BEAVERTON CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 09, 2007

POLICE DEPARTMENT HOLDING FACILITY INSPECTION:
At 6:10 p.m. Police Lieutenant Dean Meisner toured the Police Holding Facility with the Mayor and City Council for the Annual Inspection. Present at the inspection were: Mayor Rob Drake, City Councilors Bruce Dalrymple, Dennis Doyle and Cathy Stanton, and Deputy City Recorder Catherine Jansen.
CALL TO ORDER:

The Regular Meeting of the Beaverton City Council was called to order by Mayor Rob Drake in the Forrest C. Soth City Council Chamber, 4755 SW Griffith Drive, Beaverton, Oregon, on Monday, July 9, 2007, at 6:35 p.m.

ROLL CALL:

Present were Mayor Drake, Couns. Catherine Arnold, Betty Bode, Bruce Dalrymple, Dennis Doyle and Cathy Stanton.  Also present were Assistant City Attorney William
Scheiderich, Chief of Staff Linda Adlard, Finance Director Patrick O'Claire, Public Works Director Gary Brentano, Library Director Ed House, Human Resources Director Nancy Bates, Police Chief David Bishop, Principal Planner Hal Bergsma, Senior Planners Colin Cooper, Barbara Fryer and Margaret Middleton, and Deputy City Recorder Catherine Jansen.

PRESENTATIONS:

07140  Senior Issues – Long Range Planning for Oregon Communities

Delores Raymond, Governor’s Commission on Senior Services (GCSS), gave a presentation on senior issues.  She said the mission of the GCSS was to enhance and protect the quality of life for older Oregonians through cooperation with other organizations and advocacy.  She said the GCSS works to ensure that seniors have access to services that provide choice, independence and dignity.  She said the three most important issues for senior citizens were housing, transportation and health care.  She said her work was focused on housing issues and she belonged to a housing supportive services network that was dedicated to ending homelessness.  She said every night in Washington County there were 1,000 homeless people. She summarized the Legislature’s work this year pertaining to senior issues and programs. 

Raymond reviewed other issues that affect seniors including population growth, tax issues, education, social security, socialized medicine, financial protection and the sustainability of Medicare and Medicaid.  She distributed three senior resource pamphlets to Council: Riding the Wave (Long-Term Care in Oregon and Long-Range Planning for Oregon’s Communities); Preventing and Responding to Senior Financial Abuse in Oregon; and Being Prepared (A Resource Guide for End-of-Life Decisions and Planning) (in the record).

Coun. Stanton referred to the recommendations listed on page 16 of the Riding the Wave and asked if these recommendations were from the GCSS and if they went to the Governor.  She also asked how these recommendations would be implemented and if the task force would be responsible for the implementation.

Raymond said there was a group that meets monthly to look at the future of long-term care.  She said Oregon’s home and community-based long-term care system saves a great deal of money compared to states that offer only nursing home care.  She said she did not know how these recommendations would be implemented.

Coun. Bode said that Beaverton had a large retired population for retirees were not leaving the state for sunnier climates.  She thanked Raymond for coming.

Raymond said the population explosion that was occurring in Oregon was changing the character of the state and she was not sure how we would fare under this growth. 

Coun. Arnold asked how many senior citizens lived in manufactured home parks.

Raymond said there were many manufactured home parks in Cornelius and Forest Grove.  She said she hated to see people losing there homes as these park properties were sold and there had been stress-related deaths from these closures.  She said people buy these homes because they are affordable; and those families and children were ending up homeless.  She said not many seniors were in homeless shelters for they have other resources; however, there were many children.  She said she would like to see that change.    

Coun. Doyle thanked Raymond for her efforts.  He said he felt the grade for this year’s Legislative Session, in terms of what was done for seniors and veterans, was a “D.”  He said the failure to fully fund the Oregon Independence Project though the program was a tremendous cost saver was sad.  He urged her to keep up the good work. 

Mayor Drake thanked Raymond for the presentation.

07141  Transportation Improvement Projects: Looking at a Systems Development Charge

Public Works Director Gary Brentano said at its April 23rd meeting Council directed staff to determine what methodologies might be used to establish a System Development Charge (SDC) for new development to pay for small transportation improvement projects and to also consider methodologies for a street utility fee for capacity and safety improvements.  He said since that meeting staff had determined that this work required expertise that was not available through city staff.  He said Don Ganer was an expert in this field and was hired to assist staff preliminarily in developing these fees.    
Don Ganer, Don Ganer & Associates, Portland, said he worked with the City of Sherwood, which was the first city in Washington County to adopt a SDC to complement the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF).  He said he used that work to put together the information in the Council packet.  He said Washington County was unique in the state for having a County wide TIF.  He said the County TIF was never designed to cover 100% of the cost of growth; currently the TIF covers about 15% of the cost of growth.  He said the SDC Act that was adopted in 1989 allows cities to recover the cost of growth.  He said the City has the authority to adopt a separate fee and since there were restrictions on the TIF that makes city fees an attractive option.  He said the TIF can only be spent on County-approved projects and cities are required to spend at least half the TIF that they collect on arterial roads as opposed to collectors.  He said some cities, like Sherwood, have a greater need for collectors than arterials, which was why a city fee was needed.  He said the TIF has a cap on what can be charged to development; the cap was based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip General Manual that was used to determine how many trips could be charged on the County fee.  He said due to the cap, larger developments may not be paying for the full impact they create on the transportation system.  He cautioned that there were some developments that were sensitive to any type of fee and may choose to develop elsewhere. 

Ganer reviewed State law requirements for SDCs:  1) SDCs can only be used for projects that deal with growth and the relationship to growth has to be shown; 2) SDCs can only be used for capital improvements and not for maintenance or operations; 3) The City could fund up to 100% of the growth cost of all the City improvements when the City and County fees are combined; 4) Having a funding source available to build transportation facilities could give the City an advantage in attracting businesses and individuals who are sensitive to transportation facilities;  5) The SDC could collect less than 100% of the growth costs by placing a cap on the fee.  He said the advantage to that would be lower rates; the disadvantages were that existing businesses and residences would be subsidizing growth and other needs in the City would not be built for lack of funding. 

Ganer said if Council preferred an SDC that was less than 100% of the growth costs, he recommended two options.  He said the first would be to select a specific list of projects in the Transportation System Plan (TSP) and setup a fee to collect 100% of the growth cost for those specific projects.  He said the advantage was that the high-priority projects would be funded, though the low-priority projects would not be.  He said the second option was to place a cap on the SDC to collect a percentage of the money needed for the projects on the list and not limit the project list.  He said the advantage was that this would maintain the project list and up to 100% of the funds for any one of the projects could be spent.  He said the disadvantages were that it would create problems with prioritizing projects and there was insufficient funding to build all of the projects so a subsidy would be needed from another source. 

Ganer said the total that the City could collect from the City SDC and the County TIF could not exceed 100% of the growth required cost.  He said he would recommend that the City also look at pass-by trips and trip lengths.  He said SDCs could be used on any transportation facilities not just road trips.  He concluded by reviewing the development process and schedule (in the record). 

Coun. Dalrymple said he worked with Ganer when he served on the Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District Board (THPRD) in establishing the District’s SDC.  He said the THPRD adopted the methodology report and a SDC to recover 65% of the growth cost.  He asked if the City could establish the desired recovery rate but the methodology report would identify what the 100% value would be.   

Ganer said that was one option.  He said the Council could establish an SDC that covers all the projects at 100% and adopt the entire report at a different percentage.  He said the down side was that the City would end up with several projects that would not be funded as was the case at THPRD.  He said an alternate option was to determine what projects would be included on the project list prior to determining the methodology and then adopt an SDC that would be sufficient to fund all of the growth costs. 

Coun. Dalrymple asked how this would work as time passed and there was a need to add projects. 

Ganer said that State law allows the City to add projects to the list at any time and the SDC rate could be modified to accommodate the added projects.  He said revising the SDC rate was not considered a revision of the methodology.  He said adding projects to the list was done through a public hearing process, but the hearing had a limited scope for this was not a change to the methodology.    

Coun. Dalrymple said as the THPRD projects were completed, the project list evolved and new projects were added.  He said he wanted to be sure the City would be able to do that.  He said the THPRD also was able to incorporate an annual inflationary increase if it chose to do so.  He asked if the City would be able to do that. 

Ganer replied the City could also have that feature.

Mayor Drake asked if the THPRD used a construction index versus regular inflation. 

Ganer said the District used the construction cost index. 

Coun. Dalrymple noted that developers in Washington County could receive credits for some of the transportation work that was done within the right-of-ways.  He asked if that would apply with this SDC. 

Ganer said the credits provisions would be the same for certain types of projects required under conditions of development approval.

Coun. Dalrymple noted that SDCs were placed on a variety of services (parks, water, etc.).  He asked if there was a cap in the County on the total amount of SDCs that anyone could charge within the region or County. 

Ganer said there was no limit or caps on the total SDCs, however, the SDCs were limited to water, sewer, transportation, stormwater and parks.   

Coun. Dalrymple said he knew the City was looking at other funding options and, in relation to this issue; he was looking for a measured balanced approach.

Coun. Doyle asked what the reaction was from the user community in Sherwood. 

Ganer said the Home Builders Association did not oppose it and no one spoke in opposition at the public hearing.  He said following adoption of the fee, some issues arose and the City was considering modifying the rate structure for some categories.  He said Sherwood was also considering placing limits or exemptions on certain classes of development. 

Coun. Doyle asked if the Council would see a realistic outlook on what projects could be done over a ten-to-25-year period, depending on the rate selected.  He said he wanted to do this correctly and thoroughly, and added this would not solve the complete issue of providing funding for transportation needs. 

Ganer reiterated the SDC could only address the growth needs.

Mayor Drake said that the Sherwood ordinance included a provision that if the County increased the TIF, Sherwood would reduce its SDC a like amount. 

Ganer said that was correct

Mayor Drake asked if this fee was based on new development and not existing development.

Ganer replied that was correct; this was a one-time fee paid only when new development occurs to defray the cost for transportation improvements needed due to the new development.

Coun. Dalrymple asked if a developer would pay the SDC for each lot when he builds the subdivision and if the builder would have to pay the SDC again when he builds the house. 

Ganer said the fee would only be charged one time, when the building permit application for construction would be submitted.  He said if a developer was seeking subdivision approval there would be requirements that he would have to meet to obtain that approval; the developer would be eligible for a credit for those improvements and the credit would be applied at the time the building permits were pulled for the houses.   

Coun. Dalrymple said he wanted to be sure that the public understood that this fee would not be charged twice.

Coun. Arnold reconfirmed with Ganer that the SDC would be charged one time for new development and that if the developer made an improvement to help alleviate the traffic congestion created by this development, the cost of that improvement would be offset from the SDC.  She asked if that would go against the County or City’s portion. 

Ganer said it depended on the type of road; it would go against the City’s portion if it was a collector road that was not on the County’s approved list.  He said the credit would be applied against the total fee; it would not matter if it was the County’s or City’s portion.

Coun. Arnold noted there was a cap on the ITE number of trips that can be generated.  She asked what percentage of construction hit that cap.

Ganer said there was a limit of 100 trips per unit of development.  He explained that some developments, such as convenience markets, generate around 750 trips for every 1,000 square feet.  He said under the County’s TIF the limit was imposed by only charging for 100 trips for every 1,000 square feet.  He said Sherwood was reviewing its SDC because some developments had a large trip generation number and the fee was higher than expected.

Coun. Arnold asked if the SDC could be used for structured parking. 

Ganer said some cities offer a waiver or decrease on the SDC for facilities that reduce traffic impact on the transportation system.  He said he would need to check to see if structured parking was one of those facilities.  He said cities also provided exemptions for developments that they wanted to attract, such as industrial development.  He said the task force could look at this if Council desired.

Coun. Arnold asked how long Sherwood’s process took and if there was a task force.    

Ganer said Sherwood did not have Task Force it was handled by an internal staff committee and was then reviewed by the Home Builders Association. 

Mayor Drake recommended that Council ask staff to review the current TSP list and return with a list of project options, percentages and costs that could go out for public hearing and comment.  He said this would provide ample opportunity for interest groups and citizens to comment on the proposal. 

Ganer said the process in Sherwood took about eight months from start to finish. 

Coun. Stanton asked if the SDC would apply for redevelopment.

Ganer said the SDC would apply to the increase in the number of trips that would be generated by the new development versus the older development, assuming the redevelopment would generate more trips.  He said there could be situations where the redevelopment would generate fewer trips.  To determine trip generation numbers for the older development, he recommended using the current edition of the ITE Manual and looking at the most intensive use of that property in the last 18 months.  He said different standards such as two to five years, could be used to cover situations where properties had been vacant for a while.       

Coun. Stanton asked if SW 125th Avenue was on the County-approved list of projects. 

Brentano indicated that it was included on that list. 

Coun. Stanton asked if the SDC would only cover anticipated growth and not mitigation of on-going growth or previous impact. 

Ganer said it would cover to any growth from the time the SDC was adopted and forward; it would not apply to growth that had occurred in the past. 
Coun. Bode asked if SW 125th Avenue would fall into this category. 

Coun. Stanton said she did not think it would fall under this program because it was a new road. 

Brentano confirmed it would be a new road to be constructed based upon the City’s TSP and would have to be funded by some other means than the SDC.  He said if Council desired SW 125th Avenue could be included on the SDC project list and funding would depend on the priority for it would be competing with other projects.

Brentano summarized that at this point Council would like staff to return with a list of projects to frame a potential SDC so that Council could have a frame of reference for discussion as this matter proceeds.  He added that Ganer has recommended beginning with the SDC and then moving to the street utility fee and the fee for safety improvements as they logically fall in that order.  He said the other items would come forward as this moves forward.    

Mayor Drake noted staff was also seeking authorization to proceed with the contract for Don Ganer & Associates and approval of funding for the same.

Coun. Stanton stressed she wanted SW 125th Avenue on that list and if it was not included she wanted clear reasons why it was omitted. 

Brentano responded that on August 20th a work session would be held on the SW 125th Avenue Extension and staff would present up-to-date estimates and additional information so this project could be discussed in depth.  He said he guaranteed that this project would be on the project list.   

Coun. Dalrymple noted that Sherwood took eight months to develop and adopt its SDC plan.  He added that the Council was embarking on its visioning process for Beaverton.  He said as part of the visioning process, there could be another arterial or road that has not yet come to light.  He said going through the SDC process and handling the vision process would give Council time to look to the future to see if there was something else the Council wanted to include. 

Mayor Drake said that was correct and the public process to add projects to the SDC list was simple. 

Ganer clarified that it was not difficult to add projects to the SDC list but the projects do have to be included in the TSP before it could be added to the list. 

Coun. Arnold clarified that the Council would be appropriating $19,500 for the contract with Ganer.  She said she was confused about the recommendation and asked if that would include proceeding with the task force. 

Mayor Drake said that was Ganer’s recommendation though he had not discussed it yet with Ganer.  He said this would authorize work to begin with Ganer and at a staff level.  He said they would then return with a broad package for the Council review and Council would then instruct staff on how it wished to proceed.   

Coun. Doyle MOVED, SECONDED by Coun.Bode that Council authorize staff to enter into a personal services contract with Don Ganer & Associates, Inc., for a Street SDC methodology report with a recommended capital improvements program in an amount not to exceed $19,500 and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, and direct the Finance Director to include the funding for the contract in the next Supplemental Budget; and that staff seek public input and ensure that public information is shared, and return with a narrowed list of options, covering Options 1 and 2 as outlined in the Ganer report attached to Agenda Bill 07141.  Couns. Arnold, Bode, Dalrymple, Doyle and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously.  (5:0)

VISITOR COMMENT PERIOD:

Richard Eyde, Beaverton, acknowledged the successful return of Coun. Stanton from the Discovery Days Mayor Race where she represented the City.  He said over 200 people attended the Discovery Days activities and there were many canoes and kayaks in the water.  He said Coun. Stanton did not finish first or last, but she stayed dry the entire race.  He told the Councilors that anytime they wished to go out on the river the Tualatin Riverkeepers would be happy to escort them. 

Coun. Stanton added that it was a lovely day with clear, cool weather.  She said this was an opportunity to appreciate the work that was done collectively in cleaning up the Tualatin River over the last 25 years.  She said the cleanup was funded by a sewer utility charge that was paid by everyone.  She confirmed the event was held downriver from the sewage treatment plant and the water was clean.

COUNCIL ITEMS:

Coun. Arnold said this Thursday would be the first Picnic in the Park at City Park at 6:00 p.m.  She said this was for the Central Beaverton, Denney Whitford, Raleigh West and West Slope neighborhoods. 

STAFF ITEMS: 

There were none.

CONSENT AGENDA:

Coun. Doyle MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Arnold, that the Consent Agenda be approved as follows:

Minutes of the Regular Meetings of June 4 and 11, 2007

07142  A Resolution Expressing the City of Beaverton's Election to Receive Distribution of a Share of Certain Revenues of the State of Oregon for Fiscal Year 2007-2008, Pursuant to ORS 221.770 (Resolution No. 3904)

07143  Acceptance of Grant Award from the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission and Authorize Appropriations Through a Special Purpose Grant Budget Adjustment Resolution (Resolution No. 3905)

07144  Management COLA

Contract Review Board:

07145  Ratification of Beaverton Central Plant Contract Award for Boiler/Chiller Installation

07146  Contract Award – Administration of the Adapt-A-Home Program

07147  Contract Award – Administration of the Mend-A-Home Emergency Program

07148  Retainer Agreements for Professional Services in Support of the FY 2007/08 and 2008/09 Capital Improvements Plans

Coun. Stanton said she had minor revisions to the minutes that she gave to the City Recorder. 

Coun. Stanton referred to Agenda Bill 07143, acceptance of the grant from the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC), and noted she was the City’s representative to MACC.  She said MACC has an extensive grant process for the PCN grants and all 13 cities and every service district in the County compete for the grants.  She said the City was able to get everything it wanted, though it did not get everything it asked for.  She said the City received $52,000 from the grant funds.  She said the grant funds come from a $1.00 charge that was included on everyone’s cable bill.   

Coun. Doyle asked where the public could obtain information on the Adapt-a-Home and Mend-a-Home Programs (Agenda Bills 07146 and 07147).

Chief of Staff Linda Adlard said people could access the information from the City’s Web site (www.beavertonoregon.gov) or by calling the City at 503-526-2497.  She said these programs were administered by the City’s Economic Development Program. 

Question called on the motion.  Couns. Arnold, Bode, Dalrymple, Doyle and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously.  (5:0)

RECESS:

Mayor Drake called for a brief recess at 8:06 p.m. 

RECONVENED:

Mayor Drake reconvened the meeting at 8:19 p.m.

WORK SESSION:

07149  Planning for Beaverton’s Part of the Washington Square Regional Center

Senior Planner Barbara Fryer presented a PowerPoint presentation on past and future planning for Beaverton’s portion of the Washington Square Regional Center (WSRC) (in the record).  She reviewed the WSRC boundary adopted in 1999 and said though this was a large area, not all of that area was intended for high-density development.  She said the Regional Center areas score higher for Federal pass-through funds that come through Metro; by having a larger area, the transportation improvements needed for the full length of Hall Boulevard or Scholls Ferry Road could potentially be funded.  She said these improvements were in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) but were unfunded. 

Fryer reviewed the 1997 and 1999 Visions, the Compliance Report, the zoning and the 2002 Comp Plan for the WSRC.  It was noted that currently the County zoning remains in place for those areas within the WSRC that have been annexed to the City.  She reviewed the 2004 Implementation Study in detail (in the record). 

Mayor Drake asked (in reference to the Implementation Study) if the property owners in the entire regional center were contacted or if only the owners for the retail section that faced Highway 217 were contacted. 

Fryer said the owner for the retail section facing Highway 217, the area north of Hall Boulevard and the Nimbus area between Hall Boulevard and Scholls Ferry Road were contacted.  She said it was anticipated that these three areas would be rezoned into a more intense use. 

Mayor Drake confirmed the market analysis was done by E. D. Hovee & Company.  He asked if Hovee received a response from every property owner.

Principal Planner Hal Bergsma said responses were received from the key property owners, though one major property owner in the Nimbus area recently changed.

Coun. Stanton asked if the urban village north of Hall Boulevard extended from Nimbus Avenue up to the creek on the west.

Fryer confirmed it would extend up to the creek.  She said the Mercer property would be out of the study area.  She clarified that the urban village would consist of row houses, condominiums, apartments, office buildings, mixed use of retail/lofts and retail/office, and a Tanasbourne-style shopping center.  She reviewed the redevelopment assumptions and concepts from the 2004 market analysis for the WSRC (in the record).

Mayor Drake noted that the proposed location for the overpass set down was on a sensitive wetland area. 

Fryer said the overpass would set down on Gemini Drive with the intent that Gemini Drive would continue to Nimbus Avenue.  She said this was preliminary and the details of the overpass were not at the point of engineering study.

Coun. Stanton asked what the assumptions were for Highway 217 in the Study.

Fryer said the Study assumed that the financially constrained RTP would be built.

Mayor Drake noted that Highway 217 was not in the RTP and ODOT had yet to accept Highway 217 into any redevelopment.  He said it was through Metro/JPACT that the environmental impact statement was funded. 

Fryer reviewed in detail the transportation needs that have yet to be resolved in the WSRC area including the disconnected network, intersection improvements needed beyond those in the Transportation System Plan (TSP), the Highway 217 overpass, transit service and relocation of the commuter rail station. 

Fryer said the question before Council was whether the WSRC boundary should be changed.  She said the City had two regional centers (downtown Beaverton and Washington Square), there was a lack of funding for needed transportation improvements in the WSRC and this area was not ready to meet Regional Center densities, staff felt the urban village concept should proceed even if the Regional Center designation was removed and the overpass was too expensive for the overall benefit. 

Bergsma reviewed the area of the WSRC that was annexed into the City in 2005.  He said that area was currently zoned County Transit Oriented (County TO).

Fryer said the second question before Council was whether or not to consider new zoning for the WSRC.  She reviewed the zoning recommendations including the urban village, commercial zoning along Highway 217, Mixed Use Employment and Mixed Use Commercial.

Coun. Stanton asked why there was no minimum building height for the Mixed Use Employment.

Fryer said the intent was that redevelopment would occur over time and putting in an artificial building height would suppress the market or require that redevelopment occur at a certain level for which the market was not ready.

Bergsma said this was an optimistic assumption of what might happen with some fairly aggressive development standards, since there was a desire to see a lot of redevelopment occurring.  He said the question was whether this was realistic.

Coun. Arnold asked how the urban village would be zoned to ensure the density and type of housing.

Fryer said she anticipated using the David Evans & Associates Study to identify the three pod areas that would be required to have a minimum number of condominiums, apartments and row houses.  She said this area was primarily under one ownership, so they would work with the owner to determine what that area would look like.  She said that the density would not necessarily be the one in the David Evans Study but the density and mix would be identified.

Bergsma said the City could enter into a development agreement with the property owner to create zoning unique to a particular property.  He said form based zoning that defines the size and mass of a building could be used.

Mayor Drake said Tigard asked the City to take the next step and zone the WSRC.  He said this appeared the City may be recommending doing less than more in the short run.  He said he knew the City needed to do what was best for Beaverton and asked if this was discussed with Tigard.

Bergsma said he has discussed this with Tigard’s Planning Manager and he has received copies of all of this material so he is aware of the discussions that have taken place.  He said they agreed that once staff had discussed this with Council and the Planning Commission, they would have further discussions with Tigard. 

Coun. Stanton asked why this was being considered now, other than because Tigard wanted Beaverton to reconfirm its commitment to the 1999 Plan.

Bergsma said in 2003 David Evans & Associates was retained to look at the WSRC for there had been changes in the assumptions since the 1999 Plan, including a change in the location of the station.  He said that work was delayed because the station location was uncertain and other projects had priority.  He said they were now looking at the WSRC because a legal issue has arisen.  He said the City now had a Baker conflict (Baker vs. City of Milwaukie); the Baker ruling states that the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning have to be consistent.  He said zoning needs to be created for a Regional Center designation and since the City was now beginning an update of all of the zoning districts (Code Chapter 20), this was the opportunity to look at the zoning for this area.  He said with the Mayor’s concurrence, staff was starting the process to discuss how to proceed; should the Regional Center designation be maintained and zoning applied that is consistent with that designation or should there be a different designation and zoning. 

Bergsma said this was considered by the Planning Commission and its response was:  1) Keep the Regional Center designation to receive Federal funding; 2) Change the zoning to allow increased intensity in the Gemini/Nimbus loop, Scholls Ferry/Hall and Cascade Plaza areas; 3) Maintain the urban village area; 4) Let the market dictate intensity and development and do not set minimum standards;  5) There was concern with intensifying the use when needed transportation infrastructure had not yet been constructed; 6) There was concern that if Mixed Use development was allowed, that no single use be allowed to dominate; 7) There was support for pursuing the 1999 Regional Center Task Force’s idea of a people mover to connect the Nimbus/Cascade area with the WSRC area to the east of Highway 217;  8)There was concern about the marketability of office space and the provision of affordable housing so that the people who work in that area could live there.  He said that was why it was now before Council.    

Coun. Dalrymple said he did not support the WSRC designation and he did not want it to dilute the focus from the downtown core area.  He said if the WSRC designation was maintained, the City would be in competition with itself in terms of the visioning for the downtown.  He said this would also stratify the City by moving the business environment to the City’s borders rather than in the central core.  He added he was not yet certain the central core was the best location but that could be determined through the visioning process.  He said he felt the City needed to look at the downtown Regional Center location very carefully before it stratified or diluted what the City could have in the downtown.  He said anything that the City does outside of that would be a plug in the process of doing additional development that could be very beneficial for the community.

Coun. Bode said she would support maintaining the WSRC designation and the zoning that would be current for a Regional Center.  She said the transportation issue was huge and rail would probably be an option in the next 20 to 40 years.  She said there was a slow shift from huge regional downtown cities to having people work and live in the same area.  She said that was something the City might want to look at, so she did not want to close that door.  She said she also wanted to bring in Federal funds for transportation.  She said the urban village concept was interesting for it provides another choice, however, in her tenure when she thought the affordable subdivisions were being constructed, by the time the subdivisions were completed they were not affordable.  She said she would like to see true affordable housing.  She said the City would need to look at who would support the employment effort in the business corridor and they would not all be high-tech, high professional employees.  She said the City needs to offer affordable transportation and affordable housing for low, middle and high incomes, and it seems the urban village would be more middle-income.  She noted major transportation infrastructure was needed and State and Federal support was needed to build those facilities.

Mayor Drake said the reality was that because it was a growing city, Beaverton was fighting a war on many fronts, not just downtown.  He said Coun. Dalrymple was correct that by concentrating on the Washington Square area west of Highway 217 it does some diversion of energy and potential dollars.  He said the reality was that currently the Federal funds (MTIP) was not a large pot only $30 million for a whole region that was focused on a few projects.  He said right now no one was willing to accept responsibility for Highway 217.  He said the City also had other areas that were growing rapidly, including the Teuffel Project, the Murray/Scholls Town Center and other corridor work that needs to be done in the City.  He said he believed the focus needed to be in the downtown.  He said he wants to be a good partner with Tigard, though he would prefer keeping things as they are and not go with anything too intense as this time because a lot of funding needs to be found before they can start talking about huge densities that will take decades to receive in the Washington Square area.    

Bergsma clarified that the Mayor’s preference was to maintain the current zoning and remove the Regional Center designation. 

Mayor Drake said he preferred to potentially remove the Regional Center designation but he did not want to do was to harm Tigard’s success for the WSRC for that would impact Beaverton.  He said if he were voting he would not change the short-term zoning because he does not think much would happen west of Highway 217 in the short term.  He said the infrastructure needs were so great in the short term that the City would be remiss in starting a process that has no chance of finding funding for Highway 217 or the constrained funding package.  He said he thought the urban village was less problematic because it was somewhat isolated and the potential there was huge for housing near the Fanno Creek Park area.  He said he did not think the City should take too big a bite in the short run.

Coun. Stanton said she saw not point in removing the WSRC designation to replace it with something else that was an unknown.  She said she could not imagine that all of the components of the employment and corridor requirements were not met under the Regional Center designation.  She said she was content to leave the designation intact and she did not see the need to come up with a new designation. 

Bergsma said one option would be to change the Regional Center designation to an employment designation, at least in the Halls/Scholls Ferry area as it is predominantly employment with a corridor designation.    

Coun. Stanton asked why that has to be done now.  She said she remembered that one of the things the City did with the Regional Center designation was to load it with the housing and jobs requirements from Metro’s last targets in the late 1990’s. 

Bergsma said the City did not suggest that there would be a lot of development in this area in its Compliance Report of 1997; it was assumed most of the development would be in the downtown Regional Center.  He said the Regional Center was mainly applied because of the work that Tigard did in 1999.  He said that was not completed yet when the 1997 Compliance Report went to Metro; it was primarily an employment area and the targets to Metro were reflective of that.  He said the other compelling reason was the legal issue of Baker vs. City of Milwaukie, which says the zoning has to follow the designation.  He said the definition of Regional Center under the Metro Urban Growth Functional Plan was that it should achieve an average of 60 people per acre.  He said to achieve that density, the zoning has to be fairly aggressive; more aggressive than the current zoning in that area.

Coun. Stanton said Beaverton was a piece of the WSRC; it is not incumbent on the City to take the biggest hit on this.

Scheiderich said the problem will arise if someone comes in with a development application within that area.  He said the mismatch with the Comprehensive Plan will be a problem if that development proposal was opposed. 

Bergsma said there have been developments in that area and staff has heard of other potential developments along Cascade.  He said some of that would not be consistent with the Regional Center designation.  He said that may come to the City’s attention fairly soon; possibly less than two years.

Coun. Stanton said that did not mean she had to make a decision at this meeting.

Coun. Arnold asked how the institutional zoning fit into the need to meet Regional Center requirements. 

Bergsma said the Red Tail Golf Course was zoned institutional and the County retained that use reflective of the long-term use of the property as a golf course.  He said most of the other properties that were unincorporated received a County transit oriented employment and retail commercial designation.  He said most of the uses did not meet that designation; most of it was low density development.

Coun. Arnold asked if an applicant wished to redevelop that property, what could be developed on that site. 

Bergsma said if an application was received tomorrow it would be subject to the County zoning currently in place including the maximum development standards for the transit oriented zone which was fairly high. 

Coun. Arnold said she was concerned about the legal issue, for the City has been in that position before between County and City zoning.  She said it would be nice to have everything under City zoning.  She asked if having the Regional Center designation meant the entire area would have a density of 60 people per acre.
Bergsma responded it would be 60 people per acre on average though certain areas could have higher and lower densities.  He said the 1999 Plan called for the highest densities on the east side of the freeway and moderate densities on the west side of the freeway.

Coun. Arnold said she was concerned about the legal issue and asked what the likelihood would be if that happened.    

Mayor Drake said that the City was beginning an update on Chapter 20.  He said the legal opinion may be conjecture, until a better analysis is received.  He said the Council might want to have City staff process this information and take a better look at the legal question, and then come back with another work session. 

Coun. Arnold said she did not want to make a decision at this meeting. 

Coun. Doyle said he would like to know if there was any indication that having two Regional Centers would negatively impact the Downtown Regional Center.  He said staff did not need to respond to that right now.  He said if that becomes an issue, then Council needs to revisit this matter.  He said due to lack of funding, the chances of any transportation improvements for that area was minimal.  He said he had no problem with two Regional Centers in the city as that was a positive opportunity.  He said he thought the concept of an urban village in that area was dynamic.  He said he looked forward to seeing what comes back to Council and the Planning Commission.

ORDINANCES:

Mayor Drake explained the Council would only be considering Agenda Bill 07138.  He said Agenda Bill 07150 would be renoticed and Agenda Bill 07151 would be postponed until to the next meeting.    

Coun. Doyle MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Bode, that the rules be suspended, and that the ordinance embodied in Agenda Bills 07138, be read for the first time by title only at this meeting, and for the second time by title only at the next regular meeting of the Council.  Couns. Arnold, Bode, Dalrymple, Doyle and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously.  (5:0)

First Reading:

Scheiderich read the following ordinance for the first time by title only:

07138  TA 2007-0002 (Operations Center 2007) (Ordinance No. 4443)
(Carried over from Council meeting of June 18, 2007)

07150  PULLED - An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 4187, Figure III-1, the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to Apply the City's Neighborhood Residential Standard Density (NR-SD) Plan Designation and Ordinance No. 2050, the Zoning Map to Apply the City's R-7 Zone to Property Located at 12730 SW Fairfield Street; CPA 2007-0013/ZMA 2007-0013 (Ordinance No. 4444) (Rescheduled to the meeting of August 13, 2007)

07151  PULLED - An Ordinance Amending Beaverton Code Chapter 6 Relating to Parking Zone Additions (Ordinance No. 4445)  (Rescheduled to the meeting of July 23, 2007)

ADJOURNMENT: 

There being no further business to come before the Council at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 9:37 p.m.

APPROVAL:

Approved this 13th day of August, 2007.

__________________________________
Rob Drake, Mayor