EXHIBIT I
MEMORANDUM TO COUNCIL
March 27, 2007
Create a local improvement district to construct street and bridge improvements from the Columbia Slough to Alderwood Road in the NE 92nd Drive Local Improvement District (Hearing; Ordinance; C-10020)
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENTS SINCE FEBRUARY 28, 2007
On February 28, 2007, the Council conducted a hearing to consider the creation of a local improvement district to construct improvements on NE 92nd Drive. A second reading of the ordinance was held on March 14, 2007 but was immediately continued to March 28, 2007 with no staff, property owner or other testimony on this agenda item at the March 14, 2007 Council session.
Per the direction of the Council a property owner meeting was held on March 12, 2007 and was facilitated by Andrew Aebi, Local Improvement District Administrator. Invitations to attend were extended to those property owners who either remonstrated against formation of the local improvement district and/or previously testified in opposition to formation of the local improvement district. The invitation list is attached as Attachment 1.
Sixteen people attended the March 12, 2007 property owner meeting as indicated on the signin sheet, except for Andrew Aebi, Local Improvement District Administrator, who as the facilitator of the meeting did not sign in. Alan Snook, transportation planner for DKS & Associates, was one of the 15 people who signed in; however he is not an owner of property in this proposed local improvement district. Some property owners had more than one representative in attendance. This signin sheet is attached as Attachment 2. Mr. Aebi distributed a meeting agenda which is attached as Attachment 3.
An alternative “Square Footage” assessment methodology was described as noted within Attachment 3, with an informal “straw poll” taken of property owners after Mr. Aebi’s explanation was given; none of the 14 property owners and representatives thereof voting informally in this “straw poll” indicated a preference for this alternative assessment methodology.
An alternative “Abutting Linear (Front) Footage” assessment methodology was described as noted within Attachment 3, with an informal “straw poll” taken of property owners after Mr. Aebi’s explanation was given; none of the 14 property owners and representatives thereof voting informally in this “straw poll” indicated a preference for this alternative assessment methodology.
An alternative “Properties Being Brought Into Fire Code Compliance” assessment methodology was described as noted within Attachment 3, with an informal “straw poll” taken of property owners after Mr. Aebi’s explanation was given; none of the 14 property owners and representatives thereof voting informally in this “straw poll” indicated a preference for this alternative assessment methodology.
Various attendees put forth an alternative assessment methodology not included in Attachment 3 which would assign all of the special benefit to properties north of the Columbia Slough and none of the special benefit to properties south of the Columbia Slough. All of the 14 property owners and representatives thereof voting informally in this “straw poll” indicated a preference for this alternative assessment methodology.
Dean Phillips, counsel to International Paper (dba Xpdex Inc.) put forth a “modified square footage” assessment methodology. Key features of the draft of this proposal included fully exempting the Acme Storage properties and increasing the extent of exempting the Owens-Brockway Glass Container Inc. properties. There was consensus for him to further refine this proposal and to present it to Mr. Aebi, who would in turn offer this and any other alternatives proposed by Mr. Phillips as an alternative assessment methodology for City Council consideration.
It was communicated to all attending that the deliverable(s) for proposed assessment methodology alternative(s) would take the form of proposed amendment(s)for Council consideration on March 28, 2007. Mr. Aebi said at the March 12, 2007 property owner meeting that he reserved the right to offer his own alternative assessment methodology of his choosing for Council consideration. Mr. Phillips requested that any alternative proposal brought forth by Mr. Aebi at the March 28, 2007 Council session first be communicated to him and those attending the March 12, 2007 property owner meeting. Mr. Aebi agreed to this request. Mr. Aebi said that a synopsis of the meeting would be documented in the form of a memorandum to Council, which would be available for review and comment at the March 28, 2007 Council meeting.
Mr. Phillips e-mailed Mr. Aebi a single alternative assessment methodology on March 22, 2007 which is attached as Attachment 4. The proposed change in assessments is summarized as follows:
Since Mr. Aebi is not proposing an alternative assessment methodology for Council consideration, no notification of Mr. Phillips and the meeting attendees of any alternative assessment methodology was needed.
SYNOPSIS OF MARCH 12, 2007 PROPERTY OWNER MEETING
Question #1: Did the assessment methodology take into account current versus potential trip volume of lots not yet developed; e.g., for the Ikea store under construction?
Mr. Snook confirmed that this was taken into account; i.e., the trip volume assumes full buildout, not an undeveloped trip volume of zero.
Question #2: Won’t the East Columbia to Lombard Connector project relieve congestion?
Mr. Snook noted that while this project is designed to relieve congestion west of roughly NE 92nd Avenue, it is not designed to mitigate congestion at the NE Columbia Blvd./NE Sandy Blvd. I-205 interchange.
Question #3: Are business employees’ trips factored into the trip analysis?
Mr. Snook confirmed that the traffic analysis takes into account trips of employees at properties both north and south of the Columbia Slough.
Question #4: Does the traffic analysis take into account the higher trip generation of retail uses versus other less transient uses?
Mr. Snook noted that the traffic analysis takes into account a higher trip generation rate for retail uses (e.g., the Ikea store), but for properties north of the Columbia Slough, this is offset by a lower trip split using NE 92nd Drive due to more alternative means of access available; e.g., an average of 6% north of the Columbia Slough and an average of less than 25% south of the Columbia Slough.
Messrs. Aebi and Snook were excused from the meeting shortly after the scheduled 3:00 PM adjournment time. Others on the attendee list per Attachment 2 continued deliberations thereafter.