City Council Packet - 10/15/1984 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate
OCTOBER 15, 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
10865 SW WALNUT of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items
TIGARD, OREGON 97223 are asked to be kept to 2 minutes or less; longer
matters can be set for a future Agenda by con-
tacting either the Mayor or City Administrator.
1 . SPECIAL MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1 . 2 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items
2. VTSI'OR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less, Please)
3. DURHAM TRUCK LIMIT - ORDINANCE NO. 84-
3 Chief of Police
4. LID AUTHORITY - ORDINANCE NO. 84--_
o City Attorney
5. STORM DRAINAGE DISCUSSION
o Councilor Brian 6 Rick Daniels
6. LERON HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR SEWER REPORTS
o Director of Public Works
7. DISPATCH CONTRACT RFP DISCUSSION
o Councilor Edin
8. CROW LEASE DISCUSSION
o City Administrator
9. SISTER CITY DISCUSSION
o City Administrator
10. 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:
10. 1 Approve Council Minutes - October 8, 1984
10.2 Call Council Workshop 1/18 6 1/19
10.3 Call 11/12 Council Meeting To Be Held At 7:30 PM at Durham
Treatment Plant and 9:00 PM at Tigard City Hall
10.4 Accept Maintenance Bond For Copper Creek III - Resolution No.84-73
10.5 Deny Second Request For 1-Year Extension On Sidewalk Bond For
Scheckla Park - Ward-West Construction
10.6 Approve and Authorize Signatures:
o Sanitary Sewer Compliance Agreement - Western International -
Tech Center Drive/72nd Avenue
o Sanitary Sewer Compliance Agreement - Mull Sewer - Grant 6
Tigard Street
o Sanitary Sewer Easements - Mull Sewer - Grant d Tigard Street
o Street Dedication S.W. Tigard Street - Mull
o Street Dedication Compliance Agreement - Pac Trust - SW Durham Rd i
11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff
E
i
e
12. ADJOURNMENT
T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: President Kenneth Scheckla; Councilors: Tom
Brian, Phil Edin, and Ima Scott; City Staff: Bob Jean, City
Administrator; Kelley Jennings, Captain; Patt Martin,
Deputy City Recorder; and Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel.
2. CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS
a. LCDC Hearing Report and Executive Session October 29, 1984
regarding LCDC
b. Reconsideration of Newsletter insert for Tetrapolitan
Kiwanis/Tualatin-Sherwood Food Bank/St. Vincent De Paul.
C. Compass Consulting Group Report prepared for Washington County.
d. Formal Certificate of Conformance in Finance Reporting presented
to the City by the Governor's Finance Officer Association.
e. Councilor Scott asked when the accumulated time report would be on
the agenda to be discussed. City Administrator stated it would be
in conjunction with the Personnel Manual sometime in December. It
was suggested both the accumulated time report and Personnel
Manual be tentatively set for the 11/12/84 City Council meeting.
t 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA
a. No one appeared to speak under the Visitor' s Agenda. However, it
was stated Jim Hartman had talked to President Scheckla and stated
he would be late but wished to speak on the community effort to
help Tigard Fish.
4. DURHAM TRUCK LIMIT
ORDINANCE NO. 84-59 AN ORDINANCE RESTRICTING TRUCK TRAFFIC ON CERTAIN
STREETS WITHIN THE CITY OF TIGARD, AND DECLARING
AN EMERGENCY.
a. Captain Jennings gave a summary of this Ordinance stating that the
Ordinance now in effect prohibits truck traffic 24 hours a day on
certain streets. This Ordinance proposes restricting truck
traffic at certain times each day . The County Public Works people
will conduct the sign installation. Delivery date of the
specially order large sign for Pacific Highway will be later in
the week. All signs will be installed late next week.
b. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott, to adopt
Ordinance No. 84-59.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
Page 1 - COUNCIL MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1984
5. LID AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO. 84-60 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING BANCROFT BOND
PROCEDURES; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BANCROFT
BONDS; REPEALING 13 .04.085; AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
a. Legal Counsel gave summary of the Ordinance stating Bond Counsel
recommended to batch $100,000 increments then go for sale of
bonds. If Measure #2 passes, the City has no vehicle to collect
on these LID's.
Councilor Edin and Brian felt page 2 should be amended to read
"the owner of any property so assessed for such improvement in the
sum of $500 or more" instead of the sum of $25.
Councilor Scutt asked if this Ordinance would be used as a way to
get around Measure #2. Legal Counsel stated it could. Councilor
Scott disagreed with this is what the Ordinance should do.
City Administrator stated the proponents were not trying to create
problems with LID's. They just wanted property taxes lowered.
b. Motion by Councilor Edin, seconded by Councilor Brian, to adopt
Ordinance No. 84-60 amending page 2 to read $500 instead of $25
and replacing page 6 with the revised page 6 Legal Counsel passed
out prior to the meeting.
Approved by 3-1 majority vote of Council present, Councilor Scott
voting NAY.
6. STORM DRAINAGE DISCUSSION
a. Rick Daniels, Director of Land Use & Transportation for Washington
County gave a summary of what the County proposes with the SL,rm
Drainage problem. He introduced Larry Swart, who gave a slide
show presentation and explained the problem areas in Washington
County.
Rick Daniels stated he came to the meeting to get the questions
Council had and either answer them or find answers and report back
to Council. He stated Unified Sewerage Agency probably would be
the most likely agency to be responsible rather than for questions
to go the City and County. There would be a $2.00 surcharge a
month of which 75f would go locally, 75f to the regulating
facility (USA), and 50f for capital construction planning or long
range planning. Since Tigard is already paying 75f on their bills
per month, this amount could be recinded or left as is. He stated
the problem of storm drainage exists today and will increase. He
also stated the $2.00 fee will only be charged to the areas being
worked on only.
Discussion followed how and when Tigard would fit into this
project.
e
Page 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1984
7. LERON HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR SEWER REPORTS
a. City Administrator stated staff has worked out a memorandum of
agreement with Leron Heights Interceptor, Inc. , that clarifies the
standard determining which properties are subject to the Leron
Heights Interceptor surcharge and how the collection will be
made. He stated the City will provide notice to the property
owner and request payment by check made out to Leron Heights
Interceptor Corp. at the time of issuing a sewer permit. The
checks will then be immediately forwarded in self-addressed,
stamped envelopes provided by Leron Heights Interceptor Corp. The
City will be held harmless for any oversight that may
inadvertently occur.
b. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Edin, to approve
the agreement.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
Council agreed to hear .2 from non •agenda items at this time.
.2 TETRAPOLITAN KIWANIS/TUAI.ATIN—SHERWOOD FOOD BANK/ST. VINCENT DE PAUL
FLYER
a. Jim Hartman, Tetrapolitan Kiwanis, requested Council consider
inserting a flyer in the October City Newsletter regarding Tigard
FISH. He stated it was a joint effort by Tualatin, Tigard, King
City, Sherwood, Metzger and Durham to collect canned food
donations or cash donations to help the Tigard FISH program in the
area. He stated this was strictly a volunteer program and very
worthwhile. He also stated the Kiwanis would pick up any extra
cost or time to be spent on this project.
Councilor Scott felt she could not support putting this flyer in
the newsletter because it would set precedence but stated she felt
this was a good program. She suggested using school government
classes, school children, scouts, and other service o iented
groups.
Councilor Brian felt this was a unique situation and stated it was
a matter of setting precedence. He felt if strict criteria were
set the City would not have a problem.
Councilor Edin said he was willing to support the newsletter
insert but felt the Council would have to go on a case by case
situation as long as strict criteria is set up.
President Scheckla questioned Legal Counsel if the City were
legally tampering with what the newsletter is supposed to do.
Legal Counsel stated it was not illegal unless the newsletter
would address an item that would appear on the ballot. He stated
/ Council decides what goes in the newsletter and the criteria that
applies.
1
Page 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1984
City Administrator stated one of Council's goals was to promote
( volunteerism. This would be a way of doing that.
b. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Edin, to approve
inserting the flyer from Tetrapolitan Kiwanis/Tualatin-Sherwood
Food Bank/St. Vincent De Paul in the October City Newsle?_ter with
the following criteria set for City Newsletters.
1. This exception does not set precedence.
2. Must be a non-profit organization.
3. Must be multi sponsored
4. Be a regional effort
5. All volunteer
6. No cost to City or City personnel time
7. All proceeds go to collection area
8. No delay or conflict with primary purpose of newsletter
Approved by 3-1 majori�y vote of Council present, Councilor Scott
voting NAY.
RECESS AT 9:40 P.M.
RECONVENE AT 9:53 P.M.
8. DISPATCH CONTRACT RFP DISCUSSION
The Compass Consulting Group Report for Washington County was handed out
to Council tonight.
a. Councilor Edin gave a summary of the selection process up to now
of the Consultants. He felt as did all Councilors that the price
of a consultant fee for Cogan & Associates was too expensive and
beyond the budget capacity. He read a memo from Mayor Cook who
could not attend the meeting, stating Cogan & Associates were too
expensive but had a good concept. Mayor Cook also questioned the
authority of the Fire District in using a LFDS terminal. He
supported the proposal of having all Fire dispatch from one
location and one police dispatch center for Washington County .
All Councilors felt there were many questions to be answered. It
was also felt possibly to save money to have Clay Durbin do the
study by himself instead of combining with Cogan & Associates.
Questions that the Councilors have should be handed in to Donna
Corbet by October 23, 1984 who will type up a list. Councilor
Scott will then contact Clay Durbin to have him give a quote on
how much it would cost to answer the questions and see if he can
do the study at an affordable price by himself.
CAPTAIN JENNINGS LEFT AT 10:40 P.M.
9. CROW LEASE DISCUSSION
a. City Administrator recommended the Council agree to extend the
lease on the Crow building City Hall is currently occupying at the
Page 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1984
current rate for 2 months definitely and possibly a 3rd month.
Also extend the lease on old City Hall for the same amount of time
for Mr. Crow and at the current rate.
b. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott, to extend
the leasHal Crw
g and old
ll for
Mr. Crowe
eatn ther
rcurrent grate for o2 months definitely City o
curent definitelyand possibly
a 3rd month.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
10. SISTER CITY DISCUSSION
a. Councilor Brian asked if there was a timeline regarding the Sister
City. He felt this item should be tabled until after he attended
the League of Oregon Cities in which an item on their agenda is
Sister Cities. He will then report back to the Council on this
subject.
All Councilors felt this was a low priority and concurred it
should be tabled until a later date.
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.
11.1 Approve Council Minutes October 8, 1984
11.2 Call Council Workshop 1/18 & 1/19 1Be Held at 7:30 P.M. at Durham
11 .3 Call 11/12 Council Meeting
Treatment Plant and 9:00 P.M. at Tigard City Hall
11.4 Accept Maintenance Bond for Copper Creek III-Resolution No. 84-73
11.5 Deny Second Request for 1-Year Extension on Sidewalk Bond for
Scheckla park - Ward--West Construction
11.6 Approve and Authorize Signatures:
o Sanitary Sewer Compliance Agreement - Western International
- Tech Center Drive/72nd Avenue
o Sanitary Sewer Compliance Agreement - Mull Sewer Grant &
Tigard Street
U Sanitary Sewer Easements-{lull Sewer - Grant & Tigard Street
U Street Dedication S.W. Tigard Street - Mull
o Street Dedication Compliance Agreement - Pac Trust - SW
Durham Rd.
Councilor Scott asked items .2 & .3 be pulled from consent agenda to be
discussed.
a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Edin, to approve
consent agenda items except 11.2 & 11.3.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
.2 Call Council Workshop 1/18 & 1/19
( a. Councilor Scott questioned these dates and if it was fair
to have a workshop so soon after elections of Council
page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1984
positions. She felt this item should be tabled and dates
set after the new Council members take office.
City Administrator reported the Mayor had tentatively ;et
these dates with Mary Himmel and was asking if these dates
were OK with the Council.
b. Motion by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Edin, to
table and check with Mary Himmel for possible February
dates.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
.3 Call 11/12 Council Meeting to Be Held at 7:30 P.M. at Durham
Treatment Platn and 9:00 P.M. at Tigard City Hall.
Councilor Scott questioned why the Council meeting was set at a
different location.
City Administrator stated November 12 is a school holiday and if
the Council had the meeting at Fowler Junior High or the School
District Board Room $15.00 overtime would have to be paid to the
janitor. He also stated at 7:30 P.M. the Civic Center Committee
Workshop will. be held with Council and the Personnel Manual will
be discussed at the meeting. Since the Civic Center Committee may
want to continue their meeting, it is suggested Council move to
City Hall to have the Executive Session on Labor Relations.
a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott, to approve
.3 of the Consent Agenda.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
12. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff
a. Paul Deemie Letter
Councilor Scott read a letter from Paul Deemie stating he could
not pay his assessment because of being out of work and his
property had not sold. Councilor Scott felt he should be given
special consideration.
City Administrator felt more property owners would be writing to
the City in the same condition. He recommended tabling this issue
until after the election and do a study to bring back to Council
in January.
No action was required .
i
Page 6 — COUNCIL MINUTES — OCTOBER 15, 1984
b. LCDC Report
City Administrator stated LCDC liked Tigard's Plan and recognized
acknowledgment if Lhe subsidized policy was deleted. LCOC did not
feel it was appropriate. City Administrator recommended to table
this issue until October 22, 1984 at Executive Session.
13. . ADJOURNMENT: 11:03 P.M.
/�cZ���C.tl� � �cZ/.-Gcy✓
Deputy City Recorder - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
-'1
o - City of Tigard
(pm/2064A)
Page 7 - COUNCIL MI0.'JTES - OCTOBER la, 1984
TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Le" 7-6136
P O BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice
BEAVERTON,OREGON 97075 RECE/VED
Legal Notice Advertising 4 J9N4
• ❑ Tearsheet Notice CITY
City of Tigard OF TICgRO
P. O. Box 23397 0 ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
Tigard, OR 97223
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON,
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss'
Susan_Pinkley___
being first duly sworn, depose acid say that I am the Advertising €
Director, or his principal clerk, of the_____Tiga d T; m S
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
and 193.020; published at__._-------EP 1$9
in the
aforesaid county and state; that the
eetin�
___ C; v UDAj c_i� Special N
_ . —___--
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:
14-81 ---- -
Subscribed and a' o before me this c t• 1
1 84
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission 4cpie 9/20/88
AFFIDAVIT
4M ion'
wig
r :
pTON �
I'll, c7SL WASHINGTON COUNTY
(3 t43 ��' ADMINISTRATION BUILDING — 150 N. FIRST AVENUE
HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPT. OF LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATIO1.
Planning Division
WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman 2nd Floor
BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman 15031648-8761
EVA M. KILLPACK
JOHN E. MEEK September 18, 1984
LUCILLE WARREN
To: City Councillors, Planning Commissioners, Citizens of
Washington County, Members of the Business Community, and
Interested Organizations
From: Richard A. Daniels , Direct
County Department of Land Use 8 Transportation
Subject: EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES, DRAFT DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
For the past nine months, the County has been working on a detailed
study aimed at improving the existing system for planning, financing
and maintaining the drainage system in the urban area. The results
of this work are now available in draft form, intended for public
review and discussion.
The Drainage Master Plan is presented in two major pieces--the
Financial Element and the Prototype Basin Plan Element. Executive
Summaries from these documents are attached for your information.
They are designed to provide a brief overview of the recommendations
contained in each element in addition to some background information
on the work leading up to the recommended programs.
For more specific information about the draft Drainage Master Plan
and opportunities for public comment, please contact the County
Planning Division at 640-3519.
RD:JJN:stb
Attachments
an equal opportunirr emplu)•er l
September 1984
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
FINANCIAL ELEMENT - DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. OVERVIEW
This summary explains the essential elements of a stormwater
management financing strategy for the urban area of Washington
County. The guiding theme for that strategy is to provide a
regional authority to coordinate drainage management and to estab-
lish reliable, equitable funding for the drainage system, but to
retain local control over the -*orm drain system.
The Phase I Washington County Drainage Master Plan prepared in 1981
recommended that the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) become the
regional drainage authority and that USA establish a utility type
of funding for drainage. This report builds on those
recommendations, defining the de' iils of the proposed stormwater
management and financing strategy.
2. THE NEED FOR IMPROVED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
As the eastern portion of Washington County develops as an an urban
area the drainage system is being converted from a rural type
system to an urban one. In many areas this conversion is taking
place with no clear idea of the ultimate drainage system needs.
The result is that individual drainage projects are sometimes
inconsistent with those nearby, and improvements do not provide the
protection they were intended to. Some improvements even make the
situation worse. On intervening undeveloped properties no one has
responsibility for the drainage system and the inadequate rural
drainage system is not improved. This pattern has caused flooding
in streets, homes, yards, and businesses.
Urbanization greatly increases the need for drainage management for
two reasons:
o roof area and paved area result in faster runoff and greater
volumes of runoff; increasing the probability of flooding; and
o urban improvements make property more valuable and flood
damage has greater economic consequences, making it more
important to protect that property from flooding or poor
drainage.
-1-
v
3. PAST IMPEDIMENTS TO DRAINAGE CONTRUL
Addressing the drainage needs in Washington County has been dif-
ficult in the past for several reasons:
1. The cities have broad authority to plan and manage drainage
systems but that authority is limited to inside their city
limits. Drainage does not respect those city boundaries so
only a coordinated program between incorporated and unincor-
porated areas can successfully address drainage management.
2. A second problem for the cities has been inadequate and
unreliable funding for drainage system construction,
maintenance, planning and administration.
3. Much of the drainage system is on private property where
neither the cities not the county has authority to maintain
the system.
4. Washington County has extremely limited funding for drainage
management. The general fund is largely used for state man-
dated programs. The only other past source of funds for
drainage management in the County has been the road fund, but
road funds can be used to improve and maintain only that
portion of the drainage system within County rights-of-way.
5. Unlike other utilities (e.g. electricity and sewer) there is
no single agency in Washington County with overall responsible
for the drainage system. People looking for help to solve a
drainage problem often feel they are getting the run-around by
local government, because every agency they call says the
drainage system is not that agency's responsibility.
4. MAJOR CONSIDERATIONS
It has been apparent throughout this study that the emergent nature
of stormwater problems in urbanizing Washington County presents an
obstacle to building a consensus among the various jurisdictions,
interest groups, and the general public.
In order to formulate an organizational and financial concept in
the context of this lack of clear consensus, the consultants made
an effort to separate the various elements of stormwater management
and address them as "building blocks" or components of an overall
effort.
The cities have been and will most likely continue to be involved
in some aspects of stormwater control even if a USA or a county-
based regional approach is successfully established. For the most
part, the cities have concentrated on improvement and maintenance
of minor drainage systems tributary to the creeks and the Tualatin
River. Their regulatory efforts have focused on controlling
drainage from new developments. Some major capital improvements
have been built, but most cities have been able to do so only
within road corridors.
—2—
Rather than project a regional agency or program over these local
efforts, it was determined that a better opportunity lies in
providing a regional management and financial support base for the
cities. This regional effort would focus on filling in gaps in
local programs by doing those things which the cities have not been
able to do to date.
A USA-based approach to stormwater management is more likely to
succeed if done on an incremental basis than if implemented
throughout USA's jurisdictional area. It is assumed that a ballot
measure will be required to authorize a USA role in stormwater
management. Public acceptance may be enhanced if it is evident
that a "worst first" approach is being used to concentrate
immediate attention and funding on solving the most serious
problems. Advisory committee discussions during this study indi-
cated that relatively localized funding would be politically more
attractive than financing concepts which spread costs area wide.
In developing a stormwater program for Washington County, the basic
question was asked, "How can a regional stormwater program both
meet the needs presently not within local agency capabilities, and
at the same time provide an incentive for improved local programs?"
It was felt to be critically important that a USA program offer
something to the cities that would encourage their active support,
and that the presently activL issue of city versus county revenue
and services be addressed as far as drainage is concerned.
Some cities may see little value initially to being included in a
regional stormwater management program, whether it is based in USA
or the County. Some incorporated areas will probably "opt out" of
participating in a drainage program, and there is little in practi-
cal terms that can be done to alter that choice, other than offer
those communities a good reason to "opt in". The best option is to
design the program and financing strategy around such a
possibility, and insulate it from any requirement for 100%
concensus.
In summary, a USA regional drainage program should be organized
around relatively local drainage basins, identify a limited scope
of regional responsibility, and provide an incentive for effective
local programs to meet other drainage program needs complementing
the regional effort.
5. NEW FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Service Area
The hydrology of Washington County is fairly complex, and decisions
in one drainage basin often impact conditions in others. The
smallest practical area for a regional USA drainage program in most
parts of the county will be the area drained by one of the larger
i tributaries to the Tualatin River. It is recommended that two of
the large tributary basins of the Tualatin River be designated as
the first areas for implementation of a regional stormwater
-3- S
program, the Rock-Beaverton-Butternut Creeks area and the Fanno
Creek basin. These service areas are comprised of basins and
subbasins which are significant enough to implement an effective
master plan for the physical drainage system, and yet small enough
that a local level of interest and concern is retained.
5.2 Regional and Local Responsibilities; Formation of an Advisory
Commission
It is recommended that the regional drainage authority be respon-
sible for improvements to and maintenance of the regional systems
throughout the proposed stormwater service area, defined as those
draining 100 or more acres, and also for improvement and main-
tenance of "local" systems in unincorporated areas. The cities
would be responsible for improvement and maintenance in their
jurisdiction for systems draining less than 100 acres. Drainage
District 8 would be responsible for the systems serving less than
100 acres in the District. Regulatory programs for new development
in the incorporated areas would be the cities' responsibility,
while the county would retain regulatory responsibilities in the
unincorporated areas.
One of the most difficult issues facing this program will be deter-
mining the respective responsibilities of the regional and local
programs. Service levels should be provided that are consistent
with the charges to rate payers in both incorporated and unincor-
porated areas.
A Stormwater Management Advisory Commission should be established
in each drainage basin to guide and advise USA in formulating
policies, programs, capital improvement plans, and service levels
for their area. Representatives appointed by each incorporated
community in those areas which choose to participate should be
included on the Advisory Commission. Other membership on the
Commission might include special-purpose jurisdictions, organiza-
tions with related interests, and citizen representatives.
5.3 Regional System Funding
There are several mechanisms which might be used for funding the
regional drainage program. A mix of methods could be used to
tailor funding to various costs in each of the two major basins.
Assuming USA will be the responsible regional agency, it is recom-
mended that a service charge be used as the primary financing
system both in unincorporated and incorporated areas.
If the County were to be the regional agency, a new tax base should
be proposed to the voters to fund the improved stormwater program.
A difficulty with this approach besides the lack of popularity of
property taxes is that a new tax base for the County would be
countywide rather than segregated to the proposed drainage basins.
A Systems Development Charge (SDC) or similar financing concept
should be used to ensure that new developments "buy into" the
L
-4-
communities' prior investment in drainage facilities designed and
built to accommodate future development.
5.4 Funding for Local Programs
Funding for stormwater improvements and maintenance has tradition-
ally been a problem for all local jurisdictions. It will do little
good to assign responsibility for "minor" stormwater systems to the
cities unless a means of funding such duties is available. To
assist the cities in providing at least a minimum service level for
the local drainage systems in their communities, it is recommended
that a portion of the regional service charge be returned to the
cities, based on the revenue generated within their respective
communities. This is consistent with an approach now used by USA
for sanitary sewers. The reversionary funding returned to the
cities should be earmarked for use only on drainage. It could
conceivably result in different levels of service depending on
productivity and other factors.
6. IMPORTANT DETAILS
6.1 Service Boundary: The service boundary of the initially designated
basins would be determined prior to the authorizing ballot. It is
suggested that it be limited to area inside the metropolitan area
Urban Growth Boundary and inside Washington County. This approach
would not require an alteration of USA's defined service area.
6.2 Proposed Services Provided by Regional Authority:
6.2.1 Planning: USA would prepare detailed basin plans for capital
improvements within three years in the basins being implemented.
Basin plans would be presented to the local jurisdictions for
concurrence prior to final adoption.
6.2.2 Regulation: USA would provide regulation only in the unincor-
porated areas of the basins being implemented. Coordination
between jurisdictions would be facilitated, and a uniform set of
standards could be developed for local adoption to ensure consis-
tent USA and city regulatory requirements.
6.2.3 Construction: Capital improvements will be determined basin by
basin through master planning (see Planning, above) comparable to
that now underway in the prototype basin. The regional authority
would be responsible for construction of improvements only to the
"regional" systems.
6.2.4 Maintenance: Maintenance of both regional and local systems would
be funded, although USA would be responsible only for maintenance
of regional systems and local systems in unincorporated areas. A
portion of the revenue derived within incorporated areas would be
returned to the cities to help fund improvement or maintenance of
/ "local" systems.
—5— 7
6.3 Funding
6.3.1 Initially it is expected that a uniform service charge would be
applied to each basin. It is recommended that the service charge
be based on the gross area of each property and a factor indicative
of the relative intensity of development of each parcel, except
that all single family residences would be charged a flat rate of
$2.00/month. The service charge is intended to fund four program
elements:
o Administration planning and capital improvements to major
systems;
o Administration and maintenance of major systems;
o Administration, planning, construction, and maintenance of
minor systems in unincorporated areas;
o Administration, planning, construction, and maintenance of
minor systems in incorporated areas.
The major system capital improvement component of the service
charge would be retained by USA. An initial guideline and estimate
for major capital improvements in other basins was derived from the
prototype baEJ n work now underway. Initially, the capital improve-
ment component of the service charge is expected to be $.50 per
equivalent residential unit. After a capital improvements plan is
completed for other areas, the major capital improvements component
of the service charge would be adjusted if necessary.
Administration and maintenance of major systems will be uniform
throughout the service area and will be retained by USA.
Initially, it is estimated that this portion will be $0.75 per
equivalent residential unit per month.
The local system maintenance component collected from unincor-
porated areas would be retained by USA and used for those purposes.
The money collected for maintenance from incorporated areas would
be returned to the cities and earmarked only for drainage. This
component of the service is expected to range $0.75 per month per
equivalent residential unit.
6.3.2 Other funding methods could be used by the cities to augment the
distribution from USA and provide a higher level of service in
local systems. Options include Local Improvement District fees, in
lieu of construction local stormwater service charges, developer
extensions, and city general funds.
6.3.3 Regulation Services (initially plan review and inspection) are to
be funded entirely by special fees charged through the permitting
processes.
6.3.4 Systems Development Charges are suggested as an equitable mechanism
to ensure that new developments participate in the cost of prior
improvements in the basins, in a sense requiring that new projects
O
-6-
buy into the communities' previous investment in systems oversized
for existing development, but sufficient for projected future
development.
c,
�s �7�
September 1984
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE PIASTER PLAN
PROTOTYPE BASIN PLAN - DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Washington County is committed to the planning process. It is
committed to the idea that balanced growth can occur which respects
and integrates the existing environment and human needs. It is
committed to the idea that rainfall and flooding do not have to
become synonymous in a developing community.
2.0 AUTHORIZATION
In December of 1983 the County authorized the firm of Kramer, Chin
6 Mayo, Inc., in association with David Evans and Associates, Inc.
to complete the second phase of the County's drainage master plan-
ning process. In this second phase, a representative developing
area of the County was selected for study (the Prototype Basin).
The Basin hydrology was analyzed, present and potential drainage
problems were identified, and a capital improvement prograa was
recommended to address the identified problems. A summary of the
analysis and findings is presented in the following paragraphs.
Details of the study can be found in the body of this report.
3.0 ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Washington County's Department of Land Use and Transportation
oversaw the master planning effort for the County. However, the
County must interact with a variety of jurisdictions, agencies and
Individuals in the implementation of master plan elements. Thus,
It became essential that those impacted by the outcome become a
part of the master planning process. Two advisory committees were
formed - a steering committee for guidance in matters of policy,
and, a task force for guidance in the specific details of the
of the various County entities wer
analysis. Representativese
requested to serve on the committees. In addition to the
committees, two public meetings were held to inform and consult the
public on study issues. '
i
4.0 NATURE AND SCOPE
This drainage master plan includes the following elements:
o A description of the study area characteristics which affect
drainage including climate, rainfall patterns, soil
elation
characteristics, geologic characteristics, geography, g
and land use.
-1- ��
o An inventory of the existing drainage system including pipes,
bridges, open channels and 36 detention ponds.
o Evaluation and recommendations -for each detention pond.
o Definition of drainage sub-basins and computation of storm
runoff from these sub-basins.
o Analysis of several drainage system alternatives in light of a
variety of evaluation criteria to determine themosteffective
approach to stormwater control in the Prototype
o Integration of the most effective drainage system improvements
from each of the alternatives intBacin,recommended capital
improvement program for the Prototype
o Prioritization of the recommended drainage system improvements.
o Maintenance recommendations for the drainage system.
5.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA AND ITS DRAINAGE SYSTEM
The Prototype Basin includes portions of Rock, most of Bronson and
all of Willow Creeks. The location of the Basin is shown in Figure
1.1 of the main report. The study area is 15 square miles; its
drainage area includes an additional 21 square miles upstream of
the Basin. General characteristics of the area are shown in the
following table.
General Characteristics of the Main Creek Channels
Rock Bronson willow
Creek Creek Creek
Drainage Area, m12 28 4 5
Drainage Area within 5
Prototype Basin, mit 7 3
Length of Channel within 5.4 5.9
Prototype Basin, miles 4.3
Average Slope, X
0.2 0.6 1.3
Existing development in the Basin is primarily residential with
pockets of comvercial and industrial development. Nearly eighty
percent of of the Basin is open land. Future zoning for the Basin
attempts to maintain the open space provided by the main creek
channels in the Basin. Zoning also protects sensitive features of
the existing environment including the 100-year flood plain and
wildlife habitat•
i
f
-2- �L
6.0 DETENTION POND REVIEW
Thirty-Six existing residential detention ponds were evaluated.
The ponds were constructed during the County's detention program
(1975 to 1982) when
h n detent designnfacilitie
criteriaand eae required
lack of basin-wide
developments•
facilities resulted in we1e inadequate,
pinning for the detention recommended
. Of the 36 ponds reviewed, 8
ineffective ponds
for elimination, modifications
satisfactory in their presecoent one, and the
tconditionc
rescinder were
7.0 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS OF THE BASIN
EPA's Stormwater Management Model (SWI4!) was used to simulate
hydrologic and hydraulic conditions in the Basin. The computer
model provided a tool for analysis of peak flows and volumes
related to rainfall runoff. The model also computed hydraulic
main channel of Rock, Bronson and Willow
characteristics along the
of full basin development nearly all the
Creeks. Under conditions
main channel culverts would suing incl caalizedouponding off water
tributary would surcharge inesofttoads and channels.
and in some cases overtopping
8.0 ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO STORMWATER CONTROL
Four approaches to control of the Basin's storhes wereer were analyzed
and a fifth acknowledged. The four app
Program 1 (CIP1) - Full Capacity Tributary
Capital improvement
System: In Phase I, design storm recurrence intervals roc
this lnmain the
mended for design of theCrainagemsystecreekchannelsppppwoachuld be
drainage system tributary
improved to the level ofchannels criteria. No improvements would
be made to the main creek
Capital Improvement Program 2 (CIP2) - Full Capacity Tributary and
Man Channel System: This approach incorporates CIP1 and includes
improvement Oflf main
atchannel
full c bridges
and culverts to discharge
the 100-year peak
Capital Improvement Program 3 (CIP3) - Regional Detention: This
approach includes
salso CIP n.t Thirteen
n potential regional detention
pond sites were
Do Nothing: In this approach, no improvments would be made to the
if the
existing system. This approach wrclected d be vfutureery Ceflowse without
present system could discharge projected
flooding.
The final approach, Unplanned Improvements, should be given only
passing mention. This approach occurs when the drainage system is
s to
allowed to develop without a coordinted plan for im=ior to t
re unknown p heir
the system. Since changes to the system a
implementation, there is no means for comparison of this approach
-3-
with the others. Haphazard unpredictable drainage systems result
from this approach-
Each with h 'the exception of Unplanned Improvements, was
analyzed using the SWMM model to determine its hydrologic and
public
hydraulic benefits, capital costs, maintenance costs, p
acceptance, plan reliability, safety, hydrologic balance, ease of
implications, environmental impacts, ease
implementation, land use
of addressing immediate problems first, aesthetics, and eater
quality. Twelve criteria were used to compare the plans.
veloped to
task forcetcrommittee.deResults of the program advisory
program analysis follow:
task f
Summa of Capital improvement Program Evaluations
Total Score from Evaluation Matrices
Rock Bronson Willow
Creek Creek Creek
CIP1: Full Capacity
70.5 90.5 81.5
Tributary System
CIP2: Full Capacity
SO 59 61.5
Tributary and Main
Channel System
CIP3: Regional
84 55.5 60
Detention
Do Nothing
54.5 62 59
9.0 RECOMMENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The recommended capital improvement program is shown in Figure 7.1
of the main report; components, costs, and a 30-year implementation
Figure 7.2• The recommended program draws from
plan are Shaun in e unique te three
each of the approaches to meet threqui=ovementsfofhCapital
study area drainage basins. The tributary imp
Improvement Program 1 would be included in all of the basins plans.
The Regional Detention approach is recommended on Rock Creek.
However, only one major detention facility is recommended. The
facility would incorporate Holcomb Lake during severe storm events
providing a 2,500 cfs reduction in future peak flows just upstream
of West Union Road. With such a reduction in flows, no replacement
of man channel bridges or culverts would be required along Rock
Creek.
The Bronson Creek basin is narrow with
a quick ponds prspon6elitime
between rainfall and peak flows; detentiononly
benefit to the basin.existing 100uyearovide utrelows peakarflowse(aboutt40icfs)o Since
slightly
/Y
-4-
f the present flood plain has been established by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency and would increase only negligibly in
the future, it was recommended that only the improvements of CIP1
(full capacity tributary system) be implemented in the Bronson
Creek basin.
The Willow Creek basin suffers from numerous undersized pipes in
developments and in County rights-of-way. The land required for
adequately-sized detention facilities is not available. Allowing
the main channel to remain in its present state would result in
increased peak flows along an already seriously undersized main
channel (100% of the crossings are projected to flood under full
development). As a result it was recommended that the entire main
channel system be improved to discharge 100-year flows at full
capacity. With a full capacity main channel, an increase of 700
cfs would be discharged into Beaverton Creek at the mouth of Willow
Creek during the 100-year storm with full basin development. Even
with increased future runoff to Rock Creek, the reduction in peak
flows from the Holcomb Lake detention facility would more than
compensate for the increased Willow Creek discharge to Beaverton
Creek.
SUMMARY
Drainage master planning allows the County the opportunity to
provide for future drainage needs before full basin development
{ precludes st-h opportunity. This document is intended to serve as
a model for other drainage basin planning efforts throughout the
County. With planning, the County's drainage system can serve its
basin now and into the future.
I
-5-
�/
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
Urban Washington County's continued rapid population growth and physical
development is increasing the severity of stormwater runoff problems. Natural
systems are no longer able to absorb the rapid runoff flows generated by such
impervious ground covers as homes, patios, shopping centers, parking lots,
roads and other forms of development. The time for dealing with this problem
is now while the solutions are still affordable. To this end, Washington
County's Department of Land Use and Transportation has contracted with Kramer,
Chin & Mayo to complete the second phase of a comprehensive Drainage Master
Plan. The plan will serve the urban portions of Washington County. It pro-
poses long-term solutions and the methods for funding them.
DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
Two years ago, a Phase I Drainage Master Plan was prepared for Washington
County. This plan recommended a unified approach to drainage management in
which a single agency would take over drainage management responsibilities for
the entire urban area of Washington County. It also recommended that drainage
management be funded, in part, by a monthly utility charge much like water and
sewer. The Phase II plan proposes the existing Unified Sewerage Agency to act
as the stormwater drainage utility. It recommends financing drainage main-
tenance and improvements through a flat service charge of $2.00 per month per
residence and a variable rate for other forms of property.
Three advisory committees have been formed to help prepare the Phase II Plan.
These are the Steering Committee, Financial Task Force and Prototype Basin
Task Force. Representative of each city and several interest groups, the
Steering Committee is advising the consultants and Department of Land Use and
Transportation, and reviewing study findings and recommendations. The Finan-
cial Task Force is helping to prepare system funding recommendations. The
Prototype Basin Task Force is working on the final plan for that area.
The draft Phase II Plan is divided into two sub-plans -- the Financing Plan
and the Prototype Basin Plan. The Financing Plan evaluates the present
drainage system and recommends actions to implement the Phase I findings.
These include identifying the agency to manage the drainage system and identi-
fiying an equitable method for funding drainage system maintenance and
improvement costs. Second, the Prototype Basin Plan provides a detailed drain-
age plan for one portion of Washington County (the "Prototype Basin") to serve
as a model for how drainage plans will be prepared for the nine other drainage
basins in the urban portions of the County.
YOUR OPINIONS ARE NEEDED
Today's presentation provided you with useful information. on Washington
County's stormwater drainage problems and what is being done about them. We
are here to explain what is proposed, how you can become involved, and to
answer your questions and hear your comments.
Your opinions are important. Washington County wants your comments about
these proposed plans. Summaries of the plans are available at most city halls
and libraries. Please complete the enclosed comment form and share your views
with elected officials and staff of the Department of Land Use and Transporta-
tion (640-3519).
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
PLAN HIGHLIGHTS
The following provides a brief summary of the Washington County
Drainage Master Plan's two sections -- the Prototype Basin Plan
and the Financial Plan. Washington County citizens are encour-
aged to review the full plans. These are available for review at
the Department of Land Use and Transportation (Washington County
Administration Building) and at several city halls and public
libraries in eastern Washington County. For information on the
locations, call Jane Jensen-Norman or Larry Svart at 640-3519.
PROTOTYPE BASIN PLAN
1. Key Elements:
a. Description of the study area characteristics.
b. Inventory of existing drainage system including pipes,
bridges, open channels and 36 detention ponds.
C Evaluation and recommendations for each detention pond.
d.. Definition of drainage sub-basins and computation of
storm runoff from these sub-basins.
e. Analysis of drainage system alternatives to determine the
most effective approach to storm water control in the
Prototype Basin.
f . A recommended capital improvement program based on an
integration of the most effective system improvements
from each of the alternatives.
g. Prioritization of recommended drainage system improve-
ments.
h. Maintenance recommendations for the drainage system.
6
2. Prototype Area: Willow Creek, most of Bronson Creek and
portions of Rock Creek. Study area is 15 square miles plus
21 miles upstream of the basin. The area is 80% open space.
The developed land is primarily residential. i
3. Detention Ponds: Of the 36 in study area, 8 recommended for
elimination and 1 for modification.
4. Alternative Approaches:
Capital Improvement Program 1 (CIP1) - Full Capacity
Tributary System: drainage system tributary to the main
creek channels would be improved to the level of Phase I
criteria. No improvements would be made to the main
creek ct -nnels.
Capital Improvement Program 2 - Full Capacity Tributary
and Main Channel System: Incorporates CIP1 and includes
improvement of all main channel bridges and culverts to
discharge the 100-year peak flows at full capacity. i
{
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
-- Capital Improvement Program 3 - Regional Detention: Also
includes CIP1 and analyzed 13 potential regional
detention pond sites within the basin.
-- Do Nothing : No improvements would be made to the
existing system.
5. Recommendations: (for 30 year capital improvement program)
a . Tributary improvements for all three basins
b. The following improvements to the basins:
1) Rock Creek: A single regional detention facility,
Holcomb Lake, is recommended on Rock Creek with no
replacement of main channel bridges triulverts.
s stem
2) Bronson Creek: Only fall capacity Y Y
improvements (CIP1) are recommended for Bronson
Creek.
3) Willow
systemk•to Recommend discharge mIOOV year entire
f lows main
c
at full
capacity.
6. Model Planning Approach: Document serves as a model for
other drainage basin planning efforts throughout the County.
FINANCIAL PLAN
1. Regional Authority: A regional authority is needed to coor-
dinate drainage management and to establish reliable, equi-
table funding for the drainage system while retaining local
control over the storm drainage system. Consistent with the
recommendations of the Phase I report, the Unified Sewerage
Agency is recommended to be the regional drainage authority
and should establish a utility for funding the system.
The regional authority will be responsible for improvements
to and maintenance of the regional systems throughout the
proposed stormwater service area, defined as draining 100 or
more acres. The cities would be responsible for improvement
and maintenance in their jurisdictions for systems draining
less than 100 acres.
2. Regulatory Authority: Regulatory programs for new develop-
ment within incorporated areas would be the cities' responsi-
bility, while the county would retain regulatory responsibil-
ities in the unincorporated areas.
3. Advisory Commission: A Stormwater Advisory Commission should
be established to guide and advise USA in formulating
policies, programs, capital improvement plans, and service
levels for their area.
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
4. Priority for Improvements: It is recommended that two of the
large tributary basins of the Tualatin River be designated as
the first areas for implementation of a regional stormwater
program. These are the Rock-Beaverton-Butternut Creeks area
and the Fanno Creek basin.
5. Regional Authority's Services: These include planning, regu-
lation, construction and maintenance.
6. Funding: Use of a service charge is recommended.
A "systems development charge" is recommended to ensure that
new developments "buy into" the communities' prior investment
in drainage facilities designated and built to accommodate
future development.
A portion of the regional service charge should be returned
to the cities, based on the revenue generated within their
respective communities and earmarked only for use on drain-
age.
A uniform service charge will be applied to each basin. This
would be a flat rate of $2.00/month for single family resi-
dences, and a fee based on the gross area of each property
and a factor indicative of the relative intensity of
development of each parcel. The charge will fund the four
program elements of :
a . Administration planning and capital improvements to major
systems;
b. Administration and maintenance of major systems;
C. Administration, planning, construction and maintenance of
minor systems in unincorporated areas;
d. Administration, planning, construction and maintenance of
minor systems in incorporated areas.
Cities may use other funding methods to augment the
distribution from USA to provide a higher level of service in
local systems. Regulatory services will be funded by special
fees charged through the permitting process.
5�
LEGEND
\\ '
County Bn.rnnar/
< ` p Creek or River
N. --
Drainage Bann Boundar/
\ Mayor H gnways
\I Urban Growth Boundary
Initial Service Area
Banks 'rP
l
North Plains
1 �1
26 � \\
Cornelius / / loll , N
Forest
Grove / Hillsboro r / �� 1 Portland
i -
r.� `< t Beaverton
Gaston ! / r 217 I
Tigard I
King City <.. Durham
Tualatin 1\
L1 • _ � � i
�. Sherwood
' 99 W —J
Wilsonville
5
FIGURE 2.2
Initial Service Area
Kramer.Chin&Mavo. Inc. Washington Countv
KCM :OS ty Ash St.Portland.OR 47204 Department of Land Use and Transportation
,Fater R•�ourlr A•1111J`IeS Rock • Bronson • Willow Creeks
WRA surtr„l�13�Lake St.S Kirkland.ORyWI;t Financial Planning Element
67
� 5
• n
\1 t
n
c it wit
SIN_�\ +
` ' 1
n
• •
n
n
� � r
n •
r
•
r<
�1
'1
R
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
KEY QONTAC'TS
Commissioner Wes Myllenbeck Commissioner Bonnie Hays
Chairman Board of Commissioners
Board of Commissioners 150 North First Avenue
150 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
Commissioner Eva Killpack
Richard Daniels Board of Commissioners
Director 150 North First Avenue
Department of Land Use Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
and Transportation
150 North First Avenue Commissioner John Meek
Second Floor Administration Board of Commissioners
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 150 North First Avenue
648-8740 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
Jane Jensen-Norman Commissioner Lucille Warren
Planner Board of Commissioners
Department of Land Use 150 North First Avenue
and Transportation Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
150 North First Avenue
Second Floor Administration
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
640-3519
Larry Svart
Planning Division
Department of Land Use
and Transportation
150 North First Avenue
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
640-3519
CONSULTANTS
Glen Grant Susan Hall and Lawrie Robertson
Krasner, Chin & Mayo Hall & Associates
10 S.W. Ash 1111 UAL Building
Portland, Oregon 97204 2033 Sixth avenue
221-1814 Seattle, Washington 98123
(206) 682-1828
Ed Sigurdson
Krasner, Chin & Mayo Hector Cyre
Salem, Oregon Water Resources Associates, Inc.
370-8864 Suite 200
135 Lake Street South
Kirkland, Washington 98033
f Tony Righellis (206) 828-7583
David Evans & Associates
2626 S.W. Corbett
Portland, Oregon 97201
223-6663
WASHINGTON COUNTY DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Are you aware of any drainage problems in Washington County?
Yes No Comments:
2. Have you personally experienced a stormwater drainage problem?
Yes No Comments:
3. Urban Washington County's population will grow by nearly 25% in the next twenty years. This
growth will increase the County's drainage problems. Do you think solving this problem should
be a high priority?
Yes No Comments:
4. Who do you think should be responsible for drainage management? Should it be the:
(check one or more)
a. Neighborhood d. Cities g. Federal Government
b. Unified Sewerage Agency e. Metro h. Combination of
c. County f. State and
Comments:
5. What else would you like to know about the drainage program? Do you have any other recom-
mendations or concerns to share with drainage planners and County decision-makers?
Name of the Community Where You Reside:
Your Affiliation (check as appropriate)
( ) Interested Citizen ( ) Developer
( ) Elected Official ( ) Environmental Interest Group Member
( ) Advisory Group Member ( ) Other
( ) Drainage Professional
meeting:
COMMENTS:
(FOLD)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Planning Division
150 North First Avenue
Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
(FOLD)
m
cm mm >1 a)
co w L Y t
m c } - E �»
c N C ca _ X I �p c O
CD� _ mom' �— � O c.0
V r C m c a L as
mm 0EttO �oLa) Q I :3 p cn
to m 2 N _ CL m�.- Dm w r I U °w as_N .m
Lc �� cC� L EDmN� c0 I .0- a) � me Q
.� c� > m � -- t � �� E � cac �Q C
O a—
7O ;_= cN V � 5 m o a) coC:-cc Ci
G Um �a�i � � aEi _� � a�'ic�3on < c o f a? o
c -0 - 0 o� � Z ` c`c m$ a �� �� O N —
Gn mmaoo 3N � - 0 = aEou� cE °
0 — a0 c0c6 � E ` O
++ t � B0)E Em -Ura �oY —
ytc —ami Mocco > >.E I ca) ca — c >
— �- � � � U- E .0m — ._ I � c��coca E o Co
E cM Zv —
C O E 'O \�, j R - c m m L N
m v ` cd V c �_ '— N c� ovi Fa .. Em
0 0� .- cn:. m CD c m O � QM
r comm►. :�\ � � cnm amcri0CM(D CO -0 C
W ctim '� • ' � rn( c O 'O � Nv cn m N y vi too
cc
O mcoc0 \ c — v >,0mcv�EO �� C O 'D.0 o
c \ ov» -vviva' cEc 5 0cca m
r o N co-' \ m a) m cc E o ca = 0= E co v�
Cm m O o m .0 m m` > O "- O 00 .0 a N m E O N Cc
> .ter O L- 'n m m O .� O «. �- U cn >. OD m O r
m m w E - moo s �cc cc m m - E � C m am cm co cc .- � cc
�L mL ° $ E F� m C ` LL C O O CEO m e cC O mL
I) tk ca O m :. CD
N N (VL ` t«d C m t d tin m �' E c N m 7
c'0 m m .m. •� D m o E y •- i C C C C m E r_
L 7 m L > C m m = _0- cn <O m t > m to O cr L m cd t m y
�--� E ED
m Cc m E co c m
cn o cc
ccc wn 0 m '0 o ° � v, E � a so �=.
c`c m ov � cc oo N ami c 0 �'� � yon E
W ccc m 0 > CDC= � � o $ �,o o at � cyc�
� Et moo' ��"• C �0omE co CMO r- � c�i- � 0 cc
...� 0c Q tc� o m 3
oc coo
� � E c oErac � m •- m•- Er- m o --� �' m3—
O wC O'O 0 - 2 Q+ m o o m 20 OL c C.0 ` >,m 0 0
V 10
0 w > s= m �" S.
> 3Lcc t C N C
� omm cc o,0 0000 o a vo cc c`occ'Ec°� m
L m a) E c cCoin a>.m c r m— E mLo.m co—
a om I I I I O m= m= d0 me oL > � > Cl cm&E
� mN0 �„c '+c > ._ O«. Y � o N wCo3 mcc0p 0) Cc
W 0 cc m O Wt aw_ ._ �:. Q cONL Zr- cs..._ �..-
O
:2s.�
005 O O O •
O s.4
U 0 O
A 0 w 0
+r C
C13 _
t \ I I C Q) Y -
(Allh
ro
Irl \ i> , • '. d "" Ecac?� � o ,
\ \1
to
01
r . t! M N R LL
- o � c0 > 07m >w �S=
y
jaOrj)Y I place tw"
m m I
� a D I
DUB I
IME CNC- I
a* ,* E (0 '0 e I
p,0 c0 C �� ' I
o o_- Attn: Jane Jensen-Norman
1° .0 °' Y I Larry Svart
c x y U Washington County Department
cd Washington
0 EEm� I
m m I of Land Use and Transportation
mN >t
— $
�. � o�oicw� 150 N. First Ave.
I Hillsboro, Oregon 97124
I
I
1
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: AGENDA ITEM #:
DATE SUBMITTED: 9/26/84 PREVIOUS ACTION:
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Leron Heights
Interceptor Sewer Reports PREPARED BY: Frank A Currie
Agreement REQUESTED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: 1!_ CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
.szsasszzassaasas-aa4a::z---aa-aaa-a-z:saes-------aasaasa------------zaaaszaaa z
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Staff has worked out a memorandum of agreement with Leron Heights Interceptor,
Inc., that clarifies the standard determing which properties are subject to
the Leron heights Interceptor surcharge and how the collection will be made.
tJ
------------ --------------------
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Maintain the status quo wherein staff only notifies the applicant that the
property is subject to a surcharge from Leron heights Interceptor, Inc.
zs:s:sass::ssaaas-----sass--sass------------zzaz:-.sass....sas-zzz-zzss:zsa:sz
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve the attached Memorandum of Agreement which redefines the standard for
payment and lets the staff request payment in the form of a check from each
applicant at the time of application.
(0176S)
• LERON HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR CORPORATION
/.,�,.v .1iV, ,1.'/:,,,, iv,ts
12700 SOUTHWEST PACIFIC HIGHWAY
f TIGARD. OREGON 97223
l (503) 639-2125
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the parties to the co-tract between the CITY
OF TIGARD and J. A. PATERSON of September 14, 1964, and its
ADDENDUM dated April 22., 1968, desire to amend and/or clarify
certain standards , collection procedures and contingent_
liabilities, the following is set forth;
( 1 ) Henceforth the standard for who pays LERON HEIGHTS
INTERCEPTOR CORPORATION the service charge at the time of
connection are those who use the line directly or through any
feeder or subsidiary line connected thereto a�; further determined by
the City of Tigard's authority to issue a sewer permit;
( 2 ) To assist in collection the CITY OF TIGARD will
request payment by check made out to LERON HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR
CORPORATION at the time of issuing a sewer permit as per the
above standard. Said checks are to be immediately forwarded
in self-addressed, stamped envelopes provided by LERON HEIGHTS
INTERCEPTOR CORPORATION and notice given at any time of any
refusal to pay by any applicant so that ordinary collection
procedures may be followed by . LERON HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR CORP.
The CITY OF TIGARD will continue to note, "Subject to Leron
Heights Sewer Surcharge, " on each appropriate sewer permit
(� issued.
( 3 ) LERON HEIGHTS INTERCEPTOR CORPORATION will hold
harmless the CITY OF TIGARD for any oversight that may in-
advertently occur in interpreting the above standard regarding
those who are subject to the service connection charge or any
administrative omission or error due to inadvertence in
assisting with collections.
In all other respects the said contract of September 14,
1964, and addendum dated April 22, 1968, be and the same is
hereby ratified, confirmed and perpetuated.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their
hands, this day of 1984.
LEO E GHTS IN. ERCEPTOR, INC.
By �—
CITYV'OF TIGARD, a municipality
of the State of OregonBY-76"t, -�Gi,1f�.�C
Mayor
By—
� .�� Recorder
f ..,�IY S '{'�'�fai`'•� '+" r-G }A'r:`'�Or�•, t4'1fr3ay'
�kI �a
.: Q��'"�'1'"'f3' �Z yt f• .,� Ld' .��`��� s yr "}`.r'� ,fi'
WR
f1x,�r a + f } 3 - } ��� •�,! a.JF ,�y E ..•t• s Y �. d k o
�'• � =��'�' .• ,y 7�,.- �` + 1 ��� �1. >'�iat �+i�rr f , � t Pr � ,•rte`ri j.raj��t'ti�°},�'S(`'*M:.: ' y ✓,'
f h, 7 r.. s .�t r .a it j }•.7iyf i: * } t.r7 t
1 }' �41' y `fxtr�E°���iF�f�P�t'���' r a'�r%a; -LAS.+:q,P�{_y� ''.P 't uf,4s t �✓, + r -'�SC�•
'.7 v ttyyii q�"�h +�•7'g s ..ac t' � ',fie Y 'r >.+ X 4. t 4.,�
�+Q `FF k'"... T ii is"tj'�� �#i� t {�r`�'.i �Y` fi{ :� '�' ;.1 c..t�c tF` e !t,�l�i•Y j�� � t� t -': '{ t..
{ ��j�•'ky�� � € Ynv���� YM 'S'�t•� ��.a'�. , 4 +. ,y�i¢i?t �K� y�,,+"�;a1.M yf � y 1 t ; f
t {ih ✓r � 'y�1ci'r D1 � ��_:y � YII f t% .Y � c .ts •�y°..�' Yr�� � „ ,�iy t r
• ��'�. i` �.. � - � � - }i r -7 � ,..4 rr, ..1 r �->. :r as'• Y�:.- � ,ftr n�r -.;
'' t.IFS• 5','- #"�',�y y '/t �i 4 tt i i ,
Y
• �$� ��,+�t "i+* 4�1.ts x •-`'_ ,r x`���J�1r `�'� i�!�'�y.s ,a '`• �'
' ;'.� ,! .. f b� i e i 1:. ✓ *"' h ,, �+ �'�it�t'}ih'�� t i'f�)^ J +�i.:.
.j �i i'{r ..J t<4Y.v7.4 i'Y�t,�,• ,� �•,� r, tt�n� '..',.t r �•'t � i D ' fR �
� K,l 5 SJ�',K 1Yf F �j.•�i•b'*C' k ''c F- '. t.'�' - �� n jt t S rF 1 �
t'��b,+.�'� '�I� �,; �'� ,y«• ��T t �.< is s } L �• � �•^,,.,.d" . �*,;r-�� � �1 y ;` Y
r t '�{ J�C•t !t ♦ ,. :vy �• i'"� '�, r" F _ r a�C¢_
• _; �� r r' t +f', yr .� � �,` ' .. A.�
r y �,y P r r s r �•�'`� �p��,x����T j �f�.� � .{ er - -
M �C w•r �jr T ",1
r �
i F
(�►n►I►:���•( c)I►s►ildIlg(;t-lnip
l
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES AND 5
CURRENT COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
CHAPTER III PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND GROWTH 30
PROJECTIONS
CHAPTER IV SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS AND TECHNOLOGY 33
( ASSESSMENT
F
CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 48
CHAPTER VI CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 74
CHAPTER VII IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND SCHEDULE 78
i
i
x
,,j - CompassC'.onsuldngGmup
Rb
i
l
i
s
r
CHAPTER I
V
INTRODUCTION
C'.ompassConsuIdngGroup l
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
3
Overview
This is the Final Report and Long-Range Plan for the Emergency Communications
Project for Washington County. It compiles the data collected and findings presented
in three separate interim reports and includes additional information about the
implementation plan, schedule, and funding strategies to put the recommendations into
effect.
Background to the Study
In June 1983 the Washington County Department of Finance and Administration issued
a Request for Proposals for consulting assistance in the development of an Emergency
Communications Plan. Most of the public safety agencies (including law enforcement,
fire, and emergency medical services) in the County participated in this study, which
involved the analysis of four program objectives, as follows:
• Central dispatch
- What is the feasibility of one central dispatch for
Washington County?
- If feasible, how would it be implemented?
Computerized dispatch
- For current providers of central dispatch, how could
computerized dispatch be implemented?
- If one central dispatch center is recommended, detail the
potential interface with computerized dispatch.
• Enhanced 9-1-1 (E 9-1-1)
-1 - Is E 9-1-1 a viable option either under the current situation
or in a consolidated dispatch environment?
Integration of cable television/dispatch
, r
2
(;oml k1-sti(:0nsi1ltinKGrc nip
- Determine if cable television is a viable option for an
alternative emergency communications system.
If it is a viable option, what are the required interface and
financial implications?
Compass Consulting Group, Inc. was awarded the contract to develop the Emergency
Communications Plan as the result of a competitive bidding process. Work began in
January 1984. The Compass proposal divided the project into six separate tasks, which
followed the traditional systems analysis and engineering approach, as follows:
Task 1 - Document current emergency communications systems and levels of
support to various agencies
Task 2 - Analyze current and future communications systems requirements
Task 3 - Survey technology options
ITask 4 - Prepare system(s) design
Task 5 - Analyze and evaluate optional approaches and costs
Task 6 - Prepare recommendations and long-range pl.-In
This report covers all six tasks and includes information from public safety agencies
throughout the County. (Subsequent to the initial RFP, a number of agencies decided
not to participate in this study; however, data is provided on these agencies in an
attempt to identify opportunities and solutions from a Countywide perspective.)
In addition, curing the course of the study, Washington County assigned responsibility
for project administration to the Director, Support Services Department. Throughout
the project, however, there was a Steering Committee comprised of representatives of
agencies in the County which provided guidance and direction to the consultants and
reviewed the interim reports.
Project Scope and Approach
oretin the analyses of the four objectives listed above, s
The scope of this study, incorp g
covered the emergency communications systems and equipment in use throughout the
..+ County. The initial component in the emergency communications systems typically
involves calls for service from citizens. All of Washington County is served by the
9-1-1 emergency telephone system, which is the principal means used for emergency
_ calls from the public. In some cases, however, the seven-digit telephone numbers are
still used by citizens, especially in the smaller jurisdictions, to request assistance. The
9-1-1 emergency calls are handled by a number of public safety answering points
(PSAPs) within the County, which are actually part of the emergency communications
centers.
3
(;A)nIEw�titi(_cnLtittltir (�muFr
onent of the overall system and includes
Radio equipment comprises another comp the mobile radios in emergency vehicles,
central dispatch centers around the Coun y,
and the less powerful handheld radios used when staff are not in their vehicles.
l Various types of radio transmitters and receivers,
located at numerous sites
patchers at the
�! throughout the County, are part of the overall sperystem
and en
in the fielable d This collection
centers to communicate with the vehicles and n turn, made operational by landline
of radio equipment and transmission sites is,
telephone and microwave links which control the transmitting into areceiving
equipment
q ip ons
at the various sites and tie together d capacity to handle1 he workload. In the course of
system with adequate coverage communications
th re also,addressed,taffing and
d organ options l i wereurevielwed.ated to emergency
es r
we
l Other components of the overall communications systems em covered
in the relatedcope of information
sy
(CAD) sy n
J project included computer-aided dispatch (C
ice and l
the data
systems which use the daaused for planning and resourceon calls for seryellocation dec Much so ns by the
generated by citizen cal s
various agencies and accordingly is part of the analysis of the dispatch function.
The approach used in the initial project tasks involvedthe revieand a support w of is l data
APs
and current operations of the various public safety agencies
and dispatch centers. Annual with encynother
andcommunicationsrcenter staff on werertoecollect
interviews were conducted g dispatch centers
p�
current data. On-site visits to all of the existicent el offng PSAPs i^ed maps were provided eby
1
made, and coverage maps and telephone Utility
was also
County personnel Information State9 ball tcall Coordinator lsalso providedcurrent inf ormationt about he
collected. The Oregongoe
County's emergency telephone system.
! roach to ly, the determining all functions and operational requirements
requirements,ain terms of
er of
The app
activities. Initially, the ove ected changes in future operations
communications systems, were reviewed. Any ex p the
or agency responsibilities were nroe h The
sdaalson reviewedd for .
Next,ces ncom communications
ations
;l correlated with overall County g + perspective were analyzed. The
1 requirements from a technical and engineering
emphasis of this analysis was to ensure that the communications sysed on public safety agency
orily bas
operated as designed an ar were
Thegmethodologytused in this s project phase involved a
operations and coverageenc communications
review of accepted local and national standardera ions,emergency
management areas.
systems, including the equipment, facilities, op
Representatives from the various agencies were also contacted to gaXh ected changes
about current unmet needs, expected future requirements, and any p
in their scope of services or agency responsibilities.
1. stem
Finally, based on the
of ealternativesntwereddeveloped.c In addition ted growth for sysing tem
e
planning period, a n tions for organizational structure and
-; configuration and equipment needs, op
implementation were developed and reviewed.
4
R Remaining Chapters of This Report
The remaining chapters of this report include:
• Chapter II - "Review of Public Safety Agencies and Current
Communications Systems"
' Chapter III -"Planning Assumptions and Growth Projections"
• Chapter IV - "System Requirements and Technology Assessment"
• Chapter V - "Analysis of Alternatives"
• Chapter VI - "Conclusions and Recommendations"
• Chapter VII -"Implementation Plan and Schedule"
i
1
I �
1
5
4
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES
AND CURRENT COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
'l
J
Overview of Public Safety Agencies
This section provides basic information about the various fire and law enforcement
agencies operating within the County.
Fire Departments
The fire departments respond to fire and emergency medical service
(EMS)
�-t calls, with EMS calls comprising the largest number of emergencyresponses.
1 Rapid dispatch and response is vital for both fire and EMS calls, and command
and control capabilities are neeeQuipmen t and d in oer to
personnel t oassign ltcovelunits to
r exposed
serious fires and to "move up
geographical areas during serious incidents. The following fire departments
provide services in Washington County:
• Beaverton Fire Department - covers approximately 11 square
miles with two stations, has approximately 53 full-time staff,
and handles about 2,285 emergency calls per year.
• Cornelius Fire Department - covers about 40 square miles with
two stations, and uses an all-volunteer force, and handles under
100 calls per year.
• Fire District No. 1 - covers about 75 square miles with seven
stations, has a current staff of 162 personnel (including about 25
clerical and about 20 volunteers), and handles about 5,000 calls
per year.
Fire District No. 2 - covers about 150 square miles with four
• stations, has eight full-time staff (one clerical) and about 75
volunteers, and handles about 800 calls per year.
Forest Grove Fire Department - covers 81 square miles with two
stations, has ten. full-time
bout 50 volunteertsff, a dpersonnel
handles about 1clerical),000 calls per year.
Gaston Rural Fire Department - volunteer department handling
t
• about 170 calls per year.
G
"_► (;��n i1�;�.titi(;c insultir�rc n tF� 6
J -
• Hillsboro Fire Department - covers 11 square miles with two
stations, has 32 full-time staff (including one clerical) and about
five volunteers, and handles about 1,100 calls per year.
• Tri-Cities Fire Department - volunteer department with three
stations, handling about 300 calls per year.
• Tualatin Rural Fire Department - covers 110 square miles with
seven stations, has about 127 full-time and 53 volunteer
1 personnel, and handles almost 2,850 fire incidents per year.
(Fire departments such as the State Forestry Department and ambulance
companies serving the County which are alerted only about calls are not
described separately.)
A number of departments indicated that additional stations were currently
J under consideration for construction within the next few years. These
agencies included Fire District No. 2, Forest Grove, Beaverton, and Fire
District No. 1. Tualatin Rural Fire District is the only fire agency currently
supported by a Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) system. However, the
Hillsboro Fire Department and Fire District No. 2 have recently signed a
contract for a CAD system, and the Beaverton Fire Department and Fire
District No. 1 are currently considering a CAD system; several other
( departments are also in the planning stage for procurement or joint use of
i CAD systems.
Law Enforcement Departments
The various law enforcement agencies respond to calls-for-service of a
criminal nature and handle numerous accident and other public service types
of emergencies. Communications are a vital component of providing these
public safety services, and continuous monitoring of communications with and
the status of field units is also vital for officer safety. The following law
J enforcement agencies currently provide services in the County:
• Beaverton Police Department - staffed with about 61 personnel
7 of which about half are patrol officers in the Uniform Division;
other divisions include Criminal Investigation and
Communications and Records, with a Crime Prevention Unit;
handles about 3,700 emergency calls and almost 19,000 total
responses per year.
• Cornelius Police Department - staffed with 10.5 personnel of
which seven are patrol officers and 1.5 are clerical staff and
handles about 100 emergency calls per year.
• Forest Grove Police Department - staffed with about 22
personnel of which 16 are sworn (administration and operations
division), with six personnel handling the dispatching, clerical,
J
t 0►rnEKL-,4; ►r►sr11614;nail► 7
�1
f
and parking enforcement areas; receives about 4,140 emergency
calls per year.
l Gaston Police Department - staffed with one full-time sworn
s staff member and four reserve officers and handles about 50
emergency calls and over 700 incidents per year.
1
_� Hillsboro Police Department - staffed with approximately 36
sworn personnel divided into the Patrol Division (26 staff),
Detective Division, and Community Services, with 5.5 non-sworn
staff, and handles about 2,900 emergency calls and about 12,000
- incidents per year.
1 Sherwood Police Department - this department has five sworn
J personnel and receives part-time clerical support from City Hall
staff; no statistics on the number of emergency calls is available.
• Tigard Police Department - staffed with approximately 23 sworn
personnel (administration, patrol, and investigation) and seven
civilian personnel and handles about 2,200 emergency calls and
J almost 13,000 total calls per year.
J Washington County Sheriff's Office - staffed with approximately
201 staff divided into administration, corrections, services, and
operations divisions; handles over 6,000 emergency calls per year.
Review of PSAPs and Dispatch Centers
i
The three PSAPs serving the County are identified in Exhibit III and include the
Forest Grove Dispatch Center, the Washington County Central Dispatch Center, and
the Tualatin Fire Dispatch Center. These three centers answer emergency 9-1-1 calls
and serve as dispatch centers and also transfer calls to secondary PSAPs which handle
the call transfers and dispatch the appropriate public safety agency. These secondary
PSAPs include Washington County Fire District No. 1 Dispatch Center, Beaverton
Police Dispatch Center, Tigard Police Dispatch Center, and the Oregon State Police
Dispatch Center !which is included for informational purposes only).
3 Exhibit II.2 displays the various telephone company central offices and telephone
prefixes which the various PSAPs service. Exhibit II.3 displays the general pattern of
call transfers from the primary PSAPs to the secondary PSAPs.
J Each of the six dispatch centers are described in general terms in Exhibit II.4,
�] including the participating agencies, population served, call volume data (for
J emergency calls), staffing, and other data about the scope of services provided.
{� The Beaverton Dispatch Center is in the Police Department building in the City Hall
complex and occupies approximately 607 square feet. There is computer flooring and
t+ ( ()ILIIkLtiti( ()fLtiLdtillgGrotip 8
EXHIBIT II.1
WASHINGTON COUNTY CALL FLOW
1
Banks Police Dept.
- Gaston Police Dept.
Forest • - Gaston Rural Fire Dept.
J -1-1 Grove _____________________________> - Forest Grove Police Dept.
calls Dispatch - Forest Grove Fire Dept.
Center - Metro West Ambulance Co.(Alert
1 - State Forestry (Alert)
Washington County Fire 01
Washington" - Skyline Fire 020
l County Fire - Beaverton Fire Dept.
J District 01 - - Buck Ambulance Co. (Alert)
Dispatch Center - TVA Ambulance Co. (Alert)
Metro West Ambulance Co.(Alert
1 J ;t.- Washingtnn Camty Sheriff Dept.
Hillsboro Police Dept.
Hillsboro Fire Dept.
Washington • - Cornelius Police Dept.
County ___________________________--- - Cornelius Fire Dept.
{ - Central - Sherwood Police Dept.
calls Dispatch - North Plains Police Dept.
Center - Tri-Cities Fire Dept.
- Washington County Fire 02
Metro West Ambulance m. (Alert
- State Forestry Dept. (Alert)
Beaverton*'
Police _ Beaverton Police Dept.
Dispatch
Center
Tigard"
Police
Dispatch Tigard Police Dept.
e Center
Tualatin• - Tualatin Rural Fire Dept.
1 Fire __ __________________________ Metro West Ambulance ( Alert)
Dispatch - W. Falls Ambulance Co. (Alert)
calls Center - TVA Ambulance Co. (Alert)
�i
=Dispatch
_ Oregon State Police
Notes:
• designates primary PSAP
•• designates secondary PSAP
••• The cities of Tualatin. King City, and Durham contract with the Sheriff's Dept.
for police services.
telephone communications
radio communicatior,
Y
i
9
CAM I[XI_S4 �nritdur�;t;tcnll�
_ 1
Ct
EXHIBIT 11.2 ,
1
CENTRAL OFFICE A. PSAY CONFIGURATION
f
' Central Office Dispatch
and PSAP Center i
Telephone Utility ContiConti=on PSpP
Central office Forest Grove
- 357, 359 Forest Grove
Forest Grove
Washington County Washington County
Banks 324 t
J Hillsboro 640, 648, 681 Washington County
Wash ngton County
Washington County Washington County
North Plains 647
Forest Grove Forest Grove
Gaston 985
Washington County Beaverton Police
Aloha 642, 649 Washington County
Fire Department
No. 1 E
Washington County Beaverton Police
Beaverton 626, 627, 641, Washington County
643, 644, 646 Fire Department
No. 1
Washington County Beaverton Police
1 Somerset West
629, 645 Washington County
Fire Department
No. l
Tigard 620, 639, 684
Tualatin RFD Tigard
Sherwood 625
Tualatin RFD Washington County
Stafford 638
Tualatin RFD Washington County
Tualatin RFD Washington County
Tualatin 692 for Police
lTualatin for Fire
r 682, 685 Tualatin RFD
Wilsonville
Oni11XLti:+A�iIltitiltirig(;n)tip 10
t
EXHIBIT II.3
GENERAL CALL TRANSFER PATTERN
9-1-1 Calls Forest Grove
Dispatch Center
d
a ; 4750
_ a o COs Washington County
A4 0° 220
Fire No. 1 Dispatch Center
4 �j o calls
op w m
Jo
o n v
e
Washington County
9-1-1 Calls Central Dispatch
Center 3700 Beaverton Police
Dispatch Center
ca s
8
0
U t
C N
J �n 120 Tigard Police
c.0 c s Dispatch Center
m 2200
J 3� calls
o m
��u
Tualatin
Fire Dispatch
9-1-1 Calls Center
Primary PSAPs Secondary PSAPs
J
J
� J
�;()fT1lkLtiti(.()Iltill�l�f1�:t'cn)1) 11
1
f
E m a
I C E
W r
C Em
• m� G m
� r• n e•�
J
Q
C
ou �^ o
o eo.. ' Y ICS
N
z _ o
w eo �e > mm
H U ec« E u b Cc La °c-
rn ca
X Cn e
> o o c o 0
A Q y O O O N O N
N
a
m d
cn a -0 OV ILP
v
a c c oci ,° .o d c = a m o r
yc o f y U U p a w c np E
in
o• mo 'c5 Ac. 41
s❑ m w w .� w a U❑ U❑ F w F❑
u
m L L L
N V N
< bo ❑ oU izzU VU
Py.'G Qi L L U u c V 00 y
dd o � - bl
mU 0 F ❑ F❑
�l
On IgGrAmp 13
Vs
with two
quencies.
supports
about
i o N these
x
E v a
4.r
C m
W
2 m
Z
T
U
C d
u — E o 0 0 0 0 0
c- o
m C 0 o m
E > o 0
•� U o p� N O O 04 - .p e-f
� E �; ca .r� m
m N
y N 1
Q OO
SEL U ' _ v
o
cm m
a c p c d
W /+ O y7 Qi N e d'
X a�j N -W N N N
■ W ° h
d
T >' y C N d
baU
j m W C C z
O p, W
y U E i+, a! ° n. c w ° aCi oCo �i 0 d « m
Ev � a of QE $ � $ L�31
U S.mQ c .
yo° � G 3ia. UQ UQ
3i, i ¢G yZ 3v� 2Q =Q rnQ
T L T
.0
7 O :3 r
q � d
< 5b o— °Q
En°• ar L z ::
3i+U 3U
-� ( (►r>II�;Ititi( tin;tlll]it�;i;rtxtl) 13
1
�I
1 a generator provides backup power. There are two ten-button telephone sets with two
9-1-1 lines; a logging tape recorder handles all telephone lines and radio frequencies.
The consoles were manufacturered by Kustom Electronics, which no longer supports
^` (or provides) this type of equipment. The consoles (which are not duplicates) are about
four years old, and there are problems with spare parts and maintenance for these
units. The general layout of the center is as follows:
^, Direct line to Fire District No. 1
Boom microphone
Radio Fi lea Paging
Printer
]0-Button
Telephones
Secondary Console Primary Console
Alarms
(30 rinancial
institutions)
The Forest Grove Dispatch Center is located in the front of the Police Department
building and also serves walk-in traffic for the Department. It covers about 400
square feet. There are six 9-1-1 lines (four on the 357- prefix and two on the 98.-
prefix). Backup power is provided by a generator in the basement of the building. The
console was custom-made. The general layout of the center, with only one console
position, is as follows:
Door controls
O Radios I
CRT e
CCTV Index
Control
7LEDS Walk-lu
!natant Keyboard Traffic
Playback Window
Recorder
7 Fire
Alarms Printer
(on Telephones
wall) ❑
1 Typewriter
1
I ❑ Records
J (Power
File)
—I
1
( c)niE>�tir;( c)►itiulw►�(�rcx1E) 14
I
f
1 The Tualatin Fire Dispatch Center is located in the basement of the administrative
offices of the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District. The center occupies about
2,300 square feet, including a bunkroom, kitchen, mapping area, communications
_ center office, and equipment room in addition to the center operational area. There is
a generator to provide backup power for all radio and telephone equipment and the
computers for the CAD system. There are four identically equipped console positions
(with radio and telephone equipment) and one separate telephone answering position.
The general layout of the dispatch operations area is as follows:
t
st„tn.�
Status Alarm Monitor
— MoniloODisplays <>
1 �I
Four Redundant Console Positions
� —I Equipped with Telephones and CR s)
J
Main Telo pho:.
` Printer An. er,n¢ Position
1`
Tape
ecord r
The Tigard Police Department Dispatch Center is located in the Police Department l
administrative offices and covers about 400 square feet. The dispatch personnel
answer the telephones, including the ten-button set with two incoming 9-1-1 lines
(transfers from Tualatin Fire Communications Center), one direct line to the Sheriff,
and five administrative lines. A second telephone set can be used for backup call
answering. The dispatch staff also handle walk-in traffic and are assigned records and
_ clerical duties. There is only one radio, and the general layout of the office is as
follows:
s
Public Window
7 adi
Telephone
lDesk Typewriter
1 LEDS
CRT
Telephone
15
CA)II Eklti�;( t�n�iilut>�;(;rtniE)
{ Center is located at a fire station
l The Washington County Fire District No. 1 Dispatch
quare feet. It is in a separate area of the fire station with
and occupies about 1,420 sareas and has a closed-circuit TV system for security and
its own sleeping and lounge
surveillance. There is a battery backup power system (eight hours duration) for radio
—� and telephone equipment and a standby generator. The general layout of the center,
which has two redundant positions, is as follows:
� Primary Position
1 (Telephone and Radio) I
J Tape
Recorder
Ii
hone
Radio) "•I
1 '
Hazardous Materials File
EDCommand
Position
I The Washington County Dispatch Center, which is currently the largest in the County,
j occupies about 1,160 square feet, including the police and fire operations area and the
is area. The center is
ated in the
equipment room; o offices Co areincluded
and there is backup power for the whole building.
basement of the County Courthouse,
The layout of the operations area is as follows:
i
16
T N•pe"n t',
(li as hi n F'ton
` (Hillsboro U County
Police Sheriff)
J Department)
POLICE
DISPATCHING i
. LEDS (Four Console::-)
CRT
J
(liashingion
(Contract ❑ Count}' '
Cities) Sheriff)
S
Typewriter i
1 )
r
s
54
J 3
CALI. ANShERIN(. R
(Three Positions)
Address
Verification
Files
I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
Telephoncs FIRL DISPArCHI.\(,
C� (Two consoles, located
in separate rooms)
r
Current Radio System Desin
The following exhibits display the design and configuration of the existing radio system:
• Exhibit II.5 displays the Sheriff Is F1 network configuration.
• Exhibit II.6 displays the Sheriff's F2 network configuration.
"1
• Exhibit II.7 displays the Tigard network configuration.
• Exhibit II.8 displays the Beaverton Police Department network
( configuration.
J
( cart17
s
l t
EXHIBIT II.5
SHERIFF F1 NETWORK CONFIGURATION
I
Function: WCSO Dispatch and Operations
Frequency: 460.375/465.375 MHz
Tone: 100.0 Hz
t
i
T (T2 - 112) T (T2 - 112)
R R
4
South i
Saddle MW MW St. Vincents
Mtn.
IT I// t
R
I / k
CIO
onsole t
I I $
IWCD
J
E
f
t
J
gR
Bald Peak
�C
.ir
18
( c�ml>:r�y(:crnstiltingGroll 1
J
EXHIBIT II.6
SHERIFF F2 NETWORK CONFIGURATION i
Function: WCSO Dispatch and Operations I
Frequency: 460.150/465.150 MHz
Tone: 100.0 Hz
I
a
Buxton Lookout
r
3
T (T2 - R2)
i
1 T (T2 - R2) R
JR St. Vincents
71 South MW
Saddle MW
Mtn.
IlConsole
I i
r
I
LCD----�
J
J
C
y'
(.c�rnE k�titi(:cnL;liltirC;rc n lI 19
EXHIBIT II.7
TIGARD NETWORK CONFIGURATION
-� Funetit n: Tigard Police and Public Works Dispatch
l Frequency: 155.085 MHz
J
I R ( I R
I
Console I Console
Tigard PD— J
LWCD--- --� �- - --
1
3
1
( �►ntlkt��( cxi�tlltirt�;(�rtullr 20
1 EXHIBIT II.8
BEAVERTON POLICE DEPARTMENT NETWORK CONFIGURATION
Function: Beaverton Police Dispatch
Frequency: 154.650 MHz
1
T (T2 - R2)
R
St. Vincents
MW
Tel
i
Console Console Tel R
WCD Beaverton PD
Tel
R
Y�
1
`� ( cxniki�ti( c►r]~u1ti11gt;n)1Ip 21
` Exhibit II.9 displays the city law network configuration.
1 Exhibit II.10 displays the Hillsboro Police Department network
configuration.
1 Exhibit II.11 through Exhibit II.15 display the F1 to F5 fire network
configurations.
The Washington County Tualatin RFPD microwave system is described in Exhibit
II.16. There are current plans to relocate the current South Saddle link to Buxton
Mountain and then as a second step to relocate the currently inactive David Hill link
to South Saddle.
Overall Costs
The annual budgets for the various dispatch centers currently serving the County are
as follows:
Washington County Central Dispatch Center $1,060,600
Beaverton Police Dispatch Center 307,500
Washington County Fire No. 1 Dispatch Center 381,000
Forest Grove Dispatch Center 103,000
Tualatin Fire Dispatch Center 450,000
Tigard Police Dispatch Center 133,700
COUNTYWIDE TOTAL $2,435,800
These figures were provided by the various agencies. The bulk of this cost is for
personnel, but other operating expenses for telephone lines and equipment,
maintenance services and contracts, and normal office expenses are included.
jIn addition, there are a number of jurisdictions considering capital expenditures for
communications equipment and related items such as logging recorders and for CAD
systems and equipment. None of these planned expenditures are included in the above
Jestimate.
t
_i
r
22
i (urr�Eklti�(:()nstiltirigGmtit)
EXHIBIT II.9
CITY LAW NETWORK CONFIGURATION
`T
Function: Multiple City Police Agency Dispatch
Frequency: 155.010 MHz
J T (T2 - R2)
R
St. Vincents
MN
T
R
—� F —— — — Sherwood
T I MW Tank
T I
J i
Console ` I Console I
L �--
orest Grove WCD
— —— —
J
J
1
J
_.0
J
1 23
isulWigGmtIF)
1
_ r
EXHIBIT II.10
HILLSBORO POLICE DEPARTMENT NETWORK CONFIGURATION
_1 Function: Hillsboro Police Dispatch
Frequency: 154.785 MHz
T I
R Tel
Console
Console I
WCD
Hillsboro I
G1ty Hall l
__j
7
7
t
it
+ ('c�mllt�S�+C crosultirlK(�rcwl� 24
'1
1 EXHIBIT II.11
FIRE F1 NETWORK CONFIGURATION
1
Function: Countywide Fire Dispatch
Frequency: 154.400 MHz
1
t T
J R
South MW
Saddle
Mtn.
1 I R I I rT ' ( T
R ( i R
Console I I Console J i i 7Conole
LF�rest Grove LCD — _— J LFRMW
Sherwood
Tank
MW
T Console
� _ :BMW T
R l i R
Cooper Mtn. TRFD Mountain
Road
MV 1W
l x
R Wilsonville
JBald Peak
' �J
25
t;c lm1 k�tiy(%�1f t_titiliit�,Cirt x1E 1
EXHIBIT II.12
FIRE F2 NETWORK CONFIGURATION
f�i Function: East Fire Working Net
Frequency: 154.205 MHz
I!�2T
( T
R
I '
Console I i Console
I2;LF
I
I WED I _—J R
MW
R
Sherwood
T an
' M W
---- M W T it
Console
R
TRFD
� Mountain
Cooper Mtn. Road
MV W
R
T /
R Wilsonville
Bald Peak
I
1 --
z
(;cmltxi-,;, onsultingGmtij) 26
EXHIBIT I1.13
FIRE F3 NETWORK CONFIGURATION
Function: West Fire Working Net
Frequency: 154.445 MHz
r- - - — —7 - - - ---I r- - -- -- �
Ti I I I
R I R I I R
Console I I Console i i Console
LFor.-t Grove—_I Lw-c-D—__— —J !-ED—# — —
Tel
T
R / Console
/
Cooper Attn. TRFD
mw
T
R
Bald Peek
f 27
_i (.()I71 f)iLtiti(,.()(L511II1I]��mul)
EXHIBIT II.14
_ FIRE F4 NETWORK CONFIGURATION
J Function: Fire Command
Frequency: 154.340 MHz
l
I I T
— I T T
R I ( R I I R
j I Console I Console
Console
Forest Grove FD M1 PCC
�wcD- -- - -- -- - J
�.
MW
l R
Tank
///Sherwood
T�
�2/ Console
Cooper 111tH. TRFD Mo unt ai nRoad
MW
Bald Peak
.e-
�r
( c)fTllk�titii t)rLtilllUltK(irc)UI)
28
:1
EXHIBIT II.15
71 FIRE F5 NETWORK CONFIGURATION
-t
Function: State Fire Net
l Frequency: 154.280 MHz
Ti
r - r- - -- --�
T ' C
R I I R
Console ( Console �
L WCD I �FD 01 - -__j R
M W /'
Tel
///Sher.
ood
/ Tank
BMW
T Con^ sole 1 MW T I
LR 7 1 R
TRFD Mountain
Cooper Mtn. Road
MW \
Wilsonville
Bald Peak
3 C ul nE>i�tinsultiDln xip 29
EXHIBIT II.16
MICROWAVE NETWORK
l Buxton
Mountain
1 Q
1
0St. Vincent's
J�.! Hos_pital
i
South I (Ptvoosed) /
Saddle
'.Mountain /
0.�
Washington Countv Courthouse Dispatch Center
i
(Inactive)��
i
i
r David
Hill
a
Portland
Com-nunitv
College
! Tigard
Fire
Station
Tigard
a Bald King Fire
Posit Plre Station
St atio
Slountain
Meridian Food
s Park Hospital Fire
Station
Sherwood Fire
Station
Sherwood Water
Tank
Elhgsen
Road
———-- Washington County Microwave Dispatch
f Center
i
tTualatin RFPD Microwave
`. +1+111-h-}} Tualatin RFPD Cable
•_ Wilsonville Fire Station
v
CompassCon%AkigGroup
a / a
-46
OAQ
in
..x--� �'�"`''°"�� /t�.' '.,, .y-.r•w •d S,�.�„ :d+•�{'d"�t�_,' � c '�.—=a..� �j'i,'� �t \�' �� r`� 3 _
L ,yL 4w.., y`. t_2.:Y V..l_ > S": a'F.. s 2Y- ^W*i,}• �M4f+f ..>}iA''• r+r P
L 1IV M B.CS !!�.}'<, 1 -�. 4 * �3y+ • i" ,} ` t �� tG ' N.s 1 v;. -
j.
F a t.`1)r'� ' 'T'T{��>. y�t _ rk� rx_'y }.-.R <k � ���yyy ,,.�+• `' s�
,:i N, -��?
f
l \ yy}}
PLANNING ASSUMkiND t3RO
PTIONSWTY - ROd1# ON
X �
-- ()ni1xis5(:)nsWtir�(�mup
I �n
CHAPTER III
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND GROWTH PROJECTIONS
I
l Population Projections
Data about the projected population growth was provided by the Washington County
-� Planning Department. The most current projection was made for transportation
planning purposes and was based on 1983 data. The projection used data from a
• number of different sources, including the Columbia Region Association of
_ Governments, the Metropolitan Service District, and the Economic Consultants of
Oregon, as summarized in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan.
, J
The projected total population for the County for the year 2000 ranged from about
350,000 to 400,000 people. The Planning Department assumed, based on the statistical
accuracy of projections this far in the future, that the most likely outcome would be
somewhere within this range and further broke down the County into 13 traffic zones.
These zones do not match public agency service boundaries but do provide an
indication of the expected relative growth of various geographical areas. Exhibit III.1
displays 1980 population, the projected year 2000 population, and the percentage
changes.
EXHIBIT I11.1
YEAR 2000 POPULATION
PROJECTIONS BY GEOGRAPHICAL AREA
Projected
1980 Year 2000
Areas Population Population Change % Change
Barnes-Cornell 12,985 29,298 16,313 +125.6
_ Cedar Hills-West Union 11,864 20,962 9,098 + 76.7
Hillsboro-North Plains 32,945 61,745 28,800 + 87.4
_ Cornelius-Forest Grove 23,420 35,276 11,856 + 50.6
Bald Peak 9,289 11,967 2,678 + 28.8
Tualatin-Sherwood 13,501 28,092 14,591 +108.1
Tigard-Bull Mountain 23,972 38,319 14,347 + 59.8
Aloha-Cooper Mountain 22,010 36,384 14,374 + 65.3
East/West 185th 15,580 45,243 29,663 +190.4
South Beaverton 25,674 28,106 2,432 + 9.4
Metzger-Progress 12,696 12,520 (176) - 1.4
Canyon Road-Beaverton 18,070 17,650 (420) - 2.3
Hillsdale
Cedar Hills 17,272 18,474 1,202 7.0
Total 239,278 384,036 144,758 + 60.5
)-- Compu_s-,ConsrrltingGroup 31
i
Despite the current flat growth of the County's population, which is a result of the
overall economy, the information presented in Exhibit III.1 indicates that by the year
2000 the County can expect about a 60 percent increase in overall population.
Implications for Emergency Communications
The public services provided by the various public safety agencies are based on the
need for a certain level of police and fire protection and emergency medical support.
While the geographical coverage area is one criterion which determines the required
resources, the demand for these public services (i.e., police and EMS support) is often
directly correlated with the population. The emergency communications system
requirements, which involve handling calls-for-service from the public and the
dispatching (command and control functions) of resources, are typically also tied to
the population to be served. The demand for service is generally analyzed from a
perspective of average volume of activity and peak level volume of activity.
The various communications centers serving the public safety agencies of the County
are currently equipped and staffed to satisfactorily accommodate the average level
activities, but a number of the smaller centers are not equipped or staffed to handle
the peak levels; the communications (and command and control functions) are usually
most critical during peak period activity levels. Based on the growth projections over
the long term, which include a substantial population growth, this should be seen as a
critical concern. From a planning perspective, this increasing level of
demand-for-services should be included in the analysis of new communications centers
and in any alternatives for consolidation of communications centers.
Planning Assumptions
The following assumptions have been made for this planning project:
• Despite the current stability in population throughout the County, there is
substantial population growth expected over the next 10- to 15-year
-� period. A typical trend for jurisdictions experiencing population growth is
for staffing (for police and fire agencies, based on a ratio of staff per
copulation) to lag behind the required service levels based on the cyclical
oudgetary process governmental agencies use. One typical result of this
' staffing lag is the need for efficient and flexible command, control, and
communications systems to provide for maximum utilization and
management of limited resources in order to meet service demands. It
-� appears likely that the various Washington County public safety agencies
will face similar needs in the future.
• As with most governmental jurisdictions, the various Washington County
public safety agencies will continue to face budgetary constraints in the
w' future. In addition, if a tax-limitation measure is passed by the public, it
will place even more extreme limits on funding.
r
(; ) npa--;; ori_tiulbyigGr nilr 32
,l The basic mission and operational approach used by the various public
safety agencies will remain the same. Police agencies will continue to
provide patrol operations and respond to citizen calls-for-service, with
crime prevention and call-prioritization programs likely to be given more
emphasis. The demand for police services will continue to be dependent
on the increasing population levels. Fire agencies will continue to respond
to fires and emergency medical incidents, with the latter growing in
terms of percentage of overall demand for services. While the number of
fire incidents will likely decrease (due to more stringent building codes
and improved automatic fire suppression systems), the fires that do occur
are likely to be major events (based on the lack of suppression systems
and/or the aging of buildings). The need for communications systems will
be based on the average peak period activities for various public safety
emergency incidents.
• Several jurisdictions within the County have current plans for new
facilities, and in some cases communications centers are included in these
plans. t
• Responsibility for public service to the population in various geographical
areas within the County which are annexed or contract with existing
jurisdictions for police and fire services will continue to change in the
future. In terms of planning for communications services to impacted
agencies, maximum flexibility will be a prime consideration in the ability
to meet future needs based on shifting population patterns.
t
sow
i
i
r
F
J
R
�l
CompassConRbkroup
I
r
I
- i ... Ale:-
.
Xf lttTID �y��t, f .�4"-1
a t k r,-• �» s,
- ��.. �., ,._t * r R: }...i >✓5. {'phi IrJ � }
� r
�.-
�. t 1
; 7 d
j 3 sS"
- , CHAPTER;IY c
f{{ S�CSTEM.REQUIREMENTS NDS CHNOLOGYt ASSESSM}EN
.+.: -y .'`� �• +rtn f j• _ y T�rA 1 "�•R rta '�fi lr
• i' � rr ha,5�1Z S t.j t '.�.i.
:.
0miFxL,;.4: iistAtingroup 33
J CHAPTER IV
SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Law Enforcement Functional Requirements
The various law enforcement agencies provide services to citizens throughout the
County and have similar major functions as follows:
• Patrol operations - Responding to citizen calls-for-service and normal
field operations including traffic enforcement
• Specialized operations - Special units which support field operations such
as K-9 units and traffic investigations
• Investigative operations - Providing investigation of major crimes and
crime analysis support
f Support operations - Providing records and information system support
\ and other administrative services
In law enforcement agencies which provide their own dispatch center (e.g., in Forest
Grove, Beaverton, and Tigard), the communications support is a part of the support
operations, and staff typically perform records and administrative duties in addition to
call-answering and dispatching duties. In most of the other agencies, the
communications support is provided by a separate agency which enables the law
enforcement agency to carry out the organizational mission.
The primary need for communications is to support patrol operations and involves
receiving and processing calls from the public, dispatching field units, and having
sufficient frequencies and operators to provide immediate access to and from field
units. There are no major problems in the equipment and systems area currently,
except that coverage when using handheld portable radios (when officers are out of
their vehicles) is not satisfactory in some geographical areas, and in several centers
additional equipment is needed. Investigative and specialized operations personnel
typically use regular operational radio channels, but there is a requirement for a
tactical channel to allow for specific missions (e.g., undercover operations and
surveillance activities) where a dedicated channel can be used.
The current configuration of the radio systems is such that the larger police agencies
have dedicated channels for their own field units, with the smaller agencies either f
sharing a channel or using a larger police department's channel for their minimal radio
traffic needs. There are also County frequencies which provide communications with
adjoining county sheriffs' units and a Countywide city police agency net. There is no
frequency which all law enforcement in the County can use for mutual aid or major
t
(;cnnExLtiti(:c nsidting(in)iit
34
t
` incidents, and the development of such a capability should be considered for
development in the future.
lThere are several requirements which are related to communications systems,
I including information systems and unit status monitoring, which should be addressed in
the future. Most police agencies could use more extensive (and better access to) local
offender and wants/warrants files. (All agencies now have access to LEDS
computerized files, but these state and national data bases do not include local
' information.) Most agencies also have some type of crime analysis information
system, which typically uses data from the dispatch activities such as location, type,
and frequency of incidents. However, it would benefit all agencies if such information
' included all Countywide activity and access was available to all agencies. Several
agencies have plans to procure CAD systems, which would assist with the collection of
incident data and could provide the data base for regional as well as departmental
information files.
i' CAD systems would also facilitate the monitoring of unit status at both
communications centers and by supervisory personnel. Many departments either
' currently use or are planning to implement some type of call-prioritization program,
which would assign urgent calls to the available field units and "stack" or hold less
urgent calls-for-service until units have handled higher priority calls. The CAD
' system could keep track of all pending calls, which will assist dispatchers with their
jobs. In addition, mobile digital terminals (NiDTs) could be used with CAD systems to
provide pending call and unit assignment data to supervisors in the field. Similar data
could be provided using CRTs linked to the computers supporting the CAD system,
which could be located in the various law enforcement agencies. There can be one
consolidated CAD system serving all departments, or a number of separate systems
which could share files, but there is a need is for a capability to review the status of
field units and assignments and the calls pending (if any) for use by supervisory staff
regardless of their location (i.e., either in the field or departmental offices). This
requirement is based on the growing importance of a command and control concept for
` maximum use-of field resources and the integration of more computerized information
system support for those field resources.
The use of CAD systems also has applications for management and resource allocation
aspects of law enforcement agency operations. The information gathered about the
dispatch function can be used for management reports on workload and cases handled;
investigations can also be entered to provide case management data. Again, this type
of information will be needed in the future if staff increases do not keep up with the
demand for services.
There are also communications center operational requirements which must be met in
order to facilitate performance of the law enforcement functions. Some of these
areas, which include sufficient staff, adequate training and supervision, and
standardized procedures, were mentioned briefly in the interim reports. In the
staffing area, all communications centers are operated on a 24-hour-per-day basis, and
the number of personnel is adequate to handle normal workloads. However, several of
the smaller centers with only one person assigned to handle both call receiving and
radio dispatch duties require additional personnel in order to handle the peak period
activities. For law enforcement operations, adequate staffing affects not only the
(;crrnlKL,;,4 c)iisuftin Gnm 35
i
l ability to respond to citizen emergencies but officer safety. Basically, the minimum
staffing level should be for two personnel to be on duty at all times in order to handle
normal peak period activities as well as unexpected emergency situations.
Training is an important and ongoing requirement for communications center staff,
and the various centers have varying degrees of programs currently in use. In smaller
centers, which rely on sworn personnel and other administrative staff to assist with
heavy workload periods and during staff breaks, training is especially important.
Unless staff skills (covering operational procedures and familiarity with equipment, for
mmllevels because
unicat ons duties, there should be ai
t ning
coprogram and/or periodic exercises to
co
maintain operator proficiency.
Adequate supervision is a related requirement in terms of operations. All supervisory
personnel should be completely trained in all aspects of communications center
operations and should provide training and guidance to center staff. Also, there should
be one person clearly designated as in charge for each shift (which can be
communications center staff or a sworn officer) to handle difficult operational or
assignment questions.
r
Fire and EMS Functional Requirements
The fire agencies provide fire and emergency medical services to the citizens of
Washington County (with some overlaps in coverage for adjoining counties) and have
similar major functions as follows:
• Incident response - Providing fire suppression, hazardous materials
incidents response, medical rescues, and arson investigation
• Fire prevention - Conducting building inspections, code enforcement, and
public education
• Disaster preparedness - Providing disaster planning and emergency
operations
• Support operations - Providing records and information systems support,
training, equipment and vehicle maintenance, and administrative services
Communications support in the past has typically covered the incident response and
disaster operations area; however, in the future, the prevention activities will also
need to be included. Fire suppression, EMS, and hazardous material incidents involve
receiving and processing emergency calls, alerting and dispatching the appropriate
units and resources, and maintaining status of units and incidents (and sending
additional units depending on the seriousness of the incident). The trend in Washington
County (which coincides with the national patterns) has been for the proportion of
medical rescues to increase (which currently accounts for over 50 percent of most
agencies' activity and, in some cases, approaches 70 percent of the responses), while
the number of fires is declining. The incidence of medical responses is generally
I (�initkL,;,4;xL-SiiltiligGr mp 36
�l
r
related to population (which is expected to continue to rise), and when compared to
fire responses, places less of a burden on the communications systems due to generally
fewer units being assigned for EMS calls. (Another factor is that the communications
between the ambulance and the receiving hospital is handled over a separate radio
system with designated EMS channels.)
The number of fires is decreasing for a variety of reasons and is, of course, a goal of
the fire agencies' prevention programs. Some of the reasons include the stricter
building codes covering automatic suppression systems (such as sprinkler systems) and
construction materials, the use of smoke detectors, and the increased prevention,
inspection, and education programs. The number of fires is not related to population
growth, and as the older housing and building stock is replaced or refurbished based on
new codes, the incidence of fires is expected to level off at a minimal number. The
implications for communications requirements for fire suppression dispatches involve
fewer units being initially assigned to fires; however, it is also expected that some
percentage of the fires that do occur will involve major multiple alarm responses
because of the failure or absence of automatic detection and/or suppressioneY
In this latter case, the communications systems will experience extremely high
workloads, and flexibility will be important in order to provide the needed services.
Another aspect of needed communications support for incident response is the tactical
fire ground systems. Tactical communications capabilities are needed for the
management, control, and direction of units and personnel at the incident scene, and
1 f typically they require dedicated radio channels which will not interfere with normal
] dispatch communications (and, conversely, will not be interfered with by other
dispatch or status monitoring radio traffic). The current capabilities for adequate fire
ground communications are satisfactory, but more flexibility and capabilities could be
achieved with the existing channels through consolidation.
Most fire agencies currently have prevention programs, and many of these programs
are being upgraded to use units and personnel for inspection duties. This will present
added complexity to the alert and dispatch (and unit move-up) communications
activities and will require additional radio equipment in some cases to ensure that all
units and personnel can be alerted when out of quarters performing prevention tasks.
The basic communications requirements in both the equipment and operational areas
are similar to those for law enforcement agencies and, likewise, the current adequacy
is generally related to the size of the supporting communications centers. The larger
centers have sufficient personnel and equipment to staff two operator positions (or
more) for handling the call-receiving and dispatching duties. Training and supervisory
activities are similarily often dependent upon the size of the communications center,
but in some cases the centers dedicated to fire communications have comprehensive
training programs.
Most of the larger fire agencies in the County either have operational CAD systems or
are in the process of implementing such systems. Such systems are useful in
recordkeeping and for preparing fire reports and incident statistics. In aadition, the
response to fire incidents typically involves the move-up of available units to cover
areas left unprotected when units responsible for certain areas are assigned to an
incident. CAD systems can store move-up (and multiple alarm) assignment
9 (;r nnl�y�(:c xLtiultir�.r(.�rc tti� 37
instructions which is a valuable aid to dispatchers. Other potential applications
include management of facility inspection and prevention activities and access to
national data bases (or generation of local files) on hazardous materials, storage
locations, and appropriate response measures in case of an incident. Mobile digital
terminals are currently in use by one fire district and are potential applications for
other agencies. A primary use is for status reporting where the MDT units allow rapid
and easy status reporting by dispatched vehicles (with no need for voice radio traffic)
T and provide accurate statistics on incident responses. More sophisticated units involve
the use of small computerized display units for the receipt and transmission of
messages. This latter application is important in the hazardous materials area where
+1 the ability to actually see (or transmit) the name of the substance is sometimes
critical to proper response and personnel safety.
General Public Safety Communications Requirements
There are several types of requirements which pertain to all types of agency
functional support areas, which include adequate staffing and training programs (as
discussed in previous sections). Another area which applies to all types of
communications support is the capability to handle special citizen requirements such
as language and handicapped equipment. The language requirement is generally
handled by having qualified staff assigned to each shift for available for assistance).
Specialty equipment (such as a Teletypewriter [TTY) or Telecommunications Device
for the Deaf [TDDJ) should also be available in communications centers, and their use
and availability coordinated with the local telephone utility (for publication in the
telephone directory).
Local and National Standards
'J to emergency
There are a number of stndards and guidelines which apply rg y
communications centers and systems. Some of these are laws and rgulations of the
State and others are in the form of guidelines and standards which should be met, such
as those from the Associated Public Safety Communications Officers (APCO) and the
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). The major applicable requirements are
reviewed in this section.
l State Regulation
ORS 401.720 covers the establishment of the 9-1-1 eniergncy telephone system
on a statewide basis. Washington County already has 9-1-1 service, and all of
the 9-1-1 call-answering centers (PSAPs) appear to meet the minimum
standards contained in the law, which are for at least two 9-1-1 circuits (lines)
from each telephone utility central office and two seven-digit numbers for
j telephone operator and administrative use.
i
C;c)mp:is5(;crosidtin�mup
38
N F PA Standards
The 1980 NFPA standards cover installation, maintenance, and use of Public i
Fire Service Communications facilities, including public reporting,
dispatching, telephone, and two-way and microwave radio systems. Some of
the major standards include:
• Power sources and back-up emergency power
'r The number of staff (operators) based on the yearly volume of
alarms (incidents) and qualifications
Operations and call transfer procedures
Recordkeeping
• 9-1-1 emergency telephone service
• PSAP equipment and voice recording capabilities
The number of circuits for alarm (emergency) calls from the
• public
The use of CAD systems and equipment for operators and
,
capacity of computers
APCO Guidelines
Various APCO projects have involved establishing standards and guidelines for
primarily law rcement communications systems. One project (13A)
covered the following
• Public access
• Command control support
Data systems access
• Interagency coordination
Report 16A covered the following areas:
• Radio propagation
` Interagency coordination
i Channel loading
Citizen access
( cirt�lk�titi( cnL�ultir ;(_�rc�uF� 39
• Data systems
• System reliability
System management
Many of the goals, objectives, and standards from various APCO projets were
summarized in the Coordinator's Handbook, 9-1-1 Emergency Telephone System,
provided to each county by the Emergency Management Division. This list covers the
following areas:
• Citizen access
Dispatch
• Interagency coordination
• System governance
• Administration
• F iscal
Facilities and equipment
The intent of noting these various sources of standards and guidelines is to provide an
indication of the various requirements which should be used for future planning, rather
than audit each existing communications center for compliance. While most county's
centers appear to meet most of the major objectives, there are some current problems
in the areas of back-up power, voice recording, and staffing levels.
Assessment of Existing Technology
The technology assessment tasks were divided into two sections, with the first
ILI covering existing technology. Future technology, which is either available (but not in
wide use to date) or anticipated in the upcoming years, is discussed in a separate
section.
ILI
Some of the public safety agencies are currently using, implementing, or considering
existing advanced technology such as CAD systems and MDTs for status reporting.
Once the basic CAD systems are operational, there are generally additional
administrative and management information applications which are developed (using
the basic computerized system and teleprocessing network) to provide needed
information systems support to the agencies. For the fire agencies using and/or
developing CAD systems, the use of MDTs for status reporting is an appropriate first
step, with the use of full-function MDTs as a potential enhancement. For police
agencies, the planning and implementation of the CAD systems is the first step and is
(amil►:�titi( c�nr��ilun�t;rcniE� 40
t
expected to greatly enhance their ability to provide operational information for
resource allocation, budgeting and planning, and crime analysis needs. M DTs would
also be useful, and, as a next step, supervisory vehicles should be equipped.
Subsequently, all field vehicles should be equipped with M DTs, which will reduce the
— traffic loading on existing channels as well as decrease the need for additional
dispatch staff (e.g., record checks would be handled by the MDT system with direct
links to computerized data bases, which would eliminate the need for voice messages
from dispatch personnel).
In the area of radio console equipment, there are now products on the market which
are considered modular in design. This provides flexibility for the design of
communications centers and reduces the need for customized equipment or
construction. Related to the use of modular equipment is the development of
1 Countywide standards for uniformity of any new equipment procurements. If such a
standard could be developed and all new equipment was compatible, potential future
consolidation of facilities (as well as training, orientation, and back-up operations)
would be easier and probably less costly. The newer console equipment is generally
easier to maintain and repair than units available in the past.
In the emergency call-receiving area, there is Automatic Call Distributor (ACD)
equipment available. In larger centers with a pool of call-takers, such equipment
uniformly distributes incoming calls to the next available operator; ACDs are not
recommended for smaller centers with only one person designated to handle calls.
However, ACDs generally provide information on the number of calls, the time
required to answer calls, and calls receiving busy signals and data about underutilized
incoming lines (which might indicate malfunctions in need of investigation). This
information is useful in staffing analysis and for determining when additional
emergency 9-1-1 lines are needed to meet public service criteria.
Enhanced 9-1-1 emergency telephone systems, which are one area of analysis of this
study, are considered an existing technology but not always available in every location
or jurisdiction. The electronic switching capabilities are provided by the telephone
utilities' central offices using specialized computers to translate the originating call
location and number for proper routing to the appropriate public safety agency. Until
the telephone utilities providing service convert their central office equipment to the
needed electronic switching equipment, E 9-1-1 is not available. In addition, E 9-1-1
y systems are very expensive and oftentimes do not completely eliminate the need to
1 transfer calls. The call transfer problem is not entirely overcome when agency
coverage areas for fire and EMS service are different than for police services (such as
exists in the County locations served by fire districts), and calls must be answered at
some central location to determine the nature (i.e., fire, police, or rescue) and then
transferred. The consolidation of communications facilities, in fact, often results in
the same benefits (as an E 9-1-1) in terms of the reduction of call transfers. However,
it is only a matter of time before all telephone utilities install the needed switching
equipment and E 9-I-1 systems become the standard service replacing basic 9-1-1
systems. In terms of planning for transition to an E 9-1-1 system, staff from the
various public safety agencies (and other governmental departments with similar
needs) should define a uniform standard for the development of a geo-coding system
which will be compatible with the geographical data base which the E 9-1-1 system
will use. This type of Countywide plan should reduce the chances of developing
41
(:omPas-,,(=c)nsultir9Gro11p
or coding systems and any costs associated with
numerous incompatible addressing
needed revisions in the future.
In the medical response area, the use of telemetry is a potential need in the future.
Telemetry ribing the
is the transmission
which isused for medical Gdiagnosis) data dofcemergency
electrical activity of the + has not been a need of the hospital
incidents. In the past, the use of telemetryrelied on
emergency room medical staff because the overall EMc an s and used for "stnding of
Orders." These standing orders were developed by phy
emergency medical technicians lTs) who staffed the vehicles the appropriate emergency centerch respond to
incidents and transport the patients o
patient as
The current overall concept of treatment includes both stabilization e emergency
well as medically approved transportation to the receiving hospital's
where more control is desired by the physicians in the
changed in the future to one
facility, and standing orders cover both of these areas. However, if this orientation is
emergency facility, telemetry will become more important.
he
While telemetry systems will be part of the communications equipment
the
emergency vehicles and used for vehicle-to-hospital transmissions, they should
which would
considered part of the high-definitionora �color closed-circuit tele television
(A relate
potential application is
allow observation of emergency medical cases ir, the field. Closed-circuit television is
an existing technology, but the advanced systems needed for EMS u; currently
cat on.)
available, and CCTV is not used to any significant extent in this app
Another topic of existing technology to consider is an 800 MHz mobile radio ay oust
800 MHz refers to the radichannels of UHF TV.frequency band
The increasedcreased congestion m 806-86 MHz. This nont he other
was allocated to the upper
mobile radio bands (e.g., the 150/450 MHz bands currently used by theit did not
County s
nciesjurisdictions) prompted the Fes Would be used look for di tiothenal foreseeable Since
they were
freque
appear those UHF TV c`�ann
reallocated to land mobile. 1f 80FCC also departed 0 MHz considerablyfrom its "normal" way of doing
things which changed the use o
The 800 MHz radio systems can be organized in two different ways:
• Conventional
• Trunked
The existing 150/450 MHz system is conventional DAn int 00 MHziew. conventional system
would not be functionally different from the user's p
Trunking, which under FCC rules is mandatory for systems larger than five channels, is
radically different. Mobile and portable radio units are microprocessor-controlled.
Base facilities are controlled by a somewhat larger minicomputer. All radios in the ter can handle separate
system keep track of the status of all other units. The frequency to be used at any
given instant is chosen by the computer. The compu
('ompxl-s(l,on5uldrigGrcwp 42
i
subsystems within the assigned frequency group such as Police, Fire, Public Works, and
other local government departments.
In 800 MHz systems, the FCC assigns the frequencies on a first-come/first-served
basis. The only exceptions to this are the block of frequencies the FCC allocated
exclusively for the use in high-capacity cellular mobile telephone systems operated by
telephone companies or other common carriers and a block of frequencies currently
held in reserve. This means that common services may not share common or adjacent
frequencies. Therefore, severe compatibility problems could develop. Because of the
high frequency of 800 MHz, the range is generally less than that of the other bands.
This means a more complex system of base stations or repeaters is required to obtain
the same coverage. Mobile and base station equipment is approximately 50 percent !
more expensive than UHF equipment. High-power repeaters (100 watt) are 200-300
percent more expensive than their UHF counterparts. Advantages of 800 MHz systems
include high confidentiality (with trunked systems) and excellent building penetration.
The decision to go to an 800 MHz is generally based on the availability of additional
frequencies, however. Generally speaking, the 150/450 MHz frequencies are all
allocated and not available for agencies in Washington County. At the present time,
800 MHz channels are available, but this band could become fully occupied at some
lu time in the next few years. If no additional frequencies are required, there is no need
to switch to the 800 MHz band. However, if additional requencies are required, then
the higher costs must be absorbed. A conventional 800 MHz system would require
replacement of all radio equipment (consoles, base stations, microwave equipment, and
IF mobile radios) and the design and installation of a new system. If a trunked system is
required, in addition to all new equipment, more sophisticated computer equipment is
needed, and the cost is even higher.
Future Technology
There are some types of technology which are expected to be available in the future
which could be considered enhancements to existing equipment and systems. Handheld
mobile digital terminals, which are analagous to the relationship between a mobile
radio in a vehicle and a handheld portable radio for use independent of a vehicle, are
now actually available. However, they are not widely used, the communications
system needed to support the data traffic is complex, and there have been few, if any,
evaluations of their effectiveness. Accordingly, they should be considered as a
potential future application. The various County agencies should be planning for M DTs
for vehicles and will not need to plan for implementation of handheld MDTs for at
least ten years.
Another example of an enhancement is the graphic display capabilities of
computerized applications such as CAD systems. Computerized mapping systems,
when integrated with incident and assignment status information from a CAD system,
can be used to provide dynamic graphic displays for command and control personnel.
Such geographic displays can be part of communications centers or can be located in
{
. (;�rrnF r:itis(;crosultinKGrcnil r 43
agency operations centers in order to provide supervisory personnel with an ongoing
assessment of incidents in progress. Again, such an application will necessarily have
to wait until CAD systems are implemented and provide basic statistical data and until
Countywide geograhical files are established to support such applications.
A new technology which has potential applications in emergency operations is the
? voice-activated computerized systems. In vehicles, such systems could be used to
control radio communications(without the need for the vehicle operator to either push
buttons or hold microphones) and will possibly allow communications system users
(field personnel) to bypass dispatchers with routine requests for information. Such
applications are not currently available, and high cost is a limiting factor to use in the
near future.
Communications System Traffic Projections
t
The traffic workload projections involve the determination of call processing times,
the calculation of the 9-1-1 emergency telephone calls and resulting radio traffic, and
1 the number of frequencies required to handle the expected traffic. These components
of the traffic workload projections are covered in the following sections.
Call Processing Time Requirements
The emergency workload handled by communications centers is a mix of
police, fire, and EMS calls, each with a different length of time needed to
process the call (e.g., answering the call, determination of type of emergency
incident, determining address of incident and name of caller, etc.). There are
no statistics available on the average length of telephone calls currently
3 handled by the various dispatch centers, thus national averages are used M.
The average length of time needed to process the different type of calls is 60
seconds for law enforcement calls, 30 seconds for fire calls, and 45 seconds for
EMS calls.
The time consumed in answering the telephone call is assumed to be 10
seconds. For planning purposes, a conservative or safe assumption is that all
calls will require 70 seconds, which is based on the 60 seconds for law
enforcement calls plus the 10 seconds for call answering. Another factor in
this assumption is that once CAD systems are fully operational, the call
1 processing function will be made easier, and thus shorter, based on the
assistance provided by the automated systems.
(1)
of 9-1-1 Systems — A
Yung, T. J., and Dayharsh, T. 1., The Design and Costing
Technical Manual, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice,
Washington, D.C., September 1980.
ow
_ ( cnnlKIS'4;011";tilthig(Inn 11) 44
t'
traffic generated by the emergency calls for service, the
J In terms of radio
national averages are used as above. Dispatches average 35 seconds, status
checks average 10 seconds, and persons/license checks average 40 seconds
J each. For planning purposes, 35 seconds for each radio transmission will be
used, which is a conservative assumption. In addition, each emergency call
often generates more than one dispatch or radio transmission due to the need
for status checks, calls for backup units, or requests for other additional
information. The conservative assumption used for the number of radio
transmissions per emergency call is six, with a duration of 35 seconds per
transmission.
Average Peak Workload Calculations
The design of emergency communications centers is generally based on the
expected average peak-hour activity, which in turn is based on the demand for
1 services of the public safety agencies supported. The number of emergency
responses for all agencies in the County is currently approximately 41,025 per
year. This figure is based on the current estimates of emergency 9-1-1 calls
from the various communications centers. For planning purposes, there are
several reasons why this figure might need to be adjusted upwards. Many of
' the communications centers continue to receive emergency calls over their
seven-digit telephone numbers, and some of the centers have different
methods for recording and classifying calls (none of the centers currently use
mechanical call-counter equipment). Accordingly, a worst-case estimate of
the annual call volume is also used in the workload calculations; the
worst-case volume is estimated at 75,500 emergency calls per year. The
accepted standard formula for peak-hour workload is as follows:
Responses Estimated Peak Day Peak Hour
Per Peak = Responses x Loading x Loading
Hour Per Year Factor Factor
12
The factors for peak day and hour loading are 10 percent based on national
averages and are used in this case. The calculations are as follows:
Responses Per 41,025 x .10 x .10 = 34
Peak Hour = 12
This figure of 34 responses per average peak hour assumes that all agencies
• are consolidated and is thus the determining factor in how many call taker and
dispatch positions would be required. It is assumed that there is one
emergency telephone call for each incident. In reality, especially with calls
for fire incidents, there are oftentimes multiple calls from the public for a
single incident. However, the majority (typically 75 to 85 percent of all
emergency calls) are law enforcement-related and do not involve multiple
calls. The remainder of calls are for fire and EMS incidents, with the EMS
( c rmEk��ti(:c�rrsrrltir ;(�rouEr
## 45
1�
f
calls comprising at least half of the total fire and EMS calls. EMS calls do not
generally involve multiple calls per incident. Another factor in the assumption
about the number of calls per incident is that the CAD system should have the
capability to assist call-takers with the identification of calls referring to an
already-reported incident, which will enable them to process the call in a
J much shorter time than the average mentioned in the previous section. Lastly,
all assumptions used in these calculations are conservative and use high figures
for the duration of calls and radio transmissions. In actuality, it is typical in
peak workload situations for most calls to be handled more quickly (i.e., in
shorter time periods) due to the staff's ability to respond to such periods.
The calculation based on the worst-case call volume is as follows:
Responses Per 75,500
Peak Hour = 12 x .10 x .10 = 63
1 Based on the staffing tables for call-takers (in the referenced 9-1-1 manual)
for 34 calls in the average peak hour, with a call duration of 70 seconds each,
three call-taker positions are required. Based on the worst-case situation of
J 63 calls in the average peak hour, with the same call duration, four call-taker
positions are required. It should be pointed out that, based on the statistical
tables, this worst-case situation only barely exceeds the volume requiring
three call-taker positions and that the table would specify three positions for
this call volume if the average time were 65 seconds rather than 70 seconds
for handling each call.
For dispatch positions, the calculations are based on 85 percent of the calls for
police calls and 15 percent of the calls for fire and EMS incidents. For police
dispatching, using the 34 responses per peak hour level (and an average of six
radio transmissions per call, with an average of 35 seconds per transmission)
four dispatch positions are required. Using the worst-case volume for police
activities, six dispatch positions are required. For fire dispatch positions, for
both the low and worst-case level of responses per peak hour, two dispatcher
Jpositions are required.
These estimates are for the Countywide call volumes, and the number of
positions is for one consolidated communications center. The case where all
of the public safety agencies are consolidated is the most efficient option in
the use of personnel. In order to handle the same expected volume of calls
with the same level of service at different communications centers, rather
than one consolidated center, more call-taker and dispatcher positions will be
required. This is because of the less efficient utilization of such staff at
smaller centers with lower average calls for service levels.
Based on the maximum predicted population growth, by the year 2000 the
annual number of responses (using the 41,025 call level) is expected to increase
about 62 percent, for a total of approximately 66,461 per year. Using the
same formula, the calculations are as follows:
46
�.()I71Ek�titi(.()�LtilllLlrl��rciul�
Responses Per - 66,461 x .10 x .10 = 55
Peak Hour - 12
Based on the staffing tables for call-taker positions (in the referenced 9-1-1
.- manual) for 55 calls in the average peak hour, with a call duration of 70
seconds each, three call-taker positions are required. For police dispatch
staff, assuming that 85 percent of the calls are police-related, there are six
radio transmissions per call, and with a 35-second transmission duration, five 4
dispatcher positions are required. For fire and EMS calls, even with the
increase in volume, the required number of dispatcher positions is still two.
(However, it is often typical to include another console for fire personnel to
handle multiple-alarm situations.)
t
Based on the worst-case level of calls (75,500) and adjusting this volume for �
22,310 calls are predicted. The calculations are
the year 2000, approximately 1
as follows:
Responses - 122,310 x .10 x .10 = 102
Per Hour 12
This translates into five call-taker positions, eight police dispatch positions,
and three fire dispatch positions. Again, these staffing projections are
Countywide for a consolidated communications center.
I� There are of course many more calls and radio transmissions handled by
communications centers that are administrative in nature. These are not
considered in the peak-hour calculations based on typical operational patterns
in which administrative calls would be assigned a low priority during a peak
activity period. At normal times, the call-takers and dispatchers would be
able to process administrative calls and radio transmissions without any
Jexpected delays.
Frequency Requirements
There are a number of guidelines for determining channel loading for law
enforcement communications systems, as follows:
• Northern California APCO Frequency Coordinator -
60
units/channel, but not less than two channels
.J FCC, paragraph 90.377 - 50 units/channel for 800 MHz 1
conventional systems
F
Washington State APCO Coordinator - 35 and 50 units/channel
• King County, Washington Communications Supervisor - 25
units/channel
�r
i
E
47
(;ompas4A)nsultirigGroup
l
perational radios (mobile and handheld)
Assuming that the current number of os
in use at the peak workload is about 63 or 64, and that by the year O
figure will double, the maximum number of operational radios would be about
128. Using the most conservative criterion from the above guidelines, which is
25 radios per frequency, five frequencies will be needed, and the six available
frequencies would certaintly be adequate. This assumes a consolidated
operation where the frequencies are pooled and shared by the various law
enforcement agencies. (This number is consistent with other locations. For
example, Oakland, with a popuilation of 347,300 has five channels; Portland,
with a population of 368,000, has six channels; Seattle, with a population of
500,000, has six channels; and San Jose, with a population of 770,000, has
—' seven channels for law enforcement use.)
If all of the agencies do not consolidate, there will be fewer radio frequencies
to pool. For example, if Tigard chooses to maintain a separate
communications center, their underutilized frequency would be unavailable for
the rest of the law enforcement agencies. Based on an estimate of twice as
many units in the field by the year 2000, there would be 108 radios in service,
which slightly exceeds the conservative rule of 25 operational radios per
frequency. Four frequencies should be able to handle this level of growth,
assuming that CAD systems would be operational, and possibly even MDTs
would be in use at that time. If no consolidation were to take place, it appears
that the Beaverton Police Department would require two frequencies by the
` ional radios during peak period. It
year 2000, with an expected 32 operat .
should be noted, however, that population growth is expected to be 60 percent,
and that to assume a 100 percent growth rate in police capabilities is the
worse--case situation from a planning perspective.
Because fire and EMS emergencies typically do not follow the same patterns
as police incidents and are less frequent but more intensive in nature, the
above guidelines do not apply. The current frequencies allocated for fire
ies
incidents isimultaneously,
based ondthe estimated t enficient to hanle two major ds,n
ec
appears appropriatewhichlprojects felwer fires
in the future.
t
i
CCompasscrosutdng roup
i
T
f
. t .
i
i' xL 1
ti
CHAPTER V, �'
ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES:"
( ilKi-s (;oristAtirigGnnrlr 48
; rm
s�
, I
A
it CHAPTER V
ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
�J
Communications System Goels and Objectives
1 The organizational responsibilities of the public safety agencies were reviewed in the
Phase II Interim Report and are basically all related to the provision of high-quality
J law enforcement, fire, and EMS support to citizen demands for service. The goal of
providing responsive and quality service to the citizens of Washington County is the
top priority of the public safety agency administrators and in turn dictates the type
} and level of communications support required to achieve this goal.
tJ As indicated in the Phase II Report, there are a number of standards or guidelines for
the development and operations of emergency communications centers. These include
citizen access, dispatch procedures, interagency coordination, system governance,
administation, fiscal policies, and facilities and equipment. These standards in turn
become objectives which should be met in order to achieve the support goal. However,
all agency administrators' first concern is achieving the highest level of public service
and satisfaction, and this governs current planning for emergency communications
systems and equipment.
Current Plans with Potential Impact on Communications Support
Since this planning project began, a number of events have taken place which have
potential implications for the planning of emergency communications. There are at
J least three jurisdictions which are developing plans for new government office
complexes. The City of Beaverton is planning a new public safety facility which will
provide space for fire, police, EMS/civil preparedness, municipal court, and council
chambers. The preliminary plans include a communications facility. The City of
Tigard is planning a new facility for City offices and staff, and it will include a
communications center to support at least the City Police Department. Washington
County is also considering a new office faclity based on their space requirements;
however, there appear to be no plans to include provisions for an emergency
communications center at this time.
At the start of the project, only two fire agencies (Hillsboro and Fire District No. 2)
had definite plans to procure a CAD system. The Prophase CAD system has now been
purchased and is currently being installed. In addition, two other fire agencies
(Beaverton and Fire District No. 1) have decided to procure computer equipment for
# use with the CAD system and for administrative data processing support. The CAD
system, as currently planned, will support all the fire agencies except Tualatin (which
law enforcement
has its own CAD system), Forest Grove, and Gaston. Several
t
_. (;r xnE�:���;c►nor iltir�(�rc cul� 49
agencies, such as the Hillsboro Police Department and Washington County Sheriff, had
tentative plans for a CAD system when the project began and are awaiting the results
of this study before any final decisions are made. As mentioned in the Phase II Report
covering requirements, a CAD system would provide numerous benefits and enable
several agencies to share offender data on a regional basis and that planning should
_ proceed. The Beaverton Police Department also has funds budgeted for computerized
support, although not specifically for a CAD system.
System Design Technical Considerations
There are several system design factors of a technical nature which need to be
addressed. In terms of meeting the public service goals of the various agencies, the
technical system design objectives cover the operation of the radio, microwave, and
telephone equipment in the sense that they function as intended, are reliable, and are
adequate to provide the command, control, and communications support. From a
technical systems and equipment standpoint, the current arrangement of multiple
communications centers functions as intended and meets the basic requirements of the
1 agencies being supported. There are several centers in need of more and/or new
equipment, and some of the facilities could be upgraded in terms of additional space or
changes to make them more pleasant places to work. (Within the planning timeframe
of this study, which is through the year 2000, all of the current communications
centers except Tualatin will need to replace their radio console and call-answering
equipment.) The placement of transmission equipment and site selection appears to
provide adequate coverage for users. Additional backup power is needed in several
1 centers. However, overall the communications network is sufficient to meet the
current needs of the public safety agencies.
However, there are other possible locations for the communications centers (i.e.,
1 consolidation possibilities) which would also be sufficient from a technical standpoint.
Changes in location of the communications center themselves would have some effect
on the current arrangement of radio transmission sites, some of which would require
relocation; however, coverage of the geographical area would remain relatively
U If there were to be a change in location of various communications
centers, radio control landlines or microwave links serving some agencies would need
to be moved, and the location of transmission/receiving equipment and repeaters
would need to be adjusted. In the analysis of alternatives, there is no one best system }
design from a technical standpoint, and the location of the communications centers,
except for costs, is a different issue from the overall configuration of the
communications network.
The use of institutional CATV systems as a potential transmission media for
J idered in all of the alternatives in which it
emergency communications should be cons
is appropriate. The primary use of an institutional system will be for data
communications, and if CAD systems are developed for the various fire and police
agencies on a shared basis, CATV could be used to link the various locations together.
J Also, CATV cculd be used to provide a centralized network to support LEDS terminals
for the various agencies. However, there are possible restrictions in this application
due to the confidentiality and security issue related to transmission of this
..1
J
()IT]Ek�titi(OILSuI(lllirc)ul) 50
J
information over such a media. The use of a CATV institutional network should be
considered as an opportunity to reduce ongoing charges wherever possible.
The consideration of an E 9-1-1 emergency telephone system is not currently
appropriate due to the existing gaps in the central office capabilities that provide
J service within Washington County. This advanced service is expected to be available
within the next few years and will probably be the standard service provided by the
telephone utilities in the near future. In this case, it should be considered in the
long-range plan, and development of the geographical data base for use with CAD
systems should be coordinated with the data base which will be used by the E 9-1-1
system. All of these technical and system design issues are discussed in the review of
the alternatives, which is discussed in later sections of this chapter.
Operational Considerations
From an operational standpoint, there are significant differences in the various
communications centers throughout the County. The selection and training procedures
are different, and the extent to which various centers are using up-to-date and
comprehensive policy and procedure manuals varies significantly among the various
centers. In many of the smaller centers, the dispatch staff have other administrative
and/or clerical duties, and oftentimes there is no on-site supervision at all times
(which is sometimes a procedural matter as opposed to a size factor). In the current
consolidated centers, there are also different levels of involvement of the user
agencies, and, in some cases, the smaller departments feel that they have little or no
say in the operational and managerial aspects of the communications centers.
How the centers are managed and supervised is currently a very important concern
from the perspective of the user agencies and is a larger issue than the technical
considerations in terms of meeting the public service goals which have been
established. This issue of the management role of agencies (considering participation
in a consolidated center) is one aspect of the analysis of alternatives and affects the
feasibility of the various alternatives.
Analytical Approach to Planning Issues
There are three levels (or steps) of analysis which are involved in the planning issues
related to consolidation and future requirements. The first is whether or not
consolidated operations are more cost-effective than the current arrangement of
multiple communications centers. For this level of analysis, the baseline for
comparison is the current agency costs and staffing level. This comparison is based on
normal operational costs and does not include new equipment, facility costs, the
one-time costs of moving to a new facility, or reconfiguration of the communications
network (i.e., radio and microwave equipment and sites).
The second level of analysis, if a consolidated operation is cost-effective, deals with
-� what alternatives are available based on technical feasibility and various levels of
J
j
0)mE kj_ssConsWtingGn)tip 51
1
Jparticipation. in this case, facility costs, equipment costs, management costs, and
other one-time expenditures are included.
A third level of analysis is planning for the communications needs of the public safety
agencies in Washington Cointy in the year 2000. The growth needs of the County and
the various public safety agencies should not be excluded from the analysis of
<1 alternatives because many issues related to equipment and facility requirements
�J impact the communications systems needed to handle the projected workloads in the
year 2000.
The initial level of analysis, dealing with the basic question of consolidation, is
covered in the following section. The subsequent levels of analysis are then addressed.
Analysis of the Consolidation Issues
From the standpoint of analysis of the consolidation issue, the current costs of
operations and staffing are typically used as the baseline for comparison. Information
about the current communications system was contained in the Phase I report and
includes six distinct centers and an annual cost of about $2,435,800; and involves 4
managerial, 61 call-taker/dispatcher, 2 specialist, and 22 part-time personnel
supporting the various centers, as follows:
Communications Center Current Staffing
Beaverton Police Center Manager - 1
Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 7
Forest Grove Center Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 4
Part-Time Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 4
i
Tualatin Center Manager - 1
Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 10
:i Electronics specialistist - 1
I
Tigard Police Center Manager- 1
Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 6
Fire District No. I Center Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 6
Part-Time Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 6
Washington County Center Manager- 1
J Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 28
Data Coordinator- 1
Part-Time Call-Takers/Dispatchers - 12
Based on the current level of emergency 9-1-1 calls handled by the various centers
(about 41,025 currently) and the estimates of radio transmission requirements outlined
�.()I771.kLtiti�.()I LSl llt]I 11;�iI'()t 11) 52
_l
r
—� in the workload calculations in the previous chapter, a consolidated operation would
require fewer people. For purposes of comparison of the operational staff, excluding
management and technical personnel, and assuming that to staff one full-time position
five people are required, the following personnel savings are possible.
1 Multiple Center Operations
Call-takers/dispatchers (full-time) 61
Call-takers/dispatchers (part-time) 22
1 Consolidated Center Operations
Call-takers/dispatchers (full-time) 45
The consolidated center operation is based on three positions assigned to
call-answering and six positions for dispatching (four for police and two for fire). It
`1 should be noted that, using the workload calculations based on the worst-case estimate
of calls, fewer positions are required, but the potential savings are still significant.
There are other factors which must be taken into account in this comparison,
however. Some of the smaller agencies, which use their communications staff for
records and clerical duties, will need to retain some of these personnel, and in order to
consolidate, there will be an expense related to switching personnel systems and
retirement plans. Even considering these one-time expenditures dealing with
personnel systems and non-communications duties, the implications of this comparison
are clear and indicate that a consolidated operation is more cost-effective than
multiple communications centers for the County as a whole. It should also be noted
that the consolidated center is based on adequate round-the-clock staffing and
provides better service than is possible in many of the smaller existing centers, which
are minimally staffed and oftentimes rely on one person to answer emergency calls
from the public as well as dispatch police or fire units. The various alternatives to
consolidated operations, covering different levels of consolidation, are covered in the
following section.
l Identification of Alternatives and Baseline for Comparison
1
The above section discussed the concept of consolidation from the perspective of the
I County as a whole and indicated there was a large potential savings in terms of
required operational staff. However, there are often technical, managerial, and
political ramifications to consolidated communications operations which affect the
potential cost savings. Accordingly, a series of alternatives for various levels of
Iconsolidation are identified for analysis, as follows.
f
(;c�r nF k�.titi(;c��Ltii iltinf;C:rc n�l� 53
_ Alternative 1
Continue as is with six separate centers, with no consolidation (this is the
baseline for comparison).
1 Alternative 2
This alternative involves the consolidation of the Beaverton Police and the
Fire District No. 1 communications operations (including the other
jursidictions served) with the Washington County center in Hillsboro. The fire
agencies involved will share the CAD system being implemented, and the
1 police agencies will jointly develop a CAD system to meet their needs.
l Alternative 3
,J Alternative 3 will involve the same agencies consolidating as Alternative 3 but j
at the Fire District No. 1 location rather than the Washington County location I
1 in Hillsboro.
f
Alternative 4
This alternative involves the consolidation of the Forest Grove (including other
jurisdictions served) and Tigard centers with those already consolidated in the
J Washington County center (as outlined in Alternative 2 or 3 above). Both fire
and police agencies would participate in the CAD systems.
Alternative 5
. _ This alternative involves the consolidation of the Tualatin fire communications
'
(and the agencies which hich it supports) with the Washington County
- communications center (using either the Courthouse facility or the Fire
District No. 1 location). This would involve standardization of the fire CAD
systems as well.
Alternative 6
This alternative involves the consolidation of all agencies into one center (as
outlined in Alternative 5 above), which would be a new facility constructed
specifically for a communications center.
Alternative 7
f This alternative involves consolidation of all police agencies into one
communications center and all of the fire agencies into a separate
(;:xnpi��;(:�msultu�;Gmup 54
6
center.communications
hpolice
location, and the fire centerwouldbe at the existing Tualatin center.Courthouse
Alternative 8
This alternative involves consolidation into separate fire and police centers (as
outlined in Alternative 7 above), both of which would be new facilities
constructed specifically for communications centers.
The alternatives involving new facilities consider either a totally new separate facility
or a dedicated area of a new building for the communications center. For example,
1 several jurisdictions are planning new facilities, and adding space to accommodate a
-+ consolidated communications center appears feasible.
l As noted in a previous section, the baseline for comparison of alternatives igenerally encies
J the current operational situation and costs. In the case of many p Y g
in need of new equipment and those which should add staff to provide for improved
coverage, the current situation will tend to J understatal personnel savings their costs and sof the make
consolidation less attractive. Accordingly, the poten
various alternatives will be evaluated first; and costs of moving into a consolidated
center, such as remodeling, construction, new equipment, and reconfiguration of the
radio or microwave network, pa . Lastly, the t
savings for gecywill be projeced based the recommended level of
consolidation.
In terms of evaluation of the alternatives to meet future (year 2000) requirements, the
primary consideration is that the facility be large enough to handle consolidation of all
agencies (regardless of the expectation for such an occurrence at this point tions, seven
1 Based on the projected workload (translated into three call-taker po
dispatch sole opand otherlve spacesfolon, and two command r equipment and est areas,lthe, for a following is
.� of 13 console positions)
the estimate of square footage needed:
Area/Function Required Space
13 Consoles (at 125 square feet each) 1,625
Equipment Room - Radio 100
Equipment Room - Computer 120
! Back-up Power Battery Room 80
Reception Area 120
_ Office - Manager 120
Office - Data Coordinator 100
Office - Shift Supervisor 100
Lounge Area 250
- Kitchen 110
Restrooms 550
3,275 square feet
55
(;r rrnH:�.��(;cxL�ultir>�rcnip
�i
4 staff costs (including salary and fringe benefits) are used for the calculation
i Averages year for managers; $33,000
of potential savings, at the following rates: $37,000 per y g
per year for senior dispatcher/call-taker personnel; and $27,000 for
dispatcher/call-taker personnel. Part-time staff are assumed to work 20 hours per
week (or half-time). No assumptions about future salary increases are made. New
construction is based on $85 per square foot. Remodeling costs are based on $50 per
l square foot. Computer flooring is based on an additional cost per square foot of $9,
1 installed with carpet, for those areas where it is needed.
1 Description and Analysis of Alternatives
a
Each alternative is described in detail in the following paragraphs.
Alternative 1
This alternative involves basically maintaining the existing communications
centers and operations as described in earlier chapters of this report. The
f same PSAPs, call transfer situations, and separate operations would continue.
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 involves the consolidation of the Fire District No. 1 agencies
(which are Fire District No. 1, Beaverton Fire, and Skyline fire No. 20) and the
J Beaverton Police Department into the Washington County center. The 9-1-1
calls for all of these agencies are handled at the Washington County center in
Hillsboro, and consolidation would eliminate the need to transfer calls to the
other agencies. The current console configuration of four positions dedicated
to police dispatch (two for the County Sheriff, one for Hillsboro Police
Department, and one for the police departments in Sherwood, North Plains,
and Cornelius) would be adequate to handle the Beaverton Police Department.
(However, if this alternative is chosen and new eq Apment is procured, a fifth
console for police dispatching is recommended to provide an equal level of
service to each agency that currently exists. In this case all new console
equipment could be designed to handle all channels in order to provide back-up
support in high-volume activity periods.)
The addition of the fire agencies would not require any additional radio
equipment or system changes. However, as with the police dispatching
equipment, another redundant console would provide for additional back-up
1 and enable fire department personnel to be assigned to a command position in
1 the event of major incidents requiring special coordination or direction of fire
resources. The current consoles at the Washington County center are already
equipped to handle Fire District No. 1 and Beaverton fire channels. The
l addition of the Beaverton Police Department, however, would require minimal
changes. The Washington County center can currently transmit on the
( Beaverton frequency satisfactorily but cannot always receive adequately and
I
0m11r;Ls,4 56
needs access to voted output which is only available at the Beaverton Police
Department. Either installing phone lines to this location or relocation of the
voting receiver to the County Courthouse, and the extension of lines to the
voter receiver sites, is feasible.
i
The use of the fire CAD system would fit nicely with this alternative because j
all of the agencies planning to participate in the new system would be
dispatched out of one center. In the case of the police agencies, all of which
have tentative plans for a CAD system, the same operational and cost
efficiencies are available. Depending on the possibilities to share the fire
CAD hardware (which is in question at this time), a police CAD system could
cost as much as $200,000. The police agencies potentially consolidating under
Alternative 2 include the three largest agencies in the county and, together
with the three other smaller police agencies, will go a long way to forming a
regional computerized support system.
IAlternative 3
I Alternative 3 involves consolidation of the same agencies as described in
Alternative 2, but instead of one center at the existing Hillsboro location in
the Courthouse, the center would be located at the Fire District No. 1 station
r (address 14480 S.E. Jenkins Road) which houses their current communications
I4 center. The staff requirements would remain unchanged.
This location is currently equipped with a closed-circuit TV surveillance
I system and security is good. One factor in this location is that the microwave
network would need to be reconfigured to connect this location with the
County's net.
Alternative 4
Alternative 4 involves the additional consolidation of the agencies currently
served by the Forest Grove communications center (i.e., Forest Grove Police
and Fire, Banks Police, and Gaston Police and Fire) and the Tigard Police
Department into the communications center. This alternative would be
feasible at either site identified in Alternatives 2 or 3 and would enable these
agencies to share in the fire CAD system (applicable for Forest Grove and
Gaston) and the police CAD system in the planning stages.
Alternative 5
IAlternative 5 involves the inclusion of the Tualatin Fire Communications
Center (and the agencies supported) into a centralized center to serve all
County agencies. The fire radio system would not need to be changed in terms
of frequency capabilities, and no new frequencies would be required over the
five currently in use. However, the microwave network currently in use would
need to be linked with the Washington County network. The fire CAD system
I
i
i
( cnIII KLti.4:()rISII1 iI1gGnnil) 57
_ in use by Tualatin operates on different equipment than the system being
implemented by the County's other fire agencies, and if all fire agencies
consolidated, it appears that one of the systems should be upgraded. The
Tualatin CAD system is capable of being upgraded to serve the entire County
and is an operational and very sophisticated system. It is also possible to
expand the other CAD system being developed. (No new police agencies would
be added in this alternative, and the police CAD system would thus not be
affected.) With all agencies served by one communications center, the call
transfer problem is obviously eliminated as an operational concern.
Alternative 6
This alternative involves the same agencies (i.e., all agencies in the Coanty) in
a consolidated center except that instead of selecting an appropriate site from
an existing cer!t,-r, a new building would be constructed.
i
Alternative 7
1 This alternative involves separate communications centers for police and fire }
agencies. The Tualatin site could handle all fire agencies in the County
without significant changes, and it appears that the Fire District No. 1 facility
1 could also handle all agencies but would require new equipment and
remodeling. Accordingly, the Fire District No. 1 location is not considered
due to obviously higher costs. The police agencies could be served by the
1 existing Courthouse facility.
The major concern under this arrangement would be the need to transfer all
1 fire and EMS calls, since it is logical to have the police center be the primary
PSAP (because generally about 85 percent of calls are police emergencies).
Another concern about separating the centers is that additional managerial
and technical staff would be needed to handle two centers.
.1
Alternative 8
1 This is the same as Alternative 7 except that new facilities would be
constructed rather than using existing centers.
The potential personnel savings involved in the alternatives are displayed in Exhibit
V.I. The savings are determined based on reductions from the existing staff employed
.� in all centers pound the County and indicates the various levels of staff needed to
handle the CL.-rent workload. (The alternatives which do not involve a different level
l of consolidation and involve only site changes are not included.)
..1
R ( c�mEk�ti�(;cin��dtirrouE� 58
a % a
foc o
u.s
m w w w ,�
A.rn
�N N C w
d
C m1Hit
U U , < rn m o
a _
u 2P
a %v o C'G p r. cH�,wc,F, w w w a m
d13 d o ;, c m O S
�
> c > u.. m ? o %
� m
m
oE:.riF
d
� % u
d0 N O
(n C C r N C
W ! > V
t"-1 � d N •
Q d ? % bi aC d cc cc9
z > c C � y .Q U "; FHFFFFFHFHH in
Qom. ® F V OC C Ls. W W W W w W G. W W W p
a _ Vy �UA � UG r� m0 d
m
a m
^ C •� ._z5 C d C
E
_ a > v
d > >w
d an d
c/1 <c mo omi0 o H c
H U i
.. z •m
m be _
.
7 C to >
° o
CL.rn ,� 3
W LL V o%,
Q uY m > w d V•1
m yc y % Nio FHFFFFFFHFH _� m
w� mF. F c .20
e wwwwwwwawww
C
7 m C o C M
Q :: Uin VAr VA La m < \
d c.
w z °E-4 —T
� ° o
C 9 .�
d > d an d 7
a <� mov �� o°O0 E m
3UmwzF4
H m
n R,
m % m a
r
be a a
om wwwwawwawwa
a v2 QQ�
W EO N Z i d w C
m E mFm F mm m in m
13
N C7
Uy �UA "UAr-vai < uuuuctiGtt^Neh o E
C m COL 00.
uu mmm F C
u$ ° o m a m m 6aCL d aFi E+ ui a4i E
m> � m d^ u u u v PiA 0AHF f 3
-I a� O o o o.O o �
30m99.11 o.aao aWwa UUU F 4. w
_ CA)I III Nc,�-( 59
The information in Exhibit V.1 indicates that Alternative 5 is the optimum level of
consolidation and results in the maximum number of personnel being saved.
Alternative 5 is based on the staffing pattern to handle the average peak-hour
workload and shows that, through consolidation, 27 full-time operational positions (22
full-time positions plus 10 part-time positions which translate into 5 full-time
positions) can be saved. Accordingly, based on the current communications workload,
and using a $27,000 average annual salary level, the annual savings would be $729,000;
_ adding the one manager's salary of $37,000 to this figure, the tot::: personnel savings
would be $766,000 per year.
The potential savings for all of the alternatives is as follows:
Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative
2 4 5 7
Potential Personnel $189,000 $459,000 $766,000 $594,000
Savings (Per Year)
These potential savings are based on handling the existing workload with basically the
same categories of staff as are currently employed at the various centers. At least
one center (Washington County) is planning to institute a supervisor level of
dispatcher, which would provide a single person to be in charge of the center. This is
an appropriate change and is consistent with the need for more supervision. The
( Washington County Center is currently planning to add two staff to handle the
supervisory tasks. However, because they had not been hired at the time this analysis
was made, no new positions were included in the above analysis.
As indicated above, there will be costs involved in the actual consolidation of
communications centers which will offset potential staff savings. These costs include
personnel system "adjustment" costs for those staff changing retirement systems and
for differences in current salary levels, remodeling or construction costs,
reconfiguration of the existing radio system, etc. The costs included in this next level
of analysis are based on consolidation requirements only and do not take into account
any new equipment. (The implications for costs and savings related to new equipment
and systems will be addressed in the subsequent level of analysis pertaining to needs
for the future.) The estimated costs for each alternative level of consolidation are
discussed in the following paragraphs.
t
Alternative 2 involves consolidation of the Beaverton Police Department into the
County Center, which can currently transmit on the Beaverton frequency. Relocation
of the voting receiver to the County Courthouse and extension of lines to the voter
receiver sites is the recommended change and would cost approximately $1,200 per
year. The current Beaverton radio system uses St. Vincents as a site for its
transmitter, and this is not an especially good site for Countywide coverage.
However, if Beaverton continues to use their one frequency for only their own
dispatching requirements, no other changes are needed at this time. Other telephone
line and alarm changes are estimated to cost about $3,000. No changes to the fire
radio system are needed. The staff from Beaverton and Fire District No. I will need
to be integrated into a different personnel system, and it is assumed that $100,000
- ( ;�rnrl►:���1 �n��rilutik�(;rvruii
60
1
_ ($50,000 per agency) will be needed for this change. Miscellaneous costs are estimated
at $2,000.
Alternative 3 involves the same agencies as above being consolidated but at the site of
the current Fire District No. 1 center. This facility, although it only has two consoles,
has 1,421 square feet of space (which is more than the County Center) and could
accommodate this level of consolidation. Moving costs would be approximately
$14,000, which include actual transportation of equipment and the preparation and
wiring of the facility. Rerouting the 9-1-1 telephone lines and other related lines
(alarm and administrative lines) is estimated to cost about $6,000. (No new equipment
or remodeling is assumed at this level of analysis.)
Another potential factor in this choice of the location is reconfiguration of the
microwave system. The system is now a star configuration with the central hub at the
Courthouse and with links to two mountaintops (South Saddle and Bald Peak) and to St.
Vincent's Hospital. Bald Peak provides an interconnection to the Tualatin Fire
District system. Location of the consolidated center at Fire District No. 1 would
involve establishing a new link between the Fire District No. 1 location and the
Courthouse (or any other point on the microwave system). This will cost an estimated
$50,000. Performance of the microwave network and the overall radio system will not
_ be affected. The same amount of personnel system adjustment costs ($100,000) are
included in this alternative. A miscellaneous cost of $2,000 is included.
Alternative 4 involves the consolidation of the Tigard Police Department and the
agencies served by the Forest Grove Center into either the Washington County or Fire
District No. 1 location. Both of these centers could be handled with the existing
'. ,equipment (although it would be staffed at a full-time level). Anew telephone line
configuration from the Courthouse to the Tigard base station (similar to the
arrangement for the inclusion of Beaverton) would be needed at a cost of about $1,200
per year. No other changes would be needed at this point, and the Tigard frequency
would still be dedicated to their dispatching needs. No changes on the frequencies
currently used by the Forest Grove agencies would be needed, although the Tigard
frequency is not used to capacity and could be shared with other agencies. Another
$75,000 for personnel system adjustments is included, and it is lower because it is
expected that Tigard would retain some of their personnel for use in the records and
clerical function. Changes to the 9-1-1 telephone lines is estimated to cost about
$7,000. Moving costs of $14,000 would apply if the Fire District No. 1 center were
used, but there would be no costs if the consolidated center remained at the current
location. Miscellaneous costs for any work on the consoles is estimated at $2,000.
_ Alternative 5 involves the incorporation of the Tualatin agencies into either the
County or the Fire District No. 1 center. No new equipment would be needed, and the
added communications workload could be handled by the same staffing level as in
Alternative 4. New telephone lines for 9-1-1 calls and alarms would be needed, at an
estimated cost of $16,000.
The microwave system would need to be integrated into the County's network at a
cost of about $50,000. No changes to the fire radio system would be needed.
However, because this center is responsible for part of Clackamas County, some
- miscellaneous changes might be required, at an estimated cost of $8,000. There would
61
CA iltlIIg(4y)111)
_ (
be no moving charges, unless the Fire District No. 1 location is used. Personnel
system adjustment costs are estimated at an additional $100,000.
Alternative 6 involves all agencies in the County in a consolidated center at a new site
rather than an existing location. This would involve constructing a new building of
approximately 2,700 square feet, at an average cost of $85 per square foot or
$229,500. Additional costs for computer flooring for 1,425 square feet, at $9 per foot
installed, would be about $12,825. It is assumed that land currently owned by some
Movind cost about ome
agency could be used
new sitegaintot no cost the
microwave owave linkcenter lmtght be needed for a
_
Depending on the location of the
cost of $100,000. Other changes to the telephone lines and alarms are estimated to be
about $30,000. The costs of incorporating the consolidated center into a new facility
(rather than a separate building) being planned would be about the same and are not
listed separately. Staff adjustment costs would be the same as in the previous
alternatives. Miscellaneous costs are estimated at $10,000.
Alternative 7 involves establishing two centers, one for police and one for fire, at the
Courthouse and Tualatin center, respectively. The Courthouse could handle all of the
police agencies, and the costs wou involve new telephone lines to base stations in
Beaverton and Tigard ($2,400 per yeti.). No basic changes to the Tualatin center would
be needed to handle the other fire agencies (and, in fact, they have more equipment
than is needed for the current level of work). The Tualatin microwave system is also
es would be
currently able to justment costscover the wouldy on the fire system, and no bethe same as in the previous
needed. Staff a 1 alternatives.
�
_ Miscellaneous costs are estimated at $10,000.
Alternative 8 involves construction of new facilities (or incorporation in planned
facilities) and would involve expenditures of about $208,000 for a police facility and 9
uld be costs for reconfiguring the
$165,750 for a fire facility. In addition, there wo
microwave systems and moving expenses.
Organizational Considerations
i
There are two basic approaches or models to organization of a consolidated center. ,
The first involves the largest agency, or one of the largest agencies, taking the overall
support role (versus the management control role) for a consolidated center. The large
agency prov:c:-s administative support such as personnel (hiring, providing payroll
services), budgeting and accounting assistance, and oftentimes provides physical space
and janitorial services. Such an arrangement can work well if there are arrangements
for a policy- -**;ng board with representation of all user agencies, and in fact the joint
decision-n- :inp, process is carried out in practice. A consolidated communications
center is H, c, ily a service-oriented organization and must be responsive to the needs
of the us A.id without a suitable mechanism for user control, a primary objective of
consolidation is not being met.
This approach to communications services often benefits smaller agencies, which are
"subsidized" by the larger agencies by virtue of the "free" administrative services. In
addition, this arrangement can be less expensive than other options because there is
62
' f
_ no need to establish a redundant administrative group to handle the routine tasks such
as payroll services. This organizational arrangement is currently in use in several of
the centers around the County, where the largest agency handles the support tasks. It
generally requires no special effort to form this type of arrangement other than
approval of the officials from the participating jurisdictions.
The second type of organization, a joint interagency agreement, is defined in State
statutes (ORS 190.000, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act) and prescribes the
duties and responsibilities of an Intergovernmental Council, User Boards, and Directors
and covers other areas such as the budget, equipment, facilities, admission of new
_ agencies, and termination of the agreement. Because of this mandated structure, this
arrangement often takes more time and can require assistance from attorneys to
T establish. However, this arrangement provides more safety for all user agencies,
regardless of their size, in terms of the policy and decision-making process. With the
council and user board clearly defined and with regular meetings an expected part of
the overall purpose of the agreement, there is less likelihood that the management
process will either slowly fade away or be taken over by a dominant agency. This type
of organization often involves the need for clerical staff dedicated to the new agency;
such additional personnel will increase the overall costs accordingly.
Regardless of the type of organizational structure adopted for a consolidated center, a
primary concern of all agencies is how the overall costs are allocated among the
various users. Typically a formula, based on some indicator of workload (such as
calls-for-service, units in the field, or emergency calls received) or of agency size
(such as population or assessed valuation) is used. Also, oftentimes a number of
factors are used rather than one single indicator. Important considerations in
t whatever formula is used include fairness and objectivity, the case of administration,
J and the ease of understanding by city and County administrators and officials. Also,
another issue is to establish a formula that does not "penalize" agencies for usage and
1 create a situation where they will not use the services because of cost considerations.
This defeats the purpose of a consolidated arrangement and obviously is not in the
public interest.
. In the analysis of one-time costs for consolidation, the worst-case situation is assumed
in terms of funding requirements, and between $15,000 and $30,000 is budgeted for the
various alternatives. There is a range because there would be more agencies involved,
1 and in some cases (such as Alternative 7), there would be two separate organizations,
with the different levels of consolidation.
Shared CAD System Considerations
In the case of shared CAD systems, generally those alternatives with the most t
agencies participating would result in the maximum level of cost-sharing and,
accordingly, the least cost to all users. Only one fire agency, Forest Grove, will be
without the support of a CAD system based on the current plans. Alternative 4, which
1 involves their participation, would provide an opportunity at very low cost to get the
Csupport of a CAD system. In terms of Alternative 5, which would include the Tualatin
( rrrrilri��( rrtr.rilUrtk,�(�rY�rri� 63
1 �
1 Fire Center with an advanced CAD system already developed, the other fire agencies
would be able to cease development of the Prophase system. It appears that the
1 hardware could be used for management reporting, but essentially the Tualatin system
would be able to support such applications. Accordingly, some of the equipment for
the fire CAD could be used for other applications, and new equipment (such as CRTs)
would be needed for the fire agencies to connect to the Tualatin system. In addition,
to take full advantage of the Tualatin CAD system, all other fire department vehicles
would need to be equipped with the mobile digital status terminals. Including all
equiment and fixed costs, each terminal would cost approximately $3,000.
The development of a police CAD system would be simplified if all of the law
enforcement agencies are consolidated in one communications center. It is possible
for non-consolidated agencies (such as Forest Grove and Tigard in Alternative 4) to
t reporting and other limited use, but it would
participate in such a system for incident
be cumbersome in terms of possible redundant data entry requirements and operational
t
procedures.
i
Costs and Savings of Consolidation
Exhibit V.2 summarizes all of the one-time costs associated with the various
_ alternatives to handle the current workload. It is clear from this information that the
alternatives involved with construction of new facilities (i.e., Alternatives 6 and 8) are
the most expensive. However, in order to compare all of the alternatives, these
one-time costs should be combined with the potential personnel savings. Exhibit V.3
displays the potential personnel savings over a 15-year period (to the year 2000),
taking into account the one-time costs noted above. This as
that the current
workload is constant (which is not expected to happen) and the current equipment will
remain in satisfactory operational condition (which it will not) over this period of
time. The purpose of this analysis is to display the benefits from consolidation over
time against the one-time costs of consolidation; future requirements in terms of
equipment, staff, and facilities are addressed in the following section.
From Exhibit V.3, it appears that Alternatives 5 and 6 provide the most savings. These
alternatives involve consolidation of all agencies into one center, and even with the
high cost of a new building (Alternative 6), substantial savings are projected. The
potential savings range should be considered as a planning guideline and used for
comparisons of the various alternatives and should not be considered as definite
savings based on various levels of consolidation. For example, new equipment
expenditures (as noted above), additional clerical and support staff (if an independent
agency is established), and other types of maintenance and training staff will need to
be considered; and these costs will impact the potential savings.
Future Equipment Requirements
The final level of analysis involves including the costs of the required new equipment
and facilities to provide adequate communications support in the next five-year
r
fi
1
J
J
64
w
p o 0 0 O
Cl
CD
� Q
I F I O O
� F
C O O O O O N N I C
H ' I o 0 c 0 0 0
o
1•.n I I O I U9 H O O OJ ;•9 N N F i :J
1 ZI r
O
CD
i > I• i O O O O O O I Q CCo
O O v O O O an
m U
�r C I m t0 7 C
O L O
y l Z i N N N U ¢
N I I I O O O C I s a 0
- I ID
F_ Id
«�.. p j 0
O O O O O O
i .; O N F O N �. � I L •C
O I W I N O 1
Z E.`!'
i F i I c a
1
W I N I o 0 0
Q O y ? N U m R
O
Z O N > C
►i u c 7 J v o u
v.
rn O I O N C L 3 U 00
I O C I C •yLU O '
E av Q u °°� s L E c � U
m y L �n d CI < U F
i o`f a
J
I
�� l ;,rnllwi��l�►rr�ulUrlKi�r7ruli 65
JEXHIBIT V.3
POTENTIAL SAVINGS RANGE OVER 15-YEAR PERIOD
J
Alterna- Potential Worst-Case I Less One- I Potential
tive YearlySavings I Yearly savings Time Costs savings Ra e
J '
No. 2 189,000 54,000 121,200 $688,800- 2,713,800
No. 3 1899000 54,000 188,200 I $621,800- 2,646,800
No. 4 459,000 243,000 276,400 I $3,368,600- 6,6089600
No. 5 766,000 489,000 4589400 $6,876,600- 11,031,600
No. 6 766,000 489,000 742,325 $69592,675- 10,747,675
No. 7 557,0000 152,000• 317,400 $19962,600- 8,037,600
� i
JNo. 8 I 557,0000 I 152,000• 892,750 $1,387,250- 7,762,250
*Assumes one manager for each separate center.
J
M
J
J
J
J
• (A)[I I1 1l,,r(41)1111 66
1
(
jperiod. In terms of new equipment, all agencies except Tualatin and Washington
County (for their two fire radio consoles only) will need to replace their radio and
telephone console equipment within the next few years, and several agencies are
planning to replace such equipment immediately. There is also the need to implement
or upgrade related equipment such as logging tape recorders and back-up power
systems. Exhibit V.4 displays the impact of consolidation on the need for new
equipment. The different types of equipment include radio consoles such as are
currently in use in the Washington County Center, which are separate from the
telephone answering consoles; and the combined radio and telephone consoles in use in
1 the other centers. (The equipment is listed in the Washington County Center for
consolidation alternatives for convenience and does n,.,' `nricate the center's location.)
;
The equipment currently in use at the Tualatin Center does not need to be replaced
and could be used whether Tualatin became a fire communications center at the
present location or if it were moved to a different facility. The information in Exhibit E
r
V.4 indicates that either Alternative 4 or 5 would result in the maximum savings in the
costs for new equipment. This display is based on the equipment needed to handle the
current overall workload; additional equipment would be needed to handle the
projected workload in the year 2000.
+f In addition to these equipment costs, there would be costs for office furniture (about
$25,000), technical assistance for procurement and engineering (about $30,000), and
other installation and contingency funds (about $57,000). If full consolidation were to I
take place, there would be other costs associated with reconfiguration of the radio
network to handle Countywide coverage as opposed to just selected jurisdictions.
Based on the workload analysis, for the year 2000 additional police dispatch consoles,
additional call-answerer telephone consoles, and replacement of some of the fire
consoles would be required.
_1
Communications Center Site Considerations
-1 In terms of possible locations for consolidated center(s), there are several feasible E
alternatives. As previously stated, the square foot requirements for one consolidated
center (with the projected year 2000 workload and enhancements) involving all
agencies is about 3,275 square feet. The candidate sites to accommodate one
consolidated center include the current Washington County center, the current Fire
District No. 1 center, or a new facility. The existing Washington County center
occupies about 1,172 square feet, which covers the actual dispatch area and the radio
equipment room. An additional 700 square feet are available for expansion, for a total
of 1,872. Even if the office space is separate from the center and equipment rooms,
this is not sufficient space to house a consolidated center. The Fire District No. 1
( center currently occupies about 1,421 square feet, and there is another 2,407 square
feet available for expansion. This is a total of 3,828 square feet, which would provide
sufficient room. In addition, there is adjacent land area which could be used for
-� additional space if needed.
67
_i (A1(11�F6ti��IIlNlll�fl�il7lU(1
1 �
}I .0
Ot K `c n
1:
zC —- — - ---- -—
C.CL p O C O
OI
It I O O O
N
E- IN is b
rel N
oro
7 ! G to
( I
I o v o
c I
_ 1
m C O Cco
I d m r. L C L ¢ rA
c U O '� mu o
c c c Y v u c ^y a c G u u � u
° 88� o b o 0 0rZ
°b c oa
3
U
be , p. JE
i
I < a
b T Ii i
C j U IC
I E U o I{ I
d U U O
V
m I ru
` F `
� c me
a
31j �U W 2 FU tJ U HJ
J
rrrr�rdhn>g(;nnilr 68
A new facility would obviously be designed with adequate space for all operational and
administrative needs. .Alternative 7, which involves separate fire and police centers at
the Tualatin and Washington County locations is also feasible. The Tualatin center,
with all needed dispatch, kitchen, and lounge facilities (2,300 square feet) would be
J sufficient for the fire center. The Washington County center, including the use of the
available area, does have adequate space for a police center if the offices are located
in a separate area. However, planned expansion of the County's jail facility in the
adjacent area to this site must be considered a drawback from a security standpoint.
.. A new building, or a specially designed facility in a planned building, would obviously
suffice.
t
The costs associated with the use of an existing facility are the remodeling costs of
$50 per square foot and the cost of computer flooring for the operational and
J equipment areas. In the case of the Fire District No. 1 center, the most feasible site
for a consolidated center, this cost would be about $208,725 (at 3,828 square feet of
remodeling and 1,925 square feet of computer flooring, which is more space than
Jneeded but assumes the entire area is remodeled).
Summary of Costs of Benefits
Combining the findings from all levels of analysis, which includes the personnel
i� savings, the equipment savings, taking into account the one-time expenditures (as
summarized in Exhibit V.3), and selection of a site large enough for future expansion,
it appears that Alternative 5, with a location at the existing Fire District No. 1 site, is
the most cost-effective solution. (A close second is Alternative 6, which after taking
into account the remodeling costs, is only slightly less cost-effective. Alternative 6
involves construction of a new facility, which could be designed exactly as required,
incorporating all needed features and design layout.) Alternative 5, with its
consolidated call receiving, eliminates the call transfer problem. A consolidated
J center will simplify the implementation of Countywide CAD systems. This alternative
provides for adequate flexibility for growth in the future and provides for the most
efficient use of staff to support the overall workload of all County agencies. This
alternative, which would result in pooling of all available police frequencies in the
County, provides enough capacity for normal dispatch activities, as well as an "extra"
frequency for tactical or undercover police work. From a Countywide perspective, it
provides for the best use of all radio frequencies.
Alternative 7, involving separate police and fire centers, also looks attractive from a
cost standpoint (ranked the third highest in terms of potential long-term savings).
Only minor changes in the staffing level of the fire center (located at Tualatin) would
result in savings closer to Alternatives 5 and 6, and this alternative requires less
one-time expenditures. In addition, it would provide all fire agencies with a very
i sophisticated CAD system. However, the call transfer problem, with the fire center
as a secondary PSA P, is a significant drawback.
..
r
69
CA
• Radio System Design Considerations
ice
� In conjunction with consolidation, it ould bcoungywide.ical to rThis would maximize theeconfigure the various luse
radio frequencies to extend their coverage
of the available frequencies and would eliminate the need to procure an 800 MHz
system. Under consolidation (Alternative 5 or 6 with el_ agencies participating), with
_ six channels available (two UHF and four VHF), the following plan is feasible:
2 UHF channels -Sheriff Department
1 VHF channel - West County
1 VHF channel - East County
2 VHF channels - Tactical use, one for East and West County
be
ated (and some
1 In order to accomplish this, several transmitters ve the change mentioned inthepreviousccosanalysis to
purchased), over and abo
hanges are as follows:
simply consolidate operations. These c
• To provide countywide coverage on the Beaverton frequency, the
transmitter currently at City Hall should be moved to South Saddle, and a
new transmitter should be located at the Cooper or Parrot site. This will
involve a cost of $5,000 for a new transmitter and about $500 to relocate
the existing equipment.
• To provide countywide coverage on the Tigard frequency, the transmitter
at Tigard City Hall should be moved oar of site.r PSouth Saddle, and a new
l a costs are the
transmitter located at either the Copp
1 same as with the Beaverton configuration.
• To provide countywide coverage on the Forest Grove city law frequency,
no new transmitters will be needed, but one should be moved to South
Saddle and the other left as is or moved to heWataboutst site.
ifhere
would be a cost of $1,000 to move the equip
ment and new site at Watererest is used.
• Tigard, with
the eedrforrequency are the same as one additional transmitter.1tT Beaverton
costes
Tigard,
would be incurred.
As indicated by the projected workload for the year 20009 five channels are sufficient,
and reconfiguration of the available channels for Countywide use would meet the
,.� projected requirement with one to spare. In addition, expected future use of Mthe DTs
and 800 MHz channels for the data communications should result in less u e of the
voice channels. However, if consolidation is not selected, it app
j Beaverton Police Department will need two channels in the future. Because there are
no available channels left for allocation, one option is to procure a new 800 MHz
conventional radio system. This would involve replacement of all mobile and handheld
radios in addition to the transmitters and antennae. A new trunked 800 MHz radio
system for the entire County (for law enforcement agencies) would involve a similar
replacement of all equipment and is estimated to cost about $700,000. This is based
)I]-,I IfUlIgGrimp 70
on replacement of 80 mobiles and 120 handheld radios, with the trunking controller
(computer) and repeater package. This compares with an estimated cost of about
$67,500 to reconfigure the existing system as outlined above.
Other Operational, Equipment, and System Improvements
The staffing levels used in the analysis of alternatives are based on the current and r
T projected workloads at an equivalent service level as exists today. However, there are
several enhancements which should provide better service to the various user agencies
and operational staff of a consolidated communications center. A senior-level E
dispatcher position is recommended. This would be a working position and would i
1 provide a career path for the center's work force. In addition, a shift supervisor-level
position is recommended. This position, which would involve an increase in the number i
of staff, would provide a single point of contact for all problems and questions during
each shift. This level person would also be involved in personnel selection and training
activities. An option to a shift supervisor-level position would be a designated training
officer. This position, which would not involve staffing all shifts, would be responsible
for training for call-taking, dispatching, and CAD operational procedures. Regardless
1 of which approach is chosen, the training function will be more important in the future
J with the expanded use of CAD systems and new radio and telephone equipment.
j Additional staff to handle the data coordination and information reporting are also
J recommended for consolidated centers. Additional maintenance staff will also
probably be required. The number needed will be affected by the degree of
consolidation, the amount of new equipment procured (newer equipment generally
requires less maintenance than older equipment), and the complexity of new equipment
(such as mobile digital terminals). Some of these changes should be considered
regardless of the level of consolidation which is finally agreed to by the various
1 jurisdications and public safety agencies.
J Related to the need for more supervisory and training support is the need for an
itJditional radio/telephone console. It is typical in large communications centers that
a supervisory console be available. It is used by the shift supervisor or the training
officer to monitor the staff's handling of calls and dispatchers, and it can also be used
3 for training new staff. In addition, during extreme workload situations, it crn. be used
as an operational position. Such a console is typically equipped with both police and
fire radio frequencies and with all telephone lines.
Other improvements which should be considered, whether or not consolidation of the
dispatch centers takes place, include:
• Gradually reconfigure the microwave system to eliminate the current
relay point at the Courthouse location (in Hillsboro) and develop a loop
configuration; a loop configuration is typically more reliable
• Convert VHF police channels to UHF if UHF channels become available as '
�- a result of future conversion of neighboring jurisdictions to an 800 MHz
syste m
i� 1,�
71
(�niiFritir.l t►rttitiltjIW,(:nrtip
i
• Implement MDT data channels as an 800 Mliz conventional system (as
opposed to a more expensive trunked system) with two channels (one
channel would be adequate, but two would be desirable)
There are other enhancements, such as the relocation of the radio transmitter to a
new site (a proposed site is Watercrest Road, based on preliminary plans by Forest
Grove personnel) and establishment of a microwave link for radio control circuits,
which should also be considered. Such changes, however, do not affect the analysis of
consolidation alternatives and should probably be done regardless of the consolidation
question. One effect of consolidation on all such changers to the radio system would be
the sharing of the costs among all agencies rather than only one jurisdiction.
' Potential Impact of Consolidation on Agency Budgets
The potential for savings from participation in a consolidated communications center
is an important consideration for most of the public safety agencies in tree County.
From s Countywide perspective, there is definitely a significant savings; however,
translating this total figure to the potential savings for individual agencies is more
1 the various agencies do not currently
difficult. The primary reasons for this are that
pay for their communications services in relation to any uniform measure, such as
population, volume of emergency calls, numbers of units in the field, or some factor of
j� assessed population. The various agencies have different levels of support, and some
of the existing consolidated centers are using different formulae for the participating
with fire and police agencies with overlapping
agencies. In addition, in dealing P g
boundary responsibilities and, in some cases, jurisdictions contracting for services
1 from another jurisdiction, it is difficult to make valid cost comparisons with other
agency expenditures.
I} Despite all of these concerns, however, it is possible to project potential savings based
j on the current Countywide expenditures and each communications center's share in
the total amount. Exhibit V.S displays the current six centers, their budget in dollars
and as a E..:rcentage of the total, and projected costs and savings of consolidation. For
example, each center shares in the overall yearly savings due to the lower overall
staffing needs of one center, and some agencies save the funds required to procure
new equipment. All agencies then are required to fund their share of the development
} of the new center, including reconfiguration of the communications network, purchase
of new equipment, remodeling, personnel adjustment costs, setting up an interagency
agreement, and other one-time expenses (for a total of about $934,000). The final
column of this table indicates that most of the centers (and the agencies involved)
would have a net savings after the first year of operations, and that the maximum "pay
back" period for all of the agencies of the new consolidated operation is two years. It
should be noted that this is for a completely new center with new equipment and a
level of service which exceeds the current situation in some of the centers. Again,
this cost analysis is for comparison purposes, and actual savings are expected to vary
with each center depending on a number of factors. Such factors include the number
of staff retained by the different agencies to handle clerical or administrative tasks,
- the exact amount and type of equipment purchased, and new staff (such as training or
data coordinators) added to enhance overall operations.
I A II I I K Lti A lI 1ti11IIlI1 Ott uE i 72
1
F I �
mb
L'l bo
rj
�• C N .n n �n
•• > e m c-� r> v o
y w
9
U v O
� p Oc U N I w
1 I U J
e 0 o c o
O
bo
c C ri
c4 N ?
E c rc p o c o
Ln
o 0 0 0 oI o I
mwJ
.7 I 0 y n
10bo
1 i. U O :n m :J N •n v o .I I
t'f t0 OI O N I h
ow
Uc-� I N
O
U I mrd
�i
� ^ 2 C
•Z� Z J
ymoI v
x
J
U I w l
0
M 0 0 0 0 l o a
o o
V
M O O
O m T
j 9 M N Cl
c. x
C� m d CJ V
J I C � �' m y
C m 7 tom. U U U '�
C m c. O ta. R• ar d d 7
a: ud
R U
�•cc � °' � c -• om
i U 3 a v m coLM
U W 3 Z w H F I • •
J
.i
J 73
' ('�u►►E�►ti.l ;►n►ti►illi►t�(;rY ii►i�
The establishment of an interagency agreement for a consolidated center provides an
' opportunity to develop a cost-sharing formula which will equalize the costs for all
County citizens in all jurisdictions. It is possible that such a formula will change the
1 level of payments of some agencies, and the components should be clearly stated and
•J easily understood. The costs and percentages listed in Exhibit V.5 are based on
' historical developments; it is likely that any new cost-sharing formula will be
different, and accordingly the potential savings will be different than shown in the
exhibit.
I
I
I �
I
1
i
I
I
I
I
I �
Ck)m[xiss(:orisultir Group
I
i
J
J
J �
CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
( �nr ri►:i��(�it r�r iltir ik�t �rti n ri�
74
J �
CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIGNS
1 This chapter discusses the conclusions and recommendations based on all data
collected and analyzed throughout the project.
J
Conclusions
The following conclusions are presented:
J There are currently six separate communications centers providing
emergency communications support throughout the County, and all are
currently providing at least the basic services needed. However, many of
{ the smaller centers are not equipped or staffed to handle major incidents.
J The current arrangement of multiple small communications centers
results in underutilization of radio equipment, available frequencies, and
staff, yet in many cases the current workload of specific centers does not
warrant additional expenditures.
• Several jurisdictions are currently planning new facilities and/or the
procurement of additional radio equipment. From a Countywide
perspective, this provides an opportunity to reduce the overall
expenditures on equipment and means that it is a prime time to consider
consolidation.
• There are numerous advantages to consolidation of communications S
services, including overall reduced operational costs, more efficient use
of available radio frequencies, more flexible use of staff and the ability to
handle specialized language requirements, and increased interagency
coordination.
• Several of the existing communications centers are in fact already
consolidated operations serving many agencies. However, in some cases,
this arrangement is not meeting the operational or managerial needs of
the user agencies. A prime concern of public safety agencies is the
potential lack of control over their agency's resources and the resulting
lack of responsiveness to the public.
• Several fire agencies are currently jointly developing CAD systems, and a
CAD system is needed by law enforcement agencies in the County. Joint
J development of a police CAD system would reduce the costs for the
individual agencies and enable them to develop a Countywide system.
J
75
1 '�n r►E� �A►►ice►►IU►►}4(�rti)1►i 1
• The
current radio frequencies available to the police and fire agencies
should be adequate through the year 2000. However, there are some
enhancements which should be initiated, such as implementing MDT data
channels on an 800 MHz conventional system. I
• in terms of new technology, the County public safety agencies should
continue the development and planning for CAD systems. The orientation
for such automated systems initially should be for incident information
and tracking purposes, and subsequently, as the agencies grow (and
increase the number of units in the field), more attention should be given
to unit status monitoring capabilites. MDTs should be introduced over
time with supervisory personnel being the first equipped.
Further consolidation of communications centers is technically
f alible
and is projected to result in substantial savings. Any
decisn to
consolidate operations at this point in time should be coordinated with the
procurement of new equipment and possible relocation of facilities to
provide flexibility for the future.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are presented for review:
• The jurisdictions within Washington County should immediately begin
planning to consol►date.
The level of consolidation outlined under Alternative 5 (with the agencies
currently served by the Washington County Center, the Fire District No. 1
Center, the Forest Grove Center, the Beaverton and Tigard Police
Departments, and the Tualatin Fire Center) is estimated to result in a
potential savings of between $6 and $10 million dollars through the year
2000. This takes into account the use of the operational savings for new
radio equipment, redevelopment of the microwave network, remodeling of
a new facility, and procurement of CAD systems. This
to alternative
new
also preclude the need for some of these agencies
equipment on their own and/or fund new facilities (i.e., those areas
devoted to communications) which are planned.
A phased implementation plan should be developed_ to facilitate
consolidation.
Consolidation of the various public safety agencies will be a complex
process and will require detailed planning andith coordination
among level the of
various jurisdictions. Accordingly, n
consolidation as outlined in Alternative 5 as the overall objective, a
phased implementation approach is recommended. Phase 1 would involve
consolidation of the Beaverton Police and Fire District No. 1 with the
Washington County Center. (All emergency calls to these agencies are
f -
i
�i
_J7 6
'A)[1hi lilli Ik,�:rr n Ii�
1 currently handled by the Washington County Center, and this would
eliminate the need to transfer calls and allow for more efficient use of
staff and equipment.) Phase 2 would involve Forest Grove Police and Fire
and Tigard Police joining the consolidated center. The final step, Phase 3, i
would involve the addition of the Tualatin Fire Center into the
consolidated center. This Phase will involve the integration of CAD
systems and reconfiguration of the microwave networks.
Using a phased approach would enable a very difficult project to be
broken down into more manageable steps. In addition, with a coordinated
j phased approach involving the purchase of standardized equipment and
�j systems, the potential savings of consolidated operations can still be
achieved.
• The consolidated center should be established at the site of the current
Fire District No. 1 communications center.
This site offers an existing facility with sufficient space for expansion to
meet the needs of a consolidated operation through the year 2000.
Security is currently good at this site.
• The purchase of new equipment should be coordinated with the plan to
consolidate.
` All new police radio and telephone console equipment and related items
such as a logging tape recorder should be procured for installation into the
new consolidated center. The equipment from the Tualatin fire center,
including the CAD system, should be relocated at the new center. The
CAD system in use by Tualatin is fully tested and operational, is very
advanced, and will receive new software from the vendor as it is
developed. Equipment from the other fire CAD system should be used for
other administrative applications (if feasible) or for the development of a
new police CAD system.
• A joint powers agency,should be established.
The number of agencies potentially involved in the consolidated center is
approximately 25 (including all police, fire, and ambulance agencies) and
range dramatically in size. In addition, the consolidation will require
careful and detailed planning and the development of all agencies if a
consolidated operation is to be successful. The establishment of an
independent agency with a management role by all of the user agencies is
needed to ensure the participating jurisdictions that their operational and
public service requirements will be met.
As part of the preparation for a joint powers agency, work should
immediately begin on development of comprehensive policies and
procedures manuals with input from the various agencies about their
requirements. A plan for staff recruitment and transition to a new
agency (and a new personnel system) should be developed and should
1 77
1.
—r
include how center supervision and training will be handled. In addition, a
scheme for management and financial reporting should be developed to
keep all user agencies informed about the center's operations and budgets.
Plans for additional staff to serve in shift supervisor and/or training roles
• should be incorporated in the consolidation a ort.
Additional staff for shift supervision and training should be added to
enhance the operations and responsiveness of the consolidated center to
_ its user agencies.
• The microwave system should be reconfigured to accommodate the site of
the consolidated center.
The new links needed to connect the Fire District No. 1 site to the
Washington County and Tualatin systems should be engineered and
implemented in coordination with the consolidation effort. Any redundant
links should be taken out of operation, and a loop arrangement should be F
designed and implemented.
The new communications agency suld 1 for licenses for two
Th g y hoa '
J conventional 800 NIHz channels for data communications.
t
800 MHz channels could be used for the data communications needs for
MDTs and will relieve the need to use voice channels for records checks.
MDTs are expected to be implemented in the future and a request for
these frequencies should be initiated.
i
CATV transmissions media should be used wherever feasible.
The overall network for telephone and radio control circuits and data
communications for the CAD systems should use CATV capabilities t
wherever feasible and in compliance with State and Federal regulations
—� pertaining to the transmission of confidential information.
The work plan and schedule to put these recommendations into action are contained in
the next chapter.
J
J C,ompassConsWungGroup
I
l I
J
,J
..J
..J
CHAPTER VII
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND SCHEDULE
C rrijk+.s,ti(: rnsrilbr>gGroul) 78
CHAPTER VII
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND SCHEDULE
Implementation Work Plan
The implementation work plan is made up of the following major phases:
• Phase I - Organize Consolidation Project
• Phase II - Establish Independent Communications Agency
• Phase III - Develop Police CAD System Design
• Phase IV - Prepare Communications System Design
• Phase V - Prepare Facility Design
Phase VI - Procure Communications Equipment
Phase VII - Remodel Facility
• Phase VIII - Procure CAD System Equipment and Software
• Phase IX - Reconfigure Microwave Network
• Phase X - Cutover to Consolidated Center
In addition, there are other long-range activities which should be included in the work
plan, including:
• Phase XI - Refine Operational Procedures and Organizational Structure
• Phase XII - Prepare Plan for MDTs
• Phase XIII - Prepare for Implementation of E 9-1-1 System
• Phase XIV - Develop CAD/MIS Interfaces
The detailed tasks involved in these major phases and a schedule are displayed in the
following section.
' C;cm�Frititi(�ons�iltu�t;mul� 79
Implementation Schedule
Exhibit VII.1 displays the proposed schedule for the major consolidation project and
other long-range developments. The schedule is based on elapsed months from the
date of approval to proceed by various jurisdictions in the County.
The schedule is based on the level of consolidation described in Alternative 5. This
total-consolidation effort will be complex and involve a great deal of detailed planning
and coordination among the various agencies. Accordingly, a phased implementation
plan might be a more appropriate approach to consolidation. The alternatives outlined
involve progressive levels of consolidation and could be used as guidelines for a phased
implementation plan. For example, the initial phasc could involve the agencies
included in Alternative 2 and then at a later date the agencies involved in
Alternative 4 could be added. The full potential for cost-savings and joint
development of CAD systems and operational policies and procedures would not be
realized immediately under a phased implementation plan, but for the agencies
involved in the intial phases, significant cost savings are still expected. The tasks
listed in the full implementation schedule will still need to be accomplished with a
phased plan, but the timeframes would be shorter based on less complexity and fewer
agencies involved with each phase.
l
c.
(;A)m F)a-tisCortstiltingC'rou f) 80
O
M a0
a
r m
N
O
W
m
N �
W �^
a
a �
A
� e
M
_ rn
N
F o
F
m ¢ _
I W W
W m
a ti
m '
a•
I M I
N
ba m C
E
V m � m m m i
vEC o m m v 7c c] m
Ei m 5 �' c m :. ,
7 xC O m
,�, L �,d m m e c c 2 0 v ❑ c
be
E m tJ Ti r d m 6"
x 3 c o hod u c �,> > v m E w
' v v c emmcm5
c •C�mmm Ly�Cy.~�o Cp° �o� yq:a:+.dEd. mmlIavmadi >9ymm�2mm �o_ym�Se cuQmV+«a-dCEm�wEy.�.0. $ moc$., CO']� uEm m Eo bC0 mm m , eo
v_m Y d 9`a0
m � _y dd i t E L o G m
a
3a300.
Em.� amL, > > a) >
vvmomdr
tr�`
_I CO ,' ccc
y d y L a) = L a7 ca CD m m d L d C) m
GLC n a i+. o rn a I U C
G A.IL)I t
G
S1
CA)l nF K IS4:0ntiultii lg(;n)t 11
e
1
_o
w
n o
m �
Y
r
to
e
N
nl
O
01
m
N H
r.
m so
d
• 'b v,
O e
� n
C
O N
� N 1
O
M� On
ccW
Jr
w
t-
oo, m
N
N
Y C 1
o p 2.2 d L q
m c
m w E G C O d
c mZ EC
mu E9 `'m e u v m c m E
v F a CC m 0,"0Y G b or- a m °
=v E N^ Q d
at N8i oc
md� °ia,gi ,�`o c �
F ca Y tiYcEmc. w cmc F� l: ,.c y r o
Y Ca m S,oY �� u cY. uoar7 Y 7oT =.� c. — m
aa, ma E « fly Q � H�
« o Inc YY
m 0C S.dvcY. m> � a
A. m p, 1.v . 1'~ C wtG. m
�c °;C-0 c«U
O
my
do � EE Sm� �C > d > ayiaaiE > EI d�>d Y2ivi E ai�67m�
Y R. V Y fl< �` Y d d Q7 O U Y t Y Y
rn m m a Aa yaa3. E m
a am y�Q azv�
a
Cor nptisConsWtir�roup 82
N �
H
O
ch
Go
a
03
N m
N
N
N
N
_O
cc
m '
N �
m �
a
� a
G N
. N
'J O
H cft
m
� w t
x
d
cc7 1 m
n
N
rl
°0 E d m
d m .� �^3•" 79
e3 d C
079 C 11 dC� mdD.
m � c A� o,$a oo.� u��m 06 do a c.
0to
64
m C E d > U I ism! Ci« m« C > Cc a0 CL
� d
Cc m >
o vm � ' 2 w o edQ,y X10 d
d a '9 7 aC.Ca � C7yC � �» �+ u d %„ d0. A C« m '
.... a m9.,r
y d
X om k � q�pd� E �m
C n E« atm x X X
> d e d m d
t � L' d LI7 C L t
46 e a I . . . . . . . . . o.FO a 06 ro o.
ra 7A
1/7
e- /k
01%
14
6F PY
7--At
MINUTES
t
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY
SEPTEMBER 11, 1984
MEETING CONVENED 10:08 a.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Chairman Wes Myllenbeck
Vice Chairman Bonnie Hays
Commissioner Eva Killpack
Commissioner Lucille Warren
Commissioner John E. Meek
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT Donald D. Stilwell , County Administrator
Gary Krahmer,General Manager, Unified Sewerage Agency
Rick Daniels, Director of Land Use & Transportation
John Rosenburger, Land Use & Transportation
Alan Bachman, Assistant County Counsel
Jerry Parmenter, Land Use & Transportation
PRESS Harry Bodine, Oregonian
Doug Browning, Argus
Steve Sechrist, Times
1. CONSENT AGENDA Approved 20 items under Consent Agenda, removing items a
and q to be heard at their regular time.
Motion--Meek Second--Hays Vote 5-0
Approved minutes for meeting of 8-21-84 for Board of
Commissioners (approved under Consent Agenda) .
Approved minutes for meeting of 8-28-84 for Board of
Commissioners (approved under Consent Agenda) .
Ia. Land Use & Transportation Vacation No. 250 (Portion of NW 334th Avenue)
Mr. Daniels summarized the staff report and recommended
denial of the vacation request.
Doug Jensen, 1727 NW Hoyt, Portland, representing Harold
Seiffert, submitted letters from the neighbors on 334th
Avenue. He said that there were sound reasons for vacat-
ing the road.
Sharon Seiffert, 1130 NW 334th Avenue, submitted written
testimony and photographs of the road in question.
Joe O'Meara, 1270 NW 334th, gave his comments on the testi-
mony.
Board denied the request for vacation of a portion of NW
334th Avenue.
R&O 84-197 Motion--Hays Second--Warren Vote 5-0
lb. Awarded construction bid for Barnes Road/Miller Road
Intersection LID to Clearwater Construction Co. in the
(� MO 84-402 amount of $543,315.00 (approved under Consent Agenda).
MINUTES -- BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Page 2 ,
SEPTEMBER 11, 1984
lc. Land Use & Trans ortation Adopted Resolution and Order imposing load restriction _
(continued) on various roads (approved under Consent Agenda).
R&0 84-198
ld. Appointed Kenneth B. Stewart as Alternate Hearings Officer
MO 84-403 (approved under Consent Agenda).
le. Approved request for De Novo Hearing on Item 84-142-M,
MO 84-404 Teufel/Falk Plan Amendment (approved under Consent Agenda) .
if. Approved Agreement for Acceptance of Student Training with
MO 84-405 Portland Community College (approved under Consent Agenda) .
1g. Assessment & Taxation Authorized the Sale of Tax Foresclosed Property (approved
84-208 under Consent Agenda).
lh. Office of Community Approved contract for CDBG Project NO. 4348 with the City
eve opment of Gaston (approved under Consent Agenda).
MO 84-406
li. Juvenile_ Services Adopted Resolution and Order for the 1984-85 Juvenile Ser-
trommission vices Commission Plan (approved under Consent Agenda).
0 84-199
ij. Mental Health Approved Contract with Luke-Dorf, Inc. for a Fairweather
M 84-407 Lodge (approved under Consent Agenda) .
lk. Public Safety Approved contract with Beaverton School District for En-
RU-94---TOT forcement Services (approved under Consent Agenda).
11 . Suort Services Authorized to call for bids for copy machines (approved
under Consent Agenda).
lm. Approved Declaration of Surplus Property (approved under
MO 84-410 Consent Agenda).
In. Approved Amendment to the 1984-85 Position and Salary Reso-
lution for Land Use and Transportation (approved under Con-
R&0 84-200 sent Agenda).
lo. Approved Refunds kto various individuals and businesses)
MO 84-411 (approved under Consent Agenda).
1p. Approved Proposed Professional Services Agreement with
Partin and Hill for Conversion of the McGinn Apartments
MO 84-412 (approved under Consent Agenda).
lq. Compass Consulting Report
Russ Washburn, Fire Cheif of Tualatin Fire District,
stated that Tualatin supports a concept of consolidation
of facilities and are interested in. t4kr' savings•
He
said that-it is not their intention tosopa consolidation
efforts. Mr. Washburn was concerned that salla of the're-
copmendations would duplicate a service that already exists
He rec6WO"dad that the Tualatin Facil#tymould do all fi
and.d cAl dis0emb and the County W1lity could do al
Polite dispatch. He concluded stating, thatbeforre a de T=
cion is made, the cost analysis Must 00 completed.
MIAUTES -- BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Page 3
SEPTEMBER 11, 1984
lq. Support Services Mrs. Cutler stated that the Board was being asked to ap-
continued prove the concept of consolidation. She gave comments on
Mr. Washburns' testimony.
After lengthy discussion, Board adopted staff recommendation
MO 84-413 and accepted the Compass Consulting Report.
Motion--Meek Second--Hays Vote 4-1
(Warren voted no)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The following actions taken as Board of Directors for Unified Sewerage Agency, a County
Service District:
1r. Unified Sewerage Agency Authorized General Manager to sign amended agreement with
Cooper Consultants for Design of Banks STP modifications,
at a cost not to exceed $25,000 (approved under Consent
USA MO 84-144 Agenda).
1s. Approved Refund of Sewer Parmit Fee to Tielemann Real EstatE
USA MO 84-145 (approved under Consent Agenda).
it. Repealed Resolution and Order No. 84-43 and a portion of
Resolution and Order No. 84-39 for Brad`ord-Corylus Local
USA R&0 84-49 Improvement District (approved under Consent Agenda).
The following actions taken as Board of Directors for Service District for Lighting SDL-1,
a County Service District:
1u. Service District for Adopted Resolution and Order amending the plan of financing
Lighting SDL-1 and operations to set new maximum assessment levels and
calling for a public hearing on October 2, 1984 (approved
SOL R&D 84-13 under Consent Agenda).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
2a. PUBLIC HEARINGS SW Barnes Road/SW Miller Road Local Improvement District -
Public Hearing on Assessments
Jerry Parmenter stated that the method of assessment is
equal share by ownership. He said that the total project
cost is $635,625.
Chairman opened the public hearing.
No public testimony was presented.
Chairman closed the hearing.
Board adopted Resolution and Order for preassessment roll
and directed that notice of assessment be given.
/ R&0 84-201 Motion--Hays Second--Killpack Vote 5-0
l' 2b.
Corridor Center Drainage Local Improvement District -
(Continued from August 7, 1984) f
i
t
i
MINUTES -- BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY
Page 4
SEPTEMBER 11, 1984
2b. PUBLIC HEARINGS Mr. Daniels stated that staff has been working with Farme
(continued) Insurance to include them within the LID. He said that
this will require a review by Farmers' central office. He
asked that the LID be suspended for up to six months to al-
low Farmers Insurance to be included in the LID.
Chairman opened the public hearing.
No public testimony was presented.
Chairman closed the hearing.
Board suspendedthe Corridor Center Drainage LID for a per-
iod up to six months to enable Farmers Insurance to partici-
pate in the LID. Second--Hays Vote 5-0
MO 84-414 Motion--Killpack
Adoption of Findings for Plan Amendment 84-134-M, Gerald
and Donna Vanderzanden (continued from August 21, 1984 -
2c
Public Hearing Closed)
Alan Cachman stated that the findings refer to other ex-
ception areas. He advised that the Board should consiaer
whether the findings are adopted based upon the exception
areas own merits, or on the consideratiot, of other exception
areas.
Mr. Bachman advised the Board to continue this item to
enablelison to revise the exception areas.
Board continued item to end of public hearings to enable
County Counsel to revise the findings. Vote 5-0
Motion--Warren Second--Hays
Mr. Bachman outlinedthe revisions to the findings submitter
by Mr. Allison. Mr. Allison concurred with the changes.
Board approved plan admendment with the revised findings for
Case 84-134-M for Gerald and Donna Vanderzanden.
Motion--Warren Second--Killpack Vote 3-2
(Meek and Myllenbeck voted no)
2d Murray Boulevard, Preferred Alternative (Continued from
August 28, 1984)
Mr. Daniels reviewed the written testimony received regardir
Murray Blvd. He summarized the staff recommendation, statinc_
that the five additional conditions be considered with the
selection of an alternative:
1) Subsequent to the construction ( ` Murray Road Improve-
ment, the Cedal Hills Community 'an will be reviewed
for revision. (The Plan already indicatesaswquer
to a decision being made on this roadWayi theplanwith the
cent
i
updated. This also ties
r
cent criteria adopted by the Boardwhich indicates tha',
major public improvement projects and their completion
shall be one of the criterion utilized for instituting
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: October 15 1984 AGENDA ITEM #:
DATE SUBMITTED: October 9, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: Placed onto
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Maintenance _ Maintenance using their Performance Bond
Bond exchange for their existing_..__ PREPARED BY:
Performance Bond on Copper Creek III REQUESTED BY: _
DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: w � — CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Copper Creek III, was placed on Maintenance August 20, 1.984, using their
Performance Bond as their Maintenance Bond. They have now sent us a
Maintenance Bond so that they may have their Performance Bond released
reducing the cost of bonding.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
SUGGESTED ACTION
We recommend that the City Council accept this Maintenance Bond and release
their Performance Bond.
f (0673P)
j
CHUBB & SON INC.
C ' Manager
CHUBB
FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
MAINTENANCE BOND
Bond No.. 80944097
Amount S ...69,752.80
Know All Men By These Presents,
That we. Tualatin Development Company, a Delaware Corporation
(hereinafter called the"Principal").
as Principal, and the FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, of Short Hills, New Jersey, a corporation duly
he State of
organized under the laws of the Stateof New Jersey, and duly(hereinafter called the"Su elty'),as Surety,are he icensed to transact d and f mbusiness(lyt
Oregon bound unto
_ _... ...
City of_.Ti. gg.ardO
, regon
(hereinafter called the"Obligee ).
Sixty-Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Two and 8...0/100- -- _ .._.
. . ....... . ...... .
in the sum of ... .
(s .69.7.52..80.... ),for the payment of which sum well and truly to br made, we, the said Principal and the said
Surety.bind ourselves.our heirs,executors.administrators,successors and assigns,jointly and severally,firmly
by these presents.
20thday of .
September i
Sealed with our seals and dated this - -- --
_._ ...._ .. .. .. _ ..
A D.nineteen hundred and .eighty-four.__ ._.... _. (
ntered into a contract with said Obligee dated.August
WHEREAS.the said Principal has heretofore e
19.84.. ,for platting Copper Creek III Subdivision. and,
i`
WHEREAS,the said Principal is required to guarantce the improvements
installed under said contract.against defects in materials or workmanship which may develop during the period
August 8, 1984 to August 8, 1985
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH,that if said Principal shall faithfully
carry out and perform the said guarantee,and shall,on due notice, repair and make good at its own expense any
and all detects in materials or workmanship in the said work which may develop during the period
August 8, 1984 to August 8, 1985
or shall pay over,make good and reimburse to the said Obligee all loss and damage which said Obligee may sustain
by reason of failure or default of said Principal so to do,then this obligation shall be null and void,otherwise shall
remain in full force and effect
Tualatin Development Company.
............................
Principal
....... ...........
FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
By... L..,�� .....................
At rney-in-Fact
And.. .....................................................................................
C-153 °•
Fqm 11O7S—F(Ed 6-53)
1
POWER OF ATTORNEY
Know all Men by till Presents,That the FEDERAL INSURANCE COYPANy, 15 Mountain View Road.Warren,New Jersey,a New Jersey Corpora-
11W.,has constituted and appointed, and does hereby constitute and appoint Nancy L. Kummer, Raymond B. White, James R. Daly,
Hartley P. Walker and Leslie L. Rudat of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania--------------------------------
each its true and lawful Attorney-in-Fact to execute under such designation in its name and to affix its corporate seal to and deliver for and on its behalf as
surety thereon or otherwise,bonds of any of the following classes, ,t
1. Bonds and Undertakings filed in any suit,matter or proceeding in any Court,or filed with any Sheriff or Magistrate.for the doing or not doing of anything
specified in such Bond or Undertaking.
2. Surety bonds to the United States of America or any agency thereof,including those required or permitted under the laws or regulations relating to Customs
or Internal Revenue; License and Permit Bonds or other indemnity bonds under the laws,ordinances or regulations of any State,City,Town,Village,
Board or other body or organization,public or private;bonds to Transportation Companies,Lost Instrument bonds;Lease bonds,Workers'Compensa-
tion bonds. Miscellaneous Surety bonds and bonds on behalf of Notaries Public, Sheriffs. Deputy Sheriffs and similar public officials.
3. Bonds on behalf of contractors in connection with bids, proposals or contracts-
In Wlbreea Where$,the SW FEDERAL WNIMANCE COMPANY nes,prrreYa)a its ey-Lawe,eareed tiieee presents to be signed by as AaMtart Vvoe n a.derN and A"Www SOMOWY and b
doneormis aw to be lnaree of ed Me 7th ay of December sig 83
Corpora.Seri �St:titir
y
••••.JE FEDERAL ANY
ey
Georg•Mecte.ri
��idtMComm _ AaalMarM Yle►/rVa1MM
\ Assistant s.erM.rY
RATE OF NEW JAMEY
County of Somerset I
Jia 7th day Of De ee mbe r 19 83 .bears we per.onasy carne Richisrd D.O'Connor to me known and by me known e be AWWAM saorefafy M the FEDERAL W
$LgtANM COMPANY,Ile capo'aoon described in and white slecio d tine ar1gMW Power of Atlanay.and I"read Richard D O'Connor berg by rhe dulyMellon.Od dspoM and a"Mato he is AUNO M$e'r I
of Me PEDIRAL INSURANCE COYFANY and knows to corporate Mel dew) Ina Mie Mal afksed ioIlls aregornp Power or Marney a such or 111 sfe Nal&rid wit OMMo a-taW by WANOGY fN fhe ay-Laws
of and Connprry,ad MM he agreed said Power of Attorney M AMetkiM Seraseary of sed company by kke arfiorey,end del he is acquainted with George MCC1eMan and known fen to be no Assistant V WO*femdrN
of end Company.and that Pte signature of and George McCf~subscribed to and Pawn of Attorney e in the gerwne ha dwrl"of aril George M cClsasn ane wit Mereb subwO W a IsnMofay of std
ay-Laws and in depont"We presence
Notahr Se010".t
lilAcknowledged and Sworn a before nne
Noury PCERTIFICATION LL ICC t`''�Ii,RD
1`131ARY PUiAiC OF NEW JERSEY.
STATE Of NEW JERSEY
County of Somerset I My Comrt eau❑ E:pros June 28. 1983
1,Me undaregred,AMMAN Secretary of Me FEDERAL etatMRANM COMPANY.do hereby Oeftity that the Wow np is a true.icer"from the 9y-Lawn M ate said Comparry rete adopted by its acrd of Oreelors
an Marsh 11,19M NO mos laoatlly anaded Manch 11.INI3 rend into the Sy1ew a in kill force aid eN
"ARTICLE xVIN
Section 2.AN Doritos lir is"N tell.oaNrMM a"atiner nreWn Wft-Mier a nor seabove for ad an tell W the Company which N e autho need by law er M eIWNr Ib eMaMa,may
and eW be exemasd in tie wit and on bells-of$w Con%v"~by the Chak~a the Vlo*Cho~orPte Preed&N or a Vc&-PrMK%m.IonMy woh tie$wary«ter AmMm M
S@CMWV under enk reap rt derefghe mile,ea. I met emir on,or more ofNoene or albrrey►N►fecf daMprimed in all reeok)rn M th cord of Directors or Me Ens xdk*CanhlMa.
or in eny power,of Sarney,am - M provded for in Section 3 below.rhey execute any such bond.IMrdalakng Or 0"W elongation as povndW in such rMOMdn or parer M seem we
Section 3.AN powers of WWrney for kind on behati of Me Carvery may,and eMN be aMciAW in no none and on ww W the Conpaiy.now by the Charman or tine VrceC•hannien or tie Praatdren
oravioe"rMnderMoraiAmmoniteWorPnreidrM.jointly with tieSeam"oranAOSMWVSoaftn.under MinrespecWeds*Wwbom Theswwk"saudroukm$neybeo'W prMMW
or NMnoprapled"
1 Ito tiism cerMy Went sed FEDERAL-NIJIIANCE COMPANY Is illy kcaieW to barest I' -%and arty busneM n eatMr of IM Slaere W ese l l W W States of ArnwiM Distinct of CdkeMia.P1M POW and each of the
Moviress of Canada wall the aa- V-off of Prince EOwrd bM":and is also ditty Nnrernaed to becMeerm money an bads.utWrWrips,Mc.,Poo I or repuYSO by law.
1.teeundrsignalAssltornfSecretryofPEDSIMDOURANCECOMPANY.dolistMeeyoeflMyVIN din arepoMgPower ofMoneyankill laceand
sssaw. (?A-
n
f�
r n uMs my hared kind the major readCowell"M iii!CrWarren.N.J..*us � oat of�a■C-2 u�•L .f• u �.
t F.
heir. .Sent
,�11TtiF N�,
w J:
fy, �
•S-fit,??S`�."-. _ � f
wJEay��
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: October 15, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #:
DATE SUBMITTED: _ October 8, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: Had previous One Year_
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Extension on _Extension
Sidewalk Bond for Scheckla Park PREPARED BY:
Estates i REQUESTED BY: Ward-West Construction
DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: — G -- CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The City Council approved an extension of one year, on October 10, 1983. The
developer was to have all sidewalks installed by October 10, 1984, but to date
there are still lots (see attached map) without sidewalks. The developer has
requested that he be given another one year extension to install the remaining
sidewalks.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
SUGGESTED ACTION
Planning and Development recommends that the sidewalks be installed now and
deny the second one-year extension request.
(0665P)
PARK AREA TO CITY
OD
.yds All T
cINo
450 C3 �� Il')
`' 6072°_ I Y
.•� '" � 19 18
r6,� QD o 6567 10.00 8189®51'53"W
62--
eL
A
n.{s 1SK 2 68 PG 670
ya
Q) 1 / ®,7553 § 73.0 rfiv rn _ TRACT "g"
Q i � � �� 16 I' x 257' RESERVE STRIP
od, (�h TO THE CITY
i7266°$ Cj12
Q4d � ® 11 '
° so' �o. - ® 600.07 ��„ w
o , /a6 t� EAST LINE SOLOMON-
m 28 , / i5 oa 0 RICHARDSON D.L.C. N044
a» S �
sa 7643® 73514 w a
°C A '+' w i• 0
M U IV&/ .�- i t 0 tR?7105®. 5
w v '� 0 i$ z
o ui or g 88163 �. ����. 6970'
17 w �Tr ACT
�►- s®51`3 p 1Or et° �® +� °� 1 3 , - - �� ® " I`x :50 RESERVE STRIP
1.�5---
a x'69 °1945 c� TOTHE CITY
B05.uB '� 70.33 70.00 68.00 71.98.00 25 �. 75.00 3.03 89.01 t04.�0 St?.00 .vb'
�J 1�09 619.8 �9i cli
to 7559e p? C° �� 5o° 8'O w 7514' � U3 M B
8064 �c9 �✓ ® � 04 ,�7co
�ev$ ' ��� ®® 8 7 � 8 5 �y� �_' � 0 � ® �;� O� g` Abp m � C0
C5 S ' :�, vy 7699& �r a 8444 a '� 5140 !�' 642 ' Iv 595 c'
�9 IO245 9335 0 �cel �,n r � � A
O 3�z
8137 � p 0 V'�'ri it s
00v // m 70. r.T.. 4T 12 - 10236.03 S `03�I wcc
��o s
//0 '93�� fiy 6141° ` � T `�+ '-! ti 1 7� 01
9� 922 I
' 123u €.
J5 777Z 0
71 ' z5z5' --
G%F"! It 6642
V6 25V 0
a 'ri 55 , ! J O
g� 31 9416 , rry � ``C'i r" I`-
�. ��® � � ' na a 9 2 z� 90 0 M. cti 10172� � 30
_ 9
BaeO _ 8 1
�� to 0 6415m 5� EAST
g zs' o f
���.Ea to `'��! /s 1®3.�'8 �� 7 i \1 8 5✓ � I.wi p2 0
s s ® 8843 �� . g 8 10t 4
,3 6v s
0. < � w 91931, I - 93.00 EA �v m 10987� �
! �, �!�`�> '�' N 09'ro'3z" ,v�.1 9 26 EAST p X03 et °, e5 A2
�95i7cc
� se �� �� X538 IQ ®os' ® 6 8 53 q � Ci77 �
5o'p 9 "E 3z7' 0 ua o tO , o0 10
p _I � + 92,97 � 9 .00 �" 2 ' 63
_0 sv 18E 513 R 148.77 R 650a� � �
7 tR�s� -WEST- 19 EAST S�$a 3/� 12030 is � s
1®x.97, �, � Qy vs 82.39 rn 65SO� !-� 7496
A (�
9665 6- q w 13t7.Cl0 w 86.I? 5�` "t 6�E �9a9° �� 7 ,v� 1 5 O`_� 4 u,
ty �a 9639• eOOO' 8301y� 4474° 9�73' x xLy e� 0: eaa9�
0 r �- WEST ) EAST � '�� X �.
® g OF } �J `:% 'to 6876 ci
_� ty.�'1� � `d I"' �` 0
X63316 ,
{ 140.00 80.00- 80.00 Acn 108.09 6745 .01 68.29 i 7 89x 118.01 100.01 (D ri e
e, --- 416'9''16'33"E STREET 134.61
CR 727 aS1AT�i LEPe -1-_ 451. -z
' Sept. 26, 1984
City of Tigard
Att: Bob Thompson
Ward West Construction Inc, is requesting a 1 yr. extension on the
remaining lots in Scheckla Park Estates. Enclosed is a copy of the
remaining lots.
Due to the slowness of selling of lots and homes, the cost of putting
them out would be to high at this
in the sidewalks then having to tear
time.
This will be the last time we would ask for an extension, would you
please advise us on this.
Thank you,
F,rd lr:ardin
Ward-West Const. inc.
Pres.
l
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: October 15 1984 AGENDA ITEM #:
DATE SUBMITTED: October 8, 1984 _ PREVIOUS ACTION: NONE
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorization
to execute in behalf of the City — PREPARED BY: John Hagman
San. Sew. Comp. Agrmt (West. Intl) REQUESTED BY: Engineering Services _
DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: L4, CITY- CITY ADMINISTRATOR: _
INFORMATION SUMMARY
1. The attached (City standard form) Sanitary and Storm Sewer Compliance
Agreement and Performance Bond provides for assurance of completion of
installation of a 400 foot 8" main line sanitary sewer and an 800 foot
(15" 6 24") main line storm sewer, to City standards.
2. The lines are proposed to be installed by a private developer and will be
located northerly of Tech Center Drive (near 72nd Avenue) .
a
3 . It is recommended that the Council act to accept the Agreement (and Bond)
and authorize the Mayor and Recorder to execute same in behalf of the
City.
f
3
. t
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
4t4
i
SUGGESTED ACTION
Accept the Sewer Compliance Agreement and Performance Bond and authorize the
Mayor and City Recorder to execute the Agreement document in behalf of the
City.
(JH:bs/0699P)
SANITARY SEWER &
STORM SEWER COMPLIANCE. AGREEMENT'
THIS AGREEMENT dated this day of �G7,0 84
the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter Lermed thr
"City", and Western International Properties
hereinafter termed "Petitioner
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for approval of consLruction of public
sewers, to be known as TECH CENTER SANITARY & STORM SEWER EXTENSION
being within the boundaries of an area as described on the aLLachcd Exhibit "A" and oy
reference made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard requires applicants for constru(- Lion of sewers, and
appurtenances thereto, to submit to construction inspection, and testing therewithal ,
to grant public easements, therefor, and requires the payment of fees; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved and adopted the standard specifications for Public Works
construction by APWA, Oregon Chapter, and the uniform Building Code, for storm sewers,
prepared by professionals for Public Works construction; and
WHEREAS, the public improvements required to be constructioned are incomplete, but
petitioner has nonetheless requested that the City permit granting of the property to
the public, and the parties herein named desire to protect the public interest generally
to assure the public improvements will be installed as required and completed within
the time hereinafter set forth,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premise and the covenants and agreements
to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and his contractor and Peti,tionei's isurety,
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Petitioner shall proceed to complete all public improvements as shown on herewith
improvement plan, as approved by the City of Tigard and prepared by David Evans &
Associates titled Grading & Utilities Plan Said improvements to be completed
no later than one (1) year from the date of this agreement, and Petitioner hereby
agrees to comply with all standard specifications adopted by this City, or as may
otherwise be approved by the Department of Public Works and to use only such material
and to follow such designs as may be required tc conform thereto.
2. To assure compliance with the City's requirements and the provisions thereof,
Petitioner agrees to .provide herewith axltender to the City, a surety bond(s)
in form approved by the City, with liability in the amount equal to the contract
price of $ 30.931 .50 prior to issuance of a permit for construction of said
improvements; Petitioner's contractor shall be licensed, and insured as required.
3, In the event that the contractor shall fail , neglect or refuse to proceed with
the work in an orderly and progressive manner to assure completion within the time
specified, upon ten (10) days notice by the City to the Petitioner and Petitioner's
surety, and such default and failure to proceed continuing thereafter, the City may
at its option proceed to have the work completed and charge the costs thereof against
the Petitioner and the Petitioner's suretv and in the event the same be not paid, to
bring an action on the said bond to recover the amount thereof. In the event that such
action be brought, the Petitioner and the Petitioner's surety shall be required to 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 cost incurred by the Citi , both
in the Trial Court and Appellate Court.. if any, or the City mav�at its option bring
prc-ceedings to erforce against the Pe' ; 711 ' _r a^d/,or Petitioner s surety, specific
performance of the contract -icd compliance with the standards adopted by the City of
Tigard, and in anyevent, ir. a like canner, the CitV shall be entitled to recover such
s,.)gs as the Ccurtmay adj-,dge reaso-able for the City's attorney's fees and cost, both
in the Trial Court and Appellate C^Lirt, if a7y,
Petitioner , concurrent with the execution hereof, agrees to pay the following fees
as required by the City of Tigard.
a, A plan check fee to cover the cost of review and approval of construction
plans in the amourt of $ 10j),00
h, A perr.,it fee to ecce t` co=t of p,ocessing the pc*mit application
and performing the i^sp- tion of s,-wcr c(,r <'-uction, in the amount
of S
C. A connection charge to conrzct directly to an ex sting sewer, which was
installed with/with-' : ;strike irapplicab'r word) cost to the petitioner,
in the amount of $
d, A monthly sewer service charge for the use of public sewer system
in the amort-It of $
5. Petitioner, cc-current with the execution hereof, also agrees to pay a surcharge
in the amount of $ * as required by that certain contract entered
into by the Citv with
r for the reimbursement of sewer contiuction costs pertinent thereto.
6. The City agrees to make periodi,, ir.specti.ons as, in the City's judgement, is necessary
i� to assure compliance.
7. The Petitioner agrees to insure that the City receives 48 hour advance notice of
commencement of construction and, also, 12 hour advance notice for all requested
field inspections.
8. The Petitioner agrees to insure that the Petitioner's engineer obtains accurate
as-built (field) construction records of said sewer installation -and, also, agrees to
insure that the City is furnished with one accu-ate as-built mylar thereof.
9, At such time as all public improvements have been completed in accordance with the
City's requirements, Petitioner shall be required to notify the City of the readiness
for final inspection; upon affirmation by the Department of Public Works that all
requirements of the City have been met, the Petitioner will submit to the City a
good and sufficient maintenance bond in the form approved by the City in a sum equal.
to twenty per cent (20%) of the contract price to provide for correction of any
defective work or maintenance becoming apparent or arising within one year after
final acceptance of the public improvements by the. City.
1.0. 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 accept the public improvements, subject to the requirements of correction of
deficiencies and maintenance for a period of one year.
STORM SEWER DEDICATION - Page 2 of :i
* To be determined at time of application for building sewer connection permit.
I 1 , es
That the Petiti nor, in consideration of the City's approval of the application
to construct a stern sewer'itl-An
boundaries of easements h ld Cityt,titstoffV. dicers,
�-ereby covenant aT:d agree t
fc� arj from all. claims, demands, damages, and each and every
;gents and erployee
ether obtigatior tha' c � r c:uld arise frc-r tie reQlect of Petitioner, his officers,
agents, contractors � 'd =Rp1cy'=es, or from trespass upon property outside of the
^.ey's fees and costs . if any, necessarily in-erred by
easement area, including atte
t'7e City in defending agai^st Such claims, with the intent and purpose that the Che
!d
sFall be made whole with -esp-ct to any amou*its it may be required to pay or he he
I iabie for in connection with the exercise of the privileges afforded Petitioner to
ty°s ease ?nt for sewer. construction purposes.
, i !ize th- area within ti-r- Ci
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the pa'tIE, Fave excc,jted this agreement pursuant to authority
-ted in eac�-
PETITIONER: W St International ProR rtie s
x
(Pres.)
x
(sec.)
E
(Attach Acknowledgement Hereto)
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON D
Mayor
J Recorder
t STORM SEWER DEDICATION - Page 3 of 3
SANITARY & STM SEWER PERFORMANCE BOND
y ORBond No. YS 861 3221
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we _Western International Properties
as Principal, and ndustrial Ind M91 Company
a corporation duly authorized to conduct a general surety business in the State of
Oregon, as Surety, are jointly and severally held bound unto the City of Tigard,
Oregon a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called the Obligee, in
the sum of $30.931.50lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment
of which we, as Principal, and as Surety, jointly and severally bind ourselves, our
successors and assigns firmly by these present.
THE CONDITIONS OF THIS BOND AND OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that the Principals are
constructing a sanitary S sewer sewer, and appurtenances thereto, in the City of
Tigard, Oregon, and entering into a sewer compliance agreement with the Obligee
herein, and upon acceptance of said compliance agreement, the Principals shall
make all improvements required by the City of Tigard Ordinances and agreement
documents all of which are by reference, made a part hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, if the Principal herein shall faithfully and truly observe
and comply with the terms of the agreement and shall well and truly perform all
matters and things undertaken to be performed under said agreement and shall
promptly make payments to all persons supplying labor or material for any of the
work provided by said agreement, and shall not permit any lien or claim to be
filed or prosecutioned against the Obligee, then this obligation shall be void,
otherwise to remain in full force and effect.
In the event of suit or action be filed by the Obligee hereunder to enforce
said contract or to recover under the terms of this bond, in addition to all other
rights and remedies hereunder the City, in the event it shall prevail, shall be
entitled to recover such sums as the Court may adjudge reasonable as and for
attorney's fees.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this bond to be executed
this 28th day of September , 19 84
ernational er 'e : By: (seal)
Pres.
By: (seal) By: (seal)
sec.
' /,'_ (seal) By: (seal)
By:_ ,
(A true copy of the Power of attorney Industrial Indemnity Company
must be attached to the original of
this bond.) Surety
AqWorney-In-Fact G. M. Dunn49
INDUSTRIAL
11viver of ( lttorneg #620 INDEMNITY
NOME OFFICE V FRANCISCO
Inafn all men by these presents:
That INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California,
and having its principal office in the City of San Francisco.State of California,does hereby make.constitute and appoint
-G. M. DUNNING----------------------------------------
its true and lawful attorney-in-fact for it and in its name,place and stead to execute on its behalf as surety, bonds,undertakings,stipu-
lations. consents and all contracts of suretyship and to attach its corporate seal to such obligations in favor of all obligees,provided
that the liability of the Company as surety under his authority in no one instance shall exceed the sum of
----------------------------------------UNLIMITED-----------------------------------------
and reserving to itself full power of substitution and revocation.
This Power of Attorney is made and executed in accordance with the Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of
INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY at a meeting held on the 27th day of Septe..iber. 1972,reading as follows:
"RESOLVED,that the Chairman of the Board or President or Executive Vice President or Senior Vice President of the Company,
in conjunction with the Secretary or an Assistant Secretary of this Company.be and he hereby is authorized to execute,acknowledge
or verify Powers of Attorney qualifying selected attorneys-in-fact to act under such Powers of attorney to execute on behalf of
Industrial Indemnity Company bonds, undertakings,stipulations,consents and all contracts of suretyship,and to attach the corporate
seal thereto;
"RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the signatures of said officers so authorized by this Company may be printed facsimile, litho-
graphed or otherwise produced,and that the facsimile signature of any person who shall have been such officer of this Company at the
time of such execution, acknowledgment or verification may continue to be used for the purpose hereinabove stated and will be
binding on this Company,notwithstanding the fact that he may have ceased to be such officer at the time when such instruments shall
be issued."
In witness whereof, INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed and its corporate seal to be
affixed by its proper officers,at the City of San Francisco,California,this 11th day of November ' 19 77
Attest: INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY C0161PANY .
,'`159fGKq/
y~• �o+ i.
, M. Gi spie Secretary y J. 9r. 8P18nte
Se o Vice President
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
On this lltiu y of November , 19 77 before me, Mary Mueller ,
a notary public in and for the City and County of San Francisco.State of California,personally appeared
J. G. LaPlante and R. M. Gillespie
known to me to be the Senior Vice President and Secretary of the corporation
which executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same, and that the resolution
referred to in the preceding instrument is i true and correct copy of the resolution duly passed at a meeting of the Board of Directors
on September 27, 1972,and that the same is in full force and effect.
In witness wherecf, 1 have hereto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written.
�.annnnsa.s..usJf.AeY`sh:JCILER NCTAnY CALIFORNIA
••M•••u•
Or W1 FRANCISCO otary Pub 1 to ind for the City and County
of San F n co.State of California
µr Cosllllisuon EIciilcs Aug. 3.3.-1979--1
1, L. E. Mulryan, (Secretary) of INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY,
do hereby certify that I have compared the Power of Attorney granted herein and the Resolution recited herein with the originals now
on file in the principal office of said Company, and that the same are correct transcripts therefrom and of the whole of the said
originals,and that said Power of Attorney has not been revoked but is still in full force and effect.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto subscribed my name as such officer and affixed the seal of INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY
COMPANY at the City of San Francisco,California,this 28th day of Sept 7' . 19 84
SEAL
L. E. Mulryan, Secretary
1-foal 87110/72/
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: October 15 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: �.
DATE SUBMITTED: October 8, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: NONE
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorization to
execute in behalf of the City - San. PREPARED BY: John Hagman
Sew. Compliance Agrmt. Mull Sewer REQUESTED BY: Engineering Services
DEPARTMEi'�T HEAD OK: �' CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
INFORMATION SUMMARY
1. The attached (City standard form) Sanitary Sewer Compliance Agreement and
Performance Bond provides for assurance of completion of installation of
a 200 foot 8" main line sanitary sewer to City standards.
2. The line is proposed to be installed by a private developer and will be
located in the vicinity of Grant Avenue and Tigard Street. It is
intended to serve parcels of land, thereat, which are presently being
t developed.
3. It is recommended that the Council. act to accept the Agreement (and Bond)
and authorize the Mayor and Recorder to execute same in behalf of the
City.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
SUGGESTED ACTION
Accept the Sewer Compliance Agreement and Performance Bond and authorize the
Mayor and City Recorder to execute the Agreement document in behalf of the
City.
(JH:bs/0699P)
SANITARY SEWER COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT
[HIS AGRLEMENT dated this rJ+� day of -- OG � - _— 1984 -'
--..
between the CITY OF T1GAR0, a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter
termed the "City", and Gregory S. Mull and George E. Mull _
hereinafter termed "Petitioner" .
. W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for approval of construction
of a sanitary sewer, to be known as _The Mull._.S.anita y_-Sewer _
being within the boundaries of an area as described on the attached Exhibit_($) "A" & "B"
and by reference made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard requires applicants for construction of
sewers, and appurtenances thereto, to submit to construction inspection, and
testing therewithal, to grant public easements, therefor, and requires the
payment of fees; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved and -adopted the standard specifications for
Public Works construction by APWA, Oregon Chapter, and the Unified
Sewerage
Agency specifications for sanitary sewers prepared by professional engineers
for Public Works construction; and
WHEREAS, the public improvements required to be constructed are
incomplete, but petitioner has nonetheless requested that the City permit
granting of the property to the public, and the parties herein named desire to
protect the pubic interest generally to assure the public improvements will be
installed as required and completed within the time hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORF, in consideration of the foregoing premise and the
covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and its
cuntractor and contractors surety, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1 . Petitioner shall proceed to complete all public improvements as shown on s
herewith improvement plan, as approved b�, the City of Tigard and prepared
by Bancroft & Associates dated September 25th, 1984 _
Said improvements to be completed no later than one (1) year from the date
of this agreement, and Petitioner hereby agrees to comply with all
standard specifications adopted by this City, or as may otherwise be .
approved by the Department of Public Works and to use only such materials
and to follow such designs as may be required to conform thereto. '
Petitioner shall provide certification of installation conformance, via a
registered civil engineer, to the City prior to City inspection of
petitioners improvement work for City tentative and final acceptance
consideration.
2. To assure compliance with the City' s requirements and the provisions
thereof, Petitioner agrees to obtain, provide and tender to the City, a
surety bond(s) in form approved by the City, with liability in the amount
equal to the estimated price of $_4,324.50 _ prior to issuance of a permit
for construction of said improvements; Petitioner' s contractor shall be
licensed, and insured as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution
and Order(s) No. 72-12 and No. 71-9.
- 1 -
3. In the event that the Petitioner shall fail, neglect or refuse to proceed
with the work in an orderly and progressiva manner to assure completion
within the time specified, upon ten (10) days notice by the City to the
Petitioner and the Petitioner' s surety, and such default and failure to
proceed continuing thereafter, the City may at its option proceed to have
the work completed and charge the costs thereof against the Petitioner and
the Petitioner' s surety and in the event the same be not paid, to bring an
action on the said bond to recover the amount thereof. In the event that
such action be brought, the Petitioner and the Petitioner' s surety shall
be required to promise and agree to pay, in addition to tho amounts
accruing and allowable, such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable a�
attorney' s fees and cost incurred by the City, both in the Trial Court ,arid
Appellate Court, if any, or the City may at its option bring proceedings
to enforce against the petitioner and/or Petitioner' s surety, specific
performance of the contract and compliance with the standards adopted by
the City of Tigard, and in any event, in a like manner, the City shall be
entitled to recover such sums as the court may adjudge reasonable for the
City' s attorney' s fees and cost, both in the Trial Court and and Appellate
Court, if any.
4. Petitioner, concurrent with the execution hereof, agrees to pay the
following fees as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order
No. 70-12:
a. A plan check fee to cover the cost of review and approval of
construction plans and inspection of sewer construction (except house
connections) in the amount of $ 100.00
l+, b. A permit fee to cover, the cost of processing the permit application
and performing the inspection of property connection(s) in the amount
of $
C. A connection charge to connect directly to an existing sanitary
sewer, which was installed with/without (strike inapplicable word)
cost to the Petitioner, in the amount of $
d. A monthly sewer service charge for the use of the public sanitary
sewer system.
5. Petitioner, concurrent with the execution horeof, also agrees to pay a
surcharge in the amount of $ _ * -_ as required by that certain
contract entered into by the City with
for the reimbursement of sewer construction costs pertinent thereto.
6. The City agrees to make periodic inspections as, in the City' s judgment,
is necessary to assure compliance.
7. The Petitioner agrees to ins(i that the City receives 48 hours advance
notice of commencement of construction and, also, 12 hours advance notice
for all requested field inspections .
8. The Petitioner agrees to insure that the Petitioner' s engineer obtains
accurate as-built (field) construction records of said sewer installation
and, also, agrees to insure that the City is furnished with one accurate
as-built mylar thereof.
* To be determined at the time of application for a building connection permit.
- 2 -
9. At such time as all pubic improvements have been completed in accordance
with the City's requirements, Petitioner shall submit a "certificate of
installation conformance" to the City to notify the City of the readiness
for acceptance consideration inspection and upon notification by the
Department of Public Works that all requirements of the City have been
met, the Petitioner will submit to the City a good and sufficient
maintenance bond in the form approved by the City in a sum equal to twenty
percent (20X) of the contract price to provide for correction of any
defective work or maintenance becoming apparent or arising within ur.L year
after final acceptance of the public improvements by the City .
10. 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 at3l --yes to accept the public improvements, subject to the
requirement of correction of deficiencies and maintenance for a period of
one year.
11 . That the Petitioner, in consideration of the City' s approval of the
application to construct a sanitary sewer within the boundaries of
easements held by the City, does hereby covenant and agree to save, hold
harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, agents and employees, for
and from all claims, demands, damages, and each and every other obligation
that can or could arise fl .poi Lhe negl,( L of Petitioner, his officers,
agents, contractors and employees, or from trespass upon property outside
of the easement area, including attorney's fees and costs, if any,
necessarily incurred by the City in defending against such claims, with
the intent and purpose that the City shall be made whole with respect to
any amounts it may be required to pay to be held liable for in connection
with the exercise of the privileges afforded Petitioner to utilize the
area within the City' s easement for sewer construction purposes.
i
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement pursuant to
authority vested in each of them.
PEITTIONER:AX ;
S. Mull
---v`
(Attached Acknowledgment Hereto) Geor a E_. Mull _
CITY OF TIGARD:
Mayor
mom:_
" pull Recorder
3
FATE OF OREGON )
ss.
County of �� ) G
On this day of ���t�� , 19 p —/ , personally i
appeared the oitp named u� cel G cwt
and ack=wledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and deed.
Before tee:
Notary Public fcr Oregon
My Commission Expires:_
r
c �
STATE OF OREGON )
ss.
County of )
On this day of 19 , personally
appeared the above rased
and acknowledged the feregcing instrument to be their
voluntary act and deed.
Before me:
Notary Public for Oregon
My Ccn-_r.ission Expires:
3
. � � o
.�- ,
� r .r .- • o• • - v
. � � �• -'
.�. r -
e
/ ?�_ ��� • acs /_�3'
p• 4 ? 6'
ss_
a� Nry
tv
ti
•��o� 1 1
L EGENO
� ' F�,►d�awur�.rr os iaoea✓
kw" 'iP. 4!z4/VC-,e vXT Pe //29
A r• t' of -s' rfr'e!- tre-'
< ;e.,r -e.Pa 1^ Stct!" 2 T•-L^-8..1 2 cp.;...
:ee• ,c"'� C�'...t• Creon c^n�:e':P^ t I'ar01C
"r e• e .west, e: e'•P -
' -rP part 'Pecr!'^P'! as
•L B
8-8
eel a
f'P• {r I
v '
of 'I t a' .
i
��
N �ry
0 n' 00
ti
v q^
oq o 0
N N
CV ry
It
h
en./6
L�GENp
f
/.�►P�iicSr✓ 'W d4hO'cRofT //2q•
sanitary Sewer PERFORMANCE BOND
Bond No. UI 65026
J KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we Gregory S. Mull
and George E. Mull
as Principal, nd UNION INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY
a corporation duly au or ze o conduct a generalsurety business
in the State of Oregon, as Surety, are jointly and severally held
bound unto the City of Tigard, Oregon a municipality of the State
of Oregon, hereinafter called the Obligee, in the sum of $ 4,324.50
lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment of
which we, as Principal, and as Surety, jointly and severally
bind ourselves, our successors and assigns firmly by these present.
THE CONDITIONS OF THIS BOND AND OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that
the Principals are installing a 150 foot (8 inch) sanitary sewer line and
appertances located in the City of Tigard, regon, and entering
into a sanitary sewer compliance agreement with the Obligee herein,
and upon acceptance of said sewer compliance agreement, the
Principals shall make all improvements required by the City of
Tigard Ordinances and sewer Compliance agreement documents
as described in said compliance agreement all of which are by
reference, made a part hereof,
NOW, THEREFORE, if the Principal herein shall faithfully
and truly observe and comply with the terms of the agreement and
shall well and truly perform all matters and things undertaken to be
performed under said agreement and shall promptly make payments to
all persons supplying labor or material for any of the work pro-
vided by said agreement, and shall not permit any lien or claim to
be filed or prosecutioned against the Obligee, then this obligation
shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect.
In the event of suit or action be filed by the Obligee
hereunder to enforce said contract or to recover under the terms
of this bond, in addition to all other rights and remedies here-
under the City, in the event it shall prevail, shall be entitled
to recover such sums as the Court may adjudge reasonable as and
for attorney's fees.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
bond to be executed this 4th day of October , 19 84 .
By: (seal) By: 4;__ seal
G e E. Mull Beal
By: (seal) By:
By:
(seal) By: Gregor S. Cli (seal)
(A true copy of the Power of UNION INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY
Attorney must be attached to Surety
the original of this bond. )
Kt-t-0JquW-,In-Fact DENNIS V. GILBERT
VA Insurance
OF ATTORNEY AND BONO NO. U1 65026
Conwanr of Now York
Executive Offices 200 Madison Avenue New York,NY 10016 Producer Number: 003
LNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: ALL AUTHORITY HEREBY CONFERRED. UNLESS
REVOKED EARLIER.SHALL EXPIRE AND TERMI—
That Union Indemnity Insurance Company of New YorkNATE.WITHOUT NOTICE. UNLESS USED BEFORE
does hereby appoint:
Dennis Gilbert or Mary Gilbert of MIDNIGHT OF MAY 30.19M.
its true and lawful Attornjye&j-%V-9't,ga �'individually i'. there by more than one named,to make, execute, sign,
acknowledge,affix the Company Seal to,and deliver any and all surety bonds,undertakings,recognizances,and other
contracts of indemnity and writings obligatory in the nature of a bond,for and on behalf of said Company and as act and
deed of said Company,not to exceed TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS($25,000.00)on any single
instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Union Indemnity Insurance Company of New York have executed these presents
so"y
this 4thday Of c]r•rc�bPr 19R4—
EEAI
Itl!
••..••�;a RICHARD L. BOYLE. Senior ice President
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
onthis 4th dayot!he Octoberlg��lbetore� ^e v 1Mt�tr N
• LUCILLE 8CHULTZ
New
above nomad officer of Union Indto be
insurance idu and officer
of NOTARY PUBLIC.STATE OF NEW YORK
New York to mo Personally known to be tM Individual and officer �� tiEIK •`� No.03-472751/
desribed hersin, and acknowledged that he executed the loregoinp ��* �o Ouatifled in 9ronx County
instrument and affixed the seals Of said corporations thereto by orale
Term ExDltes March 30,1986
authority of his office.
CERTIFICATE
Excerpts of Resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of Union Indemnity Insurance Company of New
York: March 17, 1980:
RESOLVED, that solely in furtherance of the Company's surety business, the Chairman of the board, the
President,Senior Vice President,Vice President, an Assistant Vice President or Secretary of this Company is
ri hereby authorized to appoint Attorneys-in-Fact to represent and act for and on behalf of the Company to
execute bonds, undertakings, recognizances and other contracts of indemnity and writings obligatory in the
nature thereof, and to attach the corporate seal of the Company to such documents;
RESOLVED,that the signatures and attestations of such officers and the seal of the company may be affixed to
any such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating to the Power of Attorney by facsimile,and any such
Power of Attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding
upon the Company with respect to any bond, undertaking, recognizance or other contract of indemnity or
writing obligat6ryin the nature thereof; and
RESOLVED,that any such Attorney-in-Fact may deliver a certification that the foregoing resolutions are still in
effect and may insert in such certification the date of the certification but that date maybe not later than the date
of delivery of the certificate by the Attorney-in-Fact.
I.Thomas G.O'Brien III,Secretary of Union Indemnity Insurance Company of New York,do hereby certify that
the he
of Attorney foregoiof ng excerpts
the
are trueResolution oand corrted by tect board that both the Reso utio naration and the Powers
nd Powers of Attorney
are in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the facsimile seal of each corporation
r+IA§Cf this 4th day of QCtober . 1984
EEA! it
1!R e
•+.�`'�';r' Thomas G. O'Brien I11, Secretary
------------------------ --- ------- ------ - ---------- -- __� _._.._
i
CITY OF TIGARD OREGON
t COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: October 15 1984 AGENDA ITEM #:
DATE SUBMITTED: October 8, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: NONE
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorization
to execute in behalf of the City — PREPARED BY: John Hagman
San, Sewer Easements (Mull Sewer) REQUESTED BY: Engineerinq Services
DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
INFORMATION SUMMARY
1. The attached sanitary sewer easement document(s) provide for the creation
of fifteen foot wide public sewer easement right—of--way; to facilitate
(future) maintenance of a two hundred foot long "soon—to--be- installed"
sanitary sewer line.
2. The sewer line is proposed to be installed by a private developer and
will be located in the vicinity of Grant Avenue and Tigard Street. It is
( intended to serve parcels of land, thereat, which are presently being
developed.
3 . It is recommended that the Council act to accept the easements and
authorize the Mayor and Recorder to execute same in behalf of the City.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
SUGGESTED ACTION
Accept the (2) easements and authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to execute
the documents in behalf of the City.
(JH:bs/0699P)
9
PERMANENT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT
Darold D Snyder and
Sue A. Snyder
hereinafter called the Grancors, in consideration for the
Ot NoOe City of
dollars (S
Tigard, hereinafter called Grantee, grant and convey Unto the City of Tigard a
perpetual easement for constructing, reconstructing, operating, maintaining.
inspecting and repairing of an underground sewer line and appurtenances,
together with the right to remove, as necessarynecessary, vegetation.
ta io . foliage,
edeas
as
and other obstructions on the following parcel
:he City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon:
See MEHIBIT "A"
IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right.
title or interest except those expressly stated in this easement, nor
otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided,
however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the
intent of the easement.
IN CONSIDERATION of the premise+, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its
successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the rights of
the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall
immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the ease
of such event.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the abova-described and granted pramisec unto said
Grantee, its successors and assigns forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantors) has (love) he *unto set 19er)
(their) hand( and me 1(a) this � day of G•1�c7/ ,
SEAL) (SEAL)
i
EAL) (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON sc.
County of Washington ) L fl
Oe�O!�c R �
da .
BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this I andY of 19 v
before me, the undersigned Notary Pu AiGin for hj�ta�,°E �lregon,
personally appeared the within-named ,L7 0 d
Jti r
who is ase known to .. to be the identical individual s described an and
to me that he (ahs) (they)
who executed the within instrument and acknowledged
executed the same freely and voluntarily,
IN TEgTIMONY WHEREOF, 119ave h .eunto set my hand and seal this 1_ day
o f OC C6c•/
Notary Fubiij for Oregon
i
(NOTARIAL SEAL) My Commission Expires: J
Approved as to form this day of 9 '
By:
qi Attorn y - City of Tigard
Approved as to legal description this �� day of 19 +
Approved this day of
19 •
CITY COUNCIL. CITY LARD
By: r1l'_ _
_ -
(01265)
1
s
EXHIBIT "A"
A portion of that certain tract of land located in Section 2, Township 2 South,
Willamette
Meridian, Washington County, Oregon conveyed to Darold
Range 1 Nest,
D. Snyder and Sue A. Snyder by a deed recorded in Book 498, Page 268, of the
Deed Records of said County, said portion being more particularly described as
follows:
A strip of land 15 feet wide, 7.50 feet each side of the following described
centerline:
sewer manhole which bears South 08'02156" West
Beginning at an existing sanitary
75.16 feet from the most Southerly corner of that tract of land conveyed to
Gregory .Mull and Georgethence th E. Mul02b19D cumeastxo778940feetOtonaspointaid oonttheeed
Records 8
Southwesterly line of said Mull tract.
Also a strip of land 7.50 feetwide
abutting and
lying Southwesterly of the entire
length of the Southwesterly line of
said F
vv.
J6 469 6C
0
Cb
o'
y O A01)
Mtv
tiro \era
h `
• = For...oi M►a•�.ri..r o� IAoeaa"
��7�iiife+/ 'R tQi4/yc.QofT P[.3 //29
PERMANENT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT Gregory S. Mull and
George E Mull
hereinafter called the Grantors, an consideration for the sum of None
dollars (_ ) fromthe City of
Tigard, hereinafter called Grantee, grant and convey unto the City of Tigard a
perpetual easement for constructing, reconstructing, operating, maintaining,
inspecting and repairing of an underground •ewer line and appurtenances,
together with the right to remove, as necessary, vegetation, foliage, trees
and other obstructions on the following described parcel of land, situated in
the City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon:
See EXHIBIT "A"
IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right,
title or interest except those expressly stated in this easement, nor
otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided,
however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the
intent of the easement.
IN CONSIDERATION of the premises. Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its
successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the rights of
the Grantee in the above–described easement will be forfeited and shall
immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the case
of such event.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above–described and granted premises unto said
Grantee, its successors and assigns forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor(@) has (have) hereunto not his (her)
(their) hand(&) and seal(s) this / V- day E ev e'TaliEje1%$y_
(SEAL) 291A (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON 1
County of Washington )
BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this L day of Q c—r-&6
before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for the -State of Oregon,
personally appeared the within-named George E. Mull and Gregory S. Mull
who be ars known to me to be the identical individual • described in and
who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to se that ksx#shm) (they)
executed the same freely and voluntarily.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set ■ hand and seal th's •;T day
of 4m oBEle
Not Public or Oregon
(NOTARIAL SEAL) r My Commissio xpires:
Approved as to form this Cl day of &7&j 19�.
By: - I ` �---
ty AttorneyN- City of Tigard
Approved as to legal description this r day of G' T 19�.
Approved this day of 40! QJ Iy , 19_ .
CITY COU IL, CITY Ol�1G e�
Cy s 7 Of • _Ste'` t
(01465)
EXHIBIT "A"
A portion of that certain tract of land located in Lot 60 of the Amended Plat of
Tigardville Addition, a plat of record, in the Northwest Quarter of Section 2,
Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon
conveyed to Gregory S. Mull and George E. Mull by a deed recorded as Document No.
83-015320 in the Deed Records of said County, said portion being more particularly
described as follows:
A strip of land 7.50 feet wide abutting and lying Northeasterly of the entire
Southwesterly line of said Mull tract.
C
E
s
#t
I
t �
C
0
IF E? �44
0
2r��
0 l yc ~� Stv PV %
11)
IK
fv -pit
A' �1 ,W
IV
0 Ary e •° 0 /
p 11 V
v ry
th
-26, J
0
p � a
h
L�GENO
• - Forino//1Jowc�iri.,r 4-1 Aloeee�
O c SCG �~X 30'"//� wiYK�e/%.r P/avC•
/.r�Pii�cY✓ 'iP Q4Nc.QofT PL.3, //29
k
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: October 15 1984 AGENDA ITEM #:
DATE SUBMITTED: October 8, 1984 PREVIOUS Ai-TION: NONE
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorization
to execute in behalf of the City PREPARED BY: John Hagman
Street Dedication (Tigard Street REQUESTED REQUESTED BY: Engineering Services
DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: (�'v"i CITY ADMINISTRATOR:
INFORMATION SUMMARY
1. The attached street dedication document provides for dedication of
additional right-of--way fronting 9738 S.W. Tigard Street (being located
approx. 300 feet northerly of Grant Avenue) .
2. The dedication document needs to be executed by the City and, then, needs
to be recorded.
3. It is recommended that the Council act to accept the dedication and
authorize the Mayor and Recorder to execute it in behalf of the City .
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
a
SUGGESTED ACTION
Accept the dedication and authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to execute the
dedication document in behalf of the City.
(JH:bs/0699P)
C
IVIDIIAL-CF.NFRAL PARTNERSHIP
STREET DEDICATION
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Gregory S. Mull and
George E. Mull
do hereby dedicate to tt,e 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"
To have and to hold the above-described and dedicated rights unto the Public
forever for the uses and purposes hereinabove stated.
The grantors) hereby covenants that they are the owner(s) in fee simple and the
property is free of all liens and encumbrances, they have good and legal right to grant
the rights above-described, and they will pay all taxes and assessments due and owing on
the property.
The amount paid for this dedication is i None
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor(s) has (have) hereunto set his (her) (their)
hand(.) and seal(s) this 1st day of October , 19 84
(SEAL) (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON )
as.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) October 1 19��
c
Personally appeared the above named George E. Mull and Gregory S. Mull
vhu executed this instrument and each of them acknowledged to me that this instrument !!!
Was executed voluntarily and freely.
Notaft Public// E'or Oregon
My Commissiop,isxpire::
ACCEPTANCE ((//
Approved as to form this day of , 19 Lir
By:
Attorn y - City of Tigard
Approved as to legal description this �_ day of 19T�•
City Engineer - City of Tigard
Accepted by the City Council this - X day of 4G1b,6e e , 19 ?V
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF TIGARD. OREGON
By:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
(1704A)
(7-84)
f
{
EXHIBIT "A"
A portion of that certain tract of land located in Lot 60 of the Amended Plat of
North Tigardville Addition, a plat of record, in the Northwest Quarter of Section
2, Township 2 South, Range 1 Weat, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon
conveyed to Gregory S. Mull and Leorge E. Mull by a deed recorded as Document No.
83-015320 in the Deed Records of said County, said portion being more particularly
described as follows;
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Mull tract, a point on the South line of
S. W. Tigard Street (County Road No. 767) and running thence North 64'49100" West
along said South line 60.00 feet to the Northwest corner of said Mull tract; thence
South 20046000" West along the West line of said Mull tract 20.06 feet to a point
that is 20.00 feet distant, when measured at right angles, from the South line of
said Tigard Street; thence South 64'49'00" East parallel with said South line 61.49
feet to a point on the East line of said Mull tract; thence North 16'00'00" East
20.80 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing 0.03 Acres, more or less.
t
S
f
ry �^
o'
0 1 A o
ti y �0 ry
ry
n o
�•;'ifs l�
h
• Fa�v.,d�i�rla+�i�a.rr 47.v meed
O = SCG it 'e 3C"//t'
STREET DEDICATION COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT dated this �S � day of �� TL 1984
between the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter
termed the "City", Pacific Realty Associa*es, L.P.
and hereinafter termed "Petitioner",
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for approval for dedication of
a street to be known as S.W. Durham Road
as described on the attach( _
Exhibir "A" _ and by reference made a part
hereof; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard requires Petitioners for street dedications to
install streets, sidewalks, street lighting, storm sewers, sanitary sewers,
underground utilities and other public facilities for the development of the
street and requires the payment of fees; and
WHEREAS, the City has approved and adopted the standard specifications for
Public Works construction by APWA, Oregon Chapter, and the on Unified
nifiengineers Sewerage
specifications for sanitary sewers prepared by pr
Public Works construction; and
WHEREAS, the public improvements required to be constructed or placed in
i the said street area are incomplete, but Petitioner has nonetheless requested
the City to permit dedications of the property to the public and the parties
herein named desire to protect the public interest generally by legally
enforceable assurance that the public improvements will be installed as
required and completed within the time hereinafter set forth,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premise and the
covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and its
surety, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Petitioner shall proceed with the intent and purpose to complete all
public improvements as shown or, the improvement plan, as approve by the City
of Tigard, prepared by DeHaas & Associates, Inc. , (Wilsonville, OR)
Said improvements to be completed no later than one (1) year from the date of
this agreement, and Petitioner hereby agrees to comply with standard
specifications as adopted by the City, or as otherwise be or have been
approved by the Department of Public Works, to comply with all terms and
provisions specified hereinregard this improvement by the Council and Planning
Commission of the City of Tigard, Oregon, and to use only such material and to
follow such designs as may be required to conform thereto. Petitioner shall
provide certification of installation conformance, via a registered civil
engineer, to the City prior to City inspection of petitioners improvement work
for City tentative and final acceptance consideration.
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
d
a
by the City, with liability in the amount of $ 153 636.29 copy whereof
is
hereto attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
- 1 -
3 . In the event that the Petitioner shall fail, neglect or refuse to
proceed with the work in an orderly and progressive manner to assure
completion within the time limited, upon ten (10) days' notice by the City to
the Petitioner and the Petitioner' s surety, and such default and failure to
proceed continuing thereafter, the City may at its option proceed to have the
work completed and charge the costs thereof against the Petitioner and the
Petitioner' s surety and in the event the same be not paid, to bring an action
on the said bond to recover the amount thereof. In the event that such action
be brought, the Petitioner and the Petitioner's surety shall be required to
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, if any, or
the City may at its option bring proceedings to enforce against the Petitioner
and/or Petitioner' s surety specific performance of the contract and compliance
with the standards adopted by the City of tigard, and in any event, in a like
manner, the City shall be entitled to recover such sums as the court may
adjudge reasonable for the Ci .y'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 rew-al and maintenance fees with respect
to the street lighting facilities according to Portland General Electric
Schedule #91, Option B 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,
in the sum of $_. _935.04
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 inspection fee of lso,
4% of the total estimated cost of the construction; said fee being $1 (fZ
,scL_5
the prescribed sanitary sewer plan check and inspection fee, being $100.00.
6. The City agrees to installation of certain street identification and
traffic signs for said street, in consideration of payment in the amount of
$ 476.80
7. At such time as the public improvements have been completed in
accordance with the City' s requirements, Petitioner shall submit a
"certificate of installation conformance" to the City to notify the City of
the readiness for acceptance consideration inspection and upon nAification 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 maintenance ;
bond, if not already provided with the performance bond form approved by the
City, in the sum of $ 30,786.00 to provide for correction of any defective work
or maintenance becoming apparent or arising within one (1) year of tentative F
acceptance of the public improvements by the City.
6. Various design features and construction standards are in(,orporated in
the plans which were submitted to the City for variance approval . it is {
agreed that the specific items described in the attached Exhibit "3" are approved.
9. Petitioner agrees to provide for correction of any defective work
and/or maintenance becoming apparent or arising during the guarantee period as
Chereinabove set forth.
- 2 -
10. At such 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 been met, the Council
agrees to accept said improvements, for operation and maintenance
responsibility thereinregard, and release the Petitioner's guarantee bond.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement pursuant to
authority in each of them.
PETITIONER
PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P.
Z —
Peter F. n (Partner)
President
artner
t
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON p
DMayor
BY:
Dt�pK-/ Recorder
(0070S) J
3 -
t
C•r�; i :+!' MULTNOMAH )
} y 84
On thi-.
1st of October ,rc
r i Peter F. Bechen _
P "r and President
i-;r, ,,t Pacific Realty Associates, L.P.
s t a t f_A
a pari.n_ } I.
instrt,rcc•nt ,--
ud ric f,d ref sa id firm.
IN
her,-into set my hand 2 nd
r:,,: official seal r:d
and rr l ;+ st atjuvc, ..,• ittr,n .
for 0.
Apr. 9, 1988
Exhibit "A" Parcel 1
Tax Lot 1300 (Proposed Revision)
(Future Street Dedication)
A tract of land situated in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 13,
Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian,
Washington County, Oregon being more particularly described as
follows:
Beginning at a point that is S 89028'28" W 525.86 feet from
the center of the northeast one-quarter of said Section 13
(as shown on C.S. 19, 127) and S 31'32" E 41.85 feet from
the north line of the south one-half of the northeast one-
quarter of said Section 13; thence S 89028'28- W 72.00 feet
to a point; thence N 0031132" W 129.92 feet to a point of
curvature; thence northwesterly along a 158 foot radius
curve to the left (through a central angle of 4008133")
110.70 feet (long chord bears H 20035"48" W 108.45 feet) to
a point; thence N 40040'05" W 246.94 feet to a point of
curvature; thence along a 392 foot radius curve to the right
(through a central angle of 803945") 59.27 feet (long chord
bears N 36020112" W -59.21 feet) to a point on the south
line of that tract of land dedicated to the public and
recorded in Fee No. 83-003788 of the Washington County
Records; thence N 89054155" E along the south line of said
dedication 46.67 feet to a point; thence N 0005'05" W 13.15
feet to a point of curvature; thence northwesterly along a
150 foot radius curve to the left (through a central angle
of 14050'06") 38.84 feet ( long chord bears N 7030'08" W
38.73 feet) to a point; thence N 0005105" W 10.86 feet to a
Point; thence S 30028134" E 19.64 feet to a point; thence
southerly along a 320 foot radius curve to the left,
(through a central angle of 10011'31") 56.92 feet ( long
chord bears S 35034119" E 56.85 feet) to a point; thence
S 40040'05" E 247.07 feet to a point; thence southeasterly
along a 230 foot radius curve to the right (through a
central angle of 40008'33") 161.14 feet ( lone chord bears
S 20035'48" E 157.87) to a point; thence S 0031'32" W
129.92 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Contains 0.922 Acres
Basis of Bearing: P.S. 20,596 of the Washington County
Survey Records.
9/21/84
83.380. 198
Exhibit "A" Parcel 2
Portion of Existing Utilities Easement to be dedicated.
A parcel' of land in the N.E. 1/4 of Section 13 of T.2S., R.lW.,
W.M. Washington County, Oregon, being a portion of that tract of
land described in Fee No. 79-036450 of the Records of Washington
County, Oregon (T.L. 1700, Map 2S-1-13A), said parcel being
described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the southerly right-of-way of S.W.
Upper Boones Ferry Road (County Road No. 534) that is
S 49019'55" W 79.236 feet from a 1- inch iron pipe with a
Washington County cap shown as being set for the N.W. corner
of that tract described in Book 128, Page 34, of the
Washington County Deed Records, in County Survey No. 19,127,
said 1-inch iron pipe also lies S 89005'04" E 26.91 feet
and S 48041-42" W 716.23 feet and S 49019-55" W 452.67
feet and S 40040105" E 30.00 feet from the recognized East
1/16 corner on the line between Sections 13 and 12, said
1/16 corner being shown as Point No. 289 on County Survey
No. 19,127; thence southeasterly along a 45-foot radius
curve to the right, (through a central angle of 6:P44-02")
49.271 feet ( long chord bears S 7202'06" E 46.847 feet) to
a point of compound curve; thence continuing along a 65-foot
radius curve to the right (through a central angle of
35023'20") 40.147 feet (long chord bears S 22058'25" E
39.512 feet) to a point; thence northwesterly along a non-
tangent 392 foot radius curve to the right (through a
central angle of 4011'25") 28.669 feet (long chord bears
N 28054 '09" W 28.663 feet) to a point of reverse curvature;
thence northwesterly along a 40-foot radius curve to
the left, through a central angle of 103051'39" 72.509 feet
(long chord bears N 78044-16" W 62.981 feet) to a point on
the southerly right-of-way of said S.W. Upper Boones Ferry
Road (County Road No. 534 ) ; thence N 49019' 5.5" E along the
said southerly right-of-way 20.616 feet to the Point of
Beginning.
Contains: 0.099 acres
Basis of Bearing: P.S. 20,596 of the Washington County Survey
Records.
9/21/84
83. 380. 198
Exhibit "A" Parcel 3
Tax Lot 1300 (Proposed Revision)
Reserve Strip
A tract of land situated in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 13,
Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridan,
Washington County, Oregon being more particularly described as
follows:
Beginning at a point that is S 89028'28" W 525.86 feet from
the center of the northeast one-quarter of said Section 13
(as shown on C.S. 19,127) and S 0031'32" E 41.85 feet
from the north line of the south one-half of the northeast
one-quarter of said Section 13; thence S 89028'28" W 72.00
feet to a point; thence S 0031132" E 1.00 foot to a point;
thence N 8928'28" E 72.00 feet to a point; thence
N 031 ' 32" W 1.00 foot to the Point of Beginning.
Basis of Bearing: P.S. 20,596 of the Washington County
Survey Records
9/21/84
84. 380. 198
t
v DE HAAS &
� % Suite 445 - AGC linter
9450 S W. Commerce Circle
t,) Wilsonville, Oregon 97070
Al ssoclates, Inc. 1503882-2450
Consulting Engineers & Surveyors
August 31, 1984
Mr. Frank A. Currie, P.E.
Director of Public Works
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Frank:
The purpose of this letter is to officially request City
concurrence on various design features that may require variance
approval on the S.W. Durham Road Street, Storm Drain and Sanitary
Sewer Improvements project.
The specific items are as follow and are incorporated in the
plans submitted for City approval :
1. Driveway Aprons. In as much as the driveways need to
accomodate long low-profile trucks with wide-turning
radius, driveway aprons are designed at 60 feet long.
Also, the apron slope is to be at 1/4" per foot to the
property line.
2. Final Lift of A.C.. It is agreed that because this is not
a residential development, we will not have to wait a year
before placing the final lift of A.C. The street
dedication compliance agreement will need to be revised to
reflect this procedure.
3. T.V. Inspection. It is understood that the Contractor
wi l 1 not be required to provide T.V. tapes and video
reports for the 30" storm drain.
4 . Gate. In lieu of a barricade, a gate with proper
dT efineation (reflectors) will be placed at the southerly
end of the street.
5. Trench Backfill Above Pipe Zone Trench backfill above the
pipe zone shall be clean pit-run gravel, crushed rock, or
gravel having reasonable even graduation from coarse to
fine. The maximum shall be four (4) inches. Materials
shall be subject to approval of the Engineer. Compaction
shall be 901 of maximum density per AASHO T-180 and such
that no settlement will occur. Materials shall be placed
in lifts not greater than 12".
6. Typical Section. Truck traffic on the existing Durham
Road leg i 67 and 482 ADT respectively for years 1980
Mr. Frank A. Currie, P.E.
August 31, 1984
Page 2
and 2000 projected. For design of the new leg, we have
selected 150 and 271 respectively, which we feel is a ver
safe (high-end) projection.
The CBR developed for the 72nd Avenue project was five (5)
for Boones Ferry Road and ten (10) for 72nd Avenue.
Again, being very safe, we have selected a CBR of five (5)
for design of the new leg.
Design based upon these two parameters calls for a full
depth section of 8.6" of A.C. Using a section of 3" of
A.C., the required additional crushed rock equivalent (2"
rock to 1" A.C.) equates to 11.2".
Our typical section of 3" A.C. and 12" crushed rock
exceeds these very safe design requirements.
Sincere
MARLIN DE HAAS, P.E.
MJD/skd
E
cc: 83.380. 198 /
John Hagman ✓
i
r
3
E
i
C
STREET DEDICATION AGREEMd-,NLT
PERFORj-'\VNCE BOND
Bond No. 012379
KNOW ALL IE N BY THESE PRESENTS, that we PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P. and
South Carolina Insurance Company
zed to conduct a general surety business
as Principal, and a corporation duly authori
in the State of Oregon, as Surety, are jointly and severally held bound unto the
City of Tigard, Oregon a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called
the Obligee, in the sum of $153 536�IUlawful money of the United States of America
for the payment of which we, as Principal, and as Surety, jointly and severally
bind ourselves, our successors and assigns firmly by these present.
THE CONDITIONS OF THIS BOND AND OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that the Principals are
dedicating a 72 ft. wide right-of-way known as S.W. Durham Read
located in the City of Tigard, Oregon, and entering into a Street Dedication
Compliance Agreement with the Obligee herein and upon acceptance of said
Compliance Agreement, the Principals shall make all improvements required by the
City of Tigard, Ordinances and Compliance Agreement documents
ocu entsas described in said
Compliance Agreement all of which are , by reference, Pa
NOW, THEP.EFORE, if the Principal herein shall faithfully and truly observe
and comply with the terms of the agreement and shall well and truly perform all
matters and things undertaken to be performed under said agreement and shall
all persons supplying labor or material for any of the
promptly make payments to
shall not permit any lien or claim to be
work provided by said agreement, and
filed or prosecutioned against the Obligee, then this obligation shall be void,
otherwide to remain in full force and effect.
In the event of suit or action be filed by the Obligee hereunder to enforce
said contract or to recover under the terms of this bond, in addition to all
other rights and remedies hereunder the City, in the event it shall prevail, shall
be entitled to recover such sums as the Court may adjudge reasonable as and
for attorney's fees.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this bond to be executed
this 2nd day of October 19$4 •
Suutts Carolina Insurance Company Pacific Realry- Associates, L.P.
_c
name)
(Sttr Nam
By:
G. M. ounnin9, Attorn -in-fact Panner BY�4k
Partner
S�4k?fL�t157f?�+
(Corporation acknwoledgment of corporate By: South Carolled Insurance Company
principal and a true copy of the Power
of Attorney msut be attached to the Surety
original of this bond) .
Attorney-In-Fact
-1A
Form No. 1971
r
G. M. Dunning
1 .
September ZS, 1981
C
Sept-mber 24,1984
Mayor John Cook
12755 SW Ash
Tigard, Or.97223
Dear Mayor Cook:
As representative of Tigard Fish,St.\ incent de Ta:il a::d the Tetrapolitan
Golden k Kiwanis Club of King Citi- r:e invite yo:.r ;participation and
support of a second arJvuL-1 food drl\-E t!' acs-;.— in need in
Tuala,-i ,Tigard,iI�g Cit�",S:"lerl+ood, '1 `_ ,Pr .:,: l"._:. ..�... lcu are ln:"1L
to be a special guest at an of lcial at 11 :30 XI on
Mondav October 15th. at El-mer's Restaurant in iisard. The attached
brochures and news release explain ;pore about _e:\ ice_ al aiiable to
people in need. Since these ser-vices are paid ±or and provided completely
b,,• volunteers we ask you to sip the en:losed i^: .: procl:m-ation urging
"neighbors to help neighbors".
Please bring the sicnea proclamation with you to the luncheon on
October 15th and call Lyle Salquest, -)resident of Kiwanis at 639-147
to confirm your lunch reservation.
Your neighbors,
v e a quest F' core Tori .;ens
hiwanis St. Vincent de Paul Tigard Fish
a
j
PROCL*tATION
AS MAYOR,I PROCL�,I1-1 NOVa•IB:ER AS ".NITGHBOR
HELPING NTIGHBJR DAYS". DURING THIS "XJ\TH
ESPECIALLY, I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT YOi fP
VOLUNTEER CQIIU\In' ASSISTANCE AGE14CIES
BY Do.NATING FOOD,TIDE AND MONEY TO HELP
THOSE IN OUR CU41NUTY IN NTED.
BY ORDER OF:
JOHN COOK
DIAYOR OF T I GARD
d`UALATIN • TIGARD • KING CITY • SHERWOOD
METZGER • DURHAM
We need your H E LP desperately!
PLEASE DONATE FOOD
for the needy in your own area
FILL THE BARRELS
at your church, school or supermarket
� (cash donations accepted)
yt SPECIAL FOOD DRIVE KICK-Off tit
Nov 9 & 10 - at - King City
7 a.m.-7 p.m. Arco Station
(Volunteers will be there to accept your gifts.)
HELP TIGARD FISH, ST. VINCENT DE PAUL &
TUALATIN-SHERWOOD FOOD BANK
HELP OUR PEOPLE IN NEED OF FOOD,
A COMMUNITY EFFORT
for more Informatlon: sponsored by
Call Rev. Berglund TETRAPOLITAN KIWANIS
620-3070 iUAIATINSF16RN100D f00D BANK
ST. VINCENT DE PAUL