City Council Packet - 02/08/1988 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE:: Anyone wishing to speak on an
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate
STUDY AGENDA sign--.UP sheet(s). If no sheet is available,
FEBRUARY 8, 1988, 6:30 1),M. ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start
TIGARD CIVIC: CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are
1312.5 SW HALL BLVD. asked to be to 2 minutes or less. longer matters
TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting
either the Mayor or City Administrator.
6:30 1. STUDY MEETING:
-1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Call To Staff and Council For Non—Agenda Items
2. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive
Session under the -provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e); & (h) to
discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and
pending litigation issues.
3. STREETLIGHTING POLICY DISCUSSION
o Community Development Staff
4. NON—AGENDA ITEMS: - From Council and Staff
5. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE'— COUNCIL WORKSHOP
-
o Transportation Plan Update Discussion
o Streets Public Facility Plan
6. ADJOURNMENT
cw/2942D
COUNCIL AGENDA — FEBRUARY 8, 1980 PAGE 1
U P D AT.E
S;
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
REGULAR MEETING AGENDAagenda item needs to sign on the appropriate ;
STUDY AGENDA sign—up shoet(s). If no sheet is available,
FEBRUARY 8, 1988, 6,30 P.M. ask to be recognized by the Chair, at the start
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are
13125 SW HALL BLVD. _ asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters {'
TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be sett for, a future Agendil by contacting i
either, the Mayor or- City Administrator.
1, STUDY MEETING:
I .1 Call 'To Order and Rol.l Call — Ea and Ed Absent
1.2 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items
2. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive
p;
Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to f
discuss labor, relations, real property transactions, and current and k
pending litigation issues. .Convened Committee _ (Jo, Sc) 6:40 p.m.; f
Mayor Brian arrived 6:53 p.m. for quorum of Council
3. STREETLIGHTING POLICY DISCUSSION
o Community Development. Staff -- Postponed t
4. NON--AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff
.1 Noted Council Calendar Update
-.2 . Civic Center• Parking Plan — cost estimate reviewed; staff will
prepare appropriation resolution for consent agenda, request bids
+.. and advise Council of bid award.
.3 Discussion on landscape circle in front of City Hall; staff to
review cost for upscale landscape project; other possibility would ,
be 20-25` blue spruce tree (possibility that funds will be donated t
by civic organization). '
.4 City of Tigard received Lath and Plaster Troost 1987 Award of
Distinction for Civic Center Building.
-5. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE — COUNCIL WORKSHOP ;
o Transportation Plan Update Discussion
o Streets Public Facility Plan
Discussion included look at timeline for process of the Transportation
Plan Update, transportation needs and fundiesg. Council cork session f
with Transportation Committee tentatively set for for July. Possible r
public hearing before Council in fall concerning project list.
6. ADJOURNMENT 9:22 p.m.
cw/2942D
COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 8, "1988 PAGE 1
n
N N w 14
r • w a, r�
ai s` c
ci
H 0 q
O b o a ¢
m N
r O O
41
H T T
¢ ¢
'm V)
co LO
14 ui =.U- C14
LL-
2
om•.. N 5
> 2O OIOCE 2.-1wU
¢ U L- U U H 1 Cn ti ^
m toOU, S
I-¢ rG ¢ O c 2 U
U ~ U U p J H ^
¢ a J O a m 0 a w O
� naF- n V hs n sh
S S U
LU
>- \ O O C OZ ca
?•- : .r .i
J to O ., CL CL c r,
LU a.-+ ¢ h s £ 3 a
O0.n
TU£n sUhS
y F- O x2 a
= W a v3tt1
* £ J ra T03 nUHi 0. IO O L O O � £ O
£..0 £ 4.) m .am c
C F-
41 z C v
H
�O U1 Z n. m C11 V)
co 1% W w O C,) C 4 I Q
"'•�
Z Na0Y E JOa �,.,
0 ,0 w JUS Etfs� Ha � O ¢ £Q L N
o nJ� w � a � rd
a { Ux]� a m o,� t-
Wz cd H cd 4- Q; x rn l W L
M CL \�xa oaa cl1H w I d L
tNIUI cF
Op OU OZ 0 ")
F- v
ti -P°
L
hn
V U¢
QC 0 N w ¢o, a �
*a J m Co J N ¢ N N H m N S't S .c
i 4S 1 4J
..•a Q.c c
in V-4 O Q
20) ri 4- • I U £ £ .
A U -+ U% 1-4
W 4- O f6 N £ = O O
a s ° H 0 -0
O { rd r8
m .� O � U O £ m y Ttn 6 (n
aU aU U aU�
.Cil tn
~
N CJ c L
L
C+ N N 4 dam.c4 Q
,Q 3 1- N C
0CL T T T T
L am W L L L L
V1 o a � � > 3
*
w w w w u
T I GAR D C I: T Y C 0 U N C I !
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES — February 8, 1988, — 6:40 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Toni Brian; Councilors: Valerie Johnson,
and John Schwartz; City Staff: Bob Jean, City Administrator; David
Lehr, Chief of Police (arrived 6:43 p.m.); Jill Monley, Community
ServicesDirector (arrived 6:44 p.m.); Tim Ramis,-City Attorney; Steve
Slabaugh,` Parks & Recreation Board; Catherine Wheatley, Deputy
Recorder; and Randy Wooley, Aching Community Development Director.
f;
2. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council, at 6:40 p.m., went into
Executive Session under theprovisaans of ORS 192..660 (1) (d), (e), &
a
(h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current
and pending litigation issues.
z
a. Council Committee consisting of Councilors Johnson and Schwartz
convened' at 6;40 p.m. Mayos Brian Arrived at 6:53 p.m. and the
Executive Session convened with a quorum of Council.
3. STREETLIGHTING POLICY DISCUSSION — (Postponed - to future -Council
meeting)
4. NON—AGENDA ITEMS
a. Calendar Update -.. City Administrator noted the Council calendar r
update was hand—carried to the meeting' and distributed to
Councilors for their information.
b. Landscape;Circle/Tree Donation — Mayor Brian noted the Tigard Arts
and Gifts Association indicated interest in donating a 20 -` 25
foot Blue ,Spruce tree (approximate value: $1,250) to be placed in
the landscape circle in front of the City Hall building. a
Discussed was the possibility of a fountain or sculpture for- this
circle, but this would be too costly for the City to pursue at
this time.
Council consensus was to request that staff do some research on
the expense for an upscale interim landscaping project
(rhododendrons, azaleas, etc.) for, this area. Perhaps later,
funds would be available for a fountain or sculpture.
C. Civic Center Parking Plan— Acting Community Development Director
reviewed the proposed Civic Center Parking Plan. This plan would '
add approximately 100 spaces.
There was discussion on the need for adequate lighting in the
parking lot. Proposed lights would match the existing,
Mayor expressed interest in keeping the landscaping buffer between
the existing employee parking lot and the recently purchased
property.
Council consensus was for staff to pursue the plan as presented
while keeping in mind the need for adequate lighting and the
landscape buffer• suggested. City Administrator advised that an
appropriation resolution will be prepared for a future Council
meeting .(Consent Agenda). Staff will prepare specifications and
Page 1 — COUNCIL MINUTES — February 8, 1989
request bids; Council will have an opportunity to review the
specifications before going out for hid.
d. Award City Administrator noted that the City of Tigard received
the Lath and Plaster Trust 1987 Award of Distinction for the Civic
Center building.
CHIEF OF POLICE, ,COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR, CITY ATTORNEY, AND STEVE
SLABAUGH FROM THE PARKS.AND-RECREATION BOARD LEFT THE MEETING.
5`. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE — COUNCIL WORKSHOP
-a. Transportation Committee Members Present: Joe Schweitz,
Chairperson; Committee members James Dusevoir, Nancy Newcomb, and
Erick'Petersen.
Acting Community Development Director summarized the current work
of the Transportation Committee. The Committee's major project,
he noted, was the Transportation Plan update. He noted that they
will also be developing a- street CIP recommendation for the FY
1988-89 budget.
Acting Community Development Director distributed and reviewed the
proposed Transportation Plan Schedule for 1988. •The Schedule is
listed below:
o February — Identify< potential projects for immediate City
funding,' and rconsultant 'retained forNortheastBull Mountain
Area Study.
o March — Develop FY 1988-89 CIP, and consultant retained for
downtown access study.
o April—June — Develop street improvement proposal for possible
November ballot issue.
o Summer — Complete Triangle Area Plan in coordination with EDC
and ODOT projects, and begin transportation planning for the
Washington Square area in conjunction with County, ODOT, and
others.
o Fall — Complete transportation studies, consider appropriate
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and develop a long—range CIP
for streets.
o Winter - Complete and adopt a Transportation Plan document,
and coordinate with Comprehensive Plan periodic review.
City Administrator noted that the purpose of this workshop was for
the Committee to communicate to Council where they were with their
schedule and for Council to review and explain some of their
expectations and desires. It was noted that a July workshop would
be called for assessment and review of the Transportation Plan
Schedule.
Mayor suggested that an August public hearing may be appropriate
for citizen review and final check of the project' list as
developed, 'Then, in September and October, there would be a
Page 2 COUNCIL MINUTES -- February 8, 1908
series of neighborhood and Town Hall meeting, to discuss
transportation issues as well as other programs such as parks,
fv Police, etc. Mayor noted importance of the timeline and, the
setting of specific dates as soon as possible.
'(here was discussion on criteria utilized by the Transportation
Committee to prioritize projects. Chairman Schweitz said that the
Committee reviewed 'many streets and had focused somewhat on
collector streets and streets which were heavily used. Also, the
Committee looked at spreading proposed street improvements
throughout the City. The streets also had been previously
identified in the Plan,
Mayor outlined that he envisioned a list of street projects
arranged in priority order with cost estimates included. The City
would then determine how much money the City could attempt to fund
through a ballot issue.
There was discussion on federal matching funds which may be
available. Some projects which qualify for matching funds may riot
be on the City's priority project: list. Councilor- Johnson notd
she hoped the City would not be so tied to the priority list Lhat e
they would be unable to take advantage of opportunities to gain
improvements through the matching fund process. Councilor Johnson
suggested a review of areas within the CIp to determine what may
qualify for matching funds.
There was discussion on the feasibility of a downtown
structure, which may be eligible for mat-chin funds, as a,joint
joint
venture project with Tri-Met. This should be reviewed with
Tri--Met officials.
Chairman Schweitz noted the need for, planning agencies (ODOT,
local governments) in urban areas to be aware of the different
modes of transportation other than just just vehicular traffic,
He cited as examples: transportation pathways for pedestrians,
bus, rail, etc.
Chairman Schweitz said that the Committee will want: to be able to
explain exactly what will be before the voters; i.e. , site
specific and funding proposals. Councilor Schwartz stressed the
importance of the education of the NPO's and other committees
involved.
Councilor Johnson noted that there are several "missing links" in
Tigard's transportation system and the need for connections in
system in the several areas. She said she would like to eventually see a grid
City of Tigard with more north—south connections
developed. Councilor Johnson noted the need to get the "missing
links" on a transportation map so they are identified as
Possibilities for future projects.
'There was discussion on development of the road system so that
j Washington Square and downtown Tigard would be complementary.
Acting Community Development Director noted that if proposed
projects were not listed in the current Transportation
Plan/Comprehensive Plan, their addition would> involve a
Page 3 - COUNCIL. MINUTES February 8, 1988
amendment and ,a series of public hearings
Comprehensive Plan -
timing far the next `construction season would be a hindering
factor. Acting Community Development Director advised that
priorities were to correct and improve the existing streets and to
alleviate,present traffic problems.
Transportation Member Newcomb inquired about the cost to, educate F
thepublicon the City's proposed project list and ballot issue.
Mayor responded that the City, could issue a factual brochure
(noting that it could riot be promotional or of a persuasive
nature). Any educational literature would be reviewed by the City
Attorney before being published and distributed. Also, education
efforts could be furthered through neighborhood group meetings and
public hearings.
t
b. Councilor Johnson noted that the gull Mountain/Walnut` CPO/NPO
groups would be meeting at City Hall on February 16 at 7:30 p:m. €
This group would be discussing a variety of topics and she invited ¢ :
the Transportation Committee to attend.
C. Acting Community Development Director advised that the Oregon
Department of Transportation would be holding a meeting on
February 9th at 7:00 p.m. at the Tigard Civic Center. The subject
of the meeting will be I-5 at Highway 217/Kruse Way Interchange — I
Alternative and Location Design Study, The Oregon Department of s
Transportation is in the process of an alternative and location
design study aimed at identifying highway improvements in the area
of the I-5 interchange of Highway 217/Kruse Way. {
The meeting agenda included goals and objectives of the project,
transportation needs analysis, and development of alternatives.
This was a public meeting and key persons were invited to attend
to learn about the project, view the presentation, review the
progress to date, and give the ODOT views and comments. Acting ,
Community Development Director noted that he would be attending
OS
e
and would represent Tigard. lie advised that he would propose
another alternative.
d. Acting Community Development Director reported Mr. Gordon Martin ,
has requested that ODOT consider combining the I--5 at Highway
217/Kruse Way and Highway 217 at 99W projects for common E
a
development
Acting Community Development Director distributed several items of
correspondence including;
o January 270 1988, ODOT letter to the Tigard Transportation
Advisory Committee;
o January 29, 1988, Charles Ruttan (Mr. Martin's attorney)
letter, to property owners of the Tigard Triangle concerning
declining property values in the Triangle;
o January 29, 1988, Charles Ruttan letter to Mark Beeson of
a ODOT concerning the combining of the two projects noted above;
Page 4 — COUNCIL MINUTES '— February 8, 1988
o A flyer noting the public meetings of the 'Oregon Department
of Transportation regarding 1-5 at 'Highway 217/Kruse Way
interchange Alternative and Design Study for February 9, 1988;
o February. 4, 1988 Department of Transportation letter to
Charles Ruttan concerning 1-5 at Highway 217/Kruse Way and
Highway 217 at 99W.
ActingCommunity Development Director- noted that the Highway
Division's response to Mr. Rutt-an was that their consultant's
initial concept for the 1-5 at: Highway 217/Kruse Way project
demonstrated a solution to provide a freeway-to-freeway connection
without extending the project limits beyond the 72nd interchange.
The Highway Department did riot consider- it necessary to expand the
consultant's contract to include the development of the Highway'
217 at 99W interchange. ODOT will continue to develop these two
projects iride pendently.
Acting Community Development Director reported that when he
attended the ODOT meeting on February 9, he would advise that
Tigard wished to retain good freeway access in all areas.
e, Acting Community Development Director noted that the ODOT would be
holding a Six Year Plan hearing in Beaverton, March 7, 1988, at
Whitford Junior High cafeteria at 7:00 p.m. The Six Year Plan is
a listing of projects planned for the next six years by the ODOT.
Acting Community Development Director named , several of the
projects in the Tigard area. Councilor Johnson requested that
Acting Community Development Director- make a list available of the
Tigard projects listed in the Six Year Plan.
f. Councilor Johnson invited members of the Transportation Committee
to the Fanno Creek Conference to be held on Saturday, February 27,
1988, at the Tigard High School cafeteria, 8:30 a.m. to 3:45 p.m.
Councilor Johnson described some of the activities planned for the
day.
6. ADJOURNMENT: 9:22 PM
Approved by the Tigard City Council on March146 1988.
eputy Recorder-City uf- Tigard 0
ATTEST:
Mayor City of Tigard
cs/3190D
Page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 8, 1980
is
Legal �
TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY
P.O:BOX 370
PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice
BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075 RECRf vLct)
Legal Notice Advertising r
'ES 81988
!1\ e ❑ Tearsheet Notice
pC1 C 6 v CIPI ,f=T!
0 [3Duplicate Affidavit,_ rARD
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON, )ss.
COUNTY F WASHINGTON, )
ertising
being first duly sworn,depose and sA�l am t��e-Adv
Director,or his principal cle�-k
kof the
\
a newspaper of general cilaiinn as fin in ORS 193.010
9 nOhe
and 183,020;published at 1 °-
af ounty and s ale;the th
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed,was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for successive and
consecutive
^ in the following issues:
Subscrib
to before me this
((��
otary Public for Oregon
My Commission,Expires-A, Z
AFFIDAVIT
WW
yv 3
.� �ti0�llo�I�s�feCf�d�$earla items are,gtablishhsd$o�Ynt��etdom.
x3fier iafomm�tlds and Ztti�a�emdms be
tasty, 0 tataecf 4s ra ttsr Ct* 4t=
der,l�l 25�'ul �dett$tvd,�t�'d,bs��or�9723,or by'.�1�f47I
V �v(@*��q�p �y}pax�y ,;r��ryrqY�/r �iqq tgp9yyp i
LViJt49dIrkY 34GGlId+}, 1T.8i'dl(.+'V:. t'MS� 67YA1'�Y P6'�
f 6:39 if?;A9 Stady Nee
tt
fi1(3{t JD CIVIC C N i TOWN HAIX
1125sS iRry 1 dlYII.9VAtl};TICst>RIDi iwiiONT
`� tr(fItftftt31� 9 f
.fir ...- ..R.: ami ..xr.MaYt#h„'-Wn iFrea.�1✓
t
CIOF' TIGARD OREGON
COUNC1�AGENDA IT MC SUMMARY
DATE SUBMIl-1"Eu. J'anua 28, 1986
AGENDA OF: FFeebruar:y—8-1986
PREVIOUS ACTION: Dis••cussa
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE; Str__ eeti L hLin December 7.1, 1987
PREPARED By' J_ohr1.Auk�r
REQUESTED 8Y -= 1
�I•T
�IY "ADMIN OK
DEPT NEAD OK
POLIS SSU
t
the City adept a policy for either purchase or, rental of new �
1. Should ;
streetlights?
requiring a specific l�am9.nair•e style
2. Should the City adopt a policy
for installation in new residential subdivisauns?
=' ~– SUMMARY
INFORMATION
ien
resentecl a report on issues to be `time
de�edmahjor
On December 21, 1987, staff p ' s 5te"R At that
our overall street lighting y
discussing styles in new resiclenf gal subd�v�sis s
locations of the luminaire style
discussion
discussion cantered on lumrnai.re
Councilor Eadon requested a map n the
f-ur•ther discussion, A copy of the
council
could see what the differences are. That map was send in council mail
on January 24, 1988, so that .there can be
December 21, 1987, report is attached.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Review and discuss with staff _.
FISCAL PACT
Information only.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Provide direction to staff- as to further,
Review and discuss with staff.
action.
ht/2931D
,i
x
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Members of City Council January 28, 1988
FROM John Acker, Assistant Planner
During the December 21, 1987, Council meeting, several is>ues pertaining to
the City streetlight system were discussed. The following summarizes my
understanding of the discussion.
There seemed to be agreement that: aggressive conversion of mercury vapor
luminaires to more efficient high pressure sodium luminaires or purchase of
PGE owned luminaires by the City is not feasible at this time, Although there
could be a-long-term'savings, money needed for initial conversion or purchase
is not available.'
There also ''seemed to be. general agreement that the highest priority for new
streetlight installation is along arterial and collector streets that do riot
presently have streetlights. City engineering staff individually evaluates
new 'installation to determine' if new luminaires are purchased or "rented." 'The
question is whether the City should have a standard policy for either purchase
or rental when installing new streetlights.
There' was agreement that the existing policy which requires citizens to pay
for streetlights and their installation in existing neighborhoods should be
maintained.
Most of the discussion centered on luminaire styles installed in new
residential subdivisions.
The luminaire styles being considered for use in new residential subdivisions
are 70 watt high pressure sodium (NPS) Town & Country and 70 watt HPS Cobra
Head.
Since both of these luminaire types are 70 watt HPS, the operating and
maintenance costs are the same. Maintenance cost for the 25 foot pole used to
mount the Cobra Head is slightly higher than the 16 foot post: used for the
Town & Country. The amount of light that is emitted by either type of
luminaire is identical and, in any case, streetlight systems are required to
meet engineering,standards for roadway lighting.
These two styles of luminaires differ in mounting location and method and the
pattern of light that is emitted.
Members of City Council
Page 2
January 28, 1988
The Town & Gauntry is a post tap f-xx
Lure that is located on the roadside.
This type of fixture emits light in all directions and provides some sidewalk
and area lighting as well as lighting the roadway.
The Cobra Head is mounted on an ar•netha�l.ureaches vl the road natio.
neblight
is directed downward and, therefore,
yond
the road.
can be viewed in terms of what: a City streetlight system
These. differences
should do.. Specific issues to be considered are:
1, Should the City require that new streetlights illuminate the
roadway only (Cobra Head); or
2. Should the City require that new streetlights provi country);oraemount
of area lighting as We as roadway lighting
3, Should the City allow developers to make the aEcision ceilingnonwthe
style .luminaire to install while establishing
operation and maintenance costs for newly installed streetlights-
ht/2931D
i
o
MEA
P C�� r��
y
� Z"",P0
STREETLIGHTING �•Z �
I. Current System i
i
As of September 1987, the public streetlighting system consisted of 1833 i
luminaires 'of various wattages. Six hundred one of these lamps are ;
li.E.d with power by PGE (option "A"). The
owned, maintained and supplied
remaining 1,2.32 lamps are owned by The y butfurgmaintained aril rep was �
ower by PGE
(option '��g��)
W p ber 1987 ('see attachment A for a
$13,192.60 for the month of Septet'
breakdown of lamp wattages, types, and costs).
The system also includes 1,260 PO
ed
posts to support the lamps.
Sixty-five poles are owned and maintained by PGE, while 1,195 poles are
s
owned key the City but maintained by PGE. (NOTE: There are fewer pc les
than lamps because PGE does not charge for transmission poles on w ich
streetlights are incidental.]`` The maintenance and capital cost for poles
was $1,281.18 for the month of September 1987. '(Attachment 8).
The monthly costs for, the :.entire system varies with new streetlight
f old luminaires. The
installations ' and removal or replacement o
following is a billing history of the past 12 months.
Month Amount Paid s
November 1986 $13,397.49
December 1986 13,295.15
January 1987 13,242.36
February 1987 13,275.69
March 1987 13,254.96
April 1987 13,191.89
Y _1987 13.318..93
May
J13,.,295.31
June 87
13: 333.99
July 1987
August 1987 13,565.35
September 1987 14,473.78
October 1987131979.81.
12 MONTH TOTAL $161,624.71
districts within the area of Northeast
There are three street lighting dis aid for these F
Metzger recently, annexed to Tigard. Residents have P will not et any
through June 30, cap a their propertyuntil 1988-89.he They City will begin
significant per capita revenues
ayments for these lamps on July 1, 1988.
making operation and maintenance p
of new subdivisions are required to install
Currently, developersering
streetlights. Developers are directed by enolnzlluminating Engineering
design the streetlight system according 1 to the amount of light on
Society (IES) standards. These standards apply arterial, etc.), with
roadways of particular classification (local, and wattage,
consideration given to such variables as lamp type
uniformity, spacing, mounting height, and traffic conflict areas.
Systems designed to IES standards provide optimal Visibility for traffic
safety.
IL
Page — 1 —
Within the preceding parameters, developers are allowed to select from
standard PGE, luminaires and poles as desired (attachment "C"). Recent
developments typically install 70 watt Town & County fixtures on 16 foot
fiberglass posts. The installed and operational streetlight system is
dedicated to the City, along with a sum estimated to operate and maintain
the system for 24 months. Upon dedication, the streetlights and posts
become part of the City--wide system and the City assumes responsibility
for operating and maintaining them.
The dedication requirement and illumination standards have historically
been City, policy but neither ,is explicit in the Community Development
Code.
II. Issues
Issues to be addressed .in assessing our current system and procedures
are: 1) need for."a streetlight 'system; 2) J uminaire type and pole type;
3) ownership of the system and; 4) ongoing costs to the City.
1. "The purpose of roadway lighting is to create an environment
conducive to - accurate, comfortable seeing which will promote
improved traffic safety, effective traffic movement, and, adequate
pedestrian safety, under all types of weather conditions." - The
Illuminating Engineering Society Application Book
There seems to be little debate that streetlighting enhances road
safety, but other public benefits are less easy,to determine.
Although. no"•studies have proven-conclusively that_streetlighting. is
a deterrent to crime; "there .is at least the perception among many
that increased lighting"equates to greater security. '
Local real estate appraisers declined to put a dollar figure on
property values related to the existence of streetlights, saying
that streetlight value has not been proven in the market.
Appraisers and realtors do agree that lack of streetlights may limit
the market for a particular piece of property.
2. Streetlights in recent new developments are typically 70 watt Town &
County style luminaires mounted on 16 foot fiberglass posts. The
probable reason for this choice is the Town and Country's
aesthetically pleasing day-form and night-form appearance. In
addition, this combination is relatively inexpensive when compared
to the rectangularboxluminaire which is the other "stylish"
standard PGE fixture.
The design of the Town & Country fixture allows for a more even 3600
distribution of dight, rather than concentrating light on the
roadway as is typical of most streetlights. This design has both
advantages and disadvantages. The 3600 lighting pattern can allow
sidewalk lighting and some yard light, depending on placement and
wattage, The non-cuttoff design also allows posts to be more widely
spaced. On the other hand, without proper prismatic refractors, or
Page - 2
good placement, this same feature can cause "light pollution on
private 'property. These luminaires are also seen as less efficient
(i.e., less illumination on the roadway per lumen produced), ,for
purely roadway lighting purposes.
Alternatives to the Town & Country are rectangular box or cobra head.
The rectangular box is an aesthetically pleasing, modern style
luminaire with an asymmetrical light distribution pattern. This
design comes in either cutoff (flat lens) or semi—cutuff (drop lens)
styles. Both styles are more directed to-the roadway but the
semi—cutoff would allow a wider• light distribution. The ,only
available wattage for residential use is l00 watt which normally are
mounted on 25 foot poles These luminaires are more efficient for
roadway lighting than the Town & Country but capital cost is more
arid, because rectangular box luminaires are only available in 100
wait, maintenance .and operations costs would be greater.
The cobra head is- 'a more, functionally 'designed luminaire that has
been in .use for many years: The cobra head also comes in a cutoff
or semi—cutoff style, within similar characteristics as' . the
rectangular box, The luminaire comes in either 70 watt or l00 watt;
either is mounted, on a 25 foot pole. The cobra head would be more
efficient for purely. roadway lighting purposes,; and capital and
maintenance costs are similar to that. of the Town & Country. The
main drawbackofthis luminaire is that to some it is non—appealing
in it's day-form appearance. For that reason, cobra head luminaires
are normally used on through traffic streets and highways._
If, we require streetlighting systems to be designed in accordance
with accepted 'standards,. 'it would be logical to assume that we-'have
optimal lighting on our 'roadways. Operation .and maintenance cost is
determined by wattage which is also determined primarily by design
standards. Appearance standardization, then, would seem to be the
only reason for requiring particular luminaires in certain
situations or locations.
3. There are three options for streetlight luminaire ownership and
maintenance, known as options A, B, and C. Under option A, PGE
owns, maintains and supplies power to the luminaire. Option B is
for maintenance and energy supplied to luminaires owned by the
customer. Option C is for the furnishing of electric energy to
luminaires owned and maintained by the customer and installed only
on customer owned poles.
Of a total of 1,833 luminaires that compose Tigard's streetlight
system, 1,232 (63%) are owned by the City under option B. The
remaining 601 luminaires are owned by PGE under option A. The City
has no option C luminaires. The City also owns 1,195 (95%) of the
1,250 poles used to mount the luminaires, excluding PGE poles that
hold incidental streetlights for which there is no charge. All
poles are maintained by PGE.
All new residential streetlight installations come into City
jurisdiction under option B, with the City responsible for operation
Page — 3 —
and maintenance costs. New streetlights that are not the
responsibility of a ' developer (i.e., along, arterials) are
individually evaluated to determine if the luminaire and pole will
be purchased (option B) or "rented" (option A).
The advantage to option A is that capital expenditure is deferred
into monthly payments over the life of the system. Opti.on'B would
require initial capital expenditure but monthly co t:s would be
reduced and, assuming the luminaires and poles reach or, exceed their
functional life expectancy, a payback point would be reached.-
Payback period would depend, on the cost differential of option A and
option B monthly charges and purchase price of the chosen luminaire.
4. The two major economic factors pertinent - to streetlighting are
operating cost and maintenance cost. The third, and increasingly
less important: factor is capital equipment costs. In, September
1987, the capital cost ' recovery portion of option A "luminaires
accounted for 'only 11.5% of. the total month's luminaire cost. This
does not consider initial equipment purchase either by the City or
Developers,-but it does indicate sources of continuing costs.
The following are' "options for long term streetlighting cost
containment. Any of these approaches could potentially' reduce
streetlight expenditure; computation of potential saving amounts, if
any, and payback times would require further analysis.
® Conversion
A All new streetlight installations' within PGE's service area use
High , Pressure Sodium (HPS). lamps. HPS lamps are much more
efficient - than Mercury Vapor (MV) lamps and, therefore, are
Tess expensive to operate.' For .example: a 175 watt MV lamp
produces 7,000 lumens, while a'100 watt HPS lamp produces 9,500
lumens. (Lumen is a`measure of light output); A 100 watt HPS
lamp will cost between $1.19 and $1.44 less per month to
operate than a similar 175 watt MV.
The City has 1,094 (60% of the total) MV lights that were
installed prior to common HPS usage. Conversion of these
luminaires to lower wattage but more efficient HPS luminaires
could potentially save the City $1,838.31 per month. These
operational savings cannot, however, be realized without
initial conversion expenditures. The cost of conversion of an
option A luminaire is computed by taking the book value of the
MV luminaire being replaced (purchase price minus
depreciation), plus the cost of labor for removal, minus any
salvage value for the old, luminaire (usually little or
nothing). Option B conversion costs are the cost of labor for
removal of the MV luminaire and for installation of the HPS
luminaire, plus the cost of the HPS luminaire we retain the
old MV luminaires. Conversion costs, then, will depend on the
value of MV luminaires, purchase price of NPS luminaires and
the labor rate and time involved in removing and installing new
luminaires.
Page 4
a Delamping
Another way to reduce streetlighting expenditure is through
removal of streetlights. Removal can be temporary or
permanent', and initial costs are incurred for either option.
Temporary delamping of option A luminaires (i.e., disconnecting
power without removal) will reduce monthly expenditures by only
the energy costs; the City continues to pay capital equipment
and maintenance. the City also must pay labor, (:osis for
disconnection. Option A permanent delamping would cost the
City for removal labor plus the undepreciat-ed value of ;the
luminaire.' For temporary or permanent delamping of option B
luminaires, costs for removal/disconnection labor-' would be
incurred.
For delamping purposes, it is necessary to prioritize
streetlighting needs. There are three basic approaches to
prioritize streetlights: 1) Prioritize according ;to area or
street ` type . designations. This prioritized- list may have
arterials as the highest -priority and local streets as the
lowest or high traffic commercial areas as a high priority and
lower traffic residential areas as a low priority; 2) A second
approach may Gist four-way intersections with all streets four
lane as a highpriority and midway between lower priority
intersections as-a low priority;" 3) The third approach would be
a combination of the first two where entire areas or corridors
are designated high priority and less important areas can be
more specifically categorized. The advantage of the third
approach is that entire areas of high .priority can be assured
of adequate lighting while .lower. priority areas, except during
extreme cutbacks, would. experience reduced levels ;of lighting
rather than total elimination of streetlights.'
® Streetlight Purchase <
The City currently "rents" 601 luminaires and 65 poles from PGE
under option A. Although the capital recovery costs for the
option A luminaires is less than 12% of the monthly total, the
dollar figure is nearly $1,500. Purchase price depends on the
depreciated value of the equipment. Payback period should be
considered when determining whether to purchase all or a
portion of the option A streetlights.
a Other Possibilities
Reducing the number of hours that some streetlights operate
could save energy and reduce costs. There are some technical
problems in controlling operating times and metering energy
consumption that would require further analysis.
Reconfiguration in terms of streetlight location and size could
make the system more efficient. This would require a thorough
system analysis.
' br/2122D
Page - 5 _
SEPTEMBER 1987
OPTION A* UNIT OPTION BX* UNIT TOTAL TOTAL
LUMINAIRES UNITS COST UNITS COST NUMBER COST !
175 W MV DELUX WHITE 231 8.22 578 6.08 890 5,413.06
COBRA HEAD
(2].)
175 W MV RECT. -0- 139 6.86 139 953.54 .
SPACEGLOWx*'
(46)
400 W MV DELUX WHITE 87 13.30 39 11.03 126 1,587.27
COBRA HEAD
(23)
1000 W MV DELUX WHITE 20 28.94 -0- 20 578.80
COBRA HEAD
(24)
70 W HPS GE 2 6.10 321 3.88 323 1,253.24
TOWN & COUNTRY
(25)
70 W HPS COBRA HEAD 115 6.10 63 3.88 178 945.94
(33)
100 W HPS COBRA HEAD7 7.03 31 4.64 38 193.05
(34)
100 W HPS RECTANGULAR 10 6.56 =0- 10 .85.60
BOX, SEMI-CUTOFF f
(76) ,
100 W HPS RECTANGULAR -0 39 4.64 39 180.96 ;
BOX, CUTOFF
(77)
150 W NPS COBRA HEAD -0- 4 5.85 4 23.40
(35) ,
400 W HPS COBRA HEAD 13 14.70 -0- 13 191.10
(37) f
200 W HPS COBRA HEAD 116 9.94 18 7.05 134 1,170.60
39
TOTALS 601 1,232 11833 12,576.56 '
OPTION A LUMINAIRES ARE OWNED, MAINTAINED AND SUPPLIED WITH POWER BY PGE.
# OPTION B LUMINAIRES ARE OWNED BY THE CITY BUT MAINTAINED AND SUPPLIED WITH
POWER BY PGE.
# SPACEGLOW STYLE LUMINAIRES ARE OBSOLETE- AND CANNOT BE REPLACED UNLESS USED
FIXTURES CAN BE FOUND.
SEPTEMBER 1987
OWNER TOTAL
POSTS/POLES PGE TIGARD UNIT COST COST
SLO WOOD POLE < 35' 11 2.58 28.38
(1)
ALUMINUM POST (billed as 1 2.58 2.58
wood pole 1)
(2)
SLO WOOD POLED 40' to 55' 3 4.90 14.70
PAINTED STEEL POLE 25' 101 3.14 317.14
(7)
ALUMINUM POLE, REGULAR 25' BO 1.23 98.40
(8), (54)
ALUMINUM POLE, REGULAR 25' 12 9.64 11.5.68 j
(32)
9
LAMINATED WOOD POST, .695 .48 333.60
NO MAST 'ARM < 20'
(23) a
LAMINATED WOOD POST, 30 3.77 113.10
NO MAST ARM < 20'
(39)
CURVED LAMINATED WOOD 91 68 61.88
POLE < 30`
ALUMINUM POLE, DAVIT 7 1.39 9.73
TYPE 30'
(50)
ALUMINUM POLE, DAVIT 9 1.49 13.41
TYPE 25
(52)
ALUMINUM POLE, REGULAR 3 1.54 4.62
OR DAVIT 35'
(53)
UNPAINTED STEEL POLE, 1 2.70 2.70
DAVIT TYPE 30'
(51)
FIBERGLASS POLE, BRONZE 16' 165 .35 57.75
(58)
FIBERGLASS POLE, BRONZE 25' 8 3.86 30.88
(59)
FIBERGLASS POLE, BRONZE 43 .45 19.35
OR GRAY 25'
X60 (62
TOTALS 65 1,195 1,216.94
Ma
City ®f King city
Robert W. Jean, Administrator
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223 February 1, 1988
Re: Area of Interest Agreement
Dear Bob:
Since your letter of mid-December on the subject of "urea of
interest" , we have had several discussions with City Councillors.
At present there is general consensus that such an agreement would
be beneficial to our interests 'particularly .if it identified more
preceisely what the specific "interests" were.
Essentially "interests" in the past have focused on land use,
service providers and other elements relating to "impacts" on the
immediate adjacent area, or policies pertaining to whom was respon-
sible for the delivery of a service. While we are still interested
in-those specifics we are equally concerned about the "interests"
which Tigard has relating to transportation system issues and storm
water drainage problems that are relevant toeachof our area of
interest.
To be more specific', we have just received a storm drainage'
report covering King City which notes the importance of storm water
drainage policies and plans from areas outside the City limits,
either in Tigard's area of interest or in other Washington County
unincorporated area. We know that alone we can address and solve
only part of what are serious problems. A similar case exists
regarding Beef -Bend Road and the intersection of Beef Bend And Pac-
ific Highway. Frankly, we are looking for both "partners" and "par-
ticipants" which will, with County assistance, allow us jointly to
address and solve these specific problems. I'll contact you in the
next week or so to see if we can develop an agenda to guide dis-
cussion.
With reference to the "Urban Planning Area" map used by King
City, we intend to seek an amendment which expands our "interest
in urban development south of Beef Bend but westerly of 131st
Avenue to include the area within the amended urban growth boundary.
These comments are made only to bring you Up-to-date on our-
thinking. It is evident, I am sure, that each subject will require
better definition and discussion.
lee d, 4 d n-1
City of King City 15300 S.W. 116th Avenue, King City, Oregon 97224 ® (503) 620-6444
MINIM
In the interim we would welcome the opportunity to review a
draft agreement that represents Tigard' s policy position and
service objectives.
Sincerely,
George Pl.Morgan
City Administrator
P.S. I have appreciated the opportunity to review Tigard's
program to update your Transportation Plan. My thanks
to Randy Wooley.
I
CITY OF TIGARD1-OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITLM SUMMARY
6, 1988 DATE "IMMIlTED: JanuarY-19-1-1 988
AGENDA OF: February PREVIOUS ACTION:
-
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: meetinc�Wit h
_
Transportation Advisory' (ummittee _,,, -----------•-------Randal —v
_ PREPARED BY: l R. Woole
DEPT HEAD OK CITY AgMIIU _OK REQUESTED BY
- POLICY ISSUE
Meeting with Transportation Advisory Committee.
i
— INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Council's periodic meeting with the members of the Transportation Advisory
Committee has been scheduled forFebruary 8th. The committee i1iembers have
been asked to arrive at 7:30 P.M. a
The Committee's major project currently is the Transportation Plan update.
They will also be developing a Streets CIP recommendation for the FY 1988--89
budget.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
t
6
l�[
t`t
FTSCAL 'IMPACT �
i
k
t
--� - SUGGESTED ACTION `
Discussion of the Committee's work and any additional direction that the
Council may wish to provide.
br/2959D
i
I
HIM
February 8, 1988
PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION PLAN SCHEDULE FOR 1988
February 0 Identify potential projects for immediate City funding.
0 Consultant retained for- Northeast Bull Mountain Area study..
March 0 Develop FY 88-•89 CIP.
0 Consultant retained for Downtown Access .Study.
Apri1—June 0 Develop street improvement proposal for possible November
ballot issue.
Summer 0 Complete Triangle area plan in coordination with EDO and ODOT
projects.
0 Begin transportation planning for the Washington Square area
in conjunction with County,; ODOT and others.
Fall 0 Complete transportation studies; consider- appropriate
comprehensive plan amendments.
0 Develop along—range CIP for streets.
Winter 0Complete and adopt a transportation plan document.
0 Coordinate with Comprehensive Plan periodic review.
br/3102D
t
ig
glill 1:1 g mill
' F `I Department of Transportation R
HIGHWAY= DIVISION
NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT Region IUd4/1�
VEMOF
f.OP
9002 SE McLOUGHLIN,MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653_3090 9���
January 27, 1988
In Imply flop"to
Fda No
TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE 603-1947
City of Tigard 34-1988
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Subject: 1) `I-5 @ Hwy. 217/Kruse Way
2) Hwy. 217 @ 99W
Randy Wooley has informed me of the recent .appearance of
Gordon Martin before your committee and Mr.. Martin's confidence
that ODOT would combine the two subject projects for common
development.
As you are aware, ODOT currently has a contract with Howard
Needles Tammen & Bergendoff, out of Seattle to develop the
I-5 @ Hwy. 217/Kruse Way project. ODOT staff is proceeding
with the design of the interchange at Hwy. 217 @ 99W indepen-
dently:
At one time, it was thought that the project development
of these two facilities would overlap and would best be handled
by common development. Based on the 'alternatives developed
by our consultants to date, it does not appear that the proj-
ects need to be combined.
Therefore, we wish to make clear to your committee that ODOT
sees no need, and currently has no plans, to extend the consul-
tant's work to include the 99W @ Hwy. 217 project. We will
continue to develop these two projects independently; the
first by consultant services and the second by our staff.
If we can further meet the needs of your committee regarding
either of these two projects, please call me at 653-3240.
MARK BEESON
Project Coordinator
MB:po
�. cc: Randy Wooley Jim McClure
Gordon Martin Jack Carman
Charles Ruttan ;
Rick Kuehn
734.1850 (1.87)
s
DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN. HIGGINS & TONGUE'
ROBERT R.CARNEV JOHN C.CAHAI.AN
ROBERT L.ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW
RUSSELL.w KILKENNY
THOMAS H.TONGUE 0519.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE 900 HELLS RODE
GEORGE J.COOPER.III PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING MARSHA MURRAY-LUSSV
CHARLES D.RUTTAN TELECOPIER 15031224-732A .� DONALD E.TEMPLETON'
BPORTLAND OREGON 97204-1357 !'
ROBERT K.WINGER DOUGLAS V.VAN OVK
1
G.KENNETH SHIROISHI• �, SALLY R.LEISURE I.
COL13EAT E.PARKER.JR. TELEPHONE(503)224.6440 k. • SHANNON 1.SKOPIL•
JOAN OINEILL.P.C.' `• JEFFREY F.NUOELMAN
ROBERT L.NwSH•• -CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE
+, JONATHAN A.BENNETT
ANDREW S.CRAIG 709 N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 1 ZS MARK A.PRATER- 4
BRADLEY O.BAKER BEND.OREGON 97701 �.,+^ AARON J.BILL }#'
JACK O.HOFFMAN F
TELEPHON_15031 382.9241 , BRYAN W.ORUETTER"
MICHAEL J.FRANCIS
.JENNIFER L.PALMOUIST'
January 29 1958
WILLIAM H.MORRISON
a IIB97.198��
JACK H.OUNN _
V JON.J.HIGGINS
RETIRED (`/)�� 11927.19671. {y
JAMES G.SMITH l�3A'ADMITTED IN OREGON Y'
NATHAN L.COHEN AND WASHINGTON "FF
OP COUNSEL
-RESIDENT.BEND OFFICE
(To propertyowners of the Tigard Triangle)
RE:' Declining Property Values in the Triangle
r
Dear (Sir/Madam)
Our office represents Gordon R. Martin and Gordon S. Martin,
longtime residents and owners of commercially zoned land in the Tigard
Triangle. You are also an owner of -land suitable for commercial
development in the Tigard Triangle. It is reasonable to expect that, in �
the future, you will either develop or sell your property. The Oregon '
Department of Transportation (ODOT) has, however, placed restraints on
traffic` flows out of the Triangle that may preclude future commercial
development of your property and, thus, significantly impact the value
of your property.
PUBLIC HEARING,
On Tuesday, February 9, 1988, at the Tigard. Civic Center at
7:00 p.m., ODOT will be holding hearings for public input on the
1-5/217 interchange redesign. If you want to protect your property
values, we believe it is important that you appear at this hearing and
that you urge that the scope of the 1-5/217 interchange project be
expanded to include the designing of a road out of the Triangle oetween
the 72nd Ave. and 99W interchanges with 217. If such a road is built,
the State will lift its restraints.
The Reasons Why
In August 1987, the City of Tigard requested permission from
ODOT to connect the new Dartmouth Street (Dartmouth LID) to Pacific
Highway. ODOT, after extensive review of traffic studies submitted by
the City and the Martins, agreed, providing certain conditions were met
by the City:
i
I
I
January 29, 1988
Page 2 E
"Until additional accessis built, the City will be x
required to limit development` [in the Triangle] to
that which can be served by the existing system
supplemented by Dartmouth. The criteria ` for
measuring development impact will be traffic volumes
on -several streets measured along a north screenline
[2000 vehicles] and a south screenline [2400 1
vehicles]." (ODOT, "Cooperative Improvement
Agreement's 9/23/87.)
Stated differently, Tigard's current road network, plus the new
Dartmouth Street, if built, will only 'support development of
approximately '78 acres of some 235 acres of commercially zoned land
availaole for development within the Triangle. When new development
reaches this projected level, the City must stop all further development
in the Triangle until a new road is built. The State requires that such s
new road (called South Access) out of the Triangle, logically located I
somewhere in the vicinity between the 72nd Avenue and the 99W inter-
changes with 217, -must be built before ODOT's Triangle traffic capacity
restrictions will be lifted. (ODOT, "Cooperative Improvement
Agreement", 9/23/87.)
Conclusion
The 1-5/217, 72nd Ave. and 99W interchanges are; close together.
' This creates difficulties when planning a new road out of the Triangle
w' and will probably result in the project being exoensive. >;Therefore,> itis
critical that ODOT and the City of Tigard work together, now, to design
the r w South Access road, and that it be included in the list of
approved ODOT road projects.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours.,
Charles D. Ruttan
CDR:wpc
Enclosure
cc: Oregon Department of Transportation
City of Tigard
Mr. Gordon R. Martin
Mr. Gordon S. Martin
-mom
(0 ma
PUBLIC EETING
Oregon Department of Transportation
2-5 @ HIGHWAY 217/KRUSE WAY INTERCHANGE
ALTERNATIVE AND LOCATIONDESIGNSTUDY
February 9, 1988
7 P.M.
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER
The Oregon Department of Transportation is in the process of an
Alternative and Location Design Study aimed at identifying
highway improvements in the .area of the I-5 Interchange at
Highway"217/Kruse Way. A map of the study area is shown on the
other side of this notice:
A public meeting on this project will be held at the Tigard
�- Civic Center, Town Hall Room, 13125 Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon,
on Tuesday, February 9th at 7 p.m. The meeting agenda will in-
clude, presentation of the:
o Goals and Objectives of the Project
o Transportation Needs Analysis
o Development of Alternatives
You are invited to attend the meeting to learn about the project,
view our presentation, review the progress -to date and give us
your views and comments.
If you have any questions about the upcoming meeting or the pro-
ject, please contact the field office at (503)620-3826 or visit
the field office on Tuesday or Thursday afternoons between the
hours of 1 and 5 p.m. The field office is located just off 72nd
Avenue; the address is:
7140 Fir Loop Road
Suite #220
Tigard, OR
Oregon Department of Transportation
Region 1 Highway Division
9002 S.E.McLoughlin Boulevard
Milwaukie,OR 97222
r
r
rY Iy
1' t
S 4
r Y
1.
ik} r
a
z t ti
y l`E
F
4 tS r
��� rte• n S.i
Ir Y
Fr 'rrt t
t
'tit t j
}(b 7
u6; pt 1
4
�r-X�tt
1� y
i
s 4 Gl%
i
� "11 �•1• 1' li 1 rs�
���. 1 1 it 1 •� .� r t �,
•t � 1 �•y '�r�y�t j
�a r�
x
.n
j
'x yak
zr
a xK' t r
,R
Ir'?.
�.k�.�..wt �F.,' .�f_,sd z. i.y 4')L_•, A F
w�....z....._ ....4"T:'".:ti s.)�.�.i�_'1 ... .... ..• k.�. �... .. . N.�....1, 7•.x..0 ...... �......,. ..
DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L PALMOUIST•
ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER
ROBERT L.ALLEN 831.5.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE 1500 JOHN C.CAHALAN-
JOHN J.HIGGINSRU55ELL R.KILKENNY
THOMAS H.TONGUE. PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL.BUILDING
TELECOPIER 1303)224.7324 HELLS RODE
GEORGE J.COOPER.111 MARSHA MURRAY•LUSBY
CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON.97204-1357 DONALD E.TEMPLETON'
ROBERT K.WINGERDOUGLAS V.VAN DYK
G.KENNETH SHIROISHI• TELEPHONE(503)224-6440
SALLY R.LEISURE
GILBERT E.PARKER,JR. SHANNON.).SKOPIL-
JOAN RT E.P P.C.' CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F.NUDELMAN
ROBERTNO'NE LL,RC.. 709 N.W.WALL STREET,'SUITE 103 JONATHAN A.BENNETT
ANDREW S.CRAIG -BEND,OREGON 97701 MARK A.PRATER`
BRADLEY O:BAKER I TELEPHONE(503)382.9241 AARON J.BELL
BRYAN W.GRUETTER"
JACK D.HOFFMAN
MICHAEL J.FRANCIS p
January 29, 1988 WILLIAM H.MORRISON
11897.1953)
RALPH R.BAILEY
JACK H.DUNN ..(1902-1974)
JAMES G.SMITH
NATHAN L COHEN A
N OREGON
Of.COUNSEL _�J,J 'ADMITTEDAND
WA HINGTON
ANO WASHINGTON
"RESIDENT.BEND OFFICE
-HAND DELIVERED '
Mr. Mark Beeson
ODOT
9002 S.E. McLoughlin dy
Milwaukee, OR 97222
Dear Mr. Beeson:
Mr. Martin's "confidence that ODOT would combine the two subject
projects forcommon [design]" resulted from my :conversations with Rick
Kuehn, RegionEngineer.
In December 1987, 1 met with Rick to discuss the terms and
conditions of the ODOT Agreement submitted to the City in response to
the City's request to connect Dartmouth Street to Pacific Highway. In
pertinent part, the-Agreement provides:
"Until additional access is built, the City will be
required to limit development [in the Triangle] to
that which can be served by the existing system
supplemented by Dartmouth. The criteria for
measuring development impact will be traffic volumes
on several streets measured along a north screenline
[2000 vehicles] and a south screenline [2400
vehicles]." (ODOT, "Cooperative Improvement
Agreement", 9/23/87.)
"The City shall complete a Transportation Plan for
the Tigard Triangle which will identify major
roadway and land requirements to adequately serve
buildout development of the Triangle. This Trans-
portation Pian shall be based upon the current Land
Use Plan. The Transportation Plan shall be adopted
by the City on or before September 1988," (ODOT,
"Cooperative Improvement Agreement", 9/23/87.)
ro
ISSUE'' Ill IM
Mr. Mark Beeson
January 29, 1988
Page 2
i
Even if additional access is built, it will not allow full development j
under current 'zoning. Despite this, the City is discussing changing the
zoning in`the Triangle to allowhigh-rise commercial development. See
Tigard'Times article given to Rick Kuehn. This causes grave,concern
recognizing that Tigard is to develop a Transportation ,Plan to serve
existing zoning, and the City has exhibited such a lack of talent in this
area.
ODOT has recognized that the proximity of the 1-5/217, 72nd Ave.
and 99W interchanges will make additional access, out of the Triangle
difficult. For this reason, it was thought imperative that the two
studies (1-5/217 and 99W/217 interchanges) be combined so as to enhance
the possibility of achieving a workable South Access design.
Please advise as to why this is no longer considered necessary.
Very truly yours,
Charles D. Ruttan
CDR(R3032):Imm
cc: Mr. Gordon R. Martin
Mr. Gordon S. Martin
Mr. Rick Kuehn, ODOT
Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee
Mr. Randy Wooley
C:
E,
I
l� 1 Department of Transportation
r „
HIGHWAY DIVISION
NEIL GOLDSCHNID7 Region
9002 SE McLOUGHLIN,MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090
- February 4, 1988
In Ilollly 110",To
J,1 No
CHARLES D. RUTTAN 603-1907
Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins & Tongue 34-1988
Attorneys at Law
851 S.W. Sixth Ave. , Suite 1500
Pacific First Federal Building
Portland, OR 97204-1357
Subject: 1. I-5 @ Hwy. 217/Kruse Way
2. Hwy. 217 @ 99W
As you are aware from your discussions with Rick Kuehn Tuesday,
our consultant's initial concepts for the I-5 @ Hwy. 217/Kruse
Way 'project demonstrate a solution to provide a freeway-to-
freeway connection without extending ,the project limits beyond
the 72nd 'Interchange. As I indicated to the Tigard Transporta-
tion AdvisoryCommittee in my letter of January 27, 1988,
we, -therefore, do not consider it necessary to extend the
consultant's contract to include the development of the Hwy.
217 @ 99W Interchange. ODOT will continue to develop these
two projects independently - the first by consultant services
and the second by our staff.
MARK BEESON
Project Coordinator
MB:po
cc: Rick Kuehn
Jim McClure
Jack Carman
4
Randy Wooley I
i
734.1850(1.87)