City Council Packet - 03/28/1983 Ann
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate
MARCH 28, 1983, 7:30 P.K. sign-up sheet(s) . If no sheet is available,
FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ask to be recognized by the Chair. Non-agenda
LECTURE ROOM items are asked to be kept to 2 minutes or less
and are heard at the discretion of the Chair.
1. REGULAR MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call To Staff, Council. & Audience 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 Receive Department Reports and Update
2.2 Approve Sewer Connection Payment Schedule Request, Chamberlain
2.3 Approve Police Job Descriptions and Reclassifications
2.4 Adopt Pay Plan for FY 83-84
2.5 Approve NPO Appointments
2.6 Receive and File:
e Buildable Lands Memo
e Response to Mrs. Ball's Questions
• Memo Regarding LCDC Extension
2.7 Approve Street Dedication, SW 78th
2.8 Approve Street Dedication, Durham Road
2.9 Accept PGE Easement
2.10 Accept Public Improvements:
• Straford Subdivision Resolution No. 83-_-.0
e Hamback Park Subdivision Resolution No. 83- _?/
2.11 Approve Resolution Calling for Speed Zone Study, Sattler
2.12 Approve Expenditures and Investments $ 231,141.58 °
2.13 Approve OLCC Permit for Zoops, PS (Main & Commercial)
2.14 Authorize Purchase of Air Conditioner for Computer Room °
3. PRESENT KEY-TO-CITY
• James Cody, Police Reserve
• American Legion Post #158
4. ASH-PACIFIC LID
• Public Hearing Opened
• Continue to 4-25-83
5. S.W. GRANT PARKING RESTRICTIONS, ORDINANCE NO. 83-
5 Public Works Director
6. SOLID WASTE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, ORDINANCE NO. 83-
0 Public Works Director
7. NEWSPAPER RECYCLING & SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE, Discussion
• Public Works Director
COUNCIL AGENDA - MARCH 28, 1983
man=
S. APPEAL-SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 3-81 - USA TRUCK LIFE (WHIPP SEWER LINE)
NPO #7
A hearing on the Notice of Review issue and if necessary the substance of
the Planning Commission's approval in March of 1982 of a Sensitive Lands
Permit for construction of a sanitary sewer truck line. Wash. Co. Tax
Map 2S1 3AA, lots 100 & 101; 2S1 3AB, lots 100 & 300; 1S1 34DC, lots
3601, 3602, 6400, 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, & 6900; ISI 34CD, lots 1200,
1201 & 1202.
• Public Hearing Opened
• Staff Report and Summary of Planning Commission Proceedings by
Director of Planning and Development
o Argument: Appellants, Respondents, Appellants Rebuttal
• Public Hearing Closed
• Council Consideration and Action
9. ATLANTA-PACIFIC LID, ENGINEERS REPORT
• Public Works Director
10. RATIFY FLOODPLAIN POLICY, ORDINANCE No. 83-
e Director of Planning & Development
11. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AMENDMENT, ORDINANCE NO. 83-
Public Works Director
12. DARTMOUTH EXTENSION LID
:PEN
Public Works Director
13. 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.
14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will bo into Executive
Session under ORS 192.660 (1)(f) to consider issues related to Pending
Litigation.
15. ADJOURNMENT
COUNCIL AGENDA - MARCH 28, 1983
Page 2
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983 - 7:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Mayor Wilbur A. Bishop (arriving at 7:45 & leaving at 10:30
P.M.) , Councilors: Tom Brian, John Cook, (leaving at 11:00
P.M. ) Kenneth Sch_eckla (arriving at 8:20 P.M. ) and Ima Scott ;
City Staff: Director of Public Works Frank Currie, Finance
Director/City Recorder Doris Hartig, City Administrator Bob
Jean, Planning Director Bill Monahan, (arriving at 8:30 P.M. )
and Legal Counsel Ed Sullivan.
Due to absence of Mayor and President of Council, meeting was called
to order by consensus of Council.
(a) Motion by Council Brian, seconded by Council Scott; Councilor Cook be
appointed Acting Chairman until a presiding officer arrives.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
i
2. CALL TO STAFF, COUNCIL AND AUDIENCE FOR NON AGENDA ITEMS UNDER OPEN AGENDA
o City Administrator noted a resolution distributed tonight at the
request of Nancy Robbins regarding the Beaverton School District
proposed closure of McKay School and letter from Attorney Fred P
Anderson regarding surface water impact on DJB Inc. property.
f
3. RECEIVE DEPARTMENT REPORTS AND UPDATE
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to receive and ,
file.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
4. APPROVE SEWER CONNECTION PAYMENT SCHEDULE REQUEST.
(a) Staff requested this item be continued to April 11, 1983.
(b) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to continue to
April 11, 1983.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
5. APPROVE POLICE JOB DESCRIPTIONS AND RECLASSIFICATIONS
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approve by unanimous vote of Council present.
i
i
6. ADOPT PAY PLAN FOR FY 83-84 {
r
r (a) Councilor Scott requested this item be removed from consent agenda.
City Administrator pointed out that Council will be holding a hearingI
April 4th on FY 1983-84 budget and the proposed salaries were used in
budget preparation.
E
PAGE 1 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983 f
tom►®��rass�®®®®��i®�����
(b) Motion by Councilor Brain, seconded by Councilor Scott to continue
item to another Council meeting.
Approve by unanimous vote of Council present.
7. APPROVE NPO APPOINTMENTS
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
8. RECEIVE AND FILE
(a) Buildable Lands Memo regarding LCDC Extension.
(b) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to receive and
file.
Approve by unanimous vote of Council present.
(c) Response to Mrs. Ball's Questions
Mrs. Ball requested this item be removed from consent discussion for
further discussion. There was discussion by staff and Mrs. Ball if
all her questions had been answered as she had submitted several
letters for Council records. Staff to work with Mrs. Ball and bring
back to Council at later date.
9. APPROVE STREET DEDICATION, SW 78th
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve
street dedication and authorize signing by City Recorder.
Approve by unanimous vote of Council present.
10. APPROVE STREET DEDICATION S.W. DURHAM ROAD
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve
street dedication and authorize signing by City Recorder.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
11. ACCEPT PGE EASEMENT
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve and
authorize signing by Mayor and City Recorder.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 83-30 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING
THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN
STRATFORD SUBDIVISION.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approve by unanimous vote of Council present.
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
13. RESOLUTION NO. 83-31 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING
THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN
( HAMBACK PARK SUBDIVISION AND AUTHORIZING RELEASE
OF THE MAINTENANCE BOND THEREFOR.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
14. RESOLUTION NO. 83-32 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING INITIATION OF ACTION BY
WASHINGTON COUNTY TO INVESTIGATE AND ESTABLISH
POSTED SPEED ZONE(S) ON S.W. SATTLER STREET,
BETWEEN S.W. 98th AVENUE AND S.W. HALL BLVD.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
15. APPROVE EXPENDITURES AND INVESTMENTS $231,141.58
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
16. APPROVE OLCC PERMIT FOR ZOOPS, P.S. APPLICATION (MAIN & COMMERCIAL)
(a) Motion by Councilor Brain, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve and
forward to OLCC.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
17. AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF AIR CONDITIONER FOR COMPUTER ROOM
(a) City Administrator referred to memo from City staff recommending
authorization to purchase air conditioning unit from Sunset Fuel &
Engineering in the amount of $2,722. Councilors Scott and Scheckla
discussed installation costs and if there were alternatives, since
the city is leasing current space. City Administrator responded the
unit would belong to the city and could be moved when necessary. He }
emphasized the need to keep the temperature between 68-70 degrees and
the potential of losing some of the equipment. He recommended
Council approve and authorize transfer of funds.
P
t
(b) RESOLUTION NO. 83-33 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
TRANSFERRING FUNDS.
i
(c) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve the
resolution and authorize purchase of roof top model unit in amount of
$2,722. f
I
E
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
i
18. PRESENT KEY-TO-CITY
(a) In absence of Mayor Bishop, Chief Adams presented the Key-To-City to
James Cody of the Police Reserves.
MAYOR BISHOP ARRIVED
(b) Mayor Bishop recognized the American Legion Post #158 gift of
American flag for City Council meetings and requested staff forward
key-to-city.
19. MCKAY SCHOOL
(a) Nancy Robbins of 12185 S.W. Summer St. Tigard spoke to Council
regarding the concern of the closure of McKay School by the Beavertou
School District and requested Council pass a resolution supporting
her position. City Administrator commented staff supported her
request because of the growth area involved and felt the issue was of
general concern to the community.
(b) RESOLUTION NO. 83-34 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
AGREEING TO RECOMMEND TO THE BEAVERTON SCHOOL
DISTRICT, NO. 48, THAT THE MCKAY SCHOOL REMAIN
OPEN FOR THE UPCOMING SCHOOL YEAR TO SERVE THE
CITY OF TIGARD RESIDENTS WHO RESIDE iN THE
SCHOOL DISTRICT.
(c) Motion by Councilor Brain, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
20. ASH-PACIFIC LID
Public Hearing Opened
(a) Motion be Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to continue
hearing to April 11, 1983.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
21. ORDINANCE NO. 83-18 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND SUPPLEMENTING CHAPTER
10.28, OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING TO
SECTION 10.28.125 TO RESTRICT PARKING DURING A
SPECIFIC PERIOD(S) ON A PORTION OF S.W. GRANT
AVENUE, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND FIXING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian.
Council and Staff discussed if property owners had been notified and
impact of placing parking restrictions on both sides of Walnut.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
C
22. ORDINANCE NO. 83-19 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE,
CHAPTER 11, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT TO PERMIT RATE
INCREASE.
i
PAGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983 z
a�� �a�a sra ®���•��� e®
(a) Director of Public Works noted this ordinance would allow the pass
through of charges by resolution and the garbage haulers would not
have to go through the process of findings and evaluation for a rate
increase. Councilor Brian requested Council review any proposed rate
increases. Consensus of Council was to amend section one to read,
seconded sentence. . "Except, increases in charges to the franchises
for solid waste disposal site fees imposed by a governmental agency
may be included in the rates (with) by Council (action) resolution
provided such increases are evenly distributed among the rates.
(b) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scott to adopt.
Motion carried by unanimous vote of Council present.
23. RESOLUTION NO. 83-35 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CIZY COUNCIL
INCREASING GARBAGE RATES.
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
(b) City Administrator commented the resolution provides for new rates to
go into effect February 1, 1983. Information received by staff
indicates one of the haulers has made the changes effective as of
January and he cautioned the haulers to make an adjustment on the
customers statements as well as giving the city sufficient time to
make rate adjustments.
24. NEWSPAPER RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE DISCUSSION
(a) Director of Public Works reviewed his council packet memo and pointed
out this is a matter of Council policy.
Nancy Alford, 11200 S.W. Greenburg, testified she would like to see
the ordinance changed so she would be allowed to pickup newspapers in
the portion of Summerfield that she services.
Council and staff discussed the issue of the garbage franchisees
collecting all the waste or if Council wants to allow someone else to
collect.
COUNCILMAN SCHECKLA ARRIVED
Council considered the problems of collection, financial
considerations, collection by non-profit groups/service clubs and
enforcement of the code.
(b) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scott, to direct
staff to leave the ordinance as it stands and enforce the Municipal
Code.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council.
PAGE S - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
t
25. APPEAL-SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M-3-81 USA TRUCK LINE (WHIPP SEWER LINE)
A hearing on the Notice of Review issue and if necessary the
substance of the Planning Commission's approval in March of 1982 of
Sensitive Lands Permit for construction of a sanitary sewer trunk
line. Washington County Tax Map 2S1 3AA, lots 100 & 101; 2S1 3AB,
lots 100 & 300; 1S1 34DC, lots 3601, 3602, 6400, 6500, 6600. 6700,
6800, & 6900; 1S1 34DC, lots 1200, 1201 and 1202.
PLANNING DIRECTOR ARRIVED: 8:30 P.M.
(a) City Attorney stated this is a review hearing to review the
recommendations before the Council and the issue is whether the
Hearings Officer correctly applied the law to insure the ordinance
provisions were correctly applied. Council will be hearing on
"arguments only" and no new facts can be presented or testimony from
new individuals. Discussion by Council and staff regarding
Procedures to be followed. City Attorney noted the Council is bound
by original rules as in effect at the time of the appeal, even though
since that time the administrative rules have been changed.
(b) Public Hearing Opened
o Planning Director summarized staff memo to Council.
(c) Public Testimony - Appellants
o Charles Whipp, 11880 SW 116th, spoke to merits of appeal and
discussed a memo with exhibits to Council. He referred to flooding
in the area and feels the 30" sewer line would displace a large
amount of storm/flood water. He referred to the TMC code regarding
flooding and requested the permit be denied.
o Dale Ott, 11900 SW 116th, requested Council consider the area as it
now is and how it would be in the future. He read from a written
statement pointing out violations in the City code. He added he
fears his home may be flooded sometime in the future. He spoke to
issue of how the public was notified regarding the continuation of
the February 2nd Planning Commission meeting.
o Discussion followed by Council and staff regarding process of
Planning Commission setting over the issue. Consensus of Council was
to accept new testimony.
o James Asp, 11945 S.W. Katherine pointed out the inaccuracies if the
sewer line sketch mailed out.
o Marion Ensley and Alma Johnston, residents of the area supported
Whipp and Ott's testimony.
o Art Haas, 11665 S.W. Katherine ST. concurred with Whipp and Ott's
testimony and added he was concerned about the proposed truck line
displacement of storm water.
PAGE 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
.��d►H�1®l� �®�wry���
(d) RESPONDENTS
o Bob Kruz, representing the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) responded to
testimony by Whipp and Ott. He noted the drawings are available
based on actual field survey and spoke to specifics of the project,
giving history of preparation and plans. He added that the
installation of the line could increase run off into Summer Creek and
that some provision will have to be made for storm water as
developments takes place.
o Council and staff discussed the possibility of Tigard, Beaverton and
Washington County getting together to solve the storm water problem
along with installation of the sewer line. Councilor Scheckla
commented he felt there is a potential flooding problem as
development takes place upstream. Staff commented U.S.A. is not
responsible for the storm water but is -responsible for causing the
problem and that the issue is upstream development that will cause
additional water.
(e) APPELLANTS, RESPONDENTS, APPELLANTS REBUTTAL
o Charles Whipp repeated his testimony that the basic issue is increase
in storm water run off and that it is in violation of the City code.
o City Attorney summarized the two issues and directed Council they
should make findings of fact to determine whether to allow the
permit. Lengthy discussion followed regarding city's liability in
granting the permit and future development upstream.
o Dale Ott read from the code regarding long range problems upstream
and read from a portion of the code "in combination of proposed uses"
which he interpreted the permit would be a violation of the code.
Attorney Sullivan, rejected the proposed interpretation by Ott and
suggested Council reject the testimony.
RECESS 10:00 P.M.
RECONVENED 10:13 P.M.
(f) Public Hearing Closed
o Discussion continued by Council with Councilor Brian stating he had
difficulty dealing with only the sewer issue.
(g) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to sustain the
appeal to deny the permit.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council.
Council requested Legal Counsel to bring written findings for the 2nd
meeting in April.
s
PAGE 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
26. ATLANTA-PACIFIC LID, ENGINEERING REPORT
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to continue to
April 11, 1983.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
27. ORDINANCE NO. 83-20 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NATURAL FEATURES AND
OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING THE
FLOODWAY/GREENWAY POLICY: AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to adopt.
o Lengthy discussion followed whether the Council wanted to accept any
further public testimony and instructions given to staff regarding
the preparation of the ordinance. Deborah Naubert, NPO #3, 14365 SW
80th Place, objected to the new language in Section 3.2.1 and felt
the issue was amply covered 3.2.2.
Motion passed by 3-2 majority vote of Council with Councilors Scott
and Scheckla voting NAY. Ordinance will require second reading.
28. ORDINANCE NO. 83-21 AN ORDINANCE OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AMENDING
SECTION 1 (5) OF ORDINANCF 82-71 RELATING TO
DEFINING AN "EQUIVALENT SERVICE UNIT" ON THE
CITY'S STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND FIXING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to adopt.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council.
MAYOR BISHOP LEFT
29. DARTMOUTH EXTENSION LID
(a) Director of Public Works synopsized the recent events, as he
understood them, regarding the establishment of a road system and
could city staff take on the engineering responsibilities of the
LID. He read from staff memo regarding manpower and considerations
for the city to do the project. He recommended hiring an engineer
designated with the specific assignment for this project at an hourly
wage and also hire out the survey services, all who would work in
city hall under the direction of City Staff. He further explained
this would reduce the cost of the project and allow the project to
begin immediately. City Administrator tried to .:Larify the options
for Council as (1) hire a consultant, (2) hire additional staff on
personal services contract, (3) set aside other city projects to
allow time to handle the project. Councilor Brian questioned if
there were any preliminary discussions with the property owners and
i to what extent outside funds are available for preliminary
' - engineering. Staff responded they had met with three of the four.
PAGE 8 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
Ell
o Gordon Martin, 12265 SW 72nd property owner, spoke to the preliminary
engineer study and added the information that Invest-A-Venture is no
longer involved. He stated he hopes the cost will be kept down.
o John Gibbons, 9800 SW Barbur Blvd. spoke to costs and suggested city
submit a "request for proposal" for a preliminary engineer.
o Consensus of Council was to have staff come back with recommendations
and estimate of cost for options discussed, for preliminary
engineering study.
30. OPEN AGENDA
o 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.
COUNCILMAN COOK LEFT: 11:00 P.M.
o Attorney Anderson letter regarding DJB properties and surface water
was continued to April 11, 1983 meeting
31. EXECUTIVE SESSION
o The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS
192.660 (1)(f) to consider issues relating to pending litigation.
o Consensus of Council was to set this item over to another Council
meeting.
32. ADJOURNED 11:15 P.M.
ri i
City Recorder City of T 46rd
L/
ATTEST:
Mayor - City of Tigard
PAGE 9 - COUNCIL MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1983
Da to February 28, 1983
I wish to testify before the Tigard City
Council on the following item:
(Please print your name)
1.3 Call to Staff, Council E Audience For Non-Agenda Items Under Open Agenda
Name, Address & Affiliation Item Description
— a
3
E
E
I wgsn Eo eesElky oetore the Tigard City Council orn,
the follow-in_e tem: (Please print your name) February 1983
Iters Description: 2.!XTURA - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
'roponent (for) Opponent (against)
lam ,, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation r
x'94 U i h 41
4
C 1A z 06�vo s c'd v
I,
JL W15n Lo -esclzy netore the Tigard City Council on
the following ' -m: (Please print your name) February 21 1983
Item Description: 40 CITY - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
'roponen t (for) Opponent (against)
:acne, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation.
t4y� P"I 2 _
i74 ;N� V
t
i
i
e
i
i
i.
I wish co ceSCIty before the Tigard City Council on
February 23. 1983 t
the follo«ing i' (Please print your nave)
Item Description: 6. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC HEARING
• s
ropo entfor — . « k Opponent (against)
me dre 191and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
EMMA
f €'
z
t
s"
r
s
i
1
I
r
t
t
l
r
i.
l �
S
i
i
f
L{ S� 7r � l� �., n� - LcJh•rim "���r`. ✓�-�h E
((rr / � t7 S S L✓ iG-f—[felt.-✓ti—� X—!
t
e
S
i
d
p�
i
t
e
ie
F
et
K
t
[tt
p}t
C'
'.1
Date -12
I wish to testify before the Tigard City
Council on the following item:
(Please printvour name)
-7
A10 t7 5� 0A2 r/.
Name, Address & Affiliation Item Description
-�4
Al
---------------------
ti
OL,V\
E
�.l
TIGMKU UPDRTE
TRAINING NEWS
o An all day Executive Staff Retreat was held at the City Administrator' s
home on March 18.
o Building Inspector Brad Roast and Plans Examiner Don Howick, upon passing
an extensive exam, have been certified as Fire and Life Safety Plans
Examiners. This certification is awarded by the State of Oregon Building
Codes Division.
o The Tigard Employees And Managers (T.E.A.M. ) committee met on March 16 to
discuss benefits and tax levies .
o An All Employees Meeting was held March 16 to discuss levies and the
budget.
o Lt. Kelly Jennings will be leaving in April to attend the FBI National
Training Academy in Virginia.
o Planning & Development Director Bill Monahan, Associate Planners Jeremy
Coursolle and Liz Newton, and Planning Commission member- Chris Vanderwood
attended the American Planning Association Conference.
o Building Official Ed Walden attended the 17th Annual International
Conference of Building Officials Short School on March 15 .
EMPLOYEE NOTES
o Office Manager Loreen Wilson was in an auto accident and is on leave until
her doctor allows her to return to work. We wish you a speedy recovery
Loreen.
o Jerri Widnes has been appointed to the position of Finance Director.
Jerri's first day will be April 18th. Welcome Jerri!
o Officer Darwin Deveny and Dispatcher Lori Deveny are the proud parents of
a baby boy. Daniel Lloyd Deveny was born January 30th and weighed a
healthy 7 lbs, 10 oz, and was 21 inches long. Congratulations to you
Darwin and Lori!
o Building Inspector Fsr;id Roast was awarded the Most Valuable Player Award
by the Oregon Hockey League for his outsi andin); p,rformanc+-, in the •'h"
Teague .
o Superintendent of Eni.ineering Services John Hagman is a grandfather for
the first time. Joh::'s daughter Terria gave birth to Sharon Irene, a 7
lb. 12 oz, baby girl, on March 18th. Congratulations John!
o Joey, an "employee" c.f the K- 9 Division of the Tigard Police Department,
aided in the arrest o' two persons engaged in theft from an auto . The K- 9
unit has proven to be very successful and our thanks go to this beautiful
German_ Shepard and hii• trainer Sgt. Chuck Martin.
1
POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
February, 1983
TO: City Administrator/City Council
FROM: Chief of Police
I. Personnel:
As since August, 1982, there is still the vacancy in the Patrol Division,
keeping total strength at 28 members.
The average daily department strength was 17.3 compared to 18.7 in February,
1982. By division, the breakdown is as follows: Administration 1.7;
Services Division 4.2; Patrol Division 8.0; Investigation Division 1.4; and
Traffic Division 2.0.
II. Service Delivery:
The department responded to 384 non-criminal calls for service this month in
contrast to 421 calls in 1982.
Patrol Division's obligated time was 1,180.3 hours vs. 994.2 non-obligated
hours.
III. Crime:
There were 104 Part I crimes reported this month as compared to 89 reported
in February last year. Of the Part I crimes reported, 28 were cleared, or
26.9%. The department responded to 59 Part II crimes and 33 were cleared.
There were 56 persons charged this month as compared to 50 for this same time
period last year. The crime rate increased 3.2% this month comapred to
February, 1982.
The Investigative Division worked 17 active cases this month, and cleared 3,
or 17.6% of the active cases.
The property loss was $44,733.26, and $3,968.63 was recovered, or 8.9%.
IV. Traffic:
Patrol Division responded to 24 accidents, of that number 5 were injury.
There were 321 citations issued, as compared to 289 for this same time
period last year. In addition, 46 warnings were given. The enforcement s
index was 51.80. s
i
i
V. Police Reserves:
The Reserve Unit worked 305-1/2 hours this month assisting the department
in policing the community. The majority of this time was spent out in the
community on patrol and assisting citizens. The majority of all the
Reserves are now trained to provide residential and commercial building
security surveys to enhance our community crime prevention program. (See j
attached monthly report. ) [
l
tVI. Special Assignments: r
E
A. Narcotic Enforcement Task Force. (see attached report from Sgt. Wheeler) . 4
#i
E
t
B. K-9 Recap. (see attached report from Sgt. Martin) .
C. Motorcycle Program. (see attached report from Sgt. Newman) .
D. Alarms and Permit Recap. (see attached report from Lt. Jennings) .
VII. Training:
A. Oregon Juvenile Officers Conference. Officer Grisham attended a 1-
day seminar on February 10, at the Holiday Inn in Wilsonville.
8 training hours were received.
VIII. Community Relations:
A. Block Watch Activity.
February 7, 2 hours at Templeton School. Block Watch skit with
Officer Grisham and Sgt. Martin.
February 15, 2 hours on Genesis Loop. Block Watch meeting with
Officer Peterson.
February 16, 2 hours on Genesis Loop. Block Watch meeting with
Officer Peterson.
February 23, 1 hour at Templeton School. Block Watch and Drug Talk
with 60 students by Sgt. Martin.
February 28, 2 hours at Calloway Hills. Block Watch with Sgt. Martin.
B. Kiwanis Program. On February 23, Officer Grisham spent 2 hours
attending a Kiwanis meeting. The Kiwanis were very positive concerning
the statistics presented, and also the new programs, the K-91s and the
motorcycles. He discussed the Crime Stoppers Reward, and they responded
very well. Ed Gottlieb, the new chapter president, advised that all three
of the Tigard chapter presidents are starting regular meetings -- a sort
of President's Club, and he suggested this issue would be a great topic
for their first meeting scheduled for February 25.
C. Child Abuse Program. Officer Grisham met with 70 parents on r
February 17 at Durham School, spending 2-1/4 hours with them discussing
child abuse.
D. On February 22, Officer Grisham presented the "Officer Friendly"
program to 25 pre-schoolers at Canterbury Day School, spending 1 hour
with them.
E. On February 23, Officer Grisham attended a CE-2 board meeting at E
Tigard High School. He spent 1-112 hours meeting with 10 high school k
students.
F. On February 9, Lt. Jennings met with Drs. Giesbrecht and McClusky
for 1-112 hours, to discuss a health maintenance program for the
department.
G. Annual Report. On February 14, the department presented their annual 4
report to the City Council and Executive Staff. 16 departmental man hours
were spent.
t
i
ff
H. K-9 Demonstration. The K-9 Team presented a demonstration to
approximately 40 citiliens of the community, including the City Council,
on February 26. A total of 5 departmental man hours were spent.
NOTE: A total of 38-1/4 departmental man hours were spent in community
relations this month.
Respectfully submitted,
Chief of Police
RBA:ac
i"
I
t
i
i
i
NMI
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CONSOLIDATED MONTHLY REPORT
FOR MONTH OF FEBRUARY 19 83
DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL
AVERAGE A
NUMERICAL STRENGTH I DAILY ABSENCE AVERAGE EFFECTIVE STRENGTH
End of Same This Same This I Last Same
this Month Month Month Month Month Month
Month Last Las[ Last
Year Year Year
TOTAL PERSONNEL 28 29 10.7 10.3 17.3 I7.9 18.7
CHIEF'S OFFICE 3 3 1.3 1.1 1.7 2.0 1.9
SERVICES DIVIS. 7 7 2.8 2.4 4.2 4.4 4.6
PATROL DIVISION 13 16 5.0 5.7 8.0 8.3 10.3
TRAFFIC DIVIS. 2 0 •6 0 1.4 1.3 0
INVEST. SECTION 3 3 1.0 1.1 2.0 2.0 1.9
FORCE ONE 12 13 4.1 4.7 7.9 8.4 8.3
FORCE TWO 9 9 3.4 3.6 5.6 5.8 5.4
FORCE THREE 7 7 3.2 2.0 3.8 3.7 5.0
CHANGES IN PERSONNEL DAILY AVERAGE PATROL STRENGTH
1. Present for duty end of last month 28 This Same Month
Month Last Year
2. Recruited during month 0
1. Total number field
3. Reinstated during month 0 officers 15 16
Total to account for 28
2. Less Agents Assig-
4. Separations from the service: ned to Investigat. 0 C
(a) Voluntary resignation 0 3. Average daily abs-
0 ences of field off-
(b) Retirement icers owing to:
(c) Resigned with charges pending 0 (a) Vacation, susp-
0 ension, days off,
(d) Dropped during probation comp. time, etc. 5.3 , 5.0
(e) Dismissed for cause 0 (b) Sick d Injured -31 .7 r
0 (c) Schools, etc.
(f) Killed in line of duty
0 Total average daily
!g) Deceased absences 5.6 5.7
Total separations 0 4. Available for duty 9.4 10.3
5. Present for duty at end of month 28 j
3
i
C
}
swim W-M
TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT
Monthly Report
I. Calls for Service: This Month 547 Year to Date 1,208
A. Oblig•_ted Time 1,180.3 B. Non-Obligated Time 994.2
II. PART I CRIMES
No. Cleared Arrests
A. Homicide
B. Rape 1 2 1
C. Robbery 1
D. Assault 9 8 8
E. Burglary 23 5 12
F. Larceny 64 12 13
G. Auto Theft 6 1
Totals 104 28 34
III. PART II TOTALS 59 33 22
TOTAL - Part I and II
162 61 56
IV. TOTAL PERSONS CHARGED: 56
a. Adult Male 28 C. Juvenile Male 15
-b: - Adult Female 8 d. Juvenile Female 5 V. WARRANTS SERVED 4
VI. TOTAL PROPERTY LOSS $ 44,733.26 TOTAL PROPERTY RECOVERED 3,968-63
VII. TRAFFIC
a. Accidents Investigated 24 Injury Accidents 5 Fatal 0
b. Citations: VBR (Speeding) 185 Yield Right of Way--L—
Following
ay0Following too Close 0 Red Light 28 Stop Sign 10
Improper Turn 7 Reckless Driving 0
Careless Driving 6 Driving Under the Influence 4
Driving While Suspended 12 Other Hazardous 7
Non-Hazardous 62 Total Hazardous 259____
C. Enforcement Index 51.80
d. Traffic Enforcement Totals
Citations: This Month This Year 321 Year to Date 589
This Month Last Year 289 Last Year to Date 550
Warnings: This Month This Year 46 Year to Date 88
This Month Last Year 134 Last Year to Date 223
NOTE: - Part I Crimes (Major Crimes) Clearance Rate 26.9%
- Part II Crimes (Minor Crimes) Clearance Rate 55.9%
Q G � � � !�' Cn ' n ',y C I
rj
u cS Crly
cj o
° O u\
1 Tk
in
coo
O
I`' NSA L
\IN
Ui
Sq,
_ T�°
0
AV&
k PO OP
ID
'�Fp `bks
cn
tic
v- r o trj
C(Izs
H
�� \ i� C� ►yG
. GrT
- oNs \
?NGS
� � � � cs v� •
sUsp SAL
6� s°sPrctoU Rsc�'s
- s
Z
� .. roN chrEG�
F? S
s
r E
i
_ 7
i
MEMORANDUM
March 7, 1983
TO: Chief of Police
FROM: Sgt. Wheeler
SUBJECT: February Monthly Narcotics Activity Report
Sir:
The following is a recap of the narcotics cases worked as a task force
effort.
83-0363 A doctor reported possible drug abuse by a nurse. A
case was initiated, however, the patient died before the
case was completed. Pending lab analysis at this time.
83-0491 This case originated in Wasco County, Oregon, whereby
Wasco County seized 1 ounce of cocaine from a suspect
(Alexander Kraul) . Subsequent investigation led to the
delivery of 1-1/2 ounce buy of cocaine, then the above
listed subject was arrested and shot in the chest. One
i, other WMA was arrested for DCS/PCS. 2-1/2 ounces of
cocaine seized; arrest x 2 for DCS/PCS.
83-0547 An undercover investigation led to the delivery of 1/2
ounce of marijuana, and the seizure of 30 tablets of
quualudes. Arrest x 2 for PCS/DCS.
83-0601 Subsequent to the investigation listed in case 483-0491, a
search warrant was obtained, thereby service yielded a
small amount of cocaine and some unknown type pills, and a
small amount of marijuana. Also established probable cause
for arrest x 3 for PCS.
There were 23 hours of volunteered time put in by this officer, and 8 hours
by Officer deBrauwere, during the month of February.
Respectfully submitted,
Sgt. Robert Wheeler~
Narcotics Un t
RJW:ac
MEMORANDUM
March 7, 1983
TO: Chief of Police
FROM: Sgt. Martin
SUBJECT: K-9 Recap for February, 1983
Sir:
The K-9 team has completed its first month of full service. There were
17 calls for K-9 units during the month of February, five requests
coming from outside agencies.
11 of the calls were tracks; 4 building searches; 1 crowd control incident;
1 article search, and 1 assist on a burglary in progress in which two sus-
pects were captured after being confronted by Officer Miller and Buck.
i A total of 26 man hours were spent by the K-9 team in training during the
month.
Respectfully submitted,
Sgt. Charles G. Martin
K-9 Unit Commander
CGM:ac
TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT
MOTORCYCLE ACTIVITY
MONTH OF February 19 33
VBR (Speeding) 124
YIELD RIGHT OF WAY --
FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE - —
RED LIGHT 24
STOP SIGN 6
IMPROPER TURN 1
RECKLESS DRIVING
s CARELESS DRIVING 3
DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
DRIVING WHILE SUSPENDED S
OTHER HAZARDOUS
NON.-HAZARDOUS 15
*TOTAL HAZARDOUS 163
*TOTAL CITATIONS �ZH
s
M M
bo 00 00
G C1 14 \ \
b w _4 N N
\ \
N u ETH M M v
W d Ai
ca $4
M UO
O •r4
H
b CU p Ai b co yr
CA to d O Co
u H .,4 C cd O
coo 1 z A O CU -Li
'� cn � 1 1 t w; O
La CO O, O AJ W
•d m
O.
L m Ga
d O
ar S'
N O O O O� d
U O 93
w •,4
O
M t),
H 00 � � 6
H o r..4 FR
�O N O O 1
m O
-L a C3 �U
i p
W. ki z ou
O pq P.
C O
WCDCDC)
O O p o o O G. d
EH 41 er P
s.+ •-4 co o N p
W O m o N N M H 'T.
d m Q
ccn x M —4 N a (7
vw yr yr co d
a Gu
a a ■
N O
z w
0
H
6 N
H Ad H O
U
v1 CT Cl O N N O
U ,C
00
41 %O
v�
CC d
W w C Cd
0 bo " .a W
..a
N 7 L Vt O
0o /+ m 93ar ++
•a u P �4 1- 4j oo
w i co C>cn Ln N W d ato cep � ..4
N
•d
w N m W A Vim-! E+
V o 3 m b of
L a) -,4
C P U •d W
r4
v P•
O o
0 en G a m m eD a�
4J PdO u a'�� >+ m O U en uy .ra W
m 'a 4J 0 H Cd 0 O $4 0
.0 CO m v 41 'Fi Cti O d p U c0 uo �� w $4 c0 m ..�
H >4 d x � �+ w 1 r. m 0 u � a41 a
ca ,°la yy. w i, m A u w � N 0 cd w ai �t � u 0 u u o
a 4 c0 b !+ q
U a ii sm+ H cd c� d o cmo� .± �+ •a m O •.± 7 ? 7
�, �.
TIGAROLIBRARY
PUBLICPhone 639-9511
12568 SW Main•Tigard, Or. 97223
MONTHLY REPORT February 1983
TO: Library Board
city Council
FROM: City Librarian
BUDGET 1983-84: The Library budget was presented to the City of Tigard Budget
Committee on February 24, 1983.
WCCLS: The Washington County Budget Committee turned down the Citizen Advisory
Board request to include $800,000 for a county-wide automated circulation system
in the County's operating levy request for 1983--84.
VOLUNTEERS: Volunteers worked a total of 141 hours; daily average 5.9.
WORK INDICATORS: February 19.83 February 1982
Adult Books, 70.17 6316
Juvenile Books 289,6 2348
Interlibrary Loan 81 88
Magazines 526 401
Records/Cassettes 144 160
Other 47 52
Total Circulation 10_,711 9365
Days- of Service 20 20
Average Daily Circulation: 536 468
% Increase-Circulation 15%
Reference/Readers Advisory 564 553
Materials Added 609 161
Materials Withdrawn 362 141
Story-Time Total 60 75
Borrowers: new/renewals. 201/87=288 309
YOUTH SERVICES - Jahn Henshell
Eighteen puppets were added to the juvenile collection for circulation. They were
donated a number of years- ago by a Girl Scout troop. The puppets fit child-sized
hands-. They are packaged in media bags and are a popular improvement to the service.
Celebrati-ng Valentine"s Day was a special program for children in grades 2-4. The
theme, 'Things- to Make and Do for valentine''s Day, was carried out with stories,
activities r a dog -made from Valentine hearts- and refresfiments-.
Juvenile circulation is up 25% for the same month last year.
Two Tigard High School classes have come in for sepcial presentations and demonstrations
of -multi-media storytelling. More groups will attend in March and April.
Five children (4th & 5th graders) have contributed 7 hours volunteer work in the
children's room
y
March 16 , 1983
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning & Development '
SUBJECT: Monthly Report of Department of Planning & Development - February
Attached please find the Planning and Development report for February
1983. The report contains the following:
1. Building Activity Report
2 . Code Enforcement Report
3 . Annexation Report
4 . Comprehensive Plan Update
5 . Approval Authority Action
Summary
The Comprehensive Plan process is gradually nearing completion. A copy
of Jeremy Coursolleis February 18 letter listing progress to date is
attached as the monthly report.
Building revenues were up for February as there were 19 single family
shifts
permits. It appears that recent fts in the economy may finally
result in an improved climate for the home building industry .
totaling $17 ,795. 03 were generated for work valued at $1 , 513 ,244 . 00.
A figure of $44 , 325 is shown. for sewer connections for the month. This
inflated figure represents the fee paid by Plaid Pantry for their site
fee for the remaining area of their site
as well as the sewer connection }
to be used for housing construction.
i
i
t
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PLANNING A14D DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: March 14, 1983
SUBJECT: Monthly report for month of February
February's building activities include permits for 3 signs, 19 single family
residential, 1 residential addition (garage) , 1 commercial, 8 commercial alter/
repair, 1 foundation only and 1 site work only for a total valuation of
$1,513,244.00.
Fees for 31 permits $ 12,801 .53
Fees for 3 signs 80.00
Plumbing Activity - 25 1,662.50
Mechanical Activity - 22 417.00
Business License -- 40 2,834.00
TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,795.03
Sewer Connections - 22 44,325.00
Sewer Inspections - 22 780.00
There was no building activity in King City for the month of February
atom
z •
�-A o o O o o c o o O o 0 0 o c o O o O o 0 0 o O O o O O o C) -<r O
H Oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .r O -zr
`4 � MMtntnn r- Ln ntnCDMWa% — zr0OvIOo 000o0 � O tnO0- Ln N
M :D .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. . .. w . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
00 a 00 N �o N to S ^ �-o �D N to M trn M to t` O, O a, .a -t _:r U1 ON -:r I'D N to ^ O, M
O, .10 1- k�O to to u'i Ln Ln to -T ,a Lr) 1.0 O, 00 N M �D �7 ^ •�
tf)
cu
CIDC13 r-4
✓�
'a
WC13
3
pnw
W
wbco -
,°)+co .14 J ❑
-- U) cd •r+ a) a, a) a, a, a) a, -
cn cv c0 cC cn cv ca cv ctf cv cri cu ca cb N cv :v a3 cC ccf r-4 r-4 G •1 O O O o O O O -
-,4 • 4 •rc •a -rc • 4 -,-I • 4 • 4 -4 —1 • 4 •,-4 —4 •,-4 •,a -,a • 4 •rc 'M ca o E Ir E 1r 6 z
y iJ 4-3 u 4-3 4-: " IJ 4-J 4-1 4-) " sJ t-J .0 JJ 4J -W 4-J4-3 •, "1 O '0 a) a) a) a) a) a) a) O O
r-
W 0 0 0 0 r- 0 G C 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 a rl r- G U U w co P ;+ 1-4 S4 P P N a H O
P4 (1) a o v 0 a) a) a) v a) () v v a) (D a) a) a) v v H sa H o o to vi
>. -cyb -0vO -0v -d •vv -cyb -ovv -ovv ov a a) o a (23M
a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a a) d a) w a) a) N a a) a) 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O
P4 P4 04 P4 C4 P4 04 r-e� 1:4W W W W P4 C4 134W P: r4 CYS U U U U U U U U U U U
Ea
H
r'
H •
H
U a
Q Ewa
O
H
C�
z • • co co C13
U A N P. �4 4-J
A c0 > c0 -x a U o :3 p • 3 w' y to to oO
• o x cc3 O )a O S T •�
a 3d3 • • • • • • - 4.J a cc -4 4 :3U o co v -aa: x w pC xxx
4-, 4) 4-J ,J a) v a) M >4 a P- O U 3 > >
H b 4-1 •a U) v) N On > > > U to U to b � -4 O U U U U
0 w o d -C4 -c4 co I, a) •r+ O 0 cV H M cP -,a •.a a) cn a m y •,i ,a • 4 -4
O 0 (L) o co cU co co r. D, a) i4 rn A ,-4 Cd r- co w w -',dr. =$ =S w w w= 4,4
I-, 3 .0 = = = b b b —4 ;3 CO a) O >, 60 () + —4 -A • .i —4 P b a) .0 p • 4 •r •H •.d
PCIO U pO 4J 4J W 4� Sa 7-+ .-+ 0 Fr- r ,.
> G b p )-, H Or-4 -4 U U N F_ 0 a) F S U U U U
cococacaCrnrncn a zAco w � zw w
o Cd coa% omz0 oucnzw zww
a) o
Q 3 3 3 3 3 ^s 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 -
ug � U) cna) En cnEncnEn Ln cncncn � m U) � �
cn m cn cn cn cn cn cn cn
rz] tnOO n• cnM Otntn OMtn Lr) tnOO ON tnOOvl W tntntn �
C7 P4 % �o M1- I- NN _r -It dtoO wm -4 Ln to -'r C14 O a, Q\ � � O toO n � W 00 co d
(O ^y' N d' 'O to 'O I- N N N O, n n N to M O ON M %D �O N ^ O, A to 00
H � .a .o %DC'I " rnrn `a %D %0r- " o ^ M � N owtntncr, cm ^ 0 .0000 ^ ._ U
_. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ oO
H t:
00
t:
co O O,
c0
3W a) 4.J 4-1
.,4
cn cn U a) p
O O a) a) P4 Pa a) �+
4-) U > > it CY+ to
U
J 130) .Q H F-i 0 N U LY. 0 tV
N .0 CCI E9 �4 '-+ —4 O V) W 3+ Q
o O 00 M U • 4 •r+ -*1 ••i a w Cy -A
°�' > U � 4 -4xxPa ` 4J> > > > > CO Ej T)
• a) d a) a) a) a) N m .l pq v) y U x .L )a C I C:
C -- 0 » N > �+ cb cti 4.J 4J a a) G 1-7 p
4 -4 �4 -obbb bbb 0 .0 6 >a 00 4j rt. gM Co s4 14� 03
C. �
w ca Pa ,-c -4 .-+ ,-4 r+ ,-+ r+ o H o w •.I x CO � •,4 �, >, o O H CO c0 cd v O ca w 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u a) x '-+ 3 x (1) ce sa N U v w v a N U H , •,4 0
P4 N $4 �4 .a .a fl ,a ,n p p 0. s4 N a) > L s.+ p a )-c 41 P4 w v)
O a) a) v F3 F3 5 q .'4 0 x ti cd N 4J -O •,a P C 00 OO.0 a) � w � m t) O a w
Ei -4 .-+ a) a) c) a) d a) a) O P t4 � • 4 -,.1 41 as CO 0 G .0 4J m P t.) 4 H Cn a) as
U r4 ,-4 ,--c P4 W a P4 C4 P4 x 0 P4 CO >, w CO ctf 6 a P+ 0 0 I-c p 0 >4 c) 0 x w U >, a) 3
,-I -A -A w Py N P W 0H N 0UH -- P+ � a) 0 . 4
G a) v �+ 0 o b aJ � $ H •,a r1 o G 0
E 1 a a a a a a a .n cG -o w a L 4 0 o C) •,� •,4 w m v ,-c 3+ , 4 .--+ 3 z E-c 0 oO•� }+
s, ap 0 .c CO ca E 0 4 U 0 ,4 � 0 0 z co v Er a)
o o ., m w 0 4-J 0 E ,o • a) -4 } 0 0 0 0 0 ,•-c P •-a -4 I4 t4 0 0 CO 0 0 0 P H O y >a 0 0
U HHH �: a4D4 �4p4 �4c' xHHhC4Ucn " -:4AwP+ 6d3xPawN�/ xPCI cn Ul Ena E-+
G
°
N
C '0 .0 .Y
o '000 m v•+ c
•� CID 1 u E o
�-rl ..d H•� C
L 1 w v
.--1 N N w D•L ..°-I
b s > W ° H O
y
Q) G O b U
�. -0 .) N ; v f r+ ro
MN ro O M ca ro
y L w
T7 00 U E u w u 3 '= 3
C
c0 1 'p u
)1 Y ro U) H
rn
H N 1 p y N L
CYI 1 N A G �h C U Co X
•ti-Ci o o •� v .�.tli v a a 'a
N 7 H Ny •-� C � G H J .
0. 3 p C y
N p y y E O O T
F N W u o o O a) w E H
Q. •H 0D T U b pp 0D u H••.--� O OD U4 0
O) N
y 7
O 1 ..+ U v H N
ro
y al 7 v m O a) a) M a u C. F C
C P. G- ro
T H
v
4+ G w H C
ro Q) ° H M M M O O p
yC, p A'L 00 0o 00 y b T
Ecu
r+ r 00 v u
W SU+ 3 0 ° N �' x
O H•7 T N N N N _ G p
y L v T E G
Z
V L •O Cl) O) L a 6)
° p
.Ui Ui a G = y
O a � vOi 3 G y y 3 N
O p O O O O b >' 'D
H H O b .-+ 1 y,) C C C V N -
U C •.ul 114 U R.
ro.+ u v w .-4 u v w y v
O b y..-1 .--1 •r-1 A '� .-! r-1 '� H (y L
H C•.+ y N .1 '.� •.a 00 U) N y
coro ro p N ro
LL U Z E G 7
W
W ++ u
Q) ro LL,
+ E C w
H
C 0D H
O y
W Z F i p w
~ U N 7 N x O
dcao G o 3
W W Was G w F F
.>
U O A C N m N C O
U b 7 U y e) N U H G
O C r-
0
OD p ..-1
Z 00 N T O .� 'yN O ro 'O x
O O N a w y 7 c y H O u H
o v
(H N O y w co
ro A > y
W U 14 CL ro G G G •ro Z [-Hi N
CD
N a U O O a W
W
O
U
m
W G G C
� L L +)
y •C ro ro ro
H H N O\
G
ZO of Q 0 3 •°i .Oa •pa 3 3 3
41
m cc En 10 ca cc
U U U CD
000 Ol C14
F� N 00 M1 co - N ^ ^I
4
1 M1 N
C.
E
O
H N c.y M M M M M M
W N dp 00 00 00 00 co
00 co M1 GO N Vl M
y M •d W .� N N O
O 1
1 1 1
N N 1 1
F S.%
O P O O O O O O O
C G
> O >.O > O
L +-I 1.)..d
CU C +J C
. 'o c b 7 ro
Z0
-I U•.-I U
U3 w w
•-I N-A N•�I
.Q L•0 i) 'G JJ
C (1) 14 Q) W C) U
UM M M M N a) a) (D a) C)
co 00 03 -0 zvzv zv
a rn rn rn
rJ
c � _
L l
LO L E E E
E
G M
E- h N N NOD
to m CC) co OC)
C o. —
El li co
w `, F
J
In
07
t N N N
O E U m m coM M Cl) M M -
H M w m m 00 00
E L ro .-4 .-I co a, o. m
CU t4E :� rn u -
< G 7 N • .b .. .. .. .. .. .. ^' M
Z_ C m ^ L C
L r_
1+ U U U U V U U 7
x 3-Ni O O O
C
G
O
Z Z N N N N N
O m co co CC) N
O H CA 01 O, T CT 11) cn
�.•) M
p U) .4 .4 .-i .d 00 00 00 00 00 00 rn
In
M('•1 M C)a)
9
E O A 4; cts M co co C11
C,a. C, U c c c c c c4J 4J 4J
c
C3 v c c a) m ro a ro m m ro ro ro
C w V) N th
N V 1) i)
...I •.� -.-1
C C C
O 4.J .0 y
H
E•
In m r w .4 0 .o •O 0 � CD •o O O O r
cn C1% .� O O O O O O I C C C q
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C C G t
O •� .-1 N N .-i rd ^� M M M M M M M . ro ro M
U) 00 m co CD co co tb GO 00 00 00 N co 00 C) `. () 10
EO w W w
w W w
to ro ro
Z L 1-)
O N N N
w
In ro 'd '17
2 C C C
Q) y p d ro ro ro
E c a) a) a) c '-I � ,4
O O .-I .-� L L N N N
u 3 a, c d v a n e) w w -4 -I -1
z 4J L V 4J E E 4J c ro ro w v a a c) L c,
>~w a d d N O O v u
L—. .d ri .d .•I v v -4 � N N Q, ro m M3
a a s a c a o a
nd. E E E E 41 y E 4J y aJ .0 it
z O O O O O O O o O O 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O o
x U U U U C e U U c c U U U U U U c c c U
O
C
a)
a 1,•
C v .A
O C
O y E p rNi o )N+ -4 ai ro z
Q )' a $4 Ln r cli U b a) H O �
$4 E.
In a a r +.1 ro c ro c + O W
E -+ La O -4 N c N w 1.1 O tr it tr +J U E O
ro N >. y N C a) 7 O +J ro + C 7 ro tr
G .0 •17 a c c w N y .-I c 't7 N d ro c L a)
w u c o c H >. ro ), > c >. •A w c >
C a ro O W U 3 > ro 3 a) ro -4 00 O W ro :3L
< C C U 1x1 T.. S :4 •-� x > ca U w u c o E 3 7_ C :t
SN3tiS2fVd3a SN3WdO12A34 ONV ONIN.�tf'Id - SSOd3N NOI.i.VX3NNV
MEMORANDUM
February 18, 1983
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Jeremy Coursolle, Associate Planner,-1 `
Department of Planning and Developmen
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Revision Update
The following chart indicates which documents have been reviewed and adopted
by the Planning Commission and City Council.
P.C. C.C. Ord. No.
Citizen Involvement 11- 9-82 11-22-82 82-77
Natural Features & Open Space 1-18-83 1-24-83 83-03
Air, Water and Land Resources Quality 12- 7-82 12-13-82 82-79
Economy 12- 7-82 12-13-82 82-80
Housing 1-20-83 1-26-83 83-05
Public Facilities and Services 12-11-82 12-15-82 82-81
Transportation 1-22-83 1-25-83 83-04
Energy 11-23-82 12-15-82 82-78
Findings, Policies & Implementation
Strategies 1-22-83
Comprehensive Pian Land Use Map 1-27-83
Interim Zoning District Map 2- 8-83
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Plan
Map 1-22-83 1-25-83 83-04
Development Standard Areas (Established/
Developing Areas) 2- 8-83
Community Development Code
Development District Map
On Wednesday, February 23, 1983 and Wednesday, March 2, 1983 the City Council
will reconvene to initiate the review of the "Policy" document and the
Comprehensive Plan and Interim zoning maps. The review of the mapping issues
will be conducted in reverse order to the Planning Commission review, NPO # 7
area first and NPO # 1 area last. The City Council is allowing for two
evenings to complete their review of these issues. If more time is needed,
the City Council will continue the public hearings to a date certain without
further notice in the newspaper
Prior to submitting the final Comprehensive Plan documents to LCDC for
acknowledgement, staff will be completing some "housecleaning measures" for
the entire plan to insure we have addressed all of the goals in a satisfactory
manner. This may mean that certain aspects of the plan will be reviewed again
by the Planning Commission and City Council. An example of needed
"housecleaning" is the designated wildlife habitat areas and the conflicts
between those areas and existing and proposed development. These
�a
"housecleaning measures" will also be forwarded to the NPO's and CCI for their
review. In addition, all of the report elements will be collated into one
resource document for ease of use. The final Comprehensive Plan document will
include three volumes: The Resource Document, the Findings and Policy
Document and the Community Development Code.
On Tuesday, February 22, 1983, the Planning Commission will begin their study
sessions for the Community Development Code. Although many of the same
sections of the current draft of Community Development Code will be included
in the second draft, many changes will occur based on the adopted
Comprehensive Plan reports and policy language. The revised draft will be
made available by the second week in March.
At this time, staff anticipates that the City Council review of the Community
Development Code will be completed by mid-April.
dj
(0060P)
F
UNION
MONTHLY REPORT
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPROVAL AUTHORITY ACTIONS
FEBRUARY 1983
The following projects were acted on by the Planning Commission over the
past month.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MAP
The Planning Commission voted unanimously by members present to
forward the Development Standards Map with modification to City
Council with recommendation for approval. (February 8, 1983)
ZC 19-82 INTERIM ZONING DISTRICT MAP
The Planning Commission voted unanimously by members present to
fo;aard the Interim zoning map with changes to City Council with
recommendation for approval. (February 8, 1983)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE
The Planning Commissioner had a Study Session on February 22, 1983,
to review this document.
APPROVAL BY PLANNING DIRECTOR - February 25, 1983
SITE DESIGN REVIEW
SDR 1-83 Mel & Dick Armstrong ( Pioneer Pies) NPO X11
APPLICANT: Mel & Dick Armstrong OWNER: Same
9209 East Mission
Spokane, Washington 99206
REQUEST: To construct a 1020 sq. ft . addition to an existing 3970 sq. ft.
restaurant for seating & bakery. Zoned C-3M.
LOCATION: 11960 S.W. Pacific Hwy. (2S1 2AA lot 602)
APPROVAL BY HEARINGS OFFICER - February 20, 1983
ZONE CHANGE
ZC 1-83 Robert Randall Company NPO # 4
APPLICANT: Robert Randall Company OWNER: Hazel J. Anderson
9500 S.W. Barbur Blvd. S-300 9931 Deerhaven
Portland, Oregon 97219 Santa Ana, Calif. 92705
REQUEST: Change zoning from Wash. Co. M-1 to City of Tigard M-4 Industrial Park
on the rear portion & C-5 Highway Commercial on front portion.
LOCATION: North of SW 79th, east side of Pacific Hwy. (1Sl 36CD lot 2200)
_-
IN
March 18, 1983
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Frank A. Currie, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT; Sewer Connection Payment Schedule Request
As you can see from the attached letter, Mr. Gary Chamberlain has
requested a pa�r^ent schedule to enable him to pay the $3,000 charge in lieu
of assessment cost for connecting to the Senior Center Sewer.
I have researched this request and find that Unified Sewerage Agency does
allow individuals to pay this fee in the same manner as property owners in
a local improvement district.
Pursuant to that U.S.A. policy, I have prepared an Installment Application and
Disclosure Statement and a Resolution adopting a City of Tigard Policy for pay-
ment of charges in lieu of assessments (attached) , that would allow Mr. Chamber-
lain to make installment payments.
i
t
s
i
F
i
ISM
INSTALLMENT PAYMENT AGREEMENT AND
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
To the City Council of the City of Tigard, Oregon:
In accordance with the provisions of Cityf Tigard
Rolntion 83-eu of assess-
which relates to City of Tigard policy on payment
charges
ments, I HEREBY MAKE APPLICATION AND AGREE, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY, TO PAY said
charge in lieu of assessments as has been determined
dy the City
i ye ual ouncins fthents
City of Tigard, Oregon, under Ord. No. 82-33, ser annum. First payment is
together with interest th9reon'aand onrate
sioxf( mont Pntervals thereafter.
due on
Interest toYe--p—di-E--semi-annually at the time each equal installment of the assess-
ment is paid.
If I neglect or refuse to pay any part of the installments provided herein,
including interest, within 60 days after the same shall have become due and payable,
then the �vhole amount of the unpaid amount including accrued interest, shall become
due and payablosureoncetandhe bshallow descr�bedcrealted �propertyn the nner provided by law in-
cluding fore on
The charge in lieu of assessments, annual percentage rate of interest, and
f finance charges which I agree to pay are as follows:
1. Amount of Assessment (cash Price) . . . • • . . . . . ' . . . . . . $
2. Amount Financed . . . • . . • • . -
3. Finance Charge (If paid in 20 semi-annual installments) —
4. Deferred payment price (2+3) . . . • • • • . . . ' $
5. Annual percentage Rate . . . " • • . • • • . . '
I understand that I may prepay a portion or the entire amount of the above
assessment without penalty.
I agree that in the event that this property changes ownership the remaining
balance becomes immediately due and payable.
Property affected by this improvement and subject to the Lien:
It is understood that (I( am (we) are entitled to a copy of this Installment
Payment Application and Disclosure Statement. The signature(s) below acknowledge
receipt of a copy hereof.
ereunto set my had and seal this day of
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have h
19 _
Witness:
(SEAL)
j- -
(SEAL)
ignature o pp scants an�-
ignature o itnesses Property Owners)
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BOB ADAMS, CHIEF OF POLICE 'S
DATE: MARCH 17, 1983
SUBJECT: POLICE DIVISION COMMANDER PROMOTIONS
The Budget Committee's Recommended Budget for FY 1983-84 includes three
Division Commander positions and the reclassification of the present
Lieutenant's position to that of Captain. As of the November, 1982, ruling by
the Employment Relations Board, we have had both union and non-union Sergeant
positions, but no clearly defined destinctions in their duties. Revised Job
Descriptions have now been prepared and are attached for the Captain
t (Executive Officer), Lieutenant (Patrol/Investigative Division Commander) , and
the Support Services Office Manager (Division Manager) positions.
Additionally, Lieutenant (Captain) Jennings will be attending the FBI Academy
for several weeks this Spring. Rather than waiting for July 1, 1983, we
recommend implementing these reclassifications and promotions effective as
follows:
EMPLOYEE FROM TO EFFECTIVE
Jennings, Kelly Lieutenant* Captain* 4/1/83
$2,565/mo• $2,565/mo.
Branstetter, Lonnie Sergeant* Lieutenant* 12/1/82
$2,086/mo. $2,219/mo.
Wheeler, Robert Sergeant** Lieutenant* 4/1/82
$2,086/mo. $2,219/mo.
Carrick, Alice Records Supervisor** Office Manager* 4/1/82
$1,594/mo. $1,729/mo.
* Non-Union/Managerial ** Union
ACTION REQUESTED: A motion to authorize the reclassification and promotions
as recommended within the FY 82-83 Control Budget amounts.
RA:RWJ:dkr
Attachments: Job Descriptions
f
SUBJECT'
NO.: 235.015
DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL
JOB DESCRIPTIONS PAG E 0 F
235.015 JOB DESCRIPTION - CAPTAIN (EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
235.015.10 Definition: Works under the general direction and is responsible
to the Chi _. of Police. Shall be directly responsible for the Operations
Division and for overall coordination of the Patrol, Investigation and
Services Divisions of the police department.
235.015.20 Principal Tasks: Coordinates all activities between respective
divisions of the police department. Coordinates and helps prepare divisional
budget.
Assumes responsibilities of the Chief in his absence, and also the Patrol,
Investigative, or Services Division Lieutenant and/or Supervisor in their
absence.
i,
Responsible for the general direction of the Patrol, Investigative, and
Services Divisions of the department. Responsible for maintaining an
operational plan, consistent with the rules, regulations and general orders
of the department, which will serve as a guide to the members of each
Division.
After conferring with Divisional Commanders or Supervisors, makes recom-
mendations to the Chief of Police regarding revision or development of
departmental programs and procedures.
Reviews overall personnel performance of all divisions and determines need
for training programs, equipment and supplies.
Regularly inspects all divisions to insure fulfillment of division and
department goals and objectives.
Reviews personnel problems and makes effective recommendations to the
Chief of Police; recommends individuals for commendation, merit recognition
or discipline.
���� ���� NO.: 235.015
DEPARV ENTAL PERSONNEL
JOB DESCRIPTIONS PAGE OF
Responsibility entails directing the preparation of necessary reports on
daily activities; interviews individuals and receives, evaluates and acts
upon complaints; assigns command personnel to duties within their respective
divisions.
Insures the establishment of harmonious working relationships and informa-
tion sharing between divisions as needed for combined crime reduction efforts.
235.015.30 Minimum Skills, Qualifications and Experience:
1. Demonstrated ability to apply judgement and discretion in performing
duties and obtaining departmental performance objectives.
2. Six year's experience in a wide variety of police work, including a
minimum of three year's supervisory experience.
3. Associate of Science Degree in Police Science Management, or
Administration, or any satisfactory equivalent combination of experience,
training and education.
4. An extensive knowledge of modern principles, practices and techniques
of police administration, organization and operation, and their
application to specific situations.
5. Extensive knowledge of technical and administrative phases of crime
prevention, juvenile delinquency control, including investigation,
patrol, identification, record keeping, and the care and custody of
persons and property.
E. A thorough knowledge of criminal and police procedural law.
7. Ability to understand and execute difficult oral and written instructions.
Ability to develop and implement special programs. Ability to work with
minimal supervision.
8. Ability to assign, instruct and review work of subordinate officers
and civilian employees.
9. Highly skilled in written and oral communications with fellow officers,.
public officials and the public.
MEW 09M
SUBJECT- DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL NO.: 235.020
JOB DESCRTPTTONS PAGE OF
10. A working knowledge of the geography of the City.
11. In addition to the above, this position requires demonstrated skills
(at a satisfactory level) as specified for the Police Lieutenant.
12. Valid Oregon driver's license or ability to obtain one within 30
days of appointment.
t,
f
�+
[S7U 7BJ:ECT: DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL N®' 235. 20
0 0
JOB DESCRIPTIONS PAG E
Revision Date: 3-9-83
235.020 JOB DESCRIPTION - LIEUTENANT (PATROL/INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION COMMANDER)
235.020.10 Definition: Directly responsible to the Chief of Police for the
operation and management of the Division. Coordinates with the Executive
Officer as to department and division activities. Shall be directly
responsible for the management of the Division and the supervising of Team
Leaders or Assistant Team Leaders on an assigned shift.
235.020.20 Principal Tasks: Manages, coordinates and supervises all
activities within the assigned Division.
Responsible to the Chief of Police for the Patrol or Investigative Division of
the department. Responsible for maintaining an operational plan, consistent
with the rules, regulations and general orders of the department, which will
serve as a guide to the members of each division.
Makes recommendations to the Executive Officer regarding revision or develop-
ment of programs and procedures.
Shall develop intelligence data for the department and report this directly
to the Executive Officer.
Develops divisional budgets and work programs. Establishes performance goals
and objectives for subordinate personnel. Reviews completed performance
evaluations and recommends individuals for commendation, merit recognition
or discipline. Determines needs for training programs, equipment and
l or denial of training requests for divisional
supplies. Recommends approva
personnel.
Monitors and controls Division to insure fulfillment of division and department
goals and objectives.
Responsibility entails directing the preparation of necessary reports on daily
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL NO.:
235.020
d JOB DESCP,TPTTONS PAG E 0 F
,m.e®
activities; intervie°•is individuals and receives, evaluates and acts upon any
complaint; assigns command personnel within their respective divisions.
Insures the establishment of harmonious working relationships and information
sharing with other divisions as needed for combined crime reduction efforts.
235.020.30 Minimum Skills, Qualifications and Experience:
1. Demonstrated ability to apply judgement and discretion in performing
duties and obtaining Division performance objectives.
2. Five year's experience in a wide variety of police work, including a
i ai r,
minimum of one year supervisory experience.
I/
3. Associate of Science Degree in Police Scienc,tor Administration, or any
satisfactory equivalent combination of experience, training and education.
{
4. A thorough knowledge of criminal and police procedural law.
5. Ability to understand and execute difficult oral and written instructions.
Ability to develop and implement special programs. Ability to work
with minimal supervision.
6. Ability to assign, instruct and review work of subordinate officers
and civilian employees.
7. Highly skilled in written and oral communications with fellow officers,
public officials and the public.
8. A working knowledge of the geography of the City.
9. In addition to the above, this position requires demonstrated skills
(at a satisfactory level) as specified for the Police Sergeant.
10. Valid Oregon driver's license or ability to obtain one within 30 days
of appointment.
.i
ff
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL NO.: 235-070
JOB DESCRIPTIONS PAG E O F
Revision Date: 3-9-83
235.070 JOB DESCRIPTION - SUPPORT SERVICES OFFICE MANAGER
235.070.1.0 Definition: This is a supervisory and confidential management
position working under the general direction of the Executive Officer. The
incumbent supervises all personnel assigned to the Services Division, plans
and directs the activities of the Division, controls the budget and programs
of the Division, and must be able to perform all the duties of the Clerk
Specialist and Clerk Dispatcher when needed.
235.070.20 Principal Tasks: Responsible^for the management and the
operation of the Services Division, under the general direction of the
Executive Officer.
Maintains daily, monthly and yearly reports, and insures proper recording of
�. complaints and filing of records. Evaluates subordinate personnel and
determines need for training, equipment and supplies. Assures that personnel
are properly instructed in record keeping, and that required discipline is
maintained. Reviews personnel problems and makes appropriate recormnendations;
reviews and recommends personnel for commendation and merit recognition.
Prepares work schedules for Services Division personnel. Acts as personnel
officer for Division, determining best qualified applicants for review by
the Chief of Police. Performs Clerk Specialist and Clerk Dispatcher duties
as may be required.
Provides confidential support to administration and other supervisory staff.
Responsible for Division budget expenditures, and assists with budget
preparation.
Acts as Property Control Officer for department, maintaining chain of
evidence and keeping proper control of all records pertaining to same.
Assures that yearly police auction is held as scheduled.
S
t
Acts as secondary operator for the Integrated Criminal Apprehension Program
(•ICAP) computer system, and primary responsibility for department word
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL NO ' 235.070
JOB DESCRIPTIONS PAG E O PF
processing operations.
Works in harmony with all other Divisions and provides close cooperation and
exchange of information needed for combined crime reduction efforts whereby
Division and Department goals and objectives will be met.
235.070.30 Minimum Skills, Qualifications and Experience:
1. Demonstrated ability to apply judgement and discretion in performing
duties and attaining division performance objectives.
2. Equivalence of high school graduation.
3. Two years of law enforcement experience, or one year and Associate Degree.
4. Ability to pass written and oral examination.
5. Ability to understand and execute oral and written instructions.
6. Must be stable, flexible and able to work effectively with fellow employees.
7. Must have considerable experience in meeting and dealing with the public.
8. Considerable knowledge of police methods and procedures.
9. The ability to develop and apply sound supervisory skills.
10. The ability to assign, instruct and review work of subordinate
Services Division personnel.
11. Ability to type 60 wpm.
12. Transcription and dictation experience.
13. Must have considerable knowledge of English grammar, spelling,
business English and modern office procedures.
14. The ability to prepare clear and comprehensive reports.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL / 7
FROM: BOB JEAN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ✓L.
DATE: FEBRUARY 14 , 1983
SUBJECT: COUNCIL WORKSHOP, GROUNDRULES, GOALS AND PRIORITIES
WORKSHOP: Minutes are attached from the January 31 , 1983 Council
Workshop for your review and approval .
GROUNDRULES: Receiving no further comment, I updated the Ground-
rules as outlined by Helen Terry, adding those items from the
1/31/83 Workshop, and included herein for your review and approval .
GOALS AND PRIORITIES: Again, with no further comment the Goals
and Priorities list of 1/20/83 was accepted by Council on 2/7/83 ,
subject to further update after the Town Hall meeting with Board
and Committee members set for 3/14/ 83 .
ACTION RECOMMENDED: Approve Minutes , Groundrules, Goals and
Priorities. A date for any further Council discussion remains for
Council to decide. Helen Terry' s materials on interpersonal
communications are attached for your review or future use.
RWJ dkr
� I
f
i
k
[!p
f` I
March 22, 1483
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
j
FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator)'
SUBJECT: Pay Plan for FY 83-84
Attached is the revised City Pay Plan for FY 83-84 based upon value surveys of
job content and comparable worth. This Pay Plan would apply to all non-Union
positions and would be the basis for our Union contact negotiations.
Recommendation: Adopt the City Pay Plan for FY 83-84.
(0447A)
L J J
SOt'3H .i.N311Z2itld30/;10.L:N.LS?[:II�C!t' ,�.LIJ �n c u u
1
c _ a
33VIS IVNOISS3302Id/SII39VNVW NOISIAIO
¢ p
w
w m c w
E 0
p 1+ u >r O
.33V7.S TVNOISS3AO21d/SH3gVNVW NOIJ03S . X a
s _
Y 5
S o-•1 N Ip
L
`� y 1••1 B1H d d M
y � •u, ., .,u. 30ZTOd
W A w•p .+w wo
<� 3 O 6 8 .4 W WO U
� w • • e •
JI � M N N••1
Q M M H p-1 M
:J ty
0 o~ov 0 m u m m u 4 TVNOISS330md-VKVd
c•.+ e c lu c e al c
w r~ '- QNtl TV0INH03Z
9n M H
� V
c
CL c x aue �. x SLT3?R10M 30NVN31NIvw/su3xHom xZITIZII
.r .. w .. t.. •.a w
z S S 3 O 3 0 3
+ > T
1-•1 H H > > N
I-•1 H H H •.1 10
O/ M d Ol Cl d Y u u
IVNO LSS330Nd-VZItld/Ttl0Z2I3T0
u u u
.-1 d •rl L •d u •.1 u •.d Y fJ M
al •Q W•O W 0 W N W N W t9 x U
•rl W•N W f9 W 0 W tll W N X N
o ¢ oa o¢ o ¢ oa o < ww
E N J J co fes.-v 1/1 0 N J 0 Co 0 0 O O .-. N ,p N O O In o .O N p 0 v1 O
c0 N O .000 O O ✓1 O O O •. t'1 <"1 O O N O c0 O N O
X O O .-•n N r 1•'1 T J N c0 N p o .-r O• 1'1 O In 0 C0 •O N J •n a
�--1 N .-•1.1 •-1 J .-y Vl 1-•1 f� .•-1 CI •--1 N N J N Y1 N YJ N O N.•-1 N J r'1 t^1 :V
J1 ..• r•1 .-w ,� .r N N N N :V In t1 r•1 J
1 Vf
E 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 I I I
L O OO vlO •O a0 O X0 .p N 0 OO VlO OO OO O O a c0 a �O Cn O O T 00 '—
J1 u•1 O c0 GO.� N O N mO N J �O N O .O 2 O.O O
L . CON T•T O,00
00 O n .--1 N N f•'1 J n •O .r O A l N 3 N Vl N n J` I� T
f`1 Nl O O .r.Nr .•-1-� .-.� ^I
H ti ti N V N N N ^ .•l
C'n w
cli
N c•': J
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning & Development 's
DATE: March 15 , 1983
SUBJECT: NFO Appointments
The Planning Commission at its regular meeting on Tuesday, March
8 , 1983 , considered four individuals for membership on the NPO ' s.
These individuals were interviewed on Thursday, February 10 , 1983
by the NPO Membership Interview Team:
_NPO
Jerry Linschoten 16120 S .W. Grimson Court 6
Yvonne M. Larson 10730 S .W. North Dakota 7
Richard W. Boberg 10660 S .W. North Dakota 7
Howard L. Cornutt 11720 S .W. Lynn 5
Should each of these individuals be approved as members , the new
make up of the NPO' s will be as follows :
NPO No. of Members
1 8
2 4
3 8
4 11
5 8
6 8
7 8
The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve
the four interested applicants for membership.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the applications of
these four individuals to the NPO' s applied for.
S
NPO A P P L I CATI ON JAN 51982 IDL"
QUESTION: What are NPO's? CITY OF TIGARD
ANSWER: The function of each NPO is to be involved in all phases of PLANNING DEPT.
the Comprehensive Planning process and the implementation of those
plans; to review City plans; policies, projects or other actions
affecting the livability of the neighb. rhood, including, but not limited
to, land use, zoning, housing, communi facilities, human resources, �G
social and recreational programs, tra -ind transportation, environ- 9-10
mental quality, open space and parks; to participate in the process
of determining City priorities for capital improvements and development
of specific project plans; to keep the neighborhood informed; to seek
neighborhood opinion on issues brought before them; to represent the
views of the neighborhood in matters of extra neighborhood importance.
PLEASE COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS BELOW
NAME- A;S C F��T-e_P:S77 ADDRESS 5 4,1 Z O 5 !G X04 5 0 A
TELEPHONE NUMBER (Bus.) COA?,— S a c.7 (Res.)
PRESENT OCCUPATION qtj^"^ n4or^a okA I—K-
F1 RM NAME N4fL-
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? ►►'4
IS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA?
HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED WITH MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS BEFORE? E 4,
IF YES, PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR INVOLV ENT: f} JLA !�= �C-*L df--
' �-
WHAT DO YOU FEEL YOU CAN OFFER AS A MEMBER OF AN NPO? 15
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
DAYTIME TELEPHONE NUMBER sC1
.4ii9i.Rn
N P O A P P L I C A T I O N
QUESTrON: What are NPO's?
AVSWER: The function of each NPO is to be involved in all phases of
ti:c Comprehensive Planning process and the implementation of those
plans; to review City plans; policies, projects or other actions
affecting the livability of the neighborhood, including, but not limited
to, land use, zoning, housing. community, facilities, human resources,
social and recreational programs, traffic and transportation, envirotn—
.:ental duality, open space and parks; to participate in the Process
of determining City priorities for capital improvements and development
of specific project plans; to'keep the neighborhood informed; to seek
neighborhood opinion on issues brought before them; to represent the
Vies of the neighborhood in matters of extra neighborhood importance.
PLHASE CM1PLETE THE QUESTIONS BELOW
`' r� ' . • ADDRESS
A
ISIE
TELEPHONE NUUBER (Bus.�•� , f (Res.�
PRXSENT OCCUPATION l.E Sst
FI R3[ NAIIE
HO%7 LONG HAVE YOU. BEEN EMPLOYED ;YITJ1 THIS FIRLI?
IS THIS ComPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA?
HAVE YOU BEEN .INVOLVED S",ITII LIUNICIPAL OPERATIONS BEFORE? 1�
IF YES, PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR INVOLVEMENT:
I
ti
WHAT DO YOU F£F YOU CAN OFFER AS A MEME)ER OF AN hTO?
T
ADD J TI ONAL COM •NTS• !
it
_ k-C,
[.EPIIO.�:F. IN UL1[lEit —------ _ ---
N 1' O A P P L I C A T I O 17 { �3
QGi.%TIox: What are NPO's?
The function of each NPO is to be involved in all phases of
the Comprehensive Plannin; process and the iloplcmentation of those
plans; to review City plans; policies, projects or other actions
affecting the livability oft neighborhood, including•, but not limited
to, land use, zoning, housing, community, facilitacs, - human resources, _
social and recreational programs, traffic and transportation, environ-
ru nt.:l quality, open space and parks; to participate in the process
of determining City priorities for capital improvements and development
o: specific project plans; to'keep the neighborhood informed; -to seek
neighborhood opinion on issues brought before them; to represent the
views of the neighborhood in matters of extra neighborhood importance_
PLEASE. COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS 13EL01Y
2iAdtE ' HOWARD L.' •CORNUTT _ ADDRESS 11720- -SW LYNN
_ --TIGARD; Qregon
TELEPHONE NUMER (Bus_) 641=6143 (Iles_) 620-2180
PRESENT OCCUPATION CPA
= Fl Rat NADIE CORNUTT &' STEARNS. CPA' s P.C.
.•
HOW -LONG HAVE YOU. BEEN EMPLOYED V11TH T11IS FIRLI? 5 years
is TIAs COMPANY LOCATED VIXTILI14 YOUR NPO AREA? .No
HAVE YOU BEEN...INVOLVED WITH MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS BEFOREI__j�jo
IF YES, PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR INVOLVEMENT:
r WHAT DO YOU FEEL YOU CAN OFFER AS A MEME)Urz OF AN A'PO?
-have bePri 'a citizen of 'Tigard for nearly 15 years. During
this peri=od -of time my wife and I have become well acquainted
�til<h. manv Tigard citizens, businesses and institutions, and
I feel that I understand their needs and concerns. -
{ ADDITIONAL Com111iNTS. Specifically , I feel that my community
` _1�Lv :)_lvements and business background can blend the emotional
.unci ractical aspects of land use development.
D,tr'r1�;s: "rl:t.>:Piio>:F �uaiat:z 641-6143 -
- N P 0 A P P L X CATV or:
QUESTION: IChat are NPO's?
;.\StiIiR: The function of each NPO is to be involved in all phases of
the Comprehensive Planning process and the implementation of those
plans: to review City plans; policies, projects or other actions
affecting the livability of the neighborhood, including-, but not limited
to, land use, zoning, housing, community, facilities, human resources, ,
social- and recreational programs, traffic and transportation, enviroh-
mental quality, open space and panes; to participate in the process
of determining City priorities for capital improvements and development
of spec$fic project plans; to'keep the neighborhood informed; -to seek
uelmhborhood opinion on issues brought before there; to represent the
views of the neighborhood in matters of extra neighborhood importance.
PLEASE- COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS BELOW
NAUE!?=i t'N44L 0l.� a �iz-l�- Al DRESS/0
TELEPHONE NUMBER (Bus. �0 3�' 1 3►( y (Res.p
PRESENT OCCUPATIOY
FIRM NAME cr F bi Os C'Y 6 7 '
HOIC LONG HAVE YOU. BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? :2-
IS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA?HAVE YOU BEEN.INVOLVED WITH MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS BEF011E?
IF YES, PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR INVOLVELIENT:_ TTi:-- ((D /nL'f/�- C_C!k pr,
'WHAT DO YOU •FEEL YOU CAN OFFER AS A MENDER OF AN Npo!?
ADDITIONAL CO\IbmnS:
i
L'FiC.EPI{O`:F: �iUJIQF:i2 3�I - 1 .j
i
March 17, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Department of Planning and Development
SUBJECT: Changes in the Buildable Land Inventory
the following chart shows the changes in the City's Buildable Land Inventory
as a result of City Council changes to the Comprehensive Plan Map on March 2,
1983, March 14, 1983 and March 16, 1983.
Changes March 16, 1983 Acres
From Commercial - linear to
Medium High Density residential 5.31
From Loc. Density Residential to
j Medium Density Residential 24.21
`. From Medium Density Residential
to Low Density Residential 7.17
From Medium Density Residential
to Commercial - Professional •62
From Commercial - linear to
Commercial - Professional 2.49
From Commercial - linear to
Commercial - Neighborhood .22
From Medium Density Residential
to Commercial - linear .16
March 1, 1983 March 2, 1983 March 14, 1983 March 16, 1983
Total residential acre: 852.95 858.35 858.57 863.91
Total units 8,700.66 8,345.14 8,005.14 8,231.94
Units/net acre: 10.2 9.72 9.32 9.53 s
*The lastest density calculations do not include any of the permitted density
within Commercial Professiona; zoning areas. The feasibility of this issue is
still being discussed between the staff, the attorney's office and the state.
i
(0051P)
r
I
G�Jal�ilJ� �I�r� � s®ti�a�o
March 14, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: Mrs. Ball 's letter of February 7, 1983.
On February 7, 1983 Mrs. Ball read the attached letter into the record
before the City Council. At that time, Council asked staff to respond
to Mrs. Ball's letter by March 28, 1983. Staff's response to Mrs. Ball's
concerns is attached for your information. A copy has been mailed to
Mrs. Ball.
Also attached is a letter from Frank Currie regarding the wetland.
i
t
r
��a®®®a�a�aaa®�®�[aaa®►®�
MPM
1. "WHY DIDN'T THE CITY SEND THIS DOCUMENT TO THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION INSTEAD
OF THE ONE WHICH INCLUDED ALL THE TRIANGLE PROPERTY BUT OURS?"
To my knowledge, the memo from Aldie regarding the omission of Iry
Larson's property was sent to the Boundary Commission after the Triangle
annexation failed.
2. "WAS THIS DONE SO THAT THE CITY WILL NOT HAVE TO FURNISH US WITH SEWERS
AND IF WE DO NOT HAVE SEWER SERVICE OUR LAND WOULD BE UNBUILDABLE AND
COULD NOT BE DEVELOPED?"
The timing of when the memo from Aldie was sent had nothing to do with
sewer service.
3. "IS THE CITY OF TIGARD RESPONSIBLE FOR SO DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY? IF
THE ANSWER IS "NO" WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?"
The City never designated the property in question as unbuildable. If the
designation of unbuildable has been placed on the property, I assume it
was done by the County.
4. "DO YOU AGREE WITH KEN MARTIN IN REGARD TO NOT BEING ABLE TO DE-ANNEX
PROPERTY UNLESS THE TAXPAYER ASKS TO BE DE-ANNEXED AND SIGNS DOCUMENT SO
REQUESTING?"
The property owner would have to agree to de-annexation of any property by
s_2,ning a petition.
5. HAS THE CITY OF TIGARD COUNCIL BEEN AWARE OF THIS DISCREPANCY?
I don't know if the City Council has been made aware of any discrepancy
between annexation 1668 documents submitted to the Secretary of State and
those approved by the Boundary Commission prior to your bringing it to our
attention.
6. "UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY WAS THE CITY RECORDER AUTHORIZED TO CHANGE THE LEGAL
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED UNDER ORDINANCE 81-30 WHICH INCLUDED THE 1668
ANNEXATION?"
I don't know what authority the City Recorder would have to change any
legal documents no- that the City Recorder has changed any documents.
7. "UNDER WHOSE AUTHC 1"i 1 WAS 'I HL SWORN S7 A'I E:MEN1 REINOVLD FROM '!HE SECREl AR1
OF STATE'S RECORDS "
I don't know under whose authority a statement would be removed from the
Secretary of State 's files nor do I know that this has occurred.
8. "AS THE CITY COUNCIL ARE YOU AWARE ThA7 THIS HAS HAPPENED?"
I don't think the city Council has been made aware of this prior to you;
letter.
9. "IS THIS THE REASON 1HE CITY OF TIGARD USES MAPS 1HAT DO NOT SHOW US IN
THE CITY WHEN THEY tiAVE SENT 01-HER DOCUMENTS TO 1HE BOUNDARY COMMISSION
FOR ANNEXATION?"
The City does not usa maps that show Mrs. Ball 's property out of the City
because of changes in legal documents. The City uses maps made available
to us by the county.
10. "IS PHIS WHY THE COUNTY HAS US ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AS IN THE
COUNTY?"
I assume that the County shows Mrs. Ball's property in the county because
the maps have not been updated but I don't know for sure.
11. "IS THIS WHY ON THE MAPS I HAVE SEEN AT THE METROPOLITAN SERVICE DISTRICT
THEY SHOW US IN THE COUNTY AND NOT THE CITY?"
The City has no control over the maps that the Metropolitan Service
District chooses to use.
12. "HAVE YOU ON THE COUNCIL BEEN ADVISED THAT WE ARE NOT IN THE CITY?"
The City Council, to my knowledge, has never been advised that Mrs. Ball's
property is not in the City.
13. "DOES THE CITY OF TIGARD PRESENTLY HAVE THIS INFORMATION IN THEIR
POSSESSION AND HAS IT BEEN MADE PART OF ZCA 8-81 (1668 ANNEXATION)
RECORD? IF NOT, WHY NO1?"
The DOR 34-317-81 document is not in the City's 1668 Annexation file. I
do not know for sure whether or not that document was received by the City.
14. "IN PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE, IF THE METROPOLITAN SERVICE DISTRICT DESIRES
TO HAVE PROPERTY SET ASIDE FOR A PARK AND RIDE STATION, LIGHT RAIL STATION
OR REST AREA COULD THEY REQUEST THAT THE PROPERTY BE ZONED SO IT WAS
UNBUILDABLE AND THEREBY HOLD THE PROPERTY UNTIL SUCH TIMES AS THEY MIGHT
NEED IT? AT A MEETING I ATTENDED IT WAS STATED THEY HAD VOTED TO CHANGE
THE ZONING ON SOME OF OUR PROPERTY."
The MSD has not requested the rezoning of any property in the City of
Tigard. We would not support such a request .
15. "ARE WE IN THE CI1Y 4 '1IGAIiD I+5 OF '�� Dr.l' FELiN'. AF"t i Iyb�?"
Yes
16. "IS 11 PLANNED TO KEI-:P OUR PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF TIGARD?"
Yes
17. "IF 1HE ANSWER IS "N ARE WE IN 1hi; COUNT' A\: iPii P1t1'.SLN'1 TIME INSTEAD OF
THE CITY?"
All of the property in question is in the City.
\ _
mm7l
18. "IF WE ARE IN THE COUNTY AT THE PRESENT TITLE DO YOU PLAN TO ANNEX OUR
PROPERTY AT THE SAkIE TIME AS THE REST OF THE TRIANGLE?"
A11 of the property in question is in the City.
19. "DO YOU PLAN TO HAKE OUR PROPERTY BE AN ISLAND?"
No.
20. "WAS ANYTHING PRESENTED TO THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION AT THEIR MEETING ON
FEBRUARY 3, 1983 TO CHANGE THE STATUS OF OUR PROPERTY OR LARSON PROPERTY?"
No, except to annei= Tax Lot 5200 owned by Iry Larson.
i'
1
CITY®F TWA RD
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
Larch 16, 1983
Geraldine L. Ball
11515 S.W. 91st Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mrs. Ball :
In your letter of February 28, 1983 to the Tigard City Council , you have quoted I
after paragraph three,; from the Boundary Commission staff report;
A wetland crosses the middle of the area running from east to
west in the vicinity of Dartmouth Street".
In the fifth paragraph you state that "there is not a wetland running east and
west on vacated S.W. Dartmouth". You have added the word vacated and indicated
an alleged wetland as being on instead of "in the vicinity'--o-f--5-.-W. Dartmouth.
These subtle changes in text make a large di erence in meaning and interpreta-
tion of the intent of the original statement in the Boundary Commission staff
report.
In summary, there is indeed a wetland in the vicinity of S.W. Dartmouth west of
S.W. 68th. Please see attached topography map.
Sincerely,
i
Frank A. Currie
Director of Public Works
enclosure j
FAC/dc
i
12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning & Development
DATE: March 21, 1983
RE: LCDC Acknowledgment Process
Attached please find a letter from the LCDC Director, James F. Ross, notifying
the City that a 90 day extension has been granted to our Comprehensive Plan.
Our new date for review is now set at June 9, 1983. Based on recent progress
i-i completing the adoption of the plan elements and maps, it is possible that
I this date will be reached.
l
I
l
Department of Land Conservation and Development
VICTOR AnYEH 1175 COURT STREET N.E., SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-4926
OOVEIOIOM
March 16, 1983
The Honorable Wilbur Bishop
Mayor, City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear "ayor Bishop:
On March 11, 1983, the Commission approved the enclosed order allowing
the Commission to again consider your acknowledgment request beyond the
90-day statutory review period. You will be notified when your plan has
been scheduled for Commission review.
Please contact your prthenenclossdJim ordertorathetreviewOofJif yo your have any questions concerning
acknowledgment request.
Sincerely,
J s F. Ross
erector
JFR:dl
5411A/3C/3142B-7/6B
Enclosure
cc: Washington County Board of Commissioners
City Planning Director
Coordinator
Real Estate Division
Field Representative
Lead Reviewer
DLCD Library
Objectors and Commentors
BEFORE THE
_ LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF OREGON
IN THF MATTER OF ) COMPLIANCE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
THE CITY OF TIGARD'S REQUEST ) REVIEW POSTPONEMENT
FOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COMPLIANCE ORDER 83-EXT-61
On July 1, 1980, the City of Tigard, pursuant to ORS 197.251 (1981
Replacement Part), requested that their comprehensive plan and implementing
measures be acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission
to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals.
Oregon Law, specifically ORS 197.251(1) , requires that the Commission
f review and approve or deny the request within 90 days.
The Commission finds, however, that pursuant to ORS 197.251(1) (1981
Replacement Part) the following extenuating circumstance(s) will again
necessitate a delay in Commission review of the Comprehensive Plan and
Implementing Measures of the City of Tigard.
Due to the significant amount of staff time necessary to
process the numerous acknowledgment requests and the time
required to obtain needed compliance revisions, the Department
is unable to review the request and prepare staff
recommendations within the required 90-day time period.
Review of the City's plan for acknowledgment will occur by June 9, 1983,
unless an additional postponement is granted by the Commission.
DATED THIS 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 1983.
FOR THE COMMISSION-
)
OMMISSION•
Jam s F. Ross, .Direc or
De rtment of Land
nservation and Development
JFR:dl
4904A/3192B-12/68
MEMORANDOM
March 17 , 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Staff �w
SUBJECT: Street Dedication, Lasal Land Development SDR 25-81
The attached street dedication was required as a conditon
of approval for SI3R 25-81 . The documents have been reviewed
and approved by the City Attorney, the Engineering Superintendent
and the Plarning .Commission President.
Staff request that the Council approve the street dedication
and authorize the City Recorder to sign.
P16,—,-CT NA_tiIE: art FILE REFERENCE : L
ADDRESS: TAX MAP: 151 ? TAX LOT:
STREET DEDICATION
IC T ALL ti1EN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT Mary Ann McGrath, Mary Jensine McGrath„ Piper Ann McGrath,
Helen Pedersen, S. R. McGrath, trances Pedersen, Jeanette Pedersen, S. R. McGrath Custodian for:
Edward S. McGrath
hereinafter called grantor(s) , for the su---i of $1.00 constituting the actual consideration
for this deed, do hereby give, grant and dedicate to the Public, its successors and assigns,
:rpetual right-of-way and ei:sement for street, road and utility purposes on, over,
across, under, along and within the following described real premises in Washington County, Oregon
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT ^A"
To Have and to Hold the above eescribed and dedicated rights unto the Public for the uses
and purposes hereinabove state(:_
The grantor(s) hereby covenant that he (they) are the owner(s) in fee simple and have a
good and legal right to grant Lis rt-heir) rights above described_
IN WITNESS %-.*HEREOF, the grantors) have hereunto set his (their) hand(s) and seal(s)
this a4th day of February 1983
cam'_ Wil. (SEAL) ` �' /yL[L ZSL1��Z �/ A, (SEAL)
Mary PAn ra
1
(S AL) i (SEAL)
Jens:LneA6G th ` S. R. McGrath
SE �'��z�� (SEAL)
` e en a er
r"
(SEAL) Aw ! awe—zk f S. ;--v (SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON ) SS.
County of Washington )
On this a4th day of February 19 83 , personally ampeared the above nam- ed,
Mary Ann McGrath, Mary Jensine McGrath, Piper Ann McGrath, Helen Pedersen, S . R. McGrath,
Prances PeAer-sang JPanettP Pad; •sPn. S. R. McGrath Custodian for: Edward S. McGrath
and acknowledged the foregoing nstr=ment to be their .roluntary act and deed.
Before me:
Notary Public for Oregon
Ny commission expire : 4-23-85
1tLI'L':121•;NC:�% !•'1 Lli tl
ACCEPT.UICE 1.
App _owed as to legal description this �9� day of �1 ��V c=`,- _ 19
BY:
4Zy of Tigard
Apr-oved as to form this �7 _ day of
Ey ` T.torney - City of Tigard
Approved this 14 -day of a n � 19
BY:
Chairperso ty of Tigard, Oregon Planning Commission
Accepted by the .City Council. this � day of 19
City Recorder - City of Tigard
ST;'-'t: OF OREGON )SS.
Ca ay of
On. this day of 19_, before me appeared .
and both to me personally known who, being duly sworn, did
saY chat he, the said is the Mayor, ani- lie, the said
is the Recorder of the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal Corporation,
and the said and acknowledged
the said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipal corporation.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
vy official seal, this the day and year in this r:y certificate
first written.
i
Notary Public for Oregon
yr'✓ Commission Expires
Page 2
BUHR
EXHIBIT "A"
fug t r. :n -
t::� a 1 0.0 _ _i _ _ _ _.__. _ _
arse of fest
t:ie no: rici
i
S
REGISTERED
PROFrs�a�i�A:-
KEITH M. CLARK, P.L.s.
3435 N.W. JACKSON RD.
HILLSBORO, ORE.97123
PHONE 1-503-648-1250
OF:cGOIV
JULY 1^
KEITH 5r.3 8 LARK
JLY IG Y
u:
cp 4i ¢ Q W C• � �.
U ?2SS O
mono az
w
o;
J CS) -z,
m�
OO C,F-> w ri
0
\ Lli l��i a Z
LE I
a� Z) w 3 r u o
'I e, -� y c o�m
1 W" '� w � IE
2")
a �-
I'�SZ�SZ� mo003 C = �
Lu CL
\ rz
p O
m cc C,ti h U
w
CO
� mw
ct
r0. a ® Omz
0. cr
J
� v-
``
° U) OD
i �1na
co OD 3� 3
�d F J U Qi ip�q V'
CD 00,)
00
o Q 1,, \` 14 rpa N N
dj 00 u n u n V)
m1 "�� - oc •
U-V
\ 60
3,2;oGn.
_. 1W3Sd31dOZ'"r sl-
CL
as— 6f M zboO N Q`� • r.p
ZboON`
60'08
F �0 0 w 3 2
Lu ';N � O21w N ��O00 �O \
L7
LLw by N m a.w
¢ Ia z w
a i
3 INOO � ZboON___ _� +
if w
N.I m 4 3
N C O
2
'O N tA6 -c, Ory m
`00 \Op ori° ^�O
y m
t}P
j sz sz�
J U h
i� w 3 Gtl-686 8£9b" 0 o tv Q _l v�
j p
1-41L-lON l.j BL'05£-1N/Od
r�QO
NMI
MEMORANDUM
March 17 , 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Staff
RE: Street Dedication - Dave Hail MLP 21 -81
The attached street dedication was required as a condition
of approval of MLP 21-81 . The documents have been approved
by the City Attorney, the Engineering Superintendent and the
Planning Commission Chairman.
Staff request that the Council approve the street dedication
and authorize the City Recorder :-o sign.
FILE REFERENG�
PF�� i, _• TAX LOT:
TAX MAP:
STREET DEDICATION 83005471
'C40W ;'LL .• ]d BY TECSE P-R SENTS, THA-1 W. L. SAWYER, BERTINA K. SAWHER, husband and wife; DAVL
HALL & COMPANY, REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT E D NANCY C. BOONE, PAULI E 4
CUDDY AND EUGENE MOLINARO --- --
here. a`ter =ailed grantor(s) , for the sum of $1.00 constituting the actual consideration
for this to the Public, its successors and azsi,:.s
deed, do hereby give, grant and dedicate ,
a
perp,-cal richt-o£-way and easement for street, road and utility purposes on, over,
cross, (s_der, alcng and withirL the following describ d real premises in Washington Ccua ,
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A"
^o Haw_ a^? to Hold the above descr.hed and dedicated rights --.tc• t=e Public for th- u e
_.- oaoses nereiaabova- -tare
=-- d.
The gra.tor(s) herebv covenants that he (they) are the owner(s) in fee simple and have a
good and legal right to grant his (their) rights above described.
I:i WITNESS NFHEREOF, the grantor(s) have hereunto set his (their) hand(s) and seal(s)
this fST,r� day of
(SEAL)
W. L./ e .R G. BOONE
(SEAL)
BERTINA K. SA[4YER CY C. B N
DAVE HALL & COMPANY,
REAL ES A INVESTMENTS (SEAL) (SF;%-'-)
,/� PAULINE CUDDY, y er attorney a.n�t;
� �5�'� '�� (SEAL)
B :
David B. Hall, President
� . E M LINA— RAY his torney 1n acE�—
STATE OF OPEGON ) SS.
County of Wr-HINGTON )
On t_`:is 15th day of February 19 83 , personally appeared the above
W. L. Sawyer, Bertina K. Sawyer, Robert G. Boone, Nancy C. Boone _
and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and deed.
F\:,... ( 4,• Before me:
Notary Publ' or Ore —
=3 �o My Commission expire 3-13-85
OF 0
FORM N.. 159—ACKNOWLEDGMENT 6Y ATTORNEYAN-FACT.
STATE OF OREGON,
Washington...
County of. i
. _ _ .._............�ss.
15thFebuary 19.83.... personally appeared
On this the.... __.... - ... .......day of .. ......................._..... ......
Robert G._.Boone
a who, being duly sworn (or affirmed), did say that ....he is the attorney in fact for...........................................
_ Pauline--Cuddy.and Eugene-Molinaro--...... ......_ .._........-- - and
a that ...he executed the'for&gaaf)g instrument by authority of and in behalf of said principal,and....he acknowl-
edged said instruifrent to;bchtje act and deed of said principal.
c tom(, -.� .. ,j'•.�<..`t
Before me:
................... /1
1 <'-'' ^G'I'F•�"" i•;y commission expires: 3-13-8*
_........ .......I/.... .
......................................................
e ♦ (Tale of Oe(c-)
u
t
4
EXHIBIT "A"
l
A portion of that certain tract of land in the Southwest Quarter of Section 12,
Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon,
described in that certain agreement between W. L. Sawyer and Bertina K. Sawyer
and Dave Hall & Co. Real Estate Investment, recorded as Document No. 81001840,
Washington County, Oregon, Deed Records. Said portion being rare particularly
described as follows:
Beginning at the. Southwest corner of said tract and running thence Northerly
along the Vest line thereof 45.00 feet; thence Easterly parallel with the South
line of said tract 296.00 feet, more or less, to the Easterly line. thereof;
thence Southerly, along said Easterly line 45.00 feet to the Southeasterly corner
of said tract; thence Westerly along the South line thereof 296.6 feet, more or
less, to the point of beginning.
t
i
E
i
144 E
h._ A'1
> - ALIP
MINOR LAND PARTITION
FOR DAVE HALL 6 BOB BOONE
IN SW 1/4, SECTIOTi 1.2, T2S, R1W, W.H.
City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon
Scale: 1" v 100' 7 October 1981
T.L. 4200 T•L. 4'S06 T.L, 4001
Q
7
1
� r �
r r T.L. 5200
T.L. 5000
GAS!Ar.B To
50
r,�E7?TIG
tioLlsE ` , p TANK
TO IiEMA49 L-J p.SEM'T
,
lot
.25OE ICATtOK � '
��iLTwwTeel'T '"' 293 _
S W Dvtzt�AM QAAO 0a
T.t— i000 T.i. Soo 400 Y.L. 300
OWNER/DEVELOPER TAX MAP
Dave Hall 4 Bob Boone 251-12C, Tax Lot 5100
P.O. Box 938
Beaverton, Oregon 97075 AREA
2.70 Acres j����y�^�'�rp�
ZONING Bd'1dYt.tC.`a.� 1
n-5 ca�R CREVICE — T= rnt
STATE OF OREGON Septic tank on easement F a r�c�c �rx .
SS until sewer LID costructed.
County of Washington ASSOCLA=
n
I N C O h V .l N A 7 ! Ii
1,Donald W.Mason.Director of Assessment -
and Taxation and Ex-OffSCWFW�&der of Can- CIVIL ENGINEERS
veyances for;aid.QOLtnSy.do heia4gtertify that LAND SURVEY"ORS 6 PLANNERS
the withifi irtslrlxoeM of,writtng'vr_a'j received 140 N E 'LAIRD AVENUE
and recorded in book otYecordsOTsa county. HLLLSBORO.OREGOiV oIt23
' 5031648.4101
Donald W. Meson.;Diiector of
Asaessfnent and Taxation, Ex- 1 o Q
O Officio Chief DeputyClerk J O
a�
1983 FEB !6 PH 2: 54
Reviewed as to form this r day of G� 19 .
By:
City Attorney - City of Tigard
Reviewed as to legal description this day of �� i G! , 19 �
By: —
j I�
Approved this —L—/4 ;—day of , 19P53
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
BY: !
Chairman
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED this DAY OF , 19 by
resolution of the Tigard City Council.
Witness my hand
City Recorder: Tigard, Oregon
i
f
t
i
e
t
�4
t
t
i
i
r'
I
March 11, 1983
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works
SUBJ: P. G. E. Utility Easement
The staff recommends that the City Council approve P.G.E.
utility easement for the Tigard Senior Center and authorize
the City Recorder to sign and return to Portland General
Electric.
t
UNDERGROUND DISTRIBUTION LINE EASEMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That The City of Tigard _
(hereinafter called "the Grantors,"whether one or more than one),for and in consideration of the payment of the sum of
_ One and no/100------------------- Dollars($ 1.00 --),the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, hereby grant, sell and convey to Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon corporation_----
(hereinafter called"the Grantee,"whether one or more than one),its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement and
right of way under and across the following described parcel of land situated in the Southeast quarter
of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, County of Washington,
State of Oregon, said easement being a strip of land
6 feet wide and 3 feet
on each side of a centerline, being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING AT a Point, said point being the intersection of a Portland General Electric
Company power line and the most easterly line of that certain tract of land, as described
in Fee No. 79047825, Deed Records of said County, which bears N.0'58103"E., 12.25 feet
from the easterly southeast corner of said tract of land; THENCE, along said centerline,
N.37'31124"W., 17.70 feet; THENCE, N.23'58127"W., 50.96 feet; THENCE, N.10°55134"W.,
39.43 feet; THENCE, N.27'30122"W., 27.21 feet; THENCE, N.89°11'43"W 239.35 feet, more
or less to the westerly line of said tract of land and the terminus of said centerline.
The above-described centerline is shown on Portland General Electric Company
Drawing E-6679, attached hereto which by reference thereto is made a part hereof.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described easement and right of way unto the Grantee,its successors and as-
signs for the following purposes,namely: the perpetual right to enter upon and to install, maintain, repair, rebuild,
operate and patrol underground electric power lines and appurtenances,and also including,but not limited to,the right
to install surface or subsurface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets and also
temporary overhead utility service facilities during construction.
Grantors shall have the right to use the lands subject to the above described easement for all purposes not incon-
sistent with the uses and purposes herein set forth,except Grantors shall not build or erect any structure upon the right
of way without the prior written Consent of the Grantee.
If the Grantee, its successors and assigns,shall fail to use said right of way for the purposes above mentioned for it
continuous period of five years after installation of said underground electric power lines, then and in that event this
right of way and easement shall terminate and all rights and privileges granted hereunder shall revert to the Grantors,
their heirs and assigns.
The Granton hereby warrant that they are possessed of a marketable title to the property covered by this easement,
and have the right to grant the same.
The Grantors, for themselves and their heirs and assigns, covenant to and with the Grantee, its successors and
assigns,that the Grantee, its successors and assigns, shall peaceably enjoy the rights and privileges herein granted.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantors have caused this easement to be executed this day of
19_ The City of Tigard
By:
_(SEAL i
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON l
r ss.
County of
,19
Personally appeared the above name -
-and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act. Before me:
Notary Public for Oregon
My commission expires
YCW/mm
5-59.37A23
Z '
Tt /00
C/7Y of T/CARO (7/,ARD Scvlec
�N
Co. P CT.E. CO. N
PAD NO.95¢O
si•.--- 'x.33' --- y.
At AP 2
3o'YV /Bf 56 -- �,1 M
FAIR sis-LR. IW L, i
•? !v o
+I h v T 7o/
• w
VILLA Rinf-C
Tt 6 O� � � CH.4/ST/Ani CNru�N
.ti
Book 498 i
^n 0W6C- 331 I
M„
�.S
,/51'!1'/2'-'
7-4.7'
AVD.fie"n f.
g NW.cOR•.LOTS
"EDGEWaap"
n�
T 602 T 603 T 60/
h
1=
?0 10.
N s. W a'MARA sT/ZEFr
S 9f' 26'3o"E. /V•E.COR,LOT�f
n E04EWAop"
aEcm CO.
PORTLAND.OREGON
To CCOAt- ZWA,- F.4TSA16NT
TIGARD SEN/OR CENTER
SE. wJTfC.2T•1 A/W W. 4!9/Ce.oee.
ecus / =So' 2-z3 83
BAS/S t'F BEAR/NGS= Dnays ss ?sac cr crcccco
Y C.W. .
3
/8' 2
584 / ��c. roo.E- 667i J
PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
3/28/83
PROGRAM BUDGET
Community Services
1.1 Police 7,760.26
1.2 Finance & Records 6,684.45
1.3 Municipal Court 1,016.40
1.4 Library 2,098.99
1.5 Social Services -0-
Total Community Services 17,560.10
Community Development
2.1 Public Works 7,702.17
2.2 Planning & Development 2,137.36
{, Total Community Development 9,839.53
Policy & Administration
3.1 Mayor & Council 1,068.92
3.2 Administration 1,903.85
Total Policy & Administration 2,972.77
City Wide Support Functions
4.1 Non-departmental 10,892.43
Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc. ) 21,537.98
Investment -0-
DEBT SERVICE
5. Bancroft Bond & LID Expenses 92,164.27
UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY
Contract 76,174.50
TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 231,141.58
An
CITY lar' TIGAKll
.o: AE'
From
Cf7L%� L7' C> �G-C '. Date
Subject:
U'c
Fkn
G`
;vc- C-3,-
F
{ CITY OF T'IGARD
P.O.Box 23397
9020 S.W. Burnham
POLICE DEPARTMENT Tigard,Oregon 97223
On-02-83
TO: LT. KELLEY JENNINGS
FROM: JAMES E. CODY
SUBJECT: RESIGNATION
SIR:
I,, JAMES E. CODY DO HEREBY TURN IN MY RESIGNATION, DATED THIS
DATE,. 02-02-83 AS A RESERVE POLICE OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD.
I WISH TO THANK THIS DEPARTMENT AND ALL THE OFFICERS FOR THE
KINDNESS AND GOOD TRAINING THAT I HAVE OBTAINED. I HOPE TO
RETAIN ALL THIS INFORMATION AND TRAINING,, HOPEFULLY, TO USE IT
IN THE FUTURE.
DUE TO MY JOB POSITION NOW, IT IS VERY HARD FOR ME TO PUT IN THE
REQUIRED HOURS AS A RESERVE POLICE OFFICER.
THANKS AGAIN -FOR THE KNOWLEDGE AND TRAINING I HAVE RECEIVED-
ESP E CTFL
ECEIVED.ESPECTFL , °)
AMES E. CODY
c
IN Ill l�iiii
�m
MEMORANDUM
March 18, 1983
TO: City Administrator/City Council
FROM: Chief of Police
SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. Renewal
RE: PS - ZOOP'S FOOD WA7(LHGCSE
12230 S.W. Ma'.n Street
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Sir:
It is recommended that this O.L.C.C. renewal request be approved, and
forwarded to O.L.C.C.
There is no status change involved in this renewal request.
Respectfully,
`/��� ,� .1`��t-tel/ �
R.B. Adams
Chief of Police
RBA:ac
f.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: BOB JEAN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: JOY MARTIN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
DATE: MARCH 16, 1983
SUBJECT: AIR CONDITIONER FOR THE COMPUTER ROOM
SPECIFICATIONS
Specs were developed primarily by Jerry McNurlin during January. They are
based on current and projected needs and are listed below:
Furnish and install so ready to work upon completion
-- All-electric air conditioner
r -- Cooling only
-- Roof-top unit, mounted so there is no danger of leaks to the
computer equipment
-- Cool air year-round to 68-70 degrees, with equipment generating
5,000-12,000 BTU's/hr.
-- Room thermostat
-- Relatively low noise level
-- Portable
Quote is to be FOB and include electrical wiring and labor
BIDS
Three vendors, including our current vendor, were selected from previous
contacts, references and/or the local phone directory. Specs were sent out
early February and all three were received on or before March 4. The
companies responding with written quotes are listed below with quote and basic
description:
1. Arrow Mechanical Company Plan A: Carrier #48AQ018 $2,279.00
Tualatin Split System, 9,600-10,000
BTU
Plan B: Carrier #50YH024 $2,856.00
Roof System, 17,000 BTU
2. Sunset Fuel & Engineering Plan A: Carrier #38GS-018 $2,368.00
Portland Split System
Plan B: Carrier #50YH024 $2,722.00
Roof, Self-Contained Unit
. . . Continued . . .
MEMO - ROBERT W. JEAN
MARCH 16, 1983
PAGE TWO
3. Western Engineers, Inc. Carrier #50YH024 $2,935.40
Portland
FUNDS
Fund transfer of $2,350-Capital Outlay to City-Wide Support.
DISCUSSION
The split units have the air conditioner on the roof and the air handler
mounted on the ceiling. These units are much noisier which is part of the
problem now. One company says the noise level is similar to that of a home
furnace.
The roof-top model is larger than necessary for current needs, but it will
allow flexibility for changes and to allow additions to the equipment. In
addition, this unit will serve the needs if City Hall moves and the room may
have different conditions which may not be as favorable. Costs for duct work
increase the costs of this option and will have to be included if we move.
Since a move will probably require extensive duct works, this should not be a
problem. The roof-top model is $372 more than that transfered, and is
approximately $400 more than the lowest cost split units.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Accept the three bids as competitive bids.
2. Purchase the roof-top unit, Carrier Model #50YH024 because it is less
noisy and will not limit future options caused by a move or needs for
additional equipment.
3. Contract with Sunset Fuel and Engineering Co. for the unit and
installation since they are low bidder at $2,722.00 pending confirmation
of specs and quote. Also, work needs to commence as soon as possible.
JM : dkr
CC : Jerry McNurlin
f__
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOY MARTIN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ��
i
DATE: MARCH 21, 1983
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE PURCHASING AN AIR CONDITIONER FOR THE COMPUTER ROOM
BACKGROUND
The computer equipment's optimum environment is between 68-70 degrees.
Currently the room averages 90 degrees and above year round. This high
temperature decreases the lifetime of the equipment and there is a potential
of losing some equipment. In October of last year Council approved a transfer
of funds for an air conditioner. Attached is a description of the selection
process and a recommendation.
PURCHASING REQUIREMENTS
Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board and operating under rules
established in Resolution No. 77-5, must authorize the City Administrator for
expenditures greater than $1,000 on a case-by-case basis. For expenditures
greater than $2,500 the City must have three oral or written competitive
quotes prior to accepting any bid.
JM : dkr
Attachment
i
i
MiNUUMMURAW
'T
CITY F TIO
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
March 23, 1983
Mr. J B Bishop
Mainstreet Land Corporation
10505 S.W. Barbur Blvd. S-303
Portland, Oregon 97219
RE: Site Design review - Main Street Project
Dear JB,
I would like to clarify the information which I sent you on March 8,
1983, relative to scheduling your Site Design Review for the Main Street
Project. It is essential that you submit a plan in a timely manner in order
that we may avoid any obstacle which arise due to existing filing, notice and
scheduling requirements.
Following is a proposed schedule which I believe would best serve your
needs:
March 29, 1983 - Actual deadline for submittal.
April 7, 1983 - Extended deadline to submit your application for
Site Design Review to my office.
April 19, 1983 - Planning Commission informally determines if it
wishes to take up the Site Design Review on its
own motion.
April 22, 1983 - Staff will complete the staff report and send
notices to those persons required by law to q
receive notice. 4
May 3, 1983 - Planning Commission formally reviews the Site
Design Review application and Planning Director's
decision.
May 9, 1983 - City Council could review the Site Design Review
application and decision.
Due to the nature and importance of this project, I would be willing to-
extend the filing deadline from March 29th to April 7th, however, I would only
do this if I receive a written notice prior to the 29th advising me of your
intent to follow the schedule. f
t
Since ,
Q
William A. Monahan
Director of Planning & Development
WAM:dmj
12755 S.W!ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
March 28, 1983
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Frank A. Currie, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Re-cycling of newspapers as part of Solidaste Franchise
You have received the attached memo from the city attorney' s office and
the attached letter from Nancy Alford.
In basic sumnarv, Nancy Alford is in violation of Ord. 78-64 in that the
franchise is exclusive in determining who can recycle newspapers. She
has requested the ordinance be changed or she be given permission to collect
newspapers in Summerfield on weekends.
The franchised collectors counter with the claim that they pick up and recycle
regardless of market conditions and require sufficient volumes to sustain the
low market conditions as related to recycling of newspaper.
i
The Council has the ability to accommodate either position.
f
MM
U UUNNtLL [JAIL I'1,1A.U11L�' 0, L'lb.i
SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I TC) Mr. Robert W. Jean, City Administrator
1727 NW HOYT STREET
PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
(5031 222.4402 FROM K. Schneider , City Attorney ' s Office
RE City of Tigard/Council; Garbage Franchise
FACTS
The City of Tigard has granted a franchise to certain garbage collectors
to pick up garbage , including newspapers , within the City of Tigard.
In July of 1982 , a newspaper distributor , Nancy Alford, offered to pick
up the newspapers of her customers in the Summerfield area of the city.
In October she began the collection service, collecting froma. majority
of her customers. In the same month Mrs . Alford was told of the
franchise provisions. On December 22, 1982 , the city received a
petition representing approximately 105 households in the area asking
that the franchise ordinance be amended to permit Nancy Alford to
recycle newspapers of those of her customers who wish to use her service.
The garbage hauler for that area, Mr. Schmidt, indicates that the portion
of his recycling business which Mrs. Alford proposes to take over
represents about 250 of his recycling business.
Mrs. Alford has not indicated any interest in serving other areas of
the city. Mrs. Alford is not doing this to provide a service to her
customers which is not now being provided. Mr. Schmidt does pick up
the newspapers , as is his right,under the franchise agreement.
ISSUES
May the city alter the franchise agreement to accomodate Mrs. Alford' s -P
request?
May the city be subject to antitrust action for failing to amend its
franchise agreement to accomodate Mrs. Alford or for its franci:ising
arrangements for garbage haulers in general?
CONCLUSION
Provided appropriate findings are made, the city may amend its
garbage franchise agreement to accomodate Mrs. Alford.
The state of antitrust law with respect to local government is in
a state of flux. what is clear is that local governraents are, at
least to some extent, subject to antitrust actions. It is nearly
impossible to say what the extent of that exposure is. Garbage
franchising is certainly an area ripe for litigation.
DISCUSSION
r 1 . Amending the Franchise.
The City of Tigard has entered into a franchise agreement
for garbage collection, including the recycling of newspapers. The
agreement is set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code at Chapter 11 . 04 .
SKS: ial
2/8/83
Page 1
MINE
U UUNNtLL 3 , 1983
SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW T<> Mr . Robert W. Jean, City Administrator
1727 N.W HOYT STREET
t PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
15031 222-4402 FR(,)M Susan R. Schneider , City attorney' s Office
RE City of Tigard/Council ; Garbage Franchise
" (a) Subject to the provisions of this section,
this chapter , the City Charter, and any amend-
ments to these documents, there is granted to
the following persons an exclusive franchise
to provide service within the exclusive area "
T.M.C . 11 . 04 . 040.
The service to be provided is defined :
" ( i) ' Service ' means the collection and transpor-
tation of solid waste for persons for compensa-
tion. " T.M.C. 11 . 04 . 030 (i) .
Solid waste is also defined :
" (j ) ' Solid waste ' means all putrescible and non-
putrescible waste , including but not limited to
garbage, rubbish, refuse, ashes, waste paper and
cardboard ; residential , commercial , industrial ,
demolition and construction wastes; discarded
home and industrial waste; vegetable or animal
solid and semi-solid wastes; dead animals, and
other wastes. " T.M.C. 11 . 04 . 030 (j ) .
The relevant area of the city is designated as Area III under the
agreement. "Area III . Schmidt' s Sanitary Service, Inc . , John Schmidt,
President, 8325 S.W. Ross, Tigard, OR 97223 . " T.M.C. 11 . 04 . 040 (b) (3 ) .
Under Oregon law a franchise is a contract. Rose City Transit Co. v.
Portland, 18 OrApp 369 , 525 P2d 1325 (1974) ; Elliot v. City of Eugene,
135 Or 108 , 294 P 358 (1931) . The conditions are binding as the
terms of any other contract. See Rose City, 12 McQuillin 934 . 06 at 19.
The city may only amend the franchise agreement if the power to do so
is reserved. 12 McQuillin 534 . 44 at 116 .
The City of Tigard has reserved the right to amend portions of its
agreement to permit the withdrawal of certain services.
" (d) Nothing in this franchise or this section shall :
. . . (4) Prohibit the City Council from withdrawing
certain solid waste services by amendment to this
chapter on the basis of finding that such a regula-
tion is not necessary for the implementation of the
purposes of this chapter or a city, county or metro-
politan service district solid waste management plan; "
T.M.C. 11 . 04 . 040 .
In addition, an Oregon court has provided this guidance in construing
franchise agreements.
SKS : ial
2/8/83
Page 2
U UUNNtLL. DAlL
SULLIVAN & RAMIS February 8 , 1983
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1727 N W. HOYT STREET TO Mr . Robert W. Jean, City Administrator
f, PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
15031 22 2-4402 FROM Susan K. Schneider , City Attorney ' s Office
RE Cit of Ti and
Y g /Counc 'il ; Garbage Franchise
" (S] ince the franchise has all the incidence of a
contract, the rights and liabilities of the parties
to that contract are evaluated in standard contract
terms with one notable exception. [Cites omitted. ]
' It is a rule of construction that, if the terms of
the franchise are doubtful, they are to be construed
strictly against the grantee and liberally in favor
of the public. What is not unequivocally granted is
withheld, and nothing passes by implication, except
what is necessary to carry into effect the obvious
® intent of the grant. ' " Rose City at 1332 .
The combination of the reservation to amend to withdraw services and a
liberal construction rule in favor of the public means that the Council
may withdraw the newspaper recycling in Surnmerfield from the franchise
agreement.
The amendment must be done by an action of equal dignity. 12 Mcnuillin
§34 . 44 at 116 . This means that the amendment must be by ordinance.
The ordinance must include a finding that the amendment which withdraws
this element of Schmidt' s service is a regulation which is not necessary
for the implementation of the purposes of the chapter, or the city,
county or metropolitan service district solid waste management plan.
T.M.C. 11. 04 . 040 (d) (4) .
The following purposes of Chapter 11. 04 are relevant to this issue :
" (1) Provides sufficient waste volume to sustain solid
waste management facilities necessary to achieve resource
recovery goals established by the city, county, State
Department of Environmental duality and Metropolitan
Service District; . . .
(4) Ensure maintenance of a financially stable, reliable
solid waste collection and disposal service; . . .
(6) Prohibit rate preference and other discriminatory
practices which benefit one user at the expense of
other users of the service or the general public; . . .
(8) Eliminate overlapping service to reduce truck
traffic , street wear, air pollution and noise; . . .
(10) Provide technologically and economically feasible
`. recycling by and through solid waste collectors . "
T.M.C. 11. 04 . 020 .
Findings for amendment of the agreement must address these purposes.
It must also address the elements of the city, county, and MSD plans
dealing with solid waste.
SKS:ial
2/8/83
Page 3
O DONNELL. DATE I'ebruary .3 , L983
SULLIVAN & RAMIS
• ATTORNEYS AT LAW To Mr . Robert W. Jean, City Administrator
1727 N.W. HOYT STREET
i`• PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
15031222.4402 FROM Susan K. Schneider , City Attorney ' s Office
RE City of Tigard/Council. ; Garbage Franchise
If an exception to the franchise ordinance is made , consideration
should be given as to whether Mrs . Alfred should be required to take
the same responsibilities for service she will provide as the existing
franchisees take . For example, franchisees pay the city a fee equal
to "30 of gross cash receipts resulting from solid waste services
conducted under the franchise . " T.M.C. 11 . 04 . 060 (a) . Such records
are subject to audit. There are also requirements for insurance, com-
pliance with ORS Chapter 459 , security deposits or performance ponds ,
limitations on time for collection, provisions for city inspection
and limitations on the transfer , suspension or modification of the
franchise. T.M.C . 11 . 04 . 070- . 080 . In addition, the city regulates
the rates which are charged for such services. T.M.C. 11 . 04 . 090 .
2. Antitrust Considerations .
The City Council will be receiving a separate memorandum dealing
with the antitrust implications of garbage franchising. The area of
the law is new and unsettled. What is clear is that cities can no longer
be considered immune from such litigation. Community Communications Co.
v. City of Boulder , 102 SCt 835 (1982) . And, such litigation is extremely
complicated and expensive.
SKS: ial
2/8/83
Page 4
P l
WIWI
er 21 51 /
December , 19 1P
Bob Jean, City Administrator
12755 SW Aah Avenue
Tigard, OR 97223
Mr. Jean:
Not knowing there was any regulations forbludint, a news carrier from
recycling their customers newspapers, I offered, in July 1982, to pick
up any papers left out for me on Sudday mornings. One of my customers
suggested I go through my route on Wednesday since he saw many papers
left out then, too. The first and only Wednesday I did, tor. Schmidt
sae me and became very angry. He chased me out of Summerfield and
called Tigard Police. This is when I learned about Ordinance 78-64,
which regulates recycling. This was October, 1982.
I have been working with Brad Roast, Tigard Code &nforcement Officer.
The enclosed petition I have made for my cuCtomers has taken quite
awhile because of the Green River Ordinance, which 14r. Roast said
includes my petition.
t Of the people on my paper route I have contacted, there were very
few :rho were either disinterested with or opposed to my efforts.
Some were, in fact, angry that Ordinance 7`3-64 has given exclusive
rights to garbage collectors to recyclable materials. . They do under-
stand, though, that non-profit organizations are free to ask for
recyclables.
What I would like is to be able to recycle ghat papers my customers
would leave out for me to collect on weekends. Could you please look
into either 1. Revising Ordinance 78-64 o; separating recyclables
from solid waste and give the homeowner the option of deciding -aho to
leave papers for, or 2. Give me permission to pick up newspapers
left out for me by my customers in Summerfield on weekenas. I would
be glad to turn over a fair percentage to the City of Tigard for this
permission in lieu of a franchise.
Sincerely,
Nancy Alford
11200 SW Greenburg std. '' 57
Tigard, OR 97223
Knc: Petition
cc: Wilbur Bishop
d
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the City Council —
FROM:
William A. Monahan, Director of Planning and Development �"
DATE: March 21 , 1983
RE: Charles Whipp Appeal
Attached are the following materials for your use in preparation for the March
28th hearing on the Whipp appeal:
1. February 2, 1982, Planning Commission meeting minutes.
2. March 2, 1982, Planning Commission meeting minutes.
3. March 2, 1982, Planning Commission transcript.
4. Appeal filed by D. Charles Whipp Jr., March 26, 1982.
5. Notice of Public Hearing for March 28, 1983.
6. Memorandum from Elizabeth A. Newton concerning allegations
made by Mr. Whipp before the Council on February 20, 1983.
Hearing notices were sent to all property owners within 250 feet of the the
project. Please note that some of the persons notified for the March 28, 1983
hearing are receiving notice of this action for the first time. The number
of affected property owners has increased substantially as a result of a
change in Tigard's Administrative Procedures. The procedure formerly required
that a notice be sent to all property owners within 100 feet of a property,
it no:: requires that all owners of record within 250 feet receive a notice.
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 2, 1982
Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room
10865 S.W. Walnut Street - Tigard, Oregon
1. President Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL: Tepedino, Moen, Kolleas, Christen, Herron, Owens, Bonn.
(Speaker and Helmer were excused)
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 January 12, 1982 meeting were considered. Commissioner
Owens noted the s was missing on her name throughout the minutes. (corrections noted)
Tepedino moved for approval of minutes, seconded by Moen. Motion carried
unanimously.
4. COMMISSION COMMUNICATION:
(a) Chairman pedino ann2unced that Public Hearin items 5.3 - Unified §2werage
lAoggy.; 5.4 - The Meadows and 5.4 - Con lona Use Stan rds were being
f Qostponed until the March 2nd Planning Commission Meeting.
(b) Planning Director introduced the newly hired Associate Planner, Jeremy Coursolle.
(c) Commissioner Kolleas infors:.ed the Commission she had been questioned by the
Times inquiring if she felt there was a conflict of interest between JB Bishop
and Mayor Bishop and if she had been pressured in any way regarding Main Street
Land Company's development.
(d) Chairman. Tepedino commented that each Commissioner may be contacted by the press
and cautioned the Commissioners to be sensitive and caution in their public
statements regarding public hearing items, as they are govern by the Open.
Hearings Law.
(e) Chairman Tepedino distributed his letter written to Jack Nelson, Mayor, Beaverton
regarding modification of the floodplain. Included were the responses from
Mayor Nelson and Christopher Bowles, City Engineer, assuring Chairman Tepedino
this modification would have no negative effect on Tigard.
(f) Chairman Tepedino inquired if Staff could give status of the Urban Renewal
Agency - Downtown Tigard Revitalization describing boundaries and the effect
on shops within that area; Planning Director roughly described the boundaries
and the creation of the Urban Renewal Agency. He stated Tax Increment Financing
would be going to the vote of the people. Invited concerned citizens to
come to City Hall in order to go into more detail.
(g) J. Allan Paterson stated, there was only a small amount of Tax Increment
Financing available which would only finance a little bit of planning. As
of this time nothing has been decided as to what will happen to property
within the revitalization area. Explained how Tar. Increment Financing would
affect a business that expanded and have no affect on a business that was
already improved to 100 per cent.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 2, 1982
Page 2
® Commissioner Speaker inquired if applicant would agree to approval under the
condition if they should change the type or scope of their business they would
have to return to the Planning Commission for approval; Applicant agreed,
o Commissioner Bonn moved for approval of CU 3-82 per Staff Findings and
Conclusions including the following additional condition:
2. Application is approved for permission to supply Veterinary Clinic Services,
should any significant change be contemplated in type or scope of business
conducted, they shall return to the Planning Commission for amendment of
the Conditional Use Permit. Seconded by Commissioner Speaker.
Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Owens arrived 8:00 A.M.
5.2 SENSITIVE LANDS PEF14IT M 3-81 - Unified Sewerage Agency NPO # 7
Request to install a underground sanitary sewer line from S.W. Tiedeman west
to S.W. 121st Street.
(a) Staff Report was read by Associate Planner, Newton.
(b) APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Robert Cruz and Paul Klope, Unified Sewerage Agents,
were present to answer any general questions the Commission might have. Mr.
Cruz informed the Commission, since the original hearing of September 8, 1981,
they had been working with the City of Tigard, Corps of Engineers and property
owners addressing concerns. They specifically worked with Mr. Ott, which
brought about some major changes. Mr. Cruz stated they agreed with the Staff
Report and would have no problems meeting Staff's requirements.
(c) PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Dale M. Ott - 11900 S.W. 116th, Tigard, Oregon, stated he had no problem with
alignment. However, he wanted to raise a question as to when the pump station
would be eliminated. His main concern being the pump station which keeps
over-flowing onto his property.
o Commission requested applicant to respond to Mr. Otts concern; Mr. Cruz
stated pump station was privately owned and even though this line was in the
design it was not in their contract and suggested Planning Director would
be better able to respond to this than USA.
o Planning Director stated that elimination of this particular pump station was
not one of the aims, but something that would be completed in the future.
Further discussion followed between Commissioners, Staff and opponent
regarding raw sewer problem.
o Commissioner Speaker suggested Mr. Ott contact the City directly regarding
his concern as it was not directly connected with applicants request.
o Mr. Ott then raised a question in reference to Section 18.57.070 (a) (1)
regarding the affect this project would have on the watershed; Mr. Cruz
stated this project would have no permanent affect, however, upstream
development might and Staff would have to respond to that issue.
PLANNING C014MISSION MINUTES
March 2, 1982
Page 3
• Discussion followed among Commissioners, Staff and Applicant regarding affect
construction would have on floodplain , time construction would occur, how
they would accomplish installation and how the CH2M Hill study would be used
in the evaluation of this and future projects.
• Public Hearing Closed
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION:
• Moen commented that the need is there and in order to prevent tearing up the
floodplain more than once, make sure a large enough line is used to carry
future development.
• Moen moved for approval of Sensitive Lands Permit M 3-81 for Unified Sewerage
Agency subject to Staff Findings and Recommendations, seconded by Commissioner
Herron.
Motion carried unanimously.
5.3 CONDITIONAL USED STANDARDS - moved to end of Public Hearings
5.4 CONDITIONAL USE CU 6-82 Tri-Met NPO # 1
A request to locate a Tri-Met bus time-transfer center in a C-3 General
Commercial zone. (8960 S.W. Commercial Ave_ WCTM 2S1 2AA lot 4800)
(a) Staff Report was read by Associate Planner, Newton-
(b) APPLICANTS PRESENTATION - Lee Hames, Capital Development, representing
Tri-Met, explained how they had been looking at locating a transit center in
Tigard for the past two or three years. They analyzed several sites and
determined Mr. Kadel's property would be the most appropriate. She explained
Tri-Met has filed for a grant which will pick up approximately 80% of the
cost of this project with funding available sometime in August. She stated
Steve Smith, from Tri-Met, was also available to answer any questions.
Discussion followed between Commissioners, Applicant and Staff regarding
issues of parking, traffic congestion, pedestrians crossing railroad tracks,
feasibility of busses (especially articulated ones) negotiating turns on
specific streets and possible need for installation of traffic light.
Public Hearing Closed.
(c) COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION:
• Commissioner Christen inquired what overall cost would be; Applicant
responded, estimated cost 1.2 million with half of the cost for the land
and the remainder for removal of existing building, construction of new
building and landscaping.
• Commissioner Herron moved for approval of Conditional Use CU 6-82 per Findings
of Facts and Recommendations by Staff, seconded by Commissioner Helmer.
0 Motion carried unanimously.
Planning Commission - March 2, 1983
SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 3-81 - Unified Sewerage Agency NPO #7
Liz Newton This is a Sensitive Lands Permit for the Unified Sewerage Agency
and NPO #7. The applicant is Unified Sewerage Agency and there are
several property owners listed, requesting for a sensitive lands permit
to install an underground sanitary sewer line. The location is various
property north of Southwest Walnut between Southwest Tiedeman and
Southwest 121st Avenue. On Sepatember 8, 1981, the Tigard Planning
Commission tabled the sensitive lands request until the following
conditions were met:
Installation to be realigned to avoid gsiax1xxx:t:imxxsf destruction of
existing streets, Public Works Director to supervise this installation.
U.S.A. coordinated this project for Tigard School District in relation
to actual location of the proposed line in the Tiedeman/Tigard Avenue
area. U.S.A. to present final plans to the Planning Commission in the
future which would address the concerns voiced by property owners in
this September 8th meeting. No construction to commence until the
engineering plans have been approved by the Public Works Director
binding the Unified Sewerage Agency is proposing to construct the
sewer line within the 100-year floodplain and greenway area as
identified on the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and we've out-
lined Section 2.57.040 of the Tigard Municipal Code, which deals with
uses and activities allowed with special use permit, and you will note
i, that public improvements. . .. . . .. ..
Mumbled voice "B?"
Newton 1D right, Utilities. Okay, uh, number 3 - The City of Tigard-Engineering
Division has reviewed the engineering plans for the project estimated
by the U.S.A. and construction land with minor changes. Particularly,
=sasoo�n.�o ����ffi ffi
M '3-81 - Page 2
i
the Engineering Staff has asked Unified Sewerage Agency to propose
another option for crossing the streets which would involve an open
trench and would not include the The proposed
Scholl trunkline will have the capacity to replace the existing Leron
Heights line in the future. The proposed Scholls trunkline will
accomodate anticipated development west of 121st. The engineering
plans have been made available for interested residents in the area to
review.
Conclusion - Section 18.57.040 (1) of the Tigard Municipal Code allows
utilities facilities within designated greenways. Section 18.57.040 (2)
addresses uses allowed with a special permit in greenways and floodplains.
The proposed sewer trunkline will not impede or interfere with the flow
of flood water within the district. The construction of the sewer line
will change the flow of water and also the velocity
however these changes will occur during construction only, and will not
be permanent. It is anticipated that the existing Leron Heights
trunkline will be abondoned in the future, and the City of Tigard will
tie existing and proposed lines into the larger capacity Scholls trunk
line.
Staff recommends approval of the Sensitive Lands Permit for construction
of the proposed Scholls trunkline within the 100-year floodplain and
dedicated greenway, based on findings as follows:
Tigard Municipal Code allows utilities facilities within a designated
greenway with a special use permit. Construction of the Scholls Ferry
Sewer trunklin will not permanently impede or interfere with the flow
of flood waters within the 100-year floodplain. Further, staff
recommends the following conditions be attached for approval of the
sensitive lands permit M 3-81; City of Tigard inspector shall be
contacted before existing City sewer lines are uncovered and covered,
m �a �®
M 3-81 - Page 3
to insure proper care is taken to protect these facilities during
construction. The contractor shall restore in the street to acceptable
City standards after construction.
Tepedino: Thank you staff. May I have the applicant's presentation, please.
CRUZ: Good evening, my name is Robert Cruz, I am the collection systems
division engineer of Unified Sewerage Agency, the applicant for this
sensitive lands permit. I am here primarily to try to answer any
general questions that may arise in relation to the Scholls trunk,
additionally, Paul Klope who is a design engineer with the agency is
also in the audience. He is the project engineer and surveyer for this
particular project and is here and available to answer any specific
questions that may arise.
As you may know, U.S.A., or Unified Sewerage Agency is charged with the
responsibility of collection and treatment of sewage within the incor-
porated areas of Washington County. To do so, in order to meet that
requirement, we are in the process of implementing a master plan that
was adopted with the formation of the agency, back about 12 years ago.
The Scholls trunk is one portion of the master plan. This portion of
the Scholls trunk which is located between Tiedeman Avenue approximately
and S.W. 121st Avenue is located completely within the City of Tigard,
and within the 100-year floodplain. Aside from taking off from an
existing pump station that is owned and operated - maintained by Unified
Sewerage Agency of S.W. 121st Avenue, it's primarily there to enable
the City of Tigard to implement it's own comprehensive plan as adopted
for future development. Another portion of the Scholls trunk was
built or constructed about 3 to 4 years ago, and that portion exists
from S.W. 121st Avenue to S.W. 130th, so in essence, this portion of
it will eliminate quote, a missing link, between the two, and also
`tl
a�
M 3-81 - Page 4
enable the City of Tigard to eliminate, if they choose an existing
privately oxaned pump station, but as I undetstand it, uh, maintained
by the City of Tigard. I believe that the staff report covers adequately
some of the background as to how we got here tonight, in addition to the
public hearing that we've had here in Tigard, or hearings, we've had
numerous meetings and made applications to the various jurisdictions -
other jurisdictions that we have to get permits from, including the
division of state lands, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Washington
County, and obviously in addition to the property owners along its
route. The primary reason for tabling a decision at the September
meeting was to try and address everyone's concerns that were raised
at the last public hearing. We feel that we have done so - that we
have addressed everyone's concerns. That's not to say that we have
solved or eliminated everyone's concerns, that's an impossibility;
primarily because different concerns conflict with other jurisdictions
concerns, for instance, one of the items that we were to deal with
was to try to eliminate the destruction of as many trees as possible -
and that's also one of our intents. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
emphasized that also. One of the property owners, however, would like
us to move the line onto an open grass area, to eliminate interference
with the ball field. Obviously we can't meet both concerns, so we've
left kkal the line in that area primarily in the grass area. As you
also may recAll, Mr. Ott testified at the last public hearing. We've
met individually with him, and have come up with a significant alignment
change there, and we believe that we have solved his concerns. There
have been other minor design changes in regards to some of the concerns
Cityof Tigard's staff has had. We've met with them, and hopefully have
addressed those also. So in conclusion, obviously we agree with the
staff recommendations, and have no problems with the conditions that
M 3-81 Page 5
have been attached to the approval, - should you approve them.
Thank you.
Tepedino Thank you, Mr. Cruz. Are there any parties that wish to speak in
favor of this proposal? Those in favor. Any parties wishing to
speak in opposition - those against this proposal. Let's hear it.
OTT: My name is Dale Ott. I live at 11900 S.W. 116th, and I'm standing
here with a different idea in mind than the reason I thoug)3t I came
to this meeting. Mr. Cruz and I had a little discussion prior to
the meeting. I understand they have in fact acted to allay my fears
and my problems. I no longer have a problem with the alignment of
the line. However, I heard a comment that I think I have to at least
raise a question on. 1 understood that one of the stated purposes of
this trunk system was to eliminate 2 pump stations. The one that's
owned by Unified Sewerage Agency at 121st and the one that's owned
by City of Tigard, or Mr. Patterson, whichever, off in the field
behind 116th. What I'm hearing now is a question mark. This trunk
may eliminate that pump station. I believe Mr. Cruz's words were
that the City in effect would have the option - that they could decide
to eliminate that tie-in to the U.S.A. trunk. Now this is of great
concern to we because one of the main reasons that I'm conceptually in
favor of this line, from the standpoint of the way it affects me is
simply the fact that I'm tired of that pump station going down, and
raw sewage overflowing in my back yard, which has happened probably
six times in the past year for periods varying from i day to of up
to about 3 days at a run. So I am raising this question, and I don't
know what other point to take to do it. Is it or is it not going to
intercept that 18-inch main and short-circuit that existing pump station.
Tepedino: Good point, Mr. Ott. We'll try to get that answered for you during
M 3-81 - Page 6
r
the period for cross-examination and rebuttal. Any other parties
i
wishing to speak in opposition - those opposed to this issue?
Okay, now is the opportunity for cross-examination and rebuttal on
Mr. Cruz, can you respond to Mr. Ott's question?
Cruz: Since the pump station is .,privately owned, and as I understand it,
maintained by the City, I believe probably Mr. Currie would be better
to answer it. I think he knows the particulars a lot better. I
believe there is a contract between the City and Mr. Patterson, of
which we_Ire not a party, and so that's why I believe it would be
better for Frank to answer that.
Tepedino: Frank and Staff, would you respond to that?
Currie: Yes, uh, I guess I would have to say that it is no one of the aims
of this project to eliminate that privately owned pump station at
this time. It is their airm to eliminate the pump station on 121st.
It is, however, the City's intent to eliminate the pump station in
the future. We are in the process of doing a comprehensive sewer
plan now that will probably be one of the questions that is answered
by a comprehensive sewer plan when it is finished. We done - it is
not prioritized or scheduled right now, but is an intent to abandon
that line in the future.
Cruz : Possibly to clarify that also, initially we started looking at this
project, that was one of the intents that Mr. Ott indicated was for
this line to take that pump station off line. At that time we didn't
realize that it was privately owned. We thought it was owned by
the City and we didn't think that there would be any problem, and so
that the line is designed to take that pump station off line. We can't
do it as part of our contract.
Tepedino: Does that answer your question, Mr. Ott?
AMIM
M 3-81 - Page 7
Ott: No it doesn't. It doesn't answer my question at all . It stirs
up a few more. Perhaps this is not the right forum to look for an
answer to this. . . .
Tepedino: Well this is the type of forum you have in your rebuttal so if you have
a question. . ..
Ott: Well, we've been going since last July all the way with the understanding
in fact stated, verbally and in writing that this was one of the purposes
of the line. I can understand this confusion faxxtk from the standpoint
of the Unified Sewerage Agency if they were not at that time aware of
the ownership line, but I fail to understand in my own mind, why it's
not going to be taken off. I am not happy with the situation. What other
recourse do I have? I have some other concerns about this line, which I
have chosen not to bring out because I picked my priorities. I said I
will if I can get rid of that pump station and the problem, I will not
fi ht the trunk sewer line. . . ..
Voice: That's not scheduled on the forum. . . .
Currie: The Unified Sewerage Agency line is designed to take that flow. It's
not just a simple matter tax:Kaksk of disconnecting the pump station and
xzconnecting it. The 18-inch line has lines all the way up through, and
we want to bring not only the pump station but the 18 inch line also.
In order to do that, you've got to disconnectxxkxxx from the 18- and
connect to the new:Scholls Ferry trunklin. That's - That I think is
another reason Unified Sewerage Agency chose . .. .
oil- Okay, well of course, I'm not aware of where the specific connections are
to that 18-inch main in terms of the newer developments - Dawn's Inlet,
and so on and over off of 113th.. . . Yeh, I'm very concerned about this,
because I've been operating for 5 months shooting at the wrong target,
I guess. And, it leaves me with a very big question mark as to what
my recourse is to get rid of raw sewage in my back yard and dumping into
M 3-81 - Page 8
the creek for days on end.
Tepedino: Staff, will you respond to that question. That's really a public
health kind of question, more than the specific issue as far as
the application by the Unified Sewerage Agency.
Speaker: Mr. President, I would like to inject one note here, I think that Mr.
Ott has a real concern there, but I think the answer to his is not
connected directly with this pump line sewer. What you have to dg,
Mr. Ott, is work with the City who has some other things that they have
to do before that pump station can be eliminated.
Ott: I can appreciate that that we're getting off a little bit in left field.
While I didn't intent to take this much time, what I would like to do
is progress for a few minutes on another matter, which is directly
related. I guess I have to back up a little bit as an opponent, if
you will, rather than as a rebuttal. This is also more in the way
of raising a question in the minds of the Commission, and this is
something that you might say that I basically shoved aside as lower
priority in my two concerns. I have not lost my first priority, so
here goes. I believe, and I'll make this as brief as I can, that
somewhere within your Tigard Municipal Code, and since I only have a
few pages plucked here, I can't quote you all of the pertinent
identification, this is basically under the sensitive lands section,
would be, uh, okay, Section 18.57.070 Titled Standards, under the
Sensitive Lands Ordinances, wherever that shows up. Uh, I'm going to
just read this standard reall quickly as I can, here, Section 18.57.070,
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
M 3-81 Page 9
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. Tksxg That's the pertinent section, so I'll stop
there. I would now like uh, out of - certainly not out of context
in terms of meanings to condense that, I'm going to take words from
that section, and leave out the items that aren't pertinent-consider
this, if you will. That ordinance in effect says - no structure
shall be permitted which in combination with proposed uses would
raise either the flood surface elevation or flow rates. Now it's
clearly stated in writing - it's been stated orally, that one of
the primary purposes of this trunk is to, if I can choose a word,
enable further upstream development - land development, uh, within
urban growth plans. In effect, what we are saying is that the proposed
use is indirectly going to enable the development of land areas in
terms of covering Zkxx with concrete with blacktop with roofs and
structures, we are in effect. . .tape.over. ...... ....the water's going
to run off. It's going to run off that much faster, it's going to
result in certainly higher flood levels downstream. I think these
would all be clear facts. I'm simply saying that within the terms
of the ordinance, that this project „could in fact, indirectly affect
the behavior of the watershed, and the way I interpret that ordinance
and it seems quite clear, that unless a project like this is
considered in conjunction concurrently with the storm sewer system,
which would negate the affects of this change in the run-off pattern
on the downstream flood conditions, unless it's considered concurrently
and in conjunction with the storm sewer system, it's clearly against
the ordinance. That's my feeling. I wanted to raise that question
M 3-81 - Page 10
I am concerned about this, I'm not just trying to make waves, I'm
concerned about what happens to me 10 years from now when there is
1,000 or 2,000 kaxxag more houses upstream basically, in the summer
creek watershed, and the rains come, and they come down to me that
much quicker and I'm sitting there flooded. A week and a half ago,
I had about 6 inches of freeboard left before the water was in my house.
It's a concern to me, because I think that the effect is there. I did
pose this question to Aldie Howard, in fact, and what I got was sort of
a chuckle, I means he was helpless, I suppose, in that he didn't have
an answer, but, uh, his response was well, you know we can't do anything
about that. I thiel '-hat the implication was that he agreed that it
would have this effect on mg. I'm raising this question - is this
sort of a project in effect, a violation of the ordinance? Without
some tempering factor included in, in this particular case, what I'm
saying is a storm sewer system in conjunction with a sanitary sewer
system to counter-balance the effects that it's going to have on the
behavior of the drainage. Thank you.
Tepedino: Thank you Mr. Ott. Any other parties wishing to speak against this
proposal?
Mr. Cruz, do you have a response to Mr. Ott's concerns?
Cruz: His last questions is something to the effect that is this project
in violation of the ordinance? The answer to that question, and I
t _nk _hat he indirectly answered it is that this project in and of
tseLf is not - this project will not cause danger in raising the
flood level, something to that effect. Uh, it's true, indirectly
it could have detriment uh, with upstream development. I believe
that, and again, aux probably Frank could answer this or redress
is better than I can, but I believe that the City of Tigard does have
within its realm, storm sewer standards that would take into account,
M 3-81 - Page 11
limiting run-off on new developments and things like that, but
anyway, to answer Mr . Ott's question, no this project, in and of
itself does not violate the code.
Speaker: Mr. Skala President, I would ask how much of the upstream from
Mr. Ott's house, How much development does the City of Tigard have
would the City of Tigard have control of, because- simply because I
think it's, uh, you aren't too far from the edge of the City limits,
are you Mr. Ott?
Ott: I couln't tell you any more. . . . .
Voice: I believe the current City limits are at 135th, and I believe that
Urban Growth Boundary is somewhat beyond that.. .
Currie: 135th right now. . . .
Voice: I have a question that's not related . . . there is a mention in here
to masa propose
someplace that the City Engineering Division asking/fax another obstacle
crossing the g:kxaakxixxK1xmdcreek involved and should not include the
damn. What damn are you referring to?
Cruz The City staff asked that uh, some details be provided in addition
to the construction drawings themselves. This particular detail
showed that a temporary damn would be built and would leave a 12-inch
culvert installed during the operations, during the installation of
the 30-inch sewer itself. And what staff has requested, and I believe
will make a requirement is to not install the temporary damn during
construction - in essence be a wet installation. Do I understand
correctly, Frank?
Currie: Yes, that's correct. I guess welre not so concerned about that except
that we prefer that the contractor have the option whether they would
choose the wet installation over this one.
Let me zmy*xi if. I may, Mr. Cruz, so what you are testifying is that
your construction and installation of this sewer line, in and of itself,
M 3-81 - Page 12
would be so designed that it would not adversely affect the floodplain
and the holding capacity in the floodplain and direction of velocity
of the waters.
Cruz: Correct, according to, I believe, your city codegnAx and the
Washington County floodplain ordinance, and Division of State Lands
law, we cannot fill within the 100-year floodplain, and we won't
do it with this project.
Voice: It will temporarily affect the flood capacity of the stream?
Cruz: It can have temporary during construction - temporary affects, sure.
But I take it, when you put your pipe in, you are decreasing the
net valible on metric capacity of the floodplain. How are you going
to offset that decrease. . .. . .
Cruz: There As excavation that is taken off and not put back into the
floodplain... ..
.... .. .. . .. .. .... . . ..... .extra pipe.
Cruz: No, like I say, that's not allowed by any number of ordinances.
Does the staff agree to that?
Currie: Yes, we've already asked those question.
The real problem you know has been a bug on the floodplain, and
here's somebody that's going to go smack in the floodplain with a
pipe. I don't know where else to put a sewer line.
Tepedino: Commissioner.
Well, I guess I could comment that since the other part of this was
female)
pub in behind our property, we haven't noticed any change in the
water capacity that goes behind our house. I do have to say, that
we saw the most water behind our house
since 1974, but that was true everywhere, it wasn't just related to
that particular capacity of Summer Creek, there was a problem everywhere.
ZMEM
M 3-81 - Page 13
Currie: I might add that the City does have a comprehensive storm water
management plan from CH2M Hill, which specifically addresses Summer
Lake and mitigating measures that will need to be taken on the stream
and pertinences over and around the stream, and addresses as far as
those things obviously occur within Tigard's area or future area of
influence, this is designed to also conduct sewerage
from Beaverton, and handle unincorporated area of Washington County,
perhaps, and they also have storm runoff standards - I don't know
exactly what they are. I think those things are and will be addressed
as the development occurs, not as the line is built. I'm not sure they
should go concurrently.
Tepedino What iaxasx one issue I'm having uh, stirring over in my mind is
whether_ the developer wanted to come in and put a big pipeline in
the center of the creek, what my reaction would be to him, versus
Unified Sewerage Agency, and whether I should treat these people
differently , because U.S.A. always wears the white hat, and somebody
wears the black hat, and I'm having a real philosophic problem with that.
Any other questions.
g Commissioner Bob?
ex re sed
We/ax a number of concerns at the last hearing, i believe, in
September, and I understand these have all been addressed in the
last 6 months . .. .
Currie: Apparentely not all of them have been addressed. . .
Comm: Whether or not satisfactorily, it has been addressed.. .
Helmer: How soon do you anticipate doing this particular job, this, basically
your winter work, or are you looking for the summer time.
Cruz: No, and that's why we've been lax in coming back to you, so to speak,
we knew we weren-'t going to be able to do it during the winter, so that's
why we are back here now. We would hope to be able - in fact, I believe
M 3-81 - Page 14
the permit from the Army Corps says that we have to do the installation
during the driest period of the year - I don't recall the exact dates,
but it's like May to September, something like that. Those dates aren't
correct, probably. To try to address Mr. Tepedino's concern regarding
:kkKx U.S.A. and/or a developer, a portion of the Scholls trunk was
installed three to four years ago was constructed by a private developer.
It was obviously done under the approval of U.S.A. and I believe the
City of Tigard. So, we are talking about the same project with two
different people doing different phases of it. There is also a good
possibility that/ax extension from 130th would be done by a private
developer. We don't know that yet, but there is a_possibility of that.. ..
Currie: .... . .. . .Public utilities..
Tepedino: I see, is there any other comments, or questions from the commissioners?
8ixc Any other comments before I postpone the hearing on this.
Postpone the public hearing on this issue.
Commissioner
Yi�:sa?`
M 0eA
-G4.,-Q: Uh, well, in terms of Mr. Ott's question, I xasamtd really think that
the tie in between this line and future development related to the
flookplain issue, is rather indirect, I think that you axxxprobably
demonstrated a need that this line needs to be put in. I think the
function of whether future development's tied into it is soley a
function of how big they make it. Make it small, or bigger. It makes
sense to me that they are going to tear up the place, that you ought to
tear it up only once, and should make them put in as big a line as
practical to handle what may come down the line, and not have to do it
twice. I think it's - it seems to me that it's needed, I think it being
designed to hook into the second pump station and hopefully to work that
out is with the City at this point. I think that Unified Sewerage Agency
M'3-81 - Page 15
has done their bit, and I think we ought to get on with it.
Tepedino: Would you like to make a motion, sir?
Molen: All right, I would like to make a motion for approval M 3-81,
Sensitive Lands Permit - Unified Sewerage Agency subject to staffs
findings of fact and recommendations.
Tepedino: /xxy ydzotion made for approval.
Fem�?lP : Second
Tepedino: Seconded, further discussion?
All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying Aye-
Commissioners: Aye
Tepedino: Those opposed - No.
Y$is� Motion carried.
i
i�ireraro -Neu nmwwm�
ats®
l
PLANNING COI.IMI SS ION 14INUTES `G/
March 2, 1982
Page 2
-Commissioner Speaker inquired if applicant would agree to approval under the
condition if they should change the type or scope of their business they would
have to return to the Planning Commission for approval; Applicant agreed.
e Commissioner Bonn moved for approval of CU 3-82 per Staff Findings and
Conclusions including the following additional condition:
2. Application is approved for permission to supply Veterinary Clinic Services,
should any significant change be contemplated in type or scope of business
conducted, they shall return to the Planning Commission for amendment of
the Conditional Use Permit. Seconded by Commissioner Speaker.
Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Owens arrived 8:00 A.M.
_. 5.2 SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 3-81 - Unified Sewerage Agency NPO U 7
Request to install a underground sanitary sewer line from S.W. Tiedeman west
to S.W. 121st Street.
!' (a) Staff Report was read by Associate Planner, Newton.
(b) APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Robert Cruz and Paul Klope, Unified Sewerage Agents,
were present to answer any general questions the Commission might have. Mr.
Cruz informed the Commission, since the original hearing of September 8, 1981,
they had been working with the City of Tigard, Corps of Engineers and property
owners addressing concerns. They specifically worked with Mr. Ott, which
brought about some major changes. Mr. Cruz stated they agreed with the Staff
Report and would have no problems meeting Staff's requirements.
(c) PUBLIC TESTIMONY
• Dale M. Ott - 11900 S.W. 116th, Tigard, Orego4 stated he had no problem with
alignment. However, he wanted to raise a question as to when the pump station
would be eliminated. His main concern being the pump station which keeps
over-flowing onto his property.
• Commission requested applicant to respond to Mr. Otts concern; Mr. Cruz
stated pump station was privately owned and even though this line was in the
design it was not in their contract and suggested Planning Director would
be better able to respond to this than USA.
Y Planning Director stated that elimination of this particular Gump station was
not one of the aims, but something that would be completed in the future.
Further discussion followed between Commissioners, Staff and opponent
regarding raw sewer problem.
S
o Commissioner Speaker suggested Mr. Ott contact the City directly regarding
his concern as it was not directly connected with applicants request.
s Mr. Ott then raised a question in reference to Section 18.57.070 (a) (1)
regarding the affect this project would nave on the watershed; Mr. Cruz
stated this project would have no permanent affect however, upstream
development might and Staff would have to respond to that issue.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 2, 1982
Page 3
a Discussion followed among Commissioners, Staff and Applicant regarding affect
construction would have on floodplain , time construction would occur, how
they would accomplish installation and how the CH2M Hill study would be used
in the evaluation of this and future projects.
i Public Hearing Closed
COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION:
s Moen commented that the reed is there and in order to prevent tearing up the
floodplain more than once; make sure a large enough line is used to carry
future development.
Y Moen moved for approval of Sensitive Lands Permit M 3-81 for Unified .Sewerage
Agency subject to Staff Findings and Recommendations, seconded by Commissioner
Herron.
Motion carried unanimously.
5.3 CONDITIONAL USED STANDARDS - moved to end of Public Hearings
5.4 CONDITIONAL USE CU 6-82 Tri-Met NPO # 1
A request to locate a. Tri-Met bus time-transfer center in a C-3 General
Commercial zone. (8960 S.W. Commercial Ave. WCTM 2S1 2AA lot 4800)
(a) Staff Report was read by Associate Planner, Newton.
(b) APPLICANTS PRESENTATION - Lee Hames, Capital Development, representing
Tri-Met, explained how they had been looking at locating a transit center in
Tigard for the past two or three years. They analyzed several sites and
determined Mr. Kadel's property would be the most appropriate. She explained
Tri-Met has filed for a grant which will pick up approximately 80% of the
cost of this project with funding available sometime in August. She stated
Steve Smith, from Tri-Met, was also available to answer any questions.
Discussion followed between Commissioners, Applicant and Staff regarding
issues of parking, traffic congestion, pedestrians crossing railroad tracks,
feasibility of busses (especially articulated ones) negotiating turns on
specific streets and possible need for installation of traffic light.
Public Hearing Closed.
(c) COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION:
o Commissioner Christen inquired what overall cost would be; Applicant
responded, estimated cost 1.2 million with half of the cost for the land
and the remainder for removal of existing building, construction of new
building and landscaping.
s Commissioner Herron moved for approval of Conditional Use CU 6-82 per Findings
of Facts and Recommendations by Staff, seconded by Commissioner Helmer.
0 Motion carried unanimously.
r AECEI�IECa
MAR 2 G 1982
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIGARD, OREGON C IGA
r ( _ 1llf ET RD
c
NOTICE OF APPEAL File No.
1 . Name ,� l `/�f��.�C✓� G✓�//�� /� -
2 . Address : // O C�Lt/ ��� ` �
Street P .O. Box
CiSate Zip Co e
3. Telephone No. :
4. If serving as a representative of other persons , list their names
and addresses :
5 . What is the decision you want the City Council to review?
(Examples : denial of zone change; approval of variance. )
�t7'T�l
F, The decision being appealed was announced by the Planning Commission
on
Date
7 , On what grounds do you claim status as a party? (See Section 18. 92. 020
Tigard Municipal Code. )
A4P60"Ifx!/ems2,
8. Grounds for reversal of decision. (Use additional sheets if
necessary. ) Your response should deal with the following:
(a) Explain how your interest is damaged.
(b) Identify any incorrect facts mistakenly relied on in the
decision or recommendation from which you appeal .
(c) Identify any part of the zoning code or other law which you
claim has been violated by the decision or recommendation
from which you appeal .
(d) Describe what decision you are asking the City Council to make.
A -Va&-J&4 L d e
9. Estimate the amount of time you will need to present your argument to
the City Council . (The Council will schedule more than 15 minutes
per side only in extraordinary circumstances. Each side will be
given the same length of time for its presentation. )
Signed: C�
Date:
###################################,##############-a
FOR USE BY CITY
Date and time of filing:
Date of Planning Commission decision:
Date set for Council consideration:
Time allowed for arguments :
per side
Entered by:
Amount paid: Receipt #:
Page 2 of 2
Notice of Appeal
o-
AFFIDAVIT
WE THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY OWNERS INVOLVED IN CASE
NUMBER M-3-81 FILED BY THE UNITED SEWERAGE AGENCY,
150 NORTH FIRST AVENUE, HILLSBORO, OREGON, BEFORE
THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY
SWEAR AND AFFIRM THAT WE DID NOT GET ANY NOTICE
WHATSOEVER OF THE MEETING HELD MARCH 2, 1-982.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
d
C- F'2
L/
1Ns;"'FoJ'w
/1���
Q- A"a
. .. .........
AFFIDAVIT
WE THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY OWNERS INVOLVED IN CASE
NUMBER M-3-81 FILED BY THE UNITED SEWERAGE AGENCY,
150 NORTH FIRST AVENUE, HILLSBORO, OREGON, BEFORE
THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY
SWEAR AND AFFIRM THAT WE DID NOT GET ANY NOTICE
WHATSOEVER OF THE MEETING HELD MARCH 2, 1982.
SIGNATURE:
DATE: I
17
- 'L
i
January 4, 1982
Mr. Sid Stecker
Permit Coordinator, Portland District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2946
Portland, Oregon 97208
RE: Reference Number: 071-OYA-4-004254
Summer Creek-Fill
Dear Mr. Stecker:
As property owners whose property will be severely affected, we would
like to express our deep concern about this project.
The sole purpose of this project, replacing a 12 inch inside diameter
sewer pipe with a 30 inch inside diameter sewer pipe, is to open up a vast
area of land for development. There is no storm drainage in, or near, this
part of Tigard and all storm drainage is fed into Summer Creek. This creek
is very small and is incapable of handling the amount of storm drainage
presently required of it without flooding. Each and every rain storm causes
the creek to quickly rise out of its banks. This creek has been declared
a sensitive lands area and a flood plain area. A map showing this as such
and showing the 100 year flood plain was printed by the City of Tigard in
August of 1977. Due to the many developments which have occured in the
last four (4) years, the 100 year Flood Plain as shown on the map has almost
been reached last year and this year seriously threatening our home. If this
project is allowed, the plan will have to be renamed the "Annual Flood Plain
Area".
The project alone, without the additional storm dainage coming from the
future development, is in conflict with the City of Tigard zoning and building
code paragraph 18,57.070 which states: "No structure, fill, excavation, storage
or other use shall be permitted which alone or in combination with existing or
propolsed uses would reduce the capacity of the flood plain 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 sewer line .having a
30 inch inside Diameter would displace approximately 50 gallons of water a
lineal foot when buried in the ground. Over the length of this project, we
are speaking of nearly a quarter-million gallons of water being displaced.
Summer Creek can not handle even 10110 of that.
The Zoning Laws (Paragraph 18.57.060(1)(B) also require: "Plans drawn
to scale, submitted in triplicate as prepared by a registered Professional
Engineer with experience in Hydraulic and Geoghydrologic Engineering and
processes, showing the nature, location, dimensions, elevations and 'topography
f� of the site, the location of existing and proposed structures located upon
the site, existing and proposed areas to be filled or otherwise modified, and
the relationship of these to the location of the stream channel, and proposed
methods for controlling errosion". The drawings furnished do not do this,
nor are they accurate. The creek bed as shown on the drawings is totally
inaccurate for our property-Lot 1202. In fact, The Plannin4 Commission
for the City of Tigard turned down the request for a permit due to poor
engineering drawings at their meeting on September 8, 1981.
i'
January 4, 1982
Page Two
Mr. Sid Steck
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
Portland, Oregon
The inaccuracy and incompleteness of the detail of the drawings plus
the fact that the sewer line is scheduled to cross the creek 14 times in
.8 miles (once every 300 feet) shows to us how little thought was put into
the planning of this project. Also, on the drawings, an 80 foot working
easement is shown except for the area 29+00 through 31+00. In this area,
although not indicated on the drawings, the working easement would have
to drop to about 25 feet without an additional easement over the back of
our property. Even the 25 foot easement would mean serious root damage
and possibly cutting down the few large old trees on our property which
just happen to be on that part of our property line. If an additional
easement were required, about 1/4 of our property would be taken by the
easements and pof value. Whytrees wouldn'tttheerequired easement, which would rbelshown
affect the property
on this particular part of the drawings?
The United Sewerage Agency of Washington County isnot showing
gpiny
consideration to the property owners nor the general public
helping
to create another Johnson Creek flood zone by going down uthe direct
of this highly sensitive area. There are alternative routes which common
intelligence dictates must be used.
If this project is allowed to be completed as the United Sewerage
Agency of Washington County is requesting, our property and others will
be sacrificed and will become completely worthless and uninhabitable.
We sincerely request that the permit be denied and that a public
hearing be held so that we may further emphasize our objections and
concerns. We are also enclosing copies of the flood plain area map as
published by the City of Tigard, copies of the related City of Tigard
zoning laws, and copies of the original engineering drawing furnished
to the planning commission at their meeting of September 8, 1981.
Re-pectfully your ,
D. Charles Whipp, Jr.
Paula Rossi
11880 S. W. 116th
Tigard, Oregon 97223
503/620-5160
DCW;vs
Encl.
CC: Les AuCoin
United Sewage Agency, Washington County
N 0 T I .0 .EO F P U B L I C H E A R I N G C1 OF T1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - WASHING0NCOUNTY,OREGON
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE-TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY,
March 28, 1983 AT 7:3 0 p.m . IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF FOWLER
3UNIOR HIGHSCHOOL; 10865 S.W. Walnut, Tigard, Oregon, WILL CONSIDER THE
FOLLOWING APPLICATION:
APPLICANT: MR. D. CHARLES WHIPP. JR.
11880 S.W. 116th STREET
TIGARD, OR 97223
M 3-81 SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT USA TRUCK LINE
NPO #7
A hearing on the Notice .of Review issue and if necessary
the substance of the Planning Commission' s approval in
March-of 1982 of a Sensitive Lands Permit- for construction
of a sanitary sewer truck line. Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1- 3AA,
lots 100 & 101; 2S1 3AB, lots 100 & 300; 1S1 34DC, lots
3601, 3602, 6400, 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, & 6900; 1S1 34CD,
lots 1201 & 1202.
(See Map on Reverse Side)
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
l RULES OF -PROCEDURES OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
i-TESTIMONY MAY BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD.
.-FOR FUTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY RECORDER OR PLANNING DIRECTOR
AT: 639-4171 CITY OF TIGARD - 12755 S.W. ASH - TIGARD, OREGON 97223
Corner of Ash & Burnham
12765 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
\ 1
. y .
1t4
J
1 {:•1 P
1t 1S
C
' LLO Ta
u MU
.Q.-W- Ewnft
M' 1$ 1 4CO : , "r 1200
•� Q -+�}n_ �• ? !�5*'`.��°(1tt . pry �. °
1202
ItATIMAINE ST
ji
� '1rsFa k= ' a,I .` '�36A3 �1� t ` a .•r�s"' � •. -
3601 •-� � ., k
t8`1 3AOa+� !Tz 2R 1 3A0�`
100 1,
100
101
31 /
3:W. wAufuT ST.
rw
MEMORANDUM
TO: William A. Monahan
FROM: Elizabeth A. Newton 40
SUBJECT: Whipp Appeal
After listening to Mr. Whipp's comments on the February 28, 1983, City Council
tape regarding his appeal on the USA sewer line sensitive lands permit, I
offer the following comments:
1. Mr. Whipp contends that no notices to surrounding property owners
were mailed for the March 2, 1982 Planning commission meeting at
which the permit was granted. This is correct, however, at the
opening of the February 2, 1982, Planning Commission meeting,
President Tepedino announced that the USA sewer line Sensitive Lands
Permit would be postponed until March 2, 1982.
2. Mr. Whipp said at the February 28, 1983 City Council meeting that the
School District filed their appeal on March 26, 1982 earlier in the
day. In fact, the School District filed their appeal on March 22,
1983. I was not aware that the School District had even filed an
appeal until Mr. W!-Lipp told me on March 26, 1982 when he himself
attempted to file an appeal. Mr. Whipp at that time (approximately
4:50 P.M.) also told me that the School District had not filed a fee
with their appeal. I checked on that while Mr. Whipp waited and
found that indeed the School District had filed on March 22, 1982 and
had not paid a fee. Mr. Whipp asked if the School District's appeal
was accepted. I told him I didn't know. Mr. Whipp told me he wanted
to reserve his right to appeal by filing the appeal but did not want
to pay the fee until he found out what happened with the School
District appeal. I explained to him that only one appeal need be
filed for the item to go foward to City Council. I never refused to
accept the money nor did I indicate that the appeal was filed
appropriately. I stamped the appeal received and told Mr. Whipp that
the City Recorder would have to determine the validity of the appeal.
3. There seems to be a problem with my having "received" the document
and the Recorders office never having "accepted" the document. To my
knowledge, the document was never, 01accepted" by the Recorder's
office although the fee was received. On the bottom of the last page
of the appeal form, there is some information required of the City
upon acceptance of an appeal. This section has not been completed on
Mr. Whipp's appeal form.
Please let me know if there are additional items needing clarification on this
issue.
E
4
I or � ho�o
ExPi in
hib � � 5
� 5 � e Co �nci
March 23, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Pacific/78th Avenue/Haines Road/Dartmouth Extensions LID
(Department Extension LID)
At the March 16, 1983 City Council Meeting the Council directed the initiation
of the Dartmouth Extension LID, and that appropriate documents be prepared by
the March 28, 1983 Council meeting.
The normal cut—off date for submitting completed materials for the March 28,
1983 meeting was March 18, 1983. Obviously the two working day notice are not
sufficient for routine preparation and timely submittal of the needed
materials. Staff is working on the project and will include in the packet
such materials as we have and hand carry the rest of the materials to the
March 28, 1983 meeting.
(0051P)
t Jf
t
t M E M O R A N D U M
TO: LT . JENNINGS
FROM: BOB JEAN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: MARCH 23 , 1983
SUBJECT: CITIZEN COMPLIMENT TO MAYOR RE. OFFICER MERRILL
On Monday, 3/ 21/ 83 , Mayor Bishop received a call from a citizen
on Burlcrest who was having a problem with some juveniles and a
motorbike. According to the citizen who reported the events to
the Mayor, Officer Merrill is to be complimented in his handling
of the potentially difficult situation and in problem prevention.
The Mayor asked that this be forwarded to the Department and
brought to Officer Merrill ' s attention.
i Mayor Bishop pointed out that he hears about complaints from
citizens , but wants the Department to know of his recognition of
the day-to-day job well done that too often is taken for granted.
RWJ dkr
s
IN
r
i
Y
k-
C
a
M
c
r
`(kt4(i
i
r
March 28, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator 66
SUBJECT: Fred Anderson's Letter of March 25, 1983
At 5:00 P.M. on Friday, March 25, 1983, Mr. Anderson delivered and requested a
signed receipt by the City of his letter of March 25, 1983 and attachments.
in this letter, Mr. Anderson requests a response by the City at the Monday,
March 28, 1983 meeting.
Other than the general topic of Floodplain Policy, there is no agenda topic on
the March 28, 1983 Council agenda pertaining to Mr. Anderson's letter. Any
response by staff will be preliminary and as an oral report due to receipt of
the request well pant agenda cut—off dates. A written response will be
prepared and reported to Council in a timely fashion.
cc: Fred Anderson
Frank Currie
I
Pm
(0458A)
l
ANQERSON. 01=MAN Sc ANDERSON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
TIGARD PROFESSIONAL CENTER
8865 S. W. CENTER STREET
P. O. BOX 23006. TIGARD. OREGON 97223
639-1121
March 25 ; 19 8-3 _.
FRED. A. ANDERSON
DERRYCKH. DITTMAN
ROGER F. ANDERSON
City of Tigard
Robert Jean, City Administrator
P. O. Box
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re : Disposition of Surface Waters , East side and
West side of Highway I-5, N. Tigard - S. Tigard Interchange
I enclose a copy of my letter of March 23, 1983 to Bob
Shotwell and Edward Hardt, both connected with the above refer-
enced project on which we understand bids will be considered on
March 31, 1983, by the department.
As you are undoubtedly aware , page 16 Bl sheet #9B, take-
off copy of the pertinent part enclosed for your ready reference ,
purports to show a 24-inch water drain line extending from the
east side of Highway I-5 first southwesterly, thence westerly to
I-5 , thence southwesterly to a manhole or such other discharge
point on the west side of 66th Avenue , all as generally indicated
by the red line on the attached copy.
We believe that the Highway Department , perhaps with or
without the knowledge or consent of the City , has so planned the
drainage of surface waters from the reservoir planned on the west
side of I-5 in such manner that the abutting lands of DJB Inc. , our
client, will suffer material damage from inundation or subsurface
absorption of the water.
Our concern in this regard forms the basis of our letter of
March 23, 1983 to the highway people as enclosed. I want to
emphasize that it is a matter of public concern of the City of
Tigard and concern for the property owners as to how the disposi-
tion of this water is arranged. I am experienced in the propensities
of water and the legal problems that arise therefrom, and the pur-
pose of this letter is to document the problem so that if any of
these waters are not properly attended by the Highway Department in
connection with its construction project with or without the knowledge
of the City of Tigard, a claim of lack of knowledge or notice cannot
be made in any litigation which may be instituted to rectify any
condition which appears to be improper disposition of these surface
waters .
City of Tigard Page 2
I request your comments in writing as to whetter or not the
City of Tigard is a participant in this unacceptable proposal,
along with a statement or copy of any documentation you may have
with respect to any sols .tion.
I ask that a copy of this letter, and your response thereto,
if possible , be made part of the documentation normally made avail-
able to the council members for the meeting of March 28, 1983, at
which time I understand that the Council will consider problems
connected with drainage and disposition of surface waters .
Very truly yours ,
ANDERSON, DITTMAN & ANDERSON
ed. A, Anderson
FAA:pt
Enc.
C
b
I � O
< �. � .ice /I � •r I ' � 1 $ I ' ; o `o_
50
•z= �/ C� �, I tip , I I dC'Si0+.36�s P.s T �
1 �
O �� r7 ti �'1 1a t ' k
5�W. W.M.
I /
'5. 2.1 W.,W.M.
• �1 f
LAS
00" . I
55
:.,• �: �, 1 1 1 � 1 1 �
z�^40ty
- A• I ,_ H .� 1 1 6�X61
11V
i...+
1
w. /str I
1 I�
I
8 i l 60 TI O 1 Z
�_� � y, a•I �� j C6p,.p+'d�P.D.T.b j � � O x ti
_ 1
•� ' , 1�1� 1
U)Ln 1 ' 9. ZT
Z
�Iy m
3 ,+ U7'
� ' 1 r .
1 ��
f --4 co
7M.1—Eg�F.m
ANDERSON. L7ITTMAN SC ANDERSON
ATTORNEYS AT L.AW
TIGARD PROFESSIONAL_ CENTER
8863 S. W. CENTER STREET
P. O. BOX 23006. TIGARD. OREGON 97223
503 - 630-1121
FRED. A. ANDERSON
DERRYCK H. DL"rTMAN
ROGER F. ANDERSON March 23, 1983
Bob Shotwell Edward Hardt
Project Manager Metro Region Engineer
N. Tigard-S. Tigard Interchange Section 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Boulevard
4755 S.W. Watson Avenue Milwaukie, Oregon 97222
Beaverton, Oregon 97005
Re: Disposition of Surface Waters
East side and west side of Highway I-5
N. Tigard - S. Tigard Interchange
This letter is being written in our capacity as attorneys for DJB, Inc. and
G.L. Ball, who separately are owners of several tracts of land located northerly
and/or westerly of Landmark Ford ownership, and southerly of the off ramps at the
interchange above mentioned. We have obtained and have at hand in this connection
copies of the Department of Transportation plans for the proposed project, which
we are informed is now scheduled for bid consideration on March 31, 1983.
The plans for transfer of surface waters from the easterly side of I-5 do
i:ot include any reliable indication of disposition of waters along S.W. 66th Avenue,
and we understand that this is a matter of concern for the Department of Transporta-
tion as well.
It is our further understanding from Mr. Bob Shotwell that the plans include
the construction of a large holding pond approximately due east of the planned
convergence of the westerly planned traffic ramps, but that plans with respect
to the surface waters are being reinvestigated for-the purpose of determining C
the ultimate disposition thereof rather than following the present proposal to
release the impounded water westerly of I-5 at 66th Avenue. The vo-lume�of surface w
water which we understand will be involved should not be released indiscrimately
on the west side of I-5, as it is our opinion this would constitute a violation
of the rights of the adjacent property owners.
As we understand, the redetermination of the disposition_ of these surface t`
waters involves legal as well as physical and topographic problems, but the con-
struction contract plans as distributed show only the discharge of such water =.
onto 66th Avenue. Our concern includes the rights of adjoining property owners,
and we have been assured in this regard that prior to final determination of the
issues that are involved here we will be afforded an opportunity to review and
i
f
r
Bob Shotwell
Edward Hardt
March 23, 1983
Page 2.
comment on the revised water disposal plans. We believe that this is a very
vital aspect of the matter, and our clients are concerned that their rights
may not receive proper consideration, resulting in the need for court determina-
tion of rights after expensive litigation.
Your cooperation in furnishing us a copy of your findings and proposals as
the matter progresses will be greatly appreciated by the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
ANDERSON, DITTMAN & ANDERSON
Fred. A. Anderson
r
FAA:o J
City of Tigard Page 2
I request your comments in writing as to whether or not the
City of Tigard is a participant in this unacceptable proposal,
along with a statement or copy of any documentation you may have
with respect to any solution.
I ask that a copy , of this letter, and your response thereto ,
if possible , be made part of the documentation normally made avail-
able to the council members for the meeting of March 28, 1983, at
which time I understand that the Council will consider problems
connected with drainage and disposition of surface waters .
Very truly yours ,
ANDERSON, DITTMAN & ANDERSON
ed. A. Anderson
FAA:pt
Enc.
Original received this 25th day of March, 1983.
Cityo Tig rd
By
v�
Tit 1e
3 �f�'T 067S5; IVr
Qfi CZE` 7� X92 Ca^15-