City Council Packet - 05/05/2015
TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE AND TIME:May 5, 2015 - 6:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION:City of Tigard - Town Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Times noted are estimated.
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for City
Center Development Agency Board meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the City Center Development
Agency Board meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (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 by
calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD
MEETING DATE AND TIME:May 5, 2015 - 6:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION:City of Tigard - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
6:30 PM
1.CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A.Call to Order- City Center Development Agency and City Council
B.Roll Call
C.Call to Board and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING
2. APPROVE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN A
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER AGREEMENT FOR THE SAXONY PACIFIC PROPERTY -
6:35 p.m. estimated time
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUSINESS MEETING
3. APPROVE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES - 6:55 p.m. estimated
time
4. PRESENTATION ON THE ASH AVENUE/BURNHAM STREET PROJECT DESIGNS -
7:00 p.m. estimated time
5. UPDATE ON ASH AVENUE DOG PARK RELOCATION - 7:30 p.m. estimated time
6. UPDATE ON THE STROLLING STREET PROGRAM - 7:40 p.m. estimated time
7.NON AGENDA ITEMS - 7:55 p.m. estimated time
8.EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Center Development Agency Board may go into
Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be
announced identifying the applicable statute.
9.ADJOURNMENT - 8:00 p.m. estimated time
AIS-2197 2.
CCDA Agenda
Meeting Date:05/05/2015
Length (in minutes):20 Minutes
Agenda Title:Prospective Purchaser Agreement
Submitted By:Sean Farrelly, Community
Development
Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct
Staff
Meeting Type: Council
Business
Meeting -
Main
Public Hearing
Newspaper Legal Ad Required?:
No
Public Hearing Publication
Date in Newspaper:
Information
ISSUE
Consider a resolution to authorize the City Manager to sign a Prospective Purchaser
Agreement for the Saxony Pacific property.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Staff recommends approval of the resolution which will enable the Prospective Purchaser
Agreement to be executed.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The City and the City Center Development Agency (CCDA) have been interested in acquiring
the Saxony property on Main Street since 2012. A purchase and sale agreement (PSA) was
executed in April 2014. During the course of due diligence investigations, contamination was
found on the property. Staff, with the City Attorney and environmental consultant, have been
working on obtaining a Prospective Purchaser Agreement (PPA) from the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). This agreement will spell out the City’s
cleanup obligations and liability limitations for existing contamination should the City
purchase the property. Obtaining the PPA is a precedent to acquiring the property under the
PSA. The City/Agency started this process in April 2014.
The contamination that was found on site was solvent contamination in groundwater.
Solvents found included tetrachloroethene (PCE), and trichloroethene (TCE). Levels of
groundwater contamination exceed the risk-based concentration for vapor intrusion into
buildings for the urban residential setting. Similar contaminants were found in soil gas at
concentrations, but below risk-based levels. Soil samples did not contain contamination. A
pore water sample from the shoreline of Fanno Creek was analyzed for VOCs, but none were
found. This indicates that the plume of solvent contamination below the site is not impacting
the creek.
The PPA (Attachment 1, Exhibit A) is in the form of a legal complaint by DEQ against the
City of Tigard. The City is listed as the defendant. A “consent judgment” form of the PPA, a
court decision, provides the strongest protection for a prospective purchaser (as compared
to DEQ’s “administrative” PPA). It could be described as a "friendly lawsuit." On November
1, 2014, DEQ published notice of this proposed Consent Judgment and provided opportunity
for public comment in accordance. No comment was received.
To obtain the PPA, a work plan was required by DEQ that includes obtaining additional data
regarding solvent contamination and determining appropriate institutional controls to be
implemented when the property is redeveloped. (Much of the cost for these PPA assessment
tasks has been reimbursed by the Brownfield Assessment grant that the city was awarded in
2014).
To gain the PPA protection, the City is committing to the following scope of work:
1. The City will commit to install, or require installation of, engineering controls to mitigate
the potential for vapor intrusion, and to agree to institutional controls when the City closes
on the property to enforce the controls. When the property is redeveloped into a new
building, a vapor mitigation system will be installed to be comprised of a network of
perforated pipes in trenches, covered with gravel, and overlain by a heavy duty vapor barrier.
The system will be passive in nature (but capable of retrofitting to an active system with
blowers), allowing any accumulated vapors to vent to outdoor air.
2. Prior to building demolition, the City will prepare a contaminated media management plan
(CMMP) for use by contractors working at the site. This will provide guidance to the
demolition workers to safely work on the site.
3. At the time of building demolition, the City will perform additional environmental
investigation to evaluate whether soil cleanup work is necessary to reduce or eliminate the
need for the vapor mitigation system.
a. Additional investigation will consist of approximately five soil gas sample points with
follow-up soil and groundwater sampling.
b. If contaminated soils are identified, the most contaminated material will be removed
to reduce or eliminate future risk from on-site sources.
c. If additional groundwater investigation is determined to be necessary, then
groundwater sampling may include three to four groundwater monitoring wells, which
will be sampled for up to four quarters. As an alternative, additional push probe
groundwater sample points may be installed with DEQ approval.
City Attorney Chris Reive, a specialist in environmental law and prospective purchaser
agreements, worked with DEQ on the content of the PPA, representing the City’s interest.
He will attend the May 5th meeting to present the proposed PPA and answer questions.
Council is requested to approve the attached resolution that will authorize the city manager to
sign the PPA, which will clear the way for the City to close its acquisition of the site in
approximately 45 days.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
Council could reject the resolution, which would mean that the Saxony Pacific purchase and
sale agreement would need to be terminated.
COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones
Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be
City Center Urban Renewal Plan
Project H: Real Property Acquisition
Tigard Comprehensive Plan
Special Planning Areas- Downtown
Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village.
Tigard Strategic Plan
Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision
DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
The purchase of the Saxony property was discussed in a number of Executive Sessions
including:
December 2, 2014
October 28, 2014
September 2, 2014
January 7, 2014
December 3, 2013
November 5,2013
October 1, 2013
September 3, 2013
August 20, 2013
Fiscal Impact
Cost:$199,000-319,000
Budgeted (yes or no):no
Where Budgeted (department/program):CCDA
Additional Fiscal Notes:
The estimated costs to clean up the property under the Prospective Purchaser Agreement
are $199,000-$319,000. These costs have been reflected in the lower purchase price that was
negotiated with the sellers. The largest portion of these estimated costs ($60,000-$110,000) is
for a vapor mitigation system that may be required for a new building that is constructed on
the site.
The City Center Development Agency will soon be undertaking a study of the Saxony
Pacific site to determine the best use – public space, private redevelopment, or a
combination of the two. If the entire site is used for open space, the range for clean-up costs
are estimated at $147,000-$219,000. The City plans to apply for an EPA Brownfields
Clean-up grant in the next grant cycle (fall of 2015). If successful, the grant could provide
$200,000 toward the cleanup of the site.
For any cost of clean up, either in excess of the grant, or if the grant is not awarded, the
options are some combination of the following:
Developer who is redeveloping the site pays for the clean up.
CCDA cuts programing over FY 16 and 17. At the highest potential cost, this would
significantly reduce the funds available for programing.
City bears the costs. This is not currently funded or planned in the city budget.
Attachments
Council Resolution
Exhibit A- PPA
RESOLUTION NO. 15-
Page 1
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 15-
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITYMANAGER TO SIGN A PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER
AGREEMENT WITH THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRNOMENTAL QUALITY FOR THE
PURCHASE OF THE SAXONY-PACIFIC PROPERTY
WHEREAS,the City of Tigard’s City Center Development Agency has signed a Purchase and Sale Agreement
to purchase the Saxony-Pacific property and this agreement will be assigned to the City of Tigard; and
WHEREAS,a condition precedent to closing is for the City to obtain a Prospective Purchaser Agreement with
the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; and
WHEREAS,the Prospective Purchaser Agreement will provide certainty to the city about the extent of the
cleanupobligation and liability for the existing contamination if it purchases the property; and
WHEREAS,the Prospective Purchaser Agreement will commit the City to the scope of work in Exhibit C of
the Prospective Purchaser Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION1: The City Manager is authorized to execute the Prospective Purchaser Agreement with the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality attached as Exhibit ‘A’, subject to final legal
review.
SECTION 2:This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED:This day of 2015.
Mayor -City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder -City of Tigard
Page 1-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Exhibit ‘A’ to Resolution
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
STATE OF OREGON, ex rel.
DICK PEDERSEN, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF TIGARD
Defendant.
Case No. ________
CONSENT JUDGMENT
General Judgment
Contents Page
1.Purpose....................................................................................................................3
2.Stipulations and Findings........................................................................................3
3.Work to be Performed.............................................................................................6
A.Measures to be Undertaken............................................................................6
B.Modification of SOW or Related Work Plans................................................6
C.Additional Measures.......................................................................................7
D.Site Restrictions and Periodic Reviews..........................................................7
4.General Provisions..................................................................................................8
A.Project Managers............................................................................................8
B.Supervising Contractor...................................................................................8
C.DEQ Approvals...............................................................................................9
D.Access to Property........................................................................................10
E.Records.........................................................................................................10
F.Notice and Samples.......................................................................................12
G.Quality Assurance.........................................................................................12
Page 2-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
H.Progress Reports...........................................................................................13
I.Other Applicable Laws.................................................................................13
J.Reimbursement of DEQ Costs......................................................................14
K.Financial Assurance......................................................................................15
L.Force Majeure...............................................................................................16
M.Dispute Resolution........................................................................................16
N.Effect of Consent Judgment..........................................................................17
O.Indemnification and Insurance......................................................................18
P.Parties Bound................................................................................................19
Q.Modification..................................................................................................20
R.Recording......................................................................................................20
S.Service...........................................................................................................20
5.Releases from Liability and Covenant Not to Sue.................................................20
6.Third-Party Actions...............................................................................................22
7.Defendant Waivers.................................................................................................23
8.Benefits and Burdens Run with the Land..............................................................23
9.Certification of Completion...................................................................................23
10.Continuing Jurisdiction..........................................................................................24
Exhibit A: Vicinity Map
Exhibit B: Property Legal Description
Exhibit C: Scope of Work
Exhibit D: Service List
Page 3-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
1.Purpose
This Consent Judgment is filed simultaneously with and for the purpose of resolving the
underlying complaint by the State of Oregon. Plaintiff State of Oregon ex rel. the Director of the
Department of Environmental Quality (“DEQ”) and Defendant City of Tigard (“Defendant”)
(collectively, the “Parties”) desire to resolve this action without litigation and have agreed to
entry of the Consent Judgment without admission or adjudication of any issue of fact or law. The
mutual objectives of the Parties are: (a) to protect public health, safety, and welfare and the
environment in accordance with ORS 465.200 through 465.410, and regulations promulgated
thereto, and (b) to facilitate productive reuse of property; and (c) to provide Defendant with
protection from potential liabilities in accordance with applicable law.
2.Stipulations and Findings
A.Defendant stipulates:
(1)To entry of this Consent Judgment;
(2)To perform and comply with all provisions of this Consent Judgment; and
(3)To not litigate, in any proceeding brought by DEQ to enforce this Consent
Judgment or to assess penalties for noncompliance with this Consent Judgment, any issue other
than Defendant’s compliance with this Consent Judgment.
B.DEQ and Defendant stipulate:
(1)For the purposes of this Consent Judgment, the “Facility,” as defined in ORS
465.200(13), means: (a) the Property; and (b) the full extent of existing known or unknown
contamination by hazardous substances of any media on, above, or below the Property, or that
has migrated, might have migrated, or hereafter migrates to anywhere from the Property.
(2)For the purposes of this Consent Judgment, “Matters Addressed” means all
investigation, removal, and remedial actions taken or to be taken and all remedial action costs
incurred or to be incurred at or in connection with a release of hazardous substances at the
Facility.
Page 4-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
(3)For the purposes of this Consent Judgment, “Existing Hazardous Substance
Releases” means: (a) any release of hazardous substances, as defined in ORS 465.200, at the
Facility existing as of the date of Defendant’s acquisition of ownership or operation of the
Property; (b) any spill or release of oil or hazardous material, as defined in ORS 466.605, at the
Facility existing as of the date of Defendant’s acquisition of ownership or operation of the
Property; and (c) the entry of oil into the waters of the state, as defined in ORS 468B.300, from
the Facility before the date of Defendant’s acquisition of ownership or operation of the Property.
C.DEQ finds, and Defendant neither admits nordenies:
(1)Defendant is a political subdivision (municipality) of the State of Oregon. The
property proposed for acquisition by Defendant, currently owned by Saxony-Pacific, LLC, is an
approximately 0.44-acre site located at 12533, 12535, and 12537 SW Main Street, Clackamas
County, Oregon, in Section 02, Township 2S, Range 1, of the Willamette Meridian (the
“Property”). The location of the Property is illustrated generally in the Vicinity Map, Exhibit A
to this Consent Judgment. The legal description of the Property is set forth in Exhibit B to this
Consent Judgment. All attachments are incorporated into this Consent Judgment by this
reference. In the 1930s the land use surrounding the site was primarily agricultural. By 1947 the
site was occupied by a large building that housed the Tigard Planing Mill. Later businesses that
occupied the building include a tire shop, automotive repair shop, bakery, jewelry store, real
estate office, and an insurance office.
(2)Sampling below a part of the facility that has been used for auto repair work
found solvent contamination in groundwater. Solvents found included tetrachloroethene (PCE),
up to 106 mg/L and trichloroethene (TCE), up to 803 mg/L. Levels of groundwater
contamination exceed the risk-based concentration for vapor intrusion into buildings for the
urban residential setting. Similar contaminants were found in soil gas at concentrations below
risk-based levels; soil samples did not contain contamination. There is a dry cleaning
establishment immediately NE of the site which may be a potential source of solvents and/or
Page 5-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
there may be an onsite source in the auto repair shop.
Contaminants found in initial sampling of sediments in the adjacent Fanno Creek include
the metals arsenic and lead and the PAHs benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, fluoranthene, and
pyrene. Additional sediment sampling and porewater sampling was completed on the banks of
the Fanno Creek, upstream and downstream of the site. Petroleum, metals, PAHs, and PCBs
were found in sediments but there was no indication that the site was significant source of
sediment contamination. A pore water sample from the shoreline of Fanno Creek was analyzed
for VOCs but none were found; this indicates that the plume of solvent contamination below the
site is not impacting the creek.
(3)These contaminants are “hazardous substances” within the meaning of ORS
465.200(16). The presence of hazardous substances at the Property constitutes a “release” of
hazardous substances within the meaning of ORS 465.200(22), and makes the Property a
“facility” within the meaning of ORS 465.200(13).
(4)Pursuant to ORS 465.255(1)(b), Defendant could become liable to DEQ and
other persons for releases of hazardous substances at or from the Property by becoming the
owner or operator of the Property with actual or constructive knowledge of the releases. On April
8, 2014 Defendant applied to DEQ for a “prospective purchaser” agreement under ORS 465.327
and agreed to reimburse DEQ’s costs of technical review and preparation. This Consent
Judgment is intended to protect Defendant from potential liability for pre-acquisition releases of
hazardous substances at or from the Property including any contamination from the Property of
sediments in the adjacent Fanno Creek, in return for Defendant undertaking certain obligations as
described in this Consent Judgment. In determining to propose this Consent Judgment, DEQ
considered reasonably anticipated future land uses at the Property and surrounding properties and
consulted with The City of Tigard Community Development. This Consent Judgment is entered
into pursuant to ORS 465.325 and ORS 465.327.
(5)On November 1, 2014, DEQ published notice of this proposed Consent
Judgment and provided opportunity for public comment in accordance with ORS 465.320(1) and
Page 6-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
465.325(4)(d). The comment period ended December 1, 2014. No comments were received.
(6)Consistent with ORS 465.327(1):
(a)Defendant is a “person” within the meaning of ORS 465.200(21);
(b)Defendant is not currently liable under ORS 465.255, 466.640, or
468B.310 for the Existing Hazardous Substance Releases;
(c)Removal or remedial action is necessaryat the Property to protect
human health or the environment;
(d)Defendant’s ownership and operation of the Property will not cause,
contribute to, or exacerbate existing contamination, increase health risks, or interfere with
remedial measures at the Property; and
(e)A substantial public benefit will result from this Consent Judgment.
(7)Based on the administrative record, the Director of DEQ determines that: (a)
the release from liability set forth in Subsection 5.B satisfies the criteria set forth in ORS
465.327(1); (b) the covenant not to sue set forth in Subsection 5.D satisfies the criteria set forth
in ORS 465.325(7)(a) and (d); and (c) this Consent Judgment and Defendant’s commitments
under this Consent Judgment will expedite removal or remedial action, minimize litigation, be
consistent with rules adopted under ORS 465.400, and be in the public interest.
3.Work to be Performed
A.Measures to be Undertaken
Defendant will perform the remedial design and remedial action for the Site in
accordance with the terms and schedules set forth in the Scope of Work (“SOW”) attached to and
incorporated by reference into this Consent Judgment as Exhibit C, and the terms and schedules
set forth in a DEQ-approved work plan.
B.Modification of SOW or Related Work Plans
(1)If DEQ determines that modification to the work specified in the SOW and/or
in work plans developed pursuant to the SOW is necessary in order to protect public health and
Page 7-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
the environment, DEQ may require that such modification be incorporated in the SOW and/or
such work plans; provided, any such modification may be required pursuant to this paragraph
only to the extent that the modification is consistent with protection of public health and the
environment.
(2)Subject to dispute resolution under Subsection 7.M., Defendant will modify
the SOW and/or work plans as required by DEQ and implement any work required by the
modifications. Before invoking dispute resolution under Subsection 7.M., Defendant and DEQ
will make a good-faith effort to resolve any dispute regarding DEQ-requested modifications by
informal discussions for no more than 30 days following notice from DEQ of a requested
modification.
C.Additional Measures
Defendant may elect at any time during the term of this Consent Judgment to
undertake measures, beyond those required under this Consent Judgment and the SOW,
necessary to address the release or threatened release of hazardous substances at the Property.
Such additional measures are subject to prior approval by DEQ. DEQ’s approval will be granted
if DEQ determines that the additional measures are consistent with the remedial action objectives
in the ROD and will not threaten human health or the environment.
D.Site Restrictions and Periodic Reviews
(1)Defendant agrees to prepare and record with the County Clerk, Washington
County, an Easement and Equitable Servitude in the form approved by DEQ unless further
investigation and cleanup after building demolition eliminates the need for site restrictions.
(2)Property subject to the Easementand Equitable Servitude may be freely
alienated at any time after recording, provided the deed or other instrument of conveyance refers
to or incorporates the Easement and Equitable Servitude.
(3)Any deed, title, or other instrument of conveyance regarding the Property
must contain a notice that the Property is the subject of this Consent Judgment. Defendant, in any
Page 8-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
such deed or conveyance, must also reserve such access (by easement, right-of-way, or
otherwise) as might be necessary to carry out Defendant’s obligations under this Consent
Judgment.
(4)DEQ may elect to review whatever remedy may be installed on the Property
as described in Exhibit C to ensure that the Property, as it may be developed, remains protective
of public health, safety, and welfare and the environment. Such reviews may include evaluation
of monitoring data, progress reports, inspection and maintenance reports (if any), and of land and
water uses, compliance with institutional controls, and any other relevant information.
4.General Provisions
A.Project Managers
(1)To the extent possible, all reports, notices, and other communications required
under or relating to this Consent Judgment must be directed to:
DEQ Project Manager Defendant Project Manager
Bob Williams
Department of Environmental Quality
Northwest Region
2020 SW 4th Ave Portland, OR 97201
Phone: 503-229-6802
Email:
williams.robert.k@deq.state.or.us
Sean Farrelly
Redevelopment Project Manager
City of Tigard/City Center Development
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR, 97223]
503-718-2420
Sean@tigard-or.gov
(2)The Project Managers or their respective designees must be available and
have the authority to make day-to-day decisions necessary to complete the work described under
Section 3.
B.Supervising Contractor
(1)All aspects of any work to be performed by Defendant pursuant to this
Consent Judgment must be performed under the direction and supervision of a qualified
employee or contractor having experience in hazardous substance remediation and knowledge of
applicable state and federal laws, regulations, and guidance.
Page 9-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
(2)Before initiation of remedial design work for the Property, Defendant will
notify DEQ in writing of the name, title, and qualifications of any proposed supervising
contractor. DEQ may for good cause disapprove the proposed contractor. In the event of such
disapproval, DEQ will notify Defendant in writing of the reasons for its disapproval within 14
days of receipt of the initial notice from Defendant. Defendant, within 14 days of receiving
DEQ’s notice of disapproval, will notify DEQ of the name, title, and qualifications of an
alternate supervising contractor, subject to DEQ’s right to disapprove under the terms and
schedule specified above.
(3)If, during the course of work required under this Consent Judgment,
Defendant proposes to change its supervising contractor, Defendant will notify DEQ in
accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph. DEQ may disapprove such
contractor, under the terms and schedule specified in the preceding paragraph.
C.DEQ Approvals
(1)In the event that DEQ review and approval is required for any plan or activity
under this Consent Judgment, Defendant may not proceed to implement the plan or activity prior
to DEQ approval. Any DEQ delay in granting or denying approval correspondingly extends the
time for completion by Defendant. Prior approval is not required in emergencies, provided
Defendant notifies DEQ immediately after the emergency and evaluates the impact of its actions.
(2)After review of any plan, report, or other item required to be submitted for
DEQ approval under this Consent Judgment, DEQ will: (a) approve the submission in whole or
in part; or (b) disapprove the submission in whole or in part, and notify Defendant of its
deficiencies and/or request modifications to cure the deficiencies.
(3)DEQ approvals, rejections, or identification of deficiencies will be given in
writing within the time specified in the SOW or as soon as practicable, and will state DEQ’s
reasons with reasonable specificity.
(4)In the event of DEQ disapproval or request for modification of a submission,
Page 10-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Defendant will, within 30 days of receipt of the DEQ notice or such longer time as may be
specified in the notice, either correct the deficiencies and resubmit the revised report or other
item for approval, or invoke dispute resolution under Subsection 4.M.
(5)In the event of two deficient submittals of the same deliverable that are
deficient for the same reasons due to Defendant’s failure in good faith to cure the original
deficiency, DEQ may modify the submission to cure the deficiency.
(6)In the event of approval or modification of a submission by DEQ, Defendant
will implement the action(s) required by the plan, report, or other item, as so approved or
modified.
D.Access to Property
(1)Defendant will allow DEQ toenter all portions of the Property owned by or
under the control of Defendant at all reasonable times for the purpose of overseeing Defendant’s
performance under this Consent Judgment, including but not limited to: inspecting records
relating to work under this Consent Judgment; conducting such tests and taking such samples as
DEQ deems necessary, verifying data submitted to DEQ by Defendant; conducting periodic
review; and using camera, sound recording, or other recording equipment. DEQ will make
available to Defendant, upon Defendant’s request, any photographs or recorded or videotaped
material taken.
(2)Defendant will seek to obtain access to property not owned or controlled by
Defendant as necessary to perform the work required in this Consent Judgment, including access
by DEQ for purposes described in Paragraph 4.D.(1). DEQ may use its statutory authority to
obtain access to property on behalf of Defendant if DEQ determines that access is necessary and
that Defendant has exhausted all good faith efforts toobtain access.
E.Records
(1)In addition to those reports and documents specifically required under this
Consent Judgment, Defendant will provide to DEQ, within 10 days of DEQ’s written request,
Page 11-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
copies of Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) memoranda and audits, raw data, final
plans, task memoranda, field notes (not made by or at the direction of Defendant’s attorney), and
laboratory analytical reports relating to the work to be performed under this Consent Judgment.
(2)Defendant will preserve all recordsand documents in possession or control of
Defendant or its employees, agents, or contractors that relate in any way to activities under this
Consent Judgment for at least five years after certification of completion under Section 9. Upon
DEQ’s request, Defendant will provide to DEQ, or make available for copying by DEQ, copies
of non-privileged records. For a period of 10 years after certification of completion, Defendant
will provide DEQ 60 days notice before destruction or other disposal of such records or
documents. Ten years after certification of completion, Defendant has no further obligation to
preserve documents or records.
(3)Subject to Paragraph 4.E.(4), Defendant may assert a claim of confidentiality
under the Oregon Public Records Law regarding anydocuments or records submitted to or
copied by DEQ pursuant to this Consent Judgment. DEQ will treat documents and records for
which a claim of confidentiality has been made in accordance with ORS 192.410 through
192.505. If Defendant does not make a claim of confidentiality at the time the documents or
records are submitted to or copied by DEQ, the documents or records may be made available to
the public without notice to Defendant.
(4)Defendant will identify to DEQ (by addressor-addressee, date, general subject
matter, and distribution) any document, record, or item withheld from DEQ on the basis of
attorney-client or attorney work product privilege, except to the extent that such identifying
information is itself subject to a privilege. Attorney-client or work product privilege may not be
asserted with respect to any records required to be submitted under Paragraph 4.E.(1). DEQ
reserves its rights under law to obtain documents DEQ asserts are improperly withheld by
Defendant.
Page 12-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
F.Notice and Samples
(1)Defendant will make every reasonable effort to notify DEQ of any excavation,
drilling, sampling, or other fieldwork to be conducted under this Consent Judgment at least five
working days before such activity, but in no event less than 24 hours before such activity. Upon
DEQ's verbal request, Defendant will make every reasonable effort to provide a split or duplicate
sample to DEQ or allow DEQ to take a split or duplicate of any sample taken by Defendant
while performing work under this Consent Judgment. DEQ will provide Defendant with copies
of all analytical data from such samples as soon as practicable.
(2)If DEQ conducts any sampling or analysis in connection with this Consent
Judgment, DEQ will, except in an emergency, make every reasonable effort to notify Defendant
of any excavation, drilling, sampling, or other fieldwork at least 72 hours before such activity.
Upon Defendant’s verbal request, DEQ will make every reasonable effort to provide a split or
duplicate sample to Defendant or allow Defendant to take a splitor duplicate of any sample
taken by DEQ, and will provide Defendant with copies of all analytical data for such samples.
Defendant will provide DEQ with copies of all analytical data from such samples as soon as
practicable.
G.Quality Assurance
(1)Defendantwill conduct all sampling, sample transport, and sample analysis in
accordance with the QA/QC provisions approved by DEQ as part of the work plan. All plans
prepared and work conducted as part of this Consent Judgment must be consistent with DEQ's
Environmental Cleanup Quality Assurance Policy (DEQ10-LQ-0063-QAG). Defendant will
make every reasonable effort to ensure that each laboratory used by Defendant for analysis
performs such analyses in accordance with such provisions.
(2)If DEQ conducts sampling or analysis in connection with this Consent
Judgment, DEQ will conduct sampling, sample transport, and sample analysis in accordance
with the QA/QC provisions of the approved work plan. Upon written request, DEQ will provide
Page 13-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Defendant with copies of DEQ’s records regarding such sampling, transport, and analysis.
H.Progress Reports
In the event of any remediation or work being performed on the Property as
described in Exhibit C, and during each calendar quarter following the latter of entry of this
Consent Judgment or the initiation of such work, Defendant will deliver to DEQ, on or before the
tenth working day of each quarter, a progress report containing:
(1)Actions taken by Defendant under this Consent Judgment during the previous
three months;
(2)Actions scheduled to be taken by Defendant in the next three months;
(3)A summary of sampling, test results, and any other data generated or received
by Defendant, if any, during the previous three months; and
(4)A description of any problems experienced by Defendant during the previous
three months and actions taken to resolve them.
DEQ may approve less frequent reporting by Defendant, if warranted. Progress reports
may be submitted in electronic form. If submitted in hard-copy written form, two copies must be
provided to DEQ.
I.Other Applicable Laws
(1)Subject to ORS 465.315(3), all activities under this Consent Judgment must
be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws.
(2)All activities under this Consent Judgment must be performed in accordance
with any applicable federal, state, and local laws related to archeological objects and sites and
their protection. If archeological objects or human remains are discovered during any
investigation, removal, or remedial activity at the Property, Defendantwill, at a minimum: (a)
stop work immediately in the vicinity of the find; (b) provide any notifications required by ORS
97.745 and ORS 358.920; (c) notify the DEQ Project Manager within 24 hours of the discovery;
and (d) use best efforts to ensure that Defendant and its employees, contractors, counsel, and
Page 14-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
consultants keep the discovery confidential, including but not limited to refraining from
contacting the media or any third party or otherwise sharing information regarding the discovery
with any memberof the public. Any project delay caused by the discovery of archeological
object or human remains is a Force Majeure under Subsection 4.L.
J.Reimbursement of DEQ Costs
(1)DEQ will submit to Defendant a monthly invoice of costs on or after April 8,
2014 in connection with development and approval of this Consent Judgment and any activities
related to the oversight and periodic review of Defendant’s implementation of this Consent
Judgment. Each invoice must include a summary of costs billed to date.
(2)DEQ oversight costs payable by Defendant include direct and indirect costs.
Direct costs include site-specific expenses, DEQ contractor costs, and DEQ legal costs actually
and reasonably incurred by DEQ under ORS 465.200 et seq. DEQ’s direct cost summary must
include a Land Quality Division (“LQD”) direct labor summary showing the persons charging
time, the number of hours, and the nature of work performed. Indirect costs include those general
management and support costs of DEQ and of the LQD allocable to DEQ oversight under this
Consent Judgment and not charged as direct, site-specific costs. Indirect charges are based on
actual costs and applied as a percentage of direct personal services costs. DEQ will maintain
work logs, payroll records, receipts, and other documents to document work performed and
expenses incurred under this Consent Judgment and, upon request, will provide copies of such
records to Defendant.
(3)Within 30 days of receipt of DEQ’s invoice, Defendant will pay the amount of
costs billed by check payable to the “State of Oregon, Hazardous Substance Remedial Action
Fund,” or invoke dispute resolution under Subsection 4.M. After 30 days, any unpaid amounts
that are not the subject of pending dispute resolution, or that have been determined owing after
dispute resolution, become a liquidated debt collectible under ORS 293.250 or other applicable
law.
Page 15-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
(4)Defendant will pay simple interest of 9% per annum on the unpaid balance of
any DEQ oversight costs, which interest will begin to accrue at the end of the 30-day payment
period, unless dispute resolution has been invoked. Interest on any amount disputed under
Subsection 4.M will begin to accrue 30 days from final resolution of any such dispute.
K.Financial Assurance
(1)In the event of any remediation or work beingperformed on the Property as
described in Exhibit C, Defendant will demonstrate its ability to perform such remedial work by
obtaining and submitting to DEQ for approval one or a combination of the following: (a) a
performance bond; (b) a letter of creditequaling the total estimated cost of the work; (c)
evidence of an escrow account dedicated to payment of or reimbursement for remedial action
costs; or (d) internal financial information (financial test or corporate guarantee) sufficient to
satisfy DEQ that its net worth is sufficient to make additional financial assurances unnecessary.
If internal financial information is relied upon, the standards used to determine the adequacy of
Defendant’s resources must be substantially equivalent to those set forth in 40 CFR Part 265,
Subpart H. Financial assurance must be submitted within 30 days of DEQ approval of the final
remedial design work plan in the amount of the estimated total capital cost of the remedial
action.
(2)Within 30 days of receipt of the financial assurance or other information,
DEQ will determine its adequacy and communicate that determination to Defendant. If DEQ
determines that such assurance or information is inadequate, Defendant will submit one of the
other forms of assurance to DEQ for approval. If internal corporate information is relied upon,
Defendant will submit updated financial information annually on the anniversary date of
issuance of this Consent Judgment.
(3)During implementation of the remedial action, DEQ may require Defendant to
revise the cost estimates used to demonstrate Defendant’s financial assurance, and Defendant at
its own election may revise the cost estimate for the required work from time to time. If a revised
Page 16-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
cost estimate is significantly higher or lower than the originalcost estimate, DEQ may require
Defendant to submit revised financial assurance under the terms and schedule set forth in the
preceding paragraphs adequate to assure financial capability at the level of the revised cost
estimate.
(4)Except as approved by DEQ,work required under this Consent Judgment may
not be delayed pending submission and/or approval of financial assurance under this subsection.
L.Force Majeure
(1)If any event occurs that is beyond Defendant’s reasonable control and that
causes or might cause a delay or deviation in performance of the requirements of this Consent
Judgment despite Defendant’s reasonable efforts (“Force Majeure”), Defendant will promptly,
upon learning of the event, notify DEQ’s Project Manager verbally of the cause of the delay or
deviation, its anticipated duration, the measures that have been or will be taken to prevent or
minimize the delay or deviation, and the timetable by which Defendant proposes to carry out
such measures. Defendant will confirm in writing this information within five working days of
the verbal notification. Failure to comply with these notice requirements precludes Defendant
from asserting Force Majeure for theevent and for any additional delay caused by the event.
(2)If Defendant demonstrates to DEQ’s satisfaction that the delay or deviation
has been or will be caused by Force Majeure, DEQ will extend times for performance of related
activities under this ConsentJudgment as appropriate. Circumstances or events constituting
Force Majeure might include but not be limited to acts of God, unforeseen strikes or work
stoppages, unanticipated site conditions, fire, explosion, riot, sabotage, war, and delays in
receivinga governmental approval or permit. Normal inclement weather, increased cost of
performance or changed business or economic circumstances may not be considered Force
Majeure.
M.Dispute Resolution
(1)Except as provided in Paragraph 4.M.(4), if Defendant disagrees with DEQ
Page 17-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
regarding any matter relating to this Consent Judgment, Defendant will promptly notify DEQ in
writing of its objection. DEQ and Defendant then will make a good-faith effort to resolve the
disagreement within 14 days of Defendant’s written objection. At the end of the 14-day period,
DEQ will provide Defendant with a written statement of its position from DEQ’s Northwest
Region Cleanup Manager. If Defendant still disagrees with DEQ's position, then Defendant,
within 14 days of receipt of DEQ's position from the Region Cleanup Manager, will provide
Defendant’s position and rationale in writing to DEQ’s NorthwestRegion Administrator. The
Region Administrator may discuss the disputed matter with Defendant and, in any event, will
provide Defendant with DEQ's final position in writing as soon as practicable after receipt of
Defendant's written position.
(2)If Defendant refuses or fails to follow DEQ’s final position pursuant to
Paragraph 4.M.(1), and DEQ seeks to enforce its final position, the Parties, subject to Subsection
2.A. and Section 7, are entitled to such rights, remedies, and defenses as are provided by
applicable law.
(3)During the pendency of any dispute resolution under this subsection, the time
for completion of work or obligations affected bysuch dispute is extended for a period of time
not to exceed the actual time taken to resolve the dispute. Elements of work or obligations not
affected by the dispute must be completed in accordance with the applicable schedule.
(4)Dispute resolution under this subsection does not apply to DEQ approval or
modification of the remedial design/remedial action work plan required under the SOW, which
approval or modification is nonetheless subject to Subsection 4.C.
N.Effect of Consent Judgment
(1)If Defendant fails to comply with this Consent Judgment, DEQ may seek civil
penalties under ORS 465.900 and enforcement of this Consent Judgment by this Court. If DEQ
seeks enforcement of this Consent Judgment by this Court, DEQ may seek monetary sanctions,
such as civil penalties, only if DEQ has not assessed and collected any civil penalties under ORS
Page 18-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
465.900 regarding the same violation.
(2)Subject to Section 2, Defendant does not admit any liability, violation of law,
factual or legal findings, conclusions, or determinationsasserted in this Consent Judgment.
(3)Nothing in this Consent Judgment is intended to create any cause of action in
favor of any person not a party to this Consent Judgment.
(4)Subject to Section 2 and Section 7, nothing in this Consent Judgment prevents
DEQ, the State of Oregon, or Defendant from exercising any rights each might have against any
person not a party to this Consent Judgment.
(5)If for any reason the Court declines to approve this Consent Judgment in the
form presented, this settlement is voidable at the sole discretion of any Party and the terms of the
settlement may not be used in evidence in any litigation among or against the Parties.
(6)DEQ and Defendant intend for this Consent Judgment to be construed as a
judicially-approved settlement by which Defendant has resolved its liability to the State of
Oregon, within the meaning of Section 113(f)(2) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9613(f)(2), regarding
Matters Addressed, and for Defendantnot to be liable for claims for contribution regarding
Matters Addressed to the extent provided by Section 113(f)(2) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§
9613(f)(2).
(7)Unless specified otherwise, the use of the term “days” in this Consent
Judgment means calendar days.
(8)This Consent Judgment is void and of no effect if Defendant does not
complete acquisition of the Property by September 30, 2015, unless this date is extended mutual
prior written agreement of the parties hereto.
O.Indemnification and Insurance
(1)Defendant will indemnify and hold harmless the State of Oregon and its
commissions, agencies, officers, employees, contractors, and agents from and against any and all
Page 19-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
claims arising from acts or omissions related to this Consent Judgment of Defendant or its
officers, employees, contractors, agents, receivers, trustees, or assigns. DEQ may not be
considered a party to any contracts made by Defendant or its agents in carrying out activities
under this Consent Judgment.
(2)To the extent permitted by Article XI, Section 7,of the Oregon Constitution
and by the Oregon Tort Claims Act, the State of Oregon will indemnify and hold harmless
Defendant and its respective officers, employees, contractors, and agents, and indemnify the
foregoing, from and against any and all claims arising from acts or omissions related to this
Consent Judgment of the State of Oregon or its commissions, agencies, officers, employees,
contractors, or agents (except for acts or omissions constituting approval or disapproval of any
activity of Defendantunder this Consent Judgment). Defendant may not be considered a party to
any contract made by DEQ or its agents in carrying out activities under this Consent Judgment.
(3)Before commencing any on-site work under this Consent Judgment,
Defendant will obtain and maintain for the duration of this Consent Judgment comprehensive
general liability and automobile insurance with limits of $1 million, combined single limit per
occurrence, naming as an additional insured the State of Oregon. Upon DEQ request, Defendant
will provide DEQ a copy or other evidence of the insurance. If Defendant demonstrates by
evidence satisfactory to DEQ that its contractor(s) or subcontractor(s) maintain equivalent
coverage, or coverage for the same risks but in a lesser amount or for a lesser term, Defendant
may provide only that portion of the insurance that is not maintained by its contractor(s) or
subcontractor(s).
P.Parties Bound
This Consent Judgment is binding on the Parties and their respective successors,
agents, and assigns. The undersigned representative of each party certifies that he or she is fully
authorized to execute and bind such party to this Consent Judgment. No change in ownership,
corporate, or partnership status relating to the Property in any way alters Defendant’s obligations
Page 20-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
under this Consent Judgment, unless otherwise approved in writing by DEQ.
Q.Modification
DEQ and Defendant may modify this Consent Judgment by written agreement,
subject to approval by this Court. DEQ and Defendant may modify the SOW or a work plan
without having to obtain court approval, provided the modification is consistent with the ROD.
R.Recording
Within 14 days of entry of this Consent Judgment by the Court, Defendant will
submit a copy or original of this Consent Judgment (whichever is required by the county) to be
recorded in the real property records of Clackamas County, Oregon. Defendant will provide
DEQ with written evidence of such recording within seven days of recording.
S.Service
Each Party designates in Exhibit E the name and address of an agent authorized to
accept service of process by mail on behalf of the Party with respect to any matter relating to this
Consent Judgment. Each Party agrees to accept service in such manner, and waives any other
service requirements setforth in the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure or local rules of this Court.
The Parties agree that Defendant need not file an answer to the complaint in this action unless or
until the Court expressly declines to approve this Consent Judgment.
5.Releases from Liability and Covenant Not to Sue
A.Pursuant to ORS 465.327(3), this Consent Judgment is a “prospective purchaser
agreement” entered as a judicial consent judgment in accordance with ORS 465.325. Thus, this
Consent Judgment contains related but independent liability provisions pursuant to both ORS
465.327 and 465.325. The ORS 465.327 liability provisions are set forth below in Subsections
5.B. and 6.B. The ORS 465.325 liability provisions are set forth below in Subsections 5.D.,
6.A., and 6.C. In addition to these state law provisions, this Consent Judgment may affect
Defendant’s rights and liabilities under federal and other laws, as described in Paragraph 4.N.(6)
and Subsection 5.E.
Page 21-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
B.Pursuant to ORS 465.327, and subject to Subsection 5.C. and the satisfactory
performance by Defendant of its obligations under this Consent Judgment, Defendant is not
liable to the State of Oregon under ORS 465.200 to 465.545 and 465.900, 466.640, or 468B.310
regarding Existing Hazardous Substance Releases. Defendant bears the burden of proving by a
preponderance of the evidence that a hazardous substance release (for all hazardous substances,
hazardous materials, and oil described in Paragraph 2.B.(3)) existed as of the date of Defendant’s
acquisition of ownership oroperation of the Property.
C.The release from liability under Subsection 5.B. does not affect liability of
Defendant for claims arising from:
(1)A release of hazardous substances, spill or release of oil or hazardous
material, or entry of oil into the waters of the state at or from the Property on or after the date of
Defendant’s acquisition of ownership or operation of the Property;
(2)Contribution to or exacerbation, on or after the date of Defendant’s acquisition
of ownership or operation of theProperty, of a release of hazardous substance, spill or release of
oil or hazardous material, or entry of oil into the waters of the state at or from the Property;
(3)Interference or failure to cooperate, on or after the date of Defendant’s
acquisitionof ownership or operation of the Property, with DEQ or other persons conducting
remedial measures under DEQ's oversight at the Property;
(4)Failure to exercise due care or take reasonable precautions, on or after the date
of Defendant’s acquisition of ownership or operation of the Property, with respect to any
hazardous substance at the Property;
(5)Disposal or management of hazardous substances or solid waste removed
from the Property by or on behalf of Defendant;
(6)Criminal liability;
(7)Violation of federal, state, or local law on or after the date of Defendant’s
acquisition of ownership or operation of the Property;
Page 22-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
(8)Any matters as to which the State of Oregon is owed indemnification under
Paragraph 4.O.(1); and
(9)Claims based on any failure by Defendant to meet any requirements of this
Consent Judgment.
D.Pursuant to ORS 465.325, subject to satisfactory performance by Defendant of its
obligations under this Consent Judgment, the State of Oregon covenants not to sue or take any
other judicial or administrative action against Defendant under ORS 465.200 to 465.545 and
465.900 regarding Matters Addressed, except that the State of Oregon reserves all rights against
Defendant with respect to claims and liabilities described in Subsection 5.C.
E.Subject to satisfactory performance by Defendant of its obligations under this
Consent Judgment, DEQ releases Defendant from liability to DEQ under any federal or state
statute, regulation, or common law, including but not limited to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.,
regarding the release or threatened release of hazardous substances addressed in this Consent
Judgment, except that DEQ reserves all rights against Defendant with respect to claims and
liabilities described in Subsection 5.C.
6.Third-Party Actions
A.This Consent Judgment is a judicially-approved settlement within the meaning of
ORS 465.325(6)(b), pursuant to which Defendant has resolved its liability to the State of Oregon
and is not liable for claims for contribution regarding Matters Addressed.
B.Subject to the satisfactory performance by Defendant of its obligations under this
Consent Judgment, Defendant is not liable to any person under ORS 465.200 to 465.545,
466.640, or 468B.310 regarding Existing Hazardous Substance Releases.
C.Subject to Section 7, Defendant may seek contribution in accordance with ORS
465.325(6)(c)(B).
Page 23-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
7.Defendant Waivers
A.Defendant waives any claim or cause of action it might have against the State of
Oregon regarding Existing Hazardous Substance Releases, provided Defendant reserves all
rights concerning the obligations of DEQ under this Consent Judgment.
B.Defendant waives any rights it might have under ORS 465.260(7) and 465.325(2) to
seek reimbursement from the Hazardous Substance Remedial Action Fund or the Orphan Site
Account for costs incurred under this Consent Judgment or related to the Property.
8.Benefits and Burdens Run with the Land
A.Pursuant to ORS 465.327(5), the benefits and burdens of this Consent Judgment run
with the land, provided the releases from liability and covenant not to sue set forth in Section 5
limit or otherwise affect the liability only of persons who: (1) are not potentially liable under
ORS 465.255, 466.640, or 468B.310 for Existing Hazardous Substance Releases; and (2)
expressly assume in writing, and are bound by, the terms of this Consent Judgment applicable to
the Property as of the date of their acquisition of ownership or operation.
B.Upon transfer of ownership of the Property, or any portion of the Property, from
Defendant to another person or entity, Defendant and the new owner will provide written notice
to the DEQ Project Managerwithin 10 days after the transfer. No change in ownership of the
Property or the corporate or partnership status of Defendant in any way alters Defendant’s
obligations under this Consent Judgment, unless otherwise approved in writing by DEQ.
9.Certification of Completion
A.Upon Defendant’s completion of work in accordance with the SOW, Defendant will
submit a final closeout report to DEQ signed both by an Oregon-registered professional engineer
and Defendant’s Project Manager certifying that the remedial action for the Site has been
completed in accordance with this Consent Judgment. The report must summarize the work
performed and include all necessary supporting documentation.
B.DEQ will preliminarily determine whether the remedial action has been performed
Page 24-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
for the Property and all oversight costs and penalties have been paid in accordance with this
Consent Judgment. Upon a preliminary determination that the remedial action for the Property
has been satisfactorily performed and all costs and penalties paid, DEQ will provide public
notice and opportunity to comment on a proposed certification decision in accordance with ORS
465.320 and 465.325(10)(b). After consideration of public comment, and within 90 days after
receiving Defendant’s closeout report, the Director of DEQ will issue a final certification
decision. The certification decision will subsequently be submitted by DEQ to this Court. A
certification of completion of the remedial action does not affect Defendant’s remaining
obligations under this ConsentJudgment or for implementation of measures necessary to long-
term effectiveness of the remedial action or productive reuse of the Property.
10.Continuing Jurisdiction
This Court retains jurisdiction over the Parties and the subject matter of this Consent
Judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED this ____ day of ____________________, ________.
______________________________
Circuit Court Judge, Washington County
Page 25-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
STATE OF OREGON, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
By:_____________________________________Date:_____________
Lydia Emer
Administrator, Operations Division
By:_____________________________________Date:_____________
Gary Vrooman OSB No. 075832
Assistant Attorney General
Oregon Department of Justice
1515 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 410
Portland, OR 97201
Attorney for DEQ
City of Tigard
By:Date:
Marty Wine
City Manager
By:_________________________________Date:_____________
Christopher L. Reive OSB No. 833058
Of Attorneys for City of Tigard
Two Centerpointe, Suite 600
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
Page 26-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Exhibit A
Vicinity Map
Page 27-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Exhibit B
Property Legal Description
Page 28-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Page 29-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Exhibit C
Scope of Work
Exhibit C –Scope of Work
1. The City will commit to install, or require installation of, engineering controls to mitigate the
potential for vapor intrusion, and to agree to institutional controls at the time of closing to
enforce the engineering controls.
a. The engineering controls will be installed at the time of redevelopment, and will
consist of a vapor mitigation system comprised of a network of perforated pipes in trenches,
covered with gravel, and overlain by a heavy duty vapor barrier. The system will be passive in
nature (but capable of retrofitting to an active system), allowing any accumulated vapors to vent
to outdoor air.
b. Institutional controls will be in the form of an Easement and Equitable Servitudes that
will enforce the maintenance of engineering controls and prevent use of site groundwater.
2. Prior to building demolition, the City will prepare a contaminated media management plan
(CMMP) for use by contractors working at the site.
3. At the time of building demolition, the City will performadditional environmental
investigation to evaluate whether soil cleanup work may be necessary to reduce or eliminate the
need for the vapor mitigation system
a. Additional investigation will consist of approximately five soil gas sample points with
follow-up soil and groundwater sampling. Sampling locations will be proposed to DEQ for
concurrence.
b. If contaminated soils are identified, the most contaminated material will be removed to
reduce or eliminate future risk from on-site sources.
Page 30-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
c. If additional groundwater investigation is determined to be necessary then groundwater
sampling may include three to four groundwater monitoring wells, which will be sampled for up
to four quarters. As an alternative additional push probe groundwater sample points may be
installed with DEQ approval.
Page 31-CONSENT JUDGMENT
Department of Justice
Exhibit D
Service List
FOR PLAINTIFF:Gary Vrooman, OSB No. 075832
Assistant Attorney General
Oregon Department of Justice
1515 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 410
Portland, OR 97201
FOR DEFENDANT:Christopher Reive, OSB No. 833058
Jordan Ramis, PC
2 Centerpointe Drive
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
AIS-2182 3.
CCDA Agenda
Meeting Date:05/05/2015
Length (in minutes):0 Minutes
Agenda Title:APPROVE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MINUTES
Submitted By:Norma Alley, City Management
Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: City Center
Development
Agency
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Approve City Center Development Agency Minutes for March 3, 2015.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
N/A
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
N/A
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS
N/A
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
N/A
Attachments
March 3, 2015 CCDA Draft Minutes
TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES –MARCH 3, 2015
City of Tigard | 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 | www.tigard-or.gov | Page 1 of 3
City of Tigard
City Center Development Agency and City Council
Joint Meeting Minutes
March 3, 2015
6:30 p.m.
1.CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A.Chair Cook called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
B.Deputy City Recorder Alley called the roll:
Name Present Absent
Chair Cook
Director Goodhouse
Director Henderson
Director Snider
Director Woodard
C.Pledge of Allegiance –Mayor Cook lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
D.Call to CCDA and Staff for Non Agenda Items –None announced.
2.CITY COUNCIL:CONTINUATION OF QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING –
CONSIDERATION OF A+O APARTMENTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA2014-
00002) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR2014-00003), SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
(SDR2014-00004), AND SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR2014-00002)
Open Public Hearing:Mayor Cook announced this was a Quasi-Judicial Hearing continued from January
13, 2015 and February 3, 2015. This hearing is reserved for council deliberation as the public testimony had
closed.
Mayor Cook called for any declarations of ex-parte contact, bias or conflicts of interest since the February 3
hearing. Mayor Cook said he drove down the street a few times. There were no objections from the public.
Staff Recommendation:Associate Planner Pagenstecher stated staff recommends approval with
amendments to conditions #7 as stated in the applicant’s memo dated February 10, 2015 and #8 as written in
the handout provided at the meeting tonight (handout was entered into the record).
Council Deliberation:
Councilor Woodard expressed concern for the amount of fill dirt that will be used to cover the flood plain.
He asked where the fill dirt was coming from. Mr. Pagenstecher said he did not know that as that information
is not an application requirement. Councilor Woodard requested notification of the type of fill and where it is
coming from be made a requirement.
Councilor Henderson stated he shared Councilor Woodard’s sentiment with how much fill dirt is proposed to
be used for the wetlands. Mr. Pagenstecher said essentially the whole site is being filled in attempt to level it
to the Oak Street level.
Council President Snider said it is fair to say the council is struggling with the wetland criteria decisions and
what is going into that wetland space is germane to the decision.
TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES –MARCH3, 2015
City of Tigard | 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 | www.tigard-or.gov | Page2of 3
Mayor Cook said as it stands there may be some councilors that donot support the current application. He
asked if there wereprovisions that could be added to the conditions making the application amenable to
getting approved.
Councilor Woodard said hepreferredsensitive wetlands not be reduced. It would be prudent to make sure
the development fits the space and doesnot have a huge impacton the sensitive wetlands.Itispreferredto
see a development with higher buildings in order to stay out of the wetlands.
Council President Snider commented he did not desire to moveforward with the ordinanceif the conditions
arenot different.
Councilor Henderson shared concern if mitigatingthe wetlandswas realistic and there being a compromise
on the walkabilityof the community.
Mayor Cook said he was troubled with the use offill of any kind on the wetlands and foresees it causing
problems elsewhere. There are other alternatives and maybe they are not favored, but it may have to go that
way.
Council President Snider asked if the ordinance does not get approved what the disposition of the resolution
would be. City Attorney Ramis answered if council doesnot pass the ordinance then the plan wouldnot be
the same so theycouldnot act on any of the others.Mr. Ramis suggested making a tentative move directing
staff to come back with findings that reflect the basis of the council’s decision to deny the ordinance.
Councilor Snider motioned to direct staff to draft findings for the ordinance reflecting the basis of denying
the application and postpone this matter to April 14, 2015. Secondedby Councilor Woodard.Motion passed
by unanimous vote of the council.
Name Yes No
MayorCook
CouncilorGoodhouse
CouncilorHenderson
Council PresidentSnider
CouncilorWoodard
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
3.APPROVE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
DirectorHendersonmotioned to approve the December 2, 2014 and February 3, 2015 CCDA Minutes It was
seconded by Director Snider.Motion passed by unanimous vote of the board.
Name Yes No
ChairCook
DirectorGoodhouse
DirectorHenderson
DirectorSnider
DirectorWoodard
4.RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON THE MAIN STREET ART AND GATEWAY DESIGN
Redevelopment Project Manager Farrelly provided an update,accompanied by a PowerPoint, on the Main
Street art and gateway design project. He stated the art has been assembled and is currently being stored at
TIGARD CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES –MARCH3, 2015
City of Tigard | 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 | www.tigard-or.gov | Page3of 3
the fabricators in Canby waitingforthe boardto give the authority to paintthem.Staff is planning to take the
project to bid and return to the Board on April 7 for a decision.City Manager Wine said the purpose to go to
bid is to get a precisecost estimate and then come back with recommendations forfunding.
Mr. Farrelly said the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC)votedto send a letter to the board
encouraging support of the project(the letter was included intothe record).
CCAC Chair Carine Arendes and CCAC Member Sherrie Devaney said they werehere to support all the
effort that has been put forward to this point and askedfor the install ofthe gateway art. The gateway idea
hasbeen around as long as the downtown plan and the CCAC isall in support of the installation.
5.NON AGENDA ITEMS –Mr. Farrelly showed a picture in the slideshow ofthe Fanno Creek Trail map that
was installed on the Dolan property.
6.EXECUTIVE SESSION –Chair Cook called the executive session to order at 7:59 p.m. to discuss real
property transactions under ORS 192.660(2)(e),held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room.Chair Cook
closed the executive session at 8:41 p.m. and reconvened the public meetingin Town Hall.
7.ADJOURNMENT
At 8:42p.m. Director Snidermotioned to adjourn the meeting. Director Henderson seconded the motion
and all voted in favor.
Name Yes No
Chair Cook
Director Goodhouse
Director Henderson
Director Snider
Director Woodard
_________________________________
Norma I. Alley, Deputy City Recorder
Attest:
________________________________________
Chair, City Center Development Agency
Date: ___________________________________
AIS-2122 4.
CCDA Agenda
Meeting Date:05/05/2015
Length (in minutes):30 Minutes
Agenda Title:Burnham and Ash Mixed Use Design Presentation
Submitted By:Sean Farrelly, Community
Development
Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: City Center
Development
Agency
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
The Board of the CCDA is requested to review the revised Burnham/Ash Mixed Use plans
and provide final comments. This is a provision of the Disposition and Development
Agreement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
The Board of the CCDA is requested to provide final comments on the plans. Staff will make
a recommendation to the Board at the May 5 meeting, after reviewing the revised plans.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between the City Center Development
Agency (CCDA) and developers Capstone Green Light Partners LLC, and Diamond
Investment Group Tigard LLC was executed on April 15, 2015. Section 3.6.1(a) calls for the
developers to provide project plans to be displayed at an open house. This open house was
held on April 22. The developers will then “consider and incorporate public comments into
any revisions reasonably determined to be appropriate.” After this, the developers will provide
revised plans to CCDA staff who will then review and provide a staff recommendation to the
CCDA Board. The DDA then calls for the CCDA Board to review the plans and provide
final comments within 45 days.
Attached are the plans and elevations displayed at the April 22 open house. Materials
discussed on May 5 may have some updates based on comments from the open house.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
The Board of the CCDA could approve the plans as submitted, or suggest further revisions.
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones
Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be
Support residential and mixed use development in walkable and transit-supported areas
by completing the Ash Avenue/Burnham Street Redevelopment project.
City Center Urban Renewal Plan
Tigard Comprehensive Plan
Economic Development
Goal 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy.
Goal 9.3 Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business.
Housing
Goal 10.1 Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse
housing needs of current and future city residents.
Special Planning Areas - Downtown
Goal 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village.
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
April 14, 2015: Authorized CCDA Executive Director to sign Disposition and Development
Agreement
September 2, 2014: Ash/Burnham Housing Development
Attachments
Burnham Ash Open House materials
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X001PERSPECTIVE - BUILDING 2
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X002
PE
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
F
R
O
N
T
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X003
PE
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
F
R
O
M
P
A
T
H
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
BUILDING 2
FA
N
N
O
C
R
E
E
K
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X050SITE PLAN 1" = 30'-0"1SITE PLAN
3
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
D
E
N
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
MAIL FITNESSLEASINGLOBBYCOMMON ROOM2 BR+2 BA3 BR+2 BA1 BR+DEN1 BR+DEN
1
B
R
+
D
E
N
ST
A
I
R
1
W
ST
U
D
I
O
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
MOVE-INELEC
DO
G
/
B
I
K
E
W
A
S
H
BI
K
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
STAIR 1N
ST
A
I
R
1
E
ST
O
R
A
G
E
JA
N
I
T
O
R
WATERELEVRESTROOMCORRIDOR
ST
O
R
A
G
E
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
PA
R
K
I
N
G
TRASH
CO
R
R
I
D
O
R
CO
R
R
I
D
O
R
BIKE PARKING
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X101FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 1 - LEVEL 1 3/32" = 1'-0"1FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 1 - LEVEL 1
ST
O
R
A
G
E
3
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
D
E
N
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
STAIR 1N ELECTRICAL1 BRSTUDIO1 BRSTORAGE1 BR
1
B
R
1
B
R
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
ST
U
D
I
O
1
B
R
+
D
E
N
1
B
R
+
D
E
N
1
B
R
+
D
E
N
3 BR+2 BA 2 BR+2 BA 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR+2 BA 2 BR+2 BA1 BR1 BR
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
ST
A
I
R
1
E
CORRIDOR TRASHELEV
ST
A
I
R
1
W
CO
R
R
I
D
O
R
CORRIDOR
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X102FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 1 - LEVEL 2-3 3/32" = 1'-0"1FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 1 - LEVEL 2-3
ELEVSTAIR 1N CORRIDOR1 BR
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
D
E
N
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
3
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
ST
U
D
I
O
S
T
U
D
I
O
S
T
U
D
I
O
S
T
U
D
I
O
S
T
U
D
I
O
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1
B
R
1 BR2 BR+1 BA2 BR+2 BAROOF DECK 1 BRSTUDIO1 BRSTORAGE1 BR1 BR
1
B
R
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
ST
U
D
I
O
1
B
R
A
N
S
I
A
1
B
R
1
B
R
3 BR+2 BA ANSI A 2 BR+2 BA ELEC TRASH
ST
O
R
A
G
E
ST
A
I
R
1
E
ST
A
I
R
1
W
CO
R
R
I
D
O
R
CORRIDOR
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X104FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 1 - LEVEL 4 3/32" = 1'-0"1FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 1 - LEVEL 4
PA
R
K
I
N
G
TR
A
S
H
LO
B
B
Y
+
M
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
BI
K
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
EL
E
C
RETAILRETAIL
ST
A
I
R
2
N
ST
A
I
R
2
S
3
B
R
+
2
B
A
1
B
R
1
B
R
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
CO
R
R
I
D
O
R
3 BR+2 BA
1
B
R
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
ST
U
D
I
O
2
B
R
+
2
B
A
ST
A
I
R
2
S
ST
A
I
R
2
N
ST
O
R
A
G
E
ST
O
R
A
G
E
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PU
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
X111FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 2 - LEVEL 1-3 3/32" = 1'-0"1FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 2 - LEVEL 1 3/32" = 1'-0"2FLOOR PLAN - BLDG 2 - LEVEL 2-3
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PE
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
X001
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
P
U
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
Bu
r
n
h
a
m
& As
h
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
CC
D
A
Bo
a
r
d
Pr
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
Ma
y
5,
20
1
5
SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR May5, 2015 Item #4
Ci
t
y
of
Ti
g
a
r
d
Vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
Ma
p
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PE
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
X001
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
P
U
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PE
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
F
R
O
N
T
X002
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
P
U
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
PE
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
F
R
O
M
P
A
T
H
X003
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
P
U
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
1
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2
FA
N
N
O
C
R
E
E
K
1"=30'-0"
BU
R
N
H
A
M
&
A
S
H
M
I
X
E
D
U
S
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
SI
T
E
P
L
A
N
X050
04
.
2
2
.
2
0
1
5
P
U
B
L
I
C
O
P
E
N
H
O
U
S
E
1SITEPLAN
PR
E
V
I
O
U
S
VE
R
S
I
O
N
UP
D
A
T
E
D
V
E
R
S
I
O
N
PR
E
V
I
O
U
S
VE
R
S
I
O
N
UP
D
A
T
E
D
V
E
R
S
I
O
N
PR
E
V
I
O
U
S
VE
R
S
I
O
N
UP
D
A
T
E
D
V
E
R
S
I
O
N
PR
E
V
I
O
U
S
VERSION
UP
D
A
T
E
D
VERSION
UP
D
A
T
E
D
VERSION
AIS-2119 5.
CCDA Agenda
Meeting Date:05/05/2015
Length (in minutes):10 Minutes
Agenda Title:Update on Ash Avenue Dog Park Relocation
Submitted By:Sean Farrelly,
Community
Development
Item Type: Update, Discussion,
Direct Staff
Meeting Type: City Center
Development
Agency
Public Hearing
Newspaper Legal Ad Required?:
No
Public Hearing Publication
Date in Newspaper:
Information
ISSUE
Update on Downtown Ash Avenue Dog Park.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
Staff requests the Board’s comments on the presentation.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
As part of the Burnham/Ash Mixed Use project Development and Disposition Agreement,
the City Center Development Agency agreed to relocate the Ash Avenue Dog Park. The
existing dog park site will be redeveloped, together with the Public Works Yard, into two
buildings with 157 market rate apartments and 2,000 square feet of commercial space.
The new site of the Ash Avenue Dog Park is diagonally across the street from the site, the
city-owned former Zuber house property. A feasibility study conducted by an engineering
consultant and city staff considered the Zuber site and another city-owned site partially in the
Fanno Creek Park floodplain and behind B&B Printing. The study determined a preference
for the Zuber house site due to its similar size, the site’s visibility, existing water service, and
the lower cost to build the project. The new site is 0.28 acres, while the existing site is 0.35
acres. A representative of the Dog Park Committee has worked with staff and the project
consultant on the choice of the location and the design of the new park.
The Zuber house was purchased in 2011 as part of the Burnham Street and Ash Avenue
improvements. It housed Public Works facilities staff until March 2015. The staff has been
relocated to the new leased facility at 8965 SW Burnham. A pre-demolition study of the
Zuber house determined the presence of some lead paint and asbestos, so the demolition
contractor required an abatement sub-contractor. The signed contract amount for the
demolition was $24,848. The house was demolished on April 21, 2015. The large trees on the
north side of the property will be preserved.
Like the existing dog park, the majority of the surface will be wood chips with a small
concrete area. Many of the elements of the existing park will be re-used at the new site,
including benches, sign, shelter, tool shed, scoop dispenser, water fountain, and the
dog-friendly hydrant and concrete pipe amenities. New street trees will be planted.
The amount of down time between closure of the existing park and opening of the new park
will be minimized, so for that reason the chain link fencing will not be re-used. A brief closure
will allow for relocation of dog park amenities into the new park. The city will communicate
any closure of the Ash Avenue Dog Park by informing the dog park committee, posting
signage at the park (directing them to nearby Potso Dog Park) and posting information on
the city website. The current schedule has the new dog park opening the week of June 29,
2015.
Attachment 1 consists of the preliminary plans for the new dog park. These plans do not
reflect staff comments. The revised final plans will be available at the May 5 CCDA meeting.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
The Board of the CCDA could provide a different direction to staff.
COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones
Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be
Support residential and mixed use development in walkable and transit-supported areas by
completing the Ash Avenue/Burnham Street Redevelopment project.
City Center Urban Renewal Plan
DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
September 2, 2014
October 28, 2014
January 27, 2015
Fiscal Impact
Cost:150,000
Budgeted (yes or no):Yes
Where Budgeted (department/program):CCDA
Additional Fiscal Notes:
The budget for the relocation of the dog park, including the demolition of the Zuber house
is $150,000.
Attachments
Preliminary Dog Park Plans
UTILITIES
AND
TOPOGRAPHIC
FEATURES
SANITARY
SEWER
STORM
DRAIN
EXISTING
WATER
(EX
W)
PROPOSED
WATER
SERVICE
FENCE
RIGHT
OF
WAY
PROPERTY
LINE
FIRE
HYDRANT
DECORATION
WATER
METER
WATER
VALVE
CATCH
BASIN
CLEAN
OUT
STREET
SIGN
POWER
POLE
IRRIGATION
VALVE
ROUND
BACKFLOW
PREVENTION
(DCDV)
STORM
DRAIN
(SD)
VAULT
TREES
AND
SHRUBS
DECIDUOUS
EVERGREEN
COMMUNICATION
PEDESTAL
DETECTABLE
WARNING
STRIP
LIGHT
POLE
DOWN
SPOUT
(DS)
PROTECT
BENCH
STYLE
1
STYLE
2
DOG
SHAPED
BICYCLE
RACK
GARBAGE
CAN
WATER
FOUNTAIN
MATERIAL
IDENTIFICATION
EARTH
CONCRETE
ENGINEERED
WOOD
3/4"
-
O
CLEAN
AGG.
ASPHAULT
CONTRACTOR
TO
PROTECT
P
EX
W
WATER
SERVICEP
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
COVER
SHEET
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\General\14094_GENERAL.dwg 3/30/2015 5:13:09 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
IMPROVEMENT
DRAWINGS
FOR
TIGARD
DOG
PARK
RELOCATION
TIGARD,
WASHINGTON
COUNTY,
OREGON
MARCH
2015
PROJECTLOCATIONVICINITYMAPATTENTIONEXCAVATORSOREGONLAWREQUIRESYOUTOFOLLOWRULESADOPTEDBYTHEOREGONUTILITYNOTIFICATIONCENTER.THOSERULESARESETFORTHINOAR952-001-0010THROUGHOAR952-001-0090.YOUMAYOBTAINCOPIESOFTHESERULESFROMTHECENTERBYCALLING503-232-1987.IFYOUHAVEANYQUESTIONSABOUTTHERULES,YOUMAYCONTACTTHECENTER.YOUMUSTNOTIFYTHECENTERATLEASTTWOBUSINESSDAYS,BEFORECOMMENCINGANEXCAVATION.CALL503-246-6699.
CONSTRUCTION
WILL
BE
IN
ACCORDANCE
WITH
THESE
DRAWINGS,
CITY
OF
TIGARD
STANDARD
PLANS,
AND
CITY
OF
TIGARD
STANDARD
CONSTRUCTION
SPECIFICATIONS.
NTS
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
VALUE
VALUE
C-0.01
SHEET
INDEX
DRAWING
NO.
DRAWING
NAME
C-0.01
COVER
SHEET
C-1.01
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
1
C-1.03
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
2
C-1.05
DEMO
1
C-1.07
DEMO
2
C-1.09
SITE
PLAN
C-5.01
FENCE
DETAIL
C-5.03
DETAILS
SW
ASH
AVE
CAPFENCEGATEBACKFLOWPREVENTER
STOP
SIGN
SIGN/DOG
PARK
DEC
TREE
(
3
INCH
CAL.)
BENCH
BAG
DISPENSER
RAIN
COVER
DECTREE
(16
INCH
CAL.)
FENCEGATEWATERFOUNTAIN CLEANOUT FENCEGATEGARBAGECAN
SD
VAULT
WATERMETERCOMMPEDSHED/VOLUNTEERTOOLS5FTØRCPDECTREE(4INCHCAL.)FIREHYDRANTDECORATION6FTØRCP DECTREE(7INCHCAL.)BENCH ALUMINUMCAP
ALUMINUM
CAP
UTILITY
VAULT
SHRUB
(TYP.)
BENCH
BIKE
RACK
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
1
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\14094_Drafting.dwg 3/30/2015 5:13:21 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
N/A
N/A
C-1.01
SHEETKEYNOTES1.PROTECTEXISTINGPUBLICSTREETIMPROVEMENTS.2.PROTECTEXISTINGODOTMONUMENTATIONANDSURVEYMARKER.GENERALNOTES:1.REMOVEALLEXISTINGSTRUCTURES,UTILITYSERVICEFACILITIES,TREES,SHRUBS,ANDOTHERDELETERIOUSMATTERTOACCOMMODATETHEWORKSHOWNINTHESEDRAWINGS.2.OBTAINAPPROPRIATEPERMIT(S)FROMCITYOFTIGARDRELATEDTODEMOLITIONACTIVITIES.3.COORDINATEUTILITYSERVICEDISCONNECTIONSFOREXISTINGSERVICESONTHESITEANDREMOVEUTILITIESTOPROPERTYLINE.4.ALLSIGNSTOBEMOVEDFROMEXISTINGSITETONEWSITE.5.CONCRETEPIPESTOBEMOVEDFROMEXISTINGSITETONEWSITE.6.SHELTERANDBENCHESTOBEMOVEDFROMEXISTINGSITETONEWSITE.7.TWOSMALLTREESTOBEMOVEDFROMEXISTINGSITETONEWSITE.
SWBURNHAMST
SW
ASH
AVE
9025
SW
BURNHAM
ST
ACACCONCRETE
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
2
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\14094_Drafting.dwg 3/30/2015 5:13:27 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
N/A
N/A
C-1.03
GENERAL
NOTES:
1.
REMOVE
EXISTING
HOUSE,
TREES,
SHRUBS,
ROOTS,
AND
OTHER
DELETERIOUS
MATTER
TO
ACCOMMODATE
THE
WORK
SHOWN
IN
THESE
DRAWINGS.
2.
BASEMENT
BOTTOM
WILL
NEED
TO
BE
BROKEN
UP
AND
BASEMENT
WILL
BE
BACKFILLED
WIT
GRAVEL
FROM
THE
PARKING
LOT.
3.
OBTAIN
APPROPRIATE
PERMIT(S)
FROM
CITY
OF
TIGARD
RELATED
TO
DEMOLITION
ACTIVITIES.
4.
COORDINATE
UTILITIES
SERVICE
DISCONNECTIONS
FOR
EXISTING
SERVICES
ON
SITE.
5.
DRIVEWAY
TO
REMAIN
AND
BE
LEFT
OPEN
AS
TURNAROUND
FOR
VEHICLES.
SW
ASH
AVE
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
DEMO
1
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\14094_Drafting.dwg 3/30/2015 5:13:32 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
N/A
N/A
C-1.05
SHEETKEYNOTES1.RELOCATEDOGPARKSIGNTONEWLOCATION.2.RELOCATEBENCHESTONEWSITE.3.RELOCATETWOSMALLTREESTONEWSITE.4.RELOCATESHELTERANDMETALBENCHESTONEW
SITE.
SHELTER
TO
BE
MODIFIEDANDLOWEREDINHEIGHT.5.RELOCATEDISPENSERTONEWLOCATION.6.TWOLARGERTREESTOREMAIN.7.RELOCATETWOCONCRETEPIPEAMENITIESTONEW
SITE.
8.RELOCATEHYDRANTDECORATIONTONEWSITE.9.RELOCATEVOLUNTEERTOOLSHEDTONEWSITE.
10.REMOVEDRAINANDSERVICETOPROPERTYLINE
OR
AS
DIRECTED
BY
CITY
OFTIGARD.11.RELOCATEFOUNTAINANDSERVICESTONEWSITE.
12.RELOCATEBACKFLOWPREVENTIONVALVEFROM
TO
NEW
SITE.
13.
METER
TO
BE
REMOVED
BY
CITY
FORCES.
14.
RELOCATE
FENCE,
GATES,
2
X
12
FENCE
GUARDS,
AND
ALL
OTHER
MATERIAL
(EXCEPT
POSTS)
TO
NEW
SITE.
REMOVE
&
DISPOSE
OF
POSTS.
15.
PROTECT
SANITARY
CLEAN
OUT.
16.
RELOCATE
BIKE
RACK
TO
NEW
SITE.
17.
PROTECT
COMM.
PED.
18.
RELOCATE
GARBAGE
CAN
TO
NEW
LOCATION.
GENERALNOTES:1.REMOVEALLEXISTINGSTRUCTURES,UTILITYSERVICEFACILITIES,TREES,SHRUBS,ANDOTHERDELETERIOUSMATTERTOACCOMMODATETHEWORKSHOWNINTHESEDRAWINGS.2.OBTAINAPPROPRIATEPERMIT(S)FROMCITYOFTIGARDRELATEDTODEMOLITIONACTIVITIES.3.COORDINATEUTILITYSERVICEDISCONNECTIONSFOREXISTINGSERVICESWITHCITYOFTIGARD.4.PROTECTEXISTINGPUBLICSTREETIMPROVEMENTS.5.PROTECTEXISTINGODOTMONUMENTATIONANDSURVEYMARKER.
16
14
181312 1417961014
6
78 273
5
4
2
3
2
1
11 15
P
P
P
P
SWBURNHAMST
SW
ASH
AVE
9025
SW
BURNHAM
ST
ACACCONCRETE
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
DEMO
2
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\14094_Drafting.dwg 3/30/2015 5:13:37 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
N/A
N/A
C-1.07
SHEET
KEYNOTES
1.
LARGE
TREES
TO
BE
SAVED.
2.
TREES
TO
BE
REMOVED.
3.
REMOVE
FENCE
AND
GATES.
4.
REMOVE
PAVERS.
5.
REMOVE
CONCRETE
WALKWAYS
AND
STAIRS.
SAW
CUT
CONNECTION
AT
BACK
OF
WALK
TO
PREVENT
DAMAGE
DURING
REMOVAL.
6.
HOUSE
TO
BE
DEMOLISHED.
BASEMENT
FLOOR
TO
BE
BROKEN
UP
TO
ALLOW
DRAINAGE
AND
BASEMENT
TO
BE
FILLED
WITH
GRAVEL
FROM
PARKING
LOT.
7.
REMOVE
IRRIGATION
VALVES
AND
SERVICE.
8.
REMOVE
SANITARY
MANHOLE.
REMOVE
LATERAL
BACK
TO
POINT
WERE
CONNECTION
FOR
IMPROVEMENT
IS
MADE.
REFERENCE
SHEET
C-1.09
FOR
PROPOSED
IMPROVEMENTS
9.
EXCAVATE
8"
BELOW
FINISHED
GRADES
SHOWN
ON
C-1.09.
GENERAL
NOTES:
1.
REMOVE
EXISTING
HOUSE,
TREES,
SHRUBS,
ROOTS,
AND
OTHER
DELETERIOUS
MATTER
AS
NOTED
TO
ACCOMMODATE
THE
WORK
SHOWN
IN
THESE
DRAWINGS.
UNLESS
NOTED
OTHERWISE.
2.
OBTAIN
APPROPRIATE
PERMIT(S)
FROM
CITY
OF
TIGARD
RELATED
TO
DEMOLITION
ACTIVITIES.
3.
COORDINATE
UTILITIES
SERVICE
DISCONNECTIONS
FOR
EXISTING
SERVICES
ON
SITE.
4.
DRIVEWAY
TO
REMAIN
AND
BE
LEFT
OPEN
AS
TURNAROUND
FOR
VEHICLES.
5.
PROTECT
EXISTING
PUBLIC
STREET
IMPROVEMENTS.
6.
PROTECT
EXISTING
ODOT
MONUMENTATION
AND
SURVEY
MARKERS.
9
1
3
6
75
2
3
4
5
8
5PP
P
P
P
P
WATERSERVICEWATERSERVICE
WATER
SERVICE
DCDV
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
SITE
PLAN
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Site Plan\14094_SITE PLAN.dwg 3/30/2015 5:13:50 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
KEYNOTES
-
WORK
BY
CONTRACTOR
1.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
4'
BLACK
VINYL
COATED
CHAIN
LINK
FENCE
WITH
2-PRESSURE
TREATED
2
X
12
FENCE
GUARDS
ALONG
FRONTAGE,
REFERENCE
DETAIL
C-5.01/
1&2.
2.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
METAL
CANOPY.
3.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
3
METAL
PARK
BENCH'S
(NO-BACK).
ORIENT
BENCHES
PER
CITY
OF
TIGARD
DIRECTIONS.
4.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
2
METAL
PARK
BENCH'S
(WITH-BACK).
FACING
INTO
PARK.
5.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
HYDRANT
AMENITY.
6.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
SCOOP
DISPENCER.
7.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
WOOD
PARK
BENCH.
8.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
WATER
FOUNTAIN
AND
PROVIDE
FROST
FREE
HYDRANT
OR
SPIGOT
FOR
DOG
WATER.
CONNECT
TO
EXISTING
WATER
AND
SANITARY
SERVICES.
9.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
METAL
TRASH
ENCLOSURE.
10.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
DOG
SHAPED
BIKE
RACK.
11.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
CONCRETE
PIPE.
12.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
20'
WIDE
MAINTENANCE
ACCESS
DOUBLE
GATES.
13.
CONTRACTOR
TO
REMOVE
LOWER
BRANCHES
TO
PROVIDE
7'
HEAD
CLEARANCE.
14.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
9"
X
9"
AREA
DRAIN
WITH
GALV.
STEEL
GRATE.
INSTALL
PVC
TO
EXISTING
SERVICE
LINE.
RIM
ELEV.
100.50.
15.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
BACK
FLOW
PREVENTION,
REFERENCE
DETAIL
C-5.03/1.
16.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
4'
WIDE
GATES.
17.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
6'
TALL
BLACK
VINYL
COATED
FENCE
WITH
2
PRESSURE
TREATED
2
X
12
FENCE
GUARDS,
REFERENCE
DETAIL
C-5.01/
1&2.
18.
TWO
TREES
TO
BE
RELOCATED
FROM
EXISTING
DOG
PARK.
19.
INSTALL
TWO
NEW
3"
CALIBER
TREES.
20.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
THREE
7'
WIDE
BY
22'
LONG
PARKING
STALL
MARKERS.
21.
TRANSITIONS
FROM
6'
TO
4'
FENCE.
22.
INSTALL
VOLUNTEER
TOOL
SHED.
23.
INSTALL
6"
COMPACTED
3/4"-0
CRUSHED
AGG.
KEYNOTES
-
WORK
BY
CITY
FORCES
1.
CONTRACTOR
TO
INSTALL
DOG
PARK
SIGN.
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
N/A
N/A
C-1.09
SWBURNHAMST
SW
ASH
AVE
4
13
1
11
9
3
8
2
6
10
1
5
12
USABLE
AREA
=
11,221.65
SF
7691
GENERAL
SHEET
NOTES
1.
THREE
TREES
ON
THE
NORTH
WEST
FENCE
LINE
TO
BE
SAVED.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
22
14
1.0'
(TYP.)
23
3'-0"12"ROUNDSECTION CHAINLINKFABRICBANDFABRICBOTTOMHINGE(180°SWING)TOPHINGE(180°SWING)SELVAGE BARBEDTRUSS12"ROUNDSECTION12"ROUNDSECTION
18"BAR
3' -0"
RODS 12'OR15'(ASSPECIFIED)STRETCHER TUBULARSTL MATERIALLINEPOSTEND,GATEORCORNERPOSTTWISTEDANDBRACERAILTRUSSRODFABRICBANDTOPRAIL(AS SPECIFIED)2" MAX 2.87512'OR15'GATEOPENING CHAINLINKFABRIC END&CORNERPOSTGATEPOSTBRACEPOSTSGALVTUBULARSTLNOMINALDIA(IN)(ft)4GALV 2.375 1.660 NOMINALDIAGATEFRAMEMEMBERBRACERAILLINEPOSTSGALVTUBULARSTLGALVTUBULARSTLGALVTUBULARSTL2.00 (IN)MATERIAL NOTES:1.ALLFITTINGS,FASTENERS,&ANDFABRIC
TIES
SHALL
BE
HOT
DIP
GALV.
2.CONCSHALLBEMIN2500PSI@28DAYS.
3.PROVIDEBRACERAILBETWEENENDPOSTS
AND
LINE
POSTS.
LENGTHS
AS
REQ'D.4.PROVIDEGATESTOPSANDDROPRECEIVERS
SET
IN
CONCRETE,
EACH
GATE.
5.PROVIDEEXTENSIONARMSONLINE,END
AND
CORNER
POSTS
&
GATE
POSTS
ASREQ'D.6.PROVIDESIGHTOBSCURINGSLATSWITH
ALL
WASTEWATER
PUMP
STATIONS.
7.CENTERBRACERAILNOTREQUIREDWITH
FENCE
HEIGHT
OF
5'
OR
LESS.
8.ALLPOSTSANDRAILSTOMATCHFENCE
COLOR.
BRACE
POST
TRUSS
ROD
TOP
RAIL
WIRE TENSION BRACERAIL CHAINLINKFABRIC SLEEVES
STRETCHER
BAR
PULL
POST
TWISTEDANDBARBEDSELVAGE 9GA.W/GREENORBLACKPVCCOATING.4'-0" TO 6'-0"
4'-0" TO 6'-0"
(AS SPECIFIED)
PARK
STREET
OR
ADJOINING
PROPERTY
NOTE:
REUSE
MATERIALS
FROM
EXISTING
SITE.
FABRICATE
ADDITIONAL
AS
NEEDED.
(2)
2
X
12
PRESSURE
TREATED
BOARDS
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
FENCE
DETAIL
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\Details\14094_DETAILS.dwg 3/30/2015 5:14:02 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
VALUE
VALUE
C-5.01
SCALE:1FENCEDETAILN.T.S.
SCALE:
2
FENCE
GUARD
DETAIL
N.T.S.
TIGARD,
OREGON
CITY
OF
TIGARD
DETAILS
FEDCBA
7
6
5
4
321
8
9
SHEET
TITLE
HORIZ
DATUM:
VERT
DATUM:
HORIZ
SCALE:
VERT
SCALE:
DESIGN:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
NO.
DATE
BY
DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
DATE
SIGNED:
PROJECT
NO:
P:\2014 Projects\14094 Tigard Dog Park\The CAD\Civil\Drafting\Details\14094_DETAILS.dwg 3/30/2015 5:14:07 PM
9
7
6
5
4
321
8
REVIEW
E
N
G
I
NEER
58882
OREGON
EXP:
DECEMBER
31,
2015
TIGARD DOG PARK
RELOCATION
14094
AF GF AS
SHOWN
AS
SHOWN
VALUE
VALUE
C-5.03
SCALE:1REDUCEDPRESSUREBACKFLOWN.T.S.
SCALE:
2
WATER
SERVICE
N.T.S.
SCALE:5SANITARYSEWERCLEANOUTN.T.S.
6"
ENGINEERED
WOOD
FIBER
2"
OF
3/4"
-
0
CLEAN
AGG.
NONWOVEN
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC
SCALE:
3
DOG
PARK
SECTION
N.T.S.
4"
CONCRETE
2"
OF
3/4"
-
0
CLEAN
AGG.
NONWOVEN
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC
SCALE:
4
SLAB/WALK
SECTION
N.T.S.
AIS-2118 6.
CCDA Agenda
Meeting Date:05/05/2015
Length (in minutes):15 Minutes
Agenda Title:Strolling Street Program Update
Submitted By:Sean Farrelly, Community
Development
Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: City Center
Development
Agency
Public Hearing: No Publication Date:
Information
ISSUE
Update on Strolling Street Program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST
The Board of the CCDA is requested to receive the presentation and provide feedback.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
In 2013, the City of Tigard announced a new strategic plan and vision to become the most
walkable community in the Pacific Northwest where people of all ages and abilities enjoy
healthy and interconnected lives. Main Street is one of the city’s best opportunities to create a
true “strolling street:” a street that attracts pedestrians with a comfortable and safe walking
experience, buildings with attractive facades and window displays, and areas of visual delight.
The completion of the Main Street Green Street Phase I project has vastly improved the
public realm of the southern half of Main Street. Walkers of all ages and abilities benefit from
the improved streetscape. A Strolling Street matching grant program was proposed to
improve privately owned areas between the sidewalk and building facade. Some of these areas
have dead or dying landscaping and damaged paving. These spaces continue to detract from
the pedestrian experience.
In March, 2014 the Board of the CCDA approved the creation of the Strolling Street
program and funding was included in the 2014-15 CCDA Budget. In July 2014, the Urban
Renewal Improvement Programs Joint Committee developed criteria to review the criteria for
awarding the Strolling Street grants.
Applications were solicited from Main Street property and business owners in July and
Applications were solicited from Main Street property and business owners in July and
August; six applications were received. At its September meeting, the joint committee selected
two projects to fund: 12430-12442 SW Main (Maki Sushi, Tigard Wine Crafters, and Elvia’s
Studio) and 12405 SW Main (Tigard Chiropractic).
Staff and landscaping consultants, Greenworks, met with the property owners to discuss their
goals, preferences and potential budgets. The consultants then developed alternatives for the
property owners to choose from. There was some delay in the grant awardees finalizing their
preferred plans; however, both projects are slated to be built in the next 2-3 months.
The 12430-12442 SW Main Street project will be a significant project, with it being an
approximately 1,100 square foot site. The project includes new paving and landscaping, a new
pergola, a water feature and a seat wall. Final bids are being obtained by the property owner,
but it is likely a $30,000-35,000 project, with the CCDA reimbursing 80%.
The Tigard Chiropractic project (12405 SW Main) comprises of new landscaping and an
irrigation system. Final bids are being obtained by the property owner, but it is likely a
$2,500-4,000 project, with the CCDA reimbursing 80%.
The second round of Strolling Street applications will begin in July 2015.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES
The Board could advise staff to move the program in a different direction.
COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS
Tigard City Council 2015-17 Goals and Milestones
Goal #2. Make Downtown Tigard a Place Where People Want to Be
- Support walkability by completing two Strolling Street projects.
Tigard Strategic Plan
Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision
Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan
DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
March 4, 2014 Urban Design; Strolling Street; Proposal for program to improve private
landscaping areas on Main Street
Attachments
12430-12442 SW Main Plans
12405 SW Main Plans