City Council Packet - 09/20/1982 r ,
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign their name on the
SEPTEMBER 20. 1982, 7:30 P.H. appropriate sign-up sheet(s) . If no sheet is
FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL provided, ask to be recognized by the Chair.
LECTURE ROOF!
1. SPECIAL MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call To Staff, Council & Audience For Non-Agenda Items Under Open
Agenda
2. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be
enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request
that an item be removed for discussion and separate action. Motion to:
2.1 Receive and File Departmental Monthly Reports
2.2 Plaid Pantry - Durham & Hall Location - Report
2.3 Accept Street Dedication - Geoffrey R. Spencer - SW Walnut
2.4 Approve Resolution No. 82-/G Requesting Review of Cambridge Square
2.5 Call Special Council Meeting 9-28-82 at Noon
2.6 Call Special Council Meeting 10-4-82 7:30 P.M. Study Session
2.7 Hearing Officer Announcement - 74th & Durham Sensitive Lands
hearing on 9-23-82
3. WATER COMMITTEE REPORT
/ • Councilor Stimler
l
4. URBAN SERVICES TASK FORCE REPORT AND RESOLUTION NO.
o City Administrator
S. MASTER STREET PLAN
o Public Works Director
6. MASTER STORM DRAINAGE PLAN
• Public Works Director
7. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda Items identified to the Chair
under item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are
encouraged to contact the City Administrator prior to the meeting.
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive
Session under ORS 192.660 (1)(d) and (1) (f) to consider labor
negotiations, and pending litigation.
9. ADJOURNMENT
f
®tea
T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 - 7:30 P.M.
E
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors Tom Brian (arriving
at 7:38 P.M. ), John Cook, Nancie Stimler (arriving at 7:40
P.M.), and Kenneth Scheckla (leaving at 11:00 P.M.); Director
of Public Works, Frank Currie; Finance Director/City Recorder,
Doris Hartig; City Administrator, Bob Jean; Director of
Planning & Development, William Monahan; Office Manager,
Loreen Wilson (leaving at 10:15 PM).
2. RECEIVE AND FILE DEPARTMENTAL MONTHLY REPORTS
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to receive and
file.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
3. PLAID PANTRY - DURHAM AND HALL LOCATION - REPORT
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to set matter
over to 9-27-82 meeting.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
4. ACCEPT STREET DEDICATION - Geoffrey R. Spencer - SW Walnut Street
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to accept
dedication.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
5. RESOLUTION NO. 82-108 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CALLING FOR
REVIEW ON ITS OWN MOTION OF CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO
SUBDIVISION 5-82 AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 2-82
CAMBRIDGE SQUARE.
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve
Resolution No. 82-108.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
b. CALL SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING 9-28-82 AT 12:00 NOON AT CITY HALL
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to call special
meeting for 9-28-82 at Noon at City Hall.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
7. CALL SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING 10-4-82 AT 7:30 P.M. AT FOWLER
(a) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to call special
< meeting for 10-4-82 at 7:30 P.M. at Fowler Junior High School.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
8. HEARING OFFICER ANNOUNCEMENT - 74TH AND DURHAM SENSITIVE LANDS HEARING ON
9-23-82
�•` (a) After lengthy discussion regarding hearing on sensitive lands issue,
Councilor Cook moved to receive and file the report.
Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council.
9. WATER COMMITTEE REPORT
(a) Councilor Stimler reported that the next meeting of the Committee
would be Thursday, September 23rd. To this date they have been
gathering information. Bruce Clark, the Chairman of the Committee,
will issue any statements made by the Committee. She stated there
would be further reports later as the Committee completes more of the
study.
10. URBAPI SERVICES TASK FORCE REPORT
(a) City Administrarol_ explained the scope of work and stated that this
would be done on a County-wide basis to document the costs of
providing urban services in the County as well as analyze the extent
of possible double taxation. He explained the financial side to this
issue and recommended the Council pledge $5,000 as the City's share
to facilitate this study.
(b) Councilor Brian expressed concern that this item should not be done
before the November 2, 1982 election. City Administrator responded
that the relationships and basic patterns in the County would be
helpful to take to the legislature if Ballot Measure #3 passes.
(c) RESOLUTION N0. 82-109 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS.
(d) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to approve.
Approved by 3-2 majority vote of Council. Councilors Brian and
Scheckla voting nay.
(e) Mayor Bishop requested staff report back as to how the other cities
in the County vote on this issue.
11. MASTER STREET PLAN
(a) Director of Public Works stated the transportation plan will be in
the Comprehensive Plan and should be out in about 2 weeks. He
highlighted the various components of the plan.
(b) Lengthy discussion ensued regarding various individual streets
proposed on the plan. Mayor Bishop requested that the Ash Avenue
extension from Burnham Street to Commercial Street be eliminated from
the plan. Director of Public Works stressed that streets shown are
"general locations" only.
SEPTEMBER 20, 1982
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES -
I
(c) Councilor Stimler requested that each NPO see the plan as proposed
and asked that each NPO Chairmen be present for the final hearing and
-- adoption of the plan before the Council.
(d) Bob Bledsoe, NPO #3 Member, stated that the NPO has voted to have
121st and raarde Streets as minor collectors.
(e) Gordon Martin, NPO #4 Chairman, stated that NPO X64 wants the existing
road plan to remain in their area as previously adopted.
(f) City Administrator reported that this item would be brought back
before Council for hearing and adoption after the NPO's and Planning
Commission have seen it.
RECESS: 9:00 P.M.
RECONVENE: 9:11 P.M.
12. MASTER STORM DRAINAGE PLAN
(a) Director of Public Works discussed issues surrounding the future
adoption of the master storm drainage plan. Various waterways (i.e.
Fanno Creek, Ash and Summer Creeks and -he Tualatin River) were
discussed in more detail.
(b) City Administrator reported that the plan will address the following
concerns: (1) function of the floodway; (2) preservation of the
floodway; (3) economic development; and (4) capital improvement
projects for storm drainage. He stated this would be presented again
to Council for hearing and adoption.
13. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda Items identified to the Chair
under item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are encouraged
to contact the City Administrator prior to the meeting.
13.1 ATTORNEY REPORT
(a) Legal Counsel reported that letters have been sent to developers who
have outstanding development bonds. They have been given 60 days to
complete the work outstanding, or they should contact the City to
work out a reasonable time frame. Legal Counsel will be reporting to
Council on each subdivision as it comes in.
13.2 LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES CONVENTION - 11/7-9/82
(a) City Administrator reported that the League Convention is scheduled
for November 7-9, 1982 in Eugene. He asked those Councilors
interested in attending to contact the Administrative Secretary for
registration.
Councilor Brian requested staff supply a draft agenda for the
convention.
�" PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 20, 1982
13.3 NW UNDERGROUND LAWSUIT REPORT
(a) Legal Counsel reported new developments in the NW Underground lawsuit
T and requested motion by Council to authorize attorney to proceed
against the bond of $12,000 at this time. If the City wins the case,
the City would also receive payment for attorney fees.
(b) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Stimler to authorize
City Attorney to proceed against the surety bond.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
13.4 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISCUSSION
(a) Legal Counsel reported on various issues which over the last year
have required much time and expense on his part (i.e. Emmert/O'Brian,
Settlemire, 72nd Avenue Writ of Review, Recall Election, Senior
Center Litigation, Water District Issues, Labor Relations, and 10
LIDs.)
(b) City Administrator discussed with Council ways which the City might
lower its legal services expenses over the next year.
(c) Mayor Bishop requested City Administrator and Legal Counsel continue
working on the issue and keep Council advised by reporting monthly.
Consensus of Council was to support Mayor Bishop's request.
RECESS: 10:15 P.M.
14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session
under ORS 192.660 (1)(d) and (1)(f) to consider labor negotiations and
pending litigation.
COUNCILOR SCHECKLA LEFT: 11:00 P.M.
RECONVENE: 11:05 P.M.
15. 72ND AVENUE BANCROFT APPLICATIONS
(a) Motion by Councilor Stimler, seconded by Councilor Cook to accept the
late amended bancroft applications for Southern Pacific in the 72nd
Avenue LID.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
16. ADJOURNMENT: 11:07 P.M.
City Recorder - City of Ti d
ATTEST: C
ty of Tigard
P !c�e�f- o-4-C
eGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 20, 1982
(' 11GARLOLIBRAKY
PUBLICPhone 639-9511
12568 SW Main-Tigard. Or. 97223 Monthly Report, August 1982 -
TO: LIBRARY BOARD
CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY LIBRARIAN
Overdues: The new procedures for overdues is continuing to work well. There is still
approximately a two-week backlog, attributable in part to increased summer circulation
and staffing shortages during vacations.
State Aid: The Library will receive $1787 as its share of State Aid this year.
Auxiliary of Eagles' gift: At its meeting on August 11, the local Order of Eagles
Auxiliary presented the Library with a $100 grant to buy large-print books.
Give=A-Book.: The Give-A-Book program was launched with an information sheet and book '
mark (attached). This suggestion came from a regular patron and the information was
passed along through the International City Managers Association newsletter. At last
count there were 38 inquiries from other cities requesting details of the program.
WCCLS: The librarians and city managers met on August 5 to continue planning for a new
serial levy and to devise a more equitable system for distribution of funds. Concensus
was that (1) a base refund to cities is essential with some cost per total circulation;
(2) 95% of the second year long range budget projections be the level for community
Libraries funding; (3) the new levy will take effect July 1, 1983 (eliminating the final
year of the present levy). WCCLS Coordinator will prepare a new levy budget outline when
new assessed valuation figures are available in early September with a maximum total of
$2.6 million.
It was also reported that 1980-81 state-wide operating Expenditures Per Capita in Oregon
were $8.19; Washington County was $6.47; state-wide circulation per capita was 5.95 items.
A good goal for Washington County would be $10 per capita expenditure and a county-wide
circulation of 8-10 items per capita. (Tigard's 1981-82 per capita expenditure for its
service area of 25,000 was $5.44; circulation was 4.4 items per capita.)
Volunteers: Thirteen volunteers worked a total of 190 hours, a daily average of 7.3.
Work Indicators: August '82 August '81
Adult Books 7133 5594
Juvenile Books 2838 2194
Interlibrary Loan 69 85
Magazines 569 301
Records/Cassettes 208 125
Other 52 6
Total Circulation 10,869 8,305 F
Days of Service 22 21
Average Daily Circulation 494 395
7 increase--circulation 31% -
Reference/Readers' Advisory 448 343
Materials Added 493 711
Materials Withdrawn 144 263
Story Hour Attendance 53 56
Special Programs 168 112
Borrowers: new/renewal 203/105 167/ _
Tigard Public Library - Monthly Report August 1982 - page 2
Youth Services: Major events were the Tigard Town and Country Days' parade, the summer
reading awards party and Zoo-to-You.
Thirty-six children participated in the parade, wearing Wizard of Oz and rainbow costumes.
The float was a twenty-foot-long rainbow carried by the children.
The Rainbow Reading Game awards party was held at THE PIZZA MERCHANT. Readers of ten books
were treated to two rounds of exotic drinks, pizza, movies, games and prizes. Forty-seven
attended the party; approximately 100 completed the summer reading program. Friends of the
Library picked up the tab.
Washington Park Zoo presented Zoo-to-You on August 26. One-hundred children and eighteen
adults packed into the Young People's room to see the animals. Because of the space
problem, we plan to have two sessions next year.
MEMORANDUM
September 15, 1982
TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: William A. Manahan, Director of Planning and Development o�
RE: Monthly Report of Planning and Development
The Planning and Development monthly report for August contains the
following elements :
1. Comprehensive Plan Update - including a letter from LCDC
2 . Annexation Report
3 . Approval Authority Actions
4 . Building Activity
5. Code Enforcement Report
i Summary - The Comprehensive Plan is moving along well towards completion.
An extension of the Comprehensive Plan review period has been granted by-"
LCDC as they are backed up with their workload. A ninety day extension
has been granted until December.
Annexation activity has picked up as staff is acting with the direction
of the City Council to process all remaining annexations except the
Tigard 'Triangle.
The Building Division took in $13 ,491.11 for permit fees during August.
Over $775,000 in value of new construction and alterations were applied
for.
A report on Code Enforcement activities and Approval Actions is also
attached.
mer
{ MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 10, 1982
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Update
EXTENSION
As you recall staff's original work program indicated that the City
would resubmit its document materials for LCDC acknowledgement by
the end of September, 1982 . It is staff 's understanding that this
submittal date was agreed upon by the Council and the LCDC Field
Representative in Portland. This agreement was made because of Tigard' s
lack of Comprehensive Plan revision work since the City's original
submittal in July of 1980 , and because of the gross deficiencies in
the existing Tigard Comprehensive Plans as they relate to the Statewide
Planning Goals.
Since Tigard' s original submittal in July, 1980 , the City has been on
a LCDC 90-day continuance cycle. (see attached LCDC letter. ) These
continuances were necessary because of the number of plans that LCDC
had to review versus manpower to complete such reviews . The City
was just granted another 90-day continuance as of September 2 , 1982 .
In discussing the City' s need for an extension to complete its revision
work, LCDC stated that it would not be necessary for the City to
formally request an extension beyond the end of September due to LCDC 's
continuance order. In addition, LCDC staff also told the City that
their work schedule is close to being completely caught up, and they
felt that there would not be an additional need to issue more 90-day
continuance orders .
The City staff is now in the process of presenting an alternative
work program to the Committee for Citizen Involvement (C.C.I . ) at
their next meeting, September 16 , 1982 . The C.C. I . will then present
an alternative work program to the Council for approval.
PROGRESS
The following describes the extent of work that has been completed to
date and what needs to be completed.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT % COMPLETED
1. Citizen Involvement 100 %
2. Natural Features and Open Space 100 %
3. Air, Water and Land Resources 0 %
C 4 . Economy 25 %
5. Housing 100 %
. 6. Public Facilities & Services 100 %
7. Transportation 50 %
8. Energy 0 %
Comprehensive Plan Update (continued)
Page 2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT % COMPLETED
9 . Urbanization 30 %
- Annexation policy 100 %
- UpAA To be negotiate with the
County by October 1. f
10. Land Development Code 100 %
- Subdivision Code 100 %
- Sign Code Revisions to be reviewed
by Planning Commision on
September 21, 1982.
11. Preliminary Comprhensive Plan
Future Land Use Map 100 %
12 . Preliminary Development District Map 100 %
Because of the extreme cost of photcopying these reports, staff is
now in the process of finding a printing company that will inexpensively
reproduce the draft copies of these reports. Therfore, there may be
a slight delay in circulating the draft reports to the NPOs , Planning
Commission and Council.
ar
nenartment of Land Conservation and Development
VICTOR "E'" 1175 COURT STREET N.E., SALEM, OREGON 97310-0590 PHONE (503) 373-4926
September 2, 1982
The Honorable Wilbur Bishop
Mayor, City of Tigard
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mayor Bishop:
On August 19, 1982, the Commission approved the enclosed order allowing
the Commission to again consider your acknowledgment request beyond the
90-day statutory review period. You will be notified when your plan has
been scheduled for Commission review.
Please contact your Field Representative, Jim Sitzman, at 229-6068, if
you have any questions concerning the enclosed order or the review of
your acknowledgment request.
Sincerely,
cca
® Sip � iSb2
James F. R s
Director Gill OF T�GHKD
JFR:sm PLP���NG D�,pCo
5411A/3C/0972B/3B
Enclosure
cc: Washington County Board of Commissioners
City Planning Director
Coordinators
Field Representative
Lead Reviewer
BEFORE THE
_ LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
( OF THE STATE OF OREGON
IN THE MATTER OF )
THE CITY OF TIGARD'S REQUEST ) COMPLIANCE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
FOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COMPLIANCE ) REVIEW POSTPONEMENT
On July 1, 1980, the City of Tigard, pursuant to ORS 197.251 (1981
Replacement Part), requested that their Comprehensive Plan and Implementing
Measures be acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission
to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals.
Oregon Law, specifically ORS 197.251(1), requires that the Commission
review and approve or deny the request within 90 days.
The Commission finds, however, that pursuant to ORS 197.251(1) (1981
Replacement Part) the following extenuating circumstance(s) willagain
necessitate a delay in Commission review of the Comprehensive Plan and
Implementing Measures of the City of Tigard.
Due to the significant amount of staff time necessary to
process the numerous acknowledgment requests and the time
required to obtain needed compliance revisions, the Department
is unable to review the requests and prepare staff
recommendations within the required 90-day time period.
Commission consideration of this ,jurisdiction's acknowledgment request is
hereby extended 90 days beyond the end of the original statutory review period.
DATED THIS 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1982.
FOR THE COMMISSION:
James F. Ross, 51reaeor
Department of Land
Conservation and Development
JFR:sm
4904A/3C/0994B/3C
t"
C C
���° y°G
y 7 ro 0 ro W C ro
E. O U O U%O N O U
Z U U•"1 .-1 U
W 44 w w oc r= N .A
'44
U)-.1 m-1 a
O N LIU N N U U) 1.1
U d) N N 41 O C a) N
ZUZU [s.�-'12U
N
N CC)
O�
Q �
U U
N .•rr >
U O
cn Z
W •
E-
E-
En E•E
Cia W •--�
Oa
44 ro
U E
W
Z N N N
O E U CO c0 00
H m )•1 O1 O1 O1
a u
=3
a Q O co
[� D b co r r r
zcrn
o s ro.-r
W O ••"1 N
U 3•,.c O O O p,
aEn
a •a
n >
z z N N N N N
00 00 co OD )�
C)to .--1 .4 .•-1 11
O
W
EI O l.i W W W N N N C
.0 a as a
W
cn ..c •.i •.i s
C G C W
Z $
O W W W
H
E+ m m n co \O rl o O r- C C C
cn .1-1 c o N co r i U U U 0
UJ co cooD a0 co m coaD co cocO O
W W W W 3
PG W W W
W W W
O ro m m m
H W
N m b b b In
-4 G G C
41 41 +m) � ro m co >.N N v N .-1riW
vs ri 1-1 W W W W W W m m m .4
ro ro a) a) w a a a $4 u sa �+ )+ $4 W -+ -� -� v
a W W W W E E @ E ro ro ro ro m m m O
>+W N G) O) N O O O O W W W W W W W C C C C G
C.LL ri -4 r1 14 U U U U m N
o a E E E E W W W W W W W W W W W .-4 W W W W
z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -'c O O O O
U U U U C C c G G C C G C G C 3 G C C G
O
w
C-'
b WC c U
.-t 0 m ro )-1 r1
OH O �--) -4 d ro
N G :3,C )O.1 cNf) r U 3-t E,
-4 a m r W \ -1 ro G ro C O )+
W $4 G O C N >� ro )a >, C >+
ay o a w x x to x > m mro H 3 z Q x
SN3WIUVd3Q LNaWdOlaAaU QNV ONINNKZd - LLHOdSH NOIIKXENNV
ffimaAMW - A SS4.S P4S
MEMORANDUM.
TO: City Council
DATE: September 13 , 1982
FROM: Planning and Development e*
SUBJECT: Monthly report for month of August, 1982
Building Department
August' s building acitivity include permits for 11 signs , 4 single family
residential, 8 residential alter & repair, 2 commercial, 11 commercial
alter & repair, 2 site gradings and 1 inspection for mobile home installation
.for a total valuation of $ 775,090 .00 .
Fees for 28 permits $ 6 , 338 . 73
Fees for 11 signs 210. 00
Plumbing Activity 27 2,197 . 50
Mechanical Activity 21 419. 88
Business license 119 4 ,325. 00
TOTAL 13 ,491. 11
(connections)
Sewer Permits 9 7500. 00
Sewer Inspections 9 335 . 00
King City activity included 1 commercial alter and repair for a total
valuation of $20 ,000 and fee of $231.83.
i
z
o '
H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
E.i 000 O r- 001- 0 000000000 0000000000 dr
N drri 00 r- �n0 MO to r.nrnOO4- 00lo Ol- �tr 0000000 N O
a r-IMk NNl- -1 -! Md' � MOOLnIflON t1) mmcr) V' Mr-ICO [ ri U
to dr Ln to N Vr N qtr M a) r-1 Ln ri N N l0 >
Q)
O
}4 �4
3 3 a) N
co
r1 rn z
\\\\\\\\a-) 4J ?4 t4 t4 �4 N 44 }-I �4 )4 �4 H -O H O O O O O O O O O O O CD C:)
cd rd cd rd fo c(S f13 (d --I H \\\\\\\\\\\ O H O O O O O O O O O O O O
E rd td rd rd as Ca cd ct) rd co (a F=i H P
cn aC oOOOOo000 0 00
cd cd rd cd cd rd rd cd rd cd cd rd r-i r-4 r-I H H r-4 r 4 —i --I —4 —4 -A r-1 ri —4 I~ A ::D
o 0 0 0 to o 0 0 0 0 o cn
-r° •ri -r-I -1 -14 -r-I rd rd rd rd cd cd cd cd rd rd cd rd rd rt cd 0 0 ca vi Ln m Ln M Ln r-i Oar N rno
.P 4J 4j a-) t r 4J 4J 4J 4J 4-3 4-3 4-3 -1 -1 .r..1 .4 -1 -4 .i -4 •r-1 -r1 -1 •r1 -4 .r{ .r.i -ri A c) �. M dr
q t~ >~ s~ >~ C s~ >~ >~ s~ s~
Do U U U U U U U U U U U U U 4J < ,-1Q) a) Q) O a) Q) O Q) a) a) a) �4P �4 3-c >4 }4 �4 �4 �4 �4 }4 �4 s4 34 �40
W ro ro'L3 rc$ ro rc$ rcs ro rU ro rc$ rd Q) W Q) a) a) a) a) Q) a) Q) Q) a) a) a) a) a) W
Pa r) -rI-ri .En •En •ri •rt -r-I w r4 .ri -ri 0 9 2 0 9 0 9 6 0 2 9 s 0 r cn 124 O
� cn N cn m rn to rn v) U) N U) U)
E-+ Q) a) a) Q) a) a) a) Q) Q) a) a) Q) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I~ x ri
a as t� aaaaaaaa000UUUUUUUUUUUUH z a)
a) FC4H
a O H
>1 rs. 3
arU O
E� cC�i a
H W E
A+ I
H O A a r� }�4 U) � C s~ �4 : 41 O
x
a) U) �, �,a . $4 4-) 1-00rn Q) zr :s to ss N 4s °n
4; 4 -P O v 3 rd lei3 10 rd 3 +-) 4-) Q) (1) U) o o ri •r1 •r1 •rc (1) r1
U U �+ v ►� � 00x rd rd tnEn >• xisw vr �r O xxxx w , x (1) 4-)rd rte r-I cn � � rO x o o 41 11.1t t o v v v U cn 4 v •4-) �+
c� CO rd o -4 -4s a ar o to rd >r U 0z �4 �+ 4-) N rd cn m w rq .�, .� —1 --1 U) U)
z = �U ar U) 3 44 (L) �4 U --4 ri A O O m U) -i t~ 44 4 4 4 r 4 1 w r i 4 4.4 4 a) m
H U U E~ C. O •4-) �4 ;E: � -r-I 4-4 rd rd t~ 44 r- x x ;:$ r-I a) 7••c .4 -r1 •r1 � O �. r. U
4-) rO CO a) 4-) > •14 -N 4J rd -14 U --1 -r-4 .Q z O 10 .s~ a)
H :E: z a, 01 z 34 14 Q) -41 I~ cd a) U cd I~ r. Z rd S4 Z I~ --I-i cd U--1 Ln 4-) 04 cd rd rd cd cd U rd rd Rf t
rd rd 00 00 F:4 rs r-4 •Z. U) (1) O U cd P+ O O :3 a4 U' z U3 E-A 00 00 x P-4 a a w U) a+ N N
x a s A U a mwm xx (d rd
cin 3 33 333 33 3 33 rv3333333 w 33333333 w W
a
A cn cn Ul 3 U) cn v) U) to cn u] 3 U) cn U) cn U) U) U) U) cn c
3 - U] cn aA n U) cn cn U) U) a) ro 93
x A cn v) cn cnco cn cn cn Ln Lr) Lr) Lf) O o O 4n Ln sa �4�C A cn o0 00Ln rnocnLn Ln Lr) oLnNLnr.r') rnrn A
(7 Fi'r O
Ln c,4 04n0lfllpOtnNdr000000ON00c c - O0 dr 000000 FIr OOaDOOOON OMd' M ty, as
H 00 r- ON riOl [` kOMt� d' O0NlO %00 ON 0061 "0t'o "D -I NNd' NNtfl �OIOk.O �00Md� N0 b> >s
P m fn¢T Lin r-4 :-4 1-1 O Ln m Ln O r-I r-I M co r-♦ N O dr -zr O N N r-4 l0 lU In ri r-1 r-1 ri N N N N N •r1 •r-1
00 00 r-4 r-I r-I 00 r-I r•i r-I O r-I H ri r1 r- r- rn ri —I i� r- r-•I r-i .--I ri r i r-i H r 1 r-1 H -4 r4 -1 r-a r A —e H E-c
N
00
m
U U r-1
H H En N
z z z
4-) -P is rt3 � a O o O . r-. S4 O U
a) a) •r1 cd U) C: 4J a-► r-•I 4-) 4-) F N C2r ¢a Cl,U r I cd U O H
N a) E 1~ r-I z Q) a) U) U) -4-4 Q) cd rd U f4
a) 0 04 04 a) 0 3 4) 0 0 >4 res Cl) a) 0 o
.� � 0 0ro a� � •r-4 00 a) O � � N U) x ° 0 0 0 0 ,~0
m a)—I 4 o r-I 41 J UU U) NA rUU •4-) :~ U UUUU m3a o ,
C7 U a) a) !~ Q) s-4 3 a) a) O O cn O O r1 cn
U > a) O >, x >Y >r+4 4-) a U) a Q) a) r- U U 3 E >~ >~ to C: 0 co •rt U]
U
s 4 a� a) s4 �+ •ra 4: 9-: O rd H a is t r tr tr +) o 4-) cn
o Cl Cl a) ri ria cd -4 -, : " 3 ► 0 O U U) >r o r1 -ri -r-I •ri p >4 � 4-4 -4 >c
E 4 to P rO S4 —i S4 r 1 0 0 O O rO Q) rO -P 4-) 3.4 cd rd P4 Ei cn to U) U) Q) O cn cd it (1) 4-)
U xx0 vs4os4Ar1 •4roUrd0xx s~ a s~ NEl) OU) opHHM w U > z s4 U) d-4 -1
•ri -,-1 as o 0 rd r.74 0 4-) 4-) U) to 0 rd �4 s4 U a) Ct 0 a z I~ 5:1. r. 0 rc$ U $4 -4 U
En U) Z 0 A 4a a) 44 0 rl U3 cn —1 o r-I m y i`4 M C: z > 0 0 0 0 0 .+~ p O s~
H a) a)•� •,i ri 4-4 > •4-3 4)� a) A � •r1 -4-) >~ >~ r-4 4-I -HO O f a z H is tS tT is U a► r6 s~ > •r1 N
Z 5 E t~ ri s~ •r1 a) N :4 5,H 0 >~ 4 .>~ U) ?-I 1,-4 P N r-4 0 U) 4 X X P 0 z Q) a) Q) Q) z rd 43n t D-4 E: U)
U 174 AOx00uU) P44 :zzP4hs033 040c0i 4 00134m na UH) oU 0000 > xa' Hv) � a 0
MIN
CODE ENFORCEMENT REPORT:
AUGUST 31, 1982
VIOLATION ACTION TAKEN
Sign violation, Law Nursery Removed signs , cited Owner for
109th & Naeve St. repeated violation, waiting
court action.
Broken Real Estate Sign Owner removed per request.
Pacific Highway
Banners on Warehouse Owner removed per request.
Hunziker
A Board Signs Owner removed signs .
72nd a Upper Boones Ferry Rd.
Owner Directing storm water on Correction being sought
neighbors Lot. 119th St. between owners .
Noxious Veg. 90% Compliance with request
numerious locations for abatement.
Abandoned Structure on Owner was notified to
12350 Bull Mtn. Road comply with abatement
requirements .
Noxious Veg. and debris in vacant Owner notified, no compliance
lot behind Cantebury Plaza. as of this date.
Dumping debris and oil from Pit of Car Written notification to
Wash on Public Right-of-way and edge of owner 8/31 pending
property. Owner - R V Oil Co.
Tigard Car Wash, Pacific Highway.
l
k
i
l
PLLANNINGRANDRDEVELOPMENT - APPROVAL AUTHORITY ACTIONS
f' AUGUST, 1982
The following projects were acted on by the Planning Commission over
the past month:
ZONE CHANGES
ZC 15-82 City of Tigard NPO # 7
APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: Mercury Development
12755 S .W. Ash & Roger Belanich
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Request: To change the zone designation on the Greenway Town
Center property trom C-4PD to C-3PD.
Site Location: Greenway Town Center, S.W. 121st and S.W. Scholls
Ferry Road. (WCTM 1S1 34BC, lots 100, 101, 200 , 300
and 390 . )
Action Taken: Approved as requested, August 3 , 1982
SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT
( M 1-82 The Meadows NPO # 7
APPLICANT: Bruce Kamhoot OWNER: Unified Sewerage Agency
20 Greenridge Ct. Washington County Court
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Hillsboro, Ore. 97123
Request: A remand by the Tigard City Council to the Planning
Commission for further consideration of a Sensitive
Lands Permit with a revised subdivision layout.
Site Location: On the east side of S.W. Black Diamond Way, just east
of the Black Bull Park subdivision. (WCTM 1S1 34AD
Lot 2600. )
Action Taken: Approved with conditions, August 3 , 1982
ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
ZOA_ 4-82 A motion was approved at the August 3rd Planning
Commission meeting to amend Chapter 18.44 , M-4
Industrial Park Zone, to include Financial, Insurance
and Real Estate Services as a permitted use type; and
to forward to City Council.
s� s rworwwr® w
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Monthly Report Page 2
ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS - continued
ZOA 5-82 A motion was approved at the August 10 , 1982 Planning
Commission meeting to amend Section 18. 84 . 030 of
the Administrative Procedures, limiting the times
for Comprehensive Plan Revision to be heard in the
months of April and October , unless initiated by the
Commissions or Council. This ordinance shall remain
in full force and effect until January 1, 1984 , at
which time it shall become null and void. Ordinance
to be forwarded to City Council.
ZOA 3-82 A motion was approved at the August 10, 1982 Planning
Commission meeting to recommend to City Council
the amendemnt ordinance to extend the sign code
dead line to December 31, 1982.
NPO MEMBER APPOINTMENTS
NPO # 1 A motion was approved on August 3, 1982 to forward
Gareth Ott` s name to City Council for appointment
to NPO # 1.
< The following projects were acted on by the Hearings Officer during
the month of August.
SENSITIVE LANDS PERMITS
M 4 -81 Losli Inc. NPO # 5
APPLICANT: Donald & E. Howard Losli OWNER: Same
8015 S.W. Hunziker Road
Tigard, Oregon 97223
REQUEST: Sensitive Lands permit to include channel improvements
and cut and fill within the floodplain for future
development of a building.
SITE LOCATION: 8015 S.W. Hunziker Road (WCTM 2S1 1BD lot 300) .
ACTION TAKEN: Approved with conditions.
C
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Monthly Report Page 3
The following projects were acted on by the Director of Planning
and Development during the month of August.
SITE DESIGN REVIEW
SDR 14-82 Page Stevens NPO # 1
APPLICANT: Page Stevens OWNER: Same
9180 S.W. Burnham Road
Tigard, Oregon 97223
REQUEST: To construct a 1,500 sq. ft. addition to an existing
6 ,000 sq. ft. building in a C-3M Zone.
SITE LOCATION: 9180 S.W. Burnham (WCTM 2S1 2AC lot 200)
ACTION TAKEN: Approved with conditions .
SDR 15-82 John VanderWerf NPO # 1
APPLICANT: John VanderWerf OWNER: Chuck Woodard
12300 S .W. 106th P.O. Box 23303
!' Tigard, Oregon 97223 Tigard, Oregon 97223
\ REQUEST: For a Site Design Review to locate a pet store in
an existing building.
SITE LOCATION : 12442 S.W. Main Street (WCTM 2S1 2AB lot 4600)
ACTION TAKEN: Approved with conditions
SDR 16-82 Pyramid Designs NPO # 2
APPLICANT: Pyramid Designs OWNER: Fourier/Larson
10 N.E. 31st Ave. 10685 S.W. Greenburg Rd.
Portland, Ore. 97232 Tigard, Oregon 97223
SITE LOCATION: 10865 S.W. Greenburg Road (WCTM 1S1 35B lot 1202)
ACTION TAKEN: Approved with Conditions .
SDR 19-83 Tradewell Stores/Prairie Market NPO # 1
APPLICANT: Tradewell Stores Inc. OWNER: Pacific Gamble Robinson
7890 South 188th St. 10829 N.E. 68th
Ken, Washington 98032 Kirkland, Wn. 98033
C SITE LOCATION: 8959 S.W. Commercial St. (WCTM 2S1 2AD lot 1203)
ACTION TAKEN: Approved with conditions.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Monthly Report Page 4
MINOR LAND PARTITIONS
MLP 5-82 Forrest Cowgill NPO # 7 & 2
APPLICANT: Forrest Cowgill OWNER: Same
Rt. 4 PO Box 354A
Sherwood, Oregon 97140
SITE LOCATION : 10525 S .W. Tigard Street (WCTM 1S1 34D lot 3400)
ACTION TAKEN: Approved with conditions.
MLP 7-82 Oregon Education Association NPO # 4
APPLICANT: Oregon Education Association OWNER: Same
6900 S.W. Haines Road
Tigard, Oregon 97223
SITE LOCATION: 6900 S.W. Haines Rd. (WCTM lSl 36DA lot 2300)
ACTION TAKEN : Approved with conditions.
t
TEMPORARY USE PERMITS
TU 12-82 Southern Pacific NPO # 5
APPLICANT: Southern Pacific Co. OWNER: Same
800 N.W. Sixth
Union Station
Portland, Ore. 97209
SITE LOCATION: 15200 S .W. 72nd Ave. (WCTM 2S1 12D lot 200)
i
ACTION TAKEN: Approved for sixty days , application scheduled for
City Council on Sept. 27, 1982 for Temporay Use
for one year.
(
4
i
[L1
b H •4 {� M
41
41
N.14
LJ O
•O; 0
[� y w
G
-4 ao
a. d
41 to
6
-3+ CLO e
:3..4 ® tr 4"1
az 4 �;
a o
41
U w -0
i O
N
t ® t
-4
41 Pa A u
x z 41
w
0
V o
EA
y o d Ns
•� z
CO3 rd S3 C)C4 E4 A A
914
ca ®
Ow
H
}'
a 44
60
C/3
a, •N m yr o
w
bo
d
� o ` i
ra 93 V.
P4 r.4
fa w Ea
b p � to 'O d
7 -ami .� = •u+
L ^ '� •N semCj -
+ N C: Pteo
P-4 P.
.o -o u :3 a ar w
C r. U pa
� `.
as Op ir1 H y� O w
41 z c to a
0 10W go
r ami w V d p u o d p v cd to s+ go Li
-.a CO rn V >a [: '�+ G z >+ .,{ •.t v1 �' cl O G
a1 d N N N d N >� u W Sr cJ p y C 7
CC V
P4 a to c1 A Q E to 41 u t" eld S-4
r `�, U a'a w ►a a. 1-�1 v Ems+ •�4. a. x .i z o 3
POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
AUGUST, 1982
l TO: City Administrator
FROM: Chief of Police
I. Personnel:
The department is down one from full strength this month (28) , due to
the resignation of Officer Tim Burgard. Tim resigned in order to move
to California.
The average daily department strength was 14.7 as compared to 15.2 of
August, 1981. By division the breakdown is as follows: Administration
1.8; Services Division 3.7; Patrol Division 7.7; and Investigative
Division 1.5
II. Service Delivery:
The department responded to 568 non-criminal calls for service this
month in contrast to 512 calls in 1981; year-to-date total is 3,949.
Patrol Division's obligated time was 1,150.8 hours vs. 777.2 non-
obligated hours.
III. Crime:
There were 93 Part I crimes reported this month; only 89 were reported
in August last year. Of the Part I crimes reported, 27 were cleared, or
29.0%. The department responded to 63 Part II crimes, and 24 were
cleared. There were 45 persons charged this month as compared to 54
for this same time period last year. Part I crimes increased 4.5% this
month over August of 1981.
The Investigative Division worked 23 active cases this month; and cleared
14, or 60.9°A of the active cases.
The property loss was $26,904.72, and $2,758.51 was recovered, or 10.3%
IV. Traffic:
Patrol Division responded to 41 accidents, of that number 9 were injury,
and we also had 1 fatal accident. There were 120 citations issued, as
compared to 175 for this same time period last year. In addition, 55
warnings were given. The enforcement index was 8.00
V. Police Reserves:
The Reserve Unit worked 186 hours this month assisting the department
in policing the community. The majority of this time was spent out in
the community on patrol and assisting citizens.
See attached monthly report from the Reserves for a complete breakdown
of their activities.
aes®�sa�aaawa�a.�
' E
r
's
VI. Community Relations:
A. Town and Country Days - Parade and Auction. Many hours were spent
{ by both the police and reserves during Town and Country Days, especially
Saturday doing traffic control during the parade, and holding the police
auction. A tonal of $2,955.50 was realized from the sale of property at
the auction.
B. On August 25, both the Chief and Lt. attended a metro law enforcement
dinner at Marika's Restaurant. This was held so all new police administrators
from the various metro agencies could be introduced to everyone. The dinner
lasted 3 hours, and approximately 50 administrators were in attendance.
1
C. On August 27, the Chief and Lt. attended a meeting at the Ramada Inn.
Topic disucssed was Measure 3, and what interchange of resources from
various law enforcement agencies would be available should it pass. This i
lasted 5 hours.
i
D. On August 26, Sgt. Martin and the Lt. gave a 2 hour community crime
watch program to approximately 50 Summerfield residents.
E. On August 31, Chief Adams attended a meeting at City Hall, whereby
the city staff met with the candidates for City Council positions, and
gave them an orientation of city programs.
F. ICAP Presentation. Officer Grisham spent 2 hours on August 11,
giving a presentation on ICAP and its capabilities to the Chief of
Police at Prineville Police -Department. _
G. Golf Tournament. Officer Grisham organized the annual Tigard Police
Officers' Association charity golf tournament held on August 9 at Progress
Downs. Several officers and Services Division personnel assisted to
make it a successful tournament. Total monies realized was $3,000;
$2,100 of which is going to the Kiwanis Crippled Children's Camp, and the
remaining $900 is going to purchase additional playground equipment for
Cook Park.
Respectfully submitted,
R.B. Adams
Chief of Police
RBA:ac
F
t
r
f
C
f
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CONSOLIDATED MONTHLY REPORT
FOR
MONTH OF AUGUST 19 82
( DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL
AVERAGE
NU4ERICAL STRENGTH. DAILY ABSENCE �� AVERAGE EFFECTIVE STRENGTH
End of Same This Same This ! Last Same
this Month Month Month Month � Month Month
Month Last Last Last
Year Year Year
COTAL PERSONNEL 28 29 13.3 13.8 14.7 15.0 15.2
'HIEF'S OFFICE 3 3 1.2 1.3 1.8 1.6 1.7
SERVICES DIVIS. 7 7 3.3 3.2 3.7 3.2 3.8•
?ATROL DIVISION 15 16 7.3 7.8 7.7 8.3 8.2
CRAFFIC DIVIS. ------- ------------------ --------- --------- -------- ------- --------
ENVEST. SECTION 3 3 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.9 1.5
FORCE ONE 12 13 5.1 6.6 6.9 6.5 6.4
FORCE TWO 9 9 10 4.5 4.8 4.5 5.1 5.2
Tyr` THREE 7 1 6 3.7 2.4 3.3 3.4 J 3.6
CHANGES IN PERSONNEL DAILY AVERAGE PATROL STRENGTH
1. Present for duty end of last month 29 This Same Month
2. Recruited during month p Month Last Year
. Reinstated during month p 1. Total number field i
officers -5 16
-Total to account for 29
2. Less Agents Assig-
�. Separations from the service: ned to Investiga t. O 0
(a) Voluntary resignation 1 3. Average daily abs-
(b) Retirement 0 ences of field off-
icers owing to:
(c) Resigned with charges pending 0 (a) Vacation, cusp- .
(d) Dropped during probation p ension, days off, -
comp. time, etc. 7.1 7.2
•(e) Dismissed for cause 0 (b) Sick & Injured .2
(f) Killed in line of duty 0 (c) Schools, etc. .6 -
(g) Deceased _ 0 Total average daily
absences 7.3 - 7-.8
Total separations 1 ,
. �+. Available for duty 7.7 8.2 -
. Present for duty at end of month 28 _
Page one
MEN A
TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT
Monthly Report
I. Calls for Service: This Month 724 Year to Date 5,323
A. Obligated Time 1,150.8 B. Non-Obligated Time 777.2
t F
II. PART I CRIMES
No. Cleared Arrests t
A. Homicide
B. Rape
C. Robbery 2
D. Assault 9 ` 4
E. Burglary 28 5 5 F
F. Larceny 51 17 15
G. Auto Theft 3
Totals 93 27 24
III. PART II TOTALS * 63 24 21
TOTAL - Part I and II
156 51 45
` PERSONS 45
IV. TOTAL P RSON CHARGED: �
a. Adult Male 21 C. Juvenile Male 12
b. Adult Female -7 d. Juvenile Female 5
V. WARRANTS SERVED 10
VI. TOTAL PROPERTY LOSS $ 26,904.72 TOTAL PROPERTY RECOVERED $, 2,758-51 '
VII. TRAFFIC
a. Accidents Investigated 41 Injury Accidents 9 Fatal 1
b. Citations: VBR (Speeding) 20 Yield Right of Way-1—
Following
ay7Following too Close 3 Red Light 15 Stop Sign 8
Improper Turn 2 Reckless Driving 1
Careless Driving 9 Driving Under the Influence 3
Driving While Suspended 2 Other Hazardous 10
Non-Hazardous 40 Total Hazardous 80 ,
C. Enforcement Index 8.00
d. Traffic Enforcement Totals
Citations: This Month This Year 120 Year to Date 1,539
This Month Last Year 175 Last Year to Date 1757
Warnings: This Month This Year 55 Year to Date 555
This Month Last Year 23 Last Year to Date 459
NOTE: Part I Crimes (Major Crimes) Clearance Rate 29.0%
* » Part II Crimes (Minor Crimes) Clearance Rate 38.1a
6A o
14
PATROL
PATROL
V ) '� DRIVING
C
DIRECTED
:V PATROL
l _
All
-TRANSPORT
'\ PRISONER
• w- �' C„3 COURT -
CLASSROOM
TRAINING
DISPATCH
` OFFICE
e COMMUNITY
RELATIONS
\ REPORT
cq \ e �, WRITING
ACADEMIC
(,3 SPECIAL
DETAILS- -
�✓°� ADMINISTRATIC
OTHER -
• OTHER
OTHER -
3 C TOTAL.
O
. • � HOURS . .
� Sv (,�y NUMBE OF
v
o rn
CITATIONS
WARNINGS \ �
WRITTHN•
WARNINGS Aa gy \� � .•-
VERBAL
SUSPICIOUS
PERSONS t.
SUSPICIOUS .� \
VERI CLIE S
o
ARREST � . • ® -
ARREST (,J
ASr TST -
VACATION
CHECKS
PIR°S
OTHER
- -
r mama
September 16, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Doris Hartig, City Recorder AV--
SUBJECT: Plaid Pantry OLCC Application - Durham & Hall Location
Per your request of Monday, September 13th, staff has investigated the
application process for the Durham/Hall location of the Plaid Pantry Store.
Tigard City Council minutes of June 1, 1981 reflect that the full Council
voted unanimously to approve an application for that location. (Attached is a
copy of the minutes from that meeting. )
Staff has contacted OLCC and found that the application has been approved by
that office and is being held until construction of the store is completed.
On this date, staff requested OLCC to hold the application as pending to give
the Council a chance to look at this issue again. OLCC has put a hold on the
application for two weeks. The OLCC office advised that if Council wishes to
rescind their previous approval a letter must be sent to that effect with the
reasons not out in full.
The Chief of Police recommends Council rescind their previous action and
request OLCC deny the application for the following reasons:
There is an application approved for a Plaid Pantry store at the
corner of Hall and Bonita; which location is too close to allow
another at Durham.
Plaid Pantry representative, Mr. Roger Staver, advised staff and
Council that if the site at Bonita and Hall was approved, there
would not be any construction occur at the Durham/Hall site.
(i) Council discussed the possibility of giving the residential
properties an assessment deferral interest-free, until the
property is sold or a zone change is requested.
Council requested Legal Counsel investigate the possibility of
deferring assessments interest-free for residential properties
and also whether Bancroft funding could be used at the time pay-
ments begin on the property.
Legal Counsel will report back at the next Council meeting .
(j ) Consensus of Council was to not limit the City' s percentage of
participation in the project until bids were received and a
cost is determined.
(k) Council approved by unanimous vote the motion to send to bid.
(1) Staff was instructed to prepare an ordinance to formally adopt
decision made by Council . and present at June 8th Council meeting.
RECESS : 9 :35 P.M.
RECONVENE: 9 :53 P.M.
5. OLCC APPROVAL
(a) Chief of Police requested Council approve two liquor licenses .
Godfather Pizza , SW Pacific Highway and Plaid Pantry, corner
of Hall Blvd. and Durham Road.
(b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Brian to
approve and authorize forwarding to OLCC.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council .
.5. CANVASS OF VOTE - Loaves and Fishes
(a) City Recorder stated the Loaves and Fishes measure on the May
19th ballot passed with 950 votes Yes and 355 votes No. She
recommended Council approve the canvass of the vote .
(b) :motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilwoman Stimler to
accept the canvass of the vote.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council .
7. STATUS REPORT - Street Vendors
(a) Acting City Administrator reported that copies of ordinances
from other cities dealing with this issue have been received
and do not address the concerns of the City.
C Council suggested that City Attorney meet with staff and work
out an acceptable solution to the issue and report back at a
future study session.
" PAGE 5 - COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, June 1 , 1981
or��as
d- y
September 16, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning Division 1
SUBJECT: Cambridge Square Subdivision Approval
On September 7, 1982, the Planning Commission approved a 6 lot subdivision
(S 5-82) and Phase I of a planned development (PD 7-82) on property at 11820
and 11900 SW 98th Avenue. The Planning Commission attached conditions to the
approval (see attached) .
Condition 06 reads "The 32 foot section of road off 98th Avenue shall be a
public street."
The developer is proposing a 32 foot right-of-way to be paved with no
sidewalks on either side. The Public Works Director has indicated that public
streets Faust be constructed to approved City standards which include a 50 foot
right-of-way with sidewalks on both sides.
Staff requests that City Council review the conditions attached to the
subdivision and phase I approval by the Planning Commission, particularly
conditions #6.
lur
The sketch below is made solely for the purpose of assisting in locating said premises and the Company assumes
no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions and location ascertained by actual survey.
Pioneer National Tit' Insurance Company
A TICOR COMPANY
I � �
s
r r
�''` t nba ��nr 1 �J•
,gVL, "W,,- 436 j..
'sa'w -(414.27)
6 66th 1` a y'57 w
3.2 0 1 1900 '
3.7 I
ml
OD
a m � /. 60 Ac. j
0
Al 89a 5a'E 369-92
O p
1,4 c.r, r7l
JR G N 82-59' E6.66 Cn( 4363)
219.sj 21S�5
1 2000 2100
1
.32AC. n .74 s1 C.
r S 5924 2 600
(
C.S. 5335 v ,,
2001
:,
34 4c. ° 1 Q1 A
\oo , ci9 15 219.15'
2244 _ 2500
0COAc.� � L
s o M
oo�� 2403
C.S. 3493
0
c _ r
\ ( K ti9 SyC t 53tl.3 1 _
\ \ � e.65c:n
2 300
\ N �r
1.7s a c. N
t uAkkr= ;i it !/ y fit- �h i u cziJl6's !/ ice%'%Sdii<i; is• ? s/ G ?a ? I
SOUTH LINE OF NORTH HALF Of jONN L. HICKL+N 1�
\ SEE MAP !
7c 1 7 PA I
1
air_—
C11Y OF TWA PM
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION
1. The final decision was filed by:
PLANNING COMMISSION
concerning PD2-:82 S 5-82 on September 7 , 1982
Case Number Date
2. Name of Owner: Century 21 Homes , Inc.
3. Name of Applicant: Century 21 Homes , Inc.
Address 7412 S.W. Beaverton Hillsdale HwyGity Tigard State Oregon
4. Location of Property:
Address 11820 & 11900 S.W. 98th Ave.
Legal Description Wash. Co Tax Map 1S1 35CD lot 22.00 & 2300
5. Nature of Application:
General Plan Review and approval of a six
lot subdivision on .58 acres . as Phase I of. Cambridge Square
6. Action: Approval as requested
XX Approval with conditions
L� Denial
7. Notice: *Notice was published in the newspaper & was mailed to:
aThe applicant & owners
Owners of record within the required distance
The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization
QAffected governmental agencies
*If there are questions regarding the names of the persons or agencies who
received notice, this information is available at the Planning Department.
8. Final Decision:
The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of condition can be
obtained from the Planning Director, City of Tigard, City Hall, 12755 SW
Ash, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223.
In the case of a decision on an application for a variance, the applicant
must acknowledge this form and return it to the City of Tigard, Planning
Director, before any builuing permits will be issued or engineering approval
given.
Signature of Applicant or Applicant's Agent Date
9. Appeal: An appeal E] has been filed X}{ has not been filed.
Note: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision. Please see
the appeals procedure on the reverse side of this notice.
10. Questions: If ,you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard
Planning Department, 639-4171.
CONDITIONS-
1. The applicant shall apply for Preliminary Plan, General Plan
and Subdivision approvals for Phase II of Cambridge Square
at a later date.
2. The applicant shall. submi.t sewer...improvement plans, all street
improvement plans, all water improvements plans and storm drainage
improvement plans to the City Engineering Division to be approved
prior to- issiiance of any-Building Permits.
3 . Full half-street improvements shall be made to S.W. 98th. These
Improvements shall be bonded for .100% of the estimated construction
costs prior to issuance of any Building Permits. In addition,
a bond shall be posted. for 100% of. the cost of water, sewer and
storm drain improvements required to serve. the site prior to
issuance of any Building Permits. ,
4 . The on site street improvements shall be completed prior to the
issuance of Occupancy Permits.
5. No changes shall be made to approved plans without approval of
the appropriate City Department.
6. The 32 ' section of road off 98th Ave. shall be a public street.
7. A sidewalk shall be constructed on at least one side of the
street and the cul-de-sac.
STAFF REPORT �--�
PAGE 5
l
5 . APPLICABLE OREGON REVISED STATUTES SECTIONS
Staff has attached applicable ORS sections to this report
(attachment "E") .
C. STAFF ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
After careful review of the technical data submitted by the
applicant, it is the opinion of the City Engineer and staff
that the fill presently in place, if offset by the excavation
proposed by the applicant, does not violate the intent or
purpose of the floodplain district. Further, 100 feet of green-
way/open space buffer will remain between this site and the
land designated single family to the west. It is staff 's
opinion that 100 feet is adequate for the purpose intended
for the Greenway. The applicant's proposal will not reduce
the capacity of the floodplain area, raise the flood surface
elevations or flow rates, adversely affect flow direction or
create a hazard to public health, safety and general welfare.
Remaining issue regarding this proposal involves the Greenway
Bikeway System. In accordance with the adopted Parks and
Open Space a bike path is to be constructed along Fanno Creek
within the Greenway area. (see attached map Exhibit "F" . )
When development occurs adjacent to greenway area, it is the t
responsibility of each property proposing development to
complete their portion of the Greenway Bikeway SystQm, .or at
a minimum acquire an estimate for the construction of the
bike path and submit a deposit to the City to cover the cost
of construction.
Staff recommends approval Of the Sensitive Lands Permit allowing
the new fill to remain and permitting the excavation as proposed
with the following conditions:
1. A soils investigation by an approved soils engineer of the
area to be filled shall be made before and after the filling
and excavation occurs.
2. The material used for stream bank protection shall be as
required on attached plan from the City of Tigard Drainage
Plan. (figure # 6 .1) The rip rap shall go in prior to
November 15 , 1982.
3 . All lands remaining in the 100 year floodplain shall be
dedicated to the public prior to the issuance of any permits.
The dedication document shall be recorded with Washington
County after it is approved by the City.
l
STAFF REPORT
PAGE 6
Conditions continued:
4 . A plan showing the topography of the entire site and
potential areas of cut and fill, if any, as a guide for
determining Greenway boundaries, shall be submitted
prior to permit approval.
5. The applicant shall construct a bikeway to City standards
the length of subject property, to meet the approval of
the City Engineer; or at a minimum the applicant shall
submit to the City an estimate for the cost of construction
for the bikepath and a deposit to cover those costs.
Should the permit not be approved the new fill shall be removed
prior to November 15 , 1982 .
It
PREP D BY: Elizabeth A. NewtWh APPROVED BY: William A. Mo n
Associate Planner Director of Planning
and Development
REVIEWED BY: Frank A. C rie
Public Works Director
September 16, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning Division
SUBJECT: Sensitive Lands Permit - Jadco Chemical - 74th & Durham
Attached is a draft copy of the staff report on the sensitive lands permit
request by Jadco Chemical for the property at 74th and Durham Road. The
Public Worts Director will review this item on Friday, September 17th and his
changers and additions will be available at the Council's September 20th
meeting.
lw
s
t
t
i
i
i
i
(fkft
i
t
t
r
n
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 2. 1
CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER
SEPTEMBER 23 , 1982 - 7:00 P.M.
DURHAM WASTE TREATMENT PLANT - CONFERENCE ROOM
Corner of S.W. Durham & S.W. Hall
Tigard, Oregon
A. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. GENERAL INFORMATION
CASE: M 2-82 Sensitive Lands Permit
REQUEST: For a Sensitive Lands Permit to include landscape
and fill within the floodplain, for future development
of a building and landscaping.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on staff analysis of the technical
information. supplied by the applicant and
site inspection, staff recommends that the Hearings Officer
approve the Sensitive Lands Permit with the conditions listed
on Page of the staff report.
APPLICANT: John & Janice Duncan OWNER: Same
16055 S.W. 74th
Tigard, Oregon 97223
LOCATION: 16055 S.W. 74th (WCTM 2S1 13A lot 1500)
LOT AREA: 6 .9 acres
PRESENT ZONE DESIGNATION: M-3 Light Industrial
NPO COMMENT: No comments from NPO # 5 had been received at
the writing of this report.
PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED: 18 public notices were mailed to
surrounding property owners on
September 13, 1982. One written response was received and
is attached as Exhibit "A" .
2. BACKGROUND
On July 21, 1982, the Public Works Director wrote a memo to
the City Council which is attached as Exhibit "B" . The owner
had filled in the floodplain area of his property without a
Sensitive Lands Permit. A Sensitive Lands Permit was filed
on September 7, . 1982.
STAFF REPORT M 2-82
PAGE 2
f 3. VICINITY INFORMATION
The property to the northeast and south is developed for
industrial uses.
The western portion of the property is within the 100 year
floodplain. Fanno Creek runs southerly through the property.
All of the land within the 100 year floodplain is designated
greenway/open space on the Comprehensive Plan. The property
west of the greenway is currently designated urban low density
residential.
4 . SITE CHARACTERISTICS
There is an existing warehouse on the site which occupies
approximately a of. the total land area. A little more than
40% of the property lies within the 100 year floodplain.
The property slopes toward Fanno Creek.
B. APPLICABLE LAND USE POLICIES AND STAFF ANALYSIS
1. LCDC GOALS AND GUIDELINES
a. Citizen Involvement - The intent of this goal is to
F insure the opportunity for citizens to be involved
in all phases of the planning process. Owners of
record within 250 feet of the site were notified by
mail on September 13 , 1982 . In addition, a legal
notice was published in the Tigard Times on September
9 , 1982.
b. Land Use Planning - All applicable LCDC goals and
guidelines, NPO # 5 policies and Tigard Municipal
Code sections have been considered in review of this
application.
C. Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural
Resources - The intent of this goal is to protect
land which may have a value as open space, historic
or natural resource areas . There are twelve resources
to be considered in review of this goal. The resources
applicable to the applicant's proposal are as follows:
1. Land needed or desirable for open space; a portion
of this site is designated greenway on the City's
adopted Parks and Open Space Plan. There is a
bike path proposed for the greenway in this area
but no other greenway uses are proposed. There
is 100 feet of greenway between the residential
lands to the west and the area the property owner
° has filled.
q
STAFF REPORT M 2-82
PAGE 3
2 . Water areas , westlands , water sheds and groundwater
resources. A portion of the property lies within
the 100 year floodplain of Fanno Creek. The
applicant is proposing to remove approximately
yards of earth sloping to the 100 year floodplain
to mitigate the fill which will allow for construction
of a new building in the future . Section 18.57 . 070
of the Tigard Municipal Code addresses standards --
for
for reviewing proposals to cut and fill within the
floodplain.
d. Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards - In thy..
flooding is a concern. The excavation proposed by the,
applicant will be done to meet the requirements of the
City under Section 18.57 .070 of the Tigard Municipal Code.
This code section prohibits any fill or excavation which
would reduce the capacity of the floodplain area or raise
flood surface elevations or adversely affect flow direction
on upstream or downstream properties.
e. Economy - The purpose of this goal is to improve and
encourage diversification of the State's economy.
Economic growth and expansion of existing businesses
should be encouraged by the City. However, the benefits
of encouraging business expansion in this case need to
be weighed against the effect of the applicant's
proposal on the floodplain and flood control measures .
f. Public Facilities and Services - The intent of this goal
is to insure the availability of public services to
developing areas. Sewer, water and storm drainage are
available to service the site. Specif is locations will
be addressed at the time future development occurs.
2. APPLICABLE NPO # 5 POLICIES
POLICY 22 . The industrial portion of the NPO is seen as an
economic asset to Tigard community and land use decisions
which affect this area must be judged according to their
economic implication.
3 . APPLICABLE POLICIES FROM ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AND OPEN SPACE
PLAN
POLICY 1. Designate areas of physical limitation (poorly
drained, seasonally flooded, ground instability) and incorporate
these designations in the City Zoning Ordinance and Map, and
develop graduated development restrictions according to the
distinct characteristics of the constraints and anticipated
limitations.
A portion of the site is designated greenway/floodplain and
is subject to requirements under Chapter 18. 57 of the Tigard
Zoning Code.
STAFF REPORT M 2-82
PAGE 4
Policy 5 . The City shall adopt an ordinance to regulate
the removal and/or replacement of existing natural vegetation
in designated areas, e.g. floodplains , drainageways, areas
of high visibility, unique habitats, or rare species.
Significant trees or stands of lumber shall be protected.
Chapter 18.57 of the Tigard Municipal Code regulates activity
within the floodplain.
4 . APPLICABLE POLICIES FROM THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE
Chapter 18.57 Sensitive Lands
a. 18 .57 .010 Statement of Intent - The floodplain district
has for its purpose the preservation of natural water
storage areas within the floodplain_ district by dis-
couraging or prohibiting incompatible uses.
b. 18 57 040 Uses and Activities allowed with a Special Pemit.
(2) (B) Any change in the topography or terrain which would
change the flow of waters during flooding periods , or
which would increase the flood hazard or alter the
direction or velocity of floodwater flow.
' The new fill and excavation proposed by the applicant
will alter the topography of the site.
C. 18.57 .060 Special Use Permits - The applicant has
provided the staff and Hearings Officer adequate in-
formation to make a decision on the proposal.
d. 18 .57 .070 Standards - (a) Application for a special use
permit in floodplain areas shall be granted or denied in
accordance with the following standards:
(1) No structure, fill, excavation, storage or other use
shall be permitted which alone or in combination with
existing or proposed uses would reduce the capacity of
the floodplain area or raise either the flood surface
elevation or flow rates, or adversely affect flow direction
on upstream or downstream 'roperties , or create a present
or forseeable hazard to public health, safety and general
welfare.
' The applicantb narrative (Attached Exhibit "C") addresses
standards required for action on a Sensitive ;ands Permit
to allow fill and excavation within the 100 year flood-
plain. The City Engineer has reviewed the applicant' s
narrative. His comments are attached as Exhibit "D" .
Briefly, the City Engineer finds that the proposal is
consistent with the City's "zero foot" f loodway ordinance
and .that any change in direction of flow are not detrimental
. to the health, safety and welfare of the public and will
not adversely affect upstream or downstream properties.
t
s
STAFF REPORT M 2-82 i
PAGE 5
F
5. APPLICABLE OREGON REVISED STATUTES SECTIONS
r
Staff has attached applicable ORS sections to this report
(attachement "E") .
i
3
C. STAFF ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
After careful review of the technical data submitted by the E
applicant, it is the opinion of the City Engineer and staff
that the fill presently in. place, if offset by the excavation •-
proposed by the applicant, does not violate the intent or
purpose of the floodplain district. Further, 100 feet of green-
way/open space buffer will .remain between this site and the
land designated single family to the west. It is staff's
opinion that 100 feet is adequate for the purpose intended
for the greenway. The applicant' s proposal will not reduce
the capacity of the floodplain area, raise the flood surface G
elevations or flow rates, adversely affect flow direction or
create a hazard to public health, safety and general welfare. t
Staff recommends approval of the Sensitive Lands Permit
allowing the new fill to remain and permitting the excavation z
as proposed with the following conditions:
1. A soils investigation by an approved soils engineer of the
"t. area to be filled shall be made before and after the filling
and excavation occurs. 4
2 . The material used for stream bank protection shall be as
required on attached plan from the City of Tigard Drainage
Plan. (figure # 6 .1) The rip rap shall go in prior
to November 15, 1982 .
3 . All lands remaining in the 100 year floodplain shall be
dedicated to the public prior to the issuance of any permits.
The dedication document shall be recorded with Washington
County after it is approved by the City.
4. A plan showing the topography of '.:.he entire site and
potential areas of fill shall be submitted prior to permit
approval.
Should the permit not be approved the new fill shall be
removed prior to November 15, 1982.
t(
� t
PREP ED B : E1 ' z eth A. Newton APPROVED BY: William A. Monahan
Associate Planner Director of Planning
and Development
t
t.
REVIEWED BY: Frank A. Currie
Public Works Director
EXHIBIT "A"
nD jT Se-nte-.-,nber 15, 1982
' Db 15115 S.1'1. 74th A'%re
Tigard, Oregon 97223
T I r7ar d Tenrin-,s OfficeLr%/7-),
Plannln.- Director PLA/ViVr '-'GARD
12755 S.
Ash Ave NG L)Ep,,
Tigard, Oregon 07223
D-ar Sir:
Re: Sensitivj-- Lands Permit 1-1 2-82 J--dco Chemical NPO #5
As the owner of 2 acres on S. J. 74th Ave. for 40 years or so
I think the permit should be denied and I am, wondering
1 . ':Vhy with city, county and state police passin- the corner of
74th Ave. ad Durham Ro-d this ille-al land fill on the flood
plain of Fanno Creek was ev,--r allowed to start. Each fall and
spring during flood time the .,raters of the creek easily reach
74th Ave. at this point.
2. In spite of three desist orders from the city, orders plainly
posted on trees the dumping has still gone on and Is btill in progress.
Now besides the fill dirt rubbish and ce,,-.1ent tailings are being
added to the fill to polute the creek.
3. %-.r. John Duncan or whoever is responsible for the fill should be
required to turn the area to its original state, for the loss of
this reservoir for floodwater will push the flood water farther
up the creek and caused last fall the floodin.- of the parkIng,
area. of the new apartments on Donita '
4. To the city official concerned: It should be noted that the drain-
sible for the fill, has neglected to place
r
ewer�ji?,rho was responsible,e s
a screen or orate over the mouth of the sewer where it flows Into
the creek and right now with the creek low small children could
creep into the tile -without even get-tinr, their feet wet. t. grating
C7
should be Installed at once.
Sincerely yours,
C.A. Hubbard
Carbon retained
MI
EXHIBIT "B"
July 21, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Floodplain Filling at 74th Avenue & Durham Road
An estimated 5,000 cubic yards of fill have been placed in the floodplain at
SW 74th Avenue and Durham Road without a permit.
A stop work order has been issued and the property owner given until Wednesday,
July 21, 1982, to pick up a sensitive lands application at City Hall.
This pey.m.it will require considerable engineering and soils work on behalf of
the property owner to give us the information necessary to evaluate the extent
of the impact on the floodplain, floodway, greenway and open space.
I anticipate allowing the property owner until the end of August to accomplish
the necessary engineering and hydraulics work and submit a completed sensitive
lands application.
Staff evaluation and staff report should be completed in time to allow the Hearings
Officer to render a decision in -September, in plenty of time to have any material
removed before the rainy season should that be required.
We will xeep the Council updated on the progress of this issue.
® y
I
i
i
i
i
� t
! N
- \ 7
MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Sheet 1 of 3
EXHIBIT "C"
MEI Job #182367
JADCO
INTRODUCTION
The following narrative will provide brief responses
to the Tigard Zoning Ordinance criteria for a Sensi-
tive Lands Permit. The proposal includes cut and fill
within the floodplain, for future development of build-
.ng, landscaping, and open space.
The fill material which has been placed on the site,
was obtained by the applicant from the contractor in-
stalling a new storm water drainage pipe in Durham
Road, as well as other local construction projects.
The applicant received the material after checking
with the State of Oregon. He was unaware that a per-
mit for filling, from the City, was required on the
assumption that disposing of the excess material in
this manner would be of value to all parties concern-
ed. 3
d
The filled area was previously a low depression, sub- }
ject to periodic flooding from Fanno Creek. With the
addition of the fill, the applicant will utilize the i
upland area for future building, parking and land-
scaping, while the slope, floodplain, and stream chan-
nel will remain in a natural character.
It should be emphasized that although the fill has been
placed, the applicant was not aware of the necessity of
permits, and did not intend to circumvent any regula-
tions.
In addition to the following statements addressing Sec-
tion 18. 57 (Sensitive Lands) and Part II (a) 4 of the
floodplain application, a site plan has been prepared
and accompanies the application. Also, complete engi-
neering calculations have been submitted to the Direc-
tor of Public Works.
A. The proposal will not reduce the capacity of
the floodplain area or raise either the flood
surface elevations or flow rates.
The proposal maintains the floodplain capacity
in two ways:
1. The channel flow capacity is maintained
by reducing the wetted perimeter of the
channel which reduces flow resistance
and friction, and increases the hydrau-
lic efficiency of the channel. The flood principals:
Thomas R.Macken.;-
Eric
acken.;-Eric T.Salto E
M.M.Breshears
e
0690 S.W. BANCROFT STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 PHONE 503:224-9560
MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Sheet 2 of 3
MEI Job #182367
JRDCO
profile is controlled downstream by the
constriction at the Durham Road bridge_
This constriction remains unchanged by
this proposal.
2. The storage volume of the floodplain
will be maintained by excavating areas
between the top of existing creek bank
and toe of fill slope. ,
The capacity of Fanno Creek, adjacent to the
subject property, has been calculated for the
following conditions:
1. Existing stream (prior to fill) .
2. Existing stream plus fill to date.
3. Proposed total fill, floodplain alteration.
B. The-proposal will not adversely affect the flow
direction on upstream or downstream properties.
The proposal does not include any relocation of
the main stream channel, therefore, no -redi-
rection of flood flows will occur.
4
C. Identify any foreseeable hazards to public
health, safety and welfare, and how they
will be mitigated.
The proposal will not create or increase any
hazard to the public health, safety or general
welfare since the basic drainage way character
will not change. In most cases a drainage way
is not considered hazardous, since in its
natural state a flood water rise will occur
slowly enough to pose no particular danger.
f
Currently, large boulders and trees have been
dropped over the edge of the fill. These will
be removed, as they present minor flow restric-
tions in their current location (the log could
float out and result in substantial constric-
tion in the stream channel) .
f
I
r
MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Sheet 3 of 3
MEI Job #182367
JADCO
The earthwork (cut and fill) proposed will re-
sult in no change in the 100 year flood
profile, which is consistent with the City of
Tigard' s adopted "zero foot" floodway ordinance.
(see attached General Data Sheet and Computa-
tions submitted to the City Engineer) .
D. Erosion Control.
Erosion Control must be an integral part of the
alteration proposal. The alteration increases
the average stream velocity only about 13%,
(approx..5fps. ) , however, the existing stream
velocity is detrimental to unprotected native
material.
The relatively granular fill should be rip-
rapped with 6" - 12" pit run rock to 1' above
the 100 year floodplain. The excavation area
should have an established native grass cover
prior to any major stream flows, as stream
velocities above 4 feet per second could cause
erosion of the silty-clay soil.
CONCLUSION
The proposal as herein outlined will allow industrially
zoned property to be developed to a higher level. it
has been demonstrated that the proposed modifications
to the 100 year floodplain will not cause a rise in the
flood profile; will not create re-direction or increase
in flow; will not cause erosion and sediment transport
utilizing the recommended erosion control methods.
.DL/slm
5
Y
W
r GENERAL DATA SHEET
t
Backwater Curve
100 year flow rate at Durham Road - 5903 CFS, based on Corps of Engineers Data
for river mile 1. 44. Downstream control is the Durham Road Bridge, as channel
and flood profile steepen significantly downstream of the bridge.
Mannings "n" = 0.06
Velocity Coefficient = 1.36
Control PT elevation: C.O.E. 100 year elevation, 129 .19. w
100 Year Flood Profile Elevations Before and After Construction
Sec- Elev. before Elev. after Elevation Elev. after Elevation
tion Current Fill Current Fill Change Proposed Fill/Exc. Change
0 129.19 129. 19 0 129. 19 0
A 129.62 129. 64 +.02' 129. 63 +.01
B 129.81 129. 85 +.04 ' 129. 80 -.01
C 129.99 130. 03 +.04 ' 129. 99 0
Average Stream Velocity Before and After Construction
Vel. before Vel. after Velocity Vel. after Velocity
tion Current Fill Current Fill Change Proposed Fill/Exc. Change
0 7.47 7.47 0 7.47 0
A 4 . 22 4.$6 ft/sec. +0.64 ft/sec. 4.87 +.55 ft/sec.
B 3.33 3.77 ft/sec. +0.44 f t/sec. 3.71 +. 38 ft/sec.
C 3.46 3. 43 -0.03 ft/sec. 3.09 +. 44 ft/sec.
e
� �ro of ��Qa o s tea• _ RD
COW OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON
7E RAL APPLICA'T'ION F01:JiM CASE No.
CITY OF TIC?1RD, 12755 SW Ash , PO Box 23397
RECEIPT Na.
Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171
1. GENEKAL INFOV14ATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY:
PROPERTY ADDRESS . 16055 S. W. 74th. Associated Cases:
Tigard, Oregon 97223 =
LEGAL DESCRIPTION T25 R.1W Section 13(A) TL 1500
INTERNAL PROCESSIi
SITE SIZE 6.9 acres Accepted for Pre-App. :
PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER John A. Duncan, Janice M. Duncan By:
ADDRESS 16055 S. W. 74th PHONE 684-0044
Pre
CITY Tigard, Oregon ZIP 97223
APPLICANT" Saar as owner Date &• Time:
ADDRESS PHONF, / jl"� /
_, , Accepted for Decision=
CITY Z.IP
*Where the owner and the applicant are different people , the By:
applicant must be the purchaser *of record or a leasee in .
t
Dae
Hearing -
ossession with written authorization from the owner or an
`gent of the owner with written authorization. The written
authorization must be submitted with this application. Bearing Reset To:
2. REQUIRED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION IS ATTACHEDE] YES ® NO Decision: filed & mailed—,
3. ' THIS APPLICATION INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING: APP.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment FEE FILED PAID Accepted for Appeal:
from t o icial By:
quasi-jud
legislative Date of Hearing: {
Zone Change from to
quasi-judicial 1
legislative DESCRIPTION:
Planned Unit Development Comp. Plan Designation:
concept plan detailed plan E
Subdivision NPO No.
Major Partition
Minor Partition i
Design Review Zoning District t
Conditional Use t
Variance to Zoning Ordinance Zoning 2:ap No, i
(Title 18)
Variance to Subdivision Ord. Quarter Section No. E
(Title 17) '
Sensitive Land Permit STAFF NOTES:
Floodplains i
Drainage ways
,z,. I
Steep Slopes
Other
GENIERM. APPLICATION FQIl' t - PAGE- 2 CASE No.
CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash , PO Box 23397
Tigard , Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171
T" DPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (TO BL PROVIDED BY APPLICANT) FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Notice of Response
4. DISTRICTSA • e n t
esNo _•Yes
SCHOOL DISTRICT Tigard 23 J
WATER DISTRICT Tigard Water District
FIRE DISTRICT Tualatin Rural F.P.D. -
PARK DISTRICT Tigard
•UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY - Sewer Available: YES X NO
OTHER
5.- PUBLIC UTILITIES
ELECTRICITY P.G.E.
;NATURAL GAS Pacific Northwest Natural Gas.
TELEPHONE General
OTHER
6. PUBLIC TRANSIT (TRI MET)
NEAREST BUS ROUTE AND STOP #37 & #38 at Durha-n & Boones Ferry -_
#43 at Hall & Durham
7. , OTHER INTERESTED AGENCIES (SPECIFY)
Unified Sewerage Agency
S. CHARACTER OF THE AREA
EXISTING LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION ZONE VERIFIED BY STAFF j
NORTH Vacant R 7
•SOUTH
Durham Rd. M 4
EAST 74th Avenue R 7
WEST
Vacant R 7 .
i
. -GENE-RAJ. APPLICATION' FOl:
GENE1:AL' APPLICATION FORM - PAGE 4 CASE No.
i
CITY Of TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397
lard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171
19. The following is ®� 'is not required.* t. �;':" j
2O. Overall Site Deve lop-ant j
Residential CoaLmercial Industrial Open Space Other Roads Total
+ Future ( arking) J64 No. of acres Bu:ticli�ng areior square 3000 3,00
feet per use 7800
Percent of
site -260 96.4% — 1 %
covers e
Type of Residential Use and Characteristics
of Bedrooms/Unit
Type of Use # of Units EFF. 1 2 3 14 1 Proposed Density
EH I I
• i
- E
Where applicable, please explain how the open space , common areas and recreational
• facilities will be maintained.
1 l
i
c
F
r
if the project is to be completed in phases , please describe each phase of the project.
VF
u
IF
•'ENER61- APPLICATION FORM - PACE 5 CASE No.
CITY OF TIGARD. 12755 SW Asti , PO Box 23397
Tigard , Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171
_sIE FOLLOWING PEOPLE, AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT, SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF EACH HEARING.
(e.g. Attorney, Surveyor , Engineer) Staff Notice
Notice Report Decision of Review
Name Dave Tarson/Mackenzie Engineerir:g
Street 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street =
Cit Po a d State nu zip 9720
Plaine
• Y�
Stree t
city State zip
Name
Stree t
city State zip
Flame
Stree t
City State Zip
4PPLTCANT
t
OWNER ,
EXHIBIT "D"
1 . City Engineer has reviewed all calculations presented with the application
and finds that the proposed alterations to the site are consistent with
the citt.gs adopted"zero"foot/floodway ordinance and further, that any
increase! in velocity or change in direction of flow are not detrimental
to the health, safety and welfare of the public and will not adversely
affect upstream or downstream properties. The city engineer also finds
that the proposed changes actually increase the hydraulic efficiency of
the stream.
2. s:: applicant to provide a plan for development of the coi7plete parcel .
(At least on this side of the creek) If no more filling is proposed in
the 100-year floodplain, then all land in the 100-year floodplain after
all proposed filling should be dedicated to the public for greenway
purposes.
3. Contribution to proposed bike trail system should be required in lieu of
of construction of a bike trail portion at this time.
4. It appears some filling has been done in the northeast portion of the ,
property which may also be involved in an intrusion into the 100-year
floodplain. Should be "checked out."
i
EXHIBIT "E"
541.060 «A"1'iI R LAXV S
r �
f otherwise. Damage resulting from extraordi- 541.080 Suits involving water rights;
n of the elements,or parties; decree as to priorities. In any suit
nary and unforeseen actio
attributable in whole or in part to the wrong- commenced for the protection of rights to
ful interference of another person or irriga- water acquired under the provisions of the Act 4
tion, drainage, water improvement or water of 1891, pages 52 to 60, Oregon Laws 1891,
control district organized pursuant to ORS the plaintiff may make any or all Persons who
chapter 545, 547, 552, 553 or 554 with the have diverted water from the same stream or
irrigation, drainage, water supply, water source parties to the suit, and the court may
control or flood control works, which may not in one decree determine the relative priorities tri
be known to the person or irrigation, drain- and rights of all parties to the suit. Any per-
age, water improvement or water control son claiming a right on the stream or source,
district organized pursuant to ORS chapter not made a party to the suit, may become such
545, 547, 552, 553 or 554 for such length of on application to the court, when it is made to `1
time as would enable the person or irrigation, appear that he is interested in the result, and ='
drainage,water improvement or water control may have his right determined.The court may
district organized pursuant to ORS chapter at any stage, on its own motion, require anyY
545, 547, 552, 553 or 554 by the exercise of persons having or claiming rights to water on `-
reasonable efforts to remedy the same, shall the stream or source, to be brought in and
not be recovered against the person or irriga- made parties, when it appears that a complete
tion, drainage, water improvement or water determination of the issue involved cannot be
control district organized pursuant to ORS made without their presence. 4 y�
chapter 545,547,552,553 or 554. -
(2) An action or suit under subsection (1) APPROPRIATION OF WATER. :?=g
of this section must be commenced within two FOR MINING AND EI.ECTRiC
years from the date when the damage is first POWER,UNDER 1899 ACT
discovered or in the exercise of reasonable 541.110 Use of water to develop min-
care should have been discovered. However, in eral resources and furnish power. The use
no event shall any such action or suit be com- of the water of the lakes and running streams -
menced more than four years from the date of Oregon for the purpose of developing the
the damage actually occurred. (1979 c.882 §11 mineral resources of the state and to furnish
r purposes, is declared to -
electric power for all purpo. a
541.060 Paste of water; flooding be a public and beneficial use and a public
premises; unnecessary diversion. Every necessity. Subject to the provisions of the _
corporation having constructed a ditch, canal Water Rights Act(as defined in ORS 537.010),
or flume under the provisions of the Act of the right to divert unappropriated waters of
1891, pages 52 to 60, Oregon Laws 1891, shall any such lakes or streams for such public and
carefully keep and maintain the embank- beneficial use is granted. -
ments and walls thereof, and of any reservoir -
constructed to be used in conjunction there- 541.120 hitches, etc., through lands-,
with, so as to prevent the water from wasting two or more prohibited; use of existing
ditch b others than owner; joint liability. .T
and from flooding or damaging the premises 3' -
of others. The corporation shall not divert at No tract or parcel of improved or occupied K
any time any water for which it has no actual land in this state shall, without the written
use or demand. consent of the owner, be subjected to the bur- '
den of two or more ditches, canals, flumes or
541.070 Ditches, canals and flumes as. Pipelines constructed under the Act of 1899, yl
real estate. All ditches, canals and flumes Pages 172 to 180, Oregon Laws 1899, for the ;moi
permanently affixed to the soil, constructed purpose of conveying water through the prop-
under the provisions of the Act of 1891, pages prop-
erty, when the same object can be feasibly and
52 to 60, 01 agon Laws 1891,are declared is be practically attained by uniting and conveying sk.r
real estate, and the same or any interest all the water necessary to be conveyed �Y
therein shall be transferred by deed only,duly through such property in one ditch, canal, ;
flume or pipeline. Any person having con- "'� •
witnessed and acknowledged. The vendee of -
the same, or any interest therein, at any stage structed a ditch, canal, flume.or pipeline for
shall succeed to all the rights of his vendor, the purpose provided in the Act of 1899 shall
and shall be subject to the same liabilities allow any other person to enlarge such ditch,
canal, flume or pipeline, so as not to interfere
during his ownership.
302 >�
iyllSCELLANEOUS pitOVISIONS _ 54I.055
ditches, canals, flumes, distributing ditches,
WATER COMPANIES I
ORGANIZED UNDER 1891 ACI' and feeders of any corporation appropriating
water under the provisions of the Act of 1891,
541.010 Furnishing of water for cer- across all lands belonging to' the State of
tain purposes declared to be a public Oregon and not under contract of sale, is
utility; rates; amendment of law. (1) The granted. ! i
use of the water of the lakes and running 541.040 Headgate; mode of construe-
streams of Oregon, for general rental, sale or tion. Every corporation having constructed a
distribution, for purposes of irrigation, and ditch, canal or flume under the provisions of
supplying water for household and domestic the Act of 1891, pages 52 to 60, Oregon 1,83ws
consumption, and watering livestock upon dry
i lands of the state, is a public use, and the 1891, shall erect and keep in good repair a
right to collect rates or compensation for such headgate at the head of its ditch, canal or
flume, which, together with the necessary
use of water is a franchise. A use shall be embankments, shall be of sufficient .height
deemed general within the purview of this and strength to control the water at all ordi-
section when the water appropriated is sup-
nary stages. The framework of the headgate
plied to all persons whose lands lie adjacent to f
or within reach of the line of the ditch, canal shall be of timber not less than four inches
or flume in which the water is conveyed,with- square, and the bottom, sides and gate shall
out discrimination other than priority of con- be of plank not less than two inches.in thick- }
tract, upon payment of charges therefor, as
mess. �
long as there may be water to supply. 541.050 Leakage or overflow; liabili-
tion. Every corporation having
(2) Rates for the uses of water mentioned t3'. exception.
cted a ditch, canal, flume or reservoir
in this section may i,=^. fixed by the Legislative constru
Assembly or by such officer as may be given under the provisions of the Act o£ 1891, pages
that authority by the Legislative Assembly, 52 to 60, Oregon Laws l$91,shall be liable for
but rates shall not be fixed lower than will all damages done to the persons or property of
allow the net profits of any ditch,canal,flume others, arising from leakage or overflow of
water therefrom growing out of want of
or system thereof to-equal the prevailing legal
{ strength in the banks or walls, or negligence
of interest on the amount of money actu-
_ rate or want of care in the management of the
ally paid in and employed in the construction ditch, canal, flume or reservoir. However,
and operation of the ditch, canal, flume or damage resulting from extraordinary and
system. unforeseen action of the elements,or attribut-
(3) This section and. ORS 541.020 to able in whole or in part to the wrongful inter-
541.080 may at any time be amended by the ference of another with the ditch,canal,flume
Legislative Assei_'Iy, and commissioners for or reservoir, which may not be known to the
the *management of water rights-and the use corporation for such length of time as would
of---iter may be appointed. enable it by the exercise of reasonable efforts
to remedy the same, shall not be recovered
541.020 Construction of ditch, etc., by against the corporation.
corporation; route across lands. Whenever 1.055 District liability for seepage
any corporation organized under the Act of
1891,pages 52 to 60, Oregon Laws 1891,finds and leakage from water or flood control
it necessary to. construct its ditch, canal, works; limitation on commencement of
flume, distributing ditches, or feeders across action. (1)Any person or irrigation,drainage,
the improved or occupied lands of another, it water improvement or water control district
shall select the shortest and most direct route organized pursuant to ORS chapter 545, 547,
practicable, having reference to cost of con- 552, 553 or 554 that owns, operates or main-
struction upon which the ditch, canal, flume, tains any irrigation, drainage, water supply,
s distributing ditches, or feeders can be con- water control or flood control works shall be
structed with uniform or nearly uniform liable for damage caused by seepage and leak-
grade. age from such works only to the extent that
such damage is directly and proximately
j 541.030 Ditches, etc., across state caused by the negligence of the person or
t of irrigation, drainage, water improvement or
lands; grant of right of way. The righway, to the extent
1, water control
` organized pursuant to
page 2 to 60, Oregon h
Laws1891, fored in the Act of s he ORS chapter 545,district
5552,553 or 554 and not
!
301
t
CHANNEL BANK PROTECTION
®
601 .00 General
Channel bank protection is necessary when natural bank material
is unstable as discussed in Section 5. Riprap of rock, rubble masonry
with grout, sacked concrete, and broken concrete slab are most commonly
used to protect embankment or channel slopes of unstable material .
-.02_00 Rock Riprap
Rock riprap is either light loose or heavy loose riprap. Either
shoutd-be p•iaced-on a one-foot thick filtor material graded from sand _
to- 6 inch gravel to protect the original bank material from scour or i
sloughing. The filter should be graded in layers from fine to coarse
t
out to the• riprap_ Riprap thickness should be 2 feet thick for light
loose anis 3 feet thick for heavy loose riprap. The -toe of the riprap z
�- el bed a depth equal to the thickness
should be placed below the chann
of the riprap.
� s
• C
ar
Typicv/ ROC Ri ro
Fig. 6-1
UP 41
BEAVER'TON September 14, 1982
Jack Nelson
Mayor
Honorable Mayor & City Council
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
12755 S.W. Ash
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mayor and Council,nembers:
As President of the League of Oregon Cities, I have long been involved
in the questions of urban service provisions. We hear much discussion of
cross subsidization, tax inequities, double taxation and overlapping
government services.
In this era of property tax limitations and increased concern of all
citizens abcut the cost of governmental services, it is incumbent upon local
government to seek ways to deliver needed services in the most cost efficient
way possible.
In order to further this goal, it is necessary to understand how these
services are presently provided and identify the areas where intergovernmental
agreements or changes in structure can provide improved delivery at lower
costs.
As a practical opportunity, I suggest we band together and participate
in a two phase study conducted by Portland State University which will
document the costs of providing urban services in Washington County as well as
analyze -the extent of possible double taxation existing today. The study will
not address changes in structure or areas of intergovernmental cooperation but
provide a neutral analysis for developing baseline data for us all to use in
cooperative efforts to lower governmental costs.
In ordea to finance this study each City needs to pledge financial
support. The first phase, as described on the attached sheet, will cost
approximately $32,000. We are pursuing outside support to cover these costs.
If partial funding is available, we will pro-rate that funding among the
participants.
City of Beaverton . 4950 S.W. Hall Boulevard • Beaverton.,Oregon 97005 a (503)644-2191
Honorable Mayor & Councilmembers
Page 2
Please give this matter careful consideration and respond back to me by
September 28, 1982.
I have attached a proposed funding schedule for your information.
Sincerely,
C�/Jack Nelson
JN:tw
Enclosure
i
i
t
r
F`
F
i
i
f
}
E
1ici�t l inc lusts
ANALYSIS 01- JJJBA.N SLAZVILJ;S IN WASIIINGFON LA)UNT'l :
of Ll 1110 re CU'iiplL:te draft Pf'opo-sal Submitted to tile
This is a brief Ovel'vitz!w . by the Lenter for Urban Studies . 'File pro. po�,.Lj
Washington Coujity Executives group
of prO\,,idi1jg urban services by jurisdiction
.Jould lead to a study of Lll-- Costs approximately one year to COMPlete alld
11, the County. The study, would take ut I-I 11,w,:l
the -StUd)' COLIld bt: broken into two parts as 0
$62,000. Alternatively , app roxi"late 1Y
o e,; , each 1)Ilase would require
0 phases , Lidditlull",
below. if separated into tw Iwo would require an
eight months . Phase One would cost a3-_,Uoo. t
$30,000.
Phase One
baseline data oil the cost of
portion of the overall study would produce 1) county .
Phis representative jurisdictions III Washington
by represen police, roads
providing urban services or example, water, sewer, fire PrOtectlor ' on coupty
--ucli services include, f Such services are currently provided in Washingt
. ties to spt�cial
and library functions.
t1v a wide variety Of governmental jurisdictions ranging from cl
f providing these services vary by jurisdiction for a
di�,trl ts . The costs 0 structure of the providers ,
the
r.
number of reasons including the institutional overed by
preferences for type and quality of services and the geographic area c y decline
prei ernmental revenues are declining, and ma
rtle provider. in an era when gov ublic decision makers need to 1.now
further if Measure 3 passes in November, P w. d which jurisdiction of government can provide them
ijat the range of costs is aninformed decision making in tt::rnis Of
Most -*:ficiently. This would permit more i . oils(L;- g.
,,-v,-. _;,,,jig cost curtailment strategies and alternative delivery opt'
ments, transfer of functions , etc.) -
tergovernmental agree
I'Vase "Wo
the extent to which governmell
rhe �,econd phase of the study would investigate . es in incorporated versu:!
he county go to provide serv:1c
received by the of primary concern here is the manor in which property
unicorporated areas . are used to provide services to residents of
raised by the county in cities ' dents receive pattern less of service
servi- t;
unincorporated areasit fo
is and
thata
t city resi ervice
than they pay for, th. Ifere may be a need talter tile funding al
provision by the County. Such alterations could include intergovernment
greater use of service fees and charges or changt;:S in tilt!
of the relationship
transfers of revenues ,dictions provide services . Knowledge
:iattern of which juris ipt of services would permit public officials to
tsetween revenues raised and rece constituency in terms Of the value of service receive'
7110re adequately serve their cons
+(.)T rax dollar paid.
_Ijjj jig of the Study
formed by tile center for Urban Studies at Portland State
study would be per ring Committee composed of representatives from
under the supervision of a Stee Funds would be provided by
Washington County governmental jurisdictions .
turf ciictions financially capable of participating and through the soli. ItL0, 111
from other sources such as foundations , state govullIme"t ,
Of .1ticiitional support Its of the study would be available t,--
it- deral agencies. The results
Itimcntal agencies in the County.
MEN Ill 11 111111
MAYOR JACK NELSON cirl PM
CITY OF BEAVERTON WIF
4950 S.W. HALL BLVD. WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON -
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97005 September 9, 1982
SUBJECT: URBAN SERVICES STUDY
Dear Jack:
icial' s Caucus in Tigard, the issue of Urban Services--
At the May 6, 1982, Public Offssed_ It was decided that City, County and
costs and resources--was discuproposal develop a to
District staff should work with Portland State University to
study the problem and make recommendations on how we as local governments might
p
more efficiently or equitably assure the provision of urban services.
Staff or representatives from Tigard, Beaverton, Hillsboro, Tualatin, Cornelius,
Forest Grove, Sherwood, Durham, Washington County, and Wolfe Creek Water District
a
all have been meeting with Dr. Sheldon Edner of Portlan�OState.
2.)htherSeorvidework
program involves: 1.) Urban Services Analysis at $32, ,
Staff is recommending the following contributions:
Equity Study at $30 ,000 . r
CITIES COUNTY $2,500
Unified Sewerage Agency
Beaverton $ 9,000 $2,500
Cornelius
Durham SPECIAL DISTRICTS
Forest Grove $ 2,500 $2,500
Hillsboro $ 8,500 Wolfe Creek Water $2,500
Sherwood * Washington Fire #1 $2,500 i
Tigard $. 5,000 Tualatin Rural Fire $7,500
Tualatin $ 2,500
Others * PRIVATE UTILITIES
$28,000 $1,000
General Telephone $1,000
STATE OF OREGON Northwest Natural Gas 000
Intergovernmental Portland General Electric $3,000
Relations Division $2,000
$2,000
TOTAL ALL RESOURCES: $62,000
GRANT Jsmalle
H.U.D. or Foundation$19,000
$19,000
The grants by State (for Economic Development, Housing, Land Use, etc.)Private Utilities (to lower taxes and coordinate urbanization) are for tcities shares.
Since the League of Oregon Cities is suggesting that these Urban Servicissues can be best resolved at the local level, the committee felt itosbe
be
appropriate for you, as President of the League, to forward this propjurisdiction. Yours truly,
CI +rO-'F) TIGARD
Robert W Jean, City Administr
RWJ dkr '
12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
MEN
A: S Of [:R:_._: SS 'TCT_
Baseline Cost-= by 1--ype of Jurisdi ction
IN.RODUCTO-d
This is a second draft of a proposal to study and analyze the
costs of providing Urban Se . maces i:, Coun
proposed study seeks to meet two principal objectives :
S To document and compare the costs of providing urban
type services by different jurisdictions in Washington
County to provide baseline data for developing policies
concerning modes of service delivery;
® To analyze the extent of possible double taxation
resulting from the provision of County services in
unincorporated areas financed by tax revenues generated
t in incorporated areas of the County.
This proposal is preliminary and will be refined and a final
workplan developed after a concensus is reached on overall project
scope and specific work tasks . The project is anticipated to be a
cooperative venture of all major governmental jurisdictions and
special districts within the urban growth boundary of Washington
County. The final scope of work will reflect the interests and
contributions of all participating jurisdictions .
JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROJECT
The costs of governmental services have risen substantially in
recent years, particularly in urban. areas. Additionally, there
has been growing public resistance to accompanying tax increases .
Thus, local government jurisdictions have been caught in a squeeze
between the increase of providing needed services while holding
down taxes and user fees to pay for ,the services. While some
1
be - _= t _- e_'Fort t} .
progress haem _ r:`�_ _-- -- -
A fees and service charges , Lhe pc-ter._ Of se- • e Pr v4 on
and revenue generation currently available to local j __=1--ion=
is a product of many years of piecemeal development and adaptation .
In order to respond effectively to public demands for service
provision and cost reduction a more comprehensive and orderly
approach is necessary. Such an approach would entail a coopera-
tive reordering of service provision and revenue generation wit:
a_n eye to providing services in the most cost saving and effective I
manner possible .
i
In addition, the current initiative to reduce property tax revenues
poses significant challenges to all of the County ' s jurisdictions . 4
If the ballot measure passes in the Fall general election, each
jurisdiction will confront a serious and difficult process of
i
deciding where to reduce or eliminate services in the face of
continuing demand for these services. one possible solution to
this difficult situation would be a rearrangement of service
of service
provision through the transference or acceptance
delivery responsibility to the most effective and efficient
jurisdiction in the immediate vicinity. To make such a change
in service delivery will also require a prior knowledge of the
costs of providing such services vis-a-vis other jurisdictions.
To meet both of these needs, the Center for Urban Studies at
Portland State University proposes to initiate a study of the
costs of providing urban services within Washington County.
The study will require approximately one year to complete and
will cover a selected set of governmental jurisdictions within
the County. To complete the required work the Center will form
an interdisciplinary research team composed of faculty and
graduate students with the appropriate expertise in the area
of local government services and finance. The team will conduct
all research in cooperation with the participating jurisdictions
and will compile , analyze and report its findings to these
jurisdictions.
2
r..-
The following task_c will be aerformed by the research tea....
T a s I 1
Collect, analyze and present data concerning the cost Of
selected urban services provided by selected jurisdictions
(count-, , city and special district) in 1%ashincton Counz%-.
A limited samale of urban services including but not
necessarily limited to the following will be investigated:
library, water, sewer, police, fire , and roads . The final
list of services and jurisdictions will be chosen in cooper-
ation with the Technical Advisory Committee for the project.
The findings will be presented in a manner commensurate r
across jurisdictions , e .g . , per thousand gallons of water
supplied, per capita, per hundred clients served, etc.
t
Task 2
( p
Collect, analyze and present data concerning the revenue
and expenditure patterns of Washington County for all !
services. Particular attention will be paid to the source
"t
of revenues and the distribution of their expenditure (i .e . ,
who benefits from the County ' s expenditures) . In addition ,
i
the spatial distribution of services provided by Washington
County with particular emphasis on patterns of population
concentration will be analyzed.
s
t
TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT OF THE PROJECT
During all phases of the proposed research a Technical Steering
Committee composed of representatives of all financially partici-
pating jurisdictions will provide technical advice and guidance to
the research team. The research team, through the project director,
will maintain ongoing communication with the Committee through all
phases of the research and seek their advice on matters pertaining
3
r�rs or
(: t0 ]u� cvylec tion of the data . 1i1C
analysis of the data will be made availahle to the Committee in
draft form for their review and comment . Pre::)ai-aticn of the fin-=1
report will rest with the research team. Local dissemination c=
the findings will be the responsibility of the participating
jurisdictions.
In addition. to the Technical Steering Cor:Lrnittee , the research teary,
will also require the cooperation of the selected jurisdictions
in the collection and identification of data. Such cooperation is
essential to the timely and financially reasonable performance of
the study.
REPORTS
As stated above the study will require one year to complete . The
research team will prepare monthly briefings for the Technical
f. Steering Committee and provide a preliminary report of the overall
findings within nine months of contract execution. A final report
will be submitted to the participating jurisdictions after all
reviews have been completed and necessary modifications made but
no later than twelve months after execution of the contract.
FUNDING AND CONTRACTI14G {
t
It is anticipated that the study will be funded through payments
to a single contracting unit of government. The amount of each
participating jurisdiction' s share of project costs will depend
on the number of jurisdictions and the ability of these juris-
dictions to solicit supplementary funding from foundation or
other sources. The precise share will therefore be dependant on
the ability 'of the jurisdictions to solicit the widest possible
participation in the study and support from other sources.
4
The Center for Urban S zufies will contract with a single -nit of
i
gover-ri ent chosen by all jurisdictions to represent them in dealina
with the Center on the proposed project.
The total cost of the project will be $61 , 997 as detailed in the
attached budget.
i
5
BUDGET
Twelve Months
PERSONNEL
S. Edner, Principal Investigator $ 5 , 150
3 months - 40%
9 months - 10%
D. O'Toole , Research Associate 4 , 400
3 months - 330
3 months - 15%
A. Rufolo, Research Associate 5 , 800
3 months - 330
6 months - 100
L. Robinson, Research Associate 8 , 000
6 months - 800
Graduate Research Assistants 4 , 900
Clerical 2 , 550
12 months - 25%
Student Hourly 1 , 800
300 hours @ $6 . 00
$32 ,600
FRINGE 8 , 510
Faculty 28% $6 ,550
Clerical 31% 790
Student 50 330
Tuition 840
Total Personnel Costs $41, 110
CONSULTANT 9, 000
OTHER 3 , 770
Travel
Microprocessor lease
Supplies/Postage
Photocopy/Duplicating
Phone
Computer Time
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 53 , 880
F INDIRECT COSTS - Vital Partners Rate, 15% 8 , 120
"� TOTAL $62 , 000
Spl
� r/r��i� �• �I_-_ �� SZ)' �� `� ��f\�� \\\_ � 111 i
[3F-
q7
TUALATIN RIVER
r t
CURRENT CONDITIONS
The Tualatin River is a major tributary of the Willamette
River. The Tualatin River drains a 708 square mile basin
primarily located in Washington County. Land use within the
basin is predominantly agricultural , although the growth of
communities adjacent to the Portland metropolitan area, such as
Tigard, has brought increasing amounts of urbanization as well .
As part of the Washington County FIS, Jones and Associates
(Seattle, Washington) under contract to the COE computed flood
elevations along the 8.6 mile reach of the Tualatin River
-located in Washington County. The study started at the Washington ;
County line upstream to the Elsner Avenue bridge. The Tualatin
River study reach encompasses the entire 8.2 mile long southern
border of the Tigard UGB.
Floodplain maps were drawn by the COE for the 100-year flood {
along the Tualatin River. The maps show that extensive damages
will occur during the 100-year flood along the river. Most of
the damage will occur on the south overbank and within the City
of Tualatin. The 100-year flooding damage along the north over-
bank in which Tigard's UGB is located will be minor. Below is
a detailed description of the north overbank damage during thef
100-year flood along the Tualatin River.
Interstate 5 to the Southern Pacific Railroad. The north over-
bank oo ing along this 1 .1 mile reach of the river is very '`
minimal . No damage is expected during the 100-year flood.
Fanno Creek enters the Tualatin River jsut downstream of the
SPRR crossing.
Southern Pacific Railroad to Highway 99W. The flooding damages a`
along the north overbank of this 2.3 mile reach are minor. A ?"
few farmhouses just upstream of the SPRR crossing appear to be
in the 100-year floodplain. The width of the north overbank
flood plain ranges from 2,400 feet in the vicinity of 92nd
Avenue to 150 feet where tFe river bends downstream of 108th
Avenue.
Highway 99W to Elsner Ave. The north overbank flooding along
this final 4.8 mile reacF of the river is rather extensive. How-
ever the anticipated flood damages will be minor since most of
the flooded area is agricultural . Several barns and farmhouses
appear to be in the floodplain; most are located off 131st Avenue.
Several other residential structures are also located in the
floodplain. These are located in the southern portion of a
large subdivision off of Fisher Road and farther upstream off of
137th Avenue. The width of the north overbank floodplain ranges
from 50 to 3,200 feet. The 100-year flood elevation at the Eisner
Avenue bridge is projected to be well below the road surface.
mm��® M�--
RECOMMENDED PLAN
Nonstructural management of the Tualatin River flooding is
recommence or the entire reach of the river that borders on
Tigard's UGB. Continued urbanization of the Tualatin River
basin will have little effect on the existing 100-year flood-
plain drawn on the FIS maps. No channel improvements or
bridge replacements are recommended for the Tualatin River.
!y
i
CURRENT CONDITIONS
The flooding problems along this reach of Fanno Creek are n
relatively minor because the area is essentially undeveloped.
{_ Flood elevations from the mouth to the Southern Pacific
Railroad (SPRR) Bridge are controlled by backwater from the
Tualatin River. The floodplain downstream of the SPRR
crossing ranges in width from 400 to 800 feet. The flood-
plain narrows from the SPRR crossing upstream to Durham Road.
Neither the SPRR bridge nor the Durham Road bridge will be
yam.} inundated by the 100-year flood.
Ing
sG
RECOMMENDED PLAN
r
This length of the stream is subject to inundation from the
=Y 100-year flood on the Tualatin River. Nonstructural manage-
x meat of Fanno Creek flooding is recommende or t is stream
°" reach. Continued urbanization of the Fanno creek basin will
have little effect on the flood elevations along this reach
of the stream. The FIS maps remain valid for future water-
A.
ater-
¢p shed conditions. '?
5 -5
MEN Ill, t-
Cr$:
�w
{-ry
rts'
t
f•
CURRENT CONDITIONS
The floodplain width along this reach will vary from 200 to
800 feet. Residential and industrial development along SW
74th Avenue will experience some minor flood damage during
the 100-year flood. An industrial building south of Bonita
Road between SW 76th Avenue and the creek will experience
some damage. The upstream flood elevation at Bonita Road is
approximately 0.5 foot lower than the road surface over the
structure. Two houses �5st east of Hall Blvd. and next to
Fanno Creek may experience some damage. The 100-year flood
is projected to be 0.6 foot over the Hall Blvd. bridge. As
a result, the structure may Be damaged since the channel
velocities will be close to 10-feet per second (fps) .
RECOMMENDED PLAN
Nonstructural management of Fanno Creek flooding is recommended
or this stream reac However, continued urbanization of Fanno
Creek will increase 100-year peak flows approximately 40 percent
and increase flood elevations approximately 2-feet. The existing
500-year floodplain drawn on the FIS maps is a good estimate of
the future 100-year floodplain. The existing zero rise floodway
( drawn specifically for the City by the COE should be used along
this reach to ensure an adequate flow area for the 100-year
flood.
The recommended plan does not specifically call for the replace-
ment of the Bonita Road bridge. If the bridge needs replacing
because of structural problems, it should be replaced with a
40 percent larger bridge opening.
V
CURRENT CONDITIONS
t The floodplain width along this reach will vary 150 to 700
feet. Industrial , commercial , and residential structures
along both sides of the stream will experience minor flood
damages. Se%aral major industrial and commercial structures
mostly on the east side of the creek are just barely out of
the 100-year floodplain. An increase in the 100-year flood
flow caused by future urbanization of the basin could create
severe flooding problems in this reach of the creek. The
100-year flood elevtion on the upstream face of the Main
Street bridge is projected to be 1-foot lower than the road
surface. Projected stream velocities offs. may cause
some structural damage.
RECOMMENDED PLAN
Major channel improvements and two bridge replacements are
recommended for this reach of the stream:
Item Est. Engineering & Construction Cost
1 . Replacement of the
Hail Blvd. bridge $321 ,750
2. Improve 360-feet of
channel from 160-feet
downstream to 150-feet
upstream of the Hall Blvd.
bridge (see "grasslined"
channel detail ) $ 48,346
3. Improve 1550 feet
of channel , beginning at
the Main Street bridge and
running downstream (see
"grasslined" channel detail ) $165,551
($106.80/feet)
4. Replace the Main Street
bridge $293,150
7
�".S$�5!�V �.ir Jam. . .... .t. . - ...r;f .. ..,... �F�-"",�✓
r�
nay.
CURRENT CONDITIONS
The flooding problems along this reach of Fanno Creek are ;
extensive and severe. The floodplain width ranges from 100
'. to 1 ,200 feet. High floodwaters created by the Main Street r,
bridge and the upstream channel constriction will inundate ,
commercial and industrial structures on both sides of the s
creek. Floodwaters up to 1 .4 feet deep are projected to
occur in the commercial and industrial structures on both
overbanks just upstream of Highway 99W. Extensive resi-
dential flooding will occur on the west bank of Fanno Creek r
in the vicinity of the cul-de-sac north of Johnston Street. `a
Some houses will be inundated on the east side of Fanno `
Creek just downstream of Tiedeman Avenue.
The 100-year flood elevation on the upstream face of Tiedeman
Avenue is projected to be 0.2 foot lower than the road surface }
over the bridge. However, floodwaters will be approximately ``
0.8 foot deep over a low spot on Tiedeman Avenue located about ~
150 feet east of the east bridge abutment. The Grant Avenue ,
bridge, which has been inundated many times in the past, is
2i
projected to be under 2.3 feet of water during the 100-year _.. t
flood. The possibility of osing the bridge span during a s
flood of this magnitude is very great.
t$hi
RECOMMENDED PLAN =^
Major channel improvements and two bridge replacements are
recommended for this reach of stream.
R
Item Est. Engineering & Construction Cost
1 . Improve the channel
along this reach of
stream. (see "grass-
lined channel detail ) $358,314
2. Replacement of the
Grant Avenue bridge,
raise road bed and
restore pavement. $271 ,286
3. Replacement of the
Tiedeman Avenue bridge,
raise road bed and
restore pavement. $303,049
CURRENT CONDITIONS
The floodplain width along this reach of Fanno Creek ranges ,
from 250 to 800 feet. Houses along Tiedeman Avenue next to w�
Fanno Creek are projected to be inundated with floodwaters =
up to 1 .8 feet deep. The Tigard Street bridge is estimated
to be under 3.8 feet of water during the 100-year flood.
The floo T elevation over the North Dakota Street bridge is
projected to be 2.2 feet higher than the road surface. Both .;-Y-
the Tigard Street and Nortfi--Dafcota Street bridges would have
a high probability of losing their spans if a flood of this -
magnitude did occur.
RECOMMENDED PLAN
Major channel improvements and two bridge replacements are s
recommended for this reach of the stream. .;
Item Est. Engineering and Construction Cost
1 . Channel improvements
along this reach of
stream. (see "grass-
lined" channel detail ) $407,976 -
t 2. Replacement of the rpt
Tigard Avenue bridge,
raise road bed and re-
store pavement. $249,730 .
3. Replacement of the
North Dakota Avenue `s
bridge, raise road bed r
and restore pavement. $279,279
CURRENT CONDITIONS =
{ The flooding problems along this reach of Fanno Creek are
relatively minor because development has been restricted in
the floodplain. A few residential structures on Ironwood
Loop may experience minor damage during the 100-year flood.
The floodplain width along this reach of the stream varies
from 250 to 950 feet. "
3^�
RECOMMENDED PLAN
F y
Nonstructural management of Fanno Creek flooding is recommended
ort is stream reac Continued urbanization of Fanno Creek will
increase the 100-year peak flows and flood elevations. However,
an oversight by the COE has resulted in floodplain maps that are
currently showing the projected extent of flooding under ultimates .
planned watershed development.
ASH CREEK
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Ash Creek is a major tributary of Fanno Creek, and it enters
Fanno from the east approximately 400 feet upstream of North ,
Dakota Street. Ash Creek drains a 4.1 square-mile area that
is predominantly residential in land use. As part of the
Washington County FIS, the COE computed flood elevations along
a 1 .5 mile reach of Ash Creek from its mouth to Hemlock Street. Y
s:
Floodplain maps were also drawn by the COE for the 100-year
flood along Ash Creek. The maps show that some flood damage
would occur along Ash Creek if the 100-year flood occurred.
The following is a detailed description of the 100-year flooding
problems along Ash Creek. €
Mouth to Highway 217. The floodplain width along this reach of A ,
s--h—Creek variesrom 100 to 900 feet with the greater widths
occurring downstream of Greenburg Road. An industrial building
located on the southeast overbank of the creek between the
Southern Pacific Railroad and Greenburg Road may suffer some
minor damage. One residential structure appears to be within
the 100-year floodplain. It is located on the northwest over- -
bank approximately 600 feet upstream of Greenburg Road. Some
new apartment buildings exist on the southeast overbank just
upstream from Greenburg Road. They do not appear on the COE
floodplain map; however, they may be within the 100-year
floodplain.
The 100-year flood is projected to be 0.1 foot over the Green- q
burg Road bridge. Estimated channel velocities through the
Greenburg Road bridge are only 3.6 fps, so little structural
¢; damage is expected if a flood of this magnitude occurred.
Neither the SPRR bridge nor the Highway 217 crossing will be
inundated by the 100-year flood. " .
Highway 217 to Hail Blvd. The flooding problems along this
reach of the creek are relatively minor because the floodplain
area is essentially undeveloped. The floodplain width ranges
in this reach between 100 and 900 feet. A house located on
the northwest overbank of Ash Creek just downstream of Oak
Street is within the 100-year floodplain. The 100-year flood ;F
elevation at the upstream face of the concrete box culverts
under Oak Street is estimated to be 1 .3 feet below the road
surface. However, floodwaters are projected to flow at the
approximate depth of 0.8 foot over the road surface at the
Hall Blvd. culvert crossing. Little or no structural damage
would be expected if a flood of this magnitude occurred.
Hall Blvd. to Hemlock St. The floodplain width along this reach
of the creek ranges from 100 to 550 feet. A house located on AJ
the west overbank downstream of Locust Street is in the flood-
plain. An apartment building on the east overbank just upstrem
C ` of Locust Street also is in the 100-year floodplain. Flood-
waters are projected to be approximately 3.4 feet over Locust
Street at the Ash Creek culvert crossing. The 100-year flood a .A�
is estimated to overtop the Hemlock Street culvert crossing by
2.1 feet. Both of these culverts may suffer severe damage during
' .. the 1Q0.-year flood sart�e,..ct�a , 1� v'0 ya '°'z x
p
k RECOMMENDED PLAN
Nonstructural management of Ash Creek flooding is recommended
for the entire length of the stream included in the FIS. Con-
tinued urbanization of the Ash Creek basin will not significantly
increase the 100-year flood elevations along the creek. There-
fore, the FIS floodplain maps remain valid for future watershed
conditions. Existing flooding problems along the creek could be s
reduced through the improvement of the Oak Street, Hall Blvd. ,
and Locust Street culvert crossings. These culvert replacements
are not officially part of the recommended plan. If the crossings
ever have to be upgraded for other reasons, however, such as road
improvements, they should be designed to pass the 100-year future
discharge of 890 cfs.
y-•
T
!p A
MILM
SUMMER CREEK
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Mouth to 121st Avenue. The flooding problems along this reach
of the creek are re atively minor because the floodplain area
is essentially undeveloped. The floodplain width ranges in
this reach between 100 and 650 feet. A few residential
structures located adjacent to the creek and scattered along
both overbanks may experience some minor damage during the
100-year flood. Floodwaters are estimated to be 2.2 feet over
the unnamed bridge located on the grounds of the Fowler Junior
High School . Projected channel velocities are only 4 fps, and
little or no structural damage is expected to occur during a
flood of this magnitude. The 100-year flood elevation is pro-
jected to be 0.4 foot higher than the road surface over the 121st
Avenue culvert crossing, but little or no structural damage would
be expected during the event.
121st Avenue to the Summer Lake Weir. Some residential flooding
may occur to a few houses adjacent to the creek and scattered
along Summercrest Drive. The floodplain width along this reach
varies from 300 -to 550 feet.
Summer Lake Weir to Scholls Ferry Road. The flooding problems
along this reach are relatively minor because the floodplain area
is essentially undeveloped. Floodwater elevations are projected
to be 1 .9 feet over the 130th Avenue culvert crossing and 3.0
feet over the 135th Avenue culvert crossing. Both structures
may suffer some damage if the 100-year flood occurred. The
floodplain width from 130th Avenue to Scholls Ferry Road ranges
from 200 to 300 feet. Floodwaters are estimated to be 1 .7 feet
over the road surface on the Scholls Ferry Road bridge but would
cause little or no structural damage.
RECOMMENDED PLAN
Nonstructural management of Sumner Creek flooding is recommended
for the entire length of the stream included in the FIS. Con-
tinued urbanization of the Summer Creek basin will increase
100-year flood peaks and flood elevations along the stream. The
existing 500-year floodplain drawn on the FIS maps is a good
estimate of the future 100-year floodplain. The existing zero-rise
floodway drawn specifically for the city by the COE should be used
along the stream to ensure an adequate flow area for the 100-year
flood.
121st Avenue Crossing
The 121st Avenue culvert should be replaced by a bridge crossing
to eliminate upstream flooding along Summercrest Drive. (Est.
engineering and construction cost - $122,040) The stream c�nnel
through the new structure should e a riprapped, trapezoidal-shaped
channel with a 15-foot wide bottom and 12 to 1 side slopes.
A field survey will be required to verify the streambed profile
shown by the COE on the Summer Creek FIS profiles. If deposition
is occurring downstream of the existing culvert and the COE
streambed profile is accurate, a major channel improvement of
1 ,800 feet is recommended from 1 ,490 feet downstream of the 121st
Avenue culvert. (Est. engineering & construction cost - $119,328)
The recommended improvement upstream and downstream of the new
121st Avenue bridge is a grass-lined, trapezoidal-shaped channel
with a 15-foot wide bottom and side slopes of 2 to 1 . A rip-
rapped, trapezoidal-shaped trickle channel designed to carry 16
cfs is also recommended
AM MWaman
its
Table 8.2
F
FANNO CREEK RECOMMENDED PLAN
PRIORITIES AND COSTS 7
Annual
Construction Maintenance
Priority Quantity _ Cost Cost
Item
Preserve natural drainage-- 3 5,680 if $ 48,850 $ 7,950
mouth to SPRR.
wait
Preserve natural drainage-- 2 9,170 1£ 78,860 12,840
SPRR to Bonita Rd.
Preserve natural drainage--
Bonita Rd. to 160 ft down- 1 7,100 if 61,060 9,940
stream of Hall Blvd. `
Construct grass-lined channel i
with 150 if of riprap
160 ft downstream of Hall
Blvd. to 150 ft upstream 3 360 if 42,040 250
of Hall Blvd. `
Replace Hall Blvd. bridge-- -
( 90-ft span length.
3 5,850 292,500a
ft2
' i
Preserve natural drainage--
150 ft upstream of Hall � {
Blvd. to 1,550 ft down- 1 2,820 if 24,250 3,950 i4
stream of Main St. `
i
Construct grass-lined channel
with 700 if of riprap--
1,550 ft downstream of f
Main St. to 750 ft upstream l 3,655 if 345,470 2,700
of Grant Ave. � (
Replace Main St. bridge-- -
1 5,330 ft2 266,500
82-ft span length. j ;
Replace Grant Ave. bridge-- -
1 4,500 ft2 225,000
-
100-ft span length. 1 810 yd3 9,720 '
Raise road bed. -
1 300 if 7,500 '
Restore pavement. 242,220 -
Construct grass-lined channel
with 450 if of riprap--
750 ft upstream of Grant
Ave_ to l00 ft upstream of 2 5,820 if 440,510 4,070
North Dakota St.
aState Highway Department will incur this cost.
464V
8-4
5
Table 8.2 (continued)
Annual
Construction Maintenance
Item Priority Quantity Cost Cost
Replace Tiedeman Ave. bridge--
90-ft span length. 2 4,950 ft2 $247,500 -
Raise road bed. 2 730 yd3 9,880 -
Restore pavement. 2 400 if 13,200 -
270,580 -
Replace Tigard St. bridge--
90-ft span length. 2 4,050 ft 2 202,500 -
Raise road bed. 2 1,100 yd3 11,000 -
Restore pavement. 2 300 if 7,500 -
221,000 -
Replace North Dakota St. -
bridge--80-ft span length. 2 4,400 ft2 220,000
Raise road bed. 2 1,560 yd3 15,600
Restore pavement. 2 350 if 11,550
247,150 -
Preserve natural drainage--
110 ft upstream of North
Dakota St. to Scholls Ferry
Rd. 1 4,470 if 31,290 5,360
I Replace Scholls Ferry Rd. a
bridge--55-ft span length. 1 3,850 ft2 192,500 -
LTotal Plan Costs $2,804,780 $47,060
Total City Costs $2,319,780 $47,060
4 Total City Priority 1 Costs $ 970,790 $21,950
Total Cost Summaryb
Natural drainage preservation $ 244,310 $40,040
Channel improvements 828,020 7,020
Bridge replacements 1,247,450 -
$2,319,780 $47,060
I
bState Highway Department will incur this cost.
Excluding State Highway Department costs.
4641 8-5
E
ding
l'
Table 8.3
now
ASH CREEK RECOMMENDED PLAN
PRIORITIES AND COSTS
Annual
Construction Maintenance
Item Priority Quantity Cost Cost
Preserve natural drainage--
mouth to Hwy. 217. 1 2,460 if $14,760 $2,460
Nam
Preserve natural drainage--
Hwy. 217 to Oak St. 2 3,060 if 18,360 3,060
Preserve natural drainage--
Oak St. to Hemlock St. 3 2,230 if 13,380 2,230
Total Plan Costs $46' '500 $7,750
y
Total Priority 1 Costs $14,760 $2,460
C
i
464W 8-6
OL
Table 8.4
in SUMMER CREEK RECOMMENDED PLAN
PRIORITIES AND COSTS
14 Annual
Construction Maintenance
Item Priority Quantity Cost Cost
Preserve natural drainage--
mouth to 1,490 ft upstream
of 121st Ave. 1 3,560 if $ 23,850 $3,990
EM
Construct grass-lined channel
with 150 if of riprap--
1,490 ft downstream of
121st Ave. to 280 ft up-
stream of 121st Ave. 2 1,800 if 105,600 970
Replace the 121st Ave. culverts
with 48-ft span bridge. 2 2,160 ft2 108,000 -
Preserve natural drainage--
280 ft upstream of 121st
Ave. to Summer Lake outfall. 1 1,440 if 9,650 1,610
Preserve natural drainage-
130th Ave. to Scholls Fe�c�y Rd. 3 2,300 if 15,410 2,580
Total Plan Costs $262,510 $9,150
Total Priority 1 Costs $ 33,500 $5,600
Total Cost Summary
Natural drainage preservation $ 48,910 $8.,180
Channel improvements 105,600 970
Bridge replacements 108,000 -
$262,510 $9,150
__.W
IL
464X 8-7
C
MEMOi
i
i
t
S �t
I
i
i1
4
Table 8.5 jt
RECOMMENDED FLOOD-PLAIN STUDIES
PRIORITIES AND COSTS }
Reach Study
Stream Reach Priority Len th Cost
Red Rock Creek Mouth to Interstate 5 1 1.6 mi $12,000
Ball Creek Mouth to Interstate 5
1 0.5 mi 3,750
Unnamed tributary Mouth (1,000 ft downstream
Cof Fanno Creek of Tiedeman Ave.) to 115th 1 0.9 mi 6,750
Ave.
Unnamed tributary Mouth (800 ft downstream of1 0.9 mi 6,750
of Fanno Creek Main St.) to Hillview St.
$29,250
Total Plan Costs
$29,250
Total Priority 1 Costs
y
i
3
464Y 8-8
i
_ _._..... 1.
Wirt
Table 8,6
TOTAL COST SUMMARY
RECOMMENDED PLAN
Item Cost
Fanno Creek
Natural drainage preservation $ 244,310
Channel and bridge improvements 2,075,470
Ash Creek
Natural drainage preservation 46,500
Summer Creek
Natural drainage preservation 48,910
Channel and bridge improvements 213,610
Total Plan _
Channel and bridge improvements 2,307,080
Construction contingency @ 15% 346,060
Subtotal 2,653,140
Engineering design @ 13% 344,910
Subtotal 2,998,050
Natural drainage preservation 339,720
Flood-plain studies 29,250
Subtotal 3,367,020
Legal and administrative @ 3% 101,010
Subtotal 3,468,030
Financing @ 9% 312,120
Total Costs $3,780,150
8-9
464Z
3
® i
fi
E
k
r
f
s
E
September 16, 1982
t
9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Doris Hartig, City Recorder
SUBJECT: Status of 72nd Avenue LID
The following is an up to date status of 72nd Avenue LID.
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
Applications Signed - 88
Paid in Full - 23
COMPLETE - 111
Problem Applications - 16
No Response - 13
STILL PENDING - 29
DEFICIT ASSESSMENT
Applications Signed - 86
Paid in Full - 19
COMPLETE - 105
Problem Applications - 7
No Response - 29
STILL PENDING - 36
KMEM-
_ Detailed Breakdown of Still Pending Applications
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROBLEM APPLICATIONS
# 8 Anthony & Karalee Maksym $ 4,626,24
## 24 H. A. Anderson/Fought Co. 7,658.83
# 25 Joseph M. Fought 31,426.52
## 26 Fought & Company 4,639.99
## 28 National Safety Co. 1,388.40
## 36 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 13,327.15
## 38 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 9,221.96
## 41 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 16,642.92
# 60 So. Pacific Industrial Bev. Co. 5,185.98
## 61 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 20,288.32
## 63 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 94.561.54
# 70s Ted Nelson Co. 11,456.94
# 70b Ted Nelson Co. 3,580.29
# 70c Ted Nelson Co. 26,671.23
# 70d Ted Nelson Co. 2,759.12
## 71 A.T. & Doris Nelson 19,939.31
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT NO RESPONSE
## 5 Gus & Loraine Greco $ 5,846.08
# 16 Lillian Hickethier 4,324.34
�! # 35 Zel Chemical Distributing 4,546.51
# 53a Washington Co./Dir. of Public Works 96,898.03
# 53b Washington Co./Dir. of Public Works 1,627.91
# 66 SAMACK, Inc. 14,181.76
## 75 Fought Company 2,802.75
# 79 Ralph Leber Co. 2,169.88
# 93 E. Lee Robinson 4,050.48
# 94 E. Lee Robinson 4,903.66
#100 E. Lee Robinson 1,193.43
#101 E. Lee Robinson 1,193.43
#106 E. Lee Robinson 19453.81
r
DEFICIT ASSESSMENT PROBLEM APPLICATIONS
# 8 Anthony & Xaralee Maksym $ 1,721.59
# 36 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 4.959.52
# 38 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 3,431.83
# 41 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 6,193.44
# 58 F. H. Tower 1,234.46
# 60 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 1,929-89
# 61 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 7,550.03
# 63 So. Pacific Industrial Dev. Co. 31,254.54
DEFICIT ASSESSMENT NO RESPONSE
# 5 Gus & Loraine Greco $ 2,175.54
# 7 Paul & Lenore Warner 2,111.56
# 9 Robert R. Gage 1,201.07
# 16 Lillian Hickethier 1,609.25
# 24 Fought Co. , Inc. 2,850.13
# 25 Joseph M. Fought 11,694.96
# 26 Fought & Co. , Inc. 1,726.71
# 28 National Safety Co. & William Fleet 516.67
35 Zel Chemical Distributin 1,691.92
# 47 Watt Petroleum Supply, Inc. 1,634.42
#i 49a Howard & Marilyn Boyte 1,043.77
# 49b Howard & Marilyn Boyte 1,154.98
# 53a Washington Co./Public Works Director 36,059.31
# 53b Washington Co./Public Works Director 605.81
# 56c Empire Pacific Industries 8,433.37
# 66 SAMACK, Inc. 5,277.55
# 68a John & Marietta Smets 605.62
# 68b John & Marietta Smets 1,114.34
# 70a Ted Nelson Company 4,263.55
# 70b Ted Nelson Company 1,332.36
# 70c Ted Nelson Company 9,925.34
# 70d Ted Nelson Company 1,041.66
# 71 A.T. & Doris Nelson 7,420.15
# 72b Williams Air Control 15,271.60
# 79 Ralph Leber Company 807.49
# 83 B.L. Investments, Inc. 952.84
#105 James F. & Elizabeth Crumpackar 436.04
#115 Smats Machinery Co. 129.21
--maim
72nd Avenue Street LID #21
Status of Project
September 20, 1982
SavLanditure Auitust Sefltember Total
Paid: Professional Services 301,701
contractual Services 209,495
miscellaneous 3,632
Billed: Professional Services 19,855
Contractual Services 53,665
Encumbered: Professional 45,000
Services
514,828 118,520
633,348
Cash Received
Assessment Receivable 151,322 1,639
Warrants Issued 292,521
City Share of Project 129,685 29,855
605,022
Deficit [28,326]
' O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS
CAMSY OIrICC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW is,
N.GRANT. SUITE 202
MARK P.O'DONNELL CAeuB Y.OREGON97013
EDWARD J.SULLIVAN BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING
15031 265-114949
TIMOTHY RAMIS
1727 N.W. HOYT STREET
KENNETH M.ELLIOTT
CORINNE C.SHERTON PORTLAND.OREGON 97209 SALEM OFFICE
STEPHEN F.CREW (503) 222.4402 EQUITABLE CENTER TOWER
530 CENTER ST.N.E..SUITE 240
STEVEN L.PFEIFFER
THOMAS L.MASON PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE SALEM—OREGON
97301
-.-- ($OSI 376.9191
September 14 , 1982 u � i
1992
Honorable Hollie Pihl
Judge of the Circuit Court
Washington County Courthouse
Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
Re: Industrial Contract Carriers, Inc. V. City of Tigard,
Washington Countv Circuit Court No. 82-1010C
Dear Judge Pihl:
` Enclosed please find a form of Order pursuant to your findings
t outlined in your letter of September 10 , 1982 in the above-
entitled matter. If the enclosed meets with your approval ,
please sign and date it, asking your secretary to complete and
return the enclosed verification cards.
Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS
Steven L. Pfeiffer
SLP:mch
enclosures
CC., Mr. Paul J. Rask
City of Tigard
:t
{
Now= womw2w
-J s
I IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
i
2 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
3 INDUSTRIAL CONTRACT CARRIERS, )
INC. , an Oregon corporation, )
4 ) No.
Plaintiff , 82-1010C) E
5UDGMENT
)
V. ) FINAL ORDER AND J
s
6 )
i
CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal
7 corporation,
)
8 Defendant. ) !
9 THIS MATTER having come before the Honorable Hollie Pihl ,
10 judge of the above-entitled court, on the plaintiff ' s petition for a
11 writ of review and on the motions of defendant for dismissal for want
12 of jurisdiction over the person and for failure to state ultimate
{ 13 facts sufficient to constitute a claim; and
14 The plaintiff appearing by and through its attorney, Paul
15 Rask and defendant appearing by and through its attorneys, Edward J.
16 Sullivan and Steven L. Pfeiffer, and the Court having reviewed and
1i taken into consideration all of the materials submitted, including
18 oral and written argument of counsel , and being fully advised in the
19 premises; it is, therefore,
20 ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss for want
21 of jurisdiction over the person filed by defendant is hereby denied
22 as the term "opposite party" under ORS 34 . 080 in Local Improvement
23 District cases means the local government that by ordinance has
24 legislatively created the district; and
25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss
26 for failure to state facts sufficient to state a claim is denied in
Page 1 - FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT
O'DONNELL,Xj09X'K • SULLIVAN 3 RAWS
Attorneys at Low
1727 N.W.Hoyt Street
Portland d,Oregon4402
209
f
t
•1
i
s
i
t
f I order to allow the resolution of this matter on its merits; and
2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition for
3 Writ of Review is DENIED on the merits on the basis of the following
4 findings:
5 1. The question of special benefits to property owners
6' within the Local Improvement District as determined by the defendant
7 was supported by substantial evidence in the record;
8 2. The 1981 ordinance relating to Local Improvement District
9 21 was repealed by implication upon the passing of Ordinance 82-13 on
10 March 29 , 1982;
11 3 . The probable cost of the improvements were sufficiently
12 determined and publicized so as to not deny any remonstrator of the
13 right to a fair hearing;
I
14 4 . The deficit assessment issue is not before this Court
I
15 in that it is not in the petition and cannot be attacked until spread
I
16 by ordinance;
17 5. The invitiation for bids on the project, although
18 advertised before the passage of Ordinance 82-13 , is not of sufficient
19 magnitude to render the acceptance of a bid invalid. (TMC 13 .04 . 070
20 Bids--is merely directory to the city clerk, not a condition precedent
21to the validity of the accepted bid in this kind of case , as opposed
22 to a contest between bidders or potential bidders. ) ;
23 6. The city ordinances of defendant did not require at the j
ii
24 time of bid opening the presence of the majority of city council
25 members, but did require the presence of a city employee who was
26 present in the person of the city engineer; and
Page 2 - FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT
0•DONNELL,X1}Q C4 • SULLIVAN &RAMIS
Attorneys at Law
1727 N.W.Hoyt Street
Portland,Oregon 97209 i
)503)222-4402
1 7 . The council ' s method of determining the amount of
2 assessment to be charged against each lot in the district, although
3 a combination of assessment methods, was according to the special and
4 peculiar benefits accruing and therefore not arbitrary.
5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant shall be
6- allowed to recover its costs and disbursements in the amount of
7 $35. 00 , representing the statutory prevailing party fee awarded
8 pursuant to ORS 20. 190 (2) (a) .
9 DATED this ic4 day of September, 1982.
10
11
Hollie Pihl , Circuit Judge
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Page 3 - FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT
0'DONNELL,a[FX7}BR9C SULLIVAN 6 RAMIS
Attorneys at Law
1727 N.W.Hoyt Street
Portland,Oregon 97209
,503)222-4402
i
1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
2 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
3 INDUSTRIAL CONTRACT CARRIERS , )
INC. , an Oregon corporation, )
4 )
Plaintiff , ) No. 82-I010C
5 )
VS. ) STATEMENT OF COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
6 )
CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal )
7 corporation,
8 Defendant. )
9 The following is a statement of costs and disbursements
10 incurred and claimed herein by defendant City of Tigard in the above-
11 entitled cause and Court
12 Description of Expenditure Amount
C13 Prevailing Party Fee for Defendant $35 . 00
14 TOTAL EXPENDITURE $35 . 00
15 O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RAMIS
16
17 By: Is/ Steven L Pfeiffer
Steven L. Pfeiffer
18 Of Attorneys for Defendant
19 STATE OF OREGON )
) ss.
20 County of Multnomah)
21 I, STEVEN L. PFEIFFER, being first duly sworn, depose and
22 say:
23 That I am one of the attorneys for defendant City of Tigard
24 herein;
That the items set forth in the foregoing statement are true
26 and correct and said costs and disbursements have been necessarily
Page 1 - STATEMENT OF COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
0*DONNELL,XDCTADZW • SULLIVAN 3 RAMIS
Attorneys of Low
1727 N.XV.Hoyt Street
Portlond,Oregon 97209
1 incurred herein , as I verily believe .
2 DATED this 14th day of September, 1982 .
3
4 /s/ Steven L Pfeiffer
Steven L. Pfeiffer
5
6 SUBSCRIBED AND SP]ORN to before me this 14th day of September ,
7 1982.
8
9 /s/ Margaret C. Hand
Notary Public for Oregon
10 (NOTARIAL SEAL) My Commission expires: 3/27/86
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
Page 2 - STATEMENT OF COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
O'DONNELL.X*CD fXXRVURIDCSULLIVAN & RAMIS
Attorneys 01 LOW
1727 N.W.Hoyt Street
Portland.Oregon 97209
MEW
CERTIFICATE — TRUE COPY
of Costs and Disbursements -•..............
Statemen__....._....
I hereby certify that the foregoing copy of -•••• et
- tete and exact copy of the original.
is a comp
...............................Se tember•- 14 19 t5�
.__t•----•••••...----•••. , Pfe.i f£et----------•-- •--- ..
Dated..__........p.......... ....... �.D...aTa ._.. .
AttorneY(S)for.......De.f.enda.nt------------------------
ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE
- -------•...............•---------••------------ is hereby accepted
...........................................
•••--•••-....._ .
Due service of the within -------------•1---•' --'by receiving a true copy thereof.
........................119 ,
AttorneY(s)for----- -•------------------
CERTIFICATES OF SERVICE
Personal ••-•-----•--•--•--•• •-•••••. 19-•-•••. , I served the within ---------------••---••--•- -
I certify that on --------------------------------- ......._
-•-----•-• ------ _-----•-- ---- •..... -------•--•--------------•-----------•----
-•-•---
atlorney of record or --•----•-•-•-- a true copy thereof. ----------------------------------•-•----- -•-----
by personally handing to said attorney -- ---------------------------------•__..__-----
Y(s) --------------
--------- •--------•
Attorne � for----•----------••-
---------------------
At Office ---- 19...-----, I served the within ---------------------
I certify that on -----•------------------- --•---- ---- ----------•-------•on -------------•-
-----------•----•--------•--•--....
.
- •----
e r son apparently in
............................... attorney of record for ------------------------
thereof at said attorney's office with his/her clerk therein, or witha P
Oregon.
by leaving a true copy ----•-_hi -------------•----------•--------•--------
charge thereof, at --------•----------•-------------•------------------..._.-
------------•-•--
---------------------------•---------_--
Atjorney(s)for
Mailing
Ste em ret_..o_f---Crests_--and_..Disbur.s-ements___.---:_-;
I hereby certify that I served the foregoing ------ -------------------------------------••------------------------
on -------Paul_.j._.._Rask-------------------- ----------------------------------------
-------------
-------------------------------- -
- ----------------------------
matling to said attorney(s) a true copy thereof, certified by me
attorney(s) of record for ------.p-�-a1-Ilt1.f_f................... - at said aftorney(s) last
- 19.-$. _, by
on -..-_-__._._S2.ptember._-1.4_,_____ ___ _ ___ _ • aid, addressed to said atforney(s
C_ity_-r-•--9r.eg.ox>
__9_1223-----•----
as such, contained in a sealed envelope, with po � Za JL11� C��IlS3_r-•-• �Tlg----
known address, to-wit: ........2-0- _,Kin$._G.J.ty ------•--------------------------- -------------- -------
- ---.•-----•...
_-____ Oregon, on said day.
and deposited in the post office at _____________POrt1aI1.-_.__._-- /s/ Steven L. Pfeiffer
ge tember 14
----, 19_.$x_.
Dated----------•p-•------- - -------- -------•---------------------------------
------•------•------------- Attorneys)for------•D.E:�ex1G1AIA�--------•-•----------------•-•
O'DONNELL,
SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1727 N.W.Hoyt Street
Portlond,Oregon 97209
15031 222-4402 1/1/80•B
BACKING SHEET No. 1001/3_%sr v .rs...CSS LAw IVB.CO..lOnTLAND.OAC.
theRghdaii
company
Kristin Square•9500 S.W. Barbur Blvd. • Suite 300• Portland,Oregon 97219• (503)245-1131
Telex 0360557
i
i
September 16, 1982
Mayor Wilbur Bishop and Members of the City Council
Chairman Frank Terpedinno and Members of the Planning Commission
c/o Mr. William Monahan, Planning Director
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re: RC-809 - Tigard Triangle Property
Tax Lot 2200, Map 1S1 36CD
Gentlemen:
As you know The Robert Randall Company has recently submitted an
application to the Boundary Commission for the annexation of the
6 acre parcel located at 11722 S.W. Pacific Highway to the City
of Tigard. The completion of this annexation will result in
bringing this final key undeveloped piece of land in the Tigard
Triangle into the City.
We know the City is now fully involved in developing its
comprehensive plan, an effort we support because when a well
thought out and flexible land use plan exists' in a community
it enhances the opportunity for private endeavor to successfully
bring economic development to that community. So it is important
to inform you of what plan designation and zoning we feel should
be applied to this property.
We think that a consensus clearly exists among all the parties
involved in the development of a plan for the Triangle, that its
prime assets are accessibility, visibility and flexibility. The
accessibility, of course, is produced by its location between
major highways. The properties in the area are visible either
from 217 or Highway 99. The reserve of undeveloped land in the
area produces the flexibility that would be so attractive to a
variety of potential users of the site.
Mr. William Monahan
September 16, 1982
r" Page 2
Recently, we have been involved in negotiations with a major insurance
company seeking to develop their regional headquarters in this area.
Unfortunately because of the uncertainty regarding Tigard's comprehensive
plan for the Triangle, particularly the apparent controversy regarding
the area's transportation plan, they were unable to consider this site
as a potential location.
However, we think that several of the insurance company's needs and
desires should be kept in mind as you finalize the planning and zoning
for this area. Their number one priority in the selection of a
location for such a project, is it's close, within walking distance
prefferably, proximity to restaurants, banks and office support
commercial facilities.
For this reason we believe that a zoning designation for the front
portion of our property, within approximately 200 feet of Pacific
Highway, whici,.nermits the independent development of these facilities
would be appropriate as a logical continuation of the current type
of development along Highway 99. It would also bean enticement to
prime tenants for an office park and light industrial development
which could potentially be developed in the rest of the area.
Our opinion is that on land up to a distance of 600 feet from Pacific
Highway an office commercial use should be emphasized. Beyond that t
distance from the highway we feel the constraints of topography,
particularly the drainage situation, indicates a light industrial
land use would be best, considering the cost of development given
these constraints.
We have seen preliminary plans which indicate an Industrial Park
designation is being considered for our property. We do not oppose
such a designation for the area since each of the uses we envision
for the area is permitted under such a designation. However, we
would oppose such a designation if it resulted in a limitation on
the independent development of any of those uses. We definitely
fell that flexibility, the right to independently develop each
seperate use, is essential to the economic success of the Triangle's
development.
For the same reason we are concerned about proposals being made by
some parties that any development of the area would be contingent
on the complete construction of a major transportation network in
the Triangle. We support the development of a plan providing for
this transportation network and we have -understood the NPO plan for
this area was the ultimate general guide for the transportation
system.
i
i
Mr. William Monahan
September 16, 1982
Page 3
However, the NPO plan makes it clear it was not intended to be a
constraint on the individual development of property prior to the
construction of the system if access to the development and any
one of the major roads, particularly Pacific Highway, could be
made safe and functional. Considering the variety of ownerships
and land use situations existing in the Triangle, we think the {
retention of such a policy is the only logical-course. Each project t
should be subject to review on this standard as well as on its
fulfilling obligations to the development of the over-all transportation 1
system.
We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to share our views on this
matter with-you and your consideration of them.
Very truly yours,
O k
John T. Gibbon #
Secretary/Counsel
i
t
cc - Doug Seely
Steve Janik
JTG/tu
s
9 P. R/
i
s
yr—?�7. Irle -
}
i
d
i
_ v
roomy-�7
�33 3q-7-S7
E
ME -
O'DONNELL. DATE September 14 , 1982
SULLIVAN & RAMIS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW To Edward J. Sullivan and Tigard City Council
1727 N.V1(_ "OYT STREET
PORTLAND. REGCItJr 91209 `
tso ' �! J'i �i 'FROM Stephen F. Crew
RE Recovery of Attorney Fees in a Lawsuit
Against Northwest Underground on Surety
Bond
SES' 1932
Pursuant to your request, I have done further research on the issue
of whether or not the city could recover attorney fees in the event
that we proceed against Northwest Underground for our damages as a
result of the arbitration award in favor of D. M. Thompson.
As I mentioned in my previous memorandum, the contract between the
city and Northwest Underground is silent on the issue of attorney
fees. Further, there is nothing in the surety bond agreement which
provides for attorney fees. However, under ORS 743 . 114 , it appears
that we can recover attorney fees in an action on an insurance policy
or a contractor' s bond. In essence, ORS 743 .114 provides that if
settlement is not made within six months from the date proof of loss
is filed with an insurer [and in this case the bonding company] and
we file an action and our recovery exceeds the amount of any tender
made by the defendant, then we may recover attorney fees.
The sttuthat if our recovery
oes not
exceedatheeamount oftany ttenderomade rbytd
goes on the defendant, then they can
recover attorney fees against us.
The case of He:gey v. Massachusetts. Bonding Co. , 169 Or 132 , 126 P2d
836 (1942) also supports the proposition that if there is a statute
providing for attorney fees in an action against an insurer then
this is also applicable to surety bonds.
In essence, I would modify my previous conclusion that we would not
be able to recover attorney fees. It appears, pursuant to the above
statute and case, that we would be able to recover our attorney fees
in the event we prevail or if our recovery exceeds any amount offered
by either the defendant or the insurance company.
SFC:ial
{� 9/14/82
cc: Mr. Frank Currie
Mr. Bob Jean
City Council Members !f '
Mr. Edward J. Sullivan