Loading...
City Council Packet - 04/27/1993AGENDA CITY OF TIGARD OREGON PUBLIC NOTICE. Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet Is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's 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. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda Items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION (5:30 PM - Town Hall Conference Room Discussion: 5:30 p.m. - Policy Concerning the Capital Improvement Plan 6:30 p.m. - Citizens for a Community Center Review: Council Calendar Business Agenda 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 PM - Town Hall) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & 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 p.m. 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) C COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 1 7:45 p.m. 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 Local Contract Review Board: Bid Award - Dartmouth Street (Set Over from the 4/13/93 Council Meeting [Item 4.6a]) 3.2 Approve 99W Task Force Recommendation to Request Oregon Department of Transportation Fund 80% of a 99W Transportation Systems Management Study; City of Tigard would Fund Remaining 20% 3.3 Approve Surface Water Management Agreement Modification (Redefining Responsibilities) between Unified Sewerage Agency and City of Tigard 3.4 Authorize Submittal of an Application for State Marine Board Facility Grant Funds 3.5 Approve Disposal of Surplus Property Purchased for the Gaarde Street Project - Resolution No. 93- 3.6 Authorize the Issuance of Refunding Bond Series 1993 - Resolution No. 93- 3.7 Authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to Sign an Agreement with the Oregon Department of Transportation for Bikeway Improvements on S.W. 121st Avenue 7:55 p.m. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: WESTERN BYPASS - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVES FOR THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS). • Open Public Hearing • Staff Report a. Engineering Department b. Oregon Department of Transportation • Public Testimony • Council Questions/Comments • Staff Recommendation • Close Public Hearing • Council Consideration: Resolution No. 93- COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 2 8:30 P.M. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0005 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 92-0003 VARIANCE VAR 92-00110 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 92-0002 QUAESTOR/MATRIX DEVELOPMENT The City Council will reconsider a request for approval of the following development applications: 1) Subdivision preliminary plat/Planned Development conceptual plan approval to divide a 33.8 acre parcel into 64 lots ranging between 7,000 and 21,950 square feet in size; 2) Variance approval to allow a 14 percent grade for a 200 foot section of a proposed local street whereas Code Section 18.164.030 (M) (1) limits the grades of local streets to 12 percent; 3) Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow grading, road construction, and home construction on lots in excess of 25 percent gradient and to allow utility construction within a drainageway. The City Council previously approved this application subject to certain conditions of approval. The applicant appealed the City Council's decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. The City of Tigard withdrew the earlier, challenged decision, and will now reconsider the application. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.50, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.92, 18.150, 18.160, and 18.164; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.1, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 3.1.1, and 8.1.3. LOCATION: West of the intersection of 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street (WCTM 2S1 3CC, tax lot 401 and 2S1 4, tax lot 1400) ZONE: R-4.5 (PD) (Residential, 4.5 units/acre, Planned Development) The R-4.5 zone allows single family residential units, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, and accessory structures among C other uses. • Open Public Hearing • Declarations or Challenges • Staff Review: Community Development Department • Public Testimony Opponents Proponents - Rebuttal • Council Questions/Comments • Staff Recommendation • Close Public Hearing • Council Consideration: Resolution No. 93-_ COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 3 9:15 p.m. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: DISPOSAL. OF PROPERTY ON MCDONALD STREET. Shall the City offer for sale a parcel of vacant land on McDonald Street, set a minimum bid for the sale and proceed; with the sale in accordance with TMC 3.44.015. Location: Tax Map and Lot No. 2S1 11 BA 103 within the boundary of the Tigardville Heights Street and McDonald Street Sewer Local !mprovement District. • Open Public Hearing • Declarations or Challenges • Staff Review: Finance Department • Public Testimony Opponents Proponents Rebuttal • Council Questions/Comments • Staff Recommendation • Close Public Hearing • Council Consideration: Resolution No. 93- 9:30 p.m. 7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 9:40 p.m. 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. 10:00 P.M. 9. ADJOURNMENT cca0427.93 COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 4 Council Agenda Item T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Edwards. 1. ROLL CALL Council Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Judy Fessler, Wendi Conover Hawley, Paul Hunt, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Dick Bewersdorff, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Community Relations Coordinator; Michael Robinson, Legal Counsel; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer. STUDY SESSION Policy Concerning the Capital Improvement Plan City Engineer Wooley reviewed the policy question: What should the process be for selecting the projects to be funded under the capital improvement program for the next fiscal year? He reported that each year, funding is identified through the budget process for capital improvements to the streets, sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems of the City. Specific projects are then selected to utilize the available funds. Due to changes in the City's committee structure, there is a need for review of the process for selection of projects. Mr. Wooley then reviewed history for each of the capital improvement project areas. For streets, there is slightly over $12 million of projects in "back log." Approximately $1,000,000 is available each year for streets. The Transportation Committee no longer exists; this Committee used to study and recommend project priorities for consideration by the Budget Committee and City Council. The sewer capital improvement budget has a substantial contingency and only a few immediate project needs. Storm drainage projects have been selected based on severity of potential damages from flooding. Projects for the small budget of $100,000 per year are selected by staff subject to Council approval. SDC funds are collected and regulated by USA. SDC dollars have been collected and are being held in an interest- bearing account awaiting USA policy development for fund expenditure. There was lengthy policy discussion. Mark & Jill Link and Rosemary Shrauger own property along the recently approved "Gaarde Road CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 1 Extension. 11 Property owned by Mr. & Mrs. Link and Mrs. Shrauger will have to be purchased in order to build the road as aligned. The Links and Mrs. Shrauger have asked for consideration of initiating negotiations as soon as possible for the purchase of their land and homes. Mayor Edwards noted that when the time comes to discuss the specific purchase of property, an Executive Session would be called for Council determination of any details on potential purchase. Staff was directed to prepare information for a June 22 Council discussion. Information requested by Council included: • where else in the City is there a potential for the situation as it now affects the Link and Shrauger properties (identify these on a map) • research policy followed by other cities • prepare a list options as possible suggestions to address this issue • Council will submit to staff ideas or options they can identify Citizens for a Community Center Mr. Jack Schwab, representing the Citizens for a Community Center (CCC), reviewed the group's position on attempting to purchase and renovate the old Fire Station on Commercial Street into a Community Center. Voters turned down the proposal to fund the purchase and renova-cion through issuance of bonds. Be,ause of the show of non- support in a monetary way, the CCC determined that they had no further options to pursue without additional resources. There was discussion on the need for a community center for meetings, events, and educational classes. Several Council members advised they would favor non-monetary support through endorsement or private fund-raising efforts. At the suggestion that the Fire District may be able to give the Fire Station to another governmental entity (i.e., rental to the City for $1/year), Mayor Edwards said this possibility merited further review. Legal Counsel Robinson advised his office would need to do some research. Council meeting recessed: 7:25 p.m. Council meeting reconvened: 7:30 p.m. BUSINESS MEETING 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA • Lynne Kamerman, 13145 S.W. Watkins, Tigard, OR began to testify from a prepared letter to the City Council. Legal Counsel Robinson intervened and suggested it would be better if Ms. Kamerman submitted her testimony to the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 2 Planning commission during their upcoming hearing on the ( issue she partially presented. Upon advice from Legal counsel, council did not accept Ms. Kamerman,s letter. Mark Rockwell, 164 S.W. Kingsgate, Lake Oswego, Oregon advised he purchased property in the Tigard Triangle area. He requested Council consider a request for a Comprehensive Plan Change out of the sequence prescribed for the timing of such proposals. Community Development Director requested, and Council granted, a two-week delay (next Council meeting is May 11, 1993) to prepare a written report outlining policy implications for this particular request. Ed Gallaher, noted his concern about a billboard located near Highway 217. He advised the billboard does not appear to be intended for viewing by 217 travelers. Rather, the message on the sign can only be read by persons traveling on Scholls Ferry Road. Staff will review whether the sign is in compliance with the ordinance. • Jack Polans, King City, thanked the Council for the new policy of providing copies of tape recordings of Council meetings at the Library for check-out. He noted some problems with background noise and tape clarity. Mr. Polans questioned proceedings of a recent Tigard Water District budget meetings and executive sessions. Mayor advised Mr. Polans it would be appropriate to register his concerns with the Water District. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Hawley, to remove Consent Agenda Item 3.1 for separate discussion. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") Motion by Councilor Fessler, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to remove Consent Agenda Item 3.2 for separate discussion. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Fessler, to remove Consent Agenda Items 3.4 and 3.7 for separate discussion. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 3 Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Fessler, to remove Consent Agenda Item 3.3 for separate discussion. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Hawley, to approve Consent Agenda Item Nos. 3.5 and 3.6: 3.5 Approve Disposal of Surplus Property Purchased for the Gaarde Street Project - Resolution No. 93- 15 3.6 Authorize the Issuance of Refunding Bond Series 1993 - Resolution No. 93- 16 The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") Consideration of Consent Agenda Item No. 3.1: Local Contract Review Board: Bid Award - Dartmouth Street (Set Over from the 4/13/93 Council Meeting (Item 4.6a]) Councilor Schwartz advised that since reading the supplemental report submitted by City Engineer Wooley, he was still in favor of awarding the bid for concrete rather than asphalt. The low bidder remains the same for either paving material. Councilor Hunt advised of his reluctance to approve concrete over asphalt because the City Engineer had recommended asphalt. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Fessler to approve Consent Agenda Item 3.1. The motion was approved by a majority vote (4-1) of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler; Hawley and Schwartz voted "Aye"; Councilor Hunt voted "No." Consideration of Consent Agenda Item No. 3.2: Approve 99W Task Force Recommendation to Request Oregon Department of Transportation Management Study Fund City O of Tigard would Fund Remaining S20%ems Councilor Fessler said she was surprised that the Oregon Department of Transportation declined to participate in the Study. Councilor Hawley noted, as a member of the 99W Task Force, this was a second attempt to persuade the State to participate in a 99W Transportation Study. She noted the importance of the information which would be obtained on g with such a study with regard to decision-making efforts CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 4 Motion by Councilor Fessler, seconded by Councilor Hawley, to approve Consent Agenda Item No. 3.2. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") Consideration of Consent Agenda Item No. 3.3: Approve Surface Water Management Agreement Modification (Redefining Responsibilities) between unified Sewerage Agency and City of Tigard - Resolution No. 93-14-a City Administrator responded to questions and clarified the purpose of the agreement modification. It is not anticipated that additional employees would be needed if this agreement was approved. Motion by Councilor Fessler, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to approve Consent Agenda Item No. 3.3. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted 11yes.11) Consideration of Consent Agenda Item No. 3.4: Authorize Submittal of an Application for State Marine Board Facility Grant Funds Councilor Hunt received clarification from staff that this item would have to come back to the Council for budgetary approval. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to approve Consent Agenda Item No. 3.4. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "yes.") Consideration of Consent Agenda Item No. 3.7: Authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to Sign an Agreement with the Oregon Department of Transportation for Bikeway Improvements on S.W. 121st Avenue - Resolution No. 93-17 In response to a question from Councilor Hunt, staff advised that the process must be started now in order to be in a position to take advantage of the possibility of bikeway improvements through this program. This item would come back to the Council for budgetary approval. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Hawley, to approve Consent Agenda Item No. 3.7. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 5 The motion approved by a majority vote, 3-2. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Hawley and Schwartz voted "yes"; Councilors Fessler and Hunt voted "no." 4. PUBLIC HEARING: WESTERN BYPASS - REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVES FOR THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS). a. Public hearing was opened. b. City Engineer Wooley introduced this agenda item and reviewed the staff report. C. Bill Ciz, Project Manager for the Western Bypass, with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) reviewed material distributed (see Council packet for a copy of said material). ODOT is investigating how a bypass (new highway from I-5 to Highway 26) or alternatives to a bypass would help reduce north-south and circumferential travel congestion in southeast Washington County. Five alternatives were identified and reviewed. The next step in the study is to analyze how these alternatives would impact neighborhoods, the environment, economics, land use, and other important factors through what is known as a Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Washington County, after Tigard, will be the last jurisdiction to hear the alternatives and to approve a resolution which mould endorse the alternatives for further study. All other affected jurisdictions have given approval to continue. The County hearing is scheduled for May 14, 1993. Mr. Ciz reviewed the target schedule for the process. There were Council comments on the process, with it being noted that the Council, in the past, had had some concerns about components of several of the proposed alternatives. d. Public Testimony: • John Beckman, 9960 S.W. Sattler, Tigard, Oregon asked that the "use of alternatives" be considered rather than building another freeway. He suggested that the following be encouraged: - shorter commutes - carpooling - non-motorized transportation APRIL 27 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - , 1993 - PAGE 6 t Larry Westerman, 13665 S.W. Fern Street, Tigard, • Oregon urged consideration of the LUTRAQ alternative. He noted the Triangle planning now being done represented forward thinking. advised that the way land is used is changing. (For example, the LUTRAQ alternative proposes transit oriented developments that mix commercial, retail and residential land uses near transit lines/light rail stations.) David Wadley, 6062 S.W. Meadows Road, Lake Oswego, Oregon submitted written testimony (on file with the Council packet material). Mr. Wadley supported the LUTRAQ or a similar alternative. Ed Gallaher, 12140 S.W. Merestone Court, Tigard, Oregon testified that he objected to the project being named "western bypass." He suggested it should be called a regional transportation study. He noted concerns with placing a bypass through prime agricultural Urban Growth Boundarplace pressure on extending the Mr. Gallaher noted that this hearing was to discuss the alternatives, but questioned when the citizens would be able to get their voice heard with regard to the selection of the final choice. / Mr. Ciz reviewed the process and noted there will before hearing the open house and be an informational alternatives another specific to jurisdiction. Larry Bissett, 10205 S.W. 107th, Portland, Oregon • testified with regard to a proposal for another alternative to the five presented by ODOT. He of his reviewed traffic volume figures will not advisedtraffic concerns that the Bypass on 99W. He noted that other build options inthh City of Tigard should be the first priority w the Bypass being the last to be built. Mr. Bissett presented traffic pattern and traffic count maps (on file with the Council packet material). There was contention between the Mayor n Mr. Bissett as to whether the testimony Bissett's proposal was appropriate at this time. The Mayor indicated he had heard Mr. Bissett's proposal previously and did not believe his comments were germane to the subject of that this hearing. Councilor Fessler requested Bissett continue to present his proposal. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 7 After discussion and a request by the Mayor that Mr. Bissett testify only on the subject matter of the public hearing, the Mayor allowed Mr. Bissett to continue. Mr. Ciz of ODOT commented on Mr. Bissett's proposal, noting that this proposal had been reviewed as a possible alternative about a year ago in the process. Mr. Bissett's plan is similar to the Transportation System Management (TSM) and the Arterial Expansion alternative. At that time, the decision was made not to look at Mr. Bissett's proposal further. e. Staff recommendation was to approve the proposed resolution. f. Public hearing was closed. g. RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 - A RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF ENDORSEMENT OF FURTHER STUDY OF WESTERN BYPASS ALTERNATIVES RECOMMENDED BY JPACT AND METRO. h. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Hawley, to adopt Resolution No. 93-18. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt, and Schwartz voted "yes.") Council meeting recessed: 9:15 p.m. Council meeting reconvened: 9:30 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0005 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 92-0003 VARIANCE VAR 92-0010 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 92- 0002 QUAESTOR/MATRIX DEVELOPMENT The City Council will reconsider a request for approval of the following development applications: 1) Subdivision preliminary plat/Planned Development conceptual plan approval to divide a 33.8 acre parcel into 64 lots ranging between 7,000 and 21,950 square feet in size; 2) Variance approval to allow a 14 percent grade for a 200 foot section of a proposed local street whereas Code Section 18.164.030 (M) (1) limits the grades of local streets to 12 percent; 3) Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow grading, road construction, and home construction on lots in excess of 25 percent gradient and to allow utility construction within a drainageway. The City Council previously approved this application subject to certain conditions of approval. The applicant appealed the City Council's decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. The City of Tigard withdrew the earlier, challenged CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 8 decision, and will now reconsider the application. a. Public hearing was opened. b. Mayor Edwards asked if there were any declarations of ex parte contacts or information gained outside the hearing or a site visit. Mayor noted receipt of correspondence: A letter dated April 24, 1993, from Althea Rodde, 13745 S.W. 121st Avenue, Tigard, Oregon is on file with the packet material. Ms. Rodde noted objections to development and to the permissible uses contained in the zoning language. Members of Council confirmed that they had familiarized themselves with the application. There were no challenges to hearing the matter before the city council. Legal Counsel Robinson read the following: Testimony in evidence must be directed toward the criteria the Mayor has described or other criteria in the land use regulations which the person believes to apply to this decision. Failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the decision makers and the parties an opportunity to respond to that issue precludes an L. appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals. Councilor Hawley advised that she had not had time to review the letter from Ms. Rodde; she was given a copy for review. C. Community Development Director Murphy reviewed the staff report submitted to Council with their packet material. The issue before Council was: Should the council modify its August 18, 1993 decision for the proposed Vista Point subdivision with regard to 1) amount of developer constructed improvements for the S.W. Gaarde Street extension; 2) reimbursement to the developer for construction of S.W. Gaarde and other public improvements; 3) dedication of open space; and 4) narrowing internal subdivision streets? Mr. Murphy advised of a change to Page 25, Condition No. 19 of the Final Order. (Note: The amended Condition should read: The S.W. Gaarde Street extension shall be built to major collector standards from S.W. 121st Avenue to proposed Lot 52 with. development of Phase I. Prior to or concurrent with construction of Phase II, the applicant shall construct the S.W. Gaarde Street CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 9 extension to a point 140 feet south of the norther edge of the subject parcel. The collector street improvements shall be 44 feet in width for Phase I and 40 feet in width for Phase II. The applicant shall not be responsible for the second lift of asphalt for the section of roadway to be built with Phase 1I.) Mr. Murphy answered several questions of clarification from Council. d. Public Testimony: • Steve Pfeiffer, Attorney, 900 S.W. 5th, Portland, OR 97204 advised that his client had no problems with the staff recommendation. e. Public hearing was closed. f. RESOLUTION NO. 93-19 - IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF A FINAL ORDER UPON CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE THE VISTA POINT SUBDIVISION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (SUB 92-0005, PDR 92-0003, SLR 92-0002, VAR 92-0010) PROPOSED BY MATRIX DEVELOPMENT. g. Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Fessler, to adopt Resolution No. 93-19 with the change to Condition No. 19 as outlined by Community Development Director Murphy. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt, and Schwartz voted "aye.") 6. PUBLIC HEARING: DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY ON MCDONALD STREET. Shall the City offer for sale a parcel of vacant land on McDonald Street, set a minimum bid for the sale and proceed with the sale in accordance with TMC 3.44.015. Location: Tax Map and Lot No. 2S1 11BA 103 within the boundary of the Tigardville Heights Street and McDonald Street Sewer Local Improvement District. a. Public hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. C. Finance Director Lowry reviewed the staff report. d. Public Testimony: None. e. Staff recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 10 f. Public hearing was closed. g. RESOLUTION NO. 93-20 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF A VACANT PARCEL OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON MCDONALD STREET AND SETTING A MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE SELLING PRICE. h. Motion by Councilor Fessler, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to adopt Resolution No. 93-20. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. (Mayor Edwards and Councilors Fessler, Hawley, Hunt and Schwartz voted "aye.") 7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:05 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. 9. ADJOURNMENT: 11:15 p.m. _e z06LatU±j= Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Re rder Mayor',-City of Tigard Date: ccm0427.93 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 27, 1993 - PAGE 11 LJ COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 7521 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising 1'~ffiLIC HEACtiAio The following will be considered by the T►gard Ctty' tJotmcil oit Apri! 27, ° City of Tigard ° ❑ Tearsheet Notice 1993, at 7:30 P.M. at Tigard Civic Centex Town Hall Rorn,13123 S.W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Further information may bo obtained Accounts Payable/Terry ❑ Duplicate AHidavl from the Community Development Director or City Reco;tl.r at the same ° 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ° location or by calling 539- 4171..You we invited to submit written tes- 97223-8199 timony in advance o 110 public hearing- written and oral testimon will Tigard, OR . , y b - id ed h B i s e cc - er at t e r ng.: The pl►blic heirbs; will be conducted in ac- cordance with the applib ble Chapter 1832 of the Tigard Municipal Code and any rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Rall1 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION CUBDMSfOtV S11B 92, cx1D5 . ; PLAANNEDDEVBL~P[v1ENi' P611 4i-W)3 STATE OF OREGON. ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' SNSI TIVE I, ,.Judith Koehler being first duly sworn, depose and sayg t Wdvertising O i 1ivtATI2iX D~PMiNT The City Council will reconsider a'requesi forapproval of the following. development applications: 1) Subdivision relttr►inary plit/Planned y F Director, or his principal clerk. of the a newspaper of general cirgjlatioondas defined in ORS 193.0100 Development ccsnrepbml pla s al);, oy :l to div a 332 =t pwzc3.iiji4 62 lots rangingg between 7,000 and 21$50 square feet in si* 2) Variance rip- and 193.020; published a of roes).20; pu h~ $BV 4L-0003 l a ~ pro~al to allow a 14 pp~ercent grade for a 200 foot section of a proposed local street whereas Ce lc Sectirm 18.164.030 (N1) (1) limits th6 grades of - ~Iea l SUS I local streets to 12 percent; 3) Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the grading, road construction, and home construction on lots in excess of 25 entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and percent gradient said to allow utility construction within a drninsgeway: consecutive in the following issues: Tlie City Council previously approved this application sup*t to certain canditions of a proval The a licant a ealed the C t C il' April 15, 1993 . pp pp i y ounc s decision to the Oregon Land Use Boiud of Appeals. The City of Tigard withdrew the earlier, challenged decision, ced wt7.l govt atcoa:sicerdz ap- plication. / APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Coale Ch 18 apters .50,18.80;18.84,18.88,18.92,15.150,18.160, and 18.164; 15th day of April, 19 Compmhensitro Plnn Riiicies 2.1.1, 3.1.1.3.4.2, 3.5.1, 4.2.1, 7.1.2; 7.3.1, 7.4.4; 7.6.1, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3. LOCATION: West of tho intersection of Subscribed and sworn before me this 121st Avenuc and 6urde Street (WC M 2SI 30C. tax lot 401 and 2S 14, tax lot 1400) 'LONE: R-4.5 (PD) (RnsidCatial, 4.5 units/am. Planned Development) The R4.5 zone allows single family residential units, Notary Public for Oregon 1 public support facilities, residential !^!':Sttr►eittlitttnes, far,aing, manufac- hy Commission xpires: r y~ 7 tured homes, family day care borrie mss, u=pertny uses, and ac- cessory structures among other trees : g AFFIDAVIT TI-7521 -Publish April 15. _ COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal Tr 7530 P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 - Legal Notice Advertisin The following meeting highlights are published for your information. Pull 9 agendas.may be obtained from the City Recorder; 13125 S.W. Hall City of Tigard att: Terry 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or 97223 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.97223; or by calling 639-1171.. O Tearsheet Notice CITY COUNCIL. BUSINESS MEETING O Duplicate Attidavi APRIL27,1993 TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 S.W. HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON Study Meeting (Town Hall Conference Room) (5:30 P.M.) Review of - Policy Concerning the Capital Improvement Plan Council Calendar . Business Agenda ) Business Meeting (Ibwn Ball) (7:30 P.M.) STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )as' Public Hearings: • Subdivision (SUB 92-00005) Planned Development (PDR i Judith Koehler 92-0003). Variance (VAR 92-0010) Sensitive Lands (SLR being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising 92.0002) - QUAESTOR/IvtATRIX Development. The City - Council previously approved this application subject to certain Director, or his principal clerk, of the Ti gar' '99S1 a newspaper of general circul ion as defined in 93.010 conditions of approval. The applicant appealed the Council's and 193.020; published at and in the decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. The City of ator~paid Bounty d state; that the Tigard withdrew the earlier challenged decision and will now C T 8ounci Busi nesg Mepting reconsider the application: Location: West of the intersection of a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the S.W. 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street. entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and . Western Bypass - Request for approval of alternatives for the consecutive in the following issues: Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Presentation will be made by the Oregon Department of Transportation. April 02>-1993 Disposal of property on McDotWd SU=L Local Contract Review Board Meeting ~J Executive Session: The Tigard Ciry.Council may go into Executive Ses- sion under the provisions of ORS, 192.660 (1) d), (e), & (h) to discuss 22 day of April-122L labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation Subscribed and sworn Jo before me this issues, - TT'7530 -Publish ARri122,1993. wncL<!1 V Notary Public for Orego NOTARYPUBLIC•OREGON My Commission Expires: MY VCOMMISSIIOMf EIXPIRES JUNE 9. 1997 AFFIDAVIT / - COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 664-0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising City of Tigard att: Terry 13125 SW Hall Blvd. a Tigard, Or 97223 s 13 E3 a Legal NatlceTT 7540 Tearsheet Notice. ~ . Duplicate Alliuavis- r~ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )as' ;`3 I, Judith Koehler. ~5' being first duly sworn, depose and say that 18M-the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of the TiRar s ~M x ehf a newspaper of general cir",Iatio~ as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at $ in the aforesaid coup and state, that the a: ' 4, CaunO.igp; ai ►rtPAr; ng c ' a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and d, • consecutive in the following Issues: 29, 1993 APr Subscribed and swo to before me this r 1 OFFICIAL SEAL J P JACQUELINE AHELLANO i NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Notary Public for Oregon COMMISSION NO. 023140 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 9. 1997 My Commissi Expires: AFFIDAVIT AGEND ' ITEM NCB s 2 . VISITOWS. ENDA (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) DATE 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 you. Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount r of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. IBYPASS - MPACT STATE E T OR APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVES FOR PUBLIC HEARING: WESTERN THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 PLEASE PRINT Proponent - (Speaking In Favor) Opponent - (Speaking Against) Nam (lJ BEG AA) Name Address 99r,=,d '51-0 SAr LE lb Address 9 ~ W~S L Name Address 13665 S O FE~J S? 7'-16- W Address ame Vt P U LIa Name Address Address Name C~;- cmz o~ Name _ Address r A-10 S( ,j - t Address Name Name Address &)"f Address ame Name Ad yeas Address Name Name ress Address Name Name Address Address Name F dress ress Name Name Address Address Name Name Address rt Address Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. no -27 TW ..tea d.a PUBLIC HEARING: SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0005 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 92-0003 VARIANCE VAR 92-0610 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 92-0002 QUAESTOR/MATRIX DEVELOPMENT The City Council will reconsider a request for approval of the following development applications: 1) Subdivision preliminary plat/Planned Development conceptual plan approval to divide a 33.8 acre parcel into 64 lots ranging between 7,000 and 21,950 square feet in size; 0) Variance approval to allow a 14 percent grade for a 200 foot section of a proposed local street whereas Code Section 18.164.030 (M) (1) limits the grades of local streets to 12 percent; 3) Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow grading, road construction, and home construction on lots in excess of 25 percent gradient and to allow utility construction within a drainageway. The City Council previously approved this application subject to certain conditions of approval. The applicant appealed the City Council's decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. The City of Tigard withdrew the earlier, challenged decision, and will now reconsider the application. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.50, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.92, 18.150, 18.160, and 18.164; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.1, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3. LOCATION: West of the intersection of 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street (WCTM 2S1 3CC, tax lot 401 and 2S1 4, tax lot 1400) ZONE: R-4.5 (PD) (Residential, 4.5 units/acre, Planned Development) The R-4.5 zone allows single family residential units, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, and accessory structures among other uses. PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS I'1'EIVI N~: A91 Proponent - (Speaking In Favor) PLEASE PRINT Opponent - (Speaking Against) Name Name r Address 0 0 f Gf/ S O Name Name dress Address -Mme P e Address rI w Name Name Address Address Name Name Address dress -ITame Name Address Address ame Name _Mdress res. Name Name Address Address Name Name dress dress Name Name Address Address Name Name ress Address Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. ~'~V1~.RiMV~vev.~.~,-.,--a r a IA/1-D~...,.•~1 l~sf y7147~167~~° PUBLIC HEARING: DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY ON MCDONALD STREET. Shall the City offer for sale a parcel of vacant land on McDonald Street, set a minimum bid for the sale and proceed with the sale in accordance with TMC 3.44.015. Location: Tax Map and Lot No. 2S1 11 BA 103 within the boundary cf the Tigardville Heights Street and McDonald Street Sewer Local Improvement District. PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS a. ` PLF_,~C~ DDIteIT CITY COUNCIL MEETING 4/27/93 Study Session Item MEMORANDUM CITY OF.TIGARD TO: Pat Reilly April 22, 1993 FROM: Randy WooledJ2 "V SUBJECT: Capital Improvement Program What should the process be for selecting the projects to be funded under the capital improvement program for the next fiscal year? Each year, funding is identified through the budget process for capital improvements to the streets, sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems of the City. Specific projects are then selected to utilize the available funds. Due to changes in the City's committee structure, we need to review the process for selection of projects. HISTORY Here is how the system has worked in the past: Streets: Approximately $1,000,000 is available each year for street projects. Roughly half comes from gas tax and half from TIF (Traffic Impact Fees). About the only restriction on gas tax is that it be used for street purposes, including pedestrian facilities. TIF can only be used for constructing improvements needed as a result of growth. TIF is restricted to certain streets listed in the County TIF ordinance. At least 500 of the TIF funds are to be applied to the major streets listed as arterials in the County ordinance. In the past the Transportation Advisory Committee has reviewed project needs and recommended priorities to the Council. The Committee has reviewed various project requests, listened to citizen input, and established project priorities. Last year, the "needs" list reviewed by the Committee included over $7.5 million of project requests competing for approximately $1.0 million of funding available. Most of the "needs" list remains unfunded. In recent years, approximately half of the gas tax funds have been allocated to the major pavement maintenance program (overlays, slurry seals, and bridge maintenance). The Committee expected that the program would continue, to protect the City's investment in existing streets and to avoid more expensive pavement repairs in the future. In the TIF program, the 72nd/99W intersection project has been partially funded in the current year. Since construction of the project will mostly occur in FY 93-94, the Committee intended the TIF funds necessary to complete the 72nd/99W project would be from the 93-94 budget. This project will use a significant portion of the 93-94 TIF budget. Sanitary Sewer: This capital budget has a substantial contingency and only a few immediate project needs. I would like to discuss use of this budget to fund extension of sewer lines to existing neighborhoods that lack sewer service, perhaps with the formation of reimbursement districts to repay construction costs as homes are connected to the sewer system. The immediate issues on sanitary sewer funding may be related more to review of City policies than to selection of specific projects. Storm Drainage: This is a small budget of approximately $100,000 per year. Typically, staff has selected projects subject to ratification by Council. Project priorities have been selected based on severity of potential damages from flooding. FUTURE During the next year, I would like to see a long-term CIP (capital improvement program) developed. Perhaps a 5-year CIP would be adopted, then updated each year. A 5-year CIP would help to give an overview of project needs and priorities. It would allow us to better answer citizen questions about when improvements will be made. When a new project is proposed, the 5-year CIP would provide comprehensive information about what projects would be displaced if the new project is funded. I recommend that the Planning Commission develop and recommend a 5- year CIP. The final document would be subject to ratification by the Council. The Planning Commission would review the document each year and update as appropriate. I am recommending the Planning Commission because they could coordinate capital planning with their other long-range planning activities and because they are the successors to the activities of the Transportation Advisory Committee. This work could be started this fall, after Triangle Plan and other current major projects are completed. THIS YZAR For the FY 93-94 budget, I propose that project selection be made by the City Council, rather than going through the Planning Commission, for the following reasons: • Due to prior project commitments, funds for new projects will be limited this year. • The Council is already involved in several of the projects that will be competing for funds (e.g., purchase of properties along the proposed Gaarde extension alignment, improvements in downtown area, etc.) • Some of the process this year will require Council policy { direction. Establishing Council policy this year will be a benefit when the Planning Commission begins the 5-year CIP development later on. • Planning Commission is already involved in some major projects at this time. rw/cip c. Ed Murphy COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3, I 5er ov" -6 Wa-7143 AGENDA OF: Apx i-~ -~3 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: construction of the D EPT HEAD OK CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD DATE SUBMITTED: April 2, 1993 for _ PREVIOUS ACTION: mouth Str PREPARED BY: Gar Alf son ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: Award bid for construction of the Dart !mouth Street improvements to the low bidder. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the award, authorizing the City Administrator to sign the contract with Emery & Sons Const. for the asphaltic concrete street alternative when all the rights of entry have been obtained. INFORMATION SUMMARY On March 30th, 1993, eleven bids were submitted for the construction of phase II of the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District (LID) and Capitol Improvement Program (CIP). Phase I was completed in 1991 and involved construction of the signal at 99W and approximately 200' of Dartmouth Street. Phase II involves the construction of the remainder of the project. The right of entry has not been obtained for one property which we are currently pursuing. We expect resolution of the matter in the courts in 4 to 6 weeks. Each contractor submitted a bid for asphaltic concrete (AC) and portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement to determine the least expensive alternative. Both alternatives are equivalent in pavement structural section. The LID requires us to select the lowest cost option which is the AC pavement. The increased cost to construct PCC pavement vs. the AC pavement is equivalent to an additional 2" AC overlay. The City has the option of selecting the PCC option and paying the difference but this is not recommended. The eleven bids are as follows: Emery & Sons Const, Stayton Ken Leahy Const., Cornelius Morse Bros., Sherwood NW Earthmovers, Tualatin Clearwater Const., Tigard W. Jeskey Const., Clackamas Bones Const., Lake Oswego Eagle-Elsner, Tigard Dirt & Aggregate, Troutdale Benge Const., Lake Oswego C & M Const., Sherwood AC $ 996,268.60 $1,012,360.98 $1,035,080.00 $1,038,618.34 $1,109,189.00 $1,100,081.60 $1,132,535.00 $1,191,696.00 $1,216,083.00 $1,243,699.50 $1,253,790.00 PCC $1,063,838.60 $1,071,819.48 $1,131,170.00 $1,094,354.14 $1,174,754.00 $1,168,436.60 $1,197,735.00 $1,302,541.00 $1,269,703.00 $1,295,634.50 $1,314,195.00 The Engineer's estimate was; AC $1,337,410 and PCC $1,410,260. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES Award bid to the low bidder, authorizing City Administrator to sign when the right of entry has been obtained. Defer award until right of entry has been obtained. FISCAL NOTES The funds for this project will be obtained from the LID formed by Ordinance No. 88-08 for construction within the LID boundary. Improvements outside the LID are funded from the CIP budget. Phase I construction costs were approximately; LID $63,000, CIP $161,000. Phase II construction costs are approximately; LID $934,900, CIP $61,400. I ga/Cart-ph2.ss CITY COUNCIL MEETING 4/27/93 Agenda Item 3.1 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Pat Reilly FROM: Randy Woole~ SUBJECT: Dartmouth Street April 21, 1993 Here is additional information on asphalt and concrete pavements, as requested by the City Council. We are prepared to construct either alternative. Farmington Road and 185th Avenue were cited as locations where other jurisdictions had chosen concrete pavement. On Farmington, City of Beaverton reports that they bid alternate pavements, just as we did on Dartmouth, and received lower construction bids for concrete. The Farmington project was bid at a time when asphalt prices were higher. In choosing concrete for the 185th project, the County based its decision on life-cycle costs. We have requested more information on the assumptions made in computing life-cycle costs but do not yet have this information. Pavements are designed based on the number of vehicles that will pass over the pavement during the design life of the pavement. The intent with Dartmouth was to design and bid alternate pavements based on the same assumptions about the vehicle loadings during the design life. As explained in the attached memo, in reviewing the original design information we find that an error had been made when the consultant prepared the design drawings. The asphalt pavement should have a thicker gravel base than shown. Once this correction is made, the difference between asphalt and concrete pavement is reduced. The concrete pavement costs $30,000 more than asphalt in initial construction. This is about 10% of the pavement cost. Should the City spend an additional $30,000 now to reduce long-term maintenance costs? The answer is not clear. If traffic forecasts prove accurate and if long-term planning for the area does not lead to revisions of the Dartmouth alignment, then the City would likely save more than $30,000 in maintenance costs during the next 15 to 20 years. If traffic does not develop as rapidly as forecast, then it would take longer to realize the maintenance savings. If changes to the transportation system plan lead to revisions in the alignment, then the maintenance savings would never occur for those portions of the road that are realigned. If the decision is made to spend the additional $30,000 now for concrete pavement, the additional funds would need to be provided by the City. The most likely source of funding would be the streets capital improvement fund. Some other project would need to be deferred. The decision then is whether the City is better served- by deferring a current project need to possibly reduce future maintenance costs or by completing more projects now to reduce current and future maintenance costs on the projects. When the apparent difference between asphalt and concrete appeared to be around $70,000, I felt that the cost was not justified. Now that it appears that the difference is only $30,000, the decision is not so clear. If the $30,000 is to come from the funding from pavement major maintenance, then I would not find that a good trade-off; from the life-cycle standpoint, the funds would be better used to protect existing pavements. If the $30,000 is to come from deferring safety and capacity improvements, then the decision is not so clear. It is hard to put a value on safety improvements, especially when they are often based on the desire to reduce the potential for accidents rather than on an actual accident experience. Perhaps this is the policy issue that the Council will want to discuss. Neither asphalt or concrete is inherently superior. Both require regular maintenance. Concrete typically lasts longer before major maintenance is required. Concrete works better for nighttime illumination and some people prefer its appearance. Asphalt has a better ride and is easier to repair when it is necessary to cut the pavement for utility work. Asphalt repairs can typically be done with less traffic disruption than concrete repairs. rw/dart-pvt MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD April 20, 1993 TO: Randy Wooley*'~ FROM: Gary Alfson SUBJEC T: Dartmouth Street Pavement Alternative Bids for Asphaltic Concrete (AC) and Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavements were obtained for Dartmouth Street. The structural strength and the life cycle cost of the two pavements must be equal in order to compare the two to determine the most cost effective alternative. The pavement section designed in 1986 recommended an AC section of 7" of asphalt on 12" of baserock and a PCC section of 63'z" of PCC on 4" of baserock. The AC section was modified by the Consultant Engineer, reducing the asphalt thickness to 511. The baserock should have been increased by 4" to compensate for the reduced asphalt section but was not. Therefore an additional 4" of baserock must be added to the AC section in order to make it equivalent to the PCC section. The contractor has provided a cost of $37,840 to furnish and place the additional 4" of baserock for the AC pavement. The PCC pavement alternate included short sections of AC pavement also, therefore an additional cost of $5,940 must be included in the PCC pavement cost. The total cost of the AC pavement is now $277,040 and the PCC pavement is 306,590. The PCC pavement will cost $29,550 more to construct. A life cycle cost comparison is not as easy to compare as the initial cost of construction. The general rule of thumb is that PCC pavements will last twice as long as AC pavements before major maintenance is required. After 15 to 20 years AC pavements should be overlayed, and after 30 to 35 years the surface should be ground back down and fabric placed prior to the second overlay. After 40 to 45 years PCC pavement should be repaired, which typically involves reconstructing portions of the pavement and crack sealing. In todays dollars this roughly amounts to $55,000 at 15 to 20 years and $120,000 at 30 to 35 years for the AC pavement, and $110,000 for PCC pavements at 40 to 45 years. Based on this analysis the PCC pavement would be the least expensive after the first AC major maintenance in 15 to 20 years. Other factors to consider are that AC pavements ride better and are easier to maintain for utility trenching and patching. PCC pavements are easier to illuminate at night and do not wear as rapidly. The traffic level on Dartmouth is expected to be 10 - 15,000 ADT at build-out, similar to current traffic levels on Durham Road. 185th Avenue, a PCC pavement built by Wash Co. has an ADT of 20,000+. The City of Beaverton typically constructs PCC pavements on their Major Collector streets. They have found that, as the traffic volumes increase, the cost of the required pavement section for AC is equal to and sometimes 'exceeds the cost for PCC as was the case with Farmington Road when it was built a few years ago. I recommend that we construct PCC pavement for the Dartmouth Street project with the additional extra cost of $29,550 to be paid by the city. l COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM AGENDA OF: ISSUE/AGENDA T CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 1 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY 0-7) /qq 3 DATE SUBMITTED: r.,. nnT mrancnn-r+atlon PREVIOUS ACTION: systems mana emt--m. j PREPARED BY: Caro A n sm DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK_ _REQUESTED BY: 99W_Task _Force/CD Should the City request that the Oreg Department of Transportation (ODOT) fund 80% of a 99W transportation sys ems management study to improve the efficient use of the existing roadway, as recommended by the 99W Task Force. The City would offer to pay the remaining 20%. ODOT has not offered any funding for the study. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff supports the 99W Task Force recommendation. INFORMATION SUKKARY The 99W Task Force has been working with ODOT for well over a year to determine improvements to 99W that will not seriously damage businesses in that corridor. One project to improve the Hall St./99W intersection has been identified. The task force believes that now the State and Tigard should take a comprehensive look at 99W to determine ways to improve the corridor in Tigard and to increase its efficiency without expanding it. This can be accomplished through such techniques as access management, lane stripping and pedestrian and bikeway improvements. Because this study will benefit the State and Tigard, the task force has recommended that the city be an active partner in the study by funding 20% of its cost. ODOT staff have declined to participate in the study because they believe it should be done after other regional studies, such as the Western Bypass, are completed. The task forced believes, however, that because these the soon improvements proposed use of what is presently there, improving this study can and should be done as the as possible. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 1) Not request funding for the study. 2) Request 100% funding. - FISCAL NOTES The study will cost about $75,000. If the City pays 20%, its share is $15,000. April 27, 1993 Mayor Jerry Edwards Bruce Warner Region 1 Manager ODOT - Region 1 Office 9002 SE McLoughlin Blvd. Milwaukie, OR 97222 Dear Mr. Warner: City Council Judy Fessler Wendl Conover Hawley Paul Hunt John Schwartz The City of Tigard asks Oregon Department of Transportation to become a partner with the City in studying ways to improve the 99W corridor in Tigard. The City requests ODOT fund 80% of a $75,000 99W transportation systems management study; the City would pay the remaining 20%. The attached scope of work outlines this study which will identify ways to improve the efficiency of the existing roadway without expanding it. Because this is not a demand based study, but one that looks at ways to improve efficient use of an existing facility, improvements will be evaluated in terms of costs and benefits. This is a timely study. No matter what other improvements will ultimately be made on 99W we will, of course, want first to insure that it is operating at the maximum efficiency possible within the framework of state and local goals. We look forward to hearing from you regarding this study and working with you to resolve transportation problems on 99W. Enclosure Pn/mayortsr.99w 4/16/93 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 99W TSM IMPROVEMENT SCOPE OF WORK Ah 1rpose: To identify problem areas and points of conflicts on 99W and determine a package of actions and willlljbe re atively low cost, e existing capacity more ee undermining and will not add new paavementjects Study Area: 99W in Tigard. Background: 99W is a major arterial connecting Portland and communities to the southwest; it moves large amounts of commuter and recreational traffic. it is also a major commercial district with many types of busy activities that attract trips, conflicting turns and congestion. The regional transportation plan identified the need for improvements to 99W in Tigard. ODOT has conducted studies of this corridor. The results of the western bypass study will affect traffic on 99W as will the proposed Barbur LRT study. Whatever the results of these studies, mobility and safety need to be improved on 99W. This study will identify low cost interim improvements that will be a part of whatever other improvements other studies recommend. Study: This study will review existing conditions and identify points of conflict, accident locations, and unsatisfactory service levels. It will explore a range of low cost actions and projects to improve mobility, safety and access on 99W and evaluate their costs and benefits. It will involve and inform the business community and general public and build a consensus for a series of road improvements. options considered in study: Access management techniques such as consolidating driveways, closing off non essential driveways and streets, adding frontage roads and medians. Transportation systems management improvements such as modifications to signal system or lane stripping patterns, adding turn lanes. Pedestrian and bike safety improvements including installation of sidewalks and improved pedestrian crossings, better connections from commercial centers to streets, transit stops, neighborhoods and other commercial centers. Transit improvements including pullouts, shelters and park and ride lots. Improved signs to reduce driver confusion and lost second lane switching. Improvements to the aesthetic quality of the street particularty where needed to reduce driver confusion or where other traffic improvements are proposed. Study methodology: Set goals and decision criteria. Gather and review all existing studies and information; create database and maps. Create a public information program. Review existing conditions. Identify trouble areas. Identify range of possible improvements. Evaluate the possible Improvements in terms of mobility, safety, economic development, and f aesthetic impact. 1 Determine costs and benefits. Develop a package of improvements and implementation techniques. Hold public hearings. Adopt a plan. PGJWWSCO'x Mr l COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3. 3 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 27, 1993 DATE SUBMITTED:April 15. 1993 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Surface Water PREVIOUS ACTION: June, 1990 MC111Q =A1=11 v 1--. - - ZLIJL PREPARED BY : DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OX REQUESTED BY: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL PJR Should the Surface Water Management (SWM) responsibilities, divided between USA and the City of Tigard, be redefined? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the-attached _resolution. ---~-INFORMATION SUNIIrtARY Since inception of the SWM program, USA has been responsible for certain activities within each Washington County city, including Tigard. The SWM fee has been shared in accord with the distribution of responsibilities. The level of responsibilities is supposedly the same for each of the seven cities which conduct their own program. In reality, however, there are disparities among the cities due to local circumstances associated with the original agreement. The seven cities and USA have discussed this division of responsibilities and fees concluding that a redefinition is in order. These discussions have been prompted by the disparities among cities, inefficiencies in the current system and confusion over who does what. Further, experience has shown the difficulty in segmenting SWM activities between cities and USA. The problems, it is believed, could be eliminated by assigning to the cities the responsibility for 100% of SWM maintenance, with the exceptions of regional facilities and State highway and road facilities. There would be a redistribution of revenue to cities to cover the added costs. In any event, the City is not liable to spend more on SWM responsibilities than SWM revenues received. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 1. Maintain current distribution of revenues and responsibilities. 2. Redefine SWM, making USA responsible for the program in its entirety. FISCAL NOTES Additional expenditures would be covered by the 12% increase in the city's share of the SWM, from $2 to $2.24. There is no requirement that the city spend more on SWM than it receives in revenue. h:\login\cathy\swm.cc 3 Council Agenda Item CITY OF TIGARDt OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 4/27/93 DATE SUBMITTED: 4/5/93 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: State Marine PREVIOUS ACTION: none Board Facility Grant PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Ed Murphy. CD Dir. ISSU BEFORE THE COUNCIL To authorize th submittal of an application for State Marine Board Facility Grant Funds STAFF RECOMMENDATION To authorize submittal of the application INFORMATION SUMMARY The Oregon State Marine Board Facility Grant Program provides funding assistance to local jurisdictions and state agencies in constructing and improving public recreation boating facilities on all water bodies of the state. The City seeks Marine Board grant funds to replace the Cook Park floating dock and gangway to access the dock. Technical assistance in designing the proposed improvements was provided by Marine Board staff, who inspected the facilities last year at the City's request. The attached memo summarizes the grant request. Copies of the full application are available with City recorder's office. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 1.) authorize as recommended 2.) do not authorize submittal of the grant application FISCAL NOTES The amount requested is $13,012. To meet the 25% local match requirement, a $4,338 City contribution is proposed. This amount is within the $6,500 for dock/gangway improvements included in the proposed 1993-94 City budget. The project proposed in the budget was for upgrading the existing facilities, with railings, bumber guards, transition plates, and a landing at the end of the gangway. If awarded, the grant would be used to completely replace the old dock/gangway with a new dock/gangway. In addition to this state program, the project concurrently is eligible for funds from a federal program, called the US Fish and Wildlife Wallop/Breaux Fund. Staff proposes to request the $4,338 amount from this source. No local cash would be required if both the marine Board and US Fish Wildlife Department awarded funds. The City previously has received awards from both programs for Riverfront improvements. DR/Dock April 16, 1993 f MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Patrick Reilly FROM: Edward Murp DATE: April 16, "V SUBJECT: Application for Marine Board Grant At the City's request, State Marine Board technical staff have inspected the Cook Park floating dock and gangway to access the dock. They have identified various safety and access problems with these facilities. The option they recommend to correct these problems is to completely replace the existing structures at an estimated cost of $17,350. The State Marine Board currently is accepting applications for funding assistance for improvements to public boating facilities. The proposed dock/gangway work potentially is eligible for funding from this program. The match requirement for the project would be 25%, or $4,338. Because either local or federal funds can be used to meet this match requirement, staff proposes to request the $4,338 amount from the US Fish and Wallop/Breaux Fund. The City previously has received awards from both programs for Riverfront capital projects. If awarded, the grant funds would be used to replace the existing 15-year old dock with a new dock that would be 50% larger than the existing structure. The existing wooden gangway would be replaced with a handicapped accessible aluminum gangway. According to Marine Board staff, the new facilities would be 100% more accessible than the existing facilities and would reduce substantially the City's potential liability under ADA standards. e APPMMIX C J 0952hr OREGON STATE MARINE BOAR C02 Q V FACILITY GRANT APPLICATION Office Use Only Approval Status Project Number Date Received Body of Water Requested $ Awarded Grant Sign Installed Date Awarded Biennium Date: TOTAL $ __XX Rehabilitation Replacement Acquisition Development 2. County 1. Project Name Washington Cock Paris Floating Dock 4 3. Government official responsible . Name of o and specific Address location o off project- Name, TmIatin River Duane Paberts . • (look Park Riverbront City of Tigard 13125 SST gall B mAevard Tigard, cR 97223 3a.Phone Number 50:3 63t?-4172 5. Brief description of project (indicate size of site in acres, scope and purpose of project, type and number of boats served, etc.). The project involves safety and handicapped access improvements to an existing boarding float and gangway to access the float. As estimated 60 motorized boats per month use the dock. 6. Type of applicant A City County Park Dist. Port Dist. State Agency other 7. a. Grant funds requested: L ia,012 00 b. Hatching funds (source)- Applicant 50.00 Fish & Wildlife $ 4,338-;00 U .S. Wallop/Brew= or City Total Project Cost # X7,700-00 C-1 8. Type of application: 1 New grant Xx Continuation of Project 9. Classification of site: Rural Community/Town XX Metropolitan/Regional other 10. List prior Marine Board Facility Grants for this location. Grant No. Year Amount 5 _ 3 $ 1211 .OA 11. Status of land Brief Description: lmmmyements to boat a-cce= sit m-, XX Fee simple title by applicant Less than fee (specify): Acquisition intended (attach description of property and cost appraisal). 12. ~ Justification for the project f 5 a. Describe the need for project, area served, present deficiencies in boating facilities, etc. The tie-up dock/gangway serving the Cook Park boat ramp has been inspected by State Marine Board technical staff. The inspection identified the need for certain safety and access improvements. Among other items these include widening the dock and installing a railing. The Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan identifies the need ZO or an The additional Park boat is ramps in Washington County by the year centrally located and serves people living on the west side of the Portland metropolitan area. b. Describe the relationship of the project to nearby existing public and and private marine facilities. The Cook Park boat launch served by the tie-up dock is one of only two boat access points located on the 2S-mile long valley floor reach of the Tualatin River. The other site is located in the City of Tualatin approximately one mile upstream and on the opposite side of the river from the Cook Park site. The Tualatin site includes a single-lane ramp and eight car-trailer parking stalls. There are no nearby private access sites. C-2 13? Indicate the kinds of users who will benefit from the project: The proposed movements wall benefit outdoor motoscboat users who wish to use the Cook Park boat launch. By improving access to boating activities, the Project will open up new boating opportunities to the handicapped. ;1-4~ What will be the estimated use of the facility once it is completed and in operation? (Indicate user days or some comparable estimate of use; i.e., launches/day.) Because of a lack of data, it is difficult to develop a figure for estimated use of the float and gangway. Assuming improved water-duality coxnditions, it is estimated that 20-30 people per day will use the float and gangway- 4- 15. Check the facilities to be constructed or rehabilitated. Concrete Ramp Asphalt Ramp Plank Ramp _2M_ Boarding Floats Transient Moorage x_ Gangway Other (specify) Access Road Asphalt Parking Gravel Parking Ski Float Breakwater, Rip Rap Piling Vault Toilets Flush Restroom Sanitary Pump Out Utilities Debris Boom Dredging 16. Construction Duration 30 days a. Est. Starting b. Est. Completion How many? 1/. will progress payments ne neeaea? C-3 X18. a. Is the facility in the MAP program? J --29L Yes No #278 18. b. Estimated annual maintenance costs: $ 500.00 19. Who will maintain the facility? City of Tigard Operations Division- 20. a. Is there a fee charged for use of facility? Yes XX No 20. b. If yes, is fee collected for: Launch Ramp $ Parking $ Day Use Entry $ Annual Amount $ 21. Relationship with comprehensive plan: a. Is the project consistent with the local comprehensive land use plan for the area or region? XX Yes No If No, explain: L b. What plan(s) cover this project? The project is identified in the Cook Park Master Plan and the Tigard Park Plan. 22. Indicate any permit(s) required to carry out the project: Type of Permit Applied for Approval received a. NO Permits required- b. C. d. C-4 23. Cost Estimate Summary Note: Provide in Item E Required Attachments a detailed cost breakdown, ( quantities, unit prices, etc. to substantiate cost estimate summary below. PROJECT BUDGET Cost Classifications Applicant Other** Board Total 1. Administrative Expenses $ 350.00 $ $ * $ 350.00 2. Purchase or lease of land, structures, and right of way $ $ $ $ 3. Architectural or engineering fees $ $ $ $ 4. Project inspections and permits $ $ $ * $ 5. Project construction contract or items 6-12 $ $ 4,338.00 $ 13,012.00 $ 17,350.00 J 6. Demolition and removal $ $ $ $ 7. Site preparation $ $ $ $ S. Materials $ $ $ $ 9. Equipment $ $ $ $ 10. Labor $ $ $ $ 11. Landscaping $ $ $ $ 12. Signs $ $ $ $ 13. Contingency (max. l0$ * of item 5 or 6-12) $ $ $ $ TOTALS $ $ 4,338.00 $ 13,012.00 $ 17,700.00 An asterisk denotes these costs are ineligible for Board grant funds. Specify source of other funds below: US Fish & Wildlife wallop/Breaux or City $ 4,338.00 C-5 Applicant Assurances The applicant possesses legal authority to make this proposal; that a resolution, motion, or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body, authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application, and to provide such additional information as may be required. The applicant further agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal laws in conjunction with this proposal, and agrees to adhere to all Agency program rules and requirements. L Signature Rdaard Murphy Typed Name Date Community Development Director Title * A City Council motion authorizing the f"j-ng of the application is scheduled for April 27, 1993- Revised 10/90 C-6 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS xc A. ]x B. X% C. x D. xL- E. lx_ F. xx G. WA H. xx I. 3m_ J Location Map vicinity map Site Plan Preliminary Plans* Detailed Cost Breakdown* Photographs Resolution (expected April V, 1993) Third Party Agreements Zoning Certification Environmental Assessment Report pr~~ ~1^y Plans and Detailed Cost Breakdown are provided by the Ma_rim Board Boating programs technical staff. NOTE: Instruction and further information regarding this application form can be found in the Marine Board Boating Facility Grant Procedure Guide or you may contact the Facilities Manager, State Marine Board, 435 Commercial St. NE, Salem, OR 97310. Telephone (503) 373-1405 Ext. 252 * Preliminary Plana and Detailed Coat Breakdown to be Provided by Marine Board Boating Progam tecbnical staff. C-7 a Ask 4 LOCATK- . MAP OREGON V a f Z r I~•uwuntw + (V ' I C n.ll lld ~ ' f 1 Y I W t~ , 4nauuwrUll`.-~ y./\ IIUUD I '•~'l I I-'~-V M A T I L L AI W A L L u W A 1.11• •i .1• 1/ •~IIIIIY° \O uut~M 4.1 A, 11 1.~IIV[M It ( J' l °I.IltMlu 1 I.... _ ueo tN r . jl1 I ,vw1J-I O`ry~t,I IMO RN...Oi.W a O N U N 1 p 4 I' i9 J~ HF.RMAHr I Y M ; ('C LA C K A M A SC l1 U ~-f~ l C•)W A 0 cO '-fin-w, l ---.i.--_• POa~.Ilo ..lt S.ltM 0 A H E R U .t.wl t) o~ iW H E E L E R' C, Z j z`~~r ~ L 1 N N I J E F F 41ER j SLDI-~ i a R A H 9' - eammcm 1L c R o o R I 1 J I J.i ^ L A N E j 0 t S C 11 u-f L 1.4 A L H E U P. r; I•I D 0 U C L A S ' ( ll Oc". It / ( rI H A R T: E Y I L ~A K E: O' j I< L A IA T 11 ~ I I V 6 0 :e 4 4 VICINITY MAP a.eu' ~ `mac • •-t Lj -7 i Y"' ~e t ' 4 NCO / ~ ' , ~Y 1 • ` as I ti • 4 ~ s. •r t I sw ~ ~ I-T L-1 n7 b L W. 1 1 i TIGARD HIGH 1 SCHOOL USA TREATMENT r PLANT 1 I /I ' 1. . -i - i , COOK ' PARK 1 7, i , !i/ • TUALATIN COUNTR `-«..'IL:-.s. rs=~~v~,. c•-~iT-•J-1 CLUB MN i ,N DUI April 5, 1993 Oregon State Marine Board 3000 Market St. NE, #505 Salem, Oregon 97310 REFERENCE: Cook Park Facility Grant Application Dear Sirs: This is to verify that the improvements proposed to the Cook Park floating dock and gangway are consistent with the zoning of the land upon which these facilities are sited. Cook Park is zoned for single family residential development, and boating facilities are an allowed used within this zone. Sincerely, Dick Bewersdorff Senior Planner 13125 SW Half Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 l Attachment J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Project Naive Cook Park Floating Dock Indicate the possible effects of construction and facility operation on the site and adjacent area. Use supplemental sheets if necessary. 1. Will the project effect water quality? yes* no XX 2. Will the project effect air quality? yes* no XX 3. Will the project effect wildlife or fish? yes* no XX 4. Will the project effect land use? yes* no XX 5. Will the project result in additional long term noise? yes* no XX 6. Will the project result in safety or law enforcement impacts? yes* no XX 7. Will the project result in recreational use conflicts? yes* no XX 8. Will the project be susceptible to environmental hazard? yes* no XX 9. Are overhead utilities located at the facility that would pose a hazard to people or tall boat masts? yes* no_ML 10. Will the project effect any known archaeologic or historic resources? yes* no_2g- 11. Will the project impact wetlands? yes* no_M_ 12. Will this proposal necessitate an environmental impact assessment investigation of the site? yes* no_= *NOTE: Please elaborate on a separate sheet the extent of the effect(s) to any question identified yes. C-8 C COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3.5- CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 27, 1993 DATE SUBMITTED: April 15, 1993 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Dis osal of PREVIOUS ACTION: sur lus property purchased for th Gaarde Street ro'ect PREPARED BY: Gary Alfson DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Shall the City Council offer for sale three substandard undeveloped properties acquired for the Gaarde Street Realignment project, set minimum bids for the sale of each parcel and proceed with the sale according to Tigard Municipal Code Ch. 3.44.010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the attached resolution, Authorizing the City Aministrator to offer for sale to the highest bidder each of the three properties at or above the minimum bid of $2,000, $1,300, and $900 for parcels 7,8 and 13 respectively. Also authorize the City Administrator to complete the sale for any bid at or above the minimum bid. INFORMATION SUMMARY The surplus properties are the remnants of three parcels purchased for the Gaarde Street realignment project. The portions necessary for the right-of- way have been retained and the adjacent property owners have expressed an interest in purchasing the surplus property. The appraiser who provided the appraisal to purchase the properties has been consulted to determined the minimum value of the surplus properties. The parcels qualify as 'substandard undeveloped' property because they are smaller than the minimun buildable size for the zone they are located. TMC 3.44.010 does not require a public hearing for disposing of substandard undeveloped parcels. Adjoining property owners will be notified of the proposal in accordance with TMC 3.44.010. We see no need of the properties for Public use. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES FISCAL NOTES The funds generated from the sale of the properties shall be credited to the Major Streets Bond fund. ga/ss-surpp.gar SURPLUS PROPERTY a r 0 vi McDONALD STREET P G~ QP C' GAARDE STREET REALIGNMENT NEW GAARDE ST. COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3.(V CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 27, 1993 DATE SUBMITTED: April 15, 1993 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorize the PREVIOUS ACTION: March 16 approving issuance of refunding bonds Series: submittal of 121an to state. 1993 / PREPARED BY: Wayne Lowry DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OKI Z,111 REQUESTED BY: Shall the City Council authorize the inance Director and City Administrator to take certain actions to issue refunding bonds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the attached resolution granting sufficient authority to issue refunding bonds. INFORMATION SUMMARY Due to the decline in tax exempt interest rates it appears to be advantageous to the City to refinance certain portions of existing outstanding debt. Resolution 93-09 adopted on 3/16/93 authorized the staff to submit an advance refunding plan to the state and to engage certain experts to begin the process of preparing for a refunding sale. Dain Bosworth, an investment banking firm, has been selected as underwriter for the bond issue. We are presently working with Public Financial Management, our financial advisors, on the draft official statement that will be used to market the bonds. The next step is to begin the process of marketing the proposed bond issue. In order to proceed, the Council must authorize staff to structure the issue, prepare and distribute the official statement, negotiate the terms of the issue and undertake a variety of other actions common to the sale of bonds. The attached resolution grants the necessary authority to the Finance Director and the City Administrator to take the necessary steps to accomplish the sale. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES * Approve the attached resolution * Do nothing. FISCAL NOTES Approval of the attached resolution allowing the refinancing of certain City debt is projected to result in net savings of $260,000 over the life of the bonds. l l COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 4/27/93 DATE SUBMITTED: 4/9/93 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: 121st Avenue PREVIOUS ACTION: Bikeway Funding Agreement PREPARED BY: Gary Alfson DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Shall the City accept funding STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the attached resolution. on 121st Avenue. INFORMATION SUMMARY We have been successful in obtaining State Bikeway Funding to construct shoulder bikeway improvements along both sides of 121st from Scholls Ferry Road to Walnut Street. This project qualified for the funding because it is an important segment for regional bike routes and benefits the safety of school children for Mary S. Woodward and Fowler schools. The estimated total cost is $65,000. The State provides for 80% of the total cost up to $50,000. If the Council approves of this agreement, it is necessary to approve a resolution authorizing execution of the attached agreement. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES FISCAL NOTES The City will need to provide approximately $15,000 matching funds from the City's CIP fund (to be budgeted in FY 93/94). ga/e5-1219t.res COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM _J CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 27, 1993 DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Western Bypass PREVIOUS ACTION: Alternatives endorsement for fu_r11A TI/ DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN PREPARED BY: City Engineer REQUESTED BY: 1JJU1J arjr L/jdJ 111JJ v Endorsement of the five alternatives selected by Metro for further study in the Western Bypass Study. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the attached resolution endorsing the alternatives for further study. INFORMATION SUMMARY Metro, An IGA (intergovernmental agreement) was adopted in 1991 by ODOT, Washington County and the eight cities of the Western Bypass Study area. Under the IGA, all the parties to the IGA must formally review certain decisions before the study can move forward. We are at one of those review f points. Following two years of work with their consultants and advisory committees, ODOT has identified five alternatives which they have recommended for more aft processa he MetrooCouncil haslendodrs d thevfivemalternat vets forafurther P study. Attached is a copy of the Metro resolution, including a summary of the five alternatives. ODOT staff will be available at the April 27th City uncil meeting to provide additional information and answer any questions the Council may have. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES under commended by Metro foryfurther tmust e study. Under the IGA reject the h city must alternatives take action by May 24, 1993. Adoption of the attached resolution endorses the Metro recommendations. To reject the Metro recommendations, it would be necessary to prepare a different resolution explaining the reasons for rejection. FISCAL NOTES No City funding is involved in this study, other than staff time to ( participate in advisory committee activities. CA la-~ ~'3 X- - L4 Western Bypass Study Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 SE McLoughlin Blvd. Milwaukie, OR 97222 -r BULK RATE s I`~ Q U.S. POSTAGE • PAID PERMIT NO. 2925 ~ PORTLAND, OR 97222 VV , R:N P.N.S S S U DY Oregon Department of Transportation ® O January 1993 The Oregon Department of Transportation is investigating how a bypass (new highway from 1-5 to Hwy. 26) or alternatives to a bypass would help reduce north-south and circumferential travel congestion in southeast Washington County. Five alternatives have been identified. The next step in the study is to analyze how these alternatives would impact neighbor- hoods, the environment, economics, land use, and other important factors through what's known as a "Draft Environ- mental Impact Statement. " a Next Step; Environmental Analysis Flow would the five Western Bypass Study alterna- tives affect the environment and community? That's what we'll find out over the next year as we complete the next step of the Western Bypass Study - prepa- ration of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS). We've identified and studied how each alternative might improve travel. Now, technical experts will evaluate how each alternative would affect the natural environment, neighborhoods, economics and land use. When this information is complete - about one year from now - decision-makers will have a full analysis of the impacts as a basis for their selection of an alternative. Five Alternatives To Be Analyzes In our June 1992 news!etter and at three' open houses, we described four alternatives.' Since that time, three of those alternatives have been 'modified and one alternative has been added. The Western Bypass Study Advisory Committees and Metro have now approved five distinct alternatives (describLd inside) for further study in a Draft Environmental Impact Statement: NO-BUl TrarmportationSystem Wnag nt/PlannedProjesc;ts Airte, ial Expansion/High Occupancy VehMe Express .Bypass Land Use, Transportation and Air Quality (LUTRAQ) More detail on the schedule, decision-making process and Draft Environ- mentai Impact Statement is included on the hack page. ® 49 The Alternatives Over the next year, the Western Bypass Study technical team will be analyzing the environmental impacts (natural, community, neighborhood, economic and other) of five alternatives for improving north-south and circum- ferential travel in the study area. The alternatives differ in their approach and use of roadway and transit solu- tions, and one alternative focuses on land use changes. Briefly, the No-Build Alternative is considered a "no action" alternative for the study, including only those roadway and transit improvements that already have funding. The remaining four alternatives are called "Build" alternatives, because they entail building im- provements beyond those in the No-Build. Forecast For Year 209 . By the year2010, population in the study area is expected to grow by 60-0/a (about 148,000 more people) and employment is expected to grow by 73% (about 100, 000). Accordingly, there will be a 66°% increase in the number of teflcle trips to 1. t million per day- No No-Build Alternative BUILD The No-Build Altemative was defined early in the study process and includes the roadway and transit systems that are in place now, plus the planned improvements that already have commit- ted funding. Defining and analyzing this alterna- tive helps us understand what would happen if none of the "build" alternatives were implemented. The No-Build includes already-funded improve- ments such as: • Westside Light Rail to 185th Avenue. • Expanding "feeder" bus service to support light rail. • A variety of already funded roadway improvements. Page 2 Transportation System o Management (TSM) / P0.06RAMS Planner! Projects •Dlala•R( L Alternative r+ur,., tMchl This alternative tries to make the best use of existing roadways and transit services, and what- ever planned improvements are being actively pursued by local, state and regional agencies. This may sound similar to the Rio-Build Alternative, but the difference is that these planned projects do not yet have approved funding. It's likely they'll be in place by 2010, but not guaranteed. This alterna- tive includes two sets of elements. Planned Projects include: • Extending Westside Light Rail to Hillsboro. • Expanding Hwy. 217 to three lanes in each direction. • Extending Beef Bend Road to Elsner Road. • Extending Murray Blvd. to Hwy. 99W (one lane in each direction, plus a center left-turn lane). • Improving various intersections. Transportation System Management elements include: • Adding express bus service on Hwy. 217. • Expanding feeder bus service. • Transportation Demand Management Program - Parking charges to discourage automobile use and free bus passes to encour- age transit use. • Demand Responsive Transit Program - "Dial-a-Ride" bus service for areas not conve- niently served by regular bus service. • All projects in the No-Build Alternative. l Page 3 FLU, cfXrwL 1 A Arterlal CR- it1-1SIV111 eN~~ 1 High Occupancy ` Vehicle Express C= Alternative Although the name is a mouthful, the general concept behind this alternative is easier to under- stand. That concept is to expand and extend existing roads in the urban area and add transit service. This alternative can be broken into three categories: The arterial expansion elements would expand or connect some of the existing unconnected north-south and circumferential roadways and add capacity to roadways that are highly congested. These elements include: • Expanding Hwy. 217 to four lanes in each direction. • Extending Murray Blvd. beyond Old Scholls Ferry Rd. to 1-5 at a location between Bonita Rd. and Carman Dr. • Building a new expressway from 1-5 to Hwy. 99W in the Tualatin-Sherwood area. • Expanding Hwy. 99W to six lanes from Bull Mtn. Rd. to 1-5. The express elements would address longer distance travel on Hwy. 217 by: Making one lane in each direction on Hwy. 217 an "express" lane, for longer distance travel. Limiting entrances and exits to this lane to: 1) 1-5 and Hwy. 99W for northbound traffic, and 2) Hwy. 26 and Canyon Rd. for southbound traffic. The high occupancy vehicle (HOV) elements focus on increasing opportunities for people to carpool or ride buses (both are HOV's) by: • Giving buses, carpools and other HOV's "preferred access" at Hwy. 217 on-ramps. This alternative also includes all projects and programs in the No-Build and TSM Alternatives. Page 4 tsypass K, N Hwy Alternative A The Bypass Alternative focuses primarily on building ti.. . a new highway between 1-5 and Hwy. 26, beginning in r 't the Tualatin area and ending at the Cornelius Pass or 185th Avenue interchange with Hwy. 26. The alterna- tive also includes several transit service improve- ments. Specific elements of this alternative include: • Building a new four-lane, limited access highway from 1-5 to Hwy. 26.f~ • Giving transit and HOV's preferred access on Hwy. sZ ice- J 217 ramps. • Expanding Hwy. 99W to six lanes from Bull Mtn. r Rd. to 1-5. This alternative also includes all projects and programs in the No-Build and TSM Alternatives. Legend-, raw •p .a,w, ..1w \ T _ LUTRAQ N Alternative a ` -o LU I HAO -"making the land use, . transportation and air quality ii connection" - was developed by 1000 Friends of Oregon • „ to evaluate if relocating land uses, supported by an •f a; y , expanded transit system, would result in a viable alterna- W6- .4ij?o, tive. This alternative has two main components. ? The land use component proposes "transit oriented° I' L! developments" that mix commercial, retail and residential r land uses near transit lines/light rail stations. This - c• alternative assumes the same population and employ _ ;i ~•.w' - ment projections as the other build alternatives, but relocates higher density near transit. The transportation component includes: • Westside Lt. Rail (to Hillsboro). • Hwy. 217 Lt. Rail (Beaverton to Tualatin) and an exten- sion (Tualatin to Lake Oswego). • Barbur Blvd. Lt. Rail (Tigard to Portland). • Expanding Hwys. 217 and 26 to three lanes in each direction. • Expanding Farmington Rd. to two lanes each direction. • Transportation Demand Management. • Demand Responsive Transit. • All projects in the No-Build Alternative. Legend. :ih a r f `r Page 5 What Is A Draft Environmental Impact Statement? A Draft EIS analyzes and compares the impacts of all the alternatives. Those impacts include: socioeco- nomic, noise, land use, water resources, transportation, energy, soils, geology, historical and cultural resources, hazardous materials, utilities, vegetation, wetlands, wildlife, visual quality, and air quality. Technical staff will spend about one year collecting and analyzing relevant information and writing summary reports for the Draft EIS. After the Draft EIS is completed, ODOT will hold a formal public hearing. Then Metro, Washington County and the involved cities will select a preferred alternative. That alternative could be one of the five alternatives described inside or a combination of alternatives. Whatever the alternative, ODOT will then prepare a final environmental impact statement on that alternative. Who Implements The Selected Alternative? Each alternative contains projects and programs that would be implemented by agencies or jurisdictions other than ODOT. That's why ODOT has stressed consensus among these entities at each major step in the study. After ODOT has completed the Final EIS on the selected alternative, the next step is for each agency, city and/or county to plan and implement the projects and programs under its responsibility. Summer 1994 present to the decision makers (the involved cities' Washington County and Metro) the Draft EIS results and a report on the public hearing. Summer 1995 Final EIS - ODOT will complete a Final EIS on the selected alternative. D® You Have A say? - - Yes, you do! Before a preferred alternative is selected, ODOT will hold an open house to present the results of the Draft EIS, then hold a formal public hearing. All public hearing testimony will be recorded, and along with responses from ODOT, will be documented in a "Hearing Study Report" that will be presented to the decision makers. You also can always call or write with your comments or questions at any time during the study. Call: Debie Garner, 235-5881 or Bill Ciz, 653-3240. Write: Bill Ciz Western Bypass Study Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 SE McLoughlin Milwaukie, CA 97222 April 27, 1993 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Re: Written testimony in regard to Western Bypass Alternatives. Dear members of Tigard City Council: My family has lived in this area since the early 1930s and I myself reside here still. I would like to testify both as a local person and as a professional urban and regional planner specializing in urban design. I would like to make a statement regarding my opposition to the Western Bypass. I will give my full support to the LUTRAQ alternative as well as any other suggestions that will promote community building and improvements in planning practice. Concepts like can LUTRAQ not only addresses transportation concerns but relate to a larger scope of concerns including building better communities. Today we have the opportunity to make a change in our approach to transportation and other physical planning. We know that sooner or later we will have to change our thinking and take a more balanced view and practice very long range proactive sustainable planning. We can make a commitment to preservation of community identity as well as revitalize our historic centers. LUTRAQ is just a start. I hope that you may become as interested as I in improving our understanding of community identity and problem solving for the future. All of us will have to act together to improve the practice of local government and planning. The day of the easy fix is over. A basic change in approach is called for. I am happy to work further with yo" regarding development of concrete planning and design processes and products. I have worked with other communities in developing a new generation of codes, regulations and specific projects. THANK YOU Sincerely David F. Wadley, MURP 6062 SW MEADOWS RD. LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97035 684-2086 i Ii L (6 1.9 !6 .72 67 _ 3? 6t . ' . lB ?9 6~ ?8 m AP m I6 76 .b~0 °-S9 5t3 373 97,5 189 59 ,L 6~ .n._ 7805 ~1. n, 4 p^i 1979 8 404 • 97. Y' rob 1) WEST SIDE BYPASS: 2010 P'll "TAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES - ~•.mum 96 <9 f f Yl5 17 0 ,lo ~ 1 x 1 811 0 a 00 37 . 0 __j1 0 0 b 0 1~ ~I g7 DSO •r6s"` G69 587 ~r~ R ~m 729 o day 313 I89 25U r• S7S SSB 777 7/J~ `n w° 1 11 - 41 06[9• ?206 - •1+•ISS, 1595 1B7 ~ o 1267 ~5/2 ~ 19 12 9 65 I24 ' ` UP SO 1O III 167 v, S W ib 1050 j58G 412 ` 369 IfB 1433 { i 1St9 k 822 ~ `87 3 I , 8 I 1? 716 ~ 0 1 1 0 ~y 1979 " r8 + 83 m-ry '.4 `j m a N1ti mo e ' 671 I k I 0 `~5 611 78 m 6 }~J2 610 ~ v 12! 0 _ 0 N 494 6A3 0 799 525 0 86 391 _ - 181 377 -_267 ' 2!2 ~2_~ i <75 ~ if•, ~ n 6 7087 Ij Wy' = 31,5 `b~ b' m 137 n 516 ' 179E '300 1 772 ' v. 1102 'rq3 61 1 ~ ~ J s ~J 0 D. ' 11 '6, O ~.1f 0 I 1 - l•0 ,e A 97 96 66 _ 507 ~Y' ^~1• ,00 b~~., 99 66 390 ~ w ~ i/•b L i 37 35 5 n ~o m 33. 18 i 3< 1C.-Y b~ Lti 2 WEST SIDE BYPASS WITHOUT B`- 4SS NORTH OF PACIFIC HWY 99W - It 71 ry ti O 0 Z 0 0 0 ~9,qS 0 O 00 0 0 0 a aGp a' NJ IN 99 i ! ti0 i nl„ 0 0 ~S 2- _12 0 i l 41 109 % Bp _ a~ 0 i 1 0 •6 _g3 151 yh,~` d,• SB ,t1 o ~ '409 .46 i om p o ~ 77 I^ m. (3) DIFFERENCE PLOT: TRAFFIC VOLUME ADDED OR SUBTRACTED DUE TO DELETION OF NORTH PORT! A OF BYPASS 4 a~ 0 00 ~O 0 , ~O O 6 0 5 !9 +n 0 g0 R 0 0 qy -109 r 0 - 0 3t W -60 22 16 0 0 1 o ,A~ 6 J 0 1~b P 0T• ~ ~0 -J -7 p 17 19 .1 7 oti 9 I ti 77 1 J 1 22 ~e 00 0 a o o ~V it ss 0 0 61 74 4 J ?R ° o o :a = ~ re..- e r 0 0 K - -16 20 22 it 21 0 0 0 ! -38 20 1 J 9 33 33 10 20 n 1 1 ' 3 ;ic o 10 fis m m~ ~•p Be OS• 31 37 36 3) o°. ,b~ 8 11 9 .39 ° 0 ~ X Y o COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 27 1993 DATE SUBMITTED: April 13, 1993 val on il n of ti id PREVIOUS ACTION: Counc appro ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: o era Recons rior decision for SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03 Aucrust 18, 1992; Appealed to LUBA by p uaestor'Mat ix Vista Point subdiy - applicants; Ci decision withdrawn. PREPARED BY; erry Offer . Planner sion ADMIN OK Murphy Ed REQUESTED BV: CDD DEPT HEAD O CITY _ _ Should the City Council modify its Auc}ust 18, 1993 decision for the proposed Vista Point subdivision with regard to 1) amount of developer-constructed improvements for the SW Gaarde Street extension; 2) reimbursement to the developer for construction of SW Gaarde and other public improvements; 3) dedication of open space; and 4) narrowing internal subdivision -streets? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached resolution and proposed revisions to the final order. INFORMATION SUMMARY After reviewing the Planning Commission's approval of the Vista Point subdivision at a public hearing on July 28, 1992, the City Council amended the Commission's decision to require the developer of the subdivision to extend and construct SW Gaarde Street to the northern edge of the property. The Council adopted Resolution No. 92-43 on August 18, 1993 adopting findings supporting that decision. The applicants appealed that decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals raising issues related to conditions of approval of the Council's decision which required the subdivision developer to construct an extension of SW Gaarde Street to the northern edge of the subject property, beyond the area proposed for residential development. The Council directed staff to meet with the applicants to attempt to reach an agreement can the disputed issues rather than having the issue determined by LUBA. Subsequent discussions with the applicants resulted in staff presenting a proposed agreement to the Council in executive session. Upon direction by the City Council, the City Attorney's office on March 1, 1993 filed a motion withdrawing the City's decision on this application and staff set up a hearing for reconsideration of the application. The City has until June 1, 1993 to issue an amended decision on this matter. Staff has drafted the attached recommended revisions to the August 18, 1993 resolution and final order corresponding to the recommended revisions listed above. Revisions are hicrhlicxhtcad. The preliminary plat map is also attached. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES r. 1. Approve the attached resolution and proposed revisions to the final order. r 2. Modify and adopt the resolution and proposed revisions to the final order. 3. Readopt the August 18, 1993 resolution and final order. FISCAL NOTES The City may incur some future expense for constructing the final 140 feet of SW Gaarde Street on this site, as well as additional expense for installing the second lift of asphalt on SW Gaarde Street in phase two of the subdivision. t RECEIVED PLANNING APR 2 6 1993 ~f,Gvl n f 'iZ~i~7 ✓~Y ~ ~ t ~44 a/"t ev. 1 Ic a 00 6 j3 C., 0 ~g(vd G~y c~.mG t qla/rl 3 Q~.~n~a j COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM AGENDA OF: ISSUE/AGENDA Domreis Pron, CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ril 27, 1993 n DATE SUBMITTED: April 15, 1993 TITLE: Disposal of PRE'vIOUS ACTION: DEPT HEAD OK McDonald Street" r/ PREPARED BY: Wayne Lowry CITY ADMIN OK. REQUESTED BY: _ ISSUE BEFOM THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council offer for sal a parcel of vacant land on McDonald street, set a minimum bid for the sa e of the parcel and proceed with the sale in accordance with TMC 3.44.015. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the attached resolution authorizing the sale, setting the minimum bid and directing staff to proceed with the sale. INFORMATION SUMMARY In the early 1980's both the Tigardville Heights Streets and the McDonald Street Sewer local improvement districts were completed in the area of this property. This property was assessed for its share of the costs of both improvements which at the time amounted to $25,763. The property owners apparently never made any payments on their assessments and the County foreclosed on the property in 1986 to collect delinquent taxes. For several years, we have been trying to obtain title to the property to satisfy our delinquent assessments. In February 1993, the County finally allowed the City to gain title by paying the back taxes which amounted to $1,100. Having clear title to the property, we now would like to sell it at a fair market price to satisfy as much of the assessment liens as possible and extinguish the balance. Including principal and interest, the total liens outstanding on the property amount to $51,850 as of April 27, 1993. The appraised value of the property according to a recent appraisal is $43,200. We recommend that the Council use this amount as the minimum bid. We see no City need to keep the property for City purposes and therefore recommend that the council, after holding the required hearing, authorize the sale of the property. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES •Approve sale of property and set minimum bid. *Retain property for public use. FISCAL NOTES The sale of the property will allow the City to recoup the original assessment of $25,763 and a significant portion of the accrued interest. ~A