Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CCDA Packet - 10/13/2015
city of'rigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL& CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MEETING DATE AND TIME: October 13,2015 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session;7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard -Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available,ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated;it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171,ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments;and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http://live.tigard-or.gov CABLE VIEWERS: The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 P.M. Monday 6:00 a.m. City Of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL& CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE AND TIME: October 13,2015 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard -Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 6:30 PM •STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. DISCUSS TIGARD ENTERPRISE ZONE EXPANSION WITH CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 6:45 p.m. estimated time C. RECEIVE BRIEFING ON TWO UPCOMING IGAs WITH METRO FOR TRAIL SEGMENTS 6:55 p.m. estimated time D. DISCUSS CITY MANAGER EVALUATION CRITERIA AND PROCESS 7:05 p.m. estimated time •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 A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less,Please) A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication B. Tigard High School Student Envoy C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce D. Citizen Communication—Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council) These items are considered 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: 7:35 p.m. estimated time A. RECEIVE AND FILE: 1. Council Calendar 2. Council Tentative Agenda for Future Meeting Topics B. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: • September 8,2015 • September 15,2015 • September 22,2015 •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Separate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion mill be considered immediately after the Councill City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. LEGISLATIVE SESSION WRAP UP 7:40 p.m. estimated time 5. DEVELOP 2016 FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA 8:00 p.m. estimated time 6. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR FIELDS TRUST 8:20 p.m. estimated time 7. CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING FY 2016 FIRST QUARTER BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL 8:45 p.m. estimated time r 8. CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING FY 2016 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL 8:55 p.m. estimated time 9. CONSIDERATION OF TASER PURCHASE CONTRACT 9:00 p.m. estimated time 10. APPROVE 72ND AND DARTMOUTH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS DEVELOPER COSTS AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE REIMBURSEMENT 9:10 p.m. estimated time 11. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9:20 p.m. estimated time 12. 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. 13. ADJOURNMENT 9:25 p.m. estimated time City o f Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Agenda October 13, 2015 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. DISCUSS TIGARD ENTERPRISE ZONE EXPANSION WITH CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO — Economic Development Manager Purdy 6:45 p.m. estimated time C. RECEIVE BRIEFING ON TWO UPCOMING IGAs WITH METRO FOR TRAIL SEGMENTS—Public Works Director Rager and Parks Manager Martin 6:55 p.m. estimated time D. DISCUSS CITY MANAGER EVALUATION CRITERIA AND PROCESS— Human Resources Director Bennett 7:05 p.m. estimated time Administrative Items: 1. Two-pass rule for Contracts - Mayor Cook 2. LOC Policy Committees—City Manager Wine 3. Supplemental Budget Addition- .1 FTE in Central Services—City Manager Wine 4. Public Comments on Fields Trust Comp Plan Amendment and Zone Change—City Recorder Krager Council Calendar October 6 Tuesday City Center Development Agency Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 13* Tuesday Council Business and CCDA Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 16 Friday Tailgate with Council at Tigard High School Tennis Courts, 5-6:30 p.m. 20* Tuesday Council Workshop/Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 27* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall November 3 Tuesday CCDA Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall—ELECTION NIGHT 10* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 17* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 24* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall December 1 Tuesday City Center Development Agency Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 15* Tuesday Council Workshop Fleeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting is cancelled. Council Training will be held from 5:30-9:30 at Fanno Creek House Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk(*). AIS-2073 A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Council Liaison Reports Submitted By: Norma Alley, Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Council will present liaison reports. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments No fale(r)attached AIS-2347 B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Tigard Enterprise Zone Expansion with City of Lake Oswego Prepared For: Lloyd Purdy, Community Development Submitted By: Lloyd Purdy, Community Development Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE The City of Lake Oswego requests an expansion of the Tigard Enterprise Zone to include 96 acres of Lake Oswego's industrial/commercial zoned land. This expanded enterprise zone would be called the Ti La Oswego Enterprise Zone. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST In coordination with the City of Lake Oswego,pass a resolution on October 27 expanding Tigard's current enterprise zone to include the portion of Lake Oswego outlined in the attached maps, and authorize the City of Tigard's economic development manager to manage this multi-jurisdictional program. Exhibit I shows the existing Tigard Enterprise Zone in blue and the proposed expansion area in green. Exhibit II shows a preliminary view of the area that the Lake Oswego City Council would like to include in the proposed Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Enterprise Zone was created by Tigard City Council Resolution 14-51 in October 2014. The Tigard Enterprise Zone was authorized by the Director of the State's Economic Development Agency, Business Oregon,in November 2014. Currently ten enterprise zones act as a tool for economic development in the Portland metro region. Forest Grove/Cornelius and Troutdale/Fairview are examples of cities that work together through enterprise zones that cross municipal boundaries.A similar partnership between The City of Tigard and City of Lake Oswego would result in the creation of the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. Enterprise zones offer qualified businesses that are located within a defined boundary, a three to five year tax abatement on new investment (equipment,buildings, and facilities) when the firm also invests in new employees by increasing their workforce by 10%. To date, three firms in Tigard are eligible to participate in this program. The Tigard Enterprise Zone currently includes all the industrial, manufacturing and commercially zoned properties in Tigard eligible for this program based upon the State's economic hardship criteria. Exhibit III provides background on the Tigard Enterprise Zone. Amending the Tigard Enterprise Zone boundary to support business growth in a neighboring city is allowed via a formal request to Business Oregon, the State of Oregon's economic development agency. Expanding the enterprise zone to include industrial land in Lake Oswego's Southwest Employment Arca will add: •96 acres of property. •84 industrial zoned or commercial tax lots. •15 eligible businesses (estimated). •1 firm ready for an immediate investment within the next 12 months. The Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone will be managed by the City of Tigard's Economic Development Manager. An IGA will govern the specifics of that partnership. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Limit the Tigard Enterprise Zone to the boundaries of the City of Tigard. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Expanding the Tigard Enterprise Zone is consistent with the recommendations of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan Goal 9 encouraging regional partnerships and economic development. It is also supported by the strategic vision of a more interconnected city connecting us through a collaboration with a neighboring municipality. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION February 2014 Council discussion of Enterprise Zone program. October 2014 Resolution (14-51) to create the Tigard Enterprise Zone. Attachments Proposed Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone Map(Draft) Expaned view of sites in Lake Oswego(Draft) Tigard Enterprise Zone -R-IGE,W R-DSI !t AIS 2347 ExhlbitI F Enterprise Zone BROGK MSA*N��pS T/�r3� r��/� jfj, 11 �] /�y� > 19J�Q V LS IIxS �IN y l`.-i 1 TAY L=ORS=F:E:R R.Y RD Expansion r _ ! Map a51 �o WEIR=RD � w (DRAFT) 1 i . Proposed Lake Oswego S GN' w Expansion 2015 Tigard Enterprise Zone 2014 Tigard City Boundary NPro n or°s z Area in blue shows the existing y� enterprise zone in Tigard.Area in w green shows the portion of the zone em that,after expansion,would include Lake Oswego resulting in the Tigard/ MSI,-RmOS E-7 Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. City of G:A•A.R:, Tigard Oregon 1 D-E-ST MGD•0rN*L--D-ST l K•RU SE.WAY b i1.1• `w I ME LC In Itq Map_ 1 I _ U:LI B rY.O.0 NTA IN RD(' ,� Q Rp r rob a i BO NIFA><RD iO > eurseoao •'�� aunm�(�v'F`-'� r o 'I N R� PEs / tau B�E.E:FFBEE 0` - D'UR,H,A,M-RSD J �VJp /I l os to\� 1 n{�GrIC� C�02r 7h n--- r Map Cmated 912412015 7UA•L-*TIN-R•D + s y�00 City of Tigard. Oregon lY/Q a o 0 Nv «-x! ,�4 �. O 13125 SW Hall Blvd �� C--Fi9LD5=RSD Tigard. OR 97223 ONES=EE' - 6 3 9 50 3 71 z 4 1 N BR I www hgartl-or gov C'-S pain 11192 t6P 1952'S�GiS Fro�ecis,F lS_p:crecrs120'.5�enlerpnse zoneMnterpnse_zppe111]mxtl. AIS 2347 Exhibit II a� Enterprise Zone h kOIWAdN:IN.GTONeC-p Expansion (draft) 5..�- �- Lake Oswego Southwest Employment Area ' Enterprise o Zone �*0 + Lake Oswego area to include Tigard Enterprise Zone j Tigard City Boundary Expanded view of sites in Lake y m Oswego that will be included in the proposed Tigard/Lake 0 ® Oswego Enterprise Zone. a >f` n _ City of �Ro JEA:N-Ro Tigard Oregon Bp,WER�BOOME --__ n itY Map�vnycoovrx I Lake Oswego X- 'oo �. /.` :uttsBoxo ox �rvp MI Y � emsT U A T I N UQHAff z _ a Map Created.9/24/2015 I I i City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 _ 503 639-4171 - - I www tlgard-or gov z •m. r `– ---- - Pall 1\191195109115\GIS_Prd�eCd\F lSyreleda120tSenterprte zoneknlarpnse_xone111]—d AIS 2347 Exhibit III Tiegard s Entefprise Zone I Supporting business growth and job creation in Tigard ENTERPRISE ZONE OVERVIEW 11 ��aoQR Tigard's Enterprise Zone Supports local business growth F and job creation within the city. - Businesses located in Tigard's Enterprise Zone may be eligible for a three to five B U I LD I NG S year tax exemption on new equipment,facilities and buildings. Tigard's Enterprise Zone Program offers a 100 percent waiver of real property tax on eligible investments for up to five years.These investments must meet state and local requirements, including a 10 percent increase in employment. Land and existing equipment are not eligible for the Tigard Enterprise Zone r exemption.Once the abatement period of three to five years is over the entire asset enters the tax role. ENTERPRISE ZONE ELIGIBILITY v - The property and investment for industrial, manufacturing and commercial firms must be located within the Tigard Enterprise Zone boundaries, and meet the state a U I H rs L N I and local requirements found on the next page. 4 / PO BROCKMAN ST 99<<e Des°a Portland `D Washington ` Beaverton Square WEIR RD Shopping y . - Center s A,C L I I I t 5 < S f c FkY kO < �Triangle Q r vrt,l NUt ST \ -L Tigard JGAARDE ST MCDONALD ST htr-ItJL, BULL MDU T O BUNItA RD Lloyd Purdy Nva ,r Pam Economic Development Manager = - King Pat Trust 503.718.2442 nl Lc rc ND Rn CITY uu NeA�1 en Or Bu Lake ps Oswego City of Tigard - Community Development Department FceI 0 1,250 2.50O 5.000 7.500 10.000 Tualatin D u r h a m 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard's Enterprise Zone,shown above shaded in green,is as inclusive as possible given state wWw.tigard-or.gov requirements.This was done to allow as many businesses as possible on opportunity to participate. STATE REQUIREMENTS Tigard's Written Agreement: Participating business is required to enter into a written agreement with the municipality that will be based on the terms of the company's Authorization Application and Oregon Statute and Administrative Rules. Enterpr' se First Source Hiring Agreement(FSA): Prior to or concurrently with the execution of the written agreement,firm shall enter into an FSA with WorkSource Oregon Zon • Employment Department for employees hired at the qualified facility throughout the project's construction and tax exemption period. Supporting business growth Employment qualifications: By the first exemption filing,firm must increase and job creation in Tigard employment(and maintain that throughout the exemption period) by 10 percent in the zone. LOCAL INCENTIVES Expedited Land use Review. Fast tracking of the land use review process. Tigard's Enterprise Zone was created Fee waivers: The following fees are also waived by 50 percent: in 2014 to induce additional private- A. Pre-application conference fees sector investment and jobs as well B. Business registration fees as a short-term benefit to a project's C. Sign permit cash flow. D. Development Code provision review ■ Encourage Tigard-based entre- Extended Abatement: The City Council may extend the standard exemption by up to preneurs and firms to start up two more years if the qualifying company increases employment by 10 percent and grow. each year and new jobs are compensated(wages plus benefits)at 200 percent of Oregon minimum wage(Oregon minimum wage is$9.10 per hour as of 2/2014). • Prompt bigger re/investments than might otherwise occur. LOCAL REQUIREMENTS ■ Accelerate investment,expan- In addition to state requirements,the City of Tigard has elected to add the following sion and hiring. requirements to its Enterprise Zone program: • Expand employment. Minimum Investment: A minimum investment of$500,000 is required. ■ Bolster early success of business Procurement Plan: A procurement plan to increase purchasing with Tigard-based projects. companies is required. ■ Attract investment and facilities Job Quality: that would move or locate A. Total compensation for 75 percent of company's zone facility jobs(wages plus outside of the City of Tigard. benefits) must exceed 200 percent of Oregon minimum wage after one year of employment(Oregon minimum wage is$9.10 per hour as of 2/2014); B. Must provide benefits to employees that meet or exceed the national average of non-mandated benefits for the size of the company,and C. Must offer sufficient training and advancement opportunities for all employees. Application Fee: There is an application fee of one tenth of one percent(.001)of the value of the investment for qualified property that is proposed in the application,capped at$50,000. Community Service Fee: Companies applying for the extended abatement of up to two additional years must pay a community service fee.This fee is calculated at a rate of 25 percent of the abated taxes for years four and five,and is paid by the eligible Lloyd Purdy business to the City of Tigard. Economic Development Manager 503.718.2442 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST If you are interested in participating in Tigard's Enterprise Zone, please contact the City of Tigard City of Tigard's Economic Development Manager Lloyd Purdy at 503.718.2442. Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 Businesses interested in Tigard's Enterprise Zone program can obtain the state www.tigard-or.gov application online at: http://www.oregon.gov/DOR/PTD/docs/303-029.pdf AIS-2350 C. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Briefing on Two Upcoming IGA's with Metro for Trail Segments Prepared For: Steve Martin,Public Works Submitted By: Steve Martin,Public Works Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Council will be briefed on upcoming intergovernmental agreements (IGA) with Metro. The first two will be discussed in detail,as they are near completion: 1.An IGA for an easement and maintenance of a trail near Sunrise Lane. 2. An IGA for the construction and maintenance of a trail near Tiedeman Avenue and Woodard Park. The following two IGAs will also be brought to council's attention: 3. An IGA to allow the Fanno Creek Trail to be built on the Fields and Brown properties for the Regional Flexible Funding Account grant. 4. An IGA to maintain the infrastructure that Friends of Bull Mountain Park will add to Bull Mountain Park. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends council receive the briefing and give staff direction,if needed. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Council will be briefed on two draft IGAs currently being reviewed by staff;maps are attached that show these segments. 1.The first IGA is to receive and maintain a trail segment that connects Sunrise Lane to Sandridge Lane. There is currently a small paved trail in this area that is on private property. Metro is negotiating to purchase the property,and the IGA will allow Tigard to maintain this trail segment. The trail connects the future Westside Trail and several neighborhoods on Bull Mountain to Sunrise Lane and the future Sunrise Community Park. This trail segment is identified in the Neighborhood Trails Plan as #9 (it is erroneously marked#14 on the photo).This IGA will apply to future METRO acquisitions in Tigard under this METRO program. 2.The second IGA is for Tigard to be reimbursed for up to $660,000 in Metro bond funds for the design and construction.of a bridge over Fanno Creek and the connecting trail segments for realignment of the Fanno Creek Trail adjacent to Tiedeman Avenue. There is no required match for this funding grant,however Tigard's responsibility will be to construct and maintain the trail segment. This project will remove one dangerous turn on the existing trail and move the trail.off Tiedeman Avenue and onto the Metro-owned Swann property and Woodard Park. This trail segment is identified in the Greenway Trail System Master Plan as project"H". If time permits, staff will brief the council on two other IGAs that are still in process of development. That briefing will be informational and will inform council as to IGA status and provide them opportunity to give direction as to having these items in future study sessions. Those agreements are: 3. An IGA to allow the city to build the Fanno Creek Trail from the Library through the Fields and Brown properties. This is mostly a formality,as the city is already committed to building and maintaining the future trail in this area. 4. An IGA will be required for the Friends of Bull Mountain Park to receive their grant from Metro to build a shelter,playground,and trail segments. The IGA assures the city will maintain these facilities and add to the parks inventory when they are completed in Bull Mountain Park. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Council approves all IGAs. These IGAs will help further the city's strategic plan for walkability. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION There has been no previous discussion on these IGAs. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Information: The fiscal impact for these IGAs will involve budgeting for maintenance of the trail sections. Additionally, the Tiedeman realignment will require the City to pay invoices to be reimbursed by Metro for construction of the bridge and trail. Better fiscal information should be available for these items when the IGAs come back for Council approval. Attachments Tiedeman Description Tiedeman Map Sunrise Area Sunrise Aerial Tigard Greenway Trails System Master Plan April 28,2011 Recommended Greenway Trails FANNO CREEK TRAIL — TIEDEMAN AVENUE CROSSING H REALIGNMENT (ALIGNMENT 5B) Summary Cost Opinion This alignment would improve the difficult Fanno Length:450' Creek Trail crossing of Tiedeman Avenue.The City is High Design Option:Alignment constructing short-term improvements, including: 0 Design: 12'permeable asphalt,precast signage,curb ramps, and high-visibility crossings. concrete bridge,fencing This alignment would additionally eliminate the 90 • Planning-level cost:$274,000 degree turns currently required in this segment and Medium Design Option:Alignment cross Fanno Creek via a bridge near the existing road bridge. The trail would connect to the Fanno Creek • Design: 10' asphalt,wood bridge, Trail in Woodard City Park. The land this alignment Planning-level cost:$173,000 crosses is currently owned by Metro under the terms Low Design Option:Length:Alignment of a life estate.Trail use is prohibited on the property • Design:6' gravel,wood bridge until the life estate is relinquished and would be • Planning-level cost:$139,000 subject to Metro approval thereafter. Opportunities • Enhances safe routes to schools opportunities • Improves safety and user comfort on a popular segment of a regional trail Constraints • Majority of trail in flood plain • Crossing improvements on Tiedemann Avenue • Requires bridge over Fanno Creek • 105'in'strictly limit'habitat area lis Tigard Greenway Trails System Master Plan July 2011 Recommended Greenway Trails FANNO CREEK TRAIL - TIEDEMAN AVENUE CROSSING H REALIGNMENT (ALIGNMENT 5B) t � ' +� ,`I"r :'�� � .�• r�.� ! 1 ���-vim_., All a " � 7`y i a �` _i+• i 1"ter 4 11� _ ••s' P.Ff�1t I,1�F ril/r',�cn�-n�= , __, ___...___ �i 150TH AVE T jc 40 4ki ;u loo rn IE:l rn n. � * s n SANDRIDGE DR : ! a arm= *opus NAHCOTTA DR r t 144TH AVE h or lb OR Ad6 0 F m IL omil ! 141ST AVE a * � � S� ; t • f • 'a OPT fii ir i [ h � e . � � s_�$3�- �' �J3I� �3•I�3 i �f • i / � • v �1 1 I it 1 � � � - �! 1 Lu f x'-7]3 ; VII SIM WL I r I 1 , 1 e - '-- �, I � � •,�, - - :� - I - - ��': - � VG.• � '1.1 1�'�`� ,� � �Jlf 1�1 1 - ��../l L JUp 1 7 1 or r 6 iI L r� a S1 - ` ,Ttr �r '�- ~• 1 .f 1. 'r4,`�'. ,��--,l5-��,.� i ' 1 -I ; A- 6 ! FAp. a" i1 _ �d • / 11 -'�� � Y W' gyp' 1 ) 1 JAY 3" �` -, ' ¢` PAL, S 1 y� UP 7777%A- It Ar Jd Aft - �� Q00 1 - a4' 3 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET 75 �`� �. 11764 FOR D 'f 3. ©�s r ,, ���� '� -- a' h (DATE OF MEETING) - 'v"'� ! rem DirloenPark r10 0 ' 4 T F 0425 0395 x]365' 32 T) 48" 027,5 r , 4481 11)4 6 r °t 121 . . 272 a t 3-jeD W syy '• r 80,, 10350 1042010390103 p ;' r 070 2 65 3 '� .i 0205 A . 0 0 ;; i 10130 t► .� ���'` QU 02 Woodard Park i 7 _ . Swan Property 21:3 0 ' 230�7?14b 25 �i r - 0505 a 4 122 ° fI ?70j" / `• 223:3 15 o .,` ; U 85 05 0 { 235 ' ;. .t 04 75 ,104 95 1& 14 lu X22371046. k t,J 1 520 04 _ a � X1223 Feet t 2295-'%' 1 30 7 �D45 ,�: 3 0 a 0 250 i I" --- ► J-�?J' e V t4 - M•. � off: f• ,�ztg r .a - - .� �:» � - :+ ° }A�-�' �h ?.� %.•: io(. y.k'� �b, � Si' � -----iii EJ+ SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR OA (DATE OF MEETING) 77-47.- - COD �y"° ;.� } . s - � r� •/` l _ - -- __-J- ,_—��1�1 333 - Js t 1 IIJ , a3, - yA , Y 1�}. 'I II 1 (I 6 T t T 4 I R � 1 'I _ ; •-. -._,._ "�-�-�- — 7 fr' , . it n: � r. .. y � ,,� � —{ �' � � � � � �•t- T. � ,, yet' �r , 9, 'I : " - • - - I „T � � �� t� �� �; ' fix. • - 55 I r Y gar iv eft M - • • � y j I - i ItN Ab - -_ Ir J r x _ r • r _ ..'1 .. :I {�I w�.iw` 1 _ , � ,-i' it 't:s=-- --- �< I r- ,� � .\ -`\` i� • AIS-2371 D. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: City Manager Evaluation Criteria and Process Submitted By: Dana Bennett, City Management Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Initiating the City Manager's Annual Performance Evaluation Process STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Council to review attached 2015 City Manager evaluation criteria and process and provide guidance/direction to staff regarding any desired changes to criteria,process and/or evaluator list. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Please see the attached memo to Council regarding the prior year's process. Also attached is a blank copy of the following documents -- the 2014 evaluation tool, the 2014 external partner's evaluation questions, and also revised tools for the 2015 evaluation process for Council consideration. OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This is the first meeting for Council to consider the 2015 City Manager's evaluation process. Attachments City Mgr.2015 Process Memo to Council City Mgr. 2014 Eval Form City Mir.2014 External Partner Questions City Mgr. 2015 Eval Form Draft City Mgr.2015 External Partner Questions Draft . City of Tigard Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council From: Dana Bennett, Human Resources Director Re: City Manager Annual Performance Review Date: October 1, 2015 In accordance with the Employment Agreement for City Manager Marty Wine, the City Council is required to conduct an annual performance review in December 2015. The first step to be taken by Council is to decide on the criteria and process to be used for the evaluation. This is scheduled for your October 13th meeting, during a study session. On November 10, 2015 during a business meeting, the Council will request public input on the criteria and process that has been selected, as required by employment law for public employees. Following these two steps, then I will initiate the process of collecting information/evaluations data to compile. Once that process is completed, the performance evaluation will take place during an executive session. Last year's performance review of the City Manager included the following process/steps: 1) The City Council decided to have both the council and other evaluators complete a written performance review of the City Manager for the prior 12 month period. The Council approved a review form to be used and a list of raters/evaluators. A copy of the completed final review is attached. The format that was used by external evaluators was a set of questions, as the external evaluators would not have the benefit or opportunity of observing internal operations, last year's list of questions is also attached. 2) The Human Resources Director coordinated the distribution of forms to all raters. 3) The Human Resources Director received all completed review forms and collated ratings and comments into two final documents: one that incorporated all City Council comments and ratings, and a second which incorporated all ratings and comments from the other evaluators. The information was transferred without reference to the rater's name, and each category/criteria was assigned an average score. 4) Both documents were submitted to the Council for their review prior to the date of the performance review of the City Manager. 5) If there were no further changes, both documents were provided to the City Manager prior to the actual review. 6) A performance review was conducted for the City Manager with the City Council in an Executive Session. The other evaluators who provided input for last year's evaluation, in addition to City Council included: External Partners: TDA Board (Murphy, DeAngelo, Mollahan Shearer,Thornburg and Stevenson), Tom Anderson (Planning Commission), Randy Ealy (City of Beaverton, Chief Administrative Officer),Joel Rubin (CFM Strategic Communications Inc., VP Federal Affairs), Mike Duyck (TVFR, Fire Chief), Alan Kennedy (TVFR, Battalion Chief),Joel Komarek (City of Lake Oswego, LO-Tigard Water Project), Scott Lazenby (City of Lake Oswego, City Manager) All Department Directors: Toby LaFrance (Finance and IT Director), Dennis Koellermeier (LO-Tigard Water Project Director), Margaret Barnes (Library Director), Chief Orr (Chief of Police),Liz Newton (Assistant CM), Kenny Asher (CD), Brian Rager (PW), Nadine Robinson (Central Services Director) and Dana Bennett (HR Director) Other Staff Joanne Bengtson (Exec. Assistant to the CM), Loreen Mills (Assistant to the CM), Rudy Owens (Communications Strategist) and Lloyd Purdy (Economic Development Manager) Based upon some Council feedback regarding last year's tool, the form has been modified to address some of the concerns that were raised, while largely maintaining the same core rating dimensions. A copy of the 2015 City Manager Goals, that were established as a result of the Council's 2014 performance review and feedback, have been built into a draft evaluation tool that will be before Council, to measure the City Manager's performance against the stated goals and objectives The issues before the City Council for your October 13th meeting are: 1) What criteria does the Council wish to include in the review document (a draft tool is attached for your consideration based on feedback from last year's review) 2) What process do you want to use to collect this information (note any changes from last year) 3) Who do you want to include for this year's evaluator list (note any changes from last year) I will be at the meeting of the 13th to collect any feedback or direction and to assist in any way I can. Thank you CITY OF TIGARD CITY MANAGER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Review period: ,January 2014- December 2014 I. In completing this evaluation,please consider the City-wide core values adopted to set the standard for service excellence at the City of Tigard ("Get it Done", "Do the Right Thing", and"Respect and Care"). Please use the following criteria: 4 =Exceeds Expectations;3 =Fully Effective;2 =Developing; 1 =Needs Improvement; NA =Not applicable(have not observed this area during the evaluation period). PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT II. Evaluate and discuss the City Manager's overall job performance in achievement of the GOALS set for the current review period.Base your evaluation upon the job requirements,achievement of the goals established during the past review period,and your assessment of the City Manager's accomplishments. 1. GOAL 1-Economic Development a. Establish an ED strategy so Tigard is organized to support developing the local economy b. Set up staff resources to carry out and support the strategy c. Engage a community committee or group to help with and carry out the strategy d. Create transportation connections by continuing to pursue Ash Avenue rail crossing e. Downtown Tigard and Urban Renewal District f. Advance plaza development through property acquisition g. Pursue a housing redevelopment project h. Pursue a retail and mixed-use project i. Create a bike/pedestrian connection with Tigard Triangle RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 Page 1 2. GOAL 2-Financial Stability: build the city's financial reserves a. Work with employees to establish "fair share" benefit contribution b. Defer or delay projects or find more efficient ways to do business c. Pursue local option levy in spring of 2014 d. Find creative solutions to increase revenues e. Plan for Growth:River Terrace Community Plan substantially complete,bring entitlement/zoning decisions to Council as soon as possible(in calendar year 2013 if possible),communication with annexing residents to understand service desires f. Community recreation: find financing to support increasing recreation capacity in Tigard RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 3. GOAL 3-LO-Tigard Water Partnership: continue to build partnership relationships and keep current sources and project on track RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 4. GOAL 4-Community Engagement: develop venues to meet with the public quarterly to gather input on key issues facing the City,including: a. Annexation b. Transportation/HCT RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 Page 12 5. GOAL 5-State and Regional Relations a. Effectively represent Tigard on revenue reform issues in 2013 b. Work with neighboring jurisdictions to advance joint transportation and economic development goals at the state and federal level RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 III.Evaluate and discuss the City Manager's job performance for the current review period.Please provide specific examples to support your assessment/evaluation. Consider the City Manager's performance in the following areas. a. Administrative Ability/Professional Sldlls including planning, organizing,time management, decision- making,and organizational/strategic thinking RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 b. Personnel Functions including supervision,delegation,labor relations,and leadership/management style RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 c. Budget and Finance including financial management and operational efficiency RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 d. Community Relations including public service,sensitivity,public involvement,and media relations RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 Page 3 e. Intergovernmental Relations including representation and developing resources RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 f. Interpersonal Skills/Individual Characteristics including professionalism,creativity,ethics,and adaptability RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 g. Coin munications including community/public,employees,and Council RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 h. Economic Growth&Development including strategy,vision and community engagement RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS (OPTIONAL) Page 4 IV. Are there areas of exceptional performance that should be particularly noted?Provide specific examples. V. Are there areas of performance needing more attention or improvement?Provide specific examples. ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS FOR UPCOMING RATING PERIOD List and discuss your expectations and suggested goals for the City Manager for the upcoming performance evaluation period. Goals should be: (1)related to community goals, (2) may include new projects or ongoing fundamental portions of the position,and (3) should include specific measures including outcomes and timeframes. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS(OPTIONAL) Please provide any additional comments on the City Manager's performance review in the space provided here. CITY OF TIGARD CITY MANAGER EXTERNAL PARTNER EVALUATION FORM Review period: January 2014- December 2014 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 1. How has Marty's leadership impacted the City of Tigard's partnership/relationship with you and your organization? 2. What has Marty done to increase,improve,or enhance the partnership/relationship with you and your organization? 3. What are some areas where Marty could improve the City's partnership/relation with you and your organization? E iernal Pariiters Ei alualion Form Page 1 Revised 20 14 CITY OF TIGARD CITY MANAGER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Review period: January 2015- December 2015 I. In completing this evaluation,please consider the City-wi(je core values adopted to set the standard for service excellence at the City of Tigard("Get it Done", "Do the Right Thing",and"Respect and Care'). Please use the following criteria: 4 =Exceeds Expectations;3 =Fully Effective;2= Developing 1 =Needs Improvement; NA =Not applicable(have not observed this area during the evaluation period). PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT II. Evaluate and discuss the City Manager's overall job performance in achievement of the GOALS set for the current review period.Base your evaluation upon the job requirements,achievement of the goals established during the past review period,and your assessment of the City Manager's accomplishments. 1. GOAL 1—Economic/Community Development a. Adopt Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan and Enable Future Development Capacity b. Enable Groundbreaking in River Terrace by Summer 2015 c. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be d. Purchase Park Plaza RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 2. GOAL 2—Recreation a. Provide Recreation Opportunities for the residents of Tigard b. Fund and Hire Recreation Coordinator RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 3. GOAL 3—Homelessness a. Address Homelessness--squatting,camps,and panhandling through robust public policy discussions/resources that include our Downtown area and throughout Tigard RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 __ Page 1 4. GOAL 4—Strategic Vision a. Lead the Implementation of the City's Strategic Plan RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 5. GOAL 5—Community Engagement a. Expand Opportunities to Engage People in the Community b. Provide Open Communication c. Promote Trust d. Make Network Neighborhoods Websites active and useful for all of council and community outreach and volunteer project purposes (e.g.,neighborhood volunteer coordination, functions,promote city recreation, events and activities,list city events and social grant awards,identify neighborhood nuisances that include vagrant and pandering activities and homeless camp siting policy review,etc.) RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 6. GOAL 6—Council Support/General Improvements a. Balance history and context on issues before Council and help Council develop collegial style b. Assist Mayor in efficient Council Meetings c. Prevent Waste d. Fund and Hire additional Police if assessment determines need for RT this year RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 7. GOALS 7—State and Regional Relations a. Help Facilitate Intergovernmental Communications b. Advance Tigard's membership on JPACT and MPAC RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 P a.{e 12 III.Evaluate and discuss the City Manager's job performance for the current review period.Please provide specific examples to support your assessment/evaluation. Consider the City Manager's performance in the following areas. a. Professional Skills/Decision Making Ability to anticipate and analyze problems and map effective solutions.In making decisions considers the best available facts,projections,and evidence and to the extent that resources permit,ensures that such tools are available.Has a solid understanding of all departmental functions within city government. RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 b. Leadership Sets the performance tone and culture of the organization,recognizes opportunities,capitalizes on partnerships,promotes trust,builds and motivates teamwork,provides vision and direction,encourages and seeks to develop the skills and abilities of others.Treats all with respect and sets the standard for performance accountability by example. RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 c. Personnel/Risk/Labor Relations Understands contract negotiations,labor strategy and contract administration.Equitably, fairly and with consideration addresses issues related to labor matters.Recognizes the value of excellent staff and seeks to maintain high performers while balancing the containment of costs. Implements effective programs and decisions to ensure management and control of liability and loss. RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 d. Budget and Finance Including financial management and operational efficiency such as accurately and concisely reports and projects the financial condition. Management practices and policies are designed to maintain or achieve a sound long-range financial condition. Obtains the best possible result for the money spent,and monitors efficiency,service improvement and effectiveness for programs. RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 PaAe 3 e. Community Relations Including public service,sensitivity,public involvement,and media relations RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 f Intergovernmental Relations Develops good working relationships with other local,county,regional,state and federal agencies and effectively represents city interests RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 g. Interpersonal Sldlls/Individual Characteristics Including professionalism,creativity,honesty,ethics,and adaptability RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 h. Communications Provides Council with well-informed concise oral and written communication,responds to the direction of the majority of the Council--while still recognizing the concerns of the minority, approachable and responsive,is able to represent Council to the community through forums,publications and other venues.Pursues an outreach style of management as a spokesperson for city issues. RATING: NA 1 2 3 1 4 i. Economic Growth & Development Including strategy,vision and community engagement RATING: NA 1 2 3 4 Page 14 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS (OPTIONAL) IV. Are there areas of exceptional performance that should be particularly noted?Provide specific examples. V. Are there areas of performance needing more attention or improvement?Provide specific examples. ESTABLISHMENT OF GOALS FOR UPCOMING RATING PERIOD List and discuss your expectations and suggested goals for the City Manager for the upcoming performance evaluation period. Goals should be: (1)related to community goals, (2)may include new projects or ongoing projects,and(3) should include specific measures including outcomes and timeframes. 1. Goal/Project/Training. 2. Goal/Project/Training. 3. Goal/Project/Training 4. Goal/Project/Training. 5. Goal/Project/Training. 6. Goal/Project/Training ADDITIONAL COMMENTS(OPTIONAL) Please provide any additional comments on the City Manager's performance review in the space provided here. City Manager's Signature: Date: Mayor's Signature: Date: Page5 CITY OF TIGARD CITY MANAGER EXTERNAL PARTNER EVALUATION FORM Review period: January 2015- December 2015 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 1. How has Marty's leadership impacted the City of Tigard's partnership/relationship with you and your organization? 2. What has Marty done this year to increase,improve,or enhance the partnership/relationship with you and your organization? 3. What are somethings that Marty could do differently that would help the City of Tigard in its relationship with you and your organization? 4. Other observations you would like to share? External Partners Evaluation Form Page I 1 Reviser/ 2014 CITY OF TIGARD SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET CITY MANAGER EMPLOYEE INPUT FORM FORa_-T o'= Review period: anus 2015- December 2015 (DATE OF MEETING) P I S uL4yScs�Fernp In completing this employee input form,please consider the City-wide core values adopted to set the standard for service excellence at the City of Tigard("Get it Done","Do the Right Thing",and"Respect and Care'. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 1. Note key accomplishments achieved during the rating period. (Consider achievement of thegoals established during the review period and any other key accomplishments). 2. Are there areas of performance that you wish to highlight as unique or of particular note that occurred during the rating period? (Provide specific examples). 3. Are there areas of performance that need more focus,attention or improvement or for which you need some additional guidance on from Council? (Provide specific examples). 4. State any goals you have for the upcoming review period. (Consider any supportyou may need to achieve the listedgoalr and consider how they will play a role in furthering the City's Strategic Plan.) Employee Signature Date Employee Input Form Page I 1 AT THE LEAGUE SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR Oc L /3 (DAi,TE, OF MEETING) Get Involved: s dy .el ,l1.�e"�s Sign Up for an LOC Policy Committee The League has eight policy committees which develop recommendations for the LOC Board regarding specific How to Apply for an LOC Policy Committee legislative initiatives that will form the basis of the League's To apply,fill out and mail,email or fax the application form legislative policies. In addition,the committee recommen- dations are forwarded for a prioritization survey of all cities in Oregon. The League's Board of Directors will review the The form is also available on the Legislative page of the LOC prioritization survey results to guide the adoption of key legis- website at:www.orcities.org. lative priorities for the 2017 legislative session. Committee chairs and members will be appointed by the Legal Advocacy Committee League president in December for two-year terms. The com- The League is also soliciting members for its Legal Advo- mittees will meet approximately four times between March cacy Committee(LAC). The LAC considers requests and and June 2016,and thereafter on an as-needed basis. Each makes recommendations regarding whether the League committee is staffed by the League lobbyist assigned to that should participate in litigation matters that affect cities portfolio of issues. and what position(s)the League should take in such Voting members consist of elected city officials and full-time cases. The League generally participates in such cases city employees. No more than two members from a city will by filing an amicus curiae brief with an appellate court be appointed to a committee,and each city represented on to support a city member's position. Individuals with a committee will have one vote. In-house government rela- interest or experience in legal-related matters are encour- tions or lobby staff employed by cities may sit as non-voting aged to fill out the form and check the box next to"Legal "interested parties." Liaisons(agency staff,for example) may Advocacy Committee." also be appointed as non-voting committee participants. The eight LOC Policy Committees are organized as follows: USDA Community Development:land use;parks and recreation; ' housing;solid and hazardous waste;air quality;economic development. L`4 What is the future for your rural community? Energy:conservation and efficiency;renewable generation; L. clean energy economic development;utility(electric and visit the USDA Rurol Development booth at the League of 0iegon CJtles natural gas) franchise and right-of-way management. 90th Annual Conference in Bend,Oregon,on September 24-26,2015, Finance and Taxation:property/income taxation;school to learn ab DhN 1 t t r. re. finance;local government debt instruments;infrastructure funding;public budgeting;state shared revenue sharing; economic development financing. General Government:public safety;fire;courts;elections; ethics;ADA;libraries;public contracting. Personnel: collective bargaining;employee benefits; WWW.fd.USda.gOV/Of recruiting;hiring and training;employee records/confiden- tiality. Telecommunications,Cable and Broadband:franchising; public right-of-way management;technology advancement; Fa efficient and widespread provision of broadband services. t,> Transportation: funding;planning;streets and roads; I ! ' r { �• Po safety; transit;rail. Water/Wastewater:supply and quality;conservation;safe drinking water;Federal Clean Water Act. 8 LOCAL FOCUS I September 2015 www.orcities.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 I ' 1 ' 1 1 ' 1 ' I � 1 � LEAGUE of Oregon CITIES ' League of Oregon Cities Policy Committee Application Form 1 E I I 1 1 Name I I ' ' Title ' I � ' City , 1 � If Elected Official,my current term began and ends ' Daytime Phone Email 1 � I I 1 Best Address for Correspondence _ I City Oregon ZIP , I I ' First Choice of Policy Committee Second Choice of Policy Committee ❑ Legal Advocacy Committee My occupation/area of expertise is ! , Complete and return this form by October 31 to: I ' I I Craig Honeyman-Email:choneyman@orcities.org -Fax:(503)399-4863-Mail: 1201 Court St.NE#200,Salem,OR 97301 1 I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NATI ONAL2015 CONGRESS of CITIES LEAGUE ]181whadio- OFCITIES MUS/C �C/TY Music City Center in downtown Nashville,TN I November 4-7,2015 1 www.nlc.org/noshviIle MEET US IN MUSICC ITY Host City Nashville heads the list of best travel dest,notions,places to live, and cities 1 attracting young people See why this November of the annual Congress of Cities and Exposition, and discover how this city ran with its identify as o historic music center and 1 developed a th,iving creative economy. Join over 2 500 mayors, council members, and city staff to experience Nashville's crealiv,ty for yourself at the largest national gathering for local leaders in America. www.orcities.org September 2015 1 LOCAL FOCUS 9 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR Oe - 1341 GAS City of Tigard (DATE OF MEETING) S- u t/� S-e SS ©►... Memorandum Adrw�li Acnu Is am&,. To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Nadine Robinson, Central Services Director/W;(4 _ ( _ Re: Request for budget amendment Date: October 9, 2015 One of the court's long-term clerks will be retiring effective December 2,2015.The position she is vacating is a .9 FTE. I am requesting a budget amendment that will allow the vacancy to be filled with a fulltime court operations supervisor.Approval of the request will increase the FTE in court by .1 and increase personal services by$14,000. Currently I am responsible for the day-to-day operations of the court With my transition to the Central Services Director position I am finding that the time commitment to directly oversee the court staff and programs is unmanageable. A court operations supervisor will be able to provide the direct support that is needed in the area. The supervisor will be responsible for: • Coordinating with the judge to review and adjust programs to maximize time efficiencies and update court rules to continue compliance with state laws. • Working with the judge on the court's annual report. • Reviewing workload and distribution so the work is evenly distributed and processing deadlines are met. • Increasing productivity by providing staff with immediate performance feedback. • Providing timely performance evaluations. • Providing monthly and quarterly statistics for PD. • Processing all accounts payable,including the statutorily required payments to the state, county and other agencies. • Coordinating software upgrades as well as resolving software issues. • Preparing the court's budget and tracking expenditures and workload measurements. This will be in addition to the court clerk responsibilities of assisting the judge in the courtroom, coordinating with the prosecutor and attorneys to schedule attorney trials, scheduling non-attorney trials and providing daily customer support. The time I will gain will allow me more time to focus on program development in other parts of the department. The areas in facilities and fleet that are of immediate concern are developing budget data for departments related to fuel usage and vehicle and equipment replacement,conducting a gap analysis for the Fleet and Facilities division for next fiscal year's budget, creating a proposal to allow public rental of the city's conference rooms and,with the 2016 retirement of the assistant to the city manager, assuming the lead on managing property leases as well as coordinating ADA compliance for city facilities. FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental SUPPLEMENTAL WaT Exhibit A FOR C�), f AMENDED Q1CD01. LQC-Dartmouth Overlook MATE OF MEETING),, Creation of an overlook destination in the Tigard"Triangle with the existing right-of--way at w 1 Dartmouth and 68th to capture a westward view of the city. A 4 f"11 r�m�, This action will show a decrease in General Fund contingency of$6,000 with an equal increase in Community Development program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services 5 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S $ - Total Resources $ 411795,903 $ - $ 41,79640 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 6,000 S 4,043,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 $ 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 6,000 $ 31,292,017 Debt Service S - $ - Loans S $ Work-In-Progress $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ (6,000) S 1,114,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS01.Payroll Allocation-Director A request to change the salary allocation of the Central Service Director's position is needed to reflect the divisions that report to this position as a result of the reorganization of the City Management. With this request,the salary and benefit split will be 40%Court,20%City Recorder/Records, 20%Design&Communications,and 20%Fleet&Property Management. This action will show a decrease in Policy&Administration's program expenditures by$6,840 in General Fund,as well as a decrease of$6,840 in Policy&Administration's program expenses within the Central Services Fund.Reserve for Future Expenditures will increase by the same amounts in both funds. In turn,this action will show a decrease of$13,679 in Fleet&Property Management contingency With an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenditures. Fund 1 of 3 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Prop"'Faxes $ 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 $ 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ $ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S (6,840) S 892,662 Public Works $ 4,118,322 $ 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ (6,840) $ 31,279,177 Debt Service $ - $ - Loans S $ Work-]n-Progress $ - $ _ Transfers to Other Funds $ 3,434,936 $ 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ (6,840) $ 35,834,113 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ 6,840 $ 5,961,790 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS01.Payroll Allocation-Director A request to change the salary allocation of the Central Service Director's position is needed to reflect the divisions that report to this position as a result of the reorganization of the City Management. With this request,the salary and benefit split will be 40%Court,20%City Recorder/Records, 20%Design&Communications,and 20%Fleet&Property Management. This action will show a decrease in Policy&Administration's program expenditures by$6,840 in General Fund,as well as a decrease of$6,840 in Policy&Administration's program expenses within the Central Services Fund.Reserve for Future Expenditures will increase by the same amounts in both funds. In tum,this action will show a decrease of$13,679 in Fleet&Property Management contingency with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenditures. Fund 2 of 3 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 182,372 Property Taxes $ - $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 33,872 5 33,872 Intergovernmental $ - $ - Charges for Services $ 6,986,481 $ 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings $ 22,593 S 22,593 Miscellaneous $ 19,900 S 19,900 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 698,824 S 698,824 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ $ 7,944,042 Requirements Community Development S - $ - Community Services $ - S - Policy and Administration $ 7,591,137 $ (6,840) $ 7,584,297 Public Works $ - $ - Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ (6,840) $ 7,584,297 Debt Service S - S - Loans $ $ Work-]n-Progress $ $ Transfers to Other Funds $ - $ - Contingency $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ (6,840) $ 7,734,297 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ 6,840 $ 209,745 Total Requirements $ 7,944,042 $ - $ 7,944,042 r FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS01.Payroll Allocation-Director A request to change the salary allocation of the Central Service Director's position is needed to reflect the divisions that report to this position as a result of the reorganization of the City Management. With this request,the salary and benefit split will be 40%Court,20%City Recorder/Records, 20%Design&Communications,and 20%Fleet&Property Management. This action will show a decrease in Policy&Administration's program expenditures by$6,840 in General Fund,as well as a decrease of$6,840 in Policy&Administration's program expenses within the Central Services Fund.Reserve for Future Expenditures will increase by the same amounts in both funds. In turn,this action will show a decrease of$13,679 in Fleet&Property Management contingency with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenditures. Fund 3 of 3 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Fleet/Property Management Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 113,138 $ 113,138 Property Taxes S - $ Franchise Fees S $ - Licenses&Permits S $ Intergovernmental S - $ - Charges for Services S 1,783,024 $ 1,783,024 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings $ - $ - Miscellaneous S 29,686 S 29,686 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 19,647 S 19,647 – -- ------–T—otal_Regoltrgpr, -$ 1,945 95- $- -- $ -W-5 Requirements Community Development S - $ - Community Services S - S - Policy=and Administration S 1,852,362 S 13,680 S 1,866,042 Public Works $ - S - Program Expenditures Total $ 1,852,362 $ 13,680 $ 1,866,042 Debt Service $ - $ - Loans $ $ _ Work-In-Progress $ $ - Transfers to Other Funds S - S - Contingency $ 75,000 S (13,680) $ 61,320 Total Budget $ 1,927,362 $ - $ 1,927,362 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 18,133 $ $ 18,133 Total Requirements $ 1,945,495 $ $ 1,945,495 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS02. City Facilities-Carryforward This request will carry forward a total of$30,000 to be used for the purchase of benches at City Hall for $20,000,and$10,000 to pay for the installation of flooring at the Senior Center. This action will result in a decrease in contingency in the Fleet/Property Management Fund by$30,000 with an increase in Property Management program expenses. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Fleet/Property Management Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 113,138 $ 113,138 Property Taxes $ - $ - Franchise Fees S - S Licenses&Permits S - $ Intergovernmental $ - $ - Charges for Services S 1,783,024 $ 1,783,024 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings S - S - Miscellaneous S 29,686 S 29,686 Other Financing Sources S $ Transfers In from Other Ftnids S 19,647 S 1').6,17 Total Resources $ 1,945,495 $ $ 1,945,495 Requirements Community Development S - $ - Community Services $ - $ - Policy and Administration S 1,852,362 S 30,000 S 1,882,362 Public Works S - S Program Expenditures Total $ 1,852,362 $ 30,000 $ 1,882,362 Debt Service $ - $ - Loans $ $ Work-In-Progress $ $ Transfers to Other Funds S - $ - Contingency S 75,000 S (30,000) $ 45,000 Total Budget $ 1,927,362 $ - $ 1,927,362 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 18,133 $ - $ 18,133 Total Requirements $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,945,495 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1FS01. Citywide Phone System-Carryforward This request will carryforward a total of 5205,000 to be used for the purchase of a citywide phone system including hardware and maintenance contract. This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance in the Central Services Fund by$205,000 with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenses. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 205,000 $ 387,372 Property Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 33,872 $ 33,872 Intergovernmental $ - $ - Charges for Services S 6,986,481 $ 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings $ 22,593 $ 22,593 Miscellaneous $ 19,900 $ 19,900 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other bunds S 698,82-1 S 698,824 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ 205,000 $ 8,149,042 Requirements Community Development $ - $ Community Services $ - S - Policy and Administration S 7,591,137 S 205,000 S 7,796,137 Public Works S - $ - Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ 205,000 $ 7,796,137 Debt Service $ - S - Loans S $ Work-In-Progress S S Transfers to Other Funds $ - S - Contingency $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ 205,000 $ 7,946,137 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ - $ 202,905 Total Requirements $ 7,944,042 $ 205,000 $ 8,149,042 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1FS02. Park Utility Fund Fee-Carryforward A carryforward is requested to hire a consultant to conduct a cost of rates stud),for development of a parks utility fee.This will result in an increase in beginning fund balance by 535,000 in General Fund and an increase in transfers out.Central Services Fund contingency will decrease by 525,000.Program expenditures in Policy and Administration will increase by a total of S60,000. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 35,000 $ 10,744,593 Property"]'axes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise lees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 35,000 $ 41,830,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ - $ 31,286,017 Debt Service S - S - Loans S - S Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 $ 35,000 $ 3,469,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 35,000 $ 35,875,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 35,900 $ 41,$30,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1FS02. Park Utility Fund Fee-Carryforward A carryforward is requested to hire a consultant to conduct a cost of rates study for development of a parks utility fee.This will result in an increase in beginning fund balance by$35,000 in General Fund and an increase in transfers out.Central Services Fund contingency Will decrease by$25,000.Program expenditures in Policy and Administration will increase by a total of$60,000. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 182,372 Property Taxes $ - $ - Franchise Fees $ - S - Licenses&Permits $ 33,872 $ 33,872 Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 6,986,481 S 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Eamings $ 22,593 $ 22,593 Miscellaneous S 19,900 $ 19,900 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 698,824 S 35,000 S 733,824 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ 35,000 $ 7,979,042 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S - $ - Policy and Administration S 7,591,137 $ 60,000 S 7,651,137 Public Works S - S - Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ 60,000 $ 7,65tI137 Debt Service $ - S Loans S $ Work-in-Progress S S Transfers to Other Funds S - S - Contingency $ 150,000 S (25,000) $ 125,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ 35,000 $ 7,776,137 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ - $ 202,905 Total Requirements $ 7,944,042 $ 35,000 $ 7,979,042 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QIPDO1. State Farm Teen Driver Safety Video&Tigard Rotary Donation-Carryforward The most recent State Farm grant of$10,000 was awarded in May 2015 and was awarded to support driver safety education and to purchase additional video/kiosk displays.These funds will support the creation of the video.A total of$5,000 of the award will be used to purchase and install an electronic display in the Police lobby.In addition,a total of$1,893 of donated funds are remaining from a fund raiser with proceeds going to special training and additional equipment for the city's second police dog Diesel. This action will show an increase in General Fund intergovernmental revenue by$11,893 with an equal increase in Community Services program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 $ 10,000 $ 5,432,785 Charges for Services $ 3,038,015 $ 1,893 $ 3,039,908 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings $ 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 11,893 $ 41,807,796 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 11,893 S 22,242,907 Policy and Administration $ 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 11,893 $ 31,297,910 Debt Service S - S - Loans $ S - Work-In-Progress S S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 11,893 $ 35,852,846 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 11,893 $ 41,807,796 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QlPD02.P25 Compliant Portable Radios After declaring 10 portable radios as'surplus',the PD sold them to the Washington County Sheriffs Office.With the sale of the 10 older radios,the I'D intends to purchase two(2)additional 1325 compliant radios to work toward our goal of replacing our entire inventory by the end of 2018. As a result,General Fund intergovernmental revenues will increase by$10,000 with an equal increase it Police program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property'Yaxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fecs S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 10,000 S 5,432,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - 1'ransfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 10,000 $ 41,805,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 10,000 S 22,241,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 10,000 $ 31,296,017 Debt Service S - S - Loans S S Work-]n-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $35,840,953 $ 10,000 $ 35,850,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 10,000 $ 41,805,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PD03.Taser Upgrade The department is proposing to replace 60 Taser Conducted Electrical Weapons(CEWs)which have reached the end of their useful lives.In addition,support for the city's CEWs has decreased due to the manufacturer's support of their newer models.As a result of this action,General Fund contingency will decrease by$41,132 with in equal increase in Community Services program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 5 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services $ 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 S 41,132 5 22,272,146 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures To $ 31,286,017 $ 41,132_ $__ 3.1,327149_ Debt Service $ $ Loans S $ Work-In-Progress $ - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 $ 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ (41,132) $ 1,078,868 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW01.River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan-Carryforward A total of$62,000 is required for the implementation of the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan. As a result,beginning fund balance in the Stormwater Fund will increase by$52,000.In addition, contingency will decrease by$10,000.In turn,capital program expenditures will increase by$62,000 in the Stormwater Fund. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Stormwater Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,774,154 $ 52,000 $ 3,826,154 Propert}-Taxes S - $ Franchise Fees S S - Licenses&Permits S - S Intergovernmental S - $ - Charges for Services $ 2,595,949 $ 2,595,949 Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings S 7,936 S 7,936 Miscellaneous S 3,100 S 3.100 Other Financing Sources S - S Transfers In from Other bunds S Total Resources $ 6,381,139 $ 52,000 $ 6,433,139 Requirements Community Development $ - $ - Community Services S - S Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works S 1,738,126 S 1,738,126 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,738,126 $ - $ 1,738,126 Debt Service S - S - Loans $ - $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,265,096 $ 62,000 S 1,327,096 Transfers to Other Funds S 433,356 S 433,356 Contingency $ 200,000 $ (10,000) $ 190,000 Total Budget $ 3,636,578 $ 52,000 $ 3,688,578 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,744,561 $ - $ 2,744,561 Total Requirements $ 6,381,139 $ 52,000 $ 6,433,139 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW02. Wetland Mitigation Bank Purchase(Hall/Wall-Wall St.Extension) This new request will appropriate$57,750 in Gas Tax Funds for the wetland mitigation site at Hall/Wall. This site has been found noncompliant by Dept.of State Lands.The purchase of.33 acres of mitigation bank credits is determined the least expensive option available to meet wetland mitigation requirements. The purchase must be made by November 2015. As a result of this action,Gas Tax beginning fund balance will increase by$57,750.Transfers will increase. Public Works program expenditures will increase by the same amount. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 57,750 $ 762,622 Property Taxes S $ - Franchise Fees $ - S - Licenses&Permits $ 5,872 S 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - S - Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings S 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous $ 62,818 S 62,818 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 $ 100,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 57,750 $ 4,057,161 Requirements Community Development S S - Community Services S - $ Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works S 2,166,046 $ 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ - $ 2,166,046 Debt Service $ 592,425 $ 592,425 Loans S - $ - Work-In-Progress $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 229,389 S 57,750 $ 287,139 Contingency $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 57,750 $ 3,245,610 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 57,750 $ 4,057,161 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&forfeitures S 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S 57,750 S 57,750 Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 57,750 $ 41,853,653 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 $ 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 $ 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 57,750 S 4,176,072 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 57,750 $ 31,343,767 Debt Service $ - S Loan., S S Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other bunds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 57,750 $ 35,898,703 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 57,750 $ 41,8534653 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 1 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 8,500 $ 713,372 Property Taxes $ - S - Franchise Fees $ - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 5,872 $ 5,872 Intergovernmental $ 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings $ 55,732 $ 55,732 Miscellaneous $ 62,818 $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers hi from Other Funds S 100,000 S 1(10 O00 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 S 8,500 s 4,007,911 Requirements Community Development S Community Services $ S Policy and Administration $ - $ - Public Works $ 2,166,046 $ 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ - $ 2,166,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S 592,425 Loans $ - S - Work-In-Progress $ - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 229,389 $ 8,500 $ 237,889 Contingency S 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 8,500 $ 3,196,360 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 8,500 $ 4,007,911 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling 585,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by S8,500 in Gas Tax;S51,000 in Underground Utility;S8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,S8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by 585,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 2 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Stormwater Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,774,154 $ 8,500 $ 3,782,654 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits S S Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 2,595,949 S 2,595,949 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Garneigs S 7,936 $ 7,936 ;Miscellaneous S 3,100 S 3,100 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 6,381,139 $ 8;500 $ 6,389,639 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S S Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works $ 1,738,126 S 1,738,126 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,738,126 $ - $ 1,738,126 Debt Service S - S - Loans S - S - Work-In-Progress S 1,265,096 S 1,265,096 Transfers to Other Funds S 433,356 S 8,500 S 441,856 Contingency S 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,636,578 $ 8,500 $ 3,645,078 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,744,561 $ - $ 2,744,561 Total Requirements $ 6,381,139 $ 8,5QO_ $ 6,389,639 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling 585,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;58,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by 585,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 3 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Underground Utility Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 425,300 $ 51,000 $ 476,300 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees $ - S - Licenses&Permits S 48,948 S 48,948 Intergovernmental $ - S - Charges for Services $ S Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings $ 7.160 S 7,160 Miscellaneous $ - S Other Financing Sources S S Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 481,408 $ 51,000 $ 532,408 Requirements Community Development S Community Services $ Policy and Administration S S Public Works S - $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service $ - $ Loans S - S Work-In-Progress S - $ Transfers to Other Funds S 320,477 $ 51,000 S 371,477 Contingency $ 50,000 S 50,000 Total Budget $ 370,477 $ 54000 $ 421,477 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 110,931 $ - $ 110,931 Total Requirements $ 481,408 8 51,,, $ 532,408 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. )Fund_4.o[b Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Sanitary Sewer Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,586,876 $ 8,500 $ 3,595,376 Property'raxes $ - $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 16,549 $ 16,549 Intergovernmental S 221,770 $ 221,770 Charges for Services $ 1,590,932 S 1,590,932 Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings S 100,333 S 100,333 Miscellaneous S 143,091 S 143,091 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Trarn<fcr� In from Other bunds S - $ - Total Resources $ 5,659,551 S 8,500 $ 5,668,051 Requirements Community Development S - S Community Services S $ - Policy and Administration $ - S - Public Works S 1,960,087 $ 1,960,087 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,960,087 $ - $ 1,960,087 Debt Service S - $ - Loans S - $ - Work-In-Progress $ 984,693 $ 984,693 Transfers to Other Funds S 76,934 $ 8,500 $ 85,434 Contingency S 400,000 $ 400,000 Total Budget $ 3,421,714 $ 8,500 $ 3,430,214 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,237,837 $ - $ 2,237,837 Total Requirements $ 5,659,551 $ 8,500 $ 5,668,051 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AN1EN1)E1) QlPW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling S85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility'work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;S8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,S8,500 in Stormwater;andS8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by S85,000 in the Transportation C1P Fund. Fund 5 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 20,245,015 $ 8,500 $ 20,253,515 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - S - Lieenses&Permits S 31,335 S 31,335 Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 18,827,178 S 18,827,178 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Larnings S 30,644 S 30,644 Miscellaneous S 10,933 S 10,933 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 58,751 $ 58,751 Total Resources $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S S Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works S 8,682,558 S 8,682,558 Program Expenditures Total $ 8,682,558 $ - $ 8,682,558 Debt Service S S - Loans S - $ Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds $ 24,882,226 S 8,500 S 24,890,726 Contingency S 500,000 $ 500,000 Total Budget $ 34,064,784 $ 8,500 $ 34,073,284 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,139,072 $ - $ 5,139,072 Total Requirements $39,203,856 $ 8,_5.00_$ 39,212,356 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QIPW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;58,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 6 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees $ $ Licenses&Permits $ $ Intergovernmental S $ Charges for Services S $ Fines&Forfeitures S S Interest Earnings S $ Miscellaneous S $ Other Financing Sources S - S - '1 nm4ers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 85,000 S 1,168,-14 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 85,000 S 1,548,067 Requirements Community Development S $ Community Services S S Policy and Administration S S Public Works $ - $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S - S - Loans $ S - Work-ln-Progress $ 1,073,448 $ 85,000 $ 1,158,448 Transfers to Other Funds $ 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency $ - $ - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 85,000 $ 1,215,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 S 85,000 $ 1,548,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QIPW04.95th Ave./N.Dakota Sidewalk-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward is requested in the amount of$187,000 to fill sidewalk gaps and provide curbing and drainage improvements.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance in Gas Tax by $187,000 with an increase in transfers.In turn,capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP fund will increase by the same amount. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 187,000 $ 891,872 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - S - Licenses&Permits S 5,872 S 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous $ 62,818 $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 S 100,000 Total Resources S 3,999,411 $ 187,000 $ 4,186,411 Requirements Community Development $ - S - Community Services S $ Policy and Administration $ - S - Public Works $ 2,166,046 S 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 166,046 $ - $ 2,166,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S 592,425 Loans $ - $ - Work-In-Progress $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ 229,389 $ 187,000 $ 416,389 Contingence S 200,000 S 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 187,000 $ 3,374,860 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 187,000 $ 4,186,411 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW04.95th Ave./N.Dakota Sidewalk-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward is requested in the amount of$187,000 to fill sidewalk gaps and provide curbing and drainage improvements.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance in Gas Tax by $187,000 with an increase in transfers.In turn,capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP fund will increase by the same amount. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S S - Franchise Fees S $ Licenses&Permits S Intergovernmental S $ Charges for Services S $ Fines&Forfeitures S $ Interest Earnings S 5 Miscellaneous S $ Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 187,0()n S 1,270,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 187,000 $ 1,650,067 Requirements Community Development S S Community Services S - $ Policy and Administration $ 5 Public Works S $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S $ Loans S S - Work-In-Progress S 1,073,448 S 187,000 $ 1,260,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency S - S - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 187,000 $ 1,317,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 187,000 $ 1,650,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW05.North Dakota Bridge Repair-Capital Improvement Program A request in the amount of$70,000 is needed to pay for the emergency repair work on the North Dakota Bridge,along with the construction of a new walkway. This action will increase beginning fund balance by$70,000 in Gas Tax;increase transfers;and increase capital improvement program expenses in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 70,000 $ 774,872 Property Taxes $ - S - Franchise Fees $ - S - Lcenses&Permits $ 5,872 $ 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 $ 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous S 62,818 $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Fundi ; 100,000 S 100,000 Total Resources S 3,999,411 S 70,000 $ 4,069,411 Requirements Community Development S $ Community Services $ S Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works S 2,166,046 S 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046__$__ - $ 2,166,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S 592,425 Loans $ - S - Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ 229,389 S 70,000 $ 299,389 Contingency S 200,000 S 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 S 70,000 $ 3,257,860 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 70,000 $ 4,069,411 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW05.North Dakota Bridge Repair-Capital Improvement Program A request in the amount of$70,000 is needed to pay for the emergency repair work on the North Dakota Bridge,along with the construction of a new walkway. This action will increase beginning fund balance by$70,000 in Gas Tax;increase transfers;and increase capital improvement program expenses in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - S Licenses&Permits S - S Intergovernmental S - $ - Charges for Services S - S Fines&Forfeitures S - S Interest Earnings S - $ Miscellaneous S S Other Financing Sources S - $ Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 70,000 S 1,I S..I-IS Total Resources $ 1,463,067 S 70,000 $ 1,533,067 Requirements Community Development $ Community Services S Policy and Administration S Public Works S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ $ - Debt Service S $ Loans 5 - $ - Work-ln-Progress S 1,073,448 S 70,000 $ 1,143,448 Transfers to Other Funds $ 57,410 S 57,410 Contingency_ $ S Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 70,000 $ 1,200,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 70,000 $ 1,533,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A ANIIINDFID Q1PW06. Erosion Control-Intergovernmental Agreement with Clean Water Services The City of"Tigard has entered into an IGA with Clean Water Services to provide inspection services at an estimated cost of 580,000 to be funded with permit revenues. As a result,General Fund contingency will decrease by$80,000 with an equal increase in Public Works program expenditures ut Engineering's professional services account. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property'Taxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ $ 412795,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 80,000 S 4,198,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 80,000 $ 31,366,017 Debt Service S - S - Loans S S Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 S (80,000) S 1,040,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,7951903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW07. LQC-Tigard St.Trail A carryforward in the amount of$35,000 is being requested to pay for completion of the"Tigard Street Trail.This action will increase beginning fund balance in General Fund by$35,000 with an equal increase in transfers.Public Works program expenditures will increase by$35,000 in the Gas Tax Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 35,000 $ 10,744,593 Property"Taxes $ 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services $ 3,038,015 $ 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings $ 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds $ - $ - Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 $ 4,037,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration $ 899,502 $ 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 $ 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ - $ 31,286,017 Debt Service S - S Loans $ $ Work-In-Progress $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ 3,434,936 $ 35,000 $ 3,469,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 35,000 $ 35,875,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 35,000 $ 41,830,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW07. LQC-Tigard St.Trail A carryforward in the amount of$35,000 is being requested to pay for completion of the Tigard Street Trail.This action will increase beginning fund balance in General Fund by$35,000 with an equal increase in transfers.Public Works program expenditures will increase by$35,000 in the Gas Tax Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 704,872 Property'faxes $ - S - Franchise Fees $ - S - Licenses&Permits $ 5,872 S 5,872 Intergovernmental $ 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services S - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings $ 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous S 62,818 $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 S 35,000 S 135,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 35,000 $ 4,034,411 Requirements Community Development S - S Community Services $ S - Policy and Administration $ - S - Public Works $ 2,166,046 S 35,000 S 2,201,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ 35,000 $ 2,201,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S 592,425 Loans S - $ - Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ 229,389 $ 229,389 Contingency S 200,000 S 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 35,000 $ 3,222,860 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 35,000 $ 4,034,411 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW08.Hunziker Industrial Core-Capital Improvement Program A request totaling$200,000 is required to conduct the initial design of the Wall St./Tech Center Drive project.This design work will be used to apply for federal grant funding for construction of this project. This action will show a decrease in contingency by$200,000 in the City Gas Tax Fund with an increase in transfers.In tum,capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP Fund will increase by $200,000. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget City Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 126,479 $ 126,479 Property Taxes $ - S - Franchise Fees S $ Licenses&Permits S - S - Intergovemmental S 612,802 $ 612,802 Charges for Services $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings $ 34,584 S 34,584 Miscellaneous $ 32,052 S 32,052 Other Financing Sources S S - Transfers hi from Other Funds S C Total Resources $ 805,917 $ $ 805,917 Requirements Community Development S - $ - Community Services $ S Policy and Administration S rS Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S 316,560 S 316,560 Loans $ $ - Work-In-Progress $ $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,208 S 200,000 S 203,208 Contingency $ 300,000 $ (200,000) $ 100,000 Total Budget $ 619,768 $ $ 619,768 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 186,149 $ $ 186,149 "Total Requirements $ 805,917 $ $ 805,917 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW08.Hunziker Industrial Core-Capital Improvement Program A request totaling$200,000 is required to conduct the initial design of the Wall St./Tech Center Drive project.This design work will be used to apply for federal grant funding for construction of this project. This action will show a decrease in contingency by$200,000 in the City Gas Tax Fund with an increase in transfers.In turn,capital program expenditures within the"Transportation CiP Fund will increase by $200,000. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendrucnt Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S S Franchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits S S Intergovernmental S S Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures S $ Interest Earnings S - $ - Miscellaneous S S Other Financing Sources S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 200,000 S 1,283,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 200,000 $ 1,663,067 Requirements Community Development S S - Community Services S S Policy and Administration S S Public Works S $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S $ _ Loans $ $ - Work-]n-Progress $ 1,073,448 $ 200,000 $ 1,273,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency S - $ - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 200,000 $ 1,330,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 200,000 $ 1,663,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW09.72nd Ave./Dartmouth St.Intersection-Capital Improvement Program This carryforward request in the amount of$10,000 is needed for legal fees associated with 4 Martin Properties not concluded in FY 2015.As a result,beginning fund balance in the Transportation Development Fund will increase by$10,000.Transfers will increase and capital program expenditures will increase by$10,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation Development Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,112,633 $ 10,000 $ 1,122,633 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 700,000 $ 700,000 Intergovernmental S - Charges for Services $ $ Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings $ 11,279 S 11,279 Miscellaneous S S - Other Financing Sources S S Transfers In from Other Funds $ - Total Resources $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 $ 1,833,912 Requirements Community Development S - S Community Services $ S - Policy and Administration $ S Public Works $ S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service $ $ Loans $ $ - Work-In-Progress S 6,800 $ 6,800 Transfers to Other Funds S 526,690 S 10,000 S 536,690 Contingency S 250,000 S 250,000 Total Budget $ 783,490 $ 10,000 $ 793,490 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 1,040,422 $ - $ 1,040,422 Total Requirements $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 $ 1,833,912 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW09.72nd Ave./Dartmouth St.Intersection-Capital Improvement Program This carryforward request in the amount of$10,000 is needed for legal fees associated with 4 Martin Properties not concluded in FY 2015.As a result,beginning fund balance in the Transportation Development Fund will increase by$10,000.Transfers will increase and capital program expenditures will increase by$10,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S S - Franchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits S Intergovernmental S $ Charges for Services $ S Fines&Forfeitures S $ Interest Earnings S $ Miscellaneous $ $ Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Otho S 1,083,448 8 7 ii,(mn 1,093,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 S 10,000 S 1,473,067 Requirements Community Development $ Community Services S - S Policy and Administration $ S Public Works $ $ Program Expenditures Total $ $ - $ _ Debt Service S $ - Loans S $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,073,448 $ 10,000 $ 1,083,448 Transfers to Other Funds $ 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency $ - S - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 10,000 $ 1,140,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 10,000 $ 1,473,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW10. Downtown Land Acquisition-Capital Improvement Program This request will carry forward$515,000 in Parks Bond CIP appropriation for the Saxony land acquisition that occurred on July 9th.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance of$515,000 in Parks Bond Fund with an increase in transfers.Total capital program expenditures will increase by$515,000 in the Parks Capital Fund. Fund l of Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budgct Parks Bond Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,700,000 $ 515,000 $ 2,215,000 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits $ S Intergovemmental $ - S Charges for Services $ $ Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings $ 4,020 S 4,020 Miscellaneous S - S - Other Financing Sources S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - $ Total Resources $ 1,704,020 $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 Requirements Community Development S S Community Services S S Policy and Administration $ Public Works S 5 Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S - S - Loans $ - $ Work-In-Progress $ $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ 1,382,013 $ 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Contingency $ - $ Total Budget $ 1,382,013 $ 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 322,007 $ - $ 322,007 Total Requirements $ 1,704,020 $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW10. Downtown Land Acquisition-Capital Improvement Program This request will carry forward$515,000 in Parks Bond CIP appropriation for the Saxony land acquisition that occurred on July 9th.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance of$515,000 in Parks Bond Fund with an increase in transfers.Total capital program expenditures will increase by$515,000 in the Parks Capital Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Capital Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 298,740 $ 298,740 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees $ - S Licenses&Permits S $ Intergovernmental $ $ Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures 5 - $ Interest Earnings $ 3,015 S 3,015 Miscellaneous $ - $ - Other Financing Sources S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 3,1;1,561 S 515,000 S 3,666,561 Total Resources $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 Requirements Community Development S $ - Community Services S S Policy and Administration $ $ Public Works $ $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S $ - Loans S - S _ Work-In-Progress S 3,151,561 S 515,000 $ 3,666,561 Transfers to Other Funds S 123,932 $ 123,932 Contingency S - S - Total Budget $ 3,275,493 $ 515,000 $ 3,790,493 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 177,823 $ - $ 177,823 Total Requirements $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW11 Lake Oswego Tigard Water Partnership-Capital Improvement Program An additional appropropriation of$6,660,000 is required to pay for Tigard's share of the partnership. due to a delay in timing of payment of expenditures from the prior fiscal year.The requested action does not change the total cost of the project.As a result,the reserve for future expenditure will decrease by 53,260,000 in the Water CIF Fund.The Water SDC Fund reserve for future expenditure will decrease by$3,400,000.Transfers will increase.Capital program expenditures will increase by$6,660,000 in the Water CIP Fund. Revised Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 17,223,215 $ 17,223,215 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits S S Intergovernmental $ S Charges for Services S $ Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 13,096 S 13,096 Miscellaneous $ 5,318 $ 5,318 Other Financing Sources S - S _ Transfers In from Other Funds S 18,840,921 S 3,400,000 S 22,240,921 Total Resources $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39 482,550 Requirements Community Development Community Services Policy and Administration Public Works S ti Program Expenditures Total $ $ - $ _ Debt Service S S Loans S $ _ Work-In-Progress 5 29,168,682 $ 6,660,000 $ 35,828,682 Transfers to Other Funds $ 231,256 $ 231,256 Contingency S - S - Total Budget $ 29,399,938 $ 6,660,000 $ 36,059,938 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 6,682,612 $(3,260,000) $ 3,422,612 Total Requirements $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW11 Lake Oswego Tigard Water Partnership-Capital Improvement Program An additional appropropriation of$6,660,000 is required to pay for Tigard's share of the partnership. due to a delay in timing of payment of expenditures from the prior fiscal year.The requested action does not change the total cost of the project.As a result,the reserve for future expenditure will decrease by$3,260,000 in the Water CIP Fund.The Water SDC Fund reserve for future expenditure will decrease by$3,400,000.Transfers will increase.Capital program expenditures will increase by$6,660,000 in the Water CIP Fund. Revised Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water SDC Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 4,571,596 $ 4,571,596 Property Taxes S - 5 - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits S 873,715 $ 873,715 Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings $ 233 S 233 Miscellaneous S $ Other Financing Sources S $ Transfers In from Other Funds S S Total Resources S 5,445,544 S S 5,445,544 Requirements Community Development S Community Services S S Policy and Administration S S Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S S Loans $ $ Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 299,130 $ 3,400,000 S 3,699,130 Contingency S 100,000 S _ 100,000 Total Budget $ 399,130 $ 3,400,000 $ 3,599,130 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,046,414 $(3,400,000) $ 1,646,414 Total Requirements $ 5,445,544 $ - $ 5,445,544 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Amended Item Q1CS03.Position Reclassification A request is made to reclassify one of the Court Clerk 11 positions from a.90 FTE to a 1.0 FTE Court Operations Supervisor.The supervisory position will assist the Central Services Director by directly overseeing the daily operations of court staff.As a result,General Fund contingency will decrease by$14,000.In tum, Policy and Administration program expenditures will increase by$14,000 along with a.10 increase in FTE. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 $ 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings $ 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - $ Transfers In from Other bunds Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ S 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 $ 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 $ 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 14,000 S 913,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 S 4118 322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 14,000 $ 31,300,017 Debt Service S - $ _ Loans $ - S Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 S (14,000) S 1,106,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental SUPPLEMENTAL PPACKETExhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes FOR r aJ C r 17 . v� 1— AMENDED (DATE OF MEE'T'ING#) Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Affected City Funds Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 65,153,602 $ 1,251,750 $ 66,405,352 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 S - $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 S S 5,909,165 Special Assessments S - $ S - Licenses&Permits S 3,062,711 S S 3,062,711 Intergovernmental S 9,327,474 $ 20,000 S 9,347,474 Charges for Services S 34,821,579 $ 1,893 S 34,823,472 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S - S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 394,347 S S 394,347 Miscellaneous S 363,330 S S 363,330 Other Financing Sources S - S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 23,953,152 S 4,594,750 $ 28,547,902 Total Resources $158,184,134 $ 5,868,393 $ 164,057,524 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 6,000 S 4,043,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 S 63,025 $ 22,294,039 Policy&Administration S 10,343,001 S 309,000 S 10,652,001 Public Works S 18,665,139 S 172,750 S 18,837,889 Program Expenditures Total $ 55,276,333 $ 550,775 $ 55,827,108 Debt Service S 908,985 S - S 908,985 Loans S - $ - S - Work-In-Progress S 35,650,280 S 7,789,000 S 43,439,280 Transfers to Other Funds S 32,000,957 S 4,594,750 $ 36,595,707 Contingency $ 3,345,000 S (419,812) S 2,925,188 Total Budget $127,181,555 $ 12,514,713 $ 139,696,268 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 31,007,576 $ (6,646,320) $ 24,361,256 Total Requirements $158,189,131 $ 5,868,393 $ 164,057,524 1of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Amended Fund Reference Budget Items: Q1CD01,Q1CS01,Q1CS03,Q1FS02,Q1PD01-03,Q1PW02,QIPW06-07 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 70,000 $ 10,779,593 Property Taxes $ 14,330,765 $ - $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ - $ 5,909,165 Special Assessments, $ - $ _ $ _ Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 $ $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 20,000 $ 5,442,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 1,893 $ 3,039,908 Fines&forfeitures S 873,006 S - $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S - $ 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S - $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - $ 57,750 S 57,750 Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 149,643 $ 41,945,546 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 $ 6,000 $ 4,043,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 S 63,025 S 22,294,039 Policy&Administration $ 899,502 S 7,160 S 906,662 Public Works $ 4,118,322 S 137,750 $ 4,256,072 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 213,935 $ 31,499,952 Debt Service S - $ - S - Loans $ - S _ $ _ Work-In-Progress S _ $ - S _ Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 70,000 S 3,504,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ (141,132) $ 978,868 Total Budget $35,840,953 $ 142,803 $ 35,983,756 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ 6,840 $ 5,961,790 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 149,643 $ 41,945,546 2of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: QlCS01-02 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Fleet/Property Management Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 113,138 $ $ 113,138 Property Taxes $ - $ - S - Franchise Fees $ - $ $ Special Assessments S $ $ - Licenses&Permits $ - $ S Intergovernmental $ $ - $ Charges for Services S 1,783,024 S $ 1,783,024 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ $ _ Interest Earnings $ - $ $ - Hscellaneous $ 29,686 $ $ 29,686 Other Financing Sources S - S $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 19,647 S S 19,6<17 Total Resources $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,945,495 Requirements Community Development S - $ - S Community Services $ - $ - $ Policy and Administration S 1,852,362 $ 43,680 S 1,896,042 Public Works S - S - S _ Program Expenditures Total $ 1,852,362 $ 439680 $ 118969042 Debt Service S - S - $ _ Loans S S - $ - Work-In-Progress $ $ $ Transfers to Other Funds $ S - $ Contingency $ 75,000 $ (43,680) $ 31,320 Total Budget $ 1,927,362 $ - $ 1,927,362 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 18,133 $ - $ 18,133 Total Requirements $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,9459495 3of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1CS01,Q1FS01-02 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 205,000 $ 387,372 Property Taxes S - S - S - Franchise Fees S S S Special Assessments S $ $ - Licenses&Permits S 33,872 S S 33,872 Intergovernmental S - S S - Charges for Services S 6,986,481 S S 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures S - S S - Interest Earnings S 22,593 S S 22,593 ;Miscellaneous $ 19,900 $ S 19,900 Other Financing Sources S - $ $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 698,824 S 35,000 S 733,824 Total Resources $7,94410142 240ipQ0 $ 8, 843042 Requirements Community Development $ $ S Community Services S - $ - S Policy and,Administration S 7,591,137 S 258,160 S 7,849,297 Public Works S - S - S - Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ 258,160 $ 7,849,297 Debt Service $ - S - S - Loans S $ S Work-]n-Progress S - $ S Transfers to Other Funds S S S - Contingency S 150,000 S (25,000) S 125,000 Total Budget $ 7,7412137 $ 233,160 $ 7,974,297 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ 6,840 $ 209,745 Total Requirements $7,944,042 $ 240,000 $ 8,184,042 4of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW02A4,Q1PW05,Q1PW07 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 323,250 $ 1,028,122 Property Taxes $ - $ S - Franchise Fees S S S - Special Assessments $ - S S - Licenses&Permits S 5,872 S - S 5,872 Intergovernmental $ 3,070,117 $ - $ 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - $ - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - S - Interest Earnings S 55,732 S - S 55,732 N iscellancous $ 62,818 $ - $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources $ - $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 $ 35,000 $ 135,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 358,250 $ 4,357,661 Requirements Community Development S - S - S - Community Services S S $ Policy&Administration S S $ - Public Works $ 2,166,046 $ 35,000 $ 2,201,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ 35,000 $ 2,201,046 Debt Service $ 592,425 $ - S 592,425 Loans S - $ - S - Work-In-Progress $ - S - S - Transfers to Other Funds $ 229,389 $ 323,250 $ 552,639 Contingency S 200,000 S - $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 358,250 $ 3,546,110 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 358,250 $ 4,357,661 5 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1PW01,Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Stormwater Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,774,154 $ 60,500 $ 3,834,654 Property Taxes $ - S - S - Franchise Fees S S $ Special Assessments S - S S Licenses&Permits S - S - $ - Intergovernmental $ S $ - Charges for Services S 2,595,949 S $ 2,595,949 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - S - Interest Eamings S 7,936 $ - S 7,936 Miscellaneous S 3,100 $ - S 3,100 Other Financing Sources S - S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S S - Total Resources $ 6,381,139 $ 60,500 $ 6,441,639 Requirements Community Development S - S - $ - Community Services S S $ Policy and Administration S S $ - Public Works S 1,738,126 S $ 1,738,126 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,738,126 $ - $ 1,738,126 Debt Service S - $ - $ - Loans S - S $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,265,096 $ 62,000 $ 1,327,096 Transfers to Other Funds S 433,356 $ 8,500 $ 441,856 Contingency S 200,000 $ (10,000) $ 190,000 Total Budget $ 3,636,578 $ 60,500 $ 3,697,078 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,744,561 $ - $ 2,744,561 Total Requirements $ 6,381,139 $ 60,500 $ 6,441,639 6of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Underground Utility Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 425,300 $ 51,000 $ 476,300 Property Taxes $ - $ - $ - Franehise Fees S $ - S Special Assessments $ $ $ Licenses&Permits $ 48,948 $ $ 48,948 Intergovernmental $ - S $ - Charges for Services $ $ $ - Fines&Forfeitures $ S $ Interest Earnings S 7,160 $ $ 7,160 Miscellaneous S - $ $ - Other Financing Sources S - $ S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S S - Total Resources $ 481,408 $ 51,000 $ 532,408 Requirements Community Development S - S - $ - Community Services S S - $ - Policy and Administration $ - S - $ - Pu_blit Works $ S - $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S $ - .S Loans S $ - $ Work-In-Progress $ - S - $ Transfers to Other Funds S 320,477 S 51,000 $ 371,477 Contingency S 50,000 S - $ 50,000 Total Budget $ 370,477 $ 51,000 $ 421,477 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 110,931 $ - $ 110,931 Total Requirements $ 481,408 $ 51,000 $ 532,408 7of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Sanitary Sewer Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,586,876 $ 8,500 $ 3,595,376 Property Taxes S - $ - S - Franchise Fees S S $ - Special Assessments $ S S - Licenses&Permits $ 16,549 $ - $ 16,549 Intergovernmental S 221,770 $ - $ 221,770 Charges for Services S 1,590,932 S - S 1,590,932 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - $ - Interest Earnings $ 100,333 $ - $ 100,333 Miscellaneous $ 143,091 $ - $ 143,091 Other Financing Sources S - S - S - Transfers In from Other bunds S - S S Total Resources $ 5,659,551 $ 8,500 $ 5,668,051 Requirements Community Development S - $ - S - Community Services $ - $ $ - Policy and Administration S - S S - Public Works S 1,960,087 $ S 1,960,087 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,9609087 $ - $ 1,960,087 Debt Service $ - S S - Loans S - S S - \Vork-In-Progress S 984,693 $ - S 984,693 Transfers to Other Funds S 76,934 S 8,500 S 85,434 Contingency S 400,000 S - $ 400,000 Total Budget $ 3,421,714 $ 8,500 $ 3,430,214 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,237,837 $ - $ 2,237,837 Total Requirements $ 5,659,551 $ 8,500 $ 5,668,051 8 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 20,245,015 $ 8,500 $ 20,253,515 Property Taxes S - S - $ - Franchise Fees $ - S $ Special Assessments S - $ $ - licenses&Permits S 31,335 $ S 31,335 Intergovernmental S - S S - Charges for Services S 18,827,178 S S 18,827,178 Fines&Forfeitures S - $ $ - Interest Earnings S 30,644 S $ 30,644 Miscellaneous S 10,933 S - $ 10,933 Other Financing Sources S - S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 58,751 S - $ 58,751 Total Resources $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 Requirements Community Development 5 S - $ - Community Services S S - $ - Policy and Administration $ - S - $ - Public Works $ 8,682,558 $ - S 8,682,558 Program Expenditures Total $ 8,682,558 $ - $ 8,682,558 Debt Service S - $ $ - Loans S S $ - Work-In-Progress S - $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 24,882,226 $ 8,500 S 24,890,726 Contingency S 500,000 S - S 500,000 Total Budget $ 34,064,784 $ 8,500 $ 34,073,284 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,139,072 $ - $ 5,139,072 Total Requirements $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 9of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW03-05,QlPW08-09 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ - $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - $ - $ - Franchise Fees S $ $ - Special Assessments S $ $ Licenses&Permits $ $ - $ Intergovernmental S Charges for Services $ $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures S S - S _ Interest Earnings $ $ - $ Nfiscellaneous $ S - S - Other Financing Sources S S - $ _ "Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 552,000 S 1,635,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 552,000 $ 2,015,067 Requirements Community Development S $ - $ - Community Services S - $ - S - Policy and Administration S S - $ - Public Works $ $ - $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service $ - $ - $ - Loans S - $ - $ Wotk-In-Progress S 1,073,448 $ 552,000 S 1,625,448 Transfer%to Other Funds S 57,410 $ - S 57,410 Contingency $ - S - $ - Total Budget $ 1,1308 $ 552,000 $ 1,682,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 552,000 $ 2,015,067 10 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:QIPW10 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Capital Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 298,740 $ - $ 298,740 Property Taxes S - $ - $ _ Franchise Fees S S - $ _ Special Assessments $ $ - $ _ Licenses&Permits $ $ _ $ _ Intergovernmental $ S - $ _ Charges for Services S - $ - $ _ Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - $ _ Interest Earnings S 3,015 $ $ 3,015 Miscellaneous S - S S - Other Financing Sources S - $ - S - 1'iansfers In from Other bunds S 3,151,561 S 515,000 S 3,666,561 Total Resources $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 Requirements Community Development S - $ - $ - Community Services $ $ - $ Policy and Administration S - $ - $ - Public Works $ S _ S _ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ _ Debt Service S S $ _ Loans $ - S $ _ Work-In-Progress $ 3,151,561 $ 515,000 S 3,666,561 Transfers to Other Funds S 123,932 $ - S 123,932 Contingency S - S - S - Total Budget $ 3,275,493 $ 515,000 $3,790,493 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 177,823 $ - $ 177,823 Total Requirements $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 11 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW10 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Bond Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,700,000 $ 515,000 $ 2,215,000 Property Taxes S - S - S Franchise Fees S S $ Special Assessments S S S Licenses&Permits S S S Intergovernmental S S S Charges for Services S $ S Fines&forfeitures S S $ Interest Earnings S 4,020 $ S 4,020 Miscellaneous S - S S - Other Financing Sources S S S Transfers In from Other Funds S S $ Total Resources $ 1,704,020 $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 Requirements Community Development S - S - S Community Services S S S Policy and Administration S S S Public Works S S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S S S loans S S S Work-In-Progress $ S S Transfers to Other funds S 1,382,013 S 515,000 S 1,897,013 Contingency S - S - S - Total Budget $ 1,382,013 $ 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 322,007 $ - $ 322,007 Total Requirements $ 1,704,020 $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 12 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW08 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget City Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 126,479 $ $ 126,479 Property Taxes $ - $ S - Franchise Fees $ $ - $ - Special Assessments $ $ $ - Licenses&Permits $ $ $ - Intergovernmental $ 612,802 $ S 612,802 Charges for Services $ - $ S - Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ $ - Interest Earnings S 34,584 S S 34,584 Miscellaneous $ 32,052 S S 32,052 Other Financing Sources S - $ S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S $ - Total Resources $ 805,917 $ $ 805,917 Requirements Community Development S - S - $ Community Services $ S - S Policy and Administration $ S - $ Public Works $ S - $ - Proaram Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S 316,560 $ S 316,560 Loans $ - $ - S - Work-In-Progress S - $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,208 $ 200,000 $ 203,208 Contingency $ 300,000 $ (200,000) $ 100,000 Total Budget $ 619,768 $ - $ 619,768 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 186,149 $ - $ 186,149 Total Requirements $ 805,917 $ - $ 805,917 13 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW09 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation Development Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,112,633 $ 10,000 $ 1,122,633 Property Taxes $ - S - $ - Franchise Fees S S S Special Assessments S - S S Licenses&Permits S 700,000 S S 700,000 Intergovernmental S - S $ _ Charges for Services S - S S _ Fines&Forfeitures S - S S - Interest Earnings S 11,279 S $ 11,279 Miscellaneous $ - S S - Other Financing Sources S S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S S $ - Total Resources $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 $ 1,833,912 Requirements Community Development S - S - $ - Community Services S - $ - S _ Policy and Administration S - S - S - Public Works $ - S - $ _ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S S - S Loans S $ - S Work-In-Progress S 6,800 S - $ 6,800 Transfers to Other Funds S 526,690 S 10,000 S 536,690 Contingency S 250,000 S - S 250,000 Total Budget $ 783,490 $ 10,000 $ 793,490 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 1,040,422 $ - $ 1,040,422 Total Requirements $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 $ 1,833,912 14 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW11 Revised Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 17,223,215 $ $ 17,223,215 Property Taxes S S $ Franchise Fees $ S S - Special Assessments $ $ $ - Licenses&Permits $ S $ - Intergovernmental $ S $ - Charges for Services S S $ - Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - $ - Interest Earnings S 13,096 S $ 13,096 Miscellaneous S 5,318 S S 5,318 Other Financing Sources S - S - $ - Transfers In from Other bunds S 18,840,921 S 3,400,000 5 22,240,921 Total Resources $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 Requirements Community Development S - S - $ - Community Services $ S - $ - Policy and Administration S $ $ Public Works $ S - $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S S - S Loans $ - S - $ - Work-In-Progress $ 29,168,682 $ 6,660,000 S 35,828,682 Transfers to Other Funds S 231,256 $ - S 231,256 Contingency $ - S - S - Total Budget $ 29,399,938 $ 6,660,000 $ 36,059,938 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 6,682,612 $ (3,260,000) $ 3,422,612 Total Requirements $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 15 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW11 Revised Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water SDC Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 4,571,596 $ $ 4,571,596 Property Taxes $ - S S _ Franchise Fees S $ S Special Assessments $ $ $ _ Licenses&Permits S 873,715 S S 873,715 Intergovernmental S - S $ _ Charges for Services $ - $ $ _ Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ $ _ Interest Earnings $ 233 S S 233 N iscellancous S - S S _ Other Financing Sources S S $ Transfers In from Other Funds S S Total Resources $ 5,445,544 $ - $ 5,445,544 Requirements Community Development $ - S S Community Services $ $ S Policy and administration $ S S Public Works $ S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service $ S S Loans $ S $ Work-In-Progress S S - $ _ "Transfers to Other Funds S 299,130 S 3,400,000 S 3,699,130 Contingency S 100,000 $ - $ 100,000 Total Budget $ 399,130 $ 3,400,000 $ 3,799,130 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,046,414 $ (3,400,000) $ 1,646,414 Total Requirements $ 5,445,544 $ - $ 5,445,544 16 of 16 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR MATE OF MEETING) TIGARD HIGH SCHOOL CITY UPDATE: 10/13/15 • Random Acts of Kindness: Notes throughout school with kind messages and buttons that read "radiate kindness" • Holly, the 2015 Sparrow was introduced at Homecoming football game and there was a successful elephant ear fundraiser for her • Durham Center Awareness Walk 10/10/15 • Homecoming Parade • Homecoming Dance: Night Under the Big Top (Dance raised $6,400 for choir program) • Japanese exchange students • Powderpuff girls flag football SUPPLEMENTAL City Council Update Oct 2015 FOR (IDA. E C)r MEM TING) Chamber Events Good Morning Tigard (GMT),Thursday A.M. Networking 7:30 a.m.—Weekly 10/15/15— Hosted by Send Out Cards @ Tigard Chamber 10/22/15—Hosted by AccounTax of Oregon @ their location 10/29/15— Hosted by Culture by Design @ location TBD 11/5/15—Hosted by Costco Tigard includes ribbon cutting of new gas station Other • 10/14/15—6-8 p.m. TYP and YPLO After hours Halloween networking at Home Turf • 10/15/15—4-5 p.m. Monthly Home, Garden and Design Referrals Group—3(d Thursdays • 10/28/15—8-930 a.m.—TYP Educational Breakfast of Champions—Speaker from Columbia Sportswear • 10/28/15—9-10 a.m.—Business Services Referrals Group @ the Tigard Chamber • Save the date, Holiday Happy Hour,Tuesday, December 1"at Broadway Rose Check our event calendar at http://business.tigardchamber.org/events/calendar/for locations and hosting companies Tigard Farmers Market Update • Trick or Treat at the market, Sunday 10/25/15 and submit your carved pumpkin for judging. • Join us 11/14/15 from 10am—4 p.m. for our annual Harvest Market& Bazaar at Tigard High and get a jump on your holiday shopping, crafts, food, art and more! Downtown Updates • Big congratulations to Tigard Downtown Alliance for your Excellence in Revitalization Award at the recent Oregon Main Street Conference for your special event SubUrban Art! • 31d Friday is 10/16/15, come Explore Downtown Tigard • Friday 10/30/15 Trick or Treat Main Street 4-6 p.m. • Save the date Holiday Tree Lighting, Friday 12/4/15 Learn what there is to do in Downtown Tigard on Facebook at www.facebook.com/exi)loredowntowntigard and at www.exploredowntowntigard.com TIGARD AREA co"MERCE tC&&IMEIRS CI tigardyoungprofessionals 'T 'R. O�� connect <oll*ctcdlaborstc dMnb. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1) - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: October 13, 2015 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items 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 becomes 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. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: �•�' Address I oft 4a 5 A I Atiqj/ft Qr� PxJJ k' Cityf lunfim State Q0— Zip Phone No. �► n � r Na e: Al' ,pl ell/yon e it sou s,i willhel th r ron unc i Ador ss City, S hip �7 P ne No. SOS V Name: l Also, ease spell m as it sounds,if will help e presidin ffic r pr ounce: Addr s u p/ City osd State Phone NoJA CITIZEN COMMUNICATION 1:\ADM\CAT11Y\000 Ciry Recorder-Records Resources and policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 150722.doc AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1) - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: October 13, 2015 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items 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 becomes 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. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Na e: l pn- Also, le se sp ll our name as it sounds,if help e r si g e onour;te: Addre s City State i Phone No. Name: CIC 1�— Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Cb �e Address J &O .SW aqt" pi. erL V v k-V- City rk ey.-b GG _'�C, CP' State K Zip <j 7:P_:?-:�) 'S't✓v W Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address l c�t (r '•S'Uy '�lit ( ��� City Vd-, State C Zip �(1�.�� WC0r l4- Phone No. ? C17_61 C-7& :,-- CITIZEN COMMUNICATION 1:\ADM\CAT1iY\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 150922.doc AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1) - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: October 13, 2015 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items 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 becomes 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. NAME,ADDRESS &PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: A l Also,pl ase spell your name i sounds,if it will lielp th presiding officer rono ce: Addre s V City ciZ. State q 2 Phone No. rd - jr? " 4 Name: '13o h Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding offie r p'onounce: Address-12 1&0 0 S�� \2-1 I City State Z Zip efl223 Phone No. S�", ��3�Q P 5 2- Name: Name: M►c!Lta /2-136(gTs Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will p help the presiding officer pronounce: Address $6 S 5-w W A L N,'t r City 11 L MZ o State op- Zip '17 2 t 3 Phone No. -7( 7 I C y d 71 Y CITIZEN COMMUNICATION h\ADM\CATHY\000 City Re rde Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citiam communication t50922.doc SUPPLEMENTAL.PACM s- FOR a L_61r To whom it may concern: GATE OF MEETING) I am writing as a resident adjacent to the proposed cellular tower site at SW 129th and Walnut St to express my opposition to the project. The conditional use is inappropriate for reasons outlined below. The visual impact of the proposed cellular tower is severe. Tigard development code would normally require a 6' fence and screening trees to limit the visual impact on surrounding residences. The site is incompatible with either requirement,so the applicant has deemed it appropriate to locate an accessory equipment box twenty feet in the air, in clear view of houses on both sides of Walnut St and 129th. This arrangement creates a monstrosity of a structure, contrived purely to circumvent code provisions that would otherwise protect residential zones from such development. The claim that the cellular tower replaces a utility pole is a farce. They propose to tear down a power pole in an area where houses are moving to underground electric service, move three feet to relocate in a public utilities right of way,and erect an antenna three times taller. The movement into the right of way betrays a sinister precedent that would be set; the applicant argues that a 72 foot tall tower is an appropriate use in any utilities right of way, in the front yard of any house in Tigard. If here,why not everywhere else? The data coverage justification defies common sense. When was the last time you had limited or no cellular—voice or data—coverage in any suburban neighborhood? Why does every resident on 129th have no issue with his or her cell phone? T-Mobile has the closest cellular tower to the proposed site at 1.2 miles away. If that is not sufficient,then how are Verizon,AT&T, and Sprint all providing adequate voice and data coverage to this area? T-Mobile's own consumer-facing maps available online advertise that 4G LTE—the highest quality data service—is already available with no gaps to a five mile radius around the proposed site. Thank you for your time, Michael Roberts and Rachel Batzer 12865 SW Walnut St SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET OPPOSITION SYNOPSIS FOR TIGARD CITY COUNCIL FOR _e (DATE OF MEETING) October 13,2015; 7:30 pm; Tigard City Center-Town Hall RE: CASE ID SDR2015-00001 I am speaking on behalf my fellow neighbors who live on 129th Place in Tigard off of Walnut Street. We are here because the City has put us in an unfortunate situation--the city is about to approve the insertion of a cell phone tower in our front yard--and we need your help. We have been voicing our concerns and opposition since November of last year,and our voices and concerns have not been taken seriously.We are here because we hope that as our elected representatives,you will hear us and advocate for us--because no one else is.YOU are our final opportunity to help us stop this project before cell phone towers are the new norm in residential areas and our home values are irreversibly damaged. Why do I say the City has put us in this situation?Two reasons: FIRST--the City is reviewing this cell tower proposal using antiquated code that is not working to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Tigard residents. On top of that, based on our independent review of the current code, a significant portion of the code is not being met. For starters,the code allows for attachment to an "existing" utility pole.T-Mobile plans to remove the existing 24' pool and replace it with a pole and canister totaling 72'. We've documented this and other code violations and submitted it to the Planning department. SECOND--of the 7 sites considered by the development company representing T-Mobile, 4 are City properties. 2 of those 4 are the Tualatin Valley Fire Station and Jack City Park. Both of these locations have ample wide-open space in the middle of the desired coverage area, and both locations had the luxury of saying"not interested."The City didn't want the cell tower on its land, so the easiest option for all involved was to cram a 72-foot eyesore in less than 2,000 sq ft directly in front of several residences...where our children ride their bikes and wait for the school bus, resulting in our neighborhood becoming less desirable and our homes values significantly declining. I'm sure you can see how this situation is quite unfair. We are all hard working taxpayers of this city, but none of us are zoning, planning, and land use lawyers. It's wrong that the City can simply say no to a cell phone tower on its land, while we have to spend our precious time and resources to fight this so we can preserve the value of our homes and the integrity of our community. We communicated our concerns to Mayor Cook at a fireside chat back in May. His response was that much of the City code is outdated, and to get in line--it will take 5 years to update it. He also responded that federal telecommunications laws do not allow the City to deny the request of eligible facilities and that PGE has the right to allow the equipment on their poles. Our mission has never been to prevent the cell tower from being in the City of Tigard, but to find a more suitable location. And we refuse to accept the rest as an adequate and true response. So, what are we asking you to do? 1. Put T-Mobile and Lexcom's proposal on hold until this can be given the scrutiny it deserves. ♦ _ . 2. Recognize this location is not appropriate and that the City can and should take this burden off our shoulders. Push your own departments and agencies--like the fire station and Jack Park--to accept the tower on their properties. 3. Finally, push for amendments to current code that requires cellular providers to pursue the least intrusive options first. The City of Salem's Planning Commission initiated a project to update its land use regulations for wireless communication facilities, and City Council approved the amendments in March, 2014. The new code requires cell towers to be located outside of residential zones unless it can be proved that a site in a residential zone is necessary to provide service. And the new code requires any new cell tower in a residential zone to be designed to appear as an object that would be found in the area, such as a tree. The City of Tigard should be able to follow suit. This situation is not black and white. It should NOT be about how to make A, B, and C true or somewhat applicable to get paperwork off your desks.This is about our lives. Our families. And our homes.This is a matter of precedent that deserves further scrutiny.Thank you for your time. RE:Type II Proposal Site Development Review Case ID:SDR2015-00001 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR 494,71-- /3 201 To:Cheryl Caines,Associate Planner,City of Tigard (DATE OF MEETING) Please consider the following public comments and relevant evidence as it relates to Case ID:SDR2015- 00001. • "Code" is defined as a collection of requirements, which pertain to a specific subject, to regulate specific practices.The purpose of all codes is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. o In this instance,the code does not pertain to this specific subject or practice; as a result,the code is not protecting public health,safety, or welfare. • Chapter 18.798 states the regulations are in place to ensure wireless communication facilities are regulated in a manner which minimizes visual impacts and protects neighborhood livability-- neither of those requirements are being upheld in this proposal. Code has not been met. o As you will see below, screening/buffering codes have not been met, proposed tree plantings pose a major safety threat to nearby residences and school children, aesthetics codes as they relate to non-tower structures are non-existent, and the proposed location of the tower is invasive, unnecessary, and detrimental. • Section "18.798.020 Definitions" defines a "Wireless communication facility, attached" as affixed to an existing structure.This cell tower will NOT be affixed to an existing structure.The existing structure (a 24-foot utility pole) is being removed and replaced with a 60-foot structure that is topped with a 12-foot antenna array attachment—bringing overall height to 72 feet.This means future Providers can use this project as precedent for removing and replacing existing structures. Code has not been met. • Section "18.798.040 Uses Permitted Outright" item "A) Collocation of antenna(s) on existing non-tower structures in residential zones" states "Installing an antenna(s) on an existing structure other than a tower...so long as the additional antenna(s) is no more than 10 feet higher than the existing structure." Replacement of the existing structure will result in the proposed non-tower structure standing 48-feet higher than the "existing" structure. Code has not been met. • Section "18.798.050 Uses Permitted Subject to Site Development Review" heading"B. Review criteria" number"1.Aesthetic" FAILS TO ADDRESS aesthetics for NEW non-tower structures (utility poles),further demonstrating the inadequacy of the current code as it relates to this project. Code does not exist. • Section "18.798.050 Uses Permitted Subject to Site Development Review" heading "B. Review criteria" number"2. Setbacks" sub-item "B" states "Towers not designed to collapse within themselves shall be set back from the property line by a distance equal to the height of the tower." Code is incomplete;it does not address non-tower structures.Additionally, the 72-foot non-tower replacement structure is NOT set back from the property line by a distance equal to the height of the non-tower structure. Should the non-tower structure collapse, approximately 39 feet of the non-tower structure would fall over the private residential property line of two different residences. Code has not been met. o Should the tower collapse,ALL 72-feet will fall—not just the initial replacement structure of 60-feet.Should it fall,due to earthquake or other circumstances,the tower poses a great risk to the families and numerous children who live, play,and wait for the bus on SW 1291h Place and the neighboring private drive of SW Walnut. Page 1 1 4 • Section "18.798.050 Uses Permitted Subject to Site Development Review" heading "B. Review criteria" number"7. Landscaping and screening." sub-item "B" states "When adjacent to or within residentially-zoned property,freestanding towers and accessory equipment facilities shall be screened by the planting of a minimum of four evergreen trees at least 15 feet in height at the time of planting.The planting of said trees shall be prescribed in number by a plan prepared by a certified arborist in locations that(i) most effectively screen the wireless facilities from residential uses and (ii) promote the future survival of the trees while limiting adverse effects of the trees on abutting properties. Existing evergreen trees at least 15 feet in height may be used to meet the screening requirement of this section if the arborist demonstrates that they provide screening for abutting residential uses." o The location of the four(4)15'douglas fir trees as drawn on the overall site plan IN NO WAY buffer views of the non-tower structure relative to the views of ANY nearby residences located north or south of Walnut. Two of the trees are placed 20'feet to the east of the non-tower structure and the remaining two are 15'to the west of the non- tower structure. Given the great distance from the non-tower structure and the substantial height difference, zero screening is provided. Code has not been met. o After reviewing the 4/15/15 report supplied by David D. Hunter, registered consulting arborist, it has NOT been clearly demonstrated or documented that the arborist prescribed the planting of these trees in locations that provide screening for/buffer views of abutting residential uses/nearby residences. Code has not been met. o The proposed location of the four(4) 15' douglas fir trees will impede visibility for safe and efficient egress of ALL residences located on the south side of SW 129"' Place and the private drive of SW Walnut as well as visibility for school bus drivers picking up/dropping off children daily(See EXHIBIT A). Code has not been fully and reasonably considered. ■ Section 2 of the "Street Tree Planting and Maintenance Standards" under"Part 1.Street Tree Planting Standards:" item "D" states "Street tree species shall be appropriate for the planting environment as determined by the city manager or designee and seek to achieve a balance of the following: ... 2. Compatibility with space constraints for roots and branches at maturity..." Douglas firs are deemed by the county to be"large stature" trees that will grow 180' high with a 40' spread, and a 1256 sq. ft. canopy.These trees are NOT APPROPRIATE given the space constraints.STANDARDS HAVE NOT BEEN MET. Page214 COMMUNITY SENTIMENT As initially stated in the mandatory neighborhood meeting held on March 31, 2015, the residents surrounding the proposed project site at 12840 SW 129th Place in Tigard, OR, adamantly oppose this proposal. Our reasoning is based on logic and facts: • The site selection review and approval process was not reasonable or objective. Four of the seven sites investigated by Lexcom are city properties that had the luxury of being bypassed due to a reply of"not interested."We,the tax-paying residents of the City of Tigard, have not been afforded the luxury and the right of being bypassed with a "not interested" response.This is a complete conflict of interest.The City Planning office states it and all other City departments are required to remain "neutral" in this matter,yet there is zero neutrality when the City itself has been an equivalent participant in the project and is the number one reason we, the taxpayers, are now in this unfortunate position. • By admission of the City's own Community Planning and Development office, the requirements contained in Chapter 18.798 "WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES" are antiquated (written in 1998) and were not written to review or address projects of this nature--the code is being misused and incorrectly applied to the benefit of no one but large multinational corporations, like T-Mobile. We,the public,are NOT being protected by our City; in fact, we are being harmed. • Before the City grants this damaging application to T-Mobile and Lexcom, we ask you to please put this project on hold and take the time needed to make the right decision—before the City sets precedent in this matter. Many other surrounding cities, including the City of Portland and the City of Salem, have codes in place to prevent cellular providers from taking intrusive and damaging measures in residential areas. Don't Tigard residents deserve the same protection and consideration? Sincerely, Joni Heidt 12880 SW 129th Place Paul Heidt 12880 SW 129th Place Kristen Block 12860 SW 129th Place Jim Block 12860 SW 129th Place Elizabeth Layton-Weihrauch 12976 SW Walnut Lisa Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Glen Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Kathryn Waterman Morris 12988 SW Walnut Ery Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Danielle Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Enclosure: street photographs Page 4 EXHIBIT A When garbage cans are placed curbside on SW Walnut (directly in front of the proposed project site), egress visibility from 129th Place is already extremely limited and dangerous.As you can see from the two pictures taken one after another,the large truck does not come into a driver's view until the very last moment.The addition of branches and foliage from two douglas fir trees-expected to produce a canopy of over 1200 square feet—will further obstruct already limited views. Rg ,.g 4 `i y, l Photo 1–The on-coming truck is hidden by the Photo 2–The on-coming truck is only seen at garbage cans. the very last moment. Page 414 ' March 31, 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR �o l TO: Owen Whitcomb, Lexcom Development(representing T-Mobile) (DATE OF MgETING) Jim Carver, PGE City Council Members, City of Tigard RE: Opposition to Proposed T-Mobile Project P001235C Walnut We,the undersigned, are writing to communicate our opposition to T-Mobile and Lexcom Development's plans to install a wireless communications facility at the property adjacent to 12840 SW 1291' Place in Tigard, Oregon. The members of our small, established, and well-maintained neighborhood agree that the site selected by Lexcom is inappropriate due to its densely-populated urban location and incompatibility with neighborhood aesthetics. Lexcom's proposal will place a communications facility at the entrance of our beautiful community— a neighborhood with median home values of approximately$495,000—and in an area where our children play daily and wait for the school bus. We firmly believe the insertion of a communications facility in this area will be a detriment to our community character, negatively affecting property values and reducing our enjoyment of the space as local homeowners. According to an article published in Realtor®magazine,the official magazine for the National Association of Realtors®, an overwhelming 94%of home buyers and renters surveyed by the National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy(NISLAPP)say they are less interested and would pay less for a property located near a cell tower or antenna.According to this same article, 79%of survey respondents said that under no circumstances would they ever purchase or rent a property within a few blocks of a cell tower or antennas, and almost 90%said they were concerned about the increasing number of cell towers and antennas in their residential neighborhood. Combine these facts with the widely-known skepticism and controversy related to the health risks associated with living near a cell tower or antenna, and our fears and opposition are valid and justified. Please note the presence of our community members at the March 31, 2015, informational meeting as our official opposition to this proposal. Please also note that on March 18, 2015, a community representative proactively voiced the neighborhood's opposition to the City of Tigard's Planning Division, as well as to Owen Whitcomb of Lexcom Development.Additionally, on March 19, 2015,this same message of opposition was voiced to Jim Carver of PGE. The homeowners surrounding the property at 12840 SW 129"' Place in Tigard, Oregon kindly—yet strongly— request you consider relocating this project to a different, more suitable site. Thank you for making the right decision and protecting our community. Sincerely, Ery Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Joni Heidt 12880 SW 129th Place Danielle Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Paul Heidt 12880 SW 129th Place Vicky Westerfield 12915 SW Walnut Kristen Block 12860 SW 129th Place Michael Roberts 12865 SW Walnut Jim Block 12860 SW 129th Place Rachel Batzer 12865 SW Walnut Elizabeth Layton-Weihrauch 12976 SW Walnut Kendall Kamphuis 12705 SW 128th Ave. Lisa Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Glen Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Kathryn Waterman Morris 12988 SW Walnut Enclosure: Neighborhood photographs Ile, wl z'IF �\%��� . 'Alt. � . , . > . . . � . . . . . a. : w. . , v. y. . . . �\ 2 : rK r _ F_ rte• Mrs, ti•:•I I , . . . .�. «.w tk .. �, [ / © . q , . . yy . SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR April 2, 2015 (DATE OF MEETING) Re: Proposed T Mobile cell tower location 12840 SW 129`h PI Tigard, OR 97223 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to you to communicate my opposition to T-Mobile and Lexcom Development's plans to install a 60' cell tower at the entrance to my neighborhood. Several of the families in my neighborhood attended the community informational meeting(required prior to submitting permit application) held by Lexcom on Tuesday, March 31, 2015. We were all very vocal in expressing our concerns about the negative impact placing a 60ft tower in this location,the entrance to our private neighborhood,would have on neighborhood aesthetics and property values. Those leading the meeting representing Lexcom and T-Mobile did not answer our questions regarding due diligence into alternative sites, nor were they willing to discuss suggested alternatives by community members. We feel that the pre-application filed by Lexcom was misleading, as the terminology used requested "replacement"of an existing utility pole,yet the utility pole currently standing is non-functional and would, in actuality, remain in place behind the proposed cell tower. Additionally,the City of Tigard's utility pole screening requirements,which mandates planting a minimum of four (4)trees that are a minimum of 15ft tall at planting, will seemingly present a challenge, as those leading the meeting indicated that our neighborhood was ideal as there were no close trees—a contradiction,to say the least. The following morning, a nearby neighbor (12880 SW129th) & 1 (12860 SW 129`") met with the City Planner assigned to this project. We reiterated our concerns and were able to get additional information regarding the process and code requirements. During that meeting,we reviewed a planner map of our area and discovered there are at least three (3) very nearby locations we feel are equally suitable—without destroying home owners' property values and neighborhood aesthetics. Two of these locations are in public right-of-ways so there would be no change or delay to the permitting process with the City of Tigard. They are as follows: Page 1 of 4 Alternative site#1: Intersection of SW Walnut&Gaarde-the location is 50yds away from the proposed location, has a large area of public right-of-way, is not at the entrance to a private neighborhood, and has some screening already present,which is required by the code for any location of this tower. i r, Page 2 of 4 Alternative site#2: Intersection of SW Walnut& 121St Ave-this location is 4 blocks away from the proposed location, has an adequate area of public right-of-way, and is not at the entrance to a private neighborhood. now, 0 PY Alternative site#3: 13401 SW Benish St.This location is 5 blocks away from the proposed site. This location would follow a different code/ permitting process, as it is private land, but the location and elevation appear to be ideal. The property owner is Our Redeemer Lutheran Church. It was clear from the meeting that this landowner had not yet been approached. (no picture) Page 3 of 4 I strongly urge you to reconsider placing the proposed tower in an alternative location. I understand that this is the first cell tower to be placed in a residential neighborhood within the City of Tigard. The precedence that is set by the actions taken and consideration given (or not)to the community, it's citizens, and the City of Tigard, will undoubtedly have great impact—positive or negative—in the future as more of these towers are placed. We are all called to be good stewards of our communities and neighborhoods—would you place a cell tower in the driveway of your home? Thank you in advance for your consideration. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Kristin Block 12860 SW 1291h PI 503.753.8266 Page 4 of 4 SUPPLEMENTAL PAL"--,T FOR OL f - 12 20 lS J April 3, 2015 (IRATE OF MEETING) TO: Owen Whitcomb, Land Use Associate, Lexcom Development(representing T-Mobile) Louis Levy, President, Lexcom Development (representing T-Mobile) CC: Cheryl Caines, Associate Planner, City of Tigard City Council Members, City of Tigard Jim Carver, Wireless Project Manager, Portland General Electric Kristen Block 12860 SW 129th Place Jim Block 12860 SW 129th Place Elizabeth Layton-Weihrauch 12976 SW Walnut Lisa Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Glen Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Kathryn Waterman Morris 12988 SW Walnut Ery Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Danielle Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Vicky Westerfield 12915 SW Walnut Michael Roberts 12865 SW Walnut Rachel Batzer 12865 SW Walnut Kendall Kamphuis 12705 SW 128th Ave. RE: Alternative Site Considerations&Opposition to Proposed T-Mobile Project P001235C Walnut I am writing you to urge Lexcom Development to consider alternative site locations proposed here within.As clearly communicated, both verbally and in writing, during the informational meeting held March 31, 2015, at Tigard Community Friends Church,the homeowners surrounding the property adjacent to 12840 SW 129th Place in Tigard,Oregon are adamantly against the installation of any wireless networking equipment at the entrance of our beautiful community. Alternative Site Considerations Based on the details shared by Lexcom Development representatives during the March 31, 2015 meeting, my neighborhood ("we") does not believe Lexcom has thoroughly exhausted every site option in the low-coverage radius described. We believe Lexcom's efforts likely extended to properties outside our small street, but were quickly discarded in lieu of taking the path of least resistance—our small community of hard-working Tigard residents who cares about the value of our homes,the character of our neighborhood, and the health of our families. After meeting with the City of Tigard on April 1, 2015, my neighbor(12860 SW 129th) and I (12880 SW129th) conducted our own land assessment within the low-coverage area identified by Lexcom. Based on our findings, we propose T-Mobile and Lexcom consider the intersection of 1215'and Walnut Street,the southeast corner of Gaarde &Walnut, and the property of Our Redeemer Lutheran Church located at 13401 SW Benish St.for the installation of T-Mobile's wireless communications facility. In consulting with the City of Tigard,the first two pieces of land are: classified as a public right-of-way, away from neighborhood homes, at a higher elevation than the current site, and possess less native vegetation. And given the fact that Lexcom's plan for project P001235C does not include utilizing the existing (and defunct) utility pole—rather installing a new 63' pole a few feet over—the presence of a utility pole on any potential site should be a moot point. 1of2 Lexcom's willingness to put extra time and effort into pursuing these alternatives is a win-win: our beautiful homes maintain their value,T-Mobile gets to increase coverage for its customers, and Lexcom earns the image of being a compassionate company that cares about its footprint, long-term impact, and community neighbors—and, above all, wants to and works hard to do the right thing. Once again, the homeowners surrounding the property at 12840 SW 1291h Place in Tigard, Oregon kindly—yet strongly—request you consider relocating this project to a different, more suitable site. Thank you for making the right decision and protecting our community. Sincerely, Joni and Paul Heidt 12880 SW 129th Place Tigard, OR 97223 503.936.8526 2of2 r May 6, 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR D C4 . 1 3; S To:John L. Cook, Mayor, City of Tigard (DATE OF MEETING) CC:Jason Snider, Council President;John Goodhouse, Councilor; Marland Henderson, Councilor; Marc Woodard, Councilor RE:Antiquated City Code Regarding Cell Tower Installation in Residential Neighborhoods Dear Mayor Cook and City Council Representatives, We,the undersigned, want to inform you that our Tigard residential neighborhood is being threatened with the insertion of a "wireless communications facility." In late March of 2015,T-Mobile and Lexcom Development announced its plans to replace an existing 24' utility pole with a new 60' pole (able to accommodate six antennas as well as low-hanging boxed equipment) in our residential neighborhood on a utility right-of-way adjacent to 12840 SW 129th Place in Tigard, Oregon. The members of our community strongly believe Lexcom's selection of our neighborhood for T-Mobile's antenna is inappropriate and unnecessary. There are several other suitable site options that meet T- Mobile and Lexcom's requirements,yet they are not required to pursue them. Instead of pursuing less intrusive nonresidential sites, Lexcom wants to place an antenna in front of our homes—an area where our children play daily and wait for the school bus. Most damaging,the siting of these towers in our neighborhood is expected to reduce our property values by 20 to 24 percent—that's approximately $100,000 per home (or at least a $1.2 million dollar taxable loss for the city). For our newer residents, that's all of their home equity. We ask the city to please scrutinize this situation carefully and not let these corporate giants take advantage of your Tigard homeowners. 1998-Adopted Wireless Communication Facilities Codes Are Antiquated: Precedence Will Be Set The "Wireless Communication Facilities" chapter of Tigard municipal code was adopted in 1998, and in those 17 years, only a few minor updates have been made.As currently written,the City of Tigard's codes do not specifically address the allowance of antennas on power poles in residential areas. In fact, in speaking with Associate Planner Cheryl Caines in the Community Development office,this is the first time a cellular provider has proposed replacing a power pole with a cellular antenna within the City of Tigard; therefore, the city attorney had to be consulted to determine how to apply the current codes to this precedence-setting scenario for the city. We want to call attention to the fact that the City of Tigard's code in this matter is antiquated; it does not encourage providers to locate new cell towers in nonresidential neighborhoods, putting Tigard homeowners at risk. Before the city grants this damaging application to T-Mobile and Lexcom,we ask you to please put this project on hold and take the time needed to make the right decision—before the city sets precedence in this matter. Many other surrounding cities, including the City of Portland and the City of Salem, have codes in place to prevent cellular providers from taking intrusive and damaging measures in residential areas. Don't Tigard residents deserve the same protection and consideration? Providers Should Be Required to Document Pursuance of Least Intrusive Site Options Before residential areas are considered, the City of Tigard should require wireless providers to prove that the location selected is the least intrusive means of filling a significant wireless communications service gap and that prohibiting the siting would effectively prohibit the provision of wireless communications services. Given the facts listed below,we can guarantee Lexcom cannot meet this threshold—with regard to intrusiveness or service provision. Due Diligence Has Not Been Done i Based on details shared by Lexcom Development representatives during a mandatory March 31, 2015 community meeting, Lexcom has failed to thoroughly exhaust every nonresidential site option in the low-coverage radius it described. While other nonresidential right-of-ways exist, and have been proposed by our neighborhood via written communication, Lexcom has chosen to continue down the path of least resistance—targeting our small community of hard-working Tigard residents who have little to no power in this situation. As you will see from the copies of letters included in this folder, our opposition to this project has been well-documented and communicated, and we have adequately identified alternative nonresidential sites that meet T-Mobile's requirements. Clearly, Lexcom has not exhausted all nonresidential options. Additionally, we would like to note that Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue's"Fire Station 50,"which sits on ample nonresidential property, was approached by Lexcom as a potential site for the antenna.The fire station declined due to reasons of"administrative hassles." We,the homeowners of Tigard, do not have the luxury of declining Lexcom's proposal,yet we will absorb the most severe and long-term impact. To reiterate our request, before the city grants this damaging application to T-Mobile and Lexcom,we ask you to please put T-Mobile/Lexcom's application on hold and scrutinize city code.Your action in this matter will affect the health and financial well-being of more than a dozen families. Thank you for making the right decision and protecting our community. Sincerely, Joni Heidt 12880 SW 1291h Place Paul Heidt 12880 SW 129th Place Kristen Block 12860 SW 129th Place Jim Block 12860 SW 129th Place Elizabeth Layton-Weihrauch 12976 SW Walnut Lisa Henneman 12950 SW 1291h Place Glen Henneman 12950 SW 129th Place Ery Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Danielle Dutt 12996 SW Walnut Kathryn Waterman Morris 12988 SW Walnut SLrpLEMENTAL PACKET FOR DATE LookingW a n u t P001235C Within R.O.W. adjacent to -� 12840 SW 129th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Washington County ' �- J T Mobile } 8960 NE Alderwood Road Portland,Oregon 97220 Phone:503-813-9000 DON CUSHING ASSOCIATES 107 SE Washington Street Suite 26S Portland,OR 97214 Phone:S03-387-5331 n u I Looking East �fj� P001235C Within R.O.W. adjacent to 12840 SW 129th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 " Washington County • • • Mobile • _ 8960 NE Alderwood Road Portland,Oregon 97220 Phone:503-813-9000 !Pee DON CUSHING ASSOCIATES 107 SE Washington Street.Suite 265 Portland,OR 97214 Phone: S03-387-5331 • T V,,. -.-t7,U PACU'll SUPP IPO RECEIVED(DA AvING) W-E E CITY •T..Mobile- INTO obile- LT. . .M0 1 e . aFrI D 1 V - .... --- -- --- - - . _ ._ P�NNINy .. ! 9960 NE AtDERWOOD ROAD PORTLAND,OR 97170 SITE NAME: PHONE:(501)813-9000 WALNUT EX!STW OVERHEAD UTfm LIKES TO 9E\ FAX:150 '3WO1 A RELOCATED SITE NUMBER: AYE SNET ytuANa _ RtsAutaNEwRR vRnuciw aRrA nN MOUMTON T.k"T}LF A' Cs P001235C ; 'STA 6OfTMdNEG:RAME P001235C f%KTIN(.;'NfE TO NFMAN WALNUT LOCATION: aw wm-mn aT WITHIN ROW ADJACENT TO A°"WPET1O11°'°°'"'t MAVT �' INSTALL(AINfW DIwIAN-f NNAS �. .St NroRHWV TIOAROL OR ffr= 12840 SW 129TH AVE, "�'=I NEW W1NTW'B"4DE -� Ntp CA1NStEN I EXI37NGmOf pPNAYEIBR 9A14 RREAN9 TIGARD OR 97223 - _ • , . - A J T.1 Tt9QTLO`2RAILSM-RRAN SITE NAME SITE NUMBER: ___ -- — - V--, tffi11NV3 COIOT!IONS 'NKNLR --- PM, .-!"� •.� C., ELEVATIONS SITE ADDRESS: COUNTY: W OUTDOOR PLIRCF.i CARNET ._.----. __....__..._. _._._-_.— / NTTHIRROWADACEM10 WASNINOTONCOLN'Y . µSTALL(,NEW IS TALL DWOLAS FIR 11 �• TREESINSTALNEW TBE- Tilk w CAN6Tt.R APLAnglu LRXNTNO DETAL9 17NDaW,29TH AVE °TREES WR1O1RQV.MST 9E,R TALL Cfl GRAwnro NlORRRATtGN i AT TME OFFPLANT MUST BE-9 TALL Tr.+aD.okwm �---__.___ ATTtufaRAFmNo _ AT _ `••�•"'r•�`� Et c. Emmum WTAL9 ZONING: JURISDICTION: REDf RAxTRG r RF-I IIF DESIGN P.,A OTY OF MARO J ���^ % .' EXISTING, O RE ICMF , pNaApyATUIE AOML �.I•; PL TREE TO Rt'NAIN RESIDENTIAL 1AEf 701EOW - FLAN9lW9PAWR09H SHEET INDEX � _, �- SIGNATURE DATE PROJECT COORDINATES: PGE INFO: ` '.- „.1 E'XS NGXAO IROPOE LTLm POE _. LAT NI!I'2S9A.AP rtlA7A1 _._._ POLE A2Y.,!' f 7966 WR�R0VElOtl 11 POLE f110!].MAP C2—TORE REMOVED AND lLMM TIIEE TG minim PRN'-EO WRN NEIN W AGL WOW UTLM POIE St'E AcG' ONO, W1jr1915.N'1-,22210C, NAPC2!�/. y ' r 1 TO A tz STEALTH CANISTER,E E)O POLE IO E CMRSTIE RFYN0FR%19111 ADW W5 SOURCE A ` LO 1 TO TIE f FROM OF: �i� �/ '1£EnSTNAi POIf POLE OWNER LOCATION ANDP O FRW THE BAG(CE THE 9OE1NµK mNNo' F,� � roTNE CENTER DINE N-�11�Pae IxAnoN OWF.NVAiTCOAl IMPIbYbI2A PORR.AM OF1ERµ R nff,TIM FA,STFOTRANSFORM �. 115W SN.MDN ST TO RFIKAI ,M WARyTRlI ttT T PORTLAND.OR JI'lOL I ° ., EXta:NG OVEINEAO UTRItt LXlES'O SE PORTLAFI0.A lRt• NF fu[.1.NEFN: AM CMVLN IMT 1MND23 /. RELOCATED WO AEN W A:L WOOD ION mld KOSASLRAYN11Tr AMM12MdR6A WME YMAIUNF AMM . �l4 L11LRTv—F PROJECT DESCRIPTION:. "tE'°RE" ; /�i 1 " � CONST.MCA+ T4X)KE PROPOSES TO REPLACE AN Q767N0 X TALL UTBJTY POLE T l - ADAMSPRKGU[lC.,-]Tl,Y1D NiM.NEW A9 TALL NTY0D,IRl11\'POLE MTINAtz TALLS,EAl '( EjUfa1ER TC ACCfIUMMATP 11 NEW AVTENAS AM RAE VOWED AOJAOCHTz—� `. !,�'} �•.. 1 RKVACENT 20MNG GENERAL ' /TT�� i� IIIA` OPSVCA' sconwA.EwFFAtsc9mn GENERAL INFORMATION: R.5 1.PAKIN i REOIARNlN!SAM U—C u PROXCT MCR1Si91,AGE AT=R PROPOSED WITEAT TALMdt A'01 JOM,O :�.� . ,- R CCN A DOCUMENT REVIEW SITE INFORMATION _ �L�. 07.Ae FROM THE POWMARU UOMF OFFICE: WASHINGTON COUNTY,OR ,.I ' , ^ EXISTING NESOENCE TO REMwv 1, MAC SOUINFAST ON N:N.DBMV000 RD TOWARD AXCRVATW 7. TUM rotoGM ONTO 1E V15TN AN'.10.6M ."_.-•.-.-.•.•_..---.-"-'--'--_.v _ 1 I /,I I RF^1F WAI. DATE 12/31/15 D, TURN RIGHT ONTO WE SANDY "Von I M) UN NA. < A TLER ONTO rE IMMO AYE.ag W .r 0. SLIGHT RICHTDmD 'HE NS"10 W 107 Ln I • - RNBt1 TME: LWROF ONTO IJAW W AR) •-'.'- lYy I TME EXIT ON LEFT TOWARD BEAVERMNIMALEM IDA MR SERMON 143(1,1M ' I - TITLE SHEET 1. NEEPRIdnATCDITttOSTAFDNI.R!I4.3W,, 1D. TARFENERM>ONTOOR09WSN,1'1VARD,R',AR2-'Ml) & OVERALL ,. nMRtt ONTO OT.0S WALMSIR91M 0.w @7 A91 ,.yam R r R 12. T1aN NONI d1T04W WALM/T ST lta HT1 `V 1'. DESRNATV*M.L BE ON LEFT AFTER TY IAM%KET EST. OFTI,� i T I W SITE PLAN yy1E tK r TIME O,MHS. 651.MILE",, T1AO - 1� j' WITWMFR: T-1 DRIVING DIRECTIONS LOCATOR MAP N,S OVERALL SITE PLAN .ff � W. WALNUT STREET I�' "" °c -liT ..Mobile- nW NE ALDERWOOD ROAD ---111---_ PORTLAND.OR Y7220 /l I PHONE:(xa)e134000 It FAX:IWatns-aa+R /l i �/ rRoxc*RnaRwA,aR: P001235C • 77 e— — M . .M. �.a..."..a WALNUT a .a• �' . - .._. • ADJACOff TO ClRD SW 7!/IN AVE - -.`'�_..__ _�._ _ • ® O m..' ; • .Yom_ ' TIWM OR w= wnT aneaee • �" �- "'-�. � � � 1eEA M.w �* row:m AYR r C _�ft MW WAk"OLL y Ov'r .Re e..weraP++mRrm,mw,N ane 6 N c.s vuvr O cnuu.fiTR :MrnwE wwew+.u"•"�ura�w,n. > "+a my '`'� rct,M:aus,e¢ wRRweewn,.a c..rR. N �� nAre.PRPRReo"v: •CR••0.E ® COYWMCATdfS YAILi f E2 MRP MCtfP LJ ,n r rReerstvw men rzm- - "•• <...»....� 148 R CON� "i7' �..�'-• Q' reorymw,u CN i wv,o 4JPVCY PREPA @v RENEWA;. DATE 12/7,1/'5 300' Mal I 51 $TRELT acmr ;1r9CnC.Do DJi J. RLe: (503))5.7N-'tW Com EXISTING — CONDITIONS V-1 E SnNGCONDMONS „x•tru�r.m ma5xer•m ..',65 oRAWluc n[OR rtFAR%f ArX PURPOMS OM.Y TM9M POLEL FOP PFPRF6FNTATIGNAt P,/RWYSFa DILY UILM'V P2LEAaTRUCTUPAI NORA DY CT,F.RS • Ult"POLC ISTRJ MALL'AMVOTHERS TD A,CN ,Eao ,, •T•••Mobile• 72-O hCL= TfN` ANiF.NNAS 0_�, 9960 HE ALDEMiY100D ROAD 7T-10 hCL 2 ANTENNA RAD-CEN in 01, PORTLAND.OR 97220 69'-'ACL t T PHONE:(56316iMM BOTTOM OF ANTENNAS_Ob FA%:(SD])i26-201/ 86-IO ACL t �T oP ofANIENN�S O.—.� RS-10 AQ t PROJECTNrORMATRTN ANTENNARAS 0-CE1p 6 0., P001235C 1 FRaMi6FO M;AME`8N5 AIO�- 3=15 ACL t ��(121 TNA 106E MdATE0 b1e21E BOTTOM&AE NTENNA$O 4) G NEW26'0 ON 60-'�� 1 P 1. -� WALNUT NEW 3TEP.ON AN NEW WOOD SOP OF POLE 0 uRRV PERE 60-D AGL i ADJACENT TO VW OW 120TH AVE SEE uOLNTING EMS. G7 MAIM OR gym DAR REWO[ OO 121 IT PRT TO Af S,45 V C C EN1 irr cDAv u21�^.'RET CABLES,s LF EACH I I --WN Pfd W AOL WOD0 UTLTT+'POLE TO REMLACMn1PICN AOL NOONLMLLE __-.--- nA,/.WAP C+4 gUWMO MPORYAl1OMt (� T�MSMRWPRlNEM1Ap E!M A4! YAVF11rvb M0Y�.RR'RfdR DFOifty NYI W F M.MMR AAOnFMFAN,tA bNNwD)NRRFNRpD[Y nuP MY�fFPaMNRROYPMP�en, PEAN9 PREPARED RY: F1DSI1Nf.N'Afd iO'WOOfEN P^.:{—� y PRDPOSf7NIR,M51 TORE VTLTTV UTA POLE F2IE:T,ANP C2,dh MOUNTS NEW WLIOC OP!!CMAN._MYMCR,}9PFJP4E Rr Pea QE WfN gym TORE PEP.ACEO TVPIGtT+TO9LE 6 STANDOFF e M1(AP.'TN'i FRAME LOCATE EMING POWER LME. TOf Ft9RMMDFON wfwE EWST9G CONDUCTORS TO BE wpAAA n1Oee rtEN•W�nE ro. ate•RrN Z.ON Pry,L FOUIP TARED COMPXIOR nuMAvavt , Ton .F AG Prn Ysc cax m N d A P fCMZI r'(Mn I _._ _-��5• L1CmuRE: r•- •.._ �•� "_-.COBDIIGTS�i--9 xC' KL 1 I / N:NCW C•A'A"ANiERNt pp��� EMIM TREE TO RfV _ 1 is IgRDM OK W WY'T TALE �V S �� •1 t EOUPIEN'ffeMFT� (Np F%nTMGANLBOr.TO RE -.�,1.� „'. ,� 414g A. 'tet / PLA'rfOR.L1"M. 10—~KT 7 . , .- trxn OM PO M. ro Ntw �� �_ 1A•.mcu.R...Nn LFVF: /'�'" 1 uTtry wood POLE RECON a iOOCROM W tJ11nfT �, / TNG—F TCRFNAN OfC �: ✓ /011,. i t.T e.F PONER 'Ci •P 1. 4T1NO TRANSFORMER EXLSTNC PRonERTr LNC TO --_=a REANN FiR6TPA:AIAR9Ox RFNEWAL i)ATF t"I/St/15 lJ/ TO RElA4N TRANSFORMER OQTTRL[: E%6TIGUKnCAPE AREA N RdW--.�� `<-T�y.i� '�.AJ' t/f�• rO RFuw fh YO fur "J J/1' �r�yµA REVM J/ 3� ELEVATIONS T GAWND IFYEL IOLI T.1r`7d MEET NYERFR: EXISTING ELEVATION =usc-a 1 PROPOSED ELEVATION SCALE 0ti =,SCALE,+M 2 C-1 •T ..Mobile- RM NE ALDERW000 ROAD PORTLAND.OR 47720 PMONE:(103)013.0000 FAX:fS03173&3014 1-CT MFa1w710N: P001235C WALNUT ADJACFMT TO 0840 SW 129TM AVE TIGARD.OR 97223 OA_iP wEL9AB6 .,m, rr wlr+rn \ - i I. � ! \t v OINwM9Mi01SATEIR •1r i �4e�».r.ne.n+w+mn un snr •,wF w,o,.nw�«�arceo r,ec9 PLAwB PRrPA1m9 Bv: . . -- OenCwMy A.,ec1,N, CM Fngm.m+ i I ,AF N WAWgTON siva j �1f03191d1,f'• KN wBA`Au9.L4Y.L19!.R9 .u LCEwBMw[: BOTTOM V tLCdNF,�' MOUNTING LOCA7VIEW30NS LEFT V!W pgpF(�VIEW MMHT VIM TOP VIEW FRONT DOORS OPEN R GON 4 OfC 07. C��\� NOTE: RENEWAL, DATE 12/31/1- A COwORICMNO LNr.M,CFMF9T AN0 WMEL:J ETE BE DVMMEO E+ / OTNERS L 5F10PLEN VX31.3115 MANUFACT9RE015'I"CELL. BMW"ELF: ]. ST'EFLEX SFX31-1 WE10nS 3TA L9i ., GATT MES WE1CA1950 LBS. S. WLLT LOAM SEEEFLEX S 11.3031 wEMMS'300 LBS. OUTDOOR PURCELL CABINETS Xr,EE1 N.„n„B PURCELL SFTE FLEX SFX31.3031 CABINET - C-2 MOTE: TH3 gUWN3 5 FOR 1EPRESEWATIOW1 NRRDSES My •T•..Mobile- L\ - 170S1NG ME WOOD UTLm 1960 ME ALDERWOOD ROAD j 1 POIC PORTLAND.OR 97210 PHONE:(50318134M --nm BOLTS FAX:(503)7354014 PAR 13 L15T --- _ -. 6 mcma 0[ LMF OF APPROXMTF EIXJPMEM IOCATOMlI(TM rRoteT PMrORMAnpe: 1 p OA P001235C POLE MOUNTED 31ML PLATFORM t ' - 9V NkWVV0003RALOPI(THRU WALNUT 9OLT MO NTM SnTEML DESOII - - FOR I.0mm i ..... ........_. _. ADJACENT TO 5M40 BN 119111 AVE 3T OA RILOOAIE I I W W—D 9T'EEL-1 HOARD.OR W= l04 I GRATOO ATTACH®TO q tlFWAVF'OR POW.PLATFORM DAfT R69A9! T Vh.�!p'n MTM i e, - 0MP IM1ALM � - I 17- NRF RMMM 4z J 1 1�. Xb�y Y►IM�A6 EA3 SRA!a FOBNATT pt 12 FT. II A,- It .tea env Mn'Mvwa:r+nM.ieF II „j -- V� PDEwooDDnm - V- I I ?�Yc� naR9 AReweD n! I ��kFl oaP At1,P4 II � O � � nMRu eanm*1 Cw9€^1►�+P _ , I oaMANvcTaI9LRm ..4 II I I Q.[ `gg �3w MO DALWIR®9TElL.BM1 dvsl9MeasT4:m ) wmPR roM M"UEy`'S!LMOVfN 1pIMRIG FLM aRAT9q A7TAdE010 t1CiM9YRC IEYRNC OR MAV RAITORM 0!00 �j NF 149 a 91oe " SFCIIpR REGON 07. —POLE MOIPf!ED 51113 ..., 4y• CUSN\a PUIFOAM BY 1.EWAN:'UR _.::` ��V T` KIT No. SH24161 FOUNNf.M(tHRv 3oT �-`"-` Y 36'01) . 12 FT.CELLSILO urnntTlMm s•3*ELP RENFW AL DATE 11E 00 MIST VOW RAR NU NTT D A MLS O POLE BME1(AS:ROM If 04,10 IMA aIR[T 1tfL[� CANISTER OL • PMM I,•BPIi+n Rero,>nLDY Mqr " - -�� PLATFORM FRONT ELEVATION smEaR > MOUNTING DETAILS a.v11+uM.eeP: C-.3 STEALTH CANISTER DETAIL 1' UTILITY POLE EQUIPMENT MOUNTING PLATFORM scILE ns 2 6 ` -T---Mobile- I , 5960 NE ALD€WWOOD ROAD J� PORTL ANO.OR 97220 iAX:I5031736.7014 9 —1-f ATMN w T ANELA ENM(TVP.) P001235C % � � WALNUT i+ * vwA,ox7uIcRactEtTPART ADJAClNT TO OR!JM 17FM AVE N PAR1Y .V=OR APPROVED EQLNL ! T70ARD.OR QRL7 bw Ott I PN Q 1 N4 Aft.Ptt•.LORr -It 7JMRELFA.E IO+SW RrriL 0-10.P! fcV1^�\j\'{�iEs �'j f �tSllt i IYRpR Oe.�.Mbf. i �� ; 5+10901EOO77Y0 STV%tib Noe B,f L S 6TJ00DE14SA i ,II S➢IIVgNr 51100014007JSFP SR6X,NONoe Rob 1 STlOeDSU57P YI4 N'RR,R RAD CENTER R PAC CCNTTP/2 NDrE9' ,t NW"5CW=&%-a T9lE"nNl1 LWSANIDRNYMWM N01E:10107N M61AEl A[7W:CM -TAOIQTAI6TEWPERPOIZADMTDSMAp1ET.SEMMEU6NOX, NOD WNBER MDAYNOVAC10T WDONT MAMweotNIORMATteNk "NWQVAIF.PROVOM TWOMPPOM NAMA D J5.4b na nu+wo.evwEiRorewMww.t D TO NET THE DEGREE OF DORNTRT,A M TIE CESM NMESONTNE ~ACTURE* LENGN Y1DTN I DEPTN wvR.nn rAUMA nwr+mua6Ao.es• SCISSMORACR MADSECIIRiVM%.NCMkARDWAREPROVOFdANORCTY 'A ,1r dr NPW iW lMa nu6Rl�m�� 31 THE WAMN OF CONNECTORS L VARY EASED ONANTENNA TYPE YPL ,K uw.wiiw, rwn.rt 'a AaAIUTHDIAGRAM 2 ANTENNA i1WITI G DETAIL S sDuU E�TAN1EfW DETAIL P AN er-PAAw Ev sEUE Nr,s. m Sr +sa� td �. _ � MpIWRIN01P1.7MIT `JL4 � F •\ >bsA�r�6 LICEMEURE: ._— ------ _ _ O "u -MCA LIDII MCLU6RACIET eIERV+ :EM1.ryAA<N569a✓14 PICLLOk9��[ 1�t b i '.%" APU•F,5C4 TAF. � MCLUOED SStp J I{ MAN _T M.SNtIFM;tURER .CNO7N A60TN 0[FM ✓ I.. UTACTFFR i LENCTN l NWN DEP'N `J ANORFW 1.^ ar ]P ` NOIM a 'ex a7 44V �T1CdNF,�L+•P 146 '/'rnxALTagaEaar �RRU DETA0.S �/ STANO-0FFNg1NIN6F11F1! g AYOIMIEARL►1IN SVu.E:N.TS. R CON O NODIAF TOWER MOUNTED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS CHART D1�`� V NRMI ACTION OOAMTTv RE34 ' wm I MODEL i OMmMeoM iRomil � CV+�\� mr y I NEW NEI ANTENU(WAD) ANCREWTAIEJDf X16 544t7R5.T 35 D4 RENEWAL DATT '2'3'/", FEW (DI TMA(AWS) ANDREW ETW190V5121A 1DSRE.TY,i.r 74,Eb SHEET SINE!: s j NEW (SI TMA MCS) ANDREW ETW111oV512UD To.7%5.T'X3.7• 14,E to }I ,� NEW (1) CAHRET PURCELL j SFX-31 3YR30'w 13M E6 EQUIPMENT PaE NEW m RRuNOXA I FXFC I 21 XTErS2 Ss1b DETAILS LNOCEL MNER IINOIRfNNO MMOE7 B6pIT --_.-- .........`I .—. E'w,9Cv5�ti�EtS,S39PM NI1lO®_�^wb FEW (7) RRU NCTM FRE 2TX79.Tu 55.1 TIR ANNIFACTUNER LEN(RN NDIN 011N Nr,t v:uRt.r. L ANDREW ox cr ST NEW cm COAX Coy ncoK CR440 45OF UX 0.13EdE T1IA DETAp$ MOUNTING DETAILS T EDUi71ENT CATpN 6NART �BGAIP.:NTa OE-TS-----.._... suulLTAI C-4 •T•..Mobile- 1M Cmftunftn 3-29120201 OFeauFd Based ftdlos for CorAlpww s11d gAD ra ruNO,OR 9M 0 FrM vwiftd FCS Morkslh ]ttnls a.-.)r PHONE:(60.11613= *W Alpha SOCIM 8110WI1 fOI Y F A'NiM} FAX:(M)736-V14 F11mJ RlFOIIWTRIR: 6 7 a s P001235C a a n WALNUT &r' ri A0.NClNf TO 12M0 ON Qifl1 AVE TRMM A OR MM Twti1' Ji1Lc. a 1 tMK 'tlill4 ",tRtta, ew. K .1r�•.a ORAwIlI6 R1FdUAAMN! wxo mC.+•vRIC7•TJ A•.Ol M1Rt rxUIH,R vp,•.f(Mt[R.rtRnY01�•R•LY r�•Ar •wm•nawnx nim it nunRRwYoneai wr.a ruga FREMR6o a,: Sur" / _ _ Don Owhl�q Maee61•a 148 LMI E,glnrA �m u wAuwo*oR siRCEt I wRiu.�o.ami m.. IF111•mail. t1COYRVRE: REGON % •� ,�.,; � • P.ENEWAL GATE 12/31/15 ew[tl inti: RF boaFN F tTF F61/QIQlR9 DESIGN •YMPn.MOA IMaIYFMI�gOI nig$MR Ric111INte iMEET RUYReR: RF-1 NSN CONFIGURATION DIAGRAM SCALEN S AIS-2386 3.A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes):Consent Item Agenda Title: Receive and File: Council Calendar and Council Tentative Agenda Submitted By: Carol Krager,Central Services Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: Consent- Receive and File Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Receive and file the Council Calendar and the Tentative Agenda for future council meetings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST No action is requested; these are for information purposes. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are the Council Calendar and the Tentative agenda for future Council meetings. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A-Receive and File Items Attachments Council Calendar Tentative Agenda MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor& City Council/City Center Development Agency Board FROM: Carol A. Krager, City Recorder RE: Three-Month Council/CCDA Meeting Calendar DATE: October 6,2015 October 6 Tuesday City Center Development Agency—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 8 Thursday Voters Forum—6:00-7:30 p.m. Twality Middle School Commons, 14650 SW 97th Avenue 13* Tuesday Council Business/CCDA Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 16 Friday Council Tailgate- 5:00-6:30 p.m. (before football game,Tigard High Tennis Courts 9000 SW Durham Road 20* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 27* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall November 3 Tuesday City Center Development Agency—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall (ELECTION DAY) 10* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 17* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 24* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall December 1 Tuesday City Center Development Agency—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 15* Tuesday Council Workshop/Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 22* Tuesday Council Training&Groundrules Meeting—5:30-9:30 p.m,Location TBD Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk (*). is\adm\city council\council calendar\3-month calendar word fomiat.doc Meeting Banner El Business Meeting ❑ Study Session 2 Special Meeting Consent agenda 6 Meeting is Full Workshop Meeting ❑ CCD A Meeting City Council Tentative Agenda 10/5/2015 11:01 AM - Updated Form Meeting Submitted �MeetingInbox or # Date B ype ---------------------Title---------------------------- Department Finalized 2036 10/13/2015 Norma Alle AA October 13 2015 Business and CCDA Meeting 207310/13/2015 Norma AlieY7 115 Minutes - Council Liaison Reports ___71city Management 12/22/2014 I 2347 10/13/2015 Lloyd PurdyCCSTUDY 10 Minutes - Tigard Enterprise Zone Expansion with City �rDevelopmen:t :j ommunity 10/05/2015 I of Lake Oswego 235Q 10/13/2015 Steve Martin ACCSTUDY 10 Minutes - Briefing on Two Upcoming IGA's with Metro Public Works 10/05/2015 I for Trail Segments 2371 10/13/2015 Dana Bennett ACCSTUDY 10 Minutes - City Manager Evaluation Criteria and Process City Management Newton L, Asst I Cit Manage 2286 10/13/2015 arol Krager CCBSNS P6 Minutes - Legislative Session Wrap-up City Management Newton L, Asst I City Mana er 2303 10/13/2015 Norma Alley CCBSNS rLegislative 20 Minutes - Develop 2016 Federal and State City Management Newton L, Asst I A enda Cit Manager 2192 10/13/2015 Lloyd PurdyCCBSNS �menclment 25 Minutes - QJ Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Community Pagenstecher G, and Zone Change for Fields Trust IDevelopment JjAssoc Planner 2316 10/13/2015 Carissa CCBSNS 10 Minutes - FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Finance and 10/05/2015 Collins Supplemental Information Services 2344 10/13/2015 Carissa CCBSNS 5 5 Minutes - FY 2016 City Center Development Agency Finance and 10/05/2015 Collins Budget Supplemental Information Services 232910/13/2015 Lisa Shaw CCBSNS 6 10 Minutes - Consideration of Taser purchase contract Police 10/05/2015 I 2379 10/13/2015 Carol Krager CCBSNS 7 10 Minutes - 72nd and Dartmouth Intersection Finance and Info LaFrance T, Improvements Developer Costs Services Fin/Info Svcs Director Er 10/16/2015 O 16, 2015 Tailgate with the Council I . ]= ictober and High School Football Game 5:00-6:30 p.m. is\cit�-,vide\tentagenda\october 5, 2015.docx Meeting Banner ❑ Business Meeting ❑ Study Session § Special Meeting Consent:agenda © Meeting is Full Workshop Meeting ❑ CCDA Meeting City Council Tentative Agenda 10/5/2015 11:01 AM - Updated Form Meeting Submitted Meeting rF�Iiin box or # Date B e ---------------------Title-------- -------------- Department alized _7 2037 10/20/2015 Norma Alley AA October 20 2015 Workshop and Business Meetin 2330 10/20/2015 Buff Brown CCWKSHOP 1 50 Minutes - Tigard Transportation Advisory Community Brown, B., Assoc Committee TTAC / Cit Council Joint Meetin Develo ment rans Planner 2320 10/20/2015 Carissa CCWKSHOP 2 30 Minutes - Discussion on Sidewalk Gap Program Finance and Info Asher, K, Comm Collins Services Dev Dir. 2326 10/20/2015 Norma Alley CCWKSHOP 3 75 Minutes - Discussion on Parks & Recreation Charge Finance and Info Rager B, PW I Services Director 2365 10/20/2015ohn Floyd CCWKSHO 4 30 Minutes - Heritage Crossing Continuation Community McGuire, T, AsstP I � I Development CD Director otal Time: 185 of 180 Minutes Scheduled — MEETING IS OVER SCHEDULED -I 203810/27/2015 Norma Alle AAA October 27 2015 Business MeetingI I 2074 10/27/2015 Norma Alle ACCSTUDY 1 15 Minutes - Council Liaison Reports 11city management 12/22/2014=1 2359 10/27/2015 oseph ACCSTUDY 2 5 Minutes - Discussion on Upcoming Contracts Finance and Info Barrett J, Sr Mgmt I Barrett Services lAnalyst 2312 10/27/2015 JlCarol Krager 13 25 Minutes - Update from Metro Councilor Dirksen Central Services 09/16/2015 I otal Ti 2383 10/27/2oanne CCBSNS 1 5 Minutes - Proclaim Manufacturing Day in Tigard ity Management 09/28/2015 015 I Ben tson 2387 10/27/2015 Carol Krager CCBSNS 2 10 Minutes - Tree for All Award Presentation City ent ManagemKrager C, City I 1 11 Recorder 2322 10/27/2015 udy Lawhead 3 5 Minutes - Briefing on an Agreement with the City of Public Works Rager B, PW I Beaverton Related to Maintenance of Barrows Road Director 2349 10/27/2015 Sherri Russell CCBSNS 4 10 Minutes - Consider a Resolution Concurring with Public Works Barrie, L, Sr. Washington County Findings Regarding Right-of-Way Admin Spec. Vacation of an Unnamed Street 2342 10/27/2015 Lloyd Purdy CCBSNS 5 10 Minutes - Enterprise Zone: Resolution Expanding ommunity ]L Purdy, L, Econ i and Enterprise Zone Develo ment Develo ment M r 21P . c is\cit}�vide\tentagenda\october 5,2015.docx Meeting Banner E3 Business:Meeting ❑ Study Session I Special Meeting Consent agenda © :Meeting is Full Workshop MMeeting ❑ CCD. :Meeting City Council Tentative Agenda 10/5/2015 11:01 AM - Updated Form Meeting Submitted Meeting �jnbox or # Date B e ------------------"--Title---------------------------- Departmentinalized 2364 10/27/2015 Laura Barrie CCBSNS 6 30 Minutes - First Quarter CIP Council UpdatePublic Works lZmin rrie, L, Sr. Spec. otal Time: 70 of 100 Minutes Scheduled a2 1 Norma Alley AA November 3, 2015 CCDA Meeting - ELECTION NIGHT 11/03/2015 Ma or Cook Absent I I 2134 11/03/2015 Sean Farrelly CCDA 1 20 Minutes - Downtown Housing Inventory and Report Community Farrelly S, Redev I Development jProject Mana er 2135 11/03/2015 Sean Farrelly CCDA 2 20 Minutes - Downtown Jobs Inventory and Report Community Farrelly S, Redev I Develo ment �Project Manager 2127 11/03/2015 Sean Farrelly CCDA 3 25 Minutes - Future of Saxony Site - Update Community Farrelly S, Redev I Development Project Mana er F,-,---- -1111/03/2015 Sean Farrelly CCDA 4 20 Minutes - Brownfield Initiative Update Community Farrelly S, Redev I IDevelopment Protect Manager otal Time: 85 of 180 Minutes Scheduled - MEETING IS CLOSED I 2C?9 11/10/2015 Norma Alle AAA November 10 2015 Business Meeting 2075 11/10/2015 JINorma Allev 71CCSTUDY 1 15 Minutes - Council Liaison Reports 11city Mgt 12/22/Z014 I 2310 11/10/2015 udy Lawhead CCSTUDY 2 10 Minutes - Briefing on an Agreement with MetroPublic Works 08/26/2015 I lRegardinga Grant to DevelopDirksen Nature Park 2357 11/10/2015oseph CCSTUDY 3 20 Minutes - Discussion on Upcoming Contracts Finance and Info Zalyst rrett J, Sr Mgmt I Barrett ervices - Time: SESSION I 2323 11/10/2015 Sherri Russell CCBSNS 1 10 Minutes - Consider Authorizing the City Manager to Public Works Rager B, PW Sign an Agreement with Beaverton Related to Director Maintenance of Barrows Road FnI11/10/2015 oseph CCBSNS 2 10 Minutes - Contract Award Dirksen Nature Park Finance and!nElyst rett J, Sr Mgmt Barrett Environmental Education Center & PathwayIm rovement Services 31 Pi ,, c is\citS-.vide\tentagenda\october 5, 2015.docx Meeting Banner d Business sleeting ❑ Study Session ® Special Meeting Consent_agenda Meeting is Full Workshop Meeting ❑ CCDA Meeting City Council Tentative Agenda 10/5/2015 11:01 AM - Updated For Meeting Submitted Meeting Inbox or # Date B eF ------"-"---------Title---------------------------- Department Finalized 2381 11/10/2015 ohn Floyd CCBSNS IC: rossing 20 Minutes - Tentative Continuance Date for Heritage Community Floyd J, Associate I Development Planner a2382 11/10/2015 Lisa Shaw CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Update to Chronic Nuisance Property Police Shaw L, Police Ordinance TMC 7.42 Business Manager III 2389 11/10/2015 Judy Lawhead CCBSNS 5 10 Minutes - Briefing on an IGA with the Oregon Public Works McCarthy M, Department of Transportation for Design and St./Trans Sr. Proj Construction of New Sections of Fanno Cr. Trail En 2368 11/10/2015 Dana Bennett CCBSNS 6 15 Minutes - City Manager Evaluation Criteria and City Management Bennett, D, HR I Process Adoption Director 2375 11/10/2015 Lloyd Purdy CCBSNS 7 15 Minutes - Intent to Pursue Grant Funding Community Purdy, L, Econ I Develo ment IDevelopment M r otal Time: 95 of 100 Minutes Scheduled 2040 11/17/2015 Norma Alley:]� AA November 17 2015 Workshop Meeting 2338 11/17/2015 Steve Martin CCWKSHO 1 50 Minutes - Joint Meeting with the Park and blic Works Martin S, Division I Recreation AdvisoryPu Board Mana er 2327 11/17/2015 Norma Alley CCWKSHO 2 60 Minutes - Continued Discussion on Parks & Finance and Info LaFrance T, Recreation Charge Services Fin/Info Svcs Director 2325 11/17/2015 CarissaCCWKSHO 3 20 Minutes - Continued Discussion on the Sidewalk Finance and Info Collins C, Sr Mgmt Collins lGap Program Services nal st 2167 11/17/2015 Lloyd Purdy CCWKSHO 20 Minutes - Economic Development Update Community Purdy, L, Econ 1 1Develo ment IlDevelopment M r 11 2363 11/17/2015 Liz Hormann CCWKSHO 5 30 Minutes - Safe Routes to School Update 1community Hormann L, SRTS I Develo ment IlProgram Coord 2041 11/24 2015 Norma Alle AA November 24 2015 Business Meeting 2076 11/24/20-175 INorma Alle CCSTUDY 1 15 Minutes - Council Liaison Reports ity Mana ement 12 22 2014 4 1 P ;i 'L_ c is\citywide\tentagenda\october 5, 2015.docx Meeting Banner C1 Business Meeting ❑ Study Session Special Meeting Consent:agenda ❑ Meeting is Full Workshop Meeting ❑ CCD. Meeting City Council Tentative Agenda 10/5/2015 11:01 AM - Updated Form Meeting Submitted Meeting Inbox or # Date B e ----"----------------Title------------------------- Department Finalized a�2388 11/24/2015 Mike Lueck CCSTUDY 2 10 Minutes - Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Mandated Public Works Rager B, PW �5 year Review �JlDirector 2384 11/24/2015 Dennis ACCSTUDY 3 20 Minutes - Briefing on Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Public Works Koellermeier D, Koellermeier Partnership Activities LOT Water Proj Coord 2311 11/24/2015 Judy Lawhead CCBSNS 1 10 Minutes - Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Public Works Staedter C, Project Agreement with Metro Regarding a Grant to Develop Coordinator Dirksen Nature Park 2390 11/24/2015 Judy Lawhead CCBSNS 2 10 Minutes - Consider Authorizing the City Manager to Public Works McCarthy M, Sign an IGA with ODOT for Design and Construction of St/Trans Sr Proj New Sections of the Fanno Creek Trail En 2378 11/24/2015 Joseph CCBSNS 3 10 Minutes - Contract Award - Street Sweeping Finance and Barrett J, Sr Mgmt Barrett Services Information Analyst Services 1758 11/24/201511Carol Krager CCBSNS 15 Minutes - PLACEHOLDER - Google Franchise City Management Mills L, Asst to I reement 11 lCityManager 2380 11/24/2015 Norma Alley CCBSNS 5 10 Minutes - Update on the Strategic Plan City Management Wyatt K, Management Analyst otal Time: 55 of 100 Minutes Scheduled 2142 12/01/2015 Norma Alle AA December 1 2015 CCDA Meeting —�I I 2125 12/01/2015 Sean Farrell y CCDA 15 Minutes - Fanno Creek Overlook Update Community IFarrelly S, Redev I Development Project Manager 2136 12/01/2015 Sean Farrell y CCDA 45 Minutes - Annual Report on the Urban Renewal District Community Farrelly S, Redev I Development Project Manager otal Time: 60 of 180 Minutes Scheduled I 5 P � r�. is\citywide\tentagenda\october 5, 2015.docx Meeting Banner ❑ Business Fleeting ❑ Study Session ❑ Special Meeting Consent:agenda ❑ Meeting is Full Workshop Meeting; ❑ CCDA Meeting City Council Tentative Agenda 10/5/2015 11:01 AM -Updated Form Meeting ubmitted Meeting ------------- _------Title---------------------------- Department nbox or # Date By Type Finalized 2042 12/08/2015 Norma Alle AA December 8, 2015 Business Meeting 2077 12/08/2015 JINorma Alle CCSTUDY 15 Minutes - Council Liaison Reports lCity Mgt 12/22/2014 2369 12/08/2015 Dana Benne 130 Minutes - ORS 192.660 (2)(i) Executive Session Cit—Mgt 09/14/2015 otal : iftes Schedul . SESSION IS FULL 2353 12/08/2015 Liz Lutz CCBSNS 1 5 Minutes - Appoint Audit Committee Members Finance and Info �sst utz L, Conf Exec Services 2354 12/08/2015 Liz Lutz CCBSNS 2 5 Minutes - Appoint Budget Committee Members Finance and Info Lutz L, Conf Exec Services Vksst 2358 12/08/2015 oseph CCBSNS 3 10 Minutes - Contract Award - Utility Billing Mailing Finance and Info Barrett ], Sr Mgmt Barrett Services Services nal st 2324 12/08/2015 Larissa CCBSNS 15 Minutes - Info. PH: Sidewalk Gap Program Finance and Info Collins C, Sr Mgmt I Collins ervices nal st 2293 12/08/2015 Norma Alley CCBSNS 5 20 Minutes - Placeholder - Update on Homelessness City Management Newton L, Asst 1 1 Cit Mana er —11 otal Time: 55 of 100 Minutes Scheduled ----F-- — --- 2043 12/15/2015 Norma Alley AAA P December 15 2015 Workshop Meeting I 12/22/20December 22, 2015 Council Training I E 15Location TBD from 5:30-9:30 p.m. 6 1 1' a c is\citywide\tentagenda\october 5, 2015.docx q MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Honorable Mayor& City Council/City Center Development Agency Board FROM: Carol A. Krager, City Recorder RE: Three-Month Council/CCDA Meeting Calendar DATE: October 6, 2015 October 6 Tuesday City Center Development Agency—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 8 Thursday Voters Forum—6:00-7:30 p.m.Twality Middle School Commons, 14650 SW 97th Avenue 13* Tuesday Council Business/CCDA Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 16 Friday Council Tailgate- 5:00-6:30 p.m. (before football game,Tigard High Tennis Courts 9000 SW Durham Road 20* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 27* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall November 3 Tuesday City Center Development Agency—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall (ELECTION DAY) 10* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 17* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 24* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall December 1 Tuesday City Center Development Agency—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 15* Tuesday Council Workshop/Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 22* Tuesday Council Training&Groundrules Meeting—5:30-9:30 p.m.,Fanno Creek House 13335 SW Hall Boulevard Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk (*). is\adm\city council\council calendar\3-month calendar word format.doc AIS-2391 3. B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes):Consent Item Agenda Title: Approve City Council Meeting Minutes Submitted By: Carol Krager,Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Public Hearing: Publication Date: Information ISSUE Approve City Council meeting minutes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve minutes as submitted. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached council minutes are submitted for City Council approval: •September 8,2015 •September 15,2015 *September 22,2015 OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments September-8,2015 Draft Council Minutes September 15,2015 Draft Council Minutes September 22,2015 Draft Council Minutes Citgo of Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes September 8, 2015 STUDY SESSION Council Present: Mayor Cook, Councilor Woodard, Councilor Henderson, Councilor Goodhouse,and Council President Snider Staff Present: City Manager Wine,Assistant City Manager Newton, City Attorney Ramis, City Recorder Krager,Parks Manager Martin,Assistant Community Development Director McGuire, and Associate Planner Floyd Mayor Cook called the study session to order at 6:30 p.m. A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Councilor Henderson said the Tigard Youth Advisory Council members will host a chalk walk activity at the Downtown Tigard Street Fair. The youth are publicizing and coordinating it. Councilor Goodhouse reported on a Westside Economic Alliance meeting. He also reported on a Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee (TTAC) meeting and said a loan from the Gas Tax Fund is required to begin the Wall Street planning. Mayor Cook attended a Washington County Coordinating Committee (WCCC) meeting where the proposed list of Transportation Development Tax (TDT) projects was amended. The Roy Rogers Road widening project was included. The Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP) planning for the next round beginning in 2019 will start earlier than usual. There is $35 million annually for five years available and Tigard will be submitting projects for inclusion on the list. B. RECEIVE LAND USE PROCESS BRIEFING City Attorney Ramis gave a refresher on the quasi-judicial public hearing process. He said once the hearing winds down, five things need to get managed in a coordinated way. 1) The 120-day clock cannot be exceeded and staff will keep council apprised of this date. There may be a request for a waiver depending on what the city wants to accomplish. 2) A final statement by staff is needed so council can ask questions and staff can comment on the evidence. At the close of oral testimony staff loses any opportunity to comment further unless council reopens TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 1 of 12 the record. 3) The applicant has the burden of proof so they have the right to give the last word. They can do this by filing a final written submission. No evidence is allowed after this. 4) Council deliberates to reach a decision. 5) Findings are adopted describing the decision. City Attorney Ramis said these five things usually need to happen in a short timeframe. Mr. Ramis said once the record is closed council enters deliberation to determine their decision, but could also elect to reopen the record if they think there is additional information or a different option needed. This requires a meeting notice and is a new opportunity for people to comment. He referred to the Heritage Crossing quasi-judicial public hearing on the agenda later in this meeting and stated there is a request that council reopen the record. He recommended that if council decides tonight to reopen the record,it be done well before deliberation because there is no point in deliberating and then deciding to reopen. City Attorney Ramis said the specific request by the applicant tonight is that council reopen the record to consider a map showing a compromise proposal. This map is not before council so he was speaking generally,not specifically, but said it suggests a compromise and partial zone change. If council is interested in adding this to the record and deliberating about it, they will need to motion to reopen the record and work with staff to select a date for a continued hearing which will need to be noticed. The applicant in this case has offered to pay for the notice. The continued hearing would be specifically targeted on this compromise,but everyone who has testified has the opportunity to testify again on the issues raised by staff. The final point is adoption of findings. Mayor Cook clarified that this would not go back through the Planning Commission. Councilor Henderson asked why it would not and City Attorney Ramis said it was reasonable to characterize this as a proposal for conditions,but Council could decide that this change is so substantially different or extreme that they want to remand it back to the Planning Commission or ask the applicant to do a new application. The city code is silent on this subject so it is up to council. Regarding findings,City Attorney Ramis said council should make their decision tentative subject to reviewing findings submitted by staff for review and adoption. Usually the prevailing party is consulted because they have the burden to defend the findings if the case goes to the Land Use Board of Appeals. He said if a land use application is approved, the city's position is that it is the applicant's burden to defend it, so for that reason it is fair to allow them substantial input into what the findings say. Staff reviews the findings to make sure they do not set a bad precedent or are at odds with the city's code. City Attorney Ramis described the outline for the hearing tonight. There will be a brief staff report which will be a short statement on the status of the case,a call for disclosures and conflicts, a brief attorney procedural statement since testimony guidelines are not needed,and council deliberation. He said if anyone on council wished to reopen the record, the logical point to do that is at the deliberation stage. Councilor Woodard said the process was confusing and City Attorney Ramis agreed it is not typical to have the applicant come in with new evidence after the record and hearing are closed. He said council could elect to deliberate and make a decision tonight on the evidence already in TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER S, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 2 of 12 the record. If they want to see the new evidence the hearing must be continued, the record opened for the new evidence and an opportunity allowed for everyone to hear the new information and testify on the case. City Manager Wine said the purpose of having the city attorney discuss this with council was to receive generic information on what council should do when it comes time to deliberate on a quasi-judicial land use matter. Staff wishes to formalize the steps so the process is smoother in the future. C. UPDATE ON YOUTH SPORTS LEAGUE AGREEMENTS Assistant City Manager Newton introduced this item and acknowledged former Tigard Little League (TLL) President Kim Kelleher,who has been helping with the process,and was present tonight. Ms. Newton said she spoke with Southside Soccer just prior to this meeting. She will loop back with their representative one more time but the agreement has already been distributed to their board and no comments were received. She praised both league representatives for their thoughtful comments and commitment. She said staff and the leagues have reached agreement on some key assumptions and these are listed in the staff report Ms. Newton said the TLL had some suggestions and she covered these briefly. She said in her 35 years with the city there was a period where park staff was cut back to one employee. Public Works parks staff are concerned that if that unlikely event happened again the city would be in the position where the fields might not be maintained and the agreement would need to be terminated. She said both Southside and Little League understand that the city would not necessarily want to terminate the agreement but might need to until things recovered. Councilor Henderson asked if an arbitrator would be used in that instance. Ms. Newton replied that when this happened before,the city had a plan and that was to go out for a levy. The levy passed so there was just a nine-month period where the city did not have the funding to maintain the fields for league use. It would be a budget/council decision. Their second concern is about the term of the agreement. TLL suggested that the term be for an initial 15 years with the option for two renewals rather than an initial ten years with three renewals. Early discussions with council showed a preference for ten years but she did not know if this was a deal breaker and asked for feedback. The last concern is that the agreement allowed 14 days to cure the breach if there is a violation in the contract. TLL pointed out they are working with volunteers so more time may be needed. City Attorney Rihala suggested 30 days and TLL requested 60. Ms. Newton requested that council decide. Councilor Woodard said he was not present when this was first discussed and he had some concerns. He asked why other leagues would not have these same opportunities when the ten- year period passes. He said the term goes above and beyond what would be fair compensation. Ten years is fair but he had problems with qualifying statements and challenges that might come from other leagues. The two leagues are paying for their own operations but the taxpayers might take the position that their taxes are paying for wear and tear on the fields. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 12 Council President Snider asked if another league met the qualifications if there was anything that would stop the city from forming a similar agreement with them for city facilities.Ms. Newton said that was true. Mayor Cook said they would need to bring in some capital for improving a field for him to support this. Council President Snider said he did not think the termination wording was needed in the case of a dire financial issue with the city.He suggested a middle-ground where they can use the field but the city does not guarantee the field condition. He said terminating the agreement for a few months and then restarting it when a levy is passed is not logical. Ms. Newton said staff is taking on the responsibility for making sure the field is safe for children to play on. Councilor Goodhouse suggested instead of termination in a dire financial time for the city, the agreement could state that the users would need to maintain the field so it does not deteriorate too much in the time it takes the city to recover and take over maintenance again. Councilor Henderson said there was a communication problem between the leagues and the city and the cure was an annual meeting. He asked if just one meeting each year was adequate and would there be more if an issue develops. City Manager Wine said that scenario is covered in Section 16 Dispute Resolution. Mayor Cook said alternate language as suggested by Councilors Snider and Goodhouse was fine with him for the first question. He said a 15-year term was good and after serving on these boards, he understands the leagues' desire for 60 days to cure a contract breach. Councilor Goodhouse and Council President Snider agreed with the 60 days and a 15-year term. Councilor Woodard said he preferred a ten year term. He asked for, and Assistant City Manager Newton said she will provide, the calculations from the Finance Department on the property contribution payments made by the leagues. Ms. Newton said she will incorporate this feedback into the league agreements and they will come to council for consideration on September 22. D. RECEIVE UPDATE ON TIGARD/BEAVERTON IGA FOR JOINT LAND PARTITION Assistant Community Development Director McGuire directed council to a map showing a parcel of land that straddles Scholls Ferry Road and is located partially within both Tigard and Beaverton. West Hills Development Corporation has purchased the property and wishes to partition it into two parcels north of Scholls Ferry Road located in the Beaverton City limits, and one parcel south of Scholls Ferry Road located within the Tigard city limits. Mr. McGuire said an IGA between Beaverton and Tigard will provide an efficient approach to achieve this partition.Beaverton would have primary authority and will use their development code process in their portion and Tigard's development code for the area south of Scholls Ferry Road. Beaverton will prepare a staff report for Tigard to review and then they will approve the entire partition. Council President Snider asked if it is a recommended practice for a city to approve another city's land use action. City Attorney Ramis said it is allowed in TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 4 of 12 the intergovernmental agreement section of the statute and it is his recollection that this was done with Tualatin previously for the Bridgeport Village shopping center. City Manager Wine said the IGA would be on a future council consent agenda. Administrative Items: Assistant City Manager Newton asked if council would be available on January 28 for the winter outreach Town Hall at Summerfield. The Study Session ended at 7:27 p.m. 10 U 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. At 7:34 p.m. Mayor Cook called to order the meeting of the Tigard City Council and Local Contract Review Board. B. City Recorder Krager called the roll. Present Absent Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ C. Mayor Cook asked everyone to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Mayor Cook asked Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items. None. 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication— None. B. Tigard High School Student Envoy— Associated Student Body President Shaina Azbari reported on recent and upcoming activities at Tigard High School. A staff breakfast hosted annually by the class presidents was held on August 31. The Powerhouse Coffee Shop began operations, raising money for various entities. Today was Freshmen Orientation, hosted by the Link Crew. There are over 500 freshmen this year and over 160 upper classmen volunteered to help to make their first day of high school an easier adjustment. An Open Table cultural event, educating students on different cultures and uniting them with food will be held on September 21 at the Commons. Homecoming is scheduled on October 2 for the game and parade with the dance on October 3. The theme this year is "Night under the Big Top."The October 9 football game will be a"pink out" supporting breast cancer research,raising money and awareness for the Susan G. Komen Foundation. Mayor Cook said he was impressed with TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 5 of 12 the number of students attending the first football game even though school had not begun for the year. C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce—Tigard Chamber CEO Monahan will give an update at the September 22 meeting. D. Citizen Communication— U Zachery Dean, 7814 SW Cedarcrest Street,Tigard, OR, said he was elected as the new Tigard Youth Advisory Council (TYAC) president and is looking forward to helping out the council and the city. TYAC will be helping at the Downtown Tigard Street Fair with the chalk walk. Anyone can participate and will be assigned a space on the Burnham Street sidewalk to show off their artistic skills with chalk. Mayor Cook noted that the Tigard Downtown Street Fair is from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday, September 12,with food, beer garden,wine, booths and entertainment. Councilor Henderson noted that people will have an opportunity to meet Tigard's newest police dog, Diesel. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council and Local Contract Review Board) — A. RECEIVE AND FILE: 1. Council Calendar 2. Council Tentative Agenda for Future Meeting Topics B. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: July 14, 2015 Minutes C. AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH CLEAN WATER SERVICES AND BEAVERTON REGARDING BARROWS ROAD SANITARY SEWER PHASE 3 Council President Snider moved for approval of the Consent Agenda. Councilor Woodard seconded the motion. Yes No Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Mayor Cook announced that the Consent Agenda was approved unanimously. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 6 of 12 4. CONTINUATION OF QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING—APPEAL OF HERITAGE CROSSING ZONE CHANGE AND SUBDIVISION (ZON2015- 00002/SUB2015-00001/VAR2015-00001) a. IJ Mayor Cook announced that tonight's council deliberations are to focus on the appeal filed by the applicant. Final written arguments were due on July 28,2015 and the record and hearing are closed. There will be a statement by the city attorney regarding procedures. b. City Attorney Ramis said because the proceedings are at the point of deliberation he could dispense with going over testimony guidelines because no testimony will be taken tonight. C. Mayor Cook asked if any members of Council wished to report any exparte contact or information gained outside the hearing,including any site visits. Councilor Goodhouse said he runs and drives by the site daily. Council President Snider said he lives in the neighborhood and has been paying more attention to the area and the density. Councilor Woodard said he walks by the site. Councilor Henderson related that he has admired the site for years. Mayor Cook said some people came to a National Night Out event and asked if they could talk to him about this and he said no,it was in a quasi- judicial process and they respected that and they did not discuss it. Mayor Cook asked if all members had familiarized themselves with the application and no one said they had not. He asked if there were any challenges from the audience pertaining to the council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or if there was a challenge on the participation of any member of the council. There were none stated. d. Mayor Cook called for final remarks by staff. Associate Planner Floyd said this is a proposal for a concurrent zone change and subdivision. The zone change would convert 9.1 acres of land from R-12 to R-7. The site is located on Hall Boulevard just north of the intersection on Durham Road. On July 14,2015, staff and the applicant both made presentations regarding the three approval criteria. This is before council on appeal from the Planning Commission's decision to deny the request. On July 14, after staff and the applicant made presentations regarding the three approval criteria, council took oral and written testimony from the public and closed the record with one exception. The applicant was allowed to provide final written argument by July 28,2015. The applicant met the deadline and provided their argument which is in the staff report before council. Staff had no comment on the argument. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 7 of 12 Mr. Floyd said the city council is obligated to make a decision within 120 days of the application being deemed complete. The 120 days expired on July 23, 2015. The applicant provided an extension until tonight. Council must make a decision to uphold the Planning Commission decision, overturn the decision, or reopen the record to consider new evidence,which will require re-noticing the project. City Attorney Ramis concurred with the staff remarks. e. Mayor Cook asked if council had any questions or comments before consideration of a motion. Councilor Goodhouse moved to reopen the record. Mayor Cook asked for the reason and Councilor Goodhouse responded, "for additional information." Council President Snider seconded the motion. He added that he was prepared to make a decision tonight and is always troubled by late in the game information but he understands the applicant has additional information that may be a compromise. He said he did not want to stifle a compromise and would prefer to make a motion,but without even knowing what it is, can support the general concept that there might be a better way for everyone. Councilor Woodard said he was also concerned to learn that there is additional information but he cannot know what it is at this point. He said he agreed with reopening the record. He said he also was prepared to make a decision but this got him curious and he does not want to feel like he is blinded in any area so he agreed with opening the record. Council President Snider asked City Attorney Ramis to clarify the process. City Attorney Ramis said it made sense for the staff to determine what hearing schedule dates might be available, select one, ask the applicant if they are willing to extend to that date,and then put that in the record. Associate Planner Floyd said staff had not received an official submittal of a compromise solution and in terms of noticing,would need four weeks lead time in order to satisfy requirements for newspaper publication and mailing notification to the neighbors. The absolute soonest date would be October 6,2015,provided the applicant could provide materials tomorrow. He said staff would feel more comfortable with mid-October. He asked the city recorder what dates were available and asked if council had a preference regarding their availability. City Manager Wine said if council is willing to hold a combined business and workshop meeting they could meet on October 20 or after that, the October 27 business meeting. Councilor Woodard noted he was unavailable on October 27. Associate Planner Floyd said the October 20`h date is within the 245-day maximum extension period. City Attorney Ramis said applicant's counsel indicated to him that they would be agreeable to an extension to the 120-day clock to a date that is two weeks beyond the date of the hearing in order to provide an opportunity to prepare adoption findings. He said they will put that in writing. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.dgard-or.gov Page 8 of 12 Mayor Cook asked if there was any additional discussion. Council President Snider asked if council would be hearing the additional information tonight and City Attorney Ramis said there will be a hearing on the date set, council will receive a staff report and will consider the evidence taken that night. Councilor Goodhouse and Council President Snider withdrew their motion and second. Mayor Cook moved to continue the hearing to the date certain of October 20 and reopen the record,give the public notice that they will be able to comment, extend the 120-day rule to two weeks from the October 20 date to give time for hearing procedures. Councilor Woodard seconded the motion. There was no further discussion. Yes No Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Mayor Cook announced that the motion passed unanimously. 5. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING—CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE APPROVING CENTURYLINK FRANCHISE AGREEMENT a. Mayor Cook opened the public hearing. b. Staff Report: Network Administrator Sears introduced Metropolitan Area Communications Commission Administrator Fred Crist. Mr. Crist said there is a unanimous recommendation from MACC for a CenturyLink cable franchise in the Tigard area and four other MACC jurisdictions. He said it is a franchise similar to Comcast in that they wish to roll out a cable TV service but it would only be for the small area where they are currently providing telecommunications service,in north and northeast Tigard near Highway 217. The term is just five years in order to inspire additional build out. C. Public Testimony- No one signed up to speak d. Council Discussion and Questions—There were none. e. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. f. Council Discussion and Consideration TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 9 of 12 Councilor Woodard moved to approve Ordinance No. 15-14. Councilor Henderson seconded the motion. There being no further discussion,Mayor Cook asked City Recorder Krager to read the number and title of the ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 15-14—AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVE CABLE FRANCHISE TO QWEST BROADBAND SERVICES,INC. D/B/A CENTURYLINK City Recorder Krager conducted a roll-call vote. Yes No Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Motion passed unanimously. 6. RECEIVE UPDATE FROM GREATER PORTLAND INC. ON REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Manager Purdy introduced Greater Portland Inc. (GPI)Vice President Derek Olson who was present to give a report on GPI and their services. 19 Mr. Olson gave an overview of GPI's services and their work plan. They are a regional public/private partnership that came together for three core functions: marketing, recruitment, and retention/expansion. Their territory is bi-state and they approach what is beneficial for the region as a whole. He noted that companies looking for a location look at regions first and once a decision is made, GPI helps them focus on specific areas based on land availability and other factors. The GPI work plan is Uniting Regionally to Compete Globally. They build cross-border and cross-sector collaboration that leverages the region's assets, engages leadership and aligns efforts to compete in the global market. They develop best practices and other efforts to show cities how to grow and develop their economy. Their Stay and Grow in Greater Portland effort develops tools and services that support local community partners in their ongoing efforts to retain and grow existing traded-sector companies in the region. Work is focused on bread and butter industries to retain them. They do not control incentives but piece together taxes, etc. Choose Greater Portland creates targeted awareness of the regional value proposition as a place for businesses. They re-launched their website and targeted the Silicon Valley with TIGA.RD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 www.dgard-or.gov Page 10 of 12 advertising. Their website is new and designed for those not familiar with the region. It is targeted for site selectors and Tigard helped pioneer this focus. Research and analysis has been expanded,with information on comparative costs,utilities and taxes. Mr. Olson said GPI can also do modeling of what additional jobs would do for an area. This is information a city might use to develop incentives. Economic Development Manager Purdy said site selection for the state does not zero in on Tigard. GPI shares inquiries with his real estate professionals and if there seems to be a fit, that connection is made.When communities collaborate it is better for the region as a whole. Councilor Henderson asked who the biggest competitor to the Portland area is. Mr. Olson said they look at who we are compared to and also with what cities they would like to be compared to. He mentioned Salt Lake City and Austin but not Seattle so much. San Francisco area companies are looking at the Portland area for expansion. Companies are looking for access to Asia and that is why GPI partners with the ports of Vancouver and Portland. One area that is a strength and also a weakness is that wages are lower here;we are a cost competitive large metro area in the west coast states. Our software industry is up and coming. There are workforce challenges but many of our competitors face the same thing. In response to a question about the Port of Portland losing its container business,Mr. Olson said that was a negative but the container business was always a small part of the Port's business. Most exports were already going through Seattle,Long Beach or by air. It does impact some in this region such as hay and other agricultural products. Because other Portland competitors are land-locked, such as Cincinnati and Salt Lake,it is a loss but not a crippling one. The port leaders are working hard to replace it. For some,air cargo is more important than sea cargo and the PDX airport is doing well. Mayor Cook said he appreciates GPI's effort to help cities retain businesses. Mr. Olson said it is also about growing trust and building relationships with businesses and they hope to do even more in those areas. Mayor Cook gave Mr. Olson a city of Tigard pin. 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION -None 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS - None 9. ADJOURNMENT At 8:39 p.m. Councilor Woodard moved for adjournment. Council President Snider seconded the motion and all voted in favor. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 11 of 12 Yes No Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ City Recorder Carol A. Krager Attest: Mayor John L. Cook Date: TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 12 of 12 o City o .,Tigyard Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes September 15, 2015 1. BUSINESS/WORKSHOP MEETING—September 15, 2015 A. At 6:33 p.m. Mayor Cook called the meeting of the Tigard City Council to order B. City Recorder Krager called the roll. Present Absent Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook ✓ C. Mayor Cook asked everyone to stand and join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Mayor Cook called to council and staff for any Non-Agenda Items. City Manager Wine said she had an item to present at the end of the meeting. 2. PROCLAIM PLAY BALL MONTH&HONOR TIGARD/TUALATIN CITY LITTLE LEAGUE TEAM IR Mayor Cook proclaimed September as Play Ball Month and honored the Tigard/Tualatin City Little League Team and their coaches and manager. Mayor Cook said when attending the United States Council of Mayors Conference in June he heard about a joint initiative from the U.S. Council of Mayors and Major League Baseball.Tigard joined many other cities to promote sports activities (baseball and softball). Mayor Cook said the Tigard-Tualatin City Softball Team represents Oregon District 4 and is a majors division of 11-12 year olds. The city recognizes them for making it to the World Series. He commended them for their goodwill and sportsmanship and noted that Fusion is the team name because they are two leagues joined together. Manager Steve Dardis,and Coaches Howard Hoyle and Steve Harms were present with many of the team members. Mayor Cook presented the manager and coaches with baseballs and a city pin and the players with t-shirts and city pins. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 www.dgard-or.gov Page 1 of 6 3. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance led the discussion and was joined by Streets and Transportation Senior Project Engineer McCarthy. He reviewed the history of the street maintenance fee program. He said the focus tonight would be on how council's policy direction from January and March,2015 was included in proposed changes and to confirm if council feels this is ready for a public hearing. Mr. LaFrance said the city's public outreach included both residential and commercial customers. Key results from the outreach presented to council in January showed that residential customers did not want to pay a higher share. Responses were mixed regarding the commercial share. Commercial customers did not want to pay more;residents thought commercial customers could pay more. Both felt commercial and residential should pay for right-of-way maintenance. Responses leaned towards businesses paying for right-of-way maintenance in areas that are largely commercial. There was no clear direction on the program to cap parking lot spaces at 250 and there was a question as to if we should raise the cap. Council direction was to remove the cap so additional spaces create revenue. Council directed that the road type splits in the code remain the same. Mr. LaFrance said the street maintenance fee pays for Tigard's Pavement Management Program (PMP). In 2009 council set a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) goal of 72-75.The city's PCI is currently a little below that. Council wishes to raise the PCI to 80-82,which would be less costly to maintain once achieved. However,much work needs to be done to rise to that PCI. $11 million over ten years would be added to the PMP. ADA requirements for curb cuts have been added and Tigard's current code is ambiguous about whether the street maintenance fee can pay for these. Earlier,council indicated they wish to amend the code to allow the use of street maintenance fee dollars including these federally required sidewalk curb cuts. 10 Councilor Henderson said staff provided no information identifying what the ADA curb cut costs are. Mr. LaFrance said that is not currently split out from the total. Appendices A and B include the cost of curb cuts. Councilor Henderson asked if the city needs to subsidize that in a fee increase and how much that would be. Engineer McCarthy said the city has been doing 50 curb cuts per year at around $5,000 per ramp which is 12-13 percent of the overall program. He said that is figured into the calculations going forward. Councilor Henderson commented that it is normally a residential cost and not necessarily a commercial one. Engineer McCarthy said the ADA ramps are built into the cost of the street. Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance said looking ahead,arterial roads will become the largest share. This road type is paid 62 percent by commercial customers so there is a general shift towards higher costs for commercial customers. The fee increase for commercial customers would be larger than residential customers will bear. Mr. LaFrance said once the backlog is taken care of the street maintenance fee will lower. He directed council to Table 5 in the staff report attachment which shows impacts of the backlog. In this case, the share of different street type costs is a one-third,two-thirds split. It would cost$2.34 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 2 of 6 r more per month for residents and.66 cents per parking spot per month for businesses. The$50,000 charge for commercial right-of-way maintenance adds about.12 cents per parking spot. He said the commercial fee would be doubled. Councilor Henderson said he understands how the figures were arrived at but doubling the commercial street maintenance fee did not seem logical. He said when businesses are charged more, they pass it along through their prices to consumers. He said this is concerning to him. Mr. LaFrance discussed how the commercial and residential fees were reached. Council agreed that the dollar figures were clear,but requested that Mr. LaFrance work on the table showing percentages. Council President Snider said it is well described and thought through. It reflects council's policy direction at the high level and makes sense. He said he thought it good that businesses pass their expenses on to customers who do not live in the area but use the roads. He said if the city is serious about reducing the backlog this needs to be done. Councilor Goodhouse said he was favorable to the idea of passing it onto businesses. He noted that commercial drivers are using side streets and take detours through neighborhoods. He asked if catching up on the backlog will prevent any future backlogs. Engineer McCarthy replied that is the goal but an unknown is the future cost of asphalt which could limit what the city can afford to do each year. Councilor Henderson said when Tigard goods and services cost more than goods and services in other cities,it is hard to believe customers will want to shop here. Council President Snider said he did not think Washington Square would lose any customers. He said there was no rationale for the cap. Mayor Cook said he mentioned this to the general manager of Washington Square so they are aware they will see an increase. Council President Snider commented they have been getting a subsidy for all these years. Councilor Goodhouse mentioned that their customers take nearby side streets. Councilor Henderson commented that it would be good if Portland was having this conversation. He said while it is understandable that maintaining the CPI at a high level saves money,the CPI jump is sizable for a small town. He commented that the politics were strong last time this was considered and council did not err by talking to businesses. Transportation Project Engineer McCarthy said Hillsboro recently doubled their fee. West Linn and Oregon City are currently at$10 per month. Councilor Goodhouse asked about projections for what will be raised by River Terrace construction. Mr. LaFrance said for the next ten years River Terrace roads will be brand new. He said when homes are occupied this will increase the residential base and there will be more people to spread the costs. Engineer McCarthy commented that these new residents will also be driving on other Tigard streets. Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance asked if council wanted to move forward with code changes or fees. He asked if a hearing should be scheduled or was another workshop discussion desired. Mayor Cook acknowledged the outreach already done but suggested further TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES- SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 6 outreach to residents and commercial customers with actual dollars listed. Council President Snider said it needs to be clear what the city is trying to achieve. Councilor Goodhouse mentioned that a question came up at the Cooking with the Council event about why a road that already looked good was being paved. He said people need to hear that preventive maintenance on good roads is easier and cheaper in the long run. Council President Snider suggested tying communication about this to the future and sharing that everyone's cost will get cheaper by the mile. Councilor Henderson said in the past we found our street maintenance program was not working. We are increasing the index and must do some extra work. He acknowledged previous councils were brave to tackle this and did a good job of protecting Tigard's streets. He said he is still upset about the federally demanded ADA curb cuts having to come out of this budget. City Manager Wine confirmed that the street maintenance fee report reflects the direction council is prepared to consider. She said staff will replicate the residential outreach poll and extend it to businesses,perhaps through Tigard's Chamber of Commerce or the city's fall community survey. Staff will put the feedback results in a report for Council so they will have it before considering any policy changes. Council President Snider suggested giving survey responders information about the public hearing date. 4. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VACATION OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT ADJACENT TO ASH AVENUE a. Mayor Cook opened the public hearing. b. City Attorney Olsen gave a statement describing procedures. C. Mayor Cook asked council if they have any conflicts of interest. None were mentioned. Mayor Cook asked council members to declare any contacts about this case with a member of the public or if they have independent knowledge or relevant facts,such as from a visit to the site in question. Councilor Goodhouse said he walked past the site. d. Statement by Mayor Cook: Mayor Cook said the conduct for tonight's hearing shall be as follows: 1. City staff will summarize the written staff report. 2. Council will take public comment. 3. Staff will have an opportunity to respond. Council members may also ask the staff and witnesses questions throughout the hearing. 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. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 www.tigaxd-or.gov Page 4 of 6 e. Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly gave a brief staff report and said this easement is no longer needed. Utility providers and adjacent property owners were notified and only one response was received. Frontier said they have no objections to the vacation. f. Public Testimony: Mayor Cook asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak. No one testified. g. Staff response to public testimony: (Not needed as there was no public testimony.) h. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. i. Council consideration of Ordinance No. 15-15 Councilor Goodhouse moved for adoption of Ordinance No. 15-15. Council President Snider seconded the motion. City Recorder Krager read the number and title of the ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 15-15 AN ORDINANCE VACATING APPROXIMATELY 100 SQUARE FEET OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG SW ASH AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TIGARD,WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON (VAC2015- 00001)AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY There was no further discussion. Mayor Cook asked City Recorder Krager to conduct a roll-call vote. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard (absent) Mayor Cook ✓ Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 15-15 passed by a unanimous vote of council. 5. PREVIEW AND UPDATE ON THE LIBRARY'S AUTOMATED MATERIALS HANDLING Library Director Barnes said the Lyngsoe automated materials handling system is fully operational and has been well received by library patrons. Efficiencies in checking in items and returning them to the shelves have improved. She said council will be given a demonstration at the library at the end of this meeting. Councilor Henderson mentioned he heard a comment about volunteers losing 189 hours because of automation. Library Director Barnes said the 189 hours represents 4.5 FTE volunteers which was a fluctuating workforce. She said they love their volunteers but they do not meet the same schedule requirements as for employees. The automated system provides a more consistent work flow and also frees up other volunteer opportunities. She said staff spent six months meeting with volunteers TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES- SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 5 of 6 r to offer them other areas of the library where assistance is needed. She acknowledged that the check-in process changed dramatically and for the public good but there are many other activities that have been transferred over to volunteers. At 7:42 p.m. Mayor Cook said the council would go over to the library to see a demonstration on the new automated materials handling system. He announced that the meeting would adjourn from the library. At 7:45 p.m. Councilor Henderson left the meeting. Mayor Cook,Council President Snider, Councilor Goodhouse,City Manager Wine,Assistant City Manager Newton,and City Recorder Krager went to the Tigard Public Library where Library Director Barnes gave a tour and demonstrated the automated materials handling system. Council identified some security concerns and asked about the unit cost for checking in library materials and the difference in efficiency since the new system was implemented. Ms.Barnes said she will have this data by the next budget preparation cycle. 6. NON AGENDA ITEMS *This item was heard prior to council leaving Town Hall to tour the Library. City Manager Wine said she sent a memo to council outlining content of materials the city will use to educate and inform voters on the three measures on the November ballot. She encouraged council to read them and give her any comments. She said all materials have been reviewed by the Secretary of State. The only other planned election activity council will be a public forum to be scheduled for October. Councilor Henderson asked if council suggests changes would the material have to go back to the Secretary of State's office for review. City Manager Wine said it would. 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION None Scheduled. 8. ADJOURNMENT At 8:20 p.m. Council President Snider moved for adjournment and Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion.The motion passed. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson (left at 7:45 p.m.) Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard (absent) Mayor Cook ✓ Carol A.Krager, City Recorder Attest: John L. Cook, Mayor Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 Cityof Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 6 of 6 ■ �� Cit o Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes September 22, 2015 STUDY SESSION Council Present:Mayor Cook,Councilor Henderson,Councilor Goodhouse,Council President Snider and Councilor Woodard Staff Present:City Manager Wine,Assistant City Manager Newton and Deputy City Recorder Alley A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Councilor Woodard reported the Park and Recreation Advisory Board(PRAB)had a robust discussion on the ballot measure and had decided to wait until after the election to continue discussions.The PRAB agreed they wish to have a five year recreational plan.Councilor Woodard reported on his travels to the National Parks and Recreation Association Conference stating the U.S. Surgeon General noted he was a proponent of walkability and encouraged cities to begin moving in that direction.He went over the sessions he attended noting they were very robust educational sessions on developing recreation and he would be willing to share the material. Councilor Henderson reported the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Plan has been completed and he will provide the councilors and staff with a copy.He expressed excitement for the Plan and wished for the Council and staff to begin promoting the CDBG program.He announced the Tigard Youth Advisory Council's (TYAC)Chalk Walk was not a great success,but the ambition was there.The city of Forest Grove is a great example of a successful Chalk Walk program and the TYAC will look to glean information from them. Mayor Cook stated there was a SW Corridor Meeting with the same presentation Council recently received shown at the meeting.There will be future meetings and he will keep the Council informed of those dates when they are set.He stated the LOT Water Project is under budget and ahead of schedule.The committee recently approved the purchase of a filter that was originally cut from the budget due to costs.It was the committee's wish to purchase the filter now with the money left in contingency at the reduced costs quoted for the four already being purchased rather than wait five-plus years to purchase it at a higher cost. B. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 6:29 p.m. Mayor Cook announced that the Tigard City Council was entering into Executive Session to review and evaluate,pursuant to standards,criteria,and policy directives adopted by the governing body,the employment-related performance of a public officer under ORS 192.660(2)(i).The Executive Session ended at 7:06 p.m. C. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS—These were announced during the Business Meeting under Non Agenda Items. Study Session adjourned at 7:30 p.m. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page l of 7 1. BUSINESS MEETING �I1 A. Mayor Cook called the City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. B. Deputy City Recorder Alley called the roll: Name Present Absent Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ C. Mayor Cook led the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Mayor Cook asked Council and Staff for any Non-Agenda Items. City Manager Wine said she had six administrative items to go over. 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication—None stated. B. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce—No report given. C. Citizen Communication-Noone signed up. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council) A. Approve Minutes for: • July 28,2015 • August 18,2015 • August 25,2015 B. Consider a motion approving an Intergovernmental Agreement with the city of Beaverton regarding a joint land partition C. Consider a Proclamation declaring October 11-17,2015 as Community Action Week—This item was pulled from the Consent Agenda to be voted upon separately. Councilor Woodard moved for approval of the Consent Agenda. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Mayor Cook introduced the future Community Action Executive Director Rene Bruce. Ms.Bruce requested the Council consider approving a proclamation declaring October 11-17,2015,as Community Action Week. She invited the Council to an Empowerment Summit to be held October 13,2015 from 7:30-10:00 a.m. at the NW Event Center in Hillsboro. She also announced there is a The Changing Face of Poverty in Washington County exhibit open at the Hillsboro Civic Center Plaza Building until November 21,2015. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 972231503-639-41711 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 7 Councilor Henderson moved to approve a Proclamation declaring October 11-17,2015,as Community Action week. Council President Snider seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ 4. CONSIDER A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT REGARDING JOINT USE OF PROPERTY Parks Manager Martin summadtied the staff report and recommended approval authorizing the city manager to sign the agreement.Mr. Martin noted the agreement terms will be introduced to the parents at the Back to School Night on September 30th. Councilor Woodard shared his concern that there were not consulting services provided from a recreational expertise to draft the agreement.He noted he preferred to see the agreement approved after the recreational coordinator was hired and had the opportunity to review it. City Manager Wine commented the agreement is a step toward pursuit of looking at a better way to make use of underused school district fields and establish a partnership between the city and the school district.This agreement sets the stage for future opportunities. Councilor Woodard asked how many Tigard residents the fields in the agreement would serve.Mr.Martin said he did not have a specific number,but knew the Metzger area is under served with parks and the need is there. Councilor Woodard asked if any concern had been expressed over servicing an area that is not specific to Tigard.He said there is good and bad to investing dollars in an area not in Tigard.Mr.Martin said the school is inside Tigard and serves a lot of Tigard residents.The Park and Recreation Advisory Board recommends approval and Metzger Elementary is mentioned in the Parks Master Plan. Council President Snider moved to authorize the city manager to sign an agreement with the Tigard-Tualatin School District regarding joint use of property. Councilor Woodard seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ 5. CONSIDER A MOTION APPROVING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND TIGARD LITTLE LEAGUE AND THE CITY OF TIGARD AND SOUTHSIDE SOCCER CLUB Assistant City Manager Newton summarized the staff report pointing out the highlighted changes in the agreements from the September 8 council meeting and recommended approval of the agreements. Councilor Woodard expressed concern with the contract being approved prior to the recreational coordinator being hired as things in the contract may affect their job responsibilities. In addition,he was concerned for the contract's length of term being fifteen years and felt it was too long and may not be equitable for the tax TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1503-639-41711 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 3 of 7 payer. In time,the cost of inflation creates disparity in revenue for the city and the loss of collection of an administrative fee.He stated he had grave concerns with the term and concessions made.Ms.Newton stated the agreements are requiring the leagues to reserve the field time where they are actually going to use the field. This allows fields to be opened up to other users who would pay the administrative fees.The city also added the preclusion of closing the parks when the fields are in use. Council President Snider commented he understands this contract is for the good of the community by providing a service to the children in Tigard and is clearly not a cost recovery model. It was about how much the city is willing to lose,not recover,for a public good and service.Ms.Newton said the city loses about $30,000 in fees from both leagues in a year. Tigard Little League Representative Kim Kelleher commented she understands the different positions and concerns expressed tonight.She noted she is a little biased that a recreational coordinator is not going to create a program supporting a baseball or soccer league. She said a lot of work had been put into negotiating the contract before the Council and was hopeful the Council would support it as presented. Councilor Goodhouse said the length of the contract gives the organization certainty and stability of what they can operate within to provide service to the families in the communities and he supports the contracts as presented. Mayor Cook said in the many negotiations over the last two years,both sides do not feel like they got everything they wanted,but concessions were made from all parties.He said there are some aspects in the agreements he really liked which is why he supports it. Councilor Woodard expressed concern the members on the negotiating team did not have the expertise to negotiate recreational contracts and there was a possibility something was missed that an expert might have caught.He reiterated his concern for the increased cost of maintaining the fields that the city would be responsible for.Ms.Newton said the city will continue discussions with the leagues regarding replacement of equipment with the city driving those discussions. Councilor Woodard expressed concern that the check and balances were not in place and the term is too long. Council President Snider moved for approval of agreements between the city of Tigard and Tigard Little League and the city of Tigard and Southside Soccer Club. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion.The motion passed with the following votes of the Council.: Name_ Yes No Absent Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ Councilor Henderson moved to amend the contracts to have an executive review every three years.Councilor Woodard seconded the motion.The motion failed with the following votes of the Council: Name Yes No Absent Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 4 of 7 Councilor Woodard moved to amend the contracts to reduce the term of the contracts to five year renewal periods for the contract to last fifteen years. Councilor Henderson seconded the motion.The motion was withdrawn. Mayor Cook asked if the Tigard Little League would be amenable to the amendment.Ms.Kelleher said if the amendment would be for ten years that would probably be amenable.This amendment would have to be taken back to the League Board as it is significantly off from what was discussed. Councilor Woodard moved to amend the contracts to reduce the term of the contracts to ten years with two five year renewals. Councilor Henderson seconded the motion.The motion failed with the following votes of the Council: Name Yes --No Absent Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ 6. CONSIDER A MOTION AUTHORIZING A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT Arb APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT IWA Senior Transportation Planner Brown summarized the staff report provided in the packet and asked for Council's approval to authorize staff to apply for a Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) application for a section of sidewalk on Commercial Street from Lincoln Street to 95th Avenue. Councilor Henderson expressed concern ensuring the project happens and the city does not pull out of the project. Mr.Brown said he is more than confident the city can deliver on meeting all the stipulations of the grant. Councilor Henderson moved authorizing a Community Development Block Grant Application for Commercial Street Sidewalk Project. Council President seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ 7. CONSIDER A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN A US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE EDA GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE HUNZIKER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT 19 Economic Development Manager Purdy presented the staff report notifying staff intends to pursue a grant for the Hunziker Infrastructure Project. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES—SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1503-639-41711 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 5 of 7 Councilor Henderson moved authorizing the city manager to sign a US Department of Commerce EDA grant application for the Hunziker Infrastructure Project. Council President Snider seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. Name Yes No Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS 0 City Manager Wine reported on the following: • Requested a start time for the January 28,2016 Summerfield Gathering-Consensus was to meet at the Summerfield Clubhouse from 6:00-7:30 p.m. • Announced the council staff is working on an open forum to discuss the ballot measure to be held on October 8,2015.Additional details will follow. • Provided dates for possible Council training follow-up with Lenny Borer and requested the Council let staff know what dates work best.Council consensus was to have two sessions at two hours each or a Saturday for four hours.Ms.Wine said she would come back with additional dates. • Requested guidance on how Council would like to proceed in purchasing clothing with the city's logo on it for Council to wear at meetings.Consensus was to purchase clothing with the city's logo. • Reminded the Council's Tailgate to be held on October 16,2015 at the Tigard High School Tennis Courts from 5:00-6:30 p.m. • Announced the December 22,2015 Council meeting has been cancelled. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION 18 At 9:08 p.m. Mayor Cook announced that the Tigard City Council was entering into Executive Session to discuss exempt public records under ORS 192.660(2)(0.He said the City Council would adjourn from Red Rock Creek Conference Room at the conclusion of the Executive Session.The Executive Session ended at 10:09 P.M. 10. ADJOURNMENT At 10:09 p.m. Council President Snider motioned to adjourn the meeting. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion.The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Council present. Name Yes No Mayor Cook ✓ Councilor Goodhouse ✓ Councilor Henderson ✓ Council President Snider ✓ Councilor Woodard ✓ TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1503-639-41711 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 6 of 7 Norma I.Alley,Deputy City Recorder Attest: Mayor,City of Tigard Date: TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES-SEPTEMBER 22,2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1503-639-41711 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 7 of 7 AIS-2286 4. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes):20 Minutes Agenda Title: Legislative Session Wrap-up Prepared For: Liz Newton, City Management Submitted By: Carol Krager,Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Wrap-up of the 2015 State Legislative Session and 2015 federal lobbying efforts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST State Senator Ginny Burdick and State Representative Margaret Doherty will share their perspectives on the 2015 state legislative session with council. Staff will present a brief summary of the 2015 federal lobbying efforts KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The city had a very successful year advocating for its legislative priorities in partnership with elected representatives in 2015. Mayor Cook made the trip to Salem at least monthly to attend regular meetings with Senator Burdick and other legislators;and met monthly with Representative Doherty to advance Tigard's legislative priorities. Highlights include Representative Doherty's tireless efforts on the city's behalf to obtain $1.5 million in lottery back bonds for future infrastructure improvements to the Hunziker Industrial Core. Representative Doherty also introduced HJR 1; a bill requesting the US Postal Service recognize Tigard as a city designation in the 97223 and 97224 zip codes. Both Representative Doherty and Senator Burdick testified in support of the legislation which passed both chambers. Senator Burdick co-chaired the Joint House-Senate Committee on Marijuana Legislation successfully passing rules for implementation of the legislation. For your reference, the city's 2015 State Legislative Agenda is attached. At the end of April,Mayor Cook spent a couple of days in Washington,DC meeting with representatives of federal agencies and the city's congressional delegation to present and discuss Tigard's legislative priorities. Attached are summary notes from those meetings prepared by Joel Rubin of CFM. A couple of items are noteworthy: The city was encouraged to apply for a clean-up grant through the Brownfield program and the Mayor accepted an invitation to participate in the Mayor's Institute on City Design this November in Houston. An initial meeting to discuss potential projects is scheduled in Tigard at the end of October. A copy of the city's 2015 Federal Legislative Agenda is attached. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments 2015 Federal Lobbyiniz Trip Follow-up Federal Legislative ALenda State Legislative Agenda Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfield Program:David Lloyd Action Items• • $200,000 is the maximum amount for cleanup grants per site. Tigard can submit 3 separate applications for the 3 potential sites the City hopes to acquire in the next few months. So the total request could be up to $600,000. • Tigard should continue to work closely with local EPA staff as the assessment moves forward. In addition, Tigard should continue to consult with CCLR on any cleanup grant proposals. • When preparing for the Cleanup application, Tigard should review EPA's "Getting Started Early"resource: hhtt ://www.epa.aov/brownfields/pdfs/getting-started-early-on- preparing=your-assessment-cleanul2-proposal.pdf • EPA expects to release the 2016 Cleanup grant guidelines sometime August. The application will be open approximately 30-60 days. • Tigard must own the site at the time of application submittal. Notes: EPA staff provided the following guidance as Tigard moves forward: • The All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI) document cannot be older than 180 days at the time of submission. This is your liability protection. • When preparing a cleanup application, it is important to tell a story. The narrative should be concise and explanatory. Tigard should incorporate its vision for the City and highlight aspects of its strategic plan. EPA staff also suggested explaining the amount of water in the community and the need to protect the streams and creeks from contamination. • Reviewers are looking for a sound approach—what is your plan and how will it be conducted?Budget and tasks should be clear. • It's also important to explain how you will leverage your project with other resources. What do you have to keep this project going? • Partnerships and your relationship with the state are key. Explain these roles. • Commitment letters are also important. If an entity is contributing money,there must be documentation. Economic Development Administration:Barrett Haga Action Items: • Barrett was impressed with the City's preparation and materials. He indicated this project would be very competitive. • Tigard should keep continue to in touch with David Porter as the Hunziker project moves forward. • David Porter can conduct a pre-application evaluation, which can be helpful as the application is drafted. Tigard can also invite EDA regional directors to look at the project. This may help David"sell" the project to the selection committee. • Barrett explained that the 3rd and 4th quarters generally have the most funds available for projects. Notes: • EDA funds applications that present a strong needs assessment, provide compelling data and seek measurable outcomes. • Should Tigard receive funding, Barrett suggested that Tigard designate the area as a "Department of Commerce" site. This could help with branding and marketing the site to future companies. • Tigard should think about what the site will look like 20 years from now. So Tigard might want to consider renaming to "Hunziker Commercial Core" or"Hunziker Business Core"... this is strictly a branding strategy. DOJ Community Oriented Policing Services:Danielle Ouellette Action Items• • The COPS Hiring Application will open mid-May. Staff expect to have a"soft launch" where applicants can view guidelines. Grant proposals will likely be due the end of June. Awards will be announced September 30th. • $134 million available for FY 2015 grants. The program supports 75 percent of the approved entry-level salaries and fringe benefits of each newly hired and/or rehired full- time officer, up to $125,000 per officer position over three years. Agencies are required to retain officer(s) in the 4th year. • Tigard may want to nominate the police officer responsible for solving the theft of home appliances case for the Goldstein Award. The award recognizes officers who solve difficult cases and are creative in their approach to catching perpetrators. Notes: • Reviewers focus on crime data(compiled over the past 3 years), budget, unemployment rate and the community policing development plan. Staff explained that there is some flexibility on the crime data time frame provided you report 3 years total. • Although crime statistics and fiscal need are significant parts of the application, the narrative section allow agencies to go into detail to highlight need and present their story. It is important Tigard elaborates in this section. • As in previous years, priorities will focus on the community policing strategy. Staff also explained that the hiring of veterans, gun violence, school-resource officers, trust problems and homeland security will likely still be priority funding areas. • In 2014, the office received 1800 applications and 215 proposals were funded. Tigard will be competing against local agencies in areas with populations less than 150,000. Mayors's Institute on City Design:Jeff Jamawat Notes: • MICD offered an invitation to Mayor Cook to attend the regional session in Houston, Texas in November. • MICD will work with the Mayor and City staff to come up with three potential case studies to present at the conference. Senator Ron Wyden:Lauren Goldschmidt and Ryan Abraham • CFM will work with Wyden's scheduler to get him out to Tigard this summer. • Wyden supports a long-term transportation reauthorization bill and is continuing to work on a funding plan. CFM will track Wyden's new legislation that would provide up to $45 billion in"Move America"infrastructure tax credits and up to $180 billion in "Move America Bonds,"a new bind of tax-exempt vehicle used to finance road, bridge, port, rail and airport projects. The bonds would be similar to tax-exempt facility bonds without the customary government ownership requirements, as long as the facilities are generally available for public use. The tax credits are aimed at freeing up private equity for infrastructure projects, by giving states the ability to either sell the credits to raise capital or allocate them to a project sponsor. • Wyden will continue to support Tigard's projects and CFM will coordinate with his office on support letters for any future grant submissions. Senator Jeff Merkley:Liz Cooney • Merkley is supportive of Tigard's projects, and CFM will coordinate support letters as federal grant applications are submitted. Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici:Sarah Round Bonamici supports a long-term transportation reauthorization bill and a funding mechanism thar will enable Congress to pass the legislation. Oregon 1111VIKER INDUSTRIAL CORE 2015 Federal Leuislative Agenda ?s Portlard Beaverton N h m Tigard's Hunziker Industrial Core project represents a unique and exciting opportunity to redevelop industrial land in an urban setting.When complete,the project will foster significant economic growth and provide long-term Tigard high-skill,high-wage job opportunities for the region. Lak The core includes more than 138 acres of industrial-zoned p property located three-quarters of a mile from Interstate 5, r one-half mile from Highway 217 and immediately j accessible by existing rail.In this area,96 acres are developed but underutilized.Forty-two acres are Tualatin undeveloped but limited in their development potential. The area exemplifies the challenge inner-ring suburban I-205 cities face when trying to support business growth. 1_ A private developer is working on a 225,000 square foot development on 18 acres;an estimated$22 million For more information... private investment and home to 115-300 new jobs.New More information about these projects and Tigard's infrastructure here will support new investment and vision for the future can be found on our website at I) r redevelopment on the adjacent 120 acres of industrial www.tigard-or.gov. Please don't hesitate to contact us property.This sets the stage for another 300-500 jobs for additional information. and$35 million in private investment. Through a state grant,and in partnership with local Mayor John L.Cook,503-718-2476, property owners,Tigard completed a Public Infrastructure mayorcook@tigard-or.gov Finance Plan in 2014.The total cost of public infrastruc- > City Manager Marty Vine,503-718-2486, ture(roads,water,wastewater and stormwater)to support marty@tigard-or.gov private sector development in the Hunziker Industrial Core Assistant City Manager Liz Newton,503-718-2412, is estimated at about$10.5 million.The city is seeking IizC�3tigard-or.gov $1.5 million from the U.S.Department of Commerce _ Economic Development Administration program to fund some of the public infrastructure improvements. . City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 REQUEST AMOUNT:$1,500,000 —�— www tigard-or.gov r 7_. q� POLICY Robust Transportation Reauthorization Bill ► The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act which would Congress should develop a comprehensive transportation require the U.S. Department of Transportation to set a — reauthorization bill that would create jobs by providing performance measure to reduce the number of a robust funding for bridges, highways, mass transit and bicyclists and pedestrians killed on our roads. other local infrastructure needs.Within the reauthorization ,1 bill,Tigard strongly supports inclusion of: FY 2016 Program levels ' The bipartisan Innovations in Surface Trans- Maintain adequate funding levels for TIGER, CDBG, ° ? portation Act,which creates a grant program that HOME, BYRNE,EDA, and COPS funding. would put transportation funds in the hands of local / COPS Hiring and Technology Funding _ f o communities.The Innovation grants would be awarded Tigard strongly supports additional funding for the COPS on merit by a panel with representatives from state Hiring and Technology programs.The city plans to apply and local jurisdictions,ensuring that funds go to for a COPS position in 2015 to advance public safety TIGARD, OREGON. Located just eight miles well-conceived projects with the most local support. through community policing.There are very few funding southwest of Portland,Tigard is Oregon's 12th largest Needed projects in Tigard with local support include: options at the federal level to help police departments city with a population of 50,044.The city is largely > Hall Boulevard—Burnham Street to Durham Road purchase equipment,despite the fact that federal residential and offers a mix of industrial,commercial This project will add turn lanes at key intersections, mandates continue to require costly upgrades.Federal illuminate,add transit stop amenities and fill in the funds for equipment upgrades are important,especially and retail space which results in a daytime population sidewalk gap along Hall Boulevard from downtown for police departments with cash strapped budgets. around 100,000.Because of the demand placed on Tigard to Durham Road.Sidewalks along Hall Protect Municipal Bonds its transportation,water and public safety resources, Boulevard are one of the top priorities identified by citizens to make the city re walkable. Protect tax exempt municipal bonds from being eliminated or Tigard faces big-city infrastructure issues. --tY mo_____ limited.Since federal income tax was instituted in 1913, Tigard is ideally located to meet regional REQUEST AMOUNT:$7,100,000 interest earned from municipal bonds issued by state and employment demand.The region's workforce lives local governments have been exempt from federal taxation. here.What's lacking,however,is infrastructure that Highway 217 Interchange with 72nd Avenue These bonds are the primary financing mechanism for state supports business expansion here. Evaluate and develop a conceptual design to address and local infrastructure projects,with three-quarters of the transportation issues in the interchange of Highway infrastructure projects in the U.S.built by state and local Late in 2014,the City Council adopted a strategic 217 with 72nd Avenue.This project will focus on governments,and with over$3.7 trillion in outstanding tax- plan to become "the most walkable community in the planning, not construction,for ramp terminals,cross exempt bonds,issued by 30,000 separate government units. Pacific Norlbwest wberepeople of all ages and abilities street and streets intersecting 72nd Avenue. Local governments save an average of 25 to 30 percent on enjoy healthy and interconnected lives."This 20-year REQUEST AMOUNT:$1,000,000 interest costs with tax-exempt municipal bonds as compared strategic vision,along with four strategic goals,will to taxable bonds because investors are willing to accept provide guidance and direction for the city's priorities / Safe Routes to Schools.A key aspect of the city's lower interest on tax-exempt bonds in conjunction with the over the long term by leveraging and building on our recently adopted vision is to ensure that children have tax benefit,If the federal income tax exemption is eliminated strengths to grow Tigard as a thriving community. safe routes to walk to school. In July 2012,Congress or limited,states and localities will pay more to finance Tigard continues to work with its regional passed the transportation law MAP-21.As part of that projects,leading to less infrastructure investment,fewer g g law,they folded the Safe Routes to School program jobs,and greater burdens on citizens. partners toward creative solutions that address into a new program called Transportation Alternatives infrastructure and service delivery challenges.We are and cut funding by approximately 30 percent.When Secure a Tigard ZIP Code committed to responsible stewardship of public funds Congress considers the next transportation bill in State Representative Margaret Doherty has introduced a and to making sound fiscal decisions that will guide 2015,the city supports increased funding for Safe measure urging the United States Postmaster General to Routes to School and a sustained federal commitment recognize ZIP codes 97223 and 97224 as Tigard ZIP codes us to a sustainable future. to these critical safety projects. that are separate and distinct from Portland ZIP codes. M.... O • q Regular February • y �r- Sen.Ginny Burdick Rep.Margaret Doherty SENATE DISTRICT 18 HOUSE DISTRICT 35 900 Court St.NE,S-213 900 Court St.NE,H-282 Salem,OR 97301 Salem,OR 97301 sen.ginnyburdick@ rep.margaretdoherty@ state.orus state.or.us Oregon uses a system of single-member districts to elect its legislators.Each of the 90 members represent a designated )(�l senatorial or representative district,meaning each Legislative Agenda Oregonian is represented by a single senator and a single representative.Representative districts have a population of about 63,850;Senate districts contain about 127,700 people.These district lines are redrawn every ten years. Tigard, Oregon Tigard City Council { A Mayor Council President John Cook Jason Snider Councilor Councilor Councilor Marland Henderson Marc Woodard John Goodhouse counciimail@tigard-or.gov City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 ' wwwtigard-or.gov Economic Development and Land Use ■ Oppose preemption of the ability of cities to manage and receive compensation for ■ Support funding and policies to facilitate the use of public ROW. for brownfield mediation and clean-up. N Advocate for a change to the current fiscal ■ Request funding for infrastructure to year(July 1 to June 30) as mandated by support development of the underutilized state law to a calendar that better Hunziker Industrial Core and support coincides with the legislative session. funding for SB 246 which would provide funds and authority to Business Oregon Transportation which could assist in assembling infrastructure funding for the area. ■ Support passage of a comprehensive • Support renewal of the State's Vertical transportation funding and policy package to address multi-modal needs with a Housing and Development program priority of maintaining and preserving (which sunsets Jan. 2016).The city recently established a VHD program which existing infrastructure. will be an important tool in advancing ■ Support legislative priorities that address targeted development in the downtown traffic congestion, economic development urban renewal district. and jobs. ■ Advocate for legislative funding of the ■ Request funding for improvements to Oregon Transportation Forum on Climate SW Hall Boulevard— Burnham Street to Smart Communities Durham Road.This project will add turn lanes at key intersections, illuminate, add Finance transit stop amenities and fill in the sidewalk gap along Hall Boulevard from ■ Property Tax Reform: downtown Tigard to Durham Road. ► Support referral to voters that would Sidewalks along Hall Boulevard are one of allow local control of temporary the top priorities identified by citizens to property tax outside of statewide caps; make the city more walkable. ► Support an amendment of the state Request Amount:$7,100,000 constitution that would reset a property's assessed value to its real market value at Other Focus Areas the time of sale or construction; ■ Advocate for legislative changes that ► Support a statutory change regarding will clarify and enhance public safety the way new property is added to the and local control related to marijuana tax rolls to provide the option of dispensaries. applying a city-wide changed property w Support increased resources for persons ratio to new property. with mental health issues, especially in ■ Allow for price comparison when procuring crisis situations. the services of architects and engineers. AIS-2303 5. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes):20 Minutes Agenda Title: Develop 2016 Federal and State Legislative Agenda Prepared For: Kent Wyatt,City Management Submitted By: Norma Alley,Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Council is asked to identify potential areas or issues for advocacy on the state and federal level for the upcoming year. This could include ways to partner with neighboring jurisdictions on issues of common interest,or key legislation that will be considered that Tigard should track and communicate with our state and federal legislative delegation STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Discuss the city's 2016 state and federal legislative priorities and direct staff to prepare State and Federal Legislative Agendas. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Each fall, city council adopts state and federal legislative priorities for the coming year. The 2015 Oregon legislature recognized Tigard's legislative agenda by granting$1.5 million to build public infrastructure in the Hunziker Industrial Corridor. The purpose of this discussion is to provide council an opportunity to review priorities from the past year, consider council goals,citizen's priorities,and issues and opportunities the city may face in the coming year and reach consensus on priorities for 2016. The state legislature will convene in February for a short session.A majority of their action will focus around policies fixes. It is unclear whether the state legislature will address transportation funding. Attached are the state and federal legislative agendas from 2015. The League of Oregon Cities has not released its 2016 legislative priorities.This discussion will center around updating the 2015 agendas to accurately reflect the Council's legislative priorities. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Based on council consensus on priorities,council may request further clarification on issues not raised in this summary. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Represent Tigard at the regional,state and federal level to advocate for tax reform and other funding opportunities. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION 11/25/14: Adoption of the city's 2015 State and Federal Legislative Agenda. Attachments 2015 State Leeislative Agenda 2015 Federal Lep_islative A¢enda Oregon's 2015 Regular Legislative Session: Februarylark i 4 Sen.Ginny Burdick Rep.Margaret Doherty SENATE DISTRICT 18 HOUSE DISTRICT 35 900 Court St.NE,S-213 900 Court St.NE,H-282 Salem,OR 97301 Salem,OR 97301 Sheffies wilb her own irh�qs-"-judge Jessie Quinn Thornton sen.ginnyburdick@ rep.margaretdoherty@ state.or.us state.or.us Oregon uses a system of single-member districts to elect its legislators.Each of the 90 members represent a designated 2015 senatorial or representative district, meaning each Legislative Agenda Oregonian is represented by a single senator and a single representative.Representative districts have a population of about 63,850;Senate districts contain about 127,700 Th people. ese district lines are redrawn every ten years. Tigard, Oregon Tigard City Council tS'> Mayor Council President John Cook Jason Snider Councilor Councilor Councilor Marland Henderson Marc Woodard John Goodhouse councilmail@tigard-or.gov City of Tigard ' 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.figard-or.gov Economic Development and Land Use ■ Oppose preemption of the ability of cities to manage and receive compensation for ■ Support funding and policies to facilitate the use of public ROW. for brownfield mediation and clean-up. ■ Advocate for a change to the current fiscal ■ Request funding for infrastructure to year(July 1 to June 30) as mandated by support development of the underutilized state law to a calendar that better Hunziker Industrial Core and support coincides with the legislative session. funding for SB 246 which would provide funds and authority to Business Oregon Transportation which could assist in assembling infrastructure funding for the area. ■ Support passage of a comprehensive ■ Support renewal of the State's Vertical transportation funding and policy package to address multi-modal needs with a Housing and Development program priority of maintaining and preserving (which sunsets Jan. 2016). The city recently established a VHD program which existing infrastructure. will be an important tool in advancing ■ Support legislative priorities that address targeted development in the downtown traffic congestion, economic development urban renewal district. and jobs. ■ Advocate for legislative funding of the ■ Request funding for improvements to Oregon Transportation Forum on Climate SW Hall Boulevard— Burnham Street to Smart Communities Durham Road.This project will add turn lanes at key intersections, illuminate, add Finance transit stop amenities and fill in the sidewalk gap along Hall Boulevard from ■ Property Tax Reform: downtown Tigard to Durham Road. ► Support referral to voters that would Sidewalks along Hall Boulevard are one of allow local control of temporary the top priorities identified by citizens to property tax outside of statewide caps; make the city more walkable. ► Support an amendment of the state Request Amount:$7,100,000 constitution that would reset a property's assessed value to its real market value at Other Focus Areas the time of sale or construction; ■ Advocate for legislative changes that ► Support a statutory change regarding will clarify and enhance public safety the way new property is added to the and local control related to marijuana tax rolls to provide the option of dispensaries. applying a city-wide changed property ■ Support increased resources for persons ratio to new property. with mental health issues, especially in ■ Allow for price comparison when procuring crisis situations. the services of architects and engineers. City qf Tigard,Oregon HUNZIKER INDUSTRIAL CORE 2015 Federal Leuislative Agenda La / - Portland ' Beaverton , N M . Tigard's Hunziker Industrial Core project represents a — unique and exciting opportunity to redevelop industrial land in an urban setting.When complete,the project will . foster significant economic growth and provide long-term TI rd� high-skill,high-wage job opportunities for the region. cr Lake The core includes more than 138 acres of industrial-zoned _Z� Oswego - property located three-quarters of a mile from Interstate 5, one-half mile from Highway 217 and immediately accessible by existing rail.In this area,96 acres are developed but underutilized.Forty-two acres are Tualatin undeveloped but limited in their development potential. The area exemplifies the challenge inner-ring suburban I-205 •, cities face when trying to support business growth. A private developer is working on a 225,000 square foot development on 18 acres;an estimated$22 million For more information... private investment and home to 115-300 new jobs.New More information about these projects and Tigard's infrastructure here will support new investment and vision for the future can be found on our website at redevelopment on the adjacent 120 acres of industrial www.tigard-or.gov. Please don't hesitate to contact us property.This sets the stage for another 300-500 jobs for additional information. and$35 million in private investment. 41 Through a state grant,and in partnership with local > Mayor John L.Cook,503-718-2476, " property owners,Tigard completed a Public Infrastructure mayorcook@tigard-or.gov Finance Plan in 2014.The total cost of public infrastruc- >City Manager Marty Wine,503-718-2486, ture(roads,water,wastewater and stormwater)to support marty@tigard-or.gov private sector development in the Hunziker Industrial Core p p >Assistant City Manager Liz Newton,503-718-2412, is estimated at about$10.5 million.The city is seeking liz@tigard-or.gov $1.5 million from the U.S.Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration program to fund some of the public infrastructure improvements. . City of Tigard REQUEST AMOUNT-$1,500,000 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 wwwtigard-or.gov '• POLICY Robust Transportation Reauthorization Bill The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act which would Congress should develop a comprehensive transportation require the U.S.Department of Transportation to set a reauthorization bill that would create jobs by providing performance measure to reduce the number of n robust funding for bridges, highways, mass transit and bicyclists and pedestrians killed on our roads. �® other local infrastructure needs.Within the reauthorization A t bill,Tigard strongly supports inclusion of: FY 2016 Program Levels The bipartisan Innovations in Surface Trans- Maintain adequate funding levels for TIGER,CDBG, `•'' portation Act which creates a grant program that HOME, BYRNE,EDA,and COPS funding. would put transportation funds in the hands of local / COPS Hiring and Technology Funding communities.The Innovation grants would be awarded Tigard strongly supports additional funding for the COPS on merit by a panel with representatives from state Hiring and Technology programs.The city plans to apply and local jurisdictions,ensuring that funds go to for a COPS position in 2015 to advance public safety TIGMD, OREGON. Located just eight miles well-conceived projects with the most local support. through community policing.There are very few funding southwest of Portland,Tigard is Oregon's 12th largest Needed projects in Tigard with local support include: options at the federal level to help police departments city with a population of 50,044.The city is largely > Hall Boulevard—Burnham Street to Durham Road purchase equipment,despite the fact that federal residential and offers a mix of industrial,commercial This project will add turn lanes at key intersections, mandates continue to require costly upgrades.Federal illuminate,add transit stop amenities and fill in the funds for equipment upgrades are important,especially and retail space which results in a daytime population sidewalk gap along Hall Boulevard from downtown for police departments with cash strapped budgets. around 100,000.Because of the demand placed on Tigard to Durham Road.Sidewalks along Hall its transportation,water and public safety resources, Boulevard are one of the top priorities identified by Protect exempt municipal Bonds citizens to make the city more walkable. Protect tax exempt municipal bonds from being eliminated or Tigard faces big-city infrastructure issues. limited.Since federal income tax was instituted in 1913, Tigard is ideally located to meet regional REQUEST AMOUNT:$7,100,000 interest earned from municipal bonds issued by state and employment demand.The region's workforce lives local governments have been exempt from federal taxation. here.What's lacking,however,is infrastructure that > Highway 217 Interchange with 72nd Avenue These bonds are the primary financing mechanism for state supports business expansion here. Evaluate and develop a conceptual design to address and local infrastructure projects,with three-quarters of the transportation issues in the interchange of Highway infrastructure projects in the U.S.built by state and local Late in 2014,the City Council adopted a strategic 217 with 72nd Avenue.This project will focus on governments,and with over$3.7 trillion in outstanding tax- plan to become"the most walkable community in the planning,not construction,for ramp terminals,cross exempt bonds,issued by 30,000 separate government units. Pacific Northwest where people of all ages and abilities street and streets intersecting 72nd Avenue. Local governments save an average of 25 to 30 percent on enjoy bealtby and interconnected lives."This 20-year REQUEST AMOUNT:$1,000,000 interest costs with tax-exempt municipal bonds as compared strategic vision,along with four strategic goals,will to taxable bonds because investors are willing to accept provide guidance and direction for the city's priorities Safe Routes to Schools.A key aspect of the city's lower interest on tax-exempt bonds in conjunction with the over the long term by leveraging and building on our recently adopted vision is to ensure that children have tax benefit.If the federal income tax exemption is eliminated strengths to grow Tigard as a thriving community. safe routes to walk to school.In July 2012,Congress or limited,states and localities will pay more to finance Tigard continues to work with its regional passed the transportation law MAP-21.As part of that projects, leading to less is ra c ucture investment,fewer g g' law,they folded the Safe Routes to School program jobs, partners toward creative solutions that address into a new program called Transportation Alternatives infrastructure and service delivery challenges.We are and cut funding by approximately 30 percent.When Seem a Tigard ZIP Code committed to responsible stewardship of public funds Congress considers the next transportation bill in State Representative Margaret Doherty has introduced a and to making sound fiscal decisions that will guide 2015,the city supports increased funding for Safe measure urging the United States Postmaster General to Routes to School and a sustained federal commitment recognize ZIP codes 97223 and 97224 as Tigard ZIP codes us to a sustainable future. to these critical safety projects. that are separate and distinct from Portland ZIP codes. AIS-2192 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 25 Minutes Agenda Title: QJ Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change for Fields Trust Prepared For: Gary Pagenstecher, Community Development Submitted By: Lloyd Purdy, Community Development Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting Public Hearing- Quasi-judicial - Main Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE The Fred W. Fields Trust proposes to amend the comprehensive plan map for their vacant property at the southeast corner of Hunziker and Wall Street. The proposed amendment is from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential (L) to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial (IL) and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential(R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST The Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change subject to the Findings in Section IV of the attached staff report and the following recommended four conditions of approval (the conditions of approval are more fully described in the key facts section): 1.The planned development overlay zone shall be applied concurrently with the proposed MUE zone; 2. Future development within the MUE zone shall include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EOA; 3. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 630 a.m. peak hour trips and 630 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more trips, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA) with Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660-012-0060 analysis will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed. The trip cap shall be implemented as a condition of approval on subsequent land use permits for proposed development and will be listed as a condition of approval in the ordinance adopting the zone change,if approved by the City Council; and 4. The applicant shall record an easement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument on the subject property that is acceptable to the city to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is maintained along the eastern property boundary abutting the Rolling Hills subdivision. The proposed Mixed Use Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development despite existing slope constraints. It will also reduce potential conflicts between uses on the subject property and abutting residential development.The proposed zone change from I-P to MUE has the potential to increase economic development in Tigard by allowing for a wider variety of potential development on the site that is not limited by the physical attributes of the site. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Site Information and Proposal Description The site is located on the southeast corner of Hunziker and Wall Street. The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial(CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE).The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P),and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24,2 acres of MUE. The application is required to meet approval criteria set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC or Municipal Code) Title 18 Community Development Code. The application is submitted in response to site slopes and other constraints which make the eastern portion of the site unsuitable for industrial uses. No development plans accompany this land use application and no specific development plans exist for the proposed MUE portion of the property. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 2015 to consider the request and take public testimony. The record was left open until August 3 for additional testimony, and until August 10 for rebuttal testimony.All testimony was posted to the city's website for interested parties to review. The Commission continued the hearing to August 17, 2015 for deliberation and to make their decision for recommendation of approval to Council. Site History The 42.5-acre property that is the subject of this application was owned by Fred W. Fields for many years before his death in 2011. It is presently owned by the Fred W. Fields Trust. The current zoning designations on the property have been in effect for several decades. A portion of the industrially zoned part of the property was used by the Coe Manufacturing facility,located at 7930 SW Hunziker Road, directly across Wall Street. Beginning in the early 1950s, the southwestern end of the industrially zoned portion of the property was used as a brick-making facility. Remnants of that facility still exist,including a concrete foundation. In the late 1960s a rail spur was constructed along the western edge of the property abutting Wall Street. A single family home existed on the residentially zoned portion of the property, but was demolished in 2012.Also in 2012, the Trust had an on-site horizontal mine shaft,which was used for clay removal, filled in for safety reasons. There have been no other uses of the property during the last 70 or so years. Neighborhood Testimony Representatives of the Rolling Hills community,an area to the east of the subject site,provided abundant written and oral public testimony throughout the hearing process. They submitted thirty comment letters with concerns over what the proposed change may bring to their quality of life. Their testimony addressed four basic issues related to the quality of life of the Rolling Hills neighborhood: 1) Identifying that traffic in the surrounding area is an issue of concern; 2) Requesting permanent closure of Varns Street at the Fields property to limit traffic through the neighborhood; 3) Supporting continued maintenance of an historic 50-foot forested buffer along the full length of the neighborhood on the west boundary; and 4) Requesting less intense zoning adjacent to the northern part of the neighborhood at 76th and Crestview. The commission supported the 50-foot forested buffer, as recommended through condition #4,but found that the transportation-related issues and compatibility of adjacent uses would be more appropriately addressed at the time when an application for development of the site is submitted. These issues are very development specific and can be best addressed under a planned development review procedure, as recommended through condition of approval#1. Transportation Planning Rule Compliance ODOT provided testimony addressing the assumptions underlying the applicant's evidence submitted to satisfy the Transportation Planning Rule requirement for zone changes. General agreement was reached on the amount of development that would represent a reasonable worst case scenario with a 0.30 Floor Area Ratio. However, a difference remains in deciding which ITE Manual land use type is most appropriate to represent future development,with respect to the number of trips generated. Where ODOT prefers the Business Park land use type, the city agrees with the applicant that using the Office Park land use type better reflects the types of development anticipated by the proposed zone change under MUE. The city supports the August 3 memorandum from McKenzie that recommends a trip cap of 630 AM and 630 PM peak hour trips be applied to the 24.56 acres subject to the zone change. (Condition of Approval #3) Tobs Capacity Maintained Recommended condition of approval#2 requires future development within the MUE zone to include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EOA. This condition is supported by the applicant and was not an issue during the Commission hearing. Ci of Tigard/Fields Trust Cooperation The City has worked with Fred Fields over the years with respect to land use issues including acquisition of property for the Library in the early 2000s and acquisition,with Metro, of adjacent property to the east for natural resource conservation.This application is the outcome of efforts between the Fields Trust and the city to unlock the economic development potential of adjacent upland property,which has remained undeveloped in the heart of the city. The central problem has been a mismatch between the existing Industrial Park zoning designation and the slope of the subject site being unsuitable for industrial development (see Attachment 2 of the application: Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study, dated February 13,2014). The applicant's narrative describes this cooperative effort in detail. In February 2014, the results of the Development Analysis were shared with the City's Planning Commission and City Council. Both bodies gave the Trust and staff feedback on the Development Analysis, and expressed support for the overall direction recommended by that analysis. Both bodies anticipated a follow-up application from the Trust requesting a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change consistent with the Development Analysis recommendations. Infrastructure Finance Plan As a follow-up to the Development Analysis,the City applied for and received a grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to prepare an infrastructure finance plan for the Fields Trust property, as well as the surrounding Wall Street/Hunziker Road industrial area to the west and north. The purpose of the study was to quantify and size new public infrastructure for the area,with the hope of ultimately spurring economic development. The infrastructure study recognized that not only would the Fields Trust property need significant infrastructure investment,much of the adjacent industrial property - especially to the west of Wall Street-would also benefit from public infrastructure investment. The infrastructure plan was completed late last year and continues to inform the City's actions regarding the Wall Street/Hunziker Road area, as well as the Trust's planning for its property. Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment In March 2015, the City Council adopted an amendment to its 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) acknowledging that slope was not taken into account as a factor in determining the suitability of vacant or redevelopable land in the city for industrial uses. Both state law and Metro allow slope to be a limiting factor in the designation of industrial land. (See OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(B) and Metro's 2009 Urban Growth Report.) This omission resulted in an overstatement of available and suitable industrial land in Tigard. In fact, it obscured the city's deficit of industrial land supply. The amendment allowed industrially zoned properties with significant slope,like the Fields Trust property, to be rezoned for more feasible uses and highlights the need to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Council may approve, approve with modifications, approve with conditions, deny or adopt an alternative to an application for the legislative change or to remand to the commission for rehearing and reconsideration on all or part of an application. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Action on this item is supported by Tigard's Comprehensive Plan Goal 9.1 Policy 3, "The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available," and Council's 2014 Goal #6 to "develop and adopt strategic priorities,resources and programs that support the local economy." This action is also consistent with the city's Strategic Plan Goal 2 Objectives 1 and 2 that see to "make best use of undeveloped and underdeveloped land to increase the value of the city..." and "Build a healthy business climate that attracts, serves and employs more Tigard residents." A complete review of relevant comprehensive plan goals and policies is included in the attached staff report. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION June 16,2015 Fields Industrial Property Project update March 24,2015 Public Hearing for Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendment to Economic Opportunity Analysis. December 9, 2014 pre-development update and presentation of draft MOU September 9, 2014 discussion of the grant for the Public Infrastructure Finance Plan from the Department of Land Conservation and Development August 9,2014 update on Public Infrastructure Finance Plan February 18,2014 Fields Property Site Analysis study Attachments CPA2015-00004(Fields Trust) Staff Report CPA2015-00004 PC Minutes Ordinance Application Materials PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION a TO CITY COUNCIL = FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FIELDS TRUST PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FILE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA2015-00004 Zone Change Amendment ZON2015-00005 PROPOSAL: The Fred W. Fields Trust proposes to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential (L) to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial (IL) and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. APPLICANT Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust OWNER: Fred W. Fields Revocable c/o Miller Nash Graham& Dunn LLP Living Trust Attention: Kelly Hossain 111 SW 5th Ave, #3400 Portland, OR 97204 LOCATION: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road & SW' Wall Street; WCTM and Tax Lots 251010001100, 2S101 CA00100, 25101 DB00300, and 25101 DB00400. CURRENT ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: I-P: industrial park district. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers,in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated,attractively landscaped,and pedestrian-friendly. 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. 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. PL.ANN]NG CONINJISSION R1:C01`7�11?ND.1"1'lON"lY)COUNCIL-.A000S"1'17,2015 PUB].IC III;.ARING (;),\2015-00004/1,111],D5 TRUSTCON1PRI'I11.N51VF PJ..\N.MEN DN11 NT ZON2011-00005/I+I1,.1,DS'1'RUS"]'"/.ONI?CI1.\NGI? PAGE 1011,18 PROPOSED ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: MUE: mixed-use employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to appply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use emp)oyment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi- family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community+ recreation facilities, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and- ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and wi� the Triangle, it is still important to (1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and (2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the city through the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.380;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1,2,9 and 10; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9 and 10; Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 9; the Oregon State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) 660-012-0060; and Metro Title 4. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL to City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and Zone Change subject to the Findings in Section IV of this Staff Report and the following recommended conditions of approval. Amendments bj, the Planning Commission to the conditions of approval recommended in the staff report are indicated in bold itallic, below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The planned development overlay zone shall be applied concurrently with the proposed MUE zone. 2. Future development within the MUE zone shall include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EOA. 3. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 630 a.m. peak hour trips and 630 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more . a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) with Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660- 12-0060 analysis will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed. The trip cap shall be implemented as a condition of approval on subsequent land use permits for proposed development and will be listed as a condition of approval in the ordinance adopting the zone change,if approved by the City Council. 4. The applicant shall record an easement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument on the subject property that is acceptable to the city to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is maintained along the eastern property boundary abutting the Rolling Hills subdivision. SECTION III BACKGROUND INFORMATION PLANNING COMMISSION RI3COMMENDA11ON TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HE UNG CP.A2015-00004/FIIAI)S TRUST COMPREHENSIVE PIAN AINiF_NDriLNT ZON2011-00005/FIELDS TRUST'ZONE CHANGE PAGE 2 OF 18 Commission Hearing and Deliberation The Planning Commission helda hearing on July 20, 2015 to consider the request and take public testimony. The record was left open until August 3rd for additional testimony, and until August 10th for rebuttal testimony. All testimony was posted to the city's website for interested parties to review. The Commission continued the hearing to August 17, 2015 for deliberation. Neighborhood Testimony The Rolling Hills community testified, with some thirty comment letters, to a peaceful enclave, an oasis, where two generations of families have enjoyed a wonderful quality of life; where, as the traffic around them has grown intolerable, they have been able to preserve calm streets that foster close social ties among each other. Their testimony addressed four basic issues aimed at protecting the quality of life of the Rolling Hills neighborhood. 1) Identifying that traffic in the surrounding area currently exceeds the capacity of the street network; 2) Requesting closure of Varns Street at the Fields property to limit traffic through the neighborhood. 3) Supporting an historic 50-foot forested buffer along the full length of the neighborhood. 4) Requesting less intense zoning adjacent to the northern part of the neighborhood at 76t" and Crestview. The commission supported the 50-foot forested buffer, as recommended through condition #4,but found that the transportation-related issues and compatibility= of adjacent uses would more appropriately be addressed at the time of development application under a planned development review procedure, as recommended through condition of approval#1. Trans ortation Planning Rule Compliance ODOT provided testimony addressing the assumptions underlying the applicant's evidence submitted to satisfy* the Transportation Planning Rule requirement for zone changes. General agreement was reached on the amount of development that would represent a reasonable worst case scenario with a 0.30 Floor Area Ratio. However, a difference remains with respect to the number of trips generated as determined by the type of development anticipated. Where ODOT prefers the Business Park land use type, the city agrees with the applicant that using the Office Park land use type better reflects the slope constraint on the site that underlies the proposed zone change. The city supports the August 3rd MacKenzie Memo recommendation for a trip cap of 630 AM and 630 PM peak hour trips be applied to the 24.56 acres subject to the zone change,as recommended through condition of approval#3. Jobs Capacity Maintained Recommended condition of approval #2 requires future development within the MUE zone to include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EOA. This condition is supported by the applicant and was not an issue during the Commission hearing. Site History The 42.5-acre property that is the subject of this application was owned by Fred W. Fields for many years before his death in 2011. It is presently owned by the Fred W. Fields Trust,The current zoning designations on the property have been in effect for several decades. The industrially zoned portion of the property was nominally used as part of the Coe Manufacturing facility,located at 7930 SW Hunziker Road, directly across Wall Street. Although this property was never fully developed, in the late 1960s a rail spur was constructed along the western edge of the property abutting Wall Street. Beginning in the early 1950s, the southwestern end of the industrially zoned portion of the property was used as a brick-making facility. Remnants of that facility still exist, including a concrete foundation. In 2012, the Trust had an on-site horizontal mine shaft, which was used for clay removal, filled in for safety reasons.A single family home existed on the residentially zoned portion of the property, but was demolished in 2012. There have been no other uses of the property during the last 70 or so years. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL—AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC II AIUNG CPA2015-00004/FIl-�LDS'PRUS'T C:OMPREFIRNSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/FIHLDS TRUS!r ZONIs CRXNGE PAGE 3 OF 18 City of Tigard/Fields Trust Cooperation The City has worked with Fred Fields over the years with respect to land use issues including acquisition of property for the Library in the early 2000s and acquisition, with Metro, of adjacent property to the east for natural resource conservation. This application is the outcome of efforts between the Fields Trust and the city to unlock the development potential of adjacent upland property, which has remained undeveloped in the heart of the city. The central problem has been a mismatch between the existing Industrial Park zoning designation and the slopes on the subject site being unsuitable for industrial development as outlined in Attachment 2 of the application: Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study, dated February 13,2014. The applicant's narrative describes this cooperative effort in detail. In February 2014, the results of the Development Analysis were shared with the City's Planning Commission and City Council. Both bodies gave the Trust and staff feedback on the Development Analysis, and expressed support for the overall direction recommended by that analysis. Both bodies anticipated a follow- up application from the Trust requesting a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change consistent with the Development Analysis recommendations. Infrastructure Finance Plan As a follow-up to the Development Analysis, the City applied for and received a grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to prepare an infrastructure finance plan for the Fields Trust property, as well as the surrounding Wall Street/Hunziker Road industrial area to the west and north. The purpose of the study was to quantify the need for and appropriate size of public infrastructure in the area, with the hope of ultimately spurring economic development. The infrastructure study recognized that not only would the Fields Trust property need significant infrastructure investment, much of the adjacent industrial property - especially to the west of Wall Street - is substantially underdeveloped and would also benefit from public infrastructure investment. The infrastructure plan was completed late last year and continues to inform the City's actions regarding the Wall Street/Hunziker Road area, as well as the Trust's planning for its property. Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment In March 2015, the City Council adopted an amendment to its 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) acknowledging that slope was not taken into account as a factor in determining the suitability of vacant or redevelopable land in the city for industrial uses. Both state law and Metro allow slope to be a limiting factor in the designation of industrial land. (See OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(B) and Metro's 2009 Urban Growth Report.) This omission resulted in an overstatement of available and suitable industrial land in Tigard, resulting in a deficit of industrial land supply. The amendment allows industrially zoned properties with significant slope, like the Fields Trust property, to be rezoned for more feasible uses and highlights the need, under an efficient land needs scenario, to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment. Site Information and Proposal Description The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light IndustriWl 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial CP),and 2.1 acres o Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Lag t ndustrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of AIUE. The application is required to meet approval criteria set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code (IMC or Municipal Code)Title 18 Community Development Code.The application is submitted in response to site slopes and other constraints which make the eastern portion of the site unsuitable for industrial uses. No development plans accompany this land use application and no specific development plans exist for the majority of the pornon of the property subject to e comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change. The proposed amendment and zone change is shown in the applicant's figure below. PLANNING C OhM1ISSION RECOMMENDA'170N'ro COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CI'.12015-00004/1--IEI,DS'rRUST COMPRI31IENSItT PIAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/14ELDS TRUST'ZONE CI4ANGE PAGE 4 OF 18 Ffelds Trust Zone dime Hunsl&PropoYWZll on C-G bdstir�t�wapos.d Zona ti MUE' � PR s1.' CRfMIFW ST Proposed l-P \ w -•..••-•.•-- /Zoning SW VARNS ST K / popo R-25 ProZonirtgM\� R-3.5 N / \ SW FIR S7r R-12R-12 PR SWC1/ERRYDR r { Q MACKENZIE. C-P Vicinity Information The site is located south of Hunziker Road and east of Wall Street. The low density residential Rolling Hills neighborhood borders the subject site to the east. A railroad switching yard abuts the site on the southwest with aprivate rail spur running across the subject property adjacent and parallel to Wall Street. Red Rock Creek flows paralle to Wall Street to the west of Charter 1\lechanical and the city's Potso Dog Park located across Wall Street from the subject site. The Hunziker Industrial Core area extends further to the west from Red Rock Creek to SVG' Hall Blvd between Hwy 217 and the railroad. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.380: 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in Subsection B below. A. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The Council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Section 18.390. The proposed zone change application to change the zoning on the subject site from I-P, C-P, and R-3.5 PI..INNING COMNIISSION RECOMMHNRATION 7'O COUNCIL- WGUS1'17,2015 PUBLIC I IIF.:IRING CP.i2015-0(1004!1+II?LDS'1 itUS"1'COMI'R1:111:NtiI\'1? 1)1..W:kNII,NDN4FNT /.ON2011-00005,'F11 I DS 1'RU51'GONli CI L\N(;1: P.1G1's 5 OIC 18 to MUE also involves a comprehensiveplan map amendment from Industrial Park, Professional Commercial and Low Density Residential to Mixed Use Employment. Therefore, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to Council on the proposed zone change application and comprehensive plan map amendment. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 18.380.030. B.1 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES The City has an acknowledgged Comprehensive Plan consistent with the statewide planning goals. Therefore, consistency with the applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies as addressed in this section of the staff report constitute consistency with the applicable statewide planning goals. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. The applicant's representative sent out notices to surrounding property- owners and neighborhood representatives, posted a sign on the property, and held a neighborhood meeting on May 6, 2015 in accordance with the City of Tigard's neighborhood meeting notification process (Application, Attachment 5); as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. In addition, the City mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, interested citizens, and agencies, published notice of the hearing, and posted the site pursuant to TDC 18.390.050 for Type III Procedures.These parties have the opportunity to attend the Planning Commission hearing and provide testimony. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed comprehensive plan and zone change is consistent with the applicable Citizen Involvement Goal. LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 3. The City shall coordinate the adoption, amendment, and implementation of its land use program with other potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. Notice and request for comments for the proposed zone change were sent to Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Metro, Washington County and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). ODOT and Metro submitted comments on the proposal, which are included in the findings of this report,below.This policy is met. Policy 5. The City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro-designated Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial areas. As shown in the applicant's materials 37.4 acres of subject property is included on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) as a designated Industrial Area. Of this amount, 17.9 acres would remain in the current I-P zone and 19.4 acres would be changed from Industrial Area to Employment Area by virtue of a zone change to MUE. Given the unsuitability of the eastern portion of the property for industrial uses, changing the comprehensive plan and zoning to MUE will enable the City to promote a more intense urban development of the site. This policy is met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING (;P,k2015-00004/1^IGLDS"I'RUSI'COMPREI-IENSI\'1 PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/I-'IELDS'17tUS'1'ZONfi CI I.1NGI? PAGE, 6 OF 18 Policy 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. As stated in the applicant's narrative, the rationale for the map amendments is to allow for a range of development opportunities on the up-hill portion of the site that would offset the considerable development costs associated with site grading and public improvement requirements necessary to lead to industrial uses on the flatter, western portion. Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan to account for the slope constraints on approximately 17 acres of the site that hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. The industrial uses, by themselves, would not provide sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services. The costs of developing this constrained parcel to accommodate industrial activities undermine the potential economic value of the parcel itself as currently zoned, and have led to it remaining vacant. In combination with the remaining I-P land, the proposed rezoning to MUE provides a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services for the site and advance the City's social and fiscal stability. This policy is met. Policy 7. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: A. Residential; B. Commercial and office employment including business parks; C. Mixed use; D. Industrial; E. Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted; and F. Public services. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IP to'MUE. The need for industrial land is established in the city's 2011 EOA which indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant industrial is 48 acres and the 20-year supply is 50 acres. Although this action would decrease the industrial land area, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment types some of which are also allowed in the IP zone, such as office use. The simultaneous designation of 2.1 acres from R-3.5 to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. In the context of the City's overall supply of residential land, a reduction of 2.1 acres of low density residential is minimal compared to the increase in residential capacity permitted in the MUE at 25 units per acre. The proposed MUE zone permits a number of residential, civic, commercial, and industrial uses not currently permitted in the C-P zone. Where no residential or industrial uses are permitted in the C-P zone, the MtTEermits multifamily residential (R-25), light industrial, research and development, and some warehouse%freight movement. Civic uses are expanded in the MUE to include colleges, schools, and community recreation. Commercial uses such as commercial lodging, eating drinking establishments and sales oriented retail, where limited to a percentage of permitted uses in the C-P, are permitted outright in the MUE. On balance the proposal would provide a wider range of uses under the MUE zone suitable for a sloped site,while limiting several uses currently permitted in the IP zone, such as industrial services and wholesale sales. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code will continue to implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses. This policy is met. Policy 14. Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and when necessary, those of the state and other agencies. The applicant's narrative provides evidence that the application substantially complies with applicable criteria of the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the Tigard Community Development Code. This policy is met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECONINIEND.ITION TO COUNCIL—.AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC III?ARING (:P.12015-00004;'1-11?l,Ds'I'RUSI'CUniPRI?I 1ENSIVI. ILAN.AMENDMENT /.ON2011-00005/1,1Fl.DS TRUS ZONE CI IANG1: 11.1GF1 7 OF 18 Policy 15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation. Analysis of transportation impacts and public facility infrastructure (Application, Attachments 3 and 4) indicates that the site would have access to infrastructure with sufficient capacityty to accommodate development of the site under existing zoning or proposed zoning, and future development of the site would improve both Hunziker Road and Wall Street. The Transportation Planning Rule analysis (Attachment 3) demonstrates that the PM peak trips for uses allowed in the existing and proposed zoning designations are similar; therefore, imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning will ensure the amendment has no significant impact on transportation facilities. As conditioned, this policy is met. B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services. As noted above, the applicant requests that the city- condition the approval of the requested zone change with atrip cap that does not exceed the total number of automobile trips associated with the most intense use, a medical/dental office. With a condition of approval implementing a trip cap on the subject site, this policy is met. C. The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment, housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location,versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; The applicant's Development analysis and Opportunity Study demonstrates that, due to slope constraints, the eastern portion of the subject property is constrained for large footprint industrial type development. The proposed alternative zone, MUE, permmil its multi-fay residential development, which has been the focus ofdeveloperand real estate market interest in the site. The applicant has shown that the ph Tsicallyy constrained portion of the property is more suitable for residential or office development than industrial. This policy is met. D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; The proposal is for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning for land that is physically constrained and not appropriate for its existing industrial designation. Given that the current industrial designation is not appropriate for the site another more suitable designation is required. Under this action this criterion does not apply since NIUE is an appropriate replacement designation but it is not necessarily related to whether there is an inadequate amount of NIUE designation in other areas. This criterion does not apply. E. Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled. The applicant states uses allowed in the MUE zone can be arranged and clustered to fit into the site topography rather than requiring mass grading to create the large, flat sites that would be necessary for industrial uses. Subsequent Planned De-,-elopment, Conditional Use and/or Site Development Reviews would ensure development would comply with all applicable development code regulations. The subject site is not currently designated with any overlay zones such as historic (HD) or planned development (PD). This policy is met. F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible,with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses. PL.\NNING COnI1\IISSION 1U CO1P\ILND;\'I'ION'I'O COUNCIL—.\UGUS'I'17,2015 PLIBLIC Ill.',\1tlNG CP.12015-00004/III:LD5"1'RUSI'CO;\tI'RI?IIHNST\'I?Pl..\N�\Ml?ND;\4F?N'I' /.ON2011-00005/loll:LDS TRUST'ZONE.CI 1.AN(;F PAGE 8 Ole 18 The applicant's Development Analysis and Opportunity Study identifies site constraints that any development would need to address. Constraints include slope and configuration of site, slope of Hunziker, Wall Street TSP classification and rail spur, wetlands, trees, limited access, and noise from the railroad switching yard. Surrounding land uses include low density sing-family attached and detached residential and industrial uses. The range of uses permitted in the MUE zone would reqquire Conditional Use and/or Site Development Review to ensure development would comply with all applicable development code regulations and be compatible with surrounding land uses. However, the complexity of the site characteristics including environmental conditions and surrounding land uses suggests a process that provides flexibility in site design to maximize the opportunities and mitigate for the constraints of the site and surrounding land uses. Use of the Planned Development overlay zone is the be the best way to ensure permitted uses in the MUE zone are compatible, or are capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses. This is demonstrated through the purpose statement of the Planned Development section of the Development Code: 18.350.010 Purpose A. The purposes of the planned development overlay done are: 1. To provide a means for properly development that it consistent with Tigar d's Comprehensive Plan ihrortgh the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the city,and 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural arras or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of srgn:ficant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets tlmt contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community_,bevelopmeni Code;and 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use ofopen space, innovative trap�ortation facrlrtres) which will retain their character and city ben fits, while respecting the characteristics of existing rreighborlroods through Appropriate buffering and lot size transitionin •and 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landsc e tures and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) thraugb the use of a planning procedure (rite design and analysis,presentation of alternatives, conceptual miew, then detailed review)that can relate the type and design of a development to aparticular site;and 5. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the ci ; and 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials A planned development overlay on the proposed MUE zone would best ensure development's compatibility with site conditions.With a condition requiring the PD overlay,this policy is met. G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. The subject site contains jurisdictional wetlands in the northwest area of the site, steep slopes along the southern edge of the site, and lower value significant habitat designation on the uplands portion of the site The applicant has proposed accepting a condition of approval on the zone change requiring a 50-foot forested buffer along the eastern boundary of the site, which would support the habitat values of the site. Staff suggests that the applicant alternatively provide the buffer by recording a buffer easement on the lot line-adjusted parcel containing the boundary. As identified in the planned development purposes above, the planned development standards are designed to balance environmental resource protection with context sensitive site design. This policy is met. Policy 16. The City may condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s) and per specific design /development requirements. The applicant has determined that due to extraordinary development costs, the flatter western portion of the site (which would continue to maintain I-P zoning) is only likely to develop if the steeper eastern portion can also be developed with some mix of employment and/or residential use. Knowing that staff is interested in ensuring job capacity on the subject site,the applicant respectfully requests that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. The applicant cites the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions in support of this request. PL,XNNING COMMISSION IU:COMMENOXIION TO COUNCIL—AUGUST 17,2015 PUBI.1C HEARING CPA2015-00004/FII"LDS'I'RUSTCOMPFX-141 NSIVF.I'L.kNAMENDMENT l.ON2011-00005/1ZILLDS'I7I1UST ZONE CHANGE PAGE 9 OF 18 Staff finds, consistent with findings in the amended 2011 EOA, that slope constraints reduce the subject site's suitability for some large-footprint industrial uses, but that there is potential for employment use of slope-constrained sites. The city's limited inventory of buildable lands highlights the need to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment within an efficient land needs scenario. Although the city supports opening the development potential of the whole site with the proposed zone change to MUE of the slope constrained portion of the site, it also must protect its employment capacity, which can best be managed through the planned development review process. Therefore, staff recommends a condition of approval to ensure the area of the subject property zoned MUE provides a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity and application of the PD overlay to provide a deliberate process that balances the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the city. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Land Use policies have been met. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to City Council a condition of approval requiring a definite land use (employment, 280 non-retail jobs) and a Planned Development Overlay be applied to allow for specific design/development requirements in order to meet the applicable Land Use policies. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal 9.1: Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy. Policy 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available. The applicant states that industrial development by itself is not able to economically offset the high cost of on-site grading costs, public improvements to abutting streets, and utility extensions. MUE rates of return would allow the high infrastructure costs associated with the development of this property to be financed by the development itself. The intent of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is to create flexibility that generates job-creating development in the City. This policy is met. Policy 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. The applicant states that under the current zoning, the site has remained undeveloped for many years due to the development constraints outlined in Section Il of the Fields Property Development Analysis. The proposal would respond to market conditions by allowing a mix of uses on the easternportion while preserving the western portion for industrial employers. The proposed zone change would allow a more efficient use of employment land than the current underutilized condition. Well designed and efficient development can be assured through the deliberative planned development process that provides flexibility in site design and such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. This policy is met. Policy 6. The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro-designated Employment and Industrial Areas. Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) shows the I-P-zoned parcels of the subject site (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. The evidence in the application shows that despite relatively high demand for light industrial land and low supply, this site has not developed for light industrial use and is unlikely to do so in the future because of its unsuitable site characteristics and development constraints. The applicant states that the MUE zoning on the eastern portion allows the site to be developed with some combination of employment and multifamily workforce housing use and allows the site to be developed in a more flexible way. Development allowed under the MUE zone will help create a stronger, more diversified, and sustainable development on this site, which in turn will help PLANNING COMMISSION RFCOMNIENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC 14E.\RING CP.\2015-00004/I;IE1.1)S'1'RUST COMPREI iENSI\T PIAN AMENDMENT 'LON2011-00005/MELDS,mu, "LONE CI IANGL' PAGE 10 OF 18 the local economy. Provided the MUE zone is indeed developed with mixed uses, including employment, the re-zone will promote greater, more efficient, utilization of Metro-designated employment and industrial lands. This police-is met. Policy 7. The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metro-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of these lands for industrial jobs. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. In accordance with Metro Title 4, Section 3.07.430, Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the I-P zone (Table 18.530.1, Note 2). In accordance with Metro Title 4, Section 3.07.440, Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the MUE zone (Table 18.520.1, Note 22). Approval of the proposed comprehensive map amendment would functionally convert 19.4 acres of the site into a Title 4 Employment Area from a Title 4 Industrial Area, where commercial retail uses are restricted, consistent with the purpose of Title 4 to protect a supply of sites for employment. This policy is met. Policy 12. The City shall assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality that are necessary for a sustainable economic future. The proposed MUE rezone should unlock the development potential of the site. The city can assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality by placing a PD overlay over the MUE zone to provide such added benefits through the planned development process as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. This policy is met. Goal 9.3: Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business. Policy 1. The City shall focus a significant portion of future employment growth and high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center (Downtown); Regional Center (Washington Square); High Capacity Transit Corridor (Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. The subject site is located outside of the listed plan districts. The disposition of employment and housing uses across the site should acknowledge the direction of this policy and can best be considered with the planned development process. This policy is met. FINDING: As show in the analysis above, the applicable Economic Development policies are substantially met with application of a condition of approval requiring a PD overlay and a minimum threshold of employment use within the proposed MUE zone. HOUSING Goal 10.1: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policy 5. The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square), and along transit corridors where employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future (SW Pacific Hwy). The proposed zoning designation, MUE, permits "medium high-density" housing at 25 units/acre as an outright use. There appears to be market support for multi-family housing at this location (Fields Development Analysis II.2). Multi-family residential use on the subject property has been a key expectation for development in the proposed MUE zone. However, the subject site is not located in a town center, regional center or along a transit corridor. Currently, the site does not provide ready access to E opportunities, commercial services, transit, or other public services necessary to support higher population densities. However, the hope is that the rezone will catalyze the transformation of the area where some of these opportunities and services will become available. The MUE zone allows commercial uses and staff recommends a condition of approval requiring a minimum job density for the PLANNING COMMISSION R1 COMniIiND.\"1'ION'i'O COUNCIL—.1UGUS'1'17,2075 PUBLIC H1 .\RING (TA2015-00004/1-11 SIDS TRUST COMPRl31 IENSI\`I;PL,1N.1MLNDh11iN"1' %ON2011-00005/11F,LDS TRUST%ONE Cl1ANGli 11AGIi 11 OF 18 proposed NIUE zoned area. In addition, the city's Public Infrastructure Finance Strategy is likely to lead to unproved street connectivity in the area, and the Southwest Corridor Plan includes new access across 217 connecting SW Beveland with Wall Street, potentially with high-capacity transit service. Staff further recommends a condition requiring application of the PD overlay concurrently with the MME zone. Planned Developlimits Review for future development will create the best opportunity to consider an amount of development on a site, within the of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer,neighbors, and the city.As conditioned, this policy is met. Goal 10.2: Maintain a high level of residential livability. Policy 6. The City shall promote innovative and well-designed housing development through application of planned developments and community design standards for multi-family housing. The proposed zoning designation, MUE, permits "medium high-density" housing at 25 units/acre as an outright use. There appears to be market support for multi-family housing at this location (Fields Development Analysis II.2). I\sulti-family residdential use on the subjectproperty has been a key expectation for development in the proposed MUE zone. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring application of the PD overlay concurrently with the MUE zone. Planned Development Review for future development will provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other q pes of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. In addition a planned development process can help achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning. With the PD overlay, the proposed MUE zone will promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. Policy 7. The City shall insure that residential densities are appropriately related to locational characteristics and site conditions such as the presence of natural hazards and natural resources, availability of public facilities and services, and existing land use patterns. The proposed MUE zone allows for multifamily residential construction at a density of 25 units/acre. The subject site is distinguished by the hillside location with views out to the west, the presence of a mature stand of trees that characterizes the hill from views elsewhere in the city, and limited access to the transportation network and other services to support higher density residential development. As described above, there are transportation and access improvements being planned for the area. The applicant has offered to provide a 5h-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P toning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, the proposed MUE zone can promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. Policy 8. The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing, or more intense, land uses on residential living environments,such as: A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another, B. protection of existing vegetation, natural resources and provision of open space areas;and C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowe&in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts.With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, the proposed MUE zone can promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned,this policy is met. 9. The City shall require infill development to be designed to address compatibility with existing neighborhoods. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 1'O COUNCIL.-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HF 1RING CPA2015-00004/1;IJ?LDS'17tUST COMPREI-IL:NSIvE Pl„1N AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/I71 L.DS 1RU51'ZONE CHANGE PAGE 12 OF 18 The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density Rolling Hills residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, development in the MUE zone can support unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation tilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering. As conditioned,this policy is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Housing policies, as supported by the recommended condition of approval requiring the PD overlay zone, can be met. 18.380.030.B.2 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and FINDING: For the purposes of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change, the applicant has satisfactorily addressed the applicable Sections of TDC Chapter 18.380, Zoning Map and Text Amendments. The standards of TDC Chapter 18.390.050 for Type III-PC procedures are applicable to this proposal, as identified in 18.380.030. Theapplicant has submitted an Impact Statement as required under 18.390.050.B.e. The public acilities impact study is included as Attachment 4 to the application. The applicant concurs with the requirement to dedicate right-of-way along Hunziker Road and Wall Street in conjunction with future development. Because no development is being proposed as part of this application, no right-of-way dedication is warranted at this time. Anticipated uses include multifamily residential and office. Any proposed development must meet all of the applicable Tigard Development Code standards in effect at the time an application is submitted. As shown in the analysis above, the proposed comprehensive map and zone change amendment complies with the applicable standards of the Tigard Development Code. 18.380.030.B.3 Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. FINDING: In March of 2015 the City adopted a Post Acknowledgment Plan Amendment to the City of Tigard's 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (Ord 15-06), which 1) acknowledges that slope was not applied as a development constraint factor in the Inventory of Suitable Sites (Land Suppl ), 2) applies slo a as a suitability constraint for properties currently zoned industrial (!�P, II-L, and I-I-l�, and 3) qualifies the Assessment of Potential with respect to slope constraints. The slopes on the subject property represent the majority of the lands addressed by the EOA amendment. The EOA amendment provides evidence of a mistake in the comprehensive plan in support of the proposal comprehensive plan and zone change from I-P to MUE. The proposal meets this standard for zone changes. 18.380.030.0 Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050. A legislative decision may be approved or denied. FINDING: The land use action requested is quasi-judicial as it is limited to specific parcels and does not apply generally across the city. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommendation to Council may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions. Staff has prepared proposed recommended conditions of approval for the Commission's consideration. APPLICABLE STATE AND METRO REGULATIONS OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES PMNNING COMMISSION 1112COMMENDA110N TO COUNCIL—AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC IM-m 1NG CP.\2015-00004/PI1RLDS'111UST COMPREFIENSIVL I'I,AN AMENDmi.- 7.ON2011-00005/I-IIsl<DS'172UST ZONE CHANGTF PAGE- 13 OF 18 Economic Development OAR 660 Division 9 —Economic Development 660-009-0010 Application (4) For a post-acknowledgement plan amendment under OAR chapter 660, division 18, that changes the plan designation of land in excess of two acres within an existing urban growth boundary from an industrial use designation to a non-industrial use designation, or another employment use designation to any other use designation, a city or county must address all applicable planning requirements, and: (a) Demonstrate that the proposed amendment is consistent with its most recent economic opportunities analysis and the parts of its acknowledged comprehensive plan which address the requirements of this division; or (b) Amend its comprehensive plan to incorporate the proposed amendment, consistent with the requirements of this division; or (c) Adopt a combination of the above, consistent with the requirements of this division. FINDING: The City's 2011 EOA compares demand and supply of employment lands to evaluate the land inventory over a 20-year period. The Analysis indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IL to N1tTE. Although this action would decrease the area of land with an industrial designation, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment use since the NIVE designation accommodates a variety of employment types. The simultaneous redesignation of two acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. The City of Tigard's ECA indicates that the City has a surplus of two acres of industrial land; however, Ordinance 15-06 recognized that the City is "now potentially in deficit for industrial zoned vacant land." The proposed zone change affecting the site would deplete the two-acre surplus by converting approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE; however, this depletion would be partially offset by converting 0.4 acres from C-P to I-P. Taken together, the proposed zone change would need to compensate for the jobs associated with a net reduction of 17 acres of industrial land. While there is no guarantee that the site would produce jobs under the existing zoning (as evidenced by the current lack of development), for the purposes of comparison, employment density assumptions from the EOA have been used to quantify the number of jobs that could be expected on 17 industrial acres. Based on 16.5 industrial jobs per acre (derived from the 794 jobs on 48 industrial acres identified in the HOA), 17 acres of industrial land would lead to an employment level of approximately 280 jobs. Approval of the zone change could therefore decrease the City's employment potential by 280 jobs unless these jobs can be accommodated elsewhere. The proposed NIUE zone permits a variety of employment uses, including office uses, which are also allowed in the I-P zone. To the extent the proposed NIUE zone preserves the ability to create jobs on the subject site, jobs capacity will not be decreased. To ensure preservation of jobs capacity, staff recommends a condition of approval that requires 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the 1\,1tTE-zoned portion of the site. Analysis of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan economic policies, as addressed above in this report, supports the recommended jobs capacity requirement. Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660 Division 12—Transportation Planning PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONTO COUNCIL-.\UGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC 1-11t.-\RING CI'.\2015-00004/]�I I?LDS'1'RUS"1'COi\iPR I�J 1 ENSU'F:PL,�N.\1FiENDT4iEN"1' /.ON2011-00005/MELDS IMUS]'%ON F'CI L\NGF. P.1G1-, 14 OF 18 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. [...1 (4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and other affected local governments. FINDING: TPR compliance is demonstrated in Attachment 3 of the application. This analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning (note that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning,regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built). Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned MUE except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Development of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) a ith housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 P1\1 peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the MUE zone were entirely multifamily housing and the I-P zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the NIUE zone and I-P zone were entirely office use, trip generation would be 715 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and medical-dental office use, trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. As conditioned, this regulation is met. METRO REGULATIONS Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 4—Industrial and Other Employment Areas 3.07.410 Purpose and Intent 3.07.420 Protection of Regionally Significant Industrial Areas 3.07.430 Protection of Industrial Areas 3.07.440 Protection of Employment Areas 3.07.450 Employment and Industrial Areas Map 1)1..\NNING CONINIISSION RI3CONINIPNLll.\T'ION 1'0COUNCIL-.\UGUSI'17,2015 PUBLIC l Il?,\ItlNG CP.\2015-00004/FIE'LDS 1'RUST COMPRE'I IFINSIVI?IT,\N.WENDMENT %ON2011-00005/I-'IE'LI)S TRUST%ONE'CI I,\NGE, P.IGI?15 0 18 FINDING: Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) shows the I-P- zoned parcels of the subject site (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to NIUE. In accordance with Section 3.07.430, Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the I-P zone (Table 18.530.1, Note 2). In accordance with Section 3.07.440, Tigard's Community Development Code limits thhe size and scope of commercial retail uses within the MUE zone (Table 18.520.1, Note 22). Approval of the proposed comprehensive map amendment would functionally convert 19.4 acres of the site into a Title 4 Employment Area from a Title 4 Industrial Area,where commercial retail uses are restricted, consistent with the purpose of Title 4 to protect a supply of sites for employment. This regulation is met. Section 3.07.450 allows the City to amend the use of lands on the Industrial and Other Employment Areas map based on satisfaction of a number of criteria. With the exception of a transportation impact analysis addressing regional freight movement for criteria #4, this site complies with those standards since the property is 1) not surrounded by RSIA or Industrial Area land;2) the change would increase rather than decrease the acreage devoted potentially to employment uses; 3) the site is not designated as RSIA; 5) the zone change would not lead to retail or cultural uses that compete with Central City or Regional or Town Centers; and 6) the property designated Industrial Area subject to the amendment is less than 20 acres (namely, 19.4 acres). In addition, as described in Ord 15-06, the eastern portion of the site is not suitable for industrial uses due to topographic constraints. 'Therefore, a Title 4 map amendment from industrial to employment would be indicated,if supported by a transportation impact analysis. SECTION V. OUTSIDE AGENCY AND ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS LCDC, ODOT, Metro, and Washington County were notified and requested to comment on the subject proposal. Of these agencies,-ODOT and Metro provided comment. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) commented verbally on the proposal taking issue with the assumptions of the TPR analysis with respect to existing use trip generation. As of the publish date of this report, written comments have not been received. Condition 3 has been imposed to account for ODOT's concern and to allow for a revised TPR analysis. Metro commented on the proposal whose comments are included in the findings in this staff report. The City of Tigard's Public Works Department reviewed the proposal and commented that they have no objections to the proposal. The City of T�'gard's Development Review Engineer reviewed and accepted the TPR analysis prepared by MacKenzie dated May 11,2015. SECTION VI. STAFF ANALYSIS ANALYSIS: Zone Change Request The proposed Mixed Use Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development types which can better accommodate slope constraints while also reducing potential conflicts between uses on the subject property and abutting residential developwent. The proposed zone change, primarily from I-P to MUE, has the potential to'increase economic development in Tigard by properly accounting for development economics applicable to the different portions of the site. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-,IUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CRM15-00004/17TELDS TRUST COMPREHI NSIlT PLAN AMENDMENT 70N2011-00005/MELDS'TRUST ZONE CI LINGE PAGE 16 OF 18 Outstanding Issues Planned Develo ment Overla• Zone The complexity of the subject site's characteristics (Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study) including environmental conditions and surrounding land uses suggests a process that provides flexibility in site design to maximize the opportunities and mitigate for the constraints of the site and surrounding land uses. Use of the Planned Development overlay zone is the best way to ensure permitted uses and development design in the MUE zone are compatible with existing development and include the required employment capacity. (Condition 1) Protect Employment Capacity The applicant cites the importance of maintaining flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions to support a request that the City allow any permitted use in the WE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. However, the city wishes to ensure employment capacity is maintained within mixed use zones and recommends requiringg as a condition of approval a minimum lob density on the proposed MUE portion of the site. (Condition 2) Transportation Planning Rule compliance The applicant proposes l n iting trip generation of future uses permitted in the MUE zone to that allowed under the existing zoning, as shown in the Mackenzie TPR analysis dated May 11, 2015 (or as amended), to avoid a significant effect finding. The city will require a trip cap to limit future development to existing trip generation rates. Transportation analyses required with new development applications must be consistent with the trip cap limitation. (Condition 3) Rolling Hills Buffer The applicant proposes accepting a condition of approval of the zone change requiring a 50-foot buffer between the proposed WE zone and the existing R-3.5-zoned Rolling Hills development to the east. The buffer was an artifact of the previous Comprehensive Plan, which is no longer in effect, to buffer potentially allowed industrial uses from the existing residential uses. However, the applicant's willingness to accept a condition acknowledges that a buffer remains important to the livability of the Rolling Hills neighborhood even with more intense commercial uses permitted under the MUE zone. (Condition 4) In lieu of a condition of approval with this zone change, the Fields Trust may otherwise record in advance of the Council hearing an easement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is placed on the subject property for the benefit of the city. Metro's Title 4 compliance The city will request an amendment of Metro's Title 4 map for the MUE zoned portion of the site from industrial to employment based on the suitability analysis of the subject site contained in the city's amended 2011 EOA, SECTION VII. PLANNING COMMISSION CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION CONCLUSION: Based on the foregoing findings and analysis, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed comprehensive plan map and zone change amendments are consistent with applicable provisions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Tigard Development Code, statewide planning goals and the Transportation Planning Rule, and provides evidence of a mistake in the comprehensive plan (City of Tigard 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. To ensure consistency, the Planning Commission recommends certain conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of the proposed comprehensive plan map and zone change amendments with recommended conditions of approval and any others conditions the Council deems appropriate through the public hearing process. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST'17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CP,120154WIN/FIELDS TRUST COMPRI311ENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005JFIELDS TRUST ZONE CHANGE PAGE 17 OF 18 PASSED: THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. CIA Jason Rogers,Planning Commission Presiden Dated this day of August. 2015. Exhibits A. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation B. Proposed Zoning PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMME-NDATION TO COUNCIL—AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004/17113LI?S TRUST COMPREML:NSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/F']I3].DS TRUST ZONE,CHANGE PAGE,18 OI`18 � vkVN IL UE IL d l SW�CRESTVIEW$ IL SW VARNS ST l j Q C)$ MUE MH SW IR ST Legend r Site Taxlots CG: General Commercial CP: Professional Commercial IL: Light Industrial D . L: Low Density Residential SW CHERRY � M: Medium Density Residential p Z MH: Medium-High Density Residential MH N MUE: Mixed Use Employment 0 " 350 769 OS: Open Space � - AX C_G Elq R� 1� SITE 'S't� M U E I-L OffSWICRESTVIEW ST SW VARNS ST W Q Cp MUE R-25 3 Legend R-3.5 SW FIR ST Site Taxlots C-G:General Commercial C-P: Professional Commercial I-L: Light Industrial C-P I-P: Industrial Park MUE: Mixed Use Employment SW CHERRY DRLU Q PR: Parks and Recreation � R-3.5: Low-Density Residential R-12: Medium-Density Residential R-25: Medium High-Density Residential J1 175 .350 N CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes August 17,2015 CALL TO ORDER President Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Rogers Vice President Fitzgerald Commissioner Middaugh Alt. Commissioner Mooney Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Schmidt Absent: Alt. Commissioner Enloe; Commissioner Feeney; Commissioner Lieuallen Staff Present: Tom McGuire,Assistant Community Development Director; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner;Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant;Lloyd Purdy,Economic Development Manager COMMUNICATIONS—None CONSIDER MINUTES August 3 Meeting Minutes: President Rogers asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the August 3 minutes; there being none,Rogers declared the minutes approved as submitted. President Rogers explained to the audience that this is a continued hearing from July 20th and is open for Planning Commission Deliberation only. He said they will not be opening the record unless they have more questions for new information to be presented. They will consider the written testimony that had been submitted since the previous hearing. President Rogers opened the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED FIELDS TRUST PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE — CPA2015-00004, ZON2015-00005 REQUEST: The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial(CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential (L) to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial (IL)and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment(MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE.APPLICANT: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust August 17, 2015 Page 1 of 4 LOCATION: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road & SW Wall Street ZONES: I-P: Industrial Park; C-P: Professional Commercial;R-3.5: Low-Density Residential QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS President Rogers read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no abstentions;no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: Commissioners Schmidt, Middaugh, Muldoon, Rogers, Fitzgerald, Mooney had made site visits. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. DELIBERATION President Rogers asked each commissioner, one by one, to give their thoughts on the written testimony and the rebuttals that had been submitted and the case set before them. Following are comments from the commissioners: • The main concern written about was with regard to traffic. This case isn't about a development;it's basically just a zone change at this time. • In 1986 there was a Resolution to keep Varns Street closed. The city should recognize that when a development comes in. • Regarding the two pieces of property not in the Rolling Hills Development—the request to be considered wouldn't be appropriate here. Again, this is just a zone change. • This request isn't about extending the roads —this is a rezoning. When there is a planned development—we'll address that then. • There was a concern about the commissioners not actually observing the neighborhood— we've all been there now and we've all seen it. It's a great neighborhood— I appreciate the close-knit community and kind of wish I lived there. • I'm in support of the request. I hear the concerns, but believe they're being addressed well. • I appreciate the testimony from the neighbors. • A good turnout from a passionate neighborhood. Once a development comes up, the opportunity to speak again will be here. • I'm facing the same type of thing in the Summerfield development. Everyone in my neighborhood figured the trees in our neighborhood would go on living a long,long time and now they're building garden style/cottage type apartments and my neighborhood is up in arms. I get it— the fear is that everyone's going to cut through our neighborhood and traffic flow is going to increase and they're going to bypass Scholls Ferry—and as a paramedic I don't want to see kids hurt in the neighborhood—none of that stuff. But the only thing we can do at the end of the day is participate in the public process. There are rules that are set up and I've chosen to get involved on the Planning Commission so that I can be involved on things like this. I would encourage everybody - and I know there are some open seats on this commission— so this is my plug- to get involved within the City. • So there are a bunch of issues here (in the written comments). There's this whole concept of Varns Street. Again, I think this is not under consideration for the Planning Commission at this point. But if there was an agreement, the next step of this—regardless of what happens is - this process goes to the City Council. The City Council will hear this again. All of you here should attend. The piece about Varns Street you should bring up. If there was an agreement with the city you need to bring it to the Mayor and the Council—the elected August 17, 2015 Page 2 of 4 officials. We are all volunteers that were appointed by the current City Council. You need to contact the elected officials and make sure that hey—we had this agreement. Remember us! • When we eventually see a plan—that's the point where we will get involved in the design, screening, conditions, etc. Right now we're talking about general zone changes. So that's a different process. We're just a little early on this one. • Traffic Impact analysis—Undoubtedly, as I look at the 10,000 foot view,if we were to punch Varns through at that point it makes a direct shot into Hwy217;there's no question in my mind what would happen to this neighborhood. Again, that conversation's a little early—this is a different conversation here. What we should be encouraged with is that at the point the property is developed... there will be a traffic impact study done by the developer at that point. It's a requirement—as well as a mitigation plan. For example, Walmart had to do a traffic study and they had to do traffic mitigation as well. That has to occur. REVIEW OF CONDITIONS At this point the commissioners looked at the language of the conditions and deliberated on what they wanted the motion to look like. After a short deliberation, there was a motion. MOTION Commissioner Fitzgerald made the following motion: "I move for approval of application CPA2015-00004, ZON2015-00005 and adoption of the findings and conditions of approval contained in the staff report based on the testimony received. Condition 1 - regarding Planned Development Overlay Zone as stated in the staff's recommendation. Condition 2—Protect Employment Capacity as stated in the staff recommendation. Condition 3— as modified by ODOT with the time city required trip cap of 6:30 am and 6:30 pm peak hour trips be applied to the 24.56 acres subject to the zone change. Condition 4—regarding the 50 foot historical forested buffer between the zones." Commissioner Muldoon seconded the motion. A vote was taken; all were in favor, none opposed. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY City Council will hear this case on October 13th. PUBLIC HEARING - CLOSED FIVE MINUTE RECESS ATTORNEY RIHALA'S BRIEFING City Attorney Shelby Rihala gave the commissioners a briefing regarding the differences between hearing Quasi-judicial and Legislative cases. They had a roundtable type discussion with the commissioners and staff asking questions that Attorney Rihala answered. The attorney distributed August 17, 2015 Page 3 of 4 a flowchart regarding receiving evidence at a public hearing(Exhibit A). She went over the flowchart and answered various questions that the chart brought to mind. There was clarification about the 120-day rule, ex parte contacts, the jurisdiction of the commission,oral and written communications about the hearing with persons other than City staff or the City attorney, conflict of interest, etc. Tom McGuire, staff liaison to the commission,mentioned that a more detailed learning session is being planned for the beginning of next year. There will be a chance for all the commissioners (new and seasoned) to learn or be reminded about the nuances of serving on a Planning Commission. OTHER BUSINESS President Rogers let the commissioners know that Commissioner Smith had submitted his resignation from the commission. Commissioner Smith had missed seven out of the twelve meetings that had taken place so far this year. President Rogers reminded the commissioners that the bylaws state [under Section VIII Attendance]: "If any member is absent from six meetings within one year (or three consecutive meetings without reasonable cause), the issue shall be placed on the upcoming agenda, and upon majority vote of the commission, the commission may recommend that the position be declared vacant. The commission shall forward their action to the mayor and council, who shall vote whether to accept the commission's recommendation." President Rogers told the commissioners that he had spoken to Commissioner Smith personally and had reminded him of those bylaws. Commissioner Smith decided to resign and sent a resignation letter to President Rogers (cop)ing staff) stating that he'd enjoyed serving on the Commission but that his life had taken a turn and at this time he was unable to commit to serving. He hoped that at some point in the future he Would again re-engage and become a more involved Tigard citizen. .ADJOURNMENT President Rogers adjourned the meeting at 8:36 p.m. z Doreen Laughlin,Planning Commis n Secretary 4A - *esi'dent August 17, 2015 Page 4 of 4 Evidence received at public hearing Request by party to present additional EXHIBIT A evidence Grant continuance of Leave written record public hearing open Continue to time,date,and Record open at least 7 place certain at least 7 days days* from initial hearing* New evidence No new evidence Written request for No request to received received application to respond to respond new evidence submitted Request prior to No request for Reopen the record conclusion of hearing additional evidence that record be left open Any person may raise [evidence* ecord must be left open new issues which relate t least 7 days to submit to new evidence dditional written Conclusion of testimony Request for final Applicant waives final written argument written argument * Subject to 120-day rule. Allow at least 7 days no Final new evidence allowed not Decision subject to 120 day rule CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT (CPA2015-00004) AND ZONE MAP AMENDMENT (ZON2015-00005) FOR THE 42.6-ACRE FIELDS TRUST PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SW HUNZIKER ROAD & SW WALL STREET, TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP FROM 37.4 ACRES OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (IL), 3.1 ACRES OF PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL (CP),AND 2.1 ACRES OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L) TO 18.3 ACRES OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (IL) AND 24.2 ACRES OF MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT (MUE). THE PROPOSAL WOULD ALSO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM 37.4 ACRES OF INDUSTRIAL PARK (I-P), 3.1 ACRES OF PROFESSIONAL/ADMINISTRATIVE COMMERCIAL (C-P), AND 2.1 ACRES OF LOVA'-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-3.5) TO 18.3 ACRES OF I-P AND 24.2 ACRES OF MUE. SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) APPLYING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE, 2) PRESERVERING EMPLOYMENT CAPACITY, 3) IMPOSING A TRIP CAP, AND 4) ENSURING A 50-FOOT FORESTED BUFFER. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S MAP AND TAX LOTS 2S1010001100, 2S101CA00100, 2S101DB00300, AND 2S101DB00400. WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.A of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires quasi-judicial zoning map amendments to be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050,using standards of approval contained in Subsection 18.380.030.13;and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.A.2 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the council on an application for a comprehensive plan map amendment; and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations;and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.2 of the Tigard Development Community Development Code requires demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinances;and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.3 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires evidence of change in the neighborhood or community, or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application;and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18.390.060.G of the Tigard Development Code, a recommendation by the Planning Commission, and a decision by the council, shall be based on consideration of Statewide Planning Goals and guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statues; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable;and any applicable Metro regulations;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 17, 2015, and recommended approval of CPA2014-00004/ZON2015-00005 by motion passed unanimously;and ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 1 4 WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on October 13, 2015, to consider the request for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan and zone map amendment and determined that the amendments will not adversely affect the health,safety and welfare of the city and meet all applicable review criteria. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA2015-00004) and Zone Change (ZON2015-00005) are hereby approved by the City Council, subject to the conditions of approval in the Planning Commission Recommendation to Council dated August 24,2015. SECTION 2: The attached findings in the August 24, 2015 Planning Commission Recommendation are hereby adopted in explanation of the council's decision(Exhibit"A"). SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor,and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only,this _ day of 22015. Carol A. Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2015. John L. Cook,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ., TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON i SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FIELDS TRUST PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FILE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA2015-00004 Zone Change Amendment ZON2015-00005 PROPOSAL: The Fred W. Fields Trust proposes to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CI'), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential (L) to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial (IL) and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Em lo'ment(MUF .The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of htdustrial Park (II-P),3.1 acres of Professional/,Ndministrative Commercial (C-P),and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUEL APPLICANT Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust OWNER: Fred W. Fields Revocable c/o Miller Nash Graham& Dunn LLP Living Trust Attention: Kelly 1-lossaini I 11 S\X 5th Ave, #3400 Portland,OR 97204 LOCATION: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road & S\yv' Fall Street; WCTh1 and "fax Lots 251010001100,2S101CA00100,2S101 DB00300,and 2S101 DB00400. CURRENT ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: I-P: industrial park district. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, Personal services and fitness centers,in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the i-P zone. In addition to mandatorl site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated,attractively landscaped,and pedestrian-friendly. 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, to 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. 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 perimitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. PLANNING COMMISSION RI?C(»i U I•:NI).\TION'1'()(:OI'N(:II.—.\L1(;US'1'17,2015 PUBLIC I WARING (:1'.12075-(K)ODd/IIla.hs'I`I2US'I'c:c�\II'RIiI IliNtil\'1?PL.iN.1,\Ilit\'1)I�IIiN'I' IoN2011-((X)15/111?1.1)S•1'RI'til ZO\I"(AI 1NOI. PAGE 1 OF 18 PROPOSED ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: 1IMUE: mixed-use employ?ment. The MUT zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional Waxed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Ilwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and !'ousing; the latter includes multi- family housing at a maximum densiq- of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to communist�}} recreation facilities, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and- ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the "Triangle, it is still important to (1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and (2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the city through the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Commutnity Development Code Chapters: 18.380;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1,2,9 and 10; State\ride Planning Goals 1, 2, 9 and 10; Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Dk ision 9; the Oregon State Transportation Planning Rule (Tl'R) 660-012-0060; and Metro Title 4. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planting Comnussion recommends APPROVAL to Cit)- Council of the proposed Comptehenswe Plan Amendment and Gone Changc subject to the Findings in Section T\' of this Staff Repots and the follo\%•ing recommended conditions of approval. Amendments by the PlannhiCommicrioit to /be cb»diliona of approtx�!recv�mmended in Mr ttu�'rrrorl air indirated in bold italliic,'below. � _ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The planned development overlay zone shall be applied concurrently with the proposed NIUE zone. 2. Future development within the N111F zone shall include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the cit)-'s amended 2011 EOA. Vii. `Ile site shall be limited to a maximum of 630 a.m. peak hour trips and 630 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more trips, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) with Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660-412-0060 analysis \will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed. The trip cap shall be implemented as a condition of approval on subsequent land use permits for proposed development and will be listed as a condition of approval in the ordinance adopting the zone change,if approved by the City Council. 4. The applicant shall record an easement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument on the subject propem that is acceptable to the city to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is maintained along the eastern properq,boundary abutting the Rolling Hills subdivision. SECTION III. BACKGRQUND INFORMATION PLANNING t:c)\1111ti`It>\ I21 O M111'.NI)ATI )N'I't)c a)UNCIL—.Wt,UNI'17,2015 1'l'I;I.Ic.I WARIM, CP.12015-0"4'111.I.I)1-110 N] ( ()MI HIFN'SINTPLAN \NIFNI)\II:NT '/.t)N201100(105/I'll 1.1)S HU'Sl G()N1 i HAMA:. 1'\(;I,2O1 18 Planning: Commission Hearing and Deliberation The Planning Commission held a hearing on July 20, 2015 to consider the request and take public testimony. The record was left open until .'august 3rd for additional testimony, and until august 10th for rebuttal testimony. All testimony was posted to die city's website for interested parties to review. The Convnission continued the hearing to.August 17, 2015. for deliberation. Neighborhood Testimony, The Rolling Hills community testified, with some thirty comment letters, to a peaceful enclave, an oasis, where two generations of families have enjo?yed a wonderful duality of life; where, as the traffic around them has grown intolerable, the}, have been able to presen-e calm streets that foster close social ties among each other. Their testimony addressed four basic issues aimed at protecting the quality of life of the Rolling Hills neighborhood. 1) Identifying that traffic in the surrounding area currently exceeds the capacity of the street nehvork; 2) Requesting closure of Varns Street at the fields property to limit traffic through the neighborhood. 3) Supporting an historic 50-foot forested buffer along the full length of the neighborhood. 4) Requesting less intense zoning adjacent to the northern part of the neighborhood at 76i1,and Crestview. 7"he commission supported the 50-foot forested buffer,as recommended through condition #4,but found that the transportanon-related issues and compatibility of adjacent uses would more appropriately be addressed at die tune of development application under a planned development review procedure, as recommended through condition of approval#l. Trans ortation Planiiiug RulePlat Compliance ODO ' proyided testimony addressing the assumptions underlying the applicant's evidence submitted to satisfy the Transportation Planning Rule requirement for zone changes. General agreement was reached on the amount of development that would represent a reasonable worst case scenario with a 0.30 Floor Area Ratio. However, a difference remaiis with respect to the number of trips generated as determined by the type of development anticipated. Where 0130T prefers the Business Park land use type, the city agrees with the applicant that using the Office Park land use type better reflects the slope constraint on the site that underlies the proposed zone change. The cilt�, supports the August 3rd MacKenzie Memo .S recommendation for a trip cap of 630 NI and 631 PI`i peak hour trips be applied to the 24.56 acres subject to the zone change,as recommended through condition of approval #3. Jobs Capacity Maintained Recommended condition of approval #2 requires fixture development within the mLIF, zone to include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 ROA. This condition is supported by the applicant and was not an issue during the Commission hearing. Site History The 42.5-acre property that is the subject of this application was owned by Fred W. Fields for many years before his death in 2011. It is presently owned by the Fred W. Fields Trust. 7'he current zoning designations on the property have been in effect for several decades. The industrially zoned portion of the property was nominally used as part of die Coe manufacturing facility,located at 7930 SW Hunziker Road, directly across Wall Street Although dais propert�' was never fully developed, iii the late 1960s a rail spur was constructed along the western edge of the property abutting WWall Street. Beginning in the early 1950s, the southwestern end of die industrially zoned portion of the property was used as a brick-making facility. Remnants of that facility still exist, including a concrete foundation. In 2012, the Trust had an on-sitz• horizontal mine shaft, which was used for clay removal, filled in for safety reasons. A single family home existed on the residentially zoned portion of the property, but was demolished ih 2012. There have been no other uses of the property during the last 70 or so years. I'I,1\\IN<�(a>11i\11StiU 1NRIi(:t�\INI??\1).\"Ili;\ It1(a1UNCIL-.1U(11N] F,2015 111:WING Y.c�\2x111-(N10(lS,I11 i.I)j I'Kl'a'I (JIA\(;I 1'\GF.3(W 18 Cil3'of Tigard/Fields Trust Cooperation The City has worked with bred Fields over the years with respect to land use issues including acquisition of property for the Library in the early 2000s and acquisition, with Metro, of adjacent propem, to the east for natural resource conservation. This application is the outcome of efforts between the Fields "frust and the city to unlock the development potential of adjacent upland propem-, which has remained undeveloped in the heart of the city. The central problem has been a mismatch between the existing Industrial Park zoning designation and the slopes on the subject site being unsuitable for industrial development as outlined in Attachment 2 of the application: Fields Propel' Development Analysis and Opportunity Study-, dated February 13,2014. The applicant's narrative describes this cooperative effort in detail. In Febtuary= 2014, the results of the Development Analysis were shared with the City's Plamnung Commission and City Council. Both bodies gave the 1'rust and staff feedback on the Development analysis, and expressed support for the overall direction recommended by that analysis. Both bodies anticipated a follow- up application from the Trust requesting a comprehensive plan map amendment and none change consistent with the Development analysis recommendations. Infrastructure Finance Plan As a follow-up to the Development Analysis,the City applied for and received a grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DI.CD) to prepare an infrastructure finance plan for the Fields Trust property, as well as die surrounding Wall Street/Hunzik-cr• Road industrial area to the west and north. The purpose of the study was to quantifi, the need for and appropriate size of public infrastructure in the area, with the hope of ultimately spurring economic development. '11re infrastructure study recognized that not only would the Fields `!'rust property need significant infrastructure investment, much of the adjacent industrial property - especially to the west of Wall Street - is substantially underdeveloped and would also benefit from public infrastructure investment. The infrastructure plan was completed late last year and continues to inform the City's actions regarding the \Vali Street/Llunziker Road area, as well as the Trust's planning for its property. Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment In March 2015, the City Council adopted all amendment to its 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (E-OA) acknowledging that slope was not taken unto account as a factor in determining the suitability of vacant or redevelopable land in the city for industrial uses. Both state lav and Metro allow slope to be a limiting factor in the designation of industrial land. (See OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(B)and Metro's 2009 Urban Growth Report.) This omission resulted in an overstatement of available and suitable industrial land in Tigard, resulting in a deficit of industrial land supply. The amendment allows industrially zoned properties with silmifrcant slope, like the fields Trust property, to be rezoned for more feasible uses and highlights the need, under an efficient land needs scenario, to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment. Site Inform 'on and Pro o al Descri ion. '13re proposal is to amend t re comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial 0L), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (03), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-1'), 3.1 acres of Professional[Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (1-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of NIUE. The application is required to meet approval criteria set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code (1TfC or Municipal Code)Title 18 Community Development Code.The application is submitted in response to site slopes and other constraints which make the eastern portion of the site unsuitable for industrial uses. No development plans accompany this land use application and no specific development plans exist for the majority of theportion of the propem- subject to the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change. The proposed amendment and zone change is shown in the applicant's figure below. P1..INNIN(.C(MIMISSION Irl?r:(rMMI;:\1)\I It)N 7'(1 C(1UNCH,--.1000ST 1?,2015 PUlil.lt:111 FRIM, (:1'.\2015-(xlotr4;I'li(l.l)ti 1'RUS1 Ct t�11'I:I l II ��l\'1?YL.1\ \NIVNI)MI{N'I' %Oti?011.00(r115�1111.1)ti lltl'�I %t�\I tal��c;l: P\t;l -1()1 18 FleMs Trmt Zone Change �{ Hundker Rd i Wag St Esdstirr R Aopeeed Zones MUE y� ykk i -L PR CREnVJfW Sr Propose \� j Zoning SWVARNSSr / \ P�� ^ R-25 / \ Zoning \ R-3.5 u3, SWnRsr PR \ SWCHERRYCR �„ r R-12 _ `r MACKENZIE. C-P 4" Vicinity Information The site is located south of Ilunziker Road and cast of Wall Street. The low density residential Rolling Hills neighborhood borders the subject site to the east. A railroad switching yard abuts the site on the southwest with a private rail spur running across the subject Property adjacent and parallel to Wall Street. Red Rock Creek flog\�s parallel to Wall Street to the west of Charter i\Iechanical and the city's Potso Dog Park located across Wall Street from the subject site. The Ilunziker Industrial Core area extends further to the west from Red Rock Creek to SVG' Ilall Blvd between I lwy 217 and the railroad. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.380: 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in Subsection B below. A. The Commission shall snake a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The Council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Section 18.390. The proposed zone change application to change the zoning on the subject site from I-P, C-P, and R-3.5 I'l..\NNIN(;COMMISSR)N COUNCI1,-.\UGU44 17,2015 PUBLIC I IIC.\IiING (:1'.\2015-(X)004/I;II{LI)S IRUtiI'(a)51PR1.1IFNSI\'F PIAN X\IFNI),\II{N I' /,1)1 2011-(XN)05,1'i1;.1.1)�"1'RU�I Z0 N1;(:I LW(;I; 11.k(;F.5 OI;18 to MUE also involves a comprehensive ]plan map amendment from Industrial Park, Professional Commcrcia) and Low Density Residential to Mixed Use Employnncnt. 7"herefore, rite Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to Council on the proposed zone change application and comprehensive plan map amendment. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 18.380.030. B.1 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES 'Ilse Cite has an acknowledged Comprehensive Plan consistent with the statewidelannin goals. 'Ilierefoie, consistency with tilead applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies as dressed in this section of the staff report constitute consistency with the applicable statewide planning goals. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. The applicant's representative sent out notices to surrounduig propert}. owners and neighborhood representatives, posted a sign on the property, and held a neigg]iborhood meeting on Ma}' 6, 2015 in accordance N%ith the Citx, of Tigard's neighborhood meeting tnotifcation process (application,Attachment 5); as noted in the sumnlar}', the primary concerns raised at the inectuiig were connection to Warns Street andpotential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffet' required by the City under previous land use rules. In addition, the City mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, interested citizens, and agencies, published notice of the hearing, and posted the site pursuant to'I'DC 18.390.050 forType ype III Procedures. These parties have the opportunity to attend the Planning Commission hearing and provide testimony. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the propposed comprehensive plan and zone change is consistent with the aplilicable Citizen InvIement Goal. LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 3, The City shall coordinate the adoption, amendment, and implementation of its land use program with other potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. Notice and request for comments for the proposed zone change were sent to Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Metro, Washington County and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). CIDOT and Metro submitted comments on the' proposal,which are included in the fundings of this report,below. This policy is met. Polis& 5. The City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro-designated Centers and Corridors,and employment and industrial areas. as shown in the applicant's materials 37.4 acres of subject property is included on Itletro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Emplcn-ment Areas map Qanuary 2014) as a designated Industrial Area. Of this amount, 17.9 acres would remain in the current I-P zone and 19.4 acres would be chin&ed from Industrial Area to 1 mployment Area by virtue of a zone change to WE. Given the unsuitability of the eastern portion of the property for industrial uses, changing the comprehensive plan and zoning to MUE will enable the City to promote a mora intense urban development of the site.This pohcy is met. PL.\NNINt;fa).�1:�11S�Ic�?\ RIiC(r�l�ll �I)�I It i\ i"c�c:c ri'N(:I1.- 1UGUti1'17,20151'Ulil.it:IIIi.Ui1NC ( 1.12015-(M)41 F1H I)SA ItIIS 1MENDMIt1V'I' XON201I-W)051•11 I.DS I'WF6OF18 Policy 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. As stated in the applicatit's narrative, the rationale for the map amendments is to allow for a range of development opportunities on the up-lull portion of the site that would offset the considerable development costs associated with site grading and public improvement requirements necessary, to lead to industrial uses on the flatter, western portion. Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan to account for the slope constraints on approximately 17 acres of the site that hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. '17he industrial uses, by themselves, would not provide sufficient economic value to fiind needed public facilities and services. The costs of developing this constrained parcel to accommodate industrial activities tindermine the potential economic value of the parcel itself as currently zoned, and have led to it remaining vacant. In combination with the retraining 1-13 land, the proposed rezoning to NIDE provides a range of land use n'pes which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services for the site and advance the City's social and fiscal stability. '17nis Policy is met. Policy 7. The City's regulatory land use snaps and development code shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: A. Residential; B. Commercial and office employment including business parks; C. Mixed use; D. Industrial; E. Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted; and F. Public services. Overall, the site \would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IP to N1UE. The need for industrial land is established in the cit's 2011 EX which indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand foi• vacant industrial is 48 acres and the 20-year supply is 50 acres. ."\lthough this action would decrease the industrial land area, there would be no net loss o acreage designated for employment since the NIUE' designation accommodates a variety of employment types some of which are also allowed in the IP zone, such as office use. 77uc simultaneous designation of 2.1 acres from R-3.5 to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. In the context of the City's overall supply of residential land, a reduction of 2.1 acres of low density residential is minimal compared to the increase in residential capacity permitted in the NIUE at 25 units per acre. The proposed hiUl zone permits a number of residential, civic, commercial, and industrial uses not currently permitted in the C-P zone. Where no residential or industrial uses arepermitted in the C-P zone, the 1\1UI? ermits multifanvly residential (R-25), light industrial, research and development, and some \warehouse/freight movement. Civic uses are expanded in the MUE to include colleges, schools, and communis- recreation. Commercial uses such as commercial lodging, eating drinking establishments and sales oriented retail, where limited to a percentage of permitted uses in the C-P, are permitted outright in the On balance the proposal \would provide a wider range of uses under the MUi: zone suitable for a sloped site,while limiting several uses currently permitted in the IP zone, such as industrial services and wholesale sales. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code will continue to implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses. This policy is met. Policy 14. Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and when necessary, those of the state and other agencies. The applicant's narrative provides evidence that the application substandafly complies with applicable criteria of the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon f\dniinistrativc Rules, ) 1 tro regulations, the 'Tigard Comprehensive Plan,and the'I'igard Community Development Code. This police is met. 111,NNNINt t;c)AINI1SSIt NIti•:cx).NfNlI .\rlc)�'I'c)COl'\sal.—.\l1l1l1S'1 17,2015 PURI ACIIFARING (;11.\2015-(X)(X)4,HI:I.I)S'Ilit ISI CONI 11101IFNSIVIi I'1.\N,\NII?NI)Ntl{Nl• %tJ\2O11-fH)(1t15jI fI Lt)�7'Rl'ti'I'%t)Kl t;ll.\Nc�li P%GF—01 18 Policy 15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available,or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation. .Analysis of transportation impacts and public facility infrastructure (Application, Attachments 3 and 4) indicates that the site would have access to infrastructure with sufficient capacitt}}� to accommodate development of the site under existing zoning or proposed zoning, and future derelopment of the site would improve both Hunziker Road and Wall Street. The Transportation Planning Rule analysis (Attachment 3) demonstrates that the PM peak trips for uses allowed in the existing and proposed zoning designations are similar; therefore, imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning will ensure the amendment has no significant impact on transportation facilities. As conditioned, this policy is met. B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services. .As noted above, the applicant requests that the city condition the approval of the requested zone change with a trip cap that does not exceed the total number of automobile trips associated with the most intense use, a medical/dental office. With a condition of approval implementing a trip cap on the subject site, this policy is met. C. The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment, housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location,versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; The applicant's Development.analysis and Opportunih• Study demonstrates that, due to slope constraints, the eastern portion of the subject property is constrained for large footprint industrial type development. The proposed alternative zone, NIUE, permits multi-family residential development, wfuch has been the focus of developer and real estate market interest in the site. The applicant has shown that theih �sica11 constrained portion of the property is more suitable for residential or office development than in ustria . This policy is met. D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; The proposal is for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning for land that is physically constrained and not appropriate for its existing industrial designation. Given that the current industrial designation is not appropriate for the site another more suitable designation is required. Under this action this criterion does not apply since NIUE is an appropriate replacement designation but it is not necessarily related to whether there is an inadequate amount of I�IUE designation in other areas. This criterion does not apply. E. Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled. The applicant states uses allowed in the MUF zone can be arranged and clustered to fit into the site topography rather than requiring mass grading to create the large, flat sites that would be necessary for industrial uses. Subsequent Planned Development, Conditional Use and/or Site Development Reviews would ensure development would comply with all applicable development code regulations. The subject site is not currently designated with any overlay zones such as historic (HD) or planned development (PD). This policy is met. F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible,with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses. PLANNING COA(AIISSION Itli(:OA1A11?NI);\"I`ION'I'OCOUN(:]L-.1l'GUS1'17,2015 PUBLIC 11FARING CP.12015-00004/1'll:l.l)S'1'RUS'1'COMPRIJ IINSIN li 1'1..1N.VNIFNI)NIF NT %ON2011-00005/111?I,bS'I'R11S1'%ONl Cll.\NGF. 1):1G1;8OF18 '1'lle applicant's Development Analysis and Opportunity Study identifies site constraints that any development would need to address. Constraints include slope and configuration of site, slope of 1-lunziker, Wall Street TSP classification and rail spur, wetlands, trees, limited access, and noise from the railroad switching yard. Surrounding land uses include low density sing-faniilN attached and detached residential and industrial uses. The range of uses permitted in the MUE zone would reqq�uire Conditional Use and/or Site Development Review to ensure development would comply with all applicable development code regulations and be compatible with surrounding land uses. However, the complexity of the site characteristics including environmental conditions and surrounding land uses suggests a process that provides flexibility in site design to maximize the opportunities and mitigate for the constraints of the site and surrounding land uses. Use of the Planned Development overlay zone is the be the best way to ensure permitted uses in the MUE zone are compatible, or are capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses. This is demonstrated through the purpose statement of the Planned Development section of the Development Code: 18.350.010 Popose .9. The prnposes of the planned denelopvie111 olullay none.are: 1. To provide a ri;eans/or pnoperYy deirlopmeul Mal it�.onsis/ent with Ti aid's Corrrprel.�ensdr�e Plan thlrrli�G lbe apj�/icaliotl rl/flez�ible standard.-n,»rb consider and nriligale fol•l/le polenlia/lmpacls to the ci/y;and To pmoide such added benefrls as inarased natural arras or open spare in Ibi til}', ullernalil>P blrr/dingy designs, walkable eomerrrnriffes, presemalion of rrgnrfrcan1 natural resourre.(, aesIbetre appeal, and olher l)pes of asrels Mal conllibute to lbe /agger community!n lieu of spiel arlbeleurr to many of Al e. rifles of lbe 77 igald ComwYni j•Development Code;and 3, o acbier>e //Irfque neigbbolhoodr(/ry wgthg%/!e bom.dn ,g xlyles lb/orr&b a/7.hilorinral acren/r, use of open spuce, innanulil+e Imn spponalion facilities) which will relelln lberr• charar.•ler and city benelilr, while respeelnrg /be )hararlelirlics of ea7.rling nen bbnrboodr throng/.�apprvlprfa/c bu�erin alit/o/.ri Ze Iransilionin ;and 4. To p,rselxve to thegmalerl e.wenl possible/be cxistrn landscape fealulrr and amenities(tires, )Paler rerormrs, rammer, elr.) 1hr•ougb lbe nre of a planning p)oredirle (rile design and analysis,presen/anon of ulleruulilves, conceptna/levicw, Men detailed yp rernely)That ran it/ale Abe e and design of a development to a par/rc7 1 si/e;and 5. 7'o consider an amuml off deivlopmenl on a rile, within the limits of densly!rrinirrments, nd h will balance Abe inlerrs/r of the owner, de)reloper neigbbors,and the dov and G. To prmide a means to belle-!elate Ibe built envimnmen/to lie natural ennilnnmenl tbroligh snrlainab/e and innol>U/nye building and public,fadlily ronsh-liclion melbods and malerzah. A planned development overlay on the proposed MUE zone would best ensure development's compatibility with site conditions. With a condition requiring the I'D overlay, this policy is met. G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. The subject site contains jurisdictional wetlands in the northwest area of the site, steep sloes along the southern edge of the site, and lower value significant habitat designation on the uplands portion of the site The applicant has proposed accepting a condition of approval on the zone change requiring a 50-foot forested buffer along the eastern boundary of the site,which would support the habitat values of the site. Staff suggests that the applicant alternatively provide the buffer by recording a buffer easement on the lot line-adjusted parcel containing the boundary. As identified in the planned development purposes above, the planned development standards are designed to balance environmental resource protection with context sensitive site design.'Phis policy is met. Policy 16. The City may condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s) and per specific design /development requirements. 1lne applicant has determined that due to extraordinary development costs, the flatter western portion of the site (which would continue to maintain I-P zoning) is only likely to develop if the steeper eastern portion can also be developed with some nnix of employment and/or residential use. Knowing that staff is interested in ensuring job capacity on the subject site,the applicant respectfully requests that the Cite allow any pernutted use in the M E zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. The applicant cites the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions in support of this request. IT%NNINGIll:.CONINIFNI)ATIONTOCMINCI1.- \It(;I'SI I-.3111iI'l lil.l(:III:\R1N(� (a'.1?015-(Kl(N)4/I II[I.I)S I'1(t'St�:(t�ll'iii 111 \Sl�'I PLAN.\MENDt1IEN-1 /.(NN20110=5,1I II I.I)S FHt'S_I /.()\I: II 00'11. PAGE,9OF IB Staff finds, consistent with findings in the amended 2011 ) OA, that slope constraints reduce the subject site's suitability for sonic large-footprint industrial uses, but that there is potential for emp loyment use of slope-constrained sites. The city's limited inventory of buildable lands highlights the need to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment within an efficient land needs scenario. Although the city supports opening the development potential of the whole site with the proposed zone changge to 1\1L1E of tl11 slope constrained portion of the site, it also must protect its employment capacity, which cats best be managed through the planned development review process. Therefore, staff recommends a condition of approval to ensure the area of the subject property zoned NIUE provides a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs topreserve employment land capacity and application of the PD overlay to provide a deliberate process that balances the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors,and the city. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Land Use policies have been met. Staff recommends the Planning Conmussion recommend to Citi- Council a condition of approval requiring a definite land use (employment, 280 non-retail jobs) and a Planned Development Overlay be applied to allow for specific design/development requirements in order to meet the applicable Land Use policies. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal 9.1: Develop and maintain a strong,diversified,and sustainable local economy. Policy 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available. The applicant states that industrial development by itself is not able to economically offset the high cost of ou-sitegrading costs, public improvements to abutting streets, and utilih' extensions. NIU1- rates of return would allow the high infrastructure costs associated with the development of this property to be financed by the development itself The intent of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is to create flexibility that generates job-creating development in the City.This policy is met. Policy 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. The applicant states that under the current zoning,the site has remained undeveloped for many tears due to the development constraints outlined in Section II of the Fields Property Development Analysis. The proposal would respond to market conditions by allowing a mix of uses on the eastern portion \vhilc preserving the western portion for industrial employers. I-lie proposed zone change would allow a more efficient use of employment land than the current underutilized condition. Well designed and efficient development can be assured through the deliberative planned development process that provides flexibility in site design and such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community its Gen of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code.This policy is met. Policy 6. The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro-designated Employment and Industrial Areas. hietro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (lanuary, 2014) shows the ]-1'-zoned parcels of the subject site. (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximate]]- 19.4 acres of land from 1-1' to NIUE.. I he evidence in the application shows that despite relatt,.ely high demand for fight industrial land and low supply, this site has not developed for light industrial use and is unlikely to do so in the future because of its unsuitable site characteristics and development constraints. '11it appficant states that the NIUE zoning on the eastern portion allows the site to be developed with some combination of employment and multifamily workforce housing use and allows the site to be developed in a more flexible way. Development allowed under the MUE zone mill help create a stronger, more diversified, and sustainable development on this site, which in turn will hep PLANA ZINC COMINIISSIO\ ttlst;<1\1111:NI).1'I'ie t YOt OUNCIL—AUG LIST 17,2015 I'11BLI :I IFARING. (T.\201s-00004il11 l B., I /.cN 2011-WooK/lll l.Uti'IRtSTA1NF(al \Vcit PA Alitoc 100V 18 the local economy. Provided the AiUE zone is indeed developed with nixed uses, including employment, the re-zone xvill' promote greater, more efficient, utilization of Metro-designated employment and industrial lands. 'flus policy is met. Policy 7. The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metro-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of these lands for industrial jobs. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. In accordance with Metro Title 4, Section 3.07.430,Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the I-P zone (Table 18.530.1, Note 2). In accordance with I\Ietro 'Title 4, Section 3.07.440,Tigard's Communitv Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the MUE zone (fable (8.520.1, Note 22). _approval of the proposed comprehensive map amendment would functionally convert 19.4 acres of the site into a Title 4 Hnnployment Area from a Tide 4 Industrial Area, where commercial retail uses are restricted, consistent With the purpose of'Title 4 to protect a supply of sites for employment. This policy is met. Policy 12. The City shall assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality that are necessary for a sustainable economic future. `11ne proposed NIUE rezone should unlock the development potential of the site. 'Ilse city can assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality by placing a PD overlay over the MUE zone to provide such added benefits through the planned development process as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. This policy is met. Goal 9.3: Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business. Policy 1. The City shall focus a significant portion of future emplowent growth and high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center Downtown); Regional Center (Washington Square); High Capacity Transit Corridor(Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. The subject site is located outside of rile listed plan districts. The disposition of employment and housing uses across the site should acknowledge the direction of this policy and can best be considered with the planned development process. This policy is met. FINDING: As show in the analysis above, the applicable Economic Development policies arc substautiall� met with application of a condition of approval requiring a PD overlay and a minimum t nreshold of employment use within the proposed NJOE zone. HOUSING Goal 10.1: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policy 5. The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square), and along transit corridors where employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future (SW Pacific Hwy). 11ne proposed zoning designation, MUE, permits "medium high-density" housing at 25 units/acre as an outri ht use. There appears to be market support for multi-family housing at this location (F=ields DeVe opinent Analysis 11.2). Multi-family residential use on the subject property has been a key expectation for development in the proposed MUE zone. However, the subject site is not located in a town center, regional center or along a transit corridor. Currently, the site does not provide ready access to employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, or other public services necessary to support higher population densities. I IoNvever, the hope is that the rezone ill caralyze the transformation of tine area where some of these opportunitia m es and services will bCC011IC' available. The MUE zone allows commercial uses and staff recommends a condition of approval requiring a minimum job density for the I'1..\NNI\c;(A),MMISSIONW-AX)AIAIEN17. TION R)COUNCIL l'S"I'17,201511tIBLIC111 WRING (:P.\2(�15dxHKW'I II:I.I)1"fl(t!ti'f(a)All'111�.II1dNtil\'1•:I'1..11� \A11:N1)All•:\I /.c)x2111 (AIANGE 1'AGI.. 11l)I. 18 proposed 1\1LJE zoned area. In addition, the city's Public Infrastructure finance Strategy is likely to lead to unproved street connectivity in the arca, and the Southwest Corridor Plan includes new access across 217 connecting SW lievcland with Wall Street, potentially with high-capacity transit service. Staff further recommends a condition requiring application of the PD overlay concurrently with the MUE zone. Planned Development Review for future development will create thebest opportunity to consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of densityrequirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors,and the city. Ns conditioned, this policy is met. Goal 10.2: Maintain a high level of residential livability. Policy G. The City shall promote innovative and well-designed housing development through application of planned developments and community design standards for multi-family housing. The proposed zoning designation, MUE, permits "medium high-density" housing at 25 units/acre as an outri};lit use. "There appears to be market support for multi-family housing at this location (Fields Development Analysis 11.2). Afulti-fainly residential use on the subject property has been a key expectation for development in the proposed NIUE zone. Staff recomtnends a condition of approval requiring application of the PD overlay concurrently with the NILIE zone. Planned Development Review for future development will provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the cite, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Ti8ard Community Development Code. In addition a planned development process can help achieve unique neighborhi ods (by var}iris the housing styles through architectural accents, use of Open space, Innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning. With the PD overlay, the proposed Mt I: zone will promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. Policy 7. The City shall insure that residential densities are appropriately related to locational characteristics and site conditions such as the presence of natural hazards and natural resources, availability of public facilities and services, and existing land use patterns. The proposed MUI zone allows for multifamily residential construction at a density of 25 units/acre.The subject site is distinguished by the hillside location with views out to the west, the presence of a mature stand of trees that characterizes the hill from views elsewhere in the city, and limited access to the transportation network and other services to support higher density residential development. As described above, there are transportation and access improvements being planned for the area. The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the MU zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than rhe. existing 1-P zoningg due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the 131) overlay required is a condition of approval, the proposed NIUE zone can promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. Policy 8. The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing, or more intense, land uses on residential living environments,such as: A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another; B. protection of existing vegetation,natural resources and provision of open space areas;and C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoblingg low-density residential neighborhood. "I"he range of uses allowed in the MUF zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing 1-1) zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, the proposed MUF zone can promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned,this policy is met. 9. The City shall require infill development to be designed to address compatibility with existing neighborhoods. PLA NNINGQMIMISSI0\ItI4:0NINIV'N1).\'17(1K'I'<)C0UNCII.— .\l'c;V.11 17,X01ihtti1.l�:it1..\ItIKc c:11.\2015•d10b04/I11 LDS MIN] c(MIPi(l•:III:NSI\F ITAN .\AIFINI)XI M /ciN?O11-0(M)O5, 111:I.I)Slitl'SI /ci l:tai \ •GI( P\GI I2(W 18 The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density Rollin gg Hills residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the h'il'F�. zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the PD ov crlaN required as a condition o£ aplaroval, development in the MUE zone. can support unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents,use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) %vilich will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering. As conditioned, this policy is met. MINDING: 1s shown in the analysis above, the applicable Housing policies, as supported by the recommended condition of approval requiring the PD overlay- zone, can be met. 18.380.030.B.2 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and MINDING: For the purposes of the�roposcd comprehensive plan amendment and zone cliange, tine applicant has satisfactorily addressed the applicable Sections of TDC Chapter 18.38(1, Zoning Map and Text .Amendments. The standards of TDC Chapter 18.390.050 for Type III-PC procedures are applicable to this proposal, as identified in 18.380.030.The applicant has submitted an Impact Statement as required under 18.390.050.B.e. The public facilities impact study is included as Attachment 4 to the application. The applicant concurs with the requirement to dedicate right-of-way along Hunziker Road and Wall Street in conjunction with future development. Because no development is being proposed as part of this application, no right-of-way dedication is warranted at this time. Anticipated uses include multifamily residential and office. An proposed development must meet all of the applicable Tigard Development Code standards ards in effect at the time an application is submitted. As shown in the analysis above, the proposed comprehensive map and zone change amendment complies with tine applicable standards of the Tigard Development Code. 18.380.030.B.3 Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. FINDING: In March of 2015 the City adopted a Post Acknowledgmernt Plan amendment to the Cin. of Tigard's 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (Ord 15-06), which 1) acknowledges that slope %vas not applied as a development constraint factor in the Inventory of Suitable Sites (Land Suppl'), 2) applies slope as a suitabilinv constraint for properties currently zoned industrial (]-P, 1-I., and 1-H), and 3) qualifies the Assessment of Potential \vith respect to slope constraints. The slopes on the subject property' represent [lie majority of the lands addressed by the GOA amendment. The FOA amendment provides evidence of a mistake in the comprehensive plan in sup]nort of the proposal comprehensive plan and zone change from I-P to ;\IL'E .'I'he proposal tweets this standard for zone changes. 18.380.030.0 Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050. A legislative decision may be approved or denied. FINDING: The land use action requested is quasi-judicial as it is limited to specific parcels and does not apply generally across the city. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommendation to Council may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions. Staff has prepared proposed recommended conditions of approval for the Commission's consideration. APPLICABLE STATE AND METRO REGULATIONS OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES PIANNI>\6, RlI Nlt\'H(A i'enc:ell"�e'll.—.�t�c�Us7't7,2rr15Pt.�lil.lc:lll?.11i1Nt; (;11%201.5-c>004,l FIDSIRLISTCONIPHItIn:NSI\Itl'1 \\ 01INu\II'.NT %( N2o1 I•(M)Q(15/1 II?l.!)ti'l'RUtif f.()NI:r:l I. N(N, PAGI�. 13 UI;18 Economic Development OAR 660 Division 9—Economic Development 660-009-0010 Application (4) For a post-acknowledgement plan amendment under OAR chapter 660, division 18, that changes the plan designation of land in excess of two acres within an existing urban growth boundary from an industrial use designation to a non-industrial use designation, or another employment use designation to any other use designation, a city or county must address all applicable planning requirements,and: (a) Demonstrate that the proposed amendment is consistent with its most recent economic opportunities analysis and the parts of its acknowledged comprehensive plan which address the requirements of this division; or (b) Amend its comprehensive plan to incorporate the proposed amendment, consistent with the requirements of this division; or (c) Adopt a combination of the above,consistent with the requirements of this division. f-INDING: The City s 2011 F10A compares demand and supply of ennplo}•meat lands to evaluate the Lind inventory over a 20-year period. The Analysis indicates that tinder the Efficient ],and Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial): This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from 11 to MUE, ,although this action would decrease the area of land with an industrial designation, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment use since the MVE designation accommodates a variety of employment types. The simultaneous redesignation of two acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. The Ciq, of Tigard's I OA indicates that the City has a surplus of two acres of industrial land; however, Ordinance 154.)6 recognized that the City is "now potentially in deficit for industrial zoned vacant land." The proposed zone change affecting the site would deplete the t vo-acre surplus by converting approximately 11.4 acres of Land from 1-P to NIUE; however, this depletion would be partially offset by converting 0.4 acres from C-l"' to 1-P. Taken together, the proposed zone change would need to compensate for the jobs associated with a net reduction of 17 acres of industrial land. While there is no guarantee that the site would produce jabs under the existing zoning (as evidenced by the current lack of development). for the purposes of comparison, employment density assumptions from the 1°.0A have been used to quantic? the number of jobs that could be expected on 17 industrial acres. Based on 16.5 industrial jobs per acre (derived from the 794 jobs on 48 industrial acres iclentificd in the FOA), 17 acres of industrial land would lead to an employment level of approxilnately 280 jobs. Approval of the zone change could therefore decrease the City's employment potential by 280 jobs unless these jobs can be accommodated elsewhere. The proposed 111UI: zone permits a variety of employment uses, including office uses, which are also allowed in the 141 zone. To the extent the proposed MUE zone preserves the ability, to create-jobs on the subject site, jobs capacity %viU not be decreased. To ensure presen-ation of jobs capacity, staff reconnmends a condition of approval that requires 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the NILE-zoned portion of the site. Analysis of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan economic policies,as addressed above in this report, supports the recommended jobs capacity requirement. Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660 Division 12—Transportation Planning PLANNINIG COM%Il�tilc \lti.1,l��IAnI;Nle.1'I'It)?� "I(nc:OIINc;II.—MItJUSTI".2015PUBLIC I1EARIN t:P.\2�t5.f1(>OOJ(I�II?1.1�ti I"Kl'�I'ta�1Jl'ItI�.If1�NSl1'I•:l'J..1N.lAlI:J*11)111•a�f %ON21111•fHNH)5'I II.I.I)S'17t1' 1 %l�N1:CJI:\'. GF( P.\O. 14(W 18 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP.As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. [• •1 (4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and other affected local governments. FINDING: TPR compliance is demonstrated in Attachment 3 of the application. 'flus anai\•sis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning (note that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning,regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built). Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned '\1 t,l: except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Developnient of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) with housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 PNf peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the ART'' zone were entirely multifamily housing and the 1-1) zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the N1l_'E zone and I-P zone were entirely office use, trip generation would be 715 ISM peak hour trips (a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area,if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and tnedical-dental office use, trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. As conditioned,this regulation is met. METRO REGULATIONS Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 4—Industrial and Other Employment Areas 3.07.410 Purpose and Intent 3.07.420 Protection of Regionally Significant Industrial Areas 3.07.430 Protection of Industrial Areas 3.07.440 Protection of Employment Areas 3.07.450 Employment and Industrial Areas Map PLANNING(:ONINIISSOWRFCON[Nil•:Nib.1'I'IUN'1't>COI�NCII.- .\l (�tS'1 17,2015P 1Hl.lc'll1-.\It1NG (:l1.12015-(10004/FII A)S'I'M ISI (:(iNI1'ItliHi{NSI\'I:PLAN \NIF,M),NII•:NT /.052011.00(X)5/I-*IIiLI)S 1AI'S'I /.O1\'FC1lAN(;P. PAGE IS(**18 FINDING: Metro's Title 4 Indnuttial and Other Employment +xas map 0anuary 2014) shows the 1-13- zoned parcels of the subject site (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. In accordance with Section 3.07.430, 'Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the I-P zone (Table 18.530.1, Note 2). In accordance with Section 3.07.440, 'Tigard's Community Development Code lints t ne size and scope of commercial retail uses within the MUE zone (Table 18.520.1, Note 22). .Approval of the proposed comprehensive map amendment would functionally convert 19.4 acres of the site into a Title 4 Employment area from a Tide 4 Industrial Area, where commercial retail uses are restricted, consistent with the purpose of"Title 4 to protect a supply of sites for employment. This regulation is met. Section 3.07.450 allows the Cite to amend the use of lands on the 1whis tvl and Other 1;rWpIlyment Areas map based on satisfaction of a number of criteria. With the exception of a transportation impact analysis addressing regional freight movement for criteria #4, this site complies with those standards since the proper", is 1) not surrounded by RSIA or Industrial Area land; 2) the change would increase rather than decrease the acreage devoted potentially to employment uses; 3) the site is not designated as IISIA; 5) the zone change would not lead to retail or cultural uses that compete with Central Cite or Regional or Town Centers; and 6) the propem designated Industrial Area subject to the amendment is less than 20 acres (namely, 19.4 acres). 1n addition, as described in Ord 15-06, the eastern portion of the site is not suitable for industrial uses due to topographic constraints. I herefore, a Title 4 map amendment from industrial to employment would be indicated, if supported by a transportation impact analysis. SECTION V OUTSIDE AGENCY AND ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS LCDC, ODOT, Metro, and Washington County were notified and requested to comment on the subject proposal. Of these agencies,DDOT and Metro provided comment. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) commented verbally-on the proposal taking issue with the assumptions of the TPR analysis with respect to existing use trip generation. As of the publish date of this report, \vritten comments have not been received. Condition 3 has been unposed to account for ODO'rs concern and to allow for a revised TPR analysis. Metro commented on the proposal whose comments are included itn the findings it) this staff report. The City of Tigard's Public Works Department reviewed the proposal and commented that they have no objections to the proposal. The City of Tigard's Development Review Engineer revicwed and accepted the TPR analysis prepared by MacKenzie dated Mai, 11, 2015. SEC'T'ION VI. STAFF ANALYSIS ANALYSIS: Zone Change Request 'I'lle proposed Mixed Ilse Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development types which can better accommodate slope constraints while also reducing potential conflicts between uses on rite subject property and abutting residential development. The proposed zone change, primaril) from I-P to MUE, has the potential to Increase economic development in Tigard by properly accounting for development economics applicable to the different portions of the site. PL,IN�INCiC(tAfAli�til(nNIiI.Ci>.\1\fl;�u\'ll(i� 1'(�i:(�lwral.-:1000�'I I 'ui�I'l ill W11EI.IRING la°,12015•[N101b!/I11:I.I)� IRl�til'i O\II'Itl'.IIIASI\I• IT\N 1\II(�1)Itli?Tv'1' %(1N2011-OINNIS/I 11:1.1)ti'1'Rlhl'/.�>\I AA1\N(;I PWI I601� 18 Outstanding Issues planned Development Overla ••/one The complexity of the subject site's characteristics (Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study) including environmental conditions and surrounding land uses suggests a process that provides flexibility in site des: n to maximize the opportunities and mitigate for the constraints of the site and surrounding land uses. L se of the Planned Development overlay zone is the best way to ensure permitted uses and development design in the MUE zone are compatible with existing development and include the required employment capacity. (Condition 1) Protect 1-miplo�+mens Capacity The applicant cites tile- importance of maintaining flexibility. in response to ever-changing market conditions to support. a request that the City allow any permitted use in the NIUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. However, the city wishes to ensure emplovnnent capacity is maintained within mixed use zones and recommends requiring as a condition of approval a minnnum job density on the proposed 11IL113 portion of the site. (Condition 2) 'Transportation Planning Rule compliance The airj.�licant proposes limiting trip generation of future uses permitted in the NIUE zone to that allowed under the existing zoning, as shown to the Mackenzie "TPR analysis dated 114ay 11, 2()15 (or as amended), to avoid a significant effect finding: The city will require a trip cap to knit futiire development to existing trip generation rates. Transportation analyses required with new development applications must be consistent with the trip cap limitation. (Condition 3) Rolling Hills Buffer The applicant proposes accepting a condition of approval of the zone change requiring a 50-foot buffer between the proposed NIUE zone and the existing R-3.5-zoned Rolling I lills development to the east. The buffer was an artifact of the previous Comprehensive Plan, which is no longer in effect, to buffer Potentially allowed industrial uses from the existing residential uses. I lowever, the applicant's willingness to accept a condition acknowledges that a buffer remains important to the livability of the Rolling Mills neighborhood even with more intense commercial uses permitted under the NIUi--- zone. (Condition 4) In lieu of a condition of approval with this zone change, the Fields Trust may otherwise record in advance of the Council hearing an casement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is placed on the subject property for the benefit of the city. Metro's'title 4 compliance The city wiU request an amendment of Aletro's Title 4 map for the MUE zoned portion of the site from industrial to employment based on the suitability analysts of the subject site contained in the city's amended 2011 EOA. SECTION VII. PLANNING COMMISSION CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION CONCLUSION: Based on the foregoing findings and analysis, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed comprehensive plan map and zone change amendments are consistent \with ap)hcable provisions of the 'Tigard Comprehensive Plan, 'Tigard Development Code, statewide planning goa�s and the 'Transportation Planning Rule, and provides evidence of a mistake in the comprehensive plan (City of Tigard 2011 Economic Opportunities analysis (EOA) as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. To ensure consistency, the Planiung Commission recommends certain conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of the proused comprehensive plan map and zone change amendments with recommended conditions of approvalpand any others conditions the Council deems appropriate through the public hearing process. 1'1.1\\INC:t:OAhlititilONitl?c:c)\ILII{V1).\7'ION'I'U(:UUNCII.- W(;1'S'1 17,2015PUI{J.1i;111:AR1\(; r.l'.� U15(HNHW/I II{1.1)5 I RL'tif(A),\11'RIA II:NSI\'I:.PIAN .\111:\1)111.\I A(I.N201 I-INNH►5/I II.1.1)ti'I'itl'S'I /.c)NI to I\N(;). P.u;F. 1'i* 18 PASSED: THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. lason Rogers,Plannilig, Commission President Dated this - da •of August,2015. Eahi it A. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation B. Proposed Zoiung P1..INNIN(;(:t NIMISSIM 1,,2015IIIIIII.W..IIFARIM; (a3.\2!115-0iR704/I11:1.lri'I'RI'til'c ONIPRI-lll?NSIVFI PLAN VNIENDMI:N't Zc 1N2011-(X)W.S,'1'll•a.I)S'I-kl`S I'/.()Nl•-c.11.1N(;I: 1)U;I 18(-*,18 S�kUN21 IL KF . ?1 Ili--r` _ ,; UE SW�CRESTVIEW IL k SW VARNS ST w > 2 0S MUE MH 3 ----- - S IR Legend Site Taxlots CG: General Commercial CP: Professional Commercial .. IL: Light Industrial ` D L: low Density Residential SW CHERRY M: Medium Density Residential O MH: Medium-High Density Residential ` Z MH N MUE: Mixed Use Employment OS: Open Space N �fljlrv2ik y�� C-G ER Rp �1� y MUE 1 U PRPw SW CRESNIEW S S� T -P SW VARNS ST W Q l+ lD MUE R-25 3 Legend R-3.5 � SW FIR ST Site Taxlots C-G: General Commercial C-P: Professional Commercial I-L: Light Industrial C-P I-P: Industrial Park MUE: Mixed Use Employment SW CHERRY DR w i PR: Parks and Recreation Q O R-3.5: Low-Density Residential z N w R-12: Medium-Density Residential R-2S: Medium High-Density Residential ^` - MACKENZ I E . DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED July 7,2015 City of Tigard Attention: Gary Pagenstecher 13125 5W Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Fields Trust Zone Change{Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Metro Title 4 Compliance Project Number 2134474.02 Dear Gary: In support of the Fields Trust's comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change application, we would like to provide some additional commentary with regards to compliance with Title 4 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. Title 4 imposes certain limitations on the size of commercial retail and professional service uses for lands designated on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map. These limitations are typically implemented via provisions in cities' zoning regulations; however, it appears that the retail restrictions in the City's Industrial Park(I-P) and Mixed Use Employment(MUE)standards are not identical to those in Title 4. The enclosed maps depict the Title 4 Industrial and Employment designations for the existing and proposed zoning. As illustrated, the boundary of the Industrial designation is over 300 feet south of Hunziker Road and excludes the two site parcels currently zoned Professional Commercial (C-P) and Low-Density Residential (R-3.5). The total area proposed to receive MUE zoning that is currently designated Industrial on the Title 4 map is 19.4 acres (4.8 acres of the proposed MUE zone are outside the Title 4 Industrial area). To provide assurances that future uses on the rezoned site will be consistent with Title 4, the Fields Trust would propose that the City impose the following condition of approval on the area affected by the zone change: To ensure compliance with Title 4 of the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Flan, development of the site shall be subject to the following limitations: A. Within the MUE zone in areas designated Industrial on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map, retail commercial uses and retail and professional services that cater to daily customers shall not occupy more than 5,000 square feet of sales or service area in a single outlet, or multiple outlets that occupy more than 20,000 square feet of sales or service area in a single building or in multiple buildings that are part of the some development project. B. Within the MUE zone in areas designated Employment on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map, retail commercial uses shall not occupy more than 60,000 square feet gross leasable area on a single lot or on contiguous lots. P 503.224.9560 • � 503.228.1285 , W MCKNZE.COM • RiverEast Center,1515 SE water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 ARCHITECTURE + INTERI CRs . STRUCTURAL EN GIN£ERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND USE PLANNING • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING . LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ■ Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington + Seattle,Washing[on H:\Projects\2130474021,WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Metro Title 4 Compliance-150707.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 July 7, 2015 Page 2 The retail and professional service size limitations outlined in the proposed condition align with current requirements of Title 4 and provide the consistency with Title 4 that Metro is seeking. If the current Title 4 map designation remains unchanged, then the 19.4 acres would be subject to the limitations in "A" above, while if Metro amends the Title 4 map to re-designate the area from Industrial to Employment, then the 19.4 acres would be subject to the limitations in "B" above. Imposing this condition would ensure that Title 4 protections are in force regardless of whether the Title 4 map or the Tigard Development Code is amended at some point in the future. Thank you for your consideration. We are available for further coordination with both City and Metro staff if you have any questions Sincerely, Brian Varricchione, PE Land Use Planning Enclosure(s): Existing Zoning and Metro Title 4 Designations map Proposed Zoning and Metro Title 4 Designations map c: Brian Harper—Metro Kelly Hossaini—Miller Mash ■ H:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Metro Title 4 Compliance-150707.docx 24) Vi s = Ln O a u c , q 06 a c ar E a « T ❑ v W n£ c4W e' Q G © m stir E o _ _ �i O Q t�z.5 a L 4 °p a N r44E '� aui ori o = '� '� �W U W Y #r19t u, c (A = aa m _ c o E E 7 Ln 3CU E c g ar ,« � TM+ 3 a s cuj N v F l7 a J c io J _ p `—': �p�i �, P ■ '� . w y a iri - c3 y W Ln LM " 3AV H1bL NIS — LJ\W w t r �1 3 SW 75TH PLx c� Ln O cr "' MV H19L NIS m y n`f 3AV +~n q- uro �►' H191 NIS E �Q k. 7d L MS ui H CC a a J N a�, Vis06 = Ln o _ W V M to � � � a ga€ m� + _ e g 06 a O z m -_ QN © m E V - { � o o �� s �a EL N oU W Lncu UJ CL Ho� � � � � k= F- .n u u �a °• '� a s s s Q �z.`. �+"` � I i � c'�i �� ASS 1o'` U /f d N " 3AV H1bL MS oc Z w LU SW 75TH PL x c� Lui r cr "' MV H19L AAS m yam H.1.9L MS G 1 +n 7d N1MS LU w H CC a CL J N N �1 MACKENZIE . DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT & ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION To City of Tigard For Fred W.Fields Trust SW Hunziker Road&SW Wall Street Submitted May 14,2015 Project Number 2130474.02 MACKENZIE Since 1960 RiverEast Center 11515 SE Water Ave.Suite 100,Portland,OR 97214 PO Box 14310,Portland,OR 97293 1 T 503.224.9560 1 www.mcknze.com ME TABLE OF CONTENTS L PROJECTSUMMARY.........................................................................................................................1 II. INTRODUCTION & SITE ANALYSIS....................................................................................................2 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2 History.................................................................................................................... .2 Efforts to Sell the Property........................................................................................................2 DevelopmentAnalysis...............................................................................................................2 Infrastructure Finance Plan.......................................................................................................3 Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment.........................................................................3 Summary ...................................................................................................................................3 Description of Request ............................................................................................... 4 Existing Site & Surrounding Land Use.......................................................................... 4 Development Constraints............................................................................................ 7 Primary Site Constraints............................................................................................................8 Private Street(SW Wall Street) Designation/Width .................................................................8 Secondary Site Constraints:.......................................................................................................9 Prior Collaboration with the City................................................................................. 9 Proposed Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change ......... 10 Development Economics/Feasibility.......................................................................... 12 Economic Benefit to the City..................................................................................... 13 Employment Land Issues........................................................................................... 13 Transportation Planning Rule.................................................................................... 13 Public Utility Considerations..................................................................................... 14 NeighborhoodMeeting............................................................................................. 14 Historic50-foot Buffer............................................................................................................. 14 III. NARRATIVE &COMPLIANCE .......................................................................................................... 16 Statewide Planning Goals.......................................................................................... 16 Goal 1, Citizen Involvement .................................................................................................... 16 Goal2, Land Use Planning....................................................................................................... 16 Goal3, Agricultural Lands........................................................................................................ 16 Goal4, Forest Lands................................................................................................................ 17 Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources................................ 17 Goal 6,Air, Water and Land Resources Quality...................................................................... 17 Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards......................................................... 18 Goal 8, Recreational Needs..................................................................................................... 18 Goal 9, Economic Development..............................................................................................18 Goal10, Housing ...................................................................................... .., 19 Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services.....................................................................................20 Goal12,Transportation ..........................................................................................................20 H:\ProfeMV13047402\VVP\RFF-CAy of Tigard-comprehensw Plan Mapwnendment-150514Am ME Goal 13, Energy Conservation .................................................................................................20 Goal14, Urbanization......................................................................... ....................................21 OtherGoals..............................................................................................................................21 Oregon Administrative Rules..................................................................................... 21 Economic Development..........................................................................................................21 Transportation Planning Rule..................................................................................................22 MetroRegulations.................................................................................................... 23 Urban Growth Management Functional Plan.........................................................................23 Tigard Comprehensive Plan................................. ..................................................... 23 CitizenInvolvement....................................................................................•............................23 LandUse Planning...................................................................................................................24 Economic Development..........................................................................................................26 Housing....................................................................................................................................28 Title 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code (Tigard Community Development Code) .......... 29 Chapter 18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments..............................................................29 Chapter 18.390 Decision-Making Procedures.........................................................................30 IV. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................31 ATTACHMENTS 1. Legal description and exhibit map of zoning districts, dated May 11, 2015 2. Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study, dated February 13, 2014 3. Transportation Planning Rule analysis, dated May 11, 2015 4. Public facilities impact analysis, dated May 11, 2015 5. Neighborhood meeting documentation 6. Copies of deeds 7. Pre-application conference notes One copy provided separately from bound submittal: 1. Original Application Forms and Submittal Checklists 2. Check for Application Fee H:\Projeas\2130474oz\wvP\RFF-Cary of Tgarc-Cornprehensrve Plan MapArnendment-15o514.d= MN I. PROJECT SUMMARY Applicant: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust c/o Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP Attention: Kelly Hossaini 111 5W Fifth Avenue 3400 U.S. Bancorp Tower Portland, OR 97204 Owner: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust Map/Tax Lot Number: 2S1010001100(13.2 acres) 2S101CA00100 (24.2 acres) 2S101DB00300 (3.1 acres) 2S101DB00400 (2.1 acres) Location: Southeast corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street Site Address: Tax Lot 25101DB00400 had an assigned address of 13085 SW 75th Avenue from the former house (since demolished); remaining tax lots do not have assigned addresses since the properties are vacant Zoning: Tax Lots 2S1010001100 and 2S101CA00100 are zoned Industrial Park (I- P); Tax Lot 2S101DB00300 is zoned Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P); and Tax Lot 25101DB00400 is zoned Low-Density Residential(R-3.5) Comprehensive Plan: Tax Lots 251010001100 and 2S101CA00100 are designated Light Industrial (IL); Tax Lot 25101DB00300 is designated Professional Commercial (CP); and Tax Lot 2S101DB00400 is designated Low Density Residential (L) Adjacent Zoning: Light Industrial (I-L)to the north and south; I-L and Parks and Recreation (PR)) to the west; Professional/Administrative Commercial, Law-Density Residential (R-3.5), and Industrial Park(I-P)to the east Existing Structures: All four Tax Lots are vacant Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment & Zone Change to result in 18.3 acres designated Light Industrial (IL) and zoned Industrial Park (I-P) and 24.2 acres designated Mixed Use Employment (MUE) and zoned Mixed Use Employment(MUE) Project Contact: Mackenzie c/o Brian Varricchione 1515 SE Water Avenue,Suite 100 Portland,OR 47214 Phone: (503)224-9550 Email: bvarricchione@mcknze.com H:\Project5\213047402\VAI\RPT-itydT%prd-Ccxrpreheriew Plan Map A�ndm nt-150514xkl 1 M0 Ill. INTRODUCTION & SITE ANALYSIS Introduction History The 42.5-acre property that is the subject of this application was owned by Fred W. Fields for many years before his death in 2011. It is presently owned by the Fred W. Fields Trust. The current zoning designations on the property have been in effect for several decades. The industrially zoned portion of the property was nominally used as part of the Coe Manufacturing facility, located at 7930 SW Hunziker Road, directly across Wall Street. Although this property was never fully developed, in the late 1960s a rail spur was constructed along the western edge of the property abutting Wall Street. Beginning in the early 1950s,the southwestern end of the industrially zoned portion of the property was used as a brick- making facility. Remnants of that facility still exist, including a concrete foundation. In 2012, the Trust had the related horizontal mine shaft, which was used for clay removal, filled in for safety reasons. A single family home existed on the residentially zoned portion of the property, but was demolished in 2012.There have been no other uses of the property during the last 70 or so years. Efforts to Sell the Property Over the years,there has been interest by industrial developers in the industrially zoned portion of the property. The issue that consistently prevented its sale, however, was that while the industrial property encompassed approximately 37.4 acres, only about half of that acreage was suitable for industrial development. The rest of the industrially zoned property was too steeply sloped to support the large- format structures typically used in such development. As discussed in the 2014 Development Analysis and Opportunity Study ("Development Analysis"), much of the western portion of the industrial property has a slope of 10-12%,while the regional standard for industrial land is a slope of less than 10% (see Attachment 2.) As a result of this inherent constraint on the usability of the industrially zoned portion of the property, offers from prospective purchasers included no value for the sloped acreage. In short, developers were only willing to pay for about 20 acres of the 37.4-acre industrial property. Further, the cost of grading the industrially zoned portion of the property to achieve even a minimally acceptable lot size and slope for industrial development increased the cost of development to the extent that the price a developer could pay for the land was even further suppressed.As a consequence, neither Mr. Fields nor the Trust ever received an acceptable offer. Development Analysis In 2013, the Trust decided that a holistic approach was needed to rethink how the property could be developed. The portion of the property suitable for industrial development seemed hopelessly stuck, and there had been no interest over the years in the commercially zoned or low-density residential- zoned portions of the property. The reality was that approximately 43 acres of land in the middle of a thriving suburban community, well-served by public infrastructure, seemed doomed to remain vacant even in a robust economy where developers simply could not find enough serviceable land to meet demand. It was at this point that representatives of the Trust met with City staff, including the City's new economic development director, Lloyd Purdy. Staff agreed that allowing the 43 acres to simply languish in the current stalemate was not acceptable. The City wanted the jobs, the residents, and the tax revenue that would be unlocked by taking a fresh view of the property. In the fall of 2013, the Trust hired Mackenzie to prepare a concept plan for the property to determine how the property could be rezoned and reconfigured to meet the City's objectives for the area,to align with market demand, and to meet the Trust's goal of selling the property for an acceptable price. Over H;`,Pr jos\213o474o2\wp\RPT-cky�afTg..kc rpreh.rwry PlanMpAm.d..t-1so514A. 2 ISI . approximately four months, City staff, Mackenzie, Trust representatives, two commercial real estate brokers, and a seasoned industrial developer worked together to reach the conclusions embodied in the Development Analysis. The Development Analysis recommends that the western 20 acres or so of the Larger Property be partitioned from the remainder and retain its existing Industrial Park zone. The Development Analysis also recommends that the zoning designation for the remainder of the property be changed to Mixed Use Employment to accommodate a range of employment uses, as well as multi- family development. These recommendations coincided most closely with the objectives of the City,the market, and the Trust. In February 2014, the results of the Development Analysis were shared with the City's Planning Commission and City Council. Both bodies gave the Trust and staff feedback on the Development Analysis, and expressed support for the overall direction recommended by that analysis. Both bodies anticipated a follow-up application from the Trust requesting a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change consistent with the Development Analysis recommendations. Infrastructure finance Plan As a follow-up to the Development Analysis, the City applied for and received a grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD)to prepare an infrastructure finance plan for the Fields Trust property, as well as the surrounding Wall Street/Hunziker Road industrial area to the west and north. The purpose of the study was to quantify the need for and appropriate size of public infrastructure in the area, with the hope of ultimately spurring economic development. The infrastructure study recognized that not only would the Fields Trust property need significant infrastructure investment, much of the adjacent industrial property - especially to the west of Wall Street - is substantially underdeveloped and would also benefit from public infrastructure investment. The infrastructure plan was completed late last year and continues to inform the City's actions regarding the Wall Street/Hunziker Road area, as well as the Trust's planning for its property. Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment In March 2015, the City Council adopted an amendment to its 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) acknowledging that slope was not taken into account as a factor in determining the suitability of vacant or redevelopable land in the city for industrial uses. Both state law and Metro allow slope to be a limiting factor in the designation of industrial land. (See OAR 550-009-0015(3)(a)(B) and Metro's 2009 Urban Growth Report.) This omission resulted in an overstatement of available and suitable industrial land in Tigard.The amendment allows industrially zoned properties with significant slope, like the Fields Trust property,to be rezoned for more feasible uses. Summary Much work has been done by the Fields Trust and the City since mid-2013 to arrive at this application for a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change. This work has already begun to have the desired effect in that the industrially zoned portion of the property that is suitable for industrial development has been under contract by an industrial developer since the fall of 2014. That developer continues to work with the City to bring the industrial portion of the Fields Trust property into full development. The current comprehensive plan map and zone change application will allow the remainder of the property to realize its potential,as well. H:\Project5\213047402\VAI\RPT-itydT%prd-Co preheriewPlanMapA�ndm nt-150514.= 3 MN Description of Request The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. The application is required to meet approval criteria set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC or Municipal Code)Title 18 Community Development Code.The application is submitted in response to site slopes and other constraints which make the eastern portion of the site unsuitable for industrial uses. No development plans accompany this land use application and no specific development plans exist for the majority of the portion of the property subject to the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change.' All future development will be required to comply with applicable sections of the Community Development Code. Existing Site &Surrounding Land Use The property is Iocated just south of Highway 217 and west of the SW 72nd Avenue exit.As illustrated in Figure 1, the subject site consists of four tax lots at the southeast corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street within Tigard city limits.The total area of the four tax lots is 42.5 acres. l.Sf+ir5E3f,'+7300 y��2'�j y Y _S1i;7LlJU.l O ff 7 4 $ D Legend Site 7axlots 'Approximately 0.4 acres of the C-P-zoned property will be rezoned to I-P and is currently under contract with an industrial developer,as described in the Introduction section. H.\ProJectsV 3047402\WP\RPrr.riy Dfrrgard-corrpreherisim Plan snap Aa ndm nt-1so514xkc 4 ME Figure 1:Aerial Photo Table 1 specifies the existing area, comprehensive plan designation, and zoning for the four tax lots, while Figure 2 and Figure 3 illustrate the existing comprehensive plan designations and zoning. Tablerr Comprehensive . Zoning Designations &Tax Lot 'Area Existing Comprehensive Existing Zoning Designation 251010001100 13.2 Light Industrial (IL) Industrial Park(I-P) 2S101CA00100 24.2 Light Industrial (IL) Industrial Park(I-P) 2S101DB00300 3.1 Professional Commercial (CP) Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P) 2S101DB00400 2.1 Low Density Residential (L) Low-Density Residential (R-3.5] SIV GG Rp IL SIT€ lyy MUE V Sw CRESTVIEw .r SW YARNS ST uj a x 05 IL MH L Ln SW FiR S7 Legend Site Taxlots CG:General commertiaE CP CP:Professional Commercial IL:Light Industrial \ SUV CHERRY 01ilks L Low Density Residential M:Medium Density Residential MH:Medium-High Density Residential MH �+ MUE:Mixed Use Employment 41 05:open Space 1 a s7s iso N Figure 2:Existing Comprehensive Plan Designations H;\Pmjects\213047402\VV"PT-CfWofTigard,C mpmhensiv Plan MapAmendment-150514.dacx 5 C-G MILE -L PR R-25 �. R-3.5 Legend I-P Site Taxiots C-G:General Commercial C-P:Professional Commercial e-P 14:Light industrial I-P:Industrial Park \ 5W CHEftI, MUE:Mixed Use Employment PR:Parks and Recreation R-3.5:Low-[tensity Residential R-12:Medium-Density Residential 1, 11-25:Medium High-Density Residential i.... Figure 3: Existing Zoning As illustrated in Figure 4, the site has approximately 345 feet of SW Hunziker Road frontage along its north side and abuts SW Wall Street (a private street) on its west side. Currently, the only public access to the site is from 5W Hunziker Road. The site abuts the Portland & Western Railroad tracks and contains an unused rail spur along the west edge adjoining Wall Street that connects to property on the north side of SW Hunziker Road. The site contains a grove of mature evergreen trees along the eastern side which abuts existing lower density (R-3.5) residential properties. The property contains a low- quality wetland area near the northwest corner and site elevations range from approximately 240 feet along the eastern property line to approximately 150 feet along the western boundary, with slopes of ten to twelve percent on the eastern side and four to five percent on the western side. The property is currently vacant. H;\Pmjects\213047402\VV"PT{ityofTigard,C mpmhensive Plan MapAmendment-150514.dacx 6 ME Existing Conditions and Topography Rail Sputr °,g Low•Grade Weiland(Clean Water Serwkzs• J� designated Vegetated Cm ck r). SLOPE ��4 0-6% MA-7% Lei I f . trJ I \, ej 4131 AGO 4- t ti Oe M ZG/E 1100 X .MAP Yatmsao i r the em .. ,o # MM25191CA � ,, 71 � f f a "- t. ACRES r ].,AUKS 11q s �3; I r tct noo I r Lm xo ry MAP 251 vov MAP 251010B N } I I Figure 4:Existing Conditions and Topography The site is in a transition area between low density residential properties (R-3.5) to the east and industrial properties (I-P) to the west and north. A dog park is located on the west side of Wall Street. The south side of the site is bounded by the Portland &Western Railroad tracks and beyond that is a 26- acre natural area purchased from Mr. Fields by Metro and the City in 2012. Development Constraints As discussed in the Introduction section, the property has been on the market for many years with the significant interest from the development community being only in the industrially zoned portion of the property. Even with that limited interest, development has thus far been deemed economically unfeasible due to site and market constraints as described in detail below. Generally, the location is desirable only for a limited set of uses due to access constraints, and there are significant topographical challenges with siting the uses allowed under the current I-P zoning designation. Previously considered uses include a bus barn for Tigard-Tualatin School District, City Public Works use, multiple industrial development users, and multi-family residential development. To date, none of these uses have been able to find a development pro forma that could be considered practical in the current market and feasible given the property's development constraints. The Development Analysis for this site was generated through a series of public/private joint venture workshops that included the property owner, local developers, local real estate brokers, the City of Tigard, and Mackenzie land use planners and civil engineers. The workshops and analysis were a collaborative effort to determine the highest and best use of the undeveloped Fields Property given: ■ Significant site constraints ■ The current and future development market ■ Regional needs/City needs for employment areas H.\Pmlect5\2130474021,vVP\RvrrryarTcard4ccxrpreherurve Plan Mapnmendnwnt-vsaslaxk= 7 ma The analysis and recommendations contained in the Development Analysis were presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council in early 2014 for comment, leading to this Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change request. Listed below are the primary and secondary site constraints identified by the Development Analysis that significantly impact the development feasibility of the site: Primary Site Constraintsz Primary site constraints consist of site factors which severely limit the development potential and will require significant cost or zoning modification to rectify. Slope and Site Configuration The slope and configuration of the majority of the site is not suitable for market-scale development allowed under current I-P zoning. ■ The site slopes from east to west, corresponding to the site's narrow dimension and limiting the ability to create flat areas for large buildings. ■ The western portion of the site could accommodate small industrial buildings (150-200' deep) if coupled with a 20-30' high retaining wall and/or extensive grading. The associated site costs have been cost prohibitive for several previous potential buyers. ■ As noted in the City's recent EUA amendment, the eastern portion of the site could not support large-footprint industrial structures due to slopes in excess of 10%. ■ Mid-scale commercial buildings such as high-end (Class A) offices could fit on the site; however, they would require partial basements and retaining walls or more extensive grading, as well as better access and vehicle connections to and through the site. Additionally, there doesn't appear to be a short or long-term market demand for Class A office with existing high vacancy rates nearby. ■ Narrow buildings such as multi-family residential or mixed-use buildings could be built into the slope with small retaining walls. However, current zoning does not support housing as an allowed use. Slope of SW Hunziker Road The slope of SW Hunziker Road as it abuts the north side of the property is not adequate for truck access that would be needed under current I-P zoning. The majority of the slope along the property's SUV Hunziker Road frontage (the only public street frontage) is approximately 10%, which is too steep for trucks servicing allowed I-P uses on the site (4—5%is the maximum possible). The only current access to the property is along SW Wall Street(a private street). Additional access points off of Hunziker Road are needed for viable development. Private Street(SW Waii Street)Designation/Width The Transportation System Plan (TSP) designation and width of SW Wall Street (a private road) between adjacent development on the west side of SW Wall Street and the rail spur on the Fields Trust property is not wide enough for City Collector standards. 2 Mote that some of the primary and secondary constraints do not directly affect the portion of the property that will have its zone changed through this application, but they affect the overall ability to develop the entire site. H;\Projects\213o474o21,wP'\avrr.riyDfrgamkcc prehermv Plan map Aa rkdm nt-1sos14.dc $ ME ■ The most appropriate vehicular access to the site has been found to be from a private street (SW Wall Street). SW Wall Street is included on the City's TSP as a Minor Collector, with a required width of 58'-96'.At different points along SW Wall Street in its current layout between the rail spur and existing buildings, the width is less than 58'. An adjacent property owner has rights to the rail spur and does not appear willing to abandon the spur, which would facilitate road improvements along Wall Street. ■ The TSP could potentially be amended to designate Wall Street as a Local Industrial street, which is a more feasible design section. ■ Wall Street could potentially be extended to SW Tech Center Drive (designated a Local Industrial Street in the TSP)to provide connectivity for the larger industrial area. Secondary Site Constraints: Secondary site constraints consist of site factors which impact the development potential and need to be addressed, but that do not appear to require zoning modification and are not cost prohibitive to the overall development. Wetland Area A low-quality wetland exists on the flattest parts of the site (see Figure 4 above),which is also the most appropriate location for industrial development due to slope and access considerations. The area is identified by Clean Water Services as a vegetated corridor but has not been deemed locally significant in the City's Local Wetland Inventory. This wetland could be mitigated only if applicable permits are granted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Oregon Department of State Lands. Remaining Trees An existing grove of mature trees exists along the eastern edge of the property.The trees act as a buffer to adjacent residential uses and could be potentially integrated into a development scheme that includes smaller scale buildings such as residential. On the other hand, the trees serve as a constraint for many of the currently approved uses in the I-P zone. Limited Access from Major Routes The site is in close proximity to Highway 217, SW 72nd Avenue, and Highway 99W, but is not easily accessed from all directions (e.g., from the northbound left-turn lane at the intersection on 5W 72nd Avenue). Access difficulties are a potential issue for many use types currently allowed in existing I-P zoning. SW Tech Center Drive to the south of the site does not currently connect to SW Wall Street, but could be considered with future transportation improvements, subject to acquisition of the intervening property in the roadway corridor. Railroad Switching Yard Noise from the adjacent railroad switching yard could impact possible uses depending on needs. Prior Collaboration with the City Since 2013, the property owner and the City have collaborated to determine how this property may be successfully developed to benefit the community.The market strength of the site's potential future uses was discussed at workshops with City staff, the owner, and local industry/development experts. The need for and interest in potential uses that can be supported by the current market was identified by H;\Proj—\213047402\WP\RPT-AyDfrgamkC-wrehers�e€'1ar,MapAa Adm nt-Zs0514xko 9 ME local developers and real estate brokers with experience in the Tigard area and reviewed with the workshop team to determine how to feasibly develop employment uses on the property. This analysis identified high market demand for both light industrial/smaller office/flex space (5,000—7,500 SF tenant spaces within larger building footprints, which typically need 150' deep x 250' wide buildings with 50' truck bays) and for multi-family residences (workforce to mid-range housing which would also support adjacent industrial and employment uses). Low demand was identified for Class A office space in suburban areas, retail, restaurants, specialty recreation (e.g., fitness centers), and "live/work" spaces in suburban areas. City staff and the owners made presentations to the Planning Commission (February 10, 2014) and City Council (February 18, 2014) to discuss the site constraints and identify potential approaches to developing the property. Based on the site conditions, the site was divided into two subareas, as shown in the Development Analysis (Attachment 2). The western side is relatively flat and would work well for commercial or industrial uses, whereas the eastern side is steeper with many trees and is not suitable for cost-effective, market-ready I-P zone development, but may be marketable as a mix of commercial and workforce (up to mid-level) housing. Proposed Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change Based on extensive site analysis and collaboration with the City to identify the highest and best use for the site, the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to preserve as much of the developable industrial land as possible, resulting in approximately 18.3 acres of I-P on the western, flatter side and approximately 24.2 acres of MUE on the eastern, steeper side. Since a zoning map amendment must be consistent with the comprehensive plan map, in order to allow the zone change the City would also need to amend the comprehensive plan map to result in 18.3 acres designated IL and 24.2 acres designated MUE. A description and illustration of the two zoning areas can be found in Attachment 1. Table 2 specifies the existing and proposed comprehensive plan designation and zoning for the four tax lots, while Figure 5 and Figure 5 illustrate the existing comprehensive plan designations and zoning. ProposedTable 2:Existing and . . Designations ProposedExisting Tax Lot Area Comprehensive . . - Plan JM, "At Zoning Zoning _e It ,I 251010001100 13.2 IL IL & MUE I-P I-P & MUE 2S101CA00100 24.2 IL IL& MUE I-P I-P & MUE 2S101DB00300 3.1 CP IL& MUE C-P I-P & MUE 2S101DB00400 2.1 L MUE R-3.5 MUE Abbreviation key.- Comprehensive ey:Comprehensive Plan designations Zoning designations CP=Professional Commercial C-P=Professional/Administrative Commercial IL=Light Industrials I-P=Industrial Park L=Low Density Residential MUE=Mixed Use Employment MUE=Mixed Use Employment R-3.5=Low-Density Residential Table 3 indicates the number of acres in the existing and proposed zones for each tax lot. H;\Pmjects\213047402\VV"PT{ityofTigardCo pmhensiv Plan Map Amendment-150514.da 10 ME Table 3:Areas of Existing and Proposed Zoning Existing Zoning Proposed (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 2S1010001100 13.2 0 0 1.9 11.3 2S101CA00100 24.2 0 0 16.0 8.1 2S101DB00300 0 3.1 0 0.4 2.7 2SIOlDB00400 0 0 2.1 0 2.1 Note:Figures between existing and proposed zones differ due to rounding. Abbreviotion key: Zoning designations C-P=Professional/Administrative Commercial I-P=Industrial Park MUE=Mixed Use Employment R-3.5=Low-Density Residential g IL y w y��z1k���fl +CG IL 4 SITE I' MUE 640 L 5 CRESTViEWST h IL SW YARNS ST LU OS MUE MH L un su, Legend Site Taxiots -CG:General Commercial CP _ CP:Professional Commercial IL Light industrial SW CHERRY D L•Low Density Residential M:Medium Density Residential r MH:Medium-High Density Residential MH MUE:Mixed Use Employment D5:open Space Figure 5: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designations H:\Pmiect\213047402\VAI\RPT-iWofTgand-Cwnprehens Plan MapAmendment-150514.da 11 C-G MUE 1-L PR -P MUE R-25 R-3.5 Legend Site Taxiots C-G:General Commercial C-P:Professional Commercial � C-P 14:Light Industrial \\ I-P:Industrial Park 5W CHEfti• MUE:Mixed Use Employment PR:Parks and Recreation R-3.5:Low-[tensity Residential R-12:Medium-Density Residential 1, R-25:Medium High-Density Residential Figure 6:Proposed Zoning Chapter 18.380 of the Community Development Code outlines the process through which the City evaluates amendments to the zoning map or comprehensive plan map, consisting of a Planning Commission recommendation followed by a City Council decision.The City's analysis will be based on all allowable uses under the zoning regulations, since specific future uses have not been determined. The amendment could lead to further development and job creation by allowing the economical use of an existing industrial property. Development Economics/Feasibility Over the course of the past few years, several development feasibility studies have been completed for this site. A PacTrust analysis demonstrated that the cost of developing even just the flatter portion of the property in the IP zone exceeded costs of other sites (primarily due to significant site grading and street construction) to a degree that would result in a development cost premium of 25-40%. By contrast, approving the zone change to apply MUE zoning to the steeper portion of the site allows development costs to be shared across the full extent of the site and brings the estimated cost of development in line with market demands. H:\Project5\213047402\VAI\RPT-ityofT%prd-Co preheriewPlanMapAmendment-1Sk514Accx 12 MN Economic Benefit to the City Approving the proposed map amendments would have a number of economic benefits to the City. As a result of the increased viability of the site for development,the assessed value and property tax receipts increase significantly following development. Development would also generate revenues for the City such as permit fees and system development charges. Finally, the map changes have the potential to lead to several hundred jobs and the possibility of workforce housing (if some of the MUE portion were to develop with multi-family housing). Employment Land Issues Although the subject property represents a portion of the buildable Industrial acreage in Tigard,the site cannot be a significant source of economic development because of the constraints outlined above. This significantly diminishes the usefulness of the site for industrial development, which generally requires relatively large unconstrained acreage. The proposed map amendment would convert a site that is currently zoned I-P,C-P, and R-3.5 into a site zoned I-P and MUE.This action would preserve 18.3 acres for industrial use and create 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land that could be developed with retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses, research and development, multi-family housing, or a mix of these uses. The EOA compares demand and supply of employment lands to evaluate the land inventory over a 20-year period.This report indicates that under the Efficient Land Meed Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial/mixed use) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial).. On March 24, 2015, the City Council adopted Ordinance 15-06 to amend the comprehensive plan and the EOA by applying slope as a suitability constraint for industrially-zoned property throughout the City. The City's updated analysis confirmed that approximately 17 acres on both I-P tax lots within this site (Tax Lots 251010001100 and 25101CA00100) are slope-constrained for industrial uses requiring large- footprint buildings due to site slopes greater than 10%. The ordinance found that citywide, "the slope constraint reduces the suitability of a few sites for some industrial uses, but need not limit the potential for employment use of slope-constrained sites. However, a slope constraint on a third of the vacant industrial zoned land highlights the need to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment." The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change allows for different job density than large-footprint industrial buildings on the eastern portion of the site. To preserve and enhance the City's supply of employment lands, this proposal would increase the overall land area designated for employment uses by 2.1 acres by rezoning one parcel from R-3.5 to MUE and by maintaining the remainder of the site as either MUE or I-P. Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) stipulates that the City must demonstrate whether an amendment to the comprehensive plan and zoning map would have a significant effect on the transportation system. If the analysis demonstrates that a significant effect would occur, then the City must either deny the application or require mitigation to offset the traffic impact. Determinations of significance are made by the City in consultation with the roadway authority (which may be the City, Washington County,or ODOT). Attachment 3 describes the TPR analysis performed for this site. The TPR analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning, and it is important to note H;,Proj�S\2.13o474o2\wP\RPT-cky[afTg..kc rpreherw5 Wan i+Aap Ak .dmen415o514A. 13 ma that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning, regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built. Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned MUE except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Development of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) with housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 PM peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the MUE zone were entirely multifamily housing and the I-P zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were entirely office use,trip generation would be 715 PM peak hour trips(a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and medical- dental office use,trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Public Utility Considerations Demands on potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage are assessed in detail in the Public Facilities Impact Letter (Attachment 4). This assessment concluded that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change should not negatively affect public utilities. Neighborhood Meeting A neighborhood meeting was held on May 6, 2015 to share information about the proposal and seek feedback from area residents and businesses prior to submittal of the land use application. Copies of the neighborhood meeting materials and summary are in Attachment 5, as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. Historic 50 font Buffer Historically, the City's Comprehensive Plan required a 50-foot buffer between the Fields Industrial Park- zoned property and the Rolling Hills subdivision to the east, as shown in Figure 7. The purpose of this buffer was to provide increased separation between industrial uses and the single-family residential neighborhood. When the City amended its comprehensive plan, this 50-foot buffer requirement was lost. At the May 6 neighborhood meeting, the Trust heard concern from residents of the Rolling Hills subdivision that the 50-foot buffer was no longer applicable. Although the Trust is requesting a zone change from an industrial zone to a less intensive mixed-use employment zone, the Trust would still like to honor the historic 50-foot buffer that neighbors have come to rely on. Therefore, the Trust would accept a condition of approval on the zone change requiring a 50-foot buffer between the portion of the Trust property that is now zoned Industrial Park and the Rolling Hills subdivision,as depicted in Figure 7. H:\Projects\2130474021,wr'\Rr'T-Cfcydrgard-ccxrpreheriew Plan Mapn rodm nt-LW514A= 14 Al �tMENEM gTe W. whir Legend Site Taxicts 50'Tree Buffer b i. . - - s.. r r r 1 -rr - - e � 'r •• • For MN Ill. NARRATIVE & COMPLIANCE This action proposes a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change for property on the southeast corner of 5W Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street. Map amendments are required to meet development standards set forth in the Tigard Community Development Code, codified as Municipal Code Title 18. Therefore, the following addresses the applicable Municipal Code criteria, together with statewide planning goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and Metro regulations. Pertinent code sections are cited either in their entirety or in a summation and are followed by a response. Statewide Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement Objective: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Response:Goal 1 broadly requires that local governments have mechanisms in place which solicit public participation in both quasi-judicial and legislative land use decisions. The City's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and the Community Development Code include citizen involvement procedures with which the review of this application complies.This process allows for citizens to communicate their input into the map amendment review conducted by the City at public hearings or by submitting written comments. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 6, 2015. Copies of the neighborhood meeting materials and summary are in Attachment 5; as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules.The Planning Commission will review the proposed comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. Within the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change process, the City mails notices to affected property owners and agencies, notice is published in the newspaper, and public hearings are held.This process complies with the Goal. Goal 2, Land Use Planning( Objective: To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. Response: Goal 2 requires that each jurisdiction have a comprehensive plan and implementation measures such as a zoning code and area-specific plans.As a quasi-judicial land use action,the proposed comprehensive plan amendment is based on its conformance with relevant elements of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan and considerations related to that plan's established zoning districts. The procedural requirements for the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change involve assessment of the application's merits, notice to affected parties, and public hearings. The proposal is to change the planning and zoning designations of urban land within the Urban Growth Boundary in compliance with Goal 2. Notice of the proposed comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment is provided by the City to DLCD as required. Oregon Department of Transportation and other affected agency staff will also be provided the opportunity to comment. The City's decision is based on findings of fact. Goal 3,Agricultural Lands H:\Project5\213047402\VAI\RPT-itydT%prd-Ccxrpreheriew Plan MapA�rodm nt-M514Ac 16 Mu Objective:To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. Response: This Goal is not applicable because the site is within the City of Tigard Urban Growth Boundary,and no identified agricultural resources are located on the site. Goal 4, Forest Lands Objective: To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture. Response; This Goal is not applicable because the site is within the City of Tigard Urban Growth Boundary and City Limits. The majority of the site was previously cleared of trees with the exception of the variable-width tree buffer along the eastern site boundary.. Goal 5, Open Spaces,Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources Objective:To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. Response: Goal 5 is a wide-ranging policy initiative intended to protect natural and historic resources generally, and is most commonly implemented through sensitive lands/critical areas ordinances that protect streams, riparian corridors, trees, wildlife habitat, and open space. According to the Tigard Wetlands & Stream Corridors map, dated November 1, 2010, the Local Wetlands Inventory did not identify significant or non-significant wetlands on this property. However, there is a wetland on the western portion of the site that is depicted as part of the Clean Water Services vegetated corridor. This wetland is unaffected by this application, since the I-P zoning for the wetland would not change. Development proposals of that portion of the site would need to account for presence of the wetland in accordance with local and state regulations. The Tigard Significant Habitat Areas map identifies the eastern half of the site as lower value habitat(this map appears outdated, since the majority of the tree cover has now been removed) and no areas as moderate value or highest value habitat.The Tigard Tree Groves map depicts the tree grove along the eastern site boundary; the presence of this grove would be unaffected by the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The City provides incentives to preserve tree groves when developments are proposed. The subject site is not designated as open space or a scenic or historic area by the City. Comprehensive plan amendment proposals must demonstrate consistency with Goal 5. In most cases, however, Goal 5 considerations can only apply to a specific development plan, which is not proposed at this time. A re-designation of the subject property is consistent with Goal 5 inasmuch as it allows future site development to better accommodate natural features categorized under Goal 5. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is not in conflict with this Goal. Goal 6,Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Objective:To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. Response: Intended to maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state, Goal 6 requires that all development be consistent with State and Federal standards related to air and water pollution, while also requiring that local governments establish plans which: ■ Designate alternative suitable sites for development which is likely to cause pollution discharge; ■ Designate urban and rural residential areas only where appropriate sewer services are available; ■ Buffer incompatible uses and; ■ Consider the carrying capacity of affected airshecls and watersheds. H;\ProjectsVI30174021,WPI\RPTLityDfrgard4CcxrpreherurveP1wMapA4 ndm nt-IW514d� 17 MU The site is currently designated Light Industrial (37.4 acres), Professional Commercial (3.1 acres), and Low Density Residential (2.1 acres) on the comprehensive plan and is subject to City regulations regarding off-site impacts, so the potential harmful effects on air, water, and land resource quality are limited. Small-scale commercial, light industrial, or housing development produces relatively small impacts on environmental quality when performed in accordance with the City's development regulations. Re-designation of the eastern portion of the site from industrial to mixed use employment will have a positive benefit on the local airshed by limiting the potential for diesel particulate emissions. The proposal to amend the comprehensive plan map and zoning boundary to designate 18.3 acres for industrial use and 24.2 acres for mixed use employment would therefore have no negative impact with respect to this Goal. Gaal 7,Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Objective: To protect people and property from natural hazards. Response: Pursuant to Goal 7, local governments "shall adopt comprehensive plans...to reduce risk to people and property from natural hazards," including floods and landslides. According to FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map 41027605170, dated February 18, 2005, the site is not within a mapped flood hazard area. According to the Tigard Seismic Hazard map, the northwest and southern portions of the site are classified as category A(greatest seismic risk),while the remainder is classified as categories B or C (the categories are assigned based on tendency to experience damage due to any combination of liquefaction, amplification of ground shaking, or slope instability hazard). The Tigard Slope Instability Map does not illustrate any drainage hazard areas, debris flow hazards, or landslide hazard areas on site but does confirm that a small portion of the site has slopes in excess of 15°!. Development of the site would need to comply with all applicable building code regulations and engineering requirements to minimize the potential for damage from natural hazards. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is not in conflict with this Goal. Goal S,Recreational Needs Objective: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Response: The site is across Wall Street from the Potso Dog Park. The site is presently designated for industrial, commercial, and residential development on the comprehensive plan map and has not been planned for recreational opportunities. Since the property is not identified for recreational use, the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change to industrial uses and mixed use employment would have no significant impact on the City's planning for recreational needs. Gaal 9,Economic Development Objective: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. Response: Intended to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities, Goal 9 requires that land be designated for commercial and industrial uses according to the needs of the local and regional economy, current economic base, workforce, availability of land, availability of key public facilities, etc. Practically speaking, Goal 9 has encouraged communities to preserve employment land. Decisions based on Goal 9 considerations take into account more than the simple amount of buildable acreage, but also carefully evaluate the suitability of land to accommodate industrial development that would further economic opportunities. Currently, 2.1 acres of the site are zoned R-3.5, 3.1 acres are zoned C-P, and 37.4 acres are zoned I-P. The Tigard Buildable Lands Inventory map,dated January 1, 2014, indicates that the site was included in H;,Proj�S\2.13o474o2\wp\RPT-cky vfTg..kc nprehe.Plan i+Aap Ak .dmen415o514A. 18 MN the City's inventory of buildable lands at that time (including three-quarters of the parcel zoned R-3.5). However, as acknowledged when City Council adopted Ordinance 15-06, slope was not applied as a development constraint in the City's Buildable Lands Inventory or in the EOA.The City's updated analysis in Ordinance 15-06 confirmed that approximately 17 acres of the Fields Trust property are slope- constrained for industrial uses requiring large-footprint buildings due to site slopes greater than 10%. Consequently, other building formats are more appropriate in the slope-constrained areas, which is one of the motivating factors for the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The zone change would result in 18.3 acres zoned I-P and 24.2 acres zoned MUE.The EOA indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). Ordinance 15-06 concluded that approximately 17 acres of the Fields Trust property identified in the Buildable Lands Inventory and the ECA are too steep for some industrial uses, particularly those requiring large, rectangular buildings, truck courts, and associated parking areas. Approval of this application would change 19.4 acres from an industrial designation to a mixed use employment designation; however, the land would continue to be counted in the employment land inventory and available to promote economic growth. Furthermore, the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change would increase the amount of land available for economic development by converting 2.1 acres from residential (R-3.5) to employment use (MUE).The site can be put to productive use by designating the eastern portion as MUE in order to increase the developable area and allow a developer to spread costs across a larger area. By encouraging development of existing vacant land the zone change would increase the number of jobs available to the community. The EOA indicated that the City has a surplus of two acres of industrial land; however, Ordinance 15-06 recognized that the City is "now potentially in deficit for industrial zoned vacant land." The proposed zone change affecting the site would deplete the two-acre surplus by converting approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE; however, this depletion would be partially offset by converting 0.4 acres from C-P to I-P. Taken together, the proposed zone change would need to compensate for the jobs associated with a net reduction of 17 acres of industrial land. While there is no guarantee that the site would produce jobs under the existing zoning(as evidenced by the current lack of development),for the purposes of comparison employment density assumptions from the EOA have been used to quantify the number of jobs that could be expected on 17 industrial acres. Based on 16.5 industrial jobs per acre (derived from the 794 jobs on 48 industrial acres identified in the EGA), 17 acres of industrial land would lead to an employment level of approximately 280 jobs. Approval of the zone change could therefore decrease the City's employment potential by 280 jobs unless these jobs can be accommodated elsewhere. The proposed MUE zone permits a variety of employment uses, including office uses, which are also allowed in the I-P zone. The City can conclude that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would preserve the ability to create jobs on the site. The applicant understands that staff will be recommending a condition of approval that 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Therefore, the proposed amendment is supportive of this Goal. Goof 10, Housing Objective: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. Response;The comprehensive plan currently designates 2.1 acres of this site for Low Density Residential development (tax lot 2S10113600400). These 2.1 acres are proposed to be changed to Mixed Use Employment. The current zoning (R-3.5) requires 10,000-square-foot lots so the tax lot could H;,ProjectS\2.13047402\WP\RPTLityufTganW-ornprehen Plan Map AM ndm nt 50514xkl 19 MN accommodate around seven single-family homes. In the context of the City's supply of buildable residential land, a reduction of seven units may not be significant since it would decrease the city's residential land supply by a very small fraction (the 2014 Buildable Lands Inventory indicates that 307 acres of residential land were buildable). The Mixed Use Employment zone also allows for multifamily residential construction so housing could be accommodated even with the MUE zoning. The proposed amendment would not conflict with this Goal. Goal II, Public facilities and Services Objective: To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. Response: Goal 11 is primarily implemented by the City, which has adopted public facilities plans and standards. It is therefore not directly applicable to comprehensive plan amendments - such as the one proposed herein - which do not entail significant changes in public facilities plans. Any resultant development of the subject property will be connected to sufficient public infrastructure such as the water and sewer system, and shall provide drainage facilities in a manner consistent with adopted public facilities plans. The subject property lies within City Limits, and preliminary comments from the Development Engineering Department indicate that sanitary sewer and water service is available to serve the site (subject to capacity analysis). Public facilities are discussed in more detail in the Public Facilities Impact Letter (Attachment 4). Insofar as future development of the site is subject to the requirements of such plans,the proposal is consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12, Transportation Objective; To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Response:This Goal requires the City to prepare and implement a Transportation System Plan (TSP). The Tigard 2035 TSP (dated November 2010) assumed that the site would develop with more than five jobs per acre and performed transportation analysis accordingly. Since the proposed application would change the existing zoning,further transportation analysis is necessary. The TSP designates both SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street as collectors. Adjacent to the site, Hunziker Road is improved with two travel lanes plus a sidewalk along the north side of the road. The roadway was designed to accommodate the mix of commercial, industrial, and residential uses envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Wall Street is a private road improved with two travel lanes but no bicycle or pedestrian facilities. Development of the site under the proposed zoning would lead to additional street improvements to City standards. The application of Goal 12 to proposed comprehensive plan amendments typically requires an application to demonstrate that a proposal is consistent with the TPR, as implemented through OAR 650-012-0060. As discussed in the detailed TPR analysis (Attachment 3), redesignating the eastern portion of this site from I-P, C-P, and R-3.5 zones to MUE zoning has the potential to slightly increase traffic levels, depending on the type of the resulting development. To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change do not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Goal 13, Energy Conservation Objective; To conserve energy. Response; The subject property is in a desirable location for development because it is located close to SW 72nd Avenue, Interstate 5, Oregon Highway 217, the Portland & Western Railroad, and other commercial and industrial uses. The applicant's proposal would increase the likelihood of employment H;`,Projects\213017402\WP\RPTLityvfTganW-orpreehermry Plan Map Arnerdm nt LS0514xko 20 MM development in close proximity to other industrial sites, potentially leading to trip sharing, carpooling, and/or combined deliveries, thereby increasing energy efficiency. The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change would permit development with the potential to create an energy- efficient land use pattern within the City. Goal 14, Urbanization Objective.To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. Response: The subject property is within the City, and no expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary is proposed. The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change would not affect the City's Goal 14 compliance. Other Goals ■ Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway ■ Gaal 16, Estuarine Resources ■ Goal 17, Coastal$horelands ■ Goal 18, Beaches and Dunes ■ Gaal 19, Ocean Resources Response: Goals 15-19 are not applicable to this application. Oregon Administrative Rules Economic Development OAR 660 Division 9—Economic Development 660-009-0010 Application (4) For a post-acknowledgement plan amendment under OAR chapter 660, division 18, that changes the plan designation of land in excess of two acres within an existing urban growth boundary from an industrial use designation to a non-industrial use designation, or another employment use designation to any other use designation, a city or county must address all applicable planning requirements, and: (a) Demonstrate that the proposed amendment is consistent with its most recent economic opportunities analysis and the parts of its acknowledged comprehensive plan which address the requirements of this division;or (b) Amend its comprehensive plan to incorporate the proposed amendment, consistent with the requirements of this division;or (c) Adopt a combination of the above, consistent with the requirements of this division. Response: The EOA compares demand and supply of employment lands to evaluate the land inventory over a 20-year period. This report indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20- year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres(48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IL to MUE. Although this action would decrease the area of land with an industrial designation, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment use since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment types.The simultaneous redesignation of two acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. The response to Statewide Planning Goal 9 starting on page 18 provides additional H;\ProjectsVI30474021,WPI\RPTLityDfrgard-CcxrprehermvePIwMap A4 ndm nt4is0514.d� 21 MW analysis demonstrating that the proposed amendment is consistent with the City's EOA. Analysis of comprehensive plan policies is included later in this report. Transportation Planning Rule DAR 660 Division 12—Transportation Planning 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section(3), (9)or(10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adapted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system;or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (g) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan;or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. 1-4 (4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and other affected local governments. Response: TPR compliance is demonstrated in Attachment 3. This analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning (note that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning, regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built). Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned MUE except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Development of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) with housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 PM peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the MUE zone were entirely multifamily housing and the I-P zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were entirely office use, trip generation would be 715 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and medical-dental office use, trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation H;\Projects\213o474o21,wP\RPT-ckyufTgamkcc prehermi €'lar,map A+ ndm ntiw514Ad 22 M5 network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Metro Regulations Urban?Growth Management Functional Plan Title 4—Industrial and Other Employment Areas 3.07.410 Purpose and Intent 3.07.420 Protection of Regionally Significant industrial Areas 3.07.430 Protection of industrial Areas 3.07.440 Protection of Employment Areas 3.07.450 Employment and Industrial Areas Map Response: According to Section 3.07.410, Title 4 seeks to provide and protect a supply of sites for employment by limiting the types and scale of non-industrial uses in Regionally Significant Industrial Areas (RSIAs), Industrial and Employment Areas. Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) does not identify this site as a Regionally Significant Industrial Area (RSIA), so Section 3.07.420 does not apply. Metro illustrates the I-P-zoned parcels of this site (totaling 37.4 acres) as industrial Areas adjoining other Employment Areas (west of Wall Street). In accordance with Section 3.07.430,Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of non-industrial uses within the i-P zone. This site is smaller than 50 acres, so further land division is allowed under Title 4 and City regulations. Approval of the proposed map amendments would convert 19.4 acres of the site into an Employment Area rather than an Industrial Area. The City's MUE zone standards comply with Section 3.07.440 by restricting the size and scope of commercial retail uses. Section 3.07.450 allows the City to amend the use of lands on the Industrial and Other Employment Areas map based on satisfaction of a number of criteria.This site complies with those standards since the property is not surrounded by RSIA or Industrial Area land; the change would increase rather than decrease the acreage devoted to employment uses; the site is not designated as RSIA; the Transportation Planning Rule ensures that transportation issues are properly evaluated and mitigated if necessary;the zone change would not lead to retail or cultural uses that compete with Central City or Regional or Town Centers; and the property designated Industrial Area subject to the amendment is less than 20 acres (namely, 19.4 acres). Furthermore, as discussed in the City's adoption of Ordinance 15-06, the eastern portion of the site is not buildable with industrial uses due to topographic constraints. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Citizen Involvement GOAL: 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Response: The property owner and the City have collaborated extensively to determine how this property may be successfully developed to benefit the community, including workshops with City staff, local industry/development experts, the Planning Commission, and City Council. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 6, 2015 to share information about the proposal and seek feedback from area residents and businesses prior to submittal of the land use application. Copies of the neighborhood meeting materials and summary are in Attachment 5; as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. Notice of the application is mailed to area H.\Pmleds\2130474021,vVP\RPTrryarrgard4ccxrpreherurve Plan snap Amendment-1S0514xkk 23 M0 property owners and affected agencies, and the proposal is evaluated at Planning Commission and City Council public hearings so the public may participate in the planning process. Land Use Planning GOAL: Z.T. Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. POLICIES.: S. The City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro-designated Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial areas. 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. Response: As discussed in the Metro Regulations response starting on page 23, 37.4 acres of this site is included on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) as a designated Industrial Area. Of this amount, 17.9 acres would remain in the current I-P zone and 19.4 acres would be changed from Industrial Area to Employment Area by virtue of a zone change to MUE. Given the unsuitability of the eastern portion of the property for industrial uses, changing the comprehensive plan and zoning to MUE will enable the City to promote a more intense urban development of the site. The rationale for the map amendments is to allow for a range of development opportunities on the upland portion of the site that would offset the considerable development costs associated with site grading and public improvement requirements necessary to lead to industrial uses on the flatter, western portion. Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan to account for the slope constraints on approximately 17 acres of the site that hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. The industrial uses, by themselves, would not provide sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services. The costs of developing this constrained parcel to accommodate industrial activities undermine the potential economic value of the parcel itself as currently zoned, and have led to it remaining vacant. The discussion above demonstrates that in combination with the remaining I-P land, the proposed rezoning to MUE provides a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services for the site and advance the City's social and fiscal stability. 7. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: A. Residential; B. Commercial and office employment including business parks; C. Mixed use; D. Industrial, E. Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted;and F. Public services. Response:The EOA indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario,the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (30 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial).This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IL to MUE. Although this action would decrease the industrial land area, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment and housing types.The simultaneous redesignation of 2.1 acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment- related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. In the context of the City's overall supply of residential land, a reduction of 2.1 acres is not significant. A low-quality wetland is located on H;`,Proj�s\213o474o21,wP\RPT-ctycaf Tg..kccxrpreh..WanMapAk .d..t-iw514A. 24 ma the western portion of the site; this wetland is unaffected by the zone change, and future development proposals would be subject to the City's sensitive lands regulations and state wetlands rules. 14. Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Cade, the Comprehensive Flan, and when necessary, those of the state and other agencies. Response: This narrative provides evidence that the application complies with applicable criteria of the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the Tigard Community Development Code. 15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria. A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation, B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services; C. The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment, housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location, versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; L Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled; F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses;and G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. Response: Analysis of transportation impacts and public facility infrastructure (included as Attachments 3 and 4) indicates that the site would have access to infrastructure with sufficient capacity to accommodate development of the site under existing zoning or proposed zoning, and future development of the site would improve both Hunziker Road and Wall Street. The Transportation Planning Rule analysis (Attachment 3) demonstrates that the PM peak trips for uses allowed in the existing and proposed zoning designations are similar; therefore, imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning will ensure the amendment has no significant impact on transportation facilities. Given the importance of providing an adequate employment land base for the City, redesignating 19.4 acres from IL to MUE and 2.1 acres from L to MUE would ensure that there is no net loss of employment capacity. While the change causes a nominal decrease in land designated residential, it will actually increase the amount of land available for potential multi-family development. The slope of the eastern portion of the site does not allow for large, flat building pads for industrial development, and the grades along Hunziker Road are too steep for truck turning movements into the site. Consequently, only the western portion of the site is feasible for light industrial uses. Residential or office uses could be constructed on the sloped area in the eastern part of the site. The key mechanism to allow a financially viable industrial development proposal on the western portion is to allow for non- industrial development of the eastern portion. The response to Statewide Planning Goal 9 starting on page 18 provides additional analysis demonstrating that the proposed amendment is consistent with the City's EDA. While the current I-P zone would allow for some non-industrial office usage on the sloped H;\Proj�s\213o474o21,wp\RPT-ckyvfTg..kc nprehe.€'1ar,MapA4 .d..t Lso514A. 25 MN eastern side, the marketability of this area would be enhanced by the change to MUE, and improved marketability is more likely to lead to job-creating development of the west side. An illustration of a hypothetical marketable, site-appropriate development concept is included in Attachment 2 to demonstrate that development could conform to applicable regulations and provide a potential vegetated buffer between the site and the adjoining residential area. No overlay districts are found on the site. The Tigard Significant Habitat Areas map identifies the eastern half of the site as lower value habitat (this map appears outdated since the majority of the tree cover has now been removed) and no areas as moderate value or highest value habitat. The subject site is not designated as open space or a scenic or historic area by the City. Uses allowed in the MUE zone can be arranged and clustered to fit into the site topography rather than requiring mass grading to create the large, flat sites that would be necessary for industrial uses. The City's development regulations further ensure that relevant environmental regulations will be met. Therefore, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would not detract from the viability of natural systems. 16. The City may condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s)and per specific design/development requirements. Response: This report demonstrates that due to extraordinary development costs, the flatter western portion of the site (which would continue to maintain I-P zoning) is only likely to develop if the steeper eastern portion can also be developed with some mix of employment and/or residential use. The applicant understands that staff will be recommending a condition of approval that 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Clue to the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions,the applicant respectfully requests that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. Further, in order to maintain compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule, the applicant proposes a condition of approval imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Economic Development GOAL:9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy. POLICIES: 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities,provided that required infrastructure is made available. 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. 6. The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro- designated Employment and Industrial Areas. 7. The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metra-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of these lands for industrial jobs. 12. The City shall assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality that are necessary for a sustainable economic future. Response: Industrial development by itself is not able to economically offset the high cost of on-site grading costs, public improvements to abutting streets, and utility extensions. MUE rates of return would allow the high infrastructure costs associated with the development of this property to be financed by the development itself. Conversely, maintaining the existing zoning for industrial use does not produce sufficient economic value to fund needed public infrastructure to serve the site and therefore acts as a significant development constraint, prohibiting industrial use of the site. The intent of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is to create flexibility that generates job-creating development in the City. Under the current zoning, the site has remained undeveloped for many years due to the development constraints outlined in Section II. The proposal would respond to market conditions by allowing a mix of uses on the eastern portion while preserving the western portion for industrial employers. This change would be a more efficient use of employment land than the H;`,Pr jos\213o474o2\wP\RPT-ctycafTg..kc rpreh.rwry PlanMapAm.d..t-iw514A. 26 MN current underutilized condition. The MUE zone restricts retail and service use of the property but allows lower-intensity uses than typical light industrial uses, which improves livability for the nearby residential properties. Because of site constraints outlined above and in Attachment 2, the eastern portion of the site is unsuitable for industrial use even though a large portion of the site could be described as "buildable" given a high enough expenditure of development costs. It is important to note, however, that theoretical "buildability" is not the relevant legal or practical standard for analyzing whether a particular site is appropriate for industrial use. Both under Goal 9 and from a market standpoint, a site can be "buildable" and still not be suitable for industrial use. Site suitability requires the consideration of a number of factors. In this case, even though a large portion of this site is theoretically "buildable," other factors implemented by OAR 666-009-0025 demonstrate the area proposed for the zone change is unsuitable for industrial use. The site characteristics and development constraints outlined in Table 4 and Table 5 make the property unsuitable for industrial use. -Tahip-A-09tp-Characteristics Site Characte (OAR 1 11' !11 The site is wedge-shaped with the narrowest portion abutting Hunziker Road at the north. The western boundary (Wall Street) is a private street. Access to the Site configuration including shape south is restricted by a rail line and access to the east is restricted by adjoining residential development. The site is longer in the north-south dimension than the east- west dimension. 37.4 acres of the site are zoned I-P, of which Acreage approximately 17 acres have been identified by the City as being slope-constrained for large-footprint industrial development. The site has slopes of ten to twelve percent on the eastern side and four to five percent on the western Topography side. The ground slopes from east to west in the site's shorter dimension, limiting the ability to create flat areas for large buildings. Limited visibility from Hunziker Road reduces the Visibility attractiveness of the rear portion of the site for certain development types. Specific types or levels of public facilities, Industrial access to roads is difficult due to slopes on services or energy infrastructure Hunziker Road and the rail spur along Wall Street. Proximity to a particular transportation or freight facility such as rail, marine A rail line is located immediately to the south of the site, ports and airports,multimodal freight or with an existing spur that connects to the Portland & transshipment facilities,and major Western Railroad. transportation routes H:\Project5\2130474021,WP\RPT-itydT%prd-Co preheriewPlanMapA�rodm nt-LW514A= 27 M0 Development Site Condition Wetlands Low-quality wetlands are present in the northwestern portion of the site. The Tigard Significant Habitat Areas map identifies the Environmentally sensitive areas such as eastern half of the site as lower value habitat. This map habitat appears outdated since the majority of the tree cover has now been removed. No areas are identified as moderate value or highest value habitat. A railroad spur is located on the western boundary; low Environmental contamination levels of soil pollution can be typical near railroad alignments. Slopes on the eastern portion of the site pose a significant constraint on industrial development. Slopes in Slope/topography excess of ten percent hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. General industrial and manufacturing buildings require relatively large unconstrained acreage to create industrial development. Cultural and archaeological resources No known cultural or archeological resources are on site. Infrastructure deficiencies Major extensions of utilities will be required to serve the site. Parcel fragmentation The site is comprised of four parcels, two of which are currently zoned I-P. The Tigard Seismic Hazard map classifies the northwest Natural hazards and southern portions of the site Category A (greatest seismic risk). The evidence shows that despite relatively high demand for light industrial land and low supply,this site has not developed for light industrial use and is unlikely to do so in the future because of its unsuitable site characteristics and development constraints. MUE zoning on the eastern portion allows the site to be developed with some combination of employment and multifamily workforce housing use and allows the site to be developed in a more flexible way. Development allowed under the MUE zone will help create a stronger, more diversified,and sustainable development on this site, which in turn will help the local economy. Housing GOAL:10.2 Maintain a high level of residential livability. POLICIES: 7. The City shall ensure that residential densities are appropriately related to locational characteristics and site conditions such as the presence of natural hazards and natural resources, availability of public facilities and services, and existing land use patterns. 8. The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing, or more intense, land uses on residential living environments,such as: A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another, B. protection of existing vegetation, natural resources and provision of open space areas,and C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. H.\Pmleds\2130474021,vVP\RvrrryarTgard-ccxrpreherurvePlan Map Am ndm nt-150514xk= 28 MN Response:The comprehensive plan currently designates 2.1 acres of this site for Low Density Residential development (tax lot 2S101DB00400). These 2.1 acres are proposed to be changed to Mixed Use Employment. The current zoning (R-3.5) requires 10,000-square-foot lots so the tax lot could accommodate around seven single-family homes. In the context of the City's supply of vacant residential land, a reduction of seven units may not be significant since it would decrease the city's residential land supply by a very small fraction. (The 2014 Buildable Lands Inventory indicates that 307 acres of residential land were buildable.) The Mixed Use Employment zone also allows for multifamily residential construction, so housing would continue to be accommodated even with the MUE zoning. As illustrated in Figure 1, some of the existing mature trees along the eastern site boundary may be able to buffer development from the adjoining residences. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential uses than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses. Title 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code (Tigard Community Development Code) Chapter 18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Mop. Approval of an ordinance amending the zoning map, comprehensive plan map, comprehensive plan, or development code shall be based on the following: A. Quasi-judicial amendments. Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in subsection D of this section. The approval authority shall be as follows: 1. The commission shall decide zone change applications which do not involve comprehensive plan map amendments; 2. The commission shall make a recommendation to the council on an application for a comprehensive plan map amendment;and 3. The commission shall make a recommendation to the council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Chapter 18.390. Response: This application is for a quasi-judicial zone change which also involves a concurrent comprehensive plan map amendment. The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council and City Council makes the final decision.This standard is met. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance;and 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. Response: This report provides evidence of compliance with comprehensive plan policies and other local, regional, and state approval standards. The City's adoption of Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan and the EOA by accounting for slope constraints on industrially-zoned properties, including the subject site. The new information contained in this ordinance identified approximately 17 acres of the subject site with slopes in excess of 10%, which limits the ability to create large, flat sites H;\Projects\213o474021,wp\RPT-ctycafrgard-ccxrpreherwe€'lar,m pA�.d..t-Lw514A. 29 ma required for many industrial uses. The proposedcomprehensive plan amendment and zone change builds on the City's recognition of the prior oversight in the EQA's buildable land inventory. The Development Analysis (Attachment 2) supports the conclusion that the existing plan and zoning designation is inconsistent with the market requirements for industrial development (also see the response to the Comprehensive Plan Economic Development policies). By changing a portion of the site to Mixed Use Employment, the City can encourage economic efficiencies that lead to development within both the MUE portion and the I-P portion. C. Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for decrial, approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050.A legislative decision may be approved or denied. Response: The applicant has supplied evidence in support of the proposed zone change and comprehensive plan map amendment so the City has a sufficient basis for approval of the application. The applicant understands that staff will be recommending a condition of approval that 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Due to the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions,the applicant respectfully requests that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. Further, in order to maintain compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule, the applicant proposes a condition of approval imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Chapter 28.390 Decision-Making Procedures 18.390.050 Type liI Procedure B. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type III applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by 18.390.080.E.1. 2. Content. Type If1 applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form, b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; C. Be accompanied by the required fee; d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in subsection C of this section. The retards of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; e_ Include an impact study_ The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet city standards and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the community development code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Response; The applicant has submitted forms supplied by city staff and provided the materials noted in the list above. The public facilities impact study is included as Attachment 4. The applicant concurs with the requirement to dedicate right-of-way along Flunziker Road and Wall Street in conjunction with future development. Because no development is being proposed as part of this application, no right-of- way dedication is warranted at this time. H;\Projects\2136174021,wP\Rvrr.riyDfrgard4Cornpreheruke Plan snap Aa ndm nt-IS0514xk c 30 MW IV. CONCLUSION The proposed Mixed Use Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development types which can better accommodate slope constraints while also reducing potential conflicts between uses on the subject property and abutting residential development. The proposed zone change from I-P to MUE has the potential to increase economic development in Tigard by properly accounting for development economics applicable to the different portions of the site. As detailed above, the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change meets or exceeds the City of Tigard requirements and applicable statewide planning goals and administrative rules. The applicant respectfully requests approval of the application in order to advance the City's economic development objectives by bringing vacant land into productive use. H:\Project5\213047402\VAI\RPT-itydT%prd-CcxrpreheriewPlanMapA�ndm nt-1s0514A= 31 ORTHWEST RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCIAL - INDUSTRIAL Licensed in OR,WA&ID URVEYENG1flNC. 1815 NW 169`k'Place,Suite 2494 Telephone: 503-848-2127 Is ' Beaverton,OR 97006 Fax: 503-848-2179 I-P Zone Description May 11, 2015 NWS Project Number 366 A tract of land located the northwest one-quarter and the southwest one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most westerly southwest corner of Lot 1 of "Tech Center Business Park", recorded in Boob 53, Page 29 of Washington County Plat Records, said point also being on the northeasterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad and being the most southerly corner of that property described as Parcel V in the deed to Fred W. Fields as Trustee of the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust, recorded on May 5, 2010 as Document Number 2010-033975, Washington County Deed Records; Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line, North 41'55'03"West 1113.55 feet to the Point of Beginning; Thence leaving said northeasterly right-of-way line, North 29"34'10" East 1856.77 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street (30.00 feet southerly from the centerline thereof, when measured at right angles); Thence along said southerly right-of-way line, North 71°51'14" West 421.12 feet to a point of curvature thereon; Thence continuing along said southerly right-of-way line, 43.75 feet along a tangent curve to the right with a radius of 230.00 feet, a delta angle of 10°53'59", and a long chord bearing North 66'24'15" West 43.69 feet to a point of tangency; Thence continuing along said southerly right-of-way line, North 60'57'15" West 3.78 feet to the northwest comer of that property described as Parcel VI in said deed to Fred W. Fields; Thence along the westerly line of said Parcel VI, South 29'34'10" West 1614.75 feet to said northeasterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad; Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line, South 41°55'03"East 485.10 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 18.31 acres, more or less. The basis of bearings for this description is survey number 32,010, Washington County Survey Records. ORTHWEST RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCIAL - INDUSTRIAL Licensed in OR,WA&ID URVEYENG1flNC. 1815 NW 169`k'Place,Suite 2090 Telephone: 503-848-2127 Is ' Beaverton,OR 97006 Fax: 503-848-2179 MUE Zane Description May 11, 2015 NWS Project Number 366 A tract of land located the northwest one-quarter and the southwest one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly southwest corner of Lot 1 of"Tech Center Business Park",recorded in Book 53, Page 29 of Washington County Plat Records, said point also being on the northeasterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad and being the most southerly corner of that property described as Parcel V in the deed to Fred W. Fields as Trustee of the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust, recorded on May 5, 2010 as Document Number 2010-033975, Washington County Deed Records; Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line, North 41'55'03"West 1113.55 feet; Thence leaving said northeasterly right-of-way line,North 29'34'10" East 1856.77 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street (30.00 feet southerly from the centerline thereof, when measured at right angles); Thence along said southerly right-of-way line, South 71°51'14" East 180.65 feet to a point of curvature thereon; Thence 36.08 feet along a tangent curve to the left with a radius of 230.00 feet, a delta angle of 8°59'21", and a long chord bearing South 76°20'55" East 36.05 feet to the northeast corner of that property described as Parcel 11 in the deed to Fred W. Fields and H. Suzanne Fields recorded May 1, 2006 as Document Number 2006-051473,Washington County Deed Records; Thence along the east line of said Parcel H and the East line of Parcel I from said Document Number 2006-051473, South 00°55'57" West 626.06 feet to the southeast corner of said Parcel 1; Thence along the south line of said Parcel 1,North 89°19'21" West 330.40 feet to the southwest corner thereof, said point being on the east line of that property described as Parcel IX in said Document Number 97-097055; Thence along the east line of said Parcel IX, South 01°20'51" West 671.06 feet to the southeast corner thereof, said point also being the northeast corner of said Parcel V; Thence along the east line of said Parcel V, South 0111'55"11'55"West 1086.06 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 24.18 acres, more or less. The basis of bearings for this description is survey number 32,010, Washington County Survey Records. ZONING EXHIBIT MAP (PAGE 1 OF 2) LOCATED IN THE NW 1/4 AND THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.I ., N60'57'1 5"W 3.78' CITY OF 1GARD, sW y �� � WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON r s�� �� MAY 11, 2015 WESTERLY LINE OF C2 PARCEL A ~ 180.6,5 DOG. NO. 2010-033975 1 PARCEL it C.SCALE 1" _ 400 FEET �'�° ZONING 2006-0 11473 n � BOUNDARY %i?Vr PARCEL I CD 0 0 ¢[}DC. No. Cv c b 2006-451473 N89'19'21"W ! 330.40' CURVE INFORMATION �c�, �o Cl LENGTH = 36.08' �� oFz R RADIUS = 230.00' f.0 DELTA = 859'21" CHORD = S76'20`55"E 36.05' o N 1 a Cn CL C2 LENTH=43.75' t RADIUS=230.00' m DELTA=10'53'59" �sr CHORD=N66'24'15"W 43.69' GE�a ��`��' cr_ POINT OF BEGINNING a I-P 70NE Ddb C LOT 1 POINT OF BEGINNING "TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK" MUE ZONE . BOOK 53 PAGE 29 PREPARED FOR: JOB NAME: FIELDS SURVEY FRED FIELDS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST JOB NUMBER: 366 — NORTHWEST 1815 NW 169th PLACE, SUITE 2090 C/o KELLY HOSSAINI BEAVERTON, OR 97006 MILLER NASH LLP DRAWING NUMBER: 366 TONING PHONE:503-848-2127 3400 US BANCORP TOWER FAX:503--848-2179 111 SW 5TH AVE. DRAWN BY. CHS URVEYING, Inc, nwsurveyinggnwsrvy.com PORTLAND, OR 97204 CHECKED BY: SFF ZONING EXHIBIT MAP (PAGE 2 OF 2) LOCATED IN THE NW 1/4 AND THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M., syr CITY OF TIGARD, s 'EEr WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 11= MAY 11, 2015 -III-I I —111-III II III SCALE 1" = 400 FEET I I 1-1 11-1 Co w 1:::l -III Cl� 11-11 I-I I ti x u) CIL I I-III- N Y Z Cl Ch fes' n i Vs'f SJI.x vV/� olQ LOT 1 "TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK" BOOK 53 PAGE 29 PREPARED FOR: JOB NAME: FIELDS SURVEY FRED FIELDS — NORTHWEST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST JOB NUMBER: 366 1815 NW 169th PLACE, SUITE 2090 C/o KELLY HOSSAINI BEAVERTON, OR 97006 MILLER NASH LLP DRAWING NUMBER: 366 ZONING PHONE:503-848-2127 3400 US BANCORP TOWERDRAWN BY: CHS URVE �NG ��� FAx:503-848-2179 111 SW 5TH AVE. - SURVEYING, . nwsurveying®nwsrvy.com PORTLAND, OR 97204 CHECKED BY: SFF a � 0 � W � a � OO LL j W O } 4- a y a a m 3 m N a rn 3 � ~ n o 3 © y L J 3 U w it s Q c w u -a E Z o o x �j Q a m a vi C e>L -t7 .y ry� N M �V I� W Uy M �,,V,.tI5 lQ 61 N CW N a u1 m w 0a Q7 2 w a 6F y m 3 ` C V7 W y m N s m ++ > Q m E C a w m a E o p N > .� m ycci ¢ p y y ++ a' m LL [aY p7 C Qy aQ0) OD ° ° p C yoy o W U + C a yE aNN.O e CN = O c 4.1 y a. m 7 a a 'D 'ay a GJ r- E U x p a w u ul c a ro a a+ p y R3 c c p 4 _3 a w ' 3 zs C r A m w L m at w o 4 2 2 a c D Q U E , 47 E u (1)(D a s a a n w o r- u a -p [L > e .a X �7 U Y d 7 "c > 7 w J37 L w N y 97 % ' r L w a w R1 Q� Za L U f!7 F- = p V I V7 � N -N M O �] Lq m —_ CL _ N — - _ _ - _ - - -. S 1 N 3 L N 0 4 O S a�T ca �maw Z m w n c �2 2-. Y t m rn W E o o.°1-e a 4 �yE�� D U Q C y u C mw Ix s m o° 'cp a m = T1 a ¢D m N u E o ■ � �' n a o Q - a�,a�o O C G d 6 W 0 Qµ aY W a m N A o s —E E c ° w w C o N "�" d �t 2 WO �I ] @ C %L aw Ol LL it -U u D Ga O m ?.a Q % d�®N t;a' £ m u H $- E t x d 4 '^w39 `m yy ° iv 0 ~ N L uEr m sJ7 m jxO m } n Y C a 4 .� c o P = m LU O �M" E � £i o 'w a d a c O a o Eo°E� y C O C V w - C U C w E E w$a H N Com+'C !Y s q Y CE aC c cm=mg mp X21 Nip o s a- 0 O f E � 7 ryQC7 W fNN� D N N C rn M $+Y m N'tlU M i W ry Q, LL CJ J 4 d a F 'wJ rCL ro 0 N a CL a� Q N ii w- N s.. N L7 CL Q fo R} R1 _ Fl • - it LII {17 c, Inr ,+al � . , �I4 -•; all IT 46 VIII 0 a LLJ � zo CL 47 tp Ln C � R � J M C S p � C •G '� � � O f V M X R3 Q QJ Vl }> l/ O C _ i v i W .� � ° °' � �, vim �q 7C C3 m Q N w +� a' p � � C on O 4) p1 rip V7 LO N Q .0 O IR In [i °y d O I i C Q- U R7 D? ++ cn C I N CC R7 C 3 N CJ 7 > U d +�+ �, N J 97 �7 tIt C 3 A Q N CL LL > 4) fR u7 . LL0 CL C v m [ A C L S L Ul 61 N = , m O A C U -� �+ u Ln CL e E 16 a°Ji Q d d W J V ) N e li us L H w C: cn LL U) pep t Q ti: Q �k rr� Q - i N s Lr) i ii M CL CL o y.. m N �d C cm .g 4Z �d o � 3 "ry N W r -0 E LG.��' w OU 0-6 c O 3� Q CLE �v� �I a a w CV — `0 ocu 3 obi 1 co � m a O,C a) D C L O Uf C C UN E N N -� p r-•`-' t: Y >° ' a 1° c °- O V � cvQ� 0 C1 'x A. O'D w�'� Q W v„•, Q •N a �1 � •� +, enc ,4 F( �•i LL � ! ' Z Lo ) z k a L.LJ cc � ..* �+ r M f +Il � ! 7] C fo T !_""�►*-�" u�''t can r 4- O O a � C • 0 via N a � V ro C y n aj. : rc : r g U)O .wry -- r {/A i1 o a fa C y N H`1 o � w Q u Q7 Ft .��2 O m a CY ,w rb ac 4 Ln N fl" d � a. L N N Li Q1} R d Q^ CC N 0 N U Ln t��ryll r ;+rte.-� "V. • �A 1 1 • 1 A i I i • A 1 L , 1 z f� • 1 1 1 r * 1 1 i' Lp �, . • Q r a Z5 (D O� m > V, C t O . at 3 � a .Q a a N u w LLIfa 0 1 LU 1..1..E r 0 T • C • ° y �U)p Yui C • 0 � � - ara c �r, 0 �i y A ru L iCF m � c Q m v ° m �C, e LL CAt a; m ° �. CL c a d `s' E r v aj CL ry `m c >. v 0 y N C * L �•► ! a �e z71 a F ° Y 7 r0 UU N CL N n .. rr• ° G� i C a d L H ❑ c1 � w tA z 2 Qt 0 i � _ N 4 � ,^ �'.rte' t N V fa t 4J wlall CD C = L Gni N 97 Z3 r V r 0 ° 7 a 'C7 fu yr .N N q V rA 3 -O u O _d Cim t Q -2 � a 'D N C [V 7T TN � °' C7 u J Y U aA m S} i-p 3 D 0Y A D3 U 3 O N X O 19 ry•� roL a j Q v ` -Y rn oto F a d" cmQ N ro cr ro .3o w m a N 01-1 y °N Cc d V °a.r m R m �y 3-1 ® C p�— C _ O w 63 CL_ LUi ° � YYa naa - NT 4i m N Q7 iA y•� C N yrp G+ 7''6 V ro O .°+ a O 3 N 7 N i N C N U C U21 N N " N~ p O d w N rb m Qi ro j lJi Q 'i3 = p� O C i > m W N N 72 0 y L°j vUm CLi O 67 _ O m 6p m 7 z °- a.° N ro 07 Y LV4 CI ° q 0 2 : R •rp C d B U OL 0 N ro a O ° mv ° �a rn m r N a E o f vo E a N O— rV F=o ro ro -j r.. a. � fo n- a r N M N o b c� c :3 c�e Ln Ln c r_6 U i C 0 Lo 3 T� X_ ro CL `o ami E CLI � W cl 2V EE x X u W i T L T CL ro n 0 es a rn o � 4 C � d R F - Ae .f 9 O •� ? Q -0 fl > Ci p c1 Ln ro X (U U kn N i R3 a7 Lo a-' 7� C1 m fl i s m Q1 .N V7 3 Ln ate+ 0 •3 +� 'D O �." o ra a C fo 4 c v �R Q m Q 0 � �S3 C fll N ay Q 0 a � 3 (o } .( ZS1 O X a7 r. a) c; RS Q Q C c Q- 0 CL r,C m N Q .5 i o Ey e "Q O0 m v4W Q 0 � 7 a m N fu c0 4O C3 + w L ® ra en Ln E Cl U ) ' c c Qw � � •xcu c : a N N Q = w C ;u a' u] o C.� o a -FaCL- mho = r C-C .-.a Q X V) " � N m a d Q 4, 4� acs m w r[3 RF CC3. �1 G Q m C O 0 O U U Em CD iQ N p kn p cn w ° � s r0 v 'N i c i -c v a c �oa' � � cl © a� N © o _ o En Q 0) Lnw tn U Baa`) 3: 55 apo U Lea) °, aco � 0 iV, T� C7 y as 7ti r+ -C {y� 3 3 cy Q C C 3) u m uJ Z CL . . a . LL 7 \_ i ! Ln 7 � -0 I I c � X h CD E cy fu 4 n r 7t } Q. } ■ CL Ln t 6 ' 1 � LA- U I + c Q 1 V � to O J w� z c ❑ for z a m ❑ O F C U Q w Q m Q a X L11 � c� Cz CL fo , . 77 � 7e L � C % � r� ` • g � O Q 4 a a} Vy y PCO Cl N N C © C L �• •_ ak 01 V} 0)S C N '•Z7 1– C "Q a) C U) Ln =017, m as s L U} U +J a -0 a) aQ OL ~ +J � Q a � E ❑ 'C7 Q c: Ln V1 �} L a7 U +J Q 31– N — +v+ cn _ i7 z a7 m C #` -F O 1\. FO C: v (a ,_ CL to W as E Z Q- - Z � s � tnao Ivo "n Ln 0 51p� � �� L 7 L La 3i a, C a a 'R Ln ++ 3 UL1 Q Q 'Pn c F (O�DD , W D _ 0 0 .5 M U 2 d C }� Cin o- fiJ 0 � Q CL 4 @ = a) Cl ClCL� L =5 � a7 L a, � C3 a) � � 7 Q � O i Q PO +C+ '- Q_ u .O ra3 � ul � o � � i arta Aj A fa of O • � m .2 � y�0r- E } (]} a) a� '' .GSI = 7 E i aJ �} oa� ' oo� E r i ♦ r. ■ r r • �I h 1 } a rt� a p 7 C ro E ACL c auH -Ca 3 0$ m N ,C `0 p w u1 3 4 .� w L N N dJ N Tge2 Lib ie � 7❑7 C a+ C N ON 4-- w Q r31'� Nal 0 O .L +� E a; U a �L Q � (X U 77 � 7 v a ` cE ma' Q.S � N © tja L _ C C O z ° n CL c Nm'C c �, CL a w@gam � v y N C C Ln o O A3c� Ol 46 01 °w Q41 Tv ar L C7 a � � E cn — � � o � � rz- o � yTJT] v7 t37 N UvE wd p ± w Ln Rl m(uLac 06 Ln- y }' O © U CL p Ua V a n C: j > 29 a r c N a++. D u 'N Q. {� DML rg6S C . - m C -_0 D Q � c11 d n 4 x �pE c `� ft7 4J R7 C '� " r- d cv j. O o C 4�4 ti. m O N � O O O O + E ro 4-1 IV O D N a) � O w J 7 •0) O -C3 n'1a F T a N ?7 C 9} C c � m a im L U7 �, C 4-ml ro „a- M C 07 T {n, d C w K jp.UCo Q Uf7 � O tL7 � +' C) cU pro IF N a a3 6 c 3��° LII " (y C, 07 0 Q7.. C6 . Qt m+y w d c� g O w cU O j T3 p O 7 N O ° o a a'9 a ++ A 13 c U = cll d ` � UU +J asap a: ozy t!! PO � 0 p Nin p R1 t 4} s rn� �v t m 0 v -= V (21 N j 4) C7. ¢LP C ,tn C7� pF�.o `Da LI1, e N N i p iA o e a e Eas w - � o a; r .. o A cs s C ar ° (1)� E13) E $ a y > m ` o xv U a E Ln rt o 4.- N W � N d Q O 'p C7P E ■ U .N y. C L N 72 a O Q Ci a m .�� a E o 0 4U v °1 a LL � u D L b e C 'm LO N U (N w N ro C X _ Vi 9 4A Q Q 6 � C CL y � ,gyp CA D N a O 0) m Kl N Y C N V C L aT+ Cj T ill - i _ N •N .cm CD C N UQ. `" 0 w T w C 0 ar c C .� xa Q } a v 3ro 0 0 ro v 3 Q ^� 3 o C-o � a 07 N '7 0 _ p� o m LLIm a Q! : L g U C _ N �' 0 N c C l7 N C (0C 10 �w m Q u `m ay � -a `o ro o U d ro a (!7 3 -1-.� C LL O Qy T c U �a o C;) s ti ro (CO: W L o a 3 c o ❑ m u' p ° u 000 rm < a � CL T@ C _ O _ p C° a - -Y C ° W LUQ c ° � m N 1 7. wQJ '8 (]7 O C « p O � N M cu 4- O � Q m U O 4- (U i N ro Q fo 4-0fo R 3+ ++ „L, ^W 0- O L W v 0 4- (n 0 c V) a) WC) do `- V)' 79 U 5 " 4- m tA tj ° j c c 0 E 0 c ° 40 m R) 4� P .ice+ L ° 3 m 3 E D (°� o � 0 C Q v to 2 U? LJ N C n a > Q a 0 � 73 O S] c a cl Q O Q m C {B m H Q. �{ L � LL tn v—� a °1 E C M 9 n �L � N � m QJ � Q m v rn i 'Z Q Q N - L C V 'N _ fTj r�rt r OL a Q Q7 �J Y 7 0 4 a—" UJ CJ a � OL ca m ocs V 3 Q Q) u� +� n r 0 o a *10 O om a7 � rn C d $ E 2 a 0 � � dr a3 m v Z .2d � m o Jc E -2:E7 U u o a yQa, C1� V L:1 0 Q a ai aim m N N N 11 0 ] d w Z Q) CL mo 6 0 .2 D OL IF + a0 E(Da � , v) a �w v +_+ c e 9} cro w s as w 1 L O mar r tr Q C]. rG 0 i3 m 4- nuit d 0 � C j 010-0 u � > �Yd ra � � � •ia w L D +' (} ^�l v i arc 9m� 'C -die :3 -�W N at+ a Q► ate+ v LE d f fu a) saw' om > E �3 ■ .i� i un � ql a- Qf A c� 0 s D J�Y3 Wf 151 J1C N+ f0 9�1 i m Q N U �twr swe �y 7 c� �a N viz � 0 a a>' m CL u D O N N v LU d y � c ?. [V L m m tN In n - !'- bi m m y Y maw o � � a� a�wa o � c ma n w dti a� ® =• -Ca 6a a -s- (u O l� l 1 a� Ll O C N p 0Q 4 nil]' i m N C VI I/7 m °ap o a—a� �_ g 3o �NN n"r Q34 Eo cz : 1ILI m - oawa m� E as cmoa E ° ar= c opNZ) L4 � o � wQ= ° dyiaaaal ° o� ° w E r a w v Q Oy4 cDa O m .m p m 'S=Y`@•� Nm— UO n C 'X N+N7'+ N N V EU C Xm �1 ui Q r, a, w N N w—.Q C momT ; E-a-a m wa N@E o:63: col15 ° � a, My0C N or 0. " moQ C Q NN Nm 7aN m 7 N wmiSaQjY _ m N w U/ m Q1 N N' w i]2 N pt 01 U c E y 4 0 (o—, u p ub N O a O u� p uQ o 000.0 N � ++ 0 w V to m 0 6i O N LJ b -ES m U w N r ❑7 Q N.O D a m Y (0-0 N t m N•tn ro CD y m'p C4 —a M a t-O CQ � a � w 4au1 � � E � @omml m N �tN = Ec � p �mamwmo 2 E * o w�ja3 0) am m. vaa �um ami N.7 c � mr H N o7;-,i. �.N� o � , o'm y'�,� a m �' u c C-N a �� in S p V.� a m C U Z�7 y U nU Y ii g o n �' a �' Z3 �= 7 N m N 3'� F m Q H N•N N C' U Q H N N O.0 E N.0 - N a -� iz y , °qo CL tea m o U. y 1 Kv o;E E ae� a 2 aP.. oroc � x m C] c Q, e m c r 0. MCL 0 / ++ 10 �bEE i r y.0 N r .p Li Q v � a Yn rr 3ifa -6 CL Ll IL r � 4.�w dDA u x © a a V Q m N R OL M T 91 aco o a (U a m3 N N a� c y N y N Q m O-0 Q m o O q 0 Q w c w a I CL� -A = 'CV C. a 4 A- CL C. O. 1 QD �.•� �. O m N N Q O in n' 4a O. '-' V.t V p T N O 7 u. Q C p- 'p is p L E 6 �a ua m a Q v u y E H y ° m e S] , p `° ma a aim as a c m a y c y 4,R p v 07 o-� 6LaCau.00 w t � �� om � m li L �c � � � � m �"rc(D ur•: oma �Yfly �'� v ra ET] p c a, y m x E N m � c � mamNro-c� T. ccv � � �Lpm Pp mmQ� Ndm0a' pn� cQoy S1u�iC m w r mem °oE U O N c C ai ate¢C ac.o O a a3 a c p y p, 0 � mb m9 c o c C.'.'� a v—° y N �� M-'E a', E r' u m 0! p � Q Tm � Ca y as2� p v� c � mcg fl 3 m a of:3 }p� -r- N a7 c m 3 T (C,, V r 4 CD 0,L N m Q. V CL T 0Y p m y Q1 ay1 �' T O 7+' d N m a Q� C m-0 C l y �. O Q 'rrc I, T 7 d C l7 C N a !1 p p rg 3 q ,p•O .w p m a' c pEmxym � rs � m� �n':� .`. Ec a Emc � oE ro $ m w m m m , t d 'm 4, o a, l U� 01 N a 10 n / S 0u r1i !].117 CL Q p 4Y V V Q r ,� u y ^ a 4� CL � r a E 05 Q1 E a 'o6. 017 O o � CL N E C Q E p Q �V a a ff O r= D LL i 9 N d C tNy �� C1 a' O O c°L ai 111 i C r, Q utl i�1ua�aia•a�h15 43 s Y f3 V tra E V C y 'N ti o 7 f11 p v) O- N ice+ Ip ~ -Q.-C c N '� cU v 'aim vas @� Y (D7 (/1 C ❑ 6j u 7 C 01 In i7 O O rJ rp J7 't}" [3� W r a+ 4. E Ea- 7 c C •o N d3 C. CA O 0 a p o r °1 v g Y C 7 w w N c LL! O g a yup F 0 vn1 ° w a d�.� Z O U 9 N O +- O� -0 cJ Q1 fp 07 c W = i a Ip. © C a N Y N u- M v g 0 w u,m: 1) u m c c o � � Q +p h1 U tb ._ 3 W. O 4 �] x^ C c. c Q u `m a L N O e�`- N Rt Ln.m RI 4 7 V c a1 C3 N a1 c 9 m a c� DNt79 N 77 tn ; O �U :1 4 a w W D r 7 6Ycf © LLLI E a m d N o Ln (n 0 0 ri U L) u a Ln a F m x a u r, q� d ¢ . z 0. 'LL U) .. d D a S7 `Y r o a A L CL Q r ]aapS swe,A MS � CL E i 4fro � N i L O f G M fi a O N w CD \ b C U �� V w w n p V (U rYr a N O @ G4 4 Q O > o a, i C N ` o` m N W tN ro q — c 0 L L a •aniaQ ialua�47x1/,AS L S � N N LLI C UZ., pN 71.11 J ■ d 3 Q- u V�L 0, Q - Q C 3 o _ ¢� Q (57 X C C t Q r4 u L 0 N~ OC iQ7.-C3 °G E Q N N c O Q 4 — cv d H m OZ v_ N V Q� C .0 N N ,L.. b as d _ ¢ rt7"47 ro @ CD O `� Qau9 asp Q N a T � E B @ (S O d V1 VI L 7 Q Y <r Q NO .0 N CL.0 fl W t a a M � � Q W @ O� 7 N D iy1 v u D 2'ID y ti v L W :a= �. CL O '� LJ -° �v w O C 6 y ® e cn .�1 o © 3 co p 2 .0 c C3 tJY t%I' ru - as E H .� su CJ 47 c m u Q,- ~ = os W u� o /Q/� F7 w d nYo +' a m 072 o r 0 oma N CL V E N O 117 0 W Q M 0 LL �j ' a 0C,r- 3 7 LU °c 'm =1 i w u LLo EJ E 'a R1 N (7.v,�ry � LL N,e-° 3'O j m 'LL t N � �n w i7 W d 2:c � m 'a ° O E © 16ss c � � Z ❑ ° Oa a"� � , ❑ Z � vEcm Q � ax � m7 � Vecac W Q D ma a paR0 E F ° °uTEQ d '�" ° � z E � -0oG - ms`s Day 'D Ll n wQ n = 1 Rc "n 3E B ro = m ate+ C7 ° 2 p D a c r a ro a, >, 'r Qu (D E �. W r] a� }i 'mN �� acs j, w nva, m 'm4 C o o E -°ae °a ara Sa o 0 Z LLJ 'C (D a U? w �:" M D`7 � .: r � � R 0 0 Q,� W � E LL Q '—° R 2 M 0 ny O � y, a r c N O C E � � O-p ffl O i � � ',�� o° o 7 tq c� Q >;t, N W a - 01 �' CL m L- O U Y X a o.o U c o z � -a'- d m �1 f m u, E. i a z o u W cy ° n, L CL a y u � � . A F- 'u-0 �. ~ �D m.+m �.' (a ro 3- faaRix U anw Y CS �' ru °' � � N £J.-. R W 07',`n Q m S] S V D W .�N M U x 4 �U -� Z "n C? LL W L� Jlu J r aUo W mro J © n W Z U') Ln W W Q [ N W h Z W Z a H W o � `� p W W F- U7 z o w z a Z 0 Z 0 } a� oa � PQ0LLNa LLJ rL wQu a wa �- Zo +ou xaZa o 0 o W ❑ tea ~ ate° ❑ ° Z WQ W 2 LL, (I En W x i pya ro oDr p m j 3 W W ( w N Z J R © J a `� QCOCD 0 ! Q ILLI � © m� J"3�a�i � a � m W � 2 � Q = LL []C Z 0 (DQ3 � .� ' ,o N ©` mow 0LU ate ~ U � Nd 7, �' NMQ �_u LLi m 0� m� � � N � � ooQQ4'J � � _ ofl �@ a: o aa; vU �, Wo _j UJ C) U a Lu L, � ° J c N-r- - � � D J C W J Z N U z ' '° m ° w m d W W m W 0 J wry W E 0�- ' 3° Q U') 7 �, LU O N p d C) n w b t � LA m a c N a W W 0 rs .°v � Rs� �'R 7 'E � �' � � � c � W � W F- U7 W U COW � � � fi w '� Q� � ; o 'Eo Llj W OU zi! Lu z Lo CY Lnv c' o ¢ W H N W H N Z a .. c S N "o, •D W O C Z3 LL ate.�F ia u N;4 5 N N Rl SI rpRh rove 0a a, j �7 S: � a ° o D D N ^•m a o V mW 'mom a. P *L, � aahuE , ceE Lu °c'w ❑ D 2sw R W .L D. J@ 4 V !1 C LJ C T3 s r,� 111 LLJ /Wy O Q CD QI� 47 a Li y_ .}R E tis D rriau U 3 v c M W o Ln W °-'5 1'14 w W CL -ED `f ' and E aW u u uh E r 2 ua, m ❑r cp \ �V\ N.. 4 a£�. y, F W � a �3m vcts " L O NQ. UD � Az o-aUCL q_) m m uNon °°C .0 m L9 rri 'm iA r. N o c 7 C ° 8 L7 vi c cn w u CD E +�'CCL o 0 � O 7, d �_ ° 7J LU O L i� 23 w - CL C N L L O D (� 0 0c -4 o �v o Ln m o as 9 v ro 0 Q) Q c a w F ar o o Q C N N , L a.1 1 07 ° L.1Gi ■ C 1 00-0., -.0 �R C> a a Q � 12 c ro L E 0• V a V CU 61 Gl 4i O ad D N N N Gi a rs c a a Q N _ oar a 10 a C 1 N cc rc Z3 ° a 1 3lu0 2-5 �: 1 ) 1 Qj No a Qj rm y Ln awl A-liadoid OA - - - auji Al.+ daid - - - auig Aa.aadad W a .0 0 N s1 .N 3 laaa35 IIeM MS 4x� jaa4S IIeM MS 3aal3S lleM MS fa ro d] N 7 C Nom . �m oo mYvm-��w ++ v Q 'c a M :2 0 C " Rol .'„wl L j xlJJ W N T LU d•ate_+ a-+� M o +v' £ 4.C 3 0 c � � N a n6'yC-a E j �k. w y. w L j��_ � � > N �7 d C�1 c u1 yam.. Qy O N 67 C 7 !n a 1. b 2 a' 5 ACU N F- x Q O 4 N N.0." L1J � o aE o y �.E °'ooa�� � YNV�� �' o Ycrp msx� wNQ�lyyU .L CL Vl C o[) E 2 N C , dY 8 �?, +C1 4.N C c N Q1+�+0 C 41 N i s-0 i -0 u rd CE. ..L. C 0 8 ~ 7 In " qa m 'n v g u 0- 7.0 - Nur O w C 3 C u.. 7 L? 6l.6� X 13� ]~ ate+ e6 p aU7 w T�'.-( pp. c CLa du ��.�.. sN U_a Q Q '�_'� �., 4 �" O D O vi C[_ ii!c*! O= a yv°„ N ® w O eA C d? y 4 m C c i v ,w.© a ~B 8 qt u +� 'D C N W 8 !n 62,:2 N 8 c E ` ' ` o y5 o$ ° Ea '0 Q 6•� Ey $ oro ° � 07 � Q+ Ci pc ■ BID ' O•x N.�_ c O O D •'- _ 73y Oen 4mx °'r,T3oo' wa N E H V}H C "8 6 tF7 H.u ]D LL O y N=w fi ua O N.l m 7 C 0-- 4.�. r6 O c V W.X C 7. L 7 ro — V <6 y C `! a o ro N fl -y a s Q• RS {f Q C E� z V O N ❑u E E 8 0 Y ° o ff a m o � '° 3 © �rJly' o OY Z (+ v sEiarn i� p Q O O ro C I E *. N O (D N +^ 01 Ffi C 8 C' r6 � ro -° 0 V C lf1. N t1') ° E vci v 3 3.ao ala� u �, QOl orv0 v v N ° a�'$!o�'� orn3mm a c v c @ � v mac a f3+ 3 na L � �4 ]� 7 i —vi 67 A 8 r'8 d 81 ,fl ro c 'q v j 7+O C C H i6 V C v 61 D� O v d O mUlu �"OOc N�� p�. ¢ utmOOONc '4 v v ro .=a :E.O,�,.N C a as O p ,Y nr o o N F.�. da -w...� ° [x sEi,'. rts O. M v = ' =�' p �q � qa ° ��(0 ro� 'macr QE � f £ QamcE 0 w m i ] 4 ,-: 47 x Y x R7 Cl*' p x U an C N N C t}L �} x a s 7" a rry lY V >.�. a > 0 U a U w W,C z rd 6 0 N dl Z.0 io @ E 6 n V+ 4q W'W m 0 L9 A 6 0 0 fn N-O 0 tJ C-8 H -0 u u7 � U C i+ ro c w E e 0 = N C Y 4 O- 'e E N v;' C U Q? N N ru QPN QU N W =d+ 0 © o +- ro y o a 5 M to f2 N � Y Y, C v � ra orom 0a3� N N G ° 0 E Pa 2 a tlf N N [ O ¢ 1� a c m c Q7 CU OL 7 m y w o a p sn T a �' Q � Q = ctea' r_ 0 du o u Q V N N a R N 0 = C 7_ CL n ma � N mo � . p. Z} O Cl a N a+r 0 q r CL Q a a 6 L O OL 0 0 46- D V L +� +' E ro ria W C1 ro � q ru o Ln ID Vl'c N j m _ a <,r1 ro N N"p 41 N N V N u X00 m oa -0-3-0 U U C zN 4.T+ C U ro N _ 47 i u�i Q ra a a. C d N C .m a-u ra /W ra 0 N +3 0,-0-0— ,d-0_ a N h Li OL �/1 U Q1 L Vt fl Pli G! V O LL .� Zy:L Y C ru 7 C 2 NrL 21 O N C O Q n P31-_tiers 7 G CN_T '> (I7 J'� C rp�'" 2 p '� W Pp ID t} � C vi c U If 3 N c � �� c 'a T3 �.P 0 c ._ zn a do 3 ° ti 't1 n +c p o u - S-60 a If O ro @ m ..Q Q i a E p a 3 v 1 i Ln p as vL ,nQ00 E „ W � , tin . NaL) 3 ) � t o mo y _C 4-0 cm �+� a — u a) N to �c s d IIx M Q� 2 V t ra Il � 3 c � +d t31 U)0 E f^ V N R/VI�Ir 3, � i+ UJ E o 7 E E 'Q — d 4 i n hQ7 7i V .9Sf-+ C u o q = 43 > r° v W r 0. t E tls Q U) ti \ i N�1 6 n om'' ` U! i j •.Ul N Q. 10 1 Li O T] N a M1 ID E] N LO T L ) 0. V 0c C © �} �r " av `,4 N w N N �r 44 v� C1 J R7 J�—I w w ' Q , U LL V ry p 0" E LL tA ZL a 0 %&- Cc, O W �— LL 0 4. v d o C U- as o -i W O E i5 61 0 41 � C _ L W U) m a n ti w w c u w n Ln of O 1l 4 b n O!i co iV O W D1 a..r Q7 b v�y cu Y m r4 - » ° i fl yNq w M C di c [ y pec m 0. d � � L�. CL �„/ ca CW U? Lit cw W W > Q3 � N W Z zC H E!} 7 m6 o" o _C co co r„ p V) s B fl cod ALJ its -p Q c i Q Q. W Q eU i c v y c +� a' fl A Z a E w , H c (UE c ru 0— a L/) v 0 o c Zs o o v C5 cE ��� C �,E v �s a cc c a m °N' E o p o N w Ct oa m 2 „�, T p ro m �,, d p u U C +o d i? w � S moa m ' L c a = .y m e i � ."3 .4 c N O 0 o r t a c Q w n .0 7 m m p o 0 0 ,� ro o p m a o �+' LL C7 m r6 LL t17 Q J l!'1 F LL M- I © — J 2 V f U F 0 C 0 a a °7 � M io o I I I d d Lo Q c U y o -0 E L1J U 0- n�c ° LZ' u 0'`5 a� � p Q ?s VI X71 - W OQsa3-2o c� m _ v �2o° 'fl CL o Ul J m�aos ani � QE' Q $ T� � fo� © Sy ``'' � N _ a l!1 '" J < Ge L- a C� c Ck V 7 y a li au.:EM . fo-- � MACKENZ I E . DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED May 11, 2015 City of Tigard Attention: Mike McCarthy, Development Engineer 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Fields Property Zone Change Transportation Planning Rule Analysis Project Number 2130474.02 Dear Mr. McCarthy: Mackenzie is providing this Transportation Planning Rule Analysis letter for the proposed comprehensive plan reap amendment and zone change for the property located at the southeast corner of SW Hunziker Street and SW Wall Street in Tigard, Oregon. This analysis incorporates your April 13, 2015, comments on our February 18, 2015, scoping letter. The property is just south of Beaverton Tigard Highway (GR-217) and west of the SW 72nd Avenue exit. The property is identified as NW %, SE %, Section 01, Township 25, Range 1W, Tax Lot 100 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101CA), 300 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101DB), 400 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101DB), and 1100 (Washington County Assessor's Map 25101). The property is 42.5 acres in size, and is currently zoned Industrial Park (I-P), Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and Low-Density Residential (R-3.5). The comprehensive plan designations include Light Industrial (IL), Professional Commercial (CP), and Low Density Residential (L). The following table presents the existing and proposed comprehensive plan and zoning designations. EXISTING&PROPOSED , . DESIGNATIONS ProposedArea Existing .. . Tax Lot . . 1Zoning Plan Plan I-P MUE* 2S1010001100 13.21 IL IL& MUE* 1-P 1.90 11.31 2S101CA00100 24.16 IL IL& MUE* I-P 16.04 8.12 2S101DB00300 3.07 CP IL& MUE* C-P 0.37 2.70 2S101DB00400 2.06 L MUE* R-3.5 0.00 2.06 *Mixed Use Employment (MUE) TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE This analysis will address Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requirements outlined in Oregon Administrative Rule(GAR) 660-012-0060(1) stating, "if an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation(including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section(3), (9) or(10) of this rule." ©AR 660-012-0060(2) further states, `7f a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and P 503.224.9560 • � 503.228.1285 , W MCKNZE.COM • RiverEast Center,1515 SE water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 ARCHITECTURE + INTERI CRs . STRUCTURAL EN GIN£ERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND USE PLANNING • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING . LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ■ Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington + Seattle,Washington H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project'Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 2 performance standards of the facility measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rale. A local government using subsection (2)(e), section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor vehicles in response to this congestion." In determining the analysis plan year,the Oregon Highway Pian (OHP)Action 1F.2 additionally states, "When evaluating highway mobility for amendments to transportation system plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans and land use regulations, use the planning horizons in adopted local and regional transportation system plans or a planning horizon of 15 years from the proposed date of amendment adoption, whichever is greater." The City of Tigard Transportation System Plan planning horizon year is 2035. Therefore, according to the OHP, the analysis plan year is 2035 if a Transportation Impact Analysis is determined necessary by ODOT and City of Tigard Staff. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS FOR ENTIRE 42.5-ACRE SITE TPR analysis is based on the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning. For this analysis, the most intense development allowed under zoning rules was utilized. The TPR analysis assesses high traffic generators under the zoning, regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built. The City of Tigard Development Code allows 85% lot coverage in the C-P and MUE zones,'80%lot coverage in the I-P zone,'and FAR of up to 0.40 in the MUE zone. Lot coverage includes both parking and building areas of a development, while FAR addresses only the building area. In order to address "reasonable worst case" scenarios, FARs were assumed for the C-P, MUE and I-P zones. Appendix 6 of the 2014 Metro Urban Growth Report references typical FAR values for developments in the Inner Westside market subarea (including Tigard) with FARs of 0.45 for Office and 0.30 for General Industrial, Warehouse, and Tech/Flex and Business Parks. This site has an area of 42.5 acres and multiple zoning designations under the existing and proposed conditions. Mackenzie planning, architecture, and engineering staff evaluated the site's development potential given the current and proposed zoning, site constraints,and likely tenant types.The slope of the eastern portion of the site does not allow for large, flat building pads for industrial development, and the grades along Hunziker Road are too steep for truck turning movements into the site. Consequently, only the western portion (along Wall Street) of the site is feasible for light industrial uses. Residential or office uses could feasibly be constructed on the sloped area in the eastern part of the site. Multiple trip generation iterations have been prepared to reflect these development restrictions. Current Zoning For the 37.37 acres currently zoned I-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 732,527 sf of office use. For the 3.07 acres currently zoned C-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 50,000 sf medical/dental office building.The residential R-3.5 zone is 2.05 acres, which could support up to seven single family homes given the minimum lot size of 10,000 sf and deductions for roadway and driveway access. 1 Development Code Table 18.520.2 'Development Code Table 18.530.2 3 Development Code Table 18.520.2 M ■ H:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 3 Proposed Zoning With the proposal, 18.31 acres will remain zoned I-P, and 24.19 acres are proposed to be zoned MUE. Utilizing a 0.45 FAR development potential, as with the existing zone analysis, would include a total of 358,913 square feet of office buildings in the i-P zone. For the area proposed for MUE, a range of uses is allowed, including office and residential. In order to determine the highest trip generator,three options have been considered for the area proposed to receive new MUE zoning. ■ Option 1 consists solely of apartments in the MUE zone. The 24.19 acres zoned MUE will be developed using the maximum housing development of 25 units per acre or 605 total apartment units. ■ Option 2 consists of all office in both the I-P and MUE zoning. In the I-P zone, the FAR is 0.45 based on Metro's typical values, whereas the 24.19 acres zoned MUE utilize 0.40 FAR as specified by the Tigard Development Code. Development potential of the MUE zone will include a total of 421,487 sf of office use. ■ Option 3 consists of medical-dental office and office in the MUE zone. 3.44 acres will be developed as medical- dental office in the MUE zoning to include a total of 60,000 sf utilizing a 0.40 FAR. A 60,000 sf medical-office building is one of the largest building sizes surveyed in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. A larger medical-office building could not be supported without surrounding similar land uses, i.e., a hospital or other medical-dental offices. The development potential for the remaining 20.75 acres zoned MUE, utilizing a 0.40 FAR,would include a total of 361,548 sf office use. TRIP GENERATION FOR ENTIRE 42.5-ACRE SITE Trip generation estimates for the reasonable worst case site development under the existing and proposed zones have been prepared based on data contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition.The following table provides a summary of the three(3) land use scenarios described above and the selected ITE land use for the entire site, including the portions which would retain current zoning. Based on the mix of uses, all trips are expected to be primary trips—no pass-by or diverted linked trips would be generated. OPTION Code)Zoning Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak PIVI Peak (ITE Land Use Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 732,527 SF 8,042 1,128 990 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 10,301 1,286 1,214 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 358,913 SF 4,149 616 534 MUE Apartment(220) 605 Units 3,790 300 350 Proposed Zoning Trips 7,939 916 884 Trip [differential (2,362) (370) (330) ■ H:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 4 OPTION 2-SITE TRIP GENERATION Zoning Land Use J,_Lize (ITE Land Use Weekday Code) -A Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 732,527 SF 8,042 1,128 990 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 5F 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 10,301 1,286 1,214 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 358,913 SF 4,149 616 534 MUE Office Park(750) 421,4875F 4,801 702 610 Proposed Zoning Trips 8,950 1,31.8 1,144 Trip Differential (1,351) 32 (70) OPTION 3-SITE TRIP GENERATION Zoning Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak Code)(ITE Land Use Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 732,527 SF 8,042 1,128 990 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 10,301 1,286 1,214 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 358,913 SF 4,149 616 534 Office Park(750) 361,548 5F 4,176 620 537 MUE Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 Proposed Zoning Trips 10,493 1,379 1,285 71 Trip Differential 192 93 71 Trip generation for Option 1 results in an anticipated difference between the current and modified zone to be -330 PM peak hour trips and -2,362 ADT. Trip generation for Option 2 anticipates -70 PM peak hour trips and -1,351 ADT. For comparison purposes, trip generation for Option 3 anticipates only 71 additional PM peak hour trips and 192 additional ADT. As presented in the previous tables, trip generation with the proposed zone change does not impose a significant effect on the transportation network. There is only a small increase in expected AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily traffic levels compared to the existing zoning in Option 3. As outlined in Options 1 through 3, the proposed MUE zoning would accommodate a variety of land use types, any combination of which could feasibly be developed within the trips that would be generated under the existing zoning. M ■ 11:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-CityofTigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 5 TRIP GENERATION FOR PORTION OF PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ZONE CHANGE To isolate the transportation impact of the proposed zone change, trip generation estimates were performed for the portions of the site that are proposed to receive new zoning. As with the trip generation estimates for the entire site, these estimates are based on the reasonable worst case site development under the existing and proposed zones based on data contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Based on the mix of uses, all trips are expected to be primary trips-no pass-by or diverted linked trips would be generated. The table below tabulates the areas of each tax lot that are proposed to retain current zoning and that are proposed to receive new zoning. The two existing I-P lots are proposed to remain partially I-P, the currently zoned C-P tax lot is proposed to change to I-P and MUE, and the currently zoned R-3.5 lot is proposed to change to MUE. ZONE CHANGE SUMMARY Tax Lot Existing Zoning(acres) Same Zoning(acres) Zoning Change(acres) 2S1010001100 I-P 13.21 1.90 0.00 11.31 2S101CA00100 I-P 24.16 16.04 0.00 8.12 2S101DB00300 C-P 3.07 0.00 0.37 2.70 2S101DB00400 R-3.5 2.06 0.00 0.00 2.06 Total 42.50 17.94 0.37 24.19 To effectively compare the trip generation for only the 24.56 acres of the site affected by a zone change, trip rates for each zone were established for the existing and proposed conditions using the same three options utilized for the entire site. Current Zoning For the 19.43 acres currently zoned I-P,utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 380,867 sf of office use. For the 3.07 acres currently zoned C-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 60,000 sf medical/dental office building.The residential R-3.5 zone is 2.06 acres,which could support up to seven single family homes given the minimum lot size of 10,000 sf and deductions for roadway and driveway access. Proposed Zoning With the proposal, 17.94 acres will remain zoned I-P, and 24.56 acres are proposed to change to either I-P or MUE. Utilizing a 0.45 FAR development potential as with the existing zone analysis would include a total of 7,253 square feet of office buildings in the I-P zone. For the area proposed for MUE, a range of uses is allowed, including office and residential. In order to determine the highest trip generator,three options have been considered for the area proposed to receive new MUE zoning. ■ Option 1 consists solely of apartments in the MUE zone. The 24.19 acres zoned MUE will be developed using the maximum housing development of 25 units per acre or 605 total apartment units. ■ Option 2 consists of all office in both the I-P and MUE zoning. In the I-P zone, the FAR is 0.45 based on Metro's typical values, whereas the 24.19 acres zoned MUE utilize 0.40 FAR as specified by the Tigard Development Code. Development potential of the MUE zone will include a total of 421,487 sf of office use. M ■ H:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 6 ■ Option 3 consists of medical-dental office and office in the MUE zone. 3.44 acres will be developed as medical- dental office in the MUE zoning to include a total of 60,000 sf utilizing a 0.40 FAR. A 60,000 sf medical-office building is one of the largest building sizes surveyed in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. A larger medical-office building could not be supported without surrounding similar land uses, i.e., a hospital or other medical-dental offices. The development potential for the remaining 20.75 acres zoned MUE, utilizing a 0.40 FAR,would include a total of 361,548 sf office use. Out of the 42.5 acres, 17.94 acres would retain the same zone designation and 24.56 acres are proposed to change to either I-P or MUE. Using the same land uses used for the entire site, three land use scenarios were compared for the 24.56 acres that are proposed to change in zone designations. The table below presents the three scenarios and the assumptions made for each. Below are the three scenarios and the corresponding trip generation for both the existing zoning and the proposed zoning. OPTI ON •AON Land Use MV (ITE Land Use Code) Size Weekday AM Peak PM Pea Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 380,867 SF 4,378 646 560 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 6,637 804 784 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 7,253 SF 485 134 105 MUE Apartment(220) 605 Units 3,790 300 350 Proposed Zoning Trips 4,275 434 455 Trip Differential (2,362) (370) (329) OPTION 2-SITE TRIP GENERATION Land Use Size Weekday M Peak PM Peak No (ITE Land Use . . - Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 380,867 SF 4,378 646 560 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips +6,637 804 784 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 7,253 SF 485 134 105 MUE Office Park(750) 421,487 SF 4,801 702 610 Proposed Zoning Trips 5,286 836 715 Trip Differential (1,351) 32 (69) 11:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-CityofTigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 7 il� tl - + -Zoning Land Use Size (ITE Land Use Weekday Code) Existing Zoning I-P Office Park (750) 380,867 SF 4,378 646 560 CP Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing (210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 6,637 804 784 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 7,253 SF 485 134 105 MUE Office Park(750) 361,548 SF 4,176 620 537 Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 Proposed ZoningTri ps 6,829 897 8S6 Trip Differential 192 93 72 Trip generation for Option 1 results in an anticipated difference between the current and modified zone to be -329 PM peak hour trips and -2,362 ADT. Trip generation for Option 2 anticipates -69 PM peak hour trips and -1,351 ADT. Trip generation for Option 3 anticipates 72 additional PM peak hourtrips and 192 additional ADT. As presented in the previous tables, trip generation with the proposed zone change does not impose a significant effect on the transportation network. There is only a small increase in expected AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily traffic levels compared to the existing zoning in Option 3; therefore, we propose a trip cap be imposed on the site based can anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. As outlined in Options 1 through 3, the proposed MUE Zoning would accommodate a variety of land use types, any combination of which could feasibly be developed within the trips that would be generated under the existing zoning. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE COMPLIANCE As demonstrated in the trip generation calculations for the portion of the site proposed to change zoning (24.56 acres), the proposed comprehensive plan amendment zone change would have no significant effect as defined by the Transportation Planning Rule if the City were to impose a trip cap limiting future traffic to levels currently allowed under existing zoning. City standards for traffic studies, codified in Development Code Section 18.810.03D.CC, outline a number of factors such as site development and trip generation that may trigger a requirement for a study. A traffic study is anticipated to be completed with each specific development application for the site if the thresholds are met. Sincere Brent Ahrend, PE Senior Associate I Traffic Engineer c: Belly Hossain!—Miller Nash aa�aaa Marah Danielson—ODOT Brian Varricchione, Matt Butts,Janet Jones—Mackenzie h r T. A�4ti EXPIRES: 12131/7 e� H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-15G511.docx MACKENZ I E . DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED May 11, 2015 City of Tigard Attention: Gary Pagenstecher 13125 5W Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Fields Trust Zone Change{Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Public Services Impact from Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment&Zone Change Project Number 2130474.02 Dear Gary: In accordance with the application requirements for Type III land use decisions (Tigard Code 18.390.050.B.2.e), Mackenzie has reviewed potential impacts to the public services at the Fred W. Fields Trust property that may result from the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change from the current combination of residential, commercial, and industrial zoning to a combination of only mixed-use and industrial zoning. The specific public services in question are transportation,drainage, parks,water,and sewer facilities. The existing and proposed comprehensive plan map designations and associated areas are indicated in Table 1. DesignationTable 1:Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Comprehensive Plan Map Zoning Existing Acreage Proposed9A Light Industrial (IL) Industrial Park (I-P) 37.4 ac 18.3 ac Professional Commercial (CP) Professional/Administrative 3.1 ac 0 ac Commercial (C-P) Low-Density Residential (L) Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) 2.1 ac 0 ac Mixed Use Employment(MUE) I Mixed Use Employment (MUE) 0 ac 24.2 ac Total Site Area* 42.6 ac 42.5 ac *Total area differs due to rounding. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPACTS Oregon's Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) stipulates that the City must demonstrate whether an amendment to the comprehensive plan and zoning map would have a significant effect on the transportation system. Mackenzie's May 11, 2015, Transportation Planning Rule analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning. The proposed zoning could result in a decrease of 329 PM peak hour trips or an increase of 72 trips P 503.224.9560 • � 503.228.1285 , W MCKNZE.COM • RlverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 ARCHITECTURE + INTERI CRs . STRUCTURAL EN GIN£ERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND USE PLANNING • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING . LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ■ Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington + Seattle,Washing[on H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tlga rd-Public Services I m pact-150511.d ocx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 2 compared to the existing zoning, depending on the type of development that takes place. To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network,the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. It is anticipated that a traffic study would be required as part of future development proposals at this site in accordance with the specifications of Community Development Code Section 18.810.030.CC. Resulting transportation system upgrades may consist of improvements to Hunziker Road and Wall Street along the frontage, plus a possible extension of Tech Center Drive to connect with Wall Street, depending on the results of traffic analysis for specific development proposals. DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPACTS Stormwater drainage is required to meet the standards of the City of Tigard as well as regulatory requirements of Clean Water Services. These standards do not differentiate between stormwater runoff from industrial, mixed-use, or multi- family residential sites. We expect that any development on the Trust properties will be required to provide on-site water quality and flow control facilities in accordance with Clean Water Services standards described in the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management(R&Q 07-20). The actual developed impervious area coverage for the site will depend on the final development layout; however, the various existing and proposed zones on the site allow equivalent impervious area coverage of up to 85 percent of the total site. Therefore, the proposed zoning is not expected to have a significant effect on the stormwater runoff or drainage system as compared to the existing zoning. Development of the site will require extension of public drainage facilities to collect runoff from the site and public roadways. Drain lines are expected to run within SW Wall Street and along the south side of the Potso Dog Park property, with discharge to Fanno Creek west of the site. Public storm lines should be sized to handle runoff from the fully developed contributory basin draining to the system. PARKS SYSTEM IMPACTS The project site is located within the City of Tigard Park District boundary (which encompasses the entire city limits) and is across the street from Potso Dog Park and near the "Fields Property" open space along Fanno Creek. The proposed zoning configuration would allow a higher population than the current zoning if the M'UE portion were developed with multi-family housing as allowed by the Tigard Community Development Code. Therefore, the proposed zoning could result in consideration of additional park facilities to serve the subject site. However, the site is located near existing park facilities with sufficient capacity for additional users. Furthermore, the City imposes parks system development charges (SDC} on all land uses (residential, commercial, and industrial), so development of the site would generate new revenues that could be used to improve the parks system. Therefore, the proposed zone change is not anticipated to negatively impact the parks system. WATER SYSTEM IMPACTS The subject site is located within the City of Tigard water service boundary. The water system at the site has been sized to account for planned utility demands from the existing zoning configuration. Domestic and process water system M ■ H:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 3 demands can be estimated for each land use based on compiled historic data used in utility master plans. The 2009 Clean Water Services Sanitary Sewer Master Plan presents detailed unit flow rates for several land uses. Since sewer flow demand generally matches water service demands for a given site, the sewer flow estimates can be used to compare relative water demand changes between the zoning configurations. Table 2 summarizes generalized domestic water demands for the subject site zones. Table I Water Demand Y-T V -1 Comprehensive Plan Map Domestic Water WaterDemandfor . - Designation Demand Existing ZoningProposed Zoning 0 Y 1 (9pd) 4 e Light Industrial (IL) 3,660 137,000 67,000 Professional Commercial (CP) 3,660 11,500 N/A Low-Density Residential (L) 1,000 2,100 N/A Mixed Use Employment(MUE) 2,950 N/A 71,400 Total Water Demand: 150,600 138,400 gpd=gallons per day ac=acre Fire flow demands are summarized in Table 3. ow Comprehensive Plan Designation - * . Light Industrial (IL) 3,500 (3 hrs) 392,700 192,200 Professional Commercial (CP) 2,500 (2 hrs) 15,500 N/A Low-Density Residential (L) 1,500 (2 hrs) 6,300 N/A Mixed Use Employment(MUE) 3,000 (3 hrs) N/A 217,800 Total Fire Flow Demand: 414,500 410,000 gpm=gallons per minute As shown by the above calculations, the proposed zone change is expected to result in a minor reduction in water service demand compared to the existing zoning. Development of the site will require extension of public water mains to provide domestic and fire water service. Water lines are expected to run within SW Wall Street, with possible connection to public mains near the southeast corner of the site. Public water lines should be sized to handle the expected domestic and fire flow demands from the subject site, as well as portions of the water network affected by the system expansion. M ■ LI:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 4 SEWER SYSTEM IMPACTS The subject site is located within the City of Tigard sewer service boundary. The sewer system at the site has been sized to account for planned utility demands from the existing zoning configuration, including a recent capital improvement project to upgrade a sewer near the west edge of the site. Sewer collection and conveyance is required to meet the standards of the City of Tigard as well as regulatory requirements of Clean Water Services. The actual sewer demand for the site will depend on the final development layout and industrial uses on the site. Table 4 summarizes generalized domestic sewer demands for the subject site zones, based on projected flow demands presented in the 2009 Clean Water Services Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. Table 4:Sewer Demand Domestic Demand for Sewer Demand for Land Use Zone Demand Existing Zoning ■ .o ■ Zoning ILA9949L • rf r9 Light Industrial (IL) 3,660 137,000 67,000 Professional Commercial (CP) 3,660 11,500 N/A Low-Density Residential 1,000 2,100 N/A Mixed Use Employment(MUE) 2,950 N/A 71,400 Total Sewer Demand. 150,600 138,400 As shown by the above calculations, the proposed zone change is expected to result in a minor reduction in sewer service demand compared to the existing zoning. Specific industrial uses on the site may result in lower or higher sewer flows than the assumed demands; it is expected that specific needs would be addressed on a project-by-project basis to confirm the public system has capacity to accommodate high-flow sewer users without upgrades. Development of the site will require extension of public sewer lines to provide sewer service. Sewer lines are expected to run within SW Wall Street, with connection to the recently-upgraded line along the south side of the Potso Dog Park. Public sewer lines should be sized to handle the expected sewer flows from the fully developed contributory basin draining to the system. M ■ LI:\Projects\213047402\wP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project dumber 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 5 SUMMARY In summary, our review of the public systems at the Fred W. Fields Trust property indicate the proposed zone change with a trip cap will not increase demands on the public infrastructure compared to the existing site zoning. Sincerely, q ,lt� Brent Ahrend, PE Brent Nielsen, PE Brian Varricchione, PE Traffic Engineer Civil Engineer Land Use Planning c: Kelly Hossaini— Miller dash Ma H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx MACKENZIE , DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED Notice of Neighborhood Meeting April 21,2015 Re: Proposed Fields Trust Hunziker Road &Wall Street Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change Dear Interested Party: The Fred W. Fields Trust is the owner of the 42.5-acre property located at the southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street (tax lots 251010001100, 2S101CA00100, 2S101DB00300, & 2S101DB00400). The Trust is considering proposing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for approximately 24 acres on the east side of the site from Light Industrial (IL), Professional Commercial (CP), and Low Density Residential (R) to Mixed Use Employment (MUE), and a concurrent zone change from Industrial Park (I-P), Professional Commercial (C-P), and Low Density Residential (R-3.5) to Mixed Use Employment (MUE), which allows for a range of uses including office and multi-family residential. The remaining approximately 18 acres on the west side of the site (facing Wall Street) is proposed to continue with Industrial Park zoning. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, Mackenzie planners would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents.You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday,May 5,2015 Community Room,Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Station 51 8935 5W Burnham Street Tigard, OR 97223 6:00—7:00 PM Please nate that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503-224-9560 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Alf � vm;oe'61� Brian Varricchione Land Use Planner Enclosure(s): Neighborhood Meeting Information Fields Trust Maps P 503.224.9560 • i- 503.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.CQM • RiverEast Center,1515 SE water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 ARCHITECTURE . INTERIQRS E STRUCTURAL ENG,N£ERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING . LAND USE PLANNING . TRANSPORTATION PLANNING . LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ■ Portland,Oregon F Vancouver,Washington • Seattle,Washington H:\Projects\2130474021,WP\LTR\LTR-Neighborhood Meeting-150421.docx r . , Neighborhood Meeting Information The City of Tigard requires developers to hold a neighborhood meeting to notify affected property owners about their proposed development. This is done as part of the development review process for most land use applications. Below are some frequently asked questions about the neighborhood meeting process. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer finalizes their submittal package (often taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the city. Sometimes it takes awhile before the developer's application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the city, staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be made. Many types of applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity to provide comments or concerns. Property owners within 500 feet will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. WHAT IF THE PROPOSAL PRESENTED AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS NOT WHAT IS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED? Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the project is significantly different, a new neighborhood meeting would be required as determined by staff. HOW DCI I KNOW WHAT ISSUES ARE VALID? A decision is reviewed based on compliance with Title 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code (also known as the Community Development Code). Revaeav the eio'r demlopnsent code tofamiliarkeyourse f with what Upefmiaed and what way not be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard Public Library, on the city's web site at www.tigard-or.gov, or a copy may be purchased by contacting our records department www.tigard-or.gov/city_haff/services/public—records/. You may also contact city planning staff by calling 503.71$.2421 and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be prepared, however, that you may not LIKE all the standards, but at least you know what they are. If a development meets the code standards, it can proceed. For your assistance, attached is a list of questions that may assist you in determining your position on a particular proposal. l�f LORI'1.h+�,lCastcr��1'rc-.l�rPlicaticsn[;�nlcrcncc 1'acket�NttiGhUnrhaoJ�iectin�infnrrnarinn_,(�ucrtiou. aac Updated 3/25/21113 w Typical Questions to Help Ensure Common Neighborhood Concerns are Considered The following is a list of questions intended to aid you in formulating your own questions for proposed development in your area. Heel free to ask more or alter the questions to address your own unique concerns and interests PROCESS ► What applications are you (the developer) applying for? When do you expect to submit the application(s) so that neighbors can review it? What changes or additions are expected prior to submittal? ► Will the decision on the application be made by city staff,'Tigard Hearings Officer, Planning Commission or City Council? How long is the process? (timing) ► At what point in the process are citizens given.notice and the opportunity to provide input? ► Has a pre-application conference been held with City of Tigard staff? ■ Have any preliminary requirements been addressed or have any critical issues been identified? �+ What city planner did you speak with regarding this project? (This person is generally the planner assigned to the land use case and the one to contact for additional information). STREETS / Will there be a traffic study done? What is the preliminary traffic impacts anticipated as a result of the development and how do you propose to mitigate the impacts if necessary? ► What street improvements (including sidewalks) are proposed? What connections to existing streets are proposed? ,Are streets proposed to be public or private? What are the proposed street and sidewalk widths? ► What are the emergency access requirements and what is proposed to meet those requirements? ZONING AND DENSITY ► What is the current zoning? What uses are allowed under this zoning? ► Will there be a re-zone requested by the developer? If yes, to what zone? ► How many units are proposed for the development and what is the minimum and maximum number of units allowed in the zone? DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ► What is your erosion control and drainage plan? What is the natural slope of the property? What are the grading plans? ► Is there a water quality facility planned within the development and where will it be located? Who will own and maintain the facility? TREES AND LANDSCAPING / What is the urban forestry plan and how will the applicable development requirements be met? ► What are the landscaping plans? What buffering or fencing is required and/or proposed? ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ► How do I request more information or a follow-up meeting from/with the applicant? 1:�(;UR]'LN�14a�tcsa tPre-,•ipplicattnn C:on(ercnec Pncket\Neighborhood]Meeting lnfnrrnatiun_Qur:tioos.doe Updated 3/25/2013 :Y r f r • AMP a '016 13, Jo AL W um L/1 W w O ami . a p 4 3 c } nei aL smun % 2- /�Y a N _0 y •ko) � 0 = a 3 a mY[j „ a ; -W CL 0 E v4i a a2= O d 0 k` a 'Y} L �• w d •O C � -�' i. © SIF 0. 3 y x L -V © x aj o L o a 2 a -m UJ cl {/} _ 00 V1 LJ CJ J2 o N u _ H n � J 011 W 'J �— cr. — Ln W / z ui c3 3na H�9c nns J N7 a � Z' y J ui -+ ro W iJ — —5 u ^ €" W Ln .aj a a° a 4 wO — ,iO C GJ cc •CJS ` O G u fY e •= fY .a �' r =C wQ Iq a Q N �p 'N a '� 0 o i op a 3 04 EE mY n � i� a � [ ; T Z a L. p q ip0. n y x� asvi r`.'r iii o .N •7C i►1 = W d C C a C M g WCD �r01 1 Z m a' C W a J a LL o a _ J {� Ln V Ln 2 1 Icc c w n F- Ln --- W L w LA v' 3AV H.L91 MS Jr tLU Ln o m a a� a V`! a J N r-I i OC fV r-I i N rl r►, OC � �y n� W C • E o �n +aajW = L/1 W (fir} f0 C — C21 J-- v d pa ao p u zv C E 0 vi ''' c µ ^ m�'o z oa 3qQ v 0 n afpG La 00 Y#+} L E o ani y z� % .V ry "� - © i J „ g x 3 Gl x e CL LU CL LL o - 01 1I- CL d .ri LLJ Vw w v ?,� U / z U = JW � 3lla H!9L MS v � J 4 ti y W J LLd N � J � ro W _ s u ^ €" Ln _o °C� x e 3 �l O . x M u ur Z C g y Q c W —Y 0 fY 'f ` 9 41 ` r v C �� E2 n n a a rc N 'i3 '{3 �° N i �i op a z a m°Y 0 n ; W +, it G3 m ° a c' of w a W 5f 97 �CA ' L CL J C p = x W { Y CL L;i ? n U ci _ n. c� ce a M g A WCD Z s n LU q'� C uqi W a LL JOil 1 � Ln cc U V N u', ~ w z Ln -- _ C.7 ,; `r uj z u uj Ln LA 'h 3AV H.L91 MS 117 __ W M is>> 41 T d OC a J N r-I i OC fV r-I i a' N r-I i OC City o f Tigard COMMUNITY D :VI"LOPMENTDEPARTMIim Request for 500' Property owner Notification Property owner information is valid for three (3) months FOR STAFF USE ONLY from the date of your request. Contact staff member Joe Patton: 503-718-2714 or joep(c tigard-or.gov. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING LABELS Project name: Fields Trust Hunziker Road zone change #of sheets cost each set, ry mr,te,s Staff planner you are working with:: Gary Pagenstecher 1rrlhrP,npe" 00 feet: b 52.00 1 $ 12.00 Name of contact person: Brian VarricchiOne 1nterxtedprfik�: 5100 $ Name of company: Mackenzie Qnerafe list. - - S11MO Phone: (503) 224-9500 TOTAL: $ 23.00 Email. bvarricchione@mcknze.com LAND USE ENVELOPES Please indicate all map and tax lot numbers (i.e. 1 S 134AB,tax 4"t lot 00100) that are included in your project or the addresses for ##of envelopes cost each sets sheets all project parcels below: (if more than one (1) tax lot or if H.Mbin s a,�,e,F the parcel has no address,you must separately identify �' "'SaO Feer. 50.13 each tax lot associated with the project.) 5013 Iule�erled p{rrtiea: 251010001100, 25101 CA00100, Gene,ntelftr. _ _ 51l'o 2S101 DB00300, & 28101 DB00400 Ptulrgge: S. S TOTAL: $ REQUEST (onit check ones: Q One (1) set of labels for notification of neighborhood meeting. After submitting your land use application to the city,the project planner will review your application for completeness and you will be notified by means of a completeness review letter. Please indicate what the complctcness letter indicates you need: ❑Type II TWO sets of envelopes ❑Type III or Type IV one set of envelopes (a second set may be required if decision is appealed) Land use case number: The contact person listed above will be notified of the amount to pay at the front counter in the Permit[:enter once the request is processed.A printed list of all property owners within 500 feet and interested parties will be provided at time of payment.Upon request,a PDF copy is available via email. City of Tigard • 13125 5W Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • www.tigard-or.gov • 503-718.2421 • Page 1 of l I:\CLTRPI.N\Masters\500'Properh'Owner Notification Recluest.docx Rev.20150325(previous versions obsolete) o° C NUM LL H +.. . r Lo cc 12.tz DO r - ! ■ III .. ■ ■ ■ �•■`■ � ■ ■r Lo a NE pal adl ,� , SII-JII�. I���■. � ;� 111;'I�f 1pHillillk HLAUPIIIR#1!I■Wlll urWE !■■ANN ■■■Now .. .. w l I�"AH:fmu: ■u■■■■u.r.u.r�.rr■r.■■■NONE ■■■ .ru r.■.rrrrrur■. .� /✓ J -■■■■■r■■■.■■■MEMEMEMEr.r � ■rr■r■■■■■■r i■■rr ■r■r.rr■r■■. t/ire' _ ,■■r■■■■r.■■rrr _ ■rr■r■■■■■■■ eMEMEMMIrr■■Q r■r.rro■■�r►� l %r �[ ■■■■.r■■r.r ■rr■r■■o■■■ I'M:„r■r.r■■■ Irr',�r 1. EMEMEMElof r� r w i ..r.rrr a ■rrrr■■■■■■■ ol -rrrr a rr1r■� r.Jrr r�•� = e tr 4 ■rr■....■■ MMmvj MEMEMEMEME.■ -.r.■ r■MENNOMMEMMrrii I fflummmor ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ u■■■r ■■rr■■■■■■ op ■■■fin r i�j��r ■ I qMINE INS ■! lam . mm Will MEW is12 01016 �i� SME00 X1111 l�yrs �����p ! � ■� ��� 2S101 DB00607 2S101DC05000 ABBLITT,RANDI I ALBERTINA KERR CENTERS 7700 SW CHERRY DR ATTN: ERA1J) A HOFFF1 WI' TIGARD,OR 97223 424 NE 22ND PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S I011)B00605 2S101DB00608 I3I],K1:R LMNG TRUST BLAGGE,DIANNE E BY BIEKER,WILLIAM A&_JOANNE K TRS 7404 SW DELAWARE CIR 7730 SW CHERRY DR TUALATIN,OR 97062 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00506 2S112BA06000 BOME,FRANS R BONITA LLC 7500 SW CRISTVIEW ST 8320 NE HIGHWAY 99 TIGARD,OR 97223 VANCOUVER,WA 98665 2S101BD00105 2S101DB00504 BR&G CO LLC BRETL LIVING TRUST 17608 SYDNI CT 11970 NW REEVES ST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 PORTLAND,OR 97229 2S101 DCO2700 25101 DCO2900 BRIAN,THOMAS M CHICK, INIARIBUTH _1 JOENE A 11575 SW PACIFIC I It!i'Y 7630 FIR ST PMB#120 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DC01800 2S101DB00704 CONANT,JAMES&ALISSA COURREGES,TIMOTHY W&PAMELA J 7510 SW CHERRY DR 7425 SW YARNS ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DCC03000 2S101BD00104 DIMICK,HEATHER M&DAMON R EAST SIDE VAN AND STORAGE 7545 SW CHERRY DR INC TIGARD,OR 97223 4836 SE POWELL PORTLAND,OR 97206 2S101DB00619 multiple:251010001100 to 2S101DB00400 1;Ll.I.NEON,I'Y].1.R LIVING TRUST F1 I--I.13S,FRED W REVOCABLE LIVING ELLENSON,MARGARET LIVING TRUST 111 SW 5TI-I AVE#3675 13280 SW 76TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97204 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00614 2S101DB00606 FREZZA,CONRAD NICHOLAS&APRIL GILES,DIANE P 13275 SW 76TH AVE 7710 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 DB00706 2S101DB00616 GILLETTE,REED T&ANDREA L GRILE,WILLIAM P&LINDA J FURMA 7480 SW YARNS ST 855 SIGNAL WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 COOS BAY,OR 97420 2S101DB00609 2S101BD00103 GUTHRIE,GEORGE DEREK&DOLORES H G M CO,BY NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 7665 SW FIR ST ATTN:BLAKF HIRING TIGARD,OR 97223 121 SW MORRISON #200 PORTLAND,OR 97204 25101 DB00800 2S101DC01900 HAMPTON RIDGE APARTMENTS LLC HI:RMANSON,PATRICIA M BY COOPERS CHASE LLC 7530 SW CHERRY DR 17952 SW PARRISH LN TIGARD,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 multiple:2S101DB00200 to 2S101DB00201 multiple:2S101DB00100 to 2S101DB00103 HILLCREST HOLDINGS LLC I IILLTOP BUSINESS CENTER LLC 9 SE 3RD AVE,STE 100 HUNZIKI:R LLC PORTLAND,OR 97214 9430 NW KAISER RD POWI-L 1ND,OR 97231 25101 DB00613 2S101DB00707 HOLLIS,MARK&TONNA HOPKINS,BURTON C RUTH N 13235 SW 76TH AVE 7430 SW VARNS TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 DB00101 2S101 CB00100 HUNZIKER PROFESSIONAL CENTER LLC HLT-1.11G,INC 3601 WREN ST 555 MARVILLE CENTER DR LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 PO BOX 1041 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63006 2S101DB00503 2S101DB00501 JARAMILLO,GUS 1&SANDRA L KING,EDWARD A&SONYA M 7580 SW CRESTVIF,W ST 7505 SW CRI.SI'VIEW ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S101DC01700 2S101DB00505 KIRNAK FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST KRAFT,CRAIG&JOAN C BY EMMEL&CLAIRE KIRNAK TRS 7585 SW CRESTVIEW ST 7490 SW CHERRY DR PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DB00620 2S101DB00602 LEA,ERIC S& 1I1R1;1\I 11 LEACHMAN,DIRK 7530 SW VARNS ST 7575 SW VARNS ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DCO2500 2S101DCO2400 MAYER,KENNETH D AND MEMOVICH,BARBARA J TR JANICE K 7630 SW CHERRY DR 7650 SW CHERRY ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 multiple:2SI01CA00600 t©2SI01CA00700 2S101CA00400 MERITAGE FIVE LLC MERITAGE FIVE LLC BY FHA&ASSOC FHA&ASSOC 155 B AVE#222 155 B AVE#222 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S101CC00100,251010001200 2S101DB00705 METRO MILLER,ROBERT CLARENCE ATTN OFFICE OF THE METRO r1'I'I'ORNI:Y DORO'T'HY NELL 600 NE GRAND AVE 7475 SW VARNS PORTLAND,OR 97232 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AC01800 2S101DB00618 MOSTUL,TERRY A&DEBBI C MYI?RS, KENNETH E 7585 SW HUNZIKER RD 13320 SW 76H TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CB00800 2S101DCO2800 OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION PAYNE,KEVIN M RIGHT OF WAY SECTION 7615 SW CHERRY DR 355 CAPITOL STREET NE,RM 420 TIGARD,OR 97223 SALEM,OR 97301 2S 101 DB00601 2S101BD00300 PEARSON,H ODELL&DONNA M REV L PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING GROUP IN 7525 SW VARNS ST 16400 COLLI?GI BIND TIGARD,OR 97223 LENEXA, KS 66219 25101 DB00604 25101 DCO2600 PIRKI,,RAYMOND E&ROSE MARIE TR POWELL,JAMES WAIN']?R TRLISl' 7745 SW VARNS ST BY POWELL,JAMES W TR TIGARD,OR 97223 7660 SW FIR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00502 2S101CB00200 RELVAS,PATRICIA D CONWAY SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L WALTON,MATTHEW D PO BOX 930 7545 SW CRESTVIEW ST WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DB006I 1 2S101DCO2100 STARKS,ELIZABETH STEWART,MARTIN D&CARLA E 7715 SW CHERRY DR 7570 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DB00603 2S101DC04500 STONE,DIANE E SUMMIT PROPI ATIFIS INC 7675 SW VARNS ST 4380 SW MACADAM BLVD STE 330 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97239 2S101DB00612 2S101DCO2300 SUNNARBORG,MARSHALL H TAKAHASHI,WAYNE H JOANNE E SHARON S 7670 SW VARNS ST 7610 SW CHERRY ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 DB00615 2S101DB00617 TAYLOR,IAN THACKERY,RUSSELL H III 13315 SW 76TH AVE 13360 SW 76TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BD00200 multiple:2SI01 DC06400 to 2S101DC06500 TIGARD DISTRIBUTION CENTER LLC TIGARD,CITY OF 4800 SW MACADAM,STE 120 13125 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97239 ATTN:GARY 1)AGE NSI'ECHER TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102DA00500 2S101DB00610 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL TROT"I'I,LOUISE DISTRICT 23J 7705 SW CHERRY DR 6960 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1010001500 2S101DCO2200 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO VANDERBITRG,JOHN SCOTT 1700 FARNHAM ST,10TH FL SOUTH 7590 SW CHI:RRY DR OMAHA,NE 68102 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 CA00200 2S10IDC04000 WALL STREET INDUSTRIAL LLC WALTON CWOR SOUTHWEST 12 LLC A RICHARD VIAL EXECUTIVE CENTER LLC BY RYAN 7000 SLS'YARNS ST PO BOX 460169 PORTLAND,OR 97223 HOUSTON,TX 77056 25101 DC03101 2SI O1 DCO2000 WEATHT:RFORD,BETTY L WIDMAN,THOMAS G 7495 SW CHERRY DR 7550 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DC05200 2S101DC04900 WILLARD,SHAWN P WILSON,CHRISTOPHER E& 13469 SW 75TH AVIS SHARON K TIGARD,OR 97223 13400 SW 76TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DCC05300 2S101DC04601 WORZNLAK,DENNIS&NANCY WPC TIGARD ILC 13493 SW 75TH PL 307 LEWERS ST 6TH FL TIGARD,,OR 97223 HONOLULU,111 96815 ALEXANDER CRAGHEAD BARRY ALBI.B'I'SON 12205 SW HALL BOULEVARD 15445 SW 150TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223-6210 TIGARD,OR 97224 BEVERLY FROUDE BRAD SPRING 12200 SW BUT MOUNTAIN ROAD 7555 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 BRIAN WI<'GI:NIM CAROL RENAUD—WACO CPO NEWSLETTER COORD. 9830 SW KIMBERLY DRIL'T? OSU EXT.SVC-CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT FACULTY TIGARD,OR 97224 155 NORTH 1ST AVENUE SUITE 200 MS48 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 CHARLIE AND LARIE STALZER DAVID KIIVMEL 14781 SW_JULIET TERRACE 1335 SW 66TH SUITE 201 TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTI,AND,OR 97225 DAVID WALSH DAYLE 17.&EVELYN O.BEACH 10236 SW STUART COURT 11530 SW 72ND AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 DON&DOROTHY ERDT ELLEN BEILSTEIN 13760 SW 121ST AVENUE 14630 SW 139TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 GENE MILDREN GLENNA THOMPSON MILDREN DESIGN GROUP 13676 SW HALL BLVD UNIT 2 7650 SW BEVELAND ST,STE 120 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 GRETCHEN BU1aHNER HAROLD AND RUTH HOV ,AND 13249 SW 136TH PIACE 13145 SW BENISH TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 HEIDI BRENNEMAN JIM LONG,CHAIR,CPO 4M 11680 SW TIGARD DRIVE 10730 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 JOHN GOODHOUSE JUI.IF RUSSELL CHAIR CPO 4B CHAIR 9345 SW MOUNTAIN VIEW LANE 16200 SW PACIFIC HWY SUITE H BOX 242 TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224 JULIE RL-SS1.L1.,CPO 4B CHAIR KEVIN HOGAN 12662 SW TERRAVIEW DRIVE 14357 SW 133RD AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224 LISA HAMILTON CPO 4B VICE CHAIR MONA KNAPP 13565 SW BEEF BEND ROAD 9600 SW FREWING STREET TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 NAOMI GALLUCCI NATHAN AND ANN MURDOCK 11285 SW 78TH AVENUE 7415 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 NEAL BROWN.GRI PATRICIA KEERINS MEADOWS INC REALTORS 15677 SW OREGON ST.APT 209 12655 SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET TIGARD,OR 97140 TIGARD,OR 97223 PATTY NEWTH REX CAFFALL 12180 SW MERESTONE COURT 13205 SW VILLAGE GLENN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 ROSS SUNDBERG STACY CONNERY 16382 SW 104TH AVE 12564 SW MAIN STREET TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 SUE RORMAN SUSAN BEILKE 11250 SW 82ND AVE 11755 SW 114TH PLACE TIGARD,OR 97223 TlGARD,OR 97223 TODD HARDING&BLAKE HERING JR. VANESSA FOSTER. NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 13085 SW HOWARD DR 121 SW MORRISON,SUITE 200 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97204 VICTOR DEFILIPPIS 13892 SW BRAYDON CT TIGARD,OR 97224 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE,TO THE ADDRESS BELOW. City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT&COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: I, being duly sworn,depose and say that on the day of t , 20-' _,I caused to ha Ic maite o each of a persons on the attached list,a notice of a meeting to discuss a roposed development at (ar near) i Z1a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in ernvelo es plainly addressed t said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 11�, & S Tr/1�P q with postage prepaid thereon. �7 . Lt S ature (In the presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: 1, . n 61&W do affirm that I am (represent) the parry initiating interest in a proposed land use application for fti C ►7d affecting the l t d located at (state the approximate locadon(s) IF no address s and all tax lot{s)currendy re(s) {� 4ta/tf,� - Lt) Axt�— DQ 7$ df $D io b1 3O ,and did on the 7D day of AEVA 20,-iro —personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a - + land use application,and the time,date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 7U1 &A, y N > 1� Lt1 1, ak L+ ) w YlF1. '� c bhn (State the location you posted notice on property) L—t 0��'t ! ignature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF���� O r } County of M�4� JJss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 5j-day of 52AV Y�� ,20-L5 OFFICIAL S!BBRANDT L REBECCA LYNNNL77ARY I#UBIJCEGO3VNOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON COMMISSION NO, 69806MY COMMAISSION EXPIRES JUL8,2016 My Commission Expires: O?feet/Zel [:\CUR]ILN\Nllasterv\l're-elnpEc,ition Conference Packet\Af6da,,it of Mailinr;-Posting Neighborhood Meeting.ducx Updated 3/25/2013 MACKENZIE P 503.224.9560 • F 503.228.1285 - W MCKNZE.COM IIID E.ET I N G NOTES RiverEast Center.1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 Portland.©rec Vancouver,Washington • = tittle.Washington PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 ISSUE DATE: May 8, 2015 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zone Change RECORDED BY: Brian Varricchione, Land Use Planner TO: City of Tigard planning staff PRESENT: Attendees listed on attached sign-in sheets J.Clayton Hering—NAI Norris, Beggs&Simpson Kelly Hossaini—Miller Nash Graham& Dunn LLP Brian Varricchione—Mackenzie SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting(May 6,2015) MEETING INFORMATION Neighborhood Meeting Wednesday, May 6,2015 (6:00 PM) Tualatin Valley Fire Station 51 Community Room, 8935 SW Burnham Street,Tigard,OR 97223 PRESENTATION TOPICS Brian Varricchione introduced himself and Kelly Hossaini from Miller Nash, read the required opening statement from the City of Tigard, and described the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The proposal would result in approximately 18 acres remaining in the Industrial Park zone and approximately 24 acres changing to Mixed Use Employment (MUE), which would accommodate a variety of commercial uses plus multi-family housing. The primary reason for the request is that the slopes on the eastern portion of the property are too steep for industrial uses and changing the designation could lead to development that would bring jobs to the community. It was noted that there were no development plans at this time for the proposed MUE portion. PRIMARY CONCERNS RAISED BY THE PUBLIC The primary concerns raised by attendees, who were mostly residents of the adjacent Rolling Hills subdivision, related to potential impacts of development on neighborhood character. The attendees universally opposed allowing a connection to Varns Street and provided a copy of Resolution 79-86, passed by City Council in 1979, which created a street plug to prevent through traffic. Attendees also opposed potential tree cutting that could result from development. The attendees noted that the City had at one time required a fifty-foot buffer along the eastern boundary of the existing Industrial Park- zoned property and inquired if the Trust would propose to maintain such a buffer, stating their preference that a buffer remain between their residences and future commercial or multifamily residential uses. H:'1Projects\213047402\WP\MTG_MIN\MM-Neighborhood Meeting-150506.docx Neighborhood Meeting(May 6, 2015) Project Number 2130474.02 Page 2 OTHER ISSUES RAISE© BY THE PUBLIC Members of the public raised a number of additional issues and questions as listed below. ■ Whether the neighborhood meeting was specifically for the zone change or whether it also addressed possible future development. ■ Whether the Trust would consider donating the sloped portion of the site to a charitable organization or keep it as a park rather than change the zoning to MUE. ■ Whether the eastern portion could be rezoned to allow single family residential use rather than MUE. ■ Whether the zone change could wait until a specific development proposal was available. ■ Concerns that property values for the residences could be affected by adjacent development and increased traffic. ■ Concerns about habitat reduction and wildlife impacts from tree cutting and future development. ■ Concerns about the potential impact of residential septic systems' greywater discharges on the Trust property, particularly with future site grading. ■ Concerns about what traffic levels would be associated with future development. ■ Concerns about commercial traffic passing through a residential neighborhood and how that would affect livability and safety, particularly if Varns Street became a cut-through street. ■ Observations that the residential area is now an island surrounded by industrial and commercial development. ■ Observations that the railroad spur could affect the ability of the site to develop. ■ Questions about whether wetlands were on site. ■ Questions about what types of uses are allowed in the MUE zone. ■ Questions about the ability of neighbors to influence decisions made by the City. ■ Questions about the public hearings process and a preference that the notice radius be enlarged. ■ A preference that access should be taken off Hunziker Road or Wall Street rather than Varns Street. ■ A preference for open space and wildlife habitat rather than development. ■ A general preference to keep the site in its current condition. ■ A statement that a zone change would lead to development so the neighbors should work together to make their opinions known to the City now rather than waiting for a development proposal. Enclosure(s): Sign-in sheets Meeting agenda Meeting handout H:\Projects\213047402\wP\MTG_MIN\MM-Neighborhood Meeting-1505o5.docx MAC K E NZ I E . P 503.224.9580 ■ F 503.228.1285 ■ W MCKNZE.CCM SIGN—IN SHEET RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,JR 97214 Portland,Oregon ■ Vancouver,Washington • Seattle,Washington PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zane Change SUBJECT- Neighborhood Meeting—May 6, 2015,6:00 PM NAME REPRESENTING ADDRESS barj�aqcj"e y t7rmaj�I '5t? f\fe 9 -7(o,3e> --?tAl 0_LV-r-V "f -2j `GCS & ot s S i7V t t J r H.\Projects1213047402\PLANNING\neighborhood meeting\handoots\Fields X neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet.docx MACKENZIE . P 503.224.9560 • F s03.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.COME SIGN-IN SHEET RlverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97211 Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington ■ Seattle,Washington PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zone Change SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting--May 6,2015, 6:00 PM NAME REPRESENTING ADDRESS azo -� S_05 <�C'j C"'f_'09 jVTgAj ► � l Arc-lnn i� "151Y 6LJ VARNS _ 7 i li St_( `77 e� D S(,�J CA141r A 17` 70, ]Z)f F 70,S_SVJ L1A(zZjS S-F Cu S A2,o� S t-C F 7 S`S d S c� P 540 S � - 7S H.\Projects\213Q474Q2\PtANNING\neighbor'hood meetinglhandnuts\Fields ZC neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet.docx MACKENZIE P 503.224.4580 • F 503.228.1285 • NVV MCKNZE.COM MEETING AGENDrA RiverEast Center,151 SSE Water Avenue,##100,Portland,OR 97214 Portland,Oregon ■ Vancouver.Washington ■ Seattle.Washington PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 TODAY'S DATE: May 4, 2015 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zone Change MEETING DATE: May 6, 2015 MEETING TIME: 6:00 PM MEETING PLACE: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Station 51,Tigard, Oregon PARTICIPANTS: Affected property owners and interested parties FACILITATOR: Mackenzie SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting I. INTRODUCTION ■ Brian Varricchione—Lane Use Planner, Mackenzie ■ Kelly Hossaini—Miller Nash (representing Fred W. Fields Trust) IL CITY STATEMENT OF PURPOSE Brian Varricchione, Mackenzie III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Brian Varricchione, Mackenzie IV. DISCUSSION Meeting Attendees V. NEXT STEPS Brian Varricchione, Mackenzie c: Participants H:\Projects\213047402\WP\AGD-Neighborhood Meeting-150506.docx wl W cu wl vxag A gW/ N $ ' $ 6r 2 uj Dti�1 A 1 ` wo- LM 9AVGIVZLMS too) 3 a � L 3A V Hi 9L MS U LA 4 w "t3 � C) a •!S`l -�� CL,N W, c o a 00 c L 0- CL 1 N J � N e^i i N s Washington County,Oregon ' 05/0512010 1015:44 AM 2010-033975 a-DW Cnt,i Stn=12 S PFEFFER 540.00$5.00$11.00$15.00-Total-$71.00 L(D After recording, return to. 111111111111 014787512a1a0033975008a0t3$ 1111111 David M. Munro J.Richard Hobemlcht,Oirectar orAaaeasment and Taxation and E) OFM ;O County Clark for Waahin an Thede Culpepper Moore Munro & Silliman LLP County,Oregon,do hereby certiythat the Within Instrument or writing was race Ived and recorded In the Y; 111 S.W. Fifth Avenue, Suite 3 675 book of records ersal d Cour Portland, Oregon 97204 Richard Hobe'nicht. irectornrAaaeaama Taxation,Ex-officio County Clerk WARRANTY DEED FRED W. FIELDS, Grantor,conveys and warrants to FRED W. FIELDS, in his capacity as Trustee of the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust under Revocable Living Trust Agreement dated February 17, 2009, Grantee,the real property situated in Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The true consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of an indefeasible estate in the real property described above in fee simple,that Grantor has good right to convey the property,that the property is free from encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein, and that Grantor warrants and will defend the title to the property against all persons who may lawfully claim the same by,through, or under Grantor, provided that the foregoing covenants are limited to the extent of coverage available to Grantor under any applicable standard or extended policies of title insurance, it being the intention of Grantor to preserve any existing title insurance coverage. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS, BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD {CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010,TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL,TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES,AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF Until a change is requested,all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: Fred W. Fields,Trustee 1149 S.W. Davenport Street Portland, Oregon 97201 00234485.1 - 1 - ANY, LENDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.345 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2407. DATED this Lobay of , 2010. Fred W. Fields STATE OF } } COUNTY OF On WA , 2014, before me, ,personally appeared Fred W. Fields prisonally known tome(or proved tome on the ba5i of satisfactory evidence}to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument he executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Ll- ?aAfmk-N= Not4 Public for My commission expires: OFFICIAL SEAL HELEN PARKER NOTARY PUBLIC- RE:t?N w f' COMMISSION NO.428848 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 5,2412 00234485.1 2 ` EXHIBIT A Parcel 1: The North one-half of Lot 1, EDGEWOOD ACRE TRACTS, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon. i Parcel 11: The South cane-half of Lot 1, EDGEWOOD, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon. Parcel III:. A tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range I West of the Willamette Meridian, in the j City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly Southeast corner of that certain tract described in deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530,to Jane Brooks,running thence West along the South line of the Brooks tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel to the most Easterly East line of the said tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned, to a point on the South line of County Road No. 245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road No. 245 to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned; thence South along the East line of said Brooks tract to the place of beginning. Parcel I V: All that certain tract of land in the William Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39 in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, conveyed to Beecher B. Robinson by deed recorded at page 193 of Volume 126, Washington County, Oregon Deed Records, and being more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Beginning at the Southwest corner of the aforesaid Rubinson tract in the center of the County Road at the Northwest corner of Lot 1 of EDGEWOOD, a duly recorded subdivision of Washington County, Oregon, which beginning point is said to bear 5.60 chains West and 21.02 chains North of the Northwest corner of Section 12, Township 2 South, Range I West of the Willamette Meridian; thence from said point of beginning North 0°22' East in the center of the said County Road 969.4 feet to the Northwest corner of said Robinson tract; thence South 47°43' East 26.9 feet to an iron pipe; thence continuing South 47°43' East 431.1 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 99.0 feet to an Alder tree marked "C,8"; thence continuing South 16.0 feet to a point in the center of Fanno Creek, from which point an iron pipe bears North 19.9 feet;thence down stream following the center of Fanno Creek the fallowing courses and distance: South 37°01' East 110.0 feet; South 26°58' West 126.0 feet; South 6°44' West 86.8 feet; South 30°08' East 40.5 feet; South 73°51' East 44.8 feet; North 53°56" East 71.7 feet; South 74°06' East 33.1 feet; South 4°44' West 72.6 feet; South 24°24' East 64.3 feet; South 51°2' East 137.0 feet; and 00234485.1 - ` South 11'35' West 42.7 feet to a point on the North line of said EDGEWOOD Subdivision; thence North 89°00' West along the North line of aforesaid subdivision 35.1 feet to a point in the center of Fanno Creek, from which point an iron pipe bears South 89°00' East 17.1 feet; thence running downstream in the center of Fanno Creek North 39°18' West 32.8 feet North 58°29' West 104.5 feet, South 86°48' West 41.6 feet and South 12°02' West 76.4 feet to a point on the North line of aforesaid subdivision, from which point an iron pipe bears North 89°00' West 28.0 feet; thence leaving Fanno Creek and running along the North line of said subdivision 528.0 feet to the place of beginning. SAVE AND EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through the State Highway Commission recorded August 20, 1965, in Book 656, Page 306, Records of Washington County. PARCEL V: Beginning at a stone at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon and running thence South 43°23' West along the Northwesterly line of said Donation Land Claim 734,0 feet to a point in the center of County Road; thence South 60°59' East in the center of said County Road; 1814.8 feet to a stone at the Northeast corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to R. and Sophia Hunziker by deed as recorded on Page 271 of Volume 90 of Washington County, Oregon Deed Records; thence South 29°34' West along the East line of said Hunziker tract 1652.9 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way;thence South 42°00' East along said Northerly ! boundary 120.0 feet to an iron pipe at the true point of beginning of the herein described tract; thence from the above described true point of beginning North 89°51-'/z'East along the North line of said Hunziker tract 998.4 feet to an iron pipe at the most Easterly Northeast comer thereof,thence South 1°14' West along the East line of said Hunziker tract 1085.6 feet to an iron pipe at the Northerly boundary line of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way; thence North 4200' West along said Northerly boundary 1457.2 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL VI: Beginning at a stone at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, and running thence South 43°23' West along the Northwesterly line of said Donation Land Claim 734.0 feet to a point in the center of the County Road; thence South 60°59' East in the center of said County Road 1814.8 feet to a stone at the Northeast corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to R. and Sophia Hunziker by deed as recorded on Page 271 of Volume 90 of Washington County, Oregon Deed Records; which point is the true ' point of beginning of the herein described roadway; thence from the above described true point of beginning South 29°34' West along the East line of said Hunziker tract 1631.8 feet to an iron pipe; which pipe is 20.0 feet from, when measured at right angles to the Northerly boundary of the Southern Pacific Railway right of way; thence South 42°00' East parallel to and 20.0 feet from, when measured at right angles to said Northerly boundary a distance of 144.7 feet to an iron pipe on the North line of said Hunziker tract; thence South 89°51-%z' West along the said North line 26.8 feet to an iron pipe on the Northerly boundary of said Southern Pacific Railroad right of way; thence North 42°00' West along said Northerly boundary 141.1 feet to an iron pipe; I 00234485.1 -2 - thence North 29°34' East parallel and 20.0 feet from, when measured at right angles to the East line of said Hunziker tract a distance of 1646.0 feet to a point in the center of said County Road; I thence South 60°59' East in the center of said road 20.0 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL VII: I Beginning at an iron pipe at the reentrant corner on the South line of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon and running thence North 1'27 East 1020.7 feet to a square iron at the Northeast corner of EDGEWOOD; thence North 89°07' West along the North line of said subdivision 151.1 feet to a corner of that certain tract of and conveyed to R. and Sophia Hunziker by deed as recorded in Deed Book 90, Page 271; thence North 4°13' East along the property line 597.1 feet to the Southwest corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to the Oregon Electric Railway Company by deed as recorded in Deed Book 83, Page 163; thence South 43°44' East along the Southerly line of said tract of land 400.0 feet to the most Easterly corner thereof; thence South 4195' East along the Southerly boundary of the Oregon Electric Railroad right of way 1796.9 feet to an iron pipe on the recognized South line of the said W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence North 89°23' West on said recognized South line 1387.8 feet to the place of beginning. PARCEL VIII: Beginning at the Northwest center of Lot 2 of EDGEWOOD, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, and running East 13.24 chains (873.8 feet)to the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence South with the East boundary thereof 30 feet; thence West 2.68 1 chains (176.9 feet); thence North 79°30' West 0.827 chains(54.6 feet)to a pipe 3/4" in diameter; thence West 9.80 chains (646.8 feet), more or less,to the West boundary of said Lot 2; thence with said West boundary, North 20 feet to the place of beginning. I PARCEL IX: Section 1, Township 2 South, Range I West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and. State of Oregon: Graham Donation Beginning 20 chains North and 20 chains West of the Southeast corner of the W,W Donation Land Claim; thence West 17.11 chains to stake; thence North 30° East 26.60 chains to center of County Road; thence South 72°48' East 9.91 chains to the Southwest corner of J.A. Keller's tract of land; thence South 10 chains to a stake; thence West 5 chains to a stake; thence South 10 chains to place of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM a certain tract conveyed by Rudolph Hoohuli, et ux and George J. Erdner, et ux, to Beaverton and Willsburg Railroad Company as shown by instrument recorded in Deed Book 75, Page 420, on May 14, 1907. i EXCEPT a tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette j Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly i described as follows: I I 00234485.1 - 3 - Beginning at the most Easterly Southeast corner of that certain tract described in deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 534 to Jane Brooks; running thence West along the South line of the Brooks tract above described, a distance of 330 feet;thence Northerly parallel to the most Easterly East line of the said tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned to a point on the South line of County Road No. 245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road No. 245;thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned.; thence South along the East line of said Brooks tract to the place of beginning. SUBJECT TO: 1. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : April 12, 1948, in Book 284, Page 406 Favor of Tillie Zurcher Affects Parcels V &VI Tillie Zurcher conveyed an undivided one-half of her interest in said easement to her husband, Paul A. Zurcher, by instrument Recorded January 4, 1951, in Book 315, Page 386 2. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof- Recorded December 31, 1952, in Book 340, Page 167 Favor of Portland General Electric Company, a corporation of Oregon For : Electrical transmission lines Affects Parcels V, VI & IX 3. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded June 14, 1957, in Book 395, Page 58 Favor of Portland General Electric Company Affects Parcels V &V1 4. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 12, 1960, in Book 435, Page 312 Favor of Tigard Water District,a municipal corporation, and the South Tigard Sanitary District, a municipal corporation For : Sewer lines and water lines Affects Parcel VI 5. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded October 9, 1961, in Book 451,Page 10 Favor of Northwest Natural Gas Company, a corporation of the State of Oregon For : Pipeline Affects Parcels VI & IX 00234485.1 -4 - ; 6. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: j Recorded : December 8, 1965, in Book 580, Page 313 Favor of City of Tigard, a municipal corporation of Oregon Affects . Parcels VI, VII &VIII 7. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded December 27, 1965, in Book 575, Page 43 Favor of D.H. Overmyer Warehouse Co., an Oregon corporation For Railroad spur track Affects Parcels VI& IX I I The above easement was assigned by instrument Dated June 14, 1966 Recorded July 5, 1966, in Book 606, Page 590 To Southern Pacific Company,a Delaware corporation 8. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded January 4, 1966, in Book 583, Page 258 Favor of Northwest Natural Gas Company, an Oregon corporation For . Gas pipeline Affects Parcels V & IX 9. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded March 16, 1966, in Book 592, Page 13 Favor of Southern Pacific Company, a Delaware corporation For : Railroad track Affects : Parcel V 10. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded June 10, 1971, in Book 821, Page 413 Favor of Tigard Water District, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Oregon For : Underground pipeline and/or mains for water Affects : Parcel VI 11. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 16, 1971, in Book 835, Page 507 Favor of : Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon corporation For Anchor easement Affects : Parcels VI, VII, & VIII 12. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded December 15, 1971, in Book 847, Page 55 Favor of Tigard Water District, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Oregon For Underground pipeline and/or mains for the purpose of conveying water Affects : Parcel IV 00234485.: - 5 13. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded July 20, 1972, in Book 878, Page 295 Favor of Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district of the State of Oregon For Sewer Affects Parcell 14. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded July 20, 1972, in Book 878, Page 298 Favor of Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district of the State of Oregon For Sewer Affects : Parcel 11 15. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded April 18, 1973, in Book 920, Page 38 Favor of Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district of the e State of Oregon For Sewer i Affects Parcels VII & VIII i i 16. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 15, 1975, in Book 1043, Page 992 i Favor of City of Tigard, a municipality of the State of Oregon For Street dedication and slope easement Affects Parcels VI & IX 17. An easement created by instrument,including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 15, 1975, in Book 1043, Page 994 Favor of : City of Tigard, a municipality of the State of Oregon For : Street dedication and slope easement Affects Parcels VI & IX 18. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded November 18, 1975, in Book 1054, Page 608 Favor of City of Tigard, a municipality of the State of Oregon For Street dedication and slope easement Affects Parcel III i19, Any adverse claim based upon the assertion that some portion of said land have been removed from or brought within the boundaries thereof by an avulsive movement of Fanno Creek or has been formed by the process of accretion or reliction. (Affects Parcel IV) 00234485.1 - 6- pr�c, 7 U ?a& �(�, 5101/200n County,Oregon 2006-051473 rpt v" I _ V 05J0112006 09:44:11 AM ly 11 6) ,j 1 (� p{ygg Cntst Gtn=7 K GRUNEWALO 6 [J nn/ ��itW// 415.110 SBA 3i 1.00•Total a$32.00 T.D After recording,return to: 1111111 11� 1111111111111111111111111111 u 1� 0p946856200600514T30030030 1 Pacific NW Title Co. I,JerryManeen,Glract®ra}Aseersmant end TRxatlan end E><•�I.1.County OlerkforVhhahington County, Commercial Services Division Oregon,do hereby eertlfy that the within InatN?""t of 111 SW Columbia Ave., #200 wsihng was rceel red end reearded Intha boats at r Portland, T7 ncarda aT acid county. y;1„�y,_.-`qph Portland, OR 97201 Jerry R Hanson,Diirreclor a eouarrtY Glerk t end Taxatlan, EXfARe: Order No. 06280596 i=CDctpUntil a change is requested, all tax statements should be sent to the following address: oola �U Fred W. Fields 1149 SW Davenport M M; — H a Portland, OR 97201 y Ha BARGAIN AND SALE DEED �!Nl F.W.F. Investment Company, a dissolved Oregon corporation, Grantor, conveys to C= Fred W. Fields and H. Suzanne Fields, husband and wife, Grantee, the following described real o property: The real property described on attached Exhibit A(TL 2S11DB-00300 and TL 2S1lDB-00400 in the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 1,T2S, RIW, WK in the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon). BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS,IF ANY,UNDER CHAPTER 1,OREGON LAWS 2005 (BALLOT MEASURE 37(20[14)). THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES,TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES A5 DEFINED IN ORS 30,930 AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS,IF ANY,UNDER CHAPTER 1,OREGON LAWS 2005(BALLOT MEASURE 37(2004)). The true consideration for this conveyance is $10 and other property or other value given or promised. Dated April 13, 2005. F.W.F. Investment Company By red W. Fields President -1- PDXDOCS:1501014.1 � r . State of Oregon ) } ss. County of Multnomah ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April 13, 2006,by Fred W. Fields, president of F.W,F. Investment Company, a dissolved Oregon corporation. Notary Publi f r Oregon My commission expires: p - 3 - OFFICIAL SEAL CHERYL A SCHOEBEL NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.396205 *COMMISSION EXP(RES OCTOBER 23,20D9 -2- PDXD®CS:1501 014.1 Exhibit A PARCEL [: A tract of land in the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 1,Township 2 South, Range 1 West,of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard,County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING at the most Easterly Southeast comer of that certain tract described in Deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530,to Jane Brooks, running thence West along the South Eine of the Brooks Tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel with the most Easterly East line of the said tract described in the said Deed above mentioned, a distance of 271 feet; thence Easterly,parallel with the above mentioned South line of the said Brooks Tract, a distance of 330 feet, to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks Deed above mentioned, thence South along the East line of the said Brooks Tract, a distance of 271 feet, to the place of beginning. PARCEL II: A tract of land in the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard,County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the most Easterly East line of that certain tract described in Deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530 to.lane Brooks, which point is Northerly a distance of 271 feet fro the most Easterly Southeast corner of said Brooks Tract described in the said Deed mentioned above; and running thence Westerly parallel with the South line of the Brooks Tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel with the said most Easterly East line of the said Brooks Tract described in the said Deed above mentioned, to a point in the South line of County Road No.245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks Deed above mentioned;thence South along the said East line of the said Brooks Tract to the place of beginning. Page 5 of Pretiminary Commitment Order Number: 06280596-W PRE-APPLICATION NOTES FOR FIELDS ZONE CHANGE/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT May 13,2014 STAFF PRESENT: Gary Pagenstecher,Lloyd Purdy,Coreg Berry APPLICANT: Christine Mcl,,'elvey/Mackenzie PROPERTY LOCATION: SE Corner of SW Hunziker and Wall Streets. TAX MAP/LOT#'s: 2S101CA TL 100;2S141 TL1100;2S101DB TLs 300/400 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests a zone change and comprehensive plan amendment on approximately 23 acres, from I-P, C-P and R3.5 to R-25 or MUE;minor portion of C-P to I-P. The application is made within the context of a public/private partnership between the Fields Trust and the City to address site slope constraints which make a portion of the site unsuitable for some industrial uses and is based on the February 13,2014 Development Analysis and Opportunity Study,prepared by McI{enzie. COMP PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Industrial Park,Professional Commercial,Low Density Residential ZONING: I-P,C-P,R3.5 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting is required for a quasi-judicial zone change/comprehensive plan amendment. APPLICABLE CRITERIA 18.380.430 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this 'Title and Map A. Quasi-judicial amendments. Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in subsection B of this section.The approval authority shall be as follows: The commission shall make a recommendation to the council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Chapter 18.390. B. Standards for making_quasi-judicial decisions. .A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; (Goal 1, Citizen Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning, 2.1- policies 5, 6, 7, 14, 15, 16; Goal 9, Economic Development, 9.1, policies 3, 5, G, 7, and 12; Goal 10, Housing, 10.2,policies 7 and 8). 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; (18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments; 18.390 Decision Making Procedures);and 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. (COT 2011 Economic Opportunity Analysis/February 13, 2014 Development Analysis and Opportunity Study) C. Conditions of approval.A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial,approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050.. 18.390.050 Type III Procedure A. Preapnlication conference.A preapplication conference is required for all Type III actions. B. Application requirements. 1.Type III applications shall be made on forms provided by the director. 2.Type III applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b.Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in subsection C of this section. The records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. 18.390.060.6. Decision-making considerations. The recommendation by the commission and the decision by the council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; (Goals 1,2, 9, and 10) 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; (Oregon Administrative Rue 660, Division 9, Economic Development) 3.Any applicable METl1.O regulations; (Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan,Title 4 Industrial and other Employment Areas) 4.Any applicable comprehensive plan policies;and (Goal 1, Citizen Involvement; Goal 2,Land Use Planning;and Goal 9, Economic Development Goal 10, Housing) 5. Any applicable provisions of the city's implementing ordinances. (18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments, 18.390 Decision Making Procedures). PROCESS Application for a Type III quasi-judicial zone change/comprehensive plan amendment: two hearings, one before the commission and one before the council. APPLICA'T'ION I'll aS: Comprehensive Plan Amendment: $9,996 Quasi- udicial Lone Change 3,761 Total $13,757 2 APPLICANT'S {QUESTIONS: 1.Verification of the zone change request frorn I-P to R-25 (or MUE) for approximately 23 acres of the site. NNE is a zone which includes employment uses, in addition to multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. Since the city is interested in preserving vacant land for employment uses to the extent possible,the city could support rezoning to MUE. 2. Specific criteria the City would like addressed,ether than those that would be the result of the described Comp Plan/Zone Changes? Goal 2.1,Policy 16,permits the city to condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use and per specific design/development requirements.. Anticipating that the EOA land efficient need scenario will continue to apply and be in deficit given the findings in the Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study,please provide an analysis that addresses the suitability of the upland portion of the site for employment uses other than large-footprint industrial building types.The case for residential use in lieu of employment uses in the proposed MUE will need to be made. 3. Specific traffic concerns that the applicant should be prepared to address, other than those that would be the result of the Comp Plan/Zone Changes? See Development Engineering nates. 4.Wall Street classification/improvements? See Development Engineering notes. Attachments: TDT Rate Calculation Worksheet PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner 3 City of Tigard ■ TDT---COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX Rate Calculation Worksheet APPLICANT DATE MAILING ADDRESS �/ o PREPARED BY CITY/ZIP/PHONES PLANS CHEC �;k&4 moJ TAX MAP# ti C D 1 •�5 PROJECT TITLE 5 o �' -7 SITUS#ADDRESS FORMERUSE(S) U#E CODE UNITS R RATE AMOUNT DESCRIPTION/NOTES ©i111L��5�. 1C�5 i Ire— x - ✓�1�..t��74 r r w TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) ,/ 3SuK�S "!'vTZkILF7Re- 3t j4 J nrC� L,L 5�S`� J �E�175 � .�� JI'h'L•+�fi�N`19►LYS15 PROPOSED USE(S) #E CODE UNITS X RATE TDT AMOUNT DESCRIPTION/NOTES f rt�� f'7 "�'r�jZ - ��7 r iPCP f C30P �E f►(I'�. H i 11� Us i Y2i a9 41!) R Cv o C�+/ rt ►arf]�Div" C--E NtL Z,�)PF7) e zo 30o x Soo A°-A zowxhm- x - TOTAL TDT,PROPOSED USE(S) '�� SIP■�• •F � '�' � $�O/9` LESS TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) — .�.� 3gG,C/2-a TDT INCREASE/(DECREASE) - (INCREASE=TDT DUE) PAYMENT METHOD CASH/CHECK 91/r1■ CREDIT 6,57 BANCROFT AGREEMENT ;W-414-71 ���, /C,/,o/, S 5 {PROMISSORY NOTE] /�}pi;s C `'d'yg .o'y' Kpp � �Qf/,'Yy`I,G!'/L DEFER TO OCCUPANCY D, Z- V/ORS/CD/F0RMSITDT Rate Calculation Worksheet.indd(Rev.4/22/49) PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES )�o DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING � City of Tigard,Oregon Community(Development S A Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax INap[s): 2S101CA, S'll 1K 2S1 010B Tax Lolls): 1041100,300,400 Use Type: Indtl tCam,Beslden[lal These notes were prepared based on information provided by the applicant requesting a Comprehensive Plan/Zone Change. Mentioned improvements and dedications are those typically required. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a prosection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication (required with zone change): The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: SW Hunziker Street 37 feet from centerline of right-of-way. ® SW Wall Street, a designated collector in the Tigard Transportation System Plan, to a full dedicated width of 62 feet. If a new north-south street is constructed away from Wall St, it will need to meet the Local Commercial/Industrial street standard right-of-way width of 50 feet. Street improvements: (Required with development): ® Partial street improvements would be necessary to meet standards along SW Hunziker Street to match adjacent improvements with a pavement half-width of 23 feet, curb, storm drainage, 5' planter strip, street trees, street lights, 8' sidewalk, and other improvements to collector standards. Z Full street improvements would be necessary to meet standards along SW Wall Street. Sidewalk to a 36-foot paved width with 5' planter strip, street trees, street lights, S' sidewalk, and other improvements to collector standards. If the street abuts a rail line that is in use, sidewalk and planter strip may be deleted along the rail side. CITY OF TIGANN "Plication Conderence Nates-Fields Property Page 1015 BauMpmem Emineedni Traffic Analysis Requirements In accordance with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2, land Use Planning, Goal 2.1: In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Pian/Zone Map shall be subject to the following criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation; B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services. A comprehensive traffic analysis is also required by Oregon Administrative Rule 660-012 — the Transportation Planning Rule A traffic study is required for the proposed zone change, and will be required to be confirmed prior to development. These studies will need to be coordinated with and approved by both the City of Tigard and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The actual study area will be determined after the applicant provides detailed and acceptable trip generation and distribution information. It is likely that the study area will include at least Hunziker St, its intersections with Hall Blvd and with 72nd Ave, the whole 72nd Ave/217 interchange area, and other intersections in the area. It is likely that the traffic study will identify capacity deficiencies in the area and will need to identify mitigation measures and/or proportional share contributions to mitigation measures that will need to be constructed and paid before development will be allowed on the subject property. Connectivity: The applicant will be required to construct a street connection through the subject property to SW Varns St. Railroad Issues The applicant will need to obtain approval from ODOT Rail and the owner of the rail line (Portland and Western Railroad) for any new rail crossings or any work affecting a street within 500 feet of a rail crossing. The rail line along the western portion of the subject property is considered by ODOT Rail to be active, and typical railroad requirements and standards apply. 18.730.040 Additional Setback Requirements: This section sets requirements for additional setback distance from roadways. The minimum yard requirement shall be increased in the event a yard abuts a street having a right-of-way width less than required by its functional classification on the city's transportation plan map and, in such case, the setback shall be not less than the setback required by the zone plus one-half of the projected road width as shown on the transportation map. This does not appear to be applicable in this case Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s)to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: CRY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes-Holds Property Page 2of 5 DevelopmentEnoineedno (1.) This does not appear to be applicable in this case Overhead Utility Lines: ® Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, if approved by the City Engineer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is approved, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The existing utilities along SW Hunziker and Wall Streets will be required to be relocated underground as a condition of development. All utilities serving the property shall be placed underground. Sanitary Sewers: The applicant will need to verify adequacy of existing lines to accommodate the proposed development. Contact the City of Tigard Utility Billing Department for connection fees. Sanitary sewer service appears to be available from adjacent streets as shown on attached. The applicant will need to demonstrate adequacy to serve the intended uses of the subject property. The area around Vams Street to the east is without sewer service. The developer will be required per TMC 78.810 to extend the public sewers to Vams Street so that it may be further extended to provide service in that area. Water Supply: The City of Tigard provides public water service in this area. Coordinate with the City of Tigard Public Works Department for information regarding adequate water supply for the proposed development and connection fees. Water service appears to be available from adjacent streets. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District [Contact: John Wolff, 503-259-15041 provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. Provide a plan that shows how the storm drainage system for the site connects to the public system. Storm drainage plan and calculations shall be submitted with the application for it to be considered complete. CFrY OF TIGARD Pre Plicallen conference Notes-Fields Property Page 3 of 5 Ba Mpmem EmineeNns Storm wafer detention is required. Storm wafer detention facilities must be reviewed and approved by the city. Storm water detention calculations shall be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. The stormwater plan and facilities must meet Clean Water Services (CWS) standards. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SIMM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (Resolution and Order No. 07-20) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. Please contact the Building Division for the current fee. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: F] Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ❑ Payment of the fee in-lieu. Water quality treatment is required. Calculations for sizing of water quality treatment facilities must be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. Water quality facilities also must be reviewed and approved by the city. Review and comply with provisions of Chapter 4 Clean Wafer Services Design and Construction Standards (Runoff Treatment and Control). if the applicant can demonstrate that it is practically impossible to provide detention on specific small areas of the site, a fee-in-lieu may be considered for those specific areas. Other Comments. Water quality and detention facility design and construction must be certified by a professional engineer as meeting Clean Water Services requirements. After completion of the construction of these facilities, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city on city-furnished forms for long-term maintenance of the facilities. This agreement will be recorded and city staff will be periodically inspecting the facilities for compliance with the terms of the agreement. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAI[ In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) which was replaced in 2008 by a Transportation Development Tax (TDT} that became effective 711109. The TDT program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TDT incorporates the proposed use of the land and the size of the project. The TDT is calculated, due, and payable at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances payment of the TDT may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TDT exceeds the TDT rate for a single- family home. Pay TDT as required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre Plicalbn Caderence Notes-Fields Property Page 4 of 5 Dump=["EMineerim PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from Development Engineering. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in the Permit Center at City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The PFI permit application shall include any on-site water quality and detention facilities that may be required as part of the land use approval. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. A PF1 permit is required for this project. This permit must be obtained before any work begins on site. Buildinq Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit cannot be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. PREPARED BY: Greg Bend 517114 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER DATE Phone: 15031718-MB E-mail: greg@dgard-or.gov Revised: March 2612 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Applicftn Cenfemnce Notes-Holds Property Rape 5 of 5 DaMpmem Eminearim City of Tigard � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Master Lana Use Application LAND USE APPLICATION TYPE ❑ Adjustment/Variance (II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ® Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development(III) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Land Review(II or III) ❑ Development Code Amendment (IV) ❑ Site Development Review (II) ❑ Downtown Design Review (II,III) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) IZ Zone Change (III) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) NOTE. For required submittal elements,please refer to your pre-application conference notes. PROPOSAL SUMMARY (Brief description) Comprehensive Plan Amendment for approximately 24 acres on the east side of the site from Light: Industrial (IL) , Professional Commercial (CP) , and Low Density Residential (R) to Mixed Use Hmplelymenf=- (MTiE) , and a concurrent zone chartse from Industrial Park (I-P) , Professional Commercial (C-P) , and Low Density Residential (R-3 . 5) to Mixed Use Employment (MUE) . The remaining approximately 18 acres on the west side of the site (facing Wall Street) is proposed to eentinue with industrial Park zening. PROPERTY INFORMATION (where proposed acti-6ty will occur) Location (address if available): Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road & SW Wall Street Tax maps and tax lot #s: 251010001100 , 2S101CA00100, 2S101DB00300, & 2SIOIDBOO400 Total site sire: 42 . 5 acres Xoning classification: I-P, C-P, & R-3 . 5 OR STAFF USE ONLY APPLICANT INFORMATION Name: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust Case \o.: / Mailing address: C/0 Miller Nash, 111 SW 5th Ave #3400 Related Case No.(s): � Gip: Cit}/state: Portland OR 97204 Application Fee: Phone number: (5 0 3) 224-5858 Application accepted: Primary contact name: Kelly Hossaini By: Date: Phone number: (5 0 3) 205-2332 Application determined complete: Email: Kelly.Hossaini@MillerNash.com By: Date: l;\CURPLN\Masters\Land Use Applications Rev.11f2512014 City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • www.tigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 . Page I of 2 PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER INFORMATION (Artach list if more than one) Name: Fred W. Fields Revocable living Trust Mailing address: c/o Miller Nash, 111 SW 5th Ave #3400 City/state: Portland, OR Zip: 97204 Phone: (503) 205-2332 FInail: Kelly.Hossaini@MillerNash.com When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authoriratinn from the owner or an agent of the owner."rhe owners must sign this application In the space provided on the hack of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. THE APPLICANTS) SHALL CERTIFY THAT; • If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and lunitations of the approval. • .1!1 the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith,are true;and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this application, snap be revoked If it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denting the application(s). MDavid Munro, Trustee :'applicant's signature W44W�111- Print name Date .Applica - gent/Representative's signature ]'tint naris Date Al'plicant/:Agent/Representative's signature I)nnt frame Date SIGNATURES of each o`vner of the subject property required David Munro, Trustee Jr wiler'S signatUre I)rtnt narne c to Owner's signature Print narne Date Owner's signature I)ri:lt narne Date Owner's signature Print name Date MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Cite Qf Tigard • 1.3125 S%X'11a11 Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • Nvwv&.tigard-ongov • 5i13-718-2421 • Pacge 2 of 2 ■ City of Tigard Land Use Permit Application APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL SUBMITTALS. ALL ITEMS MUST BE SUBMITTED AT ONE TIME. This form is required to complete your submittal. The applicant must check the box next to the item verif ing that the information is present. Staff will check off the items at intake. Three (3) copies of all materials are required for the initial review process. The balance of the copies will be requested once your submittal is deemed substantially complete. ➢ Each packet must be collated. Plans are required to be a minimum of 24"x 36"or 22"x 34". Plans must be FOLDED,rolled plans are not accepted. Applicant Staff Documents,Copies and Fees Required Completed Master"Land Use Permit"Application with property owner's signature or name of-agent and letter of authorization X Title transfer instrument or ffant deed X Written summary of pwposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval X criteria as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes X Documentary evidence of Neighborhood Meeting: Neighborhood Meeting Affidavits of Posting&Mailin Notice,Minutes,Sign-in Sheets Service Provider Letter X Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2(e) X Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes X Filing Fee see fee schedule Preliminary Sight Distance Certification preliminary Storm Calculations Arborist Report X Traffic Report if Required) X Maps or Plans Plans must be at least 24"x 36" Architectural Drawin s elevations&floorplans) Existing Conditions Ma Landscape Plan Preliminary Gradin /Erosion Control Plan Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan Prelimin2a Utilities Plan Public lrn rovements/Streets Plan Site Development Plan Subdivision Preliminary Plat Ma Topography Ma Trcc Preservation/Mitigation Plan X Vicinity Ma A Once your application has been deemed substantially complete you will be notified by the Planning Division in the form of a completeness letter indicating that you will need to provide the following: Two (2) sets of stamped,addressed#10 envelopes for all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property (the 2 sets must remain separated for the purpose of 2 mailings). Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-siae (#10), addressed with 1"X 4"labels (please see envelope submittal requirements). Property owner mailing lists must be prepared by the City for a minimal fee(please see request for 500'property owner mailing list form). 1:\CURPLN\Masters\Submittal Requirements{:heck Ust.doc (updated:21-january-10) ■ A'' City of Tigard RD Land Use Application Detailed Submittal Checklist TIGA Please read Haus form carefully in conjunction with the notes provided to you at the pre-application conference. This checklist identifies detailed submittal requirements for a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff,a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks. If you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, 503.718.2421. Staff: nate: 1. BASIC INFORMATION Please refer to the"Land use applications basic submittal requirements"checklist for the basic submittal requirements. 2. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS Because of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop,THP FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES WILL BE RhQUIRI?D. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: ❑ Arborist Rcport/Tree Assessment 13 Local Streets Traffic Study ❑ Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area Evaluation ❑ Geotechnical Report ❑ Geotechnical Report must address liquefaction potential and soil bearing capacity ❑ Other 3. PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 10/20/50/100/200') and include a north arrow, legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet. Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 8'/x x 11 format. THE FOLLOWING I5 A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION ICOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (If the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). Vicinity Map Included in narrative z:> Showing the location of the site in relation to: t ,'adjacent properties + Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ ♦ pedestrian ways and bikeways ♦ Transit stops ❑ Utility access City of`J jprd land Usc Application C;hcckhst (I,�C:Uit]']�a'�1Ja:terti�l're-,lpplication C nnCercncc 1'a�ket�l]etailcci tiuUsnattal i;lzecl liwt.dnc�-lJpdatcd 3/35/a3)1'a�c 1 Qf 4 Existing Conditions Map Included in narrative => Parcel boundaries,dimensions and gross area z* Contour lines(Z'intervals for 0-10%slopes or 5'for slopes X10%) => Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands [] => Potential natural hazard areas including: * Floodplain areas ❑ * Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24"of the surface for three or more weeks of the year * Slopes in excess of 25% * Unstable ground * Areas with severe soil erosion potential Q * Areas having severely weak foundation soils * Locations of resource areas including. * Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan * Wetlands => Other site features: * Rock outcroppings * Trees with�!6"caliper measured 4'from ground level Location and type of noise sources Locations of existing structures and their uses =�- Locations of existing utilities and easements Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways =t* Locations of driveways on adjacent properties and across the street Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map Not applicable to this application => 'The proposed name of the subdivision => vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets => Names,addresses and telephone numbers of the owner,developer,engineer surveyor and designer(as applicable) Q => Scale,north arrow and date =� Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided => Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land => Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2'intervals for 0-10%grades and 5'intervals for grades greater than 10% The purpose,location,type and size of all of the following(within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): * Public and private right-of-ways and easements Q * Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines * Domestic crater mains including fire hydrants ❑ a Major power telephone transmission lines(50,000 volts or greater) 0 * Watercourses +► Deed reservations for parks,open spaces,pathways and other land encumbrances * The location of all trees with a diameter G inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ * The location of all structures and the present uses of the structures,and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting Supplemental information including: * Proposed deed restrictions (if any) Q * rl.proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements [� => Existing natural features including rock outcroppings,wetlands and marsh areas The proposed lot configurations,lot sizes and dimensions,and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential,it shall lie indicated upon such lots If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat,it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application materials Q City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklixt (1:\CURT'IaN\Masic-n\Pre-,Npplication Conference Paeket\Detailed Submittal ChecWict.docx-Updated 3/25/13]13are 2 of 4 Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan Not applicable to this application 7:> The owner of the subject parcel ❑ =* The owner's authorized agent [] => The map scale,north arrow and date ❑ => Proposed property lines ❑ => Description of parcel location and boundaries ❑ => Contour lines (2'intervals for slopes 0-10%or T for slopes>100/0) ❑ => Location,width and names of streets,easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ => Location of all permanent buildings on and within 25`of all property lines ❑ => Location and width of all water courses ❑ => Location of any trees with 6"or greater caliper at 4'aboveground level ❑ => All slopes greater than 25% ❑ => Location of existing and proposed utilities and utility easements [] Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ => Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient fixture land division where applicable => Future street extension plan showing;existing and potential street connections ❑ No development proposed with this application Site Development Plan for comprehensive plan amendment zone change The proposed site and surrounding properties E] Contour line intervals F1 The locations,dimensions and proposed names of the following- Existing and platted streets and other public ways ❑ ♦ Easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site ❑ t Alternative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions ❑ => The locations and dimensions of the following.- 0 ollowing:♦ Entrances and exits on the site ❑ Parking and circulation areas ❑ t Loading and service areas ❑ ♦ Pedestrian and bicycle circulation 4 Outdoor common areas ❑ t Above ground utilities ❑ i Trash and recyclable material areas ❑ => The locations„dimensions and setback distances of the following: s Existing permanent structures,improvements,utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25'of the site ❑ t Proposed structures,improvements,utilities and easements on the site ❑ ♦ Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ ♦ Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ t Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ => Locations and type(s)of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques => The locations of the following; All areas to be landscaped Mailboxes ❑ ♦ Structures and their orientation ❑ f its•of"Cigard Land U,ce Application ChcckEst (1:1(;UR1'1,N\Nlastm,\Pre-Apphci t6on Cnnfcrence Packet\l)ctailed Submittal Checkli:t.docx-Updated 3 25/13)l'sigc 3 of 4 Urban Forestry Plan&Landscaping No development proposed with this application for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change => Location of trees to be removed F1 => Location,size and species of existing plant materials ❑ => General location,size and species of proposed plan materials ❑ Landscape narrative that addresses: ♦ Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them s flans for soil treatment such as stockpiling the top soil [� Erosion control measures that will be used => Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable [] 7* Location and size of fences,buffer areas and screening El => Location of terraces,decks,shelters,play areas,and common open spaces No development proposed with this application Public Improvements/Streets Plan for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change =� Proposed tight-of-way locations and widths ❑ => A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips Q => Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision QI No development proposed with this application Grading/Erosion Control Plan for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change The locations and extent to which grading will take place �] => Existing and proposed contour lines => Slope ratios Q No development proposed with this application Utilities Plan for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change => Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitay and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans M z--> Plan of the proposed water distribution system,showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and meter sizes Fire hydrants (existing and proposed) Q z--> Proposed fire protection system No development proposed with this application Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change => The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ => Location,width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways [] => Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines [] Where applicable,location and estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility 0 No development proposed with this application Tree Preservation for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change => Identification of the location,size and species of all existing trees ❑I => Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal Li => A protection program defusing standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ Architectural Drawings No development proposed with this application for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use => Elevation drawings for each elevation of the structure No development proposed with this application Sign Drawings for comprehensive plan amendment & zone change Specify proposed location,size and height Cite of"Tigard Land Use:Application Checklist Conference Packet\Detailed Subm ttal C:hcck6r.docx-Updated 3/25/13)Page 4 of 4 7-2 -� C.- SUPPLEMENTAL FACIO�-T FOR (IDA,TE OF MEETING) f_ SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON (DATE OF EET G) RESOLUTION No. 79—_ 4 ' A gESOLUT101W OF TAE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CREATING A STREET PLUG AT THE WEST END OF S.W. VARNS STREET TO ELIKMTE THROQGH TRAFFIC. WHEREAS, the Tigard City Clnterchanuncil has ebeen placeeatstreetthe plugCitizens the West oend Comi.ttee for the 72nd Avenue E of S.W. tarns Street; and WHEREAS, the Council has also been requested to place signs at the East entrance to S.W. Yarns Street to install signs to prevent through traffic NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL THAT: Section 1: The City of Tigard will create a street plug at the gest end of S.W. Varns Street and will also install signs at the East end of said street, which will prevent through traffic in the Rolling Hills Subdivision. PASSED: itis , _�Y of r, �,,,�.,_� 1979. —Mayor -�` ATTEST: City Recorder t r '`� AMMUTION No. 79,,_f„�, SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR Mayor Cook and members of the Council. (DATE OF MEETING) My name is Ray Pirkl. My wife Marie and I reside at 7745 SW Varns Street. We have lived at this address for 46 years. In 1979 a neighbor and I carried a petition throughout the Rolling Hills Subdivision asking that Varns Street be blocked on the West end which butts up to the Fred Field Trust Land. We carried it in good faith, The council addressed it in good faith and voted unanimously to grant our wish by passing Resolution 79-86. The Resolution was valid contract between Rolling Hills and the City. Now the rules have been changed without any notice to Rolling Hills. The City is now saying there is no longer an agreement between it and Rolling Hills. I was told by a Planning Department employee that it was removed because a new Development Plan made everything in the previous Development Plan invalid including the 50 foot buffer and the street block. I asked why they needed the street to be opened. His reply was, "So we can run the sewer down the Street." Nothing was said at that time about really using it as an access Street to the Fields Property. I told him the neighborhood would do anything needed to allow a sewer line down the middle of Varns St which is going to happen some day anyway but please leave the block in place. We were not notified that all of this was happening until we received material from McKenzie. Later someone came in the middle of the night and placed a sign at the end of Varns. There was hardly any transparency in this project. Now here we are fighting for our way of life in the Rolling Hills Subdivision. And it just shouldn't have to be. I have a rhetorical question to ask which is, "Have any of you actually been to the subdivision to see what we have been talking about?" The Planning Commission at the second meeting stated they indeed did finally visit Rolling Hills. At that meeting one said, " I had no idea it even existed." Another said, "I wouldn't mind living there myself." When you vote, please remember the core Values of the city which include Respect and Care, Do The Right Thing and Get It Done. Please keep the block in place as was promised and which we believe is still a valid agreement.. � 55 Plat You cs r 'c "�- Gm Alm -7- �¢ �4 !-r r•� � ,��, - k Carol Krager From: Joanne Bengtson Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 8:23 AM To: Carol Krager; Norma Alley Subject: FW:Testimony for the Mayor and Tigard City Council members Attachments: Testimony letter Marie to Mayor John Cook &Council 10-10-15.odt;Testimony Mayor Cook and council 10-10-15--Ray 2--send.odt;Testimony to Mayor and Council Husseni comments--send.odt;Testimony--Marie to Cook and Council 10-10-15--send.odt SUppLEMENTAL PACKET FOR -----Original Message----- DATE OF MEETING} From: Ray Pirkl [mailto:rpirkl@frontier.com] cM Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 1:14 PM To: Councilmail Councilmail Subject:Testimony for the Mayor and Tigard City Council members 1.The attachments are testimony or letters to the Mayor and City Council members. regarding the rezoning of the Fred Field's Property on Hunziker and Wall Streets. If you cannot open any, let me know and I can send them in a different format. If you have any questions please call me on my cell 503-502-0137. 2. Please consider this a request for a hearing assistance device for the 10-13-15 council meeting. Sorry for being a pest. DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 10-10-15 Testimony Re: Rezoning of Fred Field's Trust Property Our name is Ray and Rose Marie Pirkl. We reside at 7745 SW Varns St., Tigard, OR 97223 My wife and I had the opportunity to listen to every minute of the recording of the Planning Commission meeting on July 20, 2015. There were several comments made during the meeting that I think are appropriate for the Council to look at now. Comment 1—By Kelly Hossaini—Do not have the exact time she said the following: "No one is disputing that traffic is an issue. Comment 2-79.00 minutes. "'Will Varns be open or will it be closed' "We are not asking that Varns be extended." Comment 3—Kelly Hossaini "I want it to be clear we are not asking that Varns Street be extended through this zone change. The trust is fine with Varns Street remaining closed, so, if the city reaches an agreement with the neighborhood to keep Varns closed the trust is perfectly fine with that." Comment 4—Brent Ahrend-1 28.44—MC KENZIE, Traffic Engineer "With regard to Varns Street not getting extended that's something we're OK with not seeing that road extended as well." His sentence is a bit messed up, but the message is very clear. The last three quotes clearly says the seller and Mackenzie engineer have no problem with keeping Varns Street closed. That begs the question, If the seller has no problem keeping Varns open then why is the Planning Department so adamant to open it? At least the seller is willing to bend some. How about another great idea. Keep Varns closed PERMENENTLY! Please honor the 1979 City Council Resolution. Leave the zoning on the two lots on 76th Street as they are now. Lets keep them low density not MUE. MUE will serve only to commercialize the street and forever be a problem for the neighborhood. I do not know where any Council members live but I feel certain that each one of you either lives in a nice livable neighborhood or wish you did. Knowing that, why would you forever change our livability negatively by opening Varns to through traffic? Leave us be and find another way onto the Field's property I am sure there are other ways. Please direct the Planning Department to find them. Thank you, SUppLEMENTAL PACKET Ray and Rose Marie Pirkl FOR (DAA OF MEETING) Mayor John Cook and members of the City Council send City of Tigard Oregon October 10, 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET My name is Rose Marie Pirkl, FOR �9 �� / 3 I reside at 7745 SW Varns St. Tigard , OR 97223 (DATE OF MEETING) I have lived at this address for forty six years In regards to the Fred Field property could you please tell me why it is more important to appease the people developing this property than it is to look at our neighborhood concerns. I must be tax revenue. Yes, it is an older neighborhood with older houses and older people but we have been paying City of Tigard Taxes and voting long before some of you were born. We also have a safe and great walk-able neighborhood and would like to keep it that way. Please keep all the traffic from the Field's property out of our neighborhood. Do not open Varns West or any other street that goes through our Rolling Hills Subdivision.. Wall and Hunziker do not have even half the traffic that we have on 72na I cannot see any street that is good for that extra traffic but the streets in Rolling Hills including Varns would be the worst. We kept hearing from staff and the Trust Attorney that now wasn't the right time to fight to keep the West end of Varns closed but to wait until later after the property was rezoned and sold. That was terrible advice and would have served only the City, not the Rolling Hills Subdivision.. Getting straight answers from the Planning Department has not always been forthcoming. Then we find out that the City signed a Memorandum of Agreement with the Trammel Crowe Company and had a council workshop on July 16 just 4 days before we attended the Planning Commission meeting on July 20. This is not transparency. What else has been done that we should know about? By the way, 3 times during the Planning Commission meeting the Trust Attorney and the Mackenzie Traffic Engineer said they had no objection to leaving Varns closed. Tom McGuire voiced his loud displeasure with this idea. Maybe the Trust Attorney and MacKenzie saw it as a useless idea as well. Sincerely, Rose Marie Pirkl SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR 0 EL 15, 2-o I's- To sTo Mayor John Cook and Tigard City Council membersfDA' OP MEET K) 41�h da item Regarding the Fred Field's Property Currently Being Planned for Rezoning We are Ray & Rose Marie Pirkl residing at 7745 SW Varns Street, Tigard, OR 97223 We have lived at this address for 46 years. As you know, the Planning Department has brought to the City Council a proposal to make Varns Street a through street to serve the Fred Field's property, particularly the proposed MUE portion of the property. At this time the Planning Department is adamant that Varns will be opened and refuse to look at other possible options. We are in an old but nice subdivision with good livability, that is reasonably safe, well kept up and a place for children and adults alike to enjoy their neighbors and the streets. The Planning Department simply refuses to even tell us why other options will not work. Why not Wall or Hunziker or Tech Center Drive? Why through a neighborhood Street? What is good about that? It seems to be out of place in a City like Tigard and it sure destroys a city goal, at least for Rolling Hills, regarding city walk-ability. The 72nd/Varus/217 Highway Interchange is a disaster already. It is overloaded morning, noon and night. And look out if there has been an accident on either 217 or I5. Then people really go a little crazy. The neighborhood has learned to stay away from the intersection during the rush hours. If Varns is opened and all the extra vehicles try to use the Interchange at the same time as all of those coming off the exit ramp of Highway 217, most of which want to turn left onto 72nd and who believe they have the right of way over those trying to cross 72nd from Varns. The accident report from ODOT shows quite a number of accidents at this intersection and counts only those with damages of $1500. or more yet there are many more with less damage but accidents nevertheless. Enough about the Interchange. It is dangerous and needs less traffic, not more. I don't know what the city is thinking by increasing the danger. From city documents I learned that there is a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Trammel Crowe regarding the IP Fred Field property. To be told there is no buyer only to find out that was a serious non truthful statement is very disconcerting. Yes a Memorandum of Agreement is not a sale, but the document was made in good faith by both parties. To be told one thing by the Planning Department only to find that there is already a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the IP property pretty much says it all. To have a disagreement with the city is one thing but when we get deliberately misled it makes it very hard to believe anything else the city tells us. By the way, on the wall of the Council Chambers there is a sign that says, "City Core Values include Respect and Care, Do The Right Thing and Get it Done." I beg you to remember those Core Values when this issue comes before the City Council. Please keep Varns Street closed PERMANENTLY by honoring the 1979 Council Resolution. Sincerely, Ray Pirkl Carol Krager From: Joanne Bengtson SUPPL: T Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:48 AM FOR To: Carol Krager (DATE: OF MEETING) Subject: FW: October 13th Council Meeting �9?nd2 11-em 6 Attachments: Traffic Impact.pdf; Varns St Resolution.pdf;Two Lots within Rolling Hills.pdf From: Nick and April F [mailto:nickandaprilahotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 6:34 PM To: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail Subject: October 13th Council Meeting Greetings All, My name is Nick Frezza and I have been a resident of the Rolling Hills neighborhood in Tigard for 38 years. At next week's Council Meeting you will be considering a zoning change request for the Fields Trust 42 acre plot of land immediately bordering the Rolling Hills neighborhood to the West. I and my fellow neighbors have been actively involved in opposing this requested zone change. I plan to testify at the upcoming meeting. I am deeply disappointed that I will be limited to two minutes to be heard. That simply is not adequate time to present a compelling argument. Representatives of the Fields Trust have been working with Tigard city planners for well over a year. By contrast, I will have had three minutes in front of the Planning Commission and my upcoming two minutes in front of Council. In consideration of the two-minute time limit for citizen testimony, I have attached three short documents which outline the neighborhood's concerns. Please take a few minutes now to read each document. There are important and substantiated facts that you need to be aware of as you consider the rezoning application. Thank you for your time and attention to this very important matter. Regards, Nick Frezza DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 To: Mayor John Cook From: Nick Frezza Tigard City Council Date: October 6, 2015 The residents of the Rolling Hills neighborhood have repeatedly expressed our serious concerns that the rezoning of two of the parcels included in the Field's Trust application that are located well within Rolling Hills will immediately and permanently commercialize our quiet, walkable, residential community. am referring to lot#'s 2S101 DB00300 and 2S101 DB00400, both of which are located on SW 76ch Ave, immediately North of SW Varns Street. Lot 00300 is currently zoned CP and has always been vacant, lot 00400 is zoned R3.5 and until recently was the site of a single family home. Both lots are deep within our neighborhood and located far away from any other commercial properties. The applicant seeks to have both of these lots rezoned as MUE, a broad classification that allows a myriad of business uses as well as high-density housing. The applicant's desire is of course to make these two lots much more attractive to a wider range of developers. Our grave concern is the negative and permanent effect that introducing businesses or high-density housing will have on our lovely neighborhood. The following statement is drawn from Tigard's Development Code, Chapter 18.510 — Residential Zoning Districts': 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 nonresidential development—schools, churches, parks and recreation facilities, day care centers, neighborhood commercial uses and other services—at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scale. Rezoning lots within Rolling Hills as MUE, if not an outright violation, is clearly inconsistent with the spirit and intent of the Development Code. Creating an MUE zone deep in the neighborhood will forever end the safety, walkability, and relative tranquility of Rolling Hills. Allowing businesses to establish a foothold well within our neighborhood will lead to further encroachment and the eventual and inevitable commercialization of SW Varns Street. Introducing businesses or high-density housing on those two lots will result in a dramatic increase in the number of daily car trips on SW Varns, SW 76th and SW Cherry, the local streets that provide access to the subject lots. Every day, year-round, there are dozens of people walking in the neighborhood. Residents take their daily walks and employees from nearby businesses walk the neighborhood on breaks and lunch. A dramatic increase in traffic will effectively end the safe walkability on those streets which are at the heart of our neighborhood. Please visit the neighborhood, spend a half-hour here and see for yourself what I'm describing. Rezoning the two aforementioned lots as MUE is the wrong answer. In adherence with Development Code Chapter 18.510, the residents of Rolling Hills request that these two lots be zoned as purely residential with a density no greater than R-7. SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR `r. " f ING) http://www.tigard-or.goy/DevelopmentCode/18510 (DATE OF MEETING)A Cn d, 5 To: Mayor John Cook From: Nick Frezza Tigard City Council Date: October 6, 2015 The residents of the Rolling Hills neighborhood have repeatedly expressed our serious concerns that the rezoning of the Field's Trust property will lead to an eventual "unplugging' of SW Varns Street, a residential "local" street that has never been a through-street and was never intended to be a through-street. We anticipate this happening because Gary Pagenstecher and Tom McGuire made it abundantly clear at the PC hearing on 7/20/15 that they would not commit to such an arrangement. Punching through Varns Street will immediately commercialize our quiet neighborhood, introducing dramatically increased traffic and effectively ending the safe "walkability"' along Varns and its connecting streets within the neighborhood, SW 76th and SW Cherry. Research has revealed the following facts: • City of Tigard Resolution No. 79-862, dated August 13, 1979, specifically states: o "The City of Tigard will create a street plug at the West end of S.W. Varns Street... in the Rolling Hills Subdivision." • Opening up Varns Street is inconsistent with the City of Tigard's 2035 Transportation System Plan. o Nowhere within that 699 page document is opening up Varns identified as a project. o All the maps in the 2035 CoT TSP show Varns Street in its current "plugged" configuration as a local street. No map in the document, current or future, shows Varns as a through- street. • The TSP consistently identifies Varns as a "Local Street". Further, the TSP states "Through traffic on local streets is discouraged by design". • The applicant is not requesting that Varns be opened up. o At the July 20th Planning Commission Hearing, Kelly Hossaini, attorney for the applicant stated on record, "I want it to be clear we are not asking that Varns Street be extended through this zone change. The Trust is fine with Varns Street remaining closed, so, if the city reaches an agreement with the neighborhood to keep Varns closed the Trust is perfectly fine with that." o Tigard Planning Commissioner Matt Muldoon commented, "The Trust is comfortable with Varns Street remaining closed. Would (the Trust) be comfortable with a condition of approval tonight?" o In reply, Kelly Hossaini stated, "We would be comfortable with a condition of approval tonight." o Brent Ahrend, MacKenzie Traffic Engineer later added, "With regard to Varns Street not getting extended that's something we're okay with not seeing that road extended as well." • During a phone conversation earlier this month with an ODOT Engineer discussing the likelihood of Varns being made a through street if the zone change was approved, he indicated that ODOT would have a huge problem with that plan, citing the additional traffic load it would put on the 217 /72nd Ave /Varns Street interchange. SUPPLEMENTPACKET FOR (DATE O� MEETING)!� 6 Referring to Tigard's goal of being the"most walkable city in the NW". -49 en Q 2 A copy of which was submitted to the record at the PC hearing on 7/20/2015 To summarize: The residents of Rolling Hills are resolutely opposed to opening up Varns Street to through traffic. There is a City of Tigard Resolution on record declaring that Varns Street be plugged. The City of Tigard's 2035 Transportation Study Plan does not include any reference to making Varns a through street. The applicant has repeatedly stated that they are "fine with Varns Street remaining closed". r Planning Commission Muldoon proposed keeping Varns closed as a condition of the proposed zone change. And finally, ODOT has stated they would have a huge problem with making Varns a through street. There is a long-standing Resolution closing Varns Street, no existing formal plan to open it, and overwhelming support for keeping Varns closed to through traffic. The residents of Rolling Hills request that the City of Tigard Resolution No. 79-86 remain in force, now and in the future, thereby keeping Varns closed to through traffic. To: Mayor John Cook From: Nick Frezza Tigard City Council Date: October 6, 2015 The residents of the Rolling Hills neighborhood have repeatedly expressed our serious concerns regarding the proposed Field's Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change Request. Specifically, we are concerned with the very real and significant negative consequences the changes will affect in additional traffic congestion, decreased safety, and diminished livability. The proposed zone change anticipates adding 7,939 to 10,493' more trips per day. If you live, work, or are forced to travel through the Hunziker, 72"d Ave, Highway 217 interchange area during the PM peak commute, you know that the traffic congestion is often horrendous. This very problem is the subject of a 2012 Project Application submitted by Tigard to ODOT2, wherein Tigard proposed a $900,000 conceptual design study be conducted to find ways to resolve the traffic problems in the area of the 72nd Ave Interchange. Here are several pertinent excerpts pulled directly from that application (highlighting added): • Traffic volumes exceed capacity at multiple locations in the interchange area, including the ramp terminals, and are nearing capacity at other intersections along 72nd Avenue. • Crashes occur frequently in the interchange area. A lack of adequate facilities hampers walking and cycling. • The Tigard Triangle (north of 217) is planned as a high-density employment area, but is largely undeveloped due to traffic problems and the high cost companies would need to pay to resolve them, meaning bad traffic at this interchange is keeping thousands of jobs from coming to this area. • The hundreds of companies in the 72nd Ave area truck in significant amounts of raw materials and truck out significant amounts of finished products. Truckers are hindered by the many curves and corners, tight spaces, confusing configuration and poor traffic flow in this interchange area. Improving this interchange area will open another door for business in this part of Oregon. • Congestion delays occur at various times throughout the day, affecting freight haulers' schedules. • The lack of sidewalks, bike lanes and transit stop facilities in the interchange area keeps people from walking or cycling, or riding the bus through this area, further adding to the traffic volume. • However, due to traffic problems in this area and at other locations along state highways, there is very little available capacity for trips to and from new employers in the Tigard Triangle and much of this area is undeveloped or underdeveloped. • Traffic congestion in this interchange area results in hundreds of additional hours of vehicles idling per day, with resulting vehicle emissions and their resultant effects on air, energy and greenhouse gas goals • The high crash rate and regular delays (and resulting driver stress) in the interchange area have significant negative impacts on the livability of those who travel through it. SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR 004 f 1.1 ad ls- Mackenzie, May 11, 2015 (DATE OF MEETING) 2 Submitted to the record, July 20, 2015, Tigard PC Hearing Link: htti)://www.ore4on.aov/ODOT/HWY/REGION1/STIP/Tigard 0R217(a)72ndAve Pdf encourage you to read in its entirety Tigard's Project Application to ODOT. That application makes it abundantly clear that a full and complete traffic study is required and must be conducted before any zoning change is approved. That need was recognized and formalized by Tigard Planning staff in 2012. To ignore this immediate need, approve the zone change, and subsequently require a future developer to do the study is negligent and represents a great disservice to the current residents and businesses in the subject area. At the Planning Commission Hearing on July 20th, the applicant and city planning staff were quick to point out that there is no difference between the trips generated by full development under the current zoning versus full development under the proposed zoning. I understand that this "worst case" comparison is all that is required of the applicant at this stage. However, that comparison completely ignores the reality that, "Traffic volumes exceed capacity at multiple locations in the interchange area s3. Adding one more daily trip to a system that is over capacity makes it worse; to consider adding 7,939 to 10,4934 more trips per day is irresponsible. The application states, "trip generation with the proposed zone change does not impose a significant effect on the transportation network". Nothing could be further from the truth. A trip-cap has been added to the application as a condition to mitigate additional traffic. Trip- caps, although recognized, are largely ineffective. They are a highly theoretical calculation based on a number of variables, all of which are projected based on planned usage and all are subject to change at any time during the life of a building or development. Who will enforce the trip-cap? Does the City of Tigard have the excess administrative resources to do so? It is unlikely, as the City is currently operating on a four-day workweek to cut costs. The reality is, a trip-cap is meaningless as a method to control additional traffic. At best, it's an empty promise. Traffic in the area of 72"d and Hunziker is already terrible; your own traffic engineer has stated that "traffic volumes exceed capacity3s. Traffic congestion has most certainly gotten worse since he made those statements in 2012. Do the right thing. Don't ignore the established facts. Don't approve a zoning change will add thousands of trips per day to area that is already beyond its capacity. 3 Tigard's 2012 Project Application to ODOT 4 Mackenzie, May 11, 2015 Carol Krager From: Joanne Bengtson Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:39 AM To: Carol Krager Subject: FW: Fields Trust Property& Rolling Hills Neighborhood SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR 0,-/- 1-?a61s- From: Tom McGuire (DAT198F METING) Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 4:27 PM To: Joanne Bengtson Subject: RE: Fields Trust Property& Rolling Hills Neighborhood The public hearing on the zone change is at Council on Oct. 13. Tom From: Joanne Bengtson Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 3:36 PM To: Tom McGuire Subject: FW: Fields Trust Property & Rolling Hills Neighborhood Hi Tom, Has there been activity on this site that would trigger more correspondence to Council? Joanne From: geodeetig@aol.com Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 1:17:43 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US &Canada) To: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail Subject: Fields Trust Property & Rolling Hills Neighborhood October 1, 2015 Dear Sir: Just a reminder that it is in Tigard's best interest to keep our livable Rolling Hills neighborhood livable. "Livability' is the essence of a good town or city. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- 7665 SW Fir Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 July 27, 2015 i Dear Sir or Madam: Traffic on Varns Street must be limited. It is already too busy for its intended purpose as a neighborhood street. The interchange at Varns Street, 72nd Avenue, and the 217 ON/OFF ramp is already a significant traffic problem. (I believe Tigard and ODOT officials have already admitted that to be the case.) strongly urge you to continue (or re-instate) a 'plug' at the west end of SW Varns Street and to continue Lot 2S101 DB0400 as a 'low density residential' zone. No matter how Lot 2S101 DB0300 is to be zoned, I strongly urge you to require that its generated and significantly increased vehicular traffic be kept off SW Varns Street. Access and exit from that area should be required to be via SW Hunziker Road and/or SW Wall Street. Since the applicant has already agreed to a 50 foot buffer between their property and the Rolling Hills neighborhood, I ask that you require the buffer be extended to include the area between Lot 2S100DB0400 and the Fields Trust property. Sincerely, George D. Guthrie P.S. I bought our lot in 1962. We had our house built there in 1963. We chose this area because it was very 'livable'. Tigard needs to keep as 'livable' as many of its neighborhoods as it can. DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 2 Carol Krager From: Joanne Bengtson Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:38 AM To: Carol Krager SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET Subject: FW: Council Meeting 10-13-2015 FOR _z24� �o/S (DATE OF MEETING) ��In�✓�- l fcm ,� From: John &Beth Bishop [mailto:jcbandbhbCabcomcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 9:43 AM To: Councilmail Councilmail Subject: Council Meeting 10-13-2015 On October 13 you will be acting on a zone change request from the Fred Fields Estate asking that the abutting property to Rolling Hills be designated WE. My wife Beth and I, as well as our neighbors have actively voiced our concerns about how the property is developed,particularly regarding the buffer previously granted, but later rescinded, and the dead ending of Varns Street previously granted in a 1979 resolution. The Planning Commission approved the MUE subject to the 50"buffer but did not act on dead-ending Varns. We are told closing Varns is premature because there is no specific development plan in connection with the zone change request and admonished to keep our requests within a legal framework and factual. We wish to concentrate on the factual concerning the ramification of opening Varns as access to any development on the property. Fact 1. Varns feeds into the 72nd intersection servicing the on and off ramps of Hwy 217 which in turn feeds the intersection of I-5 and 217. This is one of the most congested bottlenecks in the Metro area. Adding more traffic here makes no sense. Fact 2. There is no current traffic study reflecting current conditions. Traffic generators like Walmart have come on line since last studies. Fact 3. A project to access the site by connecting Wall Street to SW Tech center is already underway so while that will still create congestion at its 72nd intersection it is a lesser impact when compared to the Varns intersection. Fact 4. Any development whether Apartments, Offices or Commercial development will generate traffic at peak times on this already overloaded infrastructure. Beth&I ask that you honor the 1979 resolution dead-ending Varns, approve the 50' buffer passed by the Planning Commission and pursue infrastructure solutions to an already overstressed traffic system. Taking these actions is not premature; rather it is a rational response to the situation that already exists. We invite you to drive through our neighborhood so you can appreciate the impact this will have on the citizens of this long-established neighborhood and understand the cramped configuration of the Varns-72nd-Hwy 217- Hunziker intersections. A prior commitment means we cannot attend to meeting on the 13th but we join our neighbors in our concern and continued involvement. Respectfully, i John& Beth Bishop DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." z AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: October 13, 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR /9 r f % f ,-2U/s- (DATE OF MOETING) PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: FIELDS TRUST PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2015-00004 ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2015-00005 REQUEST: The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres.of MUE. LOCATION: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road & SW Wall Street;WCTM and Tax Lots 2S1010001100, 2S101CA00100, 2S101DB00300, and 2S101DB00400. ZONE I-P: Industrial Park; C-P: Professional Commercial; R-3.5: Low-Density Residential. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.380, 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, 2,9 and 10; Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 9; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9 and 10; and Metro Title 4. Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: October 13, 2015 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent—(Speaking In Favor Opponent— S eakin A mnst Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. 11 ao 7 d-1 D OX 9 5-q_30- fig CD3 - 731 - Y7s3 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. � ke.. f&t L w� '�„�(t U�l l Se�� v► Name,Address&Phone No. Name,AddressPhone No. Name,Address&Phone No. -7 q gc> Sw JAS S 'Z-L 5��A Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. 13a�s Sw -7 btu jq%)-e- Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.re 13a737Sw76-d, I�J arc- IDA- -j-=' xo --S 6 a l Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. a- f, lel 17 H Tr- T1 �a7;( a� L3OY�y Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: October 13, 2015 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent—LSpeaking In Favor Opponent— S eakin A airnst Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&PhoJe4oName,Address&Phone No. -S-" Penn �4&r "11w SW v -Tk�wl Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. �amd A-bbliO X100�sw ch�r�y�vr vd ote t,-n 2.23 503.6P�-l 45& Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. 7430 5w Jar s S� -Tq-4. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. T f� 503- Name,Address&Phone No. Nalpe,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. � ,,,j� � 75-70 Cr,c� C/7 22 S-03 685 Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Due to time Constraints City Council May Impose a Time Limit on Testimony WRITTEN TESTIMONY SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET Tigard City Council FOR /0 - /3 Pd Ca- Tuesday, October 13, 2015 (DATE OF MEETIN?) 0,wa, 11-em Re: Fields Trust Plan Amendment and Zone Change Good Evening Mayor Cook and Councilors. Thank you for this opportunity to testify regarding the rezoning of the Fields Trust site. My name is Jon Makler, I am the Region 1 Planning Manager for the Oregon Department of Transportation, I am here tonight because of ODOT's concern regarding safety at the 217 interchange for 72°a Avenue. We want to be sure our agencies have the opportunity to mitigate the risk posed by future increases in traffic. The Oregon Department of Transportation recommends that the Tigard City Council amend Condition of Approval#3 to include the phrase, "for the purposes of build-year and future-year analysis when development is proposed"at the end of the first sentence. ODOT recommended this requirement in its written testimony to the Planning Commission (8/10/15) and the Commission noted(8/17/15 minutes) its desire that such work be borne by the applicant rather than by the City. ODOT is fine with this approach as long as it is stated in the Conditions of Approval. ODOT and Tigard agreed to employ a"trip cap" for this rezoning, which has the benefit of streamlining the development review process. However, Tigard staff has endorsed a cap that exceeds ODOT's tolerance. In ODOT's view,the excess trips represent a risk to nearby facilities, especially in terms of safety. The value of the future-year analysis is that it will allow the City and ODOT to identify when and where development on this site imposes safety or mobility problems on nearby facilities. This will provide a rational basis on which the City can negotiate with the developer for mitigation, which the Commission noted worked previously in the case of Walmart. At no cost to the city,this condition leaves options on the table to ensure safety on the roads. Jon Makler, AICP Region 1 Planning Manager Oregon Department of Transportation Jon.maklergodot.state.or.us (503) 731 —4753 AIS-2316 7. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Prepared For: Carissa Collins Submitted By: Carissa Collins,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Resolution Business Public Hearing- Informational Meeting- Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication 09/30/2015 Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE A first quarter supplemental amendment to the FY 2016 Adopted Budget is being requested. The purpose of the supplemental is to account for revenues and expenses that were unknown at the time of budget adoption. The amendment includes requested budget ad)ustments in city operations and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve the FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The following is a list of items that require council action for the FY 2016 budget: City Operations Community Development •Lighter.Quicker, Cheaper Project- A request in the amount of$6,000 is needed to pay for work that created an overlook destination in the Tigard Triangle within the existing excess right-of-way at Dartmouth and 68th to capture a westward view over the city,including access paths,benches, landscaping, and signage. Central Services •Payroll Allocation—A change in the allocation of payroll for the Director's position is required in order to reflect the actual span of duties resulting from the transfer of Fleet Maintenance and Property Management from Public Works to Central Services. This request will reduce the General Fund and Central Services Fund contributions by 10% each for a total of$13,679. Fleet and Property Management Fund's allocation will increase by 20% or$13,679. •City Facilities—A request will carry forward a total of$30,000 to be used for the purchase of benches at City Hall and Public Works for$20,000. In addition, $10,000 is requested to pay for the installation of flooring at the Senior Center. Finance & Information Services •Citywide Phone System—A requested carry forward totaling$205,000 is needed to purchase a citywide phone system including hardware as well as the maintenance contract. •Parks Utility Charge—A total of$60,000 is being requested to hire a consultant to conduct a cost of rates study for development of a parks utility fee. Police •Grants/Donations—The most recent State Farm grant of$10,000 was awarded in May 2015 in order to support driver safety education and to purchase additional video / kiosk displays. These funds will support the creation of the video. A total of$5,000 of the award will be used to purchase and install an electronic display in the Police lobby. In addition,a total of$1,893 of donated funds are remaining from a Tigard Rotary fund raiser with proceeds to be used for special training and additional equipment for the city's second police dog Diesel. Total requested carry forward is $11,893. •P25 Compliant Radios —A total of$10,000 is being recognized from the sale of 10 portable radios that were in surplus and sold to the Washington County Sheriffs Office. The proceeds will be used to purchase two additional P25 compliant radios to work toward the city's goal of replacing the entire inventory by the end of 2018. •Tasers—A request totaling$41,132 is required to replace 60 Taser Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEWs) that have reached the end of their useful lives. In addition, support had decreased due to the manufacturer's support of their newer models. Public Works •Wetland Mitigation Purchase—A total of$57,750 of Gas Tax funds is being requested to pay for the wetland mitigation site at Hall/Wall St.This site has been found non-compliant by Dept. of State Lands. The purchase of.33 acres of mitigation bank credits is determined the least expensive option available to meet wetland mitigation requirements. The purchase must be made by November 2015. The other option available was to develop a new restoration plan for the site,implement the plan,monitor the site for a minimum of 3 (possibly 5) years, and hope to pass. •Intergovernmental Agreement: Erosion Control—This request in the amount of$80,000 is for ongoing general fund appropriations to pay for erosion control inspections provided by Clean Water Services. The City of Tigard has entered into an IGA with Clean Water Services to provide inspections at an estimated cost of$50,000 to$80,000,and will be funded with permit revenues. IGA was approved by council on 8/18/2015. *Tigard St. Trail LQC—A request to carryover a total of$35,000 is needed to pay for the completion of the Tigard Street Trail. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) •River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan Implementation—A requested carry forward in the amount of $62,000 is needed for the implementation of the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan including the development of the plan document. •Walnut Street (116th/Tiedeman)—A carry forward totaling$85,000 is needed to pay for utility work and staff time for this project that is in partnership with Washington County. The project was delayed due to a schedule change by the county. •95th Avenue/North Dakota Sidewalk—On May 19, 2015,city council amended the Community Development Block Grant with Washington County to fill sidewalk gaps and provide curbing and drainage improvements to be funded with a carryover amount of$187,000. •North Dakota Bridge Repair—A total of$70,000 is required to pay for the emergency repairs of the North Dakota Bridge and construction of a new walkway. •I-Iunziker Industrial Core—Upon recommendation of the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee, this new request in the amount of$200,000 will be used to support the initial design of Wall/Tech m Center Drive project and applying for federal grant funding. The City Gas Tax Fund will be reimbursed in full by the proceeds from the$1.5 million state grant that was awarded in July 2015. •72nd Avenue/Dartmouth—A carryover totaling$10,000 is required to finalize payment of the legal fees associated with the four Martin Properties that went through an extensive federal process for acquisition. •Downtown Land Acquisition—A carry forward in the amount of$515,000 is required to pay for the acquisition of the Saxony property that occurred on July 9,2015. •Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership-An additional appropriation of$6.66 million is required to pay for Tigard's share of the partnership that was delayed during the prior fiscal year.This request does not change the total cost of the project,just the timing of the expenditures. Non Budgetary Impact Items •Dirksen Nature Park—Design and construction funding has been reduced in FY 2016 and reallocated to FY 2017. •Park Land Acquisition—The purchase of the Lasich property is programmed for three years beginning in FY 2017. •Fanno Creek Remeander—The request moves $336,628 from Parks Bond to Parks Capital to reflect the actual location of the appropriation. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS,POLICIES, MASTER PLANS 2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be 3.Adopt Tigard Triangle Strategic Plan and Enable Future Development Capacity 4. Enable Groundbreaking in River Terrace by Summer 2015 DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION None Fiscal Impact Cost: $12,514,713 Budgeted (yes or no): No Where Budgeted (department/program): All Programs Additional Fiscal Notes: The total impact of this amendment will increase the FY 2016 Adopted Budget by$12,514,713. Although the supplemental consists of increased requirements,they are partially offset by additional resources.These resources include transfers,contingency,and beginning fund balances . The remainder of the requests are offset by use of Reserve for Future Expenditures,primarily the use of water bond proceeds for the LO/Tigard Water Partnership. Exhibits A,and B contain the details of each budgetary item to the impacted funds) and the capital projects. Exhibit C summarizes the items by fund for all city funds, Attachments Resolution Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C CITY OF TIGAR.D, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE FY 2016 ADOPTED BUDGET TO ACHIEVE THE FOLLOWING: RECOGNITION OF GRANT REVENUES AND EXPENSES ALONG WITH BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS IN PUBLIC WORKS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, POLICY & ADMINISTRATION,COMMUNITY SERVICES,AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the city acknowledges those items that were unknown at the time the FY 2016 Budget was adopted;and WHEREAS, the city recognizes approximately $12.5 million of unanticipated requirements in operations and the capital improvement program;and WHEREAS, the city acknowledges that the increase in unanticipated requirements is offset by transfers, and carryforward of funds from the prior fiscal year as well as approximately $6.66 million from reserve for future expenditure. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The FY 2015-16 Budget is hereby amended as detailed in Exhibits A and B. SECTION This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2015. Mayor- City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder- City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 15- Page 1 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET Exhibit A FOR G AMENDED Q1CD01. LQC-Dartmouth Overlook (DATE OF MEETING) Creation of an overlook destination in the Tigard Triangle with the existing right-of-way at Dartmouth and 68th to capture a westward view of the city. This action will show a decrease in General Fund contingency of$6,000 with an equal increase in Community Development program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes $ 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ _ S "Transfers In from Other Funds $ $ Total Resources, $ 41;795;903 $ - $_ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 6,000 $ 4,043,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public\Y,'orks $ 4,118,322 $ 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 6,000 $ 31,292,017 Debt Service $ $ Loans S $ Work-In-Progress $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 S (6 000) $ 1,114,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795;903 $ $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS01.Payroll Allocation-Director A request to change the salary allocation of the Central Service Director's position is needed to reflect the divisions that report to this position as a result of the reorganization of the City Management. With this request,the salary and benefit split will be 40%Court,20%City Recorder/Records, 20%Design&Communications,and 20%Fleet&Property Management. This action will show a decrease in Policy&Administration's program expenditures by S6,840 in General Fund,as well as a decrease of$6,840 in Policy&Administration's program expenses within the Central Services Fund.Reserve for Future Expenditures will increase by the same amounts in both funds. In turn,this action will show a decrease of S13,679 in Fleet&Property Management contingency with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenditures. Fund 1 of 3 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property'faxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 $ 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 $ 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S (6,840) S 892,662 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ (6,840) $ 31,279,177 Debt Service S - S - Loans S S Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ (6,840) $ 35,834,113 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ 6,840 $ 5,961,790 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS01.Payroll Allocation-Director A request to change the salary allocation of the Central Service Directors position is needed to reflect the divisions that report to this position as a result of the reorganization of the City Management. With this request,the salary and benefit split will be 40%Court,20%City Recorder/Records, 20%Design&Communications,and 20%Fleet&Property Management. This action will show a decrease in Policy&Administration's program expenditures by$6,840 in General Fund,as well as a decrease of$6,840 in Policy&Administration's program expenses within the Central Services Fund.Reserve for Future Expenditures will increase by the same amounts in both funds. In turn,this action will show a decrease of$13,679 in Fleet&Property Management contingency with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenditures. Fund 2 of 3 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 182,372 Property Taxes $ - $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 33,872 $ 33,872 Intergovernmental $ - S _ Charges for Services $ 6,986,481 S 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings S 22,593 $ 22,593 Miscellaneous S 19,900 S 19,900 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds $ 698,824 S 698,824 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ 5 7,944,042 Requirements Community Development $ - S Community Services $ - S - Policy and Administration $ 7,591,137 $ (6,840) S 7,584,297 Public Works $ - S _ __ Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ (6,840) $ 7,584,297 Debt Service $ - S _ Loans S $ Work-In-Progress S $ Transfers to Other Funds S $ - Contingency $ 150,000 S 150,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ (6,840) $ 7,734,297 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ 6,840 $ 209,745 Total Requirements $ 7,944,042 $ - $ 7,944,042 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS01.Payroll Allocation-Director A request to change the salary allocation of the Central Service Director's position is needed to reflect the divisions that report to this position as a result of the reorganization of the City Management. With this request,the salary and benefit split will be 40%Court,20%City Recorder/Records, 20%Design&Communications,and 20%Fleet&Property Management. This action will show a decrease in Policy&Administration's program expenditures by 56,840 in General Fund,as well as a decrease of$6,840 in Policy&Administration's program expenses within the Central Services Fund.Reserve for Future Expenditures will increase by the same amounts in both funds. In turn,this action will show a decrease of 513,679 in Fleet&Property Management contingency with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenditures. Fund 3 of 3 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Fleet/Property Management Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 113,138 $ 113,138 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - S Licenses&Permits S S Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 1,783,024 S 1,783,024 Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings S - S - Miscellaneous S 29,686 S 29,686 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 19,647 S 19,647 Total Resources $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,945,495 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S - $ - Policy and Administration $ 1,852,362 S 13,680 S 1,866,042 Public Works S - S - Program Expenditures Total $ 1,852,362 $ 13,680 $ 1,866,042 Debt Service $ - S Loans $ S Work-In-Progress S S Transfers to Other Funds S - S - Contingency S 75,000 S (13,680) S 61,320 Total Budget $ 1,927,362 $ - $ 1,927,362 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 18,133 $ - $ 18,133 Total Requirements $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,945,495 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1CS02. City Facilities-Carryforward This request will carry forward a total of$30,000 to be used for the purchase of benches at City Hall for $20,000,and$10,000 to pap for the installation of flooring at the Senior Center. This action will result in a decrease in contingency in the Fleet/Property Management Fund by$30,000 with an increase in Property Management program expenses. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Fleet/Property Management Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 113,138 $ 113,138 Property Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees $ $ Licenses&Permits $ $ Intergovernmental $ - S - Charges for Services $ 1,783,024 $ 1,783,024 Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings S - $ - Miscellaneous S 29,686 $ 29,686 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 19.617 S 19,647 Total Resources $ 1,945,495 $ $ 1,945,495 Requirements Community Development S - $ - Community Services $ - $ - Policy and Administration $ 1,852,362 S 30,000 $ 1,882,362 Public Works S - S - Program Expenditures Total $ 1,852,362 $ 30,000 $ 1,882,362 Debt Service S S - Loans S - $ Work-In-Progress S $ - Transfers to Other Funds S - S Contingence S 75,000 S (30,000) S 45,000 Total Budget $ 1,927,362 $ - $ 1,927,362 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 18,133 $ - $ 18,133 Total Requirements $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,945,495 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1FS01. Citywide Phone System-Carryforward This request will carryforward a total of$205,000 to be used for the purchase of a citywide phone system including hardware and maintenance contract. This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance in the Central Services Fund by$205,000 with an equal increase in Policy and Administration program expenses. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 205,000 $ 387,372 Property-Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees $ - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 33,872 $ 33,872 Intergovernmental $ - $ - Charges for Services S 6,986,481 $ 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures 5 - S - Interest Earnings $ 22,593 S 22,593 Miscellaneous $ 19,900 $ 19,900 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds $ 698,824 5 698,824 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ 205,000 $ 8,149,042 Requirements Community-Development $ - $ - Community Services S - $ - Policy and Administration S 7,591,137 S 205,000 $ 7,796,137 Public Works $ - $ - Frogram Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ 205,000 $ 7,796,137 Debt Service $ - S - Loans $ $ Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ - $ - Contimgency S 150,000 $ 150,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ 205,000 $ 75946,137 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ - $ 202,905 Total Requirements $ 7,944,042 $ 205,000 $ 8,149,042 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QIFS02. Park Utility Fund Fee-Carryforward A carryforward is requested to hire a consultant to conduct a cost of rates study for development of a parks utility fee.This will result in an increase in beginning fund balance by$35,000 in General Fund and an increase in transfers out.Central Services Fund contingency will decrease by$25,000.Program expenditures in Policy and Administration will increase by a total of 560,000. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 35,000 $ 10,744,593 Property'Faxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Dees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Fsarnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous 5 56,432 S 56,432 Other financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 35,000 $ 41,830,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ - $ 31,286,017 Debt Service S - S - Loans S S Work-In-Progress S - S _ Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 35,000 S 3,469,936 Contin};eney $ 1,120,000 $ 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 35,000 $ 35,875,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 35,000 $ 41,830,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1FS02. Park Utility Fund Fee-Carryforward A carryforward is requested to hire a consultant to conduct a cost of rates study for development of a parks utility fee.This will result in an increase in beginning fund balance by$35,000 in General Fund and an increase in transfers out.Central Services Fund contingency will decrease by$25,000.Program expenditures in Policy and Administration will increase by a total of$60,000. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 182,372 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - S - Licenses&Permits $ 33,872 S 33,872 Intergovernmental S - $ - Charges for Services $ 6,986,481 S 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings $ 22,593 S 22,593 Miscellaneous S 19,900 $ 19,900 Other Financing Sources S - S - ,rransfers In from Other Funds S 698,824 S 35,000 S 733,814 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ 35,000 $ 7,979,042 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S - $ - Policy and Administration S 7,591,137 S 60,000 S 7,651,137 Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ 60,000 $ 7,651,137 Debt Service S S - Loans $ - S Work-In-Progress $ S Transfers to Other Funds S - S Contingency $ 150,000 S (25,000) $ 125,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ 35,000 $ 7,776,137 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ - $ 202,905 Total Requirements $ 7,944,042 $ 35,000 $ 7,979,042 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PD01. State Farm Teen Driver Safety Video&Tigard Rotary Donation-Carryforward The most recent State Farm grant of$10,000 was awarded in May 2015 and was awarded to support driver safety education and to purchase additional video/kiosk displays.These funds will support the creation of the video.A total of 55,000 of the award will be used to purchase and install an electronic display in the Police lobby.In addition,a total of$1,893 of donated funds are remaining from a fund raiser with proceeds going to special training and additional equipment for the city's second police dog Diesel. This action will show an increase in General Fund intergovernmental revenue by$11,893 with an equal increase in Community Services program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property faxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 10,000 S 5,432,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 1,893 S 3,039,908 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings $ 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 11,893 $ 41,807,796 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 $ 4,037,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 S 11,893 S 22,242,907 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 11,893 $ 31,297,910 Debt Service $ - S - Loans S - S Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $35,840,953 $ 11,893 $ 35,852,846 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 11,893 $ 41,807,796 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QlPD02.P25 Compliant Portable Radios After declaring 10 portable radios as'surplus',the PD sold them to the Washington County Sheriffs Office.With the sale of the 10 older radios,the PD intends to purchase two(2)additional P25 compliant radios to work toward our goal of replacing our entire inventory by the end of 2018. As a result,General Fund intergovernmental revenues will increase by 510,000 with an equal increase in Police program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 10,000 S 5,432,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 10,000 $ 41,805,90-` Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 10,000 S 22,241,014 Polic3 and Administration S 899,502 $ 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 $ 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 10,000 $ 31,296,017 Debt Service S - S - Loans S S Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 10,000 $ 35,850,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 10,000 $ 41,805,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PD03.Taser Upgrade The department is proposing to replace 60 Taser Conducted Electrical Weapons(CEWs)which have reached the end of their useful lives.In addition,support for the city's CEWs has decreased due to the manufacturers support of their newer models.As a result of this action,General Fund contingency will decrease by$41,132 with an equal increase in Community Services program expenditures. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 S 14,330;765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 $ 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3;038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other bunds S S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 41,132 S 22,272,146 Policy and Administration S 899,502 $ 899,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 $ 4,118,322 Program Expenditures'Total $ 31,286,017 $ 41,132 $ 31,327,149 Debt Service S S Loans S - S - Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 $ 3,434,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 $ (41,132) $ 1,078,868 Total Budget $35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW01.River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan-Carryforward A total of$62,000 is required for the implementation of the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan. As a result,beginning fund balance in the Stormwater Fund will increase by$52,000.In addition, contingency will decrease by$10,000.In tutu,capital program expenditures will increase by$62,000 in the Stormwater Fund. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Stormwater Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,774,154 $ 52,000 $ 3,826,154 Property Taxes S $ - Franchise Fees S - S Licenses&Permits S $ Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 2,595,949 $ 2,595,949 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings $ 7,936 $ 7,936 Miscellaneous $ 3,100 $ 3,100 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S S "Total Resources $ 6,381,139 $ 52,000 $ 6,433,139 Requirements Community Development S Community Services S $ Policy and Administration S - $ - Public Works S 1,738,126 S 1,738,126 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,738,126 $ - $ 1,738,126 Debt Service $ - $ - Loans S - $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,265,096 S 62,000 $ 1,327,096 Transfers to Other Funds S 433,356 $ 433,356 Contingency $ 200,000 $ (10,000) $ 190,000 Total Budget_$ _3,636,578 $ 52,000 $ 3,688,578 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,744,561 $ - $ 21744,561 Total Requirements $ 6,381,139 $ 52,000 $ 6,433,139 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW02. Wetland Mitigation Bank Purchase(Hall/Wall-Wall St.Extension) 'Phis new request will appropriate$57,750 in Gas Tax Funds for the wetland mitigation site at 14all/Wall. This site has been found noncompliant by Dept.of State Lands.The purchase of.33 acres of mitigation bank credits is determined the least expensive option available to meet wetland mitigation requirements. The purchase must be made by November 2015. As a result of this action,Gas Tax beginning fund balance will increase by$57,750.Transfers will increase. Public Works program expenditures will increase by the same amount. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 57,750 $ 762,622 Property Taxes S $ _ Franchise Fees S $ - Licenses&Permits S 5,872 $ 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 $ 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - S - Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings $ 55,732 $ 55,732 Miscellaneous $ 62,818 S 62,818 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 S 100,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 57,750 $ 4,057,161 Requirements Community Development S - $ _ Community Services S $ Policy and.Administration S - S - Public Works S 2,166,046 $ 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046__$__ - $ 7166,046 Debt Service $ 592,425 $ 592,425 Loans S - $ _ Work-In-Progress S - Transfers to Other funds $ 229,389 $ 57,750 S 287,139 Contingency S 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 57,750 $ 3,245,610 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 57,750 $ 4,057,161 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes $ 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services $ 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S S 57,750 S 57,750 Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 57,750 $ 41,853,653 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 $ 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 57,750 $ 4,176,072 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 57,750 $ 31,343,767 Debt Service S $ _ Loans S - $ Work-In-Progress S - S _ Transfers to Other Funds $ 3,434,936 $ 3,434,936 Contingence S 1,120,000 $ 1,120,000 Total Budget $35,840,953 $ 57,750 $ 35,898,703 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 57,750 $ 41,853,653 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QlPW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedemon)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pays for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 1 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 8,500 $ 713,372 Property Taxes $ - $ Franchise Fees S - $ Licenses&Permits $ 5,872 $ 5,872 Intergovernmental $ 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services S - $ - Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings $ 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous $ 62,818 S 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 S 100000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 S 8,500 S 4,007,911 Requirements Community Development $ Community Services S S Policy and Administration $ - $ - P_u_blic Works $ 2,166,046 $ 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ - $ 2,166,046 Debt Service S 592,425 $ 592,425 Loans S - S - Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 229,389 S 8,500 S 237,889 Contingency 5 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 8,500 $ 3,196,360 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 8,500 $ 4,007,911 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;58,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 2 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Stormwater Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,774,154 $ 8,500 $ 3,782,654 Property Taxes S $ - Franchise Fees $ S Licenses&Permits $ S Intergovernmental $ - $ - Charges for Services $ 2,595,949 $ 2,595,949 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - Interest Earnings $ 7,936 $ 7,936 Miscellaneous $ 3,100 S 3,100 Other Financing Sources $ - $ - Transfers In from Other funds S - S - Total Resources $ 6,381,139 $ 8,500 $ 6,389,639 Requirements Community Development S - $ Community Services $ $ Policy and Administration $ - $ - Public Works $ 1,738,126 $ 1,738,126 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,738,126 $ - $ 1,738,126 Debt Service S - $ Loans $ - $ - Work-In-Progress $ 1,265,096 $ 1,265,096 Transfers to Other Funds $ 433,356 $ 8,500 S 441,856 Contingency $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,636,578 $ 8,500 $ 3,645,078 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,744,561 $ - $ 2,744,561 Total Requirements $ 6,381,139 $ 8,500 S 6,389,639 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedemen)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund, Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund of Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Underground Utility Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 425,300 $ 51,000 $ 476,300 Property"faxes $ - S - Franchise Fees $ - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 48,948 $ 48,948 Intergovernmental $ - S - Charges for Services $ S - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 7,1(,o $ 7,160 Miscellaneous $ $ - Other Financing Sources S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S S Total Resources $ 481,408 $ 51,000 5 532,408 Requirements Community Development 5 S Community Services S S Police and Administration S S Public Works S $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S S - Loans S $ Work-In-Progress S $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 320,477 S 51,000 $ 371,477 Contingency $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Total Budget $ 370,477 $ 51,000 $ 421,477 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 110,931 $ - $ 110,931 Total Requirements $ 481,408 $ 51,000 $ 532,408 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Funri4_of-6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Sanitary Sewer Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,586,876 $ 8,500 $ 3,595,376 Property Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits S 16,549 S 16,549 Intergovernmental $ 221,770 $ 221,770 Charges for Services $ 1,590,932 S 1,590,932 Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings $ 100,333 S 100,333 Miscellaneous S 143,091 S 143,091 Other Financing Sources S - S - 'rransfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources S 5,659,551 S 8,500 $ 5,668,051 Requirements Community Developmcni S - $ - Community Services S $ Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works S 1,960,087 S 1,960,087 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,960,087 $ - $ 1,960,087 Debt Service S - S - Loans S - S - Work-In-Progress $ 984,693 S 984,693 Transfers to Other Funds $ 76,934 $ 8,500 $ 85,434 Contingency $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Total Budtet $ 3,421,714 $ 8,500 $ 3,430,214 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,237,837 $ - $ 2,237,837 Total Requirements $ 5,659,551 $ 8,500 $ 5,668,051 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QiPW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 5 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 20,245,015 $ 8,500 $ 20,253,515 PropertyTaxes S S - Franchise Fees S - S - Licenses&Permits S 31,335 S 31,335 Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 18,827,178 S 18,827,178 Fines&Forfeitures S" - S - Interest Earnings $ 30,644 S 30,644 Miscellaneous $ 10;933 S 10,933 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other bunds S 58,751 S 58,751 Total Resources $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 Requirements Community Development S - S Community Services S $ Policy and Administration $ S Public Works S 8,682,558 $ 8,682,558 Program Expenditures Total $__8,682,558 $ $ 8,682,558 Debt Service $ - $ - Loans $ S - Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds $ 24,882,226 $ 8,500 $ 24,890,726 Contingency $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Total Budget $ 34,064,784 $ 8,500 $ 34,073,284 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,139,072 $ - $ 5,139,072 Total Requirements $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW03. Walnut Street(116th/Tiedeman)-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward totaling$85,000 is required to pay for staff time and utility work that was not completed by June 30,2015.As a result,beginning fund balance will increase by$8,500 in Gas Tax;$51,000 in Underground Utility;$8,500 in Sanitary Sewer,$8,500 in Stormwater;and$8,500 in the Water Fund. Transfers will increase with capital program expenditures increasing by$85,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 6 of 6 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees S $ Licenses&Permits S $ Intergovernmental S $ Charges for Services S $ Fines&Forfeitures $ $ Interest Earnings $ $ Miscellaneous $ S Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 85,000 S 1,168,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 85,000 $ 1,548,067 Requirements Community Development $ $ Community Services S $ Police and Administration S S Public Works S $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S S Loans S $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,073,448 S 85,000 S 1,158,448 Transfers to Other Funds $ 57,410 S 57,410 Contingency S - $ - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 85,000 $ 1,215,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 85,000 $ 1,548,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW04.95th Ave./N.Dakota Sidewalk-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward is requested in the amount of$187,000 to fill sidewalk gaps and provide curbing and drainage improvements.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance in Gas Tax by 5187,000 with an increase in transfers.In turn,capital program expenditures within the"Transportation CIP fund will increase by the same amount. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 187,000 $ 891,872 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S - S - Licenses&Permits S 5,872 S 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services $ - S - Fines&Forfeitures $ - S Interest Earnings S 55,732 S 55,732 ;Miscellaneous $ 62,818 S 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Fwi(k 1(1(1,000 S 100,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 187,000 $ 4,186,411 Requirements Community Development $ - S - Community Services $ S Policy and Administration S - S - P_ublic Works S 2,166,046 S 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ - $ 2,166,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S 592,425 Loans S - S - Work-]n-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 229,389 S 187,000 S 416,389 Contingency S 200,000 S 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 187,000 $ 3,374,860 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 187,000 $ 4,186,411 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW04.95th Ave./N.Dakota Sidewalk-Capital Improvement Program A carryforward is requested in the amount of$187,000 to fill sidewalk gaps and provide curbing and drainage improvements.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance in Gas Tax by $187,000 with an increase in transfers.In turn,capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP fund will increase by the same amount. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees $ - S Licenses&Permits S - S intergovernmental S - S Charges for Services $ - $ Fines&Forfeitures S - S Interest Earnings S - $ Miscellaneous S - S Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 187,000 S 1,270,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 187,000 S 1,650,067 Requirements Community Development S - $ Community Services S $ Policy and Administration S S Public Works S - $ Program Expenditures Total $_ - $ - $ - Debt Service $ - $ - Loans $ - $ - A'ork-In-Progress $ 1,073,448 S 187,000 $ 1,260,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 S 57,410 Contingency $ - S - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 187,000 $ 1,317,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 187,000 $ 1,650,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW05.North Dakota Bridge Repair-Capital Improvement Program A request in the amount of$70,000 is needed to pay for the emergency repair work on the North Dakota Bridge,along with the construction of a new walkway. This action will increase beginning fund balance by$70,000 in Gas Tax;increase transfers;and increase capital improvement program expenses in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 70,000 $ 774,872 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees $ - S - Licenses&Permits S 5,872 $ 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services S - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous S 62,818 $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 $ 100,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 70,000 $ 4,069,411 Requirements Community Development S Community Services $ - S - Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works $ 2,166,046 S 2,166,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ $ 2,166,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S 592,425 Loans $ - S - Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 229,389 S 70,000 S 299,389 Contingency S 200,000 $ 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,1870860 $ 70,000 $ 3,257,860 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 70,000 $ 4,069,411 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW05.North Dakota Bridge Repair-Capital Improvement Program A request in the amount of$70,000 is needed to pay for the emergency repair work on the North Dakota Bridge,along with the construction of a new walkway. This action will increase beginning fund balance by$70,000 in Gas Tax;increase transfers;and increase capital improvement program expenses in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes $ - $ - Franchise Tees $ S Licenses&Permits $ $ Intergovernmental S $ - Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures S S Interest Earnings S $ Miscellaneous S $ Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 70,000 S 1,153,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 70,000 $ 1,533,067 Requirements Community Development S - Community Services $ Policy and Administration S Public Works $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service $ S Loans $ - $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,073,448 $ 70,000 S 1,143,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency $ - $ - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 70,000 $ 1,200,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 70,000 $ 1,533,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW06. Erosion Control-Intergovernmental Agreement with Clean Water Services The City of Tigard has entered into an IGA with Clean Water Services to provide inspection services at an estimated cost of$80,000 to be funded with permit revenues. As a result,General Fund contingency will decrease by$80,000 with an equal increase in Public Works program expenditures in Engineering's professional services account. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes $ 14,330,765 S 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services $ 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 $ 873,006 Interest Earnings S 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous S 56,432 $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ $ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 $ 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 S 80,000 S 4,198,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 80,000 $ 31,366,017 Debt Service $ - $ - Loans $ S Work-In-Progress $ $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 S 3,434,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 $ (80,000) $ 1,040,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW07. LQC-Tigard St.Trail A carryforward in the amount of$35,000 is being requested to pay for completion of the Tigard Street "frail."This action will increase beginning fund balance in General Fund by$35,000 with an equal increase in transfers.Public Works program expenditures will increase by$35,000 in the Gas Tax Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 35,000 $ 10,744,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Larnings $ 103,722 S 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 35,000 $ 41,830,903 Requirements Community Development S 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 S 22,231,014 Policy and Administration S 899,502 S 899,502 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ - $ 31,286,017 Debt Service $ - S Loans S $ Work-In-Progress $ - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 $ 35,000 $ 3,469,936 Contingency $ 1,120,000 S 1,120,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ 35,000 $ 35,875,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 35,000 $ 41,830,903 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW07. LQC-Tigard St.Trail A carryforward in the amount of$35,000 is being requested to pay for completion of the Tigard Street "frail.This action will increase beginning fund balance in General Fund by S35,000 with an equal increase in transfers.Public Works program expenditures will increase by$35,000 in the Gas Tax Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 704,872 Property Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - Licenses&Permits S 5,872 S 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 S 3,070,117 Charges for Services S - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 55,732 S 55,732 Miscellaneous S 62,818 S 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 100,000 S 35,000 S 135,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 S 35,000 $ 4,034,411 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S S Policy and Administration S - S - Public Works $ 2,166,046 S 35,000 $ 2,201,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ 35,000 $ 2,201,046 Debt Service $ 592,425 S 592,425 Loans S - S - Work-In-Progress S - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 229,389 S 229,389 Contingency $ 200,000 S 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 35,000 $ 3,222,860 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 35,000 $ 4,034,411 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW08.Hunziker Industrial Core-Capital Improvement Program A request totaling$200,000 is required to conduct the initial design of the Wall St./Tech Center Drive project.This design work will be used to apply for federal grant funding for construction of this project. This action will show a decrease in contingency by$200,000 in the City Gas Tax Fund with an increase in transfers.In tum,capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP Fund will increase by $200,000. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget City Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 126,479 $ 126,479 Property Taxes S - S - Ftanchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits S - S - Intergovemmental S 612,802 $ 612,802 Charges for Services S - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings S 34,584 S 34,584 Miscellaneous S 32,052 S 32,052 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds - S Total Resources $ 805,917 $ $ 805,917 Requirements Community Development $ Community Services $ Policy and Administration $ S Public Works $ S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S 316,560 S 316,560 Loans S - $ - Work-In-Progress S - S - Transfers to Other Funds $ 3,208 S 200,000 S 203,208 Contingency $ 300,000 S (200,000) $ 100,000 Total Budget $ 619,768 $ - $ 619,768 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 186,149 $ $ 186,149 Total Requirements $ 805,917 $ $ 805,917 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW08.Humiker Industrial Core-Capital Improvement Program A request totaling$200,000 is required to conduct the initial design of the Wall St./Tech Center Drive project.This design work will be used to apply for federal grant funding for construction of this project. This action will show a decrease in contingency by$200,000 in the City Gas Tax Fund with an increase in transfers.In tum,capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP Fund will increase by $200,000. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S $ Licenses&Permits S S Intergovernmental S $ Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures S $ Interest Earnings S $ Miscellaneous S $ Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 200,000 S 1,283,448 TotalResources $ 1,463,067 $ 200,000 $ 1,663,067 Requirements Community Development $ - S - Community Services $ S Policy and Administration S S Public Works $ $ Program Expenditures Total $ $ - $ _ Debt Service $ S Loans $ $ - Work-In-Progress $ 1,073,448 S 200,000 $ 1,273,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency $ - $ - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 200,000 $ 1,330,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 200,000 $ 1,663,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW09.72nd Ave./Dartmouth St.Intersection-Capital Improvement Program This carryforward request in the amount of S10,000 is needed for legal fees associated with 4 Martin Properties not concluded in FY 2015.As a result,beginning fund balance in the Transportation Development Fund will increase by S10,000.Transfers will increase and capital program expenditures will increase by S10,000 in the Transportation C111 Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation Development Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,112,633 $ 10,000 $ 1,122,633 Property'faxes S - S - Franchise Dees S - S - Licenses&Permits S 700,000 S 700,000 Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Farnings S 11,279 $ 11,279 Miscellaneous S - S - Other Financing Sources S - $ - Transfers In from Other Funds S - Total Resources $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 $ 1,833,912 Requirements Community Development S - S - Community Services S $ Policy and Administration S S Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ $ - $ Debt Service S S Loans S S - Work-In-Progress S 6,800 $ 6,800 Transfers to Other Funds S 526,690 S 10,000 5 536,690 Contingency S 250,000 S 250,000 Total Budget $ 783,490 $ 10,000 $ 793,490 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 1,040,422 $ - $ 1,040,422 Total Requirements $ 1,823,912 $ 111000 $ 11833,912 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW09.72nd Ave./Dartmouth St.Intersection-Capital Improvement Program This carryforward request in the amount of$10,000 is needed for legal fees associated with 4 Martin Properties not concluded in FY 2015.As a result,beginning fund balance in the Transportation Development Fund will increase by$10,000.Transfers will increase and capital program expenditures will increase by$10,000 in the Transportation CIP Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 379,619 $ 379,619 Property Taxes $ - S Franchise Fees $ $ - lacenses&Permits S $ Intergovernmental $ - $ Charges for Services S S Fines&Forfeitures S $ Interest Earnings $ - $ Miscellaneous $ S - Other Financing Sources S S Transfers In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 10,000 S 1,093,148 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 S 10,000 $ 1,473,067 Requirements Community Development $ Community Services S Policy and Administration S S Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S S Loans S $ - Work-In-Progress S 1,073,448 $ 10,000 $ 1,083,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 $ 57,410 Contingency S - $ - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 10,000 $ 1,140,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 S 10,000 $ 1,473,067 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED QIPW10. Downtown Land Acquisition-Capital Improvement Program This request will carry forward$515,000 in Parks Bond CIP appropriation for the Saxony land acquisition that occurred on July 9th.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance of$515,000 in Parks Bond Fund with an increase in transfers.Total capital program expenditures will increase by$515,000 in the Parks Capital Fund. Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Bond Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,700,000 $ 515,000 $ 2,215,000 Property Taxes S - S - Franchise Fees S S Licenses&Permits S $ - Intergovernmental $ S Charges for Services S - S Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - Interest Earnings S 4,020 S 4,020 Miscellaneous S - S - Other Financing Sources S S Transfers In from Other Funds $ - S Total Resources $ 1,704,020 $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 Requirements Community Development S S Community Services $ - S Policy and Administration $ S Public Works $ $ Program Expenditures Total $ - $ $ Debt Service S S Loans S $ Work-In-Progress S Transfers to Other Funds S 1,382,013 S 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Contingency $ - S - Total Budget $ 1,382,013 S 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 322,007 $ - $ 322,007 Total Requirements $ 1,704,020 S 515,000 $ 2,219,020 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW10. Downtown Land Acquisition-Capital Improvement Program This request will carry forward$515,000 in Parks Bond CIP appropriation for the Saxony land acquisition that occurred on July 9th.This action will result in an increase in beginning fund balance of$515,000 in Parks Bond Fund with an increase in transfers.Total capital program expenditures will increase by$515,000 in the Parks Capital Fund. Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Capital Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 298,740 $ 298,740 Property Taxes $ - S - Franchise Fees S - $ Licenses&Permits S - S Intergovernmental $ - S Charges for Services S - S Fines&Forfeitures S - S Interest Earnings $ 3,015 $ 3,015 Miscellaneous $ - S Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 3,151,561 S 515,000 S 3,666,561 Total Resources $ 3.453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 Requirements Community Development $ Community Services $ - Policy and Administration S Public Works S Program Expenditures Total $ 5 $ Debt Service S - $ Loans $ - $ - Work-In-Progress S 3,151,569 $ 515,000 S 3,666,561 Transfers to Other Funds S 123,932 S 123,932 Contingency S - S - Total Budget $ 3,275,493 $ 515,000 $ 3,790,493 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 177,823 $ - $ 177,823 Total Requirements $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW11 Lake Oswego Tigard Water Partnership-Capital Improvement Program An additional appropropriation of$6,660,000 is required to pay for Tigard's share of the partnership. due to a delay in timing of payment of expenditures from the prior fiscal year.The requested action does not change the total cost of the project.As a result,the reserve for future expenditure will decrease by$3,260,000 in the Water CIP Fund.The Water SDC Fund reserve for future expenditure will decrease by$3,400,000.Transfers will increase.Capital program expenditures will increase by$6,660,000 in the Water CIP Fund. Revised Fund 1 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 17,223,215 $ 17,223,215 Property Taxes S S Franchise Fees S $ Licenses&Permits S S Intergovernmental $ S Charges for Services S $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Larnings S 13,096 S 13,096 Miscellaneous S 5,318 S 5,318 Other Financing Sources S - S - Transfers In from Other Funds $ 18,840,921 S 3,400,000 $ 22,240,921 Total Resources $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 Requirements Community Development S S Community Services S - S Policy and Administration S Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service $ S Loans S $ - Work-]n-Progress S 29,168,682 S 6,660,000 S 35,828,682 Transfers to Other Funds $ 231,256 S 231,256 Contingency $ - S - Total Budget $ 29,399,938 $ 6,660,000 $ 36,059,938 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 6,682,612 $(3,260,000) $ 3,422,612 Total Requirements $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Q1PW11 Lake Oswego Tigard Water Partnership-Capital Improvement Program An additional appropropriation of$6,660,000 is required to pay for Tigard's share of the partnership. due to a delay in timing of payment of expenditures from the prior fiscal year.The requested action does not change the total cost of the project.As a result,the reserve for future expenditure will decrease by 53,260,000 in the Water CIP Fund.The Water SDC Fund reserve for future expenditure will decrease by 53,400,000.Transfers will increase.Capital program expenditures will increase by$6,660,000 in the Water CIP Fund. Revised Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water SDC Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 4,571,596 $ 4,571,596 Property Taxcs S - $ Franchise Fees S - S Licenses&Permits S 873,715 $ 873,715 Intergovernmental $ - S - Charges for Services $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - Interest Earnings S 233 S 233 Miscellaneous S - $ Other Financing Sources $ S Transfers In from Other Funds S - S Total Resources $ 5,445,544 $ $ 5,445,544 Requirements Community Development Community Services Policy and Administration S Public Works S 1 Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S - S Loans S $ Work-In-Progress S $ - Trtnsfers to Other Funds S 299,130 S 3,400,000 S 3,699,130 Contingency S 100,000 S 100,000 Total Budget $ 399,130 $ 3,400,000 $ 3,799,130 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,046,414 $(3,400,000) $ 1,646,414 Total Requirements $ 5,445,544 $ - $ 5,445,544 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A AMENDED Amended Item Q1CS03.Position Reclassification A request is made to reclassify one of the Court Clerk 11 positions from a.90 FTE to a 1.0 FTE Court Operations Supervisor.The supervisory position will assist the Central Services Director by directly overseeing the daily operations of court staff As a result,General Fund contingency will decrease by$14,000.In tum, Policy and Administration program expenditures will increase by$14,000 along with a.10 increase in FTE. Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 10,709,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 $ 5,909,165 Licenses&Permits $ 1,352,420 $ 1,352,420 Intergovernmental $ 5,422,785 S 5,422,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 $ 3,038,015 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 S 873,006 Interest Earnings $ 103,722 $ 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ $ 41,795,903 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 S 4,037,179 Community Services S 22,231,014 $ 22,231,014 Policy and Administration $ 899,502 S 14,000 S 913,502 Public Works $ 4,118,322 S 4,118,322 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 14,000 $ 31,300,W Debt Service S - $ - Loans S S - Work-In-Progress $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds $ 3,434,936 $ 3,434,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 S (14,000) $ 1,106,000 Total Budget $ 35,840,953 $ - $ 35,840,953 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ - $ 5,954,950 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ - $ 41,795,903 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B 94035 River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan Implementation Cam fi—ard of S YK)for implctnentanon of the River Tttrnec Stor n watcr i taster Plan. Revised Revised Revised Revised FV 2016 ! Budget Projected Projected Projected I Projected Projected Projected Budget This Change FV 2016 2017 2017 2018 MIR 2019 2019 Project Total Internal Expenses Desitin and Enl+inecnng 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Protect Management 05,000 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 Construction Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 5,000 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 External Expenses Dca,gn and Engmcrnng 0 57,000 57,000 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 57,000 Consrtvcnon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t:ontmgcncr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 57,000 57,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 57,000 Total Project Expense 0 62,000 62,000 1 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 62,000 i i Revenue Funding Source 51nSm tontvtcr Fund 0 62.000 62,000 0 0 O 0 0 0 62,000 00 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Project Revenues 0 62,000 62000 0 0 0 0 0 0 62,000 i 9/24/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B 95021 Walnut Street 116th/Ticdeman This request will tarn.forwyrd 585.000 in multiple C:IP funds.This is a 57\7 Washington Counts•proicct that the City of Tigard supports with stafftime and urilin•work. A schedule channe by Washington County delayed F1'2011-15 vock to F1'201.5-16. Revised i Revised Revised Revised Bud;. Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Budget This Change FY 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Project Total Internal Expenses Design and Enginccrinn 28,173 0 28,173 0 0 O 0 0 0 28.173 Project Manapement 28,173 26,000 54,173 20,000 20,000 0 0 0 0 74.173 Constowtuw Management 16,174 2,000 18,174 20.000 20,000 0 0 0 0 38,174 Total 72.520 28,000 100,520 40,000 40,000 0 0 0 0 140,520 External Expenses j Public lnvol•.cmcnt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 land;Right of A ayAcquisition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dcstgn and Engineering 0 0 0 10,000 10,000 0 1 0 0 0 10,000 Crmstructmn 217,000 57,000 274.000 100,000 ', 100,000 0 0 0 0 374,000 Contingency 87,480 1 0 87.480 50,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 137,480 Total! 304,480 57,000 361,480 160,000 160,000 0 0 0 0 521,480 Total Project Expense 377,000 1 85,000 462,000 200,000 200,000 0 0 0 0 662,000 Revenue Funding Source 405-TrAnspnnation Dcvclopmenl 23.250 I 8.500 31,750 17,000 17,000 0 0 0 0 48.750 411-Undergnwnd Utilin•Fund 1 319.750 51,000 370,750 150.000 150,000 0 0 0 0 520,750 160-Cansponatinn(:IP Fund I 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 500:Samacy Sewer Fund 0 8,500 8.500 0 0 0 0 0! 0 8,500 51(1-Srnrmwattthund 19,000 8,500 27,500 18,000 18,000 0 0 0 0 45.500 530-1C Ater Fund I 15,000 8.500 23,500 15.000 i 15,000 0 0 0 0 38,500 0 0 0 0, 0 0 1 0 1 0 20 Total Project Revenues 377 85,000 462.000 200,000 1 200,000 0 0 0 0 662,000 � I 9/24/2015 :�Y 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B -5045 95th Avenue and North Dakota Street Sidewalks his request uin carry forward Sl 8-,M)in multiple f_iP funds. Thio project includes fillling sidrvvalk saps and providing curbing and drainage mprovrmrnts is capretrd to be finished n'2015-16. Revised Revised Revised Revised FY 2016 Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Budge 'This Change FY 2016 2017 1 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Project Total :eternal Experts" 1h.tgn and Engineering 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 0 0 Project Uanagerttcnt 0 14,008 14,008 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 14,008 Construction Management 0 8,653 8,653 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,653 Total L 0 22,661 22,661 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,661 3xtcrnal Expenses 1, Public Involvement 0 0 0 O i 0 0 0 0 0 0 ]and,Right of Way.\cquisition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Design and Engineering I 0 24,339 24,339 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 24,339 Crnuttvctinn0 140.000 140.000 0 0 O I 0 0 0 140,000 Contingency 0! 0 0 0 0 0 1 ±0 =00 0 0 0 Total 0 i 164,339 164,339 0 0 0 0 0 0 164,339 notal Project Expenae 0! 187,000 187,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 187,000 1 I � i Revenue Funding Source 2M-Gas Tas Fund 0 28,050 28,050 0 0 0 0 0 0 28,050 Waslimpton County 0 158.950 I 158,950 0 0 0 00 0 158,950 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rotal Project Revenues 0 187,000 187,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 187,000 9/24/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B 95046 North Dakota Bridge Repair Additional appropriation in the amount of 570,(X10 will be usad to pay for emergency repair of the North Dakota Bridge and construction of a nc walkway. Budget 'This Change I Budget 2017 I Projected 2018 Projected 2019 Projected Project Total Internal Expenses j Project Manapement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Comauction Management 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 External Expenses land,'Right of\\ay.\cquounnn 0 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 0 0 0 Design and F.nginecring 0 0 0 0! 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cntutrucrion 1 0 70,000 70,000 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 70,000 Contmpenec 1 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0• 70,000 70.000 0 0 0. 0 0 0 70,000 i Total Project EVense I 0 70,000 70,000 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 70,000 I Revenue Funding Source j 300-Gas'I-as Fund j 0 70,000 70,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 70,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 Total Project Revenues 0 70,000 1 70,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 70,000 I i 9/24/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B 75047 Hunziker Industrial Core Funding request for$300,001 to pay for the initial design of the Wall St.'Tech Center Dritr project as well as applying for a federal grant. Budget IThis ange Budget 2017 Projected 2018 1 Projected 2019 1 Projected Project Total Internal Expenses ! ' Dcs�gn and Enginccrmo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Protect Managernent 0 10,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 Construction Management 0' 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total' 0 10,000 1 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 External Expenses !, DesT.n and Engineering I 0'I 190,000 190,000 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 190,000 Construction I 0! 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 Contingency 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 190,000 190,000 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 190,000 i Total Project Expense 0 2001000 200,000 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 200,000 Revenue Funding Source 20,Cm•Gas lax Fund 0 200.000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 0j 0 0 0� 0 0! 0 0', 0 0 0i o 0 0j 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 '', 0 0'1 00 0 0'• D 0 Total Project Revenues 0! 200.000 I 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 200,000 I i 9/24/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B )5035 72nd Ave./Dartmouth St.Intersection Improvements 1dditinnal appropriation in the amount of S70.000 will be used to pay legal fres associated with the four Martinproperties. Budget This Change Hudget 2017 ' Projected 2018 ' Projected 2019 Projected Project Total Internal Expenses Design and Engineering I 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Protect'Manage Ment 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 Construction Management 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 External Expenses Design and Engincennq 0 10.000 10,000 0 0 0 0 00 10,000 Construction 0 1 0 0 0• 0 0 0 0 0 0 i Contingency 0! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 10,000 1 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 Cotal Project Expense 0 ! 10,000 10,000 0- 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 i I I Ree uc Funding Source 105-Ttanpxxntinn � Devchnuncnt'las 0 10,000 10.000 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 10,000 0'I 0; 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Cotal Project Revenues 0 10,000 10,000 1 00 0 0 0 0 10,000 i 9/ia/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B )2028 Dotvntotvn Land Ac uisititm :amfotward of finds used to pay for the Sammy property that t.w purchased on Julr 9,'_015. Budget This Change Budget 2017 Projected 2019 Projected 2019 - Projected Project Total Internal Expenses Design and D*ncerng 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 O 0 0 Pmjcct Matngenrnt i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction\lanagctttcnt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 External Expenses Land.'Rigln of Way Acquisition 770,000 ii 515,000 1.265,000 0 0 0 0 0 'I 0 1,285,000 Dcsi,m and L T,,tnccring 0 0 0 0',1 0 0 j 0 0 0 0 Cnnstmction ( 0 00 0 0 O I 0 0� 0 0 Cont u>,Gcnq' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Total 770,000 515,000 1. 1,285,000 0 0 0 1 0 01 0 1,285,000 Total Project Expense 770,000 515,000 1 1,285,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,285,000 i Revenue Funding Source 421-Parks Bond Fund 770.000 469.000 1,239,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,239,000 420-Parks Capital fund 0 46.000 46,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 46,000 0 0 0 0 0 0'i 0 0; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 rota)Project Revenues 770,000 515,000! 1.285,000 0 0 0 1. 0 0 0 1285,000 i 9/x4/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B 94018 Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership Additional appropriation is needed to pap for,rigard's share of the Partnership that-is delayed in prior fiscal rear.This action(Ines not change the Intal cost of the project,only the tinning of expenditures. Revised 1 Revised Rnrsed Revised i FY 2014 Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Budget This Change FY 2014 20172017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Project Total Internal Expenses I I Project\lanagemrnt 1 171,500 1 0 171,500 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 171,500 Pritx We-To-Date 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 171,500 0 171,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 171,500 External Expenses Project\hungcMent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Desism and Engineering 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Construction 1 26,718,8231 6,660.000 33.378,823 3,800.000 7,570.000 0 1 0 0 0 40,948,823 Prior Lifo-lb-Date0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total, 26.718,823 6,660,000 33.378,823 3,800,000 7,570,000 0 0 0 0 40.948,823 I I Total Project Expense 26,890,323 6,660,000 33,550,323 3,800,000 7,570,000 0 0 0 0 41,120,323 Revenue Funding Source 530-Water Y'unJ 17,092,000 f' 0! 17,092,000 3,800,000 0 0 0 0 0 17,092,000 532-WarerCIP fund 9,798,323 3.260.000 13,058,323 1 5,070,000 0 0 0 0 18,128,323 531-\\arer SIX: 0 1 3,400.000 3.400.000 0 2,500,000 0 0 0 0 5,900,000 23 Total Project Revenues 26,890,3 8,660.000 33,550,323 3,800,000 7,570,000 0 0 1 0 0 41,120,323 9/24/2015 7Y 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B Von Budgetary Impact Item ?016 Dirksen Nature Park his request in the Dirksen Nature Park CIP adjustments drives CIP work into Fl-2016-17 resultmg from an adjustment to the Nature in ,nghlxxhonds Grant,and grant match. Revised Revised Revtsed Revised FY 2016Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Budget This Change FY 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Project Total atemal Expenses j Design and Engineering 6,297 0 6,297 4,000 0 4,000 0 6.600 0 6,297 Project5lanagement 14,298 0 14,298 10,000 1, 55.100 6,400 70,000 0 28,000 167,398 Construction Management 34,798 0 34,798 43,500 0 30,500 0 44,000 0 34,798 Total 55.393 0 1 55.393 57,500 55,100 40,900 70,000 50,600 28,000 208,493 ;xtemal Expenses Public Involvement I 0 0 I 0 0 6,000 0 1 0 0 0 6,000 Land'Right of\C ay Acqui uon I 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dcstlnt and I-.ngmcctmg 45,200 I 0 45,200 50.400 15,000 22.000 0 54,000 0 60,200 Construction 400,000 (205,571) 194,429 708,000 547.000 433.000 498,000 823.000 1.090,000 2,329,429 Contingency 60.000 0 60.000 141 600 142,020 108.250 0 246,900 0 202.020 Total 505.200 205.571) 299.629 900,000 710,020 563,250 1 498,000 1,123.900 1.090,000 2,597,649 i 'oral Project Expense 560,593 (205,571) 355.0221 957,500 1 765,120 604,150 1 568,000 1,174,500 1 1,118,000 1 2,806,142 revenue Funding Source 260-Urban Forestry Fund 100,000 I 0 100,000 100,000 11 100,000 0 38,000 0 18,000 256,000 420-Parks Capital Fund 0 0 0 857,500 I 0 604,150 1 520,000 0 0 520,000 421-Parks Bond Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 425-Parks SDC Fund 295.593 14.22Cl 180.773 0 173,660 0 0 0 0 354,433 460-Transportation CIP Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,174,500 1,090.000 1,090,000 5(1l).Sanitar Sewer Fund 20,000 (18.881) 3,139 0 1 1,040 0 0 0 1 0 4,179 510-StormwatcrFund 145,000 (89,890) 55.110 0 1 63,420 0 10,000 0 10.000 138.530 530-A'ater Fund 0 0 0 0 4,000 0 0 0 1 0 4.000 \arum in ncighborborxa 0 0 0 0 390,000 0 0 0 0 390,000 Agikx 0 1 16,000 16,000 0 i 33,000 0 0 0 0 49,000 State Parks Grant 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'ot2lProject Revenues 560,593 205,571 355,022 957,500 765,120 1 604.150 568,000 1 1,174,500 1 1,116,000 2,606,142 I I 9/24/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B Non Budgetary Impact Item 312026 Park Land Acquisition nn.s request Programs the I.asich land punhasr into the Parks SDC 1'und. The lasieh Purchase is made in paymens c yr the next three rears. Revised Revised i Revised Revised FY 2016 Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Budget This Change FY 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Project Total Internal Expenses j Design and Engineering 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project\fanagcment ( 0 0 0 O 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 on Cstruction\lanagemrnt 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 External Expenses Public Inrolcement 0 I 0 0 i, 0 01 0 0, 0 0 land/Right of WayAcquisition 805,649 0 885,649 0 150,000 0 150,000 0 600,000 1,785,649 Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 885,649 0 885.649 0 150,000 0 150,000 0 600,000 1,785,649 i I I Total Project Expense 80509 i 0 885,649 1 0 150,000 0 1 150,000 0 600,000 1,785,649 Revenue Funding Source 421-Parks Bond Fund 550,649 0 550.649 0 0 0 0 0 0 550,649 3r5-Parks SDC Fund 335,000 0 335,000 0 150,000 0 150,000 0 600,000 1.235,000 Total Project Revenues 885,649 0 885,649 0 150,000 0 150,000 0 600,000 1,785,649 9/24/2015 FY 2015-16 First Qtr. Supplemental Budget Exhibit B Non Budgetary Impact Item 12013 Parton Creek Remeander nus request moves the Fanno Crock Remcander from the Parks Bond Fund to the Park Capital Fund. Cash was transfcrrcd from the Parks 3ond Fund to the Parks Capital Fund in FY 2013-I4 for this CI P. RevisedI Revised Revised Revised FY 21116 Budget Projected I Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Budget This Change, FY 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 1 2019 Project Total :ntemal Expenses Dc.;gn and Engmeermg 0! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project\Management 0 0 1 0 25,000 1 25,000 0 0 45,000 0 25,000 Constmetion 3lanagcment 0 0 0 0 1 0 45,000 45,000 45,000 0 45,000 Total 0 0 0 25,000 25,000 45,000 45,000 90,000 0 70,000 3xtemal Expenses Public Im•ohement 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 land.-Right of Way-lcquisition 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Design and Engincenng 0 1 0 0 100,000 1 100,000 0 0 10,000 1 0 100,000 Cnnstruction 0 0 0 0 0 600.000 600,000 100,000 0 600,000 Contingcncy 0 0 0 20,000 1 20,000 107,000 107.000 50,000 0 127,000 Total 0 0 0 120,000 120,000 707,000 707.000 160.000 0 827,000 I ! I Total Project Expense 0 0 0 1 145,000 1 145,000 752,000 752,000 250,000 1 0 897,000 I I Revenue Funding Source 425-Parks SDC Fund 0 0 0 0 0 560,372 560,372 250,000 i 0 560,372 420-Parks Capital Fund 0 0 0 0 1 145,000 0 191,628 0 0 336,628 total Project Revenues 0 0 0 0 1 145,000 560,372 752,000 250,000 0 897,000 145,000 191,6381 9/]4/2015 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental SUPPLEMENTAL PACKS 1 Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes FOR 3 D! AMENDED (DATE OF MEETING) Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Affected City Funds Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 65,153,602 $ 1,251,750 $ 66,405,352 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 S - $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees S 5,909,165 S - S 5,909,165 Special Assessments S - S - S - Licenses&Permits S 3,062,711 S - S 3,062,711 Intergovernmental $ 9,327,474 $ 20,000 $ 9,347,474 Charges for Services S 34,821,579 $ 1,893 $ 34,823,472 Fines&Forfeitures $ 873,006 $ - S 873,006 Interest Earnings 8 394,347 $ - $ 394,347 Miscellaneous S 363,330 S - S 363,330 Other Financing Sources S - S - S - Transfers In from OHM bunds S 23,953,152 S 4,594,750 S 28,547,902 Total Resources $ 158,189,131 $ 5,868,393 $ 164,057,524 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 $ 6,000 $ 4,043,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 S 63,025 $ 22,294,039 Policy&Administration S 10,343,001 $ 309,000 S 10,652,001 Public Works S 18,665,139 S 172,750 S 18,837,889 Program Expenditures Total $ 55,276,333 $ 550,775 $ 55,827,108 Debt Service S 908,985 S - S 908,985 Loans S - S - S - Work-In-Progress S 35,650,280 S 7,789,000 S 43,439,280 Transfers to Other Funds 5 32,000,957 S 4,594,750 $ 36,595,707 Contingence S 3,345,000 S (419,812) S 2,925,188 Total Budget $127,181,555 $ 12,514,713 $ 139,696,268 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 31,007,576 $ (6,646,320) $ 24,361,256 Total Requirements $ 158,189,131 $ 5,868,393 $ 164,057,524 1of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Amended Fund Reference Budget Items: Q1CD01,QICS01,Q1CS03,QIFS02,Q1PD01-03,Q1PW02,QIPW06-07 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,709,593 $ 70,000 $ 10,779,593 Property Taxes S 14,330,765 $ - $ 14,330,765 Franchise Fees $ 5,909,165 $ - $ 5,909,165 Special Assessments $ - S - S - Licenses&Permits S 1,352,420 $ - S 1,352,420 Intergovernmental S 5,422,785 S 20,000 S 5,442,785 Charges for Services S 3,038,015 S 1,893 S 3,039,908 Fines&Forfeitures S 873,006 S - S 873,006 Interest Earnings $ 103,722 S S 103,722 Miscellaneous $ 56,432 S $ 56,432 Other Financing Sources $ - S S - Trinsfers In from Other kill(k S S 57, 5i) S 5-,-50 ML_ Total Resources $ 41,795,903 $ 149,643 $ 41,945,546 Requirements Community Development $ 4,037,179 S 6,000 S 4,043,179 Community Services $ 22,231,014 $ 63,025 S 22,294,039 Policy&Administration $ 899,502 S 7,160 S 906,662 Public Works S 4,118,322 S 137,750 S 4,256,072 Program Expenditures Total $ 31,286,017 $ 213,935 $ 31,499,952 Debt Service S - S - S - Loans S S S Work-In-Progress S - S - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,434,936 $ 70,000 $ 3,504,936 Contingency S 1,120,000 S (141,132) $ 978,868 Total Budget $35,840,953 $ 142,803 $ 35,983,756 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,954,950 $ 6,840 $ 5,961,790 Total Requirements $ 41,795,903 $ 149,643 $ 41,945,546 2of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1CS01-02 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Fleet/Property Management Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 113,138 $ - $ 113,138 Property Taxes $ - S S - Franchise Fees $ - S S - Special Assessments $ - S $ Licenses&Permits $ - $ - $ - Intergovernmental $ - $ - $ - Charges for Services $ 1,783,024 $ - $ 1,783,024 Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ - $ - Interest Earnings S - $ - $ - Miscellaneous $ 29,686 $ - $ 29,686 Other Financing Sources $ - $ - $ - Tran�fcr� In from 011ier I�unds S 19,647 S - S 19,647 Total Resources $ 1,945,495 $ $ 1,945,495 Requirements Community Development S - $ - S Community Services $ - $ Policy and Administration $ 1,852,362 S 43,680 $ 1,896,042 Public Works $ - S - $ - Program Expenditures Total $ 1,852,362 $ 43,680 $ 1,896,042 Debt Service S - S - S - Loans S S - $ - Work-In-Progress S S - S Transfers to Other Funds S - $ - S - Contingeng, S 75,000 S (43,680) S 31,320 Total Budget $ 1,927,362 $ - $ 1,927,362 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 18,133 $ - $ 18,133 Total Requirements $ 1,945,495 $ - $ 1,945,495 3of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1CS01,QIFS01-02 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Central Services Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 182,372 $ 205,000 $ 387,372 Property Taxes S - $ - $ - Franchise Fees S - S - S Special Assessments S - $ - S - Licenses&Permits S 33,872 S - S 33,872 Intergovernmental S - S - S - Charges for Services $ 6,986,481 S - S 6,986,481 Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - S - Interest Earnings $ 22,593 $ - S 22,593 Miscellaneous $ 19,900 $ - $ 19,900 Other Financing Sources $ - $ - $ - 'I'ransfers In from Other hiii(Is S 698,824 S 35,000 S 733,824 Total Resources $ 7,944,042 $ 240,000 $ 8,184,042 Requirements Community Development $ - $ - S - Community Services S - $ - $ - Policy and Administration S 7,591,137 S 258,160 S 7,849,297 Public Works S - S - S - Program Expenditures Total $ 7,591,137 $ 258,160 $ 7,849,297 Debt Service S - S - S - Loans S S $ - Work-In-Progress S $ - $ - Trans€ers to Other Funds S S $ - Contingency S 150,000 S (25,000) S 125,000 Total Budget $ 7,741,137 $ 233,160 $ 7,974,297 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 202,905 $ 6,840 $ 209,745 Total Requirements $7,944,042 $ 240,000 $ 8,184,042 4of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items;Q1PW02-04,Q1PW05,Q1PW07 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 704,872 $ 323,250 $ 1,028,122 Property Taxes S - S - S - Franchise Fees S - $ - S Special Assessments S - $ - $ - Ucenses&Permits S 5,872 S - $ 5,872 Intergovernmental S 3,070,117 S - $ 3,070,117 Charges for Services S - $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - $ - Interest Earnings 55,732 $ - $ 55,732 Miscellaneous 62,818 $ $ 62,818 Other Financing Sources S - S - $ - Transfers In frim Other I�unrls S 100,000 S 31 000 S 135,000 Total Resources $ 3,999,411 $ 358,250 $ 4,357,661 Requirements Community Development S - S $ - Community Services S S - $ Policy&Administration S - S - $ - Public Works S 2,166,046 S 35,000 S 2,201,046 Program Expenditures Total $ 2,166,046 $ 35,000 $ 2,201,046 Debt Service S 592,425 S - S 592,425 Loans S - $ S - Work-In-Progress S - S - S - Transfers to Other Funds $ 229,389 $ 323,250 $ 552,639 Contingency S 200,000 S - S 200,000 Total Budget $ 3,187,860 $ 358,250 $ 3,546,110 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 811,551 $ - $ 811,551 Total Requirements $ 3,999,411 $ 358,250 $ 4,357,661 5of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhihit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1PW01,Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Stormwater Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,774,154 $ 60,500 $ 3,834,654 Property Taxes S - S - S - Franchise Fees S - S - S Special Assessments S - $ - S Licenses&Permits S - S - S Intergovernmental $ - S - $ - Charges for Services $ 2,595,949 $ - S 2,595,949 Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - $ - Interest Earnings S 7,936 S - S 7,936 Miscellaneous $ 3,100 S - S 3,100 Other Financing Sources S - S S - Transfers In from Other funds S - S S - Total Resources $ 6,381,139 $ 60,500 $ 6,441,639 Requirements Community Development S - $ - $ - Community Services S $ - $ Policy and Administration S - S - S - Public Works S 1,738,126 S - $ 1,738,126 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,738,126 $ - $ 1,738,12E Debt Service S - S S - Loans $ - $ - $ - Work-In-Progress $ 1,265,096 S 62,000 $ 1,327,096 Transfers to Other Funds $ 433,356 S 8,500 $ 441,856 Contingence S 200,000 S (10,000) S 190,000 Total Budget $ 3,636,578 $ 60,500 $ 3,697,078 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,744,561 $ - $ 2,744,561 Total Requirements $ 6,381,139 $ 60,500 $ 6,441,639 6of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items: Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Underground Utility Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 425,300 $ 51,000 $ 476,300 Property Taxes S $ S Franchise Fees S - S - S - Special Assessments $ - $ - $ - I.icenses&Permits S 48,948 S - $ 48,948 Intergovernmental S - S - $ - Charges for Services S - S - S - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - S - Interest Earnings S 7,160 S - S 7,160 Miscellaneous S - $ - S - Other Financing Sources S - S - S Transfers In from Other Funds S S S Total Resources $ 481,408 $ 51,000 $ 532,408 Requirements Community Development S - S - $ - Community Services S $ - S - Policy and Administration S - S - S - Public Works S - $ - $ - Program Expenditures Total $ - $ $ Debt Service S $ - -S Loans S - S - S Work-In-Progress $ - $ - $ Transfers to Other Funds $ 320,477 $ 51,000 $ 371,477 Contingency $ 50,000 S - $ 50,000 Total Budget $ 370,477 $ 51,000 $ 421,477 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 110,931 $ - $ 110,931 Total Requirements $ 481,408 $ 51,000 $ 532,408 7of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Sanitary Sewer Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,586,876 $ 8,500 $ 3,595,376 Property Taxes S - $ - S Franchise Fees $ $ S - Special Assessments S - S - S - Licenses&Permits S 16,549 S - S 16,549 Intergovernmental S 221,770 S - S 221,770 Charges for Services S 1,590,932 S - S 1,590,932 Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - S - Interest Earnings S 100,333 S - S 100,333 Miscellaneous S 143,091 $ - $ 143,091 Other Financing Sources S - $ - S - Transfers In from Other Funds S - S - S - Total Resources $ 5,659,551 $ 8,500 $ 5,668,051 Requirements Community Development $ - $ - S - Community Services S - S $ Policy and Administration S - S - $ - Public Works S 1,960,087 $ - S 1,960,087 Program Expenditures Total $ 1,960,087 $ - $ 1,960,087 Debt Service S - S S - Loans S - S S - Work-In-Progress S 984,693 S - S 984,693 Transfers to Other Funds $ 76,934 S 8,500 S 85,434 Contingency S 400,000 S - S 400,000 Total Budget $ 3,421,714 $ 8,500 $ 3,430,214 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 2,237,837 $ - $ 2,237,837 Total Requirements $ 5,659,551 $ 8,500 $ 5,668,051 8of16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:QIPW03 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 20,245,015 $ 8,500 S 20,253,515 Property Taxes S - $ $ - Franchise Fees S - $ - $ Special Assessments S - $ $ - Licenses&Permits S 31,335 $ S 31,335 Intergovernmental $ - $ S - Charges for Services 5 18,827,178 $ S 18,827,178 Fines&Forfeitures S - $ S - Interest Earnings S 30,644 S - $ 30,644 Miscellaneous S 10,933 S S 10,933 Other Financing Sources S - S - S - Transfers In from Other 1'UnLIS S 58,-,S1 S S 58,-51 Total Resources $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 Requirements Community Development S - $ - $ - Community Services S S $ - Policy and Administration S - S - S - Public Works S 8,682,558 S S 8,682,558 Program Expenditures Total $ 8,682,558 $ $ 8,682,558 Debt Service S - S S - Loans S - S - S Work-In-Progress S - $ - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 24,882,226 S 8,500 S 24,890,726 Contingency S 500,000 $ _ - S 500,000 Total Budget $ 34,064,784 $ 8,500 $ 34,073,284 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,139,072 $ - $ 5,139,072 Total Requirements $ 39,203,856 $ 8,500 $ 39,212,356 9 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW03-05,QIPW08-09 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Bahoicc $ 379,619 $ $ 379,619 Property Taxes S - $ - S - Franchise Fees S - $ Special Assessments S - $ S Licenses&Permits S - $ $ Intergovernmental $ - $ $ Charges for Services S - $ S - Fines&Forfeitures $ - $ S - Interest Earnings $ - S $ Miscellaneous S - S S Other Financing Sources S - S S Transfer, In from Other Funds S 1,083,448 S 552,000 S 1,635,448 Total Resources $ 1,463,067 $ 552,000 $ 2,015,067 Requirements Community Develolment S - $ - S - Community Services S S Policy and Administration S - S S Public Works S - S S Program Expenditures Total $ $ - $ Debt Service S - S $ - Loans S - S - S - Work-In-Progress $ 1,073,448 S 552,000 S 1,625,448 Transfers to Other Funds S 57,410 $ - $ 57,410 Contingency S - S - S - Total Budget $ 1,130,858 $ 552,000 $ 1,682,858 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 332,209 $ - $ 332,209 Total Requirements $ 1,463,067 $ 552,000 $ 2,015,067 10 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items,QlPW10 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Capital Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 298,740 $ S 298,740 Property Taxes S S $ - Franchise Fees S - $ $ Special Assessments $ - $ $ - Licenses&Permits $ - Intergovernmental $ - $ $ - Charges for Services S - $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - $ $ - Interest Earnings S 3,015 $ S 3,015 ;Miscellaneous S - S S - Other Financing Sources S - S S - Transfers In from Other Funds S 3,15 1,561 S 515,000 S 3.660,561 Total Resources $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 Requirements Community Development $ - $ Community Services S S Policy and Administration S S Public Works S S S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S S $ - Loans S S $ Work-In-Progress S 3,151,561 S 515,000 S 3,666,561 Transfers to Other Funds $ 123,932 S - S 123,932 Contingence S - S - S - Total Budget $ 3,275,493 $ 515,000 $3,790,493 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 177,823 $ - $ 177,823 Total Requirements $ 3,453,316 $ 515,000 $ 3,968,316 11 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:QIPW10 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Parks Bond Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,700,000 $ 515,000 $ 2,215,000 Property Taxes $ - S - S Franchise Fees $ - S Special Assessments S S Licenses&Permits S S - $ Intergovernmental S S - S - Charges for Services S S $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - $ - Interest Earnings S 4,020 S S 4,020 Miscellaneous S - S S - Other financing Sources S - S S Transfers In from Other bunds S S Total Resources $ 1,704,020. $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 Requirements Community Development - S - $ - Community Services - S - S Policy and Administration S - S Public Works S - S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S - $ - Loans S - $ - $ Work-In-Progress $ - $ - $ Transfers to Other Funds S 1,382,013 $ 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Contin ncy S - S - S - Total Budget $ 1,382,013 $ 515,000 $ 1,897,013 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 322,007 $ - $ 322,007 Total Requirements $ 1,704,020 $ 515,000 $ 2,219,020 12 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW08 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget City Gas Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 126,479 $ $ 126,479 Property Taxes S S S - Franchise Fees S - S - S Special Assessments S S - $ - Licenses&Permits $ $ - $ - Intergovernmental $ 612,802 $ S 612,802 Charges for Services S - $ - S - Fines&forfeitures S - S - $ - Interest Earnings S 34,584 S - S 34,584 Miscellaneous S 32,052 $ S 32,052 Other Financing Sources S - S S - Transfers In from Other bunds S - S S - Total Resources $ 805,917 $ - $ 805,917 Requirements Community Development S - S S Community Services S S - S - Policy and Administration S S - S - Public Works S S S - Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ - Debt Service S 316,560 $ S 316,560 Loans S - S - S - Work-In-Progress S - $ - $ - Transfers to Other Funds S 3,208 $ 200,000 $ 203,208 Contingcncy S 300,000 S (200,000) $ 100,000 Total Budget $ 619,768 $ - $ 619,768 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 186,149 $ - $ 186,149 Total Requirements $ 805,917 $ - $ 805,917 13 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW09 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Transportation Development Tax Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 1,112,633 $ 10,000 $ 1,122,633 Property'Taxes S - $ - $ Franchise Fees S - $ - $ Special Assessments $ - $ - S Licenses&Permits S 700,000 S - S 700,000 Intergovernmental S - S - S - Charges for Services S - $ - $ - Fines&Forfeitures S - S - S - Interest Earnings S 11,279 S S 11,279 Miscellaneous S - S S - Other Financing Sources S S Transfers In from Other Ftincl, S - S Total Resources $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 S 1,833,912 Requirements Community Development S - $ - $ - Community Services S - $ - $ - Policy and Administration S - S - $ - Public Works S - S - S _ - Program Expenditures Total $ - $ $ Debt Service S $ $ - Loans S $ - $ - Work-In-Progress S 6,800 $ - $ 6,800 Transfers to Other Funds S 526,690 S 10,000 S 536,690 Contingency S 250,000 S - S 250,000 Total Budget $ 783,490 $ 10,000 $ 793,490 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 1,040,422 $ - $ 1,040,422 Total Requirements $ 1,823,912 $ 10,000 $ 1,833,912 14 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW11 Revised Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water CIP Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 17,223,215 $ $ 17,223,215 Property'Taxes S - $ - Franchise Fees $ $ Special Assessments $ S S - Licenses&Pemvts S S - S - Intergovernmental S $ - $ - Charges for Services $ - S $ - Fines&Forfeitures S S $ - Interest Earnings S 13,096 S - $ 13,096 Miscellaneous S 5,318 S $ 5,318 Other Financing Sources S $ - Transfers In from Othcr Funds S 18,840,921 S 7,A),000 00 S 22 240,921 Total Resources $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 Requirements Community Development $ - S - $ - Community Services S $ $ - Policy and Administration S - S - S - Public Works S S - S - Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service $ S - $ - Loans $ S - $ - Work-In-Progress $ 29,168,682 $ 6,660,000 $ 35,828,682 Transfers to Other Funds S 231,256 $ - $ 231,256 Continency S - S - S - Total Budget $ 29,399,938 $ 6,660,000 $ 36,059,938 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 6,682,612 $ (3,260,000) $ 3,422,612 Total Requirements $ 36,082,550 $ 3,400,000 $ 39,482,550 15 of 16 FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Exhibit-C Summary of Budget Changes Reference Budget Items:Q1PW11 Revised Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Water SDC Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 4,571,596 $ - $ 4,571,596 Property Taxes S - S - S Franchise Fees S - S $ - Special Assessments $ - $ - $ - Licenses&Permits $ 873,715 S $ 873,715 Intergovernmental S - S S Charges for Services S - $ - S Fines&Forfeitures $ - S S - Interest Eamings S 233 S S 233 Miscellaneous S - S ti Other Financing Sources S - S Transfers In from Otiter Fun(ls S - S 5 Total Resources $ 5,445,544 $ - $ 5,445,544 Requirements Community Development S - S $ Community Services S - $ - S Policy and Administration S - S - S Public Works S - $ - S Program Expenditures Total $ - $ - $ Debt Service S S - S - Loans S - S - S - Work-In-Progress S - $ - S - Transfers to Other Funds S 299,130 $ 3,400,000 S 3,699,130 Contingency S 100,000 S - S 100,000 Total Budget $ 399,130 $ 3,400,000 $ 3,799,130 Reserve For Future Expenditure $ 5,046,414 $ (3,400,000) $ 1,646,414 Total Requirements $ 5,445,544 $ - $ 5,445,544 16 of 16 SUPPLEMENTAL. PACKET ,o FOR City of Tigard (DATE OF MEETING) Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Nadine Robinson, Central Services Director/V6_A - Re: Request for budget amendment Date: October 9, 2015 One of the court's long-term clerks will be retiring effective December 2, 2015. The position she is vacating is a .9 FTE. I am requesting a budget amendment that will allow the vacancy to be filled with a fulltime court operations supervisor. Approval of the request will increase the FTE in court by .1 and increase personal services by$14,000. Currently I am responsible for the day-to-day operations of the court. With my transition to the Central Services Director position I am finding that the time commitment to directly oversee the court staff and programs is unmanageable. A court operations supervisor will be able to provide the direct support that is needed in the area. The supervisor will be responsible for: • Coordinating with the judge to review and adjust programs to maximize time efficiencies and update court rules to continue compliance with state laws. • Working with the judge on the court's annual report. • Reviewing workload and distribution so the work is evenly distributed and processing deadlines are met. • Increasing productivity by providing staff with immediate performance feedback. • Providing timely performance evaluations. • Providing monthly and quarterly statistics for PD. • Processing all accounts payable,including the statutorily required payments to the state, county and other agencies. • Coordinating software upgrades as well as resolving software issues. • Preparing the court's budget and tracking expenditures and workload measurements. This will be in addition to the court clerk responsibilities of assisting the judge in the courtroom, coordinating with the prosecutor and attorneys to schedule attorney trials, scheduling non-attorney trials and providing daily customer support. The time I will gain will allow me more time to focus on program development in other parts of the department. The areas in facilities and fleet that are of immediate concern are developing budget data for departments related to fuel usage and vehicle and equipment replacement,conducting a gap analysis for the Fleet and Facilities division for next fiscal year's budget, creating a proposal to allow public rental of the city's conference rooms and,with the 2016 retirement of the assistant to the city manager,assuming the lead on managing property leases as well as coordinating ADA compliance for city facilities. AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: October 13, 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR TESTIMONY (DATE OF MEETING) SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: Informational Public Hearing - CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING FY 2016 FIRST QUARTER BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: October 13, 2015 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting,subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public, The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Pro onent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Addtcssk Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. 6 1't C' Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. AIS-2344 8. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: FY 2016 City Center Development Agency Budget Supplemental Prepared For: Toby LaFrance Submitted By: Carissa Collins, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: City Center Resolution Development Public Hearing- Informational Agency Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE A first quarter supplemental amendment to the FY 2016 Adopted Budget for the City Center Development Agency (CCDA) is required. The purpose of the supplemental is to account for revenues and expenses that were unknown at the time of budget adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Approve the FY 2016 First Quarter Supplemental Budget Amendment for the CCDA. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY A carry forward in the amount of$15,000 is being requested to pay the remaining contract and internal expenses associated with the dog park and the demolition of the Zuber House. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the supplemental budget amendment. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES,MASTER PLANS Revitalization of downtown. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION NA Fiscal Impact Cost: $15,000 Budgeted (yes or no): No Where Budgeted (department/program): CCDA Additional Fiscal Notes: A carry forward in the amount of$15,000 is needed to pay the remaining contractual agreement as well as internal expenses related to the dog park and demo of the Zuber House. Attachments Resolution Exhibit A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE FY 2016 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET WHEREAS, the city acknowledges those items that were unknown at the time the FY 2016 Budget was adopted;and WHEREAS, the CCDA recognizes a total of$15,000 in additional requirements that are offset by additional resources of equal amount. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the Tigard City Center Development Agency that: SECTION 1: The FY 2015-16 Budget is hereby amended as detailed in Exhibit A. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of ,2015. Chair—City of Tigard City Center Development Agency ATTEST: Recorder—City of Tigard City Center Development Agency CCDA Resolution No. 15- Page 1 FY 2016 First Quarter Budget Supplemental Exhibit A QICCDAOL Ash Avenue Dog Park-Capital Improvement Program This request will carry forward 515,000 to FY 2016 to pay remaining contract and internal expenses associated with the relocation of the Ash Avenue Dog Park and demolition of the Zuber House. As result,beginning fund balance in Urban Renewal Debt Service Fund will increase by $15,000 with an increase in transfers.Capital program expenditures within the Transportation CIP Fund will increase by$15,000. Fund I of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Urban Renewal Debt Service Fund Resources begippinjifund Balance S 170,697 S 15,000 $ 185,697 Property Taxes S 397,792 S 397,792 Franchise Fees $ - 5 - Licenses&Permits S S - Intergovernmental $ - $ - Charges for Services S - S - Fines&Forfeitures $ - S - InterestEanmW, S S 1,ow Miscellaneous 5 $ Other Financing Sources S S T-1,f't,ht fnnn Other Funds S S Total Rcsnurces S 569,489 S 15,000 S 584,489 Requirements Community Development $ S - CommunityServices $ - $ - Policy and Administration $ $ Public Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ $ $ Debt Service $ 219,198 S 219.198 Loans S - S Work-In-Progress S S Transfers to Other Funds $ 175,3) $ 15,(Na1 S 191J.;nu Contingence S S Total Budget $ 394,498 $ 15,000 $ 409,498 Reserve For Furore Expenditure $ 174,991 $ $ 174,991 Total Requirements S 569,469 S 15,000 S 584,469 Fund 2 of 2 Adopted Revised Budget Amendment Budget Urban Renewal Capital Improvement Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $ 445,700 S 445,700 Propert)faxes S - S Franchise Fees S - S - Licenses&Permits $ - S - Intergovernmental S - S - Charges for Services S 84,000 $ 84,000 Fines&Forfeitures S - $ - Interest Earnings $ - $ - Mi<cellaneous S - S - Other Financing Sources $ S I rans&rs In from Other I-und, S 175.3(0 15110(, S 190300 1or111Resources S 705,0110 S 15,1100 S 720,000 Requirements Community Development $ - $ - Community Services $ $ Policy and Administration S - S - 1'ttblic Works S S Program Expenditures Total $ $ $ Debt Service $ $ Loans $ S Work-hr-Progress $ 705,000 $ 15,000 $ 720,000 Transfers to Other Funds S 5 - Contingencyy S S Total Budget S 705,000 S 15,000 $ 720,000 Reserve For Future Expenditure S S S Total Requiremetrts S 705,000 S 15,01111 S 720,000 AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: October 13, 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR TESTIMONY (DATE OF MEETING) SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: Informational Public Hearing - CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVING FY 2016 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FIRST QUARTER BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses 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. 8 Date: October 13, 2015 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Pro onent—(Sgeaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Y ` U S Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. AIS-2329 9. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Consideration of Taser purchase contract Prepared For: Alan Orr Submitted By: Lisa Shaw, Police Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Police Department plans to replace 60 outdated Taser Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEWs) with a newer model. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends authorizing the City Manager to sign the Taser Assurance Program contract for the purchase of 60 new Taser CEWs and their future replacement CEWs. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Police Department plans to replace 60 existing X-26 CEWs with the newer model,X-2. Although our authorized sworn position count is 68.0 FTE, not all sworn personnel are mandated to carry CEWs. The Patrol Division will be issued 50 CEWs and Services will be issued 10. The Department has used Taser CEW products for 12 years, since the inception of issuing CEWs to Tigard officers in 2003. A recent scan of the CEW market revealed that two other companies who had previously offered similar products have since gone out of business; the remaining vendor with a CEW product does not meet our technical needs. Taser has phased out its production of the X-26 model currently used. We have started to experience an increase in equipment breakage due to the end of the product's useful life. Support from Taser on the X-26 model has been reduced as it focuses on the newer models. All Taser support for the X-26 product line will cease by 2019. Based on our department's review of Taser's new offerings we have determined that the X-2 is the best CEW for our training and tactical needs. OTHER ALTERNATIVES If the contract is not approved, the department's CEWs will continue to break and eventually Tigard officers will no longer carry this less-lethal weapon. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES,MASTER PLANS This purchase supports Tigard Police Department's goal to "Enhance the safety and security of Tigard's residents,visitors and businesses". DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Council will have received a memo regarding this information in the September 21st Council newsletter. Fiscal Impact Cost: $133,160.30 Budgeted (yes or no): yes Where Budgeted (department/program): Police Additional Fiscal Notes: Based on the quoted price within the Taser Assurance Plan,Tigard could acquire the equipment this year for an up-front cost of$82,484.15 and an annual payment over the next four years of$12,669. The total contract cost would be $133,160.30. The initial cost would be split evenly between the Police Department's Forfeiture Fund, and a$41,242 request from Contingency during the Q1 Supplemental Budget process. Current appropriation within the Forfeiture Fund is $70,000. The ongoing program costs of$12,669 will be budgeted for as a line item within the Police Department's operating budget starting in FY 2016-17. Attachments Council Memo and Taser Quote Taser Contract imCity of Tigard Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City ( �/ Councilors From: Alan Orr, Chief of Polic-SP�J Re: Taser Upgrade Proposal Date: September 21, 2015 The purpose of this memo is to provide you with information about the PD's proposed Taser replacement purchase and acceptance into the Taser Assurance Plan (TAP). Overview Taser has phased out its production of the 1-26 Continuous Electrical Weapons (CEWs) that we currently use. We have started to experience an increase in equipment breakage at the same time that support from Taser has been reduced. All Taser support for the 1-26 product line will cease by 2019. Based on our department's review of Taser's new offerings,including Master Instructor School training attended by our in-house master-trainer, we have determined that the 1-2 model is the best CEW for our training and tactical needs. Department Need It is the Department's plan to replace 60 existing CEWs with the newer model,X-2. Although our authorized sworn position count is 68.0 FTE,not all sworn personnel are mandated to carry them. For the Patrol Division, we plan to replace 50 and for the Services Division 10. Taser Assurance Plan (TAP) Taser has developed a program to allow law enforcement agencies to `prepay' for the replacement of the CEWs in five years. The annual fee that Tigard would pay after the initial equipment purchase goes toward this replacement fund. The TAP includes the following benefits: • Replacement for 60 CEWs after five years with an upgrade to the most current technology. • Price certainty—no inflation increase during the five year period. • Two on-site spare CEWs (62 total: 60 assigned and 2 spares) • Software support and hardware warranty coverage Costs and Timing We propose entering into a contract with Taser this October in order to purchase 601-2 CEWs needed to outfit the entire department at one time. Based on the current prices with the Taser Assurance Plan, Tigard could acquire the equipment this year for an up-front cost of$82,484.15 and an annual payment over the next four years of$12,669. The total contract cost would be$133,160.30. The initial cost would be split evenly between the Police Department's Forfeiture Fund, and a$41,242 request from Contingency during the Q1 Supplemental Budget on October 13`h. Current appropriation in 1 n.rer L P3�cide Pr opoezr/ Page 1 q12 the Forfeiture Fund is $70,000. The ongoing program costs of$12,669 will be budgeted as a line item in the Police Department operating budget starting in FY 2016-17. Next Steps The Police Department will request Council's approval to enter into contract with Taser at the October 13`h business meeting. Please let us know if you have questions about the purchase. Attachments: • August 10, 2015 Taser quote • Taser Assurance Plan flyer Taser L p�radr Prupo.Irl Pitge 2 0%2 TASER International Protect Life.Protect Truth. 17800 N 85th St. Scottsdale,Arizona 85255 United States Phone: (800)978-2737 TA► E R Fax: David Frisendahl (503)718-2567 (503)684-5654 Quotation david.frisendahl@tigard-or.gov Quote: Q-30639-2 Date: 8/10/2015 1:38 PM Quote Expiration: 10/30/2015 Contract Start Date*: 8/10/2015 Contract Term:5 years Bill To: Ship To: Tigard Police Dept.-OR David Frisendahl 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard Police Dept.-OR Tigard,OR 97223 13125 SW Hall Boulevard US Tigard,OR 97223 US SALESPERSON PHONE EMAIL DELIVERY METHOD PAYMENTMETHOD Tom Recker (480)463-2174 trecker@taser.com Fedex-Ground Net 30 *Note this will vary based on the shipment date of the product. Due Net 30+shipping at bottom QTY ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL BEFORE DISCOUNT($) NET TOTAL PRICE DISCOUNT 60 22003 HANDLE,YELLOW,CLASS III,X2 USD USD 61,797.00 USD 0.00 USD 61,797.00 1,029.95 2 22003 HANDLE,YELLOW,CLASS III,X2 USD USD 2,059.90 USD 2,059.90 USD 0.00 1,029.95 48 22501 HOLSTER,BLACKHAWK,RIGHT,X2, USD 65.85 USD 3,160.80 USD 0.00 USD 3,160.80 44HTO1BK-R-B 12 22504 HOLSTER,BLACKHAWK,LEFT,X2, USD 65.85 USD 790.20 USD 0.00 USD 790.20 44HTO1BK-L-B 150 22151 CARTRIDGE,PERFORMANCE,SMART, USD 31.50 USD 4,725.00 USD 0.00 USD 4,725.00 25' 20 22155 CARTRIDGE,PERFORMANCE,SMART, USD 43.00 USD 860.00 USD 0.00 USD 860.00 INERT SIM,25- 200 22157 CARTRIDGE,PERFORMANCE,SMART, USD 30.60 USD 6,120.00 USD 0.00 USD 6,120.00 TRAINING,25' 76 22012 TPPM,BATTERY PACK,TACTICAL, USD 54.50 USD 4,142.00 USD 0.00 USD 4,142.00 PINKY EXTENDER,X2/X26P 2 22012 TPPM,BATTERY PACK,TACTICAL, USD 54.50 USD 109.00 USD 109.00 USD 0.00 PINKY EXTENDER,X2/X26P 2 22013 KIT,DATAPORT DOWNLOAD,USB,X2/ USD 164.75 USD 329.50 USD 329.50 USD 0.00 X26P Page 1 of 3 QTY ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL BEFORE DISCOUNT($) NET TOTAL PRICE DISCOUNT 60 85049 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW USD 211.15 USD 12,669.00 USD 12,000.00 USD 669.00 ANNUAL PAYMENT,X2 60 85047 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW,X2 USD 0.00 USD 0.00 USD 0.00 USD 0.00 r2-185047 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW,X2 USD 0.00 USD 0.00 USD 0.00 USD 0.00 Due Net 30+shipping at bottom Total Before Discounts: USD 96,762.40 Due Net 30+shipping at bottom Net Amount Due: USD 82,264.00 Due Year 2 QTY ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL BEFORE DISCOUNT($) NET TOTAL PRICE DISCOUNT 60 85049 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW USD 211.15 USD 12,669.00 USD 0.00 USD 12,669.00 ANNUAL PAYMENT,X2 Due Year 2 Total Before Discounts: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 2 Net Amount Due: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 3 QTY ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL BEFORE DISCOUNT($) NET TOTAL PRICE DISCOUNT 60 85049 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW USD 211.15 USD 12,669.00 USD 0.00 USD 12,669.00 ANNUAL PAYMENT,X2 Due Year 3 Total Before Discounts: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 3 Net Amount Due: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 4 QTY ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL BEFORE DISCOUNT($) NET TOTAL PRICE DISCOUNT 60 85049 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW USD 211.15 USD 12,669.00 USD 0.00 USD 12,669.00 ANNUAL PAYMENT,X2 Due Year 4 Total Before Discounts: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 4 Net Amount Due: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 5 QTY ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL BEFORE DISCOUNT($) NET TOTAL PRICE DISCOUNT 60 85049 TASER ASSURANCE PLAN CEW USD 211.15 USD 12,669.00 USD 0.00 USD 12,669.00 ANNUAL PAYMENT,X2 Due Year 5 Total Before Discounts: USD 12,669.00 Due Year 5 Net Amount Due: USD 12,669.00 Subtotal USD 132,940.00 Estimated Shipping&Handling Cost USD 220.15 Grand Total USD 133,160.15 Page 2 of 3 TASER International,Inc.'s Sales Terms and Conditions for Direct Sales to End User Purchasers By signing this Quote,you are entering into a contract and you certify that you have read and agree to the provisions set forth in this Quote and TASER's current Sales Terms and Conditions for Direct Sales to End User Purchasers or,in the alternative,TASER's current Sales Terms and Conditions for Direct Sales to End User Purchasers for Sales with Financing if your purchase involves financing with TASER.If your purchase includes the TASER Assurance Plan(TAP), then you are also agreeing to TASER's current Sales Terms and Conditions for the AXON F1exTM and AXON BodyTM Cameras TASER Assurance Plan(U.S. Only)and/or Sales Terms and Conditions for the X2/X26P and TASER CAM HD Recorder TASER Assurance Plan(U.S.Only),as applicable to your product purchase.All of the sales terms and conditions,as well as,the TAP terns and conditions are posted at hap://www.taser.com/sales-tens-and-conditions.If your purchase includes AXON hardware and/or EVIDENCE.com services you are also agreeing to the tens in the EVIDENCE.com Master Service Agreement posted at https://www.taser.com/serviceagreementl4.If your purchase includes Professional Services,you are also agreeing to the terms in the Professional Service Agreement posted at htips://www.taser.comiprofessional-services-agreement.If your purchase includes Integration Services,you are also agreeing to the terms in the SOW posted at https://www.taser.com/inte2rationstatementofworkl4.You represent that you are lawfully able to enter into contracts and if you are entering into this agreement for an entity,such as the company,municipality,or government agency you work for,you represent to TASER that you have legal authority to bind that entity.If you do not have this authority,do not sign this Quote. Signature: Date: Name(Print): Title: PO#(if needed): Please sign and email to Tom Recker at trecker@taser.com or fax to THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! 'Protect Life'and Q are trademarks of TASER International,Inc.,and TASER®is a registered trademark of TASER International,Inc.,registered in the U.S. ®2013 TASER International,Inc.All rights reserved. Page 3 of 3 upgradeASSURANCE PLAN Benefits New CEW After 5 Years Guaranteed Budget CertaintyIdentify the exact yearly cost agency's TASER CEW programr Upgrade Technology Without • . with capital . • Protect Your Present... Plan for Your Future Protection rom , „ , Capital SpareMake your budget dollars work harder Officers experience downtime DeploymentFeatures Full Program 5 Year Terms Pre-Pay Penalty What is the TASER°Assurance Plan? Warranty Coverage Included The TASER Assurance Plan(TAP)is our new service program,integrating warranty coverage for your current Conducted Energy Weapons(CEWs)with a free upgrade handle after the 5th payment along with on site spares so officersWhat Products • X2-CEWs experience zero downtime. One Stop for Service and Support •• TASER CAM"HD Only TAP gives you the service you need today and the protection you want tomorrow.Not only does TAP secure you today's price,it also guarantees a superior level of personal support for your CEWs and your agency for the next five years.Peace of mind:just another way TASER is putting your security first. Software Support Included • Visit www.TASER.com/tap Whether you are an armorer or patrol officer,you'll have access to prompt and X2T'%X2613-and TASERCAM—HD are trademarks ofTASER International,Inc.,and TASER*and the personalized direct support from TASER experts on a wide range of topics. Hardware Coverage TAP provides"no questions asked"repair coverage for CEWs or TCAM HDs.No matter what happens,you can rest easy-we'll take care of it for you. u logo are registered trademarks ofTASER International,Inc.,registered in the U.S. CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON S PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR TIGARD—TASER:TASER ASSURANCE PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 13th of October, 2015 by and between the City of Tigard,a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called City, and TASER International, hereinafter called Seller,collectively hereinafter called the"Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, Seller has submitted a bid or proposal to City for the sale of certain goods; and WHEREAS, Seller is in the business of selling certain goods and is aware of the purposes for which City will use the goods; and WHEREAS, City and Seller wish to enter into a contract under which City shall purchase the goods described in Seller's bid or proposal; THEREFORE,The Parties agree as follows: 1. GOODS TO BE PROVIDED City shall purchase 60 Class III 12 Conducted Electrical Weapons and associated cartridges, battery packs and holsters as outlined in the attached quote through the TASER Assurance Program from Seller in accordance with: A. The specifications (including any addenda) attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; B. The Seller's proposal dated August 10, 2015, which was accepted by the Contract Review Board attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference; and C. The City's Standard Terms and Conditions attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated by this reference. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION This Agreement shall become effective upon the date of execution by the City's Local Contract Review Board and shall expire,unless otherwise terminated or extended, on October 13, 2020 whichever comes first. All goods under this Agreement shall be delivered and completed prior to the expiration of this Agreement. 3. COMPENSATION A. City hereby agrees to pay Seller Eighty-two thousand two hundred sixty four and no cents ($82,264.00) for the goods, including shipping and handling. The total purchase price shall be considered payment for all Sellers' obligations described in this agreement. Seller shall invoice City the purchase price upon the delivery of the goods. City shall have thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice in which to make payment. Seller shall be responsible for the payment of all taxes associated with the sale of the goods. City is exempt from the payment of Federal Excise Tax. B. Seller shall promptly advise City of all reasonably available technological advances that are known or become known to Seller while this agreement is in effect which may result in the goods having added value, capacity, or usefulness when used for City's purpose. If Seller intends to provide goods incorporating technological advances and still meeting the specifications and the City's needs at no additional charge, Seller shall provide City with 30 days' notice of the proposed change. The City may require that only goods not incorporating the changes be supplied by providing written notice to seller within 5 days of receiving the notice of the proposed change. Any other changes incorporating technological advances shall only be approved as an amendment to this agreement. C. The City certifies that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this contract during the City's FY 2015-16 fiscal year. Funding for future fiscal years shall be subject to the adoption of the budget by the Tigard City Council. 4. DELIVERY Seller shall deliver the goods no later than 30 days after receipt of City's purchase order, with the exception of any back-ordered items, together with an executed copy of this Agreement. Seller agrees to provide goods as specified in Exhibit A. Within 30 days following delivery, City shall inspect the goods and shall notify Seller immediately of any damaged items. No language contained in a purchase order,work order, or delivery order shall vary, amend,modify,or add terms or conditions to this Agreement under which the order is placed. 5. INSTALLATION Unless the Specifications (Exhibit A) or the proposal (Exhibit B) require installation by Seller, the City shall install the goods purchased under this agreement. Any installation by Seller shall be un accordance with the provision of this agreement,including all Exhibits. 6. TESTING AND ACCEPTANCE Seller shall test the goods prior to delivery. Seller's tests shall determine whether the goods meet Seller's specifications and are fit for the purpose intended. Acceptance or rejection of the goods purchased shall occur 10 days after delivery and inspection by Buyer. Failure to inspect and accept or reject goods shall neither relieve Seller from responsibility for such goods, which do not meet the requirements in this Agreement nor impose liability on Buyer. 7. RISK OF LOSS Risk of loss to goods in shipment (including damage, destruction, theft, or loss) shall be borne by the Seller. Risk of loss shall not pass to Buyer until the goods are delivered to and checked in at the location specified by Buyer. 8. ASSIGNMENT/DELEGATION Neither party shall assign or transfer any interest in or duty under this Agreement without the written consent of the other and any attempted assignment or transfer without the written consent of the other party shall be invalid. 9. SUBMITTING BILLS AND MAKING PAYMENTS All notices and bills shall be made in writing and may be given by personal delivery, mail or fax. Payments may be made by personal delivery, mail, or electronic transfer. The following addresses shall be used to transmit notices, bills,payments,and other information: CONTRACT MANAGER FOR CITY TASER INTERNATIONAL Attn: Lt. David Frisendahl Attn: Legal Department Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Address: 17800 N 85th Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Scottsdale,Arizona 85255 Phone: 503 718-2567 Phone: 800 978-2737 Fax: Fax: Email Address: David.Frisendahl@tiard-orLOV EmailAddress: contracts@taser.com 10. TERMINATION City has the right, in its sole discretion, to ternninate without cause or for no cause, to termination this Agreement at any time by giving notice to Seller. If City terminates the contract pursuant to this section, it shall pay Seller for goods shipped by Seller prior to receipt by Seller of the notice of termination. City may deduct the amount of damages, if any, sustained by City due to any breach of contract or warranty by Seller. Damages for breach of contract or warranty shall be those allowed by Oregon law, reasonable and necessary attorney fees,witness fees (expert and non-expert), and other costs of litigation at trial and on appeal. 11. ACCESS TO RECORDS City shall have access to such books, documents,papers and records of Seller as are directly pertinent to this Agreement for the purpose of making audit,examination, excerpts and transcripts. 12. FORCE MA-EURE Neither City nor Seller shall be considered in default because of any delays in completion and responsibilities hereunder due to causes beyond the control and without fault or negligence on the part of the parties so disenabled, including but not restricted to, natural disaster, war, civil unrest, volcano, earthquake, fire, flood, epidemic, quarantine restriction, area-wide strike, freight embargo, unusually severe weather or delay of subseller or supplies due to such cause;provided that the parties so disenabled shall within ten (10) days from the beginning of such delay, notify the other party in writing of the cause of delay and its probable extent. Such notification shall not be the basis for a claim for additional compensation. Each party shall, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and shall, upon cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligation under the Agreement. 13. NON-DISCRIMINATION Seller agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statues, rules, and regulations. Seller also shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, ORS 659.425,and all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to those laws. 14. WARRANTY AGAINST DEFECTS Seller warrants that the goods shall remain free of defects in material and workmanship for a period of one (1) year commencing the date of City's acceptance. Such defects shall include any failure of the goods to meet Seller's specifications or the description contained in Seller's product literature. If within the warranty period City discovers such a defect, Seller shall repair or replace the defective item or component free of charge. If after three attempts Seller is unable to eliminate a defect, or if Seller does not commence the warranty work within the time allowed in this paragraph, City shall have the right to return the defective item or component and, at City's option, either obtain a full refund of the purchase price of the goods or obtain a refund, in an amount to be agreed upon by the parties, of the portion of the purchase price of the goods that is allocable to the defective item or component. Seller shall commence all warranty work within 48 hours of receiving notice of the warranty claim. All warranty work shall be performed at City's facilities unless otherwise agreed by the parties. If warranty work is performed at Seller's facilities, Seller shall pay all shipping costs,including the cost of return shipment. This warranty shall apply to all repair parts furnished by Seller and all repairs performed by Seller. 15. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WARRANTY Seller warrants that none of the goods,the use thereof or any of the applications, processes or designs employed in the manufacture thereof infringes the valid claims of any letter patent, patent application, copyright, trade secret or any other property right of any third party. If as a result of any suit or proceeding alleging an infringement of any of the foregoing property rights City's use of the equipment is enjoined, Seller shall at no cost to City either obtain for City a license to use the goods or modify the goods so as to avoid the infringement without any degradation in performance. If Seller cannot obtain such a license and cannot so modify the equipment, Seller shall promptly refund to City the purchase price,less a reasonable amount for depreciation. 16. ASSIGNMENT OF MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTIES Seller hereby assigns all warranties of the manufacturers of components of the goods to City to the extent such warranties are assignable. In the event Seller must obtain the consent of the manufacturer or take other action before any such warranties are assignable, Seller shall do so prior to delivery. 17. INDEMNITYMOLD HARMLESS Seller shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, City's officers, employees, agents and representatives from and against all liability, claims, demands, judgments, penalties, and causes of action of any kind or character, or other reasonable costs or expenses incidental to the investigation and defense thereof, of whatever nature, resulting from or arising out of the tortious acts or omissions, willful misconduct, or product defects of the Seller or its subsellers, agents, or employees under this contract, except, however, that the foregoing shall not apply to liability that arises out of City's negligence. 18. INSURANCE Contractor and its subcontractors shall maintain insurance acceptable to City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract. Such insurance shall cover all risks arising directly or indirectly out of Contractor's activities or work hereunder,including the operations of its subcontractors of any tier. The policy or policies of insurance maintained by the Contractor and its subcontractor shall provide at least the following limits and coverages: A. Commercial General Liability Insurance: If Seller will be installing or testing the goods, or otherwise performing services on City's premises, Seller shall provide a certificate indicating that Seller has commercial general liability insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an "occurrence" form (CG 2010 1185 or equivalent). This coverage shall include Contractual Liability insurance. Coverage will include $2,000,000 per occurrence and $3,000,000 general annual aggregate. Said insurance shall name City as an additional insured and shall require written notice to City thirty (30) days prior to cancellation. If Seller hires a subseller to perform services on City's premises, Seller shall ensure that Seller's subseller complies with this paragraph. B. Business Automobile Liability Insurance: If Seller will be delivering the goods, Seller shall provide City a certificate indicating that Seller has business automobile liability coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $2,000,000. Said insurance shall name City as an additional insured and shall require written notice to City thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation. If Seller hires a carrier to make delivery, Seller shall ensure that said carrier complies with this paragraph. C. Workers' Compensation Insurance: The Seller, its subsellers, if any, and all employers providing work, labor or materials under this Contract that are either subject employers under the Oregon Workers'Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017,which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage that satisfies Oregon law for all their subject workers or employers that are exempt under ORS 656.126. Out-of-state employers must provide Oregon workers' compensation coverage for their workers who work at a single location within Oregon for more than 30 days in a calendar year. Sellers who perform work without the assistance or labor of any employee need not obtain such coverage. This shall include Employer's Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 each accident. D. Certificates of Insurance: As evidence of the insurance coverage required by the contract, the Seller shall furnish a Certificate of Insurance to the City. No contract shall be effected until the required certificates have been received and approved by the City. The certificate will specify and document all provisions within this contract. 20. ATTORNEY'S FEES In case suit or action is instituted to enforce the provisions of this contract, the parties agree that the losing party shall pay such sum as the court may adjudge reasonable attorney fees and court costs, including witness fees (expert and non-expert),attorney's fees and court costs on appeal. 21. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS/RULES Seller shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, the requirements concerning working hours, overtime, medical care, workers compensation insurance, health care payments, payments to employees and subsellers and income tax withholding contained in ORS Chapter 279, the provisions of which are hereby made a part of this agreement. 22. CONFLICT BETWEEN TERMS It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should there be any conflict between the terms of this instrument in the proposal of the contract, this instrument shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the terms of proposal conflicting herewith. 23. SEVERABILITY In the event any provision or portion of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected to the extent that it did not materially affect the intent of the parties when they entered into the agreement. 24. COMPLETE AGREEMENT This Agreement, including the exhibits,is untended both as a final expression of the Agreement between the parties and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms. In the event of an inconsistency between a provision in the main body of the Agreement and a provision in the Exhibit, the provision in the main body of the Agreement shall control. In the event of an inconsistency between Exhibit A and any other exhibit, Exhibit A shall control. In the event of an inconsistency between Exhibit C and Exhibit B,Exhibit B shall control. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until it is made in writing and signed by both parties. No waiver,consent,modification,or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both parties. Such waiver,consent, modification, or change if made, shall be effective only in specific instances and for the specific purpose given. There are no understandings,agreements,or representations,oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. Seller, by the signature of its authorized representative, hereby acknowledges that Seller has read this Agreement,understands it and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized undersigned officer and Seller has executed this Agreement on the date hereinabove first written. Approved by Tigard's Local Contract Review Board at their October 13,2015 business meeting. CITY OF TIGmw TASER INTERNATIONAL By:Authorized City Representative By:Authorized Contractor Representative Date Date EXHIBIT A GOODS TO BE PROVIDED Summary outlined in the table below: Quote:Q-30639-2 Taser Assurance Plan Purchase 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Contract 2015: Contract Qty Unit Price YEAR 1 Year 2 Year3 Year4 Year 5 Value X2 CEW 60 $1,029.95 $61,797.00 $61,797.00 ......Ei�...................................................................................................................................I.................I..............................................................................ii X2 (spares) 2 $0.00 $0.00 00 ............ ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ TPPM battery pack 76 $54.50 $4,142.00 $4,142.00 TPPM battery pack(extra) 2 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 '6'a'*t'a'*p....................................... o"'r"t"*download--''..."*''",...k'i*t*'**... ..........—......*"'2'*"*"* *$"0- .......*$...0,.-0'*0" ....... ......*'*'*..........*........ Holsters(48 R/12 Q 60 $65.85 $3,951.00 $3,951.00 25'Smart Cartridges 150 $31.50 $4,725.00 $4,725.00 .....;.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Inert Simulation Cartridges 20 $43.00 $860.00 $860.00 ——----------- Training cartridges,25' 200 $30.60 $6,120.00 ...................................... $6,120.00 Taser Assurance Plan CEW 60 $211.15 $12,669.00 $12,669.00 $12,669.00 $12,669.00 $12,669.00 $63,345.00 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Taser Assurance Plan DISCOUNT 0 $0.00 ($12,000.00) ($12,000.00) Taser Assurance Plan CEW 2 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated shipping&Handling $220.15 $220.15 Net 30+tax/shipping $82,484.15 12,669.00 12,669.00 12,669.00 12,669.00 , $133,160.15 Detailed description of items as per the attached quote Q-30639-2 dated August 10,2015. EXHIBIT B SELLER'S PROPOSAL Please see attached quote Q-30639-2 Dated August 10, 2015 EXHIBIT C CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON GENERAL TERMS &CONDITIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF SUPPLIES AND/OR SERVICES 1. DEFINITIONS: 'Contract'shall mean the entire written agreement between the Parties,including but not limited to any Invitation to Bid, Request for Proposal, or submitted quote and its specifications, terms, conditions, solicitation instructions, addenda, contract amendments,price agreement documents,and purchase order. `Contractor' shall mean a person or organization with which the City of Tigard has contracted for the purchase of goods or services. The terms `Contractor' and `Seller' are synonymous as used in the Uniform Commercial code (Oregon Revised Statute(ORS)chapter 72). `City'means the City of Tigard, Oregon and is synonymous with Buyer' as used in ORS chapter 12. `City' shall also mean an Oregon Cooperative Procurement Program (ORCPP) member if the purchase is being made under the State's cooperative purchasing program as authorized by ORS 279A and Tigard's Public Contracting Rules. `Parties'shall collectively mean the`City'and the`Contractor'. 2. ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT: This Contract is the City's offer to purchase the goods and/or services described herein from the Contractor. The City's placement of this Contract is expressly conditioned upon Contractor's acceptance of all the terms and conditions of purchase contained on or attached to this Contract. 3. WORKERS'COMPENSATION: The Contractor, its subcontractors, and all employers providing work, labor, or materials under this Contract are subject employers under the Oregon Workers'Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide Oregon Workers' Compensation coverage that satisfies Oregon law for all their subject workers. Contractor shall also comply with ORS 279B.230 regarding payment for medical care. 4. STANDARD AND SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: The terms and conditions printed on this page are standard to City contracts for the purchase of goods or trade services. There may also be special terms and conditions detailed in an Invitation to Bid, Request for Proposals, Quote Request,or other documents which may apply to this contract,and which are incorporated by this reference herein. 5. DELIVERY. All deliveries shall be F.O.B. destination with all transportation and handling charges paid by Contractor unless specified otherwise in the Contract. Responsibility and liability for loss or damage shall remain with Contractor until final inspection and acceptance when responsibility shall pass to the City except as to latent defects, fraud, and Contractor's warranty obligations. 6. INSPECTIONS: Goods furnished under this Contract shall be subject to inspection and test by the City at times and place determined by the City. If the City finds goods furnished to be incomplete or not in compliance with solicitation specifications, the City may reject the goods and require Contractor to either correct them without charge or deliver them at a reduced price,whichever is equitable under the circumstances. If Contractor is unable or refuses to cure any defects within a time deemed reasonable by the City,the City may reject the goods and cancel the contract in whole or in part. Nothing in this paragraph shall in any way affect or limit the City's rights as Buyer, including the rights and remedies relating to rejection under ORS 72.6020 and revocation of acceptance under ORS 72.6080. 7. WARRAN`T'IES: Unless otherwise stated, all goods shall be new and current model and shall carry full manufacturer warranties. Contractor warrants all goods delivered to be free from defects in labor, material and manufacture and to be in compliance with solicitation specifications. 311 implied and expressed warranty provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code (ORS chapter 72) are incorporated in this contract. A11 warranties shall run to the City. Contractor warrants that the material and/or equipment furnished do not infringe any patent registered trademark or copyright, and agrees to save,hold harmless, and indemnify the City in the event of any claim of infringement. 8. CASH DISCOUNT: If the City is entitled to a cash discount,the period of computation shall commence on the date the entire order is delivered or the date the invoice is received,whichever is later. 9. PAYMENT: Payment for completion of City contracts is typically made within 30 days following the date the entire order is delivered or the date the invoice is received,whichever is later. 10. TERMINATION: This Contract may be terminated by mutual consent of both parties or by the City at its sole discretion. The City may cancel an order for goods at any time with written notice to Contractor, stating the extent and effective date of termination. Upon receipt of this written notice, Contractor shall stop performance under this Contract as directed by the City. If this Contract is so terminated, Contractor shall be paid in accordance with the terms of the Contract for goods delivered and accepted if Contractor's damages arising out of return of the goods cannot be mitigated by the resale as provided in the Uniform Commercial Code(ORS 72.7060). 11. FORCE MAJEURE: Neither City nor Contractor shall be held responsible for delay or default caused by fire, riot, acts of God and/or war, which is beyond the Party's reasonable control. The City may terminate this contract upon written notice after determining such delay or default will reasonably prevent successful performance of this Contract. 12. BREACH OF CONTRACT: Should Contractor breach any of the provisions of this Contract, the City reserves the right to cancel this Contract upon written notice to Contractor. Contractor shall be liable for any and all damages suffered by the City as the result of Contractor's breach of Contract including but not limited to incidental and consequential damages, as provided in ORS 72.7110 to 72.7170. In the event of repeated breach of public and/or private contracts, Contractor shall be subject to disqualification for City contracts, as provided in ORS chapter 279B and Tigard's Public Contracting Rules. 13. INDEMNIFICATION: Contractor agrees to defend,indemnify,and hold harmless City,City's officers,employees,agents,and representatives from and against all liability,claims,demands,judgments,penalties,and causes of action of any kind or character,or other reasonable costs or expensed incidental to the investigation and defense thereof,of whatever nature,resulting from or arising out of the tortious acts or omissions, willful misconduct, or product defects of the Contractor or is subcontractors, agents, or employees wider this Contract,except,however,that the foregoing shall not apply to liability that arises out of City's negligence. 14. ACCESS TO RECORDS: Contractor shall maintain all fiscal records relating to this Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall maintain any other records relating to this Contract in such a manner as to clearly document Contractor's performance hereunder. The City and its duly authorized representatives shall have access to such fiscal records and to all other books, documents, papers, plans and writings of Contractor which relate to this Contract, to perform examination,and audits and make excerpts and transcripts. 15. AMENDMENTS: The terms of this contract shall not be waived,altered,modified, supplemented or amended in any manner whatsoever without prior written approval of the City. 16. SEVERABILITY: Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require the commission of any act contrary to law,and wherever there is any conflict between the provisions contained herein and any present or future statute,law,ordinance or regulation contrary to which to the parties have no legal right to contract, the latter shall prevail. The provision of this Contract,which is affected,shall be curtailed and limited only to the extent necessary to bring it within the requirement of the law. 17. WAIVER: Failure of the City to enforce any provision of this Contract shall not be a waiver or relinquishment by the City of its right to such performance in the future nor of the right to enforce any other provisions of this Contract. 18. GOVERNING LAW;JURISDICTION,VENUE: This Contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon,without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules, or doctrines. any claim, action, suit, or proceeding (collectively, "the Claim") between the City and the Contractor that arises from or relates to this Contract shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Washington County for the State of Oregon. Provided,however,if the claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Portland office of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Contractor hereby consents to the in persona m jurisdiction of said courts. 19. ASSIGNMENT/SUBCONTRACT/SUCCESSORS: The Contractor shall not assignor subcontract any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written approval of the City. any unapproved assignment shall be void. Contractor shall be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any subcontractors and all persons employed by them,and neither the approval by City of any subcontract nor anything contained herein shall be deemed to create any contractual relation between the subcontractor and the City. The provisions of this Contract shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, the Parties to the Contract and their respective successors and assigns. 20. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS: Contractor shall comply with all federal,state and local laws,codes,regulations and ordinances applicable to the provision of goods under this contract, including, without limitation, the provisions of ORS 279C.505,279C.515, and 279B.235,as set forth below and the provisions of:(i) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; (ii) Section V of the Rehabilitation act of 1973; (iii) the americans with Disabilities act of 1990 (Pub L No 101- 336). ORS 659.425, and all amendments of and regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to those laws;and (iv) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes,rules and regulations. 21. PAYMENTS REQUIRED BY ORS 279C.505 AND 279B.220: For all goods provided wider this Contract,Contractor shall(i) pay promptly,as due,all persons supplying labor or material; (ii)pay all contributions or amounts due the Industrial Accident Fund from the Contractor or any subcontractor; (iii) not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against the state,county, school district, municipality, municipal corporation or subdivision thereof; and (iv) pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees pursuant to ORS 316.167. 22. CITY PAYMENT OF CONTRACTOR CLAIMS: If Contractor fails,neglects,or refuses to pay promptly as due, any claim for labor or services furnished to the Contractor or any subcontractor by any person in connection with the goods provided under this Contract,the City may pay such claim and charge the amount of the payment against funds due or to become due the Contractor under this Contract. The payment of a claim by the City pursuant to paragraph 21 shall not relieve the Contractor or its surety,if any,from obligation with respect to any unpaid claims. 23. HOURS OF LABOR: No person shall be employed by the Contractor for more than ten hours in any one day, or 40 hours in any one week, except in cases of necessity, emergency, or where public policy absolutely requires it, and in such cases the laborer shall be paid at least time-and-a-half pay for all overtime in excess of ten hours a day and for work performed on Saturday and on the legal holidays, including each Sunday, as specified in ORS 279B.020 and 279C.540. 24. SAFETY AND HEALTH REQUIREMENTS: Goods and services provided under this Contract shall comply with all federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements and with all Oregon safety and health requirements,including those of the State Workers'Compensation Division. 25. AWARD TO FOREIGN CONTRACTOR If Contractor is not domiciled in or registered to do business in the State of Oregon, Contractor shall promptly provide to the Oregon Department of Revenue and the Secretary of State Corporation Division all information required by those agencies relative to this contract. The City shall withhold final payment under this contract until Contractor has met this requirement. 26. RECYCLABLE PRODUCTS: Contractor shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent economically feasible in the performance of this Contract. Contractor shall specify the minimum percentage of recycled product in the goods provided. 27. MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET (MSDS) In accordance with the OR-OSHA Hazard Communication Rules in OAR chapter 437, Contractor shall provide the City with a Material Safety Data Sheet for any goods provided under this Contract which may release,or otherwise result in exposure to,a hazardous chemical under normal conditions of use(OAR 437- 002-0360). In addition,Contractor must label,tag or mark such goods. 28. LICENSEXERTIFICATION: 'The Contractor shall have a business license from the City and be EEO certified,if required under City Code. AIS-2379 10. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/13/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: 72nd and Dartmouth Intersection Improvements Developer Costs Prepared For: Toby LaFrance Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall Council authorize the City Manager to execute the attached letter fulfilling the intent of the signal funds collected from prior development in the Tigard Triangle and reunburse the developer who installed the traffic signals at the intersections of Dartmouth Street with 72nd and 68th Avenues? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Authorize the City Manager to execute the attached letter to reimburse Walmart Real Estate Business Trust for its portion of costs from the signal fund. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Since 1999, development in the Tigard Triangle has been contributing to a signal fund to pay their share for the future signalization of the intersections of Dartmouth Street with 72nd and 68th Avenues. The City of Tigard has maintained the signal funds in a liability account in the Gas Tax Fund. All the contributions totaling$343,475.66 are listed in Exhibit A. This year, the Walmart Real Estate Business Trust completed and paid for the installation of signals at these two intersections. Their development impacts triggered the installation of both intersection signals. Consistent with the intent of the contributions from prior development, the Trust should be reimbursed for a portion of the cost from the collected signal funds. During construction, change orders in the amount of $22,937 reduced the amount of the signal funds available to Walmart,making the total reimbursement $320,538.66. This is also on the attached Exhibit A. In order to meet audit requirements, the City needs approval from an authorized body to make the reimbursement. Staff reviewed the development record for the Walmart Real Estate Business Trust and it does not provide this authorized approval. Attached to this agenda item is a letter from the City Manager to the Walmart Real Estate Business Trust. By Council authorizing the City Manager to execute the letter, the city can reimburse the Walmart Real Estate Business Trust in the amount of$320,538.66 and audit requirements will be met. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to not authorize the City Manager at this time. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Fiscal Impact Cost: $320,538.66 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where Budgeted (department/program): Public Works Additional Fiscal Notes: The payment to Walmart is a pass-through of contributions made by prior developers in the Tigard Triangle area. The cost of the reimbursement was accrued to last fiscal year. If Council authorizes the City Manager to execute the attached letter, the expense will come against FY 2015 Public Works budget which has sufficient remaining capacity to cover the expenditure. There is no impact to the current FY 2016 Adopted Budget. Attachments Letter Exhibit A AgendaQuick©2005-2015 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved Z City of Tigard Volker Heimeshoff Vice President of Prototype and New Format Development 2001 Southeast 10th Street, MS 5510 Bentonville, AR 72716-5510 October 13, 2015 Re: Walmart Signal Reimbursement Dear Mr. Heimeshoff: Walmart recently completed construction of a Walmart store on property in the Tigard Triangle,which included the construction of traffic signals at the intersections of 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth and 68th Avenue/Dartmouth, as required by the City's land use approval. Generally, as a condition of development in the Tigard Triangle, all development must contribute funds to an intersection deposit account for future signalization within this area ("Signal Fund"). However, in lieu of this contribution,Walmart constructed these signals with the understanding that the City of Tigard would reimburse Walmart for a portion of its costs from the Signal Fund, once the project was complete. Walmart provided documentation of the costs of the signal installations in June 2015. The City of Tigard and Walmart agree that Walmart is entitled to $320,538.66 as reimbursement for a portion of its costs for the Signal Fund. The City therefore authorizes reimbursing the Walmart Real Estate Business Trust from the Signal Fund. Sincerely, Martha Wine, City Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 0 www.tigard-or.gov Exhibit A 200 GAS TAX FUND LIABILITIES 200-0000-22000 Customer Deposits Debit Credit 06/22/2000 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth ROCKY MOUNTAIN LAND 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 533.00 09125/2000 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 1,200.00 05/05/2000 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth MAGNOLI HI-FI INC 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 2,000.00 10/26/2000 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 25,333.00 10/24/2000 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 26,667.00 05/15/2001 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 6,800.00 07/17/2002 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth CD-COUNTER 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 9,067.00 08/15/2003 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth CD-COUNTER 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 1,067.00 05/21/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 221.05.2004 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 501.00 06/28/2004 Cash Receipts Balch 228.06.2004 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 727.00 08/20/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 220.08.2004 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 1,002.00 05/25/2005 Cash Receipts Batch 225.05.2005 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 2,133.00 10/19/2005 Cash Receipts Batch 219.10.2005 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 5,012.00 09/14/2006 Cash Receipts Batch 214.09.2006 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 1,504.00 06/09/2006 Cust Depst-68th/Dartmouth SDR2004-00012 CD C 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 2,005.00 12/20/2007 Cash Receipts Batch 220.12.2007 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 1,002.50 02/13/2007 Cash Receipts Batch 213.02.2007 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 42,105.00 12/02/2008 Dartmouth Square LLC-SDR2006-10001/Dartmout 68th/Dartmouth 18,545.00 0.00 01/18/2008 Cash Receipts Batch 218.01.2008 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 501.25 05/14/2008 Cash Receipts Batch 214.05.2008 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 2,506.27 06/27/2008 Cash Receipts Batch 227.06.2008 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 18,545.00 04/27/2009 Cash Receipts Batch 227.04.2009 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 711.62 07/02/2009 Cash Receipts Batch 202.07.2009 68th/Dartmouth 0.00 1,500.00 05/29/2014 Customer Deposits CD Counter 68th/Dartmouth 3508.77 137,386.41 68th Intersection Contributions 12/17/1999 Cash Receipts-DOS JE 31 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 10,000.00 11/10/1999 Cash Receipts-DOS JE 18 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 14,667.00 12/17/1999 Cash Receipts-DOS JE 31 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 20,000.00 06/22/2000 Cust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth ROCKY MOUNTAIN LAND 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 1,454.00 09/25/2000 Cust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 4,000.00 05/05/2000 Cust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth MAGNOLI HI-FI INC 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 4,182.00 10/26/2000 Cust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 5,818.00 10/24/2000 Cust Depsl-72nd/DartmouthDST-COUNTER 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 41,818.00 05/15/2001 Cust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth DST-COUNTER 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 2,364.00 07/17/2002 Cust Depsl-72nd/Dartmouth CD-COUNTER 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 6,364.00 08/15/2003 Gust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth CD-COUNTER 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 2,182.00 07/20/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 220.07.2004 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 501.00 05/21/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 221.05.2004 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 712.00 07/20/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 220.07.2004 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 712.00 06/28/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 228.06.2004 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 1,067.00 08/20/2004 Cash Receipts Batch 220.08.2004 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 3,636.00 05/25/2005 Cash Receipts Batch 225.05.2005 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 6,909.00 10/1912005 Cash Receipts Batch 219.10.2005 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 12,097.00 06/09/2006 Cust Depst-72nd/Dartmouth SDR2004-00012 CD C 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 712.00 09/14/2006 Cash Receipts Batch 214.09.2006 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 712.00 12/20/2007 Cash Receipts Batch 220.12.2007 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 712.00 02/13/2007 Cash Receipts Batch 213.02.2007 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 30,600.00 12/02/2008 Dartmouth Square LLC-SDR2006-1000/Dartmouth 72nd/Dartmouth 14,536.00 0.00 01/18/2008 Cash Receipts Batch 218.01.2008 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 712.62 05/14/2008 Cash Receipts Batch 214.05.2008 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 10,674.26 06/27/2008 Cash Receipts Batch 227.06.2008 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 14,536.00 04/27/2009 Cash Receipts Batch 227.04.2009 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 711.62 05/29/2014 Customer Deposits CD Counter 72nd/Dartmouth 0.00 22,771.75 206,089.25 72nd Intersection Contributions 343,475.66 Total Contributions 1/31/2015 Signal Funds-72nd&68th/Dartmouth 44,412.00 0.00 6/30/2015 Adjust Walmart share of 72nd&69th/Dartmouth 0.00 21,475.00 -22,937.00 Adjustment for Change Order $ 320,638.66 Amount due to Walmart SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR / -., a2el City Council Update Oct 2015 (DATE OF MEETING) Chamber Events Good Morning Tigard (GMT),Thursday A.M. Networking 7:30 a.m.—Weekly 10/15/15—Hosted by Send Out Cards @ Tigard Chamber 10/22/15—Hosted by AccounTax of Oregon @ their location 10/29/15—Hosted by Culture by Design @ location TBD 11/5/15— Hosted by Costco Tigard includes ribbon cutting of new gas station Other • 10/14/15—6-8 p.m. TYP and YPLO After hours Halloween networking at Home Turf • 10/15/15—4-5 p.m. Monthly Home,Garden and Design Referrals Group—3`d Thursdays • 10/28/15—8-930 a.m.—TYP Educational Breakfast of Champions—Speaker from Columbia Sportswear • 10/28/15—9-10 a.m.—Business Services Referrals Group @ the Tigard Chamber • Save the date, Holiday Happy Hour,Tuesday, December 1"at Broadway Rose Check our event calendar at http://business.tigardchamber.org/events/calendar/for locations and hosting companies Tigard Farmers Market Update • Trick or Treat at the market, Sunday 10/25/15 and submit your carved pumpkin for judging. • Join us 11/14/15 from 10am—4 p.m. for our annual Harvest Market& Bazaar at Tigard High and get a jump on your holiday shopping, crafts, food, art and more! Downtown Updates • Big congratulations to Tigard Downtown Alliance for your Excellence in Revitalization Award at the recent Oregon Main Street Conference for your special event SubUrban Art! • 31d Friday is 10/16/15, come Explore Downtown Tigard • Friday 10/30/15 Trick or Treat Main Street 4-6 p.m. • Save the date Holiday Tree Lighting, Friday 12/4/15 Learn what there is to do in Downtown Tigard on Facebook at www.facebook.com/exploredowntowntigard and at www.exploredowntowntigard.com T 4ARD AREA CHAMeE0.Of • COMMERCE t � � � � F tigardyoungprofessionals MARKET V�4reC��US+wis .r"l cOMIKt.COIIKt Collab0Eatt.CIM1b. GROW.GATRER.GIVE.