City Council Packet - 03/05/1979 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
MARCH 5, 1979, 7 :30 P.M.
FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
LIBRARY ROOM
AGENDA:
1. ROLL CALL
2. REVIEW AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM- Martha McLennan & Steve West
3. REVIEW PERSONNEL MANUAL REVISIONS - Martha McLennan & Steve West
4. DISCUSSION RE . PROPOSED MODEL HOME ORDINANCE
5. PROPOSED SPRING STREET OVERLAY PROGRAM - City Administrator
6. RESOLUTION TO WASHINGTON COUNTY REGARDING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE
OF S.W. DURHAM AND GREENBURG ROADS - City Administrator
7. DUPLICATION OF FINANCIAL REPORTS - Finance Director
a
8. BUDGET COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT Recommendation of Selection o
Committee u,
V
9. FRED COOPER REQUEST FOR FEE WAIVER - Planning Director
10. DISCUSSION REGARDING NON-REMONSTRANCE AGREEMENTS - Request
of Council
il.
CONSIDERATION 1ON SITE DESIGN REVIEW uvrxteL L iaititing rcctor
12. CONSIDERATION WASHINGTON COUNTY AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF TIGARD
REGARDING URBAN PLANNING AREA - 'Planning Director
13. REDUCTION OF SPEED ON S.W. HALL AND S .W. 72nd AVE. - Chief
of Police`
EXECUTIVE SESSION - TO DISCUSS LITIGATION - (Burman vs. Wheeler
& Killion) under O.R.S . >192.660 (1) (b)
ADJOURNLKNT
{f;
01
� 3
Y
t�j.
1
T I G AR D CITY C O U N C I L
STUDY SESSION MINUTES, MARCH 5, 1979, 7:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Alan Mickelson; Councilmen Tom Briar., John E. Cook,
Kenneth W. Scheckla; Councilwoman Nancie Stimler; Legal
Counsel, Joe D. Bailey; Chief of Police, Robert B. Adams;
City Administrator, R.R. Barker; City Recorder/Finance
Director, Doris Hartig; Planning Director, Aidace Howard;
Research and Development Aides Steve West, Martha McLennan.
2. REVIEW OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM
(a) Martha McLennan, Research & Development Aide gave a brief overview of the
Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Program Resolution, ex-
plaining the need for such a resolution; the research involved in its de-
velopment; and, the significance of the program.
(b) Council expressed concern over the cost impact of implementing this
program. Staff stated that the City°s ability to undertake the burden
Of the program was considered in its design. In addition, much of the
work required for the AAP would be merely a matter of collating data F
which is already being kept, or which will be useful for the administration
of personnel matters.
(c) After discussion by Council, it was agreed -to consider passage of this
resolution at the next regular Council meeting.
3. REVIEW OF PERSONNEL MANUAL REVISIONS
(a) 'Steve'West,;Research, & Development Aide, explained the research, development
and review process followed in the revision of the Personnel Manual. He
went on to discuss factors of concern including the addition of depth and
clarification, conformance with EEO laws, and ease of revision.
(b) Council praised staff on the quality of the Personnel Manual, and agreed
to .consider passage of this resolution at the next regular Councilmeeting.
4. DISCUSSION RE: PROPOSED MODEL HOME ORDINANCE
(a) Legal Counsel explained the background of the proposed ordinance,in
particular the inclusion of Section (G). He went on to describe an
amendment needed in Section 1. In the last; sentence, 'after;the word
"Purchasers", the words, "have a right to be free from" should be added.'
4
(b) Councilman Brian expressed his concern over the addition of the Section
(G), stating that this provided developers with two possible starting
points and appeal processes.
(r_) Councilman Cook wondered why six years had been allowed in Section (G)
instead of the maximum of four years provided in the rest of the Resolution.
(d) Planning Director stated that he would prefer a provision for annual review
in all cases, with no maximum number of years, as'would'occur if both Sections'
(F)' and (G) were deleted. ,
l
s �
(e) Councilwoman Stimler suggested that at least a portion of the problem might
be eliminated by placing tighter regulations on the initial placement of the
model homes (i.e.. at the fringe of the developments).
(f) Bob Bailey, Prestige Properties, gave a history of the problem in
Summerfield. He went on to say that he agreed that some protection is
needed for homeowners, but felt that the developers problems should be
addressed better. Particular problems of developers include the cost of
establishing, maintaining and moving model homes. He backed up Section
(G) of the resolution, stating that in large projects any time limits may
be too short. He also expressed concern over the maximum of three homes
in a development.
(g) Councilman Brian asked Bois Bailey if he would be satisfied with the annaul
reveiw proposed by the Planning Director, Bailey felt that this would be
fine.
(h) After lengthy discussion by Council it was agreed to drop Sections (F) &
(G), amend Section 2 (b) by deleting the words, i°for a second year and
again for a third year" in the first sentence, and inserting the words
"to operate model home(s)" in that place, and putting the Resolution as
amended on next week's agenda for consideration.
5. PROPOSED SPRING STREET OVERLAY PROGRAM
(a) City Administrator, referring to the memorandum from the Engineering
Division, reviewed the proposed overlay program. He pointed out that the
funds for this program will come out of the 1978-79 Budget, and any
additional funds could be budgeted for next year. He went into depth
regarding the proposed overlay of 72nd Avenue, stating that since most of
this area is now in the City there is a chance that the LID proposed
several years ago might again be considered as a-technique for improving
this street rather than 'the overlay. He went on to say that it would take
at least one and one-half years for-the PID to be formed and construction
begun. He recommended that Council consider the possibility of just patching
72nd now and wait for further improvements until the LID could be formed.
After lengthy discussion by Council it was agreed to delete the majority
of the money for 72nd and use this on other streets.
(b) Councilman Cook pointed out a problem with the curve at Tiedeman.near.
Walnut Street. He felt that improvement of the curve should be included
as a part of this project.
(c) City Administrator listed other possible streetsto be improved including
Gaarde, Katherine & 116th, areas in the Burlcrest Subdivision. He asked
Council for further recommendations.
(a) Council asked that staff'prepare the necessary documents for Council as soon
as possible, including the reduction of funds for 72nd Avenue and the
addition of other streets'.
6. RESOLUTION TO WASHINGTON COUNTY REGARDING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF S.W. DURHAM
AND :GREENBURG ROADS.
PAGE 2 - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - March 5, 1979
i
(a) City Administrator, explaining that a clerical error had been made, asked
for an amendment of the Resolution to include reference to S.W. Greenburg
in all the places where reference was made to S.W. Durham.
(b) RESOLUTION No. 79-30 RESOLUTION RECORDING THE DESIRE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF TIGARD TO ENCOURAGE THE WASHINGTON
COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO PL?.CE S.W. DURHAM
AND S.W. GREENBURG ROADS ON A HIGHEST PRIORITY RATING
FOR POTHOLE REPAIR.
Motion by Councilwoman Stimler, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve
as amended.
Passed by unanimous vote of Council.
7. DUPLICATION OF FINANCIAL REPORTS.
(a) Finance Director recommended that Council follow the recommendation of
the auditor regarding the discontinuance of the duplication of fin:ucial
reports, i.e.: have only the summary listing and copies of checks available
and discontinue the itemized "Listing.
(b) City Administrator recommended the same.
(c) Council agreed that the itemized listing had been helpful, but due to the
cost of producing such a listing agreed to discontinue its usage.
(d) Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to accept
the recommendation of the Finance Director and the auditor, and dis-
continue the use of the itemized listing.
Approved by unanimous -Vote of Council_
8. BUDGET COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT
(a) City Administrator gave the report of the Selection Committee, stating that
Dale Evans and Alan Patterson have been considered for the appointment in
addition to Gerald Edwards. He stated that the Selection Committee re-
commended the appointment of Gerald Edwards, and the further consideration ,
of Dale Evans should future vacancies occur. '
RESOLUTION No. 79-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING AN
APPOINTMENT TO THE TIGARD BUDGET COMMITTEE.
(b) Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilwoman Stimler to appoint'
Gerald.Edwards to the Budget Committee; term expiring December 31`, 1982.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
9. FRED COOPER REQUEST FOR FEE WAIVER
(a) Planning Director asked that this be taken off the agenda as Legal Counsel
was still researching the legality of the 75% vote of NPO #4.
PAGE 3 - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - March 5, 1979
(b) City Recorder asked when the appeal should be heard. Planning Director
stated that this should be placed on March 26 agenda as required by the
appeal regulations. The question of fee s,,aiver can wait until research
is complete.
10. DISCUSSION REGARDING NON-REMONSTRANCE AGREEMENTS
(a) Planning Director refreshed Council's memory on the history of this
problem. He went on to emphasize the impact a half street improvement
requirement places on small developers. He also pointed out that this
was a piece-meal approach and recommended a non-remonstrance policy which
would allow development prior to the street improvements, and provide a
single improvement effort through LID's.
(b) Councilwoman Stimler expressed her concern over the lack of enforcing the
non-remonstrance agreements, and her fear that if development was not
required at the beginning it would never happen.
(c) Planning Director emphasized the need for a master plan to insure en-
forcement of the non-remonstrance agreements. He went on to say that
the Planning Department would continue using the half street improve-
ments whenever possible. Planning Director suggested City adopt -a
street capital improvement program which would be supported by systems
development fund and special road levy. Item will be considered at the
next study session.
11.. CONSIDERATION SITE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
(a) Planning Director explained the problems of the Design Review Board,point-
ing- out that there is a lack of interest, lack of impact, and added
burden,on staff by the continuation of theDesignReview Board. He
recommended that Council abolish the Site Design Review Board.
(b) Mayor Mickelson felt that the Board should not be abolished.
(c) Councilman Brian suggested that re-strengthening the Board might make
itmore useful.
(d) Council asked for further research into re-strengthening the Board.
g Planning Director stated that he would be unable to do this as his
feeling was to abolish it. He recommended that Council do such research.
E
(e) Motion by Councilwoman Stimler to abolish the Site Design Review Board.
Motion failed for lack of second. No further action was taken by Council.
12. CONSIDERATION WASHINGTON COUNTY AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF TIGARD REGARDING URBAN
PLANNING AREA
(a) Planning Director, Pointing to a lack of cooperation in the past, explained
that this proposed agreement was a contract between the City and Washington
County to cooperate. He went on to say that this was a fairly common
contract among jurisdictions.
PAGE 4 - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - March 5 1979
k
F'
(b) After discussion by Council it was agreed to consider the agreement at
the next regular meeting of the Council.
13. REDUCTION OF SPEED ON S.W. HALL AND S.W. 72ND AVENUE
(a) Chief of Police, referring to a memorandum to the City Administrator, re-
commended reduction of speed on these two streets. He gave increased usage
and uniformity along the streets as reasons for the reduction.
(b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Brian - to send a
letter to the State Speed Control Board recommending the reduction
as outlined in the memorandum.
Approved by 4 to 1 vote of Council, Councilman Scheckla voting nay.
14. OTHER
(a) Planning Director informed Council that a. neighbor of the Busch Annexation
applicant in the Summercrest island now wanted to annex to the City. He
stated that this is a perfect example of the problem of a no forced island
annexation policy" and emphasized the impact in terms of staff and Council
preparation and consideration time for this piece-meal approach to
annexation.
Motion by Councilwoman Stimler, seconded by Councilman Cook to prepare
a resolution addressing annexation of the entire island to be sent to
the Boundary Commission.
Mayor Mickelson pointed out that this action would be in conflict with
the City Council policy of no forced island annexation.
Councilman Scheckla objected to the motion as this is a major issue in
Tigard, and was not placed In advance oa t e agenda, _ publ ed
CouncilmanBrian suggested that Councildiscussamending Council policy
. ,
for annexation at the April 2nd study session_..'
Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilman Cook to table the
previous"motion.
Tabled by unanimous vote of Council.
(b) Councilman Cook reported that he had been attending Park Board meetings
and explained recommended reorganization taking place within the Board
to include: reduction:by two members, changing the regular meeting
time to the fourth Thursdav of each month, better scheduling and
notification processes.- He also called attention to the deadline re-
garding application for BOR funds. Staff to get recommendationfrom
the Park Board.
(c) Councilman Brian asked for confirmation that the Annexation Plan would
. be placed on the April 2nd study session agenda.
PAGE 5 - STUDY SESSION MINUTES - March 5, 1979
1
(d) Councilwoman Stimler read into the record a letter from Sandy Stewart,
14923 S.W. 106th, Tigard, regarding Canterbury Woods Project by Hoffman
& Hoffman Construction
(e) City Administrator proposed that the first Budget Committee meeting
be scheduled for Wednesday, March 21st. Council agreed that this
would resolve some of the conflicts of the previously proposed
meeting date.
(f) Finance Director reported on a letter from CETA regarding the proposed
transfer of payroll and benefits to the City, with CETA reimbursing
subsequently.
(g) Councilwoman Stimler reported that she had been research;.ng the nroblem
with PGE on the repair of street lights. She stated that PGE
acknowledges only one complaint, and expressed her concern over staff
communicating these problems to PGF.. City Administrator stated that
:staff had been communicating the problems vihether or not PGE
acknowledges it or not. He suggested that perhaps Council take a formal
action (such as a resolution) to communicate the problem.
MEETING RECESSED AT: 11:00 P.M.
Executive Session
Meeting reconvened 11:10 P.M.
Council went into executive session to discuss litigation under O.R.S.
192.660 (1) (b) Burman vs. Wheeler and Killion.
Councilwoman Stimler reviewed a portion of the transcript`previously
distributed to Council; outlined her roncerns 'and called attention to
specific items in the transcript.
Council and staffdiscussedthe case at length and what action that
Council might consider.'' City Attorney did not attend executive session
and there were several issues Council wished to discuss further with
him.
Motion by Councilwoman Stimler to table until the City Attorney has had
a chance to give 'input; notion seconded by Councilman Brian.
Motion'`carried 3-2. Councilman Scheckla and Cook voting NAY.
Meeting adjourned 11:45 P.M.
Ci y kecorder
ATTEST:
-,
Mayor - City of Tigard
a
TO: Ci'.y Admin::strator
FR`'ii: Engineering- Division
SUn.76G'P. County Road Transfer Maintenance Priority Listing
DATE: February 23, 1979
The following list of recently acquired county—roadways has been prepared as a
guideline to establish which roadways are in priority need of immediate maintenance,
based on the condition of the existing road surface, classification and usage, and
tha estinated cost of resurfacing. It is important to note that not all of the
roadway sections acquired are in need of resurfacing at this time, but can be
placed on a routine preventive maintenance schedule (i.e., patching, shoulder
worn, storm drainage, etc.) until such time that future annexations and subsequent
jurisdictional transfers warrant complete street improvements via L.I.D. or capital
improvement programs.
No. T Street- From To Est.Tons A.C. Est. Cost
1. S.W. 72nd Avenue S.W. Varnes S.W. Bradbury Ct. 2066 $42,354.
2. SJ-7. Creenburo Rd. Pac. Ho:-yS.i:. 95Lh Ave. 5506 $10,373.
3. S.'J. BoniL-a Rd. I-5 Overpass S.W. 76th Ave. 482 $ 9,881.
4. S .W 1 Cueni 1v:2 190' \i of CL! S.1-". Walnut a
te
t. 2,'9 $ 6,13O.
Meadow
5. S..'n. 'Pfaffle St. Pacific Hwy. S.W. 82nd. Ave. 268 $ 5,494.
6. S.W. Tigard St. Katherine St. City Limits 125 $ 2,562.
All o,' the streets listed will require street sweeping and most will require sho:aldcr
blad*"ng, preliminary patching of severe areas, and manhole adjusting (risers),
prior to resurfacing.
i
i
i
1
MEMORANDUM
March £, 1979
To: City Council
From: City Administrator 146
For several months the Finance Department has been furnishing Council
with duplicate information with respect to the bills payable. It is
requested Council review the matter to eliminate this duplication of
reportina_
_�....-o
Attached is a page from Coopers and Lybrand report to management where-
in a recommendation was made to eliminate the costly detailed report of
disbursements. At that time the City Council approved the recommendation
and the summary totals of the check run was presented to Council. Copies
of each check was made available for Council inspection.
At the November 13th Council meeting it was the concensus of Council to
submit the detailed and summary short report form for bills payable.
Please refer to your Council packets for copies of the detailed and short
form of reporting.
Since that time staff has complied with the request however, it has
created unnecessary problems in preparing and submitting the reports to
Council in a timely manner.
In the past there have been no problems in approving expenditures nor
has c:ouncii refused payment on apt s%eut.
It is staff recommendation that we implement the Auditor's recommendation
by;reporting expenditures in summary form and thereby save considerable
clerical time in typing and reproducing reports.
Sewer Fund Depreciation Schedules Should Be Prepared, Continued.
of depreciation expense has occurred in the City's records due to
the 40-year life of the most costly assets in the Fund, it is good
accounting practice to list each asset or class of asset and
calculate the annual depreciation required for future years.
Wa recommend that depreciation schedules be prepared to
more systematically account for depreciation expense.
Expenditure Approval Procedures Could Be Modified.
Currently, the Council receives a typed listing of all
prepared but unmailed checks twice monthly. This listing, which
often runs for several pages, includes check number, payee, and
the coding of each check. The process of filling out the listing
takes about eight hours monthly.
We recommend the accounting department prepare a
IRF
summary of the totals ,by fund and program of each bi-monthly
check run for presentationto the Council`. At each meeting the x
check copies could be made available to the Council for any
detailed insenectlon of the disbursements 'that they consider
necessary. This ;procedure'could reduce clerical time by approxi-
s ,
mately 80 hours annually.
s � a
Receiving Policies Should 'Be Formalized.
f
A copy of the purchase order is used as a receiving
J;
document in the various departments. We noticed several
instances where the ante of receipt of goods and services was not
noted, and a fear instances where the receiving copy was not `
signed. This inconsistency could cause confusion over which month
{ or year an expenditure is appropriately charged to.
M
3
1
- 6
COOPER & ASSOCIATES9 INC,
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
11675 S.'N.66th AVENUE • PORTLAND,OREGON 97223 e (503) 639-4914
35.000 FEB 2C 09
7�
February 26, 1979
CITY OF TiGARQ
Mr. Ken Selby PLANNING DEPT.
Planning Department
The City of Tigard
12420 S.W. Main Street
Tigard, Oregon 9722
Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Action
Dear Mr. Selby: .z-
I wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission on
agenda item 5.2 for the meeting of February 6, 1979 concerning
my request for a zone change for tax lots 700 and 800 at
12700 S.W. 72nd Avenue.
This appeal is subject to receipt by the staff of an opinion
from your legal counsel on the legality of the 75 percent
favorable vote by owner-occupants of the affected conversion
unit within the NPO.
In as much as this finding is beyond the capabilities and respon ;
sibilit es of the applicant, I would :request any appeal fee
be ,waived.
If the City Council, based upon the legal opinion presented,
remands the decision back to the Planning Commission, I' am
willing to abide_
Re ectfully, '
Fredrick C. Cooper `
a
j
FCC/ms
E
4
}
c
j
t
4
4�
4 -
a
D R A F T
WASHINGTON COUNTY - TIGARD
URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT
This agreement is entered into by Washington County, a political subdivision
of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY", and the City of
Tigard, an incorporated municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred
to as the "CITY".
WHEREAS, ORS 190.010 provides that units of local government may enter into
agreements for the performance of any or all -functions and activities that a party
to the agreement, its' officers or agents, have authority to perform; and,
WHEREAS, Statewide Planning Goal #2 (Land Use Planning) requires that
opportunities for review and comment by affected governmental units on plans and
implementation ordinances shall be provided; and that city, county, state and
federal agency and special district plans and actions shall be consistent with the
comprehensive pians of cities and counties and regional plans adopted under
ORS 197.705 through 197.795; and,
WHEREAS, Chapter 655, Oregon Laws, 1977, empowers the Metropolitan Service
District (MSD) to adopt land-use planning goals and objectives for the district,
review comprehensive pians adopted by cities and counties within the district, and
require charges in any such plan to ensure that the plan conforms to certain goals
and objectives, and coordinate the land-use planning activities of that portion of
=• the cities and counties within the district; and,
WHEREAS, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC)
"AcTcoyt, e�,,dgement of Compliance Rule" (OoA.R. 660-03-010(2) (£)) requires each
'.a>i .1rt'i nn :rnn iaotin�: ��A rlrnn it crTaamont of ('mm��iart+Y'f to submit:a sta.t.EA.+` pnt; '
J.....s.a...ct,-..... ......y...st-i..b ......------
setting
.--..__ .... r....__._ _ _.setting forth the means by,which`a plan for management of the unincorporated area
with the regional Urban GrowthBoundary will be implemented; and,
WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY, to ensure coordinated comprehensive plans,
compatible land uses, and the orderly'conversion'of urbanizable Land to urban
9�__. �..:.... " tit: ., 8 f-0 deline.tn.T TTi-1— r
uses, consider..1t mutually...advantageous to alta lis . .-y.. C, ,
v Planning Area '(UPA) for the City and a process by which land use issues between
u..
the CITY and the COUNTY may be resolved,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNTY AND THE CITY Agree as follows:
I. General Provisions
A. The Urban Planning;Area for the City shall be designated as all lands
within the Cities Comprehensive Plan of 1971, more specifically all
lands within the seven (7) Neighborhood Planning Organization areas
as adopted by the Tigard'City ;Countil. (See Exhibit "A" - UPA Map
and Exhibit "B" - NPO Map).
e
age 2
B . The City shall be the predominant aut authority over all land use issues
within the Urban Planning Area as outlined. All requests for development
within this area shall first be reviewed by the Tigard Planning Department
and a report shall be made to the County as a part of all applications for
development of lands within the Urban Planning Area but not within the
incorporated boundaries of the City.
C . The County hereby agrees to allow development within the UPA only if
proposals conform in all -respects to the City standards and policies of
development as stated in the Tigard Municipal Code and applicable NPO Plans.
City Planning Dept. staff reports will clearly outline these specific concerns
following preliminary review prior to development within the UPA.
D . The County hereby agrees not to permit the installation of sanitary sewer
systems within the UPA except direct connections to the Unified Sewerage
Agency/Tigard sewer system.
I, Review of Proposed Land Use Actions
A. The COUNTY will provide the CITY the opportunity to review and comment on
proposed land use actions within the UPA prior to COUNTY action. Such
proposals include:
(1) Comprehensive plans or plan amendments, including any proposed changes
in land use designations or policies.
(2) New or amended planning implementation ordinances
including zoning and subdivision ordinances.
`
(3) Development proposals and land use actions, including the following:
(a) Rezonings;
(b) Conditional Use Permits;
(c) Subdivisions and Major Partitions;
(d) Administrative approvals of items requiring public notice.
(4) Proposed public improvement projects`, including:
(a) Construction of major sewage collection/treatment systems (by the
Unified Sewerage Agency);
(b) Major Street improvement,, Dedication, or Vacation (Public Works
Department);
(c) Governmental Structures and Buildings.
B. The City will notify the County of all annexation requests passed by
resolutionby the City Council.
C. The following PROCEDURES shall be followed by both the COUNTY and the CITY:
in fulfilling the terms of this agreement.
(1) The CITY shall be the primary reviewing agency in all land use matters
within the UPA. The COMITY hereby ;agrees to direct all applicants wishing .
to develop within the UPA to the Tigard Planning Department for initial
consultation.'
Em
P�^e
(2) A "Preliminary Staff Report" prepared,by the Tigard Planning Staff
shall be made a part of each land use issue within this UPA before
action can be considered by the COUNTY.
(3) The COUNTY shall contact the CITY if problems arise in relation to this
agreement and the CITY shall respond immediately to the COUNTY"s
concerns over land use issues within the UPA.
(4) Comments made by the CITY shall be given priority in all land use
matters within the UPA. It is the intent of the CITY to control
all aspects of lard use within the UPA realizing that significant
energy has been expended by the Neighborhood Planning Organizations,
the Planning Commission and City_Council, in developing specific
plans for the land use within the UPA and that eventually the un-
incorporated areas within the UPA will be Tigard. If the COUNTY
acts contrary to the desires and expressed concerns of the CITY in
land use matters, the CITY understands that it may seek administrative
appeal of such actions.
T_.II. Amendments
(1) Changes to this agreement, or changes to the Urban Planning Area,
may be made only by the mutual written concurrence of both parties.
(2) The parties will jointly review this Agreement two (2) years from the
date of execution to evaluate the effectiveness of the administration
of the processes set forth herein and to make any necessary amendments.
IV. Spec-.a1 Policies:
A. Annexations within the Urban Planning Area will not be opposed by.the
COUNTY.
B Annexations outside of the Urban Planning Area will not be supported
by the COUNTY or CITY unless this agreement- is changed by mutual consent'.
7N i a:. planning for urban facilities in the
C Tho (TTY ar"(! COUNTY 1'Y r.�'7 T cooperate in l
- --r p� 6 facilities
Intermediate` (Future`;Urban) Area which surround the UPA as outlined
in this agreement. Should the COUNTY receive an application(s) for
development within the Urban Intermediate (Future: Urban) Area surrounding
the UPP,the COUNTY shall notify the CITY and both ,parties shall work out
an equitable agreement concerning said proposal(s).
D. The following exhibits are hereby accepted and made a portion of this
agreement:
Exhibit "A" - UPA .Map Exhibit "F" -Copy of zoning Text
Exhibit "B" - NPO Map Exhibit "G" - Copy of Subdivisions Text
Exhibit "C" - Copies of each Exhibit-""H""
NPO 'Plan Exhibit "I"
Exhibit "D" Tigard Comprehensive Exhibit "J""
Plan of 1971.
Exhibit "E" -- Copy of SensitiveLands
Ordinance
1
;e 4
This Agreement commences on 19
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Urban Planning Area Agreement
on the date set opposite their signatures.
CITY—OF
BY:
WASHINGTON COUNTY
BY: -
Chairman, Board of County Cow-nissioners
Recording Secretary
}
a
MEMORANDUM:
February 23, 1979
TO: City Administrator
FROM: Chief. of Police
SUBJECT: Request Speed Limit Changes
RE: 1) Hall Blvd., between 99W and Durham Road
2) 72nd Street, between Landmark Lane and
the south city fruit
Sir:
Enclosed please find two recommendations, prepared by the police depart-
ment, to reduce the posted speed limits on the above named streets within
the cit, limits of Tigard: 72nd Street is a local arterial; Hall Blvd.
is a state highway.
I wish to request a resolution by City Council, directed to the State
Speed Control Board, to study this proposal, whereby reduction in
present posted speed limits may be reduced„
The accident frequency is increasing on both of the move streets; twenty
accidents were investigated on Hall Blvd., and fifteen on 72nd Street in
1978.
The majority _F all not the developable Land abutinQ 'these roads is devel-
oped at this time, including residential', commercial, and industrial, as
well as other development contiguous to Hall Blvd. and 72nd Street.
Whereas these streets are major arterial streets within the city of Tigard, �
they can no 'longer be considered rural toads, due to the 'present and
proposed development.
It is recommended that Hall Blvd. be reduced to 35 m.p.h. from S.W. Omara
to Durham Road; and 72nd Street to 30 m.p.h. from Landmark La-.ie to the
south city limit at Bridgeport Road.
Respectfully, f
R.B�.Id ams
Chief of Police
1 `
RBA•ac
Enclosures
r
f
i ;
WHO
AvoidVcrix�L .ics_-,3}es ;s-
To Fro: -- - - -- - -- --- --
Subject r.�^.� Gr,-Z S - - -- _ Da ---0?_1:-79 ('r esday)-
72ndSrto:
-- -
r - p �w SI3FCS.I?) SFF`'D If
F. -3LFr.. CITY s,R , 'r .-�,; :x Lc, _.�, csr
Z" ;lw 72nd i p: °'i V.Z7yk RTDGE 'v,'Y f C S'st 5'luJ:-;?CFT Rn.
i R A'T1:_P'l- i T) DL GRA :HIS "� 4 1S ?Ci Ft Sli; �rT7 L _". =-n,1S i:'FLL 4S IN—UST:LAJ
AND A PRT -.YY ... _= IAL.?CAU NY r 0 . 'i. 3I. I TiPtAFFIC,
p r,' " TUC sS. r'i?'ir! :R TL,R� ,�F.S „LTI RCU3 T' -. tur c; T_ _=3'S
TFC: v LUD= LA.R;S
HUN2 R uc< SCP:I" Si: UFF_a ?G•*' _, F Y RL.
c:. ?^.._. sj 72na �; Pc�1:� 3'� '-�H -=3"� °IT'S =r_^C TO a�Lc_� S.
R=D ;� ' _ter ,,�1C:: CO.
(r� �' ?•=.._. -'� 72nd � 1HS:t•.;t� cRF,.0. ( � .:r -
- I p,. :T c^;�t =;r �`�-' = VET F-'ST S .
AT Si: ? ;: 7':�S`.1i 72nd I? IS _.Sim _
iTr, Lu:F' I5 :t; r ="? 1'� 9 - 7:,7 ?.t CU 'r. C= =CT._T� 1T
F,_CC' i^' "o JAR -p ir-N C. 72nd TS . I__ C!l,Y tel.
.Lt. "-' TrL -- r
_ _ _1, nS
. -
_ s ),p .��} FF �"� '_1 TO 3C '°' ' SL` i'._ A u
TC. i- C OF Ar,
l:
^.S i.�t,� ,p r- r S L� _% : 'C� N 3p 1
L R -
u-r 30� '
TS �.Ur Tr
F-5, THE _ `.:C
c. -f,c� YCUEa ATT_T,- c :3Is
c�
-
1.'. S'CUL r; `-"L.v
a Cis^_'-� V Sc: ,!T FD
IL
LAM
1 LA
lop
FPI
A J111
PCSTFD 30
�! _s����, ��/'j�• � •L� �Y•� .� X71• J JL/ �- '�C•LV�
_iso IP:�r r 30 .
ccr
'��, _7 •" s �-� ,.f/ �.,� �'t � ! �.-ice\\ '�� ; Q
fli
•'3110 �� J
f- - i i+ ! •'a 40 PTH
ii
y
A-1
ij4�.-.
To: CH i�F OF ?-'LICE
-
Subject Cnan,,in^ of
ted steed sins r.:at 578 — ---
Sir; As I°am sure that you are aware, S71 Fall Blvd,' from S'.%' Pacific H-`a, S79 Durham rd.
has been a constant area of accidents,and speeding vehicles. This problem as I view
it is due to several factors, ie; S;4 Hall is nzjor artery through Tigard, for cur
industrial area, High school, and major residential areas( Su---,erfield,ri.nebrook,
your attention for many reasons of which public
Greer.s::ai d Park). I bring this to
safty, and decressirg asc^unt of accidents, as both of these areas are of irajer concern.
. Furth r I feel that th- major cause for cOnec n, and certainly a c? ?rge which ::cold
cutting down the occurar :es :•could be to change r:e pasted speed
be a start as far as
on SYT rail blvd from 45rr.,L to _5;ph.
this being, as I 1'13ve Stated above is tr at Thi c _`^Pa ].5 mostly if
i justif_cation for teeing,
+ Q ( Sattler,
cj, onald,
not intirel residential with five r-jor streets in-
-!IMM
Crnara, Hlriziker). This along with the fact tYat new areas , pori being const u•�Led :;rich
will add greatly to the already heavy ar,ount of traffic ut_lizirg this :ezil y'•
r speed c-ted is 457,oh.
�• T 3c' on So.' Hall towards Syr, thet
Currently as you drive from r. Durham
c - 'e� bridge, the 'speed ;reps to -35T,-,ph, and imediately droop
at H�11 just cast the i anr.o
e to Co �erc a1 St. th=en raises
again to 30r ph as you drive through curves frorr, Burnham St.
has been observation that these vario::s eiis;.ing speeds
to 35rph unt ill reaching:g 99W. It iY
�- and ?to i reduced speed
are not re-adily aohered to.
r Cyt traffic is 50 p Lus in l - -, re
h this wcul d ��e cafe for entire length of
ureas. He..�
:er should the speed be pc
st�d at 3arrp ,
t� o,her area -:at is posted 45rrph ot.,er than
_ T� G id r -cher ce not_ed that the only
rat better to j ,stify that
+ � gid, and this is ��r
:�11, �'9 :rc -;-;� =r ��, ,o cul_ ,.ten
r steel is C/I ?. -ri � =r O i5 nri157 Vnis o:.sel-vation is --ur attwnti�=1, and world request
p ;7
:es�'ec.'u�ly,subr•.it`,d.
i A pts
i N
:F Core ar::a Apts
hunziker
�•
s Industrial area
SW Buri
J i .
-35 SW M LL BLVD: Two(2) lanes
__. No Shoulder, uneven roadv.ay
surface, Residential area
i Fq
Residential 7�0
numerous intersections
] 51•�__'cB�na
Z
Gree:" Gard 1
r , _
Levelop.
Apari;r.ents
Industrial area
Residential
Sts rinPbr ck
-Schools !t�
a
i ,
' 3
-Su:r.;x=r'ield �cvelo :reit
3
*Industrial area
F
lark
i Du2.i'<ri tre atl� nt plan.t
February 26, 1979
SELECTION COMMITTEE MINUTES
Meeting Commenced 4:45 Y.M.
Present: Mayor Llan Mickelson, Councilman Kenneth Scheckla, City Administrator
Raeldon R. Barker.
Commitee interviewed the following:
Budd�ammittee
Gerald R. Edwards
Park Board-
Phil Hirl
Recommendations:
1. That Gerald Edwards be appointed to the Budget Committee (term expiring
12-31-81)
2. That Phil Hirl be reappointed to the Park Board (term expiring 12-31-82)
Meeting Adiourned: 5:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
R.R. Barker
City Administrator
_ TE
ARD PD
TIG U 1;
A WEEK! Y NEWSLETTER
VOLUME II ISSUE 7 March 1, 1979
PINEBROOK LOT AND TRACT "C"�
The Staff has received the appraisal figures for the Pinebrook lot at $35,000.00
and Tract "C" off Pathfinder and Fonner at $3,500. Staff will prepare the
necessary documents to declare these properties as "surplus" prior to advertising
for bids:
BRAD ROAST ADVANCED.
The Building Department has a new Class °"C" Inspector. Brad Roast was notified
that he had passed the exam. Congratulations.
RELIGIOUS FANATICISM IN CITY HALL.
On Wednesday afternoon two persons were escorted from City Hall in hand-cuffs
following a major disturbance over a traffic ticket. Staff was subjected to
various religious ravings and much shouting. Generally a miserable experience
for all.
CANTERBURY WOODS.
The Planning Director has refused to authorize the moving of a recreation
building within the Canterbury Woods complex. Local citizens have objected
to this"project for various reasons and it was felt that significant changes
at this late date should be avoided.
ECLIPSE OF THE SUN HAS CAUSED PROBLEMS.
Since the ;noon passed before the face of the 'sun we have had a very difficult
timeinCity,Hall. Arrests, missing files, short tempers and general confusion.
Mr. Barker has been asked for donations of support from a local citizen, the
Planning Director was assaulted by an irate developer,and the lights keep
blinking on and off during the noon hour. It is hoped that the coming weeks will
settle these matters. The next time an eclipse takes place in this area we will
declare a holiday for. :Staff.
NO
k