City Council Minutes - 03/27/1989■
y
T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 27, 1989 - 5:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards: Councilors: Carolyn Eadon,
Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz (arrived at 6:40 p.m. ); City
Staff: Pat Reilly, City Administrator; Keith Liden, Senior Planner; Ed
Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Senior Planner; Tim
Ramis, Legal Counsel ; Catherine Wheatley, Deputy City Recorder; and Randy
Wooley, City Engineer'.
1. STUDY SESSION:
City Administrator reviewed several agenda items, including the following:
o Agenda Item 4.8 - Authorize Preparation of a Preliminary Engineer's
Report for the Proposed PacTrust Local Improvement District. Mr.
John Smets, an adjacent property owner who may be affected by the
proposed LID had expressed concern to staff over the LID formation.
City Administrator advised that Mr. Smets and some of employees
planned to speak to Council during the business meeting. Council
consensus was to receive limited testimony from Mr. Smets at this
meeting. In order to allow further opportunity for testimony,
Council agreed this item could be postponed to the April 10, 1989
Council meeting.
o Ann Turner had contacted staff and advised she would be addressing
Council during the Visitors' Agenda concerning a possible development
proposal at Cotswald No. IV.
o Proponents and opponents for the 93rd Avenue Local Improvement
District proposal may be present to discuss extension of the deadline
for the preliminary engineer's report. Should no proposal be
forthcoming at this meeting, the proponents would have to begin again
with the LID process should they wish to proceed. Council consensus
was to not extend the deadline on the 93rd Avenue LID preliminary
engineer's report.
o City Administrator noted that on Item .6 of the Consent Agenda
(Authorize Issuance of General Obligation Bonds for Purpose of
Financing the Rehabilitation & Construction of Certain Roads) , the
proposed resolution noted bids would be received on behalf of the
City for the purchase of general obligation bonds until 10:00 a.m. ,
Tuesday, April 25, 1989. City Administrator advised the date has
been changed; bids would be received until 10:00 a.m. , Wednesday
April 26. Exhibit A of the Resolution would be amended to reflect
this time change.
a City Administrator noted that on Item . 11 of the Consent Agenda
(Declare Certain City Real Properties Surplus and Authorize to Sell)
the notice requesting sealed bids for the sale of surplus property
in the two proposed resolutions would be changed: The first and only
publication (newspaper) would be on April 13, 1989.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 1
i
o Discussion on the 135th Avenue Local Improvement District included
an issue on bike paths noted by the Mayor. He had been advised of
< litigation concerning bike path legality in the State of Oregon.
City Attorney noted he would review the issue and report findings
to Council .
o Council discussed Agenda Item No. 7, which was the public hearing
concerning site development review for the Grabhorn/Centron property.
Staff advised two issues were before Council: 1 ) the rights-of-way
dedications and 2) the east-west road issue (i.e. , public or
private).
o City Administrator reviewed Agenda Item No. 6, which was the public
hearing concerning the City Center Development Plan and Report.
After discussion, it was consensus of Council to receive all
testimony at this hearing, close the public hearing, and use the next
two-week period before the next Council meeting to review testimony
on an individual basis.
(Councilor Schwartz arrived at 6:40 p.m. )
Community Development Director reviewed the concept of "tax increment
financing" (TIF). Essentially, TIF was a funding mechanism wherein
a designated area's increase in assessed valuation over a specified
period of time was utilized to fund improvement within that area.
At the end of the specified time period (in this case, 15 years) ,
if the programs have worked as planned, the assessed value for the
downtown area would be increased significantly over and above what
would have occurred without the implementation of the Development
Plan. Therefore, when the area's valuation is returned to the
overall tax rolls, the tax rates for all would go down.
It was noted that the net affect to the taxpayer was outlined in the
Report. There was discussion on the elements contained in the Plan
and Report. Councilor Schwartz suggested more emphasis should be
placed on the transportation system. Mayor Edwards also noted
concerns with some of the proposed public improvments including
public restrooms and a town square. Community Development Director
noted that 88% of the projects outlined in the Report were street
improvements.
Senior Planner Newton distributed an "Errata Sheet" which included
changes suggested by Council and others at previous public meetings.
Community Development Director noted it was important to include all
conceivable projects to be funded through TIF. If a project was not
listed, TIF would not be available to fund its completion unless
first approved by the voters. He further advised that inclusion of
a project on the list would not necessarily mean the project would
be completed.
Mayor Edwards referred to the importance of voter education on this
issue including tax increment financing and the Development Plan
implementation process. It was noted the ultimate desire of City
Council was to assist business growth in downtown Tigard.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 2
2. VISITORS' AGENDA (Note: Several people had signed in to testify concerning
S.W. 135th Avenue Parking Restrictions. Mayor directed that a separate
sign-up sheet be passed around for all those persons who wished to speak
on this item. An opportunity for public testimony would be given when
Council reviewed this agenda item. )
a. John Smets, 6830 S.W. Bonita Road, Tigard, Oregon, noted concerns
with Consent Agenda Item .8 (Preliminary Engineer's Report - Proposed
PacTrust LID). Mr. Smets introduced family members and his employees
who were concerned with possible impacts of the single-owner LID
and asked for more time to review the issue. Discussion followed.
Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to remove
Consent Agenda Item .8 and reschedule as a separate item on the
April 10, 1989 Council Agenda.
In response to a question by Councilor Johnson concerning what
purpose would be served by a delay, Mr. Smets advised he believed
information previously presented to Council by PacTrust was
inaccurate. He like to have an opportunity to respond.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
b. Ann M. Turner, 11787 S.W. Wilton, Tigard, Oregon, testified she was
concerned with potential development on the subdivision identified
as Cotswald IV. She noted survey crews had been working on the
property. She was worried that three-story apartment buildings may
be constructed on this site. During discussion with Council , it was
determined that Ms. Turner was scheduled for an appointment with City
Staff to review the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) process.
Councilor Eadon requested a summary of the meeting with Ms. Turner
and staff be forwarded to City Council.
Community Development Director briefly reviewed the CPA process.
In response to a question as to whether the property could be "down-
zoned," he advised this would require a CPA. Also ft be considered
was what this change would mean for the current property owner and
his expectations for use of this land.
C. Leon Hartvickson, representing PacTrust, reported he refuted Mr.
Smets' testimony that information presented to Council had been
inaccurate.
d. Byron Darr, 10665 S.W. Pathfinder, Tigard, Oregon, advised he
supported Consent Agenda Item .11 , "Declare Certain Real Property
Surplus and Authorize to Sell."
3. PROCLAMATIONS:
a. Mayor read into the record a proclamation declaring April as "Fair
Housing Month. " He noted the Washington County Community Action
Organization administered a Fair Housing Program under contract with
the County office of Community Development. They, and other fair
housing organizations in the Portland metropolitan area, jointly
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 3
sponsor activities to commemorate this time and educate the public
about civil rights and the harmful effects of housing discrimination.
Mayor noted it was especially timely that citizens be alerted to the
changes in the recently amended Federal Fain Housing Act.
The Mayor proclaimed April 1989 as Fair Housing Month in the City
of Tigard.
b. Mayor proclaimed the first full week of April as Arbor Week, and the
last Friday in April as Arbor Day.
Mayor noted Orego- was the nation's leading timber-producing state.
Trees play an important role in every city by providing shade, clean
air, sound barriers, and year-round beauty. The Oregon Legislature
has designated Arbor Week/Day as a special time to focus attention
on trees and their place in the environment.
4. CONSENT AGENDA:
4. 1 Approve Council Minutes: February 13, 1989
4.2 Recess Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board (LCRB)
Meeting: a) Authorize Contract for McDonald Street Bike Path
Construction; b) Approve Acquisition of Gaarde Property for S.W.
Gaarde Street Bond Project; c) Approve Acquisition, of Douglas
Property for Summer Lake Park; Adjourn LCRB; Reconvene Council
Meeting.
4.3 Initiate Pedestrian Access Easement Vacation - Cotswald Meadows No.
3 - Resolution No. 89-17
4.4 initiate Street Vacation - S.W. 66th Avenue - Resolution No. 89-18
4.5 Authorize Community Development Director to Sign Quit-Claim Releasing
City's Interest in Portion of the Pinebrook Sanitary Sewer Easement
4.6 Authorize Issuance of General Obligation Bonds for Purpose of
Financing the Rehabilitation & Construction of Certain Roads -
Resolution No. 89-19
4.7 Support Adoption of Senate Joint Resolution 10 Providing for a
Constitutional Amendment to Allow Local Regulatory Control Over Adult
Businesses and Activities - Resolution No. 89-20
4.8 Authorize Preparation of a Preliminary Engineer's Report for the
Proposed FacTrust Local Improvement District (Set over to 4/10/89
for separate review. )
4.9 Request Washington County Dissolve Existing Drainage Local
Improvement Districts within City of Tigard -Resolution No. 89-21
4. 10 Consent to Creation of a Regional Storm Drainage Authority (Unified
Sewerage Agency) - Resolution No. 89-22 and Resolution No. 89-23
4. 11 Declare Certain City Real Properties Surplus and Authorize to Sell -
Resolution No. 89-24 and Resolution No. 89-25
Motion by Councilor- Johnson, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve the
Consent Agenda with Item .8 removed for separate consideration on April 10,
1989.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 4
s i
a:
5. CONSIDERATION OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON S.W. 135TH AVENUE E
a. City Engineer summarized this agenda item. The staff report noted
the policy issue was: "Shall parking be prohibited along the S.W. t
135th Avenue LID to prohibit parking along 135th Avenue. Requests
have also been received from some property owners to allow parking
to continue in certain areas.
i
Included in the Council packet was a report from the City Engineer
which provided background information and recommendations that
parking be prohibited along portions of S.W. 135th Avenue.
Ordinances were presented to Council which would implement the
recommendations of the City Engineer. City Engineer's c
recommendations were:
- Parking be prohibited along the east side of S.W. 135th Avenue
from Scholls Ferry Road to the second house of Brittany Drive.
Parking be prohibited along the west side of S.W. 135th Avenue
from Scholls Ferry Road to the first driveway south of Scholls
Ferry Road.
- The recommended action would prohibit parking in the area where
S.W. 135th Avenue was marked as three lanes, but it would leave
on-street parking available along the frontages of the older,
single-family residential units. It would also leave parking
in the area of the apartments where adequate off-street parking i
was not yet available.
i
- After July 1 , 1989, parking would be prohibited along the west
side of S.W. 135th Avenue from Summercreek to Morning Hill
Drive. This would add parking prohibitions along the frontage
of the apartment units after providing adequate time for the
owners to construct additional off-street parking for their
tenants.
b. The Mayor called upon persons who had signed-in to testify on this
issue:
o Teri Wasco, 11591 S.W. 134th Place, Tigard, Oregon, read a
statement into the record, noting she had sent out letters
regarding this issue and had received several unsolicited
responses in return from concerned homeowners. (Ms. Wasco's
written text of her testimony has been filed with Council
packet material. ) She noted several issues including speeding
problems and cars being parked and posted "For Sale" along
135th Avenue.
Also at issue was the bike paths -- why hadn't these been
constructed as part of the LID?
Ms. Wasco asked that the "No Parking" prohibition be
implemented immediately (not as proposed for July 1).
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 5
o Rhonda Quayle, 11705 S.W. 134th Terrace, Tigard, Oregon,
C advised she was very concerned over the bike-lane issue. She
noted it was extremely dangerous for bike traffic along S.W.
135th Avnue with cars parked along the street. She asked the
record reflect that residents in the area have requested to
receive what they have paid for; that is, bike paths. i
o Herman White, 11935 S.W. Morning Hill Drive, Tigard, Oregon,
noted he represented the homeowners in the Morning Hill
Subdivision. Mr. White advised that many of his concerns had
been articulated by the previous speakers. He noted
disappointment over not having bike lanes constructed within
the LID improvements. He said the situation was dangerous
and advised there were a number of children who lived in the
area. He added that parking along S.W. 135th Avenue was a very
serious problem.
Mr. White pointed out that the apartment owner was an absentee
landowner while the people testifying at this meeting were
living in the area and should be given consideration.
o Russel Head, 11689 S.W. Wilton Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, advised
he lived in the Cotswald development and was also a member of
NPO 7. He asked that the proposed ordinances be implemented
immediately.
Mr. Head noted the apartment buildings were compelled to meet
certain parking requirements -- on-street parking should not
be used for fulfulling any of those requirements.
o Herman Jobelman, 11955 S.W. Morning Hill Drive, Tigard, Oregon,
agreed there was a great safety hazard with parking on S.W.
135th Avenue. He noted the older homes in the area generally
had enough parking room for several vehicles. He advised, that
of the various vehicles parked along this street, there was
a truck with no engine.
C. Council Discussion/Consideration:
o Bike Lane Issues - City Engineer advised there were presently
bike lanes on S.W. 135th Avenue because there was extra room.
It had not been within the LID specifications to pay for the
marking of the bike lanes. He noted extra expense would be
incurred if the lanes were to be so marked.
o Landscaping was to have been minimal with some seeding of
areas.
There was discussion on the cost for the bike lanes which would also
entail ongoing maintenance expense.
After lengthy discussion, Council consensus was that the two
ordinances should be combined into one ordinance.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 6
Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to
direct staff to prepare an ordinance prohibiting parking, effective
May 1 , 1989, on both sides of S.W. 135th Avenue, from Scholls Ferry
Road to Morning,Hill Drive.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
There was further discussion by Council on the bike lane issue.
Council agreed that a safe place should be provided for bike travel .
Mayor Edwards advised the audience of the earlier Council discussion
(see Study Session comments) concerning bike paths. He reported the
City Attorney would review bike lanes as they pertain to state
statutes to assure Tigard complies with those requirements. Council
consensus was that once the legalities were clarified concerning the
bike paths, Council would support striping of the bike lanes in the
LID.
Councilor Eadon requested staff to review the minimum requirement
of 1.5 parking spaces for apartment buildings noting this appeared
to be inadequate.
(Meeting recessed: 8:35 p.m.)
(Meeting reconvened: 8:41 p.m. )
6. PUBLIC HEARING - CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REPORT
Council to consider ordinance adopting the City Center Development Plan
and a Resolution accepting the City Center Development Report on the Plan.
a. Public hearing was opened.
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
C. Summation by Community Development Staff:
Community Development Director advised the purpose of the public
hearing was to gather testimony to enable Council to decide whether
or not the Development Plan and Report should be adopted. He
recommended that public testimony be received at this meeting after
which Council would direct staff to make appropriate revisions to
the Plan and Report. Adoption of the proposed resolution and
ordinance would be postponed to April 10, 1989.
The Development Plan was created to:
1) Protect both public and private investment.
2) Create more opportunities for public and private investment.
3) Create an identity for the downtown and the City as a whole.
There were many positive elements present in the downtown including
its location and some of the business improvements which have
occurred over the last several years. Community Development Director
noted, however, transportation accessibility (both pedestrian and
vehicular) was difficult.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 7
Senior Planner Newton reviewed the history and some of the elements
contained in the Plan and Report. She advised that, if Tigard voters
authorized the use of tax increment financing, certain projects
within a defined geographic area would be eligible for funding. She
reported that 430 of the funding for the proposed projects would come
from tax increment financing (TIF).
Senior Planner Newton advised that 88% of the Development Plan was
f-jr the transportation network and the park. The remaining 1211". was
allocated towards beautification projects.
Without the use of TIF, the implementation of the Development Plan
would take much longer. With the public sector taking the initiative
to implement some improvements, it was hoped that this would send
a message to private developers that the city center was a vital
area and a good place for business.
Senior Planner Newton reviewed several projects and noted how they
were defined in general terms. This was necessary because, when
using TTP, any conceivable project must be identified at the
beginning of the Plan process (for voter approval). She then
reviewed the list of specific projects.
Senior Planner advised the Report was more specific in describing
the projects and information was used for computation of the amount
of funding which would be needed. Other funding options were listed
which included local improvement district formation and projects
wholly or jointly financed by the Oregon Department of
Transportation.
The concept of TIF was explained by the Community Development
Director. He advised the City would not be asking for an additional
tax levy, but the TIF mechanism would have an impact on the Tigard
citizens. He described the possible impacts both during and after
the 15-year implementation period. At the end of the 15 years, the
downtown area's assessed valuation would be added back to the total
tax rolls. If the assessed valuation in the downtown area increased,
then the tax rate would go down.
Community Development Director reported the ratio of land:building
value was 1 : 1.76. This ratio should be at least 1:4 up to 1:8 for
a good, healthy downtown. The assessed value, therefore, was lower
than it should or could be. He explained this means that Tigard
residents are now paying a higher tax rate than they would have to
if the ratio was where it should be for a healthy downtown.
d. Public Testimony:
Proponents
o Louise Shaw, 6735 S.W. Ventura Drive, Tigard, Oregon, noted she
supported the proposed Plan. She advised that Tigard lacked a sense
of community, with no attractive places to gather for community
events or City-sponsored activities. She said it was evident, from
the support of the 4th of July activities, that this was a community
which wanted to feel and act like a community.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 8
Ms. Shaw said she believed in the necessity of aesthetic improvements
as well as residential, commercial , and industrial development. She
noted she now travels outside the area to take her children to parks
in other communities. She noted aesthetic improvements would also
serve to draw others to the area.
Ms. Shaw commended the City for the Development Plan and acknowledged
there would be obstacles; however, she said it would be far-sighted
to improve the downtown area. She urged the City to continue to do
the necessary work to implement the Development Plan as proposed.
o Chuck Woodard, 12490 S.W. Main Street, Tigard, Oregon advised he
approved of the Development Plan with some reservations. Mr. Woodard
proposed some amending recommendations.
Mr. Woodard outlined a "general store" concept. He promoted this
idea by noting that the traditional , old-fashioned general store
provided the residents with everything needed. He noted the
transportation plan should be designed with the idea of encouraging
people to travel to the downtown area to shop. He objected to a
transportation plan which was designed to allow people to rush
through.
Mr. Woodard spent some time reviewing the history of Tigard and the
historical significance of several of the buildings. He urged
preserva;.lon of Tigard's history be placed as a high priority.
o Richard Morley, 6630 S.W. Ventura Drive, Tigard, Oregon advised he
was speaking to Council as a citizen and had served as a member of
the City Center Plan Task Force (CCPTF) for the past year. He noted
the CCPTF was comprised of Tigard residents who volunteered many
hours gathering information through the public meeting process.
The goal of the committee was to develop a plan for a downtown which
would make Tigard citizens proud. He noted the legitimate worries
expressed by the downtown business people, and said he felt the CCPTF
kept these concerns in mind while developing the Plan.
Mr. Morley advised the seven people appointed to the Task Force had
unanimously come to the conclusion that the downtown area needed to
be developed to take advantage of the opportunities available in
Tigard. He advised it was time for visionaries to take hold and look
to the future. He noted the projects in the plan were not firm,
but were open for amendment and discussion. He reported that the
Task Force was legally required (state statute) to define possible
projects. Mr. Morely then referred to the vision statement noting
the desire for a living, growing downtown with special character and
identity. He said the major unifying feature was the image of a
"City in the Park." He suggested Fanno Creek Park would be a
beautiful asset if developed as the heart of the downtown area.
Mr. Morley reported the Plan addressed preservation of Tigard's
history and noted the importance of retaining the special features
which made Tigard unique. He referred to the development which had
occurred in Portland despite tremendous opposition. Mr. Morely said
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 9
i
i
he believed there was a large group of Tigard citizens who supported
the Vision Statement and the importance of securing a vital downtown.
He stressed that development would be incremental , taking place in
the next 15 to 30 years.
He referenced concerns as reported in a recent newspaper article
expressed by the Mayor against the public square and other features
of the Plan. Mr. Morley acknowledged these concerns with potential F
public liability but suggested that the positive and negative effects
must be weighed.
I
o Stuart Cohen, 14275 S.W. 125th, Tigard, Oregon, Chairperson of the
City Center Plan Task Force advised he believed the Plan would help
establish an identity for Tigard. He noted he has talked with people j
who were not aware of where the Tigard city center was located. He
said the downtown has not changed significantly since the mid-40's. 1
Mr. Cohen reported the Plan was an attempt to design a livable area,
much the same as has been achieved in the Summerfield area of Tigard.
He referred to the tax increment financing method and explained the
city center area would come off the tax rolls for a period of time
so the taxes paid by this area would be utilized to finance the
improvements to this area.
He concluded by saying that Tigard needed a vibrant commercial center
where people would enjoy visiting. There was a tremendous market
potential for the downtown area. He encouraged the City Council to
take a bold step and approve the Development Plan.
o Todd Mains, 6705 Ventura Drive, Tigard, Oregon advised he owns a
business and lives in Tigard. He said Tigard needed a focal point
and identity. Further, downtown development would be helpful to the
local economy which would benefit him as a resident as well as a
businessman.
o Gordon Martin, 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
distributed three maps denoting traffic patterns in several Tigard
locations. (Please note these maps have been filed with the packet
meeting material. ) Mr. Martin referred to his testimony before the
Planning Commission concerning the "Macro" traffic plan and his
concerns with moving cars to the downtown area. He referred to
several traffic bottlenecks which needed to be resolved. He
emphasized the importance of not forgetting the Macro plan in the
overall process as it would be vital in making the Plan work.
o Dave Atkinson, 10460 S.W. Century Oak Drive, Tigard, Oregon testified
he felt the City Center Development Plan was an ambitious
undertaking. He said he believed developers would not want to put
their investments in the downtown area but would prefer to locate
on Highway 99 to secure visual traffic trade. Mr. Atkinson said
that, despite the testimony given concerning the financing methods,
this endeavor would cost Tigard taxpayers money. He expressed
concern with the large expense and the sums which would be available
for use at City Council's discretion.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 10
He expressed concern with the large expense and the sums which would
be available for use at City Council's discretion.
Mr. Atkinson referred to several new obligations for Tigard
taxpayers; i .e. , new regional storm drainage district; possible
Tigard park levy; Portland convention center; and light rail
expansion into the area.
He advised that Washington County was becoming an expensive place
to live and expressed concerns for the large number of senior
citizens who must meet an increasing tax bill on fixed incomes.
o Jerry Cach, Cash's Realty, 12757 S.W. Main Street, Tigard Oregon
(resides at 15170 S.W. Sunrise in Tigard) noted he had a real estate
office on Main Street. Mr. Cach noted he had probably sold about
20 acres of real estate in the downtown area over the last 25 years.
He advised that since the zoning was changed to Central Business
District (CBD) , he has experienced three sales failures. He advised
he has no potential sales for the small shops in the CBD. He said
he believed the zoning was incorrect for the area.
o Dan Dolan, 4524 N.E. Davis, Portland, Oregon said he was a concerned
businessman. Mr. Dolan is employed at A-Boy which was located on
Main Street between Fanno Creek and Burnham Street. He noted his
business was prepared to invest $1 million in improvements on their
property.
He said the Plan contained some elements which were not needed; i.e. ,
towers and lakes. The "City in the Park" placed too much emphasis
on the park. Tigard needed a realistic Development Plan for the
benefit of those who live and work in the area. Mr. Dolan said a
good transportation to and from the core area was needed along with
repairs to items such as the Main Street bridge. He said he was
opposed the "T" formation of the transportation plan and would prefer
to see more emphasis placed on Main Street.
Mr. Dolan said he was not comfortable with the role of the Advisory
Committee who would recommend projects for implementation should the
Plan be approved. He said he could not support a Plan which did not
let individuals know "up front" which businesses would be relocated
and which would remain. He noted concerns over decisions which might
be made ten years later which would not reflect the original intent
of the Plan.
o Pat Dolan, 3907 S.E. 130th Street, Portland, Oregon 97236 testified
he was also with A-Boy Company. He noted he believed the Plan would
mean a tax increase; future revenue needs would fall squarely on the
residents of Tigard.
o Margaret McDade, 9225 S.W. Burnham, Tigard, Oregon testified she had
lived at this residence for the last 44 years. She noted she was
very concerned with the City's plans for her property and noted she
did not wish to move or sell.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 11
Councilor Johnson noted with the following points in response to Mrs.
McDade's concerns:
- The Plan proposed transportation and park improvements.
At this time, there were no specific plans which included
Mrs. McDade's property.
The City has authority to buy property necessary for
street improvements whether the Plan was implemented or
not.
The urban renewal authority, if granted by the voters
to City Council , would expand Council 's authority to
purchase property for resale to private investors.
(Presently, this authority is limited to the purchase
of private property to be used for public improvements
only.)
When projects are selected, a detailed policy would be
established to assure protection of all parties involved;
this was also provided for by State law.
Mrs. McDade concluded her testimony by saying she had no desire
to leave tier home.
o Bibianne Scheckla, 10890 S.W. Fairhaven Way, Tigard, Oregon
asked if the call for an election on an urban renewal issue
was legal. She said she thought the Tigard voters had voted
out any possibility for urban renewal efforts. Councilor
Johnson advised that the State of Oregon gave cities the
authority to implement urban renewal; however, in the City of
Tigard, the voters approved a Charter amendment which specified
that any urban renewal effort would have to be approved by the
voters.
Ms. Scheckla advised she felt the downtown property owners were
opposed to the Plan and that they would want to take the
responsibility themselves to increase the valuation of their
property should they choose to do so.
She referred to the historical significance of Tigard's
downtown and said it should be left alone. She emphasized that
new commercial development should be located elsewhere and
cited the I-5 Corridor as a good alternative. She suggested
that rather than putting in all new development, renovation
efforts could be effective.
o Ken Cheeley, 15390 S.W. Alderbrook Court, Tigard, Oregon noted
he and his Summerfield neighbors were concerned that there was
going to be a tremendous amount of tax increases. He listed
several new taxing issues which included: 1) potential new high
school; 2) the recently approved transportation safety bond
issue; 3) legislatively mandated school funding issues; 4)
possible Tigard park levy.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 12
He said the Development Plan was very good but the timing was
C such that it would be difficult for voters to approve because
of the number of tax issues they were facing.
o Tim Miller, 9075 S.W. Burnham, Tigard, Oregon advised he was
concerned about the zoning in the city center. He noted that
because the zoning had changed on his .97 acre residential
parcel the taxes were too expensive. He noted the uncertainty
over zoning has made this property difficult to sell .
Mr. Miller expressed concerns with regard to paying for
sidewalk construction on his property. There was discussion
on this issue. Community Development Director explained if
there was no improvement to the building, or if no local
improvement district was put into place, then there would be
no requirement for the property owner to pay for sidewalks.
o Gary Hoisington, 6345 S.E. 69th Street, Portland, Oregon
testified he was Vice President of A-Boy Supply Company. Mr.
Hoisington referred to the problems the City of Portland has
had with reduced dollars for police protection. He said areas
such as Mt. Tabor Park were unusable because of crime problems.
He advised the Tigard Development Plan did not address the cost
. of patrolling, servicing, and taking care of the Park.
He referred to the proposal that the Plan was a endeavor to
attract investment to downtown Tigard. He advised that A-Boy
has plans to improve their property through a $1 million
renovation; this was done without anticipation of action by
City Council .
Mr. Hoisington noted concern that the Plan may call for the
use of their entire piece of property and was apprehensive
about selection of a new business site. He advised that lost
business alone would be very costly and he was unsure if
monetary reimbursement for lost business was stipulated within
the Plan. There was discussion on this issue. Councilor
Johnson noted she did not recall the Plan calling for
utilization of a piece of property as large as the A-Boy
property. Mr. Hoisington noted the difficulty he had with the
Plan was that projects were defined so broadly, that it was
left open as to any number of ways for possible development.
He noted concerns that once the urban renewal district was
formed, project implementation could be deployed in a manner
dissimilar from what had been proposed to date. He advised
this would not attract business in the foreseeable future --
he said someone needed to present a strong idea of exactly
what was going to happen.
o Mayor read into the record a letter dated March 27, 1989, from
the law office of Furrer & Scott. This letter noted concerns
with the City Center Development Plan and how implementation
would affect the existing businesses. (This letter has been
filed with packet material for this meeting.)
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 13
Ce. Staff Recommendation:
Community Development Director advised the audience appeared .to
understand the proposed in Development Plan with few technical
misconceptions. He reviewed issues brought up during testimony:
o Concerning testimony by Mr. Gordon Martin on the macro traffic
plan -- The Transportation Advisory Committee has not yet
submitted the nacro traffic plan to City Council for their
consideration. Council will be making policy decisions at a
later date concerning access to interstate 5 and the Greenburg
Road area. The macro traffic study was not a part of the City
Center Development Plan.
o Concerning testimony given by Mr. Dave Atkinson on the legality
of tax increment financing -- Tax increment financing was
challenged in the court system and the use of this funding
mechanism was upheld.
o Concerning testimony given by Mr. Gary Hoisington on the
purchase of a 25' strip of land accessing the Fanno Creek Park
area -- This was not a recent proposal and that he, during his
tenure as Community Development Director, had not been
approached with any offers for purchase of this property.
Community Development Director agreed that zoning and development
standards were uncertain; these were areas which would addressed in
the future. Exact plans for improvements (i .e. , how they will be
funded; how they will be constructed; how wide the streets will be;
where the streets will be, etc. ,) will be made in the future after
it has been established there are funds for redevelopment.
Community Development Director noted that widening of the Main Street
Bridge and building a new street across Ash Street were projects
which have been discussed for many years. Nothing has happened.
This Plan would make it possible for work to begin on these projects.
Community Development Director noted staff recommended that Council
delay making a decision on the Plan and Report until April 10, 1989.
He noted that staff had distributed recommended changes to the
Development Plan which had been suggested previously. Staff has also
been in touch with legal counsel who have suggested technical
language changes. At the April 10 meeting, staff would be prepared
to insert these changes as well as any changes asked for by Council.
f. Public hearing was closed.
g. Mayor advised Council would take into consideration all testimony
received at this meeting and they would not make a final
determination on the Plan and Report until April 10, 1989.
C
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 14
7. PUBLIC HEARING - SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - SDR 88-25; MINOR LAND PARTITION
C MLP 88-16; VARIANCE V 88-39; GRABHORN/CENTRON NPO #7
City Council review of Planning Commission's approval with conditions of
a Minor Land Partition and Site Development Review to divide the 35.39
parent parcel into parcels of 17.83 and 17.56 acres and to construct a 266
unit apartment complex on the 17.83 acre site. Also, approved were
variances to allow a single driveway access where two or three accesses
were required and to allow a 20-foot setback from the eastern property line
where 30 feet is normally required. The complex would be located on both
sides of Summer Creek. Zoning: R-25 (Multi-family residential , 25
units/acre) . Location: East of S.W. 135th Avenue, south of Scholls Ferry
Road (WCTM 1S1 33 DB, Lot 300).
a. Public hearing was opened.
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
C. Staff Report: Senior Planner Liden reviewed this agenda item. He
advised the Community Development Director approved the application
in December 1988 subject to a number of conditions. The applicant
appealed the Planning Director's decision to the Planning Commission
primarily because of the right-of-way requirements imposed on S.W.
135th Avenue, Scholls Ferry Road and S.W. 130th Avenue. A second
appealed condition was the Director's requirement of a public east-
west street developed north of the apartment complex, roughly where
the two parcels were proposed to be divided.
Senior Planner noted the Planning Commission reviewed the Director's
decision. They basically upheld the decision with one major
exception: the requirement for the public east-west street. In its
place, the Planning Commission required a private driveway be put j
in with common use available so it could be used by both the proposed 3
apartments on the south side as well as the yet-to-be developed
northern parcel . The idea was that this driveway system would allow
for internal circulation within the development on this property and
also allow for people within this area to exit to either 130th or
125th.
Senior Planner Liden noted the applicant then requested that Council
review the Planning Commission decision based on only the argument
that the right-of-way dedication requirements, which the Planning
Commission left in place, were either inappropriate or illegal. The
Council then decided to call this item up for review and hold the
public hearing.
City Engineer then explained the right-of-way provisions were
conditions of the minor land partition (MLP). He advised the MLP
was basically a subdivision process. Under the City subdivision
process, the Development Code requires dedication of rights-of-way
for collector and arterial streets which were identified in the
Comprehensive Plan. There were three such streets abutting this
site: S.W. 130th; Scholls Ferry Road; and S.W. 135th. There was
a process for deferral of street improvements when they were not
timely and, in the past, the City has considered the actual
improvements to not be timely until the actual development occurs.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 15
City Engineer then described how the streets around this property
were developed at this time:
-- S.W. 130th - was undeveloped, but was basically a local access
road to two properties. It was not paved, but was shown on
the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map. Proposed conditions
require dedication of right-of-way to serve future development
of S.W. 130th with actual construction deferred until
development occurs.
-- S.W. Scholls Ferry Road - was an arterial street and required
a somewhat wider right-of-way than a local street. The
conditions required dedication of sufficient right-of-way to
be 55 feet from the centerline to accommodate the proposed
Oregon Department of Transportation improvements. City
Engineer advised that since the time of the Planning Commission
review, the State has determined they would need less than 55
feet. Therefore, staff would recommend that Council modify
this condition so that only the amount of right-of-way needed
would be dedicated.
-- S.W. 135th street - was a local improvement district project.
Through the LID, the City has been acquiring right-of-way.
He advised there was right-of-way area which had not been
acquired; rather, a permit of entry allowed the City to proceed
with road construction. The right-of-way for this property
still needs to be determined. City Engineer explained that
through the LID, the property owner has the option of donating
or having the City purchase right-of-way. This decision would
affect the property owner's assessment. In this instance, the
property owner had not made this decision and staff believed
the decision needed to be made to clear up the right-fo-way
issue before the minor land partition (basically a subdivision
plat) was recorded.
With regard to the issue of the local east-west street condition,
City Engineer advised that local streets were not designated on the
Comprehensive Plan, but were reviewed at the time of subdivision
development for determination where they should be located. The
proposed east-west street would fall into the category of such a
local street. He advised staff saw a need for an additional local
street in this area which was why it was placed as a requirement on
the approval .
There were no east-west connections between S.W. 130th and 135th
between Brittany Drive and Scholls Ferry Road. He referred to *::ie
development of Summer Lake Park and noted this could be a significant
traffic generator and it would be undesirable to have this traffic
using Brittany Drive as the primary connection. He noted the City
preferred multiple connections through residential areas for
emergency access and for access when streets were closed.. He advised
there was some design criteria specified by the City, but the
alignment of the east-west street was to be determined by the
developer in the final plat of the MLP.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 16
Adequate access for the northerly portion of the MLP was also a
consideration when staff placed the conditions on the proposal .
d. Public Testimony:
Proponents
o Steve Malsam, Vice President, Centron of Oregon Corporation
11080 S.W. Allen Boulevard, Beaverton, Oregon 97005 testified
they had started the process for this development last June.
He summarized the review process and noted they had not been
advised of the east-west road requirement until December 15,
1988 which was the day before the conditions of approval were
to be made available. Thee were a number of conditions which
were of concern to them, but the east-west road requirement
was the main issue.
Mr. Malsam advised that their consultant, Mr. Dick Waker,
proposed a private dr-v-- system that would work for both their
property and the property to the north. This system would
equally distribute traffic to 130th and 135th. He advised that
the Planning Commission agreed and did not determine it would
be necessary to construct an east-west roadway.
Mr. Malsam advised they did not have any problem with the
conditions of approval received from the Planning Commission.
They have altered their plans to meet those conditions and were
ready to submit for a building permit. He advised Centron was
not appealing the Planning Commission decision, but noted, on
behalf of the landowner, some unfairness with regard to the
right-of-way requirements on S.W. Scholls Ferry Road and S.W.
135th Avenue.
Mr. Malsam complimented City staff and advised they had been
excellent to work with. He said Centron was anxious to build
the nicest apartment project in the metropolitan area. He
advised they had received approval from the Brittany Square
neighborhood with conditions. He noted that NPO 7 (which
entered the process late) also approved the project by a 4-3
vote.
o Richard Waker, Civil Engineer for the applicant, advised
Centron had no issue with the conditions proposed by the
Planning Commission. Mr. Grabhorn, the property owner, however
did have issues.
Mr. Waker explained that Mr. Grabhorn had farmed the whole
parcel for the last 20 years. The principal reason he chose
to sell the south parcel to Centron was to pay the $130,000
assessment for S.W. 135th Avenue.
Mr. Waker noted Mr. Grabhorn's attorney raised three issues
in their appeal:
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 17
i
F.
1 . Dedication of S.W. 135th Avenue right-of-way. Mr.
Waker advised this was no longer an issue and
requirements of dedication would be fulfilled.
Dedication of Scholls Ferry Road right-of-way. Z
This issue was somewhat reduced since the original
55 feet from centerline would be changed to a
lesser amount as noted in earlier testimony by the
City Engineer. Mr. Waker explained that Mr. E
Grabhorn felt he should receive compensation from
the State for this property. He noted the State
planned to purchase right-of-way as needed for
their project. The acreage involved was less than
.2 of an acre.
3. Dedication of S.W. 130th Avenue right-of way. Mr.
Waker referred to configuration of the area for
this right-of-way dedication. He said the
subdivision to the east was inadvertently platted
in such a way that there was no land left for
right-of-way dedication to accommodate a future
extension to 130th. Therefore, there was a 30'
dedication for about the northerly half of the area
under consideration which then fanned out to a 60'
dedication.
Mr. Grabhorn had two issues with this requirement:
1) The property to the north was not to be
developed at this time; he would wished to continue
to farm this section. Therefore, he felt it would
be more timely for the dedication of 130th to be
deferred on this northerly parcel until a
development application was submitted. 2) It was
unfair to expect Mr. Grabhorn to dedicate the
entire 60' . He felt, at the time of dedication,
he should receive compensation for 30 of the 60' .
Discussion followed. In response to questions by Councilor
Johnson, City Engineer advised the requirement to develop S.W.
130th Avenue up to Scholls Ferry Road was a condition of the
MLP rather than the site development of the south half. The
proposal was for two applications in one: The first proposal
was to subdivide the land. Proposal No. 2 was to develop the
south half with apartments. The right-of-way dedications were
a condition of the subdivision (MLP). Improvements to the road
were conditioned on the site development of the south half.
In response to the Scholls Ferry Road right-of-way issue, City
Engineer said it has consistently been the City's policy,
whether the property abutted a State, County or City road, to
require dedication of right-of-way to provide for complete
development of the roadway. This way,. development helps to
pay for improvements to the roadways. In other words,
development creates the need for improvement; therefore,
development helps pay for those improvements by dedicating
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 18
right-of-way, making improvements, and/or paying systems
development charges. The City has consistently asked for
right-of-way dedication by new development along Scholls Ferry
Road.
After some discussion, Mr. Waker confirmed the City Engineer's
statement that it has been past practice for both Tigard and
Beaverton to require right-of-way dedication of new development
along Scholls Ferry Read. He noted that Mr. Grabhorn will have
no access to Scholls Ferry Road. Since the State wound be
purchasing right-of-way from other property owners,
Mr. Grabhorn thought the State ought to buy his too.
Discussion followed on the east-west road requirement.
Mr. Waker advised an public east-west local street would sever
the two parcels from ever relating to each other in a
meaningful way. He noted one of the staff's concerns was that
the east-west road would serve the needs of the people to the
west to use the new park. He advised that five acres in the
proposed development would be dedicated as park area. He noted
the City park would not generate enough traffic to justify
construction of an east-west public street. The residents
within the parcel would be fully served by a pathway network,
a park in this parcel , and a City park 300 yards from the
development.
Mr. Waker noted Scholls Ferry Road was being designed to handle
all of the local traffic in the area. He said it seemed
redundant to go south a few hundred feet and build another road
across. He noted internal circulation would be helped by such
a road, but pointed out that after the Planning Commission
hearing, the project was redesigned with private drives to
accommodate the Commission's findings. He asked the Council
to uphold the Planning Commission on this issue.
o Russel Head, NPO No. 7, testified he was not in opposition or
in favor of the development. He recommended that the 130th
access be developed not only to relieve traffic on 135th, but
also to provide emergency access. Mr. Head also noted concerns
with 135th and Scholls Ferry Road and advised he hoped a
traffic light would be installed here. He asked that the
conditions asked for by the Brittany Square neighborhood be
followed through by the developer. He concluded by saying he
hoped this apartment complex would satisfy density requirements
in the area. He noted the NPO was preparing for a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to decrease density on parcels
in the area.
o David Oringdulph, Century 21 Properties, advised his company
owned the parcel contiguous to the proposed Centron
Development. Mr. Oringdulph advised he was opposed to the
east-west road as he objected to an "expressway" be required
through the residential area. He noted the park being
developed by the City would have no parking spaces F.nd said
if a public road was built, this would encourage parking on
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 19
these neighborhood streets. Mr. Oringdulph reviewed traffic
pattern concerns in this area which included safety issues as
well.
i.
e. Recommendation by Community Development Staff j.
Community Development Director advised that this issue was before
Council because the applicant/landowner asked City Council to hear
it. He noted the issue had already been appealed to the Planning
Commission and, therefore, was not appealable to the City Council .
He advised this issue was not brought forward by staff nor was it j
considered an appeal . !;
Community Development Director reviewd some of the issues before
Council :
o Should the City require dedication of right-of-way along
Scholls Ferry. Staff was recommending "yes" as has been done
with past practice.
o Should the City require extra dedication of 130th because of
a mistake which might have been made in the past or the City's
failure to require dedication at the time of development. Or,
should the City compensate the landowner in some way for the
disproportional amount of dedication. Community Development
Director noted the change in development plans for this area
over the last 13 years and explained why there was no
,C dedication requirements for earlier development. He noted
staff felt the dedication of the 60' should be required so when
the property to the north was developed, 130th would be
improved all the way to Scholls Ferry Road.
Discussion followed. It was noted that a developer was
normally required to construct 2/3 street improvements; that
is, improve one side of the street with curbs and sidewalks
and provide for two travel lanes.
f. Council Discussion
There was lengthy Council discussion on the issues which included
the following:
o Timing of development of road improvements and the possibility
of allowing Mr. Grabhorn the opportunity to farm the land until
time of development.
o Configuration of east-west road wherein it was noted that at
no time had it been suggested that this road would have to be
a straight-shot. In fact, it would be preferred if the east-
west road was of a circuitous nature.
o Differences between a local public street and a private access
Cstreet.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 20
c Expression of support for the Planning Commission decision as
well as support for staff's recommendation on an east-west
road. Mayor expressed concern that a public east-west road
would create traffic problems by encouraging through-traffic
in a neighborhood.
g. Public hearing was closed.
h. Council consideration:
Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to
require the right-of-way dedication for Scholls Ferry Road be the
minimum amount needed by the Oregon Department of Transportation;
and the right-of- way for S.W. 130th Street be for half-street
improvements only (30') and not the full right-of-way (60' ).
Councilor Schwartz questioned the right-of-way issue on S.W. 135th
Avenue. Councilor Johnson advised it was her understanding that the
applicant was not objecting to this requirement as stipulated by the
Planning Commission at this time.
Discussion followed on the 130th right-of-way dedication for the
remaining 30 feet which would not be required. City Attorney
confirmed that the City would be able to purchase this property when
the road improvements were ready for construction.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Eadon,
to support
the staff recommendation that a public street between 135th and 130th
be placed as a condition of development; further, this public street
shall not be a straight alignment but take a circuitous route.
The motion passed by a majority vote of 3-2. Mayor Edwards and
Council Schwartz voted "Nay."
8. PUBLIC HEARING - SWANSON'S GLEN UTILITY EASEMENT
Consideration of a proposed vacation of a public utility easement within
Lot 62, Swanson's Glen, a recorded plat in the City of Tigard, Washington
County, Oregon. The request was initiated by the City Council on February
13, 1989 at the request of the Titan Properties, Inc.
a. Public hearing was opened.
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
C. Staff advised no negative written or oral comments had been submitted
with regard to the proposed vacation.
d. Public testimony: There was none.
e. Public hearing was closed.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 21
f. ORDINANCE NO. 89-10 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
LOCATED IN LOT 62, SWANSON'S GLEN, A RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT, IN
THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON.
g. Council Consideration:
Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to adopt
Ordinance No. 89-10.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
9. PUBLIC HEARING - TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK EASEMENT VACATION
Consideration of a proposed vacation of a public utility easement within
Lot 2, Tech Center• Business Park, a recorded plat in the City of Tigard,
Washington County, Oregon. The request was initiated by the City Council
on February 13, 1989, at the request of the International Land Corporation.
a. Public hearing was opened.
b. Thera were no declarations or challenges.
C. Staff advised no negative written or oral comments had been submitted
with regard to the proposed vacation.
d. Public testimony: There was none.
I
e. Public hearing was closed.
f. ORDINANCE NO. 89-11 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF A PUBLIC
UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED IN LOT 2, TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK, A
RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT, IN THE CITY OF T LUlm �lP% lllGTON COUNTY,
OREGON.
g. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to adopt
Ordinance No. 89-11. i
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. '
i
10. PUBLIC HEARING - 88-89 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
Public hearing on the approved Supplemental Budget for the City of Tigard I
f
for the 1988/89 Fiscal Year. I
a. Public hearing was opened.
i
i
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
C. Finance Director advised the proposed resolution was in accordance
with the approved supplemental budget considered by the Budget
Committee. He recommended resolution approval by Council.
d. Public Testimony - There was none.
e. Public hearing was closed.
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 22
a
f
f. RESOLUTION NO. 89-26 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
FOR 1988-89 AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS.
g. Council consideration: :7
Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to
approved Resolution No. 89-26.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
i
11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None.
s
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Se3sion
at 12:16 a.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to
discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and
pending litigation issues.
13. ADJOURNMENT: 12:25 a.m.
Approved by the Tigard City Council on May 8, 1989.
f
Deputy Recorder - City ofAigard
i
ATT T•
I
ayor - City of Tigard
i
a:cc32789
j
I
City Council Meeting Minutes - March 27, 1989 23