The URL can be used to link to this page

08/04/2003 - Packet POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. � � d4GENDf� ' City of Tigard Corr�ruruiy Deu�Oprrern TIGARD F'L�,IV(VING COIVIMIS510IV s�t�A a��y At1�tJS1' 4, 2003 7:00 p.rrs. TIC�ARD CIVI� G�NTER— RED ROCK CREEK CONFERENCE ROOM 13125 SW FiALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 1. Ce4LL TO 06aDER 2. i��LL CALL. 3. C4iVIMUNICAT901VS 4. �OPPROiIE HNINl1T'ES 5. VI�E�— "PLAeN6VIRJ� 101" 6. �°RAINING WVITFi CI�'Y Al'TORlVEY (7:30 p.rrao) "�ecision 11Aaki�g, Findir�g� and Condition�" 7. DI�Cl1SSION l71V i4NlVEXAT'ION POL.ICY �. �T'F°IER ��.l�BNE�� 9. A��JOIJRtd�fI�NT .: . , : ; . �. , . . � � CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING CO�MIVIISSION Meeting Monut�s August 4, 2003 1. CALL TO ORD�R President Padgett called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Red Rock Creek Conference Room, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. FtOLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Padgett; Commissioners Anderson (arrived late), Buehner, Haack, Mores, Munro, and Sutton (arrived I�te) Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Bienerth and Webb Staf�Present: Gary Firestone, City P,ttorney; Barbara Shields, Planning Manager; Jerree Gaynor, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PL�►�IiVING Ci7iVI�lIB�SI�N C091lI�EIIl1NICAT9�fVS The secretary updated the Commission on the Bretton Woods and Ash Creek Estates appeals. 4. p►PPRC)�fE IVIEET'IN(� I�INIJTES Commissioner Buehner moved and Commissioner Haack seconded the motion to approve the July 7, 2003, meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0 (Commissioners Anderson and Sutton arrived after the vote was taken). Commissioner Munro abstained. 5. \/I�E�— "PL_ANNBNG 101" Th� Commission watched a video presentation (Exhibit A) on the history of land use plannir�g in Oregon and how statewid� planni�g goals are appli�d in th� City of Tigard. The pres�ntafion w�s recently f�atured on the cable program Focus on Tigard. 6. T4��11R11�1G VIlITH GiTY�4T�"ORIVEY The Commission had a training session with Gary Firestone on decision making, findings, and conditions of approval (Exhibit B). 7. DISCUSSi�N OPV APVNE�►TI�N POLlCY Planning Manager Barbara Shields and the Commission held a discussion on the possible annexation of Bull Mountain (Exhibits C-1 to C-4). Shields advised that the Board of County Commissioners ao not want to be advocates, but they are supportivs of an annexation plan. Once the Council decides in which direction they ALANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES -Aubust 4,2003-Page 1 ,; : � � want to go, staff will develop an �verail annexation program. The Planning Commission will be part of that program. President Padgett talked about a marketing approach for helping to motivate Bull Mountain residents to be in favor of annexation. He proposed looking at the City service package as a product. When the value of fihe product exceeds the perceived price (increase in property t�x), th� customer will "buy." The Commission discussed fihe importance of doing a campaign that includes both �uII MQUntain and City of Tigard residents. The campaign should focus on park�, roads, police protecfiion, and protection of property values. Ifi was also agreed that Tigar� residents should be able t� vote on the �nnexation. Commissioner Buehner suggested doing a special outreach io penple who live on B�!II Mountain and are already inside the City limits. President Padgett noted that some of the Commissioners would like to be incl�rded in whatever committee the Co��ncil puts together to address public outreach for the annexation. Barbara �hields agreed the Planning Commission should be a part of the process. �. OT6iER BUSINES� The next meeting is scheduled for August 18`h; on September 15th there will be a public hearing for a planned development and an update on Goal 5. A CIP update is scheduled for October 6tn 9. ,�DJAIJ��lMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Jerr� �aynar, Plannin mission Secretary r �^ � ATTEST: Presid�n ark Padgef� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES -August 4,2003-Page 2 q i:...._ . . . . ..., ... , .,,.. .,.. ,.. .. . . .. -r3u-.-�'T---rt--.m. . .. . � F[3ick Bew�rsdorff decmakefindcond.ppt �,,,,, ,�,..�.,...,,,. � -�..� �.M... ,..,. ,_� .,�..:.,..� : . .. Page 1 j ,.. .. ...,. �. ,...«.....i �xh�h�+ � ��I� � � �� , �I � � I � �7� /�� ITI�� ry Fires�one R�rr�i� �r�w Corrig�n & �achr�c� �ity Attorney� . _ ._ �.W.,. . ,�..�..� .._ n... wu . _ bick Bewersdorff decmakefindcond ppt Page 2 ��I� �� • L�GI�L�4`fliiE • C�UASI-JIJDICBAL _ _.._ . _ `Dick Bewersdorf€ decmakefmdcond ppt _ � „p,Page 3,� .._.��-�-��„. . T_�.,,.-...,..,r_,�, , ..., .,� .�,., ._ _.�.:_.�..,,. . .,. „ ,,..,..,. Legislative C�e�i��ons • fVlu�t be consistent with statev�ride land use planning goals, any �pplicabl� statutes, and unchanged portions of Comprehensive Plan • So long as not inconsistent v�ith ar�y c�ntrolling lav�o, City has braad dis�retior� �s to what to adapt �nd can base i�s decision on any factor re�s�nably rel�ted �o the decision � ..., .,w �Dick Bewersdorff decmakefindcond ppt �� Page 4 j .,.,..w .,, ,�,.�.,�..,Mw.�.,. ,� ..K.. .....� ,.._ , , . , . � .. .. _ ,_ _ .� ..�. � - C�ua�i�j�dici�l Deco�i�ns w B�sed solely or prir�n�rily on Co�r�unity Developrr�ent �ode • Deci�i�n �u�t b� b�sed �n applicable standard� and criteria (CD� or other) • Can deny oniy if �pplicabl� standard �r criterion is not met - cannot deny just bec�use �f neighborhood oppositio� �r persor��l di�lik� �f proje�� : � � �� •— _ . ..�. ..,... . .. ... ..� ._��....w...._� �ick BewersdorfF decmakefindcond ppt � age .. .. . �. ._�w. . ............_... � .,,.�... ......,.. M...,�._ . ,�._ A...,�,,:. �.�.._ . . ,._ . .w �...w, ..._ P 5 �� 1 V � � 1 M �� CO� DI�IC�1 �I�J �----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Click. to add sub-title =----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� �ick Bewersdorff-decmakefmdcond.ppt _� -��_�� _�� _.�� .�� ' '" �Page 6,;: _:. . ._.., . r,.... .,,, . _ . �w,m....m...�., , .,.�..,.,._...��. ....,�. V�/h�t �re find�� and g conditions? • A findir�g is a sfiaternent of fact, bas�d or� evider�c� in the record, that is related �o ar� applic�ble st�r�dard or criterion � A c�nditoon is a r�quirern�nt imposed as part of �n apprav�l that rnust be satisfi�d f�r the approval to rernain valid �ick Bewersdorff decmakefmdcond,ppt r�µ � N � � � �' � Page 7 �� Dick`Bew�ersdorff decmakefmdcondppt � � �� " � �• M4M� .�.'�• + �•�- Pa e 8 � 1—_ �a�or �oncept� • Findings are st�t�ments of fac� � Findings are requir�d to support a I�nd use decision • Findings must address all relev�nfi st�ndard� ar�d criteria • These co�cepts ar� not absolc�t� r�l�s a - �- . . _ _ .w_ ., . _ p Dick Bewersdorff decmakefindcond.ppt � . T� ��. WJ�.�y. �• "`Pa�e 9 � .rr��.r.. ,. ,..m�.«,..,.. . ....n��.er�. .v� .J � " _' .:�� Relationship betv�een finding� and decisior� • De�isions, espe�iaily q�aasi ju�dici�l . de�ision� must be based on findings � Because deci�ions must be based on appli�able standards and cri�eria, findings should address applic�ble sta�d�rd� and criteria ,__ . _. _, . .__: ,_.._ _ „ _. Dick Bewersdorff decmakefmdcond p _ Page 10 ........... .rS.xr_'•� ,.^_':y.. Wh� dr�f�s fin�ings�? • St��f narrr�ally drafts findings, appiicants sometimes draft findings • A� hearings, the City Council or Planning Commi�sion rr�ay add new findings or direct that nevv findings rr�ay be drafted, in v�rhich case st��f, the cit� attorney, or even a p�r�y � nlay draft th� finding ,. _. _. ,�. . . _ ..... . ........ „. .......... Dick Bewersdorff decmakefindcond.p t �. ... �, .,,.` .,,,, _ _,� .....,�. ...w�_..,. .� w.��. . . ✓ .M.. _ �.,.,._. .,, Page _ __. 11 � Wh�t To In�lud� In Frndings • Findings should mosfily state f�cts — Examples of fact�a� findings: • T'he proposed building will be 34 feet high s The lot is 94 feet wide at its narrowest paint • Notice was �ent to proper�y owners within 500 feet �f the property • Findings rna� also include conclu�ior�s __--,�-�-,-�... ..._.. „ �... �-,r,�,-�-,.�, �Dick Bewersdorff-decmakefindcond p,t '� �'~ �� Pa,ge 12 --____--_ �� CONCLI�S � C�N� IN �INDINGS � Thr�e appro�ches 1 . Factual findings:Na conclusions in findings 2. Mixed findings: Conclusions in findings are �K as long as there are factual findings to support the conclusion 3. Just conclusions: Only conclusory findir�gs are needed • Fir�t twc� approaches are accep�able o The third approa�h, while the rn�sf cor�rnon, is by far the riskiest ar�d does not �ati�fy the statutory requirern�nt to have findings �. �--r-.—� .. ... ... W . W.. _ .__. .. ... _. . .... �Dick Bewersdorff decmakefindcond pt � �,, ,. .. „_� ,.�. _,,_ � ��__:�,�.,....,�9.� _ ._. P 3 �� Fir�t Appro��h -- Factual Finding� • lJse separ�te �ections in the decision docurnent for (� ) findRngs (2) conclusions (or �onclusions �nd decssion or analysis) and (3) conditions . • Put only pure f�ctual findings in the finding section — e.g. the lot is �5 f�eet wide at its narrowest poin� • Put conclusory f ndings in � dif�erent sectAOn -� The lot mee�s the minim�m 75 foot width standard irr�posed by Cod� �ection 19.XXX .. ......� ._� Dick Bewersdorff decmakefindcand p�t J+..... �_.µ' �. µ��Y� ...� �J.J� � . - .....__..._. - . ._, ..,...,�,_,,,,,t.ti, ..,.�,. ..,,.., . ,. .. ,. ....., ,..,. ., .._...�.�..,__. .�. Pa�e 14 � ��cond Appro��h - I�ixed � Findings • This approach is acceptabl� so long as the �onclusory findings on conte�ted issues are suppor�ed by factual findings • Example: - T'he property is located in the XY Zone - Maxirr�um building height in the XY zone is 35 fe�t (Code Citatic�n) - Th� propose� building as designed will be 34 feet hegh - The prop��ed b�ilding meets the maximum bui�ding heigf�t star�dard of the XY �one ._— .._..._.. _.� , . .. _ .. .... �.-.,, .. , . . ._.. F..� .._...._�..., . _. .w..,..._,_ .�.... ._.;.... _ . ��mr�,... LDick_Bewersdorff decmakefindcond.ppt ,� Pa e �5 Third ,�ppr��ch �— Just �c�nclusi�n� � �"his approa�h should n�t b� used if th�re is �ny opposition �r any passibility of an �pp��l � It �a�y be �cceptabl� if there is no f�ctu�l � - q�aest�on as fin any �f th� �riteria • Ex�rr,ple �f a very conclusory findir�g: — Ali �pp�roval st�ndards arod crit�ria ha�� be�n r�et _.. ---�-w---s- a.. ..� Dick Bewersdorff decmakefindcond �,_. , . ... ,M.� „ , r . ,_ �-� C.�_.._ ...�.�. . .�, . � ,.. ,. .. _. , .. _ _...... ... .n,.. . �.. . .�. �.,... ., rr,�..,, , �� ALL I� NC)T L��T � LIJ�A �nrill uphold a d�cision that h�� inad�quat� findings if �he eviden�e is cl�ar that the cret�rio� ha� b�en rr�et (or the issue wa� n�t r�ised below) -c-^s-�.��r.r...... � - _. �.xtr.r.e^..—,---nrsv+amr�.' ,. , ........,_ . _.. . . . « - y �Dick Bewersdorff decriiaicefindco� t � Page 17; , r� w_.�._ _,,��:��.� �� V �� • �v�ry code stand�rd/crifierion �pplicable ta an application sh�a�ld b� addr��sed v��th on� or r��r� find��gs (a �inding can �ddr�ss more than �r�e stand�rd �r �ritere�►n) � L..IJ�3A �ar� r�verse if a deci��on is n�t s�pp�rted b� f r�dings on a�plicable crit�rda .. _.., � .. ..w,..�..W. _. w_.,_ .._.. .�M,� _..._ �...�,.,�._... . � Dick BewersdorfF decmakefindcond.ppt P e�-� _ _ __ .m. . .�� ....... ,...�.�.�...�_� ..�. ...�. ._.. . ..��. ..� ...._ _.r�....�..,.. .._ m� . ..� ._. � a�e 18• How d�taiied? • In �n ideal world, �very 6and use de�i�i�n would have a connplete s�t of findings addressing in detail every singie po�sibly �pplicable crit�ri�n and includir�g a citation to th� code c�r oth�er provision irr�posing the standard or crit�rion • in re�lity, that is a vvaste of tir�e ar�d p�per s If � Ll1�A �ppeal is expected, th� decisinr� �hould ha�e � �ompl�te se� of findrngs �ddr�ssing each �ri�erion • I� rnost cas�s, sp�cific findings as to �h� m�in i�sues ar� r��eded, but rnin�r issues thaf are �ot contrc�versiaf can b� �ddressed by conclu�ory findir�gs ; , CDick^Bewersdo�rff decmakef�ndcond.p{a .�m�� .� � , 1. � �� . ,,�� .�� Page 19� � y. . .....,._ .,.,...._,...�_m.., ._,. . ._. .,.,. , .,, ...,_..., ., FINDI �IG� 1�0 fN�LIJC�E IN ��N1"RCJ\/Ef�� l�� 5 • In �or�t�over�i�l ��se�, th� f�l�owir�g fir�dings should be consider�d: — Fmndings reg�rdeng cr�dib�lity of v�itnesses — ��ndings stating which exper�s are reli�d on �nd vvhy — Findings addr�ssing argurnents or facts disagreed vvitf� by the de�ision-rnaker �__� k. ._ �a m kea findcond.. , `�, ._._._ .�.� . . . ._...�_... .. ._ . . ��,--�-� Dic Bewersdo _.pp Page 20�� ....y .�., .,�axu��.cr. ,-.,.v:�_a�.::• ADDII�IONAL �IN � IN�� • Additw�n�i finding� rnay be ad�p�ed at hearing�o - The h�aring body rr��y direct �ta�F (including the Ci$y Attorney) t� dr�ft 6anguage to be read at the hear�ng - A �ernber �f th� h�ar�ng body m�y draft a fending - An oral fir�ding rr�ay be mad� �o b� incorporated in th� final vvritt�n apir�ion ,;;. .__ .�.._.. .. _-.— dick Bewersdorff decmakefi d n pp �+ � � � �� Pag 21 _... _ _ _ _ .,.__...,.. . ._ �, ... . ,,. ,. _, ., . _.... _. � ��I � � �II V � � 1 V �� he hearing body mu�t forrr�ally adopt findingsr — The motion to approve or deny rr�u�� r�fer to findings tha� are being ad�pt�d — The st�ndard rr�otion as to adop# t�e findings prepared by �taff, as rnodifed at �he hearing . — �f he r�or� �pecific the st��ment of adoption es, the b�tter ,-----_-�-�,�-x,��.-r---�-�..�–�-,�,�,.—,-..-:,m.� w.... ._ _ .. . _. . .... .. _ . _w., . _�. . .. .. �.. �, Dick Bewersdorff decmak�findcond.pp E,_ _ Pa�e 22� �..- � - R� ..,.M . �� f_Dick Be dorff decmake�ndcond.pp� ��.. �.��, ". ., f. f. .�� . Pa.�e 23 �,�, .,_,__,. _y... V�IV�I�I�� F ��f�� V�'1� � �or�diti�� of appro�al rr��y be innposed^ � — V!lhen a�t�orized by code — V1lhen applic�tion could be deni�d sf conditions not irriposed — To in�ure cc�rr�pliance �nrith applicable criteri� — If applicant has agre�d ta th� condition ..,, - ��. . _ . . -�---��-�--xr��:�:- .�..„, .,...�.m. . . r.,- ... . �, . ...�.-^^--s-�rmm�r�-xv.rx-iam+n�-r m-c.<r.amre�,:�.-ammrsmxrr-�avr-:cm.rvt " Deck Bewersdorff-d�cmakefindcond,ppt E.. . ........�. �...-�s..,._..R�..�..._.��,� . . ..w.w....�...,. .... ,., T ._.. ry w ..1:�::�. - .,,�.y�� r�,. „ ... �L:��:a,.��:��x..c.,wP�ge� _ _ �. Dr�fting C�ndit�on� � � Sta� �oill norrnally dr�ft cond6ti�ns � P9anning Cor�r�nissic�n or Caty �ou�ci� r�,ay . add conditic�n� in th� s�m� way tha� findings are added or a�e�ded ,,.,.�. •.-- .--r--n-T-<-�--� ,r.... .. . .. ... _. ..�.�.,�. i Dick Bewersdorff decmakefmdcond,,pp ,.:,..._9�25 �. „ , .. .:.,.,��.r.,: w.., , , , ,., , �. �. ,.�..� �,..,.._, .. .....�.,r—�:,:�,��-.�:��.:�..:=� T! I\/I I �l G C�F COIVI �'L IAN C E � • Ev�ry cor�dition r�u�t specify when th� �ondition rnust be ��ti�fied: — �y building perrriit i��r�ce — �y ��rtificat� of occupancy — On an c�ng�ir�g basis — By f na! pl�t approval ,;, � _.. —.--� _..,.. .....,._......_. ...,,—,.�—.�,�--�-�--� ._ ...._....,M... ...—,s�--�—�.—T�--a-�,x-�- rDick Bewersdarff decmakefindcond. p � �r� , 6 �_,.. .,_,-,.y,,.,..�.., r.�..,,�.....�..�......mr..��.,.....,, w.. .,�.... , ... . ..�..._.. .w..,.... .. � w,. . .. ag�.. .... P ��ndition� �hould �e Thor��gh • Conditions sho�ld be drafted to ensure full ong��ng cor�pliar�ce • For example, if a �frc�nt-fa�ing en�ranc� is r�quired by code �nd fihe plan� don't sh�vv or��, c�nditions are ne�ded as follovvs: — Ar�nend site plan by time ofi �uilding permit issuance to �how front-facing entr�nce — �onstruction of front-facing entr�nce a� �h�wr� on �mended plans requored prior to certificate of occupancy . — �1ain#ain fr�nt-f�cing entran�e as fun�ti�nal entrance (on an ongoing basis) �Dick Bewersdorff-decmakeflndcond�. �� . , � ..,. ��_. ..' �.�.� � � Page 27 _ �.�,�-,cpp ..._ .. ,... . n.0 ..,,.�,�.r�,.��._, Cc�nditions �hould Ensur� All Appii�able �ret�ria ,por� Corr�p�i�d VVith • For every standard or criterion th�t is n�t �thervvi�e as�ured of compliance, � conditi�r� � of app�oval should b� ir�p��ed �o ensur� compliance • !t is not �Iways necess�ry to specificaily � �ddr�ss every crit�rion with a �eparat� conditior� of approval • �411 approval� sh�uld contain the basic condition �hat the prc�je�t will be built and maint�ined according to the approved site plan � � L��b'�� U �. E ' � t�� ;� ra V^:�+fJ fi �I (�'� r f�a��°i(i 4 [„i� .�,'it ' ��`�:�" � L Il � ��1:��i� ;,�!`�Jr,�uC.;�s� �L�u li�R�I�,:� l;. Sl'ATIEIIP�9IDE PL�1NIdI1VG GOALS 2 (Land Us� Planning) 11 (Public �acilities and Plans) 14 (Urbanizatic�n) Jurisdictions produce Cor�nprehensive Plans to Address the Goai� and Guide Future �rowth �j Tlt��i�C.� Plan Area = Unincorporated Areas -' � Plan Area e City Limits Rural (Non-UGB) Urban (UG�) .,R .. e o�..,ou�y.ni•� .,� . I� - �''''� � — . � i .,�. � , � � � , � . UPAi4- General Coordination Agreement �oopera�Bve Agr��rreents: —�it��—Coaaa�ty—fVlet�a�—�i��rect�— �orr��s �9annir�g ��d C3��la�amer�t�ctia�o�s ;; .. �U5l�Q+- �Fevelr�pment Seti�ice§ by Tigarc9 ,:, TUSi4-Tigard= Uftimate�ervice Provider TIG;�IRD � Comprehensive Plan Amendments Ail path�do fh�follovv6ng: 1. Require new deve�opm�nt to ar�nex 2. �ncourage dot�ble-majority annexations 3. Require irnplerr�enta�ion af Assessrn�r�t Repor� rec�rr�r�endation� �. , � EFFICIEAlCY � Daes not go b��aa��data�s rgu�. _ --_ _ Longest patFi t�f�alE ss��r��►aratcon. - - Empl�y ch�rry��, »��s�d, other methods to EF�9CiE�ICY bring in ar�a��s�� e��ssessmertt reparf. Fu61 incorporati�� t�ke� m�re time; path n�t - as clearly defs�aQ�. " -_ � �.. -; _ _. EFFICIEi�CY �. ,,. � Reyuir�s vote af�aela �€�s�s�tain, Cifi�optionaf :: �. , _ _ F2equires �a�tslic s�a��r�ent plan, - - ex#ensive cp��ty coordin��ion. .> Full incorpo��ao��€�� 4a�systerr?atic; could be shoctest route to�aaE� E€��oc�aratio�. ��0�e�[��i{ =Ability to Provide Services in an Efificient and Effeciive Manner(based on Assessment Report) � N � � � r� �� FACTORS F(3R AN EFF�CT6VE I�lJ�LIC OUTRE�►CH PLQ►N o �� r.,�,.,,;_��y� • Decernber 2003—Plan Must Be Developed m Irvapiernentation—Begins no later than nine months before the vote(January 2004 for November 2004 election) � g 4�° i;^� ,��!a' �;i'r'.; a.. • Change discussion from "YES/[VO" to "WH�iV" � Engage public in productive dialogue to resolve issues Art�t °:h:�. �.,al�„ + .y,�,e1 f<:Dk. ,Y :��C'9Fad�,��.'..�`{.. �.`�I�Q.��I�l�_n:." m Niche cc�mmunications as opposed to citywide ---37% Bull Mountain residents support annexafion plan ---80% Tigard residents support annexation plan • Income over$100,000 more likely to support s 18-24 years old give stronger support • 9 in 10 parents with kids support e . ,. . . :' . , 1 ... . . , S 1;.. . .. .M , . , t i h ... .:}::��i9�� L�.:��.: A!i �� • P�rks 84% • Ro�d� 76% • Libvary 75% • Political Representati�n 74% � �` .��;� � . << � I�a�er�al. City staff meetings � {�a��a�c��nc��: City/County sf�fi��e�tings � �x��a��ai: f�iche communications with stakeholders �' +�>�°�.,$�," f N , '^ ° .. R 1 .�.'r� i .. . - � Comrnunication at ali ievels � �hir�-party facilitation to assis7 with problem solving • Prioritize current work programs to accommodate annexation • Consistent message • ANNEXATION PLAN TIMELIN� C- Agreement � development Develop Annexation Plan whfch Inaludes: with County Timing and sequence for annexation addressing � Local standards of urban service availabllity required flscal impacts � 2s a preconditlon of annexation if annexation planned schedule for providing urban services to area will cause � to be annexed reductions in The effects on existing urban service providers County � Long-term benefits of annexation plan property tax (required by ORS 195,220) revenues. 6 months to 12 months to 17 months to prepare plan prepare plan prepare plan and conduct and conduct and conduct public outreach publfc outreach public outreach for May 2004 for Nov 2004 for March 2005 election(from elect(on(from electlon(from June PF&S June PF&S June PF&S completion) compietion) completion) Provide notice of proposed annexation to Dec 2003 June Nov 2004 affected agencies per Metro requirements(45 2004 days prior to hearing) Prepare staff report Jan 2004 July 2004 Dec 2004 Publish notice once each week for 2 weeks prior to the oublic hearina Public hearing to consider the annexation and to Feb 2004 Aug 2004 January consider putting the Annexation Plan on the 2005 ballot File with the County(as early as the day after the March Sept Feb 2005 last election but no later than 1 month oriorl 2004 2004 Election � May 2004 Nov 2004 March 2005 Election results certified by the elections office June Dec 200h April (20 days after election) 2004 2005 1 Council adopts ordinance proclaiming results of June Dec 2004 April the elections 2004 2005 � Notice o(annexation sent to Department of Revenue and Secretary of State(30 days after July 2004 Jan 2005 May 2005 adoption unless adopted by emergency) Annexation on the tax rolls(if annexation plan .1uly 1, July 1, July 1, does not set a delayed annexation date) 2005 2005 2006 � � 1'ICA�2� PLi4fVNING COMIVIISSIOtV C�TY OF TIGARD OREGON ROLL CAL.L ��AR�� D,�T'�: ~ ' D3 S'TAl2T'6NG TIN6�: :°?� D�ir�-• �c�n�nnassio��RS: n�ARK �aD�ETr �PR�sr��N�r) „�„� JUDITH ANDERSON (VICE-PIRESID��1T) JODIE BIENERTH . � GRETCHEN BUEHNER � BILL HAACI� GLENN �ORES JIJDY MUNRO SGOT SIJT-f'ON EILE�N WEB� v REX C�FFAL.L (aiterna�e) �"i°.A�� E��i�9�': ' a ..� €�I�P� �EV11�R��ORF� JIM Fi�I�CJR1rX "y ' �_ B6�AD KIL�3Y '�BARBARA SHI�LDS i � MOF�GAN TRACY _` JULiA Hl�JDUK � :� � MA,T�f' SCHEIDEGGER DUANE R�BEF�TS a .� � � �RIAN RAGER �ETH ST, AMAND �� f3US DUEN/�� . � t J a , j_� � �Grl .�p�� G � � CITY OF TIG�►RID Communiry Development Shaping A Better Community ��AN�� I�� TC�: F'lanning Gommissioners FROM: Jerree Gaynor DATE: July 21, 2003 SU�JECT: Annexation Policy Discussion Mark Padgett would like to discuss his idea� for an �nnexation policy with the Planning Cornmission— it�m #7 of the August 4tr' meeting agenda. Barbara Shields from Long Range Planning wil! attend the meeting to provide some history of Bulf Niountain annexation efforts to date and an update of Council direction. Attached is a memo dated Niarch 4, 2003 from fvlark to the Mayor regarding an annexation policy fUr Tigard. Also attached, for your� infarmation, is a draft copy of th� Public Facilifies and S�rvices Assessment Repor�for the Bull Mountain Area recently c�rr�pleted by st�fif. u.�� ? � � hJfarch 4, 2003 To: Jim Griffith, Mayor Fram: Mark Padgett, Planning Cotnmission Pr�sld�nt Re: Tigard �nnexation I'olicy Mr. Mayor, Following our joint workshop, I began to think s�riously about the challenges our city faces concerning the annexing of adjacent property, specifically in the Buli Mountain area. As we both know, there is a larg� feeling of resistance to annexation among many of those who are in the Urban Services Area. 7heir basic position is that they are �antent wit�r the status quo, and see no reason to increase their taxes. I propose taking a traditionai marketing approach ta the situation. i believe we should market the city like we would a produc4. Using �t�ndard marketing techniques, I am confident we can devise a plan that would convincg those people that ot is in their best iriterests to annex. This would save a lot of acrimony down the ilne. Nere's whaf I mean. All marketing is based on the principle of differentiation. Right now, we have two "products". One is living in the unincorporated Urban Services Area and the other is living in the City of Tigard, First, we musfi identify the differences in those two product�. Then we must take fhat list ofi geatures and turn them into benefits. N�xt, we qu�ntlfy ihase b�nefiks and place a dollar value on them. It is a basic principle of marketing dh�t whe�n the prospect pPrceives the value of the product exceeds the price - they w!H buy. The stumbling block is that they are now receiving some city lev�l servic�s without paying for them. This makes it difficult to shaw a true differQntiatlon and therefore a difference in value. Our first step must be to develop a way to bring equity to the current level of service given vs. the payment for that lev�l of sc�rvlce, 9 believe the Planning Commission can ac�a� a�� "Annex�klon Task �arce'°and come up with as� �cfio�-� �fan based on th� above proposal. ��le�as� ca�sider �his aizd let me know if y�u�ould like me to Jiscuss this fur4her with tha� �nunclf. T'ha�k ya� for your time anc� consicieration. Mark Padgett