Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 02/19/1990
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an H REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item should sign on the appropriate FEBRUARY 19, 1990 5:30 PM sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, TIGARD CIVIC CENTER ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the H UU33 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's E'' W TIGARD, OREGON 972223 Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Administrator. 5:30 o STUDY SESSION (5:30 p.m.) - Agenda Review 6:00 o PARKS LEVY DISCUSSION (6:00 p.m.) 6:30 o PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP - PERIODIC REVIEW DISCUSSION (6:30 p.m.) 7:30 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 p.m.) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council and Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:45 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes: Jan 15 and 22, 1990 3.2 Local Contract Review Board: Award Bid for Microfilming Services Contract 3.3 Authorize Mayor to Enter into License Agreement with Utah State Retirement Board (SCE 89-04) 3.4 Approve Board and Committee Appointments - Res. No. 90- !'C 3.5 Approve Inter-Fund Loan - Park Land Acquisition - Res. No. 90- ! ~t 7:50 4. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE CU 87-03 MINOR LAND PARTITION NIP 87- 09 ROBERT WYATT (TEXACO) NPO #3 A request for a six-month extension of an approval period for a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a vehicle fuel and convenience sales business on property zoned C-G (General Commercial). Also for a Minor Land Partition to divide this 1.54 acre parcel into two parcels of 38,468 and 28,532 sq. ft. each. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) LOCATION: 11290 S.W. Bull Mountain Road (WCIM 2S1 10AC, Tax Lot 1100) o Public Hearing to be Continued from February 5, 1990 o Declarations or Challenges o Summation by Community Development Staff o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation by Community Development Staff o Council Questions or Comments o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration by Council: Resolution No. 90-/ COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 1 i k i 4 i J 5. CONSIDERATION OF ABANDONED VEHICLE ORDINANCE - ORDINANCE NO. 90- Lq o Chief of Police 6:45 6. CONSIDERATION OF PROPERTY CONVERSION ORDINANCE - ORDINANCE NO. 90 9:00 7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 9:10 8. 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, current and pending litigation issues. 9:30 9. ADJOURNMENT cca205 COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 2 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MF I'Il1G MMUI.IS - FAY 19, 1990 1. RDLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Ken Fox, Legal Counsel; Ron Goodpaster, Chief of Police (left at 6:00 p.m.); Keith Liden, Senior Planner (arrived at 6:35 p.m.); Wayne Lowry, Finance Director; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director (arrived at 6:02 p.m.); Liz Newton, Community Involvement Coordinator; and Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder. 2. COUNCU, UPDATE AMID AGENDA REVIEW a. City Administrator said that Richard Devlin of METRO has advised Sydney Hieb of Tigard has expressed an interest in serving on the Boundary Commission. b. Council reviewed the business meeting agenda. Chief Goodpaster answered questions on Agenda Item No. 6- Consideration of Property Conversion Ordinance. This ordinance would allow conversion of unclaimed property for City use. In response to concerns expressed by Councilor Johnson, Chief and Legal Counsel explained the notification process to locate owners of seized property. C. Finance Director reviewed Consent Agenda Item .5. Approval of the proposed resolution would authorize an interfund loan to facilitate park land acquisition. 3. PARK BOARD - RFiTMq OF TIGARD PARKS UVEMENr PR0GRAM PROPOSAL Park Board members Dan Graham and Suzi Fern were present. Dr. Graham reviewed the park improvement plan with the yearly project breakdown list (see attached). There was discussion on specific projects; it was noted that some projects, especially in years two and three, might reverse in priority. Also, dollar amounts assigned may fluctuate, depending on land acquisition costs and receipt of grants or funding from other sources. There was contingency in the amount of $84,000. Council consensus was for general acceptance of the project priority list with the exception that restroom evaluation costs would discussed again by Council. It was agreed that the project list should be reviewed at least annually by the Council. 4. PLANNIM CCP14ESSION W Planning Commission members present: President Don Moen; Commissioners Vlasta Barber, Judy Fessler, Milt Fyre, and Harry Saporta. i CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 1 Associate Planner John Acker reviewed the time line for the Comprehensive Plan Review (aka "Periodic Review"). April 30 is the date targeted for submittal of a proposed order to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). This order would contain findings, description of needed amendments, and set a date for a final hearing. The final hearing date before Council was scheduled for August 27, 1990. The Comprehensive Plan update will incorporate changes related to new or amended state statutes and state-wide planning goals. City Attorney Ken Fox reviewed the rights and responsibilities of Board and Committee members with regard to "Conflict of Interest" and "Ex Parte Contact": > Most Planning commission decisions were quasi-judicial; i.e., an applicant requests review of use of a specific land parcel. > A Board or Commnittee member must have no personal financial interest in the outcome of any issue they were reviewing. "Personal financial interest" would include not only the board or committee member, but also close family members or a business interest within the last two years. > A Board or Committee member should remove themselves from deliberations if they have a strong personal bias for or against an issue which would prevent them from being impartial. > Ex parte contacts were contacts by proponents or opponents of a public hearing issue outside of the public hearing arena. Board and committee members were strongly urged to avoid such contacts when possible. Sometimes, however, avoidance was not possible and when this happened, the nature and substance of the contact should be disclosed at the public hearing. If the Board or Connnittee member felt he or she could not be impartial, they should remove themselves from deliberations. > "Appearances of impropriety" also should be weighed. City Attorney explained government agencies strive for fairness in the decision- making process in fact as well as in appearance. Therefore, representations by Board and Committee members concerning matters they will be hearing should be reviewed by the individual to determine if it would create the appearance of impropriety. Additional topics discussed included: o Council/City annexation policy was reviewed. The City would assist residents when they initiated interest in joining the City. o President Moen indicated that the Hearings officer, by provisions of the Code, now heard applications pertaining to sensitive lands. He suggested, and Council concurred, that the Planning Commission CITY COUNCIL MEETING NIINIT.CFS - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 2 . j 1 C should review Sensitive Land applications when they were part of a major development. o Tzere was lengthy discussion on manufactured homes permitted on single-family lots of record. Tigard's Development Code comes close to reflecting state law which (effective 1/1/91 or at periodic review, whichever was first). State statute and City Code definitions for the terms "mobile home," "modular home," and "manufactured homes" were different; clarification was needed. Commissioner Fyre suggested that a review of requirements for stick-built homes be reviewed; i.e., should a foundation always be required? He said that a stick-built home without a foundation would cost less. Legal Counsel advised that other factors should be remembered; i.e., stick-built homes must be built to Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards while manufactured homes were subject to Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. The presence/absence of a foundation would not necessarily be a determining factor over which set of guidelines must be used. It was conceivable that a stick-built home would not be required to have a foundation if it could be shown that UBC requirements had ' been satisfied. Senior Planner added that a structure must meet k equivalent standards for structural integrity. Commissioner Fyre said he thought the state law for manufactured home siting should be changed. Commissioner Barber noted her concern with Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) of individual homeowners' associations. Legal Counsel advised that if a CC&R conflicted with state law, r the state law would prevail. Also, CC&R's must be consistently enforced over time or they, most likely, would not h.. enforceable. Two main points of discussion were: 1) Should the ordinance allowing manufactured home siting on single-family lots be more restrictive as allowable by state statute? 2) Should a policy be developed specifying designated areas for manufactured housing? Community Development Director Ed Murphy ad7;ised that staff was preparing information clarifying definitions and developing design standard recomTendations on manufactured housing. This information would be shared with the NPO's first and then with the Planning Coamnission before suh fitted for Council review. o President Moen referred to multi-family zoned a•_aas which were being developed with single-family housing. He noted concerns that lot sizes were very small. He suggested a review of minimum standards. CITY COUNCIL MEETING M URTIES - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 3 o There was brief discussion on the urban renewal proposal for President's Parkway. Planning Commission, on February 20, would hear testimony on the Development Plan and then forward their recommendation to City Council. Also, Planning commission would hold a public hearing on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) relative to the urban renewal effort. (Business meeting called to order at 7:43 p.m.) 3. NCK-AG NDA a. Councilor Johnson reminded everyone of the Fanno Creek Conference scheduled for Saturday, February 24. b. Mayor Edwards reported that staff was reviewing material reference the Anton Park Neighborhood petition requesting closure of S.W. North Dakota Street. More information should be available next week. r C. Mayor advised a Charter amendment, to be submitted on the May ballot, would be scheduled for Council discussion on a future agenda. Said amendment would be to increase the Mayor's term of office from two years to four years. 4 4. CCNSIIRr AGENDA: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes: Jan 15 and 22, 1990 4.2 Local Contract Review Board: Award Bid for Microfilming Services s Contract 4.3 Authorize Mayor to Enter into License Agreement with Utah State Retirement Board (SCE 89-04) 4.4 Approve Board and Committee Appointments - Res. No. 90-08 4.5 Approve Inter-Fund Loan - Park Land Acquisition - Res. No. 90-09 Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of council present. 5. PUBLIC MM M - CONDITIONAL USE CU 87-03 M 2M LAND PAKP7*r*rCN NIP 87- 09 IOSERr WYATT (TEla= NPO #3 A request for a six-month extension of an approval period for a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a vehicle fuel and convenience sales business on property zoned C-G (General Commercial). ? Also for a Minor Land Partition to divide this 1.54 acre parcel into two parcels of 38,468 and 28,532 sq. ft. each. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) LOCATION: 11290 S.W. Bull Mountain Road (WCIM 2S1 10AC, Tax Lot 1100) a. Public Hearing was continued from February 5, 1990. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 4 b. There were no declarations or challenges. C. Summation by Senior Planner Liden: The subject application was approved by Council on August 22, 1989. Subsequent to said approval, the Code was amended in February 1989 (Ord. 89-06) to permit an 18 month approval period. Operating under the assumption that the one-year approval was still effective, the applicant requested, and the Council granted, a six-month extension to the approval on August 14, 1989. The City Attorney has determined that the new 18 month approval period applied to all cases which had a valid one-year approval period in effect when the new Code provision was passed. Therefore, the six-month extension for this case was granted prematurely. The request was consistent with criteria in Section 18.130.045 of the Code for granting such an extension. If the project was not begun within this renewal period,. the applicant would be required to request a variance or reapply. d. Public Testimony: Proponent: o Mark Greenfield, 2000 One Main Place, Portland, Oregon, advised he was legal counsel for the applicant. He introduced Mr. Bob Smith, Texaco Area Manager, and Mr. Paul Volmer, `y Texaco Marketing Representative. Mr. Greenfield advised Texaco had not been able to proceed with development because of the City-imposed condition that Oregon Department of Transportation improvements scheduled for the intersection must first be completed. There had been a delay by ODOT because the project was opened for bid three times before acceptable bids were received. It now appeared the project would be completed by August. No changes to the site plan have been proposed. Opponent: o Fred Clagget signed in, but declined to speak. e. Senior Planner advised staff recommendation was for the approval of the proposed resolution. f. Public hearing was closed. g. RESOLUTION NO. 90-10 IN THE MATITER OF THE ADOPTION OF A FL?AL ORDER UPON CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF A REQUEST FOR AN APPROVAL PERIOD EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION NO. 88-81 FOR A CONDITIONAL USE AND MINOR LAND PARTITION PROPOSED BY TEXACO (CU 87-03/MLP 87-09) CITY COUNCIL MEETING MD ITS - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 5 h. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to approve Resolution No. 90-10. The motion was passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. 6. ON OF ABANDCNED VEHICLE CRDINANCE a. ORDINANCE NO. 90-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7, CHAPTER 7.60 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING NOTICE AND HEARING PROVISIONS FOR ABANDONED VEHICLES. b. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to adopt Ordinance No. 90-04. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 7. C~LSIDERATICtd OF PROPERTY C C NVERSICKd CIRDINANCE a. ORDINANCE NO. 90-05 AN ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD AUIHORIZE CONVERSION OF ABANDONED PROPERTY TO CITY USE AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE REQUIRED WAITING PERIOD b. There was brief discussion on the ordinance. Under provisions o the proposed ordinance, abandoned property, once a prescribed waiting period had expired, would be converted to City use upon approval by the City Administrator. City Administrator presently had the authority to authorize seized, unclaimed property be sold at auction or destroyed. C. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Edwards, to adopt Ordinance No. 90-05. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 8. FDaE(RIVE SESS•ICN: Cancelled 9. 8:09 p.m. Brine Wheatley, City Reco er A CU4 ,Mayor Date: -3 IS CCM219 r 1 CITY COUNCIL MEET-MG MM7I"ES - FEBRUARY 19, 1990 - PAGE 6 Yearly Project Breakdown PROJECT SITE PROJECT DESCRIPTION TOTAL. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 o Playground $ 80,000 o Riverltont Development $170,000 o Picnic Tables & Benches$ 21,500 o River bank earthwork, $135,000 o Restroom Renovation $40, 000 o Asphalt Trail $ 92,400 COOK PARK stabilization, Irrigation o Ircigntion of Ballfields $ SS,050 and landscaping and Play Area Sub Total: $114,900 o Restroom Evaluation s 2,000 Sub-Total: $265,050 Sub-Total: $217,000 $596,850 FANNO CREEK o Land Acquisition $ 72,000 o Easement acquisition & 549,050 o East Entry Improvement$ 21,750 o Bicycle Path (2/3 mile) o Meadow Planting s 10,000 PARK Sub-Total: $ 72,000 o Foot Bridge Relocation $ 7,000 Sub-total $S6,OSO Sub-Total: $ 31,750 $158,800 o Bridge at Dam $ 30,000 o Winterlake Playground $ 60,000 o West End Grading $ 25,000 o Land Acquisition - $ 95,000 o Restroom at West End $ 80,000 and Rough Seeding 1.9 acres o Grading, Landscaping, $ 28,000 o Tennis Courts s 50,000 u Asphalt Trail - 1/3 mile $ 24,000 Irrigation and o Basketball Courts s 10,000 SUMMERLAKE from playground to Pathway at Playground o Picnic Shelter $ 17,000 Winterlake Ave. Picnic Tables s 10,000 PARK o Lawn Seeding at $ 16,800 Sub-Total: $168,000 o o Irrigation & Landscap- $ 20,000 Lakeside ing at Picnic Area o Footbridges - 2 $ 2,000 o Soft Trail - along $ 4,900 Sub-Total: $132,000 southwestern edge of lake o East Lake Playground $ 30,000 o Irrigation (3 acres) - $ 42,000 along north & southeast sides of lake Sub-Total: $244,700 $544,700 o Englewood $ 79,000 CREENWAY/ (1.S miles) o Pathfinder/Genesis $145,000 o Cook Park- PARK PATHS o Durham Road-Cook (1.9 miles) 113th Connection $ 70,000 Park Connection $ 70,000 Sub-Total: $149,000 Sub-Total: $145,000 Sub-Total: $ 70,000 $364,000 TOTAL $672,700 $634,100 $348,650 $1,665,450 TIGARD PARKS - TABLE 1 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice 7-6490 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising * City of Tigard • .mow f ~ PO Box 23397 ❑ Tearsheet Notice Tigard, OR 97223 ~a` x • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit 'To • •xt Fiutlr;mfg selerrted aBends ltcn s"rQ~ra4~iiie ormataon endfutl a dss ma bo obtaittod from Roc der; 731?,~"S'~~Aall ~H3ute~Cd,~'>~ t 3 { 5 °Otga>7!3. der`} uig 639171 IW' i x r't +~s<Sd-"• 'i> xw i r r *rr r `f, f my, OW 5 30 M ARY 19;199p P AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION SSQ 7.34f'BUS ME~'1'II~TG ~1`IGARDfIG!~!S1fRAT..: STATE OF OREGON, 13125 S W' iF7Ald. BOULFYARD, 7`tGARD.ORW" t ! COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) x 1, Lincia T •'PArk I.eVy DISCOS$NJQ R ~ssty~ r ;r j • Cammtssion+W ' Prnodic Review being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigartri Times •c~~~875~n N'~} i a newspaper of general circulate as defined in ORS 193.010• I'~t~tI1~1.P87-09'RobertWjratt7~aactl~s rFy " ik a and 193.020; published at Tigard in theCon3siom.~~ i~4 { afo aid ount n t to that the tYC~ty ~ersivn~of iT sDCaata 'r~ ~irY ^ f i s Fr 1 y G~ounei~ `Meeting 'Use -A'bdl ~ y, ,~an~, jj - VehiC1C ~~F GTY4~ ~ Y r j e' k~`' }'-any S _ a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the o1.bCe1CQ118CZReviCaBOaliiidlle1` s`, r'~ r' ,r~~`' •,l?Xeciatre ORS' entire issue of said newspaper for 1 successive and s consecutive in the following issues: ~ ~ x, ~ ~ n,, r y S , ~ February 15 1990 911:. + . ~ . k r~ 7~A Subscribed and sworn o before me this February 19-1990 19 Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: 6/3/93 AFFIDAVIT ec. # _ `AGENDA tTEM' 2, ~ yISTTOR S,~ AG~AIDA DATE (Limited `to' 2 minutes••or less; , please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council 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 Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank y.-u. NAME 6 ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED 'Please Prin.}- _ E { i f { Z S L C f G 1 E A DATE 2/19/90 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) PERSONS WILL BE ALLOWED 10 MINUTES FOR PRESENTATIONS. Item Description: yAGENDA`°ITEM-40,;-10 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE CU 87-03 NIMR 140 -PARTITION- _ IV6P 87 4_* ROBERT WYATT (TEXACO) APO 13 Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation r, e r "T~ Cc [01 L"C jW J-1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In the Matter of the Proposed Orc~t~~h~ AID, qo-v~l a~,e' 90-05 STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss City of Tigard ) I, -1-j begin first duly sworn, on oath, depose aiA say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number (s) q C) - O q Ce n d qn - 0S which, were adopted at the Council Meeting dated r? , I C/ Ct U copy (s) of said ordinance (s) beng, hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the . 3r date of 1990 1. Tigard Civic Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. US National'~Bank, Corner of Main and Scoffins, Tigard, Oregon 3. Safeway Store, Tigard Plaza, SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 4. Albertson's Store, Corner of Pacific Hwy. ( State Hwy. 99) and SW Durham Road, Tigard, Oregon Subscribed and sworn to before me this d date of No Public for Oregon my Commission Expires: - ,S ` 93 ke/CwPOS'T qo- ORDINANCE NO. Q AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7, CHAPTER 7.60 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING NOTICE AND HEARING PROVISIONS FOR ABANDONED VEHICLES WHEREAS, recent Supreme Court rulings require specific notice and hearing rights when an abandoned vehicle is towed; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard wishes to assure that all citizens have the right to notice and hearing when their vehicle is towed; now, therefore, THE CITY OF TIGARD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 7.60.010(1) is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.010 Definitions. (1) 'Abandoned' or 'abandoned vehicle' means any vehicle that has been deserted or relinquished. A vehicle shall be considered abandoned if it has remained in the same location for more than 24 hours and one or more of the following conditions exist: (a) The vehicle does not have an unexpired license plate lawfully fixed to it, or (b) The vehicle appears to be inoperative or disabled, or (c) The vehicle appears to be wrecked, partially dismantled or junked." Section 2. Chapter 7.60 of the Tigard Municipal Code is amended by adding Section 7.60.015 to read as follows: "Section 7.60.015 Abandoned Vehicles Offense. (a) A person commits the offense of abandoning a vehicle if the person abandons the vehicle on any public right-of-way or on public property of the City of Tigard. (b) The owner of the vehicle as shown by the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles shall be considered responsible for the abandonment of a vehicle and shall be liable for the cost of removal and disposition of the abandoned vehicle. (c) A vehicle abandoned in violation of this section is subject to the provisions for removal of abandoned vehicles under sections 7.60.020 to 7.60.030 and to being sold as provided under Sections 7.60.070 to 7.60.110. (d) The offense described in this section, abandoning a vehicle, is a Class B traffic infraction." Section 3. Section 7.60.020 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.020 Removal Notice. (a) It i shall be the duty of the police department, whenever a vehicle is found abandoned on any public right-of-way or on public property, to: (1) Make a routine investigation to discover the owner and request removal of the vehicle; or (2) Failing to discover the owner by such a process, to make diligent inquiry as to the name and address of the owner of the vehicle by examining such vehicle for license number, I.D. number, make, style and any other information which will aid in the identification of the ownership of the vehicle, 4 and transmitting all available information pertaining to the vehicle to the Department of Motor Vehicles of this state with an inquiry for the name and address of the owners and any lessors or security interest holders. (3) If the owner cannot be identified or located or does not remove the vehicle upon request to do so, to give notice to remove the vehicle by both of the following methods: (a) By affixing a Notice to Tow to the vehicle with the required information. (b) By mailing notice, by certified mail with the receipt stamped as proof of mailing, at least five days before taking the vehicle into custody, with the required information to the owners and any lessors or security interest holders at the address of each shown by the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles. The five-day period under this paragraph does not include holidays, Saturdays or Sundays. ORDINANCE NO. ~U -U7 PAGE 2 4 (4) The notice shall state all of the following: (a) That the vehicle will be subject to being taken into custody and removed by the City if the vehicle is not removed within twenty-four (24) hours. (b) That the vehicle violates Chapter 7.60 of the Tigard Municipal Code and the vehicle will be removed under the authority of that chapter. (c) The place where the vehicle will be held in custody or the telephone number and address of the appropriate authority that will provide the information. (d) That the vehicle, if taken into custody and removed by the City, will be subject to towing and storage charges and that a lien will attach to the vehicle and its contents. (e) That the vehicle and its contents will be sold by the City or the towing and storage facility where the vehicle is located to satisfy the costs of towing and storage if the charges are not paid. (f) That the owner, possessor or person having an interest in the vehicle is entitled to a hearing, before the vehicle is impounded, to contest the proposed custody and removal if a hearing is timely requested. (g) That the owner, possessor or person having an interest in the vehicle may also challenge the reasonableness of any towing and storage charges at the hearing. (h) That a hearing must be requested not more than five days, holidays, Saturdays or Sundays not included, from the mailing date of the notice and the method for requesting a hearing. If a timely request for a hearing is received prior to towing the vehicle, the vehicle shall not be removed pending the outcome of the hearing. ORDINANCE NO. %vrU PAGE 3 (5) The notices in Subsection (3) above are not required when the vehicle is abandoned in such a location as to constitute a hazard or obstruction to traffic using the public right-of-way or public property. Upon discovery, the police department may immediately take custody of and remove a vehicle constituting a hazard. However, the City shall provide the notice described in Section 7.60.050 and, if requested, a hearing described under Section 7.60.055." Section 4. Section 7.60.030 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.030 Removal Procedure. An abandoned vehicle which remains in the same position for a period of five days, holidays, Saturdays or Sundays not included, after an owner has been requested to remove it or after notice has been given as required by Section 7.06.020 shall be removed by the police department using their own personnel, equipment or facilities or those of others." Section 5. Section 7.60.040 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.040 Possessory lien for towing charges. (a) A person shall have a lien on the vehicle and its contents if the person, at the request of the City tows an abandoned vehicle. A lien established under this section shall be on the vehicle and its contents for the just and reasonable charges for the towing service performed and any storage provided. The lien shall be subject to the provisions for liens under ORS 98.812(3). The person holding the lien may retain possession of the vehicle and contents until the charges on which the lien is based are paid. A lien described under this section does not attach to the contents of any vehicle taken from public property until 15 days after taking the vehicle into custody. ORDINANCE NO. `d"v PAGE 4 (b) A person who tows any vehicle at the request of the City shall provide written notice, approved by the City, containing information on the procedures necessary to obtain a hearing. Each person who redeems a vehicle shall sign a copy of the receipt issued, indicating that they have received notice of their right to a hearing." Section 6. Section 7.60.050 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.050 Impoundment Notice. (1) If the City takes custody of a vehicle, the City shall provide, by certified mail with the receipt stamped as proof of mailing, within forty-eight (48) hours of the removal, notice with an explanation of procedures available for obtaining a hearing to the owners of the vehicle and any lessors or security interest holders as shown in the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles. The notice shall state that the vehicle has been taken into custody and shall give the location of the vehicle and describe procedures for the release of the vehicle and for obtaining a hearing. The forty-eight (48) hour period under this ' section does not include holidays, Saturdays or Sundays. (2) Any notice given under this section after a vehicle is taken into custody and removed shall state all of the following: (a) That the vehicle has been taken into custody and removed by the City, that the vehicle violated Chapter 7.60 of the Tigard Municipal Code and that the vehicle was removed under the authority of that chapter. (b) The place where the vehicle is being held in custody or the telephone number and address of the appropriate authority that will i provide the information. (c) That the vehicle is subject to towing and storage charges, the amount of charges that have accrued to the date of the notice and the daily storage charges. ORDINANCE NO. w-~ f PAGE 5 (d) That the vehicle and its contents are subject to lien for payment of the towing and storage charges and that the vehicle and its contents will be sold by the city or the towing and storage facility where the vehicle is located to cover the charges if the charges are not paid within fifteen (15) days. (e) That the owner, possessor or person having an interest in the vehicle and its contents is entitled to a prompt hearing to contest the validity of taking the vehicle into custody and removing it and to contest the reasonableness of the charges for towing and storage if a hearing is timely requested. (f) That a hearing must be requested not more than five days, holidays, Saturdays or Sundays not included, from the mailing date of the notice and the method for rec,* kesting a hearing. (g) That the vehicle and its contents may be immediately reclaimed by presentation to the appropriate authority of satisfactory proof of ownership or right to possession and payment of the towing and storage charges." Section 7. Chapter 7.60 is amended by adding Section 7.60.55 to read as follows: "Section 7 60 055 Hearing to contest validity of custody and removal. A person provided notice under Section 7.60.020 or 7.60.050 or any other person who reasonably appears to have an interest in the vehicle may request a hearing under this section to contest the validity of the removal and custody under Section 7.60. or the proposed removal and custody of a vehicle under Section 7.60.020 by submitting a request for hearing with the City not more that five days from the mailing date of the notice. The five-day period in this section does not include holidays, Saturdays or Sundays. A hearing under this section shall comply with all of the following: (1) If the City proposes to remove a vehicle under Section 7.60.020 and receives a request for hearing before the vehicle is taken into custody and removed, the vehicle shall not be removed unless it constitutes a hazard. ORDINANCE NO. ` PAGE 6 Oil (2) A request for hearing shall be in writing and shall state grounds upon which the _ person requesting the hearing believes that the custody and removal of the vehicle is not justified. (3) Upon receipt of a request for a hearing under this section, the City shall set a time for a hearing within 72 hours of the receipt of the request and shall provide notice of the hearing to the person requesting the hearing and to the owners of the vehicle and any lessors or security interest holders shown in the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles, if not the same as the person requesting the hearing. The 72-hour period in this subsection does not include holidays, Saturdays or Sundays. (4) If the City finds, after hearing and by substantial evidence on the record, that the custody and removal of a vehicle was: (a) Invalid, the City shall order the immediate release of the vehicle to the owner or person with right to possession. If the vehicle is released under this paragraph, the person to whom the vehicle is released is not liable for any pre-decision towing or storage charges. If the person has already paid the towing and storage charges on the vehicle, the City shall reimburse the person for the charges. The person shall be liable for new storage charges incurred after the decision. New storage charges on the vehicle will not start to accrue until more than 24 hours after the time the vehicle is officially released to the person. . (b) Valid, the City shall order the vehicle to be held in custody until the costs of the hearing and all towing and storage costs are paid by the person claiming the vehicle. If the vehicle has not yet been removed, the City shall order its removal. (5) A person who fails to appear at a hearing under this section is not entitled to another hearing unless the person provides reasons satisfactory to the City for the person's failure to appear. ORDINANCE NO. ~v D PAGE 7 (6) The City is only required to provide one hearing under this section for each time the City takes a vehicle into custody and removes the vehicle or proposes to do so. (7) A hearing under this section may be used to determine the reasonableness of the charge for towing and storage of the vehicle. Towing and storage charges set by law, ordinance or rule or that comply with law, ordinance or rule are reasonable for purposes of this subsection. (8) The City shall provide a written statement of the results of the hearing to the person requesting the hearing. (9) Hearings held under this section may be informal in nature, but shall afford a reasonable opportunity for the person requesting the hearing to demonstrate by the statements of witnesses and other evidence, that the tow and/or storage of the vehicle was invalid, or for any other reason not justified. (10) The hearings officer at a hearing under this section may be an officer, official or employee of the City, other than the Tigard Police Department, but shall not have participated in any determination or investigation related to taking into custody and removing the vehicle that is the subject of the hearing. The hearings officer may promulgate necessary rules and regulations for conducting the hearings. (11) The determination of the hearings officer at a hearing is final and is not subject to appeal." Section 8. Chapter 7.60 is amended by adding Section 7.60.057 to read as follows: "Section 7.60.057 Exemption for criminal investigation. A vehicle that is being held as part of any criminal investigation is not subject to any requirements of Section 7.60.020, 7.60.050 and 7.60.055." ORDINANCE NO. 90`~ PAGE 8 Section 9. Section 7.60.060 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.060 Appraisals. A person who is issued an appraiser certificate by the Department of Motor Vehicles shall be the only person qualified to appraise vehicles for sale under Sections 7.60.070 and 7.60.080-7.60.090. Section 10. Section 7.60.070(a) is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.070 Vehicles--Disposition. As often as necessary, the Chief of Police shall be provided with a list of all unclaimed vehicles which have been towed and stored by or for the City. (a) If the vehicle has been stored more than 15 days and has been appraised at seven hundred fifty dollars ($750), or less, or has been in storage for 30 days or longer, the Chief of Police or designee shall as soon as convenient, authorize the sale of, or sell the vehicle in accordance with the provisions of any contract authorized by the Council and pertaining thereto. If there is no such contract and the vehicle is valued at $750 or less, the Chief of Police shall file with the Department of Motor Vehicles the license plates, if any, and an affidavit describing the vehicle, stating the location and appraised value of the vehicle, and stating that the vehicle will be junked or dismantled. The Chief of Police or designee shall state that notice of intent to junk or dismantle the vehicle has been sent with notification of the location of the vehicle to the owner." Section 11. Section 7.60.070 is amended by adding Section 7.60.070(e) to read as follows: "(e) In the event a vehicle is sold in accordance with the provisions of a contract, the Chief of Police shall ensure that, at the time of sale, that a certificate of sale in substantially the same form as described in Subsection 7.60.070(d) is issued to the purchaser." ORDINANCE NO. q b-0 PAGE 9 Section 12. Section 7.60.080(a) is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.080 Sale--Notice. (a) The Chief of Police may decide to sell at public auction any vehicles which have not been claimed within 30 days and which are valued at $750 or more, if there is no contract authorized by the council pertaining thereto. If there is to be a public auction, the Chief of Police shall cause to be published, in a newspaper of general circulation within the city, a notice of sale which shall state: (1) The sale is of abandoned property in the city's possession; (2) A description of the vehicle, including the type, make, license number, I.D. number and any other information which will aid in accurately identifying the vehicle; (3) The terms of the sale; (4) The date, time and place of the sale." Section 13. Section 7.60.090(a) is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.090 Sale--Procedure. (a) If the Chief of Police decides to sell any vehicles at public auction under the provisions of Section 7.60.080, then the Chief of Police shall hold a sale at the time and place appointed with the vehicle to be sold in view." Section 14. Section 7.60.130 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.130 Charges. A person or owner entitled to a vehicle held under the provisions of this Chapter is not liable for nor shall be required to pay storage charges for a period in excess of 60 days." Section 15. Section 7.60.140 is amended to read as follows: "Section 7.60.140 Forms. All forms necessary to implement and enforce the provisions of this ordinance shall be prepared and on file in the city recorder's office." ORDINANCE NO. l/ PAGE 10 Section 16. Section 7.60.150 is amended to read as follows: "Secticn 7.60.150 Claim of owner to proceeds. (a) If the vehicle is sold by the Chief of Police under the provisions of Section 7.60.070 or 7.60.080 and 7.60.090, then at any time within two years after the sale of the vehicle the former owner of the vehicle may recover the proceeds of the sale, as deposited in the general fund of the City pursuant to Section 7.60.110, by filing a claim with the City Treasurer. Such claims shall be audited in the same manner as other claims against the City. (b) If the vehicle is sold under the `provisions of a contract, the balance of the proceeds of the sale, with a return of sale, shall be transmitted to the City Treasurer for deposit in the general fund of the City. The towing and storage facility under contract may deduct from the proceeds of the sale the costs incurred in the sale and the costs and expenses in the removal, preservation and custody of the vehicle. At any time within two years after the sale of the vehicle the former owner of the vehicle may recover the proceeds of the sale, e as deposited in the general fund of the City, by filing a claim with the City Treasurer." PASSED: By *i1wnD&6 vote of all Council members present, his _ day of 1990. 6ttherifie W /atley, Deputy City Recorder d f , 1990. APPROVED:--,. s Gera wards, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney mnd\tigard\abandveh.one ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 11 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE CONVERSION OF ABANDONED PROPERTY TO CITY USE AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE REQUIRED WAITING PERIOD WHEREAS, Chapter 2.52 of the Tigard Municipal Code provides for the sale of abandoned, found, seized or stolen property; and WHEREAS, from time to time, there are items held by the police department which would be of use to the City; and WHEREAS, Chapter 2.52 does not provide for the City converting the property to its own use; now, therefore: THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subsection 2.52.030(a) of the Tigard Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: "2 52.030 Sale of property. (a) At any time after the expiration of ninety days from the time the property comes into the possession of the police department, the chief of police may sell the property at public auction. The chief of police shall not sell any such property held in evidence in any court proceeding until the need for its use in that proceeding has passed. Notice of the sale ~shall be given once by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city of Tigard at least ten days before the date of sale. The notice shall give the time and place of the sale and shall describe generally the property to be sold at the sale. Section 2. Chapter 2.52 of the Tigard Municipal Code is amended by adding section 2.52.045 to read as follows: 112.52.045 Use of property by city. (a) In lieu of a sale of the property under Sections 2.52.030 and 2.52.040, at any time after the expiration of ninety days from the time the property comes into the possession of the police department, the city manager may, at the request of the chief of police, convert the property to public use by entering it on the city's fixed asset inventory. (b) Notice of the transfer of the property to the city shall be given once by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city of Tigard at least ten days before the property is converted to city use. The notice shall describe the property and state that the described property shall be converted to city use if the property is not reclaimed within ten days. Any claim of ownership shall be subject to the provisions of Section 2.52.020. (c) If the property is not reclaimed within ten days after publication of the notice described above, the property shall be entered on the city's fixed asset inventory and shall not be subject to the right of redemption. Section 2. Section 2.52.045 shall apply to all personal property, except motor vehicles, now or hereafter in the custody of the city of Tigard, as provided in Section 2.52.060. I PASSED: By U?a n i rt 1 UUS vote of all Council ' members present, this /q[Yl day of 1990. herine Wheatley, Beputy-Ci y Recorder E APPROVED: ay of 1990. r Geral E wards, Mayor Approved as_ to form: City Attorney mndW gardeproperty.^rd i 3~ 1 T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MRb,1.1 MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 o Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by mayor Edwards. 1. ROLL. CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randall Wooley, City Engineer. 2. AGENDA REVITW: a. Council and staff reviewed the business agenda. City Engineer outlined the major issues for the Greenburg Right-of-Way Public Hearing. b. There was Council discussion concerning the public hearing for the manufactured home on Cook Lane. Community Development Director outlined staff's position; that is, the Development Code allows for manufactured homes on individual lots of record. Building Inspector and City Attorney reviewed definitions and correlations as contained in the Uniform Building Code (UBC), Housing & Urban Development Standards (HUD), and the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC). City Attorney advised that the state and city use different definitions for terms such as "manufactured housing" which made the issue somewhat confusing. Building Inspector advised the foundation for the home on Cook Lane meets Development Code requirements; there was no requirement the home be "anchored." State legislation approved last session will be effective in 1991, advised the Community Development Director. New state law would continue to allow cities to determine design standards of homes so that compatibility issues can be addressed. Council discussed elements of the requirements contained in the Development Code with City Attorney and Building Inspector advising. City Attorney summarized history of HUD requirements, noting the Development Code did not refer to HUD standards which were the regulations governing manufactured housing. HUD regulations were functionally equivalent to UBC standards. HUD requirements were federally administered; UBC rules were, essentially, adopted state-by-state. City Attorney advised Tigard's code, with regard to manufactured housing, appeared to be more liberal than otherwise required by state law.. Records indicated that current Code requirements were CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE: 1 written in advance of potential mandates from the 1985 State Legislative Session. Subsequent statutes were less liberal than anticipated. Commuilty Development Director advised the home on Cook Lane met HUD Code and was a "manufactured home." C. Councilor Schwartz commented on turn-around time for Council meeting minutes. He advised it would be helpful to have the record available for review of issues. d. City Administrator noted provisions of the proposed noise ordinance reflected DEQ standards. If necessary, more restrictive language could be considered later. 3. UTILITY & FRANCHISE WORKSHOP a. Chairman Gerry McReynolds reviewed issues the Utility & Franchise Committee had worked on over the last year. He reported the following: o The committee held a public discussion on styrofoam products where both pros and cons of the issue were deliberated. The problem with styrofoam was that it was not biodegradable. The City of Portland and Multnomah County considered banning the use of the product in certain instances. Another option would call for be recycling of styrofoam. Mr. McReynolds suggested the Committee continue to monitor this issue over the next six months. o The Tualatin River cleanup project was now in court. Mr. McReynolds noted the importance of keeping informed on the subject. o Third-party recycling has become an issue. Oregon law states that the solid-waste industry must offer recycling with cost offset by profits made on the recyclables. To allow private companies, other than the franchised haulers, to operate a recycling operation ultimately increases fees paid by rate payers. Mr. McReynolds advised the ordinance should be clarified and modified to address modern-day issues. b. General discussion followed. Councilor Johnson noted that April 22, 1990 would be the 20th Anniversary of Earth Day. Virginia Hartman was chairing the effort for Tigard. In response to Councilor Johnson: inquiry, Mr. McReynolds said he thought the Utilities & Franchise Committee would be willing to assist with associated community events. There was brief discussion on better ways to promote recycling programs throughout the City. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 2 C. The committee would work on the third-party recycling issue; specifically, towards clarification of the ordinance. 4. UPDATE ON TUAI.ATIN VATT,FV EOONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (TVEDC) ACTIVITIES a. Mary Tobias, President of TVEDC, reviewed the following issues: o Western Beltway o Tualatin River Water Quality o Urban Growth Boundary o Light Rail o Suburban Mass Transit o Major Street & Transportation Improvement Program - 2 (MSTIP/2) o School Finance Reform o Small Business Development o Washington County Economic Development Plan Material distributed to Council on the above issues has been filed with the Council meeting packet information. Business Meeting: Called to order by Mayor Edwards at 7:33 p.m. 5. PROCLAMATION FOR KIWANIS WEEK: a. Mayor proclaimed week of January 21-27 as Kiwanis week in the city of Tigard. Kiwanis International, a community service organization with 320,000 members and 8,500 clubs, raised $65 million during the past year and donated more than 22 million volunteer hours in 73 nations and geographic areas. There were 95 Kiwanians in 3 clubs in the City of Tigard. 6. VISITOR'S AGENDA: a. David Blake of Trammell crow company requested review of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment out of the regular sequence. The purpose would be to have this issue before Council at the same time the Trammell Crow urban renewal proposal would be considered. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Eadon, to approve the request. The motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. 7. Consent Agenda .1 Approve Council Minutes: November 16, and 20, 1989 .2 Resolution of Public Necessity for S.W. 121st Street Improvements; Resolution No. 90-04 Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve the consent Agenda. t, The motion was passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 3 8. PUBLIC HEARING - LDGALIZATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF GREENBURG ROAD This hearing is to consider reestablishment of the right-of-way of Greenburg Road between Pacific Highway and Tiedeman Avenue through the legalization process provided by State law. A written report from the City Engineer contains the specific survey alignment proposed for the reestablished right-of-way. The existing right-of-way cannot be accurately retraced due to numerous alterations of the road and due to loss or destruction of the original survey of the road. a. Public Hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. c. The City Engineer reviewed the staff report with Council, after which Bob Taylor, Surveyor, outlined the process by which the right- of-way alignment was reconstructed. Greenburg Road was originally dedicated in 1871; the original wooden survey posts could not be found. City Engineer advised that once the legalization of right-of-way was in place, design issues would be reviewed to address concerns like those received in letters from property owners. (See public testimony.) d. Public Testimony: There was no oral public testimony. The following letters were E received prior to the Council meeting and submitted to Council for their review: - Letter dated January 15, 1990 from Harry Sneidman. - Letter dated January 17, 1990 from Michael W. Wilhelm, DMD - Letter dated January 18, 1990, from Radu and Elena Ghionea The above are letters on file with the Council meeting material. e. Council discussion followed with clarification on issues by the City Attorney and staff. f. The public hearing was closed. g. ORDINANCE NO. 90-01 AN ORDINANCE LEGAUZING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF GREENBURG ROAD BEIWEEN PACIFIC HIGHWAY AND TIEDEMAN AVENUE, DIRECTING THAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BE SURVEYED AND MONUNIE3=, AND DIRDOIING THAT A SURVEY MAP AND NARRATIVE BE FILED WITH THE COUNTY SURVEYOR. h. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to adopt Ordinance No. 90-01. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. CITY COUNCIL MMING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 4 9. FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING - LOCAL IM1WVEMEN'T DIST'RICT (LID) #42 (S.W. 68TH PARKWAY SANITARY SEWER) The purpose of the hearing was to consider written objections to the individual proposed assessments on properties within LID #42. All objections must have been filed with the City Recorder by 5:00 p.m., January 22, 1990. a. Final assessment hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. c. City Engineer reviewed this issue. On January 8, 1990, Council received the final engineer's report for LID #42 and set January 22 as the date for a hearing on the final assessment roll. d. One written objection was received by Council. (See letter dated January 22, 1990, from Irving L. Larson, which has been filed with Council meeting material) e. Council comments and questions: Councilor Johnson noted concern over the issue presented in Mr. Larson's January 22 letter. City Engineer advised he talked to Mr. Larson prior to the meeting. Mr. Larson was attempting to acquire property from the State Highway Department (right-of-way). He thinks the property will eventually be vacated and sold; Mr. Larson was concerned that because the property was not assessed in the improvement district, it may not have future sewer access. City Engineer advised sewer access would be possible, but connection charges would be higher because the State did not participate in the construction costs. Mr. Larson had indicated to the City Engineer he was not optimistic the issue would be resolved soon. h. The assessment hearing was closed. i. ORDINANCE NO. 90-02 AN ORDINANCE DEI'ERM KING THE FINAL COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SW 68TH PARKWAY SANITARY LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 42, APPORTIONING THE COST AMONG THE BENEFITED PROPERTIES, SPREADING THE ASSESSMENT DECLARING A DEFICIT ASSESSMENT OR CREDIT FOR EACH PROPERTY, AND DIRECTING THE ASSESSMENTS IN THE LIEN DOCKET. j. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to adopt Ordinance No. 90-02. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 10. PUBLIC HEARING - MISCELLANEOUS M 89-20 MANUFACTURED HOME AT S.W. COOK LANE - NPO #3 A request for u review of a Director's interpretation of Chapters 18.26 and 18.94 of the Community Development Code pertaining to manufactured and mobile homes. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUI'ES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 5 a. Public hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges c. Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. Sometime ago there was a permit issued for a manufactured home on Cook Lane. Some of the neighbors objected and questioned whether or not the permit was issued correctly. A director's interpretation on the subject was issued October 10, 1989; the interpretation found that the manufactured home at 10676 S.W. Cook Lane was appropriately sited on the property in conformity with the community Development Code. This issue was appealed to the Planning Commission by NPO #3, and the Director's interpretation was upheld. At the request of the NPO, Council decided to review the Commission's decision. The packet material, submitted to Council for their review, also included a considerable amount of background information. The staff and Commission have concluded that the residence is 1) a manufactured home as defined in Section 18.26.030; 2) a permitted use in the R-3.5 zone, and 3) in conformity with design standards contained in Section 18.94.040 for manufactured homes on individual lots. City Attorney advised that the Community Development Director identified the three essential issues to be considered. Two items should be kept in mind during deliberations: 1. This was a case to be resolved on criteria set forth in ` the City zoning code; it was not an issue to be determined by reference to the state statutes. The controlling law was bound in Tigard's code, not in the statute. Definitions and criteria which appear in the city's code (written in 1985) in many instances pre-date the state-law definitions and, for that reason, were different than those which appear in the state code. 2. The second comment concerns the policy issue involved; that is, how liberal or conservative to be in allowing the placement of manufactured homes. Me policy of the City Code appears to different than that which appears in state law - either the current state law or the law that will go into effect after periodic review. In the event the Council was not happy with the policy, as expressed in the zoning code, the remedy would be to change the policy. The Council has the authority to do that. This process would have to take place after consideration of this application. This particular applicant was entitled, under the law, to the benefit of the law as it appeared at the time the application was filed. Any change which might be made in the policy would affect future applications. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MIN MS - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 6 d. Public Testimony: Proponents o W.R. "Bud" Norte, 868 S.W. Liberty Bell Drive, Beaverton, Oregon, advised he represented the Mobile Homeowners' Association, which was a non-profit Oregon corporation. He complimented the City of Tigard for allowing the home to be placed on this lot. The home, as far as he could determine, met all of the requirements. Mr. Norte reviewed: - history of regulations for manufactured homes; in 1976, HUD wrote strict specifications for manufactured homes, - construction process of manufactured homes, - cost savings offered as alternative by manufactured housing, especially for first-time buyers, - at last state legislative session, House Bill 2863 (aka "infill bill) was adopted, ? - inspection procedures for manufactured homes were very thorough. Mr. Norte said he hoped the Council would confirm the permits on the home in question. o Clyde Johnson, 10676 S.W. Cook Lane, Tigard, Oregon, noted he and his wife lived in the manufactured home which was the subject of the public hearing. Mr. Johnson reviewed the construction of his home noting insulation and construction was equal to or better than the construction of the homes in the neighborhood. He advised of his efforts to accommodate his neighbor's concern with placement of the home on the property. He commented that his home's appearance was better than that of neighboring residential property. He reviewed costs for his home which included: $33,000 for the home, $21,500 for lot purchase, $3,000 for sewer and wager, $5,000 for a garage and $1,500 for the driveway. o Mr. John Lee, 11565 S.W. 90th, Tigard, Oregon, testified that he visited Mr. Johnson's home. He said he supports Mr. Johnson's right to remain on the site and asked that Council give him the opportunity to landscape which would give an even better appearance to the property. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 7 Mr. Lee advised the home looked better than some of the existing homes in the area which were in need of maintenance work, such as painting. He also suggested that opponents look C at the construction of mobile homes before expressing objections. o Don Miner, Oregon Manufactured Housing Association, 2255 State Street, Salem, Oregon, urged Council to ratify the action taken by City staff. Mr. Miner reviewed history of construction standards for manufactured homes at federal and state levels. He advised that manufactured homes are entirely engineered and energy efficient. HUD requirements, according to Mr. Miner, wE_e superior to UBC requirements. Mr. Miner reviewed that Mr. Johnson had secured all permits necessary and spent a substantial sum on land and improvements. o Ron Rau, Marlette Homes, 340-A N.W. 12th Street, Hermiston, Oregon, advised that Mr. Johnson's home was constructed by his conpany. Mr. Johnson was assisted by them in locating his home on this site. Mr. Rau said he was available for any questions concerning the home. "Neutral" Testimony- " Martha Bishop, 10590 S.W. Cook Lane, Tigard, Oregon read material written by Mr. Dennis Moonier, concerning his challenges to the Director's decision. This material has been filed with the Council packet information. In addition, Mrs. Bishop read a statement, which she prepared, into the record. This statement has been filed with the Council packet information. Mrs. Bishop expressed the need for both sides of the issue to be heard and that impacts to existing neighborhoods should be considered. o Judy Fessler, 11180 S.W. Fonner Street, Tigard, Oregon, testified from a prepared statement which has been filed with Council packet information. Ms. Fessler urged the Council to call a moratorium on any further "MH" permits for residential areas until the Planning Department and staff develops specific verbiage and guidelines to the City Council for public hearing and testimony. Opponents: o Bibianne Scheckla, 108905 S.W. Fairhaven Way, Tigard, Oregon, testified she was not opposed to manufactured homes and noted their qualities as far as she understood. She noted that, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 8 ~ where there was already an established neighborhood, placement of manufactured homes should be required to go through a hearing process. She added she would like to see the city of Tigard identify areas where manufactured homes were permitted. o Dave Klingele, 12900 S.W. 132nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, declined to testify. o Herman Porter, Chairman of NPO #3, 11875 S.W. Gaarde Street, Tigard, Oregon, advised that the NPO initiated the review of the Director's Interpretation. He clarified that the question of the quality of Mr. Johnson's home was not their concern. He said realized an occupancy permit had been issued and the City would be liable if the City should require that the home be moved. Mr. Porter said he assumed the home would be allowed to remain and he had no personal objection to that. The issue, said Mr. Porter, was the way the Planning Department had interpreted the law. Mr. Porter asserted that the law was very clear, although the planning staff testified at the Planning Commission hearing that it was confusing. Mr. Porter advised he participated in NPO discussion in 1984/5 and argued in favor of manufactured homes on lots if they met the same standards as site-built homes. NPO has no objection to this interpretation. This home, according to the Planning Department, met HUD requirements. Whether or not this was sufficient with regard to meeting UBC'standards should have been an issue determined through a public hearing process according to Mr. Porter. o Cal Woolery, 12356 S.W. 132nd Court, Tigard, Oregon, advised his concerns were with regard to buildable lots in established neighborhoods where Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) were in place. Would these MR's be observed by the City when issuing permits? Mr. Woolery advised he was concerned that the UBC was not met in this situation. He said he thought Council should issue a variance to Mr. Johnson, with foundation and tie-down requirements issued as a condition of the variance. Mr. Woolery said he supported a moratorium on future permits until language of the Code was clarified. Rebuttal: o Mr. Clyde Johnson, commented with regard to foundation. He advised his home was set on six continuous concrete stringers (full length, 12-inches wide, 6-inches thick). He advised the foundation requirements had been met; the home was "lagged down." CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 9 He referred to other issues, such as plumbing. He said plumbing pipes were plastic because of weight considerations when the home was moved to its site. He reported that he was hooked up to the sewer while many of the surrounding homes were on septic tanks. He requested that the neighbors make an attempt to get along with one another. o Mr. John Lee noted his disagreement with the call for a moratorium on "MH" permits. e. Recommendation by staff: Community Development Director advised staff recommended Council uphold the Director's interpretation and the Planning Commission's recommendation and pass the proposed resolution which would allow the manufactured home to stay where it was. f. Council Questions/Comments: - Councilor Eadon asked for clarification on differences of terminology used throughout the hearing. City Attorney responded that the City Code and the State Statute use different sets of terminology. The City Code defines manufactured homes and defines mobile homes. The state code defines manufactured structures and prefabricated structures. r Prefabricated structures, under the state code, was a factory- built structure which meets the UBC. A manufactured structure, under the state code, included a number of things. One the categories it included was a dwelling built to the HUD standard. HUD standards were national standards designed for the construction of what we once knew to be "mobile homes" and which we now call "manufactured homes." This is distinguished from the UBC which is the code applied to site-built homes. Tigard's zoning code is not required to use the state terminology; in Fact, a different terminology is used. This is why council has been encouraged to analyze the case using Tigard's terminology rather than trying to mix and match terms from the state code. City Attorney asked that the record include, in this proceeding, the minutes from the work session in order to make clear the degree to which the Council has delved into this particular question and the efforts expended to explain the different terms. - Community Development Director reviewed, for audience clarification, the material council received for review. Information included: the minutes from 1985 of both the Planning Commission and council workshop and hearings; the CITY COUNCIL ME:E•rING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 10 proposed 1985 law; the Code which was in effect in 1985, as well as the Code which was changed in 1985. The subject home was a test case as it was the first manufactured home to be sited on a lot of record since 1985. The distinctions made in 1985 appear to be relatively clear. City code prevails in this situation, not the state law. Tigard's Code notes a distinction between manufactured homes and mobile homes; a manufactured is like a mobile home but must meet certain design restrictions found in the Development Code. The Code says a manufactured home must meet requirements of the UBC; staff was of the opinion this home met those requirements. - City Attorney. advised that the Building official determined that the structure meets HUD standards; the home has a HUD sticker so certifying. The Building official has reviewed the specifications and drawings for the unit provided by the manufacturer; it meets the structural aspects of the UBC. Councilor Johnson asked the Building Inspector concerning testimony that the structure was not tied to the foundation { per the manufacturer's standards. Building inspector' responded that the structure was not required to be tied to the foundation. The home was set up per manufacturer's specifications which was similar to state regulations for setting up a manufactured home. Tie-downs were not required in this geographical area, based on wind- load requirements (these are state standards). Councilor Schwartz noted the home was lagged down, according to Mr. Johnson's testimony. Councilor Schwartz referred to packet material which included a July 5 letter from Mr. Moonier outlining questions of violations with regard to the mobile home. Councilor Schwartz commented that as he understood it, foundation requirements for manufactured homes and stick-built homes were different because of construction differences. He asked the Building Inspector if the skirting was installed in accordance with Code Requirements. Building Inspector responded the skirting consisted of treated plywood designed for direct contact with the ground; there was no code violation. Councilor Schwartz referred to Mr. Moonier's concern with the garage as a stand-alone structure. Building Inspector advised there was no building code requirement that the garage be attached to the home; there was no code violation. t.. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 11 Setbacks were another issue cited in Mr. Moonier 's letter. Building Inspector advised setbacks were checked; there were no code violations. Councilor Schwartz noted Mr. Moonier said the owner had two front-yard driveways planned. Were two driveways allowed on a single lot? Building Inspector advised plans for this home did not show two driveways. Mayor Edwards asked for clarification on the testimony with regard to changes to the Code (as recent as February 1989). Community Development Director noted the February changes related to when portions of the code were streamlined and clarified. Nothing of substance was changed; however, he indicated he would review the record. Councilor Eadon commented she had compared the 1985 language with current language and did not find where changes had been made, but concurred that this should be checked again. - Councilor Eadon noted that during the study session prior to the hearing, Council discussed terminology. She noted Council had been advised that HUD requirements were functionally equivalent to UBC. City Attorney affirmed and clarified that in terms of wind load, insulation, etc., the HUD code was equal to UBC. In response to com-.ents from Councilor Schwartz, Building Inspector confirmed that the UBC had guidelines for plastic plumbing pipe. Many new homes in Tigard were constructed with this type of pipe. Councilor Johnson noted Mr. Moonier's letter, as presented by Mrs. Bishop, questioned the Oregon Department of Commerce regulations. Community Development Director advised regulations were no longer called Oregon Department of Commerce Regulations. Building Inspector advised regulations were administered by State Building Codes Agency. Commmity Development Director clarified that information had been given out, by a member of staff, that state law provided for placement of manufactured homes on individual lots of record. This had nothing to do with this issue or was a consideration in the Director's Interpretation or the Planning Commission decision. g. Public hearing was closed. h. Council discussion followed. - Councilor Schwartz reviewed the amount of time devoted to this issue. He said he understood the concerns of the neighborhood. Standards for homes can be addressed through the design review and permit process. The Code definitely CITY COUNCIL MEETING MMIr S - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 12 required work and review. In reviewing the current code, with the assistance of legal counsel, Councilor Schwartz said he thought this home met the specifics required in the Code. He advised he would vote to uphold the Planning Director's Interpretation on this issue because of the language contained in the Code. Councilor Eadon said she felt it was quite clear that the current Code allows for placement of manufactured homes on single lots of record (TMC 18.94.040). By definition of manufactured homes, she advised she felt the home on Cook Lane was, indeed, a manufactured home. With regard to the question of whether the home met the design standards of the Code, Councilor Eadon found advised the home meets HUD standards and Council has been advised this was functionally equivalent to UBC. With regard to the anchoring of the home, she noted the Code, as it refers to state standards, provided that the manufactured home was not required to be anchored in this geographic area. Councilor Eadon advised she would support the Director's Interpretation. ti - Councilor Johnson concurred with Councilor Eadon's comments. She referred to Mrs. Fessler's comment about contradictory regulations wherein the higher standard would govern. Councilor Johnson said all of the evidence from the professionals indicate that the UBC and HUD standards are equal. Councilor Johnson stated this issue must be reviewed with criteria outlined under. current law. However, there was evidence of concern of ambiguity in 1985 which was also of concern at this time. Councilor Kasten noted he agreed with many comments made by his fellow Councilors and acknowledged the sensitivity of the issue in the community. Specific technical concerns have been raised; those questions have been answered so that the issue of equivalency has been satisfied. Councilor Kasten advised he would support the Director's Interpretation and the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mayor Edwards thanked all those who testified and researched the issue. He noted this was not an easy issue and acknowledged concerns of impact throughout the community. He advised it was his understanding that there were items contained in the new state regulation which would allow CITY COUNCIL MEETING MIN(= - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 13 cities to have some flexibility to facilitate planning. Mayor advised, that according to the Code, Mr. Johnson's home was located properly. He reiterated the need for review of the Code for clarification of intent. Mayor advised he would vote in favor of upholding the Director's Interpretation and the Planning Commission recommendation. i. RESOLUTION NO. 90-05 A RESOLUTION CONCERNING A CITY COUNCIL DECISION WHICH UPHOLDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION INTERPRETATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO A MANUFACTURED HOME (FILE NO. M 89-20). j. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve Resolution No. 90-05. The motion was passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. k. Council discussion: Councilor Johnson recommended that Council direct staff to perform a thorough research on the wording and intent of the Code for manufactured housing and report their findings to Council. The issues she identified included: o Was the TMC more liberal in siting allowances than the ORS? If so, was this the City's intent? o Were design restrictions, for a manufactured home, as strict as state law allows them to be? She said design and siting restrictions should be exactly the same for exterior appearance. She said she hoped the Code could be written to come as close to this objective as possible. She said she would interested in staff reporting on additional criteria such as "pit-set" which would mean the manufactured home would be set lower to the ground. o She referred to testimony from Mrs. Fessler wherein she raised questions concerning remodeling standards. o The question of CC&R's was also raised. If CC&R's prohibit the siting of manufactured homes, could this be addressed in the Code? She would like to know, as a policy issue, how the City would deal with this. Councilor Eadon thanked all of the people who put a lot of work into this issue. She advised she does not favor a moratorium; however, in light of new state regulations it was necessary to look at the entire issue of manufactured housing. The City should research the issue with presentation to the CITY COUNCIL MEET MG KM]TTES - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 14 E i NPO's so citizens would have an opportunity to provide input. r This should be made a priority item. The Code needs to be clarified as quickly as possible. Close attention should be given to terminology with consistency, footnotes, and definitions throughout. Councilor Kasten concurred with comments from Councilors Johnson and Eadon. r - Councilor Schwartz noted the difficulty in making a decision on this issue, indicating Code language was of concern to him. Mayor Edwards referred to written comments received from Ms. Fessler, Ms. Bishop and Mr. Moonier. He asked that staff review the points contained in these letters in addition to Council comments. t r In response to a question from Councilor Johnson, Community F. Development Director estimated that the NPO's could begin review in March. He would submit preliminary information to { Council before going to the NPO's. k' s: 11. PUBLIC HEARING - NOISE ORDINANCE ` Amendment to the Tigard Municipal Code Chapters 7.40 and 18.90. f (Amendments to the Noise Ordinance provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code) a. Public hearing was continued from December 11, 1989. b. There were no declarations or challenges. c. Community Development Director reviewed the staff report, noting the draft ordinance before Council adopted DEQ standards by reference. d. Public Testimony: o Donna Nesbitt, 8900 S.W. Birch Street, Tigard, Oregon advised of ongoing noise problems late at night with street sweepers at Washington Square. She summarized her history of attempting to resolve the problem by contacting the owners of the sweeping equipment as well as the Washington Square proprietors. There was lengthy discussion on Mrs. Nesbitt's testimony. Councilor Johnson noted her concern that this issue would not be specifically addressed in the proposed ordinance. e. Staff recommendtA adoption of the proposed ordinance. CITY COUNCIL MEETING NMMU ES - - JANUARY 22, 1990 PAGE 15 { E f. Council discussed the merits of the proposed ordinance. It was noted the ordinance was broad in scope and may not deal with every issue or complaint. However, the ordinance was more restrictive than what was presently in place. g. Public hearing was closed. h. ORDINANCE NO. 90-03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEFINITIONS, PROHIBITIONS, AND REMEDIES REGARDING A LOTAMBLE NOISE LEVELS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND DECLARING AN EFFECITVE DATE. i. Motion by Council Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Eadon, to adopt Ordinance No. 90-03. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. j. Mayor Edwards urged Mrs. Nesbitt to contact Windmar Company, which is the owner of the Washington Square Development, and advise of her continuing problem with noise from street sweepers. k. City Administrator reported it may be possible to propose language limiting hours of street sweeping activity. This would make it easier to enforce, since violations of the noise ordinance require monitoring with special equipment. Council consensus was for staff to research this possibility. 12. NON AGENDA ITEMS: None 13. FD(ECU'= SESSION: Cancelled 14. ADJOURNMENT: 10:32 p.m. r 7 Catherine Wheatley, Cit!y Record ATI~ur: Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor Date ccml22 CITY COUNCIL Nom" ING MIN= - JANUARY 22, 1990 - PAGE 16 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL NIlJG M RHES - JANUARY 15, 1990 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerzy Edwards; Councilors: Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Ken Elliott, Legal Counsel; Greg Berry, Utility Engineer; Ken Elliott, Legal Counsel; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Community Involvement Coordinator; and Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder. 2. DIU41UR MEE TNG WITH $PffAT iN CITY CO(DKaL a. Present from Tualatin: Mayor Steve Stolze; Councilors: Robert Haas, William Gleason, Ronald Sarazin; Kathy Lawrance. Staff Present: Steve Rhodes, Tualatin City Administrator b. Mayor Edwards opened discuss=on by saying the purpose of the meeting was to get to know members of the Tualatin City Council. He advised the Tigard council was endeavoring to meet with as many of the surrounding jurisdictions as possible to discuss mutual concerns and to educate themselves on regional issues. Mayor reported briefly on issues Tigard has identified, including the Western Bypass, Bull Mountain Transportation Study, urban renewal, light rail, senior citizen operations and regional police dispatching proposals. He noted the importance of neighboring communities communicating on regional issues. By establishing P mutually agreeable working relationship, the cities will be able to present a strong, united front. C. Mayor Stolze noted his agreement with Mayor Edwards' comments. The major issues he identified included the Tualatin River clean-up efforts and the Western Bypass. He also agreed on the importance of eastern-county jurisdictions finding ways to work together. d. Councilor Schwartz updated the Councils on Surface Water Management (SWM). He cautioned that because Tigard and Tualatin are located downstream, continued involvement in the SWM operations was very important; the cities would need to remain involved with unified Sewerage Agency's administration. Therefore, he recommended that the elected officials remain involved and periodically review the SWM program policies. e. There was brief discussion on the County's transportation improvements scheduled in MSTIP/2. Affected jurisdictions should continue to monitor project priorities to assure the eastern county receives their listed road improvements. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1990 - PAGE 1 E f. Mayor Stolze updated the Councils on his participation as the area representative on the EMS Board. He summarized recent developments noting bid process and the Board's attempt to determine the best method of providing service and cost considerations. A modified fee schedule, as proposed by the Fire District, for emergency services (not transporting services) was approved by the County. He noted issues were still being worked out; there may be a court challenge. g. Council Johnson cited common concerns for traffic impacts due to a major office development by PacTrust along Interstate 5 in Tigard. h. other topics of discussion included: - Brief continent concerning feasibility of a bridge over Tualatin River connecting the two cities. - Possible meeting with the Park Boards from Tigard and Tualatin. - Status of swimming pool project in Tualatin: Mayor Stolze advised survey results indicated a great deal of interest by citizens; however, this was not a No. 1 priority. - Urban renewal issues in general were discussed. Tualatin's Village Square project was over 12-years old. Tigard's effort at downtown development was not approved by the voters. Discussion on the future for both cities with regard to urban renewal was reviewed. It was noted that the neighboring communities of Lake Oswego and Beaverton are contemplating city center development plans. - The Westerly Bypass, as an on-line project, was in jeopardy; the issue has been tabled at the state level. - Mass transportation; i.e., light rail and park-and-ride areas continue to be issues of study. There was discussion on growth-containment pressure and the need to provide better services for an urban population. Council Meeting Recessed: 8:00 p.m. Council Meeting Reconvened: 8:12 p.m. 3. URBAN RENEWAL DISCUSSION - TRAMMEEL CRAW COMPANY a. Mr. David Blake of Trammell Crow Company presented an urban renewal proposal near the Washington Square/Lincoln Center Developments. He referred to a map outlining the subject area noting its current valuation of about $5 million. He speculated that this area would be valued at $300 million with the improvements he was proposing. CITY COUNCIL MMMING MD UPES - JANUARY 15, 1990 - PAGE 2 Mr. Blake presented slides showing the condition of the area. He noted inadequate roads, storm drainage problems, declining building values, and an elementary school which needed to be relocated to address safety concerns and to better serve the residential community. Urban renewal, utilizing tax increment financing, would provide the necessary funding mechanism to accomplish the improvements. Mr. Blake's presentation included the following: - Residents and the school district have expressed interest in the relocation of the Metzger Elementary School. - Urban renewal would provide funds for traffic improvements, including the widening of 217 with related interchange upgrades. - The entire project, as proposed, could be substantially completed within five years. - Broad-based support was evident in the affected area. b. Mr. Blake advised Trammell Crow Company was requesting the-City of Tigard's assistance by referring the urban renewal issue to the voters on the May ballot. C. Lengthy discussion and questions from the City council followed. Council identified elements of the plan and issues which required careful review. Discussion points included the following: - Determination of financing alternatives/assistance; i.e., matching funds from state and federal sources for transportation improvements. - Determination of amount of support from the school district and affected property owners. - The immediacy of action required; the filing.deadline for the May ballot was March 15. Mr. Blake advised Trammell Crow had expended $210,000 on options to purchase in the area. When these options expire, they will not be renewed. He advised great efforts to contact the affected community to get them behind the proposal had already taken place. Further, Mr. Blake advised that the Lincoln Center Development had lost tenants to the Kruse Way development because of traffic issues. d. After discussion, Council consensus was to schedule a workshop meeting with Metzger-area residents. Council also requested that the School Board be invited as well as a representative from the Oregon Department of Transportation. The purpose of the workshop would be for Trammell Crow Company to present their proposal and then open up the meeting for questions and/or comments. t. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1990 - PAGE 3 In addition, Council requested a meeting opportunity for the Cityls Boards and Committees to review the proposal. Council meeting recessed: 9:25 p.m. 10. EXBCMTVE SESSION: The Tigard city council went into Executive session at 9:35 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 11. ADJOURNMENT: 10:09 p.m. C w Catherine Wheatley, City Record ATTEST: Gerald R. Bdwards, Mayor J Tate ccm115 CITY COUNCIL MF'E=G MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1990 - PAGE 4 E MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, ORBIGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council 8, 1990 FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator SUBJECT: Parks Levy Schedule Following the passage of the Parks levy, the staff and Park Board have been working with Murase and Associates to prepare a parks improvement schedule, attached hereto for your review. Once the city council reviews the schedule and either approves it as is or as modified, the staff will immediately initiate any necessary analysis, design and bidding processes. Further, it is anticipated that the staff will begin to E inform the public about the schedule through signage, newsletters, the general media and the NPO's. Note that even though the parks levy was a five-year levy, with actual receipts i of tax revenue beginning in November of 1990, the schedule shows a three-year f improvement program, beginning this summer. Thus the sale of Certificates of Participation may be necessary. Wayne Lawry has initiated a fiscal analysis to determine whether borrowing this spring will be cost effective given the i realities of inflation. Also, please be aware that the schedule and the projected expenditures are still general estimates, and will become more precise as time goes on. The important thing for City Council to review right now is not so much the exact dollar amount for each project, or the exact month certain things may be done, but in general, the proposed three-year timetable, and the break-out of projects year by year. Some members of the Park Board and the City staff will be available to cormnent and answer questions at the Council's February 19th workshop. Attachment cw.parks. sch { NNW= OF TIGARD CITY ment program }t, Improve Tigard parks proposal M - Ta uM- -J v C ooc, Q\ 10 Arw r` ~ to a , ,p ,r~~ - .f ~ i/ ,1 February 89 1990 , C r.. MURASE associates February 8, 1990 I~ F i i_ Mr. Ed Murphy Community Development Director f` City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. P. O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Ed: It We are pleased to submit the following proposal for the Tigard Parks Improvement Program. We hope this document will serve as a useful guide for 1 . the future refinement of the work program and subsequent implementation of park improvement projects. k L._ The purpose of the document should be seen as a starting point for the process and not as a "cast-in-stone" program. Obtaining the maximum benefit for your community from the hard-earned funds generated by the Park Improvement Levy: will require flexibility and adaptation of the work program to fit future conditions. L We would like to thank you, the Parks Advisory Board, and other members of the City staff for all their assistance in developing this document. Their efforts have been invaluable and much appreciated. In closing, we wish to congratulate your community for the effort you are taking to improve your park system. The end product will leave present and future t.. residents of the area with a richer environment and a variety of useful and I enjoyable recreational facilities. 1- Sincerely, i MURASE ASSOCIATES Joe Percival Project Manager LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN PLANNING 1300 N.W. Northrup, Portland, Oregon 97209 Telephone (503) 242-1477 E 4 ( t INTRODUCTION F f In 1989, the voters in the City of Tigard passed a five-year tax levy which provides $1,750,000 for improving the city's parks. This report describes the recommended three- year program for implementing specific park improvement projects to be funded by this levy. The estimated cost for the improvement projects identified in this program is $1,665,450. L This leaves $84,000 of the levy funds as a modest contingency or for spending on improvement projects not identified within this report. L City staff members have been successful recently in acquiring additional money for parks improvements through grant applications. Two such grants, State Grant-in-Aid and State Marine Board grants have been awarded for improvements in Cook Park. Other grant applications are being submitted and there is cause for optimism about more grant money being secured for park improvements. These monies, while targeted for particular s L improvement projects, provide flexibility to the City in future park funding. The City may choose to increase the scope of work funded by the grants, shift funds to other projects, increase the scope of projects identified in this report or fund entirely new projects. At present, neither the total amount of grant money nor the way they will affect project budget is known, and for these reasons, this report does not include grant money in the evaluation. This report only looks at projects which have been discussed, reviewed, and approved by the Park Board for funding by the tax levy. These proposed improvements are found in _ Cook, Fanno Creek and Summerlake parks and along three Greenway/park paths. It is important to keep in mind that the intent of this report is to be only an outline for L future action. Using the funds available from the levy, state grants, and other sources in a way which will provide the greatest benefits, will require flexibility in the `fleshing out' f of the details of the improvement program. l The report is divided into three sections. The first is the "Yearly Project Breakdown". This section identifies the projects to be implemented in each of these three program t years. The second is the "Work/Task Schedule". This section describes the timing and nature of the tasks required to implement projects in a efficient manner. The third section, "Maintenance and Operation Impacts" provides an analysis of the additional maintenance and operation work that would be generated by these improvements. t_ f i 1 i . YEARLY PROTECT BREAKDOWN Within this section, a three-year improvement program will be described in sequence. The improvement projects for each of the three years will be grouped separately by park and under the Greenway/Park Path heading. The general nature of each project, the rationale for a particular order or grouping of projects, and the estimated cost for each project will be identified. Table 1 accompanies this section and provides a quick overview of the yearly project breakdown and budget. YEAR 1 Cook Park Three projects are scheduled for Cook Park in the first year. These include a new s playground in the upland picnic area, an evaluation of the existing restrooms, and the first L_ phase of improvements to the riverfront near the boat ramp. j- The existing playground is not adequate to meet the demands for children's play in the 1 park. This project will provide an expanded play area with a greater variety of play opportunities to meet this need. Where possible, existing play equipment will be integrated into the new playground. The new play area will include play structures, a soft - ° surface play area, walks, benches, potential for a future water play area ($80,000). The two existing restrooms in Cook Park are in need of varying levels of repair and rehabilitation. Money has been allocated for the refurbishment of one or both of these facilities within the second year program. The evaluation in this first year's program will serve as a guide for the future rehabilitation project. A detailed evaluation of the facility's condition will be made, new lower maintenance and vandal-resistant equipment will be looked at, and several action options will be evaluated. These options include improving one or both facilities or building a new structure, possibly in combination with a group picnic or other structure. It should be noted that this last option is beyond the budgetary ' allocation for this project. The evaluation, itself, will be the best way to assure that any _ money spent goes to serve short-term and long-term needs in the most efficient manner possible. ($2,000). The boat ramp at Cook Park is one of the few public access points to the Tualatin River and one of the few places for public use and enjoyment of this recreation resource. The park presently provides only ;imited areas for recreation and access to the river. In this first year, a multi-phased program for improving access and recreational opportunities will begin to be implemented. This project is being scheduled for this first year to meet the funding schedule of available grant money and to provide needed additional recreation t 2 { 1. w . - areas. This year's work will include improvements of the boat ramp, car and trailer parking areas, grading of the steep river bank to provide for boat launching and easier riverside access, river bank stabilization, re-vegetation of river's edge using native plantings and irrigation and seeding of the new grassy slope down to the river ($135,000). The estimated cost for improvement projects in Cook Park during the first year is $217,000. Panno Creek Park Acquiring additional land is this year's project for Fanno Creek Park. Presently, less than half of the targeted area for this park is owned by the City. This acquisition will obtain a key access point as well as additional wetland area ($72,000). Summerlake Park The first year will see improvements and expansion of land immediately around the lake. Projects include extending paths and constructing bridges to complete the loop trail around the lake, connecting the residential area south of the park by extending the pathway system to Winterlake Avenue, obtaining additional land on the south eastern edge of the lake, construction of a new playground, and improving the irrigation system and plantings around the lake. - One project, which may be added is the installation of conduit runs, junction boxes and other preparatory work required for the future installation of pathway lighting. At this time, the need or desire for such lighting is still being debated. If it is required, this work should be done within the first year to prevent future construction-related damage to park improvements. The estimated cost of this work is $18,000. This sum would need to be added to the first year and the final program total if it is decided that lighting is desirable. Completing the loop trail around the lake will involve constructing a bridge to span the existing dam ($30,000), a soft surface trail through the natural area along the southwestern edge of the lake ($4,000), and two foot bridges over small streams ($2,000). This will leave the existing dirt/gravel drive to serve as the western portion of the loop. Installation of a gravel walking path through this route will be a temporary solution for improving this section. The improvement/extension of Winterlake Avenue will impact that area, so a permanent trail improvement needs to be coordinated with that of the future road 1 improvement project. 1 3 I Lawn seeding ($16,800) and irrigation ($42,000) of the rough lawn area along the north and southeastern shores of the lake were originally envisioned to provide a totally new irrigation system and completely new seeded lawn for that area. Interim repair and improvement projects may limit the need for such a complete overhaul and may allow some of this money to be spent on other lakeside improvements (i.e., riparian planting and trees) or allow for the shifting of money to other projects. The design and construction of the East Lake Playground ($30,000), the trail extension to Winterlake Avenue ($24,000) and the land acquisition ($92,000) scheduled for this program year are somewhat interconnected. These improvements are located immediately adjacent to this parcel. There is an advantage to surveying and designing improvements in this area at the same time. The goal is to complete the parcel acquisition in time to allow the playground and trail extension work to be done in conjunction with the Lake loop trails and related improvements. However, if there is a moderate delay in the acquisition t process, it may be useful to approach these improvements separately. If there is any lengthy delay in the acquisition, the design and construction of the playground and trail extension should be joined with the other first year improvement projects. _ The estimated cost of all the first year projects for Summerlake Park is $244,700. Greenway/Park Paths In the first year, two pathway projects will be completed. 1.5 miles of the existing Englewood path system will be reconstructed. The paved portion of the pathway will be widened to 8 feet. Grass covered, gravel shoulders will be installed to allow for maintenance vehicles use of the route. ($79,000) [The estimated cost for the first year's improvement is $682,700.] L. YEAR 2 Cook Park The second year would see a continuation of the riverfront improvements, renovation of the restroom and a new irrigation system for the existing ballfields. At the riverfront/boat ramp area, further riverside improvements would be constructed, the picnic areas expanded, informal open recreation area developed, the access road improved, and additional forest plantings installed ($170,000). I I 4 t If the evaluation of the restrooms points to renovation of the existing structure(s) this work would take place at this time ($40,000). If construction of a new structure or renovation more extensive than allowed by the budget is to be the course of action, additional funds would need to be found or the improvement program schedule revised. The irrigation system covering the ballfields needs to be replaced. Installation of a new irrigation system and a new pump house foundation would take place during this project year. Installing irrigation mainline to the picnic/playground area to provide for manual watering would also be part of this work ($55,050). The estimated cost for the second year improvements in Cook Park is $265,030. Fanne Creek Park Relocating an existing trail bridge, acquiring easements, and extending the trail to Main Street are the improvements scheduled for this project year. The present alignment of one of the existing footbridge prevents smooth travel through the park and forms a potentially troublesome intersection. Relocation of this bridge will take care of these problems and improve the scenic character of the route ($7,000). t The existing trail system ends about halfway between Hall Boulevard and Main Street. This project will acquire the easements and construct the paved path connecting these two primary streets ($49,050). The estimated cost for these second year projects in Fanno Creek park is $56,030. Summerlake Park This year will see the beginning improvements to the undeveloped west end of the park. This year's improvements will be made at the south end of this area of the park and will concentrate on providing a playground and adjacent improvements. An area will be graded for the playground and surrounding improvements and an irrigation system and landscaping will be installed around the playground area ($28,000). The playground ($60,000) and an adjacent restroom ($80,000) will also be constructed. These improvements will provide a variety of recreational resource for this end of the park as well as a number of infrastructure elements (water, power...) for future improvements. Installation of all these facilities as a group will prevent work from disrupting existing improved areas. The estimate for the second year's improvement to Summerlake Park is $168,000. r i 5 C Greenway/Park Paths Improvements of the 1.9 miles of the Pathfinder/Genesis path is scheduled for this project year ($145,000). [The estimated cost for projects during the second year of the improvement program is $634,100]. YEAR 3 i._ Cook Park Extending the River/Greenway Trail and providing additional picnic tables and benches throughout the parks are the improvements scheduled for this year in Cook Park. - Presently, the River/Greenway Trail ends near the southwest corner of the soccer fields. This project would extend the trail system along the top of the river bank, south, to the boat launch area ($92,000). Concrete pads and new picnic tables would be provided for the existing upland picnic area and the newly improved riverfront picnic area ($22,500). ( Total estimated cost for this year's projects in Cook Park is $114,900. Fanno Creek Park Improving the eastern entry to the park and providing a small meadow for informal play 11 are projects to be completed in this program year. Improvements to the east entry would include a new sign, native/riparian plantings, an enlarged paved area at the trail head, and an interpretive/educational display describing the function and unique character of the park's natural setting ($21,750). In a small area of existing reed grass, a small meadow will be created and native plant materials will be planted around the periphery. This will create a place for informal 1 recreation and enhance the visual quality and habitat value in this area of the park t_ ($10,000). The total estimated cost for this year's projects in Fanno Creek Park is $31,750. 6 1. ~ _ Summerlake Park This year will see further improvements to the west end of the park. Additional grading work and rough seeding to provide vegetative cover and prevent erosion will take place ($25,000). A paved basketball court ($10,000) and double tennis court ($30,000) will be installed. Irrigation and landscaping ($20,000), a shelter ($17,000) and picnic tables will be installed for group and individual picnicking. The estimated total for this year's projects in Summerlake Park is $132,000. Greenway/Park Paths Constructing a path from Cook Park, west to 113th will be completed during this third project year. ($70,000) [The estimated cost for all the third year improvement is $348,650.] f_ . f i 1 c 1 7 1_ WORK TASK SCHEDULE The implementation of each of the improvement projects requires the completion of a sequence of work tasks. This schedule is an outline to guide in the timely completion of the improvement projects. The starting point for developing this schedule is the "Yearly Project Breakdown" outlined in the previous section of this report. Identifying the specific tasks, their order and the time required to complete these tasks is the next step in this process. The final step is to assign each task to a specific period of time. In the first project year all project schedules start in March. It seems likely that this is the earliest practical starting time. In the second and third program years, the construction completion target date was used as the starting point for scheduling projects. This requires that some project tasks begin in the year preceding that identified in the "Project Breakdown". These projects are scheduled in this way to allow construction to be complete in time for improvements to be available for use during the peak recreation season. The type and sequence of the work tasks are generally similar for the various projects. Before describing these tasks as they apply to specific projects, the general nature of each type of task is explained as follows: Organization: This is often referred to as the scoping or organizational phase. It is at this time when the specific nature and extent of each project is identified. This includes delineating the physical boundaries and budget of a project, identifying the specific work needed to implement the project, designating who will do that work, and when the work is to be completed. The results of this effort includes a detailed written work summary, budget, and schedule, as well as work orders or request for proposals for specific work tasks. This work task would be completed by City staff. Land and Easement Acquisition: This is also a work task to be completed by City staff. It is one of the most important and difficult tasks to schedule. It is a task t that must often be completed before other tasks can be begun. It is also a task which cannot easily be tied to a determined time period. The potential variation in the duration of this task is demonstrated in Tables 2 and 3 by the dashed time line. The solid line designates the targeted time period and all the subsequent tasks are scheduled in relation to this period. The timing of these subsequent tasks is dependent upon completion of the land or easement acquisition and any delay in this work may delay the start and completion of all those subsequent tasks. i 8 i I Survg3 ft: This task ranges from doing engineering/instrument surveys to simple staking of field locations for site improvements (e.g. trail and picnic table pads). In many cases, this is a task which must be completed before most design work can be started. In the case of field locating improvement sites or trail alignments, this work becomes part of the design and construction process. It is anticipated that City survey crews will be available to perform the majority of this work. This will require careful coordination with their assignments for other projects. Consultant Selection: In cases where City staff time or expertise is not available for developing design and construction documents, assistance from outside consultants will be required. Time and staff resources will be required to develop a detailed "Request for Proposal" and to carry out the selection process. Design: This part of the work involves the refining of ideas for the improvement projects and is carried through the completion of the documents needed to bid and construct the improvements. In cases where this task is not preceded by "Consultant Selection", it is assumed that City staff will complete the design work. The "Greenway/Park Paths" are the primary projects assumed to be designed by City staff. In most cases, however, it is assumed that outside consultants will be used to do this work. Construction: The time periods identified for construction take into account the extent of the specific improvements, the construction season, and the period of peak recreation demand. Scheduling projects when weather is likely to have minimal impact on construction and in order to complete the improvements in time for summer-time recreation season are the primary factors for determining the scheduling of construction work. The following pages describe the work schedule for the various projects. The approach will be to take the groupings of projects as identified in Tables 2, 3, and 4 through all three program years park by park. Cook Park (See Table 2) Various elements of the Playground, Riverfront and Trail projects will be implemented over the entire three-year program implementation period. However, the organization, survey, consultant selection and design tasks should all be completed together in the first project year. The riverfront improvements, while constructed over a two-year period, need 1 to be guided by a unified design concept and a coordinated set of construction documents. Much of the asphalt trail is to be constructed in the riverfront area and, therefore, it is logical to couple the design of the trail alignment with the riverfront improvement plans. The playground, while physically separated from the riverfront project, will utilize the same 9 sort of expertise in the development of the design and construction documents. Including the playground design work with the other projects will improve the efficiency of these tasks and eliminate potential redundancy. The bidding and construction of the various projects is divided up into separate years as called for in the "Yearly Project Breakdown". This will require the development of individual/separate construction documents and bid packages for each of these individual projects. The Evaluation and Renovation of the Restrooms are two steps in the same process. In the first or evaluation step, determining the type of expertise needed to evaluate the existing facilities will be an important part of the initial organizational phase of the projects. In the first year, the initial "design" task designates the time period where the actual examination, evaluation and reporting of the findings of that work will take place. The second organizational task, identified as starting in September, 1990, will involve { deciding just how to proceed. If construction of a new structure or more extensive renovation than budgeted is called for, decisions will need to be made: 1) where to get additional funds, 2) to drop this project and, 3) allocate this money elsewhere, or to take some intermediate action. Assuming the renovation work goes ahead, construction is scheduled to be completed by the first of June to assure the facility is useable for the summer recreation season. The key factor in completion of the Ballfield Irri ag tion project is the scheduling of the completion of construction work by the end of April. This will allow lawn in any areas disturbed by construction to become fully established in time for the beginning of the baseball season. While the organization through consultant selection tasks are scheduled for the second year, there may be an advantage in doing this work as a part of the Riverfront... related tasks. The same type of expertise will be required and combining these tasks could eliminate redundancy. f The addition of Picnic Tables and Benches in the park will largely be accomplished through the direction of City staff. Selection of standard benches and tables, determining the number and location for installing these furnishings, designing typica'. .-Istallation f details, developing bid documents, and carrying out the bidding procedure are all tasks which could be handled most efficiently by staff. Installation of these improvements is ( scheduled for April and May to take advantage of generally suitable construction weather f.. during this period and to assure completion of the work in time for the active summer picnic season. 1 Fanno Creek Park (See Table 3) The Land Acquisition scheduled for the first year is not a project which may potentially delay any subsequent project. Assuring that these parcels are not removed by private development is the primary reason for moving expeditiously on this project. As noted + to S. { 1. . earlier, it is not possible to set a particular time in which this work can be accomplished, so a dashed line is seen on the end of the time line. - The Bicycle Path Extension and Footbridge Relocation scheduled for completion in the second year are begun in the first year due to the difficulty in determining the duration of the easement acquisition process. Delays or difficulty in obtaining the easement will cause a corresponding delay in subsequent work phases. The East Entry and Meadow improvements are independent of any other work. The schedule of the construction work is set during the summer months to be sure that these areas, which can be wet till early summer are dry enough to allow for construction. The construction period is extended into the early fall to provide for a proper planting time for grasses and other native plantings. No irrigation is scheduled for these areas, and it is important to install the plantings when the weather is still somewhat warm to assure germination of grass but late enough to have the Fall rains provide the watering needed. Summerlake Park (See Table 4) Ideally the Lake Edge Irrigation & Seeding, Soft Trail, Footbridges and Bridge at Dam and Land Acquisition, East Lake Playground, and Asphalt Trail groups of projects would be coupled and completed together. However, the acquisition of land in the second grouping of projects creates potential problem for considering these projects as a single group. The playground and trail connection to Winterlake Avenue are located on the newly acquired parcel of land and, therefore, are somewhat connected to the acquisition process. If the acquisition process proceeds expeditiously, these separate project groupings may be joined. The Winterlake Playground... and West End... projects are scheduled to have the organization through design work completed in the second program year. These improvements are all located in the same area of the park and so should all be derived from the same design process. Only in this way can these and later improvements in that area of the park be installed in a coordinated manner. Because construction is divided into two separate years, two separate sets of construction/bid documents will need to be developed. The construction period for the "West End..." group of projects is shown as extending past June, the beginning of the summer recreation season. This has been done to improve the chances for drier conditions needed for proper construction of subgrade and paved surfaces for the tennis and basketball courts during the construction phase. E The scheduling and development of the designs for the improvements plans at this end of the park also need to be coordinated with the plans for extending Winterlake Avenue. Every effort should be made to determine the vertical and horizontal alignment of this 11 i roadway and to coordinate the layout and design of park improvements with the roadway design. The projects included in this program will not complete the improvements to this end of the park. However, to assure that future improvements do not disrupt existing improvements and to insure a coordinated and unified setting the design work for this area of the park should be completed as fully as possible during the second program year. Greenwav/Park Paths See Table 3 ( ) All three of these projects follow a similar course of action. With the exception of the construction, all work tasks are accomplished by City Staff. Construction is scheduled for the summer months to assure proper conditions for preparation of subgrade and paving. 4 l_ f l t 12 Nil MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS IMPACTS The improvement projects funded by the tax levy will provide a greater quantity and variety of recreation opportunities for the community. The new and expanded recreational improvements which provide these expanded opportunities will require effort to maintain and keep in good working order. The various improvement projects were evaluated to see where additional maintenance was being created. In some cases, new projects are simply renovating existing improvements (e.g. path rehabilitation projects) or replacing old improvements with new ones (e.g. irrigation system replacements). These types of projects create no net increase in the maintenance and operational work load. What follows is the identification of projects which do add to these work loads and a rough estimate of the work hour impacts. YEAR ONE: The new playground and expanded recreation area along the riverfront will provide a net increase in both the area and the facilities in need of maintenance. It is estimated that an average of an additional 12 hours of work per week will be added by these projects. - The new playground at Summerlake park will add roughly 5 hours per week and the soft surface trail will require an additional 80 hours per year for maintenance. - This adds up to a weekly average of 17 hours per week of added maintenance time and ( an additional 80 hours per year for trail work. YEAR TWO: The expanded recreation area at the riverfront in Cook Park is estimated to add an additional 4 hours per week. The trail extension in Fanno Creek Park adds 2 hours per week. The new playground in Summerlake park adds an average of 10 hours per week and the new restroom adds 10 hours per week in the summer months (generally, such a facility would be closed during the rest of the year). In the second year, 16 hours per week are added on a year around basis with an extra 10 hours per week during the summer. I 13 c_ i _ YEAR THREE: The extension of the trail in Cook Park adds an average of 4 hours per week. The east entry and meadow improvement in Fanno Creek Park add an average of 3 hours. The picnic area, courts and landscape improvements at Summerlake Park add 13 hours. The third year improvement projects add a total of 20 hours per week to the maintenance. In summary, at the end of the third program year, roughly an average of 54-hours of maintenance time would have been added per week. In addition, 10+ hours per week would have been added to the summer work schedule. This translates into approximately 1 1/4 full time positions and 1/4 summer position added by these improvement projects over the next three years. 2-, i t_ 14 Yearly Project Breakdown PROJECT SITE PROJECT DESCRIPTION TOTAL. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 o Playground $ 80,000 o Riverltnnt Development $170,000 o Picnic Tables & Reaches$ 22,500 o River bank earthwork, $135,000 o Restroom Renovation $ 40,000 o Asphalt Trail $ 92,400 COOK PARK stabilization, irrigation o Irrigation of Ballfields $ SS,OSO and landscaping and Play Area Sub-Total: $114,900 o Restroom Evaluation $ 2,000 Sub-Total: $26S,OSO Sub-Total: $217,000 FANNO CREEK o Land Acquisition $ 72,000 o Easement acquisition & $49,OSO o East Entry Improvement$ 21,750 o Bicycle Path (2/3 mile) o Meadow Planting $ 10,000 PARK Sub-Total: $ 72,000 o Foot Bridge Relocation $ 7,000 Sub-total $S6,OSO Sub-Total: $ 31,7SO 51501800 o Bridge at Dam $ 30,000 o Winteriake Playground $ 60,000 o West End Grading $ 25,000 o Land Acquisition - $ 95,000 o Restroom at West End $ 80,000 and Rough Seeding 1.9 acres o Grading, landscaping, $ 28,000 o Tennis Courts $ S0,000 o Asphalt Trail - 1/3 mile $ 24,000 Irrigation and o Basketball Courts $ 10,000 SUMMERLAKE from playground to Pathway at Playground o Picnic Shelter $ 17,000 Winterlake Ave. o Picnic Tables $ 10,000 PARK o Lawn Seeding at $ 16,800 Sub-Total: $168,000 o Irrigation & Landscap- $ 20,000 Lakeside ing at Picnic Area o Footbridges - 2 $ 2,000 o Soft Trail - along $ 4,900 Sub-Total: $132,000 southwestern edge of lake o East Lake Playground $ 30,000 o Irrigation (3 acres) - $ 41,000 along north & southeast sides of lake Sub-Total: $244,700 $544r700 o Englewood $ 79,000 GREENWAY/ (1.5 miles) o Pathlluder/Genesis $14S,000 o Cook Park- o Durham Road-Cook (1.9 miles) 113th Connection $ 70,000 PARK PATHS Park Connection $ 70,000 Sub Total: $145,000 Sub Total: $ 70,000 5364,000 Sub-Total: $149,000 TOTAL $672,700 5634r100 =348,650 $1r665,450 TIGARD PARKS - TABLE 1 AnUclpaied Time Span ® potential Time Wansiott L9tL .xr 1992 Oct Nov Dec i Cook Park 1991 r Mny Jun Jul Aug S,p Nov 1)cc tun Feb htur Ap Work Schedule Mu Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1990 un Jul Aug Sc Oct Nuv Dec Jul' Fob Mur A r PROJECTS - Tasks Mar A r nm J Trail Playground, Riverfront old & Asphalt Trail play 8 R a& organization Surveying Consultsnt selection Design Bidding Construction Restroom Evaluation Ron Silo & Renovation E . Organization surveying Consultant Seledlon Design Bidding Construction Ballfleld irrigation organization surveying Consultant selection Design Bidding construction picnic Tables and Benches Organization Surveying Design Bidding Construction TIGARD PARKS TABLE 2 sbws us 40s1h's P.Vn b, sud srs sublat W chsoK. Note: Titus Itoss sl wort schedsle drplctrd 'I1me Seen t t ~ ~ ~ Anricfpated po1en11et Time lenslon t)a y, ,99J Aug Sep NOV Paths Atx Mar Juu Jul I Gree°~'ay ' Falk ,991 Sep Oct Nor Doe ]nn Feb mar ~v k & nl Au6 FannU Creek F`t~ Jan Lzeb Misr %pr May 3110 J ,990 0 d Nor oee Schedule ' ~Ork M~ APr Mnr Jun Jul Aug Sep PROJECTS - Tasks FA►'iNO CREEK PARK , * ■r ■ w s~ 1 Win I1nd Acquisition Lend Ac4elsltton ' Fjctenslon Bicycle Path tion & Footbridge Reioca 019"boon s 0, AcyolsiUon "W"' l Selection 60040 aldding n ConsVUC~ E►KN and Meadow East o"I"u,"n "td ~pction Design gMdin9 Cor+elt~l0n GR PARK EENPATHS , En9lewood+ PatMinderl P d Durham Genesis, an Road-Cook Park c Connection Orgenlutlon Sliveli"O DOW ck%MT"~1ot' TIGARD PARKS TABLE 3 w %got . old u+ kyArs V~OfaFb •sd ono oot~ of ~ecb abdtik kP~ vow'n°+ nsN Work Schedule / Summerlake Park Pottenntial T Ti al Tims Span ® l Potime Extension ■ 1 PROJ_CTS -Tasks 990 1991 1092 Afar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noy Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noy Dec Jun Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noy Dec Lake Edge Irrigation & Seeding, Soft Trail, Footbridge and Bridge at Dam Organization Surveying Consultant Selection Design Bidding Construction Land Acquisition, East Lake Playground, and Asphalt Trail to Winterlake Avenue Organization Land Acquisition ■ ■ ■ Surveying Consultant Selection Deslgn Bidding Construction Winterlake Playground, Restroom, Irrigation, and Landscaping Organization Surveying Consultant Selection Design Bidding Construction West End Grading, Rough Seeding, Tennis & Basketball Courts, Picnic Area (Shelter, Tables, Irrigation and Landscaping) Organization Surveying Consultant Selection Design Bidding Construction Not. M- I[- at .art ..bedul. d.pkkd boys ..e k..U,e pmp-b ad n ..bi«t to .h..g.. TIGARD PARKS TABLE 4 lima 7~ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: February 19, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: February 9, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Recommendation to PREVIOUS ACTION: award microfilmincf services contract PREPARED BY: Nadine Robinson DEPT HEAD OK Ua~ CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Loreen Edin 42 PO CY ISSUE Ordinance No. 87-59 adopted the Ladal Contract Review Board regulations for the City of Tigard service contracts and purchasing process. INFORMATION SUMMARY In 1987 the City Council approved a records work plan which included the microfilming of records to begin in 1990. The first year of this program identified the following records for filming: City Council minutes, resolutions & ordinances; Building commercial structure plans; Engineering as- built drawings; and Police case files. Four Bids were received for the 1989-90 microfilming needs: Company Name Estimated Total Linco Micro-Image Systems, Inc. $21,636.80 Microfilm Service Company 13,590 Oregon Micrographics, Inc. 14,890 Challenge Center, Inc. 13,452* *Bid did not meet specifications. Does not include jacket carriers for film _ nor are these indexed for ease in use. All qualified bidders were rated in various areas which included: quality control, records security and confidentiality, meeting of State Archivist standards, service continuity as well as the variety of services provided, etc. Site visits and extensive reference checks were performed. Upon conclusion of this process, Microfilm Service Company was determined to be the lowest responsible service provider and bidder. Since the bid is based on "estimate" rather than "actual count" of pages to be filmed, staff is recommending the bid award be set not to exceed $15,600. This is a 15% increase of estimate based on the complexity and volume of building commercial structure plans and police records. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award the bid to the lowest qualified bidder, Microfilm Service Company, for microfilming services of council, Engineering, Building, and Police records in an amount not to exceed $15,600. 2. Reject all bids for microfilming services and give staff further direction. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are budgeted in the 1990-91 budget for this service contract. SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative No. 1 - Motion to award bid to Microfilm Service Company not to exceed $15,600. -AO Project #1 - Council Meeting Minutes, Resolutions, and Ordinances Paper sizes vary, most of the docLments are 8-1/2 x 11 or 8-1/2 x 14, typewritten, and two-sided. However, there are oversized documents that will need to be filmed using 35mm film. Resolutions and ordinances are mainly one-sided. Security copy - 16mm silver halide roll film. .Di.azo Duplicate roll film - One. Estimated Project Cost $ 2.660.00 Estimated Time to Complete 20 working days Project #2 - Engineering As-builts Drawings As-builts range in size from 8-1/2 x it to 36 x 42, although the majority of the docnmts are 22 x 34 and 24 x 36. - -Ihe documents have _ been stored in a flat form. Drawing mediums include: sepia mylar, vellum, and bluelines on paper. Security Copy - 35unn silver halide roll film. Silver halide roll film duplicate - One, loaded into jackets. Diazo Duplicate Microfiche - One. Estimated Project cwt $ 850.00 Estimated Time to Ccapiete 5 - 7 working days Project #3 - Building Commercial Structure Plans Plans vary in size from 8-1/2 x 11 to 36 x 42. Zhe documents range in age from current to 28 years old, and have been stored in a rolled format. As a result, some of the plans have begun deteriorating. Security Cony - 35mm silver halide roll film. Silver halide roll film duplicate One, loaded into jackets. Diazo Duplicate Microfiche - One. Estimated Project Cost $'5,990.00 Estimated Time to Complete 20._- 25 working days Project #4 - Police Records Paper sizes vary from 4 x 5-1/2 to it x 14. Many of the documents are handwritten and two-sided. Security Copy - 16nnn silver halide roll film. Silver halide roll film duplicate - One, loaded into jackets. Diazo Duplicate Microfiche - One. Estimated project cost $ 4,090.00 Estimated Time to Complete 20 - 25 working days TOTAL COST FUR ALL PRO`TEC'TS $ 13,590.00 ESTIMATED TIME TO COMPLETE ALL PROJECTS 45 working days 4 Oa mnents or Additional Information L See Addendum by Project ADDITTIICNAL QUESTIONS Does your fi= provide storage facilities for archival film? Yes X No _ Does the storage area meet t~eratx]re (60 - 700) and humidity (40%) standards for cptiYmmt storage? Yes X No If yes, what is the cost per year, per unit? Unit type 16mn roll Cost $ .30 month What are your procedures for quality control? See attached filming specs. Regarding quality of images, what type of guarantee does your firm provide? We guarantee all A.N.S.I. and AIIM National Standards for Quality. In your last ten filming projects, what was your percentage of refilms? See Addendum. Price Proposal The undersigned proposes to furnish the filming services herein mentioned at the price indicated, all in accordance with the specifications and provisions attached bereto and made a part hereof. Signature: Name: Jeff 1 Title: Mark in Dated: January 8, 1990 Firm: Microfilm Service Company Address: , q'Aq N T? ;atldy Rbz 3 Portland. R 97232 Phone: (503) 239-0570 z CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 2/19/90 DATE SUBMITTED: 2/8/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: License Agree- PREVIOUS ACTION: Approval by Planning ment for Utah State Retirement Commission Board SCE 89-04 L Ad PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT BEAD O ITY ADMIN OK% REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Should the Council grant a license, with certain conditions, to a private land owner for private use in conjunction with an abutting development? INFORMATION SUMMARY A Sign Code Exception application (SCE 89-04) was approved by the Planning Commission to allow the construction of a 5.5 foot high by 8.5 foot wide monument sign within the Oak Street right-of-way. The sign is to be used in conjunction with the UNYSIS building which is owned by the Utah State Retirement Board. This approval included conditions to remove an existing sign within the Oak Street right-of-way, approval of the sign's location and design by the Engineering Division, and the approval of a license agreement by the City prior to installing the new sign. The attached agreement has been reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division and the City Attorney's office. Attached is a copy of the license agreement and site plan for your review. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Enter into the attached license agreement with the Utah State Retirement Board to allow the placement of the sign within the Oak Street right- of-way. 2. Deny the request and have the Sign Code Exception application reconsidered by the Planning Commission. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor, on behalf of the City, to enter into this proposed license agreement with Utah State Retirement Board for this limited private use of a public right-of-way. SCE89-04.LIC/kl y E. r- MEMORANDUM TO: Ed Murphy, Community Development, pirector FROM: Keith Liden, Senior Planner RE: Utah State Retirement Board license agreement DATE: 2/8/90 The Utah State Retirement Board requested a Sign Code Exception and Variance (SCE 89-04/V 89-04) to place a 5.5 foot high by 8.5 foot wide monument sign within the Oak Street right-of-way near the UNYSIS building. The Planning ;i Commission determined that because there was adequate space within the right- of-way to accommodate the sign and that placing a sign on private property 5i would require a much taller and larger sign, the request was justified. t:. The Commission approved the application subject to removal of an existing sign yys. i.. within the Oak Street right-of-way, a street opening permit from the Engineering Division, a license agreement a roved by the City, and the prohibition of a freeway oriented sign on the property. A site plan illustrating the location of the sign is attached.` SCE89-04.LIC/kl r i _ _ _ _ _ ~ - _ ~n a a ;'~1 1 6 1 1 I I t l l l l l l l l l (l I I I I I 1 1 I ~I ~ - h I I~ I I I I C I L,I I 111.. _1_IJ_. _l.l.i I~~r l~l ~r~'I IIII•III I~TI1~1 II111~ 111111 IITI ITI ~ III r II III III ICI 111 I l l l l l l l l l r l l l l l l l l I 1 1 I 16111 v yy~q ~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~ I- ~ I 1 V,~_ I _._I I_ I. I_ I_ ) I 11 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 11 I n. ~ , 2 3 4 _ 5 `6 7 8 9 10 _ _ LI 12 ' ~ ND1E: 1F THIS NICRDFILMED DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN - TRIG NOTICE; IT IS DUE TO - THE QUALITY OF Tif ORIGINAL • ~ 'DRAWING. _ _ OE ISZ ~ BZ LZ 9Z SZ bZ EIZ ZZ fZ OZ ISI '~8~~1 LI ~ 91 ~SI ~bl EI ZI II OI 6 B L 9 ~~5I ~bI •'I'. E Z IH"~ , _ `~N~jn~INn6mhNdu111RU61nI1mLnliunlpnlR116NIbuILIUINnIyDluillunhullOtIIII11111UI1Wll Iwl"I~Iilililllu Iliulllt lu ilNfi1111111111111~UI11~UI~IIIIIIIIIIIII~IWIIwIuIIII1~111111111111110111111J)WIIIW111111uWu6utluu6lull IIN t • A~ . ~x~ ~~EBR UAR Y. . , _ w ~ - - ~n....~__ r _ N D , POWER POLE 4 , _ ~ r V / - _ _ OVERHEAD POWER / _ / _ T _ ~ _ - - Ex!STIN000NC SIDEWALK I j EXIST BUILDING SIGN ~ / iC 6E REMOVED SANITAPY SEWER % ~ 5,-0, - IN STREET _ - - I - - 9 ~ - - - ~ r cl},r ~ 3.. . --FXlSTING POWER a- 1~- - - - - - - - SS L - ~ ~ ;,W ~ j! TC NEW SIGN IN PLACE ~ _ I I j ' C, NNMBUILOr1G --W- - I I i ~ ~ h DEMTi~CAT1r711 I I i ~ ~..a- u.• SKI r ~ ~ ~ I ' Ja DEG DFF 0~ ' ~ f RJ~'ERi r LINE ~ ~ ~ -~j,- i i s I i' ~ ~ ~ ~ i r-- i Z EXISTING PARKING ; ~ ~d C7 ~ . 1.-_- ~ . . ai I . • I:.. ,1 _ ~ ~ i i I i ~ I I . I ~ I I ~ - - I _ ; i l i, I i I I ~ ~ ~ - --u , , , L ~ ~ I I I i I -r I + I ~ I I ~ ~ ~ r, - ~ I I ~ I I , I ~?2/19/90 AGENDA # a.3- - , PLAZA ~E'if ~.G1~ 1 OF 1 ` eX.i',IING tE~~.Nt _ I N ...~.,....M.,,~...~.~ _ ......x.:.:,;..~.e.._.::::..~. 9600 S W - - S E ...._.._._._...~.....r.._._.v~a.e _._~-L:-?~.G~~,°.GEO FA/'E,. rr - 4ND ARKING., . , ,M ~~"I I t l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 ~ ~ I 1 i. I I I- 1, ~ n fi I I I rt I I, I I I n i III I l f I I III 1 I I I I I I I , -u -~~~.r,~me+, 1 1 1 1 1 I 1111.1J_ L_I1.1 hl~lttr CI 111 r l r~ I t ICI, rI I~I III. >l I I I ~ I If 111 I I I I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I i r I I I h_ 1 1 I-. __I ~ ~ I~ I I~1 ~~I ICI III. , 2 3 4 _ 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 NDTE; IF THIS MICROFILMED , , , - DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR IRAN I - TNIS NOTICE,`IT IS WE~ TD THE QUALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL - DRAWING. s _ _ _ _ _ _ . . I. OE 6Z 8Z LZ 9Z SZ bZ EZ ZZ -IZ OZ 6t BI LI 91~ §f bl EI ZI II 01 6 6 L 9. S b E Z I'~i - , - ';~,1 _ d~IIII~IIII111111111111111111IUIIUUUIdIUIINIIIIIIIIIgIIU1111NIIIIIIYII~I11111111~I1NIlI11~IIIIIoI~IL1111IIIinH~i Illllfp III )~~iDII11111111J11~1111~IIIIIIW~IIIIjIIII~IWI UIuuIIRIlu~1bRIIIIUIUllIll1WIWIW►IIuWOWU~III~i,, II ' ~E~R A Y~I . U R ; - _ R~ LICENSE THIS LICENSE, given by the City of Tigard, entitles Utah State Retirement Board ("Grantee"), its successors and assigns, to the certain limited, described uses of the real property described in-Exhibit A ("the Subject Property"). 1. The execution of this licensing agreement is authorized by the City of Tigard Planning commission approval of a Sign Code Exception (File NO. SCE 89-04, Final Order 89-06 PC). The Commission found that unique circumstances existed to justify the location of a freestanding sign in the public right-of-way for the reasons described in Final Order 89-06 PC (Exhibit B). 2. The Subject Property is a portion of a dedicated, partially developed, accepted, public street right of way. By this License, the City of Tigard grants to Grantee the rights to make the following uses of the Subject Property: A. To install a sign 9 feet long by 5 feet high constructed of stone tiles over a painted concrete structure located at a point which is a minimum of 3 feet south of the Oak Street sidewalk and 440 feet west of the right-of-way's intersection with 95th Avenue, and for no other purposes. The limitations on the license include the following: A. If, at any time, the city or other government or any person, partnership, or corporation proposes the opening, improvement, or governmental acceptance of the subject property at an improved public street or road, Grantee shall remove, at its sole expense and within 30 days of receipt of written notice to do so from the city, the sign and any supporting structures or other improvements placed on the Subject Property by Grantee which might impede the opening of the Subject Property for public travel. • r B. The City may also elect to revoke this license for any purpose, upon written notice to Grantee. Upon receipt of such notice, Grantee shall remove, at its expense and within 60 days of receipt of said written notice, the sign and any supporting structures or other improvements placed on the subject property of Grantee. C. The opening, improvement acceptance of the Subject Property as an improved public street or road or revocation of this license shall not give rise to an action or suit for damages by Grantee, its successors and assigns. It is specifically agreed by Grantee that if the opening, improvement or governmental acceptance of the Subject Property occurs, any violations by Grantee of the land-use regulations of any government caused by the loss of use of the Subject Property shall be the responsibility of Grantee, its successors and assigns, and Grantee, its successors and assigns, shall take such action as may then be required by relevant laws and land-use regulations, without cost to the City of Tigard. D. Grantee accepts responsibilities for the care and maintenance of the subject property and all of Grantee's improvements thereon and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the City of Tigard harmless from and against any and all claims, suits, liabilities and expenses (including, without limitation, attorney's fees), that may be asserted against the City of Tigard arising out of Grantee's possession, use or maintenance of the Subject Property. E. This license shall not entitle Grantee the use of the Subject Property for the purpose of providing access to any tract of land. F. This -license shall be perpetual, unless sooner terminated by other conditions recited in this document or by the consent of all parties. G. In the event litigation is initiated to enforce any of the provisions of this license agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorney fees at trial and on appeal. H. The City shall revoke the license immediately if any conditions of approval of Final order 89-06 PC are violated. .Y EXECUTED THIS day of , 1990 , on behalf of the'City of Tigard. STATE OF OREGON ) )ss COUNTY OF THIS INSTRUMENT was acknowledged before me on 1990, by as and as of the City of Tigard. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires: (NOTARIAL SEAL) EXECUTED this day of 1990, on behalf of Utah State Retirement Board. By: STATE OF ~y ) )ss COUNTY OF THIS INSTRUME T w acknowledged bef re me n 1990, by 4 )2," ~ r -de- as -f 4ai~v a Public my commission expires: i (NOTARIAL SEAL) t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: February 19, 1990 DATE SUEb1ITTED: January 31, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TI=: Board & ggM%ttnP PREVIOUS ACTION: intments 1A L 11k I PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Newton DEPT' HEAD OK CITY AU4IN OK (I REQUESTED BY: i i ISSUE r INFORMATION SUMMARY The attached resolution outlines the rations of the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee for filling vacancies on various boards and ccmnnittees. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Adopt the proposed resolution. 2. Adopt the proposed resolution with amendments. 3. Decline action at this time. FISCAL IMPACT N/A SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative No. 1: Adopt the proposed resolution. of/lanais l/ 1 ~n wMi f u L-ITYOF TIGARD CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION NAME: JOHN SAVORY DATE: 2/25/87 ADDRESS (RES.): ~1 M..Iivt7 Cffru./jt,ES. PHONE: ~t ADDRESS (BUS.): YS S t.~1 Me,; vt i tr Lv~I BUS. PHONE: y -7~q-317 LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARO: SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: ruso e ~9.v. / r t { >7_,~` "d Q ~t/`~~r In t*~D ( ~A ✓ l 1 ~ U t ll P U' S f •w Pn ra t,". Sp OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: -5+~ GIB ~lo Ic1(~~' d ' (5 0 e -e pi c- s . S s tMa a Z G ,,t u A HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN* EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? ` PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: pccvGt vt- tVrr ~oul 5 1 > OGc,VliC U t- fJ l Y e t D! r ✓ l~ A Cc.tM U~v ©Y L OU4 po e V c E~ J el _ ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: y-ea-, uyev 44`(~~~ /eelj IV e e / o CA- OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): 1 ~ n vu v1.t L ! (.LARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: COKOt+tt l G~ ~.~~r Date Received at City Nall mate interviewed Date AppoinCed Hoard, Committee, (it NI'U Inside Citv Outside city I INV1:NTORI F •1 1 ZEN:, CITY OF TlGtiftLl Suggested for Cummonit.y :;cr•vjcu• !)AT Jan.. 9. 1984 14AME_ Mr. Amo De 'ernardis i~'•S • 1111ONF 620-2682 ADDRESS 14930 S. W. 92nd Ave. BUS. PHONE , 1 LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD_18 months _ SUGGESTED BY WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? Portland Oregon - i EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND S. and M.S. - Oregon State University I D•,P - University of Cre!,:on OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND Retired Former Assistant Superintendent. Portland Public Schools_ President, Portland Community Collerre PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Advisory Board Goodwill Industries: Portland Chamber of Commerce Education Committeet 'Multnomah County Board of/.,qualization• _ OECC Education Task Forcer providence 'inspital Medical Foundation: Soard of 'trustees Willamette University; Oregon Alliance Business, Labor, and Education. ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES _ Chairman Tyee Yacht Club Board of ;Managers Trea.s Tyee Slue f~avel_, Providence Medical Foundation• 'rice- Chairman "duc r • T sk FnmP OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS) BOARD:) OR COMMITTEES INTERESTED IN TlrA127 PLAfill Ii? 'COMMISSION /All Date Received at City 11x1 J Data l nt,~rv iew:•ci l;r,te Appointed lsoard or Commi t. to 1N:;1171•: CTTY 1'Y ON CITY ®F TIIFA R® CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON /S 539 NAME :/1,1 DATE: ADDRESS (RES.): /3,ZS~S RES. PHONE: ADDRESS (BUS.): BUS PHONE: ~/,Q LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: / SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? S^ EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: ~s~.7~~ ,~~Tr ~ iI.C/ri ~i ~':~l^ ~N~~~7~ 47~ -3ii- rT ~1"1~'.✓i~~ l~~r fi~~.~l~~ - HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? C :S THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPL CANTS 0NLY)1 PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMRKS): COMMITTEE! NP ESTED IN: BOARDS~,^ Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City cs/4772A 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 PAW ~ i . N1 AR i986 OF T~~AF~O INVENTORY OF CITIZENS t~ Suggested for Community Service DATE q t / OC6 tvA ME Y,-- RE$. PHONE 6)-Q-7S'S ADDRESS i7t BUS. PHONE 6 ` -7 d LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD 14 SUGGESTED BY ~ WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? C~ EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND i~• A. I t 0/ L1 i S~1^ y ~v M a d OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND /e c~~~L U s r & .4 a--v` I d !1-I CO- A-9-Aj gk-L4 6P4~~t- 4-t -U PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY A!!~-•TF-,) 4S jd.ra:jCE AduSv- -tom ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES wph g 4 j. 7-7*::~~ C-4,f j L.,s c~•c_.. OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS) Ice, ~•!.ti/ PF a u-v' Cie Lu,v ~tl - a-ti- ts~Fli ok- BOARDS OR COMMITTEES INTERESTED "M vr-r r-~.-+~•~"'-...r' - Pate Received at City Hall Date Interviewed trace Appointed Board or Committee INSIDE CITY OUTSIDE CITY CITY OF TIGARD CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION NAME : DATE: c, A ADDRESS (RES.) : RES. PHONE: = J? ADDRESS (BUS.): - BUS. PHONE: - LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARDi/(?~cc,yc• SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? ! - EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: r , v - - s'~ • { . HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? Li C 'S THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): )ARDS. COMMI7TEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: _~a~i~s Gr Date Received at City Hall Date Incervieved Dace Appointed Huard, Committer, tit NI'O Inside City Outside City (03461)) CITY OF TI VA RD CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME : DATE : ADDRESS (RES.): 1,00AT- 5, W. RES. PHONE: !c2,f5~Z y* ADDRESS (BUS.) : BUS. PHONE: LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: CDrs~T,~.~! GTD•~ ~ G'o~ySU.G %//Yl' G./1!6'/G . HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? 34 `s C IS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPL CANTS ONLY)-?~~~~"~~ PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: 1,4~eQCO,,wA-f Xiiq w 1'VTz ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: ri~°AJY~S/~D/eTiQT/O/✓ Date received at City Hall I b? Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO 6&1 Inside City Outside City cs/4772A 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 I RECEIVED Wi=t 1yI35 C '1TY0F T1 7A' RD CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION "'y OF TIGARD ' NAME: ~`~J DATE: ADDRESS (RES.) RES. P /ONE: ~3y 3rz ADDRESS (BUS.): BUS. PHONE: LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: J 0, 1" 57 SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? ~0~~7 _ • _ G.1 { /i t7f EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: V/2s4, i,t g-l~= ST yy~ y e rS~~{/ l.9 radka/e l OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: 11 / 1 1 Cu ~ n HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: ~ylc3 d a-r ~~-,~1 ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: icTC~r rt rG{~ - J'Y) J` OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL kEMARKS): r BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: eC O t° Date Received at City Hall q/a~F-8s Date Interviewed U e Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO_~~i yc~~~ 1Qia Inside City Outside City (0346p) e OF TIG,4 RD c~~pFl~ 1986 CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION nw ~Q NAME: fE89CKAlf &UErf DATE: k ADDRESS (RES.) : 6-tJ, S~Tl1 :e-6 TlG,IcO., 010- 97,193 RES. PHONE: La-:_: 9S3S ADDRESS (BUS.): 9/7"6- BUS. PHONE: Sy-37L) LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: lyd SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? ~ A6W.,41uJ gg, ro~(toAl t/ vGs AJt~TO'%r4 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Aq 3F,~Gy E~uGTro.I 1r7_oAJA STATE uy1dF~GST7 c1•.At A gc_z.o j-4 .9rArE Ge~rzdEes~rt 47- OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: -f-rWj,, Aj_ n5 r' goy c r ZAe- € s~Fra),(L6 ~A.rr~GsoF*r- sEt t 4'-V~ titvus a _>o43=;r CSI s ilk C3Y' ~i , ~Y f~ f a v HOW LANG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? //yg& tkW C CIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? i PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): S HAS' rde,9,-,EO As AAI ~cr r,~x►TAAt1T nr o~Au,~A~, p+,• Qa~ oFsIrEPFSt" sn1 i~ic~5~~ss ~'t~~_~_a.~~~-,CF Ac~c.Arr~.Je w Fi.Ja,JeF_. iiferau_k uEAR,$ r l)A/?-- 0bOPCE12 3u~PP~~GrsrJ6 +-Tk. e1G wzrr1 Acanj,. 6- F: ~ ~.2~ r co,u~cr~ 2 oP~.2.t-rte ~a -IS. COMMETTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN Date Received at City Hall Date Interviewed cc Appointed Hoard, Committee, (it NI'o icke City Out . isle City p) RECEIVED JA IV 2 7 198& . ~ CITY OF TIGARD CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION CITY OF TlGgRD NAME: 'J/ i< D~'~~C; DATE: ADDRESS (RES. RES. PHONE: ~(Qli(~ (J LIZ) ADDRESS (BUS.): 62L/yAI BUS. PHONE: Jbyo ~ n LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: ) - 3 .OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? IS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? ~rU PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: /`1C ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: GA 4 l 4~Sc-. OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): C(~b(~,~~ / 16E T ~Egye TN e On n Dr l lb /i(26 f C s nL~ BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: 8 T ~L~ Jl.~ 1 it U f Date Received at City Hall Date Interviewed T "7 Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City (0346p) TYPES OF BOARD 6 COMMITTEES r BUDGET COMMITTEE: The Budget Committee, assisting the Council and City Administration with preparation of the fiscal Budget, consists of five members. Committee term is three years. Meetings are called as required. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: The Economic Development Committee, assisting the Planning Department in preparing an economic development program, consists of nine members - the Mayor, a Commercial Banking representative, three at-large representatives, and representatives of the Tigard Triangle Area, Central Business District, North/Cascade Boulevard Area and the 72nd Avenue Industrial Area. Committee terms are: four members serving two years and four members serving one year. Meetings are held once a month on the third Wednesday each month, 7:30 A.M., Elmer's. LIBRARY BOARD: The Library Board, dealing with City Library functions, consists of seven members, not more than two of whom may be nonresidents of the City. Board term is four years. Meetings are held once a month on the second Monday each month, 7:00 P.M., Tigard Public Library. NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS: Tigard has seven NPO's. The function of each NPO is to consider and act upon a broad range of issues affecting neighborhood livability. The membership of each NPO shall be at least seven but not more than twelve. At least 50% of the members of each HPO shall reside within the City limits. The remaining members shall reside, own property or maintain a business within the boundaries of the NPO for which their membership has been approved. Membershif, term is four years. K.V's meet once a month. PARKS & RECREATION BOARD: The Park & Recreation Board, dealing with the creation, operation and maintenance of recreation facilities under the jurisdiction of the City, consists of nine members, not more than two of whom may be nonresidents of the City, and one appointed by the Tigard School District and approved by Council. Board term is four years. Meetings are held once a month on the third Thursday each month, 7:30 P.M., Tigard City Hall. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission, dealing with land use (development applications including subdivision, comprehensive plan map changes, zoning map changes, and planned development applications), consists of nine members, not more than two of whom may be nonresidents of the City. Commission term is four years. Meetings are held once a month on the first Tuesday, after the first Monday, each month, 7:30 P.M., Fowler Junior High School. Transportation Committee: Will develop, maintain and advise as to the implementation o a ransportation Public Facilities Plan and the resulting Capital Improvements Plan affecting Transportation and coordinated with related Wastewater plans. ITYOF TIGARD CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION Iff NAME : JO e -J DATE: ADDRESS (RES.) : 116A6 stJ wnncO L y, 01 RES. PHONE: 39 9~aG ADDRESS (BUS. -F4-; -f~1 901A S I7r~ I Or'r I, BUS. PHONE: LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: `J„tS SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? {<'t S I o.e G EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:r ~s I o e - N~ lea OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: ~u s 0r' Ve r Sr 1 u I c Le 1 f "~e HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? JL IS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? (oweVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: N~~~ JrQ r 5 ~o o~i o r C l~ rr~ ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): BOARDS. COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: _ - Date Received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, N('U _ losidc City Outside City (034613) Ron Pulliam Bill Fagan BUILDING SUPPLIES - 16255 S.%NF * Upper Boones FerryRd, Tigard, OR 97224,., (503) 684-0300 Ci i i O<" T'OA CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME: DATE: / ADDRESS (RES.): RES. PHONE: X17 ADDRESS (BUS.): BUS. PHONE: d~~t-oL3Q~ LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? /3 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 6:51 4 6'-= T42~d~7 OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: 10e; - ,~h_ rc T7~h Pig- 56- 2 4 2 G~r D Q64' ( OW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS✓FIR_M? THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPL CANTS ONLY)?~ S PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY : ORGANIZ TIONS AND OFFICES: OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): X19 4:t i~ <C/~4 'r-iYs BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City C sb/4772A/0002A 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 CITY OF TIGARD, OREMN COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: February 5 1990 _ DATE SUBMITTED: January 19, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Interfund Loan. PREVIOUS ACTION: Council Decision Park Land A isition to Purchase - January 15, 1990 ~j j/ PREPARED BY: Wayne DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN REQUESTED BY: Wayne Lowry PO CY ISSUE Shall the City Council authorize an interfund loan between the Sewer Fund and the Park Levy Improvement Fund to facilitate the purchase of park land in anticipation of future park levy revenue? INFORMATION SUMMARY ORS 294.460 gives the City Council the authority to approve loans between city funds. Such loans must be repaid by the end of the next fiscal year. The Council wishes to move ahead with the acquisition of certain vacant land for park development. Park levy revenue will not be received until December, 1990 and the proceeds of any borrowing against that stream of revenue will not be realized until the Spring of 1990. In order to complete this transaction, an interfund loan must be approved to provide the necessary funding. The following loan is being proposed from the Sewer Fund: Estimated Purpose Effective Date Amount Repayment Borrowing Fund Park Land Acq. 2/6/90 $110,000 12/1/90 Park Levy Improvement This loan will be repaid with levy proceeds in December, 1990, if borrowing proceeds are not available before that time. Interest will be earned at the LGIP rate for each period the loan is outstanding. _ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Authorize interfund loan. 2. Do not authorize loan. FISCAL IMPACT 1. No fiscal impact as the lending fund will earn interest on loaned funds. 2. The General Fund would have to purchase the property. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends approval of resolution to authorize interfund loan. dC : PKLVY s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 2/19/90 DATE SUBMITTED:. 2/6/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Extension of PREVIOUS ACTION: Approval by City approval period for Conditional Council Use CU 88-03 MLP 87-09 Texaco , PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OR: REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Should the Council grant a six-month extension for the Texaco service station located on the southwest corner of Bull Mountain Road and Pacific Highway? INFORMATION SUMMARY The above application was approved by the Council on August 22, 1988 with a one year approval period that was allowed by the Community Development Code. Following this action, the Code was amended in February, 1989 (Ord. 89-06) to permit an 18 month approval period. Operating under the assumption that the one year approval was still effective, the applicant requested and the Council granted a six month extension to the approval on August 14, 1989. This past fall, the City Attorney determined that the new 18 month approval period applied to all cases which had a valid one year approval period in effect when (L the new Code provision was passed. Therefore, the six month extension for this case was granted prematurely. The request is consistent with the criteria in Sections 18.130.030 and 18.162.045 of the Code for granting such an extension. Attached is a copy of the applicant's request and a resolution approving the six month extension. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached resolution approving a six month extension to the approval period to August 22, 1990. 2. Modify and approve the attached resolution. 3. Deny the request and direct staff to prepare a corresponding resolution. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the attached resolution. i Charles A. Gove Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers 10335 Main St., Suite 5, Bellevue, WA 98004 ❑ (206) 451-1212 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Kieth Liden December 7, 1989 Subject: Texaco Station Bull Mountain Road Tigard, Oregon Dear Kieth; As we discussed on the phone, Texaco would like to proceed with an extension of the present conditional use for the subject site. It is understood that we have received one previous extension which expires on February 22, 1990. We would ask the City of Tigard to \ grant a further extension since the construction of Texaco's project has been tied to the completion of the State of Oregon's much delayed Cantebury Square road improvements. The State now anticipates starting construction of their project sometime this spring. The granting of this extension would allow Texaco to coordinate completion of subject site with the State project, which should be finished sometime in the summer of 1990. Please call if you have any concerns or questions. Sincerely i'aagiorumm DEC 111989 Mark T. Metge P.E. MTM:mw cc:Darrell Watson, Texaco, Kirkland ❑ Petroleum Handling Facilities ❑ Industrial Piping Systems ❑ ~J\ 1.'..J CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ' AGENDA OF: February 19, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: February 9, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: n /PREVIOUS ACTION: None Abandoned Vehicle ordinance fi, !PREPARED BY: Ron Goodpaster 1 DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK / REQUESTED BY: Ron Goodpaster POLIC$ ISSUE To update our Abandoned Vehicle ordinance so it complies with recent law changes. INFORMATION SUMMARY As a result of a Supreme Court decision and changes in the law, our Abandoned Vehicle Ordinance needs this updating to be legal and enforceable. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Upgrade current ordinance FISCAL IMPACT Can be handled with existing revenue. SUGGESTED ACTION Recommended Council approve the proposed Abandoned Vehicle ordinance amendments. Council may wish to declare an emergency for immediate enactment. We have not been able to tow vehicles for months and numerous home owners are requesting quick action. r CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: February 19, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: February 9, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: PREVIOUS ACTION: None Property Conver ion r PREPARED BY: Ron Goodvaster DEPT HEAD OR X CITY ADMIN O i REQUESTED BY: Ron Gooduaster POLICY ISSUE j To convert seized unclaimed property to City use. INFORMATION SUMMARY Presently unclaimed property is sold at auction or destroyed. This ordinance would allow the City to convert unclaimed usable property to City use. i f ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i `t 1. Status Quo 2. This recommended conversion FISCAL IMPACT May save money and provide tools/equipment to City uses without an expenditure. SUGGESTED ACTION Recommend Council approve the proposed Property Conversion Ordinance. {