City Council Packet - 01/11/1982 Da to 1-11-82
I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on
the following item: (Please print your name)
Item Description: MILNE ZClA 37-/81 PUBLIC HEARING
Proponent (for) _
Opponent (against)
Name, Address and Affiliation —`
Name, Address and Affiliation
1 '
t
Date 1-11-82
I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on
the following item: (Please print your name)
Item Description: NIEL/SEN ZCA 36-81 PUBLIC HEARING
Proponent (for) Opponent (against)
Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
i
Date 1-11-82
I wish to testify before the 'Tigard City Council on
the following item: (Please print your name)
Item Description: FLOODWAY ELEVATION DETERMINATION PUBLIC HEARING
-�4 .>c✓cam � ��
ropunent (for) Opponent (against)
ame, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
,/l�rt1E-
l�is� c 30F 14, 4-
P;;DGRA`[ BUDGETPAVMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL December 31, 1981
Commuuni ty PEO tec tion
Police 12,159.30
Public Works 3,845.98
Municipal Court 582.22
Planning 1,428.82
Building 1,225.67
Total Community Protection 19,941.99
Home & Community Quality
Public Works 5,212.31
Social Services
Library 1,876.24
Aged Services 3,502.06
Youth Services 23,371 .48
Historical
Total Social Services 28,749.78
Policy & Administration
Mayor & Council _ 1,555.10
Administration 1,877.06
Finance 2,318.48
Total Policy & Administration 5,750.64
City Wide Support Functions
Non-departmental 22,111.33
Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc.) _ 45,121.54
Investments
CAPITOL BUDGET 350,000.00
Community Protections
Road Acquisition & Dev.
Parks Acquisition & Dev.
Storm Drainage
Total Community Protection
Support Services
Building Improvements (Tigard Sr. Citizens Center) 22,226.00
DEBT SERVICE
General Obligation Bond
Bancroft Bond 37,144.18
UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY
Contract
TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 536.457.77
y• .5 •. .b O s
F r .
(TI21
Q ..
N u m ! - 0 y o5 � Q • O j
•oo — .o .3 .4gtr s - A o _ .. 94 � _ -
3
•:� ;• _. �$� x t^ C�' y!►a� � ti-yam."• - _ .
CD
Ch
71
t•s h �' CA'p r �@ 7 _4�
- �_``-' �` - f + O•S4 ..�' � - o fru. ? '
o .• sz � O _ _-
_ '' �G• . 0 1 a.0 '
� -' �'. -I ♦ L _7.+ '.moi-�!r�? Cr!�4 .. ..`•:,. n . ._ J
i. �.'` `� � +.'r • � X �wrSd tCr •' 3t S03'. t t �ti
all . TAX LOTTED ON
:MAP_ -IS 1'-36 DB
aI 602.12 �+ >
NO°30'E 95 H rt8727 N 0003d
'otV °5c O 30' W 208.33
MI
0
,
00°30 w
20
`� -i
A, - •;M - _ _ 133
: �_.� - 208.33 "NOIm4Oti71 _•.- -'
.w Oa IYIo40'E 287.9 .. 79.(16 NI°5730"W' 100
TAX. LOTTED:QN 'MAP•.
`{ r 1sl36DC: _
Ile
N0°30E c
75 Z 6t .30 73
01
on C
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING— 150 N. FIRST AVENUE
-- HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123
qE O� (503) 648-8681
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ROOM 418
VIRGINIA DAGG,Chairman
LYELL GARDNER,Vice Chairman
JIM FISHER
BONNIE L.HAYS
LUCILLE WARREN
December 17 , 1981
Office of the Mayor
City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mayor Bishop:
Enclosed is a copy of a resolution recently approved by this Board
of Commissioners.
While we understand and appreciate the need for land use planning
and environmental protection measures, we believe the time has come for
some realistic thinking on the economic status of the state of Oregon
and local governments.
Land use planning is proving to be a costly burden. In addition to
the enormous amounts of tax dollars that cities and counties are pumping
into land use planning, the state, this biennium, is supplying more than
$6.6 million to the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
As the resolution indicates, this Board believes it is time for the
Lesiglature to look at LCDC funding and return land use planning to the
local level as originally intended by Senate Bill 100.
LCDC, in response from pressure groups, has placed too much emphasis
on goals 3 and 4, agriculture and forestry, and virtually has ignored
all the other goals, including citizen participation and economy, goals
1 and 9 respectively.
LCDC should be an unbiased body whose basic intent is to get good
land use planning set up in all counties. The will of that appointed
body should not supersede the wishes of local residents.
We are asking that land use planning be done at the local level and
administered at the local level. The state' s role should be one of
monitoring to see that counties do follow their plans. The legal nit-
picking and the blatant attempts by small interest groups to latch onto
this program as a vehicle for total state control over land use is
hurting every county in the state.
an equal opportunity employer
December 17 , 1981
Page 2
We hope you will consider adopting this oc a similar resolution to
be forwarded to the Governor, your Legislature, to the Association of
Oregon Counties, or League of Oregon Cities.
The time is now, while the Legislature is in special session, to
bring land use planning back to the local level as intended by Senate
Bill 100 , and to help minimize the total cost of land use planning on
state and county budget.
Sincerely,
Virginia , Chairman
Board of C Toners for
Washington County
Lucille Warren,
Planning Liaison for
Washington County
VKD:crm
1 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
2 FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
3 In thF Matter of Recommending That the )
State Legislature Reduce the Budget of )
4 the DLCD and LCDC Whereby the Intent ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER
of S.B. 100 Will be Carried Out by )
5 Directing DLCD and LCDC to Accept and ) NO. 81-245
Acknowledge Local Plans as Submitted, )
6 and to Develop a System Ensuring Tha )
the Local Plans are Beinc Followed by' . )
7 the Various Jurisdictions. )
8 The above-entitled matter carne before the Board of County
9 Commissioners at their meeting of December 15, 1981 .
10 It appearing to the Board that Senate Bill 10 and Senate Bill
11 100, adopted in 1973, clearly envisioned a "working partnership"
12 between the Counties and Cities and the Land Conservation and
13 Development Commission on land use; and
14 It appearing to the Board that the clear affect of Senate Bill
15 100 was to give local jurisdictions the primary thrust of compre-
16 hensive planning consistent with local control; and
17 It appearing to the Board that most local jurisdictions have
18 compiled and adopted comprehensive land use plans with great input
19 from the public; and
20 It appearing to the Board that nearly 86 per cent of those
21 comprehensive plans have been rejected by the Land Conservation and
22 Development Conmtission on first submission; and
23 It appearing to the Board that most jurisdictions have sub-
24 mitted their comprehensive land use plans to the DLCD and the Land
25 Conservation and Development Commission only to be subjected to
26 long, costly and arduous hearings in which the state agency has
Page 1
1 attempted to superimpose its will over that of the local juris-
t dictions; and
3 It appearing to the Board that DLCD staff reports have been
4 inconclusive with criteria or standards to guide jurisdictions
5 regarding questions of interpretation of the administration of
F goals as they apply to the planning of land use; and
7 It appearing to the Board that the one-sided treatment has
s led to expensive activities, both for the state and the local
9 jurisdictions, both for staff time and for legal actions, whereby
10 a significant amount of time is being spent on land. use matters by
11 local jurisdictions; and
12 It appearing to the Board that most counties that have ac
13 knowledged plans have been put on notice by the Land Conservation
14 and Development Commission that their plans will not pass present -
15 state standards on post acknowledgment review; and
16 It appearing to the Board that a review of plans acknowledged
17 shows a shocking preferential treatment of goals 3 and 4 , with no
is deference to the productivity of the land or to the economy of the
19 area; and
20 It appearing to the Board that such one-sided actions by the
21 state has placed the Land Conservation and Development Commission
22 in an adversarial relationship with all jurisdictions and has
23 created only confusion and di rust; and
24 It appearing to the Board that most jurisdictions find them-
25 selves with declining revenue, with vital and necessary services
26 having to be curtailed; and
Page 2
1 It appearing to the Board that current and future legal
2 actions only serve to waste more of the taxpayers' funds in a futile
3 effort to satisfy the demands of the state board rather than meet
4 the intention of Senate Bill 100 to meet the needs of the city
5 and county jurisdictions and their people; and
6 It appearing to the Board that the state agency is greatly
9 in arrears in reviewing plans submitted, with only eight of 36
8 counties having been acknowledged; a-id
9 It appearing to the Board that recent state legislation shows
10 a further increase in the authority of the state agency over local
11 jurisdictions and over local control of land use planning; it is,
12 therefore
13 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Legislature, during its upcoming
.4 sessions regarding the financial status of the state budget, should
15 consider reducing the budget of the DLCD and the Land Conservation
16 and Development Commission to retuzn to the intent of Senate Bill
17 100; and it is further
18 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Legislature recommend that DLCD
19 and the Land Conservation and Development Commission be directed
20 to accept and acknowledge local plans as submitted and developed
21 with the local citizen participation, and in conformance with
22 Senate Bill 100; and it is further
23 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Legislature direct the Lard
24 Conservation and Development Commission to proceed to construct
25 a monitoring system that will ensure that the various jurisdictions
26 follow the land use plans they have adopted; now, therefore, it is
Page 3
i
I RESOLVED AND ORDERED that these actions will result in great
2 savings in dollars, time and relationships to the state as well
3 as to the local jurisdictions and will serve, in truth, to imple-
4 ment the original intentions of the Legislature when it enacted
5 land use legislation.
6 DATED this 15th day of December, 1931 .
7
8 BOARD � COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FOR SHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
p / GSE
10 AYE NAY ABSEN '
T
DACE j I
11 FISHER
A87
R TV,
GARDNER ✓ ✓ o
12 HAYS �-
13 WARREN CARDING SECT{E i
14
15
16
17
i3
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Page 4
WASHINGTON COUNTY
ADMIN63TPAT!ON BUILDING— 150 N. FIRST AYEENU_
HILLSBORO, OREGON 9712
15031 643-8631
BOAPD OF COMMISSIONERS
VIRGINIA DAGG,Chairman ROOM 418
LYELL GARDNER,Vice Chairman
JIM FISHER
BONNIE L.HAYS
LUCILLE WARREN
December 31, 1981
Mayor Wilbur Bishop
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear "Mayor Bishop:
On December 8, 1981 our Board adopted the enclosed Resolution and
Order urging Congress and the Federal Administration to earnestly con-
sider converting all non-educational categorical and block grant
prograzs to the General Revenue Sharing program concept in granting
local governments financial aid.
This action was the direct result of the concerns expressed by the
Association of Oregon Counties. It was also timely based on the
information I obtained on my recent trip to Washington, D.C. empha-
sizing the importance of Federal Revenue Sharing to local governments.
In Washington, D.C. and in ensuing correspondence and discussions, it
is apparent that there will be reductions in the Federal Revenue
Sharing program, but that the program will not be abolished., nor will
the cut be of the same magnitude as other programs. It is evident
that both Congress and the Presidential Administration strongly sup-
port the concept and precepts of the Revenue Sharing program. Their
rationale for this support is similar to that of Washington County.
The General Revenue Sharing program is:
1. The lowest administrative cost program of all Federal grant
programs;
2. Monies are allocated on a formula basis, which even though
not a perfect formula, to a large extent distribute monies on
a fair basis; and
3• It allows local officials to determine how the funds will be
spent. This means that we, as local officials, can use the
funds to meet the most crucial needs of our constituents.
an equal opportunity employer
V ,
December 31, 1981
Page 2
I am also enclosing a letter I received from J. Steven Rhodes,
Special Assistant to the President, requesting our assistance in pro-
viding input on Entitlement programs. The reason for this request is
that the Entitlement programs constitute one of the largest expen-
diture areas in the Federal budget. Accordingly, this Board is
requesting your assistance. We request that you con t_nue to provide
your Congressional delegation information on the Federal Revenue
Sharing program and any ideas or suggestions you may have in dealing
with cutting entitlement programs.
It was our cooperative effort that enabled us to have an impact on
saving Federal Revenue Sharing. By continuing to work together, we
can have an impact on Federal and State revenue issues.
Best wishes for a happy and prosperous New Year!
Sincerely,
Virgihia'-Dagg , Chairmas�� ���
Board o€`CoTmyssioners f
Washington cry , ty
VKD: crm
Enclosures
r
t
1 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONE'PS
2 FOR 11ASHIivGTON COUNTY, OREGON
3 In the Matter of Endorsing the )
Continuation of Federal General ) RESOLUTION ANBD ORDER
4 Revenue Sharing Program in Sub- )
stantially its Present Form and ) NO.
5 Calling for the Support of the )
Program by the Oregon Congres- )
6 sional Delegation. )
7 The above-entitled matter carne on regularly before the Board
at its meeting of November 17, 1981 ; and
9 It appearing to the Board that the Board of County Comm-is-
10 sioners of Washington County, Oregon recognizes the importance of
11 Federal Revenue Sharing Funds which have been received since the
11 program' s inception in 1972 and that General Revenue Sharing has
13 been the most _effective entitlement program operated by the Federal
14 Government; and
16 It appearing to the Board that General Revenue Sharing
16 helps cities and counties meet the unpaid costs for federally-
17
ederally-17 mandated programs, and has the lowest administrative cost of any
18 federal grant programs; and
y
0 19 It appearing to the Board that General Revenue Sharing funds
U_ 20 are used by local governments to provide vital services to their
. o- 21 citizens such as police and fie protection, social services and
Z
Wu 22 road maintenance; and
-i 23 It appearing to the Board that the Board appreciates the
zo 24
=)o flexibility of this program, as opposed to categorical programs,,
_J
O2
ys 2s to address differing local needs as determined at the local level,
16 and the consistency that this entitlement program provides for budget
.Page 1
'i
1 preparation; and
2 It appearing to the Board that the administration has proposed
3 an across-the-board reduction of 12% , which includes General Revenue
4 Sharing; and
5 It appearing to the Board that a complete phase-out of General
6 Revenue Sharing over the next three years has also been proposed;
7 and
8 It appearing to the Board that cities and counties are already
9 cutting public services because of reductions in other federal pro-
10 grams; and
11 It appearing to the Board that reduction or termination of
12 General Revenue Sharing funds to the County during the County' s fis-
13. cal year could result in disastrous consequences to the County by
14 reason of the County' s inability to plan for any such redaction- or
15 termination; it is therefore
16 RESOLVED A14D ORDERED that the Board of County Commissioners
17 of Washington County, Oregon, this 17th day of November, 1981,
18 does hereby enthusiastically endorse the continuation of General
z 19 Revenue Sharing in substantially its present form and urges all
D
ou_ 20 citizens of Washington County to support the continuation effort
zI
OT
P0 21 by contacting their Congressman and Senators; and it is further
z
_0 22 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Board of County Commissioners
Q W
J° 23 hereby urges the Oregon Congressional Delegation to support the
UJo
zo 24 continuation of Federal Revenue Sharing at current levels; and it
0�
>z 25 is further
I.-
D 26 RESOLVED AND ORDERED that a copy of this resolution be trans-
0
v
Page 2
1,
I witted to our Congressional Delegation.
2 DATED this 17th day of November, 1981.
3 BOARD OF COUNTY CObi%SISSIONERS
FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
C alr
6 -
. an 1
G��NSR
RE r ng�Secretary /
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
' 19
z
D
Q_ 20
zI
0m 21
zz
Z
22
N C7
Qw
3" 23
M�
z° 24
41
�J
u2 25
26
0
U
Page 3
THE VYHITE HOUSE:
WASHINGTON
December 17 , 1981
Dear Ms. Dagg :
Thank you for taking the time to meet with me on your last
trip to Washington. As we discussed, the Intergovernmental
Affairs Office is acutely aware of the importance of gene-ral
revenue sharing to local govern-ments. The President in a
number of meetings with local elected officials has re-
affirmed his position that revenue sharing will not be
eliminated until there is an al-ernative source of revenue
to take its place. Please understand that there is no
proposed plan by this Administration to phase our general
revenue sharing.
Also, as we discussed, it would be advantageous if over the
next few weeks, you and your people would begi;i to examine
the whole question of entitlement programs. At the present
time, entitlement programs in this country represent one of
the largest uncontrollable budget items in the Federal
government. With your help in redesigning these programs,
we will be able to provide better help to those in need
while reducing the entitlement expenditures.
Again, thank you for your thoughts and concerns on your last-
visit
astvisit and know that if there is anything that we can do to
assist you, it will be our pleasure.
Qery �-u yours,
. Steven Rhodes
Special Assistant t '-he President
for Intergovernmental Affairs
CC: Marge Post
Ms. Virginia Dagg
Chairman
Board of Commissioners of �j�> >
Washington County
Administration Building
1
Room 418 DEC ny 1931
150 N. First Avenue t
Hillsboro, OR 97123 ..
CITYCWTWAIM
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
December 28, 1981
Mayor and City Council
City of Tigard, Oregon
SUBJECT: Charter Review
Honorable Persons:
Councilor•Stimler has asked 'that staff prepare suggested Charter amendments for
her to introduce for Council consideration regarding the procedures for calling
Special Council.Meetings. Treating this as a request for information on how to
accomplish such a change, I will see to the preparation of an amendment. Con-
sistent with our policy of no "plops" and my effort to provide information equally
to all Council members, I have initiated this letter.
I would like to suggest that we review other areas of the Charter for possible
update as to clarity or streamlining. I have asked staff to submit suggestions
for Charter housekeeping to me for our February 15, 1982 Study Session. Charter
amendments.for voter approval in May would need to be passed by resolution of
the Council.no later than March 22, 1982.
Any further suggestions or guidance from Council would be appreciated.
Yours truly,
Robert W. Jean
City Administrator
cv
i
12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
CI ®F TIGA
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
December 31, 1981
I
TO: City Council
FROM: Park and Recreation Board
SUBJECT: Annual Report
As required by Ordinance 79-93, this is the second Annual Report of the
Park Board Activities for 1981.
We are addressing the key items in Ordinance 77-70, the Environmental Design
and Open Space Plan for the City of Tigard. This is our fundamental guide
for Park Board Activities. We are noting activities and our involvement in
each of the key items:
1. Organization:
We met the last Thursday of each month for the September and
December meetings which were delayed until the first week of the
next month. Attendance by all members has been good, meeting
-quorum.requirements.
Frank Currie, Public Works Director, and/or Liz Newton, Planning
Staff, have attended all our recent meetings. They have kept us
well informed on City planning development activities.
We attended City Council meetings to speak on important Park and
Open Space issues. We attended City Budget meetings to present
park needs.
We have two vacancies on the Park Board now created by the resig-
nation of Roger Zumwalt and Hiram Fitzpatrick. Also, two appointments,
for members Mary Payne and Art Haas, expire in December,. Action needs
to be taken by Council to appoint two new members and reappoint the
other two.
We established objectives early in the year. We have taken action
on all of the objectives although not all have been completed.
New officers were elected in December for 1982. They are Chairman,
Ron Jordan; Vice Chairman, Bob Bellinger; and Secretary, Betty Golden.
12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
City Councii
December 31, 1981
Page 2
2. Park Development and Acquisition:
Development and Acquisition plans have slowed this year because
of the slow down in construction and the resultant reduction in
system development funds.
Plans for the Downtown Fanno Creek Park are being held until
activities are concluded in the overall Downtown Plana We have
been involved with both the Downtown Development Committee and
the Civic Center Committee to assure that park plans are a key
part of any development.
Some grading and erosion control work has been done at Summer
Lake Park. A sprinkler system is needed next year.
We have had continuing discussions regarding a band stand at
Cook Park, but as yet have not agreed to a final design.
The Tigard Police Officers Association provided some kiddie play
equipment which is partially installed by the 20-30 Club in Cook
Park.
3. Park Operation and Maintenance:
We worked with.City Staff to define park maintenance needs. We
recommended and successfully increased funding levels to the Budget
Committee and City Council.
We reviewed and agreed to proposed park maintenance standards for
the new Englewood Park. We also discussed these with neighborhood
representatives. . These standards have been reviewed on the site
and have been performed satisfactorily by.City crews.
We also reviewed proposed park special uses and park fee proposals
and made recommendations for action.
.4o Recreation Programs:
We heard and recommended a proposal from a private citizen for a
recreation program for the City. The citizen was scheduled to
appear before City Council but withdrew the proposal. We plan to
redraft the proposal and present to City Budget Committee this
coming year.
5. Greenway:
We had requested in last years report to have more involvement in
development activities in or adjacent to greenways. Development has
been slow this year but City Staff has brought proposals to us: for
review.
F
city Councii
December 31, 1981
Page 3
6. Bike Paths:
We were involved early with the Fowler Junior Hi�hClass in their
bike path study. . We strongly endorsed their activity and supported
their proposal- to Council. The students did. the work and deserve
the credit and we are very pleased with the success of the levy.
We plan to'maintain contact with City Staff on progress of con-
struction of the bike paths.
7. Historic Sites, Visual Corridors and Vegetation Cover:
We considered an application for converting the windmill on 121st to
a residence; we recommended against it.
We have had little or no involvement in these areas nor do we know
of any significant activities.
SUMMARY:
We have been pleased with the increased involvement from the City Planning
Staff. We have been more aware of development activities within the City
this year. The new City Administrator promises continued cooperation in
this future.
LANDIS, AEBI & BAILEY, P. C.
LAWYERS
1516 GEORGIA-PACIF'IC BUILDING
PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-1276
TELEPHONE(503)224-6532
DAVID C.LANDIS
FRED M.AEBI
JOE D.BAILEY
JOHN C.MERCER
JAMES M.CALLAHAN January 5, 1982
ANNA M. MORAN
DAVID R.FOSTER
RSG
Mr. Robert Jean
City Administrator
C_ t-y of Tigard
P. O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Bob:
Re: City of Tigard v. Paterson, et al
Our file: 12, 836-41
I have now received a notice setting this case for
trial on February 25. There is a pretrial conference begin-
ning at 4:30 p.m. on February 8. I think it would be helpful
to have you go to that, though your presence is not essential.
Typically at these conferences the judge will make some effort
to see whether the case can be settled, and I think you would
find the meeting interesting, even if we didn't achieve a lot
at it.
I anticipate that Mr. Birnie will struggle a bit
with this trial date, pleading his legislative activity as a
reason to set it over, but I haven't heard anything about that
yet.
truly yours,
Bailey
JDB/mr
r
CITYOFTWAPD
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator
DATE: January 5, 1982
SUPJECT: Civic Center Phase I Contract
As per your authorization, I have amended and signed the attached Phase I
contract. The Phase II contract incorporating all hourly and Phase I
word: will be ready for you in early February after your meeting on January
28, 1982 with the Civic Center Committee.
12420 S.W. MAIN P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH: 639-4171
o`- f
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS
�`'l 1,t�•I I("t✓
17
AIA Document 6727
Standard Form ®# Agreement Between
Owner and Architect
tor Special Services
1979 EDITION
THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR USE WHEN OTHER B-SERIES DOCUMENTS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE
THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES;CONSULTATION WITH
AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION
AGREEMENT
rASn.ry_P
made as of the -Fetji=teems. ' day of December in the year of Nineteen
Hundred and Eighty-One
BETWEEN the Owner: City of Tigard
Tigard City Hall
12755 S.W. Ash Avenue
Tigard, Oregon 97223
and the Architect: Brun Moreland Christopher Architects pc
1020 S.W. Tenth Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97205
For the following Project:
(include detailed description of Project location and scope.)
Review and evaluate several program and site options for a proposed civic complex to
be located within the City of Tigard, Oregon. The study shall encompass the review
of manpower and space needs, review of policies for development along with associated
cost implications, analysis of site options and preparation of site plan studies for sel-
ected sites, and recommendations on financing options and strategy.
The Owner and the Architect agree as set forth below.
Copyright 1972, (D 1979 by The American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Avenue, N.W., Wa,hingtun, D.C. 20006. Repro-
duction of the material herein or substantial quotation of its proxisions without permission of the AIA %iolate, the copyright lay.,
of the United States and will be subject to legal prosecution.
AIA DOCUMENT 6727 • SPECIAt- SERVICES AGREEMENT • JUNE 1979 M:110N • AI. ' • ��:,,Iw9
THE AMERICAN INSTi rUTE or ARCHITECTS,173? NEW YORK.AVE., N,%':..WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 B727-1979 �
ARTICLE -1
ARCHITECT'S SERVICES
(Here list thn,e services to be provided by the Archit_ct undf, the Terms and Conditions of this A3rr mC^ ..! ,\'::'e• --nd--, eech xrcirr li,f'd the methnd and
means of compensation to be used, if applicabfe, a, provided in Article 10.)
Basic Services shall include:
t1 .1 Review existing manpower plans and space projections as prepared by the City
of Tigard, and prepare recommendations as to space needs for the anticipated
building program.
6"1.2 Review and evaluate three (3) selected site alternatives in terms of development
suitability.
1.3 Review existing zoning and land use documentation, a well.-as a
4ek-elepment-plans fei`eti,aluaas to impact of the selectedalternative sites.
1.4 Review identified Policy Options/development scenariosfor suitability, y^,�
✓1.5 Prepare site development studies of each of the selected sites.
n
1.6 -ldc p financing alternat sAand assist in developing an implementaion strategy
for development of the civic complex. ,pyy515
1.7 Assist the City Administrator in the preparation of a cost
for the selected site.
publie pi-esentatien of the
F' 1 n Assist \ {
'V
1.10 Recommend a timetable for development of the civic complex. (01A2f�1 aIX=� Qt.,495 ��
Additional Services shall include:
1.11 Review and analysis of additional site alternatives.
1 .12 Preparation of additional site development plans.
• J
�u���vuT' SO.�cs��c ��'N9�'24� Z�o�✓ �1�
AIA DOCUMENT B727 • SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT JUNE 1979 EDITION AIA' ^1979
THE ANIIER!CAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHIFECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., NAV.,WASH,-`cFUN, D.C. 2.0036 6777-1979 2
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT
ARTICLE 2 ARTICLE 5
THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT
2.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding 5.1 Payments on account of the Architect's services, and
requirements for the Project. for Feimbursable Expense, a, defined in Article 4, shall be
2.2 The Owner shall designate, when necessary, a rep- made monthly upon presentation of the Architect's state-
resentative authorized to act in the Owner's behalf with ment of services rendered or as otherwise provided in this
respect to the Project. The Owner or such authorized
Agreement.
representative shall examine the documents submitted by 5.2 An initial payment as set forth in Paragraph 10.-1 is
the Architect and shall render decisions pertaining thereto the minimum payment under this Agreement.
promptly, to avoid unreasonable delay in the progress of 5.3 If the Project is suspended or abandoned in whole
the Architect's services. or in part for more than three months, the Architect shall
be compensated for all services performed prior to re-
2.3 The Owner shall furnish required information as ex- ceipt of written notice from the Owner of Such SuSpen-
peditiously as necessary for the orderly progress of the Sion or abandonment, together with Reimbursable Ex-
Work, and the Architect shall be entitled to rely upon the penses then due and all Termination Expenses as defined
accuracy and completeness thereof. in Paragraph 8.4. If the Project is resumed after being
suspended for more than three months, tP.,• Architect's
ARTICLE 3 compensation shall be equitably adjust •d.
DIRECT SALARY AND
DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSE ARTICLE 6
3.1 Direct Salary Expense is defined as the direct salaries ARCHITECT'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS
of all the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project, 6.1 Records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses
but does not include the cost of contributions and bene- pertaining to services performed on the basis of a Multiple
fits related thereto, whether mandatory or customary, as of Direct Salary or Direct Personnel Expense shall be kept
described in Paragraph 3.2, and included in Direct Per- on the basis of generally accepted accounting principles
sonnel Expense. and shall be available to the Owner or the Owner's
3.2 Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the direct authorized representative at mutually convenient times.
salaries of all the Architect's personnel engaged on the
Project, and the portion of the cost of their mandatory ARTICLE _7
and customary contributions and benefits related thereto, ARBITRATION
such as employment taxes and other statutory employee Lam-- -
benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pen- 7.1 All claims, disputes and other matters in questio-
sions, and similar contributions and benefits. between the parties to this Agreement arising out of or
relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof, sh be
ARTICLE 4 decided by arbitration in accordance with the Co struc-
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES tion Industry Arbitration Rules of the AmericaArbitra-
tion Association then obtaining unless the pa les mutu-
4.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to the Archi- ally agree otherwise. No arbitration arising ut of or re-
tect's compensation and include actual expenditures lating to this Agreement shall include, by consolidation,
made Isy the Architect and the Architect's employees and joinder or in any other manner, any addi onal person not
consultants in the interest of the Project for the expenses a party to this Agreement except by %w' tten consent con-
listed in the following Subparagraphs: taining a specific reference to this Agreement and signed
1 expense of transportation and living expenses in by the Architect, the Owner and ar other person sought
connection with out-of-town travel authorized by to be joined. Any consent to rbitration involving an
the Owner, additional person or persons s all not constitute consent
to arbitration of any dispute of described therein or with
.2 long distance communications, any person not named or escribed therein. This agree-
.3 fees paid for securing approvals of authorities hav- ment to arbitrate and an agreement to arbitrate with an
ing jurisdiction over the Project, additional person or rsons duly consented to by the
parties to this Agree ent shall be specifically enforceable
.4 reproductions, under the prevailin arbitration law.
.5 postage and handling of documents, 7.2 Notice of t I demand for arbitration shall be filed in
writing ,with ti
other party tc this Agreement and with
.6 renderings and mcdels requested by the Owner, the America Arbitration Association. The demand shall
.7 data processing and photographic production be made\w' hin a reasonable time after the claim, dispute
techniques when used in connection with Addi- or other latter in question has arisen. In no event shall
tional Services, the de and for arbitration be made after the date when
instil ion of legal or equitable proceedings based on
.8 expense of overtime work requiring higher than su claim, dispute or other matter in question would be
regular rates, if authorized by the Owner. rred by the applicable statute of limitations.
AIA DOCUMENT x727 SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • JUNE 19'9 EwrION • AIA"'-' GI4:9
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHI rECTS,1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.V.,1AASH1NGTON, D.C. 2(1006 B727—1979 3
•
0.7.
7.3 The award rendere�bythe arb a be final, For Services provided on a Fixed Fee basis, 10°0 of
and judgment may h pon it in accordance with the Fixed Fee earned to the time of te:rnination.
ap li In any cong jurisdiction thereof.
ARTICLE 9
ARTICLE 8 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT 9.1 Unless otherwise specified, this Agreement shall be
8.1 This Agreement may be terminated by either part governed by the law of the principal place of business of
Y the Architect.
upon seven days' written notice should the other party
fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms 9.2 As between the parties to this Agreement: as to all
through no fault of the party initiating the termination. acts or failures to act by either party to this Agreement,
any applicable statute of limitations shall commence to
8.2 This Agreement may be terminated by the Owner run and any alleged cause of action shall be deemed to
upon at least seven days' written notice to the Architect have accrued in any and all events not later than the date
in the event that the Project is permanently abandoned. payment is due to the Architect pursuant to Article 5.
8.3 In the event of termination not the fault of the 9.3 The Owner and the Architect, respectively, bind
Architect, the Architect shall be compensated for all ser- themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal
vices performed to the termination date. together \�ith representatives to the other party to this Agreement and
Reimbursable Expenses then due and all Termination Ex- to the partners, successors, assigns and legal representa-
penses as defined in Paragraph 8.4. tires of such other party with respect to all covenants of
this Agreement. Neither the Owner nor the Architect shall
8.4 Termination Expenses are defined as Reimbursable
assign, sublet or transfer any interest in this Agreement
Expenses directly attributable to termination for which
the Architect is not otherwise compensated, plus an without the written consent of the other.
9.4 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated
amount computed as a percentage of the compensation
earned to the time of termination,as follows: agreement between the Owner and the Architect and
supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or
For Services provided on a Multiple of Direct Salary agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may
or Direct Personnel Expense basis, 20°o of the total be amended only by written instrument signed by both
expenses incurred to the time of termination; Owner and Architect.
AIA DOCUMENT 13727 • SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT JUNE 1979 EDITION AIA!" 01979
THE AMCRICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1775 NEW YORK AVE., NAV.,WASFIINGTON, D.C. 20006 B727.—1979 4
ARTICLE 10
BASIS OF COMPENSATION
The Owner shall compensate the Architect for the services provided, in accordance with Article 5, I'aynlent, to the Archi-
tect, and the other Terms and Conditions of this Agreement, as follrnvs:
10.1 AN INITIAL PAYMENT of One thousand five hundred and 00/1 00 dollars 6 1,500. 00 1
shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and credited to the UFvner s account as follows:
10.2 COMPENSATION FOR THE ARCHITECT'S SERVICES, as described in Article 1, Architect's Services, shall be com-
puted as follows:
(Here in,ert basis of compematiun, including fixed amounts, multiples or perterilig ,,aril id,ntjfy the• ,emacs to L.;hi(h plrUCular method; of compen-
sation apply,if necessary.)
/ r 11
3•J,-
Compensation for Basic Services shall be a Stipulated Sum of &iXt- t'l `he -- -:-el
en_ t - tgelreel Elellar_ . tE -7Wo4e �
Sq,-ra).NSs'r�A / y7YC
Compensation for Additional Services rendered by Principals and Employees and
Subcontractors shall be based on the following rates:
1. Principals' time at the fixed rate of Fifty-five dollars ($55.00) per hour.
For the purposes of this Article, the Principals are:
Dennis J. Brun
Robert S. Moreland
Grigsby S. Christopher
2. Subcontractors' time at the fixed rate of Fifty-five dollars ($55. 00) per hour.
For the purposes of this Article, the Subcontractors are:
Robert S. Moore
James Breithaupt
3. Compensation for services rendered by Employees shall be based on a
multiple of 2.75 times their Direct Personnel Expense, as defined in
Paragraph 3.2.
10.3 FOR REIt11BURSABLE EXPENSES, as described in Article 4, and any other items included in Article 11 as Reimburs-
able Expenses, a multiple of 1 . 10 ( ) times the amounts expended by the Architect, the Architect's
employees and consultants in the interest of the Project.
10.4 Payments due the Architect and unpaid under this Agreement shall bear interest from the date payment is due at
the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing at the principal place of business of
the Architect. At a rate equal to one (1) percentage point above the prevailing
(Here insert any rate of interest agreed upon.) Prime Loan Rate of The Oregon Bank of Portland,
Oregon, at the date of billing.
(Usury la.vs and requirements under the Federal Truth in tending Act,similar state and local consumer credit laws and other regulations at the Oi%ner's
and Architect's principal places of business, the location of the Project and el,esvhere may affect the validity of this prrndsion. Specific let;:,/ adcicc
should be obtained with respect to deletion, modification or other requirements such a,written disclosure,or nai�er,)
AIA DOCUMENT 6727 • SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • JUNE 1979 EDITION AIN! • 01979
THE AMERICAN INSTITUIE OF ARCHITFCr5, 1-35 NEW YORK AVE., NAV.,WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 8727--1979 5
° 10.5 The Owner and the Architect agree in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of thi, Agreement that:
10.5.1 IF THE SCOPE of the Project or of the Architect's
seri ice< is changed materially, the amounts of compensa-
tion shall be equitably adjusted.
10.5.2 IF THE SERVICES covered by this Agreement have riot been completed «vithin nine
( 9 ) months of the date hereof, through nrr fault of the Architect, the amounts of compensation, rates
and multiples set forth herein shall be equitably adjusted.
ARTICLE 71
OTHER CONDITIONS
11. 1 The City of Tigard shall be responsible for providing all required program
materials and documentation necessary for the Architect and Subcontractors
to perform the services defined in this Agreement. Materials required
include, but are not limited to:
Comprehensive Plan Maps; Comprehensive Street Plan; Downtown Plan;
NPO #1 Plan; ORB Park Plan; Existing Land Use Plan; Existing Zoning
Plan; Manpower Plan; Space Needs Projection (Year 2000); Policy Options;
City Organizational Chart; base information on selected site:_ alternatives
including property maps, utility service and capacities, topographic maps
if available, existing structures, flood plain analysis, and other documen-
tation available.
// /i1 11� off' GC�vD ZST�n�L TS 7"0
f�2�P�4�� Q.C�'t-v�En/ -t'�I•E /��G{��T�CT' ,qND
This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above.
OWNER ARCHITECT
City of Tiqzjrd
12755 S.W. Ass _ Brun Moreland Christopher Architects pc
Ash Avenue —_ 1020 S.W. Tenth Avenue
Tiga�rd� Oregon 97223 _ Portland; Oregon-_.97205
Robert Jea , City Admirlistrator \ �F
Denrfis J. Brun, President —
AIA DOCUMENT 27 • SPECIAL SERVICES AGREEMENT • )UNE 7974 EDINON • AIAV . 9
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEN'YORK AVE., NAV„wASH!NC:TON, U.C.O(N106
8727-1979 6
c7. 1
L..^.terg�verrra�n�a1 P.eiat10n3 D'-vis;on
155 Cottage Street N.E.
Salam, Oregon 97310
LONG-RANGE FISCAL PROJECTION
Cities over 10,000 Population
Estimated Revenues and Expenditures in compliance with ORS 4 71.810 2(2) _
REVENUES FY 82-831 FY 83-84 ! FY 84-85 FY 85-56; FY 86-87 1
Property Tares ** 835,400 1,300,000 1,500,000 1,600,000 1,750,000
Taxes other than Property -0- -p- -p- I -0- -0-
Fees, Licenses, Permits 888,158 981,092 1,075,222 1,173,707 1,276,686
Utility Revenues 456,000 492,000 507,000 517,000 537,000
Other Local Revenue 345,485 221,115 232,543 236,328 240,828 1
Intergovernmental Revenue -0- -0- -O- -0-
-O-
--Federal Revenue Sharing '05,000 -0- -0- -0-
-0-
Other Federal Funding
0 0 O 0 - - -0- -0-
--State Revenue Sharing 86 000 86 000 86,000 86,000 86,000
state-Shared Revenue 393,195 428,940 449,365 452,770 476,600
Other State Funding -0- -0_ !
--Other Intergovernmental
Revenue 735,663 208,241 535,819 550,397 314,975
TOTAL ,877.901 3,767,388 4,385,949 4,616,202 4,682,089
EXPENDITURES
Public Safety (Police,
Fire, Ambulance,
Building: Inspection) 1,525,989 1,679,905 1,832,072 2,001,615 2,163,273
Transportation (Streets,
Transit, Airports,
Parking, Bikeways,
Lighting) 1,454,500 1,109,500 1,141,500 1,294,500 1,340,500
Sewer and Water 258,000 284,000 301,000 319,000 330,000
Land Use Planning 90,000 99,000 109,000 115,000 122,000
Parks and Recreation 201,000 227,000 227,000 237,000 250,000
Libraries 144,082 161,370 204,815 235,537 270,870
Social !,ervices 116,000 92,000 103,000 114,000 125,000
Financial and General
Administration 304,809 337,850 377,780 424,700 473,660
Debt Payments
Principle and Interest 99,458 90,125 90,590 93,912 93,449
Other 302,000 312,000 322,000 O 332,000 352,000
TOTAL 4,495,838 4,392,750 4,708,757 5,167,264 5,520,752
** Assuming no 1$% limit...assuming reasonable Political odds
Certification: I certify that this long-rangeI
fiscal projection was i
approved by the City Council of the City of
on 198 - }
Mayor
1'0ao . q
2S
S.W FIR ST.
31C•O H 890 24'W - ` -- _ _
5 890 18'E may? CANCELLEDTax LOTS
140 L
to vn 3100,3901,1200,3701,
a_ R' . J
�0 4200 °
.55Ac $ '� , SEE MAP
9
2S I !dA
3100 P I �s� FIR LOOP
200 o5ti� 36si 9a.45
-9/,4c.
20 40 105 43001 4400
u .53AC. .50.4c.
o �� 1�1DJ� a ��lr
2 j o 3 �f
N I '�✓
N
3100r — _r
•' v INITIAL C J�J J Ir Ir
T�
300 /- ^ 50.02 POINT 176.55 140 589° is' 37"w
sa4c , r i c /, fff Fsx rcxruvs 4714 zll
�.'_ } • Fi .l :�N � Vt:`. q,,,__ y ••-; .. r - 3-lf-�.
o 40 '�F��' ft
.
m
3700 y w
l '/•J./� /`1! --...i '�r�,-r. �4A "a:L tty�}q y,t �`tl v"-a.. �`W-FYy
..X10.0
400 N 89* 24'W
I �rn L wr r , u rr:} 44 �+176YTv"^'�e l
} l / � .y�yt p � :•s�'�3�'��� .yY� �p T' -.i. 't 1
,�1. /� �.0 � f'-�fIS�M' �� �4 ..P} �;' r Y'��]Giq �• 'G� Glx, 1h_.+w. J..
k 'iu Yay i A a"3� ryr t'� 5 •.
a a
qz 24;. 3100
,er r �'�^.s, i..1
F Tin l+J 1. }• .'a.'.
.';S'8$�i'�$ :':;3e�'s�±/:.S: %'� i/i:!>;i!...•.-` :� i, c `sy n+-�;✓tG9^a
h a 3':-;"Wj1 n.O
500 v - et .,r ON 11-tL'd
A�
��,
CV
r
o7.t
N es° Za'w io0 TO PUBLIC 845/929
3,;.� � so SANDBURG STREET
1:00 = _
2 5 88' 53' E ,410
3 801
3800 23ac.
n J -
_! -� /.B/Ac o
! I ,
N
SEF k!A
-' " O I .1 iz 50 T o
7-o
(C.S. No. 13,084) F 25 1 iC•7
!% N
W I
N
A 1
Y 148° 53' W
360 5 69" 53' E ci
N
' - 3
317 O n�
_ u �
3900 E
z A
z z
o �c
E, ,a HITY. 43 ca CD�,
z e•+ � �N
0 0
A js+
a
zcn
o a
U
U � �
H �
W � U
dy ,
x
x v
H
b
H
R5 W
H U
z z
a
U U
C
U
H W r+
H E+
E-• ~ � a U
z � a
Pd
a w
H cn ggqW
6 U
H
H
d
cn
z
P.
z
Cly H
x
A H d
x 3 G6,
i O
H
W U
6 H
TIGARD TRANSIT CENTER
Key Locational Criteria
Adequate space for 10--12 bus bays
Proximity to major radial corridor (Hwy. 99W-Barbur Blvd.)
Proximity to business and commercial activities
Linkage to pedestrian walkways
Min-'Mize walking distances between buses for transferring riders
Minimize adverse impacts on traffic circulation
Integration with character of downtown
Capital costs of construction
Capital costs of right-of-way
Rider Amenities to be Included
Shelters
Benches
Information displays
. Landscaping
. Telephones
. Trash receptacles
. Small concessions kiosk
SEE
I c
---- p -
I u
� ===
= a �
IL
Z O
tu
¢LU
C3
3i� �I = (n 1=
C6 —_-- —=== O
a.
J
----- —_
�I
MEMORANDUM
January 6, 1982
TO: City Council
FROM:* City Administrator
RE: Urban Renewal Ordinance
Ordinance 81-124-A
Procedural Options
At the December 21 , 1981 Council meeting the above ordinance approving
the Downtown Tigard Revitalization Plan under ORS 457.095 was approved
by 3-1 vote of Council present and requires a second reading. Ordinance
81-124-B approving the Downtown Tigard Revitalization Plan Under ORS
457.095 and providing for an advisory election was also approved by
unanimous vote of Council present.
The question has been raised as what to do with ordinance 81-124-A
without jeopardizing the adopted ordinance. The apparent options are:
1.) vote to table the ordinance indefinitely, or
2.) move to withdraw the ordinance from consideration
I recommend that Ordinance 81-124-A be withdrawn from consideration.
If the Council wishes to reconsider the ordinance, the Council would
then have to adopt an amendatory ordinance.
f
r.
1`IEt I01L�1VDLT1
TO: City Council
Public Works Director
SUBJECT: SW 74th Avenue LID #27
The public hearing for this project was set for January 11, 1982 and
so advertised.
Staff was unable to put together the necessary information for sufficient
notification by January 11, 1982.
We would request that the hearing be continued to January 25, 1982 to allow
property owners the opportunity to have sufficient time to consider the
assessment distribution methods.
I' ll MINE 1 11111
o Co
MPIORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Planning Director
Attached please find the proposed Administrative Procedures for the City
Planning Department functions. Also attached is correspondence from the
City Attorney regarding comments made on the proposed Administrative
Procedures and correspondence from the Hone Builders Association relative
to the proposed Administrative Procedures.
The City Attorney will bring the Ordinance and replacement pages to insert
where changes have been made as indicated in his attached letter.
HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN PORTLAND
LA,E OSWEG 0. 0 R E G 0 N ..;'0: U3 6c:1 is
THE METRO HOUSING CENTER
December 23, 1981
City of Tigard
Liz Newton
Planning Division
P O Box 23397
Tigard OR 97223
Dear Liz:
Burton Weast and I have both reviewed the draft administrative
procedures ordinance. As I told you over the phone, we find it
to be an excellent ordinance overall. It is so refreshing to
read an ordinance that incorporates and reflects the current
state of Oregon land use law.
We do have some comments and suggestions:
Section 18. 84. 020 (a) (2) : To avoid confusion, we suggest that the
words. "not including legislative comprehensive plan map changes"
be added. Obviously the city does not wish to personally notify
all residents of impending legislative amendments.
. 030 (c) (3) : In sub (A) , "incomplete" should be defined as "an
application not containing one or more of the major elements
required in an application. " If the application hits all the
bases, but not in sufficient depth, that is grounds for denial.
Refusal to accept the application is warranted only where the
applicant has ignored the submission requirements.
The intent of ORS 227.175 was to force cities to expedite their
planning review process, not to extort waivers from applicants .
That intention was reinforced by the enactment this session of
SB 419, setting a 180 day limit for final action on subdivisions
and partitions. Sub (B) should be deleted. The section as
written gives total discretion to refuse applications (any project
could be deemed to complex to review in 60 days) .
. 050 and . 070: We are pleased to see the director given authority
to act on the items listed in . 050. However, we don' t believe
that minor partitions and extensions of time ( . 050 (a) (1) and (4) )
should be subjected to notice requirements. They are purely
f ministerial decisions, unlike temporary uses and design review,
where judgment factors do enter in.
Page 2
City of Tigard
. 100 (a) (1) : The zoning and subdivision ordinances should fully
implement the plan. Compliance with the comprehensive plan should
be an issue only where the ordinance did not contemplate the
action under consideration.
. 100 (e) (iii) : Protection of the public from "possible deleter-
ious effects" is a vague standard and should be deleted. The
other three criteria should be adequate and give notice to the
developer of what can be expected. (Editorial note: Why the
change in numbering style here to roman?)
.120: Six months between applications would be a better standard,
more in keeping with general practice.
. 150 (c) and . 250 (a) : To stay within the SB419 180 day limit,
we suggest that appeals of director decisions go directly to the
Council rather than through the Commission.
. 290 (b) (3) : This indicates that a brief has to be filed prior
to hearing. While that may be a practice that would help the
council, it is so different from standard practice that such a
requirement should be carefully studied for its impacts on
applicants and opponents.
We look forward to more quality work from the city in the future.
Sincerely,
Kev n L. anway
Senior Staff A torney
KLH/djgb
cc: Ed Sullivan
O'CIONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MARK P. J.SULLIVANONNELL
BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING CANBY OFFICE
EDWARD J.SULLIVA
TIMOTHY RAMIS 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET
KENNETH M.ELLIOTT PORTLAND. OREGON 97209
181 N.GRANT. SUITE 202
CORINCANBY.OREGON 97013
STEPHEN
E F.CREW
(5037 222-4402 (5031 266-1149
ST'E PHEN F.CREW
STEVEN L.PFEIFFER PLEASE REPLY To
PORTLAND OFFICE
December 29 , 1981
Mr. Frank Currie, Director
Public Works Department
City of Tigard
P. O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re: Comments of Kevin L. Hanway re Porposed Tigard
Administrative Procedures Ordinance
Dear Frank:
I have carefully studied the letter from Mr. Hanway and appreciate
his review of the proposed Administrative Procedures Ordinance for
Tigard. This letter is written in response to those comments and
contains some suggestions for further amendments to the City Code
based on Mr. Hanway's review. There are a couple of other items
which should be seen as policy matters for Council decision when
it reviews this matter in a study session on January 18.
The first change suggested is in 18 .84 .020 (a) (2) wherein Mr.
Hanway suggests we specifically exclude "legislative comprehensive
map changes" . I thin that would be superfluous in view of the
opening portion of that same section, which defines "administrative
action" as a "quasi-judicial" action including the three uasi-
judicial actions listed in that subsection.
The second change suggested is to 18 .84 .020 (c) (3) (A) . Mr. Hanway
suggests we further define "incomplete" . I have no objection to
this approach and would suggest at the bottom of subsection (c)
that the following sentence be added:
"An application shall be deemed "incomplete" unless it
addresses each element required to be considered under
applicable provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code or
specified in the application form. "
On this same subsection, Mr. Hanway suggests that the city should
delete the ability of the Director to refuse applications if the
same cannot be acted upon within 60 days. This is a policy matter
for the Council to decide. I note that ORS 227. 175 requires a
municipal hearings officer or such other person as the Council may
designate a hearings officer to hear applications for permits and
zone changes and that a hearing and decision on the same must be
had within 60 days.
Mr. Frank Currie
December 29, 1981
Page two
However, ORS 227 . 175 (2) adds:
***"However, at the option of either the city or the
applicant, the proceeding on the application may be
extended for a reasonable period of time, as determined
by the hearings officer. "
The extension, therefore, is at the option of the city and the
extent to which the application may be extended is by a
municipal hearings officer which, in this case, may include the
Planning Commission. This provision stands in stark contrast
to ORS 215.416 (2) , which puts a six months limitation on any
extension after the permit has first been heard.
Mr. Hanway also argues that SB 419 (Chapter 884 , Oregon Laws
1981) reinforces his proposition. Section 2 (2) of that legisla-
tion also speaks to receipt of the application as being the date
for determination as to whether the application be "complete"
and in setting the 180-day time limit for action upon a complete
application. However, neither in this legislation nor in ORS
227. 175 is there any requirement that a city receive an applica-
tion, even if complete, if the city cannot act upon the same.
As stated above, I have written these sections for the protection
of the city. If the Council deems it appropriate to modify or
to delete the same, I have no difficulty with that action. The
language I have sugge,ted, however, is not illegal.
Mr. Hanway then comments on Sections 18 .84 .050 and 18 .84 .070 ,
stating that minor partitions and extensions of time should not
be subject to notice or quasi-judicial hearings requirements in
that they are "ministerial decisions" where judgment factors do
not enter in. I disagree for the following reasons:
1. ORS 92.046 allows cities and counties to adopt minor
partitioning regulations and to establish "standards and proce-
dures" for the approval of minor partitions. This section also
provides for an "appeal" from the decision of any officer or
body which may grant or deny such a partition. Further, sub-
sections 5 and 6 of this section prohibits approval unless a
minor partition is in compliance with the zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan of the city or county. All of these items
indicate to me that judgment is used in deciding whether to
approve or disapprove a minor land partition.
2. In addition to the statute, Chapter 17 .07 of the Tigard
Municipal Code is not couched in ministerial terms. This means
Mr. Frank Currie
December 29, 1981
Page three
that there are no absolute standards for approval or denial as,
for example, in the case of a building code where no judgment
enters into consideration. Based upon the relevant statute and
provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code, I conclude that a minor
land partition is a quasi-judicial, rather than a ministerial ,
action within the city limits of Tigard.
3. With respect to applications for extension of time,
these are also permissive, rather than mandatory, actions.
Section 17.06 . 085 states in relevant part:
"The Planning Director may, upon written request of the
applicant, and payment of the required fee, grant an
extension of the approval, not to exceed six months. "
(emphasis added)
Further, Section 17. 06 . 090 states that the Planning Director mal•
authorize a time extension for plat staging for a period not
to exceed three years. Finally, Section 18 .56. 170 allows, but
does not require, an extension of time for construction of a
planned development. As each of these items are discretionary
and each of these items may involve rights of both the applicant
as well as affected neighbors, I cannot recommend that they be
handled any differently than proposed, so that all affected
persons may be notified of the contemplated action and given
the opportunity to be heard.
Mr. Hanway then calls our attention to Section 18 .84 . 100 (a) (1)
which requires all applications which are discretionary to
consider the applicable portions of the policies and map of
the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hanway indicates that because
the zoning and subdivision ordinances should implement the Plan,
that a separate consideration of the Plan is unnecessary. I
respectfully disagree. In the first place, the zoning ordinance
does not duplicate the policies of the Plan but merely carries
out the Plan. Under Mr. Hanway's theory, as I understand it, if
a neighborhood planning organization wished to have special con-
siderations for the development of certain lands within its
territory, it would have to have those policies spelled out in
the zoning ordinance, in addition to the Plan. In the second
place, ORS 227 . 175 (3) requires all development to be in accordance
with the comprehensive plan adopted by the city and nowhere in
the enabling legislation is there a requirement that plan policies
be duplicated in the ordinance. It is because of the many
policies which might be applicable that the Oregon Legislature
has required a statement of findings and reasons based upon
Mr. Frank Currie
December 29, 1981
Page four
articulated criteria in the plan and the city's development
ordinance under ORS 227. 173 . For this reason also, the city
has required a preapplication conference in its proposed
administrative rules in Section 18 .84 .030 (b) .
Mr. Hanway then suggests that we consider deleting Section
18 .84 . 100 (e) (iii) so that protection of the public from
"possible deleterious effects" of a proposed use be deleted as
a standard for conditions. Again, I disagree. It is impossible
to list in a zoning ordinance all possible deleterious effects
which may occur from the placement of a use or the grant of a
subdivision or partition. The explanation of the application
of the criteria to particular fact circumstances is required
by ORS 227.173 (2) under current views of administrative law,
especially in Springfield Education Assn v School District,
290 Or. 217, 621 P.2d 547 (1980) , if the term was not meant to
be explained further by administrative rule, nor complete in
itself, the burden is upon the rulemaking authority to demonstrate
compliance by adequate findings and conclusions. This is the
burden the city must carry.
Mr. Hanway then calls our attention to Section 18.84 . 120 in
which a one year time period must elapse between denial of an
application and resubmission. He suggests that a six months '
time period is more the norm. This is a policy matter for
Council to consider.
Mr. Hanway then asks us to review Sections 18 .84 . 150 (c) and
18 .84 .250 (a) and suggests that appeals of director decisions go
directly to the City Council rather than through the Planning
Commission. However, Planning Director approvals do not relate
to subdivision plats or major partitions, the only two items
subject to the 180-day time limitation of SB 419 (Ch. 884,
Oregon Laws 1981) . Therefore, this change is not required.
The final suggestion made by Mr. Hanway is that Section
18.84.290 (b) (3) be reviewed carefully by the City Council as a
policy matter. I agree with his suggestion in that the change
from oral and written argument being allowed in the present
circumstances versus the proposal to allow only written argument
before the Council is a major one which the Council should
consider as a policy matter. I appreciate his emphasis of that
change.
I hope the above is of assistance to you. In summary, I recom-
mend the change so as to define "incomplete" in Section 18 .84.030 (c)
L
Mr. Frank Currie
December 29, 1981
Page five
as dec.ribed above, and also suggest the editorial change in
Section 18.84. 100 (e) and (f) changing from Roman lettering to
Arabic enumeration. Additionally, I found one other typographical
error so than in Section 18 .84 .050 (c) (4) the reference to Chapter
18 .98 should read "Chapter 18. 88" .
Please contact me if you wish to discuss these matters further.
Sinces� lye
L ! ,
Edward J. Sullivan
EJS:mch
cc: Mr. Kevin L. Hanway
tc
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
Section 18. 84 . 010 Purpose -
The purpose of this chapter is to establish p: _:cedures under
Titles 17 and 18 for the consideration of development applications ,
for the consideration of quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendments
and for appeals or review of decisions .
Section 18. 84 . 020 Definitions
As used in this chapter:
(a) "Administrative action" means a quasi-judicial action,
including:
1. An action conducted pursuant to a portion of Titles 17
or 18 of the Tigard City Cade in which the legal rights ,
duties or privileges of specific parties are determined,
and any appeal or review therefrom;
2. A comprehensive plan map change; or
3 . Any other proceedings as provided by ordinance, rule
or resolutionadopted by the Council.
(b) "Appeal" means a request that a final decision by the
Director be considered by a higher authority either on
the basis of a de novo hearing or with the inclusion of
evidence in addition to that considered by the maker of
the initial decision.
(c) "Approval Authority" means either the Director, the Initial
Hearing Body, or the Council, depending on the context in which
the term is used.
(d) "Commission" means the Planning Commission of Tigard,
Oregon.
(e) "Comprehensive plan" shall have the meaning set forth
in ORS 197 . 015 (9) , shall embody the elements listed in the
state-wide land use planning goals adopted pursuant to ORS
197. 240, and shall include text and maps.
(f) "Council" means the City Council of Tigard, Oregon.
(g) "Development application" means any application required
by an implementing ordinance or Chapters 17 and 18 for the follow-
ing activities : a man-made change to real estate, including but
not limited to, the construction, alteration or use of buildings ,
the division of land, creation of public or private streets or
1 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
ways, mining, excavation, any other activity specifically regulated
by the provisions of Titles 17 and 18 , and specifically includes
Comprehensive Plan map changes and zoning map changes .
(h) "Director" means the Planning Director of Tigard,
Oregon, or authorized agent.
(i) "Final action, " "final decision, " or. "final order, "
means : a determination reduced to writing, signed and filed under
Section 18 . 84 .100 (f) by the appropriate approval authority and:
(a) With respect to the Planning Director, a decision
- made under Sections 18 . 84 . 050 (a) and 18 . 84 .150
of this chapter, appealable to a further approval
authority, and subject to Council review.
(b) With respect to the initial hearing body, a
decision made under Sections 18 .84 .050 (b) or (c)
or 18. 84.100 to .140 and 18. 84 . 160 to . 240 and
subject thereafter to Council review.
(c) With respect to the Council, a decision made under
Sections 18 . 84 .050 (d) or 18 . 84 .250 to . 3710 , or
both, and subject to a Petition for Rehearing.
(j) "Hearings Officer, " means a person appointed by the
Council under Section 18. 84 . 045 of this chapter to hear applications
listed in Section 18 .84 .050 (c) of this chapter.
(k) "Initial hearing body" means the Planning Commission or
the hearings officer appointed by the Council. The term shall
include the City Council only with respect to those matters listed
in.Section 18 .84 . 050 (d) (1) and' (2) .
(1) "Implementing ordinance" means an ordinance adopted to
carry out the comprehensive plan, including but not limited to, the
provisions of Titles 17 and 18 .
(m) "Party" means a person who has the right to pursue appeal
or review of a decision of an approval authority.
(n) "Quasi-judicial action" means an action which involves the
application of adopted Policy to a specific development application
or amendment, as provided by this chapter.
(o) "Review" means a request that a final decision by the
initial approval authority be considered by a higher authority only
on the basis. of the record made before the initial hearing body.
Section 18 . 84.030 The Application Process
(a) Who May Apply
1. Applications for approval required under this chapter may
be initiated by:
2 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
(A) The owner of the property which is the subject of
the application;
(B) The purchaser of such property who submits a duly-
executed written contract or copy thereof which has
been recorded with the Washington County Director of
Records rnd Elections ;
(C) A lessee in possession of such property who
submits written consent of the owner to make such
application; or
(D) Resolution of the Commission or Council .
2 . Any persons authorized by this chapter to submit an
application for approval may be represented by an agent
who is authorized in writing by such a person to make
the application.
(b) Pre-Application Conference Required
1 . The applicant shall be required to meet with the director
or a designee of the Director for a pre-application
conference.
2. At such conference, the Director or designee shall :
(A) Cite the applicable comprehensive plan policies
and map designation;
(B) Cite the applicable substantive and procedural
ordinance provisions;
(C) Provide technical data and assistance which will
aid the applicant;
(D) Identify other policies and regulations that
relate to the application; and
(E) identify other opportunities or constraints that
relate to the application.
3 . The failure of the Director to provide any of the
information required by this Section shall not consti-
tute a waiver of the utilization of the standards ,
criteria, or requirements to the application.
(c) The Requirements for Making an Application - Refusal
of an Application
1. The application shall be made on forms provided by the
director as provided by Section 18 . 84 . 040 (x) (1) of this
code.
3 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
2 . The application shall be complete, and shall contain
the information requested on the form, address the
appropriate criteria in sufficient detail for review
and action, and be accompanied by the requisite fee .
3 . The director shall not accept :
(A) Incomplete applications or applications not
accompanied by the requisite fee; or
(B) Applications which the Director determines cannot
be acted upon initially within sixty (60) days due
to such considerations as the complexity of the
application or the status of future agendas , except
where the applicant has consented to a longer period
for action.
(d) Fees
The Council shall adopt by resolution a schedule of fees
reasonably calculated to defray the expenses of the adminis-
trative processes of Titles 17 and 18 and this chapter. The
Council may waive any fee upon timely application and shall
charge no fees for city-initiated applications or Neighborhood
Planning Organization appeals or requests for review_
Section 18 .84 . 040 Duties of the Director
(a) The Director shall :
1 . Prepare application forms made pursuant to the standards
c=ntained in the applicable state law, comprehensive
plan and implementing ordinance provisions ;
.2. Accept all development applications which comply with
the provisions of Section 18 . 84 -030 of this code;
3. Within sixty (60) days after accepting an applica-
tion pursuant to this chapter :
(A) Give notice as provided by Section 18 _84 .070 and
18 .84 .080;
(B) Prepare a staff report which shall include :
i. The facts deemed relevant to the proposal and
found by the Director to be true.
ii. Until the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and imple-
menting ordinances be acknowledged, those State-
wide Planning Goals deemed to be applicable a:
the reasons why any other goal - is not applicable
to the proposal. The Director or approval
authority need not deal with State-wide Planning
Goals 15-19, which are not applicable in Tigard.
4 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
iii . Those portions of the Ticlard Comprehensive Plan
and implementing ordinances which the Director
k deems to be applicable to the proposal . If any
portion of the plan or ordinances appear to be
reasonably related to the proposal and are deemed
not applicable by the Director, the Director shall
explain why such portion or portions are not
applicable.
iv. An analysis relating the facts deemed true by
the Director to the applicable criteria and a
consideration of alternatives open to the approval
authority, resulting in a recommendation of denial ,
approval, or approval with conditions under
Section 18 . 84 . 110 .
(C) Make the staff report and all case-file materials
available at least seven (7) days prior to the
scheduled date of the final decision to all persons
entitled to notice under Section 18 . 840 _ 70 or
otherwise made a party to the proceeding under
Section 18. 84 .140 of this chapter;
(D) Act on the development application pursuant to
Sections 18. 84 .050 (a) and 18 . 84 . 150 of this chapter
or cause a hearing to be held pursuant to Sections
18 . 84 . 050 (b) through (d) and 18 . 84 .160 to 18 . 84 . 240
of this chapter, unless the applicant has requested
or consented to a delay;
4 . Administer the hearings process pursuant to Sections
18 .84 . 160 through 18 . 84 . 240 of this chapter;
5. Maintain a register of all applications which have been
filed for a decision. The register shall at all times
identify at what stage the application is in the process ;
6 - File notice of the final decision in the records of
the Planning Department and mail a copy of the notice
of the final decision to the applicant and all parties
and to those persons requesting copies of such notices
who pay the necessary fees therefor. The notice of the
final decision shall contain the information set forth
under Section 18 . 84.130 (b) of this chapter;
7 . Maintain and preserve the file for each application.
The file shall include, as applicable, a list of persons
required to be given notice and a copy of the notice
given pursuant to Section 18 . 84 . 070 and the accompanying
affidavits, the application and all supporting information,
the staff report, the final decision, including the
findings, conclusions and conditions , if any, all
correspondence, the minutes of any meeting at which the
application was considered, and any other exhibit,
information or documentation which was considered by the
hearing body with respect to the application; and
S - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
` 8 . Administer the appeals process pursuant to Sections
18. 84 . 250 through 18.84 . 330 of this chapter .
Section 18 .84 .045 Hearings Officer - Appointment, Removal ,
Planning Commission Review
(a) Position of Hearings Officer is hereby established to
hear applications under Section 18 .84 .050 (c) of this
chapter.
(b) A Hearings Officer shall be appointed by the Council for
a term of one year.
(c) Prior to appointment of a Hearings Officer, an interview
team, consisting of one member from the Council, one
member from the Commission, and the City Administrator
shall review prospective applications and make a
recommendation of one or more qualified persons to
Council.
(d) The Planning Commission shall, in an annual report, review
the work of the Hearings Officer and recommend to Council
whether there be a continuing need f(-;r the position of
Hearings officer and whether the work of the incumbent
in that position is, or is not, adequate.
(e) A Hearings Officer shall not be removed from such position
prior to the expiration of his or her term, except for
neglect or malfeasance in office.
Section.. 18 . 84 .050 Approval Authority
(a) The Director shall have the authority to approve, deny
or approve with conditions pursuant to Section 18 .84 . 110
the following development applications in accord with
the provisions of Section 18 .84 . 150 of this chapter:
1. Minor partition applications pursuant to Title 17 .
2. Design review applications pursuant to Chapter 18 . 59 .
3. Temporary use applications pursuant to Chapter 18 .80 .
4 . Applications for extensions of time in which to file
final plats under Section 17 .06 .085, or to carry out
phased development pursuant to Section 17 .06.090 ,
or extensions for no more than six months to carry
out phased development pursuant to Section 18 .56 .170 .
(b) The Planning Commission shall have the authority to approve,
deny, or approve with conditions pursuant to Section
18.84 . 110, the following development applications , as the
initial hearings body, pursuant to Section 18 . 84 .160
through 18 .84 .240 of this chapter:
6 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
- i
1. Subdivision and major land partition applications
pursuant to Title 17.
I
2. A quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map amendment, '
provided, however, that all such amendments shall be
reviewed by the Council.
3 . A development application referred to the Commission
by the Director pursuant to Section 18 .84 .150 (a) (2) .
4 . An appeal of a decision made by the Director under
Section 18 . 84 . 250 (a) and subsection (a) of this
section.
5. A planned unit development proposal under Chapter
18. 56.
6. Interpretations of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and
Neighborhood Plans thereunder or Titles 17 and 18
of this Code, if requested by the Director or other
interested persons.
7 . Any other matter not specifically assigned to the
Director, the Hearings Officer, or City Council
under Titles 17 or 18 .
6a - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
• (c) The Hearings Officer shall have the authority to approve,
deny, or approve with conditions pursuant to Section
18 .84 .110, the following development applications in
accordance with Sections 18 . 84 . 160 through 18 .84 .240
of this chapter:
1. Conditional use permit applications pursuant to
Chapter 18. 72.
2. Variance applications pursuant to Chapter 18 .76 .
3. Sensitive land permits pursuant to Chapter 18 . 57 .
4 . Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments pursuant to
Chapter 18.98.
(d) The City Council shall have the authority to approve, deny,
or approve with conditions pursuant to Section 18.84 .110 ,
the following development applications in accordance with
the provisions of Section 18 .84 .160 through 18 .84 .240
of this chapter:
1. The formal imposition of plan and zone designations
made to lands annexed to the city, so long as such
designations be made within one year of such annexa-
tion.
2 . Matters referred to the Council by the Planning
Commission or Hearings Officer for review under
Section 18 .84 .250 (b) (3) .
3 . Review of decisions of the initial hearings body,
whether on the Council ' s own motion or otherwise,
as provided in Section 18 . 84 .250 to 18 .84 . 330.
(e) Alternative recommendation for zoning map change
The initial hearing body may consider an alternative means of
amending the zoning map of Tigard, in addition to that
proposed in the application upon the decision of the
Planning Director to do so, or upon its own motion.
Such alternative zoning map change shall be considered
only if:
1.. Notice of such alternative be given as part of the
Hearing Notice in addition to the matters contained
in Section 18 .84 .080;
2. The alternative classification be in the same general
category (e.g. , low density, medium density, high
density residential; industrial, commercial, etc .) ;
and
7 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
t
3. The staff report prepared under Section 18 . 84 . 040
(a) (3) (B) justifies such an alternative.
Section 18. 84. 060 Consolidation of Proceedings
Whenever an applicant requests more than one approval and more
than one approval authority is required to decide the applica-
tions, the proceedings shall be consolidated so that one
approval authority shall decide all applications in one pro-
ceeding. In such cases, the hearings shall be held by the
approval authority having original jurisdiction over one
of the applications under Section 18 .84 .050 , in the following
order of preference: City Council, Planning Commission,
Hearings Officer, or the Planning Director.
Section 18. 84. 070 Notice
(a) Decisions by the Director
1. Notice of a proposed action on a development applica-
tion pursuant to Section 18 . 84 . 050 (a) shall be given by
the Director in the following manner :
(A) At least twenty (20) days prior to the date of
final decision set forth in the notice , notice
shall be sent by mail to:
1. The applicant and all owners or contract
purchasers of record of the property which
is the subject of the application;
2 . All owners of record of property within one
hundred (100) feet of the property;
3. The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization,.
if active;
4 . Any governmental agency which is entitled to
notice under an intergovernmental agreement
entered into with the city which includes
provision for such notice;
5. Any person who requests, in writing, and pays
a fee established by the Council.
The Director shall cause an affidavit of mailing of notice
to be filed and made a part of the administrative record.
(B) A notice published once in a newspaper of general
circulation in the city at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the date of final decision set forth in
the notice. An affidavit of publication shall be
made part of the administrative record.
8 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
i
(b) Decisions by all other Approval Authorities
1. Notice of an impending Administrative Action pursuant
to Section 18 .84 .050 (b) , (c) and (d) shall be given by
the Director in the following manner:
(A) At least ten (10) days prior to the scheduled
hearing date, notice shall be sent by mail to :
1. The applicant and all owners or contract
purchasers of record of the property which
is the subject of the application;
2. All owners of record of property within two
hundred and fifty (250) feet of the property;
3 . Any affected governmental agency which has
entered into an intergovernmental agreement
with the city which includes provision for
such notice;
4 . The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization,
if active;
5. Any person who requests, in writing, and pays
a fee established by the Director; and
6. All "parties" described in Section 18 . 84 .140 of
this chapter to an appeal or review.
The Director shall cause an affidavit of mailing of notice to
be filed and made a part of the administrative record.
(B) At least ten (10) days prior to the hearing,
notice shall be given in a newspaper of general ,
circulation in the city. An affidavit of publication
shall be made part of the administrative record.
Section 18. 84 . 080 -Contents of- the Notice
Notice given to persons entitled to mailed or published
notice pursuant to Section 18 . 84 . 070 shall include the
following information:
a. The number and title of the file containing the
application and the address and phone number of the
Director's office where additional information can
be obtained;
9 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
j b . A description of the subject property , T-ea.;o1lably
calculated to give notice as to its actual location
which shall include, but not be limited to , the
ti metes and bounds description or the tax map 9-
nations of the applicable county assessor 's office;
C . The nature of the application in sufficient detail
to apprise persons entitled to notice of the
applicant' s proposal ; and
d . In the case of a Decision by the Director
as of the
provided by Section 18 . 84 . 050 (a) , e
natDirector ' s proposed action, the date the decision
will be final and a statement that:
(A) An appeal to the proposal , filed in writing
before the proposed decision is final, shall
cause a public hearing to be held; and
(B) Sets forth the - last day onicthe decision
of the Director may be appealed.
e . In the case ofan Administrative Action as
p ov
by Sections 18ded
. 84 . 050 (b) , (c) and (d) , t
place and date of the public hearing , a statement
that public oral and written testimony is invited,
and a statement that the hearing will be held under
this chapter and any rules of procedure adopted by
Council and available at City Hall .
Section 18 . 84 _ 090 Mechanics of GivingNotice and Failure to
Receive Notice
(a) The records of the applicable county assessor ' s office
shall be the official records used for giving notice
required by this ordinance, and a person ' s name and
address which is not on file at the time the notice
mailing list is initially prepared is not a person
Section 18 . 89 .070 of this
entitled to notice under
chapter_
(b) The failure of a property owner to receive notice shall
not invalidate the action provided a good-faith attempt
was made to notify all persons entitled to notice.
(c) Personal notice is deemed given when the notice is
deposited with the United States Postal Service, -
Published notice is deemed given on the date it is
published.
10 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
i
(d) In computing the length of time that notice was given,
the first date notice is deemed given shall be excluded
and the day of the Administrative Hearing or Decision by
the Director shall be included unless the last day falls
on any legal holiday or on Saturday, in which case, the
last day shall be the next business day.
Section 18.84 . 100 The Decision Process of the Approval Authority
(a) The decision shall be based on consideration of the
following factors:
Proof by the applicant that the application fully
complies with:
1. The applicable comprehensive plan policies and map
designation;
2 . The State-wide Planning Goals adopted under ORS
197. 240 until acknowledgment of the Tigard plan and
ordinances; and
3 . The applicable standards of any provision of this
Title or Title 17, or other applicable implementing
ordinance.
(b) Consideration may also be given to :
1. Proof of a change in the neighborhood or community
or a mistake in the comprehensive plan or zoning
map as it relates to the property which is the
subject of the development application; and
2. Factual oral testimony or written statements from
the parties, other persons and other governmental
agencies relevant to the existing conditions ,
other applicable standards- and criteria, possible
negative or positive attributes of the proposal
or factors in subsection (a) or subsection (b) (1) ,
above.
(c) In all cases, the decision shall include:
A statement in a form generally conforming to the
requirements of Section 18 .84 . 040 (a) (3) (B) .
(d) The Approval Authority may:
11 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
j
- i . Adopt findings and conclusions contained in the
staff report;
ii. Adopt findings and conclusions of a lower approval
authority;
iii. Adopt its own findings and conclusions ;
iv. Adopt findings and conclusions submitted by any
party; or
V. Adopt findings and conclusions, either with or
without modification of the findings and conclusions
from other sources, which, upon making a tentative
decision, it directs staff to prepare upon keview
and an opportunity for all parties to comment upon
the same.
(e) The decision may be for denial, approval or approval with
conditions, pursuant to Section 18 .84 .110 , where such
conditions are necessary to:
i. Carry out the Tigard Comprehensive Plan;
ii. Carry out the applicable implementing ordinances;
iii. Protect the public or surrounding property
from possible deleterious effects of the proposed
use; or
iv. Assure that adequate public services are
provided as a part of the development or
to assure that other required improvements
are made.
(f) The final decision shall be a decision which is in writing
and which has been:
i. Formally adopted and signed by the Approving
Authority other than the Director in the
case of an Administrative Action and filed
with the Director and the City Recorder
within ten (10) calendar days of the formal
adoption of the decision; or
ii. Signed by the Director jin the case of a
Decision by the Director and filed as a
final decision within ten (10) calendar
days of the signed decision.
12 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
r
Section 18. 84 . 110 Conditional Approvals - railure to Fulfill Condi + jel
(a) Conditions of approval shall be fulfilled within the
time limit set forth in the decision; or , if no time
limit is set forth, within one year. Failure to
fulfill any condition of approval within the time
limitations provided may be grounds for revocation of
approval, after notice and an opportunity to be heard
as an administrative action.
(b) Changes, alterations or amendments to the substance
of the conditions of approval shall be processed as a
new administrative action.
(c) Prior to the commencement of development, i .e . the issuance
of any permits or the taking of any action under the
approved development application, the owner , and any
contract purchasers, of the property which is the subject
of the approved application, shall sign and deliver to
the Director their acknowledgment and consent to such
conditions.
(d) The conditional approval may require the owner of the
property to sign .within a time certain or, if no time
is designated, within a reasonable time, a contract
with the City for enforcement of the conditions . The
Council shall have the authority to execute such
contracts on behalf of the City . If a Contract be
required by a conditional approval, no building permit
shall be issued for the use covered by the applications
until the executed contract is recorded in the real
property records of the applicable County and filed in the
County Records. Such contracts shall be enforceable
against the signing parties , their heirs , successors ,
and assigns by the City by appropriate action in law
or suit in equity for the benefit of public health,
safety and welfare.
(e) A bond, in a form acceptable to the Dir- ctor or, upon
appeal or review, by the appropriate approval authority,
or a cash deposit from the property owners or contract
purchasers in such an amount as will assure compliance
with the conditions imposed pursuant to this Section
may be required. Such bond or deposit shall be posted
prior to the issuance of a building permit for the use
covered by the application.
13 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
`Section 18. 84 .120 Denial of the Application - Resubmittal
(a) An application which has been denied and which on appeal
has not been reversed by a higher authority , including
}he Land Use Board of Appeals, the Land Conservation and
:)evelopment Commission, or the courts , may not be re-
3ubmitted for the same or a substantially similar proposal
or for the same or substantially similar action for a
period of at least twelve (12) months from the date the
final decision is made denying the application.
Section 18.84 .130 Notice of the Final Decision
(a) The final decisioi, shall be filed in the records
of the Planning Director within ten (10) calendar days
after the decision is signed and notice thereof shall
be mailed to the applicant, all parties to the action,
and shall be available to members of the Council.
(b) Notice of a final decision shall contain :
1. A statement that all required notices under Section
18. 84 .070 have been given;
2. A statement of where the adopted findings of fact,
decision and statement of conditions can be obtained;
3 . The date the final decision was filed; and
4. A statement that a party to the proceeding may appropriate.
seek appeal or review of the decision, as
The statement shall explain briefly how an appeal or
review can be taken, the deadlines and where
information can be obtained. In the case of a
decision by the Director in which no appeal has
been filed, the notice shall state that fact and
that the decision is, therefore, final .
(c) The final decision may grant the application with respect
to less than all of the parcel which is the subject -of
the application.
Section 18. 84 . 140 Establishment of Party Status - Standing to
Appeal or Review
Any person shall be considered a party to a matter, thus having
"standing" to pursue an appeal or to seek review, provided:
1. The person appeared before an Approval Authority
other than the Director either orally or in writing
or appeared in writing before the Director in a
i
decision made by the Director; and
14 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
' r
2. The person is a person entitled as a matter of
right to notice and hearing or is a person whose
interests are adversely affected or is a person
who has been aggrieved by the decision .
Section 18.84 .150 A Decision by the Director
(a) Pursuant to Section 18. 84 . 050 (a) of this chapter, the
Director is authorized to make certain decisions , and
no hearing shall be held except where:
1. A written appeal under Section 18 . 84 . 250 (x) of the
Director's proposed action with respect to the
development application has been filed with the
Director by a party prior to the date the decision
is scheduled to be final made as set forth in the
notice. In such case, the application shall be
treated as if it were filed under Section
18. 84. 050 (b) of this chapter;
2. The Director has an interest in the outcome of the
decision, due to some past or present involvement
with the applicant, other interested persons or in
the property or surrounding property, and cannot
render an impartial decision. In such cases the
application shall be treated as if it were filed
under Section 18 . 84 . 050 (b) of this chapter.
(b) A decision made by the Director shall be made in accord-
ance with the provisions of Section 18 . 84 .100 of this
Ordinance, and a record shall be made which shall include :
1. A copy of the application and all supporting infor-
mation, plans, exhibits, graphics , etc .
2. All correspondence relating to the application;
3. All information considered by the Director in making
the decision; _
4. The staff report of the Director prepared under
Section 18 . 84 .040 (a) (3) (B) ;
S. A list of the conditions, if any are attached to the
approval of the application; and
6. A copy of the nc c_' !:-e which was given pursuant to
Section 18-84 .070 (a) , and accompanying affidavits,
and a list of all persons who were given mailed
notice; and
15 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
1
7 . A signed statement by the Director stating the
nature of any past or present involvement with the
applicant, other interested persons or the property
if the Director makes a decision, and if there could
reasonably be expected to be a challenge to the
fairness of the decision.
(c) A decision made by the Director shall be final unless :
1. A party to the action files a written appeal with
the Director on or before the date given in the
notice pursuant to Section 18 . 84 . 080 (d) , but in no
case less than fourteen (14) days after
notice is given pursuant to Section 18 .84 . 070 (a) .
2. The Commission or the Council, on its own
motion, orders review on or before the date given
in the notice pursuant to Section 18 .84 . 080 (d) .
(d) The Director shall give notice of the final decision,
as provided by Section 18 . 84 .130 and report to the
Commission and Council Notices of Decisions given under
Section 18. 84 . 070 (a) on a regular basis before such
decisions be final .
(e) The Director may grant the application with respect to
less than all of the parcel which is the subject of the
application.
(f) No Director's decision may be modified from that set out
in the notice given under Section 18 .84 . 070 and 18 . 84 . 080
unless new notice be given.
Section 18. 84.160 An Administrative Action - Hearings Procedure
(a) Pursuant to Sections 18 . 84 . 050 (b) , (c) and (d) of this
chapter, the Approval Authority shall have the authority
pursuant to Rules of Procedure adopted by the Council,
to conduct a public hearing; and
1. Determine who qualifies as a party.
2. Regulate the course, sequence and decorum of
the hearing.
3. Dispose of procedural requirements or similar
matters.
4. Rule on offers of proof and relevancy of evidence
and testimony.
5. Impose reasonable limitations on the number of
witnesses heard and set reasonable time limits
for oral presentation, cross examination of
witnesses and rebuttal testimony.
16 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
1
6 . Take such other action appropriate for conduct
commensurate with the nature of the hearing .
7 . Approve or deny applications or approve with
conditions pursuant to Section 18 .84 . 110 of
this Ordinance.
(b) Unless otherwise provided in the Rules of Procedure
adopted by the Council, the Approval Authority shall
conduct the hearing as follows :
1 . Announce the nature and purpose of the hearing
and summarize the rules for conducting the hearing;
2. Recogni-e parties;
3. Request the Director to present the staff report,
to explain any graphic or pictorial displays which
are a part of the report, summarize the findings ,
recommendations and conditions, if any, and to
provide such other information as may be requested
by the Approval Authority;
4 . Allow the applicant to be heard on his, her or its
own. behalf or by his, her, or its representative;
5. Allow parties or witnesses in favor of the appli-
cant' s proposal to be heard;
6 . Allow parties or witnesses in opposition to the
applicant' s proposal to be heard;
7. Upon failure of any party to appear, the Approval
Authority shall take into consideration written
material submitted by such party;
8 . Allow the parties to offer rebuttal evidence and
testimony, and to respond to any additional evidence.
The scope and extent of rebuttal shall be determined
by the Approval Authority;
9. Conclude the hearing by announcing officially the
public hearing is closed; and
10. Make a decision pursuant to Section 18 .84 .100 or
take the matter under advisement pursuant to
Section 18 . 84 .180 of this chapter.
(c) The following rules shall apply to the general conduct
of the hearing:
17 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
a
Z . The Approval Authority may ask questions at any
time, before the close of the hearing, and the
answers shall be limited to the substance of
the question;
2 . Parties or the Director must receive approval from
the Approving Authority to submit directly questions
to other parties or witnesses or the Director;
3 . A reasonable amount of time shall be given to
persons to respond to questions;
4 . No person shall testify without first receiving
recognition from the Approval Authority and
stating a full name and address;
5 . The approval authority may require that testimony
be under oath or affirmation.
6 . Audience demonstrations such as applause, cheering
and display of signs, or other conduct disruptive
of the hearing shall not be permitted. Any such
conduct may be cause for immediate suspension of
the hearing; and
7 . No person shall be disorderly, abusive , or disruptive
a
of the orderly conduct of the hearing.
(d) The initial hearing body may refer any matter for Council
action on the record made before it.
Section 18. 84 .170 Ex-Parte Communications with Approval Authority
(a) Members of the Approval Authority shall not:
1. Communicate, directly or indirectly, with any party
or representative of a party in connection with any
issue involved except upon giving notice and oppor-
tunity for all parties to participate; nor
2 . Take notice of any communication, report, or other
materials prepared by the proponents or opponents
in connection with the particular case unless the
parties are afforded an opportunity to contest the
material so noticed.
(b) This section shall not apply to director decisions made
under Section 18 . 84 .050 (a) .
i 18 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
Section 18. 84 .180 Continuation of the Hearing - Notice
An Authority may continue the hearing from time to time to
gather additional evidence, to consider the application fully,
or to give notice to additional persons . Unless otherwise
provided by the Approval Authority, no additional notice need
be given of the continued hearing if the matter is continued
to a date certain.
Section 18.84. 190 Subpoena or Deposition of Witnesses
Any person wishing to subpoena or depose witnesses to an
appeal may do so by application to the Director not less than
seven (7) days prior to the hearing and a showing that the
witness resides in Oregon, is unable or unwilling to appear
and the testimony is material and relevant. Upon approval by
the Director, application for subpoenas or depositions shall
be made after proper completion and payment of those fees
applicable to civil cases, to the Washington County Circuit
Court.
Section 18.84. 200 Evidence
(a) All evidence offered and not objected to may be received
unless excluded by the Approval Authority on its own
motion;
(b) Evidence received at any hearing shall be of the quality
that reasonable persons rely upon in the conducting of
their everyday affairs;
(c) No person shall present irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly
repetitious testimony or evidence;
(d) Evidence shall be received and notice may be taken of
those facts in a manner similar to that provided for in
contested cases before state administrative agencies
pursuant to ORS 183.450, except as otherwise provided for
herein; and
(e) Formal rules of evidence, as used in courts of law, shall
not apply.
Section 18. 84. 210 Official Notice
(a) The Approval Authority may take official notice of the
following:
1. All facts which are judicially noticeable.
Such noticed facts shall be stated and made
part of the record.
19 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
2 . The State-wide planning goals adopted pursuant
to ORS 197. 240 .
3 . The Comprehensive Plan and other officially
adopted plans, implementing ordinances , rules and
regulations of the City of Tigard and the compre-
hensive plans and implementing ordinances of other
planning authorities within the Metropolitan
Service District Boundary.
(b) Matters officially noticed need not be established by
evidence and may be considered by the Approval Authority
in the determination of the application.
Section 18.84. 220 Participation in the Decision--Voting
(a) Each member of the Approval Authority shall be impartial;
any member having any substantial past or present
involvement with the applicant, other interested persons,
the property or surrounding property, or having a financial
interest in the outcome of the proceeding, or having any
pre-hearing contacts, shall state for the record the
nature of their involvement or contacts , and shall either:
1. State that they are not prejudiced by the involvement
or contacts and will participate and vote on the
matter; or
2 . State that they are prejudiced by the involvement
or contact and will withdraw from participation in
the matter.
In the event of a challenge to the impartiality of a
member of the approval authority, the remaining members
shall decide the issue of participation. Such challenge
shall be raised at the earliest possible opportunity.
(b) An affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the
Approval Authority who are present and voting is required
to approve an application or to amend, modify or reverse
a decision on appeal.
(c) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of this section,
no member of an Approval Authority having a financial
interest in the outcome of an application shall take
part in proceedings on that application; provided,
however, with respect to the Council only, a member may
vote upon a finding of necessity made by the majority of
the Council present.
Section 18 . 84.230 Record of Proceeding
(a) A verbatim record of the proceeding shall be made by
stenographic or mechanical means. It shall not be
20 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
+ 7 4
necessary to transcribe testimony except as provided
for in Section 18 . 84 . 300 . The minutes or transcript
of testimony, or other evidence of the proceedings ,
shall be part of the record.
(b) All exhibits received shall be marked so as to provide
identification upon review.
(c) The official record shall include :
1. All materials, pleadings , memoranda, stipulations
and motions submitted by any party to the proceeding
and recorded or considered by the Hearings Officer
as evidence;
2 . All materials submitted by the Director to the
Approval Authority with respect to the application;
3 . The transcript of the hearing, if requested by the
Council or a party or the minutes of the hearing, or
other evidence of the proceedings before the
Hearings Body; .
4 . The written findings, conclusions , decision, and,
if any, conditions of approval, of the Hearings
Body; and
5 . Argument by the parties or their legal representa-
tives permitted pursuant to Section 18 . 84 . 290 (b) (3) at
the time of review before the Council;
6. All correspondence relating to the application; and
7. A copy of the notice which was given as provided by
Section 18 . 84 . 070 -of this chapter , accompanying
affidavits and list of persons who were sent
mailed notice.
Section 18.84 . 240 The Effective Date of the Decision
Appeal or Review
(a) Any decision made under the provisions of this chapter
shall become effective on the fifteenth day from the date
notice of the final decision is given, as provided in
Section 18 . 84 .130 of this chapter, unless an appeal or
review is taken pursuant to Section 18 . 84 . 250 of this
chapter.
Section 18. 84 . 250 Authority to Appeal or Seek Review of a Decision
(a) Any decision made by the Director on a development
application as provided by Section 18 . 84 . 050 (a) may be
appealed to the Commission as provided in Section
18 .84 .150 (c) .
21 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
(b) Any decision made by any other Approval Authority under
Section 18. 84 .050 (b) or (c) may be reviewed by the Council
by:
1. The filing of a Notice of Review by any party to
the decision within fourteen (14) days of sending
of the notice of final decision; or
2. The Council or Commission, on its own motion, seeks
review by resolution filed within fourteen (14) days
of notice of the final decision; or
3. Referral of a matter under Section 18. 84 .160 (d) by the
initial hearings body to the Council, upon closure of
the hearing, when the case presents a policy issue
which requires Council deliberation and determination.
Section 18.84 . 260 Notice of Appeal or Review
(a) The Notice of Appeal or Review shall contain:
1. A reference to the application sought to be appealed
or reviewed;
2. A statement as to how the petitioner qualifies as
a party;
3. The specific grounds for the appeal or review; and
4. The date of the filing of the final decision on the
action.
(b) The appeal or review application shall be accompanied by
the required fee.
(c) The appeal or review shall be limited to the grounds
listed under subsection (a) (3) of this section.
Section 18 .84 . 270 Persons Entitled to Notice on Appeal or Review
Type of Notice
Upon appeal or review, notice shall be given by the Director
as provided by Section 18. 84.070 (b) of this chapter_
Section 18. 84 . 280 Contents of Notice on Appeal or Review
Notice shall include those matters provided by Section 18 .84 . 080
of this chapter, as applicable.
22 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
a .
Section 18 . 84 . 290 Type of Appeal or Review Hearing - Scope of
Review
(a) The appeal of a decision made by the Director under
Section 18.84. 050 (a) and Section 18 . 84 .150 of this
chapter shall be de novo and conducted as if brought
under Section 18. 84. 050 (b) .
(b) The review of a decision by the Commission or Hearings
Officer by Council shall be :
1. Confined to the record of the proceedings as
provided in Section 18 . 84 . 230 of this chapter;
2 . Limited to the grounds relied upon in the Notice
of Review as provided in Section 18 . 84 .260 (a) of
this chapter, and conducted in accordance with the
provisions of Sections 18. 84 .100, 18 .84 .130 , and
18. 84 .160 through 18. 84 . 250 of this chapter.
3. The subject of written argument only . Such argument
shall be submitted not less than five (5) days prior
to Council consideration.
Section 18. 84 . 300 Transcripts
(a) The petitioner for review shall request that a transcript
be made of the proceedings before the initial Hearings Body.
The Director shall estimate the cost, and the person
requesting the transcript shall bear the cost. The
person making the request shall deposit the estimated
cost with the Director within five days of requesting
the transcript, and any excess shall be returned. If the
cost of the transcript be greater than the estimate, the
petitioner shall pay such excess within ten days of notice
by the Director.
(b) Failure to pay the costs of the transcript shall be
grounds for dismissal of review.
Section 18. 84 .310 Action on Appeal or Review - Time Limit and
Authority to Change the Decision
(a) The Approval Authority shall act upon the appeal or review
within 60 days of filing unless such time limitation is
extended with the consent of the parties; provided
that, unless otherwise ordered by the Hearings Body
or Council, the Director shall take such appeals in
the order in which they are filed; and
23 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
(b) The Approval Authority may affirm, reverse or modify
the decision which is the subject of the appeal;
however, the decision shall be made in accordance
with the provisions of Section 18 .84 .100 of this
chapter; or
(c) The Approval Authority may remand the matter if it is
satisfied that testimony or other evidence could not
have been presented or was not available at the hearing.
In deciding to remand the matter, the Approval Authority
shall consider and make findings and conclusions respect-
ing:
1 . The prejudice to parties;
2. The convenience or availability of evidence at
the time of the initial hearing;
3. The surprise to opposing parties;
4 . The date notice was given to other parties as to
an attempt to admit; and
5. The competency, relevancy and materiality of the
proposed testimony or other evidence.
Section 18. 84. 320 Participation by Members of the Approval
Authority in the Decision and Voting
(a) The provisions of Section 18 .84 . 220 of this chapter apply
and, in addition:
1. Only those members who have reviewed the entire
record shall vote; and
2. A majority of the voting members of the Approval
Authority must vote affirmatively to amend, reverse
or remand the decision.
(b) Unless a decision be deferred, in the event of a tie, the
decision which is the subject of appeal or review shall
stand.
Section 18. 84 . 330 Final Action of the Approval Authority;
Effective Date; Petition for Rehearing
(a) Action by the Approval Authority on appeal or review,
known as a "final order, shall be effective on the
fifteenth day from the filing of the order with the
Director under Section 18 . 84 .100 (f) .
24 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
e
(b) The final order of the Council shall be stayed upon the
filing of a petition for rehearing, which shall be filed
within fourteen (14) days of the notice of the Council 's
decision and shall contain the matters set forth in
Section 18 .84 .260. No fee need accompany such petition.
(c) The Council shall decide whether to grant such a petition
at its next practicable regular or special meeting.
(d) No person failing to apply for such Petition for Review
shall have been deemed to have exhausted administrative
remedies. It is the purpose of this section to provide
parties every remedy possible, prior to litigation.
To that end, the filing of a Petition for Review is a
condition precedent for further administrative or judicial
review.
(e) No time period for challenging Council action shall
commence until the Council has disposed of the Petition
for Rehearing.
(f) Within seven (7) days of the filing of the final order
of Council, or upon a final order on the grant of a
petition for rehearing, the Director shall give
notice of the final order to all parties to the proceed-
ing, �informing them of the date of filing, the opportunity
further urther remedy by petition for rehearing, the decision
rendered, and where a copy may be found.
25 - ADMINISTRA'T'IVE PROCEDURES
l =
MR40RANDUM
TO: City Coun--il
FROM: Planning Director
in order to allow the City of Tigard to become eligible for Federal
Finergency Management Agency Flood Insurance, specific regulations must
be incorporated into the existing Sensitive Lands Ordinance. The major
component is the adoption of a `b foot" or "l foot" floodway elevation.
The Planning Commission at their December 1, 1981 special meeting passed
a motion to recommend to the City Council adoption of a `b" foot floodway.
An ordinance will be presented at the January 11, 1982 City Council
meeting incorporating this recommendation and other Federal requirements
into Section 18.57 of the Tigard Municipal Code.
i�
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Public Works Director
SUBJECT: 68th Avenue Sanitary Ser LID
City Council received a petition for annexation and sanitary sewer service
from the area in the "Tigard Triangle" known as the Larson. annexation. The
area has been annexed and some property owners have asked about the status
of the sanitary sewer.
I would like to request that City Council authorize staff to proceed with
the engineering feasibility study with the intent of the possible formation
of a local improvement district for sanitary sewers.
O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MARK P.O'DONNELL
EDWARD J.SULLIVAN BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING CANBY OFFICE
TIMOTHY RAMIS 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET
KENNETH M.ELLIOTT PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 181 N GRANT. SUITE 202
CORINNE C.SHERTON (503) 222-4402 CANBY. OREGON 97013
STEPHEN F.CREW (503) 2661149
STEVEN L.PFEIFrER PLEASE REPLY TO
THOMAS L.MASON PORTLAND OFFICE
December 8 , 1981
RECEIVED DEC 1 1 19$i
Lauren Jacobs, Chairperson
Land Conservation and Development
Commission
1175 Court Street N.E.
Sale- OR 97310
Re: Proposed Administrative Rules (OAR 660-07-000, et seq)
Dear Mr. Jacobs and Members of the Commission :
The City of Tigard has participated in the formulation of the
above rules, relating to the expected housing density alloca-
tions in the Portland metropolitan area. We wish to thank
you and the Commission for inviting us to participate in this
process and hope that our contributions will be valuable to
the Commission.
The rules proposed are, generally, of benefit to the land use
system. Definitions are made, a process for buildable land
inventories set forth, standards are established by which
Tigard can review its Comprehensive Plan in a manner which is
responsive to regional and state, as well as our own city criteria,
and a process for varying the rules established. These are all
praiseworthy objectives which we applaud.
As you know, Tigard is not particularly wild about the ten units
per net residential acre allocation ascribed to it . There is
very little to distinguish Tigard from Tualatin, West Linn, or,
especially, Milwaukie. We ask the Commission to reconsider the
classification assigned to us in OAR Section 660-07-045, as
proposed.
Secondly, the fifth draft of the proposal does not have a defini-
tion of "cost moderating opportunities , " nor does it have any
direction as to application of that term. This concept is
important both to the housing industry, which seeks to use it,
as well as to cities, which must apply it. We suggest the
Commission define the term and assist the cities by illustrating
the concept by examples .
Lauren Jacobs , Chairperson
December 8, 1981
Page 2
Thirdly, the use of the exceptions process to justify non-
compliance with the rules is illusory at best and disingenuous
at worst. There is no acceptable reason, using past acknow-
ledgment proceedings and contested cases as a guide, for non-
compliance. If the Commission wishes to devise a method for
flexibility , it need only look to its second draft of the rule,
to former section 7 .405 to 7 .454 of the third draft of the rule
or section 7 .446 in the fourth draft of the rule . If the rule is
to be applied strictly, no flexibility ought to be hinted.
Again, we thank you and your staff for the ability to comment and
to participate in. the preparation of these rules . We appreciate
that opportunity.
Sincerely,
Edward J. Sullivan
Tigard City Attorney
EJS :bm
cc: Mr. Bob Jean
i
O'OONNELL. SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MARK P.O'OONNELL BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING CANBY OFFICE
EDWARD J.SULLIVAN
TIMOTHY RAMIS 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET 181 N.GRANT. SUITE 202
KENNETH M. ELLIOTT PORTLAND. OREGON 97209 CANBY. OREGON 97013
CORINNE C.SHERTON (503) 222-4402 (503) 2661149
STEPHEN F.CREW PLEASE REPLY TO
STEVEN L.PFEIFFER PORTLAND OFFICE
December 10, 1981 �L CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN
RECEIPT REQUESTED
W. M. I. Industries
10120 S. W. Nimbus
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Attention: Mr. Kevin P. Colt and Mr. E. Carlos Black
Re: City Business License
Dear Messrs. Colt and Black:
This office has been retained by the City of Tigard to serve as its
City Attorney. The Tigard Police Department has advised me that
numerous complaints have been received over -the past several months
concerning WMI employees peddling wholesale housewares door-to-door
in Tigard. Complaints have come both from residential property
owners and owners of commercial establishments and parking lots.
At least two formal Municipal Court citations have been issued
against WMI employees , No. 81-1247 against John Winters and No.
81-1994 against Charles Stephen Doyle. The unlawful soliciting
has continued despite these enforcement measures.
The practice of entering onto private property for the purpose of
selling goods door-to-door, whether it be in a residential or
commercial area, is prohibited by Chapter 7 .32_090 of the Tigard
Municipal Code. A copy of that chapter is enclosed herewith.
Furthermore, authorizing or alliwing WMI employees or agents to
conduct sales in violation of the Tigard Municipal Code is a
violation of Chapter 5. 04 , regulating city business licenses.
Copies of Chapters 5 .04 .020 (d) and 5. 04 . 080 (a) are also enclosed
for your review.
This letter will serve to notify you of the City of Tigard' s
request that any and all such violations by agents or employees of
WMI Industries cease immediately. In the event that the unlawful
peddling continues and additional complaints are received, the
City of Tigard is prepared to commence appropriate legal proceedings
against WMI Industries.
I trust that this problem can be resolved amicably and that the
ti
city will not be forced to take such action.
€.. W. M. I. Industries
December 10, 1981
Page two
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Edward J. Sullivan
EJS:mch
enclosures
cc: W.M.I. Industries (surface mail)
Mr. Bob Jean, City Administrator
Lt. Kelley Jennings, Tigard Police Department
r_
N N C ) _
q O
a
w � m
W H 4-J
Q
C-; Lr) N rn v-�
--a N N GJ U,
i.
ca
H O U O I cn Z C'7 i WW ^
r U 1 �D I pq 001 nJ 4_1
10
L. F-4 c„ 0 01 .r H h 1 Ems+ U]
_ U O O .—+ 1 1
1-4 Q)'
3+1 P4 M l
Z x U .aia CO
• 3 t 3I cc 0 .0 cn
v� r` �, N 3 cn l 4 p4 k ,1 Q v] i
—�`(`�• O I ca @
N .; r3. G
OG1 ^t O O
ON cn
f
O N 1 O r-+
��- Z H 914 —4
I z ca W rte+
$41 4-JT Q.
Cl) O 41
Q i U z N' U N G O
H O W ca
I co M 1 W ^
•• H O
> 1 H ^1 Er• O (1)T
Lj
E.) ON
V n 1-d
_ CLt
i v �I ca
' i.+
.,..1
., zz aJ o ie 3
z
�c i 6 4 1 zE-+H - -;c a!
N N 1 a FO 1 O v U]
N
1 w r�
PQ
BI a p, cn az c�n�
CIO
en
ti �, r I•+
a
ow aca11 ter~ �-4 >4 xv
O >a 3 U U a1 l r
2 •d t]1 O O a0 a 3ti C•—+
1 71 U W • r O O N O O E in
1 Ca
C3. C
1 aJ C
i
O r r N t cn s
i
1 AV— As=
%1A-. - RD UPD .
A WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
VOLUME IV ISSUE I JANUARY 11, 1982
PERSONNEL CHANGES
Effective December 1, seven staff members will assume new duties and responsibilities.
Mary Strickland will act as Accounting Manager; Loreen Wilson as Office Manager;
Billie Rawlings as Records Manager; Pat Robertson as Information Specialist;
Linda Sargent as Administrative Assistant; Diane Jelderks as Word Processing
Specialist and Liz Newton as Associate Planner. Celeste Vaughters came aboard
December 1 as Executive Secretary in Administration. Carole Van Eck joined
the Public Works department as Senior Secretary (Office Assistant III) December 16.
Jeremy Coursolle was hired as Associate Planner January 6. Joy Martin will
begin her duties as Administrative Assistant January 18. Jacqueline Roth
joined the Police Department as a Clerk Dispatcher December 20. Carolyn Classick
also is working as a Dispatcher beginning January 3. Renee Stephens has resigned
from her post of Clerk Dispatcher October 30. John Featherston has been placed
in an Officer position in the Police Department; Thomas Killion has been promoted
to Corporal effective December 16.
TRAINING
Employee Positioai - Activity Date
r Joe Grisham Patrolman Annual Juvenile Conference 10/I.9-21/81
Jesse Miller Patrolman Annual Juvenile Conference 10/19-21/81
John-_Newman Police Sergeant Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Robert Wheeler Police Sergeant Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Chuck Martin . Police Sergeant Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Lonnie Branstetter Police Sergeant Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
John Featherston Patrolman Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Paul Johnson Corporal Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Don Myers Corporal Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
James Call Patrolman Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Robert Newman Patrolman Laws: Misuse of telephone 10/21/81
Darwin DeVeny Patrolman K-9 Handlers School 11/14-15/81
Joe Grisham Patrolman ICAP Training 11/16-20/81
Kelley Jennings Lieutenant ICAP Training 11/16-20/81
James Call Patrolman Advanced Training 11/16-20/81
James Call Patrolman Self-defense Tactics 11/23-25/81
James Call Patrolman Child Abuse Seminar 11/30-12/3/81
Linda Sargent Adm. Assistant LGPI Personnel Systems I1/1-6/81
John Newman Police Sergeant Legal Developments/Search/Seizure 12/3/81
Chuck Martin Police Sergeant Legal Developments/Search/Seizure 12/3/81
Robert Wheeler Police Sergeant Legal Developments/Search/Seizure 12/3/81
John Newman Police Sergeant Mgmt. of Police Records 12/4/81
Robert Wheeler Police Sergeant Mgmt, of Police Records 12/4/81
Chuck Martin Police Sergeant Mgmt. of Police Records 12/4/81
Billie Rawlings Records Manager Mgmt, of Police Records 12/4/81
Alice Carrick Records Supervisor Mgmt. of Police Records 12/4/81
OVER
Irene Ertell Librarian Microcomputers 12/10/81
Cindy Cranston Accountant I Intermediate Accounting/
Local Governments 12/9-11/81
Bob Jean City Administrator Labor Negotiations Workshop 12/10-11/81
Linda Sargent Adm. Assistant Labor Negotiations Workshop 12/10-11/81
WORK PROGRAM STATUS REPORTS
.Planning and Administrative Procedures report will go before Council January 11 .
. Conditional Use standards are being reviewed and will go before Planning
Commission February 2.
.NPO #3 is in the process of electing officers.
NOP #7 is gearing up for reactivation.
.Buildable lands inventory has been completed.
.Housing Plan is currently being analyzed.
.Downtown Revitalization Plan consultants will meet with staff January 12.
.Public Works crews have sanded streets during the icy and snowy weather. Street
sweepers are out in force now. Yard debris pick up has been completed. Street
maintenance crews are checking catch basins and preparing for spring street
repair.
.Accounting has reviewed and prepared a control budget. W-2 forms are being processed
on the computer.
.Loreen Wilsons Forrest Brouillard, and Cindy Cranston have formed an ad hoc committee
to assess computer and word processing needs for the City. A report will be generated
by Joy Martin in late January.
.The Building Department is reviewing the enforcement of business licenses and sign
code ordinances. Approximately 15 drawings of residential units are being checked.
.Billie Rawlings is reviewing the Records Retention ordinance for compliance with
the State Archivist's procedures.
.Engineering is updating maps and completing street inventories in order to
implement the 81-82 street overlay program.
.Police Departmental report will be presented to Council January 18.
Tigard Police Department will be sponsoring a seminar on Microcomputer Police
Manager•ent Systems January 20 .at the G14 Training Center. The class has been
accredited by BPST. Participants will be receiving six hours credit. Forty
individuals from 25 law enforcement agencies are scheduled to attend.
ICAP is on line; data is being entered into the computer.
.The City's Personnel System is being evaluated. Operating procedures will be
drafted. A city wide pay plan has been developed in draft form. Preparation
for labor negotiations has begun.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS
City Administrator Bob Jean met with the Metropolitan Area Cable Commission
January 6. Public Works/Planning Director Frank Currie, Bob Jean, and Liz Newton
met with Washington County Planning Director Rick Daniels January 7 to discuss
the Active Planning Agreements. Chief Adams attended the Washington County
Law Enforcement Council December meeting in Hillsboro.