City Council Packet - 07/16/1996
=~1 I
v
- -
[66. f~.v a } - J - - f-~t4
C~L rv 3 ~
_ .r
- k
F1 k
~ s a
r ~ T
r(4
F [
r _ -
t
(Qj I
v
.r
`x =s ' s
N
r
3 I" >~i7 -
--6'~' Nr-r- - z a - - - - - ,.F
L
_ 4v4~z' dq - - K Y S
-Ysa^i¥s:e~..wa+::s.:s: '+,ux:u,.u.a:,,..w,.A.v.._,W:.:,.....,.»a.,...A.. .....w,".wws:.aa.assc~x.aa~a:: - ' ; 2`~k
- r..x....t _ 4. r ` S O
x a- - -
{ - t ` - ^ - A - -
\a ` OF TIOARD
Ck\~ CITY
s~~ti
:\F3ht.vO~G,.,O~`•`a\.`~.`~'-1-_-W' '~n'~"'^Ta,mr~
i 8`:i.'i~T#RVF•r4iMi4L\.~\\ f-'z Y-r.'}'- 9 ~4}~i -~F _'4
F
o.• \\\e its...., ..i,.'<a:\u,, ..q„\::, aqaC"v.'i, y, 3 - -f'i Ct~ 71
0 -'3 Lim 5`MYatJf t
g vIr
PUBLlC NOTICE: e
mes noted are estimated: it is recommended that persons g s
y^
interested in testifying Times
present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in F
sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7.30 p•m• -
i Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and ; _n ;
11
should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the k t ~ V ,
Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - ' ` Z"" "4
- J C` 1
Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
t 0 -4 YJf~r ' ! 3 _1
Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: 4 Y a3 F N
11 .1-1-1
- Qualified si Ian
gn guage interpreters for persons with speech or hearing v
Impairments; and
x r~
• Qualified bilingual interpreters. ,u
Since these senaces must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is ' r 1- I s
important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your . , ° 6~' rt 6
need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone r, N
numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - e '
Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA ` P `d PE
b - t ? t +
t {
. 3 e
f ( t.ri`
it 6_-.hF -
- i
t - - k -L ~ ~ Y' k
~ Y' k
f k
f k
r k
L
3 COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 1 ~ F. * ~ "V'
I ~ - 1-1-11141 . ~-l' ~ '4 _ 1 ~ "?z, ~
- ? - ~ •K'Sx `VFt "I
_ - - - _ _
}
r y
> $
•x¢'71^ t f _ f _ 4`'' tl` r]
T' fir,- - - - - f. y
4
ry K - 4 - - t - t
I r m
a
y cy { e 4 t~ E 1
r - - - I `
i____ . _ _ _.ls_._ _ _~E`
h
-o-it+~k" ¢
as
as ' < r4
11
- - E ;"'M~Z'~,$~ ~ . , T" - , , " "~'~,'-~'i?i i
- ,~fh` 6
x1 f d a L
?4 -ry t f ry -
u~ ` 1.. . a4u.,.r~i. .4..~.o-....~...._ ......_...e s.wwcr ,ax,ar~~.aY+am--
t- 'g ate`"`' _ `t . - r c' • e
n f ag w 1 a ~s
h
" i AGENDA 't ,
' ; TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING _ "
s u 16, 1996
I ; s
ens y 6:30 P.M.
1. WORKSHOP MEETING ; ~1
~
r 1.1 Call to Order -City Council Local Contract Review Board ate-$'' ` 11
> ~t ~
fti " s 1.2 ROIL Call
~ ~l ' 1~ fi t
r i .3 Hedge of wiiegtance e~ z
1.4 Council Communications/Liaison Reports ~s s~ e
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items° `
E,, - r a
~4 R f m}
e r - - - ~ s '
235 p EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executiv g
1 3 } r t
S Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), at (h) to f '
discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending V ,
litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are 3 ut~ - "
confidential• therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those 4
present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this j:i k ? g"" r
_
session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. u . p ~'~%2; , I "r ;
k - 'i F.sr #
' $ ' 3~ p CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM COMMUNICATIONS `L°~ '~4 7 '011t" "
- r
• Citizen Involvement Team Representatives s; i' ~ ~
- j 7:10 p.m. , , 6 c
4. DISCUSSION: FUTURE OF THE DOWNTOWN ~v * , I~ °w` r ur
' 7
City Administrator and Representatives of the Downtown Merchants
Association ' r --1 x t -117 I -1
C
--l.- 1--11---1---~e;-.- ['1- - ' ~ 4 - 5. p.m. UPDATE: METRO 2040 ogs ~t
3 M r
645 DISCUSSION: WATER OPTIONS
~ f
„u .
• City Administrator and Public Works Director
z=4
t, 8: IS p.m.T3 `1r*„d~f -
k 7. DISCUSSION: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR CONSULTANT TO k t
REVIEW THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE
7 Y - M1C a+' t h
• Community Development Director -
835 P.M.
LAND USE ITEM SCREENING AND BUFFERING ~ ~
`p r`~
' • Community Development Director
" r'
y s
' - - ,f _4 fin ` - ~ I
t tS - VY dq
1-1
} - T - s` b _
0 f
y COUNCIL AGENDA -JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 2 ~3 M ,
- ' r
Fit`" , ate a
, r q YY F' -"':'S". zr% A c r" 1
k - v').".fiYedd+^ '.'v G 5>?t 'KKK :,F "Y - T. - 4~,
- : 4'` r
s l Y--z'w - t 12 - -
gr t
~ f ~ , -
fi t
r r E
a.,, _ f - Y 5 Li, iI
- Y
t A d - { f t - i` _ d ~J
- t - x`7 '1S i'
flt _ f
A t{ S x x - x-~ Z .1
f Fkf
E~v'x..~
a e~ - _ - -
11 -
1-~1C _ sue:-.f" -T.a...w m .1-as-n•--^...-'.~a~ h_ 1
u---LL. , ._~.r_ ..ice i. . r. P_ ~..W c..i-f ._~1_ 1r -.c_ t i_ ~e- _r M1_.'c._..~_
{h"T!r ? k. "k a$ "Z-01111' 11Y rax
~ N ~ ~a~+Y"c rTLe+4c "z J P x ~ e r' { ~ ~ • ~ ttt~ ~ ~ ~ S
Aw-
zY r , 9. DISCUSSION: CITY FACILITIES SPACE PLANNING
Assistant to the City Administrator*
~Mvbv
Syr
'~'F~~~t.ta~3`x ✓}~i 9:20 p.m.
10. DISCUSSION: REACTIVATION OF THE HOMELESS TASK FORCE,
~s
s City Administrator
9:40 p.m.;'
1 1. NOW-AGENDA i T EMJ
nyT
9:30 p.m. , ' ~ -
12. ADJOURNMENT
r c..0716.96
®r,-
MR
IN i~
e3b "'E" A 3tc ~ S
f - zru - E s Cx T
_
.cM1+~ ~S~.Lrm.e - ~ n4 $~~~f-fir
t~-mss` K _ j ➢ -Y>x✓ l`"
..•56 "i "i 9 asG-SS,y -cd' : t ;S'e'a , F
yY ai'FZ dl pk 4 - ± j'k, Ayy-31 V t
G
<"sp3t COUNCIL AGENDA -JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 3
-k2 m~,y :;dsr_.sd' -rPa~e'• .^C°^ F,+t",''-a T"y^ 'ia-f{ 'k - 4 v if'' £ `g~'
'S.",^, tikes`,"
",v-4 12
DNS a a r s 3 '~7 ~ r3~' e~~
x fl,'' °h4 x " W - -t r. - r s'it's? afx-3'-r
,2 rP• ~~r, ~c ~ rr'r~ G.. -t ~t to ~ } r s z - _ r~'~~+~.f
_ f lk w fi t, rb STt dS~. i e C J
k ~ - } ~.p`$,~ Y ~Y x'S z - ~ ? } r J r4 F r~ t~4r, 1 F l.r
a - 3 A,
p -
r
s
w 3 N
F _1:,-,-,z-i' - - , _ - - , , . ; , " "
11 t- I
nF
l 1 - ~r:.•~_.-~ I eS - . - 'd6.F.xil`r..s'i'GL3...:5 . " t
S i= 1Y
~ _ _ Agenda Item No. 5. 1 - ¢ g
a - ¢ niu, =
Fx~ Z ~ Meeting of 13 4[0 6,M { ~
ac_ TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
s4 A 1$*Y r
; ~'3, , WORKSHOP MEETING ' i' k'x
MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996
r ` Meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoli } ' `t Z
717p37_17
,
g m= = Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoll, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Bob Rohlf, ~--~,.L~ x
and Ken Scheckla. ,1}t~ L1
C
• Staff Present: City Administrator Bill Monahan; Planning Planner Dick Bewersdorff; t ~ t ' ^
Legal Counsel Chuck Corrigan (Executive Session only); Community Development '
Director Jim Hendryx; Asst. to the City Administrator Liz Newton; Associate Planner I , fit _ , tr
" Mark Roberts; and City Recorder Catherine Wheatley. ? szMx a{ a
EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at r=
} 6:35 p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), & (h) to discuss labor ~
~
relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. k , , R, ,
4" 1 -1
• Mayor Nicoli convened the open session at 7:45 p.m. _ i'
1. WORKSHOP MEETING s ~t € f - _ -
1.4 Council Communications/Liaison Reports: None
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items ~ ~ F I ~
l,, y'
3 City Administrator Monahan stated that he had several updates to present to ~ ~ , w
~ the Council. ; '
E; a _
f a- = x t s I a j
May ~j or Nicoli said that he had four informational items for the Council.
- J
3. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM COMMUNICATIONS: None 1 r , "
a d -
4. DISCUSSION: FUTURE OF THE DOWNTOWN r ; x `i.
~~~n - -
z Mr. Monahan presented the staff report reviewing the Council goal of deciding on a
',x ~t~
rt direction for the downtown. (See staff report). He stated that of the $50,000 that . I
the Council allocated in 1994 for use in the downtown, $32,000 remained. `a~fi+
a
^j Mike Marr, Downtown Merchants' Association, presented suggestions to use the`
remaining funds to install a reader board at the south end of Main Street, to install a 3 ' 'o%
drip irrigation system for the island on Main Street, to install a flagpole on the center ' k`
z island, and to allocate any remaining funds to the proposed parking lot on Main L
g i Street. He noted the lengthy time required to water the hanging baskets and the , I, t -1
< Z' island every day. He reviewed the history of the downtown plants, pointing out that k : j f Y , I
t the island did not exist when the Association agreed to maintain the plants without t,
j / t~ i~
4 Y incurring City expense, and that it should not be too difficult to work with the City "°)4 Public Works Department to arrange an offshoot water pipe to water the island. t xn s
,t' „t4 FYI - 'la- ' B ]5`y~ P
F T
' r 'F CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 1 r~ rr Sx - {
F
gg))
C 'v --'1 _ r 9
h
k rya s 1? - e ~
_ _ - _ ~ i
L ii Z 33 x{ 5' }
V-
3y% i - ~Jf 3t A 45 i" }
_ 12 , _ , ~ : -~f~`,, i",-rr'. , -`-L:, ~ - ~ " ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ , , ~r ,
,:~,6 3 A JWr Y F
R Y
- f }k
f -t+' - 'y -x ear f '..i
r`F ay R4q k b - x r l;1 t s'3 :5 J
Y
f y _
_ ^ i .I.... _._..i 4. 4h ♦ l -~T ..._a ___..-ua m;._i , t _ .i....~ __z.._.
I
, l - - ,
,
, S 4 € l k -
5 £
7 - - r , ,r - c ~ - ` - - ~!:1,171 ~ 0 - ,
R . , - I ~ , , I , ~ , - - " , ,,,1-,'-*,-7, -,1~ ~
_ F, ~Y EY S T _ _ • _ _
,3aj.•, - K f .e..r..._ __...»...,._......._...__N_ e«..i.,..... .*,,..,..n, -,...:„.:a..__~ t - - ?
k } - _ 1
_
z r- .3 _ _ - ST- _
R
Chuck Woodard, Downtown Merchants' Association, commented that they t
.p j decided to get public input on possible projects for the $50,000 rather than spend
F~ ~ all of it on one project. Suggestions included clean up, benches, trees and flowers * t
1 have already been implemented. The last two suggestions were a reader board t "
- a ' and a traffic light at Burnham and Main. He reviewed the structural and ~ ~
l § construction details of the reader board and presented a rendering of the board. s ° f
He said that it would be used primarily for announcing community events with some X
advertising of businesses in the Central Business District. The cost would be 4 }
a approximately $21,500. Approximately $5,000 would remain for the parking lot. x ' - x
In response to Councilor Hunt's concern for safety, Mr. Woodard cited the reader k'
! t
board on Airport Way at the Portland International Airport as an example of a r t 4 '
4 reader board that did not create a safety hazard. He noted the exact placement ' F ` t ` ,
,..,-,•r. , and orientation of the board: facing southbound traffic at the upper end of Main ~>,r Y 1_.'
Street. He said that he has spoken with the police chief about it. max'`
~ K
4 - In response a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Woodard said that the board _ `
£ -
r would be on 24 hours a day and emphasized the subtle nature of the sign. - i,
r1 I-
t
Councilor Hunt raised the issue of who would decide what messages went on the ~ ` = z~ i s
board and who would be responsible for maintaining and changing it. Mr. Woodard ` .:t ,""mot, '
' 'T-t u 'of s' r DSa
said that the downtown merchants would contribute a fee for maintenance and °
utility costs but all others in the community could use the board for free. G ~ , n', 'r
$ i _
z Councilor Scheckla asked if "downtown businesses" meant only those on Main r r F
S 43 4
Street, commenting that the $50,000 came from taxpayers' money citywide. Mr. j { K _l
Woodard said that they would have to define more exactly which businesses could e >1 - F ~ - r _
use the board and how much the fee would be. t,_r
- Councilor Hunt stated that he could only support a reader board if the City were r I _
divorced completely from any responsibility for it. r ' ~~4
- , k .
Councilor Moore asked who made the final determination on where the initial ' ,
$50,000 was spent: the Council or the Merchants' Association? 4$, r~~ f
a . , `
{ Mr. Monahan explained that previously the Merchants' Association had submitted x, ; , "I , d
} , their requests for expending the $50,000 for Council approval. He reviewed several i , r `
I issues surrounding the board, including ownership, maintenance. '
r - ? ! Tl
Mr. Marr stated that he saw the $50,000 as City taxpayers money, and the ~ ~ 5
Merchants' Association as a volunteer advisory group sought out by the City for t ' ;
-:r.,i,"~.","?",~'~,~,'I,",-"r~i~..~-",il'w suggestions on how best to spend that money in the downtown. The Association "I ~ ,
, was recommending purchase and installation of a reader board. He agreed that ` _ ,
they could not be restrictive on the use of the board but stated that he thought it
would be solely for the use of the Central Business District businesses. He said r . $ Ji
that the board would be owned b the Cis -
by City (since it was their money) and that the fi
3 Council would have the final say its use. - `
r
I
s I 0 -
Y
'i' = CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 2 -ar
-st , , .
a t - S - r },q - ,.q ,
- Y-~ i 'fiJ -
yS
iZ
t ~ Yk
_ J _I
§ l
, - , , ~ ~ - .1 ~ Ir ~ , r ~ . I I 11 ~ I .r I ~ - I ~1~ ~ - - , I I , , , , . , , , _ ~
X
'S d @n~ - - - t
~
_
is
L , , , , r
> >e...,,vt_
. - . , - - - -
- - - e - - - -
- Y'- l k -
, M - ~2 -
~ - x a x - - - - - s z
ro z
,
P
sues r ~ ,
. . _
. ....,..~..,...v ,..,.~..nu.t.,o.~.i
e - 5. s f a,.,x..,..........._.._..-- -.W. n , .
r - <=a a
tq` ",~,~~M,1`1~ - ~ I _,z~
° ~r 4`+ - e -TC
4 r
at , ~ -,2.ff""~ " i~
3 - ii~ - 1 ,y it s, - -
s Mr. Marr said that they were willing to discuss the project with Council. He r
r explained that Chamber of Commerce staff would handle programming the board. i,F
Councilor Rohlf stated that he could not support a reader board, pointing out that it ,
a was not approved as an expenditure when presented once before at Council. He R ~ , t ]
his might pose problems for the City and cost a significant °
said that it sounded like this'
amount of money. He suggested looking at beautifying Fanno Creek or installing - f '
the flag pole. ~rS--
k ~ 'i Mr. Woodard commented that his suggestion of a water wheel on Fanno Creek had
gone over well with the Fans of Fanno Creek but that the Water Master said it Wiz` '
would take 5 to 10 years for a decision on that to be made. He spoke for the reader _
- board as a way to announce newsworthy events in the community, commenting j t
i that advertising would probably take less than 10% of the board time. - _ M=.,,} Wit!
1 Councilor Scheckla expressed concern over damage, vandalism and graffiti. Mr. tIi z,_ ~T
Woodard stated that sign companies had maintenance programs for purchase, and V ,,t
s that the plexiglass material used was almost unbreakable. He said that vandalism s A.~
I
was unavoidable, noting that five plants were stolen last year. 'ff" sr - _ y
Mayor Nicoli suggested voting on accepting the idea of a reader board and asking F.
the Association to return with more information responding to Council's concerns. , 7 I i '
Councilor Hunt said that he did not feel comfortable voting but that he supported K 3A ' a
asking for a firmer proposal. Mayor Nicoli said that he did not have a problem with e tr
Il.d the reader board. i,: ` S
a Councilor Moore stated that while he liked the idea of a reader board, he was not ,f {
comfortable with it as presented, noting the questions of liability, maintenance, and ? ~ "
ownership. - " "
p. He suggested asking businesses if they wanted to help finance it. He ( ~ _ ^g~ fi
asked if the other items mentioned by Mr. Marr would also come out of the E',~,a. y . ;
j remaining $32,000."~
_N ~ I "a .
Mr. Woodard said that there was enough money only for the reader board and one ' _ -s s
: I'll other project. N 2 tiii : " ; ~ l the
considered
usin
mone partc pateRn the v seoning study. cMr' Woodard stated that a great de al ftmoney k t' N - -
has already been spent on downtown. ~ ~x
a =<A, Y i
Mr. Marr said that although a downtown revitalization program was developed in r '
prior visioning studies, the voters voted down the tax increment financing necessary f -i
to implement the vision. He said that many still wanted that vision (which was (
comparable to NW 23rd, Sellwood, etc. in Portland). He pointed out that the little ,a t 2 ;
` a bit of history left in Tigard was on Main Street and spoke to preserving that history,
expressing his fear that an adult video store would move in on Main Street and
destroy the downtown. ' 4
. } ~H,',,%~! , , i, - 11
5~q wa -
G
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 3 n r t5 Ei ;
+ A
A: xl (i
( r
S+, - k` - Y , , t , , ,
l .i- .-.-..mev+.ss:.-o----- . - iS`,C 3-• 6f , t p,
l - X I
}
J _ [fV
-~T'-,~:i - ~ ~ , . , ~ I I , , ~ , , i ~ I . , ~ , I , - ~ ,~~L., . ,-L ~ "i~'ll~,~",--C,~~:~~,"~'~~'~;r~-"-'.~"')' Z*"j~~!%;~ .
t ~ j 4
L
t 'E 4L~'k £ . -
Gfy
- _ _ f s• 1
y
t ! t
44
U i
(3j tt
T
- . h
._.at.~ .I v.J ra...-
.
-'r .
1
' R ~ - a - ' ; _
*n't ? -F i - - a
6 K.`' w~"a, Y Z S' a t _ x R b aY is _
s -4 ti t,
AEMMMc ~k~E mss"' i! - - t*' t s'g~'s, -
a' 'A a 3.~ - q a z~ s 's- - t . s -
Y
tt~ a f , 3 ~
3
11 a< €rrri a , ~
.
, - a f # Mr. Marr said that those actively working on the vision had limited financial and time e s : 1 ,
resources and needed City help to accomplish a good long-term plan. He noted ;
that other communities in the area were years ahead of Tigard in focusing on what r
they wanted for their communities. He said that he hoped that investing in Main
--a , Street or the Central Business District did not get put on the back burner until it was tfi a
on by . ti„ , o gative businesses. ` r 1r
, too late to reverse i~~fiiiraiia,._
, }
Councilor Rohlf concurred. Mr. M arr said that
s,
.ry-
to volunteer time and effort in of only -
t were willing t°i ~ he merchants
practical efforts but also to engage in meetings and dialog to preserve along-term n `x~~=~ J`
h - i identity for Tigard for the benefit of the citizens. _ Y , 3x n _
,
Mayor Nicoli asked Mr. Marr to bring back a report responding to Council's a5 ;tip _k?t }
11 ,
concerns after consulting with staff. ivir. Monahan asked to see cast estimates and
proposals on the City's role in owning and operating the board. Y ~ l
- k~
Mr. Monahan noted that the role of the City in revitalization of the downtown was a&r 4 14 11 * Council goal, and asked if Council would like to discuss that the next time the
Merchants' Association came before the Council. He said that they would schedule r _ ; x`
the Association for August 20. ',FS.,} 'Nz
~cz>
s'
5. UPDATE: METRO 2040 k~ ;
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, reported that Metro Exec Mike 7' A-""! ''I I
I .1 "I
11 ,
Burton finalized MPAC's recommendation into a new document; staff has not yet N i
reviewed that document to determine if Tigard's comments were responded to. He off 1~ Y x
said that the Growth Committee of the Metro Council has begun receiving public 1 _ ' ,
testimony on MPAC's recommendation. Though staff has not obtained a revised r m, a -
with the ~schedule,n~4a! , he anticipated that the MPAC hearings would continue through August st
"n hearings before the. Metro Council in September and October and . I
i e. 5.
s i y
adoption in mid-October.
_I"r
Mr. Hendryx said that staff could get copies of the latest draft to the Council. Staff
would return with an analysis and evaluation at a later date. -fir " I
x ~ -C ij
6. DISCUSSION: WATER OPTIONS t ~ .
g 1$ a
Ed Wegner, Public Works Director, presented the staff update. He reviewed the t
specific actions staff has taken to deal with the water situation, buying as much ,
} water as they could from whoever would sell it to them and storing 17 million ( a' C
gallons from Portland over the weekend. He reported the two times that Lake
F i Oswego shut Tigard's water supply from them off completely. He said that , , I
Portland has agreed to self Tigard additional water. f
Mr. Monahan stated that staff wanted to investigate the Portland option. He said j,`~yt d k
that Lake Oswego has determined that it will not be able to expand its treatment %y ~ a
_ I
plant in West Linn.
3f ~ ,
f e L 5S' W a
- rl 4 i _
a -i CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 4 ~-v Y h"nr - -a
_ S7 r ~t~~ 1
t a f4'"' E
xs's- }
r _ - p A
f - 4„ Y
S r -
- S - t'P 6
1- d ? - , Yt i - -1
P
ai
x r , ~V
,a • s'I ; - y'' Y-
}=ae - _ 1 , H -i i
f $
T f F -
, , i, It.. ~ ~ , , . , . . . ~ _ - ~ - . , , , .i I , , : , . - ~ - I , , , _j
~ - 7-,~-~~,`_~~ ~ ' I ~ r I . I - I _ . . r ~ I .1 , , % *11 - I o~ `
y i
+~c~r.
-
_~1_6' Ff --k,'OKME~ ~~,,,"~,,-f , ~'ti , ` - - , -i~~- 1 ~ , 7 - ~ - ,F ~ - , - , 1~ .
t icY - S 3 - _ q p ,
x
y ' - - - r
to - Y .~aa,a , ----..em. 1_ _w_~~_
z : 'r a - x
, :
r-~'r _':t k d
14 -
,
as
- . t aif,,, - - .
I "I
& - 1 ` ST
t Mr. Monahan said that they were still waiting for the draft contraci lion, Lake
, Oswego on the new rate and purchase of water for the future. He recommended s r '
' y telling Lake Oswego up front that Tigard was concerned that Lake Oswego was not a NJ t
k going to provide Tigard with enough water which was why Tigard would have to
buy a second million gallons from Portland. He commented that it appeared to staff
that Lake Oswego was weaning Tigard from its system.
` Mr. Wegner reported that the final draft of the Regional Water Supply Plan would r Y' ti
be completed in September. He mentioned that the staff report on water SDCs 7
- recommended a rate increase; staff was developing a public input portion similar to ? - r
that used for the parks SDC. 3 x
Mr. Wegner reported that they would turn in the conditional use permit for the { y
r. Menlor site on August 8 after the neighborhood meeting on July 31, on the advice o , ;
, '
of t..e attorney who suggested addressing any neighborhood concerns prior to F
submitting the permit. 4~ _O
„ , `
j Phil Smith, Murray Smith & Associates, presented the update of the October ' t s > k r f`"f
a 1994 water supply plan. He reviewed the four supply alternatives identified in that ` _J1
.
plan: Lake Oswego, Portland, a regional approach to developing the Willamettexx y
River as a source, and Tigard developing the Willamette on its own. He noted that i k`
their pursuit of equal partnership with Lake Oswego and sharing of water rights r 5
- 11
never came to fruition. He reported that Lake Oswego ran into serious Fn a
neighborhood opposition over the expansion of their water treatment plant in West ? ~ , tkV
Linn. fi~ , ,
-11 ,
Mr. Monahan reported that Lake Oswego did get local approval of their plan to x
~t upgrade the status of the West Linn plant but would not be getting any increased,
capacity there. ;
a t r .e
#
Mc Smith reviewed the second alternative, Portland, noting the importance of
continuing to maintain good relationships with Portland; Tigard's contract was up in
2007. He noted that Portland has not yet decided if it will be a regional supplier or
only serve its own citizens. ` 11
I.
Chris Huber, Murray Smith & Associates, stated that Portland would renegotiate" ,r,
r all wholesaler contracts and was in the process of forming a Model Contract `
Committee to get input on the contracts from its wholesalers. ,
< r < ~ 54
Councilor Rohlf asked if Portland was using other jurisdictions to spread the water I~ - §4
x costs to help keep rates down for its users. Mr. Smith said that Portland had an ° ~
. economic incentive to wholesale water for that reason since selling water paid fora A,a
lot of their operations. _ ;
M-
z Mr. Wegner reported that Portland indicated at the Water Managers meeting last v: s-K
week that they have set up a Steering Committee and an Executive Committee to i
{ develop a road map to renegotiate contracts.
r
~
-i..Cµ •`~s x --j CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 5 { ya F 2
'^i"k'. k t .l
f^ t j h j ne" ~ F, Z F
P k
r t( f
c g
~ xM L
_ t x?µ
- _ 4 _ F a
~t t _ - - -
j
is
" _ - ;,i;`~~' '~~rZ'-,,~ ' ~1, ~ I'~ ' I I I - , t I ~ , ~ ,-r ~ , I , , J " ~ ,~I`t, i,, ~-~,~~..~,_,,~"f~",V~- ~ " r. 1~
kf. 1 - - _
Y - k
, -br x ' 11 to't' r" r - a
r ' - - - - "~j
Y
U - - ,
L
_ ti
~ i6
,!W , i
r ,
t€ t,
~i
I",
K- }
a
°4'y - - - - - - S 4°
x }
- - - - .,...,~..1 I L , 4 , . ~ , -
~ wTt x _ -
_ - _ _ __~..v..~ , -
^.4 - y~' f t 1
x
ti? F - FY fv.2i
Mc Huber noted that another issue was that the demand forecasts in the Regional
1 Water Supply Plan indicated that Portland had enough water to supply itself without = r L ~F
expanding capacity until the year 2050;.
I
'r. "
In response to questions from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Huber said that the current
contract was signed in 1982 for a 25 year term. Mr. Wegner said that the Water
' j Managers made it clear to Portland that any contract would have to be for the long : "
term; the finance people were looking at 25 years while the planning and water
supply people didn't want that long a commitment. Mr. Smith and Mr. Huber both - _ " 4 a
agreed that the longer the term, the better. # 'F ®
_ ` d Councilor Rohlf noted that Lake Oswego also spread out its costs by selling water x r
' and asked if they have found someone else to buv their water. Mr. Monahan said ? , -
they someone
they had no indication that Lake Oswego had found a new customer.
X $ "
, "
r Mr. Smith reviewed the third alternative, the Willamette River Regional Water ~,r '4
Supply system. He reviewed the subregional studies looking at plant location and x "
piping arrangement. He noted that the Tualatin Valley Water District has bought , , ~ 'l r
into the Barney project of the Hillsboro Joint Water Commission. Mr. Huber - 4 `h `
reviewed the sources of water for the Tualatin Valley Water District. ~ - ` 4,~
z:
Mr. Huber presented an overview of the Regional Water Supply Plan, noting on a "f
map the locations of the 40 plus providers involved. He reviewed the alternatives in "r
the plan, including a treatment plant at Canby~lsonville with piping to Tigard and
Sherwood. He explained that issues yet to be resolved included the exact location f
of the Wilsonville plant, the size of the facility, and the participation level of the - h } ~3
providers. He reviewed the piping alignments under consideration, noting how they r +t j
came to Tigard. '1~ ti
Mr. Huber said that other issues needing resolution included how much water was ~kz
available and what the cost was. He said that expansion of the Baylor Street
1
supply lines could be a viable interim solution while the Willamette River supply was z ti r L
under development. He explained how the transmission lines would function as W f _ , ~ , 7"
part of either system. s ~ y, 0'r
Councilor Hunt asked about water rights. Mr. Smith said that Tigard filed for water ' z,~ gr~
x '
rights on the Willamette in 1995; last week the Water Resources Department
reported they were processing Tigard's permit. He pointed out that the demands k n
t< j ` s,~ ~ ~ "
for water indicated in the Regional Plan were less than the amounts requested in €
t
the water right permit applications throughout the region. He said that Water 7 `X z
? 4 Resources Department intended to adjudicate the permit requests and look more at r r f n . ,
- "11-14 balancin the water ri hts with the ro ected demands than simply
9 9 P 1 granting 'A requests on a first come first serve basis. Mr. Monahan noted that Water ' h z
Resources was trying to resolve the issue by October. j' S,,
_ 4'. I
x Mr. Monahan stated that several local jurisdictions with pending Willamette River , F
water rights applications have met and intended jointly to raise questions at the
, Water Resources Department to see how they would be treated collectively.
o °w' rt (CF
✓ I
i
1- , l t'~,~ > -
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 6
r, s r
x
e --i ..x~i - -
~t {
l -
b
k-
f E
I , _ _ ~ - _ 2 , r , ~ , , 4: ! - ~ A , _ - = 4
A
4 - 7 _ r t
?N
v
y - j _ _ r p -
' - a-`' t {
I
i -
l a
T
i
j== ~ ._c-_.X a. rct 1i - s...,._ T. s.s c_ ..a Lv i. t _1
*f
I
'z. , 111, f ~•1, t
L h
2
'sue,, + .
c
- `ag - ~2 - a - avh.~.~au.z,x ww...,.....~ ' t e Q
4 -rir ix x ® Ur-:
17 ~~7
1 'i fi'``t `L- - 3 -
r r-
Councilor Rohlf asked if Mr. Smith was aware of any radical changes to the cost of
- the regional alternatives. Mr. Smith said yes, that over time they have been able to
better evaluate the costs to the various jurisdictions. Mr. Huber noted that though - a I "
` Wilsonville would be the first to use the treatment plant, the other jurisdictions -
needed to con_ cider whether -
of _he or not they would buy into the system now to make t
sure that it had sufficient intake on the river to supply them later. He said that their
rt best cost estimate for this alternative was $3-5 million dollars at this time but that F`
they would know more after the preliminary design was completed in August. 1. x~F.,,,.
r `ff In response to a question from Mr. Monahan, Mr. Huber said that Portland would 4£ 4 x' t ~
14 { have a say in Tualatin Valley Water District sending Portland water to Tigard. {
Councilor Hunt asked if it would be wise to start setting aside monev for capital e ~ ,
t.~ expenditures for the water supply system. Mr. Huber said yes. Mr. Wegner i- -k'-:v~y .t.,*~t-;
reviewed the ways that Tigard could begin to set aside a reserve, including rates w -
and SDCs. Councilor Hunt recommended building into the current rate review a -
, factor to accumulate money for a reserve fund. Councilor Rohlf concurred. 4 r _
Mayor Nicoll asked when the rate study would be finalized. Mr. Wegner said that . ; 11 ~
the rate study was complete and could come to Council now; they could easily ,,~xN ! ,
r factor into the model a reserve amount. He commented that they would like to wait ar- r,; , k: ; fi€, - -
until they had the costs from the Tualatin Valley Water District proposal included. hI~y
, cr ,
In response to Council questions, Mr. Wegner said that the current rate study was " , , x
revenue neutral but that part of the study had been to develop a model to allow f ' ' r
them to add in amounts for a water treatment plant and calculate a new rate. a- x ~ , , ri
L 4
- 11-
7. DISCUSSION: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR CONSULTANT TO REVIEW - ' . ' -111 I 11 - ~Zg
= THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE ='t'~s ~'tV~~
r - -1 4g i`y
J, 7 'J
, 3- ' ky
Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager, reviewed the RFP staff has proposed to ri
hire a consultant to rewrite the Development Code. He said that staff has been
collecting code provision changes, including the Metro 2040 process changes, and - I'I .
wanted a consultant to review the Code without bias and then recommend a 7
simplification of the process. He explained that the timing of the hiring of the 1~~
{ consultant was such that the Metro 2040 plan would be adopted around the same F j ` I
S time the consultant was hired who would then include the final 2040 plan provisions
i in his review. 4 , xs '
1"
1 f i{#
( Mayor Nicoll asked if staff would seek input from the development community. Mc ` '
Bewersdorff stated that the RFP included provisions on public involvement W 1,
t methods. I
Councilor Rohif asked that a summary in plain English of the purpose of the Code
be included at the beginning of the Code. Mr. Bewersdorff said that currently there Nfr~
was a summary at the beginning of the Code; they could look at putting it into plain
4 English. Mr. Hendryx commented that the intent was to provide a user friendly
Code that people could understand without the aid of experts. 3
& r t
: , j
'v CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 7 rx t
q r r
Y
L -t
Y - S - - - J - _
r t
3 - - -
- _ J '
2
r' F _ _ £
!b - - :F
r$ V
Tr - _
,r - - - r~
.
C - - -
- - F' Z
_„r
1 - -
t.
_ - - - - - -
V - 'yy = G't t 1 Y - -l _'L
~ `"zsf .Zfi - - 'r
'k s-' y Y `+3_- 1-
K u '7 - - r -
as1u -fw 3 _J,' 'wkkt~±1v-u:-. .a.-I.+..maw.a,...marsa....sw.,-.,°- <.:~.s..,w,..a.•.....r. f r s
x
* _ '
a-Y` 34 ss ''~'!z
r
y y f
r -
r " 4 Mayor Nicoli spoke to creating a task force from the community to work with the SEE S
f - s consultant on making the Code readable to ordinary citizens. He expressed ;
a concern that a consultant might write the Code in hard to understand terms that 3
. were favorable to the City. Mr. Hendryx reviewed the public involvement process
- 1- et I
envisioned by the staff which included a Steering Committee ggrpprjsPri of key a
f - - representatives to serve as a sounding board to make sure that the process was on - I-
the mark. He pointed out that they would not throw out the key provisions in the - ' -
Code; there were certain standards that reflected the community's values. This 1 v
was an effort to clean up the Code and make it more understandable. x, '
Mayor Nicoli recommended including people in the private sector who worked with 1 _
V i j the document on a daily basis to tell the City what was wrong with the document. ti 4y
I Mr. Monahan stated that the RFP would go out to interested firms or individuals; it k
would not be bid out. He noted that the City could hire a temporary staff person to N ~T z
review the Code, if Council was concerned about the level of public involvements
Mayor Nicoll stated that he did not have a problem with the process but commented -
that the consultant would want to know how much authority a task force had over g - P .dj~
$
the process. `ie>~
3 Mc Bewersdorff noted that this was only the RFP. Staff would evaluate the ~v 1 111
proposals and select the consultant who would do the best job within the City's 1`_
x ,-A parameters. Mc Hendryx commented that staff brought this to the Council to have=i= ` ; {f y~ j
discussion on how this would be taken forward in terms of public involvement of the ':AYfit1 $~i£ `
Planning Commission and the CITs. A# sg~ to ~ {
~ r - s _
~ 2,1711,
. Mayor Nicoll noted that there was consensus by the Council for staff to proceed V - ` r `
with the RFP. F A ,
8. DISCUSSION: LAND USE ITEM -SCREENING AND BUFFERING s : M -
~j` rv
Mark Roberts, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He said that the ~ _
' , i revisions focused on screening and buffering between commercial and residential. ~ ~ E
` ~ He reviewed the standards for noise buffering. Mr. Monahan noted that the main , '1 A ;^~~the time the
standard
written
noise headeghtsn Mayo9Nicoli comment d that with nrthe la t 10 years the Councllland ; i" 3~ # r
F considered upgrading the DEQ requirements to a higher level but it did not pass. ; # s `
> a ~
a ; Mr. Roberts reviewed a chart in the Community Development Code that detailed ~ - m ` ;F ~
` - how much and what kind of a buffer was required for specific uses.' He pointed out
F' Vf t
other provisions in the Code referring to structural setbacks for buffering. I ti ,"k .k s C
sti ` ,
i Councilor Scheckla cited the Tualatin Green as an example of a project that 41 €
~ ~ , - ex - - ~
received many complaints about noise and lighting. He expressed concern about f
buffering microwave poles and offensive odors.
! E -
t Mr. Bewersdorff stated that there were provisions in the Code to deal with those g, r
-s issues; staff required further study from a developer on those issues. He cited ~ ~ r
{
Y - f n
"f s CITY COUNCIL [dEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 8
~a 2 } _ C Y•g v S + f
{
~a
L
i w k
-c - r
a
':J
7
N9 - ~
- 2,t i
1-
1' - a - t ,
I
i[ - _ r i F J
rti _ - k
Sg , 4 s
y
' x
g~"f i a f - i - - - - a.
7 s' - r _ zF-t 3 -
-t ""t r•
1
eFy -X
i.
- .
i ~ a a ! -'tom -2 . r__ -t i
_ _ _ _
-
av~.~
R, 21 L 1 i 1- k, lf -.v'
f.a"` vx Y.Y. 6 -t
x~t 2C r-
-
AN a-3 'srk". - - i --t r~Fa
- z Tr
A~ c -
11,
w
'Mm 'It
q # -,l Fowler School as an example of a successful project that did not receive ~f ; -
r j complaints. tx
kr
~ , r., Mr. Roberts presented slides showing the buffering (or lack thereof) in various ~ F , ',"v ,
- commercial sites bordering residential areas around the City, including some in n.= } n tea:
- t Beaverton. C'
Councilor Rohlf raised the issue of enforcing buffering standards. Staff noted the r s
a problems with enforcement, especially with developments that occurred prior to theme} 4
, newer buffering standards. They required maintenance of the buffering in the more a,.F~.~.~ ~ ,-3..? ,
.-I-
recent developments and could use the citation process in the Code for F - ,'I
- _ enforcement. Mr. Roberts said that, in cases of redevelopment, unless a new ,
business altered the building or rhannod the use ^ific°,,n*~'.,y^ta `couldn't appl*"; x~:"
1=; ;z`s - - - significantly, Y rZ' M ;..aeg L:,_. -
t y the new standards. E ZV
- Mr. Roberts presented the staff recommendations. These included cleaning up the
format of the chart so that it was clearer and more readable, making all the .s-K„ ~ -
i -4 screening standards at one level, and increasing the 10 foot buffer requirement for s h x
- fl' =ms.'4 Vii--
i parking lots with less than 50 spaces. ' -
Councilor Rohlf asked if the code process needed modification, noting that ii t I ~ ~ ~ ,
appeared cumbersome. Mr. Hendryx said that they looked at complaints on a case 111.
by case basis where there were no clear standards. '
11, -e I
Mr. Monahan commented that it would be beneficial if the Council met with the '-t ; ' ` I r ,
r
Municipal Court Judge to find out what issues were coming through the court p .
system and which provisions were difficult to administer. He cited the lengthy time , " "11
it took the court to reach a decision on the Fir Grove buffering issue as creating imp- ~
s 1 ~ z 5
some unrest in the community. ~ - K ,
4
1 - - I y
Mr. Hendryx stated that staff intended to take this to the CITs and the Planning ,--Xj ~ s
L Commission. Mr. Monahan said that staff resented this to Council first to make i= _
sure that they were addressing the Council goal appropriately. -
9. DISCUSSION: CITY FACILITIES SPACE PLANNING I r ~ t
{ f .
The item was continued to next week. . ' ~
s~ g
, F
' 10. DISCUSSION: REACTIVATION OF THE HOMELESS TASK FORCE „>W,5 +L
11
This item was continued to a later date. t, ` ,t~4 C,
11. NON AGENDA ITEMS - } - ~ t
t r r ~ -
°s ' > Mr. Monahan presented an update on the purchase of the right of way from the a 'X"''tf '
{ cemetery on Greenburg Road. He recommended not purchasing the right of ways '
i because of the number of graves very close to the road. He suggested reallocating 1~
#ti the $200,000 to the road maintenance program ($70,000) and to the Main and - ' 1 i
- f °°a, Commercial Street projects. ; -I
✓ ; #
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 9 ~ f f~ 4
~ 11 -0 "1'16111 11" ,
~",.,~',~g-, - ' ~ ,~Z~; ~ ii F'---Z~'?4 -l" ~ ~
r z
r_
~ I - ' - i~~ - ~J
'6 „
Sd F t
u ,
g 5 f, Y } 0. - - 4 f f~
t- t~'a 4 t' i T J
L Y
Y
` r - - - - ,
M - -
s - - . ,s
A`• , L- - -
t
-3.2 _ -
` s^ r.ks5 y - k -
{
aro y
h
x
- - - -i tf - -
? 1 E
, 11 d - -3 i ^7
L = r t Fa > Mr. Monahan reported that the state had to rebid the Grant Avenue and Tiedeman
f i
I bridge projects due to disqualification of the bids; Grant Avenue would be delayed }
until next year and Tiedeman Bridge until 1998. ^
> Mr. Monahan. reported that the Portland and VVestem Railroad _einUlrl not fix the s f "z--~
railroad crossing until the detour was over at the end of August. `
> The Council discussed Greenburg Road. Councilor Rohlf asked how great the F
- need was for right of way at the cemetery, pointing out that the longer they waited, =,z_'-<, ".,,r -
F the more gravesites there would be. Mr. Monahan said that it was at the top of the r ` " '
R i CIP list but that he would have to get more information. M
> Mayor Nicoli reported that Washington County was interested in selling the Durham T u
rock pit because they needed funds to purchase land adjacent to the existing I y~ E'- 4e
j Washington County Road Department facility in Hillsboro in order to expand the ~ ~ ,V F _
facility. He stated that the County has approached the jurisdictions with an interest ~ s
1 in the Durham rock pit to ask if they had any concerns. FE
_A
Mayor Nicoli said that City of Durham wanted the County to reserve the land for Vr , . 9 _
future road and parking improvements. He explained that though the County ,f _
agreed with Durham's concerns, they could not spend their road fund money on ~ y . , ri
, those items. He said that the County has suggested that they sell the land and
' offered to foster a cooperative spirit by promising to build a foot bridge over the a 1 V-I
Tualatin River. I m
2 r
> Mayor Nicoli reported that the state government was only allocating $17 million a - - r
year in capital projects from the entire region (Astoria to Hood River); this amount
might fund one out of the 20 - 30 projects proposed. He said that the trend was to . -1 , ` ,
raise money at the local level, commenting that Washington County spent more in " }~fi z
its MSTIP program than the state's plans for the region. { ,
Mayor Nicoli said that the Washington County Coordinating Committee F.ll, s~
y t (representing all cities in the county) has decided to wait on promoting additional
fees at the local level until after the legislature meets to see if the state would come , wt '
up with additional monies for improvements. If they did not, the Committee would ti ~ ' ~ i
try to reinitiate the Tri-county plan; if that failed, then they would look for additional ~ r r ` I
funding, possibly in registration fees. S { f ~x E
! > Mayor Nicoli reported that the Count,, and the Mayors of Beaverton, Tigard, ~ - -z d V'_ ;s I
, Tualatin and Sherwood have been meeting to discuss putting passenger traffic on e
existing freightiines. He explained that the jurisdictions were upset because of the i'. ~ t
violation of the informal agreement that the Washington County road system would r' ~
not be hit in order to finance the $700 million North-South light rail package (passed
during special session last year); Washington County took a big hit and the Mayors
' did not want to lose any more of their transportation dollars. He said that they were , i 'J
- also concerned that the problems with the North-South light rail meant that they F
would lose even more of their money to finance it.
Y 4
S •
i k
1 r.
F i
+ ? CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 10 r_ y_j F 1
r _ ) ti -
1 _ - E
a
x 3 's 9 - 1- - may.
h
F _ j -s- , _i
I
F - _ jf ~ _ : I ~ . - - : ~ ~ ~ ' , - ~ - - L ~ I . I I I I - I I :1 . . r ~ r L I L - J, - , -
d { . t. 1
X R
- -TS
- - , - -
i
r f
- tf tj 1
" - - -
F
ps
Y'# fy r g ,i _7
{
- - v.~
- _ .i' i.
~la---- _~7~r~n._r.~..-.rte. _ { .'^'^'.e~-r+l^'•. K... u - t t f
ffi- h•
x - k
V~~ - 5 3 t s } r Wiz' 't 3 a. fi ~,x a~-c' -
-l-It p-=•* xr S a ! 1 i { `~Y E - s uj x - -yns~'P sr` a , MR ~',M .t„ , WOYr R - , _ t t„ ' - - + _ 1 - a- %a .S" fi ns +
'k.*'c-°7't ~.a`Y 4".9~.:'swa tea' s..,,
V 'r
~„a <<
.i
s a ?l? rr =sf3 > Mr. Monahan reported that they have not received any word back on Aspen s s, - r
_ , ' S F Ridge. t f t f
k F 12. ADJOURNMENT: 11:00 .m.
u ^ .5?aR. ; 'w3 szsx ''ate TX
~ 'i, I
'tip'`- dg _-y, 73 , 'rX ./.u i 5
' r ~ , Catherine Wheatley, City Re rder c L
_
_
%i-tfy rv$~ . . ,.,IFgRib .,fy'' «rt, if,'-a x -i--".y' _
i k ti Attest: k
e
Yr`-a -xPtr. °,~""®t
1_17 1_4 1~
} - ~i 'r`ye.
c' -
" 'q y' ~ ~ Mayer: City of Tigard l ~ ~
1 t 1 ` ` f Date: ? l3 /lCl(y
M~
~
"
_ I
rid'- - ~ Y{~`. ! - S -9 .......i , i
t
x
?r' ~e.rr`4t
-i 1,
0 K•-, "..~t- Yet ~ qk
'jr, i wrs ~~fl i
- R 4
r_ - @ z- ,-OrgM-1 $v S
+'4K yak "
A_z_; a-- - - t
i S - 2 W y, - A Cr'tea .
Y "'t 7yJt c. Fs. ~~'"€~7 .v E
ix r 3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1996 - PAGE 11 ?-3• y ,„s'rs# -
!d' k
- 3' - Ito--' ".v"~•~^-fi` -...,"~.'uA' = ~*m ~ ~y+n k~ ' fa
_ '€'2'2 k' 7'- b - y by .f+, "R,
~ jt ;
-`~r~r VlY ~j-- any E a t rr - t -..1. ,
';2' sir-`ti:` e., e•,;~ "zz .-,e~y e s' - - - _ x { _ s} ai, ~.-cs o- y
w'%,r €N,. y s 5" s ~w c - ` s -r,rr* ``s`1 t r ~9
ar g +~'s . « f9r,. 43. - v}x-, S - - 1, - r;'-' r i x t ,S:s
s 5 ' i ; a,.~4Ln.,~:?„j"..^"tx - _
'W a s _ a ' r n 'r s . ,t r'y.iNs f '3
-ez.F'ag X fit" r i^..,y',' u, f r. - a r` Fr
F
#3$'`,.ti-9 rs ? tr~, s r. F 4 r'~ _ -t3 1'11- ,a *s,
r
} ~F J" OF Y. I 1 } 2 - Yr F [
. ;5 ~ ~
-fJI" 1 $yY S'1,- - - _ 4 1 4
°_..:.-.s Vic. r n ' - e - - t r _ ,r - 4` r 02 ~
~ > - Piz x. _ - - r
Pnw,
' 1 r. .r% fir. ti. < _ t r f - c t o m .s` z'~ zr RN, .Z
at`--' a
2, ~
- 10
, x3.o- -k t~~
sa r' u t-` by, S ) y a rns
11. - k ~ . 3-; "
~ r COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal '
g } - - " P.O.BOX370 PHONE (503)684-0360 Notice TT 8565~e%- s.;
✓ 4
* rt F - - - BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 1_11~' s,,, - F- A,
f " S' t y t ' - i .x.,1.7
} f ~ Legal Notice Advertisingx
~.€S"s.-u S d"h'A-a5-
r ~`-h ? k City of Tigard • 13 Tearsheet Notice, z ,
~ ` r-
~ " _ ° ❑ Dup:lcata ..,idavit 0,11--m-'12-in,
fig:5 §r` 4 a,,, , i. 11 f
f r _ 4~ccounts Payable
14 y , ,rte a-~''•-s3+~ c, rt 1i
k slc~_ s g2
rivi0 '"'T. s $ x ~
i i AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION 1
~ -r r STATE OF OREGON, ) -tnsrt,sc; r'f,a, -§,~z' r 4-~
,
- COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. ~ - 11 L.
Kathy Snyder &
~being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising ~x~ g°
i Director, or his principal clerk, of 1heT14ard-TUaaltin Times
- , , a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 ~ . $ ~ ' t
2 - and 193.020; published at Tigard in the It
- - afgresaid county and starkte; that the >.~-P`
11
z City Council Woshon Diee 'na - i
us a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the ~
rt s entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and ~w
7 ?!}ids 'Y i.' M
# - g - . consecutive in the following issues: ~ a =1
} E
T-',;,~ July 11.1996 y
3 1
r54 d~~ s
a
r ,
' Subscribed and sworn t b ore me this 1996~r ! u~ ~ W 1~ -
'rt - a y t°1"`_VOFD. ~tAl uEAL "r ~ -
zk Notary P is for Oregon O)IU `0. 024552 q s - ,REST- i
' h r
c - t > _ - a` - Illy 10 t :8Z5MAYI6,1997 - . '--xR 1,,, -I s`~-~ i
~ - r- My Commission Expires: " a'~ ;
`k- w.. rF - ~ r s a '.~zn REM t' .i
smear AFFIDAVIT - > r ; NQ, t m
` f a (
' r -
=u~
~~s ~3 . i
t t - s.r,rx~.w...s.~. -
`fie - -:e !z'," e - , 4 f§~^.',;? - k c
S wnrf r j `"t j.....
- ,_1,-,--, t t P.
J. P aR~ r
t A 3 5,
yy`,,~~~r-+a."q, ~3''~7 } r 11 'rte ~~i I" r _ a
C~ 5.. i"~.'~- 6-si- Y •C'- '°'a^ }'r-.',+9.~' w.,- '~.S~FCS+o-xwm°"""'°"'~ro.nvax ~yyr7,°d;?3A .u..s tai".,E Ta"' c- -ere-~;-sq,..-t m.fi, S%!i". ,,+.sA yz,. a` .yy yt
av5• 4 - Y m', es ,f '"'yr4-n:ns,:ue
h`i - _ _ ^`i:; _ a^,-.x" :;1-i:;{`+ n ;kt€' -l-w v+ x k'3~., y>: r,~,~,~W;
. ,:»e z y - -.I
t?, ~
~".s'N`r •'ri;.» -a: :t - z., '-S 'r:'S'"^•,I"- S" , 'tea r. ~ -
~;.>ami•_y , _ - 4- , <rx. ~r,. s q;,,irt;?,' ses,, ;
r+ t _ h - _ e _
_ i,-, s3=
' 4 h.~- - ~ r;6 Syr k,}~r;r
, [I , -1 w,~, -e~, y - '9 - _ -,-.11
z w } S
E `4tc r2 tiz'} a } s - rta2u , ri?z 11. 1-.1 141~1.1 E t
1 f d Y w ",1
,y ,u' .
yam *v r r" 4 - t 3 n r a. z'r" v-i i s Y
~„7 y2 ~y ''1°r s 4 ^ r „E , ' j x _ s a ,4 r,.'` -
L- ~jk y..r r, a t •i 3 _ 1, r Y eK ,~-k~~'.k, > V- s E .i
r r e
> z 6
Elm , , ' - : - _j~ - , -
E 1
„ _ _ ' . - „Y. , - _,.Y _-I~ ~ _ v Y . _ y ,.w_~~r~~
_ T
-t
- a - -
t - - - - - -
*s,-
N-6 " 11 it I.
x
~wkh xs ' z
.k~'E' .g. .r - t
F~j Y 1
,t4 , ` t ,3-,, , s,; Wit _
-?F~'.k R, l U
t " 3, -1.11 til"', -
k p t .'s` t' t k r -
pv~x£s' i rte' } s fi - d 1
' x'd~ - x 'r -
11
3- --4 a -s -A
11
d t'cr x~~t3
I
~ _ : S` i
y. YJ-f.f t _ b.- - -
J
I f: .
'4 -,.x,43, -
Tfa fnllnvl„o tMnlinn h:nht:eh.. I:= . wuna_i _
w W~ ~ your infernation. Full
agendas 1 rayy be obtained from the City Recorder; 13125 S.W Hall
Boulevard. Tim Omgon 97223, or b g & k4 '
by caUin 639-4171. ~ , R ? ~ T
t CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MFfiTTNG _ "2 a
x
'3u1y16;199b-6:30P.M. j~r~x4_ t`
' s
J7 t 13125 W. HALL BOUT fiy -.TOW;M%46
ARD, TIGx " v' V ,
R z , a w^_""`9~ MCel7I1g ~'opIC3 - - 4 r r .»"M,"t K, g' .
, ,
m1
_ ' - ` i ~
• Citizen Involvement Teams (2CM ComTmuumcauons & Meetin
1 ~ 1 ,t f= ~
Y - tafl'
whit CTT Fttcilitators and S Resource s _
j • 'Update Motro 2040 g kk , ~ s i
Discuss Land Water Use Topic. ic: M
ScreeningandBufferinBR~R°±ttents, y- _ l `
Discuss
• RDaeu Downtown Area with Downtown Merc ~ . * l
vauat of Homeless Task Face ; r a `r°
equest for Proposal for Consultant to Review th
fx ; Tigard Devrdopment Code a i h~ a ~z ~ k
t , r • Executive Session: The Tigard City Council may e t; I z
five Session under the provisions of ORS 192.66pg 1 mm ° , M `t i
y - (h) to discuss labor relations real (e) P s~` ) erty
Ow M __1
andpendmgliti gationIssues - prop_ hansacuons curm~t ` 1 -
r', T18565I Pnbitsh July 11 1996 s T" r 71IM".
t
u~s
] 'tIiT~~,j4L~,_ , , t - 'x y, r a ~,~f3 - 11 ~~i
a ~~a x> L ~K"s V
f - y 4 L Y - ,.f
ty - r 3 44,: - a C 7Mf Y i d 7 t{. d- Si J . A. i
~f- f 4 'j r
f y'Li 3 Ij'
r I
F'Y 1 k
1 n Inc-t'~ t _ a } 7v _
r
77 _-l' }t t 3 y,~y'~ r
-I it t t" h Y ` y. , - {
jr r"i,~c. xiw, sa' .>~^cd+.a-Pr d ,,n.l"F -:xa".»•. T«J{'"_~':~?~. ='4 ::m '99 „f,n y r -~~L r -#~+1.a ` _
u'- e R )C - - ) - d
s tffr - 4
{
a y - 5 y
f - w_ x w `€r _
L - _ ~ ~ : ' r~.~ ~ L I ' L I 11 -Lr~, - - . ,
y
~ ~ ,'~;'vj'~ , _r.
t
{ ? r f ! t
3
o-
5
- - i ~ " " "'t '~,l " 1~ ~ , ~rl 1, 1, I` . , I I _ , r ~ I - I , - - - I , ~ " , i - , _ I ~ , - - 1~ I M ,
. ~1, I I ~ ~ 1:, , ~ ttt ~ ~ . I t * I ~ ~ ~r. I , . ~ : ~ ~ : I ~ - I I M ~ 1, , fff a
„
z`[~ - : _ .r1 - : ~ -S. ..__x i;. __2'~,......., 1 z...v.y_.....~_.__ z_„_ _v..;? ..__...L
w. . -
$ r -,y,3~"c'--' e tit - - - - - r 4 r
k .9 <.[2'.:~ - _ 3...iw..,s.t -,ix, 3 ,u:.nr.`v~n.*'~.•FS:'u'i
~ ~01111 , . -
Z ~x - _ r- vt- M3 ,i`w
p*'r
nV" nt }:w F a _ ,47 ~F
{ ,.L .s < -fir - Y t 1(x tub q + -
't1- x Qom, __.,_w,~__.. - .i - - ra z- s -a
Nq - t - R.1-" 'fir a , p.",.t - ® -
+4.L L' xL rr ~,y.
r3 1 = AGENDA ITEM # ' ~ /
a,.>~ - f r ,
r1 ,mac For Agenda of 7/16/96 µ - ,
f 1* / t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON "
} { i T ~;1-. < COUNCIL AGEI D A }
. ITEM 'SUMMARY } . ;n;' =r-% = t;.
f g
i
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE The City's MZ, Direction for the Downtown Area 1 ` µyyY :z Lid 11
4 i
a tam } <
PREPARED BY: William A. Monahan DEPT HEAD OK _CITY ADMIN OK &V te~' a~ '
ISS BEFORE THE O TN I 3,gA z
x r Council should discuss with the Downtown Merchant's Association and staff (1) expenditure of a portion for the '.y
r 1 ,
funds remaining from a $50,000 grant of funds to the Association; a ,d (2) the process to develop the City's ` ~r ,
z A:--,: ,
- .11 - - con IU1 tie downtown area. _ - ' ~T7, E"s "
' STAFF RECOMMENDATION &
71
J Staff recommends that Council discuss with the Association its request to use $20-$21,000 of the remaining ,,n" 6 ;3
t° $31,281 funds earmarked for downtown improvements for a reader board. In addition, staff proposes that the w T rt"
implementation of the 2040 plan and visioning process be used as forums to develop input for discussion of the .4
future direction of downtown. f~
r+
Y INFORMATION SUMMARY m' - ~ 2 ` t
The Downtown Merchant's Association seeks approval of disbursement of a portion of funds set aside b Council s ~
for the downtown area. Council will meet with Association representatives to discuss a proposed expenditure fora
reader board.
~ 9'
A Council goal for the current year is "develop the City's direction for the downtown area." Staff seeks guidance 3
} from Council of what is expected to achieve this goal. An opportunity exists to discuss this question in the review
of 2040 implementation and the visioning process.
} W"~~
' OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ' t
iii
11
z r -ri Take no action. s rx °x r r- ar-' t f
rr e-* FISCAL NOTES +.+£;5 J
{
? 1. $31,281 remain in a fund earmarked for downtown projects. r,; " F s
rx
2. No estimate is available regarding the cost of developing the City's direction. Y' x
't x' ryu.~ ~.wmbewnvwn due r T
; - 0 f
c€ r t;K ,ray-^,+~
r 1p "x f y 1-.' f r,,. a'k" r of j
3
T t' et"y,<~' d(
r 4' F - .I,, . 3 lZ 0 , = q Y 4
a i - r~ •E• TT l x"~F' Lx _ -
if J fr ( - I - 4z `F~ Lq 11 g k-ems; C r -r.,E*--; Y € ' pc-c _ i_ "s,~,r 4TT'
L
w
Pr7 1 } ors {lC - c ,
4 d J- - f r - f E t J
.r 1 { M l - lcr' -
& it y h
_ C $ _ ~ rrr
n{ i` r } tr , d b T 1x r
Y i Y` i 7r - t t k? H - j
-
a -r $ - r - z, 2~. Ji
J i{
u ,I
7
r3
Y
t :1R, - 3 , t
t e
zw cn
t rs x u ` { §
4
`3, im -x l - - : .e. 1 rte.«.r s....._...._,_J..a. ....,....y - T «
- S
5y-, v nil- I - _ e[ ~~j
,1~ is - - _ ' $ -,t£ - 5 }
4 ..~°S; k~r41n1C1 r . r 3" -2s5 €
-s. 4 1- i; - y s,
a 34
During the Council goal setting session, a goal was identified to "Develop the City's Direction for the Downtown , ss 4 ~3 {
Area." Council directed staff to gather some information so that Council may consider options and decide on a J - k ~
L' course of action. ' 3
4 c
For the past few years, energy has been generated by the Downtown Merchant's Association. In May, 1994, the „ ~A € ^
Association sought and was granted $50,000 in City funds for a variety of items. Funds have been spent on r ; few j
4 planters and benches, as well as on an appraisal and environmental assessment for the Feed and Seed store site. In ,,~y
..dd,tior., iiuutigi~ the capital improvement program, Main Street was resurfaced last summer. This year both ends f µ
g of Main Street and Commercial Street will be improved. ~ - o ~ j k s
Additional funds remain from the $50,000 budgeted for the merchants. Suggestions have been made that these ; -
t
funds be used for a reader board, traffic signal at Burnham and Main, and off-street parking. The City has , a
- purchased a portion of the land below the Feed and Seed Store. Once the building is removed by the Chamber, the
City will improve the lot by paving, fencing, landscaping, and half-street improvements, Funds have been set _f+f a ;v d _
aside for this purpose in the FY 96-97 budget. , li ?rr,;
ii.-.- rF -.(4k
t -I _
y ouncil Goal: r~' c rI td
1. What should be done with the remaining funds ($31,281) set aside for the Merchants? » _ , . ?
The City has received a request from Mike Marr, on behalf of the Association. The request asks ' tf. -t ` r ~-,Xf that $20-$21,000 be spent toward purchase and installation of a reader board sign at the south end r,_ , k
of Main Street on City park land. This sign would alert the traveling public to events, businesses in , : k £ - , ~ -
the downtown, and also project driver safety messages as well as other community events. The v
Association has requested an opportunity to discuss the sign with the Council on July 16. 2 y , ~ t -
, x €
k
In addition to the sign, the Association has discussed with Chief Goodpaster the need for a traffic "4 ~ F 11-1111 I.. I signal at Burnham and Main. This project is identified as a potential future project in the City CIP. .a'ia
Funds to complete this project would be above and beyond the 1994 allocation to the Association. fi ? i
Participation in the creation of an off-street parking facility at the site of the Feed and Seed store x' zm y
must be resolved. The City expected that a portion of the $50,000 award will go into the' { £ I.~
I construction of the parking lot. The Association has also expressed willingness to work with the - ~ ~ 7 ,z E _
° i Chamber to police the lot to keep it clean, collect revenue, and regulate use. r 4 - g,~ f[[[
x a "`'i - ago p i'
x e-' ~ ~ E
A
F.
4 {c /~i ' '~lN'afPS-aF d.. 3-. fa!^_ "4 .L _ +.,m~c9bT.~XC,, - .$T.@. . ,.Tr 4y F
J1-*f t L~- d
k - 3 - - J YO, ",p r [
F
Z S _
F` T - r y i_~ j 4
;~5 - 4 } IIIFFF _
t Y W Y
C2., u 11" - - t fi~ ~ ti
TM
r _ z - _ F
, E ~ , " - , , , - ~ . ~ , - - I , , , - ~ , , . , - i
Y-<
11 , , , - " - - ~ : ~ _ ~ , I ~ . - I_ . : : ~ ~ ~ I ~ , . , , . - , ~f ~ - . - .~~F~ , , - . ~ . I _ - , - , . ~ i, I I - - ,I-] I L- ~z~L'
C ~n
..11 _Iiv. _
t: w -
ry`"x^ Wit'" ~7
M 4 I, e _ w r t-- r~ as .x
v v-x h
wnigg- l v
, W ;,tit _'-k - - - -s t i - --n»
I {'..y~,"y ~a,
,
n
tXYy $
I
Y li 11 , 's 2. What role should the City play in the revitalization of the downtown? - ,
" The tougher issue is deciding what the City's role should be in revitalization of downtown. f
r, - } Through anon-aggressive support role the City has had some success the past few years. The.
L~ Merchant's Association and the City have made positive strides. To fully set a direction for the - , , -
K791{ ti r; µ , . downtown, however, the City must decide if it will take the lead. Taking the lead would require.T;}
'4 changes to the comprehensive plan and development code, allocation of additional capital funds to i ~ y ~s
, improve infrastructures, and economic development attraction activities. ~ - ' t 7
{ Staff suggests the Council discuss this issue now so that options for goal attainment can be .Iq~~ h
h _ t developed. Based on Council direction, staff can prepare a work plan and strategy for addressing - s ,
t-- the Council goal during the next year. Of course, the future of the downtown is a ripe issue for s 1 % , y
discussion, since the Metro 2040 plan has identified the area as a town center. Over the next year,
ti - F ~ •1 as staff makes recommendations on the implementation of the 2040 plan and engages the E `
n a 7z> community in the visioning process, much information will be gathered and discussed to help e ,c«~ } E x t
} } Council choose a direction. I recommend that preliminary discussions be held over the next few ` g
months before the visioning process takes off; then Council should discuss the input with the IA, I ~t t P' a E,
fi- - 3 Association and develop a plan. £
ski - + , El
!
i ~ ti A letter and materials submitted by the Tigard Downtown Merchant's Association is attached.
2,_ - a k f i:\cirywide\SUmWowntown.doc e1Y'~µ„ t
'L ~1
iii ~,4~x
3 t~ -.,F~i' `was-a~~ ~ cll
c ~ 7 N, }
- y~ F
Frv 3 ~ t~ ~ xJs r
* ' {
A-jf
a x u Fx L
Z 1. - S,t cu .a 6 1 S i
111.
f.- -
~
11_ 4 i, Y' 7 4 'ua F
r
4 't- 'iI It, _ p Ij
- - 3 k b' x --fi r'~ -k,x
~i ^f F tiff i )
e ,,,t yt-, rim - _ ,e„x,,,.. x,~_ w. 1, ,u ,c F I 'L _
, s E
s r
# r - _ ~L~ br , t FF I'
a
fF ) T- - 1"k 4 t %~,71 '
; , ~ - ji, E ~i~_,~, ~ ~ . ~_`_.i- .-L", , , . _,_,;-~L~- ~ ~ 4 1 A i~I' " : . . ' " ~ - , - - -
-sk~ t r - t
,k.. ply s. G 3 - C _ 4 Y-'~} "jr
'?t1 _ V
SIij54 ~F 2 -t - T _ d V W
4 -cv t1 h Y 57 f
S i; - RW r .r' Y 4 1 _
4 ;RM . - I Z K
6,K ^ _ l1 fIl ~rr~-.~1a.
.~.-Y.~ c_u~. c. :s. .y r.. s._,.,.. ~.._1 N1
,
g 3{ Y y i ! S 1 dt
I T,
{.t'~• ~"c t r} - s.. _ a...,. , - - _r "sue, .-mss .,~3 r _ . _
ARV
5-5, 1
-
r r, }kfi 's Y nd ~e 'rte, ~.e 1 ggp'
g k Tigard Downtown Merchants Association
_ 1~x r
ANot for Profit Corporation s '&--Qv
' -r (503) 624-2975
- 12420 S. W. Main Street 4
z Tigard, Oregon 97223 tt i t
{ ? June 17, 1996
t
i William A. Monahan
C s vetk
r City Administrator, City of Tigard
13125 S.W. Hall Blvd.
4-' f '
440
Tigard, Oregon 97223x
n..
s Subject: Main Street Budgeted Improvements Y s
o - Dear Bill,,' f'
f In May of 1994, the Tigard Downtown Merchants Association presented a number of
? ideas for use of the budgeted $ 50,000 of City funds. A portion of the ideas were ~y 3r~
approved by the Tigard City Council and have since been accomplished. One of the ideas,
_
a Reader Board, was not approved. We would like to resubmit this idea to Council.
Pi,
I' 4.~
j
r A sample picture of what it might look like is enclosed (as well as a borchure from the X X. c -
' vendor). We have investigated and feel that this project could be completed for mf ~ ~ sr
approximately $ 20,000 to $ 21,000. There are more than sufficient dollars remaining in ?
the budgeted amount for this. There is still interest in a mixed use for this Board; _ P
s community service at no charge and commercial space for a fee. The Board investigated kx ~fi7ri '
is computerized for messages and would accomodate continually changing the messages. ; ' s l
It should also be noted that this is not a `flasling' type sign; the message is fixed for
e predetermined seconds before changing to the next message. Not shown is the box for
time and temperature. k
} We would like to discuss this with City Council again. Could you review the Council
agenda and advise us of a time when we could provide answers to the Council so as to :LL
possibly set the stage for their approval of the expenditure. • 4 r r~~- ~ j ~ ,
t ` 4 Thankyou for your attention to this matter. Let us know if further actions are required.
.x}` r
ff k ? ~v
Sincerely,
sn _ - - e = rya ,_-~ws
R. Michael Marr
§ Board of Directors s.:
Tigard Downtown Merchants Association
F p
{ # _ Enclosures a t .
3.e F 1
J F f
7 -T
7 77
ar~+ F t
aA r~,l~~ E 3,
~ R S
s> t - tea. y - c. - r 1
AN
a x ~ e E
- f n A~
47,
Z - - + r. - - ° s s - a 3
x v t
T S
-
y.
d
U
r r
r
r r '
t
~ _,.._a.,.....,a............a+....n....nuns':.4.....ed...saea.ntwi`nP.:Kt°niwm
3 CENTERLINE COMPANY
i
11642 SW PACIFIC HWY.
j TIGARD, OR 97223 y
Ph. 5031684-0454 - ;
Fax 5031636-5354
i y
AUGUST 8, 1995
PRICING ON OUTDOOR LED MESSAGE CENTER FOR CITY OF TIGARD
THE FOLLOWING ARE ESTIMATES OF PRICING ON VARIOUS SIZES OF OUT-
* 1
DOOR DISPLAYS. ALL UNITS ARE SINGLE-SIDED, RED LED'S, FULL
MATRIX, WITH FULL ANIMATION SOFTWARE FOR USER'S PC COMPATIBLE kr¢
COMPUTER, INCLUDING SHIPPING AND 3 YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY.
3.5" CHARACTERS (READABLE UP TO 175 FEET): f rw
2611H X 61411W, 4 LINES OF 26 CHARACTERS .............$15,500..§r
2611H X 7'811W, 4 LINES OF 32 CHARACTERS .......:.....$17,900.
r~
3411H X 614"W, 6 LINES OF 26 CHARACTERS.
$20,500.
t U
9 x f
3011H X 7'8"W, 5 LINES OF 32 CHARACTERS .............$21,500.
6" CHARACTERS (READABLE UP TO 300 FEET):
>S ~ ~ k
2911H X 7'10"W, 3 LINES OF 19 CHARACTERS $17,900. aa..?r
' 36"H X 618"W, 4 LINES OF 16 CHARACTERS .............$19,500.
~ ~ rF
0,5
` 24"H X 911111W, 3 LINES OF 22 CHARACTERS .............$19,900.` axle °
36"W X 711011W, 4 LINES OF 19 CHARACTERS $21,900.
ALL PRICES INCLUDE 4 HOUR TRAINING SESSION IN USE OF PROGRAMMING
SOFTWARE, PLUS LOCAL PROGRAMMING SUPPORT AND 800 NUMBER FACTORY 1~ A
PROGRAMMING SUPPORT.
r
3
THANK YOU,
RON CHAMPION
s d x i R
~ U: tl
~ ~ JL
1
Y Y
1
.
p., - .
--t ""r~.-_-, - - - ; ~ ~
..i - S , ,r ,v - -
1RV 1 yl~ - - - - Y
S i
a
`i 6 V'£ -
ib~Ttiis.~~s Y - 'C o w
" ~ _ - - y
SE - 4 - -1- I _ _ - i - - - - - - -.e._,.....~.'v.Frf..,:~._e~. .~„_»=....v..... _ f ~ j {}C ~ r
x x r
4 rfi t- (I ~1 Ui4
s
DESIGNERS AND MANU CTURERS OF LOW ENERGY EL TRONIC MESSAGE CENTERS` I
J 612 496 0952 800 676 2629 Fax 612 445 7528 16695 Marschall Road, Shakopee, MN 66378 `I g -
Flistorv Of 1_ VICFip} 11ptp C rns 1, 7 4 Y ~pg~
F ia91~
K McKay Data Systems was founded in 1983 to design and manufacture changeable message electronic 5 s
Y signs, for sale to the visual communications industry. Initially our products were the small character, light ~ 5 g-
-
emitting diode displays that frequently are seen in retail stores. The most common sizes were 2, 4 and 6
t ~ inch character systems. Soon foreign manufacturers entered the market with products manu .
factured in the - - s i u
Far East, It became apparent that the competition would be intense especially in the 2 inch character size. - 0+
r In the mid 1980's we Introduced our first message centers to the outdoor market. At that time there was no ' 1
significant competition In the small character (less than 24 inch high character) outdoor market. The most - ` r
practical light emitter, that can be seen in bright sunlight, would have to be the Incandescent lamp. We
were the first to pioneer the use of low-energy, wedge based lamps for outdoor displays. Wedge-based y y t y
lamps are small, high-intensity incandescent lamas that had previously been used Lit aircraft and
automotive applications. McKay Data Systems built these systems with S, 8, 12 and 19 inch characters. A+ $
measure of the success of this approach is that since 1990 several other manufacturers have introduced rx~
wedge-based lamp systems to compete with McKay Data Systems. - - s ~ r
z {
We are continually reviewing new technology for use in low-energy, cost-effective display systems. In ¢K
1990 we made the decision to use the new high•brightness, Light Emitting Diodes (LED's) that were fY' ; ° "t`-
t , ti - 1 - Y.- S.
entering the market primarily for use as automotive brake lamps. LED's had been around for nearly 30 r, Y _ + '
years. Their long reliable life was well established, but prior to 1990 LED's bright enough for outdoor use ~
and at a reasonable price, were unavailable. The high volume needs of the automotive market helped'
r drive prices low enough to allow us to consider LED's as a replacement for Incandescent lamps. « r r
a s
j In 1991 we Introduced our first outdoor LED message center. The first systems had an eight Inch i= 7 , n ` 1 1 .
character, and were a direct replacement for our successful eight inch incandescent lamp system. The LED 3 x ' 5 ?
design, :hen Thcompared to the Incandescent system, has the following features:' > > t a aaz~
e initial purchase price is lower. r as - - ~ z i
The operating energy cost is one-fifteenth that of the lamp system. a - - Ott 1'
• Reduced energy means lower system operating temperature and higher reliability, ~t~
r The installation cost is less. i zr~
'i,, - LL
• The maintenance cost of changing lamps is eliminated.
• Reduced shipping costs due to lower system weights. t
fY,N 5'''
Subsequently we have expanded our manufacturing to provide a broad range of LED character sizes; 1 x-
• 2 inch H
'-r`__-~,"-,~,,,~" ~~,p ~ , gf~~,~~:":~ f~~ ~
• 3.5 inch ~ '
• 6inch 4 yynM`'
flinch ~'rtfi,
• 10 inch 3 z £ s, ,
• 13 inch
~ -
• 18 inch
• 21 inch 1 ; I J
r • 24 inch < - lr"t - r ZZ111,
3 • 28 inch ty #
• 32 inch.
• 35 inch .
• 14 and 1 B inch Time and Temperature Systems
tx 1I 14 and 18 inch Gas Price Changers
{4
B x v We continue to explore the limits of display technology and expect to offer multi-color outdoor LED p
, ~ display systems in early 1995. ,u f
1':
?s.. s
5 9 _
a.
.
S ^-n0'k _ .%~Y,"' 17-111
1
4{ , ,i
Y > S - -
-J 3 - ~
t`
4 5 y.'
- t - 1. S
4' t - It ` T ~
f
- 1 <rr - -''b
b3 p - 4
r
, . .Z~ . . . v, .nom!'-.^•"- 'A'7- i "f (f ~3
a a„y_. - 't:' R-. W K,i":/. car': Y."'
f'N
r
t x,a, rU r t ~ 1 ir~`"Ft eJi , 2+ ::`.t5 i;. 'ry( p
3' pt . M, ti, trr d
7,7
r+'
a ,tix,
h I
'x i ~ i k 1 S, d t I } -~r, A l 'laF J f'tyfi p ~ .4
_ .7 t !4 f 1 J
r 1 ~ 4 1
F ti
)
V t~ t 1'
ANNUAL ELEC MCAL OPERATING COST COMPARISONS Double Faced systems f,
j Competing Incandescent Limp Systems McKay Data Systems LED Systems
Character Size 35 6 8 105 13 18 245 28 35,
Lamp Wattage 3 5 12 15 25 30 55 75 0.27 03t 0365 0.41 0.175 1.1 1.43 192 1.47 -
f mat m, Si"
E Rom Columm Total Lamps
E
7 64 896 $706 SI,177 $2,826 $3,532 $5,887 57,064 $12,951 517,660 549 557 567 575 $87 5201 5262 5352 $819
7 80 1120 $883 $1,472 $3,532 $4,415 57,358 $8,830 $16,188 522,075 S62 S71 $94 S94 $109 5252 5327 5440 51,023
7 96 1344 $1,060 $1,766 $4,238 $5,298 58,830 510,596 519,426 526,490 $74 $85 SIDO $113 5130 5302 $393 5527 51,228
7 112 1568 S1,236 $2,060 54,945 56,181 $10302 512,362 522,664 $30,905 S87 $99 5117 S131 $152 $353 5458 5615 $1,433
1 14428 1792 51,413 52355 55,651 57,064 $11,773 $14,128 525,902 535320 S99 SII4 SI34 5150 5174 5403 SS24 5703 $1,637 "
1t i 7 1 2016 51,589 52,649 56,358 57,947 513,245 315,894 529,139 539,735 Slll 5128 S1S0 5169 5196 $453 5589 5791 51,842
_ 7 160 2240 $1,766 $2,943 57,064 58,830 514,717 $17,660 532377 $44,150 5124 5142 $167 $188 5217 5504 5655 5879 52,047 -
7 176 2464 $1,943 $3,238 $7,770 $9,713 516,188 S19,426 535,615 548,565 S136 S156 5184 5206 5239 5554 S72D 5967 52,251 _
r II~ 16 64 2048 $1,615 57,691 $6,459 58,073 513,455 516,146 529,602 $40,366 5113 5130 5153 5172 5199 5460 5599 5804 51,811
i • 16 80 2560 V.018 53364 58,073 510,092 516,819 520,183 537,002 550,458 5141 SI62 5191 $2IS 5249 5576 5748 51,005 52,339 k` _
16 96 3072 52,422 54,037 59,688 512,110 520,183 524,220 544,403 560,549 5170 5195 1729 5257 519It 5691 5898 51,206 52,807
16 112 3584 $2,826 $4,709 511303 $14,128 523,547 528,256 551,803 $70,641 5198 5227 5267 5300 5348 $806 51,048 51,407 53,275
1 16 128 4096 S3,229 $5382 SIZ917 516,146 526,911 532,293 559,204 $80,732 $226 $260 S306 $343 $398 5921 51,197 51,607 53,742
16 144 4608 53,633 56,055 514,532 S18,165 530,275 S36329 566,604 590,824 5254 5292 5344 5386 5447 51,036 51347 .51,808 54,210
16 160 5120 $4,037 56,728 116,146 520183 533,638 510366 574,004 SID0,9I5 5283 5324 3782 $429 5497 57,151 51,497 52,009 54,678
r - a S 16 176 5632 54,440 57,400 517,761 5223,01 537,002 314,403 581,405 $111,007 5311 5357 SA20 5472 $547 51,266 51,646 52,210 $5,146 z _
1 - _ - 24 64 3072 52,422 54,037 59,688 $12,110 $20,183 5.!4,220 $44,403 $60,549 5170 5195 3,229 5257 5298 $691 5898 !11,206 52,807
1 _ i4 24 80 3840 $3,027 $5,046 512,110 215,137 $25,229 530,275 555,503 $75,686 $212 5243 5,286 $322 $373 5863 51,122 31,507 53,508
24 96 4608 53,633 $6,055 514,532 S18,165 530,275 $36329 566,604 590,824 5254 5292 5344 $386 5447 51,036 51347 31,808 54210
t 24 112 5376 54,238 57,064 516,954 521,192 535320 542384 577,705 5105,961 5297 5341 5401 5451 SS22 51,209 S1S7! 32,110 $4,912
' 2a 128 6144 54,844 58,073 519,376 124,220 540366 548,439 588,805 SI21,098 5339 5389 1458 5515 5597 51,381 51,796 $2,411 55,614
' 24 144 6912 $5,449 59,082 521,798 517,247 $45,412 514,494 $99,906 $136,236 $381 5438 1516 5579 5671 SI,554 52,020 $2,713 56,315
24 160 7680 56,055 $10,092 $24,220 530,275 550,458 560,549 $111,007 SI51373 5424 5487 5573 5644 5746 51,727 52,245 S3,014 57,017 t
1 - 24 176 8448 $6,660 $11,101 526,642 533302 555,503 566,604 I- ,107 5166,510 5466 $535 5630 $708 5820 $1,899 52,469 53315 57,719
32 64 4096 53,229 55382 512,917 SI6,t46 526,911 532,293 559,204 SB0,732 5226 $260 5306 5343 I 5921 $1,197 5,1,607 53,742 s
- 32 80 5120 54,037 56,728 516,146 $2O,i83 S33,638 540366 574,004 5100,915 5283 5324 5382 5429 5497 51,151 $1,497 52,009 54,678
32 96 6144 $4,844 $8,073 $19376 $24,220 540366 $48,439 $88,805 $121,098 5339 5389 5458 5515 $597 51381 S1,796 S2,411 55,614
• 1 - 32 112 7168 $5,651 $9,419 522,605 $28256 547,094 $56313 5103,606 5141,281 $396 5454 $535 5601 5696 S1,612 $2.095 S2,813 56,549 1
32 128 8192 $6,459 510,764 525,834 $32,293 553,821 564,586 5118,407 $161,464 5452 5519 5611 5687 5795 SI,842 52394 53,215 57,485
- -a 32 144 9216 57,266 S12,110 529064 536329 560,549 57:2,659 5133,208 5181,647 $509 5584 5588 171 5895 52,072 $2,694 53,617 58,420
32 160 10240 58,073 513,455 532393 540366 567,277 $80,732 5148,009 5201,830 5565 5649 5764 2858 5994 52,302 $2,993 54,019 59,356
$ 32 176 11264 $8,881 514,801 535,522 544,403 $74,004 583,805 5162,810 5222,013 5622 5714 5640 5944 $1,094 52,533 53,292 $4,421 510,292
S
Based upon 10 cents per 19lowm hour, electrical cost, "
Message content of40%lamps on, operated 365 days per year. -
1 : - - t
1R Pow at night (12 hours) for lamP systems - 1/6 povc at night (12 hours) Cor LID sysums,
S Please note : Incandescent lam
P systems require savior to place failed lamps. '
t, - 4 This may easily amount to $3.00 per lamp per year. -
120M
P I 4{
ore i ~ t
77= 7
1 1 ~ I * 3 - F .l t~':r ,t~f[s°1Tx{S 3' - N.,', ✓ y. 1 1 4, t N 1 , ~ J _
d, .ten >'ti~ 7 E- _ k
M1 G
{ l4 a J'!
.Y. J
l
gym, t' °r
sr. ..iv. s:sr
5 till.k
f
.l
^r~4, rirl , fr".
w. ; .Sr
t r w 9
' ~ 1, ?ai'°,,S,.,x...• i4
S .:tr ,t
~rS
M •ei5
3
l S a
p ,>'J :iy`_;i y tom,,,; o:a. ..a ".I~ X•°w....
I n 3 't v n, b 'S. '::M1+,..:Fa
F
k
WS ,3:'~3 `'12 h i v"~+!.,•tv'>~ .t }''i y.~: .
-`F
c e~: t
5 c
r 1~3 r
f d
r i R?.rYR '.y^+....+'~,''^.-mC >~,w.~p~vw n. irf +.n"". r*.nrv` ~t:^.ir=r•,-^ l•;.tp'
v;3tj~
kid}7 9
l ti t r t .i 1~ 3~ I ; ~ 3,k , IN t { i a
~ rlF r t,r 1~ 3 I 1 , I h _ 3C'ttir" ~ E i 4 i i t - 4 I.
.1~1~- .~C _>__..i ...~:1 ~^L i. ,.i i3 _ .,,.1 ,{-i C:~ y.l~"' ~.t`~I, •L'?
4 "c 3 , o f - 4
-j, XF7 , M, 3,--'i~~-`,',-. 7-,~,~~ ~ - ; ~ , - -
k fa by t&k 5 -t- Y
3V~_. r-,
's _ _ _
k.
i< - - _ 'ti'p -
t -y E Li F' -k
r4 1 t 5 W✓e
_ a r DESIGNERS AND AUFACTURERS OF ELEC7RO11TC MESSAGE CENTERS F'
- - 612496 0952.600 676 2529-16695 Marschall Road, Shako 5 _ x -
, pee, MN 55379 - -I r
r ' - r
McKay Sign Systems Description 1
s - '
This is a brief description of the indoor or outdoor LED products we currently offer. x e
c4 .
We have increased the number of message center sizes available. They are'- r 5 ,
2, 3.5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 18, 21, 24, 28, 32 and 35 inch. Mis-
r ' `gas c-,.r r m3
F,i,
Please refer to the sheets that show the dimensions for systems with various character heights. ' y r ~rIT r
-111111111 a', - I -
- - We have also included low cost Time and Temperature and Gas Price Changer displays with 14 and ' lr`
X 18 inch, seven segment characters. P "
X
dt'}
F t~
We have two types of controllers for our message center signs A Graphics and Animation ? r' ~
I ~
r Controller and a Simple Controller. > r
~l L k ? Y
i
r Our Graphics and Animation Controller is configured either as a direct drive system or as a host/ t U'W 1 a,,
t remote system.
_ ~s g
As a direct drive system, messages are composed and edited on an IBM compatible computer while the y ,
computer is directly connected and running the sign. This computer is dedicated to the sign. `
f q1 s
f For systems located more than 1000 feet from the programming location we recommend ghost /remote ,4 k ~ a .t
system With ghost /remote stem, ' z, .
sy your customer may use his computer to compose and send A , -K z`
messages to the remote sign controller, located within the sign. This is most frequently via telephone line or ~ # ~
cellular telephone. If your customer does not order a computer controller from McKay and chooses to use z _ ~
I ~ ',`,,~~-'~A`~!.r-4v r_,- ~
his own, it must be at least an- IBM 386SX computer, with 4 megabytes of RAM, a VGA monitor and a ka _
Hayes compatible modem.4~F h
McKay Data Systems Graphics and Animation Controller has the following features: f l~ ,,rt -f :1
, ,
• Sixteen character fonts. p f
• Virtual memory allows for message sequences of many megabytes. c r 1-
• Easy mouse operated graphic message operation. ~ ~ ~ t
, • Two levels of mess e scheduling
ag • a a- _ 2~
: ;
• A simple and easy method of placing messages on the sign. E=. =I
'Z'~ _ " - - - - -'~i~-, ~
1.
{ ° A sophisticated scheduling system that allows for scheduling over 12 months.
• Twenty On and Off modes for easy message creation Five speeds for each mode. 4- d Y 1
° Maximum frame rate of 120 flames per second. " ' 3
rt £ . • Accurate "what you see is what you get" display graphics insures that what you see on the ; , - r,Kt x
-.,1 computer is what you see on the sign. ~ s z ~
Messages ma be displayed instantly s7,~; l
' {a • may - especially forsporting events.
ti • Graphical editing tools such as - Cut paste and move, line, box and circle draw.,;';.
5 s-' y,4 - 3r s _
" '
S Y #{1 ~
- 1 _
1 Y , C t,
_ r - "3 t ara=, Y' ~ s+., srnrnrv^'rrsr xnc .s Ss'~^37 rs^e ' 3~
St
c , i
r
a t tk -
4
y Y F a
A1T ~ t gip' !L -
~,i _ L2 . r~ ]"t'~
, qq
_ S - - - J x
L
, ^r - T
J f
R" U
-S, 7 1~~ ~ , L'~~;,~-,~.` -*1 - r - 'r~ . - - ' , - -1 ~ I -
- . . ~ I , I I , , I , WW ~ I r I L . I I ~ ~ " ~ . ~ ' L~ , , . ; ,I - - ~
' .-1_ u_,i y,. _..__.uu..~ y,_ ....v.._.,. T.. _ - _..1„ i _ , _i._. i - _rr_._.___ _.._..~_c}_. Y.~_.,.. _...y.
-b t a.-~.. ~ . _ -
' ,
~ " t I'M iu - - : , -
5l $
-
.-t.Ert ax t _ _ _F
;.s 91 v,. ,t f
3 l ~ N ~
- t~I .f t -
~ • Automatic text formatting. This means that when you first create a message you simply type in the
ak+,
message and the line will automatically format. i - 4
n
1 ` c r - • Library functions for saving messages to floppy disk. _ y , -
af xr s3 • Powerful image capture control that allows the best possible image to be captured from a camera or = e- p,~.-..r. •
VCR (this is an optional feature). P -
• Modem control is done automatically without operator involvement. k,
i • Time, Temperature, Day of the week, Month, Year and Date can be added to any message. ti ` ` %K
4 - • Text and graphics can be added to the same frame. ;
S
• Automatic start up after power failure with messages and schedules active. p.,_ y,° S~
< • Message compression for transmission to the sign. This reduces the transmission time. t-1 -11 I'll "I
? ?
i' J1 .rK 4 ~t
• Extensive help screens. _
w - r
• Automatic control of multiple remote signs. z ; s
T1
• Fast graphical window based display. L~ - _ , , ~'a
„CX
f images may be imported and displayed directly. a x s mr
For one or two line signs, we have a Simple Controller that will allow signs to be programmed _ ~ ` r~~ =
with two low cost methods. -
RJ r } , Low Cost Programming Method #1. With this controller your customer may use his k ~Y! f`
- 1, 1~ i ,7 E _
computer and our software to compose messages and send them to the sign via direct cable ~ s
or telephone modem (any IBM compatible running MSDos 2.0, with an available serial 5 ` w-k- ' ~ ' I- I L_
c~ port, either Coml or Com2). We use an optically isolated amplifier to drive a simple two '~c > i
ri R twisted-pair data cable between your customers computer and our sign. sit , ~ - 5
r
t Low Cost Programming Method 42. Your customer may choose to program the sign 1
r with our custom keyboard. To program the sign with this keyboard you must be able to „ I- I i
see the sign and the ~b!e length to Lhe sign must be less than 100 feet. r ` ' ~ - i
This software and or keyboard method of programming the sign has the following features: aft - r
These McKay Data Systems message centers that use our Simple Controller will display Time, Day, _ F
+ Date, Month, Year and the Temperature in degrees C and F. Messages come on to the face of the sign with x , ,
14 different display motions. The systems have advanced scheduling that allows messages to be scheduled'
9 one year in advance. Upon power failure, the system has memory retention for seven days. There are 25 0 - 4
pre -programmed graphics. The McKay software for signs using our Simple Controller is a simple text g w,.4405 ~
; }n*
editor -easy to use. v0 ; K , , €
a 3, x } ~w" 4 ~ f it
Our Time and Temperature displays and Gas Price Changer displays are controlled via a two button g~-
- controller. This two button controller has a display to show what the sign is displaying. The maximum
r
cable length to the sign is 1000 feet. " `
If you would like the services of a factory technician to assist with installation and software training, there - zF Y
- ° is a fee. When calculating your cost be sure to select the controller and add its price to the display. j ' r
r '.r - Yz i >wy-yC
11
.t V. k
- All systems are Underwriters Laboratories listed for outdoor use in the U.S. and Canada. Y~" ;
a " R . t x k, Our Underwriters Laboratories listing number is 8M84 for the U.S. and Canada. M" ~,ri (
L Delivery is usually 6 to 8 weeks ARO. _ Ns s+ 1
r,, ; Warranty: Three year limited warranty. k„~ r,
r ,r
All shipments: FOB Shakopee, MN.
i z 6n195 a`
4
33 ~ , a e, a
- - 77
E ,c r +
{ - 111 - - _ 4 C
- >1r_
.F i i ,yi tip F
' - E a h s~ k
t ; t F i
t
4
r _ e 1 r,, - u - 'xua -
, 11 s-.s.E,:.v.. 3,~..~1.~,. 2 .7 t
- - - f
1
- " ~ L : - I I I I ~ ~ ,~..~,".~~'I'~,~~"""",~.I.~'Ll'~~,'~~.~1.1~"I'~,~'ll~~. I ' 2j
f _ _ d -
F ; -
{
x.. .rte..--......r..__ i.. _..a~.._...~.~~~~. _ L 1 _ _ t_. -71 _ ,r_ _ r.~_ " _ ~._._cx . - - ,
` - U 29- .~'n~' .,LY 3 - y a XI
Div mw
4 S- _
~gv - r..+p=t2 `ail.[ t > _ _ +P
ig,g ~Zt T2rt L~. Y t l- i - -
s t
AN P k _ a x
r
y ~~`-~yl s yep;~ Z? ` 'u - - - ':r - 3 -
.'rv. is t -
r ii
3t C F
e•'t~' £ C rr3 }`rE . - -jl~"„' e...-d..__.....w._._.,....._..._....... .......+,_.....e....,....__ - Y$ - -
s r'
ME ?1 - -
{
f - yj.} ! ~1~ -
v 3
Z h
o- ~V r,- f 'w4 xt.
3 ? ry McKAY DATA SYSTEMS LIMITED WARRANTY .i ~ t
S E x McKay Data Systems (McKay) LED products, when installed according to our instructions, come c, a -
, 4214, ~ with a three year (36 month) limited factory warranty against defects in material or workmanship, x r-
from the date of shipment. Incandescent systems have a one year (12 month) warranty. McKay is x ! v~
not liable for transportation, travel, time, labor, or xn,ate. al charges in connection with the testing, § r ` '
f
N,e z ~ repairing, removing, shipping or installing our parts or equipment, nor for down time, nor for any fl
other consequential damages. , ?~k t
.4r ,
a fi
During the time of the warranty, defects will be remedied with, at our option, new or like new 52-, z~- , 4
r i components, or by repair of the product. } z- g . 4 1
- _ x ti* x f
c: Under no circumstances will McKay be liable for an amount greater than the original cost of repair < r z- . r
E or replacement of the defective equipment. Repair or replacement will beat the option of McKay. , 5. Q + U r
This warranty does not cover incandescent lamps nor damage caused by improper mounting, b ;F- 1 ,fY ;
i t lightning. fire, riots, floods or other acts of God, beyond our control. s ..E
i EI
'r 7 Materials covered under warranty will be repaired or replaced at the sole discretion of McKay ~,j,
Data. Materials to be repaired must be returned to McKay Data post-paid and a Return Material,, ~ §4 -
r r 3 Authorization (RMA) must be requested prior to the return. The RMA number must be clearly t ,
j marked on the shipping container. All materials returned to McKay Data must be properly - ' 5 F ~ y
packaged for shipment. k~f 4
. t
No other warranty is expressed or implied. - P-1;0 R~£ + ~ t
! ~f t _ v.er >b g4 s; r n`4 . " s i ~ r
P. a>F f L.
r
f
t
R £
-1(N tR
g i i x - r, l~
r - - y ice, t _
d wi j F -3 e-4 F !y.
,
1
'r ra - . E r - a
K Ryt 5 'I -iw- r
J - r , x
J
k 3 A. '3.. 1
- k ,s f - sx
Y
r n'
"ij
11 ~ _ ti i ✓ _ ~q, - - 5
s. ' r " " i'} 1 +r ,x +ajr7
~.^.^~«.c.- ;,:se:,.,;;-cF.w.axr:,re.-a-7-• _ u' Y'~a+ G-'~` -'i;`' '~r
AM a f a-
x a s,, It y~ s sr
S { s'+ r (3+' t
~ . E _
F
_
O h s 15 r r t' r h rt i
eY - - A i - _ E
4 } _ f _ } t{ 11
,r{ ffi t 3 e'"-^ - Lam.,
. J x c' - J7
u
,4
. ,C- - .
...,.~::s,.-._ _a.., r_.- 1' _ __e. :-.~2 r3t - . _ _y t.~__1t _ __s.~:.3
r
DES1G i 7 sc
McKay Data Systes
NERS AND MANUFACTURERS OF LOW ENERGY ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTERS
612 496 0952 800 676 2529 Fax 612 445 7528 16695 Marschall Road, Shakopee, MN 55379
l
Low cost 14, 18, 24,36 and 42 inch LED
Time /Temperature and Price Changer displays.
i These energy-saving, low-cost Time/Temp displays feature accurate, laser-trimmed tem-
perature probes. Time is changed via software or a remote two button control box, with ® ~{r
digital display. Time and temperature units display degrees in F and/or C.
Save ener
t I
Compare the operating cost of the 18 inch double-faced
system with an incandescent system using 25 watt lamps.
The LED system costs less than $55.00 per year to oper-
ate, while the lamp system is over $1,348.00 per year
plus maintenance costs to replace lamps. (Savings are a
based upon 10 cents per kilowatt-hour energy cost.)
Id inch displays are 20" x 44" x 8"
18 inch displays are 24" x 55' x 8"
24 inch displays are 31 ° x 84" x 8" t ° 1
36 inch displays are 42" x 96" x 8" ~ . _
42 inch displays are 48" x 124".x 8" i u a
Ask about Kits! P
1 McKay manufactures price Changer and Time/Temp dis-
plays as kits to be mounted in your cabinets. Please call
j for a quotation.
All systems feature the ability to change the display via ~LiF i` C Y
soft ware or a push-button, hand-held control with digital ! t
display located up to 500 feet from the sign. Displays also "'T t 7~ l
have automatic dimming at night. Cabinets are black
aluminum.
- z, a+r t ~gS -
3
1~
c
, stem, are t L fisted m the US and Canada 8\184 -
Nil ~tl
- _ N arrant336 month lmuled w arrant,
_ Dch%cn Stock to three t%eeks. `--45~ 'y ([t `
- 1:013 Shakopee. tF
- . - ' ~ v:sa A1Caccepted
-
i
I
J
t_
r~ ,
ri
Y
2 ! ,
l' '.tl
3' 'Sig u t^s
c ' yam( ,
e . F k..c'a a
.sue •,r a-. k 1, .t-, ~ a
1♦ f
1'- iM k~ a
t. ;i':'ti TA .M. ...,ee L ~,+F . .n'r'1 F rf''' y1,'.'g ."'4SY ,n_~,. 3t"'r"
`:.l" N A 5 C .P.i
,fir ",z. Yl r; 5.
N
't;'•;Sr s A% xN~
F y
a
'
,t r 1 "A 5"
.,a
N„" yy,,
J.l r ..s-
t l
1~ ♦ rp•
r ,
.:fyh4
sib
f t
:rY. YI-• 1. !'✓s' ~ 'Y,1 -•x[,
t i
Y •'nk P
'r
vi
r
1, s t' J 1.'4 r,.
;4 }
s.
a~ ,.2 {•~.A 1- ~e . a t:"15;x' # ,,;7jst, r'*, F"r ^
J 4't rv.. 9 ~9
k a-- r, C' ''.34 -z4i 5 3 r yi i•, ''i'cin ','4y>'x 3'i„:
I G t «_.__..i .wv,.,«, t ................»,..,..,..U..-.._ '"_.,r.„....«.~~-.v~.....+i-' t,~ r h, •s - ' ~ffir f aY. E
L ~ - tier
t 1
1- t•„ n 5J1 F Y
rr ~ r
+ t i
1 F 5
E1 t
MCKAY DATA SYSTEMS Outdoor Systems Using Light Emitting Diodes
18 Inch Character (For viewing distances less than 900 feet)
41 ` Length 128' 13'8" 14'8" 158" 16'8" 178" 18'8" 19'8" 20'8" 21'8" 22'8" 23'8" 24'8"
l Columns 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
P 4 Height Inches Lines Rows i'
24 1 7 Model Number = 18 (Rows) (Columns) F`
48 2 16 !
! 67 3 24 For example a 67 inch high message center, that is 16 feet 8 inches long, has 24
d 88 4 32 rows and 80 columns - it's model number is 182480
' Maximum characters per line 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
21 Inch Character (For viewing distances less than 1050 feet)
Length 16' 18' 20' 22' 24' 26' 28' 30' 32' 34' 36' 38' 40'
: Columns 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 128 136 144 152 160
Height Inches Lines Rows'
t ' 29 1 7 Model Number = 21 (Rows) (Columns)
54 2 16
i 78 3 24 For example a 78 inch high message center, that is 16 feet 8 inches long, has 24
1 102 4 32 rows and 64 columns - it's model number is 212464
t t
' Maximum characters per line 13 14 16 18 19 21 22 24 26 27 29 30 32
t t)
24 Inch Character (For viewing distances less than 1200 fee "
Length 188" 21 234" 258" 28 304' 328' 35 374' 398 42' 44'4 468'
Y Columns 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 128 136 144 152 160
Height Inches Lines Rows 1
E
Y 30.5 1 7 Model Number= 24 (Rows) (Columns)
62 2 16
90 3 . 24 For example a 62 inch high message center, that is 24 feet long, has 16 j
' 118 4 32 rows and 80 columns - it's model number is 241680
1
Maximum characters per line 13 14 16 18 19 21 22 24 26 27 29 30 32
a x
S rf
f
4{ h
Y K Y
7
1
J G
}
1 f
' jl. 1 t `•..e~.e'xr ,;.,,,.}r _ .:>Nkr"'tF;""crc, -^^z. y`;^,;+^-?tF..,•.. ,.r'^.-t,-r• r+ r,i v-
7 7
ti
1. 4
a
P.
- 3 i
J y,RgT.
i2
u
t tY
r - a:
r-
- u1n °`al''' 7r
t
' ~Y r 3€! 5
.l•
f q~~ ~iti» sr a
AL ;7n, .,3 gyp'
a uv s . !
< , ire" 4' -
A: P M ¢ y
f Y . .,5,}2-Y P Y
I 'f i- :7Hr 4
1 p .e ~5 t'
f;
{ ~ N'tt lr 3 1
1` ~,Y s •Wii'} . f 1 „ .4u f, 3., e 'pl f
.~".x 'uVR
,c
4 .'S. P`e -3 ` r•..r ~ a, ~ , t',i..i„~,4 , ,E, v PrF #
7n~;•r ,,.P „rya fi -
r. ~'r " °x'44°• '.;vy',< tu. .rP.:,r.,,r.
s '~i ` e: 1
.e-. >t R:.y:~ =,,:I r .•'^~k ~.as-r 'i'n'~paY
.e4 4r TI ~6., ~Mv 'y
t'~ t^ ~F 'n l• :fir J'. •k'
3n t- . s'. 'lr." . F 1
I' a ,'k ' F air
^e . •r :
..fit, ,x ti;t„ ;p k ';i''~ , ,a'.•.v N.. ,;q^~,,, `r.
.;,w", .r«a; ~ "J ,4 , f~.•M"' i Y v,,.i1, ^'3- 'tu I n
)4-
%
E ,.'^~s.`r.^~.,+~ Sr Q.. T'r^ ar^. '^r' ~,,.-~r.~•n'~'~,.,"• Fn. 777
t "
1 4 I.t d t 4}t7„. Al R.
i
f tl t { i r t ~..1 ~i S 1.:~' t' a i~•~ E y r•? - I F 31 ~ a ~ E, ; ~
~,nJ rl .''lo- rE-, ,'.z'la •vb::r ~ v::. 3 t'~ "k is... N t i :'Sy - , r.
'
e.. 1 - - : d..
r %3 F ar f- ,k Y
017 , "~~!*t 2'4~~!.t' , " ~ ,t~' - ,~'~~:t`
-n tY S t t x- - - S 4
6- t is - - - _ - - 1- ~y--,€
•u sue` t ~ - - x.e,A'...:. > ...,a.»_~.....~.-a.. ...:~..__-.s ' -
JUL-09-96 TUE 11:59 MAY, SMITH & P.M. FAX NO, 503 225 9022 P.02 t
X2`5 .c~ -..+Y - Z 3 - d -1 -
urn 11- - F f -tj" -:il
ar
mi------- Agenda Item No. 5 r
S
* € 4 ( ,J m. Meeting of ~ l (Y i £ 4 a r 5
.r.. y "Cp'
h ltrtr~~gt.&AAI
' - - } t ' t -
K Flt 851PIi7025 _ _131._SW_.aox_10 P aLm7 _.Grtgv_9_ .7~i. P lptti ..-_401. 2 St 10 4 ru %$229M ~
- rk °r _ 6S
h
IL ,
} 94 0310.403 f,i .y"< s t'
' July 9.1996 I - ~ a 1 F ° -
h_ „s - I d'€" rye `'l®9
'
€ Mt. F.(t Wegner g- a..a.s j.' - . 1-1-11 e Public Works Director E. j-r{'.
a x i
c City 13125 of SW Tigard Hall City Blvd. „r Ball 1 ~i 4'~ 51
j s+"+y- ~"zarte.
- ,
C iisiuu, vb 97223 .:S'£s[ .
4w-'l;' ~
Re: Short, Medium and Long Term Water Supply Planning Update t 3 = w_
Dear Ed: ~ _ 't - w
i - 4 - uC @_4
In accordance with your request we have prepared a brief status report concerning the 5 - s- ~ '
r City's water supply planning efforts. Also presented is a supply alternative that may t v' s
offer the City more time to evaluate and develop a long term water supply. ~ , " . W ' ~ x
Background ,3 F ` - ~ , C4
- w., t M
y The October 1994 City of Tigard Water Supply Plan Update included ; . 3 ~ ~ s~ I a
recommendations for developing tong term and short term wau r supplies for the City, ~ ' a P
The long tern water supply alternative recommended was the development of a joint ;t~,~ ~j°`~~ `
water system with the City of Lake Oswego. The City of Tigard and the City of Lake y? . ~ L
as a
Oswego are continuing negotiations for the development of this long term water t
supply for the Cities. -t~V s
d r ? K so- - ' I
Recent attempts by Lake Oswego to gain approval from the City of West Linn to j
" 11 modify its existing water treatment plant indicate that the City may be limited in its v
` ability to ultimately expand the existing treatment plan[ to a capacity adequate to .1 S, r s `t n w
serve both Tigard and Lake Oswego. , ~ 4
r ` - t Short term water suPPiY improvements were recommended in the suPPIY A ~ lan that - ~r
I
would provide Tigard adequate water supplies as the long term water supply ~ 1
' alternative is developed. In early 1995 an agreement for water service was signed 2 a
i r F
between the City and the Tualatin Valley Water District Phis 10 year agreement r ` r
11 ~ , , provided for the District to supply the City up to 6 million gallons per day (mgd)
' through a number of connections. In July 1995 the first of these connections was tN~;
.
to
f a
t '4 t'o- x _ a - 2'Y Rt.y t
A 0.F 'y fi -
St -F+..mro-^ - ,t : e'~„ iela--R.h r C,~`•y..,~eu LL
- 'F 1 - - 7 l.F"` 3 SL- -a-.k -;~''~f 11 Y[, 4 3 b5 ~'t.
/ r r I L'
Y -
a i
r - i r'-a
iys -a k 4 L -r„ d- ads 4k . , _ , , , ~ - - - - ' r 'L' ~ - A
4 _ t, _ { FIF
F'p - Y t _ _ kr .u
f - -q.- ¢ f
,
i k
r t
12 ~ - r M
`
- - - - { x.
. -
r
r:
- - . - ~ ~7] I
t
~
e
, ~~4 .
e•
t a
k4?tEa
4--
f ks j y,e' _ - ..-~-c; i.,,.. .:k:.,,,:,,U,.::<S: b...aa..,......-~__•_-_._....-..:r - -z`
E J1IL-09-98 TUE 11:59 MAY, SMITH & ASSOC, FAX NO. 503 225 9022 P. 03 r "
€T i Mr. F,d Wegner
July 9, 19915 a -y 1'
r
Paget } - 3
t it 1
, 01- -x- rY `Y 3 Y , 7 \
constructed near the City's Baylor Street Reservoirs. This intertie presently provides t r . '
up to approximately 2 mod to the City. A h draulic anal sis = " '
_ - a y Y completed by Tualatin i.-''=- t~----, ~F;,
- - - - V__ ~Itr-Y Water Dict t f .n.t rhot t.6.. opportunity ..ad :i. at writ -
_ _etia;ts WAS -
....rlC..............., t' for a., ' -iF ,
- - t~ s
s C- .
- limited by the hydraulic capacity of the District's water distribution system where it -
bordets the City.
r
City of Lake Oswego Supply r k
t~
i t 3
Over ilte past two years available water supplies from the City of Lake Oswego have 4
declined as recent growth in Lake Oswego's has resulted in progressively less surplus f y .
v
water available for Tigard. Over this same period of time Lake Oswego and Tigazd a,
have continued discussions and negotiations related to the development of a lung term t, } t '
wafer supply arrangement acceptable to both tides.
N y yg
The City of Lake Oswego recently completed a Water Treatment Plant Master Plan x ,4 X Y a
that included recommendations for immediate modifications to the plant's cheruical x yh , `V,
1- I _
' t feed processes and sludge handling systems. These itnrnediate improvements would ` ' , _,sN
not r xpatal the plant's capacity beyond its existing capacity of approximately 16 mgd. s` ~n-
t-: ' '
t Also included in the plan were recommendations for the ultimate expansion of the L 3
treatment plant facility to a capacity of approximately 48 mgd. rs ; - ~ J
,
Fs~~-,--
i The City of Lake Oswego's treatment plant is located in a residentially zcnted - z"`
: L-1
, F U✓ Y -L
neighborhood in the City of West Linn. Proposed improvements and expansions of~; .i
the treatment plant must be completed in accordance with West Linn's comprehensive x° ,
plan, development regulations, and lit conformance with deed covenants which apply - L i
g -
i to the treatment plant property. - 4,i
t r a~:x4aE' , y
V While the immediate upgrades to the plant were conditionally approved by the City of F3 ~~4 ~ =
West Linn this year, the ultimate expansion of the treatment plant may be seriously
n:D
jeopardised by the deed covenants and substantial cottununi opposition any community to an
y~ ]
modification or expansion of the treatment plant In addition, the Metro 2040 Plan s ,r"1 ~ gam`
identifies Lake Oswego as the likely water provider to the Stafford Road area. If tz fix, ? q',kr~~ tires
Lake Oswego is required to meet the water demands of this area its capacity to serve t,, - ,4 L
Tigard is greatly diminished ' 1 ' f
y
Lt addition to the existing items presently under negotiation between the two Cities
the following new issues related to this supply must now be addressed and resolved: ,1 4 * d
1
r , ; L A determination of Lake Oswego's level of commitment to continue " a'` r
pursuing the expansion of its treatment facilities that will provide a joint Y , F f
long term supply for Lake Oswego and Tigard. z t .
'~U ~ -
¢rt ~
I n _
S ~ t`{r
h.-,t _ a~xv +TCtie"'t v+. 77 -
A' I ` M .v I wk"mot "tY~. .,5%T, ` 7 a f
x
x k _ - a f
, ^f , 1FFF i
~ ~-,j 'n 8-~, - x~, ~ - L - , , , ~ ~ . I ~ ~ , , . ~ 11~ ; ' L ' 't~~',~~ I _~'~'L~,, L~~' ~ : r .i ~
Az
K {
3
jjj
Y } s
z J 3,a r . ~e t2 1 _7 1
r a, a t _ ~,,v •y
, ~ , . ~ , - . - - I , ~ - . ~ . . . . ~ I , , , I " ~ _ M ,
L, _ 7d
- ' - _ J
P
1
.-_i..,
r " I - I I ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ - I I , ~ ,
_ -S
2 "I -s
zF'y Jam' - -F i _ l
' n - r t. t, i LL , k
r S, -n 4
S " 1N+ar+v+rerras.I+.ist:.W'#tY~+gut..u.F_.e~.a..~,.Ge.u--rets._..,um..rsu sswvd '~i'1'Ni `.1€e3' i~'fi_S.--.
r
, ~ 'j JUL-09-96 TUE 12:00 HURRAY, SHITH & ASSOC. FAX NO. 503 225 9022 P. 09
c t
x, ¢
n;
,v - r>
VT Mr- Ed Wegner
r-- v July 9, 1996 i
Page 3 : ' w , '
t t
17 2. Fstablishing the limits of Tigard's willingness to pwt:c:p°„tc in the putsuit fflP
of the expansion of Lake Oswego's water supply system. i
3. Determination of additional costs, other than engineering and construction r z
costs, of potential land use litigation or legal actions now associated with
the development of Otis supply alternative x rt
4. Establishing the certainty that a Lake Oswego/Tigard water supply system - '
- can ultimately be developed in time to meet the water needs of both Cities.
r S
City of Portland Supply k ,
i - x {t _
Discussions also continue between the City of Portland, Bureau of Water Works and s u q
a rs.
the City of Tigard concerning water supplies. Based on Tigard's request, Portland has , ;g
agreed to increase Tigard's annual tninimum purchase of water from an historical 5 R 3 -
percent of Tigard's total annual demand, or approximately 0.2 mgd, to approximately ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
15 percent of annual demand. This increase results in an additional supply of P is ~ ~ A,
-
approximately 1.0 mgd. Portland has also agreed to adjust Tigard's peaking factor for w i c
the first year of this, increased usage. Portland and Tigard's wholesale water supply -
a
sgneement which expires in the year 2007, does not restrict future increased usage of t. f r
I Portland water through the term of the agreement.a x
- ~aS a
In addition, the City of Portland has begun the process of assessing the renewal of its k t x p
I wholesale contracts which begin expiring in year 2004. Portland intends to involve 4 t t
l the City of Tigard audits other wholesale users in this process. One of the major} Y '
y issues to be resolved in this process will be the capability of Portland to supply y_~ V a
increasing nature water demands from its retail and existing wholesale customers and 4 ;s _
to potential new service areas, During the interim, prior to contract renewal, Portland ' x , ~
is being cautious when considering any significartt increases in wholesale supplies. } , a
+ NO
f
Willamette River Water Treatment Plant ff
`
_ > _
:4 ! , x, f
Since the con letion of Ti ard's Water Sul Plan Update
s P g PP Y , a draft of the Regional; K t s
j Water Supply Plan also has been completed. This plan identifies a regional water a
treatment plant on the Willamette River to serve the south and west metropolitan area
of ,g _
f Tir v,....F I . - i% presently participating as a member of a local consortium of _ N r
Cities and Water Districts participating in the preptttation of the Willamette River , * ,a, C
Water Supply Study. The other water providers participating in this consortium
include:; z- b
l 'x t-
a • Canby Utility Board
• Clackamas River Water ' .t
City of Sherwood k ` {
- - • City of Tualatin - zE? u
F
x
f
w .y >z RCH, E - 1
1
, YTx 3
tir
5,
f k S, S - i~# t V
I ;s
i 5 fi
_ ff - _ ~
h _
- t
Y - -f
* 4
, L . I - . ` , ~ , , ~ : , , ~ , ~ I `~-----Ll I 1~;,~ " ~ "L, ~
X
- i' Y - - - t - / - ~ 6:
4 l -X
/ - 3 t
k- T - - -
L A - C,E, l
_
f . , rI j 12 ~R ~ : L, , , , " ~ - ~ ~ : . I I., - - . , ,1' _ , . ~ j' _ - ' L '
i. " - -
- - - r..:
_ , r - - 1 - _
r. .
- x~ t d_F _
r F s
t tU, s R - -
K
` 4- t-~- - - 5
,tk _ fi b- _
SL - _ _ _ . - r 3 - -
~S#- - 1 - - - - - - '
f it&i, 4 _u..._-...._~a.... o-....r«.. ..r. '..w...._2.t. ....xf zr1_11 ...r-,vxst~ :las.tLti,.am -,......r...~..___..a 4 + 7k -
z y ;
a ~f `JUL-09-96 TUE 12:01 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOC. FAX NO. 503 225 9022 P, 05 = ,
_ _ ti-
-4 - i- - - . x t
y, n 4 Mr. Ed Wegner u, t , , r .
July 9. 1996 - Y
4
Pagc4 Wyk -
t,-
• Tualatin Valley Water District ,1 v
_ • City of Wilsonville n
v x e "jl ~ y L`
The Willamette River Water Supply Study included the development and analysis of , 1
alternatives and project costs associated with the development of a Willamette River , - „ f '
1 h
- supply for the participating water providers. Among the alternatives considered were {
treatment plants in Wilsonville and Canby. The analysis included an evaluation of k r
transmission piping needed to transmit the water from the proposed treatment plant to 4 t fl,
the oarticit>atin-entities. t ` I , a } ' "
,75
47
,71
The supply study concluded that it was most feasible to locate a proposed treatment
t .
p~
- - W il;oaville. Based on the planning level analysis completed as part of this
~i~
work Tigard's share of the treatment and transmission facilities associated with {
developing a Willamette River supply may range from approximately $-5,000,000 to J
$38,000,000. . u - , I
Of all the consortium members the City of Wilsonville is most in need of an f y - + - ~
t tf~ -
immediate expansion of water supplies. Wilsonville is presently in the process of 4 i .1~ - 1 t,
j I'll
acquiring property for a Willamette River water treatment plant. The City is pus. ming s , , s , i
g %
the acquisition of a site capable of ultimately supporting a 100 mgd treatment facility. i t r~ `
Wilsonville is considering the construction of a treatment plant that will initially be j . a-~ ? , ~ ,
"
capable of meeting its immediate water needs and that will allow for phased treatment - ~A
capacity expansions to serve the needs of all consortium members. The 100 mgd - ' -tea Y
capacity was arrived at considering existing Tualatin Valley Water Rights at z r f_ , ~ !
Wilsonville, treatment plant siting constraints, and the water needs of the consortium 3 e-`~ r Q ; _
members to the year 2050.
The analysis completed for the consortium included an evaluation of a subregional 1 ~t
txartstnission stem that supW hes water from a Willamette River treatment an _ . r..
north, to the Tualatin Valley District The preliminary
Y gttment for this
transmission stem included major transmission facilities that pass through 1-1ra V -
system b .rb~.. Y h t t~
w er,d provided for a supply connection to Tigard's 10 Million Gallon Reservoir_ I x WR n
t _x
-s ~ { a
y A wide range of engineering, water rights, financial and institutional issues related to v a
the development of this long term water supply crust yet be addressed and resolved. r . ~ , ' ? ~ 1
These issues include, but are not limited to, the following: j f ~T,e" i
1. Establishing a site, capacity, configuration. and cost of a Willamette River p y , , h
r 1 supply system that includes provisions for facility oversizing for future 3
t expansions. Y
2. Development of the institutional, financial and management framework for the
development of this supply.
4 t
-
S - 1 '.fb- w'F' Yin t
-Y #1
-r } _ y Y f - -
N, k
I
6
'q.' ~ 'vim` i tit' - ed~ 4 E 7
- - ix trt F
c C - } 2 {
* - , ,',I e. . . ~ , , , - ~ , , , , " ~ L ' 1~ , I I I - I I ~ : L ~ . ~ - - ~ I ~ - ~ I . ~ . I . ~ 't ~ ~ I I -,4 . ` i - . , . J ,~','4~~~ , -
"x d, .t _ c,ii '79 8 k }
?g
r~,
r
c
t
s.....-r_ _ _ _ _ _
` --,..--,.-,.,....._s--r. ._L.c. 1 _..~1-i 111 , . _ _ Y._ ._i._- , - _ i,,,L -
1~....~.~. i_. _ ,.~-L.
. .
tr
- zS +e r _
S - >S4X-F X - --I" i _ . - C, _ - t r
- , #E - - -
it~v y f - ,
~ Al- y ~ - ! - - - - - _ - - - 1 -
..t S ,4• 2~bZ>rwa" .q'uc.t tr'4:.dsni:....4:...iz-f-.'.!i- 5"'5..--.......- : .,-,t.xeTU°.~.a&.'sm..s Y g
5£ JUL-09-96 TUE 12:01 Mmy SMITH & P.SSOC. FAX NO. 503 225 9022 P, 06 l: ,
O
r
z 3f
rx, g Mr. Ed Wegner ia>-
- s - :l July 9, 1996 S„ z7- sfrc ZZ' ,
Y
¢ Page 5 ~ r~
5 f 1 a r
ai 3. Establishing the level oF'ligard's participation in the development of the 5 Y
Willamette River supply option including the potential commitment to provide
1 financial support for the funding of this alternative as a long term supply ?i. - aX r
x r t,j without the benefit of immediate use of this water supply. -
- 3 4- Agreement as to the allocation of the short term and long term costs among the it ' #
consortium members associated with the development of this supply. ;
i 5. Establishing a schedule for the immediate anti ultimate development of this ~ -4 r, `
supply in light of Tigard's need for short tern and medium term water r, , - $ ` ,o
supplies.
Medium Term Water Supply Option [ ~ h - _ - Y
3 L f u„
s - s In March 1996 the Tualatin Valley Water District approached the City of Tigard with i z
an offer to expand the existing agreement for interim water supplies from the District - ~ ~
~1',!~'L;-4"~';-"-`i -'j'-~-~`~i`~ ~ .1 , , ~ R--,' ' to the City, The existing intergovertmental agreement (IGA) includes provisions to x ~ a -
provide up to 6 mgd to the City as an interim water supply. Approximately 2 mgd is -k~ Y~
presently provided under this agreement through the SW Baylor Street Intcrtie. I Y
E iy k,- y Tf V P
The District is requesting that the City consider the expansion of these existing F ` L i-11 -1-1
supplies in amounts ranging from approximately 8-t) mgd to 13.0 mgd. It is r i,i§ t ~ r I
anticipated that this water may be available to the City by 1998- The District has x y j , ~t ~ '
-;j E outlined a plan by which these supplies would be availabTe to the City for a period of h " ~ M
r, approximately 10 to 15 years. The Tualatin Valley Water District has the ability to t ` -
offer this supply to the City as it is presently participating in the expansion of the Joint r ,R
Water Commission (JWC) supply system in western Washington County. Thls - r ~ &
expansion will allow the District to supply the western portion of its service area from F ~ , r
the JWC supply. r -
{ aSi4- c k 1
- 4.* i
Under the present agreement for water supply from the City of Portland, however, the - i': ~
ti
_ p
District mIISC maintain a minimum level OF annng~l t:'ater ^•-:u7ui - CIlaSC9 lt'Otn r ~ ~ ~ q a I
_
r yu y par f: - av t,+"S €?~#Y ` t
Portland. While the District anticipatf,-% that it will ultimately need all of its existing x t t ;
supplies, as well as additional future supplies, the District anticipates that it will have t - - Kz - 4 c ' t
a surp]us of supply in the easterly portion of the District- The District estimates that it r g
may have a surplus supply of water for approximately IO to 15 years beginning in f, -A "t,
1998. It is this surplus that the District is offering to Tigard fi 1 r- -
'
A preliminary review of this alternative found that modifications to the District's}
r r
t Metzger area distribution and supply system provide the best opportunity to i ` t r, z ~ 1
accommodate the expanded supply from the District to the City. The District is
presently completing a hydraulic capacity analysis of proposed piping modifications ' f
and transmission system improverncnts associated with this alternative. The results of u 1
' this analysis should be available for City review by late July 1996. - r
-
v. r
d -5 Ir } f 1
r' F
-,-f'r t
I Y
L j is f S~ 5,{ J
4
4 F
j ~k Y et r kEr[' Q`
t - t .~,.TM^^..m.*,..- . sa--ti•'w'z:s,°.c. -F.-., --.rw 'r.t : r. '-a., K , IL
..iG3~ -'.i ;K Y F
b,
is - - 1 EC - ; 1
41 tT , 'i - r \ t - 1 ,1
i
F
1S " K t tF t
a a .;r 5 y r_i
A
I"
- - s - - - - - - J
v JY t - - J k
k p
L £ - , . ~ ~ , . - ~ . - ~ ~ - , I , I `
i r
i
c
i - . -
. . -
1...•_~ - _",ice _ r. ~._z_. _K.i._ , ._-.r .__.__e a.... d3
An - .
k, x_ n . I'll
~ R~
e' s
zi<~''.-as= s{z."" - s, _ a s'i`x
, 1 a as 4- g , - s r _ Y f
.2
- - } , -
e,.. s'4. g j 1- }
~z
t t r r_ _dUL-09- P. TUE 12:03 HURRAY, SMITH & AM, FAX NO. 503 225 9022 . 09
-14 U t x ss
e ~ -mss , - - Y - z~-,
tf, I .1: 1, A-Zif~~X,Xi 7 Mr. Ed Wegner C x' -
h? x x
td duly 9, 1996
Y w- X La
;K Page l v avm
s
- }\h T ~
Conclusion s N ,
3~- h
> ~ The current status of Tigard's water supply alternatives can be summarized as '
T # follows: t3 r - -
~ 1. Major obstacles may prevent or significantly affect the development of a ' zk ~ - \
` _ joint long term water supply between Tigard and Lake Oswego g # - - ~ M ,
2. The City of Portland is making no commitments to Tigard for long tern[ -x
" a
` water supplies that meet T'igard's long teen water supply needs. ' ; -i 1
K 3. Work to develop a Willamette River water supply system, in line with the a I ~I t
concepts outlined in the Regional Water Supply Plan, has began. A ,
number of issues related to this supply must be resolved prior to the full ~`'~g
development of this supply for the City. r -
' 4. A medium tern supply alternative has been offered that provides Tigard j 0 i - p " , x'
2 t-- c
the opportunity to meet its short and medium term water supply needs. `~'.r` 1 i, - za `_1
_ This alternative involves the construction of transmission system ~ R , K
improvements consistent with long range regional transmissions Y r stem : T
$x,
;
plans and/or an ultimate supply through the City of Portland's water ~ t t 11 - ,
, system 4 r 11
c We appreciate this opportunity to provide our assistance to the City. We are looking sk
forward to reviewing this water supply status report with you and the City Council on l;~A- t 5
- ~r ` July 16, 1996. Please can should you have any questions or comments. o- ~ - -
j
Sincerely, ~r -'11 I
f lea E 5 3C
.i MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
.
i ~
U
11
t A
1 Cla is H. Uber, PE. , , i
S11 -1 r
Vice President , !
-Y 7 7 - - - -!f I
- - x j _ s~
r CHU:chu ~~.~F y -
e"±
is _ - "S 'Y V E,r
0z " _
r{ - i s At"' ya S~
? r r - - a ~a
} t 11 - "O C h `s P t 1
q $sz a
rs7 i*~ i :mym~emw +%lmaa•:ma „j 5.,. c°a ,5. rn -.z^,sr .rare. s;~ s K s-r r
~.t i '2 f - a"° ''tom- < ~r 'v'F "s€>
r
{-f M,~ 3 t,,, £
4 f , _ _ f Y]7. 1
4~ - LE ~ ~ I ~e , ~ - , - - - f
j
..i. - - r 'tn i I.s 's~ f - }
n~.s- r s- f-- t a Tam
i
i
-r z r kk t 'g x
r x ,j _ k
r a
E S
-'fx t i ' 3'^
- - - - - xh L.. - dt "1 -
t2 -./i+ 3 'w4.'Nea7t.-"b A:,- = ~ - iGa,i. . go l x .o b'c 3i
~'ss '•p, t¢kt: " « aa_ e ._._...._u_.........__.•. 3W_........»..:c.«s~..~_~.~ .n..._....,,aw.~~3>„x~a,n
[ - z -
1' r bS C n§ • L 'f ` j h'- -
h. 'e 'tag 7'4
- 1' AGENDA ITEM # (-O j
v, -k , For Agenda of 7 I (y (~f~ s,1 5 r
' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON " g ~ ~y
s COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY , s" R - "t
v t , _ j
1~-, ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Request for Proposals for Development Cn iv tzP,
s - J - r ~ k `
ki - PREPARED BY: Dick B. v DEPT HEAD OK (/d~ CITY ADMIN OK_I G 4° • k f
t L F-
ISSUE B TORE THE COUNCIL ,t a
3
Should the City Council approve the attached request for proposals and process for revising the Community - '
{ y Development Code? °r r k}-
Z
STAFF RF.C0MMFNDATT0M ,Im - I
It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached request for proposals and authorize staff to send it W-Z -51
' out to qualified consultants. d ^`r# gfi_.A ~ t M•
INFORMATION SUMMARY R
~
r .
i The Community Development Code is over ten years old and in need of a considerable amount of work to clarify ~ 6%'
and cleanup various provisions as well as modernize the code. The City Council budgeted $75,000 to accomplish 1, ,1„ 7
. 1 '41 .111,
` s -this task in the 1996-97 fiscal year. The approach would be to hire a qualified consultant firm to take an open- "a 3a' 1 '
' s inded, unbiased look at the code and suggest revisions. The RFP places major emphasis on examining whether k - X- t ;l ' ~ .1 11
k
or not development review procedures can be simplified given legal requirements and court decisions. The
consultant will also be required to incorporate those changes necessary to implement METRO's 2040 program.'
, 1,I wss3i
The project scope includes a number of other areas of review including a staff compiled list of needed code
changes. e e ra~ .
x l - I`~ , y
The consultants will be asked to address public involvement within the parameters specified in the RFP. This will ' -0 4~r
be a key area on which a recommendation for hiring will be made. z % e.
_ j f
r OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 3 , E
1. Hire additional staff to do the same work. , c ~ x
2. Revise the RFP. z - L- a
r~_ }
x - FISCAL NOT r _•r z Ms;
.1 I F1, 1 , " I .
i $75,000 has been budgeted for this project for 1996-97. - ' , 41" ,
-t ,~,!-~~n C , , i ~-,F."Z ~-3~,,, K, 1.
,ice ' 1 Jar- y
x j wy wa_ mu `mow
£ 9 drcl.0]AL961226 PAI _ - L1' f
9 - 4 C t _y E X13{ S(
Y
x e - t z.'S s .d
} t , 'Ktq - + - eat {F I"
-1 il h a< cry t- t ~ i, g l"
- e}u a xc ~a x.r _ s L
1 v r''M1 r' ,f F
m" _ I- n
2 I' f' j4!! - k "fir
to y 9 t R t... xy 4+ P
i' 2 h - - i _
f s - •F 4 5 - 4" 4 - i~ y
'rs s_ x, t'k Y J - L J
7# f. f- - ---y Y
- - [tar -'I - d' ff y 1
tea., dS LJ.J Y6 t L.
It-, v
x
..i~._. ...r~
.
i
, " - , , ,
S~TS,~''' F777777t-45E
1} C Y j - _ - _ i.
4 --f t - r k
'tl '94CjLT-,5
#.353. k S
~e- S - ' -
3 y - r - 3•'"'. «.Jam`"'...'. °,}..E'in_....~ -K.:t.~~,....,...:...~.a~,t~-.,....t ~_..._e.,...~,, _.,..,.,.nx,,w.~n.ewe,„w,:;xs cLL;c~~_.,r,..L-x~,:~=..~..v, :2` a€y s. _ -`_''x d j~ -
,...5.-. . : R.Ur r IYT; 55£- rte, I l PI t'
w
'e y - - L 3-, ✓
~ - - DEVELOPMENT CO RE :4`=:
DE VISION r
x s
Request for Proposals i , s - P
- ,
' r-
The City of Tigard requests proposals from qualified applicants to prepare a major e f~, b t '
x t revision of the City's Development Code.
>;n
J
r j ,
To prepare a revised code, the City proposes to contract with a qualified firm or z r a 7 t
t individual(s) to perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work. The successful ,
candidate will have demonstrated experience in code drafting, implementation of code ,>,;..7 *sty~ r `
-1 11 provisions, land use analysis, the issues of the development process and working with = - ,g -tea m
a public agency and citizens. It will be necessary for the consultant to work closely with ~
the City staff, public officials and citizens. zus3 : K
" Project Descri f~don' t
gg- , .
The City desires to rewrite the development code, retaining those features and f' 5 _ F * '
attributes that set it apart and are useful, but revising the code with emphasis on ` 5 `
- X . x z, ;
I simplification of the development review process. The project will require an analysis of b-'' F, x ~ lm
i existing administrative, legislative and quasi-judicial processes with recommendations a' , { 11 and new code language suitable for adoption. Where possible the revised code will . `
l incorporate and emphasize non-discretionary procedures. Consolidation of provisions `S~,7'
and expediting the development process is expected. The revised code must reflect s ~ U
changes in the Oregon Revised Statutes and applicable court decisions. The revised `;'s,-k, -
code will also incorporate code changes necessary to implement METRO's 2040 `y r
program.
_ s- -
-5 ; .L
Project Scooe " n- ~ 1
ttt
o Simplify development review procedures including administrative, legislative andk
quasi-judicial provisions; incorporate and emphasize non-discretionary actions - d~ ,
wherever possible; incorporate changes in ORS and court decisions; analyze k d~ r 11 "
j notice procedures and simplify. `~~4 a j t
"1 $
,
o Incorporate code provisions necessary to implement 2040. kr
{ Y
o Review all standards, revise and clarify where necessary. ' 3
, 'K
o Incorporate responses to draft code revisions by City Attorney and staff; revise erg, ' F `
as required.
11 ~ 11 I
r
€r
o Review use classification system; revise to APA model or other model if 1,
warranted; develop use matrix; compare new classification with existing to p,i'~'
' minimize non-conforming uses because of code changes. : ,
r '`a FF G [ 5
t - ' s. ; L
tr _ ~a z, -
iF s F r r'
" , , 1 , 1 EL- ~ : - ~ ~ - - , , ~ _ ~ , ~ : : . " ~ ~ i 21 , ,Z ~ ~ ,
t
I
~7 y4 a
t s -
k
i] - F
4 -i ` 1T
I
- PF"., , - ,-f~,~ . r : , , , 1 . " ~ !P 2 , ~ I % . , - ~
.w-•..~.-.-.-.-.
- _
1. y F .C -Ykk - - - - _ If, - - - - -
` - - _ S'- 4
~t` Y` S Y S.. 4 .5. _ y _
- k - - T } k5 t - Y
Y
t tkt73 Js - - - - .-x-21 r
~ .
..,..,.a.~..- - - - - - - - - - - -
45'LF ' k t - ~k'%z' tiTij
ir' d. r_' 'rw....,:.... r - - - - - `cs : : ,a,. .s- r1". . .mss
- a -
t_ :.,f's>r'~....,v ;c ..,(x..su:caaius.,z..m„hr.:s.e`="°.:.. r..r.-..e:.`v ' s - s 3 $
~y EI, a - J k v 5 t t,- ri' 3 -s
o Review street and utility , ttko~~ clear requirement-, to clarify and make clear when and where 1 C7 _1
*
~ improvements are required
and when not.
k _ l V L, -L h < `~y
K"t zr;,~ c:
%',,.t-° ; 4 o Review and revise definitions that are outdated and vague; add definitions where
1. -1 T warranted. y ;.g,
t J ~_s
z' o Review environmental performance standards (especially physical -soils, Cw
geology, slopes, riparian corridor setbacks, etc, for practical effectiveness; draft r- 'i's K~ t~ a" ~
new provisions). a ,
_ `V~ - ,
o Incorporate changes responding to staff generated list of amendments, such as a ";,t, .,g ^
definition of development, temporary uses, major and minor modifications, =g ~ ` > , t
- rtancihi transition etc. •,m..
o Ensure all changes compatible with Comprehensive Plan. kk
'i ,t~
o Independent review and recommendations by consultant; , ~vu
fi a€~%-
i ~ r '
o Provide summary of changes and modifications suited for public distribution and '
public meetings. £•z X«1
t
Coordination/City Staff Involvement , ~ , ~W~
- , `;AO The consultant's proposal must include a program and schedule that provides for ` 3 `y
rt - - 7
} , periodic City staff review and monitoring of all phases of work. „ 4 ' '
x~~ s -IL .
Public Involvement 5F, A § q
77
d ~ , ,
This is an area key to success. Formulate a public involvement strategy to provide, ?
public information and obtain input at key decision points. A steering committee or task w
force could be considered. Incorporate request of Planning Commission and Citizen K* ,.5~ _ I
` h r Involvement Teams (CIT's) for issues they believe should be addressed prior to ~
- 11 3 ~t ~ ~
3 : L embarking on the technical rewriting of the code. Products: A memo or paper initiating jb 11-1
s
discussion with the Planning Commission and CIT's; at least two public informational
meetings to allow public comment and input; a memo summarizing public comments = pi ,
and how they and other issues are addressed in draft code revision. ti . k`._ ` f
9
Product Y F r£ M1~
I 1,
x x Provide a hard copy of revised development code as well as computer compatible disk k s
V, r'` 3 ~
r t 11 4 copy. The proposed code must incorporate graphics and diagrams to assist T ~1x ~ k
' interpretation. The proposal must address how and where this task will be , ,
1, ; accomplished. - Vk f
Project Schedule (n x T
L 'f } 6
Sy - 3 {l , - ~ k xC S ~Y d f
.c'S.,
I L
_ mnmfii..,Y.KtXXfa+7. -vw'.+~c4 ;,5.,. t, y.~ t_ ! a y "~'-Y ;a"4' 2 L"1~_ 4t `
11
1
.l 4 - h -k ^jr ^a "u aR
"r ¢ 7--t i 'yn e' i-1
~t I
{ t - -r s - '
T r j 3 ti - - r _ } {y rot fir' F j
_ - .
t"7 _ x - - _ C'am'.?-,, r'"'
Y; A - -.m;-.. r _ '
f
t a
A%-7a _ - - La fir
f
r
- - . - -tom,
n. _.t _rr.., _ i .~iL:
.
„E
' f ` r kZ 34i - 5
®i
_
r ~ - " - , - , , j - . ~ ~ - ~ -,~1,-,,~, " I
3 ~5 -
H "d -
~ 4 -
S s ` R
k t .etix3!:2t w.L~ls.:± :i.. 1.«"YL,.•'~r>'.+r...wiw.a ..............-,r....~.e..o-..e:..u.u.ew.3e«r. -.D + S'
~
y5-3x5..K: F'ts.C~ iE_ a r 1 4 S _J,_ -S 2-i -
i -
R~ wz S a,, .t .a Jz - -
T .~'€s{ s`. e. - i ` , 1. 7- -
'r-Al NZ h f ?C
g ~ F Selected consultants will be interview by a panel. The contract will be award by the Vim , ~ a
- F.1 - 10- T r -~LL_ Tigard City Council. The consultant should be prepared to start on the project ` t , 4
e'v?zY` , immediate) after selection. The ro ect is ex ected to be com le ed µ V
t•.-,;'.; Y P J P p t within ten months afi v ;'r It
z ' A of consultant selection. ' . ; , Y
~ r
s f Project Budoet '
e
5 6- l k J, i y f y, .k 7
11
£ The City has approximately $75,000 available for the consultant portion of the project. ti'
t ¢ 4 3r v
t `lam Submittal Requirements °
g t
r
'+s 5 s r c~Y + c _
3 The City requires that interested individuals and firms submit three copies of their ~
1 £ -Y J
y proposal.
- 1 - 7 - -F. - 4k 1-1 Fst c,
y The proposal should include: I
L
! 1. Name and qualifications for all individuals that will perform work on the project. I I
~srrr
include the estimated hours to be spent on the project by each individual and the , xz i x j*
t- ,F~ v
J hourly rate for each. This must indicate who will perform the legal analysis of ~ _
s,,.a-;P _ :a.r P 9~'=-,-N'~z'~~~';,i`k4^:iz< a~_f :
any provisions proposed in the draft and final product. The successful, : sou r
K, A
consultant must guarantee that the individuals identified to perform the work -fir x
shall complete the project or the City will have the right to void the contract. --0
s r-i,' s N.~3 }3,
2. Itemization of project expenses and their estimated cost. ' , r_ r ,
r ' 3. Description of prior experience and references of municipal entities for which the J- , k F
4 "3 a contact persona dt a red epholne'Inumbeect. Include the name of the organization, j - ~ 7
t
4. A detailed work program which describes the services to be rendered including a air , ~
.11 1,
r time frame for phases. f ,
j . A, m l
5. Total fee for the proposed work itemized on a hour) basis that includes: ~
- r ~ - I
- ~ ~r
r -1 „rsst} as
-Amount of time and bud et to be ex ended b hourly
9 P Y Principle(s); t - I
- Amount of time and budget to be expended by subcontractors; - R k a
200- 1. ~ -Amount of budget allocated to materials and expenses.
,,!-,,4~----~~".,-~,,,~~ [ -1 I
6. Statement regarding ability to start and complete the project within the defined fi art t
time frame.- ,
' , p r
<A " ,f Contract Requirements
- -
ra'w' xq x i -
£ f
The City of Tigard's standard form of contract shall be used for this project. The "
r consultant will be required to car insurance in the q - - ~E
carry types and amounts specified by the ,l
~r , City in the contract,
` ~ f
Submittal Deadline r4
2 f 2 R k7! , -3k~ -
T - L _ A -4
M1`[- J r F ~ M j r L J
? £ _ _ g _ s`*'P~s~w +...~a.~ es,~. ^s` 'S - r see' r.4 i , 7A _ r,;• ~i A'.- it ~ .r S i'
yrr 3s v - P 3 = ~
- t k- y x - art, a"- s ' k {
r k s5s
s i'
F
,
~,~7~4,,%~~t';~', M "t-l" f
1 2 { f.
- - F' - w--
# , 1 3
P~ - r
is
P 1
- 1: J
11 .
...x... Z
44
Y f
.mot- '.-..rte- --rwt• "T~"'..' .-~..t[f.,T_-.-T~~..~, 4 _
c~. fA~''x--d'rt F€ ti 5 _ t `s 4 s £+3Vn-,
Z,, n. 1 4
~:ANR x
- 'Fr a .a t s,Y a - s ^z+ F' r^. Pz
~ •as~~~~~N;~. },,,.rte - - ~ _ : Y rid x,. h, `fir. K~iKi',rt`~ ~s~,
G 1
r. - "nTb k
M13,
17
„r Proposals must be submitted by 4:00 p.m. August , 1996#z~~~ ;aft
i:curpln\dick\devcode.rtp
v 06124/96 2:33 PM 4, E. r
M - N
zv~
lei
rY"Fd °4-.#s'" T 4' i a'/ ,~y~{ r'be~ •S ~1~•
rt i s 2_,~
k " s y~
-„j i A'-t S• Y S six` 8:~~'•,~
#a
NINE
K V: "M T
ai - T Y:z - ~
K <z~" iar ~ li t ~ aF1 ,a '~a°a'sax'ary~.} z
t
T k-. 6 4
R M!
r2§ a jvt r
%
0 '0
-`~nmY•L ~ ~ a " ( i - - _ + '~r~- 3 -'fie
i
F
~ .
g' t _ -
r ..a
g,17vn _-,g ii7 - _
MY 3 F
-'`tt`-!' e S _ r x _
Z'-T si y v - - to 9
ka c ,a~42 S3ax}`is•:;:::e;;.,...__' -.._-,,,..«m-n....--..._.__ -N....._ -x d s
Item No.~.. _ ,
-tom I Agenda S
_
Meeting of I to Q 4
~4,
T _ >y 1 L ~}i
s ~ f MEMORANDUM j,
, - CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
r'
P
t
i' _ i Y~..i.S- t
TO: City Council F
. :
FROM: Mark Roberts p o n • y.
t
DATE: May 24, 1996 _
~ _
SUBJECT: Screening and Buffering Requirements 3 ;S w~ r
} F '-W -a- fT~~ r
Background:
The City Council has previously received complaints from property owners who lived '
near the Food Connection Store and the Ernst Store. At that time the neighboring y an ,w v
property owners stated that the noise and other operational issues of the permitted s ,tT ~
commercial uses were being provided with an inadequate buffer from adjoining , ~n } ~ a s
, residential areas. r, * F
1, i - , x- ter,
Periodically, the City's Code Enforcement Officers have also received complaints on ` .
this type of issue. Objections were raised concerning noise from the Fred Meyer 3
vJ Center and Howard's store due to early deliveries. Street sweepers at both the ~ x 'w
Albertson's/Ernst Center and the Target Center operating at late night and early , j y~ 4'2y. fi~ w ~
morning hours have also been the basis for complaints. They have also received ` ,r~ { r ,
complaints about insufficient land use buffering between the Fir Grove Apartment site '~iW
z
and adjoining residential areas, and the Boston Market and adjoining residential areas. D , ~ I. $
j- ` sr µ y
Several of the City's existing shopping centers were developed with little or no R , . -
screening and buffering between service areas and the adjoining residential uses. -Z `t
Because existing shopping centers were developed under County regulations, or older f'Z,- 'y ~~~s _ '
City standards, violations of the City noise or other nuisance regulations are handled on 0
a complaint basis. ~ - 0
rk r~N7~ i
In response to these complaints the City Council adopted a Goal that made an analysis i - 1 " " i j
of land use buffering requirements a priority. Specifically, the City Council stated that, - ' a s
"The Community Development Code shall be reviewed in order to increase the i' _
`r protection between existing neighborhoods that abut new commercial development." i - i
}
r 5 # Current Requirements: s { r ; ti; bk
` The Comprehensive Plan currently requires that all new development comply with _
' Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) regulations concerning noise. (See ,
y Exhibits A and 8). The Comprehensive Plan also requires that the City work closely s :
with DEQ during the review of new development applications. DEQ defines a noise { Y t
( _
sensitive land use as a residential dwelling unit. DEQ sets a range of noise levels for '
r 1
commercial uses that are located in proximity to residential uses. (See Exhibit C)
~ S,1 a„, -F t
1_ _Y, Page 1 of3 <r t ,j~4 C. i
~r w _ _
r
f
-
J
f
}S -y ,rw '
l - - - 1 :
x
C - 'c ,
t 1
r _ _ !
m y
.Y
a
1
4
-
.
-
_
- w
r- 7z -,T , ,~7 ~ 1, , _ I ~ , , , -
tai
tit '
Ft's;Ft tLqT
- rtr - - t
4 - 4 Y - _ , Y
mu-w: n
, v° r - ::j ~..,~~a_, _.A,~t.__a..,a.w..~,,.....___ - ._W._~~_.___•. __'__.e_ - i ~ t: N s The Community Development Code addresses Screening and Buffering requirements F fj",
i between different types of land uses. Section 18.100 (Landscaping) provides a series
1 of specific screening and buffering measures that must be provided. These measures ; -
F include the provision of a specified buffer distance (usually 10-20 feet). Within this
buffer, a row of trees or shrubs and a fence, wall or landscaped berm is required.
,f Chapter 18.100 presently requires a minimum buffer width of 20 feet between 4 _ z
commercial and residential properties, and 10 feet for parking lots of less than 50 ` - 4
spaces. The matrix requires that the buffer contain a combination of the following; a
row of trees (with spacing based on their height at maturity), shrubs of either 10, five-
1 gallon shrubs or 20, one-gallon shrubs for every 1,000 square foot of area. The land use - i F . 3 }r ; r
j buffer must also contain either; one row of evergreen shrubs, a minimum of a five-foot
Il fence, or an earthen berm with evergreen shrubs. (See Exhibit D) z, -
Section 18.120 Site Development Review lists a range of buffering -l,`~*
( ) issues that are z
required to be addressed such as noise, absorption of air pollution, filtration of dust, and f
provision of a visual barrier. As a part of Site Development Review, the size and height _
of the required buffer, and the direction that buffering is needed is also reviewed. The ; x f~4 `
required density of the buffer, whether the viewer is stationary or mobile, and whether j
the screening needs to be year-around are also reviewed.
In special circumstances such as the development of a new shopping center, a noise M Y
study is often required to address any such use of facility impacts. The purpose of a ; , r , 3 Y
I *
( noise study is to identify potential noise problems that may be created by new. t
. r_,,_7 ,1,_-~,
development. This is done by recording the existing background noise levels over t_ ~ ,
i different periods of time during the day. Then a measurement of the noise levels ;
generated from a similar existing use is taken. These noise levels are then projected t , '
elv~
on top of the existing noise background to make a determination about the expected ' b - . - =
decibel levels that would be experienced by adjoining noise sensitive residential areas. 4 ~ w
(See Exhibit E) ; -
It Screening is also required to be provided for outdoor living areas. Protection of private '"F "tear ,
d _ 0~
outdoor areas of multiple-family residential dwelling units is required. Locating ~--X 11
` residential uses on the quietest portion of the site is required. Noise, lights, and glare, - , >
are also required to be buffered from adjoining residential uses. A AA '
k
3 r
Within the last several years, where there has been concern that a new development `
does not comply with the DEQ standards, a noise study has been required to be i+ 3 f
provided. Similar to other technical reports, the recommended mitigation measures of r t _
this type of study are reviewed and often incorporated into project requirements as F
Conditions of Approval. In the case of the Albertson's site, the noise study indicated
that a quieter evaporative cooler should be used rather than a roof mounted condenser t
unit. To address the impacts of the approved TRI-County site at SW Dartmouth and
SW 72nd, the acoustical engineer recommended the use of a masonry wall instead of a
wood fence as sound mitigation. These were both made Conditions of Approval for I
ti
these developments.
5 i~,~ j i Y ar EF
i _ !!I
Page 2 of 3
z s ~ r ~
s xa ° 1
L
x
F
- sV. L. - 1
y _ - - ~ ,i
_ - y..
3
- L
h i
-
i
F fi -
+n
-
F
z r _N,,_N , , ~ ~ 1 ~ " r ~ .1 ~
3A
5'.*?5 - 1.3' 3 4 - - x.
¢ dl
b
yt , t' T - {
4
-
-X t K&0&x i _ -
_4F ,
k t A rrc..x_s-k ...m.-- - .e I -1
l t } _ r
'S'q - - [..C '
i~I$ - - C T. I CL..
Possible Code Amendments: -
t '.~4~° 11 r One amendment that could be considered are the DEQ standards for allowable noise :
, z_
levels. Although DEQ has discontinued their noise program, the decibel levels they are ,
ti
based on are consistent with cthcr communities. Tigard could further restrict noise , y
{ -
levels but this does not appear warranted given the extent of the current regu tions, E a
and the range of operational issues that are addressed through the existing
development standards and site specific noise studies.
Y
r The Buffer Matrix chart could require a minimum of a 20-foot buffer between all z a
commercial parking lot uses and residential uses. Presently, the matrix requires a ` ,
10-foot buffer between a parking lot with less than 50 spaces. The matrix should also " f y r F ' mms4
be rewritten to correct issues such as the City's current zoning district designations to , 3 P
require less interpretation of the matrix chart. Presently, the heading of the screening r ` t t
and buffering chart is interpreted to require screening and buffering to apply between.e ,4r ,
Existing non-GOrlfnrrning 'Se3 that are ^:rj~accnt tv ic : proposed uses. The code is VoFS .
_ also interpreted to require a buffer between older established residential uses that are wy; ~ y
in conformance with the underlying zoning and adjacent newly proposed uses. , 4 ' '~~'c ~ '
Presently, a developer can use one of three methods for screening allowed under , x f ~u
Section 18.100. This could be revised to require a six-foot height regardless of the 4 A > T
method of screening that is used. A six-foot screen could be considered as a minimum , l z
height, and may provide a more effective screen because it is in excess of the average r , 3
height of people. Compliance with this standard through the use of a fence or wall . } a I x
requires afve-foot height. Shrubs are required to be four-feet in height within two ~ - r, ?
I 57
1 years. Only the third combination of a berm with a row of shrub on top requires a - ` k
t
t i six-foot screen. r ` " t'
11
Beyond the standard required screening and buffering requirements of Section 18.100, - 1` 3
statements within Section 18.120 (Site Development Review) criteria are open-ended. - 4
The decision maker must determine what is appropriate to buffer and what is not. The il.~ -
If""
current open-ended standards allow flexibility when addressing unusual situations. It is -
not recommended that changes be made to the current screening and buffering review V ~ 5 "
+ standards of Section 18.120 (Site Development Review) standards. _~Z n •
t, -
` Review Schedule: `
Any recommended amendments could be brought before the City Council at a future .r `v , „ q s~
workshop or brought directly to the Citizen Involvement Teams at either next months f -4 F`s t
~IS , l;
meeting, or the following meeting. The City Council and the CIT's recommendations x
would then be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The amendments would be
F:`
fi reviewed by the City Council approximately 4-6 weeks after the Planning Commission • x
Hearing. This process would be approximately six to eight months to complete.
a
i a-._>"
, t , -Y
u. a `i E"" d -
t
7 ~s k
-r i:kurplnUnark_rXccnoise.doc °
Page 3 of 3
k
r r , tr
r
~ -G ,
k
1
A"
7 y f ; 6 4
G
v
h P
xy F 8 - L - - 3.._.s i , 7
l r , ~k
U , ~ - I 'L~ ~ , - , r r r . , , , . I ~ ~ , L , , _ _ I - I
- - ~ - . r I ~ I r. I ~ - r r 11 _ I . , ~ : 0 _ r ~ . _ I - I m T-1
r 1
't' - a`. S
Iyf - Y 'T'ut - 1 # - - 4 k
RUNS } L Sl-s 2 r 4 - G^ yi - 7
' f~ Yom- - y 7 - _
-S'~'^49~-#'Y s3R,'ta # - 1 S- l t'+.2~ V _
~ y, t 5 Y a.,..-s FS..
' 1 , ~ ~ A'co-
" i r -
$ A_ 5 ® ,
. ,pp
EXHIBIT x
$ zz I ss
G -?-S.. 5F ?'QM-
~4;~4 a 8 CIA d the Gomm-,un1 -'Iy
I`~OISa Ao]lu~j on ~ _
, 4m
~ 14M
_ - J _ as 4 _
- 46 T { j .W,
tF'~
- ' S:!ECTca CCAIMU PI TY ,,a ---T.- m I c- R=ACTION OTri:R i 5 ( d8 (A) SOUyC_~ TO OU T'JOC9 SiF=C.S P ,4' - ,
5 $ _ SCATS AREaS NOISES 4a
I
- j3Q a0 kP SIREN (1001 1 5 v x 1,
,
(2007 s-e L ~~s u
I /s TAKEOF- l
, 170 IkC3EA5it1: -`"`x t#- 1' 3- i~.IZ ,"..17 + 1,11
i _ . Q I .°.:•f ET:?:G 11:.: - t 'k ,rxr.,r's f -
1
+ /f~/~ CJT-CF: SwSY I 4 v. A t ,tS v '
' - f..zr
v ASS g.- ° - _ i
1;.:2C?.r1F SUgtiaYTR.}I.1 (201
1 _ (D gQ T Low r:~ 0'!cA _ 7'+
R~tEL: b:ATIC 0?1L. 03') ~
ACTIGK
x ~Q 11%5::3F SPORTS CAR (50 +eah) _
t _.9.
70 IvaCU racr.~l ?(tai tars:Ia A.. rya
TH3_°ATS 1 ` $s- ~s
11 . z ter y -
I F?EE%7:.Y T':.FFiC
60 ast a`,
Y.IJ C>PnEa34 S .'c rN'
LARG_ TRANSFCR.VSR (20.01 COra?LAINTS ! x 'r b 4
VLtcr+TTRnrlc(ta01F'-.
c, y 70 •(LV HCx1E. UR=aV INDUS TRIAL ^"~StON%.L~,
-.1 I a _ l I n0. 5
3 40 In nOa+E. UR9an R atO=NTUI (CTIC 8LE ,
I An(~#u
3r
Y +
jQ 1.1 NdME. QUtE- SU3t+R3 r s
r
s k r i 4 ) ! of % t s., w '3~,£rkrrrrrrrr
t'
d
a & t
S_
' P x"
pq t
s 3'r . r r _1 f ~,1
9. _;r„ a~~-:waz:>r:<;.:s-.„t>" vHtaw- - y.c.'.. ,sc _ -,x _ ~,~:f~`~wu°; ffi icy'' x - ,5. r ~>)~i _
J 7 t 1 _x s A
, - ,qN, , , r;,,,. , ~ ~ ~ ~ " - ~ - - - . - . . I, , j -
_ i t~'+~' t _ ~2
- h' L _ 1 a., g ,s''3 i', 1
g s*° L:f - 5 4 x st ~S - Kr v
U
, " ~ " , , , , i" . ~ . I- i , - , !
.
r
1 8 - - - -
)-u ` ` x
-3 t - ~ -
~c.' t M _
P - - $z i \
, ,to - - 1 ..I j fey t
V orb o- -
- 5
0
z
L 1 Y
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE RANGES
r
f r y
s m p~
, .i
'tt _ LEVEL tCSA) AT 50 FEET t I_„Y;^
C L.- ..1 _
i- U -ii'j _ -
-r--, _ 60 70 80 90 100 l/0 & ~ 't---' f$~
p.'c tV "
" COMPACTERS IROLLERSI Y
~~P 4x
N a Sx ~
- - Z FRONT LOADERS a®r.or~ t{@'. z --az' x~~
C7 Pr fi k t
t a4 7575.1 "`7~${
Z > BACKHOES I I
,~a 't.. ~`s?
I
a 7' TRACTORS w E- 11 tv t < 4,
W SCRAPERS. GRADERS
O I,^ n i
R} j PAVERS I ® Itr` t tXy
e TRUCKS rs T
;r£ k°a a
~o-. ,
2 CONCRETE MIXERS I ' 1r ~ d1
f
> e? i ; `e., s~?max
W a. CONCRETE PUMPS I ! o , M ~ a
-j C O I I I I t 4~-'- -r ~ .rt a.
` a CRANES (MOVABLE) I I I I 3• -'AgM, y~0
CRANES (DERRICK) ~ V ® I I I 6, ~,--W - ~ .
` a
r _T PUMPS i - " ~--s*•x . p F ~ZZ . O Q ® I I I I t S Hn.,.A- SL I"t~'FS jFt , "TL a 1 E
re ut C GENERATORS
I I V
I I f `
` COMPRESSORS I 'e r t! mw~
N
r PNUEMATIC WRENCHES I i
I , , I ~ , . [ ' " :
•
I Noun=
.1 I
a 2 JACKHAMMERS - -t. ' & - - t '
1 _ i y ANO ROCK OR I I I I ' r n : y
I'-, y -
w IMPACT PILE DRIVERS IPEAKSII I I ' , - f r-,'!~„'"! $ c
i
` ~ A~ 1
F = VIBRATOR ( I 7 ;
I I F f 4--,
O SAWS { - ~j ]
s'
I I I _ . f
~ti 1
2 ,
-
° y i
4t ~ F
t t t ,,fi .
J -
4 t
g;<'.q~%taY" .'-aR'lJ' YZ4. "'F -cx +.m y - ro' _ i 7 1'- ` ' k - J
~ ~
2 E x
z _ k
jjii
. , 2- . . . - ~ - " . I ~ , - 2'.~,~~".,~"~~' 7 , ,r , ~ ~
6 _
M~ ✓ x - -
f t £ F
- 1' e t4,
9 - tt - - t i F! t
Z P t 7 Sy, _j
1
7h 4 -
t "
fm ~ , " 1, ~ - ~ ~ - : r ' - , I , ~ , - . . - - , ~ - ~ 1, r r - x _
i_ro -
- - - y " 3'
I ~.r..* - - - - _ _ -
: n _ - - - -
r r y~ rt't ~ - . .
AN EXCERPT FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
-1 7 r_- EXHIBIT B 4
-11,
F CONCERNING THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS FOR ° 1
s
^4
THE CONTROL OF NOISE EMISSIONS # k ' `
1 4.3 NOISE POLLUTION
-3' ' Findings i - - 'a„ r o
f'-`r-,, - ti ;
f k Noise is a recognized cause of physical and psychological stress which has 2 v ,~i,
t been directly related to various health problems.
4
1. 't Motor vehicle traffic noise is the major contributor to the ambient noise
, level in Tigard. E_
Noise ]..vela F^r _+~t - 1 residential districts in Tigard appear to be f ' ` £
within acceptable levels..
` the highest noise levels appear to be found along Pacific Highway (99W), _ - -
s Hain Street, I-S, Hwy. 217 and Hall Boulevard. L~ > c
Effective control of the undesirable effects of highway generated noise ~-,~3
levels requires a three part approach: 1) source emission reduction; 2)
improved highway design and street design; and 3) land use controls. the "'tz1,.,~y," ~~s
n first two components are currently being addressed by private industry and}- 7
_ by federal, state and regional agencies. The third area is essentially a
fi-Ts^~S z - ~ '
~ f,", - , ~ [---11 t ~ local government responsibility. I 5 r-
POLICY = rr:•:'
z
- 4.3.1 THE CITY SHALL: y h q Yfi"- -
11
j a_ REQUIRE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS LOCATED IN A NOISE CONGESTED AREA ) - a.-~°_^ t'
OR A USE WHICH CREATES NOISE IN EXCESS OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS ~ 1 _ ~ ' -
TO INCORPORATE THE FOLLOWING INTO THE SITE PLAN: ( _-{..a+ ? r F=
I. BummnG PLACEMENT ON THE SITE IN AN AREA WHERE THE NOISE ( ~ r- f~v - ; 'a
LEVELS WILL HAVE A MINIMAL IMPACT; OR tt L Z, - x , ~ 4
2. LANDSCAPING AND OTHER TDCHNIQUES TO LESSEN NOISE IMPACTS TO 8 ,4 a
i- a LEVELS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. _
b. COORDINATE WITH DEQ IN ITS NOISE REGULATION PROGRAM AND APPLY THE z r ~
DEQ LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM. ° X { - "fi
_ fi c. WHERE APPLICABLE REQUIRE A"STATIIQF2JP FROM THE APPROPRIATE AGENCY ' s -=5
L (PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL) THAT ALL APPLICABLE + - x-+ { s,. '
_ 5 i~ STANDARD6 CAN BE HET. x '-8 r>-4 ^`'j 3 i
t ti J
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES t § `1
e _x,
r, I. The Tigard COmmmity Development Code shall ensure that future -noise
sensitive' developments are designed and located so as to minimize the
h' a intrusion of noise from motor vehicle traffic and/or neighboring noisy uses. Yb s,} , fi{
t
J - ~3
y s
E a .Zr q
r
T- -
4
iS ee'
tr J i -1 < b w'a'gs t
C~ d < - 1 t _
K„' aF ei
- - 7 1 f 4
t
F, a.
rl -Y - - -
R i _ . l
"'z- -'r r - - -
K
Eft k r
c ` e 1 kq dfi
d
V
{ 1 - kr
-"F . I - . -L ~ I I _L - I ~1 L I : ~ j4 7 T " , ` 'j" F-~-,~L-"-~ -
LL_. ,:i_~_a. .-s.. - - _.A,.. . ..,c, y_"_,'.
61z
3",
q-
'IlIg &
iVPh g-P
"WN'g
-.k 4",e'
RN 'ZZ
. . .
V'R-1 k-M
J,
ij,
, 0
g
4
T".
rt
ft
rt
®r
f
41
t AQ
"~A! ~N
MP ll~
5t, S§
go,
"E" -11 -1 W,
14
NMI"
-"d- RM., 7 q,
WE,
5
m
W -AN
7*1-~~--~77 77,1~-- '77- 7,7
J 7
k~ P""~"
N-
~kf--Y i ; -,~'<3 ~3>}sx "s.
xa 0111g
3{' f P - - , -x - _ " v -G ~ sad . -
_ +-:,a A2` -+r c - r _ - r a s a,'sT i
$ ,]g.f -t; v°,;, lY' d q t, F s, i-' cam.,.
_ nia
P i 1 ; 'y ya, A
I
~~,k,'' AN EXCERPT FROM THE OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE EXHIBIT C
~ rz;_-:,, RULES CONCERNING THE ALLOWABLE
, I
DECIBEL LIMITS OF NOISE EMISSIONS >
i _m _,t 4
t - Sy-- - -
ORECON ADMIIVLSTStATiVERULES ~_.I ,,s
, - ! ~[API-A JsO. D'VMCN S-1)E AR7IH'E~YTOF'FSMROtW CE7'MAL U,~Ln-Y g- zs p•. , ' .
- - k N - 1r a, - - k, ® - -
t~°S' l re^Pxz rvZ ,y^sa
(340-3s-035) . ~ _r,3, w rte"
T ,Y Y `ate-- Yy `1 J -
11-
F i+tin¢ Indvse=ial and Cemaerc3al Koise Source Standards V~,*-'2',`,
-~`-5 ; z ALlovable Star=sCcs1 Yoiae Levels is Any one Sour- 1, 4.•k y
t -
~,~_0 T
1 a.---f0 .3-,. 1:1 .j. ".-*r a.-. ' _ - Y" .
f i
s Allowable limit 30 minutes per hour. L40 - 55 dad L50 - 50 d9i v"•_ , r
r€. Allowable limit 6 minutes per hour. _
L to 6a d91 L70 55 d`b } of^'v ^s+rv.
I ,1. f, '.z , c " Allowable limit 36 seconds per " " OR r=y v°
x' pe hour. L 1 - TS d9d L 1 - 6C d9t ,Y 4k .1 r° _ ~ a ,
e - - - t k P '2 ;w a
t~, w~.. i
_Ix x fir.
T"gw -'I arm ~t.-~;?`''r' Qa' -
TAB= a ko"
t. (340-35-035) - ~ , I }
y New Ladust ial and Cas=ereial :Noise Source Staada-da - ~
s - f }ct shy- ,
r ASlovable Sezcisc2cal Noise Levels in Any One son-- y sar~ F
I, r
'k.. Fx r s- ,era'-rt
a a 7 a.a. - 10 0.3. 10 v.n. - 7 a.m. uz ' ~bfi nh rr
5 _ ' s - - f, 2 'L-e h - 't
11 I Allowable limit 30 minutes per hour. L - 55 d9a L - So den ; s A, - L'
a 50 50 'Y - N, r - e
l Allowable limit 6 minutes per hour. L10 - 60 d9n Llo - 55 d8n' s
k"1R .1v t ,
t - 75 Ll - 60 d3a z 4~
S' ? Allowable limit 36 seconds per hour.
a
lxfs!_ t iS 4 4 t 4f- "g,
_11 1- - s s i }K
t
r fE
1
i
q6
.f 5 % x _ F 'C 'J
x ~-_.rx ppp 2r ,S-
r 11 - 6.Ts61es - -u 4 , ' Y "1 tG
,~.k,. 1.t- .fi,,,•4 3.. t 17 - k.~, o~1".~- CIS E 7
Y l.Y 1 f - .C ~ Hmn `-*4,Pd' `•'ti = r - +m ..ei .r'ic 1 A ,7` `+"a t
11-1 - 7 - `;s ,..at' +"',a r - - k ,x r { ~ v 3~` G
" ."z r' , t 1
'^f~ is r i - P5 - .,s 3
- , A r
.z _ '1 r - _ - -x r4 Mkt ~ t
r. 11'1
A;~. ~ lk . ~ -j __I, , T: - , r, _ , ~ ' - r ~ ' ` , - , ~'Fi~'_~O~ 1
s S. rR r' , n - s - s x -j_'
S - I - - - ~Y t~
rats k - - - - - r,¢ ''7 z`ry r :1
lw-p -h 'l 5 -i 4
- r t `i
" ~ : : r , ' , ' ' . -1 , , , ,,~L~0 I " ~ ~ P ,;,,,;,~,;~j
, tY
irk- Y -r- - t. x-` .t r'
-
ks
- - ~ - ~:~-.~~:~,~~',:~*,-~,"~,~~~-,-,,--~,.:,'--',t'~~i,'i~~-~~:,,~,~,-~~~*-,~-~',i~-~-7] -~~i
Ir
g x '.wY ~ ~,jr+r,= t. x { * - - 5r z' t k- f, ~a ' ~
~Sa~F`
d`.rr - L a.ra:4au~. .w..~...... vY - .rC e 5 -y.
.LbSt -4 t I t _ r
- y''
r3u,.~sy ,rvr-d .a Fr.;F;1`'',
A'
3z r
- f- a^ v a ORECA N AD&MISMAT)YE RULES E r s k??t a , -
y' ?e F h Fi QiAPTP3i:w. OtYLSION SS-~QEP.ARSF(T OF E'GiQNytN~'YI'.~L~U.LLIIY r } . '1
11 I - 1,
- ' x$67
`Y § -a t MEN 7FA
s rg ~ aR'`` . ]40-3s-03$) z~`N} . z1. ,
I
t.
~4 `''1 Industrial and Cafinereial Noise Source Standards for Ouiec Areas ~H ,rt
r ~ ..ltcc•-,bI- 3toti.:tic.-1 tr.^isc Levels in A" One Her rw € z R
1
tp r s
Y * Allowable limit 30 minutes per hour. LSO _ so dBA LSQ - 45 dBA 3~,, A -
Allowable limit 6 minutes per hour. Li0 ss dBA . Lla - So den `5 MM"~ f ~ .
- ' y
IM-111"
` , ' Allowable limit 36 seconds per hour. L - bu dBA Ll - SS dsn y j
t
x "Quiet Areas" are those areas defined asr
serving a broader public interest such VNEI, '
as a park or a designated wilderness area. " r ~ * G
` TABLE 10 ? ' ~
: 9 (340-3$-03$) S-
t
y ;
~ !`ed'_aa Octave 3aad Standards f°r Induntr±al and C c=erc'nI vo'se Sau-ees ; 'E
_ a, a S.
allowable Oetave Hand Sa=d Pressnrt r_eo~~- sr E
` Octave Sand Center a j
.1 r
i r equeacy, at 7 a.~. - Ifl s aza
xkw
T - i 63 b$ :n to 6z J-1- 2000 46 GU E, ~i ~e
_ y r _ hits
i t'~ I''r 8000 43 37 - - ~ "t ~ ~ y - r
,a rg r 40 34 11 2s~
NS r k, ""t~ r"r r'`~ • ° ' yr.- y. r
{y c,,r %,-,F'G tI's1
M ax - -z 7.Tabin (June. 19W) 71 - vky,'~, 1
t 1`' 2~ {f a Fh t~r-^ tic f*,~ .
' s , f j - - - - Yzx n* ~~.-..,:a-, r -;v' ;.:r- r r, _ ~7 n,- m_ ~ , - Tt> - ~ - r y
I ,
k
r? Sum f -
r g T.-_ - f k -rn,r--3. j a
~ -1 r . , - -I. ~ ~ , ~ , ~ . ~ ~ J-1
- n c t s - - - t b e~•TZ's, -
( - f - 4 e d Y
F r E
I, ra .s 7 j. F d - _ §~lr
- - si a -m.,. -
I : : : ~ ~ - ~ ~ . ' 1"~,~,' r f
• -
~ _
s .a..
3
i - - - .
,
g~-g 30
" - ~ ~ 1, I I I I I ~ ~ ~ . , - ~ - , 1~ . 71
{
.d. 3 14 t j - - _ - -
- I
jj
d1
} IBIT.D
" - f AN EXCERPT FROM SECTION 18.100 "LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING OF TH x
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT ADDRESSES SCREENING AND : { -
, _ , _ BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS t
° _ j f- f-'
-t e
3
.1
]7 I K'
v
I.' 'c* .-xFr~
r a
f °y ri
I CM '
E- -
18.100-070 Buffering and screening -General Provisions s r 'I
A. 2t 3s the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and }
protection and reduce or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise y's f n y
pollution at a development site, without unduly interfering with the view A,, ,s
from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of pedestrians and gAiy-<
vehicles. (Ord. 69-06; Ord. 83-52). _ 1-Y e~ =fit ,
B. Buffering and Screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent
- uses which are of a different in accordance with the matrix in this '"x= ='r "I"2, 7 `
type ` ' ll , 4 xt,t , K- 3•'}
chapter. The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the 1,Iex
installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When ~i 4 `r
different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a e.,; i>
right of way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as y 5~',N ~ ~r
specified in the matrix.
i C. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and f
screening plan may be submitted for the Director's approval as as f „
alternative to the buffer area landscaping and screening standards, f~'-.-,_ -
=z y01",
provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as x L
required by this code. (Ord. 91-17) ~ '
F}C
18.100_080 Buffering/Screening Requirements <:-,+,("'a4dr..~-O" - y -
A. A buffer consists of an area within a required interior setback adjacent. x~ y
to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in i4016 a -
the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length equal to the
length of the property line of the abutting use or uses. rv F[
' B. A buffer area may only be occupied by utilities, screening, sidewalks and ~ r,
bikeways, and landscaping. No buildings, aecessways, or parking areas u _i
1 shall be allowed in a buffer area except where an accessway has been
7 apprcved by the City. `--2
-I a~`~
} C. A fence, hedge, or wall, or any combination of such elements which are
located in any yard is subject to the conditions and requirements of
Section 18_100.80.
' D. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of the+
following:
1. At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall be not less
ti
than 10 feet high for deciduous trees and five feet high for . i
evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing for trees shall )
be as follows: . }
" i. Small or narrow stature trees, under 25 feet tall or less
'Pi than 16 feet wide at maturity shall be spaced no further than _ - " t
15 feet apart; f E
C F
{ I Yi { ~_~1 t~
+ ~'fi, -~}rsnmw'a+ €r -rt . ,:a.„: °J _ t Y tf3
H
„Y - "i ''J
I
{ - L _J
-t i {
f u
I '_1"-'-, '.11~4k. , ~ ~ ~ . , . ~ , : , ~ : i - 7 , ~ , . , : , ~ L~ I ~ ~ " ~ ~ ] , ~ . ~ J, ' , ~
t
t f M1 $
1y t {
f
- - _ u u_-. maau._+L
"
t
°
-
~I
- 1
c.:. _ 3 v_ i_.__r,.~~_.. .°_c_..i ° c..._ i z _ 11 I .I.......LL _.ec 5~... ~....t , _z.. ,_..i..r ..t I. . -
S f
IT
- ^a.r s - - - - - - _ _
Say' i~, _
~a y3 z ~ t'
A MAT 91 vmymy,j,A-
s
awl
TWO
ii. Medium sized trees between 2S feet to 40 feet tall and with
16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced e -
no greater than 30 feet apart. r
iii. Large trees, over 40 feet tall and with more than 35 feet
Hida branching 4` -a. maturity, _:`=11 be spaced no greater than
30 feet apart. s
"n moo. Twolms:
2. In addition, at least 10 five gallon shrubs or 20 one gallon shrubs [ } Y -
r
} shall be planted for each 1000 square feet of required buffer area.
CZ T-a
Nvy
3. The remaining area shall be planted in lawn, groundcover, or spread
with bark mulch- _
E. Where screening is required the following standards shall apply is t~ s £
addition to those required for buffering:
r ~ r~ z
1. A hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs shall be planted CN 3 v
which will form a four foot continuous screen within two years of a
1{
~ planting, or;
l 2. An earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials shall be
provided which will form a continuous screen six feet in height
? within two years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be s
4 planted in lawn, ground cover or bark mulched, or;;s {c f ~g~ ~rZ }
zt
3. A five foot or taller fence or wall shall be constructed to provide
a continuous sight obscuring screen.
F_ Buffering and Screening provisions shall be superseded by tha vision f - F - t} f
clearance requirements as set forth in Chapter 18.102. snn e J, ,
] G. When the use to be screened is downhill from the adjoining zone or use, r
the prescribed heights of required fences, walls, or landscape screening
shall be measured from the actual grade of the adjoining property. In ae x
this cese, fences and walls may exceed the permitted six foot height at x d
the discretion of the director as a condition of approval. When the - -
grades are so steep so as to make the installation of walls, fences or s
landscaping to the required height 'impractical, a detailed T r
landscape/screening plan shall be submitted for approval. s -
H. Fences, and Walls.
says., L
1. Fences and walls shall be constructed of any materials commonly r p
used in the construction of fences and walls such as wood or brick, r 1 {
or otherwise acceptable by the Director; 5-„V
21 110 WAM
2. Such fence or wall construction shall be in compliance with other E l
f o City regulations; and A
Mpg 0
3. Chain link fences with slats shall qualify for screening. However,
' chainlink fences without slats shall require the planting of a P'<,
31
Y continuous evergreen hedge to be considered screening.
2. Hedges. 3 s
0 An evergreen hedge or other dense evergreen landscaping may satisfy r E _ 7
a requirement for a sight obscuring fence where required subject 1
to the height requirement in Subsections 18.100.090.8.1 and 2; f
.r, ~ - ~~€t Ft
Revised 06/25/91 Page 219-1 F
t =
1 Eton
am A not on 0
4
f tr _ } r f(
{FIT
- - - Syr .
,z+
. 3 - - 3 - - - -
Y k-g -S2 4 ; - _ 1
a> ca 3y - - c _ J -sue ` t _
• . t a
_
was' .a?X • r ,a - _ - i -'r r tt
-11111 -!~Wg~ - - . 1. ~ " - . 1,2L I , -1 , ~k~ -r "
I ~
. „S'2 "i,-~~ c s . -w, _ . - . s,m - ,.....mw,..wr - ,.,..-s..._- -1% s,s, .-i,
*j keg ggap - J' - I , ,
mr
-MI
4ri"sg[,~,~ a tea` k spa c - ;
P
,11 .
ti t • -
ate" -P' w.. k x -
JFZy ^4 ft°~r ` f~ ~h B~`r
11
r~ q _ 2. such hedge or other dense landscapinn_ s!=11 w- - riy maintained
a s a..d _ li ;a replaced with another hedge, other dense evergreen '
' landscaping. or a fence or wall when it ceases to serve the purpose ' aF S rr
~ -2* of obscuring view; and +
. # 3. No hedge shall be grown or maintained at a height greater than that ;
F r- - permitted by these regulations for a fence or wall in a vision 3r $
z f i a clearance area as sat forth in chapter 18.102. (Ord. 91-17; Ord. a ~ xL g x ,111 89-06; Ord. 84-71; Ord. 83-52) 7# . at~
j' t.
_,.i,, q It - ...a•-,
Y 3 i - 1 ZT ; 7 = C
zs. I ~ "
1' 2tf,°.... ` t r
T, 4 - zLi _
z a - x - f1 _ ate-
C'n
T f u
E
{4 - Vii-
t
- z - [
} ~ ,
w,F ' 4, f
`S 4^{ b k - ~~4
,R,,,i;~- M`E,-'~-~,~:T"~,L!,' , , ,
e*€ r
*v,-, rfi , + • f z atj Ck
4
-rr t-d - K L j- r fi 7 k
l4 -`SX X C T 4 - h , { -
hL s^ f 'T,N 1 K , - y F' .t '1-F k
{ ,5.s`_'~~3-"- 'RYA r _
h w {,T' * - d~fr*",.n `fi't 4,p,,aRS3YN~, 2u..,.izt"sb~+rw.•av- W.sFrsa+t. 'ai'k':p ay^ , Y S LY v- vs ` rt.<w-t'z M e '"F rZ" ~.K" i
•N r3~e° S - _ ~ u rt.7 , # J q. , .1
- iiscr `rte ,-I r' ` 4- - o- s' a e'1Tq t
st {,?iu'E <4 - _a ry ly,,gAky
T
~-zz; 'r+M1':T z 4q 'y- } _ t - s s_ - -h u ~,j - r r
S 5~ E
-teat'*d~. 5 ~r' 'S- r ° + { 1F _ R--• -.t r,* oz's 5x, 7
J~'4 4 a1 1.-.•. a T _ _ f - L h, V .k t '
uz s - w ` t
7
11
- {
-i-,
A,±. 3'_'- ut. 'fi'r' 'S., - -
-1., I 11 J A t.k~ 1T C S J 1-
_ ? S- e' - - - -
t
L h y
ck4~ .tea. ' zya- "i~x.'
,i - AN EXCERPT FROM SECTION 18.120 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW' OF THE EXHIBIT ti
a .r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE T HAT ADDRESSES SCREENING AND ~
r ,r , BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS ° '--i'-
- c _ ch,- -1 - d fit'-~ ~rf
,j 'fit
5 t 7 >
v,. 3 ' y n ..r
y x_g3
-1 c, t +i p i
F 3r,,,6''Y 4w
r ivy P= , , ,
$ - -
5 t
N ~R"
,i !![*z r , by a
J -
_ z'.rd " lYxr ry '1
Z"`3sz'~"3 34
a• Suffering. Screening, and Ca sk?4
mpatibility between Adjoining Uses: s
x fl~+' _ a• ^uf=ering s;;a,i y@ p a -s'""`~
rovide~ be_reen d'f-"event typ ~ F _
! and uses es or
(fcr exaaso le, between sin a , sn
s-
7 ~'-ti?le-family residential, and ~Y and L~ 11.
rssidentia_ and
conanerc.al), and the followin
N ,9,
N ,9,
N ,9,
N ,9,
t a considered is actors shall , _1 be h
i - - I -4 date^iiainS the adequacy o: the -~a and x ,
extent o: s bu::er: w r~ss
3 U-) Z he purpose of the buffer, for exa".ele
x
JY noe s,~
to decrease - s
✓ f _ lsvels, absorb a._ 2ol_u_.on, - , ter dust, or `S x, if - I_ , , I I "I -
$ o .=vide a visual _a.
' -
''-r,,v M T-" ~ j is~ The size ^ the hu.fer_ reQuired to achieve : r~ 11 - r
- ~ - 'l -ru pese inte ~s a: width and height; the ~ ~
ai-x rya
i - 3 _ ° ,gam ~
? ~ - t S i x€ d+ aL';-v im i t ^i
Y i
...a,+ _t r s rx7, s 5'*
¢F-4s t Se V_$2d ~2!.~. i'f99 may., _
?are 310 p
- - T sY - 'fi'r -9r a «r • - a µ.s, s+ T, Y , Z'~ Fr'y, 1 , 77 Piz' - r 3 3.
11-1 - -1
7 s`5 9r'`•zy' t '1 - 'r 4F 'f 5 -
,s, s- r t` r r t
S~ 5- S ! "''y"s' n F
" - r - - - ,p ~z, } fi , i x f i
i .,i~ , K _ _
' h ; y
}
F -
- W_
AV AM~Qa Mows y
C - k SAC \ y, - _ l
VOW:
f d
L F _ i l L.S - 2 -
kr 0a
Mal
00 - 00
A- Won a wwwMATANTy
BE &I A Q
KA( f Iw Y 'iL§a. 2r zw.u_,..a.............,.........._ _~r .,..a.~nYSVe~uw..' . .............✓_.~..tr.V..,.:~s'¢- -
z a,
"4 fyMMO t - - 3-
F'e'tes C - Y 1 1 F _
i
>
3 ~ (iii) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; MEN
t 1xry S .Y (iv) The required density of the buffering; and &S
, • } (v) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; "-11 ~Ra l
b. On site screening from view from adjoining properties of
such things as service areas, storage areas, park'
ng3
lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air y*4;
t
cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the;. e.-
r r H following factors will be considered in determining the
adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: g Y
W-A
<; (i) What needs to be screened; MW MW A ~
,t r z
:x (ii) The direction from which it is needed;
W-W
2
} r{ +~Fa i
(iii) How dense the screen needs to be; k< r +
(iv) whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and L ,
(v) whether the screening needs to be year around;
S. Privacy and Noise: %:a'°rq=°tt?::;'
a. Structures which include residential dwelling units shall
provide private outdoor areas for each ground floor unit Cti. Asa .
which is screened from view by adjoining units as
e provided in Subsection 6.a below;
b. The buildings shall be oriented in a manner which ,=wt rQ ~Mv,
e ` F
protects private spaces on adjoining properties from view{ N and noise; r =r2 '
c. Residential buildings shall be located on the portion of
the site having the lowest noise levels; and ` 5z¢
d. on-site uses which create noise, lights, or glare shall
z,
be buffered from adjoining residential uses; (See Section
f,
-to
x n¢
19.120.190.A.4)
ya +
f ' 3 2S€ s
MAP M
6. Private Outdoor Area: Residential Use:'
1 a. Private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be,
provided and shall be designed for the exclusive use of + S G ~ ~ ~R
individual units and shall be at least 48 square feet in ' t ffi ?
size with a minimum width dimension of four feet; and:
(i) Balconies used for entrances or exits shall not be
? considered as open space except where such exits or
entrances are for the sole use of the unit; and
NMI
1$ } r t-'C~ x a
vow'
Revised 02/27/89 Page 911
z
k f{ MOM,
i
0. ...iS... .de..c_,_.
7 7
y r C
Z
l
fi
JI,Q
r