City Council Packet - 08/30/1982 Moog
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
AUGUST 30, 1982, 7:30 P.M.
TIGARD CITY HALL
12755 SW ASH AVENUE, TIGARD
1. SPECIAL MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
2. BOWMAN/92ND AVENUE REPORT
s Director of Public Works
3. HAINES ROAD REPORT
:NNEXATION
Public Works Director
4. STATUS REPORT & MAP
0 Planning Director
5. OLCC APPROVAL - Manila Express (formerly Town Tavern)
Finance Director
6. MAIN STREET LID #37 - INFORMAL QUOTES FOR LANDSCAPE & SIGNAL AGREEMENT
o Director of Public Works
7. ORDINANCE NO. 82- CORRECTING HAMPTON STREET LID ORDINANCE
o Director of Public Works
8. ORDINANCE NO. 82- CALLING FOR BIDS - LID FINANCING, FIRST SALE
Finance Director
9. LID BUSINESS ACTIVITY
9.1 72nd Avenue Settlement Alternative, City Administrator
® Summary and Outline
Resolution No. 82- Intent to Form District (Contingent Upon)
® Resolution No. B2--- Calling Assessment Hearing (Based On
Engineer's Estimate)
Cover Letter (Settlement and 9/8 Meeting)
9.2 72nd Avenue Contract Amendment Report, Public Works Director
s Report and Findings
s Authorize Contract Amendment
10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session
under ORS 192.660 (1)(i) to evalutate City Administrator's performance and
ORS 192.660 (1)(f) regarding pending litigation.
11. OTHER BUSINESS AND COUNCIL COMMENTS
12. ADJOURNMENT
COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 30, 1982
{{
i
T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 302 1982 - 7:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors John Cook, Kenneth
Scheckla (arriving at 7:45 P.M.) , Nancie Stimler; Director of
Public Works, Frank Currie; Finance Director/City Recorder,
Doris Hartig; City Administrator, Bob Jean; Planning Director,
William Monahan; Legal Counsel, Tim Ramis.
2. BOWMAN/92ND AVENUE REPORT
(a) Director of Public Works explained the revisions and adjustments
staff was planning to make regarding installation of sidewalk. He
stated to Council that staff never intended to put the five foot
sidewalk in the future right-of-way, however, he felt there was a
misunderstanding between the property owners and the builder. What
the staff needs is dedication for right-of-way from the four property
owners at some future date for future underground utilities, and the
City will build the sidewalk in the existing right-of-way. The
additional five feet of right-of-way is not necessary at this time to
build the sidewalk.
COUNCILOR SCHECKLA ARRIVED: 7:45 P.M.
(b) Tim Lewis, 16135 SW 92nd Avenue, property owner requested the City
pay for the five foot right-of-way as well as be reimbursed in the
amount of $1,600 spent solving the minor land partition problems,
etc.
(c) Discussion followed with the consensus of Council being that
generally the problem was between the developer and the property
owner. Director of Public Works stated the City could install the
sidewalk and place the cost against the developer. City
Administrator recommended staff proceed without the additional
dedication of right-of-way, for the completion of Kneeland Estates
and the City then look into the other issues and place a claim
against the bond or Mr. Bowman. Attorney suggested the Lewis'
present their -!Iaim in writing to the City.
(d) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to proceed
with improvements as recommended by staff.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
3. HAINES ROAD OVERPASS
(a) In response to previous inquiry by the Mayor, the Director of Public
works stated he had contacted the State Highway Department regarding
163 million of federal funds being turned over to all states.
Director of Pu::'_=c Worki stated the amount of funds to come to the
City of Tigard at this time was not known. Mrs. Ball, from the
4' audience, stated her source of information indicated the City of
Tigard received one million. Director of Public Works replied he
didn't have any further information at this time. Staff to report
any new developments.
4. ANNEXATION STATUS REPORT & MAP
i
(a) Planning Director requested Council direction as to which annexations
listed on memo staff should pursue. General discussion followed
regarding status of various areas. Council prioritized and gave
direction to staff.
5. OLCC APPROVAL - Manila Express
(a) Finance Director reported Chief of Police recommended approval.
Council questioned whether the restaurant use was for beer and wine
only.
(b) Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Cook to forward
to OLCC if sales wire limited to beer and wine only.
Motion carried by unanimous vote of Council present.
6. MAIN STREET LID
(a) Director of Public Works requested Council approval to request
informal bids for landscaping on the SW Main Street project. City
staff plans to remove and salvage existing shrubs.
(b) Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Cook to proceed
on securing informal landscaping bids.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
7. SIGNAL AGREEMENT MAIN STREET LID #37
(a) Director of Public Works recommended Council approve agreement which
sets out the City and State of Oregon responsibility for this
project. JB Bishop, developer, discussed with Council new State
concept for financing.
City staff to explore and report back to Council.
(b) RESOLUTION NO. 82-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO
ENTER INTO A CONSTRUCTION-FINANCE AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL
INSTALLATION.
(c) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to approve.
Motion carried by unanimous vote of Council present:
8. ORDINANCE NO. 82-62 AN ORDINIV1 CE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 82-46 (LID #22)
FOR A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR.
(a) Director of Public Works explained this ordinance corrected a
typographical error and recommended approval.
(b) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 30, 1982
a.
9. ORDINANCE NO. 82-63 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
(a) Finance Director reported receiving a last minute bancroft bonding
application and requested the ordinance be amended to reflect an
additional $33,000 in the bond sale and maturity schedule. Staff and
Council thoroughly reviewed the amendments.
(b) Motion to adopt ordinance, as amended, calling for bids on September
27, 1982 at 10:00 A.M. by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor
Cook.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
10. 72ND AVENUE LID SETTLEMENT ALTERNATIVES
(a) City Administrator gave quick summary of the various alternatives and
options available to the City and property owners. City
Administrator further commented he was meeting with the property
owners on September 13th and will report to Council. He further
recommended all of the City's actions fit within the time limits of
the legal process. If the City Council wants staff to pursue the
alternative of changing the street standards, then he recommended
they adopt the resolution which would set the public hearing for
September 133 1982.
The proposed resolution does not repeal previous resolutions and
ordinances, but does set up the framework for another public hearing
and changing of street specifications. City Administrator emphasized
if Council was dissatisfied with any of the proposals then Council
should so state and staff would go back to the original ordinance.
General discussion held by Council regarding costs for 32 foot option
vs savings in 40 foot option.
City Administrator reviewed financial situation and costs.
Option - Status Quo, 60' right-of-way - $2,450,000
$1,625,000 contract $1,475,000 assessment
555,000 r-o-w 60' 505,000 deficite assessment
270,000 legal, admin. eng. 1,975,000 assessable costs
$2,450,000 475,000 city share
2,4503000
Compromise 32' right-of-way 75 - 25% city share
$1,625,000 contract $1,729,000 assessable costs
- 34,000 net savings r-o-w 576,500 city share
146,000 net adds $2,305,500 total
265,500 r-o-w & easements
270,000 legal, admin. eng. 5 year road 32' vs 15 year road 60'
33,000 additional engineering
$2,305,000 total
PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 303 1982
WHOM
Compromise 40' r-o-w i
$1,625,000 contract $1,623,750 assessments
265,000 50' r-o-w & easements 541,250 city share
270,000 legal, admin. eng. $2,165,000 total
4,500 engineering
$2,165,000 total i
3
City Administrator stated he would like to pursue the compromise and
try to get to a general obligation bond sale. The alternative that
staff was exploring would be a special assessment boud, although this
would be less desirable. ?
(b) Council continued to discuss options and Mayor Bishop commented he
felt the Council has gone far beyond what is required to work out the
problems and that the City is being unfairly criticized.
(c) RESOLUTION NO. 82-100 DECLARING AN INTENTION TO CONSTRUCT CERTAIN
STREET IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN AN AREA DETERMINED TO BE A STREET
IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO BE KNOWN AS SOUTHWEST 72ND AVENUE
AREA LID NO. 21; DESCRIBING THE PROBABLE TOTAL ASSESSABLE COST
THEREOF; DEFINING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT TO BE BENEFITED AND
ASSESSED: APPROVING AND ADOPTING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
WORK AND ESTIMATES OF THE CITY'S ENGINEER, AND SETTING A PUBLIC
HEARING AND DIRECTING THE GIVING OF NOTICE THEREOF.
(d) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
(e) Council discussed what additional costs would be incurred with this
public hearing. Staff estimated approximately $500 plus staff time.
Mayor indicated he was approving only on basis resolution does not
increase City costs more than discussed.
(f) RESOLUTION NO. 82-101 A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO
DETERMINE THE COST OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SW 72ND AVENUE AREA
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID 421) , TO RATIFY AND ADOPT THE
APPORTIONMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF THE COST TO RESPECTIVE PARCELS OF F
LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT, TO SPREAD THE ASSESSMENT AND DIRECT THE
ENTRY OF ASSESSMENT IN THE LIEN DOCKET. ,
(g) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
(h) Director of Public works gave engineer's summary of cost to button up
project as of this date in the amount of $962,970. DeHaas commented
that there were some 52 items that would need to be cleaned up.
(i) Tony Maksym from audience questioned Council and staff regarding
contractor's claim for damages as well as general obligation bonds
and special assessment bonds.
E
PAGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 30, 1982 .
( 11. HOODVIEW LID FINAL PAYMENT $19,963.11
(a) Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Stimler to
approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
9:30 P.M. Council recessed into executive session.
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session
under ORS 192.660 (1)(i) to evaluate City Administrator's performance and
ORS 192.660 (1)(f) regarding pending litigation.
13. ADJOURNMENT: 11:30 P.M.
City Recor er - City o gar
ATTEST:
Mayor - City of Tigard
PAGE 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 30, 1982
i
Fil
I
t
f
3
NOTE TO COUNCIL
'r
t
i
s
i
x
t
The following ager-1^ items will either have items hand carried to the meeting
or will be verbal reports.
i
3
2, 3, part of 6, 8, & 9.
t
IN
i
;4
f
3
i
t
S
txt
I
i
i
i
I
y
MEMORANDUM
August 26, 1982
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PLANNING STAFF
RE: ANNEXATIONS
Attached is a list of all areas within the Urban Growth Broundary not
yet annexed to the City. The paperwork on each annexation petition will
take at least ten hours for staff to complete. For that reason, staff
would appreciate some direction from Council as to which areas Council
would support annexation resolutions for.
s�rsrrar®�r�®®®
f
N i
i
2
W 6
Ey N
00
EE-+ a
t.
O ►W
.7 n1
w
U
W
rn
z
O f
H N
�a \
6 M
a
C) a
as v co
z
d �
� o
to a) E
O " E
a)
E
0 o
� U
Ot
f"1 4 1 4 1 1J t
E-1 i 1 i4
rte{ r 4 t-4
o 21 @ E
W O O U U
W U U
y F4
H U i
W O
M )-1
^Q) T) p'
O a) C) a) a) Q) a) a) a) N a) a co y En �
O 3 s1 4.1 4J 4.1 4.1 tJ 4.1 +r1 41 41 4-1 to to to to a)
w p P >4 p H $4 a) v ar 0 a) a) a) v JJ
ca ca ct) ca co cc co ca ctf to cq 41 U U U U �+ u 41 A �
y41 :..t a.) 41 ,-i sj 41 a.1 (1) O O O O w a) d ;
0 co V) N V) to to to in M fn 4 Y1 i4 F4 P r4 --4 r--1
q 41 i
41 04 a.1 4Ja
r 1 .1 .1 r+ a 1 a 1 u E a sL R F E E E z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 q 0 0 0
A C C 0 G 0 0 U •'+ —4 •r1 • 4 U U U y
O o
w
C-)
'xi w
q:l
i
co
to
ri N M V'1 H O QQ '4
1-4
O
H y G o N U RS �+
N " a-+ �4 HV3n a *-1
H O W cd b0 $4 r^i 4.1U Q a
O 41 co —4 G :3 N � cp c0 N }a 0 C: ¢. > °ca O
Mme- U W C07 fC H 'rte `x + 3 Z w Cd A A CL 'aG .7 U i � O+ K �'
E
I
WAR
cr'
Approyed: L.E. George
MCH:pf
8/18/82
Misc. Contracts & Agreements
No. 7734
CONSTRUCTION-FINANCE -AGREEMENT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF
OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, Highway
Division, hereinafter referred to as "State"= and the CITY OF TIGARD, a
municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, acting by and through its
City Officials, hereinafter referred to as "City".
W I T N E S S E T H
RECITALS
1. The Pacific Highway West, State Primary Highway No. 1W, is a part
of the state highway system under the jurisdiction and control of the
Oregon Transportation Commission, and Main Street is a part of the city
street system under the jurisdiction and control of the City of Tigard.
2. State and City in their judgement have deemed it necessary and
desirable, in order to maintain a safer and more expeditious flow of
traffic, to construct certain roadway improvements and install traffic
control signal equipment on the Pacific Highway West at Main Street,
hereinafter referred to as "project-11.
3. By the authority granted in ORS 366.770 and 366.775, State may
enter into cooperative agreements with the various counties and cities for
the performance of work on certain types of improvement projects with the
allocation of costs on terms and conditions mutually agreeable to the
contracting parties. Traffic signal work on the project shall conform to
the current state standards and specifications.
4. By the authority granted in ORS 487.850, State is authorized to
determine the character or type of traffic control signals to be used, and
to place or erect them upon state highways at places where state deems
necessary for the safe and expeditious control of traffic. No traffic con-
trol signals shall be erected or maintained upon any state highway by any
authority other than State, except with its written approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, the premises being in general as stated in the fore-
going RECITALS, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
STATE OBLIGATIONS
1. State shall , at City expense, assign a liaison person to monitor
all work performed by the City, or its contractor, within the right-of-way
of the Pacific Highway West, and to provide intermittent inspection and
grade checking services during the construction phase of the project to
assure conformance with State standards and specifications for highway
construction.
2. State shall, at amity expense; perform- all preliminary engineering
and design work required to prepare plans, specifications and estimates for
the traffic signal portion of the project, advertise for bid proposals,
award all contracts and, upon award of a construction contract, furnish all
construction engineering, material testing, technical inspection and
project manager services for administration of the contract. The traffic
signal installation may be accomplished by the use of state forces, by con-
tract or by any combination of these methods, as the State shall elect.
3. State shall issue the necessary permits for work by others to be
performed within state highway right-of-way, and shall review and approve
all plans and specifications prepared by City, or its Consultant, prior to
any work proceeding within state highway jurisdiction.
4. State shall, upon completion of the project, perform all necessary
maintenance for operation of the traffic signal equipment installed on the
Pacific Highway West, retain complete jurisdiction and control of the
timing established for said traffic signals and maintain that portion of
the roadway lying within state highway jurisdiction, at its own cost and no
expense to City.
5. State shall, at City expense, lay out and paint the necessary lane
lines and channelization, install thermoplastic pavement markings and erect
the required directional and traffic control signing on the Pacific Highway
West.
6. State shall compile accurate cost accounting records and, when the F
actual total cost of the project has been computed, furnish City with an
itemized statement of said costs, including preliminary and construction
engineering, contractor payments, utility adjustments and all contingency
items attributable to the project.
CITY OBLIGATIONS
1. City shall, upon execution of this agremeent, forward to State an
advance deposit in the amount of $ £3.500.00 , said amount being equal to
100 percent of the estimated total cost of preliminary engineering and
design work for the traffic signal installation.
2. City shall, within 20 days following the opening of construction
bid proposals, forward to State an advance deposit in an amount equal to
-2-
i
i
i
" Y
100 percent of the estimated total cost of the traffic signal instal-
lation. No contract shall be awarded or work proceed until said advance
deposit has been received by the State. The City reserves the right to
request the State to reject all bids if the apparent low bid exceeds the
engineer's estimate by 10 percent or more.
Upon completion of the project and receipt from State of an itemized
statement, City shall pay any amount which, when added to said advance
deposits, will equal 100 percent of the actual total cost of the project,
_.. including preliminary and construction engineering, contractor payments,
utility adjustments and all contingency items attributable to the project.
Any portion of said advance deposits which is in excess of the actual total
cost of the project will be promptly refunded to City.
3. City shall , upon completion of the project, accept all responsi-
bility for, and pay all costs of electrical energy consumed in operation of
the traffic signal equipment.
i
4. City shall adopt a resolution authorizing its designated City
Officials to enter into and execute this agreement for and on behalf of the
City, and a copy of said resolution shall be attched hereto and become a
part hereof.
t
t
-3-
C
s
c
t
MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS F
1. State and City
mutually agree and understadthto advertisementt a mutual ew
of the plans and cost estimates will be conducted prior
for construction bid proposals.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties hereto have set their hands and E
affixed their seals as of the day and year hereinafter written. ' adoptedCity by
acted in this matter in accord with Resolution No. %. 1982-
its
1:982_ t
its City Council on the - s
The Oregon Transportation Commission, by a duly adopted delegation act in 4
n to
order, authorized its Chairman ov al for 9 Vice Cth smagreement was�givents honf �n - 2
approving this agreement. ApprovThe Bele
by ineer to sign this agree-
gation order also authorizes the State Highway Eng
ment for and on behalf of the ortation. Said Commission�ority is set forth in
the Minutes of the Oregon P 4
STATE OF OREGON, by and through
APPROVAL RECOMMENDED its Department of Transportation,
Highway Division
By
Region Engineer By
State Highway Engineer
Date
CITY OF TIGARD, by
and through
its City officials
By
Mayor
By
City Recorder
-4-
�.��fiw SO M EM X"M G
- tc
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION No. 82-
A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE THE COST OF STREET
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE S.W. 72ND AVENUE AREA LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID
#21), TO RATIFY AND ADOPT THE APPORTIONMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF THE COST TO
RESPECTIVE PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN THE DISTRICT, TO SPREAD THE ASSESSMENT AND
DIRECT THE ENTRY OF ASSESSMENT IN THE LIEN DOCKET.
WHEREAS, the Council has, by Resolution No. 82- on August 30, 19822
authorized and directed that the street improvements within the boundaries of
the S.W. 72nd Avenue Area Street Local Improvement District (LID #21), as
bounded and described in said resolution, be undertaken, and that that work
should be completed; and
WHEREAS, the Council declares that the total assessable cost of the
improvements within the boundaries of the Improvement District will be the sum
of $1,981,088.92 including right-of-way acquisition costs in excess of
$50,000, and the Council further finds that all lots, parcels or parts of lots
within the boundaries of the District as defined in said resolution are
specially benefited and together shall bear equitable shares of the cost of
the improvement; and
WHEREAS, the Council further finds that the apportionment of the cost of
the improvement upon each lot, part of lot or parcel, as prepared by the City,
and as set forth in the attached schedule, entitled "S.W. 72nd Avenue Area
Local Improvement District 921," which by reference is made a part of this
Resolution, is according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each
from the improvements; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That the City Council - does hereby deem it expedient and
necessary, and does hereby declare its intention to make assessments on the
aforesaid portion of S.W. 72nd Avenue Area LID.
Section 2: The Council further finds that the City Recorder of the City
of Tigard be, and she is hereby, directed to give notice by mail or cause to
be personally delivered to the owner of each lot or tract proposed to the
assessed a notice of assessment, which notice shall state the amount of the
assessment proposed on that property and also state a date by which time
objections should be filed with the City R order.
Section 3: That Monday, the 13th day of September, 1982, at the hour of
7:30 P.M. , at Fowler Junior High School Lecture Room, 10865 SW Walnut, Tigard,
Oregon, be and the same are hereby set as the time and place for hearing and
considering objections or remonstrances to the proposed improvement by any
parties aggrieved thereby. The City Council at that time shall determine the
assessment to be property apportioned according to the special and peculiar
benefits accruing to each parcel, part of lot, or lot within the Improvement
District. Each lot, parcel, or part of lot is designated in the attached
apportionment schedule as herein attached and made a part of this resolution.
Section 4: That the City Recorder be, and she is hereby, directed to
publish a notice of the hearing in the Tigard Times, issue of September 2,
1981.
Section 5: Within ten days from the date of the publication of the notice
of this assessment hearing, written objections or remonstrances against the
proposed final assessment may be made and filed with the City Recorder.
PASSED: By vote of all Council members present,
this day of August, 1982.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
IC
Page 2
RESOLUTION No. 82
(File 0309A)
Id
DE HAAS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS&SURVEYORS
t ..
SUITE 445-AGC CENTER WILSONVILLE. OREGON 97070
9450 S.W. COMMERCE CIRCLE (503) 682-2450
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERS REPORT
L.I .D. No. 21
SOUTHWEST 72nd AVENUE AREA
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
TIGARD, OREGON
(REVISED PROJECT - 32ft OPTION - AUGUST 30, 1982)
This Engineers Report relates to the identical project as approved and currently under
contract and construction with such revisions as are outlined hereinafter. Plans for
the project are attached and consist of 36 sheets entitled "STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN for
S.W. 72nd tarAVEe AREA - L.I.D. nsis dated December, 1981. Specifications for the project
are attached and are entitled "Contract Documents For The Construction of L.I .D. 21,
S.W. 72nd Avenue Area Street Improvements" , dated February, 1982, including Addendum
No.l.
* The Conceptual intent leading to proposal of the revised project proposed, and the
subject of this PRELIMINARY ENGINEERS REPORT, is to reduce the width of the roadway,
llowing for less right-of-way taking and taking
allowing reduced construction costs, a
of easements at no cost in lieu of right-of-way. The ultimate goal intended is to reduce
the total right-of-way costs to as close to a $50,000.00 figure as possible.
Revisions proposed are as follow:
1. 72nd Ave. would be reduced in width (curb to curb) from the basic 40 foot
i
width to a basic 32 foot width, except for those intersection points where k
special channelization and width is necessary, namely:
a. South of Boones Ferry Road.
b. North of Carman Drive.
c. North and South of Bonita Road.
d. Taper to State project at Fir Street.
e. The two railroad crossings.
Z. A four (4) foot curbline sidewalk would be constructed on one side throughout
the entire project.
3. Efforts will be made to reduce the costs of right-of-way taking by reducing
such basic taking to a total of ten (10) feet and thereby reducing the basic
total right-of-way proposed from 60 feet to 50 feet.
t
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERS REPORT
Page 2
Estimated effects on costs are as follow:
1. Construction Costs.
a. Narrowing the width from 40 ft to 32 ft over not more
than 650 of the project 7700 ft Save $ 86,000.00
b. Adding sidewalks. Add 52,000.00
c. Payment for work already done at the 40 ft level . Add 15,000.00
d, Adjust or tear out construction to accomodate new curb
locations. Add 30,000.00
e. Loss of prime construction season. Cost of negotiating
increase equivalent to the Construction Cost Index. Add 76,000.00
f. Potential winter maintenance costs. Add 25,000.00
g. Other possible damage claims. Add unknown
2. Legal , Administrative & Engineering Costs .
a. Engineering re-design fees . Add 23,000.00
b. Legal & Administrative. Add 10,000.00
(Sub Total Add $145,000.00)
3. Richt-of-llay Costs. To date, honorabl e commi ttments for ri ght-
of-wa_y have been made in the amount of $282,430.00. Council
could probably legally retract a number of committments, reach-
ing a minimum figure of $178,921.00. The retracted committments
would have to be renegotiated on the basis of a 5 ft taking rather
than 10 ft (if possible) and in the form of an easement if the
property owner is willing to donate as such, or as right-of-way
if he demands to be paid.
After reviewing the project revision proposal , it is estimated that perhaps a
total of 16 acquisitions would be possible where the taking could be squeezed
down to 5 feet. The appraised reduction in taking would total $72,786.00.
Of the properties where 10 ft has already been legally taken or occupied, we
see only two (2) instances where 5 ft would squeeze the city by. It is conjec-
ture that these owners might purchase the 5 ft back from the city in the face
of the prospect that the city in the future, following long-standing procedures,
would require dedication at no cost as a part of future development approval .
Constant and persistant right-of-way negotiations have been conducted over a
period of more than four months. Of 41 principal takings, 34 have been either
consumated or committed. The seven parcels yet to be committed are all local . f
It is our considered opinion that few, if any of the property owners would be
willing to convey easements to the city at no costs in lieu of being paid
right-of-way. Some may safely tender on offer to do so with the proviso that
everyone else would follow suit. This, of course will never happen. The spread-
ing of assessments over a far wider range than just the fronting properties
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERS REPORT
Page 3
dictates that only a minor reduction in assessment
would
rb received by
fronting property owners. should they forego pay
ment forIn evaluating all the foregoing, it is our conclusion that best efforts at
reducing the right-of-way takings to 5 ft where possible and to easements,
costs by a
if any owner would dediCostsafor allcost,
thewould
otherreduce
andthe
procedures 00necessary
projected $72,786.00. Cos
to exhaust the suggested renegotiations are estimated at $20,0
In summary, it appears that the deficit assessment for rightway costs
uld
exceeding $50,000-00. currently estimated at $505,000.00, could be reduced
by approximately $50,000.00. Let's assume $100,000.00 as an outside pos 0100
ity. Save $ 100,00
Net Add $ 145,000.00
seen that the cc,nce tual intent of this
of-way ft costssal arels not reducedmet.
* In conclusion, It is cost is
The construction costs are increased by 145,000.00• Right-of-way the total project
by $50,000.00 or certainly no more than $100,000.00. Thus,
ro ect is delayed at all . ;.
increased by at least $45,000.00 to ccur�000�he�currentepexposure is there for much more. t
Many of these cost increases well o the consequences of
It is our recommendation that the council weigh very carefully
embarking on the subject 32 ft proposal .
Sincerely,
MARLIN . DE HAAS, P.E.
MJD/jd
cc: 80.194.118
Attachments
d
ISE HAAS & ASSOCIA'TES, INC.
C0NSULTING ENGINEERS&SURVEY0RS
SUITE 445-AGC CENTER WILSONVILLE, OREGON 97070
9450 S.W. COMMERCE CIRCLE (503) 682-2450
August 29, 1982
Frank A. Currie, P.E.
Director of Public Works
City of Tigard
12755 S.W. Ash Ave.
P.O. Sox 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Frank:
Attached is our minimum estimate of costs currently committed and necessary
to be expended if the council should order the 72nd Avenue LID project
stopped effective August 30, 1982.
No mention or accounting has been made of the likely chance of continuing
litigation along with the legal exposure and maintenance costs, all of
which could be overwhelming.
Sincerely,
i T
MARLIN J. DE HAAS, P.E.
MJD/jd
Attachment
cc: 80.194.118
BUTTON-UP COSTS (If decision made 8/30/82)
Preliminary Engineering (Planning)
Construction $ 45,040
Paid to date $218,300
Estimate for August, 1982 52,250
Pay up Retainage 13,500
Button-up work 69,300
Offset for Mat`ls, Ordered or Produced 50,000
Allowance for Staging, etc. 25,000
$428,350
Final Design Engineering 99,295
Inspection Services (Engr. ) 5,260
Field Surveying (Engr.) 56,400
Alt. Design Est. (28 ft w/ditch & shouldr. )(Engr. ) 5,230
Alt. Design Est. (Revision to 32 ft)(Engr.) 2,470
Misc. other services requested by city (Engr. ) 2,000
R/W & Easements (min.) 265,575
Legal (Excluding R/W & Easements) 2,240
City Administration 5,355
Sub Total : $917,115
Contingency 5%: 45,855
Grand Total Button-up Costs: $962,970