180 SW Fortner St. • 3000 s.f. house • 1.5 acre lot • Surrounding Zoning: R-4.5 Kv -071 , _ . - 5. Tigard Farmhouse and Windmill • 10525 SW Tigard St. • 2600 s.f. house .5 acre lot Surrounding Zoning: R-12 6. Seven Gables Upshaw House • 9890 SW Peppertree ,I Lane • 2500 sf house • .5 acre lot • Surrounding Zoning: R-3.5 3 7. Gaarde House 11333 Gaarde St 4 2900 s.f. house .25 acre lot • Surrounding Zoning: - R-4.5 8. Shaver-Bilyeu House (aka Quello House) • 16445 SW 92nd Ave. • On National Register of Historic Places (does not have Tigard Historic Overlay) • 3600 s.f. house 2 acre lot I Zoning: R-4.5 Historic Properties in Tigard • Comprehensive Plan identifies them as important as related to the overall development of Tigard as a diverse community. • Tigard historic overlay does not offer any special benefit. (Properties on the National Register are eligible for some tax benefits.) • Owners can request removal of designation at any time, meaning the potential loss of resource. 4 Proposed Code Amendment • City Council directed staff to explore ways that owners of historic properties could generate income to assist in preservation, upkeep and restoration. • One potential source is to allow the rental of historic resources for meetings and events, subject to conditional use standards. Proposed Code Amendment Amends: • Use Classifications Chapter, 18.130 Adds a definition of Meetings and Events Use (for direct or indirect compensation) • Residential Zoning Districts, 18.510 Allows Meetings and Events as a Conditional Use in Properties with Historic Overlay and/or on National Register of Historic Places • Historic Overlay, 18.740 Adds an "incentives for maintenance" section Proposed Code Amendment Amends: • Conditional Use Chapter, 18.330 (Requires a public hearing before a Hearings Officer) Add Development Standards for Meeting and Event Uses in Historic Properties in Residential Zones 5 Proposed Development Standards • Yearly maximum number of events: 18 • Maximum number of attendees: 12 events- 40 max, 6 events- 200 max • Hours of operation: 7 AM- 9 PM (all activities must cease at 9 PM) • No outdoor amplified sound systems • Parking plan required for each event • violations of the conditions of approval or code could result in the revocation of the conditional use permit Historic Sites in Residential Zones Conclusion • The proposed Development Code Amendment complies with the Statewide Planning Goals, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. • The proposed code language attempts to strike a balance between the interests of those living in residential zones, the owners of historic properties who might wish to engage in this use, and the Tigard community, which has an interest in the preservation of historic resources. 6 Staff Recommendation If the Planning Commission can find that the proposal is compatible with the surrounding residential uses, and provides adequate guidelines for approval, the Commission should recommend approval of the code amendments to the Tigard City Council, as determined through the public hearing process. 7 Historic Site Site Characteristics On-street parking Potential Potential: Potential: up to Off-street parking up to 40 200 attendees attendees 1. Durham Developed with school No Yes Elementary School and large parking lot. Possible Possible Surrounded by industrial uses 2. John F. Tigard Small house, used as a No Church parking lot House museum, lot owned by across the street Possible Possible Water District 3. "Ye-Olde" Windmill is only structure No No Unlikely Unlikely Windmill , lot is a .13 acre park 4. Charles F. Tigard 3000 square ft. house on No On-site? Possible Possible House 1.5 acre lot 5. Tigard Farmhouse 2600 square ft. house on No No and Windmill '/z acre lot Possible Unlikely 6. Seven Gables 2500 square ft. house on No No U Shaw House '/z acre lot Possible Unlikely 7. Gaarde House 2900 square ft. house on No No Possible Unlikely /4 acre lot 8. Shaver-Bilyeu 3600 square ft. house on 2 Limited On-site and high House acre lot school across the Possible Possible street Revised table: Historic Sites in Residential Zones Attachment 3 Agenda Item: 5 , Hearing Date: November 20, 2006 Time: 7:00 PN STAFF REPORT TO THEr _.r PLANNING COMMISSION FORTHE'CI.OF-TIGARD, OREGON * , s SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT TO THE USE CLASSIFICATIONS CHAPTER (18.130), CONDITIONAL USE CHAPTER (18.330), RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS CHAPTER (18.510), AND HISTORIC OVERLAY CHAPTER 1( 8.740) FILE NO.: Development Code Amendment (DCA) DCA2006-00005 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Development Code Amendment to amend the Use Classifications Chapter (18.130), Conditional Use Chapter (18.330), Residential Zoning Districts Chapter (18.510), and Historic Overlay Chapter (18.740) of the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed amendments would add a definition of Meetings and Events Use to the Code and allow Meetings and Events Use as a Conditional Use in Properties with a Historic Overlay, and/or on the National Register of Historic Places. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: All residential zones with Historic Overlays and/or a property on the National Register of Historic Places COMP PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATION: All residential zones APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130.020, 18.330, 18.380.020, 18.390.60, 18.510, and 18.740; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, and 3.7.1; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, and 5. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PAGE 1 OF 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT SECTION H. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Ii` the Planning Commissiori~ - "fiiid that"'th- proposal is compatible with the surrounding residential!- uses, and provides adequate gtude'lnies ford approval,' Ae Commission:. shiould ' recommend approval 'to the Tigard' City ;Council to ainend;,;ihe 'Use' Classifications :Chapter. „ (18:136); Conditional Use'Chapter (18:330); 'Residential`Zoning Districts'~Chaptet (18.510) rand' ' Historic Overlay Chapter (18.740) of the Tigard Community Development Code, as determined through the public hearing process. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City of Tigard has several properties of historic interest. The properties are notable because they represent surviving examples of architectural types or are associated with important figures in the history of the Tigard community. In the Tigard Comprehensive Plan these resources were determined to be significant, outstanding, and needed as related to the overall development of Tigard as a diverse community. Nine properties have Historic Overlay designations. One of these properties is also on the National Register of Historic Properties. An additional property is on the National Register, but does not have a Historic Overlay designation. See Map A for locations of the sites. The owners of properties on the National Register of Historic Places receive some State administered tax benefits. However properties with only the Tigard Historic Overlay do not receive any special benefit. There are associated costs with having a historic overlay, including the requirement of a Type II review of for exterior alternations. Owners of properties with Historic Overlays, or on the National Register, can request removal of the designation at any time. Without the designation the historical, architectural, or cultural resources are often lost. To encourage the protection of historic resources, the City Council directed staff to investigate ways in which owners of historic properties could generate income that could assist in their preservation, upkeep, and restoration, while balancing the interest of neighboring properties in Residential zones. One potential source is to allow the rental of historic resources for meetings and events, subject to conditional use standards. The conditions to allow this use would include limits on the number of events and attendees, noise, and parking. A total of 18 events could be held annually-12 events with up to 40 attendees and 6 events with up to 200 attendees. Staff reviewed the eight historic resources that are in residential zones and prepared Table 1. The two historic properties in commercial zones would presently permit this use. Meetings would most likely be considered an accessory use in the Durham School, at this time. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERJ--1Y CONDITIONAL USE PAGE 2 OF 8 DE\rELOP1viENT CODE AMENDMENT Table 1: Historic Sites in Residential Zones HISTORIC SITE, SITE CHARACTERISTICS MEETING AND : EVENT. USE` 7 4, '7 3 { susr , { POTENTIAL _ i' 1 4✓ t Yt'( .ti~. T 1tY 4i1A cC'!y ns G~13 't -n~ j . r r, r f is UP. :TO,40 UP..r 1 T0; '200- ATTENDEES 'ATTENDEES 1. Durham Developed with school and Elementary School large parking lot. Surrounded by Possible Possible industrial uses 2. John F. Tigard Small house, used as a museum, Possible Possible House lot owned b Water District 3. "Ye-Olde" Windmill is only structure, lot is Unlikely Unlikely Windmill a .13 acre ark 4. Charles F. Tigard 3000 square ft. house on 1.5 Possible Possible House acre lot 5. Tigard Farmhouse 2600 square ft. house on '/z acre Possible Possible and Windmill lot 6. Seven Gables 2500 square ft. house on '/a acre Possible Possible U shaw House lot 7. Gaarde House 2900 square ft. house on 1/4 Possible Unlikely acre lot 8. Shaver-Bilyeu 3600 square ft. house on 2 acre Possible Possible House lot 1 Staff included all properties with a house as having the potential to have 40 attendees at a meeting or event. Staff included properties with lots .5 acres or larger as having the potential to have 200 attendees at a meeting or event. This doesn't take into account whether the site could realistically meet the conditional use requirements. In 2000, a previous Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA2000-0001) sought to conditionally allow bed and breakfast establishments and weddings in Historic Overlay zones. The City Council voted to deny the amendment. A brief search of the codes of neighboring communities did not reveal any language that was identical to the proposed language. Some jurisdictions allow Historic properties only the uses that are allowed in the underlying zone where it is located. However, the codes of the Milwaukie, Washington County and Clackamas County have provisions allowing additional conditional uses, including restaurants, offices, bed and breakfasts and community centers for civic and cultural events, for Historic properties in residential zones that meet certain criteria (including being located on an arterial street.) Additionally the city of Troutdale allows the Planning Commission to authorize any use as a conditional use which can be shown to contribute to the preservation or reuse of the site or structure, subject to the Conditional Use criteria. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL. USE PAGE 3 OF 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 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 18.390.060.G. Chapter 18.390.060.G 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 changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal was met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice has been published in the Tigard Times newspaper prior to the public hearing. Two Public Hearings are being held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which public input is welcome. Notice was also sent to 830 property owners, all the properties within a 500 foot radius of a Historic property in a residential zone. 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 planning 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 provides analysis and policies with which to evaluate a request for amending the Code consistent with Goal 2. Statewide Planning Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: Goal 5 establishes a process for natural and cultural resources to be inventoried and evaluated. This goal has been met by the inventory of local historic resources and the subsequent comprehensive plan updates that identified additional resources. The proposed code amendment could provide the owners of the historic properties additional income that would assist in the preservation, upkeep, and restoration of the properties. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: There are no applicable Metro regulations that this amendment directly impacts. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ 1-IISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL. USE PAGE 4 OF 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 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 goal has been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Tigard Times on November 2, 2006. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. Notice was also sent to all of the property owners within a 500 foot radius of a Historic property in a residential zone (approximately 830 owners). The written notices invited public input and included the phone number and e-mail address of a contact person to answer any questions. Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.7.1: Historical-Cultural Resources The policy states "The City shall identify and promote the preservation and protection of historically and culturally significant structures, sites, objects and districts within Tigard." The implementation strategy states "To preserve the community's history, an index of historic sites shall be developed and made available to the general public. A program shall be developed to acquire and/or restore a number of historical structures identified as significant. The City should consider the renovation of a historic structure as a historic museum or cultural center and meeting hall such as Durham School, Ye-Olde Windmill, and the John F. Tigard House." The proposed amendments would likely have the result of supporting this policy by giving property owners a potential source of income that could be used to protect Tigard's Historical-Cultural Resources. APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.130: Use Classifications 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. Residents are free to hold meetings and. events in their homes on a non-commercial basis. The proposed code amendment requires the addition of a definition of "Meeting and Event Use" as a Commercial Use to distinguish commercial and non-commercial meeting types. This type of use is already implicitly permitted in Commercial zones. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.330: Conditional Uses The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERIy-\Y CONDITIONAL USE PAGE 5 OF 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. The proposed code amendment would add a new section of development standards for conditional use approval of Meeting and Event Uses in Residential zones. The standards specify the use is only allowed in properties in a Historic Overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places. The standards also address the maximum number of events per year, maximum numbers of persons attending the meeting, hours of operation, light, noise, and parking. The standards also specify that violations of the conditions of approval or code provisions could result in the revocation of the conditional use permit by the Director. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this title and zoning district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Malting Procedures This chapter establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. , Section 18.390.060.G 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 18.510: Residential Zoning Districts The major purpose of the regulations governing development in residential zoning districts is to protect the livability of existing and future residential neighborhoods, by encouraging primarily residential development with compatible non-residential development. While the zone is primarily residential, such uses as schools, churches, parks and recreation facilities, and day care centers are conditional uses in residential zones. The conditional use process assures that the uses are appropriate scale and location, and that any off-site impacts are minimized. The proposal to allow meeting and events uses in historic properties in residential zones seeks to minimize the impacts on the surrounding residences, by requiring the applicant to meet standards before receiving conditional use approval. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.740: Historic Overlay Section 18.740 regulates the historic overlay. Currently, this section only regulates the designation and alterations of the properties with a historic designation and does not permit or disallow additional uses. The proposed code amendment would add a new section "Incentives for maintenance" which would allow owners of historic properties to apply for a conditional approval to allow meeting and event uses. This addition could assist in furthering two of the purposes of the chapter, to "facilitate the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of such STAFF REPORT TO THE_ PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PAGE 6 OF 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT improvements and of such districts which represent or reflect elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political and architectural history" and "promote the use of historic districts and landmarks for the education, pleasure, energy conservation, housing, and public welfare of the City." SECTION V. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Building Division, Police Department, Public Works, Long Range Planning Division and Urban Forester have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. SECTION VI. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS Metro, Oregon Department of Transportation, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Tualatin Valley Water District, Clean Water Services, the Planning Directors of the cities of Beaverton, Durham, King City, Lake Oswego, Portland, and Tualatin, and the State Historic Preservation Office were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development responded via phone and had no objections. SECTION VII. OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT As of November 6, 2006 two letters/e-mails and four phone calls were received by staff in response to the public notice. Two letters came from neighbors of the Shaver-Bilyeu Residence (also known as the Quello House.) The letters opposed the code amendment and stated that the meeting and commercial use would negatively impact their properties by increasing noise and traffic. The letters also noted that allowing weddings would result in drunk drivers in the neighborhood. The letters pointed out that the events would most likely take place on weekends, when no Code Enforcement officer is available to monitor noise and the other impacts. Of the four phone calls, three inquired into the meting of the notice, and were neither pro nor con (two were from owners of historic properties, and a third was from a neighbor.) One caller registered strong disapproval at the proposal, saying that it would have the effect of reducing property values of neighboring properties, because of the increased noise and parking problems. Additionally, prior to the notice, one phone call and two a-mails were received by staff in response to a newspaper article in the Tigard Times regarding the Quello House owner's desire to hold weddings and other events (prior to the drafting of specific code language.) One of the e- mails was neutral. The phone call and other written correspondence registered objections about the offsite impacts of allowing weddings and similar events in a residential neighborhood. Response: In order to get a permit for this use, an owner of a historic property would have to go through a conditional use process, with a public hearing before a Hearings Officer. In order to get approval, the owner will have to prove how he or she would meet the development standards, which include complying with the noise ordinance and supplying a parking plan for each event. It is likely that the events will take place during times when no code enforcement officer is available. However, the proposed code language specifies that violations of the conditions of approval or code provisions could result in the revocation of the conditional use permit by the Director. The owner of the property would have an incentive not to generate neighbor complaints and comply STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HEARING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PAGE 7 OF 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT with the conditional use requirements. Violations would however require an additional process to determine whether to revoke the approval. Please see Attachment 1 for copies of the public comment correspondence, received as of November 7, 2006. SECTION VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS The proposed Development Code Amendment complies with the Statewide Planning Goals, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Staff has presented code language with which to guide and approve any of the proposed uses. It attempts to strike a balance between the interests of those living in residential zones, the owners of historic properties who would wish to engage in this use, and the Tigard community, which has an interest in the preservation of historic resources. The Planning Commission and Council will determine in their judgment whether the proposed code amendment does that or needs to be revised or denied. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. November 8. 2006 PREPARED BY: Sean Fa y DATE Associa nner November E , 2006 APPRO D B : Ric and ewersdo DATE Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING CONt IISSION 11-20-2006 PUBLIC HE-A LING DCA 2006-00005/ HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PAGE 8 OF 8 DENIELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT Map A -j- 44 1 Historic Sites t - - - - - - =-L - + - \ 4P Residential I-- zPas r-, L Zoning Districts j FERRY- City of Tigard l i.- ou, Oregon I t u r 3 h I 1`' -1 i - - 1 r_ A Historic Site Zoning District Boundary r_-.1. _I---I-~_~ Street i• I ELI J -Railroad -._171 I /1~~ / ti, f-1°'-s^ ..K I I I'---I p,, ~t~ e~P~ lal n, H &n-~+ v 7 City of Tigard h ' - r MOUN I i m C s ti J f 7,rc i IX, w is npromrcd.w. tkanupu<64.. w J i - 4~._• - i { :~X' \Pas ,_L. f- I i N. n,aved ummmer„r. 11 1 I , -1- - I--- LLA. _ I ~Y. > > ~ Lxx .`tea _ - - I ~ it T ~ r r ; I 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 - I I ' - I ' Il1.1_... 1_.J 11 ~ I\~ T --I / tAileS L ,1\, I ~ I I -lam I I - _ . _ L _ _ r / ew'a• ,~mre e..~e...~ n..,®.nmr Attachment 4 DCA 2006-00005 List of Public Correspondence: 1. Ted & Linda Moore, November 22, 2006 2. Glen Comuntzis, November 17, 2006 3. Sherilyn de La Torre & Donald J. Hook, November 20, 2006 4. Gail & Curt Dowler, November 20, 2006 5. Cheryl Cappelli, November 13, 2006 6. Michael & Sharon Brewin, November 8, 2006 7. Cary & Benton Holzwarth, October 31, 2006 8. Karen L. Butler, October 29, 2006 9. Don & Barbara Manghelli, October 25, 2006 10. Lesli R. Miller, October 4, 2006 11. Mark Walker, October 2, 2006 Sean Farrelly -Commercial Use of Private Property Page 1 From: "TED MOORE" <ted.moore@yahoo.com> / To: <sean@tigard-or.gov> Date: 11/22/2006 3:20:19 PM Subject: Commercial Use of Private Property Tigard City Council and Tigard Planning Commission. It is unclear to me why you would want to grant commercial use of certain historical private properties when you would not do so for other private properties less than 20 feet away. We live 3 houses away from the old Gaarde House where our streets are already crowded with parked cars. Additional cars would really be unacceptable. I do not think this is an appropriate change for our residential area. Ted & Linda Moore 13870 SW 114th Ave. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Sean Farrelly - Fwd, Unlawful Zoning Change (Out of Office) _ Page From: Cathy Wheatley To: Council; Woodruff Tom O Date: 11/20/2006 3:52:55 PM Subject: Fwd: Unlawful Zoning Change (Out of Office) Hello, The e-mail below got "caught" in the filter on my computer. I found it a few minutes ago and redirected it to my regular e-mail. Cathy Cathy Wheatley, Tigard City Recorder 639-4171 Ext. 2410 NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS: cathy@tigard-or.gov Cathy Wheatley 11/20 3:38 PM I am out of the office until Monday, November 20. 1 will respond to e-mail requests on Monday, but if you need immediate assistance, please contact Deputy City Recorder Carol Krager at carol k(cDtigard-or.us, or you may call her at 503-718-2419. Cathy Telephone Number: 503-718-2140 gglenc 11/17/06 20:48 TO: Mayor, City Councilors and Planning Dept. Staff Hi Cathy, The City of Tigard and its planning dept. are attempting to foist an illegal land-use, zoning change on the entire city, that includes the Genesis Development that in effect will allow a COMMERCIAL USE in a residential area. The City Planning Dept. and the City Council/Mayor of Tigard have demonstrated their lack of representation of the citizens and their commitment to "special interests" in this city that the VOTERS will NOT tolerate. The laws have been violated by city officials and staff. One would have thought that the First Tuesday in November's election would have given the electeds on the Tigard city council a WAKE-UP call. Perhaps not. As a citizen, activist, and voter in this community, I cannot allow such a major revision of zoning code to occur to jeopardize the land values of the residential properties in the Genesis Development, and other residential areas in the City of Tigard by the planning dept., its employees, the appointed commission, and the city council. The laws are being TRASHED by the City Government which will bring litigation, legislation, and political action, against it BY the citizens of this city. Moreover, IF the planning dept. and the city council/mayor pursue such unlawful zoning changes, please understand the purpose of the electoral RECALL in Oregon. That will be employed given the abject corruption that has occurred as some of the city council members have been "entertained" by the very person who will benefit financially if such a rezoning is permitted BY that city council. Please note that the city council members who have NOT REPORTED receipt of the "value" of that entertainment from that person who is petitioning the Council, then each of the City Councilors is in CRIMINAL VIOLATION of the Oregon Ethics Code! Sean Farrelly _Fwd: Unlawful Zoning Change (Out The next session of the Oregon Legislature will bring to bear amendments to such laws that govern the city of Tigard (i.e. the city's charter). If the City Councilors continue on this path, there will be no reason for city residents to remain IN the city of Tigard and do have the ability to secede from the city of Tigard, OR, by charter the City of Tigard can be absorbed by other units of government. Those are just a few examples of "citizen action" against those who are willfully violating the state's and city's land-use laws on behalf of "cronies" in the city, at the expense of the other law-abiding residents. Please note the wide-range of citizens who would be harmed by such a move by the city of Tigard (to rezone residential use to a commercial use) and the extent to which those residents will respond in-kind. The exposure by the city councilors and planning dept. staff IS a legal one given the "entertaining" by the petitioner OF the city councilors, each of whom now are exposed by law. It is in the best interest of the citizens of Tigard, the Genesis neighborhood, and frankly, the political longevity of the city councilors and mayor's terms of office, to DROP such a corrupt idea as to commercialize a residential area (as in the Genesis Development). If the city staff and councilors/mayor pursue the current course of action, citizens will be forced to bring a political, legislative, and legal response to each. Please do not cause this to occur. Drop the issue on the Monday night's agenda and leave the neighborhoods alone. Respectfully, Glen Comuntzis Tigard, Oregon Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. CC: Craig Prosser; Liz Newton; Tom Coffee Sean Farrelly - Chapter 18.130.020 Page 11 From: <sissydlt@att.net> To: <cathy@tigard-or.gov> Date: 11/20/2006 10:38:28 AM Subject: Chapter 18.130.020 We continually receive unsigned flyers encouraging us to notify both the Tigard City Council and Tigard Planning Commission (specifically the public hearings beig held 11/20 and 12/12) to voice disapproval of the condition use of historical sites. I would like to express our thoughts. We live around the corner from the Shaver-Bilyeu House, a block away from Tigard High School. Having functions at this house is not a problem. It can not be any worse than Tigard athletic events. Noise/Music? We live next to Cook Park and there are occasional evnets going on there as well. Sherilyn de la Torre Donald J. Hook 503.639.5271 CC: <jeree@tigard-or.gov>, <sean@tigard-or.gov> RECD N 0 V 2--0 2006 ' Gail & Curt Dowler 16515 S.W. 93`a Street Tigard, Oregon 97284 November 20, 2006 Tigard City Council and the Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Council and Planning Commission Members: We are writing to you concerning a disturbing but not totally unexpected development regarding the proposed development code text changes for historical sites including those in residential neighborhoods. We have already experienced the "benefits" of having a historic home as the focus for weddings and their receptions hosted by Rev. Quello; these events were touted as being quiet, infrequent and small; in truth they turned out to be all summer long and anything but quiet. Most of the activities for these events occurred outside. As Tigard residences who purchased a home, pay our taxes and abide by the laws we were unable to use our deck area; open our windows; and even have refuge inside our house without the invasive sounds of loudspeakers and party chatter, exacerbated by the small canyon creek that increased the already substantial volume of the activities. Who would consciously choose to purchase a home in a neighborhood, supposedly residential, where your neighbor has a business that increases the traffic congestion and has paid social gatherings most or every weekend to the level that you are unable to have a few friends and/or family members at your home to engage in conversation at less than a scream? These events are more than likely to occur outside; the proposed code is a maximum of 18 meetings annually; this can translate into at least one weekend day every weekend from June through September; every weekend day July and August; the scenarios are unlimited as it seems the time range is, 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM, to ensure that actual residents of the neighborhoods are unable to enjoy their property; are we expected to conduct our activities from 9:30 PM to 6:30 AM if we hope to have an atmosphere not charged with total strangers partying? One third of those meetings can have as many as 200 people! Is this compatible with a residential neighborhood? Is this a residential neighborhood you would want to live in, raise your children in and retire in? Does this kind of activity, intrusive to our personal lives, destroying our ability to enjoy our home and our outside area in the small window that is Oregon summer; is this family values and livability? Who will benefit from this, not the families who will be most effected by the invasion with our sense of home destroyed; there will be people coming into our "residential" neighborhood that would no longer fit into the definition as residential; people who are here to have a good time and not encumbered by the concerns of the effect on the surrounding community; after all they paid to have a good time in our neighborhood. Initially, if we recall correctly, Rev Quello explained that he wanted to recoup some of the cost in renovating a rundown property and be able to send his son to college; it is very nice that he decided to fix-up the property but it was his choice to purchase it; we think it is wonderful for a father to want his son to have a good education; but on both points we could not come to terms with why the surrounding residential neighborhood needed to give up their sense of home so he could achieve some of his financial targets. Why would the neighbors have to forego basic amenities when we all have things we would like to do; we do not expect our neighbors to relinquish important aspects of their living so we can accomplish our goals. Thank you in advance for taking time to read this letter Gail Dowler Curt Dowler : -~07(4~ S, November 13, 2006 RECEIVED PLANNING Tigard Planning Commission and Tigard City Council Members NOV 1 4 2006 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 CITY OF TIGARD Dear Tigard Planning Commission and Tigard City Council Members: Dick Bewersdorff Craig Dirksen Sally Harding Sean Farrelly Nick Wilson Tom Woodruff Sydney Sherwood Can you remember the last time you went to 14 weddings in one summer? I do. My family wasn't even invited. In fact, we didn't even have to leave home. With no place to hide, my children were subjected to drunken party conversation and pounding music as they lay in their beds at 9:00 PM. And, if we missed any of the excitement by abandoning our home to avoid the event, we could count on another party the next morning or afternoon or evening. One big party, all summer long, for over three summers in a row, until the City Council heard the voice of the residential neighborhood and pulled the plug on the Quello party business by rightfully denying a Conditional Use permit. This is the first reason to vote no on this amendment: Conditional Use gives unfair advantage to one property owner. Conditional Use of the Quello property limits normal use of nearby properties. The three year test of the party train blasting through evening barbecues, Sunday morning coffee and afternoon naps demonstrated that Conditional Use is adverse to residential use. Whether the events are paid for or not, they dominate the neighborhood with noise, litter and traffic. Conditional Use has already been denied. Changing city code to permit Conditional Use is a backdoor attempt to restore the party business. But, backdoor or front door, Conditional Use unfairly disrupts the home life of neighboring properties. Next, regarding the code change citing a need for Conditional Use to "assist in the upkeep and restoration of properties", the Quellos are already receiving special tax treatment for that purpose. According to Washington County, since 1994 the Quello home, known as the Shaver-Bilyeu House on the National Historic Register has participated in an Oregon historic tax program that freezes taxable value. The Quello home, valued at $790,970 pays taxes on a frozen valuation of $166,060 until June 30, 2009. The frozen valuation is then renewable for another 15 year period. It is a poke in the nose to think that avoiding taxes on at least $625,000 over the course of 30 years isn't a substantial savings for the maintenance and restoration of this historic property. This is the second reason to vote no on this amendment: A significant incentive program by the State of Oregon already supplies historic property owners tax relief dollars for the restoration and maintenance of their property. A secondary program for compensation appears excessive. For the city to support unfair advantage for one property over others and to establish another incentive program when the state provides incentive via significant tax relief could be construed as special interest. Conditional Use has been tried and has failed in this residential neighborhood. I respectfully request that you vote no on DCA 2006-00005. Sincerely, Cheryl Cappelli 16405 SW 93rd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 Jerreb Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 1 November 8, 2006 Submitted for the Public Record To: Tigard City Council Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard, Planning Dept. From: 1) Michael Brewin, and 2) Sharon Brewin, property owners 11225 SW Morgen Ct., Tigard, Oregon 3) Michael Brewin/SOULJAZZ LLC an Oregon business Regarding: City of Tigard DCA 2006-00005 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Proposed Code Amendment to Allow Meeting and Event Uses as a Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Residential Zones Introduction: Michael and Sharon Brewin are resident property owners in Tigard, as well as owners of a local business. Mr. Brewin is a historian (US History) who has taught at Portland State University, Portland Community College, and Clackamas Community College. He has also been an events producer/consultant for almost 40 years, including directing hundreds of concerts and events at Portland State University and co-producing jazz festivals. He is an expert in these fields, and in related matters (professional musician and audio production). He has also served as a City of Tigard facilitator, on the advisory board of the Tigard Chief of Police, and as an aide to the Hon. Ron Wyden. Mrs. Brewin is a mathematics instructor at Portland Community College, and she taught 31 years in the public schools. The Brewins have lived in Tigard since the 1980s. Mr. Brewin, Mrs. Brewin, and Souljazz LLC hereby register their opposition to this proposal, request this written submission (and all attachments) and their objections be made part of the record, request they be notified of any subsequent hearings and a final decision, and they call into question the representations, process, legality, amendments, fairness, appropriateness, and any alleged necessity or justification provided, based upon a number of 1) procedural and 11) substantive issues+photosl, which we shall articulate herein. They call for the rejection of these inequitable and invasive amendments: these proposals (as written) would introduce broad, inappropriate and prohibited commercial uses into residential zones; would generate parking/traffic problems, public noise nuisances, public safety issues, and invade citizens' privacy in residential zones; would confer monopolistic commercial uses upon a handful of private property owners for their own I Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc ;}age 2 benefit; and would be inequitable to the other 45,000 citizens of Tigard - residents, property owners and businesses alike. The broad uses cited/permitted in the proposal text (which was not mailed to affected property owners in the residential zones, nor were the addresses of the locations) do not even relate directly to any appropriate "historical" activities or purposes, for the most part. There are no provisions that the city will pro-actively, responsibly enforce or accurately monitor these event uses (attendee numbers, traffic, noise, and public safety), nor the facilities (full commercial code compliance, full ADA standard disabled accessibility (including bathrooms), fire marshal and health inspections, smoke detectors/fire alarms sprinklers and posted exits, sufficient commercial use liability insurance), nor for compliance to all federal, state, county, and local non-discrimination laws and commerce regulations which pertain to renting/leasing, hiring, and pricing policies or practices, etc. which might discriminate on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, nationality, and political or personal beliefs. Neither should the city aid and abet nor engage in promoting the "establishment of religion" for any alleged "historical site" receiving such status or exclusive commercial use privileges. Furthermore, the permanent introduction of such invasive "parties" and "weddings" etc. with up to 200 attendees (and probably 100 motor vehicles) would harm the real estate market sales values of adjacent and nearby properties. Since this negative situation did not exist previously, and since this would be the fault of local governmental action, then any and all such affected property owner[s] would have every right to hold the City of Tigard liable for actual and punitive damages, costs, fees, and other restitution, at any time in the future. Please note that this hasty, ill-advised community development code amendment process originated for the sole benefit of one private property owner who apparently approached city officials, and there are fundamental problems entailed in the process, at every step. Argument I: The process has been fundamentally flawed, misrepresented, handled incorrectly, and has not been executed in full accordance with the spirit and letter of prevailing Oregon statutes. The process began with a Mr. Quello apparently contacting City of Tigard officials, who introduced a City Council meeting agenda item essentially on his sole behalf. The city officials and staff involved have not divulged any ex parte contacts or communications with Mr. Quello, or the nature of such contacts which have occurred, or in the past. Misrepresentation in the Agenda: The published Agenda for TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AND BUSINESS MEETING August 15, 2006 5. DISCUSS WHETHER TO INITI;\TE A DI \'G1.OP,\IGNT CODE AMI_ND\IF.NT 2 Jerree;~ewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Page 3 TO ALLOW NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IN A RESIDENTIAL. "ZONING DISTRICT AT THE QUE'LLO HOUSE AND SIMILAR PROPERTIES • Staff Report: Commllnlt\' Development Department [See attached published Agenda] There is no historical site or entity properly named or listed as the "Quello House." The agenda naming the "Quello House" can not be referenced anywhere in respect to a historical site. It is a false representation of a labeled historic site with a legitimately recognized name - the Shaver-Bilyeu House [aka the Shaver House]. Persons unfamiliar with this fact or house would not know what the Agenda item referred to. This listing was misleading to the public at large. Misrepresentation in the Minutes and by Mr. Quello: In the Citv Council Workshop and Business Meetin! Minutes, August 15, 2006, the term "Quello House" is used repeatedly by the city councilors and by Mr. Quello in misrepresenting the historic "Shaver-Bilveu House" as "Quello House." [See attached published Minutes, particularly pages 5 and 6.1 The correct official term for the historic house and site, the Shaver-Bilyeu House, is never used or mentioned anywhere in the minutes. Any person reading the Minutes to better understand this matter was not properly informed about the actual alleged historical site being discussed, but rather was misled by the Minutes. Any person researching Tigard's historical sites would not find "Quello House" on the City of Tigard's page of historical sites on its website, nor in the National Historic Registry. Therefore, the City Council agenda item and discussion, and the publishing of the same in the Minutes, constituted a misrepresentation to the public. Similarly, any other members of the public observing the City Council meeting were likewise misled. [It took Mr. Brewin, a historian, himself awhile to sort out this misrepresentation and find and identify the actual misnamed site referred to in the Minutes, by comparing addresses and personally visiting all the listed Tigard historical site addresses. He was familiar with the traditional historic name, Shaver House, and the official name, the Shaver-Bilyeu House.] The Minutes state: "Mr. Quello advised the Quello House was listed on the National Historical Site registry." His statement is false. The "Shaver-Bilyeu House" is listed on the National Historical Site registry. On the surface, this might seem like a technicality. However, Mr. Quello has coveted the historical site name for himself, and has methodically tried to obscure the legitimate "historical" name, ever since he applied for and obtained a historical site designation (with additional benefits, including low property taxes) in 1993 based upon the Shaver-Bilyeu House and those families' cultural histories, shortly after he purchased the property in 1990. Further Misrepresentations by Mr. Quello: Since purchasing the property in 1990 and obtaining an official historical designation for the Shaver-Bilyeu House in 1993, Mr. Quello has demonstrated selfish intent and unethical conduct in trying to erase the historical name designation, by willfully and Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.docPage 4 deceptively superimposing his own name on a historical site (giving the impression that it is the Quello ancestral home), and by making calculated misrepresentations, not only to the City of Tigard, but in deceptive large signage at the edge of his property, and in an expired Oregon business name registration ("The Flower Farm at the Quello House" first registered in 1999, expired 2-06-2005) and a recent registration ("The Flower Fann"). See attached photo of the north side of the large sign: "Quello House est. 1892" (Shave r-Bilyeu_l.jpg). Attached photo of the south side of the sign: "Flower Farm est. 1892" (Shaver-Bilyeu_2.jpg). Also, does the sign conform to city code, ne. type, size and placement, for a residentially zoned private property? On the day the photos were taken (November 7, 2006), there were no signs visible anywhere from the street that this is the "Shaver House est. 1892" (or "Shaver-Bilyeu House est. 1892"). This pattern evidenced by Mr. Quello's actions demonstrates that Mr. Quello is not a sincere or suitable guardian of a designated "historical site," that his motives are selfish, and that he seeks to gain further exclusive commercial and property privileges through misrepresentations and manipulation of a "historical site" designation, besides already paying very low assessed property taxes for such a large house on two acres. On these grounds alone, the City of Tigard should reject the proposed amendments and any future notion of extending special monopoly rights to Mr. Quello (or similar private property owners). History Mr. and Mrs. Quello purchased the 2+ acres property and 3648 sq ft house and outbuildings in 1990 for only $140,000. In 1993 they themselves sought a national historical designation for the house and property, using the Shaver and Bilyeu family histories - and thereby gaining property tax relief. They also put a misleading sign on the property, labeling the house "Quello House est. 1892." The property had allegedly previously had a sign denoting the "Shaver House." The Secretary of State, State of Oregon, has an official website with an Oregon Historical Records Index. This index contains not only state records, but historical records for every Oregon county. The historical index does not contain a single reference to anyone named Quello. Mr. Brewin tested and verified this index by typing in various surnames of Mrs. Brewin's own family ancestors, including the historic Bird family pioneers of Champoeg and Clackamas County. The Oregon historical records revealed many references to Mrs. Brewin's ancestral family members. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, among other things, delineates the goals and Purpose of the Act, which include preserving "historic heritage," such as "retain the name historically associated with the building or structure," and "protect those qualities that are historically significant." 4 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written _testimony.doc Page 5 From Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act: "(A) that historic properties under the jurisdiction or control of the agency, are identified, evaluated, and nominated to the National Register; (B) that such properties under the jurisdiction or control of the agency as are listed in or may be eligible for the National Register are managed and maintained in a way that considers the preservation of their historic, archaeological, architectural, and cultural values in compliance with section 106 of this Act and gives special consideration to the preservation of such values in the case of properties designated as having National significance." Likewise, the federal government directs the Department of the Interior (in Section 112) to do the following: (1) provide information to the owners of properties containing historic (including architectural, curatorial, and archaeological) resources with demonstrated or likely research significance, about the need for protection of such resources, and the available means of protection-, (2) encourage owners to preserve such resources intact and in place and offer the owners of such resources information on the tax and grant assistance. Relevant National Historic Preservation Act definitions: ""Preservation" or "historic preservation" includes identification, evaluation, recordation, documentation, curation, acquisition, protection, management, rehabilitation, restoration, stabilization, maintenance, research, interpretation, conservation, and education and training regarding the foregoing activities, or any combination of the foregoing activities." The National Register of Historic Places website (www.nationalregisterofhistoricalplaces.com) lists the "Shaver-Bilveu House" as follows: Shaver-Bilyeu House (added 1993 - Building - #93000014) Also known as Shaver,William E. and Lizzie,House 16445 SW. 92nd Ave., Tigard Historic Significance: Architecture/Engineering, Event Architect, builder, or engineer: Unknown Architectural Style: Other, Queen Anne Area of Significance: Architecture, Exploration/Settlement Period of Significance: 1900-1924, 1925-1949 Owner: Private Historic Function: Domestic Historic Sub-function: Single Dwelling Current Function: Domestic Current Sub-function: Single Dwelling [Please also note the historic function: Domestic. Not any "commercial" uses, not weddings, events, parties, luncheons, meetings, etc.] Evidence of the Quellos' continued efforts to obscure the actual documented historic and cultural values of the house and property site, by falsely superimposing their own name Quello as a historical site identity and designation, is most compelling in refuting any 5 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 6 disingenuous claim they might make about historical preservation, or in this most recent attempt to exploit the goodwill of the City of Tigard and gain additional personal exclusive benefits/privileges and non-historic prohibited commercial uses and functions in a residential zone. Furthermore, if the National Register of Historic Places was notified about the Quellos' quest to obliterate the historic name and historic and cultural values of the Shaver-Bilyeu House and those families, it is likely the property would be removed from the national registry of historic places. The City of Tigard's own website lists the property as follows: Shaver-Bilyeu House, 16445 SW 92nd Avenue Year Designated: * 1993 Constructed in 1906, the Shaver-Bilyeu House is the best surviving vernacular Queen Anne Cottage farm residence in the Durham community of Tigard. It is significant culturally due to its association with the Shaver family, who contributed to the formation of the local school district, and to its later association with J.C. Bilyeu, first postmaster of Tigard. [*note: listed on the national but not the local registry] The Tigard Citv Council Minutes of August 15, 2006 state: "Mr. Quello spoke to the City Council. He submitted a written statement outlining how a conditional use approval would benefit his property... His key points were: [I] there is a need in the City of Tigard for this type of facility. [2] The Quellos are willing to share this facility with the community at no cost to the taxpayers. [3] Historic property will disappear if a way is not found to make such property viable." Rebuttal to Mr. Quello's presented key points: [I ]Mr. Quello's statement outlines only how a conditional use approval will benefit him and his property. This is not necessarily a benefit to the community or to the city. The city (and outlying metropolitan area) has plenty of rental facilities for events, public meeting halls and schools, churches and facilities for weddings, public and commercial event facilities, and public parks for any and all of these commercial uses. These are all "appropriate venues.", His residentially-zoned "domestic" house and property and location is "NOT appropriate" for a commercial public event facility. [2] Are the Quellos willing to share this facility absolutely free of charge to any and all of the taxpayers of Tigard who want to reserve and use it - e.g. for a wedding, a party, a meeting, an event? Mr. Quello's statement here is also misleading; he wants to obtain commercial uses, for which he will receive monetary remuneration. He wants to run his residential property as a commercial business, with exclusive rights and broad uses currently prohibited in residential zones, commercial uses which would be denied to his neighbors - and 45,000 other Tigard residents in residential zones. [3] Que110's implied `threat' of historic property disappearing unless the city allows him to make it commercially "viable" reveals his motive, which is mercenary. His property's zoning and historical designation was never intended to make it commercially "viable." Morever, the house has always had a "domestic" function - for 100 years. Historically, it was never intended for commerce, let alone large rental events, weddings, meetings, parties. If Quello can't afford to maintain his own property (which has a high market real estate value), then he should sell it - to someone who will maintain the property, and who 6 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Page 7 will not demand inequitable government handouts and commercial use monopolies "in restraint of trade" and free enterprise, and in an inappropriate residential zone. And if he truly cares about preserving history, then Mr. Quello will sell the property to the City of Tigard or to a non-profit historical association. In the Minutes of August 15, 2006, the City Council mentioned "neighborhood opposition to the events held at the Quello house in the past." Mr. Quello was conducting weddings, with amplified music and "DJ's." He was repeatedly blatantly and willfully violating city noise nuisance ordinances, parking ordinances, and engaging in illegal commercial uses in a residential zone (including [hired] entertainment for commercial uses). He was also profiting from the use of his property for weddings, officiating at the weddings, etc. (Incidentally, how many of these weddings conducted were not of his own religion? Was he discriminating against other faiths and against agnostics and atheists, diverse groups r.e. the events scheduling?) In light of past problems, he should not be trusted to voluntarily comply with any new conditions the city might impose, since he knowingly violated existing conditions, codes, and ordinances. In fact, Mr. Quello historically has inflicted public nuisances upon his neighbors, and he has violated the noble principle of "love thy neighbor as thyself." He has not treated his neighbors as he himself would like to be treated. In the course of holding events for his own gain and violating multiple city ordinances and codes, he has callously invaded the privacy and committed transgressions against his law-abiding neighbors - in the process demonstrating selfishness. Conclusion: Instead of being thankful for what he has received in the matter of a bargain lovely home and historical designation (among other things), eligibility for federal grants, generous property tax reductions, and possible tax write-offs (all of which were not due to his own merit, or historically based upon a house with his surname), Mr. Quello further covets and seeks special legal property and broad monopolistic commercial use rights status above all his neighbors and 45,000 other citizens of Tigard, as a newly city- minted landed lord of a privately owned historic estate (which he has historically misrepresented) with attendant special self-serving commercial entitlements denied his own neighbors' properties and their businesses in the same residential zone. This is unconscionable. Note: in 2005, the Quellos paid only $2,714 in property taxes for 2.05 acres and a 3648 sq ft house worth $790,970 (WA county)-980,000 (market). Their adjacent neighbor north at 16425 SW 93rd Ave paid $2,828 - for a 1,712 sq ft house on 0.23 acre. The adjacent neighbor south at 16585 SW 92nd Ave paid $4,438 - for a 3,004 sq ft house on 1.31 acre. For any public officials to knowingly subvert public policy (appropriate land-use regulations) in order to reward such corroborated improprieties and ingratitude with inequitable exclusive commercial privileges - and then apply that sham citywide to 7 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Rage 8 facilitate it - would be patently wrong, and against the public interest. Procedural Disqualifications - Vague and Insufficient `Public Hearing Notice' The City of Tigard did not provide adequate or specific enough notice to its citizens of the public hearings, especially to each of the handful of residentially-zoned neighborhoods directly affected. The "Public Hearing Notice" (which we request the city planning staff submit to include as part of the record) was received during the last few days of October. However, the Public Hearing Notice does not specify any of the locations of so-called "historic" overlays in residential zones. Most Tigard property owners are not familiar with generic "historic overlays," nor with unmarked alleged "historical sites" in their neighborhoods, nor with misleading and confusing, incorrect markings of historical sites, nor even regarding the existence of a historic site on private property in their neighborhood. The Public Hearing Notice does not properly inform the recipients that one of these sites is in their neighborhood and that they may be directly impacted by the land- use decision. Specifically, the Public Hearing Notice does not disclose the street address of any property affected by the zoning. The Public Hearing Notice does not even disclose where one can find this information posted. The Public Hearing Notice does not reveal major details of the proposal which any reasonable person would want to know. All of these facts are contrary to prevailing Oregon statutes. [Reference to: ORS 197.763(3)(a), 197.763(3)(c), and ONRC v. City of Oregon City, 29 OR LUBA 90,97 (1995).1 The Notice Request states: "The applicant is requesting to amend various chapters of the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow meetings and events as a conditional use on properties with Historic Overlays and /or on the National Register of Historic Places in residential zones." The Notice does not mention that the "conditional use" is in fact "commercial," that there are broad "commercial uses" involved for "direct or indirect compensation," that these code changes would allow currently prohibited "commercial uses" in residential zones and on private properties, that such commercial uses could include up to 200 people and their automobile traffic/parking at events and might be totally unrelated to any bona fide historical purposes, that this new category of proprietary exclusive uses would be inequitable vis a vis other residentially-zoned property owners (even adjacent neighbors), and that these inequitable, granted uses could be perpetual - and might proliferate in the future. Mr. Brewin alerted the Tigard planning staff (Mr. Sean Farrelly) of these Notice deficiencies in a legally recorded phone conversation that took place 2:20-3:00 pm on Monday, October 30"'. Mr. Farrelly admitted that he did not list any information about how the Public Hearing Notice recipients could access this vital land-use information, including the proposed code text changes. Mr. Brewin found some of this information eventually on the internet, after a time-consuming search. Most Tigard citizens would 8 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 9 not know where or how to access this information, and about 40% of Tigard's citizens do not have internet access at home. At the very least, the City of Tigard should have mailed: 1) a two-sided sheet with the Proposed Development Code Text Changes to all the Public Hearing Notice recipients, along with 2) the specific addresses of the private properties affected by this rezoning and creation of an entirely new broad commercial use category to be applied in their residential neighborhoods. The city should also have provided 3) a list of related documents and background material which citizens could access on the city's own website (including the proposed code text changes, the web page with the list of historical sites, the Agenda and Minutes of August 15, etc.). When none of this information was again forthcoming via USPS, let the record show that Mr. Brewin again contacted Mr. Farrelly (who was unavailable), this time leaving a phone message later on Wednesday, November 1, informing Mr. Farrellyy that the planning staff should have notified affected neighboring property owners regarding the address of the affected historical site[s], the actual code amendment text changes, and links to the germane factual and specific documents. Mr. Brewin also referred to past City of Tigard planning staff Public Hearing Notices sent in the past (e.g. Steve Turner, SW 113" Place), which customarily and clearly specified the property address location and the detailed, requested commercial uses, or development, code chancyes, etc.. Ex pane contacts: The City of Tigard planning staff needs to publicly divulge all ex pane contacts with Mr. Quello (and the nature thereof). In the course of conversations with a neighbor (the owner of the Charles F. Tigard house), Mr. Brewin learned that Mr. Quello had obtained the name and contact information of this property owner (and possibly others) regarding her historic house, and had indeed phoned her about the matter, soliciting support. Mr. Quello probably could not have found this information, unless he had been aided by the city staff in networking with other historic property owners. (Who? And How?) To date (1 1/8/6), concerned affected neighboring property owners of this code amendment proposal have not been likewise assisted in networking with similarly concerned property owners in other affected residential zones. Timing of the Public Hearing Notice: the generic, single sheet Public Hearing Notice arrived via USPS along with dozens of election and campaign-related bulk materials. City of Tigard officials and staff should NOT have scheduled the notice at the peak of election mailings (when it would be overlooked and not readily understood by most recipients). and should not have scheduled hearings in such a hasty, flawed, improperly conducted process. Similarly, the associate planner handling this matter, Mr. Farrelly, is on vacation until November 15 and is unavailable to answer questions, provide information, or process testimonial letters pertaining to the code amendment proposal, etc. Official Admission of Omission: Mr. Farrelly also acknowledged to Mr. Brewin on October 30`h, that neither he nor anyone else on the city planning staff had visited and inspected all the "historic sites" involved. Since there are only five historic sites 9 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Page 10 on private properties in residential zones, this should have been an easy feat, given that the city planners have had almost three months' preparation for the staff report. (Note: The John Tigard House is administered by a non-profit public entity, the Tigard Historical Association, c/o the Tigard Public Library, and Windmill Park is public property, too. The Grange Hall and Joy Theater are in commercial zones, and the Durham school is a Tigard-Tualatin public school.) Mr. Brewin himself drove to all the historic sites in a single afternoon, November 7, taking photos and noting factors at the locations. How could the city planners even prepare a staff report and recommendations, without first carefully inspecting these properties and locations`' A reminder: The Oregon and United States Constitutions govern all actions of government. The constitutional principles of fairness and "due process" in particular are applicable to all land use decisions. The City of Tigard has neither practiced fairness nor "due process" in irresponsibly failing to disclose the most critically relevant and necessary vital information to recipients that should have been contained in the Public Hearing Notice, or contained in a supplemental explanatory sheet that was never prepared, expedited, or included with the Notice. [Again, refer to: ORS 197.763(3)(a), 197.763(3)(c), and ONRC v. City of Oregon City, 29 OR LUBA 90,97 (1995).] A corresponding city planning staff report and its assertions are likewise faulty. Furthermore, state land-use planning Goal 1 also requires citizen involvement in all phases of the planning process. To date (11/8), official City of Tigard communications have systematically worked to misinform and confuse citizens, and to effectively limit and hinder wider citizen involvement in this legal land-use process, as a direct consequence. Conclusions: This land-use process has already not fulfilled important legal and ethical criteria, and this rushed process (rife with misrepresentations) has evidently failed the citizens of Tigard in a number of areas where the citizens are depending solely upon the City of Tigard's officials and staff to act responsibly, fairly, and competently. Thus, the proposal should be rejected and shelved - or begun all over again, with any proposal very limited and more appropriate in scope, and the process handled more satisfactorily. Argument 11: Substantive facts and substantial issues raised which are directly germane to the proposal and conditional uses do NOT support changing the current developmental code, on this subject, as proposed. The Proposed Amendments to the Community Development Code are unnecessary, unreasonable, insupportable, and drastic word changes (and not electorate-based, not popularly based) to the Community Development Code, which would not only create a specifically NEW "commercial use" category, but force prohibited, excessive, and totally inappropriate and invasive "commercial uses" into and upon established 100% residentially zoned neighborhoods, including arbitrary and draconian inequitable policies which would grant unwarranted unfair exclusive commercial privileges to certain 10 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 11 property owners, while denying their adjacent neighbors (and their businesses) these same special "conditional use" perpetual privileges, and furthermore not providing for guaranteed monitoring and protections, and further offering these city-selected private property owners special "incentives for maintenance." It is inappropriate to grant perpetual exclusive commercial use privileges to a handful of private property owners in residential zones, and not also to their neighbors (or to these neighbors' competing registered businesses). The development code change would only be fair and appropriate if these "historical sites" were owned by secular non- profit historical associations, or publicly owned, operated, and maintained, and in more appropriate zone locations, and used for strictly bona fide historical purposes. It is contrary to established American notions of free commerce for any local government to institute and grant new commercial monopolies and inequitable land-use policies which favor a small group of individual private property owners in place of already pre- existing, sound, equitable local land use policies thereby unfairly harming other preexisting property owners and their rights, and in the same residential zones. It is discriminatory to give permanent exclusive commercial use privileges to a handful of private property owners in residential zones, and not to their neighbors (or their businesses), too. That is akin to recreating a feudal system of privileged lords and landed gentry. It is plainly un-American and runs contrary to every notion of fairness. This peculiar "ex post facto" superimposition of a new category of commercial uses and new code amendments upon established neighborhoods and residential zones is ill- advised, uninformed, and would be reckless public policy. The proposed "commercial use types" are too broad and do not even necessarily or appropriately pertain to bona fide "historical" purposes or uses. "Parties," "weddings," "luncheons," etc. do not typically serve historical purposes. There is therefore no reasonable basis to justify (or even consider) any types of meetings/events which do NOT directly pertain to the cultural history, archival history, or verifiable authentic preservation of alleged "historical sites." The origin of this proposal by the City of Tigard lies in the attempt by two city councilors to assist a single property owner, Mr. Quello, in his self-serving bid to commercially profit from prohibited commercial activities at his residentially-zoned address, where he has already held legally-questionable events that constituted prohibited public nuisances. Moreover, Mr. Quello is already deriving the generous benefit of very low assessed property taxes on his valuable estate, especially in comparison with other private residential properties [tax lots] and unique houses of similar size and condition. He certainly does not need public assistance - or government-sanctioned welfare, let alone special monopolistic commercial entitlements. He can always sell the property - for a huge profit. Further, any maintenance of and improvements to the Quellos' private property inure directly to their own financial benefit, and not to the public's benefit. The proposal is nothing more than a selective and improper government handout. II Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Page 12 The number of events [ 18] is excessive, and the number of permitted attendees even more excessive - to the extreme [up to 2001. These arbitrary numbers conjured up by city staff do not even take into consideration the widely varying suitability of locations, the building sizes, the available parking (or lack thereof), the amenities/lack thereof, public and non-discriminatory ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accessibility. If the weddings/parties were all held during the summer months, there would likely be an event every single weekend and holiday from Memorial Day through Labor Day. This would ruin the peaceful living environment for neighbors in every residential zone where such commercial uses transpired. The city planner has also stated that, were this proposal approved, the number of events allowed could also possibly be increased in the future, changing these residential historical sites into permanent year-round commercial event facilities in the middle of residentially-zoned neighborhoods. There is also no mention anywhere in the proposal of responsible necessary on-site monitoring of these properties by the City of Tigard during the proposed weddings, parties, events, etc., r.e. the number of events, number of attendees per event, noise compliance and measuring decibel levels, etc. (a_nd_particularly on weekends, holidays, and evenings when Citv of Tigard offices are closed and the regular city staff and code enforcement officer are NOT even available - and when such events would be most likely to occur!). The city planners do NOT have extensive or in- depth professional events experience or knowledge, they are not audio experts, they are not crowd control experts, and they are uninformed and unqualified to offer any reliable opinion in the matter of events planning/monitoring +and event site use (especially regarding private properties in residential neighborhoods). The City of Tigard does NOT properly enforce noise nuisances already (e.g. the unauthorized Gianola property party on SW Fonner of July 29, which blatantly violated numerous city ordinances/codes - including blasting neighbors at 85-100 decibels at a radius of more than 'A mile from his property and creating a road hazard on SW Former and SW 1 15th, for five hours; city officials coddled it and even made false statements about it to inquiring citizens, both during the illegal party and then for more than a week afterwards). Is the city prepared to monitor and measure the decibel noise level (not to exceed 50 db) of every single event held at these arbitrary historical locations, and respond immediately to every noise complaint - which would inevitably arise from such uses (and most likely on weekends, holidays, and evenings)? And how many police officers routinely carry decibel meters, calibrated weekly, and are trained in their use? Is the city prepared to have a staff person on-site to monitor the number of events, and monitor with absolute confirmable verification (for all public inquiries) the number of persons attending each and every event? Also, routinely coordinate and monitor for non- discrimination in event, meeting, wedding scheduling, hiring and pricing, accessibility, etc.? Actual, on-site monitoring and enforcement of the "conditional use" on a regular basis, and on a moment's notice, is NOT mentioned anywhere in the proposal. What city staff persons will be assigned to monitor each and every event, party, 12 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Page 13 wedding, fund-raiser for absolute compliance (and 7am-9pm)? There is no provision for this clear necessity - involving projected weddings, parties, fund- raisers, after all. The monitoring and compliance can not simply be left up to the property owners or managers of such proposed/designated sites in residential neighborhoods. This is untenable and insupportable; it is unverifiable and problematic. It is similarly untenable and totally unreasonable to place the further burden of monitoring these sites upon the affected surrounding neighbors. That would be a case of the city shirking its public duty - and passing it onto the victims of officials' own irresponsible actions. There is no way these old houses can safely accommodate more than a few dozen people for an event. There is no way the properties can accommodate 40-200 of people at any event (especially a wedding or party) without there being a public noise nuisance which exceeds the legal noise decibel levels (50 db, or anything which disturbs the peace and repose in a "noise- sensitive" unit la residence]), and especially as this pertains to any events (or portions thereof) held outdoors on the residentially-zoned properties. The proposed code amendments do not contain any requirement for visual "screening," i.e. solid hedge, wall, or fence 6-8 feet in height, to prevent flagrantly violating the privacy of affected adjacent properties in these residential zones. While several sites on the city's list of so-called "historical sites" are already suitable and used for regular and large events and/or meetings (the Grange Hall, Durham School and Joy Theater), the houses and private properties listed in residential districts are clearly not suitable nor appropriate. The aforementioned hall, school, and theater and properties were all designed for meetings and/or events or public use. However, the private houses in residentially-zoned neighborhoods were clearly and historically NEVER designed nor intended for such commercial and broad uses as proposed by the city planning staff. These houses were not built to standards required by commercial codes, nor for meetings/events, nor according to any federal and state guidelines/specifications for disabled access. Furthermore, there is already a more than plentiful enough supply of existing rental facilities of all types, halls, banquet rooms, etc. available for events and meetings all over Tigard and nearby in the area - in appropriately constructed public and commercial buildings and churches in appropriately zoned areas, in addition to outdoor public parks. The five "historical" private properties in residential zones are each adjacent to a number of other residential properties with houses. Any meeting and event use would inevitably regularly violate some surrounding neighbors' privacy, and certainly constitute a regular prohibited noise nuisance (weddings, parties, receptions, fund-raisers). It would be virtually impossible to have a wedding or party etc. for 40-200 people at any of these locations inside these older frame houses let alone outdoors that will NOT violate the noise nuisance ordinances, including penetrating the interiors of the surrounding "noise-sensitive" units/residences. Some people and children need sleep sometimes 7am- 9pm. 13 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 14 PHOTOS: The attached photos will provide some insightful information about these alleged "historical sites." Shaver-Bilyeu House: 16445 SW 92". Shaver-Bilyeu_l.jpg demonstrates that Mr. Quello is not preserving the historical and cultural identity as guardian of a historical house. The Quellos are pretending that a place called "Quello House" was established in 1892. Likewise, the Quellos are falsely representing that The Flower Farm was established in 1892 (Shaver-Bilyeu_2.jpg) and not in the 21" century. The SW 92na street parking (east side) is reserved for the high school uses, and parking on nearby streets is restricted. A state-of-the-art public event facility and meeting rooms are nearby at the high school, and Cook Park is down the street, with city-administered outdoor free and rental facilities. Gaarde house: The Gaarde house at 11333 SW Gaarde is located on a busy street with no parking. The photos (Gaarde_l.jpg and Gaarde_2.jpg) show the close proximity of the next-door neighbor's house. Seven Gables Upshaw House: 9890 Peppertree Lane. This house is located on a quiet cul-de-sac. The photo, PeppertreeLane_ l.jpg, shows the close proximity to the next- door neighbor. The photo also shows that the house has been seriously altered. There is a modem garage and roof, and other alterations and additions. This greatly diminishes any historical significance, especially architectural. PeppertreeLane_2.jpg also shows the proximity to the neighbor's house. Charles F. Tigard house: The house at 11180 SW Fonner is set back about 200 yards from the street and is accessible only by a narrow gravel/dirt right-of-way. The street photo (CharlesFTigard_l.jpg) shows the street has no parking, no shoulders, and that cars routinely swerve across people's front yards. CharlesFTigard_2.jpg shows the narrow right-of-way access to the property. This right-of-way is also not suitable for parking; both sides of the path belong to the adjacent neighboring properties. The photo, CharlesFTigard_3.jpg , was shot from the house at 11205 SW Morgen Ct, and shows the close proximity of the Tigard house. The photo, CharlesFTigard_4.jpg,.was shot inside the property of 11225 SW Morgen Ct. and shows the very close proximity of the Tigard house to this neighbor. The photo, CharlesFTigard_5.jpg was shot from the house at 11225 SW Morgen Ct. and shows the close proximity of the Tigard house. This house is situated in a fragile eco-system and natural wildlife habitat, with one of Tigard's remaining intact small forests of old-growth firs, and thousands of nesting and migratory birds, some of which are endangered protected species. (see: Oregon Goal Five) A newer subdivision (SW 113" P1.) is adjacent to the trees and growth. The owners (C. Schultheis) have stated they do not wish to hold commercial events etc. here, and that it would not be appropriate in this location. Note: The Charles F. Tigard house is not at its original site. This is not the "historical site" of the house. It was moved in 1980. Its original location was by Highway 99 (near Elmer's Restaurant and the discount furniture outlet store). The roof has been changed to composition, the basement and foundation are also not original, and it has been remodeled inside. A house that has been moved loses intrinsic significance as a historic place. The more important historical site and building relating 14 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 15 to Charles F. Tigard was his general store. Ripley's Furniture/Gardener's Choice is a more historic building, and was the store moved from across the street (99W). Tigard Farm and Windmill: This house at 10525 SW Tigard St. is located on 'a block with posted "No Parking" signs. It is surrounded by apartment complexes. The two photos, Tigard_Windmill_l.jpg and Tigard_Windmill_2.jpg clearly show the very close proximity of a large apartment building to the windmill and property. The other "historical sites" in residential zones are not private properties. The John Tigard House is located at 10310 SW Canterbury Lane. The photo, JohnTigard_I jpg, shows the location of the tiny house at the intersection of two streets. The photo, JohnTigard_2.jpg shows that the house is a museum used for legitimate non-profit historical purposes. This house has also been moved from its original site (near Highway 99W). This is not the "historical site." Windmill Park is a city park located on SW 12151. Nevertheless, it is located close to neighboring houses, as shown in the photo (Windmill Pk ljpor). Historical observations: In the larger context of history, none of these houses is important or significant nationally. Only in a small-town like Tigard would some of these houses be deemed worthy of any historical designation. For instance, on the east side of Portland, there are hundreds of houses that are as old (or older) which probably have more historical and architectural importance. Yet, hardly any of those houses is officially designated as "historical." On the East Coast, there are thousands of houses that are hundreds of years old. What will happen in the future, if the City of Tigard simply designates every older house, farm, or business as "historical?" (And which panel of professional historians has the city authorized for such purposes?) Moreover, if the city approves the code amendment proposal and designates more and more houses as "historical" in the future, then there will be more nuisance properties with exclusive monopolistic "commercial uses" in residential neighborhoods all over the town. The only house in Tigard that should be officially recognized and accorded any special uses is the John Tigard House, because it is the oldest and has the most historic importance, it is owned and administered as a public non-profit historical site by the Tigard Historical Association, and it serves the public for strictly historical purposes. By comparison, the City of Beaverton has two historic house sites, the Jenkins Estate and the Fanno Farmhouse. Both sites are publicly owned (the Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District). The Jenkins Estate is situated on 68 acres, away from all neighbors, has seven buildings and three support structures. Anyone may rent the Jenkins Estate, through the public park district. No amplified music or sound systems are permitted, indoors or outdoors, not even a microphone. (Mr. and Mrs. Brewin were married there.) Similarly, the publicly owned and administered Fanno Farmhouse is situated on 14 acres next to a main arterial street. Both the Fanno Farmhouse and the Jenkins Estate are suitable venues and properties for events, meetings, weddings, parties, etc. They are 15 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written-testimony.doc Page 16 publicly administered and they are not the source of any public nuisances. That's a major difference between the way the City of Beaverton operates and what the City of Tigard is proposing, r.e. historical houses and conditional uses. While some counties allow conditional uses in rural unincorporated areas, most reputable cities do not permit such inappropriate commercial uses in residential zones. Furthermore, truly historical houses and sites are not used for non-historical purposes (e.g. Hoover-Minthorn House [Newbergl, John McLoughlin House [Oregon Cityl www.mcloughlinhouse.org/, Fort Clatsop http://www.nps.gov/lewi/planyourvisit/fortclatsop.htm). Conclusion: There is therefore NO justifiable need or rationale for any further amendments to the community developmental code, on this subject, and especially pertaining to speedily and deliberately revoking zoning protections which currently protect the public and prohibit invasive broad commercial uses or public nuisances encroaching into residentially-zoned neighborhoods. The persons who purchased these five historical homes (or who sought "historical" status) knew they would have to maintain their own homes; and it inures solely to their own benefit, too. In one case, newer private property owners (i.e. the Quellos) themselves sought the historical designations, and have already been reaping the rewards - in the form of low property taxes. In 2000, a previous Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA2000-0001) sought to conditionally allow bed and breakfast establishments and weddings in Historic Overlay ones. The City Council voted to deny the amendment. It should be reminded that tens of thousands of residential property owners, families, bought their properties - their homes - with the existing zoning, and code prohibitions and protections, and the reasonable expectation that these sensible prohibitions and protections for residential zoning would be lasting and enforced. The City of Tigard's elected and appointed officials should wisely protect carefully crafted existing residential zoning protections and not confer inequitable monopolistic commercial uses and rights upon a small group of private property owners (nor specifically on behalf of any person[s]), nor thereby or otherwise irresponsibly create unmonitored public nuisances, harming numerous other citizens, their properties and property values in the process - but rather exercise prudence and uphold the public trust. Sincerely, 1) Michael Brewin, 2) Sharon Brewin, property owners, 11225 SW Morgen Ct., Tigard, Oregon, USA 16 Jerree Lewis - Brewins-written_testimony.doc Page 17 and 3) Michael Brewin, SOULJAZZ LLC, a Tigard, Oregon, United States business 17 Jerree Lewis - 060815Agenda[l].pdf Page 1 kcViscd. tqL isr 1 1 2006. \d&d a sh()1t busincssnucriii~, scc RIL"c 3. \uwst"_'? Council \Icctingis canceled. ~I F CITY COUNCIL ND BUSINESS MEETING 15, 2006 - 6:30 p.m. RD CITY HALL SW HALL BLVD RD, OR 97213 13L13Ll(: \011CE: Linn request, the City will cndcaVor to arrange for the followingscr-iccs: • Qualificdsign) language intcrprerers for persons with speech or hcaringimpairments;and • ()ualifiedbiliniatalinterprctcrs. Since these services must be scheduled With outside service providers, it is important to allow as much Icad time as possible. Please notify the City of ycxtr need by 3:110 p.m. on the Thursday prcecdingthc meeting by calling. 3113-639-4171, ext. 3410 (Voice) or 303-684-2/72 (FDD - Teleconununielions Devices forthe Deaf). SI__I_:\"l'GACHLD ACG\DA COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 13, 20116 page I Jerree Lewis - 060815Agenda[1].pdf . Page 2 A G, N D A TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP NLE.ETING AUGUST 15, 2006 a.;0rNt I. WORKSHOP \IEI "1TNG 1.1 Call to Order-1"i&Ytrd Cin. Council 1.2 Roll Call 1.; Pledge of Allegvance 1.1 Council C:ommunications& LiaisonRcports 1. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items KECF.I\"E SITE CO\I\IITII:E UPDATE - SENIOR CENTER REMODEL • StaffRcport: AdmitustrationDepartmcm i. DISCUSS RILES AND RI SPONSI1111,111ESOF THE CIT Y CI MY.11 ADVISORY COMMISSION (CCAC) • StaffReport-. Community Dccclopmcnt Department 4. DISCUSSTOVN HALL AUDIO-VISUAL UPGRADE • Staff Rcport:I--inancialandlnformationSerciccsDeparttrnent 5. DISCUSS \VHL•THI R TO INFIIATF A DG\T LOP~[G\"1'CODI: A:\IEND\IE NT TO ALLOW NON-RI SID1 N l1A1. USIiS IN A RI SIDI NTIA1. ZONING DISTRICT AT "1"1-117 OUEI_LO HOUSE: AND SIMILAR PROPER"TIES • StaffRcporc Comtnunir\. Dct clc,pmcnt Dcparnncnr COUNCIL AG FN DA - :AUGUST 1 5, 20116 page 2 Jerree Lewis - 060815Agenda[1].pdf Page 3 6. DIS(:USS(:I'll COUNCIL. RI PORTCARD • StaffRcporr. r\dministrationDcparnnent U`PDATG ON TFIE STATUS OFTHG 3006 CITI' COUNCIL. GOALS • StaffRcporc AdnutustrationDcparmunr '11GARD CHY COUNCIL. BUSINESS \IG1 11NG AUGUST 15, 2006 i. CONSIDER AN A\1GNDMI N'l-l"O THE C1T Y COUN(:IL GROUNDRULGS a. Staff Report. Administration Department b. Cin Council Discussion C. Cite Council Consideration: Resolution No. 06- 9. CONSGNf AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion ~virhour separate discussion. An-one may request that an item be removed by motion fordiseussion and separate action. MotionKt: 9.1 Approve Council Minutes for julc 18, 3006 9' Appoinr BuildingAppcals Board \Icntbcr- Rcsoludott No. 116 9.3 Approcc Budget Amendment #T to the Fl' 2006-()7 Budger to Increase Appropriations in the Gas Tax Capital Projects Budget \cithtn the Coni utnire Investment Program for Additional funding for the Hall Boulevard Sidewalk Project - Resolution No. (16- 9.4 Approve Budgn:t Amendment #5 to the It1' 31106-0; Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Parks Capital project budget \cithin the Community Investment Program for Additional Funding for the Tualatin Ricer/Cook Park Trail from Garden to Bridge Project- Resolution No. 06- 9.5 LocalContract Rct-ie\\• Board: a. A\vard Contract for the Construction of the Pl' 311116-07 Pavement Major \[aimcnanecProgram (13\(\[11)- Phase I b. Award Contract for Grounds \laintcnancc at the City's Witer Rcscn-oir Sitcs and Storm Water Qualin Facilitics • Conant A=da-ItensRaranjtorSg2arateDisvq;irn: Anyitensraauestaltoberena&franthe Conant Agenda for aparatediausim will be oorsderad immEdiatdyaRa the Council has voted on thasitens which do notnmd disvim. lu. COUNCIL LIAISON RI-TORT'S 11. NON AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL AGI :NDA - AUGUST 15, 3uu6 page 3 Jerree Lewis - 060815Agenda[1].pdf Page 4 12. 1 \li(:U'f7\'G SGSSIO\: 11ic Tigard Cite Council tna% €o into Executive Session. if an Esceutit e Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable Statute. All discussions are confidential and those present maN disclose nothing from the Session. Rcprescntati yes of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose am information discussed. No I NCCUtlyl' Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making anY final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 13. ADJOURNMENT ~omanyc oaoasosoe,e.~eo aoc C.OU\CII. AGENDA - AUGUST 15. 2006 page Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[1J.pdf Page 1 u Agenda Item No. (.c , 1 For Agenda of q. I a yc~ Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes Date: August 15, 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 Sydney Sherwood Councilor Nick Wilson Councilor Tom Woodruff Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items foll ow u Workshop Mayor Dirksen called the City Council and the Local Meeting Contract Review Board to Order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Receive Site Risk Manager Mills summarized the Staff Report. Council consensus was to Committee proceed with the Senior Update - Below is a summary of the discussion: Center Remodel process. Senior Center ➢ Risk Manager Mills introduced Senior Center City Manager Prosser Remodel Executive Director Joan Smith and a advised that with Council representative of the Loaves and Fishes and City direction to proceed, funds of Tigard Site Committees Bill Gerkin. have already been 7 Councilor Sherwood advised she needed appropriated for this project. clarification on the remodel. She said that since Staff will proceed to spend more than $1 million will be spent on the up to $100,000 of this year's project, she wanted to make sure a full Community Investment commercial kitchen is planned. She noted the Program funds for need for a facility available for groups to access a architectural work to get a commercial kitchen for community events, conditional use application fundraisers, etc. started for the remodel. ➢ Mr. Gerkin reviewed activity experienced with other senior centers in the region and the Risk Manager Mills advised populations served. that before proceeding with ➢ The Tigard Senior Center needs to be updated, architectural and engineering which would benefit Meals on Wheels and design bids to be funded provide opportunities for more activities and to with the second half of the expand activities already taking place. funds allocated for this fiscal ➢ Councilor Woodruff advised that the City year (an additional $100,000), Council is supportive of the remodel, but wants staff will return to the City to provide for growth in the Center's use. Council. ➢ Ms. Smith said some scratch cookie is now Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 1 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[1l.pdf Page 2 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u done at the Senior Center. ➢ Loaves and Fishes will pay for part of the remodel. ➢ Ms. Smith said, depending on the amount that might be awarded by the CDBG, the Tigard Senior Center remodel plans might need to be pared down or they will need to do additional fund raising. ➢ Ms. Smith said they have worked with a kitchen architect to design a kitchen that meets commercial standards. ➢ Risk Manager Mills noted that the remodel could occur in phases as funding is identified. ➢ Risk Manager Mills advised the goal is to have this project finished by June 2008. 2. Discuss City Center Advisory Commission members present. Council members agreed Roles and Chao Carl Switzer; Commissioners Carolyn Barkley, they would like more time to Responsibilities Gretchen Buehner, and Alice Ellis Gaut review the draft Bylaws and of the City scheduled another discussion Center Community Development Director Coffee on September 19, 2006. Advisory introduced this agenda item. Commission Senior Planner Nachbar distributed a marked-up draft of the Bylaws noting this document reflected changes suggested by the CCAC. Key points of the discussion follow: ➢ Section 1 outlines "charge and duties": o Bylaws should be reviewed to assure compatibility with the Urban Renewal Plan. o Discussed the situation where another urban renewal district might be formed in Tigard. Speculation on whether another CCAC might be needed or adjustments to the existing CCAC. ➢ Chair Switzer advised of the detailed review by CCAC members. The CCAC members wanted to create a document to provide guidance if there should be a leadership change, provide for a minority report, and clarify the purpose and procedures of the CCAC. ➢ Discussed representation of community interests from the membership of the CCAC. ➢ A representative from each interest group is not Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 2 Jerree,Lewis - 06081 Winutes[1].pdf Page 3 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u necessary; however, interest groups should be invited to the table so the CCAC can receive their input. ➢ If care is taken to select a broad cross-section of the community, then there will likely be a good representation of interests. Chair Switzer said CCAC members felt they should have input on selection of members to the CCAC. Mayor Dirksen commented that this would be unusual as this is not how appointments are made for other boards and committees. Assistant City Manager Newton added that this would require an amendment to the resolution regarding how appointments to boards and committees are done. After brief discussion, Councilor Wilson suggested it was good to have open lines of communication to receive input from the CCAC, but questioned whether it was necessary to codify this as a requirement in the Bylaws. ➢ Community Development Director Coffee advised that if the Bylaws require that the membership reflects representation of certain interest groups within the community, how members are removed should be outlined. Chair Switzer directed attention to Section 4, "Term of Office." ` ➢ Councilor Harding noted the need for better recruiting efforts for members and supported having Committee members assist with this process. Councilor Wilson suggested that the representation of a broad spectrum of community members within the membership of the CCAC be a goal and not a "hard and fast rule." ➢ Councilor Woodruff said Section 3(a)(2) regarding the composition of the CCAC is not needed. There was general agreement to delete this wording. Commissioner Ellis Gaut noted there is a section in the draft Bylaws allowing a vote by proxy. Section 7 outlines the Commission members' responsibilities, including wording on acting with respect and consideration for the viewpoint Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 3 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[l].pdf Page 4 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u of others. > Removal of members is outlined in Section 10. > Mayor Dirksen confirmed, in response to a question from Commissioner Barkley, that the CCAC is a "Commission" not a "Committee." These two terms have been used interchangeably - use "Commission." 4. Discuss Information Technology Director Ehrenfeld Town Hall introduced Mr. Lon Cudy of New World Audio Audio Visual Video. Mr. Cudy was awarded the contract to Upgrade analyze the current condition of the Town Hall audio/visual capabilities. Mr. Cudy reported he has observed several deficiencies with the audio system in Town Hall. The following represents the key points discussed: > Town Hall audio/video (a/v) system should accommodate overflow crowds; i.e., lobby enhancements and/or off-site viewing. > Mr. Cudy proposed a large overhead screen on the wall behind the City Council dais for easier audience viewing; people seated at the dais would be able to view presentations on computer screens. > Mayor Dirksen and Councilor Harding noted issues with their laptop computers, including that the batteries no longer hold a charge for very long. 1 > Mr. Cudy noted the multi-purpose uses of the Town Hall. He suggested that one person operate the controls of the a/v system during the meetings; i.e., the recorder or secretary. > Mr. Cudy recommended headset microphones for best results. > Sufficient microphones for everyone seated at the dais and the public testimony desk are needed. > Councilor Sherwood noted a preference for turning on the microphone when an individual wants to speak. > Review of the system will include a testimony timing system and digital recording. Mr. Cudy said he would like to "clean up" the system; do away with the numerous power cords that are visible. Mr. Cud said he plans to develop a Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 4 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[1].pdf Page 5 enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u system that will be good to use ten years from now. ➢ City Manager Prosser noted the need to determine what a/v equipment will be made available for public use. 5. Discuss Community Development Director Coffee advised After discussion, consensus Whether to that City Council members Harding and Woodruff of the City Council was to Initiate a indicated interest in facilitating the use of the Quello initiate the Community Development House for limited commercial use. Development Code Code Amendment process for Amendment to City Manager Prosser explained the process for this consideration of establishing Allow Non- matter. If a Code Amendment is considered to set an overlay zone or Residential up a procedure for a conditional use permit, the conditional use process. Uses in a legislative hearing process would be followed. If the Residential Code Amendment is approved, Mr. Quello would Zoning District need to apply for a Conditional Use Permit by going at the Quello before the Hearings Officer; this would be a quasi House and judicial hearing. Similar Properties Mr. Quello spoke to the City Council. He submitted 2 written statement outlining how a conditional use approval would benefit his property. A copy of this statement is on file in the City Recorder's office. His key points were: There is a need in the City of Tigard for this type of facility. The Quellos are willing to share this facility with the community at no cost to the taxpayers. ➢ Historic property will disappear if a way is not found to make such property viable. In response to a question from Councilor Sherwood, Mr. Quello advised he and his wife have no plans to use this facility as a Bed and Breakfast Inn. Councilor Woodruff commented that the 100-year old, restored Quello home is an asset for the City of Tigard. He said he would like to figure out a solution so a property such as this does not get sold for development. He said he understands there was neighborhood opposition to the events held at the Quello house in the past. Councilor Woodruff said he supported reviewing this again. Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 5 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[1].pdf Page 6 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Councilor Wilson said he was serving on the Planning Commission when this issue came before the City last time regarding the Quello property. While the alternative might be that the property will be sold to a developer, there was a need to balance neighborhood concerns. Mr. Quello acknowledged the issues previously, which he characterized as a learning experience. At that time, weddings were being conducted on the property. If he is allowed to have events on the property, he said he would agree to restrictions, including rules regarding amplified music and the use of "DJ's." Discussion followed regarding parking and concerns that might arise. Community Development Director Coffee suggested that conditional use standards could be developed to address these types of issues. Mr. Quello advised the Quello House was listed on the National Historical Site registry, which must be renewed every 15 years. He will need to reapply next year to retain this designation. Councilor Harding supported another review and coming up with something creative for the Quello House. Councilor Sherwood said she would be happy if a good compromise could be found. She suggested that Mr. Quello talk to his neighbors to build support for his proposal. Community Development Director Coffee referred to the process for a Community Development Code text amendment to allow conditional uses on historical sites. The legislative hearings on a proposed text amendment would take place before the Planning Commission and the City Council. He reiterated that if the text amendment is approved, the conditional use approval for a specific site will be held before the hearings officer. Neighbors would be notified of this conditional use hearing. Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 6 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[1j.pdf Page 7 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u 6. Discuss City Assistant City Manager Newton presented the staff After discussion, City Council Report report. Council members agreed that Card staff should review the At the May 16, 2006, City Council meeting, Council report card draft and make members asked that the Committee for Citizen appropriate grammatical Involvement review and provide comments on the changes. Room should be proposed Council report card. Councilor Sherwood left after each question for noted that she and Councilor Woodruff came across written comments. The the report card idea and thought this would be a Report Cards will be good evaluation tool for Tigard City Council. submitted to Board and Councilor Woodruff suggested using the proposed Committee Chairs and the format this year and modify as needed. Report Executive Staff. Names of cards could be done every year or two. persons filling out the card will not be requested; however, the City Council would like differentiation between the two groups; that is, identify whether the form was completed by a Board/Committee member or an Executive Staff member. 7. Update on Assistant City Manager Newton presented the staff the Status of report. The summary of progress made on the City the 2006 City Council goals for the second quarter of 2006 is on Council Goals file in the City Recorder's office. 8. Consider an City Council discussed the Council Groundrules on Motion by Councilor Amendment to July 11, 2006. The following wording was proposed Sherwood, seconded by the City for consideration as an addition to the City Council Councilor Woodruff, to Council Groundrules: Council members rhould attempt to give at adopt Resolution No. 06-51. Groundrules least 24 bourn' notice, by adviring the City Manager and the City Recorder of a request to remove a Consent Agenda item The motion was approved by for reparate discussion. a unanimous vote of Council present. RESOLUTION NO. 06-51 -A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL GROUNDRULES Mayor Dirksen Yes (EXHIBIT A) AND SUPERSEDING Councilor Harding Yes RESOLUTION NO. 04-83 Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes 9. Consent Mayor Dirksen reviewed the Consent Agenda before Motion by Councilor Wilson, Agenda the City Council: seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to approve the 9.1 Approve Council Minutes for July 18, 2006 Consent Agenda. Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 7 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes(1J.pdf Page 8 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u 9.2 Appoint Building Appeals Board Member - Resolution No. 06 -52 The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY present. COUNCIL APPOINTING DAN PELISSIER TO THE TIGARD BUILDING APPEALS Mayor Duksen Yes BOARD Councilor Harding Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes 9.3 Approve Budget Amendment #4 to the FY Councilor Wilson Yes 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in Councilor Woodruff Yes the Gas Tax Capital Projects Budget within the Community Investment Program for Additional Funding for the Hall Boulevard Sidewalk Project - Resolution No. 06-53 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #4 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE GAS TAX CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY INVES MENT PROGRAM FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE HALL BOULEVARD SIDEWALK PROJECT 9.4 Approve Budget Amendment #5 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Parks Capital Project budget within the Community Investment Program for Additional Funding for the Tualatin River/Cook Park Trail from Garden to Bridge Project - Resolution No. 06-54 A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #5 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE TUALATIN RIVER/COOK PARK TRAIL FROM GARDEN TO BRIDGE PROJECT 9.5 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Contract for the Construction of the Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 8 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[1].pdf Page 9 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u FY 2006-07 Pavement Major Maintenance Program (PMMP) - Phase 1 b. Award Contract for Grounds Maintenance at the City's Water Reservoir Sites and Storm Water Quality Facilities Administrative City Manager Prosser reviewed the following Items Administrative Items with the City Council: ➢ Mayor Dirksen advised Tri-Met would like to hold its quarterly board meeting (October 25) in the City of Tigard. It is possible there will be a demonstration of the equipment that lays railroad track a quarter mile at a time. Potential joint meeting with the Intergovernmental Water Board and the City of Lake Oswego City Council on October 24. The consultant will present information so policy discussions can begin. Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting will be on August 29, 2006, 7-9 p.m. in the Tigard Water Building. ➢ Status of nominations for Mayor and City Council candidates for November 2006 election: Mayor Candidate: Craig Dirksen; Councilor Candidate Gretchen Buehner. Nominations for Mayor are closed; nominations for Council members close August 28, 4 p.m. Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 9 Jerree Lewis - 060815Minutes[l].pdf Page 10 Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Harding Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Attest: Mayor, Ci of Tigard Date: • is ay Tigard City Council Workshop and Business Meeting Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 10 Jerree Lewis -Shaver-Bilyeu_1 [3] 1P9__~___ Page 1 , i •r e1F ~s ~ t~ t n~ x Irv 3( r~'~ * ~ ? fy 1° ^d t t v .'ia r 4 F~ t t 4 'yT ~i 1 VL"! r , i •'C A +F~ rF' f ~ Y R 4 ' .~f~~~~~~`-; .~^-'fit. ✓ -~+Cf ._n_,. ;C''` t~~ i{ Xc u r V r' r " i a f~~ to 'f}. F7 } E gt~Y~',. 1~ h t l ' i Y '!t i ~ j~ tit R~ d~.f r`llti{t {'•'t ,'t }c~, 4i. to ib*,9 cx 1*,Sr 1' ! i a 1 1~~F~'-~ yt•, r" ,'~I,ctr r ~N t~ 1< r+ it : A + 4 ' ; ....t:.y- x'"~• is j,.~.~, x"}, + .t. Pac t-~ 1~. t } ~1 a. ~ .,~,`.~~asX..~..a b ~"..t-* zM~'e~,~~M`-~•~~ t~ni~,~~;~, fit. 1 ti,~,~ ~s~-"5 ~I'~ hr ,53 ~'~Y°' t~~C'sn.+y, ,x, ~ ~,'j4 Si'r ♦ ~ ' ,p K%~3 •s. y 4~'-•.. ~~.•~E{?i4c ~t.~' ~ s fir !7'~R ~+~,~~+"tl~ti~,y~" T~ ` I{ x'rx'f K' jtla+ w ri > F - asr ~(`i`~c..'4 4 A ♦ F'r i ~w. ..A_ f jc. i k~ i i ~ ~ r ~ l t~ 1' ~ ~,f j ' u~1 r,t,.t ri .ad ax '~~'.Mt '3tt~✓E,~. ~44 s ` s~ 5 2 j t zvt v g< tC r r s° w. 77 33 5.~ r -i 3 r't. 'rx1 T tom.'«~1?N• 4 ~y.d{y"MS~`i.) Vt. ~"1 a~"u Y Y y T .~'c i^ k' A ~5 z' } l~ ~ 'Z 1Vt ,.J 1 r ~t ~ ~e.* x v'"'u v, . •.~rlt~~S~h~`c~F~~ ~,1 fi. } E~ p f~~ .'i ~ 1 17 OPT 7", .i*L fsx' 'i -a.,S ~`Y~^Y •'Cf' 1i>;t"''~ ~~r,%~, 1 s , 4 y3 e alt ex~•`" ? ; ;o.I3f5. ~"1'"t' .-e'' .~n: ~ ...,z 11 =U .:t~y 1t 1 ' It t 1 S Ff til 1 National Register of Historical Places - OREGON (OR), Washington County \reIli teel. hUlILIeI.. oren~iI lee I- L'nkn( %\n \CC hlleeIUl;ll SIB IL: ( )tiv r. Itun~alo%% (_'ralt,nuut IIi,torie I'cr,on:SC hulnterieh.I.(I\~ar(I SiC_ni I I I eanl 1'c:u: 1915 \re,d of Si_nilicance: Fconontic'..\rchilcClule Period o1*Si =nilieancc: 10-25-1`)1`) ( Ila: PriI, ate Ili>torie 1 unetion:lkonte,tic I IiStorie Suh- Cunetion: Sim_te lh~cllim_ ('urrent I unction: I)onte,tic ('urrrnt Suh-function: Sinclc Ih\ellinl, Sha%er--Bilyeu House (added 1993 - Building - 993000014) Also, knm\ n as Shaver.William E. and Lizzie.House 16445 S\\'. 92nd A\e.. Ti 'al-d Ili,toric Sylli"i-Im.\rchitcedure I.nyinccrin_. l4cnt - \relitecl. huilricr. orcn_incer:l:nklto"Ill \rchitectur;il Sty lc: ( idler. Queen :\nne Arm AYgnilic.ntca Architecture. INhlorathm'Seulenent I'crlod, I `li'nllleallee: 1`)(0-1921. 1`)25-1911) ( ncr: Vri\ ate lli,toric Function:I)onte'tic I listoric Suh-function: SIIL"Ie I),\ cllill_ ('urrend I unction: lk~nlestie ('urrent Suh-I'unclion: Sin_le I)~~ellin_ ShOICS, .Ahem S.. House (added IQS2 - Building - =S2003755) 15W) S. Alpine St.. C orneliu, Ili,un'ic Sigmlicancc::\rchitccumc I:n gincering. Inent \rchitcc(. huilLlcr. or en_ineer: \lartin.ILieh:ud.Jr. \rchitcctur,ll styic: liun_a1om Cralt:nt;ln \rca,)I'Si_niIlcnncc:.\rchilcelure. Conuneree I'et'io,l oI Sicnilieance; 1`)1111-1`121 ( ncr: I'ri\ ate Ili.toric I-unction:l)ontc,lic Ililtoric SLill- I'll ncti,,n:Sin`Ic I)~~ellin ('urrent I'uncliolt:l)oltte~lie ('urrenl Sul-Iilnetion:SillIC I),~cllin_ SIMIT\. Charles. 11ouse (added 1(P9 - Building - #0000; IS) Q(!~ Main St.. Ilillsh(tr(t Ili,loric Si,nilie;utce::\rehi(ecture l n incerin_ \rchilect. hulhler. or en_lnccr: Shore~.C harlcs \rchitcet(lral tits le: Otlcr. (?ncen :\nne \rc;l oCSi_nilic;utcc:;\rchltceturc I'erlod of Si_nilieanee: 1911(1-1`121 ( )mncr: I'1'11 atc Ili torie Funetion:l)ontestic Ili torie Suh-fnrletion: \lultil)IC I)\\cllill . Sill'-de D\~CIIIIIL: urrent Function: l)onteIlie file://C:\Documents and Settings\jerree Vocal Settings\Temp\GWVie\ver\state.html 11/13/2006 City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Pagel of 4 City J Welcome to the City of Tigard Logo City Hall I31.1siness C(llllllltllllty Police Lihrar, Help Boards & City Cou ~)epartments , lktl or's Corner Seri ices Bld Ad\ertisenlents 13LIS111esS TZIX `ILill icipal Code About TILard Cityscape Newsletter CLIrrellt C'onS01101011 Def ininu, Ti_ard E=vents Calendar Festi\al of Balloo New to Ti_ard:' Parks Photo Gallery Recreational ProLranls Search luard Beyond TonlorrrnW Find Volunteer Opportunities Ahout Tigard PD Con>Ill Lill iIV PolicinI Crime Pre\ell[ioll FAQ Tra f1-1 e Youth SCI-\ lees Ahout Y(uu' Lihrary Kids and Families Teens Prouraills and L:\ ents Relercllce Seri ices Us1111-1 Youl- L IN-M A Volllllleel' ( )1)1)01'tLI Miles \VILl[let AAA Notice Feedhack Form Leal DIselainler Pri\acv Polic\, Search Tigard via RSS Historical Tigard I'i Fit►rnc > Conlnlunit-~' > About Tl-uard > Historical Tigard ~arcl IZSS Feed DESIGNATED HISTORICAL SITES Quick Links J Durham Elementary 1-1()Ille Durham Elementary School, 8040 SW file://C:\Documents and Settings\jerree\Local Settings\Temp\historic.asp.html 11/13/2006 City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Page 2 of 4 A i'10rdah1e 1-luu Mu, Durham Rd. kid Ad\ertiscnlcnls Year Designated: 1984 Built in 1920, the school is significant in its C'it" Council association with early Oregon pioneer and :\-''enda businessman Albert Durham. Cit\~rahe Nc\\ sletter Ye-Olde Windmill, 121st St. and Katherine C.OIIS I1101url ill St J 121 st &Katherine Street z Tigard Year Designated: 1984 i c\e opillc,lt Clisle Built in 1909 by Edward Christensen, the l:nlel„ene\ water tower stands as a visible testimonial ~1ana'enlent to the surrounding land's original t.\ents Calend 1, agricultural use and to the Wood- Christensen families who lived and farmed there. lot) O1?h0rtunities Ne\\ to Tluard'' Charles F. Tigard House, It 180 SW Parks in Ti_ard Former St. Charles F. Tigard House f';1s .1~~\rt~ Year Designated: 1984 Constructed in 1909, this is the second Ili~tlill {Ze~tl'\ aU~ms house occupied by Charles F. Tigard, the l i'arci N1Lill icillal seventh son of Tigard's namesake. Charles COLIC established the area's first general store and V~~lunteer was involved in other commercial OPI)Ortunitic: activities. \V lter Di\ iSi0 n Tigard Farmhouse and Windmill, 10525 SW Tigard St. x Tigard Street Farmhouse Online Services Year Designated: 1986 J US Oreline N,klps Built in 1900's, the house is significant due Lihrar\ Catalo,_- to its association with the Cowgill family. \ II- Inet Hal Cowgill, who purchased the property in Orllinc f rk 1936, was a long-time employee of Pacific IZe~er\ ati~lns Power and Light. The residence is one of l..'tilit\ Pie nlcnl~ the few bungalow farmhouses with a water tower still intact. ~~encl~\r 1Ze~'istrati~~n Joy Theater, 11959 SW Pacific Hwy. Year Designated: 1986 Joy Theater Constructed in 1939, the theater building is significant as an example of the Art Deco/Modern Style. Substantial exterior alteration, approved by the City, occurred in 1992. The basic massing and style of the building was preserved and enhanced by the alterations. Tigard Grange Tigard Grange 4148, 13770 SW Pacific Hwy. file://C:\Documents and Settings\jerree\Local Settings\Temp\historic.asp.html 11/13/2006 City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Page 3 of 4 Year Designated: 1986 In continuous use since 1925, the building is an important landmark because it is representative of the efforts of early grange members, including Wilson Tigard. Seven Gables Upshaw House, 9890 SW Peppertree Lane Year Designated: 1986 Seven Gables Upshaw House The residence is significant in its association with the Upshaw family since 1909, when the Rev. William Loomis Upshaw retired to the house after serving as the minister of a north Portland church and became involved with the production and marketing of apples. John Tigard House, 10310 S W Canterbury Ln. Year Designated: 1979 J John Tigard House Built in 1880, the house is one of two Tigard sites listed on the National Historic Register. John Tigard was the eldest son of Wilson Tigard, the founding father of Tigardville. John operated a coach route from Tigardville to Portland. The house is significant in its association with John and as an example of early frame construction. Gaarde House, 1 1333 Gaarde St. Year Designated: 1991 The house was built in 1922 by Hans Gaarde, the son of John Gaarde, who Gaarde House established a blacksmith shop in 1893 across the road from Charles Tigard's store. The house is one of the few remaining examples of the bungalow style with Craftsman detail. Its significance rests primarily on its association as a landmark of the Gaarde family's early presence in Tigard. Shaver-Bilyeu House, 16445 SW 92nd Avenue J Shaver Bilyeu House Year Designated: * 1993 Constructed in 1906, the Shaver-Bilyeu House is the best surviving vernacular Queen Anne Cottage farm residence in the Durham community of Tigard. It is significant culturally due to its association file://C:\DOCUments and Settings\jerree\Local Settings\Temp\historic.asp.html 11/13/2006 City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Paae 4 of 4 with the Shaver family, who contributed to the formation of the local school district, and to its later association with J.C. Bilyeu, first postmaster of Tigard. [*note: listed on the national but not the local registry] Printer Friendly Version (IE 5.0+ or Netscape 6.1+ only) Questions, comments, suggestions? Fill out the fCedback firm. I-Cual Disclaimer I Privacy Policy I ADA Notice Cite oI'THuard, I31 15 SW Hall 131yd, TILard. OK 972 3, 5(13-639-41 1 file://C:\Documents and Settings\jerree\Local Settings\Temp\historic.asp.html 11/13/2006 Jerree Lewis - Public Hearing Notice DCA2006-00005.doc Page 1 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: THI TIGARD DE\'ELOI)NU NT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHAI J, BE PRO,.\nM Y FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING MIA, BE HELD BI=hOR . THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2006 AT 7:00 PM, AND BEFORE THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2006 AT 7:30 PM. THE PUBLIC HEARINGS \\11J, BF CONDUCTED IN THE TO\\1i H.\LI. OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 S\1" HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. THESE HEARINGS ARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING TESTIMONY FRO\1 THE PUBLIC. FILE NO.: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00005 FILE TITLE: HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE CODE AMENDMENT APPLICANT: City of Tigard Attn: Sean Farrctly 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to amend various chapters of the City of Tigard CommunitV Dcx-clopment Code to allow meetings and events as a conditional use on properties with Historic Overlays and/or on the National Register of Historic Places in residential zones. The following is a summar,• of the proposed amendments including; the affected code chapters: 1. Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS: Add a "Meeting and I vcnt Use" category; 2. Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAI.. USE: Add additional development stanolards for conditional use types to allovy "Meeting and [:vent Uses" on properties math a Historic District overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Placcs in residential zones; 3. Cha(~ter 18.510 RGSIDI NTl \1.. ZONING DISTRICTS (Table 18.510.1 - Use Table): Adel a use category for "Historic Place Meetings and I \•cnts" as a conditional use on ropcrtics that Eve a Historic Overlay and/or arc on the National Register of Historic Placcs in all residential zoning districts; and 4. Chapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY: Add a General Provision to the Historic Ovcrlay chapter to include "Incentives for maintenance" provision. LOCATION: All residential zones with Historic Overlays. ZONE: All residential zones. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community' Development Code Chapters 18.120, 18.130, 18.330, 18.390, 18.510 and 18.740; (:omprchcnsivc Plan Politics 1 and 2; and Statewide Planning Goal 1. THI: PUBLIC FIFARING ON THIS MATTI R W111, BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THI-` RUI,FIS OF CHAPTER 18.390.060.1-: OFTH[ CO\L\[[ NIT1 DI:\'I:I.OP\[GNT CODE AND RULES Ol; PROCI:.DUR1: ADOPTED B1• THE TIGARD PLANNING; COMMISSION AND CIT1' COUNCII, AND AVAILAM, F, AT (:IT) HALL Jerree Lewis - Public Hearing Notice DCA2006-00005.doc Page 2 ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS \VITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY \VILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL 503-639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR 503-684-2772 (TDD - TI LECONINIUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAD NO LESS THAN ONE PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. PUBLIC ORAL. OR WRITTEN TESTIMONY IS INVITED. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TI STINIONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN RITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING CO\FNIISSION MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. THE PURPOSE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVIEW IS TO MAKE- A RECONINIENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL WILL THEN HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ITEM AT A LATER DATE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR T\\'ENTY-I'IVE CENTS (25C) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPT' OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE' CENTS (25C) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED I.OR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER SEAN FARRELLY AT 503-639-4171 (TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 S\V HALL. BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223) OR BY FNIA11, TO scan@ci.tigard.onus. Jerree Lewis - DCA 2006-00005 language.doc Page 1 Exhibit A City of Tigard DCA 2006-00005 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Proposed Code amendment to Allow Meeting and Event Uses as a Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Residential Zones ADDITIONS indicated b~- Italics and Bold PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT CHANGES: Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS Section 18.130.020 Listing of Use Categories C. Commercial Use tapes 9. Meeting and Event Use: Activities including parties, weddings, luncheons, meetings, charitable fund raising, or othergatherings for direct or indirect compensation. 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE Section 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types 21. Meeting and Event Uses in Residential Zones a. The property where the use will occur must be in a Historic Overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places. b. Yearly maximum number of events: A maximum of 18 meetings or events may be held per year. c. Maximum number ofpersons attending a meeting or event: The maximum number ofpersons attending an event shall be 40, provided however, that up to 200 persons may attend up to 6 meetings or events per year. The number ofpersons attending an event shall include all persons present on the property and participating in any way in the meeting or event, including hosts, workers, volunteers, as well as the guests and invitees. d. Hours of operation: The meetings or events may be held between 7AM and 9 PM. All activities related to the meetings or events, including clean-up must cease by 9 PM, e. Lighting: No light source used for the meetings or events shall be directed at another property. All light sources shall be screened, hooded, or covered. f. Sound systems: Outdoor amplified sound systems for the meetings or events shall not be permitted. g. Noise: For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions ofSecuon 7.40.130 Jerree Lewis - DCA 2006-00005 language.doc Page 2 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. h. Parking. A park=ing plan for each meeting or event shall be submitted to the Community Development Department one week prior to the event. This plan shall include a description of the event, the number of expected guests, evidence of the availability of on- street and off-street parking, and signed agreements with any providers ofoff-street parking for guests. i. No signs related to the conditional use are permitted. j. The Hearings Officer may impose additional site specific conditions on the approval of the conditional use, as referenced in Section 18.330.30.B. I, Violations of the conditions of approval or code provisions could result in the revocation of the conditional use permit by the Director. L The conditional use is allovved to continue so long as the property retains its Historic Overlay and/or National Register of Historic Places designation. Chapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY Section 18.740.030 General Provisions E. Incentives for maintenance. In an effort to assist in the upkeep and restoration of properties vv-ith a Historic Overlay designation and/or listing on the National Register of Historic Places, Meeting and Event Uses may be permitted, subject to Conditional Use approval, in all residential zones. Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (Add Historic Place Meeting and Event Use as a Conditional Use in all Residential Districts. Footnote to indicate applicable to Historic Overlay/National Register of Historic Places only.) TABLE 18.510.1 USE TABLE USE CATEGORY RR=1 RR=? R-3.5 R-4.5 RR=7 RR=13 R-25 R_40 RESIDENTIAL Jerree.Lewis - DCA 2006-00005 language.doc Page 3 Household Living P P P P P P P P Group Living R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C R'/C Transitional Housing N N N N N C C C Home Occupation R' R' R' R' R2 R' R' R' HOUSING TYPES Single Units, Attached N N N R" R"/C P P P Single Units, Detached P P P P P P P P Accessory Units R' R' R3 R' R3 R' R' R' Duplexes N N C C P P P P Multi-Family Units N N N N N P P P Manufactured Units P P P P P P P P Mobile Home Parks/Subdivisions N N C C P P P P CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C' C4 C C4 C C4 C4 C Colleges C C C C C C C C Community Recreation C C C C C C C C Cultural Institutions N N C C C C N N Day Care P/C P/C P/C P/C' P/C' P/C` P/C` P/C` Emergency Services C C C C C N N N Medical Centers N N C C C C C C Postal Service N N N N N N N N Public Support Facilities P P P P P P P P Religious Institutions C C C C C C C C Schools C C C C C C C C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges N N N N N C C C COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging N N N N N N N N Eating and Drinking Establishments N N N N N N N N Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Outdoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Indoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Adult Entertainment N N N N N N N N General Retail Sales-Oriented N N N N N N R" R'' Personal Services N N N N N N R" R" Repair-Oriented N N N N N N R" R" Bulk Sales N N N N N N N N Outdoor Sales N N N N N N N N Animal-Related N N N N N N N N TABLE 18.510.1 (CON'T) Jerree Lewis - DCA 2006-00005 language.doc Page 4 USE CATEGORY R_l RR=2 R-3.5 R-4.5 RR=7 R-12 R-25 R-40 Historic Place Meetings and Events C'= C'' C' C" C' C'= C= Crz Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N N N N N N N - Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair N N N N N N N N - Vehicle Fuel Sales N N N N N N N N Office N N N N N N N N Self-Service Storage N N N N N N N N Non-Accessory Parking N N N N N CIO C"' C"' INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N N N N N N N N Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial N N N N N N N N - General Industrial N N N N N N N N - Heavy Industrial N N N N N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N N N N N Research and Development N N N N N N N N Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N N N N N Waste-Related N N N N N N N N Wholesale Sales N N N N N N N N OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture P6 Pe Pe P`' P° N N N Cemeteries N N C C C N N N Detention Facilities N N N N N N N N Heliports N N N N N N N N Mining N N N N N N N N Wireless Communication Facilities P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' P/R' Rail Lines/Utility Corridors C C C C C C C C P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'Group living with five or fewer residents permitted by right; group living with six or more residents permitted as conditional use. 'Permitted subject to requirements Chapter 18.742. 'Permitted subject to compliance with requirements in 18.710. 'Except water and storm and sanitary sewers, which are allowed by right. 'In-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right; freestanding day care centers which meet all state requirements permitted conditionally. 'When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. 'See Chapter 18.798. Wireless Communication Facilities, for requirements for permitted and restricted facilities. 'Attached single-family units permitted only as part of an approved planned development. Jerree Lewis - DCA 2006-00005 language.doc Page 5 "Permitted by right if no more than five units in a grouping; permitted conditionally if six or more units per grouping. "'Only park-and-ride and other transit-related facilities pennitted conditionally. "Limited to ground-floor level of multi-family projects, not to exceed 10% of total gross square feet,of the building. 12 Limited to properties that have a Historic Overlay and/or are on the National Register of Historic Places. - - - - - - - - - - Jerree Lewis - Gaarde_1 [3].jpg Page 1 I-W Page 1 erre-_ e Lewis " Gaa- rde2131 1Pg`_ ,r r~ i~ t 4+y' 77. .,.ur . .z_ Jerree Lewis - PeppertreeLane_1 [3].Jp9 Page 1 KQy1i ti ~11 1 R ~r ~ ertreeLane? eis Pepe . t L r fir. ; v hu lit wrr~ _ . ~ r~-.-.:'it",z,,..~ 'Yf°.~~,~'4't~r ,"„',t~~p'~•q >v ~'rr~ p`~i. ~~~v,+~~.+y ~.1~:, wµ .`."fir iy¢ Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_1 [3j.jpg - ` Page 1 f-. mow. .let * ' ~ ,p `yFr n.li . cro;- Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_2[3].jpg Page 1 •i Page . Charle_ SFTig_ 3[3l 1P9 e Lewis e A t i u 1 - ' k v ti s{ ♦ s s L C- c~ (D CD r - ID t CD x mss' dXa ~ iF i` ~'q r t h ':t~ } a , is i ~ $4 5~,r~ l~-(1J F tJ'1 'I"FCAy ~ ~ ~ yt ~y y. il~l.■ i {D I J Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_5[3].1P9 Page 1 ~q' ~ - a1.. art ~Y};- ~ :J'! dpp Pry Jerree Lewis - goal5.pdf Page 1 Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals & Guidelines GOAL 5: NATURAL RESOURCES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, AND OPEN SPACES OAR 660-015-0000(5) (Please Note: Amendments Effective 08/30/96) To protect natural resources and current inventories of the following conserve scenic and historic areas resources: and open spaces. a. Historic Resources; Local governments shall adopt b. Open Space; programs that will protect natural c. Scenic Views and Sites. resources and conserve scenic, historic, and open space resources for present Following procedures, standards, and future generations. These and definitions contained in commission resources promote a healthy rules, local governments shall environment and natural landscape that determine significant sites for contributes to Oregon's livability. inventoried resourcesand develop programs to achieve the goal. The following resources shall be inventoried: GUIDELINES FOR GOAL 5 a. Riparian corridors, including water and riparian areas and fish A. PLANNING habitat; 1. The need for open space in b. Wetlands; the planning area should be c. Wildlife Habitat; determined, and standards developed d. Federal Wild and Scenic for the amount, distribution, and type of Rivers; open space. e. State Scenic Waterways; 2. Criteria should be developed f. Groundwater Resources; and utilized to determine what uses are g. Approved Oregon Recreation consistent with open space values and T rails ; to evaluate the effect of converting open h. Natural Areas; space lands to inconsistent uses. The i. Wilderness Areas; maintenance and development of open j. Mineral and Aggregate space in urban areas should be Resources; encouraged. k. Energysources; 3. Natural resources and 1. Cultural areas. required sites for the generation of energy (i.e. natural gas, oil, coal, hydro, Local governments and state geothermal, uranium, solar and others) agencies are encouraged to maintain should be conserved and protected; 1 Jerree Lewis - goal5.pdf Page 2 reservoir sites should be identified and 3. The efficient consumption of protected against irreversible loss. energy should be considered when 4. Plans providing for open utilizing natural resources. space, scenic and historic areas and 4. Fish and wildlife areas and natural resources should consider as a habitats should be protected and major determinant the carrying capacity managed in accordance with the of the air, land and water resources of Oregon Wildlife Commission's fish and the planning area. The land wildlife management plans. conservation and development actions 5. Stream flow and water levels provided for by such plans should not should be protected and managed at a exceed the carrying capacity of such level adequate for fish, wildlife, pollution resources. abatement, recreation, aesthetics and 5. The National Register of agriculture. Historic Places and the 6. Significant natural areas that recommendations of the State Advisory are historically, ecologically or Committee on Historic Preservation scientifically unique, outstanding or should be utilized in designating historic important, including those identified by sites. the State Natural Area Preserves 6. In conjunction with the Advisory Committee, should be inventory of mineral and aggregate inventoried and evaluated. Plans should resources, sites for removal and provide for the preservation of natural processing of such resources should be areas consistent with an inventory of identified and protected. scientific, educational, ecological, and 7. As a general rule, plans should recreational needsfor significant natural prohibit outdoor advertising signs areas. except in commercial or industrial 7. Local, regional and state zones. Plans should not provide for the governments should be encouragedto reciassificat ion of land for the purpose investigate and utilize fee acquisition, of accommodating an outdoor easements, cluster developments, advertising sign. The term "outdoor preferential assessment, development advertising sign" has the meaning set rights acquisition and similar techniques forth in ORS 377.710(23). to implement this goal. 8. State and federal agencies B. IMPLEMENTATION should develop statewide natural 1. Development should be resource, open space, scenic and planned and directed so as to conserve historic area plans and provide the needed amount of open space. technical assistance to local and 2. The conservation of both regional agencies. State and federal renewable and non-renewable natural plans should be reviewed and resources and physical limitations of the coordinated with local and regional land should be used as the basis for plans. determining the quantity, quality, 9. Areas identified as having location, rate and type of growth in the non-renewable mineral and aggregate planning area. resources should be planned for interim, 2 Jerree Lewis - goal5.pdf Page 3 transitional and "second use" utilization as well as for the primary use. 3 Page 1 Jerree Lewis - Tigard-Windmill_1[3j.jpg T f;r ' Jerree Lewis - Tigard-Windmill_2[3].jpg Page 1 a i Jerree Lewis - JohnTigard_1[3].jpg Page 1 T~ 1 ..11 J' A, ~ , ^V': i'~Irl .:fir. ~ '-g~ ,~.•i}~~+~ ' :Ya „t, m ID (D r - CL) W to VWZ. ?s tL~ i 1. 'Y ~?•r. ~~".,SI-,y1 w'~; Z7~ '4 ~Y~ ;i - ,LK':~ir- •c„F4...~.c:`~t.`.n'r~..= r".:-{a: ~`x'ai.' ~`;r. i I i i I I CD ! Jerree Lewis - WindmillPk_1 [3].jpg Page 1 .A r .i.L ` .5. M Y City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Pagel of 3 City oC l igard, Oreg-o i Tigard Balloon I'e%sk-A Search City Hall Business Community Police Library Help 14 Nov 2005 Tigard via RSS Historical Tigard la :-3 Tigard RSS Feeds Home > Community > About Tigard > Historical Tigard Quick Links DESIGNATED HISTORICAL SITES Home . Affordable Housing 1• . Bid Advertisements City Council Agenda Durham Elementary School, 8040 SW Durham Rd. ' k Cityscape Newsletter Year Designated: 1984 :.Construction in Tigard Built in 1920, the school is significant in its association with early X Development Code Oregon pioneer and businessman Albert Durham. Emergency _ Management - .1 _ Events Calendar Forms . lob Opportunities . New to Tigard? `t Ye-Olde Windmill, 121st St. and Katherine St. Parks in Tigard Year Designated: 1984 t Passports Built in 1909 by Edward Christensen, the water tower stands as a Room Reservations visible testimonial to the surrounding land's original agricultural use r # :.Tigard Municipal Code and to the Wood-Christensen families who lived and farmed there. - Volunteer ' Opportunities ii Water Division Online Services Charles F. Tigard House, 11180 SW Fonner St.- GIS Online Maps Year Designated: 1984 Library Catalog- Constructed in 1909, this is the second house occupied by Charles WILInet F. Tigard, the seventh son of Tigard's namesake. Charles :.Online Park established the area's first general store and was involved in other Reservations commercial activities.' R~• ; Utility Payments L Vendor Registration http://www.tigard-or.gov/community/about_tigard/historic.asp 11/14/2006 City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Page 2 of 3 'fir w Tigard Farmhouse and Windmill, 10525 SW Tigard St.` ` Year Designated: 1986 AI 4 Built in 1900's, the house is significant due to its association with the Cowgill family. Hal Cowgill, who purchased the property in 1936, was a long-time employee of Pacific Power and Light. The residence is one of the few bungalow farmhouses with a water y=----_ s tower still intact. Joy Theater, 11959 SW Pacific Hwy. gg Year Designated: 1986 i~ Constructed in 1939, the theater building is significant as an example of the Art Deco/Modern Style. Substantial exterior MR alteration, approved by the City, occurred in 1992. The basic L . massing and style of the building was preserved and enhanced by the alterations. ` Tigard Grange #148, 13770 SW Pacific Hwy. Year Designated: 1986 In continuous use since 1925, the building is an important landmark because it is representative of the efforts of early grange - Z't ; members, including Wilson Tigard. , Seven Gables Upshaw House, 9890 SW Peppertree Lane Year Designated: 1986 ; P s7}~". 1 The residence is significant in its association with the Upshaw~ i family since 1909, when the Rev. William Loomis Upshaw retired to the house after serving as the minister of a north Portland church and became involved with the production and marketing of apples. .r f s. ~ ~ tijC', x]11 t John Tigard House, 10310 SW Canterbury Ln.' Year Designated: 1979 :tiL11. http://www.tigard-or.gov/community/about_tigard/historic.asp 11/14/2006 'City of Tigard > Community > Historical Tigard Page 3 of 3 Built in 1880, the house is one of two Tigard sites listed on the National Historic Register. John Tigard was the eldest son of Wilson Tigard, the founding father of Tigardville. John operated a coach route from Tigardville to Portland. The house is significant in its association with John and as an example of early frame construction. Gaarde House, 11333 Gaarde St. Year Designated: 1991 _ The house was built in 1922 by Hans Gaarde, the son of John J - Gaarde, who established a blacksmith shop in 1893 across the road from Charles Tigard's store. The house is one of the few remaining {3~ k examples of the bungalow style with Craftsman detail. Its significance rests primarily on its association as a landmark of the ~•-a'.- _ t} Gaarde family's early presence in Tigard. rte' Shaver-Bilyeu House, 16445 SW 92nd Avenue -•'~i` Year Designated: *1993 Constructed in 1906, the Shaver-Bilyeu House is the best surviving vernacular Queen Anne Cottage farm residence in the Durham community of Tigard. It is significant culturally due to its i~ _ ~ • , r_ association with the Shaver family, who contributed to the X51 formation of the local school district, and to its later association with J.C. Bilyeu, first postmaster of Tigard. [*note: listed on the national but not the local registry] LA, Printer Friendly Version (IE 5.0+ or Netscape 6.1+ only) Questions, comments, suggestions? Fill out the feedback form. Legal Disclaimer I Privacy Policy I ADA Notice City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR 97223, 503-639-4171 http://www.tigard-or.gov/community/about_tigard/historic.asp 11/14/2006 re wrV~f City of Tigard DCA 2006-00005 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE Proposed Code Amendment to Allow Meeting and Event Uses as a Conditional Use in Historic Resources in Residential Zones PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT CHANGES: Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS Section 18.130.020 Listing of Use Categories C. Commercial Use types 9. Meeting and Event Use: Activities including meetings, charitable fund raising. 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE Section 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types 21. Meeting and Event Uses in Residential Zones a. The property where the use will occur must be in a Historic Overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places. The property must be publicly owned, or owned and operated by a registered non-profit historical association. b. Yearly maximum number of events: A maximum of 12 historical related events, meetings, or fund-raisers may be held per year, provided that not more than one event occurs in any month. c. Maximum number of persons attending a meeting or event: The maximum number of persons attending an event shall be 40. The number of persons attending an event shall include all persons present on the property and participating in any way in the meeting or event, including hosts, workers, volunteers, as well as the guests and invitees. d. Hours of operation: The meetings or events may be held between 9 AM and 9 PM. All activities related to the meetings or events, including clean-up must cease by 9 PM. e. Lighting: No light source used for the meetings or events shall be directed at another property. All light sources shall be screened, hooded, or covered. f. Screening: All areas used for meetings or events shall be screened visually from all adjacent properties with a solid 6-8 foot hedge, wall, or fence. g. Sound systems: Outdoor and indoor amplified sound systems for the meetings or events shall not be permitted. Entertainment is prohibited outdoors at these events or meetings. Entertainment as a part of any commercial use[s] involving fund-raising or compensation is prohibited at the events. Cary and Benton Holzwarth 9240 SW Millen Dr. Tigard, OR Dear Members of the Tigard Planning Commission and Tigard City Council: We are writing today in regard. to the hearing to be held affecting the Historic Overlay. Conditional Use Code Amendment that is before the Tigard planning.Commission and the Tigard City Council. My husband and l are homeowners ar 9240 S.W. Millen Dr. Our property shares ac ferm line with the Queflo's, one of the historic properties that would benefit from this amendment. The concrete pad the Quel_lo's poured for their tent is about 15 feet f om the property lime between our yards and less than about 50 feet: from our back door. Conversattiorm music and DJ announcements all carry over well into our yard: When we're ready to turn. its early with the rear windows open on a stunmer evening, hove late will we have to iistcn to his party revelers before we can get to sleep. Liikcwm, we would assutpe our dog barking, lawn mowing and other noise would cagy over to his yard. Dan may be expecting it it may be. his guesft that are caught off guard with Ote, nai of our a~titvit a s. The first time that this conditional use amendment was considered, Mr. Quello used the Tigard High School. parking adjacent to the soccer and football fields, directly across frotat his hoarse. School activities and the use of that. parking have grown steadily over the years. I don't know how he would be able to provide convenient parking for the guests that would be.. attending his fimcdons. Your might check with the police deparunent as to hoar many ticked they've wrftw fQr illegal parking this season. Knowing that only a small fraction of violators are- actually ticketed; you aright Have some apprccWion- for how sacmited the street ParkinS* alm y M 34 through the spring, summer and fall seasons. With the steady stream of cars wiling up and down 92° heading to Cook park or trolling for sgacc%..it already takes as. much as. a.couple_minutes past wanting before wo can find a gap' to-enter: 92" froth llrtiilem ('lease sco the attachod photos for a 'typical Saturday afternoon' on Millen Dr. adjacent to 9ke, and. views- to, the. left; and right on. 9e from the comer-of Millen.) Two more- probtows .to consider am the (corkas .andbottlles).dw.were littered _around._t>te. neighborhood following his previous events, and the: risks created by drivem who have been drinking. We knew when we moved-hc m-that-therc would-be football gaim.s; soccer Saturdays and- community activities at Coolk_Parlk... There.are already enauglr o€strange people in our.. neighborhood, do. we need additional can and people: added to wlat we: already need to contend with? We feel his chosen business is simply riot compatible with a residential neighborhood We think the sort of operation he intends really news to be held in a, more rural location or he needs to provide more buffer- space between his neighbors and his guests- We recognize that. this property would be a beautiful setting for a.party or a wedding, but asking the surrounding neighborhood to subsidize him through our loss of utility, after already, subsidizing. h tLn through his tax-rate. fx'eeze, does hat seem. fain` or at the. vexy least neighborly. We urge you to vote against this code amendment. Sl pcltr iT--]~ OCT 0& r y. 11l ~J Yw: 4+ o 0 R~t 1T q Ile, ter. .q~ October 29, 2006 1 am dismayed that this issue is being revisited because of the number of hearings I attended and letters I wrote to protect my own property rights in 2002 and 2003. Mr. and Mrs. Quello are retired and have time to woo new neighbors and city council members who were not present during the original hearings. I am a full-time home health nurse and single parent of 2 children. Yet again I have to take time away from work and parenting to respond to the harmful actions of a neighbor. The issues remain the same. I live in Kneeland Estates lot 13. The weddings of 2002 took place in the north side of the Quello property that borders a natural gulley. Physically, the weddings were within 20 feet of my home. His home is at least 80- 100 feet from the section of property used for the weddings. When the weddings were first his daughter and a few families he knew, we decided as a neighborhood to be respectful and to not use our back yards during those times. However, when he added weddings for pay and without any business license or consultation with the city, we changed our minds. There were weddings on both Saturday and Sunday, both afternoon and evening when we wanted to mow our lawns or let our dogs and children run in the backyard. Noise started mid afternoon and ran into 10 pm or later. As a nurse, I work a lot of weekends and need to be up by 4 or 5 am. Many of us have young children or just find our backyards as a place for quiet solace. The weddings impacted us to the point where our backyards were unusable during the primetime summer months. The property borders Lot 13 through Lot 22. The natural gulley acts as a sound tunnel that funnels noise/music to the whole neighborhood. There was no noise monitoring and no recourse for neighbors on the weekends to report noise violations. Additionally, the walls and windows of my living room and 2 bedrooms that are adjacent to our shared property line shook due to the music. My children and I had to leave home or live in the family room. The new neighbors who moved in after 2003 have no idea how bad it was. In the original hearings, the neighbors that spoke in favor of the weddings live adjacent to the south end of the property and were not impacted due to the natural tree buffer and the Quello house is between their property and the location of the weddings. Mr. Quello was using private property for his guests for parking, that is the parking that is across 92nd Avenue that belongs to Tigard/Tualatin school district. The school district has first priority on the property, the soccer and baseball groups second. He was using the parking without permission in 2002 for his income-generating business. In the 2003 hearings, he behaved as if he was entitled to use this parking. As the school and sports clubs have more and more activities, that parking is currently being used for what it was intended. There were several large weddings in which champagne was served and then guests drove themselves home. I found many corks in my backyard. Allowing impaired drivers near evening school activities is a setup for disaster. The Quellos moved into their home in 1990. His wife and children slept on the floor of my living room that summer until their home was livable. My ex-husband and his friend helped paint and repair their home. I remember how bad the property was prior to them buying it and they did do a service to the community. At no time did they disclose any plans to use their home as a business. They now have a historical designation and get a reduction in taxes. The rest of the neighborhood has repaired and improved their homes but get no such designation. Mr. Quello commented in the original hearings that the neighborhood is already impacted by the Balloon Festival and the marching band and sports activities. However, these activities are public events or school activities, not private-for-profit events. If I am bothered by the drummers practicing under the stadium, using it like a performance shell so it sounds like they are in my living room, or if someone forgets to turn off the lights in the stadium so they shine in my bedroom at midnight, I have recourse. There is no one to call at 9 pm on Saturday about noise/music at the Quellos who can enforce any noise ordinance. This is not an appropriate use of the police and the neighbors have had no recourse in the past. Since no police knocked on his door, he has behaved as if the noise is okay. Mr. Quello has threatened several times to sell and rezone his property for apartments. Apparently again, he feels he does not need to go through channels with the city but responds only if neighbors complain. The neighbors on the West side of his property stated he has poured concrete slabs for cottages, again without a permit. His property should be inspected. It is the house, not the property itself that is listed in the historic register. He has some parking available on his own property. A bed and breakfast would be a suitable use with requirements for noise, parking onsite, etc. I would support no outside activities except those that would be common for any home as long as there was a limit on the number attending such as max of 10 at an outdoor barbeque and that all participants park on the Quello property. 1 would not support any activities that are predominantly outside. The weddings happen only because he is an ordained minister, he has to officiate. This also is contrary to most other historic homes used for weddings, the pastor is usually an outside party and not affiliated with the owners of the location. I recognize that sustaining a historic home is not without financial risk. However, this should have been considered when they bought the home. They should not be allowed to impact at least 10 other property owners due to their own financial problems. Please see a property map attached in which I have written in some locations I have described above. I request that this letter be admitted as testimony in this matter. Thank you for your review of the above facts. I trust that decisions will be made to keep our neighborhood livable and that Mr. Quello's activities will not impact the usability or resale value of our homes. Sincerely, Karen L. Butler 9220 SW Millen Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 971-506-6118 1 40A0 41.80 45'00 I f r 13500 g l Q v l I 112 ml ~ SW. MARTHA STREET 98.00 70.00, 72.00 .t. f_ 0._ 13600 m ,6'' Woo 45 00 ~ as oo 45 00 ~ 45.00 1 45 00 as o0 4tEE y.xy' 4 14000 $ r ..z I I i •~.N LU 107 a"t3900~! ° sossa bfv i 28 108 i113800m~ - 300ri 9400 19500 { 9600 19700 9800 '99001 10000 1 89 III, 88 87 i 88 85 a; 84 ` r~ 109 13700 21 P 91 .I 90 110 at r jry I r F I • y' f i~ •'e 80.17 X50 9+~~~9 o~n ' M~ y1 pp q5~p { f 4.` B•aA._.t~ -_.v 55.00 I 45.00. 'fly"'V^?'0~,~d00'•t~\~ I ~VL9~ r d w rE IMOO +.e• 1. r'LHI.r w 9200 92 7 ' +a°~'$ ysx~' fso.oo-`~ 50,M ; 7s_sa,P~' ~ °''Q • _ I 6Q - it?.8R 120 I 1201 L ( •i ~i ~x Zt AC 49 c ¢ I 1~ 9100 8%$ 120Q .39 AC 14700 01 14800 ; 14900 115000r~ 151000 ~i 93 w°{'• 32 AC r1m 96 10 m ~ 99 98 I 97 ~,I sn p . ~.c: _ I I ~I 1 ~ ~ w ~ i2 _ 780AO 70JOD ~I• ~1 9000 lti>. \Y; .1L5~ /R5/50\-•.\,~y~\' p\L~'-.~h~.iti•:Uy1...\~:~~.`ert`•\Y~::':ti•,-\~h~ ~I 94 5900 I i r i Cf) 5800 rr••j 5000 4w 2300 2404 2500 0 i 465 of 47 'r- 8900 10 a 11 S~ 12 I 'Alt I 5700 N° { w.oo r aoao ~ : ` 71. t ~ ~ O p n i1~ m ~Uju z+4" RyM1a.• +36 - - - ne.~s ~,'f'~r~ 7aoo ~--as.so--• 74. ,~►-,ayr TOO °a 44UU x 2900 r' 2$00 7700 2~~v M o 4500 III 31 16 15 m} 14 r3 32 $ S AL" .11 m I i i c •~~w 4600 p^'' nip v,11" go 4300 i3 ( Imo, ;1 3000 ~i ,+~!wr'°M s~~o 17 e° 4700 4200 or, ' ..,X 29 r w T• i j 3100 { 4100 18 v ; U II 70 o 4800 28 ^ory 76 V ~ ` y: l 35 ~~8$Y+ b oP' Q~gow'~ Iqa °a 1300` I I A.. 4000 3200 z Ac d. 27 1 V~ ~r i5 3900 26 0 ~ -0 ~ - ,l I O6 ;1400 46 3800 --p 20 qG Co. 25 Zj 35011 ±zs.as A~ ao. I' '82~ 22 f,. mtp:s° 3600 f } 29' 00 . o 23 ar ~ •`fp 888-40-i8E ~o. ~zc,6a' ? ~,s , . L. 5R t sa asw - - y 1 0 X•.: stfo i. RY~,.au+t\k'~'r'ti'~.T"7e\\.. ti-,°, `i!18:`.,.t`.t:~`: ~i~t.::t,~a~:~i ~ic\~~'•~y I f1AC..: /.'T 2A719dC' . ~.Y~.~w - OI 1 Sean Farrelly - Re: Historic Property uses, especially "Quello House" from Karen L. Butler, neighbor Page 1 From: "Karen Butler" <kIb1802@msn.com> To: <dick@tigard-or.gov>, <sean@tigard-or.gov>, <tomc@tigard-or.gov>, <craigd@tigard- or.gov>, <nickw@tigard-or.gov>, <sydney@tigard-or.gov>, <tomw@tigard-or.gov>, <sallyh@tigard- or.gov>, "Karen Butler' <klbl802@msn.com> Date: 11/20/2006 2:46:46 AM Subject: Re: Historic Property uses, especially "Quello House" from Karen L. Butler, neighbor November 20, 2006. Correction to the below letter. The wedding of 2002 was on the the Quello daughters. The dates below should be years 1999 and 2000, not 2002 and 2003 respectively. Please refer to the minutes of the previous hearings. I have a time conflict with another meeting tonight and I will not be attending the planning commission hearing. I hope you recommend against using the outside grounds of historical properties for any activity that produces noise, increased visitor traffic or otherwise impacts the livability of the neighborhood. Original Message From: Karen Butler<mailto:klb1802@msn.com> To: d ick@tiga rd-or. gov< mai Ito: d ick@tigard-or. gov> ; sean@tigard-or.gov<mailto:sean@tigard-or.gov> ; tomc@tiga rd-or. gov< ma i Ito: tomc@tigard-or. gov> ; craigd@tigard-or. gov<mai Ito: craigd @tigard-or. gov> ; nickw@tigard-or. gov< ma i Ito: n ickw@tigard-or.gov> ; sydney@tigard-or.gov<mailto:sydney@tigard-or.gov> tomw@tigard-or.gov<mailto:tomw@tigard-or.gov> ; sallyh@tigard-or.gov<mailto:sallyh@tigard-or.gov> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 8:22 AM Subject: Historic Property uses, especially "Quello House" from Karen L. Butler, neighbor October 29, 2006 1 am dismayed that this issue is being revisited because of the number of hearings I attended and letters 1 wrote to protect my own property rights in 2002 and 2003. Mr. and Mrs. Quello are retired and have time to woo new neighbors and city council members who were not present during the original hearings. I am a full-time home health nurse and single parent of 2 children. Yet again I have to take time away from work and parenting to respond to the harmful actions of a neighbor. The issues remain the same. 1 live in Kneeland Estates lot 13. The weddings of 2002 took place in the north side of the Quello property that borders a natural gulley. Physically, the weddings were within 20 feet of my home. His home is at least 80- 100 feet from the section of property used for the weddings. When the weddings were first his daughter and a few families he knew, we decided as a neighborhood to be respectful and to not use our back yards during those times. However, when he added weddings for pay and without any business license or consultation with the city, we changed our minds. There were weddings on both Saturday and Sunday, both afternoon and evening when we wanted to mow our lawns or let our dogs and children run in the backyard. Noise started mid afternoon and ran into 10 pm or later. As a nurse, I work a lot of weekends and need to be up by 4 or 5 am. Many of us have young children or just find our backyards as a place for quiet solace. The weddings impacted us to to the point where our backyards were unusable during the primetime summer months. The property borders Lot 13 through Lot 22. The natural gulley acts as a sound tunnel that funnels noise/music to the whole neighborhood. There was no noise monitoring and no recourse for neighbors on the weekends to report noise violations. Additionally, the walls and windows of my living room and 2 bedrooms that are adjacent to our shared property line shook due to the music. My children and I had to leave home or live in the family room. The new neighbors who moved in after 2003 have no idea how bad it was. In the original hearings, the neighbors that spoke in favor of the weddings live adjacent to the south end of the property and were not impacted due to the natural tree buffer and the Quello house is between their property and the location of the weddings. Mr. Quello was using private property for his guests for parking, that is the parking that is across 92nd Avenue that belongs to Tigard/Tualatin school district. The school district has first priority on the property, October 25, 2006 Honorable Mayor Craig Dirksen, and Tigard City Council Tigard City Hall 13215 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Honorable Mayor, An article in the Tigard Times on August 24, 2006 alerted me and my wife to the fact that the Rev. and Mrs. Quello were again attempting to gain approval from the City to allow weddings and other public events on their historic property. Since we are going to be out of the country during the month of November, we wanted to make sure that we had the opportunity to go on record publicly in opposition to any changes in the code that might allow the commercial use of this property for weddings and other commercial outdoor events. Almost all of the neighbors who opposed their 2000 request to allow weddings still live in the neighborhood. We remember all too well how in one summer in the late 1990's there were a couple weddings, and then at least one almost every weekend the following summer. Fridays or Saturday mornings would bring a rehearsal with the testing of the mikes, etc. Later in the day we were treated to the wedding march (usually Pachelbel's Canon in D) over the loudspeakers. After the vows came the soloist followed by the rumble of a large crowd before the D.J. music went on into the night. Only after the fact did the City Council consider these issues. We were given assurances around this time by Rev. Quello that we should not be concerned because the weddings "would only take place on about 14 weekend days during the summer." These are the same weekends that the neighbors work or relax in their own backyards. Yet on one occasion early in that season the Rev. Quello approached a neighbor who was mowing his lawn and asked him if he would wait until later to do this weekend chore so it would not interfere with the wedding. Although he was concerned that we not disturb the weddings, around that same time he installed a concrete pad and a tent for receptions near the North side of their property line just a few feet from the property line of their neighbors. Further, even though there is some distance between the Quello house and the homes to the rear of their property, sounds reverberate to the West and down the creek because of the slight gully created by the marshy area and creek behind their property. The weddings impacted the whole neighborhood. The Quello's have approached the neighbors at times when they thought it might help their cause, and have neglected to inform us on others. On September 16th of this year, I was working in my backyard when I heard the same wedding routine being repeated. I had no warning that this would happen. Granted that the activities were not as "in your face" as before, I still had to refrain from some of the activities I had intended so I would not interfere with the sacred event taking place nearby. We were frustrated to have to learn about the possibility of further events like this from the newspaper. We know that there are always public hearings and opportunity for community input. However, we were concerned because Mr. Coffee's comments in the paper made it seem like the process was already rolling without any notification to the affected citizens. We are pleased that the Quello's decided to restore a decaying property and create a jewel for the community. My wife and I believe that a commercial use of the property that does not involve groups of people outside could be made compatible with the residential nature of the neighborhood. Like we have, many of our neighbors have lived in this neighborhood since the mid 1980's. We have witnessed the growth in the area. We are now routinely challenged by the resulting increase of traffic, noise and lights from the nearby playing fields and the Cook Park balloon festival and other events. In the same way that my barking dog or my lawn mower would interfere with an outdoor event on their property, their outdoor events and celebrations have a history of significantly negatively impacting their neighbors. We believe the code was written with situations like this in mind. During the request in 2000 to amend the code for historic properties, the City Council agreed that the requested outdoor uses were incompatible with a residential neighborhood. We believe they remain incompatible. Sincerely, Don and Barbara Manghelli 16415 SW 93`d Ave Tigard, OR 97224 o Farrelly-Quello House Page1 Sean From: "Miller, Lesli" <Imiller@jesuitportland.org> To: <dick@tigard-or.gov>, <sean@tigard-or.gov>, <tomc@tigard-or.gov> Date: 10/4/2006 11:00:02 AM Subject: Quello House Hi there! I don't know if my input will be too late, but I did want to submit something. I live on SW 93rd. Basically my neighbors across the street's backyard backs up the the Quello house. I have mixed emotions about this whole thing. While I do understand the concerns of my fellow neighbors , Le parking issues, noise, loitering, etc. I also know that it is no different then what we all deal with at a Friday night Football game, Graduation, Fourth of July or the Balloon Festival. So I don't understand why this would be any different. Maybe because it might be several times in a year, who knows. I have had the opportunity to meet the Quellos and my four-year old daughter loves their horse. They have the right to operate a business out of their home, don't they? But in the same sense, we as neighbors also have a right to enjoy our evenings at home without hearing somebody's wedding toast. I don't envy your jobs Lesli R. Miller Campus Receptionist Volunteer Coordinator V City of Tigard Engineering County of Washington State of Oregon Mr. Duenas: For two years I have been requesting of the City if Tigard to reduce the speed limit from the current speed of 35 mph.to a speed of 20 mph. Appropriately the speed between 7a m. and 5p.m. Monday thru Friday is 20mph. FACT: This Street is only 3 blocks long FACT: The entire east side of those 3 blocks is Tigard high school FACT: Those same 3 blocks have what appear to be 130 illegal dangerous parking spots that require the driver to back blindly onto the road. FACT: The west side of the street has 14 residential driveways. FACT: The end of the 3 blocks is the entrance to Cook Park where the posted speed is 15mph If someone will check the record to see the combined activities of: 1. The use of the fields by the actual high school students, Football, Baseball, Soccer etc. 2. The renting out of the fields ALL NITE AND ALL WEEKEND! 3. The extensive use of the fields in Cook Park ALL NITE AND ALL WEEKEND 4. The community events i.e. Balloon festival, Chinook Soccer championships etc. They would see that there are more bodies and cars in the evening and weekends than there are most days. Any one attending these events can't e em find parking!!! Check with the Tigard police and see how many tickets they have i,br parking violations! Most people are either elderly ( watching their grandchildren) or small children watching brothers and sisters. ANYONE DRIVING 35 MPH SHOULD BE PUT IN JAIL!!! And yet it is the posted speed. Why is this accident waiting to happen? Where are our moral responsibilities to the community? Does one of our loved one need to be killed before someone applies common sense to this situation? Awaiting your response: Mark Walker Citizen and father 7 3 -7 Hello neighbor, Tigard's City Council is considering amending city code that will affect all historic property in Tigard, allowing private events to be held at each. There will be a public hearing (date to be determined) and a code amendment proposal will be put forth. There are at least 10 historic properties in Tigard, but changes would only pertain to 2 or 3. These changes would especially pertain to, and allow events at The Quello House in our neighborhood on SW 92nd Avenue. Code 'language' has not been written and 'conditional use' restrictions have not been defined, but some of the considerations are: • Number of annual events a S® r4 t r cot s, Time limitations ^'h • Addressing sound issues y,e QY N Providing adequate parking w- ~ P4 Y, K © ~~Ua cevA 9l1 All historic properties would have to at~dresgeach restriction prior to obtaining a permit once t e code change: go into effect As a local homeowner you need to make your concerns known every step of the way. You can write your city council members and express your opinions right now, prior to October hearings. Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager and Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner have already received some phone calls from concerned neighbors. We have been encouraged to put everything in writing so that they can keep a better record of our opinions. Please contact these people at: City Of Tigard Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dick Bewersdorff Sean Farrelly Tom Coffee Planning Manager Associate Planner Community Development 503-718-2432 503-718-2420 Director dickCa)tigard-or.gov seanAtigard-or.gov 503-718-2443 tomc@tigard-or.gov Council Members are: Mayor Craig Dirksen craigd@tioard-or.gov Councilor Nick Wilson nickw(a-tigard-or.gov Councilor Sydney Sherwood sydneyCcatigard-or. aov Councilor Tom Woodruff tomw(cb-tigard-or.gov 1 Councilor Sally Harding sally h(a--)tiqard-or.gov e ~ Thank you for your time, Neighbor Cary Holzwarth, 503-684-2008 SW Millen Drive September 27, 2006 m qjE Agenda Item Nos. 5 & 6 Dec. 12, 2006 d Legislative Public Hearing Attorney Statement Statement by City Attorney Any person may offer relevant oral and/or written testimony. Oral testimony may be offered only by a person who has been asked to speak by the Mayor. City staff will identify applicable standards at the beginning of the hearing. Members of the City Council will be asked whether they have any potential conflicts. A potential conflict is a situation in which the Council member or close relative could have a personal or business financial interest in the decision. If a Council member has an actual conflict, the Council member cannot participate. A Council member with a potential conflict may participate after fully describing the potential conflict. An actual conflict exists if the decision would result in financial benefit to the Council member or family member, a conflict is potential if the decision could result in a financial benefit to the Council member. After the discussion of conflicts, any person may challenge participation of a Council member based on an actual conflict or failure to disclose a potential conflict. The Council member in question may respond to such a challenge. After the discussion of conflicts and any challenges, City staff will summarize the written staff report and explain the proposed amendments. Then those in favor of the proposed amendments testify. Then those who oppose the amendments or who have questions or concerns testify. Council members may ask the staff and the witnesses questions throughout the hearing until the record closes. After all testimony is taken, the City staff can make a closing statement. After the record is closed, the City Council will deliberate. During deliberations, the City Council may re- open the public portion of the hearing if necessary to receive additional evidence before making a decision. A copy of the rules of procedure for the hearing and copies of agendas for today's hearing are 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 at City Hall. You must 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. Failure 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. When you are called to testify, please come forward to the table. Please begin your testimony by giving your name, please spell 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. These exhibits will be marked 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. G:\muni\tigatd\city attomey legislative statementgenetal.doc G.VnunWardWty ottomey r4 stalemenl.doc AGENDA ITEM No. 5 Date: December 12, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00005 - HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to amend various chapters of the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow meetings and events as a conditional use on properties with Historic Overlays and/or on the National Register of Historic Places in residential zones. The following is a summary of the proposed amendments including the affected code chapters: 1). Chapter 18.130 USE CLASSIFICATIONS: Add a "Meeting and Event Use" category; 2). Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE: Add additional development standards for conditional use types to allow "Meeting and Event Uses" in residential zones with an Historic District overlay zone and/or on the National Register of Historic Places; 3). Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (Table 18.510.1 - Use Table): Add a use category for "Historic Place Meetings and Events" as a conditional use in all residential zoning districts that have an Historic Overlay and/or are on the National Register of Historic Places; and 4). Chapter 18.740 HISTORIC OVERLAY: Add a General Provision to the Historic Overlay chapter to include "Incentives for maintenance" provision. The full text of the proposed code amendment can be viewed at: http://www.dgard-or.gov/city hall /departments /cd /code amendments /historic overlay.asn LOCATION: All residential zones with Historic Overlays. ZONE: All residential zones with an Historic Overlay Designation. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.120; 18.130, 18.330, 18.390, 18.510 and 18.740; 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 f; . AGENDA ITEM No. 5 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and recordls laws.Aff written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpemons 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 (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Name: ~fA p Name: G!~/E~7L ~RpGEyL/ 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 It, '&,S 5. '-t Z Address W u=AvE Address City City -77 4-A-96 City State Zip _ State 62 Zip. 2 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: e gesidinEofficer pronounce, C( it will help the presiding officer pronounce: D J ~"V Address 9 S Sw QivL'N2woob Lti cidress MPOIQ1 Address City Tea City a'✓, City State Zip State _ Zip 7- State Zip Phone No. 3 - a--- Phone No. Phone No. AGENDA ITEM NO.5 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 meetir:g minutes, 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 09 Address Address City TtC, AX10 City City State Zip 9 1-13-1 State Zip State Zip Phone No. ~O 6Q - 2. 5 6 Phone No. Phone No. ~ c Name:, (2- 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 l,k) VIWLA-V- Address Address City City City State Zip ZZ State Zip State Zip Phone No. Q z~ Phone No. Phone No. AGENDA ITEM NO.5 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 (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Names V/ V1 Mc, QqA ee ~ 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 i/ N (o S w Address Address City City City State Ufi~ ZiPqrl~-`2-+ State ZiP State Zi . P 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 0-837 SEv Address Address City /ZJ A' City City State C>'01- Zip State Zip State Zip Phone No. S°3 °S70 - 7 Phone No. Phone No. AGENDA ITEM NO.5 This is a City of Turd public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become pan 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 (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Name: NW Name• 1 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 S U) ~ Address Address City City City p p a C State Zip State- Zi q4pu State Zi . a:: Phone No. Phone No. Phone No. Name: Name: ad1 a Ad 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: rd iS- SW .3 Address Address Address City City I'li rd City State Zip State D Zip State Zip Phone No. Phone No. i -63 22-3 S" Phone No. AGENDA ITEM NO.5 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 (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please P ' t Please Print Name: Name: uillt'4 -S 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 l d Address City City" City State Zip State Zip State Zip Phone No. Phone No. Phone No. -p-0 Name: Name: 6 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 s~ 3 ~rQ Address City City nn CJ City State Zip State ri Zip State Zip Phone No. Phone No.®~ t Phone No. December 12, 2006 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Tigard City Council Members: Craig Dirksen Sally Harding Sydney Sherwood Nick Wilson Tom Woodruff There are six reasons to vote NO on DCA 2006-00005 to deny Conditional Use. 1. Conditional Use gives unfair advantage to one property owner over others. The residential voice at the November 2006 planning meeting was strong that Conditional Use is adverse to residential use. Conditional Use events infringe on the normal use of nearby properties with noise, traffic and litter. Conditional Use for one property unfairly dominates the livability of many properties. 2. A "Conditional Use Test" was tried at the Shaver-Bilyeu- property for three years and failed to provide for the interests of the public. Public testimony before the City Council in 2000 and again before the Planning Commission in November 2006 highlighted that three years of "test" events at the Shaver-Bilyeu property clearly disrupted the home life of neighboring properties. To vote for Conditional Use knowing that it disrupts livability of neighboring properties could be construed as special interest. 3. Conditional Use is a sleeping dog. A school, a stadium and a park are visible when choosing a home. As the community grows, increased use of these public spaces is expected. Moving into a home and discovering that large parties up to 200 occur every summer weekend is a home buyer nightmare. Property use that appears normal, yet impacts neighboring property when summer arrives is a sleeping dog that bites neighborhood desirability. 4. The current State of Oregon historical tax relief program has not been proven insufficient. No restoration/maintenance budget has been submitted that demonstrates costs exceed current tax relief based on market value. For example, according to Washington County, the Quellos have been receiving special tax treatment since 1994 for the Shaver-Bilyeu House. Comparing market value to taxable value, the market value is $790,970 yet, the frozen taxable value is only $166,060. This 15 year potentially renewable tax relief is significant. It appears excessive and somewhat special interest to add an additional compensation program when the current program has not been proven insufficient. 5. Historical property requiring Conditional Use to pay for costs fails to show a need. Reasonable investment in maintenance activities is a cost that all homeowners accept. Maintenance of a home, especially a large home on large property with a garden, can be expensive and is an assumed investment responsibility. Excessive historical costs have yet to be shown. Allowing Conditional Use for profit to meet a need that has not been clearly demonstrated appears as special interest. 6. Lastly, Conditional Use profits are not required to be reinvested. No provision requires Conditional Use profits to be reinvested in the historic properties. The proposed code change fails to ensure that historic properties actually benefit from Conditional Use profits. For theses six reasons, I respectfully request that you vote NO on DCA 2006-00005. Sincerely,, Cheryl Cappelli VV" t/Ack 0--n yS A Gam` CK JL d'l~J~c /l December 7, 2006 Mr. Craig Dirksen Mayor, City of Tigard 9131 SW Hill Tigard OR 97223 Dear Craig, I am writing with regard to the property of Dan and Jacque Quello. Their garden was among nine that made up the 2006 Seeding Our Future Garden Tour and Art Show. Our community was fortunate to be invited into this hidden spot of wonderfully gracious landscape right in the middle of Tigard. It is definitely a unique property. Walking through their gate leaves the 21 st century behind (and a good deal of the 20th) During our 25 years as residents of Tigard, my husband and I have seen much growth in our community. Bike and walking paths have been added, nature areas have been reclaimed. Parks are precious. But also population has increased bringing with it traffic congestion. In response, we've seen roads widened and traffic patterns changed. We recognize these are efforts to improve the quality of life of those who live in Tigard. One aspect of quality of life is preserving what is beautiful and unique in our community and there is no other property in Tigard like the Quello's. Enclosed are photos, which do have more impact than 1000 words. As Tigard's elected officials, you are currently in charge of making Tigard "work", on many levels. I hope that you can find a solution to the impasse surrounding the Quello property that is both sensitive to the neighbors while encouraging the Quello's to preserve and share their little bit of Tigard history. Sincerely, Karen Sigworth 11185 SW Morgen Ct. Tigard OR 97223 503 620-8380 enc. ~r Entered into the record on: A 11A O By: Agenda Item No. Exhibit No. December 7, 2006 Mr. Craig Dirksen Mayor, City of Tigard 9131 SW Hill Tigard OR 97223 Dear Craig, I am writing with regard to the property of Dan and Jacque Quello. Their garden was among nine that made up the 2006 Seeding Our Future Garden Tour and Art Show. Our community was fortunate to be invited into this hidden spot of wonderfully gracious landscape right in the middle of Tigard. It is definitely a unique property. Walking through their gate leaves the 21s' century behind (and a good deal of the 201h) During our 25 years as residents of Tigard, my husband and I have seen much growth in our community. Bike and walking paths have been added, nature areas have been reclaimed. Parks are precious. But also population has increased bringing with it traffic congestion. In response, we've seen roads widened and traffic patterns changed. We recognize these are efforts to improve the quality of life of those who live in Tigard. One aspect of quality of life is preserving what is beautiful and unique in our community and there is no other property in Tigard like the Quello's. Enclosed are photos, which do have more impact than 1000 words. As Tigard's elected officials, you are currently in charge of making Tigard "work", on many levels. I hope that you can find a solution to the impasse surrounding the Quello property that is both sensitive to the neighbors while encouraging the Quello's to preserve and share their little bit of Tigard history. Sincerely, Karen Sigworth 11185 SW Morgen Ct. Tigard OR 97223 503 620-8380 enc. _ x ~ ~u l ~~~~•LM1 ~,i4rr~~. V~ iT ~ I ~ ~ - 4 i Y 11 ~ C:, t e . t ~~1~ 4 '~.3 I + - 1 R_ ■,y ~ly ~ r N) Its, fR ~Y ~ ~r~ ~ 1 ~h ~ ' i FY , K~, r, 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~;i i .,F; , per' - - . ~ ~fl ~ .✓r . ~ ~ s . p L ~ i _ _ ~ ~ - _ r _ ~e... ~d i C E~' - ~ ~ I r ~ .r s~ ~ S^ r- 4 ~,,y !AFAR r•. ~ a r.,r * ,~:.t" t. ~ ~ : z a4 J .~f } * '3.' ~ . f1n ~ r. i ~ ~ • f, • ♦ f, - • a. ,L~Q `~1~,~~Y ~ K a .,.4 I.. x ~~w r ~nJ;LL~" ~ ) ~t ,!`~~¢iP~y~~~• L r,, 1. J. ~y~ ~`fpt'• ~,A OV, ~1~,~` ~ a S r 4 ~nry.,,~ ~Q~~ ~ A". hf fir, r ,~.'~`~i ,,s. ~ jp J ~ ~1 ~ r,~~ r ~ ` ,ter ~rf ~f~~/~~'Z Ti n ~ ' •t7"` L k - ~T 'v'Uf. s x` }i .r~A.~\ 9 rl • r ` '-,-4 Al FtEf,,~ i'rf?r vtM~I ..~hs! zt ~ '%-ylt ~ `=D ai.• 1 1< 1i ` t~ ~R~.'`~►,°~.• r,r~ ~ r'j~:. r. ~ try iw 6jnYY ~..r~~.~.~..a~ i ~ ~~ir-may` f.~Y?+'r i f,'." I ~ j~.t ; i " 'J~ ~l. a t I,• t'x:~~ l t r 1 Irv tf' 't} s 7 w A-Ili ~y+I~J°„f s }'Wfl'l+r "G,'104 ~ r•+1 ~ ~ -i. l.r ' ~ ~M~' "'e tS/ .L. y -~'Y~i.~ R ~.`'y~~ A •S' y~ . + `I a. ~ w Boom" Entered into the record on: ! a p6 By: December 12, 2006 Agenda Item No. Exhibit No. Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Tigard City Council Members: Craig Dirksen Sally Harding Sydney Sherwood ✓Nick Wilson Tom Woodruff There are six reasons to vote NO on DCA 2006-00005 to deny Conditional Use. 1. Conditional Use gives unfair advantage to one property owner over others. The residential voice at the November 2006 planning meeting was strong that Conditional Use is adverse to residential use. Conditional Use events infringe on the normal use of nearby properties with noise, traffic and litter. Conditional Use for one property unfairly dominates the livability of many properties. 2. A "Conditional Use Test" was tried at the Shaver-Bilyeu property for three years and failed to provide for the interests of the public. Public testimony before the City Council in 2000 and again before the Planning Commission in November 2006 highlighted that three years of "test"events at the Shaver-Bilyeu property clearly disrupted the home life of neighboring properties. To vote for Conditional Use knowing that it disrupts livability of neighboring properties could be construed as special interest. 3. Conditional Use is a sleeping dog. A school, a stadium and a park are visible when choosing a home. As the community grows, increased use of these public spaces is expected. Moving into a home and discovering that large parties up to 200 occur every summer weekend is a home buyer nightmare. Property use that appears normal, yet impacts neighboring property when summer arrives is a sleeping dog that bites neighborhood desirability. 4. The current State of Oregon historical tax relief program has not been proven insufficient. No restoration/maintenance budget has been submitted that demonstrates costs exceed current tax relief based on market value. For example, according to Washington County, the Quellos have been receiving special tax treatment since 1994 for the Shaver-Bilyeu House. Comparing market value to taxable value, the market value is $790,970 yet, the frozen taxable value is only $166,060. This 15 year potentially renewable tax relief is significant. It appears excessive and somewhat special interest to add an additional compensation program when the current program has not been proven insufficient. 5. Historical property requiring Conditional Use to pay for costs fails to show a need. Reasonable investment in maintenance activities is a cost that all homeowners accept. Maintenance of a home, especially a large home on large property with a garden, can be expensive and is an assumed investment responsibility. Excessive historical costs have yet to be shown. Allowing Conditional Use for profit to meet a need that has not been clearly demonstrated appears as special interest. 6. Lastly, Conditional Use profits are not required to be reinvested. No provision requires Conditional Use profits to be reinvested in the historic properties. The proposed code change fails to ensure that historic properties actually benefit from Conditional Use profits. For theses six reasons, I respectfully request that you vote NO on DCA 2006-00005. Sincerely, Cheryl Cappelli 45 Reasons to Reject the Development Code Amendment (historic overlays - DCA 2006-00005) 12/12/06: 1. Constitutes an improper government handout initiated for one property owner's personal monetary benefit. 2. Negatively affects all residential zones in city; may harm livability + property values. 3. Process flawed: misrepresentations made in 8/15/06 Agenda, Minutes, and by Mr. Quello at that city council meeting (r.e. "Quello House"). "Shaver-Bilyeu House" historic site never mentioned or noted. Confuses, misleads public. 4. Process flawed: The Public Hearing Notice does not properly inform the recipients that one of these sites is in their neighborhood and that they may be directly impacted by the land-use decision. Specifically, the Public Hearing Notice does not disclose the street address of any property affected by the zoning. The Public Hearing Notice does not even disclose where one can find this information posted. The Public Hearing Notice does not reveal major details of the proposal which any reasonable person would want to know (e.g. "commercial uses"). All of these facts are contrary to prevailing Oregon statutes. [Reference to: ORS 197.763(3)(a), 197.763(3)(c), and ONRC v. City of Oregon City, 29 OR LUBA 90,97 (1995).] 5. City officials' ex parte contacts not divulged in Council Minutes 8/15/06. 6. Introduces new commercial zoning into established residential zones. 7. "Historical overlay" does not fall into normal Development Code. Nobody is going to develop and claim their new building or property is now "historical." ~Q I 8. Parties, weddings and commercial events for profit are Not bona fide "historical" uses. z 9. Only 1 historic site property owner has requested these exclusive privileges. 10. These broad "commercial uses" are NOT appropriate within a residential zone. 7 w 11. These MONOPOLISTIC commercial uses are NOT fair to adjacent neighbors. o 12. These unlawful commercial uses have constituted verified prohibited noise nuisances in the past, and would constitute such in the future. There is already no current operational monitoring of decibel levels, for enforcement purposes. o 13. These commercial uses violate the privacy of neighbors and noise-sensitive units' (residences). 14. These commercial uses will generate parking problems in affected neighborhoods. w m a 15. These monopolistic "commercial uses" discriminate against other competing Tigard event producers and related home businesses in residential zones, which are prohibited from the same commercial uses (events) in the same residential zones. 16. There is NO provision for city monitoring of these events 365 days/ year. 17. City of Tigard staff are unavailable on weekends, holidays, and evenings when most events would logically occur. 18. There is no methodology to track that event revenues would be used for maintenance of these historic sites on private properties in residential zones 19. These houses were all built solely for "domestic use," NOT commercial use. 20. None of these "historic overlay" houses comply with 2006 commercial code consistent with standards for public meeting halls, schools, auditoriums, movie theaters. 21. These houses pose a public safety risk for large groups of people. 22. These houses do NOT have appropriate bathroom facilities for large groups of people. Porta-potties are offensive for regular commercial use in residential zones. 23. These houses do NOT have ADA disabled access. 24. The fire marshal and building inspector have NOT inspected these houses for commercial code compliance, ADA compliance, and fire/safety standards commensurate with a public meeting facility. 25. These properties do NOT have adequate parking for groups of people. 26. There is no requirement for commercial use liability insurance. 27. There is no requirement or monitoring for non-discrimination in leasing, hiring, pricing, and practices. 28. The city should NOT engage in "establishment of religion" for any "historical" site receiving privileges of any kind, or regarding any "commercial uses" at such sites. 29. The John Tigard House is the ONLY appropriate historical site in residential zones suitable for any city-endorsed exclusive uses, because it is publicly owned and maintained, and administered by a public non-profit historical association. 30. Blockbusting residential zones with "commercial use" event facilities would harm the property values of numerous adjacent Tigard property owners. 31. If the City of Tigard harms residential property values through commercial use amendments in residential zones, affected property owners will hold the city and its officials legally and financially liable. 32. The "historic" site houses are too close to neighboring houses in residential zones, for these broad commercial uses. 33. The city planning staff did NOT visit and inspect all these sites. 34. Mr. Quello is already receiving an estimated $5,000 per year property tax reduction. Multiply that by each year he has received a tax reduction! 35. Creating a new perpetual landed gentry with special inequitable commercial monopoly rights in residential zones is un-American and medieval. 36. Mr Quello is not upholding the spirit of "historic" designation, which includes preserving "historic heritage," such as "retain the name historically associated with the building or structure." 37. There is no provision for visual screening from adjacent neighbors. 38. In the future, applications for "historical" designations for more older houses would proliferate and be abused, without guarantees of maintenance using event revenues. 39. The future increase of "historical" property designations with "commercial uses" would harm livability - and property values - in all residential zones in the city. 40. "Entertainment" (including music) is Not mentioned in the proposed code changes. Entertainment (major, indoor, outdoor, adult) are separate "commercial uses." Violates residential zone uses (all residential zones). 41. "Luncheons" are mentioned, but Not "Eating and Drinking Establishments" as a "commercial use." Violates residential zone uses. 42. "Meetings" are mentioned, but residential zoning (except R-12, R-25, and R-40) prohibits "social/ fraternal clubs/lodges." Violates residential zone uses. 43. Current development code protects residential zoning appropriately. 44. Tigard City Council has rejected Mr. Quello's previous application. 45. Tigard Planning Commission unanimously rejected this proposal. Entered into the record on: i -a// Page 1 yy~ ~j - By: Agenda Item No. 5- Exhibit No. y s~1 cue -SCI c~ u? - - taw I~- ~.5 Jerree Lewis - Gaarde_2[3].jpg Page 1 M_ . r ~ ~ . Sr f• r Jerree Lewis - PeppertreeLane_1(3].jpg Page 1 s ,h R 'c" ew._ oe(treeLane r1~lt,'~. C~ 4 ti !X S tit ? °.r l11 ~n a~ _ ~a. e +s w r' .,x .rt Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_1131.jpg Page - F~ Iwni ~~rr p ir-• . ~ p y~ny~•. 3 y"QY Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_2[3].jpg Page 1 1.' y- - I r.` k ~ Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_3[3].jpg Page 1 ,tea • :.F f .p r . S 'R i rdiL4 _ F Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_4[3].jpg Page 1 .^Xr'•" a.~. ..,e' L'4. " ~Me' r a '~'~~.,,a ~ 4.M r~+gyR: w ~•d4x•w1i~YR p .t . a:: x j Jerree Lewis - CharlesFTigard_5[3].jpg Page 1 f ` . y.'. . 61.1 r errs . . . pf, S p:w W SF r r t.' a ~44 _ - - - - - Page 1 Jerree Lewis - Tigard-Windmill_1I31.1P9 Y,r . i r ~ r -+v Jerree Lewis - Tigard-Windmill_2[3].jpg Page 1 1 . 1rr- RAW= Jerree Lewis- JohnTigard_1 [31.jpg Page 1 _ i Jerree Lewis - JohnTigard_2(3j.jpg Page 1 Y'. r* Y ~ ~~p Y i is tr. k: { t -4 - .t( y - y is r rl } ~ a k- r 4._ . :S!Fr,~ ~i ~v i s - Pag e 1 Jerree Lewis -Wind millP k_l 13].jpg iy. r ~ T f ! Wb' Agenda Item # Meeting Date December 12, 2006 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY - City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Tide Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2006-00001 and Development Code Amendment (DCA) 2006-00004 Prepared By: Denver Igarta Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: W c ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall Council approve the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve comprehensive plan and development code amendments to implement the recommendations of the Tualatin Basin (Goal 5) Fisb and Wildlife Habitat Program in order to comply with Statewide Planning Goal 5 and Title 13 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Council is requested to approve the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In 2002, Metro completed an inventory of regionally significant riparian corridors and wildlife habitat in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 5 procedures and requirements outlined under Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-023. Also in 2002 (April), Council approved entering into an intergovernmental agreement with other local Washington County jurisdictions forming the Tualatin Basin Partners for Natural Places. The purpose for forming the Tualatin Basin Partnership was to establish a basin-specific habitat protection program by analyzing the impacts locally of allowing, limiting or prohibiting development within regionally inventoried resource areas. Since 2002, the City of Tigard has participated on the Tualatin Basin Partners' Steering Committee (comprised of staff representatives) and Natural. Resource Coordinating Committee (comprised of elected local officials). From 2004-2005, the Tualatin Basin Partners completed a refinement to the resource inventory, an economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) analysis, and adopted a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Program (and map). In September 2005, Metro Council formally approved the Basin Program as a compliance option for Metro Functional Plan Title 13 (Nature in Neighborhoods), which was acknowledged by the State Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) in October 2006. In February 2006, City Council authorized signing a new intergovernmental agreement (IGA) extending the Tualatin Basin Partnership to jointly coordinate implementation of the approved Program. Local jurisdictions must now implement applicable elements of the Basin program as outlined in the Tualatin Basin Program Implementation Report. On October 16, 2006, a public hearing was held with the Planning Commission concerning the proposed habitat- friendly development provisions (CPA 2006-00001 /DCA 2006-00004). At the hearing, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the amendments subject to some modifications to the proposed code language. On November 21, 2006, City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation in anticipation of the public hearing schedule on December 12, 2006, where Council will decide to approve, modify or deny the application for legislative change. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Other alternatives were considered but deemed not viable. COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT 2006 City Council Goals: • Revise the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan • Consider Opportunities for Major Greenspaces Purchases Tigard Beyond Tomorrow: • Growth and Growth Management: Growth will be managed to protect the character and livability of established areas, protect the natural environment and provide open space throughout the community. • Urban & Public Services: Open space and greenway areas shall be preserved and protected. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: An Ordinance approving CPA 2006-00001 and DCA 2006-00004 to add a significant habitat areas map to Volume I of the Comprehensive Plan and Habitat Friendly-Development Standards to the Tigard Community Development Code. Attachment 2: Metro Compliance Review Letter Attachment 3: Memorandum to Council (December 12th Public Hearing on CPA 2006-00001 /DCA 2006-00004) Exhibit A: Tigard Significant Habitat Areas Map Exhibit B: Tigard Municipal Code, Title 18 (Community Development Code) Amendments Exhibit C: Staff Report to the Planning Commission Exhibit D: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 16, 2006 Exhibit E: Council Memo (Proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions) Exhibit F: Council Memo (Response to October 16`h Public Hearing Issues and Comments) FISCAL NOTES Not applicable i:tedmtcathyVorms0008tcounci1 agenda item summary sheet 06 - June nevision.doc CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO.06- 2 0 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS - CPA 2006-00001 AND DCA 2006-00004 - TO ADD A SIGNIFICANT HABITAT AREAS MAP TO VOLUME I OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HABITAT- FRIENDLY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE - CHAPTERS 18.360, 18.370, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775 AND 18.810. WHEREAS, the Portland Metropolitan Service District (Metro) decided, with participation of regional jurisdictions, to prepare a regional program to protect and restore riparian corridors and wildlife habitat; and WHEREAS, Metro's Nature in Neighborhoods Program was adopted by Metro Council as Title 13 of the Regional Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, and Metro area jurisdictions are required to comply with Functional Plan requirements; and WHEREAS, Tide 13 of Metro's Functional Plan has been acknowledged by the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) as complying with statewide planning goals and administrative rules; and WHEREAS, Tigard and other jurisdictions and various service districts in Washington County entered into an intergovernmental agreement to jointly prepare and coordinate a natural resources protection program based on conditions and circumstances unique to the Tualatin Basin; and WHEREAS, the Tualatin Basin Fish and Wildlife Habitat Protection Program was approved by Metro Council as an alternative means to implement Metro's Nature in Neighborhoods Program; and WHEREAS, on October 16 , 2006, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend, with minor amendments, that Council adopt CPA 2006-00001 and DCA 2006-00004; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2006, the City - Council held a public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2006-00001 and DCA 2006-00004, hear public testimony and apply applicable decision-making criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan is amended to include the Tigard Significant Habitat Areas Map ("EXHIBIT A"). ORDINANCE No. 06-,2B Page 1 SECTION 2: The Tigard Municipal Code, Title 18 (Community Development Code) is amended per "EXHIBIT B" to include habitat-friendly development provisions. SECTION 3: The findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated October 16, 2006, the Planning Commission meeting minutes for October 16, 2006, and two memoranda to Council pertaining to Proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions and Response to October 161h Public Hearing Issues and Comments both dated November 7, 2006, are adopted by reference ("EXHIBIT C", "EXHIBIT D", "EXHIBIT E", and "EXHIBIT F" respectively). SECTION 4: 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 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this -/,L~day of &%r- 2006. Carol A. Krager, Deputy City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this l a "'day of ; 2006. Nick Wilson, Council President A proved as to form: V ity Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 06-,?,C) Page 2 600 NORTHEAST GRAND AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 2736 Attachment 2 TEL 503 7 9 7 1 7 0 0 r A X 5 0 3 797 1797 11,11. ~il METRO November 17, 2006 Denver Igarta Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: CITY OF TIGARD PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT TUALATIN BASIN FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT PROGRAM UNDER METRO TITLE 13 (CPA 2006-00001/DCA 2006-00004) Dear Mr. Igarta: It has been a pleasure working with you over the past several months reviewing the City's proposed plan and development code amendments to comply with Title 13 of the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Metro Code 3.07.1310 through .1370). This letter summarizes the issues we have communicated about by phone and email and serves as Metro's compliance review under Title 8 (MC 3.07.820 A). The materials I have reviewed include the "City of Tigard GAP Analysis for the Tualatin Basin Goal 5 Program," comprehensive plan amendments and development code amendments (CPA 2006-00001 and DCA 2006-00004), a section by section staff commentary on proposed plan and code amendments, and several revisions to the proposed code amendment package as a result of Planning Commission review on September 25th and October 16th, 2006. The City provided Metro with a copy of its Notice of Proposed Amendment to DLCD 45 days before its first evidentiary hearing as required by MC 3.07.820(A). As stated in the City's description of its plan and code amendments, Tigard is seeking to comply with elements of the Tualatin Basin Program adopted as part of Title 13 ("Compliance Option 5" MC 3.07.1330(B)(5)). This requires Tigard to undertake certain non-regulatory steps, including some on-going responsibilities that do not require amendments to Tigard's comprehensive plan and land use regulations. This compliance review by Metro is a review only of whether the amendments Tigard is proposing are consistent with the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, and is not a review of whether Tigard has complied, or will comply, with the other requirements of Option 5 and the Tualatin Basin Program. Summary Title 13 Compliance Issues: • Proposed code language does not limit application of the density reduction provision to lands that were within the Metro UGB as of January 1, 2002 as required under Title 13. • Amend code language in TC 18.774.140 A. to add a simplified habitat verification approach as an option to the detailed delineation methodology proposed for the City's sensitive lands ordinance. Suggestions: • Consider adding language in TC 18.775.100 C.2 to require reporting density reductions to Metro Council by April 15th of each year. • Exempt projects implementing the Clean Water Services Healthy Streams Plan from sensitive lands provisions in TC 18.775 Recycled Paper www, metro-region.org T D D 797 1804 CITY OF TIGARD November 17, 2006 Page 2 • Adopt the proposed code amendments to allow density transfers on all lands identified on the . "Significant Habitat Areas Map" in addition to those classified as Class I and II riparian corridors. • Allow site design adjustments within the city's significant habitat areas. • Adopt by reference Table 3.07.13c in Title 13 that lists 29 specific habitat-friendly development practices. • Clarify code text that the "skinny street option" is not subject to the discretionary review process for determining "minimum rights-of-way and street widths" (TC 18.810 E.1) to facilitate construction of narrower streets through stream corridors. Applicable Requirements for Compliance There are essentially four substantive elements of Option 5 compliance that could require amendments to comprehensive plan and land use regulations. In order to comply with Title 13 under Option 5, Tigard must: 1. Remove local plan or code barriers to the use of habitat-friendly development practices within all regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat. Metro Code 3.07.1330(E). "[F]acilitate and encourage the use of habitat-friendly development practices, where technically feasible and appropriate, in all areas identified as Class I and II riparian habitat areas on the Metro Regionally Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat Inventory Map." Metro Code 3.07.1330(B)(5)(d) (see also, step 2 of the Tualatin Basin Program implementation steps, applicable via Metro Code 3.07.1330(B)(5)(a), which requires Tigard to adopt Low Impact-Development guidelines "to reduce environmental impacts of new development and removing barriers to their utilization," and Metro Code 3.07.1330(E) which requires Tigard to remove barriers to the use of such practices). Metro provides examples of such habitat-friendly practices in Table 3.07-13c of Title 13; 2. "[A]llow for the reduction of the density and capacity requirements of Title 1 of the [UGMFPj" for all properties within Metro's habitat inventory. Metro Code 3.07.1330(B)(5)(e) and 3.07.1330(H). Such allowance may be provided only for properties within the Metro urban growth boundary on January 1, 2002, require the protection of the habitat via a public dedication or restrictive covenant, and only allow for the density/capacity reduction in proportion to the amount of habitat permanently protected on the property; 3. Provide both a simple and a detailed process for property owners to verify the location of inventoried habitat on their property. Metro Code 3.07.1330(G); and 4. Adopt protection provisions consistent with Title 13 applicable to upland wildlife habitat areas within territory added to the Metro UGB in the future. Metro Code 3.07.1330(B)(5)(0. (A jurisdiction is not required to adopt such provisions at this time, it may choose to address this requirement at the time that new areas are brought into the UGB and concept planning and local zoning is applied.) In addition to these substantive requirements, Tigard must, first, also ensure that provisions it adopts provide property owners with clear and objective compliance standards, Metro Code 3.07.1330(C), and may also provide discretionary compliance standards, Metro Code 3.07.1330(D). Second, Tigard must have made its proposed amendments available for public review at least 45 days prior to a public hearing regarding those amendments. Metro Code 3.07.1330(F). Adoption of Significant Habitat Areas Map and Density Reduction Title 13 requires cities and counties to allow reductions in regional density and capacity requirements to protect regionally significant fish and wildlife habitat or locally significant Goal 5 resources (MC 3.07.1330 H). Only properties within the Metro UGB as of January 1, 2002 can qualify for density reduction. The City has adopted the Significant Habitat Areas Map attached as Exhibit B of the proposed plan and code amendments. This map identifies significant habitat areas with strictly limit, moderately limit, and lightly limit classifications based on the Tualatin Basin Program decisions. The map appears to be inclusive of Metro's CITY OF TIGARD November 17, 2006 Page 3 inventory of Regionally Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat and as such is an appropriate tool to carry out the density reduction provisions of Title 13. Proposed code 18.775.100 implements the Title 13 provision for reduction in regional density requirements. The proposed code, however, does not limit application of the density reduction provision to lands that were within the Metro UGB as of January 1, 2002 as required under Title 13. We recommend the code be amended to include this date. In addition, we recommend language be added to TC 18.775.100 C.2 to require reporting density reductions to Metro Council by April 15`h of each year. Verification of SHA Boundaries Title 13 requires local governments to adopt a simplified map verification process along with the more detailed process that you have included in the proposed code TC 18.775.140 (Significant Habitat Area Delineation Methodology). The simplified verification process is intended to be less burdensome on the property owners because it requires less detail. The proposed code is written to require a detailed delineation process by a "qualified professional at the applicant's expense" (see proposed TC 18.775.100 C.1.a and TC 18.775.140). Title 13's verification process states that "as often as reasonably possible, provide a simple,-default approach that allows property owners to verify the location of habitat on a lot or parcel without having to hire an environmental consultant and without having to pay a significant processing or application fee" (MC 3.07.1330 G). Furthermore, in addition to being required, providing a simplified verification procedure makes it easier for a property owner, if he or she chooses, to take advantage of the density reduction provision. If the habitat verification process is too burdensome, then the density reduction provision is not likely to be used. The text revisions for TC 18.774.140 A. that you forwarded to me in your 11/2/06 email add a simplified habitat verification approach and Metro recommends its adoption to implement this requirement of Title 13. 1 also note that those revisions can serve as a model for other local governments in the region to meet this . requirement. Density Transfers As noted in the Tualatin Basin Implementation Report "Guidelines for Local Jurisdictions," on-site density transfer is an effective habitat-friendly development tool. Importantly, density transfers in regionally significant habitat areas should be allowed but not required. Staff recommended to allow on-site residential density transfers for properties that contain Significant Habitat Areas by amending the code's definition of "net development area." This change would allow residential density transfers in all sensitive land areas including, as an option, "significant habitat areas, as designated on the City of Tigard 'Significant Habitat Areas Map'" (TC 18.715.020 A.1.a-e.). While this change would help meet Title 13 requirements for encouraging habitat-friendly development practices, the Planning Commission recommended that the proposed code changes found in TC 18.715 A.3 be deferred until issues related to design and review procedures are addressed. We encourage the City to adopt the proposed code amendments to allow density transfers on lands identified on the "Significant Habitat Areas Map." Site Design Flexibility Flexibility in site design is an important tool to aid in habitat protection under Title 13. The City originally proposed to extend code provisions allowing a 50% adjustment to dimensional standards (setback, height, or lot area) within or adjacent to vegetated corridors and significant habitat areas (TC 18.775.100 B). The Planning Commission recommendation is to reduce the habitat areas covered by this provision. The revised language applies the 50% adjustment provision to vegetated corridors and riparian resources classified as "strictly limit" and "moderately limit" under the Tualatin Basin Program's ESEE analysis. It excludes upland habitats and lower value riparian areas shown on the significant habitat areas map but classified as "lightly limit" (Summary of 9/25/06 PC Modifications). We recommend the city apply this provision to all the city's significant habitat areas. CITY OF TIGARD November 17, 2006 Page 4 Encouraging Habitat-friendly Development Practices The city proposes to amend TC 18.360--Site Development Review-to require consideration of "innovative methods and techniques to reduce impacts to site hydrology and fish and wildlife habitat" within areas identified as significant habitat areas. Specifically, proposed code language identifies seven broad categories of methods and techniques for consideration including water quality facilities, pervious pavement, soil amendment, roof run-off controls, fencing to guide wildlife passage, outdoor lighting, and preservation of existing vegetative or canopy cover (TC 18.360.090 A.2.c) (Summary of 10/16/06 Planning Commission public hearing). We recommend that the city adopt by reference Table 3.07.13c in Title 13 that lists 29 specific habitat-friendly development practices. Sensitive Lands Exemptions The Tualatin Basin Implementation Report recommends permitting culvert replacement and associated enhancement work outright and not requiring additional land use or vegetative corridor mitigation review for those culvert projects and enhancement projects listed in the Healthy Streams Plan. Metro's Title 13 Model Code also provides an exemption for "projects with the sole purpose of restoring or enhancing wetlands, streams, or fish and wildlife habitat areas, provided that the project is part of an approved local, state, or federal restoration or enhancement plan" (Metro Title 13 Model Ordinance Section 3 E.14). The City originally proposed providing an exemption clause for projects performed under the direction of the City or in the implementation of the Clean Water Services Healthy Streams Plan. This exemption clause was removed (Planning Commission Summary of the 10/26/06 Hearing). We recommend that the exemption be provided for projects listed in the CWS Healthy Streams Plan to facilitate restoration and enhancement of vegetated corridors. Minimize Paving through Habitat Areas The Tualatin Basin Implementation Report recommends allowing narrowed paving width within stream corridors. Proposed amendments in TC 18.810.030 A.7 add "bodies of water and significant habitat areas" to the list of natural features where adjustments to street standards are allowed to reduce adverse impacts. In 2002 the City adopted "skinny street options" (20, 24, and 28 foot pavement widths) for local residential streets where review criteria are met (TC 18.810.4,.5, and .6). This process, in conjunction with obtaining a sensitive lands permit and CWS certification for development within vegetated corridors, provides a means to minimize pavement widths through stream corridors. We recommend making it more explicit in the code text that the "skinny street option" is not subject to the discretionary review process for determining "minimum rights-of-way and street widths" (TC 18.810 E.1). Thank you for your time in discussing the City's compliance with Title 13 and the Tualatin Basin Program. If you have any questions about the content of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sinf:etrly, Paul Ketcham Principal Regional Planner cc: Councilor Carl Hosticka, District No. 3 Michael Jordan, Chief Operating Officer Christina Deffebach, LRRP Manager Amanda Punton, DLCD Attachment 3 41 MEMORANDUM IDS TO: City Council FROM: Denver Igarta, Associate Planner RE: December 12ti, Public Hearing on CPA 2006-00001 /DCA 2006-00004 DATE: November 28, 2006 On December 12, 2006, a public hearing will be held with the City Council to consider proposed amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code to encourage habitat-friendly development by implementing the recommendations of the Tualatin Basin Fish & Wildlife Habitat Program in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 5 and Metro Functional Plan Title 13 Nature in Neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan Map and Development Code Chapters proposed to be amended are attached and changes are shown as follows: • The original proposed language amending Development Code presented at the Planning Commission's October 16LI, Public Hearing is shown in blue. Language to be added is underlined and to be deleted is shown in swAwthr-attgh. • Changes to the proposed language as modified by the Planning Commission at its Public Hearing on October 16, 2006, are shown in red. Language to be added is underlined and to be deleted is shown in Wis. • Changes to the proposed language as suggested by Metro in its compliance review letter dated November 17, 2006, are shown in pink. Language to be added is underlined and to be deleted is shown in . • Changes to the proposed language based on feedback from Council at its public workshop on November 21, 2006, are shown in green. Language to be added is underlined and to be deleted is shown in swAtethrough. Item No. / For Council Newsletter dated MEMORANDUM r TIGARD TO: Mayor Dirksen and Members of the City Council FROM: Denver Igarta, Associate Planner RE: Response to Issues Raised at the November 21st Council Workshop DATE: December 5, 2006 The following response was prepared by staff to address issues raised at the Council Workshop on November 21, 2006, concerning proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions. Issue t Voluntary versus Mandatory Standards Mayor Dirk ren questioned the relevance of obligating property owners to place habitat areas in a protected parcel and requiring restoration when all the proposed standards are "voluntary The proposed provision in question is Tigard Development Code (TDC) 18.775.100 related to dimensional standard adjustments. The standard allows developers to make adjustments to the dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning district in exchange for assurances that significant habitat areas are protected. This makes it possible for a property owner to make greater use of their land than would otherwise be possible under the City's land use regulations. The proviso is that they do something in exchange. In this case, it is to place habitat areas in a protected parcel and restore the natural resource functions and values of certain lands. Recommendation: Staff recommends no changes to the proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions. Issue 2: Utility of Natural Resource Easements and Separate Tracts Councilor IY/ilson questioned the utility of using easements to protect significant habitat areas. He expressed concern about the maintenance of habitat areas that may be protected either in restrictive easement areas or separate tracts. Staff conducted additional research on this matter and determined that "easements" and separate tracts are a valuable tool to protect functions and values of natural resources. Conservation easements are broadly used as an economical means to protect valuable resources that have community-wide benefits, such as forested areas, wetlands, stream- corridors, views, etc. Properly structured conservation easements allow both property owners and the general public to benefit. Property owners retain ownership and limited economic use of property and enjoy other benefits such as lower tax rates. The public benefits from the environmental contributions of preserved/restored natural resources. Easements are a flexible conservation tool in that they can be donated, purchased or in some cases exacted as conditions of development approval. Government does not necessarily have to be involved. Many non-profit conservation groups also utilize this tool. The protection of natural resource areas is based foremost on preservation. Thus in most cases maintenance of natural resource lands either in tracts or easements is not as significant as developed parks or other public areas. However, this is not to say that maintenance is not involved, but the basic premise of natural resource preservation is to protect lands from major human impact. Recommendation: Staff recommends no changes to the proposed Habitat-Friendly Development Provisions AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: December 12, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00001/DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2006-00004 - HABITAT-FRIENDLY DEVELOPMENT PROVISIONS REQUEST: Amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume 1) and Community Development Code (Sections 18.360, 18.370, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775, 18.810) in compliance with Statewide Planning Goa]. 5 and Metro Title 13 (Nature in Neighborhoods) to adopt the Significant Habitat Areas Map and to implement the recommendations of the Tualatin Basin Fish & Wildlife Habitat Program aimed at encouraging the use of habitat-friendly development practices. The proposed amendments will not result in. increased development restrictions but will give developers the option to take advantage of greater regulatory flexibility in exchange for the use of habitat-friendly practices. Amendments will remove barriers to, and provide code flexibility for development that incorporates habitat-friendly techniques. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed on the City's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code- amendments. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, I-H, I-L, I-P, MUC, MUE, MUE-1, MUE-2, MUR-1, MUR-2, R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5, R-7, R-12, R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.380, 18.390, 18.705, 18.715, 18.765, 18.775 and 18.810; Comprehensive. Plan Policies 2, 3 & 4; Metro Functional Plan Title 3 and 13; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5 and 6. 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. 6 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 (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.