The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 08/15/20001op16 iNp TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING AUGUST 15, 2000 COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT E TELEVISED iAadm\jolccpkt2.doc .V.. - Revised 8/9/00 PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead-time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639- 4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 95, 2000 - PAGE 1 w• • . AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING AUGUST 15, 2000 6:30 PM 1. WORKSHOP MEETING • Call to Order: Council President Moore • Pledge of Allegiance • Council Communications 8z Liaison Reports • Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items 6:35 PM 2. CONTINUATION OF INTERIM MAYOR INTERVIEWS Staff Report: Administration Department 9:00 PM 3. DISCUSS RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY MAINTENANCE • Staff Report: Public Works Department • Council Consideration: Council direction on the role of the City for right-of-way maintenance in locations that are the responsibility of adjacent property owners. 9:45 PM 4. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:50 PM 5. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 9:55 PM 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) at (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 10:00 PM 7. ADJOURNMENT I: \AD M\CAT HY\C CA\000815. D OC COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 15, 2000 - PAGE 2 Agenda Item No. y . I Meeting of CI a (o, 0 0 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MEETING MINUTES -AUGUST 15, 2000 1. WORKSHOP MEETING 1.1 Call to Order: Council President Moore called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1.2 Present: Council President Moore and Councilors Hunt, Patton, and Scheckla 1.3 Council Communications & Liaison Reports: None. 1.4 Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items - City Manager Monahan noted that mayoral applicant, Bill Owen, would be scheduled for an interview with the City Council. Mr. Owen had been out of town and unable to attend his scheduled interview on August 14, 2000. 2. CONTINUATION OF INTERIM MAYOR INTERVIEWS The Council, on August 14, 2000, interviewed three applicants for the position of Mayor (to begin serving on September 12, 2000, until a Mayor is elected in March). Those interviewed on the 14th included: Judy Munro, Harris Hansen and Nick Wilson. Also on August 14, the City Council discussed the manner in which it would select the individual to serve as Mayor. A rating sheet would be created with each applicant's name. Each applicant would be given a number (1-8, with 1 being the top choice). There was discussion as to how the top two- or three-rated applicants would be considered. Later, at the August 15, 2000, meeting Council agreed that should there be a clear winner (that is, an applicant with a lower cumulative score than the other applicants), then that applicant would be selected to serve as Mayor. On August 15, the Council interviewed five applicants: Jim Griffith, John Cook, Mark Mahon, Larry Beck, and Bill Owen. The following questions were asked of each of the applicants by the City Councilors: ® Councilor Hunt noted that the thing that had divided the Council in the recent past was the proposed recreation district. He asked if the applicant supported, opposed or was neutral in his or her position on formation of a recreation district. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 1 • Councilor Scheckla asked what the applicant's primary interest was for programs; that is, what are his or her top priorities? He also asked about transportation and the role of Tri Met. • Councilor Patton asked applicants to describe his or her vision of the role of Mayor in a weak mayor system, and what do you envision your role to be? She also asked if the applicant was not selected as Mayor, what were his or her plans for community involvement activity in the next five years? • Councilor Moore referred to the City's Visioning Program and asked the applicants to relay what he or she thinks is the role of the visioning program in Council decision making. He also asked what background or training would he or she need if selected as interim Mayor? Applicant Jim Griffith made his opening presentation. Mr. Griffith said he was interested in serving the community. He enjoys being involved and is willing to take the time needed. He reviewed his educational background and career background. He noted he was a hospital administrator and then a building official for the City of Portland. Since 1984, he has operated a land use planning firm. He said he works now with a number of jurisdictions to negotiate agreeable solutions for his clients. He said that when serving on a committee, he is an active participant. He referred to his involvement in the zoning code rewrite, the development of the transportation system plan, and the Vision Task Force. He noted that as President of the Oregon Remodelers Association, he has had opportunities to testify before state senate committees. He also outlined his involvement in other committees and subcommittees. As a small business owner, he wants to stay involved; he advised he is a decision-maker. Mr. Griffith is a member of the Planning Commission. He said he feels comfortable in working in a governmental environment. In response to the questions from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Griffith advised that he was "between neutral and being supportive" of a recreation district. He knows there is a need, but understands the concerns with regard to cost. He spoke highly of Tigard buying land for parks for later development. He thinks programs for children should be supported; however, he appreciates the need to prioritize areas for funding. In response to the questions from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Griffith advised his priorities concerned transportation and to review the policies now in places; i.e., connectivity. He noted City streets are not a playground. In addition, he would like to see a public relations effort so that citizens are told of the good things that the City is doing. With regard to issues relating to Metro, he noted that he served on a committee where he represented the development community. He noted that the "voluntary compliance" offer is a sham. Some ideas from metro are good, some are bad. He said he thinks Metro listens primarily to the City of Portland and not the surrounding cities. Tigard is a destination city, not simply a bedroom community. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes -August 15, 2000 - Page 2 In response to the questions from Councilor Patton, Mr. Griffith advised that the role of the Mayor and Council is to make policy and to let the City Manager deal with the day- to-day operations. The Mayor and Council should give direction as to where they would like to see the City go. He said he would like to visit with the City Manager and the Council members to identify what is important. He referred to the visioning effort and the need to prioritize. While he recognizes that 100% of the vision will not be implemented, he noted there should be compromises. If not selected as the interim Mayor, Mr. Griffith said he would want to stay involved. In response to the questions from Councilor Moore, Mr. Griffith said the visioning document was a goal, not an edict. The visioning process provided the City with tools to use to move in a direction. The direction now set is good for the City and should be followed as much as possible. He said the visioning program was an excellent process and should continue. With regard to what assistance he would need in order to get up to speed as interim Mayor, Mr. Griffith said he would need to review meeting minutes and background information on specific issues. He said he would review the Council goals and talk with other organizations in town to get input. He said he would involve others as much as possible. In response to the questions from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Griffith said Tri-Met seems to be responsive to "squeaky wheels" and that he would not anticipate much additional coverage to be provided by them. He said he thought the commuter rail would be of benefit. Eventually, we must start relying more on rapid transit and we will need to have better bus coverage. Applicant John Cook made his opening presentation. Mr. Cook thanked the Council for the opportunity to be interviewed for the interim Mayor position. He said that he thought one of them would be most qualified to serve as the interim Mayor. Mr. Cook reviewed his commitment to other past City activities. He also serves on the Washington County Budget Committee. He noted that he felt indebted to Jim Nicoli who did a lot of good things for the City of Tigard. Mr. Cook noted that he "knows the players" insofar as he has worked with City staff and also has worked with officials from other jurisdictions. In response to the questions from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Cook said that his main focus would be in the area of parks and transportation. He would also like to see an interactive web site implemented. With regard to Metro, the City should comply with mandates; however, we should work on issues with Metro where we don't agree. With regard to Tri-Met, Mr. Cook advised he worked on a subcommittee where alternatives were proposed to Tri-Met, however, Tri-Met pulled funding. Tri-Met should be held accountable. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 3 In response to the questions from Councilor Patton, Mr. Cook said the City Manager runs the day-to-day operations of the City. The Mayor should be kept abreast of issues, but should not try to micro-manage. The Mayor should serve to be a cohesive influence on the City Council and to serve as a link between staff and the Council. If not selected, Mr. Cook said he would continue to be involved. In response to the questions from Councilor Moore, Mr. Cook said after the citizens of this town work on putting the vision document together, the City Council had a responsibility to review and work toward meeting its goals. In order to get up to speed, if selected as interim Mayor, Mr. Cook said he would need to visit with the City Manager. He also thought it would be a good idea to sit in on a Planning Commission meeting. He said there are a few issues that he would need to receive more information. In response to the questions from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Cook advised he would be in favor of the recreation district. The Council's job is to let the people decide (issue is scheduled to be placed on the November ballot). He referred to the need for a district and cited the good experience with the Tualatin Hills Recreation and the Chehalem Recreation Districts. He noted that he felt he would be able supply the time needed for this position. Applicant Mark Mahon made his opening presentation. He noted he had a long history of involvement in the Tigard area. He referred to his work as a network engineer. He has been involved in neighborhood policies for a number of years. In working with issues for Tigard, lie has found the need to analyze problems, get the facts, before you can find the correct answer. He cited the water issues where some people did not have facts to support their position. He noted he supported the development of the downtown through the Tigard Central Business District Association. He was glad to see work being done to site a new library. He referred to the road bond and the need to educate the public. He said that Tigard should work toward developing a youth center regardless of what happens with the Recreation District. He noted that he attends many City Council meeting because lie cares about what happens in the City of Tigard. With the loss of Jim Nicoli, Mr. Mahon noted that lie would like the City of Tigard to keep moving fonvard. He would not propose any major changes but he said lie "feels lie can hit the ground running. In response to questions from Councilor Patton, Mr. Mahon advised that the Mayor should help build a team and build consensus. If not selected, he noted that he would continue be involved on committees and task forces. In response to questions from Councilor Moore, Mr. Mahon said that the visioning document is a tool that provides guidelines from the citizens of Tigard; however, it does not speak for everyone. The Mayor and City Council must use their judgement with regard to individual issues. He noted the importance of periodic review of the vision. If Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 4 selected, Mr. Mahon noted he would need to visit with the City Manager and City Recorder to learn procedural information. In response to questions from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Mahon advised he was neutral on the recreation district issue. He advised that he started out thinking the district was the right thing to do; however, he noted concerns with the change in the tax base structure. He advised that he would be able to meet the time commitments required if he should be selected as the interim Mayor. In response to questions from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Mahon advised he would be interested in promoting a youth center, promote efficiencies among governmental agencies. He noted the need for road improvements and to provide sidewalks in neighborhoods. He said the concept of Metro was good; however, he believed Metro was too big and powerful. He said the role of Metro should be to set goals and that City should have leeway to deal with issues. He noted that Tri-Met focuses primarily on Portland service and more needs to be done to accommodate this area. He likes the idea of commuter rail. Applicant Larry Beck made his opening presentation. Mr. Beck said he appreciated the opportunity for an interview with the City Council. He noted he has been a City of Tigard Volunteer, serving on the Library Board for the last five years. He has been a resident of Tigard for ten years. He noted that Grants Pass was a city that also grew rapidly, but they were prepared with infrastructure to accommodate the growth. He noted issues of livability that should be promoted over growth. In response.to questions from Councilor Moore, Mr. Beck noted the visioning document can help manage growth, give ideas for a transportation plan, assist in a direction for long-term water supply, and promote the development of the downtown area. The visioning document is a good blueprint. With regard to what he would need to get u.up to speed on issues, Mr. Beck noted that he would need to become familiar with what is happening on the Council agenda and determine what issues citizens are bringing forward. In response to questions from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Beck said a study should be done to determine if a park and recreation district is feasible for the City of Tigard. He suggested that Tigard look into being included in the Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District. With regard to the time commitment that the interim Mayor position would require, Mr. Beck noted that he had a fairly flexible schedule. He noted that he would not have as much time to commit as did Jim Nicoli. In response to questions from Councilor Scheckla, he noted he did not see how Metro could make policy that would work for all of the communities; i.e., Tigard, Beaverton, Forest Grove, etc. Mr. Beck said he was a proponent for mass transit and said Tigard should work aggressively with Tri-Met to get service. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 5 In response to questions from Councilor Patton, Mr. Beck advised that the Mayor's job is to make sure everyone is "on the same track." It is important for the Mayor to think in strategic, "big picture' terms. If not selected, he would like to get involved with the homeless shelter and continue to be involved with City government. Applicant Bill Owen Cook made his opening presentation. Mr. Owen advised he has lived in the City of Tigard for 13 years. He said he has been impressed with the school district. Mr. Owen is a PSU gradate and a salesperson. In response to questions from Councilor Hunt, Mr. Owen advised that he was neutral on the Park and Recreation issue. He doesn't know what has been proposed. He said lie believed he could commit to the time necessary to serve as interim Mayor. In response to questions from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Owen said he only knows the issues from what he has read in the newspaper. He noted concerns about long-term water. He would like to see greenspace areas protected and to keep wetlands free from development. He said that traffic is of concern to him. His impression of Metro is negative. In response to questions from Councilor Patton, Mr. Owen advised he is not familiar with the duties of Mayor. If not selected to serve as interim Mayor, Mr. Owen said he may become active in the Tualatin Riverkeepers group. In response to questions from Councilor Moore, Mr. Owen advised that he is not familiar with the City's visioning program. He advised he would support the development of the downtown area. Later in the meeting, the Council rated the candidates on a rating sheet. The City Manager tallied the rating scores. The Council reviewed the rating sheets and, by consensus, determined that there was a clear choice: Jim Griffith. The rating sheets and the tallied scores are on file with the Council meeting packet material. (See minutes of August 14, 2000, for additional information on the selection process as discussed by the City Council). After making the selection, Council contacted Mr. Griffith by telephone to inform him of their decision. Council President Moore asked Mr. Griffith if he would accept the appointment and he accepted. Mr. Griffith will attend orientation sessions with staff over the next couple of weeks to be briefed on the status of current Council issues and will be sworn in at the Council meeting on September 12, 2000. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 6 3. DISCUSS RIGHT-OF-%YAY PROPERTY MAINTENANCE Tigard Municipal Code Section 7.40.050(C) requires property owners or responsible parties to maintain the right-of-way abutting their property. It is necessary that the City's policy be clarified so there is fairness in its application, so costs can be planned for and budgeted, so there is uniformity in appearance in those areas under City control. and so enforcement can be carried out. In most newly developed areas in the City the property line abuts the sidewalk and the street pavement so there is no unpaved right-of-way to maintain. In older, established neighborhoods, many property owners extend their yards to the pavement and maintain the right-of-way as part of their yard. The exception is generally where. there are drainage ditches or fences. In the case where there is a drainage ditch, the property owner may only maintain the right-of-way as part of the yard to the drainage ditch. In the case of a fence, along the rear of a property for instance, right-of-way is often neglected. Along some collector streets (i.e., Durham, Sattler, and 135th) and arterial streets (Hall Blvd.) there are properties that back against the right-of-way. Usually, these properties are separated from the right-of-way by a wall or fence. In many cases, there is an unpaved strip between the wall or fence and the sidewalk or street pavement that is in need of routine maintenance. In many cases, the property owner performs no maintenance. In some cases, maintenance takes place only after an area becomes unsightly. The City's street crews now maintain some areas of unpaved right-of-way. The maintenance involves roadside mowing three to six times per year depending on the growth. Currently, the City maintains those locations that are on City arterials or collectors (not under County or State jurisdiction), under certain conditions, such as when they are too steep and/or contain deep storm drain ditches and/or are adjacent to property owned by the City. Other maintenance functions that are either taken on or neglected include street tree maintenance, weeding and spraying, and litter collection. Staff presented information detailing the City's current cost for maintaining rights-of way, discusses options available to the Council and a general cost for each, and the staff's recommendation. Council reviewed information in their meeting packet as well as listened to comments from representatives of the Morning Hill Homeowners' Association regarding maintenance of the right-of-way along SW 135th. A memo submitted to the City Council addressed some of the issues raised by the homeowners. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 7 Staff presented a PowerPoint slideshow highlighting the main points of this agenda item. (A copy of the slide presentation is on file with the City Recorder.) The Council, after discussion, agreed with the following direction to staff outlined by Councilor Patton: Council is uncomfortable with the status quo in that City crews maintain some locations and others are not. This is not consistent with Tigard Municipal Code provisions. Council is also uncomfortable that some of the right-of-way areas are not easily accessible by the property owner who is expected to maintain the right of way. These areas appear to be primarily along arterials or major collector streets. Council noted concern that street trees had not been maintained as agreed to by the property owners; this issue needs to be resolved. Council noted that the application of the Code should be consistent. Council asked staff to investigate costs of assuming responsibility/liability for arterials and/or major collector streets for both sidewalk maintenance and weed/grass mowing/maintenance (with level of maintenance to be defined). This will be brought back to the City Council for review. As a second part to this process (and at a later time), staff will prepare information for Council's review about whether the City should provide a higher level of maintenance service to areas identified as entry ways (also known as "portals") to the City of Tigard. 4. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None. 5. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None. 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:45 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1), e), discuss real property transactions. 7. ADJOURNMENT: 10:50 p.m. Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder fty6r,_C i f y ar r Date: _'Z vn UAA&oxwo Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - August 15, 2000 - Page 8 AGENDA ITEM # ` FOR AGENDA OF August 15, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Conduct Interim Ma or Interviews PREPARED BY: William A. Monahan DEPT HEAD OK 14 ITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL To conduct interviews to select an Interim Mayor. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To conduct interviews to select an Interim Mayor. INFORMATION SUMMARY On August 8, 2000, the Council was to determine which applicants it wished to interview. Interviews are to be conducted at the August 15, 2000, Council meeting. The Interim Mayor will be appointed by the Council on August 22, and sworn in at the September 12, 2000, City Council meeting. The Interim Mayor will serve until the March 2001 election. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A 1AADM\GREER\AGENDA ITEMS\SUM - MAYOR INTERVIEWS.DOC fitterim Mayor Rath& # Skeet r®tals Beck 2 S Cook 8 I / Griffith 2 2 ( 7 Hansen S s -2,0 Mahon I S 3 /3 Munro 3 7 S /9 Owen 7 F3 31 Wilson q 2 /0 I:WDM\CATHY\ELECTION\INTERIM MAYOR RATING SHEET TOTALS.DOC ILJGI-i. J,-) tel.-~.5~►'i~J~: '~r~_ ~zC~li~l {~r~(~_ cIALi ' -h -1(alua- /lslvo 9 A Interim I tif®r Ratliq Skeet Rating of Candidates from 1-8 Highest - 1 Lowest - 8 Beck Cook Griffith Hansen Mahon 0 Munro Owen Wilson I:\ADM\CATHY\ELECTION\INTERIM MAYOR RATING SHEET.DOC B latercnt Mayor Rath Skeet Rating of Candidates from 1-8 Highest - 1 Lowest - 8 Beck 6 Cook Griffith Hansen Mahon Munro 0 Owen Wilson 0 I:\ADM\CATHY\ELECTION\INTERIM MAYOR RATING SHEET.DOC C literin Maror Ratiag Skeet Rating of Candidates from 1-8 Highest - 1 Lowest - 8 Beck 0 Cook 0 Griffith 0 Hansen 0 Mahon Fq] Munro n Owen FS] Wilson 0 I:\ADM\CATHY\ELECTION\INTERIM MAYOR RATING SHEET.DOC D /ateri Mayor Rating Sleet Rating of Candidates from 1-8 Highest - 1 Lowest - 8 Beck Cook Griffith Hansen Mahon 51 Munro Owen Wilson I:\ADM\CATHY\ELECTION\INTERIM MAYOR RATING SHEET.DOC AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF _ i I CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY MAINTENANCE DISCUSSION Howard Gregory PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Newton DEPT HEAD OK~ CITY MGR OK Ed Wegner ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The role of the City for right-of-way maintenance in locations that are the responsibility of adjacent property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The City retain right-of-way maintenance responsibility in locations that meet the criteria listed as recommendations in the attached memo. That Council confirm that the existing policy that private property owners are responsible for maintenance of right-of-way along their properties, and that sidewalk liability continues as now specified in the Tigard Municipal Code. INFORMATION SUMMARY Tigard Municipal Code Section 7.40.050(C) requires property owners or responsible parties to maintain the right- of-way abutting their property. (Copy attached.) It is necessary that the City's policy be classified so there is fairness in its application, so costs can be planned for and budgeted, so there is uniformity in appearance in those areas under City control, and so enforcement can be carried out. In most newly developed areas in the City the property line abuts the sidewalk and the street pavement so there is no unpaved right-of-way to maintain. In older, established neighborhoods, many property owners extend their yards to the pavement and maintain the right-of-way as part of their yard. The exception is generally where there are drainage ditches or fences. In the case where there is a drainage ditch, the property owner may only maintain the right-of-way as part of the yard to the drainage ditch. In the case of a fence, along the rear of a property for instance, right-of-way is often neglected. Along sonic collector streets (i.e., Durham, Sattler, and 135`x') and arterial streets (Hall Blvd.) there are properties that back against the right-of-way. Usually, these properties are separated from the right-of-way by a wall or fence. In many cases, there is an unpaved strip between the wall or fence and the sidewalk or street pavement, that is in need of routine maintenance. In many cases, no maintenance is performed by the property owner. In some cases, maintenance takes place only after an area becomes unsightly. The City's street crews now maintain some areas of unpaved right-of-way. The maintenance involves roadside mowing three to six times per year depending on the growth. Currently, the City maintains those locations that are on City arterials or collectors (not under County or State jurisdiction), under certain conditions, such as when they are too steep and/or contain deep storm drain ditches and/or are adjacent to property owned by the City. Other maintenance functions which are either taken on or neglected include street tree maintenance, weeding and spraying, and litter collection. Attached is a memo that details the City's current cost for maintaining rights-of-way, discusses options available to the Council and a general cost for each, and the staff's recommendation. Also attached is correspondence from the Morning Hill Homeowners' Association regarding maintenance of the right-of-way along SW 135`h. The attached memo addresses some of the issues raised by the homeowners. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Alternatives considered in the attached memo are: 1. The City assumes responsibility for right-of-way maintenance abutting property owned by the City or the public. 2 The City assumes a reduced responsibility for right-of-way maintenance. 3. The City retain responsibility for right-of-way maintenance at the current level. 4. The City assumes responsibility for right-of-way maintenance at an enhanced level. 5. The City assumes responsibility for all right-of-way maintenance. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Community character and quality of life, community aesthetics Goal No. 1: "Develop strategies to balance needs of new and infill development with need to provide protection of defined aesthetic qualities valued by those who already use and work in Tigard." FISCAL NOTES Depending on the option selected, costs would range as follows: OPTION I: The City retains responsibility to maintain right-of-way adjacent to property owned by the City or the public. $28,188.22 OPTION II: The City retains a reduced responsibility for right-of-way maintenance. $28,715.89 OPTION III: The City retains responsibility for right-of-way maintenance at the current level. $84,103.91 OPTION IV: Tile City assumes responsibility for right-of-way at an enhanced level-cost will depend on lineal footage maintained and maintenance standards. Beaverton's program costs about $491,000 annually. OPTION V: The City assumes responsibility for all basic right-of-way maintenance. $307,164.23 the first year, $168,207.82 annual after the first year. %CITY COUNCILICOUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\RIGHT-OF•WAY MAINTENANCE.DOC MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: City Council Members FROM: Howard Gregory Liz Newton !,J yn Ed Wegner RE: Right-of-Way Maintenance DATE: August 4, 2000 Issue: Maintenance of the right-of-way is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner or responsible party. (Tigard Municipal Code, Section 7.40.050, copy attached.) In some cases, however, it may be more practical and safer for the City to assume maintenance responsibility for the property owner. The responsibility for right-of-way maintenance does not include a requirement to landscape the area. Right-of-way maintenance is defined as "cutting down or destroying grass, shrubbery, brush, weeds or other noxious vegetation as often as needed to prevent them from becoming unsightly or, in the case of weeds or other noxious vegetation, from maturing or going to seed." The purpose of Council's discussion on this issue is to clarify the standards for right-of- way maintenance and establish criteria where the City will maintain the right-of-way. Options: Several options for the City's role in right-of-way maintenance are described below. option 1: The City assumes responsibility for right-of-way maintenance only adjacent to property owned by the City or the public. The City is the responsible party to maintain right-of-way adjacent to property owned by the City. Should the Council direct that only the right-of-way adjacent to the property owned by the City be maintained by the City, the cost is estimated at $28,188.22 and would involve a two-person crew mowing two weeks out of every month through the six month growing season. Right-of-Way Maintenance Page 1 of 4 Option II: The City retains a reduced responsibility for right-of-way maintenance. City crews now maintain 92, 244 feet of right-of-way. Approximately 65,034 feet of that could be maintained by abutting property owners or responsible parties. These are locations without steep slopes or deep drainage ditches. The City would continue to maintain 27,210 feet abutting property owned by the City or about 500 lineal feet abutting private property where there are steep slopes or deep drainage ditches (deeper than one foot). Currently, two personnel maintain right-of-way continually for five and one-half months. This reduction in maintenance responsibility would allow those personnel to incorporate street marking, vision clearance and maintenance and assistance with speed humps into their right-of- way maintenance schedule. The cost for this reduced maintenance is estimated at $28,715.89. Option III: The City retains responsibility for right-of-way maintenance at the current level. As mentioned above, the City currently maintains 92,244 feet of right-of-way at a cost of $84,103.91 per year. Areas maintained by City crews currently include those adjacent to public land, and where there are steep slopes or drainage ditches. Other locations are maintained due to complaints or at the request of citizens. There are no clear criteria for when the City should assume right-of-way maintenance, therefore, the City is doing more right-of-way maintenance that requires more than necessary costs to the general fund, while enforcement of property owner responsibility is inconsistent. Option IV: The City assumes responsibility for right-of-way maintenance at an enhanced level. As noted earlier, the responsibility for right-of-way maintenance does not require the area be landscaped, merely that any grass or shrubbery be cut as needed and weeds be controlled to prevent going to seed. Recently, the Morning Hill Homeowners have expressed an interest in the City assuming maintenance for SW 135th between Walnut and Scholis Ferry Road. They cite maintenance of Greenway and Murray Boulevard in Beaverton as examples of streets they feel are good models. The City could assume responsibility for enhanced right-of-way maintenance in some areas, that is, not merely keeping grass and weeds cut but also planting and maintaining some landscaping (including well-maintained grass areas and planted areas) in certain rights-of-way. In the City of Beaverton, like in Tigard, abutting property owners are also responsible for right-of-way maintenance. The City does, however, maintain some Right-of-Way Maintenance page 2 of 4 collectors and arterials such as Murray and Greenway. This work is not performed by the City streets crew. The City employs a 5.45 member (including a supervisor) landscape crew at a cost of about $491,000. This crew also maintains City facilities including the library. If the City decided to assume enhanced right-of-way maintenance in some areas standards would need to be developed to define and clarify the level of maintenance expected, and criteria would be needed to determine what areas the City would assume enhanced maintenance responsibility for. The cost of the program would depend upon the area selected. Option V: The City assumes responsibility for all basic right-of-way maintenance. The City could assume responsibility for right-of-way maintenance in all locations not adjacent to County or State roads. There might be difficulties where property owners have landscaped into the right-of-way in some areas where crews would need to use different tools to maintain different types of landscaping (such as, to work around plantings). This could be resolved by adopting a specific standard for rights-of-way and eliminating the extension of yards or landscaping into the right-of- way. This is obviously the most costly option. The first year, with the addition of two personnel and new equipment, the cost is estimated at $307,164.23, with the cost each year after estimated at $168,207.82. Recommendation: Staff recommends Option II for ongoing right-of-way maintenance. The City would assume a reduced responsibility for right-of-way maintenance. This option is preferred because it recognizes the property owners existing responsibility but recognizes circumstances that present a hardship to abutting property owners. In the case of hardship, the City would be responsible. The standard for right-of-way maintenance as proposed would be: Grass and brush cut as often as needed so as not to exceed 10 inches in height. • Shrubs and trees trimmed as often as needed to comply with vision clearance provisions. The criteria for the City to assume maintenance of right-of-way adjacent to private property: a Steep slopes exceeding 30°. • Drainage ditches of more than 12 inches. Staff recommends implementation of this option in the 2001 calendar year. Beginning in January 2001, notice would be mailed to property owners in Area 1 (see the attached map depicting the mowing areas utilized by the Streets Division) that the City will mow Right-of-Way Maintenance Page 3 of 4 rights-of-way during a specific time period (60-90 days later). The notice would further explain the property owner's responsibility to maintain the right-of-way in the future, the standards for maintenance, and the criteria for the City to assume maintenance. Property owners would also be invited to a specific meeting to be held in their area to ask questions or get more information. The process would be repeated until property owners in all ten mowing areas were notified. Property owners would assume responsibility for right-of-way maintenance after the first mowing in their area is completed. Staff also recommends the Council provide direction on enhanced right-of-way maintenance. If the Council would like staff to pursue adding enhanced right-of-way maintenance services, the staff will bring back proposed standards and criteria for Council consideration. %%TIG3331USR%DEPTSWDM%CITY COUNCIORIGHT OF WAY MEMO.DOC Right-of-Way Maintenance Page 4 of 4 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(4)),1986). ARTICLE III. NUISANCES AFFECTING PUBLIC SAFETY. or other noxious vegetation, from maturing or from going to seed. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(1)),1986). 7.40.060 Trees. 7.40.050 Noxious vegetation. (a) The term "noxious vegetation" does not include vegetation that constitutes an agricultural crop, unless that vegetation is a health hazard, a fire hazard or a traffic hazard, and it is vegetation within the meaning of subsection (b) of this section. (b) The term "noxious vegetation" includes: (1) Weeds more than ten inches high; (2) Grass more than ten inches high and not within the exception stated in subsection (a) of this section; (3) Poison oak, poison ivy, or similar vegetation; (4) Dead trees, dead bushes, stumps and any other thing likely to cause fire; (5) Blackberry bushes that extend into a public thoroughfare or across a property line; (6) Vegetation that is a health hazard; (7) Vegetation that is a health hazard because it impairs the view of a public thoroughfare or otherwise makes use of the thoroughfare hazardous. (c) No owner or responsible party shall allow noxious vegetation to be on the property or in the right-of-way of a public thoroughfare abutting on the property. The owner or responsible party shall cut down or destroy grass, shrubbery, brush, bushes, weeds or other noxious vegetation as often as needed to prevent them from becoming unsightly or, in the case of weeds (a) No owner or responsible party shall permit tree branches or bushes on the property to extend into a public street or public sidewalk in a manner which interferes with street or sidewalk traffic. It shall be the duty of an owner or responsible party to keep all tree branches or bushes on the premises which adjoin the public street or public sidewalk, including the adjoining parking strip, trimmed to a height of not less than eight feet above the sidewalk and not less than ten feet above the street. (b) No owner or responsible party shall allow to stand any dead or decaying tree that is in danger of falling or otherwise constitutes a hazard to the public or to persons or property on or near the property. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(2)(a) and (b)),1986). 7.40.070 Streets and sidewalks. The owner or responsible party shall keep a public street and/or sidewalk abutting their property free from earth, rock and other debris and other objects that may obstruct or render the street or sidewalk unsafe for its intended use. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(2)(c)),1986). 7.40.080 Vehicles not to drop material on streets. The owner or operator of any vehicle engaged in the transportation of excavation or construction materials shall be responsible for keeping the public streets and sidewalks free from such materials, including but not limited to, earth, rock and other debris that may obstruct or render the street or sidewalk unsafe for its intended use. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(2)(d)),1986). 7-40-3 SE/Code Update 03100 Morning Will Homeowners Association P.O. Box 230433 RECEIVED C.O.T. Tigard, Oregon 97281 JUL 2 1 2000 To: The City of Tigard, Bill Monahan City Manager, City Council Administration Re: Clean Up of Weeds Along 135°i Attached is a request for the City to assume maintenance of the "parking strip" on certain areas of 135°i. In summary: 0 135a' between Walnut and Scholls has several area of unsightly overgrowth in parking strip areas. e These areas are behind homeowners' property with no direct access by them and therefore, are not readily accessible by them for maintenance. m If these properties were in Beaverton, the city would assume maintenance of these areas. • Our resulting property values and hence, your tax base are compromised by this situation. o Our request is that the City of Tigard assume the maintenance of these areas by mowing, appropriate use of herbicide, and watering of the recently planted trees which were planted as a joint venture of the City and our Homeowners Association. Morning Hill Homowners Association Board and Members ,L r~ /Jerll Zc~z c! C,~ -t Cti , u "t-e- to Morning Hill Homeowners Association P.O. Box 230433 Tigard, Oregon 97281 To: The City of Tigard, Bill Monahan City Manager, City Council Re: Clean Up of Weeds Along 1350i BACKGROUND We have two primary concerns about the deteriorating condition of the area along 135h between Walnut and Scholls Ferry Rd. First is the unchecked growth of weeds and grasses along the right-of-way. Second is the damage to the young trees planted there last year by the City and our Association. We recently requested some consideration relative to mowing of the exceptional growth of weeds that grace 135'h on both sides. The specific areas are on the backside of homes, separated from them by a permanent barrier, and having no direct pedestrian or vehicle access across that area to their property. After our request for city assistance in this matter, city department managers met to discuss whether or not they could/should do some maintenance work on this street. In years gone by the city has apparently both mowed and used herbicide to maintain these areas. The response from the managers was that they would mow for 2000 but would expect adjacent homeowners to do so thereafter. In general, we understand that the city has this expectation of homeowners. The reason this seems an unreasonable expectation is that 135" is a restricted access street. Some residents of the areas in question would have to travel several blocks each way to access the "parking strip" area behind their homes. Also, there is also a "No Parking" zone along those areas of the street. Beaverton has some streets with similar attributes, and they have assumed responsibility for maintaining those areas, and they look nice. One such street that is very familiar with us is Greenway. 135"' meets the same code requirements that dictate that Beaverton maintain Greenway, why should it be different here in Tigard, an adjacent city? We appreciate that the city "said" they would maintain this street in 2000. It is now July 18'h and still the city has not even mowed around the bridge at the wetlands that clearly belong to your staff to maintain. Neither have they mowed any other area beyond the settling ponds on Walnut St. and 135'h. Any one of you who migAt traverse along 135th will note that the appearance is one of a city gone amuck and, indeed, that is exactly whit we believe has happened. It is difficult to understand that if you drive a very few blocks east you will find one of the most beautifully maintained parks anywhere in the USA. The fact that these two areas belong to the same city is amazing and we have to ask why the discrepancy in appearance? There, also, seems to be a lost vision that was held by the departed city arborist who envisioned that Tigard would become a city of trees "like Beaverton". Our Association worked with him last year to plant wonderful trees along 135th, and knows that his concept was that other plantings would be added at a later time. Now we are aced with lovely trees that are largely engulfed with weeds and we have been advised that the city won't help with watering of these trees. (Steve Martin has been helpful and may be helping with those that are clearly in need of water.) It appears that the "vision" may have departed with the arborist. Please tell us this isn't so! ACTION REQUESTED We have two requests for 2000. (l) the city mow immediately because of the appearance and the fire hazard, and (2) the currently planted trees that are looking weary get water throughout this summer. We have an additional request for beyond 2000 and that is that you assume the maintenance of 135th so that our community looks respectable. This would be a minimum of mowing 4 times annually, and possible use of herbicide, which would be the best procedure. Whenever the homeowner is clearly responsible for the street side appearance (as when they directly face the street) we ask that you use your "muscle" to assure that these people do their part. There has not been effective enforcement to date. RATIONALE Relative to our requests we submit the following rationale: 1. We are talking about a major portal to Tigard. 2. We are loosing money because of compromised appearance of our neighborhood. You loose tax dollars, we loose property value. 3. Our Homeowner Association contributes volunteer effort to the city in many ways such as: a) Adopt-a-Street clean up (we haven't done this for several months because all the garbage is hidden in the weeds); b) Our master gardener drew up the plans for the plantings around the settling ponds and helped to find volunteers to plant those trees; c) We assisted the city arborist (Mark) in planning for the planting, placement and organized the sizable group from our association to actually plant the trees along 135 h last fall. We contacted most of the people along the street to get their consent to plant and finally, contacted those same people to remind them to water the trees. We estimate somewhere around 100 hours of service was given on this single project. Some of us also water our trees. (Note: not all are being watered by the folks, which is symptomatic of the problem we face along this street); d) Many of our membership assist with the events of the city such as the Tigard Festival of Balloons. 4. We have often asked for assistance from the city relative to compliance issues on 135a' such as poorly maintained property fronts and removed fir trees which were not replaced (the space which now looks largely like a junk yard.) We have not gotten adequate assistance from you on these issues which you can tell simply by looking. This speaks to the difficulties we all face by the many people who do not give a "spit in the wind" about how things look. Yet in your earlier rejection of our maintenance request, you stated you hope to rely on those people to maintain the areas (owned by the city not them). 5. Our property values are affected at the whim of non-compliant individuals and we seem to have no leverage. At least in our association we do. You are actually compromising all of us over a very minimal request. 6. We have to wonder who the "customer" is in Tigard. We pay the taxes, you ask for more and we have given you more. We hope you consider the taxpayer as your customer rather than city employees. 7. It appears that the city is not particularly efficient in organizing their maintenance activities, yet in response to our earlier request you report that there are "ever increasing" demands on your crews, which are not compatible with our request. In other businesses (of which we represent many) if the demand increases you uncover new and improved ways of becoming more efficient! Any sound business will respond in that way. Here we reference the use of multiple department teams in one geographic area so that mowing is done on different days by different departments and with different equipment? Please tell us that you can understand why we are under impressed with that type of organization. 8. Please show us that you have real pride in Tigard, which is so well demonstrated by Beaverton. Look at Murray Road or Greenway as a model. We need your focus on this area that represents so many taxpayers. Your consideration of this matter is clearly important to us. We constitute an important part of your population because we have proven that we will help you in supporting your levies and in volunteer support to you. You are accountable to all taxpayers so we expect careful rethought on this rather simple and inexpensive request. 10 N City Boundaries A/ Area of Interest A/ Urban Service Area King City Work Areas 500 1 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 W1 500 2W3 W2 500 500 w ✓v r~i.aw,Mb~r~ieNu a~mu4r.daim~q ~q.n,uw Vrbm~u.o um4A+.aulur~p urihn~ ,w'ad 500 'd n~~a rrrirrl 100 p~ q6 1 E BA "M F. 500 M~sf ~aMbMwMdrv r~q ownnrw n~bMra~i~d mSeEr~dwmNlbM'r~Ml 1110MI01M rygdllril M.raVM~r'mw~3irrw A City of Tfprd I o n 1 7 1 t P r ° A I 1 1 9 § 1 Street Ownership )0 500 Beaverton King City n/ ODOT Other 500 /V. Private A/ Tigard N Washington Co Tigard City Limits /1/Area of Interest N Urban service Area 500 NOTEI: 1HS irep k Wended to de okd ex utlng 500 escela(pawementwq~nNly O~irq NOTE2 Tw City of Tlpe rd, Lug Rasp PI=Nr Df,WW malnt . aMom of stmes 6 made Within 150 feet of Ne pNlboW boL.Wm deployedw We mmp. NOTE3: THS mapN a slat. sepresa ,totbon of 500 wrAPoau at ft dme ofMINN 00112000. Formoae up m ms Idrab Information, please c 111 the CByd TWoMOIGOISepplkatlon. SOURCES: ClrySbeets, and Political Boundaries:. CVyaf T"d 300 x~e e e 000 111 Feel 500 MHgwvwYNwvY WHv HMYdmHmleYSeeee leusm W 9A ryggl a~ ~mrym,lll ~wwaryvevr+xv4xW A Chy orTl~d c7 3 0 d w O Q aA W co~ • ~4 1.4 4-1 un ir% i!~ 0 z C~ 14 U 0 u a~ u a3 e 4-4 n ok, 00 rs 0 w 3 d 3 ¢¢4 l., 1ti ' J :.1. r` ~~r J 3L P4 w 7- AWN w H O H M ~t d I f } i If- 1 , F if I! ' its l `t 'i S 1 •;i y bt ~n G i ~r Cr f,' ' .t: .36 rN !f , t f alt 5 77 j 'f--r s Vd VI 14 V 03 tc 1-1 O 0 DLO Cld Cd CC3 bb O ~ O O U C7 F~ .-4 e, C~ ® CIS U U Cd 4J CCU 4-a 0 C~ JC W w d U 0 Q W w a H w C;d Q d H d w H c~ C-° C11-° c4n z 0 H a 0 a w w W GG d a d a e 1y e 4 - f t~ is~ Sri on t k ~ a 1 z 0 N a 0 . P, O N os a OG ~ N -GOS a ~ U O N taA O a O ct3 ~ ~ ~ w N ~ ~ z 0 H 0 Cd O~ "Z:l 00 ® C r~_._ ?r~fwr j;. y { '.{t . w~. F ~"'a:`7•. fl r.'n r -117 n r~ i ~atS. _ i c ' • i C r ~ t i :'Y }lJ t H. j P45 r J J. M z 0 a 0 m 4-4 O® 0 C~ 6q a ~ ~ _ a a` fp ~ i : a # ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ . ` ~ , ;3~ 1' ~ 4 '7' t i,F- , a ! ~ ~ :i':~ f~. ~ !i ' ' ` w ~ , r ~t ~ `i 4 . U 115 3 z 0 H a 0 5 b C's "Cl U N 4-0 N N Cd N cn O tD ° V) cd C's t~ c;s CC3 U U cd V) cd N N r Cd cH O > ~ .4 U g Cd to y > C13 c) ~ cd Cd V) t1. ~ U col 'b CC N t~4 U e z 0 H a 0 4-~ V1 ~ ~ w -tom CC3 _ o t4--I • 1. a 1.' 1 d~ ~ ;.rf f1 t r ~ ~ 1 N .}.a Gdl ®Q N I C A 00 con riot .f i j I' ;i i ; ji i{ :j ~ r Jr~ z 0 H w Q z 0 w 0 I IS C N CG CCU I L- 40-- a) B CO M C/1 co C L ® 35 0 ~ ca 4M C CU doom& a) Qmo) An S 0 O -0 C~ U ~ cu cv cu c 'cu ® E o Ch 0 ai c co a) c t m 0 to c a) o N L j _0 co m a) O O N cu C -0 L C ® ® 'D O da- N C 2 O~ _0 U O -W .5-0 0 x a) U co _co a) C6 o6 0 a) C U o a) a) > a) a) o o a `o o_ a a) . V U CX o ~ O (D Q 0 O a)) O E 0 ~ CX O a) 0 co 3: = 0 ~r- o a)~ Cc a) L- ® a) v E cm a cu a) Cc ~ c~ a) a) ca a Co cu cc cc C', ® 0 3 ® E O ~ CD E m L L 40- ~ .e.. c W CD 4- O c cc a) s® n .l.C s~1 V~ Cc • M ' c L Cc M 4 ca cn 40- -0 4 E U 0- w o O 0 - O ~ N ~ 0 0 0 a) Q. 0 r > 75 CU CU U CU co U_ 15 ~ c co U !4~ C a) 0 ~ _ cu U o ) ca E N C0 E ~o O ~ c W cu co cm -0 ~ Q) 0 O O ad a 0 0 ® ' < CL CL . :3 CL C. Cl) a U) O ® sa 0 L 6 . C. E O 0 ® - r Im Im .o~ • I- c Z 0 O E s- U CL ® 0 ® ® ~ ~ ate. -0 CL r CU r_ 0 Q CO) 0 0 0 s.r. Y/ rA U rA Ci3 03 V1 I f: A I t Y, - y,c r I A 4 y 7)y' > i ~ v I I ~ / C II a m boff .wen Dore 1 u I I I ~ 1 1 1 I 1 i ° 1 1 I f ~ 1 1 In, I y 4 b`g saa V VI • M VI a •I .I hl I I I I I I~ I I I K%' I I +I ~ay I ~ I ~tt~ I= i I an 1 1 I 1 / I 1 D 1 1 I f i r 1 a 1 ; 1 I I - I- 4 r_ nr; 0 0 Q 4d 4d U V1 O U O -ell U O R O d Q Z w 0 c~ 00 W N O U e ~a P°~I V1 ~ e~ +UA P-1 L~ 1^ r' h d ~~1 ` • jr. ~ f t . ry t t 1.Z ' ~b O Cf) z O v Q W U B z w H z e?,.`fit '.''t~• • Zak i, Ago: F ~ a~2r n' O H d H Z w w a a o~ M+-1 V U) cu S S'~ t Cv Fi s ~a•. .t 4-4 CAS -al fcd cn 03 Cts 5 t~ r i r H ~ . IA 3 4 r [ s'' i j ',I ~ ' J~ j d JJJ ~ f1r' ! R S . + ~ ~ ) 1 1 1 f C,.. 1~: 5. J _ 1 ~ 1 N 5 } f I l ii i. Sir ~ r. ( ti.iy j t ~ :1 ; _ f , ' ~ r ~ + 1 ~1 t r ~ ~ ~ ~ t i J L ~f j - s ll f f ff ~ ~ ~ ~ ` l f 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ N~ ~ r - ~ ~ ,f ~ t t 01/29/2000 23:38 5036202799 SHANE CO PAGE 01 A 3 9laslou FAX AUJM PHONE NO.: SMAMOAM FAX NO.: 03A20-82133 This fax is foilovved by 2 page(s). Please notify me if you do not receive all pages. Liz, here's the letter to the City Council. Please pass it on. Thanks for your help. JAN RICHARDSON Jan Richardson X234-1 SW 9W ain Street President & Mar6tin Director wp TW ar4 OR 972-23 Tamara Joi,neon Fhone .fax Vice 'resident & C-cative Director anriCh~cybCrhi~hwa y.net i 503-670.0260 503-670.8263 johnaa5QC 6er+vicshwaq.net 01/29/2000 23:38 5036202799 SHAME CO R®N & JAN RICHARDS®N 13367 SW Scotts Bridge Dr. Tigard, DR 97223 503-590-7899 August 14, 2000 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 ATTN: CITY COUNCIL RE: RICI-: T-®F-WAY MAINTENANCE Dear Council Members: I have been coordinating and participating in the Adopt-A-Street Program on behalf of the Morning Hill Homeowners Association for the clean-up of 135th Street between Walnut and Scholls Fer y Rd. since our association adopted 135'h approximately a year ago. We take great pride in our neighborhood and would like 135th to reflect that pride. PAGE 02 During this time, we have observed that many of the homeowners who are responsible for maintaining these right-of-way areas along 135th have done little or nothing to maintain their areas. In defense of these homeowners, it is not particularly easy to access these areas from their homes. However, I'm beginning to believe they don't much care anyway. A few volunteers from our association periodically clean up the trash but we find it increasingly difficult to perform these tasks due to the high weeds and trees that need to be pruned. We are very concerned about the fire hazard these weeds create. During the process of picking up trash, we find many cigarette butts and are concerned that a wild fire could easily be started if a cigarette was tossed into the weeds. We also noticed that the weeds hide the fire hydrant. Several members of our association have called the City expressing our concerns (I have called at least three times) and we were told that the compliance officer would contact the offending homeowners about this problem. We have yet to see any results and I'm sure that if a major ire resulted from a cigarette tossed in these weeds along 135th, it would cost the City thousands of dollars, not to mention the potential loss of property and/or life. `01/29/2000 23:38 5036202799 SHANE CO City of Tigard - City Council August 14, 2000 Page 2 It is my understanding that the City of Beaverton does maintain main neighborhood streets and we would like to see the City of Tigard provide the same service. We would be happy to work with the City In Improving the looks of this street. Personally, I would like to see the weeds destroyed and bark dust spread In the areas where needed and I'm confident that the neighbors would participate In achieving this goal. Sincerely, an Richardson Past President & Board Member Moming Hill Homeowners Association PAGE 03 m o •o~v • c m mp 4a av•o m C D 'O } ~ L ~ 'E •C m m m c cfl~vo~=m0EEE m L L m CD CT Ol y m 19 cC 10 7 7 U (3== OOOOcnto(n stn (Dhao lAO.-NC; ~~~-.-NNNNN CD ~ U [d C3 IL U a C3 U _g CD H .4 ae Uo 02202 2Z5O036 LL•Li•L£>> cc rn v 32 D v w m d r ¢ Q¢¢mmUUC7U N C7d 66h C6 Of O- NC; AGENDA ITEM # _75, FOR AGENDA OF 8-15-00 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Election Law Trainin PREPARED BY: Tim Ramis by cwe.,913 DEPT HEAD OK 42~--CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Participate in training session conducted by the City Attorney to familiarize the City Council, Transportation Bond Task Force members, and staff with up-to-date information on election law. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Discussion topic only. INFORMATION SUMMARY Since this is an election year for the City of Tigard Council and also because the City of Tigard plans to have a bond measure on the November 7, 2000 ballot, it is timely to review current election law with the Council and members of the Transportation Bond Task Force. Attached is an outline of the information that will be reviewed by City Attorney Tim Ramis. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED n/a VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY n/a FISCAL NOTES n/a I:WDM\CITY COUNCIL\COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\ELECTION TRAINING 8-15-OO.DOC CITY OF TIGARD - ELECTIONS LAW TRAINING AUGUST 2000 PRESENTED BY TIMOTHY V. RAM1S OF RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP TOPICS OF DISCUSSION 1. STATE LAW, CITY CHARTER AND CITY CODE 2. CITY ROLE IN ELECTIONS 3. BALLOT MEASURES 4. RESTRICTIONS ON ADVOCACY 5. CANDIDATE ELECTIONS 6. CAMPAIGN FINANCING IAIADM\CITY COUNCUELECTIONSTRAINING.DOC