Loading...
City Council Packet - 09/22/1998CITY OF TIGARD i TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 22, 1998 COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT BE TELEVISED isVdmWmjco%=pW.d- 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Revised 9.22.98 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitors Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be, scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice) or 6842772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 22,1998- PAGE 1 AGENDA 6:30 PM STUDY SESSION > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. This Executive Session is being held under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h). As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:45 PM 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve City Council Minutes - August 18 and 25,1998. 3.2 Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) Items: a. Award Contract for the Construction of Fanno Creek Trail - Segment 6a (Ash AvenuelFanno Creek - to Anderson Pacific, Inc. Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 22,1998- PAGE 2 7:50 PM 4. HEAR A PRESENTATION ON PORTLAND'S WATER PROPOSAL (LONG-TERM SUPPLY) s Staff Introduction: Public Works Department • Presentation by Portland Commissioner Erik Sten 8:30 PM 5. REVIEW OF REPORT OF TRAFFIC CALMING ON SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET 0 Staff Report: Engineering Department 9:30 PM 6. REVIEW REPORT ON REQUEST TO DEDICATE TO THE CITY SW 107TH e Staff Report: Engineering Department 10:00 PM 7. REVIEW REPORT ON PROGRESS TO IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE OF SUMMER LAKE • Staff Report: Engineering Department 10:20 PM 8. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 10:30 PM 9. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 10:40 PM 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. This Executive Session is being held under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h). As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 11:00 PM 11. ADJOURNMENT I: WDM\CATFMCCA\980922.DOC 0 COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 22,1998- PAGE 3 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising • City of Tigard s ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. oTigard,Oregon 97223 O (3 Duplicate Affidavit .Accounts Payable s AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. 1, Kathy SnVdpr being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of theTi Bard-Tina 1 at i n Times a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county and state; that the Tigard ri t-v ('rl„n`+; 1 Dom........ a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for nNT successive and consecutive in the following issues: September 17,1998 Legal Notice TT 9234 Subscribed and sworn to fore me thisl7th day of GPgtember, 1998 A, I OFFICIAL SEAL ROBIN A. BURGESS Nota Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON My Commission Expires: COMMISSION NO. 062071 L~my COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001 AFFIDAVIT TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING September 22,1998 - 6:30 P.M. TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON * Presentation by Portland Commissioner Sten on the Portland Water Proposal * Discussion: Review of the SW North Dakota Traffic Mitigation * Update: Summerlake Park * Discussion: Staff Report concerning the request for dedication of 107th Avenue TT9234 - Publish September 17, 1998. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : September 22, 1998 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED n Q v J StiJ Go~ ~ ~ 001 L a ~ -:f,- 62afz:' , Wdmljolvltibhtdoc Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 DATE: SW NORTH DAKOTA TRAFFIC CALMING PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS AGENDA ITEM NO.5 PLEASE PRINT C Proponent - (Speaking In Favor) Opponent - (S A ainst) Name, Ad ess and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. G ~ jw 0 p 7~c,c i CQ j cf 7 2 3 O- 7-55 9 Name ddr and Phone No. !55; w 7Ur? )Gv Name, Address and Phone o ,p ' o f Name, Address and Phone No. ~1S r Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, ddress and Phone No. 0-1 Z N , Address and Phone No. Q 12?17 11. Name, Address and Phone No. Ti ' r O f~ Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Du ,Cis //,AA 1 wGRLA-'- 1 S tV $ . , ?up l L~g~ ¢ „G47Z Name, Name, Address and Phone No. Fr►~ ~.s ~ pe v u~ (Z S G o 5 w Sv ~ -K Cl-~c.- 01r S r r. , f ~'-5 - Q 0- 77,2 - 777 / ame, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. W-~ Lh J 1 r c1 q~1.~3 5~ 0- Nam , Name, Address and Phone No. Z` ~ L Ge?-% me fgcs:a ,s CO D ~ 15 4 2 Or' t 1~..Z~{3 S•~ • S~ps1~., ~Q`-• . . . % rt 06'rd, 9. 713 - L $'3 0 r z ids V~ rro nent W w m r i2 v V l v Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. S k~3(`{ e, Addr and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. f~ Name, Address and Phone No 0 1 Name, Address and Phone No. G ~s LI Name, Address and Phone No. _ Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. )~i 7l Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. 0 J is\adm\j o\testify. doc Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 DATE: September 22, 1998 Request to Dedicate SW 107" Street to the City PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS CV- AGENDA ITEM NO. PLEASE PRINT Name, Address an one No. Name, Address and ho e -Xt~ 11 O. Name, Addres d Phone No. / .4111 Z~~ Name, Address and Pho a l ^ 1 Name, A s and one No. l Name, Address and Ph ne b P, ~~s-ro n 13 S FF> ( g 1 0 r2 q, 7 -;I~ s-To - o 3-45- Name, Ad d Phone No. `a y-c,K Name, Address an a o. lt) ~ v IN i.t=IS lr14 4u Ft i4Af- ~ R✓ ~ /O Il. S.2 5 s w KING c a Naitte~4~ ss and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, ress and Phone No. Name, Address and Phone o. 01, Name, Address and Phone No. J Name, Address d one No. v S'"J"O-\ Qss~ Name, Address and Phi No. Name, Address and Phone No. Name, A dress and Pho a No. Name, Address and Phone No. ut- AGENDA ITEM # 3, a CL, FOR AGENDA OF September 22, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Award of Contract for the construction of Faring Creek Trail - Segment 6a (Ash Avenue / Fanno Creek). PREPARED B'd OVannie Nauven DEPT HEAD OK Gud-Duenas CITY MGR OK Bill Monahan ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve the contract award for the construction of Fanno Creek Trail - Segment 6a (Ash Avenue / Fanno Creek) ? STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to Anderson Pacific Inc., in the amount of $31,690.00. INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed trail is one of several trial projects included in the Parks System Program of the City's seven- year Parks CIP, which begins July 1998. The segment 6 trail (Ash Avenue / Fanno Creek) is one of five committed trail segments to be constructed in the FY 1998-99 Parks list. Segment 1 (North Dakota / Tigard Street) is under construction. Segment 6 originally includes two sub-segments: Sub-segment 6a that rums in a northeasterly direction and connects Ash Avenue with Fanno Creek; Sub-segment 6b that runs in a northerly direction and connects an existing trail located west of Fanno Creek with Main Street. Due to right of way and possible wetland permit requirements, construction of Segment 6b has to be delayed until Spring of 1999. The scope of this project includes construction of approximately 490 feet of 10-foot wide asphaltic concrete pathway from Ash Avenue / Maplewood Street to Fanno Creek. The proposed trail segment will also serve as a connection between two Ash Avenues located east and west of Fanno Creek. Permits from the Department of State Land and the Corps of Engineers are not required since the proposed trail is located outside of the wetland boundary. Completion of this project along with other trail projects will make the Fanno Creek Park trail continuous between Scholls Ferry Road and Hall Blvd. The bid opening was conducted on September 11, 1998. The bid results are: Anderson Pacific, Inc. Ridgefield, WA $31,690.00 Morse Bros. Sherwood, OR $37,225.00 Yakima Construction, Inc. Medford, OR $37,730.00 Engineer's Estimate $38,440.00 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None FISCAL NOTES This project was originally funded in the amount of $30,000 in the FY 1997-98 Parks System Program and the whole amount was transferred into the same program of FY 1998-99. The difference of $1,690.00 will be funded from the general Park SDC which has a total of $1,497,000 in FY 1998-99. iAeng\98cipVannoftum6a.doc AGENDA ITEM # 3, a b, FOR AGENDA OF 22 September 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Bid Award for City Hall and LibM Window and Flashing Repairs PREPARED BY: Ben Tracy DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL To award the bid to the lowest qualified bidder for the repair of the leaky windows at City Hall and the Library. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To be provided in the addendum to be submitted on 18 September 1998. INFORMATION SUMMARY The window and flashing repairs are currently out to bid with bid closing being the 15th of September. Since the council agenda item summary must be submitted no later than the 10th of September to get on the 22 September council business meeting this item is being prepared prior to bid opening. The results of the bid opening will be submitted on the 18th of September to be included in the council packets for the 22nd of September meeting. It was necessary to go out to bid for the repairs because over the years there have been numerous leaks in various areas of the City Hall and Library complex. The leaks have caused damage to the drywall and paint in those areas, and potentially may involve some dryrot. Until the contractor begins their repairs it is impossible to determine what the extent of the leak damage to be. In addition to the damage the leaks have caused to the building, they have created problems for staff in the work areas affected by the leaks. We have employees that are affected by the working conditions created by the leaks, that being, sensitivity to mold or other adverse environmental influences. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED To deny this bid award and direct staff to re-bid the repair project. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY The maintenance of facilities is an aspect of the councils goal for community character and quality of life as it deals with the library and city hall. If the buildings are not maintained the community will become concerned about the utilization of their tax dollars by city staff. It is important to provide a pleasant environment for both staff to work in and for the citizens to utilize for their enjoyment and recreation purposes. FISCAL NOTES The current FY budget has allocated $70,000.00 for this repair project. Agenda Item No. 3. a c . Meeting MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGC TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder DATE: September 15, 1998 SUBJECT: Council Packet Materials for 9/22/98 - Agenda Item No. 3.2c Bid opening occurred after the due date for the Council packets for the September 22 Council meeting. The Council packet summary sheet will be forwarded to the City Council with the Council newsletter scheduled to be mailed on Friday. I: WDM\CATHYMCOUNCI ULATEITUDOC zt~~~l al22.iag read by Cn4ACilbr MEMORANDUM TO: Erik Sten, Portland City Commissioner FROM: Paul Hunt, Tigard City Councilor RE: City of Tigard Water Supply DATE: September 22, 1998 N cam- - This memorandum will be an expression of my personal thinking and not necessarily that of the Tigard City Council. As a member of the Intergovernmental Water Board, Chairperson of the Willamette Water Supply Agency, and the City's representative to the Regional Water Consortium, I am the Council member who is probably the most informed on the City water situation and the ongoing studies. The Council looks to me to provide information and facts and I therefore feel a responsibility to be as well informed as possible. First, let me express the City's appreciation for your help and understanding of our concerns about the City of Tigard's long term water situation. Until you became active in the regional supply system it did not appear to us that the City of Portland was interested in listening to our concerns and making an attempt to arrive at a solution that was mutually beneficial. Your willingness to listen and instigate studies as to how these concerns could be met has been apparent. There will be areas we will disagree, but we appreciate being able to discuss them openly as we look for resolution. The Tigard City staff has been given the assignment, working with the WWSA, to provide factual information to the Tigard City Council concerning the possibility of using the Willamette River as our source of water supply. We have given them a target date of December 15, 1998 to provide us with this information. It is my understanding that the City of Portland has agreed to have corresponding information about supplying the City of Tigard with water. In a recent survey the citizens of Tigard expressed concerns as follow, listed in priority as expressed in the survey • Purity of water from the tap Our studies have assured us a filtration plant, properly designed to produce water that exceeds all governmental tests for pure water. All things being equal we would choose Bull Run water as our choice of raw water, however, we would not be reluctant to use Willamette if.the water goes through the proper filtration process. Costs Although purity of water from the tap is of utmost concern, cost is a very high concern. We would like to have by December 15, 1998, Portland's proposal of how water would be supplied to Tigard and the projected cost to Tigard. This should be specific as to how the.costs are arrived at in order that we can evaluate the factors considered for the long term supply and the growing demand. • Assurance of long term supply It is my understanding that the Portland City Charter states that Portland can only sell surplus water. We have been down this road before. We must evaluate the large investment we would have to make in receiving water from Bull Run along with the guarantee that we would have a long term water supply at a reasonable rate. In my opinion this would be an option for ownership. You and the present Council could reach a long term contract, with the best of intentions, and a future Council may decide to change it. Any agreement reached, in my opinion, would have to be a legal document that guarantees us a say in the investments and ownership and a voice in the operation. Answers to the last two questions must be answered in order for me to make any recommendation to the Council as considering making Bull Run a long term water supplier to the City of Tigard. I appreciate very much your efforts in working with us and will look forward to your response in order to continue to pursue the Portland scenario option. City of Portland Water Bureau Expanding the Portland Water System Presentation to the Regional Water Providers Consortium by Commissioner Erik Stew, September 9, 1998 Portland Water Bureau 1120 SW 51 Room 601 Portland, Oregon 97204 I'~rl:•~?:i,_~''~:Ci":'3i?u~.'~F~ti"s i~'i4iri Expanding the Portland Water System Presentation to the Regional Water Providers Consortium by Commissioner Erik Sten, September 9, 1998 The Portland Direction A set of alternative scenarios was presented to the Regional Water Providers Consortium last May. These proposals indicated how the Portland water system could be expanded over the next several decades to meet the water needs of current wholesale customers and other water providers who have indicated a need for future water supplies. Since May, further work has taken place to refine these scenarios. Specifically Portland has proceeded with its Infrastructure Master Planning process to include further analysis of source development, the impacts of conservation programs on demands, refinements to assumptions about treatment, and running the scenarios through a modeling program to assess how each utilizes source, transmission, and storage to meet demands. We have engaged many of the region's water providers in discussions of their supply needs and how the Portland system could be expanded to meet those needs. The issues associated with governance, ownership, contracting, and cost allocation are also being evaluated and discussed with providers who are interested in being a part of the Portland system. I am returning to the Consortium to indicate conceptually what we have found so far in proceeding further to resolve the issues of how best to meet the short term water needs of west side entities in a manner which considers the broader regional interests. My direction at this point includes the following conceptual themes: Portland System Can Be Expanded - The Portland water system currently meets the needs of about 800, 000 people in the region, which are about 60% of the Portland metro area. The Bull Run is a premier water supply system and it can be expanded over time to meet new needs in a variety of different ways. Some of these include treatment, dam raises, new storage projects, and aquifer storage and recovery. Water for People and for Fish - There is the potential to create and manage storage in the Bull Run in such a manner that the needs offish in the overall Sandy watershed are met while obtaining supplies of water for the region. I want to explore these options at the highest levels available and I would like the assistance of the region in this effort. Conservation Is a Cornerstone - Conservation is a key underpinning of the region's water future. Regardless of how much new source is brought on line, we need to reaffirm our commitment to implement the most effective conservation programs. Timing of new supplies needs to be developed with these programs in mind. The benefits, as well as the costs, of conservation need to be shared. New supply development will be more difficult without this commitment. Regional System Interconnections - Regional interconnections through transmission is a key factor in managing water supplies efficiently and determining the level ofsystem reliability that the region should develop. This is a regional issue and will be considered in Portland's future discussions. Intergovernmental Partnerships - Issues of governance, ownership, and cost allocation and equity are all on the table at this time. Alternative means of dealing with these concerns to meet the needs of the partners who will share the Portland system will be considered. Over the next several months I intend to continue developing the supply scenarios that I presented earlier and to engage our current wholesale customers and any other entities that are interested in joining in with the Portland system. I am committed to doing this in a regional context. I want to be clear, however, that my primary objective is to ensure that the precious Bull Run resource developed over a hundred years ago continues to meet the needs of people while not damaging the natural resources of the watershed itself. I am asking the water providers of the region to take the time to carefully deliberate the issues over the next few months before making commitments to longer term regional water sources. I am convinced that the Portland water system should continue to play a key role in meeting those needs. What is the Consortium Role? The Consortium is the regional forum within which decisions about future sources and programs are discussed and changes to the Regional Water Supply Plan are made. As the various entities continue their discussions about future supplies and programs the Consortium should play a role in providing the regional context for these decisions. I would propose that the Consortium play the following roles: 1. Actively facilitate the discussion and implementation of conservation programs contained in the RWSP. This includes recognition of the key role of conservation in the discussion of source development including the sizing and timing of sources, transmission, and storage. Complete the regional conservation plan. Address key issues related to cost, financing and equitable levels of effort toward meeting regional conservation targets as contained in the RWSP. 2. Actively engaging the region's water providers in discussing the ability of the region's water systems to withstand and manage reliability and emergency events is a critical part of setting the context for the efforts of Portland and others to assess the role of transmission in both utilizing existing sources efficiently and to facilitate future source development. 3. The Consortium may need to initiate amendments to the RWSP if needed to recognize the evolution of the region's integrated water resource strategy for the future. I am encouraged by the desire of many of the region's water providers to make decisions within the regional context. The next few months will present challenges for the Consortium and the region's water providers who are facing important decisions about future source and program development. I remain convinced that the Portland water system offers much to the region as a system of high quality water at a cost which is reasonable and which doesn't sacrifice the resources of the watershed. Although individual entities will work together to make decisions, it is incumbent on the City of Portland to provide leadership and vision about the future of the Portland water system and how it fits into a regional system that is reliable and efficient. I look forward to further discussions and the opportunity to assess the best means of making my vision a reality. Next Steps Where we are now in the region, and each of us individually, is moving from planning to implementation. At the planning level we have done excellent work as a region, culminating in the Regional Water Supply Plan, as well as the Consortium as the cooperative mechanism needed for the Plan to become a reality. The Consortium Board of elected officials, and its technical Committee and Subcommittee of utility professionals, are the vehicles we will need to make administrative and policy decisions to implement the Plan. Portland needs to move forward now to determine who its future partners and contractors are. In order to do that, the region needs to make some decisions about transmission and storage projects necessary to interconnect the region and achieve our goals for supply reliability, water quality, environmental protection, and water use efficiency. I think we need a multiple track strategy consisting of (at least) the following components: ➢ PORTLAND needs to engage directly its current and potential contractors/partners and work through issues of pricing, governance, ownership, reliability, etc. ➢ At the same time, the REGION needs to engage in analysis and decision-making related to development of transmission and storage. I recommend that the Board task its Technical Committee of our utility professionals with the job of analyzing and preparing recommendations for us related to developing and implementing a regional transmission and storage program. This work needs to get underway now. None of us can make solid long-term decisions about our future relationships until we resolve the fundamental issue of how the region is going to interconnect its water systems for both efficiency and for emergency backup. ➢ Those ENTITIES that NEED TO MAKE MORE IMMEDIATE SUPPLY DECISIONS will continue to analyze their options. I want to stress that this proposal is NOT meant to delay or impede decisions that need to be made soon regarding the more immediate water needs of Wilsonville and Tigard. Those evaluations and decisions need to press on as planned. a The proposed discussion of regional transmission and storage opportunities will FACILITATE LONG-TERM SUPPLY DECISIONS. While immediate supply needs must be addressed, I am suggesting, however, that decisions on long-term regional water source do not have to have been made to start and possibly complete initial assessment of regional transmission needs and priorities. The region needs information about how transmission can help us optimize the use of our existing supplies, maximize reliability, and manage emergencies. This discussion will take place recognizing the array of supply options available to us. Discussing transmission and storage will not make long-term supply decisions for us, but WILL provide critical context for making longer-tern supply sources decisions. SO, while we individually can engage in problem solving around contractual relationships and issues, as well as resolving short-term supply issues, we have to agree on a regional transmission and storage approach that works for the region. It has to be done by us; it has to be regional; and we then have to budget for and implement it. Fortunately we have the professional expertise and tools we need to get this done. I RECOMMEND - that the Consortium Technical Committee develop and present to us in December a work plan to analyze alternatives and make recommendations for future regional transmission and storage improvements. The work plan needs to cover both the engineering/technical portion of this work AND an approach for the region's utility professionals to address and prepare recommendations related to institutional issues for ownership/govemance, operations, and maintenance of any recommended regional transmission system components. I would recommend that this work be done under the existing work program and budget by using the budget allocation made for the Coordinated Emergency Management Planning. The recommendation should also include any other fiscal impacts that might be generated by completing such work. As I said earlier, we have made great strides in the region in the area of water resources management. We are moving from planning to implementation, and the steps I have described above seem to me to be the ones we need to take to keep the decision-making process moving. We as a Board are policy makers, decision-makers, and direction givers. Given our discussion earlier this evening (regarding conservation), I think our direction is that we are committed both to conservation and the most efficient, economically sound, and environmentally protective use of our water as possible. Sound conservation programs, and a regional transmission and storage infrastructure, are two major undertakings that will help us get there. V_ WILLAMETTE WATER SUPPLY AGINCY INFORMATION REPORT To the Regional Water Providers Consortium On a Potential Willamette River Water Treatment Facility And its Consistency with the Regional Water Supply Plan Exhibit 1: WWSA Chronology Exhibit 2: South Sub-Regional Water Providers February 20, 1998 VWVSA INFORMATION REPORT The Willamette Water Supply Agency (WWSA) is considering the development of a water treatment plant on the Willamette River at Wilsonville. Throughout 1997, the Consortium's Technical Committee and Technical Subcommittee received regular reports on the progress toward formation of the WWSA and the types of projects it was considering. However, because the Agency was not officially formed until late 1997 (when the first six members signed the intergovernmental agreement forming the agency) the Consortium Policy Board has not received a briefing on the new agency's formation and plans. The initial members of WWSA are the cities of Tigard, Gladstone and Tualatin, as well as Tualatin Valley Water District, Clackamas River Water, and the Canby Utility Board. The city of Sherwood joined WWSA in January 1998. This is an appropriate point, therefore, to explain to the Policy Board how and why WWSA came to be formed. It is also appropriate to address how the treatment plant being considered by WWSA is consistent with the policies and objectives of the Regional Water Supply Plan (RWSP). Formation of WWSA A thorough explanation of the events and issues which led to the formation of WWSA is contained in the chronology attached to this report. In summary, the cooperative effort began with a shared concern among water providers in the southern metropolitan area that processing of their pending applications for new water rights should be coordinated. Over time, the coordination expanded to consideration of the possibilities for pooling both pending applications and existing water rights. This would allow for a coordinated approach to the identification of alternative sources of water supply for providers having immediate and short-term needs for additional supply. It would also allow for the possibility of scaling back the quantities requested in applications for new water rights to better match RWSP need projections. After reviewing the costs and availability of numerous alternative supply sources*, several providers (now WWSA members) concluded that the most feasible and economical source of supply to satisfy their immediate subregional need is through development of a water treatment plant on the Willamette River at Wilsonville. Expected to invest in the treatment facility are Tigard, which has an immediate need for additional long-term supplies, and Tualatin Valley Water District, which has a 1973 water right on the Willamette. Other cities with near-term needs (Tualatin and Sherwood, which are WWSA members, and Wilsonville, which is not a member) are also considering if they should join in the project. Because of the uncertainty over the potential participants, no final decisions have been made about the location or capacity of the proposed plant. Consistency with the RWSP The region's water providers have invested heavily, both in terms of dollars and time, in the development of the Regional Water Supply Plan. The formation of the Consortium demonstrates the commitment of all of those providers to ensure that those investments are not wasted, and that the objectives and policies of the Plan are carried out. WWSA and its members share that commitment. Its plans are consistent with both the spirit and the letter of the RWSP. See Exhibit 1, "Chronology," pages 1-2. . , 41 Page 2 of 8 2/20/98 WWSA INFORMATION REPORT V The RWSP acknowledged that this part of the region has immediate needs that will need to be met by the year 2000, possibly through development of a Willamette River source. e The improvements being considered are local, not regional, in scope, and do not commit the region to development of the Willamette as its sole or primary incremental supply source. e Development of a Willamette River source can assist in the promotion of source protection strategies to be developed to implement the RWSP. These three points summarize the basis for our conclusion that the proposed plant is consistent with the RWSP. In addition, WWSA and the members participating in this project are committed to a thorough and open public information process. In at process we will communicate not only with residents of participating WWSA members but also at forums in other parts of the region where other citizens outside the WWSA area who are interested in issues related to the Willamette can participate. The following discussion expands on each of those points. The RNSP Acknowledged an Immediate Need for Subregional Water Supply Developments ° Although the primary emphasis of the RWSP was on projecting the amount and timing of the need for additional water supplies to meet the needs of the region as a whole, it clearly acknowledges the need for immediate local source developments. At page 252, the plan document summarizes comments on the draft plan demonstrating the consensus of the plan participants on this point: "[I]t was felt the revised plan should provide more specific direction for near-tern implementation and less specificity in terms of long- term actions and decisions. For example, the revised plan must recognize that some parts of the region have imminent water demands which need to be met through conservation, new transmission, and/or additional supply from one or more of the sources under consideration (including the Willamette)." [enphasis added] These concerns were addressed in the revised plan document (page 271), which acknowledges the possible need for development of a new supply on the Willamette, prior to 2000, to meet the needs of communities in the south metropolitan area. "The Regional Water Supply Plan process has focused primarily on regionally significant demands and resource options. The process did not address in detail the fact that certain localities in the region are facing more imminent needs than others. Examples of those entities which are likely to need new resource capacityprior to 2000 include the cities of Wilsonville, Tigard, Sherwood, Canby, and possibly the Damascus Water District. This plan recognizes that steps must be taken in the near-term to meet these demands. Addressing these needs is identified in the next section of this chapter as a high priority implementation item Page 3 of 8 2/20/98 WWSA INFORMATION REPORT for the proposed regional water provider consortium. It is not known at this time which resource options will be selected to meet near-term local needs. Conservation would be expected to help manage demand in these areas. Non-potable options such as direct use of river or groundwater could also contribute. On the supply side, seemingly plausible source options (due to availability of existing systems, proximity to alternative sources, and water rights availability) include connection and contracted purchase of water from existing systems (e.g., Bull Run, Clackamas), ASR, or construction offirst phase supply facilities on the Willamette River. These near-term needs should be met, to the extent possible, in a manner consistent with the policies and long-term strategies set forth in this plan." [emphasis added] The Plan's policy objectives also identify the need for operational flexibility in implementing the plan to satisfy local short-term needs. "Operational Flexibility: Ensure that the plan includes flexible strategies for meeting both sub-regional and regional water demands in the year 2000 and beyond." [page 256, Table XII-1] Further demonstration that the Plan anticipates a development such as that being proposed by WWSA is given in several statements in the document that the region's providers intend to rely on information gathered from the project to guide their future planning. The Plan anticipates that these new source developments will assist the Consortium in making future decisions on such matters as the selection of source options and the need for and location of transmission and intertie facilities. The possibility of a local supply development on the Willamette to meet imminent needs is specifically mentioned. The following two excerpts from the Plan illustrate this point. The region's providers may obtain important information on the viability of conservation, transmission, and source options based on the results of anticipated near-term projects. New information gained in bringing new local resources on-line will be integrated into the RWSP to help guide future decisions in the region (e.g., transmission needs and location)." [page 271, emphasis added] "Implementation actions specific to each source option are as follows: Willamette River Option [bullet 7] Monitor the performance of any local source development which may occur to meet imminent needs in parts of the region." [pages 269-70, emphasis added] Page 4 of 8 2/20/98 WWSA INFORMATION REPORT This Local Supply Development Does Not Commit the Region to the Willamette The RWSP identified the need for development of new regional supply sources to meet the long-term needs of the region. However, it projected that the need for that increment would not occur until 2035 or later. The Plan deferred a decision on selecting from among the three identified sources for additional regional capacity (the Willamette River, the Columbia River, and/or additional storage in the Bull Run watershed). The Plan also clearly recognized that several communities in the south metropolitan area need to develop new water sources immediately, and anticipated that development of a Willamette River supply was a likely candidate for meeting that need. It is clear from the Plan, then, that immediate development of a local supply source in this area is not inconsistent with the decision to defer selection of new sources to meet long-term regional needs. This combination of strategies recognizes that development of a local supply on the Willamette to meet immediate subregional needs does not necessarily commit the region as a whole to select the Willamette as the region's ultimate or primary source increment. The scale of the project being considered by WWSA is consistent with that philosophy. a. Project Scale First, the size of the plant being proposed is only large enough to meet the immediate and short-term local needs of the communities participating in the plant. Design capacity for the planned water treatment plant will most likely be between 20 and 40 mgd. The final design capacity will depend on how many of the interested communities choose finally to participate in this plant. Only Tigard has made a definite commitment to pursue the Willamette option. It has contracted with a team of engineering consultants to do preliminary engineering work on the potential treatment plant. Tigard is planning for a 20 mgd plant to meet its needs. It currently has no permanent source of supply, and experiences peak demand days of 12 to 13 mgd. (The additional capacity beyond current peaking levels is being planned for as a fiscally responsible measure. The city recognizes that it would not be responsible to build a plant that it can project would need to be expanded in 5 to 10 years to meet its own needs. Much of the extra costs associated with that delay could be avoided by building that capacity now.) Wilsonville is evaluating scenarios for as much as 10 mgd of treatment capacity. This would allow the city to shift its water demand away from its overburdened wells so they can be "rested" and, hopefully, replenished. Its peak demand is currently in the range of 7 mgd. Up to 5 mgd of plant capacity each is being considered for Tualatin and/or Sherwood, if they decide to address their immediate needs by becoming either partners or wholesale customers of the plant. There are no plans to oversize the treatment plant to provide excess capacity to other communities that do not have immediate needs for additional supply. The availability of the plant will provide some needed redundancy of supply for adjacent systems. For example, the Metzger service area of the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) currently can be served only from Portland supplies. In the event of an emergency Bull Run shortage, TVWD could easily use its connections to the Tigard system to take advantage of the new Willamette supply. Page 5 of 8 2/20/98 WWSA INFORMATION REPORT Second, a 20 - 40 mgd plant is a small increment in relation to the total projected new demand and to the region's overall current supplies. Peak day demands for the region are projected by the RWSP to increase by up to 415 mgd by the year 2050. [page 66, Table V-4, high average annual growth rates] The proposed plant will provide less than 10% of that projected demand, hardly a level that could address regional needs. The proposed 20 - 40 mgd plant is also only 4% to 8% of the region's existing delivery capacity of 493.3 mgd. [page 69, Table VI-1] b. Oversizing Considerations As a responsible fiscal measure, WWSA is planning to oversize the raw water intake and the finished water transmission lines. It is anticipated that the intake will be sized at 80 to 100 mgd, rather than merely the 20 to 40 mgd needed to supply the plant. Transmission lines would also be oversized, probably to approximately 60 or 70 mgd capacity. Several factors favor oversizing of these facilities to preserve the option of taking advantage of these potential supply sources in the future. First, construction of an intake obviously involves work in the river itself. If at all possible it is better, from a resource and habitat protection standpoint, to disturb that environment only once. In addition, restrictions on riverbed construction continue to become increasingly strict. Limiting the intake size at this time to the proposed treatment plant capacity risks the possibility, if the Willamette is eventually chosen as a regional source increment element, of having to spend much more on new intake capacity when the plant is then expanded. By that time increased costs or regulatory restrictions could make it impossible to upsize the intake. Second, the incremental cost of upsizing the intake now favor that action. Current cost estimates for a 45 mgd intake are approximately $4.39 million*. The estimated cost of a 100 mgd intake is $8 million. That translates to a 122% increase in intake capacity (from 45 to 100 mgd) for an additional $3.61 million, only a 82% increase. The arguments for oversizing the finished water transmission lines are similar. Construction of transmission lines from a riverfront treatment plant site to Tigard will involve a significant investment in right of way as well as substantial disruption of traffic as trenches are dug and pipe laid along and across roadways. For a relatively small increase in current costs, the need to lay additional transmission lines in the future, and the disruptions that come with that work, can be reduced or eliminated. For example, a 45 mgd pump station and transmission line is estimated to cost $15 million, while a 100 mgd capacity transmission system is estimated at $23.9 million, only a 59% cost increase I to achieve a 122% transmission capacity increase. Building oversized intake and transmission lines under these conditions does not commit the region to the Willamette as part of its ultimate source of Instead, it is a small current investment, a wise fiscal decision, to preserve the option for future expansion of this source if the Willamette is ultimately chosen by the region. The current set of cost estimates evaluates a number of different treatment and transmission capacity scenarios. Although a smaller initial treatment plant is being planned, a 45 mgd plant is the smallest capacity for which ultimate build-out costs are identified. The cost estimates referenced here are based on a riverfront treatment plant location, Montgomery Watson scenarios 4c and 6a. Page 6 of 8 2/20/98 WWSA INFORMATION REPORT Source Protection Advantages Finally, development of a Willamette treatment plant can assist the region in the promotion of its source protection objectives. The Consortium's Source Water Protection Stakeholders Advisory Committee is preparing recommended strategies, for consideration by the Consortium, which would maintain the viability of all of the sources being considered for the regional source increment. Having a new water treatment plant on the Willamette, in addition to the plant already serving the city of Corvallis, will create additional urgency for the state to work with upstream users and dischargers to reduce contaminant levels in the Willamette River. The Consortium's Stakeholders Committee is also considering strategies for promoting the efficient use of all water supplies. One potential strategy to achieve this objective is to reduce the load on drinking water supplies by encouraging the use of raw water where possible as well as exploring the possibilities for water reuse. Both of these strategies have been identified by the Consortium as well as the Governor's Willamette Basin Task Force. Preliminary design work on the potential WWSA project includes an evaluation of the potential for including a dual piping system as part of the initial facility construction. This system could provide raw water for irrigation use at large industrial or municipal sites. It could also include interties to allow reuse of treated wastewater in this area. Public Involvement Because the development of this local supply source on the Willamette is consistent with the RWSP, the decisions to be made by the WWSA members will not eliminate or short-cut the Consortium's eventual public process to select the ultimate regional supply sources. In addition, the public will also be involved in WWSA's final decisions on this project. Ultimately, the residents of the participating WWSA entities will have the final say over whether this treatment plant will be built. Municipal bonds will need to be sold to finance the construction of the facilities. The public has a right to vote on whether it"approves of using tax revenues or rate revenues to support payment of those bonds. If the public withholds that approval, the facilities could not be built. In addition, WWSA is preparing an extensive public information program to i ft& the public about its plans. Information will be delivered to citizens and ratepayers,,,.;,,.y.. through utility newsletters and mailings, as well as through public meetings and electronic and print media. We anticipate that this effort will not be limited to citizens of the participating utilities. The program will also include meetings in other parts of the region, so that persons not directly affected by the proposal but with a general interest in the Willamette and the RWSP can also have an opportunity to learn about the project. Extensive testing of raw water quality in the Willamette has already been conducted, and a new round of sampling programs will begin soon. The results of these tests, along with the results of our pilot plant project and research on other water sources, will be available during this process. CONCLUSION The treatment plant being considered by WWSA addresses immediate needs in the south metropolitan area. This option is being pursued only after the participating entities evaluated the cost and availability of other supply alternatives and found that they were either not available in a timely manner or were cost-prohibitive. The Regional Page 7 of 8 2/20/98 WWSA INFORMATION REPORT Water Supply Plan recognized that this sub-area of the region would need to address immediate water needs before 2000, and that one of the probable options would be development of a Willamette River source. The small treatment plant being considered by WWSA is being sized to serve only the local immediate needs, including some fiscally responsible oversizing of intake, treatment and transmission facilities only to preserve the option to further develop this source for the region if that is the decision made on the region's source increment. The WWSA proposal is consistent with the RWSP's conclusions and policies, and will promote the achievement of the Plan's objectives. Page 8 of 8 2/20/98 WILLAMETTE WATER SUPPLY AGINCY Exhibit 1 Chronology This Chronology is intended to provide the reader with a context in which to understand the circumstances and concerns leading to the formation of WWSA, and to the proposal for WWSA to develop a water treatment plant on the Willamette River. 1973 TVWD is granted a municipal water right on the Willamette River at Wilsonville, in the amount of 202 cfs. 1992 - 96 TVWD conducts a study, partly funded by American Water Works Association Research Foundation, which includes, among other tasks, a pilot plant project on the Willamette River at Wilsonville. 1993 A subregional group water suppliers starts meeting to discuss coordination strategies on pending water right applications. The group includes TVWD, Canby Utility Board, Gladstone, Lake Oswego, and Clackamas River Water. Others, including Tigard and Newberg were invited as they also applied for water rights or as their need for additional water supply became known. Coordination was deemed important because a ruling by Water Resources Department on the public interest issues and water availability determinations for any one of the applications would impact all of the others. The group's discussions centered on trying for a joint contested case proceeding. Tigard completes a water master plan evaluating options for new or additional water supply. Tigard had historically depended on "spot" short tern contracts with other municipalities for its water supply. By 1993 it had decided to seek longer term arrangements, either long term contracts or ownership position. The master plan recommended several options, including purchasing water from Lake Oswego, Portland, TVWD, Tualatin, South Fork Water Board, or the Joint Water Commission, as well as developing a source on the Willamette. • The city pursued the potential for long-term agreements to continue purchases from Lake Oswego, but, after two years , Lake Oswego, facing opposition to expansion of its plant in West Linn, ruled out any long term arrangements to supply water to Tigard. 2/20/98 • Tigard joined with Clackamas River Water, Canby Utility Board, and Wilsonville to evaluate construction of a transmission line from the CRW treatment plant to serve these other communities. This option was rejected when construction costs (transmission lines alone were estimated at $60 to $110 million) were determined to be too high to be economically feasible. The South Fork and JWC options were also eliminated due to excessive transmission costs. • The city joined with TVWD, Tualatin, and Wilsonville on a study of the Washington County Supply Line. The study concluded in 1997 that an additional 5 - 7 mgd could be made available from the supply line. However, Portland has not yet committed that this surplus water would be available after the expiration of the current wholesale water contracts. • Tigard also submitted an application to the state for a water right of 40 cfs on the Willamette, with a priority date of 3/28/95. 1995 By 1995 the subregional group becomes the "South Subregional" water suppliers group. Other providers join the discussions, including Wilsonville, Tualatin and Sherwood. The group starts discussing the possibility of pooling their water rights and pending applications, rather than pursuing them independently. This is triggered in part by discussions with WRD, which had expressed concern that the group members' water rights and applications, when combined, exceeded what appeared, in the Regional Water Supply Plan, to be the projected need for these communities. The suppliers recognized that WRD would look more favorably on both extension requests for existing permits, as well as on pending applications, if the requests were combined and reduced. This would allow for each supplier to have adequate supplies into the future and would also bring applications more in line with projected needs. 1996 DEQ releases its Willamette River water quality study, documenting the presence of multiple contaminants in and discharges into the river. One of the more significant findings was an extremely high occurrence of fish skeletal abnormalities in the Newberg pool. The study was unable to determine the cause of these deformities. The Regional Water Supply Plan is completed and sent out for approval by all of the RWSP participants. Recognizing, among other factors, the imminent need for new supplies in the south metro area, the proximity to the Willamette, favorable water quality, and the need for diversifying sources, the initial recommendation to members regarding potential future supply increment options was an option including development of a Willamette source. In the face of strong opposition from Portland and Metro, the final plan was adopted with that decision deferred, to allow further evaluation of the needs and for comparison of the options. The plan retained language recognizing the imminent need for additional supplies in Wilsonville and Tigard. Page 2 of 7 2/20/98 tSherwood drills its last well. As rapid population growth continues, the city seeks to diversify from its exclusive reliance on its groundwater supply, which has reached its limits. Construction begins on an intertie to the Tualatin system to add a Bull Run supply for the city. Tualatin begins exploring its long term options to supplement its water supply. Its analysis shows that, using aggressive growth projections, the city could be using its full Washington County Supply Line transmission capacity by the expiration of its contract in 2005. By the following year, it is clear from the Washington County Supply Line study that the line cannot meet the long term peak day needs (beyond the potential renewal of the wholesale contracts in 2005) of all the existing contract holders, as well as the new customers (Tigard, Sherwood and, potentially, Wilsonville) that have been added since the line was built. 1997 By March, negotiations have begun on the formation of a Willamette Water Supply Agency, an agency formed by an intergovernmental agreement among several municipalities. Under the agreement, each member would contribute its water rights and its pending applications to the WWSA. As projects were approved or as coordinated need projections were developed, some of the pending applications would be withdrawn. This would be a show of good faith to WRD that the water rights picture was being cleaned up to match actual needs. As proposed, the WWSA agency would consider potential projects, including development of a water treatment plant using TVWD's water right. (These development activities would protect TVWD's interest in its current permit in the event WRD amended its rules, as it is considering, to restrict extensions of municipal permits to those that are developed or expect to be realistically developed in a set period.) Members would have the option to participate in individual projects, or to buy in at a later date. The organization would also allow for other members to join in the future. Members would retain the option to withdraw from WWSA, and to take with it its proportionate share in a water right or a pending application, so that no member would lose the ability to serve its customers by contributing those assets to the agency. The final reports on the Willamette Pilot Plant study are released. An earlier report (1994) had concluded, based on the data gathered in the pilot plant study, that the Willamette is a high quality raw water source, and that the water can be treated to levels better than required by current or project Safe Drinking Water Act standards, by using an optimized water treatment process including ozone disinfection and granular activated carbon (GAC) filtration. The 1997 report on continued water quality monitoring confirmed those conclusions. The pilot plant and water quality sampling was conducted over a period which overlapped substantially with the testing performed for the DEQ Willamette River study. Page 3 of 7 2/20/98 In September, anticipating that the agency will approve development of a treatment plant, potential WWSA members contract with a team led by Rockey Bowler, Inc., for public information and polling services. Wilsonville, in September, notified the WWSA formation group that it would not join WWSA. Wilsonville has its own water right on the Willamette. With its immediate need for a new water supply, it preferred not to contribute that asset to a group, but rather to retain sole control over it. Wilsonville continues to cooperate with the agency in planning efforts. Lake Oswego also chose not to join WWSA. In recognition of the ongoing coordinated subregional water supply planning, however, the city withdraws its application pending before the Water Resources Department for a new 60 cfs water right. Later in September, the Oregon Department of Corrections begins discussions with TVWD and Tigard about the possibilities for provision of short- and long-term water supplies to the proposed prison in Wilsonville. Between October and late December, 6 suppliers vote to join WWSA: TVWD, Tigard, Gladstone, Canby Utility Board, Clackamas River Water, and Tualatin. Sherwood joined the agency in January, 1998. In December Tigard contracts with Murray, Smith and Associates, Inc., and Montgomery Watson to begin preliminary design on a WTP and supply system. Numerous design scenarios have been considered. The most likely are for a 20 - 30 mgd plant, to serve Tigard and Wilsonville, as well as potential sales to Tualatin and /or Sherwood. 1998 Wilsonville adopts a moratorium on new development, based on the lack of adequate water supplies. The city had been notified by the Water Resources Department in 1989, as part of the approval for its final wells, that it could not continue to rely on groundwater for a long-term water supply. The city has imposed mandatory water use restrictions annually since 1992. Continued strong growth, both in residential and industrial sectors, had by 1998 pushed the city's groundwater supply to its limits. In January, an agreement with DOC is reached and announced, in which DOC would contribute $10 million towards meeting its water needs. Approximately $6 million of that sum could go to construction of a new subregional water treatment plant and related facilities. [A summary of the agreement is included at the end of this chronology.] Today WWSA is currently preparing to announce plans for a WTP and for a public information program. The primary participants in the project are expected to be Tigard, along with TVWD, which may oversize intake and transmission facilities to preserve the option for future expansion of the plant to meet its needs. WWSA continues to cooperate with Page 4 of 7 2/20/98 V% Wilsonville to preserve the option for the city to become a partner in the project, after the city has completed its options analysis and public involvement process. Tigard has already announced its general plans to its citizens and has begun to study potentia project costs and nancing options. The crtv s schedule would a nw ffir t hp }roatT nn* just prior to the expiration of the Portland contracts. 0 Page 5 of 7 2/20/98 Summary of the Department of Corrections Agreement TVWD and Tigard became involved in the prison's water supply concerns in September, 1997. After confirming that Wilsonville has insufficient water supplies to serve future growth until a new water supply is online, Department of Corrections (DOC) staff approached TVWD to ask if it had the capability to make water available to the prison. TVWD responded that it could supply them, by making available surplus water from TVWD's Bull Run connection in the short run, and through the planned water treatment plant for a permanent supply. The City of Tigard was brought into the negotiations as the provider most immediately interested in construction of the potential treatment plant. After several months of negotiations, agreement was reached by TVWD and Tigard with DOC and the City of Wilsonville on the terms of the agreement. In summary, it provides for the following: • DOC had determined that its cost to develop its own on-site water supply for short- term and long-term supply needs would be $10 million. Rather than develop its own source, DOC would reallocate those funds to the local governments to take care of the DOC needs. This approach has the added benefit to the region of contributing to solving the immediate needs of nearby communities of Tigard and Wilsonville. Under the contemplated split of the funds, Wilsonville would receive $3.6 million, and TVWD and WWSA would receive $6.4 million. These funds would be used for specific measures to provide for DOC's immediate and permanent water needs. The funds will be held in escrow and released to the appropriate agency as work is performed The first responsibility under the agreement is for participating WWSA members to construct a connection between the Tualatin water system and the Wilsonville system, using funds from the $6.4 million allocation. This intertie would allow surplus water from TVWD's contract with Portland to be delivered to Wilsonville. The water would be delivered through, and sold to Wilsonville by, Tualatin. The City of Portland has approved of these water transfers. This arrangement addresses the DOC's short-term need for water when the prison opens in the year 2000. However, the Portland contracts expire in 2005, and Portland has not yet committed to extend those contracts. Therefore, to assure that permanent water needs are met, either another source must be developed or a timely commitment must be obtained from Portland for extension of the surplus wholesale contracts. • A treatment plant is proposed to be built on the Willamette which would supply water to DOC while also supplying the larger needs of the water providers participating in the project. Tigard has already committed to participating in the development of the plant, subject only to voter approval as required. Wilsonville is still considering whether it will participate. To preserve the possibility for it to share in the DOC funds, Wilsonville must commit by March to participate in the planning and public Page 6 of 7 2/20/98 1\ information programs for the project. TVWD plans to pay for oversizing the intake and finished water lines to retain the ability later to expand the plant to meet its own source needs without building new lines. Starting on January 1, 1999, (to allow for a bond election in November 1998) Wilsonville and WWSA participating members can agree to proceed with construction of a treatment plant. If either one does not have adequate funding from its own sources to participate in the project, the balance of the $10 million from DOC will be distributed to the one ready to proceed. If Wilsonville is ready to proceed but no WWSA members join it in developing the treatment plant, DOC will pay $1,000,000 to TVWD (which will share it equally with Tigard) to reimburse it for plant design and related costs incurred to that point. • If, by Jan. 1, 2001, neither Wilsonville nor participating WWSA members has adequate funding to proceed with the treatment plant, then the balance of the $10 million will be distributed to TVWD to construct a permanent supply for the DOC facility. TVWD may build a permanent small treatment plant on the DOC property to serve only the prison. Most likely, this plant would be supplied by Willamette River water under TVWD's 1973 water right. In addition, TVWD has committed to supply the DOC through the Wilsonville - Tualatin intertie until the treatment plant is ready. The effect of this agreement is to guarantee that DOC has water in the short term (through 2005) and permanently thereafter. Page 7 of 7 2/20/98 C1 J m C D W J River Water Utility Board WILLAMETTE MATER SUPPLY AGENCY Exhibit 2 South Sub-Regional Water Providers Po ulatiot~ Served Ca acs s~ ;2,000 plus sales to Gladstone, Oak Lodge (29,000) & Mt. Scott (19,000) 35 O 5 (3,000 accounts) includes Tigard Water District, King City, Durham 21 Valley Water District 11,000 residents; plus commercial & industrial accounts ver 30 mgd, conventional treatment conventional treatment River Water conventional treatment 10.5 mgd WTP for disinfection and iron removal 2.8 mgd 10 mgd trom rornuiiu au-► TVWD, plus 1 mgd from wells; To meet peaks of 12 - 13 mgd, surplus is purchased from Portland or Lake Oswego 10.8 mgd from Washington County Supply Line (1997 peak 7.5 mgd) Washington County Supply Line & JWC conventional WTP Groundwater 7 wells, 4.6 mgd 8°i well to be drilled will add 0.7 mgd Apps pending: 71.5 & 77.4 cfs on Clackamas, 22 cfs on Willamette 20 cfs water right on Molalla 4 cfs other water rights App pending: 12.4 cfs on Willamette 9.7 cfs on Clackamas, plus 4 cfs transferred to diversion point for CRW plant; App pending 12.4 cfs on Willamette 60 cfs on Willamette Groundwater ana spnngb - recently was denied a land use permit for new well 3oundwater, plus intertie to Tualatin/Bull Run (under construction) 40 cfs pending app. on Willamette 48 mgd Bull Run 18 mgd JWC Willamette: 202 cfs water right (undeveloped) and 487 cfs pending app_ 30 cfs on Willamette WWSA Member - Total population represented: over 325,000 (For comparison, the city of Portland served 481,000 city residents in 1997.) r AGENDA ITEM # 5 FOR AGENDA OF September 22. 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE ~--✓North Dakota Traffic Calming PREPARED BY: Gus Due as/Liz Newton DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the traffic calming devices installed on SW North Dakota between Springwood and 121` remain, be modified, or be removed? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Council should consider the recommendation of the SW North Dakota Task Force, and interested citizens. A report containing staff's comments on the SW North Dakota Task Force recommendations is attached. Staff concludes that the traffic calming revisions have had the intended effect and supports a majority of the recommendations of the SW North Dakota Task Force. INFORMATION SUMMARY Traffic calming devices were installed on SW North Dakota on the recommendation of the SW North Dakota Task Force and approval of the City Council. A six-month trial period was established that began January 23, 1998 and concluded on July 22, 1998. Staff gathered traffic volume and speed data on affected streets prior to January 23 and after July 22. Staff reviewed and evaluated the data during the last two weeks of July. The SW North Dakota Task Force held two meetings, one on August 3, 1998 and one August 17, 1998, to consider whether or not the traffic calming devices had met the original objectives set forth by the Task Force. Members of the public also participated in the discussions. The Task Force concluded that the traffic calming devices had met their objectives and, with modifications, should remain permanently. A copy of the Task Force notes from the final meeting are attached. Also attached are drawings showing the current traffic revisions and the proposed Task Force modifications. Ed Halberg, Task Force spokesperson, will present the recommendation to the Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Delay action on this item for further study. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION CON IITTEE STRATEGY Transportation and Traffic: Goal # 1), Strategy 1) Discourage through traffic on local streets FISCAL NOTES $25,000 was budgeted in FY 1997-98 for the installation of traffic calming devices on SW North Dakota. An additional $10,000 was budgeted in FY 1998-99 for modifications to the devices after the six-month trial period. IACitywide\sum\Ndaksum.doc CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department SbapingA Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone 503-639-4171 Fax: 503-684-7297 TO: City Council Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Gus Duenas Po City Engineer DATE: September 1, 1998 SUBJECT: Traffic Study Findings and Comments on SW North Dakota Task Force Recommendations The trial period for the traffic revisions on SW North Dakota began on January 23, 1998 and ended on July 22, 1998. We have compiled traffic data on this street over the past decade and have a basis for comparison on the effects of the traffic calming measures over the years. Traffic counts in 1996 and early 1997 with the traffic circles and median islands in place indicated traffic volumes of 3,500 ADT and 85 h percentile speeds of 29 mph on the east-west segment and 4,400 ADT on the north-south segment. The volumes are higher than the 3,000 maximum for a minor collector, and the configuration of the islands and circles forced vehicles to the outside portions of the road near the sidewalks, mailboxes and pedestrians. The following is a summary of the traffic studies we performed after the traffic calming measures were installed. Traffic Study Findings Summary: The traffic studies performed in 1998 are summarized as follows: After the traffic revisions were installed, but prior to the speed hump installation (2-98): The overall ADT had dropped to 2,573 on the east-west leg. However, the traffic flow is unbalanced with 2,265 westbound and 308 eastbound. This is expected Memorandum to Council and City Manager concerning SW North Dakota Street Page 1 of 4 because the southbound traffic is diverted at Springwood Drive. The 851' percentile speed was 28.7 in that area. After all traffic revisions were installed (7-98): • Overall ADT was 2,467 (1,975 westbound, 492 eastbound) on the east-west segment and 2,066 (1,469 northbound, 597 southbound) on the north-south segment. The traffic speeds are 23.7 mph westbound and 24.2 mph eastbound. The speeds on the north-south segment average 29.8 mph. Effects on Springwood Drive and Summerlake Drive: The traffic volumes on Springwood Drive and Summerlake Drive have remained relatively constant both before and after the traffic revisions on North Dakota. The eastbound volume on Springwood Drive dropped from 381 in 1997 to 221 in mid- 1998. The westbound volume has remained relatively constant at 256 in 1997 and 247 in mid-1998. The volumes on Summerlake Drive have also been relatively constant at 577 ADT in 1997 and 556 ADT in mid-1998. Other than a volume drop eastbound on Springwood Drive, the effects of the traffic revision have been negligible. Effects on Anton Drive: The effects on Anton Drive have been negligible. The traffic studies indicate a significant drop in both traffic volumes and speeds in the east-west segment of SW North Dakota. The traffic volumes have likewise dropped in the north-south segment. There seems to be an unusually high traffic count in the southbound traffic between Anton Drive and the diverter at Springwood Drive. This could indicate that a substantial number of residents from the apartments are exiting at the south exit. It could also indicate that either vehicles are going the wrong way southbound at the diverter, or are cutting through the apartment driveway loop to go around the diverter. The traffic speeds are where we want them to be on the east-west leg, but are still higher than the posted speed limit in the area between Tony Court and Springwood Drive. An additional speed hump appears necessary just south of Anton Drive on the north-south segment of the street. The concern in this area is the severe curve and lack of visibility around the curve. An additional speed hump should lower the speeds in that area from 29.8 mph to something closer to the 25 mph speed limit, and should enhance the ability of residents to safely back out of their driveways. Conclusions: The traffic revisions have had the intended effect. Traffic volumes have been significantly reduced throughout the entire length of SW North Dakota between 1215` Avenue and Springwood Drive. The vehicle speeds on the east-west segment are at or below the posted speed limit. The speed north of Tony Court is higher, but is still within 5 mph of the posted speed limit. An additional speed hump just south of Anton Drive should lower speeds to match the rest of the street. Memorandum to Council and City Manager concerning SW North Dakota Street Page 2 of 4 Comments on SW North Dakota Task Force Recommendations It is the consensus of the Task Force that the traffic calming devices installed, together with some modifications recommended, meet almost all the objectives set forth at the beginning of the effort. The modifications recommended by the Task Force following the task force meetings on August 3 and 17, 1998, and my responses to the recommendations are as follows: 1. Leave the "pinches" in place painted with white reflective paint. I concur with this recommendation. The "pinches" have been painted with white reflective paint, and reflective markers have been placed on these islands. 2. Paint a fog line on the street between each of the pinches to ensure visibility. We do not normally do this in a residential subdivision. However, it should help keep the traffic in the middle of the street. I do concur with the recommendation, but with the caveat that it will be a high maintenance item in the future. 3. The city plants the area inside the "pinches" and diverter with long-term maintenance provided by area residents through some form of "adopt a planter" approach. This was the original intent when the project began. We will excavate inside the islands and place sufficient topsoil to support plantings within the islands. The City will do the initial planting. The types of plants will have to be carefully chosen to ensure that no future problems with visibility and physical damage to the pavement occur. The planters can then be adopted for long-term maintenance by the residents. 4. Leave the diverter at Springwood Drive in place, but enhance the visibility with reflective paint and/or building up the curb. The diverter was a key element in ensuring a traffic volume reduction along this street. We will not build up the curb. The island is already painted with white reflective paint. The "Do Not Enter" sign is highly visible. One possibility that we will consider is placement of reflective candle-type paddles along the island to provide better visibility at night. 5. Post an additional sign on North Dakota north of Springwood Drive indicating that southbound traffic is prohibited. There are two signs already installed that prohibit southbound traffic from proceeding beyond the diverter. The "Right Turn Only" sign, and the "Do Not Enter" signs are sufficient and the "Do Not Enter" sign is highly visible long before motorists actually reach the intersection with Springwood Drive. 6. The City review the need for the diverter at Hawks Beard and 130th with input from area residents and the 130`h Task Force. Memorandum to Council and City Manager concerning SW North Dakota Street Page 3 of 4 I strongly support this recommendation. With the diverter at the Springwood Drive intersection, there is no need for the diverter at Hawks Beard to remain. Anyone entering Hawks Beard proceeding towards Summer Lake will have to exit towards Scholls Ferry Road. There is no incentive for regional traffic to use that street connection. In addition, removal of the "Right Turn Only" provision would allow Summerlake residents entry into Tigard via the Winterlake Bridge and Winterlake Drive. My recommendation is that both the diverter and the "No Right Turn" provision be removed. 7. Install a crosswalk on SW North Dakota at Springwood Drive. I concur with this recommendation. We will have to modify the wheelchair ramp in that area, but pedestrians should be able to safely cross the street in that area. 8. Install two additional speed humps on SW North Dakota between Springwood Drive and 125th Place. Our analysis indicates that only one speed hump is needed immediately south of Anton Drive in that area. Another speed hump north of the Anton Drive intersection would be in an area with no houses adjacent to the northbound lane of travel. There is no need to place an additional hump in that area. Based on our traffic study, one hump between Anton Drive and 125th Place should help reduce the approximately 29 mph 85th percentile speed in that area. In addition, it should reduce the tendency for motorists to accelerate as they traverse that curve and should allow residents a higher degree of safety while backing out of their driveways at that location. 9. Install an additional speed hump on SW North Dakota at the "pinch" just west of 121St Avenue. Our standards for installation of speed humps is no closer than 300 feet, and no more than 500 feet apart. The addition of a speed hump in this vicinity will create spacing problems. Installation of a speed hump at the "pinch" will place the hump much too close to the next hump along the street. Installation of a hump east of the pinch will place it too close to the intersection with 121St Avenue. A traffic study we conducted during the last week of August 1998 indicates that the westbound 85th percentile speed is 28.0 mph, while the eastbound speed is 26.6 mph. The average combined speed is 27.3 mph. All speeds are well below the 5 mph tolerance that we established in the speed hump installation criteria. Therefore, a speed hump is not needed in that area. One Task Force objective was to establish a template that could be used elsewhere in the City. In my opinion, traffic calming measures need to be approached on a system-wide basis. Each street that is reviewed for traffic calming device installation must be reviewed as part of the network, and the impact on the surrounding local and collector streets must be reviewed as part of the analysis. Hence, the template approach is not desirable in this analysis. The City's traffic calming program will include analysis on a system-wide basis and should provide results that take into consideration the impact of these measures on the street system. c: Liz Newton Vannie Nguyen Michael Mills Memorandum to Council and City Manager concerning SW North Dakota Street Page 4 of 4 At their August 17, 1998 meeting, the North Dakota Task Force member consensus was to recommend the following to the Tigard City Council: Retain the traffic calming devices in place on S.W. North Dakota between S.W. Springwood Drive and S.W. 121st with the following modifications: 1.) Leave the "pinches" in place painted with white reflective paint. 2.) Paint a fog line on the street between each of the pinches to ensure visibility. 3.) The city plants the area inside the pinches with maintenance provided by area residents who adopt the pinches. 4.) Leave the diverter at Springwood in place but enhance the visibility with reflective paint and/or building up the curb. 5.) The city plants the area inside the diverter a with maintenance provided by area residents. 6.) An additional sign is posted on North Dakota north of Springwood Drive indicating that south bound traffic is prohibited. (Exact wording to be provided by the Engineering department. 7.) The city review the need for the diverter at Hawks Beard and 130th with input from area residents an(' the 130th Task Force. 8.) A crosswalk be installed on North Dakota at Springwood Drive. 9.) Two additional speed humps be installed on North Dakota between Springwood Drive and 125th. 10.) A speed hump be installed on North Dakota at the pinch just west of 121st. It is the consensus of the North Dakota Task Force that, with the modifications noted above, the traffic calming devices meet the objectives set forth by the Task Force and listed below. • Speed Control • Neighborhood Feeling • Reduce Regional Traffic Volume • Serves the Neighborhood • Commercial Traffic (trucks) • Long Term Solution MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD,'OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder DATE: September 22, 1998 SUBJECT: Council Agenda Item No. 5 - Traffic Calming on SW North Dakota Street - Council Meeting of September 22, 1998 Attached are several communications received today for the above-referenced Council agenda item. I: W DKCATHY%CO UNCI L192298.DOC From: "Liz Newton" <LIa.COT> To: Cathy Date sent: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 14:45:49 -0700 Subject: SW North Dakota Send reply to: liz@ci.tigard.or.us Mrs. Becker lives on SW 124th and called to say she opposes the traffic calming on North Dakota. Helen Aberting (620-1076) called to say she is opposed to closing SW North Dakota. Liz Cathy Wheatley 1 Tue, 22 Sep 1998 14:53:25 September 21, 1998 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Council Members: RE: N Dakota Traffic Control I support those citizens who have written to the City and The Tigard Times in opposition to the traffic control devices installed on SW North Dakota between Springwwod and 121st. Copies of letters to the City are attached to the staff report and in addition I urge you to read/re-read citizen concerns that have been printed in the Tigard Times over the last several months. I will not restate concerns of which you are already aware; however, I do present the following areas for your review and response: 1. FISCAL DISCLOSURE a) Monies budgeted for traffic calming devices on SW North Dakota are stated to be $25,000 97-98 10,000 98-99 • Were these monies specifically identified for SW North Dakota? b) Monies Spent What has been the direct cost by fiscal year? What is the est. of indirect cost (staff time etc) c) Source of monies Did the subdivision generate TIF $s from developer? How much ? How spent ? d) City Acctg' of TIF $s How does City account for TIF $s ? If account/spend as intended, would lessen citizen concerns regarding the use of "taxpayer $s" used for such limited special interest projects. 2. REVIEW OF TRAFFIC CITATION POLICY When policing any new "traffic calming device" of a similar nature, what face does the City want to present and what atmosphere do you want to build? Violations issued on this project bordered on entrapment with an officer whose attitude was strictly punishment oriented with no clue to the long term positive effects a more community information/safety approach would bring. Actually, the more I think about it, citations issued before the warning sign of one way traffic and when road construction type signs were in use should be revoked. No - I did not receive such a citation. I realize that item #2 is pretty much a dead horse; however, item #1 is alive and deserves much attention. Funding, accounting, and spending for local residential streets is bound to require increased attention as all the new developments are built. Sandra T. Smith 12880 SW 121st Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 .NOV-12-1997 17:59 ~ f® ifB FAX COVER SHEET Portland General Electric One World Tiede Canter 121 SW Salmon S~ Portland OR 9nO4 P.01 DATE: / 7;/ 9 TO:/ it/t=~v7'D/I/ AT: RECEIVER'S PHONE NO.: RECEIVER'S FAX NO.: ~ - 7 5 7 FROM: SENDER'S PHONE NO.: J` SENDER'S FAX NO.: 4,;o el _ZZ3 NUMBER OF PAGES (Including cover sheet): REMARKS: L~/f K you have any trouble receiving this fax, please contact: PGE 2157 (Aug 97) NOV-12-1997 17:58 12455 S.W. North Dakota Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 September 21, 1998 Tigard.City Council 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 SUBJECT: SW North Dakota Street Councilmen of the City of Tigard, Oregon: calming devices implemented on North Dakota Street several months ago. Our neighbors are also pleased with the results due to these low-cost improvements. North Dakota Street is much safer and quieter now, not only for residents, but also for pedestrians. Hundreds of pedestrians walk on the sidewalks, many to visit the immensely popular Summerlake Park across the street. P.02 I am still concerned about west-bound traffic exceeding the speed limit as motorists negotiate the curve near our house after passing the stop sign. Perhaps another , speed bump is required at the north end of the curve. A tfog line 8-10 feet from the curb would also protect residents and guests backing out of driveways. These traffic calming devices have significantly improved our neighborhood. Thru-traffic have access to 121st and Scholls Ferry, major highways, which do not add distance to their travel. Thank you for your consideration. I appreciate the City Council and the City Engineer responding to the needs of the community. Sincerely Roger J. Breaux, PE RJB:cot0998.wpd HOME (503) 590-3651 OFFICE(503) 464-8036 FAX (503) 464-2233 TOTAL P.02 107th Avenue Residents Committee C/o Mr. & Mrs. Peters 13365 SW 1074 Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-2682 August 9, 1998 City Council City of Tigard, Oregon c/o Mr. William A. Monahan City Administrator 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: 107th Avenue Paving Project Dear Council Members: In an effort to upgrade the aesthetic and functional value of 107th Avenue, between Park Street and Cook Street, the community members listed below would like to respectfully submit the following proposal for consideration. Proposal: After talking with Gus Duenas, City Engineer, we wish to have the current SW 107" Street between SW Park Street and SW Cook Street dedicated to the City of Tigard. Our expectation in having the street dedicated, with the appropriate 50' right of way (25' each direction from the center of the current street) would be to upgrade, pave and maintain the street to the existing neighborhood streets. At a later date, if the City decided to add bike paths or sidewalks, the appropriate footage would be there to accommodate. Advantages to the City of Tigard & the Communitv: ❑ 107th Avenue was slated to be paved by the City this fiscal year (until further investigation revealed that the City did not own the road) - therefore, the City had already deemed this a worthy project ❑ Adjacent homeowners will be donating the land to the City for this project ❑ Paving the road would improve the aesthetic value of the community while also mitigating unwanted dust and gravel strewn into windows, yards and ditches ❑ The safety of the members of the community would be increased by eliminating an unstable, potentially hazardous "gravel playground" used by road-racing youth ❑ Pavement and the appropriate drainage system would greatly augment the value of the recently completed "Park Street Drainage System" project City Council City of Tigard August 9, 1998 Page 2 ❑ Storm drains and the appropriate road contour would mitigate neighborhood water problems, as local homeowners have suffered from flooding for over 30 years By signature below, the residents adjacent to 107th Avenue in Tigard are hereby requesting that the proposal discussed above be presented for consideration at the next City Council meeting slated for September of 1998. Thanking you in advance for the Council's consideration of this proposal. Respectfully, Rose C. August 13285 SW 107'h Avenue resident & taxpayer for 31 years Mr. & Mrs. Kraft 13335 SW 107'h Avenue resident & taxpayer for 18 years l yL , Mr. & Mrs. Peters 13365 SW 107'h Avenue resident for 7 months & taxpayer for 25 years Mr. & Mrs. Rosenquist 10690 SW Park Street resident & taxpayer for 2-7 years Mr. Tabert 13395 SW 107th Avenue resi t taxpayer for 5 years Mr. & Mrs. Hugh's 10695 SW Cook Lane CORRESPONDENCE SW NORTH DAKOTA TRAFFIC MITIGATION Mr. James Nicoli, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Mayor. A ~.coxLnC L &M C-0 a- 1998 L, ; AUG 10' vi=:3~t U U I would like to take this time to tell you and the city council that 1 am very pleased with the improvements to the traffic situation on S.W. North Dakota. The volume and speed appear to be greatly reduced. We have lived here for about 5 years and love the community. I have attended a few of the early meetings addressing the traffic problems in our area, but will be unable to attend the meeting on Aug. 2e and thought I would write instead. Although our property does not sit directly on North Dakota, the traffic does impact us in many ways such as noise, but mostly safety. Crossing North Dakota was in the past quite a challenge, especially at certain times of the day. Some times going to Summer Lake park or even to get the mail could be a death defying feat. I know you have heard all of this before, but I just wanted to let you know that my family appreciates all the worts the city has done. I would especially like to thank you, your staff, the city council, the city engineers, and not least of all the home owners that worked together to resolve this traffic problem. We understand that there will always be traffic concerns not only in our neighborhood but throughout Tigard. I am glad to see the city address these problems and hope that a continued study will be done to insure these traffic problems don't return. I also hope that this resolution can help in other areas of our community. Thank you again, Rob Storlien 11135 S.W. 124"' Place Tigard, OR 97223 590-4665 cc: City council members LEE KRAUSE RITA KRAUSE O I033S SW FAIRIIAVBN WAY • TIGARD, OR 97223 AUG 1 8 190 G Z ~0 AUG 1 8 1998 Z I 7'i V L `O ~i 14 LEE KRAUSE RITA KRAUSE 10855 SW FAIRHAVEN WAY TIGARD, OR 97223 G ID 1 AUG G 1 8 1998 14 LEE KRAUSE RITA KRAUSE 10855 SW FAIRHAVEN WAY TIGARD, OR 97223 rAUG 1 8 199E3 /S I r LEE KRAUSE RITA KRAUSE 10855 SW AAIRHAVEN WAY f TIGARD, OR 97223 ea~~ -2Z _ June 7, 1998 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or. 97223 Council Members, F Each day that I stop at the intersection of Springwood Drive and North Dakota and am forced to turn left to travel on North Dakota to enter the traffic congestion on Scholls Ferry, I ask myself, "How did a handful of whiners on North Dakota create such an imposition on the many people that used North Dakota to reach destinations to the South?" I am sick and tired of being inconvenienced by the right hand turn restriction at Springwood and North Dakota. As mentioned in my letter (see attached) to the City Engineer, I don't understand how a handful of people were able to change the environment in which they live to benefit so few. If traffic was a concern to them, they. should have elected another place to reside. I have lived in the neighborhood for over eight years. The decision to not consider a location on North Dakota, due to heavy traffic patterns was a no-brainer even eight years ago! The residents on North Dakota have reason for concern due to increasing traffic on their street, just like the people on Scholls Ferry, 125th, Hall Blvd., Summerlake Drive and any other street in the area. We all can't react by complaining to our local government to place traffic restrictions in our neighborhoods. As elected officials, you should have the intestinal fortitude to remind those few residents that try to impose their desire on the community, that decisions such as the traffic patterns should not be made to benefit a few people that are incapable of taking the responsibility for their own decisions to reside on a busy neighborhood street. Believe me, there are many more residents in the Summerlake and surrounding neighborhoods that are frustrated about the traffic restrictions (primarily the right turn restriction on North Dakota at Springwood, than the few people that were complaining about jrIffic on North Dakota. I have to wonder, who on North Dakota might have had the inflyence to convince the council to move forward with such a ridiculous project? As much as I despise the idea of you spending my tax dollars to correct this mistake, I look forward to seeing the right turn restriction and the 2 new stop signs on North Dakota removed. Sincerely, Chris Bell Z)AUS i January 10, 1998 Gus Duenas Liz Newton, asst. to the city manager City Engineer 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or. 97223 Gus Duenas, As a member of the community of Tigard and a resident of the Summerlake neighborhood, I am outraged by the "traffic improvements" that have taken place on North Dakota Street. The decision to introduce stop signs North Dakota, between 121st Street and Scholls Ferry, really puzzles me. Why put stop signs up, when traffic flow will surely decrease due to the travel restriction island located at the intersection of Springwood and North Dakota? The biggest irritant for my family and many of the people in the Summerlake neighborhood is the right turn restriction located at Springwood and North Dakota. We are now forced to detour to Scholls Ferry, wait for traffic to clear, turn right, wait at the stop light at 121st and Scholls Ferry, turn right and travel to 121st and North Dakota, just to reach destinations that we previously accessed traveling exclusively on North Dakota. My place of employment is Lincoln Center, our church is on North Dakota, and the bulk of our recreation activity is south of the Tigard area. The vast majority of our destinations require the use of North Dakota. Convenient access to our frequent destinations was one of primary reasons we chose to live in the Summerlake neighborhood. With the traffic restriction, we no longer enjoy that convenience. I understand that many of the people that live on North Dakota are concerned about the traffic flow by their residences. It is precisely for that reason that I would never have purchased a home along that street. North Dakota has always received heavy commuter use and the North Dakota residents should have taken that into consideration when buying and selling their homes. Without factual data I can only hypothesize that if a home is located along a heavily used commuter street, then the value of the home would be less than comparable homes in a neighborhood away from the busy street. The residents along North Dakota received the benefit of a lower purchase price for their property and now want to change the environment in which they live at the expense of others. When my wife and I bought our property, we faced the same decisions that other home buyers face: location, neighborhood, access, the direction the house would face, schools, price and traffic patterns. We chose a location on Summerlake Drive, because we had a better view than we would have had in the culdesac nearby, we liked the direction the house would face and the property was a little less expensive. We-knew that one of the drawbacks with the location would be that we would receive more traffic than in the culdesac and it happened to be a popular street for those who travel to Summerlake Park. We took that drawback into consideration when we made our decision. If we were to react as the residents of North Dakota obviously have, we would push for traffic limitations along our street and a slower posted speed on Summerlake Drive, making it less convenient for the increasing number of people who use the street to access Summerlake Park. However, we chose to be responsible for the decision we made and will not try to change our environment to benefit a few, at the expense of many others. I was irritated when the traffic islands were installed along North Dakota a few years ago. Without parking restrictions located along the street near tl&e islands, it made travel along the street hazardous at times. Instead of simply removing the traffic islands, the decision was made to construct traffic peninsulas. As a taxpayer, I am less-than-impressed. It is yet another example of the irresponsible government spending that exasperates me. Hopefully, enough people will express their dissatisfaction with the latest "traffic improvements" so that they be eliminated. This will again infuriate me because it will be another example, of ineffective spending of my tax dollars. It is easy to question how the decision was made to impose the North Dakota Street "traffic improvements" on the many people that used the street. The decision benefits the few unhappy residents along North Dakota that chose to whine and complain, instead of taking the responsibility for the decisions that they made when they purchased their properties. My position and request is obvious. Remove the recent "traffic improvements" on North Dakota Street, refrain from making decisions that benefit a minority of the community, and spend my tax contributions more prudently. Sincerely, ZY, ~ Chris Bell 11161 SW Summerlake Drive Tigard, Or. 97223 (503) 524-8579 From: Self <CATHY.COT> To: Gus Subject: SW North Dakota Street Copies to: Bill, Liz Send reply to: cathy@ci.tigard.or.us Date sent: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 09:40:43 PST I received a telephone call from Grace Davis who lives on SW North Dakota Street. She thought the SW North Dakota hearing was tonight (8/25). t advised her of the change to 9/22. She asked to go on record to say "Thank You" for the traffic mitigation installed on that street. She especially noted her appreciation for the diverter and said her street is now a "quiet and safe street." Cathy Cathy Wheatley 1 Tue, 25 Aug 1998 10:21:39 ?U ~zIRB ~All5 September 21, 1998 Jim Nicoli, Mayor City of Tigard City Hall 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli: ln~ Thank you for your service to the citizens of Tigard. As mayor, I'm sure you are interested in hearing from your con- stituents in regard to matters that you have to decide upon which would seriously impact their lives. Thus, as a long-time Tigard resident, I am writing to you to voice my objection to the City of Tigard's council seriously considering going to the Willamette River as the source for our drinking water. This deeply concerns me when, in fact, we have and can continue to have (with some negotiations to be accomplished) SAFE drinking water from the Bull Run sunDly system. I've attended the City of Tigard's informational meetings on this matter and have listened to opposing credible data, so my objection to the use of the-Willamette River with the fil- tration plant, at Wilsonville is not without first being in- formed on the subject. Sincerely, Bonnie L. shon 11341 S.W. Springwood Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 September 21, 1998 Councilman /-ouncilman Councilman Councilman City Hall 13125 S.W. Tigard, OR Paul Hunt Bob Rohlf Ken Scheckla Brian Moore Hall Blvd. 97223 Dear Councilman: "_Qe1CJ ~tl2Zl9Fr 6D rawal ~S Thank you for your service to the citizens of Tigard as a city councilman. In that position, I'm sure you are inter- ested in hearing from Tigard citizens in regard to matters that you have to decide upon which would seriously impact their lives. Thus, as a long-time Tigard resident, I am writing this letter to you to voice my objection the the City of Tigard's council seriously considering going to the Willamette River as the source for our drinking water. This deeply concerns me when, in fact, we have and can continue to have SAFE drinking water from the Bull Run supply system. I've attended the City of Tigard Is informational meetings on this matter and have listened to opposing, credible data, so my objection to the use of the Willamette River with the fil- tration plant at Wilsonville is not without first being in- formed on the subject. Sincerely, Bonnie L. Bish p 11341 S.W. Spring wood Dr. Tigard, OR 0223- aid a, V , jb~q~ ct, 0~r a -L/98 w~ ,,,f 4 fA-6~ , -137 -D-5ca,<,5e a TUALATIN VALLEY EIRE & RESCUE EIRE PREVENTION 4755 S.W. Griffith Drive . P.O. Box 4755 . Beaverton, OR 97076 . (503) 526-2469 . FAX 526-2538 September 4, 1998 Gus Duenas, Traffic Engineer City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Mr. Duenas, This letter is intended to document our phone conversation on September 4`°, regarding the traffic barriers located at North Dakota St. and Springwood Dr. and 130 Ave. and Hawks Beard St. As per our conversation, the Fire District requests the following: 1. The traffic banter located at North Dakota St. and Springwood Dr. be removed or a driving surface capable of carrying the imposed load of a fire engine be installed along with the rolled curb. 2. The barriers located at 130"Ave. and Hawks Beard St. do not provide a ~::iricient driving surface. Remove the barriers or provide rolled curbs and a driving surface capable of carrying the imposed load of a fire engine. 3. The stops signs at both locations be moved back so that any vehicles waiting at the signs when fire apparatus approaches will be clear so they may pass through. 4. If the City of Tigard chooses to leave the barriers in place and at any time any of the barriers cause a response related accident or a significant response delay, the Fire District will request the barriers be removed immediately. 5. Please include the Fire District in the pre-planning stage of any future traffic barrier installations. Please feel free to contact me at (503) 526-2469 if you have any questions. Sincerely, e,5t, T.. 7n,-j j, & Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal cc: Fire Chief Jeff Johnson Assistant Fire Marshal Cleve Joiner Station 253 Captain Larry Pfeifer IIWorking" Smoke Detectors Save Lives A AGENDA ITEM # 60 FOR AGENDA OF September 22, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE 107th Avenue Proposal PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall Council accept the offer of dedication by residents adjacent to 107`h Avenue and authorize initiation of a project to pave the road and install an appropriate drainage system? STAFF RECOMMENDATION This is a policy matter that is presented to Council for discussion and consideration. Staff is prepared to follow through on whatever decision is rendered by Council. INFORMATION SUMMARY 107th Avenue, between Park Street and Cook Lane, is a gravel street that has been maintained by the City for a number of years. This street connects to Cook Lane, which connects to Watkins Avenue. It was originally scheduled for paving in the 1997-98 fiscal year paving program. However, staff research into the right-of-way for that street revealed that the City did not have any public right-of-way in that area. There was no public right- of way dedication from the private properties on the west side of the existing gravel roadway. In addition, title to the strip east of the private properties is unclear. That strip was not identified for public right-of-way purposes when the existing subdivision was created. A public sanitary sewer line which serves that area currently lies within this strip of land. The sewer service area was extended to Fairhaven Street and Fairhaven Way as part of Reimbursement District No. 9. The residents of the private properties on the west side of the existing street have submitted a proposal offering to dedicate the right-of-way needed along their respective frontages and requesting City Council to accept the dedication and upgrade, pave, and maintain the existing street consistent with the streets in the surrounding neighborhood. Upgrading and paving this street would require design and construction of a drainage system to adequately drain the street and resolve the periodic flooding problem experienced in that area. This drainage system could readily connect to the newly installed underground drainage system in Park Street. Dedication of a 25-foot strip along the eastern frontage provides only half of the right-of-way required for this street. The Engineering staff and the City attorney's office are looking into the status of the eastern strip. The eastern strip varies in width from almost 25 feet on the north end adjacent to Park Street to approximately 23 feet adjacent to Cook Lane. A sliver of land from the existing lots on the east side would also be needed to provide the full 50-foot width. rK Attached is the letter from the 107th residents, together with drawings showing the right-of-way dedications needed along this street. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Take no action on the request, and leave the street as a private street. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES There are no funds currently earmarked for paving this street. I:\Citywide\sum\ 107thpro.doc AGENDA ITEM FOR AGENDA OF CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ~1 September 22, 1998 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Improvements to Summer Lake _ APA9 PREPARED BY: G. N. Berry DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK L4-071-1 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Report on progress to improve the appearance of the lake. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends further discussions with staff and interested parties prior to development of a long-term plan for Summer Lake. INFORMATION SUMMARY At its November 12, 1996 meeting, Council heard the concerns of residents near Summerlake Park that the appearance of the pond was deteriorating. In response, Council directed staff to request proposals from consulting firms for the preparation of a lake management plan and appointed a citizen advisory committee to guide the project. The completed plan was submitted to and approved by Council on April 21, 1998 with direction to staff to implement the plan. The first step was to cut the weeds. Although the plan recommended purchase of an aquatic harvester, Council's preference was to contract the initial cutting and assess the results afterwards. Public Works contracted with a firm from Coos Bay and the initial cutting was performed in early July as reported to Council on July 21, 1998. A second cutting is planned for the week of September 14, 1998. The next steps in the plan are alum treatment and the installation of bottom barriers. The consultant has requested DEQ to determine the permitting requirements for the alum treatment. The response from DEQ is attached. The response points out that $7,500 is the estimated application fee and offers no assurance that the application will be approved. The consultant is currently requesting DEQ to consider a permitting procedure of lesser scope so that the application fee may be reduced. The City may proceed with the installation of the bottom barriers. The purpose of the barriers is to prevent weed growth in shallow areas of the lake out of the reach of the weed cutting machine and are typically comprised of burlap mats held in place by sand bags. Installation is labor intensive and might be best accomplished by a volunteer group. Susan Koepping, Volunteer Coordinator, is determining the availability of suitable groups. The work group will require supervision that could be provided by staff or the City's consultant. It is obvious from the response by DEQ and from contact by our consultant with that agency that DEQ is not enthusiastic about alum treatment in Summer Lake. They may make it difficult and expensive to proceed with that treatment on a long-term basis. Staff will continue to follow up NWth DEQ to determine the details of the permitting requirements for the alum treatment and report the results to Council before submitting a permit application. Staff will also continue to investigate the feasibility of using a volunteer group to install the bottom barriers. If this is found to not be feasible, requesting bids from contractors will be proposed. Council would be provided with a cost estimate before bids are requested. In addition to this project, the management of the lake is also part of two other plans that are currently being implemented: the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan and the Trees Two Thousand Plan. The Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan, adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency Board of Directors on November 4, 1997, proposes to plant shade trees and other native vegetation. These plantings could interfere with the customary use of the park by obstructing view of and access to the lake. Moreover, the Trees Two Thousand Plan could have similar results. Given the high cost and uncertainty of the alum treatment permit and these potentially conflicting planning efforts,. it would seem prudent to reconcile these differing objectives by having a full discussion with all parties concerned. Among the participants should be City Public Works, Engineering and Planning staffs, the consultant, members of the Summer Lake Task Force, and possibly others throughout the City who have an interest in Summerlake Park. The result of this discussion would hopefully be a long range plan for Summer Lake that meets the City's needs, addresses USA Master Plan requirements, and provides a facility that can be enjoyed by the residents of Tigard. This discussion will be scheduled for a Council meeting sometime in the next two to three months. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A FISCAL NOTES Funds for the work done so far have been authorized from Parks SDCs. I:\citywide\sum\sum-ca3.doc iregon john A Kitzhaber, M D., Governor Jeff Munro Parks/Grounds Supervisor City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Summer Lake, Washington Co. Ac- Dear UP-Munro, Department of Environmental Quality Northwest Region 2020 SW Fourth Avenue Suite 400 Portland, OR 97201-4987 (503) 229-5263 Voice TTY (503) 229-5471 August 28, 1998 This letter is a follow-up to the meeting that you had with a member of my staff, Rob Burkhart, regarding water quality in Summer Lake. I would like to address two key water quality issues in the lake: temperature and algal growth. As you may know, Summer Creek (which includes Summer Lake) has been listed by the State as "water quality impaired" for temperature. What this means is that the water temperatures have been found to often exceed the standards set to protect aquatic life. New regulatory plans are being drafted to address this issue in Summer Creek and many other streams in the Tualatin Basin. Since studies have shown that one of the most effective means of reducing water temperature is to increase the amount of shading, it is anticipated that these plans will call for the planting of shade vegetation on creek corridors. We acknowledge the good work that the City of Tigard has done with its ongoing efforts in tree planting, and we encourage you to include the banks of Summer Lake in your efforts. The second issue in the lake, algal growth, is something that the State and local agencies have been trying to address for years in the Tualatin River. I understand that one option for the City is to use alum to precipitate some of the algae out of the lake. The addition of alum to the lake would be considered a pollutant discharge and would require a permit from the State. The application fee for the permit would be approximately $7,500. And, since the Department's policy is to focus on addressing the cause of the water quality problem rather than instream treatment, there is no guarantee that a permit would be issued. While our department acknowledges that excessive algal growth in lakes and rivers is a nuisance, we feel that the most appropriate long-term solution would be to address the causes of the algal growth. This may be accomplished by reducing nutrient loadings to the lake and the creek upstream of the lake, and by providing shade. We appreciate the City of Tigard's efforts to address water quality concerns and hope that you will participate in the ongoing planning efforts for the Tualatin Basin. If you have any questions or comments, please contact our Tualatin Basin Coordinator, Rob Burkhart, at (503) 229-5566. Sincerely, Robert Baumgartner Manager Water Quality Source Control Section Northwest Region rwb C~ 6- vt boltvcf sch4 06 w- SECOND AMENDMENT C O66 J- ~vS This Amendment, entered into this day of , 1998, between Washington County, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon ("County"), and Interfaith Outreach Services, Inc. ("Agency"), amends the project agreement for the construction of the RITE Center, originally entered into on May 6, 1997 and amended May 29, 1998 (hereinafter "Project Agreement"). Whereas, Agency. has requested County to provide a supplemental Community Development Block Grant ("CDBG") award for the purpose of further assisting Agency in meeting its outstanding financial obligations to complete the construction of the RITE Center located at 11070 SW Greenburg Rd., Tigard, Oregon ("Project"). Whereas, in exchange for providing the Agency with supplemental funds for the Project, the County requires the Agency to meet the special conditions and amendments identified herein. Whereas, the parties acknowledge that final Project costs may increase marginally, and it is therefore prudent to establish a mechanism to expeditiously resolve such matters. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration for the Agency's promise to comply with the covenants and special conditions contained herein, County awards Agency a supplemental CDBG award of $69,000.00 and it is expressly agreed that: A. Part I, Section 3.B. "June 30, 1998" is modified to "March 31, 1999." B. Part I, Section 3.C. "June 30, 2028" is modified to "March 1, 2029." C. Part I, Section 7.D.2. County provides notice that Agency shall execute the Promissory Note and Trust Deed by October 30, 1998. D. Exhibit C, Budget Summary, dated May 5, 1998, is superseded by the revised Budget Summary, dated the day of '1998 which is attached hereto. The revised Budget Summary increases the CDBG participation from $500,000.00 to $569,000.00 and the total project budget to $1,324,861.00. E. The following are added to Part IV, Special Conditions: 6. The equity investment of County shall be no less than 51 % of the fair market value of the Project regardless of the amount or level of funds Agency received from sources other than County. 7. This supplemental award may only be used for payment of construction costs for the Project and only after Agency expends all Agency funds. 8. The Agency, within 60 days of the execution of this Amendment, shall execute an Option and Right of First Refusal ("Option") in favor of County for the purchase of the Project in the event of certain conditions. The Option shall be operative in the event the Agency chooses or is required to dispose of the Project, including any substantial change in ownership of Agency, at any time prior to expiration of the Project Agreement. The purchase price for the Option shall be forty-nine percent (49%) of the fair market value of the Project. The fair market value shall be established in accordance with the terms of the Option. The purchase price for the Right of First Refusal shall be 49% of the offer for the Project. 9. If the Project is sold for any reason prior to the expiration of this Agreement, and the'County declines to exercise its Option, Agency shall repay the CDBG funds in accordance with the terms of the Promissory Note. 10. Any liens recorded against the Project property shall be considered a material default of this Agreement. 11. Agency shall not use the Project as collateral to secure loans or any manner of debt financing without County's written consent, which consent, shall be at the County's sole discretion. 12. Agency must obtain the express written approval of County in order to rent, lease, or allow the occupancy or use of the Project for any purpose other than the provision of housing and services for the homeless. 13. The Project must be operated and maintained by the Agency to the satisfaction of the County during the term of the Project Agreement for full compliance with all federal and County requirements. County shall have the authority to periodically review the performance of the Project. Regardless of anything to the contrary in the Project Agreement, if, in the determination of the County, the Agency fails to comply with all requirements in the Project Agreement, County may exercise its Option. 14. County shall have the right to assign its rights under the Option. G. The County delegates to its Office of Community Development Program Manager the authority to resolve any additional budget requirements so long as the Manager acts within the provisions of Program Policy 4.5 as it relates to processing contingency requests under $10,000.00. All other covenants and promises in the original Agreement are unaltered and remain in effect. INTERFAITH OUTREACH SERVICES, INC. Date BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Chair Date Recording Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM Attorney for the Washington County Office of Community Development J: SECOND AMENDMENT 2DOC