Loading...
CCDA Packet - 11/24/2015 City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL,LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AND CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MEETING DATE AND TIME: November 24,2015 - 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 beard in any order after 7.3Op.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 (IDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http://live.tigard-or. og_v 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, LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AND CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MEETING DATE AND TIME: November 24,2015 - 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 PARTICIPATION IN THE NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN MANDATED FIVE-YEAR REVIEW 6:45 p.m. estimated time C. BRIEFING ON LAKE OSWEGO/TIGARD WATER PARTNERSHIP 6:55 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. Council Communications &Liaison Reports E. 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 Area Chamber of Cormnerce C. Citizen Communication—Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council and Local Contract Review Board)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. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: •November 10,2015 B. CONSIDER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN A METRO NATURE IN NEIGHBORHOODS GRANT FOR THE DIRKSEN NATURE PARK C. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD: CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT AWARD FOR STREET SWEEPING •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Separate Discussion.Any items requested to be irmoved from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediatelafter the Council/City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need disrussion. 4. RECEIVE PROGRESS REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN 7:40 p.m. estimated time 5. ADOPT 2016 STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA 7:50 p.m. estimated time 6. CCDA BOARD CONSIDERATION TO AMEND THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN TO ACQUIRE 12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET 8:05 p.m. estimated time 7. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN TO ACQUIRE 12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET 8:10 p.m. estimated time 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF SALE OF 12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET (THE "SAXONY PROPERTIES") 8:15 p.m. estimated time 9. CCDA BOARD CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION TO PURCHASE THE SAXONY PROPERTY 8:20 p.m. estimated time 10. NON AGENDA ITEMS •EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation and litigation likely to be filed,under ORS 192.660(2) (h).All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 8:30 p.m. estimated time 11. ADJOURNMENT 9:00 p.m. estimated time ,, City o 'Tigard Tigard City Council Meeting Agenda TIGARD November 24, 2015 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. DISCUSS PARTICIPATION IN THE NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN MANDATED FIVE-YEAR REVIEW— Emergency Management/Safety Coordinator Lueck and Public Works Director Rager will present this item. 6:45 p.m. estimated time C. BRIEFING ON LAKE OSWEGO/TIGARD WATER PARTNERSHIP—Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership Director Koellermeier will give an update. 6:55 p.m. estimated time Administrative Items: 1. Community Survey 2. Ribbon cutting Council Calendar November 3 Tuesday ., 10* Tuesday Council/CCDA Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 17* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 24* Tuesday Council/CCDA 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 Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting CANCELLED Council Training will be held from 5:30-9:30 at Fanno Creek House January 5 Tuesday City Center Development Agency Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 12* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 19* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 26* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 28 Thursday Council Outreach at Summerfield Club House, 7-8:30 Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk(*). AIS-2076 A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 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 files) attached. r / 4 lag Uj J-1 pp th r - F Cover photos of 2010-2015 CDBG and HOME proiects: (Clockwise from the ton left): City of North Plains Claxtar St. Waterline, Street and Sidewalk Improvements City of Hillsboro Walnut Park Improvements Northwest Housing Alternatives Alma Gardens Apartments,Hillsboro City of Hillsboro Dairy Creek Park Picnic Shelters and Accessibility Improvements WaCo L UT SW 173rd Sidewalk Improvements,Aloha City of Tualatin's Juanita Pohl Center Centro Cultural de Washington County, Cornelius Bienestar,Inc.'s Juniper Gardens Apartments,Forest Grove Public Service activities funded by the City of Beaverton Home assisted by WaCo Office of Community Development's Housing Rehabilitation Program Boys and Girls Aid Transitional Living Program,Beaverton Sequoia Mental Health Services Clinical Office Building(adjacent to Spruce Place Apartments) Copies of this document may be accessed online at: httn•//www co washington or us/CommunityDevelopment/Planning/2015-2020-consolidated-plan.cfm Approved by Washington County Board of Commissioners May 5,2015 Minute Order#15-127 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Volume 4 Washington County Consortium Washington County and The Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Oregon Prepared by Washington County Office of Community Development In collaboration with City of Beaverton Development Division and City of Hillsboro Planning Department �`a�,TOIN co Beaverton '� E o N Hillsboro 0REGON OREGON Washington County 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan The following is a list of volumes that compose the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan: Volume 1,2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Template(HUD Version)—Volume 1 of the Consolidated Plan is created in the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development's Integrated Disbursement and Information System(IDIS),which will be provided to HUD and represents the minimum information that HUD requires for Consolidated Plan submission. Volume 2,Consolidated Plan Supplementary Data—Volume 2 includes the Supplementary data and supporting documentation for each chapter of the Consolidated Plan. Refer to the Volume 2 Table of Contents for a description of the contents of each Appendix. Volume 3,2015 Action Plan—Volume 3 of the Consolidated Plan will be the Annual Action Plan for the funding Year 2015. Volume 4,2015—Hearing feedback of the usefulness of the data contained therein,it was felt that a more user-friendly version of this document would be helpful to the public and is provided here as a version that is intended to be a more comprehensive version than that which is required by HUD. Based on feedback from the public,the value of this expanded version of the Consolidated Plan was seen and is provided here in a format that will be more suitable for the public's review than the HUD version described above. Volume 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION&EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................................................i CHAPTER 1 COMMUNITYPROFILE.......................................................................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 2 PLANNING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT......................................................................................................................7 CHAPTER 3 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS&NEEDS ASSESSMENT...........................................................................................15 CHAPTER 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN..........................................................................................................................135 CHAPTER 5 CONSOLIDATEDPLAN MAPS.......................................................................................................................................148 CHAPTER 6 STRATEGICPLAN............................................................................................................................................................193 GLOSSARY............................................................................................................................................................................221 TABLES COMMUNITY PROFILE Table 1-1 Age of Washington County Population(2012)..............................................................................................1 Table 1-2 Population of Washington County Cities(2012)............................................................................................2 Table 1-3 Racial and Ethnic Composition of Washington County(2012).....................................................................3 Table 1-4 Poverty in Washington County by Race and Ethnicity(2012).......................................................................4 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT Table 3-1 Definition of Income Groups........................................................................................................................16 Table 3-2 Housing Problem Estimates for Extremely Low,Low and Moderate Income Households(2010).............17 Table 3-3 Housing Needs Assessment Demographics(2011)......................................................................................18 Table 34 Total Households Table(2011).....................................................................................................................20 Table 3-5 Housing Problems Table(2011)...................................................................................................................21 Table 3-6 Housing Problems 2 Table(2011)................................................................................................................21 Table 3-7 Cost Burden>30%Table(2011).................................................................................................................22 Table 3-8 Cost Burden>50%Table(2011).................................................................................................................22 Table 3-9 Crowding Information Table(2011).............................................................................................................22 Table 3-10 Crowding Information 2 Table(2011)..........................................................................................................23 Table 3-11 Overcrowded Units,Persons per Room,Washington County(2012)..........................................................23 Table 3-12 Washington County Consolidated Plan Summary of Housing Needs ........................................................24 Table 3-13 Rapid Re-Housing for People Who are Homeless in Washington County(2014).......................................30 Table 3-14 Affordable Housing Units by Income Range,Washington County(20 10)..................................................32 Table 3-15 Composite Estimated Need for Affordable Rental Units,Washington County(2013)................................33 Table 3-16 Low and Moderate Income Households with Housing Problems,Washington County(20 10)..................35 Table 3-17 Disproportionately Greater Need 0-30%AMI Table(2011)........................................................................37 Table 3-18 Disproportionately Greater Need 30-50%AMI Table(2011)......................................................................37 Table 3-19 Disproportionately Greater Need 50-80%AMI Table(2011)......................................................................38 Table 3-20 Disproportionately Greater Need 80-100%AMI Table(2011)....................................................................38 Table 3-21 Severe Housing Problems 0-30%AMI Table(2011)...................................................................................40 Table 3-22 Severe Housing Problems 30-50%AMI Table(2011).................................................................................40 Table 3-23 Severe Housing Problems 50-80%AMI Table(2011).................................................................................41 Table 3-24 Severe Housing Problems 80-100%AMI Table(2011)...............................................................................41 Table 3-25 Greater Need:Housing Cost Burdens AMI Table(2011)............................................................................42 Table 3-26 Ethnic and Racial Composition of Washington County,2012-2015............................................................43 Table 3-27 Ethnic and Racial Composition of Washington County and Selected Sub-Areas(2000,2012)..................44 Table 3-28 Census Tracts with Minority Concentrations in Washington County(2010).......................................46, 127 Table 3-29(a) Census Tracts with Low-Income and Minority Concentrations in Washington County(2010)..........47, 128 Table 3-29(b) Census Tracts with Low-Income Concentrations and Disproportionate Greater Need for Racial/Ethnic Groups in Washington County(2010)...................................................................................48 Table 3-30 Housing Problems by Racial and Ethnic Group by Income Status(2010)..................................................49 Table 3-31 Census Tracts with Low-Income Concentrations in Washington County(2010)................................50, 129 Table 3-32 Public Housing by Program Type Table.......................................................................................................52 Table 3-33 Characteristic of Public Housing Residents by Program Type....................................................................53 Table 3-34 Race of Public Housing Residents by Program Type...................................................................................53 Table 3-35 Ethnicity of Public Housing Residents by Program Type............................................................................53 Table 3-36 Section 8 Voucher Waiting List by Household,Washington County(2013)...............................................54 Table 3-37 Public Housing Waiting List by Household,Washington County(2013)....................................................55 Table 3-38 Point-In-Time Homeless Count,Washington County(2014)......................................................................58 Table 3-39 Number of Beds Available Year Round for People Who Are Homeless,Washington County(2014)........59 Table 3-40 Homeless Needs Assessment(2014)............................................................................................................61 Table 3-41 Race and Ethnicity of the Sheltered and Unsheltered Homeless Population(2014)...................................61 Table 3-42 Causes of Homelessness,Washington County(2014).................................................................................62 Table 3-43 Gender of Homeless Persons,Washington County(2014)..........................................................................63 Table 344 Age of Homeless Persons,Washington County(2014)...............................................................................63 Table 3-45 2012-2013 Student Homeless Count by District..........................................................................................65 Table 3-46 Ethnicity of Homeless People,Washington County(2014).........................................................................65 Table 3-47 Race of Homeless People,Washington County(2014)................................................................................65 Table 3-48 Special Needs Characteristics of People Who Are Homeless in Washington County(2014).....................66 Table 3-49 Emergency Shelters for People Who Are Homeless in Washington County(2014)....................................66 Table 3-50 Transitional Housing for People Who Are Homeless in Washington County(2014)..................................67 Table 3-51 Safe Haven Housing for People Who Are Homeless in Washington County(2014)...................................67 Table 3-52 Permanent Supportive Housing for People Who Are Homeless in Washington County(2014).................68 Table 3-53 Housing for Farmworkers by Bienestar(2014)............................................................................................71 Table 3-54 Low and Moderate Income Households with One or More Older Adults(2010)........................................72 Table 3-55 Adults with Disabilities(2012)....................................................................................................................73 Table 3-56 Low-Income Senior Households with Cost Burden(20 10).........................................................................74 Table 3-57 Housing for Seniors and Elderly(2010).......................................................................................................75 Table 3-58 Persons with Disabilities by Age,Washington County(2012)....................................................................78 Table 3-59 Persons with Disabilities by Poverty Status,Washington County(2012)....................................................79 Table 3-60 Persons with Disabilities by Earnings,Washington County(2012).............................................................79 Table 3-61 Race,Ethnicity,and Gender for Persons Living with HIV/AIDS in Washington County(2014)...............84 NON-HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT Table 3-62 Public Facility Needs in Washington County(2014)...................................................................................85 Table 3-63 Public Infrastructure Needs in Washington County(2014).........................................................................86 Table 3-64 Public Services Needs in Washington County(2014)..................................................................................86 Table 3-65 Economic Development Activity Needs in Washington County(2014)......................................................87 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Table 3-66 Total Housing Units,Washington County(2012)........................................................................................90 Table 3-67 Residential Properties by Unit Number(2011)............................................................................................91 Table3-68 Unit Size by Tenure(2011)..........................................................................................................................91 Table 3-69 Distribution of Subsidized Housing,Washington County(2011)................................................................92 Table 3-70 Targeting of Subsidized Housing in Washington County(2011).................................................................93 Table 3-71 Cost of Housing(Change in Value and Rent from 2000 to 2012)...............................................................95 Table3-72 Monthly Rent Paid(2011)............................................................................................................................95 Table 3-73 Median Rents,Washington County(2012)..................................................................................................96 Table 3-74 2014 HOME Program Monthly Rent Limits for Washington County(2014)..............................................96 Table 3-75 Housing Affordability Table(2011).............................................................................................................97 Table 3-76 Median Homeownership Costs,Washington County(2012).......................................................................97 Table 3-77 Homeownership vs.Rental Table,Washington County(2012)...................................................................99 Table 3-78 Condition of Housing Table(2011)............................................................................................................100 Table 3-79 Year Unit Built Table(2011)......................................................................................................................100 Table 3-80 Age of Housing Units,Washington County(2012)...................................................................................100 Table 3-81 Age of Existing Housing Stock,Washington County(2012).....................................................................101 Table 3-82 Plumbing and Kitchen Facilities Table,Washington County(2012).........................................................101 Table 3-83 Heating Fuel Source Table,Washington County(2012)............................................................................101 Table 3-84 Blood Level Test Results,Washington County(2007)..............................................................................102 Table 3-85 Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard(2011)...................................................................................................103 Table 3-86 Occupancy of Housing Units,Washington County(2012)........................................................................103 Table 3-87 Vacant Units between 2000 to 2012...........................................................................................................104 Table 3-88 Public and Assisted Housing:Total Number of Units by Program Type...................................................105 Table 3-89 Public Housing Condition in Washington County(2011)..........................................................................105 Table 3-90 Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households(2014).............................................................106 Table 3-91 Licensed Long Term Care Facilities in Washington County(2013)..........................................................110 Table 3-92 Structured Mental Health Housing in Washington County(2014)............................................................111 Table 3-93 Housing for People with Mental Illness and Drug/Alcohol Addiction(2013)...........................................112 Table 3-94 Housing for the Developmentally Disabled,Washington County(2010)..................................................112 Table 3-95 Housing for the Physically Disabled,Washington County(20 10).............................................................113 Table 3-96 Adult Residential Facilities for People in Drug and Alcohol Recovery(2013).........................................113 Table 3-97 Housing for People in Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery(2013)......................................................114 Table 3-98 Clean and Sober Housing in Washington County(2014)..........................................................................114 Table 3-99 Average Household Size by Renter and Owner,Washington County(2012)............................................117 Table 3-100 Projected Household Growth through 2020,Washington County.............................................................119 NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSETS Table 3-101 Business Activity in Washington County(2011).......................................................................................121 Table 3-102 Labor Force in Washington County(2011)................................................................................................122 Table 3-103 Occupations by Sector in Washington County(2011)...............................................................................122 Table 3-104 Travel Time in Washington County(2011)................................................................................................122 Table 3-105 Educational Attainment by Employment Status(Population 16 and Older)(2011)..................................123 Table 3-106 Educational Attainment by Age(2011)......................................................................................................123 Table 3-107 Educational Attainment by Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months(2011).............................................123 CONSOLIDATED PLAN MAPS Table 5-1 Mapping Indicator Matrix:Primary Indicators.................................................................................. 148-149 Table 5-2 Mapping Indicator Matrix:Demographic Indicators.................................................................................150 STRATEGIC PLAN Table 6-1 ESG Performance Objectives and Standards by Activity..........................................................................208 Table 6-2 Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle...............................................209 Table 6-3 Other Consolidated Plan Strategies Included in the Five-Year Strategic Plan...........................................210 Table 6-4 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Jurisdictional Strategies.....................................................................211-213 Table 6-5 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Anti-Poverty Strategies......................................................................214-217 Table 6-6 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summary..................................................................................218-219 MAPS Transit Access Neighborhood Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0).............................................................................................153 Transit Access in Relationship to Schools with 75%or More Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0).............................................................................................155 Proximity to Primary Care Facilities Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)..................................................................................157 Proximity to Public and Human Services Composite Neighborhood Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)................................159 Proximity to Publicly Accessible Parks and Natural Areas Composite Neighborhood Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0).....161 Walkability(Sidewalk Density)Neighborhood Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)..................................................................163 Walkability in Relationship to Percent Minority Students(by school)Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)..............................165 Walkability in Relationship to Schools with 75%or More Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0).............................................................................................167 Proximity to Supermarkets,Grocery Stores and Fresh Food Composite Neighborhood Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)...169 Schools with 75%or More Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch in Relation to Adequate Yearly Progress Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)...................................................................................................171 Percent Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch(by school)Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)..................................173 Concentrations of Households At or Below 50%AMI(10-19%and 20%or More Above the County Average)Map..........175 Concentrations of Households At or Below 50%AMI(10%or More Above the County Average)Map..............................177 LMI(Low Moderate Income)Block Groups in Washington County Map.............................................................................179 LMI(Low Moderate Income)Block Groups in Washington County Map Inset 1..................................................................181 LMI(Low Moderate Income)Block Groups in Washington County Map Inset 2&3...........................................................183 Areas of Minority Concentration in Washington County(2010).............................................................................................185 Housing Cost Burden in Washington Co.Census Tracts Map(CPD Maps)........................................................................... s 187 Percent Change in Populations of Color Map from 2000-2010(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0).................................................189 Percent Households with Low English Proficiency Map(Regional Equity Atlas 2.0)...........................................................191 FIGURES Figure 3-1 Renters Cost Burdened and Severe Cost Burdened(Line Graph from 2007-2012)................................................17 Figure 3-2 Boundaries of Washington County..........................................................................................................................20 Figure 3-3 Housing Cost Burden and Severe Cost Burden by Jurisdiction...............................................................................34 Figure 3-4 Areas of Minority Concentration in Washington County(2010) ....................................................................47, 187 Figure 3-5 Concentrations of Households At or Below 50%AMI....................................................................................51, 177 Figure 3-6 Estimated Homeless Counts:Point in Time Counts(October 2012-July 2013)......................................................60 Figure 3-7 Federal Homeless Definition:Literally Homeless Trends Sheltered and Unsheltered People(2009-2014)...........64 Figure 3-8 State Homeless Definition: Literally Homeless&Living Doubled-Up Shelteredand Unsheltered People(2009-2014)........................................................................................................................64 Figure 3-9 Washington County Age Distribution 2000 and 2010...........................................................................................72 Figure 3-10 Homeless Housing Inventory,Washington County,Oregon,(2009-2014)...........................................................107 Figure 3-11 Percent Change in Income and Housing Costs 2007-2012..................................................................................118 Figure 3-12 Self-Sufficiency Standard vs.Monthly Income(Family of Three)(2014)..........................................................124 Figure 3-13 Eastern Washington County Submarket of Concentrated Census Tracts(CPD Maps).......................................132 Figure 3-14 Hillsboro Submarket of Concentrated Census Tracts(CPD Maps).....................................................................132 CHARTS ConsolidatedPlan Process Flow Chart......................................................................................................................................14 Washington County CDBG Budget Allocation Methodology.................................................................................................142 Acknowledgements Washington County Board of Commissioners Andy Duyck,Chair Roy Rogers,Vice Chair Bob Terry Greg Malinowski Dick Schouten Policy Advisory Board(PAB) City of Banks.................Brian Biehl&Jolynn Becker City of King City...........David Newham City of Beaverton...........Denny Doyle&Cadence Moylan City of North Plains.......Robert Kindel& City of Cornelius............Harley Crowder&Brad Coffey Michael Demagalski City of Durham.............. City of Sherwood...........Linda Henderson&Kristen Switzer City of Forest Grove......Peter Truax&Ronald Thompson City of Tigard.................Marland Henderson&Marissa Grass City of Gaston................Rick Lorenz&Richard Sager City of Tualatin..............Frank Bubenik City of Hillsboro............Megan Braze&Debbie Raber Washington County........Dick Schouten&Andy Duyck ConPlan Work Group Steve Berger...................WC Community Corrections Ellen Johnson.................Oregon Law Center Justin Buri......................Community Alliance of Tenants Mona Knapp...................Luke-Dorf Joy Chang.......................WC Long Range Planning Andrea Nelson...............City of Beaverton Ross Cornelius...............Development Consultant/ Mary Quinn....................Westside Economic Alliance Walsh Construction Debbie Raber.................City of Hillsboro Jillian Detweiler.............Tri-Met Val Valfre........................WC Housing Services Katie Freeman................City of Beaverton Laura Weigel City of Hillsboro Katherine Galian............Community Action Ramsay Weit..................Community Housing Fund Mapping Subcommittee Kim Armstrong..............WC Housing Services Andrea Nelson...............City of Beaverton Louise Dix......................Fair Housing Council of Oregon Karen Perl Fox...............Community Partners for Affordable Katherine Galian............Community Action Housing Joseph Hayes..................WC Long Range Planning Jennie Proctor.................WC Community Development Ellen Johnson.................Oregon Law Center Debbie Raber.................City of Hillsboro Nels Mickaelson.............WC Information&Technology Kimberly Repp...............WC Health&Human Services Anne Morse....................Adelante Mujeres Lauren Sechrist..............WC Community Development Sharon Nielson...............The Nielson Group Ben Sturtz.......................WC Community Development Anti-Poverty Strategy Work Group Renee Bruce...................Community Action Ellen Johnson.................Oregon Law Center Jeanie Butler...................WC Disability,Aging& Jennie Proctor.................WC Community Development Veterans'Services Don Schweitzer PhD,MSW Angela Day....................OR Depart.of Human Services ................Pacific University Annette Evans................WC Housing Services Leticia Vitela.............Community Action Katherine Galian............Community Action WC=Washington County 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Acknowledgements Coordinated Planning Group Kim Armstrong........WC Housing Services,Program Coordinator Joy Chang.................WC Department of Land Use and Transportation,Long Range Planning Section,Associate Planner, Marissa Grass...........City of Tigard,Community Planning Section,Community Development Department,Associate Planner Andrea Nelson.........City of Beaverton,Community Development Department,CDBG Project Coordinator Debbie Raber...........City of Hillsboro,Planning Department,Project Manager Jeff Salvon................City of Beaverton,Community Development Department,Planning Division,Associate Planner Ben Sturtz.................WC Community Development,Housing Services Specialist Alwin Turiel.............City of Hillsboro,Long Range Planning Division,Urban Planner III Laura Weigel............City of Hillsboro,Long Range Planning Division,Urban Planner III Anna Wendt..............WC Office of Community Development U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development Vicki L.Skryha..............Senior Community Planning and Development Representative Nancy Donovan.............Community Planning and Development Program Manager Production of Consolidated Plan Washington County Office of Community Development Housing Market Analysis and Needs Assessment Jennie H.Proctor............Program Manager Ben Sturtz..........................WC Community Development Patricia Longua..............Grants Technician Anna Wendt......................WC Community Development Matthew Mattia..............Housing Rehabilitation Coordinator Focus Groups Lauren Sechrist..............Senior Community Development Arturo Villaseffor...............Adelante Mujeres Specialist Eduardo Corona................Adelante Mujeres Ben Sturtz.......................Housing Services Specialist& Eva Gomez........................Adelante Mujeres Con Plan Team Lead Hugo Ortiz........................Adelante Mujeres Anna Wendt....................Administrative Specialist Hugo Ortiz........................Adelante Mujeres City of Beaverton Sonia Marleny Gutierrez...Adelante Mujeres Cadence Moylan............Community Development Dept. Mary Carmen Gaona.........Adelante Mujeres Andrea Nelson...............CDBG Project Coordinator Anne Morse.......................Adelante Mujeres (2007-2014) Bridget Cooke...................Adelante Mujeres Katie Freeman ...............CDBG Project Coordinator Juanita Villarreal...............Beaverton Hispanic Center (2014-2015) Rich Mayo.........................Beaverton Hispanic Center Jeff Salvon,AICP........Associate Planner Dorotea Lopez...................Centro Cultural Community Survey Juana L.Meraz..................Centro Cultural Andrea Nelson...........City of Beaverton Jose Rivera........................Centro Cultural Aaron Bogle.............City of Beaverton Printing Development of Supplementary Maps Jade Tofllemoyer...........WC Department of Support Services Heidi Surna....................City of Beaverton Editing Screening Event Sherry Jirles..................WC Department of Support Services Karin Kelley-Torregroza......Vision Action Network of Principal Authors Washington County Katherine Galian................Community Action Renee Bruce..........................Community Action Andrea Nelson...................City of Beaverton Linda Nilsen-Solares.............Project Access Now Anna Wendt........................WC Community Development Annette Evans.......................WC Housing Services Annette Evans....................WC Housing Services Dan Herman..........................211 info Lauren Sechrist..................WC Community Development Denzil Scheller......................Venetian Theatre&Bistro Jennie Proctor.....................WC Community Development Ben,Paula,Deven,Ocean and Isabella Rieck Ben Sturtz.............................WC Community Development Focus Group Photos Washington County Office of Community Development wishes to Stacie Struble Pacific University student acknowledge and thank the hundreds of community members,government •••••••••••••••••• representatives,and non-profit and agency staff who participated in meetings,surveys,interviews and focus groups related to this plan. Acknowledgements 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Introduction / Did you know? • The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan describes community needs and determines local priorities for using public resources to assist low and moderate- income residents of Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro(the Washington County Consortium). B e� e ' • • • Introduction & Executive Summary I. Introduction WHAT IS A CONSOLIDATED PLAN? The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan describes community needs and determines local priorities for using public resources to assist low and moderate-income residents of Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro(the Washington County Consortium). It sets forth a five-year strategic plan consisting of actions and production targets to address community needs. The success of the plan depends on the voluntary participation of numerous agencies and local governments in the collaborative implementation of the strategies. The Washington County Office of Community Development is responsible for plan coordination and reporting. This plan has been developed in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)intended to result in"a unified vision for community development actions."Federal statutes set forth three goals that frame the overall intent of Consolidated Plans: • Provide decent housing • Support the development of a suitable living environment • Expand economic opportunities While this plan addresses all three goals to some degree,the focus continues to remain on the first two,as it has been in prior Consolidated Plans. WHY IS THE PLAN NEEDED? HUD requires jurisdictions receiving federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG),HOME Investment Partnerships(HOME)or Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)funds to develop a community-wide plan every three to five years as a condition of continuing to access these funds. The prior Consolidated Plan for the Washington County Consortium covered the time period of July 1,2010 through June 30,2015. This plan covers the time period of July 1,2015 through June 30,2020. This plan is augmented by annual Action Plans,which specify the use of funds in the coming year,and Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Reports(CAPER),which measure progress toward meeting goals annually and cumulatively. In Washington County,three jurisdictions receive formula allocations of the federal programs described above. Washington County is a CDBG Entitlement Community. It receives a direct allocation of CDBG funds annually which can be used throughout Washington County, except in the City of Beaverton.Although the City of Hillsboro is entitled to receive a direct allocation of CDBG funds,the City opted to remain part of the County CDBG program as a joint recipient. Under an Intergovernmental Agreement with the County,the County administers the City's funds and manages its projects. The City of Beaverton receives its own allocation of CDBG funds annually and runs its program separately from the CDBG program for Washington County. Beaverton CDBG funds must be used to benefit Beaverton residents exclusively. The Washington County Office of Community Development acts as the lead agency for the Washington County HOME Consortium. HOME funds can be used throughout the county. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary The Washington County Office of Community Development coordinates the development of the Consolidated Plan,Action Plans and CAPERS. The City of Beaverton contributes staff time to the development of this plan. Other incorporated cities that have not yet reached the required population thresholds to be direct recipients of HUD funds still participate in and benefit from the programs through the Policy Advisory Board(PAB). Through the PAB,these jurisdictions participate in making policy and programmatic decisions as well as selecting projects to receive funding. INTRODUCTION & IS THE PLAN BINDING? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Consolidated Plan is not binding. However,it sets targets and goals and identifies strategies to achieve them. It is an enabling document that provides participating jurisdictions and other stakeholders with information and an action-oriented framework to address critical housing,homelessness and community development needs. Through the CAPER,the County reports annually to stakeholders,community residents and HUD on the progress it has made toward achieving these goals and the causes for deviations from the plan. There is no penalty from HUD if the goals are not met as stated. The plan can be amended during the five-year period,in accordance with the provisions of the Citizen Participation Plan. II. Executive Summary Planning is less about predicting the future than it is about reaching agreement about how a community will respond to the conditions that the future brings. A good plan makes intentions explicit. Given the recent upheavals in the housing and financial markets and the resulting economic recession,it is difficult,if not impossible,to anticipate exactly how conditions will change over the next five years and further into the future.Thus,this plan is a statement of how the Washington County Consortium, in collaboration with its many partners,intends to respond to the rapidly changing community development, housing and economic environment in 2015-2020. The following principles guided the development of this plan: • The Consolidated Plan is a plan among plans.Thus,the planning process began with a review of plans and meetings with representatives from other agencies.The most direct link with another plan is with the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. Instead of creating a separate plan for addressing homelessness,the Consolidated Plan focuses on how resources can be used to help implement the Ten Year Plan. Linkages with other plans—from criminal justice to health to community long range plans—are presented in a matrix in Volume Il. • Innovative methods—beyond public hearings—are required to access the concerns and knowledge of low-income residents and the public in general. Thus, the planning process included focus groups with low-income residents. It also included several broad-reaching electronic and paper community surveys,including a new survey designed to determine how residents access information about housing and community development programs and what topics interest them in attending public meetings and public hearings. �� 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary • Engage the general public about the growing suburbanization of poverty in Washington County. A free public screening of the award-winning HBO documentary American Winter was held at the Venetian Theater as part of the Consolidated Plan citizen participation process.There is a perception among many residents in Washington County that economic development,opportunity and job growth are available and accessed by all members of the community.This screening was intended to challenge public perceptions about people living in poverty by describing the day-to-day struggles and barriers facing low-income families in Washington County. One of the families featured in the film came to the screening INTRODUCTION & to speak about the challenges of going through foreclosure,job loss and finding an EXECUTIVE SUMMARY affordable apartment in Hillsboro.A panel of non-profit service providers then discussed the themes of the film and available resources in the community.This was done in an effort to provide public education about the increased number of residents living in poverty in Washington County as a result of the recent recession. • To infuse the plan with new ideas and perspectives,it is necessary to invite new people to help guide the planning process. The Con Plan Work Group was formed with this principle in mind.This group brought knowledge and experience to bear on the planning process from a wide array of disciplines,including land use planning, public housing,advocacy,development finance,homeless and anti-poverty programs, fair housing,social services,law, economic development, mental health,community development financial institutions,public transit and corrections. • Checking in with stakeholders at key points in the process is essential to keeping the plan grounded in the community.Thus,the planning process included two sets of workshops and numerous consultations. • The strong tradition of collaboration that characterizes Washington County's social service,homelessness,housing and community development environment must be the foundation upon which this planning effort is built.The strategies presented in Chapter 6 reflect this collaborative approach. WHAT'S INNOVATIVE ABOUT THIS PLAN? Each new five-year planning cycle offers the opportunity to build on and extend the work included in the prior plan.The 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan built on some of the innovative concepts first introduced in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan and attempted to introduce some new elements.New elements in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan include the following: • Parallel formats that ensure the new electronic submission of the Consolidated Plan into the Integrated Disbursement and Information System(IDIS)is seamless in linking with the overarching document available for the community to review in a meaningful way. • New data sources and methods,including U.S.Census 2010 data,updated American Community Survey and CHAS data,Regional Equity Atlas 2.0,focus groups with low income residents,a public screening of a documentary on the topic of poverty, and several new community-wide surveys not conducted before to gauge how residents access information on housing and community development as well as their preferences and attitudes with regards to housing.For qualitative information,this Consolidated Plan also used recent data from Washington County's participation in the Transportation Funding Options Online Survey and the regional Housing Preference Survey. Introduction&Executive Summary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan III • Integration with the Aloha-Reedville Study and Livable Community Plan as well as linkages to Beaverton's Creekside District Master Plan and Implementation Strategy. This plan seeks to integrate some of the strategies of the Aloha-Reedville Study and Livable Community Plan as they relate to housing and community development and extend them to the entire County. • Age-Friendly and Multigenerational Focus. This plan seeks to focus incentives for development of affordable housing that enables elders,extended families and individuals with special needs to age in place in their existing housing and construct INTRODUCTION & more accessible and visitable housing using universal design principles.This would EXECUTIVE SUMMARY also include expanded research on multigenerational housing as an alternative model. • A renewed focus on how residents receive information on housing and community development programs in an effective and meaningful way in an attempt to increase participation in the planning processes that inform the Consolidated Plan. • A higher level of integration with the work of other agencies and departments. The working relationships formed during the planning process with local planning departments,private nonprofit agencies,for-profit and non-profit housing developers, Community Action,mental health services providers and the community corrections system will ensure that the implementation of this plan will result in a coordinated approach to addressing the challenges of low-income residents in Washington County. ENHANCED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS As indicated in the principles above,a more aggressive citizen participation process was central to the development of this plan. This process is described in detail in Chapter 2, Planning and Public Involvement. Highlights include: • The formation of a ConPlan Work Group comprised of individuals representing diverse interests, including people who have not been involved in this planning process in the past. The Con Plan Work Group advised the Washington County Office of Community Development on the process and content of the plan. • Conducting two sets of community workshops at strategic points in the planning process to meet with key stakeholders(local jurisdictions,agencies,non-profits and other partners)to discuss major trends likely to affect low income residents and their sense of community needs and priorities,and to review sections of the draft plan. • Conducting focus groups with 35 low-income residents,including residents of color, to obtain their views about the challenges and barriers they face in their day-to-day lives. • A public screening of American Winter hosted to describe the challenges and barriers faced by area residents for the general public through an award-winning documentary focused on the region.This included inviting one of the families highlighted in the film to relate their experiences living in Washington County and hosting a panel of need and available resources in the community in conjunction with the film. • Coordination of a county-wide community needs survey by the City of Beaverton for Washington County citizens. The City received 786 responses in electronic and paper format combined. This information helped inform the development of the Housing and Community Development strategies. • Coordination of a county-wide community needs questionnaire from over fifty- five nonprofit agencies,citizens,cities and other applicants with 132 responses in electronic and paper format combined. This information helped inform the development of the Community Development strategies. 1V 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary • Coordination with a County-sponsored housing preference study with 1,975 completed surveys from residents about preferences and attitudes regarding housing types, renting vs. owning and other trade-offs,commuting,and amenities with regards to housing. • Solicitation of responses from a community-wide survey with 1,260 completed surveys from residents about how they receive information about housing and community development programs and what areas of interest might get them to attend public meetings and public hearings. • Presentations by key agencies on relevant plans at ConPlan Work Group meetings. INTRODUCTION & Presentations were made by the Washington County Department of Housing Services; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Community Action;Washington County Department of Community Corrections; Families for Independent Living;Community Alliance of Tenants;Fair Housing Council of Oregon;Community Partners for Affordable Housing;Enterprise Community Partners;WorkSystems;Washington County Department of Disability, Aging&Veterans Services;AARP Oregon;Cascade AIDS Project(HIV/AIDS Plan); Boys and Girls Aid Society;Westside Economic Alliance;Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center;Mental Health Services Division of Washington County Health and Human Services;and Tri-Met. These presentations and the follow-up that ensued formed the core of Washington County's consultation process. During the comment period for the draft plan(March 10-April 9,2015),two public hearings were held and additional comments were accepted by mail or e-mail. KEY FINDINGS Below are some key findings from Chapters 3 and 4,which profile the county's housing and community development needs. •The last ten years have seen significant changes in poverty and vacancy rates coupled with significant population and growth in Washington County. Poverty rates in Washington County have risen since 2007 with the suburbanization of poverty as a factor.Cities like Tualatin,Beaverton,Hillsboro and Tigard have seen dramatic increases in the number of residents living in poverty between 2000 and 2012.While Portland is seeing high rates of urban revitalization,poverty has been pushed to the fringes of its borders,including Washington County.The region is seeing unprecedented low rental vacancy rates,due in part to significant in-migration into the area for high-wage jobs. These factors combined have resulted in an incredibly tight rental market,which is especially challenging for extremely low-income and special needs households.As of now, it has dramatically increased demand for affordable housing,rents and home prices for renters,homebuyers and homeowners. •Affordable housing supply:There are 7,030 subsidized housing units in Washington County as of 2011. In addition,the Housing Authority of Washington County administers approximately 2,700 Section 8 vouchers that provide rent payments to make existing rental housing affordable. • Most extremely low-income residents use most of their income for housing costs: Seven out of ten extremely low-income renter households(incomes at or below 30% Area Median Income(AMI),or$21,000 per year for a family of four in 2012)are likely to pay half or more of their income for housing costs in 2012. This leaves them very little other money to pay for life's other essentials. • Increasing cost-burden: Most very low-income residents are now using over half of Introduction&Executive Summary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan V their income for housing costs,by current standards:Nearly 76%of households with incomes at or below 50%AMI income are likely to pay more than 50%of their income for housing costs in 2012. • Unmet demand for affordable housing:As of 2014,there is an unmet need for 14,000 to 23,000 housing units affordable to renters with incomes at or below 50%area median income($34,700 per year for a family of four as of May 2014). • Housing with intensive services for persons with special needs is in especially short supply:The highest need is for housing for the homeless,elderly and frail elderly, INTRODUCTION & persons with severe and persistent mental illness,developmentally disabled persons, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY persons dually diagnosed with addictions and mental illness,farmworkers and released offenders. While categorizing housing types by the needs of potential residents is a convenient convention used for planning purposes,this plan recognizes that this approach fails to capitalize on the complex combination of abilities and disabilities that individuals possess. • Community Development: The community has mobilized around addressing the needs of the homeless,and this plan reflects that priority. Specifically,the 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness,the ongoing efforts of the Housing and Supportive Services Network,and the availability of federal Stimulus dollars have resulted in a systems change in the delivery of services. The heightened awareness of the needs of the homeless and the subsequent mobilization to address them resulted in priority designation for funding for services and facilities that support the 10 year plan. • Anti-Poverty: Even with a renewed emphasis on the anti-poverty strategy in the 2010- 2015 Consolidated Plan,its integration into the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan is more important than ever given the dramatic increase of residents experiencing poverty in Washington County.This is especially true for the large number of children residing in households in poverty in the County who will need a proactive strategy that aims to use housing as a tool to link education,employment,healthcare, childcare and supportive services to increase access to opportunity and exit poverty. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN The heart of the Consolidated Plan is the Strategic Plan(Chapter 6),which describes how federal funds and other resources will be deployed and what other actions will be taken to address community development and affordable housing needs over the next five years.The Strategic Plan addresses three areas of concern: housing and homelessness,community development,and anti-poverty. Strategies consist of two components: actions to help advance the strategy and production targets(such as the number of persons assisted). The five-year housing strategies address the following areas: homelessness,affordable rental housing,owner-occupied housing,fair housing,planning and organizational support. The five-year community development plan addresses needs in the areas of public facilities,public infrastructure,public services and economic development.The anti-poverty strategy includes actions in the arenas of public policy development,service and support system improvements and building civic capital formation The Housing and Homeless Strategies call for using HOME funds to leverage the production of 365 new and the preservation of 30 existing affordable housing units. All new HOME-assisted units will be affordable to households with incomes at or below 50%AMI. Included in these totals are units that serve persons with developmental and mental health disabilities,farmworkers,the elderly,and homeless or at-risk- of-homelessness individuals and households.The top priority is to use available VI 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary resources to make progress in implementing the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and the Anti-Poverty Strategy. This involves using innovative blends of resources to fund the development of the most difficult kinds of housing to create. The Housing and Homeless Strategies also call for the continuation of existing home repair, weatherization and accessibility programs,and the production of new owner-occupied housing for households with incomes at or below 60%AMI. In recognition of the fact that land use,transportation and affordable housing planning need to be linked if communities are to successfully address all three elements of a sustainability agenda(environmental,economic and equity goals),this section includes INTRODUCTION & a set of strategies dealing with planning. Affordable housing is a critical part of the EXECUTIVE SUMMARY community's investment in public infrastructure designed to promote greater social sustainability.The County also commits to a new blueprint for affirmatively furthering fair housing which includes development of new affordable housing in opportunity- rich areas,to examining a strategy to better integrate financing for affordable housing and off-site public infrastructure,and to prioritizing age-friendly and multigenerational housing which seeks to allow older adults and those with special needs to age in place in more accessible and visitable housing. The Community Development Strategies reflect the evolution of a closer working relationship between the City of Beaverton and Washington County's separate programs. In Washington County,a change in the local allocation formula will ensure that the maximum amount of funding allowed by federal statute is made available annually for public services,the funding category that typically receives the most applications. Services and facilities that implement strategies in the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness are the highest priority for funding. In recognition of the importance of services to the success of families in subsidized housing,the County will set aside a portion of the public services funding for resident services provided by the area's most qualified(Tier I)Community Housing Development Organizations. The Anti-Poverty Strategies focus on the formation of new working relationships among the different organizations that provide core supports that enable low-income families to remain stable or progress: housing,income,food,health and employment. They are built on an understanding derived from the interviews with low-income residents that a perverse reward system that discourages people from taking risks to improve their situation is imbedded in this array of supports. The Anti-Poverty Strategy calls for the formation of a new Anti-Poverty Work Group to analyze and,to the extent feasible at the local level,address this issue and also work on other public policy,service delivery and civic capital concerns. ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN In an attempt to streamline the process,the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)now requires jurisdictions to complete their five-year Consolidated Plans and Annual Action Plans in HUD's Integrated Disbursement and Information System(IDIS).Washington County still sees the value of providing an expanded,more user-friendly version to the public for use in preparing applications for Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)and/or Home Investment Partnerships (HOME)program applications. Volume 1 of the plan is the more condensed version that is submitted to HUD and contains the minimum submission requirements for this Consolidated Plan,and Volume 4 is intended to provide applicants a more comprehensive and useful document for the public's review and use. The information contained within each is similar,only Volume 4 allows for further elaboration and discussion. Introduction&Executive Summary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Vii There are four volumes that compose the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan: Volume 1: 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Template(HUD Version) Volume I of the Consolidated Plan is created in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Integrated Disbursement and Information System(IDIS),which will be provided to HUD and represents the minimum information that HUD requires for Consolidated Plan submission. Volume 2: Consolidated Plan Supplementary Data(Appendices) Volume 2 includes the Supplementary data and supporting documentation for certain INTRODUCTION & activities of the planning process,including the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Goals EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary,the Citizen Participation Plan,the Citizen Survey Summary,the workshop summaries,data,specific tables and other information required by HUD. Volume 2 supplements the information provided in Volumes 1 and 4 and corresponds to the chapters in Volume 4. Volume 3: 2015 Action Plan The Action Plan is the implementation plan for Year 1 of the new Consolidated Plan. The Action Plan acts as the Consortium's application for Community Development Block Grant,HOME Investment Partnerships,and Emergency Solutions Grant funding. Volume 4,2015—2020 Consolidated Plan(Public Expanded Version) Hearing feedback of the usefulness of the data contained therein,it was felt that a more user-friendly version of this document would be helpful to the public and is provided here as a version that is intended to be a more comprehensive version than that which is required by HUD. Based on feedback from the public,this expanded version is provided here in a format that is intended to be more user-friendly than the HUD version described above. The Chapters composing Volume 4 of the Consolidated Plan are: Chapter 1: Community Profile.This chapter includes basic demographic information about the county using the most current data at the time of creation,including 2008- 2012 American Community Survey(ACS)5-year estimates,2010 U.S. Census data, 2007 Agriculture Census and the 2012 Commodity Report from the Oregon Agricultural Information Network,and is intended to be useful to non-profits and others applying for funding from sources outside the county. Chapter 2: Planning and Public Involvement.This chapter identifies the key groups involved with the development of the plan,presents a chronology of public meetings and activities,and describes the consultations that occurred during the planning process. Federal regulations establish minimum standards for citizen participation and consultations. In undertaking this plan,Washington County Consortium members and the City of Beaverton sought to exceed these standards,and to the extent feasible, ground the plan in realities faced by low-income residents,service providers,County departments,and participating cities. Chapter 3: Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis.This chapter provides an assessment of housing,homeless,and non-housing community development needs of Washington County,including the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro. It details how demographic and market-driven changes in Washington County over the past five years have impacted low-income households across the County.This is the most complex and data-rich chapter of the plan. For that reason,it begins with an overview and summary of needs. The chapter presents a concise summary of housing needs including housing problems,cost burden,severe cost burden and overcrowding challenges.The chapter identifies the kind of housing that exists or is likely to be built by the private sector during the next five years and compares that information to the needs and characteristics of county residents. It also examines in detail the need for housing affordable to VIII 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary households with incomes 0 to 30%of Area Median Income(AMI),31 to 50%AMI and 51 to 80%AMI that is not likely to be provided by the private market unaided. The chapter includes information about the housing needs of homeless families and individuals,drawn largely from the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness.This chapter examines the housing needs of specific populations with special needs in the Non- Homeless Special Needs Assessment,some of whom require specialized housing(e.g., housing for persons with mental illness,licensed long-term care).This also includes the Non-Housing Community Development Needs Assessment to assess the growing need for public infrastructure,public facilities,public services and economic development. INTRODUCTION & The chapter then focuses on the Housing Market Analysis,including the number of EXECUTIVE SUMMARY housing units,the cost of housing and the condition of housing.The chapter evaluates Public Housing and facilities and services for the homeless and special needs populations. In terms of workforce development and employment,the chapter then discusses Non- Housing Community Development Assets to get a sense of the workforce training and educational needs of residents towards obtaining jobs that could enable them to be self- sufficient.The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of concentrations of racial and ethnic minorities and low-income households in Washington County. Chapter 4: Community Development Plan.This chapter provides a summary of Washington County's non-housing community development needs for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan,as well as an overview of the federal Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Program allocation process for Washington County and the City of Beaverton's CDBG programs. Chapter 5: Consolidated Plan Maps. Using maps,this chapter visually highlights demographic,economic and social information about Washington County and its residents. It provides a guide for data sources on places in Washington County that provide good opportunities for low income residents to connect with resources that can enhance their life chances,such as places with good schools and a healthy environment and connections to transportation,jobs,everyday goods and services. Opportunity Maps were introduced in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan,but due to the challenges faced in replicating and updating these maps for the 2015-2020 Con Plan, a Mapping Subcommittee was formed to discuss and make recommendations to the Consolidated Plan Workgroup about other mapping tools fulfilling this need that are currently available in the community,including the Coalition for a Livable Future's Equity Atlas 2.0 mapping tool and HUD CPD maps. The subcommittee selected a list of indicators that should be considered by applicants of CDBG or HOME funds,but the subcommittee recommended that maps should no longer have a scoring component embedded in the maps themselves. While the opportunity mapping component of the application will still be subjectively rated by the Policy Advisory Board and will play a role in determining whether a project is located in an area of opportunity,it was agreed that an analysis and case should be made by each applicant of HOME or CDBG funds based on mapping indicators that are most applicable to the proposed project or activity. Chapter 6: Strategic Plan. The heart of the Consolidated Plan consists of the Strategic Plan,which describes how federal funds and other resources will be deployed and what other actions will be taken to address community development and affordable housing needs over the next five year period. The following Tables summarizing the contents of the Strategic Plan are as described below: • Table 6-1 ESG Performance Objectives and Standards by Activity • Table 6-2 Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle • Table 6-3 Other Consolidated Plan Strategies Included in the Five-Year Strategic Plan • Table 6-4 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Jurisdictional Strategies • Table 6-5 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Anti-Poverty Strategies • Table 6-6 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summary Introduction&Executive Summary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan ix PAST PERFORMANCE The Consolidated Plan regulations[24 CFR Part 91.200(c)]require the executive summary to include"an evaluation of past performance." At the time of this writing, we have not analyzed the final year in the current five year Consolidated Plan. The following summary is an evaluation of the past performance of each of identified strategies through Year 4 of the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. The Community Development Objectives include Public Facilities,Infrastructure,Public Services and Economic Development(City of Beaverton only). The Housing Objectives include INTRODUCTION & Homelessness,Affordable Rental Housing,Special Needs Housing,and Affordable EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Homeownership. Over the course of the five-year period,Community Development projected goals were to construct 26 public facilities,serve 10,350 persons with public infrastructure activities,provide 66,950 people with Public Services and provide Economic Development services to 19 persons and 8 businesses. 1)Public Facilities—Develop or improve a variety of public facilities to benefit income- qualifying neighborhoods or income-qualified special needs populations. The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to provide assistance to 26 Public Facilities over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments included creation and improvements made to 18 facilities through Year 4 of this Plan. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal will fall short of the five-year projection. Barriers to meeting the production target can be attributed to escalating construction costs, increased regulatory barriers and decreases in the amount of funding,which limits the number of facilities that can be served. Facilities assisted in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)include Forest Grove Senior Center, North Plains Senior Center,Juanita Pohl Senior Center(Tualatin),Marjorie Stewart Senior Center(Sherwood),Centro Cultural,Community Action Hillsboro Family Shelter,Good Neighbor Center Family Shelter,Sequoia Mental Health Services Clinical Office,Community Action Hillsboro Multi-Service Center,Community Services,Inc.,and Albertina Kerr Group Homes for persons with disabilities, Hillsboro's Walnut Park, Shute Park and Dairy Creek Park,Community Warehouse Westside Warehouse,and Boys and Girls Aid Transitional Living(Beaverton). 2)Infrastructure—Improve infrastructure of income-qualified areas to ensure the health and safety of communities,and increase neighborhood pride and viability. The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to make infrastructure improvements benefiting 9,600 persons over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments have provided infrastructure improvements benefiting 3,927 low-income residents through Year 4 of this Plan. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal will fall short of the five-year projection.Barriers to meeting the production target can be attributed to escalating construction costs,increased regulatory barriers and decreases in the amount of funding,which limits the number as well as the scope of infrastructure projects that can be undertaken and completed each year. Infrastructure projects assisted in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)include Tigard Garrett Street Improvements,Hillsboro Spruce Street Improvements,Cornelius 14th Ave Improvements,North Plains Claxtar Street Waterline/Street Improvements,and Timber Water Association. X 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary 3)Public Services—Provide public services that ensure the health and welfare of income-qualified people living in the community. The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to provide assistance for public service activities benefiting 66,950 persons over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments show that 70,773 low-income residents have benefitted from public services through Year 4 of this Plan. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal will exceed the five-year projected goal by at least 20%.This is an indication of the increase in need for Public Services within the past five-year period and enforces the continued support for the provision of these services over the INTRODUCTION & next five-year period. Public Service providers assisted in the previous Consolidated EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Plan(through Year 4)include CASA for Children, Housing Independence(serving persons with developmental disabilities),Washington County Community Corrections Domestic Violence Advocacy Project,Domestic Violence Resource Center,Impact NW Senior Guardianship Assistance, Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center, Essential Health Clinic, SW Community Health Center,Community Action Basic Needs(serving Washington County)and Emergency Rent Assistance(serving Beaverton),St.Vincent DePaul St.Anthony Conference Rent and Utility Assistance (serving the Tigard area), St.Vincent de Paul St.Matthew Conference Rental and Utility Assistance(serving the Hillsboro and North Plains areas),Bienestar,Inc., Community Partners for Affordable Housing,Fair Housing Council of Oregon,and Community Alliance of Tenants. 4)Economic Development—Increase economic opportunities through redevelopment and job creation activities. The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was for the City of Beaverton to provide Economic Development services to 19 persons and 8 businesses activities over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments show that 49 persons benefitted from support of commercial revitalization resulting in employment through Year 4. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal will exceed the five- year projected goal by over 20%.Economic Development activities have fluctuated, but the City remains confident that these services are benefiting Beaverton citizens and businesses. Going forward the City will continue to monitor the progress of the technical assistance being provided to microenterprises. Improvements to storefront facades in Beaverton benefitted 10 businesses through Year 4. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal with exceed the five-year projected goal by over 20%.The City has identified regulatory barriers that have made it difficult to find contractors who are willing or capable of bidding on these types of projects because of the additional burden imposed by Davis-Bacon federal regulations. Economic opportunities in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)were provided through Adelante Mujeres,Hispanic Metropolitan Chamber, Microenterprise Services of Oregon(MESO),Mercy Corps Northwest,and the City of Beaverton's Downtown Storefront Improvement Program. The County identified the following Housing Objectives for the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. Over the course of the five-year period,Housing projected goals were to provide services to 6,063 persons who are homeless or at-risk of becoming homeless,support Affordable Rental Housing activities to serve 825 households, support development of 332 Special Needs Housing units and support Affordable Homeownership activities to serve 1,128 households Introduction&Executive Summary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan A 1) Homelessness—Provide emergency shelter,permanent housing and public services such as homeless supportive services,including rent prevention assistance,services for survivors of domestic violence,mental health counseling,substance abuse counseling,life skills training,childcare,risk mitigation assistance and other needs specifically targeted to the homeless. The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to provide services to 6,063 persons experiencing homelessness or at-risk of becoming homeless over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments show that 4,043 persons have benefitted from INTRODUCTION & homeless services provided through Year 4 of this Plan. Projected accomplishments EXECUTIVE SUMMARY for Year 5 suggest that this goal may fall short of the five-year projection.Barriers to meeting the production targets can be attributed to increased regulatory barriers and decreases in the amount of funding,which limits the number of persons who are homeless or that are at-risk of becoming homeless that can be served within the five-year period. It has been reported that higher security deposits,increased costs associated with shelter operations,and an increase in the amount of landlord debt for persons with evictions on their records have limited the ability to meet desired production targets for the delivery of homeless services. Programs and providers of homeless services that were assisted in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)include Luke-Dorf,Inc.,Open Door Counseling Center,Boys and Girls Aid Safe Place for Youth,Community.fiction Family Shelter, Family Promise(formerly Family Bridge),Domestic Violence Resource Center,Lutheran Community Services NW's HopeSpring program,Good Neighbor Center Family Shelter,and HomePlate Youth Services. 2) Affordable Rental Housing—Provide low-income renters with new rental units for households earning less than 50%of the Area Median Income(AMI),preserve existing affordable rental units for households earning less than 50%AMI,and weatherize existing rental housing dnits for households earning less than 50%AML The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to support Affordable Rental Housing activities to serve 825 households over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments show that 553 affordable rental housing units were created, preserved or received weatherization improvements through Year 4 of this Plan. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal may fall short of the five-year projection. Barriers to meeting the production targets can be attributed to escalating construction costs, increased regulatory barriers and decreases in the amount of funding,which limits the number of rental housing units that can be assisted and completed within the five-year period. Affordable rental housing strategies in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)were supported by the following projects and programs: The Knoll Apartments at Tigard,Juniper Gardens Apartments in Forest Grove,Alma Gardens Apartments at Orenco Station,Maples I Apartments in Hillsboro,Community Action's Self-help and Comprehensive Weatherization programs,Washington County Office of Community Development's Housing Rehab Loan and Housing Access and Repair for the Disabled and Elderly (HARDE)programs. 3) Special Needs Housing—Provide assistance in the development of housing for low- income persons with special needs,including persons with developmental disabilities, mental health disabilities,and/or chemical disabilities. The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to support development of 332 Special Needs Housing units over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments show that 322 special needs housing units were created through Year 4 of this Plan. Xii 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Introduction&Executive Summary Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that the five-year production targets will be exceeded by about 20%. Special Needs housing strategies in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)were supported by the following projects and programs:The Knoll Apartments at Tigard,Juniper Gardens Apartments in Forest Grove,Washington County Office of Community Development's Housing Access and Repair for the Disabled and Elderly(HARDE)program,and the City of Beaverton's Adapt-a-Home program. 4) Affordable Homeownership—Provide assistance to assist low-and moderate- income homeowners through housing rehabilitation programs,affordable INTRODUCTION & homeownership opportunities,and owner-occupied housing weatherization activities. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan goal was to support Affordable Homeownership activities to serve 1,128 households over the five-year period. The actual accomplishments show that 1,162 affordable homeownership units were assisted through Year 4 of this Plan. Projected accomplishments for Year 5 suggest that this goal will exceed the five-year projection by about 25%.Affordable Homeownership strategies in the previous Consolidated Plan(through Year 4)are supported by the following projects and programs: Willamette West Habitat for Humanity's Brauner Brook development,Proud Ground,Rebuilding Together,Community Action Self- help and Comprehensive Weatherization Programs,Washington County Office of Community Development's Housing Rehab Loan and Housing Access and Repair for the Disabled and Elderly(HARDE)programs,and the City of Beaverton's Hope-for- Homes,Mend-a-Home,and Adapt-a-Home programs. During the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning process,a concerted effort was made to tie strategies to specific priority needs,associated goals,and goal outcome indicators that help to support the overall strategies in a way that is congruent with how this information must now be reported to HUD through its Integrated Disbursement Information System(IDIS). Experience in reporting accomplishments to HUD on activities in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan and understanding how information is organized in IDIS helped shape the organization of this Plan in order to provide a more streamlined approach to program delivery and reporting. A matrix of 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Goals and Objectives detailing accomplishments for the City of Beaverton and Washington County through Year 4 can be found in Appendix A of Volume 2. Combining CDBG,HOME, and other leveraged resources,Sequoia Mental Health Services Clinical Office Building,with Neighboring Spruce Place Apartmentsproviding permanent supportive housing to persons with severe and persistent mental illness Introduction&Executive Summary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan xiii Chapter Community Profile Did you know? Washington County is one of the most economically ___..._._.-, diverse counties in Oregon.With its roots in farming .... ---- and logging, it is now home to several prominent high- tech industludng In itel,Tekronixand t as well as hries, incosting the world headquarters of Nike and , y .;I Columbia Sportswear. "`% ;,,r►* t , Chapter 1 Community Profile This chapter presents a brief snapshot of Washington County using the most current data available as of spring 2014. Data sources for this section include: 2008-2012 American Community Survey(ACS)5-year estimates,2010 U.S. Census data,2007 Agriculture Census and 2012 Commodity Report from the Oregon Agriculture Information Network. Washington County is a dynamic and diverse locale,with a wide variety of environments and communities lying within its 727 square miles. The eastern portion of the county is generally more urbanized and includes all or portions of several major cities. Urban portions of the county are known for leadership in the high-tech industry,and major employers such as Intel,IBM and Tektronix make it the state's top manufacturing county. The world headquarters for both Nike and Columbia Sportswear are located in Washington County. The county includes vast tracts of forestland and nearly 85,000 acres of rural farmland. The county is centered on a fertile plain that continues to produce a wide variety of crops. In 2012,it ranked seventh among all Oregon counties in value of agricultural production,with total cash receipts in 2012 of over$292 million for all commodities. Over 50%of this total came from greenhouse and nursery products,the county's largest agricultural commodity,with cash receipts totaling over$147 million. COUNTY POPULATION Washington County has a highly educated population that enjoys excellent schools. It has the second largest population of Oregon's 36 counties,and with the release of 2010 U.S. Census data,it surpassed neighboring Multnomah County and became the most ethnically diverse county in Oregon. See Table 1-1 for a breakdown of age and population. Nearly 25%of residents report a racial or ethnic background other than Non-Hispanic or Latino,White alone. The county population includes large immigrant populations from Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America,as well as various Asian countries. In 2012,23.2%percent of the county's households spoke another language other than English. TABLE 1-1 Age of Washington County Population(2012) Age range Population in County Percent of Population 0-14 113,393 21.3% 15-24 66,067 12.4% 25-44 165,151 31.1% 45-64 133,151 25.0% 65+ 54,056 10.2% Total 531,818 100.0% SOURCE:2008-2012 ACS Community Profile 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 1 According to the 2012 American Community Survey 5-year estimates,Washington County had a population of 531,818 in 2012. Approximately 40%of the county's residents lived in unincorporated areas,with the remaining 59%divided among sixteen incorporated communities,as shown in Table 1-2. The two largest cities,Beaverton and Hillsboro,make up a combined 34%of the county's population. Only a handful of the smaller communities are in the rural western part of the county(see maps in Chapter 5). In 2012,the median age of Washington County residents was 35.4 years old,up from 33 years in 2000. CHAPTER 1 TABLE 1-2 Population of Washington County Cities (2012) Jurisdiction Number Percent Banks 1,786 0.3% Beaverton 90,254 17.0% Cornelius 11,867 2.2% Durham 1,235 0.2% Forest Grove 21,245 4.0% Gaston 702 0.1% Hillsboro 91,998 17.3% King City 3,138 0.6% Lake Oswego (partial) 0 0.0% North Plains 2,059 0.4% Portland(partial) 1,716 0.3% Rivergrove(partial) 36 0.0% Sherwood 18,088 3.4% Tigard 48,366 9.1% Tualatin (partial) 23,248 4.4% Wilsonville(partial) 1,779 0.3% Subtotal 317,517 59.7% Unincorporated 214,301 40.3% Total 531,818 100.0% SOURCE:1008-2012 ACS Columbia L — Washington County CDBG ` — &HOME Consortium Cities 1 -- Washington ` µ Y ) N \\\ i Noilh � ,MUMfI ah ins 26 Nlllaboi Bel t/lr , I _ — a .� I1 *) 1 This report hereafter willK; refer to persons of Hispanic YNnNU ) cl o,- m Clackamas ruaarr or Latino origin as simply a».un.: Sh "Latino." p. 2 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Profile As in most of Oregon,the vast majority of Washington County's residents in 2012 were White(76.9%). Asians(8.8%)and Hispanics/Latinos(15.6%)were the largest minority groups. People of Hispanic or Latino origin' may be of any race. 16.9%of the people living in the county were foreign born. Table 1-3 shows the percentage of the county's population that lies within each ethnic group. For people reporting one race alone,69.8%were White; 1.7%were Black or African American;0.5%were American Indian or Alaska Native; 8.7%were Asian;less than 0.5%were Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander,and 0.1%reported that they were some other race. 3.7%reported two or more races. In Washington County, 15.6%of the CHAPTER 1 people identified themselves as being of Latino ethnicity. The Latino population tends to be younger than the non-Latino population. Approximately 43.3%of Latinos were age 19 or younger,compared to approximately 20.4%of the remaining population. One in ten non-Latinos were 65 or older(10%),compared to nearly one in fifty Latinos(2.1%). Asian and Latino residents continue to be the fastest growing minority populations. In Washington County,the Asian population grew by 53%between 2000 and 2012. The Latino population increased nearly 77%county-wide and the White population grew 15%. In 2012,the Washington County communities with the greatest concentration of Latino residents were Cornelius(50%),Hillsboro(23%),and Forest Grove(23%). The greatest concentrations of other,non-Latino minority residents were in Beaverton(17.4%),Aloha in unincorporated Washington County(16.2%),Hillsboro(14.7%)and Tigard(13.5%). In all four cases,the majority of these reside nts were Asian. TABLE 1-3 Racial and Ethnic Composition of Washington County(2012) Population Percent of Race/Ethnicity in County Population Not Hispanic or Latino: 448,733 84.4% White Alone 371,106 69.8% Black or African American Alone 8,883 1.7% American Indian or Alaska Native Alone 2,405 0.5% Asian Alone 46,446 8.7% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone 2,458 0.5% Some Other Race Alone 699 0.1% Two or More races 16,736 3.2% Hispanic or Latino: 83,085 15.6% White Alone 37,909 7.1% Black or African American Alone 451 0.1% American Indian or Alaska Native Alone 3,794 0.7% Asian Alone 536 0.1% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone 184 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 36,646 6.9% 124,947 or 24%of Washington County residents speak a non-English language at home. 48,274 or 9%of Washington County residents speak English"less-than-well"according to the 2013 American Community Survey(ACS) 1-Year Estimate. Community Profile 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 3 HOUSEHOLDS AND FAMILIES According to the 2012 ACS data,there were 200,160 households in Washington County, of which approximately 134,176(67.0%)were considered"family"households. The remainder(33.0%)was"non-family"households,consisting of individuals living alone or unrelated individuals living together. Of the 134,176 family households,79.0% consisted of a male or female householder living with a spouse,including those with children or other related family members. The remaining families consisted of a male (6.0%)or female(15.0%)householder living with children or other family members but CHAPTER 1 not with a spouse. In 2012,the average household size for the county was 2.63 persons. There was a significant difference between the average household size for the county's Latino population(4.30 persons)and that of the non-Latino population(2.34 persons)in 2012. Table 3-99 in Chapter 3 provides information on the average household size for all cities in the county for 2012,the most recent year for which this information is available. This table shows that the average household sizes for the cities with all or a portion of their land within Washington County ranged from 3.57 persons(Cornelius)to 1.57 persons (King City).More current data on average household sizes(from the five year 2008- 2012 American Community Survey)show the household sizes for the following cities: Banks,(3.26 persons), Sherwood(2.97 persons),Forest Grove(2.72 persons),Hillsboro (2.94 persons),Tualatin(2.65 persons),Tigard(2.50 persons),Beaverton(2.45 persons) and Durham(2.25 persons). INCOME AND POVERTY In 2012,the county's cost of living was among the highest in Oregon. The median household income in Washington County was$64,375.The standard for self-sufficiency in Washington County,as reported by Worksystems,is$65,800 for a four-person household,which is currently the highest self-sufficiency standard in Oregon.The cities in the county with the highest median income were Sherwood($82,257),Durham ($65,313)and Banks($65,000).The lowest median household incomes were in King City($36,446),Forest Grove($45,892)and Cornelius($50,977). The per capita income in Washington County in 2012 was$31,476,with the highest in Durham($41,490). The lowest per capita income was in Cornelius($17,582). Median household incomes in Washington County grew by$12,253 from 2000 to 2012, an increase of 23.5%. In 2000,7%of residents had incomes below the poverty rate;by 2012,the poverty rate had increased to 10.9%.All told,between 2000 and 2012,the number of people in poverty in Washington County grew by 76%. Poverty rates were lowest in Sherwood (4.6%)and Banks(5.1%). Poverty rate was highest in Cornelius(16.9%)and Forest Grove(19.6%).The poverty rate in Forest Grove grew by almost 4 percentage points since 2007. County-wide, over half of the residents below the poverty level were White,although the percentage of all White residents who were below the poverty level was lower than any other ethnic group. The highest poverty rates in 2012 were found among residents who defined themselves as having some other race(25.8%),American Indian or Alaska Native residents(25.5%)and Black or African American(18.6%). The poverty rate for the Latino population was 24.1%.All of these ethnic and racial groups bear a disproportionate percentage of poverty. See Table 1-4 for a full description of the percentages of persons living in poverty in Washington County by race and ethnicity. p. 4 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Profile TABLE 1-4 Poverty in Washington County by Race and Ethnicity(2012) White 9.3% Black or African American 18.6% American Indian or Alaska Native 25.5% CHAPTER 1 Asian 9.2% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 11.4% Some other race 25.8% Two or more races 11.8% Hispanic or Latino origin(of any race) 24.1% SOURCE:2008-2012 ACS In addition,the City of Beaverton conducted a research paper recently about the city's poverty trends.Also included within it are a number of statistics and figures about poverty in Washington County,which are listed below: • On average,over 63,000 people in Washington County were receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program(SNAP)benefits in 2012.The Oregon Department of Human Services estimates that only 57%of eligible residents use the program.If those estimates are correct,then over 110,000 Washington County residents could be receiving SNAP benefits. • The Beaverton School District had the highest rate of homelessness of any district in Oregon.In 2012-2013, 1,373 students were homeless Community Action in Washington County has also published staggering figures about poverty in the county: • In 2012,47%of families seeking emergency rent assistance at Community Action were employed at the time of application. • The Community Action Emergency Rent assistance program serves an average of 44 households per month;roughly 10%of those that seek assistance. EDUCATION In 2012,90.7%of people 25 years and older had at least graduated from high school. Almost 72%percent of the adult population achieved some college or completed a higher education degree. 13.9%gained a graduate or professional degree,and 9.3%had less than a high school education. Community Profile 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan h• 5 DISABILITY In 2012,there were 49,307 non-institutionalized disabled persons living in the county. The poverty rate of persons with disabilities was 18%. In Washington County,among people at least five years old in 2012,9.2%reported a disability. The likelihood of having a disability varied by age, from 4.2%of people 5 to 17 years old,7.8%of people 18 to 64 years old,and to 34.3%of those 65 and older. INDUSTRIES CHAPTER 1 In 2012,for the employed population 16 years and older,the leading industries in Washington County were educational services(50,729),manufacturing(45,816),and professional,scientific and management(33,685). The top five private-sector employers were Intel,Nike,Tektronix,Providence St.Vincent Hospital and Columbia Sportswear. Two of these five were high technology companies. Agriculture as well as logging continued to be major industries for rural Washington County. Approximately half of the county is covered in forest land with various ownerships: forest industries,private,state,county and federal. A 2013 study from Alice Larson and Larson Assistance Services shows there are approximately 6,700 farmworkers in Washington County in 2013. OCCUPATIONS AND EMPLOYMENT Among the most common occupations in 2012 were management,professional,and related occupations,42.7%;sales and office occupations,25.1%and construction, extraction,maintenance and repair occupations, 6.6%. 72.3%of the people employed were private wage and salary workers; 9.8%were self-employed in their own(not incorporated)businesses and 10.1%were federal,state,or local government workers. The county's unemployment rate in August 2013 was 6.4%,down from its peak at 10.1%in June 2009. Farm workers and service sector positions typically earn the lowest wages,as low as $10,000 annual income. Management and professional wage earners potentially make the highest wages with an approximate annual income of$70,000 or higher. HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS In 2012,Washington County had a total of 212,386 housing units, 5.8%of which were vacant. The county had 200,160 occupied housing units— 123,442 were owner occupied and 76,718 were renter occupied. Of the total number of housing units,66.9%were in single-unit structures,30.4%were in multi-unit structures,and 2.7%were mobile homes. 59.2%of the housing units were built since 1980. Washington County has one of the highest housing costs in Oregon. The median monthly housing costs for mortgaged owners was$1,888,non-mortgaged owners$548, and renters$961. Nearly half(46.5%)of renters and more than a third(37.7%)of homeowners with mortgages paid 30%or more of their income for housing costs in 2012. p. 6 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Profile Chapter 2 Planning & Public Involvement Or Didyou know? Washington County staff goes to great lengths to facilitate citizen participation and consultation with the _\ public to help identify the most crucial housing and ter ' community development needs in Washington County to be addressed in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. - Annette Evans of Washington County Department of Housing Services leads a brainstorming breakout session at the "What's Working Workshop",November 2013. Chapter 2 Planning & Public Involvement This chapter describes the planning process used to develop the Consolidated Plan. Regulations of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) set forth standards for both the content and the process involved in creating the Consolidated Plan(24 CFR Part 91). In terms of process,the regulations establish minimum standards for citizen participation and consultations. In undertaking this plan,the Washington County Consortium members wanted to exceed these standards and,to the extent possible,ground the plan in the day-to-day realities faced by low income residents,service providers,County departments and participating cities. The Consortium wanted to generate synergy and momentum dovetailing with goals of other existing plans and initiatives. To achieve these ends,the Consortium adopted the following concepts to guide the planning process: • The Consolidated Plan is a plan among plans. Other agencies,public sector departments and non-profits also have plans with elements that affect the lives of low and moderate-income people of Washington County. An important part of this planning process involved consulting with these other agencies regarding their plans, and then building on this foundation to develop Consolidated Plan Strategies. • Engage the general public about the growing suburbanization of poverty in Washington County. A free public screening of the award-winning HBO documentary American Winter was held at Hillsboro's Venetian Theater as part of the Consolidated Plan citizen participation process.The film describes the experiences of eight families struggling to make ends meet in the Portland metropolitan area across one winter. Several of the families were Washington County residents,and one of the families agreed to come to the screening and tell their story to the rest of their community in an effort to provide the perspective of how quickly circumstances can change for some residents who find themselves in dire financial straits. Following the film,Washington County hosted a panel of low-income service providers to discuss the film and provide more information to the community about available resources and the ongoing needs of low-income residents in Washington County. • Innovative methods—beyond public hearings—are required to access the concerns and knowledge of low-income residents and the public in general. The planning process included seven focus groups with low-income Washington County residents conducted by ten community members trained by faculty at Pacific University in an attempt to promote proactive leadership and community involvement. In addition,two community-wide surveys were conducted to obtain the views of a broad spectrum of Washington County residents(not just low and moderate income people). One survey was to specifically gauge housing and community development needs while the other was to better understand how citizens currently obtain information about housing and community development programs in order to more effectively increase public participation and involvement in these programs. These were in addition to two other surveys Washington County participated in to gauge residents'awareness on transportation funding and needs and on their housing preferences with attitudinal factors. Planning&Public Involvement 1 2010-2015 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 7 Social media was used for outreach during this Consolidated Plan in letting community members know of upcoming events,including hosting a website on the Consolidated Plan at Washington County and the City of Beaverton and the City of Beaverton's Facebook page.These websites provided a forum for residents to comment,participate and keep tabs on the planning process for the Consolidated Plan. Another innovative method used to reach out to community residents was to provide a method for citizens to quickly access the Survey Monkey website in order to take the community needs survey on housing and community development needs.A bookmark CHAPTER 2 was distributed containing a Quick Response(QR)code that with a smart phone would link to the Survey Monkey website so that users could find the survey easily. • To infuse the plan with new ideas and perspectives,new people should be invited to help guide the planning process. The Washington County Office of Community Development(OCD)invited thirteen individuals from a variety of backgrounds(such as land use planning,fair housing,community development financial institution, economic development,public transit,community corrections,social services,mental health and public housing)to participate in a ConPlan Work Group that met monthly to help steer the planning effort and review draft products. • Checking in with stakeholders at key points in the process keeps the plan grounded in the community. Staff conducted community/stakeholder workshops at two key junctures in the planning process to gather ideas and review draft products. To encourage extensive stakeholder participation,these workshops were held in physically accessible locations during daytime hours. • The strong tradition of collaboration that characterizes Washington County's social service,homelessness,housing and community development environment is the foundation on which this planning effort is built. Because so many people gave generously of their time to help create this plan, it is not just the plan of the Washington County Consortium,but a community-wide plan. GROUPS INVOLVED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN More than 60 organizations participated in the workshops, surveys and other meetings associated with the development of the Consolidated Plan. A list of participating groups, culled from workshop sign-in-sheets and other sources,appears in Volume 2. The groups identified below provided a leadership role in the development of this plan. ConPlan Work Group OCD established the ConPlan Work Group to expand the array of expertise and perspectives informing the development of the Consolidated Plan. At their monthly two-hour meetings,ConPlan Work Group members advised staff on the process and the kinds of information that should be included in the plan,and they also reviewed draft documents and assisted with outreach. The group met from September 2013 through January 2015 (15 meetings total). All meetings were open to anyone who wished to attend,and agendas were distributed electronically to more than 68 interested community members and stakeholders prior to the meetings. The ConPlan Work Group substantially influenced the breadth of the planning process as well as the content of the plan itself. A list of members appears in the opening pages of this document. P. 8 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Planning&Public Involvement Mapping Subcommittee The Mapping Subcommittee was formed to bring people together who had expertise in epidemiology,land use planning,real estate development,fair housing,public services, education,affordable housing,civil rights law,public works and mapping/geographic information systems to help guide what maps and mapping tools could be utilized for Washington County. This planning initiative helped guide staff to the various mapping tools that assess where low-income community residents might have access to an environment rich with opportunities to help one succeed in life. The maps and further discussion appear in Chapter 5 of this plan. CHAPTER 2 Coordinating Planning Group The Coordinating Planning Group representing land use planners and staff from the larger jurisdictions in Washington County was formed and met twice throughout the Consolidated Planning process to review the 2010-2015 transjurisdictional housing strategies supporting affordable housing and determine what updates and revisions were needed in developing the basis for the 2015-2020 transjurisdictional housing strategies with regards to land use planning and policy that support further development of affordable housing. The strategies developed and approved by this Coordinating Planning Group appear in Chapter 6 of this plan. Washington County Policy Advisory Board(PAB) By an intergovernmental cooperation agreement,the Washington County Board of County Commissioners(BCC)established the PAB to represent the County Consortium and make recommendations to the BCC on all matters pertaining to the programs covered in the Consolidated Plan. The PAB includes representatives(typically elected officials)from the County and each of the eleven cities within the county. Staff provided periodic updates(seven in total)to the PAB on the Consolidated Plan and sought guidance on critical issues. Per the Citizen Participation Plan,the two mandated public hearings were held before the PAB. Washington County Board of County Commissioners The Washington County Board of County Commissioners,the governing body of the lead jurisdiction in the Consortium,approves the plan and authorizes its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Partner Agencies Two agencies in particular contributed to the creation of the Consolidated Plan by taking on the development of major elements. The Washington County Department of Housing Services(DHS)helped write the sections pertaining to homelessness and public housing and made significant contributions to other sections of the plan. Community Action,the Anti-Poverty Agency,coordinated the development of the Anti-Poverty Strategy and assisted with many other aspects of plan. Staff The Washington County Office of Community Development and the City of Beaverton's CDBG Project Coordinator staffed the development of the Consolidated Plan. Planning&Public Involvement 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 9 Contributing Coalitions Two standing groups were instrumental in helping to disseminate information about the Consolidated Plan and upcoming workshops. The Housing and Supportive Services Network(HSSN)is a diverse group of housing and service providers engaged in homeless programs and homelessness prevention,including members of the faith-based community. The HSSN,facilitated by Washington County Department of Housing Services staff,is a principle venue through which the implementation of the Ten Year Homeless Plan is coordinated. The HSSN develops the Continuum of Care Plan and advises the Department of Housing Services on the annual application for McKinney- CHAPTER 2 Vento funds as well as Emergency Solutions Grant funding administered by Washington County Office of Community Development. The Coalition of Housing Advocates(CHA)is a coalition of affordable housing developers,planners,and related social service agencies. Its mission is to promote awareness of the need for affordable housing in Washington County. The group meets monthly and has approximately 25 regular attendees. In addition to disseminating information to members about upcoming Consolidated Plan events,the CHA also assisted in reviewing and evaluating the Housing Needs Assessment and Market Analysis at one of its meetings. Many of the groups that participated in workshops for the Consolidated Plan were also members of the CHA or HSSN. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The activities below represent the principal opportunities for stakeholder,beneficiary and public involvement in the planning process. The substantive information that resulted from undertaking these activities appears as workshop summaries and other reports in Volume 2 of this plan. Workshop 1: Kickoff Meeting October 16,2013 The Kickoff Meeting focused on the larger environment and major trends likely to affect affordable housing and community development in 2015-2020. With the data indicating that Washington County saw an increase in the number of residents living below the poverty line despite recent job growth,staff believed that it was particularly important to scan the broader environment and consider how it might affect life for low-and moderate-income people in Washington County. After an opening session on"Scanning the Environment"by Ethan Seltzer,Professor at Portland State University's School of Urban Studies and Planning, approximately 55 participants shared their ideas and concerns in break-out sessions. Workshop 2A:What's Working Workshop: Housing November 12,2013 Approximately 22 affordable housing developers and providers discussed opportunities, threats,strengths and weaknesses of the current system of providing affordable housing. Workshop 2B:What's Working Workshop: Community Development November 18,2013 Approximately 35 providers of public services,public facilities and infrastructure development provided their ideas about how to improve the community development project delivery system. Stakeholder Survey on Community Development Needs November 2013—May 2014 Fifty-five different agencies,departments,or organizations participated in an online survey about community development needs in the areas of public services,public infrastructure,public facilities and economic development. P. 10 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Planning&Public Involvement Community Survey on Public Engagement on Housing and Community Development Programs February 2014 From community residents came 1,260 completed surveys on the most effective tools they utilize to learn about affordable housing and community development needs, including local TV,print media,online publications, e-mail listservs and social media. The survey also asked respondents what topics might interest them in attending a public meeting or public hearing. American Winter Screening CHAPTER 2 February 2014 Over 75 community residents attended a free public screening of the award-winning HBO documentary American Winter that describes the struggles of eight area families encountering homelessness,foreclosure,utility shut-off,and other challenges faced over one winter during the recent recession in the region.After the screening,one of the families featured in the documentary was invited to speak about their experience working on the film,followed by a discussion panel of four area service agencies who answered questions and provided information about area resources for community members in need. Community Needs Survey February—July 2014 Community residents completed 786 questionnaires about affordable housing and community development needs.The survey was available in paper form and online, and it was translated into Spanish. This survey was advertised to Washington County residents in The Oregonian,through the County and City's websites,through social media on Facebook on the City of Beaverton's Facebook page,and handed out as a bookmark containing a QRF code so that residents with smart phones could scan the code that and follow a direct link to the survey on the Survey Monkey webpage. Housing Preference Survey March—September 2014 From community residents came 1,975 completed surveys about preferences and attitudes regarding housing types,renting vs. owning and other trade-offs,commuting, and amenities with regards to housing.Washington County and the City of Hillsboro were participating agencies with Metro,the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland,NW Natural,the City of Portland,Portland Metropolitan Association of Realtors,Portland State University and Clackamas County. Focus Groups with Washington County Residents with Low Incomes April—June 2014 Ten community leaders at three area nonprofit agencies conducted seven focus groups in four Washington County cities with approximately 35 low-income Washington County residents attending,a majority representing communities of color. The three nonprofit agencies that responded to a countywide Request for Proposals from the City of Beaverton and the Washington County Office of Community Development in March 2014 were Centro Cultural,Adelante Mujeres and the Beaverton Hispanic Center.The majority of the focus groups were held in Spanish and materials for the focus groups were all available in both English and Spanish.The ten community leaders received over six hours of training over two days in April from a Pacific University professor from the School of Social Work on leading focus groups and eliciting responses of housing and community development programs from members of their community.The purpose of the focus groups was to gain insight about the kinds of challenges these residents face on a daily basis so that the Consolidated Plan strategies would reflect a better understanding of the complexities of real life experienced by vulnerable individuals. Each focus group Planning&Public Involvement 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 11 also reviewed the types of services and programs available in the City of Beaverton and Washington County to assist low-income residents in an effort to determine which programs are most needed by these residents.These programs and services included an array of affordable housing programs,public services,economic development programs, public facilities and public infrastructure.Most focus groups lasted ninety minutes or longer. Participants were typically low-income Latino residents of Cornelius,Hillsboro or Forest Grove with an average household size of more than 4 members.Most rented an apartment and a majority reported that someone in their family had either a reduction in CHAPTER 2 job income or a job loss within the past five years. Formal Comment Period on Consolidated Plan March 10,2015—April 9,2015 The complete draft plan was available online and at public libraries. Oral(at public hearing)and written comments were accepted. Comments and responses appear in Volume 2. Public Hearings 1 &2: Draft Consolidated Plan April 1,2015, 10:00 AM,Beaverton City Hall(Beaverton Building) April 9,2015,7:00 PM,Washington County Public Services Building,Hillsboro A log of all comments received and the County's responses to them is included in Volume 2,Appendix B. Copies of meeting notices and minutes are also included. Formal Adoption of Plan by Board of County Commissioners May 5,2015 Monthly Work Group Meetings and Electronic Notices December 2013—January 2015 The ConPlan Work Group monthly meetings were open to all who wished to attend. Anyone could sign up to receive an electronic copy of the meeting agenda. Draft Plan Chapters Available Online June 2014—May 2015 As they became available,draft sections of the Consolidated Plan were posted on the County website. The website contained information about how to submit comments(in addition to those submitted during the formal comment period). The planning process was conducted in conformance with the standards set forth in Washington County Consortium's Citizen Participation Plan,which contains policies and procedures that provide for participation by residents of Washington County and the City of Beaverton in the development of the Consolidated Plan. The Citizen Participation Plan addresses the requirements for citizen participation and public notice established by HUD. Volume 2 contains both a copy of the Citizen Participation Plan and a table that documents how Washington County addressed requirements pertaining to comment periods,meeting notices,availability of plan for review,and efforts to encourage participation by minorities,non-English speakers,and persons with disabilities. PLEASE JOIN US FOR A SPECIAL ONE TIME SCREENING OF AMERICAN W I N T E R Public screening of the HBO p FEBRUARY 20,2014 documentary "' "American THE VENETIAN THEATRE t BISTRO 257 E.MAIN STREET,MILLSBORO Winter"at The Venetian Theatre n•w„,.aa,�••^� in Hillsboro WtRICAN • •gym p• 12 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Planning&Public Involvement CONSULTATIONS: A PLAN AMONG PLANS To understand the larger context in which the Consolidated Plan lies,the ConPlan Work Group asked that representatives from seventeen agencies and departments come to a meeting and describe the goals of their plans and how the Consolidated Plan could support their efforts. The following organizations made presentations to the Work Group over the course of several meetings: • Homelessness and Public Housing/Section 8: Washington County Department of Housing Services • Offenders:Washington County Community Corrections • Substance Abuse and Addictions:Jubilee Transition Homes • Older Adults:Washington County Disability,Aging and Veterans Services and AARP Oregon • HN/AIDS: Cascade AIDS Project • Children and Families: Boys and Girls Aid Society • Mental Health: Washington County Health and Human Services Mental Health Services Division • Public Health:Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic • Workforce Development:WorkSystems • Developmental Disabilities: Families for Independent Living • Economic Development:Westside Economic Alliance • Affordable Housing Development: Community Partners for Affordable Housing • Integration of Health and Housing: Enterprise Community Partners • Anti-Poverty: Community Action • Regional Planning Agencies: TriMet • Tenants and Renter Households: Community Alliance of Tenants • Fair Housing: Fair Housing Council of Oregon The table in Volume 2 summarizes the focus of these plans and their goals,priorities and policies,particularly as they relate to the needs of low-and moderate-income people. The issues surfaced by these plans were kept in mind as the Consolidated Plan Strategies were developed,and staff tried to build on existing initiatives that had momentum behind them. A final column was added after the draft Strategies were prepared that indicated if and how needs raised in these diverse plans were addressed by the Consolidated Plan Strategies. This table was then circulated to the contacts at the various agencies to invite comment prior to finalizing the draft Strategies. No substantive changes were requested. In addition to this process involving the ConPlan Work Group,staff also consulted directly with Oregon Housing and Community Services,Community Housing Development Organizations(CHDOs)and Washington County Department of Housing Services regarding the draft strategies and made adjustments based on this feedback. In particular,meeting with Oregon Housing and Community Services helped better align the County's housing production targets with Oregon's funding priorities and anticipated revenue flow. Staff met with Tri-Met regarding transit needs,and Tri-Met staff participated in the Consolidated Plan Work Group.The Oregon Department of Human Services,Office of Disease Prevention and Epidemiology and the Office of Environmental Public Health were consulted about lead- based paint hazards and poisonings during the preparation of the Housing Needs Assessment. Finally,the two workshops also represented a form of consultation with stakeholders. Breaking into small groups at these workshops staffed by OCD and the City of Beaverton ensured that all parties had an opportunity to bring up their ideas and concerns to those preparing the plan. The results of these workshops significantly informed the development of the Consolidated Plan. Planning&Public Involvement 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 13 n D M X N Qualitative Data:Housing a CD r ❑ What's Working Workshop report Washington County Consolidated Plan : C z o ❑ Report on results from focus groups 2015_2020 fD y � Z— ❑ Web-based survey summary(housing o portions) p p ❑ Report on consultations with public& �� � o private agenciesCD o ❑ Housing Preference Survey M NO C co)N O O o Priority Needs for Housing to Quantitative Data:Housing ❑ Statement of Needs cr y s ❑ Overview of Housing Market Needs, ❑ Justification oro ° O Conditions and Opportunities ❑ Housing Market Analysis 'ti coo Five-Year Strategic Plan n ❑ Assessment of Housing Needs for homeless,low income and special needs ❑ Housing o. o nonulations ❑ Community ' ° g a Development o Report from Kickoff Meeting m CL �• '' Qualitative Data:Community Development ❑ What's Working Workshop report Priority Needs for Community o ❑ Report on results from focus groups Development One-Year Action Plan ❑ Web-based survey summary(public services, ❑ Statement of Needs Ri facilities&infrastructure portions) ❑ Justification R, ❑ Report on consultations with public& IV private agencies ° ❑ Transportation Funding Options Survey C c t° �. < Quantitative Data: Community Development ❑ Survey of Needs Chapter 3 Housing Market Analysis & Needs Assessment MM Owl'" Did you know? , f Washington County has approximately 7,000 subsidized housing units and 2,700 housing vouchers.Nevertheless, almost eight in ten extremely -41 =•- low-income households(incomes of$20,800 or less for a family of four in 2014)pay at least 50%of their income for housing costs.At the end of the month,these 13,000 families have very little money to pay for life's other essentials, like food,clothing,transportation and health care. I� � �'�" � ,__ o= Chapter 3 Washington County Needs Assessment This section highlights the assessment of housing,homeless,and non-housing community development needs of Washington County including the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro.This needs assessment details significant demographic and market- driven changes in Washington County over the last five years that have impacted low- income households across the County.This needs assessment is also formatted a bit differently in this Consolidated Plan and includes the required information from the Integrated Disbursement and Information System(IDIS)from the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)in addition to information collected locally that has been added in order to tell a more complete story to the residents of Washington County about need.The housing and homeless needs assessments are primarily driven by Census Bureau data in the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy(CHAS) and American Community Survey(ACS)and in the HUD data through the Public and Indian Housing(PIH)Information Center populated in the Integrated Disbursement Information System(IDIS),as well as the 2014 Point-in-Time Shelter Count from the Washington County Continuum of Care.Where applicable,data has been updated if Washington County is able to access newer data through the Census Bureau.Washington County is providing additional locally determined information as part of the housing needs assessment and market analysis to provide further detail and depth to the needs of Washington County residents for rental and owner-occupied housing.For non-housing community development needs,the information on needs is derived from the community itself.Washington County and the City of Beaverton launched an online Needs Assessment Questionnaire in November 2013 to gauge the non-housing community development needs of residents,cities,nonprofit organizations and interested parties on public services,public facilities,public infrastructure and economic opportunity to assess the community development needs that would form the basis for the Community Development Plan and community development strategies within the Strategic Plan. This chapter in particular includes the following information related to housing characteristics,needs and supply in Washington County: • Overall summary of housing conditions and needs • General information about the Washington County housing market,including the number of units and condition of existing housing stock,availability of affordable housing,and geographic concentrations of affordable units. This information provides an overall context for what the private market does and doesn't do to meet general and specific needs of Washington County residents. • Housing needs for County residents with low and moderate incomes and for certain sub-populations,such as minority or elderly residents and households with special needs. This section compares the demand for and supply of housing for these groups, describing the extent of the unmet affordable housing need for each. • The nature and extent of homelessness in Washington County and the types of housing and other support programs available to the County's homeless residents. • An assessment of the non-housing needs for public facilities,public infrastructure, public services and economic development. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 15 The overall focus of this chapter is to describe the supply and demand of the entire housing market,assess who is not served by the market(focusing on low income and special needs populations),determine the number of households whose housing needs are not met by the market but are being met by existing public or non-profit programs, and determine the gaps that still exist for these groups. In discussing current housing market conditions and needs and in predicting future needs,the County is challenged by the fact that recent trends and conditions are unique, and in some respects,extreme. The last ten years have seen significant changes in CHAPTER 3 poverty and vacancy rates coupled with significant growth in Washington County. Due in part to the recent recession,poverty rates in Washington County have risen since 2007,however,the suburbanization of poverty is also a factor. Because the City of Portland is seeing unprecedented rates of urban revitalization,poverty has been pushed to the fringes of its borders,including Washington County. Furthermore,the entire Portland Metropolitan Statistical Area(MSA)has seen unprecedented rental vacancy rates,due in part to significant in-migration into the area. In 2013,the Portland MSA had the second-lowest vacancy rate(3.1%)of the 75 largest MSAs in the United States. These factors combined have resulted in an incredibly tight rental market,which is especially challenging for extremely low income and special needs households. These conditions will affect the housing market in a variety of ways, some of them unpredictable,for years to come. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY OF HOUSING NEEDS Washington County faces a wide variety of housing needs,particularly for households with low incomes and special needs. Approximately one-third(33%)of households in the County have extremely low-,low-or moderate-incomes. HUD programs use a variety of definitions for income groups. For example,the HOME Investment Partnerships Program("HOME")regulations define a low-income family as one whose annual income does not exceed 80%of the area median,adjusted for family size. The regulations for the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program, on the other hand,define low-income households as those having an income equal to or less than 50%of the area median, adjusted for household size.The regulations for the Consolidated Plan have slightly different definitions than either of these two programs. For consistency,this plan will use the following conventions to refer to income groups: TABLE 3-1 Definition of Income Groups Term Definition Shorthand Reference Extremely Low Income Income at or below 30%of Households the area median 0- 30% AMI Income above 30% and at or below 50%of the area Low Income Households median 31 -50% AMI Income above 50% and at Moderate Income or below 80% of the area Households median 51 -80%AMI Extremely Low/Low Income Income at or below 50%of Households the area median 0- 50%AMI Low/Mod Income Income at or below 80%of Households the area median 0-80%AMI Source:US Department of Housing and Urban Development p. 16 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment A significant percentage of these households(approximately 77%of low/mod income households or 27%of all households)face some kind of housing problem,including a cost burden[i.e.,spend more than 30%of monthly income on housing](see Table 3-2 and Table 3-5). Those at the lowest income levels face the most significant obstacles in obtaining affordable housing and most,particularly in the extremely low-income category,cannot afford owner-occupied housing without multiple subsidies. Based on current trends,over one-third (35%)of renters with incomes at or below 50%of median are likely to pay more than half of their incomes for housing costs in 2010. More detailed information about these statistics is found in this report. CHAPTER 3 Many of the County's low-income households are concentrated in identifiable geographic areas. In 2010, 18 Census Tracts in the County have a percentage of persons earning at or below 50%of the Area Median Income(AMI)' that is at least 10 percent higher than the County average percentage of persons earning at or below 50%AMI (19.03%)across all 104 Census Tracts in Washington County. TABLE 3-2 Housing Problem Estimates for Extremely low,Low and Moderate Income Households 0-30%AMI 30-50%AMI 50-80%AMI 80-100%AMI Renter 10,370 11,285 9,825 2,035 % of all households in WACO 5.3% 5.7% 5.0% 1.0% Owner 4,335 4,355 8,530 6,085 %of all households in WACO 2.2% 2.2% 4.3% 3.1% TOTAL 14,705 15,640 18,355 8,120 %of all households in WACO 7.5% 8.0% 9.3% 4.1% Source:2006-10 CHAS FIGURE 3-1 Renters Housing Cost Burdened and Severe Housing Cost Burdened 50% a0% tCounty Wide%Renters Paying over 30%of income to rent 30% - M W County Wide%Renters 20% Payingover50%of income to rent 109/0 —�- 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Source:Community Action, 2014 Consultation for the Consolidated Plan Work Group 1 $34,700 for a family of four in the Portland- Vancouver-Hillsboro MSA as of May 1,2014. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 17 The demand for low-cost affordable housing far exceeds the supply. In addition to market-rate units that serve low-and moderate-income households,there were approximately 7,000 subsidized rental housing units and 2,700 households with rental housing vouchers in Washington County in 2011,based on information in the Regional Affordable Housing Inventory prepared by Metro and data related to Section 8 vouchers from the Washington County Department of Housing Services. Since some vouchers are used in subsidized units,there are an estimated 7,000-9,000 households living in subsidized rental housing in Washington County,which represents 3.6%-4.6% of all housing units in the County. Based on the estimates of available housing for CHAPTER 3 households with incomes below 50%of the area median,there is an estimated need for 14,000-23,000 units for households with incomes below 50%of median available through private market(unsubsidized)and subsidized housing units and/or vouchers for subsidized units.This represents approximately 7 to 11%of all households in Washington County. Ethnic and racial minorities comprise a disproportionate percentage of lower income households and are concentrated in specific areas. For example,38%of Latino households have extremely low-or low-incomes,in comparison to 17%of all households in the County. In addition,there are 9 Census Tracts in the County that have concentrations of racial or ethnic minorities or"Minority Concentrations". Minority Concentrations are defined as those Census Tracts that have a percentage of racial or ethnic minority households from the 2010 Census that is at least 20%higher than the percentage for that racial or ethnic minority population across the whole County overall. All but two of these Census Tracts represent a concentration of Latino residents. A significant number of households in the County also have special needs, including older adults,people with substance abuse problems,survivors of domestic violence, people with AIDS,ex-offenders,people with physical and mental disabilities, farmworkers and the homeless. Data on these populations are presented later in this section. These needs are presented in tabular form in Table 3-12. The following is a table showing the population and household growth in Washington County between 2000 to 2011 utilizing data from the 2000 Census and 2007-2011 ACS. TABLE 3-3 Housing Needs Assessment Demographics Demographics Base Year: 2000 Most Recent Year: %Change 2011 Population 443,906 520,562 17% Households 168,543 197,364 17% Median Income $52,054 $63,814 23% Source::2000 Census(Base Year), 2007-2011 ACS(Most Recent Year) p. 18 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Housing needs for Washington County were gauged in the needs assessment utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data.This included a community needs survey from February through July 2014 that collected responses from 786 Washington County residents regarding their needs for affordable housing,in addition to public services, public infrastructure,public facilities and economic development.Washington County and the City of Beaverton also worked with three community-based organizations and their trained community leaders to conduct seven focus groups throughout Washington County from April until June 2014. In terms of housing,respondents were asked to prioritize three types of affordable housing if they were only able to fund three types of affordable housing.There were 155 votes tallied on housing. Housing education,homeownership CHAPTER 3 and repairs and renovation programs for owner-occupied and rental housing seemed to be the overarching themes of their priorities.Housing-related education was the highest priority with 18.1%followed by affordable homeownership at 16.1%,homeowner repair, renovation or rehabilitation programs at 14.8%and affordable rental housing at 14.2%. Renovation and rehabilitation of affordable apartment complexes and improvements in resident's homes and apartments for those with physical limitations were also notable as priorities with 12.3%and 10.3%of the responses respectively. Furthermore,an online regionwide Housing Preference Survey conducted by Metro utilizing funds from Washington County also highlighted housing preferences of Washington County residents that might be telling of their housing needs as well.Through the raw data from Washington County residents, 1,975 Washington County residents responded to the survey regarding their preferences for housing type,neighborhood,and their top three factors that affects their housing preference. 86%of respondents preferred single-family detached housing.36%of respondents preferred outer Portland or suburban neighborhoods followed closely by those respondents who preferred urban neighborhood or town centers at 35%.24%of respondents preferred rural neighborhoods.The top three factors for Washington County residents responding to the survey was safety at 16% followed by price and housing characteristics each at 15%. 53%of respondents wanted a large or medium yard. 55%of respondents wanted moderate foot traffic with some amenities that were less than a fifteen minute walk from housing. 1 Special Needs housing: Group Home for persons with developmental disabilities Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 19 WASHINGTON COUNTY OVERVIEW BOUNDARIES OF WASHINGTON COUNTY This map in Figure 3-2 shows the physical boundaries of Washington County. Figure 3-2 Boundaries of Washington County Columbia L Washington County CDBG &HOME Consortium Cities CHAPTER 3 _ tNeshington L \ Norlh l 1. Multnomah ._ 28 i� ! lus Hlllab or ' n Tlp r Yamhli) ci Dur4 m Clacks as .1 T"" lih oi.ci*ima: � / Sh The following table shows the number of households in Washington County across income levels. It includes the number of family households by size,senior households and households with young children. TABLE 3-4 Total Households Table 0-30%AMI >30-50% >50-80% >80-100% >100%AMI AMI AMI AMI Small Family 5,560 6,414 11,070 7,985 62,480 Households* Large Family 1,164 1,809 3,024 2,288 9,050 Households Household contains at least 2,443 3,144 4,543 3,538 15,964 one person 62- 74 years of age Household contains at least 2,524 3,442 4,138 1,866 5,416 one person age 75 or older Households with one or more 3,236 3,916 5,840 3,694 15,988 children 6 years old or younger* Total 17,115 19,020 30,470 20,205 110,585 Households* Source:2007-2011 CHAS, *the highest income category for these family types is>80%HAMFI p. 20 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment HOUSING NEEDS SUMMARY TABLES The following tables show the number of households in Washington County across income levels encountering housing problems including residing in housing that lacks kitchen or complete plumbing facilities,residing in housing that is severely overcrowded,and encountering severe cost burden due to the cost of housing.These tables analyze across tenure and income and also include small or large related households,elderly households, single family or multi-family households and other households. 1.Housing Problems(Households with one of the listed needs) TABLE 3-5 Housing Problems Table CHAPTER 3 Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- >80- 0-30% >30- >50- >80- AMI 50% 80% 100% Total AMI 50% 80% 100% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Substandard Housing-Lacking 500 455 609 75 1,639 64 70 98 35 267 complete plumbing or kitchen facilities Severely Overcrowded -With >1.51 people per 55 205 248 130 638 20 25 69 114 228 room(and complete kitchen and plumbing) Overcrowded -With 1.01-1.5 people per 428 765 1,084 455 2,732 75 139 354 263 831 room(and none of the above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 50%of 8 910 4,033 865 155 13,963 3,567 3,279 3,893 1,370 12,109 income(and none of the above problems) Housing cost burden greater than 30%of 768 5,850 7,244 1,265 15,127 552 1,347 3,900 4,284 10,083 income(and none of the above problems) Zero/negative Income(and none of 660 0 0 0 660 270 0 0 0 270 the above problems) Source:2007-2011 CHAS 2.Housing Problems 2(Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) TABLE 3-6 Housing Problems 2 Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- >80- 0-30% >30- >50- >80- AMI 50% 80% 100% Total AMI 50% 80% 100% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Having 1 or more of four 9,880 5,433 2,809 810 18,932 3,742 3,519 4,418 1,784 13,463 housing problems Having none of four 1,782 6,950 14,340 8,100 31,172 754 3,112 8,895 9,520 22,281 housing problems Household has negative income, but none of the 660 0 0 0 660 270 0 0 0 270 other housing problems Source:2007-2011 CHAS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p, 21 3.Cost Burden>30% TABLE 3-7 Cost Burden >30% Renter Owner 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total 0-30% >30-50% >56-80% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 3,977 4,169 3,178 11,324 1,206 1,577 3,407 6,190 Large Related 764 968 498 2,230 228 404 1,044 1,676 Elderly 1,870 2,389 1,504 5,763 1,939 2,018 2,204 6,161 Other 3,992 3,405 3,442 10,839 880 792 1,413 3,085 TOTAL NEED BY 10,603 10,931 8,622 30,156 4,253 4,791 8,068 17,112 INCOME Source:2007-2011 CHAS 4.Cost Burden>50% TABLE 3-8 Cost Burden > 50% Renter Owner 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total 0-30% >30-50% >50-80% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 3,732 1,029 285 5,046 1,116 1,279 1,661 4,056 Large Related 764 229 24 1,017 173 339 484 996 Elderly 1,585 1,447 535 3,567 1,532 1,091 1,043 3,666 Other 3,694 1,695 234 5,623 837 708 800 2,345 TOTAL NEED BY 9,775 4,400 1,078 15,253 3,658 3,417 3,988 11,063 INCOME Source:2007-2011 CHAS OVERCROWDING Generally, overcrowding is not a major concern in Washington County. In 2012,approximately 2.9%of all County households live in what the US Census defines as"overcrowded conditions,"which is more than one person per room. Cornelius is the most overcrowded city in the County,with nearly 10%of households overcrowded. The next three highest cities are Forest Grove(6.8%),Hillsboro(4.9%),and the Washington County portion of Tualatin(3.8%). Beaverton (1,092),unincorporated areas(1,330)and Hillsboro(1,586)have the most overcrowded units in absolute numbers. 5.Crowding(More than one person per room) TABLE 3-9 Crowding Information Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- >80- 0-30% >30- >50- >80- AMI 50% 80% 100% Total AMI 50% 80% 100% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Single family households 453 855 1,049 435 2,792 85 119 284 197 685 Multiple, unrelated family 80 130 264 115 589 10 45 123 169 347 households Other, non-family 0 15 59 40 114 0 0 10 0 10 households TOTAL NEED BY 533 1,000 1,372 590 3,495 95 164 417 366 1,042 INCOME Source:2007-2011 CHAS p. 22 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-10 Crowding Information 2 Renter Owner 0-30% >30- >50- 0- >30- >50- AMI 50% 80% Total 30% 50% 80% Total AMI AMI AMI AMI AMI Households with Children Present 2,890 2,935 3,710 9,535 385 970 2,180 3,535 (Ages 6 or Younger) Source:2007-2011 CHAS CHAPTER 3 Overcrowded Units, Persons per Room, Washington TABLE 3-11 County (2012) Name of Area %.5 or %.51 -1 %1.01 -1.5 %1.51 -2 %2.01 and lessup Banks 56.9% 42.9% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% Beaverton 69.2% 27.8% 2.7% 0.2% 0.1% Cornelius 47.4% 42.9% 7.5% 2.3% 0.0% Durham 83.9% 15.3% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% Forest Grove 62.8% 29.7% 5.4% 1.4% 0.8% Gaston 73.4% 24.1% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% Hillsboro 61.8% 33.3% 3.6% 1.2% 0.1% King City 93.6% 6.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Lake Oswego 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (part) North Plains 70.1% 26.2% 1.6% 1.7% 0.4% Portland (part) 77.0% 21.2% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% Rivergrove 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (part) Sherwood 63.7% 33.4% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Tigard 73.3% 25.4% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% Tualatin (part) 67.8% 28.3% 3.2% 0.5% 0.2% Wilsonville 64.0% 34.7% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% (part) Unincorporated 74.2% 24.1% 1.4% 0.2% 0.0% Washington 69.9% 27.2% 2.3% 0.5% 0.1% County Source:2008-2012 ACS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 23 TABLE 3-12 Washington County Consolidated Plan Summary of Housing Needs Population in County(Demand) Housing Available(Supply) Estimated Gap Percent of Source of Housing Units or Housing Units Population Type Number Entire County Data Housing Resources Beds Notes or Beds Renter 11,390 5.70% Supply equals an unduplicated count of subsidized(rent-restricted) 10,000-11,000 Households 0- units,section 8 vouchers and affordable market rate units.A count of units 30%AMI affordable market-rate units is not available.The gap between supply Renter and demand was inferred from cost burdened household data. 4,000-12,000 Households 31- 12,250 6.10% 2006-2010, units 50%AMI 2007-2011 Renter CHAS Households 51- 17,345 8.70% 100-1,000 units 80%AMI Metro affordable housing inventory and Department of Housing waiting list data.Total Section 8 Housing Vouchers:2,694.Total Total Renter 0985 2050% subsidized housing units,all providers:7,030 14,100-24,000 4 , . Households 0- units 80%AMI Special Needs Population Independent housing for Data source: older adults and persons 2010 OCHS with disabilities,various 796 units Housing sponsors Inventory Adult foster homes 1,264 beds Gap included in Data source: Elderly 2006-2010, Households 0- 19,295 9.60% 2007-2011 Residential care facilities 1,061 beds ODHS Office of general 80%AMI CHAS Licensing and population Assisted living facilities 1,864 beds Regulatory estimates above. Oversight Nursing Facilities 964 beds Total 5,153 beds Sum of four options above Note that population type and housing Individualsavailability do needing alcohol Washington not match; County Dept.of Specialized housing for 267(combination people have and drug 48,000 9.10% Health and people in alcohol and drug Unknown treatment of units and beds) complex services,all Human addiction recovery. combinations of incomes Services housing needs that do not fit into discrete categories. Specialized housing for people with various types of Individuals with disabilities:Hearing disabilities,all 49,307 9.30% 2008-2012 difficulty,Vision difficulty, 533(combination ACS estimates Cognitive difficulty, of beds and units) incomes Ambulatory difficulty,Self- care difficulty and an Independent living difficulty Survivors of Washington domestic 1,070 0.20% County District Emergency Shelter beds for 24 beds Monika's House 1,046 beds violence,all Attorney's women and children incomes Office Persons with ° Cascade AIDS Combination of permanent 51 beds or 532 beds or HIV/AIDS,all 583 0.10% Project housing and vouchers vouchers units incomes 2013 Registered farmworker Data source: 5,607 beds or Farrnworker camps 805 beds OSHA units Farmworkers,all 6,700 1.30% Enumeration by incomes Larson Assistance Farmworker housing 288 units Data source: Services Bienestar Released Washington 351 beds in drug and Annual capacity offenders,all 1,100 0.20% County alcohol facilities,215 beds 781 beds annually includes 319 beds incomes Community in Community Corrections turnover Corrections Center p. 24 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment SUMMARY OF SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS This section summarizes the populations of Washington County with special needs due to challenging circumstances,experiencing homelessness or at imminent risk of homelessness, encountering high barriers or housing problems affecting their ability to lead stable lives or living with a disabling condition affecting their daily routine.These populations are vulnerable and the added special need coupled with their low incomes warrants attention with this housing needs assessment. The number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance are derived from the Community Connect system from in-take at Community Action of Washington CHAPTER 3 County.Community Connect is a centralized coordinated entry and assessment system that helps people experiencing homelessness or at imminent risk of homelessness to find housing resources in Washington County.From July 1 st through the end of October 2014,Community Action screened 235 single person households in the Community Connect system.Of that amount, 130 single persons or 55%were male with 105 single persons or 45%were female. 104 or 44%were literally homeless.22 single persons or 9%were chronically homeless.37 single persons or 16%had a history with domestic violence. 132 single persons or 56%had a disabling condition.It is important to note that the data in this section only represents four months from July to October 2014 in operating the Community Connect system and can be extrapolated to be approximately three times the amount if calculated for the entire year. In addition to screening these households,Community Action also assessed single person households in the Community Connect system.Of the 108 single persons assessed,83 single persons or 77%were previously homeless. 11 single persons or 10%had a past history of residing in foster care. 63 single persons or 58%had a criminal history. 80 single persons or 74%had chronic health issues. 17 single persons or 16%were United States military veterans.4 single persons were convicted sexual offenders. 19 single persons or 18%owed debt to previous or current landlords.61 single persons or 56%had a history of mental health challenges.31 single persons or 29%were on parole or probation.27 single persons or 25%of those assessed had less than a high school education. One of the largest populations of single person households in Washington County in need of housing assistance is the senior population.There were 54,056 older adult residents in Washington County(people 65 years of age or older)in 2012. Forty-four percent of households with older adult residents were of low-to moderate-income(0-80%AMI),while 24%were extremely low/low income(less than 50%AMI)according to HUD's 2010 CHAS data.This compares to 17%of all households which earn less than 50%AMI. The population is continuing to age,as baby boomers started turning 60 years old in 2006. More than 32,000 residents will turn 60 between 2012 and 2016,and approximately 68,000 residents between 2012 and 2020. Forty percent of extremely low,low-and low-moderate income older adult households pay more than 30%of their income towards housing,according to the 2006- 2010 CHAS data.This is true for approximately 85%of those households in the 0-50%AMI bracket.Only a small number of publicly assisted housing units(740)are designated for residents age 62 and older. There are approximately 4,200 to 4,400 beds in licensed long- term care facilities in the County for seniors and other adults with physical or cognitive needs requiring housing integrated with social and medical services. Community Action also screened households within the Community Connect system from July 1 st through the end of October 2014.Of the 315 households screened, 194 households or 62%were single parent households while 103 households or 33%were two parent households. 5%were other types of households. 131 of these 315 households were literally homeless representing 42%of the households.Three households were chronically homeless. 82 households or 26%had some history of domestic violence,while 101 households or 32%had a household member with some type of disability. 81 households or 26%had some member with a chronic health condition. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 25 In terms of housing assistance for survivors of domestic violence,the Washington County District Attorney's office registered more than 1,179 new reported cases of domestic violence in FY 2011-2012 and 1,070 cases in FY 2012-2013. These numbers likely underestimate the number of incidences of domestic violence,given that a significant percentage of domestic violence incidents go unreported. There is only one shelter with 24 beds in the County dedicated to survivors of domestic violence and it provides only short- term,emergency shelter. In addition,some survivors of domestic violence are housed in or turned away from emergency homeless shelters. Shelter count data indicates that about 4% of homeless people who seek shelter report that they are survivors of domestic violence. In CHAPTER 3 combination this data indicates that there is a substantial unmet housing need for this group. In terms of housing assistance for households with members who are disabled,American Community Survey(2008-2012)data shows that 51,218 people,or 9.6%of the County population,had at least one type of disability in 2012.It is estimated that about 22,100 households will include a person with a mobility or self-care limitation in the year 2020, based on the County's projected growth rate estimated by the Office of Economic Analysis at Portland State University and an assumption of 2.70 people per household,the average household size in the County according to the 2008-2012 ACS.There is a very limited supply of housing units specifically designated or designed for people with disabilities, with approximately 533 units designated for people with physical,development or mental disabilities,including people with substance abuse issues. People with substance abuse issues are also included in the population of those who are disabled in need of housing assistance. In 2012,Washington County Department of Health and Human Services indicated that there are approximately 48,000 people in the County in need of drug or alcohol treatment.According to data from early 2014 from the Oregon Department of Human Services(DHS),the number of Washington County residents receiving treatment services from mental health programs for substance abuse challenges in Washington County was 5,117. This represents about 11%of those in need of treatment. Several housing developments and three detoxification treatment centers provide residential and treatment options for this population. Approximately 267 units are targeted to provide housing for individuals with a dual mental health and addiction diagnosis,but they are also generally available to people with mental health disabilities. Thus,there is a significant unmet demand for housing for this population. There are an estimated 583 people in Washington County known to be living with HN or AIDS as of March 2014. This constitutes almost one-tenth of a percent of the total County population,and represents more than a doubling of cases of HIV/AIDS reported in 2002 (205 people). However,it is also notable that an estimated 50%of people living with HIV/ AIDS are in danger of becoming homeless. There is an estimated supply of about 51 beds/ units Washington County for people with HIV/AIDS,resulting in a relatively sizable unmet need for housing for this group. The most common housing problems include the severe cost burden encountered by existing low-income renters of Washington County who continue to see increasing rents,utilities,and transportation costs due to high demand for affordable rental housing with limited subsidized housing supply and barriers to accessing market-rate units,the challenges faced by renters (especially those with poor credit or high barriers)seeking affordable rental housing due to this limited supply and low vacancy,and the increasing unattainability of owner-occupied housing due to a scarcity of housing programs for first-time homebuyers,strenuous conventional underwriting and skyrocketing sales prices.These housing problems include information conveyed by the Washington County Continuum of Care regarding the high barriers to accessing affordable rental housing.The information relates to the high cost of housing in Washington County compared to earning capacity(100%of households seeking p. 26 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment assistance have earnings below 30%AMI),fair market rents in Washington County require an income above 30%AMI to sustain housing stability,the low vacancy rate combined with low income and/or negative rental history make it difficult to compete for available units, and the issue of previous landlord debt(the average amount owed by households coming through Community Connect is over$2,000).Low-income households lack the resources to pay off landlord debt and save for deposits,which in turn lengthens the amount of time these households remain homeless when they are not able to access deposit assistance. Three particular populations affected by these housing problems include the homeless, offenders and farmworkers.These are three populations who often encounter significant CHAPTER 3 barriers in accessing affordable and permanent rental housing.It is partly due to difficulties in siring and zoning housing for these special needs populations,as well as the limited financing tools available to construct or acquire and rehabilitate housing for these special needs populations.In almost all cases,the need for housing to meet special needs far outstrips the supply of units designed and designated to meet those needs. In considering the needs of these populations,it also should be recognized that many individuals have multiple needs and/or low or moderate incomes. As a result,this population competes for a limited supply of affordable housing units available to people with limited incomes. The Portland Economic Research Center(NERC)published a Homeless Cost Study for families and individuals in Washington County that demonstrates the high cost of keeping people homeless. While a variety of resources and facilities are available to help address the needs of low-income and special needs households in the County,there remains a significant gap between available resources and needs. Additionally,it was noted by Community Action staff on February 13,2015 that many private-market landlords are often only willing to rent to persons with housing barriers such as past convictions,eviction or landlord- debt if the tenant agrees to pay"double deposits"and/or first and last month's rent,which diminishes the number of homeless households that can be placed in permanent housing using Continuum of Care(CoQ and Emergency Solutions Grant(ESG)funding. In terms of the homeless population,point-in-time homeless counts from January 2014 included 198 individuals staying in shelters(e.g.,transitional,safe haven,emergency),467 people"doubled up"(i.e.,staying with friends or family),as well as an additional estimated 346 people who were camping or were otherwise staying in places not meant for human habitation. Even with the estimate of additional unsheltered people,this number likely under-represents the homeless population as many homeless do not seek shelter within the County. Some seek services and shelter outside the County,while others do not seek them at all. This is confirmed in part by the fact that school districts in Washington County reported over 2,100 homeless school children in the 2012-2013 school year,representing 2.5%of total school enrollment. Approximately 64%of all homeless individuals identified in the one-night shelter counts are in households composed of single parents and children under the age of 12. There are currently emergency,transitional,permanent beds,rapid re-housing or housing units for a total of 952 individuals,a significant increase from the 499 beds reported in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. While there appears to still be a substantial unmet need for housing for the homeless in the County,it has made significant progress in expanding the supply of such housing.Homeless youth also face additional barriers in that they often cannot find a landlord willing to rent to someone with no established rental history. Paying for deposits to get into rental housing is also proving to be a burden for these youth who are in transition,particularly for youth aging out of the foster care system.They have additional barriers than most in that they often do not have the same familial supports to help them maintain financial and housing stability when a loss in employment occurs,or an unexpected medical bill means the difference between being able to pay rent that month or not. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 27 In terms of offenders exiting incarceration,the Community Corrections Department of Washington County currently supervises about 3,600 offenders on probation and parole. The Department also operates the Community Corrections Center,a 215 bed custodial work release facility that serves about 2,000 offenders a year. Many individuals currently in the community,or soon to be released from the center,need some form of special or transitional housing. Of the approximately 1,100 residents released in 2013,Washington County Community Corrections estimates that about 60%of the released offenders have housing needs. Those with substance abuse problems can usually access one of the approximately 351 alcohol and drug-free beds in the County. These beds are available primarily through CHAPTER 3 Oxford Houses,but some are available through other non-profit agencies. The length of stay typically ranges from three to six months,effectively increasing the total capacity of these facilities. Although there are agencies that designate beds specifically for offenders, the large majority of the beds available through Oxford Houses are not restricted. Beds for mentally ill offenders are much more limited. Those that have OHP or SSI/SSD,are engaged with a mental health agency,and are willing and able to follow program rules have the best chance of being placed. Sex offenders and others with restrictions on where they can live are nearly impossible to house—particularly in private market housing. Certain types of criminal convictions also preclude households from accessing public housing and other federally subsidized rapid re-housing programs.. Since July 2014,the Community Connect data shows that 49%or 121 homeless families assessed for re-housing have a criminal history,with 31%owing debt. This creates a barrier to housing which results in homeless families remaining on the streets,living in shelters that have higher operating costs,and prolongs the crisis of homelessness while diminishing the success of those transitioning on the path from incarceration,to homelessness,and on to self- sufficiency. Additionally,policies regarding the standard rate for conversion of eligible Probation and Court ordered fees to community service work to be a rate that is equitable for the community service work performed. Currently,Washington County Department of Community Corrections can only convert"department related fees"such as supervision fees, community service fees,polygraph fees,etc.There is an initiative to establish a standard conversion rate that ties to the State of Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries'(BOLI) prevailing wage rates and provide a consistent conversion rate that may be used for both Probation and Court Ordered Fees. For farmworkers,there is a significant gap between demand and supply for housing for farmworkers.As of 2013,it is estimated that there are approximately 6,700 migrant or resident seasonal farmworkers in Washington County,including those that work up to 10 months of the year in the County. These migrant and seasonal resident farmworkers make up the majority of farmworkers in the County. As of January 2014,there are only an estimated 805 beds in seasonal on-site farmworker camps,and 10 units for migrant workers in Bienestar properties. There are also 324 units of year-round permanent housing to serve farmworker households. While current immigration policies and USDA regulations appear to have resulted in a depressed demand for year-round housing at present,the demand is likely to change if policies and regulations change. In addition to these three populations,there are several other special needs populations who face additional challenges in accessing housing given the housing problems previously listed.Persons with disabilities,particularly those with mental health related disabilities are more difficult to house and struggle to retain housing because of behaviors associated with their disability. Survivors of domestic violence are also more vulnerable in that they often have similar housing barriers as described above but have the additional barrier of finding affordable housing that also in a confidential location unknown to their abuser. Additionally, survivors of domestic violence are more likely to have to move as a result of retaliation or threat that their abuser will find them at that confidential location.Persons who are limited- English proficient(LEP)face additional barriers in that the lack of General Educational Development(GED)and/or English as a Second Language(ESL)services will always p. 28 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment continue to hinder employment opportunities. While these services are available,attendance has been low and there is a need to better market these opportunities in order to help produce better employment options and increase household income.Persons on fixed incomes are also very vulnerable in that their income from Social Security is not keeping up with the cost of rent. The amount of elderly persons on fixed incomes calling for rent assistance has increased dramatically in recent years.This is the first indication that there is a rental housing crisis looming on the horizon for our aging population. In Washington County,there is a sizeable and growing population of low-income individuals and families with children(especially extremely low-income)who are currently housed but CHAPTER 3 are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered.For Washington County,"at-risk"includes all households with a residence prior to program entry that is either: staying with friends or family,rental by client(with or without subsidy),or owned by the client. All clients must be at imminent risk of losing the housing within fourteen days to be considered"at-risk".Community Action screened 180 at-risk households who met this definition within the Community Connect system from July I st through the end of October 2014.The average family size was 3.3 and 17%of the households had five or more members. Of the 180 households screened, 124 or 69%were single parent households and 49 or 27%were two parent households.4%were other types of households.46 households or 26%had a history of domestic violence.53 households or 29%had a member with some type of disability.41 households or 23%had a member with a chronic health condition. 11% of the households had a head of household with less than a high school education. The top three characteristics of low-income individuals and families with children who access housing services in Washington County include: 1)the lack of adequate income (namely,employment opportunities);2)the lack of affordable housing;and 3)the cost of childcare. Another common general characteristic is that the households have a recent eviction(which is often due to loss in employment). Many of these households will live in doubled up living situations("couch-surfing"),which do not meet the federal definition of "literally homeless,"and are households for which housing resources are scarce. They are a very mobile population that has managed to stay with family or friends until those resources have been exhausted. Unfortunately,once placed in housing,these families will often revert back to the"at-risk of becoming homeless"category as soon as the duration of available rent assistance has been reached,because there are not enough living wage jobs to support the substantial rent increases that have been seen in recent years. Other more systemic characteristics include criminal history,substantial and insurmountable landlord debt,which has shown to be the biggest housing barrier in being able to rapidly re-house persons who are formerly homeless. There are there no other resources intended to handle this kind of debt once it has been accrued. The low-income status of those households prevents them from ever being able to repay this debt,and as a result will always face chronic financial and housing instability because of it. Community Connect data shows that approximately 71%of all households trying to access these services have previously been homeless.These are families that may be better served with a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher to address homeless recidivism,but are unable to because the Section 8 Waitlist is so long. Rapid-Re-housing and Homeless Prevention dollars are being used as a temporary fix for households that need a more long-term solution. The vast majority of household that receive Re-housing assistance are housing cost burdened when their assistance ends.All of these households in general need some element or type of trauma counseling,either because of the trauma that they have experienced in their past,which often has contributed to their episode of homelessness,or because of the trauma caused by the episode of homelessness itself. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 29 Community Action of Washington County published its 2013 Washington County Issues of Poverty report that examines issues of poverty within Washington County and included a number of statistics regarding housing needs for low-and moderate-income households. Some of the key findings are: • The Community Action Emergency Rent Assistance program serves an average of 44 households each month. Community Action estimates those 44 households to be only 10%of those households that seek assistance. • 47%of families seeking emergency rent assistance to maintain their housing in 2012 CHAPTER 3 were employed at the time of application to Community Action's program. • In 2012,an average of 67 new families sought emergency shelter each month.As noted by Community Action,the family shelter network has the capacity to serve 17 families at a time. • Community Action estimates that 47%of all jobs in Washington County are in industries that do not pay an average wage sufficient to afford housing in Washington County. The table below highlights the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving Rapid Re-housing assistance and may be nearing the termination of that assistance. Rapid Re-housing for People Who are Homeless in TABLE 3-13 Washington County (2014) Organization Beds HH Beds HH Beds HH Total Name Project Name w/ w/o w/only Beds Children Children Children Rapid re-housing in Cascade scattered site 2 4 0 6 AIDS Project housing;HOPWA Grants Community Bridges To Housing- Action County General Fund 5 0 0 5 rental assistance. Community Bridges To Housing- Action Project-based Section 16 0 0 16 8 rental assistance. Community Emergency Solutions Action Grant(ESG)Rapid 20 4 0 24 Re-housing Program Rent Assistance Community Program.Scattered- 33 3 0 36 Action site floating inventory units. Supportive Services Community for Veterans Families 4 7 0 11 Action (SSVF)Housing Program Good Housing Stabilization Neighbor Program 24 0 0 24 Center Lutheran HopeSpring Housing Community Program 25 0 0 25 Services NW Lutheran HopeSpring Housing Community Program,Non-HUD 11 0 0 11 Services NW TOTAL 140 18 0 158 Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count p. 30 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment DISPROPORTIONATELY GREATER NEED: HOUSING PROBLEMS HOUSING AFFORDABILITY Affordable housing typically is defined as housing which does not cost more than 30% of a given household's total income. This rule-of-thumb has been used historically and continues to be used today by most housing analysts(e.g.,in Metro's Regional Affordable Housing Strategy,federal housing documents prepared by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and others). CHAPTER 3 According to HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy(CHAS)data from 2011,roughly 52%of rental households had some sort of housing problem at that time, with approximately 40%paying 30%of their income or more towards housing. Another way to assess housing affordability is to identify what percentage of the population can afford housing in the County,assuming the 30%affordability standard. Based on data from the 2012 American Community Survey(ACS),households would need to earn 117%of median household income in order to afford the monthly median costs of owning a housing unit. The 2012 ACS data also indicated that median priced rental housing would be affordable to households earning 60%of Washington County's 2012 median household income. This illustrates why rental housing continues to be the most viable option for many households. However,many renter households are still spending more than 30%of their income on housing as their incomes also tend to be lower than average. An additional measure of housing affordability is a comparison of the median housing value to the median income. By this measure,the median Washington County home is approximately 4.7 times the median household income. This is significantly higher than the long-term trend of for-sale home values of 2.5 to 3 times income. Much of this imbalance was greatly exacerbated during the heated real estate market of 2003 to 2007. Rents have been steadily increasing in the Portland metropolitan area from 2010 through 2015. At a time when ownership is becoming more difficult due to economic forces, renters are facing a shorter supply,as very few rental projects were built after 2002. In addition,the Portland Metropolitan Statistical Area saw the second-lowest vacancy rate in the country at 3.1%,which serves to further the demand for rental housing.While developers are now trying to meet this demand,the imbalance is expected to remain for some time. By analyzing the 2012 American Community Survey(ACS)data,housing affordability can be generally correlated to geographic location. As noted previously,more affordable monthly gross rent is found in communities that tend to be located on the outer edge of the Portland metropolitan area and in smaller jurisdictions such as Gaston($564),Forest Grove($745),Banks($839)and North Plains($887). The only anomaly to this trend is a portion of Portland within Washington County which has a median gross rent of$598. However,this same area also has the highest owner costs($2,076)in the County as well. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 31 ESTIMATING THE UNMET NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY There are three potential ways to estimate the unmet need for affordable housing in Washington County: 1.Compare the supply of housing affordable at various income levels to the number of households at those income levels 2.Identify the number of households that have what HUD defines as"housing problems," most of which are related to affordability or"cost burden"issues CHAPTER 3 3.Consider the number of people on waiting lists for Section 8 and Public Housing as an indicator of unmet housing need None of these approaches alone completely describes the unmet need for affordable housing,but together they provide an indication of the magnitude of the challenge. COMPARISON OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND FOR RENTAL HOUSEHOLDS AND HOUSING There is a lack of affordable housing units available to meet the need for extremely low-, low-and moderate-income renter households. Table 3-14 assesses the supply of affordable housing for households in different income ranges,according to the 2006-2010 CHAS data. This gap analysis focuses on renter households because they typically have lower incomes and lack the resources to afford down payments or other costs associated with purchasing housing. The table indicates that there is not enough affordable housing to meet the needs of renter households with extremely low-and low-incomes,while there appears to be a surplus of rental units affordable to households with moderate-incomes. There is a shortage of approximately 9,800 housing units that are affordable to renter households in the 0-30%Area Median Income(AMI)income range. In the 30-50%AMI income range,there is a shortage of almost 4,000 units. In the 50-80%AMI income range, there is an estimated surplus of over 21,000 units. The shortages in the lowest two income ranges likely indicates that bouseholds in the lowest range(0-30%AMI)are seeking out more expensive housing options,causing competition with households in the 30-50%AMI income range. Affordable Housing Units by Income Range,Washington TABLE 3-14 County(2010) Units (Rental)Affordable Households Rentals Gap to Households Earning (Rental) 30%AMI 11,390 1,635 9,755 50%AMI 12,250 8,335 3,915 80%AMI 17,345 39,205 (21,860) Source:2006-10 CHAS p. 32 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment There are a number of caveats that accompany this analysis. It is based on median costs for housing and median incomes. It does not distinguish among households of different sizes who may find housing more or less affordable given varying income levels and housing needs. For some household income levels and sizes,the need may be overstated; for others,it may be understated. In addition,CHAS data is based on 2006-2010 American Community Survey data. This survey has a margin of error of typically plus or minus about 5%for data in any given data grouping. The analysis assumes that the number of housing units in different cost ranges is evenly distributed within those ranges and similarly,that households are evenly distributed within different income ranges. The analysis also does not reflect the fact that many households with higher incomes choose CHAPTER 3 to rent or buy housing in lower price ranges,further reducing the supply of affordable housing for households with lower incomes. Finally,since early 2012 housing prices and rent levels have risen,and vacancy rates are reaching some of their lowest levels since the 2007-09 recession.As such,the number of units that are considered to be unaffordable for the extremely-low and low-income households is not a surprise.As the private sector moves to generate more units in the housing market,it is questionable if those developments will help fill the affordable housing gaps.Because mandatory inclusionary zoning is illegal in Oregon,it is likely that any future market-rate developments will not be affordable unless there are significant incentives create affordable units. COMPOSITE ESTIMATE OF UNMET NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 2015 As noted previously,none of the three approaches for identifying the extent of the unmet need for affordable housing units tell a complete story.They all rely on different types of data and assumptions,and the outcomes vary as a result. However they all indicate a significant unmet need for affordable rental housing for people in Washington County with extremely low-and low-incomes. Table 3-15 summarizes the findings of each of the approaches.In 2015,Washington County is projected to have an unmet need for approximately 14,100—24,000 housing units affordable to extremely low/low-income households with incomes at or below 50%AMI. The majority of this need(10,000 to 12,000 units)is for housing for extremely low-income households with incomes at or below 30%AMI.This need for lower-cost housing can be met either by constructing additional rent-restricted units or by providing programs that reduce the cost of renting existing units(such as housing vouchers),if sufficient housing units exist. TABLE 3-15 Composite Estimated Need for Affordable Rental Units,Washington County(2013) 2010 Gap 2010 Between Households 2015 2015 Supply and >30%Cost 2010 Households>50% Estimate Low Estimate AMI Demand Burdened Cost Burdened Range High Range 0-30% 9,755 9,700 9,005 10,000 11,000 31-50% 3,915 11,005 4,305 4,000 12,000 51-80% (21,860) 8,480 1,140 100 1,000 Total 0-80% (8,190) 29,185 14,450 14,100 24,000 Total 0-50% 13,670 20,705 13,310 14,000 23,000 SOURCE:Based on 2006-1010 CHAS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 33 ASSESSMENT OF COST-BURDENED HOUSEHOLDS A second way to approach the issue of unmet housing need is to look at data that estimates the number of households with housing that is severely substandard,overcrowded or unaffordable. Table 3-16 summarizes the number of low/mod-income households in the County by income level and tenure(renters vs.homeowners). It also shows the estimated number and percentage of households in each category that have what HUD defines as a"housing problem." Housing problems are of two kinds: "cost burdened,"defined as spending more than 30%of household income on housing CHAPTER 3 related costs such as rent and utilities,and various"other housing problems",including overcrowding or incomplete kitchen or plumbing facilities. HUD distinguishes between households paying 30%or more for housing expenses and those who are paying 50%or more for housing expenses. These categories are reflected in the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)data provided by HUD,as indicated by Table 3-16. Percentages of households with housing problems are based on 2010 CHAS data and 2008-12 ACS data.It should be noted that the totals within some of the CHAS tables will not necessarily equal the sum of individual elements. This is likely because Hispanic/non-Hispanic is classified by the U.S. Census as an ethnicity,not as a racial category,and because those who have reported their racial category as"other"are not included in this table. The vast majority of households with incomes less than 50%of the median have some form of housing problem. The percentage is similar for households in the 0-30%income bracket(81%have some form of housing problem)and households in the 30-50%income bracket(82%). Housing problems are more prevalent among all low-and moderate- income renters(68%)than for homeowners in the same income categories(61%). Among renters,housing problems are most common in the 30-50%income category(90%,versus 81%in the 0-30%range). A significant percentage of renters and owners in the lowest income group(70.8%and 65.1%,respectively)have more severe cost burdens,i.e.,spend more than 50%of their income on housing. Homeowners in the 31-50%median income category are more likely to have severe cost burdens than renters in the same income group. Among homeowners,housing problems are most common(80%)in the 0-30% income bracket. Figure 3-3 Housing Cost Burden and Severe Cost Burden by Jurisdiction MPaying mare than 80% - 70% 609y0 309/0 40% 30010 20% 10010 0% Washington Beaverton Cornelius ForestGrm•e Hillsboro Tigard Tualatin C ounty Source:Community Action, 2014 Consultation to the Consolidated Plan Work Group p. 34 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Low and Moderate Income Households with Housing Problems, Washington TABLE 3-16 County (2010) Percent of Number of Percent of Number of Percent of Number of Total Income Total#of HH with HH with HH with HH with HH with HH with number of category households >50%cost >50%cost >30%cost >30%cost other other HH with burden burden burden burden problems problems housing only only problems Renters 0-30% 11,390 79.1% 9,005 85.2% 9,700 13.7% 1,560 11,260 30-50% 12,250 35.1% 4,305 89.8% 11,005 10.8% 1,325 12,330 50-80% 17,345 6.6% 1,140 48.9% 8,480 10.8% 1,870 10,350 Subtotal 40,985 35.3% 14,450 71.2% 29,185 11.6% 4,755 33,940 Owner 0-30% 4,585 85.5% 3,920 87.6% 4,015 8.8% 405 4,420 30-50% 6,020 50.2% 3,020 70.7% 4,255 5.6% 340 4,595 50-80% 13,830 29.9% 4,140 59.4% 8,210 5.1% 710 8,920 Subtotal 34,435 32.2% 11,080 47.9% 16,480 4.2% 1,455 17,935 Total for: 0-30% 15,975 81.0% 12,925 85.8% 13,715 12.3% 1,965 15,680 30-50% 18,270 40.1% 7,325 83.5% 15,260 9.1% 1,665 16,925 50-80% 31,180 16.9% 5,280 53.5% 16,690 8.3% 2,580 19,270 TOTAL 65,425 39.0% 25,530 69.8% 45,665 9.5% 6,210 51,875 Source:2006-10 CHAS The CHAS data indicates that almost 40%of all low/mod income(0-80%AMI)households in Washington County pay at least half their income on housing costs. Over half(56.3%)of extremely low/low-income renters with incomes at or below 50%of median pay more than half of their incomes for rent. Housing problems are found in over two-thirds (68.7°/x)or more of the households in the following categories: Small related households(two to four members): Renters and owners in the 0-30%or 31-50%income ranges; Large related households(five or more members): Renters and owners in the 0-30%or 31-50%income ranges; Elderly households: Renters and owners in the 0-30%or 31-50%income ranges. Overall,these figures indicate that Washington County's low/mod-income(0-80%AMI)households have an unmet need for approximately 34,000 decent, safe and sanitary affordable rental housing units. Approximately 29,000 of these households are paying more than 30%of their income for rental expenses,and 14,500 renters are spending more than half of their income for housing. While the primary need is to increase the affordability of housing(which can be addressed either by programs to reduce the cost of existing housing or programs to produce new units that are affordable),at over 4,100 households are living in overcrowded conditions or housing that is significantly substandard. Overall,the needs of these 34,000 households are of primary concern, as renters typically have fewer resources to deal with housing challenges. It is also important to note that there were approximately 16,400 cost-burdened low/mod-income(0-80%AMI) homeowners and at least 1,400 who were living in overcrowded or substandard homes. This is also an area of concern,as the loss of a home has far-reaching consequences for families. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 35 As noted in the regulation at 91.205(b)(2),a"disproportionately greater need"exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of this particular racial group is at least 10 percentage points higher than the percentage of low income persons in Washington County with one or more of the four housing problems: : lacks complete kitchen facilities;lacks complete plumbing facilities;more than one person per room;or housing cost burden is greater than 30%of household monthly income.Three racial or ethnic groups have disproportionately greater needs,as identified in Tables 13— 16 across income levels ranging from 0%to 100%of the Area Median Income(AMI)derived from 2007-2011 CHAS data.Those racial or ethnic groups include: persons who are Black or CHAPTER 3 African American,Pacific Islanders and persons who are of Asian descent. As indicated in Table 3-17,86%of persons in the 0-30%Area Median Income(AMI) range reported having one or more of four housing problems: lacks complete kitchen facilities;lacks complete plumbing facilities;more than one person per room;or housing cost burden is greater than 30%of household monthly income. Of the described racial and ethnic categories,Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionately greater need in that 100%of persons in this category of need(0-30%AMI)reported having one or more housing problems(14 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of"disproportionately greater need",it should be noted that 93%of American Indian/Alaska Natives(7 percentage points higher than the County as a whole)and 95%of Hispanic or Latino persons(9 percentage points higher than the County as a whole)in the 0-30%AMI income range reported having housing problems. As indicated in Table 3-18,84%of all persons in the 30-50%AMI range reported having one or more of four housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories,Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionately greater need in that 100%of persons in this category of need(0-50%AMI)reported having one or more housing problems(16 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of"disproportionately greater need", it should be noted that 91%of Hispanic or Latino persons in the 0-50%AMI range reported having housing problems(9 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). Table 3-19 shows that 53%of all persons in the 50-80%AMI range reported having one or more of the four housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(50-80%AMI),Black or African Americans,Asians and Pacific Islanders all showed a disproportionately greater need. 82%of persons who are Black or African American reported having one or more of the four housing problems(29 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).64%of persons who are Asian reported having one or more of the four housing problems(11 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 80%of persons who are Pacific Islanders reported having one or more of the four housing problems(27 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). Table 3-20 shows that 35%of all persons in the 80-100%AMI range reported having one or more of the four housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(80-100%AMI),persons who are Asian showed a disproportionately greater need. 52%of persons who are Asian reported having one or more of the four housing problems(17 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 64%of persons who are Asian reported having one or more of the four housing problems(11 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 80%of persons who are Pacific Islanders reported having one or more of the four housing problems(27 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).39%of Hispanic or Latino persons reported having one or more of the four housing problems(only 4 percentage points higher than the County as a whole,but the only other racial/ethnic category that indicates a greater percentage of need in the 80-100%AMI range. p. 36 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 0%-30%a of Area Median Income Table 3-17 Disproportionally Greater Need 0-30%AMI Household has Has one or more Has none of the no/negative Housing Problems* of four housing four housing income,but none problems* problems of the other housing problems White 10,624 1,097 714 Black or African American 280 34 35 Asian 865 220 115 CHAPTER 3 American Indian or Alaska Native 143 10 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 25 0 0 Hispanic or Latino 2,558 84 55 Washington County 14,927 1,461 1,014 SOURCE:2007-1011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities,1.Lacks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 30%of income. 30%-50%a of Area Median Income Table 3-18 Disproportionally Greater Need 30-50%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems* problems of the other housing problems White 11,546 2,457 0 Black or African American 229 40 0 Asian 924 168 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 86 15 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 23 0 0 Hispanic or Latino 3,407 329 0 Washington County 16,572 3,047 0 SOURCE:2007-2011 CHAS*1.lacks complete kitchen facilities;2.Lacks complete plumbing facilities,3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 30%of income. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 37 50%-80%of Area Median Income Table 3-19 Disproportionally Greater Need 50-80%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems* problems of the other housing problems White 12,518 11,884 0 Black or African American 365 80 0 CHAPTER 3 Asian 1,088 609 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 24 25 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 80 20 0 Hispanic or Latino 2,667 1,988 0 Washington County 16,934 14,759 0 SOURCE:2007-2011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities;2.Locks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 30%of income. 80%-100%of Area Median Income Table 3-20 Disproportionally Greater Need 80-100%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems* problems of the other housing problems White 5,407 11,415 0 Black or African American 60 210 0 Asian 755 684 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 20 37 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 15 49 0 Hispanic or Latino 587 932 0 Washington County 7,133 13,500 0 SOURCE:2007-1011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities;2.Locks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 30%of income. p. 38 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment As noted in the regulation at 91.205(b)(2),a"disproportionately greater need"exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial group is at least 10 percentage points higher than the percentage of all low income persons with one or more of the four"severe housing problems": lacks complete kitchen facilities; lacks complete plumbing facilities;more than 1.5 persons per room;or housing cost burden is greater than 50%of household monthly income.Three racial or ethnic groups have disproportionately greater needs with regard to severe housing problems,as identified in Tables 17—20 across income levels ranging from 0%to 100%of the Area Median Income(AMI)derived from 2007-2011 CHAS data.Those racial or ethnic groups include:persons who are Hispanic or Latino,Pacific Islanders and persons who are of CHAPTER 3 Asian descent. As indicated in Table 3-21, 12,872 or 74%of persons in the 0-30%Area Median Income (AMI)range reported having one or more of four severe housing problems"(lacks complete kitchen facilities;lacks complete plumbing facilities;more than 1.5 persons per room;or housing cost burden is greater than 50%of household monthly income). Of the described racial and ethnic categories,Pacific Islanders showed a disproportionately greater need in that 100%of persons in this category of need(0-30%AMI)reported having one or more severe housing problems(26 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of"disproportionately greater need",it should be noted that 80%of Black or African Americans(6 percentage points higher than the County as a whole)and 83%of Hispanic or Latino persons(9 percentage points higher than the County as a whole)in the 0-30%AMI income range reported having severe housing problems. As indicated in Table 3-22,8,471 or 43%of all persons in the 30-50%AMI range reported having one or more of four severe housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories,persons of Asian descent showed a disproportionately greater need in that 62% of persons in this category of need(30-50%AMI)reported having one or more severe housing problems(19 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).None of the other racial and ethnic categories indicated a greater need with regard to severe housing problems than that which was reported for the jurisdiction as a whole within this category of need(30-50%AMI). Table 3-23 shows that 6,287 or 20%of all persons in the 50-80%AMI range reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(50-80%AMI),persons who are Hispanic or Latino,persons of Asian descent and Pacific Islanders all showed a disproportionately greater need. 33%of persons of Asian descent reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems(13 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).35%0 of Pacific Islanders reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems(15 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 34%of persons who are Hispanic or Latino reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems(14 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 39 Table 3-24 shows that only 1,663 or 8%of all persons in the 80-100%AMI range reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(80-100%AMI),Pacific Islanders and persons who are Hispanic or Latino showed a disproportionately greater need with regard to severe housing problems.23%of persons who are Pacific Islander reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems(15 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). 19%of persons who are Hispanic or Latino reported having one or more of the four severe housing problems(11 percentage points higher than the County as a whole). None of the other racial and ethnic categories indicated a greater need with regard to CHAPTER 3 severe housing problems than that which was reported for the jurisdiction as a whole within this category of need(80-100%AMI). 0%-30%of Area Median Income Table 3-21 Severe Housing Problems 0-30%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Severe Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems problems of the other housing problems White 9,065 2,681 714 Black or African American 280 34 35 Asian 755 320 115 American Indian or Alaska Native 117 40 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 25 0 0 Hispanic or Latino 2,228 399 55 Washington County 12,872 3,540 1,014 SOURCE.2007-2011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities;1.Lacks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 50%of income. 30%-50% of Area Median Income Table 3-22 Severe Housing Problems 30-50%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Severe Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems problems of the other housing problems White 5,966 8,047 0 Black or African American 89 180 0 Asian 668 403 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 28 73 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 8 15 0 Hispanic or Latino 1,548 2,193 0 Washington County 8,471 11,162 0 SOURCE:1007-2011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities;2.Lacks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 50%of income. p. 40 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 50%-80%of Area Median Income Table 3-23 Severe Housing Problems 50-80%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Severe Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems problems of the other housing problems White 3,969 20,425 0 Black or African American 75 375 0 Asian 568 1,128 0 CHAPTER 3 American Indian or Alaska Native 4 45 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 35 65 0 Hispanic or Latino 1,567 3,091 0 Washington County 6,287 25,390 0 SOURCE:2007-1011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities;2.Lacks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 50%of income. 80%-100%of Area Median Income Table 3-24 Severe Housing Problems 80-100%AMI Household has Has one or more of Has none of the no/negative Severe Housing Problems* four housing four housing income,but none problems problems of the other housing problems White 1,214 15,620 0 Black or African American 10 260 0 Asian 105 1,334 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 0 57 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 15 49 0 Hispanic or Latino 289 1,222 0 Washington County 1,663 18,965 0 SOURCE:2007-2011 CHAS*1.Lacks complete kitchen facilities;2.Lacks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 50%of income. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 41 As noted in the regulation at 91.205(b)(2),a"disproportionately greater need"exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial group is at least 10 percentage points higher than the percentage of low income persons in the jurisdiction as a whole who are experiencing housing cost burden,defined as spending more than 30%of household monthly income towards housing costs.One raciallethnic group,Pacific Islanders indicated disproportionately greater needs with regard to housing cost burden,as identified in Table 3-25 across income levels ranging from 0%to 30%of the Area Median Income(AMI)derived from 2007-2011 CHAS data. CHAPTER 3 As seen in Table 3-25,in the 0-30%AMI range, 124,082 or 65%of all persons in the jurisdiction as a whole reported experiencing housing cost burden. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(0-30%AMI),75%of persons who are Pacific Islander reported experiencing housing cost burden(10 percentage points higher than the County as a whole).While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of"disproportionately greater need",it should be noted that 67%of persons who are White in the 0-30%AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden(2 percentage points higher than the County as a whole) and that 66%of persons who are of Asian descent in the 0-30%AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden(1 percentage point higher than the County as a whole). Table 3-25 Greater Need:Housing Cost Burden AMI No/negative Housing Cost Burden* <=30% 30-50% >50% income(not computed) White 103,235 29,974 19,514 714 Black or African American 1,323 700 440 35 Asian 8,914 2,604 1,804 119 American Indian or Alaska Native 332 177 142 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 329 64 44 0 Hispanic or Latino 8,134 4,722 3,593 55 Washington County 124,082 39,053 26,211 1,019 SOURCE:1007-1011 CHAS`1.Locks complete kitchen focilities;1.Locks complete plumbing facilities;3.More than one person per room;and/or 4.Cost Burden is greater than 30%of income. In the 30-50%AMI range,39,053 or 21%of all persons in the jurisdiction as a whole reported experiencing housing cost burden. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(30-50%AMI),none met the threshold showing"disproportionately greater need".While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of"disproportionately greater need",it should be noted that 28%of persons who are Black or African American reported experiencing housing cost burden(7 percentage points higher than the County as a whole);27%of persons who are American Indian or Alaska Native in the 30-50%AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden(6 percentage points higher than the County as a whole);and that 29% of persons who are Hispanic or Latino in the 30-50%AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden(8 percentage point higher than the County as a whole). p. 42 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment For persons in the>50%AMI range,26,211 or 14%of all persons in the jurisdiction as a whole reported experiencing housing cost burden. Of the described racial and ethnic categories in this category of need(>50%AMI),none met the threshold showing "disproportionately greater need".While not quite exceeding the 10 percentage points higher than threshold to meet the regulatory definition of"disproportionately greater need",it should be noted that 18%of persons who are Black or African American reported experiencing housing cost burden(4 percentage points higher than the County as a whole); 22%of persons who are American Indian or Alaska Native in the>50%AMI range reported experiencing housing cost burden(8 percentage points higher than the County as a whole);and that 22%of persons who are Hispanic or Latino in the>50%AMI range CHAPTER 3 reported experiencing housing cost burden(8 percentage point higher than the County as a whole). There are income categories in which racial or ethnic groups have disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole.The 0-30%AMI range,the Pacific Islander group shows a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of housing problems and severe housing problems.At the 30-50%AMI level,the Pacific Islander group shows a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of housing problems,but the Asian population shows a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of severe housing problems.At the 50-80%AMI level,the Black or African American,Asian and Pacific Islander groups all have disproportionately greater needs with regard to housing problems,but the Asian,Pacific Islander and Hispanic or Latino groups all have disproportionately greater need with regard to severe housing problems as compared to the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole.At the 80-100%AMI level,persons of Asian descent show a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of housing problems,but the Pacific Islander and Hispanic or Latino groups show a disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category for the jurisdiction as a whole in terms of severe housing problems. TABLE 3-26 Ethnic and Racial Composition of Washington County,2012 to 2015 2012 Population 2015 2 Number Percent 010 Projected Concentration Population White Alone 371,106 69.8% n/a 388,477 Black or African American Alone 8,883 1.7% 22% 9,299 American Indian or Alaska Native Alone 2,405 0.5% 21% 2,518 Asian Alone 46,446 8.8% 29% 48,620 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone 2,458 0.5% 20% 2,573 Some Other Race Alone 699 0.1% n/a 732 Two or More races 16,736 3.2% 23% 17,519 Hispanic or Latino: 83,085 15.6% 36% 86,974 Total Population 531,818 556,712 SOURCE:Concentration based on 2010 U.S.Census,population from 1008-1011 ACS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 43 TABLE 3-27 Ethnic Racial Composition of Washington County and Selected Sub-areas 2000 to 2012 Race/Ethnicity Aloha Banks Beaverton 2000 2012 2000 2012 2000 2012 White Alone 74.3% 61.8% 89.5% 92.3% 73.6% 67.1% Black or African American Alone 1.3% 2.8% 0.4% 0.0% 1.6% 2.0% CHAPTER 3 American Indian or Alaska 0.6% 0.7% 0.3% 0.0% 0.5% 0.2% Native Alone Asian Alone 7.6% 9.6% 1.8% 0.7% 9.6% 11.7% Native Hawaiian or Other 0.3% 0.1% 0.5% 0.0% 0.4% 0.3% Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone 0.2% 0.2% 1.4% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% Two or More races 2.8% 3.8% 2.3% 1.5% 3.0% 2.8% Hispanic or Latino: 12.9% 21.0% 3.8% 5.6% 11.1% 15.9% Race/Ethnicity Cornelius Durham Forest Grove 2000 2012 2000 2012 2000 2012 White Alone 58.2% 44.5% 85.8% 80.0% 77.2% 70.3% Black or African American Alone 0.7% 0.6% 0.8% 1.8% 0.4% 0.3% American Indian or Alaska 0.9% 0.9% 0.7% 0.0% 0.6% 0.4% Native Alone Asian Alone 1.0% 1.2% 1.7% 0.8% 2.1% 0.6% Native Hawaiian or Other 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.2% 0.1% Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% Two or More races 1.7% 2.9% 2.8% 3.4% 2.2% 3.1% Hispanic or Latino: 37.4% 49.9% 7.8% 14.0% 17.3% 25.1% Race/Ethnicity Gaston Hillsboro King City 2000 2012 2000 2012 2000 2012 White Alone 83.0% 99.2% 70.3% 60.2% 97.9% 95.1% Black or African American Alone 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% American Indian or Alaska 0.2% 0.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.2% 0.0% Native Alone Asian Alone 0.2% 0.0% 6.5% 8.3% 0.9% 3.4% Native Hawaiian or Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Two or More races 2.2% 0.0% 2.2% 3.3% 0.5% 0.2% Hispanic or Latino: 14.5% 0.8% 18.9% 24.9% 0.5% 1.4% SOURCE.2008-2012 ACS 5-year estimates p, 44 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-27(cont.) Race/Ethnicity North Plains Sherwood Tigard 2000 2012 2000 2012 2000 2012 White Alone 87.7% 82.7% 90.1% 82.3% 80.8% 75.8% Black or African American Alone 0.1% 0.0% 0.4% 1.1% 1.1% 1.2% American Indian or Alaska 1.4% 2.6% 0.4% 0.1% 0.5% 0.3% Native Alone Asian Alone 1.9% 1.6% 2.2% 6.2% 5.5% 6.0% CHAPTER 3 Native Hawaiian or Other 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.5% 1.2% Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% Two or More races 1.7% 2.7% 2.1% 2.6% 2.4% 2.8% Hispanic or Latino: 7.1% 10.3% 4.7% 6.8% 8.9% 12.6% Race/Ethnicity Tualatin Washington County 2000 2012 2000 2012 White Alone 79.1% 70.5% 77.8% 69.8% Black or African American 0.5% 2.2% 1.1% 1.7% Alone American Indian or Alaska 0.8% 1.3% 0.5% 0.5% Native Alone Asian Alone 3.5% 2.7% 6.6% 8.7% Native Hawaiian or Other 0.0% 0.5% 0.3% 0.5% Pacific Islander Alone Some Other Race Alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.1% Two or More races 2.8% 2.7% 2.4% 3.2% Hispanic or Latino: 13.3% 20.3% 11.2% 15.6% SOURCE:2008-2012 ACS 5-year estimates The 50-80%AMI range shows a disproportionately greater need than all other income categories in that three racial/ethnic groups were identified as having a disproportionately greater need for both housing problems and severe housing problems. The Pacific Islander group is small in population size but the data indicates that they showed a disproportionately greater need in the 0-30%,30-50%and 50-80%AMI range for housing problems,as well as a disproportionately greater need in the 0-30%,50-80%and 80-100% AMI range with regard to severe housing problems. A disproportionately greater need is not indicated for any of the income groups for the Hispanic or Latino group with regard to housing problems,however the data shows a disproportionately greater need for persons who are Hispanic or Latino in the 50-80%AMI range and 80-100%AMI for severe housing problems. Racial composition has changed in the County during the last decade.Between 2000 and 2012,the proportion of White residents has decreased(from 82%to 69.8%)while most other racial groups have increased in relative size. In addition,the percentage of Latino residents has increased dramatically during this period. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 45 Approximately 70%of the population of Washington County is White(alone).Approximately 12%are Asian,Black or African-American,American Indian,Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander(not including any people of mixed descent).About 3%are of two or more races.The largest single ethnic group is Hispanic or Latino(16%),followed by Asian(9%).Information on race and ethnicity for the County as a whole is described in the Table 3-26.It is based on 2012 American Community Survey data,projected to 2015 based on overall County population growth.This table also identifies the"concentration percent"of different ethnic or minority groups.A concentration is defined as a percentage of any minority population within the Census Tract that is 20%greater than the percentage of that minority group across the CHAPTER 3 entire jurisdiction.For example,if 7%of the County's population is Asian,a concentration could occur in Census Tract where 27%or more of the population is Asian. Information on concentrations of ethnic and racial minority groups can be valuable when making funding decisions for housing programs. HUD rules require that all Consolidated Plans identify the areas within the jurisdiction that have a concentration of ethnic and racial minorities generally,or a concentration of any one ethnic or racial minority group. A concentration in Washington County is defined as a percentage of any ethnic or racial minority population within the Census Tract that is 20%greater than the percentage of that ethnic or racial minority group across the entire jurisdiction.The 2010 U.S.Census data and the Census Tract as the identified geographic area are used for this definition given their relatively low margins of error in comparison to American Community Survey estimates and Census Block Group data. These racial or ethnic groups are located in specific cities or neighborhoods within our community.In 2010,there were 9 Census Tracts in the County that had some concentration of racial or ethnic minorities,according to the definition of concentration stated previously.This information was first noted in the 2012 Washington County Fair Housing Plan utilizing data from the 2010 U.S.Census.Two Census Tracts represent a concentration of Asian residents in the areas north of the City of Beaverton close to the Sunset Highway.These two Census Tracts also have percentages of non-white households that are at least 20%higher than the percentage of non-white households across the whole County overall.There are 7 Census Tracts in Washington County that represent a concentration of Latino residents primarily in parts of the cities of Beaverton,Tualatin,Hillsboro,Cornelius and Forest Grove.Two of these seven Census Tracts also have a concentration of"other"racial or ethnic minorities that is 20%higher than the percentage classified as"other"racial or ethnic minorities across the whole County overall. Below is a table of these Census Tracts determined to have Minority Concentrations using the definitions above. TABLE 3-28 U.S.Census Tracts with Minority Concentrations in Washington County %Hispanic Census Tract No. or Latino %Asian %Other %Non-White 310.05 37.10% 315.13 39.80% 45.70% 316.11 31.30% 41.60% 320.05 40.30% 324.09 73.20% 30.70% 324.1 47.40% 325.01 38.30% 329.01 40.40% 329.02 51.00% 27.70% SOURCE:2010 U.S.Census p. 46 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Figure 3-4 Areas of Minority Concentration in Washington County(2010) t� � Perl two _ fit 'hlllrlo ate i 1/ ♦��erw lo- ,k' „ CHAPTER 3 n �l,ewb� C—I ten3 r i o'er " rs Areas of Minority Concentration 11, of surts. wr. 4ti. Grw Teas 20"re, I 4k, MAN VIP ;:� Aeon - MAN uw ate. BN oOoRAM �,4Kiny WA v sr ■s US .re rr YP n1+ iv Too a 1F For a larger,more detailed version of this map,refer to Chapter 5. Because there is often an intersection between Low-Income Concentrations and Minority Concentration areas,the table below notes the location of dual low-income and racial/ ethnic concentrations at the Census Tract level.As such,four Census Tracts specifically have a concentration of Hispanic/Latino residents and also have a concentration of low- income people.These four Census Tracts are identified below: Census Tracts with Low-Income and Minority Concentrations in Table 3-29(a) Washington County %of Population earning below 50% %Hispanic or Census Tract No. Jurisdiction(s) AMI Latino %Other 310.05 Beaverton 41.63% 37.10% 320.05 Tualatin, 44.06% 40.30% parts of Tigard 324.09 Hillsboro 41.31% 73.20% 30.70% 325.01 Hillsboro 35.93% 38.30% SOURCE:2010 U.S.Census,2006-2010 ACS estimates Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 47 For disproportionate greater need but not concentrations,the table below is used to indicate those Census Tracts where the percentage of any ethnic or racial minority population within the Census Tract is at least 10%greater than the percentage of that ethnic or racial minority group across the entire jurisdiction. Census Tracts with Low-Income Concentrations and Disproportionate TABLE 3-29(b) Need for Racial/Ethnic Groups in Washington County %of Population earning below 50% %Hispanic CHAPTER 3 Census Tract No. AMI or Latino %Other Race %Non-White 309.00 33.81% 28.90% _ 310.05 41.63% 37.10% 311.00 36.01% 32.86% 18.83% 312.00 49.64% 31.90% 20.46% 34.57% 313.00 33.39% 32.18% 314.02 45.36% 26.55% 34.08% 316.13 33.39% 32.09% 317.05 45.85% 30.30% 18.91% 32.61% 317.06 33.59% 28.63% 34.71% 320.03 40.93% 29.47% 320.05 44.06% 40.35% 25.64% 32.36% 324.09 41.31% 73.24% 30.72% 37.61% 325.01 35.93% 38.26% 18.82% 326.04 33.57% 28.10% 332.00 52.87% 35.26% 21.16% SOURCE.2010 U.S.Census,2006-2010 ACS estimates Housing needs among the County's minority populations are similar to their relative income levels,as shown in Table 3-30,in that the highest percentages of need are found in the Hispanic or Latino and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander populations. The Asian,Black or African American,American Indian or Alaskan Native and White populations have less housing need,in terms of the percent of households in each group that have some type of housing problem. However,due to the fact that the majority of County residents are White,the number of White households in need of affordable housing far exceeds the total for all other racial and ethnic groups combined. Approximately three-quarters of the total demand for affordable housing units(72%) is accounted for by White households who are cost-burdened or live in substandard or overcrowded housing. Approximately 18%of the demand for affordable housing units is generated by Hispanic or Latino households. Asian households generate approximately 6%of the need and other groups each represent 3%of the need or less. In addition,there is little discernible difference in the qualitative characteristics of housing needs among racial and ethnic groups. One notable difference is that many Hispanic or Latino households need access to larger housing units,with more bedrooms,due to their significantly larger average household size(4.30 persons per household,compared to 2.63 for all Washington County households based on 2012 ACS data). p. 48 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-30 Housing Problems by Racial and Ethnic Group by Income Status(2010) 0-80%AMI %of 0-80% %Demand for Race/Ethnicity Total with Housing with Housing Affordable Households Problems problems Units White 155,915 34,688 22% 72% Black or African American 3,008 874 29% 2% Asian 14,539 2,877 20% 6% American Indian or Alaska Native 2,215 253 11% 1% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 654 128 20% 0% Hispanic or Latino 18,094 8,632 48% 18% CHAPTER 3 Washington County 196,438 48,433 25% 100% SOURCE.2006-2010 CHAS DEMAND FOR LOW COST OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING Low-and moderate-income households are those whose incomes fall below 80%of the Area Median Income(AMI). This report is primarily concerned about this group of households,because these are the people whose housing needs are least likely to be met by the market.In Washington County,these are people earning at or below 50%of the AMI, which is$34,700 for a family of four as of May 1st,2014.Typically,the lower a person's income,the less likely they will be able to find affordable housing in the open market. Affordable housing is housing that costs 30%or less of the household income. One-third (33%)of households in Washington County have incomes below 80%of locally adjusted AMI. This section describes the housing needs of this population in general,and then the following sections describe the housing needs of significant sub-populations,such as racial and ethnic minorities,older adults and people with special needs. According to the 2012 American Community Survey of the U.S. Census,8%of the total households earn below 30%of AMI,9%earn between 30 and 50%of AMI,and 16%earn between 50 and 80%of AMI,. Additionally, 10.9%of Washington County residents were living below the federal poverty level in 2012,an increase from 7.4%in 2000. Those areas where the percentage of low-income persons earning at or below 50% AMI is higher than that of the County as a whole are a measure of the concentration of low-income persons. An area of concentration is defined as a Census Tract where the percentage of low-income households is at least 10%higher than for the County as a whole. The greatest concentrations of low-income persons in Washington County are found in 18 Census Tracts within the communities of Beaverton,Cornelius,Forest Grove,Tigard, Tualatin,Hillsboro and unincorporated Washington County.Table 3-31 includes a list of the numbers and percentages of low-income persons(earning at or below 50%AMI)in these concentrated Census Tracts in the County. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 49 Information on concentrations of low-income residents is important in identifying funding priorities for a variety of housing-related programs. Given the fact that the margin of error is less for Census Tracts than Census Block Groups,Washington County is using the Census Tract as the defined geographic area for determination of low-income concentration.Washington County defines a low-income concentration as a Census Tract where the percentage of persons earning at or below 50%of the Area Median Income (AMI)z is at least 10 percentage points higher than the County average percentage of persons earning at or below 50%AMI(19.03%)across all 104 Census Tracts in Washington County.The data is derived from the Low and Moderate Income Summary CHAPTER 3 Data(LMISD)released by HUD in June 2014 using the 2006-2010 American Community Survey(ACS). Below is a table of those 18 Census Tracts that are considered to be Low- Income Concentrations: Census Tracts with Low-Income Concentrations in TABLE 3-31 Washington County No.Persons No.of %of %of Census earning Persons Total Population Population Tract No. below 50% earning below Population of earning earning AMI 80%AMI Census Tract below 80% below 50% AMI AMI 332 2,995 4,145 5,665 73.17% 52.87% 312 3,430 4,675 6,910 67.66% 49.64% 317.05 2,045 2,670 4,460 59.87% 45.85% 314.02 1,270 1,730 2,800 61.79% 45.36% 320.05 1,974 2,930 4,480 65.40% 44.06% 307 460 675 1,080 62.50% 42.59% 310.05 2,175 3,075 5,225 58.85% 41.63% 324.09 2,175 3,250 5,265 61.73% 41.31% 320.03 1,545 2,605 3,775 69.01% 40.93% 311 875 1,160 2,430 47.74% 36.01% 325.01 900 1,895 2,505 75.65% 35.93% 309 1,665 2,840 4,925 57.66% 33.81% 317.06 1,730 2,825 5,150 54.85% 33.59% 326.04 2,090 3,055 6,225 49.08% 33.57% 310.06 1,970 3,305 5,890 56.11% 33.45% 313 2,140 3,850 6,410 60.06% 33.39% 316.13 2,150 3,510 6,440 54.50% 33.39% 331.01 965 1,835 2,910 63.06% 33.16% Source:2006-2010 ACS 2 $34,700 for a family of four in the Portland- Vancouver-Hillsboro MSA as of May 1,2014. P. 50 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Figure 3-5 Concentrations of Households At or Below 50%AMI Concentrations of Households AI or Helas SO.A)II -� CHAPTER 3 F.— Pwtiano Comelu Hksbwo Gee eVe d t Tipara 3 Cap . Cdy D.,nam i p ' f E"er 4 For a larger,more detailed version of this map,refer to Chapter 5. PUBLIC HOUSING PUBLIC HOUSING NEEDS SUMMARY The Washington County Department of Housing Services(DHS)owns and operates 626 units of publicly subsidized housing,of which 240 are public housing low-income units, 12 are Rural Development units,and 521 are affordable housing units financed by bonds and HOME. Information about the public housing units and the needs and programs of the agency are summarized in the DHS Public Housing Authority(PHA) Plan,which is updated annually. A copy of the most recently approved plan appears on the DHS website at the following address: http://www.co.washington.or.us/Housing/ PoliciesPlans/plans.cf n The DHS units are generally in good condition,and the agency places a high priority on providing and maintaining safe,well-maintained housing units for tenants. The agency continually improves the quality of its housing through preventative maintenance inspections and rehabilitation when necessary. The agency is also reviewing options for acquiring perhaps 2-4 new public housing units in 2014 or 2015. DHS had disposed of 40 scattered-site public housing units in an effort to reduce administrative and maintenance costs in light of federal budget cuts. Information about the number of families on public housing and tenant-based waiting lists,including results of the Section 504 needs assessment,is described in a following section. The Washington County Department of Housing Services reports that they distributed 2,784 Section 8 vouchers in Washington County in 2013,compared to 2,569 in 2007. More detailed information about waiting lists for both Section 8 vouchers and public housing can be found in the following section. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 51 In addition to operating and maintaining housing for low-income and other families, the DHS implements a variety of other programs and activities to improve community quality of life and economic vitality and promote self-sufficiency and asset development of families and individuals through the following efforts,among others: • Promotes income mixing in public housing by assuring access for lower income families into higher income developments. • Voluntarily maintains its Family Self-Sufficiency(FSS)Program enrollment limit over minimum requirements. CHAPTER 3 • Provides linkage to services to help FSS families overcome barriers to self-sufficiency, by partnering with other agencies,such as the State of Oregon Adult and Family Services Division,to provide services to participating households,including case management,supportive services,and/or employment services. • Provides Section 8 Homeownership Vouchers to families who are eligible. • Providing no-cost financial education to FSS program participants and • Providing access to Individual Development Accounts(IDA). • Partners with a variety of non-profit organizations to provide services to households receiving rental assistance through its Shelter Plus Care program. • Works with non-profit agencies and other governmental bodies to promote community events serving families and persons who are homeless or at risk of homelessness,such as Project Homeless Connect. TABLE 3-32 Public Housing by Program Type Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Mod- Public Veterans Certificate Rehab Housing Total Project Tenant Affairs Family Disabled -based -based Supportive Unification , Housing Program #of units vouchers 0 0 240 2,784 29 2,733 18 0 0 in use Source:PIC(PIH Information Center)'includes Non-Elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-Year,Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition w. 'v i Spruce Place Apartments in Aloha, serving low-income persons with severe and persistent mental illness p. 52 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-33 Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Certificate Mod- Public project- Tenant- Veterans Family Rehab Housing Total Affairs based based Supportive Unification Housing Program Average Annual 0 0 14,068 12,007 7,319 12,038 12,578 0 Income Average length of stay 0 0 6 6 0 6 0 0 Average CHAPTER 3 Household 0 0 3 2 1 2 2 0 size #Homeless at admission 0 0 0 44 6 38 0 0 #of Elderly Program Participants 0 0 26 577 1 575 1 0 (>62) #of Disabled Families 0 0 47 1,173 26 1,137 10 0 #of Families requesting 0 0 240 2,784 29 2,733 18 0 accessibility features #of HIV/AIDS 0 program 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 participants #of DV victims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Source:PIC(PIH Information Center) TABLE 3-34 Race of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Vouchers Mod- Public Project Tenant Veterans Family Race Certificate Rehab Housing Total -based -based Affairs Unification Disabled' Supportive Program Housing White 0 0 212 2,324 26 2,278 16 0 0 Black or African American 0 0 13 279 3 274 2 0 0 Asian 0 0 10 126 0 126 0 0 0 American Indian or Alaska Native 0 0 2 33 0 33 0 0 0 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0 0 3 22 0 22 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOURCE:PIC(PIH Information Center) 'includes Non-Elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-Year,Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition TABLE 3-35 Ethnicity of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Program Type Vouchers Special Purpose Vouchers Mod- Public Project Tenant Veterans Family Race Certificate Rehab Housing Total -based -based Affairs Unification Disabled' Supportive Program Housing Hispanic or Latino 0 0 78 389 1 386 1 0 0 Not Hispanic or Latino 0 0 162 2,395 28 2,347 17 0 0 SOURCE:PIC(PIH Information Center) `includes Non-Elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-Year,Mainstream Five-year,and Nursing Home Transition Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 53 WAITING LISTS FOR PUBLIC HOUSING AND HOUSING VOUCHERS The Public Housing and Housing Voucher waiting lists provide a further indication of need.The Washington County Department of Housing Services(DHS)was forced to close the waiting list in September 2011 for these two programs because the demand was too great.From conversations with DHS staff,it is possible that the waiting list will open sometime in 2015 after DHS staff finishes evaluating the remaining applicants,but staff was careful to point out that that was a best case scenario.3 Regardless,data from the wait list still offers valuable insight into the demographics of the demand. CHAPTER 3 According to the 2014 PHA plan,there were a combined total of 2,077 households on the waiting list for Section 8 vouchers and 2,575 households on the waiting list for public housing units. It should be noted that there is overlap between these two waiting lists. Many people are on waiting lists for both Section 8 vouchers and public housing units. Therefore the total number of people on the combined waiting lists is not the sum of the two numbers and the degree of overlap is not precisely known. However,even if there is a significant degree of overlap(e.g.,65%),the two waiting lists indicate a significant unmet need for affordable units. The number of people on the combined waiting list is several times the number of available public housing units. Tables 3-36 and 3-37 below provides information about characteristics of those on waiting lists for both Section 8 vouchers and public housing. TABLE 3-36 Section 8 Voucher Waiting List By Household,Washington County(2013) Household Type Number Percent Extremely low income<=30%AMI 1,895 91.2% Low income(>30%but<=50%AMI) 182 8.7% Moderate income(>50%but<80%AMI) 0 0.0% Families with children 979 47.1% Elderly families 175 8.4% Families with Disabilities 445 21.4% Race/ethnicity(White) 1,602 77.1% Race/ethnicity(Black or African American) 286 13.7% Race/ethnicity(Asian/Other) 186 5.8% Race/ethnicity(Hispanic or Latino) 422 21.6% TOTAL 2,077 100.0% SOURCE:Washington County Department of Housing Services 3 Melanie Fletcher,Interim Rental Assistance Team Leader Washington County Department of Housing Services,email,January 27, 2014 p. 54 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-37 Public Housing Waiting List By Household,Washington County(2013) Household Type Number Percent Extremely low income<=30%AMI 2,387 92.6% Low income(>30%but<=50%AMI) 213 8.2% Moderate income(>50%but<80%AMI) - 0.0% Families with children 837 32.5% Elderly families 483 18.7% Families with Disabilities 769 29.8% Race/ethnicity(white) 2,045 79.4% CHAPTER 3 Race/ethnicity(Black or African American) 286 11.1% Race/ethnicity(Asian/Other) 231 8.9% Race/ethnicity(Hispanic or Latino) 424 16.4% Characteristics by Bedroom Size(PH Only) 1 BR 1,589 61.7% 2 BR 729 28.7% 3 BR 206 8.0% 4 BR 51 1.9% 5 BR - 0.0% 5+BR - 0.0% TOTAL 2,575 100.0% SOURCE:Washington County Department of Housing Services NOTES: 1)In this tabulation,there are only 1-4 bedrooms in Public Housing units. Past tabulations included bedroom sizes greater than 4 bedrooms. 2)The number of bedrooms is only reported for Public Housing applicants because family size and"timber of bedrooms are factors in the Public Housing application process and not in the Section 8 application process. 3)The total number of applicant families whose income ranges for Section 8 Vouchers and Public Housing are reported varies from the total number of applicants reported to be on the waiting lists because the data was collected a jew days apart.Additional households applied during this time period The race,income,and family-size profile of Section 8 voucher waiting list applicants and public housing waiting list applicants are similar. Applicants are predominantly White (approximately 78%and 79%respectively),and Hispanic/Latino applicants represent the second largest share(approximately 16%and 22%respectively). Not surprisingly, applicants on both wait lists are overwhelmingly people with extremely low-incomes. More than half of the applicants on the public housing wait list are in need of a one- bedroom unit,and over 90%need a 2 bedroom unit or smaller. On the Section 8 and public housing waitlists,households with persons with disabilities comprised 21%and 29%of the respective wait list,and 8%and 19%were elderly households,respectively. Given the large number of people on the Section 8 voucher and public housing waiting lists—and the fact that the list has closed due to great demand—there is clearly a need for more of both of these resources. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 55 The County's Department of Housing Services(DHS)shared that they are reviewing options for acquiring perhaps 2 to 4 new public housing units in 2014 or 2015. The funding source for these acquisitions is the HUD Capital Fund Replacement Housing Factor(RHF)Fund Grants. The Capital Fund formula rule at 24 CFR 905.10(i)provides that a PHA may receive RHF grants for public housing units demolished or sold for a period up to five years,with an opportunity for an extension.Any new public housing units will likely be duplex-or triplex-units,which are more cost-effective. DHS's success in finding something that is safe and decent in 2014 or 2015 will depend in large part on the availability of such housing on the market.4 CHAPTER In past planning efforts,research has indicated a strong need for housing units to accommodate larger households(3 or more bedrooms). While there is still a need for larger affordable housing units,the waiting list data shows that only 22%of households have expressed a need for homes with three or more bedrooms. Similarly,CHAS data indicates that approximately 21%of large related,low/mod income households are cost-burdened(spend 30%or more of their income on housing),which represents approximately 2,000 families.CHAS data also indicates that approximately 3%of County households are subject to overcrowding,defined as"a housing unit containing more than one person per room").Although some of these households may need units with three or more bedrooms,data does not exist to quantify this unmet demand. To complicate matters further,it is possible that some of the real demand for larger units is suppressed because some residents may not report all of the household members included when occasional or permanent"doubling up"occurs. Census data provides some indication of the existing supply of larger housing units. While there are a significant number of owner-occupied units that can accommodate large families(86%of all owner-occupied units have three or more bedrooms),the supply of larger rental units is more limited. About 28%of all rental units have three or more bedrooms. Of those units with three or more bedrooms,only 24%had rents of$1,000 per month or less,according to 2006-10 CHAS data. FUTURE TRENDS As reported in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan,Metro and Portland State University completed a study that estimates future housing affordability in terms of the supply of different housing types,the demographics of people in different types of housing and the percentage of cost-burdened households within the Portland Metropolitan area and various geographic portions of it5. While this study used a different tool than Metro's Metroscope model to predict future affordable housing needs,the results appear to be consistent with the information reported in this document.The report identifies the following trends: • The percentage of cost-burdened households(renters and homeowners combined) is projected to increase overall in the four-County Portland Metro area(Washington, Clackamas,Multnomah and Clark Counties),with households spending more than 30% of their income on housing to increase to nearly 50%in 2035. • In Washington County,the proportion of households paying more than 30%of their 4 Adolph"vain income on housing is expected to increase to between 36%and 64%by 2035,varying Director Washingttonon County Department of Housing by sub-area within the County,with the highest percentage in the Cornelius/Forest Services,email,January 27, Grove area and the lowest percentages in the Tualatin and unincorporated areas. 2014. 5 Housing Needs Study for the Portland Metropolitan Area,Final Report,Institute of Metropolitan Studies, July,2008. p. 56 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment • In most sub-areas of the County,a higher percentage of renters are projected to be cost-burdened in 2035 than are homeowners or the overall population. For example,the percentage of cost-burdened renters in Beaverton and Hillsboro is expected to be 6-10% higher than the percentage of all households. The same is true as would be expected for renters of multi-family units. • In the Portland Metro area,the percentage of significantly cost-burdened renters (i.e.,spending 50%or 60%of their income on housing)is expected to be between 10%and 12%in 2035. Increases in Washington County are expected to be lower than in Multnomah County or the region,on average. CHAPTER 3 • A significant percentage of single-family renter households currently spend more tha 30%of their income on housing in the Portland region(just over 60%). However, this percentage is not expected to change significantly over the next 20 years,except for households at the lowest income levels that spend an even higher proportion of thei income(50-60%)on housing. • The percentage of single-family homeowners in the region who pay more than 30%of their income on housing is expected to increase to almost 50%in 2035,with most of the increase occurring relatively early in this time period. Increases are projected to be lower in most parts of Washington County than in other parts of the region. • The percentage of owners of multi-family units(such as condos)paying more than 30% of their income on housing in the region is expected to rise to over 60%in 2020. The Beaverton,Hillsboro and Cornelius areas will be most affected by this trend. • The demographic groups expected to be most affected by cost-burden issues in 2035 are owners of multi-family units(particularly those with lower incomes)and to a lesser degree owners of single-family units. • Among renter households,"emerging singles"households,young and middle-income families,and successful middle-aged families are expected to see the most significant relative increase in the percentage of households that are cost-burdened. This is due in part to the fact that a much higher percentage of lower income households are already cost-burdened,with relatively little capacity for the percentage to increase. • The percent of lower income households that spend more than 50%of their incomes on housing is expected to be 19-33%by 2035 among low-income households. Thes changes are expected to be most pronounced in portions Beaverton and Hillsboro, compared to other parts of Washington County. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 57 HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT In assessing the needs of homeless populations in Washington County,the Consortium looked to the 2014 Point-in-Time Shelter Count for data as well as sources such as the Washington County Department of Housing Services and the Oregon Department of Education for information on homeless children in Washington County school district. Since 2003,HUD has required continuums across the country to report the number of people who are homeless at a particular time of the year(in the last seven days of January). The annual homeless count facilitates the need for continuums to collect data CHAPTER 3 and report on the number of homeless.The point-in-time homeless count for Washington County was held from January 22 to 30,2014. The survey accounts for those who were staying in shelters,those who were camping or were otherwise staying in places other than shelters and those who were in other homeless situations, such as people who are "doubled-up." Table 3-38 shows the 2014 count. TABLE 3-38 Point-in-Time Homeless Count,Washington County(2014) Total Individuals Number Percent Sheltered(Transitional,Emergency,Safe Haven) 198 19.6% Literally Homeless(street,place not meant for habitation) 346 34.2% Other Homeless Situations(i.e.doubled up) 467 46.2% Total 1,011 100.0% SOURCE:Washington County Department of Housing Services,2014 Point in Time Homeless Count For the 2014 count,the majority of people counted were sharing housing with other people—"doubled-up."This category is an expanded version of the federal definition of homelessness,and is defined as people sharing other persons'housing due to loss of housing,economic hardship,personal safety,or facing impending eviction from a private dwelling unit and have not found a subsequent residence and resources needed to obtain housing.Given that the total number of homeless is inevitably underrepresented in this count-it is practically impossible to find and account for every person who is homeless -it is assumed that the number of homeless people going without shelter is even greater than the number captured in the Point-in-Time count. Moreover,not everyone who is homeless seeks shelter for reasons including shelter requirements and restrictions and the threat-or perceived threat-of conflict or theft among those staying in shelters. For those who do seek shelter and housing, several types are available: emergency shelter,safe haven shelter,transitional housing,and permanent housing. Emergency shelters may allow people to stay up to six weeks before requiring them to seek shelter elsewhere. Safe haven beds are established for"chronic"homeless individuals,but not for families or youth. Chronic homeless are people who have been homeless for more than one year or had four or more episodes of homelessness in the past three years. Permanent supportive housing refers to housing for those who are homeless and have special service needs. The number of each type of shelter and housing units available in Washington County is presented in Table 3-38. P. 58 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Number of Beds Available Year Round for People Who TABLE 3-39 Are Homeless, Washington County (2014) Type Beds Notes Emergency Households w/o Children 3 These beds are for domestic violence survivors only Households w/Children 93 4 beds are for children only Subtotal 96 CHAPTER 3 Safe Haven Households w/o Children 10 One site only Households w/Children 0 Subtotal 10 Transitional Households w/o Children 104 Households w/Children 33 Subtotal 137 Permanent Supportive Households w/o Children 354 Households w/Children 197 Subtotal 551 Rapid Re-Housing Households w/o Children 18 Households w/Children 140 Subtotal 158 TOTAL 952 Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services As documented in the 2013 Continuum of Care application,there are plans to increase the number of Permanent Supportive Housing(PSH)beds dedicated to chronically homeless through new development and bed turnovers.This includes prioritizing 32 beds in the Shelter Plus Care program to serve chronic homeless households,30 new beds for the Housing TEAM Program using Section 8 Project-based Rent Assistance(PRA)in partnership with the Luke-Dorf, Inc.,and 15 new beds through Veteran Administration Services Housing(VASH)vouchers,awarded to the Housing Authority of Washington County,which will be prioritized to serve chronic homeless veteran households. Transitional and permanent supportive housing provide the most significant sources of shelter and housing in the County. Although the inventory of emergency shelter beds has expanded in the last few years, there are still no emergency shelter facilities for adult individuals; facilities are dedicated solely to families,youth, and survivors of domestic violence. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 59 Figure 3-6 Estimated Homeless Counts: Point in Time Counts (October 2012-July 2013) el Exhibit 1.3 Estimated Homeless Counts Point in Time Cants 250- -' 220 L 211 ItG5 200- CHAPTER 3 1'8 161 151 150- Pill l00- 64 Rs A6 I<_ 0-1 Estimated October 2012 January 2013 April 2013 July 2011 Total on an Average Night Persons In Families in Emergency Individuals in Transitional Shelter Housing Persons in Families in Transitional Individuals in Permanent ®Housing Supportive Housing Persons in Families in Permanent ®Supportive Housing Source:2013 Annual Homeless Assessment Report for Washington County Homeless families and individuals who find a shortage of shelter or housing and other services in Washington County may end up seeking these resources elsewhere. While there is no readily available data about people in this circumstance,anecdotal information indicates that the homeless in Washington County frequently use shelter and other services in Portland where more services and facilities are available. However, transit and travel between locations can discourage this. People who are homeless in Washington County also rely on other means,such as staying temporarily with friends and family or camping in their vehicles,on the streets,or in parks and other places not meant for human habitation. p. 60 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-40 Homeless Needs Assessment Estimate the#of persons Estimate the# Estimate the Estimate the# Estimate the#of Population experiencing experiencing #becoming exiting days persons p homelessness on a given homeless homelessness experience night homelessnes each year h g s each yeareach homelessness Sheltered Unsheltered Persons in Households with 551 96 0 0 0 0 Adult(s)and Child(ren) Persons in Households with 15 2 0 0 0 0 Only Children CHAPTER 3 Persons in Households with 247 100 0 0 0 0 Only Adults Chronically Homeless 100 10 0 0 0 0 Individuals Chronically Homeless 3 1 0 0 0 0 Families Veterans 27 51 0 0 0 0 Unaccompanied Child 0 0 0 0 0 0 Persons with HIV 1 0 0 0 0 0 Data Source:2014 Washington County Point-In-Time Shelter Count(January 22-30,2014) TABLE 3-41 Race and Ethnicity of the Sheltered and Unsheltered Homeless Population Race Sheltered Unsheltered(optional) White 160 868 Black or African American 16 50 Asian 1 7 American Indian or Alaska Native 2 25 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 4 18 Ethnicity Sheltered Unsheltered(optional) Hispanic or Latino 30 244 Not Hispanic or Latino 168 767 SOURCE:2014 Washington County Point-In-Time Shelter Count(January 22-30,2014) Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 61 CAUSES OF HOMELESSNESS The primary causes of homelessness in Washington County have to do with the ability to pay for housing. As shown in Table 3-42,the top two reasons for homeless are unemployment and unaffordable rent. Along with the personal issues of drug and/or alcohol addiction and mental health challenges,which can compromise a person's ability to work steadily or put aside money for housing,these causes account for over half of the cases of homelessness documented in the last one-night count for Washington County. CHAPTER 3 TABLE 3-42 Causes of Homelessness,Washington County (2014) Cause TOTAL Percent Couldn't Afford Rent 332 31.3% Unemployment 169 15.9% Eviction 108 10.2% Kicked Out by 97 9.1% Family/Friends Drug/Alcohol Self 60 5.6% Criminal History 48 4.5% Drug/Alcohol at Home 39 3.7% Mental/Emotional Disorder 38 3.6% DV 35 3.3% Other Reason 32 3.0% By Choice 30 2.8% Medical Problems 23 2.2% Poor Rental History 15 1.4% Credit 12 1.1% Foreclosure 10 0.9% Child Abuse 5 0.5% Pregnancy 3 0.3% Runaway 3 0.3% Gambling 2 0.2% Property sold 1 0.1% Manufactured Home Park 0 0.0% Closure TOTAL 1,062 100.0% Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count There are typically multiple and compounding causes of homelessness. This is demonstrated in Table 3-42 as the total count of causes(1,062) is higher than the homeless population counted(1,011). It should be noted that compared to the 2008 count addressed in the last Consolidated Plan,violence in the home is less of a leading cause of homelessness than was reported in previous years. p. 62 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOMELESS The Point-in-Time Homeless Count also provides valuable demographic information about those who are experiencing homelessness. In terms of gender,more of the homeless population is male than female-about 58%male versus 42%female(the remaining is of an unidentified gender). As for age,the population is comprised of 56.4%adults and about 37.5%children; the age of about 6.0%of the homeless population counted is unknown. Table 3-43 and 3-44 provides more specific information about age and gender. TABLE 3-43 Gender of Homeless Persons, Washington County (2014) CHAPTER 3 Sheltered All All Grand and Sheltered Percent Unsheltered Percent Total Percent Unsheltered Male 114 57.6% 413 50.8% 527 52.1% Female 83 41.9% 396 48.7% 479 47.4% Unknown 1 0.0% 4 0.5% 5 0.5% TOTAL 198 100.0% 813 100.0% 1,011 100.0% Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count TABLE 3-44 Age of Homeless Persons,Washington County (2014) Age All Percent All Percent Grand Percent Sheltered Unsheltered Total 0-5 30 15.2% 39 4.8% 69 6.8% 6-11 13 6.6% 145 17.8% 158 15.6% 12-17 12 6.1% 141 17.3% 153 15.1% 18-23 33 16.7% 62 7.6% 95 9.4% 24-44 51 25.8% 260 32.0% 311 30.8% 45-54 34 17.2% 63 7.7% 97 9.6% 55-69 24 12.1% 35 4.3% 59 5.8% 70+ 1 0.5% 7 0.9% 8 0.8% Unknown 0 0.0% 61 7.5% 61 6.0% TOTAL 198 100.0% 813 100.0% 1,011 100.0% Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 63 The source for the following two figures comes from the Washington County Department of Housing Services'2014 Point in Time Homeless Count. Figure 3-7 Federal Homeless Definition: Literally Homeless Trends Sheltered and Unsheltered People(2009-2014) Federal Homeless Definition Literally Homeless Trends Sheltered and Unsheltered People Soo - - CHAPTER 3 700 A11--Unsheltered powe 600 500 478 91 +_Sheltered 442 People g 400 0 6 300 - Chronic 200- Homeless 200 198 (Shelter 8 100 182446 Unsheltered 77 111 0 1/2812009 1/27/2010 1/2612011 1125/2012 1130/2013 1/29/2014 • 2012 sheltered increase to 309 with new transitional housing beds;e.g.Veterans&Family Center. • 2013 sheltered decrease as transitional beds convert to rapid re-housing(permanent housing). • 2014 unsheltered increase within family households with children-new parent with babies. Increase in sheltered and unsheltered chronic homeless individuals and families with children. Figure 3-8 State Homeless Definition: Literally Homeless&Living Doubled-Up Sheltered and Unsheltered People(2009-2014) State Homeless Definition Literally Homeless & Living Doubled-Up Sheltered and Unsheltered People -- 1 13831374 _ _ Total People 13b2 —Homeless 1200 —�—With at Least On 9001011 Adult and One 769 794 Child : 585 X647 At--Without Children 600 J: --■ 537 - •45� 529 s —With Only 300 347 Children<18 18 21 39 17 years 0 i —� —, 1/28/2009 1/27/2010 1/26/2011 1/25/2012 1/30/2013 1/29t20114 p. 64 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment More dramatic statistics are provided by school districts in Washington County. Data compiled by the districts show that over five times as many students were homeless as the number of school-age children identified in the 2014 one-night count. The students are concentrated in the more urban Beaverton and Hillsboro School Districts. TABLE 3-45 2012-2013 Student Homeless Count by District District Homeless# Homeless% Total Student Enrollment Banks SD 13 * 1,128 Beaverton SD 48J 1,373 3.48% 39,488 CHAPTER 3 Forest Grove SD 15 101 1.71% 5,921 Gaston SD 511 J 12 2.48% 438 Hillsboro SD 1J 320 1.53% 20,903 Sherwood SD 88J 80 1.59% 5,018 Tigard-Tualatin SD 202 1.60% 12,641 23J Source:Oregon Department of Education, *Counts from 1-5 have been suppressed with an asterisk to protect student privacy A vast majority of the homeless population that was counted in the 2014 Point-in- Time count was White,which was to be expected given the predominance of the White population in the County. However,compared to percentages found in the 2008-2012 ACS,Hispanic or Latino,Black or African American and American Indian or Alaska Native populations were over-represented in the homeless population. TABLE 3-46 Ethnicity of Homeless People,Washington County(2014) All All Grand Ethnicity Sheltered Percent Unsheltered Percent Total Percent Hispanic or Latino 30 15.2% 214 26.3% 244 24.1% Non-Hispanic or Latino 168 84.8% 599 73.7% 767 75.9% Total 198 100.0% 813 100.0% 1,011 100.0% SOURCE:Washington County Department of Housing Services,2014 Point-in-Time Homeless Count TABLE 3-47 Race of Homeless People,Washington County (2014) Race All Percent All Percent Grand Percent Sheltered Unsheltered Total American Indian/Alaska 2 1.0% 23 2.8% 25 2.5% Native Asian 1 0.5% 6 0.7% 7 0.7% Black/African 16 8.1% 34 4.2% 50 4.9% American Native Hawaiian/Other 4 2.0% 14 1.7% 18 1.8% Pacific Islander White 160 80.8% 708 87.1% 868 85.9% Mixed 13 6.6% 14 1.7% 27 2.7% Other 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Unknown 2 1.0% 14 1.7% 16 1.6% TOTAL 198 100.0% 813 100.0% 1,011 100.0% Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 65 HOUSING NEEDS OF THE HOMELESS Approximately one-quarter(24.6°/x)of the homeless counted in Washington County were found to have some sort of special need.The majority of those with special needs were dealing with issues of substance abuse,mental illness and domestic violence.Table 3-48 demonstrates the number of homeless counted within each subcategory of special needs. Special Needs Characteristics of People Who Are Homeless in TABLE 3-48 Washington County(2014) CHAPTER 3 Sheltered Unsheltered Total Veterans 0 0 0 Severely Mentally III 28 70 98 Chronic Substance Abuse Issues 22 83 105 Persons with HIV/AIDS 0 1 1 Survivors of Domestic Violence 19 26 45 TOTAL 249 SOURCE:Washington County Deportment of Housing Services,2014 Point-in-Time Homeless Count As a part of the Point in Time Homeless Count,Washington County Department of Housing Services also submits information about the number of beds in emergency shelters,transitional housing, safe havens,permanent supportive hosing and rapid re- housing that are available in the County. Often times these facilities provide services such as mental health and addiction recovery. However,these facilities and services cannot fully serve the hundreds to thousands that are in need.Tables 3-49 to 3-52 summarize each of the facilities and number of beds available. Emergency Shelters for People Who are Homeless in TABLE 3-49 Washington County (2014) Organization Beds HH Beds HH Beds HH Total Name Project Name w/ w/o w/only Beds Children Children Children Boys and Girls SafePlace Youth 0 0 4 4 Aid Shelter Community Hillsboro Family 20 0 0 20 Action Shelter Domestic Violence Monika's House 21 3 0 24 Resource Center(DVRC) Family Family Promise Promise/Interfa Shelter-Shelter ith Hospitality Network Provider 12 0 0 12 Network at Interfaith Host Sites Good Neighbor Good Neighbor Center Center-Shelter 36 0 0 36 Network Provider TOTAL 89 3 4 96 Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count p. 66 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-50 Transitional Housing for People Who are Homeless in Washington County(2014) Beds HH Beds HH Beds HH Total Organization Name Project Name w/ w/o w/only Beds Children Children Children Boys and Girls Aid Transitional Living Program 0 5 0 5 Boys and Girls Aid Transitional Living Program 4 5 0 9 (CDC Program) Jubilee Transition Homes Jubilee Transitional Housing for 0 6 0 6 CHAPTER 3 homeless individuals Fredrick House-Homeless adults LifeWorks NW with psychiatric illness 0 5 0 5 (located in Hillsboro) Sequoia Mental Health 6th Street Interim House 0 5 0 5 Services Inc. The Salvation Army Veterans&Families Center 14 66 0 80 Washington County Homeless To Work Transitional Department of Housing Housing Program 0 12 0 12 Services (opened May 2009) Washington County Transitional Housing three single- Department of Housing 12 0 0 12 family residential homes in Aloha Services TOTAL 30 104 0 134 SOURCE:Washington County Department of Housing Services,2014 Point-in-Time Homeless Count Safe Haven Housing for People Who are Homeless in TABLE 3-51 Washington County (2014) Organization Beds HH Beds HH Beds HH Name Project Name w/ w/o w/only Total Beds Children Children Children Garrett Lee Luke-Dorf Inc. Smith Safe 0 10 0 10 Haven House TOTAL 0 10 0 10 Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 67 Permanent Supportive Housing for People Who are TABLE 3-52 Homeless in Washington County (2014) Organization Beds HH Beds HH Beds HH Total Name Project Name w/ w/o w/only Beds Children Children Children Cascade Scattered site units AIDS Project Shelter Plus Care tenant- 14 31 0 45 based rental assistance CHAPTER Community Scattered site units Action Shelter Plus Care tenant- 37 7 0 44 based rental assistance. Good Scattered site units Neighbor Shelter Plus Care tenant- 44 0 0 44 Center based rental assistance Housing The Knoll-Project-based Authority of Section 8 with VA 0 12 0 12 Washington Supportive Services. County Housing Authority of VASH-Veterans Affairs 70 39 0 109 Washington County Housing Scattered site units S+C Independence for homeless people with 0 6 0 6 Development Disabilities LifeWorks NW Tom Brewer House 2 20 0 22 Hillsboro Graduated Luke-Dorf Inc. 0 14 0 14 Independent Living Luke-Dorf Inc. Housing TEAM Program 0 70 0 70 Open Door Scattered site units Counseling Shelter Plus Care tenant- 2 6 0 8 Center based rental assistance Sequoia Tri-Haven Room and Mental Health Board- 12 units Shelter 0 12 0 12 Services Inc. Plus Care project-based Washington Mental Health County Consortium: LifeWorks Department of NW Sequoia Mental 28 137 0 165 Housing Health Services&Luke- Services Dorf TOTAL 197 354 0 551 Source:Washington County Department of Housing Services, 2014 Point in Time Homeless Count p. 68 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT This section of the plan describes the following populations and their housing needs. These groups are largely referred to as"special needs"populations that the market frequently does not serve completely,and include: • Farmworkers • Elderly residents • People with disabilities • People with alcohol or drug addictions CHAPTER 3 • Released offenders. • People with HN/AIDS In addition to housing information about special needs populations,this section also includes data about children with lead paint poisoning. This section also addresses the housing resources available to these populations. The size of the population in need is compared to the supply of housing resources available to determine whether there is an unmet need and to assess the scope of that need. This is commonly referred to as a"gap analysis." There are a number of challenges common to data about these populations and available housing resources. The population sizes are usually hard to capture and under-reporting is typical. In addition,the populations and the housing units targeted to them frequently overlap. Examples of this could include released offenders or those who are homeless but who also has mental health challenges and/or who have drug and/or alcohol addiction issues—sometimes both—and seniors and elderly who also have physical and/or self-care disabilities. In addition,information about housing resources often lacks uniformity. Data on housing and services that receive public funding typically are better documented than private organizations that provide housing and related services. In addition to the classification challenges described above,we want to acknowledge a deeper kind of problem that arises from trying to fit people and households into pre-determined"special needs"categories:missing the knowledge that comes from understanding the real-life experiences of low income households and losing essential detail about housing features that they really need. "Classification"of people and housing types over-simplifies the complex needs of families and individuals. But it does provide a sense of the scale of the gap between supply and demand,and this information,while lacking subtlety,is useful for policy making. In this chapter,we provide the quantitative information required by HUD on special needs housing demand,supply and gap. The main sources of information about housing needs and resources documented in this section include the following. Metro Regional Affordable Rental Housing Inventory(2011)—created by the Regional Housing Inventory Team(including Metro,Washington County Housing Authority, Washington County Office of Community Development,City of Beaverton,City of Hillsboro,City of Tigard,Oregon Housing and Community Services,Portland Office of the U.S.Housing and Urban Development Department(HUD),and the Rural Economic Development Office of the U.S.Department of Agriculture in Portland,Oregon) Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 69 In addition,a variety of specific housing and social service agencies and advocacy groups and resources were consulted,including the following: • Oregon Housing and Community Services(OHCS)Department • Oregon Department of Human Services(ODHS) • Washington County Department of Housing Services • Washington County Department of Health and Human Services • Washington County Community Corrections Department CHAPTER 3 • Washington County Department of Veterans and Aging Services • Specific service providers of housing and supportive services for people with drug and/ or alcohol dependencies,mental health challenges,disabilities and/or other special housing needs,including Bienestar,Cascade AIDS Project,Luke-Dorf,Inc.and Sequoia Mental Health Services. • City of Portland Housing Bureau(PHB) Farmworkers According to Bienestar,the primary farmworker and farmworker family housing provider in Washington County,the farmworker population in the County is comprised of migrant and resident seasonal farmworkers."Migrant"refers to those workers that travel and follow particular crop harvests for work,and"resident'are those that live permanently in the County. Both sets of farmworkers are typically referred to as"seasonal'in that the crop harvests provide work for up to about 10 months of the year as opposed to the full year. For Low-Income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC)purposes,housing can qualify for credit if at least one household member is a farmworker seasonally or year-round(although the workers can hold other non-agricultural jobs). LIHTC programs define farmworkers as people who are paid to work in the production of farm products,in the planting,cultivation, or harvesting of nursery stock or other agricultural crops,or in forestation or reforestation, but not in aquacultural production. The USDA Rural Development(RD)program defines farmworkers similarly,with the exception that it includes aquacultural production in its definition. A study of migrant and resident seasonal farmworkers completed by Alice Larson and Larson Assistance Services in 2013 is the most current comprehensive study available related to farmworker housing and other needs in the County. According to that study, there were approximately 12,400 migrant and resident seasonal farmworkers and their family members in Washington County in 2013 (roughly 6,700 farmworkers and 5,700 non- farmworkers). While recent studies of local farmworker incomes are not available,a 2009 study from the National Agricultural Workers Survey estimated the national average income for a farmworker family to be between$17,500 and$20,000,which is approximately 20% of the AMI in Washington County. According to the Oregon Employment Department and Occupational Safety and Health Division(OSHA),there were 805 beds for farmworkers in registered camps in the County as of February 2014. This may indicate a reduction in the number of available beds in on- site farmworker camps in the County. Bienestar is the largest provider of housing for farmworkers,and currently sponsors a total of 324 units for farmworkers and families on six properties focused near the agricultural communities in western Washington County.Ten of these units are dedicated to migrant seasonal workers and can accommodate 40-50 workers. Overall,the units range between two and four bedrooms. Most farmworkers and their families are Latino,and the average Latino family size in Washington County has been estimated at just over 4 persons per household. p. 70 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-53 Housing for Farmworkers by Bienestar (2014) Project Name Sponsor Location Number of Units Cornelius Park Bienestar Cornelius 24 Apartments Elm Park I Bienestar Forest Grove 50 Apartments Elm Park II Bienestar Forest Grove 12 Apartments Jose Arciga Bienestar Forest Grove 50 Apartments CHAPTER 3 Juniper Garden Bienestar Forest Grove 46 [11 Apartments Montebello Bienestar Hillsboro 48 Reedville Bienestar Aloha 48 Apartments TOTAL 288 Source:Bienestar Website:bienestar-or.org [1]Expected number after completion of addition to facility,due in August 2014 Between beds in registered farmworker camps and housing units listed in Table 3-52,there is housing for just over 1,100 farmworkers in the County. Given the 6,700 farmworkers enumerated in the 2013 study,this leaves an unmet need for more than 5,600 more beds or units of housing if it is assumed that all farmworkers are in need of affordable housing, as suggested by the 2009 data that found that farmworkers were earning about 20%of the Area Median Income(AMI)in Washington County. This unmet need must be met through the open market or through other housing subsidy programs. Bienestar reports a stable demand for year-round permanent housing for farmworker families. Despite the estimated need,Bienestar reports that there are presently either short waiting lists or higher vacancy rates for farmworker permanent housing. This may be due to the fact that Bienestar's clientele is transient, in need of housing immediately,do not have reliable contact information or are unfamiliar with waiting lists.As such,they have about 30 households on their waiting list as of January 2014,which is typical for them.6 Elderly and Frail Elderly Population There are many different definitions and names for older adults. Regardless of whether they are called senior citizens,elders,the elderly,older adults or some other name,and regardless of whether they are defined as people age 50 and older(AARP membership age),age 55 and older,age 60 and older,age 62 and older(HUD definition of elderly)or age 65 and older,this age group is growing faster than others in the U.S. The age pyramid in Figure 3-9 shows that all age groups in Washington County grew from 2000 to 2010. Baby Boomers started turning 65 years old in 2012. In Washington County,about 67,000 residents will turn 60 between 2012 and 2020. This plan focuses on adults ages 65 and older and refers to this group as"older adults." 6 Karen Shawcross, Executive Director Bienestar, email,January 17,2014 Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 71 Figure 3-9 Washington County Age Distribution 2000 and 2010 85+ Males Females 8484 75.79 7474 65-69 6464 55-59 CHAPTER 3 5454 45-49 02000 4&" 02010 35-39 3434 25-29 20-24 15-19 10-14E'' 5-9 •r.'F 4a 30,000 20000 10000 0 10,000 20,000 3Q000 Approximately 10%of Washington County's residents were age 65 and older in 2012 (52,000 individuals). More than nine in ten(91%)were White;4%were Asian,and the remainder was another race or combination of races. Three percent of older adults were Latino,according to the U.S.Census American Community Survey. Concentrations of older adults are found in King City,southern Tigard,northern and western Beaverton and Forest Grove. In 2010,almost half(49%)of households with at least one resident age 62 and older were low/mod-income(0 to 80%AMI). Over half(55%)of these households with older adults were extremely low/low-income(0 to 50%AMI). The number and percent of households with older adults in each income bracket in 2010 is shown in Table 3-54. More current information about the distribution of older households by these HUD-defined income brackets is not available. Low and Moderate Income Households with One or More TABLE 3-54 Older Adults (2010) Number of Low and Income%of AMI Moderate Income %of all Senior Households with One or Households More Older Adult 0-30% 4,520 11.5% >30-50% 6,180 15.7% >50-80% 8,595 21.8% TOTAL 19,295 49.0% Source:2006-2010 CHAS p. 72 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Just over seven percent(7.4%)of older adults had incomes below the poverty level, compared to 10.9%for the population overall.Households with residents age 65 and older were more likely to have Social Security income(91.8%),Supplemental Security Income (3.7%)and retirement benefits(49.8%)as sources of income than the population overall. Older adults were nearly three times as likely to be veterans(24.4%)than the civilian population ages 18 and older(8.6%),according to American Community Survey(ACS) data for 2008-12. Not surprisingly,older adults are far more likely to have a disability than the general population. Over one-third of older adults in Washington County reported having a CHAPTER 3 disability in 2008-2012(34.3%),compared to 9.3%of County residents overall.Table 3-55 provides information about the disability status of older adults and compares this population to people age 5 to 64 years old. TABLE 3-55 Adults with Disabilities, Washington County (2012) Age Range Number Percent 5 to 64 years with a disability 30,514 6.9% 65 and over with a disability 18,311 34.3% Source:2008-2012 ACS Disability and poverty status appear to be related for older adults. From 2008-12, 10.5% of people ages 65 and older who had a disability also had incomes at or below the poverty level in Washington County.In comparison,5.7%of older adults with no disability had incomes at or below the poverty level. The poverty rate of disabled older adults(10.5%)is lower than that of disabled people age 5 to 64(22.5%). The one important caveat to these figures from the ACS data is that they represent only the non-institutionalized civilian population,and thus exclude military personnel and people living in facilities such as nursing homes. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 73 Cost-burdened older adults in rental housing are a particularly vulnerable population in the County. In 2012,a substantially larger share of older renters were cost-burdened than Washington County renters overall. While adults age 65 and older were less likely to live in rental housing than residents in general(27.8%vs. 38.3%),nearly than two thirds(63.5%)of rental housing units with residents age 65 and older were occupied by households who were paying 30%or more on housing costs. In comparison,less than half of all rental housing units in Washington County(46.5%)were occupied by households paying 30%or more of their income for housing costs. In 2008—2012,approximately 6,000 rental units housing older adults were occupied by households paying 30%or more CHAPTER 3 of their income for housing costs. Given the rising cost of health care,a necessity for many older adults in particular,the likely vulnerability of these 6,000 older,cost-burdened renters is particularly concerning. Affordable low-cost rental housing represents the first area of concern.Table 3-56 shows these figures in detail. TABLE 3-56 Low-Income Senior Households with Cost Burden (2010) Cost Burdened>30% Income Renter Percent Owner Percent Total Percent Level AM1,900 u 1,900 33% 1,710 31% 3,610 32% AMI 2,375 o 2,375 42% 1,725 32% 4,100 37% 0 AMI 1,430 25% 2,015 37% 3,445 31% TOTAL 5,705 100% 5,450 100% 11,156 100% Cost Burdened >50% Income Renter Percent Owner Percent Total Percent Level 0 AMI 1,685 45% 1,240 41% 2,925 44% 31-50% 1,395 38% 915 31% 2,310 34% AMI 0 AMI 640 17% 835 28% 1,475 22% TOTAL 3,720 100% 2,990 100% 6,711 100% Source:2006-2010 CHAS p. 74 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment There are 796 units of publicly assisted housing units in the County designated for residents who are elderly or who have a disability. As shown in Table 3-57,these units are located in Beaverton, Sherwood,Aloha,Hillsboro, Forest Grove,and North Plains. The units accommodate a small fraction(about one-third)of the total number of housing units needed to accommodate senior renter households in the extremely low-income bracket that have housing problems. For every housing unit listed below(796),there are approximately eight older adults(6,000 total)who are renters in need of affordable housing. TABLE 3-57 Housing for Seniors and Elderly (2010) CHAPTER 3 Project Name City Contact Total Units Alma Gardens Hillsboro Northwest Housing 56 Alternatives(NWHA) Brentwood Oaks Aloha Cascade Housing Group 78 Carriage Place Sherwood Bowen Real Estate Group 24 Forest Grove Forest Grove Beehive Management Group 44 Beehive Forest Villa Forest Grove Kent Apartments Lp 84 Apartments Holly Tree Village Beaverton Housing Authority Of 140 Washington County Kaybern Terrace North Plains Washington Co. Housing 12 Auth. Kent Apts North Plains Kent Apartments Lp 33 Sherwood Park Sherwood Guardian Affordable Housing 44 Development Lic Stewart Terrace Sherwood Guardian Affordable Housing 24 Development Llc Tarkington Square Hillsboro Community Housing III, Inc 48 The Knoll at Tigard Tigard Community Partners for 48 Affordable Housing The Maples Hillsboro Washington County Council 29 Apartments on Aging The Maples II Hillsboro Community Housing III, Inc 21 Apartments Woodland Park Hillsboro Guardian Affordable Housing 111 Apartments Development Lie TOTAL 796 Source:2010 OHCS Housing Inventory, Martha McClellan NWHA Age-segregated housing for older adults is just one housing option for this population. Many older adults prefer age-integrated housing settings and wish to age in place in their homes in traditional neighborhoods. Thus,it is difficult to isolate the gap between supply and demand for age-segregated independent housing for older adults from the need for physically accessible affordable housing more generally. However,the prior figures about the number of cost-burdened renters who are older adults in Washington County(6,000 cost-burdened renter households with a member age 65 and older)highlight the need for affordable housing for this population. Furthermore,the information about the high proportion of older adults in the County who have one or more disabilities(over one-third have some kind of disability)indicates the need for affordable housing to be accessible or adaptable. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 75 A second area of concern is the home repair and accessibility needs faced by low-income older adults. The Washington County Office of Community Development reports a steady demand for assistance through the Home Access and Repair for the Disabled and Elderly(HARDE)program,which provides grants of up to$3,500 for qualified home repairs and accessibility improvements to low-income elderly(age 62 and older)and disabled households. The HARDE program served 31 elderly and/or disabled households in 2012-13. While in some cases the replacement of other amenities in the home might be desirable,the investment of CDBG funds is limited to only necessary repairs due to restrictions imposed by federal regulations. CHAPTER 3 Washington County annually partners with Community Action and Rebuilding Together Washington County to provide a range of home repairs and improvements. For example, the HARDE program might make electrical repairs to a mobile home and then Community Action performs an energy audit and installs weatherizing insulation resulting in increased safety and a reduction in the homeowner's monthly utility costs. Likewise,the rehabilitation dollar goes further if Rebuilding Together or Community Action first utilizes their force of volunteers for some simple plumbing repairs and then the HARDE program adds to the project by replacing a worn-out furnace. In addition,referrals from the County's Department on Disability,Aging,and Veteran's Services(DAVS)to the HARDE program ensure that clients receive the assistance that they need. Clients are able to access up to$500 from DAVS as a result of the partnership.Enhanced services to HARDE clients have been the outcome of these on-going,coordinated efforts. A third area of concern is older adults living in manufactured home parks in Washington County. In 2012 there were approximately 5,800 manufactured homes in Washington County. While it is not known how many of these households include older residents, across the U.S.approximately one-quarter of manufactured homes are headed by a householder age 65 or older,according to the 2011 American Housing Survey. Discussions with the HARDE program coordinator at Washington County reveal that seniors who live in manufactured home parks generally need accessibility improvements,such as ramps and accessible showers.Many of these homes were built in the 1970s and earlier,and often require other repairs to roofs and electrical systems. Older adults experience many benefits and liabilities as residents of manufactured home park living. Research suggests manufactured home parks may provide an environment conducive to aging in place without formal support services because of the informal networks and social relationships that exist among neighbors who lend a hand and keep an eye out for each other's continuing safety. When a park closes,older adults not only lose their home,they also lose their community,their social networks,and all that is familiar. If their incomes are low,their options for new housing and services may be limited. If they had lived independently,they may be unfamiliar with navigating the network of agencies that might be able to assist them. They may also be faced with significant financial problems if they cannot move or sell their home but still have an outstanding loan to pay for it. p. 76 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment The challenges that older adults face in trying to piece together affordable housing and assistive services is symptomatic of a larger dysfunction in how the U.S.organizes the provision of housing and health care. This is trying to be addressed at the state level in Oregon with linkages between housing and healthcare in terms of the Governor's budget and other priorities.Nevertheless,there is a lack of a common language and mission between the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. How each understands clients(patients vs. tenants),how each assesses needs,and how each approaches service delivery is vastly different from the other. These programmatic silos are reflected at the state level as well, as evidenced by a lack of integration between the publicly-assisted healthcare system CHAPTER 3 and the affordable housing system, As people move through their life course,their need for service-enriched housing grows. The policy,funding and program delivery systems are not organized to meet this challenge,and older adults are left to piece together their individual solutions from the fragments of the individual systems. Despite these systemic challenges,some non-profit housing developers are already providing services(or arranging for other community partners to provide services)to residents of subsidized housing complexes. If resources were available,housing providers could experiment further with integrating affordable housing for older adults and services at the local level. For example,enhanced social and health care services could be provided to residents in subsidized senior housing. Models might include individual resident health assessments and referrals,the provision of space for on-site services(such as meals), instituting innovative partnerships with health care providers,and the development of volunteer-based service initiatives with the faith-based community. In conclusion,there are four primary housing—related needs of older adults in Washington County,as follows: • More affordable rental housing for low-income older adults,and ways to make existing housing more affordable. To accommodate people as they move through their life course,the housing should be accessible or adaptable. Both age-segregated and multi- generational settings are appropriate. • The continuation of existing rehabilitation programs that provide housing repair, weatherization and accessibility improvements. • Advance planning related to the potential future closure of manufactured home parks and displacement of older low-income residents. • Innovative ways to address the integrated housing and service needs for older adults. People with Disabilities The U.S. Census identifies six types of disabilities: Hearing difficulty,Vision difficulty,Cognitive difficulty,Ambulatory difficulty,Self-care difficulty and an Independent living difficulty.People suffer from multiple disabilities(see Table 3-58). The 2008—2012 American Community Survey(ACS)found approximately 8.5%of Washington County residents age 18 or above to have some form of disability. The ACS indicates that nearly 18%of these people are living below the poverty level. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 77 Over three percent of residents 18 to 64 years old had an"ambulatory disability," compared to 20.9%of residents 65 and over. Just over one percent of residents 18 to 64 years old had a"self-care disability,"compared to 9%of residents 65 and over. Approximately 3.5%percent of residents 18 to 64 years old had a"cognitive disability," compared to 10.9%of residents 65 and over.Additional data on people with disabilities is found in the following tables and is summarized below. Persons with Disabilities by Age, Washington County TABLE 3-58 (2012) CHAPTER 3 With a disability Percent with a disability Population under 5 years 482 1.3% With a hearing difficulty 381 1.0% With a vision difficulty 193 0.5% Population 5 to 17 years 4,119 4.2% With a hearing difficulty 485 0.5% With a vision difficulty 510 0.5% With a cognitive difficulty 3,152 3.2% With an ambulatory difficulty 511 0.5% With a self-care difficulty 827 0.8% Population 18 to 64 years 26,395 7.8% With a hearing difficulty 5,492 1.6% With a vision difficulty 4,898 1.4% With a cognitive difficulty 11,808 3.5% With an ambulatory difficulty 11,515 3.4% With a self-care difficulty 3,839 1.1% With an independent living 8,448 2.5% difficulty Population 65 years and 18,311 34.3% over With a hearing difficulty 7,896 14.8% With a vision difficulty 3,270 6.1% With a cognitive difficulty 5,813 10.9% With an ambulatory difficulty 11,137 20.9% With a self-care difficulty 4,777 9.0% With an independent living 8,501 15.9% difficulty Sex Male 22,564 8.7% Female 26,743 10.0% SOURCE:2008-2012 ACS p. 78 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Persons with Disabilities by Poverty Status, Washington TABLE 3-59 County (2012) With a Disability Without a Disability Population Age 16 and over for whom poverty status is 45,423 361,410 determined Below 100 percent of the 18.0% 8.9% poverty level 100 to 149 percent of the o o CHAPTER 3 poverty level 12.9/0 6.9%- .9/o At or above 150 percent of 69.1% 84.3% the poverty level SOURCE.2008-2012 ACS Persons with Disabilities by Earnings, Washington County TABLE 3-60 (2012) Earnings(Past 12 Months in 2012 With a Disability Without a Disability Inflation Adjusted Dollars) Population Age 16 and over with 16,466 277,368 earnings $1 to$4,999 or loss 17.5% 9.5% $5,000 to$14,999 23.8% 14.6% $15,000 to$24,999 13.9% 13.2% $25,000 to$34,999 14.3% 12.4% $35,000 to$49,999 13.4% 15.0% $50,000 to$74,999 10.0% 16.0% $75,000 or more 7.2% 19.3% SOURCE.2008-2012 ACS The following tables describe the distribution of people with disabilities,by age,gender, poverty level and earnings. This information indicates the following: • On average,men have a higher incidence of most types of disabilities,although women are more likely to have two or more disabilities than men. • As might be expected,older residents(65 and older)have much higher disability rates than younger residents and,in this population,women have higher incidences of almost all types of disabilities than men. The most frequently cited disabilities in older residents are physical disabilities,followed by sensory and go-outside-home disabilities. • People with disabilities are about twice as likely to be below the poverty level as those without disabilities,and the incidence of women with disabilities living below the poverty level is higher than that of men. People with mental and self-care disabilities have the highest incidences of being below the poverty level compared to people with other disabilities and those without disabilities. • People with disabilities tend to be concentrated in lower-income brackets compared to those without disabilities. For example,over 55%of people with disabilities are concentrated in the three lowest income levels(below$25,000 per year),compared to 37%of people with no disabilities. • The figures above indicate that people with disabilities tend to have multiple issues related to their need for and ability to afford housing that is accessible and close to needed services. They tend to have a greater need for such housing,but have relatively fewer resources to obtain it. These issues are particularly acute for older residents and women. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 79 U.S.Census and American Community Survey(ACS)data does not separately call out people with severe and persistent mental illness and their housing needs. Discretely quantifying the housing needs of those with severe and persistent mental illness in Washington County is difficult using state and local data because mental illness often overlaps with other special needs populations addressed in this report(e.g. alcohol and drug addiction and recovery,homelessness),there are many unregistered cases of mental illness,and income information is not available for cases that are registered and receiving services.That said,data from early 2014 from the Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS)shows that 9,901 Washington County residents received mental health treatment CHAPTER 3 within Washington County.Again,these records are not accompanied by income or housing need information. The Washington County Developmental Disabilities Program,with the Department of Health and Human Services,has record of 2,075 people with developmental disabilities currently receiving County services. However,all of these clients do not necessarily have housing needs;some may choose to live with family and friends to help with their day- to-day needs.At any one time,there are approximately 10-15 clients with developmental disabilities that need long-term and more intensive services in settings like a group home or foster home. Staff estimates that group homes,foster homes,and other supportive living facilities(usually apartments with additional services provided by various agencies) serve about 500 clients in the County. The Department receives requests from clients for subsidized apartments so that the clients can live more independently and afford to pay rent with Social Security income or other benefits. These clients typically are living with their families.' According to 2008-2012 ACS data,about 49,300 people,over 9%of the Washington County population,were found to have some form of disability. As reported in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan,a 2007 ODHS report on seniors and people with physical disabilities estimated that at least 550 Washington County residents with physical disabilities,are under age 65,have low incomes,are in need of supportive housing and services and receive in-home care,adult foster care,or residential care or are otherwise in assisted living or nursing facilities. The County has not conducted a follow-up survey of accessible housing or developed a guide to such facilities since 2004. The web-based service HousingConnections.org allows users to search for fully,mostly,and partially accessible units that are currently available to rent. A search in early January 2014 found about 6 units that were currently available, mostly or fully accessible located in Tualatin,Beaverton and Forest Grove. Rents ranged from$593 to$925 and most of the units'managers would at least consider Section 8 rental vouchers. Some individuals with independent living and self-care disabilities live in adult foster care homes and/or are eligible for other housing assistance programs,including social security benefits for the blind and disabled. In addition,many elderly residents with self- care limitation live in a variety of assisted and other living centers,some of which accept Medicaid payments(see section on elderly residents). Because of limited data about the income and housing needs of those with disabilities in Washington County,it is not possible to accurately quantify the unmet need for affordable housing for this population. The best estimate is available for those with physical 7 Mary Lanxon,Program disabilities. However,given the much larger number of those known to have disabilities Management Supervisor and designated housing units,there is a significant unmet need for housing and related, Washington County Developmental Disabilities supportive services. Program,email,January 17, 2014 p. 80 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment People with Alcohol and/or Drug Addiction and People in Recovery Washington County's Department of Health and Human Services estimates that roughly 48,000 residents in the County are in need of alcohol and drug treatment.According to data from ODHS in early 2014,the number of people receiving treatment services in Washington County was 5,117. This represents less than 11%of those in need of treatment. Housing targeted to those in recovery from alcohol and drug addiction also is intended to serve those suffering from both mental illness and drug and/or alcohol addiction in some cases. Luke-Dorf,Inc.is the primary sponsor for housing for those with this dual CHAPTER 3 diagnosis and this housing is addressed in the report section on people with mental health challenges.Transitional and permanent supportive units designated more narrowly for those with alcohol and/or drug addiction issues are presented in Market Analysis in Table 3-97. There are also a handful of"clean and sober homes"for released offenders in the County, and those are addressed in the next section of the report. Although not every person in treatment for or recovery from alcohol and drug addiction requires supportive housing,the amount of existing housing does not begin to compare to the large population of those in treatment or recovery and potentially in need of supportive housing. Released Offenders/Ex-offenders The Community Corrections Department currently supervises about 3,600 offenders on probation and parole. The Department also operates the Community Corrections Center, a 215 bed custodial work release facility that serves about 2,000 offenders a year. Many individuals currently in the community,or soon to be released from the center,need some form of special or transitional housing. The Department recognizes the importance of safe,clean and sober housing in helping offenders to live crime-free in the community and has made the creation and support of such housing a priority. It has successfully applied for grant funding to develop alcohol and drug-free housing,dedicated housing subsidy funds in its budget,and worked with local non-profit agencies to encourage the creation of supportive housing. According to Community Correction's 2013-2015 Biennium Plan,there are approximately 351 beds in community clean and sober housing in Washington County. However,this housing is not strictly for offenders. The 2013-2015 Biennium Plan asserts,this housing is"instrumental in increasing offenders'involvement in treatment,participation in support groups,higher employment rates and reduction in new criminal activity." The housing is managed primarily by Oxford Houses,a non-profit organization,but other organizations such as Homeward Bound,Bridges to Change,and House of Hope also operate clean and sober housing. Stays in this temporary housing typically range from about three to six months. Given this turnover,the 351 beds in the community can usually accommodate an offender needing clean and sober housing. The Community Corrections Center is a custodial facility that serves as an alternative to jail,with extensive programming designed to assist offenders in their transition back to the community. Among its programs,the center offers a 90-day drug and alcohol residential treatment program,with 24 beds for men and 12 beds for women.The program provides intensive treatment and transition services,and has been treating an average of 100 people annually. The availability of drug and alcohol-free housing in the community has been cited as one of the main reasons for the success of the treatment program. Counselors and recovery mentors help program graduates find work,take them to community-based support groups, and assist them to find clean and sober housing. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 81 Of the 2,000 offenders a year that enter the Community Corrections Center,about 1,700 complete their sentence and transition back to the community. Of those who were unsuccessful,the majority violated Center rules and were returned to the jail.Center staff estimates that about 60%of released offenders move into"clean and sober"housing or return home,and the remaining 40%leave the center without good housing options (approximately 680 people in 2013). For those without a good option,some will end up on the street and many others will find temporary housing with family or friends who may be abusing alcohol and/or drugs or are involved in criminal activity. CHAPTER 3 Of its 215 beds,the Community Correction Center has set aside 12-15 as transitional housing for homeless,primarily parolees,those with mental illness,and sex offenders having difficulty finding permanent housing. These residents are not serving a sentence and voluntarily accept a bed. Transitional lodgers must be working or actively seeking work in order to qualify for this housing and are generally limited to a 30 day stay. In general,Community Corrections staff finds the most challenging housing need to address is housing for released sex offenders. Staff estimates that there is need for at least a couple dozen beds for this population-beds that do not currently exist. Mentally ill offenders can be another difficult population to place. There are 10 beds specifically for mentally ill homeless offenders in a facility called Safe Haven. These beds are also referred to in the section on housing needs of the homeless,which is operated by Luke-Dorf,Inc. The Community Corrections Mental Health Team estimates that there is need for at least two more similar facilities. The Mental Health Team also has identified a need for skilled foster care homes for offenders with severe mental illness or disability. Probation officers estimate that there are currently about a dozen clients in need of such housing and services. Additionally,probation officers see the need for temporary housing for those transitioning from hospitals and prisons,with an average stay lasting a couple of months. The officers estimate that about a couple dozen beds would serve this need.' Survivors of Domestic Violence The 2012 ODHS Domestic Violence Intervention Report show that over 8,500 women from Washington County sought help from ODHS's Sexual and Domestic Violence Programs in 2012.The same report also shows that in Oregon,domestic violence survivors experienced 16,000 unmet requests for shelter.If these figures are applied to the comparable Washington County population,it would mean that approximately 2,355 women in Washington County sought shelter unsuccessfully. Additionally,many instances of domestic violence are not reported. The Washington County District Attorney's office registered more than 1,179 new reported cases of domestic violence in FY 2011-2012 and 1,070 cases in FY 2012-2013. There were additional calls during these periods requesting resources related to domestic violence,but data on the number and nature of those calls is not readily available. Regardless,the reported number of cases represents at least a 50%increase over the 400 calls related to domestic violence received by the DA's office in 2002,as documented in the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan. 8 Steve Berger and Karleigh Monahan, Washington County Community Corrections, email,March 17,2014 p. 82 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Income information is not available for survivors of domestic violence. However, physically abused women tend to be young and generally need more health services, social services,and criminal/legal services. Moreover,survivors of physical abuse face ongoing health and economic challenges after the period of abuse has ended. Many services are either unavailable or inadequate in counties throughout Oregon for survivors, perpetrators,and children involved in domestic violence. In Washington County,the Domestic Violence Resource Center,Sexual Assault Resource Center,and South Asian Women's Empowerment and Resource Alliance(SAWERA)offer services to those with needs related to domestic violence. The three centers all receive funding from the Oregon Department of Justice Crime Victims Assistance Section(CVAS). The Domestic Violence CHAPTER 3 Resource Center and Sexual Assault Resource Center are also funded by the Oregon Department of Human Services. The Domestic Violence Resource Center offers shelter facilities to women and families who have experienced domestic violence. The shelter is called Monika's House and is the only domestic violence shelter in Washington County.There are 24 beds in 6 units for families and 3 units for singles.Monika's House operates a 24-hour crisis line and provides individual and group support,parenting groups,children's groups and activities, safety planning,advocacy,and referrals in addition to emergency shelter.The crisis line receives an average of 2,100 calls annually. Given that there is only one shelter with the capacity for 24 people in the County,it is clear that only a small fraction of those who have survived domestic violence are served. Further,this is emergency,temporary housing and does not address the need for permanent affordable housing for this population.They must compete with other low-income and special needs residents in the County for permanent housing to meet their needs. People with HIV/AIDS Cascade AIDS Project(CAP)estimates there are 583 people in Washington County known to be living with HIV or AIDS as of March 2014. This constitutes almost one-tenth of a percent of the total County population,and represents more than a doubling of cases of HN/AIDS reported in 2002(205 people).CAP records are a composite of data collected from County agencies,and include some demographic information but not on income or distribution within the County. Limited demographic information is available for cases of HIV/AIDS in the Portland metropolitan region and in Washington County. Cases of HIV/AIDS in Washington County account for roughly 10%of those reported in the region. As shown in Table 3-39,significantly fewer people living with HIV/AIDS in the County were White when compared to the region overall,and significantly more people were Latino. There was also a notable difference in the number of males and females with HN/AIDS;the percentage of females with HIV/AIDS in Washington County is significantly higher than the region overall. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 83 HUD established the Housing Opportunities for People with HIV/AIDS(HOPWA) program in 1992,which is the only federal program addressing the housing needs of people with HIV/AIDS. At least one person in HOPWA-funded housing must have HIV/ AIDS and the household income must be 80%or less than the AMI in order to receive HOPWA services. Portland Housing Bureau(PHB)administers the HOPWA Program for the Portland Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area(EMSA),which includes Multnomah, Washington,Clackamas,Yamhill,Columbia,Clark,and Skamania Counties. PHB has contracted with Cascade AIDS Project(CAP),Clark County Public Health,Central City Concern,and Outside In to provide housing and related services to people with HIV/ CHAPTER 3 AIDS. CAP,founded in 1983,is"the oldest and largest community-based provider of HIV services,housing,education and advocacy in Oregon and Southwest Washington." Additionally,Portland Housing Bureau in partnership with CAP received a HOPWA Special Program of National Significance grant to better integrate employment and housing services. CAP uses flexible rent assistance to address housing needs and prioritizes people involved in the employment program called Working Choices.Through this grant, a WorkSource Liaison is embedded at CAP and facilitates integration of HIV specific employment services into mainstream services. TABLE 3-61 Race,Ethnicity and Gender for persons living with HIV/AIDS in Washington County(2014) Race Black or African American 44 Asian/Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 10 White 511 Multiple,other,unknown 18 Total 583 Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino 132 Non-Hispanic or Latino 448 Missing,unknown 3 Total 583 Gender Male 497 Female 86 Housing services offered to those living with HIV/AIDS include: Tenant based rent assistance,Project based rent assistance,Short term rent mortgage utility(STRMU)eviction prevention assistance;Housing case management,employment services,furniture donation assistance, tenant education,and assistance with social security disability applications. p. 84 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS This section summarizes the need for public facilities,public infrastructure,public services and economic development activities based on the responses from the Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire process and the What's Working Workshop:Non-Housing,as well as the Washington Count Transportation Funding Options Survey in 2013 and the Consolidated Plan focus groups conducted in 2014.A more detailed description of the proposed activities to be funded and prioritized in each area is available in Chapter 4 along with the goals outlined for each activity in Chapter 6. The Washington County non-housing(community development)component of this needs CHAPTER 3 assessment was developed through an intensive information gathering process that involved local governments,non-profits,residents,and other organizations. The project team utilized surveys,focus groups,workshops,and other public involvement activities to gather public input. In November of 2013,the County,in conjunction with the City of Beaverton,held a"What's Working Workshop:Non-Housing"to evaluate the current CDBG program and identify current community development needs. Staff worked with representatives from local governments,non- profits,and other organizations to review the program,and review the needs assessment process and forthcoming Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire for our service providers.The Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire was available for respondents to fill out online or through paper versions from November 2013 through May 2014.The Community Needs Survey was provided in an online format throughout the months of January to July.Outreach was conducted through email,direct mail and through various stakeholder meetings. Representatives from over 55 different organizations responded to the Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire,identifying a total of 131 needs related to a wide variety of programs and facilities. Many organizations identified multiple needs. Of the total,41 needs were identified by cities,25 by the County,62 by non-profit organizations and 3 by special districts or similar organizations.The responses included the needs for public facilities,public infrastructure, public services and economic development. Needs identified through these assessments fall into the following major and sub-categories, which are stated here regardless of whether a need was identified through public outreach efforts: The Washington County Consortium's need for public facilities as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires processed is summarized below.Based on 31 responses from cities, the County,nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations,there is a need for over$53.2 million in public facilities in Washington County that would assist 399,050 beneficiaries across a variety of public facility types. TABLE 3-62 Public Facility Needs in Washington County Type Beneficiaries Cost #of responses Seniors 103,875 $ 10,900,000 3 Homeless 8,234 $ 5,705,125 7 Parks& Rec 45,000 $ 4,860,000 4 Neighborhood Facilities 69,010 $ 11,873,000 6 Disability 7,670 $ 2,800,000 3 Youth 1,000 $ 2,250,000 1 Community 6,865 $ 2,000,000 1 Mental Health 10,000 $ 2,000,000 2 Other 147,396 $ 10,830,000 4 Cumulative Total 399,050 $ 53,218,125 31 Source:Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 85 The Washington County Consortium's need for public infrastructure as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires processed is summarized below. Based on 20 responses from cities,the County, nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations,there is a need for over$8.4 million in public infrastructure projects in Washington County that would assist 54,628 beneficiaries across a variety of public infrastructure types. TABLE 3-63 Public Infrastructure Needs in Washington County CHAPTER 3 Type Beneficiaries Cost #of Responses Streets 24,305 $ 4,261,632 9 Water/Sewer 2,336 $ 1,690,000 6 Sidewalks 27,837 $ 1,831,500 4 Other 150 $ 600,000 1 Total 54,628 $ 8,383,132 20 Source:Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire The Washington County Consortium's need for public services as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires processed is summarized below. Based on 58 responses from cities,the County,nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations, there is a need for over$504.4 million in public service projects in Washington County that would assist 653,278 beneficiaries across a variety of public service types. TABLE 3-64 Public Services Needs in Washington County Type Beneficiaries Cost #of Responses Childcare 10,089 $ 4,117,000 3 Seniors 36,021 $ 700,000 6 Employment 57,789 $ 36,640,000 8 Youth 3,669 $ 15,039,580 6 Disability 41,973 $ 1,270,000 4 Landlord Tenant 250,451 $ 19,085,850 3 Homeless 42,233 $ 16,775,875 19 Health 140,000 $ 409,000,000 2 Legal 1,800 $ 175,000 1 Transportation 1,153 $ 144,125 1 Other 68,100 $ 1,410,000 5 Cumulative Total 653,278 $ 504,357,430 58 Source:Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire p. 86 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment The Washington County Consortium's need for economic development activities as a result of the needs assessment questionnaires process is summarized below. Based on 8 responses from cities,nonprofit organizations and special districts or similar organizations,there is a need for over$10.02 million in economic development projects in Washington County that would assist 104,810 beneficiaries focused on microenterprise assistance and storefront improvements in slum and blighted areas. Economic Development Activity Needs in Washington TABLE 3-65 County CHAPTER 3 Type Beneficiaries Cost #of Responses Microenterprise 102,420 $ 7,345,000 5 Assistance Storefront 2,390 $ 2,675,000 3 Improvements Cumulative Total 104,810 $ 10,020,000 8 Source:Non-Housing Needs Assessment Questionnaire These needs are confirmed in a Transportation Funding Options Survey funded by Washington County in 2013 and conducted by DHM Research.The objective of the survey was to gauge residents'opinions on priorities and funding for transportation maintenance and improvements. 940 Washington County residents participated in the online survey between July 16 and July 22,2013 through members of Westside Voices and Metro's Opt In.Only 49%of residents said they were aware of the deteriorating condition of roads in Washington County,based on the condition over the past decade that are projected to decline even further because current gas taxes are not sufficient to pay for all the needed maintenance.These residents placed the highest priorities on maintenance of existing roads and technology to improve traffic flow at 79%and 70% respectively.This means that almost 8 in 10 residents responding said their highest priority was maintenance of existing roads and 7 in 10 residents responding said their highest priority is technology to improve traffic flow. Over half of respondents also prioritized adding sidewalks and bike lanes to fill transportation gaps at 53%. 52%of the residents said they wanted to improve and expand public transportation. Non-housing needs are also reflected in the focus group responses from the focus groups conducted from April to June 2014 as part of this Consolidated Plan. In terms of public infrastructure,respondents were asked to prioritize three types of infrastructure activities if they were only able to fund three activities.There were 163 votes tallied on infrastructure. Public safety in relation to infrastructure seemed to be the overarching theme of their priorities. Pedestrian safety improvements was the highest priority with 18.4%followed by street lighting or signal lights at 17.8%,building or repairing sidewalks at 16.6%and bike paths at 15.3%. Road repair or road extension was also notable as a priority with 12.3%of the responses. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 87 In terms of public facilities,respondents were asked to prioritize fives types of public facilities if they were only able to fund five public facilities.There were 183 votes tallied on public facilities.Facilities for youth and childcare seemed to be the overarching theme of their priorities,while it was notable that homeless shelters and addiction treatment centers were also prioritized.Youth center was the highest priority with 18.0%followed by homeless shelter at 15.3%,childcare center at 14.8%and addiction treatment center at 9.8%. In terms of public services,respondents were asked to prioritize some of the challenges CHAPTER 3 they faced in order to determine what public services might help them in their daily lives. There were 196 votes tallied on public services.Youth seemed to be the overarching theme of their priorities given the noted priorities of child care and youth services,while health,transportation and rent were also deemed to be challenges faced by respondents that could be addressed by public services.Child care services was the highest priority with 14.8%followed by health services at 12.8%,rental assistance at 12.2%,youth services at 11.7%and transportation services at 10.2%. For two of the focus groups held in Beaverton,priorities for economic development programs were addressed.There were 21 votes tallied for these focus groups on economic development.Economic development grants were deemed to be the highest priority at 47.6%,followed by both economic development loans and coaching and assistance with business plan and budgeting at 19%and business classes and training also notable at 14.3%. WASHINGTON COUNTY HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS This section of the Consolidated Plan describes the general housing characteristics of the housing market in Washington County,and its local jurisdictions. The purpose of this overview is to identify what kind of housing is currently being built by the private sector and bow it compares with the needs and characteristics of County residents. It includes information based on the following topics: • Geography of the County-i.e.,how land and people are distributed within incorporated cities and unincorporated portions of the County • Total housing units and their distribution by location and type,including owner- occupied and rental housing • Other housing characteristics,including household size,overcrowding and housing condition • Housing costs and housing income • A general discussion of housing affordability • Projections of future housing construction based on overall projected trends in population growth for 2015-2020 As noted above,this housing market assessment paints a broad picture of housing and demographic conditions in Washington County to ascertain how the private market is generally meeting County-wide needs. It sets the stage for a more detailed discussion of how housing needs are or are not being met for certain types of households or people with lower incomes and/or other special needs. p. 88 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment While this analysis provides an overall projection of future housing needs and trends,it recognizes that projecting future needs at this time is a significant challenge,given recent upheavals in national and local economies and housing markets. These significant recent changes indicate that the housing market has not behaved normally in many respects. For example,significant increases in housing value,coupled with lower interest rates and relatively easy access to credit resulted in inflated demand for owner-occupied dwellings followed by apparent over-supply and a more recent stagnant market. In light of these changes and public reactions to them,changes to federal regulation of the housing market are expected. It is difficult if not impossible to anticipate exactly how the housing market and conditions will change over the next five years and further into the future. CHAPTER 3 In light of these uncertainties,this housing market analysis should be considered as a faithful summary of existing conditions and recent trends and a relatively conservative or approximate projection of future needs and production. A variety of data sources were reviewed to ensure an accurate and up-to-date summary of housing conditions,recognizing that some types of information are relatively dated. For example,some of the housing characteristics discussed here can only be described using 2010 Census data. In addition to 2010 Census data,the following data sources were used in this analysis: • 2008 -2012 American Community Survey(2007-2011 ACS data if most recent) • 2007-2011 HUD CHAS data(2006—2010 HUD CHAS data if most recent) • HUD building permits data • PSU Population Research Center • 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory • Claritas Market Research Geography Washington County includes 16 local city jurisdictions(wholly or in part)and the unincorporated parts of the County. Of these 16 jurisdictions, 11 are located entirely within Washington County. The County also includes relatively small portions of Lake Oswego,Portland,Rivergrove and Wilsonville(these portions together comprise approximately half of one percent of the County's total housing units)and approximately 9,400 units in the city of Tualatin. Much of the available information on housing characteristics in Washington County comes from the U.S.Census and the Census American Community Survey(ACS). Some updated information is also available from commercial data providers such as Claritas Inc. Juniper Gardens Apartments,Forest Grove Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 89 Number of Housing Units Total Housing Units There were an estimated 212,386 housing units in Washington County in the year 2012. The number of housing units has grown approximately 19%from 2000 to 2012. (2000 figures were based on 2000 decennial Census data,2012 figures were estimated based on 2008-12 ACS data). TABLE 3-66 Total Housing Units,Washington County 2012 CHAPTER 3 Housing %of housing Name of Area units units Banks 576 0.3% Beaverton 38,957 18.3% Cornelius 3,474 1.6% Durham 568 0.3% Forest Grove 7,946 3.7% Gaston 293 0.1% Hillsboro 34,639 16.3% King City 2,046 1.0% Lake Oswego(part) 0 0.0% North Plains 852 0.4% Portland (part) 778 0.4% Rivergrove (part) 15 0.0% Sherwood 6,244 2.9% Tigard 20,257 9.5% Tualatin (part) 9,465 4.5% Wilsonville (part) 297 0.1% Subtotal Incorporated 126,407 59.5% Unincorporated 85,979 40.5% TOTAL 212,386 100.0% Source:2008-2012 A CS • The largest cities in terms of number of housing units are Beaverton(18.3%), Hillsboro(16.3%)and Tigard(9.5%). Combined,the three cities contain 44.3%of all housing units in the County. • Unincorporated areas contain 40.5%of all housing units. • The remaining 15.4%of housing units are dispersed among the smaller communities. • The City of Sherwood experienced the fastest growth rate in the area,with an increase in housing units of 40%(1,788 units)between 2000 and 2012. • Hillsboro added the most absolute units,constructing an estimated 7,447 housing units between 2000 and 2012. P. 90 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-67 Residential Properties by Unit Number Property Type Number 1-unit detached structure 124,035 59% 1-unit, attached structure 15,619 7% 2-4 units 14,468 7% 5-19 units 29,033 14% 20 or more units 20,809 10% Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, 5,852 3% etc TOTAL 209,816 100% Source:2007-2011 ACS TABLE 3-68 Unit Size by Tenure Owners Renters Number Percent Number Percent No bedroom 60 0% 1,671 2% 1 bedroom 1,726 1% 16,929 23% 2 bedrooms 15,789 13% 34,355 46% 3 or more 105,855 86% 20,979 28% bedrooms Total 123,430 100% 73,934 99% Source:2007-2011 ACS Subsidized Housing Supply The housing needs of low-and moderate-income people are met through housing produced in the private market,housing built with public subsidies to reduce the rent that the owner needs to charge,and housing vouchers that reduce the rent that households have to pay for private market and subsidized housing. In March 2012,Metro released a Regional Affordable Rental Housing Inventory that presented compiled information about`regulated"housing units for each County in the Portland metropolitan region. "Regulated"units were defined as those that have been built with some form of public subsidy. Affordability was defined by each of the participating agencies that shared its housing data with Metro,and those definitions were not included with the records in the inventory. The inventory includes 7,030 units on 256 sites in Washington County. The inventory does not include HUD Section 8 voucher units or information about the tenants. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 91 Table 3-69 Distribution of Subsidized Housing highlights where the 7,030 regulated and unregulated units are located in Washington County. Distribution of Subsidized Housing,Washington County TABLE 3-69 (2011) Jurisdiction Number of Unregulated Regulated Total units sites units units Beaverton 34 11 501 512 CHAPTER 3 Cornelius 10 0 10 10 Durham 1 0 210 210 Forest Grove 31 7 597 604 Hillsboro 62 4 2,196 2,200 North Plains 1 0 33 33 Sherwood 7 1 96 97 Tigard 18 10 632 642 Tualatin 3 0 604 604 Unincorporated 89 7 2,096 2,118 County Washington 256 40 6,975 7,030 County Source:2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Report A significant percentage of the units(almost a third)are located in Hillsboro. Tigard, Tualatin,Forest Grove and Beaverton each include nearly 500 or more units. A substantial number of units in the inventory are also located in unincorporated portions of the County.In comparing these numbers to the proportion of the population living in these areas of the County,Hillsboro,Forest Grove and Tualatin appear to have higher concentrations of units compared to their share of County population. The Washington County Department of Housing Services(DHS)manages public housing units owned by the County and administers the Section 8 vouchers. HUD directly administers the Section 811 and 202 housing assistance programs. Altogether,there are 7,030 subsidized housing units and 2,784 households with housing vouchers in Washington County. Some households with housing vouchers live in subsidized housing units and some live in private market units. There are about 7,000—9,000 households living in subsidized housing in Washington County,which represents 3.6%-4.6%of all housing units in the County. As discussed in the following section,this supply of subsidized housing does not necessarily meet the demand for it,particularly for those in Washington County who are earning less than 30%AMI, given that there are approximately 29,000 low-and moderate-income households in Washington County that are"cost-burdened"(spend more than 30%of their income on housing). p. 92 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Table 3-70 is a result of analysis done by former HUD Portland Field Office Director Tom Cusack on the Oregon Housing Blog in reviewing the 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Report.The analysis highlighted the number and targeting of units by county in the four counties comprising the Portland metropolitan region.The table highlights the targeting of subsidized housing in Washington County by income level.Note that the analysis accounts for 7,011 units and not the 7,030 regulated and unregulated units tallied in the 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Report. Targeting of Subsidized Housing in TABLE 3-70 Washington County CHAPTER 3 of Subsidized Regulated (Income)Type #of Units PercentageUnits Less than 30% MFI 57 0.81% Less than 40% MFI 5 0.07% Less than 50% MFI 647 9.23% Less than 60% MFI 2,221 31.68% Less than 80% MFI 73 1.04% Targeted to 31 to 40% MFI 76 1.08% Targeted to 41 to 50% MFI 138 1.97% Targeted to 51 to 60% MFI 616 8.79% Targeted to 61 to 80% MFI 1,199 17.10% Unknown targets 1,967 28.06% Unregulated 12 0.17% Grand Total 7,011 100.00% Source:Analysis done by Tom Cusack of the Oregon Housing Blog based on 2011 Metro Affordable Housing Inventory Report(by County) Potential Loss of Affordable Housing Potential exists to lose units in the subsidized housing inventory when existing Section 8 contracts or other controls on a project expire. HUD monitors the HUD Multifamily Assistance and Section 8 database(http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/mfh/exp/mfhdiscl. cfin)to identify and track projects with expiring agreements.As of January 2014,HUD identified four projects totaling 234 units with agreements that will expire between January 2014 and September 2020. The projects are Woodland Park in Hillsboro(111 units),Aloha Park Apartments(80 units),Aloha Project(10 units)and Metzger Park (33 units).Woodland Park Apartments was recently sold to an out-of-state affordable housing developer who intends to maintain its affordability restrictions.Aloha Park Apartments was refinanced by the Housing Authority of Washington County who will keep the property affordable for another thirty-five years. Metzger Park Apartments is being recapitalized and rehabilitated in 2015 by Community Partners for Affordable Housing using HOME funds and private debt. Specialized Housing's Aloha Project (whose contract does not expire until 2018)will also see its affordability maintained by the current owner for at least another five years.' 9 Phone conversation with Misty Schafte,HUD Multifamily Project Manager for the Aloha Project on October 14th,2014. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 93 One concern relating to the potential loss of affordable housing is the prospect of new manufactured home park closures. As noted in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan, manufactured home parks represented a significant source of non-subsidized,market rate,low cost housing provided by private owners.Washington County was the epicenter of manufactured home park closures during the housing boom. From 2001-2007,fifteen manufactured home parks closed in the County,displacing more than 1,100 households and eliminating 20%of the County's spaces.Washington County accounted for nearly 40%of the manufactured home park spaces lost statewide. Since 2009,however,there CHAPTER 3 have been no reported manufactured home park closures in Washington County. The availability of rental housing units does not currently meet the needs of the population earning at or below 80%of the Area Median Income(AMI). The vacancy rates for rental housing are low in the County currently driving up the rents and making Washington County have the highest median rent of all counties in Oregon at$961/ month according to 2008-2012 ACS data.The inventory of 7,030 subsidized rental housing units is less than 10%of the 73,934 units in the County for renter households. Based on Table 3-14 of the Housing Needs Assessment,there is a significant gap between the existing supply of affordable rental housing and the needs of the population based on the number of households who are cost burdened paying more than 30%of their income towards housing and the number of households who are severely cost burdened paying more than 50%of their income towards housing.The need for affordable rental units estimated for 2015 is between 14,100 units to 24,000 units based on the supply and the number of cost burdened households between 0%to 80%AMI in Washington County using 2006-2010 CHAS data. Based on production levels of affordable rental housing currently at 110 units annually,it would be difficult to meet this substantial gap in need in the near future.This need includes the specific need for affordable rental housing for the 19,293 elderly households in Washington County earning between 0%to 80%AMI who comprise 9.6%of the entire county. Beyond the general need for affordable rental housing for low-income renter households earning between 0%to 80%of the Area Median Income highlighted in Table 3-11, there is also a specialized need for specific types of housing targeted at special needs populations.Table 3-11 details an overall need for specific housing tailored to survivors of domestic violence who have a need for 1,046 beds and only have 24 beds currently available to them in the county.This is also the case for individuals with HIV/AIDS who have a need for 532 beds and only currently have 51 available in the county. Individuals needing alcohol and drug treatment services and individuals with disabilities also comprise 9.1%and 9.3%of the county respectively but only have 267 and 533 respectively in a combination of beds and units to accommodate these special needs populations.Farmworkers are in need of 5,607 beds or units given the latest estimate of 6,700 farmworkers who work in Washington County and are in need of housing.There are 805 beds in registered farmworker camps and 288 units of farmworker housing provided by Bienestar for this population.Finally,released offenders are another population in dire need of affordable rental housing.They are in need of 319 beds annually given the limited supply in Washington County for this population that faces multiple barriers in accessing housing after exiting incarceration. The availability of owner-occupied housing units also does not currently meet the needs of the population at or below 80%AMI who often are first-time homebuyers,current homeowners or renter households seeking more stable housing that brings economic benefits.As noted in Tables 3-7 and 3-8 of the Housing Needs Assessment,there are 17,112 owner-occupied households in Washington County who are cost burdened paying more than 30%of their income towards their housing and 11,063 owner-occupied households who are severely cost burdened paying more than 50%of their income p. 94 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment towards their housing. This comes as no surprise to Washington County residents who now have second-highest median ownership costs in state at$1,888/month(for housing units with a mortgage)according to 2008-2012 ACS data. HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS: COST OF HOUSING Washington County is witnessing that the cost of housing is increasingly becoming unaffordable for low-income households in need of affordable options for both renters and owners alike.The median gross rent of$961 in the 2008-2012 American Community Survey is the highest of all counties in the State of Oregon. It is important to use the gross rent as a basis for comparison since it can include tenant-paid utilities which are CHAPTER 3 fairly common in Washington County.The Apartment Report published by Multifamily NW for Fall 2014 reported that 60%to 70%of projects pass on the cost of water and sewer to tenants now in suburban Portland markets. The median ownership costs for owner-occupied units in Washington County for those units that have a mortgage is $1,888/month.This is the second-highest median ownership cost in the State of Oregon. Of increasing concern is the number of households who are able to secure housing but are cost burdened or severely cost-burdened in Washington County.These households are seeing increasing rents or increasing ownership costs are the median gross rent and median home value continues to climb.This is due to increasing demand for these units in Washington County and low vacancy rates for rental units,which is particularly indicative of the Portland metropolitan region overall.The 2008-2012 American Community Survey highlighted that 46.5%of renter households and 37.7%of owner households in Washington County are now cost burdened paying 30%or more of their gross income towards housing.Meanwhile,22.2%of renter households and 13.0% of owner households in Washington County are now severely cost burdened paying 50%or more of their gross income towards housing. This indicates that more than 2/3 of Washington County renters and over half of Washington County homeowners are now cost burdened in some way with their housing costs comprising a larger and larger portion of their gross income leaving little money for other necessities.This is of special concern as transportation costs are becoming a larger portion of expenditures in Washington County households given longer commute times. TABLE 3-71 Cost of Housing Base Year: 2000 Most Recent Year: %Change 2012 Median Home Value $184,800 $290,900 57.4% Median Contract Rent(monthly) $650 $839 29.1 Data Source:2000 Census(Base Year), 2008-2012 ACS(Most Recent Year) TABLE 3-72 Monthly Rent Paid Monthly Rent Paid Number Percent Less than $500 6,013 8.1% $500-999 50,363 68.1% $1,000-1,499 14,160 19.2% $1,500-1,999 2,280 3.1% $2,000 or more 1,118 1.5% Total 73,934 100.0% Source:2007-2011 ACS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 95 Rental Costs: Per the 2008-12 ACS data,the median gross rent countywide was $961. During that same time,the median contract rent was $839. The difference in amount can be attributed most likely to monthly utility costs. Gaston had the lowest median gross rent($627)while Sherwood the highest($1,212). The median gross rent in Washington County grew at an estimated 2.4%per year between 2000 and 2012. This is roughly the rate of inflation during that period. Median gross rents are lowest in some of the smaller outlying communities(e.g.,Banks,Gaston and Forest Grove)and highest in Sherwood, Tualatin and King City. CHAPTER 3 TABLE 3-73 Median Rents, Washington County (2012) Name of Area Median Rent($) Banks 869 Beaverton 920 Cornelius 920 Durham 844 Forest Grove 756 Gaston 627 Hillsboro 1,023 King City 984 Lake Oswego(part) 0 North Plains 939 Portland (part) 684 Rivergrove(part) 0 Sherwood 1,212 Tigard 920 Tualatin(part) 972 Wilsonville(part) 1,195 Unincorporated n/a Washington County 961 Source:2008-2012 ACS 2014 HOME Program Monthly Rent Limits for TABLE 3-74 Washington County (inclusive of utilities) Monthly Efficiency Rent($) (no 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom bedroom) Fair Market 659 766 912 1,344 1,615 Rent High HOME 666 774 922 1,200 1,319 Rent Low HOME 638 684 821 949 1,058 Rent Source:HUD FMR and HOME Rents p. 96 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-75 Housing Affordability %Units affordable to Renter Owner Households earning 30%HAMFI 1,691 No Data 50%HAMFI 7,994 2,080 80%HAMFI 39,810 5,973 100% HAMFI No Data 17,398 CHAPTER 3 Total 49,495 25,451 Source:2007-2011 CHAS Home Ownership Costs: In 2012, median monthly homeownership costs(for homeowners with a mortgage)were$1,888 for Washington County. In 2000,the median costs were $1,358,which represents an increase of 3.2%per year. This increase outpaced inflation during that time. TABLE 3-76 Median Homeownership Costs,Washington County (2012) Name of Area Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs With A Mortgage($) Banks 1,765 Beaverton 1,868 Cornelius 1,654 Durham 2,184 Forest Grove 1,562 Gaston 1,769 Hillsboro 1,820 King City 1,148 Lake Oswego(part) 0 North Plains 1,629 Portland (part) 2,756 Rivergrove(part) 3,250 Sherwood 2,083 Tigard 1,948 Tualatin (part) 1,909 Wilsonville(part) 0 Unincorporated n/a Washington County 1,888 Source:2008-2012 ACS In 2012, ownership costs (with a mortgage)were highest in Rivergrove(partial)at $2,076 and lowest in King City($1,148). Similar to rental costs,owner costs were also relatively lower in several smaller outlying communities(e.g.,North Plains,Gaston, Cornelius and Forest Grove). Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 97 The median owner-occupied home value in 2012 per the American Community Survey was$290,900 for Washington County. Beaverton was close to the countywide median value with$290,800 and Hillsboro values were lower at$250,900. Countywide,home values have increased 61%since 2000,with Beaverton(56%)and Hillsboro(54%) increasing at a slightly lower rate than the County as a whole.The vacancy rate for owner-occupied units is only 1.2%as of the 2012 ACS. As mentioned earlier,there is not sufficient housing for all income levels due to the decreasing affordability of rents and ownership costs in Washington County. This is CHAPTER 3 especially true for households at or below 80%AMI.While there is need for between 100 to 1,000 units for renter households between 51%to 80%AMI,the number skyrockets to 14,000 units to 23,000 units for renter households earning at or below 50%AMI in Washington County.This is not only due to unavailability of affordable rental housing for these households but also due to the fact that subsidized housing is often financed for targeted units for households earning between 61%to 80%AMI.The incomes of the households that reside in these units are much lower,oftentimes at or below 30%AMI.Thus,cost burden becomes the preeminent factor for many households at or below 50%AMI. Unfortunately for these households,affordability is likely to decrease considering the 57%increase to the median home value between 2000 and 2012 and significant increase to rents as well.While median monthly contract rent rose from$650 to$839 from 2000 to 2012(a 29%increase),the median monthly gross rent rose 33.5%from$720 to$961 during that same time. Overall rents in the region continue to increase at an annual rate now of 11%and the region's vacancy rate now stands at 3.66%,according to The Apartment Report from Multifamily NW for Fall 2014.The report notes that vacancy rates in places like Tigard,Aloha and Beaverton are now 3.8%or less on average,while only slightly better at 4.1%in Hillsboro and Washington County north of Highway 26.It is even lower in the report for Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties in the region where the average vacancy rate is 2.48%and average rent per square foot is$1.13. Overall,the vacancy rate in Washington County in the 2012 ACS was 5.2%for rental units.Supply of affordable rental housing is extremely limited.Landlords with available units oftentimes highly scrutinize tenants'credit history and rental background making even available units difficult to occupy for many households. Median gross rents are a good basis of comparison to HOME rents since both include utility allowances.Therefore,the median gross rent of$961 in the 2008-2012 ACS data is considerably higher than the HOME rents for efficiency,one-bedroom and two- bedroom apartments.The HOME rents for three-bedroom and four-bedroom apartments do exceed the current median gross rent.In the past,the market rents were much closer to the Fair Market Rents and HOME rents.Now,it will cause Washington County to rethink its strategy in order to produce or preserve affordable housing moving forward. Washington County will continue to require all new HOME units to meet Low HOME rents in order to increase affordability as market rents continue to increase in available units.Washington County will also continue to encourage developers producing additional affordable housing to layer their Low HOME units with Project-Based Section 8 vouchers for households earning at or below 30%AMI in order to add additional affordability to HOME units. p. 98 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Owners& Renters Owner-occupied units accounted for 61.7%of all occupied housing units in 2012. The highest concentrations of owner-occupied units were in Sherwood(79.8%),Cornelius (78.6%)and Banks(73.9%). The lowest percentages occurred in the Washington County portion of Portland(40.6%),Beaverton(49.2%),Washington County portion of Tualatin (53.1%),and Hillsboro(55.4%). TABLE 3-77 Homeownership vs. Rental, Washington County (2012) Occupied Occupied CHAPTER 3 Occupied Name of Area Housing Units:Housing ,�o Owner Units:Housing o�o Renter Units Owner Renter Banks 548 405 73.9% 143 26.1% Beaverton 36,347 17,898 49.2% 18,449 50.8% Cornelius 3,278 2,576 78.6% 702 21.4% Durham 548 329 60.0% 219 40.0% Forest Grove 7,423 4,271 57.5% 3,152 42.5% Gaston 278 186 66.9% 92 33.1% Hillsboro 32,321 17,897 55.4% 14,424 44.6% King City 1,967 1,415 71.9% 552 28.1% Lake Oswego 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% (part) North Plains 812 597 73.5% 215 26.5% Portland (part) 778 316 40.6% 462 59.4% Rivergrove 11 11 100.0% 0 0.0% (part) Sherwood 6,095 4,862 79.8% 1,233 20.2% Tigard 19,248 11,714 60.9% 7,534 39.1% Tualatin (part) 8,735 4,640 53.1% 4,095 46.9% Wilsonville 297 0 0.0% 297 100.0% (part) Total 81,474 56,325 69.1% 25,149 30.9% Unincorporated Washington 200,160 123,442 61.7% 76,718 38.3% County Source:2008-2012 ACS Since 2000,roughly three times as many single-family homes have been built than multi- family units. This suggests that many more ownership units were built than rental units. This has changed the 2012 ratio presented above,by raising the ownership share to an estimated 61.7%of units. However,2012 HUD building permit data suggests that multi- family units may start taking a larger share of future housing development. In 2012, 1,239 building permits were issued for single family homes and permits for 817 units within multi-family dwellings were issued. Overall, less populous cities in Washington County have a larger proportion of single- family, owner-occupied households than the larger cities. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 99 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS: CONDITION OF HOUSING The housing stock in Washington County is generally in good condition,due in large part to the fact that a significant percentage of the units were constructed within the past 35 years. As of 2000,the largest portion of the housing stock in Washington County was built in the 1990s(25.4%), followed by the 1970s(20.5%). 58.6%of the housing stock has been built since 1980. The condition of housing is defined according to its age as condition and age are generally linked.This chapter also explores condition of housing determined by certain CHAPTER 3 types of facilities available (kitchen, plumbing and heating). TABLE 3-78 Condition of Units Condition of Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Units Number Percent Number Percent With one selected 38,194 31% 32,911 45% Condition With two selected 814 1% 2,633 4% Conditions With three selected 74 0% 132 0% Conditions With four selected 0 0% 50 0% Conditions No selected 84,348 68% 38,208 52% Conditions TOTAL 123,430 100% 73,934 101% Source:2007-2011 ACS TABLE 3-79 Year Unit Built(2011) Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number Percent Number Percent 2000 or later 23,661 19% 11,641 16% 1980-1999 47,362 38% 33,392 45% 1950-1979 44,580 36% 26,094 35% Before 1950 7,827 6% 2,807 4% Total 123,430 99% 73,934 100% Source:2007-2011 CHAS TABLE 3-80 Age of Housing Units, Washington County (2012) Year Structure Occupied housing Owner-occupied Renter-occupied Built units housing units housing units 2010 or later 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 2000 to 2009 18.0% 19.4% 15.7% 1980 to 1999 40.9% 38.4% 44.9% 1960 to 1979 30.8% 30.4% 31.4% 1940 to 1959 7.1% 8.2% 5.5% 1939 or earlier 2.8% 3.2% 2.3% Total 200,160 123,442 76,718 Source:2008-2012 ACS P. 100 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-81 Age of Existing Housing Stock, Washington County (2012) Number Percent Built 2010 or later 637 0.3% Built 2000 to 2009 38,263 18.0% Built 1990 to 1999 53,472 25.2% Built 1980 to 1989 32,999 15.5% Built 1970 to 1979 44,001 20.7% CHAPTER 3 Built 1960 to 1969 21,370 10.1% Built 1950 to 1959 10,144 4.8% Built 1940 to 1949 5,413 2.5% Built 1939 or earlier 6,087 2.9% TOTAL 212,386 100.0% Source:2008-2012 ACS Facilities The overwhelming majority of units have complete plumbing facilities(99.6%)and complete kitchen facilities(98.9%). Fewer than 4%used an alternative heating source, such as fuel oil,wood, or solar power. Slightly more than 0.1%,or 232 housing units, had no source of heat. Plumbing and Kitchen Facilities, Washington County TABLE 3-82 (2012) Occupied housing Owner-occupied Renter-occupied units housing units housing units With complete 99.6% 99.7% 99.5% plumbing facilities With complete 98.9% 99.7% ° kitchen facilities 97.6/o Source:2008-2012 ACS TABLE 3-83 Heating Fuel Source, Washington County (2012) House Heating Occupied housing Owner-occupied Renter-occupied Fuel units housing units housing units Utility gas 53.0% 73.0% 20.9% Bottled,tank, or LP 0.9% 1.1% 0.7% gas Electricity 42.3% 21.3% 76.1% Fuel oil, kerosene, 1.2% 1.6% 0.6% etc. Coal or coke 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% All other fuels 2.4% 3.0% 1.5% No fuel used 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% Source:2008-2012 ACS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 101 Lead Based Paints Hazards Lead-based paint presents potential health hazards,particularly to small children. State policy requires these hazards to be removed in housing units occupied by children under 6. Homeowners and landlords face liability issues associated with these requirements and risks. Some landlords may address these issues by refusing to rent to families with small children even though this practice raises housing discrimination issues. The Federal Center for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC)reports that blood lead levels of 10 micrograms or above can cause health problems in children,including lower CHAPTER 3 intelligence,behavior problems and problems with blood vessels,blood pressure,the liver and kidneys. The most common cause of high blood lead levels in children is from contact with lead dust in the home. Because funding for lead poisoning and prevention programs at the Oregon Department of Human Services was cut in July 2013,ODHS staff are completely unable to fulfill requests for recent data on lead poisoning in Washington County.As a result,all data pertaining to lead poisoning comes from the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. Data from that Consolidated Plan shows that from 2000 to 2007,there were 104,889 blood lead tests conducted in Oregon. Of that amount,almost 4.5%,or 4,732 tests,have been conducted on Washington County residents over that seven year period. In 2007,902 tests were conducted. During that year,the results showed that six people(less than one percent)had blood lead levels consistent with lead poisoning,and four of those six were children under the age of six. Thirty-one people had elevated blood levels. A normal reading of the level of blood would be between 2-3 micrograms,a level as high as 10 micrograms would indicate lead poisoning and according to the Department,a reading of higher than 10 warrants some kind of action or follow-up. In general,this indicates a very low percentage of residents who tested positively for lead poisoning(approximately 0.7%of those tested). In looking at the results of lead-based paint testing by age,818 tests were conducted on children aged 0-5 years. Of that amount,four tests reflected levels at 10 micrograms and over. In general,this indicates a very low percentage of residents who tested positively for lead poisoning(approximately 0.7%of those tested). Lead-based paint hazards generally are correlated with the age of housing units and their condition. Typically,homes constructed before 1978 have the highest potential for lead- based paint hazards. Based on data from the 2008-2012 ACS,there are approximately 87,000 housing units that were constructed before 1978.While no data is available to determine which units still have lead-based paint hazards,data from the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan indicated that in the year 2000,an estimated 11%of all owner-occupied housing(estimated 11,795 units)and 9%of all rental housing(estimated 5,829 units)may have had lead-based paint hazards. Extremely low-,low-and moderate-income families represent about 47%percent of renters and 18%percent of homeowners. Assuming that these households are relatively evenly distributed among housing units of different ages, it is estimated that approximately 2,603 extremely low-,low-and moderate-income renter households and 2,017 extremely low-,low-and moderate-income homeowner households are exposed to lead-based paint hazards. TABLE 3-84 Blood Level Test Results,Washington County (2007) Blood Levels in Micrograms Blood Levels by BLL <5 BLL 5-9 BLL 10+ TOTAL Age 0-5 Years 785 29 4 818 6+Years 80 2 2 84 Source:ODHS, Office of Disease Prevention and Epidemiology p. 102 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment TABLE 3-85 Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Risk of Lead-Based Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Paint Hazard Number Percent Number Percent Total Number of Units 52,407 42% Built Before 1980 ° 28,901 39% Housing Units build before 1980 with 16,238 13% 8,307 11% children present Source:2007-2011 ACS(Total Units)2007-2011 CHAS(Units with Children present) CHAPTER 3 Unit Occupancy&Vacancy The Washington County portion of Tualatin,Hillsboro and Beaverton and had the highest vacancy rates(rental and owner-occupied units combined)in the County in 2012, at 7.7%and 6.7%respectively. In general,a vacancy rate in the range of 5%to 6% is considered healthy, reflecting a manageable turnover of apartments and for-sale homes. Most of Washington County met this standard in 2012,with the County as a whole demonstrating vacancy of 5.8%. Of the vacant units in Washington County in 2012,roughly 35%were for rent, 22% were for sale,and 12%were rented or sold,but not currently occupied. TABLE 3-86 Occupancy of Housing Units,Washington County (2012) Name of Area Housing units Housing units: Housing units: %Vacant Occupied Vacant Banks 576 548 28 4.9% Beaverton 38,957 36,347 2,610 6.7% Cornelius 3,474 3,278 196 5.6% Durham 568 548 20 3.5% Forest Grove 7,946 7,423 523 6.6% Gaston 293 278 15 5.1% Hillsboro 34,639 32,321 2,318 6.7% King City 2,046 1,967 79 3.9% Lake Oswego 0 0 0 0.0% (part) North Plains 852 812 40 4.7% Portland (part) 778 778 0 0.0% Rivergrove 15 11 4 26.7% (part) Sherwood 6,244 6,095 149 2.4% Tigard 20,257 19,248 1,009 5.0% Tualatin (part) 9,465 8,735 730 7.7% Wilsonville 297 297 0 0.0% (part) Total 85,979 81,474 4,505 5.2% Unincorporated Washington 212,386 200,160 12,226 5.8% County Source:2008-2012 ACS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 103 TABLE 3-87 Vacant Units between 2000-2012 2010 Census 2010 ACS 2011 ACS 2012 ACS Total Vacant 11,516 13,665 11,862 11,044 Units Source:2010 Census;2010, 2011 and 2012 American Community Surveys(1-Year) NEED FOR REHABILITATION AND WEATHERIZATION PROGRAMS CHAPTER 3 The quantitative and qualitative data from the community both speak to the need for weatherization and rehabilitation of owner-occupied and rental units for low and moderate income households in Washington County.As mentioned earlier,it is estimated that approximately 2,603 extremely low-,low-and moderate-income renter households and 2,017 extremely low-,low-and moderate-income homeowner households are exposed to lead- based paint hazards.There are still 232 households who have no source of heat and 3.7% of housing units do not utilize an efficient source of energy for heating.20.3%of housing units were built before 1960 so these units may either need weatherization and rehabilitation soon or in the upcoming years.The need for rehabilitation of vacant units is also not entirely significant.Approximately 5%of housing units are currently vacant in Washington County. In an October 2014 search for REO properties in Washington County on RealtyTrac,27 properties were in the process of being sold. 10 were bank-owned, 13 were foreclosures being sold at auction and 4 were pre-foreclosures.This is a relatively small number of REO properties after witnessing considerably more inventory during the most recent recession. One of the newest challenges is that over half of the total occupied housing units mainly use natural gas for heating.Recently,state utility regulators are discontinuing incentives for weatherization programs for homes with natural gas,including insulation for walks,floors and ducts. From data from the Energy Trust of Oregon as of October 10,2014,these regulators explain that low costs for natural gas heating have stunted the savings expected from the weatherization measures.Going forward,the Washington County Consortium feels as though these programs become more important than ever as a locally funded tool to increase energy efficiency,improve housing quality and durability and assist low-income households and often vulnerable populations in need of preventative repairs to keep their housing stable. In November 2010,the City of Beaverton published the results from a survey of its residents that included questions about housing conditions and repairs. Housing condition was assessed by respondents in terms of features such as foundation,exterior,roof,windows and doors. Respondents reported that these features were mostly in satisfactory condition.However, there was variation among the type of structure that was surveyed,as single-family and multi-family homes were found to be in better condition than mobile homes.The survey also evaluated the condition of stairs,rails and porches.These particular features are important when considering the safety of building occupants. Safety concerns were greatest in the Central Beaverton area,however,the survey found that mobile homes were oversampled in that area,which may result in a misleading conclusion about housing conditions. As a result of the focus groups conducted with low-income residents as part of the 2015- 2020 Consolidated Plan,respondents were asked to prioritize three types of affordable housing if they were only able to fund three types of affordable housing.Housing education, homeownership and repairs and renovation programs for owner-occupied and rental housing seemed to be the overarching themes of their priorities.Housing-related education was the highest priority with 18.1%followed by affordable homeownership at 16.1%,homeowner repair,renovation or rehabilitation programs at 14.8%and affordable rental housing at 14.2%.Renovation and rehabilitation of affordable apartment complexes and improvements in residents'homes and apartments for those with physical limitations were also notable as priorities with 12.3%and 10.3%of the responses respectively. p. 104 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING The The Public Housing units owned and operated by the Housing Authority of Washington County consist of 243 scattered site developments comprised of 111 single family homes and 132 multifamily sites.The largest single development is Dove Court at 17 units.20 units have been converted to fully ADA accessible for residents with mobility needs. TABLE 3-88 Total Number of Units by Program Type Program Type CHAPTER 3 Vouchers Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Certificate Mod- Public Total Project Tenant Affairs Family Rehab Housing -based -based Supportive Unification Disabled* Housing Program It of units vouchers available 0 0 243 2,635 16 2,619 98 0 0 SOURCE:PIC(PIH Information Center)*Includes Non-elderly Disabled,Mainstream One-year,Five-year and Nursing Home Transition All 243 units are included in the Housing Authority's annual Public Housing Plan. Overall,the condition of the units is good.The Agency continues to utilize the Capital Fund Program(CFP)to maintain a decent,safe and sanitary environment for the residents. Residents who reside in units older than 1978 have been informed about the possible concerns of lead based paint hazards. In 2011,the Housing Authority hired an independent contractor to identify and mitigate all known lead paint hazards in Public Housing properties.A recent Green Physical Needs Assessment was completed providing an overall condition report of all unit conditions.The Housing Authority has developed a plan to be included in the 2015-2016 CFP Plan to address items of concern. This would include energy saving work to reduce all utility consumption. In August 2014 the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners approved a HUD mandated increase to flat rents while a month earlier all utility allowances were adjusted to compensate for the spiraling cost of all utilities. TABLE 3-89 Public Housing Condition in Washington County Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score OR 022 AMP 1 Last REAC score (2011) 94 of 100 points Source:E-mail from Asset Manager,Housing Authority of Washington County on October 16, 2014 Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 105 In general,Public Housing units are in good condition.Normal preventive maintenance and in-house REAC formatted inspections assist in identification of potential physical problems.Typical repairs and replacements include siding,roofs and various areas of concrete such as driveways.Upon unit turnover,other capital items such as cabinets, counter tops,appliance and carpet replacement are considered. The Housing Authority anticipates that several of the houses require replacement of old piping that is now becoming clogged with mineral deposits.This will be factored into future capital need requirements. CHAPTER 3 One notable item not directly related to the physical properties but essential for ongoing care is the aging maintenance vehicle fleet. Several of the vans used by the maintenance staff to provide service to Public Housing units have reached their useful life and will require replacement.The cost of the vehicle replacement is funded by capital funds,thus reducing the amount available for other property physical needs.The Housing Authority is exploring various options to mitigate these costs including seeking donations from dealers. The Housing Authority continues striving to improve both the physical environment and the economic environment of the Public Housing properties and residents. For example, qualified residents are encouraged to participate in the Family Self Sufficiency(FSS) program.This includes various financial and self-improvement goals over a five-year period. The Housing Authority is also reviewing options for recapitalization of the properties using the Rental Assistance Demonstration(RAD)project.This allows for debt to be placed on Public Housing units to generate funds for additional physical improvements. Residents are encouraged to participate in the Resident Advisory Board which meets quarterly.The Agency also encourages contractors to participate in the Section 3 program of employing low income residents for work performed in public housing properties. Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless TABLE 3-90 Households Emergency Shelter Transitional permanent Supportive Beds Housing Housing Beds Beds Year Voucher/ Round Seasonal/ Current& Current& Under Beds Overflow New New Development (Current Beds & New) Households with Adult(s)and 93 4 33 197 0 Child(ren) Households with 3 0 104 354 0 Only Adults Chronically Homeless 0 0 0 0 0 Households Veterans 0 0 80 121 0 Unaccompanied 0 0 14 0 0 Youth Source:2014 Washington County Point-In-Time Shelter Count(January 22-30, 2014) p. 106 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Figure 3-10 Homeless Housing Inventory,Washington County,Oregon,(2009-2014) Homeless Housing Inventory Washington County,Oregon 1000 - 900 952 Total Bed Inventory 800 permanent Supportive 700 5 Housing 600 Transitional Housing B, 500 510 551 M400 9 --a— Rapid Re-housing CHAPTER 3 300 )—Emergency Shelter 221 2001 164 166 141 — 13 98 Safe Haven 100 96 1/28Q009 1/27/2010 1/26!2011 1/25,12012 1/30/2013 1/29/2014 Within Washington County,there is a focus on connecting homeless persons to the mainstream services,such as health,mental health,and employment services,to the extent those services are used to complement other services targeted to homeless persons.This is due to a countywide resource and referral network that includes 211 info and Community Connect,the coordinated and centralized assessment system for homeless and at-risk households operated by Community Action. These agencies serve as entry points for homeless persons to access mainstream resources. Households seeking assistance are assessed for participation in mainstream resources,including TANF, SNAP,public health plans,employment and housing services,and referred to programs for which they may be eligible.For health,case managers and agencies routinely look to enroll uninsured clients in the Oregon Health Plan and ensure access through the Affordable Care Act.Agencies such as Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Clinic and Southwest Community Health Center look to fill the void in providing mainstream health care to homeless clients who may have chronic health conditions. For mental health,area agencies like Sequoia Mental Health Services,Luke-Dorf,and LifeWorks NW also work to enroll clients in the Oregon Health Plan and link them with access to a mental health provider who can create an individualized plan to manage their mental health challenges.The mental health providers are actively involved in the Continuum of Care and work closely with homeless services providers to provide access to mental health services. These agencies not only work with these clients to address their supportive service needs associated with their mental health conditions but work diligently to house them in their own properties or through use of Shelter Plus Care vouchers within a Housing First model that will help stabilize them. For access to employment services,agencies such as Luke-Dorf,Community Action and the Washington County Department of Housing Services partner with WorkSystems to ensure clients can begin to receive the training,education,mentoring and coaching they need to gain employment and a road to self-sufficiency. In addition,the Department of Housing services operates the Homeless to Work program,a transitional housing program that is focused specifically on supporting homeless individuals as they regain employment. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 107 Tables 3-49 to 3-52 of this chapter list the facilities designed to meet the needs of homeless persons,particularly chronically homeless individuals and families,families with children,veterans and their families and unaccompanied youth. Prevention services designed and targeted to meet the needs of persons experiencing homelessness or who are at-risk of becoming homeless in a given year(dependent on annual funding)include: • CASA for Children(Court Appointed Special Advocates)to advocate for foster children and unaccompanied youth • Good Neighbor Center's Children's Program CHAPTER 3 • HomePlate Youth Services,Inc.'s Street Outreach and Employment Opportunities for Youth Experiencing Homelessness • Community Action's Basic Needs Program to provide emergency rent assistance for one month • St.Vincent de Paul/St.Matthew Conference Rent Assistance • St.Vincent de Paul/St.Anthony Conference Rent and Utility Assistance • Open Door Counseling Center's Housing Supportive Services • Community Action's Homelessness Prevention Program • Community Action's Supportive Services for Veterans'Families Program to provide rent assistance • Community Action's Homeless Prevention and Intervention Program • Community Actions'Emergency Rent and Utility Assistance Program • Family Promise's Advocates for the Homeless Program • Domestic Violence Resource Center—Empowerment Fund and Monika's House • Care to Share Emergency Summer/Fall Assistance • Luke Dorf's Eviction Prevention Program • Boys and Girls Aid Safe Place for Youth and Transitional Living Program Other services include: • Lutheran Community Services Northwest's HopeSpring program designed to provide rapid re-housing for homeless women heads-of-household with children in sixteen to eighteen units for up to a year. • Good Neighbor Center and the Housing Authority of Washington County partner on the Housing Stabilization Program to case management for 12 homeless families exiting emergency shelter • Project Homeless Connect held annually as a one-day event providing services and resource referral to homeless persons or persons at risk of homelessness. • Open Door Counseling Center provides mental health outreach services to homeless persons at its drop-in day center p. 108 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment SPECIAL NEEDS FACILITIES AND SERVICES The needs for facilities and services for individuals and families with special needs in Washington County are as great as the vulnerability of these populations.Persons with special needs are often on fixed incomes,live in cost burdened housing situations,and have accessibility needs that may not be met by their housing. Persons with special needs may also need access to facilities rather than transitional or permanent housing that caters to their particular special need with the appropriate supportive services.As a result,it is imperative that Washington County continue to invest in special needs facilities and services that seek to help these individuals and families get access to and CHAPTER 3 maintain stable supportive housing.The following are the respective special needs facilities and services for each respective population of persons with special needs: Elderly and Frail Elderly Population As they age, some older adults may reach a point where they require assistance with one or more of the activities of daily living,which HUD defines as eating,bathing, grooming,dressing and home management activities(housework,grocery shopping, laundry,getting to and from essential activities outside the home). Some older adults may be able to rely on family or pay for in-home services to assist with these activities. Others may require moving to a licensed long-term care facility. HUD defines"frail elderly"as a person age 62 or older who is unable to perform three or more of the five activities of daily living. As reported in the 2010—2015 Consolidated Plan,in 2007,Oregon Housing and Community Services estimated that there were approximately 1,600 frail elderly with unmet housing needs in the County. The following facts from the 2008-12 American Community Survey provide further detail about this population. • An estimated 19%of Washington County's older adults(age 65 and older)not living in an institution such as a nursing home had two or more disabilities. This represents approximately 10,000 individuals. The disability types are sensory,physical,mental, self-care and go-outside-the-home disabilities. • There were approximately 1,900 older adults(age 65 and older)not living in an institution whose incomes were below the poverty level and who had one or more disabilities. Some frail elderly adults continue to live in their homes with the assistance of family members or professional care-givers. Others live in a licensed long-term care facility. Oregon Department of Human Services recognizes four kinds of licensed long-term care facilities that provide housing integrated with social and medical services: adult foster homes,residential care facilities,assisted living facilities and nursing facilities. These facilities serve seniors as well as other adults who need help with daily activities due to illness,physical or cognitive disabilities. Low/mod-income frail elderly face multiple layers of challenges in accessing licensed facilities. While Medicaid will pay for nursing home care for all older adults who meet income, asset and medical standards,many low/mod-income older adults who need assistance fail to meet one of these standards but cannot afford to pay for services out of their own pocket. Others do not need or want a nursing home's level of intensive round-the-clock skilled nursing care provided in a hospital-like setting. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 109 In Oregon,there are a limited number of slots for people who qualify for Medicaid nursing home care to stay in assisted living or adult foster care settings, as indicated in Table 3-91. Adult foster care homes and assisted living facilities are not required to accept Medicaid clients,and some providers may elect to either limit or not accept Medicaid clients.This is due to the fact that Medicaid typically reimburses providers at a lower rate than what foster care homes and assisted living facilities are able to charge private individuals.Many low/mod-income older adults with service needs fall through the holes in the system. CHAPTER 3 Licensed Long Term Care Facilities in Washington TABLE 3-91 County (2013) Type of Facility Description Number of Number of Facilities Beds Private Homes with family-style Adult Foster living that provide room, board 264 1,264 Homes and physical care for up to five people,24 hours a day. Facilities for six or more people that provide room, board, Residential Care assistance with physical care 25, of which 18 1,061 Facilities needs,24 hour supervision, accept Medicaid medication monitoring and planned activities. Facilities that include six or more private apartments with a kitchenette and private bathroom.Services include full Assisted Living dining room services, 22, of which 15 1,864 Facilities housekeeping,assistance with accept Medicaid physical care needs,call systems for emergency help, medication monitoring and planned activities Facilities that provide nursing care on a 24-hour basis in a Nursing hospital-like setting.Services 9, all accept 964 Facilities include skilled nursing care, Medicaid rehabilitative services and end- of-life care. TOTAL 5,153 Source:ODHS Office of Licensing and Regulatory Oversight Persons with Disabilities There are a limited number of housing facilities and units designated for those with disabilities in Washington County. For those persons with disabilities with severe and persistent mental illness, there are twelve facilities sponsored by Luke-Dorf Inc., Sequoia Mental Health Services,Julieta Sicat and LifeWorks NW.These include both residential treatment homes and residential treatment facilities.According to Elise Thompson of the Washington County Mental Health Department in her consultation with the Consolidated Plan Work Group in April 2014,the residential treatment homes are small homes with a maximum of five beds.They are typically for people discharging out of the State Hospital,or who are in acute care and on the State Hospital waitlist. The focus in these homes is on building daily living skills and community mobility skills. The residential treatment facilities could be larger homes with a maximum of sixteen beds.However,they are currently are smaller homes with seven beds each. These facilities are used to build skills for daily living and symptom management. P. 110 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Structured Mental Health Housing in Washington County TABLE 3-92 (2014) Sponsor Number of Beds/Units Luke-Doris Three Residential Treatment Homes 15 Sequoia Mental Health Services'Two Residential 10 Treatment Homes Haven House 2 CHAPTER 3 LifeWorks NW's Zora House 5 Luke-Dorf's Two Residential Treatment Facilities 14 Sequoia Mental Health Services' One Residential 7 Treatment Facility TOTAL 53 SOURCE:Elise Thompson,Mental Health Dept., Washington County Department of Health and Human Services from 2014 Consultation with Con Plan Work Group There are also twelve Mental Health Foster Homes in Washington County that provide housing options for those with severe and persistent mental illness.There are approximately 300 Adult Foster Homes in Washington County that are licensed by Oregon Department of Human Services'Aging and People with Disabilities(APD). The Washington County Mental Health Department essentially"purchases"the use of APD Adult Foster Home beds for its consumers with mental illness. Five other units sponsored by Sequoia Mental Health are available to those experiencing a combination of severe and persistent mental illness and alcohol and drug recovery or homelessness. Washington County DHS administers HUD Shelter Plus Care rental assistance that funds 90 beds for those with mental illness in the County,and administers these funds in collaboration with three non-profit mental health care providers: Lifeworks NW, Luke-Dorf,Inc.,and Sequoia Mental Health Services, Inc. In addition,Luke-Dorf Inc. owns and operates the Graduated Independent Living facility,which provides permanent supportive housing for 14 tenants dually diagnosed with mental illness and substance addiction.There is a growing need to provide residential treatment facilities to serve adults with severe and persistent mental illness(SPMI)who are eligible for State of Oregon support programs under the Addictions and Mental Health Division(AME) of Oregon Health Authority(OHA). Adults with SPMI are defined as individuals age 18 or older who have one or more mental illnesses recognized by the DSM IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders),excluding substance use disorders and addiction disorders,and a score of 40 or less on the Global Assessment of Functioning(GAF) scale as a result of such illness.The OHA has defined in their 2015-2018 Behavioral Health Strategic Plan for AMH services support for individuals in residential treatment facilities or group homes of this type,which would not be programs developed specifically for persons with developmental disabilities,but that would allow co-dwelling of persons with mental health and intellectual/developmentally disabled adults. Increasing access to safe,affordable housing in an integrated community-based residential group homes is a model intended to ensure these individuals'rights to reside in the least restrictive environment possible. The OHA Strategic Plan also calls for implementation of certification standards for behavioral health homes,needed to help promote the integration of primary care services in behavioral health settings. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 111 Housing for People with Mental Illness and Drug/Alcohol TABLE 3-93 Addiction (2013) Sponsor Number of Beds/Units Luke-Dorf 87 Mental Health Consortium of Washington 90 County LifeWorks NW 44 CHAPTER 3 Sequoia Mental Health Services 30 Mental Health Foster Homes 70 TOTAL 321 Source:Mona Knapp;Luke-Dorf Inc.,Bob Loverin;Sequoia Mental Health Services, Connie Dunkel- Weyrauch;LifeWorks NW,Melanie Tong;Washington County Department of Health and Human Services There are 2,075 people with developmental disabilities currently receiving County services who may choose to live with family and friends to help with their day-to-day needs.At any one time,there are approximately 10-15 clients with developmental disabilities that need long-term and more intensive services in settings like a group home or foster home. Staff estimates that group homes, foster homes, and other supportive living facilities(usually apartments with additional services provided by various agencies) serve about 500 clients in the County. The Department receives requests from clients for subsidized apartments so that the clients can live more independently and afford to pay rent with Social Security income or other benefits. These clients typically are living with their families.10 Nevertheless,housing identified for the developmentally disabled in the County would only provide for about 10%of those in active case management. These units are summarized in Table 3-94. Housing for the Developmentally Disabled, Washington TABLE 3-94 County (2010) Project Name City Contact Total Units Aloha, Beaverton, Unnamed Assorted Facilities Forest Grove, Hillsboro, agencies/Organizations 93 Tigard 12th St Group Home Cornelius Community Services, Inc. 1 187th Group Home Beaverton Community Services, Inc. 5 Merlo Station Apts I Beaverton Guardian Management 80 Spruce Street Group Hillsboro Community Services, Inc. 5 Home The Bridge Beaverton Accessible Living Inc. 14 Apartments TOTAL 198 Source:2010 OHCS Housing Inventory 10 Mary Lanxon,Program Management Supervisor Washington County Developmental Disabilities Program,email,January 17, 2014 p. 112 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Affordable or subsidized units in the County designated for those with physical disabilities are found in Hillsboro and Forest Grove. There are also units for seniors with physical disabilities located in Sherwood,but those are addressed elsewhere in this report. As reported earlier,a 2007 ODHS report on seniors and people with physical disabilities estimated that at least 550 Washington County residents with physical disabilities,are under age 65,have low incomes,are in need of supportive housing and services and receive in-home care,adult foster care,or residential care or are otherwise in assisted living or nursing facilities. If the 550 people indicated in the 2007 ODHS report are an indicator,the 44 units identified in Washington County fall significantly short of meeting the population's housing needs. CHAPTER 3 Housing for the Physically Disabled, Washington County TABLE 3-95 (2010) Project Name City Contact Total Units Harkson Court Forest Grove Accessible Living, Inc. 20 Smallwood Hillsboro Sequoia Mental Health 17 Apartments Rolling Green Hillsboro Quadriplegics United 24 Apartments Against Dependency, Inc. TOTAL 61 Source:2010 OHCS Housing Inventory Persons with Alcohol and/or Other Drug Addictions Three adult residential facilities in Washington County provide detoxification and other services for those in severe stages of drug and alcohol addiction and recovery, information about those facilities is summarized in Table 3-96. Adult Residential Facilities for People in Drug and Alcohol TABLE 3-96 Recovery (2013) Facility Number of Beds Lifeworks NW/Mountaindale Recovery 11 Center CODA Tigard Recovery Center 12 CODA Detox Facility 6 TOTAL 29 Source:Kathy Prenevost, Washington County Health and Human Services Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 113 Housing for People in Alcohol and Drug Addiction TABLE 3-97 Recovery (2013) Project Name Sponsor Jurisdiction Units/Beds Homeward Bound Sherwood 12 Recovery Home House of Hope Aloha 28 Recovery Ministry Greenburg Oaks Community Partners for Tigard 3 CHAPTER 3 Affordable Housing, Inc. HopeSpring LifeWorks NW, Lutheran Scattered Site Community Services, Aloha, Beaverton, 18 Apartments Domestic Violence Shelter Tigard and Community Action Oxford Houses" Various Sites 159 Stepping Stones CODA Tigard 18 TOTAL 238 Source:Kathy Prenevost, Washington County Health and Human Services, 2010 OHCS Housing Inventory, 'These are cooperatively run, "consumer directed"homes that do not receive public funding TABLE 3-98 Clean and Sober Housing in Washington County (2014) Project Name Number ofFacilities Male Beds Female Beds Total Beds Bridges to 3 20 12 32 Change Fairhaven Recovery 10 65 22 87 Homes Homeward 6 43 10 53 Bound House of Hope 4 0 22 22 Recovery Oxford Houses 21 120 37 157 TOTALS 44 248 103 351 SOURCE:Steve Berger, Washington County Community Corrections in April 2014 Consultation with the Consolidated Plan Work Group In addition to the Clean and Sober Housing listed above and in partnerships with the Washington County Department of Housing Services, there are 10 male beds and 2 female beds at the Homeless to Work Program and three single-family homes in Aloha in the Homes for Families program.These transitional housing programs are primarily utilized for offenders exiting incarceration in partnership between Washington County Community Corrections and the Washington County Department of Housing Service. There are also ten male beds at the IRISS house in Aloha and four female beds through Contracted Housing through various providers. p. 114 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Persons with HIV/AIDS Housing dedicated to those with HIV/AIDS in the Portland metropolitan region is concentrated in Multnomah County. Caritas Housing Initiatives and Cascade AIDS Project(CAP)partner in Washington County to provide housing.Villa Capri,between Hillsboro and Beaverton,still provides three apartments(permanent units)subsidized for HOPWA participants. The subsidy makes up for whatever gap there may be between the rental cost and 30%of the participant's income.CAP works with the County's Shelter Plus Care program to provide rental assistance vouchers to approximately 51 households. CHAPTER 3 Additionally,Oregon Health Authority received two HOPWA Special Projects of National Significance and contracts with CAP to provide tenant based rent assistance and case management to people living with HIV in the Portland metro area,including Washington County. Fifty-five households receive tenant based rent assistance and case management.These two grants are to work with people that are involved in the corrections system or recently released from prison or jail or to work with people that have a mental health diagnosis that affects housing stability.Through the mental health grant,a mental health counselor employed by Cascadia Behavioral Healthcare is imbedded at CAP for onsite mental health counseling.The County's 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness(2008-2018)registers five HOPWA-eligible units in the County. People with HIV/AIDS need to be homeless or at risk of homelessness to qualify for these units. In terms of housing for those homeless with HIV/AIDS,the housing inventory completed as a part of the 2014 point-in-time homeless count,there are 551 beds for singles and families available in permanent supportive housing, sponsored by a combination of CAP,LifeWorks NW,Luke-Dorf,and Sequoia Mental Health Services and provided,in part,through Shelter Plus Care tenant-based rental assistance. CAP sponsors 45 beds in permanent supportive housing units in Washington County and 6 beds in a Rapid Re-housing unit. Because PHB estimates about half of all persons living with AIDS are in danger of becoming homeless,there is a potential demand of approximately 300 beds or units, which leaves a need of around 250 beds or units. As with other groups,low-and moderate-income people with HIV/AIDS who cannot access targeted housing assistance must compete on the open market for affordable housing units. They also face the additional challenge of finding units in close proximity to where medical and other needed services are provided." 11 Amanda Hurley,Housing Director Cascade AIDS Project,email,January 31, 2014 Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 115 Discharge from State Institutions Persons returning from mental and physical health institutions are able to receive supportive housing through seven residential treatment homes,three residential treatment facilities and up to 300 Adult Foster Homes in Washington County.The residential treatment homes are typically for people discharging out of the State Hospital,while the residential treatment facilities contain seven beds each and are used to build skills for daily living and symptom management.There are approximately 300 Adult Foster Homes that are licensed by the Oregon Department of Human Services' CHAPTER 3 Aging and People with Disabilities(APD)for a variety of persons with disabilities. Housing and Supportive Services for Special Needs Populations In the next five-year period,Washington County and the City of Beaverton will continue to fund activities that address the housing and supportive services needs of persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. For housing needs in the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan,the jurisdictions will prioritize and fund the following activities as high priority needs for vulnerable populations such as persons who are homeless,persons with disabilities,the elderly and frail elderly: construction of new affordable rental housing,preservation of existing affordable rental housing(including acquisition,acquisition and rehabilitation,rehabilitation and refinancing activities), and weatherization,rehabilitation,and accessibility improvements to affordable rental properties.For owner-occupied housing,the jurisdictions will prioritize and fund rehabilitation of housing owned and occupied by low-income households including,but not limited to rehabilitation,weatherization and accessibility improvements as a high priority need for elderly, frail elderly and persons with disabilities. For housing facilities, a low priority need will be given for public facilities looking to acquire or rehabilitate existing facilities to house persons with special needs or improve existing facilities designed to provide services to seniors.These facilities are targeted to persons with development disabilities,elderly/frail elderly,and persons with severe and persistent mental illness.In terms of supportive service needs for special needs population, the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan will have a low priority need to provide a vast array of supportive services designed to assist low-income and vulnerable households(such as homeless)to overcome barriers to self-sufficiency.These supportive services include the supportive service needs of the following special needs populations:persons with disabilities and abused/neglected children. For more information on these activities, please consult the Strategic Plan in Chapter 6. I l .0 Alma Gardens Apartments at Orenco Station,Hillsboro p. 116 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment OTHER HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS FACTORS Household Size The average household size in Washington County in 2012 according to the American Community Survey of the U.S. Census is 2.61 people. In general,ownership households tend to be larger than renting households. Banks, (3.28 persons), Sherwood(2.95 persons),Forest Grove(2.78 persons)have the largest average household sizes. Average Household Size by Renter and Owner, CHAPTER 3 TABLE 3-ss Washington County (2012) Occupied Housing Occupied Housing Name of Area Average Units:Average Units:Average Household Size Household Size- Household Size- Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Banks 3.26 3.34 3.02 Beaverton 2.45 2.55 2.34 Cornelius 3.57 3.51 3.8 Durham 2.25 2.56 1.8 Forest Grove 2.72 2.78 2.64 Gaston 2.53 2.53 2.51 Hillsboro 2.94 2.91 2.99 King City 1.56 1.66 1.3 Lake Oswego(part) 0 0 0 North Plains 2.53 2.62 2.27 Portland (part) 2.2 2.95 1.68 Rivergrove(part) 3.27 3.27 0 Sherwood 2.97 3.06 2.6 Tigard 2.5 2.59 2.35 Tualatin (part) 2.65 2.67 2.63 Wilsonville 1.87 0 1.87 Unincorporated n/a n/a n/a Washington 2.63 2.72 2.48 County Source:2008-2012 ACS Household Income In 2000,the median household income for Washington County was$53,085. 2012 estimates show a 21%increase in the median household income for the County,up to $64,375. Median family income in 2000 was$61,499. In 2012,ACS estimates show median family income to be$77,351,which represents a 26%increase.As reported in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan,median family income is typically higher than median household income because families typically include more employed adults than households(Claritas Inc.). Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 117 Figure 3-11 below depicts the rate of change in median income and housing costs from 2007 through 2012 for Washington County. Figure 3-11 Percent Change in Income and Housing Costs 2007-2012 Percent Change in Income and Housing Costs 2007-2012 CHAPTER 3 Rental Costs, 18.0% 17.3% 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% Homeowner Costs, 10.0% 10.0% 8.0% Median Household 6.0% Income,4.9% 4.0% Median Family Incom 2.090 e, 1.796 0.0% - Projected Household Growth(2015 and 2020) Table 3-100 presents the projected number of households in Washington County for 2020. This projection is based on multiple sources, including the historical growth trend and projections from the Metro regional government and Oregon Office of Economic Analysis. Metro's figures were based on the 2010 Census population counts and projected to 2035. From there,Washington County staff annualized the projected growth rate provided by Metro,and tailored the data to determine the final figures for 2015 and 2020 projections. Because Metro did not split the projections for portions of jurisdictions that fall into two counties,Washington County staff collected 2010 Census data from the portion of those jurisdictions in Washington County and applied the overall growth rate for the entire jurisdiction to the population found within Washington County.These jurisdictions are marked by bold,italicized font. Growth in population is expected to grow somewhat from the recent rate of 1.65%(2005 —2012),to an estimated 1.73%during the five year period between 2015 and 2020. This is due to current economic conditions and expectations of gradual job growth during that period,as well as the expectation of slow but steady increased housing development. P. 118 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Projected Household Growth through 2020, Washington TABLE 3-100 County APR 2010 2015 2020 Households Beaverton 1.4% 37,213 39,843 42,658 Cornelius 2.5% 3,339 3,779 4,276 Durham 0.3% 545 553 561 Forest Grove 1.6% 7,385 7,979 8,621 CHAPTER 3 Hillsboro 1.3% 33,289 35,597 38,066 King City 0.1% 1,735 1,742 1,748 Lake Oswego 0.8% 21 22 23 Portland 1.9% 798 877 963 Rivergrove 0.0% 6 6 6 Sherwood 0.6% 6,316 6,501 6,692 Tigard 1.4% 19,157 20,509 21,956 Tualatin 0.5% 8,770 8,991 9,218 Wilsonville 1.8% 313 342 374 Unincorporated 1.6% 70,380 76,166 82,429 Source:Metro 2035 Projection This projected growth in the number of households will call for the development of roughly 20,000 new housing units between 2015 and 2020(this assumes the current County-wide vacancy rate of 5.8%). If factors such as growth constraints and poor economic conditions prevent this pace of development from being achieved,the immediate expected effect will be extremely low vacancy rates and increased housing costs for both ownership and rental units,as demand continues to outpace supply. BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING The following barriers adversely affect public policies for affordable housing and residential investment in Washington County: Tier 1 Barriers: Barriers that Washington County is Unable to Address Locally • Inadequate federal funding for affordable housing: Affordable housing is a program that only serves a portion of those eligible to receive its benefits. Thus, it is not an entitlement program like food stamps,where sufficient resources are allocated to serve all qualified households. • Low vacancy rates for existing affordable housing • Little incentive to spur homeownership: Focus on tools such as community land trusts has not been very strong at the federal level. • Conservative investment criteria_for LIHTC(low income housing tax credit) investors: Increasingly, LIHTC investors will only invest in projects where the General Partner has a very large asset base. This negatively affects housing developers in Washington County. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 119 • Lack of alternatives to LIHTC program: The LIHTC program has become the major source of funding for affordable housing development nationally. The lack of large- scale alternatives to this program has meant that the development of new affordable housing has been significantly impacted in recent years. • State law prohibits inclusionary zoning: Inclusionary zoning has been a powerful tool for creating affordable housing in other states. Despite efforts by housing advocates to remove the state ban on inclusionary zoning, it remains in place. • Federal programs not in alignment: The rules that govern various federal programs CHAPTER 3 are not always in alignment,making it difficult to serve the complex needs of individuals and families in a holistic way. The classic example is the divide between Medicaid policies and procedures and HUD policies and programs that makes it difficult to produce housing with services for medically needy populations. Medicaid has different income and other eligibility criteria,counts"beds"and not housing units, and only provides for long term care for a limited number of nursing-home eligible residents if the state has requested a waiver from standard policy. This lack of alignment makes it difficult to develop housing with services for very vulnerable populations such as frail elders. Tier 2 Barriers: Barriers that Washington County Could Affect Locally • Multiple reporting requirements: Affordable housing typically involves multiple funding sources,each with their own reporting requirements. Addressing the duplicative reporting and inspection requirements of these funders adds to property and asset management costs. • SDC(system development charges)waiver programs:If a local jurisdiction does not have the ability to backfill this program with other funding sources,then they are unable to participate at all. • Vulnerability of community development corporations to financial instability in a recessionary market with high unemployment:Residents in affordable housing complexes are often among the first to lose their jobs in recessionary times. This not only destabilizes families,but also impacts their ability to pay rent.This affects the cash flow needed to keep community development corporations solvent,and it adds to the likely wear and tear on units. In addition,private and foundation resources to support the operations of non-profits decreased dramatically from 2005 to 2010, resulting in additional financial stress on local Community Housing Development Organizations(CHDOs)and other housing providers. • Difficulty of providing service-enriched housing: The funding available to support services fluctuates on an annual basis,depending on allocations from government sources,the availability of foundation grants and the success of fundraising efforts. This affects the ability of housing providers to provide a reliable array of services to assist residents with staying housed and succeeding in their endeavors. • Multiple jurisdictions, multiple development pathways: Each city in Washington County has its own planning and permit processes and standards. This creates the need for a steep learning curve and the likelihood of incurring additional time and expense for non-profit housing providers who develop housing in more than one jurisdiction. • Affordable housing as a priority:Affordable housing advocates would like affordable housing to be a higher priority concern in Washington County and its cities. • Land cost: The relatively high cost of land,especially land in the most desirable and resource-rich areas,remains an impediment to cost-effective affordable housing development in Washington County. p. 120 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment • Density bonuses: This is not necessarily a tool for developers because they're already building dense enough. • Tax exemption: This is present in unincorporated Washington County, Beaverton and Tigard for non-profit, affordable housing developers. However,other jurisdictions in the County do not offer this tool, and as such, is not widespread otherwise. The County's strategies to address Tier 2 barriers appear in Chapter 6, Strategic Plan.. NON-HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSETS Within the constructs of the Market Analysis,non-housing community development CHAPTER 3 assets in the form of workers and jobs,transportation and education are analyzed to determine economic development and employment opportunities over the next five years. Based on information presented as a consultation to the Consolidated Plan Work Group by Nick Knudsen of Worksystems using 2013 American Community Survey and Oregon Employment Department data,Washington County has a population of 432,938 persons over the age of 16 who could theoretically be in the labor force.As it stands,299,201 or 69%of these individuals are in the labor force through temporary,part-time or full-time employment. 133,737 individuals are not in the labor force. Only 36%of 16-19 year-olds are in the labor force. TABLE 3-101 Business Activity in Washington County Business by Number of Number of Share of Share of Jobs less Sector Workers Jobs Workers Jobs workers Agriculture, Mining, Oil&Gas 2,995 2,844 2 2 0 Extraction Arts, Entertainment, 17,448 14,683 10 9 -1 Accommodations Construction 8,098 10,131 5 6 1 Education and Health Care 26,089 23,833 15 14 -1 Services Finance, Insurance, 11,714 9,710 7 6 -1 and Real Estate Information 5,631 5,128 3 3 0 Manufacturing 28,494 34,754 17 21 4 Other Services 6,777 5,942 4 4 0 Professional, Scientific, 16,967 13,417 10 8 -2 Management Services Public 0 0 0 0 0 Administration Retail Trade 19,381 20,329 11 12 1 Transportation and 4,005 2,401 2 1 -1 Warehousing Wholesale Trade 11,174 9,407 7 6 -1 TOTAL 158,773 152,579 -- -- -- Source:2007-2011 ACS(Workers), 2011 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics(Jobs) Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 121 TABLE 3-102 Labor Force in Washington County Civilian Employed Population 213,081 16 years and over Unemployment Rate 8.55 Unemployment Rate for Ages 24.43 16-24 Unemployment Rate for Ages 5.85 CHAPTER 3 25-65 TOTAL POPULATION IN THE CIVILIAN LABOR 233,001 FORCE Source:2007-2011 ACS TABLE 3-103 Occupations by Sector in Washington County Occupations by Sector Number of People Management, business and financial 65,362 Farming,fisheries and forestry occupations 9,222 Service 19,979 Sales and office 53,413 Construction,extraction, maintenance and repair 16,083 Production,transportation and material moving 11,120 Source:2007-2011 ACS TABLE 3-104 Travel Time in Washington County Travel Time Number Percentage <30 Minutes 130,438 66% 30-59 Minutes 55,761 28% 60 or More Minutes 11,059 6% TOTAL 197,258 100% Source:2007-2011 ACS p. 122 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Educational Attainment by Employment Status TABLE 3-105 (Population 16 and Older) Educational In Labor Force Attainment Civilian Employed Unemployed Not in Labor Force Less than high school 14,678 2,114 5,441 graduate High school graduate 30,346 3,014 9,108 (includes equivalency) CHAPTER 3 Some college or 59,045 5,310 14,164 Associate's degree Bachelor's degree or 78,913 3,655 14,878 higher Source:2007-2011 ACS TABLE 3-106 Educational Attainment by Age Age 18-24 yrs 25-34 yrs 35-44 yrs 45-65 yrs 65+yrs Less than 9th 1,024 3,101 3,158 4,575 2,636 grade 9th to 12th grade, no 5,044 4,425 3,026 3,948 2,633 diploma High school graduate, GED, 10,375 11,994 10,269 20,260 12,285 or alternative Some college, 12,952 16,172 14,074 27,082 10,556 no degree Associate's 1,275 5,282 5,489 10,480 2,147 degree Bachelor's 3,545 17,803 20,223 26,426 7,682 degree Graduate or professional 351 7,873 9,982 15,174 4,900 degree Source:2007-2011 ACS Educational Attainment by Median Earnings in the Past TABLE 3-107 12 Months Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate $19,420 High school graduate(includes equivalency) $27,171 Some college or Associate's degree $35,262 Bachelor's degree $51,961 Graduate or professional degree $71,563 Source:2007-2011 ACS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 123 The major employment sectors within Washington County based on the Business Activity table in order are:Manufacturing,Education and Health Care Services,Retail Trade,and Arts,Entertainment,Accommodations.These four sectors contain 58%of the workers and 61%of the jobs in Washington County.According to WorkSystems in their 2014 consultation to the Consolidated Plan Work Group,Washington County is expected to add 60,383 jobs added across all industries over the next decade.The semiconductor &electronic component manufacturing industry is the top industry in Washington County.It now comprises 9%of all jobs across all industries.There are 45,636 total manufacturing jobs,which comprises 39%of all metro area manufacturing jobs.In the CHAPTER 3 health care area,there are 11,842 ambulatoryjobs(i.e.physicians'offices,dentist offices, specialty health care,etc.),4,818 jobs in hospitals,and 5,805 jobs in long term-care. Within the tech industry,there are 7,837 jobs in the software,data processing/hosting and computer systems design industries.There are 13,942 jobs across all industries for software developers,computer support specialists,network/system administrators,web developers,computer systems managers and computer systems analysts. Despite the high number of jobs in the semiconductor&electronic component manufacturing industry,the industry is expected to grow and represents a workforce need of the business community in Washington County.This industry is expected to grow from 22,804 jobs to 27,025 jobs by 2024.With almost five thousand jobs added in ten years,this growth indicates that the business community will need highly skilled workers to fill these jobs with the appropriate education,certification and training. These jobs are important to the community as they are accessible,are now less focused on traditional educational degrees and more on what an individual can do and pay well enough to enable households to meet the Washington County Self-Sufficiency Standard of$65,800 for a four-person household,which is currently the highest standard in the state. Figure 3-12 describes how the Self-Sufficiency Standard(earnings needed to be able to afford all necessities)in Washington County is still considerably higher than the median income for low-and moderate-income households in the County.Thus,there is an emphasis on the employment opportunities needed to bridge the gap from current median incomes to the incomes needed for households in Washington County to become self-sufficient. Figure 3-12 Self-Sufficiency Standard vs.Monthly Income(Family of Three)(2014) Self Sufficiency Standard vs. Monthly Income $7,000 - Family of Three $6,000 --- $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 2014 2014 2014 S9.10hr 100% MI/sArea 50%Aam 200'. 90°-.Area «ashins- NVaid-ron W-bia&tm rfin.Waae Fedmi Madin Median Fedeal ?Wian CoantySelf-CountySelf-CoantySelf- (2014) Povrty Iacama Iamna Frovrty Income Sufficiency Sufficiency Sufficiency Level(2014 (2014Fam. (2014Fam. Level(2014 (2014 Fun. Standard 2 S tatdard(1 Standardl. Fam of 3) OH) Of 4) Fam of 3) of 3) Adults,1 adult,1 adult 1 infant 1 Infant 1 Pnnchoder Pmichoaler P4exhoder) 1 School Age *Income 6dTax es(-credits) UNfisc. uHealthCare ■Transportation UFood oChildCare eHousing p. 124 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment In August 2014,Washington County,the City of Hillsboro and Intel signed a strategic investment agreement that would ensure Intel maintains a large local employment presence with 17,500 jobs and invests up to$100 billion into the local community over the next thirty years. Intel is the largest employer in Washington County and the State of Oregon,with$2.8 billion payroll in 2012 and generating$327.7 in state income and local property taxes,according to ECONorthwest.This is the fifth strategic investment program agreement Intel has signed with Washington County. It comes on the heels of Intel investing$3 billion in constructing DIX,a mammoth semiconductor and electronic component manufacturing facility in Hillsboro expected to generate 6,000 to 8,000 jobs in its first phase alone by the company's estimates. The strategic agreement will CHAPTER 3 be vital for future job and business growth opportunities in Washington County for this industry,as well as the supplementary industries that support it such as construction, real estate,education,accommodations and healthcare. It is important to note that the median wage in the industry is high but there are job opportunities at a variety of income levels for skilled workers as the industry expands its presence in Washington County.As a result,these changes will create workforce development needs for the next generation of workers in this industry.While there are resources available to train workers in the semiconductor&electronic component manufacturing industry(and manufacturing and technology sectors overall),there is still a challenge in linking the skills of job-seekers and the long-term unemployed in Washington County with the specialized skills needed in this industry. In addition,infrastructure investments will still need to be made by the jurisdictions in Washington County to accommodate such job growth without significant resources available for additional land,streets and street improvements,sidewalks, bike lanes,stormwater infrastructure,and other infrastructure improvements needed to accommodate such rapid growth. The education of the current workforce is not the barriers to employment opportunities in Washington County as much as the skills of the current workforce in relation to the high number of growing employment opportunities in the semiconductor&electronic component manufacturing industry(and manufacturing and technology sectors overall). Worksystems is attempting to address this gap in skills because the industry is less focused on educational attainment than on coding skills and other highly technical skills in the industry that do not require a Bachelor's or graduate level degree.WorkSource Portland Metro has almost$11 million in grants and other financial resources to pay for any type of training for individuals looking to obtain jobs in the Manufacturing and Tech (Information/Technology)sectors in Washington County.Worksystems and Treehouse (an online learning system for software coding skills that is badge-based for coding skills as a proficiency marker instead of community college credits)have developed a partnership called Code Oregon,which is a totally free service to anyone looking to obtain these vital coding skills.This partnership is a great opportunity for self-paced development for job seekers looking to develop skills for jobs in the technology sector (and is fully subsidized).There are resources for over 10,000 slots in Code Oregon and they're currently at 5,000 so there's still room for additional interested job-seekers. Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 125 In addition to this partnership,the Aligned Partner Network(APN)is another initiative where Worksystems(supported by the Workforce Investment Boards,community colleges and other organizations)partners with public agencies and community partners who have the time to coach their clients on employment goals and job searches. These agencies have the time and investment in the network and participate in case management services to enable their clients to more effectively find a job.This particular network follows the same integrated service delivery model but also includes Career Coaches(from the APN Agencies)and WorkSource Liaisons(WIA staff).This network expands integrated delivery to public agencies&community partners in order to CHAPTER 3 increase accessibility for people with multiple barriers,ensure case management for populations that need relationship-based support,and further align resources to reduce duplication and maximize expertise. In Washington County,these partners include CODA,Community Action,County Community Corrections(and its Reconnect and PREP programs),County Dept. of Housing,Experience Works and Luke-Dorf.APN job- seekers in Washington County numbered 75 to 80 of the more than 18,000 job-seekers in Washington County but Worksystems set aside 1/3 of its training dollars as a set aside to fund a program for these APN job-seekers due to their agencies'participation in the APN since,Worksystems knows that they have the supports for the job seeker(with career coaches). Worksystems has also been active in working with job-seekers who have multiple backgrounds including offenders exiting incarceration. Washington County Community Corrections is an APN partner and that Oregon HB 3194 has enabled Worksystems to go into Washington County Community Corrections in a prelease program and work with job-seekers for career preparation before they are released through the Reconnect Program.The program is for people who have particular offenses and have been released to get the case management services they need to succeed in the job market.HB 3194 takes the legislative money that would have paid for them to go back to prison to get the case management they need instead to find employment and maintain stability in their lives.Washington County Community Corrections feels it is a well-established practice that identifying housing, employment and substance abuse services helps reduce the recidivism rate. Policymakers looking into recidivism view housing,employment and social peers as the top tier of contributors reducing recidivism that need to be addressed and issues like alcohol and/or substance abuse are usually factors falling in a secondary tier of things affecting recidivism. In terms of 2013 stats for APN regionally,there were 963 participants,2,422 workshops attended,23 internships, 167 certifications programs (entered by participants)and 389 resulting employments.These participants encounter high barriers but statistics show some success in getting job-seekers with multiple barriers become trained and employed. Washington County does not participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)at this time, so no further information is provided on a local CEDS. p. 126 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment CONCENTRATIONS It It does appear that there are certain areas of Washington County that are concentrated with racial or ethnic minorities,low-income families or both.There are no specific areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated,but these housing problems seem to be more pronounced in low-income families and racial and ethnic minorities than in the Washington County population overall. As noted in the Housing Needs Assessment,there were nine Census Tracts in the County that had some minority concentrations or areas of concentration of racial or ethnic CHAPTER 3 minorities.A minority concentration in Washington County is defined as a percentage of any ethnic or racial minority population within the Census Tract that is 20%greater than the percentage of that ethnic or racial minority group across the entire jurisdiction.The 2010 U.S. Census data and the Census Tract as the identified geographic area are used for this definition given their relatively low margins of error in comparison to American Community Survey estimates and Census Block Group data. This information was first noted in the 2012 Washington County Fair Housing Plan and Analysis of Impediments utilizing data from the 2010 U.S. Census.Two Census Tracts represent a concentration of Asian residents in the areas north of the City of Beaverton close to the Sunset Highway.These two Census Tracts also have percentages of non-white households that are at least 20%higher than the percentage of non-white households across the whole County overall.There are seven Census Tracts in Washington County that represent a concentration of Latino residents primarily in parts of the cities of Beaverton,Tualatin,Hillsboro,Cornelius and Forest Grove.Two of these seven Census Tracts also have a concentration of"other"racial or ethnic minorities that is 20%higher than the percentage classified as"other"racial or ethnic minorities across the whole County overall. Below is a table of these Census Tracts determined to have Minority Concentrations using the definition above. Census Tracts with Minority Concentrations in TABLE 3-28 Washington County Census Tract % Hispanic %Asian %Other % Non-White No. 310.05 37.10% 315.13 39.80% 45.70% 316.11 31.30% 41.60% 320.05 40.30% 324.09 73.20% 30.70% 324.1 47.40% 325.01 38.30% 329.01 40.40% 329.02 51.00% 27.70% Source:2010 US Census Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 127 Those areas where the percentage of low-income persons earning at or below 50% AMI is higher than that of the County as a whole are a measure of the concentration of low-income persons. An area of low-income concentration is defined as a Census Tract where the percentage of low-income households is at least 10%higher than for the County as a whole. The greatest concentrations of low-income persons in Washington County are found in eighteen Census Tracts within the communities of Beaverton,Cornelius,Forest Grove, Tigard,Tualatin,Hillsboro and unincorporated Washington County.The table below CHAPTER 3 includes a list of the number and percentages of low-income persons (earning at or below 50%AMI)in these low-income concentrations in the County.Washington County is using the Census Tract as the defined geographic area for determination of low-income concentration.Washington County defines a low-income concentration as a Census Tract where the percentage of households earning at or below 50%AMI(which is$34,700 for a family of four as of May 1 st,2014)is at least 10 percent higher than the County average percentage of households earning at or below 50%AMI(19.03%)across all 104 Census Tracts in Washington County.The data is derived from the Low and Moderate Income Summary Data(LMISD)released by HUD in June 2014 using the 2006-2010 American Community Survey(ACS). Below is a table of those 18 Census Tracts that are considered to be Low-Income Concentrations: TABLE 3-29(a) Census Tracts with Low-Income and Minority Concentrations in Washington County Census % of Population Tract No. Jurisdictions) earning below % Hispanic % Other 50%AM I 310.05 Beaverton 41.63% 37.10% 320.05 Tualatin,parts of 44.06% 40.30% Tigard 324.09 Hillsboro 41.31% 73.20% 30.70% 325.01 Hillsboro 35.93% 38.30% Source:2010 US Census, 2006-2010 ACS estimates p. 128 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Because there is often an intersection between Low-Income Concentrations and Minority Concentration areas,the table below notes the preponderance of dual low- income and racial/ethnic concentrations at the Census Tract level.As such, four Census Tracts specifically have a concentration of Hispanic/Latino residents and also have a concentration of low-income people. These four Census Tracts are identified below: Census Tracts with Low-Income Concentrations in TABLE 3-31 Washington County of %of CHAPTER 3 Census earning Persons ons No.Persons of Total Population Population Tract No. below 50% earning below Population of earning° earning AMI 80%AMI Census Tract below 80% below 50% AMI AMI 332 2,995 4,145 5,665 73.17% 52.87% 312 3,430 4,675 6,910 67.66% 49.64% 317.05 2,045 2,670 4,460 59.87% 45.85% 314.02 1,270 1,730 2,800 61.79% 45.36% 320.05 1,974 2,930 4,480 65.40% 44.06% 307 460 675 1,080 62.50% 42.59% 310.05 2,175 3,075 5,225 58.85% 41.63% 324.09 2,175 3,250 5,265 61.73% 41.31% 320.03 1,545 2,605 3,775 69.01% 40.93% 311 875 1,160 2,430 47.74% 36.01% 325.01 900 1,895 2,505 75.65% 35.93% 309 1,665 2,840 4,925 57.66% 33.81% 317.06 1,730 2,825 5,150 54.85% 33.59% 326.04 2,090 3,055 6,225 49.08% 33.57% 310.06 1,970 3,305 5,890 56.11% 33.45% 313 2,140 3,850 6,410 60.06% 33.39% 316.13 2,150 3,510 6,440 54.50% 33.39% 331.01 965 1,835 2,910 63.06% 33.16% Source:2006-2010 A CS Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 129 In reviewing the characteristics of the market in the four Census Tracts listed above, they are each in mainly urbanized areas of Washington County located within city limits.All four Census Tracts listed above have both a concentration of Hispanic or Latino residents that is at least 37%of the Census Tract's overall population.This is considerably higher than the 15.6%Hispanic or Latino population of Washington County overall.These four Census Tracts also have a concentration of low-income households earning at or below 50%of the Area Median Income that is at least 41%of the Census Tract's overall population. CHAPTER 3 Census Tract 310.05 is located in an area of Beaverton south of Allen Boulevard and west of Highway 217. Census Tract 320.05 is located in the areas of Durham and Tualatin south of Tigard that is bisected by Interstate-5 in a north-south direction. Census Tract 324.09 is located in an area of Hillsboro mainly south of E.Main Street and east of Oregon 8/10th Avenue. Census Tract 325.01 is located in an area of Hillsboro south of SE Washington Street, west of 10th Avenue out to Dairy Creek Park and both east and west of(and bisected by) Highway 219/S. 1 st Avenue. These areas are truly located in two separate submarkets and are thus grouped together for analysis in this housing market analysis.Census Tracts 310.05 and 320.05 are located in the eastern Washington County submarket including Beaverton south of Allen Boulevard and west of Highway 217 and an area south of Tigard including Tualatin and parts of Durham and Tigard.Census Tracts 324.09 and 325.01 are primarily located in the Hillsboro submarket south of E. Main Street and west of NE 32nd Avenue. The eastern Washington County submarket identified in Figure 3-13 is a unique area along Interstate 5 with significant access to commercial development and retail stores. It is also well located to commuter rail and grocery stores. In reviewing the Market Analysis for this submarket in Volume 2 of this Consolidated,a number of characteristics are significant for review.The poverty rate is 16.2%which is higher the County's poverty rate of 10.4%from the 2007-2011 ACS.These are areas with significant more families with children living in poverty.The percentage of family households living in poverty is 79.6%which is higher than the County's percentage of 71.7%.There are a higher number of single-person households in this area too with 34.7%single-person households in the submarket compared to 25.3%in the County overall.This is a highly cost burdened submarket with 49.5%of households cost burdened paying 30%or more of their incomes towards housing costs(County percentage is 37.5%).The bulk of these households are renter households earning less than$35,000 annually. Cost burden seems to be more pronounced here as a housing problem than substandard housing or overcrowding.The most burdened households seem to be small family households(both renter and owner)earning at or below 30%AMI. There is a lower vacancy rate in the submarket than in the County overall. 59.1%of structures are single-family detached units in the two Census Tracts.The tenure is almost evenly split between renter and owner-occupied housing units. 79.4%of the housing stock was built between 1950 and 1979,making it much older stock than the County overall.The unemployment rate for the area is 14.85%which is significantly higher than the County overall at 8.58%. Approximately 36.1%of the workers are employed in the service occupations and sales and office occupations. p. 130 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment The Hillsboro submarket identified in Figure 3-14 is an area of Hillsboro primarily south of downtown with significant access to services,hospitals and clinics,commercial development and retail stores. It is also well located to light rail and a few grocery stores. In reviewing the Market Analysis for this submarket in Volume 2 of this Consolidated, a number of characteristics are worthy for review.The poverty rate is 32.95%which is higher the County's poverty rate of 10.4%from the 2007-2011 ACS.These are areas with significant more families with children living in poverty.The percentage of family households living in poverty is 72.02%which is slightly higher than the County's percentage of 71.7%.There is a high percentage of households with one or more persons under the age of 18 years at 41.5%compared to 35.95%in the County overall.This is a CHAPTER 3 highly cost burdened submarket with 5 8.1%of households cost burdened paying 30% or more of their incomes towards housing costs(County percentage is 37.5%).The bulk of these households are renter households earning less than$35,000 annually. Cost burden and severe cost burden(paying more than 50%of their income for housing costs) seems to be more pronounced here as a housing problem than substandard housing or overcrowding. In fact,more households are severely cost burdened here than just cost burdened.The most burdened households seem to be small family households(both renter and owner)earning at or below 30%AMI. There is a higher vacancy rate in the submarket than in the County overall. 75%of structures are single-family detached units in the two Census Tracts.There are over two times the number of renter units as owner- occupied units in the area. 74.4%of the housing stock was built before 1979,making it much older stock than the County overall.The unemployment rate for the area is 13.76% which is significantly higher than the County overall at 8.58%.Approximately 31.4%of the workers are employed in the service occupations and sales and office occupations. There is also a notable percentage that work in the construction,extraction,maintenance, and repair occupations at 21.8%. Figure 3-13 Eastern Washington County Submarket of Concentrated Census Tracts CPD Maps-Consolidated Plan and Continuum of Care Planning Tool j v s � ara (fy�. 5 October 16.2014 184 456e o as z ONmde 1 Ovemde i a 1 a afm Low Mod Traa uw,.ea•anroiuemnee•..on.xf a mmn�" Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 131 Figure 3-14 Hillsboro Submarket of Concentrated Census Tracts(CPD Maps) CPD Maps-Consolidated Plan and Continuum of Care Planning Tool & ws a NW Nwne.NNn � NeE� � ' R a$t 8 aa 9 NE t'...iNn Osla 9i 09 c0` � 1`WHNAN9:t _ � Nt lnmu.91 NTa Nt NoeN st a' B.—A 5 CHAPTER 3 Nl Bn.,a a,y o �xlz W�Na §. Nw n.nNr,s � rn..,,d.w are } 3 Nl t....91 2 _ 3 E.c H111sborO tNun,9i i eW WYnuf Bt 9t W-191 Cre iIt ecaS i nSa J4 a S i 8 � sw wnoa s. � e rea se aen - S E � -"'"--•-� v � iF Space 9 7 �, se crwr.,st October 16,2014 0 3]. 0 c5 1 39.829 13 Override 1 u .n o as ]lm Override 1 u.em wKi miaKWmneeiF.�eMoau�imin��- Low Mod Tract There are significant assets in these areas.These areas are significantly accessible to transit,employment centers and hospitals and clinics.There are an abundance of grocery stores and other markets for fresh and natural produce given their locations near downtowns in Washington County.These areas contain substantial subsidized housing whose affordability is not necessarily expiring anytime soon and also host an array of supportive services and childcare for low-income households. There may be significant strategic opportunities in all of these Census Tracts.As the jurisdictions continue to develop the Housing Elements of their Comprehensive Plans in these areas,they may choose to invest in purchasing land for future residential or commercial development with the anticipation that the well-suited locations in these areas will cause the values and sales prices of land in these areas to escalate over time. The hope is that the land value escalation does not displace the low-income households who have traditionally lived in the area.There also may be opportunities in Census Tracts 310.05 and 320.05 as Qualified Census Tracts where there is an incentive to site Low-Income Housing Tax Credit projects in those areas given the possibility of increasing equity in projects in those areas. Parts of Census Tracts 324.09 and 325.01 are included in the downtown Hillsboro area that is undergoing significant investment as an Urban Renewal District.As such, there may be significant opportunities to ensure there is affordable housing in these highly accessible Census Tracts as the affordability of these Census Tracts may decrease over time.Finally,there may be strategic anti-poverty opportunities including economic development activities such as microenterprise assistance and business development loans in these Census Tract areas.These areas have access to community events such as farmers'markets and festivals, as well as accessible to other services that allow low-income residents to live self-sufficient lives. p. 132 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Housing Market Analysis&Needs Assessment Chapter i Community Development Plan Didyou know? `� z Established in 1979,the Washington County Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program has expended over$80 million to build public facilities and infrastructure and provide services that benefit low-and moderate-income persons. Beaverton became a separate Entitlement Community with its own allocation of CDBG funds in 1994,and has expended approximately$11.5 million to assist low and moderate income residents and revitalize areas of the city. Good Neighbor Center,Shelter for homeless families, Tigard - �� Chapter 4 Community Development Plan This chapter provides an overview of the federal Community Development Block Grant Program as well as Washington County's CDBG program by providing a summary of Washington County's non-housing needs for the 2015-2020 reporting period as well as an outline of the allocation process for Washington County's CDBG programs. Funding from the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program is primarily targeted toward priority community development(non-housing)needs for low-and moderate-income persons throughout Washington County. Washington County and the City of Beaverton each receive their own annual allocations of CDBG funds and administer their jurisdiction's programs independently. Although the programs are run separately,staff members coordinated a joint needs assessment. Information to help identify community development needs was gathered through public outreach activities. Staff reviewed the findings from community workshops, one-on-one interviews with high-risk residents,community need surveys that were completed by local service providers and a community-wide survey of local residents. The results of all of these informational tools were used to create jurisdiction-specific Objective Statements,that were then used to identify what needs would most likely be addressed in the HUD Production Objectives. Each year public,local government and non-profit organizations apply for CDBG funds to help pay for specific community projects. Consistency with the needs identified in the Consolidated Plan is one of the many criteria used to approve funding for these projects.The Objective Statements(see Appendix D.1 in Volume II)are intended to be used by potential CDBG applicants for qualifying their project under the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. I. Federal Programs Congress created the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Program by authorizing Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. The overall purpose of the CDBG Program is to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing,creating suitable living environments,and expanding economic opportunities,primarily benefiting low-and moderate-income persons. CDBG activities are initiated and developed at the local level based upon a community's perceptions of its local needs,priorities and benefits to the community. Each entitlement grantee receiving CDBG funds determines what activities it will fund,as long as each project is eligible and meets one of three broad national objectives(benefit low-and moderate-income person,prevent or eliminate slums and blight,or meet community development needs of a particular urgency). Needs The Washington County and City of Beaverton non-housing(community development) component of this needs assessment was developed through an intensive information gathering process that involved local governments,non-profits,residents,and other organizations. The project team utilized surveys, focus groups,workshops,and other public involvement activities to gather public input. In November of 2013,the County, in conjunction with the City of Beaverton,held a"What's Working Workshop"to evaluate the current CDBG program. Staff worked with representatives from local Community Development Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 133 governments,non-profits,and other organizations to review the program,and review the needs assessment process and forthcoming Community Needs Survey for our service providers.Needs identified in this process that are specific only to the City of Beaverton's CDBG program are covered later in this chapter. Focus Groups Beginning in March 2014,Washington County and the City of Beaverton issued a Request for Proposal to a variety of local agencies to conduct focus groups in order to help gather information from residents on their needs,both met and unmet, for housing CHAPTER 4 and services including public facilities and public infrastructure.Three different agencies responded to the Request for Proposal including Centro Cultural,Adelante Mujeres and the Beaverton Hispanic Center. Centro Cultural conducted two focus groups in Washington County outside the City of Beaverton,and Adelante Mujeres conducted another two focus groups in Washington County outside the City of Beaverton.The City of Beaverton contracted with the Beaverton Hispanic Center for two focus groups in Beaverton and with Adelante Mujeres for another focus group held in Beaverton.These focus groups were all held at various locations from April to June 2014. Respondents were asked to prioritize three types of infrastructure activities if they were only able to fund three activities.There were 163 votes tallied on infrastructure. Public safety in relation to infrastructure seemed to be the overarching theme of their priorities. Pedestrian safety improvements was the highest priority with 18.4%followed by street lighting or signal lights at 17.8%,building or repairing sidewalks at 16.6%and bike paths at 15.3%. Road repair or road extension was also notable as a priority with 12.3% of the responses. Respondents were asked to prioritize fives types of public facilities if they were only able to fund five public facilities.There were 183 votes tallied on public facilities. Facilities for youth and childcare seemed to be the overarching theme of their priorities, while it was notable that homeless shelters and addiction treatment centers were also prioritized.Youth center was the highest priority with 18.0%followed by homeless shelter at 15.3%,childcare center at 14.8%and addiction treatment center at 9.8%. Respondents were asked to prioritize three types of affordable housing if they were only able to fund three types of affordable housing.There were 155 votes tallied on housing. Housing-related education was the highest priority with 18.1%followed by affordable homeownership at 16.1%,homeowner repair,renovation or rehabilitation programs at 14.8%and affordable rental housing at 14.2%.Renovation and rehabilitation of affordable apartment complexes and improvements in resident's homes and apartments for those with physical limitations were also notable as priorities with 12.3%and 10.3% of the responses respectively. Respondents were asked to prioritize some of the challenges they faced in order to determine what public services might help them in their daily lives.There were 196 votes tallied on public services. Child care services was the highest priority with 14.8% followed by health services at 12.8%,rental assistance at 12.2%,youth services at 11.7% and transportation services at 10.2%. Citizen Survey With the intent of increasing citizen participation and input during the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan drafting process,the Consolidated Plan Workgroup authorized staff to conduct a 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Citizen Survey.The goal of this survey was to gather input from community members across Washington County to gain insight on their views regarding the current levels of support for various programs,and where they p. 134 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Development Plan see the greatest need for those programs that are eligible to receive funding from the HUD grant programs that Washington County and the City of Beaverton administer.The survey was provided in both English and Spanish, and was available to the public from January 2014 to April 11th,2014. Written media was sent to libraries across the county through the Washington County Cooperative Library Services.This included hardcopies of the survey,as well as flyers and signage to post near computers to encourage library patrons to take the survey. Additionally,a QR(Quick Response)code was created,for both English and Spanish, to allow people to use their smart phones to take the survey.This gave them the option CHAPTER 4 to take the survey at a later time and provide access when no computers were available. Promotional bookmarks were created and sent out to the libraries along with the other materials to be distributed to library patrons. In addition to the libraries, 11 other Washington County organizations were contacted and asked to assist in distributing links to the survey electronically in an effort to be more sustainable and reduce paper waste.They were also offered hardcopies upon request.Washington County and City of Beaverton staff also provided the survey at the Project Homeless Connect event in Hillsboro. Articles were published in the Beaverton Resource Guide,Beaverton Valley Times,The Oregonian,and in the City of Beaverton's Your City Newsletter. City of Beaverton staff in charge of the weekly Neighborhood Association Committee(NAC)email list and liaisons for all City of Beaverton boards and commissions were also contacted to help distribute the survey. A utility bill insert promoting the survey was sent out in 19,000 water bills for the City of Beaverton in February.Hard copies with drop boxes were placed at both Beaverton Libraries in early April as part of a last push for survey results.As part of that same effort 30+churches and faith based organizations in Beaverton and Hillsboro were contacted by email and phone,asking for their help in reaching out to community members for their input. 584 responses were received between January and April 2014,but it was observed that an inadequate number of responses were received from the lower-income population. The survey was then re-opened between June and the end of July 2014 to attempt to receive a better response rate from lower-income tenants living in Washington County. Notice of the survey's re-opening was sent by Washington County Department of Housing Services directly to all public housing tenants, inviting them to provide feedback about the needs they have identified in the community.At the end of July, an additional 202 responses were received,and most of them from lower-income households,making a total of 786 responses received in the Community Wide Survey. All responses were analyzed as a whole for the County,and then broken down by zip code to provide insight into individual communities. People were given the option to identify their specific neighborhood in which they lived.There were also options for people who work in Washington County but reside outside of County boundaries.A summary of the results of the Citizen Survey is included in Appendix B of Volume 2. Community Development Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 135 Community Needs Assessment The Community Needs Survey was provided in an online format throughout the months of November to April. Outreach was conducted through email,direct mail and through various stakeholder meetings. Representatives from over 55 different organizations responded to the Community Needs Survey,identifying a total of 131 needs related to a wide variety of programs and facilities. Many organizations identified multiple needs. Of the total,41 needs were identified by cities,25 by the County, 62 by non-profit organizations and 3 by special districts or similar organizations. It should be noted that certain needs were identified by multiple agencies; therefore,there is duplication in the CHAPTER 4 associated cost of fully addressing each need. This should be taken into consideration when looking at the cost to address all needs. Needs identified through these assessments fall into the following major and sub- categories,which are stated here regardless of whether a need was identified through public outreach efforts: Public Facility Long Range Goal: Develop or improve a variety of public facilities to benefit income-qualifying neighborhoods or income-qualified populations. • Public Facilities,including the following sub-categories: • Senior Centers: Construct or improve senior centers for improved access to services and activities. • Handicapped Centers: Construct or improve centers to serve persons with disabilities. • Homeless Facilities: Construct or improve homeless facilities to shelter homeless persons,family and youth. • Youth Centers: Construct or improve youth facilities to serve low-income youth (includes abused/neglected children). • Neighborhood Facilities: Construct or improve parks and recreational facilities for low-income areas. • Child Care Centers: Construct or improve child care facilities to serve low-income children. • Health Facilities: Construct or improve health(physical and mental)facilities for low-income populations. • Mental Health Facilities:Construct or improve health(physical and mental) facilities for low-income populations. • Parks and/or Recreation Facilities: Construct or improve parks and recreational facilities for low-income areas. • Parking Facilities: Construct or improve parking facilities to serve low-income areas and populations. • Tree Planting: Plant trees in low-income areas for neighborhood beautification. • Fire Stations/Equipment:Construct or improve fire stations/equipment in low- income areas. • Non-Residential Historic Preservation: Rehabilitate and preserve non-residential historic buildings. • Other Public Facilities:Construct or improve other public facilities(which may include but not be limited to food banks,family resource centers,multi-purpose centers,libraries,and other facilities serving low-income populations). p. 136 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Development Plan Infrastructure Long Range Goals:Improve the infrastructure of income-qualified areas to ensure the health and safety of communities and increase neighborhood pride and viability • Infrastructure,including the following sub-categories: • Water/Sewer System Improvements:Improve water/sewer systems by upgrading water lines or constructing new facilities to increase capacity • Street Improvements: Replace,repair or construct or improve streets and related infrastructure. • Sidewalks: Construct,repair or replace sidewalks. CHAPTER 4 • Flood Drainage Improvements:Improve safety through storm water management and flood drainage improvements. • Other Infrastructure: Improve other infrastructure systems that will benefit low income areas. Public Services Long Range Goal: Provide public services that ensure the health and welfare of income-qualified people living in the community. • Public Services,including the following sub-categories: • Childcare Services: Provide child care services to support low-income families. • Crime Awareness: Support crime awareness and other anti-crime programs through education and training. • Employment and Training Services: Provide employment and training programs to help residents obtain and retain jobs. • Fair Housing: Provide fair housing services and landlord/tenant education and/or counseling. • Handicapped Services: Provide services/activities to persons with disabilities through access to services/centers. • Health Services: Improve access to health(physical and mental)and dental care services and/or education to low-income families. • Legal Services: Secure legal,advocacy,interpretation,and translation services for social service agencies • Other Public Services: Provide other public services such as homeless supportive services(rent prevention assistance,services for victims of domestic violence, mental health counseling, substance abuse counseling,life skills training,childcare, risk mitigation assistance,and other needs specifically targeted to the homeless), counseling for victims of crimes,emergency basic needs,access to affordable housing,homeownership classes,literacy programs,information and referral services,and life skills training and professional development opportunities. • Senior Services: Provide services to seniors to prevent isolation or elder fraud and ensure basic needs are met. • Substance Abuse Services: Provide substance abuse/chemical dependency services to low-income populations. • Tenant/Landlord Counseling: Provide fair housing services and landlord/tenant education and/or counseling. • Transportation Services: Increase affordable and accessible transportation services. • Youth Services: Offer an array of supportive services to low-income and at-risk youth. Need statements were reviewed,compiled,categorized and have been summarized in this plan.The objective statements that reflect these identified needs are included in Appendix D.I of Volume II. Community Development Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 137 II. Washington County Program Established in 1979,the Washington County CDBG program has expended over$80 million on projects directed at activities benefiting low-and moderate-income persons. Over the years,the County's strategies have changed to accommodate community needs. This has been accomplished through changes in the general allocation formula,which guides the proportion of funds to be expended within the program's major funding categories. Program categories include:public facilities,infrastructure improvements, public services,and affordable housing. CHAPTER 4 Projects Funded • Public Facilities: In the early years of the Washington County program,a large portion of the funds was used to construct senior centers. In recent years,a significant portion of the money spent in this category has been used for shelters,group homes, parks and other multi-purpose community centers. Special needs housing,such as shelters,group homes and residential facilities for presumed benefit groups,are not considered to be permanent or new housing,and thus are included in Public Facilities. • Infrastructure Improvements. This category includes projects such as streets and sidewalks. Expenditures for infrastructure improvements have fluctuated over the years,from a low of 20%to a high of 40%(of the total CDBG allocation minus public services and administration funds)in a given annual funding cycle. • Public Services. Fifteen percent of the grant plus program income is the maximum allowed by the federal government for public services. This category is the most competitive,with the largest number of applications submitted. • Dedicated Funding for Weatherization and Housing Rehabilitation. Expenditures in Washington County have fluctuated from a low of about 15%in the first funding cycle,to a high of about 30%in the 2010-2015 cycle. Within the Affordable Housing category(formerly the housing rehabilitation category)components have been added to address needs expressed in the community. One example of this is a CDBG set- aside for Community Housing Development Organizations(CHDOs)to use for eligible housing development activities. Projects Not Funded The Washington County CDBG program has elected not to fund certain types of projects,although they are permitted to do so by the federal government. Reasons for not funding these projects vary. • In the early 1990s, it was decided that economic development projects would not be funded using CDBG funds;however,job training and employment services are eligible under the public services category. • Planning studies are not funded unless related to the overall functioning and general administration of the CDBG program. • "Stand alone"projects to improve accessibility of public facilities are not funded because of concerns regarding the potential cost of ensuring that public facilities comply with federal accessibility requirements. The CDBG program,as required by federal law,ensures that all projects comply with federal accessibility requirements and standards. p. 138 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Development Plan Priorities Based upon the needs assessment process,policy development in Washington County and input from various stakeholders throughout Washington County,the County's Office of Community Development and the City of Beaverton have both chosen to prioritize CDBG activities that address the goals and strategies set forth in the Washington County 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness. All activities that address goals and strategies from the 10-Year Plan will be considered High Priority activities. All other needs identified through the need statement process will be considered Low Priority. Eligible activities that were not identified through the need statement process will be CHAPTER 4 categorized as"no need." Allocation Process Guidelines for allocating CDBG funds are established by the Washington County Policy Advisory Board and approved by the Board of County Commissioners. The program uses three steps to determine which projects will receive funding. First,an allocation formula is developed that identifies the proportion of funds that will be allocated to each general program category. Second,objective statements are established based on the results of the Community Needs Assessment,and only projects that address those objective statements are considered for funding. Finally,projects are evaluated according to specific criteria. These criteria are designed to ensure that projects address long-and short-term County strategies and that only viable and effective projects are selected. This Consolidated Plan includes the guidelines for program expenditures during the five-year planning cycle from 2015-2020. The allocation formula that was used for Year one of the 2015—2020 Consolidated Plan was revised for Year two to reflect changes made through the Consolidated Planning process.Actual expenditures may vary from these standards,depending on project submissions,the results of the project selection process,and the amount of funds needed for individual projects. The allocation formula, as follows,is based on the County needs as identified through the Community Needs Survey process described above. Consideration is also given to addressing needs for which other funding sources are limited. Program Administration HUD allows CDBG entitlement grantees to set aside 20%of the annual entitlement award plus program income to administer the program and ensure that all grants are in compliance with program regulations. Administration and Public Service funds are withdrawn from the pool of available resources prior to distribution of funds in each of the remaining program categories. Public Services HUD allows CDBG grantees to set aside up to 15%of the annual entitlement award plus program income to fund public service projects. For the current planning cycle,the County will allocate 15%of the total entitlement award plus 15%of program income to the public services pool of funding. This will effectively increase the percentage of public services funding available each year. To continue support for fair housing and resident services for Tier I CHDO properties, the Policy Advisory Board has authorized the County to re-authorize two set-asides within the public services funding category. 13%of the public services funding will be set-aside for resident services programs administered by tier-one community development housing organizations(CHDOs)who have at least 51%of their housing units in Washington County. Community Development Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 139 2%of the public services funding pool will be set aside for fair housing activities, in order to strengthen the County's efforts to affirmatively further fair housing. The requirement to affirmatively further fair housing is one of the many activities HUD grantees must undertake in order to be eligible to receive CDBG funds. Balance of Remaining Funds After program administration and public services allocations are subtracted from the entitlement award(including program income),the City of Hillsboro's allocation of 50% of its total entitlement award is deducted. Remaining funds are then divided between the three remaining program categories: Public Facilities(30%),Public Infrastructure (30%)and a newly titled category,Affordable Housing(40%). In previous years, Hillsboro's allocation was deducted directly from either the public facilities category or the public infrastructure category, depending on the type of project the City elected to fund that year. Due to fluctuations every two years in the amount of funds remaining in these competitive categories,the decision was made to set Hillsboro's funds aside prior to splitting them between categories and is intended to prevent inconsistent funding amounts available for other projects. Of the funds available in the Affordable Housing Category,up to$100,000 will be set- aside to support the CDBG-eligible costs of affordable housing developments. This set-aside will be awarded to projects owned,developed,or sponsored by CHDOs seeking competitive tax credits through the State of Oregon's annual Low-income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC)NOFA. Organizations should be aware that not all program activities in the Affordable Housing Category are open to competition; funding is dedicated for other CDBG-eligible activities including the County's Housing Rehabilitation Programs, Community Action's Comprehensive and Self-Help Weatherization programs,and Rebuilding Together of Washington County activities.The pie chart below demonstrates how CDBG funds will be allocated to different activities. Washington County CDBG Budget Allocation Methodology Total Annual Budget Hillsboro Allocation�' (estimate: - Balance Remaining Allocation 13.54%)* Public Balance Infrastructure Remaining (30%)Administration (estimate: (20%) 51.46%) Affordable Housing(40%) Public Services 1public (15%) Facilities (30%) *Note:The City of Hillsboro's portion will be 5096 of its annual HUD allocation. p. 140 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Development Plan Application, Selection and Funding Processes Each year,the County hosts informational meetings regarding the CDBG program and application process in mid-August. Proposals are due each October. Competitive categories are as follows: Public Facilities,Infrastructure and Public Services. It should be noted that the Policy Advisory Board will only accept proposals that address the objective statements identified in this Plan. Following receipt of project proposals,OCD staff reviews proposals and clarifies questions with applicants. Staff prepares a preliminary analysis of proposals,which are then sent to applicants and the PAB. The PAB allows applicants to briefly present CHAPTER 4 proposals and address questions in a public forum. The PAB rates proposals according to established criteria and projects are then listed in order of rank within program categories(30%to public facilities,30%to public infrastructure,and 15%to public service activities). Each year,when the federal government informs the County of the amount of its annual entitlement,funds will be allocated to each program category,according to the formula in this Plan. Subsequently,grant awards will be made to the highest-ranking projects in each category,to the extent that funds are available. Following PAB recommendation and endorsement by the Board of County Commissioners,selected projects are included in the County's annual Action Plan,which is submitted to HUD. The County then enters into agreements with project sponsors,with funding normally beginning July 1. III. City of Beaverton Program Established in 1994,the City of Beaverton's CDBG program has expended approximately$11.5 million on projects directed at activities primarily benefiting low- and moderate-income persons. Over the years,the City's strategies have changed to accommodate community needs.For the past five years the City of Beaverton has worked on improving the downtown area with the Storefront Improvement Project.The City of Beaverton continues to see a need in providing affordable housing to residents,as well as economic development for microenterprises and Storefront Improvement programming, but may elect to phase out CDBG funding of the Storefront Improvement Project.Going forward the City of Beaverton will continue to utilize the CDBG program to help first time homebuyers successfully gain access into neighborhoods that have previously been unattainable,rehabilitate existing housing,and fund the microenterprise business development model that assists in job creation and skills training.The City of Beaverton continues to be open to creating new relationships with partners that plan to benefit the City of Beaverton populations,while retaining existing partnerships that are working well. Beaverton-specific Needs Out of the 786 people that responded to the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Community Wide Survey between February 2014 and June 2014,36%stated they reside in Beaverton.The following are those survey results: • Housing Needs: In order of perceived need:(1)Affordable rental housing,(2) Affordable homeownership,(3)Housing for people with physical and mental disabilities,(4)Accessibility improvements,(5)Homeowner rehabilitation,(6)Rental rehabilitation,(7)Transitional housing for offenders,(8)Other. In order of perceived priority,(1)Affordable rental housing,(2) Senior housing(3)Housing for people with physical and mental disabilities,(4)Affordable homeownership(5)Homeowner rehabilitation,(6)Rental rehabilitation,(7)Transitional housing for offenders,(8) Accessibility improvements. Community Development Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 141 • Public Service/Infrastructure Improvement Needs:The top seven perceived need,in order,to construct,expand or rehabilitate the following buildings,spaces,or activities is: (1)Abused/Neglected Children Center,(2)Homeless Shelter,(3)Handicapped Center,(4)Child Care Center,(5)Neighborhood/Community Center,(6)Youth Center,(7)Addiction Treatment Center.The top specific infrastructure improvement was sidewalk building and repair. • Economic Development Needs: Microenterprise(businesses with five or fewer employees),other types of economic development,and the Downtown Storefront CHAPTER 4 Improvement Program were all identified as being the highest need. In the last five years at least 49%have experienced job loss,over 71%a reduced income,and approximately 50%were experiencing underemployment(defined as only having part- time employment when needing full-time or not making full use of your skills). In addition to the Consolidated Plan Community Wide Survey,Beaverton has received input regarding community needs through a few other sources such as Beaverton Focus Groups,and the Draft Recommendations from the Diversity Advisory Board. Two focus groups were held in Beaverton to address the priority for economic development.The perceived highest need for economic development,in order,are: (1)Grants,(2)Loans,(3)Coaching to help with business plans and budgeting,and(4) Business classes and training.There was no need stated for facility renovation,which is an eligible activity. According to the recent recommendations from the Diversity Advisory Board,the needs of Beaverton(as they relate to CDBG)are outlined below: • Housing Needs: Plan for accessing emergency shelters and supportive housing. Strengthen the rental housing inspection program,increase knowledge of tenants' rights,and monitor for housing discrimination.Expand programs to support first-time homebuyers while establishing a housing trust to establish public housing for low income populations across city neighborhoods. • Public Service Needs:Limited English proficiency awareness,and access to materials in other languages besides English. •Infrastructure Improvement Needs:Reduce barriers to having community gardens,and create outreach program that links communities of color to community gardens. • Economic Development Needs: There still remains an extreme disparity of people of color working in management positions compared to the Caucasian population.The study,Examining Racial Disparities in Beaverton,conducted by Alexis Ball in 2014, shows 40%of Caucasians are in management positions compared to only 10%of people of color.By 2020,just the Latino population is expected to increase by another 10%,not to mention the other non-white population increase expected by 2020.The need for education levels to increase in these populations is apparent,and programs designed to expand access to job training,support of local minority women developing small businesses,and systems that provide small business loans is requested. Projects Funded • Housing Rehabilitation:The City has consistently allocated a portion of its annual entitlement award to its housing rehabilitation program.For the past five years, Unlimited Choices,Inc.has administered the City of Beaverton's housing rehabilitation through three programs:Hope-4-Homes,Adapt-A-Home,and Mend-A-Home.These programs offer low interest rehabilitation loans,accessibility modification grants,and small grants for mobile home rehabilitation. p. 142 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Development Plan • Homeownership:The City partners with Proud Ground to assist income qualified first time homebuyers with a buyer-initiated grant program.A large portion of the grant is used for down payment assistance,with money remaining to assist with home repairs. Homes that are purchased with CDBG funds will remain in the Proud Ground Community Land Trust which ensures long term affordability. • Public Facilities: In past years,the City has used CDBG funds to rehabilitate public service buildings to better serve clients,and to develop or improve a variety of public facilities to benefit income-qualifying neighborhoods or income-qualified populations. • Public Services: HUD allows CDBG grantees to set aside up to 15%of the annual CHAPTER 4 entitlement award.The City of Beaverton plans to continue allocating 15%of the total entitlement award to the public services pool of funding to provide public services that ensure the health and welfare of income-qualified people living in Beaverton. • Infrastructure Improvements: Improve the infrastructure of income-qualified areas to ensure the health and safety of communities,and to increase neighborhood pride and viability,particularly when related to other real-estate development projects. Infrastructure improvements include street and sidewalk repair/expansion,water and sewer lines,storm drains,bike paths,street lighting,and undergrounding utility lines. • Economic Development:Increase economic opportunities through re-development and job creation activities using microenterprise and other economic development activities that support this goal,microenterprise being priority. Microenterprise is used to provide financial assistance,technical assistance,or general support services to owners and developers.Technical Assistance will facilitate skills and knowledge in planning, develop and administer activities for both microenterprises and other economic development actions.Other economic development activities may include financial assistance to for-profit businesses to acquire property,clear structures,build,expand or rehabilitate a building,purchase equipment,or provide operating capital.Forms of assistance include loans,loan guarantees,and grants. The City helps people attend Foundations for Business(a 6 week course on how to start a business),participate in business seminars,and utilizes a match savings program to provide economic opportunities for the Hispanic/Latino community,and to other low and moderate income residents.The Storefront Improvement Program is not expected to continue using CDBG funds for the duration of the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan, however the City may elect to use CDBG funds if general funds or other financial assistance are not available to continue this program. Projects Not Funded The City's CDBG program has elected not to fund certain types of projects,although they are permitted to do so by the federal government. Reasons for not funding these projects vary. • Planning studies are not funded unless related to the overall functioning and general administration of the CDBG program. • "Stand alone"projects to improve accessibility of public facilities are not funded because of concerns regarding the potential cost of ensuring that public facilities comply with federal accessibility requirements. The CDBG program,as required by federal law,ensures that all projects comply with federal accessibility requirements and standards. Community Development Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 143 Priorities In keeping with Washington County's 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness that was created in 2008,the City will continue to hold a higher priority for ending homelessness (especially for Beaverton youth),and continue to support programs and ideas that get Beaverton students into safe and adequate housing.Foster care projects, like 5th and Main that address homelessness,will continue to be a high priority.Other ideas worth considering are projects like Bridge Meadows,which is looking to develop a site in Beaverton.Bridge Meadows is a unique multi-generational community located in the CHAPTER 4 Portsmouth neighborhood of North Portland where adoptive parents,foster children,and elders live together in affordable housing,and have a support network for low-income elders and families in the process of adopting foster children. Other priorities remain as stated in the Public Facility,Infrastructure,Public Service and Economic Development Goals section previously outlined in this document. Allocation Process This Consolidated Plan is the basic overview for CDBG program expenditures during the five-year planning cycle from 2015-2020. HUD allocates the CDBG to be used for public services,administration,and for benefits to low-and-moderate income persons (each is defined in greater detail below).The City will determine the priorities within these areas in Beaverton's Annual Action Plan that is prepared and available for review annually in April. Program Administration HUD allows CDBG entitlement grantees to set aside up to 20%of the annual award,plus program income,to administer the program and ensure that all grants are in compliance with program regulations.The amount of program income the City receives each year fluctuates greatly,therefore the City only sets aside 20%of its annual award for administrative activities. Public Services HUD allows CDBG entitlement grantees to set aside up to 15%of the annual award,plus program income,to fund public service projects. Public Service project priorities are in alignment with Washington County's 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness. Public Facilities, Infrastructure, Housing Rehabilitation & Economic Development After Program Administration and Public Services allocations are subtracted from the annual entitlement award the remaining funds are divided between housing rehabilitation, homeownership activities,public facilities,public services,infrastructure improvement, economic development,and other programs and activities that have been identified herein. Application, Selection and Funding Process The City may elect to directly fund specific projects that meet the Consolidated Plan goals,or may solicit applications.The City allocates funds based on funding availability and program demand. Projects are included in the Annual Action Plan,which is generally made available for public comment in March,approved by City Council in April,and submitted to HUD in May.The City then enters into agreements with subrecipients with funding normally beginning July 1. p. 144 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Community Development Plan Chapter Consolidated • I Maps • � � � �, ISI Dld you know? Washington County and the cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro are committed to investing in community development and housing projects that promote access to opportunity for the region's low income residents. Chapter S Consolidated Plan Maps This Consolidated Plan builds upon the concept of Washington County's geography of opportunity introduced through the Opportunity Maps utilized for the first time in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. Since the Opportunity Maps were generated in that Plan,the Coalition for a Livable Future released the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 in June CHAPTER 5 2013,which also maps indicators in an effort to promote a greater understanding of how opportunity is spatially distributed across the region. Due to the challenges presented in replicating the Opportunity Maps for this Consolidated Plan,it was determined that the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 could serve as the major source and mapping tool in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan.The Equity Atlas not only includes similar indicators to the Opportunity Maps,but also includes additional indicators and utilizes more recent regional data than the Opportunity Maps.Given the nature of consolidated planning, Washington County and the cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro,with assistance from the Mapping Subcommittee and Consolidated Plan Work Group,felt it was appropriate to utilize maps from the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 for this Consolidated Plan,as well as the CPD Maps mapping tool from the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)to analyze areas of opportunity for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan. To provide context,the Coalition for a Livable Future is a nonprofit agency uniting over seventy private,nonprofit and public agencies dedicated to promoting healthy, equitable and sustainable communities in the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan region. The Coalition and its members work to create and preserve affordable housing,ensure clean water,protect open space and wildlife habitat and farmland,create living wage jobs,provide real transportation choices and end hunger in our community.The Coalition stresses the interdependence of our region in helping to improve the economic, social,and environmental health of the metropolitan region as a whole. Washington County and the cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro are still committed in determining where funds could best be invested to promote access to opportunity for the region's low income residents. Funding the construction of new affordable housing is an important public investment. Ideally,that investment should be targeted to places that provide good opportunities for low income residents to connect with resources that enhance their life chances,such as places with good schools and connections to transportation,jobs and everyday goods and services. In using the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 for this Consolidated Plan,Washington County and the cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro do so with the knowledge that an Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Tool will be released for jurisdictions to use that will enhance our ability to make important public investments using a lens of affirmatively furthering fair housing. This Consortium is excited by the opportunity to utilize that tool when it is released to make such decisions. Funding the construction of public facilities(e.g., senior centers,health centers)also represents an important public investment. Mapping information could also be used to strategically locate these investments in places where they are most needed,such as neighborhoods where there is a concentration of affordable housing.This new focus on location and linkages is seen as being a way to promote the social sustainability of Washington County's communities. The concept of Opportunity Maps pioneered by the Kirwan Institute based at the Ohio State University is still embedded in this approach utilizing the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0. Consolidated Plan Maps 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 145 In fact,the Opportunity Maps of the last Consolidated Plan used the Regional Equity Atlas as a model for how to use maps to inform the allocation of public resources.The model is built on related approaches in community health,geography,and planning.The Kirwan Institute(http://kirwaninstitute.org/research/gismapping/opportunity-mapping/)describes Opportunity Maps as follows: Opportunity mapping is a research tool used to understand the dynamics of "opportunity"within metropolitan areas.The purpose of opportunity mapping is to illustrate where opportunity rich communities exist(and assess who has access to CHAPTER 5 these communities)and to understand what needs to be remedied in opportunity poor communities... Mapping opportunity in the region requires selecting variables that are indicative of high(and low)opportunity. In this context,high opportunity indicators would be the availability of sustainable employment,high performing schools,a safe environment, access to high quality health care,adequate transportation,quality child care,safe neighborhoods,and institutions that facilitate civic and political engagement.These multiple indicators of opportunity are assessed in a comprehensive manner at the same geographic scale,thus enabling the production of a comprehensive"opportunity map" for the region20. There is a distinction in how opportunity mapping is being used in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan.The focus is not on scoring opportunity,but rather on presenting areas of opportunity according to the indicators. One of the benefits of using the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 is that the recommended maps exist as base maps but can also be customized by adding other layers as applicable.This gives a potential applicant to Washington County or the City of Beaverton for public investment dollars the ability to be creative in customizing maps to state their case for the need and location of their particular project. This new approach moves away from the concept of a comprehensive opportunity map that represents the sum of the values of each of the underlying areas of opportunity. Instead,applicants will be able to construct their own analysis and case of why a particular location is suitable for a particular project,based on indicators that they deem relevant to their population,larger community development purpose,and proposed use.Thus, the maps become more of a resource to make a case for public investment that can be evaluated subjectively rather than decided by a single numerical value associated with a map.This approach better takes into account the nuances involved in evaluating areas of opportunity and acknowledges that scores may be useful but fail to capture the full story. THE APPROACH IN WASHINGTON COUNTY The Washington County Mapping initiative was conducted from August through December 2014.Washington County convened a special subcommittee comprised of representatives from legal aid,a local jurisdiction's public works department,public health,an affordable housing developer,fair housing,land use and transportation,a nonprofit social services agency,planning,housing,community development,a private development consultant and Community Action to help inform and guide this process. Additionally,representatives from Washington County's Department of Health and Human Services'Epidemiology/Communicable Diseases Division,Washington County's Information and Technology Division and the Coalition for a Livable Future attended and presented at some of the meetings regarding available mapping tools in the community,as well as the Opportunity Maps used in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Opportunity Maps Project.There was also a presentation from the Grants Manager from the City of Eugene on the HUD Sustainable Communities Initiative effort in Lane County to create Livability Lane and the indicators used and created in that effort to provide some context to the Washington County effort. p. 146 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps The first step was to select a variety of indicators that would identify areas of high opportunity for low to moderate income families, seniors,and those with disabilities. These were largely indicators used in the 2010-2015 Opportunity Maps project,although the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 indicators did not correspond directly to the 2010-2015 Opportunity Map indicators Nonetheless,the majority of the indicators were carried forward to this Consolidated Plan due to their importance and relevance. The subcommittee selected the following eight indicators to be included in this effort: • Proximity to Public Transportation • Proximity to Hospitals and Community/Intermediate Care Clinics CHAPTER 5 • Density of Services • Access to Parks and Trails • Availability of Sidewalks • Density of Grocery Stores,Produce Markets and Farmers'Markets • School Performance • Free or Reduced Lunch Eligibility In addition,the committee decided to include not just information about opportunity- related indicators,but also information about the distribution of populations that traditionally have had a higher need for services.These maps could be used to help justify the location of public services or promote access to opportunity through investing in housing in areas outside racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty. They could also be used to justify the location of affordable housing in areas of high housing cost burden. Maps showing where there was an increase in immigrant communities and potential limited English proficiency could be used to justify services that increase outreach and provide public materials in languages other than English.These indicators, which include maps based on American Community Survey(ACS)data,2010 Census data and data provided through HUD's CPD Maps Tool are as follows: • Low-Income Concentration(Locally generated using 2006-2010 ACS data) • Low-Moderate Income Concentration(Locally generated using 2006-2010 ACS data) • Minority Concentration(Locally generated using 2010 US Census Data) • Housing Cost Burden(CPD Maps) • Populations of Color(Regional Equity Atlas) • Immigrants(Regional Equity Atlas) Subcommittee members recommended that the values associated with the maps not be used as a basis for scoring access to opportunity as a funding application criterion, but instead that the project sponsor make a case using the maps as evidence justifying a public investment,and that access to opportunity be rated subjectively,based on this case.A project sponsor should be allowed in the narrative of their application to use any combination of indicators and any combinations of maps from the Consolidated Plan or information from other sources to address why a particular investment in a particular place serving a particular population in a certain way is a good public investment. Consolidated Plan Maps 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 147 OVERVIEW OF THE MAPS This section provides an overview of the maps that the committee found to be particularly useful in addressing access to opportunity. All maps are found in the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0,and all but one can be found as static,pre-made Scenario Maps that are easily accessed. The Atlas has two kinds of maps: • Maps based on Shape Files: These maps assign a value to a pre-set geographic unit, such as a census tract, neighborhood or city. The same value applies to all addresses within that geographic unit. Data which refer to a single point, such as the location of a senior center, are also mapped as shape files,with the geographic unit being a single point instead of a polygon. • Heat Maps: Heat maps display gradations in change instead of assigning the same value to all addresses within a preset area. The data are shown as raster cells(or pixels). The data in heat maps can be aggregated and displayed in "analysis units,"where the values of the pixels within a geographic area(such as a Census tract or neighborhood)are summed and averaged,thus generating a value applicable to the analysis unit as a whole. The committee recommended that applicants use shape files or heat maps that employ analysis units,as they found these easier to view and understand. Table 5-1 provides an overview of the eight indicators and the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 maps used to depict them. Table 5-1: Primary Access to Opportunity Indicators for 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Primary Indicators Map Used and Data Sources for the Map Transit Access Neighborhood Map:This map is available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0.website. The darker the neighborhood, the higher the transit access rating. Data Source:Metro RLIS(2012)and Clark County GIS(2012)Transit Access Proximity to Public in Relationship to Schools with 75% or More of Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Transportation Price Lunch: This map can be viewed as a pre-made Scenario Map. It layers the Percent Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch by school point layer on top of the Transit Access Heatmap, thus enabling you to see relationships between transit access and childhood poverty. Data Source:Oregon Department of Education & Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction(2011-2012);Metro RLIS (2012); Clark County GIS(2012) Proximity to Primary Care Facilities: Because it is not available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 website, it is a map that users must create themselves using the Equity Atlas Mapping Tool. This indicator is found under Heatmaps/Healthcare, and Proximity to Health can be displayed either as a heatmap or with the data aggregated at the neighborhood or Care Providers census tract level by using the analysis units feature. Additionally, users can add points that show the location of community, public and school-based health clinics (found under Shapes/ Healthcare). Two related maps can be created using the Equity Atlas Mapping Tool to show either health care providers that accept Medicaid by Zip Code or health care providers that accept Medicare by Zip Code. These Shape File indicators are found under Shapes/Healthcare. Proximity to Public and Human Services Composite Neighborhood Map: This map is available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 website. The darker the neighborhood, the shorter the distance to key services (and the higher the proximity Proximity to Public score), Public services include city halls,fire stations, hospitals courts, police protection and Human Services facilities, fire protection facilities,government executive offices, and postal services, Human and social services include individual and family services, child and youth services, services for seniors and persons with disabilities,temporary shelters, and other community housing services.This map aggregates the data by neighborhood. Data Source:ESRI Business Analyst(2010);Metro RLIS(2012) p. 148 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps Table 5-1: Continued Primary Indicators Map Used and Data Sources for the Map Proximity to Publicly Accessible Parks and Natural Areas Composite Neighborhood Map: This map is available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 website. The data includes parks that are open to public use, regardless of whether they are Proximity to Parks publicly owned. Parks are defined as active or passive recreation areas where facilities exist and Natural Areas that are primarily intended for recreational uses by the public. Proximity is measured based on street grid access to park entrances. This map aggregates the data by neighborhood. The darker the neighborhood,the higher its proximity score. Data Source:Metro RLIS(2012) and Clark County GIS(2012) Walkability(Sidewalk Density) Neighborhood Map:This map is available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 website.This map depicts the density of sidewalk coverage in a particular area. Neighborhoods with the most complete sidewalk coverage in the entire neighborhood appear darker than those with less complete coverage. Availability of Data Source:Metro RLIS(2012). Walkability in Relationship to Percent Minority Students Sidewalks by School: This map layers the Percent Minority Students by School point layer on top of the Walkability(Sidewalk Density) Neighborhood Map. Data Source: Metro RLIS(2012); Oregon Department of Education& Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (2011-2012). Walkability in Relationship to Schools with 75% or More of Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch: This map layers the Percent Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch by school point layer on top of the Walkability(Sidewalk Density) Neighborhood Map. Data Source:Metro RLIS(2012); Oregon Department of Education & Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (2011-2012). Proximity to Supermarkets,Grocery Stores and Fresh Food Composite Neighborhood Proximity Map:This map is available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 Supermarkets, website. This map shows proximity to food retailers that are identified as supermarkets and Grocery Stores, grocery stores and also produce stands,fruit and vegetable markets, and farmers' markets. It Produce Stands and aggregates the data by neighborhood. The darker the neighborhood, the higher the proximity. Farmers'Markets Data Source:SSRI Business Analyst(2010), U.S. Department of Agriculture (2012);Portland Farmers'Market(2012); Oregon Environmental Council(2012) ESRI Business Analyst(2010) Schools with 75%or More of Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch in Relationship to Adequate Yearly Progress: This map is available as a pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 website. This map provides a way to assess the relationship between student achievement levels and socioeconomic status by comparing school achievement data with the demographics of the student population.Adequate Yearly Progress means whether or not schools have met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)standards as required by the No Child Left Behind Act. There are many critiques to the AYP model, but School Performance AYP data are the only student performance data currently available in a consistent format across schools, which is why these data are included in the Atlas. While the data provide some useful information,any interpretation of the data should be informed by the following caveats: (1)The standardized tests that are the basis for the AYP assessment have been criticized for various reasons including cultural bias and providing an insufficient measure of student learning; (2)Test scores are as much a reflection of the socioeconomic status of the students in a school as they are of teaching quality; (3)The AYP model itself has been criticized as flawed. Data Source: Oregon Department of Education and Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, 2011-12 Percent Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch: This map is available as a Free or Reduced pre-made Scenario Map on the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0 website. It shows the percentage Lunch Eligibility of K-12 students eligible for the free or reduced price lunch program, by school,for the 2011-2012 academic year.This indicator is often used as a proxy for childhood poverty. Data Source: OR Department of Education & WA Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, 2011-2012 Consolidated Plan Maps 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 149 Table 5-2 presents maps used to depict demographic information about Washington County's population. The data come from the Low and Moderate Income Summary Data(LMISD)from the 2006-2010 American Community Survey. 2010 US Census data,CPD Maps and two maps from the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0: Table 5-2: Demographic Indicators for 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Demographic Indicators Map Used and Data Sources for the Map Concentrations of Households At or Below 50%AMI (in Washington County): This map shows the 18 Census Tracts in Washington County where the percentage of persons earning at or below 50%of the Area Median Income (AMI) is at least 10 percentage points higher than Low-Income the County average percentage of persons earning at or below 50%AMI (19.03%)across all Concentration 104 Census Tracts in Washington County. Washington County uses the Census Tract as the defined geographic area for determination of low-income concentration. Washington County defines a low-income concentration's geography as a Census Tract due to the lower margin of error. Data Source:Low and Moderate Income Summary Data (LMISD) released by HUD in June 2014 using the 2006-2010 American Community Survey(ACS). LMI Block Groups in Washington County: This map shows the 80 Census Block groups in Washington County where the percentage of persons earning at or below 80%of the Area Low-Moderate Median Income (AMI)is at least 50.44%or higher within the Census Block group. This map is Income Concentration used to help applicants in federally funded community development programs determine low and moderate income neighborhood eligibility for future public facility or infrastructure projects. Data Source:Low and Moderate Income Summary Data (LMISD) released by HUD in June 2014 using the 2006-2010 American Community Survey(ACS). Areas of Minority Concentration (in Washington County): This map comes from the Minority 2012 Fair Housing Plan and shows the 9 Census Tracts in Washington County that have a Concentration concentration of ethnic or racial minority populations.A minority concentration in Washington County is defined as a percentage of any ethnic or racial minority population within the Census Tract that is 20%greater than the percentage of that ethnic or racial minority group across the entire jurisdiction. Data: US Census Bureau's 2010 Census CPD Maps from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)allows jurisdictions to create maps for their jurisdiction using HUD's access to data from a variety of Housing Cost HUD and federal sources. Washington County was able to generate over five maps for the Burden Consolidated Plan reviewing cost burden and severe cost burden at the extremely low-income, low-income and moderate income levels.These maps are each included in Volume 2 as Supplementary Maps. The Percent Change in Populations of Color(2000-2010): This map shows the rate of change between the 2000 and 2010 Census for populations of color, as defined above.The rate of change was calculated by subtracting the 2000 populations of color number from the 2010 populations of color number, with the resulting number then being divided by the original Populations 2000 populations of color number to obtain the mapped rates. The geometries of some census of Color tracts in the greater Portland area changed from 2000 to 2010 (due to tract splits or, in a few cases, merges).The values were also split or merged prior to calculating the change over time based on a value proportion. Data Source:U.S. Census 2000 and 2010(QT-P6 Race Alone or in Combination and Hispanic or Latino); Universe = Total Population Percent Households with Low English Proficiency: This map shows the percent of the population over 5 years old with low levels of English-language proficiency. Low English proficiency is determined through a ranked question that asks whether a person can speak Immigrants English very well to none at all.The Percent Households with Low English Proficiency map shows the population over age 5 that answered that they speak English "not at all"or"less than very well"on the American Community Survey questionnaire. Data Source:American Community Survey(ACS);DP02 Selected Social Characteristics; Universe = Total Population over 5 Years Old,American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (2006-2010) p. 150 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps Volume 2 of this Consolidated Plan will include Supplementary Maps generated in CPD Maps and through the Rural Communities Explorer Tool from Oregon State University. These were not selected as depicting areas of opportunity,but they do include additional information which may be useful for public investment and policy analysis over the next five years.The main unit of analysis is the Census Tract,as it provides information with a lower margin of error than the geographically smaller-Census Block Group. LIMITATIONS OF THIS APPROACH These maps further the goal of identifying potential areas of opportunity in Washington CHAPTER 5 County. They are intended to be a tool to help inform decisions about public investments. While they represent important considerations,it is important that one consider the nuances included in each map. Thus,this section provides an overview of the major limitations that users should keep in mind as they utilize these maps. • The maps do not provide a comprehensive opportunity score or a composite score across all indicators as was done in the Comprehensive Opportunity Map in the last Consolidated Plan. •This approach assumes that the relative importance of indicators depends upon the population and purpose of the project. Each indicator is not equally important in all cases. •Applicants can choose to use the recommended maps for indicator or develop customized maps using the mapping tool associated with the Regional Equity Atlas 2.0. Applicants do not have to address all indicators included in Table 5-1,but instead can choose and justify using the ones most relevant to their project. Applicants can also use indicators,maps and other data not included in Table 5-1. •This approach recognizes that not all applicants will have the same level of training or education in how to use the maps or the mapping tool.Workshops and one-on-one assistance will be needed to help applicants navigate this new territory. •The maps do not show all data that was considered important to subcommittee members. Subcommittee members also mentioned several indicators at meetings and in their completed surveys that could be important in the County's public investments for low-and moderate-income residents.However,the indicators did not yet have reliable data sources from which the maps could be generated. • These maps show proximity to specific resources;they do not address whether individuals actually use the resources that are near them. In particular,these maps are not culturally-specific,age-specific,or disability-specific.These factors,as well as others,can make a significant difference in whether people actually access available resources. • Due to their interactive capabilities,the print quality of some of the maps generated at the end of this Chapter do not provide the level of sharp quality we intended to use in this plan. However they are included in order to demonstrate the type of maps that applicants of CDBG and HOME projects will be expected to consider when determining areas of opportunity for siting of their projects. • Lastly,while helpful in depicting a birds-eye view of conditions,maps do not replace the on-the-ground knowledge associated with knowing a site and the surrounding area well. Consolidated Plan Maps 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 151 The maps referenced in Table 5-1 and Table 5-2 represent the best and most accessible data that were available at the time that the mapping subcommittee members developed its recommendations. It is anticipated that,over the course of the five years during which implementation of the Consolidated Plan occurs,new data sources and mapping applications may become available and may provide even better resources for applicants seeking to make the case for their project. The list below is not intended to limit the use of new information,and thus changes to recommended maps and data sources shall not be considered to require a formal amendment to the Consolidated Plan. Such changes may be made by county staff as part of routine annual updates to application forms and CHAPTER 5 presentation materials. p. 152 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps Transit Access Neighborhood Map COAUTMN LIVABLE flITUNF { - s r_ - '"J DENSITY _.. .. 1 Y i• � Y M W o ,� M®ffWTY I�nAlff Dunt I + � Published using the Equity At}as 2.4,powered by the Metra Context Tool ...YlYlY!®®® '-�=�� ---'� ��=�i�5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 153 Transit Access in Relationship to Schools with 75% or More Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch •., o �� 8 wamow no. uwsLE F1trURE O ' O r � d o • 00 o • o o o o .v_ C�Cp :�o.°°° a o b o o ° s 0°• •'�' oo ° o _000 � -�� • o � o 0 o °� • •• • � Oo o m o ' o ' • 0 O _ o o • o 0 - ° ° `l O °m o� o Lo oo o ° °a► L o J N OO m Y ,,' _—•�' _ 8 � Transit Access by Neighborhood Unit - !/ O O Percent Students Eligible for Free or 1 Reduced Price Lunch (by school) [Points] t ` oersrn ,•.,,,.- �.. OWN.. O Below 75% ,, r • 75%and Above M o r•wrrn wi Jee ,J,.._f Published using the Equity Atlas 2.0,powered by me Metro COncact 7001 - 11f n 5 NIM t 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 155 Proximity to Primary Care Facilities i Health Care Providers that Accept Medicaid - [Zipcode] - �; • • ❑ 0 1-63 ` • • 64-128 \� 129-236 ■ 237-1001 • i� Locations of Community,Public,and O School-Based Health Clinics for Uninsured and Low-Income Patients[Points] O Annual hours of operation unknown + 156-416 Hours • 468-2235 Hours • 2236-2496 Hours 2600-3302 Hours Oregon Metro Regional Basemap • Published using diefqui!y Atlas 2.0.powered by the Metro Cord Tool5 F' 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 157 Proximity to Public and Human Services Composite Neighborhood Map uCOALITIONFO' i_ _i s Mw Published using the Equity Attars 2a.powered by the Metro Ccncez;Taa! �5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 159 Proximity to Publicly Accessible Parks and Natural Areas Composite Neighborhood Map UVAar W � I Tt { Yiio MM i• i JW � Mm 1 o�ndee � 4S. � yA. Published using the Equity Adas 2.0,powered by the Metre Context To� r 5 Miles M 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 161 Walkability (Sidewalk Density) Neighborhood Map w' r ©oumoww.. UVOW MIME 4 _ � ucw6nl �]4]T 1 Published using the Equity Atlas 2.0.powered by theMe<ro Lwtl of �'S Miles 4 � 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 163 Walkability in Relationship to Percent Minority Students (by school) o Ci 0 i- r' ° %, o �o r 00 a Om 0 L o �- , ° _ o ° • ' 00 o O W x, o © O C J CD O t O O -� O O O O O O O S ;o OO 1 O ti �Walkability by Neighborhood Unit O O Percent Minority Students(K-12)[Points] O 5 to 25% � rp O awn p 26 to 42% 0 43 to 64% 0 65 to 10096 ' ia Published using the Equity Atfas 2.0,Powered by the Metro Cd" -- (( 0 2. _ I d:: 5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 165 Walkability in Relationship to Schools with 75% or More Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch 0 6 ••. o o �� °§ 00 caaunoN no- ° ° O MAKEFlIME 0 0 8 °0 8 • oo ° ° 0 0 0 • m • 04 e 0 0 CD 00 4b 0° (b o° 0 6) Co) (b o 0 ti.. -1 0 ._..__ 0 «. ° �: • O J ydo ° • �, ,- O ° J.-° o i, ` - ° ° • Q o N O O • ° ° ••. V 0 r� a, r O do ft 00 ° ° • % ° • o °, ° a • ° �+ �+ o o° 0 °� _ 0 0 0 0 00 - c n:^!a+cablfiy Heatmap � ° 0 O ° • 0 Percent Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch (by school) [Points] sur O Be!o:v 754'0 t Will- 0 75%and Above C PROXIMITY(mewl M Du�eJne � Published using the Equity Alfas 2.0,Powered by the Metro Gnt:ten Tod �� �5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 167 Proximity to Supermarkets, Grocery Stores and Fresh Food Composite Neighborhood Map MALITIDN sa A i LIVABLE FUTURE - . — f j PRQI(lMfTY(mOrj YN it Dundee Pub[shed using the Equity Adds 2.0,powered by the ldevo Gorrcest Tod .—==�' __ ~� 11 5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 169 Schools with 75+% Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch in Relation to Adequate Yearly Progress • U 47 j •° tt. 0 0 WOW RM .7 - O04 00 0 0 30�t � 4 Q 7w •rj O • ° D�' 00,•v' O 99E ° • 0 o ,• a6 p °• °o �_p •r•9s , p p cP° � 00 � 0 °o 0 opE°°° ° • o° O ° ,6� Q • o0p L ® ° Eunw,xu, ® �z. c7e _ 0 e 0 o Q4 40 Schools Meeting/Not Meeting Adequate ° p,,,�, �0 Q a � • ,v Yearly Progress(AYP) [Points] y� ° O � 00� r p Ap Met -j 011 . — ° � 0 Not Met ° Percent Students Eligible for Free or r Q O Reduced Price Lunch(by school)[Points] n t o 75-95 L �7{ o NnwhMt n •p O � Wllso II1tJ. Published using the Equity Atlas 2,0,powered by the Metro Contex:Tod },, I ` -5M1125 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 171 Percent Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch (by School) i ._ I..� • • • omnnnnwea UWAU • � ` • r ;�. +♦. 0 Hertr, • 99E 1' ^•_'� - _ •��* • LLLttt"' !f " ..^-...-,_mss _ _ _ - -'',�v„\+✓� —tie ^ � �� : • �Z.-, • . • i�a��_,—� 1.,� ter _s. ' ��: _ k • M .c • v,f ll" • • f - •• 40, Percent Students Eligible for Free or • a� •' ' Reduced Price Lunch (by school) [Points] • ti� � 2 31-45unn !: t • L1 • -30% • • �r • • s • � 96 � r- • 46-7096 • 71-95% Published usmg the Equity Atlas 2.0,powered by the Meat Context Tool `-�dY _• Q_ 5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 173 Concenn-ations of Households -At or Below 50a'6-A-XH Pnrir.A&M re caj*ftmrjm cm=-mc-_Wm a cavEntram-m paccrtw Pam or mc�-tuxr,C"ty ftomm ammzr cry Uftm DOW cv Umm cam ac-my Nath nks North Plains LLL Forest Portland Grove Corneliusk..-- 5Y HAsboro rIt 19L JMiLII MU .{ Pi 'Ga L Bea' Tigard King City Durham Tualatin Ir Shermood— INSrm S I WWI tri trium G*.r.: R T?ft mints MALAKE INTEFftNI-LY at 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Consolidated Plan Maps p. 175 Concentrations of Households At or Below 504 A-Ul Ccr=Main "a Qxvc"*ZIbm Y F106M"OM.1 Or 136M 50%AM -j =p CmfLm cmff DW u-= 14wn41— Nonh nks Nor*h Plai ns Forest Portland Grme Comeliu s Hillsboro P Ga Bea Tigard L -el Ving City)Du rharn Tu*atin Sherwi>Dd- wv= Tft mW m eWAJ&,N3I-E INTERIALLY at 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Consolidated Plan Maps p. 177 LNII Block Groups in Waslnneton County AftzM tal C*^LL1 3«.cm= SEM Ob,C1,LT ft COW,:ttY Lmm ,6--,t - L�cam�, 4 - IIS � .• a® 1.,� pPop�pyNw y� �� N,Vihi� lO4EJ ST I 4� •.` � yf tem a:,ltl� Si ,8T 1.1tlV9� ST inset 3 Ta n � o Doom 7 13't — 41L nu Z PO- ~ .rLrsr M„'° ar ` '► '��g a ,fi g t: J 1? as N1SltlhP'%v enynnni,vt+rxeli N6-se. 'A•Y.CIL rtap IeO,ee,C Ce t[-^.!'fd aaow Kh h 37e>"C"7.ft Zv 1f 8mvn•sale rK M= b? represaynz vte,eeoct tsnee:7v `� m,peens tear tlaetk m rww- ra raplc MAL-M.E IWERNN.LY at TIAMM-CM14.079 AM�-_11.1796 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Consolidated Plan Maps p. 179 u'11 Block Groups in Washington County Inver 1 I` seammm LM a m m ww"ghm Cow*L►a C.0,V5 26 wasElnQei CA ioD eou afO= i OEM.b,CM Unfft Ceer Ca,L"tts ` 1 IA•.nEvkn ® IGOEit! 3. _ r!`1._ � }�W Tx Ill tR314.17 3ELN eG3 3 TIR 22 Sol �Y(b"4 _ EE1K RD R 37im GCS tR 3m t/a x iRa of ecx 111311L r� e x iy TR333.01 t�!JJ. _. ��a ! iR 32lD,M3L04 Cc 3 �a;s Rl4F1_ qy_ i�a01F ST bD —3 tx: eG 2 +s--- � aa3alr�E sr _ r rR ss,c: r eG z; ne 3xem eGl � eax1P�=f tR33LD1 R]ilm 7R Sm" wr vr] /^- R 32 1 \T sa f ra 3 TR80 4 IM1V1-rR zuN ao 4. tR iltISl6 ` wE tOG2 TR 3tA6316131R3 In 3t:at3 eG1 - 3irm37TID _. !IG xDa1 Meo l o p� 31 RIG! (f � GS ss it►.N ?' KIWI – rJR's1r.N O 9L ♦d' D'uawlc �.� rfn-m t n_-�mE!d rrvrr.misi DA3>G alr-e. 4=rmELV d er,;rfeem W W WAq plCee SLD Yr1e h_me mcrlmue t'e:G ma CalWezte UW-=R P.O weT Rtl[ffS.":.Lf YR—w.00 nG dwa finexe-jow.�..mttn c t_t Ir wi v �? ,��- mrrekers �aaltlemv mw-- TYsmapfi AVNLVaL NTEpNALLY Y r',A@C-+=LC'- %yAl1�GJnset•_t tel?pDl 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Consolidated Plan Maps p. 181 nt 31 1 ] »/t ] L—, RCi] m r rR L Lb4I Block Groups in t4ashmgton County CC II 1 tlam U 3« aco�emn u�c�au cr]r. �LL Kp O '�'a."Y�}rn:cuy LS9 films Cents M sllw°V r m L__. v+:cl+L E¢t�rrsm: m mw r o�,r cD'L,-: Lift _.. 26' norrV Nnwtrl. ® Nonh F �7 lat I N]1IIS M 71101- 1' J a 'aas — ` rrt 3.i]a M�]F]M]fl.] ] 13 tla]'� L Jp�YR OG Ij x:t It 1' Tf _. ... �. w. RR M.srt vtl >w»rAu tR ltz A7r QHI 4LLSCJ.LE"W" • Q USE W4Y eat I e.t MAIN t••-.� ]M 31 r.ad rx".A t Ra) 1D k»sal 4 1 IInvas 4 art rn 11T Isc'] 4 i I Y r ] ml? TE i 11� i I I1.�, iR4tlq la va s M-3m03 3 IR 32mm j I 1 C 1 ne sm ea s 3_NO SZ G ` IF]xaw s w � Dal 11 Q TR mr '7 �E TeP is IRrYm b Mwmtavl WPmn eN R-� i n t lta]!A d k�L mt.eelq.P]IReym I1 mm 'd irl]tllH' �. W'1e R•It�l!¢GE.S le1YS Mtl1tl11deRM f, �\ Meai J 13teJ OADc",be 0*•:TBm Wtramm-aHr_ � Y' RlC9�.1 flklk'ICY_k-x qQ v TMS map I5 AV:ALAB..E NI RNh1� .Y T.'AAtlp7�CDOI.ti�7%�II RO tlrli"t3 i t]17pR 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan Consolidated Plan Maps p. 183 C 1. R,y„�•� R� ` ,`JJ r KG ! 1 - Portland- .13 26 41, , -Hillsbor - p ` Grov_ _ Sw S D "acyl�\ get r¢011DUE L% _ 17 0 B Ve.rton f# , AVAL ft,- 31 V6, Areas of Minority Concentration CDMA 76ma m5pe x A� %oe»r %Nao-Wme e1q ,. YE 31C as 37.flL is Census Tracts 201U , _—W Pxyr � yyy m$3 ��ea. eS aBfw x uv 'ss` 378,1 313% 41 w--; Wispenit =as w=-- i Asian 324.05 7320'. 30;0% Sae- 4740? Mi Other Race is`. 40XI n g 301 34 n! x 400- Non-White ¢ City D u r h a ,x szs to '1- 5100, 27 7w. )'RE as 'CcaktrMrJMarrt...0+.nsrC rrn Con►.a rrxh drue frti n�arlr peeent.ge c:nti�sa uK Cwn[rwnrke parocrYaae iY Za. I —y C7rk m more 60[o h6w GC�J 1II?C D 6 Mno RUS Fab 9y 2014 C co[to 0�ala tl 72 ZO t7 p Gq arlcercnan G'S TLLs v mparueneeeroe mnnrunerdourpm"or r Ysnolw7errMObrie�al pynMnnp�rfurrafn+Cowpos.s VMrlrtlrs r" -W-W—.0 t b.V Dara serl.br.attna ar.Np.acabn r..er,. 321D ea Wgnrifc an ro-ucunry r m-�YayrMs;lHalaa rlur.er upon r.9u.Y ' Tu al tin 08"' ED'no — Se'.lwrion a r 2r Y fit,& rwood s C 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 185 Housing Cost Burden in Washington Co. Census Tracts - % Paying Greater than 30% of Income a M n ,,,5 a October 13,2014 1:228.983 0 2 4 8 M Override 1 HousingCostBurden 0-33.23%Paying>30% B25106 CB PCT 0 3 e 12 k, Low Mod Tract — — 332341.23%Paying>30% 3ourc=EW.HERE,oelmme,uses,nom.tenement P cam.,n CAJ. Etn ]qpm. UM EW Ghft (NMV Kaq;'L Ertl tThN1WdL To Tar <0% Paying>30% - >4123%Paying>30% Maa �Oone+3ueew.caenenowars .m�tr��,s���,c�m�mr, 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps p. 187 Percent Change in Populations of Color (2000-2010) CUUTION Fop uyABLE Furca¢ r' ...� 1 Percent Change In Populations of Color f (2000-2010)[Tracts) ■ -96%to-43% t I _ -42%to-25% -24%to-1% _ 0%to 50% ■ 51%to 100% l ■ 101%to 640% P.bhched using the Equity Atlas 2.0.powered by the Aero Cort ..1 --- 5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps P. 189 Percent Households with Low English Proficiency OULMONMAP ti - z..•hr 7-r ,� LPMLE FUi1ME s _ WN, � S+Sf ' 1 ti n.tlY 1 t� l l_ Owl- Percent wlPercent Households with Lour English Proficiency[PUMA] ❑ 3%-S% .77 696.896 ■ 996.1896 !' FuNished using the Equity Atlas 2.6,powered by the Metro Con aTool �i �5 Miles 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Consolidated Plan Maps P. 191 CHAPTER 5 This page left intentionally blank. p. 192 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Play I Consolidated Plan Maps Chapter • Strategic Plan Did you know? The Washington County Consortium proposes to use CDBG,ESG and � � � �u� � f_.M HOME funds to support the development of 392 new affordable housing � � � r �' q units,the preservation of 427 existing affordable rental units,assist ' " �� s a as ; ''� jq 31,5321ow-income persons through the construction or improvement of ' � - �_ -3. � � � �� _ public facilities and infrastructure,assist 73,248 persons with homeless := � ',;- � � _ �� �„ �;. services and other public services,and assist 402 businesses through '' City of Beaverton's economic development programs and services. s� ` ' � ._�' dFC�NO t, The Barcelona Apartments,Beaverton Chapter 6 Strategic Plan I. Introduction The heart of the Consolidated Plan consists of the Strategic Plan,which describes how federal funds and other resources will be deployed and what other actions will be taken CHAPTER 6 to address community development and affordable housing needs over the next five years. This introduction describes how the draft Strategic Plan is organized and how to interpret it. By federal statute,the over-arching goals of the plan are the provision of the following: • Decent housing • A suitable living environment • Expanded economic opportunities for low-and moderate-income households. HUD requires jurisdictions to develop five-year strategies in three areas: • Housing and homelessness • Community development • Anti-poverty Our strategies have two principal components: • Actions to help advance the strategy • Goal outcome indicators(such as number of people assisted,housing units created, public facilities created,etc.) The actions describe steps that a number of different entities(public agencies,non-profit organizations and others)will take to help advance the overall strategy during the next five years. A lead contact is designated for each action. The lead contact has agreed to report to the Office of Community Development annually on the progress made on the action so that updates can be included in the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report(CAPER). Additionally,the lead contact may choose go one step further by taking the lead on implementing that action alone or in concert with other partners. The goal outcome indicators(outlined in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summary at the end of this chapter)represent a projection of the estimated output resulting from the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant(CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant(ESG)and Home Investment Partnerships(HOME)funds, together with other funds,to advance the strategy. They are derived from considering several things:the targets set in the current Consolidated Plan,the actual outputs reported in the CAPER,and knowledge of proposed projects in the pipeline. They include the numerical benchmarks against which the County reports progress to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)and the community each year in the CAPER. They are solely an estimate and we fully expect there will be higher and lower numbers in each area depending on the applications submitted in our competitive funding processes. Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 193 The years that are included in the Goals Summary are as follows: Year 1: Program Year(PY)2015-16 Year 2: PY 2016-17 Year 3: PY 2017-18 Year 4: PY 2018-19 Year 5: PY 2019-20 The strategies were developed through extensive consultation with stakeholders and CHAPTER 6 community Partners and through public participation activities,both of which are described in Chapter 2. The principal ways in which these activities informed the development of the strategies are as follows: • The two What's Working Workshops with stakeholders(Workshops 2A and 2B) were used to help identify critical issues that the strategies needed to address and also potential partners to assist with implementation. In particular,they informed the development of the actions listed under each strategy. • The Stakeholder Survey on Community Development Needs,Focus Groups and Community Needs Survey were used to develop the Community Development Plan (Chapter 4)and also the Community Development Strategy(production goals for Public Facilities,Infrastructure,Public Services and Economic Development). In particular,they informed the development of the community development goal outcome indicators. • The Housing Market Analysis and Needs Assessment were reviewed extensively by the ConPlan Work Group,Coalition of Housing Advocates and Policy Advisory Board to obtain further feedback. The final document includes refinements and changes made as a result of these meetings. The Housing Market Analysis and Needs Assessment,along with the existing Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness,were the primary sources of data that were used to generate priorities and goal outcome indicators in the Housing Strategy. • The work of the Anti-Poverty Group was used to help identify the issues that the Anti- Poverty Strategies address. • Finally,feedback from the presentation of the Draft Strategic Plan to the ConPlan Work Group and Policy Advisory Board.The suggestions and responses were reviewed with the ConPlan Work Group and Policy Advisory Board,and the strategies were amended to reflect the input of these groups. The four sections that follow present a narrative of the Housing and Homelessness, Community Development and Anti-Poverty Strategies and the Implementation Process that will be used to achieve them in 2015-2020. In addition,this chapter also includes various elements that address Consolidated Plan regulatory requirements:obstacles to meeting underserved needs,lead based paint hazards,addressing barriers to affordable housing,and the Public Housing Agency Plan. II. Housing and Homelessness Strategies INTRODUCTION: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES AHEAD In the Affordable Housing arena,this new Consolidated Plan time period from 2015 until 2020 will provide both opportunities and challenges in addressing the overwhelming need for new construction and preservation of affordable rental housing and owner-occupied units.While an extremely tight rental market and growing population of low-income residents of Washington County impacted by a housing cost burden present ongoing challenges,there will be opportunities to leverage local, state p. 194 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan and federal resources to address the tremendous need.Washington County continues to thrive on existing and developing collaborations and partnerships.Nonprofit housing developers have seen some success in the financing of rental housing developments utilizing local HOME dollars and federal tax credits at the state level.Nevertheless, challenges ahead will include the support behind local resources to make Washington County developments more competitive at the state level,as well as non-traditional tools to address the growing number of preservation projects nearing completion of their compliance periods with the market demands determining whether they will maintain their affordability.For owner-occupied units,a variety of resources will be needed to address the County's distinction of having the highest homeownership costs in the CHAPTER 6 State of Oregon.As sales prices and home values escalate with employment growth in Washington County,the challenge for first-time homebuyers will be entry into a highly competitive homebuying market with dwindling public resources available to assist them. At the state level,it remains to be seen how Oregon Housing and Community Services will prioritize its funds for the types of developments in need for Washington County. Washington County is now aligned in competition with Clackamas County and Multnomah County regionally,so the importance of local leverage to fund tax credit projects in a competitive environment is more important than ever.Washington County enacted an ordinance in 2013 to provide property tax abatement for nonprofit housing providers managing developments serving residents at or below 60%MFI within unincorporated Washington County.Beyond property tax exemption,it will be imperative that issues of impact fees,available land,system development charges and jurisdictional requirements are addressed locally to ensure Washington County developers remain competitive at the state level. It is the hope that the Document Recording Fee at the state level will continue to grow with the possibility of a federal Housing Trust Fund and new state resources helping jurisdictions like Washington County address its affordable housing gap in concert with its non-profit affordable housing developers and other local partners. PRIORITIES FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY HOUSING RESOURCES Chapter 3,Chapter 3,Housing Market Analysis and Needs Assessment,established that there are significantly more affordable housing needs than what can be addressed by the funding available from all sources combined during 2015-2020. In developing an approach to prioritizing affordable housing needs,Washington County considered the following: • The relative urgency of the need: For example,Washington County has assigned a high priority to projects that help address the needs of homeless persons by fulfilling the Ten Year Homeless Plan. • The relative size of the need: The housing market analysis indicated that there was an unfulfilled need of 14,000 to 23,000 rental housing units affordable to households with incomes at or below 50%MFI;thus,housing for persons in this income stratum is a high priority. • The relative likelihood of the marketplace to produce this kind of housing without subsidy: Housing that the market would not likely produce was prioritized.Thus, low-and moderate-income households overall,families with children,persons with disabilities,elderly/frail elderly and farmworkers received a high priority for rental housing.For owner-occupied housing,low-and moderate-income households,elderly/ frail elderly and persons with disabilities received a high priority. • The existing capacity of Washington County housing providers: Affordable housing gets produced in Washington County primarily through the entrepreneurial efforts of the area's non-profit housing developers.In deciding on priorities,the County considered the types of housing that fall within the collective capacity of local housing providers to produce. Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 195 The County adopts the following definitions of Priority Need Level: High Priority: Washington County plans to make funds available for housing activities that address this unmet need during 2015-2020. In the annual application process, proposals that provide housing fulfilling these needs will receive the highest number of points available under the a priority need criterion. The County intends to advocate for applications to other funding sources for projects meeting this need, subject to the project's congruence with other community objectives(such as zoning,etc.). Low Priority: HUD's IDIS template does not provide a medium priority need for the CHAPTER 6 Strategic Plan.Therefore,relative to High Priority Need,the only other priority option is"low Priority Need."Washington County may make funds available for housing activities that address this unmet need during 2015-2020. In the annual application process,proposals that provide housing fulfilling these needs will receive a low number of points available under a priority need criterion. The County intends to support applications to other funding sources for projects meeting this need,subject to the project's congruence with other community objectives(such as zoning,etc.). Homelessness High Priority Needs • Extremely Low-,Low-and Moderate-Income Households • People with Disabilities • Persons Experiencing or At Risk of Homelessness Rental Housing High Priority Needs • Extremely Low-,Low-and Moderate-Income Households • Families with Children • Elderly/Frail Elderly • People with Disabilities • Farmworkers Owner-Occupied Housing High Priority Needs • Extremely Low-,Low-and Moderate-Income Households • Elderly/Frail Elderly • People with Disabilities See Table 6-2 and the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summary for priority needs, goals and indicators for housing and homelessness. HOMELESSNESS In 2007-08,Washington County Department of Housing Services led a community-wide effort to create A Road Home:Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness,July 2008-June 2018 ("Ten Year Plan"). It is a robust strategy,with partners meeting monthly as the Housing and Supportive Services Network(HSSN)to coordinate its implementation. The plan is organized around the following goals: • Prevent people from becoming homeless(eight strategies) • Move people into housing(seven strategies) • Link people to appropriate services and remove barriers(ten strategies) • Increase income support and economic opportunities(four strategies) • Expand data collection(five strategies) • Implement public education on homelessness(three strategies) p. 196 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan To avoid duplication,mitigate confusion and support a community process that had substantial momentum behind it,this Consolidated Plan recognizes the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness as the County's official homeless strategy. In 24 CFR 91.215 (d),HUD requires that Consolidated Plans contain strategies addressing four specific objectives pertaining to homeless persons and families. The Homeless Plan(and,thus,this Consolidated Plan)addresses the four objectives specified in 24 CFR 91.215(d)as follows: (1)Helping low-income families avoid becoming homeless. • The Ten Year Plan calls for the implementation of a Universal Point of CHAPTER 6 Referral for At Risk Tenancies to remove barriers to accessing resources,thus preventing homelessness and providing a rapid entry system to re-housing for homeless persons. • Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing(HPRP)and One-Month Emergency Rental Assistance programs prevent homelessness as a result of episodic incidents coupled with underemployment,unemployment or related economic factors. • Prevention of homelessness for runaway and unaccompanied youth includes Family Medication and Reunification Services. (2)Reaching out to homeless persons and assessing their individual needs. • Goal 3 of the Ten Year Plan focuses on linking people to appropriate services and removing barriers. Strategic activities include the development of a Unified Assessment System that refers families and singles to appropriate housing and service programs based on need and ability to become self-sufficient. • Improve and expand Homeless Outreach and Engagement. • Expand homeless service systems with the Veterans Administration and community-based agencies to increase access and utilization of federal VA resources. (3)Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons. • Develop a One Stop Resource Center that provides an efficient and effective system for service linkage and access to emergency shelter beds for homeless persons. • Increase availability of Rental Assistance for transitional housing programs serving homeless youth,singles,and families with children. • Create an efficient and effective system Runaway and Homeless Youth to access short-term(emergency)shelter. (4)Helping homeless persons(especially any persons that are chronically homeless) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living. • Increase availability of Rental Assistance for permanent supportive housing units to include the Shelter Plus Care Program,Bridges To Housing Program, HUD-VASH(Veteran Affairs Supportive Housing)Program,and implement project-based Section 8 Program serving chronically homeless individuals. The Consolidated Plan helps to implement the Homeless Plan by focusing on how to best deploy resources available through HOME,the Emergency Solutions Grant and Community Development Block Grant funds to implement the Ten Year Plan. Thus,the County has assigned a high priority to applications that help fulfill the strategies in the Ten Year Plan. Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 197 Washington Coun commences an annual consultation process with its Continuum of Care,through its H iusing and Supportive Services Network(HSSN),to provide for the participation of ocal homeless service providers and not less than one homeless individual or forme ly homeless individual in considering and making policies and decisions regarding any facilities,services,or other eligible activity that receives funding under the Itnergency Solutions Grant(ESG)program. Policies and other decisions resulting om this consultation process include how to allocate ESG funds each year between a eligible program activities,the amount of funds distributed between activities, evelopment of performance standards and evaluation of outcomes, CHAPTER 6 and modifications t policies and procedures as needed in relation to the administration and operation of th program. The County's Policy Advisory Board maintains overall responsibility and o tersight over the program for the approval of program policies and projects under I ie ESG program as an advisory body to the Board of County Commissioners. Proposed ESG stra gies for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan will provide an emphasis on funding the foll ing activities allowable under the ESG program: Street Outreach, Shelter Operations, omelessness Prevention,Rapid Re-housing and Administration. The next five-year riod will provide a continued emphasis on Homelessness Prevention and Rap'd Re-Housing activities due to the importance that the U.S. Department of Hou ing and Urban Development has placed on looking predominantly toward Prevention nd Rapid Re-Housing as an effective way for communities to combat homelessn s. While supporting Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re- housing activities NVill continue to be the focus,consultations with the HSSN supports continued funding for operations of shelters and street outreach activities,as funding resources dedicated to these activities can be limited and it is recognized that shelter still serves a crucial element in the road to transitioning individuals and families from homelessness and into permanent housing. Refer to Table 6-1 for more information on how ESG funding allocations align with federal and local plans to address homeless needs in Washington County. Progress on the Homeless Plan, including the actions described above,is reported on annually by the Washington County Department of Housing Services. Summary accomplishments appear in the County's CAPER. OBSTACLES TO MEETING UNDERSERVED NEEDS Developing housing for homeless individuals is one of the most challenging aspects of affordable housing development. Reasons why this is the case include: • Financing: In Washington County,housing for extremely low income individuals— persons earning 30%MFI—requires a financing structure not only with no debt payments,but also with an operating subsidy. Thus,housing for residents with incomes below 30%MFI is not only the most costly to create,but also requires identifying sources of operating subsidy(such as rent subsidies). Typically,the period of time for which these rent subsidies are guaranteed is substantially less than the loan period or affordability period of the underlying development financing,thus requiring property owners and financing sources to make a leap of faith to build the projects. Some organizations have addressed this structural challenge by including housing for homeless or extremely low income persons in mixed income housing,where the cash flow from units affordable at 50 or 60%MFI provide a bit of a cushion. However, this approach can result in challenges associated with managing projects that include persons with a variety of levels of functioning living in the same place. P. 198 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan • Coordination with Services: Many chronically homeless individuals need physical and mental health services. Receiving these services helps them stay housed;without them,some people may have difficulty conforming to the behaviors necessary to remain in housing. At the national and state levels,the eligibility requirements, application processes and duration of assistance for services(e.g.,Medicaid)and housing assistance do not mesh. This makes it extremely difficult for local providers to offer housing to homeless persons with the assurance that they will receive needed services in a timely and sufficient manner. LEAD-BASED PAINT HAZARDS CHAPTER 6 As indicated in Chapter 3,lead-based paint is not a widespread hazard in Washington County,primarily due to the relative newness of the housing stock. Nevertheless,the County and the City of Beaverton will continue to obtain HUD provided and State provided training on lead based paint and will,when feasible through partnerships,work diligently to identify resources to abate lead hazards when present in the housing stock, especially in housing where children are present. ADDRESSING BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING Chapter 3 contains a list of two kinds of barriers to affordable housing development, those which cannot be addressed at the local level and those which can. Below are the steps that the County proposes to take to address the latter set of barriers. • Multiple Reporting Requirements: Washington County is an active participant in the Streamlining Reporting initiative involving Oregon Housing Community Services and other jurisdictions in the state. The intent of this initiative is to reduce the duplicative monitoring and reporting requirements resulting from having multiple funding entities invest in individual projects. It is hoped that the outcome of this effort will significantly reduce the reporting burden on area housing providers while providing a reliable source of information. • Vulnerability of Community Development Corporations to Financial Instability: Washington County recognizes the importance of a reliable source of operating subsidy to CHDOs being able to serve vulnerable populations. Thus,the County has instituted a two-tier system of CHDOs. In addition to meeting the basic CHDO requirements set forth in HUD regulations,Tier 1 CHDOs meet an additional set of organizational standards pertaining to organizational capacity,financial management,housing development and asset management and services to program participants. In return for meeting this higher level of standards,the County commits to providing operating support for three years,pending annual recertification as a CHDO,the availability of HOME funds,and successful performance as measured against their three-year work programs. The policies governing the County's CHDO program are described in Section 1.6 of the HOME Investment Partnerships Program Policy Manual. • Difficulty of Providing Service-Enriched Housing: As an additional benefit to Tier 1 CHDOs,Washington County sets aside 13%of its CDBG Public Services funding to support services provided to residents of their housing developments in Washington County. The City of Beaverton also commits a portion of its public services funding on an ongoing basis to support this need. • Multiple Jurisdictions,Multiple Development Pathways: Table 6-4 Jurisdictional Strategies calls for a number of actions to help address the complexity that results from having multiple jurisdictions in Washington County,each with its own identity, vision and planning requirements. While it is very unlikely that there will be a uniform development pathway that all affordable housing projects will follow in the County, it is possible to clarify the unique pathways of the various jurisdictions and promote Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan P. 199 more dialogue among planners about ways to proactively support affordable housing development without weakening planning standards. This collection of strategies calls for creating model guidelines and approaches that can be customized to fit an individual jurisdiction's circumstances. • Affordable Housing as a Priority: The Washington County Coalition of Housing Advocates(CHA)continues to work on this issue. • Land Cost: The Washington County Office of Community Development and Community Housing Fund will continue to assess the feasibility of creating a land CHAPTER 6 acquisition program using flexible,local funds. PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY PLAN Washington County Department of Housing Services has been an active and supportive participant in the planning process for the Consolidated Plan. Thus,the needs of the Housing Authority of Washington County(HAWC)as well as the resources it provides are reflected in Chapter 3,Housing Market Analysis and Needs Assessment. III. Community Development Strategies The community development strategies in this section address non-housing needs for low and The community development strategies in this section address non-housing needs for extremely low-,low-,and moderate-income persons. The HUD-funded resource for addressing non-housing needs is the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) program. Washington County and the City of Beaverton operate separate CDBG entitlement programs,each of which reflects the needs in the respective communities. Chapter 4 presented the separate non-housing community development plan called for within the Consolidated Plan regulations(24 CFR Part 91). This component of the plan must state the jurisdictions'specific long and short term community development objectives. These local objectives must help further the national CDBG program goal of"developing viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities for low and moderate income persons." Table 6-2 and the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summary at the end of this chapter describe the types of activities that will further thoroughly vetted objectives developed as part of the comprehensive non-housing needs assessment process and will result in concrete actions and goal outcome indicators to be realized during the five- year timeframe. They describe how the jurisdictions will address identified needs in the following areas: • Public facilities • Public infrastructure • Public services • Economic Development Also included in Table 6-3 are"Other Consolidated Plan Strategies"that further housing and community development goals in 2015-2020. p. 200 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan IV. Anti-Poverty Strategies Washington County is known as the economic engine of the state. It is home to several prominent high-tech companies,including Intel,Tektronix and IBM,as well as the headquarters for both Nike and Columbia Sportswear.While Washington County was not immune to the impacts of the most recent recession,it fared better than many counties in Oregon.As per 2008-2012 5-year American Community Survey estimates,Washington County had the highest annual median household income of all Oregon counties at $64,375.In addition,according to Oregon Labor Market Information System data from December 2014,Washington County also boasts one of the lowest unemployment rates CHAPTER 6 across counties in Oregon at 5.6%.The county's unemployment rate follows only behind Benton and Hood River counties. Despite these economic successes,poverty has not only persisted,but has grown since 2000.The recession in the early 2000s and again in 2008 wreaked havoc on family self- sufficiency and stability.In Washington County between 2000 and 2012,the number of people in poverty grew by 76%.The population living below the poverty level in Washington County reached its highest level ever in 2011. It is now at 12.4%. Tualatin saw the sharpest increase in its poverty rate in the Portland metro area rising from 5.5%in 2000 to 13.6%in 2010(a rise of 189.1%).While Beaverton's population rose 18.8%between 2000 and 2010,its population living below the poverty level rose 101%during that same time.Tigard also saw its population living below the poverty level rise almost 75%in that same ten-year period.Hillsboro experienced a dramatic increase in population nearing 32%since 2000 while its population living below the poverty level rose almost 71%. Of the people in poverty in 2012,approximately half identified as a race or ethnicity other than White,non-Hispanic.As such,communities of color bear a disproportionate burden of poverty and its ill-effects. In Community Action's Issues of Poverty report (2013),households with children represented 53%of the County's total population but households with children in poverty represented 76%of the County's total population of households in poverty. The 2014 Point-In Time count showed that homeless family households with children experienced an increase since the year before. There was also an increase in sheltered and unsheltered chronic homeless individuals and families with children. In Washington County,there is an estimated gap of up to 23,000 housing units affordable to households at 50%MFI. The number of households experiencing housing cost burdens is significant: 30,156 rental households paying more than 30%of their income on housing and over 15,253 rental households paying well over 50%of their income on housing. These cost burdens prevent individuals and families from achieving self- sufficiency. All it takes is one catastrophic event to begin a spiral into homelessness. Affordable housing is the foundation for achieving stability and self-sufficiently which can lead to positive outcomes around health,employment,and educational achievement. Supporting affordable housing efforts is a primary strategy towards combating poverty. The causes of poverty are many and generally speaking,beyond the ability of one program or one jurisdiction to solve. Washington County's Anti-poverty Work Group has chosen to focus its work at broader,systems-level efforts,rather than outputs of performance although outputs under public services and housing will be measured. Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 201 Public and private non-profit sector institutions have begun to focus their efforts in the areas of employment,education(early childhood and K-12)and health initiatives linked to housing as a way to address poverty. The State of Oregon has proposed various initiatives in these areas as have foundations such as Meyer Memorial Trust and Enterprise and local efforts such as Washington County Thrives.Discussions at the Anti- poverty Work Group level have focused on these as well as initiatives that we should strive to link to housing when possible. Washington County's public service and rental/owner-occupied housing programs are the CHAPTER 6 primary output-oriented vehicles for reducing the number of poverty-level households in Washington County. Associated goals outlined in the Consolidated Plan include provision of supportive services for homeless persons and families(ESG)as well as providing support to projects that implement strategies from the County's Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness(CDBG). Several policies support these overarching goals.The County allocates the maximum amount allowable to support public services annually to further the anti-poverty efforts of many local area non-profits. Washington County also allocates a percentage of public service funding to support resident services at properties owned by local Tier 1 Community Housing Development Organizations. These services are critical to ensuring that persons have pathways to achieving self-sufficiency while living in affordable housing. Washington County's support for projects that implement a Ten Year Plan Strategy is carried out by additional points in the application process thereby supporting and leveraging resources to address homeless and at-risk households. County HOME and CDBG funding supports rental and owner-occupied housing. Associated goals include the construction of new affordable rental units,preserving existing affordable rental housing,and providing weatherization,rehabilitation,and accessibility improvements to affordable properties. It is a local policy that HOME funded units are targeted to households at or below 50%MFI which helps to ensure a reduction in cost burden for households in these units. In addition,additional points in the competitive process are awarded to projects that have more units targeted to households at 50%MFI and below. Finally,the Office of Community Development HOME Program coordinates with the Housing Authority of Washington County to encourage use of project based vouchers in HOME funded projects to meet the housing needs of those earning less than 30%MFI. Washington County also approved a CDBG affordable housing set-aside to support projects(through related infrastructure or other CDBG-eligible activity)to help align the HOME and CDBG programs and more effectively leverage other resources. This will go into effect in the FY 16/17 funding cycle. The County allocates 40%of its balance of funds for projects to support the set-aside and housing rehabilitation and weatherization programs which help people to remain in their already affordable homes. A series of additional strategies focusing on system change(as opposed to outputs)to be addressed during the next five years are outlined in the matrix labeled 6.5 Anti-poverty Strategies. Housing strategies are reiterated in this section to reflect the foundational importance of housing to reducing poverty. p. 202 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan V. Implementation PLAN IMPLEMENTATION The Washington County Office of Community Development,in cooperation with the City of Beaverton,is the entity responsible for coordination of the implementation of the Consolidated Plan. As described in Chapter 4,the City of Beaverton and Washington County conduct an annual application process for Community Development Block Grant funds. A parallel process is conducted simultaneously for HOME funds,following the same general CHAPTER 6 procedures for evaluating and rating projects. The results of this project selection process form the basis of the annual Action Plans,which describe in detail how funds will be allocated to help implement the Consolidated Plan. Each fall,Washington County Office of Community Development,in collaboration with the City of Beaverton,prepares the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report(CAPER),which describes the achievements of the prior year and year-to-date under the Consolidated Plan,and reports how actual achievements compare to the benchmarks set in the Consolidated Plan. As necessary,adjustments to the benchmarks in the Consolidated Plan may be made through formal amendments to the Consolidated Plan,which appear in the next Action Plan. The successful implementation of this plan depends on the coordinated but voluntary actions of many participants,including the Department of Housing Services,the Housing Authority of Washington County,area non-profit service providers,participating cities, non-profit and for-profit housing developers,advocacy groups such as the CHA,area planning departments,and Community Action. To enhance coordination,for each Action in this Plan,a Lead Contact has been designated. At a minimum,the Lead Contact has agreed to report annually on the progress made on the reported action. This information will be reported in the CAPER.The CDBG and HOME funding processes and priorities will be used to induce the production of outcomes consistent with the benchmarks established in this plan. Within Washington County,coordination will occur through the following entities: • The Policy Advisory Board(PAB),appointed by the Board of County Commissioners, includes representatives of cities within the County. The PAB reviews and approves projects for funding,recommends policies pertaining to the Community Development and Affordable Housing programs,and provides a venue for the public hearings described in the Citizen Participation Plan. Washington County Office of Community Development staffs the PAB. The PAB meets monthly. • The Coalition of Housing Advocates(CHA)provides a means to discuss and develop solutions to housing problems and to disseminate information. The CHA meets monthly and is staffed by the Department of Housing Services and one of the local Community Housing Development Organizations. • The Housing and Supportive Services Network(HSSN)provides a means to coordinate implementation of the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness and the Continuum of Care. It meets monthly and is staffed by the Department of Housing Services. • The Anti-Poverty Work Group continues to meet regularly and is staffed by Community Action to coordinate implementation of the Anti-Poverty Strategy. • Midway through the implementation of the Consolidated Plan,Washington County may reconstitute and reconvene the ConPlan Work Group to assess where we are, consider how the larger environment has changed,and make any warranted mid-course corrections in the Plan. Existing members of the ConPlan Work Group have agreed to participate in this effort. Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 203 The strengths of this system are as follows: • Tradition of successful collaboration within Washington County • Momentum behind implementation of the Consolidated Plan built by the participatory nature of the planning process • Specificity of most actions and benchmarks • Assignment of Lead Contacts • Experience of Washington County and City of Beaverton staff in program management CHAPTER 6 The primary weakness or gap of this system is as follows: • Implementation of many of the actions depends on the continued interest and capacity of the participants. Coordination of actions addressing housing and community development issues that extend beyond the borders of Washington County occurs in a number of ways,including the following: • Community development corporations belong to a statewide industry group,Oregon Opportunity Network,which(along with its predecessors)has played a significant role in the evolution of the practice of affordable housing development and asset management in the state. • Local governments are members of Metro,the three-county regional planning agency. Metro addresses planning concerns that affect the entire metro region, including some that pertain to affordable housing and community development issues. Metro has an extensive network of technical committees and advisory groups that include representatives from local jurisdictions and entities with expertise in specific areas,such as transportation. • Washington County Office of Community Development meets periodically with mutual funders including Oregon Housing and Community Services. Coordination occurs around the funding of projects in Washington County,preservation of existing affordable housing,and the roll-out of new funding resources for affordable housing development. SECTION 3 COMPLIANCE Washington County monitors covered projects for compliance with Section 3 regulations pertaining to new jobs and new contracting opportunities for construction and rehabilitation-related projects meeting the public investment thresholds. To proactively address this issue,the County has created a packet of information that staff distribute to covered sub-recipients and contractors at planning and pre-development meetings,and staff reviews covered contracts to ensure that the required language is included. The County has adopted the following numerical goals to ensure compliance for its Section 3 covered projects: • 30%of the aggregate number of new hires shall be Section 3 residents annually,i.e. 1 out of 3 new employees needed to complete a Section 3 covered project/activity shall be a Section 3 resident;and • 10%of the total dollar amount of all Section 3 covered contracts for building trades work arising in connection with housing rehabilitation,housing construction and other public construction shall be awarded to Section 3 businesses;and • 3%of the total dollar amount of all non-construction Section 3 covered contracts shall be awarded to Section 3 businesses p. 204 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan To the greatest extent feasible,OCD assists the sponsor,contractor and the subcontractors it hires to direct all newly created employment and/or subcontracting opportunities, including seasonal and temporary employment opportunities,to Section 3 residents and business concerns. The Service Areas for individual projects do not extend beyond the unit of local government(i.e. Beaverton,Hillsboro,Tigard,etc.)in which the Section 3 covered financial assistance is expended. MONITORING STANDARDS AND PROCEDURE CHAPTER 6 All HOME,CDBG,and ESG recipients will sign binding contracts that enumerate program requirements.OCD will monitor its grant recipients for compliance with specific program requirements,including applicable federal requirements,such as handicapped accessibility,fair housing,lead-based paint,and Davis-Bacon. In addition, OCD will monitor in the areas of general management,performance goals,financial management,data collection and reporting,eligibility determinations,nondiscrimination, program outreach,timely reporting,coordination with other programs,and inspection of completed units. Monitoring will consist of both desk and on-site reviews. On-site reviews will consist of periodic site visits which will include an in-depth review of agency,project and client files. Desk monitoring of voucher submittals includes a review of contractual commitments,financial documentation,determination of cost eligibility,drawdown rates, and outcome/performance measurement review. Primary Goals OCD has four primary goals associated with its approach to monitoring programs and projects: • Ensure accomplishment of service or production • Ensure accountability of public funds • Ensure compliance with federal requirements • Evaluate project performance during a specific time period. HOME Monitoring Plan: Rental and Homebuyer Housing(acquisition,rehabilitation and new construction) Workshops are offered once a year for all new and current HOME developers,sponsors and owners.Workshops are held in August just prior to the application deadline for HOME projects in October. Technical assistance on all aspects of HOME performance and compliance issues is available upon request. HOME developers,sponsors and/or owners are responsible for completing HOME- funded projects and maintaining compliance throughout the period of affordability in accordance with the terms of their HOME Project Agreement. HOME staff are available to provide one-on-one technical assistance to HOME sponsors on an as-needed basis. This is done during on-site during monitoring visits,upon request or as a result of recurring findings from ongoing monitoring visits. The HOME staff objectives for monitoring are to determine if grantees are: • Ensuring compliance of their rental housing and homebuyer projects as specified in their HOME Project Agreements(as modified or amended)throughout the period of affordability Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 205 • Maintaining rental housing properties to their applicable housing quality standards • Ensuring income verification is performed on an annual basis for all tenants of HOME- funded rental housing • Complying with other applicable laws,cross-cutting regulations and terms of the HOME Project Agreement • Properly complying with HOME regulations for homebuyer projects,including income verification and principal residence requirements. CHAPTER 6 The Project Agreement between Washington County and the sponsor/developer/owner will establish specific policies for monitoring. The schedule for on-site inspections of rental projects will be based on Washington County's risk-based monitoring procedures, which ensure at least every property is inspected once every three years. CDBG and ESG Monitoring Plan: The procedures outlined in the CDBG Monitoring Plan are designed specifically to apply to monitoring of CDBG-and ESG-funded projects in Washington County. Through on-site and desk monitoring,the reviewer can determine whether the program participant's performance meets program requirements and improve program participant performance by providing guidance and making recommendations. The specific purposes of monitoring are to: • Validate the accuracy of information presented by the program participants; • Follow-up on problems identified during the monitoring visit; • Determine compliance for those activities where there is sufficient information to make eligibility and/or national objective determinations; • Evaluate the reasonableness of judgments made for those activities that necessarily involve high levels of program participant judgment; • Ascertain the Sponsor's ability to ensure that activities carried out meet compliance requirements; • Verify the accuracy of the program participant's records;and, • Identify apparent causes of any problem(s)and offer recommendations for corrective actions. ELIGIBILITY AND NATIONAL OBJECTIVE COMPLIANCE CRITERIA The specific categories of eligible activities under which an activity may be carried out by a program participant using CDBG funds are found at 24 CFR 570.201 through 24 CFR 570.206. The criteria for determining whether an activity addresses one or more of the three national objectives are found at 24 CFR 570.208. The specific categories of eligible activities under which a homeless services activity may be carried out by a program participant using ESG funds are found at 24 CFR Part 576. DOCUMENTATION As described in the CDBG regulations at 24 CFR 570.200(a),each Sponsor is required to maintain records that fully describe the assisted activity,including related financial and eligibility information,typically to show that the project funded with CDBG funding is benefitting low and moderate income individuals. The required documentation that must be maintained by the program participant is described at 24 CFR 570.506(a)and(c)for eligibility and at 24 CFR 570.506(b)for national objectives. Required documentation and recordkeeping requirements under the ESG program are found at 24 CFR 576.500. p. 206 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan APPROACH TO MONITORING OCD staff views monitoring not as a once-a-year or a periodic exercise,but as an ongoing process involving continuous communication with the Sponsor and evaluation of financial records. Such a process involves frequent telephone/email contacts,written communications,analysis of reports and audits,and periodic meetings as needed. It is the responsibility of OCD staff to keep fully informed concerning Sponsor's compliance with program requirements and the extent to which technical assistance is needed. The overriding goal of monitoring is to determine compliance,prevent/identify deficiencies and design corrective actions to improve or reinforce Sponsor performance. CHAPTER 6 As part of this process,OCD staff must be alert for fraud,waste and mismanagement or situations with potential for such abuse. Where possible,any identified deficiencies in need of corrective action should be handled through discussion,negotiation,or technical assistance in a manner that maximizes local discretion.Monitoring also provides opportunities to identify program participant accomplishments as well as successful management,implementation,and evaluation techniques that might be replicated by other Sponsors. OCD will conduct monitoring in the fall,with a few exceptions. OCD staff will revise the Monitoring Checklist annually to determine which projects are to be monitored. The Program Manager will be provided a copy of the monitoring schedule. Past practice has been to monitor all Sponsors who have spent funds since last year,but in years where there may be too many projects to monitor,staff will use their discretion to implement a method to calculate those projects that may be more vulnerable and require monitoring more often than others. Emergency Solutions Grant projects will be monitored each year. MONITORING STANDARDS Because it is not always possible that OCD staff will be able to monitor all of a program participant's activities,projects and/or functions,or even review activities in a specific area spanning a participant's entire program year,random sampling is generally expected to form the basis for drawing conclusions about the program participant's performance. Staff may choose to take a sufficient sample of projects to be monitored,based on a "risk"calculation to determine a sampling of units to be monitored. In certain instances, however,non-random sampling will be the more efficient method to use. Such cases include activities that have only a few projects to review,any activities with unresolved problems remaining from previous monitoring visits,any new types of activities being undertaken,and/or activities considered high risk. Note that any sample review or spot- check of program participant records that raises questions concerning the accuracy of the data indicates the need for further follow-up. For a detailed summary of the monitoring selection process for CDBG and ESG projects, procedures manuals can be found on the County's website. A-133 AUDIT RESPONSIBILITIES All sponsors that expend$750,000 or more in federal funds in a year must meet the audit requirements as specified in OMB Circular A 133. Additionally,all financial transactions with CDBG monies are subject to federal audit. Each sponsor is required to permit independent auditors access to the records and financial statements at least once a year, or not less frequently than every two(2)years. Sponsors must be prepared to explain how transactions were made,why,and be able to account for any funds expended.A-133 compliance is audited on a yearly basis separate from the project monitoring outlined above. Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 207 Table 6-1: ergency Solutions Grant(ESG)Performa Objectives/Standards by Activity Eligible Activities* Street Outreach Emergency Shelter Homeless Prevention Rapid Re-Housing Performance Objective: Objective: Objective: Objective:Decent Objectives Suitable Living Suitable Living Decent Housing Housing (HUD standards) Environment Environment Outcome: Outcome: Outcome:Affordability Outcome:Affordability Availability/Accessibility Availability/Accessibility Performance Entry and exit measures Re cing the time spent Reduce the time Reduce the time spent Standards Destination at exit holess spent homeless homeless Measurement Number of Mea rement:Average Measurement. Measurement:Reduction individuals who participate shelter stay for families Reduction in new in new incidences of in Community Connect, exiting to permanent incidences of homelessness and a Washington County's housing homelessness and a reduced recidivism rate. Coordinated and Measurement:Length of reduced recidivism rate. Centralized Assessment time families spent on the System shelter wait list last year Opening Doors: Objective 10: Transform While funding to support Objective 6:Improve Objective 3:Provide Federal Strategic homeless services to crisis Emergency Shelter activities access to mainstream affordable housing to Plan to Prevent response systems that cannot be directly linked to programs and services people experiencing or and End prevent homelessness and a goal identified in the to reduce people's most at risk of Homelessness rapidly return people who fedetal strategic plan,the financial vulnerability homelessness Objectives experience homelessness to nee for shelters is still to homelessness. Objective 4:Provide (U.S.Interagency stable housing. reco zed as a crucial permanent supportive Council on co onent of the County's housing to prevent and Homelessness) homelessness crisis response end homelessness. system. Washington Goal 3: Link people to While funding to support Goal 1: Prevent people Goal 2: Move people into County's 10-Year appropriate services and Emergency Shelter activities from becoming housing Plan to End remove barriers cannot be directly linked to homeless Homelessness a goal identified in Goals Washington County's 10- Year Plan to End Homelessness,the need for shelters is still recognized as a crucial component of the County's homelessness crisis response system. Consolidated C.8.v Provide outreach CXProvide supportive C.8.e Provide one-time or short-term rental support Plan Objective services to homeless services and case for low-income persons at risk of becoming persons and families. m gement to vulnerable homeless. C.8.n Provide services po ations including C.8.w Provide case management services to through"Community ho less,mentally ill, homeless families or those at risk of becoming Connect",Washington per ns with HIV/AIDS. homeless including those fleeing from domestic County's Coordinated and violence. Centralized Assessment C.8.0 Provide supportive services to homeless System(CCAS),to provide individuals and families(and those at risk of a central point of referral homelessness)that would include,but not be limited for homeless and at-risk to,child care,housing education(e.g.Rent Well), households to prevent and mental health and addiction counseling,employment end episodes of d training,information and referral,parenting skills, homelessness. accessing housing,and homeless prevention services. *Note:Objective and outcomes reporting is not applicable for Administration and HMIS activities. p, 208 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan I I Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Table 6-2 Housing Priority Needs Priority Priority Population Associated Goals Need Name Level* 6-2.a Homelessness High Extremely Low Income Persons —Provision of supportive services for homeless persons and families Low Income Persons Provide support to projects that implement strategies from the Washington County Ten Year Persons with Disabilities Plan to End Homelessness Persons Experiencing or At-Risk of Homelessness 6-2.b Rental Housing High Extremely Low-income Households —New project-based rental assistance for extremely low-income households Low-income Households Focus on the construction of new affordable rental housing Moderate-income Households" —Preserve existing affordable rental housing,including acquisition,acquisition and rehabilitation, Families with Children rehabilitation and refinancing activities Elderly/Frail Elderly Provide weatherization,rehabilitation,and accessibility improvements to affordable rental properties Persons with Disabilities Farmworkers 6-2.c Owner-Occupied High Extremely Low-income Households —Provide support for affordable homeownership opportunities through community land trust Housing Low-income Households and homebuyer sweat equity programs Moderate-income Households Provide support for rehabilitation of housing owned and occupied by low income households Elderly/Frail Elderly including,but not limited to rehabilitation,weatherization and accessibility improvements Persons with Disabilities Non- using Prioiity Needs Priority Priority Population Associated Goals Need Name Level 6-2.d Public Facilities Low Extremely Low Income Persons Acquire,construct or rehabilitate public facilities benefiting eligible populations Low Income Persons Acquire and/or rehabilitate existing facilities to house persons with special needs Moderate Income Persons Improve existing facilities designed to provide services to seniors Persons with Developmental Disabilities Elderly/Frail Elderly Homeless Persons with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness Youth 6-2.e Public Low Extremely Low Income Persons —Construct or improve infrastructure in income-qualified areas to ensure the future health and safety of Infrastructure Low Income Persons communities Moderate Income Persons Increase neighborhood pride and viability through improvements to existing infrastructure 6-2.f Public Services Low Extremely Low Income Persons Provide a vast array of supportive services designed to assist low-income and vulnerable Low Income Persons households overcome barriers in an effort to achieve self-sufficiency Moderate Income Persons Persons with Disabilities Families with Children Abused/Ne lected Children 6-2.g Economic Low Low and Moderate Income Persons Provide microenterprise assistance Development Micro Enterprises owned by LMI Persons Provide storefront improvement program Buil din in desi ated SBA areas * High vs.Low Priority:HUD's eCon Planning Suite only provides for a Low or High Priority.The Washington County Consortium therefore stipulates that low priority does not mean an activity will not be funded.A low designation will mean that special rating points are not provided for these activities. **For Rental Housing,some activities may have more restrictive income limits(such as the HOME program). 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 209 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Table 6-3 Other Consolidated Plan Strategies Included in the Five-Year Strategic Plan Strategy Timeframe 6-3.a Preference for coordinated approaches that align multiple state and local Staff to review these priorities at the state level with regard to this strategy.Consideration of housing and services priorities,as evident in the Governor's Budget this strategy will be made if there is applicability. (including a strategy for supportive housing integrated with healthcare) 6-3.b Age-Friendly Housing and More Visitable and Accessible Housing Years 1 to 3:Staff to analyze policy implications to meet this strategy.Years 4 to 5: (includes Priority for Age-Friendly Housing that Allows Individuals to Implementation of this strategy with regards to applications Age in Place in their Housing) 6-3.c Integration into the Anti-Poverty Strategy for Activities Years 1 to 3:OCD and Anti-Poverty Work Group will study the policy implications of moving to an Anti-Poverty Strategy more aligned with the CDBG program.This would be subject to review and approval by the Policy Advisory Board.If approved,it would be implemented in Year 4. 6-3.d CDBG Resident Services Set-Aside Years 1 to 5:Continue to set aside CDBG public services funding for resident services programs operated by the Tier 1-certified Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs)in Washington County 6-3.e Fair Housing Set-Aside Years 1 to 5:Continue to set aside CDBG funds towards a variety of fair housing training and activities in Washington County 6-3.f Funding a Role for CDBG in the Development of Affordable Housing Years 2 to 5:Implement this strategy to set-aside up to$100,000 of CDBG funds for off-site through the CDBG Affordable Rental Housing Strategy public infrastructure or other CDBG-eligible costs to support rental housing sponsored by community housing development organizations pursuing HOME funds for affordable rental housing development.This strategy involves a CDBG allocation formula outlined in Chapter 4 for use in the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan commencing in Year 2. 6-3.g Mixed-Income Housing Year 1:Append the Mixed Income Recommendation Report undertaken as a result of the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan 6-3.h Assessing the County's Community Development Code for revisions to Such an assessment was initiated as part of the Aloha-Reedville Study.LUT and/or DHS to comply with the Fair Housing Act recommendations,including. report back to OCD as progress is made. • further review of how special uses could be updated • the current provision excluding group homes in Transit-Oriented Development(TOD) zones • Parking requirements are higher per unit for multifamily housing than for single family housing with no waiver based on the conditions of the population residing in the multifamily housing 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 210 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Table 6-42015-2020 Consolidated Plan Jurisdictional Strategies Plan and advocate for the inclusion of affordable housing as an integral element of the County's sustainable public infrastructure.(Because it provides a public service and requires a public investment to be built,affordable housing should be considered as much of a part of the County's public infrastructure as water and sewer lines,streets and parks.Affordable housing makes communities more socially sustainable.) Actions Lead Contact Progress Targets 6-4.a Support affordable housing by developing model(s) for Hillsboro Planning Dept./Beaverton Have model processes available for jurisdictions to review by Year 3. expediting the review of eligible projects. Models Planning Dept/Tigard Community could include designation of an"ombudsman"staff Development Department/ Identify ombudsmen in participating jurisdictions by Year 3. person in each jurisdiction,coordination of either city Washington County Long Range departments(Hillsboro model)or service districts Planning Division (Beaverton model),or accelerated review(Tigard Suggestion).Examples could also include a"one-stop" The group intends to explore this strategy for the smaller jurisdictions. permitting center for all affordable rental development Currently,the selection of"ombudsman"staff is done informally in applications in the County or plats review and each jurisdiction through assignment of planning staff. approved simultaneously at the jurisdictional and County levels. 6-4.b Develop a coordinated approach to fee waivers/fee Hillsboro Planning Dept./Beaverton Identify replacement funding sources in participating jurisdictions by reduction strategies by identifying existing policies in Planning Dept./Tigard Community Year 2. Have draft policies available for participating jurisdictions' individual jurisdictions,discussing additional options Development Department elected officials to consider by Year 3. and developing a menu of potential fee waivers/fee reduction policies targeted to affordable housing developments that meet specific affordability targets. Determine whether there are policies likely to be Currently,the City of Tigard already has an affordable housing fee supported by multiple jurisdictions,thus forming a waiver program.No replacement funding sources have been identified "trans-jurisdictional"policy package. yet outside of Tigard. 6-4.c Jurisdictions will provide an opportunity for affordable Washington County Long Range Year 1 through 5: Individual jurisdictions prepare Title 11 compliance housing in Metro Urban Growth Boundary expansion Planning Division/Hillsboro Planning documents for each UGB expansion area(e.g.,South Cooper Mountain, areas consistent with Metro UGMFP Title 11. Dept./Beaverton Planning Dept/ South Hillsboro,Area 93,River Terrace). Compliance includes specific implementation strategies Tigard Community Development and enforcement. Department The Coordinating Group felt that this could include cluster housing and multigenerational housing. Prior to adoption,jurisdictions will discuss effectiveness of proposed compliance documents with The Coordinating Group also felt that jurisdictions could choose to professionals with expertise in affordable housing. implement a density transfer(reducing density requirements as an incentive)in areas like Area 93,as well as incentives that might include a reduction to the open space requirement in exchange for provision of affordable housing. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 211 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Table 6-42015-2020 Consolidated Plan Jurisdictional Strategies (continued) Actions Lead Contact Progress Targets 6-4.d Work with the counties and the cities within the Washington County Long Range Year 1:Convene meetings with transit providers and jurisdictions to county,TriMet and Metro to expand all forms of Planning Division assess needs.Years 2 through 5:Expand transit opportunities and zone transit opportunities for low income households along for services through various planning efforts,such as UGB expansion transit corridors,town centers and elsewhere,with a area planning and CET grant planning.Choice Neighborhoods focus on paratransit and accessibility of modes of Initiative(a proposed HUD program),if approved,may be a funding transit.Allow transit services as permitted land uses in resource to support affordable housing in healthy,transit-rich "neighborhoods of opportunity"and in UGB neighborhoods. expansion areas.Adopted plans that address this action include: TriMet 5 Year Plan(TriMet),Regional The Washington County Long Range Planning Division requested that Transportation Plan(Metro),Transportation Systems this include active transportation planning,including bike and Plans and Comprehensive Plans(each jurisdiction). pedestrian modes in line with Metro goals. 6-4.e Develop and promulgate a variety of methods to Washington County Long Range Years 1-3:Gauge interest and feasibility in each jurisdiction. promote affordable and accessible housing. This will Planning Division,Hillsboro Planning include the development of incentives(e.g.smaller and Dept. /Tigard Community Years 4-5:Develop model code,visitability standards and programs. denser housing such as courtyard housing,infill Development Department Provide to lead staff in jurisdictions for consideration where feasible. housing and expanded applicability of accessory dwelling units)that enable voluntary inclusionary The Washington County Long Range Planning Division reported that it zoning."Inclusionary zoning"refers both to the adopted an ordinance to expand accessory dwelling units that include inclusion of affordable housing units and the inclusion accessible housing units.The Washington County Long Range Planning of accessible housing units. Division also included a density bonus incentive in its ordinance at North Bethany. Provide incentives that encourage the inclusion of units that meet visitablity standards in excess of those The Coordinating Group wanted a placeholder for cluster housing in required by current law. this strategy.Hillsboro wants to consider special uses such as co- housing and cluster housing to meet this strategy. The Coordinating Group also determined that fee waivers or fee reductions could also be considered for remodeling or retrofitting existing housing to be more accessible and age-friendly. 6-4.f Increase the number of units affordable to those Washington County Department of Years 1—5.The number of units increased due to the availability of tax households in the lower income bracket by providing Housing Services exemptions for units affordable to residents at 60%MFI and below will property tax exemptions for units affordable to now be measured on an annual basis. residents at 60%MFI and below. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 212 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Table 6-42019-2020 Consolidated Plan Jurisdictional Strategies (continued) Actions Lead Contact Progress Targets 6-4.g Continue to develop and implement the Washington County Long Range Year 1: Decide on a forum for coordination and collaboration transjurisdictional strategies of the Coordinating Planning Division(Washington Group(i.e.,strategies for which models would be County Office of Community Year 1 —5: Utilize the forum. developed,but for which implementation would Development new lead contact) involve the approval of individual jurisdictions,either Coordinating group decided to meet on an annual basis to coordinate potential transjurisdictional strategies. by elected officials or by management). 6-4.h Through the forum established in Action 7.h above, Coordinating Group established in Years 1-5 consider additional municipal strategies to support Action above affordable housing as a contributing part of the city, The City of Beaverton is currently exploring the possibility of such as: implementing a municipal housing inspection program to maintain the quality of existing housing.The City is examining what has been done • Reduced parking requirements based on to date in the City of Gresham. population characteristics and transit access • Identification of grants to support public The City of Beaverton is also currently discussing additional support for improvements related to affordable housing community land trusts. development • Municipal housing inspection program to maintain the quality of existing housing • Enhanced safety program to reduce crime and improve the safety of rental properties 64J Encourage the use of"Guide for Examining Local Washington County Office of Years 1-5 Land Use with a Fair Housing Lens"by land use Community Development planners in Washington County and its cities.The guide can be used by local land use planners to: • Undertake an internal audit of a jurisdiction's land use plans and implementing codes • Identify actions to comply with fair housing law • Affirmatively further fair housing through adopting best practices 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 213 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Table 6-5 ANTI-POVERTY STRATEGIES Strategy 1:Public Policy Implement innovative public policy that affirmatively seeks new was to promote the economic inde endence and well-being of low income residents. Action Lead Contact Progress Targets La Increase awareness of poverty issues among community leaders Community Action Years 1-5: Identify existing efforts and key partners. Conduct outreach to City and business leaders. Provide information about local issues of poverty and service utilization 1.b Continue to staff ongoing Anti-Poverty Work Group to guide Community Action Years 1—5: Periodic meetings of the Anti-Poverty Work Group to implementation of Anti-Poverty Strategy,monitor progress,address guide implementation of Anti-Poverty Strategy,monitor progress, barriers and respond to changing conditions as they arise. publicize results,address barriers and respond to changing conditions as they arise. Work Group should collaborate with and support current anti-poverty Year 1:Work to increase membership(Oregon Food Bank, initiatives including. VAN Workforce Development Work Group, Washington County Thrives,Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, WorkSystems,United Way Washington County(Early Learning Washington County Early Learning HUB,etc. Plan staff and others). l.c Address the"cliff effect"and other disincentives to transitioning off Pacific University Year 0-1: Leverage Pacific University partnership to undertake a services(in local,state,and federal programs)and moving toward two-part study effort:Part 1 to include review of original 2008 data greater independence and self-sufficiency. Community Action collection effort and report;identification of key federal,state and local programs/policies that contribute to the cliff effect;provides recommendations in response to findings. Part 2 to include identification,through interviews,of key populations that may disproportionally be impacted by these policies. Year 2-3: Disseminate results and convene summit to identify next steps to address these policies at the federal,state and local level. Years 2—5: Implement next steps,focusing on addressing policies that can be changed at the local level. This should be a coordinated effort among agencies. l.d Locate affordable housing and services to promote resident access to Office of Community Year 0-2:Create mapping tool(s)that address local needs under the opportunities that help people succeed in life. Development the CDBG and HOME funding cycles as well as to address new rules pertaining to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. Year 1:Implement"preliminary set of mapping tools for use in Year 2 funding. Year 1-2:work with new HUD rules to define a more final set of mapping tools for use in Years 3-5. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 214 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle 1.e Increase opportunities for communication,collaboration,and Office of Community Year 1: Identify existing efforts and key partners. Establish funders coordination between groups that fund organizations and agencies to Development forum to identify areas of potential collaboration. undertake anti-poverty efforts. Lf Consolidated Plan consultations have pointed to a need for a more Office of Community Year 1 and 2:Work with Anti-poverty Work Group to develop and targeted approach using CDBG public service funding. Staff will Development implement a strategic plan for undertaking the analysis including a analyze the benefits and implications of moving towards a targeted timeframe for completion,a plan for public outreach,and approach thereby further aligning Consolidated Plan goals. development of the appropriate application and rating tools. Brief the Policy Advisory Board on the plan to solicit feedback. Year 2 or 3:If there is merit to the strategy of a more targeted approach,undertake public process(if applicable) and seek Policy Advisory Board review and approval. Year 3 or 4 Implement. 1.g Continue to set aside the maximum available(15%)under the CDBG- Office of Community Years 1—5:Ongoing funded Public Services category. Development l.h Within policy guidelines,exercise local control to support TANF Department of Human Years 1-5: Work with Aligned Partner Program providers to ensure recipient participation in employment and training programs. Services that,to the greatest extent possible within policy guidelines,clients participating in employment and training programs are able to maintain TANF benefits. Li Identify and follow new planning efforts where coordination with Anti-poverty Work Group Year 1-5:Discuss whether representation from the Anti-Poverty Consolidated Plan strategies may make sense. Work Group makes sense to learn about new effort and whether there is a place at the table for one of our members,or at least request an opportunity to share what the Consolidated Plan is and try to encourage incorporation of same strategies where applicable. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 215 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Strategy 2:Service&Support Systems Provide comprehensive and integrated services that focus on prevention and are strongly consumer driven Action Lead Contact Progress Targets 2.a Increase provider awareness of services available within community Community Action Years 1-5: Continue to host Information and Referral Networking Breakfasts and CAOFind Listserve 2.b Improve Information and Referral infrastructure to increase Community Action and 211 info Years 1-5: Convene work group to implement outreach consumer awareness and understanding of available resources and sustainable funding plan. Approach Cities to request ongoing support for I&R Activities. 2.c Strengthen Community Safety Net Services. Safety Net Services Community Action Years 1-5: Identify existing efforts and key partners. consist of emergency,short-term rent,energy and food assistance Identify/Create new sources of funding to secure and that enable residents to remain stable in their homes. sustain"Safety-Net"Services. Years 1-5:Improve access to safety net services by increasing collaboration and coordination among providers Strategy 3:Civic Capital uni and belonging among low-income and minority residents as well as overall public investment in the social and political well-being of Increase sense of community ngiug ng ty the entire community Action Lead Contact Progress Targets 3.a Continue to engage low-income and minority residents in the Office of Community Development Years 1 and 2:Work with agencies that serve development of the Consolidated Plan and Fair Housing Plan. underrepresented communities to develop a plan for continued and improved outreach to,and recruitment of, low-income and minority residents to participate in focus groups and interviews to gain insight about the community. Years 2-5:Implement. 3.b Continue to seek opportunities to solicit feedback from the low- Community Action Years 1-5:collect and disseminate information on a yearly income community about the quality and effectiveness of services Office of Community Development basis through various outreach opportunities(including but and identify unmet and emerging needs in the community. not limited to Project Homeless Connect)to identify trends and inform planning processes where appropriate. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 216 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro Five-Year Strategic Plan for the 2015-2020 Consolidated Planning Cycle Strategy 4: Affordable Housing Plan Increase and/or preserve affordable housing units for low-income residents as a means of achieving or regaining self-sufficiency by reducing housing cost burden Action Lead Contact Progress Target 4.a Seek alignment with broad initiatives around housing,health care, Anti-Poverty Work Group Years 1-5:Anti-Poverty Work Group to continue to follow education,and employment. progress in these areas to ensure that whenever possible and logical,alignment of systems can support other efforts (example,Enterprise Community Partners,Meyer Memorial,State of Oregon Governor's Initiatives,OHCS funding rounds,etc).. 4.b Allow for the use of CDBG for off-site infrastructure costs related Office of Community Development Years 1-5:Review and amend existing application materials to housing development to support competitive projects at the State and rating tools for use in Year 1 (for FY 16/17 funding). tax credit funding round. Implement this strategy starting in Year 2 and continue through Year 5. 4.c Continue to fund housing rehabilitation efforts to ensure that people Office of Community Development Production target data will be reported in the Affordable can remain in their affordable homes. Housing Plan of the Consolidated Plan 4.d Continue to target HOME funds to units at or below 50%MFI Office of Community Development Production target data will be reported in the Affordable Housing Plan of the Consolidated Plan 4.e Continue to partner with Housing Authority on the allocation of Office of Community Years 1-5:Ongoing project based vouchers to support households at or below 30%MFI Development/ Housing Authority in HOME-assisted projects. of Washington County 4.f Continue to use Emergency Solutions Grant funding to support Office of Community Development Years 1 —5:Continue to work with the Continuum of Care individuals and families who are either homeless or at-risk of (HSSN)on allocation of the funding. becoming homeless to achieve and/or regain stability. 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan p. 217 Table 6-6 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro 2015- 2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summar Housing i 5-Year Unit of Priority Need Associated Goal /Goal Outcome Indicator Goal Measurement Homelessness Homeless Supportive Services Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 1,000 Persons Assisted Households Tenant-based rental assistance / Rapid Rehousing 50 Assisted Homeless Person Overnight Shelter 2,800 Persons Assisted Homelessness Prevention 60 Persons Assisted Homelessness Projects that Implement 10 Year Plan Strategies Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Cio of Beaverton Income Housing Benefit 1,425 Persons Assisted City of Beaverton Homelessness Prevention 1,425 Persons Assisted Public service activitigs other than Low/Moderate Washington County Income Housing BeAefit 12,345 Persons Assisted Washin ton County Homelessness Prevention 35,940 Persons Assisted Rental Housing New Construction of Affordable Rental Housing Household Rental units constru ted 352 Housing Units Rental Housing Preservation of ExisLy Affordable Rental Housing Household Rental units rehabilitated 152 Housing Units Rental Housing Assistance to Affordable Rental Properties Household Rental units rehabilitated 275 Housing Units Owner-Occupied Housing Homebuyer Programs Household Ci of Beaverton Homeowner Housing Added 10 Housing Units Household Washin ton Couno Homeowner Housing Added 10 Housing Units Owner-Occupied Housing Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation/Assistance Household City o Beaverton Homeowner Housing Rehabilitated 150 Housing Units Household Washington County Homeowner Housing Rehabilitated 2,120 Housing Units p. 218 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan Table 6-6 Washington County and the Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro 2015- 2020 Consolidated Plan Goals Summary ommunaty Development 5-Year Unit of Priority Need Associated Goal /Goal Outcome Indicator Goal I Measurement Public Facilities Public Facility Investment Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Cio of Beaverton Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Persons Assisted Washington Coun 11-ow/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 25,000 Persons Assisted Public Facilities Public Facility Investment for Special needs Populations Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than City of Beaverton Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Persons Assisted Washington County Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 25 Persons Assisted Public Facilities Public Facility Investment for Seniors Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Cio of Beaverton Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Persons Assisted Washin ton County Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 600 Persons Assisted Public Infrastructure Public Infrastructure Construction Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than 00 of Beaverton Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Persons Assisted Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Washington Coun Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 4,436 Persons Assisted Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities for Households 00 of Beaverton Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Assisted Washington Coun Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Assisted Public Infrastructure Public Infrastructure Improvements Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than City of Beaverton Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 50 Persons Assisted Washington County Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit 1,121 Persons Assisted Public Services Supportive Services Public service activities other than Low/Moderate City o Beaverton Income Housing Benefit 3,750 Persons Assisted Washington Count, Income Housing Benefit 14,453 Persons Assisted Economic Development Microenterprise Assistance Businesses 0_0 of Beaverton Businesses Assisted 400 Assisted Businesses Washington County IBusinesses Assisted 10 Assisted Strategic Plan 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 219 CHAPTER 6 This page left intentionally blank. p. 220 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Strategic Plan Glossary Did you know? You can find definitions of terms and acronyms • commonly used throughout the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan for Washington County and the • Cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro in this section. - . . Terms and Acronyms This glossary of terms and acronyms is intended to be a resource for people reviewing this Consolidated Plan and other housing and community development planning documents. Some of the following terms are defined in federal or state law,and their legal definitions have been included here. GLOSSARY Income Groups—Different HUD programs use different terms to describe income groups. The chart below reflects the terms used by the HOME and CDBG programs and in Washington County's Consolidated Plan. Income Groups CDBG HOME Washington County Definition Shorthand Reference Consolidated Plan Very Low- Extremely Low- Extremely Low- Income at or 0—30% MFI Income Income Income below 30%of area median Not Defined Not Defined Low-Income Income above 30%and 31 —50%MFI at or below 50%of area median Moderate- Not Defined Moderate-Income Income above 50%and 51 —80%MFI Income at or below 80%of area median Low-Income Very Low- Extremely Low/ Income at or 0—50%MFI Income Low-Income below 50%of area median Low and Low-Income Low/Mod- Income at or 0—80%MFI Moderate-Income Income below 80% area median Action Plan— A County document prepared annually that includes specific projects scheduled to receive funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development during the fiscal year through several programs,typically including Community Development Block Grant(CDBG),HOME Investment Partnerships Program(HOME), and Emergency Shelter Grant(ESG). ADA—Americans with Disabilities Act Adjusted Income—Annual(gross)income reduced by deductions for dependents, elderly households,medical expenses,handicap assistance expenses,and childcare. Adjusted income is used to determine the level of payment to tenants for rental assistance. A/E—Architect and/or Engineer Affordable Housing—Affordable housing is generally defined as housing where the occupant is paying no more than 30 percent of gross income for gross housing costs, including utility costs. Al—Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. Any actions,omissions or decisions taken because of race,color,religion,sex,disability,familial status or national origin that restrict housing choices or the availability of housing choices,or any actions, omissions or decisions that effect. Glossary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 221 AIDS and Related Diseases—The disease of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or any conditions arising from the etiologic agent for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Alcohol/Other Drug Addiction—A serious and persistent alcohol or other drug addiction that significantly limits a person's ability to live independently. ANSI—American National Standards Institute Annual(Gross)Income—Includes income from work,assets,and other sources as defined by 24 CFR Part 813. Annual income is used to establish homeowner and tenant GLOSSARY eligibility and for targeting purposes. Area of Low-Income Concentration—A Census Tract in which the percentage of low- income families is at least 10 points higher than the percentage of low-income families in the county as a whole. Area of Minority Concentration—A Census Tract in which one of the following statistical conditions exists:(1)The percentage of persons of a particular racial or ethnic minority is at least 20 points higher than that minority's percentage in the county as a whole; or(2)The census tract's total percentage of minority persons is at least 20 points higher than the total percentage of minorities for the county as a whole. BCC—Washington County Board of Commissioners CAPER—Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report,the annual report to the community and HUD regarding the use of federal funds for affordable housing and community development purposes and the progress made on implementing the Consolidated Plan. CDBG—The Community Development Block Grant Program that is authorized by Title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. CDBG funding is intended to enable communities to create flexible,locally designed,comprehensive community development strategies to enable them to develop viable urban communities. CC&R—Covenants,Codes and Restrictions,typically used to describe requirements pertaining to the use of land. CDC—Community Development Corporation,a non-profit organization that typically develops and manages affordable housing and provides other programs to benefit lower income community residents. CFR—Code of Federal Regulations CRA—Coalition of Housing Advocates(of Washington County); formerly known as the Washington County Housing Advocacy Group(HAG) CLT—Community Land Trust Coo—Certificate of Occupancy COC—Continuum of Care is a community strategic plan to organize and deliver housing and services to reduce the incidence of homelessness by assisting homeless individuals, youth and families with children to move to self-sufficiency and permanent housing.The Continuum of Care includes: prevention,outreach and assessment,emergency shelter, transitional housing,and permanent supportive housing or other permanent housing. Annually the Continuum of Care applies to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)McKinney Vento Homeless Assistance Program for funding to address homelessness.Washington County's Continuum of Care accesses approximately $2 million annually through this process. p. 222 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Glossary Committed Funds—funds are committed when a legally binding agreement exists between the County and the subrecipient to undertake specific activities for a specific project. Community Facilities—Structure utilized to provide programs or services to an identified limited clientele group or to an eligible low-income area. Community Housing Development Organization(CHDO)—A private,nonprofit organization that meets a series of qualifications prescribed in the HOME regulations. CHDOs may own, develop,or sponsor HOME-financed housing. GLOSSARY Consolidated Plan—A publication that describes the County's housing and non-housing needs and community development priorities and strategies for the expenditure of funds made available to the County from the Department of Housing and Urban Development over a five year planning period. Consortium—An organization of geographically contiguous units of general local government that are acting as a single unit of general local government for purposes of the HOME program(see 24 CFR part 92). For the purposes of this Plan,Washington County and the cities of Beaverton and Hillsboro form the Washington County Consortium. Cost Burden>30%—The extent to which a household's gross housing costs,including utility costs,exceed 30 percent of its gross income,based on data available from the U.S.Census Bureau. Cost Burden>50%—Severe Cost Burden,the extent to which a household's gross housing costs,including utility costs,exceed 50 percent of its gross income,based on data available from the U.S.Census Bureau. CPD—Community Planning and Development,the section of HUD that administers the HOME,CDBG and other formula grant programs used by cities,counties and states to meet affordable housing and community development needs. CPP—Citizen Participation Plan,a plan that specifies how a local jurisdiction will involve the public in the development and monitoring of the Consolidated Plan and Action Plan. CRA—Community Reinvestment Act,a federal law intended to encourage depository institutions(e.g.,banks)to help meet the credit needs of the communities where they operate. CSH—Community Supportive Housing DAVS—Washington County Department of Aging and Veterans Services DCC—Washington County Department of Community Corrections DCR—Debt Coverage Ratio Glossary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 223 DD—Developmentally Disabled, also Developmental Disability,a disability that originates in the developmental years,that is likely to continue,and significantly impacts adaptive behavior as diagnosed and measured by a qualified professional. Developmental disabilities include mental retardation,autism,cerebral palsy,epilepsy,or other neurological disabling conditions that require training or support similar to that required by individuals with mental retardation,and the disability: a. Originates before the individual reaches the age of 22 years,except that in the case of mental retardation,the condition must be manifested before age of 18; GLOSSARY b.Originates and directly affects the brain and has continued,or must be expected to continue,indefinitely; c. Constitutes a significant impairment in adaptive behavior;and d.Is not primarily attributed to a mental or emotional disorder,sensory impairment, substance abuse,personality disorder,learning disability,or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder(ADHD) DHS—Washington County Department of Housing Services Disabled Household—A household composed of one or more persons,at least one of whom is an adult(a person of at least 18 years of age)who has a disability. The term also includes the surviving member or members of any household described in the first sentence of this definition who were living in an assisted unit with the deceased member of the household at the time of his or her death. Disabled Person—A person shall be considered to have a disability if the person is determined to have a physical,mental,or emotional impairment that: (1)is expected to be of long-continued and indefinite duration,(2)substantially impeded his or her ability to live independently,and(3)is of such a nature that the ability could be improved by more suitable housing conditions. A person shall be considered to have a disability if he or she has a development disability as defined in the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act(42 U.S.C. 6001-6006). DOL—Department of Labor(federal) DVRC—Domestic Violence Resource Center EA—Environmental Assessment, an environmental analysis prepared to determine whether a federal action would significantly affect the environment and thus require a more detailed environmental impact statement. ECHO—Elder Cottage Housing Opportunity EIS—Environmental Impact Statement,a document required of federal agencies by the National Environmental Policy Act for major projects or legislative proposals significantly affecting the environment. A tool for decision making,it describes the positive and negative effects of the undertaking and cites alternative actions. Elderly Household—For HUD rental programs,a one-or two-person household in which the head of the household or spouse is at least 62 years of age. Elderly Person—A person who is at least 62 years of age. Emergency Shelter—Any facility with overnight sleeping accommodations,the primary purpose of which is to provide temporary shelter for the homeless in general or for specific populations of the homeless. p. 224 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Glossary Entitlement—Amount of CDBG,ESG,or HOME funds allocated by HUD to a city or urban county based on a formula computed according to population,levels of need,and other factors. Entitlement Jurisdiction—A governmental entity that has chosen to receive funds from the federal government for project activities within the boundaries of that entity. Cities with populations over 50,000 and counties with populations over 200,000 are allowed to participate in the CDBG program as entitlements. Entitlement jurisdictions receive funding on a non-competitive basis from HUD annually. EO—Executive Order GLOSSARY ESG—The Emergency Shelter Grant Program authorized by Title IV, Subtitle B,of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.ESG grants are allocated by HUD to local jurisdictions based upon a needs formula. ESG funds may be used for operations, services,and rehabilitation of homeless shelters and for prevention of homelessness. The HEARTH Act of 2009 amends the McKinney-Vento Act and will amend the name from the Emergency Shelter Grant to the Emergency Solutions Grant. As of this writing (9/29/10),the HEARTH Act regulations have not been released so any changes to the program are not yet known. Existing Homeowner—An owner-occupant of residential property who holds legal title to the property and who uses the property as his/her principal residence. Extremely Low-Income Family—Family whose income is between 0 and 30 percent of the median income for the area,as determined by HUD,with adjustments for smaller and larger families. Family—The Census Bureau defines a family as a householder(head of household) and one or more other persons living in the same household who are related by birth, marriage,or adoption. Family Self-Sufficiency(FSS)Program—A program enacted by Section 554 of the National Affordable Housing Act which directs Public Housing Agencies and Indian Housing Authorities to use Section 8 rental assistance,together with public and private resources,to provide supportive services aimed at enabling economic independence and self-sufficiency. Farm Labor—Services in connection with cultivating the soil,raising or harvesting any agriculture or aquaculture commodity;or in catching,netting,handling planting, drying,packing,grading,storing,or preserving in the unprocessed state,without respect to the source of employment(but not self-employed),any agriculture or aquaculture commodity; or delivering to storage,market or a carrier for transportation to market or to processing any agricultural or aquacultural commodity in its unprocessed stage. Glossary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 225 Farmworker—Any person who, for an agreed renumeration or rate of pay,performs temporary or permanent labor for another in the: a.Production of agricultural or aquacultural crops or products; b.Handling of agricultural crops or products in an unprocessed stage; c. Processing of agricultural or aquacultural crops or products; d.Planting,cultivating or harvesting of seasonal agricultural crops or e.Forestation of reforestation of lands,including but not limited to the planting, GLOSSARY transplanting,tubing,precommercial thinning and thinning of trees and seedlings,the clearing,piling and disposal of brush and slash and other related activities; or f. Any other person whom the Housing and Community Services Department defines by rule as a farmworker. Farmworker Housing—Housing that is: a. Limited to occupancy by farmworkers,including farmworkers who are retired or disabled,and their relatives;and b.No dwelling unit of which is occupied by a relative of the owner or operator of the farmworker housing,except in the case of a manufactured home. FBO—Faith Based Organization Federal Preference for Admission—The preference given to otherwise eligible applicants under HUD's rental assistance programs who,at the time they seek housing assistance,are involuntarily displaced,living in substandard housing,or paying more than 50 percent of family income for rent. FHA—Federal Housing Administration FH/EEO—Fair Housing and Equal Employment Opportunity FHLB—Federal Home Loan Bank First-Time Homebuyer—An individual or family who has not owned a home during the three-year period preceding the HUD assisted purchase of a home that must be used as the principal residence of the homebuyer,except that any individual who is a displaced homemaker(as defined in,44 CFR 92)or a single parent(as defined in 24 CFR 92)may not be excluded from consideration as a first-time homebuyer on the basis that the individual,while a homemaker or married,owned a home with his or her spouse or resided in a home owned by the spouse. FMR—Fair Market Rent,primarily used to determine payment standard amounts for the Housing Choice Voucher program,to determine initial renewal rents for some expiring project-based Section 8 contracts,to determine initial rents for housing assistance payment contracts in the Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy program,and to serve as a rent ceiling in the HOME rental assistance program. FONSI—Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact For Rent—Year-round housing units that are vacant and offered/available for rent(U.S. Census definition). For Sale—Year-round housing units that are vacant and offered/available for sale only (U.S. Census definition). FR—Federal Register p. 226 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Glossary Frail Elderly—An elderly person who is unable to perform at least three activities of daily living(i.e.,eating,dressing,bathing,grooming,and household management activities). (See 24 CFR 889.105.) GAO—Government Accounting Office(federal) GP—General Partner Group Quarters—Facilities providing living quarters that are not classified as housing units(U.S. Census definition),including prisons,nursing homes,dormitories,military barracks,and shelters. GLOSSARY Handicapped Access—Activities designed to provide accessibility to housing or public facilities for persons who are disabled. "Stand alone"projects are those that fund construction of ramps or curb cuts;CDBG projects that provide accessibility as part of a larger activity,such as construction or remodeling of a senior center,are categorized according to the primary activity. HARDE—Home Access and Repair for the Disabled and Elderly,a loan/grant program offered by the Washington County Office of Community Development. HOME Assisted Units—Units within a HOME project where HOME funds are used and rent,occupancy,and/or resale/recapture restrictions apply. HOME Funds—All appropriations under the HOME program,plus all repayments and interest or other return on the investment of the funds. HOME Program—The HOME Investment Partnerships Program,which is authorized by Title Il of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. HOME provides funding to local jurisdictions through an entitlement formula for housing for low and moderate- income households. Homeless Family with Children—A family composed of the following types of homeless persons: at least one parent or guardian and one child under the age of 18;a pregnant woman;or a person in the process of securing legal custody of a person under the age of 18. Homeless Person—A youth(17 years or younger)not accompanied by an adult(18 years or older)or an adult without children who is homeless(not imprisoned or other wise detained pursuant to an act of Congress or a state law),including the following: (1)an individual who lacks a fixed,regular,and adequate nighttime residence; and(2) an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is: (i)a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels,congregate shelters,and transitional housing for the mentally ill); (ii)an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized;or(iii)a public or private place not designed for,or ordinarily used as,a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings. Homeless Subpopulations—Include but are not limited to the following categories of homeless persons: severely mentally ill only,alcohol/drug addicted only, severely mentally ill and alcohol/drug addicted,fleeing domestic violence,youth,and persons with HIV/AIDS. HOPWA—Housing Opportunity for Persons with AIDS,a grant provided by HUD. The grant provided to the Portland region is administrated by the Portland Housing Bureau. Household—One or more persons occupying a housing unit(U.S.Census definition). See also Family. Glossary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 227 Housing Problems—Households with housing problems include those that: (1)occupy units meeting the definition of Physical Defects;(2)meet the definition of Overcrowded; and(3)meet the definition of Cost Burden>30%. Housing Quality Standards(HQS)—The habitability standards for housing as established in 24 CFR Part 882 and amended by the Lead Paint Regulations in 24 CFR Part 35. Used as minimum standards for the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. GLOSSARY Housing Unit—An occupied or vacant house,apartment,or a single room(SRO housing)that is intended as separate living quarters(U.S.Census definition). HSSN—Housing and Supportive Services Network,the Washington County group that meets monthly to coordinate efforts to implement the Continuum of Care and the Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. A* HUD—U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development Income Payments—Direct payments to individuals, such as payments for income maintenance,housing allowances,down payments,and mortgage subsidies. CDBG funds may not be used for income payments. HOME regulations permit direct payments to individuals such as tenant-based rental assistance,downpayment or closing costs assistance,and principal reduction or"gap"financing for home buyers. IDIS—Integrated Disbursement and Information System,the computer program used by local jurisdictions to drawdown funds and report activities to HUD,including the program used for the electronic submission of the Consolidated Plan. IGA—Intergovernmental Agreement Large Related—A household of five or more persons which includes at least one person related to the householder by blood,marriage,or adoption. Lead-Based Paint(LBP)Hazards—Any condition that causes exposure to lead from lead-contaminated dust,lead-contaminated soil, lead-contaminated paint that is deteriorated or present in accessible surfaces,friction surfaces,or impact surfaces that would result in adverse human health effects as established by the appropriate federal agency. LIHTC—Low Income Housing Tax Credit,one of the tools used to finance affordable housing development(federal). LIHPHRA—Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act p. 228 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Glossary i Limited Clientele Group—HUD has identified the following specific groups of persons as limited clientele groups,which are presumed to be predominantly low or moderate- income under the CDBG program. These are also referred to as special needs and target groups: • Elderly persons • Abused children • Battered spouses • Homeless persons GLOSSARY • Severely disabled adults • Illiterate adults • Migrant farmworkers,and • Persons living with AIDS. Low-Income Concentration—A Census Tract in which the percentage of low-income families is at least 10 points higher than the percentage of low-income families in the county as a whole. LP—Limited Partnership LTV—Loan to Value MBE—Minority Business Enterprise Metro—The Portland area's government. Metro is responsible for coordinating regional planning related to land use,growth management,transportation,solid waste management,parks and open spaces and other activities. Metro's Council members are regionally elected. MFI—Median Family Income MIH—Median Household Income MLS—Multiple Listing Service,a listing service for real estate for sale or lease. Minority Concentration—A Census Tract or Block Group where the percentage of any ethnic or minority group is 20%greater than the proportion of that group within the county. Moderate Rehabilitation—The term used in the HOME program to refer to any rehabilitation of property that is less than 75%of the total estimated cost of replacement after rehabilitation. MOU—Memorandum of Understanding Neighborhood Revitalization—Activities to address physical conditions that create an undesirable quality of life. Examples include improvement of substandard streets or provision of utilities or other public facilities in pre-qualified areas. NEPA—National Environmental Policy Act New Construction—For purposes of the HOME program,new construction is any project with commitment of HOME funds made within one year of the date of initial certification of occupancy. Any project that includes the creation of additional dwelling units outside the existing walls of a structure is also considered new construction. NIMBY—Not In My Backyard Glossary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 229 NOFA—Notice of Funding Availability OAHTC—Oregon Affordable Housing Tax Credits Occupied Housing Unit- A housing unit that is the usual place of residence of the occupant(s). OCD—Washington County Office of Community Development OHCS—Oregon Housing and Community Services,the state's housing agency. GLOSSARY OMB—Office of Management and Budget(federal) ORS—Oregon Revised Statutes Overcrowding—Overcrowding occurs when a housing unit contains more than one person per room,as defined by the U.S.Census Bureau. Owner—A household that owns the housing units it occupies(U.S. Census definition). PAB—Washington County Policy Advisory Board,the appointed body which advises the Office of Community Development on the use of federal HOME,CDBG,and related funds. Participating Jurisdiction(PJ)—Any state or local government that HUD has designated to administer a HOME program. HUD designation as a PJ occurs if a State or local government meets the funding thresholds,notifies HUD its intent to participate in the program,and obtains approval by HUD of a comprehensive housing affordability strategy. PHA—Public Housing Authority Physical Defects—A housing unit lacking complete kitchen,bathroom,or electricity (U.S. Census definition). PILOT—Payment in Lieu of Taxes Poverty-Level Family—Family with an income below the poverty line,which is established annually by the Office of Management and Budget. Project—A site or sites together with any building(including a manufactured housing unit)or buildings located on the site(s)that are under common ownership,management, and financing,and are to be assisted with HOME funds as a single undertaking. The project includes all the activities associated with the site and building. Project-Based(Rental)Assistance—Rental assistance provided for a project,not for a specific tenant. Tenants receiving project based rental assistance give up that assistance if they move from the project. Public Services—Essential social services for low-and moderate-income persons not funded through other state or local resources within the last 12 months. RD—Rural Development(federal) REAC—Real Estate Assessment Center Renter—A household that rents the housing unit it occupies,including both units rented for cash and units occupied without payment of cash rent(U.S. Census definition). p. 230 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Glossary Residential Treatment Facility—Under CDBG,a residential facility having round-the- clock supervision on premises that serves a qualified target population having special needs. CDBG funds may be utilized for capital improvements on residential treatment facilities or for operations or services. (Local policies prohibit use of CDBG funds for operations or maintenance in a facility acquired or constructed with CDBG assistance.) RFB—Request for Bids RFP—Request for Proposals RLI—Request for Letters of Interest GLOSSARY SAE—Single Asset Entity S+C—Shelter Plus Care SDC—System Development Charges Section 8 Rental Assistance—A federal program that provides rental assistance to low- income families who are unable to afford market rents. Assistance may be tenant-based or project-based. Service Needs—The particular services identified for special needs populations,which may include transportation,personal care,housekeeping,counseling,meals,case management,personal emergency response,and other services to prevent premature institutionalization and assist individuals to continue living independently. Severe and Persistent Mental Illness—A serious and persistent mental or emotional impairment that significantly limits a person's ability to live independently. Sheltered—Families and persons whose primary nighttime residence is a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter,including emergency shelters,transitional housing for the homeless,domestic violence shelters,residential shelters for runaway and homeless youth,and any hotel/motel/apartment voucher arrangement paid because the person is homeless. This term does not include persons living doubled up or in overcrowded or substandard conventional housing. Any facility offering permanent housing is not a shelter,nor is its residents homeless. SHP—Supportive Housing Program SRO—Single-Room Occupancy Subrecipient—A public agency or nonprofit organization selected by a participating jurisdiction to administer all or a portion of the participating jurisdiction's CDBG or HOME program. Under the HOME program,a public agency or nonprofit organization that receives HOME funds solely as a developer or owner of housing is not considered to be a subrecipient. Substandard Condition and Not Suitable for Rehab—Dwelling units that are in such poor condition as to be neither structurally nor financially feasible for rehabilitation(i.e., when the total cost of remedying all substandard conditions will be more than 50 percent of the current improvement value of the dwelling unit). Substandard Condition but Suitable for Rehab—Dwelling units that do not meet standard conditions but are both financially and structurally feasible for rehabilitation (i.e.,when the total cost of remedying all substandard conditions will be 50 percent or less of the current improvement value of the dwelling unit).This does not include units that require only cosmetic work,correction,or minor livability problems or maintenance work. Glossary 1 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan p. 231 Substantial Amendment—A major change in an approved Consolidated Plan,as defined by the Citizen Participation Plan. Substantial Rehabilitation—The term used in the HOME program to refer to any rehabilitation of property that is more than 75%of the total estimated cost of replacement after rehabilitation. Supportive Housing—Housing(both individual units and group quarters)that provides a supportive environment and includes a planned service component. GLOSSARY Supportive Services—Services provided to residents of supportive housing for the purpose of facilitating the independence of residents. Examples are case management, medical or psychological counseling and supervision,childcare,transportation,and job training. Total Development Cost(TDC)—The sum of all costs for site acquisition,relocation, demolition,construction and equipment,interest,and carrying charges. Transitional Housing—A project that is designed to provide housing and appropriate supportive services to homeless persons to facilitate movement to independent living within 24 months or a longer period approved by HUD. For purposes of the HOME program,there is no HUD-approved time period for moving to independent living. Uniform Physical Condition Standards(UPCS)-The habitability standards for housing as established in 24 CFR Part 5.703, Used as minimum standards for the HOME program administered in Washington County. Unsheltered—Families and individuals whose primary nighttime residence is a public or private place not designed for,or ordinarily used as,a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings(e.g.,streets,parks,alleys). URA—Uniform Relocation Act,a federal law which prescribes the assistance due an individual or business displaced by a federally-funded activity. Urban County—Under CDBG,a county within a metropolitan area that is authorized by state law to undertake essential community development and housing activities and that has a population,excluding metropolitan cities within its boundaries,of 200,000 or more. USC—United States Code USDA—United States Department of Agriculture Worst-Case Needs—Unassisted,low-income renter households who pay more than half of their income for rent,live in seriously substandard housing(which includes homeless people),or have been involuntarily displaced. VA—Veterans Administration(federal) p. 232 2015-2020 Washington County Consolidated Plan I Glossary Hillsboro Beaverton W nwt OREGON OREGON hePAR I I INI I V Washington County Office of Community Development 328 West Main Street, Suite 100, MS7 Hillsboro, OR 97123 Phone(503) 846-8814 Fax (503) 846-2882 Internet: http://www.co.washington.or.us/CommunityDevelopment/index.cfm To help ensure equal access to Washington County Office of Community Development programs,services and activities,we will provide translation,reasonably modify policies or procedures and provide auxiliary aids/services/alternative formats to persons with disabilities. For accommodations,translations,complaints,and additional information,contact 503-846-8814,or for voice to TTY relay dial 711 or 1-800-735-1232. Para traducci6n en espanol marque 1-800-735-3896. Political Coordinates Test SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR Co m m u n ita ria n (DATE OF MEETING) i (,OGf jZ ci Z g 1Svn �epo r i C��h Li La r- iV ev !/,r i^Sa 4, Left - -{- ---- Right i Liberal Communitarian G.\V. Bush • R. Reagan • Left ama Clinton Right ivi. rr iedman Liberal httP://www.celebritytypes-com/political-coordinates/test.php 11/16/2015 Political Coordinates Test Page 3 of 5 TAKE THE TEST AGAIN Explanation of Quadrants Left-liberalism (Social Liberalism): Individuals in this quadrant seek to uphold individual liberty while taxing the market to provide social benefits for those in need. They tend to see themselves as seeking balance between individual liberty and social justice, and to be in favor of multiculturalism, secular government, and international cooperation. While they are typically skeptical of state involvement in social affairs, they nevertheless see a legitimate role for the state in combating discrimination and ensuring equal treatment. R ight-commun itarian ism (Conservatism): Individuals in this quadrant seek to retain the traditional social and economic order and to uphold the sovereignty of the state. They tend to see themselves as the defenders of what their forebears would have wanted, favoring strict immigration laws,traditional values, and a strong military. While they typically see a role for the state in matters of national security and culture,they tend to be more skeptical of state involvement in the economy. Left-communitarianism (Social Democracy): Individuals in this quadrant seek to promote communal solutions to both social and economic problems.They tend to see themselves as supporting a mode of government that curbs the excesses of capitalism and diminishes inequality by virtue of a mixed economy and a universal welfare state.They seek to encourage collective solutions, economic redistribution and shared values throughout society by means of participatory democracy and the state. Right-liberalism (Libertarianism): Individuals in this quadrant seek to uphold liberty as the primary political good in all respects. They tend to see themselves as staunch supporters of both personal and economic freedom and are deeply skeptical of collective plans and goals, stressing instead the principle of voluntary association and the individual's capacity to make his own judgments. They typically see less of a role for the state than individuals in the other three quadrants, believing instead in the spontaneous social order of the market. Theory and Approach The Horizontal Axis: Left-Right In our test,the Left-Right Axis is used as a measure of the respondent's economic views,with the Left favoring state intervention and economic regulation while the Right favors economic freedom and laissez- faire. This means that the Left tends to support state efforts to restrain what they see as the unfair or immoral aspects of the free market while the Right tends to think that transactions between private parties should in principle be free from government interference. However, a scale covering the respondent's stance on economic issues is not sufficient to explain the considerable variation that is seen within the two groups. Hence we introduce a second axis. http://www.celebritytypes.com/political-coordinates/test.php 11/16/2015 Political Coordinates Test Page 4 of 5 The Vertical Axis: Communitarian-Liberal All liberals start from the belief that upholding individual liberties is more important than catering to the needs of society. Left Liberals tend to argue that the individual cannot make use of his or her formal liberties without some measure of education and material comfort. In their view,this necessitates redistribution from rich to poor. By contrast, Right Liberals tend to argue that taxing an individual against his will in order to provide welfare benefits to others constitutes an act of coercion and thus a breach of individual liberty. They may support charity and aid for the poor, but they prefer it to be voluntary. All communitarians start from the belief that the well-being of the community should come before the idiosyncratic desires of specific individuals. Right Communitarians tend to take what might be called a paternal view of politics, favoring a hierarchical society and taking a stern view of threats where criminals belong in prison and foreign powers are deterred by a strong defense. For their part, while the ideologues among the Left tend to hold liberal values, research has tended to point to a sizable segment of voters who combine a left-leaning view of economics with support for the more traditional values of their community and a skeptical view of immigration (Mudde 2013). Weaknesses and Limitations Our test is designed to cover the mainstream of political opinions as found within contemporary Western democracies.This means that our test has trouble accommodating extreme or niche opinions like anarcho- syndicalism,anarcho-capitalism,orthodox socialism, and fascism. While there are political coordinates tests in existence that purport to cover this whole range of opinions within the relatively simple quadrants set up by our scheme, the practical consequences(such as plotting centrist democratic leaders a stone's throw from Hitler and Kim Jong Un) seem to confuse more than inform. Another issue is that, while both of the axes are equally important in theory, the realities of parliamentary politics tend to show that in practice alliances are rarely formed across the Left-Right divide. Although Liberals and Communitarians should in principle be able to form alliances against their counterparts,this almost never happens in actual politics. Hence, while the Left-Right axis has often been said to be antiquated, it nevertheless remains the single most important scale in American and European politics. References Mudde, C.: 'Three decades of populist radical right parties in Western Europe: So what?' European Journal of Political Research Volume 52, Issue 1,January 2013 Polycom Soundstation 2 Basic Non... $134.99 Making your IT dollars go further! PCLiquidations.com Contact © CelebrityTypes International 2009-2015 CelebrityTypes.com http://www.celebritytypes.com/political-coordinates/test.php 11/16/2015 Fwd: Homeless expert shares solutions at Forum J SUpPLEMENTA PACKET From: MARLAND HENDERSON<mhcon@aol.com> FOR l/— 9 To:joanne<joanne@tigard-or.gov> Subject: Fwd: Homeless expert shares solutions at Forum (DATE OF MEETING) Date: Mon, Nov 23, 2015 11:15 am ,S d eDu he°l/ Li�iSv� ��rts JoAnne, Ale, IC-) Could you possibly send out this email to council as it will fit well into my liaison report tomorrow night. As you may recall I attended this last Monday. Thanks so much, Marland. -----Original Message----- From: Portland Business Alliance<feedback(a)-portlandalliance.com> To: Marland Henderson <MarlandAtigard-or.gov> Sent: Fri, Nov 20, 2015 2:59 pm Subject: Homeless expert shares solutions at Forum If you're having trouble viewing this email, you may see it online. Share this: ® ® 1 g0 PORTLAND 10%, BUSINESS ALLIANCE Commerce • Community - Prosperity Homeless expert Lloyd Pendleton comes to Portland to share solutions i I Pamplin Media Crnup F SL https://mail.aol-com/webmail-std/en-us/PrintMessage 11/24/2015 Rwd: Homeless expert shares solutions at Forum Page 2 of 2 f Earlier this week, we brought Lloyd Pendleton, former director of Utah's Homeless Task Force, to speak at our Forum Breakfast about how Utah reduced chronic homelessness by 91 percent in ten years. To watch a video of the discussion,click here. The solution in Utah was giving the chronically homeless homes • In addition to providing housing, the state helps integrate the homeless into the community and provides health care and other services. • Utah was able to implement the program using state funds to build new housing, by asking landlords to accept people with Section 8 vouchers and by converting old hotels into apartments. • Program leaders worked with landlords and neighborhoods to address and mitigate concerns. • Salt Lake City has reduced the money it used to spend treating chronically homeless on the street by reducing need for services like jail, police and emergency services. • After five years, 88 percent of the formerly homeless were still in their homes. Investing in emergency shelters is critical • Lloyd also spoke about the importance of investing in emergency shelter beds in addition to affordable housing. • Since Utah invested in both, no one is turned away and the shelters serve as a critical entry point to trusting relationships and permanent housing. "Get a pilot project going and make it happen now,"said Lloyd. "We're not trying to solve poverty, we're trying to get people housed." Join us at next month's Forum on Dec. 16 where we'll talk with Portland companies that have recently been acquired about how these outside"takeovers"can be a boon for the region. More information. 200 SW Market Street, Suite 150 1 Portland, OR 97201 US This email was sent to marland0tiaard-or.aov.To ensure that you continue receiving our emails, please add us to your address book or safe list. manage your preferences I opt out using TrueRemove@. Got this as a forward?Sian ua to receive our future emails. https://mail.aol.com/webmail-std/en-us/PrintMessage 11/24/2015 AIS-2388 B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Mandated Five-year Review Prepared For: Mike Lueck Submitted By: Mike Lueck, Public Works Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Should the council approve a draft intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Washington County to allow Tigard to contribute in-kind services to participate in a joint effort to review and update the city's and the county's Natural Hazard Mitigation Plans (NHMP)? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that council approve the draft IGA. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Washington County is in the process of updating the countywide Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) and is receiving assistance from the University of Oregon (UO) to complete the project. The county has allocated funds for this five-year mandated review and Tigard, among several other entities, can benefit from participating. Tigard's NHMP can also be updated along with the county's plan by contributing matching resources in the amount of$7,000 in the form of in-kind services. Tigard's emergency services coordinator has been participating in this project since it was started in April 2015 and has been maintaining a detailed accounting of his time and activities associated with the project. He forecasts that the value of his time in participation will exceed the threshold requirement. Washington County and their legal representatives have reviewed and made appropriate revisions to the draft IGA and are expected to sign it soon. In-kind matching for Washington County parties is effective as of April 1, 2015. Staff is requesting council's approval of the draft IGA. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose to not participate in the countywide project and review Tigard's NHMP independently. This approach would not be as timely, cost-effective or as closely coordinated. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Council last reviewed, approved and adopted the current NHMP in June,2009. Fiscal Impact Cost: $7000.00 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where Budgeted (department/program): PW Admin Additional Fiscal Notes: There is a requirement for a$7000 in-kind match requirement to participate in the update project. The city's emergency service coordinator (ESC) has been maintaining a detailed accounting of time and activities and forecasts that we will exceed the threshold requirement. Attachments WACO IGA-NI-IMP INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT This Agreement is enter into,by and between Washington County, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, the City of Tigard. WHEREAS ORS 190.010 authorizes the parties to enter into this Agreement for the performance of any or all functions and activities that a party to the Agreement has authority to perform. Now,therefore,the parties agree as follows: 1. The effective date is: July 1,2015, or upon final signature, whichever is later. The expiration date is March 1,2016; unless otherwis¢;amended. . 2. The parties agree to the terms and conditions sed:. rth in AttaclUnent A,which is:: : orp orated herein, and .,, describes the responsibilities of the parties,indll f d f;mcompensagD , if any. R. 3. Each party shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws; and rules and regulations on non-discrimination in employment because of race,color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex,marital status, age,medical condition or handicap::;' 4. To the extent applicable, the provisions of ORS 27913.220 through O '`179B.235 and ORS 279C.500 through 279C.870 are incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth. 5. Each party is an independent contractor with rega"W to each oilier party(s)and agrees that the performing party has no control over the work and the manner'fij which it is performed.No party is an agent or employee of any other. <..; ` r $ i. 6. No party or its employees is entitled to participate in a pension plan, insurance,bonus, or similar benefits provided by any other party. . Y. 7. This Agreement may be terminated, w or without cause and at any time, by a party by providing (30 if not otherwise marked)days written notice of intent to the other party(s). 8. Modifications to.:( _Agreejnt are valid only if made in writing and signed by all parties. V, .fY 9. Subject to the limitat"s of liability for public bodies set forth in the Oregon Tort Claims Act,ORS 30.260 to 30.300, acid the Oregon Constitution, each party agrees to hold harmless, defend, and indemnify each other, including its officers,agents,and employees, against all claims,demands, actions and suits (including all attorney fees and costs)arising from the indemnitor's performance of this Agreement where the loss or claim is attributable to the negligent acts or omissions of that party. 10. Each party shall give the other immediate written notice of any action or suit filed or any claim made against that party that may result in litigation in any way related to this Agreement. PAGE 1 OF 12 —INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Rev. 4/14/10 11. Each party agrees to maintain insurance or self-insurance in accordance with ORS 30.282,for the duration of this Agreement at levels necessary to protect against public body liability as specified in ORS 30.269 through 30.274. 12. Each party agrees to comply with all local, state and federal ordinances, statutes, laws, and regulations that are applicable to the services provided under this Agreement. 13. This Agreement is expressly subject to the debt limitation of Oregon Counties set forth in Article XI, Section 10 of the Oregon Constitution, and is contingent upon funds being.appropriated therefore. 14. This writing is intended both as the final expression of the Agreement between the parties with respect to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the Agreement. WHEREAS, all the aforementioned is hereby agreed upon by the parties and executed;b:.the duly authorized signatures below. :.:....: .;:'•:: CITY OF TIGARD r,../ air' :r• x2k:•. Signature Date Printed Name Address: WASHING.'��j < •::<..;. : Signature`>,; : 'sem.:• ':..;.A.:: Date Printed Name < :,. '' Title Address: -10" Mail Stop# Hillsboro, OR 97123 PAGE 2 OF 12 —INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Rev. 4/14/10 ATTACHMENT "A" WASHINGTON COUNTY / UNIVERSITY OF OREGON INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT SCOPE OF WORK FOR NATURAL HAZARDS MITIGATION PLAN ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES University of Oregon (UO): • Serve as the primary contact for information about the natural hazard mitigation plan update process • Serve as a technical advisor to Washington County emergency management staff • Provide plan development support to the County through training sessions, conference calls, e-mails, completion of plan update tasks as identified in the objectives section, and face-to-face meetings • Communicate with the Washington County project lead a minimum of once per month • Participate in local Natural Hazards Mitigation Action Plan (NHMAP) update meetings as needed on invitation from the Washington County Project Lead • Provide the following planning resources: • FEMA plan update resources and UO's 2009-10 Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Update Manual • Washington County NHMAP resource website on UO's website (http://csc.uorepon.edu/UO) • UO's Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Templates • Sample Action Item Report • UO's Action Item Form • Plan Appendix—Cost-Benefit Analysis of Mitigation Actions • Write the Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan • Guide the draft plan through the FEMA review process and local adoption process • Grant administration Washington County: • Convene, coordinate and staff the Washington County NHMAP Steering Committee.This committee will serve as an advisory board to Washington County Emergency Management(WCEM) (See Task 2) • Coordinate and support development Tigard's NHMAP within the county NHMAP document(See Task 1) • Coordinate and implement public outreach process(See Task 3) • Facilitate and document the local planning process as defined in the tasks of this Scope of Work (See Task 1-11) • Develop, design and co-facilitate with UO three plan update work session meetings with the Washington County steering committee (See Task 4, Mtg. 1; Task 5—6, Mtg. 2; Task 7—8, Mtg. 3) PAGE 3OF13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 • Document plan updates and amendments throughout the process(See Task 1-11) • Track and fulfill agreement deliverables and complete and submit quarterly progress reports (See Task 1 - 11) • Work with UO to submit the draft NHMAP to WCEM and FEMA for review and pre-approval (See Task 10) • Present the FEMA pre-approved plan to the Washington County Board of Commissioners for local adoption (See Task 12) • Submit a record of hours worked on the NHMAP update by Washington County, Tigard, and other staff and cost per hour or submit payment for up to$3,350.00 to meet the 25%lion-federal cost share Tigard: • Convene a local NHMAP steering committee (e.g. planning commission, city council or ad hoc committee) • Provide at least one representative and actively participate in the county steering committee meetings and Plan Update Work Sessions • Participate in the County's public outreach and engagement process • Develop locally relevant mitigation strategies • Track project in-kind or financial contributions for project cost�share requirements • Present the FEMA pre-approved plan to the City Council for adoption PROJECT BUDGET AND COMMITMENTS Project Budget: Total project cost: $28,000.00 25% matching cost: $7,000.00 Washington County has allocated funds in the FY15-16 budget in the amount of$3,350.00, and this is the amount Washington County has committed under this agreement for matching funds in the form of direct financial contribution; however, it is anticipated that in-kind matching sources by participating organizations will meet the 25%cost share requirement of approximately$7,000.00. Project organizations eligible for matching requirements include(additional organizations may be included): • City of Hillsboro • City of Tigard • Clean Water Services • Tualatin Valley Water District • Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue • Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation PAGE 4 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 Organizations eligible for contributing toward the cost share through in-kind match will keep detailed records of time spent on the project, hourly costs, and activities conducted. In-kind matching for Washington County parties is effective as of March 1,2015. OVERVIEW OF TASKS AND TIMELINES Local NHMAP Update Technical Assistance and Support The following section outlines the tasks that UO will implement to assist Washington County in updating their natural hazards mitigation action plan. Objective 1:Project Kickoff and Coordination Task 1.1: UO will participate in monthly update conference calls with Washington County Emergency Management(WCEM)to provide project updates. Task 1.1 Timeline: Monthly Task 1.2: UO will meet with the WCEM staff(Emergency Management Supervisor and DLUT Emergency Management Coordinator)to clarify the goals and objectives of the project and discuss the project timeline and potential participants. UO will work with the WCEM staff to identify steering committee participants. This meeting will be held in-person at the WCEM office. Task 1.2 Timeline: March 11, 2015 Task 1.2 Product(s): Project lead identified (DLUT Emergency Management Coordinator) Objective 2:Finalize Project Work Plan Task 2.1: Project lead [DLUT Emergency Management Coordinator] will identify project steering committee members with guidance from UO. Project lead will recruit steering committee members and solidify project commitments. Project lead will identify and recruit participation from cities wishing to join the mitigation plan update process and have county and city mitigation plans coupled in this update. Task 2.1 Timeline: Project weeks 2 and 3 (June, 2015) Task 2.1 Product(s): Mitigation Plan Steering Committee identified Task 2.2: Project lead will obtain and review sample Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA) and Scopes of Work (SOW) which will be used to solidify relationships between Washington County and UO for the plan update. UO will provide sample IGA and SOW documents to support the development for this plan update. Task 2.2 Timeline: Project week 1(June 2015) PAGE 5OF13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 Task 2.2 Product(s): IGA and SOW examples provided by UO Task 2.3: Project lead will coordinate with Washington County Support Services, Purchasing to identify the project relationship with partnering organizations,which will be formalized through an IGA. Task 2.3 Timeline: Project weeks 4 and 5 (July 2015) Task 2.3 Product(s): Draft IGA ready for review by Washington County Purchasing and UO Task 2.4: Project lead will create a Scope of Work (SOW) Task 2.4 Timeline: Project weeks 4 and 5 (July 2015) Task 2.4 Product(s): Draft SOW to be included as Attachment"A" for the IGA (this document) Task 2.5: Project lead will provide the draft IGA to Washington County, Purchasing for review. Upon approval, will provide the draft to UO for review and-approval Task 2.5 Timeline: Project weeks 4 through 6 (July;2015) Task 2.5 Product(s): Approved project IGA Task 2.6: Project lead will coordinate a project kickoff meeting where UO will provide to the Washington County NHMAP Steering Committee an overview of the NHMAP update process, review the scope of work, present a draft Community Profile (if ready),and discuss the project timeline.Topics to discuss at this meeting include: • Overview of.Natural Hazards Mitigation. Committee members will be briefed on natural hazard mitigation, its purpose, and the benefits that a mitigation plan can provide a community. • Plan update process and timeline.This meeting will discuss the planning process for updating or developing a NHMAP,and a rough timeline for completing before the plan expires February 11, 2016. • Hazard Identification: UO will provide an overview of hazards impacting the County and discuss what variations exist,if any,for the participating jurisdictions. • Discuss Risk Assessment: Risk assessment methodologies, common risk assessment barriers and ways to deal with them will be discussed. The County will have a chance to review the existing risk assessment. • Mitigatio.n.5trategy:The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires that mitigation plans include a set of plan goals. Plan goals will be discussed and developed. The steering committee will preview existing mitigation actions items and begin a discussion on their update. Task 2.6 Timeline: Project week 9(August, 2015) Task 2.6 Product(s): Project Kickoff Meeting PAGE 6 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 Objective 3:Distribute Planning Resources Task 3.1: Once the project leads and steering committee are established, UO will distribute planning resources to include UO's Pre-Disaster Mitigation Training Manual and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Manual.These documents describe the process, resources and steps needed to update a NHMAP to meet and in most cases, exceed the minimum FEMA planning requirements. Additional resources are available on the UO website. Task 3.2 Timeline: Project week 7 (July, 2015) Task 3.2 Product(s): UO's Pre-Disaster Mitigation Training Manual and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Manual Task 3.2: In addition to the plan development training manual, UO will provide a planning initiative website for this project.The website will be part of the UO's website and will include all available electronic documents and resources presented at the work sessions.The website, in cooperation with the University of Oregon's Scholars' Bank, will also serve as the repository for final adopted plans, making them web accessible to the general public. Task 3.2 Timeline: Project week 7(July, 2015) Task 3.2 Product(s): Project website: http://UO.uoregon.edu/current/Washington Objective 4: Update Community Profile Task 4.1: UO will update existing community profile information for Washington County and participating cities and make any necessary changes to relate information in the profile to natural hazards mitigation.The profiles will include information about the county environment, climate, and geography; population and demographic data for the 16 Washington County cities and unincorporated areas; information on vulnerable populations; land use and development data;the economy including critical infrastructure and key resources and the labor force; infrastructure and critical facilities data; and cultural and historic assets. Potential data sources for completing community profiles include: comprehensive plans, storm water ordinances, community wildfire protection plans, US Census, national register of historic places, and the Portland State University Population Research Center.Additionally, the community profile will describe the government structure, existing plans and policies, and community organizations and programs. Task 4.1 Timeline: Project weeks 4 through 9 (July through August, 2015) Task 4.1 Product(s): Draft Community Profile for Washington County (Section 2 of updated NHMAP) Draft Community Profiles for Hillsboro and Tigard PAGE 7 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 Task 4.2: UO will review the comprehensive plans of each of the participating communities and will identify opportunities to integrate information from the mitigation plans therein through completion of a "Goal 7 Crosswalk." UO will prepare a Comprehensive Plan Crosswalk summary as well as a Conclusions and Recommendations Memo that identifies specific areas within the Comprehensive Plan to be updated. Task 4.2 Timeline: Project weeks 11 through 14 (August and September, 2015) Task 4.2 Product(s): Comprehensive Plan Crosswalks and Conclusions and Recommendations Memo Objective S: Update Natural Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Task 5.1: UO will work with local, regional and state partners to identify and compile the best available hazard data for the following hazards:flood, landslide, winter storm, wildfire, earthquake, and volcanic eruption. UO will query partners at OEM, DOGAMI, DLCD, USGS, USFS and others to ensure the most current, relevant hazard data for the region is captured. UO will partner with Washington County GIS or a contractor for any updates to hazard maps. Task 5.1 Timeline: Project weeks 5 through 17 (July through September, 2015) Task 5.1 Product(s): Updated draft hazard description and history information in Section 3: Natural Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Updated draft hazard description and history information for Hillsboro and Tigard Task 5.2: As part of this objective, UO will work with the staff leads in the county and each participating city (Hillsboro and Tigard)to obtain lists of all known local hazard data sets. NHMAP Steering Committee members and city leads will provide current hazard data to compliment the query results. Task 5.2 Timeline: Project weeks 9 through 12 (August 2015) Task 5.2 Product(s): Updated draft hazard information in Section 3: Natural Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Updated draft hazard information for Hillsboro and Tigard Task 5.3: UO will work with Washington County and participating cities staff(Hillsboro and Tigard)to compile and analyze best available hazard and development trend data to support the development of a vulnerability analysis, using 2012 Washington County Hazard Analysis as the basis for this task. Task 5.3 Timeline: Project weeks 11 through 17 (August and September, 2015) Task 5.3 Product(s): Updated draft vulnerability analysis information in Section 3: Natural Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Updated draft vulnerability analysis information for Hillsboro and Tigard PAGE 8 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27, 2015 Task 5.4: The Washington County NHMAP Risk Assessment utilizes a hazard analysis matrix and a scoring system dependent upon four factors: history, vulnerability, maximum threat, and probability. Using updated hazard information from Tasks 5.1 and 5.2,the Steering Committee will update the Risk Assessment in a risk assessment update meeting.The steering committee will conduct the risk assessment for the county and cities and update Section 3: Natural Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment. UO will work with Washington County to ensure that updated information developed through this task is available for incorporation into other existing emergency management documents (e.g. Hazard Analysis, Emergency Operations Plan, Continuity of Operations, etc.). Task 5.4 Timeline: Project weeks 16 through 20(September and October, 2015); Risk Assessment Update Meeting project weeks 18, 19, or 20(October, 2015) Task 5.4 Product(s): Updated draft risk assessment information in Section 3: Natural Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Updated draft risk assessment information for Hillsboro and Tigard; Project lead facilitated risk assessment update meeting with NHMAP Steering Committee and UO Objective 6: Update Action Items and Plan Implementation Task 6.1: UO will obtain data from the NHMAP committee and assemble a list of 2011 NHMAP action items that have been completed since the plan was adopted.This list will be used to provide input on the 2016 NHMAP action items(Section 4: Action Items and Implementation). Task 6.1 Timeline: Project weeks 8 through 11 (July and August, 2015) Task 6.1 Product(s): Completed action items list Task 6.2: The NHMAP Steering Committee and UO will convene to evaluate 2011 NHMAP action items and assess their viability for the 2016 NHMAP. UO and the NHMAP Steering Committee will develop new mitigation action items.The 2011 NHMAP implementation schedule will be reviewed and an implementation strategy for the 2016 NHMAP will be created.This meeting will be in conjunction with the Risk Assessment Update meeting (Task 5.4). Task 6.2 Timeline: Project week 18, 19, or 20(October, 2015) Task 6.2 Product(s): - Task 6.3: Following the action items meeting, UO will update and create a draft 2016 NHMAP Section 4: Action Items and Implementation. City representatives will update action items and implementation section for city appendices. Task 6.3 Timeline: Project week 21 and 22 (October and November, 2015) PAGE 9OF13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 Task 6.3 Product(s): Updated draft action items for 2016 NHMAP (Section 4: Action Items and Implementation); Updated draft action items for the cities of Hillsboro and Tigard Task 6.4: UO will update Appendix A: Action Item Change Memo. Task 6.4 Timeline: Project week 21 and 22 (October and November, 2015) Task 6.4 Product(s): Updated draft Appendix A:Action Item Change Memo; Updated draft complementary information for the respective city appendices Objective 7:Public Outreach Task Z1: Throughout the plan update process, mitigation plan update project managers from neighboring jurisdictions will meet to discuss activities and coordinate public outreach and engagement strategies. Task 7.1 Timeline: Project weeks 2 through 22 (June through November, 2015) Task 7.1 Product(s): - Task 7.2: Project lead will attend public engagement meetings/events hosted by Portland Bureau of Emergency Management (June 22, 2015) and other neighboring jurisdictions to learn about their update process,gather and evaluate public input, and assess their engagement strategies.These events will be evaluated as potential options for use in Washington County. Task 7.2 Timeline: Project weeks 2 through 18 (June through October, 2015) Task 7.2 Product(s): - Task 7.3: Project lead with input from steering committee members and UO will create an online survey as a tool to obtain public input on the planning process and current mitigation activities. Task 7.3 Timeline: Project weeks 7 through 17 (July through September, 2015) Task 7.3 Product(s): Online survey to gather public input Task 7.4: Project lead and/or NHMAP Steering Committee members will participate in public events to engage citizens and gather input and/or advertise the public survey.The cities are encouraged to participate in the public outreach efforts. Task 7.4 Timeline: Project weeks 4 through 18 (July through October, 2015) Task 7.4 Product(s): Public input on mitigation actions for the county PAGE 10 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27, 2015 Task 7.5: UO will aggregate public input data and share with NHMAP Steering Committee members for review and input. Information gathered will be reviewed and the NHMAP Steering Committee will determine viability for action items at the action items meeting. Task 7.5 Timeline: Project weeks 18 and 19 (October, 2015) Task 7.5 Product(s): List of aggregated public input data for use as potential mitigation actions Task 7.6: UO will update Appendix C: Public Process to reflect public engagement activities. City leads will update the public process information for their respective appendices. Task 7.6 Timeline: Project weeks 18 and 19 (October, 2015) Task 7.6 Product(s): Updated draft Appendix C: Public Process. Updates draft public process sections in the city appendices. Objective 8:Draft Plan Preparation and Review Task 8.1: UO and the NHMAP project lead will update the Appendix F: Additional Maps and Appendix G: Acronyms section of the plan. Task 8.1 Timeline: Project weeks 22 and 23 (November, 2015) Task 8.1 Product(s): Updated draft Appendices F:Additional Maps and G: Acronyms Task 8.2: UO will complete final draft plan edits and assemblage and provide the draft to the NHMAP Steering Committee. Task 8.2 Timeline: Project week 24(November, 2015) Task 8.2 Product(s): Initial draft of 2016 Washington County NHMAP Task 8.3: Upon receiving the draft NHMAP,the NHMAP Steering Committee members will review the plan. Task 8.3 Timeline: Project week 24 (November, 2015) Task 8.3 Product(s): - Task 8.4: UO will submit the draft 2016 Washington County NHMAP to OEM for submittal to FEMA for review. FEMA will review the draft plan and submit comments/changes needed for plan compliance. Task 8.4 Timeline: Project weeks 25 through 28 (November and December, 2015) Task 8.4 Product(s): FEMA plan review Task 8.5: UO will incorporate FEMA input in the draft plan and provide the final draft to the NHMAP Steering Committee. NHMAP Committee members will review the final plan. PAGE 11 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 Task 8.5 Timeline: Project weeks 29 (December, 2015) Task 8.5 Product(s): Final draft 2016 Washington County NHMAP Objective 9:Final Plan Review and Adoption Task 9.1: NHMAP project lead will request a Washington County Board agenda item to submit the plan for adoption. Cities will seek plan adoption of their respective city addenda. Task 9.1 Timeline: Project weeks 30 through 32 (December, 2015 and January, 2016) Task 9.1 Product(s): Washington County approved 2016 NHMAP Task 9.2: UO will submit the approved 2016 NHMAP to OEM for final approval by FEMA Task 9.2 Timeline: Project weeks 33 through 36 (January and February, 2016) Task 9.2 Product(s): FEMA approved 2016 Washington County NHMAP PAGE 12 OF 13 Washington County 2016 Mitigation Action Plan Update Scope of Work—June 27,2015 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR L Z - G i - ao 1-5- (DATE OF MEETING) B Section VI - Incident Action Checin si t� r The intent of this checklist is to guide your initial actions, help you gather appropriate incident information, and focus your attention on the issues most critical to your policy role. You will need the information to better assess the situation and formulate your response plan. INITIAL STEPS Contact Chief Executive to determine if the Policy Group is being activated; determine meeting location if activated Gather personal gear, equipment, supplies Report in accordance with agency procedures Remember that your role is policy-making and support, not operational PERSONAL ISSUES Advise family of destination and means of contact Take disaster kit with you (see Section VII) Take list of important contacts Take personal tape recorder Take identification, checkbook, ATM card, and cash Other things to remember OPERATIONAL ISSUES Assess public impacts through brief back from operational staff Assess impacts on the agency's financial status and day-to-day activities Assess the agency's resource commitment (i.e., facilities activated, department resources committed, and overall resource status) Work with the Chief Executive and Policy Group to reassign personnel to support incident activities and cover essential departmental services LEGAL ISSUES Determine if legal staff has been assigned to advise the Incident Commander and Policy Group 20 1 Identify regulatory actions necessary to protect the public and facilitate response and recovery activities (TMC 7-74) • Emergency declarations • Chain of succession • Intergovernmental obligations for service/mutual aid • Social controls • Price controls • Suspension or alteration of administrative/financial policies • Other actions POLITICAL ISSUES Identify process logistics: • Policy Group meeting schedule • Schedule and process for situation updates • Press conference schedule and process for public information releases Assist in the development and evaluation of incident management policy Participate in Policy Group as requested Assist in coordinating other activities as requested Coordinate with business leaders Coordinate with elected officials from other jurisdictions to ensure support and consistency in response Provide necessary coordination with regional, state and national elected officials 21 1 Section VII - Personal Preparedness No matter how prepared public safety agencies are to respond to emergencies, they are never able to get to everyone as fast as they'd like to in a disaster. The public safety agency itself will be a victim of the disaster, will be hampered in their response by damage to roads, bridges, and communications systems, and will be overwhelmed by emergency calls. In view of these impacts and limitations, it's important that all citizens be prepared to fend for themselves in the first hours and perhaps days of a major emergency. The following actions are recommended for every household: Develop a Plan Prepare a plan that address or includes the following elements: • Evacuation - A plan for evacuating your home and office in case of fire or other emergency • Reunification - A plan for reunifying with your family or coworkers following a home or office evacuation • Emergency Contacts - Contact information for family members and an out-of-area contact that you and your family can check in with in case you can't reunite right away • Pets - A plan for management of your pet(s) if forced from your home Obtain Training • First Aid - Attend basic first aid and CPR classes • Fire Suppression - Learn how to use a fire extinguisher • Utility Shutoff - Know where utility shutoffs are located and how to operate them Create and Maintain an Emergency Supplies Kit • Food and drinking water for 7-14 days; a 3 week supply is even better. Stock nonperishable items that you and your family will eat and don't forget a can opener. • Temporary shelter in case your home is uninhabitable (e.g., tent, sleeping bag, or camper) • A first-aid kit and a tool kit • A way to heat or cook (e.g., Sterno, outdoor grill, or camp stove) • Clothing for several days including outerwear and sturdy footwear • Appropriate supplies for infants, seniors, and others with special needs • Supplies for pets 22 • A battery-powered radio • One or more flashlights, at least one of which can be used in a "hands- free" mode • Extra batteries for anything in your kit that needs them • Critical documents and contact information (e.g., important phone numbers [utilities, pharmacies, schools] and copies of birth certificates, passports, insurance policies, and other proof of identity and ownership) • Cash (quarters and small bills and travelers checks) • A current map of the area • Spare personal items (e.g., toiletries, glasses, and hearing-aids/batteries) • One to two weeks' worth of whatever you can't live without. If you rely on medication, home oxygen, powered life-support equipment, or other critical items, don't rely on pharmacies or other suppliers to be open or able to restock immediately after a disaster. Even when emergency shelters are opened and people can be fed and housed, certain materials may be unavailable or in short supply for an extended period of time. As noted earlier in this guide, the effectiveness of your response as an elected official will be significantly impacted by the confidence you have in the safety and security of your family. 23 Section VIII - Key Contacts All elected officials are encouraged to develop and maintain an emergency contact list with personal and business numbers for key personnel with whom they will coordinate strategic policies and information. These personnel should include: Internal • Agency executive staff and department heads with emergency response duties. Include staff from special districts or other agencies providing these functions within your jurisdiction. - Fire - Law Enforcement - Public Works (Transportation, Transit, Airport, etc.) - Utilities (Electrical, Water, Sewer, Communications, etc.) - Emergency Management - Public Health - 9-1-1 • Agency PIO (if not included in preceding items) • Agency EOC (primary and alternate) • Critical businesses (including private utilities) within your agency boundaries • Important nongovernmental organizations serving your jurisdiction (e.g. American Red Cross, Community Action Organization, etc.) • Any 24-hour emergency or information line and Website maintained by your agency (including recorded information) External • Other local elected officials as well as those at the regional, state, and federal levels • Other important emergency centers (e.g., county EOC for city and district officials and sate ECC for county officials) • Any 24-hour emergency or information line and Website maintained by other jurisdictions that are likely to contain relevant information (including recorded information) 24 s Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR ---� l -2 YL 20 IS_ Q1 In which area do you live? (DATE OF MEETING) Answered:154 Skipped:1 Banks Beaverton Cornelius Durham Forest Grove , Gaston Hillsboro King City North Plains I Sherwood I Tigard q , Tualatin Unincorporated Washington... Wilsonville Other ■ 0% 10% 20°% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80°% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Banks 0.65% 1 Beaverton 13.64% 21 Cornelius 2.60% 4 1 / 16 C Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Durham 0.00% 0 Forest Grove 3.90% 6 Gaston 0.65% 1 Hillsboro 22.08% 34 King City 0.00% 0 North Plains 0.65% 1 Sherwood 0.65% 1 Tigard 18.83% 29 Tualatin 1.30% 2 Unincorporated Washington County 25.32% 39 Wilsonville 0.00% 0 Other 9.74% 15 Total 154 # Please specify if not listed above Date 1 Tillamook 10/16/2015 10:41 AM 2 Garden Home 10/14/2015 9:58 AM 3 Aloha 10/8/2015 11:20 AM 4 Off Barrows Road in Bull Mountain Meadows 9/28/2015 1:45 PM 5 Oregon City 9/28/2015 9:29 AM 6 NE Lincoln Street 9/28/2015 7:11 AM 7 Oregon City 9/27/2015 7:08 PM 8 Bethany 9/27/2015 4:49 PM 9 Aloha-Reedville 9/27/2015 12:04 PM 10 Aloha 9/27/2015 8:40 AM 11 Portland but Washington County 9/27/2015 6:08 AM 12 Pumpkin Ridge 9/2612015 6:19 PM 13 Cedar Mills 9/26/2015 12:40 PM 14 Southwest Portland/Garden Home area 9/26/2015 12:23 PM 15 Somerset Meadows 9/26/2015 8:48 AM 16 Rock Creek 9/25/2015 6:43 PM 17 Aloha 9/24/2015 9:20 AM 18 Aloha South of TV HWY 9/16/2015 3:00 PM 19 Aloha 9/15/2015 9:13 AM 20 South of Cornelius&Hillsboro off 219 on Johnson School Rd 9/14/2015 3:17 AM 21 Unincorporated 9/12/2015 9:09 PM 22 NW Hillsboro Area 9/1112015 5:09 PM 23 Portland 9/11/2015 1:33 PM 24 Aloha 9/11/2015 12:55 PM 2 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey 25 aloha 9/10/2015 6:08 PM 26 Aloha 9/10/2015 4:01 PM 27 Portland 9/9/201510:34 AM 28 City of Portland 9/8/2015 3:44 PM 29 Portland 8/17/2015 2:16 PM 30 Gales Creek valley 8/13/2015 3:17 PM 3 / 16 ) Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Q2 What is your connection to Washington County? Choose all that apply.. Answered: 155 Skipped:0 live in Washington... 1 work in Washington... , /attend school/... 1 participate In a communi... I don't have a connection t... Please specify If not liste... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses I live in Washington County. 92.26% 143 1 work in Washington County. 51.61% 80 1 attend school/classes in Washington County. 7.10% 11 1 participate in a community/non-profit organization in Washington County. 32.90% 51 1 don't have a connection to Washington County. 1.94% 3 Please specify if not listed above(optional). 5.16% 8 Total Respondents: 155 # Please specify if not listed above(optional). Date 1 1 go to church in Washington County. 10/5/2015 7:15 PM 2 Wash.Co.respond for police services 9130/2015 8:03 AM 3 1 manage Claremont Civic Association in the Bethany area 9/28/2015 9:29 AM 4 Retired 9/27/2015 7:35 PM 5 WE live in Thailand but have our retirement home in Portland 9/27/2015 6:08 AM 6 Beaverton Library Volunteer 9/26/2015 8:14 AM 7 GRANDSON IN LAW IS DEPUTY 9125/2015 6:39 PM 8 I'm on the border of Unincorp.Wash.Co and Wash.Co 9121/2015 10:44 PM 4/ 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Q3 At any time in your life (not just in Washington County), which natural hazards have affected you personally? Choose all that apply. Answered:138 Skipped: 17 Flood Earthquake Severe weather (e.g.,winte... Wildfire(not a house fire) Landslide , Volcanic eruption 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Flood 39.13% 54 Earthquake 52.17% 72 Severe weather(e.g.,winter storm,wind storm,severe thunderstorm) 88.41% 122 Wildfire(not a house fire) 15.94% 22 Landslide 5.07% 7 Volcanic eruption 30.43% 42 Total Respondents: 138 tf Other(please specify) Date 1 Typhon Okinawa and hurricane east coast 10/27/2015 8:19 PM 2 Hurricane 10/14/2015 9:59 AM 3 Hurricanes and tornados. 9/2812015 9:58 AM 4 None 9/27/2015 11:46 AM 5 Hurricane 9/27/2015 6:10 AM 6 hurricane 9/26/2015 8:49 AM 5 / 16 i Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey 7 Tornado 9/26/2015 8:15 AM 8 tornado 9/25/2015 1:39 PM 9 Car accident 9/25/2015 11:22 AM 10 tornado 9/11/20159:20 PM 11 loss of electricity as a result of severe weather,being house bound from snow and ice 9/8/2015 4:32 PM 12 Hurricane 8/17/2015 2:18 PM 6 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Q4 Thinking about your connection to Washington County (e.g., home, business, etc.), how vulnerable do you feel that location is to the natural hazards listed below? Answered:149 Skipped:6 Flood Earthquake Severe weather (e.g.,winte... Wildfire Landslide Volcanic eruption 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Very Somewhat Not Not Total Weighted Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable Sure Average Flood 7.04% 39.44%, 51.41% 2.11% 10 56 73 3 142 1.51 Earthquake 61.49% 35.14%, 2.70%, 0.68%, 91 52 4 1 148 2.57 Severe weather(e.g.,winter storm,wind storm,severe 36.24% 61.07%, 2.68% 0.00% thunderstorm) 54 91 4 0 149 2.34 Wildfire 11.81% 49.31% 34.72% 4.17% 17 71 50 6 144 1.69 Landslide 4.23% 19.72% 70.42% 5.63% 6 28 100 8 142 1.23 Volcanic eruption 11.19% 38.46%, 36.36% 13.99% 16 55 52 20 143 1.47 7 / 16 s Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Q5 We want to prioritize our efforts for reducing impacts from natural hazards. Which hazard(s) should we start with? Choose up to three. Answered:149 Skipped;6 Flood Earthquake Severe weather (e.g.,winte... Wildfire Landslide . Volcanic eruption 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Flood 37.58% 56 Earthquake 89.26% 133 Severe weather(e.g.,winter storm,wind storm,severe thunderstorm) 71.81% 107 Wildfire 32.21% 48 Landslide 6.71% 10 Volcanic eruption 10.74% 16 Total Respondents: 149 8/ 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Q6 Where should we focus efforts for reducing the impacts of natural hazards? Answered:141 Skipped:14 Homes Businesses Schools Transportation and utilitie... Hospitals and care facilities Parks and sensitive... First response _-- facilities... Communications services(e.... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Most Very Somewhat Not Very Not Total Weighted Important Important Important Important Important Average Homes 40.29% 43.88% 13.67% 1.44% 0.72% 56 61 19 2 1 139 4.22 Businesses 7.35% 44.85% 44.12% 2.94% 0.74% 10 61 60 4 1 136 3.55 Schools 35.97% 45.32% 15.11% 2.88% 0.72% 50 63 21 4 1 139 4.13 Transportation and utilities(e.g.,roads and 59.57% 36.88% 2.84% 0.00% 0.71% bridges,electricity,gas,etc.) 84 52 4 0 1 141 4.55 Hospitals and care facilities 77.86% 21.43% 0.00% 0.71% 0.00% 109 30 0 1 0 140 4.76 Parks and sensitive habitats 1.53% 10.69% 42.75% 32.82% 12.21% 2 14 56 43 16 131 2.56 First response facilities(e.g.,fire,law enforcement, 81.43% 15.00% 3.57% 0.00% 0.00% EMS,etc.) 114 21 5 0 0 140 4.78 Communications services(e.g.,telephone,cell phone, 55.00% 40.00% 4.29% 0.71% 0.00% internet,radio,etc.) 77 56 6 1 0 140 4.49 9 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey C7 How important are the actions below for reducing the impacts of natural hazards in Washington County? Answered: 139 Skipped: 16 Move homes out of the flood... Reduce damages to utilities... s f�T ! historical... Protect avow +< :ra. „ u4= Q ■ Enhance the function of... 10/ 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey ■ I Develop and Kf Y adopt... F� # I Implement 6= earthquake... .at I Provide public ` education on... I I i ;a r Provide y4� low-income... Y ■ 11 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Most Important Very Important a$Somewhat Important 0 Not Very Important Not Important Most Very Somewhat Not Very Not Total Important Important Important Important Important Move homes out of the flood plain 10.61% 29.55% 38.64% 17.42% 3.79% 14 39 51 23 5 132 Reduce damages to utilities(e.g.,encourage electrical utilities to use underground 32.37% 58.27% 7.91% 0.72% 0.72% construction) 45 81 11 1 1 139 Protect historical resources(e.g.,floodproofing historical buildings) 3.68% 16.91%, 47.06% 26.47% 5.88% 5 23 64 36 8 136 Enhance the function of natural features(e.g.,erosion prevention in stream 14.81% 37.04% 40.00% 6.67%, 1.48% channels) 20 50 54 9 2 135 Develop and adopt hazard-specific ordinances(like landslide)to address future 34.06% 35.51%, 27.54% 2.17% 0.72%, development in hazard areas 47 49 38 3 1 138 Implement earthquake structural retrofit projects for critical facilities(e.g.,bridges, 69.78% 20.14% 8.63% 0.72% 0.72% fire stations,schools,clinics,etc.) 97 28 12 1 1 139 Provide public education on natural hazard risks and mitigation strategies 36.96% 46.38% 15.22% 0.72%, 0.72% 51 64 21 1 1 138 Provide low-income loans or other financial options to allow people to conduct 21.90% 35.04% 31.39% 9.49%, 2.19% natural hazard impact reduction activities on their homes,businesses,etc. 30 48 43 13 3 137 12/ 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey C$ How would you like to receive information about reducing the impacts of natural disasters? Choose up to three. Answered: 121 Skipped:34 TV/local media Newspaper Radio Email/email newsletter Facebook Twitter County website Mail Community Emergency... Text message Cell phone app , fir Online blog ■ Other(please ;> specify) 0% 10% 20°% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses TV/local media 52.07% 63 Newspaper 23.14% 28 Radio 26.45% 32 Email/email newsletter 66.94% 81 16.53% 20 Facebook Twitter 7.44% 9 13 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey County website 34.71% 42 Mail 23.97% 29 Community Emergency Response Teams(CERT) 20.66% 25 Text message 19.01% 23 Cell phone app 9.09% 11 Online blog 9.09% 11 Other(please specify) 2.48% 3 Total Respondents: 121 # Other(please specify) Date 1 Employer health and safety fairs 9/27/2015 7:28 PM 2 Reverse 911 9/25/2015 5:08 PM 3 City Website 8/17/2015 12:10 PM 14 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey Q9 Thank you for participating in the Washington County natural hazards survey. Your input will guide the 2015 update of our current mitigation plan and assist planners in implementing actions that are important to Washington County citizens.Check out the Washington County 2011 Natural Hazards Mitigation Action Plan: 2011 NHMAPls my home / business / organization in the floodplain? Search by addressl need Flood Insurance: FloodSmart.govJoin the Great Oregon ShakeOut - the largest earthquake drill in the state (Oct. 15 at 10:15 am PST): Join TodayEarthquake information for the home: Beaverton, OR Earthquake PageHow will YOU be affected by a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake: Aftershock: Find your Cascadia quake storyProtect your home from wildfires: Oregon Department of Forestry - Home Wildfire Safetylf there is anything else you would like to add, please share comments below. Answered:14 Skipped:141 # Responses Date 1 We need good communication on all media&planning should be done in advance based on risk to human life(not net 10/8/2015 8:47 PM worth of zip code) 2 Please work to restrict density in vulnerable areas such as steep slopes and other high risk areas.And ENFORCE the 9/30/2015 11:31 AM codes and plans. 3 Thank you for all your efforts to get the word out about disaster planning. 9/28/2015 9:34 AM 4 More enforcement of the fireworks laws needs to occur.This summer on the hottest,driest day of the year folks in our 9/28/2015 9:33 AM neighborhood started shooting off illegal commercial grade mortars and exploding in the air rockets.Hillsboro police and fire were called but declined to write a ticket even though the offenders admitted to shooting off illegal fireworks. This was near the end of July well after the 4th of July fireworks events and on the day that wild fires were rampant in many parts of Washington County.All law enforcement and fire departments need to seriously rethink the practice of just ignoring illegal fireworks all year long.The area where these folks were setting off the fireworks was near brush, trees and houses near the edge of the city limits and any fire could easily have spread to county lands.They also could have set the brush and trees along the railroad tracks on fire as well as in the neighborhood.Hillsboro police were contacted after the incident and gave a very lukewarm response to the idea that they should ever enforce Oregon fireworks law and the officer who responded said that he could not determine what was legal or illegal in Hillsboro as far as fireworks were concerned.I sincerely hope the Wash.Co.Sheriffs Dept.can determine what is legal and illegal in regard to Oregon fireworks law. 5 1 think guiding and encouraging citizens in developing emergency backpacks for homes and vehicles can help ease 9/27/2015 7:28 PM most types of emergency situations.Also,advice on how to best assist EMS and LEO personnel in an emergency would be helpful to the community. 15 / 16 Washington County, OR Natural Hazards Survey SurveyMonkey 6 Would be nice to be shown how to secure my own house to its foundation.We cant all afford tohire someone. 9125/2015 7:02 PM 7 Ban all fireworks and provide effective enforcement.I live in a heavily wooded area by Washington Square with large 9/25/2015 5:08 PM population increase and ever increasing amount of illegal fireworks use-a disaster waiting to happen. 8 1 would love to have some financial assistance available to attach our house to its foundation.It's something that 9/25/2015 11:31 AM worries me constantly,but we don't have the resources to pay the total cost of doing it.Low interest loans or a percentage paid through a program would be great. 9 This survey needs to be promoted way more. 9/21/2015 10:48 PM 10 For fucks sake,please make sure Donald Trump doesn't get elected. 9/21/2015 6:07 PM 11 County needs to invest and improve Washington County Fairgrounds as a potential post disaster event"Emergency 9/11/2015 5:32 PM Triage Center"since most additional emergency assistance help will be from State and National emergency service sources which will most likely have to fly-in their respective support to the Hillsboro Airport adjacent to the County Fairgrounds since local land transportation systems most likely will be severely damaged,if not impassable for extended periods of time.P.S.Washington County should buy and stage Army surplus"Bailey Bridges"(temp.steel bridge erector set kits)for key"at-risk"intra-County AND inter-County bridges. 12 We can learn a lot from New Orleans(Katrina),Christchurch(earthquake)and NE Japan(earthquake/tsunami)but 9/10/2015 10:44 PM just aren't bothering.People are'too busy'to worry about what might happen and the expectation is'the government' will come and save them.We need a different mentality.Only problem is,as we cram more people in smaller spaces, they have yet another reason not to store water,food,and the like.What will people in apartments do for toilets if we have a couple Christchurch like earthquakes?They lost sewage service for months and months.Also,if people choose to make their homes in the forest,they should be prepared for fires-but no,everyone else is expected to protect them,no matter the cost,so they can have'the good life.' 13 Whatever the County chooses to do,it needs to be mindful of the costs.Efforts should not place a significant financial 9/9/2015 1:13 PM burden on the tax paying public. 14 Purchase a lot of water trucks to be pre positioned at area fire stations or public works.Clean water will be PROBLEM 9/9/2015 5:19 AM NUMBER ONE. 16/ 16 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR /l-aV-ao�5� (DATE OF MEETING) S�K�✓� �'SSDr� / dem f3 ELECTED OFFICIAL EMERGENCY OPERATIONS GUIDE 41 City of Tigard November 2015 Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Emergency Management Authority • State • Regional • County • City • Special District III. References IV. The Emergency Operations System (people, facilities, organization) V. The Emergency/Disaster Declaration Process: • City/County Level • State Level • Federal Level VI. Incident Action Checklists VII. Personal Preparedness VIII. Key Contacts IX. Media Guide (Tips for working with the media) X. Training Recommendations XI. Glossary a Section I - Introduction This Emergency Operations Guide is intended as a reference for elected officials in Washington County and the City of Tigard when preparing for and responding to a local emergency or disaster. It includes important information about the emergency management system and processes, emergency contacts, and an incident checklist. As an elected official, you are encouraged to become familiar with the information in the guide before disaster strikes, and to use it during an actual emergency to help optimize your effectiveness. A "GOLDEN RULE" for every emergency is to: 1. Maintain your composure; 2. Assess the situation; 3. Understand your authority and responsibility; and 4. Take appropriate action Personal and family safety and security should be a key element of your initial situation assessment. Your performance during an emergency will be heavily dependent upon individual and family preparedness. If you have prepared adequately, you will be able to respond with greater confidence knowing that your family is safe and capable of managing on their own. Included in this guide are checklists to help you build a 72-hour emergency kit, set up a family emergency contact plan, and identify other actions that, if taken before disaster strikes, can increase your survivability and effectiveness. In addition to the actions prompted by the checklists, there are a number of community programs, including the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program, available to help you and your family prepare for disaster. Once your personal and family safety and security are assured, you can more effectively focus your attention on the disaster and its impact on the community. As an elected official, you play an important community role during disasters by: • Providing information, advice, and support to the Chief Executive Official and emergency response staff; • Reassuring citizens through your presence and leadership; 1 L • Coordinating with elected officials and senior executives from other jurisdictions, agencies, and businesses; and • Declaring an emergency, formulating policy, and taking other regulatory actions necessary to facilitate response and recovery operations and maintain government continuity. 2 Section II - Emergency Management Authority State of Oregon A. As noted in ORS 401, it is declared to be the policy and intent of the Oregon Legislative Assembly that preparations for emergencies and governmental responsibility for responding to emergencies be placed at the local government level. The state shall prepare for emergencies, but shall not assume authority or responsibility for responding to such an event unless the appropriate response is beyond the capability of the city and county in which it occurs, the city or county fails to act, or the emergency involves two or more counties. The Governor is responsible for the emergency services system within the State of Oregon. The executive officer or governing body of each county or city of the state is responsible for the emergency services system within that jurisdiction. The Governor may declare an emergency by proclamation at the request of a county governing body or after determining that an emergency has occurred or is imminent. When an emergency is declared, the Governor has very broad authority to exercise police powers, regulate commerce, control transportation, remove debris, and more. B. Pursuant to ORS 433.441, the Governor may declare a state of impending public health crisis. Such a declaration gives power to the Oregon Department of Human Services to order, authorize, and adopt reporting requirements, diagnostic and treatment protocols, public health measures including temporary isolation and quarantine, and other reasonable administrative actions, and to impose civil penalties for non-compliance. C. Under ORS 431.045, Oregon State Public Health (OSPH) has full power in the control of communicable diseases. All state and local public health officers and employees, including peace officers, are authorized to enforce rules adopted by OSPH relating to public health and other health matters subject to state authority. D. When the Oregon State Fire Marshal believes that a fire is causing, or may cause, undue jeopardy to life and/or property, the Governor may invoke the Emergency Conflagration Act (ORS 476) and mobilize local firefighting resources. The Oregon Fire Service Mobilization Plan outlines the process and procedures for mobilization and provides a mechanism for reimbursement of costs by the state. The State Fire Marshal can use 3 the Plan, without invocation of the Act, for non-fire emergencies. However, cost reimbursement is not provided in these circumstances. Portland Metropolitan Region A. The Oregon Office of Emergency Management (OEM) has created Homeland Security regions throughout the state but those regions currently have no staff, resources, defined responsibilities, or emergency management authority. Washington County is in Homeland Security Region 2, which includes the four metropolitan area counties, along with Tillamook and Clatsop counties. B. Metro, the area's regional government, has no specific emergency management authority but does have important responsibility for debris management, a critical emergency response and recovery function. Washington County As required by ORS 401.305, all Oregon counties must maintain an emergency operations plan (EOP) and emergency operations center (EOC), and utilize an incident command structure for management of a coordinated response by all local emergency service agencies. Each county may, by ordinance or resolution, establish procedures to respond to or recover from an emergency including provisions for declaring an emergency and ordering mandatory evacuations. Furthermore, each Oregon County is expected to coordinate emergency management program activity with its cities, districts, and other local governments and to be the conduit between local governments and the state during emergency response and recovery operations. A. Washington County maintains a comprehensive EOP and has established a primary EOC at the Washington County Law Enforcement Center in Hillsboro. It maintains a secondary EOC at the county 9-1-1 Center. B. The County Board of Health (the Board of County Commissioners for Washington County) is the county policymaking body in implementing the duties of local departments of health. Activities include epidemiology, control of preventable diseases and disorders, and environmental health services. The Director of the Washington County Department of Health and Human Services possesses the powers of a constable or other peace officer in all matters pertaining to public health. C. The following Washington County codes and resolutions establish the authority for the county's emergency operations activities: 4 1. County Code, Chapter 8.36, also known as the Emergency Services Code, specifies criteria for declaring an emergency and gives the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners authority to do so (if the Board is not available). It also describes the list of emergency powers that may be invoked in an emergency declaration. 2. County Minute Order # 91-354 establishes an Emergency Operations Plan to be implemented by county department heads and agencies, volunteer groups and others. The plan is to be used for the management of all disasters affecting Washington County. 3. County Resolution # 05-150 adopts the Incident Command System (ICS) promulgated by the National Incident Management System (NIMS) for managing emergency situations. City of Tigard As noted in ORS 401.305, Oregon cities may establish or maintain an emergency management program. If they choose to do so, they must, maintain a current Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and utilize an incident command structure for management of a coordinated response by all local emergency service agencies. Cities may, by ordinance or resolution, establish procedures to respond to or recover from an emergency including provisions for declaring an emergency and ordering mandatory evacuations. Furthermore, each Oregon city is expected to coordinate its emergency management program activity with its county and to work with and through the county during emergency response and recovery operations. A. The City of Tigard maintains a comprehensive EOP and has established a primary EOC at the Public Works building located 8777 SW Burnham St. It maintains a secondary EOC at the Tigard Public Library in the Community Room located at 13500 SW Hall Blvd. B. The following city ordinances and resolutions establish the authority for the city's emergency operations activities: 1. Tigard Ordinance # 96-38 establishes an Emergency Management Operations Basic Policy to be implemented by the City Manager. The city is "to mitigate and prepare for unforeseen events which affect the health and safety of city residents in a manner that protects life and property." The policy further should direct that all hazards are addressed. 5 2. Tigard Resolution # 5-58 adopts the Incident Command Systems (ICS) developed by the National Incident Management System (NIMS) for managing emergency situations. 3. Tigard Ordinance # 96-38 Also known as the Emergency Code, specifies criteria for declaring an emergency and gives the City Manager authority to do so if the Mayor or Council are not available. It also describes the list of Emergency Powers that may be invoked in an emergency declaration. 6 Section III - References Plans City of Tigard's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) - Outlines operational concepts and assigns responsibilities and activities to organizations and individuals for carrying out specific response functions in the event of an emergency or disaster, identifies hazard-specific actions, and designates lead agency responsibility for hazard-specific situations. City of Tigard's Continuity of Operations (COOP) Plan - Prioritizes critical services and activities in order of importance for periods of limited capacity characterized by a disaster or emergency situation. It establishes policies and procedures, back-up capability, requirements, and staffing needed to expeditiously restore critical services. City of Tigard's Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Addendum - Documents and assesses the most likely natural hazard threats facing a jurisdiction, identifies and prioritizes actions that can be taken prior to an incident that can lessen the impacts of the incident, and identifies the stakeholders who may assist with implementation of the identified actions. State of Oregon Emergency Operations Plan - Similar in purpose to a local agency EOP but applicable statewide. It outlines operational concepts and assigns responsibilities and activities to state agencies and organizations for carrying out specific response functions in the event of an emergency or disaster, identifies hazard-specific actions, and designates lead agency responsibility for hazard-specific situations. State of Oregon Enhanced Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan - Similar in purpose to a local agency natural hazards mitigation plan but applicable statewide. It documents and assesses the most likely natural hazard threats facing the state, identifies and prioritizes actions that can be taken prior to an incident that can lessen the impacts of the incident, and identifies the stakeholders who may assist with implementation of the identified actions. National Response Plan (NRP) - The National Response Plan integrates federal domestic prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery plans into one all-discipline, all-hazards plan. The NRP is activated for incidents of national significance. FEMA and other federal resources are assigned to support state and local response and recovery operations through the plan. These agencies may activate at or near the state's emergency center and 7 staff prescribed Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) as necessary to meet state and local needs. Procedures City of Tigard's Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) - Describes primary and back-up facilities, communications capabilities, activation processes, staffing, initial work priorities, and operating and reporting procedures. Standard Operating Guidelines Directives City of Tigard's Emergency Management Directive - Identifies the mission, strategic goals, and objectives of the program; describes management policies; designates the chain of command; and assigns roles and responsibilities. Hazard Analyses City of Tigard's Hazard Analysis and Vulnerability/Risk Assessment - Provides a systematic assessment and prioritization of likely emergencies/disasters by analyzing history, vulnerability and probability. The assessment provides the foundation for mitigation, emergency operations and recovery planning, and other preparedness strategies. 8 Section IV - The Emergency Operations System Incident Command ORS 401.305 requires all counties and any cities with an emergency management agency to establish an incident command structure for management of a coordinated response. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD-5) encourages all jurisdictions to utilize the National Incident Management System (NIMS) for all emergency operations. The NIMS adopts the Incident Command System (ICS) as the preferred national system for incident command. Jurisdictions who accept Homeland Security and other emergency preparedness grants are required to adopt the NIMS and use the ICS for management of all domestic incidents. City of Tigard has adopted the NIMS. A. National Incident Management System (NIMS) The NIMS provides a consistent nationwide template to enable federal, state, local, and tribal governments and private-sector and nongovernmental organizations to work together effectively and efficiently to prepare for, prevent, respond to, and recover from domestic incidents, regardless of cause, size, or complexity, including acts of terrorism. The NIMS represents a core set of doctrine, concepts, principles, terminology, and organizational processes to enable effective, efficient, and collaborative incident management at all levels. Using the comprehensive framework provided by the NIMS provides the structure and mechanisms for national-level policy and operational direction for federal support to state, local, and tribal incident managers and for exercising direct federal authorities and responsibilities as appropriate under the law. B. Incident Command System (ICS) The ICS is a management tool which operates within the framework of the NIMS and can be used on any kind or size of incident. It can also be used as a management system for planned, non-emergency events. The primary objective of the ICS is the safe application of resources to effectively and efficiently manage and mitigate an incident. At an incident involving any type of response activities, command, resource control, and communication must exist to ensure effective incident management. 9 • Command - An incident commander is needed to: o Assess the situation and resources o Develop and implement an appropriate action plan o Monitor the effectiveness of the plan o Review/modify the plan as changes occur o Maintain command and control throughout the incident until relieved or hand-off occurs • Resource Control - Resources must be properly directed to maximize their utilization • Communication - In order to orchestrate and coordinate the use of resources at an incident, all members of the incident response team must be linked by: o A well defined organizational structure o Clear lines of communication The ICS provides for effective command, resource control, and communication through the following organizational and operational components: • A standardized and modular organizational structure • Common and standardized terminology • Span-of-control criteria for incident management personnel • An integrated approach to communications • Unified Command for multi jurisdictional or multi-discipline incidents • A comprehensive resource management scheme • A standardized action planning process and consolidated action plans C. Incident Commander (IC) The IC is the individual responsible for all incident activities, including the development of strategies and tactics, the ordering and release of resources, and release of public information. The IC has overall authority and responsibility for conducting incident operations and is responsible for the management of all incident operations at the incident site. In the case of multiple incident scenes, each incident will have a separate IC who is responsible for management of the resources assigned and the information related to that incident. Incident Resources The resources needed for response to local emergencies are available from a number of sources. The first source is the local agency or agencies impacted by the emergency. Those resources can take several forms including people, equipment, and equipment with people and can be applied in operational, advisory, and administrative support functions. The 10 resources may be deployed individually or be organized into larger groups such as crews, teams, task forces, and strike teams. Local resources may also include people and equipment from nongovernmental organizations (e.g., the Red Cross and Humane Society), existing volunteer groups (e.g., Amateur Radio Emergency Services and Community Emergency Response Teams), and spontaneous or emergent volunteers. Contract resources may also be utilized. When the resources of local government are heavily tasked or exhausted, mutual aid resources from other local governments may be available. Those resources can be provided pursuant to presigned agreements between the governments, through a statewide mutual aid agreement, or through an interstate mutual aid compact. In widespread emergencies, the use of local mutual aid agreements is typically suspended and resources are requested and allocated through a more centralized system at the County EOC. The system, which links city and special district EOCs to the county EOC and State Emergency Coordination Center (ECC), facilitates consolidation of requests, prioritization of need, and allocation/distribution of resources to areas of highest need. If the Governor declares an emergency for an impacted county, that action makes state resources available to local governments in the county. The state's resources are not extensive, but do include important transportation, military, public health, agriculture, environmental protection, and other assets. A presidential (i.e., federal) emergency or disaster declaration for an impacted county opens the door to an extensive array of federal resources including a number of pre-designated specialty teams and their pre- positioned caches of equipment. Teams for disaster medical assistance, disaster mortuary, veterinary medical assistance, urban search and rescue, mental health, and many other specialty functions are available. Incident Facilities A. On-Scene Incident Command Post (ICP) A field location at which the primary, tactical-level, on-scene incident command functions are performed. An ICP may be collocated with other incident facilities and is often identified by a green rotating or flashing light. 11 B. Local Emergency Operations Center (EOC) The EOC is an established location/facility from which organizational staff and officials can receive information pertaining to an incident and from which they can provide direction, coordination, and support to emergency operations. A Department Operations Center (DOC) is a department-level EOC. Activities within a DOC are focused on management and support of the department's resources and coordination with other agency EOCs. A Fire Operations Center (FOC) is a fire district EOC. Activities within a FOC are focused on management and support of the district's resources and coordination with other agency EOCs. C. 9-1-1 Center The 9-1-1 Center acts much like an EOC during major emergencies and disasters. It dispatches public safety resources to incidents according to priorities agreed to by the resource owners. When call volume exceeds resource availability, the center must work with local agency EOCs to coordinate response to incidents for which it has no available resources (i.e., lower priority incidents). D. Joint Information Center (JIC) A facility established to coordinate all incident-related public information activities. It is the central point of contact for all news media at the scene of the incident. Public information officials from all participating agencies should collocate at the JIC. Multiple JICs may be established (e.g., on scene, county, regional, state) for widespread emergencies. E. State Emergency Coordination Center (ECC) The state Office of Emergency Management (OEM) operates the state's Emergency Coordination Center (ECC). As the name implies, the center coordinates the state's response to emergencies. Representatives from OEM and involved state agencies staff the center. The ECC coordinates activities with state Agency Operations Centers (AOC), county EOCs, and, if activated, federal agency emergency centers. One of the ECC's primary activities is to identify and provide resources to assist with state agency and local government response and recovery operations. 12 F. State Agency Operations Center (AOC) An Agency Operations Center (AOC) is a state agency-level EOC. Activities within an AOC are focused on management and support of the agency's resources and coordination with other AOCs and the state ECC. G. Federal Joint Field Office (JFO) The JFO is a temporary federal facility established locally to provide a central point for federal, state, local, and tribal executives with responsibility for incident oversight, direction, and/or assistance to effectively coordinate protection, prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery actions. The JFO will combine the traditional functions of the Joint Operations Center (JOC), the FEMA Disaster Field Office (DFO), and the Joint Information Center (JIC) within a single federal facility. H. Joint Operations Center (JOC) The JOC is the focal point for all federal investigative law enforcement activities during a terrorist or potential terrorist incident or any other significant criminal incident, and is managed by the Senior Federal Law Enforcement Official. The JOC becomes a component of the Joint Field Office (JFO) when the National Response Plan is activated. I. National Operations Center (NOC) The NOC is the primary, national-level hub for domestic situational awareness, common operational picture, information fusion, information sharing, communications, and coordination pertaining to the prevention of terrorist attacks and domestic incident management. The NOC is the primary conduit for the White House Situation Room and the Department of Homeland Security leadership for domestic situational awareness. The NOC facilitates information sharing and operational coordination with other federal, state, local, tribal, and nongovernmental operation centers and the private sector. The Emergency Operations System When activated, the Emergency Operations System consists of layered and interconnected field resources, emergency operations centers, and policy coordination bodies. Field resources work at the direction of the 9-1-1 center, an on-scene Incident Commander, or an agency/organizational Emergency Operations Center. 13 The 9-1-1 Center (WCCCA) dispatches the fire, law enforcement, and emergency medical resources provided to it by the county's public safety agencies. They do so in accordance with prescribed policies for emergency operations. Unless released to the providing agency or reassigned to a field Incident Commander or an EOC, resources assigned to WCCCA continue to be dispatched by WCCCA based on pre-defined call priorities. The county's private ambulance provider dispatches its resources in response to requests from WCCCA. The ambulance company retains direct control of its resources unless that control is released to an on-scene Incident Commander. Departmental and local agency (city and district) EOCs manage their own resources and operations, support others, and coordinate with the county EOC. The county EOC manages county government operations and coordinates with and supports county DOCs. It also coordinates with and supports local government, regional non-governmental organization (e.g., Red Cross), and business EOCs. The EOC establishes strategic response and recovery goals, performs strategic resource management, and coordinates incident and public information. It is also the point of contact (i.e., the gateway) for all local governments to the state and federal emergency centers. Businesses and nongovernmental organizations manage their own incident activities and coordinate their actions with local governments from their EOCs. At the EOC level (special district, city, and county), a policy coordination body exists or will be established to support and facilitate incident management activities. The Policy Group typically consists of elected officials and senior agency executives with statutory, regulatory, and/or financial authorities. The Policy Group coordinates with EOC staff and, among other things, is responsible for implementing emergency authorities, taking regulatory actions necessary to control public actions and facilitate response and recovery activities, prioritizing the delivery and restoration of government services, and coordinating incident activities with the policy groups of other impacted jurisdictions and senior executives of impacted businesses. 14 Section V - Emergency and Disaster Declarations Declarations Defined Local Emergency and Disaster Declarations A. A "local emergency" or "disaster" exists whenever a jurisdiction or an area therein is suffering, or is in imminent danger of suffering, an event that may cause injury or death to persons, or damage to or destruction of property to the extent that extraordinary measures must be taken to protect public health, safety, and welfare. A local emergency may also exist whenever a jurisdiction's resources (people, equipment, and/or facilities) are suffering, or are in imminent danger of suffering, an event that may injure or damage them. Such an event includes, but is not limited to, the following: fire, explosion, flood, severe weather, drought, earthquake, volcanic activity, spills or releases of oil or hazardous material as defined in ORS 466.605, contamination, utility or transportation emergencies, disease, blight, infestation, civil disturbance, riot, sabotage, terrorist attack, and war. A local emergency can be a small, confined incident such as a landslide or a widespread event such as an earthquake or wind storm. When a local emergency exists, the affected jurisdiction(s) may declare both an emergency and a disaster. The declarations can occur simultaneously or a disaster declaration may follow an emergency declaration. An emergency declaration is issued to implement specific local measures necessary to protect life, public health, or property and/or to suspend rules or procedures in order to expedite response operations. A disaster declaration is used to request assistance from the next higher level of government (local/county/state/federal), to include requesting a "state of emergency" declaration from the Governor and asking the Governor to seek a presidential emergency or major disaster declaration which would initiate actions necessary for local governments and individuals to receive federal disaster assistance. B. An agricultural emergency exists whenever the local agricultural industry suffers an event that causes severe physical and/or production losses. An agricultural emergency may affect a small geographic area or single agricultural sector or impact a larger geographic area and involve multiple agricultural sectors. 15 State Emergency Declarations A. The Governor may declare a state of emergency pursuant to ORS 401. The declaration can be made by proclamation at the request of a county governing body or be made after separately determining that an emergency has occurred or is imminent. During a state of emergency, the Governor may: • Exercise authority over all state agencies and suspend state orders and rules • Provide temporary housing • Control, restrict, and regulate the use, sale, or distribution of food, feed, fuel, clothing, and other commodities, materials, goods, and services • Prescribe and direct activities in connection with use, conservation, salvage, and prevention of waste of materials, services, and facilities • Assume complete control of all emergency operations in the area specified in the emergency proclamation, direct all rescue and salvage work and do all things deemed advisable and necessary to alleviate the immediate conditions • Assume control of all police and law enforcement activities in such area, including the activities of all local police and peace officers • Close all roads and highways in such area to traffic or limit the travel on such roads to such extent as deemed necessary and expedient • Designate persons to coordinate the work of public and private relief agencies operating in such area and exclude from such area any person or agency refusing to cooperate with and work under such coordinator or to cooperate with other agencies engaged in emergency work • Require the aid and assistance of any state or other public or quasi- public agencies in the performance of duties and work attendant upon the emergency conditions in such area B. The Governor may declare a state of impending public health crisis pursuant to ORS 433.441. An impending public health crisis is a situation where a "threat to the public health is imminent and likely to be widespread, life-threatening, and of a scope that requires immediate medical attention." Such a declaration gives power to the Oregon Department of Human Services to order, authorize, and adopt reporting requirements, diagnostic and treatment protocols, public health measures including temporary isolation and quarantine, and other reasonable administrative actions, and to impose civil penalties for noncompliance. 16 C. The Governor may declare a fire emergency and invoke the Emergency Conflagration Act pursuant to ORS 476. Such a declaration gives broad authority to the Oregon State Fire Marshal to mobilize and deploy structural fire protection resources from throughout the state. Federal Emergency and Disaster Declarations The President and a number of federal agencies are authorized to declare emergencies or disasters pursuant to statute and regulation. The presidential declarations are summarized below. When the threshold for a presidential declaration is not met, other federal agencies or departments such as the Department of Transportation, the Department of Agriculture, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, and/or the Small Business Administration may declare emergencies and activate specific assistance programs pursuant to their own authorities. A. An "emergency" is any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, federal assistance is needed to supplement state and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States. B. A "major disaster" is any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought). Regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under the Stafford Act to supplement the efforts and available resources of states, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby. The Declaration Process A. The local declaration process is a coordinated effort between agency emergency managers, legal and other executive staff, the incident management team (field and EOC), and agency elected officials. It is typically triggered by the results of a damage assessment performed during or immediately after an incident. In the case of widespread and/or catastrophic incidents where the impacts are obvious, the declaration process may occur immediately without waiting for completion of a formal assessment. For small incidents where outside assistance is not required, local elected officials will likely be asked to declare an emergency to invoke specific emergency authorities authorized in their jurisdictional codes or 17 ordinances (e.g., suspension of normal contracting rules). The emergency declaration must specify the time, duration and area impacted by the incident. If an incident is of such a nature or scope that it exceeds the resources available to a local government, the elected officials of the impacted government can declare a disaster and request assistance from the next higher level of government (city/special district to county to state). In many cases, a local government will declare an emergency and a disaster and request assistance simultaneously. When the county receives a declaration and request for assistance from a city or special district, they are expected to provide direct assistance to the local government and/or coordinate assistance from other local governments. If assistance is unavailable or inadequate, the county should also declare a disaster and seek assistance from the state. The county may declare an emergency and a disaster and seek help from the state without receiving a request from a local government. This is the process used when the primary incident impacts are in the unincorporated areas of the county. An agricultural emergency can occur as part of a widespread incident and be included in the disaster declaration of the impacted jurisdiction or it can occur independent of a broader emergency. Such is the case in a severe, but short duration weather event (e.g., freeze) that heavily damages crops, but doesn't broadly impact people or infrastructure. When such an incident occurs, the County Emergency Board (CEB), which consists of local representatives from U.S. Department of Agriculture agencies and other agriculture programs, sends a "Flash Report" to state and federal agriculture officials and conducts a formal damage assessment. If the assessment warrants, the CEB asks the Board of County Commissioners to declare an agriculture emergency and seek state and federal assistance. B. The Governor may declare a state of emergency by proclamation at the request of a county governing body or after determining that an emergency has occurred or is imminent. All requests by a county governing body that the Governor declare an emergency must be sent to the state Office of Emergency Management. Cities and special districts must submit requests through the governing body of the county in which the majority of the city's/district's property is located. Requests from counties must be in writing and include the following: 1. A certification signed by the county governing body that all local resources have been expended; and 2. A preliminary assessment of property damage or loss, injuries and 18 deaths. Upon the recommendation of the Oregon State Pubic Health Director, the Governor may declare a state of impending public health crisis. Identification of such an impending crisis is likely to arise from information provided by local public health officials and medical providers or from an expanding regional, national, or international public health event. Upon the recommendation of the Oregon State Fire Marshal, the Governor may declare a fire emergency and invoke the Emergency Conflagration Act. If the resources of the state are insufficient to meet the needs of the incident, the Governor may seek assistance from the President by submitting a formal request through the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Such a request must include a copy of the Governor's "State of Emergency" declaration and an Initial Damage Assessment outlining the state's physical and financial impacts and losses. 19 Section VI - Incident Action Checklist The intent of this checklist is to guide your initial actions, help you gather appropriate incident information, and focus your attention on the issues most critical to your policy role. You will need the information to better assess the situation and formulate your response plan. INITIAL STEPS Contact Chief Executive to determine if the Policy Group is being activated; determine meeting location if activated Gather personal gear, equipment, supplies Report in accordance with agency procedures Remember that your role is policy-making and support, not operational PERSONAL ISSUES Advise family of destination and means of contact Take disaster kit with you (see Section VII) Take list of important contacts Take personal tape recorder Take identification, checkbook, ATM card, and cash Other things to remember OPERATIONAL ISSUES Assess public impacts Assess impacts on the agency's financial status and day-to-day activities Assess the agency's resource commitment (i.e., facilities activated, department resources committed, and overall resource status) Work with the Chief Executive and Policy Group to reassign personnel to support incident activities and cover essential departmental services LEGAL ISSUES Determine if legal staff has been assigned to advise the Incident Commander and Policy Group 20 Identify regulatory actions necessary to protect the public and facilitate response and recovery activities • Emergency declarations • Chain of succession • Intergovernmental obligations for service/mutual aid • Social controls • Price controls • Suspension or alteration of administrative/financial policies • Other actions POLITICAL ISSUES Identify process logistics: • Policy Group meeting schedule • Schedule and process for situation updates • Press conference schedule and process for public information releases Assist in the development and evaluation of incident management policy Participate in Policy Group as requested Assist in coordinating other activities as requested Coordinate with business leaders Coordinate with elected officials from other jurisdictions to ensure support and consistency in response Provide necessary coordination with regional, state and national elected officials 21 Section VII - Personal Preparedness No matter how prepared public safety agencies are to respond to emergencies, they are never able to get to everyone as fast as they'd like to in a disaster. The public safety agency itself will be a victim of the disaster, will be hampered in their response by damage to roads, bridges, and communications systems, and will be overwhelmed by emergency calls. In view of these impacts and limitations, it's important that all citizens be prepared to fend for themselves in the first hours and perhaps days of a major emergency. The following actions are recommended for every household: Develop a Plan Prepare a plan that address or includes the following elements: • Evacuation - A plan for evacuating your home and office in case of fire or other emergency • Reunification - A plan for reunifying with your family or coworkers following a home or office evacuation • Emergency Contacts - Contact information for family members and an out-of-area contact that you and your family can check in with in case you can't reunite right away • Pets - A plan for management of your pet(s) if forced from your home Obtain Training • First Aid - Attend basic first aid and CPR classes • Fire Suppression - Learn how to use a fire extinguisher • Utility Shutoff - Know where utility shutoffs are located and how to operate them Create and Maintain an Emergency Supplies Kit • Food and drinking water for 3-4 days; a week is even better. Stock nonperishable items that you and your family will eat and don't forget a can opener. • Temporary shelter in case your home is uninhabitable (e.g., tent, sleeping bag, or camper) • A first-aid kit and a tool kit • A way to heat or cook (e.g., Sterno, outdoor grill, or camp stove) • Clothing for several days including outerwear and sturdy footwear • Appropriate supplies for infants, seniors, and others with special needs • Supplies for pets 22 • A battery-powered radio • One or more flashlights, at least one of which can be used in a "hands- free" mode • Extra batteries for anything in your kit that needs them • Critical documents and contact information (e.g., important phone numbers [utilities, pharmacies, schools] and copies of birth certificates, passports, insurance policies, and other proof of identity and ownership) • Cash (quarters and small bills and travelers checks) • A current map of the area • Spare personal items (e.g., toiletries, glasses, and hearing-aids/batteries) • One to two weeks' worth of whatever you can't live without. If you rely on medication, home oxygen, powered life-support equipment, or other critical items, don't rely on pharmacies or other suppliers to be open or able to restock immediately after a disaster. Even when emergency shelters are opened and people can be fed and housed, certain materials may be unavailable or in short supply for an extended period of time. As noted earlier in this guide, the effectiveness of your response as an elected official will be significantly impacted by the confidence you have in the safety and security of your family. 23 Section VIII - Key Contacts All elected officials are encouraged to develop and maintain an emergency contact list with personal and business numbers for key personnel with whom they will coordinate strategic policies and information. These personnel should include: Internal • Agency executive staff and department heads with emergency response duties. Include staff from special districts or other agencies providing these functions within your jurisdiction. - Fire - Law Enforcement - Public Works (Transportation, Transit, Airport, etc.) - Utilities (Electrical, Water, Sewer, Communications, etc.) - Emergency Management - Public Health - 9-1-1 • Agency PIO (if not included in preceding items) • Agency EOC (primary and alternate) • Critical businesses (including private utilities) within your agency boundaries • Important nongovernmental organizations serving your jurisdiction (e.g. American Red Cross, Community Action Organization, etc.) • Any 24-hour emergency or information line and Website maintained by your agency (including recorded information) External • Other local elected officials as well as those at the regional, state, and federal levels • Other important emergency centers (e.g., county EOC for city and district officials and sate ECC for county officials) • Any 24-hour emergency or information line and Website maintained by other jurisdictions that are likely to contain relevant information (including recorded information) 24 Section IX - Media Guide Experience has shown that major incidents often result in intense media attention from both local and national news agencies. In addition, an informed community can assist local government response. It is also true that a disaster organization which is not a center of information will find it difficult to remain a center of control. Coordination with the media, and orchestration of an effective response from the entire community, can best be accomplished by establishing a procedure which provides complete and accurate information before, during, and after an emergency. Effective public information can enhance respect and understanding of local government, as well as aid in response to emergencies. Information on Tigard's Public Information process can be found in the EOP Section 2-e. Here are some key proven points to help you when dealing with the media. Why work with the media? You have to. Oregon public records and meetings law requires a high degree of transparency in public agencies. In addition, the media provides the fastest and most cost-effective way to inform and educate your citizens about the work, challenges, and needs of your organization. Most citizens form their opinions of your organization based on news coverage. In a "bad news" situation, the media will do the story with or without your help...you'll probably be happier with the results if you make an effort to tell your side of the story. Type and style differences among the media Newspaper - Provides permanent record of events with the highest level of detail of any medium. Typically has one deadline each day/week. Uses beat reporting system. Often referred back to for subsequent stories and updates, indicating strong need to correct errors. Read by other media. Interviews are typically one-on-one conversations in person or over the phone. Be prepared with a lot of details. Radio - Most mobile medium. Requires the least of its audience. Typically has hourly deadline. Can go on instantly with breaking or major news. Provides short stories...two to four sentences at most. Small reporting staff does most work over the phone. Learn to tell your story(ies) in 14 seconds or less. Television - Where most folks get their news. Has visual orientation. Uses a combination of journalism and show business. Provides short 25 stories...usually no longer than 30 seconds to a minute. Typically have two or three deadlines a day. Conduct most intimidating interviews with a combination of video and audio taping. Wire Service - Supplies newsrooms with stories on a regional and national basis. Stories are produced in print format but can be written for broadcast. Good way to get basic story out to a large audience. Internet - Rapidly becoming a major force in news. Most news organizations post stories on the Web. Many agencies post news releases, as well. Periodic searches can protect agency reputation. What do reporters want? Information - Who, what, when, where, how, and why. Also, "how much" when appropriate. Access - To information in the form of people and documents and to facilities and event locations for visuals. What makes news? News value varies from community to community and day to day. General factors include: controversy, change, issues of broad interest, public expenditures, and compelling visuals. Legal considerations The media have a constitutionally-protected right to cover the news. Be familiar with Oregon Public Records and Meetings Law. At events, remember that the media has the right to be at least as close as the general public and take pictures from there. Public spaces are photographic "free fire" zones. Always have a "SOCO" Every time you interview with a reporter, you should have a "Single Overriding Communications Objective" (SOCO). Ask yourself "what is the one message the audience needs to take away from the story?" Identify the three key facts or statistics you'd like the public to remember. In one sentence or two, state your key point or objective in doing the interview. Rules for surviving interviews • Honesty, honesty, honesty. 26 • You're always on the record, and probably being taped. • Respect deadlines; it's important to get it right and get it fast. • If you're not the best source, connect reporters with whoever is. • Know what areas are sensitive for your agency and when to pass the buck. • Provide equal treatment for all reporters. • Don't assume reporters know anything about your agency and its work. • Stick to confirmed, verifiable facts. Do the play-by-play and not the color commentary. • Deal only with your agency's area of expertise and involvement. • If you can't comment on something, explain why in general terms. • It's okay to admit you don't know something. • Avoid using acronyms and agency jargon. Consider your audience. • Make your point as succinctly as possible, and repeat it as many different ways as you can. • Ignore tape recorders and cameras. Look reporters in the eye and have one-on-one conversations. • Be proactive. Have an agenda for every interview, with key points to make. • Never look up or down when you're on camera. • Never argue with anyone who buys ink by the barrel or videotape by the case. • Stay calm and composed...no matter what. Don't let your reaction to a story overshadow the story. When the news hits the fan • Be prepared. Know in advance what agency policy is on release of information and who is authorized to speak. • Know the law. Oregon public records law, for example, spells out the rules for release of information on employee discipline. • Collect background materials on the agency (e.g., organizational overview, service area, and key statistics). • Don't hesitate to brainstorm "worst case" scenarios. What would we do if...? Watch other organizations in the media hot seat. • Don't overlook internal communications; let employees know what's going on. They are key communicators both on and off the job. • Make sure telephone receptionists have a "script" and know where to refer calls. • Put yourself in the reporter's place...what would YOU ask? • Consider long-term effects, such as litigation. • Release as much information as possible. Be aware that some information you have been provided may not be releasable to the media or public. 27 • If the news is bad (and it's obviously going to get out), break the story yourself and get it over and done with as quickly as possible. • Coordinate with legal counsel, but make sure counsel understands the public relations ramifications of the situation. You can win in a court of law, but still lose in the court of public opinion. • If your agency has messed up, confess and repent. • Focus on solutions, not the problem at hand. • Don't be defensive. Express concern when bad things happen. You can express concern without taking responsibility or assigning fault. For more information The Federal Communicator's Network has posted its 63-page Communicator's Guide as a downloadable PDF document. Go to www.fcn.gov. "Winning with the News Media: A Self-Defense Manual When You're the Story," written and self-published by former investigative reporter Clarence Jones. The book is available through most major online book dealers, i.e., Amazon, Borders, etc. It can also be ordered directly at www.winning- newsmedia.com. 28 Section X - Training Recommendations Additional information that can enhance understanding of your emergency role and responsibilities is available through FEMA's on-line independent study program. ICS 100, Introduction to the Incident Command System, introduces the Incident Command System (ICS) and provides the foundation for higher level ICS training. This course describes the history, features and principles, and organizational structure of the Incident Command System. It also explains the relationship between ICS and the National Incident Management System (NIMS). http://training.fema.gov/­­EMIWeb/IS/islOO.asp ICS 402 (EMI G402), Incident Command System (ICS) Overview for Executives, is an ICS orientation for executives, administrators, and policy makers. It provides a basic understanding of ICS, unified and area command, and multi-agency coordination to those persons responsible for establishing or implementing policy, but who normally are not part of the on-scene ICS organization. The course also discusses responsibilities and information transfer between executives and incident commanders. htty://training.fema.gov/emiweb/pub/g402.asp IS 700, National Incident Management System (NIMS), An Introduction, describes the key concepts and principles of the NIMS, and the benefits of using the system for domestic incident response. On February 28, 2003, President Bush issued Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5. HSPD-5 directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident Management System. The NIMS provides a consistent nationwide template to enable all government, private-sector, and nongovernmental organizations to work together during domestic incidents. http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is7OO.asp IS 800, National Response Plan, An Introduction, introduces the National Response Plan (NRP), including the concept of operations upon which the plan is built, the roles and responsibilities of the key players, and the organizational structures used to manage these resources. The NRP provides a framework to ensure that we can all work together when the Nation is threatened. The NRP specifies how the resources of the federal government will work in concert with state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector to respond to incidents of national significance. The NRP is predicated on the National Incident Management System (NIMS). Together, the NRP and the NIMS provide a nationwide template for working 29 together to prevent or respond to threats and incidents regardless of cause, size, or complexity. http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is800.asp IS-7O1.A: NIMS Multiagency Coordination System (MACS) Course This course introduces Multiagency Coordination (MAC) Systems as described in the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and shows how these systems can be used to improve incident response. MAC Systems consist of a combination of elements: personnel, procedures, protocols, business practices, and communications integrated into a common system. After taking this course, you should be able to improve the overall coordination with, and support for, incident management by developing and operating within MAC Systems. http://training.fema.goy/EMIWeb/IS/is70 l.a.asy IS-7O2.A: National Incident Management System (NIMS) Public Information Systems: The National Incident Management System (NIMS) provides a consistent nationwide template to enable all government, private- sector, and nongovernmental organizations to work together during domestic incidents. This includes public information. The public information systems described in NIMS are designed to effectively manage public information at an incident, regardless of the size and complexity of the situation or the number of entities involved in the response. http://training.fenLa.gov/EMIWeb/IS/­­is7O2.a.asp IS-2OO.B: ICS for Single Resources and Initial Action Incidents: ICS 200 is designed to enable personnel to operate efficiently during an incident or event within the Incident Command System (ICS). ICS-200 provides training on and resources for personnel who are likely to assume a supervisory position within the ICS. 30 Section XI - Glossary AOC - Agency Operations Center - The EOC for a state agency (e.g., ODOT, DEQ, ODF). BCP - Business Continuity Plan - All encompassing term covering both disaster recovery planning and business resumption planning. This umbrella term also refers to other aspects of disaster recovery, such as emergency management, human resources, media or press relations, etc. From the National Institute of Standards and Technology perspective, BCP identifies procedures for sustaining essential business operations while recovering from a significant disruption. COOP - Continuity of Operations - A public enterprise's ability to survive and sustain critical core business operations and functions during an unforeseen emergency or disaster. Continuity of operations is essential for the welfare of any organization in order to mitigate the negative effects of an interruption. COG - Continuity of Government - The principle of establishing defined procedures that allow a government to continue its essential operations in case of a disaster or emergency. DOC - Department Operations Center - A centralized location established during minor emergencies and disasters from which a single department can receive information pertaining to an incident and from which they can provide direction, coordination, and support to department emergency operations including deployed field resources. EAS - Emergency Alert System - A digital technology (voice/text) communications system consisting of broadcast stations and interconnecting facilities authorized by the Federal Communications Commission. The system provides the President and other national, state, and local officials the means to broadcast emergency information to the public before, during, and after disasters. ECC - Emergency Coordination Center - Similar to an EOC, but does not exercise control of resources. An ECC coordinates and supports the incident response activities of other organizations. EOC - Emergency Operations Center - The physical location where the coordination of information and resources to support domestic incident management activities normally takes place. An EOC may be a temporary facility or may be located in a more central or permanently established facility, perhaps at a higher level of organization within a jurisdiction. EOCs 31 may be organized by ICS functions (i.e., Command, Operations, Planning, etc.), by discipline (e.g., fire, public works, law enforcement, emergency medical services, etc.), by jurisdiction (e.g., federal, state, regional, county, city, district, tribal), or some combination thereof. EOP - Emergency Operations Plan - The "steady-state" emergency plan maintained by state and local governments for responding to a wide variety of potential hazards. FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency - The federal agency established to coordinate and oversee federal assistance to state and local governments in the event of major disasters. ICS - Incident Command System - A management system used to provide effective incident management through the identification of specific roles and responsibilities and chain-of-command. The ICS utilizes functional groupings of tasks, management by objectives, and unified command. NGO - Nongovernmental Organization - Any nonprofit organization which is independent from government. NGOs are typically value-based organizations which depend, in whole or in part, on charitable contributions and voluntary service. NGOs pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake community development. Examples of emergency- focused NGOs include the American Red Cross and many faith-based charity organizations. NIMS - National Incident Management System - A system mandated by HSPD-5 that provides a consistent nationwide approach for federal, state, local, and tribal governments, the private-sector, and nongovernmental organizations to work effectively and efficiently together to prepare for, respond to, and recover from domestic incidents, regardless of cause, size, or complexity. To provide for interoperability and compatibility among federal, state, local, and tribal capabilities, the NIMS includes a core set of concepts, principles, and terminology. HSPD-5 identifies these as the ICS; Multi-Agency Coordination Systems; training; identification and management of resources (including systems for classifying types of resources); qualification and certification; and the collection, tracking, and reporting of incident information and incident resources. NRP- National Response Plan - A plan mandated by HSPD-5 that integrates federal domestic prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery plans into one all-discipline, all-hazards plan. OEM - Oregon Emergency Management - The state agency responsible for execution of the Governor's responsibilities to maintain an emergency 32 services system as prescribed in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 401. This is accomplished through the prevention, mitigation, and management of emergencies or disasters that present a threat to the lives and property of citizens and visitors to the State of Oregon. OERS - Oregon Emergency Response System - OERS is the primary point of contact by which any public agency provides the state notification of an emergency or disaster, or requests access to state or federal resources. The purpose of the Oregon Emergency Response System is to coordinate and manage state resources in response to natural and technological emergencies and civil unrest involving multi jurisdictional cooperation between all levels of government and the private sector. ORS - Oregon Revised Statutes - The codified laws of the state of Oregon. PIO - Public Information Officer - The Public Information Officer is the point of contact for the media and for other organizations seeking general information directly from the incident scene or from the Emergency Operations Center. SOCO - Single Overriding Communications Objective - Key public communications point or objective SOG - Standard Operating Guideline - Similar to Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), but typically less prescriptive. SOP - Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) - Describe primary and back- up facilities, communications capabilities, activation processes, staffing, initial priorities and work responsibilities, operating and reporting procedures, etc. SOPs are used by many agencies to implement responsibilities contained in their EOP's. WCCCA - Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency - The Washington County agency established to provide 9-1-1 service and public safety communications for participating police, fire, and emergency medical service agencies and for other governments under contract. 33 AIS-2384 C. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes):20 Minutes Agenda Title: Briefing on Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership Activities Submitted By: Dennis Koellermeier,Public Works Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Staff will present an update on current activities in the Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership construction program and local efforts to prepare and introduce the new water supply into Tigard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST No Council action is necessary. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Council was last briefed formally on February 10,2015. Tigard's members to the Oversight Committee, Mayor Cook and Councilor Snider are briefed on a monthly basis. Attachments No fzle(s)attached. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.0 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: November 24, 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 Cite of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. -=ll written and oral testimonT becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in Cite of Tigard public meeting.will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: v Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will � ' ` V� help the presiding officer pronounce: I d J, , Address A City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION 1:\ADM\CATHY\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 150922.doc SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR L - 2 y- a 0/1-- City Council Update Nov 2015 (DATE OF MEETING) Chamber Events Good Morning Tigard (GMT),Thursday A.M.Networking 7:30 a.m.—Weekly 12/3/15— Hosted by the Broadway Rose @ their location 12/10/15— Hosted by Tigard Chamber Ambassadors @ the chamber 12/17/15— Hosted by HomeStreet Bank King City @ their location 12/24/15—Christmas Eve,enjoy Other • 12/1/15—6-8 p.m. Tigard Chamber Holiday Happy Hour @ the Broadway Rose • 12/7/15 —noon—1 p.m.—Health &Wellness Referrals Group • 12/8/15—8-9 a.m.—Business Services Referrals Group • 12/15/15—630-8 p.m. Good Evening Tigard (GET Connected)After Hours networking launch. Ugly Christmas Sweater contest! Being held at Broadway Rose Check our event calendar at http://business.tigardchamber.org/events/calendar/for locations and hosting companies Tigard Farmers Market Update • We successfully closed our season and are beginning our planning for next season. Stay tuned to our facebook and website for recipes, tips, coming attractions and more. www.tigardfarmersmarket.org and tigardfarmersmarket on facebook Downtown Updates • Join us for the Holiday Tree Lighting, Friday 12/4/15 6:45—9 p.m. Rite Aid Parking Lot in view of the Tree at Liberty Park. Heated tent, Santa & Mrs. Claus, Sugar Plum Elves,Templeton Choir, Cocoa, Cookies and More • Thank you to TVFR, Rite Aid and City of Tigard for their assistance with this event Learn what there is to do in Downtown Tigard on Facebook at www.facebook.com/exploredowntowntigard and at www.exploredowntowntigard.com 14 TIGARD tigardyoungprofessionak 7FAMtFARS ET CHAMBER OF COMMERCE R.GIYF connect collect.collebortle.dNnb. AIS-2472 3. A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 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: • November 10, 2015 OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments November 10, 2015 Minutes City O f Tigard Tigard City Council/CCDM Meeting Minutes TIGARD November 10, 2015 STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS -Councilor Woodard reported on the PRAB meeting where they received an update on the proposed Park and Recreation Charge (PARC). He said the Friends of Bull Mountain have raised$23,000 and still need$45,000 in order to be eligible for a Nature in Neighborhoods $125,900 grant from Metro. Councilor Henderson reported on the Willamette River Water Coalition meeting and distributed a diagram showing their proposed governance format. He said they want three council representatives from the cities. Council President Snider said he met with the Audit Committee and things look good with very minor issues identified. He also reported on the Lake Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership. He noted that discussions will be necessary to consider future governance over the water system. Options include continuing oversight between the two cities as is done currently or creating a separate entity such as South Fork Water District. Uniform representation is desired but costs to run it need to be considered. Mayor Cook noted recent ribbon cuttings for the Waluga Reservoir and the Gladstone River Intake Pump System (RIPS). The Bonita Pump Station is undergoing testing. Mayor Cook described some of the sessions he attended at the National League of Cities Conference including economic development and downtown areas. Councilor Goodhouse represented the city at the Costco gas station ribbon cutting. He attended the TTAC meeting where a discussion was held on the street maintenance fee and sidewalk gap program. TTAC will weigh in on the street maintenance fee and are suggesting increasing the percentage paid by commercial property owners. B. BRIEFING ON AN AGREEMENT WITH METRO REGARDING A GRANT TO DEVELOP DIRKSEN NATURE PARK - Project Managers Staedter and Peck briefed council on the project and efforts to shift elements in order to arrive at the 2:1 match for the Metro grant. Work will include two boardwalks,a nature play area,wetland restoration,the environmental education center and interpretives. Mayor Cook asked if there was an issue if half-street improvements are not done near the environmental education center. Project Manager Peck said that is a condition of approval but there is no specific timeline. Funding will be sought for that and the city is not restricted by a deadline. In response to a question from Councilor Woodard,Project Manager Staedter said that Agilyx is a local company that donated$49,000 because they want to help the city. Camas bulbs were planted, also donated by Agilyx. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.dgard-or.gov Page 1 of 12 C. DISCUSSION ON UPCOMING CONTRACTS - Contracts Manager Barrett described two contracts (utility billing and street sweeping) and one IGA. Assistant Finance Director Fitzpatrick was introduced to council. Council authorized staff to put the utility billing and street sweeping contracts on a future consent agenda. The IGA is with the Portland Police Bureau. They are putting together a multi-jurisdictional Intellectual Property Crime Enforcement Task Force (IPCE) through a COPS grant and requested that Tigard's commercial crimes unit participate on this on an overtime basis. The IGA specifies that the grant will cover the cost of police staff overtime and possibly training. Lt. Eskew and Sgt. Erickson discussed this growing area of criminal activity (fake Coach handbags, etc.) which does not stop at city boundaries. Council said this IGA may be placed on a future consent agenda. Councilor Henderson asked if the business tax pays for gasoline for the commercial crimes unit officers and Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance said staff will get a response for him. 1. BUSINESS MEETING—November 10,2015 IR A. At 7:37 p.m. Mayor Cook called the meeting to order. B. City Recorder Krager called the roll. Present Absent Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x C Mayor Cook asked everyone to stand and join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. D. Mayor Cook called to 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- Student Body President Shaina Azbari recapped recent and future events at Tigard High. An Open Table event educated students on cultural diversity and brought them together over food donated by restaurants and the community. There were 300 students at this after-school event. A Halloween event allowed children an opportunity to do Halloween activities and trick or treat without having to be outside in the cold,wet weather. The annual Veterans Assembly and Breakfast was held on November 6 with over 70 veterans attending. The first THS Open Mic night was held tonight and there will be a Poetry Slam next week. Leadership TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 2 of 12 students represented Tigard High at the Oregon Association of Student Councils. The girls soccer team made it into the semi-finals. C. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce—CEO Debi Mollahan was unable to attend and will give an update at the next business meeting. D. Citizen Communication—Sign up Sheet. IR Mark Forker, 5293 NE Elam Young Parkway,Hillsboro, OR 97124, from the Willamette West Habitat for Humanity spoke. He said since 1988 they celebrate at property tax time and remind city councils that families in Habitat homes contribute $190,000 in property taxes to help build better roads and bridges. This is more than the county would receive if Habitat was not helping people move from substandard rental housing into homes. He said, "Our success is your success." He shared that they bought some land in King City and will build 60 units. Mayor Cook said staff has been looking for property in Tigard and Metzger. Mr. Forker said they would like to help to move that along. Steve Kraemer, 14931 SW 88`h Avenue,Tigard, OR 97223, said he read about a 10 percent water rate increase one year ago. The news story said there were few complaints. He said he had been paying$40-45 every other month and his bill increased to $132,which is three times what he had been paying. His house is eight years old. Early complaints to the city got him responses on how to save water. He heard from Mayor Cook and Utility Manager Goodrich who said the problem is not his usage but that his house has a 1-inch water meter making the base rate higher. He said he pays 2.5 cents per gallon but others are paying one cent for the same amount. He has been told the city will not be discussing the rate schedule until 2018. He suggested that the city divide the meter cost evenly among all users. Those with five-eighth inch meters would pay$2.60 more but those with one-inch meters would pay$29.49 less. IJ Council President Snider said the responses from staff and mayor did not adequately answer his question and there is a rationale for why it costs more to provide service to a one- inch meter. The difference is that he has a water meter that requires that the city is able to provide him with more water at a peak time than anyone else with a smaller meter. The infrastructure to be able to do that costs more. He used the analogy of a fire department. Citizens have to pay for the readiness of the system whether it is in use or not. It will not be equitable to have it be completely based on a use charge because the system has to be bigger for a one inch meter. Mr. Kraemer suggested a 20 percent upcharge for someone with more capacity would be more reasonable. Councilor Woodard said he recognized him from an Intergovernmental Water Board meeting where he spoke about this and staff told him he may need to decommission some sinks in his house but Mr. Kraemer was not willing to do this. That discussion ended by suggesting he take this to council. He said council does not have a good solution at this time but maybe the timeframe for the rate discussion could be moved up. Mayor Cook clarified that water meter sizes are based upon the number of faucets, toilets and sinks are built into the house. Based on the size of the meter,whether it be five-eighths or one inch, TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 3 of 12 the city is required to be able to supply water to all of those faucets, even if there are only two people living in the home. A house could be sold next week to a family of eight. The charge is based on the city having the capacity. Mr. Kraemer said he did not want to alter anything in his house because he does plan to sell it in the future. He said he just wanted to bring this to the attention of the council. Council President Snider said there is a general city policy to charge the actual service cost to customers and if this became a conversation happening prior to 2018 he would support that. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council and Local Contract Review Board) Mayor Cook noted that Councilor Henderson requested that Item C be removed for separate discussion. A. RECEIVE AND FILE: 1. Council Calendar 2. Council Tentative Agenda for Future Meeting Topics B. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 13,2015 October 20,2015 Council President Snider moved for approval of the Consent Agenda minus Item C. Councilor Woodard seconded the motion. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x Local Contract Review Board: C. CONSIDERATION OF A CONTRACT AWARD FOR DIRKSEN NATURE PARK ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER AND PATHWAY IMPROVEMENTS Councilor Henderson asked to hear the staff report. Contracts Manager Barrett and Project Coordinator Peck gave the staff report. Contracts Manager Barrett said this contract is for improvements to the Dirksen Nature Park Environmental Education Center and Pathway Improvements. The project included mobilization, traffic control, erosion control, clearing and grubbing,improvements to the center itself, parking lot improvements,installation of a TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 4 of 12 LIDA water quality facility,landscaping, an 8-foot wide concrete path and incidental work. The city issued an invitation to bid with bids due on September 24. One bid of three received was disqualified as it only addressed the landscaping portion. A review of the bids showed that the lowest bid was still$60,000 over the engineer's estimate. Staff reviewed the project and since it is being phased in order to keep full funding for future years, they decided to scale it back. Staff suggested removing the concrete pathway and the first contractor was willing to lower their bid to $115,000. They asked the second contractor about taking out the concrete pathways but their bid is still$50,000 higher at$190,000. Staff feels moving forward with these reductions is within the contracting rules and is a viable option. He said council is being asked to approve a$115,000 contract with Lee Contractors. Councilor Henderson said this was discussed this at the October 27 council meeting and it was noted then that the low bid was 47 percent higher than the engineer's estimate. He said something had to be done but is concerned that there was no discussion by the LCRB of what that was. The LCRB has not seen any contracts and he does not want money issues such as this put on the consent agenda. He also said that the contract they are being asked to approve is "estimated"to be $115,000 and does not know if that is true. Contracts Manager Barrett said the contract will be written for the low bid amount but staff says "estimated"because unforeseen things occur in any construction project and may make this a little higher or lower. He said they will go through the full amendment process if that happens. Councilor Henderson said his point was that this should not have been put on the consent agenda with making a disclosure. Mayor Cook said it was put on tonight's consent agenda because two weeks ago council was asked if it was alright to do that and they all said yes. Councilor Henderson said council understood there were problems with this bid that needed to be solved. He said, "We are the LCRB and we need to do more due diligence." Council President Snider said perhaps council needs to be more deliberate about the decision to put something on the consent agenda and the time to pull it would be at that time. Councilor Henderson moved for approval of the contract. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Mayor Cook conducted a vote and the motion passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I www.tigard-or.gov Page 7 of 12 4. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING—UPDATE TO CHRONIC NUISANCE PROPERTY ORDINANCE (TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.42) a. Mayor Cook opened the public hearing and announced that this is a legislative public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment. b. Staff Report: Police Chief Orr and Detective Foulkes gave the staff report which proposes several changes to the existing Chapter 7.42 of the Tigard Municipal Code on chronic nuisance property. The amount of nuisances triggering a consequence was decreased from four to three and the time where the nuisances are counted increased from 60 to 120 days. Several crimes were added to the list. After two occurrences the police chief would send a registered letter to the homeowner describing the process that will be followed if a third crime is reported within the 120 day timeframe. The existing ordinance did not prescribe when a fine would be imposed and these proposed changes state that the penalty can be charged per day after three occurrences within 120 days. C. Public Testimony—No one signed up to speak. d. Council Questions and Discussion Councilor Woodard asked if this would reduce chronic nuisance property calls. Police Chief Orr replied that when he worked in Portland there was a similar ordinance and it was a good tool. It was usually sufficient to send warning notification to property owners or renters and they did not have to go to the legislative action. e. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. f. Council Discussion and Consideration Council President Snider said he would be remiss if he did not mention that he lives close to a nuisance property and asked for support as his neighborhood has dealt with a 15-year running battle about this. Council President Snider moved to approve Ordinance 15-17. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Mayor Cook asked City Recorder Krager to read the number and title of the ordinance. Ordinance No. 15-17—AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7.42 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE "CHRONIC NUISANCE PROPERTY"WITH UPDATED AND ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE City Recorder Krager conducted a roll-call vote of council. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 6 of 12 Yes No Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x Mayor Cook announced that Ordinance No. 15-17 passed unanimously. 5. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING—CITY MANAGER EVALUATION CRITERIA AND PROCESS ADOPTION a. Mayor Cook opened the public hearing and announced that this is an informational public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment. b. Staff Report: Human Resources Director Bennett gave the staff report. C. Council questions of staff—None d. Public Testimony-No one signed up to speak. e. Council Questions and Discussion Council President Snider said this is the process council will use to evaluate the city manager's performance. In Oregon it is the statute to hold a public hearing to seek feedback from the public for the evaluation process. Mayor Cook said the council hires the city manager, city attorney and municipal judge. The city manager hires the police chief,public works director and other executive staff. f. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. g. Council Discussion and Consideration Councilor Woodard moved to approve the criteria and adopt the process for the city manager evaluation. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 7 of 12 6. INTENT TO PURSUE GRANT FUNDING: CONNECT OREGON VI—TIGARD STREET TRAIL Economic Development Manager Purdy gave the staff report on this grant opportunity. A Connect Oregon grant was pursued one year ago and while the city scored well, their submission did not get above the line to receive the grant from ODOT. He reviewed the scoring criteria and found the application was deficient in two areas: not enough matching funds and the city did not control the site at the time of application. Since then, City Manager Wine negotiated a lease agreement with the railroad, ensuring a higher score in that category. The new proposal suggests that the city improve its match. Mayor Cook shared the good news that Economic Development Manager Purdy and Senior Transportation Planner Brown asked for$240,000 in Major Streets and Transportation Infrastructure Projects (MSTIP) funds as part of the matching funds (more than half of the local match) for the grant. The Washington County Coordinating Committee (WCCC) approved their request. Mr. Purdy said the city has been thinking of the Tigard Street Trail as more than a path and has explored concepts with designer Suenn Ho. This grant is for projects that improve the transportation infrastructure and have an economic development impact and this project does this. He said council is being asked tonight if they would authorize the City Manager to sign the grant application. Councilor Henderson asked if staff could identify where the$60,000 of in-kind services will come from. Economic Development Manager Purdy said anything we do that has value, such as staff time, meets the requirement donations do not. Volunteer hours would not count in this instance. Councilor Goodhouse commented that the Tigard Street Trail gets used, even at night and he noted that lights were an element of the grant. Economic Development Manager Purdy said it is proven that this trail will get used. Councilor Woodard said people come up from the road to get on the trail so they can walk and bike without being in traffic. He liked the concept plan and possibilities of what can be done. He applauded everyone working together on this project. Council President Snider moved to approve the city manager signing the grant application. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Mayor Cook conducted a vote and announced the motion passed unanimously. Yes No Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 8 of 12 Mayor Cook announced that this next item is a City Center Development Agency agenda item. 7. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL AMENDMENT— CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY a. Chair Cook opened the public hearing and announced that this is an informational public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment. b. Staff Report: Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance gave the staff report. The city has an agreement with a developer who will build a multi-family housing project and as part of the agreement the developer has agreed to purchase the property. The CCDA will help incentivize the development and pay a portion of the system development charges (SDCs). This supplemental budget amendment recognizes the revenue and appropriation of the expenditure for paying those fees. There will be no impact on fund balances. C. CCDA questions of staff: None d. Public Testimony- No one signed up to speak. e. CCDA Questions and Discussion Director Henderson said if the property was worth $3.1 million and SDCs are $3.1 million it would be the same. Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance said they agreed to pay$1.65 million in revenue and the city will pay$3.1 in SDCs. Director Henderson said the SDC amount rose from an earlier amount of$2.4 million and he did not realize the SDCs had increased. Mr. LaFrance said he was not familiar with the $2.4 million amount. Chair Cook noted that the expenditure amount also includes the building permits and other charges. f. Chair Cook closed the public hearing. g. CCDA Discussion and Consideration Director Snider moved to approve CCDA Resolution No. 15-06. Director Goodhouse seconded the motion. Chair Cook asked City Recorder Krager to read the number and title of the resolution. CCDA Resolution No. 15-06—A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE FY 2016 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET Chair Cook conducted a vote of the CCDA and the motion passed unanimously. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 9 of 12 Yes No Director Goodhouse x Director Henderson x Director Snider x Director Woodard x Chair Cook x 8. INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING: FY 2016 ADOPTED BUDGET AMENDMENT a. Mayor Cook opened the public hearing and announced that this is an informational public hearing in which any person shall be given the opportunity to comment. b. Staff Report: Finance and Information Services Director LaFrance said this is a supplemental amendment of$100,000. The development happening in River Terrace has increased the workload in the engineering department,implicating the completion of the capital improvement plan. River Terrace development also creates revenue and almost $900,000 of engineering permit fees has been received by the city and this is expected to continue for the next two years. The$100,000 will help hire two engineering staff members enabling them to work on the River Terrace engineering and also help complete the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). There is a need to seek grants for the CIP from outside agencies. One of the positions is a management analyst to assist with this. The annual cost of the additional staff will cost$170,000. After looking at the latest financial forecast staff realized that impact to the forecasted fund balance was negligible. C. Council questions of staff Council President Snider asked if the new staff members will be temporary or permanent. Mr. LaFrance said they will be permanent and that is why staff looked at the long term forecast. He said the city considers them consulting engineers. He expects to see an increase in need with River Terrace. Financially it appears to be a push but the nature of engineering work will need additional adjusting as it has,both up and down, over the years. Councilor Henderson noted that the city lost some engineers and asked if they were replaced and are these additional FTE's. Mr.LaFrance said there was a recent reorganization in engineering and the city needs to add resources now for one developer's projects in River Terrace. He said Engineer Faha predicted that the additional staff will help with the initial bulge and there may be additional work. There could be more changes. He clarified for Councilor Woodard that the$100,000 is pro-rated for the fiscal year and is the full cost for salaries and benefits for two engineering staff. d. Public Testimony: Mayor Cook noted that no one signed up to speak and asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak. There was none. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 10 of 12 e. Mayor Cook closed the public hearing. f. Council Discussion and Consideration Council President Snider motioned to approve Resolution No. 15-50. Councilor Goodhouse seconded the motion. Mayor Cook asked City Recorder Krager to read the number and title of the resolution. Resolution No. 15-50—A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE FY 2016 ADOPTED BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE$100,000 IN PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING THAT WILL BE USED TO ADD 2.0 FTE DUE TO AN INCREASE IN DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Yes No Councilor Goodhouse x Councilor Henderson x Council President Snider x Councilor Woodard x Mayor Cook x Mayor Cook announced that the resolution passed unanimously. Mayor Cook announced that the remainder of the meeting is a City Center Development Agency meeting. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION -At 8:40 p.m. Chair Cook announced that the Tigard City Center Development Agency was entering into Executive Session to discuss real property under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) and that the CCDA will reconvene in public session after the Executive Session.At 9:21 p.m. the CCDA reconvened in Town Hall for public session. IR 10. NON AGENDA ITEMS Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly gave a brief synopsis of a non-agenda item under consideration. Staff is asking the CCDA to authorize the Executive Director of the CCDA to execute a second amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Ash and Burnham Street properties. They will build 165 units of housing and 2,000 square feet of commercial space. The bank has requested that the city subordinate the agency's right to repurchase the property in a worst case scenario where the developer failed to complete the project. The CCDA will still have the right to repurchase the property but it is a change to the DDA so they are requesting approval of this resolution. Director Snider moved to approve CCDA Resolution 15-07 and Director Goodhouse seconded the motion. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tigard-or.gov Page 11 of 12 CCDA RESOLUTION NO. 15-07 —A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO REDEVELOP THE ASH/BURNHAM PROPERTIES Chair Cook conducted a vote. The motion passed unanimously. Yes No Director Goodhouse x Director Henderson x Director Snider x Director Woodard x Chair Cook x Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly announced that the groundbreaking ceremony for the Ash/Burnham Street project is at 4:00 p.m. on Monday, November 16. 11. ADJOURNMENT At 9:24 p.m. Director Henderson motioned to adjourn. Director Woodard seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Yes No Director Goodhouse x Director Henderson x Director Snider x Director Woodard x Chair Cook x Carol A. Krager, City Recorder Attest: John L. Cook,Mayor Date TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -NOVEMBER 10, 2015 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 www.tigard-or.gov Page 12 of 12 AIS-2311 3. B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: METRO Nature In Neighborhoods Grant for Dirksen Nature Park Prepared For: Carla Staedter Submitted By: Judy Lawhead, Public Works 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 sign an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Metro regarding the award and conditions of a$390,000.00 grant to develop Dirksen Nature Park? STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Authorize the city manager to sign the agreement. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY History Council authorized staff to pursue a Metro "Nature in Neighborhood" grant for development of Dirksen Nature Park on January 14, 2014. Staff prepared an application and was subsequently awarded $390,000.00 in December of 2014. Over the past 10 months, Metro and Tigard staff have been preparing the terms of an IGA. The grant will fund: - Two Wetland Boardwalks - An Oak Savanna Overlook - A Nature Play Area (natural play equipment made from rocks,wood, and other nature elements and promoting environmental education) - Forested Wetland Restoration The City will fund or partially fund: - Environmental Education Center Improvements - Oak Savanna Restoration - Oak Savanna Overlook Interpretive Elements - Nature Play Area (Play Equipment) - Wetland Boardwalks - Park Signage - Soft Surface Trails The City will be required to construct the items listed above within 3 years of the date of grant acceptance. For detailed information see the Attached Nature in Neighborhoods IGA. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could decide to not accept the grant or not to approve the terms of the IGA and the City will construct park elements as funding becomes available. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES,MASTER PLANS - Implements Summercreek Property Master Plan - Contributes to council goal to create "the most walkable community in the Pacific Northwest where people of all ages and abilities enjoy healthy and interconnected lives." DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Council directed staff to pursue this grant on January 14,2014. Council was briefed on the details of the TGA on November 10,2015. Fiscal Impact Cost: 1,300,869 Budgeted (yes or no): yes Where Budgeted (department/program): PW/CIP Additional Fiscal Notes: Revenue Funding Sources: - Urban Forestry Fund - Parks Bond Fund - Parks SDC Fund - Stormwater Fund - Water Fund - Nature in Neighborhood Grant Funding (if approved) - DEQ SEP Funding - In-Kind/Volunteer Contributions For a detailed breakdown of funding allocations and sources see "NIN Grant Match Detail" in Attachments Attachments NIN Grant Match Detail IGA NIN Grant DIRKSEN NATURE PARK Nature In Neighborhood Grant Match PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project provides environmental education,significant vegetation and habitat enhancements to re-establish and strengthen the qualities of various wetland habitat types within the 40-acre Dirksen Nature Park site.The majority of the property will remain a natural area,with approximately 35 acres being protected under a conservation easement.The table below only presents information for park improvements funded with the NIN Grant and components that are Tigard's match to the Grant. Future grants and funding will be required for other park elements not shown below which include the Shelter/Restroom Facility(with a second Nature Play Area),Tigard Street Roadway Improvements,Multi-Use Sports Field,etc. Dirksen Nature Park 2013-2015" 2016-2019 Project Total EXPENSES INTERNAL EXPENSES Agency Staff 39,000 39,000 EXTERNAL EXPENSES Consultants 150,000 150,000 Permits 12,000 12,000 PARK ELEMENTS Environmental Education Center and Concrete Pathway 139,852 139,852 Oak Savanna Restoration 272,000 272,000 Oak Savanna Overlook 74,197 74,197 Nature Play Area 210,720 210,720 Fanno Creek and Forested Wetland Boardwalks 265,200 265,200 Forested Wetland Restoration 30,000 30,000 Signage 1,200 1,200 Soft Surface Trails 2,700 2,700 TOTAL TIGARD PROJECT EXPENSES 192,900 1,003,969 1,196,869 REVENUE FUNDING SOURCE Urban Forestry 252,000 252,000 Parks Capital Fund - Parks Bond Fund 192,900 192,900 Parks SDC Fund 273,969 273,969 Sanitary Sewer Fund - Stormwater Fund 35,000 35,000 Water Fund 4,000 4,000 TOTAL TIGARD PROJECT REVENUE 192,900 564,969 757,869 OTHER FUNDING SOURCES NIN Grant 390,000 Agilyx _ 49,000 TOTAL OTHER FUNDING SOURCES - 439,000 TOTALREVENUE 192,900 1,003,969 INKIND MATCH" Volunteers 76,000 76,000 Soft Surface Trails 3,000 3,000 Site Furishings 13,000 13,000 CWS Plants for Forested Wetland 10,000 10,000 CWS Plants for Oak Savanna 2,000 _ _ 2,000 TOTAL INKIND MATCH"" 78,000 26,000 104,000 TOTAL • ••0 590,969 TOTAL PROJECT EXPENSE&INKIND MATCH 270,900 1,029,969 1,300,869 'Pre-Agreement Agency Staff$15,000 and Consultants$50,000 "Included with total Grant Match,but not included as revenue against expenses Project Managers Date: `1 � z / City Engineer,Lori Faha: Date: Finance Director,Toby La France: Date: f 92016-FY16 Dirksen Nature Park 1 of 1 09/23/2015 4:41 PM CMETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PorortNn Grand Ave. Pland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 Project: Natural Areas Capital Grants Program Contract No. 932931 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Natural Areas Bond Measure Capital Grant Award This Intergovernmental Agreement (this "Agreement"), entered into under the provisions of ORS chapter 190 and effective on the date the Agreement is fully executed (the "Effective Date"), is by and between Metro, a metropolitan service district organized under the laws of the state of Oregon and the Metro Charter, located at 600 N.E. Grand Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-2736, and the City of Tigard, located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97233 ("Grant Recipient"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the electors of Metro approved Ballot Measure 26-80 on November 7, 2006, authorizing Metro to issue $227.4 million in bonds to preserve natural areas, clean water, and protect fish and wildlife (the "Measure"); WHEREAS, the Measure allocated $15 million from bond proceeds to the Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program to complement the regional and local share portions of the Measure by providing opportunities for the community to actively protect fish and wildlife habitat and water quality in areas where people live and work; WHEREAS, Metro has determined to make a grant award to Grant Recipient to fund Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems (the "Project") as more specifically identified within the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Work"); WHEREAS, this Agreement between Metro and Grant Recipient is now needed to satisfy the terms and conditions of the Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program as provided for in the Measure; and WHEREAS, except as specifically provided in this Agreement, including the scope of work attached hereto as Exhibit A, and otherwise notwithstanding any statements or inferences Page 1 — Capital Grants Award IGA / Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems M ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 to the contrary, Metro neither intends nor accepts any(1) direct involvement in the Project (2) sponsorship benefits or supervisory responsibility with respect to the Project; or (3) ownership or responsibility for care and custody of the tangible products which result from the Project; NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. Purpose; Scope of Work; Limitations The purpose of this Agreement is to implement the Measure and facilitate the funding of a Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program project. Grant Recipient shall perform all activities described in the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Work"). As a condition precedent to Metro's agreement to fund the Project, Grant Recipient hereby approves the Project and agrees to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the applicable provisions of the Measure. At no time will Metro have any supervisory responsibility regarding any aspect of the Work. Any indirect or direct involvement by Metro in the Work shall not be construed or interpreted by Grant Recipient as Metro's assumption of a supervisory role. 2. Declaration of Capital Project In accordance with the Measure,Metro may only provide funds to Grant Recipient for the Project so long as such funds are exclusively used for capital expenses. Grant Recipient hereby confirms that the Project will result in the creation of a capital asset to be owned by Grant Recipient. The monetary value of the Project that is recorded as a capital asset shall be no less than the amount of the grant award that is actually provided to the Grant Recipient. Until June 30, 2027 or the date upon which all Bond debt related to Project is retired, whichever occurs earlier, Grant Recipient covenants that it will (a) own and hold all such capital improvements and real property interests acquired pursuant to this Agreement, and (b) record the asset created by the Project as a fixed, capital asset in Grant Recipient's audited financial statement, consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") and with Grant Recipient's financial bookkeeping of other similar assets. Page 2— Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems M ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 3. Contract Sum and Terms of Payment Metro shall compensate Grant Recipient for performance of the Work as described in Exhibit A. Metro shall not be responsible for payment of any materials, expenses or costs other than those that are specifically described in Exhibit A. 4. Limitations on Use of the Capital Asset That Results from the Project Throughout the term of this Agreement, Grant Recipient shall maintain and operate the capital asset that results from the Project in a manner consistent with one or more of the following intended and stated purposes of the Measure (the "Nature in Neighborhood Approved Purposes"): • To safeguard water quality in local rivers and streams; • To protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; • To promote partnerships that protect and enhance nature in neighborhoods; and • To increase the presence of ecological systems and plant and animal communities in nature deficient and other disadvantaged neighborhoods; Grant Recipient may not sell, use, or authorize others to use such capital asset in a manner inconsistent with such purposes. Notwithstanding the foregoing, secondary uses that arise as a result of such capital asset being used primarily in accordance with the Nature in Neighborhood Approved Purposes will be permitted, but only to the extent such secondary uses affect a de minimis portion of such capital asset or are necessary in order to facilitate the primary Nature in Neighborhood Approved Purposes. For example, if, as part of a land use review proceeding initiated to obtain the necessary approvals to operate such capital asset consistent with the Nature in Neighborhood Approved Purposes, a portion of such capital asset was required to be dedicated as a road, such road dedication would be a permitted secondary use. If the Work is the acquisition of real property, then Grant Recipient shall satisfy the requirements in this section of the Agreement by granting to Metro a conservation easement Page 3 — Capital Grants Award 1GA/Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems M ETRO NE Grand Ave. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT 600and,OR9723 Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 substantially comparable to the form of conservation easement approved by the Metro Council at the time the Metro Council approved the grant award to Grant Recipient. 5. Funding Recognition Grant Recipient shall recognize in any publications, media presentations, or other presentations referencing the Project produced by or at the direction of Grant Recipient, including, without limitation, any on-site signage, that funding for the Project came from the Metro Natural Areas Bond Measure's Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program. Such recognition shall comply with the recognition guidelines detailed in the Measure. The Grant Recipient shall place at or near the Project's location signage that communicates that funding for the Project came from the Metro Natural Areas Bond Measure's Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program. 6. Term It is the intent of the parties for the Project to have been completed, and for all Metro funding to have been provided to Grant Recipient prior to September 30, 2018. Notwithstanding the forgoing, all provisions set forth in this Agreement, and the obligations of Grant Recipient hereunder, shall continue in effect after the completion of the Project until June 30, 2027. 7. Termination for Cause A. Subject to the notice provisions set forth in Section 7.13 below, Metro may terminate this Agreement, in full or in part, at any time during the term of the Agreement if Metro reasonably determines that Grant Recipient has failed to comply with any provision of this Agreement and is therefore in default. B. Prior to terminating this Agreement in accordance with Section 7.A above, Metro shall provide Grant Recipient with written notice that describes the reason(s) that Metro has concluded that Grant Recipient is in default and includes a description of the steps that Grant Recipient shall take to cure the default. From the date that such notice of default is received by Grant Recipient, Grant Recipient shall have 30 days to cure the default. If the Page 4— Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems WCMETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 default is of such a nature that it cannot reasonably be cured within 30 days, Grant Recipient shall have such additional time as required to cure the default, as long as it is acting in a reasonable manner and in good faith to cure the default. In the event Grant Recipient does not cure the default within the 30-day period, Metro may terminate all or any part of this Agreement, effective on any date that Metro chooses following the 30-day period. Metro shall notify Grant Recipient in writing of the effective date of the termination. C. Grant Recipient shall be liable to Metro for all reasonable costs and damages incurred by Metro as a result of and in documentation of the default. Following such termination, should Metro later determine or a court find that Grant Recipient was not in default or that the default was excusable(e.g. due to a labor strike, fire, flood, or other event that was not the fault of, or was beyond the control of, Grant Recipient) this Agreement shall be reinstated or the parties may agree to treat the termination as a joint termination for convenience whereby the rights of Grant Recipient shall be as set forth below in Section 8. 8. Joint Termination for Convenience Metro and Grant Recipient may jointly terminate all or part of this Agreement based upon a determination that such action is in the public interest. Termination under this provision shall be effective only upon the mutual, written termination agreement signed by both Metro and Grant Recipient. 9. Oregon Constitution and Tax Exempt Bond Covenants Grant Recipient acknowledges that Metro's source of funds for the Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program is from the sale of voter-approved general obligation bonds that are to be repaid using ad valorem property taxes exempt from the limitations of Article XI, sections 11, 11 b, 11 c, 11 d, and 11 a of the Oregon Constitution, and that the interest paid by Metro to bond holders is currently exempt from federal and Oregon income taxes. Grant Recipient covenants that it will take no actions that would cause Metro not to be able to maintain the current status of the real property taxes imposed to repay these bonds as exempt from Oregon's constitutional property tax limitations or the income tax exempt status of the bond interest under IRS rules. In the event Grant Recipient breaches this covenant, Grant Page 5 — Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems M ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 Recipient shall undertake whatever remedies are necessary to cure the default and to compensate Metro for any loss it may suffer as a result thereof, including, without limitation, reimbursing Metro for any Projects funded under this Agreement that resulted in Grant Recipient's breach of its covenant described in this Section. 10. Liability and Indemnification As between Metro and Grant Recipient, Grant Recipient assumes full responsibility for the performance and content of the Work; provided,however, that this provision is not intended to, and does not, create any rights by third parties. To the extent permitted by Oregon law, and subject to the limitations and conditions of the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS chapter 30, and the Oregon Constitution, Grant Recipient shall indemnify, defend, and hold Metro and Metro's agents, employees, and elected officials harmless from any and all claims, demands, damages, actions, losses, and expenses, including attorney's fees, arising out of or in any way connected with the performance of this Agreement by Grant Recipient or Grant Recipient's officers, agents, or employees. Grant Recipient is solely responsible for paying Grant Recipient's contractors and subcontractors. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between Metro and any such contractor or subcontractor. Page 6— Capital Grants Award IGA / Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems 2C M ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland, OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 11. Contractors' Insurance A. Grant Recipient shall require all contractors performing any of the Work to purchase and maintain at each contractor's expense, the following types of insurance covering the contractor, its employees and agents: 1. Commercial general liability insurance covering personal injury,property damage, and bodily injury with automatic coverage for premises and operation and product liability shall be a minimum of$1,000,000 per occurrence. The policy must be endorsed with contractual liability coverage. Grant Recipient and Metro, and their elected officials, departments, employees and agents, shall be named as additional insureds. 2. Automobile bodily injury and property damage liability insurance. Insurance coverage shall be a minimum of$1,000,000 per occurrence. Grant Recipient and Metro, and their elected officials, departments, employees, and agents, shall be named as additional insureds. Notice of any material change or policy cancellation shall be provided to Grant Recipient thirty(30) days prior to the change. B. This insurance required by Grant Recipient, as well as all workers' compensation coverage for compliance with ORS 656.017, must cover all contractors' operations under this Agreement, whether such operations are by a contractor,by any subcontractor, or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by any contractor or subcontractor. C. Grant Recipient shall require all contractors performing any of the Work to provide Grant Recipient with a certificate of insurance complying with this section and naming Grant Recipient and Metro as additional insureds within fifteen (15) days of execution of a contract between Grant Recipient and any contractor or twenty-four(24) hours before services such contract commence, whichever date is earlier. D. In lieu of the insurance requirements in Sections I LA through 11.13, above, Grant Recipient may accept evidence of a self-insurance program from any contractor. Such contractor shall name Grant Recipient and Metro as additional insureds within fifteen (15) days of execution of a contract between Grant Recipient and any contractor or twenty-four(24)hours before services such contract commence,whichever date is earlier. 12. Safety Page 7— Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems M ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 Grant Recipient shall take all necessary precautions for the safety of employees, volunteers and others in the vicinity of the Work and the Project, and shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state and local safety laws and building codes, including the acquisition of any required permits. 13. Metro's Right to Withhold Payments Metro shall have the right to withhold from payments due Grant Recipient such sums as necessary, in Metro's sole opinion, to protect Metro against any loss, damage or claim which may result from Grant Recipient's performance or failure to perform under this Agreement or the failure of Grant Recipient to make proper payment to any suppliers, contractors or subcontractors. All sums withheld by Metro under this Section shall become the property of Metro and Grant Recipient shall have no right to such sums to the extent that Grant Recipient has breached this Agreement. 14. Proiect Records, Audits, and Inspections A. For the term of this Agreement, Grant Recipient shall maintain comprehensive records and documentation relating to the Project and Grant Recipient's performance of this Agreement (hereinafter"Project Records"). Project Records shall include all records, reports, data, documents, systems, and concepts,whether in the form of writings, figures, graphs, or models, that are prepared or developed in connection with any Project. B. In accordance with Section 2 above, Grant Recipient shall maintain all fiscal Project Records in accordance with GAAP. In addition, Grant Recipient shall maintain any other records necessary to clearly document: (i) Grant Recipient's performance of its obligations under this Agreement, its compliance with fair contracting and employment programs, and its compliance with Oregon law on the payment of wages and accelerated payment provisions; (ii) Any claims arising from or relating to (a) Grant Recipient's performance of this Agreement, or(b) any other contract entered into by Grant Recipient that relates to this Agreement or the Project; Page 8— Capital Grants Award IGA / Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems QMETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 (iii) Any cost and pricing data relating to this Agreement; and (iv) Payments made to all suppliers, contractors, and subcontractors engaged in any work for Grant Recipient related to this Agreement or the Project. C. Grant Recipient shall maintain Project Records for the longer period of either (a) six years from the date the Project is completed, or(b) until the conclusion of any audit, controversy, or litigation that arises out of or is related to this Agreement or the Project and that commences within six years from the date the Project is completed. D. Grant Recipient shall make Project Records available to Metro and its authorized representatives, including, without limitation, the staff of any Metro department and the Metro Auditor, within the boundaries of the Metro region, at reasonable times and places, regardless of whether litigation has been filed on any claims. If the Project Records are not made available within the boundaries of Metro, Grant Recipient agrees to bear all of the costs incurred by Metro to send its employees, agents, or consultants outside the region to examine, audit, inspect, or copy such records, including, without limitation, the expense of travel, per diem sums, and salary. Such costs paid by Grant Recipient to Metro pursuant to this Section shall not be recoverable costs in any legal proceeding. E. Grant Recipient authorizes and permits Metro and its authorized representatives, including, without limitation, the staff of any Metro department and the Metro Auditor, to inspect, examine, copy, and audit the books and Project Records of Grant Recipient, including tax returns, financial statements, other financial documents relating to this Agreement or the Project. Metro shall keep any such documents confidential to the extent permitted by Oregon law, subject to the provision of Section 12(F)below. F. Grant Recipient agrees to disclose Project Records requested by Metro and agrees to the admission of such records as evidence in any proceeding between Metro and Grant Recipient, including,but not limited to, a court proceeding, arbitration,mediation or other alternative dispute resolution process. G. In the event the Project Records establish that Grant Recipient owes Metro any sum of money or that any portion of any claim made by Grant Recipient against Metro is not Page 9— Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems CMETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 warranted, Grant Recipient shall pay all costs incurred by Metro in conducting the audit and inspection. 15. Public Records All Project Records shall be public records subject to the Oregon Public Records Law, ORS 192.410 to 192.505. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting Grant Recipient's ability to consider real property transactions in executive session pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(e) or as requiring disclosure of records that are otherwise exempt from disclosure pursuant to the Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 to 192.505) or Public Meetings Law (ORS 192.610 to 192.690). 16. Law of Oregon; Public Contracting Provisions The laws of the state of Oregon shall govern this Agreement and the parties agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the courts of the state of Oregon. All applicable provisions of ORS chapters 187, 279A, 279B, and 279C, and all other terms and conditions necessary to be inserted into public contracts in the state of Oregon, are hereby incorporated as if such provisions were a part of this Agreement. Specifically, it is a condition of this Agreement that Grant Recipient and all employers working under this Agreement are subject to and will comply with ORS 656.017 and that, for public works subject to ORS 279C.800 to 279C.870 pertaining to the payment of prevailing wages as regulated by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, Grant Recipient and every contractor and subcontractor shall comply with all such provisions, including ORS 279C.836 by filing a public works bond with the Construction Contractors Board before starting work on the project, unless exempt under that statute. 17. Notices and Parties' Representatives Any notices permitted or required by this Agreement shall be addressed to the other party's representative(s) as set forth below and shall be deemed received (a) on the date they are personally delivered, (b) on the date they are sent via facsimile, or(c) on the third day after they are deposited in the United States mail, postage fully prepaid, by certified mail return receipt requested. Either party may change its representative(s) and the contact information for its representative(s) by providing notice in compliance with this Section of this Agreement. Page 10— Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems M ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 Grant Recipient's Designated Representatives: Steve Martin 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97233 Email: steve@tigard-or.gov Metro's Designated Representatives: Natural Areas Bond Program Manager Metro Regional Center 600 N.E. Grand Ave. Portland, OR 97223 Fax (503)-797-1849 with copy to: Metro Attorney 600 N.E. Grand Ave. Portland, OR 97223 Fax (503) 797-1792 18. Assignment Grant Recipient may not assign any of its responsibilities under this Agreement without prior written consent from Metro, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 19. Severability If any term or provision in this Agreement shall be adjudged invalid or unenforceable, such adjudication shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remainder of the Agreement, which remaining terms and provisions shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 20. No Waiver of Claims, Modifications Metro's failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by Metro of that or any other provision of this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended Page I 1 — Capital Grants Award IGA/ Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems METRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 only by written instrument signed by both Metro and Grant Recipient and no waiver, consent, or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both parties. 21. Integration of Agreement Documents All of the provisions of any proposal documents including, but not limited to, Requests for Proposals, Grant Proposals and Scopes of Work that were utilized in conjunction with the award of this Grant are hereby expressly incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that the terms described in Sections 1 through 21 of this Agreement and in Exhibit A shall control in the event of any conflict between such terms and such other incorporated documents. Otherwise, this Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between Metro and Grant Recipient and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. The law of the state of Oregon shall govern the construction and interpretation of this Agreement. The Parties, by the signatures below of their authorized representatives, hereby acknowledge that they have read this Agreement, understand it, and agree to be bound by its terms and conditions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands on the day and year indicated below. CITY OF TIGARD METRO Signature Martha Bennett Metro Chief Operating Officer Print Name: Title: Date: Date: Page 12 — Capital Grants Award IGA/Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems iOM ETRO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Por NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Signature Hope Whitney Senior Assistant Metro Attorney Print Natne: Title: Date: Date: Page 13 — Capital Grants Award IGA / Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems Ml ETRO 600 NE Grand Ave. Scope Of Work — Exhibit A Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 Metro Contract No. 932931 CAPITAL GRANTS PROGRAM GRANTS AGREEMENT I. Project Title/Project Number: Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems II. Grant Recipient contact: Jeff Peck Senior Engineering Technician City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 jeffp@tigard-or.gov 503-718-2466 III. Budget Total cost of project: $ 1,300,869 Grant award $ 390,000 Financial match $ 806,869 In-kind match $ 104,000 IV. Project location Behind Fowler Middle School in Tigard, OR (10865 SW Walnut Tigard, OR 97223) V. Scope of Work This scope of work sets forth the work and requirements the Grant Recipient shall undertake as part of Metro's Nature in Neighborhood Capital Grants program grant award. The original grant application (see attached Attachment 1) sets forth the scope of work except as modified or added to herein in accordance with the description of park elements and funding in Attachment 2: • Phase 1 scope of work will include improvements to the education center, resurfacing of trails, and oak savanna restoration. These improvements, with the exception of the oak savanna restoration, will be completed in 2016. • Phase 2 scope of work will be changed to include the installation of a wetland boardwalk (Fanno Creek Boardwalk), forested wetland boardwalk, oak savanna and forested wetland restoration, oak savanna overlook, and one nature play area. One nature play area (not two)will be constructed.The play area will be located in the lower portion of the site by the restroom and picnic shelter location and will be larger than was originally planned. Phase 2 will be completed 2016—2018. • The Project budget is revised as indicated in Attachment 3. With Metro's approval,funds that are not needed as projected in a budget line item may be applied toward other budget line items described on Attachment 3. • Future phases are not included in this scope of work. Revised November 2005 Form 3301 CMETRO 600 NE Grand Ave. Scope Of Work — Exhibit A Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 • Expenditures associated with design consultants, permits and bid documentation incurred after December 6, 2013 can be counted toward the matching requirements of the grant program, but will not be reimbursed. • Update the management plan for Dirksen Nature Park to include monitoring the impact of the proposed soccer field on the emergent wetland and address impacts accordingly. Project Benchmarks and Deliverables Benchmark 1: Pre-construction • Complete design documents • Acquire permits • Complete bid documents • Contractor selection Deliverable 1: Grant Recipient will notify Metro as these benchmarks are met. Benchmark 2: Installation of improvements Deliverable 2: Invoices documented expenses incurred that will be reimbursed by Metro as well as expenses to be used for financial and in-kind match. Benchmark 3: Update management plan for Dirksen Nature Park Deliverable 3: Grant Recipient will submit a copy of the management plan. Benchmark 4: Youth and community engagement activities Deliverable 4: Include a summary of Northwest Youth Corps, Fowler Middle School staff and students,the Tualatin Riverkeepers and other community participation in the project, including non-native plant removal,trail restoration, and planting. Publicity As provided in Section 5 of the Intergovernmental Agreement, Grant Recipient shall place at the Project's location signage that communicates that funding for the Project came from Metro's Voter-approved Nature in Neighborhoods Grant Program. Metro may withhold final reimbursement payment until such signage has been placed. In addition, Grant Recipient shall recognize in any publications, media presentations,or other presentations referencing the Project, produced by or at the direction of Grant Recipient, that funding for the Project came from Metro's Voter-approved Nature in Neighborhoods Grant Program. Revised November 2005 Form 3301 CMETRO 600 NE Grand Ave. Scope Of Work — Exhibit A Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 VI. Reporting Requirements: a. Bi-Annual Progress Reports: In addition to the Benchmarks and Deliverables set forth above, once work has begun, Grant Recipient shall provide to Metro a progress report, documenting the status of the Project at least every six months. A progress report shall be included with every reimbursement request submitted by Grant Recipient and when the Project benchmarks identified above are met. b. All progress reports shall provide the following details: an account of the work accomplished to date, a statement regarding Grant Recipient's progress on meeting benchmarks, the percentage of the Project completed, a statement as to whether the Project is on schedule or behind schedule, a description of any unanticipated events, and data regarding success indicators. All progress reports submitted by Grant Recipient shall be in the Progress Report Form provided by Metro unless Metro approves another reporting method in order to provide consistency with other project funders. c. Final Report: Grant Recipient must submit a final report and final reimbursement request within 60 days of the earlier of(a)the Project completion date or(b)the expiration date of the Intergovernmental Agreement. The final report shall include full and final accounting of all expenditures, the value and source of matching funds, a description of work accomplished, volunteer hours and participation, Project photos (including a photo of the signage acknowledging the Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program participation), and data on success indicators.The final report submitted by Grant Recipient shall be in the Final Report Form provided by Metro unless Metro approves another reporting method in order to provide consistency with other project funders. I. Project Payment and Reimbursement a. Metro will reimburse Grant Recipient$1.00 for every$3.00 of out-of-pocket costs expended after the effective date of the Intergovernmental Agreement to complete the project, consistent with the original grant application, up to but not exceeding Metro's total grant award of three hundred ninety thousand and 00/100 dollars($390,000). In no event shall Grant Recipient request or expect reimbursement from Metro in excess of that amount. b. Payments will be processed as reimbursement for costs incurred and paid by the Grant Recipient. c. RETAINAGE: Metro will reserve as retainage from any reimbursement payment an amount equal to five (5%) percent of the requested reimbursement amount. The retainage will not be disbursed to Grant Recipient until the Project is fully completed and finally approved by Metro. Following completion of the Project and approval by Metro, Metro will deliver to Grant Recipient the entire retainage as part of the final reimbursement payment. d. To request the reimbursement of allowable expenses, Grant Recipient will complete Metro's Reimbursement Request Form and submit an itemized statement of work Revised November 2005 Form 3301 METRO 600 NE Grand Ave. Scope Of Work — Exhibit A Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 completed and an accounting of all expenses incurred during the current reimbursement period. A progress report shall accompany all reimbursement requests. The form, statement,and report shall be sent to: M ETRO ATTN: ORIANA QUACKENBUSH 600 NE GRAND AVE PORTLAND OR 97232-2736 e. Metro will make a reimbursement payment for those items identified in the Scope of Work or subsequent amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement. Substitutions or changes of elements of the Project that have not been approved by Metro are not eligible for reimbursement. f. Payment shall be made by Metro on a Net Fifteen (15) day basis upon approval of reimbursement request. II. Success Indicators Grant Sponsor agrees to monitor the Project for three consecutive years following the completion of the Project and Grant Recipient agrees to report the following information to Metro upon completion of the Project. • Success Indicator 1 Demonstrate commitment to the long-term maintenance of this investment. The Grant Recipient shall provide data from monitoring efforts associated with plantings survival, control of invasive vegetation and oak habitat enhancement as well as a description of how the monitoring results contribute to on-going maintenance activities. • Success Indicator 2 Demonstrate that the site is being used for conservation education. The Grant Recipient shall provide data regarding the use of the site by Fowler Middle School and the Tualatin River Keepers. Revised November 2005 Form 3301 CMETRO 600 NE Grand Ave. Scope Of Work — Exhibit A Portland,OR 97232-2736 (503)797-1700 ATTACHMENT 1 GRANT APPLICATION Revised November 2005 Form 3301 ok'D Metro Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Check one: Contract 932931 ❑ Letter of Interest F-1 Cover Sheet ATTACHMENT X Final Pr000sal Project Name Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk Through Northwest Ecosystems Applicant Organization City of Tigard Contact Name Steve Martin Address 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 Email steve@tigard-or.gov Is the applicant organization a registered 501(c)(3)? ❑ Yes X No If Yes,what is the EIN? Public Agency Same as above. (if different from applicant) Contact name Phone Address Email Site Dirksen Nature Park Address or Across the street from 10835 SW Tigard Street and Name Location behind Fowler Middle School. Evaluation criteria: ❑ ReNature ❑ ReGreen X Both Project Summary(50 words or less) Tigard,TRK, Fowler School, CWS and Northwest Youth Corps will improve Dirksen Nature Park to enhance visitors' experiences of northwest ecosystems including; (1)restoring forested wetland/ installing a boardwalk to view the bayou setting (2) restoring savannah/installing an overlook to view meadow and oaks (3) building two nature play areas. Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grant funding $ $390,000.00 If submitting more than one proposal, N/A Reaup_vt please rank this proposal in order of priority. Total project cost $ $2,931,943.00 We, the undersigned, attest that to the best of our knowledge the information in this application is true and that all signatories have authorization to submit this grant application to Metro's Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Program. Applicant Organization Name City of Tigard Printed Name St ve Martin— Parks Director Signature Date January 23, 2014 Public Agency Organization Name Same as above. Printed Name Signature Date s January 23, 2014 City of Tigard Metro Natural Areas Program Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants 600 NE Grand Avenue Portland, OR 97232 Re: Dirksen Nature Park—A Walk through Northwest Ecosystems Dear Capital Grants Review Committee: Saving the site now known as Dirksen Nature Park began as a community effort of support and love for this beautiful natural area. Owned by the local school district and used for decades as an outdoor classroom, the district was forced to declare the site surplus in 2008. With acres of developable land, the community feared losing their outdoor classroom forever. Multiple local, regional, and state partners came together to raise funds to purchase the property and the City of Tigard successfully gained ownership in 2010. Dirksen Nature Park's first few years have been full of participation. Tualatin Riverkeepers hosts summer nature camps and classrooms of children from around the Tualatin Basin. Fowler Middle School staff and students working with Clean Water Services continue to work on restoration of Summer Creek and enhance the habitat on site. This participation has created ownership and pride in the park and very little vandalism despite the extensive use of the site. City staff have removed debris and have contracted to remove acres of Himalayan blackberry from the site. Tigard is currently working to develop its second largest park and first nature park. Finding funding for such a large undertaking would be very difficult without the support of multiple partners. Tigard would be pleased to have Metro as an active partner and is seeking the investment of a Nature in Neighborhood Capital Grant. Sincerely, Steve Martin City of Tigard Parks Director Enclosure 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 9 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 0 www.tigard-or.gov Or PROJECT DESCRIPTION Introduction and Project Overview Dirksen Nature Park houses a number of distinctly different ecosystems all within close proximity to each other. This mix of ecosystems makes the Park a very rich habitat for native plants and animals and much of the park is protected by a METRO Conservation Easement. See Figure 1 and 2. The site is located in the heart of a well-developed urban area and is beloved by the community. The City of Tigard,together with its partners, proposes to complete native area restoration and to develop facilities for park visitors to experience these unique settings. The goal is to provide enhanced experiences of these areas by playing up the most unique qualities of each. These facilities will be designed to significantly limit the impacts on the park's natural resources. Restoration at Dirksen Nature Park has been a team effort since its purchase in 2010 and is a requirement under some of the funding sources used to secure the property. The site has proven to be a rich resource for environmental education programs. The pictures above shows children enjoying tours and camps at the park. With no formal recreation program in place at the city, environmental education programs are possible because of Tigard's valued partners. They include Tualatin Riverkeepers (TRK) who bring many diverse visitors to the park through their tours and camps; Fowler Middle School staff/students who continue to use the site for education and restoration plantings, and Clean Water Services (CWS) who continues to provide needed native plants and staff to serve as interpreters for tour groups and middle school kids. The proposed grant project will provide ongoing opportunity for both residents of Tigard and our regional nature park visitors to explore and restore. The project will also provide job skill development as our new partner Northwest Youth Corp joins the team! Site History and Project Background The 48-acre Dirksen Nature Park is designated as a community park in the City's 2009 Park System Master Plan. The City purchased the 5.3 million property through multiple transactions beginning in December of 2010. Over 2.5 million in grant support for the project came from state, regional, and local agencies eager to support the acquisition and development of this nature park in Tigard. Key steps in the acquisition and planning of the park include; (1) in 1974 the Tigard-Tualatin School District acquires 100-acres and develops Fowler Middle School. Since this time,the school district uses the open areas of the site for playfields and physical education and uses the creeks, wetlands, and wooded areas for outdoor learning; (2) in 2001,the City develops the Fanno Creek Trail which extends through the site along the eastern boundary next to Fanno Creek's riparian zones; (3) in 2006, the school district declares the open space portion of the property surplus and the community becomes worried about loss of this valued natural area; (3) In 2007, with urging from community members and with regional concerns about losing the site to development, the Trust for Public Land negotiates an exclusive option-to- purchase agreement to protect the property until it can be placed in public ownership; (5) In 2010, the City purchases the first 42-acres of the park with Parks Bond funds,grant awards from METRO and Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB), and public agency contributions from Clean Water Services (CWS) and Washington County; (6)As part of the grant process,a conservation easement was finalized between the City and Metro protecting 35-acres of significant woodlands and wetlands, and the City agrees to provide environmental education on the site; (7)ln January 2011,a draft Natural Resource & Management Plan is completed and provided to Metro outlining how different habitat areas will be managed on site; (8) In April 2011,the City acquires three adjacent parcels located along Tigard Street, totaling 5 acres; (9) In August 2011, a draft Environmental Education Plan for the park is submitted to OWEB; and (10) In June of 2012 a master plan is competed for the park. See Figure 3 and Attachment 1 to review the master plan and its associated report. (11)The Park goes through the permit process that allows the site to become Tigard's second largest park and finalize the draft management and education plans. With significant input from key stakeholders and the public,the master plan is designed to achieve balance between resource protection and public access, which is required to meet the requirements of Metro and OWEB acquisition grants. Scope of Work As mentioned previously,the city has under gone an extensive public input process and developed a corresponding master plan for Dirksen Nature Park. See Figure 3 to view the Final Master Plan. The proposed grant project includes the development of three major components of the master plan; 1. Forested Wetland Restoration and Development of a Boardwalk 2. Oak Savanna Restoration and Development of an Overlook 3. Two Nature Play Areas Forested Wetland Restoration and Boardwalk. Nestled in the heart of the Natural Resource Easement, in the center of Dirksen Nature Park, is a forested wetland. It houses a wide variety of wildlife attracted to the area by the water, tree canopy, and plentiful food sources. See attached photos. This wetland has an ever changing character. In the winter up to two feet of water stands in a "bayou-like" forest of ash, oak, and alder. As spring arrives,the site's native perennial plants come to life and thigh high vegetation of arching false Salomon's seal along with the blue blossoms of camas make a showy display. As summer arrives the standing water slowly evaporates and the shade tolerant slough sedge rustles under the dappled light of summer's mature tree canopy. Unfortunately the health of this wetland is threatened by numerous demand trails and the presence of non-native plants like English Ivy, Himalayan Blackberry, and Old Man's beard. The project will restore and protect the forested wetland by: (1) Removing non-native vegetation and abandoning old demand trails. This work will be completed by trained youth corps working on gaining experience in land management and basic employment skills. Approximately 1500 feet of old demand trails will be removed along with non- native plants within the forested wetland. (2)Replanting with native emergent vegetation. This work will be completed by Fowler Middle School students and children attending TRK's field trips. Clean Water Services and the city will provide plants and technical assistance for these projects. TRK's volunteer naturalists will provide the young planters with training and leadership. Summer camp kids will monitor the plantings and provide water as needed through the dry summer months to raise plant survivorship. (3)Establishing a new trail and boardwalk . The new trail, approximately 720 feet long, will be sited outside of the wetland and will lead to a single access point into the wetland. This single access point will be served by an elevated boardwalk to minimize impacts to this wetland. The boardwalk will lift users just above the standing water,jog around trees at the edge of the wetland, and will provide windows through the decking for visitors to have a clear view of the plants below. All aspects of the boardwalk will be designed to allow people to experience this unique bayou-like ecosystem but to keep them separated to minimize impacts to the area. The boardwalk will be designed to be extremely interesting so that park users will want to access the area in this single location. This complete reworking of site access, including providing a boardwalk, will be the single most important component to long term protection of the forested wetland. Oak Savannah Restoration and Overlook. A remnant oak savanna runs along the northern boundary of the site. The area has been impacted by past farming and is currently covered in non-native grasses, English Hawthorn trees, lawn grasses, Himalayan Blackberry, and English ivy. The project will allow park users to once again feel the open nature of flowing grassland dotted with statuesque Oregon White Oak. The goal is to develop an open expansive view of this majestic ecosystem that will show off native grasses flowing in the wind and brightly colored wildflowers announcing the arrival of spring and providing color through fall. The project will restore and protect the oak savanna by: (1) Removal of invasive trees, shrubs, and grass species. This work will be completed by experienced native restoration specialists. All but the largest English Hawthorn have been removed from the site to date leaving large hawthorn trees for removed. Removal of non-native grasses will require experts in plant identification, timing of removal, and careful decisions about how to manage existing seed stocks in the soil. The City intends to secure a company with extensive experience in Oregon Oak Savanna restoration and will consult with Metro restoration staff to develop a final plan for restoration. (2) Planting of a native meadow, wet meadow, and oak trees. Oak savanna restoration will be carried out by experienced restoration specialist. It is expected to take approximately 2 to 3 years to establish native grass species at the site. (Irrigation stub outs have been designed into the park to assist with establishment of these species.) Volunteers will be used for shrub planting along the far southern edge of the savanna. In this area native black hawthorn will be installed to replace the existing wildlife values of the non-native hawthorn. Volunteers will also be used to install a dense native shrub hedge along Tigard Street to lower the long-term influx of lawn seed from the roadway into the savanna. Native Oaks will be planted throughout the savanna. Our volunteer resources with come primarily from four sources including TRK's tour kids, Fowler Middle School students,Washington County Juvenile Crews, and "Tree for All"volunteers. Volunteers will be organized and supervised by TRK staff, Fowler Middle School Teachers, Clean Water Services staff, and Tigard environmental coordinators. (3) Installation of an Oak Savanna Overlook. A unique overlook will be constructed at the highest elevation of the savannah. The overlook will include a simple widened walkway sunken slightly into the hill that will house a thick 18"tall glass "retaining"wall that will allow park user to peer into the secret underground world of grassland plant roots. This simple design will also enhance the very open feel of an oak savanna by allowing visitors to stand in this very open location. Nature Play Areas.The project will construct two play areas designed to provide park users with opportunities to climb, run,jump and build with rocks, logs, and other natural features. The larger nature play area will be sited on the outer edge of the park's mowed playfield to limit impacts to the more sensitive natural areas in the park. It will be sited between the mowed play area and the edge of the forest. The play area will include stacked log and rock climbing areas and will have logs and other natural materials available for park users to build with. The area will be covered in play chips and will be near the new restroom and picnic tables. It will be designed to allow nature park users to linger and to play outside of the most sensitive areas of the park, adjacent to the Fanno Creek Trail. The second, smaller nature play area will be located near the future parking area on Tigard Street. This small play area is intended to provide an area for small children to freely play without disturbing the natural features of the park. Located near parking, it won't require a long walk for small children and will be located in the buffer area between the parking lot and the nature park. All facilities developed under this project will provide universal access to the public and will meet the Americans with Disabilities Act. EVALUATION CRITERIA With both Key components of the proposal being ecological restoration and the enrichment of people's experience with nature, the project meets both "Re-Nature" and "Re-Green" criteria. "Re-Nature" "The project improves how ecological processes contribute to overall ecosystem health...Restores diverse riparian vegetative structure or stream character...........Increases fish passage and/or wildlife crossings" As described above, the project will restore both a forested wetland and a remnant oak savanna, each of these ecosystems are considered the highest value habitats per the Regional Conservation Strategy. These habitats are considered to be dwindling in the region and their locations next to the Fanno and Summer creek riparian forests make them even more valuable. Abandoning demand trails in these habitat areas will strengthen wildlife corridor connections between the park and the stream corridors to the east, north, and south of the park. By eliminating trail crossings and consolidating trails, wildlife will have easier access to 34.5 acres of restored riparian corridor between Fowler Middle School and the developed portions of Summerlake Park. They will also have easier access to 156 acres of publicly owned riparian corridor running downstream along Fanno Creek to Bonita Avenue and 56.5 acres of restored riparian corridor running upstream along Fanno Creek from the Nature Park to Scholls Ferry Road. See Figure 4 for the locations of these connections overlayed on the Regional Conservation Strategy Habitat Map. "Re-Green" (1)The project should enrich people's experience of nature and strengthen a physical connection to the region's ecology......the project will serve a group of people that do not currently have strong access to nature. As described above, the over-riding intent of this capital project is to develop infrastructure that will allow Dirksen Nature Park users to feel the full openness and beauty of an oak savannah, to see the canopy and watery nature of the forested wetland, and to be able to move natural objects around, climb rocks and logs and get down in the dirt at the natural play areas. The City of Tigard Park's Department currently offers no recreation programs and under the requirements of grants used to the purchase the property is required to provide rich education experiences at Dirksen Nature park. To fulfill this requirement,Tigard contracts with our valued partner Tualatin Riverkeeper's (TRK). TRK provides nature education tours, programs, and summer camps at the park. TRK places a specific focus on outreach to under-served populations across the Tualatin River watershed. TRK currently brings 10 to 15 classrooms of children from across the basin to Dirksen Nature Park every year. The goal for tour recruitment is 75%Title 1 schools. TRK has been successful in reaching this goal. When bus funding became an issue to reach underserved groups Tigard and TRK were able to partner with Tualatin River Partners for Clean Water who now offer bus grants to teachers who want to plan a trip to Dirksen Nature Park but have no way to get to the park. TRK also implements site visits with groups from Community Partners for Affordable Housing, a local non-profit group that develops low income housing in Washington County.TRK will continue to provide site tours and interpretation to Greenburg Oaks, Olsen Woods, and Spencer House, low income projects that house a high number of children. In 2013,TRK developed a relationship with the Good Neighbor Center; a family homeless shelter located within walking distance to Dirksen Nature Park, and has begun tours with the children attending the shelter's after-school program. Although it is sometimes the perception that all western suburbs are wealthy, 6 of the 10 elementary schools that serve Tigard are Title 1 Schools. Fowler Middle School, located immediately adjacent to the park has 37%of its population qualifying for reduced or free lunch. (2) The project should demonstrate ecological design solutions that are both effective and cost- efficient....leverages public dollars beyond the 2:1 match.. The city will be putting up over a 2:1 match for this project. Tigard passed a parks bond in 2010 and working with their citizen Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, placed a high value on the purchase of parks land while land prices were down during the recent recession. The city has been able to leverage these park bond dollars very effectively but does not have adequate funding to complete the entire development desired at Dirksen Nature Park. With concerns for impacts to natural resources at the park as it becomes more and more popular,the city would like to be able to develop the facilities that will control access of the public to the most sensitive habitats. However, at this time more funding will be required. See the budget narrative for a detailed description of our funding. (3) The project benefits beyond the project itself. This could be demonstrated in the following ways..........the project brings together individuals and organizations to address community concerns beyond the environmental or ecological benefits....... This project provides multiple benefits. Northwest Youth Corp will be working at the site together with City,TRK, and CWS staff. This program is a career building program for youth ages 18-24 with barriers to employment. The grant project will allow these young adults to receive career training, earn a living allowance, achieve an AmeriCorps education award, and develop professional references within the community. The project also provides progress toward Tigard's new vision of developing the most walkable city in the region and increasing the health of local citizens. Expansion and improvement of the Tigard Park ecosystems will improve the value and marketability of Tigard as both a destination for business was well as an attractant for visitors. Increased property values and increased visitor traffic benefit the Tigard business economy and tax base, in turn stimulating investment in Tigard. The project progresses Metro's 2040 Growth Concept, as well as implementing important components of Tigard's Parks and Trail Plans. The project is consistent with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife urban wildlife corridors vision for the area. As mentioned above, the environmental education tours provide affordable opportunities for school field trips and recreational opportunities for struggling schools and low income youth programs. The project will also provide Washington County Juvenile division opportunities to work with their kids at the park, providing meaningful chances to work and give back to the community. The project will also support the continued us of the site as an outdoor classroom for science study. Project Feasibility The project will require final design, engineering, construction document preparation, construction, and long-term management of the forested wetland boardwalk, the oak savannah overlook, and the natural play areas. Below is a description of how each of these project stages will be completed. Master Planning As described in the project history section above, much work has already taken place to bring the project to where it is today. Extensive public input was gathered during property and master planning phase of the project and a list of participants in this process can be found in the Attached Master Plan. For a log of public meetings and responses to public input, please visit www.tigardor.gov/community/parks/dirksen nature park.asp. The master plan was completed in 2012 working with the consulting firm Vigil Agrimis. Key staff for the master planning effort were Paul Agrimis and Maureen Raad. Paul, vice President with the firm, is a professional wetland scientist, registered landscape architect, and civil engineer with over 30 years of experience in environmental planning and design. His work covers a broad range of water resources and natural resources projects including public input, site and regional analyses, conceptualization, feasibility studies, regulatory guidance, design, construction assistance, and monitoring. Maureen, a senior-level project manager, has 15 years of experience in planning, design, and natural resources restoration. She has expertise in restoration ecology,fluvial and tidal geomorphology, and in integrating human use of the landscape into sensitive natural settings. Our consultant team worked closely with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist and other natural resource professionals including Metro and CWS biologists. Construction Document Preparation The construction document preparation phase of the project is in progress at the writing of this application and is being completed by WHPacific. Key WHPacific staff include Mark Hadley. As a registered landscape architect and studio director, with over 30 years of experience, Mark provides seasoned design services leading teams of diverse professionals. He specializes in the design of parks and public spaces. He has won numerous design awards including a Sustainable Design Award for the Burlington Bottoms Management Plan and is a regular speaker at park conferences. Mark's list of successfully completed nature park projects includes Wallace Marine Park Boat Ramp and Bank Stabilization, in Salem; Bethany Lake Park Water Quality Enhancement,for Washington County; MCormick Nature park Trails and Master Plan, St Helens, OR; Wyeth Bench Environmental Education Center and Rustic Retreat Complex, Mt. Hood National Forest. He is supported by Casey Storey biologist and environmental coordinator. Casey specializes in wetland and fisheries biology, fish passage design, water quality monitoring, wetland delineation, Endangered Species Act compliance, aquatic entomology and environmental permitting. Also supporting the team is Phil Quarterman, an award winning wetland scientist and natural resources planner with 34 years of experience. Phil's training includes wetland work (functional assessments/delineations), planting plans specifications, construction, and natural resource monitoring. Further qualifications include stream bank and riparian zone restoration, plant community mapping, and Endangered Species Act documentation. The project civil engineer is Ken Rehms PE,with over 19 years of experience,his primary responsibilities are serving as lead project engineer, design expertise,construction engineering, field support, and scheduling project staff to ensure that project timelines are met. Construction and Long-term Management City of Tigard Department of Public Works will manage the design, construction, and long-term management of the project. The department has expertise in capital construction, park and natural area restoration and management. The design and construction of park infra-structure will be managed by Kim McMillian, the city's Assistant City Engineer. Kim has 30 years of experience in project management and has been with the city for 10 years. She oversees the team that implements all parks development for the city. This team includes engineers, consultants, and construction inspectors. They have recently completed East Butte Park; Fanno Creek Trail at Grant Avenue; and won the 2012 National Engineering Award for Burnham Greenstreet. All Tigard construction inspectors are certified erosion control specialists and work closely with Carla Staedter,Tigard's environmental coordinator. Carla will manage the development of the oak savannah and forested wetland. She has 5 years of experience in park and recreation planning, design, and construction. She has 25 years of experience with native area restoration and management. Carla is the 2011 recipient of the Professional Award for Outstanding Efforts to Enhance Oregon's Urban Forests. Steve Martin, the city's parks and streets manager, will oversee the team of professionals that will provide long-term management of Dirksen Nature Park. Steve has been with the city for 14 years,and has experience as a professional research forester and with landscape design, installation, and maintenance as well as management of landscape professionals. He oversees a staff of 9,which include park maintenance staff and a designated greenspace coordinator. Northwest Youth Corps as mentioned above will complete non-native removal, and will prepare abandoned trails for restoration. Fowler Middle School staff and kids will complete replanting of the demand trails at the forested wetland. Middle school students will also provide brainstorming and input on the design and location of interpretive elements for the forested wetland boardwalk and the oak savanna overlook. Riverkeepers will continue to plan, train tour volunteers, and run tours and summer camps from the park. As part of their programs they will work with Tigard and CWS to plant the forested wetland and the scrub edges of the oak savanna. Partnerships Tualatin Riverkeepers 11675 SW Hazelbrook Road Tualatin, OR 97062 (503) 218-2580 Contact: Isabel LaCourse, Environmental Education Coordinator Isabel@TualatinRiverkeepers.org Project Role: Environmental Education,Trail Building, Planting, Serving Tualatin Basin Folks without Strong Access to Nature, Interpretive Assistance Fowler Middle School 10865 SW Walnut Tigard, OR 97223 (503)431-5000 Contact: Sue Manning, Science Teacher smanning@ttsd.kl2.or.us Project Role: Environmental Education, Planting, Building Site Stewardship in the Students, Interpretive Assistance Clean Water Services 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, OR 97123 (503) 681-3600 Contact: Rich Hunter,Water Resources Program Manager hunterr@cleanwaterservices.org Project Role: Provide Native Plants to Support Volunteer Plantings,Technical Advisors for Restoration of Oak Savanna Northwest Youth Corps 2621 Augusta Street Eugene, OR 97403 (503) 743-8590 Contact: Tom Helmer, Program Director—Community Conservation Corps& OutDoor Oregon tom@nwyouthcorps.org Project Role: Non-native removal at the forested wetland, site preparation of abandoned demand trails, Proiect Evaluation and/or Monitoring The project will be monitored by Tigard staff, Tualatin Riverkeepers, and Fowler Middle School. One of the goals will be to document changes in the oak savanna and forested wetland. The site will be followed by Tigard's Environmental Coordinator,for a period of five years. The Coordinator will establish photo points and collect photos four times per year at the Forested Wetland and the Oak Savanna. Twice per year the site will be photographed from the City's bucket truck to track changes over time.The team will watch to ensure that park users are choosing the new circulation routes through the park. If demand trails re-appear they will be blocked to encourage the use of the new circulation systems. These restoration areas will also be monitored to see if additional planting is required and will be watched through the first 2 summers to see if watering will be required to help young plants become established. The Nature Play Areas and the new boardwalk will be monitored by parks maintenance staff to ensure they stay in good condition. The play areas will have components changed as needed by parks staff. Parks staff and Riverkeepers will watch for the popularity of items provided in the play areas and will use that information to continue to provide a rich natural play environment. Tigard intends to develop detailed management plans for both the forested wetland and the oak savannas to be incorporated in the existing natural resource plans for the Park. We will do outreach to Clean Water Services, Metro staff,TRK, and local community groups to provide needed technical input into the long-term management of these resources. The plans will be completed 3 years after project completion to allow for time to see how the site responds to the changes. Tigard and its project partners will work with other agencies and non-profit groups who have experience in the restoration of oak savanna habitat. We will contact Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to see if wildlife surveys could be completed to document usage of the site and to assess if any actions are required to improve habitat. Budget Documents The city completed preliminary master planning of Dirksen Nature Park in 2012. At the preparation of this grant application, the city has construction documents for the project at 70%completion. Funding is not available to construct all elements of the park. Currently the City has funding to complete restroom construction, education center improvements, paved and soft trails, the site parking lot, and the required street improvements. The city intends to develop the property over four phases. The project timeline for completion of the four phases is: • Phase I—slated for summer 2014 includes (1)the restroom/shelter; (2) improvements to the education center; and, (3) some resurfacing of soft trails that will be completed in partnership with TRK. • Phase II—slated for 2015 includes (1) required street improvements; (2) parking lot; and, (3)road access to the nature center. • Phase III—slated for 2016 includes (1)boardwalks; (2)the nature play areas;and (3)the oak savanna and forested wetland restoration • Phase IV—slated for 2017 will be the sportsfield improvements. (Costs for these improvements is not included in the budget.) See revised budget in Attachment 3 NATURE IN NEIGHBORHOODS CAPITAL GRANT (F3) PROJECT BUDGET WORKSHEET PROFESSIONALSERVICES COSTS Estimate the hours of work directly related to your project for non-profit personnel, agency personnel, volunteers and consultants. You can delete rows that do not apply and/or add more specific descriptors. Explain the tasks each is expected to complete in the budget narrative (i.e. surveys, design development, contruction documents, plan review, construction management). Pre-Agreement costs must occur AFTER the Invitation to Submit a Full Application and are not reimbursable. Agency 8 non-profit personnel time cannot exceed 10%of the grant request. Volunteers specifically doing project installation should be included in this section. financial match in-kind match grant request TOTAL A. Pre-Agreement 1. Non-profit staff $0.00 2. Agency staff $0.00 3. Consultants $0.00 4. Volunteers $0.00 B. Post-Agreement Costs $0.00 1. Non-profit staff $0.00 2. Agency staff $0.00 3. Consultants $100,000.00 $100,000.00 4. Volunteers J M $75,343.00 $75,343.00 Total for Professional Services 1 $100,000.001 $75,343.0010.00 175,343.00 CONSTRUCTION COSTS Estimate the cost for all work elements of your project. Feel free to change the list. Specify in the budget narrative which work elements will be completed by volunteers and how you calculated the budget figure. financial match in-kind match grant request TOTAL A. Site Preparation $0.00 1. Mobilization & Bonding $90,000.00 $90,000.00 2. Clearin /Demolition/Eros.Control $38,000.00 $38,000.00 3. Staking & Surveying $13,800.00 $13,800.00 B. Utilities $309,600.00 $309,600.00 C. Improvements/Materials $0.00 1. Restroom/Shelter $151,200.00 $151,200.00 2. Educaton Center Improvements $44,300.00 $44,300.00 3. Trails (paved) $50,500.00 $50,500.00 4. Trails soft surfaced $10,200.00 $3,000.00 $13,200.00 5. Nature Play Areas $100,000.00 $100,000.00 6 Wetland Boardwalks/Overlooks $117,000.00 $210,000.00 $327,000.00 7 Required Street Improvements $823,000.00 $823,000.00 8 Multi-Use Ballfield Renovation $0.00 9 Parkin Lots $77,800.00 $77,800.00 10 Community Gardens $30,000.00 $30,000.00 D. Permits $10,000.00 $10,000.00 E. Others, please list 1. Furnishings $50,000.00 $50,000.00 2. Interpretive Signage $60,000.00 $60,000.00 3. CWS Veg. Corridor Plantings $71,750.00 $71,750.00 4. Parking Lot Trees/Planting $27,700.00 $27,700.00 5. Oak Savanna Restoration $2,000.00 $50,000.00 $52,000.00 6. Forested Wetland Restoration $10,000.00 $30,000.00 $40,000.00 7. Irrigation $154,250.00 $154,250.00 8. Restroom Enclosure $4,500.00 $4,500.00 9. Contin ency 1 $218,000.001 1 1 $218,000.00 Total for Construction Costs > ACQUISITION COSTS Please estimate the cost for all work elements. Please feel free to change the list. financial match in-kind match grant request TOTAL A. Purchase Price $0.00 B. Option Purchase $0.00 C. Option Reimbursement $0.00 D. Appraisal & Appraisal Review* $0.00 E. Title Report, insurance & documents $0.00 F. Phase I Enviro Assessment $0.00 G. Stewardship endowment $0.00 H. Management Plan Development $0.00 I. Baseline Documentation $0.00 Total for Acquisition Costs OTHER COSTS A. Travel (use current State of Oregon rates) $0.00 B. Overhead/Indirect costs -these can only be used as match. $0.00 $0.00 Totals for Other Costs $0.001 Wuul Somul $0.00 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 1 $2,451,600.001 $90,343.001 $390,000.001 $2,931,943.00 Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grants Match Form II IJLIUGLIUI IJ 1. Enter description of the source of matching funds or in-kind contribution. Put an X in the appropriate boxes. Enter the value of the matching source and appropriate notes to clarify how source will be allocated. Feel free to add as many rows as you need. 2. If utilizing volunteers, indicate this in the "Match Source" and "In kind" columns and calculate the number of hours the volunteers will be contributing to the project. The "Amount"will be those hours multiplied by the hourly rate found at the Independent Sector website: www.independentsector.org/programs/research/volu nteer_time.html 3. If your "Match Source" is a professional or technical service received as "In kind", use the market average or actual salary or bid for that individual or service. Use the "Notes" column to document your methodology. Matching Source Financial In-kind Pending Secured Value Notes venicie, rogr wages, Northwest Youth Corps X $6,000.00 indirect costs Clean Water Services X $10,000.00 native plant material Clean Water Services X $2,000.00 staff time volunteer ours donated by tour guides and visitng student who plant on tour.Based on 990 donated hours x$22.14. over a 2 TRK X $21,919.00 year period Volunteer hours donated by students planting for 1 hour each year. Based on 800 students and teachers over a 2-year Fowler Middle School X $35,424.00 period x $22.14 Total $75,343.00 DIRKSEN NATURE PARK N D S O R P Ilul :ate •� _.......-- _ -'MANZANIT'A�STy +� ELLSON LN`�_ !r -�"w >' �' ' UJ �. ` ,.a Lo~e Li '� � f do W r"` � � N a R�cj..I. ¢ * r.- >lf fr o W a pAKO * �. 44 A DR w .t: � Cal, •low t Nina 46— it _ d V)� � 4 y !�"yFr�- i• •. J ed a.• rft r '*m '' �r. C•; . 4 WF J ii s�s - ��r; •�• a' S4. PINAS � � x �' • CT .� dwcl�� '''� •a. KA HERI�NE ST � •� l"' • '! ! ar ��A��• 40 V. 1 - ■ e � w . � _ MEzCDOW $�TCP ,,�' • 4 yea. R is .KATHERINE ST If0 •` dypLNUT--ST • ;� .'- _ eRo �Hso�s;'t �• W k Y. e + W� r Lu � � �..� � ,� � '� •NJK% •� ,it'd �,� �•"•� �'�'o �'�� � 77 CAR,M.ErN gtT �.� t � � F QP � .r + /�1P••� �` � .ST • , Nor Education { , tenter Oak Savam (Restored) Emergent Education Site Wetland Ponderosa Pirie ForOA ir - - _ - Ash Forest Emergent Wetland Ash Forest Wetland Wetland ` �- Two (2) v Informal Trails _ Baseball l y Co nife ro us N Ponderosa Pine Forest Ferest r � Fields w �� � � lob Pine Forest + ...�a•a >, r' �!'F .�i*° - - -�- Porta-Potty/Storage -_ .... . F Riparian Floodplain Forest 7 ' f 'Entrance(Typical) I yr 1 Figure 2 Site Map - Fowler Middle School Existing Conditions SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY Master Plan June 2012 Entrance Community Trail/Sidewalk w � �`� Parkin (10 to 15 cars) Q Intrnee Inte retivp w: Nature Play "�. overlook -—- Savanna ��......�l.'f . Overflow Parking(10 cars) Area -- Overlook (tots) Wetland Overlook . - ' a Community Garden E+ a Restroom/Shelter A Nature Play(5-12) y. Replanting p` Forested Wetland Overlook Coniferous ; �! Fanno Creek Trail En ranee Big Cedar forest a 8-foot Paved Trail Soft Surface Trail Network _ Sidewalk i �• 5-foot Chip Trail 3-foot Chip Trail �"' :'"'- J •� I Boardwalk 1 e Cteek `'• - ''Summer Creek OverlooEntrance • Nature Play i Sa Water Quality Station Entrance Structure Education Node Fowler Middle School . ti - Note:Component circled in red to be Figure 3 Dirksen Nature Park IL4 T Ir 4L x VP * 7 * Natural ♦ *Oak Savannah Overlook Play Area f K n ! C � ` � - °�necton VVNdI;f� R �� Natural ��CC 'Aa Play Area i I �'o �o •- Forested Wetland GL ♦ --� oo„,1� and Boardwalk J, a ■ ma cy � 4Z P 111111110, iy q -Highest Value Medium-Low Value & � � -High Value O Low Value -Medium-High Value ®Least Value i _ 2 Regional Conservation Strategy Map and Predicted Wildlife Corridors through Dirksen Nature Park Figure 4 SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY MASTER P LAN Concept A S- Ti Aard StreetP arkin (10 to 15 cars) l i Nature r, Drop-off ommunity L--Savanna Play t�Wetland� Overlook o �arden and Overlook i i Overlook Area ! Boardwalk Iantmg Forested W nd Oirerloo ;, �,`��, Boardwalk <� + .� /�' r ,. Coniferous Forest ' Fenno Creek Trail Mop ll Big Cedar .; . �� - -- 8-foot Paved Trail ! Restroom/Shelter = _-- __ ` ��, ' Sidewalk Boardwalk S-footChipTrail Creek. � , 3-foot Chip Trail , Summer Creekt®verlook Boardwalk Water Quality Station Nature Play '^ Structure Fowler Middle School Education Node City of Tigard, Public Meeting No. 1 — March 28, 2012 SUMMER R EEK PROPERTY MPLAN Concept 6 rte, -_S-idewalk a S ee l .._. _..,_.._. Parking (10 to 15 cars) --- _ .—__— a �ommunity - Comm'ujn#ty-- i. IVatUre Savanna Wetland Overlook harden and Trail Overlook Play Play Area Overlook r -- - Shelter _ - - J i L antingi a �� V Forested Wetland Overlook Boardwalk Fanno Creek Trail Big Cedar Con iferousforest ! — 8-foot Paved Trail 3-foot Trails Restroom - -- Sidewalk �..._ ' - 5-foot Chip Trail k ► , .,, _foot 3 Chip Trail ' ` '" 'Summer Creek pverlook Boardwalk t W ion Nature Play Water Quality Stat Y -_ 1 -- Pow Structure Fowler Middle School ' Education Node City of Tigard, Public Meeting No. 1 — March 28, 2012 SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY MASTER PLAN Preliminary (Concept) Master Plan Exance � - - DroL-o_ff �` - - Entra , swT 'r' t Parking (10 to 15 cars) Comr�umty Trai/Sldtw � — - — — - i -- ok Nature Play i Overlo ' --- K^' Savanna Overflow Parkin .(10 cars) (tots) _ 9 Overlook - Community Garden Wetland Overlook Restroom/Shelter / rn, Nature Play(5-12) Forested Wetland Overlook i v ntrance Big Cedar Coniferous Fanno Creek Trail `! ForestAG.�� -- 8-foot Paved Trail I Soft Surface Trail Sidewalk Network = 5-foot Chip Trail 3-foot Chip Trail 3 rnmerCreekOverloolC / Boardwalk Entrance "?��Water Quality5tation �/ • Nature Play Entrance o Structure Education Node City of Tigard, Public Meeting No. 2 — May 17, 2012 Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Meeting Notes Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Thursday, February 8th, 2012 Summer Creek Park Education Building and Site 2:00 -4:30 pm Attendees: City of Tigard: Steve Martin, Carla Staedter, Tom McGuire and Greg Stout City of Tigard Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: Troy Mears Conservation Technix: Steve Duh Vigil-Agrimis, Inc.: Paul Agrimis, Maureen Raad and Susie Mattke-Robinson Clean Water Services: Rich Hunter Tualatin Riverkeepers: Lori Kruz and Brian Wegener Friends of Fanno Creek: Sue Beilke Metro: Elaine Stewart and Robert Spurlock Fowler Middle School: Sue Manning Community Member: John Frewing Ash Creek Forest Management: John Goetz These notes focus on the group discussion that took place in the field and reflect the comments and opinions of the stakeholders in attendance. The project design team will balance these remarks with other public input in preparing the conceptual master plan design. The agenda and handouts (that follow these notes) summarize the project overview provided in the Education Center. These notes are organized by location to make them easier to follow. For example, a comment made about trails in coniferous upland forest was included in the discussion of that location even if the comment was made at a different location. Comments from phone interviews conducted prior to the meeting were added in a couple of locations to supplement the field notes. Summary of Key Stakeholder Input "High quality trails and high quality habitat will create a high quality experience" by Carla Staedter Habitat Types NW Native Ecosystems and species of note on the site include: ■ Oak Savannah (restored) Ponderosas pine ■ Coniferous Northwest Forest Camas ■ Riparian Floodplain Forest Sunny South Facing Slopes ■ Emergent Wetland Madrone ■ Forested Wetland Reptiles ■ Scrub-Scrub Wetland Birds • Minimize habitat fragmentation caused by trails. Consider habitat patches and wildlife migration corridors (ie. wetland to upland) when selecting alignments. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 1 March 21, 2012 Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division • Consider boardwalks, culverts, etc. to maintain habitat connectivity. • Decommission excess trail. • Take advantage of on-site wetland mitigation and upland restoration opportunities. Restore plant communities on-site. Environmental Education Education programs being supported include: ■ Tualatin Riverkeepers, field ■ Fowler Middle School trips (all Tigard and many ■ Recreation Users Washington County schools) ■ Tualatin Riverkeepers, summer camps • Learning is experiential: seeing, hearing, touching. Design should heighten the experience. • Provide access to habitats for education but do so in a way that limits impact to and degradation of the resource. For education, quiet surfaces (not gravel) are important so wildlife can be heard over foot fall. • Identify and enhance 5 to 6 major educational experiences for NW Native Ecosystems. • Maintain fewer, but higher-quality trails • Provide viewpoints for visual access to habitats to minimize habitat penetration by trails in sensitive areas (e.g.,forested wetland). • Provide controlled access to Summer Creek for sampling in a degraded area so other areas can be restored. Recreation Recreation uses being considered include: ■ Education Center, drop off Nature Play Area ■ Education Center, curb appeal Baseball (1 field) ■ Parking for Trailhead and Park Soccer (1 field) ■ Summer Creek Community Trail Restroom ■ Trails Shelter • Provide an accessible loop-trail alternative to the busy Fanno Creek Trail. • Community Trail alignment is most appropriate along SW Tigard Street. • Design trail system to discourage off-trail exploration by people and pets. • Designed elements should be integrated into the site • Consider incorporating interpretive elements into the design. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 2 March 21, 2012 Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Location-Specific Notes Site 1. Education Center on SW Tigard Street Proposed Activities: Enhance building curb appeal, add garden area, provide outdoor gathering area and provide bus drop-off/turnaround. Discussion Synopsis: There were no concerns raised by the group about the building, garden or gathering area elements. Bus drop-off is needed at the Education Center to reduce walking time and provide safe conditions for students. Dropping students at Fowler Middle School is not an option because the walk is too far. The education goal is for students to spend 95% of their time experiencing the site. A drop off at the Education Center provides for this and will also reduce conflicts between Middle School and Environmental Education students. Summer camp students are currently dropped off at the Education center by parents. Because the wetland boundary is close to the building consider roadside pull-off in lieu of turnaround to reduce site impact. Garden spaces uses could include: community gardens, native plant nursery (perhaps pollinator focused), eatables for summer camp and field trips. The function of the Education Center building is to provide restrooms, lunch location in rainy weather, and storage for supplies and student gear. Curb appeal improvements do not need to be elaborate and could include adding native vegetation, expanding the deck and replacing doors. Site 2. Nature Play Area on SW Tigard Street in Restored Oak Savanna Proposed Activities: Nature play area and oak savanna restoration. Discussion Synopsis: There some concerns raised by the group about including a nature play area in this location. Nature play was supported but this location (near traffic on SW Tigard Street and away from parking, park entry, and public services) were seen as problematic for safety reasons. Distributing play experiences around the site in different "ecosystems" was suggested though this might not provide children with the opportunity to meet and play with others in a designated nature play area. Consolidating play and environmental education uses would concentrate disturbance and reduce impacts to wildlife. Would a nature play area at the Education Center distract from education activities? If nature play is located along SW Tigard the design should provide a vegetated buffer/separation between the play area and street traffic. A dense native vegetation buffer along SW Tigard St will also protect oak savannah restoration site from weed seed. Traffic is loud when cars are present. Locating activity area away from street will help. Half-street improvements may be required. A continuous sidewalk will probably be needed in addition to the Community trail for local traffic. Try to integrate infrastructure into site. Runoff currently flows off SW Tigard St into the site. Consider Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 3 March 21,2012 Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division using low impact development techniques (no curb and gutter, vegetated filter strip) to keep this water on-site. Design trails to discourage roaming off-leash dogs and desire-line trails. Seasonal closures could protect habitat during breeding season but would be difficult to enforce. Fencing could be used to keep users out of sensitive areas. Preserve open reptile basking habitats on south-facing slopes. Jackson Bottoms has good examples. Consider integrating habitat elements into the design of the developed locations along SW Tigard St. Since non-native English hawthorn are being removed, consider planting native hawthorn (these may hybridize with the non-native species) or other fruit-bearing trees like Serviceberry and Cascara to provide bird habitat. A covered bird watching location could be a nice amenity. Site 2.5/3.5. Forested Wetland Boardwalk Proposed Activities:Trails and environmental education. Discussion Synopsis: There were no concerns raised by the group about environmental education in this location. Habitat fragmentation and uncontrolled access were big concerns in this area. Creating a spur trail instead of a through trail was preferred. An elevated boardwalk would keep people on the trail and out of sensitive areas while allowing a unique user experience. Boardwalk nodes would need to accommodate 10 students. Design elements could include blind-like handrails and decking that allows the user to see open water below them. Accessing the forested wetland from the south will be the least impactful to wetlands. If access is provided from this location, upland forest fragmentation should be limited. Site 4. Skills Area in Coniferous Northwest Forest Proposed Activities:Trails, environmental education and skills course. Discussion Synopsis: There were no concerns raised by the group about environmental education in this location. Site currently vandalized (graffiti and fort building) and is devoid of understory vegetation. The hope is that vandalism will decrease with increased foot traffic. The size of the gathering area could be constrained by adding large wood at the perimeter. This would provide a nature play opportunity and would allow for education about the role of large wood. Replanting under the dense canopy would likely be challenging in the deep shade of this location. Summer Creek Park is an important habitat site for ponderosa pines. These will be replaced by Douglas fir and cedar over time without management these species. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 4 March 21, 2012 Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Selectively thinning them in this area could benefit ponderosa pine and provide a source of large wood. Is it appropriate to keep skills activity here? The existing trail network includes a through trail to SW Gallo and 113th Avenues. This trail should remain as it is an established site accesses. A nice loop is possible in this area but trail decommissioning is needed. Impacts to the riparian forest should be minimized when selecting trail alignments. Site 5. Water Quality Sampling Area in Summer Creek Riparian Floodplain Forest Proposed Activities: Paved trail, environmental education (water quality sampling), restroom and shelter (outside the 100-year floodplain). Discussion Synopsis: There were no major concerns raised by the group about the activities proposed in this area. The existing platform does not function for water quality sampling as it is too high. Currently the banks on either side of the creek are degraded due to uncontrolled access. A defined access for education is needed either on the north or south side of the creek to reduce habitat degradation. Adding to the existing stair and platform would consolidate impacts in one location. Water surface elevation fluctuates and should be factored into platform design. Incorporating historic flood elevations in to the design could be used as a teaching tool in this area. Asphalt and concrete paving surfaces were discussed for a trail connecting the Fanno Creek Trail with the bridge to Fowler Middle School. Maintenance currently accesses the Park from Fowler Middle School. Concrete is more expensive but longer lived, while asphalt is less expensive and consistent with other paved surfaces in the Park. National Marine Fisheries Service may object to asphalt in the 100-year floodplain. Site 3. Playing Field Proposed Activities: Remove northwest baseball backstop, add a soccer overlay in the outfield area of the southeast baseball field and provide a trail. Discussion Synopsis: There were some concerns raised by the group about the proposed activities in this area. There was some opposition to adding a soccer overlay as this would extend the recreational use season. The reconfigured playing fields will leave much of the northwest corner available for native plantings. The small wetland in this area would not be impacted by proposed activities and provides a good opportunity for on-site mitigation. Walkers use the west and north edges of the field to create a loop off of the Fanno Creek Trail. Developing a paved loop trail in this area would take advantage of sunny southern aspect and serve the active recreation areas and restroom. This trail alignment passes the riparian floodplain forest of Summer Creek, coniferous northwest forest, forested wetland, camas, quaking aspen, and ponderosa pine forest and so provides good interpretive opportunities. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 5 March 21,2012 Summer Creek Park Master Plan Key Stakeholder Meeting Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Site 6. Parking on SW Tigard Street Proposed Activities: Parking lot for Fanno Creek Trail and Community Park. Discussion Synopsis: It was after 4:00 by the time we reached this location so discussion was brief. No major concerns were raised by the group about the activities proposed in this area though adding paving to the site was a concern. Summer Creek Park will function as a Community Park and so will serve people from across Tigard. During acquisition, this parcel was targeted specifically to provide parking in order to limit the impact of additional cars on the surrounding neighborhood. Concentrating parking will allow for controlled access to the Park using designated trails. Low impact development techniques could be used in the parking lot design to limit impacts and provide an educational opportunity. There is a desire line trail used by children living north of SW Tigard St when accessing the Park and walking to school. A paved path connecting the parking lot to the Fanno Creek Trail in this area would formalize this route. An overlook of the Fanno Creek wetland could be incorporated to add an interpretive element. Summer Creek Community Trail Proposed Activities: Provide trail alignment in the park. Two alignments are proposed for this trail in the Tigard Greenway System Master Plan. One alignment follows SW Tigard St and one crosses the south side of Summer Creek Park connecting SW Gallo Ave to the Fanno Creek Trail. This trail was discussed at several sites. Discussion Synopsis: Habitat fragmentation and increased traffic (bike and ped) were concerns for the southern alignment. Paving the southern alignment was not favored. Integrating the trail into the area along the northern alignment was preferred. A vegetated buffer between the trail and SW Tigard would increase the sense of separation from the road. Modifications to the Fanno Creek Trail alignment and design could reduce wetland impacts and barriers to species migration. END Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 6 March 21,2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No.1 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Meeting Notes Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting Wednesday March 28, 2012 Tigard PW Building - 8777 SW Burnham Street 7:00 -8:30 pm Attendees: See Sign in Sheet Project Overview: Following brief introductions and welcoming remarks, a presentation was given to share information about the site's conditions, constraints and current use, with special focus toward the extent of wetlands and the variety of habitat types. A range of potential park amenities was noted that include the upgrade and re-configuration of existing sports fields and the construction of a restroom, interpretive shelter, natural play area and trails. The majority of the park, approximately 35 acres, will remain as open space - a significant portion of which will undergo restoration. Two master plan concepts were discussed and review, and special attention was directed toward enhancements at the education center and a potential parking area off Tigard Street. These concepts were used during the group break-out sessions to elicit public feedback. Break-Out Exercise - Group 1 (10 people: 5 men and 5 women) Education Center The group was generally in favor of the proposed improvements at the Education Center. Environmental Education perspective preferred the bus drop-off to be located near the education center, with forty days annual usage. Some parents do not want children to have long walk through the site to education center from a drop- off at Fowler Middle School. The curb appeal improvements proposed for the existing double-wide structure were well supported. Walking Trails The group was interested in providing some accessible trails (strollers, etc.). Paved trails could be pervious pavement. Some members of the Group really liked the notion of a loop trail using the sidewalk along SW Tigard Street and a Community Trail offset from SW Tigard in a serpentine pattern. Others mentioned that the area along SW Tigard Street is a sensitive habitat area. Need to be aware of that when considering a busy trail. Maintaining access from the neighborhood southwest of the park is important. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 1 April 3, 2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No. 1 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Nature Play Area The Nature Play Area was supported but concerns were raised about not making it too brushy or wild so that parents can easily observe children at play and keep them safe. There were folks in favor of both proposed locations (near parking) but there was some concern that the play area might be a distraction if located near the education center. Locating the play area near parking and restrooms was recommended. Playing Field The group supported the proposed baseball field and soccer field overlay. Parking on SW Tigard Street This group was split on parking on SW Tigard. Some prefer looking at the education center location as an alternative to keep development away from habitat, and would like upland scrub/shrub habitat enhancements within the proposed parking area. Others expressed a need to improve safety along SW Tigard and saw an opportunity to provide needed parking adjacent to the Fanno Creek Trail. Summer Creek Community Trail A paved sidewalk/trail along SW Tigard Street is needed for safety of children and others moving along the corridor. Some voiced a desire for a planted buffer along this trail to separate it from SW Tigard Street. Traffic moves quickly on SW Tigard, often exceeding the 25 mph poster speed limit. Traffic calming and cross walks or crossing signal could be helpful for pedestrians and bikes crossing on the Fanno Creek Trail. A raised crossing for the Fanno Creek Trail was offered as one potential means to improve safety. (See comments under walking trails) Safety The group discussed vandalism of existing site (plantings and tree tagging) and had concerns about future facilities (restrooms). Prior homeless camps and prior use of the environmental education parking lot for parties and other activities were a concern. A park ranger or patrol program like THPRD's could help. Other A park sign should be installed. A phased development approach was discussed. This would allow for a simple start and slow growth in to the site. Break-Out Exercise - Group 2 (8 people: 7 men and 1 woman) Summer Creek Community Trail The group felt that it was redundant to have both a sidewalk and paved trail parallel to SW Tigard Street. Something in between Concept A and Concept B was preferred. A wider meandering sidewalk set further off the street with a planted screen Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 2 April 3, 2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No. 1 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division separating it from the road was preferred. Access points for people crossing the street should be incorporated into the design (could swoop back to curb rather than have spur sidewalks). If there is a bike lane on SW Tigard do we need a multi-modal trail in the park? From an Environmental Education perspective there was concern about having student's first nature experience be on a paved path as this is more of an Urban Park than Nature experience. Nature Play Area The preferred location for this activity was adjacent to both parking and restrooms. No designated park parking lot location is available near the ball fields (the proposed restroom location), though limited on-street spaces are available. There is parking at Fowler Middle School but only on SW Walnut Street. There are restrooms at the Education Center, but they are only available when the building is unlocked. A port-a-potty could be provided at either the Education Center or at the proposed parking lot location to serve the play area. From an Environmental Education perspective there was concern about locating the Nature Play Area at the Education Center because parking is needed at that facility when it is in use. Walking Trails Unpaved walking trails were the preferred amenity for the group. They favored the more extensive trail network in the southwest part of the site and liked the boardwalk elements that were proposed. They liked trails that follow existing alignments (where people want to go). Questions were asked about if providing accessible trails was required. But the group did not advocate for this. Parking on SW Tigard Street Given the amount of use that the proposed soccer and baseball fields will attract, the group felt that more parking might be needed. There was a desire to look more closely at the Education center to see if additional spaces could be provided there. Education Center The group was generally in favor of the proposed improvements at the Education Center. Water Quality Sampling Area Improvements are needed here to make sampling possible. Playing Field The neighborhood already had a lot of night- lighting and noise from the playing fields at Fowler Middle School. Not having lit fields at the park was a preference that is in keeping with habitat conservation goals for the property. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 3 April 3, 2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No. 1 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Safety There was a question about security lighting in the park. Steve Martin responded that the only place it might be appropriate was on the Fanno Creek Trail because it is considered a transportation corridor. The group supported this limited approach and did not advocate for including lighting in the plan. The biggest concern relative to lighting was for children walking to school. Off-Leash Dogs/Cats There was concern voiced about the amount of damage done to habitat and species by uncontrolled pets. Providing an off-leash area was briefly discussed but didn't seem to solve the real problem. It also seemed inconsistent with Habitat Conservation goals and would require a considerable amount of land. END Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 4 April 3, 2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No.2 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Meeting Notes Summer Creek Property Master Plan, Public Meeting Number 2 Thursday May 17, 2012 Tigard PW Building - 8777 SW Burnham Street 7:00 - 8:30 pm Attendees: See Sign in Sheet Project Overview: The meeting began with brief introductions, welcoming remarks, and an update on where the Summer Creek Property is in the master planning process. This was followed by a presentation that reviewed existing site conditions, constraints and uses, with special focus on the variety of habitat types, including wetlands found on the site. The Concepts presented at Public Meeting Number 1 were reviewed and the presentation summarized the feedback received from stakeholders and the public thus far. The presentation then reviewed the modification made to the earlier concepts to create the Concept Master Plan. The Concept Master Plan presentation and discussion was followed by a more detailed discussion of the education center improvements and the two nature play areas. Following the presentation there was an informal group discussion of the Concept Master Plan followed by a brief open house that allowed for more one-on-one discussion. Feedback received at the meeting is summarized below by topic. Discussion During the Presentation: Parking The Concept Master Plan shows parking for 10 to 15 cars near the Fanno Creek Trail and an additional 8 to 10 car overflow parking area at the Education Center. There was concern that additional parking may be required. The City will likely require parking along SW Tigard Street but a resident suggested that off-street parking would be preferable due to the high traffic speeds on SW Tigard Street and unsightliness of pa rked ca rs. The overflow parking spaces at the environmental education center were discussed briefly. The proposed paving material is a pervious pavement like grasscrete. There was support for this but traditional asphalt was also suggested as a better choice. Expanding parking in this area and/or the flexible use area was also discussed. Playing Field The location and orientation of the ballfields was generally supported. It was suggested that drainage be carefully considered in the baseball backstop area as well as on the soccer field. Soil amendments and drainage improvements may be required to improve playability. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 1 May 18, 2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No.2 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Restrooms Restroom location should consider the cost of providing water and sewer to the location. There was support for the proposed location form a use point-of-view (central, near the ballfields, away from Fowler Middle School, near parking lot). Education Center The proposed curb appeal improvements to the education center were generally favored and were not discussed at length. Community Garden Community garden space proposed near the education center will be used by both the education center (to grow native plants) and the public (as community garden space). There was concern that 15 beds would not be enough to satisfy demand. Adding more beds at the education center and/or expanding the garden in the flexible use area were discussed as options. Bird Watching A covered bird viewing area (like the amenity at Jackson Bottoms Wetland Preserve) would be appealing. Adding a cover to the proposed education center deck was discussed. Providing for this in the flexible use area farther from the road was also discussed and was preferred. Nature Play Area Nature play materials choice with regard to maintenance was discussed. Maintenance staff raised concerns about sand and seasonal water (mud) near restroom and parking lot. Maintenance has experienced difficulties with these materials and keeping public restroom facilities clean and in working order. Restrooms will likely be open year round. Wood chip materials are preferred to sand in play areas. Maintenance staff was also concerned that moveable parts would make park maintenance more difficult. The group generally favored nature play. One participant voiced a preference for play elements with a rustic look. Another felt the vertical logs were reminiscent of cut trees. Concerns were raised about the longevity of wood structures, such as the log pile, with natural material breaking down over time. Swings and rocks with engraved animal characters were supported. Both nature play and traditional play structures were acceptable. Rock features were favored. Trails There was support for the trail network on the site and for the proposed boardwalk and forested wetland overlook which provides views into the wetland while protecting habitat. It was suggested that the proposed 6-foot sidewalk/community trail along the SW Tigard Street be widened to 8 feet to better serve as a community trail. Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 2 May 18, 2012 Summer Creek Property Master Plan Public Meeting No.2 Notes City of Tigard-Public Works Department Parks Division Restoration and Mitigation Restoration efforts will be focused on the Oak Savanna area in the north and west part of the site, as it includes many slow-growing species. Restoration east of the Fanno Creek Trail is not included in the master plan. Protection of the wetland mitigation area near the ballfield was discussed. Fencing was discussed as was using signing and education in lieu of fencing. Water Quality Sampling Area The need to improve the water quality testing area was mentioned as an important component to support environmental education. Phased Development It was suggested that construction be phased such that heavy construction is completed early in the phasing to avoid impacts to restored areas of the site. END Vigil-Agrimis, Inc. 3 May 18, 2012 Estimate of probable Construction Costs -- Master Plan June 30,2012 Item Quantity Unit Unit Price Cost Cost Plus 20% Mobilization Mobilization(7%of Construction Cost) 1 LS $30,119.00 $30,119 $36,143 Subtotal: $30,119 $36,143 Construction Survey&Staking 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 $12,000 Subtotal: $10,000 $12,000 Clearing& Grubbing Clearing&Grubbing 43,970 SF $0.25 $10,993 $13,191 Misc.Tree Removal 10 EA $400.00 $4,000 $4,800 $14,993 $17,991 Porta-potty Concrete Pad(for unisex accessable porta-potty) 300 SF $5.00 $1,500 $1,800 Screening(for porta-potty) 65 LF $45.00 $2,925 $3,510 $4,425 $5,310 Restrooms/Interpretive Shelter Water Meter 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 $6,000 Water Line-3/4 inch 500 LF $25.00 $12,500 $15,000 Sanitary Line-4 inch 500 LF $35.00 $17,500 $21,000 Electric Connection(for restroom) 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 $12,000 Restroom/Interpretive Shelter(4 seats) 1 LS $80,000.00 $80,000 $96,000 $125,000 $150,000 Site Furnishings Bench(6 foot) 7 EA $1,800.00 $12,600 $15,120 Picnic Table 6 EA $4,000.00 $24,000 $28,800 Litter Receptacle 6 EA $1,500.00 $9,000 $10,800 Entry Signage 3 EA $5,000.00 $15,000 $18,000 Interpretive Signage 10 EA $6,000.00 $60,000 $72,000 Bollards 2 EA $500.00 $1,000 $1,200 Loop Bike Rack 4 EA $500.00 $2,000 $2,400 $123,600 $148,320 Nature Play Areas Toddler Area(at parking lot) 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000 $48,000 Age 5-12 Area(at playing field) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 $60,000 $90,000 $108,000 Playing Fields Soccer Field(Partial Overlay) 1 LS $70,000.00 $70,000 $84,000 Baseball Field Improvements 1 LS $90,000.00 $90,000 $108,000 Baseball Field Backstop Removal(2) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 $6,000 $165,000 $198,000 Boardwalks Boardwalk(Fanno Creek Trail) 1 LS $150,000.00 $150,000 $180,000 Handrail for Fanno Creek Boardwalk 800 LF $115.00 $92,000 $110,400 Boardwalk(Soft Surface Trails) 1,200 SF $118.00 $141,600 $169,920 Water Quality Sampleling Improvements 1 LS $14,000.00 $14,000 $16,800 $397,600 $477,120 Parking Lot Driveway Apron 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000 $3,600 Asphalt Paving(with base) 10,500 SF $6.00 $63,000 $75,600 Parking Lot Signage 4 EA $500.00 $2,000 $2,400 Concrete Wheel Stops 12 EA $100.00 $1,200 $1,440 Striping 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500 $3,000 $71,700 $86,040 Concrete Abutments 6 EA $400.00 $2,400 $2,880 $2,400 $2,880 Summer Creek MP-Cost Estimate.xls/Master Plan 6-30-2012 VIGIL-AGRIMIS, INC Item Quantity Unit Unit Price Cost Cost Plus 20% Trails Paved(8-foot asphalt-Maintenance Access) 4,160 SF $6.00 $24,960 $29,952 Paved(8-foot asphalt-Community Trail) 11,600 SF $6.00 $69,600 $83,520 Paved(6-foot concrete-Sidewalk) 5,000 SF $5.00 $25,000 $30,000 Soft Surface(5-foot chip-SW Tigard St to Fields) 520 LF $3.00 $1,560 $1,872 Soft Surface(5-foot chip-Around Fields) 1,140 LF $3.00 $3,420 $4,104 Soft Surface(5-foot chip-Southwest) 2,130 LF $3.00 $6,390 $7,668 Soft Surface(3-foot chip-North) 660 LF $2.00 $1,320 $1,584 Soft Surface(3-foot chip-Southwest) 1,230 LF $2.00 $2,460 $2,952 $134,710 $161,652 Half Street Improvememts Half Street Improvements 1 LS $472,000.00 $472,000 $566,400 $472,000 $566,400 Education Center Improvements Paint 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 $18,000 Deck 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 $18,000 Screening Vegetation& Fence 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 $30,000 Community Garden 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000 $36,000 Overflow Parking 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 $18,000 $100,000 $120,000 Permanent Fencing Split Rail Fence 350 LF $40.00 $14,000 $16,800 $14,000 $16,800 Erosion&Sediment Controls Erosion&Sediment Controls 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 $30,000 $25,000 $30,000 Planting Required Screening&Trees(new lot) 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 $30,000 Replanting(baseball field) 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000 $48,000 Wetland & Buffer Mitigation 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000 $72,000 $125,000 $150,000 Miscellaneous Parking Lot Lighting(2 lights) 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 $18,000 $15,000 $18,000 Subtotal: $1,880,428 $2,256,517371 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,920,547 $2,304,656 OVERHEAD AND PROFFIT(7%) $134,438 $161,326 BONDING AND INSURANCE(2%) $38,411 $46,093 TOTAL $2,093,396 $2,512,075 DESIGN SERVICES(10%) $209,340 $251,207 PERMITTING SERVICES(4%) $83,736 $100,483 INFLATION(3%) $62,802 $75,362 (assume summer 2013 construction) GRAND TOTAL $2,449,273 $2,939,128 Summer Creek MP-Cost Estimate.xls/Master Plan 6-30-2012 VIGIL-AGRIMIS, INC CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 14- (-) i A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR 9 METRO NATURE IN NEIGHBORI IOODS CAPITAL GRANT TO FUND DEVELOPMENT OF DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WWHEREAS, the 2009 Park System Master Plan identified the properties—now known as Dirksen Nature Park—as a future community park;and WHEREAS, the citizens of Tigard supported the acquisition and development of parks through passage of the 117 million park and open space bond measure in 2010;and WHEREAS,the city,using funds from the 2010 park and open space bond measure,was able to purchase the properties that now form Dirksen Nature Park;and WHEREAS,the development of the park is planned in four phases;and WHEREAS, the city has not identified funding for phases 3 and 4 which includes construction of two nature play areas,trails and boardwalks,and restoration of the oak savanna at the northern section of the park;and WFIERE.kS, the Park and Recreation Advisory Board and City Council have asked staff to seek additional funding to augment the park bond funds;and WHEREAS,Metro has invited Tigard to submit a Nature in Neighborhoods grant application for phases 3 and 4 of the park development;and WHEREAS, if the grant is awarded, the city would be able to complete the development of Dirksen Nature Park, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the'Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council supports the submission of an application for a Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grant to partially fund the development of Dirksen Nature Park. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. >`4u PASSED: This day of 014. Mayo -City of Tigard ATTEST: l tty Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 14-(. Page 1 Contract 932931 Attachment 2A City of Tigard Memorandum 9 XW: To: Mary Rose Navarro From: Jeff Peck Re: Dirksen Nature Park - Park Element Descriptions & Costing Date: September 30, 2015 Mary Rose, The City is proposing a change to the Dirksen Nature Park scope of work and funding. Two master plan exhibits highlighting park elements to be constructed are attached for reference. One exhibit shows proposed park elements, and the second exhibit captures city and Metro funding of park elements. We were not able to secure funding for the proposed restroom/inteipretive shelter and associated utilities. As a result, the facility is being removed from our scope of work. To meet our financial match we have added the Fanno Creek wetland boardwalk, complete restoration of the Oak Savanna, and support funding for the nature play area and the Oak Savanna overlook. Renovations to the Environmental Education building, parking lot find eenswaetien 4 the ;R-ah-. ted pathwawill remain the same. Metro funding will no longer pay for the Oak Savanna Restoration. Metro will continue to fund the forested wetland boardwalk and restoration area, nature play area, and the oak savanna overlook. The City is requesting Metro to partially fund the Fanno Creek boardwalk. Park Elements & Funding: Oak Savanna Restoration Oak Savanna restoration was previously shown as a Metro grant obligation with minor financial contribution from the city. Since then,we have determined the restoration can be fully funded by one of our revenue programs. As a result,we have entered into a contract with Ash Creek Forest Management, LLC to restore the oak savanna. The city and Ash Creek are participating in cooperative agreement pricing established in Metro RFP-2788 Natural Areas Habitat Restoration The general scope of the work as follows: • Removal of trees that are currently crowding the areas oak trees • Replanting of native grasses, wildflowers, and shrubs associated with a healthy oak savanna. • Maintenance services for the areas through 2019. The projected cost for the oak savanna restoration is $272,000. This estimate included the contract price, contingency, shrub and tree plantings, and irrigation as needed. Oak Savanna Overlook The city anticipates receiving money to expand upon the Oak Savanna Overlook. The funding ($33,000) will pay for interpretive/educational features to be in-laid into the overlook. Wetland Boardwalks The city is proposing to add the Fanno Creek wetland boardwalk to the project and $67,300 in support funding. Metro funding will also be used to cover funding of the added boardwalk. Drawings of each boardwalk are included for reference. Nature Play Area The city is proposing to add funding to the Nature Play park elements. Estimated support funding in the amount of$89,720 will be used to pay for playground equipment. Drawings of the nature play area are included for reference. In summary, we have made minor changes to the Nature in Neighborhoods grant request, and we ask for your consideration and approval of the changes. We look forward to your continued support. Thank you. Park Elements to be constructed with SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY City and Metro funds in support of the Nature in Neighborhoods Grant Master Plan A.K.A. DIRKSEN NATURE PARK June 2012 Entrance Community Trail/Sidewalk r rf Parking(10 to cars) 15 ntr ncr Picnic/ interpretive ='' Nature Play - Environmental Education Area Oak Savanna (tots) I Building & Parking Lot Overlook Fanno Creek :Improvements Boardwalk , ` i Oak Savanna Restoration 1r r , ,a Oak Savanna Restoration J, w �. Restroom/Shelter It Nature Play ` Replanting — Forested Wetland Boardwalk 8 Restoration Area 4:.4 Coniferous Fanno Creek Trail E rance 41,Big Cedar Forest - -- I 8-foot Paved Trail Soft Surface Trail l Network Rat Sidewalk Y CJfII.JC e oatw►;ay 5-foot Chip Trail r ` = 3-foot Chip Trail I tCrQek Z ummer Creek Overlook� Entrance Boardwalk Su Water Quality Station 'Nature Play Structure Entrance Entrance ° Education Node Fowler Middle School Park Elements to be funded by City in support of Nature in Neighborhoods Grant SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY Metro Park Elements to be funded by Master Plan A.K.A. DIRKSEN NATURE PARK Park Elements funded by June 2012 Entrance /CommunityTrail/Sidewalk Metro and City -Drop aff. ,! _ _.._ _ S�v� �0 -�E.�p Parking(10 to 1 S cars) Entronce r—s - Picnic/ Interpretive - Nature Play Environmental Education Area Oak Savanna (tots) I Building & Parking Lot Overlook Improvements , Fanno Creek t Oak Savanna Restoration Boardwalk Oak Savanna Restoration y 3_ Restroom/Shelter _. Nature Play Area " �+ Replanting Forested Wetland Boardwalk & Restoration Area l � Coniferous Er> rance Forest Fanno Creek Trail f �";�:Big Cedar _ I I .. C 8-foot Paved Trail i Soft Surface Trail ' Network - — �••— > Sidewalk i - 5-foot Chip Trail Irr r/cnrirc r.oaca� i" 3-foot Chip Trail Coynatat: Pair ••� . - Boardwalk I t Cteek Summer Creek Overlook Entrance 5q + Water Quality Station - • Nature Play Entrance — Structure l i --- Education Node Fowler Middle School �„ "' Contract 932931 Attachment 2B — r� •-- ---• 7w TGMSTMEr I�jte�t 'T-- ___.—__—_—_—._ tun,— �� � � (fes � )^.��'� — �r 'v ��� _j J �♦5 o g�KWT6. r ,/ � uwN rro w.Na.a T wrt5.Na n:ci. / V ET LA^!� �b�R.p Wht,lC__lLfdtrD ••u ii:a�.:r ae.`w,��::�.u.... �' � �/ I i� ams � .w.a ♦ � .«wa•m1' � ! / I I SCALL ' y.0 ava rn arta Darr my M w. / : ,e ... r ery fill f - — � n ,.•x.rovwv va,.ro au. / ' I . awsam moa..wmo.rt.5> . r 1 I a.w.cN.a..,�,,5 — — e s.r+ w n • ... n.ws r...v:`m �a�.°.00 o.o. - m.Kw.nw�.woa.N,.nw•ci �4 w117CHJNE SEE SHEET,d.] a+.�w. r N an:.Son _ — ,ate r.a •avm wm wrv.a..ea.w,w..: . ae[rt o.v row r.2A5 . w.a.w♦,va '� ♦ wv ar waa w w w.m m.r.u5uw i»wwavw Na arx®,w>'ti - oDNw was .one na wwar�a rn a rw wrnawva se ari,Maur♦w.wnwn --� r55m um e m ar t wn.a.rt - - arwmmawrwwria.�.. n sw rir�r �_ wa WI m t♦1r�� w w.ww.I♦rw5 aw Sv.MK�m 10uN.,FiMui w. wuosc.ersrDaef n nort.ww5 mwmrrwaa�rm- aaQt.wi aw w fawns a ru.erc�w a�a•rt5. v♦a.arw au. w.w.ar A fitW M ryU. wr O !a 000 •..r. !d '� � � r nwilr Iwwm» r Tia awmw O .... .rMN ♦aa.♦ Y—• �`''� a wrMr wra a nwia omww l m urw Sgrar ..Nan+w.rtD.e nr faaou � rom...a a . ;wvun Nunn . .wa. ]� �• �^\ - .., Nn wmw IwS.rw ..caro wt9irD.sw �\ OXY Dw�w �aamw M mmwm wN1an 6� \v�/�•\ �' w ♦uw: Dsai `N'�m'•`i° nw»w N».rM n wieD +www p ai ♦eru N.arw M1f;-7[� aaar:ma.e warty w5w♦. w wuu w�unw Qr j . — awns wawa a www`^�,1+ fawn wwa.w a w»wm wn.aa I � �.1,. - rm♦a wema w r�� +..ow...r.wr aaofrt.owe ° ""'� `�S.ww a ruv�� wnsa .. a.m°v � uara5 w.wra r an5u N.siD F t��`y 9 » iuu:w w»wr . Dune wawa N a6 Y :• �ITiL\RE TD T. t s�TLt.1�. `� 010 SET-arevu C3.2 Y SEE SM I C wawc.wwaa�__ ir..c ...:� rrrria•� rr--rr---- — I aaa+o•a w a. �`�r v.�r 1 b�ESTEb Lt.�ID -------- ra�ro I _ �eart.arraeea�R+w I ;x r wwa wn w a a r aY�r, / • � II I IF LD �FVII-V- I L - - � n 1EfFffi O WBatIlErMO�! — —— — — / nra an � was Yaw.+cr rraeewr. I _ 1 i3 �\ rr_ + .sao a•Ye maw w+sw+U+ / - Yf.+•+is w.n.rsra,.+w r.r.r+.ur '.\ — -/�7u � \ i ,` wv.n+.•nee.n 4 u.r ae.+¢w�u� car \ _ _ ` ` JA_ ` ,�I �� Yss . .w.a,ana a•+r ti•.+�. AOsi� \\ -- L — , Concrete Pathwaylsnot . l included in this scope ofworlc, \\ XALL �f - — - w w stia ane.• / /' �\\ �' Y a/Wa Raaf � C3.3 A I (i5 is 1 / 1 F f o ` f i • � a a •' i •i•� ��a D®a 111 r cb - B 1 s4 101 _� 1 f i 6RSa Ra '�� � �. �� � o � n C�l• 9� ] g� A A � I r a n p •'� �� ` - j it iii 2t (n e \� a- �, fAWxQ CREEx IRAN ENLARGED SITE PLAN nw 1 NDIRAKTrUKRE PLAYAREA V MRKNIURPARK PRSEN 11. 1 -".- . .:.:(;1iJ6?`i� w 111111 ��` m - I V � F ---f-4 i \ l r 2v uv N h,i -- i iF- i - .DnfE1Y6.[h..OD.P00P' ---•r•• e0iEflaD.iT.tlDOKRODt 1 E PRELIMINARY PLANS PROVIDED FOR DESIGN INTENT. BOARDWALKS TO BE CONTRACTOR DESIGNED AND INSTALLED CONTRACTOR TO ' SUBMIT FINAL SHOP DRAWINGS AND STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS a Z� FOR APPROVAL AND BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL o Y 'R 1 Y4 �f o �F� w p' W a BID SET-amm5 —C19 x- AI T IT ESTFR" WOOD nw•nc.�ar>. - '" GTRI.CTUM — r ..>•...,.r - �; .IDC., PRELIMINARY PLANS PROVIDED FOR DESIGN INTENT BOARDWALKS [ TO BE CONTRACTOR DESIGNED AND INSTALLED. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT FINAL SHOP DRAWINGS AND STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS FOR APPROVAL AND BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL. J a s 4 o X 8 T z �tI wa Oo O F� i r BID SET-W31115 �C3.10 Contract 932931 Attachment 3 NATURE IN NEIGHBORHOODS CAPITAL GRANT F3 PROJECT BUDGET WORKSHEET PROFESS IONALSERVICES COSTS NOTES/CHANGES FROM IGA BUDGET financial match in-kind match grant request TOTAL SPREADSHEET A. Pre-Agreement 1. Non-profit staff $0.00 2. Agency staff $15,000.00 $15,000.00 3. Consultants $50,000.00 $50,000.00 4. Volunteers $0.00 B. Post-Agreement Costs $0.00 1. Non-profit staff $0.00 2. Agency staff $24,000.00 $24,000.00 CITY- Decreased by$18,000 3. Consultants $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 4. Volunteers $76,000.00 $76,000.00 Total for Professional Services $189,000.00 $76,000.00 $0.001 $265,000.00 CONSTRUCTION COSTS Estimate the cost for all work elements of your project. Feel free to change the list. Specify in the budget narrative which work elements will be completed by volunteers and how you calculated the budg,et figure. NOTES/CHANGES FROM IGA BUDGET financial match in-kind match grant request TOTAL SPREADSHEET A. Park Elements 1. Environmental Education Center& CITY- Incuded hard surface pathway with building Concrete Pathway(Ph 1) improvements-called it Phase 1. Mobilization and $139,852.00 $139,852.00 contingency costs are a part of Phase 1 2. Oak Savanna Restoration CITY-Added this scope element. 4-yr restoration contract has been set up, starting this year. Removed $272,000.00 $2,000.00 $274,000.00 scope element& contribution from NIN grant 3. Oak Savanna Overlook CITY-Anticipated AGILYX Money($33,000). Increased Metro allocation by taking from Oak $33,097.00 $41,100.00 $74,197.00 Savanna restoration 4. Nature Play Area $89,720.00 $121,000.00 $210,720.00 CITY-Added financial match for playground features 5. Fanno Crk and Forested Wetland CITY-Added to financial match and added the Boardwalks $67,300.00 $197,900.00 $265,200.00 wetland boardwalk to the City scope. Increased Metro 6. Forested Wetland Restoration $0.00 $10,000.00 $30,000.00 $40,000.00 7. Interpretive Signage $1,200.00 $1,200.00 CITY- Installed at donated exercise equipment 8. Soft Surface Trails CITY- Installed around ball field for donated exercise $2,700.00 $3,000.00 $5,700.00 equipment 9. Furnishings CITY- Remaining furnishings are included with $0.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 applicable park element B. Permits $12,000.00 $12,000.00 Total for Construction Costs $1,035,869.00 ACQUISITION COSTS Please estimate the cost for all work elements. Please feel free to change the list. financial match in-kind match grant request TOTAL A. Purchase Price $0.00 B. Option Purchase $0.00 C. Option Reimbursement $0.00 D. Appraisal &Appraisal Review' $0.00 E. Title Report, insurance & documents $0.00 F. Phase I Enviro Assessment $0.00 G. Stewardship endowment $0.00 H. Management Plan Development I. Baseline Documentation $0.00 Total for Acquisition Costs $0.001 $0.001 $0.001 $0.001 OTHER COSTS A. Travel (use current State of Oregon rates) $0.00 B. Overhead/Indirect costs -these can only be used as match. $0.00 $0.00 Totals for Other Costs _t___ $0.001 $0.0010.00 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 1 $806,869.001 $104,000,001 $390.000.00 $1,300,869.00 BUDGET WORKSHEET LINE ITEMS -The line items have been paired down and incorporated into each park element from Environmental Education Center to Forested Wetland Restoration Mobilization, bonding, clearing &grubbing, contingencies have been added to each park element listed above. AIS-2378 3. C. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Contract Award-Street Sweeping Services Prepared For: Joseph Barrett Submitted By: Joseph Barrett, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Local Contract Review Board Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board award a contract for street sweeping services to Water Truck Services for a possible $1.3 million over the next five years. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board award the contract for street sweeping services to Water Truck Services for a possible $1.3 million over the next five years and further authorize the City Manager to take the necessary steps to execute the contract. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In late September, the City issued a Request for Proposal for street sweeping services on an as-required basis. Work to be completed under this services includes the following: •Street sweeping and/or street flushing and removal of debris as required for approximately 320 sweeping miles of Tigard's streets (both sides of street). Each street will be swept at least once each month. •Detailing and sweeping of the City's parking lots each month.A total of 519,217 square feet of parking lot will be swept each month. •Special sweeps that are outside the regular monthly sweeps. Special sweep may include,but are not necessary limited to, the following: -Automobile accidents, - Material spills on the roadway, - Construction zone cleanup, and - Snowfall and subsequent sweep of sand on the roadway •Street sweeping for business and high traffic main boulevards will be done between the hours of 4:00 am to 7:00 am and residential shall be swept between the hours of 7:00 am and 7:00 pm. The City received proposals from one contractor (and current city contractor),Water Truck Services, Inc. Our previous RFP issued five years ago only had two responses so staff is not surprised by such a small list for such a specialty service. Water Truck's submitted proposal demonstrated an ability to provide the full range of services requested. A Selection Committee comprised of Public Works staff reviewed the proposals and scored them based on the following criteria. •Firm Qualifications, •Project Understanding,and Approach, and •Cost Proposal Requests for Proposals (RFPs) are awarded based on the highest scoring proposal on all criteria,unlike an Invitation to Bid (ITB) which is awarded based solely on low cost. Based on the review and scoring from the review by the Selection Committee, staff recommends award of the City's Street Sweeping Services contract to Water Truck Service, Inc. in the amount estimated at $255,000 during the first year of a possible five year contract. The total amount over the possible life of the agreement is estimated to not exceed roughly$1.3 million. Staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board award this contract to Water Truck Services for a total of$1.3 million over the next five years. OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Local Contract Review Board discussed this contract at their November 10,2015 Study Session meeting and the Board unanimously agreed to bring forward the item on the consent agenda. Fiscal Impact Cost: $255,000 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where budgeted?: Storm/Gas Tax Additional Fiscal Notes: This contract is budgeted in the operational budget for both Stormwater and Streets. The cost is an estimated $255,000/annually for a possible total just shy of$1.3 million over the possible life of the contract. Attachments No file(r)attached. AIS-2380 4. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Receive Progress Report on the Implementation of the Strategic Plan 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 Staff will update the mayor and council on action items taken to implement the strategic plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Receive the report on the implementation of the strategic plan. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In 2014, the City of Tigard adopted a strategic plan to become the most walkable community in the Pacific Northwest where people of all ages and abilities enjoy healthy and interconnected lives. The strategic plan will provide guidance and direction for the city's priorities over the next 20 years. Each year, the city will issue an annual report to chart the implementation of each goal area: 1.Walking and Connecting - Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity 2.Growing and Planning- Ensure development advances the vision 3.Engaging and Communicating- Engage the community through dynamic communication 4.Financing and Sustaining - Fund the vision while maintaining core services This year's annual report also charts the seven completed Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper projects, community outreach efforts, and the next steps. Staff will use the report as a communications tool to community groups,professional associations, and other interested stakeholders. Council feedback will be incorporated into the report before the final version is published. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS The strategic plan is a 20-year plan approved by Council in November 2014. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION In November,2014, the City Council approved the Strategic Plan. Council received an update on the implementation status of the strategic plan in July 2015. Attachments Strategic Plan Annual Report-Draft DRAFT A REPORT TO THE TIGARD COMMUNITY This annual report describes the beginning of our journey to implement the strategic plan. The strategic plan will provide guidance and direction for the city's priorities over the next 20 years. a Tzar:D� a...�^"• OUR VISION:To become the most walkable community in the Pacific Northwest where people of all ages and abilities en- joy healthy and interconnected lives. RECOGNITION City Council received American Planning Association Leadership Award for adopting the strategic plan. Metro awarded the City a two-year grant for Safe Routes to School. State legislature allocated $1.5 million for infrastructure in the Hunziker Corridor. Tigard and friends celebrated 2 million trees planted in the Tualatin watershed. Derry Dell project recognized by State for responsible, sustainable stewardship of natural resources. LIGHTER, QUICKER, CHEAPER(LQC) PROJECTS As part of strategic plan implementation,the City completed seven LQC projects. LQC projects are inexpensive and impactful actions that improve walkability, connectivity and health in Tigard. 1. Tigard Street Trail:The trail is a new biking and pedestrian corridor with access to the city's downtown core. 2. Dartmouth Overlook: Captures the view over the Tigard Triangle and west to the Chehalem Mountains. 3. Haines/Atlanta St.Sidewalk: A new section of sidewalk filling the gap between 68th Ave and the 1-5 bridge. 4. Spruce St.and 78th Ave.Working with the developer,a sidewalk gap was filled between Spruce St. and 78th Ave. 5. Oak Way Trail: A 150-foot trail with landscaping, a pedestrian crossing on SW 90th Avenue and signage. 6. North Dakota Sidewalk: Built a sidewalk on the street between 106th Ave. and 109th Ave. 7. 135th Ave.Sidewalk:Completed the missing section of sidewalk on SW 135th Ave. between Walnut St. and Laureen Ln., making pedestrian travel safer and easier. NEXT STEPS • Develop Tigard Street Trail area as a linear park,with plantings, benches,exercise equipment, historical interpretive signage and other improvements. • Connect Oak St.to Lincoln St. near Metzger Elementary. • Improve accessibility on 72nd Ave. where the road crosses the railroad tracks between Bonita Rd. and Upper Boones Ferry Rd. Updated:11/19/2015 Annual Report DRAFT GOAL 1: WALKING AND CONNECTING-Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity • To promote the city's popular trail network,the Police Department revitalized its bike patrol team. • Supported Tigard Downtown Alliance led initiative to install 10 bike racks,7 benches, 2 bike tune-up stations, and 20 light pole glass baskets. • Coordinated walking tours focusing on historic areas of Main St. • Filmed a public service announcement about crosswalk safety. • Worked with Clean Water Services to realign Derry Dell Creek in order to cover and protect an exposed sewer line. Project re- stored degraded stream channel, helped restore fish passage un- der SW Walnut St., add native plants and provided boardwalk connection between the dead-end sections of Johnson St. through Woodard Park. . • Completed walking and biking audit near Templeton Elementary ` and Twality Middle School. • Paved the Tigard Street Trail between Main Street and Tiedeman Avenue, using porous asphalt pavement. • Added a walkway along one side of the North Dakota St. bridge. The protected walkway makes it safer for walkers and bikers by limiting their expose to automobile traffic. • Developed a draft program for council review as to closing gaps in our sidewalk and major trails network. NEXT STEPS • Implement a sidewalk and trail gap program. • Implement maintenance efforts, in cooperation with the Police Department,to increase trail accessibility and safety. GOAL 2: GROWING AND PLANNING - Ensure development advances the vision • Completed sidewalks inventory map showing existing walkable areas,where sidewalks provide walking opportunities, and areas where sidewalks are not on either side of the street. • Consulted with Jeff Speck, a national walkability expert, on walkability strategies for the city. • Developed a vision for the Tigard Triangle that includes a walkable neighborhood with apartments, offices, restaurants and other services. • Launched Tigard Active Permits, an online tool making it easier to view permit data. • Work began on the Burnham/Ash Mixed-Use Housing Project which will bring 165 residences to downtown. • Using bond dollars and$6.05 million in contributions and grants from Metro, Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, Washington County and Clean Water Services, more than 108 acres of park land and open space have been preserved. NEXT STEPS • Revise development code to improve street connections and create a safe and inviting walking environment. • Continue Brownfields Initiative to become a more livable, walkable and economically resilient community with fewer environmental health risks. Updated:11/19/2015 Annual Report DRAFT GOAL 3: ENGAGING AND COMMUNICATING-Engage the community through dynamic communication • Engaged the public in the first-ever dog walk video contest. • Partnered with the Tigard Balloon Festival on a photo contest. • Hosted two roundtable discussions for non-profits and churches. • Attended the Farmers Market on 18 separate occasions;engaged in more than 1,400 conversations with residents • Coordinated Safety Academy,for adults with developmental disabilities. • Increased social media presence—Facebook (1,300 likes)and Twitter(7,300 followers) • Installed signage at each completed Lighter,Quicker, Cheaper project, calling attention to city's progress to build a more walkable, connected community NEXT STEPS • Adopt signage that communicates city vision and identity. • Partner with Youth Advisory Council to identify opportunities to engage high school and middle-school age residents. • Develop new city video that tells Tigard's progress to implementing its new vision CONNECTING BY THE NUMBERS 1,400: People that staff connected with at the Farmers Market 1,000: Students who participated in Bike and Walk to School Day 712: Residents who participated in National Night Out. 275: People who attended at Public Works Day. 200: Citizens who attended Ice Cream Socials 120: Walkers at the 10 Tigard Walks! events. 105: Walkers and bikers to the Library during Walk n' Roll Campaign, 100: Attendees at"Cookout with the Council." 40: People who stopped by'Tailgate with the Council.' GOAL 4: FINANCING AND SUSTAINING - Fund the vision while maintaining core services • Approved a budget that maintains core services and addresses future parks and library needs. • Implemented Open Budget Portal that provides easy to navigate budget data in graphical and tabular format online. • Provided grants for more than 15 community events and non-profits. • Increased the city's tree canopy by supplying Tigard homeowners and neighborhood groups with free trees. NEXT STEPS • Adopt an annual budget that advances the vision. • Enhance the Open Budget Portal. Updated:11/19/2015 Annual Report AIS-2395 5. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Adopt 2016 State and Federal Legislative Agenda Prepared For: Kent Wyatt, City Management Submitted By: I{ent Wyatt, City Management Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Adoption of the city's 2016 State and Federal Legislative Agenda. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Adopt the city's State and Federal Legislative Agendas for 2016 and direct staff to prepare brochures for distribution to state and federal elected representatives, agencies and interested citizens. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In October, the city council reviewed the 2015 state and federal legislative priorities and discussed updates for the 2016 State and Federal Legislative Agendas.A summary listing of additions to the state and federal legislative priorities as identified by council, staff, and Tigard's federal lobbyist follows. State LeLvislative Agenda Affordable Housing Support opportunities to meet the affordable housing needs of the community and to improve the quality of life for its low-income residents. Areas of Interest The city will monitor for any legislation with the potential to negatively impact cities in the areas of franchise fees,labor management, or marijuana regulation. Please note:As of early November, the League of Oregon Cities has not released legislative priorities for the 2016 session. Federal Leeislative ALrenda Downtown Tigard Brownfield Cleanup Tigard is seeking funds to cleanup three downtown properties for productive reuse. For several years, the City of Tigard and community members have envisioned a more vibrant and prosperous downtown and have developed detailed improvement plans. Progress has been made on implementing these plans with several projects completed. A major challenge to redevelopment, however,has been the need to assess and cleanup some downtown properties for potential environmental issues. Approximately sixty properties in this area have been identified as contaminated, or potentially contaminated, from previous uses;these are known as potential brownfield properties. Tigard supports the cleanup and revitalization of these properties,and has utilized EPA Brownfield Assessment funds to prepare properties for cleanup and ultimate reuse. Tigard Street Heritage Trail Formerly a rail line, this three-quarter-mile trail connects downtown Tigard to Tiedeman Avenue. The city recently paved a temporary trail for biking,walking and rolling.A concept for the permanent Tigard Street Heritage Trail is in the works. It will place lighting, art,plazas and other amenities along the trail. Support for Homeless Assistance Grants The city is collaborating with Just Compassion to address the lack of homelessness resources in Tigard.Just Compassion,registered non-profit in Oregon,is committed to establishing a day center for homeless adults in Tigard.The day shelter will provide resource information for mental and physical health, as well as assistance in overcoming barriers to employment,job and housing stability. Upon adoption of the State and Legislative Agendas staff will prepare agendas brochures. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Modify the proposed State and/or Federal Legislative Agenda. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION October 13, 2015: Council held discussion on priorities for the 2016 State and Federal Legislative agendas. Attachments 2015 State Legislative Agenda 2015 Federal Legislative Agenda Tigard,Oregon HUNZIKER INDUSTRIAL (R ' 15 Federal Legislative Agenda Y?s — Portland Beaverton rn -- 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 T�, ard� - foster significant economic growth and provide long-term - high-skill, high-wage job opportunities for the region. o,°' - �� Lake The core includes more than 138 acres of industrial-zoned 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. -' I-205 The area exemplifies the challenge inner-ring suburban 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 a 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, r ture(roads,water,wastewater and stormwater)to support marty@tigard-or.gov ,•:- ,� '' �! private sector development in the Hunziker Industrial Core 9 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 www.tigard-or.gov >� r''�'• , s POLICY ITEMS { 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 _ robust funding for bridges, highways, mass transit and bicyclists and pedestrians killed on our roads. other local infrastructure needs.Within the reauthorization bill,Tigard strongly supports inclusion of: FY 2016 Program Levels i►few I 1 q`_ `"" ► The bipartisan Innovations in Surface Trans- Maintain adequate funding levels for TIGER,CDBG, ' an HOME, BYRNE, EDA, d COPS funding. portation Act,which creates a grant program that would put transportation funds in the hands of local ► COPS Hiring and Technology Funding 1 .oar 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 This project will add turn lanes at key intersections, mandates continue to require costly upgrades.Federal residential and offers a mix of industrial,commercial funds for equipment upgrades are important,especially illuminate,add transit stop amenities and fill in the 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 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. PacificNorthwest 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 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 safe routes to walk to school. In July 2012,Congress or limited,states and localities will pay more to finance strengths to grow Tigard as a thriving community. passed the transportation law MAP-21.As part of that projects,leading to less infrastructure investment,fewer Tigard continues to work with its regional 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. Oregon's 2015 FebruaryRegular Legislative Session: ' F1 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.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 people.These district lines are redrawn every ten years. Tigard, Oregon CouncilTigard City Mayor Council President John Cook Jason Snider n1 Councilor Councilor Councilor Marland Henderson Marc Woodard John Goodhouse councilmail@tigard-or.gov City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 www.tigard-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 Housing and Development program to address multi-modal needs with a (which sunsets Jan. 2016).The city priority of maintaining and preserving existing infrastructure. recently established a VHD program which 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. AIS-2408 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: CCDA Board Consideration to Amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan to Acquire 12533-12537 SW Main Street Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: City Center Development Agency Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Board of the City Center Development Agency is requested to consider a resolution to amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan to add the acquisition of two Main Street properties to the list of urban renewal projects. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the Board of the CCDA approve the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Board of the CCDA will consider approval of the purchase of the two Main Street properties (Tax lots 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100,12533-12537 SW Main Street a.k.a. "the Saxony properties").To acquire this property, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan needs to be amended. This is the third proposed amendment to the Plan since it was approved by voters in 2006. The proposed amendment would add these two properties to the list of acquired properties under Project H: Real Property Acquisition. Section V of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan authorizes Real Property Acquisition and Real Property Disposition as projects. Under Project H,real property may be acquired as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII,paragraph A. Section XII of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan establishes the procedures to amend the Plan. The proposed amendment is considered a Council-Approved Amendment,because it is an "Addition or expansion of a project that adds a cost in 2005 dollars of more than$500,000 and is materially different from projects previously authorized in the Plan." Council-approved amendments require both the approval of the Agency by resolution and approval of the City Council.The amendment will be considered by the City Council and Board of the CCDA in separate resolutions. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The CCDA Board could choose not to adopt the resolution to amend the plan. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES,MASTER PLANS Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be Increase walkable access to open space by advancing plans for new downtown open space,including the Tigard Street Trail plaza, the Fanno Creek Overlook and a Main Street plaza,including programming. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Goal 1: Revitalization of the Downtown should recognize the value of natural resources as amenities and as contributing to the special sense of place. Goal 5: Promote high quality development of retail, office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape, transportation,recreation and open space investments. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Goal 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy Goal 9.3 Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business Special Planning Areas- Downtown Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Goal 15.3 Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features into downtown. Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 2. Ensure development advances the vision DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION October 26, 2015 Executive Session Attachments Resolution Exhibit A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN BY ADDING THE ACQUISITION OF TWO MAIN STREET PROPERTIES (12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET,TAXLOT IDS 2S102ABO2000 AND 2S102AB02100) AS PROJECTS WHEREAS, ORS 457. 170 authorizes the City Center Development Agency (CCDA) to acquire real property pursuant to its approved urban renewal plan;and WHEREAS, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan authorizes the acquisition of real property within the Urban Renewal Area as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII,paragraph A ("Goals"); and WHEREAS, the CCDA finds that, to further the Goals, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan must be amended to add the acquisition of two properties located in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, specifically Taxlot IDs 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100, (12533-12537 SW Main Street), to the list of urban renewal projects;and WHEREAS,adding projects that add a cost in 2005 dollars of more than $500,000 and are materially different from projects previously authorized in the plan may be approved through a Council-approved amendment; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council will also consider approval of the amendment by resolution. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the Tigard City Center Development Agency that: SECTION 1: The City Center Urban Renewal Plan amendment, set forth in Exhibit A, is hereby approved. 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 EXHIBIT A Proposed new text is shown in double-underline V. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS Urban renewal projects authorized under the Plan, which may be undertaken by the Agency, are described below and shown in Figures 2 to 7. To preserve and enhance the Area's natural resources, projects will be designed and implemented with consideration for ecologically sensitive areas and to minimize the impacts of development on the environment. Property acquisition may be required for these projects. Further, some of the projects described herein will require participation of other public agencies. In addition, real property acquisition and disposition are Projects under the plan as described in Section V, paragraphs H and I. H. Real Property Acquisition In addition to acquisition of real property, or any interest in real property, in conjunction with the Projects identified in paragraphs A through G., real property may be acquired as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII, paragraph A. This includes acquisition of real property from willing sellers to support development or redevelopment of retail, office, housing and mixed use projects within the Area. 1.Taxlot ID 2S12AC-00202; Burnham Street Property 2.Taxlots 2S102AD02800, 2S102AD02900, and 2S102AD03000; Burnham and Ash Avenue Properties 3.Taxlots 2S102AB02000 and 2S102A602100. Main Street"Saxony Properties" AIS-2440 7. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Council Consideration to Amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan to Acquire 12533-12537 SW Main Street Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE The Tigard City Council is requested to consider a resolution to amend the City Center Urban Renewal Plan to add the acquisition of two Main Street properties to the list of urban renewal projects. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends Council approve the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Board of the CCDA will consider approval of the purchase of the two Main Street properties (Tax lot IDs 2S102AB02000 AND 2S102AB02100,12533-12537 SW Main Street, a.k.a. "the Saxony properties"). To acquire this property, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan needs to be amended. This is the third proposed amendment to the Plan since it was approved by voters in 2006. The proposed amendment would add these two properties to the list of acquired properties under Project H: Real Property Acquisition Section V of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan authorizes Real Property Acquisition and Real Property Disposition as projects. Under Project H,real property may be acquired as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII, paragraph A. Section XII of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan establishes the procedures to amend the Plan. The proposed amendment is considered a Council-Approved Amendment,because it is an "Addition or expansion of a project that adds a cost in 2005 dollars of more than $500,000 and is materially different from projects previously authorized in the Plan." Council-approved amendments require both the approval of the Agency by resolution and approval of the City Council.The amendment will be considered by the City Council and Board of the CCDA in separate resolutions. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose not to adopt the resolution to amend the plan. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Tieard City Council2015-17Goals and Milestones Goal#2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be Increase walkable access to open space by advancing plans for new downtown open space,including the Tigard Street Trail plaza, the Fanno Creek Overlook and a Main Street plaza,including programming. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Goal 1: Revitalization of the Downtown should recognize the value of natural resources as amenities and as contributing to the special sense of place. Goal 5: Promote high quality development of retail, office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape, transportation,recreation and open space investments. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Goal 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy Goal 9.3 Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business Special Planning Areas- Downtown Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Goal 15.3 Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features into downtown. Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 2. Ensure development advances the vision DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION October 26, 2015 Executive Session Attachments Resolution Exhibit A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY CENTER URBAN RENEWAL PLAN BY ADDING THE ACQUISITION OF TWO MAIN STREET PROPERTIES (12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET, TAXLOT IDS 2S102AB02000 AND 2S102AB02100) AS PROJECTS WHEREAS,ORS 457. 170 authorizes the City Center Development Agency (CCDA) to acquire real property pursuant to its approved urban renewal plan;and WHEREAS, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan authorizes the acquisition of real property within the Urban Renewal Area as detertnined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII,paragraph A ("Goals");and WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council finds that,to further the Goals, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan must be amended to add the acquisition of two properties located in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, specifically Taxlot IDs 2S102ABO2000 and 2S102AB02100, (12533-12537 SW Main Street) to the list of urban renewal projects; and WHEREAS, adding projects that add a cost in 2005 dollars of more than $500,000 and are materially different from projects previously authorized in the plan may be approved through a Council-approved amendment;and WHEREAS,the City Center Development Agency will also consider approval of the amendment by resolution. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City Center Urban Renewal Plan amendment,set forth in Exhibit A,is hereby approved. SECTION 2: 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 EXHIBIT A Proposed new text is shown in double-underline V. URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS Urban renewal projects authorized under the Plan, which may be undertaken by the Agency, are described below and shown in Figures 2 to 7. To preserve and enhance the Area's natural resources, projects will be designed and implemented with consideration for ecologically sensitive areas and to minimize the impacts of development on the environment. Property acquisition may be required for these projects. Further, some of the projects described herein will require participation of other public agencies. In addition, real property acquisition and disposition are Projects under the plan as described in Section V, paragraphs H and I. H. Real Property Acquisition In addition to acquisition of real property,or any interest in real property, in conjunction with the Projects identified in paragraphs A through G., real property may be acquired as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII, paragraph A. This includes acquisition of real property from willing sellers to support development or redevelopment of retail, office, housing and mixed use projects within the Area. 1.Taxlot ID 2S12AC-00202; Burnham Street Property 2. Taxlots 2S102AD02800, 2S102AD02900, and 2S102AD03000; Burnham and Ash Avenue Properties 3 Taxlots 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100 Main Street"Saxonv Properties" AIS-2409 g, Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Council Consideration of Sale of 12533-12537 SW Main Street (the "Saxony properties' Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Tigard City Council is requested to consider a resolution to approve the sale of the 12533-12537 SW Main Street properties as outlined in the purchase and sale agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends Council approve the resolution authorizing the sale. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Council is requested to convey the Saxony properties (12533-12537 SW Main Street) from the City of Tigard's ownership to the City Center Development Agency. It is recommended that the property be conveyed in order to maintain the property's eligibility for EPA Brownfields grant funding in the future. The Saxony properties were acquired by the City of Tigard on July 7, 2015. The funding source was Park Bond proceeds. To be consistent with bond requirements, the Agency expects to have until January 30, 2017 to study the property for public space and private redevelopment. The study will determine what portion of the property could be redeveloped. This redevelopable portion will need to be sold at market price or at a price to proportionately reimburse the Park Bond, whichever is more. The balance of the property will then become public space. If the redevelopable portion of the property is not sold by January 30, 2017, the entire property becomes public space. The city intends to apply for an EPA Brownfields Clean-up grant to remediate the property. Clean-up grants are available to properties owned by public agencies or non-profits. EPA informed the city that the Saxony properties are not currently eligible for Brownfields cleanup grant funding. This was due to EPA's grant eligibility requirement that property be purchased using an "All Appropriate Inquiry" standard. This includes a provision that the Phase 1 report be updated within 180 days prior to acquisition. The Phase 1 for Saxony was done in October 2012, and not updated. Staff and project consultants were not aware of this specific Phase 1 provision, and had worked under the assumption that the data gathered under the Prospective Purchaser Agreement (PPA) work plan, supervised by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,would meet the All Appropriate Inquiry requirement. Staff inquired if the CCDA, a separate and distinct entity from the city, acquired the properties, would the properties then become "'re-eligible" for the grant. EPA staff confirmed that the properties would be eligible, provided the Phase I was updated prior to the CCDA's acquisition. The City Attorney drafted the attached purchase and sale agreement for the CCDA to acquire the property from the city. Since the property was purchased with Parks Bond funds, those funds are constitutionally protected and the city must comply with the language of the ballot title. The first priority of this project is to ensure that the voter approved bonds are protected and the project only uses the property in a manner that is permitted under the ballot title that was approved by the voters. The purchase and sale agreement includes covenants that bind the Agency to repaying the Park Bond fund the original purchase amount, or market value, whichever is greater, for the portion of the property not used for public space by January 30, 2017.The CCDA will acquire the property from the city for a nominal sum ($1.00) at closing. The Prospective Purchaser Agreement will be assigned to the CCDA. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality will be notified of the change. The Phase 1 report update is in progress by consultant Amec Foster Wheeler. This will satisfy the "All Appropriate Inquiry" standard for the purchase. If Council approves the sale of the Saxony properties and the Board of the CCDA approved the purchase, staff will submit an application for a $400,000 EPA Brownfields Clean-up grant. The grant deadline is December 18, 2015. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could choose not to adopt the resolution. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Tigard Cily Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be Increase walkable access to open space by advancing plans for new downtown open space, including the Tigard Street Trail plaza, the Fanno Creek Overlook and a Main Street plaza, including programming. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Goal 1: Revitalization of the Downtown should recognize the value of natural resources as amenities and as contributing to the special sense of place. Goal 5: Promote high quality development of retail, office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape, transportation, recreation and open space investments. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Goal 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy Goal 9.3 Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business Special Planning Areas- Downtown Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Goal 15.3 Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features into downtown. Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 2. Ensure development advances the vision DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION August 18, 2015, Discussion on Saxony Property Redevelopment Study May 26, 2015, Authorize Purchase of Saxony Pacific Site May 5, 2015, Discussion of Prospective Purchaser Agreement April 8, 2014, Authorize CCDA Executive Director to negotiate voluntary property acquisitions The purchase of the Saxony property was discussed in a number of Executive Sessions including: October 27, 2015 December 2, 2014 October 28, 2014 September 2, 2014 January 7, 2014 December 3, 2013 November 5,2013 October 1, 2013 September 3, 2013 August 20, 2013 Fiscal Impact Cost: N/A Budgeted (yes or no): no Where Budgeted (department/program): N/A Additional Fiscal Notes: The Saxony properties were purchased with Park Bond funds for $515,500. The City Center Development Agency will purchase the properties for a nominal sum at closing, but the Parks Bond fund will be repaid for any portion of the property that is not used for public space by January 30, 2017, as per the purchase and sale agreement. Attachments Resolution Exhibit A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF TWO MAIN STREET PROPERTIES (12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET,TAXLOT IDS 2S102ABO2000 AND 2S102AB02100) THROUGH A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT TO THE TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY WHEREAS, Section 3.44.30 of the Tigard Municipal Code authorizes the Tigard City Council ("Council") to transfer real property to an urban renewal agency established by the Council pursuant to ORS Chapter 457 on such terms and conditions as the Council deems appropriate and upon making the required findings;and WHEREAS, staff has proposed and recommends that the above-referenced properties be transferred through a purchase and sale agreement, attached as Exhibit A with the Tigard City Center Development Agency ("CCDA");and WHEREAS, the properties at 12533-12537 SW Main Street (tax lots 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100)were purchased by the City of Tigard using Park Bond funds (Tigard Ballot Measure 34-81);and WHEREAS, the purchase and sale agreement includes language that commits the Agency to repaying the Park Bond fund, or market value, whichever is greater, for the portion of the property not used for public space within two years. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1. Findings: A.The City Center Development Agency was established by Council pursuant to ORS Chapter 457; B. Goal 5 of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan is to "Promote high quality development of retail,office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape, transportation,recreation and open space investments".The City Center Development Agency intends to induce redevelopment,including public space,on these parcels to bring new residents to Downtown,promote revitalization and increase property tax revenue.Transfer to the urban renewal agency for redevelopment or other purpose is consistent with,and furthers the goals and objectives of,the adopted urban renewal plan; C.Transfer to the Agency furthers the public interest as it will increase the opportunities for cost-effective environmental remediation of the site,including making the properties eligible for brownfield clean-up grant funding,enable private sector investment and development,increase access to public spaces, promote an economically vibrant downtown area,and increase property tax revenues benefitting all city residents. D.The City has authority under Oregon State law(ORS 271.310) to dispose of real property when the public interest would be furthered. RESOLUTION NO. 15- Page 1 SECTION 2. Ownership of the properties at 12533-12537 SW Main Street (tax lots 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100) hereby is authorized to be transferred to the CCDA. SECTION 3.This Resolution is effective immediately upon passage.The City Manager hereby is authorized to execute a purchase and sale agreement and such other documents as are necessary to effectuate the transfer, in consultation with the City Attorney. PASSED: This day of 2015. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 15- Page 2 PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN: City Of Tigard, an Oregon Municipal ("Seller") Corporation And: City Center Development Agency, ("Purchaser") An ORS Chapter 457 Urban Renewal Agency DATED: ,2015 ("Effective Date") RECITALS A. Seller owns two parcels of real property commonly known as 12533, 12535 and 12537 SW Main St., Tigard, Or. 97224 (Tax Map Nos: 2S102AB2000 and 2S102AB02100)both of which are more fully described on the attached and incorporated Exhibit `A' (hereinafter the "Property"), including the improvements thereon. B. Seller desires to sell the Property, and Purchaser desires to purchase the Property pursuant to the terms set forth in this Purchase and Sale Agreement ("Agreement"). C. The parties acknowledge that the Property was purchased by Seller with proceeds of the bonds sold under the authority of City Ballot Measure 34-181, approved by the voters November 2, 2010 (the "Measure"). Purchaser will use the Property in a manner permitted under the Measure and to advance the purposes described in the Measure, including seeking environmental remediation grant funding. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration described in this Agreement, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as set forth below. ARTICLE 1 DEFINED TERMS 1.1 Closing. The process described in Article 8 of this Agreement. 1.2 Contingency Period. As defined in Article 3. 1.3 Deed. A statutory special warranty deed in the form of Exhibit `B' attached hereto which shall be used to convey the Property from Seller to Purchaser, subject to Seller's right to repurchase and Purchaser's post-closing obligations. 1.4 Environmental Laws. Any federal, state, or local laws, ordinances, codes, statutes, regulations, administrative rules, policies and orders, and other authority existing now or in the future that classify, regulate, list, or define Hazardous Materials. Page 1 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CODA 1.5 Hazardous Materials. Any toxic or hazardous substance,material, waste, pollutant, contaminant, or infectious or radioactive material, including but not limited to those substances, materials, waste, chemicals, or mixtures that are (or that contain any) substances, chemicals, compounds, or mixtures regulated, either now or in the future, under any law, rule, regulation, code or ordinance. 1.6 Property. Includes the land described in Exhibit `A', together with all improvements, rights, privileges, servitudes and appurtenances thereunto belonging or appertaining, including all right, title, and interest of Seller, if any, in and to the streets, alleys, and rights-of-way adjacent to the land, and Seller's lessor interest existing in leases of the Property, which will be transferred. 1.7 Property Documents. Any and all documents in Seller's possession or control relating to the Property, including without limitation, land use approvals, land use applications, permits, licenses, leases and related documents, all environmental studies, reports, assessments, any agreements related to the Property that will survive Closing,maps, development agreements, surveys and studies relating to the Property prepared by third parties,but excluding(i) documents which are no longer in effect(ii) tax documents, (iii) documents subject to attorney client privilege, and (iv) documents relating to potential transactions which have not occurred and (v) appraisals. ARTICLE 2 PURCHASE PRICE 2.1 Sale of Property. Subject to the terms and conditions in this Agreement, Seller agrees to sell the Property to Purchaser, and Purchaser agrees to buy the Property from Seller. 2.2 Purchase Price. The Purchase Price due from Purchaser to Seller is: 2.2.1 $515,500 (representing the original purchase price for the Property paid by Seller) or the amount established by an independent MAI appraisal, whichever is greater as provided in Section 2.2.2; with $1.00 due and payable at Closing, and the balance due on June 30, 2017 (the "Due Date") and subject to the City's Right to Repurchase as provided in Article 10 (the "Purchase Price"). 2.2.2 Purchaser may pay the balance of the Purchase Price at any time. At least sixty(60) days before tendering the remainder of the Purchase Price, but no later than January 30, 2017, Purchaser shall submit to Seller the qualifications of at least three MAI appraisers. Seller shall have 10 days to object to up to two of the appraisers. Purchaser shall select an appraiser not objected to by Seller and shall obtain a appraisal of the current fair market value of the Property at its highest and best use, which amount shall be the Purchase Price if greater than $515,500.00 (the original purchase price for the Property paid by Seller). 2.2.3 As further consideration, Purchaser shall assume, be bound by and fully perform Seller's obligations as set forth in the Consent Judgment (CI52218CV) between Seller Page 2- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA and the State of Oregon, ex rel Dick Pederson, Director, Department of Environmental Quality, dated May 28, 2015. ARTICLE 3 CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO CLOSING 3.1 Purchaser's Deliveries. At or before Closing, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller(i) the sum of $1.00, (ii) an executed and acknowledged acceptance of the Deed, (iii) an executed counterpart of the Assignment and Assumption of the leases in the form of Exhibit 3.2 ("Assignment and Assumption"), duly executed by Purchaser, (iv) such documentation as may be necessary to assume the obligations under the Consent Judgment C152218CV, (v) a copy of the resolution or order authorizing the purchase and (vi) an executed Promissory Note in a form substantially conforming with Exhibit `C' hereto securing payment of the remainder of the Purchase Price and all other documents and instruments reasonably requested by Seller to effectuate Closing. 3.2 Seller's Deliveries. At or before Closing, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser(i) an executed and acknowledged Deed, (ii) an executed Certificate of Non-Foreign Status,pursuant to Section 1445(b) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code, certifying that Seller is a non-foreign person, (iii) an executed counterpart of the Assignment and Assumption; (iii) a copy of the resolution or order authorizing the sale and (vi) all other documents and instruments reasonably requested by Closing. At Closing, Seller shall deliver possession of the Property to Purchaser, subject to the Lease Documents. 3.3 Purchaser's Right to Analyze Property Documents. Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date, Seller shall deliver all Property Documents to Purchaser. During the Contingency Period (as defined in Section 3.4 below), Purchaser shall have the right to analyze the Property Documents and determine, in Purchaser's sole, absolute and arbitrary discretion, whether the Property is suitable for Purchaser's intended use. 3.4 Purchaser's Right to Analyze Property. For a period of thirty (30) days after the Effective Date (the "Contingency Period"), unless extended by Purchaser as set forth below: 3.4.1 Purchaser shall have the right to analyze the Property and determine,in Purchaser's sole, absolute and arbitrary discretion, whether the Property is suitable for Purchaser's intended use. 3.4.2 Purchaser shall have the right, at no cost, to extend the Contingency Period two (2) times for a period of thirty (30) days each, upon ten (10) days prior written notice to the Seller stating the reasonable need for the extension. 3.4.3 The parties acknowledge that Purchaser intends to apply for an EPA Brownfields Cleanup grant. Seller agrees to reasonably assist Purchaser in obtaining such grant, including facilitating Purchaser in performing all appropriate inquiries as defined by law and Page 3 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CODA qualifying for liability protection pursuant to 40 CFR Part 312 or as otherwise provided by law. The parties understand that Seller has: 3.4.3.1 Obtained a Phase 1 and Phase II environmental assessment of the Property, copies of which are to be provided to Purchaser. Seller shall authorize and direct its environmental consultant(s) to make available to Purchaser any and all information obtained on behalf of Seller regarding the Property. 3.4.3.2 Entered into a Consent Judgment with the State of Oregon, ex rel Dick Pederson, Director, Department of Environmental Quality, C152218CV, dated May 28, 2015, obligating Seller to undertake certain actions regarding the property as specified therein. Purchaser agrees that on Closing it shall be bound by and responsible for fully performing the obligations under that Consent Judgment. Seller shall cooperate and assist Purchaser as reasonably necessary in performing such obligations. 3.4.3.3 Purchaser shall have the right to enter onto the Property,upon forty-eight (48)hour prior notice to Seller, to conduct any and all tests, investigations, and inspections deemed necessary by Purchaser. Seller shall have the right to be present at the inspections(s). Seller may, if it determines that access by Purchaser will interfere with the rights of current tenants,require coordination with such tenants and impose reasonable conditions on Purchaser's access. 3.4.3.4 Such investigations and/or studies shall be conducted by Purchaser at its sole expense. 3.4.4 Within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act and the Oregon Constitution, Purchaser shall defend, indemnify and hold Seller harmless for, from, and against any claim, loss, or liability, or any claim of lien or damage which arises in connection with any entry on the Property by Purchaser or any activities on the Property by Purchaser, its agents, employees, and independent contractors;provided,however, that Purchaser shall have no obligation to indemnify, defend, or hold harmless Seller from any condition of the Property discovered by Purchaser, or from any loss of marketability of the Property as a consequence of such discovery. This agreement to indemnify, hold harmless and defend Seller shall survive Closing or other termination of this Agreement. 3.4.5 In the event Purchaser elects not to close on the Property, upon such determination and termination of the Agreement, Purchaser agrees it will provide to Seller copies of all written reports resulting from any and all investigations conducted by the Purchaser during the Contingency Period,within five(5) days of termination of this Agreement. This provision will survive the Closing or termination of the Agreement. 3.5 Notice of Termination; Failure to Notify. If Purchaser determines, in Purchaser's sole, absolute, and arbitrary discretion, the Property is not suitable, Purchaser may terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice of termination to Seller prior to the Page 4- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA expiration of the Contingency Period, as it may be extended, in which case this Agreement shall immediately terminate. 3.6 Review of Preliminary Report. Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date, Seller shall provide Purchaser with a preliminary title report, describing title to the Property, and including legible copies of all recorded documents described in the preliminary report (collectively, the "Preliminary Report"). On or before ten(10) days after Purchaser's receipt of the Preliminary Report, Purchaser shall deliver written notice of approval or disapproval of matters disclosed in the Preliminary Report, which approval or disapproval shall be in Purchaser's sole and absolute discretion.Any notice of disapproval shall specify which title exceptions are unacceptable (the "Unacceptable Exceptions"). The matters disclosed in the Preliminary Report to which Seller does not object, along with the standard printed exceptions on a form of title insurance policy, shall be the "Permitted Exceptions" and included as exceptions in the Title Policy, along with any Unacceptable Exceptions that become Permitted Exceptions. 3.7 Right to Cure Disapproval of Preliminary Report. If Purchaser delivers notice of disapproval, Seller shall notify Purchaser in writing(a"Response Notice") within five (5) days thereafter, whether Seller will agree to remove or otherwise cure,to Purchaser's reasonable satisfaction, any Unacceptable Exception(s)prior to Closing. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, Seller shall be obligated to remove any deeds of trust and other monetary liens (other than liens for non-delinquent taxes and assessments). If Seller fails to timely provide a Response Notice, Seller shall be deemed to have elected not to cure any Unacceptable Exceptions. If Seller fails to agree to remove an Unacceptable Exception, Purchaser shall elect,by notice to Seller within five (5) days after the Response Notice (or,if no Response Notice is provided, within five(5) days after the Response Notice was due to either(I) terminate this Agreement or(II) waive Seller's objection and accept title subject to the Unacceptable Exceptions which Seller has not agreed to cure(in which event such Unacceptable Exceptions shall be Permitted Exceptions). Failure of Purchaser to timely so elect shall be deemed an election to waive such Unacceptable Exceptions, in which event such Unacceptable Exceptions shall become Permitted Exceptions. 3.8 Failure to Cure Disapproval of Preliminary Report. If Seller, in its Response Notice, agrees to cure an Unacceptable Exception and thereafter fails to cure such Unacceptable Exception prior to Closing, Purchaser shall have the right to (i) terminate this Agreement (ii) suspend performance of its obligations under this Agreement at no cost to Purchaser and extend the Closing Date until that removal of the Unacceptable Exception has occurred (but no more than 45 days) or(iii) waive in writing its prior disapproval of such exception and accept title subject to such previously disapproved item, by delivering written notice of Purchaser's election to Seller prior to Closing in which case such Unacceptable Exceptions will be Permitted Exceptions. 3.9 Title Policy. Seller shall be unconditionally committed to procure upon Closing, an ALTA standard coverage owner's policy of title insurance for the Property, with a liability limit in the amount of the Purchase Price without regard to any future credits and insuring fee title vests in Purchaser subject only to the Permitted Exceptions (collectively, the "Title Policy"). Page 5 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA At Purchaser's option, Purchaser may elect to have the Title Policy issued with endorsements and/or in an ALTA extended coverage form, provided (I) that Purchaser pays any additional costs associated with issuance of such policy, and (II) Seller shall not be required to indemnify the title company to induce it to issue such extended coverage or endorsements. 3.10 Approval. This Agreement is specifically conditioned on approval by the Tigard City Council and the governing body of the City Center Development Agency before the end of the Contingency Period. If either governing body has not approved this Agreement on or before the expiration of the Contingency Period, this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the Purchaser and the Seller shall automatically terminate. 3.11 Approval of Leases & Estoppel Certificates. Within ten (10) days of the Effective Date, Seller will provide to Purchaser copies of all current leases affecting the Property, copies of any related documents other than leases which provide for or discuss any matters affecting the occupancy of the Property by the tenants who have any right now or in the future with respect to the Premises, including but not limited to options to lease, relocation rights, termination rights, and/or expansion or contraction rights (collectively, the "Lease Documents"). Purchaser may terminate this Agreement at any time during the Contingency Period if Purchaser shall determine in the exercise of its sole discretion that any documents described herein are not satisfactory. Effective on the Closing Date, Seller will assign to Purchaser all leases then in effect. 3.12 Contingency Failure. If Purchaser fails to notify Seller in writing by the end of the Contingency Period that the conditions set forth in this Article 3 have been satisfied or waived, this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the Purchaser and the Seller shall automatically terminate. 3.13 Damage or Destruction; Eminent Domain. If, prior to the Closing, all or a material part of the Property is damaged or destroyed, or taken or appropriated by any public or quasi-public authority under the power of eminent domain or such an eminent domain action is threatened pursuant to a resolution of intention to condemn filed by any public entity, Purchaser may either(i) terminate this Agreement or(ii) elect to receive an assignment from Seller in lieu of the part of the Property that has been so damaged or taken of all of Seller's rights to any award and/or proceeds attributable to said damaged or taken part of the Property, and the parties shall proceed to Closing pursuant to this Agreement provided that Purchaser may not terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Section if Purchaser is the condemning government entity. ARTICLE 4 SELLER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 4.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller represents and warrants that, as of the Effective Date, the end of the Contingency Period, and the Closing, that all of the representations and warranties contained in this Agreement are and shall be true and correct, and shall survive Closing for a period of one(1) year. Each of Seller's representations and warranties is material to and is being relied upon by Purchaser and the continuing truth thereof Page 6 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA shall constitute a condition precedent to Purchaser's obligations hereunder. Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser as follows: 4.1.1 Proof of Authority. Seller has authority and authorization to enter into this Agreement and consummate the transaction contemplated by it, and shall deliver such proof of the power and authority of the persons executing and/or delivering any instruments, documents, or certificates on behalf of the Seller to act for or bind the Seller, as may be reasonably required by Purchaser. 4.1.2 Title to the Property. Seller has sole legal and beneficial fee title to the Property, and has not granted any person or entity any right or interest in the Property except as set forth in this Agreement, in the Preliminary Report, and the Lease Documents. Seller agrees to transfer to Purchaser, via Statutory Special Warranty Deed in the form of Exhibit `13% the Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. 4.1.3 Property Documents, Lease Documents; No Defaults. To Seller's knowledge, the Property Documents, including lease documents delivered by Seller to Purchaser are true, correct and complete copies and there are no other documents or instruments in Seller's possession and control that would constitute Property Documents that have not been delivered by Seller or otherwise made available to Purchaser. Seller has no knowledge of any default by Seller under any Property Documents. 4.1.4 Pending Transactions, Suits or Proceedings. To Seller's knowledge, there are no suits, proceedings, litigation, condemnation, or investigations pending or threatened against or affecting the Property or Seller as the owner of the Property in any court at law or in equity, or before or by any governmental department, commission,board, agency or instrumentality. 4.1.5 No Further Encumbrances. As long as this Agreement remains in force, Seller will not lease, transfer, option, mortgage, pledge, or convey its interest in the Property or any portion thereof nor any right therein, nor shall Seller enter into any agreement granting to any person or entity any option to purchase or rights superior to Purchaser with respect to the Property or any part thereof. 4.1.6 Environmental Conditions. Except as provided in the Consent Judgment C152218CV dated May 28, 2015, and documents provided to Purchaser, to Seller's knowledge, the Property is not now in violation of, and is not currently under investigation for the violation of, any Environmental Laws. Seller hereby assigns to Purchaser as of the Closing, to the extent assignable, all claims, counterclaims, defenses or actions, whether at common law or pursuant to any other applicable federal or state or other laws, if any, that Seller may have against third parties to the extent relating to the existence of Hazardous Materials in, at, on, under or about the Property. 4.1.7 Construction or Other Liens. Seller warrants that, at the time of Closing, no work, labor or materials have been expended, bestowed or placed upon the Property, Page 7 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA which will remain unpaid at Closing or upon which a lien may be filed, excepting work, labor, or materials for which the tenant under the Lease Documents is responsible. 4.1.8 No Option or Right of First Refusal to Acquire Premises. Seller represents that no person or entity has any right of first refusal or option to acquire any interest in the property or any part thereof. 4.1.9 Conduct Pending Closing; Covenants. 4.1.9.1 Conduct of Property. Seller hereby agrees that Seller will not modify, cancel, extend or otherwise change in any material manner any of the terms, covenants or conditions of the Property Documents or Lease Documents,nor enter into any additional leases as to the Property without Purchaser's written consent, nor enter into any other agreements having a material effect on the Property without the prior written consent of Purchaser, which Purchaser shall not unreasonably withhold. 4.1.9.2 No Alterations. Seller will not make any material alterations to the Property prior to the Closing,provided nothing herein prohibits alterations made by a tenant permitted by such tenant's Lease. 4.1.9.3 Condition of the Property Through Closing. Seller shall, between the Effective Date and the Closing Date: (i) maintain the Property in substantially the same condition as it was on the Effective Date, with no tree cutting, timber harvesting or altering of the Property in any way, subject to casualty and to alterations made by a tenant permitted by such tenant's Lease, (ii) keep all existing insurance policies affecting the Property in full force and effect, (iii)make all regular payments of interest and principal on any existing financing, (iv)pay all real property taxes and assessments against the Property prior to delinquency, (v) comply with all government regulations, and (vi)keep Purchaser timely advised of any repair or improvement which is known by Seller required to keep the Property in substantially the same condition as it was on the Effective Date. ARTICLE 5 AS-IS SALE AS-IS Sale. The Property is being sold to, and accepted by, Purchaser at Closing in its then-present condition, AS-IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and without any warranty whatsoever, express or implied, except for the representations and warranties set forth in Article 4 and in the Deed to be delivered at Closing. Purchaser acknowledges that (a) it is purchasing the Property AS-IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS; (b) it will have made or performed any and all tests, surveys, or other examinations of the Property as Purchaser deems necessary prior to the end of the Contingency Period; and (c) it shall rely solely on its own inspection, examination, and evaluation of the Property in assessing and determining the condition of the Property. Seller and Seller's agents have not made, are not now making, and specifically hereby disclaim, any and all warranties and representations of any kind, express or implied, oral or Page 8 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA written, with respect to the Property, except for any representation or warranty made in Article 4 or any warranty of title to be contained in the Deed to be delivered at Closing. The provisions of this Article 5 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE 6 PURCHASER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 6.1 Purchaser's Representation and Warranties. Purchaser represents and warrants that, as of the Effective Date,the end of the Contingency Period, and Closing, all of the representations and warranties of Purchaser contained in this Agreement are and shall be true and correct, and shall survive Closing for a period of one (1) year. Each of Purchaser's representations and warranties is material to and is being relied upon by Seller and the continuing truth thereof shall constitute a condition precedent to Seller's obligations hereunder. Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller as follows: 6.1.1 Authority. The execution and delivery of this Agreement has been duly authorized and approved by all requisite action of Purchaser, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby will be duly authorized and approved by all requisite action of Purchaser, and no other authorizations or approvals will be necessary in order to enable Purchaser to enter into or to comply with the terms of this Agreement. 6.1.2 Binding Effect of Documents. This Agreement and the other documents to be executed by Purchaser hereunder, upon execution and delivery thereof by Purchaser, will have been duly entered into by Purchaser, and will constitute legal, valid and binding obligations of Purchaser. To Purchaser's actual knowledge, neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done under this Agreement violates or shall violate any contract, document,understanding, agreement or instrument to which Purchaser is a party or by which it is bound. ARTICLE 7 PRORATED FEES AND COSTS 7.1 Prorations. Taxes will be prorated as of the Closing date. 7.2 Seller's Fees and Costs. Seller shall pay: (i)the costs for the Title Policy(but not extended coverage or endorsements requested by Purchaser; (ii) Seller's recording charges; and (iii) one-half of any transfer taxes. 7.3 Purchaser's Fees and Costs. Purchaser shall pay(i) Purchaser's recording charges; (ii) if requested by Purchaser, any extended coverage and endorsements for the Title Policy; and (iii) one-half of any transfer taxes. 7.4 Other Costs. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, each party shall bear and pay the expense of its own attorneys, accountants and other professionals incurred in negotiating this Agreement. Page 9 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA ARTICLE 8 CLOSING 8.1 Closing. Closing shall consist of(i)payment of the amount due and recording the Deed and providing a conformed copy to each Party; (ii) confirming execution of all documents necessary for Closing; and (iii) delivering fiends and documents as set forth herein, when and only when the parties have confirmed that all terms and conditions of this Agreement have been met and each of the conditions set forth below have been satisfied: 8.1.1 Funds and Instruments. All funds and instruments required pursuant to this Agreement have been delivered. 8.1.2 Satisfaction of Conditions Precedent. Each of the conditions precedent set forth in the Agreement have been either satisfied or waived, or deemed waived. 8.1.3 Liens and Encumbrances. All liens and encumbrances required to be paid by Seller have been paid and satisfied at Seller's sole expense, including without limitation any trust deed or mortgage affecting the Property. The Property shall be conveyed free of encumbrances, except for the Permitted Exceptions and those expressly accepted or waived by Purchaser pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8.1.4 Assignment and Assumption Document. The parties shall have executed the Assignment and Assumption of the leases and such documents as are necessary for purchaser to assume the obligations under Consent Judgment CI52218CV. 8.1.5 Closing. Closing shall occur on the date that is thirty(30) days after expiration of the Contingency Period unless agreed otherwise in writing by the parties. ARTICLE 9 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES 9.1 Pre-Closing Remedies: 9.1.1. Purchaser's Breach. If Purchaser breaches this Agreement,which breach Purchaser fails to cure within thirty(30) days after receipt of written notice thereof from Seller, Seller may terminate this Agreement and receive as liquidated damages reimbursement of Seller's reasonable and necessary costs associated with this transaction and termination thereof, including attorney fees. 9.1.2. Seller's Breach. In the event of Seller's breach, which breach Seller fails to cure within thirty(30) days of receipt of written notice thereof from Purchaser, Purchaser may elect to either(i) terminate this Agreement, or receive as liquidated damages reimbursement for Purchaser's costs associated with this transaction, including attorney fees, or(ii) seek an action for specific performance in order to enforce Purchaser's rights hereunder. Page 10- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CODA 9.1.3. Liquidated Damages. The parties agree that the amounts stated above have been agreed to as a reasonable compensation and the exclusive financial remedy for default, since the precise amount of such compensation would be difficult to determine. 9.2 Seller's Post Closing Remedies: If Purchaser breaches its post-Closing obligations under this Agreement, which breach Purchaser fails to cure within thirty(30) days after receipt of written notice thereof from Seller; Seller may, in addition to any other remedy provided by law: 9.2.1 Immediately exercise its right to repurchase provided for in Article 10. 9.2.2 File an action for specific performance of Purchaser's obligations. 9.2.3 File an action to collect all amounts due under the Promissory Note executed by Purchaser,the full amount of which shall be immediately due and payable. 9.3 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if Purchaser takes any action that violates the Measure, or Purchaser's Measure-related Post Closing Obligations, including but not limited to those set forth in Section 10.2,below, the entire Purchase Price shall immediately be due and payable, and Purchaser shall immediately pay the remainder of the Purchase Price to Seller in full and not in installments. ARTICLE 10 SELLER'S RIGHT TO REPURCHASE and PURCHASER'S POST CLOSING OBLIGATIONS 10.1 Right to Repurchase. Seller retains, and Purchaser acknowledges, Seller's right to repurchase the Property at any time prior to Purchaser paying the full amount of the Purchase Price, or on Purchaser's default, on 10 days written notice of its intent to repurchase the Property, or any portion thereof, for purposes consistent with the uses authorized by City of Tigard Ballot Measure 34-81. 10.1.1 The repurchase price shall be $515,500.00,pro-rated by the square footage to be purchased, or the fair market value of the property or portion thereof, established in the same manner as provided for in Section 2.2.1, whichever is less. 10.1.2 If Seller exercises its right to repurchase a portion of the Property less than the whole, Seller shall be responsible for obtaining any lot line adjustment or land division necessary to complete the repurchase. 10.1.3 Closing of the repurchase shall occur in a commercially reasonable manner generally consistent with the Closing provided for herein. 10.2 Purchaser's Post-Closing Obligations. Until such time as Purchaser has paid the full amount of the Purchase Price, Purchaser shall: Page 11 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA 10.2.1 Not enter into any rental agreement or lease, earnest money, option, development agreement, deed, easement or other document relating to transfer or sale of any portion of the Property without first obtaining Seller's written consent. No lease shall extend beyond expiration of Seller's right to repurchase. The rental amount of any such lease of the Property or any portion of the Property shall be at fair market value. No lease shall provide an option to purchase or other property interest beyond that normally associated with a tenant. 10.2.2 Not permit or suffer any lien or other encumbrance against the Property without Seller's written consent. 10.2.3 Comply, and not take any action inconsistent, with the obligations set forth in the Consent Judgment (C152218CV) between Seller and the State of Oregon, ex rel Dick Pederson, Director, Department of Environmental Quality, dated May 28, 2015. Within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act, Purchaser shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Seller against any claim arising from Purchaser's failure to comply with, or negligent compliance with, the obligations set forth in the referenced Consent Judgment. 10.2.4 Hold the Property to advance the purposes set forth in the Measure. 10.2.5 Not authorize or suffer any action with regard to the Property that would cause it to diminish in value or not advance the purposes set forth in the Measure. Purchaser may demolish and remove the existing structures on the Property, conduct environmental remediation, and take other actions with the consent of City that advance the purposes of the Measure. 10.2.6 Not make any changes to the Property or take any other action related to the Property that benefits any particular private party. 10.3 Survival. This Article 10 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE 11 GENERAL PROVISIONS 11.1 Attorney's Fees. If any action is instituted between Seller and Purchaser in connection with this Agreement, the party prevailing in such action shall be entitled to recover from the other party all of its costs of action, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees and costs as fixed by the court therein. 11.2 Construction of Agreement. The agreements contained herein shall not be construed in favor of or against either party,but shall be construed as if both parties prepared this Agreement. 11.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto pertaining to the subject matter hereof and all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations, negotiations and understandings of the parties hereto, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. The foregoing sentence shall in no way affect Page 12 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA the validity of any instruments executed by the parties in the form of the exhibits attached to this Agreement. 11.4 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Oregon. 11.5 Joint and Several Liability. If any party consists of more than one person or entity, the liability of each such person or entity signing this Agreement shall be joint and several. 11.6 Modification. No modification, waiver, amendment, discharge, or change of this Agreement shall be valid unless the same is in writing and signed by all signatories hereto. 11.7 Real Estate Brokerage Commission. Each party warrants to the other that it has not engaged the services of a real estate broker in regards to this transaction. 11.8 Notice and Payments. Any notice or document to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be delivered either in person, deposited in the United States mail duly certified or registered, return receipt requested with postage prepaid, by electronic mail, or by Federal Express or other similar overnight delivery service marked for next business day delivery. Notices shall be effective upon receipt if delivered personally, upon confirmation of receipt if sent by electronic mail, on the next day if sent by overnight courier, or two (2) days after deposit in the mail if mailed. Any party listed below may designate a different address, which shall be substituted for the one specified below, by written notice to the others. If to Seller: City of Tigard Attn: Marty Wine, City Manager City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Fax: (503) 684-7297 If to Purchaser: City Center Development Agency Attn: Marty Wine, Executive Director 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Fax: (503) 684-7297 11.9 Remedies Cumulative. Except as specifically set forth herein, all rights and remedies of Purchaser and Seller contained in this Agreement shall be construed and held to be cumulative. 11.10 Severability. In the event that any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section, article or other portion of this Agreement shall become illegal, null or void or against public policy, for any reason, or shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, null Page 13 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA or void or against public policy,the remaining portions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in force and effect to the fullest extent permissible by law. 11.11 Successors and Assigns. Subject to limitations expressed in this Agreement, each and all of the covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the successors-in-interest, assigns, and representatives of the parties hereto. As used in the foregoing, "successors" shall refer to the parties' interest in the Property and to the successors to all or substantially all of their assets and to their successors by merger or consolidation. 11.12 Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement. 11.13 Waiver. No waiver by Purchaser or Seller of a breach of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement by the other party shall be construed or held to be a waiver of any succeeding or preceding breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition herein contained. No waiver of any default by Purchaser or Seller hereunder shall be implied from any omission by the other party to take any action on account of such default if such default persists or is repeated, and no express waiver shall affect a default other than as specified in such waiver. The consent or approval by Purchaser or Seller to or of any act by the other party requiring the consent or approval of the first party shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary such party's consent or approval to or of any subsequent similar acts by the other party. 11.14 Negation of Agency and Partnership. Any agreement by either party to cooperate with the other in connection with any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as making either party an agent or partner of the other party. 11.15 Calculation of Time. Unless specified otherwise, all periods of time referred to herein shall include Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays in the State of Oregon, except that if the last day of any period falls on any Saturday, Sunday or such holiday, the period shall be extended to include the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or such holiday. 11.16 Statutory Disclaimer. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT MAY NOT BE WITHIN A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PROTECTING STRUCTURES. THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT, IN FARM OR FOREST ZONES, MAY NOT AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OR SITING OF A RESIDENCE AND THAT LIMIT LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, IN ALL ZONES. 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, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009 AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR Page 14- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA 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 VERIFY THE EXISTENCE OF FIRE PROTECTION FOR STRUCTURES AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009 AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. 11.17 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when taken together, shall constitute fully executed originals. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. SELLER PURCHASER City Center Development Agency, an ORS City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal Chapter 457 agency corporation By: Name: By: Its: Name: Its: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney Exhibit A - Property Exhibit B —Deed Exhibit C—Assignment of Lease Page 15 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA EXHIBIT A . IIIIIillllll�illl�llit (IIII_lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllllll 2003-90649 EXHIBIT A Legal Description A tract of land being a portion of Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,a duly recorded subdivision in Washington County plat records,said land being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian,in the City of Tigard,County of Washington,State of Oregon,being further described as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of said Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT',being a point on the centerline of S.W.Burnham Road;thence 545"06'43"W,along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 30.00 feet to a point on the Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Burnham Road;thence S45106'43"W,continuing on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 314.41 feet to the Southwesterly line of a 30.00 foot easement lxordai in Washington County Deed Book 890 Page 753;thence N44°28'10"W, 15.00 feet Southwesterly of,and parallel to,an existing sewer line,a distance of 190.74 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3;thence N51°56'00"E,along the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 312.87 feet to a point on said Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Burnham Road;thence continuing NS 1156'00"E,a distance of 30.27 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot 3,being a point on the centerline of said S.W.Burnham Road;thence S45°46'00"E,along said centerline,a distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13, 1978 in Book 1118,Page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in document recorded January 8,1980,as Recorder's Number 80000717. The foregoing property is the same property which is occasionally described as: Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,in the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13, 1976,page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in document recorded January 8,1980,Recorder's No.80000717, And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to the City of Tigard by deed recorded August 6, 1980,Recorder's No.80026999. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to Gerald L.Cach and Joan L.Cach,husband and wife,by deed recorded August 11,1980,Recorder's No.80027467. Pottlnd 14140012.1 0099999-00001 Title Data, Inc. FA POR10411 WN 2004028753.003 Exhibit A 50014-71545 145815481AMJ/11/1712015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 EXHIBIT B AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: City Center Development Agency Attn: Executive Director 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 UNTIL A CHANGE IS REQUESTED SEND TAX STATEMENTS TO: City Center Development Agency Attn: Executive Director 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 This space is reserved for recorder's use. STATUTORY SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED The City of Tigard, an Oregon Municipal Corporation ("Grantor")hereby conveys and warrants to the City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency, ("Grantee"), the following described real property free of encumbrances created or suffered by Grantor except as specifically set forth herein: See Exhibit A attached hereto. The true consideration for this conveyance is This conveyance is made subject to Grantor's right to repurchase and Grantee's obligations as set forth in the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the parties dated and the matters set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto. 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 119 CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. 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 Exhibit B, Page 1 of 4 50014-71545 1458154_8WMJ/11/17/2015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS,IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009,AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. DATED this day of 92015. GRANTOR By: Name: Its: STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2015 by as of the City of Tigard. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: ACCEPTED: GRANTEE City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency By: Name: Its: STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2015,by as of the City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: Exhibit B, Page 2 of 4 50014-715451458154_81AMJ/11/1712015 75!86068.2 0050637-00002 111111 Iillllilil 1!11111 IIIIIIIIiillllll IIIIIIIIIIII Z00J-86649 EXHIBIT A Legal Description A tract of land being a portion of Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,a duly recorded subdivision in Washington County plat records,said land being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range I West of the Willamette Meridian,in the City of Tigard,County of Washington,State of Oregon,being further described as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of said Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,being a point on the centerline of S.W.Burnham Road;thence S45"06'43"W,along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 30.00 Feet to a point on the Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Burnham Road;thence S45°06'43"W,continuing on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 314.41 feet to the Southwesterly line of a 30.00 foot easement recorded in Washington County Deed Book 890 Page 753;thence N44°28'10"W, 15.00 feet Southwesterl my of,and parallel to,an existing sewer line,a distance of 190.74 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3;thence N51°56'00"E,along the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 312.87 feet to a point on said Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Bwiiham Road;thence continuing NS VS6'00"E,a distance of 30.27 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot 3,being a point on the centerline of said S.W.Burnham Road;thence 945°4600"E,along said centerline,a distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13, 1978 in Book 1118,Page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street acrd utility purposes in document recorded January 8,1980,as Recorder's Number 80000717. The foregoing property is the same property which is occasionally described as: Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,in the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13,1976,page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in document recorded January 8, 1980,Recorder's No.80000717. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to the City of Tigard by deed recorded August 6, 1980,Recorder's No.80026999. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to Gerald L.Cach and Joan L.Cach,husband and wife,by deed recorded August 11,1980,Recorder's No.80027467. PortW 1.2140012.1 0099999-00001 Title Data, Inc. FA POR10411 WN 2004028753.003 Exhibit B, Page 3 of 4 50014-71545 75186068.2 0050637-00002 Exhibit B [to be provided after review of preliminary report] Exhibit B, Page 4 of 4 50014-71545 1458154_8WMJ/1l/17/2015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 Exhibit C ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE THIS Assignment and Assumption of Lease("Agreement") is made as of this day of , 20_,between the City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation ("Assignor") and the City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency("Assignee") RECITALS A. Assignor owns the fee interest in those certain premises described on Exhibit A attached and incorporated hereto (the "Premises"). B. A portion of the Premises are leased pursuant to the lease attached and incorporated as Exhibit B (the "Lease"). Assignor holds all right,title and interest in and to the lessor's interest under the Lease. C. Pursuant to that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated 20_,between Assignor and Assignee (the "Agreement"), Assignor has agreed to sell the Premises to Assignee and in connection with the sale has agreed to assign the Lease to Assignee and Assignee has agreed to assume the Lease. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Assignment. Effective as of the Effective Date of this Assignment, Assignor hereby transfers, sets over and assigns to Assignee all right, title and interest of Assignor in and to the Lease,TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same to Assignee, its successors and assigns forever; SUBJECT , HOWEVER, to each and every provision of the Lease and as hereinafter provided. 2. Acceptance of Assignment. Effective as of the Effective Date, Assignee accepts the within assignment and agrees to perform and discharge all of the covenants, terms, conditions and provisions to be kept, observed and performed by Assignor as lessor under the Lease. 3. Assignor's Indemnity of Assignee. Assignor hereby agrees to defend and indemnify Assignee, its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns, and each of them, from and against Exhibit C 50014-71545 1458154RUMM1/1712015 any and all claims, suits, demands, causes of action, actions, liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of or resulting from any breach or default committed or alleged to have been committed by Assignor as lessor under the Lease prior to the Effective Date. 4. Assignee's Indemnity of Assignor. Within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act and Oregon Constitution, Assignee hereby agrees to defend and indemnify Assignor, and its respective directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns, and each of them, from and against any and all claims, suits, demands, causes of action, actions, liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of or resulting from any breach or default committed or alleged to have been committed by Assignee, its successors or assigns, as the lessor under the Lease from and after the Effective Date. 5. Effective Date. This Assignment shall be effective as of the date of recording of the deed conveying title to the Premises to Assignee (the "Effective Date"). 6. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in one or more counterparts by the parties hereto. All Counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement. 7. Binding Effect. This Assignment shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Assignment to be duly executed on behalf of each of them respectively, by their respective officer's thereunto duly authorized, in multiple originals, all as of the day and year first above written. ASSIGNOR ASSIGNEE City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation City Center Development Agency, an ORS Ch. 457 urban renewal agency By: Name: By: Its: Name: Its: Exhibit C 50014-715451458154 8UMM1/17/2015 EXHIBIT A Premises Exhibit C 50014-715451458154 8UMM1/17/2015 EXHIBIT B The Leases Exhibit C 50014-71545 1458154MAMM1/17/1015 AIS-2407 9. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 11/24/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: CCDA Board Consideration of Resolution to Purchase Saxony Property Submitted By: Sean Farrelly, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: City Center Development Agency Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Board of the City Center Development Agency is requested to consider a resolution to approve the purchase of the Main Street Saxony properties as outlined in the purchase and sale agreement and authorize the Executive Director of the CCDA to take all necessary action to complete the property purchase on behalf of the agency. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends approval of the resolution approving the purchase of the Saxony-Pacific properties and authorizing the Executive Director of the CCDA to complete the property purchase. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Board of the CCDA will consider approval of the acquisition of two City of Tigard-owned Main Street properties (Tax lot IDs 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100,12533-12537 SW Main Street, a.k.a. "the Saxony properties"). The properties were acquired by the City of Tigard in July 2015. Section V of the City Center Urban Renewal Plan authorizes Real Property Acquisition and Real Property Disposition as projects. Under Project H, real property may be acquired as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII, paragraph A. The 12533-12537 SW Main Street properties are future redevelopment opportunities for open space and mixed use development located in the Urban Renewal area. Transfer of the properties to the Agency furthers the public interest as it will increase the opportunities for cost-effective environmental remediation of the site, including making the properties eligible for brownfield clean-up grant funding. The property was purchased by the city using Park Bond funds. The first priority of this project is to ensure that the voter approved bonds are protected and the project only uses the property in a manner that is permitted under the ballot tide that was approved by the voters. The purchase and sale agreement includes covenants that bind the Agency to repaying the Park Bond fund the original purchase amount, or market value, whichever is greater, for the portion of the property not used for public space by January 30, 2017. A feasibility study for the site is currently underway. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The CCDA Board could choose not to adopt the resolution to purchase the properties. COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Ti arg d City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be Increase walkable access to open space by advancing plans for new downtown open space, including the Tigard Street Trail plaza, the Fanno Creek Overlook and a Main Street plaza, including programming. City Center Urban Renewal Plan Goal 1: Revitalization of the Downtown should recognize the value of natural resources as amenities and as contributing to the special sense of place. Goal 5: Promote high quality development of retail, office and residential uses that support and are supported by public streetscape, transportation, recreation and open space investments. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Goal 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy Goal 9.3 Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business Special Planning Areas- Downtown Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village. Goal 15.3 Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features into downtown. Tigard Strategic Plan Goal 2. Ensure development advances the vision DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION August 18, 2015, Discussion on Saxony Property Redevelopment Study May 26, 2015, Authorize Purchase of Saxony Pacific Site May 5, 2015, Discussion of Prospective Purchaser Agreement April 8, 2014, Authorize CCDA Executive Director to negotiate voluntary property acquisitions The purchase of the Saxony property was discussed in a number of Executive Sessions including: December 2, 2014 October 28, 2014 September 2, 2014 January 7, 2014 December 3, 2013 November 5,2013 October 1, 2013 September 3, 2013 August 20, 2013 Fiscal Impact Cost: $1 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where Budgeted (department/program): CCDA Additional Fiscal Notes: The Saxony properties were purchased with Park Bond funds for $515,500. The City Center Development Agency will purchase the properties for $1.00 at closing and the Parks Bond fund will be repaid for any portion of the property that is not used for public space by January 30, 2017, as per the purchase and sale agreement. Attachments CCDA Resolution Exhibit A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF TWO MAIN STREET PROPERTIES (12533-12537 SW MAIN STREET, TAXLOT IDS 2S102AB02000 AND 2S102AB02100) AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CCDA TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY ACTION TO COMPLETE THE PROPERTY PURCHASE WHEREAS, ORS 457. 170(3) authorizes the City Center Development Agency (CCDA) to acquire real property pursuant to its approved urban renewal plan; and WHEREAS, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan authorizes the acquisition of real property within the Urban Renewal Area as determined by the Agency to be necessary to further the Goals and Objectives of the City Center Renewal Plan and as provided in Section VIII,paragraph A ("Goals"); and WHEREAS,Taxlot IDs 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100, (12533-12537 SW Main Street) are future redevelopment opportunities for open space and mixed use development located in the Urban Renewal Area; and WHEREAS, the City Center Urban Renewal Plan has been amended to include the property acquisition as a project; and WHEREAS, the agency and the property owner (the City of Tigard) have reached an agreement on the purchase/ sale of the property. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Tigard City Center Development Agency that: SECTION 1: The Board of City Center Development Agency agrees to the terms of the Purchase and Sale Agreement attached as Exhibit A. SECTION 2: The Board of the City Center Development Agency authorizes the Executive Director of the CCDA to take all necessary action to complete the acquisition of Taxlot IDs 2S102AB02000 and 2S102AB02100, (12533-12537 SW Main Street) on behalf of the Agency. This includes, but is not limited to, execution of the Purchase and Sale Agreement, acceptance of a deed conveying the property, signing leases or assignments of leases on the property and all other closing documents. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 52015. CCDA Resolution No. 15- Page 1 Chair—City of Tigard City Center Development Agency ATTEST: Recorder—City of Tigard City Center Development Agency CCDA Resolution No. 15- Page 2 PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN: City Of Tigard,an Oregon Municipal ("Seller") Corporation And: City Center Development Agency, ("Purchaser") An ORS Chapter 457 Urban Renewal Agency DATED: _,2015 ("Effective Date") RECITALS A. Seller owns two parcels of real property commonly known as 12533, 12535 and 12537 SW Main St., Tigard, Or. 97224 (Tax Map Nos: 2S102AB2000 and 2S102ABO2100)both of which are more fully described on the attached and incorporated Exhibit `A' (hereinafter the "Property"), including the improvements thereon. B. Seller desires to sell the Property, and Purchaser desires to purchase the Property pursuant to the terms set forth in this Purchase and Sale Agreement ("Agreement"). C. The parties acknowledge that the Property was purchased by Seller with proceeds of the bonds sold under the authority of City Ballot Measure 34-181, approved by the voters November 2, 2010 (the "Measure"). Purchaser will use the Property in a manner permitted under the Measure and to advance the purposes described in the Measure, including seeking environmental remediation grant funding. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration described in this Agreement, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as set forth below. ARTICLE 1 DEFINED TERMS 1.1 Closing. The process described in Article 8 of this Agreement. 1.2 Contingency Period. As defined in Article 3. 1.3 Deed. A statutory special warranty deed in the form of Exhibit `B' attached hereto which shall be used to convey the Property from Seller to Purchaser, subject to Seller's right to repurchase and Purchaser's post-closing obligations. 1.4 Environmental Laws. Any federal, state, or local laws, ordinances, codes, statutes,regulations, administrative rules, policies and orders, and other authority existing now or in the future that classify, regulate,list,or define Hazardous Materials. Page 1 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CODA 1.5 Hazardous Materials. Any toxic or hazardous substance, material,waste, pollutant, contaminant, or infectious or radioactive material, including but not limited to those substances,materials,waste, chemicals, or mixtures that are (or that contain any) substances, chemicals, compounds, or mixtures regulated, either now or in the future, under any law, rule, regulation, code or ordinance. 1.6 Property. Includes the land described in Exhibit `A',together with all improvements,rights,privileges, servitudes and appurtenances thereunto belonging or appertaining, including all right, title, and interest of Seller, if any, in.and to the streets, alleys, and rights-of-way adjacent to the land, and Seller's lessor interest existing in leases of the Property, which will be transferred. 1.7 Property Documents. Any and all documents in Seller's possession or control relating to the Property, including without limitation, land use approvals, land use applications, permits, licenses,leases and related documents, all environmental studies,reports, assessments, any agreements related to the Property that will survive Closing,maps,development agreements, surveys and studies relating to the Property prepared by third parties,but excluding(i) documents which are no longer in effect(ii) tax documents, (iii) documents subject to attorney client privilege, and(iv) documents relating to potential transactions which have not occurred and (v) appraisals. ARTICLE 2 PURCHASE PRICE 2.1 Sale of Property. Subject to the terms and conditions in this Agreement, Seller agrees to sell the Property to Purchaser, and Purchaser agrees to buy the Property from Seller. 2.2 Purchase Price. The Purchase Price due from Purchaser to Seller is: 2.2.1 $515,500 (representing the original purchase price for the Property paid by Seller) or the amount established by an independent MAI appraisal,whichever is greater as provided in Section 2.2.2; with $1.00 due and payable at Closing, and the balance due on June 30, 2017 (the"Due Date") and subject to the City's Right to Repurchase as provided in Article 10 (the"Purchase Price"). 2.2.2 Purchaser may pay the balance of the Purchase Price at any time. At least sixty(60)days before tendering the remainder of the Purchase Price,but no later than January 30,2017, Purchaser shall submit to Seller the qualifications of at least three MAI appraisers. Seller shall have 10 days to object to up to two of the appraisers. Purchaser shall select an appraiser not objected to by Seller and shall obtain a appraisal of the current fair market value of the Property at its highest and best use,which amount shall be the Purchase Price if greater than $515,500.00 (the original purchase price for the Property paid by Seller). 2.2.3 As further consideration, Purchaser shall assume,be bound by and fully perform Seller's obligations as set forth in the Consent Judgment(CI52218CV)between Seller Page 2- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA a and the State of Oregon, ex rel Dick Pederson, Director, Department of Environmental Quality, dated May 28, 2015. ARTICLE 3 CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO CLOSING 3.1 Purchaser's Deliveries. At or before Closing, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller (i) the sum of $1.00, (ii) an executed and acknowledged acceptance of the Deed, (iii) an executed counterpart of the Assignment and Assumption of the leases in the form of Exhibit 3.2 ("Assignment and Assumption"), duly executed by Purchaser, (iv) such documentation as may be necessary to assume the obligations under the Consent Judgment CI52218CV, (v) a copy of the resolution or order authorizing the purchase and (vi) an executed Promissory Note in a form substantially conforming with Exhibit `C' hereto securing payment of the remainder of the Purchase Price and all other documents and instruments reasonably requested by Seller to effectuate Closing. 3.2 Seller's Deliveries. At or before Closing, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser (i) an executed and acknowledged Deed, (ii) an executed Certificate of Non-Foreign Status, pursuant to Section 1445(b) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code, certifying that Seller is a non-foreign person, (iii) an executed counterpart of the Assignment and Assumption; (iii) a copy of the resolution or order authorizing the sale and (vi) all other documents and instruments reasonably requested by Closing. At Closing, Seller shall deliver possession of the Property to Purchaser, subject to the Lease Documents. 3.3 Purchaser's Right to Analyze Property Documents. Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date, Seller shall deliver all Property Documents to Purchaser. During the Contingency Period (as defined in Section 3.4 below),Purchaser shall have the right to analyze the Property Documents and determine, in Purchaser's sole, absolute and arbitrary discretion, whether the Property is suitable for Purchaser's intended use. 3.4 Purchaser's Right to Analyze Property. For a period of thirty (30) days after the Effective Date (the "Contingency Period"), unless extended by Purchaser as set forth below: 3.4.1 Purchaser shall have the right to analyze the Property and determine, in Purchaser's sole, absolute and arbitrary discretion, whether the Property is suitable for Purchaser's intended use. 3.4.2 Purchaser shall have the right, at no cost, to extend the Contingency Period two (2) times for a period of thirty (30) days each, upon ten (10) days prior written notice to the Seller stating the reasonable need for the extension. 3.4.3 The parties acknowledge that Purchaser intends to apply for an EPA Brownfields Cleanup grant. Seller agrees to reasonably assist Purchaser in obtaining such grant, including facilitating Purchaser in performing all appropriate inquiries as defined by law and Page 3 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA qualifying for liability protection pursuant to 40 CFR Part 312 or as otherwise provided by law. The parties understand that Seller has: 3.4.3.1 Obtained a Phase 1 and Phase II environmental assessment of the Property, copies of which are to be provided to Purchaser. Seller shall authorize and direct its environmental consultant(s)to make available to Purchaser any and all information obtained on behalf of Seller regarding the Property. 3.4.3.2 Entered into a Consent Judgment with the State of Oregon, ex rel Dick Pederson, Director, Department of Environmental Quality, C152218CV, dated May 28, 2015,obligating Seller to undertake certain actions regarding the property as specified therein. Purchaser agrees that on Closing it shall be bound by and responsible for fully performing the obligations under that Consent Judgment. Seller shall cooperate and assist Purchaser as reasonably necessary in performing such obligations. 3.4.3.3 Purchaser shall have the right to enter onto the Property,upon forty-eight(48)hour prior notice to Seller,to conduct any and all tests, investigations, and inspections deemed necessary by Purchaser. Seller shall have the right to be present at the inspections(s). Seller may, if it determines that access by Purchaser will interfere with the rights of current tenants,require coordination with such tenants and impose reasonable conditions on Purchaser's access. 3.4.3.4 Such investigations and/or studies shall be conducted by Purchaser at its sole expense. 3.4.4 Within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act and the Oregon Constitution,Purchaser shall defend, indemnify and hold Seller harmless for, from, and against any claim,loss, or liability,or any claim of lien or damage which arises in connection with any entry on the Property by Purchaser or any activities on the Property by Purchaser, its agents, employees, and independent contractors; provided,however, that Purchaser shall have no obligation to indemnify, defend, or hold harmless Seller from any condition of the Property discovered by Purchaser, or from any loss of marketability of the Property as a consequence of such discovery. This agreement to indemnify,hold harmless and defend Seller shall survive Closing or other termination of this Agreement. 3.4.5 In the event Purchaser elects not to close on the Property, upon such determination and termination of the Agreement, Purchaser agrees it will provide to Seller copies of all written reports resulting from any and all investigations conducted by the Purchaser during the Contingency Period, within five(5) days of termination of this Agreement. This provision will survive the Closing or termination of the Agreement. 3.5 Notice of Termination; Failure to Notify. If Purchaser determines, in Purchaser's sole, absolute, and arbitrary discretion,the Property is not suitable, Purchaser may terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice of termination to Seller prior to the Page 4- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA expiration of the Contingency Period, as it may be extended, in which case this Agreement shall immediately terminate. 3.6 Review of Preliminary Report. Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date, Seller shall provide Purchaser with a preliminary title report, describing title to the Property, and including legible copies of all recorded documents described in the preliminary report (collectively,the"Preliminary Report"). On or before ten(10)days after Purchaser's receipt of the Preliminary Report,Purchaser shall deliver written notice of approval or disapproval of matters disclosed in the Preliminary Report, which approval or disapproval shall be in Purchaser's sole and absolute discretion. Any notice of disapproval shall specify which title exceptions are unacceptable(the "Unacceptable Exceptions"). The matters disclosed in the Preliminary Report to which Seller does not object, along with the standard printed exceptions on a form of title insurance policy, shall be the "Permitted Exceptions" and included as exceptions in the Title Policy, along with any Unacceptable Exceptions that become Permitted Exceptions. 3.7 Right to Cure Disapproval of Preliminary Report. If Purchaser delivers notice of disapproval, Seller shall notify Purchaser in writing(a"Response Notice")within five (5) days thereafter, whether Seller will agree to remove or otherwise cure, to Purchaser's reasonable satisfaction, any Unacceptable Exception(s)prior to Closing. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, Seller shall be obligated to remove any deeds of trust and other monetary liens (other than liens for non-delinquent taxes and assessments). If Seller fails to timely provide a Response Notice, Seller shall be deemed to have elected not to cure any Unacceptable Exceptions. If Seller fails to agree to remove an Unacceptable Exception, Purchaser shall elect,by notice to Seller within five(5) days after the Response Notice(or, if no Response Notice is provided, within five (5) days after the Response Notice was due to either(I) terminate this Agreement or(II)waive Seller's objection and accept title subject to the Unacceptable Exceptions which Seller has not agreed to cure(in which event such Unacceptable Exceptions shall be Permitted Exceptions). Failure of Purchaser to timely so elect shall be deemed an election to waive such Unacceptable Exceptions, in which event such Unacceptable Exceptions shall become Permitted Exceptions. 3.8 Failure to Cure Disapproval of Preliminary Report. If Seller, in its Response Notice, agrees to cure an Unacceptable Exception and thereafter fails to cure such Unacceptable Exception prior to Closing,Purchaser shall have the right to (i)terminate this Agreement(ii) suspend performance of its obligations under this Agreement at no cost to Purchaser and extend the Closing Date until that removal of the Unacceptable Exception has occurred (but no more than 45 days) or(iii) waive in writing its prior disapproval of such exception and accept title subject to such previously disapproved item, by delivering written notice of Purchaser's election to Seller prior to Closing in which case such Unacceptable Exceptions will be Permitted Exceptions. 3.9 Title Policy. Seller shall be unconditionally committed to procure upon Closing, an ALTA standard coverage owner's policy of title insurance for the Property, with a liability limit in the amount of the Purchase Price without regard to any future credits and insuring fee title vests in Purchaser subject only to the Pennitted Exceptions (collectively, the "Title Policy"). Page 5 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA i At Purchaser's option, Purchaser may elect to have the Title Policy issued with endorsements and/or in an ALTA extended coverage form, provided(I) that Purchaser pays any additional costs associated with issuance of such policy, and (I1) Seller shall not be required to indemnify the title company to induce it to issue such extended coverage or endorsements. 3.10 Approval. This Agreement is specifically conditioned on approval by the Tigard City Council and the governing body of the City Center Development Agency before the end of the Contingency Period. If either governing body has not approved this Agreement on or before the expiration of the Contingency Period, this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the Purchaser and the Seller shall automatically terminate. 3.11 Approval of Leases&Estoppel Certificates. Within ten(10) days of the Effective Date, Seller will provide to Purchaser copies of all current leases affecting the Property, copies of any related documents other than leases which provide for or discuss any matters affecting the occupancy of the Property by the tenants who have any right now or in the future with respect to the Premises,including but not limited to options to lease, relocation rights,termination rights, and/or expansion or contraction rights (collectively, the"Lease Documents"). Purchaser may terminate this Agreement at any time during the Contingency Period if Purchaser shall determine in the exercise of its sole discretion that any documents described herein are not satisfactory. Effective on the Closing Date, Seller will assign to Purchaser all leases then in effect. 3.12 Contingency Failure. If Purchaser fails to notify Seller in writing by the end of the Contingency Period that the conditions set forth in this Article 3 have been satisfied or waived, this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the Purchaser and the Seller shall automatically terminate. 3.13 Damage or Destruction; Eminent Domain. If, prior to the Closing, all or a material part of the Property is damaged or destroyed, or taken or appropriated by any public or quasi-public authority under the power of eminent domain or such an eminent domain action is threatened pursuant to a resolution of intention to condemn filed by any public entity, Purchaser may either(i) terminate this Agreement or (ii) elect to receive an assignment from Seller in lieu of the part of the Property that has been so damaged or taken of all of Seller's rights to any award and/or proceeds attributable to said damaged or taken part of the Property, and the parties shall proceed to Closing pursuant to this Agreement provided that Purchaser may not terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Section if Purchaser is the condemning government,entity. ARTICLE 4 SELLER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 4.1 Representations and Warranties of Seller. Seller represents and warrants that, as of the Effective Date,the end of the Contingency Period, and the Closing, that all of the representations and warranties contained in this Agreement are and shall be true and correct, and shall survive Closing for a period of one(1)year. Each of Seller's representations and warranties is material to and is being relied upon by Purchaser and the continuing truth thereof Page 6 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA shall constitute a condition precedent to Purchaser's obligations hereunder. Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser as follows: 4.1.1 Proof of Authority. Seller has authority and authorization to enter into this Agreement and consummate the transaction contemplated by it, and shall deliver such proof of the power and authority of the persons executing and/or delivering any instruments, documents, or certificates on behalf of the Seller to act for or bind the Seller, as may be reasonably required by Purchaser. 4.1.2 Title to the Property. Seller has sole legal and beneficial fee title to the Property, and has not granted any person or entity any right or interest in the Property except as set forth in this Agreement, in the Preliminary Report, and the Lease Documents. Seller agrees to transfer to Purchaser,via Statutory Special Warranty Deed in the form of Exhibit `B',the Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. 4.1.3 Property Documents,Lease Documents; No Defaults. To Seller's knowledge, the Property Documents, including lease documents delivered by Seller to Purchaser are true, correct and complete copies and there are no other documents or instruments in Seller's possession and control that would constitute Property Documents that have not been delivered by Seller or otherwise made available to Purchaser. Seller has no knowledge of any default by Seller under any Property Documents. 4.1.4 Pending Transactions, Suits or Proceedings. To Seller's knowledge, there are no suits,proceedings,litigation, condemnation, or investigations pending or threatened against or affecting the Property or Seller as the owner of the Property in any court at law or in equity, or before or by any governmental department, commission,board, agency or instrumentality. 4.1.5 No Further Encumbrances. As long as this Agreement remains in force, Seller will not lease,transfer,option,mortgage,pledge, or convey its interest in the Property or any portion thereof nor any right therein, nor shall Seller enter into any agreement granting to any person or entity any option to purchase or rights superior to Purchaser with respect to the Property or any part thereof. 4.1.6 Environmental Conditions. Except as provided in the Consent Judgment C152218CV dated May 28, 2015, and documents provided to Purchaser,to Seller's knowledge, the Property is not now in violation of, and is not currently under investigation for the violation of, any Environmental Laws. Seller hereby assigns to Purchaser as of the Closing, to the extent assignable, all claims, counterclaims, defenses or actions, whether at common law or pursuant to any other applicable federal or state or other laws, if any, that Seller may have against third parties to the extent relating to the existence of Hazardous Materials in, at,on,under or about the Property. 4.1.7 Construction or Other Liens. Seller warrants that, at the time of Closing, no work,labor or materials have been expended,bestowed or placed upon the Property, Page 7 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA which will remain unpaid at Closing or upon which a lien may be filed, excepting work, labor, or materials for which the tenant under the Lease Documents is responsible. 4.1.8 No Option or Right of First Refusal to Acquire Premises. Seller represents that no person or entity has any right of first refusal or option to acquire any interest in the property or any part thereof. 4.1.9 Conduct Pending Closing; Covenants. 4.1.9.1 Conduct of Property. Seller hereby agrees that Seller will not modify, cancel, extend or otherwise change in any material manner any of the terms, covenants or conditions of the Property Documents or Lease Documents, nor enter into any additional leases as to the Property without Purchaser's written consent,nor enter into any other agreements having a material effect on the Property without the prior written consent of Purchaser,which Purchaser shall not unreasonably withhold. 4.1.9.2 No Alterations. Seller will not make any material alterations to the Property prior to the Closing, provided nothing herein prohibits alterations made by a tenant permitted by such tenant's Lease. 4.1.9.3 Condition of the Property Through Closing. Seller shall, between the Effective Date and the Closing Date: (i) maintain the Property in substantially the same condition as it was on the Effective Date,with no tree cutting, timber harvesting or altering of the Property in any way, subject to casualty and to alterations made by a tenant permitted by such tenant's Lease, (ii)keep all existing insurance policies affecting the Property in full force and effect, (iii)make all regular payments of interest and principal on any existing financing, (iv) pay all real property taxes and assessments against the Property prior to delinquency, (v) comply with all government regulations,and(vi) keep Purchaser timely advised of any repair or improvement which is known by Seller required to keep the Property in substantially the same condition as it was on the Effective Date. ARTICLE 5 AS-IS SALE AS-IS Sale. The Property is being sold to, and accepted by, Purchaser at Closing in its then-present condition, AS-IS,WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS, and without any warranty whatsoever, express or implied, except for the representations and warranties set forth in Article 4 and in the Deed to be delivered at Closing. Purchaser acknowledges that (a) it is purchasing the Property AS-IS,WHERE IS,WITH ALL FAULTS; (b) it will have made or performed any and all tests, surveys, or other examinations of the Property as Purchaser deems necessary prior to the end of the Contingency Period; and (c) it shall rely solely on its own inspection, examination, and evaluation of the Property in assessing and determining the condition of the Property. Seller and Seller's agents have not made, are not now making, and specifically hereby disclaim, any and all warranties and representations of any kind, express or implied, oral or Page 8 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA written,with respect to the Property, except for any representation or warranty made in Article 4 or any warranty of title to be contained in the Deed to be delivered at Closing. The provisions of this Article 5 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE 6 PURCHASER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 6.1 Purchaser's Representation and Warranties. Purchaser represents and warrants that, as of the Effective Date, the end of the Contingency Period, and Closing, all of the representations and warranties of Purchaser contained in this Agreement are and shall be true and correct, and shall survive Closing for a period of one (1) year. Each of Purchaser's representations and warranties is material to and is being relied upon by Seller and the continuing truth thereof shall constitute a condition precedent to Seller's obligations hereunder. Purchaser represents and warrants to Seller as follows: 6.1.1 Authority. The execution and delivery of this Agreement has been duly authorized and approved by all requisite action of Purchaser, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby will be duly authorized and approved by all requisite action of Purchaser, and no other authorizations or approvals will be necessary in order to enable Purchaser to enter into or to comply with the terms of this Agreement. 6.1.2 Binding Effect of Documents. This Agreement and the other documents to be executed by Purchaser hereunder,upon execution and delivery thereof by Purchaser,will have been duly entered into by Purchaser, and will constitute legal, valid and binding obligations of Purchaser. To Purchaser's actual knowledge,neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done under this Agreement violates or shall violate any contract, document,understanding, agreement or instrument to which Purchaser is a party or by which it is bound. ARTICLE 7 PRORATED FEES AND COSTS 7.1 Prorations. Taxes will be prorated as of the Closing date. 7.2 Seller's Fees and Costs. Seller shall pay: (i)the costs for the Title Policy (but not extended coverage or endorsements requested by Purchaser; (ii) Seller's recording charges; and(iii)one-half of any transfer taxes. 7.3 Purchaser's Fees and Costs. Purchaser shall pay(i) Purchaser's recording charges; (ii)if requested by Purchaser, any extended coverage and endorsements for the Title Policy; and (iii) one-half of any transfer taxes. 7.4 Other Costs. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, each party shall bear and pay the expense of its own attorneys, accountants and other professionals incurred in negotiating this Agreement. Page 9- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA ARTICLE 8 CLOSING 8.1 Closing. Closing shall consist of(i)payment of the amount due and recording the Deed and providing a conformed copy to each Party; (ii) confirming execution of all documents necessary for Closing; and(iii) delivering funds and documents as set forth herein,when and only when the parties have confirmed that all terms and conditions of this Agreement have been met and each of the conditions set forth below have been satisfied: 8.1.1 Funds and Instruments. All funds and instruments required pursuant to this Agreement have been delivered. 8.1.2 Satisfaction of Conditions Precedent. Each of the conditions precedent set forth in the Agreement have been either satisfied or waived, or deemed waived. 8.1.3 Liens and Encumbrances. All liens and encumbrances required to be paid by Seller have been paid and satisfied at Seller's sole expense, including without limitation any trust deed or mortgage affecting the Property. The Property shall be conveyed free of encumbrances, except for the Permitted Exceptions and those expressly accepted or waived by Purchaser pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8.1.4 Assignment and Assumption Document. The parties shall have executed the Assignment and Assumption of the leases and such documents as are necessary for purchaser to assume the obligations under Consent Judgment C152218CV. 8.1.5 Closing. Closing shall occur on the date that is thirty (30) days after expiration of the Contingency Period unless agreed otherwise in writing by the parties. ARTICLE 9 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES 9.1 Pre-Closing Remedies: 9.1.1. Purchaser's Breach. If Purchaser breaches this Agreement, which breach Purchaser fails to cure within thirty(30) days after receipt of written notice thereof from Seller, Seller may terminate this Agreement and receive as liquidated damages reimbursement of Seller's reasonable and necessary costs associated with this transaction and termination thereof, including attorney fees. 9.1.2. Seller's Breach. In the event of Seller's breach, which breach Seller fails to cure within thirty(30) days of receipt of written notice thereof from Purchaser, Purchaser may elect to either(i) terminate this Agreement, or receive as liquidated damages reimbursement for Purchaser's costs associated with this transaction, including attorney fees, or(ii) seek an action for specific performance in order to enforce Purchaser's rights hereunder. Page 10 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA a 9.1.3. Liquidated Damages. The parties agree that the amounts stated above have been agreed to as a reasonable compensation and the exclusive financial remedy for default, since the precise amount of such compensation would be difficult to determine. 9.2 Seller's Post Closing Remedies: If Purchaser breaches its post-Closing obligations under this Agreement, which breach Purchaser fails to cure within thirty(30) days after receipt of written notice thereof from Seller; Seller may, in addition to any other remedy provided by law: 9.2.1 Immediately exercise its right to repurchase provided for in Article 10. 9.2.2 File an action for specific performance of Purchaser's obligations. 9.2.3 File an action to collect all amounts due under the Promissory Note executed by Purchaser,the full amount of which shall be immediately due and payable. 9.3 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, if Purchaser takes any action that violates the Measure, or Purchaser's Measure-related Post Closing Obligations, including but not limited to those set forth in Section 10.2,below, the entire Purchase Price shall immediately be due and payable, and Purchaser shall immediately pay the remainder of the Purchase Price to Seller in full and not in installments. ARTICLE 10 SELLER'S RIGHT TO REPURCHASE and PURCHASER'S POST CLOSING OBLIGATIONS 10.1 Right to Repurchase. Seller retains, and Purchaser acknowledges, Seller's right to repurchase the Property at any time prior to Purchaser paying the full amount of the Purchase Price, or on Purchaser's default, on 10 days written notice of its intent to repurchase the Property, or any portion thereof, for purposes consistent with the uses authorized by City of Tigard Ballot Measure 34-81. 10.1.1 The repurchase price shall be $515,500.00, pro-rated by the square footage to be purchased, or the fair market value of the property or portion thereof, established in the same manner as provided for in Section 2.2.1, whichever is less. 10.1.2 If Seller exercises its right to repurchase a portion of the Property less than the whole, Seller shall be responsible for obtaining any lot line adjustment or land division necessary to complete the repurchase. 10.1.3 Closing of the repurchase shall occur in a commercially reasonable manner generally consistent with the Closing provided for herein. 10.2 Purchaser's Post-Closing Obligations. Until such time as Purchaser has paid the full amount of the Purchase Price, Purchaser shall: Page 11 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA 10.2.1 Not enter into any rental agreement or lease, earnest money, option, development agreement, deed,easement or other document relating to transfer or sale of any portion of the Property without first obtaining Seller's written consent. No lease shall extend beyond expiration of Seller's right to repurchase. The rental amount of any such lease of the Property or any portion of the Property shall be at fair market value. No lease shall provide an option to purchase or other property interest beyond that normally associated with a tenant. 10.2.2 Not permit or suffer any lien or other encumbrance against the Property without Seller's written consent. 10.2.3 Comply, and not take any action inconsistent,with the obligations set forth in the Consent Judgment(C152218CV)between Seller and the State of Oregon, ex rel Dick Pederson, Director, Department of Environmental Quality, dated May 28, 2015. Within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act,Purchaser shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Seller against any claim arising from Purchaser's failure to comply with,or negligent compliance with,the obligations set forth in the referenced Consent Judgment. 10.2.4 Hold the Property to advance the purposes set forth in the Measure. 10.2.5 Not authorize or suffer any action with regard to the Property that would cause it to diminish in value or not advance the purposes set forth in the Measure. Purchaser may demolish and remove the existing structures on the Property, conduct environmental remediation, and take other actions with the consent of City that advance the purposes of the Measure. 10.2.6 Not make any changes to the Property or take any other action related to the Property that benefits any particular private party. 10.3 Survival. This Article 10 shall survive Closing. ARTICLE 11 GENERAL PROVISIONS 11.1 Attorney's Fees. If any action is instituted between Seller and Purchaser in connection with this Agreement, the party prevailing in such action shall be entitled to recover from the other parry all of its costs of action, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees and costs as fixed by the court therein. 11.2 Construction of Agreement. The agreements contained herein shall not be construed in favor of or against either party,but shall be construed as if both parties prepared this Agreement. 11.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto pertaining to the subject matter hereof and all prior and contemporaneous agreements,representations,negotiations and understandings of the parties hereto, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. The foregoing sentence shall in no way affect Page 12- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA the validity of any instruments executed by the parties in the form of the exhibits attached to this Agreement. 11.4 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Oregon. 11.5 Joint and Several Liability. If any party consists of more than one person or entity, the liability of each such person or entity signing this Agreement shall be joint and several. 11.6 Modification. No modification, waiver, amendment, discharge, or change of this Agreement shall be valid unless the same is in writing and signed by all signatories hereto. 11.7 Real Estate Brokerage Commission. Each party warrants to the other that it has not engaged the services of a real estate broker in regards to this transaction. 11.8 Notice and Payments. Any notice or document to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be delivered either in person, deposited in the United States mail duly certified or registered, return receipt requested with postage prepaid, by electronic mail, or by Federal Express or other similar overnight delivery service marked for next business day delivery. Notices shall be effective upon receipt if delivered personally,upon confirmation of receipt if sent by electronic mail, on the next day if sent by overnight courier, or two (2) days after deposit in the mail if mailed. Any party listed below may designate a different address, which shall be substituted for the one specified below, by written notice to the others. If to Seller: City of Tigard Attn: Marty Wine, City Manager City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Fax: (503) 684-7297 If to Purchaser: City Center Development Agency Attn: Marty Wine, Executive Director 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Fax: (503) 684-7297 11.9 Remedies Cumulative. Except as specifically set forth herein, all rights and remedies of Purchaser and Seller contained in this Agreement shall be construed and held to be cumulative. 11.10 Severability. In the event that any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section, article or other portion of this Agreement shall become illegal, null or void or against public policy, for any reason, or shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, null Page 13 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA or void or against public policy, the remaining portions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in force and effect to the fullest extent permissible by law. 11.11 Successors and Assigns. Subject to limitations expressed in this Agreement, each and all of the covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the successors-in-interest, assigns, and representatives of the parties hereto. As used in the foregoing,"successors" shall refer to the parties' interest in the Property and to the successors to all or substantially all of their assets and to their successors by merger or consolidation. 11.12 Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement. 11.13 Waiver. No waiver by Purchaser or Seller of a breach of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement by the other party shall be construed or held to be a waiver of any succeeding or preceding breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition herein contained. No waiver of any default by Purchaser or Seller hereunder shall be implied from any omission by the other party to take any action on account of such default if such default persists or is repeated,and no express waiver shall affect a default other than as specified in such waiver. The consent or approval by Purchaser or Seller to or of any act by the other party requiring the consent or approval of the first party shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary such party's consent or approval to or of any subsequent similar acts by the other party. 11.14 Negation of Agency and Partnership. Any agreement by either party to cooperate with the other in connection with any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as making either party an agent or partner of the other party. 11.15 Calculation of Time. Unless specified otherwise, all periods of time referred to herein shall include Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays in the State of Oregon, except that if the last day of any period falls on any Saturday, Sunday or such holiday, the period shall be extended to include the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or such holiday. 11.16 Statutory Disclaimer. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT MAY NOT BE WITHIN A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PROTECTING STRUCTURES. THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT, IN FARM OR FOREST ZONES, MAY NOT AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OR SITING OF A RESIDENCE AND THAT LIMIT LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES,AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, IN ALL ZONES. 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, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009 AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR Page 14- PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA 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 VERIFY THE EXISTENCE OF FIRE PROTECTION FOR STRUCTURES AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009 AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. 11.17 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when taken together, shall constitute fully executed originals. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date. SELLER PURCHASER City Center Development Agency, an ORS City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal Chapter 457 agency corporation By: Name: By: Its: Name: Its: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney Exhibit A- Property Exhibit B—Deed Exhibit C—Assignment of Lease Page 15 - PURCHASE and Sale AGREEMENT Tigard-CCDA EXHIBIT A . - �IlIIII�I[I�I�I�I�� �Illlllilllllllllllil�l(NI EXHIBIT A Legal Description A tract of land being a pottiaa of Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,a duly recorded subdivision in Washington County plat records,said land being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian,in the City of Tigard,County of Washington,State of Oregon,being further described as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of said Lot 3,BURNHAM"TRACT,being a point on the centerline of S.W.Burnham Road;thence S45'06'43"W,along the Southeasterly line of'said Lot 3,a distance of 30.00 Feet to apoint on the Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Burnham Road;thence S45°06'43"W,continuing on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 314.41 feet to the Southwesterly line of a 30.00 foot easement recorded in Washington County Deed Book 890 Page 753;thence N4428'1 0"W,15.00 feet Southwesterly of,and parallel to,an existing sewer line,a distance of 190.74 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3;thence N51'56'00"E,along the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 312.87 feet to a point on said Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S_W. Burnham Road;thence continuing N51 156'00"E,a distance of 30.27 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot 3,being a point on the centerline of said S.W.Burnham Road;thence S45°46'00"E,along said centerline,a distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13, 1978 in Book 1118,Page 567, And Furtber Excepting Therefrom that portion of said I.ot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in docuramt recorded January 8,1980,as Recorder's Number 8000M 17. The foregoing property is the same property which is occasionally described as: Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,in the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13, 1976,page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in document recorded January 8,1980,Recorders No.80000717. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to the City of Tigard by deed recorded August 6, 1980,Recorder's No.80026999. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to Gerald L.Cach and Joan L.Cach,husband and wife,by deed recorded August 11,1980,Recorder's No. 80027467. Par lnd 1.2)40012.111099999-00001 Title Data, Tnc. FA PM10411 WN 2004028753.003 —` Exhibit A 75186068.2 0050637-00002 50014-71545 14581 S4_81AMJ/11/1712015 EXHIBIT B AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: City Center Development Agency Attn: Executive Director 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 UNTIL A CHANGE IS REQUESTED SEND TAX STATEMENTS TO: City Center Development Agency Attn: Executive Director 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 This space is reserved for recorder's use. STATUTORY SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED The City of Tigard, an Oregon Municipal Corporation ("Grantor") hereby conveys and warrants to the City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency, ("Grantee"), the following described real property free of encumbrances created or suffered by Grantor except as specifically set forth herein: See Exhibit A attached hereto. The true consideration for this conveyance is This conveyance is made subject to Grantor's right to repurchase and Grantee's obligations as set forth in the Purchase and Sale Agreement between the parties dated and the matters set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto. 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, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 8551) OREGON LAWS 2009,AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. 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 Exhibit B, Page 1 of 4 50014-71545 1458154_8UMJ/11/1712015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.3009 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 115 CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. DATED this day of 72015. GRANTOR By: Name: Its: STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2015 by as of the City of Tigard. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: ACCEPTED: GRANTEE City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency By: Name: Its: STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2015,by as of the City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: Exhibit B,Page 2 of 4 50014-71545 1458154_MAW111117/2015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 IIIIIIIINI I�I��II� 2104-26l53i(IIII(iill�I!!II EXHIBIT A Legal Description A tract of land beiing a portion of Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,a duly recorded subdivision in Washington County plat records,said land being located in the Northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Mange 1 West of the Willamette Meridian,in the City of Tigard,County of Washington,State of Oregon,being further described as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly tamer of said Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,being a point on the centerline of S.W.Burnham Read;thence S45"06'43"W,along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 30.00 feet to a point on the Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S.W. Burnham Road;thence S45°06'43"W,continuing on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 314.41 feet to the Southwesterly line of a 30.00 foot easement recorded in Washington County Deed Book 890 Page 753;thence N44°28'10"W, 15.00 feet Southwesterly of,and parallel to,an existing sewer line,a distance of 190.74 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Int 3;thence N51°56'00"E,along the Northwesterly line of said Lot 3,a distance of 312.87 feet to a point on said Southwesterly right-of-way line of said S,W. Burnham Road;thence continuing NS 1'56'00"E,a distance of 30.27 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot 3,being a point on the centerline of said S.W.Burnham Road;thence S45°46'00"E,along said centerline,a distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to The public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13, 1978 in Book 1118,Page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in document recorded January 8,1980,as Recorder's Number 80000717. The foregoing property is the same property which is occasionally described as; Lot 3,BURNHAM TRACT,in the City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot dedicated to the public for street,road and utility purposes in document recorded October 13,1976,page 567. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot granted and dedicated to the City of Tigard for street and utility purposes in document recorded January 8, 1989,Recorder's No.80000717. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to the City of Tigard by deed recorded August 6,1980,Recorder's No.80026999. And Further Excepting Therefrom that portion of said Lot conveyed to Gerald L.Cach and Joan L.Cach,husband and Arife,by deed recorded August 11,1980,Recorder's No.80027467. Ponlnd1.2140012.10099499-00001 I Title Data, Inc. FA Paa10411 WN 2004029753.003 "'— Exhibit B, Page 3 of 4 50014-71545 1458154_81AM0/11/1712015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 Exhibit B [to be provided after review of preliminary report] Exhibit B, Page 4 of 4 50014-715451458154_8UMJ/11/1712015 75186068.2 0050637-00002 Exhibit C ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE THIS Assignment and Assumption of Lease ("Agreement") is made as of this day of 20_,between the City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation ("Assignor") and the City Center Development Agency, an ORS chapter 457 urban renewal agency ("Assignee") RECITALS A. Assignor owns the fee interest in those certain premises described on Exhibit A attached and incorporated hereto (the"Premises"). B. A portion of the Premises are leased pursuant to the lease attached and incorporated as Exhibit B (the"Lease"). Assignor holds all right, title and interest in and to the lessor's interest under the Lease. C. Pursuant to that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated 20_, between Assignor and Assignee (the "Agreement"), Assignor has agreed to sell the Premises to Assignee and in connection with the sale has agreed to assign the Lease to Assignee and Assignee has agreed to assume the Lease. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Assignment. Effective as of the Effective Date of this Assignment, Assignor hereby transfers, sets over and assigns to Assignee all right, title and interest of Assignor in and to the Lease, TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same to Assignee, its successors and assigns forever; SUBJECT , HOWEVER, to each and every provision of the Lease and as hereinafter provided. 2. Acceptance of Assignment. Effective as of the Effective Date, Assignee accepts the within assignment and agrees to perform and discharge all of the covenants, terms, conditions and provisions to be kept, observed and performed by Assignor as lessor under the Lease. 3. Assignor's Indemnity of Assignee. Assignor hereby agrees to defend and indemnify Assignee, its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns, and each of them, from and against Exhibit C 50014-71545/458154_&4MJ171/1712015 any and all claims, suits, demands, causes of action, actions, liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of or resulting from any breach or default committed or alleged to have been committed by Assignor as lessor under the Lease prior to the Effective Date. 4. Assignee's Indemnity of Assignor. Within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act and Oregon Constitution, Assignee hereby agrees to defend and indemnify Assignor, and its respective directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors and assigns, and each of them, from and against any and all claims, suits, demands, causes of action, actions, liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of or resulting from any breach or default committed or alleged to have been committed by Assignee, its successors or assigns, as the lessor under the Lease from and after the Effective Date. 5. Effective Date. This Assignment shall be effective as of the date of recording of the deed conveying title to the Premises to Assignee (the "Effective Date"). 6. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in one or more counterparts by the parties hereto. All Counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement. 7. Binding Effect. This Assignment shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. fN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Assignment to be duly executed on behalf of each of them respectively, by their respective officer's thereunto duly authorized, in multiple originals, all as of the day and year first above written. ASSIGNOR ASSIGNEE City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation City enter Development Agency, an ORS Ch. 457 urban By: By: Name: IName: Its: Its: 50014-71545 1458154_"MJ/11/17/2015 Exhibit C EXHIBIT A Premises Exhibit C 50014-715451458154_8unV11111712015 EXHIBIT B The Leases Exhibit C 50014-71545 1458154_8U Mill 1/171.1015