The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 04/11/1983 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate APRIL 11, 1983, 7:30 P.M. 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 2t 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 Appoint Pro Tem City Recorder 2.2 Approve Fire Insurance Renewal 2.3 Receive and File q Audit Update Memo e Report on Control Budget including FY 82-83 i H.U.D. Letter e Letter from Beaverton School District o Durham Road Memo from Planning Director 2.4 Approve Resolution No. 83-�_ Transferring Funds - FY 82-83 2.5 Approve Expenditures and Investments $ 239,762.58 2.6 OLCC Applications e Savory Sandwich Corporation, 242 Tigard Plaza, Tigard, Oregon (New business)(Hall Blvd. & Pacific Hwy. ) a 7-Eleven Food Store, 12045 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon (New business)(Hall Blvd. & Pacific Hwy. ) e Webfoot Deli & Wine Company, 13815 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, Oregon (New partner) (Pacific Hwy. & McDonald) 2.7 Approve Sewer Connection Payment Schedule Request, Chamberlain Resolution No. 83--3-?- 3. 3--3-Z3. PROCLAMATION "VOLUNTEER WEEK" a City Administrator v Key to City - Cliff Speaker i 4. SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 2-82 JADCO CHEMICAL NPO #5 � An appeal by John Duncan of the Hearings Officer's denial of a sensitive ° lands permit request to excavate and fill within the 100 year floodplain at 16055 SW 74th Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 13A Lot 1500). The matter is to be reviewed by Council pursuant to Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.84.250(b)(1). This matter is to be heard pursuant to Section 18.84.290 (b) and the review will be confined to the record of the proceedings. No new evidence or arguments will be allowed. However, parties are invited to submit written arguments only pursuant to Section 18.84.290(b). Such arguments shall be submitted to the City Recorder not less than five (5) days prior to Council consideration. During Council consideration, Council may pose questions to staff and parties on policy issues. e Public Hearing Opened a Staff Report and Recommendation to Remand to Hearings Officer by Director of Planning and Development a Public Hearing Closed PAGE 1 - COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 11, 1983 Mir SUNffmW�� Ali 11 1111�1�1111111111 111111111111111 5. APPROVE ESTABLISHED & DEVELOPING AREAS MAP • Director of Planning and Development 6. ASH/PACIFIC STREET LID #38 • Public Hearing Opened • Summation by Director of Public Works o Public lostimony: Opponents, Proponents • Public Hearing Closed • Council Consideration and Action • ORDINANCE NO. 83- 7_ ADOPT FINAL ORDER FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS - SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 3-81 RESOLUTION NO. 83- (Whipp Appeal) :ITY Director of Planning and Development 8. ATTORNEY MEMO REGARDING TURA • Continued from 4/4/83 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (1)(f) to consider issues related to Pending Litigation. 10. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda Items identified to the Chair under item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are encouraged to contact the City Administrator prior to the meeting. 11. ADJOURNMENT �i PAGE 2 - COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 11, 1983 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors Tom Brian, Kenneth Scheckla, Ima Scott; Jeremy Coursolle, Associate Planner; Frank Currie, Director of Public Works ; Bob Jean, City Administrator; Diane Jelderks, Pro-Tem City Recorder; Bill Monahan, Director of Planning and Development; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel. 2. CALL TO AUDIENCE FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS UNDER OPEN AGENDA (a) Mrs. Geraldine Ball, representing herself and DJB Properties, 11515 SW 91st Avenue, Tigard, read and submitted a letter into the records regarding staff's responses to her previously submitted questions. (b) LaValle Allen, 7540 S.W. Hermosa read his letter into the record voicing his concerns regarding TURA and issue of voting on the financing method. 3. CONSENT AGENDA (a) Councilor Scott pulled item number 2.3 Report on Control budget including letter of City Attorney regarding legal fees and item number 2.4 Resolution No. 83-36 Transferring Funds - FY 82-83. 3.1 APPOINT DIANE JELDERKS PRO TEM CITY RECORDER (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to appoint. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 3.2 APPROVE FIRE INSURANCE RENEWAL (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to accept recommendation of Finance Director for renewal of insurance on City property. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 3.3 RECEIVE AND FILE (a) Audit Update Memo (b) H.U.D. Letter (c) Letter from Beaverton School District / (d) Durham Road Memo from Planning Director PAGE 1 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 �Z (e) Motion by Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to receive and file. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 3.4 APPROVE EXPENDITURES AND INVESTMENTS $239,762.58 (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 3.5 APPROVE OLCC APPLICATIONS (a) Savory Sandwich Corporation, 242 Tigard Plaza, Tigard, Oregon (new business) (b) 7-Eleven Food Store, 12045 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon (new business) (c) Webfoot Deli & Wine Company, 13815 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, Oregon (new partner) (d) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 3.6 RESOLUTION NO. 83-37 IN THE MATTER OF PAYMENT OF CHARGES IN LIEU OF ASSESSMENTS AS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 82-33. (a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 4. PROCLAMATIONS (a) Key to the City was presented to Clifford Speaker. (b) City Administrator Jean explained that there are four proclamations for the following. (1) Library volunteers (2) Police Department Volunteers (3) Administrative Volunteers (4) Arthritis Day - April 15, 1983 (c) Councilor Brian moved and Councilor Scheckla seconded to approved agenda item # 3 authorizing proclamations citing volunteers for the Library, Police and Administration and proclamation for Arthritis Day. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 5. SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 2-82 Jadco Chemical NPO # 5 An appeal by John Duncan of the Hearings Officer's den:.< i of a sensitive lands permit request to excavate and fill within the 100-year floodplain at 16055 SW 74th Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 13A Lot 1500). (a) Director of Planning & Development made staff's recommendation to remand the Sensitive Land Permit back to the clearings Officer in light of the new policy being adopted for the Floodplain/Greenway area. Mr. Monahan had discussed this recommendation with the applicant's attorney, Fred Anderson, who supported this action. o Councilor Scheckla questioned if Legal Counsel had been consulted; they had and supported the action. Discussion followed regarding conditions and writing a new staff report. (b) Councilor Brian moved and Councilor Scott seconded to remand Sensitive Land Permit M 2-83 to the Hearings Officer on May 12, 1983 at 7:00 P.M. . The meeting will be held at the Durham Waste Treatment Plant. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present 6. ESTABLISHED AND DEVELOPING AREAS MAP. (a) Associate Planner Coursolle distributed a copy of the established and j developing areas map and memo explaining how the need for this map had resulted from meetings with the CCI and the implementation of Policies 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 in the Finding Policies and Implementation Strategies document. Coursolle made staff recommendation for approval as submitted. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Yvonne Larson, 10730 S.W. North Dakota requested that the area along 107th and North Dakota be an established area because of the number of flag lots and the size of the lots in that area. She requested Council to approve map as presented to protect this area. o Michael Bercutt, 3703 S.W. Kanan Drive, Portland did not support having the property zoned R-20. He and his partners, the Bobergs, had purchased their property at 10700 S.W. North Dakota with the intention of developing it in the future. Mr. Bercutt and Mr. Boberg had both signed the petition presented by Yvonne Larson, however since that time have asked to have their names removed from the petition. Discussion followed. o Councilor Scheckla and Brian did not support taking one lot in an established area and make it developing area. Further discussion. (b) Councilor Brian moved and Councilor Scott seconded to adopt. PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 ORDINANCE NO. 83-22 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARD AREAS MAP OF THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Motion passed 3-1, Councilor Scott voting NAY. Ordinance No. 83-22 will require a second reading. 7. ASH/PACIFIC STREET LID # 38. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED (a) Public Works Director requested Dave Larson from McKenzie Engineering to give staff's presentation. o Dave Larson, Mckenzie Engineering, 0690 S.W. Bancroft, stated they had done a feasiblity study on February 23, 1983. They had reviewed the improvements and had mailed estimated assessments. Notices had been sent to property owners and at this time they have not received any remonstrances. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Mrs. Hanaman, 13075 Ash St. , objected to the LID. She felt the cost outweighed the benefits. She did not want sidewalks. f t o Mayor Bishop asked the amount of her assessment; she responded $906.00. o John Elingson, Philadelphia Square Apartments, 13070 S.W. Ash favored the LID with a bond period of 20 years. o Steve Janick, 101 S.W. Main Street, representing J B Bishop favored this LID. He reviewed the background of the project, the financial condition and the sub net worth of his client. He explained that the City's position is secure because there is a lien put against the property for the public improvements. o Public Works Director Currie read a letter from Michael P. Lockwood, stating he was selling his property to JB Bishop and supported the LID with payment over a 20-year time period. o Public Works Director Currie recommended continuing the hearing to April 25, 1983. o Discussion followed regarding the period of time for the bond, the lease agreements and the City's liability. (b) Councilor Brian moved and Councilor Scott seconded to continue the Public Hearing for Ash/Pacific Street LID # 38 to April 25, 1983. k, Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. PAGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 8. FINAL ORDER FINDING & CONCLUSIONS - SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 3-81 (Whipp Appeal) (a) RESOLUTION NO. 83-39 IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF A FINAL ORDER UPON COUNCIL REVIEW OF M-3-81, USA TRUNK LINE, AS PETITIONED BY D. CHARLES WHIPP, JR. (b) Director of Planning and Development Monahan reviewed the resolution noting corrections that had been made. He also submitted a letter from Unified Sewerage Agency supporting the Council's action. (c) Councilor Brian moved and Councilor Scheckla seconded to adopt Resolution 83-39 Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 9. CITY ATTORNEY MEMO REGARDING TURA (a) Councilor Brian moved and Council Scott seconded to receive and file the Attorney's letter Approved by unanimous vote of Council present Meeting recessed at 8:53 P.M. Council reconvened in executive session at 9:10 P.M. under ORS 192.660 (1)(f) to consider issues related to pending litigation. Executive Meeting adjourned at 9:19 P.M. and Council reconvened in regular session. 10. OPEN AGENDA (a) Councilor Brian moved and Councilor Scott seconded to remand the Sunnyside Subdivision bark to the Planning Commission. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. o Discussion followed regarding the legal fees charged by the attorney. o Discussion followed regarding transferring funds from one account to another. (b) Counselor Brian moved and Counselor Scheckla seconded to receive and file control budget. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. (' PAGE 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 RESOLUTION NO. 83-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS (c) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 11. ADJOURNMENT: 9:30 P.M. Pro-Tem City Recor?�14Diane Jelderks ATTEST: Mayor - City of Tigard f PAGE 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1983 (0398A) Date 1 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print your name) Ite Description. C�e . i' G ?roponent (for) Opponent (against) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation - f( i Date —/�— / I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print your name) Item Description: )#=// — ��'y-o r) ?roponent (for) Opponent (against) Mame, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation 110-1 _ 1 O �n vzsop-,, 97Z/y t, mm7i Date (� I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print your name) Item^l.Description;� Proponent (for) Opponent pp (against) dame, Address and AffiliationD{ed�L Name, Address and Affiliation T o C ' c.u tz ,-e.► o�, S o �c i,� . 7 / ?i'3 J --�--� i x j LGA l i i f - i DATE `T t I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please Print your name) ITEM DESCRIPTION: PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against) Na e, Address and Affiliation Name , Address and Affiliation XL c° » iter l}ie n lZa. �JL April 7, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Doris Hartig, City Recorder • e: SUBJECT: Pro Tem Recorder Appointment z I will be out of town April 10th through the 12th at an Oregon Municipal tion retreat at Rippling River Resort. Since I will Finance Officer's Associa +. be unable to attend the Council meeting on the 11th, we will need to appoint Diane Jelderks as pro tem Recorder for that night only to perform the Recorder r: duties. Y lw ` (0333A) F 5. j J April 6, 1983 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Finance Director/City Recorderk, J SUBJECT: Insurance Proposal for City Property Our Agent of Record has requested quotations for renewal of insurance on our buildings, personal property and miscellaneous equipment. Attached are quotations received and staff recommendations, and low bids are well within FY 82-83 budget appropriations. Blanket Buildings & Personal Property Coverage Quotations are for blanket coverage for city property based on a value of $1,869,492, with deductible options of $500 or $1,000 per occurrence. There is only $85 difference in premium on the $1,000 and $500 deductible option and considering the risk involved it would be staff recommendation to tape the $500 deductible quote from J.G. Newman in the amount of $2,300. Miscellaneous Equipment Floater Coverage Quotations received for the floater equipment based on value of $311,283 are attached. Staff recommends accepting the quotation from the current carrier, Chubb PI in the amount of $840 with deductible offered as noted in item 3 of the bid specifications. Recommendation 1. Accept quotation from J.G. Newman, with $500 deductible, for renewal of blanket buildings and personal property coverage in the amount of $2,300. 2. Accept quotation from Chubb PI in the amount of $840, with deductible offered as noted in item 3 of the bid specifications. pm (0458A) r"" x t � I � 1 ✓` Cy' - Ft �r .� -"t of 1`• ,,f. ) tis §�, y y:.-� ^}. - ei•. +: -' k :ry- 1 ��, :Y (7Mtl�i�t � 4 �2_ F x. d, r� i' �. '�t2 �� -•:�' - s_:� ;yr-�>,"` ,��,...'� t7'•L a`r .,t}4..� 1, ."Yv �IBr f.�5 �,ae,.: •�'�,-:. s y � r +{ t �F� ,.� �t x; �-i�,4 y -•, r "7 d,.?• L-:? S,./ � f' �':- � s '••s'L�. l ti,. t,^•^-7 is.� §- -.: .... r'•`.; 1 rte; •.!<�L Y;F;, ti -.: 'G'-t'4 s t � n f _ 1 '+.' t µ•L ,,t ti r `^ .;c. rti _ tj i?�.'-t"�.•1x'k�,��•• :.�d` {'C'4.. •�.•+.n.�r.�'3 � k d ♦� - c .:'� h y ''�7 .�• �. -.t ''. t'�,'L+. r --+ �+,T��' � w ��-.% t 1-. � r��'u F�`� ti�: ,�Ys,- :`F;-*' ,+ r• rc 77+'' i ^`. Y �.� �.%" � '_'.Z`z -.��`,. '� F"''L�.i '�` V}� ✓t�k "^'� 4SS.. �t�� X � - rf�a 1 Y � _ >'t. .i,2_•Y A+�I- � 1t t �1 !¢3 �..^� � �-},. "��ba :rt u H�..r`-`,- t •.� '1F` n. Y ti, F s !:,.t. e�?•.,- �� _ } •`3 t h Y.t � t g.:. ""4"` 's ?�* x '•t ?`Z I 3S�" Y.'•r � :. y: ! {' .t. arx- -,G! 't .a o -. :. 'E tt �K k f tt c'�.-, s. _' 4r a. .7", r aF Nt�i.,,'1+r S.I` yS'•j'4t�'�t S4ka, ty- i �+s: ,x7Y� y s c k,�t y F L- � :z J,s � "t.'f" n -a'3.'r ''',:r+ '•^s 4. ' a '��1ti, t !(14 �. "t' .-�sy,.'+"'�• ''�f' •�".a:4�4 i '-L r :; •# + ...t 3 �F ] -.lby'- �. .} � � - '��,..t-K;3 v:='t $'�`'^� X�'Si_ .,1 '� .y�"sa•. ..q �a'.ii7�T�` ~•,,kq�r: t + :! �.. "'✓„a' fT �� . •tt�.R`+3-y�'�,Y -'�K1+'. "a } - a �3? � �a. „r +yrs,L s��:. �,�.,ta,�, c '.[ � -t a•+1.t s< ',,,�s�.j -� � 'rr +^; �b yt '�' _ c •�r,+Y-f .: "'rT r• k'.r�' ni � r -+ ,wa.-_" }` .s ."'`.L c 7�- er se+i ,t?�� 'f x.:� S ati �:{a� r.r�s�,4x �•-�`i r, •p„ :.'T 33' s t'?r ,L 5 �� -.�(f' #�;:�j41�jr.'8� `� ZM.': �4Fi°�sL �w`S+�it`��`d'��^'-s*�-"• "'�'� !- '�.' 'a �f. t. � '��•.x:-..Y�.�'�,�{.{k`. � :-as w«'t -:? _.'3r F F r{� r:: ' s r' � ^'[-"Y { v t'- s E mat `'i....�- .,•�_..� ,�u'r,•sC�� [�{� �_•i 1 ++,.." .FNS •t `sc .g f ¢ ,y-...�L ;^s`.'. �2 `�*- t&' ,r r -��,- rl��.:$ .,.5•e#s' f., e•• -,'r. S c t '•(s'.(e .�..-ts 3i�y1,�1ri 5,�,.-�. _i. s: r- 'r� -.-'+x r�.r• � �.:c <�a qty✓ ; = 1�-: yx �•r +, �.t ,,r t: 1,.,� ti� �•t s� � - � F�,k;`._.,-,�',. ,�, � t-: a .. ,.,�.: ^T.c y.` a,q i .,� ..6 .� v t ! x� ��S "'• -� .r ::� s r' "t" *fie i -...- .t,+., - r"` �•- u y,'� s '.:5• t r� � -a r ...t'f4�'-� a s v �_t �' � w- # - a f + �^` ..� ;(•� �, T r,o- :, y[ ..t;:- .:�-•-�..a t ,� �:-+.}d t --� .S{.y,- r• x �:. � � .t ,�.`t' -¢ -a3 7-ar. .c''s � rr �'�., � t^`^ : a y., 33•- �' E- � a -> i .� a`�� t �' �t ;r 5 a � _'� {--� y a-�. 4a v,� -� 't+,i±,'�. _rte 4 { ��. 'l�. :' t r .-j '. "`zS, i. � � - }. � - Cl,�`�.'e+ "� ,;r.a�.� � t�;` `µ.ti+ �" 4 t:�• *,��'.tx. �P�..*. � t e: .,r Y � t :a.x. k. s t '3.7 ,� 'tr -.o-�? S'`•�.�.Kr^`.-s{: .t •'w •f 2 ,z, 1.:. `c sE }• i-`'�i � f,a:;+t '' d :"- ,+. _ � -.• `R• .,i. _ `�,- a Ott, L -C d/k` f�t�3. r t.-'i � :!R A;FS� r• °��,�r lc -.r'ry rT ,--as p• f�. y`i3 f�d6;y'Y.�....� ,fit" rc f4.�5 p.3.�t�"Fs�"��. r t � �� !i'. ,� -' t to - t (" ,a' � +., t F Y - t �'x -.,w• -� � I � 3{{ �.,-r r ca -!' n. e ro :y s r� �.•y,�' a.{2 � b 's �� -: -at v IOK Y� � c.- {''s`` �.3 ss ;. � �•' +`- x -' - L r- .� .`�.r '�-:=� .'J�� r S �..` 1 f�i±"'y,-+K gyp• -�_ r`t r ,.��c ��-�* .�.r�� ,t;g ♦ � � a l c � '' f � '. k'i• st i i a¢ S+,-� t 5: � ;i ` ��4"^rF1 .fir „� �y y �•� - �t ..»r ` ''!�` .�'.-.F•Y,"rx'.:x.�' �- ,�.•r J�-`� �� ,3� 5 �..� q c _-.�"��/c;�l _v st Y ��t�'`= � S ��;•-�',* =:.-yv s .}t ��i`��,s:.. -'t T t 1- � r�� ;, � " r;� _ � F. _ •.i.-fY -, Sr"-• � a'. ij ` C'u- ^.3'' •,, �l +, t 1r,^r--��-•?`9�.b .^ S - � t C„r:.v�1 ,i. + t ,r r= �'• ^r'_ r�' s s� l • a r-t, f � �,r�r :_ a r x-:r - r � -��„�'��.� � � P ��" � Y�;< Y i e v �'i ��,�..r;Tr„t„<tii��.g�E � t G �Sq�..+•�f;Jo-'�S�ir ,a •- e s `^-s � � �- *t. � •+F ;r -`� r t t : Ji :F^'� o: r- r :,v:i ,�rY��.-G' �fr .. � s t'u~ � ,t� -r x r r .K ti +�'�• � r �` _ fi „t "` �` `st ` �r. � f(t t+ 4...t rte- �` 'tx��' _ 4 r. -. f � -�� Xa�S.t 3 � A:-.0 ,.- -frj r, �;z � y -t r,f,,'M1 -� 6- kac- t'�^,Y ,✓ �"��-, �, '�,- t• "":� " :�4 Sr� i S ':k k, .4 �'"'w �` '• �t ,.:4` d- F f%� �. s-^.7s,y.' ��kC,��.Yr s *� -f , ru f3 y j'3••.. .��_,,� r�,, <f !y k use $-fid.. +.•r r�y�, ..? �X'.t 3 -f'y Z` �� f i �R ��,c, �S � �' Y k a.:-�¢ �� Ts�.. r .w• �Y i+' -y. � : •r:, 7 4 5 :�.`e'-�S -L �{ ;fy. ` -~ rs `��e:l.:3 �`� � '�1 t_fir. •z�.T-•f r .T a .' ��_. y 3 "��i. �;_ '�.,s.,f j v a`t" +'i > 3 � r t.F ��! -+�`-•t xtfi, -n' �,h,� Ti{. ?+• ; a.. "{`�" l'L Y�#.S-_�` i � :!d �i -yy+'t'iy -.. ! 211 -y t t+ �- �°`:K" y r "ZYy;: :..y � � -( F��' �� ,I� : T { } .�� F � .•c 2� - .r �,4 S..l -7 •f3.t. iF A� l - �S�'`h y��^. ._� : ,." .+ * � .. s-s,'�i ♦ .+ ,� -- J�{ eF y�•t� z .,y4W' t S.I: i`!'t�r �'rRx�; }• r t;. ` ;� C' >-, -� .s-.1+ t ; �� .� I -� ! :i.t r t r fi r > ,p .c -. '". }��.ti t lssr i{ ! r3 + y r ( f.R-z .ryrs"4 •r t i -55 t a yry'( + -,;} r �' rv..:�� Yy. 7"�` Sit � �•. � l x�#��c � �� x x:{T i° f1 �FFF Y.-� �:. a �� 4 'Y$ �,t^ a ,F�a Ac rrnfi �-„,,}�'Y fie- � .,:�,. Y� .n s- +,. r'� f 7 i Y ,c-, t r .'7 x -F ,r¢r [ --;"G K's.•f r y, c. ,x> .�: x J✓. �: '� 1 r _�`t F { � •J�t.` 3�.U'1 t � ,-r � '' fit.' 7 t ��- .! t- J�...t,�.,'��t- f C K} r :.-� �,. r c :- / F'' � ..a4 a..., t j+ "1 s' �- - r � Ay J• 9- + � t/ r r X ,.•-b•`i -�,z.. t -•rt .a+'e•r'�'��7r-.to �r f it rte* f _ � �t, v'? to � r-: :” ti # ji' � t.' � _ t ��; '', o- � L.: � �� t� .� h 'j t t 2 y.ave z` ,r t tr t - � •�.�„ �� #s j x r..F � '{S� ��`.'y, `q' . � ' r� 't• �. t y r� 1 ! 2 �� - ra o- t � r� .< � .rc-.t ., �' r ,r- '.+to- ! >. ->• c S _ r,t, ' � . `+•' � n l t R h � � F� '-• f 'r'C >r { � �, k � r � w rut - s Y f / T - r, .�, :"� is ti .✓_ •3 r - X a. - �}i ,(s� �' L �.r� .:' ):! - - 4 --"I+--'--ter ;� is' ... ♦: �. / < ..ai, v t �' r} F v. i. z - "�. j r � _ l March 25, 1983 INSURANCE PROPOSAL FOR: CITY OF TIGARD 12755 S. W. Ash Tigard, Oregon Leonard Adams Company 11420 S.W. Canyon Road P O. Box AA Beaverton, Oregon 97005 (503)644-1156 Presented By: Brian Dooney, President CITY Or TIGARD AIJ. PROPERLY Or ACI INSUIZC=.BLE NA`±'URE EXCLPT SCE-lEDUT.ED EQUIPMENT INSURANCE P POSAL 1. Policy quptations for blanket coverage based on the statements of values attached hereto. 2. Total limit of liability is $1,869,492. at 100% values 3. Insurable perils are: All risks of direct physical damage excluding earthquake and flood subject to other standard policy terms and conditions. 4. Deductible options: $500. Deductible per occurrence $1,000. Deductible per occurrence 5. Included coverages are as follows: Replacement Cost on all property Agreed Amount Endorsenent 6. Valuable Papers coverage in the amount of $168,000. for maps and other valuable papers stored in a metal filing cabinet at 12755 SW Ash. $100. Deductible 7. Data Processing Policy Computer Software $11,000 at: 9020 SW Burnham Computer Hardware $112,920. at: 12755 SW Ash $100. Deductible All Risk Coverage as described above. I CITY OF TIGARD QLO ATT l SPREAD S=LEEP CONIPJANY $500. DED. $1,000. DED. J_ G. NEEWMANE $2,300. $2,215. CHUBB $2,553. $2,312. NORTH PACIFIC $3,259. $3,006. SAFECO $3,598. $3,346. ST. PAUL $3,348. $3,160. I-Yff;YIAND CASUALTY $3,081. $3,355. These figures reflect the coverages stated on the prevoius page with the $100. Deductible on the valuable papers and the Data Processing policy. I Premium for 1982-1983 was $2,609.00 at the limit of: $1,811,684. at $500. Deductible Average ❑ Blan' TO BE COMPLETED BY COMPANY,AGENT OR BROKER ❑ Spec ------ -------------- --------------- ----- Rate Item Description, Location and Occupancy Cover- Values Pub. No. of Property Covered age* No. Rate Adj. CITY HALL ( OLD Z 1930-40 B 206,631_ 1 12420 SW Main ST Remodeled in 69 Tigard, Oregon foisted Masonry LIBR _%2 1930-40 NIL 2 12566-68 Main Joisted Masonry Tigard, Oregon C 325,262. 3 POLICE STATION 1955 B 87,711. 9020 SW Burnham Joisted Masonry Tigard, Oregon C 45,445_ 4 1,270. _ Located within 25' of police station 5 GARAC,A,n7ER SHOP 1945 g 90,898. 12880 SW Ash foisted Masonry Tigard, Oregon C 21,518. MAINTE�-;CE SHOP 1975 B 81,638. 6 E 12880 SW Ash foisted Masonry Tigard, Oregon C I 21,518_ SERVICE STATION Redone in 79 B 5,222. fl 7 12880 SW Ash Incombustible —`�— Tigard, Oregon C 2,690 CARPS SHOP 1955 B 7,694. - 8 12880 SW Ash Frame C 1,612. Tigard, Oregon 9 PAn,,T & STORAGE SHOP 1955 B 3,872.- 12880 ,872.12880 SW Ash Incombustible Tigard, Oregon C 2,310. 10 FENCE FRAME 6,216. 12800 SW Ash Ti ard, - -- on COOK PARK PUMP HOUSE B 10,250. 11 SW 92nd Joisted Masonry Tigard, Oregon C 2,100. REFRESHMENT STPND 1970's B 11,473. 12 Frame C 800_ TOTALS AVERAGE RATES EFFECTIVE FIE B=9u'sWing S:--Stock PPI=Personal Property of the Insured PPO=Personal Property of Others Other --Specify Above CF 16 15 (Ed. 05 77) I— Average C] B an TO BE COMPLETED BY COMPANY,AGENT OR BROKER Q SPPc Cl --- L - Rate Item Description, Location and Occupancy Cove- Values Pub. No. of Property Covered age No. Rate Adj. COOK PART: BOAT DOCK & RAMP B 15,270. 13 COOS RARE SOCCER FIEF 1970 B 47,094. ` 14 RESTRDU 1S JOISTED MASONRY C 1,155. rFRAME pja-uC SHELTER 1970's B 12,418. 15 I C 11,296. 16 FRAME COOK SHELTER 1970's B 1,360 C 25. r�A`"E FOOT BRIDGE 1970's B 6,259 17 Woodard Park B 21,300. 18 JACK PARK BRIDGE 1975 t foisted Masonry C 360. 19 PUBLIC T,TORF,S AMEX 1975 Remodeled B 31,000. Conc. Block C 2,310. 20 SUNMERLAKE FOOT BRIDGE 35,630. 1981 Frage B NIL 21 CITY HALL (NLW) 412755 SW Ash Frame & Concrete C 236,250. Tigard, Oregon SENIOR CITIZENS CENITER 1981 B 464,029. 22 8815 SW O'Mera Tilt up concrete Tigard, Oregon 23 COOK PAE9 REST RCYJM 1970 B 45,506. _ foisted Masonry C 2,? �. TOTALS 1,869,492- AVERAGE 869 492.AVERAGE RATES EFFECTIVE _ Fl B=Building S=Stock PFI=Personal Property of the Insured PPO=Personal Property of Others tither—Specify Above CF 16 15 (Ecd. 05 77) CITY OF TIGAM samDULED EQu.LPMSi"'T FIDDATER 1. Schedule of equipment per schedule on policy Limit of I:iability $311,283. 2. Insurable perils are: A11 risks of direct physical damase excluding Parthquake and flood subject to other.standard policy teams and conditions. 3. Deductible offered: 1% of amount of amount of loss subject to a $10()_ Nlinimun and $350- Maxim m- 4. Included coverages: Provision for rented, leased, hired or borrowed equipment- Autcrmtic acquisition clause for newly acquired equipment_ PRF.I`UUM SPREAD J. G. NEWMAN $861. CHUBB $840. NORTH PACIFIC $3,303. SAFECD $1,712. ST_ PAUL $1,252. The premiiun for 1982-1983 was $996.00 for the same li=t of liability and the same deductble. ae' t . April 6, 1483 MEMORANDUM TO: City Administrator FROM: Finance Director/City Recorderaa to SUBJECT: Audit Update Memo Attached is the status report of staff's response to Cooper & Lybrand's Management letter. Through the AIMS Committee, we are continuing to improve the City's accounting system. Staff recommendation: Receive and file. Pm (0458A) February 17, 1983 TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY RECORDER RE: COOPER'S MANAGEMENT LEITER TO COUNCIL - For Year Ending 1982 1. Improve Special Assessment Fund Accounting Recommendation: Review accounting procedures as well as workload and work distribution in accounting department. Consider modifying computer software currently being used. Action Taken: AIMS (Accounting Information Management Study) . Committee is working on this problem. Some modifications have been implemented. 2. Consider Charging Depreciation on Sewer Fund Contributed Fixed Assets Directly to Contributed Capital. Recommendation: Evaluate whether such a change should be made. Action Taken: Council directed depreciation on sewer contributed fixed assets be charged directly to contributed capital. 3. Improve Cash Management. Recommendation: Function and procedures be reviewed and evaluated from standpoint of future cash demands. Action Taken: Function is currently under review and part of AIMS study. 4. Consider Self Insurance. Recommendation: Review insurance costs and coverage and evaluate potential savings. Action Taken: City currently has deductible on insurance policies. To raise the amount of deductible was not cost effective in today's insurance market. 5. Account for Storm Sewer Supplemental Billings in a Special Revenue Fund. Recommendation: Resources be accounted for within a special revenue fund. Action Taken Storm Drainage Revenue Fund established. 6. Determine an Administrative Fee Schedule for Local Improvement District Projects. Recommendation: Develop an indirect cost rate fee schedule for L.I.D. projects. Action Taken: Fee of 2% has been established for all projects. 7. Consider Adequacy of Fidelity Bond Coverage Recommendation: Review existing coverage and modify if necessary adding City Administrator, Mayor & Council President. Action Taken: Mayor & President of Council now covered under public official bonds. City Administrator who does not sign checks, is covered under employees faithful performance blanket bond. 8. Update Accounting Manual. Recommendation: Accounting department review and update manual as necessary.. Action Taken: This update is pending recommendation of AIMS Committee report. �r t" U 7 V c+l � x y v a c ON C ti O u 7 O 00 N .+ 9 N d 0 0 d CJ c u G G L ;a GO O E E DO, .Ci `• c > O E G c c 300 - 3 W 3 3 O T �o m m d �D'O O .• O > v) V1 :/] '� :n N G c V -� "O �0 3 G •� m O 3 O L d d :,/) C N L t L N U � � N L N A N L rCi L L ••-• L --• C d O d d .-moi r• c] d X 7 'x•� X •. U u � N r- !n XYi U DU 00 zj L ... ••• :n W � V) u] .+ •L < W W c� U] U � cn L .-7 c/] s] :n .-� Y r 00 U y O I .- =tee �eo,e>e� ^�e,�eeeoa•eae �e oe,e,e��e � o�e J0 a Y W W O W J O O O OO Oa O O c^f M W O r p M O a O O O ".O_O C C_ C'1 C'1 ~ .1 a p O O r a O •--� O c0 O_O S 1 S U —I Z � a v I 1 1 i 1 O^ 7 1 J ^- I • « _ • _ 1 - .. _ « .. O 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 .O �"1 O•--��'1 N N O u'1 r 0 0 .O C'1 .O r N CO O •O O �O v1 � I I 1 I 1 N I I r J 1 •--� �D u1 I n r ^' � y r r 1 r V O N v N N N Y >• C a a r ooJoaC> o rOoO po0rCD c, n oJI r o .roNo c::1 O o0 .-� O J 0 0 0 N a .-+ a�0 ✓� r O r r u,c+� N 1�.W r`•-� 1" a O ON 0 .-� .O .O a .. 1y p4 w co .O a O r O J N r 0 .O .-+ U'1 O c0a o a o r COS J a N r .D ^+ N vl.--� .D N a u1 r r �O N N CI ✓1.O S J O " Ov1 O z a C> Oa �"lON 'n ao .-. Joo •oao J _ r p W a0 N -. O ^ r •!'1 .O O w S •-� J O a 0 o0 J L w s. N --• O ci <"� a O N a .--� N O N•/1 r N W O.O r c'1 a o0 OO r•-� to N a . - _ - « _ _ _ _ U 1+: -� O ^•� a O �� O J ul.--� r •D a .--� r S r•'1 O a N .--+ .-+ r c1 O U S• -� a O r U.� ^ a N J O N h N r e'i .O .r r 0 �O J •-� �"� '^N«+ N J m d. 47 :n N v1 «+ N •P1 Ul N (_. d E N N C •p O N d C o L1 c 0 •� d G c .i W W W u W T v O� ..+ N w N E— d 1+ N W 00 d > y = dd X d u U d > M d u > u C C W k' CO L N N u Y+ 7 u o W 1+ .w nd•.NI .O 6 E x w S+ o r u d G w + d o + .+ 1+ d > (n U > d u u Ia C u -0 C L Y 7 L V N �O d U\G 1+ 1+ > H W N u d 3 -0•� W L H C O x W C L u u w to d .O••+ d d••+ 3 u I+ d w E L W d d A 7 L m (, SS u C L > W In C d d N O c 00•D u > u 2 y .y y w q r-. cn d [s7 O% d G T •.+ u d Y C.•.+ G 6 .•+ N .� p V •� W "� cp 7 T T -0 0 [Y. O u u d U.. w— E N N H G �0•- ••-�•.+ c7 U c > a G V7 L 4 E d u u L t+ u C u N m •p m u Q1 7 c u C ✓J V C u d u c c O .Y -a 1 r•1•.a •.+ m..a w•.+ — 6 3 to O.to W O c c•.� O.-� 6 d W 3 a0, c 7 0 �a R O -7 Z 7 0•�+ 7 0 7Ic+•r L4cu z ii cn �n V uS w a w E w w .a :n E a a a. w w a. w•.. U G d .� n 5YgN eQ-� W UE UE FO. Cd7 U In G X O'DONNELL. DATE February 14 , 1983 -SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Bob Jean, Tigard City Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 1. 15031 222-4402 FROM. Ed Sullivan, Tigard City Attorney RE Billing for January I want you to know what has been happening with the city' s legal services billing this month . You and I have agreed to cut legal costs by assigning SKS to work half time at City Hall for $4 ,000 per month. This has worked well-perhaps too well--for the demand on Susan' s time has become such that she now spends half of her afternoons, as well as every morning , on Tigard work. My partici- pation in Tigard work, except for the extra council work, except for the extra council hearings on the comprehensive plan, has fallen, as it should. The city has a budget for legal services for this month totaling $7, 000. Actual time and costs for this month , however, came to $13, 847. 84 . (Neither the budgeted amount, nor the actual figures include condemnation litigation for local improvement districts . ) The biggest discrepancies in the budgeted vs. actual amounts occur in the following areas: Budget Category Budgeted Amount Actual Amount Council $1, 000 $ 2, 930. 20 Planning and Zoning -0- 3,909 . 75 TURA -0- 1, 470 . 95 The difference regarding council is almost three times the estimate, due to some extent to the extra hearings on the comprehensive plan . However, regarding Planning and Zoning and TURA, neither has an amount budgeted to them for this month, nor February. The TURA arose out of discussions on the use of tax increment financing, a referendum on the same, and the use of principal and interest of monies accumulated in the TURA fund, discretions of hiring an architect to work on a further TURA plan, and the like. I cannot explain the absence of any appropriation to cover Planning and Zoning activities for the first two months of this year. x_ For the January billing, Bob, I have "written off" more than $4 ,000 . This is on top of the thousands of dollars written off in past months as a part of our efforts to assist you in meeting the budget. 'r':' I review our budget each month and I agonize over billings . I . observed when the budget for legal services wa:. set last year that ; the amount was smaller than that which was realistically justified, , both by history and by the work program for this year. During the G year, we have been faced with a host of "emergencies"--i.e. the longer comprehensive plan process, the TURA issues described above, the Housing Authority flap, the Northwest Underground litigation, and the like. Everytime a new issue comes up or there is a change in policy, there' s an increase in legal fees--and these are the2 fees that I usually wind up "eating" . : EJS:mch _ 2/14/83 - Page 1 O'DONNELL. DATE February 14 , 1983 .SULLIVAN & RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW To Bob Jean Tigard Cit Administrator 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET g y PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 15031222-4402 FROM Ed Sullivan, Tigard City Attorney RE Billing for January Bob, we must work out your priorities for our time, consistent with our agreements on Susan. I do not want the city council or the public to perceive us as spendthrifts of city money. I do want to satisfy your requests for legal services. But, I do not want to be a sucker either. I foresee Susan taking over Municipal Court by this summer, which should save the city additional funds. I would like to work out a new agreement for this fall, whereby, for a fixed fee, I could put Susan on nearly full time city duty with a partner generally "covering" council meetings and taking care of litigation and extraordinary matters. But, to make that work, we need to control costs for the rest of this year--and that must be done at both ends of the pipeline. I will be more than happy to meet with you to work out any further arrangements . EJS:mch 2,/14/83 - Page 2 U M j CO u a Nom. u u 'O 3 n ✓ v v 7 4 J S 60 .Ca C .-• r -+ G..r V U u V .Ca u u d Ll u y•y CJ u C O y Cy y N -0 U y W O O V L O. 6 u Y v v K U y b C y d J y -- y v v Y y v v b M G Tt Oo x GD C �o w G •+ 3 o n7 00 ^ - E a of w -0 •--� y 'n n N 3 C L C O O V U > > p < r_> o Y C y O O G O N L• > N N y N N y n 3 0 c: C u v J1I C y Y L y U y Y y S y Y Y L u Y --1 C 's] C y v v 00 00 v v O Y .r of L :� v w o v .fin v X V •.+ x V U U .Ca m N X •--� y _: oD ^J C D V > N N W ^l z a i N �] �O J a u c _ J1 J 1 .O M c� :+G J I r✓1 M ul N N N 1 V1 } C.. N N v .-r •O � � W < M r O M J O O 0 0 .!1 r O N O O a 1(O O M y .O O M G a 0 O O M O O O �o P C M - •1 � � a J o J �/1 a M D o r a o .O o �O co 0 0 - I J DC 2 - - 1 I 1 1 1 n 1 1 ...= 1 - - - - - 1 n n - �l��ll'•••" - i 7-• < < -.. --� v 0 O x 0 0 0 0 0 O M a r N Q 1=1 O.O Y p 1 1 1 1 1 1 nl I r �..� r 1 r W N i v N O a M O N o o O O G cD J O O J J y N O J r n O O c0 O s C O o 0 N v a +a O n O r r Vl M N A M .O p 0 r` -+M a O N u'1 N�/1 M N r l O .-� .O r .D v— u O a0 a0 •--� M N N v1 n - n - n O S W ao 0 •D^. .n O:A v\-. n M Z G O -+�T.--1 N r M O .r M —. N J ••+ M M N •--� M M O z z u \ ¢ 3 _ L a O.O 0 3 0 T M p N M' .� J O OJ A N r✓� J a J M N .o.-+N M ao 2: c) r.n .0 c oo s -+ oma a o —— ;g s a. .o Cl .ors .n Mow s it E N -+ p p r .r M a O N a •-� N O N ul r N .70 O�D r M T a0 W r ^J M�O N a 0 r O J V'1 --� r .O a.-. r J M O T N .r r M 0 r r ✓1 N N a r �p as O r 7p J .O a N J O.--' N u�N M .D .r ^, .D J -+M ✓1 N .r N J M .r ^+ N r r M M .r M -+ .V ✓� N I J V1 N .-+ M .--1 O M M • � :A N �!1 .r .r N N Vl y C v E y t z v o n y ^ C N y v C O � C Si C W U .... < y ✓1 C..a O W 7 7 O G ^+ v C C ✓ .aL.l tY1 W v W ;v 0� •�J y a y E '-O+ v Lv. N G a x v u u v Y v u > u C C W iC y Y Qf .-1 y 7 61 N L J u 0 rJ Y C.+ S y O < E N _ :al Y al u r u v n +7 N O •-+ Y v ai N V v Y 1S L •c y v v V\7e- Ln L Y Y > y :R y u v v Y w C. v Y O N C N X O Y v u L:.7 N v b•-+ V v ;•�+ u Y W v C1 > y ly 8 Y ✓ J] > W N m N 0 C v v y 0 C OD 9 u > T v L Z' v 6 >� •.J u v Y ^1.-+ ••+ C 6 •+ y .-+ O V W L T -0 P OC p L V••J Y c y u Y G L N Y C L v ✓ Y i••' u V C V la at u ca at 7 C C .O V C J ^� Y X v v € u C G O Y V 1 r-J•.+ r la- Y-.+ ••+ < 3 N C.N W O C C•.+ O .-J m 6 v W > 1 0 v 7 7 •^+ Y C n C .r C d u C r a1 7 E r' a7 C t" N 7 0 7 O I s 3 s 3 3 3 u O v Y•.+ O it U GG N N V: tJ U sO Q W E O. W T_ ...1 NFj [1. >. Ci. C.0. ?. G...J V 6 v mcg c�i i U c4 tnn c a 0 00 L U) Cd CIO r- CL CU b .�. U a ¢ c c b x i O C3 O rl L Q 0 ca a 3 w e co x O L O L, >1 W b w H c0 w H L .+ U cb co w 4-J 3 I cf -4 z 1.+ C7 z C —4 >7 3 ) o w o w v V .a cn u r y >, W .-a 14 4 N y .� ) w ''co ca °-4 cc o co w .a HI 04 04 CD � cn � L � E N U U W Cwn ¢ W z x CV7 04 C 7 W d cn .� O O O M M c0 .-r O� O O� a\ co ull Ln --4O h h O h M '--< O r.+ h M O cn O+ N Ln -A O ..� N 00 u'1 00 � M Rr' N N N h co Id O 04 W w O� c0 h O h O O O O O� Q` d O O O O -zr O �7 M I O O Ln ul .-� •D O �O N as O O� u'1 ul N h H O 1 N co O� rO Co O O Fr O O Cl O O O O 1 O i O O O O O U'% O Ln �l O O O O O O O M O O a o C', Co O o co o ma+ 0 0 CCl0 CC1 o s o CS i -4 c O CD o cn cn o 0 0 0 0 o O c 00 rl co cn I ' w I rn o wo O o -4+ v a .r— o o O o 0 0 o O H O V O O O O O O O 1 O I O O O G i H O O Ln O c!1 O O O O O O O s Cd co cwf] O z r+ T -4 -� U c C a v w p h O� N •'-r O O� .-1 O •--r ..� N M M �� x a cu to � ,.•� co h h ,f1 cn r..� w Lr% T •� 7 O co T h .O h M ON N •O M M N �O N O� d ct +� H .--r OO o s. a a cc z cn C> a ^ n b p, H G m E-c G •�+ w r o r z Ha'p > o W. Q w «' -c .+ cc U) O w j d U cCG a a h 6 C� 3 •fir -7 •.t a ¢ U H H H H E-4 ca H U H ¢ .--c H En XI H O —4 H O O 04 O H co a z d pc pa r as x m a C1 E. o H O O V) H O H cn on Q y 1 N 0,4 u1 X 1 U C U) b ( C] O ro U L L C) W 18 01 Eo coC4 E4 }4 L 3 1 'O C1 2 I G -+ t ❑ / 3 C I o { V3 U) > w ro 4Ja c� ro ' ccHOI P4 OG o a �I 1 `' i E H - o C \2 WC/) U3W - 2 Cl) ro Ln irl -4 co ^ ^ O r- Cl) 1-1 O 1-1 r+ N r-1 4.Ji!1 �7 O tPl �+l I� M O M (ON C-4 O >+ H v1 .-1 10 O r+ v) Ln O N 00 Lf') 00 M .. N N N ^ 00 W li W W 0 0 0 o ON rn rn 00 ^ o d o 0 0 0 I o. -I- Cf o } 1 pOi in L17 LI-7 N ^ 7 t 1 N 00 O O O Oo O O O H O O O O O O O 1 O I O O O Ln o Irl o o O � o oo , o �a a E-4 O O o o O o 0 0 0 o Z .a O O o Cl O O O I O 1 O n g O ; p 11 O O to O vl Ul O O O O O �CI9. v 1 cn U a O O O O O O O O O � 0 1; � o O O o O O I O I O © O } n� P4 1•+ O Cl Ln O O�+'1 ul O O O O r �p y O I ! < � U O, N r O ON .-1 Co 1 r-f N M M 10 t VI ul -4oo ^ ^ Irl M M .o Irl r-+ O co ON ^ ^ cn _ Ol E-a r i N ra Ln u-1 Ln Ln N c0 ` H W A co 0 c\ a w H 2 H H a H H cn H O Z d W W H W x O A H o a a a a H p E-4 IN- m a o H o U �v 04 a cn a cn 0 H U3 a H CITY OF TIVAMD WASHINGTON COUNTY•OREGON i I March 31, 1983 MR. CHARLES TAYLOR., DIRECTOR OFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH ip H.U.D. BUILDING, ROOM 410 451 7th STREET S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20410 REGARDING: ALTERNATIVE SERVICE DELIVERY FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS H-5585-SG APPLICATION BY METROPOLITAN SERVICE DISTRICT, PORTLAND, OREGON Dear Mr. Taylor: This letter is in support of a cooperative application among many local governments in the Portland, Oregon, area being submitted to you by the Metropolitan Service District. Traditional governmental systems in our community have been pushed to their limits by rapid growth, inflation and then the reduction in Federal funds to local governments. Service demands are at an all time high, while resources and the local ability to support government programs is reduced. The Metropolitan Service District (itself an experiment in local government structure as the only elected Council of Government in the county) is proposing a series of workshops and follow-up technical assistance as to local government service delivery alternatives. Three major unincorporated urban areas exist without the MSD boundaries which should receive considerable benefit: the Mid-Multnomah County/Columbia Ridge community of 150,000 people; the Clackamas County/Milwaukie area of around 50,000 people; and the Washington County/Aloha area of about 75,000 people. Already incorporated cities are experiencing alternatives. In Washington County, 10 local governments have contracted with Portland State University for an Urban Services Study of service levels and funding mechanisms. We in the Portland area are trying to solve the problems of urban service delivery amid changing times. . . . Continued . . 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 T IGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 MR. CHARLES TAYLOR MARCH 31, 1983 PAGE TWO WF T KV WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON Some Federal assistance in conjunction with our efforts seems appropriate and consistent with the Federal goal of helping those who are trying themselves. The Metropolitan Service District provides an excellent way for all of us to work together in these studies to solve the challenges ahead. Yours truly, CITY /��OF� TIGARD P. pi. Robert Sean, City inistrator Sidi : dkr CC : Mayor and City Council 12755 S.W.ASH R.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 ti �® Beaverton Schools District No. 48 P.O. Box 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97005 William D. Logan 503/649-0367 Director of Operations-North Area APR y 1983 March 30, 1983 Tigard City Council 12755 S.W. Ash P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Sirs: This letter will acknowledge the receipt of your communication regarding resolution number 83-34 which recommends to the Beaverton School District that McKay School remain open for the upcoming school year. Copies of the letter and resolution were distributed to each of the twelve members of the Seven School Study Committee at the first meeting on Tuesday, March 29, 1983. Sincerely, Azec William D. Logan Staff Liaison Seven School Study Committee bw cc: Boyd Applegarth, Superintendent, Beaverton School District Deb Fennell , Superintendent, Tigard School District n � t MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the City Council FROM: William A. Monahan , Director of Planning & Development ' " ' DATE : April 4 , 1983 RE : Comprehensive Plan Designation - Durham Road During the Comprehensive Plan adoption process property on Durham Road owned by Lucy Scheckla (tax lot 500) and Marie Breed (tax lot 600 - 601 ) were designated low density residential. The designation originally placed on the property by staff was medium high residential, however , the Planning Commission changed the designation at its meeting on January 27 , 1983 . The City Council recently adopted the plan with the Planning Commission recommendation intact. The two property owners met with me on March 30 , 1983 and, following our discussion submitted the attached letter requesting Council reconsideration of the plan designation placed on the two properties. At an upcoming Council meeting I will bring forth a ratification ordinance for your consideration. At that time, following proper notice, you will be able to consider this as well as other identified conflicts. March 30, 1983 e Tigard City Council, } Tigard, Oregon 97223 k Dear Council Members: r 8 the Tigard PlanninT- Committee met to make On January 27 , 19 3. ' changes to the density designation of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. !fr. Paul Soloman of 10125 S. W. Kent place (Pick' s Landing) , gave testimony regarding the abutting block of land (Tax lot 500 owned by Lucy Scheckla and '"ax lots 500-601 owned by :arie (Collier) Breed) . In his testimony , ter. Soloman stated there was an 8 year restriction on the Scheckla Family from developing due to terms in Mr. acheckla' s will . THIS IS A FALSE STATE' -NT: hr. Soloman' , testimony of false statements thereby swayed original density of the planning; commission into changing the medium high to low density . h Mr. Bill vionohan (Tigard City Planner, After conferring -with we and his staff at City Hall on Wednesday, lFarch 30, 1983, would like to initiate - comprehensive landPlan change restoring this black to its initial densit prior to D".r . Sol oman' s false statements. Z - % � �7�= °i �✓ Waiving of the fee could also be ji:ti�QublearefulghtinL consideratio , the duress caused us in this matte l' r c is 6rkatiy appreciated. Lucy Scheckla r, fi 7 Marie Collier B ed si+Fta L�'$^;;�y S_ x:: ✓ .^r� .r a'�-.•lar r:a;�?t ..�` ..x , lqw- z 771 PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL 3/31/83 PROGRAM BUDGET Community Services 1.1 Police 10,444.82 1.2 Finance & Records 6,467.52 1.3 Municipal Court 139.88 1.4 Library 1,534.25 1.5 Social Services -0- Total Community Services 18,586.47 Community Development 2.1 Public Works 7,283.63 2.2 P1. ' Lg & Development 1,947.70 Total Community Development 9,231.33 Policy & Administration 3.1 Mayor & Council 1,491.41 3.2 Administration 1,065.69 Total Policy & Administration 2,557.10 City Wide Support Functions 4.1 Non-departmental 8,846.61 Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc. ) 45,075.63 Investment -0- DEBT SERVICE 5. Bancroft Bond & LID Expenses 155,465.44 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Cor_trac t -0- TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 239,762.58 tom'`"•C� MEMORANDUM March 30, 1933 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. License Application RE: New Outlet/Restaurant Application SAVORY SANDWICH CORPORATION 242 Tigard Plaza, Tigard, OR. 97223 Owners: O'LEARY, Christopher G. and YEBELL, John M. Mailing Address: 3004 S.E. Willow Drive ,r Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 This is a new business, and O.L.C.C. Restaurant Application. Investigation of the applicants is favorable; it is recommended that this application be approved and forwarded to O.L.C.C. Respectfully, R.B. Adams Chief of Police RBA:ac MEMORANDUM April 41 1983 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. License Application RE: 7-ELEVEN FOOD STORE 12045 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 (New Package Sales Outlet) `. It is recommended that this application be approved and forwarded to O.L.C.C. for their consideration. i i Respectfully, R.B. Adams Chief of Police RPA:ac f .s+ Avoid Vernal Messages A-1 --_ CITY OF TIGARD To: Ch7ie Adams From :-- Doris Hartig aAL Subj e 07 CC Liquor License Date :_ March , 1983 New Outlet - Restaurant - Savory Sandwich Corporation 242 Tigard Plaza Tigard, OR 97223 Please review and have recommendation to us by Tuesday, April 5th so we may include it in the packets for the April 11th Council meeting. Thanks. f A-1 Avoid Vernal Messages CITY OF TIGARD From: Doris Harti To:_ Chief Adams _-- Subject:__ OLCC Liquor License Date:— March 31, 1983 Please review and have recommendation to us by April 6th (if possible) so we may include it in the packet for the April 11th Council meeting. Thanks. PS - 7-Eleven Food Store 12045 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 geF ��' y , '.�•�''jj// �. "4�11LL ,{4j� `i�+3 ��jp... ( ffi � [/ay"�i�'� Y`S- 4~ � ♦ j �'`�•� ,., 'T"< � � W . � PROCLAMATION NATIONAL VOLUNTEERISM WEEK APRIL 11 - 15, 1983 ' WHEREAS, the week of April 11 - 15, 1983, has been proclaimed 9i nationally as Volunteerism Week, in an effort to recognize and encourage volunteerism; and WHEREAS, volunteerism is the voluntary giving of time and talents } to deliver services or perform tasks with no direct financial compensation expected; and + WHEREAS, the City of Tigard wishes to acknowledge the following volunteers who have donated their time and efforts to the City " of Tigard Public Library: Frank V. Allison Pearl L. Brown I j {� Yvonne Burgess Jean Carlisle Sue Carver Leona Kincheloe ` Pearl Lawson Cecilia K. Lowry Fred 0. Meisenhelder Anne Nichol Mickey Parker V. Neva J. Root ' Della M. Russell 'a Bernice Stearns Fred & Phyllis Strauch F , Marge Tominac !f Grace Waldman June Young Michelle Ballinger "-w► Jo Richards .g Susan Kristof Fran Rihala Beverly Lyon i, NOW, THEREFORE, be it known that I, Wilbur A. Bishop, Mayor of `• ' the City of Tigard, do hereby proclaim the week of April 11-15, r 1983 as -% NATIONAL VOLUNTEERISM WEEK. � I Given under my hand as Mayor of the City of Tigard this 11th day f I of April, 1983. \ 9y. Mayor - ity of Tigard s� aj - x •I � �' !" a` y+ , LLQ~ i - i t �i: 10 INS,yZ�y„�1;5� �. ' '�',• ' c { v . 0 Y' PROCLAMATION NATIONAL VOLUNTEERISM WEEK { APRIL 11 - 15, 1983 WHEREAS, the week of April 11 - 15, 1983, has been proclaimed nationally as Volunteerism Week, in an effort to recognize and encourage volunteerism; and WHEREAS, volunteerism is the voluntary giving of time and talents to deliver services or perform tasks with no direct financial compensation expected; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard wishes to acknowledge the following volunteers who have donated their time and efforts as Police Reserves to the City of Tigard Police Department: Rick Boothby Annette Dusa , a'• Carol Guarnero Robert Hamback Martin Heckman Teresa Killion Bruce Lindsay Chet Ralston Ron Royse = s: Eric Schober Bob Stimler NOW, THEREFORE, be it known that I, Wilbur A. Bishop, Mayor of the City of Tigard, do hereby proclaim the week of April 11-15, 1983 as y NATIONAL VOLUNTEERISM WEEK Given under my hand as Mayor of the City of Tigard this 11th day of April, 1983. Mayor City o. Tigard I si al R =A PROCLAMATION r ;L NATIONAL VOLUNTEERISM WEEK APRIL 11 - 15, 1983 WHEREAS, the week of April 11 - 15, 1983, has been proclaimed nationally as Volunteerism Week, in an effort to recognize and encourage volunteerism; and WHEREAS, volunteerism is the voluntary giving of time and talents to deliver services or perform tasks with no direct financial compensation expected; and "k WHEREAS, the City of Tigard wishes to acknowledge the following i volunteers who have donated their time and efforts to the administration of the City of Tigard: 4 Ralph Chamberlain Margaret B. Earl Delores M. Edwards Virginia Hanson Bernice Reffett Firs. Frances T. Rihala Ann L. Stolz , Maxine M. Smith s Linda Willcut �r = Judy Wi 1 l i ch Carole Valentine NOW, THEREFORE, be it known that I, Wilbur A. Bishop, Mayor of the City of Tigard, do hereby proclaim the week of April 11-15, i 1983 as ; NATIONAL VOLUNTEERISM WEEK Given under by hand as Mayor of the City of Tigard this 11th day - of April, 1983. I � Mayor City of Tigard al �I '45 e' e M140RANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning & Development DATE: April 1, 1983 RE: JADCO Appeal, Sensitive Lands Permit M 2-82 Jadco F The Jadco appeal has been held over since October while the Council created a new Floodway/Greenway policy. The new policy should be ratified at your April 4, 1983 meeting when Council takes a second vote on the issue. A full packet of information was supplied to you in your Council packet of March 2, 1983. Please bring that packet with you on the 11th. If you do not have a copy please notify me so that I may supply you with a replacement copy. Also, please bring your copy of the Floodway policy as adopted on April 4, 1983. 5 i s: s f 1 Fi t tv 19118 II!'IJI Iil�II9 9.1911: 0111tH II";ftil III Ijr11�7'� i73 111 Illp rrffi III III I I+III t i I I 1 ._�..i 1. 1 ��l OdIF4� i+�Ill�al l�°Illi�'!sII��I��1111111111 11111 IIIIII}IIIJI I t!II 11119+9-19 NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL gem, - GpFS fiZ 8Z LttZ SZ SZ CZ £Z ZZ iZ OZ Si 81 11 91 Sf bl CC ZI _-1!-of— S ® ` -Q.-_. 5_ io _E Z Imo■" i11111911!II19�9111!9919Iu9t19w99H1l�liiiF 11--'1H on d C R LEGEND E,1 .- S Comprehensive ESTABLISHED AREA VVIN 1.1-7 Plan DEVELOPMENT STANDARD �.: DVEL4PING AREAs�.- >s' AREAS MARCH 1983 , f I E � I i i f r. ' Jllll 1 _ „T Na I /00. 000, , �prrrinrrriirrUU"d I � it -irn ,• - i it �. - , 17 II \ yr I r^� -I Vii 1.J✓ _. � � ,I - � — ._ T — Je- 14 01 - I - ' \; -- < II - -w r 11-7 TL r 1L i « _ _ 1 i _ 7 F- , - � - y , Y .. -— - �§� -- �- -�e� r I mm 1 r� I { _l EF �L �,'Nol,rl'I,I,iq,nl,i,pi,lggnrl'�q,lrlq I'ni'nl'n rnlmp„I'i,p9rp �'NI I'p„:n nil ,,,lw i,li , � I I I Pul p� , I I nl,npnlq,j,,, - I 2 3 4 5 B ] B e o 11 ,z' ®® „d,na,�'1z�n„`u�d„�L,,,m�J.zu �ududu�,uu�Lu�wlnlamJumwinduJrv�u�wlisdwJxdlwl�ud�lsmw�xll� mJwLwiwduuLlwiwlvu6m MARCH 17 1,1990_ LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT #38 "MAIN STREET" PUBLIC HEAa'tING APRIL 1983 11, z History: "Main Street" commercial project has been in the planning and The Ma �reliininary design stages for several years. Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated has prepared material in the area of sensitive lands, ing, and the Main Street at Pacific Highway preliminary site engineer West Local Improvement District. Scope of Work:_ Local Improvement District #38, as outlined in the feasability study by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated dated February 25, 1983 , will include the following public improvements: West. 1) Traffic signal, at the main entrance to Pacif is Highway 21, Interior streets, built to "Main Street" planned development standards including utilities (30' width curb to curb) . 3) Ash Street, from Hill Street to Fanno Creek, built to minor collector standards. 4) City Park rough grading and stabilization. This latter item will involve permits with the Corps of Engineers, the Division ssociated agencies. The process of State Lands, and other a typically takes 60 to 90 days, and will be initiated immedi- ately. k } Assessment Method: t Assessments are based entirely on land area, with lots fronting on paved, uncurbed Ash Street being assessed for only a portion of their total area (proportional to the benefit received) . " { Assessment notices and notices of public hearing have been x mailed to affected property owners. a 5 The purpose of this hearing is to hear remonstrances against the proposed Local Improvement District. Written remonstrances have not been received as of this date, April 6, 1983. a.,p. a�F MAN�J d CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 83- AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING THE COST OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THE MAIN STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID #38) , RATIFYING AND ADOPTING THE APPORTIONMENT AND PRE-ASSESSMENT OF THE COST TO RESPECTIVE PAR- CELS OF LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT, SPREADING THE ASSESSMENT AND DIRECT- ING THE ENTRY OF ASSESSMENTS IN THE LIEN DOCKET AND DECLARING AN EM9RGENCY. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS : Section 1. The Council finds that by Ordinance No. 83- adopted on April 11, 1983, the Council authorized and directed that the street improvements within the boundaries of the Main Street Local Improvement District (LID #38) , as bounded and described in Resolution 83-26 be undertaken by contract, and that that work will be completed. Section 2. The Council finds that the total assessable costs of the improvements within the boundaries of the Improvement District is the sum of $611, 000, and the Council further finds that all lots, parcels or parts of lots within the boundaries of the District as defined in Resolution 83-26 are specially benefited and together shall bear equitable shares of the cost of the improvement. is Section 3. The Council further finds that the apportionment of the cost of the improvement upon each lot, part of lot or parcel, as pre- '. pared by the City, and as set forth in the attached schedule, entitled "Main Street Local Improvement District #38", which by reference is made a part of this ordinance, is according to the special and pecu- liar benefits accruing to each from the improvement. Section 4. The Council further finds that the City Recorder of the City of Tigard has mailed or caused to be personally delivered to the owner of each lot or tract proposed to be assessed a notice of pre- assessment, which notice stated the amount of the pre-assessment pro- posed on that property and also stated a date by which time objections should be filed with the City Recorder unless said property owners filed a waiver of notice. Section 5. The Council fin,9s that at its regular meeting of April 11, x 1983 the City' s final estimates of pre-assessments and all objections filed with the City Recorder were duly considered, and the City Council at that time determined the pre-assessment to be properly ap- portioned according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each parcel, part of lot, or lot within the Improvement District. t; Each lot, parcel, or part of lot as designated in the a}.tached ap- portionment schedule is hereby assessed and charged wit, the total sum shown on the lien opposite, and the pre-assessment shall consti- tute a lien against each of the said properties from and after the passage of this ordinance and entry in the City lien record as here- inafter provided. ORDINANCE NO. 83- is Section b. The City Recorder is hereby directed to enter each of the lots, part of lots, or parcels and the amount of pre-assessment against each, as shown by the attached schedule, in the lien docket of the City separate from other prior or subsequent assessments, and the same shall constitute a lien against each respective lot, part of a lot or parcel, and bear interest not to exceed the rate prescribed by law for bond issues. (ORS 288.520 (2)) Section 7. The City Recorder is further directed to charge interest at a rate equal to 2% points greater than the most recent_ Bancroft bond sale with interest to accure from the date of spreading the assessment if a property owner elects not to apply to Bancroft but is late or delinquent in making cash payments. An administrative fee of 5%G of the remaining balance will also be y due in that instance. }= Section 8. The period for which bonds shall be issued shall be years. Section 9. The City Recorder shall be authorized to issue warrants for the project until such time as Bancroft bonds are sold. a Section 10. The interest rate to be charged to those applying to pay in installments shall be the interest rate of bonds which are sold for the improvement plus 2%6 for administrative fees per ORS 223.215. Section 11. That inasmuch as it is necessary for the peace, health, and safety of the people of the City of Tigard that the affected property owners be notified of the assessment herein with the least possible delay, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and this ordinance shall become s` effective upon its passage by the Council and signature by the Mayor. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present, after being read two times by number and title only this day of , 1983. t fA. City Recorder r SIGNED BY THE MAYOR THIS DAY OF 1983. Mayor (O458A) S}( t PROPOSED ASSESSMENT TO DISTRICT TAX LOTS PARCEL ASSESSED OUTSTANDING BONDING PROPOSED BONDING AREA IDENTIFICATION VALUATION ASSESSMENT CAPACITY ASSESSMENT DEFICIENCY SQ.FT. T.L. 1200 Ma}n Street $165,677* $15,403.52** $ 331,354 $ 49,114.00 0 48,762 Land Corp. T.L. 1300 R.A. Leedy Sr. & R.A. Leedy Jr. Contract $1.22,633* $ 9,986.35** $245,266 $ 35,941.59 D 35,684 Sale to Main F Street Land Corp. T.L. 1400 ` Main Street $ 29,540* $ 2,672.32** $ 59,080 S 4,826.59 0 4,792 ' Land Corp. R. T.L. 1500 Mrs.Franziska Buchholz $ 328,062* $33,473.78** $ 656,124 $162,958.92 0 161,791 Contract Sale to Main Street Land Corp. Y T.L. 1600 a Gordan Pipkin Contract Sale $ 95,000* $ 9,964.03** $ 190,000 $ 10,736.95 0 10,660 to Main Street Land Corp. ' T.L. 2200 $ 112,400* 0 $ 224,800 $153,383.29 0 152,284 Main Street Land Corp. T.L. 201 Main Street $ 22,700* 0 $ 45,400 $ 20,620.79 0 20,473 Land Corp. T.L. 2301 Main Street $ 85,500* 0 $171,000 $169,716.35 0 168,500 Land Corp. T.L. 2300 Adolf and $ 19,496* ** 0 $ 38,992 $ 906.50 0 900 Gertrude Hanneman * LAND AREA ONLY *a ASSESSMENT PROPOSED IN L.I.D. 037 *** LAND AREA ONLY; PER L.I.D. DISTRICT MAP TABLE II - (continued) PROPOSED ASSESSMENT TO DISTRICT TAX LOTS PARCEL ASSESSED OUTSTANDING BONDING PROPOSED BONDING AREA IDENTIFICATION VALUATION ASSESSMENT CAPACITY ASSESSMENT DEFICIENCY SQ.FT. T.L. 301 John R. Ellingson Richard P. Waterman Dr. Alan Lochman Roland Wahl Florence Wahl S 2,065¢** 0 $ 4,130 S 1,183.48 0 1,175 Wm. Moak Suzanne Moak Forest McBride Kathleen E. McBride Richard T. r Carpenter 1 T.L. 300 Michael P. S 11600 ** 0 $ 3,200 $ 1,611.55 0 1,600 and Tanya Lockwood TOTAL AREA: 606,621.00 z M' W. *** LAND AREA ONLY, PER L.I.D. DISTRICT MAP e Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County 150 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 503 648-8621 April 11, 1983 Wilbur Bishop, Mayor City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mayor Bishop: The Agency would like to express its appreciation for the cooperation of City staff and acknowledge our desire to address the concerns of the citizens of Tigard. We have reviewed the findings of fact that have been developed relative to the Sensitive Lands Permit issued on March 2, 1982. After a careful review of the record, we agree that the original permit application did not meet the submittal requirements. We therefore support the action proposed by City Council . We understand that the Agency may resubmit an application for a Sensi- tive Lands Permit for construction of the Lower Scholls Sewer Trunk at a future date. This submittal will address the concerns of the citizens as expressed in previous testimony. We will continue to work the the citizens and staff of the City of Tigard to provide sanitary sewer service to the community with minimal impact on their local environment. Sincerely, GaryF. Kra mA General Manager GFK:vr 4 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 now requires that all owners of record within 250 feet receive a notice. -"7 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 TegSdino announced that Public Hearin items 5 .3 - Unified Sewerage Ate: 5.4 - The Meadows an .4 - Con conal Use Standards were being postponed until the March 2nd Planning Commission Meeting. (b) Planning Director introduced the newly hired Associate Planner, Jeremy Courso e . (c) Commissioner Kolleas informed 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 Tax 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. • 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 # 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) APPLICANTS 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 i 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. e 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. s 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. • 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 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: o 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. s 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, Newto n (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-N•et, 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. e Commissioner Herron moved for approval of Conditional Use CU 6-82 per Findings of Facts and Recommendations by Staff, seconded by Commissioner Helmer. ® 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 destruction of existing streets, Public Works Director to supervise this installation. t 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 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, M 3-81 - Page 2 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 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 porrion 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 s® _ M 3-81 - Page 4 enable the City of Tigard to eliminate, if they choose an existing privately owned pump station, but as I understand 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 f-om, 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 gkx:t the line in that area primarily in the grass area. As you also may recAL11, 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. 'Oe'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. I 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 me 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 I 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 l day to of up f to about 3 days at a run. So I am raising this question, and I don't know what rather 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 the period for cross-examination and rebuttal . Any other parties wishing to speak in opposition - those opposed to this issue? Okays 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.''re 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 r 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? 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 f' ht the trunk sewer line. . . .. J i 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 imxtxkwd of disconnecting the pump station and xaconnecting 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 disconnectxtkaxx from the 18- and S connect to the new.Scholls Ferry trunklin. That's - That I think is another reason Unified Sewerage Agency chose . . . . Qf? Okay, well of course, I'm not aware of where the specific connections are E 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, 4 because I've been operating for 6 months shooting at the wrong target, i 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 F 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 applicatioi. 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 c 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 a just read this standard reall quickly as I can, here, Section 18.57.070, e 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 • 1 permitted which alone or in combination with existing or proposed uses would reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise either M71 _ 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. Tkaxp 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 pians. 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 kkax 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 would 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 kmxxas 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 5 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 think that the implication was that he agreed that it would have this effect on mi�. 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. Tepediro: Thank you Mr. Ott. Any other parties wishing to speak against this proposal? i t 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 G s s in violation of the ordinance? The answer to that question, and I think that he indirectly answered it is that this project in and of F itself is not - this project will not cause danger in raising the F flood level, something to that effect. Uh, it's true, indirectly it could have detriment uh, with upstream development. I believe t that, and again, xat;xRa 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. kkxiix 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 xtasa propose someplace that the City Engineering Division askingJ£ax another obstacle crossing the x$xaagxxxyKIxadcreek 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 f culvert installed during the operations, during the installation of F the 30-inch sewer itself. And what staff has requested, and I believe f s c will make a requirement is to not install the temporary damn during S construction - in essence be a wet installation. Do I understand 7 correctly, Frank? X- b Currie: Yes, that's correct. I guess we're 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 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, i IMI M 3-81 - Page 12 i 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 codeaxdx and the Washington County floodplain ordinance, and Division of State Lands law, we cannot fill within the 100-year floodplain, and ;,e 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�-is 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. 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 addra--sed as the development occurs, not as the line is built. I'm not sure they should go concurrently. Tepediao : What ixxxxx 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. gxx Commissioner Bob? ex re sed We/ax em 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 i, 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 -kksx 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/Max 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.. F 3 Tepedino: I see, is there any other comments, or questions from the commissioners? li= Any other comments before I postpone the hearing on this. Postpone the pyyuYYtbll��ic hearing on this issue. Commissioner MUL'^ 1+� 3: Uh, well, in terms of Mr. Ott's question, I xaxid really think that the tie in between this line and future development related to the flookplain issue, is rather indirect, I think that you sBaxprobably 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 � w 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: /Rxy Yiotion made for approval . Female: Second Tepedino: Seconded, further discussion? All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying Aye- Commissioners: Aye Tepedino: Those opposed - No. itffigax Motion carried. t i PLANNING COMMISSION [MINUTES `Gig 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. • 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 # 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. p" (b) APPLICANTS 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. 0 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. e 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. Y Commissioner Speaker suggested Mr. Ott contact the City directly regarding his concern as it was not directly connected with applicants request- • 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 trey would accomplish installation and how the CH 2M Hill study would be used i rhe evaluation of this and future projects. • Public Hearing Closed COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: s Moer. commented that the need is there and in order to prevent tearing up the floodplain more than once, make sure a large enough tine is used to carry future development. o 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-N,et, was also available to answer any questions. Discussion followed between Commissioners, Applicant and Staff regarding issues of parking, traffic congestion, pedestrians crossing railroad treks, 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: s 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. "^ e Commissioner Herron moved for approval of Conditional Use CU 6-82 per Fi^.dinnti of Facts and Recommendations by Staff, seconded by Commissioner Helmer. 0 Motion carried unanimously. r RECEIVIEn ;( 1;iAR 2 G 1982 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIGARD, OREGON CRY Of TIGARD NOTT_CE OF APPEAL File No . /�Z ,4-d`l 1 . Name : Z:2 �i`�f��,�C G✓/�//�� /� 2. Address : Street P .O. Box City State Zip Code 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. ) 6, 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. ) 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 - :corr.nendation from which you appeal . n JY (c) Identify a-- r.... .. of the zoning code or other law which you claim has t n violated by the decision_ or recommendation from which you appeal . (d) Describe what decision you are asking the City Council to make. ) �X/'!-�i,E1�� ".&/ s��i3�C�� ,C "ZZ- .677 i �%�� /7,,r/��l ��/ �/� ��a..��.•-' - - - t i Pa e 1 of 2. �� ®:®®�aa®ii•�i•i®�iit 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: 14 4 Date : 7f'T71•?i't############71.71•if'C#-7,r, 7t'h•###7i•7t'1f7f7f7tT"ff:7## T7f'############7r# #######7t# 7r 7f 7f T 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: [`,,mount paid: Receipt : C Page 2 of 2 Notice of Appeal AFFIDAVIT WE THE FOLLOWING PROPER1Y OWNFRS INVOLVED IN CASE NUMBER M-3-81 FILED BY III[ UNITED SEWERAGE AGENCY, 150 NORTH FIRST AVENUE, HIt_LSBORO, OREGON, BEFORE THE TIGARD PLANNING COMiilSSION DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY SWEAR AND AFFIRM MAT WE DID NOT GET ANY NOTICE WHATSOEVLR OF THL MEETING M-LD MARCH 2, 1982. SIGNATURE: DATE: -� z n Z - `z If sw eAw Edi AFFIDAVIT WE THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY 0INIRS INVOLVEL IN CASE NUMBER M-3-£31 FILED BY THE UNITED SEWERAGE AGENCY, 150 NORTH FIRST AVENUE, HILLSBORO, OREGON, BEFORE THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY SWEAR AND AFFIRH THAT WE DID NOT GET ANY NOTICE WHATSOEVER OF THE MEETING HELD MARCH 2, 1982. SIGNATURE: DATE: �S �2 S n I L 4- � J i L- i 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 propojsed uses would reduce the capacity of the flood plain area or raise either the flood surface elevation or flow rages, 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 1000 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 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 Plannint 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 t-- Page Two January 4, 1982 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 i.,-rlicated 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 fey, 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 all of the large trees destroyed, which would certainly affect the property value. Why wouldn't the required easement be shown on this particular part of the drawings? The United Sewerage Agency of Washington County is not showing any consideration to the property owners nor the general public by helping to create another Johnson Creek flood zone by going down the direct middle 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. RqmQpectfully 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 RD AIM N O T Z C .E OF PUBLIC HEARING CIS OF TiGWASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY, March 28, 1983 AT 7:30 p.m, IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, 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 1 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 RULES OF PROCEDURES OF THE CITY COUNCIL. 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 12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGC N 97223 PH:639-4171 ti 3AY NO NHOP_ ern minim Wb 4<Z AP O 1 Q � N -ter'• Vii. Yy ; - — �� s.�� tic•, Of N s • f _o - VIP F - 0 M r O Y _ '3RV AISS�IM^S O 0�0 . a 3 V S. s � ®® �� ANNUMM MEMORANDUM TO: William A. Monahan FROM: Elizabeth A. Newton 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. Phis 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. Whipp 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, "accepted" 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 ai. 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. ` O'DONNELL. DATE March 31 , 1983 SULLIVAN be RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 5727 N.W. HOYT STREET TO Mayor and City Council PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 (5031 222-4402 FROM �$�fl�i)van, City Attorney RE City of Tigard/TURA This proposed Charter amendment prepared by Mr. Cox was received by our office on Thursday, March 30th. f f f JAMES A. Cox ATTORNEY AT LAVV �Ga L.eKEGiDE PL/+ZF ARE. CODE 503 O NOATM BTE STREET TELEPHONE 635.3546 LAKE OSWEGO. OREGON 97034 MEMO TO: Ed Sullivan FROM: James A. Cox Date: March 30 , 1983 RE: Urban Renewal Initiative ---------------------------- Section 1 provides for termination of TURA because of my concern that the city might decide there was some way to implement and finance the program ( including increment financing) without amendment of the existing plan. Section 2 allows a new urban renewal agency to be created f subject to limitations on tax increment financing . Although the measure would be part of the charter, Sec . 2 designates Sec . 1 as an "ordinance" capable of being acted upon by the council without a vote of the people . This is done in order to minimize any possible problem with ORS i 457 .075 (which provides that urban renewal agencies may be terminated by "ordinance" ) . This idea of putting something in a charter which nevertheless can be amended or repealed as an ordinance is adapted from the method used in Oregon Const . , Amended Article VII , Sec. 2, which in effect continued Original Article VII in force until repealed or amended by the legislature. Section 3 requires the city council in considering the adoption or amendment of any urban renewal plan to obtain voter approval of tax increment financing if such method of financing is a part of the plan. Thus, if the termination of TURA as provided for in Sec. 1 should be held to be non- effective for any reason, the council would still have to submit tax increment financing to a vote in connection with the amendment of the existing plan. It appears most likely that an amendment of the plan will be necessary for reasons unrelated to tax increment financing . Memo to Ed Sullivan March 30 , 1983 Page -2- Any thoughts you can give me on draftsmanship or legal problems I may have overlooked will be appreciated . I will be presenting a draft to the group meeting Thursday evening , March 31st. JAC/kls CHARTER AMENDMENT The voters of the City of Tigard , exercising the n- Se_ c • 1 - body of the city as reserved powers as the ultimate governing Y to them by the ordinances of the city and bfindeand rdetermine and laws of the State of Oregon, do he that there no longer exists a need for an urban renewal agency in the city. Therefore , the Tigard Urban Renewal g ordinance No . Agency, as established and/or 81 , istterminated . The facilities , 81-91 , adopted in December , 1981 , of the Tigard Urban Renewal files and personnel ( if any) _ Agency shall be forthwith transferred to the legal actions , r and the city shall termination shall not affect any outstanding Y contracts or obligations of said agency, Y be substituted for said agency in respect thereto. 1 hereof is and shall be o CiRS deto be an emed Sec . 2 . Section .075 . ord amain nce of the city within the meaningpealed Therefore , Sectionanceeadoptedreof ybyethe eCity Councor il . They nonemergency ordi create , reactivate City Council may in the future activate , city in the or recreate an urban renewal agency manner provided for by law, subject to the limitations of f Section 3 concerning the methods for financing the activities R of such an agency. plan or Sec . 3 . The city shall not approve an urban renewal an amendment of an urban renewal plan if such plan includes of ping the a tax increment financing as a permissible means Y debts and obligations of_ the agency unless , prior to the activation and implementatitheovoterslofrn f tax thecitynatcang , such method is approved by regular or special city election. Sec . 4 . Definitions. . . Sec. 5 . Severability. . . I min .DJB I NC. 11515 S.W. 91ST AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97223 U.S.A. (503) 639-2900 � Tigard City Council Regular Meeting April 11, 1983 OPEN AGE14DA My name is Geraldine Ball and I am representing DJB, Inc. and myself, G. L. Ball, and I ask that our response to the City's answers to our questions of February 7, 1983, be made part of the record tonight. On March 28, 1983 and April 49 1983 you stated this item would be heard on April 11, 1983. You will recall on April 4, 1983 it was included in the same motion as pulling "Memo from City Attorney regarding T.U.R.A." under Consent Agenda item 2.1 and both items were set over to the Open Agenda on April 11, 1983. The City Attorney Memo regarding TURA is on the Open Agenda tonight but our item was not included in the printed agenda so we are taking this means of bringing it before you. We are attaching the following documents and ask that they be made part of the City of Tigard record; Answers by City of Tigard to February 7, 1983 Hearing questions and notations by DJB, Inc. and G. L. Ball in answer Resolution 81-104 (Question 1) DOR 34-317-81 Complete copy attached hereto for the record as obtained from Iry Iverson, Dept. of Revenue on 2/1/83. The DOR 34-317-81 pertains to Questions 12 and 13 and answers also Copy of questions as submitted by DJB, Inc. and G.L. Ball on February 7, 1983 at Urbanization Public Hearing. Copy of questions attached. Letter from Frank A. Currie, dated March 16, 1983. We object to topography map referred to in letter as it does not show our property properly. This is taken from map dated 1974, which is no doubt taken from a Highway Map, as it is identical to the Highway map. Since it was the Highway's Department's intention to dump all the water from the E. side of I-5 and the freeway onto our property, no doubt this map was drawn with that in mind. We are also attaching for the record United States Dept. of the Interior Geological Survey dated 1961 and updated in 1970 and 1975 and we ask that you check this map with your latest Triangle map and you will see how incorrect the Triangle map Is. If you will check the Dept. of Interior map with the 1977 City of Tigard Topography map you will find them to be in agreement as to the general contour of the land. We ask that what we have read into the record and all documents referred to and attached be made part of the City of Tigard record. We want you to know how happy we are that the City of Tigard agrees with the Boundary Commission and Washington County that our property is in the City of Tigard and that you do not intend to ask that our property be withdrawn from the City of Tigard. E r� WN (W-73- c-'—.l_c;Lc_- i. "WHY DIDN"I 1HE C11Y SEND 1HIbr DOCUMENT TO THE BOUNDARY COMMISS10N INSIEAD OF THE ONE WHICH INCLUDED ALL 1HE TRIANGLE PROPERTY BU1 OURS?" J,L,- ; 1-1J'- no.� o ' c l vac L:-mss 7r_ .Jz.��r';urz (ZG� u"-�1 Cis: o•� �t,rte- Tri c 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. J,t e-v-6 c. onr i.L,-c J h�u� rJL=cJz�d +f -t/LC�317G � "Z .''�-b�R 0 r&tP1�Ju.C''JIL. -�U.Z.�� -titL£ ti.Sl�L =.0 •t L'ILf.� -fJ'LC C...CZ.CL(IR.PJ2t L. "WAS IBIS 1DONEE;'SO T/H.a'i ci1�r�R N&f '1t.Av ��'`'Wfm n se`'�►I� ND AND IF WE DO NOT HAVE SEWER SERVICE OUR LAND WOULD BE UNBUILDABL'E AND COULD NOT BE DEVELOPED?" The qLt.-- ti_an or-3 rdi✓_ did .tJLe Cid;' no-t tLB.e rtes. 87-104 iA rt-ee_nd .to cuv�i;i..an a-L Ta-%: L-,.t 5200- The timing of when the memo from Aldie was sent had nothing to do with sewer service. '&an J c-6'-ar. Lia c—r.aut .i-t pn-i to tzc 1970 an,uxr�%�arz ahe �;r' .c_t � -tL6.e 5200 notd�� enne>�s: 3. "IS THE CITY OF TIGARD RESPONSIBLE FOR SO DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY? IF THE ANSWER IS "NO" WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?" Uha-t zir-ht docz .th- Cauru��-'/-t- r.'�-terra to f �� urzen L-jz a�c.e tC ? 3/az urs Lear'es pa-c--a--tit �'ir_nr ecr.to 0 � Th �tyone er?esig"a a ire pro{�eY�ty q`s f}t�t�` 5i�[i�l at9� If the designation of unbuildable has been placed on the property, I assume. it was done by the County. Fr.-c_' ,_ar-:-- —60 1, OL&-- t✓f tfvirL-,s tf incl i a ; sir.a erZ: teen CL"Un-c�' uJ .:Jhr .d.Ln-Ce 1,r2 c��ze er i'L� C car /-)r-3 rza vLa .erb 4. "DO YOU AGREE WITH KEN MARTIN IN REGARD TO NOT BITING 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 signing 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 documentsnorthat the City Recorder has changed any documents. ..C;la-,�-r--q:_ , -. r�1 G_ a Cis cn t,�i,L�rt ao Fn.a ;aul e2dorz, owL 7. "UNDER WHOSE AUTHORITY WAS J E tiJORN STATEMEh1 REMOVED FROM THE SECRETARY 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. it had w z., J zhecJz,� t&c Sec.- o Stat-c- on F-.;.- 1, 19,33. 8. "AS THE CITY COUNCIL ARE YOU AWARE 1HA1 THIS HAS HAPPENED?" I don't think the City Council has been made aware of this prior to your letter. ®�■ ��® � ice• 9. "IS THIS 1HE REASON 1HE CITY OF TIGARD USES MAPS 1HAT DO N01 SHOW US IN THE CITY WHEN THEY HAVE SEN1 01HER DOCUMEN1S TO 1HE BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ANNEXATION?" T,:zc nc2b uv :r'Ye cceiUr✓:' ;'is= t1�_ C-ouru5! A.,i zhxx-rt u,S Y. 4:.nt':c C r��c dts�rc d:ca2 G' c_° ter o1�t cnl✓t' t_orz �1^JLau.Y' on l'rCr -, 20, 79u"7• The City does not use mips' 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. Thi p,7-c^-c/z-✓- .iu rza6tZj ae!rte L-, D7 0, 7rLc. cnd naf (lily. DaL1 10. "IS THIS 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. V rD tires r' ��" `r 11. 01IS 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?" Ic ze2 t a DC; 3�,-377-87 ca:tiauc' L,! i�ergs. q:'- i eUnjzire or_ ;�n�r il_ 79c07 The City Council, to my knowledge, has never been advised that' Mrs. Ball's property is not in the City. i;-au cs.,e2�: tiir .,.a .ata 17`3, Jnc.. 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) RECOR-D? IF NOT, WHY NOT?" 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 ty L 3� l.d c- e—reel .aa :,:au r�rz .d.ee L inz ae'rir��sc_' to Ac C.-ti, .0° 14. "IN PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE, IF THE MEIROPOLITAN SERVICE`DISTRICI 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 11 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. ;Zahczd t/zZa .th-c- Uate. &V-3 cZane alt .the ar the Ci-t 15. "ARF.' WE IN THE CITY OF TIGARD AS OF TODAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1983?" Yes 16. "1S 11 PLANNED TO KEEP OUR PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF TIGARD?" U.e ref .ta te-f ::.au ,'azr h ^_:t ue r-,?--- .1-0 h w&r ue afr e -La .the (Lt,� a;° T i.c an ri Yes arts' c�aL cairn .to :le UZ CL1":. 17. "IF THE ANSWER IS "NO" ARE WE IN THE COUNTY Al THE PRESENI TIME INSTEAD OF THE CITY?" All of the property in question is in the City. 4 e 71 18. "IF WE ARE IN THE COUNTY AT THE PRESENT TIME DO YOU PLAN TO ANNEX OUR PROPERTY Al THE SAME TIME AS THE REST OF 1HE TRIANGLE?" A11 of the property in question is in the City. 19. "DO YOU PLAN 10 HAVE OUR PROPERLY BE AN ISLAND?" No. 20. "WAS ANYTHING PRESENTED 10 THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION Al THEIR MEETING ON FEBRUARY 3, 1983 TO CHANGE THE STATUS OF OUR PROPERTY OR LARSON PROPERTY?" No, except to annex Tax Lot 5200 owned by Iry Larson. !Je roerte o� the vfzrru-arr .t,:a_t ' ins r s ca 1;cvLcA 3, 1953. F noun n - c.Lar_ To-,c Lot , �, 1 S 7 36 [7J u rzo` a-7 ' _ Lrs�so� {ut izLe ^✓u3^ f or .tike 0/:s arz J ej f, o° %,z r✓ o :arz, :' t}use. 17 - o;:, -in Q cc��alcn ce r1r i.z r t oil CITY OF TIGARD, ORECON RESOLUTION NO. til )Dq S.W. 66th/Larson. A Resolution furthering annexation to the City of Tigard of the territory described in Exhibit "A" attached. WHEREAS "consents" in the form of a petition have been presented to the City of Tigard requesting annexation of certain tracts of land presently contiosous to the corporate •limits of the city; and L e cons?nts the form of a petition w-are signed by the c:=Mers of sa_d tracts of lance; and WHER= S, the City of Tigard Council has reviewed the consents and set the final boundary for the annexation as required by ORS 199.490(2); and WHEREAS, subsequent to the setting of the final boundary the consents for land contained therein represent "more than half of the owners of land in the territory, who also own more than half of the land in the contiguous territory and of real property therein representing more than half of the assessed value of all real property in the contiguous territory;" and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation therefore is in accordance with ORS 199.490(2) and constitutes a so-called "triple majority" annexation and a "minor boundary change" under boundary commission law,, ORS 199.410 to 199.510. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CO,JMO;I COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, at a regular session held on the 1AJ day of 5'E.o7_� _ , 19 P1 , that: S 1. T council hereby approves tii proposed ann. :-:a tiQ7 an_. requests the Commission to approve it and effect it as soon as possible. Sccticn 2. The City recorder is hereby directed to file cert`--d copies oa t`.:_ state,,r._nts of consent and of the Resolution with the Yortlaaa I,etropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Co�.issioa at once. The foregoing Resolution adopted this _day of S`P,�,—_, 19�/ _ Mayor ATT `T: City ofTird ADDRESS: 1 24?n S _W_ Main_, City Recorder - Tigard SORE - 97223 zip 91 i0, 11 12113, 14, 15116 �� — STREET � � � EXHIBIT "A" 6 251 - 4 5 1 71 � —" 39 00 oll , o f , a 4000 4400 36 10 35 1 _ _ _ _ _34 — 12 — — 33 ° TAX LOT 5200 1,3 i 4300 32 MAP 1 S 1 36 DD i4 410 O 31 }� I 15 _ 1— _28 CD - - q i IEi too ioo 27� T a 4 � W 0 21 �1 !! W 24j 25i 2 GL %N-0 A/ TREET ,. i1r 2-T 3-T4T T6T 7198 e 1 - -s 52Cu �3o FLOPGT �o _ �j ANl�I� �C � l� 34 " — — — 33 32 —� ; O Z - ; s� —��— 16 — — --24 '74800 _ 28 IS too \ too 27 - TTS 3r 49 5000 zip 1 I 5160 00 004' 1 1942 21 22 NOTICE TO TAXIING DISTRICTS ORS 308 . 225 APPROVED AS ir=i_ FROM: O P S ---,r, This is to notify you that your boundary C�unty, foc ge in A 4�— r STATE OF OREGON APR � ��gj 11a'= --CA -'Mar, f DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE FCD e c - - - U-R MAPPING UNIT SALEM, OREGON 97310 DESCP.irTION rvIIAP has b an: P.ecoived TO: 1 r t Approved 4 Z ( L cl Q Disapproved (see notes) S! If disapproved, please submit corrected description and map. a: st ; 4 Notes- . � �1 FOR MAPPING UNIT AND ASSESSOR USE ONLY i Y i Department of Revenue f i 1 e no: f7D t2 34 -31-1-PJE M /r j PP-�� Y I 1 LSI 7 Boundary: chang eproposed change U received from: 1 i4. Z l i j The change is for a: Data received: z { OFormation of a new district ly Description Map j Annexation of territory to a district3 r ❑Withdrawal of territory from a district Certified by registered surveyor or registered 1 engineer: 0 Dissolution of a district ❑ yes as } t- i CC County Assessor Boundary Commission (when appropriate) (' F t 1 Department of Revenue A&A-0-39(11-75) t t F r a 013 T•Ai1/.= D �-✓fir », ; 1=lt Yiiv L j/,::* _ Def c .= 4'r✓z� v L neve .►.. e .3[0(r=. PORTLMETROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL GO�'ERI'ME T BOUNDARY COMI�IISSI0�1 AA\TU ( 320 S. Si. Stark 0530) - Portland, Ore. 97204 - Tel: 229-5307 f FINAL ORDER RE: BOUNDARY CHANGE PROPOSAL NO. 1668 - Annexation of territory to the City of Tigard. j Proceedings on Proposal No. 1668 commenced upon receipt by-the Boundary j Commission of a resolution and property owner consents from the City of Tigard on December 5, 1980 requesting that certain property be annexed to the city. The resolution and property owner consents meet the require- ments for initiating a proposal set forth in ORS 199.490, particularly Section (2) . Upon receipt of the petition the Boundary Commission published and posted notice of the public hearing in accordance with ORS 199.463 and conducted i a public hearing on the proposal on February 12, 1981. The Commission also caused a study to be made on this proposal which considered economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections and physical develop- s ment of the land. t FINDINGS (See Findings in Exhibit "A" attached hereto) x REASONS FOR DECISION z iE (See Reasons for Decision on Exhibit "A attached hereto) l ORDER On the basis of the Findings and Reasons for Decision listed above, the Boundary Commission approved BOUNDARY CHANGE PROPOSAL NO. 1668 on I February 12, 1981. NOT% TTIEREFORE IT IS ORDERED THAT the territory described in Exhibit "B" and depicted on the attached maps, be annexed to the City of Tigard as of the date of approval, d PORTLA\D METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNMARY COIMISSION Date: �C, !. <<,f By: i Peter McDonald Vice-Chairman Attes "1.�Z« ��_ Page 1 - FINAL ORDER C) N E EXHIBIT "A" Proposal No. 1668 r - �_+ FINDINGS f � On the basis of the public hearing and the study the Boandary Commission found that: f1. The territory to be annexed is contiguous to the city and contains c 23.79 acres, 28 single family resiGpnces, one church, and an estimated population of 70 persons and is evaluated at $1,548,500 f ' 2. The city desires annexation to extend the city limits to the Portland city limits, its urban planning area boundary, in order to regularize its boundary and plan for service provision within that hounda'ry.. 3. The Proposal creates an island of unincorporated lands surrounded by the city to the west. f 1 4. Tllc territory is developed with low density residential uses. It is desiK- natcd Urbain on the rietro and Washington County Framework Plans. The city plans the area primarily for commercial Office-Park. fS. The LCD(: Goals have been considered and the proposal conforms with the statewide goals. The staff report is referenced for a goal-by- �' goal analysis I 6. the territory is within the rictzger Water District which cclrrcntly serves the area. The district has several lines in the arca. Metzger Wziter District provides service for this area of the city ndouldot } be ;adversely affected by annexation. The district has p_ supply and storage adequate to serve the area. 7 The territory is within the boundary of the Unified Sc crthe age gency . The agency does not have a collector system available i e Drvcloi�melit of the industrial park will provide gravity service to } -vel Creek, crossing under Ihvy. 217 in the vicinity of llunziker St. � Ttle petitioners have also petitioned the city to antnci ateslforming Tmprove- ment District to obtain sewer service. The city P the 1..I.D. and planning the construction to serve all of the Tigard Triangle area. 8. Fire protection is e for city. Theodistricy oulldRFPD #nothbehadveorsely provides f:re service o Y i impacted by annexation. REASONS --OR DECISION E 1. The annexation is consistent with regional, county, and city plans and with LCDC goals. 2. Annexation will make available a frill range of urban services to the area which is part of the Tigard commu*Iity. rd 3. Annexation isya.,itepnration ancglllpolicenprotection Cornthe arca. Irrrprov- ing planning ple Page 2 - FINAL ORDER EXHIBIT 'B" Proposal No. 1663 t !� Annexation { CITY OF TIGARD f A certain tract of land located in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West and i Section 36 TISK 1W Washington County,Oregon to wit; tBeginning at a point Norch 10 06' West'30 feet from the Northwest corner of Lot 25, Block 1 of West Portland Heights, as platted; thence, along the Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 25 and E the West line of said Lot 25 and Lots_ 24, 23, 22 and 21 to the Southwest corner of said Lot 21; a thence. Westerly along the North line of Lot 6 said Block 1 to its North— west corner and the east line of S.W. 70th Avenue (platted German St.) Lot 6 Block 1 and its thence, Southerly along the West line of said Lo , t f Southerly extension to the Southwest corner of Lot 8, said Block l; i f thence, Easterly along the South line of said Lot 8 and Lot 18 of said Block 1 to the Northwest corner of Lot 15, said Block 1; thence, Southerly along the West line of said Lot 15 and its southerly f Block 10 said West Portland extension to the Northwest corner of Lot 7, ' Heights Addition as platted and the South line of S.W. Baylor Street (platted Second Street) ; thence, Easterly along the South line of S.W. Baylor Street and its r extension across S.W. 69th Avenue (platted Washington Street) , a distance of 235 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 5, Block 9 said West Portland + Y Heights Addition as platted; I thence, Southerly along a line half way between the East and West lines cif- said Block 9 to the Southerly line thereof and the Southwest corner tof Lot 23, said Block 9 and the North line of S.W. Clinton Street (platted Third Street) ; thence, Westerly along the North line of said S.W. Clinton Street, a distance of 260 feet to the Southwest corner of Lot 25 said Block 10; thence, Southerly along the Southerly extension of the West line of { said Lot 25, Block 10 and the West line of Lot 5, Block 11 said West ! Portland Heights Addition, as platted and its Southerly extension, a t distance of 360 feet to the Northeast corner of Lot 17 said Block 11; thence, Westerly along the North line of said Lot 17, Block 11 to its Northwest corner; thence, continuing Westerly along the extension of the North line of said lot 17, Block 11, a distance of 30 feet to the West line of said West Portland Heights Addition as platted; Pa_ize 3 - FI'KU ORDER ' f #1663 t thence, Southerly along the West line of said West Portland Heights Addition, as platted, a distance of 1070 feet to a point on the West oi which. nt line of said West Portland Heights ndaition, as platted, p i is Westerly 30 feet from the �outhwesr corner of Lot 18, Block 21 along the Westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 18; i E thence, Easterly along the Westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 18, Block 21 and said Southline and its Easterly extension, a distance of 249 feet to the East line of said Block 21 and the Northeast corner of Lot 26, said Block 21; thence, Southerly along the East line of said Lot 26 and its Southerly { extension, a distance of 160 feet to the Northeast corner of Block 30, said .est Portland Heights Addition, as platted; k thence, Westerly along the North line of said Block 30 and its Westerly extension, a distance of 249 feet to a point on the West line of said West Portland Heights Addition, as platted, said point being 30 feet Westerly along the Westerly extension of the North line of said Block 30; j � 1 thence, Southerly along the West line of said Addition, as platted, a distance of 610 feet to a point which is Westerly 30 feet from the North— i west corner of Lot 9, Block 31, said West Portland Heights Addition, as platted along the Westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 9, f Block 31; � thence , Easterly along the Westerly extension of, and the North line of, said Lot 9 and Lot, 36 said Block 31 and the Easterly extension of the North line of said Lot 36 to the centerline of S.W. 69th Avenue (platted I Washington Street) and the existing city limit line; thence, Northerly along the existing city limit line 130 feet to the intcrscoti(,n j f of the centerline of S.W. 69th Avenue and S.W. Gonzaga Street 1platted 54--;:c:lt ii Street) ; . i thence, Easterly along the center line of S.W. Gonzaga Street, a distance i of 290 feet to the intersection of the centerline of S.W. Gonzaga Street { and the Southerly extension of the West line of Block 23, said West Portland I Heights Addition, as platted; Ir• t thence, Northerly along said last mentioned Southerly extension and the West line of Block 28, a distance of 350 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 9, said Block 28; thence, Easterly along the North line of Lots 9 and 36 and the Easterly j extension of I.ot 36 said Block 28, a distance of 230 feet to the center r line of S.W. 67th Avenue (platted Lincoln Street) and the existing city limit line ; Page 4 - FINIAL ORDER #1668 E : thence, Northerly along, the c'rnterLiue of S.W. 67th Avenue , a distance of 130 feet to the center Linc of S-14. Franklin Street (platted di.::th StrooL) ; j I thence, Westerly along the centerline of S.W. Franklin Street , a distance of t 260 feet to the centerline of S.W. 68th Avenue (platted Grant StrEcti ; i i2 thence, northerly along the centerline of S.W. 68th Avenue, a distance of 130 feet, to a point Easterly 30 feet along the Easterly extension of the ## South line of Let 27, Block 22 west Portland heights Addition; i tliener, Westerly along the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 27, 1 tho South line of Lots 27 and 18, Block 22, said [,Test Portland Heights Addition as platted, to the Southwest corner of said Lot 18, and the ?lest line of said Block 22; i thence, Northerly along the [Nest Zine of said Block 22, a distance of 100 i feet to the Northwest corner of I.ot 15 and Block 22; � thence, Easterly a distance of 100 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lor. 15, Block 22; i ther:cc, Northerly along the East lines of Lots 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 and 4 j of Black 22 to the Northeast corner of said Lot 4 and the South line of S.W. j Elniliurst Street (platted Fifth Street) ; I t —` Lhunce, Easterly along, the South line of S.W. Elmhurst Street and its Easterly extension to the Northwest corner of Block 23, said West Portland heights t Addition and the East line of S.W. 68th Avenuc; thence, Southerly along; the East line of said S.W. 6�ith Avenue and the iticst c line of Block 23 said West Portland ifeights Addition, as platted, a distance of 100 feet to the .northwest corner of Lot 9, said Block 23; y � thence. Easrorl along the North line of said Lot 9, a distance of 100 feet to i ' the S6utheast corner of Lot 4, said -Iloc:k 23; i ] thence, Northerly along, the East line: of said Lot 4 and its Northerly extension across S.w. Elmhurst Street to a point on the South line of Block 18 said [-lest Portland liei!;hts Addition, said point being; the Southeast corner of Lot 22, said Block 18 continuing Northerly along; the East line of said Lot 22 and its Northerly s extension to the Northwest corner of Lot 36 said Block 18; i i thence, Easterly along; the Northline of said Lot 36 :and its Easterly extension to { the `tortivaon.t corner of Lot 9 Block 17 !lest Portland heights Addition; continuing Easterly alon); the North line of said Lot 9 and its Easterly extension to the tE Northeast corner of Lot 36 said Block 17; i rpt t r rr>rn T nT}nPU ! E Page "a - t titer•,. i #1668 S • 1 thence, Northerly along the [Jest line of S.W. 66th Avenue (platted Garfield Street ) 1 a distance of 410 fVI.'L to a point un the [Jest line of said S.W. 66th Avenuc and ! the `:ort}least corner of Lot 32 Block 14 said `.Jest Portland Heights Addition, as platted; 5 thence, Westerly along; the North line of said Lot 32, a distance of 100 feet to the Northwest corner thereof; thence, Southerly along the [-Jest line of Lot 32 and its Southerly extension to the Northeast corner of Lot 16, said Block 14; thence, Westerly along the North line of said Lot 16 and its Westerly extension a distance of 260 feet to the Northeast corner of- Lot 16 of Block 13; i thence, NorEheri.v 50 ;eet to the Southeast corner of i.ot 13 , Block 13; feet to the sw. outhpa • corner of Lot :32, said BLock 13; thence, hasterl� 'LOU i an easterly extension of thence, Easterly 60 Eeet alongAtho South line of said Lot 32 , Block 13 i to the Eastline of S.W. 67th Avenue and to the corner � of Lot 14 , Bloc!: 14, said [west Portland heights Addition, as platted; �,1 f 1 thence, Northerly along; the West line of said Block 14 and its Northerly extension and 'the West line of Block 7, a distance of 635 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 9 said Block 7; tbcnec• , Easterly along the North lines of Lots 9 and 36 said Block 7, a distance of 200 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 36; ? 1 thence , Northerly along; the East line of Lot 8 said Block 7 and its Northerly S extension to the Southeast corner of Blocic 4 said [•lost Portland 11cights } Addition; .is platted s I • thence , Westerly along the South litre of said [clock 4 and its Westerly extension to the tiautheast corner of Block 3 said lJast Portland Heights Addition, as platted; thence , Northerly along the East line of said Block 3andits Northerandextension to the North line of the West Por tland 13eights Addition, platted, existing, city limit line, t}sence , westerly along the North line of the [.'est Portland heights Addition, as platted, and the existing city limit line Lo the POINT OF BEGINNING. t r t Page 6 - FINAL ORDER E Proposal No. l co Co c5 . S e.C' L°''°�a a9 ® I 's-Ys el •01 cloea r S RrET_ _ �< � -- too z• �;o 0 fc2•_2•7 .. x'=01 — -*roo_23�a.. 2 zo: -33 C (' �y.i3G ,]:U 2 • 22 F� Fi.T.•_ -- �2� �a -- �! 11 7eoo — _ la • 73°, I — tf� 1 ' !t•ao ,n —om w t r .00 I aO.Q n I w I .s00� ` Z ]00i' w 1 t w w ! _ Y- :J9hlu, S! • 12�11 wa.IS Q t2.t3 3- ;? ,! p 7 W t r STREET � = - s•S Y, 9A.YLO R � 3 ■ ... a gi a "P U- .� •.•. + •. sl G1 7t ] 31 "Yr[J =EXED; ARETO BE A:. 1 I I I I -� z4o _ ;6! 02'=�- - 37 " - _ 36 -4 t2 _ _ 33 C17- - - _ 3 2239° 77 - - - e30' 32 1 l•� nn'2300 ' I1r.�`9c0 '}per S_GO _ti a- 32-j 1] Lt! - ..J:J- - 2`J J 14 31 gt-1y 1 ,e - �! 7, 1 3Vtc0- - 31 a3_ = i 1 - Ir 20 1 1,s 3coo�0 N -� H t _ .•.. i�-;g220J_ _ , F_ L-- - G��- 2? t0 1 !oi tT ,aD 1 _ ;s t aax t p — 1 —�'.y'-{ a�oo't r-t_r2' i �'a=---fT3=ci ze�tl �>r>I_ I ze `sa -f, ^,e - _ - 70•,-1 1 I zr 1 \19� »x7 L,7 6.•• ^`t zsoot ' t.•, :_! 1 i 1 1 19.2C z(22 z3 z•2526; �y• • e� v+2!=2S 2it Y - f I 0 21 22 23 24 25 n 27.23. ` 19 20 21.29 21 2•ZS 26 '® ' �1 as ' STREET CUNT0 SLV C� ��•,1 z a: y29cs 7��I •6190 3i`t a' 7'�� ?� E I i t 1 ., I t I I •� '• t 1 I •I a7r 1 1. 1 1 1 F L i � = = t- 1 �j � ! , t t 1 r 1 , i 1 t sz'oo,--'-•i � ' i F`} ' 7100 io0: ]b I 9a 207 aaOJ_7i� ^3100_ 6000_]a�t !° 7 33 10 11 T 33 t r,2 1 s9oo_3s � 7 32 1 17 GGJO-Y �SSO0_�_ 3 --!< �• ll �• I '• ' , { .tt7 - il00 2e� 1 17 0600 28 1 tF?•�00_ _ to� �7 z7 2r 1 I�a I .• . i '�6-Z]-r-1 1 ' 71 76 . 3t (. — — j 1q .. T. { E �'e- r r T� a•0o T 1 •: ' ! 1 •?CV spool t. 1 t _ et o7.. 1 I .• i I e 1 •• 1s z 1 2�2� 3.24 23 26 ?;- 1,4 i z I zS Zdi zS,2i,. ' , t 7c a.�2�Sc 2a 2d y 3 1 a 1 a'.,/ c.., S yy _ DARTMOUTH S'1 PROPOSAL NO. 1668 ,-•TTV OF TTGARD FIG . 2d� ►_ Prop j S e i IV 0. 6 i 2S NE 1,04 NE 1/4 SECTION I T2S RIW W.M. y a s w•eSti1NGTON GOU►4T•OREGON ee SCALE - - Sem' ' ^ 1'•100 ]^ 6 S �r 9 p�C.Q , 1 - 01- 1 �SEE Y✓ _ J � 1 S Yt DARTMOUTH ST 1 --`--j- _ - •- ~ "1�+ ,7th 1 � i { 1 , t I 1 , 1 n �{ »Zo ; ria I .•m , I , 1 1 1 I ,. j- -1t t � . 21 a14,! 6171• , 1 1 1 1 , 1 Fir t _L_1 ". L_1 _ l l .l t 1 1 _ .400 34 .0 sna ZZ 17 AREA TOBE -A VEXED "0. 1 �' !�- { ,� � 110049 Q -- _- -_1=..••, ! --_- - ;_-._ -o ¢ � ' ,21O , 1 1•'.l��'a. rr:2'1,14,21'1• 'r•'3l 21 1 271 41 71 24,b,2•II I , ; , I , 1 I 1 1 , i i : � � _t_- 1_x_1_♦-� 1a1 411411 MIH;.•1N{M1 —�. �,• �•I_� t _t 1. 1 _i..t _ s__t_t t ..l_� •- �- ,ci►•• , Q �� : ' ELMHURST E S.W �' • �- W T. , -� -�-; IZ TNS !`60 t I !' ; 4111:1a • 1!'4172• ' ' ! j , „ I• t l � � � i 1 i 1 = 1 1 I l i , 1 i _ t '_♦ 1 L' 1 51001 l 5,001 34 _L 1�z �1. i` •_cool_ � _ = 1 � 33-- I -- „ --,• - 1••00__ _ _ - r _ r CITY OF TIGARD € r 1 pas «,cs� sz - - -- - 4- 2 rj . -�s0 Qy co - _4 •uo :• �� - - - -- - t r -17 - T 23 17 '- - • - -�--=r - - t- rT' T , -.�..41rS::1Q� 43� ••470 ,• Y I 1 t 1 , ` 1 ' •+, r I , I , t 1 , 1 t ' T 1 , I 1A1001 21141 241, Zi 1 t • S W FRA t I 41 9.0•� ,,g� �a.. t --t-T-T r-T- r T 6.a0 1-T a00 T1190 E. rT 47Co 1 \\ 11 r1na. t 4ca 1 ' SXO 1 1 1 aTo 1 r 1 1 21314 t,t 11112.3:1 124,1 ,F} 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 I jt l i i { t ..•, �- - � SI � � •400 - -- __- - - - r'AO{O---1'` - - �[ •/ E •�" "�1 •-- _-411 -- - 11 1; L.a j • 1a -�f 33411. �• - - 2$ ---- - u 741 -- �' 26-1 + is I 4 p !o17.»24 wn 1 / r �`[V f 1 7.01 7 1 71£1 1 •' i ¢ �, 11'a T—�- a,aT T Iz411231 r4.2l� 41 1 'fI•,7a 4.{1t, t I ' _4.1.1.1 •1 1 ' a 1111 s> ,¢. ►• -- ST I PROPOSAL NO, 1668 -- -- € City of Tigard Fig 2b r \ Proposal No. ' t t,7 f • f t K SE 1/4 NEI/4 SECTION 1 T2S RI W W.M. M►SMWGTON COUNTY OREGON SCALE 1'+100' SEE «►e• I .� 2S . u► w I ! � ' > I > 1 AREA TO BE ANNEXED J � a a 1 i • Sw GONZAGA (?TMI St: I ®aa '•: •_ `.�: - � � .� 1 1 i .:J_ � ' ' 1900 ( :: ( ' i � i _( ( •' ' +.r ' t +6■i8 _COJ 1 L ' !,6J0 t-1--—_ _� r i r'�ti�m'a —� { t I600 1200 tI ( Q 29c0 —: LLA 500 IA- .L �zoseeo_ J --- - .,.� 3Ja I i�I 3 2500 z< TT-1 I t I t=' ITT TiI T 3:.<,o' :--�=.---5 ---� .-—HAMPTON . ?o - ST *+ 5500 _ i .� I'3 cc: i<..i. « +. .z a 3�.•s l a! ! 1 I 1 i t : ! ! I ( 1 ( I ` 4• I ; `•1+!_�L:_ i I-L f l:-tr + -1 i •� 1 -!_ ( i _?i , •1 t ! ' .... ' L3I �• •; -�' ,! 12 I : •��^+raw« � � U 4• aE — - 31 s —30 1 co 9,20'Z :zz_3 z.I2 _ ; I �� - �_-- - i'•_l ti�/i'v'G =•-1-' -. .—'t_'.'._s�n_l:e�_ss--z-_—r S i.___—c'-'y�-�� ..I PT"'POSAL NO. 1668 Ci Y OF TIGARD - FIG . 2c _ g5 T-7." _ C,•1 a(. . .JL cn J zeisi c e at 11515 S. 2. :1 zt iluzrul anc' J an iLe vt P.ecn t- 'i}n{c 17 , 7rLc, ciz=-I �1�u��-�or�Gc1� y /� ---J J.C. Z6 oun ' ULLk• �y } t i� �,trrA aIL'j U,�LLL:�I.��l.ty/CSE T�LC� ha-6 ,Zn%f=of— .CJS � 7_ -10r � i IlL .(./LCA T�� z%- Ssaz fes' zo that aLl- the �d would Lea .in .the CZbl. o;o T4 al" on .ta z a/- .the 17 Bounah-V . 1668 P-Le .the4z has nRzer t aAseea Le a zxp c� the- A1guz-t 25, 1981 an avmtian. att� wh.,c.-A fiai:L.ed and &Wach wouLd hwe- arzittr-d ocez Iz&qp� Y`�"" the Ci4 o-A Piq�zd' 7hi-6 ,am, ,�,a a �r��.o>z n,ecwn,*z, afz^..c ,.,-d on .ten oP .the CZbt ZCR 8-81 (7668) ALLe wz-. a rzat e it orz P. chi o lLo.a of au t Tax Lott 5200 G e irL: otirzi.L`tem Th i a aasze Huta r.xi a uL them B,aUn uy Cor.1z�.�a 0� Af-e e. 7h" .tax Lot 5200 owned t+ Lannon LcL6 mwwxed .to the Ci4 4 Tit and 4 trze Tjaaizd Caunzi t on S.rm t -Lr ei 14, 7987 rt-, Reno zt i on L'o. 87-704. OcuL gcLea _Am c.d and we wau.Lc: ZzAa it an guj j." 1�:8X�'.YTSX�O EXSt�C °.�7GY Gl91 [Z7t�+:"T TILE C7T� SC< a TILTS L-)M -2aT TO TU.E 1361'U.'vru�% CCrVJSSJGi.' 31,STE4D OF TKC OIIE IJUM Jh'CLLDED AL.L T.=LE 7R,4I:'GLE PR6PERTY BUT O�P..S? AnxLt.ewL qzt"ti or.. w.e aah a.ir- woccGr.^.: .tihe anzw and. WAS TPJS DO,:'` SO Tl-.'.'^-T TILE C77l-' 413LL �. IiOT !'t7/E. TO RPY13S LLS JJTR SCJI SR..S AJ.J JF WE DC IXT lL^ E S•r'/Cr S&-VJCE OUR VJ:v :IOaD BE 111 MULDIBL E r;/.D COULD IXT 2= DD1aG,'=£D? Laa.t &medz ah.,ea Fn e d An zAzon, ous a.ttav:.c:, anL J ch ech n-2 L:L�-n .the Ca=t i az to zAy that had dx-, ou'L f1&a-,l.�11 ata 1ti tJ.^_..d Lciltr. a G.e. C'2ir iJra L:s, i.e a_:,da Laizzon _in th-e- same Liz Lk �--2d1'L r rl�*n,� �z om l LL: fvza-1'! &! L'1La;.. ria- 77z.#-- The qv c6t -a wL' woL,.:' Xlhz to aaA c.n:_' r,.cuc anz jc,-.ed .iz.. .JS T,' C7T'' CF TJG^.Rv r CS�Oi:SJJLE FC.. ). :iES.7G�:._T7,.� T.'_'% RRC;� .T '- JF T,__ r--A ;: JS 'i;'0" J,'X JS RCS=G.:SJ3LC.? liiz.. Kr= liar..:in at thc- Sounar. -, Cavv:_ .daian aazaazd me that -ij we wire ann xe-d .to the Ci.tf o2� Tt--.a,d we zou&! not Le c e-came.:c2' L:i�Lwc t oun aahiu�- .to t pe de-annexed and as 7 .ta& A _tr Lmaz . n;w,at% &t cuad J hcu z .ta.c.ctiLe Cawnr_r_L, and th-c- -&tcW oY .the CLtq aj- T1 'T TO �IE X' T.''�_ CJT:' OF T3G':.17. Ou.,L cu.ea.tr'_aa we rwauf_d Lika anz:. er.4....DO 101 AC:EE XTIZ IZ.' l'vt?TJI,' Jl.' r'd=RD TO NOT . BE71.G r13L.E Tio x,;'l.'a PRCPL.Tl' INLUSS TILE 7 Xr :!L-DD. /IBES TO 3E [3E-A.:7.�Y�? A,:a S7Gr;;S WCL'il.'T SO RE2USTJI.'G? 1.ow .r'.t a;zz4r✓..a tlzrr..e to a ; .F . .`�= tzw we wcs..c n cue�L anrLe;,ed .i a L z c Cel Q� Tdrah�' r n nn„ ,th.e dAcl: aerz< to t�rLe Secr..etrsr�t oY S�.te on ,:over G cvL 70, 7 987 f,.t� l7o z iaflnnt.i , Ci-t-, &A Recrsar_.�z o;� t , Cies of Ti-c-,4 went not .hzc aarze 7 668 Annexn t.,i.an dac:un PrL z az a z�✓Laved Li, th,-- Paz:f-aac' I,'eir..a�- Arc Lara L Gove�uvzerLL awfu� Corvzi.daLan or_ 7% 1.907. The had Staten char---ad on .the 7668 dace .-iw-ta errzt .to theSccn.�fa��c o,C S.tr.-e .c:L the Cit',- o �i vrrr_ Lti th d=.0 z -trs . ' ;^r�r.: o-r OniinerLae 87-30 wan a euavz a.i -teat 8cDfled Lg l�art.i a ,r.�ttr, C.�t ;?cca�u..cr� r'nrr r'n fl+r� 70th. ca j, or Aoucm-Le;,, 1901, w^ t t -3 :_i_c�i a.tr�_ .irz r�...G. �:E1— c.a i p ti dy J iraue c4rz�ar..ec' Aa h err el ti_tn cazr_ a•' CAz!ii rzc� 67-30 oS �zc CZ4- o-, T u-and with ..he on i,--Lw-L to -.IL r a saF:ad i on cz� aaa to-..i�z a:= .hL.: o' t,h Citi! of TZnc.,d an` .vict .;1Lc lzc�wi.t.z cra-`r_ .t.d c cavzrr t �zacnL2t �" tl-� w,zaf� O.�aiszar>n n 1: 87-30. " , ' S., OaR � STJC:' we wou La' Line arLawerLe�:. fl_S TiZ C7T. ' OF T.7G�n CUL'-C-74 sKim G^✓�::.r C' 1 . T( _ = T. T.; 766 eJYurz J Liu-3 at tfv_ Sccf,c taf u a On r e.n ry 7, 79,33, �lr c SLa�z�z S;�t e�zc Liz Cil ;:erro•_dcz Lia._i_3 . rs ter_ f_-z: L_ccn 7 c-alfc� ;i or. S:_c:cam _ o S�j= 'd r�.t e 37-53. 7� A,:'OT.?c": CLQ T7C..' :Jc uor tL f i' e aJvsu 1in.dcn. u.' e�trca^i t: cr:�s = c aua r. e tester. cn-t A",7.aued :ram f 0 _ Snrca:da. fie :T T.JSt t.":S uc &,oaY_.d .Lua.e criz on-n cr-1 3,cx,i,_s o� .t h c .Lep-c-1- ,.azaa-,en;- L.eiszn chant:ed Lu �. the C-U a,''VTirar_.c any-' .amt- .to ;L� Sc-r-ctom o,� Stc�e iJz_�o•:rect.£�c JS -T.-J.; T � SGS: T,'!e • C7T ' OF�TJ" ":may Ct;=> S T :.7 JL' ,:'CT S.'_'"t.' '_� .7 T. ©T T' ;'� ''� SC.% C%' C JCS:� T TG T'_'c= .t"'L.-,-- C7:..;JSSJG.. FC:' , ..:. TC'. ?� And arcar;i e--u2,& _an i-Tc uou:c' ,iJ.c annus.-ec.' .. JS T.%JS .'I'i' T.' Cr:%"T'� „ Lfi G'.' T::' - ,'- %c..SJ:!� L ., I:: .J J.: T'Z% COLLT /irnatixez cunis;,ion uc aou- c' r he av3u.�cs: , .JS T.'JS :l.'": 0.'.' T,t_' l;;�i'S J =r SC1. .:T T T.'.. S';CJ LS J,:' T;' CL _".T ;'.'1 !.'CT T,''= C7T'-';' Jhcn F.c,ell =nc ;Cr., Ou./L ctta•-r _, az' J c^- d an Le 7�ctra2a torr_ S�irice Dia t�:cf .C�s� r� r an ' runativ:ed i^ - - =Vz ic' c.:r ' act nay._ the 76GS zr_aa.:-c el`' as tllz" it r�z Lm WC,Le tex-f C.` Z_ in anal _iaz_ h_rrr hacr.' 1 L t zC'/f: C s r ^, G�, JS ✓3�= On G_ _i_: �� .....•.^T._��. _:�.�Tri. t _ t•-.rJ._ �'�: _._.._. �-yam ..'_ '._ �,' . .. . .'� �. :.:.C-L .,.._... �---. ..___ . ._ . _ .:�_ILL6 zz =[LS= �..rK_- t.'�rr•� i.JJ NLJi'w�._.N-- �/? _r._..._ t/_• it.._ f•�-�r—.+_ _ ,.4/../ _-i-ra_r.f r i�. �.�v^.__ �✓:�•i._� •� Ti J_ 3�--377-'.!". -- t -- ^/✓C.. _ ;i:C ._.5:.'_:=;. Ja�3 moi_ ��: a _ Ti UL 1'L:L1` 1?J ZZ Z-3:ii,_ Cr...._' hZ-3 -.t _C.G J L'G_ a- Z - u-v 7 r uvl naj? •:Cl-t01=- /:� : 1^. _�1J: �'._�r __ /'.. _�_ �_ ..G ^l3^_^� _ r _ G3.3rL,C 71J r_^'_ Cl2 .ts�. l✓zt =- -i= --�==`-^-- -...� --_----- ._ . ._ �_ _:.__._ �a/�-S.t.�.._�' .iJ7.rsa..:;� .is .<:.^..r_� .:.G�.ter.:_`_ 1 •1 4. C crt. 7,._�� ✓r -r� _, L._ '__ ..�..•r_ J-.r-.�_�.._ �J.'. ,�r_ ._. _.�_ -Ca:.... ' _ _ , ..i,_+_•.•..__. .- .L<....� _J•:._ r r•J_• I__ �-t_ ��• ..ra'.� ..... .L J -.._j ._.._J �_._.._^L.._:.�._ ^J":.^ ..__r....--, .':.3..-.- ..�.._ _i.....�- ^L_.•..._c_ .V -.__ :�...-�,GJ Jw�:.._ ....C..:..._ Lf.! � _ •�. � � �--L-=G:�.�:i_ -.�G= -.._ C. SSC :.�.'�' ^_^ ..:Al _ "- - L'•__.C._ �_ - ---- 17 Gam^ .3.:.-..__. �a:-.^.'.' t ...' s .• C Ui-�_ S e ' S, t s cr. S. u'Swn a c rte,�:c circ �✓c .n 7,' 7: C, t3. -c -to L -ite:.•:.L'.:n d zor..coR.c ....t.^.2: --Ic .✓L LZ-•-- to r..[u rz out .'zr..o.--ca-c.,: .:11:, .f is r, r .ens oj, a-Lsre. iL6 Lrc ltvwc ztc�.c;_' r�rvs fc.-tc�. J- 7'—'--' ©T CT QJI STJO,,S 1L`U4'LD L7i.8 ZLe tae- an the Cit—, D� T.LnarLd ad a,! �y!m Fcf✓lrL:�vt 7 7983? ® & • 3z .Zt .i Carmed to kzg2 ousL f"of2•elLt , in .thc CUy o-r Tbm:L^._&7 3J_' the analJra Z6 "I.,'oB1 az c Lac in .fz.-- .Caun&. c-t the 1?/1.�^JLt .ttJ, Lr Tom^' or .. hz Cirttt? - ,�® 3� qac aJ.,.e .in .trLe Coun.5t at the .vt eaen .fuze do tzcur.C�z .ta ann cx oust. fz'LozeA4 at fJae .carte .t-ie " .the az6.t o; tAc TiLinru,.£.e? 4q Do t,�au p1'an .ta hc!,vz ou-& p&c 2.e�tr,f 4e an. 3zXD m ? -la6 anu t iinr.. en ted .to .the Bouracla vj Camw-6 s. an at thct L mptt nr zn " Fel, u 3,✓ 97 83 .ta c nnrue- .tae z.ta.tud of ou s ivL ap---& as Lanzon'1vLaze�Lt�:,7 Fi` h Ldlai4 3.:,4 waslwad vezrt har,.d on n-ettin: th,,- Ci r- a� Ti-ca--c.` ilr o- .ted areas .tc nurvtadu ads .eazA ijzch .in thr- .£nom Cfsn fLe�t. Le-rve r ou ai<,.y paa-t o f Ao,r him meeaane�s."', M iza c.L.ecri .ta 2 amL, e^-LC fUL� L Lla': tI-.;--tez! -tAe-Lr, im-Z 1, ^ ` '�T.Lf1L✓..d, G,^.;e-:.cn . �� ...� .c.•; •� c;cne rto:..ntr.„w! _:,a :...e LL-, :' ..a::arLo, 3.eaveretan, v Sheer ac or aru-, o- ie:. caawn, .Tine: tsr-:e plLo z- o. .fz,a Ciwrt o r T.ir x--d cr:: uan to ' a � f=t� -js. O .f[J-hyl a £rzatianal a ct:ttt ham r ' 1 Ln i to h,-,,-, ace Ly .thea:','.t,ii.tr� .to rarLov.:de fnn ikz oLm rcr,'.cr..an.i.2 arzz a de,_= 4en.tlz CS un.i—,,ct Ica-- ana✓Leee cLc Lar_ ` :. OurL h A-Lt r e car. Le zxae s� -f rra r_; n A:t Tzce ads us, ort rte ti ani d tzt q cortuLt-t and rpt art ' rtc fejt a a "Conn✓ n.a: This .ifLc�t.:c'ed a.(L z.Zx a.' the .aanc i~ate 4o.: :aw=i&=n and c1 : tele ci-✓u end orl Ti sans:, C 0= Zidiir c'„r_r ar.. ' riz� a p&cat dec! o .�ai.ti uz LZGtIAR an`_' .ihoL--At a �'c t✓cG.-.z a Jie CLt�s zx, Tir-C r /roar ' tiic c�cwi ar. L� ours Pvrr r one to rn P nsl nr i cz tAc. rJLOJ 't a; alts657�:1:fLi.f1. ',L^. Zh,-, L C:-,-� at, Qn c_.t f rt eedeL` cn_' cr o.= va l.^.=_tee c de.--t .in rz cyi eLzinr. acrlLeBa.i uz and .cap-at L4 titre c� i arLe. r vL.7 one az -&-!o -LII allleu l_w T.d c2iUr6 an-c to 700 rons,� vc � : r, 8u!::i cl erLt c verLa. J rLPrrLut cuiLa aaraz e crLa. i:�a,5e rre. e Li 2 a cizr_ faith .ti•_e 76650 cnr-c.*:.ti on dacLncrLto a2.vaavc2 .erg .thz 3otaz8v Ctzm-u rs,szr and e.nrl t .to and 4tt ,thz S. aw-ta v-, of S irr fc °.a o'�,�c e amZ--: Lii.tL, .the rxm--.,,f-te 4 87-30 daces emt aCst'RJ)1dE�C'd�-C L,'t�uze S.ecsz&,:.tt o,. Stc..te, LxLiciz ZrLr t eb -the zutxtrt e.tntc, t G.f thp- CL;t, o; T.craad Ci�•, r4crnzd✓L, xu^rl - _ ,_.. and tAc D-CY24 o�'! R,elrn_rtue c'.azunan t 34-377-87 1.,Lt o--, .thu_e pu,ku c 'lea Linc re� and tha CLt,,t o�f Ter u d 4,eca 4 CITY OF TINA WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON March 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 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'r—o-T-75.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, Frank A. Currie Director of Public Wor s enclosure FAC/dc 12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 oPF-M nda ro haLL rl+jlllIII+IIIII II+IeDt1ll gsIIIJIIIIIi3J�m+111111 f IIIIITI 9�J � �11t 11.10�► _.T i I (1 I 1 1 ► — e _� '�It1+IlilJPI+III+�IIPoIl+IP4+#>t1; NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED 1�' ._ ._ DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN -- - 8 9 THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF T1-E ORIGINAL ,- DRAWING. OggB 6Z 8Z LZ 9Z SZ DZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 6t 81 LI 91 5! bl EI Zi It OI 6 ® d 9 —$ 4 - E -Ztit iNllIIII�111lJIt11�111iJIPN111N11l�I)1l1_ _MA ?, 16. X( -,- ......................... 7 { LAKE OSWEGO QUADRANGLE zip UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR OREGON GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 7.5 MINUTE SERIES(TOPOGRAPHIC) pn 4 D'30 -TT' ME- 0 - �A A. R� EM TT' Zts Mo - - Ll 'ctrvi�li 7v y, m• dIf 77 60 Vj'! LT "A L�i lel NJ T -A ri-7-17All\1 II 17.7. �Fl "AA, r L X`TY D 4. ')FEE' w- I, y -,A F- ih J- IF,r,h 'K pQ y,r,Kj. A1 IA'3s HH 4 1-1 GII ---u36 l Ait, 2730". TMJ" Isl 7-10" fl RX" 1� IN�\ Z1 en A- "l,t-2 \4 I I 5, 51 K., ;j 153-7 2l' LAM.- -A� -A; '(DO Go 7 .tub Nk —9 PA. t14 AA, -2: GO 3"-11 17 27 X A nitT" p. 7 -w. 45-2230 122-45- 5-22'30" G� - 71 122-37-30" Op Mapped,edited,and published by the Geological urvey SCALE�1 24000,AO G4 ROAD CLASSIFICATION T. RIaphli3Om aell.iph.tlelphsb,ph.11g,am'�l"'csm bglld,, -t,.1 by USGS,NOSINDAA.USCF, Soo 0 CISER AA,A lh--Phl o-1952. F.11d.hl-d 19 A Ulap-D,J dil......... URNIER 0 S IN:lU- d h,d,lR1.Ah.l Gate I-NOSINOm CoNT" VIIITI'�A 10 FEET C-t,615541959)- ACOL 6173 f1958; CURVES CC_,C AL OTUN U,8,OFA- 11- loll 11UI DE- AID EOUNU,.C,"FET_ _L. LAKE OSWEGO,OREG. �GOO rgrid 0,eD.-.1 ly 1'- -1....R-le UA..AI.. )OD-Ill U-11.1 T-l-ll 4-1.,S,d'-,:"--- "�X,2111.:�IT&NIM111.11-11 --LE— ,1--blue T-IS-COMPLIES—NATIONAL III ACCURACY STANDARDS purple compiled 1-.al N4522.5-12 37.5/7.5 10 RAGo SOM,OR RESTON, "71.1-_,--nal I.-I. I.I FOR SALE By U.S.GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.DENVER.COW VIRGINIA n.2 R. A FEWER OESCIIIIIG TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS AN.S-DLI IS ABLE ON REQUEST PHOT REIISCE,1970-197, F., Id l.A IL7- indicate'Dolt selected fl-lines R.-SCRI.1.11 ---------- rII�Ip�1ti1111I111pP�IIIPIl,li9111'1I111i II 11111FIl 111riq7Irpirplillp lip III 1-11111fl 11.1 11 III[q II[InIl NOTE: IF THIS MICROFII-RED2 3 4 5 6 7 ORN61.IS LESS CLEAR THAN Ilk ff .1 NOTICE,IT IS DUE TO 'NE QUALITY OF TIE ORIGINAL IXtAMING. Oc 62 92 LZ qz sz 0a 61 of v 91 sr 1,1 el zi 11 111 --a p L 9 S v c 2 lop M A nOT-T P7 Ax