The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 08/31/1987 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOLLOWUP SYNOPSIS AUGUST 31, 1987 o STUDY SESSION: General questions, OPEU update, calendar issues, Downtown overlay concerns, 135th LID update. 1. BUSINESS MEETING — 7:25 PM: 1.1 Roll Call: Mayor Brian (arrived 6:48 PM); Councilors Eadon, Edwards, & Johnson: Staff-: Randy Clarno (arrived at 7:25 PM & left at 9: 15 PM) Bob Jean, David Lehr, Bill Monahan, Jill Monley, Tim Ramis, Loreen Wilson, & Randy Wooley 1.2 Call To Staff and Council For Non—Agenda Items — Bob Jean noted pull 10.7 for consideration at 9/14/87 meeting & amend 10.5 prior to idoption. 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA — No one 3. PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON S.W. 85TH AVENUE — ORDINANCE NO. 87-46 Motion to approve Jo/Ea — UA 4. TRUCK RESTRICTIONS ON BONITA ROAD — ORDINANCE N0. 87-47 Motion to approve Ed/Ea — UA 5. PORTLAND FIXTURE REVIEW — RATIFY COUNCIL PHONE POLL CANCELLING PUBLIC HEARING — SDR 87-15 — NPO 01 Motion to approve Ed/Jo — UA 6. PUBLIC HEARING — SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY CODE AMENDMENT o Ordinance No. 87-48 — Motion to approve Ea/Jo UA 4 7. PUBLIC HEARING — 70TIi & GONZAGA STREET VACATION o Ordinance No. 87-49 — Mot-ion to approve Ea/Jo UA 8. PUBLIC HEARING — SW 135TH AVENUE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FORMATION CONSIDERATION — PHASE III o Public Hearing Closed Consensus of Council to continue to 9/14/87 for engineer's computations and consideration of Council. 9. TIGARD TOWNE SQUARE — SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CLARIFICATION Consensus of Council to have developer work with staff to agree on � planting requirements — Mayor encouraged "substantial plantings" placed 1 on site. i f COUNCIL AGENDA — AUGUST 31, 1987 — PAGE f 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 t-i: 10.1 Appove Council Minutes: July 13, 2.0, 1987; August 3, 10, 1987 10.2 REPORTS: Receive and File a. Departmental Monthly Reports Community Development and CIP Status Report Community Services Library Police b. Tigard Nigh School Parking Concerns Update Report C. 1987 City Auction Report d. City of Tigard Cruisin' Tigard '87 Report 10 3 Receive and File: a. Dartmouth LID - Corrections to Written Testimony Submitted August 10, 1987 by Douglas V. Van Dyk, Attorney for Gordon R. Martin; Letter Dated August 19, 1987 from Charles Ruttan Concerning Oregon Department of Transportation 10.4 Approve Neighborhood Watch Comm. Dissolution - Res. No. 87-115 10.5 Adopt OPEU/TMEA Contract - Amended per Jill' s recommendation 10.6 Approve Chamber, of Commerce Sublease and Authorize Mayor's Si(�nature 10.7 Approve Solid Waste Rate Policy - Pulled tq 9/14/87 agenda 10.8 Recess City Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Approve Contract For Operation and Management of Computer Center With Management Systems Northwest; Adjourn Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Reconvene City Council Meeting. Motion to approve -is amended - Ed/Ea UA 11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff - None 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 9:57 PM tinder the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and pending litigation issues. 13. ADJOURNMENT: 10:50 PM lw/0276D COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 31, 1987 - PAGE T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1987 — 6:30 P.M. 1. ROLL_ CALL: Present: Mayor Tom Brian (arrived 6:48 PM); Councilors: Carolyn Eadon, Jerry Edwards, and Valerie Johnson; City Staff: Randy Clarno, Development Services Manager (present from 7:26 PM to 9:15 PM); Bob Jean, City Administrator; David Lehr, Chief of Police; Bill Monahan, Community Development Director; Jill Monley, Community Services Director; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; arid Loreen Wilson, City Recorder. 2. STUDY SESSION a. AGENDA UPDATE President Edwards call the meeting to order. Council discussed the consent agenda and came to a consensus to pull agenda item 10.7 to be considered at the September 14th meeting. Councilor Edwards requested the claims status report from the Community Services monthly report be discussed in the executive session. Councilor- Johnson noted she would like further follow-up with the school district regarding the Nigh School parking problems and questioned how Council might igive support for this. After further discussion, President Edwards directed City Administrator j� to contact Dr. Joki, Tigard School District Administrator, and request a joint Council meeting with thO Chief cnf Police and Community Development Director present to discuss these issues arid other—u. President Edwards expressed his concern regarding recent press coverage and suggested that the Tigard Times and the Oregonian might be able to give better coverage for City of Tigard in the future. MAYOR BRIAN PAkIVED: 6:48 PM b. President Edwards turned the meeting over to Mayor- Brian with an update as to the status of the agenda. C. 135th LID City Engineer gave update to the Council regarding the project, highlighted the addendum to the Engineer's report, and stated that the current proposal included the deletion of Murray Boulevard with either a culvert or bridge being constructed over Summer Creek. Discussion followed regarding whether or riot the cost of the bridge over the culvert would be charged back in full to the citizens. The inclusion of the bridge would not affect the net assessment over the inclusion of a culvert. Consensus of Council was that their understanding was the culvert would be i charged to the LID. Should a bridge be installed versus the culvert, system development funds would cover the increase in costs. PAGE 1 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1987 Tom— • A history of the 135th LID was discussed for Council review. Councilor Johnson rioted that various citizen comments to her were that the 3 1/2% inflation was from a City delay and not a citizen delay. Questioned whether or not this would be payable by the City or by the participants in the LID, Legal Counsel noted that it was rare for local government to pay any inflation costs in this type of scenerio. Consensus of Council was that the L_ID process needed to be revised and the process should become more smooth as staff and Council work together on future projects. d. City Administrator and Community Services Director highlighted agenda item 10.5 amendments to be opened in the contract noting that there were three items changed from the original draft. e. City Administrator requested clarification from Council on the December workshop dates. Council confirmed December 4th and 5th that they would be able to attend said workshop. RECESS: 7:25 PM RECONVENE: 7:26 PM. 3 . CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON—AGENDA ITEMS a. City Administrator advised Council that agenda item .10.7 should be pulled from consent and reset for September 14, 1987. 4. VISITOR'S AGENDA No one appeared to speak. l 5. PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON SW 85th AVENUE a. City Engineer stated that an enforcement program to discourage students from parking on residential streets in the high school area would begin in the fall . He rioted that stUdents would be encouraged to park in the school parking lot, and on the streets abutting school property. He stated that if the program were successful, some st.;dents may begin to park on SW 85th Avenue which was an ext;-nylon of Hall Boulevard south of Durham Road. Cars parked on one side of the street would allow ample room for two—way traffic, however, cars parked on both sides of the street would require only allow one—lane access. Fie recommended that c parking be prohibited on the east side of SW 85th from Hall Boulevard to the USA Treatment Plant access. b. ORDINANCE NO. 87-46 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TMC 10.28.130 F PROHIBITING PARKING ON A PORTION OF SW 85TH AVENUE, AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 2 F C. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Eadon to adopt. } e Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. t t PAGE 2 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1987 6. TRUCK RESTRICTIONS ON BONITA ROAD ` a. City Engineer notedthat signs prohibiting truck traffic over 20,000 # gross vehicle weight (GVW) had been posted on Bonita Road for several years. The prohibition was probably imposed to keep heavy traffic off the embankment near Hall Boulevard where slide problems had occurred in the past. However, as staff reviewed the ordinance requirements in the TMC for truck restrictions on Bonita Road it was found that an ordinance had never been adopted. Fie recommended adoption of an ordinance which would ratify the truck prohibitions previously posted on Bonita Road as it was a narrow roadway with no shoulders . b. ORDINANCE NO. 87-47 AN ORDINANCE. AMENDING TMC 10. 16.051 PROHIBITING THROUGH TRUCKS ON PORTIONS OF BONITA ROAD, AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. C. Motion by Councilor Edwards, seconded by Council Eadon to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote by Council present. 7. PORTLAND FIXTURE. REVIE•_W -- SDR 87-15 — NPO #1 a. Mayor Brian advised F:he Council had called a public hearing for this mooting. However-, on Friday, August 21.st, a phone poll of the City Council was taken to determine whether or not a public hearing would need to be held . At that: time the phone poll concluded that Council was satisfied with the clarification of the proposal and conditions of development arid that the hearing should be cancelled. Mayor Brian rioted he would consider a motion for ratification of the phone poll . b. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Edwards to cancel the Portland Fixture Review Public Hearing by ratifying the August 21, 1987 Council phone poll. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 8. PUBLIC HEARING — SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY CODE AMENDMENT a. Public Hearing Opened b. No declarations or challenges were filed by Council. C. Legal Counsel noted an ordinance had been developed which would create a more streamlined process for those lands owned by the City of Tigard which could be sold. The current procedure required a public hearing before any sale could occur. Under State law public hearings were riot always necessary. The proposed ordinance amended Tigard Municipal Code section 3.44 and created four classes of property to establish separate procedures for disposing of qualified property. d. Public Testimony: iProponents: PAGE 3 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1987 o Joel Couture, 3302 SW Marigold Street, Portland, supported the adoption of the code amendment rioting City owned property near his land that he wished to purchase from the City since it was not currently being maintained. f k e. Recommendation by City staff was to approve the ordinance. f. Public hearing closed. g. ORDINANCE NO. 87-48 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TMC 3.44, ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR THE SALE OF SURPLUS CITY REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO ORS 221 .727 AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. h. Motion by Councilor- Eadon, seconded by Councilor Johnson to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote by Council present. 9. PUBLIC HEARING — 70TH & GONZAGA SI-REFT VACATION a. Public hearing opened. b. No declarations or challenges were filed by Council . C. Development Services Manager highlighted the request noting that Mr. Alfred F. Kinorick, 17.560 SW 70th Avenue, had circulated a petition and obtained the required signatures for a vacation hearing of the unimproved public right--uf—way to private ownership. He rioted that Mr. Kinorick had riot received nor / sought site development approval to date. l d. Public Testimony: Proponents o Fred Kinorick, 12560 SW 70th Avenue, noted he was a property owner on the corner of Gonraga and 70th Avenue. He stated he had started the vacation project with Washington County many years ago. Since 70th Avenue was rather narrow in places and continued to be unimproved, he supported the vacation and requested Council approval. Councilor Johnson questioned why this vacation couldn't be postponed until completion of the Triangle Active Transportation Plan. Mr. Kinorick noted that he had waited many years at this point for vacation and felt that he had been encouraged to postpone it enough. Mrs. Jean Danley, 7060 SW Beveland, stated her residence Was on the west side of 70th Avenue. She had served as an NPO ##4 member for years and requested vacation be approved. She advised Council that the vacation request had been discussed many times at NPO #{4 with City staff and that her understanding was this was not to be a through street in the "super block" development plan for the Triangle area. I PAGE 4 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1997 i e. Development Services Manager recommended vacation of Gonzaga Street without 70th Avenue at this time which would allow staff to complete their• work with the Comprehensive Plan hearings. F. Public hearing closed. g. After lengthy discussion► Councilors Edwards and Eadon rioted that they could support vacation of Gonzaga and 70th Avenue because this issue had been pending for• so long. Councilor Johnson and Mayor Brian noted their support of the vacation of Gonzaga Street at this time and suggested that the 70th Avenue vacation be put on hold until an active plan for the area could be developed. h. ORDINANCE NO. 87-49 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF SW GONZAGA STREET, A DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, A RECORDED PLAT IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. i. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Johnson to adopt. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. j . Motion by Councilor• Johnson, seconded by Mayor• Brian to continue 70th Avenue vacation to May 9, 1988 for consideration. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the possibility of having an active plan adopted by that date. Motion to continue failF,d by a 2 to 2 split vote of the Council present. Councilor• Eadon and Councilor Edwards voting Nay. k. Motion by Councilor Edwards, seconded by Councilor• Eadon to approve 70th Avenue vacation and direct staff to prepare necessary papers. After further discussion Councilar•s Edwards and Eadon withdrew the motion. 1. Consensus of Council was to continue the vacation consideration for 70th Avenue to a date certain of May 9, 1988 with the condition that an ordinance for vacation of 70th Avenue be presented to the Council that evening whether or not the study was completed. Mayor Brian noted that the NPO #4 should be involved in this process prior to May 9th. 10. PUBLIC HEARING - SW 135TH AVENUE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FORMATION CONSIDERATION - PHASE III a. Public hearing opened. b. No declarations or challenges were filed by Council. C. City Engineer noted the area where the local improvement district (LID) had been reduced from the previous public hearing. He stated the new area for the LID would include 135th Avenue only and not the Murray Boulevard extension. Estimated cost of the district would be $1,124,451. He further noted completion of the project as anticipated by the end of the summer in 1988. City Engineer further noted the City Recorder had received five letters of objection or remonstrance. PAGE 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 31, 1987 . r DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MANAGER LEFT: 9:15 PM d. Public Testimony: Mayor Brian noted that all letters received -- were on file with the City Recorder and City Engineer should anyone wish to review the record. Proponents o Bob Tinsman, 13370 SW Scottsbridge Drive, appeared as the vice-president of the Morning Hills Homeowner Association. He first urged Council to take action so that the district could be completed as soon as possible. Secondly, he questioned which would cost more — a bridge or a culvert over Summer Creek. The City Engineer responded that the bridge would cost more that in the current recommendation the culvert was included. Mr. Tinsman further• stated he felt Council should have anticipated the citizens' concerns and noted that there was almost a 10% increase in cost since the original proposal at the beginning of the year. o Bill Brown, 13665 SW Ashbury, rioted confusion in the anticipated cost to the district since it was more now than when Mur•r•ay Boulevard had been included in the district boundaries. He also noted that additional cutbacks such as street: width and landscaping were recommended. Ite suggested Mur•r•ay Boulevard be placed back in the district and scale the improvement to 135th down to a 40 foot wide right-of-way with no sidewalks and no street lights . Ile compared the needs of 135th to be those of 4 Weir Road in Beaverton noting that road also was improved with no sidewalk grid a AO foot right-of-way. Discussion followed between Mr. Brown and Councilor• Johnson regarding the public hearing which was held in May. Councilor Johnson rioted that a list of items ware presented to the citizens at that public hearing to determine whether or riot they should be included in the district. At that time citizens encouraged Council to go with a full improvement and to delete Mur•r•ay Boulevard from the proposal. o Dave and Karin Trowbridge noted they were proponents of the proposal . o Mr. Russ Krueger, 1335 SW 66th Avenue ►402, Portland, 97225. Mr. Krueger noted his concern regarding the configuration of the district. He stated that with the large parcels of land he owned it would be unaffordable for him at this time to develop the property being included in the LID. Fie did encourage Council to find representatives from all the subdivisions and the major developers to meet with the project engineer and discuss options to the project. Council noted that this process had already been completed at the May public hearing. PAGE 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 31, 1987 ► hearing had Mayor Brian rioted that the citizens at the May encouraged the current configuration of the citizens attending strict and that there was now concern being presented by tonight's meeting that this may not be the best solution. Mr. Krueger stated he endorsed the project but that it was very expensive for him. City Attorney rioted for the record that if a person did riot state he was remonstrating against the LID that his testimony would be considered in support of that district improvement. Opponents: o Bob Papadakes, 11759 SW Swendon Loop, Parcel #71. Mr. Papadakes noted his objection to the project scope and encouraged Council to have 135th Avenue improved noting safety issues along that street to children and adults alike. o Mr. Earl R. Noar, 1.1766 SW Swondon Loop, Parcel 026. He stated he wanted to remonstrate against the project and wanted to go on record as riot being against a safe road improvement. His objections were as follows: 1) objection with the split fee with only 50 percent assessment being charged to Mr. Krueger and to Den Franklin; ?_) the improvement was too expensive noting that there perhaps a morn_ cost effective way to complete the project; and 3) noted a change of mood that Plan A was more equitable in assessments and questioned why this was riot a viable alternative to include Murray Boulevard. Mr. Noar• also filed a letter of remonstrance with the City Recorder U Mr. Ed Forner, 11576 SW Sheffield, Parcel 10124. lie stated that he had not been at previous meetings . He presented to the City Recorder- a petition signed by 2.0 individuals apposing the LID. He furtherstated there was support for improvement of 135th Avenue but not for the high cost- proposed. o Mr. Norman Harker, 1450 SW Sky Line Boulevard, Portland, OR, 97221 noised he represented Benj Fran. lie noted aletter ro osed was as submitted by Benj Fran in objection ort fhe IO s imp ovement of stated that Benj Fran was in total Supp 135th Avenue and was interested in the project, however-, they wished to express their opposition to the large assessment portion and also stated that Benj Fran would be charged for Walnut Street improvements when those occurred. o Mr. Jack Schwab, 9250 SW Tigard Street, stated he was legal counsel representing Mr. Grabhorn who owned Parcel #1 . He stated that Mr. Grabhorn was in opposition to the improvements noting that the cost to that parcel ($260,000) was too much and that the LID formation would force improvement of the property earlier than the owner had anticipated. He further stated that even if the property was developed at the existing Tigard zoning of multi—residential, land development could not support the cost of the LID. Mr. Schwab noted that 135th Avenue would be used as an arterial, not as a local street and for this reason should receive State and County funding sources. PAGE 7 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1987 City Engineer noted for the record that a traffic analysis had been done and it indicated most of the trips on 135th Avenue did begin and end outside the LID area. Mayor Brian stated the City made a practice to progressively pursue outside funding sources. o Shawn Lesperance, Parcel #333, appeared and expressed opposition to the LID stating that the street needed to be paved but full improvements with sidewalks and street lights was not necessary. e. City Engineer advised Council that he was unable to compute the total number of remonstrances and the percentage of remonstrance during the meeting since the petition signatures did riot include Parcel numbers. !le recommended the Council continue this hearing to September• 14th to allow ample time for computation of this information. Legal counsel recommended closure of the public hearing portion of the meeting and that Council then continue consideration to September 14th. f. Public hearing closed g. Council members expressed their• desire to conclude the meeting at this time, however, understood the difficulty the City Engineer would have in computing the amount of r•emonstr•ance. Consensus of Council was to continue consideration of this item to September- 14, 1987 at 7:30 PM. 11. CONSENT AGENDA These items were considered to be routine and were enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Motion to: 11. 1 Approve Council Minutes: July 13, 20, 1987; August 3, 10, 1987 11.2 REPORTS: Receive and rile a. Departmental Monthly Reports Community Development and CIP Status Report Community Services Library Police b. Tigard Nigh School Parking Concerns Update Report C. 1987 City Auction Report d. City of Tigard Cr•uisin' Tigard '87 Report 11.3 Receive and File: a. Dartmouth LID - Corrections to Written Testimony Submitted August 10, 1987 by Douglas V. Van Dyk, Attorney for Gordon R. Martin; Letter Dated August 19, 1987 from Charles Ruttan Concerning Oregon Department of Transportation 11.4 Approve Neighborhood Watch Comm. Dissolution — Res. No. 87- 11.5 Adopt OPEU/TMEA Contract 11.6 Approve Chamber of Commerce Sublease and Authorize Mayor's Signature 11.7 Approve Solid Waste Rate Policy 11.8 Recess City Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Approve Contract For Operation and Management of Computer Center With Management Systems Northwest; Adjourn Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Reconvene City Council Fleeting. PAGE 8 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1997 a. Motion by Councilor Edwards, seconded by Councilor Eadon to approve consent agenda with item .7 being pulled for consideration r at the September 14, 1987 Council meeting. 1 Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 12. TIGARD TOWNE SQUARE — SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CLARIFICATION a. City Engineer- synopsized his memorandum to Council rioting that the Director's decision approving the Tigard Towne Square development included a condition requiring submittal of an updated traffic analysis. Fte stated that the analysis was submitted in July and that the original plan was found to riot provide sufficient stacking distances for vehicles waiting for the signal on the east approach to Pacific Highway. At peek hours, westbound traffic on Durham Road might occasionally stack back into the Summerfield Drive intersection while waiting for the Pacific Highway signal. After reviewing several proposals for alternative designs for consideration, the best solution appeared to be alternate 'C' . Under- this alternate, the westbound left turn lane would be extended almost to Summerfield Drive. Extra widening of Durham Road would be necessary near Summerfield Drive to still be able to provide an eastbound left turn refuge at Summerfield Drive. Unfortunately, additional street widening would require removal of four existing trees. City Engineer noted that two of the four trees would probably need to be removed anyway due to their- high potential to fall in a windstorm. City Engineer questioned whether Council would approve alternate 'C' with the understanding four additional trees would be removed from this site. b. After lengthy discussion, Council requested that; substantial plantings be placed on the site. Consensus of Council was that the developer work with staff to determine what would be considered "substantial" plantings and to work out the details of the planting placement. Council consensus was to allow the removal of the four trees with reluctance understanding that it was a traffic safety concern that. required the removal of the additional trees. 13. NON—AGENDA ITEMS: None were considered. RECESS REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING: 9:45 PM 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:05 PM under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and pending litigation issues. 15. ADJOURNMENT: 10:55 PM Approved by the Tigard City Council on ep m er ?,9 7. 1 ATTEST: City Recorder — City of Tigard Mayor — City of Tigard LW:cs/0828D PAGE 9 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 31, 1907 m1°.o,gy� `a3' �'�� c!� �a � > aaoA ��•o :a '19�ipyR ,ppd.C � OaOoF+ C3saa .. a � 0�3:-RV as amu. .. � R- 08 aQ>.�o. cng 8 E434 oN a m co COO Cly ObC�. �.g v..0.. I- RE ; 0.0 ., Na�qg Q ppN da p �SiSt O;y�O tj �.G Cm•'ems fF Q a�+` .�v' c0> O.�p as�•• O�j',�• ` M U ['� q co •��? �T"S1 z Z O Ca to 2 � � , 2 tit . FL Big �• O '[ Q 4w �^ `•��a� $ ��oA ��pq'G,;,��t Xt fir' cZ �g �� V oai t� �sss+r,Ps Gga��q} u Cp�{�Zp cdc Rev o�z� a p. �� 'Y.••. alb iJCy � � a p:O �I p c� 'j'j 0� Z. rte.� b g •n o A V > A O O Z Q Q ro C t q �[ r m N C O c O W Q 13 � I� L m ¢ .�O Q) Q•4 � Y U p fn 2f Z - a Ix ca m a� L) m z CS O J J m l - c t m m m c co 4 d a o r `° q E `o a c �. o o m i LL m `° oro m m 9 0 M C) -- m Y p « m 0a O N Qa ` L e. cvH Z n`m.0 ai ua a c rn Id C\l cd r-- ON Q a m m v m c m h0 0, Z c - ct� r c o �j v a H N u' 0< Cd 0 a�> >. p W � W 4, Q w 3 - �,as G c o O O o y jr LL ) 'L mo o' a s N o 40 F- O i4 ocyav 0 - m w p LL U P• p UJ s • s Zd v m dF4 C mm mM C0UMem0Grc° 5 ea w a m N 2 U LQL NINE 111111111111111 PINES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 NOUCO 7-6527 BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice PO Box 23397 0 ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Tigard, OR 97223 s o AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' I, Anne ,lean being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk,of the. Tigard Time s a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at— T i g a r d —in the aforesaid county and state; that the a printed copy of which is horeto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 1 successive and consecutive in the following issues: Aug . 27 , 1987 Subscribed to bofore me this Ruz , 2 7_�_!9 R r_ Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: 9-2 0-r,8 t - p k� AFFIDAVIT* :.' p q,. S. -The toiiat hig.selected Ggerift item are "Isbed it.Baur Irifissrrt Furtber information and fUr,b'*, ndgL*tray be obtelW,t v t iIW_�C der,133125 SW Half Rtvdf Tigartf,rAegm 81�?, a:30I:-M—t0dys�l�-a 3'.3�! ttegnlar;`rT�tii �. TIC&"C IC;E4+TiEIE,TOWN IfAL L •"i T'''� 13125 sw Au-,'] )t3I.+Y. ICD,,'3TG/ ' i. tsi3l�t w •OrdItiance Cond&6 ua;.f t --.ftr3king Resent'.=on&W.fi5tfi Aftt1C2 • "leFiearfngf; S'igtlstlS$Rt'.&!PT9Q2riy C[rde-,�tr # i"•,��"�'`'`.'.� 1=.w Iii NOW ` f 1 TOMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice 7-6520 BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising e •City of Tigard ❑ Tearsheet Notice • PO Bax 23397 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Tigard, OR 97223 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. i,� bein sqt uiy sworn, depose and say tt�pl am gjgldlvee yising Director, or his principal clerk,of the. a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Ti g rd in the aforesaid county and state; that the a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for --I.—succgssive and consecutive in the following Issues: Subscribed annci2;�NaotaryPubllc A2 0 • 19 7 for Orogon My Commission Eypires: 88 bty cre AFFIAFFIDAVITTh8'f0WW,a�eM%��w Marr! 31, 19$7 st t `f't t d Ctvtt: Center,7's�►q '-Rt t.'1 i25 $0�51�5'i$fhlr-.'Ii'dr.{1!�i41.FIr1�Ct� � -Cs>Qa�uoi!#p iDCoclepsne�t.091f'ac�2'of i'�ty Qom`iwt tbd fCt _by oattiag ti3a�417l.You m^e ias'tffsd;to attest �� ` _ Of cy-,patwc ttembs:wrftfar►atad Z Oaip t+rll�Ids�.lati 'ct 7A attt�a�s��3t�rse:ti?�1c�. ts'au<`x��' , be ptli�at�r�.tste .d, - o'.y,rsl.. 47 4�xgi�yny-'MIA T 1ZA'i$.55YUMMi�A1y+.bWnrh*qy ryT� q,��s. ��g ..•}� �yygip'�ay�y,,.1�9'{��(+��71✓[Y�fl�ryry�(,�.ylpe�lpOt'�4:aKiC�'i^N�: f �'s _tilt. i k� CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In the Matter of the Proposed STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) as City of Tigard ) I, l T ' ,_1�_ being first duly sworn, on oath, depose and say: That I posted in the following public_ and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) 7-4(0 &,-? -41-2 which were adopted at the Council Meeting dated 18 7 copy(s) of said ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the ..L— day of 1987• 1. Tigard Civic Center, 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon. 2. U.S. National Bank, Corner of Main and Scoffins, Tigard, Oregon 3. Safeway Store, Tigard Plaza, S.W. Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon 1 �-_, 19 Subscribed and sworn to before me this _� day of -e st b 3 j �� ` � $. MAR„HA K. HUNT ota Public for Oregon Y NOTARY PUBLIC — OREGON My Commission Expires f My Commission Expires: iF i yi 3 f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 87— y{v AN ORDINANCE AMENDING T.M.C. 10.28.130 PROHIBITING PARKING ON A PORTION OF SW 85TH AVENUE, AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, T.M.C. 10.28.130 prohibits parking at any time on portions of certain public streets in Tigard; and WHEREAS, The Tigard City Council has heard a recommendation of the City Engineer that similar parking restrictions be imposed on portions of SW 85th Avenue in order to maintain adequate street width for moving vehicles; THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: T.M.C. Section 10.28.130 designating the streets or portions thereof where parking is prohibited at all times, is hereby amended by adding the following: 11(62) Along the east side of SW 85th Avenue from Durham Road to a point 450 feet south of the south curbline of Durham Road." Section 2: This ordinance shall become effective on or after the 31st day after its passage by the Council. PASSED: By f�1�n ►+:w.n�•C vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this S T day of �/a� .� �`' 1987. C/Loreen R. Wilson, City Recorder APPROVED: This ST day of 1987. Thomas M. Brian, Mayor cn/0546D ORDINANCE NO. 87—� Parte 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 87— ZI'7 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING T.M.C. 10.16.051, PROHIBITING THROUGH TRUCKS ON PORTIONS OF BONITA ROAD, AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. µ . WHEREAS, T.M.C. 10.16.051 prohibits through trucks of 20,000 pounds or more GVW on certain streets in Tigard; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has heard a recommendation of the City Engineer that similar truck restrictions be imposed on portions of Bonita Road to protect a portion of the roadway embankment; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council finds that it is in the best interests of the citizens of Tigard to restrict through truck traffic on Bonita Road in order to protect the public from unnecessary safety hazards associated with heavy vehicle traffic and to prevent deterioration of the roadway pavement and roadway embankment. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: T.M.C. Section 10.16.051(2), designating the streets or portions thereof where through truck traffic shall be prohibited, is hereby amended by adding the following: "M S.W. Bonita Road, from S.W. 72nd Avenue to S.W. Hall Boulevard." Section 2: This ordinance shall become effective on or after the 31st day after its passage by the Council. PASSED: By _t Lh K; m dam_ vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this �,/ S T day of1987. .- Q W 6LoreLenR. Wilson, City Recorder APPROVED: This 57' y da of � 1987. Thomas M. Brian, Mayor f cn/0500D ORDINANCE NO. 87—CJ7 Page 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE N0. 87-� AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TMC CHAPTER 3.44, ESTABLISHING, A PROCEDURE FOR THE SALE OF SURPLUS CITY REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO ORS 221.727 AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, from time to' time the City of Tigard acquires real property in the course of constructing public improvements; and WHEREAS, from time to time real property acquired by the City for public improvements is deemed surplus property; and WHEREAS, the current procedure for disposing of surplus property pursuant to TMC 3.44 is burdensome and costly; and WHEREAS, ORS 221.727 provides a procedure by which the City may adopt, after public notice and hearing a procedure for the sale of individual parcels of a class of City—owned real property; and W11EREAS, the City has complied with the notice and hearing requirements of ORS 221.272, i THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: i Section 1: The City of Tigard hereby deletes TMC Sections 3.44.010 and 3.44.020 and establishes an administrative procedure by which to dispose of surplus real property falling within the class of i properties as defined herein. Real property qualifying for the procedure established in this I ordinance is classified as follows: (a) Substandard Undeveloped Property. Parcels with no structures thereon which are not of minimum buildable size for the zone in which located; (b) Standard Undeveloped Property. Parcels with no structures thereon which are of minimum or greater buildable size for the zone in which located; (c) Developed Property. # Parcels of any size with structures thereon; (d) "Special Case" Property. s. Parcels that, notwithstanding (a), (b), or (c) above, were acquired by the City for capital improvement as defined by the Tigard Municipal Code and were purchased subject to an agreement for the manner in which any surplus would be disposed. ORDINANCE NO. 87- tAC�l Page 1 Section 2: DISPOSAL OF SUBSTANDARD UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY (a) Whenever a particular parcel or parcels is proposed for sale by the City, or a purchase inc;uiry is made, and the property is classified as Substandard Undeveloped Property, the matter shall be set on the regular Council agenda, but no public hearing is required. Notice shall be given, however, of the agenda item to all property owners within 250 feet of the parcel and to any parties who have inquired about purchase. The Council shall determine whether it will offer the property for sale and what the minimum acceptable terms of the sale shall be. (b) If no acceptable bids are received on a particular parcel r*' and it is classified as Subst,%ndard Undeveloped Property, the parcel will not be listed but shall remain available for sale through the City for a period of one year on the same minimum terms as established under Section 2(a). (c) After expiration of the period set out in Section 2(b), the property shall be removed from the market. Any decision to sell a piece of property once it has been removed from the market shall require that the entire procedure set forth in this ordinancoi be repeated. Section 3: DISPOSAL OF STANDARD UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY AND DEVELOPED PROPERTY (a) Whenever a particular parcel or parcels is proposed for sale by the City or a purchase inquiry is made and the i property is classified as Standard Undeveloped Property or Y Developed Property, the matter shall be set for a hearing before the Council. i (b) Notice of �A aid hearing shall be published once in a w newspaper of general circulation in the city. Said notice shall be published at least once week prior to the hearing and shall describe the property proposed for sale. (c) An appraisal shall be made prior to sale for any parcel classified as Standard Undeveloped Property or Developed Property, including any structure thereon. In the discretion Gf the Council, such appraisal shall be available at or prior to the hearing or shall be ordered after the hearing is concluded if the Council determines a sale is appropriate. (d) Public testimony shall be solicited at the hearing to determine if a sale of any parcel is in the public interest. (e) After tfi hoaring, the Council shall determine whether it will offer the property for sale and what the minimum acceptable price shall be. ORDINANCE NO. 87--iq Page 2 M If an offer to sell is authorized by the Council, a notice soliciting sealed bids shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city. One publication shall be made a least two weeks prior to the bid deadline date. The notice shall describe the property to be sold, the minimum acceptable terms of 3a1Q, the person designated to receive bide, the last date bids will be received, and the date, time and place that bids will be opened. (g) If' one or more bids are received at or above the minimum acceptable terms, the Council, shall accept the highest bid and direct the City Administrator to complete the sale. (h) If no acceptable bids are received on a particular parcel, the parcel shall be listed for six months with a local real estate broker on a multiple listing basis with the same minimum terms as established under Section 3(e). Brokers shall be selected in accordance with the criteria found at Section 3.44.030. A listing may be renewed 1.,r an additional one six month period. (i) After expiration of the period set out in Section 3(h), the property shall be removed from the market. Any decision to sell a piece of property once it has been removed from the market shall require that the entire procedure set forth in this Ordinance be repeated. Section 4: All properties classified as Substandard Undeveloped Property, Standard Undeveloped Property and Developed Property authorized for sale shall be initially offered on the basis of sealed bids only. Section 5: DISPOSAL OF "SPECIAL CASE" PROPERTY (a) Whenever a particular parcel or parcels is proposed for sale by the City, or a purchase inquiry is made, and the property is classified as Special Case Property, the a matter shall be set on the regular Council agenda, but no public hearing is required. (b) The Council shall determine the validity of the agreement for the manner in which the surplus property would be k. disposed and whether all preconditions have been satisfied. If the agreement is deemed valid, the property shall be disposed of pursuant to the agreement's terms. ' If the Council concludes that the agreement is not valid, the property shall be disposed of in the manner described under the appropriate alternate class, Substandard Undeveloped Property, Standard Undeveloped Property or Developed Property. ORDINANCE NO. 87 Page 3 f I Section 6: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the thirty—first day after its passage by the Council and execution by the City Recorder and the Mayor. PASSED: By 'ul In o►h i rr,o u 5 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this /ST day of — 1987. r ' Lli �Loreen R. Wilson, City Recorder APPROVED: This ST day of AL�.Q ,, sT 1987. t Thomas M. Brian, Mayor cn/0509D E r i 4 } i t ifdF f pZ C i� C ORDINANCE NO. 87— Page 4 l CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 87-_Y9 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF SW GONZAGA STREET, A DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, A RECORDED PLAT, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. WHEREAS, a vacation petition was received and filed with the City Recorder; and WHEREAS, the reason and purpose for this vacation is to return a portion of SW Gonzaga Street to private ownership; and WHEREAS, the vacation is recommended by the Planning Commission and the Department of Community Development; and WHEREAS, in accordance with ORS 271. 100, the TMC Section 15.08. 110, the Council fixed a time and place for the public hearing and the Recorder published notice and posted notice in the area to be vacated; and WHEREAS, notice has been mailed to all property owners abutting said vacation area and all owners in the affected area, as described in ORS 271.080; and WHEREAS, the Council, having held a hearing on August 31, 1987, finds the public interest will not be prejudiced by the vacation as provided by ORS 271.120 and TMC Section 15.08.130; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that it is in the public interest to approve the request to vacate a portion of SW Gonzaga Street right-of-way because the public interest will not be prejudiced; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the following condition is necessary to vacate said land: 1. The vacation shall not be effective until the effective date of this ordinance, and a certified copy of this ordinance has been recorded with the Washington County Clerk, Assessor, and Surveyor. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The Tigard City Council hereby orders the vacation of a portion of SW Gonzaga Street as described and shown on the attached Exhibit "B", and by this reference made part hereof. Section 2: The Tigard City Council further orders that the vacation be subject to the following condition: 1. The vacation shall not be effective until the effective date of this ordinance, and a certified copy of this ordinance has been recorded with the Washington County Clerk, Assessor, and Surveyor. ORDINANCE NO. 87- i Page 1 Section 3: In no situation shall this Ordinance be effective until the 31st day after its enactment by the City Council and approval by the Mayor. PASSED: By vote D1wn i/�Ac� vote of all Council members present -after being read by number and title: only, this day of 1987. �/Loreen R. Wilson, City Recorder APPROVED: This ,`� / ST day of ALAL 1987. Thomas M. Brian, Mayor I ORDINANCE NO. 87— �� I Page 2 i F t Exhibit "B" (Excludes SW 70th Avet.ue) That Portion of land located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Runge 1, West Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, �being more particularly described as follows:` Beginning at the southwest corner of . Block 30 WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, a recorded plat, Washington County Plat Records; thence west on the south line of said Block 30 beini also the north line of SW Gonzaga Street, 219 feet to the southeast corner of said Block 30 which is •on the west line of SW 69th Avenue; thence south on the west line of SW 69th Avenue 60 feet to the northeast corner of Block 31, said WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, thence on the north line of said Block 31, being also and the south line of said SW Gonzaga Street, 219 feet to the northwest corner of said Block 31 and the east line of SW 70th Avenue; thence north on the east line of said SW 70th Avenue 60 feet to the point of beginning. Containing approximately 13,140 square feet. ORDINANCE NO. 87 Page 3 t • 9104 *9 V2 � -N- 0 N- C 91061 I 91031 I w 83Qo. I I (`� �rt o• m„o,,,,,,,, n �J j A 3 1 5 1 6 1 7 18$ Q 2200 2300 ;�• I 1 1 1 ( I 8400 1 = 100 36 lu 35 2 i 9100 1 r _ 910 7J— -�= — 8500 �_ r" If —13 3_2 8700 _ — 860 — — Iso 13e.1o'�� — 14 — 31 - e -- — — — o- — — — — 8800a 30 160 1 e r.I s 0 9101 . 17 9106_28 — — — — — — 2400 8900 T r _7 + 7 —r _,,,r 9qoIT -T.. 1 9010 i191 21'1 �23IL4Imo. I � .1 �• I I I. i ; 1 <'}'•:7i.:r1iSf} :ti}' f:ter ti{v rr.Y.:r ti'}•rfi ,' r.'r�+.:f}'•f} tic, VACATED 85-44443 (p 11:.03 So }'fp} t:{{} 300 100 R .36 Ac. �( 0 0 2 7 .0 .::ts �.. e' 6Q 190 IBrOVr T T I 10 0 9 0 o ts' 24 a s' :s a o' ff so' I I .DESCRIBED AREA I \I 11('x/1 0. .0 1 1 0 0 I I I 1� 1 J J R O N...°s. 111 100 qf.4i 11 OS - t To •usuc S1r.of N 20 0 0 :iii _-2800 N 119.00 t 1000 200 G n_ .35Ac. 2900 N 1 3 -- c 16 0 3t 2100 M y . 1 sa Q 1 2200 p M Oz �- z S if —L J 114.00 116.00 Q 1 1100 3 N t� -2300 1g 18 $ x 17cw ?� 25 Z 0O l 2000— S.11217, I.07Ac. (dI o o r I �r'� 0 60 y gg 'Q 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 tS• 25' a9• t!S' tS Ls• 28' 19' I S. W HAMPTON ST S i i AGENDA ITEM 2 — VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE 8/31/87 t (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council Please sign on the appro p wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City 6 Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. f i i TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED t NAME & ADDRESS i 3 i i DATE August 31, 1987 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 PUBLIC HEARING — SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY CODE AMENDMENT Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) ********* Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation ******************************************************************************* DATE August 31, 1987 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 PUBLIC HEARING - 70TH & GONZAGA PUBLIC HEARING Opponent (Against Issue) Proponent (For Issue) Name**Address*and*Affiliation ********* Name, Address and Affiliation /► r, 1 DATE August 31, 1987 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: Agenda Item No. 8 PUBLIC HEARING — SW 135TH AVENUE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FORMATION CONSIDERATION — PHASE III Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation IZ �� 7b S- 3 �1�2 © Q 22 /3GG� t.✓ sc,At b 01A) E k f ' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Parking _ PREVIOUS ACTION: j Restrictions on SW 85th Avenue _ PREPARED BY: Randall R. Wooley DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Shall parking be restricted on the east side of SW 85th Avenue south of Durham Road? INFORMATION SUMMARY This fall the High School will begin an enforcement program to discourage students from parking on residential streets when they drive to school. Instead, students will be encouraged to park in school parking lots and on the streets abutting the school property. If- the program is suc,essful, some students may begin parking on SW 85th Avenue (the extension of Hall Boulevard south of Durham Road) . SW 85th Avenue is approximately 36 feet wide. . With cars parked on one side, there is still ample room for two--way traffic. But with cars parked on both sides, it would become a one-lane street for many vehicles. T'he street provides access to the USA Treatment Plant, the Justice Court, and office buiIdirig s . To serve these facilities, a two-.lane roadway should be maintained with adequate width for trucks . Therefore, it is proposed to prohibit parking on the east side of SW 85th Avenue. Parking would still be allowed on the west- side next to the High School campus. As drafted, the parking prohibition would extend from Durham Road to the entrance to the Unified Sewerage Agency plant. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Adopt the attached ordinance prohibiting parking on the east side of SW 85th Avenue. 2. Continue to allow parking on both sides of SW 85th Avenue. FISCAL IMPACT i Approximately $150 for signing if parking is prohibited. SUGGESTED ACTION D Staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance. � Z--,/,/' cn/0546D C�yrcu��e� w�•l� � JUNIOR i .r J`''I7ef' l f ( t ! I I HIGH ( ' Fra t 7 -r •1 :- _? ,�, ! _ �„I r SCHOOL ` /' I J � TEMPLE TON � � �....� � r �� s ELEMENTARY I� i �I _ -� SCHOOL •, r.. t - r I 'I ._._ L PTI t 1 - An I .- i 1 •.. r t-Tar i I 4 a�``; llL !I Il? �� I 1`•i��' i. it �-____ ._� •.,_i 1 i♦�. i '� � sW i I ��ir�i�All. t .� �:\. ..�• fit\\ �� ,•.l-�`� �- I T = -�45- •` tit t t�Y i• t 1 vI !�_: .__'.1 l .. i 'I l.. I'_ 1 il1•. 1!Ir.� l�1 It( I.L..... I .. t •I l L....�I)\1_`1111, _ ..�t 1 i 1.�.11 ----..1.__, •\ I 1 iris[:: I i.I `{ t J L , i '15 4 TIGARD HIGH r%1Nn P9A?J0A114�,L7G1�j .•.s' ♦r ^y t t { rr ^�.l�J 'I SCHOOL •1 USA y� , 1 ( t(1 1 r TREATMENTlit PLANT ' .1, 11:t� �J'�- •,,-,�V 1 r_ � [_ , t � JIM DU "o I till lM 1.Y L r ---------- ^ �— .4 -- .. - 1 COOK I $ PARK Ail 61 S+ [io waw 6. TUALATIN .. ' � •__�-:; —+J�II� t i�r�f i F ; COUNTR CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Ratify existing PREVIOUS ACTION: truck restrictions on Bonita Road PREPARED BY: Randall R. Woole DEPT HEAD OVI441 'CITY ADMIN OK _ REQUESTED BY: __ ..__...........__.........._._____ __.._._._._.._._._...___ OLICY ISSUE Formal adoption of truck restrictions currently posted on Bonita Road. .INFORMATION SUMMARY Signs prohibiting through trucks over 20,000 pounds GVW have been posted on Bonita Road for several years. The prohibition was probably imposed to keep heavy traffic off the embankment near Hall Boulevard where slide problems have occurred in the past. An ordinance has never been adopted to allow enforcement of truck restrictions on Bonita Road. The attached ordinance would ratify the existing signed restrictions. The restrictions apply only to the portion of Bonita Road between 72nd Avenue and Hall Boulevard. Continuing slope stability problems with the roadway embankment near Hall make it desirable to keep heavy vehicles off of this portion of Bonita Road. Also, Bonita Road is a narrow roadway with no shoulders, passing through a residential area, similar- to other collector streets where through trucks have been prohibited in Tigard. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Pass the attached ordinance ratifying the truck prohibitions previously posted on Bonita Road. 2. Direct that existing signing be removed. FISCAL IMPACT None. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance. cn/0500D kJ II`J _ . F ?• t © �■®III ''`� � sit© ■ �, � 'x Y ' ■■ W13 Rog r_a J• alt S ' ■ �' . �r • i r . Nunn f■ .■ ■■ ■ y AMENOWN am r R. b ��<�i� r��,M�� tttt�t ��.m■ rr count 1 � �n�t��1�m� Ntil{IIIIiI � � � ` - ■��! � .m. � tt�il.,.� ..._ 7 /Illi• S MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council August 24, 1987 FROM: L.oreen Wilson, City Recorder �J SUBJECT: Portland Fixture Review — Public Hearing On Friday, August 21, 1987, a phone poll of the City Council was taken to determine whether the above—noted public hearing would be held. Three of the four Councilors contacted requested the public hearing be cancelled. This item is placed on the agenda to ratify the results of that phone poll. The notice of the hearing was advertised in The Tigard Times prior to the phone poll; however, notice was not sent to surrounding property owners. Suggested Motion: A motion to ratify the August 21, 1987 Council phone poll to cancel the Portland Fixture Review Public Hearing (SDR 87-15) . cw/0670D i F 4 [tt xii [� t i August 21, 1987 C"_�,IF If( Mr. David P. Zimel, Vice President, Development TIFATY Tigard East Associates GON P. 0. Box 5308Portland, OR 97228 -1 Service -9986 Dear Mr. Zimel: This letter confirms our phone conversations today clarifying the proposal and conditions of development per the SDR 87-15 project file and your letter, attached, date stamped August 14, 1987. Specifically, the City and the applicant further understand and agree that: The proposed sound buffering fence along the east side residential zones will be of a type and quality equal to or better than that depicted in the photographs at the August 10, 1987 council meeting, and as further detailed on page 2, first paragraph of your letter; Additionally, while a sound-mitigating fence is not deemed necessary, along the south side adjacent to existing apartments, a City standard type sight obscuring fence, with a six foot minimum height, is required between the project and this existing residential use; The applicant shall make every reasonable effort during and after construction to keep and sustain the existing trees shown on the landscaping plan. The applicant shall provide the City with a qualified Arborist's report on recommended construction practices and follow^-up to best preserve the existing trees; New trees shall be a minimum of 1-1/4" caliper and a minimum of 8' height; Consistent with the intent of this approval, the applicant shall make reasonable efforts during construction and operation to continue to mitigate the sound and visual impacts to the adjacent residential areas; City standard sign code regulations shall be applied; a 50% increase in sign size may be allowed at the Director's level, but no sign height variances from code shall be granted; All the grocery store trash systems shall be as described in the applicant's letter, paragraph 7; The Bi-Mart trash area shall be screened as proposed by the applicant with the proposed retaining wall at an extended height or an alternate system approved by the Director sufficient to further the sound mitigation concerns; son . All other trash areas shall be enclosed consistent with City standards; 113125 SW Hail Blvd.P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 August 21, 1987 , Mr. David P. Zimel, Vice President, Development Tigard East Associates i I t E Page 2 1 Lighting shall be per the applicant's letter, paragraph 9; exact locations and specifications shall be further reviewed by the Building, Official during the Building Permit process. F Given your verbal agreement to the foregoing, the city approves the Director's Decision on SDR 87-15 as clarified, and per a phone poll of the City Council and the Public Hearing of August 31, 1987 is cancelled. Sincerely, � Robert W tean,, City Administrator cc: Mayor and City Council cc: William A. Monahan, Community Development Director cc: Loreen Wilson, City Recorder t i T J br/OG51D i i t r MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON i TO: City Council t/ August 17, 1987 FROM: Keith Liden, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Site Development Review (SDR 87-15) Portland Fixture On August 10, 1987, the Council, staff, and Portland Fixture representatives discussed the above proposal and the methods to be used for meeting Council concerns regarding the project. The issues were addressed by the applicant and it was agreed that a letter of understanding would be submitted by the applicant for Council approval to clarify how conditions will be satisfied. If a majority of Council members approve the letter, the August 31st hearing P will be cancelled. . f Attached are the Director's decision, William Monahan's memo summarizing Council concerns, draft minutes from the August 10th meeting, and a letter from Portland Fixture. Staff will contact each Council member on Wednesday or . Thursday to see if all issues are satisfactorily resolved. `r The staff has reviewed the Portland Fixture letter and it is felt that this letter and the conditions of approval in the Director's decision will address Council concerns. Staff recommends that the August 31st hearing be cancelled. We would appreciate a response by Thursday because notice for an August 31st hearing (if onei.s held) must be sent this Friday to nearby property owners. dj/0515D q� CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 87-15 PORTLAND FIXTURE APPLICATION: A request by Portland Fixture Limited Partnership for approval of a 153,180 square foot retail center and related facilities on property zoned C-G (Commercial General) and located on the southeast side of Pacific Highway 700 feet south of SW Garrett Street (WCTM 2S1 2CC tax lot 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 and 901) . DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above application subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are a: noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1. Background In 1982 the Tigard City Council approved a revision (Resolution N82-132) to the NPO 01 Comprehensive Plan and a Zone Change for these properties from Commercial Professional/General Commercial to General Commercial (CPR 4-82/ZC 18-82). This change was approved subject to several conditions. Three Sensitive Lands permits have been granted by the Hearings Officer from this property. M 3-82 and SL 6-85 approvals were valid for one year but each expired before land alteration was done. The decision for the third approval, SL 87-08, was granted recently and will expire June 23, 1988 if not acted upon. A Site Development Review (SDR 8-86) was submitted in March, 1986 for approval of a 157,000 square foot retail center and related facilities. Approval with conditions was granted in April, 1986 but expired after one year. 2. Vicinity Information The property is adjacent to Pacific Highway along the northwestern frontage and properties zoned C-G lie on the opposite side of the street. Other parcels zoned C-G are situated immediately to the northeast and southwest along Pacific Highway. The area to the east and south is committed to single family and multiple family residences. The homes to the east and southeast are zoned R-4.5 (Single Family Residential, 4.5 units per acre) and R-3.5 (Single Family Residential, 3.5 units per acre) respectively and the apartments along the remainder of the southern boundary are non-conforming units which are zoned C-G. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject properties are presently undeveloped except for one 4,644 square foot retail building. A drainageway slopes downhill toward the southern end of the parcel. The applicants are proposing to develop the properties with a 153,180 square foot shopping center called Tigard East. It is intended that the center will contain a grocery store, drug store, restaurant and assorted shops. NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 87-15 - PORTLAND FIXTURE - PAGE 1 The site plans submitted for this project are similar to ,:DR 8-86 regarding building placement and site design. There has been a reduction in the total building floor area and adjustments have been made in placing fewer loading and trash pick-up areas in the rear of the property near residential areas. 4. Agency and NPO Comments The State Highway Division has reviewed this proposal and state that they are familiar with this development since they have reviewed it several times. The present proposal appears fine to them. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has considered the proposal and has responded that any new traffic signal to be installed must be equipped with opticom controls. They are somewhat concerned that this size of development could cause the 3000 gpm fire flow requirement to be exceeded. It is required that an automatic sprinkler protection system be incorporated into all buildings in this development. NPO #1 considered the proposal and has offered the following recommendations: 1. Fencing should be solid wood (with no gaps) or made of concrete or brick and 8 feet high. ,. 2. There should be adequate sound deflection of heat/air conditioning i systems. 3. Truck traffic in rear of buildings should be limited in their time of operation. i The Engineering Division has provided the following findings: 1. Notice of Final Order SL 87-08 became final on July 6, 1987. 2. Site Development Review SDR 08-86 expired on April 21, 1987. s 3. The proposed development fronts State of Oregon right-of-way, namely - SW Pacific Highway►.; a frontage road exists therealong. 4. An existing City 8" sanitary sewerage main-line facility and storm drainageway traverses applicant's site, both draining generally y northeasterly. 5. The applicant proposes to develop a retail shopping center with two primary (signalized) access points and one right in - right out minor access point. The applicant further proposes to realign the existing public sanitary sewerage line and install a closed conduit storm sewer line, traversing the site, to enhance public operation and maintenance thereof while facilitating site structure layout. 6. Further, the applicant has acknowledged awareness of the need for (and is already participating in) action to vacate a portion of public roadway running "through" the property, to improve the portion of roadway running from the property to SW Park Street intersection N 01710E OF DECISI0N - S" 87-15 - P6RTLoNg FIXTURE - PACE 2 (providing access to adjacent tracts), to acquire fronting surplus property from the State, to landscape the frontage, io modify an existing traffic signal and add a new traffic signal, in an endeavor to develop the site. The Building Division, Portland General Electric and the Tigard Water District all reviewed this proposal and have no objections to it. No other comments were received concerning this proposal. . B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The proposed project is consistent with Community Development Code provisions pertaining to vehicular access, building setbacks, lot coverage, visual clearance and parking. The following topics warrant further discussion regarding conformance with Code requirements. 1. Landscaping and Buffering The minimum landscaping requirement for developed properties in the C-G zone is 15%. According to the Site Plan and Planting Plan provided by the applicants, this minimum requirement will be met. These plans indicate that a 15 foot wide buffer strip will be provided along all properties that are residentially zoned. As noted in the staff report SDR 8-86 concern remains whether the proposed fence will adequately deal with the potential for adverse noise impacts. The Site Plan indicates three loading and/or trash collection areas which are to be located behind the proposed buildings and along the rear property lines. Although this number has been reduced from six such locations proposed in SDR 8-86, the potential for adverse noise impacts have not necessarily been reduced. NPO H1 suggested in SDR 8-86 that the fence should include wooden slats and that no loading or trash pick-up should occur prior to 7 AM. a As proposed, the screening, buffering and fencing will have minimal effect relating to sourKi deflection or absorption. To better serve the intent of the Code to minimize commercial impacts spilling into residential areas and consistent with a condition of approval stated in SDR 8-86, it is recommended that a 8 foot high fence or masonry wall be situated along all residentially zoned parcels. In addition, a loading and delivery curfew between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM should be observed. 2. Noise A second noise issue unrelated to the mitigation of loading and trash collection impacts concerns the heating, ventilation, air and cooling (HVAC) units to be used in heating and cooling the buildings. The Site Plan has identified the proposed siting of various structures on the property but details are lacking with regard to HVAC unit placements on i the buildings. Since HVAC units are sources of potentially constant and incessant noise, sound mitigation controls (such as enclosures) should be located around these units to diminish impacts on nearby residents. t i NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 87-15 - PORTLAND FIXTURE - !SAGE 3 3. Trees SDR 8-86 had proposed 592 parking spaces while the current proposal provides 589. Based upon the number of parking spaces in a development, one tree for every seven spaces must be planted in or near the parking area. Because the original landscaping plan showed approximately 60 trees when 65 trees were required, once again staff would like to review this aspect of the plan since the present landscaping plan is almost identical to the original. 4. Signage No plans for signage were submitted with this application although SDR 8-86 addressed allowable signage previously. The shopping center complex is entitled to one multi-faced, free-standing sign. Contact with the applicant revealed the desire to be considered for an increase in sign area of 50% as permitted in the Community Development Code when such a request is made during the Site Development Review process. This amount of increase allows sufficient sign area to advertise the various tenants in a new development. An increase in height of 25% may also be gained when the ". . . sign's visual appeal and overall design quality would be served. . ." It is expected 'that the shopping center will have at least six tenants and perhaps as many as ten or twelve. Therefore, staff supports justification for an increase in sign size. Since no sign designs and plans were submitted and since the applicant provides no reasons for an increase in sign height, staff finds no justification for permitting an increase in height. C. DECISION The Planning Director approves SDR 87-15 subject to the following conditions: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. 2. The design and configuration of improvements impacting SW Pacific Highway including accessways and signalization, shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard and Oregon Department of Transportation. A Road Approach Permit from O.D.O.T. and a City--O.D.O.T.-Applicant signalization agreement is required prior to commencement of street improvement work. 3. Street improvements including lighting, sidewalk, curb, driveway approach, road base and surfacing, traffic and pedestrian controls including signalization, signing and pavement marking, closed conduit storm drainage and sanitary sewerage facilities and, also, general utilities, shall be installed by the applicant in conformance with City and State requirements and standards and specifications. 4. All documents relevant to the improvement (dedication, easement, etc.,) shall be on City and State forms; and shall be reviewed and approved thereby prior to recording. A complete copy of the State Road Approach Permit shall be provided to the City. NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 67-15 - PORTLAND FIXTURE - PAGE 4 IBM 5. Joint use and maintenance agreements for common driveways shall be provided by the applicant to the City for approval and shall be referenced on and become part of all applicable parcel Deeds. 6. The final conditions of SL 87-08 shall be considered a part hereof as though inscribed herein in full. 7. The center shall be entitled to one free-standing sign that does not exceed the allowable sign area by over 50 percent. 8. No deliveries or trash pick-up shall occur at the rear of the project between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM. 9. A. solid wood fence or masonry wall which is 8 feet in height shall be installed along the property line where the subject property abuts the R-3.5 and R-4.5 zoning districts. Said fence shall be constructed prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. The location and method for noise reduction for the HVAC systems shall be approved by the Planning Director. 11. The landscaping plan shall be revised to meet Code requirements for trees within parking areas. 12. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below. D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant & owners XX Owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization + XX Affected governmental agencies 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON 31, /%7_ UNLESS f AN APPEAL IS FILED. i 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community 3 Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with } the CITY RECORDER within 10 days after notice is given and sent. f The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 P.M. 310 MIT tt 4. Questions_: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard F Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639-4171. i r PREPARE m Dixon, A is nt P ner DATE �� D TE PPROVED William A. Monahan, Director of Community Development �Tn•...in�nen MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Keith Liden August 4, 1987 FROM: William A. Monahan, f� / Director, Community Development SUBJECT: Portland Fixture (SDR 87-15) The Council last night discussed the issues related to the Portland Fixture project. I would like to have you contact Paul Gram of Mercury Development to go over all of the issues contained in this memo. Following are the items that are of concern: 1 . Page 2, Agency and NPO Comments: Council was concerned about the Fire District comment that we need the Fire District to sign off on the s project. 2. Also on page 2, Engineering Division Comments, Item No. 5: The two primary access points. We need to review this and convince the Council 1 that the driveway locations which have been granted are in conformance with the State and makes sense relative to traffic circulation on Pacific t Highway and signalization of Pacific Highway. 1 3. Landscaping and buffering. The fifteen foot wide buffer strip that will be provided along all properties that are residentially zoned. The question there is, where will the fence be? Also within that section, the staff pointed out that the buffering and fencing will have minimal effect relating to sound deflection or absorption. The Council is concerned about noise and how we will contain that noise within the commercial development. 4. Page 3, Item 2, Noise: Council is concerned about the HVAC systems. They're not comfortable with the follow up later. They want the decision = nailed down now. 5. Page 4, Item 3, Trees: We need to make sure that at least the minimum t landscaping is provided for. Also, we need to get assurances from the { developer that the trees that will be placed will be mature enough to i have a positive effect at the time of planting. i 6. Page 4, Item 4, Signage: We have discussed an increase of 50 percent in ' size and height an increase of 25 percent. We need to clarify what we are approving and what the justification is. There is concern that the increase may not be justified due to the visibility of this site on the highway. Council has expressed that the increase may be only for commercial benefit. t r f ommoopow— Memo to Keith Liden Page 2 August 4, 1987 Decision: The overriding theme here is that the Council 7. Page 4, Item C. process, not later. Trash wants us to tie down any conditions now in the P the trash receptacles pickup was noted. The Council prefers moving . They because they feel Lhat tstersecanl be restrictions units e that are eaccessed questioned whether the dump The concerns related again to only by a tube from inside the building. and mitigation of noise, the wall and how it ties into the landscaping the possible noise from it, and the overall work on the loading dock and effect of noise on the neighborhood. 8. Concerns related to 8 and 9 on page 5. Items number 10 and 11 are also concerns. The question there is when the approval by the Planning . The Council wants these ironed out Director will take placethe outside rt is 9. One final ltnot m wantstoknow how he lights wtionod in the Staff ill obe angled to prevent lighting. Councilproperties. ' adverse effect on the neighboring pro P to discuss the issues What I would like you to do, Keith, is further with Paul Gram of Portland Fixture today or tomorrow. I talked with Ofuthehmemoowould a time to and advised him of t this afternoon concerns nd youl should t}call him at a andanset r p to all of bo available for him to get discuss them. His number is 223-2108. We, try of we and tomorrow so that you can adviseoThursday ywh3: will stand call j these issues today afternoon. Either Wednesday sometime Wednesday with Portland Fixture and some i Carolyn Eadon and tell cil whnext prog Monress we"ve made. We will have t We make session with the Council suggested that neighborhood property owners. Carolyn Eadon has , 13555 SW Cresmire; W.L. contact to the following three people: Donna' s 13625 SW Stephens 13575 SW Cresmire; and. Hal and Joanne Wiggins, going on Brennan, ro erty owners and tell them what' s g Court. Please call these three p P Each should have received a and when the meeting will be scheduled on Monday• are listed on the mailing copy of the Final Decision mailed on July 21 as they prior in the file. Also pull from the file whatever materials from the P ' approvals or this approval you feel will be helpful in giving the City application. We'll I p need to evaluate this app members as much information as they probably send out a supplemental packet tomorrow afternoon of those materials. ion of landscape plan and site plan. It should include a reduct i cs/0347D t i Excerpt — Draft of Minutes of the 8/10/87 Council meeting b. Portland Fixture (SDR 87-15) Review Discussion 1. Council President noted that Councilor Schwartz had arrived (6:45 p.m.) at the meeting; therefore, a quorum of Council was present and the meeting was called to order. 2. Councilor Eadon joined the meeting for this agenda item via Speaker Phone at 6:50 p.m. 3. Also present, representing Portland Fixture's interests were the following people: Dave Roche United Grocers, Inc. Louis Zimel Portland Fixture Company. Norm Dowty R & H Construction Company Bob Klas Ehmann & Associates, AIA David Zimel Mercury Development Paul Gram Mercury Development Tom Lancaster Consulting Engineer 4. Community Development Director summarized this item. The Council decided to call up SDR 87-15 for further review at a public meeting on August 31, 1987. Submitted to the Council in their August 10, 1987 packet was a memorandum from the Community Development Director to Senior Planner Liden (dated August 4, 1987) which summarized Council's concerns. Community Development Director advised he had also been in contact- with Councilor Eadon concerning preliminary information from the Developer addressing the Council's concerns. Present at the meeting were several representatives of this Portland Fixture project• (noted above); they were available to address items of Council concern. 5. David Zimel of Mercury Development was spokesperson for the Portland Fixture Project and responded to the majority of the concerns with other representatives being called upon as noted. The Community Development Director went through the points addressed in his August 4th memorandum with the response by the developer being noted below: o Item 1 — Council was concerned about the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection Districts' need to sign off on the project. The Fire District responded that any new traffic signal to be installed must be equipped with opticom controls. They are somewhat concerned that this size of development could cause the 3000 gpm fire flow requirement to be exceeded. It is required that an automatic sprinkler protection system be incorporated into all buildings in this development. DRAFT — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 PAGE 1 Mr. Zimel responded they are prepared to address all of the Fire Department's comments and take care of each concern. The traffic signal was designed in 1985-86 and access permits were issued last year. Councilor Eadon asked if the Highway Department reviewed the access approvals in light of new development over the last year along Highway 99. Mr. Zimel said he felt the Highway Department would have contacted the developer if they had concerns over the access permits. Mr. Zimel said he has been in touch with different project engineers w'.th the State and there has not been enough change to merit any change in the signals. Senior Planner Liden reported that Lee Gunderson of the Highway Department reviewed the current proposal and they were still comfortable with the traffic study. o Item 2 —Community Development Director outlined concern of Council on Page 2, Item 5, under the Engineering Division findings in the Notice of Decision. The Council was concerned that the driveway locations should be in conformance with the State and make sense relative to traffic circulation on Pacific Highway and signalization of Pacific Highway. Councilor Johnson asked if the City Engineer had reviewed this traffic circulation plan. City Engineer indicated he had not reviewed the traffic analysis which was prepared before he was employed by the City. Community Development Director reported at that time the City did not have a Traffic Engineer, but Frank Curry was working for the City and reviewed the traffic plan. o Item 3 — Community Development Director noted the next item for clarification was landscaping and buffering. He noted there would be a fifteen—foot wide buffer strip provided along all properties which were residentially zoned. Council questioned where this fence would be located. Mr. Zimel said the fence would be on the property line. The fence would be solid wood, eight—feet tall, and continuous along the property. Mr. Zimel distributed a photograph of a similar fence for Council to view. He noted the solid wood design would help buffer noise. Councilor Eadon questioned the wind resistance of the fence. Mr. Zimel reported the fence--post footings would be set in concrete. Senior Planner Liden also advised that this type of fence would require a Building Permit and would be subject to the Building Official's approval. DRAFT — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 PAGE 2 Council President expressed concern over maintenance and the appearance of the fence in three to five years. IL Norm Dowty, R & H Construction Company, reported this fence would be designed by an architectural firm and the material would be pressure treated (50-year life wood) for the whole structure. This fence was not like a neighborhood fence, but was a commercial product. The finished side of the fence would be on the neighborhood side. o Item 4 -There was discussion on noise mitigation. Dave Zimel said the project was in an optimum situation because an 8-foot high fence knocks out a lot of noise and because the property "sits down" on the site which would further reduce noise. At some points the top of the building would be roughly opposite the top of the height of the fence. o Item 5 - Noise from the HVAC systems was discussed next. Bob Klas, Architect addressed this item of concern. Mr. Klas outlined the following noise mitigation measures: — the roof of the building would be about level with the top of the fence -- the rear parapet wall wwould block noise; this wall would extend above the top of any mechanical units on the roof top — if there should be any ducts through the roof carrying noise, sound-deadening material could be used if necessary — roof top equipment would be enclosed by screened walls with sound-deadening material on Lhe inside face. All air conditioning units would be located exactly in the middle of the building. Community Development Director responded to concern of Councilor Johnson with regard to duct•-noise on the roof. He advised the Building Department would monitor decibel levels to determine if sound-deadening material would be necessary. o Item 5 - Trees — Community Development Director outlined in his memorandum that Council was concerned that the minimum number of trees (85) be planted or left remaining and that the planted trees would be mature enough to have a positive effect at the time of planting. Dave Zimel distributed to Council pictures of trees of another development at Murray & Allen Blvd. in Beaverton. Mr. Zimel advised they anticipated plaLir:y trees of similar size at this project. DRAFT - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 PAGE 3 Dave Zimel, in response to a question by Councilor Johnson, advised they would try to save as many existing trees as possible. He also reported that the larger trees are situated so that they will be saved. Mr. Zimel also noted there was the possibility that some trees may be situated too close to the asphalt which would not survive. The existing trees to be saved were marked with an "E" on the drawings submitted to Council. Councilor Eadon asked if the large oak tree would stay. The developer affirmed that this tree would stay. Council President Asked about the size of the trees. Dave Zimel said it would depend on what was available from nurseries. He recommended 1-1/4" caliper as a guideline for size of tree. o Item 6 - Signage - applicant requested an increase in sign size of 50% and sign height of 25%. Staff recommended approval of the increased sign size but not of the increased sign height. Dave Zimel explained the developers desire to have adequate size signage for the anchor and smaller tenants. City Administrator asked if there had been other businesses in the area which had been granted similar requests. Community Development staff indicated Park 217 and Crossroads Shopping Center were granted larger-sized signs. Senior Planner Liden noted this was riot a request for variance. Increased sign size can be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director as part of Site Development Review Process if the project qualifies as a shopping center. A shopping center was defined as over 4 acres in size with 8 or more tenants. This project met this criteria. o Item 7 - Trash Pickup and Warehouse Working - Community Development Director noted Mayor Brian suggested that the dumpster design be such that the grocery store can access the dumpster through a tube coming out of the building. The other issue concerned warehouse workers in loading areas creating noise and disturbing neighbors. Dave Roche with United Grocers advised the trash compactor is a sealed unit. He showed Council a brochure with a picture of the compactor proposed for this project. This type of compactor would mitigate problems with odor and noise. Dave Zimel added that the grading of the property was such that noise will come from a very low level which would tend to knock out sound. The eight-foot high fence would also mitigate noise. DRAFT - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 PAGE 4 r i r i i Mr. Roche said the dumpster opened on the top and there would be a chute fastened to the building. All of the trash and refuse would be be dumped from within the { building, thereby reducing noise. The dumpster would sit at grade level and about two to three feet below the finished floor. Trash pick up would not occur between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Mr. Roche advised that all work around the loading dock 1 would be done on the inside. Councilor Eadon expressed concern over residents near grocery stores experiencing problems with noise frog the loading docks when the doors may be left open and radios turned on during early morning hours (i.e. , 2:00 a.m.). Mr. Zimel said this could probably be eliminated "pretty easily." He said these are "business people who want to F be in the community for awhile, and if we have one irresponsible employee, I would hope that we'd be 6 notified of that and do something about it." i Councilor Johnson asked Mr. 7.imel if he'd be comfortable y with a condition to the effect that every attempt would be made to eliminate noise during those hours including i is il President added closed warehouse doors, etc."? Counc those kinds of issues are controllable — the City could contact the owner with any problems. Generally, the owners are very concerned and aware of public sentiment a and would not want problems to continue. Council President said the project representatives Have put together a good, high quality presentation. lie said he would like to see everything the Portland Fixture representatives have agreed to this evening put in writing so there would not be misunderstandings as to what was stipulated in the future. f e City Administrator said everything discussed tonight fit i within the framework of the original Director's Decision. A memo of understanding between the developer and the City should be written for clarification and could avoid further time delays. Council President asked if City Administrator's suggestion satisfied concerns of Council present. Councilor Johnson agreed the presentation was excellent. The remaining two items (8 and 9) in the memo dated August 4 had not been discussed; however, Councilor Johnson said she trusted the Community Development Director to pursue these issues to the same degree as with the other items. S Councilor Eadon mentioned concerns over outside lighting and construction hours. She said she would not want heavy equipment running at 5:00 and 6:00 in the morning. Community Development Director and project representatives agreed that f the lighting would be monitored by Community Development Staff and the hours of construction could be stipulated. r PAGE 5 DRAFT — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 ` f Community Development Director advised the Site Development Review could be finalized with the eacheste item , notedmittal of the an itemized list dealing Development Director would Director's Decision. Community ect would be ready review the list and, if accepted, the pro j to go. He suggested copies of the itemized letter ff, after receipt developer be sent to each Council member• the project for of the letter, Council does not call up 1proceed. The further review, then the construction u t31st, would be Hearing, which was scheduled for Aug cancelled. Councilor Eadon advised Council Pi-esident she agreed with the procedure outlined by the Community Development Director, but would like an opportunity to look at the material presented at the meeting. Councilor Johnson said she is satisfied and will trust Planning Director to see conditions and stiputo lations are the met. She added she would be more comfortableShad she h did not developer's understanding in writing. She want to delay the development any Council Schwartz said he concurred with Councilor Johnsons' remarks. Council President also agreed• tSe asked that Councilor Eadon work as closely as possible with the Community Development uld be comfortable with the issues Director o she wo discussed. Since Councilor eEsadea whe give°the C ty Recorder days, Council President sugg be her address 3OtQexpress mailon •" Council Presidents agenda item lasked forwarded to her by if this met with Couricilor Eadon's approval. Councilor Eadon indicated this procedure would be satisfactory. City Administrator said that he understoodthe Developer r was the to provide a memorandum of understanding w provisions outlined in the Director's Decision. Council consensus was: — The Public Hearing for August 31 would continue to be advertised. Community Development Director would conduct a telephone poll a few days after the Council Through a this received telephone the memorandum of understanding. g poll, the Community Development Director could determine if the majority of Council desired to review this item on August 31. of the majority of the Council was satisfied with the memorandum of understanding, then the August 31 Public Hearing would be cancelled. PAGE 6 DRAFT — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 City Attorney asked, since this was an unusual procedure, if eF the applicant agreed to this process. Dave Zimel said that they agreed to the procedure outlined, but asked how much time would this take. Council President said after the memorandum of understanding was received by Council, the Community Development Director would contact each Council member a few days thereafter (Councilor Johnson suggested 7 days) . Dave Zimel was advised by Community Development Director that the developer should write the memorandum of understanding. DRAFT — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 PAGE 7 TIGARD EAST ASSOCIATES 338 N.W. 5TH PORTLAND, OREGON 97228 D� AU G 14 1987 City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. CITY OF TIGARD P.O. Box 23397 PLANNING DEPT. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: William A. Monahan, Director Connnulity Development t Re: Tigard East i Dear Mr. Monahan, The purpose of this letter is to confirm in writing our response and commitment to William A. Monahan's nine (9) questions asked before the Tigard City Council s at 6:45 p.m. the evening of August 10, 1987 concerning SDR-87-15. ¢ t i 1. Regarding Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District comments: We acknowledge that all buildings will be sprinklered, and we understand that the Fire District will review the building drawings when they are submitted for permit and any of their requirements will have to be complied with, including the new traffic signal being equipped with opticon controls. 2. Regarding the two primary access points: In 1985-6 the State Highway Department in cooperation with the City and ourselves agreed to the access points which resulted in the issuance of access permits from the State. The State took the lead role in the I process, locating the specific access points and guiding all engineering for the signal type and street design. Our company and Keith Liden have both had recent discussions with Mr. Gunderson from the State Highway I Department confirming the appropriateness of the existing plans and engineering for the project. 3. Regarding landscaping and buffering: We discussed the location of the 8 foot solid, continuous fence and the decision to put it on the property line and jog aroL,-.d trees as required. The fence will span wherever the property abuts residential f zoning. Dave Zimel presented photographs showing a solid wood fence. p e i There was a question from Councilwoman Eadon about the ability of the fence to withstand winds. We stated that the fence would be engineered for wind loads and would be reviewed by city staff because the fence requires a building permit. There was also a question about the maintenance of the fence and its condition in the future. The fence will be built out of treated lumber for the post and framing and the fence face will be covered with a heavy body stain. It will be built of a commercial quality and if it is paneled on one side only the finished side will face the residentially zoned property. The design will be reviewed by Ehman and Associates. Concerning buffering, the existing trees along the property line abutting all residentially zoned property will serve as a very nice contributor to the buffering effort on this project. We will preserve all trees that the 15 foot landscaping strip permits as well as the expanded landscaping area behind the grocery store. The landscape plan has designated by "E" those trees intended to be saved. It was specifically stated that the large oak was among those trees. There was some discussion about how many trees would be left. In total it was stated that there are greater than 30 trees to be saved. A question was asked about whether all of those trees would be saved, and we responded that in the course of construction it is conceivable a tree could be damaged, but it is to our benefit to salvage as many of the existing trees as possible. The staff said that they would work with the contractor to mark those trees along the property line to be saved. Concerning tree size, we will commit to a 1 1/4" caliper as a minimum tree size. It is our intention that the landscaper who we have used for the last four projects will find trees in excess of the 1 1/4" caliper minimum. A quality landscaping job will be performed that enhances the esthetics of the shopping center. 4. Regarding noise: The question was asked about how we planned to deal with the noise, particularly mechanical equipment noise from the buildings. We stated that there were 5 ways we plan to handle the problem. 1. The site grade is considerably lower than the grade at the property line, which is advantageous in containing sound. At the nearest point the property f line is 80' from the building wall. The average dimension between the building wall and the property line is from 110 to 200 feet. Most of t these dimensions are in landscaped area with new plants and existing t trees which will help absorb sound. 2. The 8' solid wall on the property line will deflect a good portion of any sound. 3. At the building we intend to extend the back wall of the building high enough to provide a masonry screen between the source of noise and the property t line. 4. There will also be sound deadening material, as required, in r any ducts through the roof that would be a source of noise. 5. Finally, screen walls with sound board will be provided around any roof top P equipment that generates something greater than a low level of noise. ` The question was asked how we would determine which equipment required the screening, and Bob Klaus stated that decibel levels were available for the equipment and with this information it could be determined where screening would be required. The staff was asked to work with us during the permit process to insure that the requirements are met. 5. Regarding Landscaping: This subject was discussed in question #3. But it is worth mentioning . that the landscaping plan was revised and on 8/4/87, Dave Zimmerman the landscape architect met with Tom Dixon to review the revised plan for which Mr. Dixon expressed his satisfaction. 6. Signage: The question was raised about why the applicant should be allowed an increase in sign area. It should be mentioned that the code allows the staff to grant a 50% increase if they feel it is merited. We presented the fact that the sign would have the title of the center and the four other tenants only. We also stated that for the 150,000 square foot area, the allowable sign area was really quite minimal. The staff endorsed this statement by pointing out that Pacific Crossroads had a similar area for a much smaller building area. The question was also asked about whether height increase was still requested, and the response was made that we could live with the code requirements for the height of sign. 7. Regarding Trash: The main concern of the council seemed to be that trash handling activities be enclosed. Mr. Roach, of United Grocers presented a photograph of the compactor unit and stated that it would be connected to the building with a chute. The understanding was that all trash handling activities would be contained within the building and the compactor. There was also discussion about loading dock activities and reference was made to a current problem where radio noises, from people working in the loading dock, had disturbed the neighbors. One of the connissioners stated that this sort of problem could be handled at another level because the operators of these retail operations were responsible people and would wish to comply with neighborhood request and city requirements. 8. Regarding deliveries and trash pick up at the rear of the project: A statement was made that no deliveries should occur between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and we agreed. Our tenants understand and agree to this requirement also. The question was asked whether any trash would be picked up between these hours, and we responded that it would not. 9. Regarding Lighting; Only the briefest of reference was made to lighting and the memo which required that it not adversely affect surrounding property. A photometric layout was on SD-1, which was displayed at the meeting, -which showed the .5 foot candle lines of the parking lot and wall mounted lights, and also indicated areas where cutoffs would be required to restrict the light from crossing property lines. r I hope this satisfactorily contains the commitments made by Tigard East Associates before the council. We of course understand that we are also bound by the final decision of SDR-87-15 in its entirety. We look forward to building a high quality project that we and the residents of the city can be proud of. Very truly yours, TIGARD EAST ASSOCIATES, An Oregon Joint Venture By: Portland Fixture Limited Partnership, An Oregon Limited Partnership, Managing Partner David P. Zimel Vice President Development DPZ:jkh CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 7, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA 1ITLE: Surplus Property PREVIOUS ACTION: None Ordinance — Public Hearing and PREPARED BY: Ken Fox, City Attorney's Action on Ordinance Office and Randy Clarno, Comm.Dev.Depig;-�J DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN Okjr4 REQUESTED BY: OLICY ISSUE Should the City adopt a new procedure for disposal of surplus real property? INFORMATION SUMMARY TMC Chapter 3.44 provides a procedure by which surplus real property can be sold. This current procedure requires a public hearing before any sale may occur. Under State law, public hearings are not necessary in all cases. Some classes of surplus property may not require public comment- to determine whether a proposed sale is appropriate. Examples include substandard undeveloped remnant parcels and property that was acquired for capital improvements with an understanding as to how any surplus would be disposed. S The proposed ordinance amends TMC 3.44 and creates four classes of property to establish separate procedures for disposing of qualifying property. These alternative procedures are authorized by ORS 22.1.727. The proposed ordinance would simplify the procedures for disposal of most t classes of surplus real property. S E ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Council may adopt the proposed ordinance, or take no action and continue s to dispose of surplus property pursuant to TMC Chapter 3.44. f FISCAL IMPACT p. Not applicable. SUGGESTED ACTION k a Staff recommends holding the public hearing as scheduled. After testimony has been heard, the City Attorney will be available to respond to questions. : Staff recommends approval of this ordinance. ` cn/0509D i r CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 7 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 24, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Street Vacation PREVIOUS ACTION: Called for Public Public Hearing— Portions of SW 70th Hearin — Res. 87-105 on Julv 13 1987 Avenue and SW Gonzaga Street PREPARED BY: Development ServicesMgil DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Alfred Kinorick LICY ISSUE Petition initiated street vacation request per TMC 15.08.080 INFORMATION SUMMARY On July 13, 1987 Council passed a resolution to call for a public hearing on a petition—initiated vacation request to be held at 7:00 pm on August 31, 1987, Alfred F. Kinorick, who lives at 12560 SW 70th Avenue, has circulated a prepared street vacation petition and obtained all the required signatures. The purpose of the vacation is to return unimproved public right—of—way to private ownership and the property tax rolls. It should be noted that Mr. Kinorick has not received nor is seeking site development approval. Staff has reviewed the request (see attached report) and recommends that SW 70th Avenue be excluded from any approval because of potential conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED _ 1. Approve the attached ordinance which vacates SW Gonzaga Street only (staff recommendation). 2. Approve the petitioners request to vacate portions of SW 70th Avenue and SW Gonzaga Street and direct staff to prepare an amended ordinance for Council consideration at a future meeting. 3. Request staff to prepare resolution denying proposed vacation based on objections and remonstrances received during the public hearing. FISCAL IMPACT All fees and staff time is being paid for by applicant wheL-her or not the proposal is approved. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 with motion to approve the Ordinance as presented. cs/0658D j t 3 I 7 � , •�1 � ■,�. � aft ,,1 ®.�� E� ■■ � ■® IIS t. ,. ,� cif �■�■�■ .�1111� � ■� �• _,�,� ` ' �■■int I�M�. �/ > r 1� ■ �� ■ ■� �, , �ti a ice' nL r�N y t _ IN son INS Him oil EISEN i; m VV .i!'f .b ti F. • Z,� i.S" ��s S .�' ��-,y t. 1 c,,,c,: ..' Ti y:- > 0M gnaw Naft CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 87— U5 A RESOLUTION CONCERNING VACATION OF A PORTION OF S.W. 70TH AVENUE AND S.W. GONZAGA STREET IN WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, A RECORDED PLAT, IN THE CITY OF i TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. s � 7 1 WHEREAS, a vacation petition was received and filed with the City Recorder; and WHEREAS, the area described in Exhibit "A" lies within the Corporate i boundaries of the City of Tigard, Oregon; and WHEREAS, the petition has been signed by abutting and two—thirds of affected i property owners; and ' c s WHEREAS, there appears to be no reason why the petition should not be allowed in whole or in part. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: Section 1. That the public hearing is hereby called to be held by the City { Council on Monday, August 31, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. at Tigard Civic Center Town Hall Room, 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon, at which time the Council shall hear any objections thereto, and any interested person may appear and be heard for or against the proposed vacating of said lands. Section 2. That the City Recorder be and she is hereby authorized and directed to cause to have published in the Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Tigard hereby designated for such purpose, a notice of said hearing in the form hereto attached and by this reference made a part hereof, the first publication to be July 23, 1987 and once each week thereafter for five publishings in all. i The Recorder be, and she is hereby further directed to cause to � have posted within five (5) days after the date of first publication, a copy of said notice in the form attached, at or near each end of the area(s) proposed to be vacated. e No IBM NM hw ZW z i Resolution No. 87—N-6) Page 1 f Section 3. That the particular portion of dedicated public right-of-way proposeo to be vacated is described on the attached sheet headed Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part- hereof. PASSED: This day of ��-r ' 1987 Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of TigatW r /Z- Resolution No. 87-I , � Page 2 Exhibit "A" That portion of land located in the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of Block 30, West Portland Heights, a recorded plat, Washington County Plat Records; thence North, on the west line of said Block 30 and the cast right-of-way line of SW 70th Avenue, 212.09 feet to the easterly extension of the north right-of-way line of SW Beveland Street; thence West 50 feet to the west right-of-way line of SW 70th Avenue; thence South, on said west right-of•-way line, 220.04 feet; thence East, 20 feet; thence South, on the west right-of-way line of SW 70th Avenue, 52.05 feet to the westerly extension of the south right-of-way line of SW Gonzaga Street; thence East- on said westerly extension and said south right-of-way line, 249 feet to the west right-of-way line of SW 69th Avenue (County Road 1544); thence North, 60 feet to the southeast corner of said Block 30; thence West on the south line of said Block 30 and the north right-of-way line of SW Gonzaga Street, 219 feet to the point of beginning, containing approximately .59 acres. 0939W I r i f { I MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council August 24, 1987 FROM: Randy Clarno, Development Services Manageq---,/ SUBJECT: Community Development Department Report for Proposed Vacation of Portions of SW 70th Avenue and SW Gonzaga Street BACKGROUND These portions of SW 70th Avenue and SW Gonzaga Street are located within the Tigard Triangle and were originally dedicated to the public in 1890 with the recording of the plat of West Portland Heights . Both streets are currently classified as local stroots with SW Gonzaga Street being unimproved and SW 70th Avent.ty having limited improvements. Mr. Alfred F. Kinorick, who lives at 12560 SW 70th Avenue, has circulated a street vacation petition and has obtained all necessary signatures as required by 15.08.080 and ORS 271.080. Mr. Kinorick has not recently received a development approval or is seeking a development approval . The purpose of the vacation is to return unimproved public right—of--way to private ownership. FINDINGS The Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation as provided by TMC 15.08.090. On August 11, 1987 the Commission reviewed this request and recommended that: it be approved if all affected parcels will havo legal access i (see attached memo from the Planning staff) . i Traffic Circulation and Transportation Plan Current traffic, bicycle and pedestrian circulation in the vicinity is i accommodated by SW 68th Avenue, SW 69th Avenue, SW 72nd Avenue, SW Hampton Street, SW Beveland Street and SW Franklin Street. Most of these streets have substandard improvements. t C The transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan suggests that SW 69th r F Avenue and SW 70th Avenue be maintained and upgraded to minor collector standards. Whether or not this is appropriate or if the right—of—way should be retained will be determined later this fiscal year when the Tigard Triangle Area Plan is completed. For this reason, staff is recommending that SW 70th Avenue be excluded from the overall vacation proposal. The future improvement of SW Gonzaga Street, on the other hand, should not be necessary to achieve proper circulation in the area. Vacating this right—of-slay would also be e consistent with previous vacations of SW Gonzaga Street between SW 66th Avenue { and SW 67th Avenue and between SW 68th Avenue and SW 69th Avenue. IBMtVAM r Fire and Police Services Responses were received from both the Police Department and Washington County i Fire District 1, and neither had concerns relative to service or response time. Drainage and Sanitary Sewer The City's Utilities Engineer has reviewed the proposal and concludes that adjacent and upstream properties may be dependent on a portion of these right—of—ways for future drainage and sanitary sewer service. Therefore, he is recommending that an easement for public drainage and sanitary sewer be retained within SW 70th Avenue. Services are not anticipated to be required within the SW Gonzaga Street right—of-way, therefore eliminating the nr ' for public easements. Other Utilities Responses were received from the following other utility providers: Metzger Water District Willamette Cable Television Portland General Electric Northwest Natural Gas General Telephone Company Willamette Cable Television and Portland General Electric are requesting that certain easements be retained over a portion of SW 70th Avenue for existing services. None of the above utility providers have services within the SW Gonzaga Street right—of—way. Capital Improvements Plan There are currently no plans to improve SW 70th Avenue or SW Gonzaga Street within the City's Capital Improvements Program. The long range improvement of these streets has had very limited discussion. The need for improvements was addressed within the "Traffic Circulation :and Transportation Plan" findings of this report. TITLE TO VACATED LANDS Although determining title to vacated lands is a function of Washington County, it is my opinion, given statutory guidelines, that title to the proposed vacated lands within SW Gonzaga Street will go evenly to properties on the north and south. Title to the proposed vacated lands within SW 70th Avenue will split unevenly with 30 feet going to the east and 20 feet going to the west. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the proposed vacation be approved without condition if SW 70th Avenue is excluded from the proposal. The reasons for excluding SW 70th Avenue have been previously discussed under the Traffic Circulation and Transportation Plan findings. Should Council decide to vacate this portion of SW 70th Avenue, certain utility easements will need to be retained as described above. The recommended approval of the vacation of SW Gonzaga Street is based on the following: 1, Vacation of this unimproved right—of—way does not preclude achievement of proper traffic, pedestrian and bicycle circulation within the area; t 2, The Capital Improvements Program and Transportation Plan are not impacted; 3. This vacation would reduce the publics liability and return public lands to private ownership and the property tax rolls. cs/0b58D !` MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Randy Clarno August 15, 1987 r FROM: Keith liden, Senior Planne4� vt RE: 70th Avenue/Gonzaga Street right-of-way vacation The Planning Commission reviewed the above proposal at a special meeting on August 11, 1987, and unanimously recommended approval with the understanding that all parcels shall retain legal access. t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 87--_ _ AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE SW 135TH AVENUE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, ORDERING THE CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT, DIRECTING BID PROPOSALS BE REQUESTED, SETTING FORTH THE METHOD OF ASSESSMENT AND METHOD OF FINANCING. The City Council Finds: 1. On August 11, 1986, the City Council initiated consideration of a local improvement district for street improvements on SW 135th Avenue. 2. The Community Development Director submitted a report to the Council recommending the district be formed. Tho recommendation was based on a Preliminary Evaluation Report and tho Council' s adopted policy regarding priorities. 3. The Council, by Resolution No. 87--101, stated its intention to form the district, to make the improvements and to hold a public hearing to receive remonstrances. 4. At least ter► days prior to the hearing, individual notice was mailed by first- class mail to all property owners within the local improvement district and notice was published in the Tigard Times. 5. The hearing was held on August 31, 1987. The City Recorder received written remonstrances and the Council received oral remonstrances at the hearing. 6. There are 436 benefited properties, and there were a total of _ remonstrances representing % of the land area. The Charter provides that a local improvement district cannot be formed if the property owners of 66-2/3% of the land area within the district remonstrate. The remonstrances did not approach this number. 7. The Council adopted the Preliminary Engineer's Report by Resolution No. 87-28, and amended the Report by Resolution No. 87-101 . Further revisions have been made through the hearings process. 8. The City has proceeded in accordance with state statutes, its charter and ordinances. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: { Section 1: The SW 135th Avenue Local Improvement District is created. The legal description is set forth in attached Exhibit A. ORDINANCE NO. 87— Page 1 Section 2: The improvements shall be made in accordance with the preliminary engineer's report as amended through the hearings process as set forth in the report adopted by Resolution No. 87-28 and amended by Resolution No. 87-101. Said report is further amended by adoption of the "Revised Preliminary Engineer's Report" attached hereto as Exhibit B. Section 3: The benefited properties include all properties described in Exhibit A exclusive of public improvements. Section 4: The City Engineer is directed to invite bid proposals for the construction of the improvements in the manner prescribed by the Purchasing Rules. Section 5: The total estimated cost fur the proposed improvements, not including right-of--way acquisition costs, is $1,124,451.00. The benefitted properties shall be assessed fur• all costs of design and construction on the basis of traffic generation potential, as described in the preliminary engineer' s r•epor•t, to arrive at a fair apportionment of the costs among the specially benefitted properties. The traffic generation potential shall be based on the zoning in existence on the date that this resolution is adopted. Existing valid preli.minar•y plats, approved by and binding on the City of Tigard, shall bo recognized in calculating the traffic generation potential . Section 6: Due to the potential future alternate access via proposed Y� Murray Boulevard extension, pr•oper•ties in the area described in attached Exhibit: C are considered to have a reduced benefit and shall be assessed at 50% of the traffic generation potential of similar lots elsewhere in the district. Section 7: Sufficient right-of-•way shall bra acquirod where necessary to meet the minimum City standards for• collector streets (30 feet each side of the centerline of the new roadway) . Any and all costs of right-of-way acquisition, including legal and appraisal fees, shall be assessed on a front--fuutage basis, as measured along the edge of the new right-of-way. The acquisition costs will be assessed only against those properties along the new right--of-way which did not dedicate all necessary right-of-way to the City at no cost. Section 8: The improvements are of a character described in ORS 223 .205 and the improvements qualify for financirig by general obligation improvement warrants pursuant to ORS 287.502 - 287.510. Section 9: General obligation improvement warrants are authorized to be issued in the aggregate amount of $1,200,000. The interest rate shall be at the lowest interest rate the city can borrow on the date of the sale. ORDINANCE NO. 87- Page 2 i' Section 10: The Mayor and Finance Director are authorized to execute the general obligation improvement warrants on behalf of the City. Section 11: This ordinance shall become effective on or after the 31st day { after its passage by the Council. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of 1987. Loreen R. Wilson, City Recorder APPROVED: This day of 1987. Thomas M. Brian, Mayor cn/0565D C ORDINANCE NO. 87— Page 3 i B-2 EXHIBIT "A" i CITY OF TIGARD F S.W. 135th Avenue i Local Improvement District Boundary K AN AREA OF LAND IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, AND IN THE CITY OF { TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, IN SECTION 33, TIS, RIW, W.M., AND IN SECTION 4, T2S, R1W, W.M., SAID AREA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4, A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF S.W. 135TH AVENUE (COUNTY ROAD NO. 934); THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, r N 88° 58'10" W, 1,106.59 FEET; THENCE, N 1° 01150" E, 848.40 FEET; THENCE, N 130 35' 01" E, 35.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY MOST CORNER OF COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3, A SUBDIVISION OF PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, t ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PLAT, N 130 35'r 1" C, 35.OU FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 10 34'57" E, 470.13 FEET; THENCE, s CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 41° 54'11" E, 34.54 FEET; THENCE, i CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 850 27116" E, 101.22 FEET; t THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, S 880 22'28" E, 75.39 FEET r TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 113 OF SAID COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3; g THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 1° 37'32" E, 90.00 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 88° 22128" W, 20.35 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 1" 37'32" E, 140.00 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 33° 23123" E, 90.58 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 1° 34'35" E, 505.74 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 1° 38'52" E, 50.00 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 375.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT (CENTRAL r ANGLE: 50 20146"; LONG CHORD: S 850 40145" E, 34.98 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 34.99 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, N 1° 34'35" E, 87.36 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY MOST NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3; THENCE, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF COTSWALD { _ORDINANCE No. 87- July 9, 1987 Page 1 of 3 f s 4 MEADOWS NO. 3, S 840 35152" E, 195.43 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY MOST NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3 AND A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF LOT 24, COTSWALD MEADOWS, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG LAST SAID WEST LINE, N 010 34135" E, 8.50 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 24 AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 40, PAGE 509, SAID DEED RECORDS; THENCE, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, N 010 34135" E, 330.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT AND A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE PLAT OF MILLARD AND VANCHUYVER TRACT, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, N 880 22'28" E, 330.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 32, SAID MILLARD AND VANCHUYVER TRACT; THENCE, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 32, N 010 34'35" E, 1,283.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT LAND SALE CONTRACT RECORDED IN BOOK 914, PAGE 762, SAID DEED RECORDS; THENCE, N37021-111111, 340.64 FEET; THENCE, N22 0 12'34" W, 77.33 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.W. SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY NO. 210); THENCE, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, N 670 47126" E, 146.59 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT OF SAID CENTERLINE AT RWCL STATION 46+42.41 AS SHOWN ON THAT OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DRAWING TITLED "SCHOLLS HIGHWAY AT S.W. 135TH & OLD SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD DETAIL MAP"; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTS LINE, N 710 32101" E, 80.00 FEET; THENCE, S 180 27159" E, 114.04 FEET; THENCE, S 620 42101" E, 745.28 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT BARGAIN AND SALE DEED RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 83027784, SAID DEED RECORDS; THENCE, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, S 010 34'37" W, 990.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT AND A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF BRITTANY SQUARE NO. 3, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, S 880 23141" E, 145.70 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.W. WINTERLAKE DRIVE; THENCE, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, S 010 36119" W, 150.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE AND ALONG THE ARC OF A 280.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 480 51136"; LONG CHORD: S 220 49°29" E, 231.61 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 238.78 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, S 470 15'17" E, ORDINANCE No. 87- Page 2 of 3 165.51 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 300.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 340 49'17'; LONG CHORD: S 660 18'36" E, 179.53 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 182.32 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.W. 130TH AVENUE AND THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, S 010 30'2" W, 1,095 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE AFORESAID SECTION 4, AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 95, MORNING HILL NO. 4, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND THE EAST LINE OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 4, S 20 27'28" W, 767.73 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MOST SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 4; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4, S 20 27128" W, 1,199.59 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF S.W. WALNUT STREET (COUNTY ROAD NO.934); THENCE, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY AND NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N 860 59133" W, 521.09 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 552.96 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 230 25; LONG CHORD: N 750 17'031-, 224.42 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 225.99 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N 630 34133" W, 181.0 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 552.96 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 260 05; LONG CHORD: N 500 32103" W, 249.56 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 251.73 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N 370 29'33" W, 151.4 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 457.46 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT (CENTAL ANGLE: 260 59"; LONG CHORD: N 240 00'03" W, 213.45 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 215.44 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N 100 30133" W, 5.32 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE, ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION, N 880 58'10" W, 20.41 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ORDINANCE No. 87- Page 3 of 3 B-2-S EXHIBIT "C" Area of Reduced Assessment CITY OF TIGARD S.W. 135th Avenue Local Improvement District Boundary AN AREA OF LAND IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, AND IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, IN SECTION 33, TIS, R1W, W.M., Arm IN SECTION 4, T2S, R1W, W.M., SAID AREA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MORNING HILL NO. 5, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD, A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF S.W. 135TH AVENUE (COUNTY ROAD NO. 934) AND A POINT ON THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 4 WHICH BEARS S 20 14127" W, 607.38 FEET FROM THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE, N 870 45133" W, 20.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF S.W. 135TH AVENUE; THENCE, ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N 20 14'27" E, 119.31 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THAT DEED TO WALTER WEST CORPORATION AS RECORDED AS FEE NO. 36021792, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, DEED RECORDS; THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, S 880 25'03" W, 459.95 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MOST LINE OF COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, S 40 23112" W, 35.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY MOST CORNER OF SAID COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3 AND A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF S.W. MURRAY BOULEVARD; THENCE, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 500.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 20 48115"; LONG CHORD: N 870 00156" W, 24.47 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 24.47 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, N 880 25'03" W, 424.31 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 900.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 120 00'04'; LONG CHORD: N 820 25101" W, 188.17 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 188.31 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY MOST CORNER OF SAID COTSWALD MEADOWS NO. 3; THENCE, S 130 35'01" W, 35.00 FEET; THENCE, S 10 01'50" W, 848.40 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, S 880 58110" E, 1,106.59 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER; A POINT ON THE ORDINANCE No. 87- July 9, 1987 Page 1 of 3 a CENTERLINE OF THE AFORESAID S.W. 135TH AVENUE; THENCE, ALONG THE EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF SAID SOUTH LINE, S 880 58'10" E, 20.41 FEET TO is THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID S.W. 135TH AVENUE AND THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF S.W. WALNUT STREET (COUNTY ROAD NO. 934); THENCE, ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, S 100 30'33" E, 5.32 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 457.46 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 26° 59"; LONG CHORD: S 24° 00'03" E, 213.45 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 215.44 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, S 37° "33" E, 151.4 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 552.96 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 260 05; LONG CHORD: S500 32103" E, 249.56 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 251.73 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING E ALONG SAID RIHT-OF-WAY LINE, S63 0 34133" E, 181.0 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A 552.96 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT (CENTRAL ANGLE: 230 251; LONG CHORD: S 750 17-03" E, 224.42 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 225.99 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY t t LINE, S 86° 59-33" W, 521.09 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, i N 20 27128" E, 1,199.59 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY MOST CORNER OF I: MORNING HILL NO. 4, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHERLY MOST LINE OF SAID MORNING HILL NO.4, N 810 21115" W, 306.04 6 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MOST SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 4 AND THE EASTERLY MOST SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MORNING HILL NO. 2, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 2, N 76° 39134" W, 276.50 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, S 130 20126" W, 37.00 FEET; THENCE, , CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, N 760 39134" '-M, 103.00 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, S 13° 20126" W, 10.00 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, N 76 39134" W, 30.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MOST SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MORNING HILL g NO. 3, A SUBDIVISION PLAT OF RECORD; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 3, N 76° 39134" W, 209.00 FEET; THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, N 70° 57'13" W, 147.95 FEET; }C Q{6 t ORDINANCE No. 87- Page 2 o1 3 1 I THENCE, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, N 870 38-40" W, 74.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 3 AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE AFORESAID PLAT OF MORNING HILL NO. 5; THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 5, N 870 46117" W, 183.53 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID MORNING HILL NO. 5 AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ORDINANCE No. . 87- Page 3 of 3 TO; Mayor August 31, 1987 thmbers of "lie City Council Tigard, Oregon We the undersigned, as property owners -Atkin the boundaries of the proposed Local Imorovement District for street inorovements to 3W 135th between Scholls Ferry Road and the north line of Tax Lot 101 IGMI 231 4B, do hereby give notice that we are opposed to the formation of the said Local Improvement District. Name Address `LID VarcclNo. ,,z tO-'� 7/ 1� ,Sh��`e�q'�'�� 7j! l 4 72?3 i1s7� ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE 135th AVENUE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (L.I.D.) 1. WHAT IS THE PROJECT SCHEDULE? If formation of the local improvement district is approved following the hearing on August 31st, preparation of detailed construction plans will begin immediately. Our goal is to schedule construction for the summer of 1988. 2. WHEN WILL I HAVE TO PAY MY ASSESSMENT? After all construction is completed and final costs are known, you will be notified of your final assessment. A public hearing will be held to review any objections to the final assessment roll. That hearing will probably occur in late 1988 or early 1989. Following the public hearing, property owners will be billed for their final assessment amounts. At that time you can either pay the full assessment or apply for Bancroft bonding. Under Bancroft bonding, property owners can pay the assessment over an extended period. Bancroft payments are subject to interest and administrative fees. The interest rate and repayment period will depend on the City's ability to sell bonds at the time. In recent times the payment period has typically been 10 years. Under Bancroft bonding, payments would be quarterly beginning approximately 3 months after the final assessment hearing. Special conditions may apply if your property is classified as farm land by the county Assessor. 3. IS THIS L.I.D. PROPOSAL THE SAME AS THE L.I.D. DISCUSSED IN MARCH? No. The scope and boundaries of the proposed L.I.D. have changed. After hearing comments from property owners at a series of meetings earlier this year, the City Council directed that the earlier 135th/Murray L.I.D. proposal be abandoned and that a modified L.I.D. be considered. The L.I.D. proposal being considered at the August 31, 1987, meeting is the modified L.I.D. . The modified L.I.D. is for improvement of 135th Avenue from Scholls Ferry Road to approximately 700 feet south of Morning Hill Drive. Murray Boulevard extension is no longer a part of the L.I.D. proposal. ' The attached map shows the L.I.D. boundary now being, considered. r 4. THE EARLIER PROPOSAL INCLUDED A BRIDGE AT SUMMER CREEK. WILL THE L.I.D. ASSESSKUI,TS INCLUDE BRIDGE COSTS? No. This L.I.D. proposal is based on culvert improvements at Summer Creek similar to the existing creek crossing. -Over- During detailed design the engineers will report to the Council on the relative costs and advantages of a small bridge crossing versus culverts. At that t1me, the council will decide whether to authorize a bridge. If a bridge is built, it will be funded from the City Streets budget and will not be a cost to the L.I.D. 5. THE ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS ARE SOMEWHAT HIGHER THAN THE ESTIMATES SHOWN IN THE CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT OF JULY 2, 1987. WHY? Two reasons: First, the City Engineer made an error in his July estimate. When he deducted bridge costs from the earlier estimates, he failed to add in the costs of the alternative of extending existing culverts. This error has been corrected. Second, because construction has been delayed to next year, the engineering consultant recommended that the estimates be increased by 3.5% for inflation. The estimates now include this inflation adjustment. 6. WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION? For more information, please call 639-4171 and ask for the City Engineer. The City Hall switchboard is open from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. br/0440D 4 Ulm 4 i CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 24, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: SW 135th Avenue PREVIOUS ACTION: Hearinqs in March and L.I.D. June An PREPARED BY: Randall R. Woole GL DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: OLICY ISSUE Formation of a local improvement district for street improvements on SW 135th Avenue. ` INFORMATION SUMMARY � I In July, the Council set August 31st as the date for the hearing on formation j of the SW 135th Avenue LID. Notice of the hearing has been published. On August 17th notices were mailed to all property owners; an example of the notice is attached. e The consulting engineer is preparing a "Revised Preliminary Engineer ' s Report" to summarize and document all revisions mnde since the original report was adopted in February. The revised report will be available prior• to the hearing. The Attorney's office has suggested that the revised ro port be adopted as part of the LID formation ordinance. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Following the public hearing, the Council may: A 1. Adopt the attached ordinance forming the LID and adopting the "Revised Preliminary Engineer's Report." i 2. Direct that the ordinance be amended. i 3. Abandon the LID. i i FISCAL IMPACT s All costs will be paid by the LID. s 4 i f E SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommendation will follow after public testimony has been heard and remonstrances have been tallied. br/0565D CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council August 31 , 1987 FROM: John Schwartz, Councilor �! `7 SUBJECT: 135TH LID We've spent a lot of time and effort trying to appease everyone concerned on the 135th Avenue Local Improvement District. During all the Council meetings, Public Hearings and opportunity for final input, the City Engineer was directed by the City Council to put together the LID as currently proposed. I do riot feel comfortable making further major changes and support formation of the LID. JS:mh r,. i,. LAW OFFICES OF 87 1 3,f/Y7 CHARLES J. MCCLURE9;/� ,L . 9250$.W.TICARD AVENUE x CHARLES J.MCCLURE TIGARD,OREGON 97223 JOHN E.SCHWAB TELEPHONE(503)639-4108 3 August 31 , 1987 i i a Mayor Tom Brian City Council Members City of Tigard L RE: Southwest 135th Avenue Local Improvement District ; LID Parcel No. 1 Dear Mayor Brian and Council Members : € This office represents Mr. Burt Grabhorn , owner of 1 Parcel No. 1 within the City's proposed 135th Avenue LID. Parcel No. 1 represents 23.1 % of the total property to be specially assessed. This letter shall serve as an official remonstrance by the owner of Parcel No. 1 against formation of the district. t P Sincerely, MCCLURE & SCHWAB J n E. Schwab do bri . 1 LIVENGOOD c®MPANY•INc August 21, 1987 City of Tigard Office of City Recorder 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: RE MSTRANCE — S.W. 135th LID Again, as in prior written commmication, I would like to protest the proposed 135th LID plan. In addition to W past objections, I now would like to add that it is poor planning to assume that all required right-of-way will be donated and the resulting assessments will be zero. I find this very unlikely wish to voice my concern and opposition to the LID. LID PAZ= ?UMBER IS: 197. Thank you for registering this letter of opposition in the proper manner. Sincerely, 0A. 1 on 13130 S.W. Falcon Rise Drive Tigard, OR 97223 , WII , 4 P r ADVERTISING Fi PUBLIC RELATIONS 1201 S.W.12TH AVENUE • SUITE 205 • PORTLAND.OREGON 97205 • 5031225.0437 t t 8 is Acv,,, E AMorning Star 1 1 180 SW ERROI ! TIGARD. OR 97223 CONSTRUCT0ION.INC. i 699-136 i August 20, 1987 x Regarding lots 83 and 109 in Morning Hill 4 s {1 d This is a letter of protest over the LID. What you are planning is a i little over done in comparison to other thoroughfares in the City of Tigard. i s In reference I am referring to 115th, McDonald St. Fonner, Greenberg Rd- 1 E Walnut St. ► Bull Mt. Rd. ► Durham Rd, and Beef Bend Rd. These roads are paved with a nice road, (except for Fonner) some have bike paths, some r do not, there is no fancy lighting, or curbs, or side walks on both sides of the streets, I believe I am right that none of these have side walks. We object to the amount of assessment and the fact that due to your error the amount didn' t drop when you omitted the Murray Rd. extension. The dropping of Murray Rd is a decision that we applaud. Thankyou. { We feel that improving 135th to the standard that proceeds it on Walnut would be satisfactory. Of course the light is much needed at 135th and Scholles Ferry Rd. and we understand that that could need to be assessed to the property owners but to maintain a road the city/ county has let deteriorate so poorly and then expect the land owners to bail you out is expecting a little much. Perhaps if you were proposing an improvement that the City/ County would be willing to pay for you would find the people would be willing to consider it but it seems to us that you are getting carried away with moneys that are not yours to get carried away with. Morning Star Construction � Tim and Jane Meeker / t ..a 1 rr ::k.'. a •'. s s Jy v r `.:;•• r it,�,}:. ✓,''.�•.'. 1.•:i-.::.1.14!' x T 1 •t �. w .ILS: t . �;-.�".:�. � •.w. a Rom T1GitRD O.1 Benftan BenjFran Development. Inc., 501 S.E. Hawthorne Blvd.,Suite 295,(503)275-1519 P.O.Box 6400,Portland,Oregon 97228-6400 August 28 , 1987 Randall R. Wooley, City Engineer City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: S.W. 135th Avenue LID Dear Mr . Wooley: BenjFran Development owns the property as shown on the Washington County tax maps as tax lot number 2S1 4AB 07800. The property is bounded on the east by the existing Bellwood subdivision, on the west by S.W. 135th, on the south by S.W. Walnut Street, and on the north by Morning Hill II , IV, & V. The proposed S.W. 135th Avenue LID is opposed by BenjFran Development as it is presented in your letter. of August 17 , 1987. Even though our 142 lot Morning Hill VI is in the area of reduced assessment, the cost is still too great to be acceptable. In the notice of final order regarding Morning Hill VI, (Case numbers S 87-05 , and SL 87-3 ) , certain requirements were placed on the project as a condition of approval (See items 2A, 2B, 2D, 2F, and 3 of enclosure) . Those requirements plus our per lot assessment for the 135th Avenue LID will cost BDI in excess of $460 ,000 or approximately $3 ,250 per lot. The amount is too great for any project, or developer, to absorb and still have competitively priced lots. The scope of the LID is also felt to be too narrow in regard to the area's needed road improvements and the area of assessment. The Murray Road extension, the realignment of the intersection of S.W. 135th Avenue and Murray Road, and the full width improve- ment of S.W. Walnut should be included in any contemplated LID for the area. The area of assessed property owners should include the Bellwood subdivision, the area south of Walnut, and that area west of the city' s proposed LID boundary on each side of the Murray Road extension. All those that benefit from the improvements should share in the cost of those improve- ments. t s Randall R. Wooley August 28, 1987 Page 2 It is not our intent to stand in the path of necessary public improvements. We have always been an advocate for, or contributor to, the enhancement of the communities in which we do business. Clearly the roads in the area need to be improved. tie are willing to pay our fair share but feel we are already required to do too much. We will oppose the LID as presented. Si erely, �z David R. Ramberg Vice President/Portland Manager DRR/kh Enclosure < < RECEIVED CITY OF TIGARD MAy 29 1987 Washington County, Oregon go t3cfi;FR?�y NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER D�E.OPMENT DEPT: 1. Concerning Case Number(s): S 87-05 and SL 87-3 2. Name of Owner: BENJFRAN DEVELOPMENT, INC. 3. Name of Applicant: Same S-295 Address 501 S.E. Hawthorne '_,lid. City Portland State QRZip 97228-6400 4. Location of Property: Address North of SW Walntu St east of SW 135th AVE & snuth of Morning Hill 2, 4, and 5. Legal Description (WCTM 2S1 4AB lots 4500, 4600, 4700• WCTM 291- 4A lot 501) . 5. Nature of Application: Request to divide a 38.4 acre parcel ; nto 144 lots ranging between 7,000 and 10,000 sqft in size and for Sensitive Lands approval to fill a ortion of a drainageway on- property zoned R-4.5 (Residential , 4.5 units/acre) & R-25 (Residential, 25 unit: 6. Action: Approval as requested acre. x X Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: Y xx The applicant & owners xx Owners of record within the required distance xx The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization Xx Affected governmental agencies ` 8. Final Decision: f THE DECLSION SHALL BE FINAL ON June 8, 1987 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of condition can be i obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. t The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.H. June 8, 1987 10. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard j Planning Department, 639-4171. _ 0257P t s BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) g FOR subdivision approval and ) No. S 87-05, SL 87-03 sensitive lands approval on ) property zones R-4. 5 and R-25; ) Benj . Fran. Development, Inc. , ) applicant. ) F The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer ' at the regularly scheduled meeting of April 23, 1987 , which was a continued for further hearing at the regularly scheduled meeting of May 14 , 1987, at the Tigard Civic Center Town Hall Room in Tigard, Oregon; and F The applicant requests to subdivide a 38 . 4 acre parcel into 146 lots ranging between 7 ,000 and 10,000 square feet in size and to regrade a portion of a drainageway, property located immediately south of Morning Hill Subdivision Nos. 2, 3, 4 , and 5, and east of SW 135th Avenue and north of Walnut Street, property more specifically described as Map 2S1 4AB, Tax Lots 4500, 4600, 4700 , and Map 2S1 4A, Tax Lot 501, City of Tigard, i County of Washington, State of Oregon; and 9 The Hearings Officer conducted public hearings on April 23, ; 1987, and May 14 , 1987, at which time testimony, evidence and the Planning Department Staff Report were received; and The Hearings Officer adopts the findings of fact and conclu- sions contained in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached i hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and incorporated by reference herein; ( s \ Page 1 - S 87-05, SL 87-03 NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT S 87-05 and SL 87-03 be and hereby are approved subject to the following conditions. 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT FOR ANY PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. 2. The applicant shall provide the following street improve- ments: A. Sty' 135th Avenue - two thirds major collector street improvements consisting of full half-street improvements plus 12 feet (minimum) of pavement section (travel land) on the other side for a total of 34 feet (minimum) of pavement. B. The applicant shall execute a waiver remonstrance for the formation of a local improvement district that provides for improvements to the SW Walnut Street frontage along the subject property. C. Construction of all internal streets to local street standards. D. All improvements stated above shall include standard sidewalks, streetlights and underground utilities and conform substantially with the "Preliminary Engineering Report, 135th/ Murray/LID," prepared by Robert E. Meyer Consultants and dated February 6, 1987. Any deviation from this report shall be approved by the City Engineer. E. Formation of a local improvement district that J provides for construction of a street to the standards specified above shall be considered as satisfying the requirements for that street. r 5 Page 2 - S 87-05, SL 87-03 F. The applicant may provide the improvements of 135th Avenue and Murray Boulevard to be made through joint agreements i with the owners of adjoining property if the agreements provide l I for the improvements to be completed concurrently with other 1 public improvements in the subdivision. s 3. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the SW Walnut Street frontage to increase the right-of-way to 33 feet from centerline. The description for said dedication f t shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline as established lama by Washington County. 4 . Direct access to SW 135th Avenue and SW Walnut Street by individual lots shall be prohibited. $ 5. One foot reserve strips shall be granted to the City at j the termini of all streets that will be extended in the future. e E 6. Street Centerline Monumentation t In accordance with ORS 92.060 subsection (2) , the center- lines of all street and roadway right-of-ways shall be monumented before the City shall accept a street improvement. A. All centerline monuments shall be placed in a monument w box conforming to City standards, and the top of all monument boxes C shall be set at design finish grade of said street or roadway. s B. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 4 (1) All centerline-centerline intersections. Intersections created with "collector" or other existing streets, shall be set when the centerline alignment of said "collector" i or other street has been established by or for the City; € (2) Center of all cul-de-sacs; t Page 3 - S 87-05, SL 87-03 (3) Curve points. Point of intersection (P.I. ) l when their position falls inside the limits of the pavement otherwise beginning and ending points (B.C. and E.C. ) (4) All sanitary and storm locations shall be placed in positions that do not interfere with centerline monumentation. 7. The alignment of Franklin Street between 133rd Avenue and SW 134th Avenue shall be moved south so the northern most edge of the traveled portion of the road shall be adjacent to an existing irrigation pump presently located between platted lot 62 and 63. The costs of maintaining, protecting the irriga- tion pump shall be born by the City of Tigard or the City Park Board, and the applicant shall cooperate with the City in pro- tecting that pump during construction. 8. The applicant shall obtain a letter of serviceability from the Department of Land Use and Transportation of Washington County, to perform work within the right-of-way of S14 Walnut Street. A copy of said letter shall be provided to the City Engineering Office prior to issuance of a Public Improvement Permit. pin 9. If the SW Murrav' Rte—and/or SW 135th Avenue Local Improvement District (L.I.D. ) is formed prior to recording the Plat for any phase of the development, the applicant shall develop a method acceptable to the City for dividing the LID assessment between the individual lots. 10. SW 131st Avenue shall be realigned so it connects with I SW 133rd before entering SW Walnut Street. The applicant shall install appropriate signage as recommended by the City Engineer Page 4 - S 87-05, SL 87-03 for the City of Tigard, to maintain the residential quality of SW 131st Avenue through the proposed subdivision. 11. All public storm drainage and sanitary sewer lines along lot lines and outside of public street right-of-ways shall be encumbered by a 15 foot (minimum) wide easement granted to the City. 12. The applicant shall demonstrate that the storm drainage downstream effect on tax lot 102 Map 2S1 4AA is not significant or that drainage easements will be provided. 13. Sanitary and storm sewer details shall be provided as part of the Public Improvement plans. Calculations and topographic service area - basin map shall be provided as a supplement to the . Public Improvement plans, to demonstrate evidence of area - basin full development serviceability. The location and capacity of existing and proposed (or future) lines shall be addressed. f i 14. Following cursory review of the public improvement construction drawings by the Engineering Section, seven (7) sets i of plan-profile improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted for approval. 15. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has issued approved public improvement plans. The section will require posting of a 100% performance assurance, the payment of a permit fee and a sign F installation/street fee. Also, the execution of a street opening Page 5 - S 87-05, SL 87-03 c t permit or improvement construction agreement shall occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improve- ment plans. 16. A final grading plan shall be submitted for the site which includes justification for removal of all trees over 6 inches in diameter. A tree cutting permit shall be obtained prior to removal of any trees over 6 inches in diameter. 17. A pedestrian access easement shall be provided between 131st Avenue and Tract "A" with a location and design to be approved by the City Engineer. 18. The applicant shall contribute not more than $7 ,500. 00 towards the purchase of tax lot 102 for the purposes of dedication to the City of Tigard as park and open space or, at the option . of the owner of tax lot 102, shall share in the cost of developing access off Kathryn Avenue to serve tax lot 102 up to $7 ,500. 00. 19. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final approval date. However, this project may be phased pursuant to Tigard Development Code Section 18.160. 050. DATED is 27th day of May, 1987. HE INGS OFFIC - i i BETH MA N Page 6 - S 87-05, SL 87-03 F I ij August 27, 1987 Let it be known to the officials of the City of Tigard, that I object to being assessed for the construction of 135th Avenue. And therefore object to the formation of the proposed LID. LID Parcel no. _� (See City tter of Aug. 17) Owner Signature: i c �✓\Fit L 1j��i AY'D --- U" 1 COD ! �A City of Tigard Attn: Randy Wooley, City Engineer 13135 SW Ilall Blvd PO Box 23391 �O Tigard, Oregon 87223 114 �J i i i F i �`-"-=�" II,IFFL.►l.FI►I►►IFI.FII►I.►FII _ i Y:. I i Must received b close of Aug. 31 hearing) (NOTE. Triple fold and mail. J�1u_t be re y S) J •.r t' W� 0,fe o cC, afi 11 766 Lor C4vie- 1 �� C-D 01600 L ICS '�r�c�� • c r SUS vz s -N^ Avg aS L0 ,U.;:;,a 1 -N ��i�/�l , �TIC� t�F W<- - iNvor but wL �-E �rl^JSI TNS11D �I ►� L,NFA72 (1'C106' �'T►fir AT T 1f� ��'•�4TC £�J� j�pniC -F,4,11 Lc Cs o��y Ply -�. ray 11�6-, L-.-, /T/ f�C w E v ;H�i 'T H E /vi 012 AAy -,),::> i N� �� 4�r l LI �� [.v��L- car✓ �'a2�UG-F.�- /�t ✓L f-� .�J S ��Yo�E �Ls� � G7 } O ��i s� ✓� -- Cc�,STr�G 2502 d r �� WHYILI �►. cores /� �, I 11m&W. August 17, 1987 CITY OF T167A RD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OREGON S.W. 135th AVENUE 25 Yeors of Service LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 1961-1986 Jay Miller Builder PO Box 23291 Tigard, OR 97223 Our records indicate that you are the owner of the property shown on the Washington County Tax Maps as Tax Lot No. 151 33C0 10700. Said property is included within the proposed S.W. 135th Avenue Local Improvement District and is shown as LID Parcel No. 106. The purpose of this letter is to give notice that the Tigard City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday. August 31. 1987, at Tigard City Hall, 13125 5W Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, at 7:30 PM, to consider remonstrances or objections to the formation of a local improvement district and the construction of street improvements, curbs, sidewalks, storm drainage and street lighting on SW 135th Avenue between Scholls Ferry Road and the north line of Tax Lot 101 WCTM 251 48. The south terminus of the proposed improvements is approximately 700 feet south of Morning Hill Drive. If the district is formed, your property will be assessed to help finance the local improvements. The proposed local improvement district will include the following areas: (1) all properties abutting S.W. 135th Avenue between Scholls Ferry Road and the city limits near Walnut Street and (2) all subdivisions which will have access primarily from S.W. 135th Avenue, including the following subdivisions: Brittany Square No. 1, II and No. 3; Winter Lake; Ari Green; Morning Hill No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; Cotswald Meadows; Cotswald Meadows No. 2 and No. 3; and proposed Morning Hill No. 6 and Chalford Subdivisions. Upon hearing the testimony and reviewing comments, the Council may decide not to proceed. In determining whether to proceed, the Council is bound by the Charter. It ,provides that if the owners of two-thirds or more of the property area within the proposed local improvement district remonstrate or object, the project must be terminated except in the case of an emergency or sidewalks. All written and verbal remonstrances must be received by the close of the public hearing for which this notice is given. All written remonstrances must be filed with the City Recorder. In letters of remonstrance or support, please indicate the LID parcel number(s) of the property you own. The parcel number is shown in the first paragraph of this notice. The total estimated cost of design and construction, excluding the costs of right-of-way acquisition, is $1,124,451.00. The full cost will be assessed against all properties within the proposed local improvement district on the basis of traffic generation potential. The estimated assessment against your property is $998. These are estimates. Final assessments will be based on actual costs including engineering, legal and administrative costs and may be higher or lower than the estimates. ALV 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 S.W. 135th Avenge LID Letter Page 2 August 17, 1987 In addition, the full cost of right-of-way acquisition, including legal and appraisal fees, will be assessed on a front footage basis. The acquisitica costs wi-11 be assessed only against those properties along S.W. 135th Avenue which did not dedicate all necessary right-of-way to the City at no cost. For estimating purposes, it has been assumed that all required right-of--.ay will be donated and the resulting assessments will be zero. If right-of-way is required from your property and you choose not to donate the right-of-Way, the right-of-way will be puxohised from you. The resulting additional assessment against your property will be based an the actual total costs of all right-of-way acquisition in the improvement district and may be higher or lower than the purchase price for the right-of-way purchased from you. The preliminary plans, cost estimates, and detailed description of the assessment method are embodied in the Preliminary Engineer's Report entitled "Preliminary Engineering Report 135th/Murray LTD" as amended by Resolution No. 87-101. The Report is on file with the City Recorder and the City Engineer for public inspection. Please call Randy Wooley, City Engineer, at 639-4171 if you have questions. l Sincerely, O Randall R. Wooley, City Engineer br/2993P/0045P E I �F 1 i r 6 S • s =� NAM ' tryE Lit Ni Its POP Vfi VC ,� � SNI■■f�! � � ;,��,, 9rt� � � � -�, !_�■err■ �r�■ �� ■ � `� r,- t ■ y - T,� iy .tjn, ,}•r ? � �yy. w..;1 Y�'}� � -bti '�` r�� .� ' � �i5 �� '/ -- ■ NINE ,� � -- S :+]t y ., 2 '; rf ;� �t;Z � �- Era.w ,. Sre f 1. t �,'S a ',.X ssa� •.`' �tj _'�,1 ..:�7 .. .'f •,::� ....:;., {�. 'a -. y,; .c�, �•?'. f e'. .a... .. .�,:1" .+a N. �. .-t .1. .. ..� lb ✓ MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor and City CouncilOk0--_ August 24, 1987 FROM; Randall R. Wooley, City Enginee SUBJECT: Tigard Towne Square (Albertson's) The Director's Decision approving the Tigard Towne Square development included a condition requiring submittal of an updated traffic analysis prior to approval of detailed striping and signal plans. The updated traffic analysis was submitted in July. From that analysis we determined that the original plan did not provide sufficient stacking distances for vehicles waiting for the signal on the east approach to pacific Highway. At peak hours, westbound traffic on Durham Road might occasionally stack back into the Summerfield Drive intersection while waiting for the. Pacific Highway signal . The developer's engineers have prepared several alternative designs for consideration. All but one alternative has been rejected as unsatisfactory due to capacity problems or operational safety problems or both. It appears that the best solution is the plan shown by the applicant as Alternate "C" (copy attached) . Under this alternate the westbound left turn lane would be extended almost to Summerfield Drive. Extra widening of Durham Road would be necessary near Summerfield Drive in order to still be able to provide an eastbound left turn refuge at Summerfield Drive. This design appears to be a good traffic solution. Unfortunately, the additional street widening will require the removal of four existing trees. Two of the four trees would probably need to be removed anyway due to their high potential to fall in a wind storm; one of them is a dead snag. Although we had been attempting to save all remaining trees, it appears that traffic capacity is of even greater concern than the trees. Therefore, we propose to approve the revised street plan of Alternate "C" unless there is Council objection. We will withhold approval until after August 31, 1987, to allow an opportunity for Council review. Because of the delays associated with this redesign, the construction closure of Durham Road will now probably occur after Labor Day. I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have about the engineering design. sb/0b57D WESTECH ENGINEERING, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS&PLANNERS PRINCIPALS C.H.STEKETEE RE SA WARO.PE SC.OOVOa RE August 20, 1987 Mr. Randy Wooley City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Tigard Towne Square i Dear Randy: Per our meeting with you yesterday, enclosed is a preliminary drawing of the preferred alternate for widening Durham Road. An additional four trees will have to be removed, however, two of these trees are already being considered for possible removal. This alternate appears to be the best solution to minimize any possible future traffic stacking problems on Durham Road. I We hereby request your review and approval of this alternate so we may revise the plans. i • E Please call us if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, WESTECH ENGINEERING, INC. e H. uenz/i KHK:jm Enclosure cc: Dick Woelk CSHQA Westwood Corporation I[ f 1 Corporate Offke: 3421 25th St.S.E.Sakm.Oregon 97,402(503)5852474 13500 S.W.72nd Ave..Portland,Oregon 97223(503)684.9226 j 2300 Oalvnont Way.Eugene,Oregon 97401 (503)48.5-4454 ovc mEttL,n AnprL YrqTfffrprrpllllpli,rlfTfrTqlllll- loull,6rii 111 1pl 1 1 1 1 11 ► I 1 1 i 1 1 l i ! !1 � i � l-J ) 0 � I ( I � f1j� .-� il'�� liJ1 �'� ► illll � + 11 I IIII t NDTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED !' .-_.-..�. 2 45 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN .. _ s- - 7 B J THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. ^'-',_-- - 6 0tt6 6z 8Z .. lz low Sz sz-oZ £z zZ la Oz Bt el 01._ 6 6 1 __-9 - s-.- -e- Z ► _ 1106 F r AMRCH' 71, —. aa 3 f ) —PREEERRED-ALTERNA -:r �«! ! u � L TMR r I � r S.W.DURygM RD. ` J a 0 J � i._ Wo..:� i`1•r:�u.��_, —. ---.r,^ --- _._---`--....�--- ate'. ... :"r rI°lid►IrIi1�1'�il'!'1°0'.I�J'Uf'irlrlr�►ntni rir11i1ITf" m(_m. Ii1i_p.II lITJrT iii).I-�riilr �iI�lillili,iiip�iliir)oiiliit1i hlili,iiil�ia�iiilil' ifi�iri NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED 3 5 a a DRAWING, IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO ... • THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. ---- -- OpE 6z az [iz az 9z bz Ez zz rz 0z 61 81—[I – 91 ` Sr br el z1 11--01—6 a 1_ 9__...S- 6 e_ 'z •.--i'----, .nillllllllN�n11�I111�tInlH:Itf�Nltll lrlyd°l�«+Ix,l»»r I»•� d r i 1: G fti110 .... ...► � '�•! i ,n -1. i;W .aliu11L11DP- - MARCH 7 : i1990 i MEMORANDUM ' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON August 24, 1987 TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council! j FROM: Keith Liden, Senior Planner r SUBJECT: Tigard Towne Square - Trees i of Westwood and Terrill Collier of On August 12th, I met with Jerry Foy Collier Arbor Core regarding the on n existing for trees ethe requirehe d clocation of t site. Because of. the excavation that has western drivewav on Durham Road, it appears that the two trees immediately adjacent will need to be removed. The hattached landscaping talong tthe he lwestern ocation of the existing, trees and the proposed portion of the Durham Road Frontage. rist, will soon be submitting a report regarding the Mr. Collier, the arbo trees that are proposed to be remove aremain.nd list orecommendations no t Thestaffmustapprove the to the care of the other trees that areto arborist's analysis prior to the removal of any trees. cw/0677D V Afr& q r r ► r l i r l r i i ; ; r ; i r p r i l i i 0 i i i 1 1 i T 1 i 1 i I ITfrig f fIII] r!_i ! ! 1 J i 1.1 � �T �►T i-.I �'( � I t i.i I PTIi►11 I T�lli 1 ili ili t�i Tl�li'; �I�li��l�i�l�itriil��lilel��;lil;lr�ryi�rif ,—_ _ � r ,: � 1 )T�' I P. P� i- l Tt 1 6 I ! t l l 1 NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED .-_ - 7 8 9 0 _i l .__. -.._12': DRAWING I3 LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TOAw THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. --- ----- ' ! ' oe sz ez.._. 92 sa i;z ez zziz oz sr el—a si sr" t•i el- zl 1 ..__o ._6 e jug 1111991 j ( 1191 w DURHAM :vJ e ;-D'a�, �•fi' '/" �D�tv,C'c��"'�;C�sol� 1/ �/� d�7 • l F• • rl VJ EJ Com° o v. PAD N 4950 S.F. ` f • I LA v"' vv s' Y I / I / � FWD 'oma_ JG I�fq' ¢�rie`Itl I +dlinlltJ911 lir�rlr riilrt� +ItJIT+ tt►T jrT+ Iljtll f R rtf o 1 r i r r ii r17 r r 1 ri [r�r��l+�rly,Ir��,pir�lii�ltlllil�lll 1l+�li+`llrf+tl�ltljrl+�+f+�rfl y DRAMIr OTi(S.E,ESS CLEAR L AR NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED THIS IS 7}E QUALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL - ...DRAgING. doull�lulll�IzI 1lhlNhl-ulu,a_nn_� -- s_._s-r.-. b_.- —e e _.---.--9.._. _ I-IFrb'l �111z�1 t se cz 22 ia • r mqa 'r ARCH 91990 , tr CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 7, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Monthly Report PREVIOUS ACTION: July, 1987 Community Dev. Dept ()I � PREPARED BY: William A. Monahan DEPT HEAD OK e• CITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached please find the Monthly Report for July 1987 prepared by the Department of Community Development. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Accept and place in file. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Accept and place in file. OEM (WAM:cs/0950P/0022P) MEMORANDUM h CITY OF TIGARD TO: Members of the City Council August 24, 1987 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director, Community Development SUBJECT: Monthly Report - July, 1987 The Department of Community Development reports the following July activity: - Building Activity - The yearly totals to date are now running slightly below 1986 in terms of revenue and valuation. The year end totals should be higher than 1986 once permits for major commercial projects are issued. July was, however, a strong month, as thirty-three more single family permits were issued. - Codes Enforcement - Noxious vegetation complaints were the most common new issues. - Engineering Services -- Public Improvement contruction permits revenues were extremely high, $19,913 for July. Significant staff tims- has been allocated to private development construction inspection, survey work, ` and developmerit review. Randy Clarno is acting as project coordinator for the Albertson's project. - Parks - Stepped up mowing and litter patrol occurred in July. The crews utilized over 1,000 hours of TOYS labor in July. i - Wastewater - The crew devoted 21% of its labor to open ditch cleaning, cleaning over 2,930 feet of ditch. The major project was the ditch on the north side of Tigard Street from Main Street to Tiedeman. - Streets - Street working activity has become the major focus through August. Main Street was completed prior to the Cr•uisin' Tigard Day activity. Markings in school areas will be completed prior to school i opening day. The path project- on Locust Street near the Metzger School was initiated. t br/0950P T BUILDING SECTION — JULY COMPARISON Following is a comparison of building activity for July of 1986 and 1987: July, 1986 July, 1987 Single Family Permits 45 33 Multi—Family Permits (units) 0 0 Commercial Permits (new) 9 5 Building Permit Fees $ 26,314.44 $ 29,676.00 Plan Check Fees $ 14,469.42 $ 9,588 .16 Plumbing Permits $ 8,462.50 $ 4,907.50 Mechanical Permits $ 2,022.00 $ 1, 120.50 Valuation $6,144,370.00 $4,811,048.00 CALENDAR YEAR Jan.— July — _1986 Jan. — July — 1987 Single Family Permits 269 247 Multi—Family Permits (units) 100 40 Commercial Permits (new) 21 21 Building Permit Fees $ 133,608. 16 $ 127,717.02 Plan Check Fees $ 71,146.08 $ 59,995.21 Plumbing Permits $ 40,800.40 $ 39,259.00 Mechanical Permits $ 7,727.50 $ 10,802.50 Valuation $31,372,274.00 $28,481,825.00 cs/0950P/d0022P j •EL .•� < 11'1 P O ti N N N N N N ppE e4 lo c%l In co t..7 .� .+ .. .•. .. N .. Y T f f f .a P N J'1 111 e P N P N 1n 111 m lo M N n f-1 f M m C-4 .T-1 � N N M M M M Y N b N N y J O H .•1 ., g 5 8 8 8 8 8 8 s 8 0 S 8 O n O 10 0 h Y .r b m m m M O P b N N J M 1n m ••'• N O N f P h e M b b mN e m O f M N �•+ O n n O h 1n e O 10 f N P P b m 1n n P O M T l^ 1n b n P O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 0 2 8 N 1n P ♦ P P f e P P P P 111 Ill 1L1 P A to ^� P P h n b M M O P 1n m N O M 111 O M N 1l1 o 1"1 P N P Y T M m P N M b M N lo 1A h n M N O .+ N N M f e 1n b b On f O N N M M O J n N N y M m 111 m N b m O M n m M b O f P m 1A c" N b M b 111 f N b O N Q2 V M Q M N P b b 1l1 P O n T P N P P n n 111 0 8 o M M n o m n Ln to cc M o n m O Y P c b O at P It r n n f b N b m n 8 O P 1n P n -r O P 6 1n h m P M f 111 1A r y•� 8 8 S O O N N N N b b b m b h 0 LLL 1n 'n T P N n .1 m b n m M j m M In In b M to 0Np .M-�1 „•r m h M n m 4 .n•1 G m O b h t N lo 1n O e M M h m b m O h a M ,••• b b O nm P T Y m m b O b N e m n Y b m O M 1n n m .mn P r1 M 15 h Co P N O 8 8 S 8 O S S 8 S O 8 O O S O O O S S � - h i1 1n 1n T Y e f N N N N O O f Om n 1l1 1y3 N .•1 M P M O h n P P M M O b rl In h m n m 0 P P 11'1 �+ 1{•1 P N Y O M P P P N n .•, n -+ n N b 1n o: 1n M n O m n b O -+ a .r lo O M N h 1n b h m 1n lo T 1n b n m N R' b ^ P N M 8 n b m O �O m m N b b f N 4 O .•� h P .••1 M to M b N b m M m G 1 N b P .�+ .m.1 N M M M f e f .-1 r1 .•� N N d o j rn 1 L O � T Y E O to S L ` u r u o a m n 3 i u e y+ cL� cL .P+ h w £ 4 L h h 4 y O 2 co .P.1 11 L6 S C L h h v v L EO v YI O 0 O 0 O 8 O b O 0 0 0 -m. o N 0 0 0 O .. .. .. m e Y N m f f 41 M N .m-1 N N T f m N m m y O 0 O 8 8 40+ O O O 8 8 8 w O n T f .+ a N h O N .•+ 41 m f n a b b O C M N N T Y T N 11tl f m a m a b p T n n ro �A �O n ao b O n •r V -e N a Z M _ 10n a 0 1011 8 8 8 8 8 40, g 40'1 O 8 N ~ A N h N h n Q N 41 N N 41 n n 41 b N In 41 h E a n 0 n �.+ b a b N Y n M .� 4/ N m N O ~ 7 a N n f a a Y '+ N N b N Y eD N a b a O ..� V. 0. Y n b m < f m b a f7D M N f b 1A co Y Y Y 2 M O J H 7 m V b a Y 4'1 v1 N a M b N a b n a a Y�O 0 O M a v1 b a m a fa U �O M 10 10 M_ 0 N � m0 10 m 'JI N M a m OD C b M m a n Y b N m ea C C .+ T N b n a h b M f f w M N N a to Y m b b a 0. .w 10n 8 a 40i eon It+ f n m O 40i V4 w 8 O 8 O d1 c4, ea efl -e O O n f N - 0 g N M a f n b -� b m a eD b b m -e b n T Ili "t 47 M e» M m 0 m N .e b m n Ln 0 m 10 a In an a r a 47 Y b 0 " e» a y ..e -e N -. N N N -e N .-1 - - N .ti m 8 8 8 $ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 n ea O O m O O g m O O Q Q O eq to oa en N es N b m n h -� O e $ v •O N � coQ� � f al a a b b m T O N Y 1n Ili a M O Il o O O _ eej 8 a en N n b W M a Y m O O ai O O8 d N n It Ic N O f 4 v m N N m T A N b b 4Y N -e -e N m M 47 M N N f SOON a Ln 0 m a T L L L L T a LY E a ,pa A L L - a a A E E 15 ? L _ y b V a �+ 7 y O a a n C co m G A L L ldT C 9 a 9 Q 2 4 M3 ¢ N 0 0 O -+ F�f li � ¢ E ►7 17 � ., L .ti 4 0 P O .N+ N N N N N N d E E O U YI 00000000 .b- - - b-� � m m 0 0 0 O4 0 E d �+ m nM+ N n n P N 6f1 �!? •� 4 P N P N SCI �10 C4 60 W a' - N b 4 T m N N m N N M M T M 4 ti N N 41 N J 6 0 O tIj �6I p p O O S O O O g O > �. 0 In � S 8 � u � S H N N ~ b O n O u) b N n 4 4 b m M m M O P b L M If1 m .•'� N O N 4 P n 4 M b b m N 4 b m J OI 4 T N .+ O n n O h 4 O b 4 N P P L .-� N T 4 Lm n P O H .4r t2 M �!f b n P O U 1 M Cl S rn a a < 4 a rn m a U) U) S s s Irl O S co .; .� C MomH A N O N O h h iF1 h N n 4 T 4 P n h b H M P N P 4 4 M m P N M b T N b 1f1 n n T N O 4` 4 P 4 P fr7 4 N M 4 4 al b b O N N M M Z H J[ h m T b O 4 P m ^+ J V m ti b m O T H i b 1l1 O b O N b T ..� b 1f 4 N b O N m U T N P b b f P O N 4 P N P P n n b b T T I� 4 h m ^ 'o b m b n m O c b O m m P a b m . ti h h 4 b N b �+ �[1 M n O O P te-. P m 4 O P y N T 4 L n m P P N M 4 l Y S S S Q O NN N N b b m b n iIf O O � y'1 4 P N n m b h m T . m T v'1 1f/ b M m O N N .~� M N b M P .••� n d M m h M n m 4 4 m O b h 4 N b O 4 M T n m b m O n M b b b h T P 4 4 m m b O b N 4 m n •� .-� M 4 b N h m P .N. m S S S S S S O S S O S O S S O S S G 4 4 Q 4 N N N N O O 4 U m fl Ln fl: Ln* In LnO �O m h In II N ry� P P .-1 YI P N .moi N Q !� h N b X11 P tf1 m J7 b 4 o b 0 m N lO .w Q1 M N h O In b n n 4 h LL'1 4 N M J n b m O b m m N b b 4 NO N T to b m M m O N b P .m-� N M T T 4 4 4 �•'� N N \ 0 0 Ln P L o T ryA L L T TL L ry d T i Y E ry 1] j3 LE rC 7 m d L L E d L V Y O ry n� Qj C L L L T C '+ OI 4 1 7 a` C C A L L T .3 .Pi h u. £ ¢ £ r7 h 6 fA O 0 O .+� h :L L 6 £ c 1 U L ti p 01 0 E O V CD P b P 4r M n M N M a M C-4 M M M d d N M a d �i'1 M N .4r V ry .n OD d n P b N ol al CID Ch n N M n n m Lei b n m b G N V d z 8 O �! $ _• O N n l n N Q ry N41•� f n n j E N n m n 8 `p P 40 .+ ry 40 N dol m N P b O - rr . m M N 4 b 1(1 m a a d O. a n b a a m b P 2 H O J M OD M d d N N.. M a G 4!1 b n a Lm n b+ se `•' T v a d n .n d b b P m M M u U M b N P b n P P d Om O 4A T m J1 b eft m L N '+ b o P ti M V 40 M b b ? LnN m m G M n G - b M m C C M N 4 m b b C1 a Q p O N O O g M ui a PrI 10 10 CP .dq a �1 CDD T m Q b M s n m 1Ar, co M Ili O O N �+ b d a,d b p b m M 411 M 4f1 M m - - m '7 a N N -. P d P �i � M-i N C13 8 8 8 8 5 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 P O O O o O O O m n O d G P lr O m O cl b M M M n O N d In d) C M p tl? a b N n "n P CM G ti n Io M m m n -+ n o4 N N O m O O b d 40 N C a d O b O 7 - • • - M M 4n M N M d O N M M a- N b b 4C1 N •� "1 N O. O In P O J L L T n T T L 41 E 7 � dy7 L '} u n 16 7 L ad 0 E E V O CI 04I f6 OI eLepp •a 1T1E� 7 7 3 0 0 2(z CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 19 DATE SUBMITTED: August 20, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: C.I.P. Status PREVIOUS ACTION: Report — July, 1987 PREPARED BY: Randall R. Wooley :Y ' DEPT HEAD OK GL D CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: P ICY ISSUE A report on the status of the various projects in the CIP and LID programs. amxaaaaaaaaaaxaa=aaxxsaaaxaamaaaaaaaa aaxxaxaasaaaa xa aaax=aaaaaaaaaaaaaamasxaaaa INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is the monthly report on CIP projects as of July 31, 1987. amaamxa aaassamaaasasaaa aaaam aaa a aa:s x as as m aeras s as as amaasaa saaa axsassa:a as as a aaa ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Receive information report; no formal action required. saaaaxaaa-aaa;ssasxaaaamx3aaaxamxeaaa=aaasazs=aaaaaasssxaaaa=asxaa:sasaa:aaaaaa FISCAL IMPACT samasanassasaaaaaxaaxaaasoamaxassam:aaxaaaxa=aaaaxxaxmaasamaaamaxxax=xxasxxxxxa SUGGESTED ACTION Receive reports; no action required. mum cn/2503P/31P s CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STATUS REPORT € July 31, 1987 ST-3 - North Dakota Street Resurfacing and Reconstruction (90th to 95th) Final pavement overlay is scheduled for August. ST-6 - Tiedeman Avenue Realignment Sewer line legal problems are resolved and sewer will be relocated as soon as possible. Road work is rescheduled to 1988. ST-7 - North Dakota Street Realignment at 115r.h A, ��••� Construction is completed except some cleanup. s ST-11 - Traffic Signal at Greenburg Road and Tiedeman_ Avenue The project is being designed by the State. It now appears that they will be ready to advertise for bids by late fall. i ST-13 - Traffic Signal at Burnham Street and Hall Blvd. This project is being designed by the State. Due to shortage of State matching funds, this project has been rescheduled for 1990. ST-14 - Traffic Signal at Hall Blvd. and McDonald Street T is pro ect s being designed by the State. The project has experienced delays due to shortage of State funds. They are now beginning right-of-way acquisition and have scheduled construction for 1988. i i ST-16 - L.I.D. No. 35, S.W. 68th Parkway Construction complete. We are working to complete some legal details so f that the final hearing can be scheduled. ST-17 - L.Z.D. No. 40, Dartmouth Street Extension An additional public hearing has been scheduled for August. *Projects which were previously reported as complete have been deleted. d E ST-18 - Pacific Highway and Canterbury Lane Intersection Improvement The State has scheduled this pro3ect for 1990 construction. Preliminary s engineering study for the project has begun. i ST-19 - 135th Ave. L.I.D. 5 A new public hearing has been set for August 31st. t ST-20 - Genesis No. 3 Subdivision Improvements 4 Bids were opened on July 29, 1987. o i a ST-21 - Greenburg/Tiedeman Turn Lane { Survey work for this project has begun. ST-22 - Triangle Access Study t This work will be done in conjunction with ODOT's study of Highway 217 interchanges. The ODOT study is just beginning. ST-23 - 72nd/Pacific Highway Intersection We have not yet begun work on this project. } i ST-24 - Durham/Hall Turn Lane Survey work for this project has begun. t t ST-25 - Greenburg/Ash Creek Bridge E We have not yet started work on this project. t ST-26 - Greenburg,/Center Street We have not yet started work on this project. cn/2503P/31P f i E F, yp¢A Y. t K tFSA f R I SS-1 - Sewer Master Plan E" The master planning work will proceed as soon as the new aerial mapping $� project is complete. The aerial mapping project was delayed somewhat to coordinate with mapping work being done in adjoining cities. The result will be a small cost savings and better coordination. SS-4 - O.E.A. Trunk Access Paths Staff is working to resolve some final design details and get access approvals from property owners. SS-8 - Elmhurst Sewer Extension (LID #42) Construction of the sewer line in the Landmark Ford area will occur in early August. One more easement is required at another location before we can complete all work in LID #42. SS-9 - 89th P1. Sewer Repair Bids to be opened in early August. SS-10 - Industrial Area Sewer RR Crossing Rescheduled for late 1987 bid. SS-11 - Garrett/99W Capacity Improvements Scheduled for bidding in Spring of 1988. SS-12 - Gentle Woods Manhole Protection We should be ready to request bids in August. SS-13 - Pinebrook/Hall Repairs We will be advertising for bids in August. SS-14 - Leron Heights Modifications We will be advertising for bids in August for the first phase of this project. en/2503P/31P l SD-1 - Gaarde Street and Canterbury Area Drainage Improvements Bids were opened July 28, 1987. SD-3 - 100th/Sattler/Murdock Improvements �. Scheduled for late 1987. SD-4 - Summerlake/Anton Park Drainage Construction schedule will depend on easement acquisitions. i SD-5 - 104th/Hillview Improvements Scheduled for 1988. i SD-6 - Cascade Avenue Improvements Scheduled for 1966. i r - t i i cn/2503P/31P t F i j� 1 t i 1 E C CIP/1,TD PROJECT STATUS As Of July 31, 1987 If PROJECT STATUS ESTIMATED COMMENTS PROJECT COMPLETION DATE C L, 0 Ul U 4 V .14 10 E a) .14 11 Li Q: to" I') X. ....... ST-1 Fairview Resurface ....... Completed x .......X d -2 Complete ST SW 68th Parkway Resurf. ST-3 No. Dakota Resurface 815/8 ST-4 104th Ave. Reconstr. Completed ST-5 Commercial St. Connect. Project Postponed ST-6 Tiedeman Ave. Realign. ... 8/.30/88 X Completed Dakota Realign. ::... ST-7 No. X X. ST 79th/Bonita Realign. . Completed ST-9 Main St. Improve. Study_.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:. completed Prelim. Engrg. Only, ST-10 Hunziker Realign. Study-. Completed Prelim. Engrg. Only ST-11 Greenburg/Tiedeman Sign 5/31/88 -- -------- . ... ..... ........ ........... Completed ST-12 Scholls Fry/No Dak Signa * 1990 ST-13 Burnham/Hall Signal ST-14 Hall/McDonald SignalX12/31/86 X ST-15 Hall LID #85 Completed ............ SW 68th Pkwy LID #35 Completed ST-16 ......... xe. ST-17 Dartmouth LID #40 ...... 1988 18 99W/Canterbury Imprbve. 1990 ST-19 135th Ave. LID X.. 1988 ....... ... X, % ..... . ...... EL 1.2/15/87 T--20--Zemes ST-21 Greenburg/Tiedeman Lane 19218 CIP/LID PROJECT STATUS As Of • • COMMENTSPROJECT • • :�' t • - .,4 • 41e 1 -1 • • �r fF • • Bridge ST-26 Gr • r' - 'Y d� "J 5 )• 1t ��I J` } Y , .r r _t` f:., ,,.. _,... 2 -a x._.......�.•y ••�;,m... _,(' ..-.s.� .."'-' .i'. L..t 7 X47 � �)� :!� . �_, a� J'__. ..x ;..p a` _ ...�{_ a .• � .: .,.�. »..._....,..�.. ._ ., _ CIP/LID PROJECT STATUS As Of July 31, 1987 PROJECT PROJECT STATUS ESTIMATED COMMENTS COMPLETION DATE � c C U n A u .� m -4 'a :3 Q C N j V C aw wry Q 4G. U SS-1 - Sewer Master Plan 1/31/88 -2 - Pinebrook Trunk Repairs Completed 1;S-3 - SW 69th Sewer ExtensionX. Completed . . -4 - OEA Trunk Access Paths 10/31/88 ;S-5 - Watkins Ave. Sewer Repai Completed SS-6 - 100th/Inez Sewer IIID ': -- LID Defeated S:;-7 - 74th/Cherry Sewer LID --- LID Defeated : SS-8 - Elmhurst Sewer Extension _/15/87 -- - - SS-9 - 89th P1. Sewer Repair 8/31/87 SS-10- Industrial Area RR Xing _ _ S�ri�, 198 Garrett/99W Improvement 1988 Gentle woods Manhole Fall, 1987 .........:.:::::. Pinebrook/Hall Repairs -_____V30/87 — Leron Heights Modificat 'ri 10/31/87 _ t CIP/LID PROJECT STATUS As Of July 31, 1987 PROJECT STATUS ESTIMATED COMMENTS PROJECT COMPLETION DATE cr 0 L, C: I .14 4j Lo to u -4 'o :3 E 4) -4 C: 4j w Co 4j -4 -4 a) rn C: U) > 0 0 W L) SD-1 - Gaarde/Canterbury Drain a.e 9/30/87 SD-2 - Gentle Woods Channel Impo --- Project Deleted SD-3 - 100th/Sattler/Murdock 1988 SD-4 Summer Lake/Anton Park Fall, 1987 1.04th/ifillview Impr. 1988 Cascade Ave. Impr. 1988 III ! In IN I 1 C), a �� CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON_ COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 20 1487 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Monthly Report PREVIOUS ACTION: Community Services Dept. JuLY, 1987 PREPARED BY: Donna Corbet DEPT HEAD 0 CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Mayor and Council POLICY ISSUE Community Services Department Monthly Report for July, 1987 — _ INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached, please find ttie Community Services Department Monthly Report for July, 1987. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FISCAL. IMPACT SUGGESTED 'CUTION Review and File dc:1445p/0015p f MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council August 20, 1967 FROM: Jill Monley, Community Services Director SUBJECT: Monthly Departmental Report for July, 1987 COMMUNITY SERVICES D'IRECTOR'S OFFICE Mediation on the TMEA/OPEU contract took place on the 30th. After 11 hours a tentative agreement was reached. TMEA ratification and Council action is expected in August. The League of Oregon Cities medical rates were received . Changes in the premiums will be effective August 1, 1987. Employees will be seeing increases in premiums effective on their September 5, paychecks . The Personnel policies and Procedures Manual has been reviewed by Council, comments are being incorporated in the final draft. Adoption is looked for in September. have* come brick with an excellent; response rate from Tho Court Study Surveys of compiling and analyzing cities contacted. We are currently in the process the information. No new claims were reported to the insurance company and no claims were closed . An assessment center was held for our Personnel Manager position. We hope to have this position filled in September. This will relieve me of a terrific workload. CITY RECORDER SECTION During July, the City Recorder/Support Services y Divisionsystem tinuedywork and the many studies. These included the Municipal Court stud p records needs study. The Division worked with the City Auction process by pulling items together and assisting during the Auction itself. Preparation of Council Packets, Agendas, and Follow-up for July Council meetings was extensive. This was Loreen's first month back after an extended illness leave. Cathy Wheatley, the Deputy Recorder, attended the first of three sessions of a class working towards Fier certification as a Certified Municipal Clerk through IIMC. Many suggestions from this certification program are being discussed for implementation by the City. COURT SECTION July 9th. Traffic New trial and arraignment hours became effective Thursday, arraignments are now alng heard increase inom thenoon to 5 PM. The amou t of bail being postedWenThis maylbe y. There does seem to ben related to the new arraignment time. basically on hold during July. Staff is The Court computer program was b again, to get this up and going within the attempting to work with the programmer next month. Overall statistics for Court are holding about the same. We are up a small amount year—to—date over last year for traffic. We are concerned about the increasing amount of receivables on the books. More time is being spent in the collection process and alternatives are hoped for in the Court study that might i assist us. As of July 31, there are $12,392.00 in fines outstanding and $5,435.00 of outstanding misdemeanor fines have been turned into warrants . C.S. July Monthly Report Page 2 RECORDS In implementing the service level work plan based on the budget for the new fiscal year, our Records/Court Manager prioritized the major duties being completed in the Records section. Top priority is being given to departmental requests for records. The record inventory has been placed as low priority at this gime since the records request and current file needs are so great. The records section also awarded two quotes: one to Tab Products for the majority of the software for the color-coded file system, and the second to Space Saver Specialist for the moveable file system in the records room to maximize that space. Installation is scheduled in September. The Records Management Committee has continued meeting. They have requested a draft of a policy regarding the records submittal process, this will be presented to staff in the near future. A bright note, the City saved about $3,000 by having access to a 1970 LID file. Although that's not a vast sum of money, it does show the benefit: of having a reliable records management program. OFFICE SERVICES/WORD PROCESSING SECTION There was a slight slow down in our turn--around time for requests during the month of July, however, we were without a t_ead Operator for most of that month. We are seeing an increase in the number of dictation tapas we are now processing. Half of the work orders processed from the Police Department were dictation tapes. Overall the Word Processing Center spent: 59 hours of typing time for the tapes which were received. The ongoing saga of Office Aide turnover is continuing. It is difficult to continue training part-time, temporary Office Aides. About the time they are trained, they leave for better employment opportunities. The switchboard and message center has been processing a slightly higher number of calls during the month of July. The phone study has been in full swing and both the operators have been keeping more detailed statistics to assist with system change recommendations. FINANCE DIVISION: The month of July held several critical deadlines for our division including the submittal of the 1987-88 budget and local budget forms to the County Assessor and State Revenue Sharing, and Shared Revenue Resolutions and Ordinances to the Department of Revenue. All of those filings were successfully completed although an amended resolution certifying the tax levy was requested by the State. The new computer equipment authorized in the budget was ordered in July with delivery expected in late July and early August. The Year End closing process began as did preparation for the arrival of the Auditors in late August. ACCOUNTING SECTION The July utility bills sent out in mid-July included South Metzger residential, commercial, and industrial sewer and storm drain charges. The July bills also included the sewer and storm drain rate increases approved by the Budget Committee and by Council. Due to the addition of Metzger to our billing system and the increased rates, we received over 560 phone calls in July. Most calls were concerning the rate increases. r We have completed the transition from the Wang to the Burroughs computer in r all accounting applications except cash receipts. We expect to make this last change in late August or early September. dc:1446p/0015p COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORK MEASURES JULY, 1987 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: 7/86 7/87 SEWER: 7/86 7/87 Accounts Payable Checks: 271 445 Sewer bills sent out 1776 5939 Vendors 868 733 Sewer payments 1782 7051 Invoices 607 532 Phone calls 186 564 Check requests 402 249 Utility Receipts 864 802 Payroll checks 260 289 7/86 7/87 Expenditure Reimbursements Processed 38 107 Purchase Orders Processed 152 143 RECORDER'S OFFICE 7/86 7/87 Resolutions processed 80 109 Ordinances processed 36 45 OFFICE SERVICES 7/86 7/87 Number of Work Orders 308 614 Number• of Pages 9265 27,407 Average Turn—Around Time Per Work Order 5.2 4. 1 hrs PERSONNEL 7/86 7/87 Recruitments 6 it Hires 8 9 Terminations 4 4 Unemployment Claims 0 1 Claims Filed: Worker's Compensation 4 1 Other Liability 1 0 1446p/0015p l 07/01/87 CITY OF TIGARD CLAIM STATUS REPORT DATE OF LOSS CLAIMANT DESCRIPTION STATUS 10/01/84 Mary Strickland Alleges age discrimination CLOSED 07/01/87 paid $30,000.00 2/04/85 Fredric Nickel Criminal counter cplt. open (Officer Hal Merrill) 01/11/85 Harry Field Alleges False Arrest pending (office Merrill) 07/20/85 Steven Bacon False Arrest (Officer Harburg) claim reopened 03/16/85 Julie B. Winkelman Wrongful Death pending 07/25/86 R.A. Cutshall Bike hit cable in park path pending 04/06/96 Scott Fairbanks Code Enforcement negligence open 07/10/86 Thomas Arnholtz Hit manhole cover open 00/22/06 Jerri Widner Alleges grievance re O.T.hrs. open 10/01/06 Hue Thi Phan Intersection accident reopened $1404.80 pd. Police vehicle & claimants other claims pending vehicle - personal injuries 11/24/86 Michael Ryan) Damage to homes & contents open Ransom Boyce) due to flooding 01/07/87 Shir•ene Mills Intersection accident open Collision - Polico motorcycle & claimant's vehicle 01/"9/87 Tuality Comm. Hosp. Allege City pay for treatment open of minor child after officers called to home by mother because feather was causing child abuse to infant-. Officer Boothby 1/86 & 8/86 Charles Condon Alleges employee harassment open and stress claim 10/23/86 Various (possibly Tort claim alleges civil open 37 in all) rights deprived when arrested for a political demonstration at Flir Systems. 12/05/86 William R. Briot Alleges officers assulted & open battered him while being arrested causing injury. (Mayor Brian, Chief Lehr, Sgt. Martin, Officer Nerski, Officer Harburg, & Officer Warren.) dc:1446p/0015p VOLUNTEER/NON-STAFF RESOURCES - July, 1987 YTD EST. Category 1984-85 1985-86 July '87 1986-87 1986-87 % Change t Boards & Committees 3108.75 2601.75 110.75 110.75 1329.00 -49X r Volunteer Staffing 5171.25 7272.00 631 .50 631.50 7578.00 +4X TCYS N/A N/A 1093.00 1093.00 13, 116.00 +100% Community Service 562.00 2387.25 219.00 219.00 2628.00 +10X Other 283.00 264.00 -0- -0-- -0- Total* 10,739.50 12,688.50 2,054.25 2,054.25 24,651.00 +94% sb/1377p/15p MEMORANDUM. ! l wax CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON v TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY TO: Library Board Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Library Director SUBJECT: Monthly Report, June 1987 WCCLS: At the professional Board meeting on July 16 there was discussion regarding the continuation of Outreach Service countywide. A subcommittee has been appointed to evaluate current service and what options are avail- able. A SAIF claim against the program is pending. Tigard Library Director will serve on Budget Committee for FY 1987-88. Inasmuch as there was no funding provided from the State budget to reimburse Multnomah County as the net lender through the Access '87 program, a matter of $60,000, WCCLS is considering an exchange of Books By Mail service in lieu of money. WILL: The acquisitions module has been added to WILI. This will enable the Library to maintain complete ordering records for all circulating materials. This eliminates several labor intensive tasks plus maintenance of two files as well as recording the status of each item until it is shelved and keeping and available. The module is not oper- a record of monies encumbered, spentof ational county-wide but Tigard has opted to work with it as a "guinea pig. On July 15 the Full Load Response Time Acceptance Test was conducted and WILI performed within the limits. A simplified 3-page instruction sheet has been devised to help users at the Public Access computers. Personal Computers: The three personal computers, Tandon, Apple IIC and Macintosh, with printers were put out for public use. The manuals, soft- ware and keyboards must be checked out at the desk. Usage is steady, but not overwhelming. Needs Assessment: Mr. Ralph Holt, library consultant hired by WCCLS to do a county-wide needs assessment for library facilities, visited Tigard Julv 29. He wi.11 issue a report for use in planning new libraries and expansion of existing buildings. Output Measures: Tigard with Tualatin, Forest Grove and Cedar Mill have decided to do a study on specific Output Measures. The proiected time is October. This study will gather information that more accurately reflects library usage for use in planning. Personnel: Marty Herr, library media student at Portland State University, spent 60 hours of practicum at the Tigard Public Library.. Steven Williams, sponsored by TCYS, will spend 70 hours working as ar. Aide. Volunteers: Forty-two volunteers gave 530.5 hours; daily average 23 hours. No community service assi.anees• LibraryReam gave 6 hours. Youth Service: Five special summer reading programs were presented as well as 15 pre-school story times. Marty Herr, (see personnel above), developed a flier listing TPL's reference holdings and services of interest to students. A pur- chasing plan for FY 1987-88 will focus on updating the YA music collection and children's video and software for use with the new PCs. TIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY - MONTHLY REPORT - June 1987 -- page 2 Work Indicators July 1987 Julv ,1986 July 1985 Adult Materials 9109 8211 5855 Juvenile Materials 7442 7099 3894 TOTAL 16,551 15,220 9,749 Days of Service 23 26 21 Average Daily Circ 683.7 585 464 Hours of Service 212 226 N/A Book Circ per Hour 74.2 67.3 N/A Increase/Decrease Circ + 8.7% + 56% + 14% Reference/Reader's Advisory 401 461 306 Books in Use in Library 3369 1469 546 Materials: Added/Withdrawn 778/19 444/6 211/7 Borrowers Registered 566 565 301 Story Time (U of sessions) 215 (15) 272 (10) 118 (5) Special Children's Programs 252 (5) 240 (7) 92 (5) NOTE: Circulation has increased 69.7% since 1986. Children's has increased 91%. J MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor, Council, and Ci � A inistrator August 20, 1987 'k' FROM: David C. Lehr, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Monthly Report - July 1987 On July 4th the Police Department participated in the First Annual Tigard 4th of July Celebration. Our participation included planning for the event, security, equipment display, and a K-9 demonstration. The department feels that the 4th of July celebration was a success and looks forward to continued participation in the future. There were no complaints regarding the event received by the department. The Police Department conducted a report writing class for Washington Square store security. I then met with store security personnel to discuss police response to mall shoplifting arrests. There are still areas of disagreement between the store security people and the Police Department about the level of response by the Police Department to shoplifting arrests at the Square. The Police Department is holding to the City policy of not providing any more or less service to the Square than to any other business or person in the City. We are also adhering to the phase-in of services to the Square concept. I will continue to meet with the store security personnel and the District Attorney in an attempt to resolve concerns. I met with Al Zimmerman, the new Tigard High School Principal, and Russ Joki to discuss the SRO program. The program is ready to begin its second year. There will be a change in personnel as Officer Wayt is being transferred, by his request, to the K-9 program. We will identify a new SRO by the start of the school year. Officer Peterson will attend a SRO school at the BPST Academy in August. Mr. Monahan, Mr. Woolev, a^A I met with high school officials concerning the continuing issue of high school related parking problems. You will be receiving saparate reports concerning this issue. The department also participated in the Annual Cruisin' Tigard event. We provided security for events, displayed crime prevention materials (with Officer McGruff, the Crime Dog), and provided hamburger flippin' service. Unfortunately, the department was involved in arresting the nefarious, Hiz Honor Mayor Brian on a charge of being too young to be a mayor. We found it necessary to enlist the services of an British Constable to arrest and deliver Mayor Brian to the custody of Her Ladyship, the Honorable and Venerable Mayor and Magistrate Jeane Young for adjudication. It is our understanding that the aforementioned Mayor Brian was required to solicit sufficient funds from citizens at large for the American Cancer Society. It appears that either his efforts were successful or he managed to escape and flee the mainland. We are attempting to locate him in Hawaii. Goals for August include: selection of a new SRO and discussion with the Fire District on 9-1-1 allocation costs. cs/0625D MEMORANDUM CTrY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: City Council August 6, 1987 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director Community Development SUBJECT: Tigard High School Parking Issues Due to the many issues which arose last year- concerning parking at the Tigard High School site, my staff has attempted to provide assistance to the School District this summer to create additional parking opportunities at the site prior to the opening of school in September. Chief David Lehr, Randy Wooley, City Engineer, and 1 met a couple of weeks ago with Nancy Itawkes, Vice Principal of 'Tigard High School, and another District representative to talk about parking at the Durham and Hall site. The School District had proposed leaking some improvements to 85th Avenue which would have provided up to 20 or, 30 additional parking spaces along the extension of Hall Boulevard next to the Tigard High School Soccer Field. The Schoul District was suggesting that these additional spaces could be used to accommodate those students who normally would park within residential neighborhoods. These new spaces, coupled with an enforcement program dictated by the principal of the high school, were expected to solve any parking problems . We responded to the School District's idea with some reservations. First of all we thoucht that parking on this street next to the soccer- fields would riot in fact Help the day—to—day parking although it could have a benefit to the spacial events parking needs related to soccer. Instead we tried to focus our attention back to 92nd Avenue and the site itself. We did recommend some improvements which the High School could make on 92nd Avenue where spaces which have gone unused by students could become more usable. For instance, we suggested making angle parking as opposed to diagonal parking in one location. The School DisLr•ict will Lake steps to mark the spaces at 900 angles. We focused again on the site itself and spoke briefly about the large grassy area and treed areas of the high school which could accommodelL ! parking and be convenient to the school facilities. The School District obviously is reluctant to make additional on—site improvements given their position that such improvements would detract from the aesthetics of the site. Short of creating additional on—site parking there is one other alternative which I suggested to the school District. I suggested that they evaluate their present parking lot to determine the number of spaces which could be designated as compact spaces. I noted that our Community Development Code A` allows a certain percentage — roughly from 25 to 33 percent — of all spaces to be committed to compact vehicles. The School District assured me that theyi would take a look at their lot to determine how many spaces could in fact be gained. After the meeting I had the opportunity to speak to Bud Hillman of C the School District and he assured me that he was given direction by Nancy s Hawkes to determine if it would be beneficial for the District to restripe the parking lot. We did not talk further about overflow problems which could relate to football games held at the football stadium. I expect that these issues will be worked through by Chief Lehr and the neighbors and the School District during the coming month. My staff will monitor the situation as the season begins and be prepared to offer assistance where necessary. sb/0386D 2- MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor, Council, and Ci A �ninistrator August 20, 1987 FROM: David C. Lehr Chief of Police 01 SUBJECT: Tigard High School Parking Concerns As you know over the last several years two parking issues have been generated by high school student parking at Tigard High School . The problems have been parking on 92nd Avenue that created traffic safety concerns and large event parking that created traffic congestion and related problems in the neighborhoods around the High School. The Police Department supported an ordinance that banned parking on the west side of 92nd Avenue that eliminated the traffic safety concerns. The Department's efforts in maintaining a high visibility patrol profile in the neighborhoods around the high school during major events has significantly reduced the problems related to parking in those areas. 'this approach seems to have met the concerns of the residents. It is the intent of the Police Department to continue this patrol approach and meeting with the residents to hear their concerns. A new problem has risen with the ban on parking on 92nd Avenue. During regular school hours a number of students who had been parking on the west side of 92nd Avenue have chosen to park on residential streets. Several problems have been created because of this shift in parking locations. Cars are being parked in front of mail boxes precluding delivery of mail, parked too close to corners, and creating littering and trespassing in the i neighborhoods. Mr. Monahan, Mr. Wooley, and I had a met with Tigard High personnel to discuss this issue. The obvious long—term resolution to almost all the parking y concerns would be more on—site parking spaces at the school. Mr. Monahan' s Y and Mr. Wooley's report will detail the thrust of our conversations with the z t School District in this regard. f' t t x Short term the School District will attempt to add parking spaces on 92nd Street by restriping the spaces and encouraging students to park in these and presently unused spaces by providing some disincentives to parking in the . neighborhoods. The Police Department will continue enforcement efforts. cs/0622D i s i MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council August 18, 1987 FROM: Doreen Wilson, City Recorder SUBJECT: Surplus City Property The Tigard City Council declared surplus city property for disposal at the 1987 Auction which was held in conjunction with Cruisin Tigard '87. Attached is a list of that surplus property. The total proceed from property disposition was $468. The gross total receipts fur the auction, including the Police materials portion was $3,749.50. This compared to the 1986 total of $2,596.75 makes an increase of $1, 152.75 over last year's auction. l 6 WARM f SURPLUS CITY PROPERTY $12.50 148. One Monroe 1450 Calculator 50.00 149. Canon NP 400F/Shelving Unit w/ collator } 5.00 150. One Kiosk KEPT 151. One 2-1/2 ft. x 2-1/2 ft. Reception Table 12.50 152. One Duofone Telephone Answering Machine 30.00 153. One Phone-Mate Telephone Answering Machine 2.00 154. One Rolodex Model. #3500 5.00 155. One Monroe 2850 Electric Calculator SOLD W/ #153 156. One Monroe 2850 Electric Calculator 15.00 157. Six boxes of 5" x 8" Index Cards DESTROYED 158. One Swingline Electric Stapler 10.00 159. One 25" Bright Stik Florescent Light 17.50 160. One Yamaha Speaker (approx. 2-1/2"x12"x2-1/2") 5.00 161. One Wood Desk with drawers DESTROYED 162. Two anti-static floor mats 6.00 163. Two 4x6 metal file drawer cabinets SOLD W/ #163 164. Two 4x6 metal file drawer cabinets 2.00 165. One box carbon computer paper 5.00 166. One Mita Copy Machine 20.00 167. One Water Pump 20.00 168. One Water Pump SOLD W/ #150 169. Misc. bulletin boards e SOLD W/ #150 170. Misc. bulletin boards SOLD W/ #165 171. Misc. Ledger Notebooks 1.00 172. One Radio Transmitter SOLD W/ #159 173. One Sound System Mixer UNABLE TO LOCATE 174. One Microphone with stand 22.50 175. One Microphone with stand SOLD W/ #175 176. One Microphone with stand SOLD W/ #175 177. One Microphone with stand SOLD W/ #175 178. One Microphone with stand 10.00 179. One Microphone SOLD W/ #175 180. One Sound System speaker (small) SOLD W/ #175 181. One Metal Stationery Shelf Desk Extender 2.00 182. One Univeral 200 manual typewriter 10.00 183. One gray drafting chair w/ rollers DESTROYED 184. Two reams Erasable bond paper 30.00 185. One 3x3 skylite 35.00 186. One 3x3 skylite SOLD W/ #186 187. One 3x3 skylite SOLD W/ #186 188. One 3x3 skylite t SOLD W/ #186 189. One 3x3 skylite 30.00 190. One 3x3 skylite 5.00 191. One Coffee maker w/ coffee pot SOLD W/ #153 192. One IBM Selectric II Correcting typewriter 100.00 193. One 45-drawer 3x5 card file unit 5.00 194. One Adler 21d Electric Typewriter SOLD W/ #183 195. One typewriter stand, gray SOLD W/ #155 196. 196 Diskette looseleaf files _ i • E i MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Members of City Council V August 6, 1987 �N FROM: William A. Monahan, Director Community Development i SUBJECT: Cruisin' Tigard Update s Council requested that I provide an update on the recent Cruisin' Tigard and its affect on Community Development Department activities. The only area of concern was the preparation and submittal of the temporary use application for the event. The temporary use application was submitted only a few days before the event was held. This did not give sufficient- time for the staff to evaluate the ::availability of parking ar►d other concerns. There were no problems related to business tax reported to nip as our• new business tax i procedure for special events seems to have worked well. My only suggestion for future events is that temporary use r•equir•ements be reviewed, considered, and responded to by applicants early enough for the give the staff a chance to l give critical comments and suggest improvements. I should note also that the Operations Division devoted a significant amour►t ; of time to helping to upgrade the appear•anc:e of the downtown prior to the event. They also provided some assistance in preparing one property for one of the special events. 3b/0386D !t IMM9990JAMMM 111111 I t r y x ti u'. i fold MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor, Council, and C Ac 71nistrator August 20, 1987 FROM: David C. Lehr, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Cruisin' Tigard '87 The Annual Cruisin' Tigard event was held on July 25th. The department felt that the event itself went relatively smoothly and was a success, although attendance was down from last year. There were no complaints noted on the log regarding noise from the band at the dance or any other aspect of the day' s activities. There was one altercation at the dance of short duration. No arrests were made. Security arrangements were adequate. There was one event that generated considerable concern. During the afternoon a Burlington Northern came through on the downtown tracks. The train moved across Main Street at a time when a number of people were in the vicinity of the tracks. The train was moving in excess of 20 mph. Cruisin' Tigard personnel reported that they had been told by B & N that no trains would come through the area after 8:00 a.m. The Police Department would recommend that as part of the permit process that the permit applicant show letters from the railroa3s confirming train schedules and train speeds so that appropriate precautions can be taken. The permit process seems to be confusing and complicated to the event organizers. This creates delay in the process and some things (like the train) seem to fall between the cracks. The Police Department would recommend that a City staff person familiar with the process be assigned to the committee early to liaison between the committee and the City in the permit process. The department's participation in the event included a crime prevention display manned by Deb Watros and McGruff (Rick Peterson). McGruff was also the ?.trade Grand Marshall. Sergeant Martin and I were on-site in uniform for community relations and security purposes. cs/0524D l it DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L PALMOUIST' ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ROBERT L ALLEN 851 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE. SUITE 1900 /1, 2 JOHN C.CAHALAN JOHN J.HIGGINS PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING �J\ RUSSELL R.KILKENNY THOMAS H.TONGUE HELLE RODE GEORGE J.COOPER,111 TE LECO PIER 19031 224-732a MARSHA MURRAY•LV SBY ~ CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DONALD E.TEMPLETON' ROBERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE (503)224-6440 DOUGLAS V.VAN DYK G.KENNETH SHIROISHV SALLY R.LEISURE SHANNON 1.SKOPIL' GILBERT E.PARKER,JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F. NUDELMAN JOAN O'NEILL.P.C.' 709 N.W.WALL STREET,SUITE 103 JONATHAN A.OENNETT ROBERT L.NASH" ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND,OREGON 97701 BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(503)382-9241 WILLIAM H. MORRISON JACK D.HOFFMAN 41097-12631 MICHAEL J.FRANCIS RALPH R.BAILEY 11902.19741 August 12, 1987 'ADMITTED IN OREGON JACK H.DUNN AND WASHINGTON JAMES G.SMITH "RESIDENT PARTNER. NATHAN L.COHEN BEND OFFICE OF COUNSEL City of Tigard Council Members Re: Dartmouth LID -- Corrections to written testimony submitted on August 10, 1987 Dear Council Members: Enclosed please find corrected pages 17, 19, and 20, on which there are tables reflecting corrections due to typographical errors. Also enclosed is a revised page 9, on which there are two corrections which were noted in our testimony on Monday evening . All changes are highlighted. truly yours , Douglas V. Van Dyk DVD/clg Enclosures cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin Wayne Kittieson Ms. Loreen Wilson Tigard City Recorder Mr. Tim Ramis, City Attorney City of Tigard SUMMARY OF EXHIBITS I. Introduction This document is a summary of the critical concerns confronting the City of Tigard in deciding whether to pro- ceed with the Dartmouth LID. A significant percentage of Tigard's total developable retail and office property lies within the Triangle area. Efficient and maximum economic returns to the City are dependent on a road network capable of handling, at a reasonable level of service, all traffic generated. The design of such road network should include: (1) a South Access out of the Triangle connecting Dartmouth Street to Highway 217; (2) a five-lane arterial collector running from Interstate 5 to Highway 217; (3) an overpass at High- way 217; (4) a three-lane major collector connecting Dartmouth Street to Pacific Highway, expanded to six lanes at the intersection of 78th and Dartmouth; and (5) a three- lane major collector from Highway 217 to Hall Boulevard to service the 150 acres of industrial land south of Hunziker. If the road network is designed to incorporate these characteristics, sufficient traffic capacity would exist in the Triangle to develop Triangle property to its full eco- nomic potential. 9 5 This is very significant because the assumed trip generation characteristics represent the basis for the entire traffic analysis. Also, the report does not identify a number of significant bottlenecks and points of peak hour congestion, nor does it describe a future internal street circulation sys- tem capable of accommodating the expected future travel demands" . (Exhibit 33 at 1) . After describing numerous errors relating to the inventory of land available for development, Mr. Kittelson states: "In summary, the ATEP report errs in its esti- mate of the total amount of land available within the Tigard Triangle. It also errs in its estimate of the total amount of land within the Tigard Tri- angle that is already developed. Finally, it errs in its calculation of the percent buildout para- meter. If only the errors of fact identified thus far are taken into account, then the following effect can be seen: ATEP Corrected Estimate Estimate 72.3% 35.9% Current buildout of the Tigard Triangle (including commercial and residential land areas) 78.0% 41.3% 2005 buildout of the Tigard Triangle (in- cluding commercial and residential land areas) "The effect of the errors thus far identified is shown in the above table. Clearly, the ATEP report predicts much less potential for additional traffic into and out of the Tigard Triangle than is actually the case". (Exhibit 33 at 4) . ` Equally striking is the fact that the ATEP report actu- ally projected a decrease in traffic volume on Pacific 17 "It is clear that traffic moving west and making the left turn from 99W to Dartmouth Street is severely underestimated in the ATEP study. The ATEP study identifies 57 such left turns under 2005 p.m. peak hour conditions, based on a 38% buildout [see Exhibit 25 at 20, 341 . However, both the Kittelson study, which assessed the same left turns at this intersection to be 440 cars during the 2005 p.m. peak hour based on a 55% buildout [Exhibit 9 at 1, 91 , and [ODOT's] analysis which identifies these p.m. peak hour traffic movements at 305 cars based on a 39% buildout, refute ATEP's contention (Exhibit 37) . Thus, in this one turning movement, ODOT estimated over five times as many cars as ATEP based on approximately the same amount of buildout. Also, since the ATEP report was completed, Washington County has done a thorough review of the land use assump- tions for the Triangle area. These assumptions are contained in the 1987 Washington County Transportation Plan Update. They vary dramatically from assumptions utilized by ATEP for the same traffic zones: G' 1987 Washington County Transaction Plan Update 2005 Employment Growth Retail Office Traffic Zone 129 693 -80 Traffic Zone 226 375 4,164 1,068 4,084 .. 19 ATEP 2005 Employment Growth Retail Office Traffic Zone 129 320 418 Traffic Zone 226 360 1,631 680 2,049 (Exhibit 52 at 2) . Thus, ATEP differs in employment growth projections by more than 308 retail employees and 2,035 office employees from the most recent analysis of employment growth projections for the Triangle area. [ V. t All of the Professional Analysts Agree, Including ATEP, That the Dartmouth LID is Inadequate to Meet_ Future Traffic Demand The ATEP engineers met with Kittelson, MOT and the City of Tigard to discuss the ATEP analysis. After this meeting, ATEP acknowledged in a letter to the Tigard City MKM Council that: "Given current allowable development levels within the Tigard Triangle, a collector/distributor road that only connects I-5 and Pacific Highway ( will not be sufficient to accommodate future travel ( demands into and out of the Tigard Triangle at a ! significant percentage of buildout. It is neces- sary to provide at least one additional major entry/exit point to the Triangle area. The precise location of this new access point is not yet clear; however, projected traffic flow patterns show a need for an additional connection and/or crossing of Highway 217 by the new collector/distributor. "The specific location and design specifi- cations of such a collector/distributor is i dependent in part on the results of the I-5/Kruse Way interchange study. Therefore, the appropriate i steps should be taken to preserve the right-of-way i and flexibility necessary in completing this in- ternal system". 20 I � DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE N I R L LMOUIST' ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W RANDO LPH MILLER JOHN G.CAHAL ROBERT L.ALLEN 831 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE. SUITE 1300 RUSSELL R. KILKENNY - JOHN J.HIGGINS PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING HELLE RODE THOMAS H.TONGUE TELECOPIER 1503)2247324 MARSHA MURRAY-LUSS" GEORGE J.COOPER,111 DONALD E.TEMPLETON' CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DOUGLAS V.VAN DYK ROBERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE (503) 224-6440 SALLY R. LEISURE .' G.KENNETH SHIROISHI' SHANNON I.SKOPIL' GILBERT E. PARKER.JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F.NUDELMAN { JOAN O'NEILL.P.C.' JONATHAN A. BENNETT 709 N.W.WALL STREET,SUITE 103 ROBERT L. NASH" BEND,OREGON 97701 ANDREW S.CRAIG4 TELEPHONE 15031 302-9241 WILLIAM H. MORRISON BRADLEY O-BAKER 11897-19031 JACK D.HOFFMAN RALPH R. BAILEY MICHAELJ.FRANCIS .1902 1974, August 19, 1987 'ADMITTED IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON JACK H.DUNN JAMES SMITH "RESIDENT PARTNEH. BEND OFFICE NATHAN L.COHEN OF COUNSELHonorable Tom Bri n I Mr. Gerald R. Edwards Mayor, City of T'gn 10390 S. W. Meadow 10455 S. W. Joh on Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Tigard, Oregon 97233 Ms. Valerie J nson Mr. John Schwartz 12265 S. W. W lnut 15900 S. W. 76 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Tigard, Oregon 97224 Ms. Carolyn/ Eadon 11825 S. � . Wildwood Court Tigard, O egon 97224 Re: Dartmouth LID• Recent Correspondence From ( DOT ` 1 Dear Council Members: In our written testimony submitted on behalf of the Martins at the Council meeting on August 10, 1987, we state that all traffic experts agree that a South Access out of the Trianacceptable may levels of se�vice e D Se m Vol• Iuth I at to 4 ) .function ) .unction at 1? t OnAugust 11, 1987, we received a letter from Mr. Tom Schwab, Transportation Analysis Manager for the Oregon letter) . Department of Transportation. (See attached ; Mr. Schwab concurs that traffic studies indicate a need for additional capacity to serve the Triangle area. Mr. Schwab 4 also states, however, that he has not reviewed a study whichbe f rom the concludes that such additional accesthatothe experts agree r south of the Triangle. Our testimony that access from the south of the Triangle may be necessary should now be qualified to reflect Mr. Schwab's position. E 1 E 1 Tigard City Council August 19, 1987 Page 2 However, our studies indicate that the only prac- tical alternative for additional Triangle access is to connect with Highway 217. In this light, even ATEP concludes that the City should explore additional access which "may involve a new overpass of Highway 217 and connection to an appropriate street south of 217 such as Hunziker". (See Vol. II , Ex. 25 at 12) . Access south of the Triangle will allow traffic moving in a northwesterly direction to connect directly to Highway 217 and avoid Pacific Highway. It will also provide direct access from the Triangle to southwest Tigard. Mr. Schwab also confirms in his letter several conclusions we have reached regarding the ATEP report. Spe- cifically, Mr. Schwab agrees that additional traffic capacity for the Triangle will be necessary upon reaching an employ- ment level of 7, 800, which breaks down to a commercial buildout level of approximately 52%, which is only 30% higher than current commercial buildout (see attached letter at 4 ) . ATEP, on the other hand, concludes that the current circulation plan will not result in total breakdown of the system even at 100% buildout. Mr. Schwab also states that the ATEP report severely underestimates the number of left turns that will be made onto Dartmouth from Pacific Highway. (See attached letter at 1 ) . ATEP underestimates by at least 28. 8 acres the developable land within the Triangle. (See attached letter at 2) . ATEP overstates current buildout by 75% and year 2005 buildout by 66%, which results in large part from ATEP's decision to include in its inventory of developable land more than 80 acres that are actually outside of the Triangle. Based on Mr. Schwab 's letter, the potential for increased traffic is far greater than is reported by ATEP. In fact, Mr. Schwab's figures are conservative because he excludes from future development 11. 95 acres pre- sently occupied by a school but which are zoned commercial general planned development, which explains the discrepancy between Mr. Kittelson 's buildout figures and Mr. Schwab's. Tigard City Council August 19, 1987 Page 3 Finally, on page 3 of Mr. Schwab's letter, he states that Mr. Kittelson's study identified 6, 650 vehicle trips into the Triangle and 8,020 vehicles out of the Tri- angle during the p.m. peak hour at buildout. These areakehMr. Kittelson's figures for the year 2005 p.m. p our forecast, which is based on a projected 55% buildout. (See Vol. II , Ex. 9, at 3. ) Mr. Kittelson did not provide figures for full buildout. To clarify this paragraph of Mr. Schwab' s letter, we discussed it with him over the phone. Mr. Schwab lestating that Mr. Kittelson's year 2005 traffic figures are conservative at a 55% buildout, which suggests that Triangle traffic problems will be worse than Mr. Kittelson has pre- dicted. The City has not communicated to ODOT on the issue of whether Soutil Access should be yeti w t as part of the I- request 5/217 Interchange Study. We suggest the State to include South Access as part of its study. We will continue to submit to the Council the most current information available regarding positions taken by the traffic emoret feta etathe Dreview,1 th of Mr. Schwab'sLID. Also, wletter to will be submitting a the Council in the near future. Very truly yours, Charles D. Ruttan CDR: DVD0819-1;dr Enc. Letter cc: Mr. Gordon R. Martin Mr. Gordon S. Martin Mr. Thomas Schwab Mr. Wayne Kittelson Ms. Loreen Wilson ✓ Mr. Tim Ramis C "��T=�•- Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION VICTop•T^EN Region 1 oo.�.aw 9002 SE MCLOUGHLIN BLVD.,MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 August 7, 1987 in R,pp R,4.To iM Ho.: CharleseaLaw uttan Attorne 851 SWe. Sui a 1500 Portlan 4 Subject: Response to issues raised in prior correspondence submitted on behalf of the Martins. In your letter dated July 9, 1987, you requested a response to a number of concerns raised in previous correspondence, particularly, the March 31, 1987, analysis prepared by Mr. Kittelson. I will attempt to respond to these issues in the following paragraphs. The first paragraph of your July 9, 1987, letter states that my letter of June 12, 1987, acknowledges the need for additional access out of the southerly portion of the triangle, which will have to be built to accommodate traffic at relatively low levels of build-out, as opposed to full build-out conditions. I would like to clarify this statement by referring back to the June 12, 1987 memo, in which I have stated that this is generally true as far as an additional access to serve build-out conditions of the Tigard triangle. The traffic studies to date indicate ? need for additional capacity to serve the Tigard triangle area, ,owever, none of the studies that I have reviewed to date indicate that a triangle area is best served by a southerly access route. You state that the ATEP report severely underestimates the number of left turns that will be made into Dartmouth from # 99W westbound. I concur with your findings, the left turning k volumes in the ATEP report are extremely low, in consideration of the forecast travel conditions. This left turn volume, shown in the ATEP report, is the raw traffic model assigned number. As with any traffic modeling scheme, this number must be smoothed before these intersection numbers can be used for ! design purposes. Traffic volume turning moves at major E i Page 2 Charles D. Ruttan August 7, 1987 WE intersections must be fully analyzed, relative to the traffic analysis zone centroid connector, to develop the true turning movement volumes. I will assure you that the traffic volumes in turning movements used for the design of this intersection, will in fact, be consistent with the assumptions within the Tigard Triangle area. The following is a response to Mr. Kittelson's analysis of the alleged errors in the ATEP report: * The ATEP report describes the traffic assignment zone (TAZ) which contains the Farmers Insurance Building, to be 20 acres, with 490 employees. Mr. Kittelson contends this TAZ contains 25.3 acres. This 5 acre difference may be due to the difference in the definition of the zone. Our analysis has used 20 acres for this particular zone. Since the ATEP report and the Kittelson report conclude the same total acreage within the triangle area I would assume the definition of the zone explains the 5 acre difference. Since the Farmers Insurance Building occupies approximately 6 acres, as indicated in the Kittelson report, there would be 14 acres of developable land remaining. * TAZ 18, which contains the existing Landmark Ford dealership consists of 13.8 acres. I would agree that 5.8 acres of this land is currently developed, therefore, the ATEP report underestimates the developable land by 4.2 acres. * I would agree with the findings of Mr. Kittelson on the assumptions for TAZ No. 19. * The ATEP report underestimates the developable office land for TAZ No. 28 by 7.6 acres. * TAZ No. 30 which contains the former Portland General Electric sub-station, the Crab Bowl , Coco's Restaurant, and the Wayside Inn, consist of 16 acres. The ATEP report assumes this area to be fully developed, while Mr. Kittelson contends that only about 7 acres of this TAZ are developed. The remaining land to be developed in this traffic assignment zone has very little opportunity for access other than directly onto 99W as currently provided for the Crab Bowl. Although this land lies within the prescribed boundaries of the Tigard Triangle area, the vehicle trips entering or leaving the site would have very little influence . on the internal circulation of the Tigard Triangle area. * The ATEP report does omit 15 acres within TAZ No. 33 which are designated as 'sensitive lands' I feel the ATEP analysis was correct in assuming that the 15 acres would not have the same potential for development as the remainder of the Tigard Triangle area. A summary of the calculated differences in the development assumptions for the traffic analysis zones within the triangle area are as follows: Page 3 Charles D. Ruttan August 7, 1987 The Kittelson report questions the percent build-out of the Tigard Triangle, as stated in the ATEP report. Based upon his evaluation, Mr. Kittelson contends the ATEP percentages of the Tigard Triangle build-out are over-stated. The ATEP analysis includes three TAZ's that are either partially or entirely outside the Tigard Triangle. The inclusion of the entire population for employment within these three traffic i . assignment zones, in any calculation of the Tigard Triangle build-out percentages, is a questionable procedure. The 1986 Land-Use Inventory, 'does include the 80.7 acres designated for residential development in these three traffic assignment zones with the same acreage is also included in all subsequent development scenarios by ATEP. The following table shows the current and forecast build-out for the Tigard Triangle area as calculated by NOT and Mr. Kittelson's analysis: i Current Build-out of Tigard Triangle Area Kittelson Estimate 35.9% ODOT Estimate 41.3% ` i 2005 Year Development in the Tigard Triangle Area i Kittelson Estimate 41.3% ODOT Estimate 47 % Full Development Kittelson Estimate (not calculated) � ODOT Estimate 91.6% Further comparison of the total trips generated by the development levels of the Tigard Triangle for the year 2005 i and build-out conditions in the ATEP report, show that the assumed 2005 year travel conditions generate 1,600 vehicle t trips into the Tigard Triangle, and 2,670 vehicle trips out of the Triangle area during the AM, PM peak hour. The ATEP build-out assumptions show that 6,170 PM peak hour trips are attracted to the Tigard Triangle area during the PM peak hour, with 11,805 vehicle trips leaving the Tigard Triangle during the PM peak hour. The earlier analysis prepared by Mr. Kittelson, showed that build-out conditions of the Tigard Triangle generated 6,650 vehicle trips into the Tigard Triangle area and 8,020 vehicles out of the Tigard Triangle during the PM peak hour. R My conclusion is that the earlier report prepared by Mr. Kittelson, was conservative in either the assumption- for build-out conditions or in the total trips generated by the Tigard Triangle area, when compared to the ATEP report. 3 i 1 Page 4 MINN Charles D. Ruttan August 7, 1987 Your letter of July 9, 1987, also challenges the ATEP population employment assumptions for the Tigard Triangle area. You are correct in your findings that the ATEP report assumed only 1,180 retail employees in the year 2005 condition and 3,825 office employees within the Tigard Triangle area. The ATEP analysis used the 2005 year Metro assignments and population employment allocations to develop the 2005 year trip generation characteristics for the Tigard Triangle area. This is a proper assumption for the ATEP report since this was the population employment forecast for this area with the current regional transportation plan for the year 2005. The ATEP analysis then goes on to develop a build-out condition scenario for the Tigard Triangle area. The intent here is not to predict exactly when build-out will occur, but what travel conditions could be expected with that build-out condition. In the ATEP report the build-out assignments could be called a 2u05 year build-out condition if in fact this is when total build-out is expected to occur. The last paragraph of your letter requested information relating to the need for additional capacity to serve the Tigard Triangle. I have attempted to analyze the existing capacity, along with the planned Dartmouth LID and improvement to the 69th Avenue intersection on 99W. My findings to date show that some additional capacity will be needed to serve th^ currently adopted land-use plan. To the best of our ability in calculating existing development and future growth, we find the existing employment within the Tigard Triangle to be 1 ,892 employees. There are 55 school employees included in this figure. In addition, 352 persons reside in this area. A comparison was made of the existing traffic to the calculated capacity for the triangle area, to determine when additional access would be required. The result of this calculation reveals that with the LID improvements, the Tigard Triangle could support up to 5,900 new employees or a total development of 7,800 employees before additional capacity would be required to serve the Triangle area. I would hope that this correspondence answers the numerous questions and issues raised in your letter and provides you with the results of our findings on the ATEP report. As suggested in our earlier meetings and in our telephone conversations, it is our intent to work with the City of Tigard I i Page 5 Tk Charles D. Ruttan August 7, 1987 and the developers in the Tigard Triangle area, towards an adopted Transportation Plan that would adequately serve the development within the Tigard Triangle. This is particularly important at this time with the NOT . projects underway, such E as the I-5/217 interchange re-design and the 217/99W interchange design. b f TOM SCHWAB, P.E. f Transportation Analysis Manager TS/ds I attachment cc: Rick Kuehn E Gordon R. Marti q Gordon S. Martin { Randy Wooley (, l 4 t! p! C ! t i a4 1 f f y`y! C � ! S-9 E { { t f lo.4 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON i COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: _August 4, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Repeal of PREVIOUS ACTION: i Resolution 85-27 and the Disbanding__ of the Nei h h d Watch Commi ee PREPARED BY: Chief David Lehr DEPT HEAD OK ITY ADMIN 00%34:2_ REQUESTED BY: Chief David Lehr POLICY ISSUE i 4 f t INFORMATION SUMMARY As you know, during the Council workshop of July 27, 1987 staff discussed with Council several options concerning the role of the Neighborhood Watch ? Committee. Louncil's direction was to prepare a resolution to repeal Resolution 85-27 that would disband the Neighborhood Watch Committee. Staff t was encouraged to recruit the members of the committee as the core of a Volunteer Neighborhood Watch Group. i ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED j 1 . Repeal of Resolution 85-27 to disband the Neighborhood Watch Committee and g recruit its members as the core of a Volunteer Neighborhood Watch Group. ; Honor the efforts of the committee by awarding keys to the City. E FISCAL IMPACT —O— t SUGG,ESTED ACTION Alternative 1. sb/0351D a CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 14, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: OPEU/TMEA PREVIOUS ACTION: N/A Labor Agreement i an PREPARED BY: Jill Monely DEPT HEAD 01KCITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: OLICY ISSUE Should City Council approve and authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the Labor Agreement negotiated between the City and OPEU/TMEA. INFORMATION SUMMARY The attached OPEU labor Agreement incorporates the negotiated decisions and issues tentatively agreed to between the City and OPEU/TMEA. Please note that this is a two-year contract. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the Agreement authorizing its implementation. 2. Not approve the Agreement- and be subject to a gross unfair labor practice. FISCAL_ IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative No. 1 — Approve attached agreement. cw/0587D MEMORANDUM /0 ' s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Arl TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council August 31, 1987 FROM: Jill Monley, Community Services Direct 0-1 I,� SUBJECT: TMEA/OPEU Labor Agreement; Attached is a signed copy of the 1987/88, 1988/89 TMEA/OPEU agreement. There are three areas where it. differs from tho copy in your packet. 1. pg. 6 - paragraph beginning with "The aggregate. . .". Old contract language relating to specific information provided to union administration accompanying payments has been reinserted at the strong request of the union. 2.. pg 35 - 3rd complete paragraph beginning with "However, " . This Complete paragraph was accidentally omitted by our consultant, it was intended as new language to replace your paragraph 1 on page 35. 3. pg. 43 - 1988/89 Position Titles and Pay Ranges. This information is newly calculated however, the words defining the basis for the calculations are included in your copy. Each of these items are highlighted in yellow in the attachment. dc:0747D 7• i COLLECTIVE BARGA?NING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TIGARD and TIGARD MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (OPEU) EXPIRES JUNE 30, 1989 } TABLE OF CONTENTS PREAMBLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ARTICLE 1 RECOGNITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ARTICLE 2 SAVINGS CLAUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ARTICLE 3 EMPLOYEE RIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ARTICLE 4 MANAGEMENT RIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ARTICLE 5 UNION SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ARTICLE 6 UNION RIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 ARTICLE 7 CITY SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ARTICLE 8 PROBATIONARY PERIOD, PROMOTION, AND TRANSFER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ARTICLE 9 HOURS , OVERTIME, AND PREMIUM PAY . . . . . . . . . . 13 ARTICLE 10 HOLIDAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 ARTICLE11 VACATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 ARTICLE 12 BENEFITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 ARTICLE 13 SALARIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 ARTICLE 14 TRAVEL , TRAINING, AND REIMBURSEMENT . . . . . . . 23 ARTICLE 15 SICK LEAVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 ARTICLE 16 OTHER LEAVE 28 ARTICLE 17 LAYOFF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 ARTICLE 18 DISCIPLINE AND DISCHARGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 ARTICLE 19 PERSONNEL RECORDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 ARTICLE 20 CONTRACTING AND SUBCONTRACTING OF WORK . . . . 36 ARTICLE 21 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 ARTICLE 22 TERM OF AGREEMENT AND REOPENING . . . . . . . . . . . 40 SIGNATURE PAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 APPENDIX A SALARY RANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 i 111! 11111% PREAMBLE This Agreementis entered into as of this I S� day of �. Employees Union, 1987 , by the Oregon Public ernational, AFL-CIO, hereinafter Local 503, Service Employees Int referred to as "Union," and the City of Tigard, hereinafter 11Cityfor the purposes of collective referred to as the City , bargaining. It is the purpose of this document to set forth the !' bove-mentioned parties on matters full Agreement between the a relating to employment relations. The City and the Union acknowledge that during the negotia- tions which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect subject or matter not removed by law from the area of Co an Y collective bargaining , and that the understandings and agreements arrived at by the parties after the exercise of that right and opportunity are set forth in full in this Agreement. Therefore, the City and the Union , for the life of this Agreement, each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waive the right , and each agrees that the other shall not be obligated to bargain collectively with respect to any subject or matter referred to or covered in this Agreement or with respect to any subject or matter not specifically referred to or covered in this Agreement, even though such subject or matter may not have been within the knowl- edge or contemplation of either or both of the parties at the time that they negotiated or signed this Agreement. 1 iii I I !1121 111111111111111 ARTICLE 1 - RECOGNITION Section 1 . Bargaining Unit: The City recognizes the Oregon Public Employees Union as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent, for the purpose of estab- ditions of employment, for the lishing wages, hours, and con } classifications listed in Exhibit "A" for all full-time, regular employees (those employees regularly scheduled to work 40 hours i per week) and for all regular, part-time employees (those employees regularly scheduled to work 20 hours or more per week, em P but less than 40 hours per week) . All seasonal employees (those hired to work for a fixed period of time which is less than one rregular part-time ( those scheduled to work less year) , casual, i than 20 hours per week) , and all other employees are excluded from the bargaining unit. Section 2. Non-Discrimination: s This Agreement shall be applied equally to all employees sex, represented by the Union without discrimination as to age, a marital status, race, color , creed , handicap , religion, or f national origin. The Union shall share equally the responsi- bility for applying the provisions of this paragraph. Inasmuch as both State and federal law include mechanisms for the resolution of discrimination issues , the Union and the City agree that the provisions of this Section may be used as the basis for a Step 1 through Step 3 grievance, but shall not be pursue to Step 4 - Arbitration , or otherwise cited as the basis for a claim of a violation of this Agreement . 2 Section 3. New Classifications: The City shall notify the Union of its decision to change an existing or add a new classification by sending a copy of the new or revised classification description to the Union. The City shall also notify the Union of any change in job duties of an existing classification if such a change may affect the employee 's representation status. The City shall also advise the Union as to whether or not it regards the new or revised classi- fication or position to be within or outside the bargaining. unit. If the City and the Union cannot agree as to whether or not such new or revised classification or position should or should not be included in the bargaining unit , the dispute shall be submitted to the Employment Relations Board. The party that is proposing to change the status quo shall submit the request to the Board. When the parties are unable to agree as to the representation status of such new or revised classification or position , the City shall have the option of leaving the position vacant or filling the position at a provisional wage rate until the issue is resolved. If such a position is filled on a provisional basis and if there is a subsequent adjustment in the wage rate, such adjustment shall be retroactive to the date that the position was filled . ARTICLE 2 - SAVING-S CLAUSE If any Article or Section of this Agreement or any amendment thereto should be held invalid by operation of the law, or by any :L lawful tribunal having jurisdiction, or if compliance with or 3 enforcement of any Article or Section should be restricted by such tribunal , the remainder of this Agreement and addenda shall not be affected thereby, and the parties shall enter into immedi- ate collective bargaining negotiations for the purpose of arriv- ing at a mutually satisfactory replacement for such Article or s Section. ARTICLE 3 - EMPLOYEE RIGHTS Employees shall have the right to form, join, and partici- i pate in the activities of employee organizations of their own F choosing, for the purpose of representation on matters of employ- i, ee relations. New employees shall have the right to refuse to f join or participate in the activities of any employee organi- zation. No employee shall be interfered with, intimidated , i restrained , coerced, or discriminated against by the City or by any employee because of his/her exercise of these rights. r E ARTICLE 4 - MANAGEMENT RIGHTS d The City Administrator and department heads shall exercise the sole responsibility for management of the City and direction of its work force. To fulfill this responsibility , the rights of the City include, but are not limited to: establishing and directing activities of the City ' s departments and its employees, determining services to be rendered , standards of service and method of operation , including the introduction of new equipment; R and standards for establishing procedures a employment and promo- Is 4 E i tion; layoff , transfer, and demotion; to discipline or discharge for just cause; determine job descriptions; determine work sched- ules and assign work, and any other rights, except as expressly limited by the terms of this Agreement. In all matters not specifically limited by this contract, the City shall have a clear right to make and to implement decisions in all such areas on a ,unilateral basis. All such decisions and actions shall not be subject to the contract grievance procedure or other claim of a violation of this Agreement. ARTICLE 5 - UNION SECURITY Section 1 . Dues Checkoff : The City , when so authorized and directed in writing by an employee member of the bargaining unit on the authorization form provided by the City , will deduct bargaining unit dues and insur- ance premiums from the wages of such employee. The City will not be held liable for check-off errors but will make proper adjustments when notified of errors as soon as is practical . It is also agreed that neither any employee nor the Union shall have any claim against the City for any deduction 5 made or not made, as the case may be, unless a claim of error is made in writing to the City within 45 calendar days after the t date such deductions were or should have been made. For all dues deduction authorizations received on or before the 10th of the month, dues deductions shall be made for the month in which the application is submitted. Dues will continueAM i i 5 5 to be deducted until the employee rescinds the request in writ- ing . Copies of all such requests for dues cancellation shall be transmitted to the Union. The aggregate deductions of all employees, together with an itemized statement, shall be remitted to the Union no later than the 10th day of the month following the month for which the deductions were made. The itemized listing of the Union members shall reflect employees terminations, retirements , cancellations, leave without pay, return from leave without pay , new members, salary change, new changes , or any other personnel action which would affect the amount of dues to be withheld . The City agrees to automatically adjust the dues amount for employees whose salaries increase or decrease during the term of this Agreement. Section 1. Fair Share: Employees covered by the terms and conditions of this Agreement and who have not authorized the deduction of dues pursuant to Section 1 hereof shall have payments in lieu of dues (fair share) deducted from their pay for transmittal to the Union in accordance with the provisions of Section 1 hereof . The amount of the fair share payment shall be the bona fide cost of representation as certified in writing by the Union to the City and shall not exceed the dues required of employees who are members of the Union . The City shall notify all newly hired employees of this requirement at the time of employment. 6 Bargaining unit members who exercise their right of non- association only when based on a bona fide religious tenet or teaching of a church or religious body which such employee is a member, shall pay an amount of money equivalent to regular month- ly dues to a non-religious charity or to another charitable organization mutually agreed upon by the employee and the Union. Such payment shall be remitted to that charity by the employee and this fact certified by the employee to the City within 10 calendar days of the time dues or fair share payments will have been taken out of the employee ' s paycheck. The City shall, within 10 calendar days of its receipt , send a copy of such certification to the Union. If an employee fails to provide certification to the City by the 10th day , the City shall resume dues or fair share deductions until such notice is provided . Fair share payments shall be deducted from the wages of non- member employees in accordance with ORS 243.672(1 )(c) . The aggregate deductions of all fair share payers shall be remitted, together with an itemized statement, to the Union no later than the 10th of the month following the month for which deductions were made. Section 3. Indemnification: The Union will indemnify , defend , and hold the City harmless against any claim made and against any suit instituted against the City as a result of any City action taken pursuant to the provisions of this Article. 7 ARTICLE 6 - UNION RIGHTS Section 1 . Meetings With the City: Employees who are officers of the Union or otherwise directly involved in a particular grievance shall be allowed to attend meetings with representatives of the City without loss of regular pay. The Union shall advise the City as to which such meeting when the time for the employees will attend any meeting is set, and it shall be the responsibility of each indi- vidual employee to provide advance notice of the meeting to his or her immediate supervisor . The City reserves the right to change the time )f any meeting that unduly disrupts City opera- . j tions. Section 2. Negotiations: The negotiating team of the Union , to be comprised of not ' more than 3 employees, shall be permitted to attend negotiation meetings with City representatives without loss of regular pay when such negotiations are scheduled during the regular work } hours of the involved employees. In addition to the above pro- vided time off for negotiations, each of the Union' s bargaining 4 team members shall be released from duty for up to a total of 3 P a hours. Section 3. Bulletin Boards: The City agrees to furnish and maintain suitable bulletin 1 board space in convenient places to be used by the Union. The Union shall limit its posting of notices and bulletins to such , It bulletin boards. 3 i 8 i 10 x 01111—1 4 Section 4. Personnel Policies: The City shall submit a copy of any proposed revisions to the City 's Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual to the Union for comment before such revisions are adopted. The Union shall also receive a copy of any work rules or other memoranda that are distributed to all of the employees in the City or a department of the City . ARTICLE 7 - CITY SECURITY The Union agrees that during the term of this contract its membership will not participate in a strike, work stoppage, sympathy strike, slowdown, or other interruption of work. Any violation of this Article shall be grounds for disciplinary action up to and including discharge. There shall be no lockout of employees during the term of this Agreement. 1 ARTICLE 8 - PROBATIONARY PERIOD, PROMOTION, AND TRANSFER Section 1 . Determining Seniority: For the purpose of this Agreement , seniority shall be defined as an employee' s length of continuous service w' rh the City from the most recent date of hire in a regular, full-time or regular, part-time position, regardless of whether or not that position is in the bargaining unit. Section 2. Probationary Period: a. New Employee: The probationary period shall be a minimum of 6 months 9 9 for all new employees. By mutual agreement of the City and the employee, an extension of the probationary period of a maximum of an additional 3 months may be implemented. During the probation- ary period , an employee may be discharged at the sole discretion of the City without any reason or cause being shown. b. Promoted Employee: A newly promoted employee will be subject to a proba- tionary period of 6 months in the new classification. By mutual agreement of the City and the employee, an extension of the probationary period for a maximum of an additional 3 months may be implemented. During a promotional proba- tionary period , an employee will continue to be considered a regular employee, will continue to accrue seniority , and shall be protected in discipline and discharge procedures on the same basis as other regular employees. However , such a promotional probationary period employee may be returned to his/her previous classification at the sole discretion of the City. Written notice to the employee of the reasons for the action shall be provided. Em;:loyees shall also have the right to return to their previous classification during the probationary period at their request. Section 3. Job Posting: All vacancies to be filled shall be posted on appropriate 10 i { i bulletin boards for at least 5 days prior to the application deadline. Section 4. Promotions: t Employees shall be granted interviews and shall be given priority consideration for all promotional opportunities, if they meet the qualifications. In cases where two current City k empXoyees are equally qualified for a promotion, the promotion shall be given to the employee who has the greatest seniority. At the time of the promotion, an employee shall receive a pay increase of at least 5%. The promoted employee 's pay rate shall i not, however, exceed the established pay range for the classifi- cation to which he or she is being promoted. Any employee who is t interviewed for a position, and who is not selected, shall be ! entitled to a second interview to discuss actions he or she -might take to become a more viable.,candidate for future openings. f Section 5. Reclassification : k t If an employee believes that the duties of his/her position are no longer consistent with the classification to which he or f she is assigned, a classification review request may be submitted t to the City. The classification review request shall detail the specific changes in job duties that have occurred since the t effective date of this Agreement. The City shall have 45 days to review and respond to a classification review request and shall E have an additional 45 days if an outside consultant is to be j k retained for the purpose of reviewing the request. t 11 s t . No classification review request may be submitted by an employee during the per_.od of his or her probationary service with the City. The foregoing shall not be construed as preventing the City .from exercising its right to transfer employees, to assign job duties, to define and redefine the job duties of any position, and upon its own initiative to reclassify positions pursuant thereto. When a position is reclassified, the incumbent who is sub- ject to the reclassification shall be paid as .follows: a. If the new classification has a higher maximum rate of pay , the employee shall be paid the minimum rate plus S% of the new classification or S% in addition to his/her current rate, whichever is greater. If the employee ' s current rate of pay exceeds the maximum rate of pay of his or her new classification , the employee shall be maintained at his or her current rate of pay until such time as the maximum rate of pay of the new classification exceeds his/her current pay . b. If the new classification has a lower maximum rate of pay, the employee shall receive his/her existing rate of pay but shall not be eligible for cost-of-living increases until such time as the established maximum pay rate for the new classification exceeds his/her rate of pay. C All reclassifications shall be effective upon the first of the month following the month in which the reclassification c 12 z a request was submitted to the City. No grievance regarding an TL employee's classification assignment may be filed until after the provisions of this Section have been exhausted. If a grievance regarding an employee's classification assignment is pursued to arbitration, the arbitrator shall be bound to the standards contained in this Section in making his/her determination. ARTICLE 9 HOURS , OVERTIME, AND PREMIUM PAY Section 1. work Week: The work week, consistent with the operating requirement of the City, shall be a 5-8, 4-10, flexible or part-time as follows: a. A "5-8" work schedule shall consist of 5 consecutive days of 8 work hours each. b. A "4-10" work schedule shall consist of 4 consecutive days of 10 work hours each. C. •A "flexible" work schedule shall be equal in total hours worked during the pay period to that of a "5-8" employee but shall have no maximum or minimum number of work hours per day or work days per week. Such work schedule shall not be in effect unless agreed upon in advance by the individual affected employee and the City. d. "Regular part-time" employees shall be scheduled to work a portion of any of the above-specified schedules. Section 2. Overtime: :. The City and the Union agree to waive the application of ORS L" 13 0 s ii i 279.340 and shall utilize the following provision in determining compensation for overtime: All authorized work shall be compensated at the rate of time-and-one-half for work under the following conditions: a1 Employees assigned to a 5-8 schedule shall receive overtime credit for any work after 8 hours on any work day, and for any work performed on the 6th or 7th day of the employee 's work week. b. Employees assigned to a 4-10 schedule shall receive overtime credit for any work after 10 hours on any work day and for any work performed on the 5th, 6th, or 7th day of the employee's work week. C. Employees assigned to a flexible work schedule shall receive overtime credit for all authorized work hours that exceed 40 i hours per week. i All overtime pay shall be computed to the nearest one- j i quarter hour. Under no conditions will overtime be paid twice for the same hours worked. Section 3. Payment of Overtime: i Overtime that is not scheduled as compensatory time off j during the pay period in which it is worked shall be paid in cash t{ or , at the option of the employee, allowed to accrue as compensa- tory time to a maximum of 40 hours. A permanent record of the overtime accured shall. be available to the employees for inspec- tft i 14 tion upon request. Compensatory time off may be taken by mutual consent of the employee and the City and is to be scheduled in a manner that is consistent with the needs of the City. All accrued compensatory time shall be paid in cash upon termination of employment with the City. Section 4. Shift Change Premium: If an employee 's regularly scheduled work hours are changed with less than 7 days advance notice, those hours upon the first day of the modified schedule that fall outside of the originally scheduled hours shall be paid at the overtime rate. The pro- visions of this Section shall not apply if the change in work t hours is at the request of the employee or is the result of an unforeseeable circumstance , such as inclement weather. Section 5. Call-Back: S s Any employee who has completed his/her work day and departed the City 's premises upon completion of said day and is then called back to work more than 2 hours before --the start of his/her next normal shift will receive a minimum of 2 hours pay at time- and-one-half at the employee ' s regular rate of pay. In the event 3, z such a call-in occurs less than 2 hours prior to the start of the employee 's next normally scheduled shift, the employee shall receive overtime pay until the start of his/her regular shift, at which time he/she will begin receiving compensation at his/her regular straight-time rate. t , S 15 9 t i i Section 6. Acting in Capacity : The parties agree to strive to encourage and provide on-the- job training for employees. s When an employee is assigned for a limited period to perform duties of a higher level of classification for more than 10 days f (8 hours or any portion thereof) , that employee shall be paid 1 premium pay of a minimum of S%, but not to exceed a maximum of 10%. When assignments are made to work out of classification for } I more than 10 days, the employee shall be compensated for all t F hours worked beginning from the first day of the assignment for the full period of the assignment. An employee performing duties out of classification for training and p purposes developmental ur oses shall be so informed in writing , and it shall be mutually agreed to by the supervisor and of the employee. The notice shall state the purpose and length i assignment. During the training , there shall be no extra pay for the work. A copy of the notice shall be placed in the employee' s ¢ i file. ARTICLE 10 - HOLIDAYS The City of Tigard shall observe the following paid holidays: i New Year ' s Day . Martin Luther King Day Presidents Day Memorial Day 16 ( t t t Independence Day Labor Day rL Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Day after Thanksgiving Christmas Day Ora floating .holiday If a holiday falls on a Saturday , it will be! observed on the previous Friday ; if it falls on a Sunday , it will be observed on the following Monday. A regular , full.-time employee shall receive 8 hours pay for each of the holidays listed above on which he/she performs no work. If an employee is required to work on any of the holidays listed above, he/she shall be compensated for all hours worked at the rate of time-and-one-half with a minimum guarantee of 2 hours work. Holiday benefits for regular, part-time employees (20 hours per week or more) shall be granted on a prorated basis (hours per week worked divided by 40) . ARTICLE 11 - VACATION Section 1 . Accrual: Full-time employees shall accrue vacation days at the following rates: 0 to 6-month probation period No vacation 6 months to 1 year of service 7.0 hrs/mo 17 After the 1st anniversary of service 8.0 hrs/mo After the 5th anniversary of service 10.0 hrs/mo After the 10th anniversary of service 12.5 hrs/mo After the 15th anniversary of service 14.0 hrs/mo After the 20th anniversary of. service 16.0 hrs/mo A part-time employee shall accrue vacation on a prorata basis based upon the relationship their regularly scheduled work week bears to that of a full-time employee Notwithstanding the above-specified rates of vacation accrual, no employee shall be allowed to accumulate vacation in excess of 160 hours. It shall be the responsibility of each employee to schedule sufficient vacation so that he or she is not denied accrual of additional vacation. Section 2. Utilization: Vacation periods shall be scheduled at the mutual agreement of the City and the individual employee. Between April lst and 15th of each year, the City shall circulate within each depart- ment and in order of seniority , with the most senior employee afforded the first election , a vacation sign-up roster for the following fiscal year. Each employee shall be allowed to select one continuous vacation period from the portions of the year in which vacation is available. After the seniority vacation selec- tion ' elec-tion ' as provided for above, all additional vacation will be scheduled subject to the operational needs of the City with the first request received having priority basis. 18 s t f f An employee shall also be allowed to convert up to 1 week of accrued vacation time into cash, provided he or she is also p i taking at least 1 week of vacation time off . a All regular employees shall be entitled to payment for unused vacation leave upon separation from City service. In the event of death, the employee' s heirs will be entitled to payment i for unused vacation leave. Approved vacation leave may not be cancelled by the City except in the event of an emergency which creates an abnormal l work load or other condition not under the control of the City . F f. In the event of such condition or emergency , the employee shall r be notified of the cancellation in writing. Unrecoverable trans- . portation or lodging deposits, provided the employee notified the i City of same at the time that the vacation was cancelled, will be t 9 paid by the City if the employee produces proof of such unre- coverable deposits. i r i Section 3. Transient Provision: i Any employee who , as of the effective: date of this Agreement, was accruing a greater number of hours of vacation per { month than the number of hours per month that is specified for his/her years of service in Section 1 hereof , shall continue to accrue vacation at his/her current rate until such time as he/she s will receive a greater number of hours of vacation per month a r pursuant to the scheduled specified in Section 1 . e s 19 g. t fs VENE ARTICLE 12 - BENEFITS Section 1 . Life Insurance: The City shall provide each employee with a $25,000 group term policy and will pay 100% of the premium. Section 2. Medical Insurance: . . The City agrees to provide League of Oregon Cities Plan II coverage or substantially equivalent level of coverage for each employee and all enrolled dependents, subject to the following: a. If the employee elects LOC Plan IV, Kaiser, or other available alternative insurance coverage, the maximum City contribution towards the cost of such coverage shall be in accordance with past practice and limited to the cost of the basic coverage specified above. b. As soon as is practicable, the plan shall be modified so as to provide for the preferred-provider option offered by Blue Cross and the League of Oregon Cities. C. Effective July , 1988, for coverage to commence August 1 , 1988, the maximum additional cost to the City for medical insurance shall be limited to 10%. Specifically , if medical insurance rates increase by more than 10% , the amount in excess of 10% shall, at the option of the Union , be defrayed via payroll deduction or an equivalent reduction in wages so as to limit the increased cost to the City to 10% of its prior medical insurance cost. •:L' 20 Section 3. Dental Insurance: The City shall provide fully paid Oregon Dental Service Incentive Plan 70/30 for each employee and all enrolled dependents or substantially equivalent level coverage. Section 4. Disability Insurance: The City agrees to provide disability/salary continuation insurance at 60% of base salary , up to $1 ,000 per month, to provide coverage after 60 days of disability. Section 5. Retirement: The City shall continue to contribute 10% of each employee 's gross pay to that employee ' s established 401A retirement account. Section 6. Part-Time Employees: Employees who are regularly scheduled to work 32 or more hours per week shall receive all benefits specified in Section 1 through 3, above. Employees who are regularly scheduled to work less than 32 hours shall receive a City contribution equal to 50% of the cost of such benefits if the employee elects to pay an equal amount via payroll deduction. Section 7. Carrier Selection : The City reserves the right to provide the insurances and other benefits outlined above through a carrier of its choice. The City shall notify the Union of any changes in insurance carrier or other carriers at least 30 days prior to the change. The parties agree, that all insurance and other benefits are 21 ' subject to the terms and conditions of contracts and/or agree- ments between the City and the insurer(s) . ARTICLE 13 - SALARIES Section 1. Wage Rates: The salary range for each classification shall be as set forth in Appendix A hereof . All advancement within the range shall be based upon merit . Section 2. Probationary Step: New employees shall be hired within the range established for their classification and advanced S% effective with the first full pay period following completion of their probationary period . Section 3. Evaluations: All employees shall be evaluated in writing a minimum of two times per year. The results of the evaluation shall be reviewed with the employee and the employee shall have the right to attach written comments or objections to the evaluation. All salary in- creases within the salary range established in Appendix A shall be pursuant to a merit performance review which shall be based upon the written evaluation as specified above. All employees who are not at the top step of their salary range shall have a merit performance review which shall be conducted within one year of the last merit performance review. The employee shall be in- formed of the results , of his/her merit performance review, in- cluding the amount of his/her merit increase if any, at least 20 22 days prior to the date that he or she is eligible to receive a merit increase. ARTICLE 14 - TRAVEL, TRAINING, AND REIMBURSEMENT Section 1 . Mileage Reimbursement: Whenever an employee is authorized to use his/her personal vehicle in performance of official City duties, he/she shall be compensated at the standard IRS-allowed rate (as of May 20, 1987 , 21 .5 cents/mile) . Section 2. Expense Reimbursement: Whenever travel outside the City is required , the City shall reimburse employees for necessary and reasonable receipted meal, lodging , and other expenses. Section 3. Training: a. Assigned Training : In addition to receiving per diem and lodging , assigned training time shall be paid for as hours worked. Travel time, provided no overnight stay is involved , shall also be paid for as hours worked. b. Voluntary Training : Training that is not assigned may be with or without pay reimbursement of expenses and tuition costs at the discretion of the City . Such training or course work may also be subject to such other conditions and restrictions as the City in its discretion may specify. The employee shall be advised at the ,.time that training is approved as to 23 whether the training is considered assigned or voluntary training. Section 4. Tuition Reimbursement: The City will reimburse an employee for 100% of the cost of tuition and fees for courses conducted outside the employee's regular working hours to provide employees an opportunity for personal career development and to increase the technical com- petency of the City. This reimbursement will be made with the provision the employee requesting such reimbursement made appli- cation for approval of the course and tuition reimbursement to his/her department head prior to the registration deadline for such course. The employee must show evidence of a "C" or better or passing (when no grading is used) or must reimburse the City of all costs advanced to the employee for the course. a. If the class taken was related to the employee' s current position, and the employee is separated from the City _.service . for any reason except involuntary dismissal within 1 year of the date of reimbursement , it shall cause 50% of the amount reimbursed within such year to be deducted from the i employee ' s final paycheck. b. If the class taken was related to reasonable promotion or r `s transfer opportunities, and the employee is separated from ` City service for any reason except involuntary dismissal within 1 year, it shall cause 100% of the amount reimbursed a to be deducted from the employee 's final paycheck. If the employee terminates for any reason except involuntary dis- L Ar IL 24 t s s missal within 2 years, it shall cause 50% of the amount 1 reimbursed to be deducted from the employee' s final pay- which are only offered during check. Educational courses approved by the department head regular working hours may be an be conveniently arranged and arrange- provided time off ct ments can be made to make up time off the same week. s Section 5. Clothing Allowance: On July 19 each employee listed in this section, shall receive a credit of Upon presenta- $70 for a clothing allowance. hall be reimbursed for clothing . tion of a receipt, employees s Employee classifications qualifying for this clothing allowance i are: s Auto Service Worker f Building Inspector C Level 5 Building Inspector B Level Building Inspector A Level v 4 Engineering Tech. I t Engineering Tech. II i Engineering Tech. III Maintenance Worker Mechanic Utility Worker I Utility Worker II Utility Worker III Building Maintenance Specialist 25 i , { Any employee who is hired after July 1st of any year shall be eligible for a pro rated clothing reimbursement based upon , i that portion of the year that remains to be worked before the Y next July 1st. ARTICLE 15 - .SICK LEAVE i f Section 1 . Accrual: Regular full-time employees shall receive 8 hours of sick i leave for each full calendar month of service. Part-time employ- ee shall receive prorated sick leave of a full-time employee. There shall be no limit on the amount of sick leave that an employee may accrue. i Section 2. Utilization : Accrued sick leave shall be available for use on the regu- ays that occur from the first through the larly scheduled work d 59th calendar day of the employees disability that is due to illness or injury . In the event an employee is to be absent from work because of his/her sickness or injury , the employee shall notify the supervisor as soon as possible of the expected absence and the aq nature and expected length thereof . 4 An employee may also use sick leave where there is an ill- ness in his/her family which necessitates making arrangements for E the ill relative. For the purpose of this Section , members of an employee 's family shall mean: relatives and dependents domiciled in the employee ' s household . : 26 { i C , Sick leave benefits shall not be available for any illness or injury that is or could be covered by Worker's Compensation benefits provided by the City or another employer , however , if the employee is injured while on the job with the City the fol- lowing shall apply: 1 . If the duration of the absence from work is less than 14 days, the day of the injury and the subsequent 2 calendar days may be charged to sick leave. 2. For the first 90 days of such temporary disability , the City shall continue to make the same contribution to all benefit 1 programs specified in Article 12 , Benefits, as would have been made if the employee had worked his/her regularly scheduled hours of work. 1 t Section 3. Physician ' s Certificate: Sick leave benefits shall not be paid for any absence that Y is for 40 consecutive work hours or more unless the employee pre- sents a physician ' s statement upon return to duty. For absences of less than 40 consecutive hours , the City may , by prior notification to the employee, require a physician' s certification of illness. When verification is required for r absences of less than 40 hours, the City will reimburse the employee for any out-of-pocket physician expenses that result. • 1 The abuse of sick leave shall be grounds for denial of sick leave for the period of time involved and shall in addition be a grounds for disciplinarLy action. r AT f 27 Y 410 IM Y i t f l Section 4. Termination and Retirement: An employee who retires from City service shall receive an additional retirement plan contribution that is equal to 50% of the cash value in wages of all accrued sick leave. An employee i shall be considered to have retired from City service only if he ; or she begins receiving social security retirement (not disabil- ity) benefits upon termination of City employment, or if he or she has 30 or more years of service with the City. R ARTICLE 16 - OTHER LEAVE Section 1 . Bereavement Leave: i In the event of a death in the employee ' s family , up to 5 days of necessary time off for travel , making funeral and other arrangements and for funeral attendance shall be allowed. For the purpose of this Article, an employee' s family shall mean: spouse, parent, children, step-children , brother, brother-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, grandpar- ents, parents, grandchildren and any other person who is a i dependent of the employee. Section 2. Jury and Witness Duty: Employees shall be granted leave with pay for service on a jury or when under court subpoena as a disinterested witness, 4 S provided the employee shall seek all fees due him for jury or t witness duty, except mileage reimbursement, and turn said fees over to the City. Upon being excused from jury or witness duty r s i 28 fi E a M1111 IN I f i for any day an employee shall immedia.tely contact his/her super- visor for assignment for the remainder of that workday. Time off from work for appearances in court and other pro- ceedings other than as provided above, shall be charged to accrued vacation time, compensatory time or leave without pay. Section 3. Leave Without Pay: A regular employee who has completed his probationary period may be granted a leave of absence without pay for up to 12 months when the work of the employee ' s department will not be seriously handicapped by his/her absence and when there is good cause for the leave. Requests for such leave must be in writing and must establish reasonable justification for the approval by the City . Section 4. Military Leave: Leave of absence on a paid or non-paid basis shall be as provided by ORS and the Veteran's Re-employment Rights Law, Title 38, USC Chapter 43. ARTICLE 17 - LAYOFF Section 1 . Notice: A layoff is defined as an involuntary separation from the City for reasons that do not reflect discredit upon the employee. The affected employee and the Union shall be given written notice of a layoff at least 15 working days before the effective date, stating the reason for the layoff , and the bumping options, if any, that the employee. has. 29 Section 2. Order of Layoff : If a layoff is implemented, employees shall be laid off in inverse_ order of their seniority within the classification affected by the layoff on a City-.wide basis. Before any regular full-time or regular part-time employee in a given classification may be laid off , all seasonal, casual and irregular part-time employees who are working in the same classification shall be terminated . Seniority shall be defined as the employee 's total time of service with the City excluding non-paid leaves of absence that are for 1 full calendar month or longer since his/her most recent date of hire. If 2 or more employees have equal seniority , the employee to be laid off shall be determined by a lot. Section 3. Bumping: In the event of a layoff any employee who would otherwise be subject to a layoff shall have the right to displace a less senior employee in any lower paying classification provided he or she is qualified to perform the work of the lower paying class- ification. An employee shall be considered qualified to perform the work of such lower classification if he or she meets all of the job qualification requirements specified in the most recent job recruitment announcement for the classification in question. Any employee who exercises his/her bumping rights shall serve a probationary period of.L3 months. During such probationary period �\. 30 the City shall have the right to lay the employee off if the employee if not performing the job in an adequate manner . If an employee wishes to waive his/her right to displace an employee in a lower classification and thereby be subject to layoff , that employee shall so notify the City in writing within 3 business days of his/her receipt of notice of involuntary transfer to the lower classification. When an employee is trans- ferred to a lower classification as provided for above, he/she shall be placed at the maximum rate of the salary range of the new classification or if his/her current salary is less than the maximum rate of new classification, lie/she shall be maintained at his/her current salary . For purposes of this Article, super- visory employees who have prior service in the bargaining unit shall retain previously accrued seniority and shall also continue to accrue seniority while serving as a supervisor. Section 4. Recall: If a position opening occurs in the classification that the employee was employed in at the time of layoff , that employee, provided he/she has the greatest seniority of any employee on layoff from that class shall be offered the position. An employee will remain on the layoff list and be eligible for recall for 1.2 months. The City shall notify a laid off employee of a position opening by certified letter, return receipt requested , to his/her address of record as maintained in the employee 's personnel file. It shall be the employee 's responsibility to insure that his/her current address is on file 31 1 at the time the recall occurs. The employee shall have 3 days from the receipt , or return by the post office, of such notice to notify the City in writing of his/her intent to return within 10 days of the date of receipt of such notice. If the employee fails to so respond to a recall notice within the time herein specified , or if he/she refuses an offered position, all rights to recall shall be terminated . Employees returning from layoff shall have previously accrued sick leave and seniority reinstated , but shall not receive such benefits for the period of the layoff . Section 5. Severance Pay: In the event of layoff , any employee with more than 5 years of service with the City shall receive 1 month' s severance pay upon layoff . If an employee who receives payment under this Section is recalled within the 12 month period , they shall be permitted to take up to 6 months (12 paychecks) to repay the City for money received under this Section . ARTICLE 18 - DISCIPLINE AND DISCHARGE Section 1 . Just Cause: Disciplinary actions taken against employees shall be limit- ed to the following: written reprimand , disciplinary probation, reduction in pay or other monetary assessment, demotion, suspen- sion, or di-scharge. Disciplinary action shall be for just cause 32 only and will not be -taken against an employee without prozedural due process as herein defined, except as follows: Demotion: A demotion during a promotional probationary period (Article 7) , that is in lieu of a layoff (Article 16) or that is a bona fide reclassification shall not be the basis for a claim of a violation of this Article. If the City has reason to reprimand an employee, it shall be in a manner that is least likely to embarrass the employee before other employees and the public. Section 2. Suspension Pending Investigation: An employee may be immediately suspended pending an investi- gation and completion of the due process steps if his/her contin- ued presence on the job would constitute a safety hazard to him/herself or to other ei.iployees or be potentially disruptive to City operations. Such suspension shall be without pay, however , if after the investigation the employee is reinstated without being disci- plined, the employee shall receive all lost pay and benefits for the period of the suspension. Section 3. Due Process: Due process shall require the following: a. Before the City notifies the employee of disciplinary action pursuant to part B of this section, the employee will be served with a written notice and provided an opportunity to respond as follows:. L" 33 Y MEMMERM INS 1. The employee shall be advised that disciplinary action is being considered. 2. The specific charges or performance deficiencies will be identified. 3. The' employee will be advised of his/her right to meet with the supervisor with or without Union representa- tion and respond to the charges. b. At or after the above referenced meeting/response and such additional investigation as may be deemed appropriate by the supervisor has been completed , the superv_is.or_ shall make his/her decision and provide written notice thereof to the employee. ARTICLE 19 - PERSONNEL RECORDS Section 1 . File Access: Each employee and each former employee shall have the right to review the contents of his/her own personnel file. At his/her option , he/she may request to be accompanied by a Union represen- tative of 'his/her choosing. Access to an employees personnel file shall be limited to only the individual employee or former employee involved, his/her designated representative, such supervisory and/or confidential employees of the City who are assigned to review and maintain personnel files, provided such access does not conflict with the t provisions of ORS 192..500. 34 The employee shall have the right to receive a copy of the materials in his/her personnel file in full or part. Except when otherwise authorized by the employee, in writ- ing, no information from the employee's personnel file shall be reproduced or released for use outside of the City except verifi- cation of employment, employment dates, job title, and pay range. Section 2. Entry of Adverse Material: No material, which in any form can be construed , interpreted or acknowledged to be derogatory towards the employee shall be placed in the employee' s personnel file that does not bear either the signature of the employee indicating that he/she has been show the material or a statement by the employee that he/she has been shown the material and has refused to sign it. A copy of such material shall be furnished to the employee. An employee may include an explanatory statement in his/her file in answer to mom any reprimand. or admonishment. however , the above shall not apply if timely personal serv- am ice is not practicable. In such a circumstance, the City shall send a copy of the material by certified letter to the last known address to the employee at the time the material is placed in the file. In addition , the certified return receipt shall be placed in the personnel file. Material placed in the personnel record of an employee without conforming with the provision(s) of this Article will not be used by the- City in. any disciplinary proceedings involving the employee. 35 Section 3. Removal of Material from the File: All letters and materials of commendation and letters of caution, consultation, warning, admonishment and reprimand shall be considered temporary contents of the personnel r3cord and shall be removed and destroyed no later than 3 years after they have been placed in the employee 's personnel file. ARTICLE 20 - CONTRACTING AND SUBCONTRACTING OF WORK Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 243.650 to 243.782 , the Union recognizes that the City shall have the right to make and to implement decisions relative to the contracting and sub- contracting of work as it may determine; however , before the City may contract work presently and regularly performed by members of the Bargaining unit and provided such contracting will result in the layoff or demotion of current members of the bargaining unit , the' following shall occur: 1 . The Union shall be notified in writing at least 70 days in advance of the proposed implementation of such subcontract- ing . Such notification shall include a detailed analysis of the likely impact on the bargaining unit, and shall also outline the projected financial impact and other considera- tions that the City has deemed are pertinent to its deliberations to contract or subcontract work. 2. Upon receipt of such notice, the Union shall have 20 days in which to notify the City of its desire to meet and discuss the subcontracting. The Union may propose changes in exist- 36 xist-36 ing work rules, benefits, and/or wage rates in order to compete more effectively with the contractors or subcon- tractors and/or the Union may propose alternative staffing arrangements that it believes would reduce the impact of the contracting or subcontracting. The City shall not finalize a decision to contract or sub- contract such work until after it has afforded the Union the opportunity to meet as provided above. The City shall give full consideration to all timely Union proposals before a decision is finalized. If such work is to be contracted or subcontracted , the City agrees to transfer or demote employees to any available vacant positions rather than lay off employees whenever it is . feasible to do so; provided the employee meets the minimum quali- fications with respect to education and work exVerience for the position to which tie/she is to be transferred or demoted to, and provided that no employee rights or benefits under the Layoff Article of this Agreement are abridged . A demotion shall be defined as involuntary reassignment to a new classification with a lower paying maximum salary rate. ARTICLE 21 - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Section 1 . Procedure: To promote better relations, the parties agree to settle any t disputes as to the meaning or interpretation of this contract by the following procedure: Aft 37 STEP 1. After first attempting to resolve the grievance in— JON formally , the Union, or any employee with notice to the Union, may claim a breach of this Agreement in writing to the employee' s immediate supervisor within 14 days from the occurrence thereof , or the employee' s knowledge thereof . The notice shall include: a. A statement of the grievance and, relevant facts; b•. Provision of the contract violated ; C. Remedy sought ; The supervisor shall respond to the grievance in writing within 7 days, with a copy to the Union. STEP 2. If , after 7 days from the date of submission of the grievance to the supervisor, the grievance remains unresolved, the grievance may be submitted within 7 days to the department head . The department head may meet with the aggrieved party , who may request Union representation at the hearing. The department head shall respond to the grievance in writing within 7 days, with a copy to the Union. STEP 3. If , after 7 days from the date of submission of the grievance to the department head , the grievance remains unresolved, the grievance may be submitted within 7 days to the City Administrator, who shall meet with the aggrieved party and Union representatives and shall respond to the grievance in writing within 14 days, with a copy to the Union. STEP 4. If the grievance is not resolved within 14 days from submission of the grievance to the City Administrator, it may be submitted within 14 days to an arbitrator. The arbitrator shall 38 • be selected by mutual agreement of the parties. If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator within 25 days of the submission of the grievance to the City Administrator, he/she shall be chosen in the following manner: a. A list of 5 names from the Oregon Employment Relations Board shall be requested and the parties shall alternately strike 1 name from the list until only I is left . The Union shall strike the first name. The 1 remaining shall be the arbi— trator. 1 day will be allowed for the striking of each name. b. The arbitrator shall render a decision in writing within 30 days time. The powers of the arbitrator shall be limited to interpretation of this Agreement and determining if it has been violated . The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding on both parties. • c. The cost of the arbitration shall be borne equally by the parties. Each party shall be responsible for the costs of presenting its own case to the arbitrator. Section 2. Time Limits: Any time limits, specified in the grievance procedure, may be waived by mutual written agreement of the parties. Failure to submit the grievance in accordance with these time limits without such waiver shall constitute abandonment of the grievance. A grievance may be terminated at any time upon receipt of a signed statement from the Union or the employee that the matter has been resolved . 39 If at any step of the grievance procedure the City fails to issue a response within the time limits set forth in this Article, the grievance shall automatically advance to the next step of the grievance procedure unless withdrawn by the grievant or the Union. ARTICLE 22 - TERM OF AGREEMENT AND REOPENING This Agreement shall be effective the 71IS day of and shall remain in full force and effect through the 30th day of June, 1989. This Agreement shall automatically be renewed from year to year thereafter unless either party shall notify the other in writing not later than October 1 , 1988 , that it wishes to modify this Agreement. i t 40 AM- OREGON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION --ITY OF TIGARD Signature Signature ria. Title Title -t- Date Date TIGARD MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES Signature Title ZEZ Date 41 f s EXHIBIT AND ADDENDUM A - SALARY RANGES Section 1 . Retroactive to July 1 , 1987:# Position Titles: FY 1987-88 Pay Ranges: Helper $709-$1085 Library Aide $721-$1106 Office Aide $721-$1106 Office Assistant I $976-$1303 Library Aide I $976-$1303 Billing Clerk I $976-$1303 Maintenance Worker $1098-$1468 Library Assistant II $1119-$1496 Office Assistant II $1119-$1496 Billing Clerk II $1119-$1496 Engineering Aidc $1185-$1576 Library Assistant III $1208-$1607 Office Assistant III $1208-$1607 Accounting Clerk $1208-$1607 Engineering Asst./Draftsman $1272-$1696 Utility Worker I $1272-$1696 Office Assistant IV $1297-$1729 Library Assistant IV $1297-$1729 Senior Accounting Clerk $1297-$1729 Engineering Technician I $1370-$1827 Utility Worker II $1370-$1827 Equipment Service Worker $1370-$1827 Building Maint. Specialist $1370-$1827 Utility Worker III $1468-$1957 Equipment Mechanic $1468-$1957 Codes Enforcement Officer $1468-$1957 Building Inspector I $1468-$1957 Engineering Technician II $1685-$2109 Building Inspector II $1810-$2263 Engineering Technician III $1957-$2452 Building Inspector III ` $1957-$2452 42 Section 2. Effective July 1 , 1988: Position Titles: FY 1988-89 Pay Range: Helper $730-$1118 Library Aide $743--$1139 Office Aide $743-$1139 Office Assistant I $1005-$1342 Library Aide I $1005-$1342 Billing Clerk I $1005-$1342 Maintenance Worker $1131-$1512 Library Assistant II $1153-$1541 Office Assistant II $1153-$1541 Billing Clerk II $1153-$1541 Engineering Aide $1221-$1623 Library Assistant III $1244-$1655 Office Assistant III $1244-$1655 Accounting Clerk $1244-$1655 Engineering Asst. Draftsman $ 310-$1747 Utility Worker $1310-$1747 Office Assistant IV $1336-$1781 Library Assistant IV $1336-$1781 Senior Accounting Clerk $1336-$1781 Engineering Technician I $1411-$1882 Utility Worker II $141.1-$1882 Equipment Service Worker $1411-$1882 Building Maint. Specialist $1411-$1882 Utility Worker III $1512-$2016 Equipment Mechanic $1512-$2016 Codes Enforcement Officer $1512-$2016 Building Inspector I $1512-$2016 Engineering Technician II $1736-$2172 Building Inspector II $1864-$2331 Engineering Technician III $2016-$2526 Building Inspector III $2016-$2526 [TIG-GE.F21 43 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 14, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Chamber/Old PREVIOUS ACTION: Chamber Lease City Nall Sublease A reement A reement A roved 8/10/87 n PREPARED BY: Jill Monley DEPT kiEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Manor Tom Brian �! P LICY ISSUE Shall the City continue to sublease a portion of the old City Hall through the Tigard Chamber of Commerce to Michael Narr. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Chamber's original lease had expired and was continuing on a month-to--month basis. The new lease, which was approved August 10th clarifies exactly which areas are let, joint used and available for City use. The Chamber's long-range plans still remain to purchase, but it is not currently feasible. The lease with the Chamber requires City approval for any subleases. Michael Marr has requested to sublease and the attached sublease would accomplish this according to the terms of the Chamber lease. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1 . Sublease to Michael Marr for two years. 7.. Take no action at this time. FISCAL. IMPACT The lease and sublease payments cover basic maintenance, taxes and operating costs which all protect the City's equity ownership. SUGGESTED ACTION Authorize Mayor to sign the attached month-to-month sublease through June 30, 1989. cw/0597D SUBLEASE THIS SUBLEASE is hereby entered into this 1st day of July, 1987, by and between the TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. , as Sublessor, and MICHAEL MARR, as Sublessee. In consideration of the Sublessee's agreement to abide by the covenants contained herein, including the payment of reasonable rent, the Sublessor does hereby lease to the Sublessee those certain premises, as is, sit-.zated in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, known and described as follows: ---Approximately 105 square feet (more specifically set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference herein as area numbered 6) in the Northwest corner of that office building located at 12420 SW Main Street, and further described as Tax Lot 04400, Map 2512AB.--- The terms and conditions of the Sublease shall be as follows: 1. This shall be a month to month tenancy commencing on the date of this agreement and continuing until terminated in accordance with the provisions of this agreement but in no case shall the Sublease extend beyond June 30, 1989. 2. Rent shall be paid at $150.00 per month, payable on or before the first day of each month. If rent is not paid on or before the 5th day of each month, there shall be assessed an additional $50 late charge. Said rent payment includes payment of all utilities. Y 3. This Sublease may be terminated by either party upon 30 days prior written notice, unless the Sublessor's lease with the City of Tigard is terminated pursuant to paragraph (8) of that lease, a copy of which is attached hereto. 4. Sublessee shall at all times during the term hereof, at his own expense, maintain and keep in effect insurance policies insuring both the Sublessor and the Sublessee against all liability for damages to person or property in or about the leased premises and for property damage arising out of or related to Sublessee's use of the t. 1 - SUBLEASE i i c 1 I premises and/or the Sublessee's covenants herein contained in an amount not less than the amounts set out in paragraph 13 of the Sublessoe's lease with the City of Tigard, a copy of which is attached hereto. Sublessee agrees and shall indemnify and hold Sublessor harmless against any and all claims and demands arising from the negligence of the Sublessee, his employees, agents, invitees, as well as those arising from his failure to comply with any covenant of this Sublease, and he shall at his own expense, defend the Sublessor against any and all suits or actions or actions arising out of same negligence, actual or alleged, and all appeals therefrom, and shall satisfy and discharge any judgment which may be awarded against Sublessor in any such suit or action. 5. Sublessee shall be responsible for installing a phone jack in the space leased to him. He will be provided, by the Sublessor, with a key to the leased premises and the alarm codes necessary for his access to the leased premises. 6. Sublessee hereby agrees to abide by the terms of the Sublessor's underlying lease agreement with the City of Tigard in all its particulars, except as those terms may have been modified by the terms of this Sublease. A copy of the underlying lease agreement between the Sublessor and the City of Tigard is attached hereto and by this reference is hereby fully incorporated herein. Sublessor: Sublessee: TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF CO RCE By J n E. Schwab Michael Marr sident CONSENT TO SUBLEASE The undersigned, being the Mayor of the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation, and owner of the premises leased to the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, Inc. , and subject to the Sublease described above, hereby consents to subleasing a portion of the premises to Michael Marr on the terms and conditions outlined herein. CITY OF TIGARD By�it-'l/L' _ Thomas M. Brian, Mayor 2 - SUBLEASE UBIT A ASK r ti J U, 14- 70 4-0 J ' T � ' i /0. 8 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 31, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 20, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Computer Center PREVIOUS ACTION: Annual Contract with Operation Contract IPM dated 5/1/86 PREPARED BY: Wayne Lowry, Fin. Director DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: Computer Users Committee aaasaaaaacaxa xxsaaaaaa a.ssaxax xa as aaaaxaxaaaaxx xsxaaxs=aaaaaa.xs=xaaxaaasa xas LICY ISSUE Personal services contracts over $15,000 require approval of the local Contract Review Board. mammaaam sasses asixaaaaaaaaaaxa asaa saaaaaaaaasa as a sass sass aasaaaaaxaaasaaaaaaaxaa INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Council in approving the purchase of the Burroughs computer system in 1986 also approved a contract for the operation of the computer center. The contract was with IPM Inc., the vendor that we also purchased our financial software from. The contract with IPM provided the City with a full time on site computer operator and a quarter time management level operator as needed. The original contract signed in May of 1986 lapsed on July 1, 1987. The continuation of the contract from July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 was included in the 1987-88 Adopted Budget. In negotiation of the contract, the monthly charge of 13560 has not increased and the vendor has included additional computer operator hours for emergencies and database reorganization with no additional charge. It should be noted that the vendor's name has been changed from IPM Inc. to Management Systems Northwest, Inc. Management Systems Northwest is partially owned by IPM but is involved solely in the operation of computer centers. Because of the nature of the relationship to our software vendor, IPM, the Computer Users Committee felt that continuation of service was in the best interest of the City. Approval of the contract as submitted will ensure the City's continued progress in the area of automation and will provide us with vital coverage and operation of our computer facility. maasaaaamaasaaaaxaaaaaaaamammaamas:azaaaaasaaaaaaasaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamaaaaaaaaaaaa ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve contract with Management Systems Northwest for operation of computer center. 2. Disapprove contract. aaaxwxaxaaaxaas¢a raamaaaaaaaaa xaaaasaaaammaaaamaaaaaxa xsaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaax=zaaa FISCAL IMPACT 1. Annual cost of $42,720 budgeted in General Government in 1987-88 adopted T budget. seas aaasaaaaaasaaaaamaasaaamaaaaaaxavaaaaaaaaaxaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasaaaaaa SUGGESTED ACTION Staff and Computer Users Committee recommend approval. cn/0641D Management Systems Northwest, Inc . 1 City of Tigard, Oregon July 1, 1987 SERVICES CONTRACT * +� * --CONTRACT-- * * * * OPERATION and MANAGEMENT of the COMPUTER CENTER This agreement by and between: Management Systems Northwest, Inc. hereafter referred to as "Contractor" or "Management Systems" and: The City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard , Oregon hereafter referred to as "City". The parties hereto, in consideration of the mutual covenants expressed, agree as follows: t Jill t Management Systems Northwest, Inc. 2 City of Tigard, Oregon July 1 , 1987 SERVICES CONTRACT I CONTRACTOR shall perform or provide as follows: the term of this agreement , CONTRACTOR shall be a. During to day operation of the City of Tigard responsible for the day minimum, CONTRACTOR shall provide the Computer Center. As a following levels of coverage: 1 . A management level computer center manager as needed. erator 40 hours 2. The equivalent of one computer op per week, Monday through Friday. 3. Up to 100 hours annually of additional computer time for emergencies, database operator reorganizations and related activsub�ect to CITY Additional overtime may be situations. approval unless regretimeerion an annual 4. Up to 50 hours of programmer erforming other basis for writing reports and p tasks outside those normally required for software system usage, said time would be provided when requested by the CITY. approval of all persons CITY shall have the 1Computerght of Center pursuant to this assigned to the City of Tigardwithhold its approval- paragraph. CITY shall not unreasonably witCITY and CONTRACTOR During the first quarter of the contract , shall meet and establish a policy to evaluate Management System personnel under this provision. The persons provided pursuant to this paragraph shall levels of experience required to manage an have appropriateto ees of CONTRACTOR , operate the Computer Center and shalhtbtoedprect or supervise the not CITY, and CITY shall have no rig activities of the individuals. S responsibility for the management and b. CONTRACTOR operation of the City of Tigard's Computer Center includes lly management and operational Bf—1000 actio s norma ofcomputersuted to the operation of a Burro g CONTRACTOR shall , during the term of t isCITagreement ,may C. roup work closely with a computer counsel or user g or establish, providing communications and support required for a ` computer ccunsel to perform its duties. Management Systems Northwest, Inc. 3 City of Tigard, Oregon July 1 , 1987 SERVICES CONTRACT d. CONTRACTOR will coordinate the management and operation of the computer Center with the designated representative of CITY. CONTRACTOR will assist the CITY in achieving it goals as set forth in CITY's yearly work plan. e. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for coordination of all activities with those agencies, corporations or persons who usually service the Computer Center, including Burroughs Corporation and such other organizations who during the period of this contract might be included by CITY for coordination purposes. Additionally CONTRACTOR will coor:inate and interact with departmental managers and any other usLrs of the Computer Center. f. CONTRACTOR will insure the integrity of the date base and programs of CITY by performing those activities set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein . g. CONTRACTOR in providing for the services set forth in this agreement is not obligated for the provisions of or financial responsibilities for the computer or ancillary machinery , supplies and hardware maintenance which are supplied and paid for by CITY and maintained by other organizations and which are a designated maintenance responsibility of CITY. h. CITY may request and CONTRACTOR may provide such other additional professional services not set forth above, when said services are requested by CITY in writing, after acceptance by CONTRACTOR. Such additional services shall be charged to CITY at CONTRACTOR'S prevailing charges, terms and conditions for such services. i. On call operations shall be provided if so requested on a 24 hour, 7 day per week basis. This service would provide an operator within 1 hour on site for emergency system operations. Cost for this service would be an additional $25/per weekend and $30/hour after first 100 hours additional operator time. h. Non—prearranged weekend service shall be provided as soon as operators are able to respond without any minimum time guarantee. Amok Management Systems Northwest, Inc. 4 City of Tigard , Oregon July 1, 1987 SERVICES CONTRACT II CITY shall provide the following: a. CITY agrees to install and maintain for the duration of this agreement a modem and associated dial telephone line compatible with the existing CONTRACTOR equipment. CITY will pay for the installation, maintenance and use of said equipment and associated telephone line charges between CITY 'S site and CONTRACTOR'S servicing personnel. CONTRACTOR shall use this modem and telephone in connection with error correction . Such access by CONTRACTOR shall be subject to prior approval by CITY in each case and such access shall be solely for the purpose authorized by CITY in the individual case. b. CITY shall provide magnetic discs, magnetic tapes and all supplies necessary for the operation of the Computer Center. III Management Systems North West , Inc. shall provide services under this agreement commencing July 1 , 1987 . CITY shall pay the amount specified in Exhibit A each month for the services set forth in Section I. All payments are due on the 10th of each month commencing July 1987 . IV CONTRACTOR agrees that all data processed or handled by its employees shall be treated in a confidential manner and shall not be divulged to any persons without the express written consent of CITY. In the event any data is divulged by employees of CONTRACTOR in violation of this provision , CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY from any and all liability which CITY may incur as a result of divulging said data. V CONTRACTOR will take all action within its power to protect the proprietary rights of all software systems which may be installed on CITY'S computer. CITY will also take all normal measures necessary to rotect the integrity of all software systems installed on CITY S computer and will protect the legal rights to those systems. 0 Management Systems Northwest, Inc. 5 City of Tigard, Oregon July 1 , 1987 SERVICES CONTRACT VI CONTRACTOR shall indemnify , save and hold harmless CITY its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability, claims or damage arising out of or resulting from the act or failure to act of CONTRACTOR, its employees, agents and assigns, which act or failure to act result directly or indirectly in the breach of any software owner right or proprietary interest in software presently operational or subsequently purchased by CITY. CITY agrees to indemnify CONTRACTOR. its agents, officers, employees and assigns from any and all liability, loss or damage which CONTRACTOR may suffer as the result of claims, demands, costs or judgments against it arising out of or resulting from the acts of CITY, its officers, agents, employees and assigns. VII CONTRACTOR shall carry for all its employees and subcontractors engaged in any work pursuant to this agreement , in accordance with Oregon law, full workers compensation insurance. CONTRACTOR shall also provide CITY with proof of comprehensive liability insurance to protect CITY and Contractor and its subcontractors and the agents, officers and employees thereof against all claims for damages as a result of work performed pursuant to this agreement. Such coverage shall be in a minimum amount of $500,000 to any one claimant and $1 ,000,000 for any number of claims arising out of a single accident or occurrence. VIII In the event of a breach of this agreement by CONTRACTOR, CITY 'S remedies shall be limited to securing alternate performance. Prior to seeking alternate performance , CITY shall notify CONTRACTOR in writing of the nature of the breach and provide a reasonable time for CONTRACTOR to cure the breach. If CONTRACTOR fails to cure within said time, 'CITY shall then have the right to seek alternate performance and CONTRACTOR shall be liable to CITY for all costs incurred in procuring said alternate performance up to the amount required to be paid by CITY for the particular year in which the breach occurred. In the event of a breach of this agreement by CITY, CONTRACTOR'S remedy shall be limited to the amount required to be / paid by CITY for the particular year within which the breach occurred, as said monthly payments are set forth in this agreement. Management Systems Northwest, Inc. City of Tigard, Oregon July 1, 1987 SERVICES CONTRACT IX The CITY shall have the right to terminate the contract prior to its one (1) year term by giving at least 60 days written notice to CONTRACTOR and by paying to CONTRACTOR the sum of one (1) additional months payment as set forth in exhibit "A". In addition, a proration of overtime and programming hours shall be made on a twelve (12) month basis with any additional time being paid at CONTRACTORS prevailing charge rate. X The parties by their signatures acknowledge that they have read this agreement, understand it, and that it, together with the referenced exhibits, constitute the entire agreement, understanding and representations expressed or implied between the CONTRACTOR and CITY with respect to the services and related materials to be furnished hereunder and that this agreement supersedes all prior written or oral proposals. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the two parties and no statement, promise or inducement made by any party or agent- of any party that is not contained in this written agreement and attachments hereto shall be valid or binding. XI This agreement may only be modified or altered in writing signed by all the parties. XII The waiver of any provision or provisions under this agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision. XIII This agreement shall be for a term of approximately one (1) year, to commence July 1, 1987 and continue until July 1, 1988 with provision for automatic renewal for the sequential years until such time as written notice is received sixty (60) days prior to termination. cs/0649D . . ti r i Management Systems Northwest, Inc. 7 i City of Tigard, Oregon July 1, 1987 I SERVICES CONTRACT s s i i XIII i Both parties to this agreement shall comply with the 7 Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the regulations adopted thereunder. Neither party shall discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, national origin, j age or handicap. (i EXECUTED this ST day of 1987 , 1 at Tigard, Oregon. i City of Tigard — m�vy- "C'ho►r.o s �r�a+, frt E 157 p. DATE: a t r Z s e anagement Systems Northwest, Inc. t� C Management Systems Northwest, Inc. 8 City of Tigard, Oregon July 1 , 1987 a f F. SERVICES CONTRACT a r EXHIBIT A SCHEDULE OF OPERATIONS 1 . Perform "clear start" on a regular basis. 2. perform daily backup of database audit files 5 days a week. 3. Perform "disk maps" weekly or as needed. 4. Perform "database" maps weekly. 5. Maintain operation logs (ODT, ELOG< MMCS audit). 6. Backup system and database to disk (weekly) . 7. Clean and perform operator maintenance on hardware (tape drives , printer) . a 8. Provide user assistance. 9. Perform disk file maintenance (copying and removing files from disk) . SITE MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL July 1987 thru July 1988 One full time Computer Operator Supervisor 25% of His/Her Time 100 Additional hours operator time 50 Additional hours programmer time Total annual cost $42,720.00 Monthly charge $3, 560.00 1988 Yearly Increase of 8% Starting July 1st r