The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 01/16/1984 0M 0-Nil > TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an c SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate ° JANUARY 16, 1984,,7:30 P.M. sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start _ itor's agenda items are 10865 SW WALNUTof that agenda item. Vis ` v be kept to 2 minutes or less; longer TIGARD, OREGON 97223 asked to: matters can be set for a future Agenda by con R H m tatting either the Mayor or City Administrator. 7:30 1. SPECIAL MEETING: 1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call § . 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items $ i 7:35 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less, Please) 7:40 3. HOUSEKEEPING ORDINANCE REPEALING TMC TITLES 16, 17 & 18 r ORDINANCE NO. 84- 0 City Attorney 7:45 4. AMEND RECORDS RETENTION CODE - ORDINANCE N0, 84 o ' Deputy Recorder 7:50 5. LIMITED TIMEPARKING ZONE- SW CENTER STREET - ORDINANCE NO. 84- o ' Director of Public Works i 7:55 6. APPOINT REPRESENTATIVES FOR RECYCLING ACT o ..Director of'Public-Works 8:00 7. CONSIDER OBJECTIONS AND LEVY FINAL ASSESSMENT - LID 1141 100TH AVENUE - ORDINANCE NO. 84- 0 Director of Public Works :. 8:10 8. DARTMOUTH STREET LID PROGRESS REPORT o Director of Public Works .20 9. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT o Director of Public Works 1 8:40 10. LID POLICY DISCUSSION o Administrative Assistant € 9:50 11. 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 by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 11,1 Approve Board & Committee Appointments Budget Committee - Resolution No. 84-Qj Economic Development Committee - Resolution No. 84__921 Park Board - Resolution No. 84--aa Planning Commission- Resolution No..84-0 11.2 Receive and File TUFA Report 11.3 Accept And Authorize Appropriate Signatures For Subdivision Compliance Agreement and Performance Bond - Copper Creek IV 11.4 Accept And Authorize Appropriate Signatures For Street Dedication & Easements for LID #21 o ID 11 58 - Time 011 Company, Street Dedication, Easement For Utilities & Construction Easement 11,5 Approve Final Acceptance of Tech Center Business Park Improvements & Release Bond 55 12. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 10:00 13. MACC & STORER CABLE TV REPORT o City Admif.iiiiiiLrator 10:20 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1)(h) and ORS 192.660 (1)(d) to discuss pending litigation and labor negotiations. 10:55 15. APPROVE LABOR CONTRACTS AND 1984-85 PAY PLAN o City Administrator 11:00 16. ADJOURNMENT (lw/0316A) PAGE 1 L ACE.7A - JANUARY._.16.._1.984: g s i T I G A R D C I-T Y C 0 U:N C I" L } z SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 16, :1984 -' 7:30 P.M. 3 1.. ROLL CALL: 'Present: Mayor -Wilbur Bishop; Councilors: Tom Brian, John Cook, and Kenneth Scheckla; City "Staff: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works; Bob Jean, City Administrator; Joy F Martin, Administrative Assistant; Bill Monahan, Director of Planning & Development (left at 7:45 P.M.); Tim Ramis, Legal< Counsel; Jerri Widner, Finance Director; and Loreen Wilson, - Deputy City Recorder. 2. ' CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS UNDER OPEN AGENDA o City Administrator reported the following items should be added to the agenda and open agenda: s o Agenda item #3 add report from Director of Planning & Development regarding taped vs. typed transcripts for appeals. o Agenda item #6 - Councilor Brian requested resolution be added regarding backyard burning. � o Agenda item #8 move to be considered after item #10. f z o Agenda item 412 - add the following: 12.1 Resolution regarding; GTE rates requested by Councilor Brian. 12.2 Attorney's oral report on Mayoral election issues. C 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or less, please) a. Geraldine Ball, 11515 SW 91st Avenue, presented a letter to Council regarding the Dartmouth Street LID boundaries and the State's project for the North Tigard/South Tigard Interchange boundaries. 4. ORDINANCE NO. 84-01 A HOUSEKEEPING ORDINANCE REPEALING TITLES 16, 17, AND 18 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. a. Director of Planning & Development stated that this needs to be formally repealed to give clear direction to the codifiers. - b. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. C. Director of Planning & Development discussed the new code requirements for transcripts of items for appeal. The new code states a tape will be made. Council expressed their desire to have tvned transcripts. Consent of Council was to direct staff to begin process to amend code to reflect typed transcripts as a requirement for an appeal hearing. Director of Planning & Development lefts 7:45 P.M. PACE i - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 16, 1984 j E; r 5. ORDINANCE NO. 84-02 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 2.48.030 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODEPERTAINING TO THE RETENTION CLASSIFICATIONS OF RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS, AND ADOPTING OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES, CHAPTER 166 OF THE STATE 'ARCHIVIST AS THE CITY'S RETENTION - CLASSIFICATION, PRESCRIBING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. a. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt. g Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 6. ORDINANCE NO. 84-03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10.28, Or THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL' CODE BY ADDING TO SUBSECTION 'T' OF Y SECTION 10.28.090, TO LIMIT `PARKING ON-A PORTION OF SW CENTER STREET, AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. � a. Director of Public Works synopsized the history of the parking problems on Center Street and recommended approval. City Administrator reminded Council that parking problems are not able to be enforced by the Police Department due to time and resource constraints. ' b. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote or Council present. , C. Council requested that staff contact the beauty school in that area _, and discuss the parking problems and ask for their assistance. 7. APPOINT REPRESENTATIVES FOR RECYCLING ACT t a. Director of Public Works synopsized and noted that he would represent t: City staff and that DEQ is asking also for a Council representative. b. Mayor Bishop stated that the only Council member that was free during f the day would be Councilor Scott. C. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to appoint Frank Currie as staff representative and appoint Councilor Scott, if she is willing, as the Council's representative. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. d. Councilor Brian presented history of issue regarding DEQ's backyard burning ban and stated that, in his opinion, DEQ still needed to look for other alternatives instead of banning all. backyard burning in the Portland area. Councilor Brian suggested Council approve the resolution as presented registering their concerns with DEQ. PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - ,JANUARY 16, 1984 AKE e. RESOLUTION NO. 84-05 A:RESOLUTION OBJECTING TO DEQ ,BACKYARD BURNING BAN POLICY AND PROGRAM. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to approve and direct staff to mail to DEQ, Metro, and other affected agencies. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. ` 8. CONSIDER OBJECTIONS AND-LEVY FINAL ASSESSMENT LID #41 }_ a. Superintendent of the Engineering Division, John Hagman, gave a brief ? ffi synopsis of the project noting that all work was completed and the . final assessment amount is `less than the engineer's estimate. He recommended Council adopt the final assessment roll as presented. b. ORDINANCE NO. 84-04 AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING THE FINAL COST OF SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SW TOOTH AVENUE SANITARY SEWER LOCAL IMPROVEMENT: DISTRICT, ,RATIFYING AND ADOPTING THE APPORTIONMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF , THE COST TO RESPECTIVE PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT, SPREADING: THE ASSESSMENT AND DIRECTING THE ENTRY OF ASSESSMENTS IN THE LIEN DOCKET. C. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. a . k �,. 9. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTAL ANNUAL REPORT _•a. Director of Public Works gave a slide presentation synopsizing the Department's accomplishments over the'last'year shoeing highlights of both the Engineering and Operations Divisions. Council expressed thanks to the department for their goad work. 10. LID POLICY DISCUSSION a. Administrative Assistant, Joy Martin, presented the LID Policv and Procedure Report with the assistance of the Finance Director and 4 Director of Public Works. The Administrative Assistant noted that in the last audit report there was concern expressed that a policy and iv procedure needed to be adopted. She noted that this report was addressing that concern. i Staff and Council went through the General Policy Intent, Initiation and Feasibility sections of the report and addressed some of the following areas: a O Citizens should met with staff and understand the LID process and possible scope of the job being studied prior to the item being placed on a Council agenda. t, O City needs to be aware of the City's fiscal a--bili-f before � proceeding with an LID request.. o Feasibility Policy 2.2.5 "Property owners may be required to pay a fee at the 'beginning of the feasibility stage if the proposed improvement is in an undeveloped area.11 was discussed. Council noted they may wish to define the amount of fee later. PAGE 3 COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 16, 1984 Finance Director synopsized financial formula proposed to allow the staff to figure available additional debt and amount available for project construction per year. b. Consensus of Council was to continue this discussion in February. 11 DARTMOUTHSTREET;LID PROGRESS REPORT a. Robert Wright, Project Engineer, presented plan "B" for the alignment of the proposed street noting„advantages ,and disadvantages and recommended, Council approve Plan "B". Also Mr. Wright presented a General Assessment Plan which would divide land subject to assessment into three zones controlled by the distance they lay from the right-of-way line:of the proposed street improvements. b. Consensus of Council was to support Plan "B" for the street 'design and `request Mr. 'Wright take the proposed assessment method back to the citizens before Council proceeds further. C. Gordon Martin, 12265 SW 72nd Avenue, ' presented map and letter for Council to .review regarding his concerns on the alignment proposal and financial concerns. Council will study letter. 12. APPROVE BOARD AND COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS a. Council expressed desire to see citizen applications along with a set of minutes from the selection committee interviews when asked to appoint members to boards or"commissions"in the future. b. RESOLUTION NO. 84-01 A RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. James G. Smith - term expiring 12-31-86 Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. C. RESOLUTION NO. 84-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE TIGARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. Wilbur Bishop, Continuous with his term of office Patrick Kennedy, term expiring 1-16-86 Amo De Bernardis, term expiring 1-16-86 Tony Orlandini, term expiring 1-16-86 Tom Taylor, term expiring 1-16-86 Tom Corliss, term expiring 1-16-85 Bruce Clark, term expiring 1-16-85 Vacant Position, term expiring 1-16-85 Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. R { i . F: PAGE: 4 p COUNCIL MINUTES —JANUARY 16, 1984 t d. RESOLUTION NO. 84-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE TIGARD PARK AND RECREATION BOARD. Michael Heim and Steve Schreiner, terms expiring 12-31-87. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. e. RESOLUTION NO. 84-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENT TO THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. Dave Peterson, term expiring 7-1-85. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by CouncilorBrian to approve.' k Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 13. RECEIVE AND FILE TURA REPORT a. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to receive and file TURA report regarding current debt status. Approved by,unanimous vote of Council present. 14. ACCEPT AND AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATE SIGNATURES FOR SUBDIVISION COMPLIANCE' E AGREEMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND - COPPER CREEK IV a. Motion, by Councilor Cook, seconded' by Councilor Brian to accept and authorize signatures. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 15. ACCEPT AND AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATE SIGNATURES FOR STREET DEDICATION & EASEMENT FOR LID #21 ID #58 - Time Oil Company, Street Dedication, Easement for Utilities & Construction Easement. q r`. a. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to accept and authorize signatures. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 16. RESOLUTION NO. 84-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING E: THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK. a. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 17. MACC & STORER CABLE TV REPORT r a. Bill Tierney, MACC Administrator, and Doug Wilson & Jan Busman from Storer, discussed Storer and MACC responsibilities and current build-out information. PAGE 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1984 m } i 4 E Y F MACC and Storer representatives discussed the b. Council, staff, nt, changes in agreement, installation and intergovernmental agreeme Wilson commented that installation f service problems/complaints. Doug i of concerns and and service complaints were high on'their list - they would 'strive to improve in that area. � 18. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff` 18.1 RESOLUTION N0. 84-07 A RESOLUTION OBJECTING TO PUBLIC UTILITY CO*1ISSION'S APPROVAL OF GENERAL TELEPHONE'S EXTENDED AREA SURCHARGE TO WILSOPiVZLLE/CHARgONNEAU. Councilor Brian suggested that Council may want to adopt a 'resolution 4pp to express Council's objection to requiring citizens nv 1 /ha bonnenu. g for GTE's extended area surcharge to Council noted this was especially ` true "since Tigard residents are unable ; to call Hillsboro, the County seat, without a long distance charge: seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. Motion by Councilor Brian, 'i Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 18.2 ATTORNEY REPORT ON MAYORAL ELECTION City Attorney, Tim Ramis, reported that there have been numerous qe Mayoral 'election and he: will present a uestions regarding th f j written report on January 30, 1984 regarding the issues. sion at 19. EXECUTIVE SESSIONaons of Council 6601R(1)(h)to Executive ORS �192.660 1(1)(d)P.M. under the proves discuss pending litigation and labor negotiations. Adjourned Executive Session to again meet as Council at 12:13 AM. 20. APPROVE LABOR CONTRACTS AND 1984-85 PAY PLAN a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to adopt the 1984-85 Pay Plan, authorize the Mayor and Administrator to sign the proposed TPOA contract and the proposed TMEA/OPEU contract with the Salary and Classification Study letter as amended, and approve the proposed 3% COLA for unclassified employees. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 21. ADJOURNMENT: 12:15'A.M. �1 Deputy :City Recorder City of Tigard n MST. ' Mayor - City of Tigard (lw/A867A) PAGE 6 COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 16, 1984 W TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal 7-6027 ` P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice BEAVERTON,OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising ® _'0 Tearsheet Notice 0 City of Tigard ® 0 Duplicate Affidavit v PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. Susan PinUe b©ing first duly sworn, depose and say thaTligardd Tjmec Advertising , Director,or his principal clerk,of the— a newspaper of general circulation ass -Mhe defined in ORS 193—in and 193.020; published at T-p- aforesaid county and state;that the City Gounci7_8 � Meet' a printed COPY of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for l _successive and consecutive in the following issues: E January 12 1984 Subscribed and n to before e thi an v 13 1984 f----- j/,,tom i<lotary Public for Oregon my Commission Expo s: 3/16/87 AFFIDAVIT MR WO yY h R' filo ,3'+3 �' g 'Yli i /33 S >..Ay P.QilYg,r i Y+ M 3 ,Y d h�� it • 1 �x:'s' x �• 4 � -r R k h Slk R 'AIX 4 . CRS tiU'2 rs� ll.ra fi , .; ..�.t:�' -?,ya -.., r, i�si � iir� a k ,z r rxt ai rf asoma t,dc. 7,a-.Eerw+ �a r �`x;,_ air R ;s t _ s Rro, `:a. " °^} _; _tifi. . `��'ztyau..�:,. 3p r's%*�rg-fir '.t,.-cs,� •.,_1 '� ^'z �.-.r..�,s., 'a .. '.1.-''r`mss"n5,�. - a+•.. ,c.afi "` .�._,. _wbv....�yu�' �`"." ,k*',....'�h'.•+Y�t�t�,,.`'3 ,,...,.�`"�',... ,�`,r,� �F .aS ?.u�fi. .�.=:h. a ...t:;..'s •,,,c":..�.��,.s;'5+.- a�r,< ,'.�� .�,��e ,c. ..�.s::.�'"$ ��c�a;r a.- �� -x: �r�,* s TZGAHD CITY COUNCIL 'SPECIAL MrZTING JANU.AaY 16®' 198 Mr. Mayor and Councilors: My name is Geraldine Ball and I am speaking to you under Visitor's Agenda because I feel it is important that you have certain information before setting the boundary of the Dartmouth Street L.I.D. under Item S on tonight's agenda. I have been informed that it is possible the public will not be afforded an opportunity to speak at that time. Iwant you to know the Oregon Dept. of Transportation purchased property from me for the N. Tigard-•S. Tigard Interchange between S W. 68th and S. W. 69th which the documents I will behanding you confirm. Also the Public Hearing map I am giving you confirms the Oregon Dept of Transportations intention to con- struct the Interchange to S. W. 69th and it was 92% Federally funded to S. W. 69th. You will recall I -previously objected to being assessed for the L.I.D. between S. W. 68th and S. w. 69th because of the Oregon Dept. of Transportation's stipu- la.tion' that they were purchasing the property for the N.Tigard-S. Tigard Interchange and I also object because a have no access to gay property from S. W. 68th or from the area between S. W. 68th and S. W. 69th. I' have been told by ,Frank Currie that my name and the other small property owners in that area are not on the assessed roll tonight but might be added later. The questions I feel you might want to ask Frank Currie are: 1. Has the City acquired the property from the Oregon Dept. of Transpor .tion? 2. Has the Oregon Dept. of Transportation said that they will pay for the construction between S. W. 68th and S. W. 69th if the City does the constructing? Please maks: this and all attachments part of the City of Tigard record on the Darti Street L.I.D. Ji¢cILC , - Egon Ill Nil Ell' y � \ y\ \U� boy 7f1 }� o"I a ¢reAlt \1 / ck- )rJ JJ J'ul °1\ �k V C ne [J') Z w Qui Q 0 4'i a � rtk m� gig, t"- '-i' Y.Mt«7 : rte• �; IN 1. � � '.,.. � '#.JSa.t..... '.Yk.,ti i y^i..r. •� ;Yi� ,*m. -.. T"...�... `,.... y�S`�'ra:k"$ ;'� � �'LI„..�a � �_,,.,�� s`15"s ��:F •� `ky�Mnx �y.� �� rT�, z�r�•r�S' ��'�,�� `�� ,i�ay�.�,�� , �X�? .. ,,;,'��,.�� - '-�� x t`t"a�`.�. �� x'�"y ��y)�` �� a£s'S•r4.��•a^y','k j �a,vi}s� ^i ykyy r: Y� �s,i;�.•: t.may - 1 Cia��. � r ��.v... ,� s �r- �� r 1. Fga RIMR � 511'A�` + iC Alb ea's'.xn`1 r • � ryi.}fur+ SC�Fx''{� tR`anY�- n 1- 33 r, r::{`-t •'.,��• p`urwer,�s - � - � �tr r� ��` �'� im l � -a�•z � u";,�.��``r,�3`Y' ,i s 1 -T"`•. cam'-" }fr. u. .i .rr t ' ._ • ;+ yyrri--.53,�<''7 sfl,r. 'k-�(',f,�fitt 9g�,,i�,,... -,•wa 4i ,r 'i`• '�2*s .a.r .3;y4�-tfis rez[ii3 iy#r.-i•v�+a5.$ `•' i n S •h r tr 'a<" SxF- i" ?'�••'•...� Y s s{-�k¢k +c, f`r';*t" t3 i ':� �'rn-r-=? ,••l�zvLF�-F ;,,^ FPb- •y : ,' . r'y -le M 4 rs ',.s s* t 4� aT 't,,e..� e . '`' � •' .�a..'as-�:i`^7o y v.• e4�' �.' � 2' e g ��e tL�•-�,��'� 9 �l.�v�? at•�.. � a �r�t' �;amu S . .i�S# Z,K � Y. .s �� p 4 �+..F 4 -P- ^Ys =.• �•� z'"4 „.- �. �AC ., � ��"P�= �t� *P`:f+ {'7yj`�?•s�et'f� Y'�:?'s`. "r a'�s M1st"�r -�'��st. ��',tx3�-�"�t�� r y.s.. y-GE�=�kf.. 'yf•'4-t. �t�'+sr y�c s'�v1j�'�d`f�,�•i.... 4ei -g �.��.,.:•• 'ai - - .tet :.i 'xsa, f•� � '� �C�,�s A+6 4 ,? x^t�: t„ p �k •� a. 5 tt„ .� �, .f'�'s�- �. s.:.�< �`� ff'�^':: �•r'fx.,��+ "t r-..b � �34..�`� ,t�".M �$` ��s #s'�'-�.;�"`i� � ,..t`". r-r.�.Y,rtty.,;.,n�,�'S t}g��';�"i+Kw?�,� '-., �;' •. }� -�" �� .�i -xP, .;�:�",� x•.Lvt z� 5 4 ;.,;k'i ,..t. r v3x:•6g: y `e�,.� 1:a �.xsX„...x ��.«.14_,.�-.�..d_y`•,r,�ac� _,_:. ...., __,K'�!'�, .. ry>;:....,...-,s .. •;. t5.. ..L.7• .�?�.... -: .'�•:�3 :,,�7�e. �'fi` .=b r��# �_,. .� - K•,l � ,��6. ;Fsx�:�•rs ;� k� �,.:L4' �, :».fit} .;:...__ 55, .. :- ._, ,-rr. ::.of ^,.-7kiC ',,..,Y-1` .r..-W`2f¢'Si. ",„L+'"s r^5a s•"`= Y- ,,.."`�,k ,,rs'4 ';' » -s` �,::.r -n r..<.�+',,ra.. •c4:a. '"ip��- �y�r-_r. � .,..y--..«�.».�.. y,.#,�� +s�.,; F �`�..y,. •a�• a {,��.." 1•�'�#3,,.0.ci�„ ..�-t h' �`Y��-.i t �r�'F.,,,a 3;n ,�•„ -.'f ^:+x3'� ,�'d..+t.gip..,1<, a. :. :. �. .- �., � � �"'��"tt � ,.yy�t,.�., 4�frd',�,;,:i-. .�-..�� "'e sass:{�<..ir«r.- ,�,.^iv•+r .ay�a �.��k, ,3 s:��x`:-:k .*R.e�q�eM• .. - V 5 �. a Mi..'+:.�Z'�t',Il ,,��'3:L�t:�« � "-lYr �, _.,Ir.,'z � $ T.--"3.4".PT.�kx<. f'`y .4�.Fxy%' f-,,. ..� ..t �`.�s��'a'�x��'�.�i�:fl4 :!`�'. i "• .•.,�.•��!}}e!.��y �...,�e -fi,A::-'pct�'t d�R t`- �`1 *t(.^x -�}"., J�1 w*'d�;.�� ','2.,� �,r,:t._ t�..n � re.��•.,�.5. �r,r-=z•-`z.; �i �H '. 5 < .s c.,l " - - C:: 3; re'E°.. .'fi.••�' `<' ,3`F �ew•�' .r. .r• z x „#"fix.. , ub ,=r. �. ,:.•+z N;r .7.d�•. Q1 :1�3�. ;�c. ,_.a,�.�:at'%, 3gfy� ,�,ter •�,.,.�x�-�k rr':..- ... .�.e-, nx?e? 3jt'1 '•.d`"7,u-fS.k•`�...-...^i3" c't+€y..r- _ ',eldt7' i+ •�. �:_.:�`",:.Y..s+kr' a`.-�,„ - s'-1 L. vx''d," x_.,,✓ -i ..-'_ �..": ,` ;rte ^-; +•-� a + - MA, i•IYaza;z`' ' ax3 a'''wt' ,x,e -ri > f��-dfF 'S•a.; .a._--..�t<,rt ,�.i twrn.� - .,�„' .u•- '. ;°.f.�.°- 5 .,'�`- ` J' Y,-� { .:''-h. t _:M..a' z.,,..a ar :.-.,r,. s- ,..� fa • "."' ;r -.,.€ a t...rff'y�.•i-.,Ye'`.,fi..y... ik `"1a.F (6 �' ..�'Y^ rh.".+`. .'.r�..c�'r .:.. x"'�4..'.•C 2� r. o,h. ...; 5. �r.... •.. _f f:r..��,��' y-�r.'�a" ciary ;c,,'°s ra, Fw. .x' �`�rc�. ��.�..yy� �.-.'i "'�i,.ti :d";,w:;._,. � x'�x,,,' .�r+.? sr�s ;,�,�a' .�•,,��t `.�5'..,-�.�ws �F`e+_�t`s.^d�d� fix.,;-'�#�s"_:�i-?z �� .c 's .�"'-°� `J�' s ,3� r„k*r.r. .�.`»�'��ia,� ,-f� �, r�: r—r e �. a,�`'��' '. �t'r�E', ,;3z�,,.,�°.r#c:,. _.r��r+ .�n..'a•�F.� 91, wom ` -t t3REGON D)sPA3 ,`�}t , �sltdle{ m'� Ms>�.atex c 4 ter' Fed.Aia9 Rlo. -.I-5____ 5(7® , Estate of W. Del Ball, Deceased Washington Co. Circuit Ct. ##3396 11515 SW 91st Ayf:ntle Grantors. Mail Address Tigard, Oregon 97223 Mail Address 5 �tion �� dCbailge=.°i._Tig3rd__�T_ Highway_-�aci£ic__ � interchange �rW Baker County . ° .. ` REAL ESTATE OPTION IN CONSIDERATION of the offer to the undersigned for the hereinafter described property, the undersigned hereby give and grant to the State of Oregon, by and-through its Department of Transportation, upon the terms and conditions =k he einaf er tater+ a option to purchase the property described on Exhibit "A" attached, bearing date of �+pri� 21, 1988' and covering----2ne —parcels, subject to special provisions contained in Exhibits} ' 'F attached and by this agreement made a part of this option. The Oregon Transportation Commission shall have the irrevocable right, at any time, within six 16) _months from the date hereof, to mcept this option. The undersigned, hereinafter referred to as "Grantors," agree to deliver to the State of Oregon. by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "State," a warranty deed to said property,CONVEYING A GOOD AND MFRCHANTABLE TITLE THERETO -FREE FROM ALL OUTSTANDING LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES. INCLUDING UNPAID AND DEFERRED REAL PROPERTY 1-AXES, AND FREE FROM ALL RIGHTS OF LESSEES, TENANTS, AND OTHER PERSONS CLAIMING ANY RIGHTS IN OR TO SAID PROPERTY. The conveyances shall include all buildings, fixtures and crops located on said property as weil as appurtenances tftereto (except for the items herein reserved by Grantors).Grantors further agr^e not to sell or encumber said property during the term of this option. C: y_ Upon the delivery of said deed and the clearing of title satisfactory to State Grantors in the usual course and through the usual channels of auditing claims against State, shall be paid the sum of FIFTY NPIr THOUSAND AND NO1100 * T ------- Dollars(S 59,goo.00 ) (Less 3 __-.-- ) for items as listed on Exhibits) as full payment of the purchase thereof. Grantors, unless the right is waived herein, are entitled to receive payment, less any deposits and allowances as listed on exhibit(s),before State takes Possession of the property. Grantors of occupied property are entitled to 90 days written notice before they are required to vacate. State v.ill give grantors 30 days written notice of the specific vacation date when making payment for property less any deposits and allowances. Grantors received 90 days notice on_ OerembeT 11 -K Grantor does riot have to provide title insurance.State will pay all recording charges for documents required to vest Clear title. °e in State:and prorate taxes as of the date of possession or transfer of title,whichever is earlier. .. Grantors acknowledge all items of damages, all sums of money to be paid, and all things to be done by State are in the$ a . ovation. Grantors agree, the consideration recited herein is just compensation for the optioned properly,including ally and all darripg s to grantors remaining property, if any, which may result from the acquistion or use of said property and the s construction or improvement of the highway. All claims for damages,injury or foss on account of failure to close this option � t tpti are hereby expressly waived. . 1-J, E: GEF-RE_ aIGNING THIS OP T fON 6E SUR.E ALL OBLIGATIONS.INCLUDING'1 HOSE YOU EXPECT S ATE s '?'e TO PERFORM, ARE SET OUT IN THIS OPTION AND THAT YOU FULLY UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE TERMS OF ;yG" THIS OPTION. Eot^Ate of W. )Del Ball gDer-eamgpqr �. W MIS —day day of June � ,.��q_ •'`? a q. •. v �, � b �:f4 Sia lyi^ � �a � ,1$l�. f .. $�i•r+ �c7,4ti :i ,.6••s .� /.�> .A'„ .. `:' _ ,.p , _.Pis@. - s};•«ro.to r,:$..SNS MCKIBIT A 14 a :. 4•'3r J �� w. X21*- ��ti •T ° �`: `ey Approval Project A` `f `� 2c N. Tigard Interchange-S. Tigard Interchange . ig8aay: • Pacific �„� ,�ugtaway A' parcel of land lying in Lots 23 through 28, Block 12, WEST PORTLAND '- HEIGHTS, Washington County, Oregon; the said parcel being that portion of said lots 'lying Southeasterly of a line parallel with and 40 feet Northwesterly of the center line of relocated- S.W. Dartmouth Street, which center line is describaii as follows: Beginning at Engineer's center line Station "B" 45+94.72, said station being '112.85 feet North and 775.52 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 361• Township l South, Range 1 West, W.M. ; thence:South ':60® 47' 39°' West 305.84 feet to Engineer's center line Station "B" 42+88.88. Bearings are based upon the Oregon Co-ordinate System, North Zane. i. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 12,763 _;` ' gg :square feet, more'. or less. t •P jmc/ _ t` NOTE: Access Completely Restricted (to Parcel) . No access- restrictions to remainder lands of Grantor included in this grant, except j �.., •E along the boundary line common to the above-described tract and remainder lands. =,.. d , is r� The plat of the subject lands hereby described in this option, hereto attached, marked Exhibit "V and by this ref eranca T=de a part hereof, �rS Aft •�� , 6 .^: "' `��'�r+m5'`.�`.;a @.:'•w�� }�ti.� is 4Ly;—.�°b. u ` ,t ��•. s ,�A �4.�,� �' l S�'r r 1'+ -r�' r♦ 'rel A '� 4 2 'Y 15, r ++� �~ y�q\ C .• f C !�'� "rte +• �ry..� bVN hJ• 1 L i �'�Mo.' ACCESS CONTROL y �1 IAeo )- it is Lumlerstootl aiul atFeed that any instrument or cwweyance which nsav be rertuired to ccimplate the transoction with State shall cimlairs:..rwavisKxts a €udratantially as follows, to♦ail: r' A. (Rottric• Also for the above stated consideration. there is hereby conveyed to "tion) Grantee all existing, future, or potential common law or statutory abutiar's J i� eawments of access between the (parcels) (hripwmy)herein dauribed-and all of > Grantors' remaining property. Idelote one) a qA'• ♦ mser• eservmg, for;service ofGrantors' remaining property, access rights to and a♦vatiort) from the;abutting:highway right of way, at each of the following piers and ♦♦ for the fallowing widths and purposes only: ` wf6tt,c \ .Har.Evyds Sid.d 'To ea Cow nemrve°.aw-..Top surfmc r2 w d By ..� '. \\ +Ae e \ \ _ - r ... \`%\ rqr \\ \ \ 'When 'Ctrantors to construct, a Standard Road Approach Permit must be issued by the'Qistrict Engineer before construction is commenced. ysy C. (Cron- Reserving, fb� farm purposes only and for the service of Grantors' r ing for remaining property,`,p right to establish, naintain and use a crossing of a width 'g Facm \\ x,� Pur- of feet at a point opposite Highway Engineer's Station , so tong a posms) as any portion of the Vid remaining properly on both sides of the highway and served by such erossih q is hold by a single ownership. The construction of a frontage road 6r roads shad not defeat this right of crossing. y W. (Sus- If, after written notice to♦♦desist, Grantors, or any person hoWiN under ,• paruiatl them, ritall us® any of said right€ of access or }arm sassing for any purpose •=` `, of not stated for that particular plato, or shall use said access or farm crossing in Acoess) a width greater then above stated,%o� shalt permit or suffer any person to do so. sass's right of accsss cw\ rm erosmng shalt automaticafly be suspended and Granue rill tiwtaupon htrvm the right♦to cava troch plug of acca= or fpm , M� crocalna for all purposes. The tugmrta"ssrrt WWI terminate when satisfactory .- asawance haat been.furnid,%d Grmisia that\�&ha place of &== or farm crossing 4' Neill be utd only for thepwpom and Nn tha w§dth hirrokuAsmae stated. � a Oftntee s right to stem such piece of or fWW. Cfouun Owl bo kd rt* centiPuefng as to e=h sutcooding. f� a psa of width inert s¢aaerd. arts a OrMMM ilhiso tithes co"I Lvt a fe , a I"eaift aim odea t h od,. Ow any PoIpt". Lim kmvuaw �a�" _ •��laist+ff Pu' �� tii '3 srs. "'Sis� E, 6♦r� y.r�•:r �> ®ma«sae.®aHsMOM r `' .s•.r'"` ✓ �. }` .. , {�'°t '�'•0..*`''� "' �� ° �^mss � ,rte"� �•�r ``�i mPe •" i '� .a t.>�d Y, �, �.'-'z, '¢� •t Z � '� ,�ti a 4.1 �• r 00 Awe- fz dx.. r 49t 4 .G `� ®b a 75000 17 Z in b~ NSt i3 , 1�• �� A t � T jt h• r � a,•r c � � 2 J 'Q i •�,tr � � to ZS g. W' S l� � s t 1 !t 34 Laer f IBIT "Xfo /`� F'i y J nr.s a;i 00 q 4 1 9A/•1° v , t s7 ! Xl s Es e V A 1'• � as� "IS ._a �� a '�'" d. v �,° t � 6 ! � 1 1 v.'f }exp# x• " -w5 I'A �•�y!' Ea 3+ +. i T. s '. z'��.•'!aa"�' �` n�ie t ,��F.`�sa c 8``7 t ..z. � '� < �..�. � •F• <� �°a°./fes f� •� rr.�1�df�' ,�. ., � ,mA } � 4(�{. •�� t0. � � ��' � APR 22 . t�°t � �e�R' &t4� � ��'` 4� � ' �+.� '� .mss.• +�,?� f'h �-,- • �E,.l 3�' ;t z2y 'YS l • p•�ys��.+v 1=. t hhff :ACQUISITION` 5U9�1ARY STATEMENT ._ Land and Inipravement Damages _ , Other :r TOTAL JUST COMPENSATION $ 59,000 _2 *LAND ACQUIRED 12,763 S. F. in Fee mt Acres, S. F. (Permanent) (Temporary) K�s Easement **IMPROVEMENTS IN ACQUISITION AREA: `=4 1 . House 2. Garage -. 3. Yard Improvements4. ' :ya.� 5. :� 74. — e ----------------------------------------- —may-- -- v NOTICE TO VACATE: The State will not require you t� . rii the property of ss i red' earlier than 90 days `ol3Dw4 ' ihis latter or withi 0 days ft r ' - g ;* $ past (less dant os4 1 whichever.19.•i titer. Yc will a 9i tt� .; r specific-dato yac�te the Bs1 . t� a a X. { .« de \1 p y1Y18{.�.• ... 1 .t ". <u d1Dd'�^'rt SP'a'@a'°'•RAe�aa.A..f@?aPs h•nemOM r, 7gm —' r- ..sr�.. -r r®os.w�w�4.dld2.e w �• s R SFS ` i i�Y,w� �. ye.gir"h f rt® g @'. $. a�,Ti'•3 �- \ AST w `�$a t � �-l♦` r'.'ts�:M �t •+rR�.. M��, q�{• . ty , z y�q.. a ,,q . y "' y $~ Y + ' 1,t�� 1 .jr KP��h'(�.it�y v.a .t�� ^&'.9.r`l�i•� 4 • iAA L/\ a L DEPARTMENT OF WSTKM HIGHWAY 1.ECAIL a i 03 TrznSPM=fl0n WWiM Salem.fir:97310 :- Tele: (503) 37&A259 �- June 29 , 1982 l Mr . Fred Anderson Attorney at Law P. 0. Dox 23006 Tigard , Oregon 97223 � RE: Haines Street Interchange DJD, Inc. and G. L. Hall Washington County Circuit Court Case #42-399 042-402 Dear Fred: WY s.�• ` Zreally don't understand what your concern is about these cases in as much as 'alley are all completed and the final judgment is entered.' I am sending you for your information a copy of the right-of-way :yap that was used in the acquisition of the properties and that is still the right-of-way that has been acquired by everybody involved and is the right-'of-gray that will be used by the Highway Division to construct the project. If this is any different than the right-of-gray reap that you feel an agreement was made on, please let we know. Very truly yours, ollis ' asistant Attorney General and Attorney-In-Charge JL°S:ss '. Enclosure ccs: cc: Jg 8. Boyd �"`+� •.< ° 4 •f�' r f,rR r °1•+:.°°'s'K3'e rr'1 ' �3+'f y,.<"� v�,.F..F� A, it CITY OF TEGARD, OREGON z COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY P AGENDA OF: January 16, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: DATE SUBMITTED: January 12, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Ordinance formally repealing Titles 16, 17 and REQUESTED BY: Aires z o of Planninv r and Development I 18 of the TMC CITY ADMINISTRATOR: DEPARTtiIENT HEAD OK: INFORMATION SUMMARY i Attached is an ordinance formally repealing Titles 16, 17 and 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code. This is a housekeeping ordinance intended to give the codifiers direction for the next codification of the Tigard Municipal Code. . s t. k ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED S9L!a6¢�aet,9l9C�®Maamx�rt at��anYTat�4ta��'+1a9;&csaCae��ffiar�mmsscearc�as.+�ss -.,._ — SUGGESTED ACTION Adopt ordinance as proposed. soff lam- ' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA 'OF: January 16, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: DATE SUBMITTED: January 9, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: 1 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: RECORD RETENTION REVISION,ORDINANCE REQUESTED BY: DEPUTY CITY RECORDER s DEPARTMENT HEAD OAC: /l" CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY Due to budget restrictions and service levels being cut from service level III _ to service level II,' the City is.no longer in a position to annually purge the files using laws which are more restrictivethan state law. For this reason, staff has recommended adopting the state law for record retention periods for ; 1 the City's public records. The state law is less'restrictive thereby allowing , « the annual purging of records to be accomplished in a more efficient and effective manner. 1: t. t> F ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED we;,-------------- --------�c5 SUGGESTED ACTION - kf' Council adopt the attached ordinance to authorize staff to implement the State of Oregon's record retention rules and policies. k t ` CITY OF TIGARD, `OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM AGENDA OF: JANUARY 16, 1984 4 b lb ` DATE SUB.4LTTE�: December 5 1983 PREVIOUS ACTION: Norte ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Limited Time Parking Zone Ordinance for REQUESTED BY: Director of Public Works S.W. Center Street DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: :o CITY ADMINISTRATOR: sgs:ars=sasssassassssc agmcsscs,ssracsscatasracasscscaaz:sassmssaacxssa=cccrae asae�c��ssssmz asc ac INFORMATION SUMMARY The attached request for ereating 'aiac3c-F, L 1].!..,•ohGr�c�k Fsarzewas received by staff in November (copy of letter dated 11-15-83 attached) . Subsequent investigation of the desirability of limited parking has been c confirmed by periodic staffobservation of vehicles being left parked in front of the concerned'businesses for extended periods of time. Of concern to staff is the fart that only minimal "long term" public parking is available in that area, while quite a bit of private parking lot space does exist nearby. m caeca-------cs..@vacs.. ......... ...... Qewe....%ss+sssa=szasac c=seaca--------------- ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1) Create a "long term" (6-8 hr.) public parking area by purchasing or renting a portion of hte private parking lot adjacent to 88th Place, then enacting the attached Ordinance. 2) Take no action on the request. ----e-a=s®gg-=ag- ..,.ssa..,,gess=..s..=....:.=asss..3 ----a=u==z��------- SUGGESTED ACTION Pass the ordi.nace, which will amend Chapter. 10.28, of the Tigard Municipal Cade by adding to subsection '2' of Section 10.28.090, to limit parking on aportion of S.W. Center Street, .. _. 9 { 9 ' November 15, 1983 Mr. Bob Thompson City of Tigard 12755: 5. W. Ash Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Thompson: We are requesting a two-hour parking limit on Center Street. This area comprises the section in front of the Tigard Plaza stores Sleep n Den .#207,; Plaza Frameworks #104, and Mascotte Home Security Products #102. We have outlined in red that section on the ;enclosed map and also are -requesting: a "No Parking, designation on the side- walk area as outlined is blue. Thank you for your consideration in this matter . Very truly yours, TIGARD PLAZA By- Raymond J. Kittleson R3K/pnk ` ' Enclosure c/o fit.2,Sox 474-K La Canter,Wn.98629 �,��, 4: i '� N EXHIBIT "Pt7 „, G9 , t '�- 2.07 / A LOT i \� 0 7 VALUE VILLAGE X Y LJ' - •_i, CIO !; 1 � SAFEWAY S a�,_ �; Tlaatzc �7oP�ltic ��az� THOMAS TON ENGINEERING and SURVEYING ee FAcl !c HieHwm 4, a eca7o Q2�0 � �a�R.@� �1 w -GS 1 � T ' FHI4HWAY air ,��, � a � 6f� i , CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: t� AGENDA OF: January' 16, DATE SUBMITTED: January 11, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appoint Representaaives from Council ate_, REQUESTED BY: Sta££ for Recycling .Act. ,�._ _ CITY ADMINISTRATOR: DEPARTMENT HEA OK: INFORMATION SUMMARY The Department of Environmental Quality has asked for one representative from City staff and one representative from the ;City Council to attend a meet- i.ng on January 26 from 9 A.M. to noon to discuss the new Recycling Act.- The om 294`. meeting is at Portland State university, Smith Memorial Center Ro The 1983 Recycling Act requires local government to make available to every citizen the opportunity to recycle. . This act will necessitate changes in our franchize agreements. This effort will probably require attendance from staff. at additional meetings. Frank Currie will be the representative NEE sxes�xscaa��=e=as=�a==ss�===azsffiL:==ffiffiaSL:�==�______.-- ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED �x31'SCIkCSC3!]2=S=Sffi?.BCSiCL.�:=3E5SC=ffi"",.SCL:`Jt�StSSL: SUGGESTED ACTION a representative for attendance from the Staff recommends" Council designate Council. 1/9/84 'Bob, Elaine Glendening with the Department of Environmental Quality called. On January 26, 1984, 9:00 A.M. to 12:00 Noon there is a meeting on the new recycling legislation at Portland State University, Smith Memorial Center, Room 294. Elaine would like the names of two people from the City to invite to this meeting - one staff/one elected official . I told her I would 'call 'her back with the information (229-5060). Patti e k F i 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY i i h` 1 1i 83 AGENDA ITEM = -- -- AGENDA OF: PREVIOUS ACTION: Ord. No. 83-32 DATE SUBMITTED. 12/19,83 a ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Ordinance Determining Authorizing and Directing Sewer Impr. F , readinq Assessments REQUESTED BY: 'Director of Public Works -Final LID Cost & Sp � (RE: S.W. 100th Ave. San. Sewer LID #41) CITY ADMINISTRATOR: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: INFORMATION SUMMARY k 1) All construction work is finished, the final project costs are known (a copy f thereof is attached hereto for Council 's reference. 2) The final assessments have been computed and a copy thereof i s attached to the Of the "preliminary" assessmesnt roll ;is also the enclosed ordinance; a copy x attached hereto 'for Council reference, tracts being assessed for the sanitary sewer line were notified of the 3) The F Btime, date and place and of the amount(s) proposed to Remonstrance Hearing be assessed against each tract. . P SSS=x CACSS=S S, ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED -- SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends passage of the ordinance levying the assessments, upon conclusion of the Remonstrance Hearing. r0 h� Engineering. Inc. 13A0 S.W. Bertha 7219 C� � Portland,Oregon 37219 C®B'9��.,llting engineer . 46 A293 786.10/410.14 January 16, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council city of Tigard 12755,:S. W. Ash Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dartmouth Street Alignment At the December 19, 1983 meeting of the Council, I presented a preliminary alignment for the Dartmouth Street extension from S. W. 68th Avenue at Dartmouth Street to Pacific Highway at 78th Street. The alignment required the acquisition of the house owned and occupied by Louise Stewart. Mrs. 'Stewart advised the Council ;that she 'raid not want to move` from her home' and ' asked that the proposed street be realigned ; to avoid her property. The Council requested that I develop a revised alignment plan that would avoid the Stewart property. PLAN B ADVANTAGES . The attached alignment plan, designated PLAN B, shows the Dartmouth Street extension located along the south line of Mrs. Stewart' s property (shown as the "Hedgepeth" property) . The primary advantage of this alignment over the original alignment is that it does not require the relocation of the Stewarts. Another advantage is that it does not require that the proposed L.I.D. bear the cost of acquiring the Hedgepeth-Stewart property and relocating the Stewarts. PLAN B DISADVANTAGES The primary disadvantages of Plan B is that the street will not follo=w the property line between the Martin and Williams properties and will leave small parcels of the Martin property on the north side of the Dartmouth Street extension. The remaining parcels will be uneconomical for Martin to develop and will limit access of the Williams property to the street extension. We will therefore recommend that in acquiring the required right-of-way for - the a street, the City also acquire Martin's land north of the street and trade that land to Williams in exchange for street right-of-way that must be acquired across other parcels owned by Williams. Martin's property north of the Plan B street alignment contains a : house that Will have to be acquired by tete L.I.D. The Plan A alignment also requires the acquisition of the same house. other disadvantages of the Plan B alignment over the Plan A � alignment are not significant. A break in street alignment will be � necessary west of 72nd Avenue, but it can be accommodated by a �. E, j'. rg gat Enginearing, Ina. January 16, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Tigard Page 2 gradual curve. With Plan B an existing drainageway ,will be along the :south right-of-way of the street, east of +72nd Avenue. A storm drain will probably have to be 'constructed to replace" the ditch. This could add as much as $30,000 to the cost of the project, but the advantage of avoiding this ditch does justify moving the street north onto the Hedgepeth-Stewart property. By moving the Dartmouth Extension to the south, , as in Plan B, the intersection with 72nd Avenue is at a lower _elevationand may create' a sight distance problem over a slight knoll to the north on 72nd Avenue. If, in final design, it is determined that this problem does exist, it can be mitigated by raising the intersection elevation on 72nd Avenue and/or reconstructing and lowering the pavement on 72nd Avenue north of the proposed intersection. MEETING WITH PROPERTY OWNERS on January 4, 1984, we met with property owners along the proposed == Dartmouth Street extension as well as other interested parties' and discussed the two alignment plans. The general concensus of: the meeting was that Plan B is preferable to the original alignment Plan A. Although the discussion covered many aspects of the project, those comments that were relevant to the ;alignment of the 'street are as follows: 1. Mrs. Stewart reiterated her desire to continue living in her home and expressed a preferance for Plan B over Plan A. She added that the farther the street is from her property, the better she will like it. 2. John Alexander, owner of the Burger Boy restaurant on Pacific Highway, said that he was opposed to selling any land to the City for street right-of-way and did not want to be part of the L.I.D. He said that the street should connect to Pacific Highway at some other point where it did not affect his property. 3 Larry ,Porter, representing Homer Williams, asked that the street be moved to the north so that Homer Williams would have at least 40 feet of frontage on the street about 400 feet west of 72nd Avenue. 3n order to accommodate Mr. Porter's request without realigning the street it was agreed that a 40 foot wide portion of the street right-o£-way would be extended to the W; . 9�,,,C r,A-rtipeY4_V e This is shown on Plan B. WrIght Engineering, Ino. January 16, 1984 f Honorable Mayor ./ and City Council f Page 3 RECOMMENDATION { In my judgement the disadvantages of Plan B over Plan A are minor and can be mitigated with 'relative ease, and none are so personally significant ,or costly as the relocation of the Stewarts® I therefore recommend that consideration of the Dartmouth' Street. extension L.I.D. proceed based upon the street alignment shown in Plan B. is Sincerely, t` 0-4 Robert A. Wright RA6a/lhd f P 3 yy a- �.-, Afnaa rifflnLLth IC 1 19 AP • .......... rlfail►liii;rt(:+1+IfPlilipsee f(r iri srt�irt r(IJtjr morn iijjili i(T�(T iN{tot I'r�rro Iji i(r IIf {I F(1 1(1 Irl Irl Jri I Irl lJill If I Irl r;ltrr Irl lrl lil fif fir sif — NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO TIE QUALITY OF TK ORIGINAL DRAWING. _sz -ez cz sz sz oz ez zz Iz oz sr e1 a si sr vt e1 zi ri or s e � 9 s � s iil�nnllul�lalllw�wahlif�inlnls�mi -- Mm 'r An""A"i'd H ' I iw y .. G> e'2 '.v .. r a'Il C°" y--� T"-..aSs -. #�� - -�. 'Sc - sa+.^'-- - - •S^aa----- ---r--�I,�,—- --.. • .. tt•� �� s..� a ASI = . n ,�� .; 1 l R#* - �� •'`'- �. _ e o t "._ ♦iaC.---� b�� -ert •. � -� �+ �� •�`V` ri�--,�.& '�`✓�f--* :ter. 'r '!'a:. e �'Jt�.!R I 1 -r•,;, �,f ,' e—.. ►.�. rte.§ TZ SCAT. "� X5'1! �" ..; �� %�. •+, �':: F c _C�.+ �- �. -..IW � �•,,,.� �n 'S.9 AC. 'l� i +_` 4 .F•te- $� " -*y->.R'. i 4 y.• s� I wean —gJA� '9 AC . •w 44 : 1 Y lo I rte- j a - / x .._ 1 fes' '. •� 9%'k ¢? maA�f. .. I i�.,.. � -�-•� .. .ern �. � � ,,isr� ^ '- ` ��. t gyp � l 41 ' '•` 's'rJ.sT -� IP°p 1 a• tti�F:i.$ ^ ' .4. - • � In,'n I�IIIII�r9111P1 11'11111 PII�IU ginlppl 1 III llPll III IVIp11lI I I PIq I'Vlq 1111�grlgll 111 1 lila 11'1 Pl ipl!Iq liggi I�plilgqu� _ ..- - 2 3 4 5 6 ] B 9 O 1 12 40 .m n'a.,�1... •LI�Idn66�d�•eh�d��.Iz�d��9lznlnsluubinl nnwd nA. u InOml 1nlw1hu11nnhu111nb1uln11hu11nn6m6nJm!6nlimdnnlnuLnJnn6w6wluWuuLwluulwluWuWwlluWuu6w11wluuLnlLwiunlnlJlud11u61n1 MARCH 7 J990 Afna Dar rnotit.h 1 Le . 11 A �1rta�►�i1l11ltd°16r=p6''t?91pi��p0r+�{�apijall�li9jlia�,7�'`j T��7TtJ��+lyj�p►�aijjai�rpl�lp..Rpe i}i rya t�,t"Ipt ap€ pa api ip! p! ipT J1i fil !11 716 tp("!1 6 i 1 ! ! 1 ! ! 1 t ! 0 f11 �,, y iI NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED t •� �J ¢'i 7 8 0 p p2 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL - 8E Ez 82 LZ sz SZ bz in zz 12 01 g ® _ t .9-.__.s---- _._8 .-z 6lirnula!l�anlun4uNNl6iBunt�a�_. ' - -_.- 9 0 d ... - I a —t r -•_-- — ;Y !;Or, Y• g \ 9: it R r \ yc`cN_ :a r 1 - f.,V/ A SCALE V-100' cel E -} ` '. '�,',N �h w p.. mw_ __J I __ „F -� `t ,- • .shy 4/ �" Ulm : •=s kL RANDALL -� �•+-.. }. � � rte.. .9 AC: Cq : �+ s-4- fat .. 47, !aa a +SC x 'rrr ✓It, �. g _ '... ._'R._ - - i a a. •��"t.. r - / �LLlAMS . c '� – ... 7 AGS` w • R f } r _ v } r 1 �'.�'►�'.,_,. _ _:. .. ,.. :.. .,...F- � - - - - - ��i- -mss .c : i♦ t .. , is a Ec 71 MARTIN .LOCK 6.0 AC_. ' r S x' f � �� it .; '� a _ Ji ��'d' �:�-! � .y" •.✓,• � �r r PLA ^ A�®ills®a POSSM LD J va----- DA R Y w - ..¢qa '. F OWNERS PROPOS STR RIGHT-OF-WAY _- a � a.• - e� ��'-' I •'< •:;.'•-". ,• - '• ;, .w:,. 'a.,; STREET AVEMENT M _ f tl •K r l-LA. /rig-ht engineering PWG 766-t r2- -12-29-89 - �Ir Ir111111Ir IIIrlIlgrlrlllllll111111111111111I111111,1.111111 1 III 111 11111111 r'I II 111I 1 1111111,Ir Ir III1j11 a 111 1 1 17 1 11 11 1 1 PI I I11,III1p1r11I y11IIIIr 11 Ir 1. 1.11Ig1 Irl Ir PI11'I1111 NOTE: IF TAI S MICR0F111ED I 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 II 12 DRANIW IS LESS CLEAR TIAN iN IS NOTICE,IT IS DUE TO TE WALITY OF THE ORIGINAL owwlNG. OE 62 92 12 92 92 b2 E2 ZZ IZ OIIZ61 91 11 91 9J�1t-�I EI ZI IIIf _01�1 6 9 1 9 S b EI��1� "'11"IIIIII9NlunluUl6Rlunhnllunluulu6hl11IuuLIIlIL11(11llLI !PIIIIIIIIII1llUfWIIIIIIIIIJ�IUIIIlUII1pIIUIIIflllI11W11111n11111111111IIIIlIII�1IWIIIlIW1IP1WIW611I111111rI1f11I1111nIn1111111II1I11111IIl:nlncl 1IIIINWWllUI1111fW1IWlfllll' MARCH 7 J990 { s ri htn inee ing� Ino. 1340 S.W. Bertha Blvd. _ Portland,Oregon 97219 conrsuiting en+rgineer a 503/246-4293 786.10/410.15 January 16, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Tigard 12755 S. W Ash' Tigard, Oregon '97223 Dartmouth Street L.I.D. General Assessment Plan We have reviewed the ownership and parcelization characteristics of _all- properties- along the route of the proposed Dartmouth Street L.I.D. , and basad upon our analysis of the benefits that will accrue to properties as a result of the proposed street - improvements we have developed a general ,plasn for defining the limits of the L.I.D. and dividing the costs of the L.I.D. The general assessment plan has the following features: j 1 A. Property between S.W. 68th and 69th Avenues will be excluded from the L.I.D. The right-of-way between these two streets is currently owned by the Oregon State Highway Division and is not available for access to the proposed extension by properties between S.W. 68th and 69th. It is possible that the City will be able to acquire control of this land from the Highway Division, but even in this event it is preferable that the City continue the policy of no access to the proposed street within this section. G B. Properties on existing streets and future streets designated by P the City master plan shall not be subjected to double assessment for street improvements. Assessment areas for the , Dartmouth Extension shall not extend beyond a dividing line midway between the Dartmouth Extension and any existing or proposed street. Streets that are judged to be subject to this condition *are as follows: 1. S.W. 69th Avenin 2. S.W. 72nd Avenue 3. A future street that will extend south along the west line of the Martin property 4. A future street that will enter the Williams property from the Drive-in theater property to the northwest 5. Pacific Highway S.W. 70th Avenue has only a 30-foot right-of-way and is not R.A. Wright Engineerings Inc® January 16, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Tigard Page 2 proposed for future improvement. Land along this existing street is therefore not proposed for exclusion from assessment. C. Land that is subject °to assessment shall be divided into three zones controlled by distance from the right-of-way line of the proposed streetimprovement. Zone A will include all land that is from 0 to 150 feet from the proposed right-of-way line•" Zone -B will be all land from 150 feet to 300 'feet and Zone C will be all land between 300' and 450 feet` from the proposed right-of-way. Land beyond 450 feet from the right-of-way will not be assessed: Assessment rates for land within each of the zones shall be ` stepped such that Zone A is assessed at three times the rate of Zone C, and Zone B is assessed at two times the rate of Zone C. An example might include an assessment rate of $1.50 per square foot for "land in Zone As $1.00/sf for land in Zone B and $0.50/sf for land in Zonae C. This assessment plan is intended to recognize the diminished benefit to ;properties distant from the street improvement and at the same time to recognize that street frontage is not the sole measure of benefit. We recommend that you consider the assessment district boundaries and assessment plan proposed above and advise us of, any revisions you may desire. If you concur with the assessment plan that we ' have described we will continue with the engineers report on the proposed L.I.D. Sincerely, )o w Robert A. Wright RAW f lhd _ �ffm- 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard,Oregon 97223 { January_16, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Tigard 12755 S.W. Ash Tigard,Oregon 97223 Re: Dartmouth L.I.D. Dear Mr. Mayor and Councilors: ;i I have reviewed Mr. Wright's preliminary road alignments for the Dartmouth L.I.D., and have concluded that there are a number of concerns which need to :be addressed before further work is done on this project. Intersection at Pacific Highway. As of January 13, 1954, there is no agreement with Alexander for the acquisition of additional right-of-xray necessary in completing the intersection at Pacific Highway at Dartmouth. It is my positionthat:this agreement be reached before further work is done on the L.I.D, and that this agreement provide _a iteona right-of-way sufficient for a five lane intersection. I have submitted to the State Highway 'Department a preliminary draft plan for this intersection. The pian includes right-of-way from Alexander of approximately 2,355 square feet, 1,000 square feet of which is sidewalk, and 1,306 square feet from Probsfield. In 1978. my Father and I worked on a development project for this area which included a major sports facility. During the planning stages we spent a great deal of, time and money trying to finalize the Iocation of this intersection, and acquire right-of-way to meet City Code standards. We obtained an easement agreement for 1,306 square feet from the Chalet Restaurant (now Probsfield), thus meeting City Code minimum standards. Unfortunately, the Mthly negotiations involved in obtaining the easement killed our project. Our position is to get the said intersection settled before further work is done on the Dartmouth L.I.D.. We have no intention of being accused once more of conspiring with the city staff to construct a self-serving intersection. (see enclosed letter from Marine Lumber Co.) Financial Concerns. Property owners are beginning to realize that the Dartmouth L.I.D. is a lar e ro'ect with a possible cost of approximately 1.5 million dollars. Regardless'of what the final alignment is, the Martins will have one of the largest assessments,. and we are concerned. If we had development plans to pay assessment costs there would be fewer reasons for concern. We are faced with the competiticn of approximately 150 acres with access to the f. newly improved 68th Avenue (which they did not have to pay for) and some 90 acres with access to Dartmouth, Under these conditions we plan on having to carry the cost of our a ssnnentfor a number of years.. January 16,;1984 Dartmouth L.I.D. Page°2 We feel that committing to long term bonding during the present financial climate will prove to be a 'very poor financing decision.' Independent predictions coriclude that financing is improving as the U.S. dollar strengthens, and in the next two years they expect interest rates to probably drop an additional 4%, with the term of bonds increasing. Relating this to the Dartmouth L.I.D., the total interest costs' for this project may be 'cut approximately $60,000 per year, and the term could increase 5 to 10 years. The property owners that are pushing the project (which include Randall, Williams, and Pollock), may have large amounts of money to spend on road-improvements because of their_immediate development plans. It seems only fairto the Martins` that: if these property owners are in so much of a hurry to construct the road, let them bare a higher portion of the road costs. We feel its better business sense to.strivetowards settling every of the L.I.D., such as alignment, right-of-way, grades, assessments, and intersection u design before initiating the L.I.D. process. After settling the aspects of the L.I.D., a committment to financing and construction can be made when the financial atmosphere is much more favorable,;and all property owners have more finalized ° development plans. One can no longer depend on high:`Inflation to ease financial' burdens, or rescue property owners and developers'from poor business'investments. Alignment Problems. Mr. Wright has tried to accommodate each property owner's concerns in the alignment for the Dartmouth L.I.D., but in doing so the road has strayed from the route that best serves all properties and solves major problems of the area. In accommodating my concerns of a potential high assessment, and the taking of both the Stewart's and Dietzman's houses, Mr. Wright has at the recommendation of the Council, moved the alignment further south. This alignment change cuts directly through the Dietzman's property and is then routed northwest to Williams. This nem alignment proposal prompted me to contact the Dietzmans to determine if they would give a partial release to us (Martin, contract purchaser), for such an alignment. They have informed us that they would not give such a release. My Father's position is that he will not pre-payoff the purchase contract for a road alignment he didn't want, and if the final alignment cuts through the Dietzman's, the City would have to condemn the right-of-way. I feet it is my responsibility to reintroduce (before more work is done by Mr. Wright) an alignment that has already been discussed, but was discarded because of its high assessment potential to the Martins. This 2nd alignment option will only work if the L.I.D assessment district is increased from 23 to 85 acres with t provisions for postponed assessments. The 2nd alignment option will only be i acceptable to the Martins if their assessti—ent as vat Ric of two ares of rig t-off E i i January 16, 1984 Dartmouth L.I.D. Page 3. The 2nd alignment option would be routed 'approximately 150 feet furthersouth than the alignment which misses 'the Stewart's`and -Dietzman's houses. The alignment bisects the Dietzman's south property line routing it directly west to the Christen's east property line ;to form a T-intersection. The advantages of this alignment far outweighs Mr. Wright's northerly alignment for the following reasonst (1) The 2nd alignment option ,provides an extra 150 foot buffer for the Clinton Street residential area. 4 (2) Dartmouth is now 200 feet away from both the Stewart's and Campbell's' houses. (3) Dartmouth now intersects'72nd Avenue at its lowest and most level point,'cutting the construction cost significantly_by avoiding the expense of raising I267d, which is necessary in Mer. Wright's northerly alignment. (4) Major drainage problems that originate further east (Mrs. Ball's drainage concerns), would be solved less expensively when coordinated with road construction since the drainage follows the Dartmouth right-o#-way along its entire west alignment. Mr. Wright's northerly alignment`would. not address drainage problems west of 72nd Avenue. (5) The T-intersection design at the Christen's east property line could cut approximately`30% off the engineering and construction costs for than section of the rows compared to the costs of Mr. Wright's 500 foot radius turn. The T-intersection design would also provide better, traffic flow for the future' Westerly Loop Road connection which is routed directly south. (6) [fir. Wright's northerly alignment excludes any major assessments to-the Christen property. The 2nd alignment option provides 700 feet of frontage on Dartmouth justifying more participation through a Higher , assessment. Please consider the preceding concerns when evaluating the Dartmouth I.I.D. alignment and assessment methods. I would have presented this information.to you earlier if I would have known about the new development with the Dietzrnan property, please accept my apology for late documentation. Sincerely, GORDON S. MARTIN, JP.. Enclosure r7 f k ` mak . a y • y"�a f • �� r •�� ti :. s k • At. �t .,►;. ♦:�. a .R i u t r Y. & 11.1 � i � � i„�x/L.�.: .� -r_ x.. s�. r • z r s ri: � r_ ..;s..-r. ,.;►:: ��.s�7's� ,,r,+ t�.�ah .: =•• �t 3 ♦ 4 � • rk ,; it • ♦♦ •l: ytG 11 y - :r��-9' �t �� aft x "Y �� • i s t Y•a � F:� • ,♦.• s ^'li..'. �r Y r r:'� f { Y ,s i �id: � Y� �.�,.�g`�'. :r.r,e r c� -°- r •a • � � ., F i F.u a. a 3•.' }4 v z di'A'•'�i�'h� f �YDS ! ttzfi",xr.A�..`.pit�rw.t.' .,„^S`�°r�,.:.•.xb�iY ��>.a-4..<ti<aY�'-s �n'=:_rt, �Au#� ys�...�...v.. Mr'atT,JFry�e�-._�,+'€y,3.k,-��."+�'x`�ss=T'"r..-�:<.4.'42d�3�K..�f.-�rt'�t,j,s-§_-q...v Y�3�.�•�+.s.m�y`,.G„,z.,ut=.•-.a ”"r+na,��'-r'�3s'.:;'1€^�N.,,,"-c+rF.�..x •b+$�'-t,^om r�-"g- sa .;�.4-'g+_:.�,hr�a-t`i':`-"en=3,' �i* fr'€h'°.."r-:w;e.^"-�ik„Yr:•,r52.ze?%J..�.+'-. n`l ba�'�`3'.t':,i�'>a'>�aY`^g�`,.c�,�st..i 4-�.r r*"k�``-wf.'�#n':Y,t,g'«-1^w $.�. rs: �aL�t � .n"'^+::c�r-'L' ��wc,..�.� '^ �ae�.��'”�.s ..:sc,*,:;�.�.�t..,rs�?x..a��.a.,F,�v.,��"•,zs.." 'ar�.. .-.. �_ :t '€. �,..er,> r�'r,3:y�-Y�,�x't�`"•4"�>..akt�'�e�.,.��X'��r��rs;�x�•�.,;,'. � 9 � x Mr. .Aldie Howard Page 2 Your numerous, guarded discussions witb Mr. Martin are big bly improper, We, and our neighbors, insist on being included and appraised of what has already taken place and of any future Ilebats", ,correspondence, or meetings, rem the Dartmouth Inter- change. This is fair, open, and honest to all concerned. For everyone's inforinhtion, Mr. Gordon B. Martin—over -four months ago, and unrannouneed In mT office--casuallg introduced himself to the writer as the Washington;Square developer, s interested in our land. He vaguely asked me what our thoughts { were, about a roadway� tbrougb one of our aneig bbor9 s property-- Oregon Trails Motel, ,the Sorg family or Mr. Art Verbaren®s i Chevron station. I 'empbatically stated "then, and I now so stat, we will Sight this collectively as, once again, we are apposed to this self-serving, negatively forced proposition— r without regard to anyone's well being, safety, or livelihood. This is a calculated ice cold dollar profit for Mr. Martin and �. bis "representatives." a In all candor, we have for some time--31* years--been thinking � about a commercial development of Marine Lumber's vacant � ground-m80% of wbicb is properly zoned. The good people involved,. � at this time, are Smatter Hill Ltd. (s Gen Star Company)), Center Line -International 'along witb George Scbenk and Associates. � Mr. Sebenk phoned this PSI., relating to me that Mr. Martin' some x bow found out about our confidential dealings with the above ; concerns, and his son and two representatives--on his behalf®® gent to Center Line's offices just last Monday, 7/16/79, with the threat tbat, and I quote Mr. Schenk, "Marine Lumber CompannY needs to get pari of its property rezoned in order to develop it co ercially..thoy're going to have a touSb time getting E it rezoned unless they agree to put this road tbrough their property". This 'brazen meeting with the very people we hoed to possibly have develop and extensively landscape this 36 ' acres, is so viciously unethical, we are consulting G counsel on probable litigation for invasion of privaby and damaging ban€ai.ness interference. e your "now" final reconuandation, Mr. Howard, to the Oregon, Transportation Department and Metropolitan mirsctor, .for an intersection and ligbt placement, should be prodiCat®d on not € just one or maybe two punitive vested interests, but based on everyonec' opinions Vno are minoerc3.y ooncerened. wee are e IRRIAN12 MR, ti 4 �.q1-11AI M r a =� 51.,"'!, "j7,..,. -� y„`' s`;*I.'' �� • mss.- ,.c,E....s-«a�-�r . .- - MI x MR + .- ♦R [ ke y : ter. s�'4s•� '- s � `r a k� !' iY f'- � ! i f ►' S ;:� 7 � i Y;' :X r.( ti•y, ��a ,fit.`. ! • ,/•. x:#f�. Y • ;! .�-. . _ '' } t,_ �`:+}�s�,rum,,. f'LY..�4y"iA G,/ i #;: • it �..• y.. � " R'ran'*'" '•.`. • ��` w.,� +' 3 `n rte+} � #•. .;. 's�,� �i yyNO gn- sz, t. k rr ra ce u3 �E " ' '• s :$ '- n�.- �s c ay v w tom, � �•..,.,:�,• � �.�, � 's"kF"� n�? ��' �# e� �. �f3 _��;_«-,� C .,.ifi �:.--,ar..r�s!x_.'�r., 1*�.,..h�V'.`€� �-...�"��''la z;✓.�- � ..°� � ;�. �'T."S.K�»;,,, ..�. z�,$,�da� 5.x•..�rxr fs'x.eU ,�a'..ix �,H$�a. r �,y,��.:.�,a,: + . �"'i � °°�.- B �� :. 4 ((,/. tw^4 t L !� ------------------- 1 - , LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT POLICY SND PROCEDURE REPORT e Iil--% L.J' RY 16, 11984 DRAFT. FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY s- t TABLE OF CONTENTS 3' �3 Executive Summary Introduction 0. General Policy Intent � 1. Initiation k 2. Feasibility 3. Formation 4. Improvement S. Assessment 6. Finance and Closure Appendix , E is t 6 Miami MOM ° 4 IBM If LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 5 Table 2 6 Table 3 20 4.r IN f t E _ f 1 e _ 4 LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT POLICY AND PROCEDURE REPORT �K The city should efficiently and effectively process proposed and established LID projects ;by adopting standardized procedures and guidelines, keeping in mind the needs and interests of current and future users of the ,service system. f t i 1" INTRODUCTION In the past the City of Tigard has allowed Local Improvement Districts (LID'S) to form for the multiple purposes of (1) constructing localized capital improvement projects to the city's standards, (2) providing to the owners of the benefited property a method for financing the costs through special assessments, and (3) controlling the construction so the city is better able to operate and maintain the system. The mandated requirements and process guidelines currently used by the city for the entire process are listed below: S o ORS 223.005-223.020: Condemnationfor City Improvements; Special Procedure o ORS 223.105: Municipal Condemnation Proceedings F , o ORS 223.205-223.295: Financing Improvements in Cities (Bancroft Bonding Act) o ORS 223.387-223.401: Assessments for Local Improvements o ORS 223.405-223.485: Reassessment o ORS 223.505-223.650: Methods of Enforcing Liens and Collecting 4 .Assessments Improvements; $ebonding o ORS 223.705: Financing of City P Reinstatement; Type of Bonds Accepted in Payment of City Liens; Assessment of Public Property o ORS 287: Borrowing and Bonds of Local Government z o ORS 288.520: Public Body Issuing Bonds;' Interest; Discount; Terms of Redemption; Maximum Interest Rate for State Bonds } o THC Chapter 13: Local improvements o Local Contract Review Board Rules Some of these sections of legislation are basic minimum requirements. The state statutes provide for a wide range of differences across pities, and in mazy cases the application of policies may differ across LID'S within a city. This is partially due to the many variables which may or may not be present in any proposed project, and partly due to vague policies which allow flexibility in the process. The city is now in a position where some policies can and should become more specific. Problems in the areas of project design, project control, cash flow, and citizen involvement have led to a study of these policies and procedures. The goal of this effort is to establish effective and efficient LID policies and procedures for the city which will promote desired development and also ensure the protection of the city's future fiscal resources. This report is organized into seven sections or areas of policy, the first covering basic policy issues which are not specific to any one stage of the process. The remaining sections are for the six "stages" of the LID process. Each section is introduced with the intent of the city within the policy area, followed by a brief narrative on the policy area and current practices. Next is a listing of "Findings', including facts and statements on what sometimes .�a13- -lic ese The occur. either in Tigard or in other cities with srr - - "Folicy" statements are then given along with "Key Administrative Actions". "Implementation Strategies", which complete the section, further define the ;policy and give a plan or direction for administering the policy as proposed. LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES -- DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 1 'i a a a6a S F i 0. LID GENERAL POLICY INTENT ' E , k C 5 - i F� a k- 4• 0.0 LID GENEFAL POLICY INTENTthe city should efficiently and s effectively; process proposed •and established LID 'projects by adopting standardized procedures and guidelines, keeping in mindthe "needs and interests of current and future users of the service system. The LID process begins with a need for a local capital improvement. If a project is constructed the process does not end until ten or more years later when all finances are cleared. The efficient administration of the process F depends upon the timely coordination of many activities and people. t Effectiveness includes both the quality and "smoothness" of the process and is r provided by a just and reasonable review of proposed projects, by constructing the improvement according to previously accepted standards, by carefully documenting the process,_ and by: insuring the protection of both the city`s future fiscal resources and future citizens.' Effectiveness is more concerned with minimizing;the long—term costs for operating, maintaining, and replacing the system, and the involvement of the various people. ' The ``successful E completion of a project depends upon the cooperation of the current and future osciers of-,the:benefited property. The city intends to maximize citizen input at the right times in the decision making process, balancing it with the { long-teres needs of the community. 0.1 FINDINGS 0.1.1'- It is to the city's advantage to facilitate' the process by controlling the types and quality of the improvements. z ` 0.1.2 In the past, public use of private facilities has been a problem for the city.` Similar problems exist with private reimbursement contracts for private construction of public facilities. 0.1.3 The timing of both construction and bond sales is critical, F therefore control by minimizing delays is needed in addition to minimizing decision points and requirements. 0.1.4 Decisions are sometimes delayed due to the lackk cif some required informations thereby causing inefficiencies in the use of Council's time and inconveniences by delaying actual k onstruction into the late fall and winter months. ' 0.1.3 Inconsistencies due to delayed decisions or misunderstandings have tended to increase conflicts in a process which needs consensus building. x 0.1.6 Policy indecision at any one point in the process, leads to the development of dual or multiple policy proposals, creating inefficiencies due to increased staff time, increased vulnerability for Council, and confusion for the citizens involved. 0.1.3 It is very important that the city keep the files and documents � tee a n the prrac.s s_ F 1:.73Lii^^lit at G.9lbia 'v e.cg. ,•�••••••••��_. LID POLICY &perPROCEDURES '� DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 2 t { t 0.1.8 The ORS requires at least one public hearing with notices during the normal process and two opportunities to object; the first is I on the formation of the district, and the second is on the spreading of the assessments. 0.1.9 Informal meetings with property owners at various times during the process have been beneficial. 0.2 LID GENERAL POLICY 0.2.1 TETE CITY SHALL ADOPT A SET OF POLICIES WHICH CLEARLY REQUIRE CERTAIN KEY DECISIONS BY COUNCIL AT SPECIFIC POINTS IN THE PROCESS, THEREBY INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY OF TETE PROCESS. 0.2.2 TETE CITY SHALL REQUIRE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS DURING EACH STAGE IN PREPARATION OF THE KEY DECISION, THE MINIMUM BEING THAT MANDATED IN THE;ORS. 0.2.3 THE CITY'S POLICIES SHALL CONSIDER THE LONG TERM INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY, AND DECISIONS CONTRARY TO ADOPTED POLICY SHALL DEPEND UPON COUNCIL CHANGING ADOPTED POLICIES AND STANDARDS. 0.3 KEY ADMINISTRATLI ACTIONS 0.3.1 For each stage of the process a single person will be responsiblefor -coordinating activities and monitoring the process. 0.3.2 If conditions in a specific proposed project or district are unusual, staff shall advise Council of the eircAmmstances, the potential impacts and how these relate to policies and past practices. 0.3.3Except in emergency situations, staff will attempt to increase the common understanding of the process b; disseminating materials and letters, and by attending informal meetings. 0.4 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 0.4.1 The LID process will be outlined as consisting of a series of stages, each of which requires a key decision which dust be made before proceeding, to the next stage. The stages and the key decisions are shown in Table 1. 0.4.2 An outline of the normal process showing the required actions and reports for each stage shall be a guide for monitoring the process of each LID. The major requirements for each stage as proposed in this report are shown in Table 2. This same information in the form of a flow chart is given on each of the remaining divider pages. ly LID POLICY AND PE�OCEiDURES --- DRAFT (l f l 11'84 j z AGE 3 IN 0.4.3 One person will be designated as having lead responsibility for each stage which includes responsibility for 'coordinating the various activities, monitoringthe process, and;preparing status reports. The department which will have the lead responsibility is shown on Table 1. LID POLICY AWB0 PROCEDURES DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 4 44 9A es 41 0 ® r r0 G Oto 93 .O °0 O 3 93 to 43 0 wa 9 to 6% w63 m a4 M to PA cl 93 es 0 94 pa 0 V 41 of 0 ati t+ W ra a wa 0 60� 93 acs s u ut: � a-a as 0 0 g ss '° ,93 es 94 tam -6.4 o � o 4 fo 63 a 04 fg ,.w O r4 O to..a ® —4 to W r4 w u 0 O t8Y W C9 ad S9 6a Pa V 0-4 63 ® •r. 4.0 ta 94 La 1pOle i co 62 .00 m .4 9v4ems4 -44 if r4 .... w'aOt polo Pa -4 t3 tl 03 ad °� C2 0 O O � Age Pa g m w ca P g dD 41 rd O w ,0 fa't9 P. aJ O f3 W to 6® caof HO w i g r4 -P. a V ca P...a 43 O O P 74 94 co : : 09 t CUM. '0 � ® @ 93 10 AJOtj c ® 03 O� to a teaAj as g 6+ t3a.ar .re 0® O rb M o4 d '� Pa g W tD a t to O r-4 R9 S3 or. V. 93 07 g 'a'8 W. 94Aa � O d .re w to to-4 G ad .(.t � O Re 64 W —4 m rd U0 pb._- Pa 23 S4 41 In 44 a8 63 to m Oe 94 a ((D O .rr aJ.�..® d ® 10 .d.9 to 4j ad g `O d M O :tPYi aJ �$ -4 .A G tsf .9A g s a1 &+ . Oa O .dd' Si.rga � _...� r--.to 93,B16.ra;:s ..,.ffi .be .-. —0 tR Pa Ivar ti .iia Es m N q wk+a to 94 ..a.•,a 'r•2 g to a.e 6 cD d3 � O tod 94 r4 Aj as '.+. �'8 � m bo aP`a O� — 9ma S�9 eS as e: e tr -4 0 m in to O �s � r AA a&1� .. O o.f. O O pa ® (D P.d�r! C9 G?• .r .o+�ga9 + �. 2r 10 to O 63 6L as W aa te. a: .(D an 0 tti wa P. to d ® ¢$. as rma = g a O at as a cd O O v as G O �.ra �..a agg e-Y to 4aq es 63 6$ C3 00 m g tr r4 •.d St 0 to +1_$.e tB as iS`(d .0 e® O 0..a at w O-4 g b a' is. 0 a' (a Pa Ab w d e7 :O C to w O ' to P of ad 3 ^�a 0 v Q ¢4 O r4 w g 0 ® gA + S as aD � � m to Be r � a3 93 P a9 .0 Ba W M•ra v 0 to F gp 6+ gg�wa ah 63 d m :3 as � a9 as s! 43 a.as 944.O to 63 .w cA W t BL a, t. and 6S ®® P O a W 90 O .0 r9 63..a ba S3 v O O R9 B) e�E @�r•t G 60 .ra b: o: 'a3 63 A •-W a 63 to co:e'a .Aa-a W ora i CA r. to at.ra db -P«C0 orr �§..CrA'��..a'a wa rS A4 dD.�41 0.16 W Q 63r .eta D8 .rPa -0 ..tea r4.rPt H dd G®e m�e 4Pt..Pa u 69.0 is O O a0 9i1 &'+ 'O W Sm Fa 63 �4 �i s9 c7 t3. ® to g 0 `.� 6'3 P4 ra 0 0 P. w i �E 0 .0 .ba.a. da is taa g e� co P d3 0 a�.! ® sa G m t+ O - ¢� "°�VA " 9 rd P 0 O ra w as a0 t+ .4 .A O id 63 ®f ® g Po is O w A 0 93 93 0 w !>t +rra V'o V LLc gal W 6�a Q aD d W R.e as t8 as RR SJ al R. - .ra a^ ow w an o•n sw sr A aw a,s so ew .••, om oo rw ate. .ro a t, Go A O V P .[D U 67 A Ba � .. or ...s .. - e.. ..s ws w ,,.v.,s.w v •r .r ar ...o a.r ... a {. w E+ Aj Aj ; o �m Re m V4 ca Q 0 03 .to k ® m —4 02I 1-4 LID POLICY ARID PROCEDURES -- DRAk"Ir (1/11/84) PAGE 5 i` {I { E r tl it, Yq4 Com°d N � tl 2 d� tla� .0 W w o CU R.d Q7� R &ed C4�A�aa d 04 c la w O W•p(y. d0 9®0a ¢ @! W tl 4e bad a �� . Nd iLOaA a r.R OdD i9 .etla�7 e2 � ®.. �dwA R... I. a acdsa � rmd+ a+ �.�. ® . tlwtlo dtlw gsaw oa. al d O as &-0 6l /4 d. - .N m P•S ee 63 .d et O a R ® 4f O a w9rm °�tl 7a°��o" a�wm� in�M�� a .� o moo« aIN gc ck on 'A 014 ►. tl13, 93 Idto a qr. n a�a�pe ,s w ®u -24. .;o'a .a 5 s 'j o9.0 w 'In y w as PF•�w—0 a C A al ®• R tl y Y N .Rw u ® 0fl ad O dat ® + CIO Ch�4 40 a ae 0 0 ®. m d� Q ®y b tl.. N 4 A d O d 9 F °C�° C9 614 O C8 BI sl ba G aSA tl4 92 a—te g �� 64 o o .®.d d o •� a ®b d Ra. .ef waaa ea D y a.:wr. d.O ba a•+de _ sad tl o.tl U.�- m s d. - :a• ss a+T: eo t+. Ift a ma a Ru ® a, sa Aqs ® ®ucm mamdy ds-2 10 +-ts rI Pw 0.0 c.w F aa °w R @.od U-011 odem�` @m s a g o eIn 44 ms® r ..� _M O 4L.ii O tl -,4 2 d d .6 d U ¢d d O d 6v- p R tl ® ®.fl A.wd w.�. 9 !V & b. .ad 0,. s © v td. cwsseaWo = - waver � r maw � s w... o A r p•. d q !n 80 ..� -g n-a1 -gdL a H H a R.k O R.s� fr G 41 rW rd a W ft0.N �gOa+ �R d �� Q M��• R.sRy B®. R d am a f! M$°�.7 i+ W.P$t W oa w t N d eR•.a gu 10 k R to d W.l8 rte � M04 �A. O ifD Nal G4 ® „dq d a Qs la �.W R N0 R tl d�ed 6 ® b 4 F R S A do ® Q1 to W O 7> m •sa W d °pa }f 43 A° ((W�� Qar�'!. A R4p c �, •N di G 59 .pp+ 8 p €R SM td .i1 M fieri R 0 RA ear b £� - �txR. $ iafu)N U £D H..... 77.fl r � e+ M MN 04 04 L]£9 POLpCf AND FRCY'£DY14?r^a •,� DRAFT (1,11✓®�l a Q MEN IBM F, I. INITIATION E Citizeos/ Indica.--- &' -�-------------�---_ $ " Property Owners In --- `t Staff '----�---�-_-----_--_-_-_--_.___ Inform x s3 e sci Key Administrative Btaff's ; ------------------- Preliminary Actions Evaluation Key Decision -------------------- Resolution F FEASIBILITY t Documents --------------------------- LID Int. ' � F Ilk- 1.0 INITI.MON POLICY INTENT . the city should have a set of eligibility requl-1 ae ents for prospective projects and guidelines for setting the parameters. The key , decision for the In Stage is a resolution to prepare. irsa: directing staff to prepare the-prelimry Engineer's Report. For efficiency, the--infformation-required in this stage -uust be. sufficient for this_decision and also provide adequate guidance for the next stage. For effectiveness, the process must consider the expectations of the current property owners. The information shared at this point is as 'foundation for the entire process. Currently interest is usually expressed by a petition (a copy is provided in the Appendix). The basic plan is discussed with staff who then advises the property owner(s) of city policies and procedures. Staff then meets informally with the property owners to answer questions on LIDS and on their proposal. once there is general consensus among staff and,property owners to proceed, the petition is presented to Council by staff for a decision of whether or not to further study the proposal. 1.1 _FIMINGS 1.1.1 The ORS allows a wide range ;of improvements, providing the city the authority to decide on eligibility ,requiremento- Section if of OILS 223.387 states "any other local 'improvementfor which an assessment may be made on the property specially benefited". 1.1.2 The succaessful- completion of projects depends upon -physical, economic, andpoliticaal factors. Some proposals are immediately knoim to not be feasible at this point in time. 1.1.3 The petition serves as an indication of general interest to further steady the proposed project, however the language on- the petition may-appear to some as being a greater commitment on the part of the property owner. 1.1.4 sometimes the petition is misinterpreted to mean those signing r will support` the formation of the district, which is difficult to assume before the district is better-defined. 1.1..3 Often the only information a property owner receives is that given by neighbors which may not be accurate. This sets false expectations which may lamer create problems. 1.1.5 The boundaries of the proposed project follow only general guidellneso with variations, often made depending upon citizen Interest and political factors. This sometimes sloes or stops the process, and is .therefore= inefficient. 1.1.7 The IPO or the general citizenry is unaware of the potential r_4�sasarru+. __ LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES DST (1/11/84) PAGES 7 4 .^ S G 1.2 INITIATION POLICY 1.2.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT PROCEED TO THE FEASIBILITY STAGE AND THE PREPARATION OF THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT UNTIL PROPERTY OWNERS ARE ADVISED OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, PROPERTY OWNERS HOLDING MORS TRAN FIFTY PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY ARE INTERESTED ~ IN PROCEEDING o STAFF PREPARES A PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSAL' AND COUNCIL PASSES A RESO:.UTION DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE ;HE PRELIXINARY ENGINEER°S REPOPTT. 1.3 RESP ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS f 1.3.1 A person from Public Worms is designated as Having lead r responsibility. S 1.3.2 The interest petition shall indicate only an interest in possibly forming and LID. - 1.3.3 An LID information meeting shall be held with. stiaff where the interest peti.ti.on can be updated. 1..3.4 After staff meets with the property Owcsere and 'sufficient interest is filed, staff will, prepare a Preliminary Evaluation outlining the general scope of the project and the. interest expressed. Staff then forwards the LID proposal to Council. A � decision not to forward is based upon city standards. 1.3»5 Staff will determine, and ,report to Council in their Preliminary* , Evaluation, whether to forward the petition to.Council;usiag the 5 following guidelines for when it should not be gorroroeds Y (a) improper_design (b) unreasonable operating costs (c) unreasonable maintenance-costs _ t (d) inappropriate boundaries (e) not in the best interests of the city at this time I - F 1.4 IMpLENENTATION STRATEGIES 1.4.1 To improve effectiveness at this stage, _;staff will prepare ge€aeral information materials on LIDS to distribute to _ interested citizens and will meet informally with property � _ owners to discuss this information and its relationship to the proposed project. } 1.4.2 To avoid confusion ©n the intent' and purpose of the petition, it will be revised. The new version will he standardized, to be � used in all proposed projecta. 1.4.3 Rare exten,iver research, and therefore costa, are necessary to make a determivation on the feasibility or eligibiJAty of Gass project. Therefore ,ore specific eligibility guidelines are given inthe next stage, Feasibility. '. PAGE LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES �- DRAFT (1/11/84) U E. 1.4.4 When the proposal is forwarded to Council, staff will sena a ` copy of the proposal to the appropriate NP®. LID FOLICY AND PROCEDURES L'P,AFT (1/11/84) PAGE 9 a { E. ,a 't r# i 2, FEASIBILITY 2.0 FEASIBILITY POLICY INTENT . the city should gather the information necessary in order to, determine the priority of the proposed project and to define the city's tentative description of the entire project. The key decision for the Feasibility Stage is a resolution of intent to form the district and to set a date for a public hearing. sain, the processing of angor tion ice the primary factor for efficiency. Rfsfectiven1.ess can be �nCreas�ed if staff is sensitive to the interests'of the property ownems, yet not'swayed from the accepted city policies, standards, and practices® Currently the Preliminary Engineer's Report is either prepared inhouse or ata£f _supervi:ses a consultant. Staff presents and defends the report. All engineering costs are currently covered by city-funds`until the_spreading of assessments. The costs for the engineering study are then included in the total cosi of the project. Typically the_engineering, study concentrates on the physical aspects of the proposed project. :Decisions on the eligibility of the project have been: gui.dedAy the general ctice of discouraging proposed projects formed for a. deve3.cper of raw or pra practice a land ighest priority is for improvements is established undresidential area where the improvements ar to upgrade to standards for increased capacity or to replace services which are no longer satisfactory. 2.3 Finding 2.1.1 Staff 'requires direction--from Council reaffirming the existing standards. 2.1.2 Slav? ecoucuic times have increased the chances for defaults by individual property owners, creating a possilsle`. zaah flow problem for the city. The risk increases if the future payments rely upon future sales-. of- newly developed land. (see Springfield article in the Appendix) 2.1.3 The potential economic ret urn.. to the community from an IIID requires as certain amount of risk- 2.1.4 More information is needed in the Prelimina=ry Engineer's Report.0 on the financial feasibility.iu terms of the city's finances.' The city seeds to allow for future debt capacity while remaining fiscally secure. 2.1.5 The costs for this atage are paid from the city's opeiratin; funds until the spreading of assessments. This Impacts only the city,s cr 6hk flow, however if the district never fomes, it is a financial loss in the operating'fund. 2.1.6 The Preliminary Engineer's Reports, done by consultants, do not use the same format, creaating problems and added expense later LID POLICY AND pRCCEDU"v DRAFT (1111/84) PACE 10 F r 2 E staff the consultants are 2.1„7 When consultants are used by a indirectly accountable to Council through intervention by staff; staff is therefore more vulnerable. 2.1.$ The limit on city indebtedness set by the state in ORS 223.295(l) is "A city may incur indebtedness in the form; of bonds and other obligations by. virtue of ;the Bancroft Bonding Act to an which, exclusive of indebtedness for municipal utilities but inclusive of all ota`ae® indebtedness Of the city, shall not exceed .09 (9%) of the latest true cash Valuation of the city. Regardless of the above limitation, as03t may®issue bonds under said Act in an amount not:exceeding 4 latest true cash Valuation of the city. 2.2 FEASIBILITY.POLICY 2.2.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT PROCEED TO THE FORKATION; STAGE AND THE PUBLIC a '+Tda'UNTIL. ACCEpTING ,THE E'RELI4'tl�Yc�RY ENGINEER'S REPORT .AND HEAPASSING THE .RESOLUTION OF urmIrg TO FORK Tg- ::DISTRICT AND y SETTING THE DATDi FO& THE PUBLICMUMG® 2.2.2 ' ELIGIBILITY QUY NTS FOR LIDS SMALL DEPEND UPON THE USE of c THE LAND: i (a) IF THE PROPOSED DISTRICT IS IN A DEVELOPED AREA WITH iEss T FULL` TO sTA?UDARD SYSTEMS,- ELIGIBLE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ESL BE FOR THE PURPOSE OF UPGRADING THE SERVICE(S) TO TUE PROPERTY OR Sd OUNDING ASA AND sUALt. INCLUDE:s THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF sE�TEs'TI3EET MOTORTSTORK DRAINS _5YI? AT. , AND/OR` ANY 0" VEHICLE PARKING FACILl-, (2) T INSTALLATION OF STREET LIGHTS; s (3) THE UNDERGROUNDING, Oar OVEg��..UTYIeYTYES; € ( ) THE MAINTENANCE OF NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS. t (b) IF THE PROPOSED DIST RIC-IS IN AN UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL i AND/OR INDUSTRIAL A$EA, ELIGIBLE PROJECTS SHALL BE; (1) FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETING ELEMENTS OF AN ,ADOPTEA„� f CITY PLAN, OR SHALL INCLUDE(2) To ENCOURAGE ECONOI41C DEVELOPMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION TO COMPLETE THE SEWERS, STREETa a SIDEWALKS, AND STORM DRAINS. OT _ (3) R T IPR€DVE'fENTs 2�AYBE C(DNSIDERED ONLY IF THEY SUePLE NT THE LID PROJECT. x. (c) IF THE PROPOSED- DISTRICT IS IN Ali UNDEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL AREA ELIGIBLE PROJECTS SHALL INCLUDE TETE FOLLOWING: t (1) THE CONSTRUCTION OF SEEM; (2) THE CONSTRUCTION OF STREETS, SIDEWALKS, S oR�1 DR�#Y1dS$ � f OTHER IMPROVEMENTS kL4,y BE CONSIDERED ONLY IF THEY f SUPPLEMENT THE LID PROJECT. s: PAGE 11 LID POLICY MID PROCEDURES DRAFT (1111/$4) �. 2.2.3 PROJECTS ARE PRIORITIZED ACCORDING TO TUE ELIGIBILITY CATEGORIES AND FEASIBILITY INFORMATION. FIRST PRIORITY IS PROJECTS IN DEVELOPED AREAS (AS DESCRIBED IN 2.2.2(x)). SECOND PRIORITY IS PROJECTS IN UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL/OR INDUSTRIAL AREAS ' (AS DESCRIBED IN 2.2.2(b)). THIRD PRIORITY IS PROJECTS IN p UNDEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL AREAS. 2.2.4 THE CITY SIAL BLINAGE IT'S ANNUAL INDEBTEDNESS So THAT IF TRE INIDEBTEDNESS IN ANY YEAR GOES OVER THE LIMIT,' THE CITY WILL ADJUST THE FOLLOWING-ITAR. THE FORMULAS ARE: AVAILABLE ADDITIONAL DEBT - STATE DEBT LIMITATION EXISTING DEBT (debt includes principal and interest) ; AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR 102 x AVAILABLE ADDITIONAL DEBT PROJECT CONSTRUCTION � 2 COSTS PER YEAR 2.2.5 PROPERTY' OMERS MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY A FEE AT TI'BEGINNING OF THE ,FEASIBILITY STAGE IF THE PROPOSED IMPROIbENt IS IN AN UNDEVELOPED AREA. 2.2.6 LID PROJECTS ARE TO BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ADOPTED CITY STANDARDS. 2.3 KEY ADHINISTRA,TIVE ACTIONS 2.3.1 Public Works has lead responsibility during this stage. 2.3.2 Stuff decides who is to prepare the Prelimina Engineer's; report given staff workloads and expertise required. 2.3.3 The Preliminary Engineer's report shall include the following financial data: (aa) The city's calculated limit for baancroft indebtedness; (b) Casa available; (c) Type of interim financing to be used; (d) Special concerns for the timing of the project for^6 financing; (e) The assessment histories of the current property owners for outstanding assessments; (f) City participation or other funding. 2.3.4 The: Preliminary Engineer's report shall -include the following: � (aa) The benefits to the city the project serves, i.co completing a system, economic development, or health and safety; . M The percentage of owners who are proponents; t (c) The boundaries, the general design of the project, and the facilities approximate location; `ug essxv.iQlsLud totaaa. 4C49£7t; (e) The list of property owners, addressees, property � descriptions (tax lot) and proposed assessments. � I LIFE POLICY AND PROCEDURES DRAFT (1/11/84) k PAGE 12 ' !r f , 2.3.5 Staff shall project the priority* ranking. of ;a proposed project according to Council's guidelines. 2.3.6 If consultants prepare the report, they will, also present the 'report. 2.3s7 staff-.-may "batch'..-the ;proposals at this stage so it Is more efficient and easier to prioritize the :;projects for the available funds. 2.4 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 2.4.1 Standardizethe requirements for the Preliminary Engineer's Report. 2.4.2 Keep ;current the list of consultants eligible to do the Preliminary Engineer's Report. 2.4.3 The eity'a "`fiscal condition shall routinely be' provided to Council. 2.4.4 Determine the basic service :cost for the Preliminary Engineer's Report. 2.4.5 At the beginning of the stage, staff shall send a letter to property owners within the district and to the NrO(s) which are involved stating the status of the project, the next steps in the process and a tentative timeline. Eti ' LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 13 r� 4 3. FORMATION t 3.0 LOTION POLICY INTENT . the city should provide to citizens the opportunity to question and snake statements in a -public meeting with regards to the proposed project and whether it meets established policies and procedures. The key decision for the -Formation Stage is an ordinance forming the district. This ,follows .a public hearing on the project as proposed. ---The state has clear reIquirements assuring the citizens the opportunity to object which is reflected in the city's current code and practices. Currently the city ;publishes the notice at least twice in the local newspaper and sends the notice: to all property owners. Property owners have at least ten days from the first publication of the notice to file a remonstrance to the formation of the 'district. If'ownersof sixty-six and two-thirde percent or more in area of the property within the assessment district make and file with the city; clerk a written,objection or remonstrance against the proposed Improvement, such objections or remonstrances shall be a bar to any further :proceeding in the making of such improvement for a period =sof six �aonthas, unless the `owners of one-half or more of the property,,,.,.affected shall subsequently petition therefor (THC 13.04.050). 3.1 FINDINGS 3.1.1 ORS 223.389 states, "Provision shall be made for at least 10 days' notice to owners of property within the proposed district in which the local improvement is contemplated, which notice may ` be made by posting, by newspaper publication or by mail, or ,by any combination of such methods. Such notice shall specify the time and place where the council will -hear and. consider objections or remonstrances to the proposed iBmprov meat by any parties aggrieved thereby." 3.1.2 Sometimes the city does not have the correct names and addresees of the current owners because the listing in the county taxation _ and assessment department is only periodically u¢'dated. 3.1.3 More accurate names and addresses can he obtained through title searches, which are more time consuming and costly ($50 or more ,` per property or tax lot). 3.1.4 Currently, if the public hearing is continued to a later sweeting, new notices are seat to the property owners, an extra cost of time and' money. 3.1.5 Sometimes during the process of the ' 'public hearing the recommendations change, thereby changing some of the remonstrances. The. remonstrances however are still counted iu determining whether or not to proceed. 3.1..6 Sometimes certain weather conditions or political issues require rapid processing and notice require waste precious time. ,f LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 14 s r 3,1,7 There is no policy on future resubmittal of a proposal 'once rejected by Council for reasons other than filed remonstrances. 3.2 FORMATION POLICY 3.2.1 Tag CITY SHALL. NOT PROCEED TO THE IMPROVEMENT STAGE AND THE p pARe1T,ON OF THE FINAL PLANS AND SPECS UNTIL. COUNCIL RECEIVES OBJECTIONS saAr2LQ R m' "ATRNCES TO THE FORMATION OF THE DISTRICT PASSES Ali ORDIi O FORA THE DISTRICT. AND3.2.2 PROPERTY OWNERS SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 10 DAYS NOTICE PRIOR TO THE , GS TO FILE WRITTEN OBJECTIONS OR �iONSTR.ANCES WITH PUBLICRECORDER- RE ONST CgiS CAN LATER BE REVERSED ONLY By TUB CITYRINGS THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THE PUBLIC MEETING. 3.a.3 IF 0NSTRMCES ARE RECEIVED TOTALING MORE THAN TWO THIRDS OF THE AREA IN THE DISTRICT COUNCIL MAy DECIDE tdOT TO PROCEED. 3.2 �i IF ALL.PARTIES AGREE IN WRITING TO WAIVE THEIR RE ONS ME THE THE COUNCIL M&Y WAIVE THE; TIMELINE AND PSE oRDIHANCE FORMING THE DISTRICT- r 3.2.S THE CITY SHALL PUBLISH IIS? A LOCAL Po`EG3SPAPER OF GENERAL. HEARING TO RECEIVECIRCULATION THE NOTICE FOR THE PUBLIC OBjECTIOPaS AND EELr'ONST_-PmCES AT LEAST 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE OF TUE PUBLIC MEETING SHALL t BE GLEN. IF THE HEARING IS CONTINUED, ANOTHER NOTICE SHALL BE i PUBLISHED- IF 3.2.6 IF COUNCIL DECIDES NOT TO FORM THE DISTRICT, COUNQIL WILL STATE ' WHETHER PROPERTY OWNERS CAN RESUBMIT THE PROPOSAL EITHER. BY GAINING :TORE SUPPORT OR BY MEETING CERTAIN OTHER CONDITIONS. 3.3 KEY ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS 3.3.1 Public Works has lead responsibility during this stage- 3.3.2 Staff will follow the state requirements for thepublic hearing• 3.3.3 At the public hearing staff will be prepared to respond to known problems either by recommending revisions to the Preliminary Engineer's Report or by reporting the relevant policiesi and past decisions. 3.4 IMLERENTATION STRATEGIES 3.4.1 Staff ,will prepare the notice and be ready to publish when the resolution of intent is passed. 3.4.2 Staff will prepare a form letter to be used if property owners wanto waive their remonstrance, t eroby savintime in the process. 3.4.3 Staff will review the language on the non-remonstrance agreement so it will Wnform to the City's intent. PAGE 15 LID POLICY D PROCEDURES -� DRAFT (1/11/84) ., IRM 4. IMPROVEMENT 4.0 IMPROVEMENT POLICY INTENT the city should proceed with the r construction and financing of the•improvements, controlling the project so that it is completed to the specifications as close to the estimated cost as possible. The key decision for the Improvement Stage is a resolution accepting the final mart. This stage also includes an intermediate decision for Council acting Zs the Local Contract Review =Board and that decision is a resolution__awaEdin the contract. E_ The efficiency of both the construction and financing processes can be F enhanced if the project can take advantage of favorable' weather and market conditions. Both the efficiency and effectiveness can be facilitated at this 4 stage of the process by managing the construction, which includes coordinating i . with the finance departmen -t. This is done by staff clearly stating ;. expectations and requirements to the 'contractor, and by staff providing frequent status reports to Council. If changes occur, previous documentations a .-are needed in order to recognize the change and handle it effectivelym Currently, after Council passes the ordinance forming the district, staff r prepares the Final Plans and Specs' which then go out to -'hid. If any of the construction is not to be done by staff, the lowest qualifying=bid 3s awarded the contrast. Staff manages the construction by frequent, inspections and through the use of monetary penalties when necessary. Council receives periodic status reports dependent upon the level of activity and the presence of potential problems. 4' . 4.1 FINDINGS L 4.1.1 The purchasing system addresses how a list,;®f eligible contractors is made and used, how the contractor is selected and the terms and conditions for performance and payment. 4.1.2 Staff has no guidelines on the issuance and approval of change orders. p: 4.1.3 Waiting for approval of change orders, not having clear communication and documentation of communications, and not having obtained all the rights-of-way, all waste time and cause` inefficiencies. s 4,1.4 Interim financing must be secured, and the type of financing depends upon many factors. 1 4.1.3 If the project is funded by pre-assessments, the 'people forget 4 or fail to understand that they may have to start payments � before the construction is completed and they have a finished product. _ k y> 4.1.6 Unless there is a preassessment, the owners forget their Options for financing, with the next stage becoming more ai a x 4.1.7 Final payment to the contractor depends- upon the staff tentatively acceptiag the improvements. i LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 16 F_ 4.1.8 At the end of the construction, -a €inal report on what has occurred and of the information needed for the next stage needs to be produced. 4.2 IMPROVEMENT POLICY 4.2.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT PROCEED_ TO THE ASSESSFIENT STAGE UNTIL PASSING A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE FINAL REPORT ON THE PROJECT. 4.2.2 COUNCIL SHALL PROCEED ACCORDING TO THE POLICIES AND PBOCEDURE ES OF THE LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW B®ARD IF ALL OR ANY PART OF THE IMPROVEMENT IS TO BE DONE BY PRIVATE CONTRACTORS. 4.3 KEY ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS- 4.3.1 Public Works will have lead responsibility during this stage. 4.3.2 Staff shall 'prepare the final plans and specs. 4.3.3 The designated project manager has the authority to approve change orders consistent with the Local Contract Review Board rules and adopted city purchasing and contracting procedures. 4.3,4 The designated project manager has the authority to tentatively accept the improvements, thereby releasing the final payment to the contractor. . 4.3.5 Staff shall prepare the final report at the conclusion ' of the construction which will include sections on the improvement, finance, and legal summaries. 4.4 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 4.4.1 The city will record with the county "lien intents" on the properties, increasing the likelihood that titl& companies will be aware of a possible lien if owners of property change. 4.4.2 Once the contractor is. selected and the timetable is agreed. -" upon, staff will send a letter to property owners advising them' of these things and of who to contact if they observe any problems. If the contractor uses subcontractors, these names will also be given. 4.4.3 In order to keep property owners informed of the special assessments and to allow them sufficient time to decide how they will pay 'their portion, "staff will send a letter stating their estimated assessment, options available to make payment, and the anticipated timetables An installment application will be included which will have to be completed at the Assessment Stage with the-bancroft application If the, property owner decides to .pix. D� SE10 z.mt.aiuAcudma 4.4.4 A set of form letters will be developed and used to aid in managing the project, making it easier to document the improvement for future reference. LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES DRAFT (1/11/84' PAGE 17 4.4.5 To facilitate the transfer of responsibility for the next stage the Final Report will include the following information: (a) names and mailing addresses of owners (b) property descriptions (tax ;map and lot numbers), the assessed values and size of the property (c) area of benefited property (d) the assessment method and the computed assessments LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES _. DRAFT (1/11184) PAGE 18 k 4 1 �Et � t S. ASSESSMENT F WAr Ina z 5.0 ASSESSMENT POLICY INTENT a the city spreads the assessments across the propertiesaccording to the benefit the property' derives from the improvement. The key decision for the Assessment Stage is the ordinance spreading the assessments. This stage is similar to the formation stage is that the property ;owners have an opportunity to submit objections about this part of the process. Currently the city mails to the property owners a notice of their estimated assessment and the date by which time objections shall be filed, Which are to "state the grounds thereof" ;(THC 13.04.080). City Council is to consider: objections and staff's estimates and may "adopt, correct, modify or revise the proposed assessments". Total costs include` the "cost of right-of-way' and expenses of condemning the land,' all costs of engineering, superintendence, advertising and legal expenses and also any and all other necessary and proper expenses" (THC 13.04.080). The assessments are entered into the city's lien ,docket, thereupon becoming a lien capon the property assessed. The assessment process as outlined in this section may occur after formation and before or during the initial period of the improvement if the city decides to have an "initial assessment" (pre-assessment). The amount to be spread is based upon the engineer's estimate of total cost. If this is the ease the process at this time is either to do<a final assessment, adjusting to the actual final casts, or to issue refunds. The different types of assessments allowed by state statutes and how each fits into the structure in this report ' ,. are shown on Table 3. Efficiency can be greatly enhanced by standardizing the process, letters and forms which will also improve effectiveness by streatilining the documentation. The quality of the city's LID process is also dependent upon Council making decisions which are consistent with the current or revised policy. Special interests can sway decisions and set precedents that may not be beneficial in future decisions with other LIDs. 5.1 FINDINGS 5.1.1 ORS 223.389, "notice of such proposed assessment shall be mailed or personally delivered to the owner of each lot proposed to be assessed, which notice shall state the amounts of assessment proposed on that property and shall fix as date by which time objections shall be filed with the recorder. Any such objection shall state the grounds thereof. The council shall consider such objections and may adopt, correct, modify or revise the proposed assessments and shall determine the amount of assessment to be charged against each lot within the district, according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing thereto from the improvement, and shall by ordinance spread the assessments." 5.1.2 Property sold during this time is not noted in the County's tax lot records until later, making the identification of the current owner difficult during the next stage. Also, the new owner often is unaware they must soon pay the special assessments. LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES -- DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 19 i" lo � p - to to o • n "` d � t .4 ra d ae 4j w 10r8 ..a ..+ b+ f . � aa � •gym sevessmm 0 93 43 AJ 42 • cd CA .4� bw « w r C7 M r1 t0i 1 41 Aj y„j 43 m W o O t® u to to g3 A 0 m � 0 Aa S o C � 0-1 g .ba W � g0 we ® R m O Xa 4310 U m-4 Aj •0 0 ® i .tea D O 41 .i �.�0 O 44 m 9 Aj 4j •D G a* m ya .a -g 0 0 ' o 04a 0 to q-9 Aj 41 ;.D 41 ;3-4 V I S 0 r gni �w m ,0 Ws3 w m s es ® 6a ® N 43 ta r4 cs 41 V3 f64 od 93 0.0 m � m cc d �.• as g° ss - cA �a u In Id 0 CA W 43 ca va m Go ro Iin cqM C4 t to W pa v3 ca 03 0 94 V2 PAGE 20 LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES -- DRAFT 41/11/84) 5.1.3 The problem of unknown mailing addresses of owners is addressed in ORS 223.391, "Whenever a-notice' is required to be sent to the ownerof a-lot ...if the address of the owner or of the owner's agent is unknown to the recorder, he shall mail the notice addressed to the owner or his agent at the city where such property is located. Any mistake, error, omission or failure with respect to such mailing shall not be jurisdictional or invalidate the assessment proceedings . 5.1.4 "If the initial assessment (pre—assessment) has been made on the basis of estimated cost, and upon the completion of the work the cost is found to be greater than the estimated cost, the :council may make a deficit assessment for the additional cost" according to the standards` stated above, with a notice and opportunity to object. (ORS 223.395) 5.1.5 "If assessments have been made on the basis of estimated cost, and upon > completion the cost is found to be .less than the estimated cost, provision shall be made for refund-o€ the excess or overplus" (OARS 223.395). 5.1.6 If at the end of the stage it is found that actual_ costs are less -than the amount collected, provision must be made for the - excess. 5.1.3 The costs of determining who should receive-a refund and how much may exceed the refund. E - 5.1.5 in the past there has been no clear distinction <between objections and remonstrances. 5.2 ASSESSMENT POLICY 5.2.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT PROCEED TO THE FINANCE AND CLOSURE STAGE UNTIL PASSING AN ORDINANCE SPREADING THE ASSESSMENTS. 5.2.2 TETE CITY SMALL PROVIDE NOTICE TO PROPERTY 01WHERS OF THEIR PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS AND THAT COUNCIL WILL BE CONSIDERING WRITEN OBJECTIONS AT A SPECIFIED MEETING PRIOR TO SPREADING THE'. ASSESSMENTS EL ORDINANCE ACCORDING TO =2 SPECIFICATIONS IN THE ORS. 5.3, KEY ADMINIST4ATIVE ACTIONS 5.3.1 The Finance Department has lead-responsibility for this stage. 5.3.2 Staff will follow mandated requirements for the notices. 5.4 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES J. Send a copy of the A81.3 a.eailment contract Earl in the prevtous stage which cleanly outlines the terms and conditions of payment 1, by installments. LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES DRAFT (1111184) PAGE 21 E 5.4.2 At the time Council considers objections to the proposed assessments staff will review for Council the. proposed assessmentsg and the rationale and policies supporting the proposals. 5.4.3 The problem of keeping a ;current and accurate address list is minimized if the city makes more frequent personal and mail contacts. ,; 5.4.4 Staff will have a record of actual personnel costs for each L.I.D. which will be used in calculating the total cost. a e 4 f - e. LID POLICY A14D PROCEDURES --- DRAFT (1/11/84) FANS 22 i ' { t i 1 Imam i b n FINANCE ANIS CLOSURE l 0=- am. liffsmm >j 1 y a �ti 6.0 FINANCE AND CLOSURE POLICY INTENT . . the city should arrange financing, should enforce; payments so the project does not impact other operating funds, and maintain the improvements according to agreements and city policy. The Finance and Closure Stage is not completed until all assessments are paid and the bonds are retired. It is primarily a stage of staff activity unless more extreme enforcement procedures' 'become necessary.. The key decision for :the Finance and Closure Stage is actually an intermediate decision and does not mark the 'end to the stage and the project. The "key decision" is the resolution accepting bids for bonds and to pay-off warrants, thereby recovering ,the city's costs for long-term -financing along with the total amount property owners agree to Bancroft. The final decision for this stage is an action closing accounts and releasing liens on properties as they are paid. The LID is not actually ended until all accounts are closed and the bond is retired. Currently, once assessments are spread, staff receives cash or applications to Bancroft `within some specified time period. Staff then proceeds with bond counsel through the bond selling process according to Local Contract Review Board rules. Once this initial activity is completed, there are three major activities, first with collections, 'second' with changes 'which occur to the property ownership, and third with maintaining the new system. Bills for those bancroftiug are sent twice a year. Billing costs are estimated and .become' part of the total amount bancrofted. No penalties are charged. To date the city has not foreclosed on ;property. If ,owners of property' sell_any part of the property which has a special assessment, the city in the past has had a "due-on-sale" policy. 6.1 FINDINGS 6.1.1 Whenever there has been a special assessment placed upon a property for a local improvement, if the owner`is assessed in the sum of $25 or more, at any time within 10 days after notice of such assessment is first published, may file a written application to pay part or all of the assessment in installments. (ORS 223.210) A property owner cannot apply to pay in installments if the amount remaining unpaid upon such assessment together with the unpaid balance of any previous assessment for improvements against the same property equals or f exceeds double the assessed valuation of the property as shown by the last county tax roll. (ORS 223.220) 6.1.2 On the computation of installments, "with interest at such rate as the governing body of the city may provide on all unpaid assessments, together with an amount sufficient to pay a s proportionate part of the cost of administering the bond ' assessment program and issuing the bonds including, but not limited to, legal, printing and consultant's fees, such amount to be determined by the governing body" (ORS 223.21). LID POLICY ,AND PROCEDURES -_ DRAFT (1./11/84) PAGE 23 6.1.3 The maximum effective rate of interest which general obligation bonds shall bear ;is 13 percent per annum, unless the agency if; unable to sell the bonds after a reasonable marketing 'effort, then the interest may be increased but shall not exceed 14 percent per annum (ORS288.520(2)) 6.1.4 "The actual rates of interest paid are determined by a combination of the general market levels, the security behind a given issue, the pattern of the maturity of the dent, and the credit standing of the 'city. The city;:can 'do something about each of these, except the general interest level prevailing in the market." (from Hoak and Hillhouse, Concepts in Finance, cited in the Guide for Local Government in Oregon) 6.1.5 Technically interest begins to accrue when the assessment is spread. This happens if the, property owner pays after ;30 days or if the owner 'bancrofts, 'however if a property owner pays within 30 days, no' interest'is charged. 6.1.6 "Whenever all or part of any assessment for improvement was or Is declared void or set aside for any reason or its enforcement refused by any court by reason of jurisdictional or >other` defects in procedure, whether directly or by virtue of any court decision or when the council is in doubt as to the validity of all or part of any such assessment by reason of such defects in procedure, the council may by ordinance make a new assessment or reassessment..." (ORS 223.410) 6.1.7 The time involved in gathering bancroft applications is R sometimes extensive either due to efforts to •.Xiud correct addresses, or because people do not respect the time limits for filing, often creating problems in preparing documents for the bond sale. 6.1.8 The total amount to be bancrofted is the` total of the assessments which have valid bancroft applications filed plus the interest for the bonds, plus administrative costs for the bond sale and costs which are part of all assessments, such as recording and removing liens from the county docket. 6.1.9 Occassionally if the property owner is late completing their bancroft application, Council will accept it, even though•it can not be included in the bond sale, with the condition that payments will equal shat they would have been if part of the bond sale. 6.1.10 In the past the city has decided not to proceed with foreclosure , if the property owner makes any token payment towards their assessment, therefore possibly creating a future deficit in the fund. 6.1-.11 Past practices by the city has created very lazy expectations on . ' the part of property owners to the point where paring the assessment has a very low priority €or some. LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES -- DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 24 6.1.12 Legally, if property is segregated, the assessment can be �4 reapportioned if the Property is not part of a new subdivision. 6.1.13 if the improvement is ' a neva subdivision, the lot cannot be segregated and the assessment cannot be reapportioned. All assessments must be 'paid-in-fullbefore the final plat is approved (ORS 92.095). 6.1.14 If property is segregated, the city'must .be careful to make sure- that the segregation is not to separate out less desirable land which the :owners may have no intention of developing, or of paying the assessment. 6.1.15 The process for the collection of payments is the same for all property owners within any level of collection, i.e. the initial billing is the same for everyone and the reminders are the same. However, costs may differ from year-to-year for personnel and materials. 6.2 FINANCE AND CLOSURE POLICY 6.2.1 THE LID IS NOT "COMPLETED" UNTIL ALL ASSESSMENTS ARE PAID ANIS THE BONDS HAVE MATURED. 6.2.2 THE CITY SHALL BE REIMBURSED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR COLLECTIONS BY HAVING A' SERVICE CHARGE. THE RATE(s) SHALL BE REVIEWED ANNUALLY. 6.2.3 THE INTEREST TO BE CHARGED TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS 'SHALL BE SET AT THE RATE ALLOWED IN THE ORS IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND TO STATE CLEAR AND ACCURATE EXPECTATIONS. 6.2.4 INTEREST ON THE ASSESSMENT SHP?.L BEGIN TO ACCRUE TEN DAYS AFTER THE PASSING OF THE ORDINANCE SPREADING THE ASSESSMENTS FOR ALL PROPERTY OWNERS, WHETHER BANCROFTING OR PAYING IR CASH. 6.2.5 IF THE CITY DOES NOT RECEIVE A BANCROFT APPLICATION AND AN INSTALLMENT CONTRACT BY THE SPECIFIC DATE, AND THE APPLICANT WANTS TO PAY IN INSTALLMENTS, THE APPLICANT MUST PLEAD THEIR CASE TO COUNCIL. IF APPROVED, PAYMENTS ARE SET AT ACTUAL COSTS TO THE CITY WITH STAFF CALCULATING THE PAYMENT SCHEDULE. 6.2.6 IF A PROPERTY OWNER HAS FAILED TO PAY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON OTHER LIDS OR HAS UNPAID BACs{ TAXES ON THE PROPERTY, THE CITY SHALL LIMIT THE AAiOU14T THEY CAN BANCROFT. 6.2.7 IF THE IMPROVEMENT IS IN THE FIRST PRIORITY (A. DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL ,AREA), THE PROPERTY OWdER CAN BANCROFT 100: A3.1.0WABLE 8a THE ORSn :En TdE i ID 15 Tr THE SECOND PRIORITY CATEGORY (UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL AND/OR INDUSTRIAL) THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN B UICROFT 752 ALLOWABLE BY THE ORS IF THE LID IS IN THE THIRD POSITION (UNDEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL) THE PROPERTY OWNER �. CAN BANCROFT 502 ALLOWABLE BY THE ORS. LID POLICY !SND PROCEDURES -- DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 25 y { 6.2.8 IF THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT (PRE-ASSESSMENT) HAS BEEN MADE ON THE t' BASIS OF ESTIMATED COST, AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE WORK THE 4 ASSESSED COST IS -LESS THAN THE FIFiJ, COST, COUNCIL SHALL MAKE A DEFICIT ASSESSMENT. 6.2.9 SPECIAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CHANGES IN OWNERSHIP SHALL BE PAID FOR AS A SERVICE CHARGE, WITH THE RATE(S) REVIEWED ANNUALLY. a 6.2.10 THE CITY SHALL PLACE ANY APPARENT OVERAGES IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FUND UNTIL THE BONDS ARE MATURE, AT WHICH TIME THE REMAINING AMOUNT IS TRANSFERRED INTO THE GENERAL FUND. 6.2.11 AN OWNER WHO IS PAYING IN INSTALLMENTS CAN SPLIT DIVIDE AND CONTINUE PAYING IN INSTALLMENTS WHEN THERE IS A DIVISION OF OWNERSHIP HAVING THE ASSESSMENT REAPPORTIONED ON THE AFFECTED PROPERTIES PROVIDED IT IS NOT IN A SUBDIVISION. THIS IS DONE BY .t r RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL. 6.2.12 IF A PAYMENT IS DELINQUENT, A PENALTY AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE AMOUNT DUE SHALL BE CHARGED, THE AMOUNT TO RECOVER COSTS. 6.2.13 THE CITY SHALL CHARGE INTEREST AND PENALTY FEES ;IF A 'PAYMENT IS OVERDUE BY 30 DAYS OR MORE, WITH INTEF.EST STARTING THE 30TH DAY, g 6.2.14THE COUNCIL SHALL ;DO A FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS BY RESOLUTION AFTER ALL PENDING PROBLS WITH THE IMPROVEMENT ARE RESOLVED AND THE MAINTENANCE BOND IS RELEASED. %6.3 KEY ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS 6.3.1 The Finance Department has lead responsibility in this stage. 6.3.2 Immediately following the passage of the ordinance spreading the assessments, stat f will publish in the local newspaper the list of property owners and their special assessments and mail the same to each property owner along with a bancroft application. E 6.3.3 Staff shall enter the assessments on the city's lien docket, but t shall also record them in the county so title companies are aware of the assessment if property is sold. i 6.3.4 The terms established for the bonds on the date of sale, the pattern of maturity, etc. are dependent upon the condition of the bond market at the specific time of the sale. Therefore, stuff needs the authority to make immediate decisions in response to the market. � 6.3,5 Interest to be charged on installment contracts for unbonded assessments is to be two percent greater than the interest charted in the most recent band sale or two percent greater than what is charged the other property owners in the same LID, whichever is ,greater. t LID POLICY AND PROCEDURES -- DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 26 " v awl M EMS 6.3.6 Prior to the expiration of the maintenance bond, staff will do a ( final inspection, ; arrange to clear everything pending with the contractor, and when cleared, inform the finance department who in turn, informs the bonding company to release the maintenance bond. 6.4 WLEMENTATIGN STRATEGIES 6.4.1 The costs of issuing the bonds are estimated and added to the total costsfor 'those applying to Bancroft. 6.4.2 Determine service' charges for the successive billings, and review the rate .annually;. 6.4.3 Determine service charges for covering costs to update the county's lien docket and other costs, and; review the rate annually. 6.4.4 Develop and adopt a process for reviewing applications to reapportion.'a baacroft account. LID POLICY ARID PROCEDURES -- DRAFT (1/11/84) PAGE 27 L t s : k t 5 E A P P E N D I X An &loss=, I r t Y S c TO. THE HONORABLI: MAYOk AND CITY COUNCIL` City of Tigard County;of Washington State of Oregon In the Matter of the Improvement ) of lands described as: ) PETITION FOR A_TgD CONSENT TO CREATE A R LOCAL IMPROVEWENT DISTRICT Petitioners hereby request that the hereinbelow described area be improved by creation of an assessment district for the express purpose of (1) That the undersigned is in fact the owner(s) or the contract purchaser(s) of the indicated property(s). (2) That the undersigned represent one-half or more of the affected area as here- inbelow described. (3) That the cost of this improvement to be borne by the benefited properties and in ressp::ct theretorespectfully show: That the area proposed hereby to be improved by creation of an assessment —ii.stricxt comprises' approximately acres, and .is legally described hereinbelow or in the attached sheet marked Exhibit "A°' which by reference herein is made a part hereof) . WHEREFORE, petitioners pray that said lands be improved by creation of an assessment district and that the City Council of the City of Tigard, Oregon, expedite creation of the same as provided by law. i Signature Address Map ;# Book # Tax Lot # Page ## i I ONE I 7 l i` Eugene,OR' Register-Guard (Cir.0.66,030) (Cir,Sat.72,321) (Clr.Sun.72,174) MY 3 M3 jtn a P.C.8 Eat. 1888 "Y cur e -in Ad . gex-s a Bancroft A.sta�f�f ® force-has given the Springfield But the councils,swayed by developer pleas to City Council seyeial dozen pages of good advice on keep a good thing going,;took only half-way pre- how to get the city out of its-Itancroft bond hole-- ventative measures.And the city staff dldn't do a and dei"how.6:.avold;diggingfu ure fiscal pits. gooq job of administering or policing the program. Happily,the,loon:l seems disposed'to accept it. There's nothing half-way about the cure rec- 1louldiihar 09st caunrais had only,::stoned:to ommended by Pe task force. And'ac ted nio strongly tDia:: s1nliEai� ad�Iee . Plow° Baeicroft-loans would be limited to a since 1980sYf.:tfy had, the pity's Bancroft,hole. .manageable`total sof;1 itiifllion a•year,'with'subdi- protiabiy yac�vid;i�ot be neariy so deep. visions at the bottom of the loan priority list No Bancroft bonds were originally conceived as a new subdivision would get Bancroft loans�untll the way for'a eowners td.use city credit to pay for oily seflis ttt least•75 percent of*the 350-plus proper- street,_s dewAl -W*nd sewer•improvements•around ties T wag,stuck Iwith.through BancrofC foreclo their t.dines:`bines spddlow-interest bonds to, fi- §fires: nance; he improvement, and gave the homeown- pjeyelopers would'he required to`put up 25 ers 10 to-20 years to pay:thea:of'f. developers discovered tient Bancrofting percent of their project,costs In advance. But °They'd pe no.longer be able to useoBancroft financing for so was also a 66i :way:to subsidize*many of their eaiuclx gf'thel costs..And staff procedeires would be costs in developing ne*subdevlsloris.-Tb,ey per viiUylimprose& suaded Springfeeld,to 611dw aaa;taltra-liberal,virtu- ally no-lleii"H#;Bnncr�ft:r®olfry.iliat alto.wed:them wo . Sven if ail the policy clianges are adopted,the borrow for more of their costs and lei ti greater city viii!be iiitig time climbing out of Its Bancroft total amount than In-any other-Ore gon elty. hole:'But, with luck; It should be able to. avoid Great deal,white It lasted. But when the.bot- having to levy a special-citywide tax to finance the tom fell out:of the housing Industry,.developers climb.,couldn't sell..A heir lots and couldn't make their The council .seemed In'agreement on the Bancroft payments.luny of thein left.Springfield changes at a worts session'last Monday. All that holding the:ffiianciai bag. remains is a public hearing this Monday and for - AlFthis happened in just three years. During .Hist council adoption. that pdriod,Springfield councils-were warned sev- It might be a good Idea to add to the new eral tunes•--•by city officials and, editorially, by policies a written warning to future councils:When the Springfield !dews and Register-Guard that dealing with the city's credit, listen carefully and ' ttie city was getting in over its bead. • act conservatively. ,f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM JANUARY 12, 1984 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator YYY SUBJECT: Board-& Committee Appointments The Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee held a meeting the evening of January 11, ;1984 and recommend the following appointments to the Boards and Committees listed below.' Budget Committee - 3 year term James G. Smith: Attorney, Morrison & Dunn Economic Development Committee - 2 year `term. i Since this is a newly created committee, four members will be appointed for two year terms and four members i will be appointed for one year terms as stated in Resolution No. 83-103. Mayor Position: Mayor Wilbur Bishop Commercial Banker: Patrick Kennedy, Vice President and Manager, First Interstate Bank of Oregon At Large: Amo De Bernardis, Retired At Larger Mark Padgett, Science Sales Manager, OMSI At Large: No recommendation at this time Commercial Business District Rep.: Tony Orlandini, Manager, Lumberman's Tigard Triangle Rep.: Jim Corliss, General Manager, Landmark Ford North Tigard Rep.: Bruce Clark., Manager, R.A. Gray 72nd Avenue Rep.: Tom Taylor, Electrical Engineer, Ace Electric PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD - 4 year term Michael beim: Outside salesman Steve Schreiner: Director, North Portland Youth Services PLANNING COMMISSION - 4 year term Dave Peterson: Estimator, Cascade Roofing j (pm/1158Aj a CITY OF, A TIGRD, OR r __ COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM' SUMMARY AGENDA ITEt1 h J AGENDA OF: January 16 19 ' PREVIOUS ACTION: DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: TURA P ht R2uort REQUESTED BY: Councilor Ima SS o� f, f- �^ CITY ADMINISTRATOR: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: INFORMATION SUMMARY' Attached is a report on the current debt of the TURA Program. i ii ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION t Council should accept the information, KNOW P MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the City Council FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning and Development,, ' - DATE: January 1,2, 1984 SUBJECT: TURA Debt Report Councilor Ima Scott requested an accounting of the TURA ,debt at the Council meeting of January 9, 1984. Following is the information requested: TURA Balance on Hand 6/30/83 $5,999.46 Income Tax;Increment thru 11-30-83 240. 10 12-31-83 2,380.60 Interest thru '11-30-83 233.39 12-31-83 41 .71 Total $8,895.26 Minus Expenses Program expenses thru <11-30-83 $ 2,026. 18 Payment of loan 15,000.00 $17,026. 18 Remaining Debt $ 8, 130.92 The remaining debt will be wiped out as tax increment funds and interest are paid tothe City during 1984. t 1 a CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA STEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 1/16/84 AGENDA ITEM h: DATE SUBMITTED: 12/15/83 PREVIOUS ACTION: None ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Subdivision Compliance Agreement and Performance REQUESTED BY: Tualatin Development Bond for Copper Creek IV Co. '& City of Tigard 'Engineering>Dept DEPARTMENT BEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY The preliminary plat has' been`approved by the Planning Commission; Copper Creek 'IV being the fourth phase of the Copper Creek project. (Phase I has been completed, Phase I1 is in its final stage except, for completing side- walks and Phase III is still on its 'performance'bond.) We have received the Subdivision Compliance Agreement and Performance Bond and all` fees 'have been paid. Construction plans have been checked and are ready to be issued pending Council acceptance of this agreement and bond. , �xa¢ataaa¢�rsss sx�asssaccesxc=�asyss=csssacs�:ss==sserac=v=====esv=-====c==aes scx=.sv:er ass ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends the City Council accept this agreement and bond. al 0 SUBDIVISION COMPLIANCE AGREEMEN'1 THIS 'AGREEMENT dated the 1st day of December 19 $3 between the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipality of Oregon, hereinafter termed the "City", and TUALATIN DEVELOPMENT a Delaware Corporation hereinafter termed -"Petitioner W I N E S S E T H ': WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for ,approval for filing in Washington County, a subdivision plat known as Copper Creek IV Located in 'Section 14, Townshi 2 South; Ran a- 1 West 67illamette,Meridian, Washington County, Oregon; and WHEREAS, the City has approved and adopted the standard specifications for Y Public Works construction by APWA Oregon; Chapter and the Unified Sewerage 'specifications for the sanitary sewers prepared by professional engineers for subdivision development; and WHEREAS, the public improvements required to be constructed or placed in Petitioner's development are =: incomplete, but Petitioner has nanetheless a requested the City to permit progressive occupancy and use 'of property in the subdivision, and the parties 'desire hereby to protect the public interest generally and; prospective purchasers of lots in said subdivision by legally enforceable assurances that the public improvements will be installed as required and completed within the time hereinafter set forth. 1 a NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing , premises and the covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and its �. sureties, IT IS HEREBY AGREED .AS FOLLOWS: E (1) Petitioner shall proceed with the development, with the intent and purposeto complete all public improvements except sidewalks and street trees x of said subdivision not later than two (2) years from the date of this c agreement, and Petitioner is hereby bound to comply with all subdivision " standards as set forth in said Subdivision Ordinance and the standard Y specification adopted by the City of Tigard, or as may be otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and to use only such material and to follow such designs as may be required to conform thereto. f. (2) To assure compliance with the City's requirements and the provisions hereof, Petitioner tenders herewith to the City a surety bond in form approved by the City, with liability in the amount of $ 206,735.00 a copy whereof hereto attached and by this reference made a part hereof. B (3) In the event that Petitioner shall fail, neglect or refuse to proceed with the work in an orderly and progressive manner to assure completion within i the time limits, upon ten (10) days notice by the City to Petitioner and Petitioner's sureties, and such default and failure to proceed continuing � �__._ .. ..,,,�P.laf ed and , thereafter, .the City may at its option proceed Cv charge the costs thereof against petitioner and Petitioner's sureties and in the 'event;pame be not paid, to bring an 'action on the said bond to recover the t, Petitioner and amount thereof. - In the event such action : be brough s r Petitioner's sureties promise and agree to pay, in addition to the amounts accruing and allowable, such sum as the court shall adjudge( reasonable as attorney's fees and costs incurred by the City, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, f any, or the City may, at its option, bring proceedings to ' enforce against the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's sureties specific d compliance with the subdivision standards and performance of the contract an ordinances of the"`City'of Tigard, and in such event, in like manner, the City shall be entitled to recover such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable as and for the City's attorney's fees and costs, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if any. (4) Petitioner, concurrent with the execution hereof, has deposited with the City an amount estimated to equal rental and maintenance fees with respect to the street lighting facilities within the subdivision, according to Portland General Electric Schedule #91,- Option "n", together with a further sum equal to the estimated cost of providing electrical energy to energize the street lighting facilities for a period of two (2) years from the date of initial energizing of said lights. Said amount being $ 1,054.80 (5) The City agrees to ,make and provide periodic and final inspections which in the City's interest are desirable to assure compliance herewith, in consideration whereof the Petitioner has paid prescribed 'inspections fees.* (6) The City agrees to ,install street identification and traffic signs within the said subdivision, in consideration of ;payment in the amount of $ 75,25 (7) At such time as 311 public improvements except sidewalks and street trees within the subdivision have been 'completed in accordance with the City's requirements, Petitioner shall notify the City of the readiness for inspection and upon certification by the Department of Public Works that the requirements of the City have been met, the Petitioner will submit to the City a good and sufficient raaicatenance bond if not already provided with the performance bond, to provide for form approved by the City, in the sum of $ 41 347,Q0 stent or asising correction of any defective work or maintenance becoming app within one (1) year water tentative acceptance of the public improvements by the City. !Upon receipt of certification by the Department of Public Works, that all requirements have been met, and a One Year Maintenance Bond, the City Council agrees to tentatively accept the public improvements subject to the requirements for correction of deficiencies and maintenance for a period of one year as hereinabove set forth. (8) That in addition to or supplementary of the requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance and the provisions hereof, Petitioner binds itself to conform to the following requirements, scheduling and limitations: *Project Fee $ 5871.08 Sewer Fee -2- (a) Mone of the lots of Petitioner's subdivision as described may be occupied for residential purposes until all ermitoccupancy shall be permit issuPd `prior to under the authority of the City and no occupancy p acceptance of the subdivision and to the time that the sidewalk paralleling the street for each developed lot proposed to be occupied, is installed as a ent; provided that all sidewalks- as required ,by the plans part of the developm and subdivision code shall be --installed throughout said subdivision not later than 3 years from the date of this Subdivision Improvement Contract. (b) All Landscaping trees on that portion of each lot between the public sidewalks and the curb (parking area) as 'required, shall be planted and in place prior to final insPection and issuance of occupancy permit for each such lot in the subdivision. Provided that final inspection and applicant for occupancy permit occurs within any calendar month from October to April of any year, such plantings may be deferred until the next following growingseason. In any;event, all "Landscaping and trees in all areas shall be planted and in place within the entire subdivision' within three (3) years from the date of this subdivision improvement contract. (c) After tentative city acceptance of the ,public improvements, the Petitioner agrees to place a one (1) inch asphaltic concreteClass a C,rovedlay by on all ''roads" within the development; placement scheduling PP the City. ' iance with all terms and provisions specified theretofor (d) Compl said subdivision development by the Council and the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard, Oregon, in regard to variances allowed from the subdivision ordinance, .conditions ,specified by; the zone use classification and, also, on the approved plat(s) and plans(s). (e) Petitioner agrees to provide for correction of any defective the guarantee work and/or maintenance becoming apparent or arising g period as hereinabove set forth. (9) At ouch time as all public improvements have been completed in accordance with the City's requirements, Petitioner shall notify the City of the readiness for final inspection and upon certification by the Department of Public Works that all requirements of the City have e e be n and, mainenanc agrees to accept said improvements for op responsibility, thereinregard, and release the Petitioner's guarantee bond. (10) The parties hereto hereby adopt the form of performance bond, copy whereof is heretoattached and by reference made a part hereof, and Petitioner agrees to cause to have said bond executed and filed with the City concurrently with the execution of this .agreement at or prior to the time this agreement is executed on behalf of the City. (11) The specific requirements of Paragraph 9 hereof shall for all purposes be included as a part of the obligation secured by the aforesaid performance bond and the City shall be entitled to recourse thereto n the the YCI.Ll.ZV64Gr -4ti, vo%znect t6 any req _ event of default on the part of ^� - ' thereof. -3- INWITNESS WHEREOF, Petitioner- acting by 'and through its duly authorized undersigned 'officers ,pursuant to resolution :of its Board of Directors has caused this agreement to be executed, and the City acting pursuant to resolution of its Council adopted at a meeting thereof duly and regularly held on the day of 148 y has caused this agreement to be executed by its Mayor and 'Re"rder. By: By: e r THE CITY OF T'I ARD. OREGON Mayor t By: ` Recarder s IL I i WN I EF! _4 r ' pi,P(;ON s. STA TF OF v y o f ~L~� 15fi before me ippc` ed 0n this T"a't day and orQ�n f ' �. U`►' -- - °�tb. say ti1at he the said u r swo, n �]id Y Q - bei m duly + �2id 1,c.I-.�nnally known :ho, the is the Males, rid she, + i�1Rc c urd °r of the ?. is the ; id _ ori'C-+'. and t-t�A ca d <;. �•d toi s:°j,l cc,r y,,rat ion d t t c, l,e the `f i c , �• . ;hj[ caay N C f r Oregon .y to Cc„T_Ssion -Y fires g , €. SATE Off' OREGON )ss. a i�� County of Washington ) On this l�r day Of December and before ane appeared Robert C• Luton both to me personally Barbara L. Harrison say t at e� t e say Robert C. Luton nown, w o e zng Stu y stioorn, is tBa he President, and he, the said is floe Secretary of Tualatihe n Development Com an _ the within named Corporat.a.on, and tion tand�thatathe�said instrumentwas is the corporate seal of said Corporat o authority of its Adard of signed and sealed in behalf of said Corporationb M.R.and Chase Directors, and L.W. Buell acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said Corporation. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my eal the day hand and affixed my official and year last above written. Notary Pub icor Oregon, r My Co anmission expires_C_� �f i CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY p, r AGENDA ITEM AGENDA OF: Januzry 16 1984- DATE SUBMITTED: 'January 6, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Accept Dedications and Easements on S.W. 72nd Avenue LID #21 REQUESTED BY: Public Works is CITY ADMINISTRATOR: z DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: ��.'� � mmr.==xam=axsssmamx=== : INFORMATION SUMMARY E � s 4 Attached are a cover letter and appropriate documents for the necessary . right of way and easements_`for Ident #58 (Time Oil company) on the S.W. 72nd Avenue LID #21 The consideration was for previously vacated unused right of way. x vThe appraised cost was $3510.00. aoeassasaccsxax��xm�g��xaxa=xsxcaassscsx==cxxcxsscxsass=xx=vss-x srx==x=�xc:aasffixgffizaxxacc ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED p N/A t asaesmssxars��szrsx$ss�xsz:cesmxs=remx:ssssx=�r_r_s==xsys�== SUGGESTED ACTION f_ Staff recommends council accept 'the dedication and easements. I v % � _ Suite 445 -AGC Center 9450:S.W.Commerce Circle o Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 295 ~:s7 ssociates, Inco (500682-2A 50 Utz Consuhing Engineers&Surveyors January 3r 1984 Frank A.- Currie, P.L. Director of Publ ic' Works City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Frank: Attached are.'726d''Avenue related documents which we are providing for consideration by.the Council. Ident. 58-4-Time Oil Company) a. Street Dedication b. Easement for Utilities - c. Construction Easement - With respect to 'Ident 58,.the above dedication and easements-have been provided to the+City a:t'no,,-cost in consideration of the vacation.of - unused right-of'way. which accrues to Time Oil , This- compares with-an amount of approximately $3,510.00 if the takings had been at appraised costs.-. -- It should not be necessary to record the Construction Easement. _Sincerely, MARLIN J. E HAAS, P.E. MJD/slc Attachments cc: Ident. 58 Ident. 58 STREET DEDICATION t KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that TIME OIL CO. , a Washington corporation, and FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF OREGON, N.A. , as duly appointed and qualified and acting PersonalRepresentative of the Estate of Forrest H. Tower, hereinafter called grantor(s), for the sum of $1.00 grant and dedicate to the Public a perpetual right-of-way for street, road and utility purposes on, over, across, under, along and within the following described 'real property in Washington County, Oregon: See Exhibit "A" attached.' To have and to hold the above-described and dedicated rights unto the Public for the uses and purposes hereinabove stated. This grant and dedication is conditioned upon passage by the City of Tigard o-f a resolution vacating the street right-of-way described in Exhibit "B attached'hereto. The grantor(s) hereby covenants that they are the owner(s) in fee simple and have good and legal right to;grant their rights above described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, he: grantor(s) have hereunto set their hands and seals this /6"//e day of 1983. FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF OREGON, N.A. Personal Representative for the Estate of Forrest H. Tower BCU y Title: — >T u rr-/Ccs By: )1 �L Title: e,,.�,sem, ��,cG _ ti TIh1E OI/ CO. By: ( . Title: STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Multnomah ) On this 28th day of December 1983, before me personally appeared Lloyd 0. Randall and IvIarvin D. Hansen to me personally known, who being a Trust Officer and Investment Officer of FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF OREGON, N.A. , the within named Corporation, and acknowledges said instrument to be the free act and deed of said Corporation. (rotary Public in and for the State of regon. Commission Expires: Page 1 My C�sr.:iS.,;un Ern Street Dedication STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of King ) 0 tis��51)j day of �.ertlr 1983, before me personally appearedr�l`l and to me personally known, who being a and , of TIME OIL CO.;, the within' named'C oration, and acknowledges said instrument to be the free act and deed of said 'co pora}ion. No�u _il�_dfo� State of Washington. My Commission Expires:h ✓�_ � ACCEPTANCE 198 Approved as to form this day of , /. 5 By: City Attorney - City of Tigard V Approved as to legal description this Sa day of s �C,�7L Accepted by the City Council this day of _ 198 '. By: City Recorder - City of Tigard A Page 2 Street Dedication { Page I of 2 Right of Way Acquisition Description Exhibit "A" Ident. No. 58 A parcel of land in the N.E. 4 of Sec. 13 and the S.E. ;s of Sec. 12 of T.2S., R.1W. , W.M. , Washington County, Oregon', more particularly described as follows: Being that portion of the tract of land described`in Book 434, Page,660 of the records` of Washington County, Oregon (T.L. 1800, Map 2S-1-120) which falls between a. centerline and a line `40 feet easterly and parallel to said centerline, said centerline being described as follows: Beginning' at a point of curve in the existing centerline of 'County Road 'A-138 that is S 39005'04" E 26.910 feet and S 48041 '42" W 214.478 feet from the recognized E. 1/16 corner on the Eine between said Secs. 12 and 13, said 1/16 corner being shown as point No. 289 on Washington County Survey P.O. 19,127; thence tracing the centerline northeasterly along a 450 foot radius curve to the left through a central angle of 49003' 18" 385.277 feet (long chord bears N 24°10'03" E 373.62 feet) to a point of tangency and the end of the foregoing described centerline, said ending point lies N 89043'04" E 20.00 feet and N 0°21 '36" W 198.78 feet from the pre- viously said 1/16 corner (Point No. 289) . _Excepting that portion conveyed in Book 707, Page 366. �n 10/12/81 CRC 80.194.118 i i 9e 2 of 2 S �I 1 a Eetcy N ®o°yes i V?9 e� N rth t r.. j Scale: V 50' Oa° S/11/81 I � V P_T_ 2_9+_53_.43 40%{ Assessnwnt Sdent. No.: 58 Tax Lot No.: 1300 Tax Map Pio.: 2S-1-12D i 0ti Deed Ref.: gook 434. Page 660 L •: Owner: F.H. Tourer ' Additional eight of Nay co contains 1170 square feet i C,,l - rsore or less. I Center Line c a i Curve Rata49 03'18" 1 Rad= 450.00 S, ^ i Arc= 385.28 a C U p 4. 0 40 CL 20 _ r Additional Right of Nay Point of Beginning o o` C.R.0922 - 14 89 4 '04'- E i ;Recognized 1/16f 20 r I corner (CS 19 GJ 1" I.P. N/:Washington County Cap. ' 'Pt. No. 289 P.1. ' S/89°05'04' 20.9 I. a o ; t I1 iT 0= 1'+AY ACOWS1TI N I'4o � rr r c D ito. 2i St I M11:1 MMM Page 1 of 1 Exhibit "B" R tract of 'land being'a portion of S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Road also known as Carmen Drive, in the southeast- ],- of the southeast - of Section 12, T.2S. ,` RAW. , W.M. , City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the northerly line of Parcel 1 as shown on P.S. 11',091 of the Records of Survey of Washington County, Oregon that is H 46006'34" E 26.73 feet from a 5/8-inch iron rod at the Btorthwest corner of saig Parcel 1, said beginning point is also N 0 21 '36" W 177.89 feet and N 89 38'24" E 59.56 feet from the recognized southwest corner o. the southeast '- of the southeast 3. of said Section 12 'being Point' No. 289 on County Survey No. 19,127; thence northerly along a `480 foot, radius cu&ve to the left through a central angle of 2°26'24" _(chord bears N 0 51 '36" E 20.86 feet) 20.87 feet to a point that is 40 f8et at right angles to the centerline of County Road No. 126; thence N 0 21 '36" E 45.83 feet to a point of curve; thence northeasterly algng a 40 foot i� radius cure to the right through a central angle of 78 52'02" (chord bears IN 39 04'25" E 50.815 feet) 55.06 feet to a point that is southerly 32 feet at right angles to the realigned offset centerline of S.W. Carmen Drive; thence continuing along a line 32 feet southerly at right angles and parallel to said centerline of S.W. Carmen Drive, northeasterly a18ng a 350.3099 foot radiva curve to the left through a central angle of 17 24' 13" (chord bears N 69 48'20" E 105.998 feet) 106.41 feet to a point curvw-and spiral ; thence continuing along a line 32 feet southerly at right angles and parallel to th-- said realigned offset centerline northt•;asterly (spiral along centerline Data - 18 CR•�= 120' Spiral ; S = 10048' ; a = 15.0; e = 0.120) 4.1 feet more or less to the intersection with the easterly line of said Parcel 1 of P.S. 11 ,021 , also being the t;,esterly line of that tract described as Parcel XV of Fee No. 78-044276 of t8e Records of Washington County, Oregon; thence southeasterly S 13 33'09" W more or less 12.3 feet more or less to a 5/8-inch iron rod at the most northerly corner of said Parcell on P.S. 11 .021 ; thence southwesteSly along the northwesterly line of said Parcel l on P.S. 11 ,021 ; S 46 06'34" W 191 .49 feet to the Point of Beginning of the tract herein described. fContains 6,921 Square Feet more or less, t i m s MMOM Project: 72nd Ave. Area - hID No. 21 Assessment ident. No. : 58 Tax Lot No. : 1800 3 Tax Map No. : 2S 1 12D Deed Reference: N.A. a i EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES E KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that. TIME OIL Co. , a Washington Corp- k oration, and THE 'FIRST' INTERSTATE-BANK OF OREGON, N.A. , the duly appointed, qualifed_ and acting Personal Representative of the Estate,of Forrest Tower, of the County of Multnomah, State of Oregon, (hereinafter,Grantor) and the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Oregon, (herein after 'Grantee) do hereby enter into the following agreement: WHEREAS, Grantee's 72nd Avenue LID No. 21 incorporated widening and realignment of various roadways and an area of additional right-of- way (approximately 1,170 sq. ft ) at the southwest corner of Grantor's parcel was required for widening of 72nd Avenue; WHEREAS, realignment of S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Road left an area (approximately 6,921 sq- ft.) of right-of-way adjacent to the northwest corner of the Grantor' s parcel which was no longer needed for roadway purposes except for utilities already located therein, and portions of the existing service station improvements currently.,encroach into this right-of-way; WHEREAS, considering the needs and best interests of both parties, the Estate of Forrest Tower and the City of Tigard agreed that the City of Tigard would vacate the 6,921 sq. ft. area, retaining a utilities easement, and the vacation was not to be effective until and unless the Estate of Forrest Tower dedicated the 1,170 sq. ft. of right-Of- way; WHEREAS, the Grantor and the Grantee agree to cooperate in the future elimination or relocation of existing utilities withal in theGright - of-way or as closely thereto as possible, subject to app ee and the utility owner; NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor in consideration of the sum of one dollar to grant and convey unto Grantee, a right- them in hand paid, do hereby of-way and easement over, across and under the following described real property situated in the County of Washington, State of Oregon, to-wit: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN B REFERENCE. 1. 1 - EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES f This permanent easement is 'granted for the purpose of laying, con- structing, replacing, and maintaining utility 'lines, and the easement herein granted shall include the right for the Grantee to go 'over, across and under said land for the purpose of installing said utility lines and maintaining and repairing 'them, but reserving to the grantors the title to the lands, subject to the easement, and the right to make such use thereof as will not interfere with the uses and purposes of the easement. Grantor retains the right to relocate the utility lines within this easement at its sole cost and expense. Grantors covenant to and with Grantee that they will not in anyway inter- fere with or restrict, except as herein stated`, Grantee's use of said < easement. This right-of-way and easement is granted with the understanding that any work done by the City of Tigard pursuant hereto will be so done as to leave the premises herein described in condition reasonably' similar to the previous state thereof when any work is finished there on. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE Herein described right-of-way and easement unto the City of Tigard, its successors and assigns, forever. In the event that it becomes necessary for any person now or; hereafter a party to the benefits and/or obligations of this easement to insti- tute any action or suit to enforce any of their rights hereunder, the party prevailing in such action or suit shall be entitled to recover its costs and disbursements and such sum as the court may adjudge reasonable as attorney's fees to be allowed in said action or suit or any appeal thereon. The grantors do hereby warrant that they are the owners in fee simple and have the right to grant the above described easements. WITNESS our hands and seals this 16I day of= e_ce.i�9 ��' , 1983 FIRST INTERSTATE BANh OF OREGON, N.A. , Personal Representative for the Estate of Forrest H. Tower Title: lc^utiT- a �icC+C - r TIME OIh CO. ;j I By:_ Title:_. Lj 2 - EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES h STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss County of Multnomah) On this 22nd day of December ,- 1983, before me personally appeared, Lloyd b-�iandall 'and to me ;personally lknown, 'who being a Trust Officer and Investment Officer of FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF OREGON, N.A.', the within named Corporation, and acknowledges said instrument to be the free act 'and -deed'of said Corporation. DONNA R. POWMAN Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon My Commission Expires (NOTARIAL SEAL > a STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss County of King ) On this /GYl'day of c-c e 1983, before me personally appearedand to me personally known, who being a le„and of TIME .OIL CO. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington My Commission Expires: l/- /j-- (NOTARIAL SEAL) 3 - EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES Exhibit "A" Utilities Easement Description Ident, 58 Page 1 of 2 A tract,of land being a portion of S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Road also known as Carmen 'Drive, in the southeast h of the southeast of Section 12, T.2S. , R1W. , W.V.. , City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon more particularly described as . follows: ' Beginning at a point on the northerly line of Parcel 1 as shown on P.S. 1T091 of the Records of Survey of Washington County, Oregon that is it 46006'34" E 26.73 feet from a 5/8-inch iron rod at the northwest corner of sai Parcel i, said beginning point is also N 0 21 '36" W 177.89 feet and N 89 38'24" E 59.56 feet from the recognized southwest corner a oI"the southeast a of the southeast a of said Section 12 being Point No. 289 on County Survey No. 19,127; thence northerly oalong�a 480 foot radius cu ve to the left through a central angle of 2 26124" (chord bears N 051 '36" E 20.86 feet) '20.87-feet to a point that is 40 f et at right angles to the centerline of County Road No. 126, thence Pd 0�2i '36" E 45.83 feet to'a point of curve; thence northeasterly al$ng a 40 foot radius cure-to the right through a 'central angle of 78 52'02" (chord s bears N 39 04'25" E 50.815 feet) 55.06 feet to >a_point that is southerly 32 feet at right angles to the realigned offset centerline of S.W. Carmen Drive; thence continuing along a line 32 feet southerly at right angles and parallel to said centerline of S.W. Carmen Drive, northeaster alnng a 350.3099 foot radiu8 curve to the left through a central angle of 17 24' 13° (chord bears N 69 48'20" E 105.998 feet) 106.41 feet to a point curve and spiral ; thence continuing along a line 32 feet southerly at right angles and parallel to tri said realign-d offset centerline north%,%sterly (spiral along centerline Data - 18 CR;L 120' Spiral ; 5 = 10-48' ; a = 15.0; e = 0.120) 4.1 feet more or less to the intersection with the easterly line of said Parcel 1 of P.S. 11 ,021 , also being the %,esterly line of that tract described as Parcel XV of Fee No. 78-044276 ? of t8e Records of Washington County, Oregon; thence southeasterly S 13 33'09" W more or less 12.3 feet more or less to a 5/8-inch iron rod at the most northerly corner of said Parcel 1 on P.S. 11 ,021 ; thence southweste6ly along the northwesterly line of said Parcel 1 on '. P.S. 11 ,021 ; S 46 06'34" W 191.49 feet to the Poin of Beginning of ` the tract herein described. - Contains 6,921 Square Feet more or less. � ' r� pt-ass Cap in iron pipe at the recognized 1/161 4"; r I cor (pt• ---p" on C.S. 13,247 1 I I t ❑ Utilities Easement Area I J w t. I a Scale 1"=50' I � � Cate: I/5/83 �x I J � v ' o U i { W W UQPE Sa��ca�me� 5 - aka P.S.C. { 1 1-N89038'24"E 4rP.S.C) N `4.64' 5 S S13033'09"W + 1! 1 12.3+ I ,I P.T.T. Fd. 5/3" Iron Rod� � s , A, r� P.T. 40.OD'. o a� ----- � fiZ 5 Ident. No. 58 EEE _ `' Tax Lot No. 1800 Tax 14ap No. 25-1-12D 9 N89°38'2 "E'- P.O.B. Owner: Estate of Forest N. h 59.56' 1 Tower 1 Utilities Easement Contains + �) 6,921 square `eet core or les K N46006'34"E 26.73' f p , o Fd. 5/8" Iron Rod Curve Data a / 1 Ch Q = 49°03'18" 4N Q = 17024'13" co Radius= 450-00' Radius 350.3099' = 2026'24 (� .n = 28032'11 0 9 % I G:, " Radius= 450.CC' Radius= 318.3099' c t I . . 6 78052'02. � Spiral Data n Radius= 40.00' Veg. of Curve= IS- L,-, J- —- Recognised 1116th cor. on L= 120.00' S= 10048' ii,'°O 3<24 - South line of Sec.12 P.O.B. a=`15 00 e= 0.120 720 '0' of C.R. #922., (pt. •"239 on C.S.19,127) UTILITIES EASEMENT MAP> RS 21 EhGwNEERS E SUaVEYO 0.1 E4'•7a.: ,- j�F _ r t Project: S.W. 72nd Avenue Area - LID No. 21 Assessment Ident. No. : 58 Tax Lot No. : 1800 }. Tax Map No. : 2S=1-12D Deed Reference: Book 434, Page 660 k CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT nqt KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that TIME OILthe aas�intedr, cualliified aandand THE FIRST INTERSTATE_BANK OF OREGON,-N.A. , actin Personal rRe resentat-, ee f thn conside�at on�ofttheWsumer oof he COnety of Multnomah State of in Oreg rant and convey unto the City Dollars 1.00 ) to them in;hand paid, do hereby g Do Tigard, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the t State of Oregon, a Construction Easement, `across and under ;the following described real property situated in the County of Washington, State of Oregon, to-wit: A l0 foot wide strip lying southeasterly of, parallel and adjacent to the southeasterly right of way of S.W. Upper' Booties Ferry Road, A.K.A. - S.W. 72nd Avenue, said strip being a portion of that property described in Book 434, Page 660, Washington County, Oregon Records. This Construction Easement is granted solely for the purpose of constructing street improvements (L.I.D. 21) . Said Construction Easement shall cease to exist Thirty (30) days. from the date of Certification of Completion of L.I.D. 21 by the Engineer. Grantors covenant to and with Grantee that they will not in any manner interfere with or restrict, except as herein stated, Grantee's use of said easement. This Construction Easement �urguantehereto willunderstanding asthat leavework the done by the City of Tigard gar p premises herein described in a condition reasonably similar to the previous state thereof imirediately before the perforuiance of work pursuant to this easement. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE Herein described Construction Easement unto the City of Tigard, its successors and assigns, forever. H Page 1 Construction Easement WITNESS our hands and seals this 1�V1 day of 1983. f FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF OREGON, N.A. Personal Representative for ;the Estate of Forrest H. Tower By: Title: TIME OI CO By:_ Title: e STATE OF OREGON ) ss County of Multnomah) On this 22nd day of December , 1983, before me personally appeared Lloyd 0 Randall and ' to me ;personally known, who being a Trust Officer and Investment Officer of FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF OREGON, NA. , the within named Corporation, and acknowledges said instrument to be the free act and doed of said corporation. �, � ,�� Notary Public in and for the State of C0NNA R.130VMAN Oregon. NOTARY PUBLIC ORE Oil My commission Expires My Commission Expires Nk 1� STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. County of King ) �J On this / day of �:e n�r� , 1983, before me personal ly appeared Z /> �or.�c�c7� — ' to me personally known, who being a ��s,o and of TIME OIL CO., the within named Cor tion, and acknowledges said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corp- ation. Notary Pub is in and for the State of Washington. My Commission Expires: Page 2 w Construction Easement ,. ACCEPTANCE The City above named hereby accepts the foregoing grants and agrees to comply with each and every term and condition thereof. CITY OF TIGARD } By: Mayor By: City Recorder STATE OF OREGON } ss. County of On this day of 19` , before 'me aopeared and both to me personally known who, being duly sworn, did say that he, the ` said is the Mayor, and he, the said is the Recorder of the 'CITY OF ^� TIGARD, a municipal corporation, and the said and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municpal corporation. It] TESTIMONIY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set r,-.y hand and seal the day and year last above written. Notary Public for State of Oregon Ily Commission Expires: _ .Page 3 Construction Easement ' { — — — ---- — Page 4 � S P tr N rih N O Scale: 1 5o' — Mite: 9/17/81 - C S nT 29 . 5;4.43 <0 1Ssessment ldent. No.: 58 t - - - ---- ------ Tax Lot No.: 1800 ; 4 Tax Map Ho.: 2S•1-12D ' Deed Ref,: Ioo': 434, Page 660 ewner: F.H. Tower ' ',dditional eight of L'ty ccntains-1110 squate feet ro,c or less. Center Lire c F. 0 cu^ac Data a 49"03'18,. 1 (?z4= 450.00 ti t — Arc= 3..5.28 ` u f�j0 9•, i ofd 40 Area of C'cnsfrac7iO12 t a se megf t L 4_t 1 I I j Additional Piiht of Nay I Point of Beginning N 8904 ;0"..; E of L.R.^922 Rccog:r.c J 1/10 20 corner (,S 19/27 1' I.P. 41/'dashir,mton County Cap. l t Pt. No 2'9 , o 26.9d E i.A..a tl;>lciAiE,s. lilt.� �__ 1' , F f CITY OF TIGARD. OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY I � > AGENDA ITEM - AGENDA OF: 1983 PR DATE SUBMITTED: December 19, 1983 ACTION: Has been on maintenance improvements ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Final acceptance for one year, all public 9 have been completed r of TECCENTER Business Park REQUESTED BY: Engineering H DEPARTMENT HEAD OK- CITY ADMINISTRATOR: i INFORMATION SUMMARY 'k Tech Center Business Park has now been completed. They have installed all of the public improvements that we're required on the, public improvement plan: 1 P ffi�A@IIC��ffiL"r.C.S TCIRSCS88S Sffi88RYE6e=CffiSRCeS��SCS8S�68C��LCB-�-�-��_��ffi�ffi GCCREffi BS v+'+G�Bffiffiffi ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED x: SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recornends the City Council accept the public improvements within this project. s. ms IMAM 9MR: NOR; Mw 1 t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON" MEMORANDUM Y January 12, 1984 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Loreen Wilson, Deputy City Recorde j SUBJECT: Agenda Items For 1-16-84 Packet Please bring items distributed to you in your packet of 1-9-$4 which were marked confidential. These items will be discussed under ager=ia items 13 and 14. If you need copies of 'these items, please contact my office. g i 1w/0316A