Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 04/26/1982
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on REG3LAR MEETING AGENDA an agenda item needs to sign their name on APRIL 26, 1982, 7:30 P.M. the appropriate sign-up sheet(s) . If no FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL sheet is provided, ask to be recognized by LECTURE ROOM the Chair. 1. REGULAR MEETING: 1. 1 Call To Order And Roll Call 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call to Audience, Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items Under Open Agenda 2. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 2. 1 Approve the Minutes: April 12 & 19, 1982 2.2 Approve the TURA Minutes: April 12, 1982 2.3 Approve the Expenditures and Investments: $198,248.44 2.4 Receive and File Written Communications: e Transmittal from Chamber of Commerce to Boundary Commission e Transmittal from Governor, Victor Atiyeh to Mayor Bishop re: Boundary Commission 2.5 Receive Legal Services Update On Control Budget 2.6 RESOLUTION No. 82-36 - Approve Requesting 92nd Avenue Speed Limit Reconsideration � rn 2.7 Approve Police Car Refund - $800.00 2.8 Receive and File Senior Center Update 2.9 Approve Agreement for Engineering Services - Control Net 2. 10 Approve Sorg Library Lease 2.11 Receive McDonald LID Engineering Cost Report 3. CITY KEY PRESENTATION - Downtown Committee Members • Presentation by Council 4. HEARINGS OFFICER APPOINT14ENT o Consideration by Council • Beth Blount ® Adrianne Brockman 5. GAS FRANCHISE RENEWAL - Ordinance No. 82- • Recommendation of Director of Public Works 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. ZONE CHANGE - ZCA 2-82 (Tozer - Sims) NPO #4 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on 3 lots located on the north side of Hampton between 69th & 70th, from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard C-P, Commercial-Professional. The lots were annexed to the City on March 18, 1982 by the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission. • Public Hearing Opened o Summation of Planning Director • Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination • Recommendation of Planning Director • Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council e Ordinance No. 82- Changing to City zoning 7. ZONE CHANGE - ZCA 3-82 (Durham Island) NPO #5 & #6 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on 238.64 acres located generally north of Durham, west of 74th, south of Bonita and east of Hall Blvd. from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-5 & R-7. The area was annexed to the City on • Public Hearing Opened s Summation of Planning Director m Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination • Recommendation of Planning Director e Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council e Ordinance No. 82- Changing to City zoning f 8. ZONE CHANGE - ZCA 4-82' (Alderbrook Island) NPO #6 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on 110.5 acres located between 109th and 96th and between Kable Street and Murdock Street, from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7 & R-10. The area was annexed to the City on • Public Hearing Opened • Summation of Planning Director • Public Testimony: Proponents , Opponents, Cross Examination • Recommendation of Planning Director • Public Hearing Closed e Consideration by Council • Ordinance No. 82- Changing to City zoning 9. ZONE CHANGE - ZCA 5-82 (Bechtold Annexation) NPO #3 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on property located geaeral=y west of 121st and north of Gaarde Street from Washington County RS-1 & RU-4 to City of Tigard R-10 and R-7. The area was annexed to the City on • Public Hearing Opened • Summation of Planning Director • Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination e Recommendation of Planning Director • Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council • Ordinance No. 82- Changing to City zoning CONCLUSION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. ORDINANCE No. 82- Approving General Plan For Main Street Land Corporation/JB Bishop • Recommendation of Planning Director 11. 74TH AVENUE LID RESOLUTION No. 82- - Declaring Intent • Recommendation of Director of Public Works 12. DURHAM ROAD .1 Ordinance No. 82- Amending Original Load Limits Ordinance .2 Resolution No. 82- Requesting County Place Signs and Enforce .3 Report from Police Department on Enforcement 13. CIVIC CENTER FINAL REPORT & RESOLUTION No. 82- CALL FOR BOND ELECTION • Report and Recommendation of City Administrator 14. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda items identified to the Chair under item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are encouraged to contact the City Administrator prior to the meeting. 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to consider Property Acquisition, per ORS 192.660 (1) (e) , 6-d Labor Relations, per ORS 192.660 (1) (d). 16. ADJOURNMENT i. PAGE 2 - COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 26, 1982 T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 26, 1982 - 7:30 PM 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors Tom Brian, John Cook, Kenneth Scheckla, Nancie Stimler (Leaving at 11:35 PM) ; Director of Public Works/Planning, Frank Currie; Finance Director/City Recorder, Doris Hartig; City Administrator, Bob Jean; Support Service, Diane Jelderks; Legal Counsel, Ed Sullivan. 2. CALL TO AUDIENCE, STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS UNDER OPEN AGENDA (a) City Administrator requested the following items be placed on open agenda: .1 Code Enforcement Report .2 Ordinance for Hoodville L.I.D. amending date. .3 Resolution for segregating the assessment - Varns Road LID He requested item 2.10 Approve Sorg Library Lease be reset to May 10, 1982, so they could present a signed lease. He requested the following item be placed under consent agenda: .12 Resolution for Engineering Services Agreement. 3. APPROVE MINUTES. (a) Councilwoman Stimler noted on page two of the April 19 minutes, part (b) second paragraph, fiscal year should be revised to read 81-82 & 82-83. (b) Legal Counsel advised that on page seven, paragraph seven and eight, should be Health Division not Health Commission. (c) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve minutes with corrections. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 4. APPROVE TURA MINUTES APRIL 12, 1982. (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve minutes. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 5. APPROVE THE EXPENDITURES AND INVESTMENTS: $198,248.44 (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 6. RECEIVE AND FILE. Transmittal from Chamber of Commerce to Boundary Commission. Transmittal from Governor Victor Atiyeh to Mayor Bishop re: Boundary Commission. (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 7. RECEIVE LEGAL SERVICES UPDATE ON CONTROL BUDGET (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimor to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 8. APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 82-36 REQUESTING 92nd AVENUE SPEED LIMIT RECONSIDERATION. (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 9. APPROVE POLICE CAR REFUND - $800.00 (a) Motion by Councilor Cook_ seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 10. RECEIVE AND FILE SENIOR CENTER UPDATE (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Council Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 11. APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - CONTROL NET (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 12. RECEIVE MCDONALD LID ENGINEERING COST REPORT (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 13. APPROVE RESOLUTION 82-37 A Resolution Authorizing The City Administrator To Enter Into a Professional Engineering Services Agreement Related To The Public Facilities Component of The Comprehensive Plan and Transferring Contingency Funds. (a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Counselor Stimler to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 14. CITY KEY PRESENTATION (a) The following citizens were presented with keys to the City for their services rendered on the Downtown Committee. Dick Kadel, David Dresser, Larry Barnum, Carol Jones, Madalyn Utz and Roger Brown. page 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 15. HEARINGS OFFICER APPOINTMENT (a) Beth Blount and Adrianne Brockman were asked to come before the Council to give a brief outline of their background. Council questioned applicants regarding their ability, how they would handle conflicts of interest, time frame in which they would respond to an applicant and how they could best fill the position. (b) Councilor Scheckla commented he had talked with both applicants previously and had listened to Beth Blount during a hearings procedure. He felt because of her experience in Beaverton and Mollala, as well as being their first Hearings Officer, and the similarity of problems between Beaverton and Tigard; and the fact she has not had an appeal in Beaverton, she would be the best applicant for the position. (c) Councilor Scheckla moved for appointment of Beth Blount to the position of Hearings Officer. Motion seconded by Councilor Cook. (d) Discussion followed among Council, Staff and Legal Counsel, regarding a back up Hearings Officer. General consensus of the Council was that Adrianne Brockman would be an excellent back up Hearings Officer. (e) Motion carried unanimously for appointment of Beth Blount as Hearings Officer. City Attorney to prepare contract and bring back to Council. 8:00 PM PUBLIC HEARINGS 16. ZONE CHANGE ZCA 2-82 (Tozer - Sims) NPO # 4 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on 3 lots located on the north side of Hampton between 69th & 70th, from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard C-P, Commercial-Professional. The lots were annexed to the City on March 18, 1982 by the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission. (a) Public hearing opened. (b) City Administrator asked that this item be continued because of the lack of time for proper notification to surrounding property owners. (c) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to continue public hearing to May 24, 1982. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 17. ZONE CHANGE ZCA 3-82 (Durham Island) NPO # 5 & # 6. A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on 238.64 acres located generally north of Durham, west of 74th, south of Bonita and east of Hall Blvd, from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-5 & R-7. The area was annexed to the City recently. (a) Public hearing opened. (b) City Administrator asked that this item be continued because of the lack of time for proper notification to surrounding property owners. (c) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to continue public hearing to May 24, 1982. page 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 Approved by unanimous vote of Council 18. ZONE CHANGE ZCA 4-82 (Alderbrook Island) NPO #6 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on 110.5 acres located between 109th and 96th and between Kable Street and Murdock Street, from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7 & R-10. The area was annexed to the City recently. (a) Public hearing opened. (b) City Administrator asked that this item be continued because of the lack of time for proper notification to surrounding property owners. (c) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to continue public hearing to May 24, 1982. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 19. ZONE CHANGE ZCA 5-82 (Bechtold Annexation) NPO #3 A request by the City of Tigard to change the zoning on property located generally west of 121st and north of Gaarde Street from Washington County RS-1 & RU-4 to City of Tigard R-10 and R-7. The area was annexed to the City recently. (a) Public hearing opened. (b) City Administrator asked that this item be continued because of the lack of time for proper notification to surrounding property owners. (c) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to continue public hearing to May 24, 1982. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 20. CIVIC CENTER FINAL REPORT (a) Dr. Charles Samuel, Chairman, Tigard Civic Center Committee, briefly reviewed the Committee's efforts to meet the seven goals and guidelines set by the City Council. He stated they had fulfilled six of the seven goals and now needed the Council to adopt a resolution for this proposal to appear on the June 29, 1982 ballot, so that the committee could begin goal number seven; "develop a campaign strategy for voter approval". (b) Dennis Brun, Architect for this project, presented a scale model of the Civic Center. He reviewed the layout, how this fits in with the revitalization efforts and the benefits of building now. (c) Discussion followed regarding the lake that is proposed by Main Street Development, its size, depth of water and City's liability. (d) City Administrator stated they had been working with the Budget Committee regarding the financing options. This bond issue would be for 4.6 million dollars, which would cost each home owner approximately 30 to 35 dollars. page 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 If the Center is completed now there would be space available for leasing, which would lower the tax rate. (e) Discussion followed regarding purchasing and building versus renting/leasing space to house the City's needs . (f) Mike Marr, 14445 SW 87th Court, representing the committee for Quality Leadership and Communications gave their general support for the Civic Center as a concept and urged Council to present the issue to the voters in a clear, concise and unbiased manner. (g) Motion by Councilor Cook to direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution for the June 29th election for the Civic Center as proposed for 4.6 million, seconded by Councilor Brian. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. (h) Council expressed their appreciation for the time and effort the committee and staff have put into this Civic Center. (i) Gerry Duffy, Committee member stated he was a real skeptic when this project first started; however, with the tremendous support from staff and the architect, he is convinced this will work. He was present tonight to kick off the campaign, at which point he proceeded to distribute "I Support The Tigard Civic Center" buttons. Recess 8:45 PM Reconvene 9:03 PM 21. ORDINANCE APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND GENERAL PLAN AND GRANTING A SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT TO MAIN STREET LAND CORPORATION. (a) Mayor Bishop turned the meeting over to President John Cook, since JB Bishop is his son, he wanted to eliminate any possibility of charges of conflict of interest. (b) Planning Director read memorandum to Council recommending they approve the Planning Commission approval of this application. (c) JB Bishop reviewed the entire project with the Council. He stated he and his staff had been working closely with City staff, Planning Commission, NPO and the Park Board as well as taking into consideration the revitalization plan approved by TURA. (d) Dennis Brun, Architect, Brun/Moreland,Christopher Architects, reviewed the basic elements of this development. He felt the design reflects what is happening in Tigard. This development will be beneficial to the community, the opportunities are tremendous and timing is good. (e) Discussion followed regarding type of grading to be accomplished, soil testing, public improvements, parking and items that would be handled under the Site Design Review. Consensus of Council was this project still needed to be followed either by Planning Commission or City Council, to insure concerns are resolved. page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 (f) Legal Counsel suggested the following be included under Section 2, of the Ordinance: Notice of Site Plan Approval by the Director under T`_gard Municipal Code 18.59.010 through 18.59.100 and Section 18.84.050 (a) (2) shall be given immediately to the Planning Commission and City Council and be subject to appeal and review by those bodies under Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.84.250 (b) (2) and related sections. (g) Further discussion followed regarding full or half-street improvements. (h) Legal Counsel advised the following items be corrected as follows in Section 1. of the Ordinance: b. The applicant shall address the availability of public services to his site, specifically sewer, water and storm drainage. A Public Facilities Plan shall be submitted to the City of Tigard Engineering Division and be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. Ash Avenue shall be improved to full street improvements from end of current improvements from Hill Street to Fanno Creek to approved city standards to a width of 32' except no sidewalks shall be required on the S. E. side of S. W. Ash Avenue. C. The street connecting Pacific Highway and Ash Avenue shall be a public street from and including curb to curb designed to accommodate collector street loads, and at a depth not less than the City of Tigard's collector street standards for cross section. Said street shall contain all public utilities or approved easements. The applicant shall agree to donate to the City of Tigard for public use the two streets which cross the site; f. Specific plans for rough grading in the vicinity of the lake proposed in the Downtown-Fanno Creek Park shall be reviewed by the Park Board. Detailed engineering plans for rough grading in the park area and excavation of the lake shall be submitted to and be approved by the City of Tigard's Engineering Division. Said rough grading shall be accomplished by the applicant in accordance with the approved rough grading plans on the Design Review approval under Tigard Municipal Code, Chapter 18.59. (i) ORDINANCE NO. 82-20 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND GENERAL PLAN AND GRANTING A SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT TO MAIN STREET LAND CORPORATION/JB BISHOP (CPR 8-81, CPR 9-81 AND M2-81) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (j) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve Ordinance No. 82-20 as amended. Approved by unanimous vote of Council, with Mayor Bishop abstaining. 22. RESOLUTION NO. 82-38 DECLARING AN INTENTION TO CONSTRUCT CERTAIN STREET IMPROVE- MENTS WITHIN AN AREA DETERMINED TO BE A STREET IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO BE KNOWN AS SW 74TH AVENUE STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT; DESCRIBING THE PROBABLE TOTAL COST THEREOF; DEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT TO BE BENEFITED AND ASSESSED; APPROVING AND ADOPTING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE WORK AND ESTIMATES OF THE CITY'S ENGINEER, AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING THE GIVING OF NOTICE THEREOF. (a) Public Works Director informed the Council this Resolution of intent had been before them several months ago. Council asked staff to review the design regarding railroad crossing, sidewalk and grade alignment with neighborhood. page 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 Staff has reviewed with the neighborhood, has re-evaluated assessments and re-established prices. A public hearing is scheduled for May 24, 1982. (b) Motion by Councilor Cook,seconded by Councilor Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 23. DURHAM ROAD (a) Chief Adams stated they were developing a Task force approach to this problem along with Public Works. They will be working with DEQ, using their equipment to help with the noise and air quality issue. He stated if the City is going to regulate traffic they will need an ordinance. He also suggested an alter- native truck route might be necessary in the future. (b) Lt. Kelley Jennings reviewed the memorandum submitted by the Police Department addressing issues and suggesting methods for mitigating the problems. (c) Public Works Director stated that Durham Road from Hall Blvd. to Upper Boones Ferry Road is a State Highway and the state will not restrict through truck traffic. Now all the City can do is ask the County to cooperate with restric- tions on Durham Road from Pacific Highway to Hall Blvd. After the County has accepted the resolution to restrict through truck traffic, then an ordinance can be passed for enforcement. The resolution presented tonight should be amended to eliminate State of Oregon property on S. W. Upper Boones Ferry Road and that portion of Durham Road from Hall Blvd. to Upper Boones Ferry Road. The ordinance needed similar amendments so a copy could be mailed with the resolution to the County. (d) RESOLUTION NO. 82-39 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACTION BY THE WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO INITIATE PROHIBITIONS TO THROUGH TRUCK TRAFFIC ON S.W. DURHAM ROAD. (e) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla approving resolution as amended. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 24. CODE ENFORCEMENT REPORT (a) City Administrator stated staff is working on procedure changes and will be presenting to Planning Commission May 4, 1982. Staff wanted Council to be aware of problems being caused by the Tigard Municipal Code. (b) Associate Planner Newton stated in many cases there is not much difference between a permitted use and a conditional use. Staff is proposing to consolidate all of the specific uses into more general use type catagories, then have a definition of each category. That way if you want to locate your business in a particular zone, and the definition of the use type is incompatable with what you want to do, then staff would have a little more discretion to determine if use should be allowed, otherwise proces., could take 6 weeks. She gave example of Phagan's Beauty School conflict :ith code and timing of public hearing process. (c) City Administrator suggested changing level of decision, that conditional uses might be better handled by Hearings Officer, which would only be a two week delay. He cited several situations where the Tigard Municipal Code's page 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 intent was not clear and staff used discretion where possible, but many times discretion is not possible and the process is frustrating. Hopefully, with the new language being presented to the Planning Commission, the process will be cleaned up. Another issue is the corner of Hall and 99W, where a temporary use permit had been used by the Settlemire's Pygmalion Flowers. This temporary use has expired, now School House Antiques has set up business naming Pygmalion Flowers as their employer in the same location. Process is notice, formal warning, followed by a citation. (d) Discussion followed among Council, Staff, Legal Counsel and the Settlemires' regarding issue of outside sales or displays of sales, enforcement of the ordinance and proper procedure to be followed. Nance Stimler excused 11:35 PM 25. ORDINANCE NO. 82-21 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3 OF ORDINANCE NO. 82-18, REGARDING SOLICITATION OF CONSTRUCTION PROPOSALS FOR HOODVIEW LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID # 32) (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook for approval. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 26. RESOLUTION NO. 82-40 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL SEGREGATING THE ASSESSMENT OF GALTON AND MEEKCOMS PROPERTY IN THE VARNS ROAD LID NO. 16. (a) Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Brian for approval. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. Meeting recessed 11:20 PM 11:25 PM Council went into executive session to consider property acquisition per ORS 192.660 (1) (e) and labor relations, per ORS 192.660 (1) (d) . Council and staff discussed property acquisition regarding the Civic Center and the 72nd Local Improvement District. Staff received Council direction regarding future negotiations. City Administrator reported on status of TPOA/Teamsters negotiations and reported on TMEA/OPEU contract. Meeting adjourned 12:30 AM. !y-rC-tom City Recorder (7 Attest: l Mayor page 8 - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 26, 1982 '� 7 f. •d, TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY 14INUTES - APRIL 12, 1982 - 11: 14 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Agency members Wilbur Bishop, Tom Brian, John Cook, Kenneth Scheckla, Nancie Stimler; Staff members: Director of Public Works/ Planning, Frank Currie; Finance Director/City Recorder, Doris Hartig; City Administrator, Robert Jean; Legal Counsel, Tim Ramis; Office Manager, Loreen Wilson. 2. ADVISORY C014MITTEE APPOINTMENTS (a) City Administrator noted that the Selection Committee interviewed interested citizens for positions on the TURA Advisory Committee. (b) Agency member Brian stated he was pleased that there was so much interest in the committee and supported the positions recommended by the Selection Committee. (c) After some discussion regarding the possible appointment of a Chairperson for the committee, Agency member Brian moved to appoint members as recom- mended by the Selection Committee and appoint Pat Furrer as the Chairperson. Agency member Stimler seconded the motion. Approved by unanimous vote of Agency. (d) Those persons appointed were as follows: o Three citizens-at-large: Ima Scott, Lou Krupnick, and Joy Hirl o Planning Commission: Craig Helmer o NPO # 1: Ralph Appleman o Five Chamber of Commerce Representatives: Allan Paterson, Pat Furrer, Bill McMonagle, JoAnn Corliss, and Cheryl Kuhn. o Tigard Park & Recreation Board: Hil Hirl o Water District: James Henderson b Fire District: Eldon Johnson o School District: Pete Taylor o Tigard Library Board: Vince Matarrese 3. SCHEDULE MEETING OF ADVISORY C014MITTEE (a) City Administrator requested Agency set meeting to discuss with Advisory Committee their role and discuss the TURA budget process. (b) Motion by Agency member Scheckla, seconded by Agency member Brian to call meeting for April 28th at 7:30 P.M. (Staff will advise Agency and Committee of location at a later date.) Approved by unanimous vote of Agency. 4. BUDGET PROCESS (a) City Administrator and Finance Director discussed briefly the concerns they have regarding the way an urban renewal agency budget should be processed. Staff will continue to study the issue and report back to the Agency at a later date. 5. ADJOURNMENT: 11 :24 P.M. Agency Chairperson ATTEST: City Recor er PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL � PROGRAM BUDGET APRIL 26, 1982 Community Pro tec Lion Police 6,_597.92 Public Works 21,575.36 Municipal Court 375.15 Planning 632.65 Building 1,067.11 Total Community Protection _ 30 48.19 Home & Community Quality Public Works 5,369.65 Social Services Library 4,998.74 Aged Services 109.42 Youth Services 388.53 Historical Total Social Services 5,496.69 Policy & Administration Mayor & Council 668.34 Administration 1,297.07 Finance 1,797.25 Total Policy & Administration 3,762.66 City Wide Support Functions Non-departmental 16,721.82 Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, eta.) CAPITOL BUDGET Community Protections Road Acquisition & Dev. Parks Acquisition & Dev. Storm Drainage Total Community Protection Support Services Building Improvements DEBT SERVICE General Obligation Bond Bancroft Bond 20 78 i2 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Contract 50,730 l 8 TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 198,248.44 CITY 0F TIS WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Joy Martin, Administrative Assistant Pt DATE: March 18, 1982 RE: Library Lease From December, 1981 to July, 1982, the current library lease rate has tripled. This, along with the current need for more space and better facilities, has caused the Library Board to explore options prior to signing another agreement for the Sorg building. Attached are the three possible options which were available when the Library Board met on March 8, 1982. Since that night, the second option - the Schwary Building - has become unavailable. Recommendation from the March 8th Library Board Meeting: After examining the comparisons of costs in terms of both money and effort, the Library Board recommends the City negotiate an agreement with Sorg. Points they wish to negotiate are the following: (a) a two-year fixed rate; and (b) improvements to the building made by the owner. L 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 _j • - So 5��,��A .rjld ��,51�0 son0 SOL. '-- No,ooC> C4 2 •5 �Q$2 '¢15000 Per lir 33,000 Per yc- Tc�x �uyrv,ecL`S 3. GoSt Per saL,-Zo4- //�� �5e od G �A4w�e , �. lJ4e— Mon41�y -ps43 Csce (� .9 S. Fs �a�C }o. �e •�,is '„� -0/SDOO �U DDU 0uLi tip c1 Csee 0. it E'P, , c6 3 0► �! CwTlc� ? ,O w nD� FS 3 o r' ! IDuctS (G4�G j ctiXCs -T60 Sn,o NI ecuse PLA Con Fixeol Syed,jw, na)k Syc- QX -ensioct. ��1a,n bl�c�,�oo 9 �] . I cojec�ed Los �5ee a-�ac�e.o� 2-7,000 s7 000 o,cbo 15-1000 3v,OGY� ryLo v e_ ? O .A O ` `` �• 1 � 4v C�*�1 slah�vC IC7 fVJ X7,000 /0'),000+move -TO,000+movt YC-GLI2. Ren�,Ul��1t�CS L�G X7,000 X7000 �O,000 r"Lo v e- 9,000.1-moue 70,000 moves Year 3. Ren 57000 L,)C- v*- MO IC-<s3 1 �1 t \O���S CYl O�@r COrhm�.Kia�, �r•p�e.r4��5 �ti� 'r-1�C � �Dw YI�WN C�re1Y ��e �•om �SG.OU ��. SD �2a- s�. �. no'' IncJ,.kdIrir, �-ccx�s, ah� �rlsu_..,nnGe. J ce- Curra-nk V- eS are 4E.s�\e. P teA `o.T �e- �p oua r� 4%VN ior\o- 1 X343.00 '-I 11 7, O O TriSur'artLe. SODO,DD 2�tcrenCe �J� �``JrC� fcdbu�r� OY- COS+ �S}�ma� S �o� mc.j ?. H ea +., cLr A v e Y.-=,143�w n 3. Ca•-ape ,r cI 3, les-�.�Q�.S-Add a d fes { 1-{• 1�0.M�S -S 1C�S�f�oOn1S- �'e�a.> ��'n�Sh�ng S s. Some `jo,.,.nolProo�lnq (,. �a�n.� �e erenc¢ co . 1 cc)SA-S \T,CU-Ae 4o 4e corm' y-%*1 6L-3, O-rot-&-vCAS, 45- 41rne- S PeRT by S4=L\ p r�ciTi iZ�r1G , 1 r��•-� . comp"v\q l Mo u 0.� cos�s Z, lam�o, o,N-,,c\ �- Ktitci be `orovi�ed �oc,� Yi�Q Co mmu,V�t •h�eces� �rokPS- C osis �Y \�,.�1��\-��,•,ng��n��,a� �on�.:..�-S G�-e ��,.n,a-� baS Pd s c�sscx.rne s so" 1 eo Se rcL+,cS civ-e �:x� F VICTOR ATIYEH � GOVERNOR /Q •Gti �N •z �• 5 9 OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR STATE CAPITOL SALEM, OREGON 97310 April 20, 1982 Wilbur Bishop, Mayor City of Tigard 12755 S.W. Ash P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Thank you for your well-documented letter of March 30 sharing your concerns about remarks made at a meeting of the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission. According to Oregon Revised Statutes 199.440 (copy enclosed) , I may appoint a boundary commission member for a four-year term, but the power to remove a commission member from office for legal cause is strictly reserved to the boundary commission. I agree that difficult and controversial decisions on local government concerns benefit from an atmosphere of courtesy and sensitivity to competing points of view. Thank you for your careful and courteous review of Tigard' s interests. I wish you well in future presentations to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission. Si er y, ti Governor VA:mh Enclosure l LOCAL BOUNDARY COMMISSIONS;CITY-COUNTY CONSOLIDATION 199.410 units in the territory described in the petition (3) The Governor shall fix the time and and the public interest would be benefited by place of the first meeting and notify the mem- the establishment of a boundary commission bers of the commission thereof. The first to carry out the purposes described by ORS meeting shall be an organizational meeting. 199.410. 11969 c.494§81 (3) A resolution creating or an order ap- 199.440 Membership; appointment; proving the creation of a boundary commis- qualifications; term; vacancy. (1) A bounda- sion is effective on: ry commission shall have seven members. (a) The date the last county board in the However, if the population of the area subject jurisdiction of the commission adopts the to the jurisdiction of the commission exceeds resolution or order;or 500,000, the commission shall have 11 mem- (b) The date specified in the order, or bers. The Governor shall appoint all members resolution, but not more than 60 days after from a list of names obtained from cities, the adoption of the resolution or order. counties and districts within the area of juris- diction of the boundary commission. The Gov- (4) When a commission is created under ernor shall prepare the list annually and keep c, this section, copies of the resolutions or orders it current so timely appointments will be of the county boards shall be filed with the made as vacancies occur. The Governor shall '— Governor, the Secretary of State, and the endeavor to appoint members from the vari- county clerk and the assessor of each county our cities, counties and districts so as to pr: within the jurisdiction of the commission. vide geographical diversity of representation (5) A commission created as provided by on the commission. this section shall not have jurisdiction of any (2)To be qualified to serve as a member of proceeding initiated prior to the effective date a commission, a person must be a resident of -- of the resolution or order creating such com- the area subject to the jurisdiction of the mission. 11969 c.494 §5; 1971 c.462 §3; 1979 c.645 §1; commission. A person who is an elected or + 1980 c.14§4;1981 c.265§31 appointed officer, agent or employe of a cit-, 199.432 Status of commission as state county, district or other political subdivision agency; application of certain laws. (1) A of this state may not serve as a member of r, boundary commission created under ORS commission. No n.ore than two members of a 199.425 or 199.430 may sue and be sued,enter commission shall be engaged principally in into contracts and perform such other actions the buying, selling or developing of real estate as may be necessary to carry out the provi- for profit as individuals, or receive more than sions of ORS 199.410 to 199.519. half of their gross income as or be principally occupied as members of any partnership, or as (2) A boundary commission is a state officers or employes of any corporation, that is agency as defined in ORS 291.002 (7) and is engaged principally in the buying, selling or not subject to the provisions of ORS 291.202 to developing of real estate for profit. No more 291.226 and 291.371 to 291.385. than two members of a commission shall be (3) A boundary commission employing engaged in the same kind of business, trade, personnel under ORS 199.455 shall provide occupation or profession. `. employe benefits provided to state manage- (3) A member shall be appointed to serve ment service employes. 11979 c.545 §3; 1981 c.265 for a term of four years. A person shall not be §41 elib ble to serve for more than two consecutive 199.435 Organization of commission terms,exclusive of: e+ created under ORS 199.430. (1) The mem- (a) Any service for the unexpired term of a bers of the first board of a commission formed predecessor in office. r under ORS 199.430 shall be appointed within (b) Any term less than four years served ' 90 days after the commission is created. on the commission first appointed. (2) Notwithstanding ORS 199.440, of the (4) A commission may declare the office of ' first appointees to a commission formed under a member vacant for any cause set out by ORS ORS 199.430,one shall serve for one year,two 236.010 or for failure, without good reason, to for two years, two for three years and two for attend two consecutive meetings of the com- four years. The respective terms of the first mission. A vacancy shall be filled by the Gov- appointees shall be determined by lot at the ernor by appointment for the unexpired term. first meeting of the commission. If the Governor has not filled a vacancy with- ►�" t 297 - - �.-__ ..�'��.�w`f'�._ ,..r•.. __ a+1..°..sY::—_r.a-�'....- �rte=-__ '+7�✓�:x-•rr�c:_�.•^. .'`�'�'"��..,.,.�-�s.��._�-". 199.445 MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS 'in 45 c:ays after the vacancy occurs, then, and ary commission within 30 days after the peti- until such time as the vacancy is filled, the tion is filed with the commission. remaining members of a commission shall comprise and act as the full membership of (b) The committee shall review each ad- ..he commission for purposes of ORS 199.445. ministrative rule of the commission prior to 11969 c.494 §6; 1975 c.653 §1; 1979 c.374 §1; 1981 c.265 its adoption. The committee may propose any §51 changes to the commission's rules, policies or practices as it deems necessary or desirable. 199.445 Quorum;voting requirements (4) In addition to its other functions and for certain matters. A majority of the mem- duties, the advisory committee shall review bers of a commission constitute a quorum for the annual budget of the boundary commis- the transaction of business, and a majority of sion and any assessments levied under ORS a quorum may act for the commission. Howev- 199.457. The advisory committee shall meet er, thr approval of a majority of the members with the commission and may make such of the commission is required to: recommendations relating to the budget or (1) Adopt a final order under ORS assessments as it deems necessary or prudent. 199.461. The budget or an assessment levied under (2) Adopt rules under ORS 199.452. [1969 ORS 199.457 shall be effective only when c.494§9; 1971 c.462§41 approved by the advisory committee. 199.450 Advisory (5)A member shall serve for a tern-, of two ry committee; mem- years. Of the m&mbers first appointed, howev- bership; function; term. (1) Each boundary er, four shall serve for terms of one year and commission shall appoint an advisory commit- five shall serve for terms of two years. The tee to advise and assist the commission in respective terms of the members shall be carrying out the purposes of ORS 199.410 to determined by lot at the first meeting of the 199.519. An advisory committee shall consist advisory committee. 11969 c.494 §9a; 1971 c.462 §5; of nine members who are residents within the 1981 c.265§61 jurisdiction of the commission. Except for the public members, to be qualified to serve on a 199.452 Adoption of rules; hearing; committee a person shall be a member of the When effective. (1)A commission shall adopt, governing body of a city, county or district and may from time to time amend, rules to located within the jurisdiction of the commis- govern the proceedings before the commission. sion. The members shall include two city A proceeding shall be conducted in accordance officers, two county officers, two district offi- with the rules of the commission. cers and three public members, one of whom (2) A rule or an amendment to a rule shall shall serve as chairperson of the advisory not take effect unless the commission first committee. A governing body shall not have holds at least one public hearing regarding more than one member on the advisory com- the rule or amendment. Copies of the rules of mittee. When only one county is under the the commission and amendments thereto shall jurisdiction of a boundary commission, then be available to the public and shall be distrib- the committee shall consist of three city offi- uteri to each city council and county and dis- cers, one county officer, three district officers trict board within the jurisdiction of the com- and the two public members. Any member of mission. the committee may designate �? Y grate a representative who is an officer or employe of the member's (3) A rule or an amendment to a rule shall city, county or district to appear and act for take effect 30 days after it is adopted by the that member at any meeting of the committee. commission unless a later date is provided by (2) The adviso the commission in the order adopting the rule. ry committee shall meet at [Formerly 199.5251 least once every three months to review the policies and practices of the commission. The 199.455 Expenses of members; em- advisory committee shall also meet on the call ployes; cooperation of local governments. of the commission. (1) Each member of a bounds ry ssion (3)(a) The committee may review each may receive travel and other expenses i inc- petition filed with the commission except a dental to the performance of duties. petition filed under ORS 199.495. If the com- m (2) A commission shall employ an execu- ittee reviews a - petition, it may submit a tive officer and may employ administrative, recommendation on the petition to the bound- clerical and technical assistants for carrying eP 298 Tigard-Tualatin-King City-Sherwood-Metzger-Washington Square RECE�vE® T 16A AKS ORB A"M BEER April 15, 1982 �`°R ?� Q 1982 � �� C!� OF j1GARD Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission 320 SW Stark, Suite 530 Portland, Oregon 97204 Ladies and Gentlemen: The Public Affairs Committee of the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce has voted to advise you of our concern with regard to a situation arising from several recent hearings on City of Tigard annexation proposals. As Tigard area business people, we are somewhat concerned with the apparent change in the boundary commission's attitude toward local government annexation proposals. In the past the commission has asked the Citv of Tigard, through commission staff and directly at public meetings, to refrain from submitting single lot annexations and other small or "piecemeal" proposals. The City was instructed to work with its non-residents to obtain support for the annexation of larger areas. And, in fact, the City was specifically instructed to work on the- submission of "in-fill" peninsular and island annexations. Now the commission appears to be faulting the City of Tigard for submitting the types of proposals it called for and encouraged. We trust that it the boundary commission has, indeed, changed its policy of encouraging annexation of logical areas within the Urban Growth Boundaries of governmental jurisdictions, that those affected public agencies will be advised of this change in philosophy. A second area of concern involves the commission°s decision to penalize Tigard°s business and residential taxpayers by purposely delaying annexations beyond the deadline for placing annexing properties on the City tax rolls. We must emphasize our objection to this practice . s 12995 S.W. PACIFIC HWY. SUITE A ❑ TIGARD, OR 97223 0 639-1656 :- Boundary commission -- page 2 Such premeditated acts of "punishment" by an arm of the state government are distasteful if not illegal. We do not see the commission°s charge as being one of meting out punishment for perceived procedural violations. The public trust requires that commissioners perform within the intent of the law to review and act upon boundary changes in an unbiased manner prescribed by state annexation statutes. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Dr. Charles H. Samuel, Chairman Public Affairs Committee CC_ Tigard City Council Gov. Victor Atiyeh Rep. Norm Smith a , 5 LEGAL SERVICES Control Actual Control Year to Budget Expend- Budget Date iture Actual 1981 July 6,903 6,903 1981 August 6;261 6j�261 1981 September 5,525 5,525 1981 October 10,472 10,472 29, 161 29, 161 1981 November 8,270 10,934 37,431 40,095 1981 December 6,270 6,133 43,701 46,228 1982 January 6,270 7,242 49,971 53,470 1982 February 6,270 7,844 56,241 61 ,314 1982 March 6,270 10,913 62,511 72,227 1982 April 6,270 68,781 1982 May 6,270 75,051 1982 June 8,595 83,646 TOTAL 83,646 -0- This is submitted for Council information and review. C:ti.�/ CITY OF T1 WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council /► FROM: Joy Martin, Administrative Assistant C/ DATE: April 22, 1982 RE: Reimbursement of Rebate for Police Vehicles The contract with Carlson Chevrolet, dated November 1.9, 1980, was for two police vehicles at a total cost of $16,598.00. This includes a deduction made possible by joining with Beaverton during the bidding process. In April, 1981, Carlson made a rebate to the City in the amount of $800 based upon a directive from the home office dated March 6, 1981. This is after the contract was awarded. Since this time, the home office has further clarified the directive and now disallows the rebates. After discussing this matter with Beaverton, Chief Robert Adams, Pete Carlson and the City Administrator, I recommend the City honor the original contract which follows the competitive bidding requirements and make the reimbursement. I also recommend the check be made out to both Pete Carlson Chevrolet and to General Motors. This is in accordance with the decision made by the City of Beaverton. 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 i, CITYOFTIGMW WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Joy Martin, Administrative Assistant Pt DATE: April 22, 1982 RE: Reimbursement of Rebate for Police Vehicles The contract with Carlson Chevrolet, dated November 19, 1980, was for two police vehicles at a total cost of $16,598.00. This includes a deduction made possible by joining with Beaverton during the bidding process. In April, 1981, Carlson made a rebate to the City in the amount of $800 based upon a directive from the home office dated March 6, 1981. This is after the contract was awarded. Since this time, the home office has further clarified the directive and now disallows the rebates. After discussing this matter with Beaverton, Chief Robert Adams, Pete Carlson and the City Administrator, I recommend the City honor the original contract which follows the competitive bidding requirements and make the reimbursement. I also recommend the check be made out to both Pete Carlson Chevrolet and to General Motors. This is in accordance with the decision made by the City of Beaverton. 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-417-; MEMORANDUM t L February 11, 1982 TO: City Administrator FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: Reimbursement RE: Carlson Chevrolet (Police Vehicle Vendor for Fiscal Year 80/81) Sir: The City received a letter from the above requesting an $800 reimburse- ment ($400 per vehicle) for vehicles purchased last year. Mr. Carlson made a rebate to the City in the amount of $800 based on a Chevrolet Central Office Directive dated March 6, 1981, authorizing a $400 cash bonus to fleet purchases, by R.E. Cook, General Sales Manager. The Assistant Zone Manager, K.C. Fritz, advised Mr. Carlson that the incentives on police package vehicles had previously been applied, and that action to recover the debit from fleet customers is being reviewed by Chevrolet. There is no evidence to support any incentives were applied to the fleet purchase of police vehicles involved in the joint purchase agreement of the Beaverton-Tigard and Carlson Chevrolet. I do not feel that reimbursement is appropriate at this time: and further, Chevrolet should be required to document the incentives alluded to in the fleet purchases of police package vehicles. Nor do I feel that the dealer should stand the loss, as he acted in good faith based on the above mentioned rebate policy on fleet purchases. Mr. Carlson has been very cooperative in servicing customers of fleet purchases. I have been in contact with the Beaverton Purchaisng Department relative to their response to this issue. They are referring the matter to their legal staff for review. I have received a copy of the Beaverton letter sent to K.C. Fritz, Assistant Zone Manager, stating their position at this time. Copies of this letter and other material from Carlson Chevrolet are included with this memorandum. It is my recommendation that the City Attorney coordinate with the Legal Staff of Beaverton to resolve this issue. R.B. Adams Chief of Police cc: City Recorder RECEIVED CITY Of TIGARD CARLSON CHEVROLET P. 0. BOX 636 SANDY, OREGON 97055 668-4101 February 2, 1962 Doris Hartig City Recorder City of Tigard 12420 SW Main Tigard, UR 97223 Dear Ms. Hartig: I enclose docume.;tation pertaining to the debit of $800.00 which I received from Chevrolet Motor Division over the rebate payment of the 2 Malibu Police Sedans sold by Carlson Chevrolet to the City of Tigard. I felt at the time that these vehicles qualified for the rebate, and the Chevrolet Zone Office could noL convince me otherwise, so I made the effort to apply for the rebates on your behalf. Much later, 1 was informed that it did not qualify because Chev— reolt paid price protection and bid assistance, which was included in my bid price. Months have passed since the Portland Zone intervened in my behalf, so I have hoped and I assumed that Chevrolet Motor Division would not pursue the matter of the debit. Unfortunately, I was informed today of the debit situation. Now, I must ask to be reimbursed $800.00 by the City of Tigard. This is the amount that was paid to you by Chevrolet. 1 am sorry to ask, but obviously I did my best in your behalf, and this $800.00 was an extra dividend that I only wish would have been paid by Chevrolet without challange. I cannot afford to stand this monetary loss, so please give this problem your utmost consideration. Sincerely, � 3 ✓� Stanley W. Carlson, Pres. \( 641 A L.tachments cc: Chevrolet Motor Division _ _ OREM CHEVROLET Portland Oregon Zone October 2, 1981 Mr. S. W. Carlson Carlson Chevrolet Co. P.O. Box 636 Sandy, Oregon 97055 Dear Pete: This will confirm our telephone conversation this date concerning your previous correspondence and our many tele- phone conversations pertaining to the 1981 Malibu Incentive Program applications which are herewith being returned. Pete, as I explained, this matter has been thoroughly. reviewed with our Central Office Fleet and Financial Departments. The attached applications are ineligible because the incentive "Special Police Car Package Pricing" had previously been extended on each of the units listed on the applications. While I know you are familiar with the guidelines of the 1981 Malibu Fleet Incentive Program, I am attaching a copy of same and have high-lighted the clause pertaining to Ineligible deliveries. (On page 3 and final decisions on page 5 which cover the units listed on your application.) r� Regarding the matter of the 9 units where the Malibu Fleet Incentive Program payment has been paid to the fleet customer, your comments concerning any possible debit action iand/or any action by Chevrolet to recover said payment from the fleet customers is again being reviewed with our Central Office and you will be advised of the final disposition in the near future. ! Thanks for your patience and cooperation. Very truly y oursr;- / / C. FRITZ, - 3 , n Assistant Zone Manager. KCF:and t Attachments Gnevrotct 61.tor Do.i,ton C;cnc•nl Motors Corh:;•.,r;;,,, 15005 S W.Tu.%;al:n V.!41vy ti !i ;;ry,[lo,;verton,Or.gon Mail Address:P.O.Box 429,Beaverton.Oregon 9700 :HP IDLET F;-]�'_' Chavrolet Motor Division General Motors Corporation Inter-Organization Letter To Commercial Accow.tirg Center Location Southfield, Michigan From R. W. Nissen Location #19-Portland, Oregon Subject DEALER INVOICE REQUESTS Date January 21, 1982 Attention: QaPel W: i��� Duplicate copies of invoices have been requested by Carlson Chevrolet of Sandy, Oregon , Code Number Please forward these documents as soon as possible. Inwice # Date Amount lDD105461 12-21-81 $3,600.00 dr. Very truly yours, R. W. Nissen Zone Business Manager RWN:lh f F e�+svWo6..ite0'g'Oef ofnr+swef rol/.lofsrt CerpperoGew wptciol�ccevnHng Center ►.O.Set 20:0 r. Doeh,Mklagow 48232 ' peoferCede 19073 ® 1wro0cePfe. IDD10546 rove 1 - • Mreke DeN 1 / 1/81 ' pe*cripdon Arweunf _ -. TO DEBIT YOU FOR ACTIVITY PROCESSED . On DECEMBER 219 1981. REFER TO ATTACHED LETTER. INVOICE ACTIVITY VEHICLE IDENT. DEBIT NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER REASON -�1+ SIP PRC'ALON MALIBU.FLT6013 1GIAT69LXBZ419959 035 400.00DB ^�tL '� SP PRC ALON MALIBU.FLTC1113 1G1AT69L3BZ419964 035 400.00DB ' SP PRC ALOl1 MALI8U.FLTCj-jS4 iG1AT69L7BZ419966 035 -'400.00DB ?_ SP PRC ALON MALISU.FLT C17?7 IGIAT69LXBZ419976 035 400.00DS �r��� L SP PRC ALON MALIBU.FLT •14 5 1G1AT69L4BZ420055 �. 035 400.00DB tyw"'T SP PRC ALOM MALIBU.FLT ••17�� 1 G1 AT59L7BZ4200S'5 03S 400.OODB •� �,(.3,�u}-x�BP .PRC ALON pALIBU.FLT ING 1G1AT69H9SZ421293 035 400.00DS ��Jtt�lf _ SP PRC WLON MALIEU.FLTQ IFQ(-, I G1 AT69HXSZ421299 035 400.00DS SP PRC ALON MALIBU.FLTr jyj2 1G1ATE9H3BZ421354 035 400.00DB { f g We )..,So.'0107 Mot these goods were D•odu od iw complionce riff.all op l.cobl.reetn•e^.^'+of s ,;on-E.7-d d 12 e-n+.Fa Looe-S-o^do•ds ec-,ata—,d•d e^d V" .opr'ewMt 9,,d order*of the U.,ted Store-peoor.wsowt of lohor inu.d und.r Secswn c ,, cNf.eawMi•end /Wdret* CARLSON CHEVROLET CO R 34815 PROCTOR BLVD BX 636 --- --- SANDY OR 9705-5 co Ir - Its". 7p .. CHEVROLET Central Office 29 t © March 6, 1981 TO ALL CHEVROLET DEALERS We are pleased to announce a 111981 Malibu Fleet incentive Program." This Program is designed to stimulate immediate Malibu sales and orders from fleet accounts, including dealers rental and leasing companies (as defined) . The "1981 Malibu Fleet Incentive Program" is effective March 9, 1981 and continues through April 20, 1981. The Program includes all new and unused 1981 Model Malibus and Malibu Classics, including Station Wagons, .but excluding El Caminos. Chevrolet will make a $400 cash bonus payment to the fleet purchaser of a Malibu o __Malibu Classic ,-,orderedp��r—delivered arch 9, 1981 through April 20, 1981.6 This cash bonus will be id p by check made payable to the fleet ser and mailed to the dealer for his presentation to the fleet user. In the case of assign- ment of the bonus to the dealer, a check will be made payable to the dealer. The Bona Fide Sold Order Summary and Certification Form for eligible orders not delivered during the *program period will be mailed under separate cover and must be received at the Zone or by a Zone Representative on or before Apr IT22,-'9$i — — — _ You should immediately formulate action plans to fully capitalize on the increased sales opportunities afforded by this activity. I urge you to carefully read the attached dealer guidelines and immediately review the activity details with your sales organization. If there are questions concerning any phase of this program, contact your Zone office for further explanation. The support of all Chevrolet dealers in the 111981 Malibu Fleet Incentive Program" is essential . A total effort will help to generate the business momentum needed to improve sales and profits. This is a time when your personal leadership is required to make 1981 the kind of year we want it to be. "Let's Keep America Rolling!" Yo truly, V. E. General Sales Manager REC/jw Attachments Chevrolet Motor Dmsion General Motors Corporat.on 30007 Van Dyke Avenue.Warren.Wchigan 48090 - 3 - INELIGIBLE DELIVERIES (Continued) Vehicles rented or leased to a dealer or dealer personnel for purposes of conducting dealer business. Vehicles delivered or transferred out of any dealer, dealer-owned or deaier- controlled activity, including but not limited to service loaners, company vehicles, driver education, rental vehicles, demonstrators, etc. Vehicles delivered or transferred into any dealer, dealer-owned or dealer- controlled activity, including but not limited to demonstrators, service loaners, company vehicles, driver education, etc. (Lease units and rental units are acceptable as defined in Eligible Deliveries.) Vehicles previously used by GM or any GM Division in company service. Vehicles delivered to retail or wholesale purchasers for domestic or foreign resale purposes. Vehicles exported or resold by purchasers of more than one unit from dealer within three months shall not be eligible for the cash bonus regardless of whether the dealer knew the purchasers intended to export or resell the vehicles. ,. `...a�•..rGy'.yi�:�:' •7:4�q4..�:!'S:k.A '�'�'+—mac .K..• •e—•..— � —_ - —... OTHER PROGRAM GUTA LINES Eligible vehicles claimed by the dealer must be supported through receipt by Chevrolet of properly completed retail delivery data indicating eligible deliveries or transfer dates in accordance with the provisions of the Chevrolet Dealer Distribution Manual . No payments will be made until delivery data has been transmitted and received by Chevrolet. Dealer accounting records must support the sale, lease or rental of eligible vehicles claimed under the program. Accordingly, each delivery of an eligible vehicle must be supported by documents in dealer files showing that the dealer has received full cash payment or a finance contract for such vehicles signed by the dealer and the purchaser or that the dealer has established a valid accounts receivable for such vehicles. Lease or rental by dealer-controlled activities must be supported by lease or rental agreements that are properly executed. All applications for payment are subject to verifications and audits under the normal procedures already established by Chevrolet with dealers under the terms of the General Motors Dealer Sales and Service Agreement. Any vehicle claimed and/or paid an allowance under this program will not be considered as an eligible vehicle under any other incentive or allowance program, except as may be provided within any such program. Refer to the attached Definition of Terms. - 5 - DEALER APPLICATION (Continued) Each application covering delivery of eligible vehicles to dealer rental department or dealer-controlled or wholly-owned rental subsidiary must be supported by an affidavit stating the date the vehicle was transferred or delivered to rental service, rental dates and total revenue mileage accumu- lated. To be eligible, vehicles must accumulate at least 1 ,000 miles of revenue mileage and must be held in rental service for a minirium of four months. However, applications and affidavits for dealer rentals may be submitted as soon as the required minimum mileage has accumulated. The final date for receipt of rental applications at the Zone or by a Zone representative is January 15, 1982. CANCELLATION Chevrolet Motor Division reserves the right to cancel , amend or revoke this incentive activity due to circumstances beyond its control . TAX STATUS The liability of all taxes. applicable to payments under this incentive program is the responsibility of the recipient and not of General Motors Corporation or Chevrolet Motor Division. AUDIT Chevrolet Motor Division reserves the right to audit dealership records and disqualify any sales for which a cash bonus payment was improperly claimed by the dealer. Such audits will be conducted and any monie"mproperly paid any party based upon dealer representation shall be charged back to such deafer, In the event an irregularity is observed in a claim, Chevrolet may reject the claim before or after j payment and dealer shall have the burden of establishing i that the sales for which a payment is claimed were in fact eligible under these i guidelines. i FINAL DECISIONS ones @ thN thi.sA.nceetttve..program,._Qther. tha .R - --•- .���&.�ssta�eP;a�`r�1a�I.. ;�Lq;vtht�i�terpretati4r�o_ o�4 Chevrolet- otor,-Diy_isa ® ul o � m roc c c�� � E� o.n C U -79 O C c Cr CLS c r F-01 C` a ;,= •C•� °N' m «M y :a•C `U .1 N . Q7 N i+ co N N y `� O e�V— C L 61 C �' L. VJ E p-0 C Y�Jj•E ' O q c o = nom e�`o no o rn -,i:�.'^ D Q'O to c m Co u c y0>- 15 N T W m.? ro t a O Q c O g CL CD E7 Q •J ' w O ami ¢ •� O d m O H m W L }, U p d d CD H . OHO O C"O - C a •fl.L °� U S•- m - O C 'D Z W N �.. i.+ = p.D "U c s y �v E c W m C d ,F q L _ L y.) O m Y. ` a o rn W-`�- a C v C crn�' ='.0 a' "' aEi O ~ a) ti iq 'i Q E Q EE O ` Q r w y �+ j a' d n O.S Lj LL� CL W O C ` •; C �. «. 3 No m > m r; QI t O Cl eO d.'".0 -. OO 'C m.°1 ..+L > p �i O W . Q (Qr r W C of w t0.�� y E �•' ` T a- U' = C W .rP W c C O C as eo > > N.� ` �• ''J c- O Q i .0 C •aNi•N O H a W U A c -+� e O O o m Q m •. W n• °/ ry c a� Ll p co F zr W .c•2 _7 U W 6W C ~ T Q W ` e`a Lal y t-+ N Q.0 rl D c.� � O L•1 Ui i E C ui L �.'.. > i+ eu L �p d L c �.. c �' w N y O . - W , '� O O C1 W eo C�' c r a_ J L i y p E•� O >a � rlcc U us �' y CL. cr) Ln Tl a'° - m eco Z a o W ..-.9.E c Q L Z lam{. ui m eco_� C -5 c -c-0 1 � � ori � d ~ � W 0 '` w O �� V T pp ,�a' m 0) CDLL to c ?3 LLv > eO a IL 83!= W m N ceoi w to E 2C j CO VLu ��P F .� Y� - - W•r W'OCL:g >< N - U Z.0 F-C"�L w.0 N m ;c Cc CJ LU � m _ Lu ku oa !b.himm c W 0 ar .d '0 _ w 2 aa. J CL E ai rn a Qo Qo o in O m ca ' W O 0 W �0 . .sp m ` v! - m r-4 ri ri .-4 r j r-1 W n p Oq O M G CO CO co co m cn S E N `O 0 tt t W E z F- E ev o r�i .`�-� .�i �i C- C, G E v cc 0 m in M PR r--% in rIN C d`. •c Q y A tOi qrw- W a Z 7 w r "" �r- tu p S 7 N W o f a^ .C z I Y— w !k f W N C _ h W Z � Q > c > c �` c1 .c to L't Z m C� m y m o W O L� �fl �D lD LO to W '.. w.� E a, c W . :. J m c, C, O m Z.ar N F E E v p d r-4 m O O 0 o ° W a o to - .7 •S s Q p O G«+ w Oto Q F- O f" G `a . J C N0 W N N N '` N d C a' - �. a '- Q O U W W '� m m LT.'. G^ ED U. O c O w m` W -.2 z r2 ` m o X X M � C- � m m m V> c p O .. F- p v J J J J J J � E E , E r Wt- Om F m a W a '_' m m c, a� m w >� o p � cc Q �_ � a 0 d Q. cr t�- d > cc � S S =L -L -j 7d m L C O uZi Ga .a t t: a > d j o •-f .-4 -4 -1 r-4 .••1 �j E V E tL to �N a U O m W c N •a O C7 M C7 L7 M ar 41 T WCC J U O W V _�+ •-1 r'1 1 r-{ .-1 ri U p Q W r .Q p M 1 , W W LL W N N cc C x ` Q D a m C Q to W W p _ o ` •d LUC)O ® ol�G7 L co H 1LQ O a T> 0.CL m Q Ww Q > w d CLCLm 4 C* C3 UO CITY OF T I G A R D PURCHASE ORDER 12420,S: W. MAIN TIGARD, OREGON 97223 No. 5321 F DATE_NnArambpr 19- 1080 1 Carl son Chevrolet DELIVER TO Police _ DEP VENA _ Hwy 26 ADDRESS Tigard, Oregon l- Sandy_ Or �On 97(155 J REO. NO. (ALL PRICES F.O.B.DESTINATION UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED HEREIN.) ACCOUNT NO. QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT MAIL INVOICE IN DUPLICATE TO CITY RECORDER. - SHOW PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER ON INVOICE. 1. 1. 1-7011 2 ea 1981 Malibu 4-dr sedan Police Units, 8299DO 16,598 00 as per bid specifications, to include one (1) shop manual and one (1) parts manual Color Code 21 (Light Blue Poly) SPECIAL INSi IONS CONFIRMING TOTAL AMOUNT 16,598 00 r� 1 PURCHASE ORDER VOID ONE (1)YEAR FROM DATE OF ISSUANCE. AUTHORIZED SIGN RE L=� s _ VENDOR'S CO�'Y 1 • 2 BEAVERTON February 8, 1982 S. C. Fritz Assistant Zone Manager Chevrolet hotor Division P.O. Box 429 Beaverton, OR 97005 Re: Reimbursement of rebates Beaverton-Tigard police vehicles Dear Mr. Fritz, As you know, the City has received a request from Mr. Carlson of Carlson Chevrolet to reimburse his company for $1,600, the amount of a rebate which the City received from General Motors, in connection with our purchase of four 1981 Malibus for our police department. The City of Tigard participated in the bid process, also received a rebate, and has been similarly asked to reimburse Carlson Chevrolet. Chief Adams has asked that I handle communications with GM on this matter and that he be advised of any developments. My first impression was that if GM feels that the City was not entitled to a rebate which GM paid, why hasn't GM itself asked for its return? Although I understand that your contractual arrangement with Carlson allows you to transfer the collection responsibility to him, this doesn't change the issues, and if anything complicates the process. Our records are open to the public. We are obviously subject to question if we make a payment to a vendor and do not receive materials or services in exchange. Accordingly I must have adequate supporting documentation and ,justification to approve this payment. At a minimum, I will need to have this reviewed by our City Attorney and may ultimately need City Council approval. City of Beaverton 0 4950 S.W. Hall Boulevard s Beaverton, Oregon 97005 s (503)644-2191 €C. C. Fritz -- page two There are two items which GM will have to provide before I can authorize payment: 1. If the City is to honor the request, it must be based on proof that the City was not originally entitled to"the rebate. According to Mr. R.E. Cook's letter of March 6, 1981 : "The Program includes all new and unused 1981 Model Malibus and Malibu Classics, including Station Wagons, but excluding E1 Caminos. "Chevrolet will make a $400 cash bonus payment to the fleet purchaser of a Malibu or Malibu classic, ordered or delivered March 9, 1981 through April 20, 1981." I understood you to say that the basis for disqualification is that an allowance was claimed and/or paid under another incentive allowance program, and that this. purchase did not otherwise qualify under the "Eligible Deliveries" section of the guidelines. I ask that G4 establish when and what allowances were given, and provide a copy of the "Eligible Deliveries" sectionof the guidelines for reference, in order that our City Attorney may review the entitlement question. 2. If payment is to be made to Carlson Chevrolet and not GM, it is also necessary to obtain adequate assurances from GM that Carlson Chevrolet will not later avoid the debit with GM. We would prefer that any reimbursement be to Cif directly, since we received the rebate from GM. If you have the opportunity to relate this to the pourers that be at (LM, you might mention that Mr. Carlson was under no obligation to seek this rebate for us since he, received our purchase order .before the fleet bonus program was announced. I feel it was Mr Carlson's dedication to customer service that caused him to advise us of the rebate program. I believe that he was acting in good faith, relying on the guidelines which he had before him. We are appreciative of his efforts. But now that he is aware of the risk he is taking, I can only expect that we will not be given this type of service in the future. Sincerely, Douglas Edmunds Purchasing Supervisor cc Chief Robert E. Adams, Tigard Poli,:e Department Michael Dowsett, Beaverton City Attorney RD March 23, 1982 Ci ®F •IG WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON 1 Mrs. Carol Weaver, Director Tigard Senior Center 8815 S.W. O'Mara Tigard, Oregon 97223 SUBJECT: Follow-up from March Meeting Dear Carol: I want to thank you and all the others who helped with our recent discussion on "loose ends". My notes indicate the following as our generally agreed upon timetable and who was to do what: V ®Plantings: City to plant trees by 7/31/82. . .Eagle Scout Bill Nesbaum to work bark by #/31/82. . .City to complete landscape plan and sprinkler plan by /31/82. . . *Sprinklers: Contractor to refill trenches with available backfill, adjust and test sprinklers by 4/15/82 or sooner. . . •Clearing: City to clear construction debris by 4/15/82. . .44"AX, *Fill Dirt: Mayor to contact contractor at high school regarding top soil. . . Clayton Nyberg to contact Meridian Hospital regarding fill dirt. . .100 yards needed between now and 4/15/82. . . *Grading: Seniors to contact Bob Gray about offer to do rough grading from 4/14/82 - 4/30/82. . .City to do final grading from 5/1/82 - 5/15/82. . . *Seed: City to seed and plant ground cover by 5/15/82. . . *Bark Dust: Seniors to obtain and spread by 5/15/82. . . *Plantings: Find shrubs and plantings by Seniors and volunteers as needed. . . ®Mainten- General lawn care and area maintenance by City. . .Water provided ance: by Seniors. . . t. 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 Mrs. Carol Weaver March 23, 1982 Page 2 Other miscellaneous items discussed and agreed upon were: •Puddles in floodway - Seniors to drain as needed. . .City to assist if requested. . . ®Basement and ceiling leaks - Public Works Director to contact contractor. . . ®Damaged eaves - Claire Mead, Operations Superintendent, to correct with insurance carrier. . . *Doors and weatherstrip - Public Works Director to contact architect and contrac- tor. . . ®Chamberlain drain field - City to contact County. . . *Back door lamp - Seniors to contact Tigard electrician. . . •Clerestory windows - Public Works Director to contact contractor for long stick and screens. . . *Passive heating/cooling - Public Works Director to request that architect meet with Carol Weaver and Vern Christensen. . . The final item we discussed is the renewal of the agreement between the City and the Senior Center. The current agreement is extended by mutual consent through April. Administrative Assistant Joy Martin will work with Carol Weaver in updating the agreement to take to Council by the end of April. The City would like to accept your offer to let us hold the Washington County Public Officials Caucus at the Center the evening of May 6, 1982 if that is still appropriate. As always, thank you for your assistance in these matters. Yours truly, Robert W. Jean City Ad istrator cv cc: Ma r and Council ank Currie, Public Works Director Claire Mead, Public Works Superintendent Joy Martin, Administrative Assistant JOHN M. PETERSON & ASSOCIATES PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYING 2724 S.E. Sunflower Ct. Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 (503) 648-3820 March 23, 1982 City of Tigard Job / 0382001 12755 S.W. Ash Ave. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Mr. Clarno Horizontal Primary Control Net Revised Proposal for Consulting P.L.S. Services I. GENERAL: (1) With-'-the finan.cial ,resources presently available to the .City, there are =ttio. :g en' e L .options, which I have outlined below. I would strongly;`recomm"end option number two because of its immediate benefit to, the City. and its cost effectiveness. Option one while not without merit, would only have vary long range benefias .and those I feel would be minimal. (2) Option `,i : Very thinly spread control throughout the City. Because of .site requirements most points would be located in places very difficult to use for local control. Extensive local control would have to be established before this option would be of any real benefit. (3.) Option 2: This option will establish a good density (at least one point each one-half mile) of control over about one-third i of.;the City.,. It will concentrate on the area where the need will 'tie first. It will establish a good solid basis for future expansion as the resources become available. II. SCOPE: (1) My proposal is for the second option above, and is outlined in yellow on the attached map, future additions to the control net are shown in pink on the same map. These additions will be kept in mind, while establishing the specific points, so that additions can be made without duplicating work. (2) Some reconnaissance work has already been done to assure that this is the best workable proposal. (3) The portion of the control net, covered by this proposal, contains some 65,000 to 70,000 feet of traverse. While only r detailed field reconnaissance will tell for sure, it is anticipated that thirty to forty traverse stations will be tied to control points "Beall Mtn. " ,, "Tigard" and "Sylvania. " 'j (4) This project, as proposed here in, following; will consist of the (a) Detailed reconnaissance to determine specific locations of control points where they will be most accessible and where proper lines of sight can be maintained. (b) Once the specific locations of the control points have been determined, the physical monuments will be set. Traverse points will consist of 5/8" iron rods with aluminum cap, brass cap, or other material mutually agreed upon. (c) Next the field measurements will be made using Procedures described under "methods" below. (d) State plane coordinates will then be computed for all control points , based on the control monuments listed under "3" above. (e) The finished product will be in the format of a record of survey, drawn to scale, showing the relative location of all control points. The record of survey will also describe the physical point and give the bearings and distances between adjacent points and list the state plane coordinates for each point. While the original record of survey will be filed with the county surveyor, the City will be furnished a mylar copy of the record of survey. (5) All traverse lines will close on themselves or on a known point, and will close with an error of less than 'I in 20,0001 which is the closure required for second order, class II traverse work according to N.O.A.A. standards. III. METHODS: (1) All angles will- be measured eight times with a theodolit graduated to 20". Angles will be read to 5" and the mean of the eight repetitions will be used in the calculations. (2) All distances will be measured with an electronic distance measuring device (E.D.M.) , and at least three readings will be taken. The vertical angles will be measured in both the direct and inverted positions, and the mean will be used to compute the horizontal distance. IV. SUMMARY: Upon completion of this proposal, the City will have a horizontal Primary control net of 35 to 40 points that will be of immediate i and long lasting benefit to the City. They will : cover a little over one-third of the area of the City. This is where the present and near future development will be the greatest. This control net will allow the City to have existing and future street improvement and utility projects located on a common grid. This will be of far reaching benefit to the City. Other than the fee , stated under costs, there will be no expenditure of City money or personnel. V. COST: Total cost to the City for all services described above will be $7,250.00. VI. PAYMENT: Billings will be submitted in two portions. One half of the fee , less ten percent, will be billed after completion of all field work. The remainder of the fee will be billed upon furnishing the City with a recorded copy of the record of survey, a copy of the field notes , a copy of a log stating the steps that were gone through and a copy of the calculations. Payment to the Consultant shall be within fifteen days of billing. i VII. Every effort will be made to maintain the excellent working j relationship that we have enjoyed to this point. VIII. This proposal to be in effect for 90 days from the date on it. Work to start within 10 working days of the receipt of written acceptance , unless otherwise mutually agreed upon. Upon acceptance of this proposal, please sign and return one copy. i Sincerely yours , �'&? "41P ohn M. Peterson, P.Z.S. Accepted , 1982 i I Name Title jmp/wma Attachments . ••' r � r 1 ��7.7cf7CeY' r��a.3C fiv9d C��/�,s a� ��/ c•�grh� ja��.+�c.�t5 TO ...r r °'' � pp _ 33, 6 Z �D.3.4cl - 001) 5S7,.578 ewclt✓c��C <veO /—�crlg--63) 7fs� � . cpal Poy,Pv�7� �. ,G� sic. cervices S�GLif�.-vices ��,� �r ''�Z 503.35 � /�pS0•�7 404,.70 700,O0 4�SZ0./0 '79G.4'0 H 99 If _.. _. G ._-. , . . . . .. • - - - 4.e7.SZ - .. S 7e.75- 2) 7S2,S9S. O7) Z, 9/0.co - 15-10-0 z7 /S)z 54.75- REQUISITION C C®y OF TIV RD WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON DATE - CHECK ONE: =1 I want to buy the following. Please research. Foward to Pur- chasing Coordinator. . G7 I have researched the following (attached quote information). r Please issue a Purchase Order. Forward to Purchasing Coordinator. IZI I have ordered the following. Please issue a confirming Purchase Order. Forward to Purchasing Coordinator. ` �-haveeived.-the-fo1Zowingw Please make payment, Forward to. Accounting. Received: Date I�}'it iaZs AA -P.O. # A DATE REQUIRED .^ TO OTHER INFORMATIONCi a,y `: ,L-..4 ACCOUNT QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT _PRICE TOTAL PRICE r- ^i. � .� •��, :1�N.'��'i E r^,.i� ':.1 4C ��JC;.t• °vr;i...t.°r .5 TOTAL AMOUNT $ RECOMMENDED VENDORS DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL jv> Distribution: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL White - Pur. Coord. or (for 600 Accounts over $2500, and all 700 Accounts) Accounting Yellow - Department Copy r Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. J ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 Tckphnne(503)639-3453 1 X980 November 13, 1980 NpV . CCI`t OF t1GAR¢ ' City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2040 Billing #1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D. Basic design fee based on Estimated Construction Cost 10.75% of $149,462.00 $16,067.00 Amount due at end of study portion 25% of basic design fee 4,016.75 Less credit per letter of 6/12/80 1 ,300.00 Amount of this billing . . . . . -' _- - -- // i719V i Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ENGWE ERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 Tclephnnc(503)639.3433 June 12, 1980 Mr. Frank Currie City Engineer City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: McDonald Street Sewer L.I.D. Dear Frank: During our previous conversations, I stated that we would design the project on a percentage of construction costs. Charges for surveying and preparation of assessment rolls would be included in the fee. Normally these are special services which are charged separately. We included these costs in the basic de- sign fee, as a recognition for some value of the Dorner and Tunks Study. To better recognize the value of the Dorner and Tunks work, we would do the design and assessment rolls on the curve fee- surveying as special services and 'credit' the 'City $1,377.03. on the design fee for the Dorner and Tunks Study. The cost of surveying, preparing and obtaining easements would stillJbe a special service. We feel that the survey cost would be somewhat lower as a result of the previous study. This would be an additional , ..unspecified, savings compared to a normal job. . If you have any questions, please call me at 639-1232. Si nc r ly yo rs, Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. By: Stuart L. Cato SLC:ds APPENDIX "A" HARRIS-MC MONAGLE ASSOCIATES, INC. Scheduled Rates July 1 , 1980 - June 30, 1981 OFFICE Principal $40.00 per hour Project Engineer 35.00 as Is Engineer EIT 30.00 to " Design Technician 25.00 it " Draftsman 20.00 Is " Non-Technician 14.00 " FIELD Three-man crew 55.00 per hour. Two-man crew 50.00is Resident Engineer 35.00 Is " Resident Inspector 25.00 (1) Field rates include field equipment and transportation cost within a 5 mile radius of our office. Travel outside a 5 mile radius shall be charged at 0.25 cents per mile. i REQUIS>TI" N CITYOFTIIFARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON DATE CHECK ONE: EM I want to buy the following. Please research. Foward to Pur— chasing Coordinator. E=1 I have researched the following (attached quote information). Please issue a Purchase Order. Forward to Purchasing Coordinator. n I have ordered the following. Please issue a confirming Purchase Order. Forward to Purchasing Coordinator. Baa Please make p nt, Forward to Accounting. Ri'5EZVaZile.. 1 — 14 -6:�1 , Date Initials DATE REQUIRED , S. I-� ,�, fiP TO "C�1o�J1���E A------o ItJ C OTHER INFORMATION 890 5 L C�n�ME,pCiA 51- -- T_�- A,P 2� L`��E•' 9 72 z MCh- uL _e ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE -7,Z . Z5 �z o1JPti`� �� f 8 S, 3-7 v�v �L �2D58 TOTAL AMOUNT $ RECO11MENDED VENDORS �\\ DEPARTMENT HEAD.APPROV 1 Distribution: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVA White - Pur. Coord. or (for 600 Accounts over $2500, and all 700 Accounts Accounting Yellow - Department Copy s� Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS•SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET QP rIGARD.OREGON 97223 _- Tc)cphonc(503)639.3453 December 29, 1980 - City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2058 Billing #2 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D. Basic design fee based on Esti tpated .Canstruct i cn Cost 10.75% of $149,462.00 l $16,067.00 Engineering design services to date 30% $4,820.10. Less credit letter & previous billings 4,016.75 $ 803.35 Special Services: Design & easement surveying 1,,050.00 Amount of this billing . . . . . . . $1 ,853.35 VENDOR V - P,nDRESS C111, STATE, ZIP DATE -2 — 1-1 P.O. # CI OF TIVA- RD-- WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON CHECK ONE: I have received the following. Please make payment. (Forward to Accounting.) REQUISITION Received: Date Iditials F-1 I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) -1 have researched the following. Please M CbCQI\Lb :issue. a Purchase Order. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Se* cretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE A 7.1 -7.Z, Z5 1 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE '7 7C EPARTMENT READ.APPROVAL: INANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL*. I for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) �STRIBUTION: White Pur. Coord. *or Accounting Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. UNGINEERS-SURVEYORS _ 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD.OREGON 97223 Tc)ephnne 4303) 639.3453 February 3, 1981 City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard., Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2077 Billing #3 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D. . Basic design fee based on Estimated Construction Cost 10.75% of $149,462.00. $16,067.00 Engineering services to date 40% $ 6,426.80 Less credit)letter & previous k billings 4,820.10 Design fee amount due $ 1 ,606.70 Special Services: Design & easement surveying 700.00 Total amount of this billing . . . . . . $2,306.70 VENDOR ADDRESS U G—A, STATE, ZIP DATE ------ RD P.O. # C1'1V OF TIVA WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON- CHECK ONE: �Obuar- Please make payment. (Forward to Accounting. 7 REQUISITION Received: Date Inti-als I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (For-ward to Administrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please issue a Pur"chase Order. '(Forward to Administrativ.e ..'secretary.) - I want to buY- the:.fOl lowing. Please research. Return'price 'in.formation'to this office. (Forward to Administ'rative' Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY ..DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE ALI) ;.2.25 :I C_ ZC)S DEPARTMENT HEAD.APPROVAL: TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $S 61 1 FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: (for 600 Accounts over $2:500* and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White – Pur. Coord. or Accounting Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. VCJ�` ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET ` fiQQ TIGARD,OREGON 97223 �`�t' Telephnnt(503)639.3453 February 27, 1981 City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2089 Billing #4 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED S W McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D: Basic design fee based on Estimated Construction Cost 10.75% of $149.462.00. $16,067.00 Engineering services to date 70% $11 ,246.90 Less credit letter & previous billings 6,426.80 Design fee amount due $4,820.10 Design & easement surveying 425.00 Prepare easements 371.00 Special Services fee due 796.00 Total amount due this billing . . . . . . . . . $5_,616.10 • 3 91,10 WOMEN VENDOx ADDRESS CI' STATE, 7IP CITU T®OA DAi_ - i �.' - '��•�! P.O. �� RD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON CHECK ONE: 0 I have received the following. Please make REQUISITION payment. (Forward to Accounting.) ; : Received: Date Initial's ® I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to ® Administrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to QAdministrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward. to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE l . f 1 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE DEi. ..TMENT HEAD APPROVAL: ?' FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: a (for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White — Pur. Coord. or Accounting �_ ___Yellow— Department Copy __ - - � _ ---- -----• •-- '---rte_ '• 13arris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. r 1:NGI NE ERS•SURV EYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 • Tckphonc(503)639.3453 April 20, 1981 _ aG--- -.f C City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2127 i ri �r,c•-'rc 3 Billing #5 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED - Feb. 27th through April 15, 1981 S W McDonald St Sanitary Sewer L. I. D. Basic study fee based on estimated construction cost from study. ( 10.75% of $149,462.00 X 40% $6,426.80 Design fee based on estimated construction cost --from bids received 5/9/81 . 6,923.66 '".11 .75% of $98,208.00 :X 60% Total estimated study/design fee $13,350.46 Engineering services to date 85% complete $11,347.89 Less credit letter & previous billings 11,246.90 Design fee amount due $ 100.99 Special Services 25 additional plans & specifications 253.50 Revise easements 49.00 Special Service fee $ 302.50 Total amount due this billing . . . . . . . $ 403.49 7 l f I �a G.� s�= �.."�• •� sy��.Ys i ii -7ai...'xS7t-.� ..1.� '3.. lb AM 5-2 J \'-i C 3. 1\ vl "r S l amu- t.l,rL �'�. k•'" [. fr A-7 r . ME- 1 L Z'S • \l S ��fr Mk-40 iiJ'�' 124 S.W.M N V.O.COX 23W7 TCi ,OPEC-ON ern) VH.EJo-4171 f?+._��6L.r *''._ L' £.., `�. j4 '�cr ` "• `�f,�,.ri 'i�C ry�L ssrr^^i a (` ,,,1"� Y` a:+'nta, k i, 1 rr -sc._ - :�, JK�� - ���' � t��"'•-,"j�1 4 �a7sf Lfn^r+. s i� ��• ':. _1'x.,1 a �Y^ +t x� '�' Y -i ..�.3�It�i> y� j-T,�>nL.�'.,y,�+,�t ti q. ' j3.4"ti'c�r�rrc -`.� ¢•c ., \ r>� '` ` ,^ p ,�nDty:3.e l'. ti 'Y%. �;r�"rst,� y ne .. "'iYT±'> { ` ,�s� .. ..� L i� •. Vs h '- q!°jn t.yg�. ,rte—.�..�.ti �'� T'-X��y'.�d-� m et"'i `Z �`J`n'ez.�t".`ti_ iy�y<� "i Y+Y r � �z 2�1••'t� i' ,s. y��§ ,.Y .�_ v' ..j.,r;l` 3 f •fir 4WD �� J "-J+a>� -r Ctir n{wSS r�4 MR, +. .' z c,' R '1• ' , P �T'�a^ 'c.'rl Cr -i'M Z�t .n•t.�t.' R4��- .\-`4 r} s .. i`' .�y �, 3n' ..o.: iJ2'n.hi..f i`Z-a...ny � F'o.-;}-d� i.-.• ��Y i'-}-{� ; *i -; , 3 r a 9 � a-A _r _� f 4K'l°�'�f�� \'4191' 7•��• p -. d < .Y .�.t -ron .y�r.wr✓T L. l r1/ �i .s t.-`� } •5r1� �',�tr �d.,,�.a�+�,z n iso �.`a_.+�'��+�Yr rV � J ,4 4. .zt ti _:_ `` S F 3✓ t4r��pa�ffi2k����'�-iAr�;"'°}.sa���='� ��',-rf.�`��" y-�.\. :i��- _�L �..c�.r�is~+'rt:Kl.r�`�.�YL+,.._�:.�;�.""-o'`::��...:�.a.>.F..,.s�:.v...a..e.;::,:u i.o:Z .L' � I i b ,l I .._. t-Its•.. .T..^l 4 i � :�._ l`� - ..I�jI' VENDOR -a _ r 1: �:t-l._.�- l �L�►-'.rt:%.il c^'.r i i 4 Y_e - . ADDRESS cl ATE, STATE, ZIP DATE �•:. _... i 4-- CITYWON TOG RD P.O. 4� CITY WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON CHECK ONE: 1--have--receive-d--the-.fol-1-owing, Please_ make REQUISITION payment. (Forward to Accounting.) �• Received: Vrr " Date Inirtials I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to l Administrative Secretary.) aI have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to aAdministrative Secretary.) i I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE i I I 1 7� I r` TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $ " DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL:€€ _ FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL:" * ' f (for 600 Accounts over $2,5007 and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White - Fur. Coord. or Accounting i Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ! N(;1N1-.ERS SUR\'l:Y0RS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 ictrpbonc 003)631).7453 June 1 , 1981 City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2149 Billing #6 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED - April 16 through May 30, 1981 S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D. Basic Study fee based on estimated construction cost from study. 10.75% of $149,462.00 X 40% $ 6,426.80 Design fee based on estimated construction cost from bids received 5/9/81 11.75% of $98,208.00 X 60% 6,923.66 Total estimated study/design fee $13,350.46 Engineering services 90% complete 12,015.41 Less credit letter & previous billings 11 ,347.89 Design fee amount due $ 667.52 ! Special Services j !/ j Resident Engineer/Inspector 916.25 Construction staking i � 450.00 Reference property corners ;C`:' 212.50 '. Total amount due this billing . . . . . . . i 2,246.27 'l VENDOR ' . .ADDRESS J, Y, STATE, ZIP ZE '� - %. 1 P.G. C' F TF1a �� WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON RD CHECK ONE: � ��8�-�•eceived-,.,�1j;�,�'f�2�D��g. please make payment. (Forward to Accounting.) REQUISITION Reasz.'tre a Date Initials I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ElI have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to +i ® Administrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY --J DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 2 z5 ' S l.J' �C � tae>.t•- \L. �'� C-� ��- t r t i t TOTAL AMOUNT DUE TMENT HEAD.APPROVAL: ' FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: 1 � I (for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) I DISTRIBUTION: White - Pur. Coord. or Accounting Yellow- Department Copy Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. I:NGINE.ERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 Tc)cphnnc(503)639-3453 July 1, 1981 --- City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2167 Billing #7 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED - May 30th through June 1981 S. W. McDonald .St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D. Basic study fee based -on estimated construction cost from study. 10.75% of $149,462.00 X 40% $ 6,426.80 Design fee based on estimated construction cost from bids received 5/9/81 11.75% of $98,208.00 X 60% 6,923.66 Total estimated study/design fee $13,350.46 Engineering services complete 95% $12,682.94 Lesss credit letter & previous billings 123015.41 Design fee amount due $ 667.53 Special Services: Resident Engineer/Inspector ��2,156.25 Construction staking & survey 530.00 Total due this billing ; . . . . . . . . . $ 3,353.78 A .r I VENDOR j�nDRESS G , STATE, ZIY �~ �� � �� DATE P.O. # wum '! 0A RD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON CHECK ONE: IaaV - eived ttt��'fo�~rowing-: Please make payment. (Forward to Accounting.) REQUISITION Receive d•.- ® Date Initials I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to ® Administrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to DAdministrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) G ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE _ �..r••i t.e ._ter ���- Nti ._- 'f•( • J• !:Com.Y -.- :- �.�•. -� Y4 t ,rX ry TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $ �(� r DEt-tiRTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: ` FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: y (for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White — Pur. Coord. or Accounting Yellow— Department Co Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS.SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 ' Telephonc(503)639.3453 July 31 , 1981 - -- r City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2180 Billing #8 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED - July 1 through July 29, 1981 S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I .D. Basic study fee based on estimated construction cost from study. 10.75% of $149,462.00 X 40% $6,426.80 Design fee based on estimated construction cost from bids received 5/9/81 11.75% of $98,208.00 X 60% 6,923.66 Total estimated study/design fee $13,350.46 Engineering services to date 95% $12,682.94 . Less credit letter & previous billings 12,682.94 Design fee amount due -0- Special Services: Easements revision 175.00 Resident Engineer/Inspector 2,295.00 Construction staking & survey 125.00 Total amount this billing . . . . . . . $2,595.00 mmmmmmmmn VENDOR �ODRESS Cl—, STATE, ZIP C1 OF T16 DATE P•0. # WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON . CHECK ONE: 1--.have—received- the—following. Please make REQUISITION payment. (Forward to Accounting.) Received: t Date Initials ® I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) i I have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to f Administrative Secretary.) ® I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) 1 ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE VA i ( :, TOTAL AMOUNT DUE DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: (for 600•Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White — Pur. Coord. or Accounting SlPllnw- nPnartmenr Cnnv i Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S. V. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 Telephone(503)63.9.3453 August 27, 1987 r-- °7 #98� City of Tigard 1.2420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2190 Billing #9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I.D. Basic study fee based on estimated construction cost from study. 10.75% of $149,462.00 X 40% $ 6,426.80 Design fee based on estimated construction cost from bids received 5/9/81 11 .75% of $98,208.00 X 60% 6,923.66 Total estimated study/design fee $13,350.46 Engineering services to date 95% $12,682.94 Less credit letter & previous paymis 12,682.94 Design fee amount due _0- Special Services: Easements revision 195,00 Resident Engineer/Inspector 1 ,395.00 Construction staking 605.00 As-built surveying 715.00 Total amount due this billing . . . . . . . . $ 2,910.00 ��>'r'tr• '�.. T\C�C"r�`s.�C r `Z,)���.5O` -�ic•r e�`r v a->L.`. ��r-v 1 c G r� � a,•a c`..i.�S ��. t. �C i REQUISITION WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON DATE CHECK ONE: L I want to buy the following. Please research. Foward to Pur- chasing Coordinator. D I have researched the following (attached quote information). Please issue a Purchase Order. Forward to -Purchasing Coordinator. 1 L3 I have ordered the following. Please issue a confirming Purchase t ` Order. Forward to Purchasing Coordinator. -1--have-received-the--fo -1•owizcg Please make payment, Forward to Accounting. Received: Date Initials l _ P.O. 6 DATE REQUIRED -TO!SUMP -r-- OTHER INFORMATION ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT _PRICE TOTAL PRICE LAD liti TOTAL AMOUNT i RECOMMENDED VENDORS t-1 1`{r`i M 1. � `:: i!:!'•,} t" � �;:__ ,� (�y� DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL' E•_�';'.' Distribution: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL. 'r 't White - Pur. Coord. or (for 600 Accounts over $2500, and all 700 Accounts Accounting Yellow - Department Copy it Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD,OREGON 97223 Telephone(503)639-3453 September 30, 1981 City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice #2212 Billing #10 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED S. W. McDonald St. Sanitary Sewer L.I .D. Basic study fee based on estimated construction cost from study. 10.75% of $149,.462.00 X 40% $ 6,426.80 Design fee based on final construction cost 11.55% of $105,591 .23 X 60% 7,317.47 Total study/design fee $13,744.27 Engineering services to date 100% 13,744.27 Less credit letter & previous billings 12,682.94. Design fee amount of this billing $ 1 ,061 .33 Special Services: Resident Engineer/Inspector 1 ,532.50 As-built Plans 337.50 As-built surveying 475.00 Reset corners 151 .25 Total amount of this billing . : . . . . . . $ 3,557.58 VENDOR ! / • �_� � 'j K` i•� ! 'i ,��t' •�•, !'\til'(-o ADDRESS rt ,{. STATE, ZIP ' / ���® TI FA DATE j, 1 _' — t P O # VVASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON. CHECK ONE: -3eae�ev" e3hessfollow2rtg. Please make •�-J payment. (Forward to Accounting.), raj REQUISITION Received: '�•-- +^� - ,t:=r �' ® Date Initials I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to QAdministrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please i.ssue .a Purchase Order. (Forward to DAdministrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE o ..a.R• .�_::�/.��''ti ��_{G': Y./�. `._� i�(�...1( ��` !�• it i , { i� f i TOTAL AMOUNT DUE DEPARTMENT HEAD.APPROVAL: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: V (for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White - Pur. Coord. or Accounting Y 111111111 1 DORNER &TUNKS, INC. ENGINEERS W.J. DORNER,P.E. 519 S.W.THIRD AVENUE HOMER V.TUNKS,P.E. PORTLAND,OREGON 97204 PHONE:(503)228-3466 I N V O I C E July 10, 1981 City Of Tigard P. 0. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attention: Mr. Frank A. Curry, P. E. Director of Public Works Dear Sir: For Layout and Engineering of a sewer system to serve the Janzen, Burnam and Lautt Developments later known as McDonald I .I .D. #25. We have turned over to the City of Tigard, plans , maps, work sheets, etc . as well as tabulations of time, charges and payments as of May 19, 1980 in the amount of $8,669.30. We are hereby invoicing $6,000.00 for the above. Respectfully, Homer V. Tunks , Pres. Dorner & Tunks, Inc . VENDOR DDRESS C_ , STATE, ZIPCIF TIARD DATE >< `., P.0. �� WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON. CHECK ONE: X 1-have-received the --fol'low•ing-. Please make REQUISITION payment. (Forward to Accounting.) Receivedt ® Date Initials I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to ( t, QAdministrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please r, `F• �_ -� c ��i.,��-- issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to { DAdministrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return -price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE }J♦:� �_.1:.�•' ..-�r� �.#.. G ...ice+ l..- \ �i -'--.. 7 _ ! : , — i i f I E s TOTAL AMOUNT DUE DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: (for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White - Pur. Coord. or Accounting Ye low- Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. I NGINEFRS•SURVFYORS i 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 Tdophone ON) 631).3453 April 15, 1981 -- City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Invoice # 2122 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED 25 extra sets of Bid Documents for S. W. McDonald St. L.I .D. 25 @ $25.00 ea. $125.00 VENDOR it ADDRESS L _. STATE, 7,IP I F TIG DATE .'r.` .. ;•• P.O. # WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON CHECK ONE: a 1--have- received--the following-,. <.Please make payment. (Forward to Accounting.) REQUISITION Received: Date Initials I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to QAdministrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE =J7 . i TOTAL AMOUNT DUE $ ' - DEPARTMENT HEAD.APPROVAL: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: (for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White — Pur. Coord. or Accounting Yellow— Department Copy • M � - E�UC/IEEE-�'1.UC� Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS 8905 S.W. COMMERCIAL STREET TIGARD. OREGON 97223 Tclephone(503)639.3453 June 12, 1980 Q�IG�l tJAI_ Mr. Frank Currie City Engineer City of Tigard 12420 S. W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 - 1 <,_•t`z .--- ;,� _ !� Re: McDonald Street Sewer L.I.D. Dear Frank: During oun previous conversations, I stated that we would design the project on a percentage of construction costs. Charges for surveying and preparation of assessment rolls would be included in the fee. Normally these are special services which are charged separately. We included these costs in the basic de- sign fee, as a recognition for some value of the Dorner and Tunks Study. To better recognize the value of the Dorner and Tunks work, we would do the design and assessment rolls on the curve fee- surveying as special services and credit the City $1 ,300.00 on the design fee for the Dorner and Tunks Study. The cost of surveying, preparing and obtaining easements would still be a special service. Vie feel that the survey cost would be somewhat lower as a result of the previous study. This would be an additional , unspecified, savings compared to a normal Job. If you have any questions, please call me at 639-1232. Sinc r ly yo rs, Harris-[McMonagle Associates, Inc. By: Stuart L. Cato SLC:ds f :t — _ — r it �.r. .•• i. a lr • i 1 - t _1i. AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES CITY OF TIGARD WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON k THIS AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT, made and entered into at Tigard, Oregon, this day of ���� 19$1, by and between the City of Tigard of Washington County, State of Oregon, hereinafter called the City, and Harris-Mctdonagle Associates, Inc. , a firm of consulting engineers duly authorized to perform profes- sional services in the State of Oregon, hereinafter called the Engineers: WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, the City now desires to employ the Engineers to perform the engineering design and the preparation of detailed plan, specifications and contract documents and the performance of other professional services, which are necessary for the con- struction of certain 'designated public works improvements; and WHEREAS, the Engineers have offered their services to perform the necessary surveys, engineering designs, preparation of plans and specifications and other contract documents and the related professional services required for the implemen- tation of the public works improvements. IT IS AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I - DEFINITIONS Whenever the term "City" is used herein it is understood to mean the City of Tigard of Washington County, Oregon, or its authorized officers and the term "Engineer" or "Engineers" means an authorized representatives of Harris-McMonagle Associates, Inc. . ARTICLE II - OBLIGATION OF THE ENGINEERS The services to be performed by said Engineers under this contract are (1 ) the professional services required for the preparation of detailed plans, specifications and other contract documents for the actual construction work, (2) engineering serv- ices during construction, and (3) special services which may be required. The Engin- eers will coordinate their work with other Engineers who may be engaged by the City. The services to be performed by the Engineers are described more particularly as • I follows: Agreement - Page 1 I.. _ Detailed Plans. Ti- Engineer will collect the nece�,:ar_y- data including .,Yormat'iUtlfrom utility co,... .nies and other field inforinat . and %,,ill prepare detailed plans for all units of said improvements. These plans will include the necessary details for the public works facilities as i•iell as other drawings which may be essential to full completion of all units of the said improvements. 2. Specifications. After the plans have been made the Engineers will prepare such detailed specifications, contract forms and other documents as will .be necessary in the receiving of bids for construction work and. in the performance of contract obligations. The specifications will cover materials a na workmanship and serve as-a guide to the building of all features of the project which may not be fully defined by the plans. 3. Quantity and Cost Estimates. The Engineers will prepare estimates of the quantities of the materials to be furnished and work to be done. Estimates of cost will be provided which are to be based upon prices which appear to be appropriate at the time of plans are complete. 4. Amendments of Plans or Specifications. When plans, specifications and other documents have been prepared they will be submitted to the City for Consideration. An engineer familiar with all features of the project will be available on request of the 'City for the purpose of explaining the plans and other documents. Should the City then request modifications of any kind. which are consistent with good engineering practice, the Engineers will make them before the final documents are issued. 5.. Approval of Regulatory Agencies. The Engineers will plan the improvements so as to meet the approval"-.of the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other governmental agencies whicf may be involved, and will assist the City in any way appropriate to securing the necessary approvals for the facilities planned. 6. Copies of Plans and Specifications. After their approval by the City and the regulatory agencies, the Engineers wi furnish as a part of this contract the following copies of the plans and specifications above described: (a) Six (6) complete sets to the City for record purposes, review by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and other govenmental agencies involved. (b) Up to twenty-five copies for Contractors desiring to submit bids on the work, it being understood that deposits will be required to provide for the return of such plans issued and that a charge may be made by the Engineers for plans and specifications which may be issued to persons from whom no bona fide bid is received by the City. (c) Four (4) sets of documents as may be required in connection with the preparation of contracts for construction work. (d) Three (3) complete sets of "as built" plans of the work, as it is finally constructed, to the City for record purposes, one of which will be 'a set of transparancies. 7. Contract Awards. A qualified representative of the Engineers will attend meetings when the receiving of bids and the award of contracts for construction work are under consideration. They will prepare a tabulation of bids and will advise and assist the City 'in any way appropriate to such occasions. _ Agreement - Page 2 . 8. General Enyineer_i nc Services Duri ncL Construction. The Engineers will provide general inspection of the Contractor's work in behalf of the City, to the extent defined in the contract documents , by periodic visits to the site of the project to observe the progress and quality of the work and to determine, in general , if the word: is proceeding in accordance with the intent of the contract docu[nents. On the i basis of these visits , the Engineers will keep the City informed of the progress of - tt►e work, will guard the City against defects and deficiencies in the work of the � Contractor(s) and may reject work or materials that -fail to confonn to contract requiren►ents. Visits to the construction site and observations made by the Engineers shall not relieve the Contractor of his obligation to conduct comprehensive inspections of the work sufficient to insure conformance with the intent of the contract documents, and shall not relieve the construction contractor of his full responsibility for all construction means, methods, techniques , sequences, and procedures necessary for coordinating and completing all portions of the work under the construction contract and for all safety precautions incidental thereto. The Engineers shall make explanation of any matter which may not be clearly shown on the plans or in the specifications, including the modifications of documents if this should be required. They shall prepare and reccmmend approval of change orders when applicable. They shall review Contractor's shop drawings and approve material samples. 9. Final inspections_ The Engineers will make a final inspection of the completed construction work and report thereon to the City with recommendations concerning its acceptance or otherwise as conditions may warrant. 10. Resident Inspection of Construction and Field Staking. The Engineers will furnish the services of a Resident Inspector to provide continuous inspection of the work of the Contractor during the period of construction as well as field personnel and equipment necessary for construction staking. The Resident Inspector shall be experienced in the type of work to be done to the end that the work will be properly staked out and that competent inspection of materials and labor will be provided. He will keep all records, maps, and plans necessary for the preparation of final "as built" drawings. The Resident Inspector will make out monthly reports of construction ` and monthly estimates as the basis for payments to the Contractor as construction proceeds. He will attend the official meetings of the City each month when the above-mentioned reports and estimates are being considered and will also attend other meetings of the City when requested. Additional engineers , inspectors or assistants necessary shall be provided by the Engineers with the approval of the City. The Resident Inspector and necessary assistants will guard the City against defects and deficiencies in the work of the contractor(s) and help determine if the provisions of i the contract documents are being fulfilled. Their day-to-day inspection will not, however, cause the Engineer to be responsible for those duties and responsibilities i which belong to the Contractor and which include, but are not limited to, full f responsibility for the techniques and sequences of construction and the safety pre- y cautions incidental thereto, and for performing the construction work in accordance with the contract documents. 11 . Special Services. There may be certain special services desired by the City beyond those listed under the design and engineering inspection of construction. The type and extent of all such special services cannot be determined at this time. However, the Engineers agree to assist the City and perform such special services as the City may require, all in order that the City can best accomplish the ob- jective of providing the facilities needed. Such services may include but are not limited to the following: Agreement - Page 3 (a) Furnish survey personnel and equipment required to obtain design information necessary to prepare satisfactory plans and specifications_ (b) Furnish survey personnel and equipment required to obtain field information necessary to prepare easements and property. right-of-way descriptions as requested or approved by the City. (c) Furnish legal descriptions of easements, rights-of-way and property required for the project and provide personnel to assist the City or those designated by the City to .obtain easements, rights-of-way, and property as requested by the City. (d) Assist in preparation of Federal grant applications. (e) Assist in preparation of Engineers' reports for assessment, assessment district maps, lien dockets, assessment rolls, and other work connected with assessment procedures, and assist in public hearings on the pro- posed assessments as requested or approved by the City_ I (f) Provide personnel and equipment required to perform subsurface exlora- tions necessary for determing foundation and/or construction conditions as. requested or approved by the City. (g) Provide bacteriological , chemical , mechanical or other tests as re- quested or approved by the City. f i (h) Assist the City in the development of design and construction standards. (i ) Provide expert testimony as may be required in connection with the project.{ (j) Furnish written operating instructions and assemble a complete set of manufacturers' data and catalogs covering the equipment installed in the project. (k) After completion of the project and acceptance from the Contractor (s) by the City, provide assistance and supervision as required to train the City's personnel for operation and maintenance of the new facili- ties. 12. Insurance. The Engineers shall maintain such insurance as will protect them and the City from claims under the Workmen's Compensation Act. A 13. Time Schedule. The Engineers shall begin work within 10 days after notice to proceed and shall diligently prosecute the work to meet the time schedule(s) adopted by the City. ARTICLE III- OBLIGATION OF CITY The work required under this contract shall not begin nor shall the City assume i any obligation for the work involved until the Engineers are given written notice to proceed and the scope of the work authorized outlined in detail . In order to facilitate the work of the Engineers as above outlined and to insure proper and adequate planning in construction procedure the City shall furnish to the Agreement - Page 4 Engineers access to all existing information which is in its possession concerning r the location of sewer and water lines and other utilities or structures which may affect the planning and construction of the proposed improvements_ Should it be necessary to excavate in order to locate and make available to the Engineers any i existing structures necessary for proper planning of the proposed work, the City shall cause such excavation and incidental work connected therewith to. be done with- out cost to the Engineers. The City shall pay for the cost of publishing advertisements for bids, and for ' permits and licenses that may be required by local , State, or Federal authorities and shall secure the necessary land, easements, and rights-of-way. FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the Engineers faithfully performing the services herein stipulated, the City shall pay then sums which shall be as outlined below in accordance with the services rendered: 1. For the engineering services as outlined in Article II , Sections 1-9, required for the design of public works facilities, the City shall pay the Engineers a sum which shall be determined by Curve A or Curve B as recommended by the schedule of suggested fees of the current Manual No. 45 of American Society of Civil Engineers applicable upon the date notice to proceed is issued. For projects involving modifications, expansion, or renovation of existing facilities the basic fee under the above-mentioned curves shall be increased by a negotiated per cent depending upon the circumstances. (a) Monthly progress payments shall be made to the Engineers during the prepara- tion of the detailed plans, and such progress payments shall be based upon progress estimates of the work done, which have been submitted by the Engin- eers and approved by the City. (b) When the plans and sp8cifications have been completed and approved, the City shall pay the Engineers a sum which with all previous payments shall equal 80 per cent of the total fee applicable based on the Engineer's estimate at the time the plans and specifications are submitted to the City. (c) The balance of the fee shall be paid to the Engineers during construction in proportion to the work completed by the contractor(s) . 2. For the services the Resident Inspector and other inspectors or assistants required for the construction inspection and field staking as outlined in Article II , Section 10, the City shall pay the Engineers scheduled rates as set forth in Appendix "A". These rates include all supplies required for the work and automlobile transpor- tation within a 5 mile radius of the Engineer's office. Agreement - Page 5 3. For soils investigations which may required as outlined in Article II , Section 11 , the Engineers shall be reimbursed at their invoiced costs plus 10 per cent, for the services of soils specialists , laboratory testing and required saniplir, drilling and/or excavation. For other technical or professional services furnished by outside sources , as requested or approved by the City, an additional S per cent shall be added to cover the Engineers' administrative and continuing project responsi- bilities. 4. For any special services required by the Engineers ' staff as outlined in Article II , Section 11 of this Agreement, the Eity agrees to pay the Engineers scheduled rates as set forth in Appendix "A" automobile travel within a 5 mile radius of the Engineers' office is included in the scheduled rates. AIT other costs of the Engineers will be billed at the actual amounts of such costs. These costs, as applicable, will include, but are not necessarily limited to obtaining as constructed plans, printing and reproduction work. 5. If the City directs that competitive .bids be taken for construction on alternate designs, where this involves the preparation of designs , plans, and ' specifications for alternate structures, the compensation to the Engineers shall be the payment specified in Article III , Section 1 , for the design of work to be constructed, plus, for the alternate designs prepared for work not constructed, an additional payment to be negotiated at the time the City directs that alternative designs, plans and s¢ecifications be prepared. 6. If the engineering services covered in this Agreement have not been completed upon the expiration of=..pn eighteen (18) month period fra-n the date of execution of this Agreement, the City or Engineers may, at the option of either, on written notice, request a renogotiation of Article III, Sections 1-4, (providing for the compensation to be paid Engineers for services rendered) , to allow for changes in the cost of services. Such new schedule of compensation is to apply only to work performed by l the Engineers after delivery date of such written notice. 7. If time of construction is extended because of circumstances beyond the control of the Engineers, payments for Article II , Section 8, General En ineerin Services During Construction, shall apply only through the period ending thirty 30) calendar days after, the applicable completion date specified in the construction contract of the project. Payment for this service beyond thirty (30) days after said specified completion date shall be paid for under Article III , Section 4. 8. The City may, in its sole discretion, abandon or indefinitely postpone the project for which the professional services described herein are to be performed and may thereupon terminate this Agreement by giving the Engineers written notice of such abandonment or indefinite Postponement. covered in this Agreement and designed If any portion ee the project g specified by the Engineers shall be � suspended, abated, or abandoned, the City shall pay the Engineers for the services rendered for such suspended, abated or abandoned work, the payment to be based insofar as possible on the amounts established in this Agreement or. Agreement cannot be applied, the payment shall be on the basis of the amounts has prescribed in Article IYI, Section 4. -Agreement - Page 6 APPENDIX "A" HARRIS-PIC MONAGLE ASSOCIATES, INC. Scheduled Rates July 1 , 1980 - June 30, 1981 OFFICE Principal $40.00 per hour Project Engineer 35.00 is of Engineer EIT 30.00 of Is Design Technician 25.00 it It Draftsman 20.00 it of Non-Technician 14.00 " FIELD Three-man crew $65.00 per hoWr ` Two-man crew $50.00 to Resident Engineer. 35.00 it It Resident Inspector 25.00 OR " (1 ) Field rates include field equipment and transportation cost within a 5 mile radius of our office. Travel outside a 5 mile radius shall be charged at 0.25 cents- per mile. i i I APPENDIX "A" _- HARRIS-MC 14ONAGLE ASSOCIATES; INC. Scheduled Rates July 1 , 1981 - June 30, 1982 OFFICE Principal Project Engineer $ 8.00 per hour 3 Engineer EIT 3x.00 per hour Design Technician 32.50 per hour Draftsman 27.00 per hour Non-Technician 21 :50 per hour 15.00 per hour FIELD Three-man crew Two-man crew $70.00 per hour Resident Engineer 55.00 per hour Resident Inspector 37.00 per hour 28.00 per hour I (1) Field rates include field equipment and transportation cost within a 5 mile radius of our office. Travel outside a 5 mile radius shall be charged at 0.25 cents per mile. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be executed in duplicate by their respectively adthorized officers or representatives. CITY: OF TIGARD ' I BY BY HARRLS-MMO,ti'AGLE AYSOCIATES, INC.S / r ; By Agreement - Page 7 i • i i ' I i -7) CITYOFT14FARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator DATE: April 22, 1982 RE: Keys to the City Presentation - April 26, 1982 Keys to the City have been prepared for presentation to those citizens who have served on the Downtown Committee but are not continuing as members of the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency (TURA) Advisory Committee. The following persons have been invited to attend the Council meeting of April 26, 1982 to receive recognition for their service to the City: Dick Kadel David Dresser Larry Barnum Carol Jones Madalyn Utz Roger Brown 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 BETH D'L®U-NT ATTRNEYAT LAZA 2437 Pacific Avenue, Forest Grove, Oregon 97116 Telephone (503) 6-18-1887 March 29, 1982 City of Tigard P. O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 ATT: Linda Sargent I am submitting information for your consideration for the position of Hearings Officer for the City of Tigard. I have been providing Hearings Officer services to the City of Molalla, under contract, since 1980, and to the City of Beaverton, also under contract, since July of 1981. In each City, I was the first Hearings Officer the -City had ever retained in the area of land use hearings, and in each City, the program continues to be successful. I have contacted each of these jurisdictions regarding my interest in your contract, and neither objects to this application. Further, -Linda Davis, Planning Director for the City of Beaverton, and Dee Gilman, Mayor of the City of Molalla, encourage you to contact them to discuss the program , and my contribution to it, in each of those cities_ I am in private practice, emphasizing real estate and land use law. Prior to opening my office in Washington County in September of 1980, I was Assistant County Counsel for Clackamas County for nearly three (3) years, during which time I was counsel to the Board of County Commissioners for land use matters. I have been a certified instructor for the Department of Commerce, Real Estate Division, for two courses in land use law, since late 1980. I would propose to provide Hearings Officer services to the City for $50 per hour; billed time would include case review, hearing time and the preparation of written orders containing findings of fact as required by City ordinance and State law. If staff confer- ences or special meetings were necessary, they would also be billed at the regular hourly rate. I would not bill for travel time be- tween my office and the City of Tigard. However, time spent view- ing sites, and mileage to and from those sites from the hearing room, would be billed at the regular hourly rate plus $0.25/mile. I am available for hearings scheduled either during the day or in the evening, up to one hearing per week. The actual day for hearings would have to be worked out around current commitments. It is my understanding that the City currently plans one hearing per month, March 29, 1982 Page 2 with additional hearings as necessary. Currently, the City of Beaverton has a regular agenda for hearings each Thursday, from 4:00 PM to 6 :00 PM. on those weeks that there are no applications, we simply do not hold a hearing. The City of Molalla holds hear- ings when an application is filed, usually every 3 to 4 months. I am prepared to submit written findings after oral decisions with- in a reasonable time, usually 10 days. Those findings can be pre- pared on paper furnished by the City, or by my office, and can be in any format the City chooses. I would welcome an opportunity to interview with the City regarding this proposal. If more information is necessary regarding my ex- perience, or my philosophical approach to such a position, I will be more than happy to supply it upon request. Sincerer BETH Attorneyney at at Law BB/cem Encl BETH BLOUNT 2437 Pacific Avenue Home: 503/357-0508 Forest Grove, Oregon 97116 Office: 503/648-4887 SUMMARY OF Solid record of academic and professional achievement. Diversified . __ QUALIFICATIONS: legal background with emphasis on land use and local government. Practical experience in organization, management and development of large scale community outreach programs. Seeking a responsible position with opportunity for personal and professional growth. EXPERIENCE: BETH BLOUNT, ATTORNEY AT LAW 1980 - present *Forest Grove, Oregon General practice with emphasis on land use and local government law. Experience in all aspects of condominium and real estate work. Represent clients in land use matters before Cities of Portland and Tigard, and in Clackamas and Washington Counties. Appellate work before Land Use Board of Appeals and State Court of Appeals. Hearings Officer for Cities of Molalla and Beaverton. Pro tem. Hearings Officer for Clackamas County. Consider conditional use, subdivision, variance and zoning change applications. Certified Instructor, Department of Commerce Real Estate Division. Conduct' weekly classes in land use law throughout the metropolitan area. CLACKAMAS COUNTY 1975 - 1980 Oregon City, Oregon Assistant County Counsel. Responsible for land use and zoning enforcement/defense litigation and appellate work. Provided legal counsel for development services, roads and solid waste depart- ments. Advised county on drafting legislation and ordinances. Prepared final orders containing findings and conclusions for decisions of the Board of County Commissioners. Law Clerk, District Attorney's Office. Research and trial responsibilities. Wrote brief for Court of Appeals that satisfied writing requirement for degree. Program Director. Initiated and developed Rape Victim Advocate Program.- Interviewed police chief and senior officers of 11 law enforcement agencies for input on program design. Established goals and directives; developed three level screening process for volunteers. Organized internal structure for administration, supervising an Assistant Director and six coordinators. Planned and conducted in-house and volunteer training courses covering legal, medical and emotional aspects. Lectured before civic, government and education groups. Consultant for four other counties which adapted the program for their use. Conference Panelist for Oregon Council on Crime Prevention and Delinquency. ACCOMPLISHMENTS: �. Program received national recognition - featured on the Phil Donahue Television Show. Cited by National Association of Volunteers in Criminal Justice. Beth Blount Page Two EXPERIENCE: Program Director. Due to success of Rape Prevention Program, (Continued) approached by the District Attorney to organize a Night Prosecutor Program for Community Dispute Settlement. This federally funded program was organized to divert family and neighborhood disputes from the judicial system to a private mediation situation. - -- Established program objectives; developed recruiting/screening techniques and 40 hour training course for volunteers. Wrote job descriptions for staff; conducted in-service training. Compiled resource file and designed referral system for follow-up. Consultant for two other counties for program replication. ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Received Exemplary Award from Law Enforcement Assistance Adminis- tration (LEAA) for structure, training and operational aspects of the program. PRIOR EXPERIENCE: Lobbyist, Oregon Student Lobby, 1977. Worked on legislation for day care for student parents. Supervisor, Casino Credit, 1971-1973. Evaluated and determined credit worthiness of customers for casinos in Las Vegas, Reno, Lake Tahoe, the Caribbean, London, Monte Carlo and Tasmania. Caseworker, Nevada State Welfare Division, 1970-1971. Carried full caseload of clients for old age assistance, aid to dependent children, and aid to the blind. EDUCATION: WILLAMETTE UNIVERSITY 1977 Salem, Oregon J.D. degree. Part-time work for Legal Aid; Volunteer for Crisis Line. UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA 1973 Las Vegas, Nevada B.A. degree, dual major in Psychology and Philosophy, minor in English. Maintained a 3.6/4.0 GPA while working up to 40 hours a week. Financed 100% of expenses through work and loans: AFFILIATIONS: American Bar Association Washington County Bar Association Oregon Bar Association Clackamas County Bar Association U.S. District Court of Oregon OSB Section on Real Estate & Land Use ADDITIONAL Actively involved in political and community activities to include: INFORMATION: AAUW, Branch President, & BPR to Division Board Board of Directors, NIKE House, B.E.T.T.E.R. and Shelter Forest Grove Planning Commission, Vice-Chair. Oregon Women's Political Caucus Who's Who in American Law, Second Edition. References will be furnished upon request. n f Llr 15780 S . W. Springbrook Ct. Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 March 18, 1982 Ms. Linda Sargent Personnel Administrator City of Tigard P. O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Ms. Sargent, Please consider this letter a formal request to be considered for the position of hearings officer. You will find a copy of my resume attached. You will note from the resume that my educational back- ground includes both a master of Urban Planning and a Juris Doctor (Law) degree. .The Masters program included a number of courses relevant to this position, but in particular, my course work involved studying data collection and evaluation techniques and activity location theory. Activity location involved an analysis of the cri- eria used by the private sector in sel- ecting commercial and industrial sites. As a part of this course I wrote a paper which analyzed Washington Square in terms of generally established locational criteria and which identified all of the positive and negative impacts the center has had. These courses have given me the back- ground necessary to analyze complex proposals and formulate findings, recommendations and conditions of approval with sensitivity to both the private sector needs and the broader public interest My relevant law school course work includes classes in property law, constitutional law, administrative law, land use law and a land use seminar. My seminar paper examined all of the case law in Oregon on nonconforming uses and on variances. You will also note thatLI have read, briefed and indexed all of the land use court cases decided in Oregon to date. f c Ms. Linda Sargent page 2 My experience with the hearings process is from two perspectives. Between 1964 and 1980 my work involved me in the hearings process as a planning staff member. It re- quired me to attend planning commission and board meetings on quasijudicial matters. In addition, it required the supervision of the preparation of findings of fact, conclusions, and conditions of approval based on the application of the facts to plan policies and ordinacne standards. You will also note that I was a member of the Capitol Planning Commission in Salem, Oregon and am presently a member of the Lake Oswego Planning Commission. These experiences have put me in front of the decision making process. Please call me if you have any questions or would like additional references. Thank you very much for considering this application. Sincerely, i Adrianne Brockman i ADRIANNE BROCKMAN 15780 S. W. Springbrook Court Work Phone: Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Home Phone: 636-3985 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND Matriculated SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE; completed two year 1956 University of Oregon Graduated BACHELOR OF SCIENCE in Social Science 1962 Portland State University Graduated MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING 1977 Portland State University Grade Point Average 3. 7 Graduated JURIS DOCTOR - LAW DEGREE 1981 Lewis and Clark Law School Class standing: out of SPECIAL PROJECT In chronological order, briefed all of the land use cases decided by the Oregon courts. Developed a detailed, by subject, index for locating the court' s holding on each issue MEMBERSHIP IN PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PLANNERS - Membership by Examination AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION EXPERIENCE IN THE LAW O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS • Prepare testimony for presentation to local governments • Draft local government planning related ordinances Write substantial portions of briefs • Review planning documents for compliance with LCDC goals and local government ordinance standards PUBLICATIONS A. Brockman, E. Sullivan, LAND USE, General Remedies and Enforcement, ch. 29 , Continuing Legal Education, Oregon State Bar, 1982 ti Adrianne Brockman page 2 EXPERIENCE IN LAND USE PLANNING = 18 years 1975 to 5/30/80 PLANNING MANAGER - Multnomah County Responsibilities: Work Program - Formulation and implementation Management of: sThe Comprehensive Planning Program, and preparation of: - The Comprehensive Framework Plan- - Six Communi;:y Comprehensive Plans. Citizen Involvement Program Intergovernmental Coordination Program - Coordination with LCDC Personnel Administration ® Preparation of examinations and hiring and dismissals. Supervision of 18 full-time professional employees and 15 part-time employees. Budget Preparation and Administration Supervision of Staff Reports: Quasi- Judicial Matters ■ To assure an adequate data base on environmental, social, economic factors; OTo assure all applicable plan policies and ordinance standards were addressed; ■ To assure proper findings were made by relating the facts to the plan policies and ordinance standards; nTo assure that proper conditions were attacked. Public Presentations OTo citizen groups, public service organizations and interest groups; ■ To other governmental bodies; MSD, LCDC and local government. Supervision of the Hearings Process * Acted as staff to the Planning Commission- ■ Made staff presentations to the Commission and Board. mMaintained the record. Worked with Developers, Attorneys and Special Interest Groups to Resolve Issues * Plan Acknowledged by LCDC - January 1980 1970-1975 PRINCIPAL PLANNER - Washington County Responsibilities: Work Program - Formulation and implementation Management of: dComprehensive Planning Program. NCitizen Involvement Program, wIntergovernmental Coordination Program. Adrianne Brockman page 3 Personnel Administration ■ Preparation of examinations, hiring and dismissals. aSupervision of nine full-time employees- Budget Preparation Public Presentations Assisted at all Planning Commission and Board Hearings 1964-1969 ASSOCIATE PLANNER - Greater Juneau Borough, Alaska Responsibilities: -Administration of the Subdivision Ordinance -Preparation of the Comprehensive Plan -Drafting and data gathering 1958-1964 JUNIOR PLANNING - Consulting Firm .Responsibilities: -Graphics and data gathering EXPERIENCE AS PART OF A DECISION MAKING BODY 1981 to present PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER - City of Lake Oswego 1976 CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER Salem, Oregon - appointed by the Governor OTHER PROFESSIONALLY RELATED ACTIVITIES 1976-1980 WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE to the Governor and State Parks Division 1976-1979 DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Planner' s Advisory Committee Member OTHER ACTIVITIES AND INTERESTS Travel: Have traveled throughout Europe, the Far East and northern Africa with a keen interest in the techniques used by the various countries and cities to solve land use, transportation, housing and social issues. Interests: Music, photography, antiques, and art Sports: Golf, horseback riding REFERENCES Land Use Planning: Martin R. Cramton, Planning Director Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission 301 South McDowell St. Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 , Adrianne Brockman page 4 REFERENCES The Law Edward J. Sullivan, O'Donnell, Sullivan, Ramis 1727 N. W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 Telephone: 222-4402 April 22, 1982 MEMORANDUM TO: Director of Public Works FROM: Supt. , Engineering Division RE: NW Natural Gas Franchise Ordinance Attached hereto please find a copy thereof with my notes/concerns/recommended modifications thereto. Also attached, please find Ed Sullivan's copy with comments thereinregard. o'ooNnIELL. DATE: March 28 , 1982 SULLIVAN & RAtMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET TO: Bob Jean, City Administrator PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031222-4402 FROM: Ed Sullivan, City Attorney RE: Northwest Natural Gas Franchise Ordinance The attached Ordinance is approved as to form. I would suggest, however, that you have the city staff type it in the Tigard ordinance format. Alternatively, I could prepare a one-page cover ordinance, as with the General Telephone ordinance, if you so desire. I thin:c, however, that it is cheaper and more efficient if you or your staff does the work. Even though I approve this ordinance as to form, I have a number of comments which you may wish to consider in recommending the same to Council, either with or without modifications. Section 4 and Section 12 (5) establish the duration of the franchise. : The duration is for twenty years, although the city may seek to )renegotiate the same on the tenth anniversary of the franchise. This may be too long; however, this is a matter for administration, rather than for a lawyer. I have some compunction over Section 6 (5) . Vacation of streets is usually seen as a legislative act. This subsection would bind the legislative body of the city for the benefit of a franchisee. The question almost never comes up, but I think it deserves the consideration of yourself and Frank Currie. Section 10 (1) requires that the franchisee get city approval of its proposed excavatio _ c��he—ln�ation thereof, but exempts such approval in cases of emergenc'.es'", a term which is never defined. It seems to me that eve in an emergency, the franchisee should get city approval as soon thereafter as is feasible, rather than have a blank exemption from city approval. In Section 18, I think that the form of the judicial review of the termination of the franchise should be examined further. I would not think that a full-blown trial is appropriate in such circumstances. Rather, I think that the city should initiate and undertake proceedings before a Hearings Officer or the City Council itself and that the reasonableness of its determination should probably be undertaken by way of a writ of review, i.e. , on the record made by the city rather than having a court take evidence and make a de novo determination. In Section 21, you made a notation that the franchise should be made retroactive to March 4 , 1982. I would add a sentence at the end of that section to the effect that "this ordinance is effective from and after the 4th day of March, 1982" . I hope the above comments are of assistance to you. i' EJS:mch 3/28/82 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVE GAS UTILITY FRANCHISE TO NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS COMPANY, AND FIXING TERMS, CONDITIONS AND COMPENSATION OF SUCH FRANCHISE. IT IS ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD: Section 1: Definitions and Explanations. (1) As used in this ordinance: (a) "Bridge" includes a structure erected within the City to facilitate the crossing of a river, stream, ditch, ravine or other place, but does not include a culvert. (b) "City" means the City of Tigard and the area within its boundaries, including its boundaries as extended in the future. (c) "Council " means the legislative body of the City. (d) "Grantee" mean this ordinances the corporation referred to in Section 2 of (e) "Gas mains" includes all gas on facilities located on or under rany mstreet,ission and dgtorbpuiblil place within the City. bridgepublic (f) "Person" includes an individual, corporation, association, firm, partnership and joint stock company. (9) "Public place" includes any city-owned park, place or within the City that is open to the grounds a street or bridge. public but does not include (h) "Street" includes a street, alley, avenue, road, boulevar thoroughfare orpublic: n%, include a bridge - � within the city, but does n tom__-.____ (2) As used in this ordinance, the singular number may include the plural and the plural number may include the singular. (3) Unless otherwise specified in this ordinance, ayaction or required to be taken by the City may be takenby the nCouncil�ord by an Official or agent designated by- the Council. - I - i � Section 2: Rights Granted. Subject to the conditions and reservations contained in this ordinance, the City hereby grants to NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS COMPANY, a• corporation, the right, privilege and franchise to: (1) Construct, maintain and operate a gas utility system within the city. (2) Install , maintain and operate on and under the streets and bridges and public places of the City, facilities for the transmission and distribution of gas to the City and its inhabitants and to other customers and territory beyond the limits of the City; and (3) Transmit, distribute and sell gas. Section 3: Use of Bridges and Public Places by Grantee. (1) Before the Grantee may use or occupy any bridge or public place, the Grantee shall first obtain permission from the City so to do and shall comply with any special conditions the City desires to impose on such use or occupation. (2) The compensation paid by the Grantee for this franchise includes compensation for the use of bridges and public places located within the City as authorized. Section 4: Duration. This franchise is granted for a period of twenty 20) years from andafter the effective date of this ordinance. Section 5: Franchise Not Exclusive. This franchise is not exclusive, and shall not be construed as a limitation on the City in: (1) Granting rights, privileges and authority to other persons similar to or different from those granted by this ordinance. (2) Constructing, installing, maintaining or operating any City-owned public utility. i Section 6: Public Works and Improvements Not Affected by Franchise. The City reserves the right to: (1) Ccnstruct, install , maintain and operate any public improvement, work or facility. (2) Do any work that the City may find desirable on, over or under any street, bridge or public place. (3) Vacate, al,er or close any street, bridge or. publ i c place. - 2 - i.. (4) Whenever the City shall excavate or perform any work in any of the present and future streets, "alleys and public place_ of the City, or shall contract, or issue permits, fo-r-=such excavation or work where such excavation or wor y disturb Grantee's gas mains, pipes _pour enact he City shall, in writing, notify Grante ufficientl in advanc of such - contemplated excavation or work to enable ran ee to take such measures as may be deemed necessary to protect such gas mains, pipes and appurtenances from damage and possible inconvenience or injury to the public. In any such case the Grantee, upon request, shall furnish maps or drawingt24edexcavation City or contractor, as the case may be, showing thegcimae� cation of all its structures in the area involved in uch p7_7 or other work. t' t �S�CCI�.\G�a.�•..N.'�r t (5) Whenever the City shall vacate any street or pubf c place for the convenience or benefit of any person or governmental agency and instrumentality other than the City, Grantee's rights shall be preserved as to any of its facilities then existing in such street or public place. Section 7: Continuous Service. The Grantee shall maintain and operate an adequate system for the distribution of gas in the City. The Grantee shall use due diligence to maintain continuous and uninterrupted 24-hour a .day service which shall at all times conform at least to the standards common in the business and to the standards adopted by state authorities and to standards of the City which are not in conflict with those adopted by the state authorities. Under no circumstances shall the Grantee be liable for an interruption or failure of service caused by act of God, unavoidable accident or. other circumstances beyond the control of the Grantee through no fault of its own. Section 8: Safety Standards and Work Specifications. (1) The facilities of the Grantee shall at all times be maintained in a safe, substantial and workmanlike manner. (2) For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this-.section, the City may provide such specifications relating thereto as may be necessary or convenient for public safety or the orderly development of the City. The City may amend and add to such specifications from time to time. ,��� Section 9: Cor, rol of onstruction. The Grantee shall file with the City maps s owing the location of any construction, extension or relocation of its gas mains in the streets of the City and shall obtain from the City approval of the location and plans prior to commencement of the work. The City may require the Grantee to obtain { a permit before commencing the construction, extension or relocation of any of its gas mains. - 3 - Section 10: Street Excavations and Restorations. (1) Subject to the provisions of this ordinance, the Grantee may make necessary excavations for the purpose of constructing, -- installing, maintaining and operating its facilities. Except in emergencies, prior to making an excavation in the traveled 'Po any street, bridge or public place, and, when required by the City, in any untraveled portion of any street, bridge or any public place, the Grantee shall obtain from the City approval of the proposed excavation and of its location. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of.tjds-section, when any excavation is made by theme e—the Grantee shall promptly restore th Gt ort ion of the street, bridge or public place to the jai condition in which it was prior to the excavation. a restoration shall be in compliance with specifications, requirements and regulations of the City in effect at the time of such restoration. If the Grantee fails to restore promptly the affected portion of a street, bridge or public place to the same condition in which it was prior to the excavation, the City may make the restoration, and the cost thereof shall be paid by the Grantee. (3) At its option, the City may restore or resurface the affected portion of any street, bridge or public place excavated by the Grantee, and the cost thereof shall be paid by the Grantee. ( Section 11: Location and Relocation of Facilities. or J (1) All facilities of the Grantee shall be placed so gat theY do not interfere unreasonably with the use by the City and the public of the streets, bridges and public pl es and in accordance with any specifications adopted b he City governing the location of facilities. - ( (2) -The- City may require, in the public inter �� �� ��sdz_`�ed the remova or relocation of facilities maintained by the Grantee in the streets f the City, a the Grantee shall remove and relocz - ch facilities it in a reasons e ime��e�--- _re,ce�ing notice so to do from e` ly:- 7fie cost of such s /! r�noval or ►relocation of its facilities shall be paid by the-Grantee, but when such removal or relocation is required ` ! e for the convenience or be fit of any person or governmental agency and instrumentalit,'%they than the City, Grantee e shall be entitled to reimbursement for the reasonabl@ cost y4 thereof from such person, agency or instrumentality 4 Section 12: Compensation. (1) As compensation for the franchise granted by this ordinance, the Grantee shall pay to the City an amount equal to three -- percent (3%) of the gross revenue collected by the Grantee from its customers for gas consumed within the City. Gross revenue shall be computed by deducting from the total billings of the Grantee the total net writeoff of uncollectibe accounts, revenues derived from the sale of gas supplied for industrial purposes under- an interruptible tariff schedule, and sales of gas at wholesale by the Grantee to any public utility or public agency where the public utility or public agency purchasing such gas is not the ultimate consumer. (2) The compensation required by this section shall accrue from and .after the effective date of this ordinance, and shall be due for each calendar half year, or fraction thereof, within sixty (60) days after the close of such calendar half year or fraction thereof. Within sixty (60) days after the termination of this franchise, compensation shall be paid for the peiod elapsing since the close of the last calendar half year for which compensation has been paid. (3) The Grantee shall furnish to the City with each payment of compensation required by this section a written statement, under oath, -EORecuted by an officer of Grantee showing the amount of gross revenue. of the Grantee within the City for . the period covered by the payment computed on the basis set out in subsection (1) of this section. This compensation for the period covered by the statement shall be computed on the basis o`f the gross revenue so reported. If the Grantee fails to pay the entire amount of compensation due the City through error or otherwise, the difference due the City shall be paid by the Grantee within fifteen (15) days from discovery of the error or determination of the correct amount. Any overpayment to the- City through error or otherwise, shall be.-offset against the next payment due from the Grantee. (4) Acceptance by the City of any payment due under this section shall- not be deemed to be a waiver by the City of any breach of this franchise occurring prior thereto, nor shall the acceptance by the City of any such payments preclude the City from later establishing that a larger amount was actually due, or from collecting any balance due to the City. (5) Upon 30 days' prior written notice by either party to the other, the rate if compensation set forth in subsection (1) of this section shall be subject to renegotiation and redetermination at the end of the first ten-year period of the term of the franchise hereby granted, for the remaining ten-year period of said franchise term. 5 - rr" Section 13: Books of Account and Reports. The Grantee shall keep accurate books account at an office in Oregon for the purpose of determining the amounts due to the City under section 12 of this ordinance. The City may inspect the books of account at any time during business hours and may audit the books from time to time. The Council may require periodic reports from the Grantee relating to its operations and revenues within the City. Section 14: Collection Facilities. The Grantee may maintain facilities in t e City where its customers may pay their bilis for gas service during normal business hours. Section 15:. Supplying Ma s upon Request. The Grantee shall maintain on file, at an office in Oregon, maps and operational data pertaining to its operations in the City. The City may Inspect the maps and data at any time during business hours. Upon request of the City, the Grantee shall furnish to the City, without charge and on a current basis, maps showing the location of the gas mains of the Grantee in the City. Section 16: Indemnification. The Grantee shall indemnify and save harmless the City and its officers, agents and employees from any and all loss, cost and expense arising from damage to property and/or injury to or death of persons due to any wrongful or negligent act or omission of the Grantee, its agents or employees in exercising the rights, privileges and franchise hereby granted. Section 17: Assignment of Franchise. This franchise shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors, legal representatives and assigns of the Grantee. Section 18: Termination of Franchise for Cause. Upon the willful failure of the Grantee, after sixty 0 ays notice and demand in writing, ,to perform promptly and completely each and every term, condition or obligation imposed upon it under or pursuant to this ordinance, the City may terminate this ordinance, subject to Grantee's right to a court review of the reasonableness of such action. Section 19:. Permi and Inspection Fees. Nothing in this ordinance shall Fe—construed to limit the right--of the City to require the Grantee to pay reasonable costs incurred by the Citylin connection with the issuing of a permit, making of an inspectsggn, or performing any other service for or in connection with the Gr Estee or its facilities, whether pursuant to this ordinance op" any other ordinance or resolution now in effect or hereafter adopt d by the City. Section 20:. Remedies Not Exclusive; When Requirement Waived. All remedies and penalties under t is ordinance, including termination of the franchise, are- cumulative, and the -recovery or enforcement of one is not a bar to the recovery or enforcement of any other such _- remedy or penalty. The remedies and penalties contained in this ordinance, including termination of the franchise, are not exclusive and the City reserves the right to enforce the penal provisions of any ordinance or resolution and to avail itself of any and all remedies available at law or in equity. Failure- to enforce shall not be construed as a waiver of a breach of any term, condition or obligation imposed upon the Grantee by or pursuant to this ordinance. A specific waiver of a particular breach of any term, condition or obligation imposed upon the Grantee by or Pursuant to this ordinance shall not be a waiver of any other or subsequent or future breach of the same or of any other term, condition or obligation, or as a waiver of the term, condition or obligation itself. Section 21: When Effective. It is hereby declared that an emergency n exists and that it is necessary for the immediate preservation of the fly peace, health, and safety of the people of the City of Tigard, Oregon, that .this ordinance become effective immediately in order to provide continuity-of gas service, insure pulic revenues, and authorize the \ proper use-7of public property within the City, and this ordinance shall be. full force and effect upon its passage by the Council � yl and approval by the Mayor. ` Section 22: Acceptance. The Grantee shall, within thirty (30) days from the date this ordinance takes effect, file with the City its written unconditional acceptance of this franchise, and if the Grantee fails so to do, this ordinance shall be void. PASSED-- y the Council this day of 1982 APPROVED by the Mayor this day of 1982. a�yor or the City of Tigard, Oregan .-ATTEST: Recorder (Clerk) of the City of Tigard, regon _ 7 _ t CI ■ ® ®F TIVA B6D March 12, 1982 WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON Carl Cook, Director Federal Emergency Management Agency Region X Federal Regional Center Bothell, WA 98011 Dear Mr. Cook: Enclosed are the proposed wording changes to the City of Tigard's existing Sensitive Lands Ordinance that we discussed at our meeting of March 8th. I have also attached the old sections so that you can compare the language. Please review the proposed changes. and indicate to us as soon as possible if the proposed chagnes will qualify to meet Federal flood insurance regu- lations. We are scheduling this item for our March 29, 1982 City Council meeting. Sincerely, E1 zabeth A. Newton Associate Planner cmv 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 April 26, 1982 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Planning Departmendw— SUBJECT: Administration Problems Related to Permitted and Conditional Use Within Zoning Districts In the past few months, the City staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council has had substantial problems related to the existing uses that are permitted outright and permitted conditionally within each zoning district. In many zones, the permitted uses and conditional uses are similar types of uses, causing inconsistencies in Tigard's land use administration. For example, in a C-3 zone, sporting goods stores are permitted outright, yet, pet stores are only permitted conditionally. Both of the uses are general retail in nature, and the development standards, e.g. , parking and lot area requirements, etc. , are exactly the same. Staff is proposing to consolidate all of these specific uses into more general use type categories, e.g. , general retail or research services, which staff be- lieves allows for more consistent and equitable land use decisions. Those uses that are compatible with other uses within the various zoning dis- tricts, yet will have more impacts on the surrounding area, e.g. , schools, hospitals, etc. , are listed as conditional uses. To clarify these use types, staff is also proposing to include a Use Classifi- cation definition section within the Zoning Ordinance. This section will list each use type specified with any given zoning district, both permitted and conditional uses, and a definition with examples, when needed, of what sort of specific uses would be defining the general use type. An example of staff's proposal related to the C-3 zoning district is attached to this memo. In February, staff submitted this proposal to the Planning Commission for their review. However, at this time, no action has been taken. It will be the staff's intention to have the Planning Commission act on this matter at their regular scheduled May 4, 1982 meeting, and will then be forwarded to the City Council in late May. CHAPTERS 18.28 & 18.30 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3, C-3M Section 18.28.010 - Permitted Uses (1) Civic Use Types - Administrative services Cultural exhibits and library services Essential services - Lodge , fraternal and civic assembly Postal services Public safety services (2) Commercial Use Types - Professional and administrative services - Business support services - Financial and real estate services - Food and beverage retail sales - Funeral and interment services - undertaking, cremating - General retail sales - Medical and dental services - Convenient sales and personal services - Repair services - consumer - Transcient habitation - Eating and drinking establishments - Animal sales and services a. grooming b. veterinary - small animals - Participation sports and recreation - indoor Section 18.28.020 - Conditional Uses (see Section 18.72 & 18.84) - Major impact services and utilities - Eating and drinking establishments with drive-through facilities - Fuel sales - Parking services - Sports and recreation (participant and spectator general) - Hospitals - Heliports, in accordance with the Aeronautics Division (ODOT) and the FAA - Religious assembly and accessory uses - Automobile and equipment a. Sales and rental - light equipment b. Repairs - light s33 C. Mobile Home Residential Refers to the residential occupancy of mobile homes. Typical uses include mobile home parks, subdivisions, or mobile home condominiums. (2) CIVIC USE TYPES Refers to the performance of utility, educational, recreational, cultural, protective , governmental, and other uses which are strongly vested with public or social importance. They also include certain development accessory to the above , as specified in Section 303, Accessory Development Regulations. a. Administrative Services Refers to consulting, record keeping, clerical, or public contact services that deal directly with the citizen, together with incidental storage and maintenance of necessary vehicles, and excludes commercial use type, "Professional and Administrative Services." Typical use types are associated with governmental offices. b. Community Recreation Refers to recreational, social, or multi-purpose uses typically associated with parks, playfields , golf courses, or community recreation buildings. C. Cultural Exhibits and Library Services Refers to nuseum-like preservation and exhibition of objects in one or more of the arts and sciences, gallery exhibition of works or art , or library collection of books, manuscripts, etc. , for study and reading. d. Essential Services Refers to services which are necessary to support principal use type development and involves only minor structures such as lines and poles, phone booths, fire hydrants, as well as bus stops, benches, and mail- boxes , which are necessary to support principal development. e. Hospitals Refers to an institution where the ill of injured may receive medical, surgical or psychiatric treatment; and nursing, food and lodging during their stay. f. Lodge, Fraternal, and Civic Assembly Refers to meetings and activities primarily conducted for their members. Excluded from this use type are uses classified as group residential, group care , and transient habitation (all types). Typical uses include meeting places for civic clubs, lodges, or fraternal or veteran organizations. g. Major Impact Services and Utilities Refers to services and utilities which have substantial impact. Such uses may be permitted in any district when the public interest super- cedes the usual limitations placed on land use and transcends the usual restraints of the district for reasons of necessary location and community wide interest. Typical places or uses are sanitary landfills, airports, detention and correction institutions, mass transit waiting stations or turnarounds, and includes spectator sports and entertainment with a capacity for 300 or more such as large exhibition halls or sports stadiums; and excludes University services and facilities. h. Minor Impact Utilities Refers to public utilities which have a local impact on surrounding properties and are necessary to provide essential services. Tupical uses are electrical and gas distribution substations, and radio, microwave, and telephone transmitters. i. Parking Services Refers to parking services involving garages and lots. j. Postal Services Refers to mailing services and processing as traditionally operated or leased by the United States Postal Service and includes United +}` Parcel Service facilities. k. Public Safety Services Refers to the providing of protection by a district or entity pursuant to Fire , Life, and Safety Code Sections together with the incidental storage and maintenance of necessary vehicles. Typical uses include fire stations, police stations , ambulance services. 1. Religious Assembly Refers to religious services involving public assembly such as customarily occurs in synagogues, temples, and churches. M. Schools Refers to a place or institution for teaching and learning. Typical uses include nursery, elementary, junior and senior high schools, and related uses. (3) COMMERCIAL USE TYPES Commercial use types include the distribution and sale or rental of goods; and the provision of services other than those classified as Civic Uses. a. Agricultural Sales Refers to sale from the premises of feed, grain, fertilizers, pesti- cides, and similar goods. Typical uses include nurseries, hay, feed, and grain stores. Da to e, _z. I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following i ter : (Please print your name) // 5 r'•i C/— J irk �1 "lame, Address & Affiliation Item Description 3c 3 / /11 / of T t_ /o April 23, 1982 MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Planning Staff'zWW On April 6, 1982, the Planning Commission unanimously approved a Preliminary and General Plan Review for the Main Street Development Commercial Project. At the same hearing a Sensitive Lands Permit was approved to allow fill within the 100 year floodplain. Further, the Planning Commission voted to forward the matter on to City Council for review and adoption of an ordinance in accordance with Chapter 18.56.043 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The minutes of the meeting are attached. The Planning Commission voted to approve the application with conditions recommended by the Planning Staff. (See attached Staff Report) . If City Council wishes to attach further conditions, there is space provided for this on the ordinance. STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.4 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 6, 1982 Fowler Junior High - Lecture Room 10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon March 31, 1982 A. GENERAL FACTS: Case: Preliminary and General Plan Review for a sixteen acre commercial development and a sensitive lands permit to fill within the 100-year floodplain. (CPR 8-81, CPR 9-81; M 2-81) Request: For a Preliminary and General Plan Review for a sixteen acre commercial development and a sensitive lands permit to fill within the 100-year floodplain. Recommendation: Based on the material submitted by the applicant, the applicant plan policies and LCDC goals and guidelines, staff recommends approval of the Preliminary and General Plan Review and a Sensitive Lands Permit to 'fill within the 100-year floodplain. Previous Action: On December 8, 1981, the Planning Commission gave approval for the applicant's proposal for site access. On June 22, 1981, the Tigard City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Revision on this 16.6 acre site to the C-3MPD Main Street Commercial Planned Development Designation. Applicant: Main Street Land Corporation/J.B. Bishop, Suite 303, 10505 SW Barbur Blvd. , Portland, Oregon 97219 Owner: Same Application Date: March 2, 1982 Site Location: 12660 SW Main (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 2AC, Tax Lots 201, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 2200 and 2301) Lot Area: 16.6 acres NPO Comment: No written comment from NPO #1 had been received as of the date of this report. Park Board Comment: The Park Board, at their meeting of March 25, 1982, voted unanimously to support the concept of the proposed Main Street Development. (see attached Park Board minutes) Area Characteristics: The property to the east of the site is designated Greenway on the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is the site of the proposed Downtown-Fanno Creek Park. The property west of the site is a mix of commercial and multi-family . residential. The property along Pacific Highway and Main Street north of the site is general commercial with the exception of St. Anthony's School on the corner of Pacific STAFF REPORT M 2-82 Page 2 Highway and SW Johnson. The property along SW Ash, at the southern end of the site is multi-family and single family residential with a portion of the property in the greenway. Site Characteristics The site is vacant except for a building in the northwest corner which is currently occupied by Northwest Marine. The applicant intends to remove the existing building. Fanno Creek runs along the eastern edge of the property. Approxiinately, 1.8 acres in the southeast portion of the site is within the 100-year. floodplain. Access to the site is from Main Street on the eastern edge, Pacific Highway on the western edge and Ash Avenue on .the south. Water is available to the site from a line in SW Main. Sewer is available from an eight line which runs through the property. Applicable Planning Criteria and Staff Analysis A.. LCDC Goals and Guidelines: Goal 1: Citizen Involvement - The intent of this goal is to insure the opportunity of interested citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. In the case of this development, NPO #1 and the Park Board have had more than one opportunity to review and comment on various phases of this project. In addition, there have been several public hearings on this project at which all interested citizens have had the opportunity to comment. Goal 2: Land Use Planning - All applicable LCDC goals, NPO #1 plan policies and Tigard Municipal Code provisions have been considered in the review of this proposal. Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources - The intent of this goal is to protect lands which have a value as open space, historic or natural resources areas. There are twelve resources to be considered in reviewing this goal. The resources applicable to this appli- cation are as follows: a. Land needed or desirable for open space; a portion of this site is designated greenway on the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant intends to fill in this area to be used as a parking lot. However, the appli- cant will excavate on his site and in the park area to the east to form a lake for the park and a portion of the development. It is staff's feeling that the applicant should also grade the park area as a part of the excavation work. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards - In the case of this site, a portion of the property presently lies within the 100-year floodplain, approximately 1.8 acres. The excavation and fill proposed by -the applicant will be done in such a manner as to meet the requirements of the City under Section 18.57.070 of the Tigard Municipal Code. This code requirement prohibits any fill or excavation which would reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise flood surface elevation or flow rates or adversely affect flow direction on upstream or downstream properties. M 2-82 Page 3 The applicant's engineer has provided staff with information detailing mitigation measures and the effects and flooding. (see attached) Goal 8: Recreational Needs - The intent of this goal is to satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. The City will benefit from this development in that the applicant will be making im- provements to the Downtown-Fanno Creek Park area. The applicant will be excavating a lake in' the park and will grade the area around the lake to provide a transition from the higher ground down to the lake. The Downtown- Fanno Creek Park has been planned for 3 years and staff feels that the improvements to the park proposed with this development will be important steps toward getting the park completed. Goal 9: Economy of the State - The intent of this goal is to diversify and improve the economy of the state. The commercial center proposed on this site will be the largest in the City of Tigard. The applicant feels that the mix of general retail and office combined with the proximity of the site to the downtown and downtown park offers a unique character not shared by any other development of this type in the City. Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services - Public facilities including sewer and water are available._ See recommendations and conditions for design adequacy.' B. APPLICABLE NPO- #1 POLICIES: Policy 19. In the interest of safety and efficiency, the number of highway access points must be kept to a minimum. Wherever possible, businesses on Pacific Highway should be clustered and share common parking facilities and driveways. As new development occurs, the number of access points should not exceed the number necessary for proper on-site traffic circulation and where possible should be contained with access to adjacent businesses. The proposed development will be limited to one access on to Pacific Highway. Policy 23. The redevelopment of downtown should be accomplished in order to make it complementary to newer shopping areas. Convenience, appearance and the needs of the shopping public should be primary considerations. The development proposed on this site should be an asset to Tigard's downtown and may encourage other new development in the downtown area. Policy 28. Ash Avenue should be extended across Fanno Creek, enabling access to the neighborhood's commercial area without using Pacific Highway. Design features and mitigation measures shall hold traffic volumes to the middle limits of a minor collector. Improvements to SW Ash Avenue from SW Hill to Fanno Creek shall be constructed as condition of development of adjacent properties. Policy 30. New streets will be constructed as development occurs and new streets are necessary to carry traffic created by the new development. Of the t streets proposed by the plan, only Ash Avenue warrants construction at this time. All other streets should be constructed as the parcels they traverse are developed. M 2-82 Page 4 C. APPLICABLE PROVISIONS FORM THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. The requirements for a Preliminary Plan Review are outlined in Chapter 18.56.020 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The applicant's proposal speaks to the requirements with the following exceptions. a. There is no mention in the application of the number of parking spaces required or provided. Parking appears to be adequate. However, staff will review this closely at Site Design Review. b. Although the site plan submitted shows areas to be landscaped, no specific landscape or irrigation plans were submitted. That item will be addressed at Site Design Review. c. There is no mention of the total square -footage property within the 100-year floodplain. However, staff feels that the information provided is adequate for purposes of review. d. The. application does not detail the square footage of land included in areas of public improvements such as streets, utility easements -and park land. 2. The Planning Commission may grant approval, approval with conditions, modify or deny any Preliminary Plan Review based upon the Comprehensive Plan, the stan- dards of Title- 18, and other regulations and the suitability of the proposed development in relation to the existing character of the area. (see Code Section 18.56.021) 3. The applicant has met the requirements for General Plan Review under Section 18.56.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Further, the Planning Director has determined that the preliminary and general plan reivew may be' heard simul- taneously_ (Reference Code Section 18.56.041) 4. Chapter 18.57 - Sensitive Lands - The intent of this chapter of the code is to protect, regulate and control areas of land within the floodplain and mitigate effects of encroachment into the floodplain. Staff has reviewed the applicant's proposal to encroach into the floodplain and greenway. Data sub- mitted by the applicant appears to indicate that any adverse affects can be mitigated. 5. The Sensitive Lands Section of the Tigard Municipal Code address uses and activities allowed in the floodplain as follows: 1118.57-040 Uses and activities allowed within a Special Use Permit granted by the Planning Commission and based on the standards set forth in Section 18.57.050: 11(1) Within drainageways/greenways and steeply sloping lands: (A) Fill, grading, excavating; (B) Structures; (C) Off-street parking and maneuvering areas, accessways and service drives located on the ground surface; (D) Roadways, bridges or utility facilities; 17M EPORT Page 5 (E) Removing any live vegetation other than poison oak, tansy ragwort, blackberry or any other noxious vegetation. The grading and excavating proposed by the applicant will enhance the greenway by making the area usable. (2) Within the floodplain/greenways only: (A) "Any temporary structure which is not habitable and by its nature, can be readily removed from the floodplain area during periods of flooding, and which would impede or interfere with the flow of waters within the district," (B) Any change in the topography or terrain which would change the flow of waters during flooding periods, or which would increase the flood hazard or alter the direction or velocity of the flood- water flow. 'The applicant's proposal will alter the topography of the site by taking the areas of fill out of the floodplain and excavating in areas to allow for ad- ditional water storage areas. The applicant's proposal may alter the direction of the floodwater flow. 6. Section 18..57.070 of the Tigard Municipal Code dictates standards for approval or denial of a Special Use Permit in a floodplain as follows: 1118.57.070 Standards. (a) Application for Special .Use Permit in floodplain areas shall be granted or denied in accordance with the following standards: (1) No structure, fill excavation, storage or other use shall be permitted which alone or in combination with existing or proposed uses would reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise either the flood surface elevation or flow rates, or adversely affect flow direction on upstream or downstream properties, or create a present or foreseeable. hazard to public health, safety and general welfare. The applicant's proposal will not reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise either the flood surface elevation or flow rates. Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to approval of the pre- liminary and general plan and sensitive lands permit for Main Street: 1. The applicant shall apply for Site Design Review addressing the items set forth in Section 18.59.060 of the Tigard Municipal Code. 2. The applicant shall address the availability of public services to his site, specifically, sewer, water and storm drainage. A public facilities plan shall be submitted to the City of Tigard Engineering Division and approved prior to issuance of any Building Permits. Ash Avenue shall be improved with full street improvements from Hill Street to Fanno Creek to approved City standards. t 3. The street connecting Pacific Highway and Ash Avenue shall be a public street designed to accommodate collector street loads, but not less than City of Tigard's collector street standards for cross-section. STAFF REPORT M 2-82 Page 6 G. The applicant shall submit detailed engineering plans for fill and ex- cavation work to be done on the site and in the park. The Army Corps of Engineers shall review the detailed plans for effect of the proposal on water velocities and direction of floodwater flow. 5. No more than one structure is allowed on any tax lot. The tax lots in- volved in this project should be consolidated into one tax lot, or lot line adjustments shall be filed with Washington County so that each structure occupies one tax lot. 6. Specific plans for grading and the lake proposed in the Downtown-Fanno Creek Park shall be reviewed by the Park Board. Detailed engineering plans for grading in the park area and excavation of the lake shall be submitted to . and approved by the. City of Tigard's Engineering Division. 7. The applicant shall receive approval from the Building Department and Public Works Department confirming that soils conditions are appropriate for construction prior to issuance of Building Permits. AEliza Approved bPrepared by: C4--*, Frank A. Crrie th A. Newton Assocate Planner Planning Director April 23, 1982 MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Planning Staff 1Z4ptm On April 6, 1982, the Planning Commission unanimously approved• a Preliminary and General Plan Review for. the Main Street Development Commercial Project. At the same hearing a Sensitive Lands Permit was approved to allow fill within the 100 year floodplain. Further, the Planning Commission voted to forward the matter on to City Council for review and adoption of an ordinance in accordance with Chapter 18.56.043 of the Tigard Municipal Code . The minutes of the meeting are attached. The Planning Commission voted to approve the application with conditions recommended by the Planning Staff. (See attached Staff Report). If City Council wishes to attach further conditions, there is space provided for this on the ordinance. a • i STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.4 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION April 6, 1982 Fowler Junior High - Lecture Room 10865 Sol Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon March 31, 1982 A. GENERAL FACTS: Case: Preliminary and General Plan Review for a sixteen acre commercial development and a sensitive lands permit to fill within the 100-year floodplain. (CPR 8-81, CPR 9-81; M 2-81) Request: For a Preliminary and General Plan Review for a sixteen acre commercial development and a sensitive lands permit to fill within the 100-year floodplain. Recommendation: Based on the material submitted by the applicant, the applicant plan policies and LCDC goals and guidelines, staff recommends approval of the Preliminary and General Plan Review and a Sensitive Lands Permit to -fill within the 100-year floodplain. Previous Action: On December 8, 1981, the Planning Commission gave approval for the applicant's proposal for site access. On June 22, 1981, the Tigard City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan Revision on this 16.6 acre site to the C-3MPD Main Street Commercial Planned Development Designation. Applicant: Main Street Land Corporation/J.B. Bishop, Suite 303, 10505 SW Barbur Blvd. , Portland, Oregon 97219 Owner: Same Application Date: March 2, 1982 Site Location: 12660 SW Main (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 2AC, Tax Lots 201, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 2200 and 2301) Lot Area: 16.6 acres NPO Comment: No written comment from NPO X61 had been received as of the date of this report. Park Board Comment: The Park Board, at their meeting of March 25, 1982, voted unanimously to support the concept of the proposed Main Street Development. (see attached Park Board minutes) Area Characteristics: The property to the east of the site is designated Greenway on the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is the site of the proposed Downtown-Fanno Creek Park. The property west of -the site is a mix of commercial and multi-family residential. The property along Pacific Highway and Main Street north of the site is general commercial with the exception of St. Anthony's School on the corner of Pacific STAFF REPORT M 2-82 Page 2 Highway and SW Johnson. The property along SW Ash, at the southern end of the site is multi-family and single family residential with a portion of the property in the greenway. Site Characteristics The site is vacant except for a building in the northwest corner which is currently occupied by Northwest Marine. The applicant intends to remove the existing building. Fanno Creek runs along the eastern edge of the property. Approximately, 1.8 acres in the southeast portion of the site is within the 100-year. floodplain. Access to the site is from Main Street on the eastern edge, Pacific Highway on the western edge and Ash Avenue on.the. south. Water is available to the site from a line in SW Main. Sewer is available from an eight line which runs through the property. Applicable Planning Criteria and Staff Analysis _ A.. LCDC Goals and Guidelines: Goal 1: Citizen Involvement - The intent of this goal is to insure the opportunity of interested citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. In. the case of this development, NPO #1 and the Park Board have- had more than one opportunity to review and comment on various phases of this project. In addition, there have been several public hearings on this .project at which all interested citizens have had the opportunity to comment. Goal .2: Land Use Planning - All applicable LCDC goals, NPO #1 plan policies and Tigard Municipal Code provisions have been considered in the review of this proposal. Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources - The intent of this goal is to protect lands which have a value as open space, historic or natural resources areas_ There are twelve resources to be considered in reviewing this goal. The resources applicable to this appli- cation are as follows: a. Land needed or desirable for open space; a portion of this site is designated greenway on the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant intends to fill in this area to be used as a parking lot. However, the appli- cant will excavate on his site and in the park area to the east to form a lake for the park and a portion of the development. It is staff's feeling that the applicant should also grade the park area as a part of the excavation work. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards - In the case of this site, a portion of the property presently lies within the 100-year floodplain, approximately 1.8 acres. The excavation and fill proposed by -the applicant will be done in such a manner as to meet the requirements of the City under Section 18.57.070 of the Tigard Municipal Code. This code requirement prohibits any fill or excavation which would reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise flood surface elevation or flow rates or- adversely affect flow direction on upstream or downstream properties. �• M 2-82 ge 3 The applicant's engineer has provided staff with information detailing mitigation measures and the effects and flooding. (see attached) Goal 8: Recreational Needs - The intent of this goal is to satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. The City will benefit from this development in that the applicant will be making im- provements to the Downtown-Fanno Creek Park area. The applicant will be excavating a lake in* the park and will grade the area around .the lake to provide a transition from the higher ground down to the lake. The Downtown- Fanno Creek Park has been planned for 3 years and staff, feels that the improvements to the park proposed with this development will be important steps toward getting the park completed: Goal 9: Economy of the State - The intent of this goal is to diversify and improve the economy of the state. The commercial center proposed on this site will be the largest in the City of Tigard. The applicant feels that the mix of general retail and office combined with the proximity of the site to the downtown and downtown park offers a unique character not shared by any other development of this type in the City. Goal ll: Public Facilities and Services - Public facilities including sewer and water are available. See recommendations and conditions for design adequacy.- B. APPLICABLE NPO- #1 POLICIES: t Policy 19. In the interest of safety and efficiency, the number of highway access points must be kept to a minimum. Wherever possible, businesses on Pacific Highway should be clustered and share common parking facilities and . driveways. As new development occurs, the number of access points should not exceed the number necessary for proper on-site traffic circulation and where possible should be contained with access to adjacent businesses. The proposed development will be limited to one access on to Pacific Highway. Policy 23. The redevelopment of downtown should be accomplished in order to make it complementary to newer shopping areas. Convenience, appearance and the needs' of the shopping public should be primary considerations. The development proposed on this site should be an asset to Tigard's downtown and may encourage other new development in the downtown- area. Policy 28. Ash Avenue should be extended across Fanno Creek, enabling access to the neighborhood's commercial area without using Pacific Highway. Design features and mitigation measures shall hold traffic volumes to the middle limits of a minor collector. Improvements to SW Ash Avenue from SW Hill to Fanno Creek shall be constructed as condition of development of adjacent properties. Policy 30. New streets will be constructed as development occurs and new ( streets are necessary to carry traffic created by the new development. Of the streets proposed by the plan, only Ash Avenue warrants construction at this time. All other streets should be constructed as the parcels they traverse are developed. M 2-82_ l Page 4 ( �� C. APPLICABLE PROVISIONS FORM THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. The requirements for a Preliminary Plan Review are outlined in Chapter 18.56.020 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The applicant's proposal speaks to the requirements with the following exceptions. a. There is no mention in the application of the number of parking spaces required or provided. Parking appears to be adequate. However, staff will review this closely at Site Design Review. b. Although the site plan submitted shows areas to be landscaped, no specific landscape or irrigation plans were submitted. That item will be addre*sed at Site Design Review. c. There is no mention of the total square-footage property within the 100-year floodplain. However, staff feels that the information provided is adequate for purposes of review. d. The application does not detail the square .footage of land included in areas of public improvements such as streets, utility easements-and park land. 2. The Planning Commission may grant approval, approval with conditions, modify or deny any Preliminary Plan Review based upon the Comprehensive Plan, the stan- dards of Title- 18, and other regulations and the suitability of the proposed development in relation to the existing character of the area. (see Code Section 18.56.021) 3. The applicant has met the requirements for General Plan Review under Section 18.56.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Further, the Planning Director has determined that the preliminary and general plan reivew may be- heard simul- taneously_ (Reference Code Section 18.56.041) 4. Chapter 18.57 - Sensitive Lands - The intent of this chapter of the code is to protect, regulate and control areas of land within the floodplain and mitigate effects of encroachment into the floodplain. Staff has reviewed the applicant's proposal to encroach into the floodplain and greenway. Data sub- mitted by the applicant appears to indicate that any adverse affects can be mitigated. 5. The Sensitive Lands Section of the Tigard Municipal Code address uses and activities allowed in the floodplain as follows: "18.57.040 Uses and activities allowed within a Special Use Permit granted by the Planning Commission and based on the standards set forth in Section 18.57.050: "(1) Within drainageways/greenways and steeply sloping lands: (A) Fill, grading, excavating; (B) Structures; (C) Off-street parking and maneuvering areas, accessways and service drives located on the ground surface; (D) Roadways, bridges or utility facilities; II STAFF REPORT t�•2-£32 Page 5 (E) Removing any live vegetation other than poison oak, tansy ragwr,~t, blackberry or any other noxious vegetation. The grading and excavating proposed by the applicant will enhance the greenway by making the area usable. (2) Within the floodplain/greenways only: (A) "Any temporary structure which is not habitable and by its nature, can be readily removed from the floodplain area during periods of flooding, and which would impede or interfere with the flow of waters within the district," (B) Any change in the topography or terrain which would change the flow of waters during flooding periods, or which would increase the flood hazard or alter the direction or velocity of the flood:.- water lood-water flow. 'The applicant's proposal will alter the topography 'of the site by taking the areas of fill out of the floodplain and excavating in areas to allow for ad- ditional water storage areas. The applicant's proposal may alter the direction of the' floodwater flow. 6. Section 18..57.070 of the Tigard Municipal Code dictates standards for approval or denial of a Special Use Permit in a floodplain as follows: 1018.57.070 Standards. (a) Application for 'a Special .Use Permit in floodplain areas shall be granted or denied in accordance with the following standards: (1) No structure, fill excavation, storage or other use shall be permitted which alone or in combination with existing or proposed uses would reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise either the flood surface elevation or flow rates, or adversely affect flow direction on upstream or downstream properties, or create a present or foreseeable. hazard to public health, safety and general welfare. The applicant's proposal will not reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise either the flood surface elevation or flow rates. Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to approval of the pre- liminary and general plan and sensitive lands permit for Main Street: 1. The applicant shall apply for Site Design Review addressing the items set forth in Section 18.59.060 of the Tigard Municipal Code. 2. The applicant shall address the availability of public services to his site, specifically, sewer, water and storm drainage. A public facilities plan shall be submitted to the City of Tigard Engineering Division and approved prior to issuance of any Building Permits. Ash Avenue shall be improved with full street improvements from Hill Street to Fanno Creek to approved City standards. 3. The street connecting Pacific Highway and Ash Avenue shall be a public street designed to accommodate collector street loads, but not less than City of Tigard's collector street standards for cross-section. STAFF REPORT 4 M 2-82 Page b 4. The applicant shall submit detailed engineering plans fc- fill and ex- cavation work to be done on the site and in the park. The Army Corps of Engineers shall review the detailed plans for effect of the proposal on water velocities and direction of floodwater flow. 5. No more than one structure is allowed on any tax lot. The tax lots in- volved in this project should be consolidated into one tax lot,- or lot line adjustments shall be filed with Washington County so that each structure occupies one tax lot. 6. Specific plans for grading and the lake proposed in the Downtown-Fanno Creek Park shall be reviewed by the Park Board. Detailed engineering plans for grading in the park area and excavation of the lake shall be submitted to , and approved by the_ Ciiy of Tigard's Engineering Division. . 7. The applicant shall receive approval from the Building Department and Public Works Department confirming that soils conditions are appropriate for construction prior to issuance of Building Permits. Prepared by: Approved Eliza th A. Newton IFrank A. Currie Associate'Planner Planning Director TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - April 6, 1982 FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LECTURE ROOM 10865 S.W. WALNUT STREET - TIGARD, OREGON 1. Chairman Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. 2. ROLL CALL: Tepedino, Speaker, Kolleas, Christen, Herron, Helmer, Bonn, Owens, Moen (arrived 7:39 P.M.) . I STAFF: Planning Director, Frank Currie; Associate Planner, Elizabeth Newton; Associate Planner, Jeremy Coursolle; Legal Counsel, Ken Elliott; Support Services, Diane Jelderks. 3. The minutes of the March 2 1982 meetinq were considered. Support Services reported location of each public hearing item was inserted in original minutes per City Councilts request. Commissioner Bonn moved for approval of minutes, with corrections, seconded by Commissioner Helmer. Motion carried unanimously. 4 . COMMISSION COMMUNICATION - none at the present time_ 5 . Chairman Tepedino opened the Public Hearing by reading the usual statement of authority for and procedure to be followed in the meeting. 5.1 CONDITIONAL USE CU 7-82 Shirley Bilbao/GSG of Oregon - NPO # 6 A request for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a restaurant (Peeks & Stongs Potato Pub) located at 13620 S.W. Pacific Highway. WCTM 2S1 2CC lot 900. (a) Associate Planner, Newton made staff's recommendation for approval with condition that applicant apply for a sign permit. (b) APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Applicant had nothing to add to staff report. (c) PUBLIC TESTIMONY - No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED (d) COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION e Commissioner Herron questioned use of electronic games; staff advised this was an amenity rather than actual use. ® Commissioner Kolleas wanted to know if this was a restaurant or tavern; staff stated both are conditional uses in this zone, however, this was a restaurant which serves beer and wine. a Commissioner Kolleas was also concerned if signs were in violation of sign code; staff noted this was covered under condition number one. e Commissioner Speaker suggested changing the wording in staff's recommendation to read: "Conditional Use request to operate a restaurant at 13620 S.W. Pacific Hwy. " o Discussion followed whether to approve as a restaurant or a tavern. w Commissioner Owens moved for approval of CU 7-82 as recommended, per Commissioner Speakers correction, with condition that applicant shall apply for a sign permit. Commissioner Helmer seconded the motion. Motion carried unanim-3usly. 5.2 ZONE CHANGE ZC 1-82 Michael A. Robuck/Kevin M. Forney NPO # 3 u This item was postponed until May 4, 1982, because of improper* public notification. 5.3 GENERAL PLAN REVIEW CPR 13-81 - SENSITIVE LAND PERMIT M 1-82 The Meadows NPO # 7 A request by Bruce Kamhoot for a General Plan Review of the Meadows, a 27 lot subdivision and request for a Sensitive Lands Permit to excavate and fill within the 100 year floodplain. (WCTM 1S1 34DA, lot 2600) 106th and Black Diamond Way. (a) Associate Planner, Newton made staff's recommendation for approval with conditions. (b) APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Edward M. Writer, respresenting Bruce Kamh oot, concurred with staff report. Wanted to emphasize, there will be no change in flow or depth of water. He stated there were concerns of neighbors regarding wildlife inhabitants; so he walk through the project and did not see were there would be any affect on the wildlife. (c) PUBLIC TESTIMONY v Britt Weatherhead, 11005 S.W. 106th, Tigard, expressed his concern whether there is a need for this type of housing at this time. Presently homes in this price range are not selling. He had obtained -vacancy rate figures from Metropolitan Housing Authority, which showed Tigard had the highest vacancy rate in the six county area. He was also concerned about the effects development would have on Fanno Creek. He stated there is a run-off problem today, what will it be like with future development. Also, recently the North Dakota Bridge was closed because of high water; what specific plans are being made to prevent this from happening in the future. e Marian-Maddox, 10800 S.W. 108th Ct. stated this winter the water had flooded most of the area behind her house, which is were this project is to be placed. She wanted to know where the water will go when development is put in. What kind of insurance can City give that she won:'t be flooded after this project has been developed. e Barbara Priest, 10710 S.W. Ponderosa Place, stated her house looks out over the floodplain area and she has seen Blue Herron in residence all along that area. She continued there is already a traffic and parking problem in the neighborhood. Presently, North*Dakota does not have room for bicycle or pedestrian traffic, no provisions have been made for the railroad crossing nor the congestion problem at Tiedeman and Greenburg Road intersection. With the addition of another development theseIiazards will only be increased. She also contacted CH2M Hill regarding their report; and was informed it is out of date. She was concerned about the erosion occuring along Fanno Creek and the filling into the creek by the Steel Company, which causes even more restrictions. w Bill Robinson, previous owner of the property that is to be developed. He was not opposed to project, just wanted flood problems clarified. He is also the owner of the property which Koll Business Center is located. This project was suppose to have a retention pond, however, this has not occurred. Suggested putting a retention pond on the other side of the creek from the project. 2. Y - o Tim Roth, 10705 S.W. Ponderosa Place was in favor of a retention pond, however doesn't feel it will be adequate, especially with the run off problem created by Koll Business Center. He stated he sees the flooding first, has used two feet of fill and still has water in his back yard. He wanted to know the type of fill dirt to be used. o Barabara Priest added she had contacted Koll Business Center and was informed their parking lot was frilled to iv2 feet and they are also experiencing problems with flooding. She stated she had obtained her information on CH2M Hills report from Roger Sutherland, who suggested fill be done to 163 feet. ® Discussion followed among Commissioners, staff and residents regarding the retention pond, feasibility of this type of project, manufactured home standards and the Blue Herrons which inhabit the site. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED (d) COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION o Commissioner Moen felt development should be moved over about 10 feet and additional fill should be put in. s Commissioner Bonn wanted to know if City had pictures. He was concerned with project being so close to Fanno Creek. e Commissioner Christen commented that development now may be more feasible than later, because of the economy. e Commissioner Owen, first reaction is floodplain water goes beyond the lines shown on the map. She is in support of this type of development, however has a difficult time supporting the Sensitive Lands Permit. s Commissioner Helmer wanted to know the height of the floodplain in that area; staff responded, 161 feet. Discussion followed regarding Corp of Engineers calculations verus the CH2M Hill report. • Commissioner Speaker wanted to know what we could tell these people so they would feel secure that their homes would not be flooded with the addition of this development. He felt the traffic and pedestrian problem could be corrected if property owners would form a L.I.D.. He was also concerned about the type of fill dirt to be use; staff stated this was covered under condition number three. • Discussion followed between Commissioners and staff as to want plans were being made to prevent flooding of Fanno Creek in the future. w Commissioner Moen felt the two main issues are the impact this development would have on the neighborhood and the floodplain issue. In the past they have avoided letting residential development in the floodplain. He was not in favor of the layout of this project and was concerned if this is the best. location for this type of development. He questioned if the covenents proposed would become a part of the PD or if the City had any control and if the neighborhood conditions, submitted by the local residents, should be made a part of the motion. t n Chairman Tepedino requested Legal Counsel to address the issue regarding covenents. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 6, 1982 Page 3 a Legal Counsel stated he had not reviewed the covenants, however, to have the City as beneficiary of the covenants you would have to find something in the Planned Development District, evidence in the code or a special provision in the covenant itself. Other than that, the covenants go with the land and benefit everyone in the development. He did not believe there would be any problem, if it was agreed upon, to have the City be the beneficiary. Y Commissioner Kol.leas likes manufactured home, but did feel it was fair to deliberately place them in the floodplain. She felt we should wait until the bridges and Fanno Creek could handle the waterflow before allowing development in the floodplain. o Commissioner Herron was not against the project, however, was concerned about the development being in the floodplain. ® Chairman Tepedino objected to massive invasion of the floodplain. He felt the City has a morale obligation to protect owners against flooding risk. He questioned possibility of the applicant posting a bond, in the event any flooding should take place, the homeowner would have some kind of protection. • Commissioner Speaker favored this type of development, however, until there is a schedule or foreseeable mitigation to protect property owners from flooding, in the even of upstream development; which the Commission has no contro, '.this application should be denied. a Commissioner Bonn did not favor massive intrusion of the floodplain. He suggested this project might be re-engineered to reduce the number of lots that are in the floodplain. Commissioner Moen moved for denial of CPRPD 13-81, Planned Development General Review; and M 1-82 Sensitive Lands Permit based on the lack of present foreseeable action to mitigate the adverse affects ,on Fanno Creek due to upstream development. Motion seconded by Commissioner Kolleas. Motion carried unanimously for denial_ 5.4 PRELIMINARY & GENERAL PLAN REVIEW CPR 8-81 - CPR 9-81 SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 2-81 Main Street Land Corporation NPO # 1 A request for a Preliminary and General Plan Review for a sixteen acre commercial development and a sensitive lands permit to fill within the 100 year floodplain. Location: 12660 S.W. Main Street (WCTM 2S1 2AC lots 201, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 2200 and 2301) (a) Associate Planner Newton made staff's recommendation for approval with conditions_ Adding condition number 8. Per Chapter 18.57.070 of the Tigard Municipal Code the applicant must obtain the permits required by the State of Oregon under ORS 541 for removal of filling of water ways or demonstrate that the provision of this statute do not apply. (b) NPO REPORT e John Butler, Secretary/Vice-President, NPO # 1, still supports this project after three years. They feel this will make a nice anchor for the south end of town. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 6, 1982 Page 4 1 (c) APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - JB Bishop, 10505 S.W. Barbur Blvd. Suite 303 was present with diagrams and a scale model of the project. Also in attendance with him was his Architectial Staff, who would be making,the primary presentation; a hydrologist from McKenzie Engineering, the project's Civil Engineer; and Traffic Engineers from CH2M Hill. Following JB introduction he turned the presentation over to Dennis Brun, Architect. 0 Dennis Brun, Brun Moreland Christopher Architect, 1020 S.W. Tenth Ave., Portland; stated they had reviewed the staff report and in general agreed with the conditions that were set forth. He explained the plan is essentially the same as was presented at the previous study session. They have put considerable amount of work to refine and define each and every element of the overall development_ They have been working with staff to review all possible consideration for public orientation and accessibility. Mr. Brun expressed his interest and concern for the downtown revitalization efforts, the development of the Civic Center and the overall development in downtown Tigard. This is an unique site as the short side of the project faces the primary arterial and a portion of the property is located within the sensitive lands area. This is a community shopping center, with 200,000 square feet, costing 12.8 million dollars plus will provide 240 regular jobs. They feel this development will form the bases of the major revitalization effort in the total downtown area. Their concept was to try to integrate . and develop the opportunties that are available with the development of the Downtown Greenway Park and the proposed Civic Center, which is located directly across the creek from this project. Using the aide of drawings and a scale model of the project Mr. Brun reviewed the layout of the project_ He proposed a series of pathways connecting the Mainstreet Shopping Center to the downtown park to help accentuate pedestrian movement between the Civic Center, the downtown park and'-the-`shopping-center. -This scheme has been presented to several groups and individuals who have all endorsed the project. Their goal was to create a atmosphere*that is unique, high quality, which will attract top retailer to Tigard. They feel Tigard needs this development, the revitalization plan says we need this development and there is no other property in the downtown area for this kind of shopping center. They have retailers who are ready to start final negotations for leases, however, until they receive Planning Commission approval, they are at a standstill. • JB Bishop informed the Commission that the Department of Environmental Control application for an Indirect Source Permit has a proposed approval date of April 14, 1982, for 990 parking spaces, subject to any further public input. He questioned condition number two of the staff report requesting full street improvements from Hill Street to Fanno Creek. In the past only half street improvements have been required. He referenced the Ash Avenue Ordinance, which was approved by City Council on February 8, 1982, that adjoining property owners would pay their fare share of the road improvements. He requested the Commission consider this and make their decision based on normal. operating standards and policies. He stated they would be working with staff and the city attorney to document the donations of the streets, which will be improved by Mainstreet land Company to City standards and that the City Council accept and approve this donation prior to the issuance of building permits. He then introduced Greg Vik, President, Vik Construction, who is his general contractor. 0 Greg Vik, Vik Construction Company, Eugene, Oregon, stated his interest in this project was not only economic, but they like to keep a portfolio of the best quality projects. They have done work for Hewitt-Pack, Tektronix Inc. (at Beaverton Main Campus) , Hilton Hotel, Warehouser and they feel this project is of that quality. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - April 6, 1982 Page 5 PUBLIC TESTIMONY u J. Allan Paterson, 11605 S.W. Manzanita, stated his main concern was answered in the staff report under condition number two for full street improvements. • John Butler, 9760 S.W. O'Mara - He referenced the ORB Fanno Creek Park Plan showing how their study overlaped this development. He wanted to know who would be responsible for taking care of the lake, as only a portion will be on JB's property. Also since the restaurant, lake and a portion of the parking will be in the sensitive lands area, leaving very little for Fanno Creek Park, what type of landscaping would be expected. His final concern was buffering which he understood was to be between the single-family residences and the commercial development; and this does not appear to be there. He still supports the project, just wanted these issues clarified. ® Phil Edin, 13110 S.W. Ash Drive, was unsure if he was pro or con, just wanted two issues raised. First, the full street improvements, feels this is grossly unfair to put on any development. Second, is buffering, as he recalls, they were showed designs with a lot of buffering and very little parking. Now it appears forty percent of the parking is on their side, with no buffering. This has been a major issue and has been battled through this Commission as well as City Council: It was established to hold the traffic through this neighborhood as a minor collector. He felt parking area should be rearranged to put more parking on the opposite side of the project. CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTLE s JB Bishop explained how the buffering is being provided by property that is zoned and will be developed as duplexes. This property is located between the single- family residential area and the commercial development. The property abutting the junior department store and the back of Ash .Avenue is owned by Mr. & Mrs. Hanneman, who were present (they made no opposition) . The parking configuration changes were necessary because of the change is the design of the project. Landscaping is not required in a C3M PD, however they have landscaping planned. They would do excavating on the opposite side of the creek to mitigate for the creation of the lake. They are constructing a circle turn-a-round, .:here Ash Avenue comes into the project, to prevent excessive traffic speeds. e Commissioner Owen questioned how JB would improve half a circle. ® JB responded by half street improvements by adjacent property owners, forming and L.I.D. or if the property held by the City; the City would pay'their share. s Discussion followed regarding how the boundaries or the ORB Park Plan and project overlaped because of the outdated informational material. What type of excavating and filling work would be done. How Ash Avenue would be constructed. What happens when the parking lot floods. The measures being taken to insure project would not cause flooding. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 0 Commissioner Speaker wanted to know if the tower would require a height -variance. Mr. Brun responed they would be coming back for several variances, included one for the Tower. . Frank Currie. . stated sectio: r - i i COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION k • Commissioner Speaker wanted to know how would lake be maintained. • Planning Director stated that as far as it relates to the park., the ORB Plan says the City will maintain the lake. The lake- will require dredging, probably annually, which should be some type of joint project between the Citand developer. y • Commissioner Owen was concern about about condition number two, she did not want to see only half-street improvements. r • Public Works Director stated normally in a. half street situation you already have an existing 20 foot wide street. ' In the case Of unimproved street the City would require a minimum of half-street improvements to include the full 20 foot width of road. With this project they would require at least half-street improvements plus at least the additional feet required for traffic to travel both directions. Would not require curbs and sidewalks on the opposite side, it would improve with development. (Property is in floodplain and will be improved by the City.) p y p probably • Commissioner Moen was in favor of a full street improvement. • Commissioner Owen moved for approval of the Preliminary and General Plan Review for a 16 acre commercial development and Sensitive bands Permit to fill in the floodplain with conditions as present by staff, including number eir•ht_ Adding to condition number three the words "at depth" and _"property to be dedicated prior to occupancy permits". Motion is made under old rules. Motion seconded by Commissioner Moen. • Commissioner Bonn questioned the need for condition number five; Planning Director said this was a request of the building department. It is also neccessary for tax purposes that each building be on its own tax lot. m JB was allowed to comment. He stated that Main Street Land Corporation, which is the applicant, applied for the Preliminary and General Plan Review after the new rules were in affect. Feels he should be heard under the new rules. • Legal Counsel advised he had talked with Ed Sullivan regarding this matter and it was his recommendation that the Planning Commission act as this wish on this matter. Even under the new rules the Commissioner has the option to refer a decisi on to the City Council. on • Discussion -followed what the difference was in filing under the old or new rules. • Motion carried unanimously for approval and to forward to the City Council. 5.5 CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS • Jeremy Coursolle, Associate Planner, reviewed status of conditional use standards. Suggested time should be set aside to0 over q piece by piece. Determination was made to handle this under a study session r�r whcn there cuere f . agenda. +•�� �te,ns on the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 6, 1982 Page 7 OTHER BUSINESS a commissioner Herron asked for update of Planning Commissioner schedule- 0 Chairman Tepedino asked the Commissioners terms who are to expire be notified - - - so they may reapply, if they wish. • Commissioner Speaker reminded Commissioner to be sure they have filed with the ethics committee. o Legal Counsel advised that the individual Commissioner are personnally liable if they do not file. e Associate Planner, coursolle informed the Commission that the housing element for the comprehensive plan, as a data base, and the information compiled from citizens- involvement data will be fo'rward .for the Commissions review.. ® Commissioner Herron questioned what was being done with the house'_gn- McDonald Stree-;:; staff replied they have been to court and hope to have problem corrected soon. s Commissioners requested staff to investigate if the Steel Company Dr North Dakota was filling into Fanno- Creek. Meeting adjourned 11:12 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL- 6, 1982 Page 8 -- �� •--• -,- _.--- .. Date---• �'/�•�- �-�• ��----- I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print your name) Item Descrip tion L iame, Address and Affiliation AGENDA ITEM - .- Name, Address and Affiliation •=�•- = ' - L D -CAI �7 11 I chit//54AWo� �u� iv �72b5 ,II II�I (1 I �I II I I - - II II . - it - �l jl I � I I I . i !I III! I I ---- Ili April 23, 1982 CITYOFTIOARD Mayor and City Council WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON City of Tigard, Oregon SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan, Public Facilities Study Authorization Honorable Persons: I would ask that you add this proposal for a Public Facilities Study to the Consent Agenda items for approval. As you are aware, the City is responsible for developing the Comprehensive Plan our our community, and - as a part of this effort - the City is to assure the coordination and provision of all necessary public facilities to implement the Plan. Last fall when c Froze the Planning Director position by combining Public Works/Planning, we said we might need some additional help from the City Attorney or other consult- ants. Unless we want to pull Frank Currie, Public Works Director/City Engineer/ Planning Director, off the work on our street programs and the 72nd Avenue project, we are going to need some engineering assistance in developing parts of the Public Facilities component of the Comprehensive Plan. Given the timing of this and the lack of adequate information, we need to move rather quickly on this component, if we are not to delay other dependent components of the Plan. I estimate that about two man-months of time, not to exceed $15,000, would be necessary. Since this is a utility-related cost of the Plan, I would suggest that the Sewer Fund be charged with this project cost. Sewer Fund expenditures this year are within Control Budget estimates, while revenues are up slightly more than our earlier projections. So, there is adequate cash and budget authority to appropriate contingency funds to this project without affecting our Begin- ning Fund Balance for the fund in 1982-83. There is no requirement for formal competitive bids on professional engineering services. We can, therefore, proceed within purchasing and budget authority on a motion of Council. I suggest that the Council direct me as City Administrator to develop a formal scope of work, obtain a qualified engineering firm to perform the work within the necessary timeline, and that I be authorized to enter into this professional services agreement on behalf of the City not to exceed $159000. The attached resolution appropriating contingency funds should also be passed as a part of the motion within the Consent Agenda. I thank you for your consideration of this pr07osal and recommend approval. Yours truly, Robert Jean City ministrator 12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 z 0 H f H d E- OC) V) H z H O :4 at U [/) H W --I = P. (D Q � O O x N L U Z H .-J Z O Q 3 � H d q H E-� H W O � Q z Q O W O = HV) H O H z U W z V) H H O W 7 U fx (n O 6 Cx, O O x 00 wW H H OG O +t z O H H ..a O H FOR YOUR INFORMATION Cirf A TIOARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator DATE: April 22, 1982 RE: Newsletter Costs Per Issue Newsletter, Ad-Mail Jurdy Printing, folding and preparation for mailing (9,500 copies) $511 $490 (price quoted) Postage (9,365 @ 7.90) $740 $740 Cost per issue: $1,250 $1,230 We were using Ad-Mail, but will switch to Jurdy Printing with the May issue of the newsletter. If quality and service remain comparable, we will continue to give the job to Mr. Jurdy. As you can see, the average cost per issue (originally estimated to be around $1,000 per issue, based on 6,000 copies) is now around $1,250 due to a greater number of copies being printed and mailed to newly annexed areas. 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 FOR YOUR INFORMATION ~^ INDIVIDUAL LETTERS SENT TO 15 PERSONS WHO ATTENDED THE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING OF NPO #7 C@ F IV WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON April 20, 1982 SUBJECT: NPO #{7 Meeting, May 12 Dear: I want to thank each of you for taking the time to meet with us on April 6th. As you decided we will have our next NPO 47 meeting on May 12, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. at .Trinity Evangelical Church on 121st. . Other than just marking your calendar, please mention the meeting to your neighbors and friends throughout the neighborhood. I have enclosad some information about Neighborhood Planning Organ- Izations (NPO's) and a map for your information. A notice of our next meeting will be placed in both the Tigard and Valley Times. You will receive an agenda from City staff about a week before the meeting. Local government is just that, LOCAL, and it works better with your input and help. See you and maybe some others on May 12. Yours truly, t Robert- W. Jean City Administrator RWJ/pm Encs_ cc: Mayor and City Council CCI Joy Martin Jeremy Cou solle P.O. SOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH: 639-4171