City Council Packet - 06/15/1999
'rtf ..i:S{f.~'~•. Y'~1 ~i~yq'l. f[~.r rt~2{ v) , +{w{ y, a,s _'S rNk,,<;+,e{~i { ~;iF'~ i` N<.4k Y• T'a,r•+.,".4,:. y < ,~E«r t'r .n?C~°
Vf Yj1j`S ,t k(ya. ~ '~u.S `a yA~..y? x a~ V r ~J -f,i rt r ~ $~',f F ~ ~r'c e~ { ws
J~ a ~ ✓r 's,~ e i~`f r t ~ ( + y 1 r U ,,V ~ ~ N T ~ i; nt,
~'2 ✓~aS 1., .r dri Yfat ,
F 'f , r ~x, •ca t d z I , tr 6 - °t ' tr+o r ~
f et++4t• di s t..ti f _
{ r r -,y >r 7 N ' e tV , + S 1 P f f r 3 ijF
fi~ le 7 r r e • a
a + , r Sd r ~ i
t F .t-
ad k; N e
TIGAR CillvZONCIL"t'
1
E
Op"' ET
WORv
JUN 15~ 1990
C UNCOIL MEETING-VILL, No OT 0E.'
TELEVISED
1:%drrrjessica%ocpkl2.doc
r t + t' s r ,
I a s
♦r lr y„r1 1 t t,,
i .y r ~ rx r f ~~rd ~aa ,yI F +7
Revised on 6110199
4 . } r > Y17it~ r r ~1 4 y .
j'~ CITY OF TIGARD
x'"Ey
~M1Mfif~~5{~.._~rj'^}~r~
5rC , tfY Y~ Ahl h Fi4 fV 11 ✓}'S
~~{~Ya S ' n to x., tn~a~»SfJJrt ~~ty<r ~t, y~~ t-sH* ~l5~j~i~
~"w~t!`t ~4 i y P yu (pt rya 7"r
Sri. .z• r q ~ ~:.,"d 4y~1r~{ r~-~.}y .r Xy's~ ~~°~~"eu:;`< .
"t-n+ ~'~,9 F~~`4 ytl{j ~j'rf'4 ~"F} ~y J.r✓~~~u
r y r k y ~ w-a ,}r rrC~`t3 *~.'r' "JL ;
~f,,`i'IZ°7/,~ M~~~'~rr~3J~~>' 11qq yt ~w ~TjFyf t}Lf tix8Y4'
] i t [`~U y9 .fi'* Rtlf,,,1{rn't} ~ t~ f.a ~ir.
.~Y..•df i^l R.:...t.a.(. I'...h n~l.w ,4:iY 41 }I M. ..T;%~rGrtMt ~JrA.~
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. Visitor's 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
684.2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 15,1999 - PAGE 1
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
JUNE 15,1999.6:30 PM
6:30 PM
1. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the
provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (h) & (Q to discuss labor relations, real property
transactions, current and pending litigation issues, and exempt public records. 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.
7:00 PM
2. WORKSHOP MEETING
o Call to Order: Mayor Nicoli
o Pledge of Allegiance
® Council Communications & Liaison Reports
Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items
7:05 PM
3. DISCUSSION: WATER OPTIONS
Public Works Department
7:35 PM
4. DISCUSSION: PUBLIC, EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT (PEG) ACCESS FRANCHISE FEE
SUPPORT
• Administration Department
7:45 PM
5. UPDATE: CITY'S Y2K READINESS EFFORTS
® Administration Department
7:55 PM
6. UPDATE: CITY'S COMPLANCE FOR CITY BUILDINGS - AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
® Administration Department
8:25 PM
7. DISCUSSION: PROPOSED TEMPORARY SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS
® Community Development Department
8:45 PM
8. DISCUSSION: (CARRIED OVER FROM THE 618199 COUNCIL MEETING) WITH JIM CORLISS
CONCERNING TIGARD TRIANGLE DEVELOMENT STANDARDS
• Community Development Department
COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 15,1999 - PAGE 2
9:00 PM
9. REVIEW PROPOSED RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE METRO GREENSPACES RESOLUTION
® Community Development Department
9:15 PM
10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
9:25 PM
11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9:35 PM
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the
provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (h) & (f) to discuss labor relations, real property
transactions, current and pending litigation issues, and exempt public records. 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.
10:00 PM
13. ADJOURNMENT
I:AD M\CATHY\CCA\990518. DOC
i
i
i
i
{
f
COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 15,1999 - PAGE 3
Agenda !tern Ido. ' =3
Meeting of 1 D
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL.
WORKSHOP MEETING
MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999
> STUDY SESSION
s Bill Monahan, City Manager, informed the Council that Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue was
interested in hosting another meeting with the Council. The Council discussed the request and
directed staff to convey their interest in a dinner meeting at TVF&R's new offices.
Atfalati Recreation District
Mr. Monahan updated the Council on the Atfalati recreation district discussion. He reported
that when Tualatin declined to participate the consultant revised the project with a total cost now
of $66,200. He noted that Tigard has agreed to participate with $15,000 and Washington
County with $25,000. He said that the Sherwood School District, the Tigard-Tualatin School
District and Sherwood all would participate while Durham residents, rather than the City, would
probably contribute their $700 share. He indicated that Atfalati would contribute the remaining
$11,000.
Mr. Monahan stated that Linda Davis was the lead principal on this project for the consulting
firm, Cogen Owens Cogen. He explained that Tigard would be the lead agency handling the
contract. He noted that the County would give their $25,000 to Tigard through an
intergovernmental agreement. He suggested that the City use IGAs for the other governmental
entities in order to allow Tigard to handle the money and to process the bills. He pointed out
that Atfalati was not a governmental entity.
Councilor Scheckla asked if staff would set up a deadline date for participation. Mr. Monahan
explained that doing so was not necessary because Tigard had $51,000 available from itself, the
County, and Atfalati to get the consultants started. He noted that Dave Nicoli informed him that
he had commitments from the other partners. He said that he would send letters and the IGA to
the other groups to start that process. Mr. Monahan suggested informing the partners that
Tigard expected to receive the money by July 30.
Mr. Monahan advised the Council that the City of Beaverton has accepted Mary Wells nto the
their mediation training program.
® Community Resource Center
I
Mr. Monahan advised the Council that the Mayor received a letter today requesting funding for
the Community Resource Center (formerly the Rite Center) in the amount of $10,000 to $15,000
for next year, instead of the $8,200 set aside by the Budget Committee in the social services
{ budget.
Mayor Nicoli advised the Council that there were unresolved issues between the new local
s group (headed by Wes Taylor) and the County Community Action. He suggested waiting to see
if these two groups could work out these issues before the City decided where to send its money.
Councilor Moore commented that they could also discuss at that time whether or not to increase
the allocated funding amount of $8,200. Mayor Nicoli stated that he would try to talk with Mr.
Taylor before the meeting next week.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 1
o City of Happy Valley letter
Mr. Monahan advised the Council that the Mayor received a letter from the City of Happy
Valley regarding a proposal from an out-of-state company to get tax exempt bonds in order to
purchase two apartment complexes, one in Portland and one in Tigard. He explained that
several months ago he received a phone call from the same company with the same proposal.
He reviewed his concerns with a proposal to purchase the Tiffany Court Apartments with the
expectation that $100,000 worth of improvements would be sufficient to bring it up to Code. He
said that he and Wayne Lowry decided that this was a transaction that the City did not need to
get involved in, particularly since $100,000 would not "scratch the surface" of what was needed
to bring those apartments up to Code.
Mr. Monahan explained that the Happy Valley City Manager told the salesman to prepare the
paperwork for his review. He read the letter sent to the Mayor for his signature indicating
Tigard's support of the financing, noting that the Mayor would not be signing the letter. He
said that he suggested that the Happy Valley City Manager come look at the property if they
were interested in purchasing it.
o Fourth of July Celebration/Tigard Country Daze
Mayor Nicoli suggested that the Council split the increase allocated by the Budget Committee
for next year's Fourth of July Celebration and give half to the event committee for this year's
celebration and half for next year's celebration. The Council agreed with the Mayor's
suggestion.
Councilor Scheckla suggested reallocating some of the money slated for the Country Daze
parade to the Fourth of July. Councilor Moore pointed out that that the Budget Committee
already did that. Mr. Monahan mentioned that the non-profit originally set up to sponsor the
Country Daze event needed to vote to put the $2,500 remaining in the Country Daze account
towards this year's program. Mayor Nicoli directed staff to help this year's Country Daze
volunteers work through the process in order to access that money.
Councilor Hunt asked if this year's volunteers liked the different parade route suggested by
Council. Mr. Monahan said that Ms. Crone liked being off Pacific Highway. He mentioned a
gjarade route starting across from Magno Humphries, going down to Main Street, running the
length of Main Street, and ending at the Rite Aid store.
o Mr. Monahan mentioned the proposal from the citizen members of the Budget Committee to
increase the Council compensation. He discussed possible concerns with implementing the
recommendation. Councilor Scheckla suggested that the seated Councilors not receive any
benefit from a salary increase until their terms were up. Councilor Hunt disagreed with paying
different Councilors different rates. The Council discussed how the City increased Council
compensation the last time. Mr. Monahan said that he would discuss the issue with the City
Attorney.
1. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:30 p.m. under the provisions of ORS
192.660(1) (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt
public records, current & pending litigation issues.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 2
® Mayor Nicoli recessed the Executive Session at 7:50 p.m.
2. WORKSHOP MEETING
® Call to Order
Mayor Nicoli called the meeting to order at 7:52 p.m.
Roll Call
Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Joyce Patton, and
Ken Scheckla
Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; Asst. to the City Manager Liz Newton; Legal
Counsel Tim Ramis; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx;
City Engineer Gus Duenas; Administrative Risk Analyst Loreen Mills; City
Recorder Catherine Wheatley
e Council Communications
Mayor Nicoli advised the Council that the Washington County Coordinating Committee heard a
presentation from the Federal government and the Unified Sewage Agency regarding the
impacts of the Endangered Species Act regulations on local jurisdictions. He mentioned his
surprise at how heavily these regulations would impact Tigard's maintenance of its streets and
drainage areas. He explained that the Washington County cities all wanted USA to be the lead
agency in developing the compliance plan for the Tualatin River drainage basin. He explained
that, although Metro has asked to be the regional leader, USA already managed surface water
runoff in the Tualatin River basin and has successfully worked on reversing the pollution in the
basin.
Mayor Nicoli said that USA has set aside $100,000 to start studying a process on how to deal
with the Endangered Species Act. He noted that it involved working with several State and
Federal government agencies as well as the local jurisdictions. He stated that the desire was to
give a more in-depth presentation to the Mayors and the City Managers who would in turn
report to their Councils. He mentioned that Washington County would likely take the lead in
developing the compliance plan.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to Tigard hosting a meeting of the mayors to discuss this issue and a few
others of county-wide concern. He mentioned that all the mayors were taken aback at the extent
of the impacts of the Endangered Species Act.
Tim Ramis, City Attorney, commented that USA or the County would have a real opportunity
to take leadership in the event that Metro's strategy of adopting Title 3 did not work (adopted to
avoid more stringent regulations from the National Marine Fisheries), and the Federal
government imposed more restrictive regulations.
Mayor Nicoli mentioned discussion among the Mayors of the cities collectively raising another
$100,000 as part of taking a proactive approach to deal with this issue themselves instead of
waiting for the Federal government to tell them how to handle it. Councilor Patton commented
that the regulating agencies would like the affected agencies to develop their own proactive
plans. Mayor Nicoli stated that the Federal government representative was very clear that they
did not have all the answers to implementing this Federal law. He observed that the people first
to the table would probably get the most flexible plan.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 3
sz~
Councilor Scheckla asked when the Federal law took effect. Mayor Nicoli said that the Federal
representative told them that the Federal law kicked in as soon as they put a certain type of fish
on the endangered species list. Mr. Ramis said that the listing was about three months ago. Liz
Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, mentioned the USA briefing to the full Council on the
Endangered Species Act, scheduled for the July 20 meeting.
m Call to Council and Staff for Dion-Agenda Items: None
3. DISCUSSION: WATER OPTIONS
There was no discussion at this time.
4. DISCUSSION: PUBLIC, EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT (PEG) ACCESS
FRANCHISE FEE SUPPORT
Ms. Newton reviewed the five items on PEG access which the Council reached consensus on at
its May 11 meeting. She mentioned the Council's support of the baseline amount proposed by
TVCA and the Council's suggestion to invite other cable access providers to submit proposals
for service.. She noted the Council's agreement that TVCA should not assume large portions of
the incidental payment and capital grant dollars to fund their operation and that TVCA should
reconsider its proposal to purchase a building. She mentioned the Council's support of a
franchise fee support level of 15% to 17.5%.
Ms. Newton reported that, at its May 19 meeting, the MACC Board agreed to forward a
recommendation to its member jurisdictions to support a minimum level of funding of 15%
(preferably 17%). She mentioned that the Board encouraged the jurisdictions to provide a
higher level of support if they so desired. She explained how the MACC staff proposed
reconfiguring the percentage splits of the franchise fee to allocate 17% to TVCA and 58% to the
cities. She mentioned that the other member jurisdictions did not support going out to other
access providers, as suggested by Tigard. She said that the Board postponed the discussion of
TVCA's funding assumptions to a later date.
Ms. Newton reported that at the June 9 MACC meeting, the City of Wilsonville withdrew from
MACCand would administer their cable contract on their own. She said that Wilsonville
intended to contract with TVCA for PEG access services. She reviewed the Board's discussion
of the budget for the next two years, mentioning that the Board decided to allocate all of the
incidental payment to TVCA in $75,000 increments. She said that the other jurisdictions did not
support her suggestion to put the money in the budget unallocated and review what other needs
might exist before allocating the money. She mentioned that the Board postponed a discussion
of the building until later also.
Ms. Newton mentioned that Councilor Scheckla recommended the 15% funding level because
they still lacked performance measures for TVCA. She explained that the Council could change
the level of its support every year in January, following appropriate notice to MACC. She
reviewed the Council's choices this evening: 15% fee support, 17% fee support or another level
of support.
At Councilor Scheckla's request, Ms. Newton reviewed the situation with Lake Oswego. She
said that Councilor Bob Chizum attended in place of Mayor Bill Klammer. She explained that,
prior to the May 19 meeting, the Board had discussed letting the cities decide how much they
wanted to contribute. The Lake Oswego City Council had come to consensus on contributing
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 4
12%, and Councilor Chizum came to the meeting expecting to receive the option of 12%.
Instead, the Board came up with a resolution recommending a minimum of 15%. She noted that
Mayor Klammer intended to discuss the 15% level with his Council on July 20.
Councilor Scheckla recommended going with 15%, as Lake Oswego probably would. He
pointed out that if TVCA met and exceeded their performance guidelines, then the City could
renegotiate the level of its support.
Councilor Moore asked what levels other jurisdictions supported. Ms. Newton said that
Washington County has voted in 17%. She indicated that the Hillsboro Budget Committee
recommended 19% to its Council but the Council has not taken any action yet. She said that
Councilor Evelyn Brezinski would ask for 19% from the Beaverton City Council.
Mayor Nicoli spoke in support of 17% to match the County. Councilor Scheckla reiterated his
support of 15% until they found out what the performance measures were. Councilor Moore
supported 15%, as that gave MACC six months until January to develop performance measures.
Councilor Patton supported starting out at the 15% level, as did Councilor Hunt.
The Council agreed by consensus to revisit this issue in January to consider adjusting the
percentage level.
5. UPDATE: CITY'S Y2K READINESS EFFORTS
Loreen Mills, Administrative Risk Analyst, reported that the staff Task Force on Y2K issues
has been working to identify potential problem areas, including equipment, traffic signals, and
service providers. She stated that the City was prepared to respond to any emergency on
January 1, whether it was due to a storm or to Y2K glitches. She mentioned a practice
emergency management response event on September 8, 1999.
Ms. Mills advised the Council that the City's essential services and systems would be ready for
Y2K. She reviewed the five areas of potential problems remaining. She mentioned working
with the local post office to address problems (since the National Post Office Service would not
be Y2K ready until 2002). She said that staff had yet to get written contracts to confirm the
verbal agreements made with substitute service providers, in the event that the regular service
provider failed. She noted that they have not yet received confirmation from GTE on what
services it would provide.
Ms. Mills discussed the problem of no back-up generator for the building housing the brain for
the city-wide local area computer network. She indicated that they hoped to have this resolved
by mid-October. She said that, due to lack of information from the City of Portland, they could
not say with confidence that there was no problem with the water supply. She mentioned that
many agencies have stated that they would provide detailed reports on July 1.
Ms. Mills mentioned the concern that TCI might not provide Y2K ready broadband support in
its cable system. Since the City accessed the Internet and the WILLINET system via broadband
support, staff was concerned and working to resolve the issue.
Ms. Mills reviewed the information available from the City regarding Y2K compliance. She
mentioned the City website and emergency home preparation brochures available at the library,
at community events, and at CIT meetings. She commented that preparation for disaster was a
wise precaution, whether the cause was Y2K or a natural disaster.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 5
Ms. Mills noted the $116,000 allocated in next year's budget for Y2K compliance. Councilor
Hunt asked if that money included a generator. Ms. Mills said that it did not. The Council
discussed generators. Ms. Newton pointed out that the staff was looking at what their options
were to preserve the service for the least amount of money.
Mr. Ramis mentioned discussions between his office and City staff with regard to Y2K liability
issues. He emphasized that the Council was not responsible to be Y2K perfect. He explained
that the decision of how many resources to put into making the City Y2K ready was a policy
decision. He indicated that policy decisions were not subject to second guessing by a court. He
said that the City's first line of defense was keeping this as a policy decision and not
independently establishing a higher level of responsibility for the City.
6. UPDATE: CITY'S COMPLIANCE FOR CITY BUILDINGS - AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES ACT
Ms. Mills stated that it was time to update the City's ADA assessment (adopted on January 26,
1993) . She mentioned the City's proactive work in keeping its buildings, facilities, programs
and services accessible. She pointed out that the ADA regulations did not mandate that a City
had to be in compliance by a certain date, rather it was the City's prerogative to determine what
the priority was in its transition plan.
Ms. Mills directed attention to the transition plan in the packet which included areas needing
modifications, the responsible party, the anticipated completion date, and cost estimates. She
reviewed the balancing act required when the requirements of another regulating code, such as
the Fire Life & Safety Code or the Uniform Building Code, conflicted with the requirements of
the ADA regulations. She said that staff would implement the Federal ADA requirements with
possible modifications based on the other codes.
Ms. Mills pointed out that the formal transition plan included a written philosophy on how ADA
improvements would be made in the City parks. She mentioned that the City has not done a
major retrofit of all the curbs in the City because the standard has been changing since the ADA
was first adopted. She stated that staff dealt with complaints on a case by case basis and did
what was necessary to resolve the situation for the person needing access.
Ms. Mills said that the Council would formally recognize the ADA compliance plan on the
consent agenda next week. She mentioned that copies were available at the library.
Councilor Hunt asked what constituted a renovation, citing the Niche in particular. He noted
that the building itself was only worth $50,000. Ms. Mills said that the definition of "major
renovation" came out of the Uniform Building Code. She explained that the Council had the
right and the authority to decide what its policy was for the building. If the Council decided that
the building was not worth the investment of an elevator, then it could chose to bring the
services down to the citizens who could not reach the second floor.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the City has received many complaints regarding ADA access in
the City. Ms. Mills said that no complaints have reached the level of the ADA grievance officer
(herself) because staff has always been able to resolve the situation internally and provide the
requested service. She commented that they rarely received complaints anyway because the
City had fairly new buildings.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 6
Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting for a break at 8:43 p.m.
e Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting.
7. DISCUSSION: PROPOSED TEMPORARY SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS
Mr. Monahan confirmed to Councilor Hunt that the resolution reflected the changes made orally
by the Council at the last meeting.
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, reviewed the Council's previous direction
to staff regarding the issue of temporary signs. He mentioned looking into recouping the costs
of the removal and retrieval of illegal signs, and allowing political signs in the public right-of-
way during a campaign. He advised the Council that, because of the issue of content-neutral
sign regulations, if the Council decided to allow political signs in the public right-of-way during
campaigns, then the City had to allow any temporary sign in the public right-of-way for the
same time period.
Matt Scheidegger, Code Enforcement Officer, gave a Power Point presentation using slides to
illustrate the types of signs illegally posted in the City. He also reviewed which temporary signs
were legally posted according to the sign code. He mentioned the City's 30 day permit for
temporary signs ($30 fee and renewable two times). He said that he spent a lot of time talking
to sign owners and trying to explain the regulations.
Mr. Monahan commented that the staff did not rigorously enforce the temporary sign
regulations on the weekends when most real estate and garage sale activity occurred. He said
that if the people did not take down their own signs by Monday or Tuesday, then City staff took
them down.
Mr. Hendryx reiterated that the issue before the Council tonight was to give staff direction with
regard to penalties for illegally posted signs, and whether or not to allow signs in the public
right-of-way during political campaigns. He emphasized that if the Council allowed political
signs to remain in the public right-of-way, then it had to allow all signs to remain in the public
right-of-way.
Councilor Hunt mentioned thatle was still against allowing signs in the public right-of-way.
Mayor Nicoli described the Council's previous direction as being that staff should not
aggressively enforce the restriction against signs in the public right-of-way during political races
but return to strict enforcement when the election was over. Mr. Hendryx concurred.
,
' Councilor Scheckla raised a concern about legal signs that obscured the line of sight at
intersections, citing the one at Gaarde and I I Oh Avenue in particular. Mr. Hendryx agreed that
no sign should intrude on the vision clearance area at an intersection.
! Councilor Patton asked if the residential property owner (in front of whose property someone
Put a sign in the public right-of-way during a campaign) had any say about the sign. Mr.
'
~
I Hendryx said that the property owners could remove the signs themselves but the City would
not be regulating those, if these changes were adopted. Councilor Scheckla mentioned a
potential problem of litigation between the property owner and the sign owner.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 7
Mayor Nicoli asked what the time frame was for allowing these signs to remain posted. Mr.
Hendryx said that it was seven days before and after the election date. He commented that mail-
in elections were more complicated. The Council discussed how long to allow the signs to
remain in the public right-of-way for mail-in elections. Mr. Monahan pointed out that allowing
a five-week period for each of six election days a year totaled 30 weeks out of 52 weeks in a
year.
The Council discussed whether or not to allow temporary signs in the public right-of-way at any
time. They agreed by consensus not to allow any temporary signs in the public right-of-way at
any time.
Councilor Moore commented that the next step was to outlaw all temporary signs. Staff
indicated that the Council could do that. Mayor Nicoli did not support the idea. Councilor
Moore asked what other cities did about temporary signs. Mr. Hendryx said that Lake Oswego
had a permit process.
Mr. Hendryx asked for direction with regard to the penalty issue. Mr. Scheidegger supported
assessing a retrieval fee for signs that he removed from the public right-of-way. He mentioned
that Lake Oswego had a $20-per-sign fee. Mr. Ramis pointed out that Section 3 of the proposal
allowed the City to set a charge for sign retrieval.
Mr. Monahan noted that the City could distribute information at the time someone came in to
pick up his/her sign as a way to try to reduce the number of repeat offenders. Councilor Patton
suggested providing political candidates with better, clearer information on where signs could be
posted. She supported assessing a fine against those who understood the rules and posted signs
illegally anyway.
Councilor Hunt suggested waiving the fine the first time someone picked up his/her sign and
providing the offender with appropriate information. Councilor Moore suggested sending out a
flyer with the City business licenses explaining the program. Mr. Monahan suggested holding
an open house for political candidates and their supporters six weeks before an election in order
to provide them with information regarding the placement of signs.
8. DISCUSSION: (CARRIED OVER FROM THE 6/8/99 COUNCIL MEETING) WITH
JIM CORLISS CONCERNING TIGARD TRIANGLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Mr. Hendryx presented slides of projects in Tigard with separated sidewalks, with curb-tight
sidewalks, and with meandering sidewalks. He said that there was latitude within the Triangle
standards to allow for some meandering of sidewalks. He listed 10 projects approved in the
Triangle with separated sidewalks. He commented that they were in a transition period between
the old standards and the new ones.
Councilor Hunt stated that in his opinion, one of the most attractive landscapes in the City was
the PacWest project with its meandering sidewalks. He commented that he would not like to see
the City prohibit people from creating an attractive area because of a strict interpretation of the
regulations.
I
I Gus Duenas, City Engineer, mentioned that undergrounding of utilities was another major
concern related to the sidewalk issue. He said that they needed the full 12 feet to accommodate
all the sidewalk utilities and the plantings.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 8
Jim Corliss presented a video of the sidewalks in the area of Dartmouth, SW 680', SW 69°i, and
Franklin. He pointed out the area on his property where he had an issue with regard to the cut.
He reiterated that he would like to see the sidewalk on the streetside. He noted the examples of
parking strips with barkdust and trees that were not well maintained and became eyesores. He
held that most of the separated sidewalks in the Triangle would look unsightly without a City
plan to force the property owners to maintain them.
Mr. Corliss said that, from aesthetics and functional standpoints, he would like to see a curbside
sidewalk. He supported dropping the standard completely from the Triangle guidelines in order
to allow flexibility in the design.
Mayor Nicoli asked for clarification on whether this discussion would focus on the standard
within the context of the entire Triangle or on a request by a single property owner to deal with
the sidewalk in front of his property. Mr. Corliss supported discussing his request tonight and
the whole standard at a later date.
Mr. Monahan pointed out that Mr. Corliss did not have a land use application. If the Council
agreed to vary Mr. Corliss' sidewalk treatment from the standard, it was in effect giving
direction for a possible variance. He suggested discussing the origins and purpose of the
standard with possible direction to staff to initiate a review of the entire standard.
Mayor Nicoli noted that Mr. Corliss' property was involved in an LID (which was not a land use
action). He said that the Council had the authority to direct staff to move the sidewalk or to not
put the sidewalk in at this time (requiring Mr. Corliss to bond for its installation). Mr. Monahan
stated that staff was obligated to follow the standard adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mayor Nicoli stated that if a block was already three-quarters built out with curb-tight
sidewalks, then he supported completing the block with curb-tight sidewalks in order to
maintain consistency within the block. He indicated that the blocks could differ from one
another. He spoke to giving design professionals and property owners the flexibility needed to
do creative and attractive sidewalk designs instead of imposing a tight standard.
Councilor Scheckla spoke to having flexibility while maintaining the goal of attractive
development in the Triangle. He asked if the Council could deal with this project while looking.
to the future to alleviate potential problems.
Mr. Duenas stated that, although he did not care whether or not the sidewalks were curb-tight,
he was concerned at starting out a contract with a change order. He stated that doing so could
leave the City open to additional costs.
Mr. Hendryx stated that staff could discuss greater flexibility in the standards at a later date but
he would want a very clear idea from the Council on what that flexibility was. He commented
that the standards allowed for common sense flexibility.
Councilor Patton noted that she did not participate in the Tigard Triangle standards. She said
that from what she has heard at the past Council meetings, she could see that perhaps the
standards were too restrictive, given the potential development in the Triangle. She supported
revisiting the standard to create more flexibility and to give designers more ability to find
creative ways to do things.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 9
Councilor Patton said, with regard to Mr. Corliss' request, she supported a single look for each
block for reasons of consistency. She spoke to moving forward with the LID, dealing with Mr.
Corliss' request now, and discussing modification of the standard at a later date.
Councilor Hunt spoke in support of modifying the standards as long as they were the same for
everyone. He said that he did not support allowing a standard for Mr. Corliss that was different
from everyone else.
Councilor Moore stated that he was still not in favor of parking strips, citing the lack of
maintenance mentioned by Mr. Corliss. He spoke to going back through the process to change
the standards by the book. He remarked that he thought that staff, the consulting engineer, the
contractor, and Mr. Corliss could work out the issues with Mr. Corliss' property under the
current standards. He referenced the existing situation on the block.
Councilor Moore said that he supported revising the Tigard Triangle Plan because there were
situations that did not fit the plan 100%. He spoke to allowing the flexibility to make
adjustments in those situations on a case-by-case basis out in the field (especially for land
already partially developed with pre-existing conditions). He disagreed with using Mr. Corliss'
situation to set a precedent for curb-tight sidewalks simply because another property owner in
the future wanted curb-tight sidewalks. He emphasized that these choices should be made on a
case-by-case basis. He said that otherwise they should follow the Triangle plan.
Councilor Moore stated that he had no problem with asking Mr. Corliss to set aside money to
put in the curbs after the Council went through the process to change the standard. Mayor
Nicoli spoke to eliminating the sidewalk from the LID totally and reducing the bond amount.
Mayor Nicoli summarized the discussion as all Councilors were in favor of revisiting the
standard to create more flexibility in it. He mentioned two options for Mr. Corliss' situation:
ask Mr. DeHaas, the LID engineer, to resolve the problem or remove the sidewalk from the LID
and ask Mr. Corliss to bond the completion of the sidewalk within six months of the change to
the standard.
Councilor Moore mentioned his concern with the placement of the underground utilities without
the sidewalk. Mr. Corliss pointed out that it would cost more to put in the sidewalk later. He
confirmed to Mayor Nicoli that he was only one of the property owners on his side of the street,
and that he was not making this request for any of his neighbors.
Mr. Duenas said that staff had Mr. DeHaas look at this situation. He said that one option was to
avoid the cuts and fills entirely by building a keystone wall at the sections with two feet of cut
or fill. He said that the other option was to get a slope easement, adjust the fences, and do some
relandscaping on the top. He indicated that the slope easement option was cheaper but the
keystone wall option could avoid the problem entirely.
Mr. Corliss stated that the retaining wall cost $10,000. He said that if they moved the sidewalk
streetside, they would like it better and find it less expensive. He said that of the two options,
the option of the keystone wall was best. He stated that he did not want to give a slope
easement. He mentioned another issue of staff asking him for additional land for the
handicapped access at the two corners, land that he did not want to give.
Councilor Moore declared that he talked with Mr. DeHaas on another issue and this situation
came up in the conversation. He mentioned a safety issue of street lighting set behind the
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 10
sidewalk and not reaching the street itself. He reported Mr. DeHaas' concern with regard to the
placement of utility vaults and conduits. He indicated that PGE has put them beneath sidewalks
before in the City of Tigard.
Mr. Duenas mentioned that street trees were a problem area if located near the curb. If they
moved them back, then they might have some flexibility.
Mayor Nicoli asked if staff had sufficient direction to work something out with Mr. DeHaas and
Mr. Corliss. Mr. Duenas mentioned a meeting between staff, Mr. DeHaas, and Mr. Corliss
yesterday to discuss various issues. He said that the wall made sense to him, if Mr. Corliss did
not want the landscaping disturbed on the top. He. indicated that the City would take what land
it needed for the handicapped corners. Mr. Corliss disagreed that the City needed the additional
land if it installed curb-tight sidewalks. Councilor Moore suggested a design to solve the
problem at the corner. Mr. Duenas said that they could implement the Councilor's suggestion.
Mr. Duenas supported installing the keystone wall but leaving the sidewalks where they were at
the back. Mayor Nicoli noted that Mr. Corliss has asked to move the sidewalks forward, thus
eliminating the need for the keystone wall. Councilor Moore reiterated his concerns with
locating the utilities. Councilor Scheckla mentioned his concern that Mr. Corliss be
compensated for any property taken by the City. The Council agreed that Mr. Corliss would be
compensated fairly, in the event that the City needed the sliver of land for the corners.
Mr. Corliss clarified that his proposal would require some keystone work but considerably less
than Mr. Duenas' proposal.
Councilor Hunt asked Mr. Duenas what his objections were to moving the sidewalk forward,
other than the adopted standards. Mr. Duenas said that his main objection was that changing the
design after the bid left the City open to more expensive costs. He said that staff has not
discussed this with the contractor yet. He noted Mr. DeHaas' concern with the utilities also.
Councilor Hunt supported staff contacting the contractor to discuss costs and potential
problems. Mayor Nicoli concurred but supported pulling the sidewalk out of the design entirely.
He said that if Mr. DeHaas reported that unreasonably high costs were needed to make this
work, then the issue was back on the table.
Councilor Hunt asked if they had two to three weeks within the time frame of the LID project.
He acknowledged the desire to get the LID done as soon as possible. Mr. Corliss said that he
had no time constraints; the time constraints were on the Specht project.
Todd Schaeffer, Specht Development, stated that, per the conditions on their development,
they had no guarantee of receiving an occupancy permit until completion of the LID. He said
that their goal was to finish the project by the end of December. Mr. Duenas said that staff
hoped to complete the street portion by mid-September.
Councilor Patton supported staff going back to the contractor, citing the utility concerns.
Councilor Scheckla concurred. He discussed his hope that they could find a way to make this
work for everyone. He reiterated that they needed flexibility, not a stringent uniform standard.
Councilor Hunt pointed out that this resolution might help Mr. Corliss but hurt Mr. Specht. He
spoke to finding a way to accommodate both of them.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 11
Mayor Nicoli summarized the Council discussion as a consensus to facilitate Mr. Corliss'
request. He mentioned bringing in Mr. DeHaas and the contractor to see if there was a way to
do it. He commented that if there were major problems, then the Council would have to deal
with them. He asked staff to return to Council at next week's Council meeting with its report.
He noted that the Council has agreed to review the standard.
Mr. Duenas pointed out that the solution of the retaining walls would not touch Mr. Corliss'
property other than to match the existing slope. He said that he was not certain what the Council
was asking him to do. He said that if the direction was to move the sidewalk to the curb, that
was fine.
Mayor Nicoli reviewed the issue as Mr. Corliss wanting all the sidewalks along his property
moved to the curb (allowing a small keystone wall where necessary) versus staff wanting to pull
the sidewalk to the back and install keystone walls at the property line. He stated that Council
wanted to facilitate Mr. Corliss' request but it also wanted staff to contact Mr. DeHaas and the
general contractor to discuss facilitating the request without creating undue difficulties.
Mr. Duenas asked if the street trees could be moved back. Mayor Nicoli said yes. Mr. Duenas
pointed out that they would be an obstacle.
Mayor Nicoli asked staff to schedule their report for next week's workshop. Mr. Corliss noted
that he would-be out of town but his wife could attend. Mrs. Corliss asked if the other two
property owners on their side of the street could attend next week's meeting. Mayor Nicoli said
yes, and encouraged anyone with concerns to express them both to staff and to the Council
immediately. He mentioned that the City was under a time constraint to get this project done.
Mayor Nicoli assured Mr. Schaeffer that the City would draw a deadline on requests from
property owners who wanted a similar change.
Mr. Hendryx noted that if the City changed the standard unilaterally for the whole street, then
they needed to talk about how to do that. He said that a change to the standard was a variance.
He commented that the standard allowed some flexibility to meander the sidewalk but he
questioned whether staff had the authority to unilaterally change the street. Mr. Duenas said
that he personally would like to see flexibility in the standard.
9. REVIEW PROPOSED RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE METRO GREENSPACES
RESOLUTION - Canceled.
10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS - None.
i
11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS - None.
i
a
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 12
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:12 p.m. under the provisions of ORS
192.660(1) (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt
public records, current & pending litigation issues.
13. ADJOURNMENT: 11 p.m.
Attest: rMWheatley, City Rec rder
Wor, City of Iligard
Date: Of~/ ~r9
1: W D (MCAT H'AC C M\990615. D O C
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JUNE 15, 1999 - PAGE 13
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 9 4 2 6
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
*City of Tigard ® ❑ Tearsheet Notice
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
®Tigard, Oregon 97223 ° ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
*Accounts Payable
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON, )SS.
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss.
1, Kathy Snyder
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of thd'' - roes
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
and 193.020; published at Ti cra rd in the
aforesaid county p v state' that the
City Council Meeting
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for ONF successive and
consecutive in the following issues:
June 10,1999
Subscribed and sworn to fore me thisl 0 t-h d a3t n f June , 19 9 9
OFFICIAL SEAL
ROBIN A. BUROESS
Not ublic for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COfAt AISSION N0. 062071
My Commission Expires: Ipf CO;j,,IjSS10N EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001
AFFIDAVIT -
a _
The following meeting highliYs ark published for your information'. Full
agendas maybe obtained from the City Recorder, 13125 SW Hall
i Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, of by calling 639-4171.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING
► June 15, 1999 - 6:30 P.M.
TIGARD CITY HALL -T,OWN:HALI<;.:.:.
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON
Repolu and updates to Council on the following topics:
Update: Facility Compliance with Americans with Disability Act
* Update: Y2K Readiness
* Review: Tualatin Valley Community Access Funding Resolution
* Update: Temporay Signs Code Provisions/Enforcement
* Discussion: Water Options and the Elections Process
* Executive Session-
M426 M426 -Publish June 10, 1999. 1
► a
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF Co • 15 • G9
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Public Education and Government (PEG) Access Franchise Fee Support
PREPARED BY: Liz Newton y DEPT HEAD OK r CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
The City's Franchise contribution for PEG Access over the next 15 years.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Discuss the attached resolution authorizing an amendment an of Intergovernmental Agreement between MACC
and the member jurisdictions and authorizing a 17% Franchise Fee contribution.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Attached is a memo that explains resolution 99-02 adopted by the MACC Board on May 19, 1999. Resolution
99-02 increases MACC's contribution to the designated PEG Access provider from 10% to 12% effective July
1, 1999 and recommends that member jurisdictions contribute 5%. The jursidictions would retain 58% of
franchise fees, up from the current 57%. All member jurisdictions must adopt the amendment to the MACC
agreement or it will not take effect.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Direct staff to modify the resolution to contribute less that 17% of franchise fees but a minimum of 15%
to PEG Access.
2. Direct staff to prepare a resolution to contribute franchise fees at a level higher than 17% to PEG
Access.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Community Character and Quality of Life Volunteerism Goal #2. "Citizen involvement opportunities will be
maximized by providing educational programs on process, assuring accessibility to information, providing
opportunities for input and establishing and maintaining a program of effective communication."
FISCAL NOTES
Fiscal inpacts on the City depend on the level of franchise fee support provided. It is estimated that Tigard
would pay $46,549.00 at the 17% level retaining $158,815.00 or 58% of the City's share of total franchise fees
collected (see tables attached).
S
1 ,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ' T
FROM: Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager (/1 z-
RE: Public, Education and Government (PEG) Access Contract
DATE: June 7, 1999
Background
At the May 11, 1999 meeting, City Council reviewed the issues related to the renewal of
PEG Access for cable television. After discussion, consensus of the Council was as
follows:
® Support scenario B (revised/as proposed by TVCA).
® Invite other cable access providers (besides TVCA) to submit proposals for service.
TVCA should not assume large portions of the incidental payment and capital grant
dollars to fund their operation.
■ TVCA should reconsider their proposal to purchase a building.
Franchise Fee support of 15-17.5% is acceptable.
A copy of the Council meeting recap that summarizes the Council's discussion is
attached.
MACC Action
At the May 19 MACC Board meeting, MACC member jurisdictions voted to approve
Resolution 99-02 recommending an amendment to the MACC Intergovernmental
Agreement (IGA) to continue the contribution of additional franchise fee revenue to
MACC's PEG Access providers (currently TVCA).
{ In the resolution (copy attached), the Board agrees to increase MACC's contribution to
the designated access provider from 10% to 12% effective July 1, 1999. In addition, the
Board recommends that the member jurisdictions contribute an additional 5% for a total
of 17%. The resolution further encourages jurisdictions to contribute more than 17%.
It is important to note that the percentage of franchise fees retained by each jurisdiction
would actually increase from 57% to 58% under this scenario. This is because the
MACC Budget Committee and staff recommend a reduction for MACC operations from
28% to 25% of franchise fees.
The other MACC jurisdictions did not support Tigard's suggestion that other cable
access providers be invited to submit proposals for service. However, resolution 99-02
approved by the MACC Board is not a contract with TVCA. Contract negotiations will
begin later in June.
The funding assumptions made by TVCA regarding the incidental payments and capital
grant dollars will be addressed by the MACC Board under separate actions. TVCA is
also exploring other options regarding purchasing a building that will be reviewed by the
MACC board this summer.
Resolution 99-02 passed by majority vote. Lake Oswego, North Plains and Councilor
Scheckla representing Tigard, voted no. The no votes were in response to discussion
that jurisdictions should have the option of lower funding levels. Lake Oswego, for
example, suggested a 12% option. This would allow jurisdictions to choose from a
range of franchise contribution levels to accommodate various financial situations. A
majority of the Board did not support a franchise fee contribution of less than 15%.
Wilsonville
Since the May 19, 1999 MACC meeting, MACC staff has informed us that Wilsonville
intends to withdraw from MACC. Apparently, Wilsonville will administer its own cable
television contract and will continue to receive PEG Access Services under a separate
agreement. Wilsonville will make a formal request at the MACC Board meeting on June
9, 1999. Any new information will be presented to Council on June 15.
Council Action
Attached is a resolution for Council consideration at the June 22 meeting. The
resolution, if approved does two things. First, it amends the MACC Intergovernmental
Agreement to reflect the distribution of franchise fee revenues and outlines a process
for continued contributions through 2014. Second, it sets the City of Tigard franchise
fee contribution at 17%. The franchise fee contribution can be changed to a minimum
of 15% or as high as Council chooses.
All of the MACC member jurisdictions must approve the amendment to the
Intergovernmental Agreement or it does not take effect.
i
7
Jim Coleman of the City Attorney's office has reviewed MACC Resolution 99-02 and the
draft resolution for Tigard. A memo with his comments is attached.
i:tadmuizVnatanemo000789,doc
3
a
a
-LimultDI-LA1' Y b'1'1t11j
tuts ouppart 059m o1 pap'! ShOtf
Potential Support Levels for TVCA from MACC Jurisdictions
For the MACC and Washington County Franchises Combined for FYOO Only
5.096
Franchise Revenue Revenue 5% Franchise Fee ElaM1nated; Proposed Jurisdiction Shares
Fyoo
increase from 57%
MACC Estimate for FYOO Only $41,076,369 $2,053,818 Sherwood for
WACO Estimate for FYOO Only $8,495,413 $424,771 t0 58°~% with Access level at 17%
Total for FYOO Only ,
FYOD Aim
SJ18J9910 35 AM ortts at t9~L
Formerly thru Orig Jisbdk3ion Total JsafsdicJiorl Cost of Total Jurisdiction
Franchise Fees MACC Support Level Access Support at additional Access Support at
00096 17.00095 2.0009(, 19.00096
100.000% 12.00096 5.
Fa7
JURISDICTION 13ANKS 0.2% $ 4,094 $ 491 $ 205 $ 696 $ 82 $ 778
BEAVERTON 16.4% $ 337,311 $ 40,477 $ 16,866 $ 57,343 $ 6,746 $ 64,089
CORNELIUS 2.1% $ 42,619 $ 5,114 $ 2,131 $ 7,245 $ 852. $ 81098
DURHAM 0.3% $ 6,110 $ 733 $ 306 $ 11039 $ 122 $ 1,161
FOREST GROVE 4.2% $ 87,267 $ 10,472 $ 4,363 $ 14,835 $ 1,745 $ 16,581
GASTON 0.5% $ 10,968 $ 1,316 $ 548 $ 1,865 $ 219 $ 2,084
HILLSBORO 15.5% $ 317,752 $ 38,130 $ 15,888 $ 54,018 $ 6,355 $ 60,373
KING CITY 1.2% $ 24,975 $ 2,997 $ 1,249 $ 4,246 $ 500 $ 4,745
LAKE OSWEGO 13.6% $ 279,317 $ 33,518 $ 13,966 $ 47A.84 $ 5,586 $ 53,070
NORTH PLAINS 0.3% $ 6,868 $ 824 $ 343 $ 1,168 $ 137 $ 1,305
RIVERGROVE 0.1% $ 2,008 $ 241 $ 100 $ 341 $ 40 $ 382
TIGARD 13.3% $ 273,819 $ 32,858 $ 13,691 $ 46,549 $ 5,4776 $ 52,026
TUALATIN 6.6% $ 135,996 $ 16,319 $ 6,800 $ 23,119 $ 2,720 $ 25,839
WASH CO (note 1) 25.5% $ 949,485 $ 113,938 $ 47,474 $ 161,412 $ 18,990 $ 180,402
TOTALS 100.000096 $ 2,478,589 $ 297,431 $ 123,929 $ 421,360 $ 49,572 $ 470,932
Note 1: Wash County share of MACC revenue is 25.5%. Wash County share of WACO revenue is 1009& This chart assumes
that the County will support TVCA at a single level, equal for both franchises.
Explanation: Estimated franchise fee amounts for FYOO far both franchises combined (MACC and Washington County alts "WA001
TVCA support from MACC, currently at 15%, is composed of two elements:
1- 90% of the MACC share of franchise fees, which is per the MACUNCA Contract which expires 06130198.
2- 5% Which comes from each judsdictioWs share per MACC Resolution 9", which also expires 05130198.
MAWS franchise fee allocation is currently 28%. MACC is able to reduce Ws share to 25% for FY00.
tvca swpW 05199.9 01 ShwI2 Paps 1
Potential Franchise Fee Allocations for MACC Jurisdictions
For the MACC and Washington County Franchises Combined for FYOO Only
5.0%
Franchise Revenue Revenue 50A Franchise Fee Eliminated: Proposed Jurisdiction Shares
MACC Estimate for FY00 Only $41,076,369 $2,053,818 Sherwood for FY00 increase from 570A
WACO Estimate for FY00 Only $8,495,413 $424,771 Ito 58°:o With Access level at 170/.
Total for FY00 Only ,
W09 10-51 AM Cunwd fFYN1 A %
FYOO If PEG Support Is If PEG Support is if PEG Support Is FY99 PEG Support is (WACO Support Is)
Franchise Fees 12.000% 17.000% 19,000% 15.000% 17.500%
100.000% Jurisdiction Share is Jurisdiction Share is Jurisdiction Share is Jurisdiction Share is (WACO Share is)
JURISDICTION 0A of Total 63. 58 56. 57. 54,
BANKS 0.2% $ 4,094 $ 2,579 $ 2,375 $ 2,293 $ 2,334"
BEAVERTON 16.4% $ 337,311 $ 212,506 $ 195,641 $ 188,894 $ 192,268
CORNELIUS 2.1% $ 42,619 $ 26,850 $ 24,719 $ 23,866 $ 24,293
DURHAM 0.3% $ 6,110 $ 3,850 $ 3,544 $ 3,422 $ 3,483
FOREST GROVE 4.2% $ 87,267 $ 54,978 $ 50,615 $ 48,869 $ 49,742
GASTON 0.5% $ 10,968 $ 6,910 $ 6,362 $ 6,142 $ 6,252
HILLSBORO 15.5% $ 317,752 $ 200,183 $ 184,296 $ 177,941 $ 181,118
KING CITY 1.2% $ 24,975 $ 15,734 $ 14,486 $ 13,986 $ 14,236
LAKE OSWEGO 13.6% $ 279,317 $ 175,970 $ 162,004 $ 156,417 $ 159,211
NORTH PLAINS 0.3% $ 6,868 $ 4,327 $ 3,983 $ 3,846 $ 3,915
RIVERGROVE 0.1% $ 2,008 $ 1,265 $ 1,165 $ 1,125 $ 1,145
TIGARD 13.3% $ 273,819 $ 172,506 $ 158,815 $ 153,338 $ 156,077
TUALATIN 6.6% $ 135,996 $ 85,677 $ 78,877 $ 76,158 $ 77,518
WASH CO (note 1) 25.5% $ 949,485 $ 598,176 $ 550,701 $ 531,712 $ 530,587
TOTALS 100.0000% $ 2,478,589 $ 1,561,512 $ 1,437,582 $ 1,388,010 $ 1,402,177
Note 1: Wash County share of MACC revenue is 25.5%. Wash County share of WACO revenue is 1009& This chart assumes
that the County will support TVCA at a single level, equal for both franchises.
Explanation: Estimated franchise fee amounts for FY00 for both franchises combined (MACC and Washington County aka "WACa)
TVCA support from MACC, currently at 15%. Is composed of two elements:
f 1-10% of the MACC share of franchise fees, which is per the MACCrTVCA Contract which expires 000i139.
` 2- 5% which comes from each jurisdiction's share per MACC Resolution 94-8, which also expires 08130/99.
MACC's franchise fee allocation is currently 28%. MACC is able to reduce it's share to 25% for FY00.
i
i
i
AP
C'®~/~lc%lge~'flie Meeting Of 51-11199
pi5CUS5ion Points memo
t e sta
cit Manager Newton rev 'ewe the TVCA Prepo
Acti on Ta en to t e The Council discussed
Assistant city council. concerns
T° iC Discussion an with the with
frol m the for PEG access. l outlineb~ ,ding purchase.
Stu y session; direction noted ,check a and a
ty Counci as discussion, Councilor capital funds for a
osed Public ci dvised he
Prop Col umn purri ng ng proposal to use concerning Nom'
E t to N~
in ous issues commitmen
ducation and EG) is neXt cussion points). the TVCA revishorter-term
Government C He referred too see a of Councilor
Tualatin would prefer validity
S he checks and balance
ervices Gable ed the t
valley ACCe55 Patton ac. hoWeder, she noted including
councilor limitations olitan
n/Cp 5checkla s concerns;
available through the COnunder the GOngoard f the Metr
port review) M -CC) noting
financial rerevised),
Area communication s c°mmiss,on opted scenarifuall time monitions.
Patton said she sump additional roviders to
Councilor P- tant about creating other cable access p
she advised she did
was In addition, she
robleforiservice- ing that include
large TVCA she saw noo powls rant s do laprrssa °
submit p he assumptions made and capital 9
not like of the incidental payment
She noted concerns about TVCA
portions. on,
fund their eaerati buildi onng noting
to purchase ort for this scenara punts (share of
council id not suPP funding am also did not
or 5checkla TVCA
TVCA s assume from MACC). Tie
the purchase of a
concerns about fees passed on to
. grant amount for
franchise cap
support the large 'n statement of
building. 17.5%
concurred with coun~~e°share
support tt° T`1cA of 15-
added that a franchise
o and Moore
the issue at this
or Hunt advised he would not comment on
Councilor acceptable.
time. agreed with councilor Patton.
Mayor Nicoll advised that he
r
Council eedag Recap
Meeting Of 51.1-11-0
pa e l
Te is Action Taken Discussion Points
Study Session: Discussion an Assistant to the city Manager Newton reviewe t e sta memo
Proposed Public direction from the with the city council. The council discussed the TvcA proposals
Education and city council as noted for PEG access.
Government (PEG) in next column During discussion, councilor scheckla outlined his concerns with
services - Tualatin (discussion points). the TvcA proposal to use capital funds for a building purchase.
valley Access cable He referred to previous issues concerning TvcA and advised he
(lVCA) would prefer to see a shorter-term commitment to TvCA.
councilor Patton acknowledged the validity of councilor
scheckla's concerns; however, she noted the checks and balances
available through the contractual limitations (including
financial report review) under the control of the metropolitan
Area communications commission (MACC) Board.
Councilor Patton said she supported Scenario B (revised) noting
she was hesitant about creating additional full-time positions. ?
she saw no problem with inviting other cable access providers to
j submit proposals for service. In addition, she advised she did_
not like the assumptions made by TvcA that include large
portions of the incidental payment and capital grant dollars to
fund their operation. she noted concerns about TvCA's proposal F s
to purchase a building.
councilor scheckla did not support this scenario, noting?
concerns about TVCA's assumptions for funding amounts (share of
s franchise fees passed on to TVCA from MACC). He also did not '
,j suppport the large capital grant amount for the purchase of a
building.;
councilor Moore concurred with councilor Patton's statement of
j support and added that a franchise fee share to TvcA of 15-17.5%
- was acceptable.
councilor Hunt advised he would not comment on the issue at this
r
time.
d Mayor Nicoli advised that he agreed with councilor Patton.'
~ti.
Resolution 99-02, p. 2
WHEREAS, the support level chosen by each member jurisdiction would become effective
beginning July 1, 1999, and automatically renew for periods of three years unless an individual
jurisdiction decided to invoke the option available under §6.E (3) of the MACC IGA to give
prior notice to reduce or increase its contributions in any fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, a redistribution of the member jurisdictions' franchise fee revenues requires the
amendment of the MACC IGA, as it is currently written;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF
THE METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION that it recommends
to its member jurisdictions:
To consent to and authorize amendment of the MACC Intergovernmental Cooperation
Agreement to distribute a portion of the franchise fees revenues of each member jurisdiction to
MACC's PEG Access Provider by replacing Subsection 6.E. of the current IGA with the
following:
Section 6. E. (1) MACC recommends a jurisdictional PEG contribution of 17% of the
franchise fee revenues. Jurisdictions may individually choose to provide a
higher level of support in any amount. They may also choose to provide a
minimum of 15%.
(2) Franchise fee contributions to the Access Provider from all jurisdictions
shall automatically renew for three-year periods on July 1, 2002, 2005,
2008, and 2011, unless, prior to the immediately preceding January 1, a
jurisdiction gives written notice to MACC of its intention to reconsider the
renewal. In such case, renewal shall be suspended until such time as the
governing bodies of all member jurisdictions resolve the issue.
(3) By giving written notice to MACC prior to the immediately preceding
January 1, a jurisdiction providing franchise fee support may reduce, to
not less than 15%, or increase its support for the Access Provider for any
fiscal year beginning after July 1, 2000, by a decision of its governing
body for each fiscal year it chooses to reduce or increase its contributions.
ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE METROPOLITAN
AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION this 19th day of May, 1999.
Evelyn Brzezinski, Acting-Chair
law
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT OF THE
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN AREA
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND ITS MEMBER JURISDICTIONS REGARDING DISTRIBUTION
OF FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES TO MACC's DESIGNATED PUBLIC, EDUCATION, AND
GOVERNMENT ACCESS TELEVISION PROVIDER AND ESTABLISH A FRANCHISE FEE
CONTRIBUTION
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is a member of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (hereinafter
MACC); and
WHEREAS, the member jurisdictions of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (hereinafter
jurisdictions) have entered into an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement (hereinafter MACC IGA), and
Section 9.E. of that agreement requires that the terms shall not be amended without written authorization of the
governing bodies of all of the member jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the jurisdictions amended the MACC IGA in 1989 to authorize an initial four-year contribution of
additional franchise fee revenue to support MACC's Designated Public, Education, and Government Access
Provider (hereinafter PEG Access Provider), which is currently Tualatin Valley Community Access; and
WHEREAS, in 1994, the jurisdictions again amended the MACC IGA by re-authorizing the additional contribution
to support the PEG Access Provider to continue until June 30, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the current jurisdictional support level for the PEG Access Provider, expiring on June 30, 1999, is 5%
of the jurisdiction's share of franchise fee revenues as a direct contribution combined with MACC's contribution of
10%, which now totals 15% of the total franchise fee revenues received from the cable operator; and
WHEREAS, the MACC Board of Commissioners, on behalf of the jurisdictions, have reviewed the future funding
needs of the PEG Access Provider under the renewed TCI Franchise Agreement, and recommends that member
jurisdictions continue to make a contribution of their franchise fee revenues to the PEG Access Provider; and
WHEREAS, the MACC Board of Commissioners agrees to increase MACC's contribution to the designated
Access Provider, effective July 1, 1999, from 10% to 12% of the MACC share of the franchise fee revenues; and
WHEREAS, the MACC Board of Commissioners recommends that the member jurisdictions each continue to
contribute 5% of franchise fee revenues, combined with 12% from MACC's share, for a total jurisdictional support
level to the Access Provider of 17% of franchise fees revenues; and
WHEREAS, the MACC Board of Commissioners also encourages individual jurisdictions to elect to contribute
more than the recommended 17% level to the PEG Access Provider; and
WHEREAS, the MACC Board of Commissioners recognizes that some jurisdictions may not be able, at this time,
to contribute the recommended amount, and therefore can choose to provide only a 15% PEG contribution; and
RESOLUTION NO. 99-_
Page 1
h
WHEREAS, the support level chosen by each jurisdiction would become effective beginning July 1, 1999, and
automatically renew for periods of three years unless an individual jurisdiction decided to invoke the option
available under §6.E (3) of the MACC IGA to give prior notice to reduce or increase its contributions in any fiscal
year; and
WHEREAS, distribution of the jurisdictions' franchise fee revenues requires the amendment of the MACC IGA, as
it is currently written;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Tigard hereby consents to and authorizes amendment
of the MACC IGA as follows:
1. To replace Section 6.E with the following:
E. (1) MACC recommends a jurisdictional PGE contribution of 17% of the franchise fee revenues.
Jurisdictions may individually choose to provide a higher level of support in any amount. They
may also choose to provide only a 15% jurisdictional PEG contribution.
(2) Franchise fee contributions to the Access Provider from the jurisdictions shall automatically renew
for three year periods on July 1, 2002, 2005, 2008, and 2011, unless a jurisdiction gives written
notice to the Commission prior to the immediately preceding January 1, of action taken by the
governing body of that jurisdiction to suspend that renewal. In such case, renewal shall be
suspended until such time as the governing bodies of all member jurisdictions take action to make a
PEG contribution.
(3) A jurisdiction providing franchise fee support may reduce to not less than 15%, or increase its
contributions to support the Access Provider for any fiscal year beginning after July 1, 2000, if it
gives written notice to the Commission prior to the immediately preceding January 1, of such
decision by its governing body for each fiscal year it chooses to reduce or increase its contributions.
2. A contribution of 15 percent of franchise fee revenues to the Access Provider effective July 1, 19999, in
accordance with the amendment to the MACC IGA, Section 6.E.
3. The City Recorder is authorized to file an executed true and correct copy of this Resolution with MACC.
PASSED: This day of 1999.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
I:%c1tyMdeVe5Vnacc3.d0c
RESOLUTION NO.99-_
Page 2
4
ININ Ell NMI
RAIViIS
CREW RECEIVED C.O.T.
CORRIGAN & JUN 81999
BACHRACH, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1727 N.W. Hoyt Street MEMORANDUM
Portland, Oregon 97209
(503) 222-4402
Fax: (503) 243-2944
TO: Liz Newton, City of Tigard
FROM: James M. Coleman, City Attorney's Office
DATE: June 7, 1999
RE: MACC Resolution 99-02
You have asked me to review MACC Resolution 99-02 and the recommended draft jurisdictional
resolution which gives consent to the MACC agreement amendment proposed by 99-02. You asked me
to see if the MACC action carries out the direction given by a majority of the Council at its May 11, 1999
meeting. At that meeting the Council reviewed your May 4, 1999 memo which identified the issues
surrounding TVCA and MACC, support for the PEG access program. My understanding of the Council's
concerns that night is that there were two major areas of focus: funding level for access, and
accountability of TVCA. The consensus of a majority of the Council was to support Scenario B
(revised), as outlined in your memo, and support funding in the 15-17.5% range.
Your May 4, 1999 memo identifies four decisions facing MACC at its May 19, 1999 meeting. Resolution
99-02 addresses only item 2, franchise fee share funding from the jurisdictions. The Resolution
i recommends amendments to the MACC agreement that will recommend jurisdictional support at 17%
of franchise fee revenue, allowing jurisdictions to choose to provide only 15%. The amendments will
allow an opt out upon prior notice, and allows reduction of support to not less than 15% upon prior
3 notice. The "whereas" clauses make clear that the support is 12% of total franchise fees from MACC
and 5-7% from the jurisdictions. The body of the actual language speaks in terms of the entire 15-17%
being "jurisdictional support". I find that phrasing confusing, but the intent is clear from the Resolution
when read as a whole. The draft resolution as proposed by the MACC staff will adopt the
recommendation of the MACC Board and is consistent with the position taken by a majority of the
Council on May 11, 1999 on the funding issue.
Memorandum re: MACC Resolution 99-02
June 7, 1999
Page 2
The Resolution does not attempt to address the other three decision points facing the MACC Board as
described on page 7 of your May 4, 1999 memo. One of Councilor Scheckla's major concerns was the
accountability of future of access providers, TVCA in particular if it is MACC's choice. You correctly
told the Council that the issue of access provider choice, and the terms of that relationship were for future
MACC decision making. The consensus of the Council to support Scenario B (revised) included
Councilor Patton's support for inviting other access providers to submit proposals. MACC's
consideration and decision making on its access program will be implemented by those future actions and
are not addressed by this Resolution. Councilor Scheckla's concerns about accountability should also by
addressed in the context of that future decision making. From the information you provided I can not
tell if that decision making process is underway at this time.
If you have any questions concerning my comments please give me a call. I will be on vacation until June
21, but will be checking my voice mail and will respond to any questions you have.
jm6acm\90024Mewtonmacc.me 1
i
1
i
f
SOME;
No. JEL.
For Council ewsletter dal o
LI
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
® FROM: Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager
DATE: June 11, 1999
SUBJECT: PEG Access Franchise Fee Support
Your City Council packet for the June 15 Workshop meeting includes
information for a discussion on PEG Access Franchise Fee Support.
At Councilor Scheckla's request, the draft City of Tigard resolution in the
packet materials authorizes a 15% franchise fee support level for PEG.
Consensus of Council at the May 11 meeting was that Franchise Fee Support
of 15-17.5% is acceptable. As explained in your packet materials, the MACC
Board recommends a minimum 15% contribution. Washington County
I Commissioners approved a 17% contribution on June 8. The City of Lake
Oswego intends to authorize a 15% contribution at their meeting on July 20.
Other jurisdictions will be taking action over the next four weeks.
Councilor Scheckla and I attended the June 9, 1999 MACC Board meeting.
A supplemental FY 1999 budget and the FY 2000 Budget were approved,
containing a total of $300,000 in incidental fee payments to TVCA (MACCs
PEG provider). In addition, the MACC Board voted to extend TVCA's
contract for PEG Access services for three months with minor revisions to
the performance standards. A new contract for PEG Access Services with
Memo to Council - PEG Access Franchise Fee Support
Page 1 - 6/11/99
performance standards that reflect Scenario B proposed by TVCA will not
be in place before MACC jurisdictions take action on Franchise Fee
contributions.
At the May 11 Council meeting, consensus was to support Scenario B for PEG
Access, that TVCA should not assume large portions of the incidental
payment to fund their operation, and that Franchise Fee support of 15-
17.5% is acceptable.
At the June 9, 1999 MACC Board meeting, Councilor Scheckla and
expressed concerns of Council regarding the use of a large portion of the
incidental payment to fund TVCA's operations. We suggested that since the.
incidental fund dollars are discretionary, it would be appropriate to *at least
review other needs before making a decision. The MACC Board authorized
payment of $300,000 in total to TVCA in four installments of $75,000.
Franchise Fee support at 15% would maintain the City's current contribution
to PEG Access funding. A new PEG Access provider contract should include
performance standards that reflect Scenario B supported by the City.
After the first year, PEG Access provider performance could be evaluated
against the contract standards and the City could decide to increase
Franchise Fee support or maintain the current 15% contribution. The City
may adjust its Franchise Fee contribution every year as long as a minimum
15% is contributed and MACC is provided adequate notice of any change.
If the City contributes 15% to TVCA or $41,072.85, 60% or $164,291.40
would be retained by the City. For a 17% contribution or $46,549.23, the
City would retain 58% or $158,815.02.
EAN1jh
n
N
5
\\TfG 333\USRIDEPTSIADM+LIZ061099-1. DOC
Memo to Council - PEG Access Franchise Fee Support
Page 2 - 6/11/99
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF 6/15/99
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Y2K Ubdate
PREPARED BY: Loreen Mills DEPT HEAD OK MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Receive update on City's Y2K efforts.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff would appreciate any observations or suggestions Council may have about the Y2K effort to date.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The City has been actively addressing the potential of Y2K issues for a number of months. The City's mission
is "to assure that the millennium change will have minimal impact on the critical business operations of the City
of Tigard."
The City's Y2K Task Force is comprised of staff from each department. Critical City programs relying on
technology have been identified and prioritized. Each department is developing a "Business Continuation Plan"
which identifies how the department will continue to provide services if:
Systems will not be Y2K ready by 10/99;
➢ We doubt the validity of a projected completion date or we are not able to "test" a system we depend on;
➢ There is failure of a system reported to be Y2K ready;
➢ We believe any City vendor may cause disruptions in their service to us 1/2000 and beyond.
Essential City systems and services will be prepared for January 1, 2000. The City's web site is periodically
updated with new information about the City's readiness efforts.
Staff will share updated information at the Council meeting about specific systems and their readiness status.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Take no action - wait and see if there are problems
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Y2K is not addressed specifically within the City's Vision, however, the efforts towards our vision will not
continue if the City is not prepared for Y2K challenges.
FISCAL NOTES
The 99-00 budget contains $116,795 in expenditures, which are identified to meet Y2K readiness needs.
Lm/hJdocs/y2k/CC 6-15 sum.doc
(oA 1419 12)r G rYI toN
ConnoddWed
Y2K 3ey
i
Considerable information is available regarding the Y2K problem
and its potential impacts. The problem is real, and if unaddressed,
Taking it one step can lead to disruption of many services and systems we depend ?
Y2K on every day. Government and business are well aware of the '
problem and have been working for years to identify and correct
all systems susceptible to disruption. Those efforts have resulted
in very positive improvements in Y2K readiness. Despite those
efforts, however, the potential for limited disruptions remains and
prudent preparedness actions should be considered. The extent of
those preparedness activities should be decided individually
VIM based on information provided by business and government and
on individual assessments of Y2K impacts.
The purpose of this flyer is to provide information that will assist in
the assessment of individual Y2K impacts and to suggest activities
that will enhance INDIVIDUAL PREPAREDNESS for Y2K disruptions.
Many of these activities are similar to those recommended when
preparing for a severe winter storm or other emergency event.
The Problem:
The Year 2000 technology problem, or "bug" as it is sometimes called, stems from actions
taken by computer programmers in the early days of computer development. To save
limited memory space in computer programs, two-digit codes were used for year dates
(e.g., 87) rather than normal, four-digit year dates (e.g., 1987). The two-digit codes were
also used in computer chips that were "embedded" in equipment such as elevators, ATMs,
and VCRs to control system operations or manage system processes.
Computer programs and embedded chips with two-digit year codes will not be able to
distinguish between the years 1900 and 2000 when they process time-sensitive
calculations or comparisons. This flaw may or may not cause disruptions in the computers
or equipment housing the programs or chips. The nature and extent of any disruption that
does occur will depend primarily on the function of the year code in the system.
The Potential Impact:
The computer systems, equipment, and devices that are
considered most at risk to disruption are listed in the next
section on individual Y2K assessments. The impact of failure or
disruption of these systems or devices can range from merely
annoying to very threatening depending on the situation.
Completing the individual assessment should help identify the 1AAMI
scope and potential impact of any disruptions for most
individuals.
Individual Assessment Preparedness Checklist
Think through daily routines (weekday and Develop and implement a preparedness plan to
weekend) and identify systems and services address any problems identified in the individual
that may be impacted by the Y2K problem: assessment.
❑ Utilities: gas, electric, water, sewer, cable, Pay attention to Y2K information being
telephone distributed by uitilky providers.
❑ Furnace (Is there heat without power?) Check the Y2K readiness of equipment
❑ Special health care equipment used at howl with the equipment
❑ Alarm clocks manufacturers.
❑ Cellular phones Identify manual back-ups or workarounds
❑ Pagers for systems that may be disrupted.
❑ Elevators Stock disaster supplies (including food and
❑ Traffic and rail crossing signals/devices water) to last a week for every household
❑ Electronic locks member.
❑ Garage door openers Keep fuel tanks near full.
❑ Fire and security alarm systems Have extra cash on hand.
❑ Programmable thermostats Refill prescriptions.
❑ Kitchen appliances Maintain a supply of light sticks or
❑ ATMs, banks, and credit card transaction flashlights and batteries.
services Have extra blankets and winter clothes for
❑ Pharmacy services warmth.
❑ Gas stations Evaluate the need for alternate means of
❑ Consumer electronics (computers, TVs, power, cooking, and heating.
camcorders, faxes, VCRs, DVD players) Back-up important computer files.
Obtain a current credit report.
Keep copies of important legal, financial,
and medical records including pay stubs
and credit card statements.
Ensure smoke detectors have fresh
batteries for primary or backup power.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Call 9-1-1 only to report life-threatening emergencies.
- Resist the temptation to check all phone, cell phone, fax, and Internet services immediately at
the start of the new year.
• Do not store fuel in unapproved containers or in dangerous locations.
For family members that are away from home, establish a specific time and/or place to check-
in to ensure that all is well.
- Should utilities fail, take care of individual and family needs first, then check on neighbors.
- If traffic signals fail, remember to treat the affected intersections as four-way stops.
• Plan family activities for children who may be without television, video games, or computers.
• Make friends with an amateur radio operator or get licensed to become one!
Make sure you have a battery-operated radio with fresh batteries. In the event of a power outage or other
system disruption, listen to your radio for additional information and instructions.
For further Information, contact the Office of Consolidated Emergency Management for Washington County at (603) 648-8577
or visit the Washington County Website at http:itwww.co.washington.or.untocemlemg_prep.htm
AGENDA ITEM # `
FOR AGENDA OF 6/15/99
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE AD acili Compliance Update
PREPARED BY: Loreen Mill y DEPT HEAD OK WM d&YMGROK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Receive update on City's ADA Compliance for City buildings.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Be prepared at the 6/22 Council meeting to "Receive & File" report.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Americans with Disabilities Act became effective 1/26/92 and extends federal civil rights protection in
several areas to people who are considered "disabled". The act states its purpose as providing "a clear and
comprehensive national mandate for elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities." The
ADA prohibits the City from excluding people from jobs, services, activities or benefits based on disability.
The ADA requirements were divided into five titles. This report Council addresses requirements in Title II -
Public Services & Transportation. This title prohibits state and local governments from discriminating against
disabled people in their programs and activities. This title also requires cities to conduct self evaluations, name
an ADA coordinator, adopt a grievance procedure, develop transition plans for structural changes, provide
program accessibility with non-structural changes, and take affirmative steps to ensure accessible
communications.
On January 26, 1993, the City published its first ADA self evaluation and transition plan. The City has been
implementing this plan since that date. In 1998 & early 1999, the City conducted a second self evaluation to
make sure that Tigard's existing facilities and buildings achieve the ADA's purpose.
Attached is a copy of the report highlights including: grievance procedures and the transition plans for each
facility for structural and non-structural modifications.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Take no action to comply with ADA regulations.
Respond only on a complaint basis. _
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
While ADA compliance is not addressed specifically within the City's Vision, the ability to provide access to
services and information for citizens with disabilities who wish to participate in vision tasks is important.
FISCAL NOTES
Dollar amounts are not known at this time except for the expenditure budgeted for 1999-2000 fiscal year which
amount to approximately $103,725.
~=Mmj
A DA SELF-EVALUATION TRANSITION PLAN
Alff
Mff
p dqmww a te"...
City of Tigard, Oregon
June 22, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Numbers
Introduction
What is the ADA and why is an update to the City's Plan needed? I
➢ City's Statement of Compliance i
Updated grievance procedure ii
Compliance Reviews for Buildings
➢ City Hall/Po/ice Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd. CHP 1-36
City Hall Modular Units 13125 SW Hall Blvd. CHM 1-20
➢ Library 13125 SWHaII Blvd. L 1-18
➢ Niche Offices 8720 SW Bumham Street N 1-12
➢ Water Building 8777 SW Bumham Street W 1-35
➢ Leased House 9020 SW Bumham Street Bur 1-16
➢ Public Works Offices & Shops 12800 SWAsh Avenue Ash 1-25
A Senior Center 8815 SW O'Mara Street SC 1-29
Water Offices/Shop 10490 SW Canterbury Street Can 1-26
Compliance Reviews for Signage
➢ Building signage Sign 1-7
➢ City HalUPolice Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
➢ City Hall Modular Units 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Library 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
➢ Niche Offices 8720 SW Bumham Street
Water Building 8777 SW Bumham Street
Public Works Offices & Shops 12800 SW Ash Avenue
➢ Senior Center 8815 SW O'Mara Street
Compliance Reviews for Parks
➢ Park Philosophy & Priorities All parks Pk 1
➢ Park Facility Evaluation Summary All parks Pk 2-12
Transition Plan TP 1-12
(Listed by facility as noted under Compliance Review area)
Appendix
➢ Architectural & Transportation Barriers Compliance Board ADAAG updated 1113138
Buildings & Facilities; State and Local Govemment - 36 CFR Part 1191
➢ Architectural & Transportation Barriers Compliance Board ADAAG updated 1/13/98
Building Element Design for Children's Use - 36 CFR Part 1191
INTRODUCTION
WHAT Is THE ADA? The American's with Disabilities Act of 9990, the ADA, was enacted on
712619990. The ADA extends to people with disabilities similar civil rights protections
available on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex and religion through the Civil Rights
Act of 9964. A person with a disability is an individual that has a physical or mental
impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, has a record of such a disability or is
regarded as having a disability.
WHY IS AN uPDATE WEEDED? All local governments must ensure that access to their programs,
services and activities are conducted in such a way as to not discriminate against a person
with a disability, as defined in the ADA.
Title N of the ADA requires local and state governments to: conduct self-evaluations; name an
ADA coordinator, adopt a grievance procedure; develop transition plans for structural
changes; provide program accessibility with non-structural changes; take at6rmative steps to
ensure accessible communication; and maintain and retain riles about the ADA compliance
efforts.
The City of Tigard published its first self-evaluation & transition plan report on January 26,
1993. Since that time, the City has been committed to ensuring those programs, services
and activities are provided in the most accessible way possible.
The City desire to make sure structural changes in the properties are identified and
completed has resulted in another self-evaluation for City buildings. The transition plan has
been updated to identify the steps necessary to complete the modifications to buildings and a
time frame for the needed modifications.
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE FOR CITY OF TIGARD The City of Tigard is committed to the full and
complete implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 9990. The City believes in
the intent of the ADA, which is to remove the architectural, and attitudinal barriers that
prevent equal access to programs, services and activities to people with disabilities. For this
reason, the City has undertaken an update to its 1026193 ADA Self-Evaluation & Transition
Plan to continue its efforts to remove barriers that prevent access.
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE The City of Tigard has an ADA Coordinator and a grievance
i procedure in place. This is to ensure that complaints are handled promptly. Equitable
resolution is strived for through the review process. Please contact the ADA Coordinator with
i questions or complaints about the ADA compliance efforts. The City's Grievance Procedure
is on the following page.
7 LOREEN MILLs, ADA COORDINATOR
93925 SW HALL BLvD., TIGARD, OR 97223
(503) 639-4171 VOICE OR - (503) 684-2772 TDD
EMAIL- loreenO .tigard.or.us
i
AnA GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
The City of Tigard has adopted a grievance procedure providing for prompt and equitable resolution of complaints
alleging any action prohibited by the U. S. Department of Justice regulations implementing Title /I of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Complaints should be addressed to: Loreen Mills, ADA Coordinator, City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard,
Oregon, 97223 - (503) 639-4171- TDD (503) 684-2772, who has been designated to coordinate ADA compliance efforts.
1. A complaint regarding access or discrimination should be filed in writing or verbally. It must contain the name and
address of the person riling it, and briefly describe the alleged violation of the regulations.
2. A compliant should be riled within thirty days after the complainant becomes aware of the alleged violation.
3. An investigation, as may be appropriate, shall follow a riling of a complaint The ADA Coordinator or designee shall
conduct the investigation. This procedure anticipates informal but thorough investigations, affording all interested
persons and their representative, if any, an opportunity to submit evidence relevant to the complaint
4. The ADA Coordinator shall issue a written determination as to the validity of the complaint and a description of the
resolution, if any, within 30 calendar days.
5. If the complaint cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant by the ADA Coordinator, it shall be
forwarded to the Hearings Officer. The City will retain the services of a Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer shall
establish ground rules or procedures for hearing complaints, requests, or suggestions from disabled persons
regarding access to and participation in public facilities, services, activities, and functions in the City. The Hearings
Officer shall hear complaints in sessions open to the public, after adequate notice, in an unbiased, objective manner,
and issue a written decision within 30 calendar days of notification.
6. If the complaint can't be resolved to the satisfaction of the Complainant by the Hearings Officer, it shall be forwarded
to the City Council. The Council at a public meeting shall hear the complaint A determination shall be made within
30 calendar days from the date of the hearing. The decision of the City Council is final.
7. The ADA Coordinator shall maintain the files and records of the City of Tigard relating to the complaints filed.
8. The right of a person to a prompt and equitable resolution of the complaint riled, hereunder, shall not be impaired by
the person's pursuit of other remedies, such as the riling of an ADA -complaint with the responsible federal
department or agency. Use of this grievance procedure is not a prerequisite to the pursuit of other remedies.
9. These rules shall be construed to protect the substantive rights of interested persons to meet the appropriate due
process standards, and to assure that the City of Tigard complies with the ADA and implementing regulations.
10_ Time lines referred to above concerning the scheduling of hearings may be extended /f, after reasonable effort and
just cation, the hearing cannot be conducted within the 30-calendar day limitation period.
11. All decisions shall be sent by regular mail to the complainant within 30 calendar days of the date of the hearing and
shall be retained in the program file. Phone notification shall also be made in cases involving visually impaired
individuals.
12. The ADA Coordinator may modify this grievance and appeal process in order to assure equal access to programs,
services and activities for people with disabilities.
13. Nothing in this grievance process is meant to be used for any personnel, EEO, or labor agreement grievance
procedure for the City of Tigard. Contact the City of Tigard Human Resources Department for further information
regarding Title / grievances.
II
MINE! M~1=
BE= Mi
PARKS ADA IMPROVEMENTS
The City of Tigard developed its philosophy for ADA improvements in the park/greenway areas
and priorities for improvements within those areas. Following is a synopsis of the plan.
PnmosopHy AND PRIORITIES
The City of Tigard Public Works Department is committed to the full and complete implementation
of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The Department believes in the intent of the ADA
that is to remove the architectural and attitudinal barriers that prevent equal access to programs,
service ; activities to people with disabilities.
fly.; ' department will first focus its energy and resources on providing equal access to people with
disabilities al our two community parks; namely Cook and Summerlake Parks. They offer the most
well rounded set of services, facilities, and programs within our community. These parks are
located on the north and south ends of the City and are within 2 miles of any location in the City.
The Department will review its plan for greenways and natural areas. This work will begin first in
the Fanno Creek Greenway due to its close proximity to the Library and Senior Citizens' Center and
its heavy usage. Englewood Greenway will be next due to its existing uses and heavy patron use.
No time line has been developed for this work.
Finally, the Department will review its plan for neighborhood parks. Due to limited funds and the
fact that very little activity is provided at these parks, it is anticipated that the City will provide
access to parks at primarily the community park level. No time line has been developed for this
work
Community parks will have ADA modifications made on the following priority basis:
• parking spaces
• restroom access
• playground access
• picnic facilities
• auxiliary services (i.e., sport fields, docks, fishing, tennis, concession stands,
basketball courts, etc.)
The plan will address existing structures, programs and services being brought into compliance with
>-I the ADA requirements and any new facilities to be built in compliance.
'T'IMELINE
The City's, self evaluation will be conducted in two phases. During 1998, as a part of the
development of the Parks Master Plan, a park facility evaluation was completed (see copy of report
in this section). During the 1999-2000 fiscal year, an evaluation will be conducted to identify
specific ADA needs in the parks. The Transition Plans for each park will be prioritized and
developed during the fiscal year 2000-2001.
Lm/h:/docs/ada/98-99/park philosophy.doc
h
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE ADril 1. 1999
CITY MALL • Public access areas - Includes City Hall lobby & public restrooms in Police lobby, Town Hall room and
Red Rock Creek conference room
LOCATION11TEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED fFY) COST EST.
• Parking
raise signs to correct height Property Manager 1998 DONE
change fine amount ($300) Property Manager 1998 DONE
• Curb Ramp $ 8,000
modify ramp Building Official at Lib. addition
add handrails Building Ofl'icial at Lib. addition
• Public Restrooms - Men's & Women's
door pressure Property Manager 1999 $ 10
sink faucet pressure Property Manager 1999 $ 10
relocate signs to latch side Property Manager 1999 $ 30
evaluate whether signs can be
relocated, if not, to remain in place
• Public Restroom (Women's)
stall dimensions small Property Manager 1999-00 $10,000
• Public Restroom (Men's)
back grab bar installed wrong Property Manager 1999 $ 100
stall lock not accessible Property Manager 1999 $ 100
• Public Counters
lower counter Property Manager at major renovation unknown
provide interim accessible table of City Hall
• Town Hall
door pressure Property Manager 1999 $ 10
• Signage
install correct signs Property Manager 1999-00 $1,500
(See detailed sign report)
• Self Help Computer Table
provide accessible table CD Director 1998-99 $ 200
• Emergency Alarms (Prior)
install visual alarm system Property Manager 1999-00 $10,000
• Building Emergency Evacuation Plan Risk Manager 1998 DONE
Lm/h:/docs/ada/98-99/Cfty Hall-doe
-TP -1
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE April 1, 1999
Modular Units behind City Hall - Employee Areas
LOCATIONATEM RESPONSIBLE PAOTY SCHEDULED (FY) COST EST_
• Parking
provide a sign for accessible space Building Official at renovation $ 100
Building 1 & 2 Building Official
• Accessible Route
decrease slope or add rails
decrease slope of curb ramp
to walkway (currently 11.5%)
Modify existing handrails to comply
* Since modulars are temporary structures, City will not be spending $21,000 to upgrade
accessible route. Program access will be made by City staff meeting the public in another
facility that is accessible.
Building 1: Building Inspectors
• Restroom
relocate seat cover dispenser Property Manger 1998-99 $ 25
• Hap Watkin's Office
replace door hardware w4ever Property Manager 1998-99 $ 10
• Emergency Alarms
install audible and visual alarms Property Manager 1999-00 $ 2,500
Interior Doors
install accessible door hardware Property Manager 1999-00 $ 60
Building 2: Engineering Department
• Interior Doors
replace door hardware wAever Property Manager 1999-00 $ 40
• Emergency Alarms
install audible and visual alarms Property Manager 1999-00 $Z500
Lm1h:/docs/ada/98-99/City Hall Mods.doc
-TP a
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE April 1. -1999
LIBRARY- Public access areas - Does not include workroom, lunchroom, behind circ. desk, staff offides.
LOCATTON17TEN RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (FYI Comm.
• Entrance Doors
door threshold < 12" Property Manager 1999-00 $ 250
bevel threshold Property Manager 1999-00 $ 250
• Public Restrooms
reverse door swing (Prior)
replace back grab bars Property Manager 1998-99 $ 50
sink height (Prior) Head Librarian at renovation $ 2, 000
reduce door pressure Property Manager 1998-99 $ 10
• Tables
modify 5% of tables-height (Prior) Head Librarian 2000-01 Unknown
• Signage
restrooms & counters Property Manager 2000-01 $1,500
all other permanent rooms Property Manager 2000-01 $1,500
• Emergency Alarms
install visual alarm system (Prior) Property Manager 1998-99 $10,000
Fire Marshall will not approve access door swing modification.
Police lobby restrooms will be made available to Library patrons
who are unable to use Library restrooms.
Lm/h:/dccs/ada/98-99/Library.doc
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE Ann 1. 1999
POLICE DEPARTMENT - Employee access arew - all areas other than lobby are employee access
LOCATTOMlTEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (FU COST EST:
• Door Hardware - throughout
install lever handles Chief of Police Remodel $1,50
• Interior Lobby door to employee area
reduce door pressure Property Manager 1999-00 $ 10
modify maneuvering clearance Chief of Police Remodel unknown
• Telephone (in lobby) Network Services Remodel unknown
lower telephone & intercom
install volume control
• Signage
al/ permanent moms Chief of Police Remodel unknown
• Emergency Alarms
add visual alarms to system Chief of Police Remodel unknown
• Counters (Police Records Window)
lower counter Chief of Police Remodel Unknown
(Interim provide accessible table) Chief of Police 1998-99 Unknown
LnVh:/docs/ada198-991Po11cs.doc
^T P q
Elm
RPM-
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE AArrl 1. 1999
NICHE - Employee & Public access areas - downstairs, except lunchroom and in unimproved storage areas (Note.
This building may be phased out for office use, thus access will be modified at major renovation. In the meantime,
program access will be given by meeting the public downstairs when necessary.)
LOCA77OMI/rEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED fFY) MUM
• Accessible Route .
bevel transition and repair Property Manager 1998-99 $ 200
• Interior
provide 211d floor access via elevator Property Manager at renovation $50,000
• Parking DONE
provide second accessible space Property Manager 1998-99
raise signs Property Manager 1998-99
change fine ($300) Property Manager 1998-99
• Restroom
relocate seat cover dispenser Property Manger 1998-99 $ 20
replace sink with accessible space Property Manager at renovation $ 500
• Training Room
replace door hardware wAever Property Manager 1998-99 $ 20
• EmergencyAlarms
raise visual alarm 3" Property Manager at renovation $1,000
Signage
Replace Network Services sign Property Manager 2000-01 $ 25
with braille sign & raised letters
Replace two rear exit signs Property Manager 2000-01 $ 50
with braille sign & raised letters
Lm/h:/doc9/ad8198-991N1ch6.dOC
~P~
CITY OF 71GARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE April 1. 1999
WATER BUILDING - Public and Employee access areas
LOCATION17TEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (FW COST EST.
• Accessible Route & Parking $30,000
modify sloped walk from public walk Property Manager 2000-01
replace public walk curb ramps Property Manager 2000-01
van stripping Property Manager 2000-01
replace parking curb ramps Property Manager 2000-01
• Restrroms (Public) $ 5,000
door swing pressure reduced Property Manager 1999-00
reconfigure stalls to specifications Property Manager at renovation unknown
change stall lock location Property Manager at renovation unknown
lower coat hook or install 2nd hook Property Manager 1999-00
relocate flush control in woman's rm. Property Manager 1999-00
sink lever faucet pressure Property Manager 1999-00
sink height Property Manager at renovation unknown
lower urinal flush control Property Manager 1999-00 unknown
• Restrooms (Employee)
Employee restrooms are inaccessible. Employees
will use public restroorns if accommodation is needed.
• Drinking Fountain
hi-low fountain installed Property Manager at renovation $1,000
interim paper cup dispenser (2 ea.) Property Manager 1998-99 $ 40
• Counters
lower a portion of counter Property Manager at renovation $5,000
interim - lobby table & chairs Finance Director 2000-01 $ 800
• Signage
parking Property Manager 1999-00 $ 100
restrooms & counters Property Manager 1999-00 $ 400
all other permanent moms Property Manager 1999-00 $ 300
auditorium listening system info. Property Manager 1999-00 $ 200
• Auditorium
assistive listening system Property Manager 1999-00 $1,000
no ramp for raised stage area Property Manager N/A AAA
stage used as storage area - no public access needed.
• Emergency Alarms
install visual alarm system Property Manager 1999-00 $15,000
Lm/h:/docs/ada/98-99IWater-Sumham.doc
~C3
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE April 1. 1999
LEASED HOUSE AT 9020 SW Bumham St Note. This building is planned for demolition for future right-of-way
needs. The cost is high for ADA modifications and long term use of the building is not planned. Currently Interfaith
Outreach Services leases the building. That lease expires 613099. If the building is leased to a non-profit servlce
organization after that date or used for City of Tigard storage needs, the building will not be modltled since program
access can be made available without modfications. If the building is leased to a for-profit organization or used for
City of Tigard employees to receive the public, modifications will need to be accomplished to bring site into ADA
Compliance.
LOCATION/ITEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (FY1 COST EST
• Accessible Route Property Manager at renovation $50,000
when sidewalk is constructed an
accessible route will need to be
connected to the accessible entrance
• Parking
provide one disabled space/
van stripping
reduce transition to >114"
• Ramp Property Manager at renovation $10,000
modify ramp to decrease slope
install handrails
• Entrance Property Manager at renovation $3,000
install accessible door hardware
bevel door threshold
• Interior Doors Property Manager at renovation $ Z000
install accessible door hardware
• Restroom (1 to ADA standards) Property Manager at renovation $15,000
replace door to make accessible
reconfigure to specifications
relocate sink
install grab bars
sink pipes wrapped
sink lever faucet pressure
lower mirror
lower dispensers
• Drinking Fountain Property Manager at renovation $ 5,000
hi-low fountain installed
• Signage Property Manager at renovation $1,500
parking
restrooms
all other permanent rooms
• Emergency Alarms Property Manager at renovation $ 5,000
install visual alarm system
• Misc. Equipment Property Manager 1999 $ 25
Fire Extinguishers
are 72" above floor, lower
Lm/h:/docs/ada/98-99/House 9020 Bumham.doc
~ P'7
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE April 1. 1999
PUBUC WORKS - Public and employee access areas
LOCATIOMTEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SC14EDULED (F19 COST EST.
• Accessible Route
sidewalk from street to bldg. Property Manager When public $20,000
sidewalk is built
• Parking - accessible stalls $ 200
remark proper dimensions Property Manager 1998-99
raise signs/change fine amt. Property Manager • 1998-99
• Entrance (Public)
bevel door threshold Property Manager 1999-00 $ 200
• Interior Accessible Route
install handrail on both sides of stairs Property Manager 1999-00 $ 1,000
install ramp or elevator Property Manager at renovation unknown
• Lunchroom
replace sink faucet Property Manager 1998-99 $ 200
lower phonelnstall volume control Network Services 1999-00 $ 300
• Restroom - (Women's) and Public Unisex
door clearance only 4" on pull side Property Manager 1999 $ 100
wrap pipes Property Manager 1999 $ 25
raise sink Property Manager 1999-00 $ 200
replace toilet seat Property Manager 1999 $ 50
reconfigure stall to specifications Property Manager 1999-00 $ 3,000
• Restroom (Men's)
wrap pipes under sink Property Manager 1998 $ 25
raise sink Property Manager 2000-01 $ 200
reconfigure stall to specifications Property Manager at renovation unknown
• Drinking Fountain
paper cup dispenser-interim Property Manager 1998-99 $ 20
hi-low fountain installed Property Manager 1999-00 $ 1,000
• Emergency Alarms
install visual alarm system Property Manager 1998-99 $ 5,000
* Since extending handrails into lobby and upper landing areas create safety hazards with the current building
design, a major remodel would have to be undertaken. During the interim, staff will accommodate by meeting
visitors downstairs when needed or relocating staff downstairs.
Currently, Men's restroom is unable to be modifiad for accessibility without major renovation. Until that happens,
the Women's restroom will be made accessible and used for women staff members and any of the public who wish
to use a unisex, accessible restroom rather than the men's restroom which is some what inaccessible.
Lm/hIdocs/ada/98-99/Public Works-Ash.doc
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE April 1. 1999
SENIOR CENTER - Public access areas - all areas are considered public access except
equipment/control moms & kitchenMvork rooms
LOCA7ION17TEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED f f n COST EST.
• Accessible Route
provide route from public sidewalk Property Manager when public $ Unknown
no sidewalk traffic at this time with transit service
lack of public transit service available to
sidewalk
• Parking $ 1,000
replace curb ramp from sidewalk Property Manager 1999
crosswalk from parking space Property Manager 1999
(with detectable warnings)
install ADA sign in rear parking Property Manager 1999
restrip access aisle Property Manager 1999
replace fine amount on sign Property Manager 1999
raise sign Property Manager 1999
• Entrance Doors
bevel front door threshold Property Manager 1999-00 $ 400
bevel rear door threshold Property Manager 1999-00 $ 600
• Elevator
bring into compliance w/new
ADA guidelines Property Manager 2000-01 $10,000
• Public Restrooms - Men's in Lobby $ 500
reduce door pressure Property Manager 1999-00
relocate toilet paper dispenser Property Manager 1999-00
replace stall door lock Property Manager 1999-00
relocate seat cover dispenser Property Manager 1999-00
install accessible coat hook Property Manager 1999-00
wrap hotAvaste water pipes Property Manager 1999-00
lower paper towel dispenser Property Manager 1999-00
install additional soap dispenser Property Manager 1999-00
• Public Restrooms - Women's in Lobby $ 200
reduce door pressure Property Manager 1999-00
relocate seat cover dispenser Property Manager 1999-00
relocate toilet paper dispenser Property Manager 1999-00
• Sink areas - main halllbasemenUcraft room $ 200
lower towel dispensers Property Manager 1999-00'
• Phones $ 1,000
basement phone lowered Network Services 2000-01
provide volume controls Network Services 2000-01
• Public Restrooms - men's & women's downstairs
Can't comply with modifications.
At renovation 1 uni-sex restroom
will be constructed Property Manager At renovation $ 5,000
Lm/h:/docs1ada198-99/Senior Center.doc
-i- P 9
~a.
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE Aaril 1. 1999
SENIOR CENTER - Public access areas CONTINUED - all areas are considered public access
except equipment/control rooms & kitchenAvork rooms
LOCATION/1TEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED fFY) COST ES7:
Continued - Public Restrooms downstairs
lobby restrooms will be made available to
building users who are unable to use
basement restrooms.
Short-term solution to most users can
Access downstairs restrooms follow:
doorswing reversed Property Manager not scheduled not done**
reduce door pressure Property Manager 1999-00 $ 50
relocate paper dispenser Property Manager 1999-00 $ 50
Coat racks
some racks/hooks lowered Senior. Cntr. Director 2000-01 $ Unknown
• Tables
modify some tables-height Sr. Cntr. Director upon request $ Unknown
• Signage
provide accessible signs Property Manager 2000-01 $ 1,000
• Emergency Alarms
Review & identify changes needed Property Manager 2000-01 $ N/A
Modify existing system with visual Property Manager 2001-02 $ Unknown
Fire Marshall will not approve door swing modification. Thus, upstairs
Lm/h:/doc9/ada198-99/Sen1or Center.doc
-TP I C
'MROns ME all=
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE Anri11. 1999
_WATiR D1STR/CP ®UiLD/NC9 Canterburv Strwt Site Public and Emulovae Areas
(Note: This plan assumes no space leased to another organization and site used for City storage only.)
LOCATIONffrEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (Fl) COST EST.
• Accessible Route Property Manager at renovation $10,000
sidewalk from parking area
curb ramps
• Parking Property Manager at renovation $ Z000
provide one disabled space & van stepping
• Entrance Property Manager at renovation $ 3,000
install accessible door hardware
bevel door threshold
• Interior Property Manager at renovation $ 9,500
rebuilt walkway ramp, level landing, & handrails
• Restroom Property Manager at renovation $15,000
replace door to make accessible
reconfigure stalls to specifications
remove/reconfigure shower stall
relocate sink
install grab bars
sink pipes wrapped
sink lever faucet pressure
lower urinal
lower dispensers
• Interior Doors Property Manager at renovation $ 750
provide accessible door hardware
• Signage Property Manager at renovation $1,000
parking
restrooms
all other permanent moms
• Emergency Alarms Property Manager 2000-01 $5,000
install visual alarm system
i
7
i
i
Lm/h:/does/ada/98-99Mlater-Canterbury.dx
-TP li
CITY OF TIGARD - ADA COMPLIANCE UPDATE Aaril 1. 1999
CITY MDE CURB CUTS
LOCATION/ITEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (FY) COST EST:
• DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION Response will be on a compliant-made basis
Determine requirements City Engineer 2000-2003 Unknown
Determine action & schedule City Engineer Unknown
PARKS AND GREENWAYS - Ci@}v Mde
LOCA77ON17TEM RESPONSIBLE PARTY SCHEDULED (FY) COST EST.
• PARKS -identified by park
Determine requirements Grounds Supervisor 1999-2000 $ 7,500
Determine action & schedule Public Works Director 2000-2001 Unknown
• GRteENWAYS - identified by greenway area
Consideration will be given for access, slopes, eta at the time of development
upon first task being accomplished
I.m/h:/docs/ada198-99/curb cut & parks.doc
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF C~ 5 ~cf~j
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Temporarv Sign Collection & Retrieval Policy
TY MGR OK
PREPARED BY: Mathew Scheidegger _DEPT HEAD OK
lAi 1/1
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should the City Council adopt new regulations for temporary signs in the right-of-way.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
After reviewing the draft ordinance, direct staff to proceed with revisions and the required public hearings.
,o
INFORMATION SUMMARY
At the March 16`" 1999 Council meeting, staff and the Council discussed ideas for removal and retrieval of
temporary signs within the public right-of-way and assessing fires to recover the costs of removal of illegal
signs. As a result of that meeting, Council asked staff to draft an ordinance which provided for fines for illegal
signs within the public right-of-way, while allowing for political signs during election periods. Staff worked
with the City Attorney's office to prepare a draft ordinance. That ordinance is attached.
Temporary signs including A-board, banner, lawn signs, and balloons are permitted only for periods of 30 days
on private property. Because temporary signs in the public right-of-way are prohibited in the Development
Code, the City Attorney's office drafted new language to make allowances for certain temporary signs during
election time. Sign ordinance language must be content neutral and provisions drafted in the ordinance apply to
not only political signs, but all signs. This situation was not known at the time of the March Council meeting
and could have significant impacts on a number of signs within the public right-of-way.
In addition, the draft ordinance includes amendments to the Municipal Code section 2.52.010 that includes
temporary signs in the right-of-way as abandoned property. Abandoned property (including signs) in the right-
of-way is subject to charges and expenses incurred by the City in enforcing abandoned property under section
18.780.070(C). In order to establish a pick up fee for such signs, a resolution establishing an appropriate fee
would be necessary. The exclusion of temporary signs six square feet or smaller within the right-of-way is
covered under 18.780.070 (K). This is to allow all signs in the right-of-way for periods before and after
elections. The draft includes a period 7 days before and 7 days after an election. The Council may wish to
revise this period.
ORS 221.230 cites 4 dates when elections can be held and allows the City to call an emergency election under
particular circumstances. Therefore the proposed changes will allow limited sized temporary signs (2 x 3) to be
located within the right-of-way for periods in March, May, September, November and emergency elections.
0
Another potential issue that has not been discussed is that private property owners will no longer be able to
control political signs in front of their property. Since temporary signs can now only be posted on private
property, property owners can choose not to have various signs to be displayed on their property. Allowing
them in the right-of-way in front of parcels may create some obvious and heated conflict. Another issue is the
public right-of-way extends into the middle of the street. Uncontrolled sign locations in right-of-way could
create traffic hazards.
The earliest date for a hearing by the Planning Commission is July 19th' This would mean a public hearing by the
City Council on August 1 Ot'.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Stay with the current enforcement procedures or introduce a citation policy that would allow the Code
Compliance Specialist to write monthly citations until the problem is resolved.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION CONMETTEE STRATEGY
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
This adoption would generate revenue for the City of Tigard to cover the cost of sign pick-up.
i AciWMde\sign.ord3.doc
DRAFT
CI'T'Y OF TIGARD
ORDINANCE NO. 99-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD TO AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS
2.52.010,18.780.070(K), AND 18.780.120(C).
WHEREAS, The City of Tigard wishes to abate potential hazards to pedestrian and traffic safety
due to the placement of unpermitted signs within the public right-of-way.
WHEREAS, The City of Tigard Municipal Code contains provisions which prohibit certain signs
to be placed within the public right-of-way.
WHEREAS, greater enforcement of this prohibition will be available by declaring unpermitted
signs in the right-of-way to be abandoned property as provided by the following amendments to
the Municipal Code; now, therefore;
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Tigard Municipal Code Section 252.010 is amended as follows:
Custody of Property
Whenever any personal property other than a motor vehicle is taken into the
custody of any department of the city by reason of its having been abandoned,
found seized, or for any other reason, the personal property shall be turned over
to and held by the police department at the expense and risk of the owner or
person lawfully entitled to possession of it. Abandoned personal property
includes temporary signs located within the right-of-way prohibited by Section
18.780.070(K)
Section 2: Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.780.070(K) is amended as follows:
K. Right-of-way. Signs in the public right-of-way in whole or in part, except signs
legally erected for informational purposes by or on behalf of a government
agency. This subsection shall not apply to temporary signs 6 sq. ft or smaller
located within the right-of way 7 days before and 7 days after the dates for
elections established under ORS 221.230.
ORDINANCE NO.
Page 1
A '
Section 3: Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.780.120(C) is amended by adding subsection 4
to read as follows:
4. Signs in the right-of-way, prohibited under Section 18.780.070(x), are declared to
be abandoned propelly and shall be removed from the right-of-way pursuant to
Municipal Code Chet& 2.52. Pursuant to TMC 2.52.020, prior to return of the
sign to the owner, the owner shall pay the charges and expenses incurred by the
City in enforcing this section.
Section 4: This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its enactment.
PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number
and title only, this day of 1999.
Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 1999.
Jim Nicoli, Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Date
cAorccb\90024\tempsign.ord.wpd
ORDINANCE NO.
Page 2
JUN-15--1999 15;46 503 626 8903 P.01/0i
DLp'
~S l~9
SPECHT
9 SPECHT PROPERTIES
SPECHT DEVELOPMENT
15400 S.W. Millikan Way • Beaverton, OR 97006
503/646-2202 Fax 503/626.8903
June 15, 1999
Mr. Gus Duenas Via: Facsimile 684-7297
City Engineer
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
RE: 69th Avenue LID
Dear Gus:
It has been brought to our attention that the City of Tigard is considering revising the 69th Avenue LID
(the "LID") plans to allow for the placement of sidewalks adjacent to the curb. On behalf of Tigard
Corporate Center Limited Partnership, the initiator and largest property owner within the LID, please
understand that we must object to this change if it results in an increase in the LID cost or a
postponement in the completion date for the LID.
While it is not our intent to interfere with the concerns of other property owners, the LID cost and timing
are critical to Tigard Corporate Center. Regarding timing, we have been told by the City that the LID is
to be complete by September 1999. Given the fact that our Site Development Review conditions of
approval restrict the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy until the LID is complete, a delay in the
completion of the LID is unacceptable.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please contact me should you have any questions.
Best Regards,
SPECHT DEVELOPMENT, INC.
6"Y-
rOre- Todd R. Sheaffer
Vice President
c: Jim Corliss, Landmark Ford (fax: 598-8368)
Greg Specht
CATodd Projecb\111% Projects - TodATiaud triaoablCOT39.doe
r~
} _ _Y D E HAAS Suite 300 • m renter
9450 Ski Comu~nmet•ce Circle
Wilsonville, Oi(. 97070
(503) 682-2450
] ssocriates, Inc. (503) 682-401$ Fax
ConsulfingEn¢neers G Surveyors
June 15, 1999
Vannie Nguyen
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: 69th Avenue Reconstruction LID
Dear Vannie:
Subsequent to our meeting 6/14/99 with you, Gus, Dick Bewersdorff and Jim & Cora Corliss, I have looked
carefully at the net effect of accommodating the interest of the Corliss request, which is to move the sidewalk
from the property line to the curb line and eliminate most of the grading behind the sidewalk and on Corliss
property.
In our haste to analyze the Corliss request and find some mutually acceptable treatment, we have failed to
address the issue of underground utilities which heavily impacts the project.
For new developments, it is customary that an additional 8-10ft of public utility easement (PUE) be provided
outside the RJW to accommodate construction of public utilities (power, telephone, T.V., gas and lighting).
69th Avenue has no public utility easements and therefore all of these utilities have to be accommodated within
the existing R/W along with sanitary sewer, storm drain and water. And, because the existing power, telephone
(massive fibre optic cable) and T.V. being undergrouuded are on the Landmark Ford side of the R/W, it would
be cost prohibitive to move such utilities to the other side of the R/W.
The attached excerpt from the plans show the network of underground utilities between Franklin and
Dartmouth.
Following are some, and perhaps not all, of the issues faced if we are to move the sidewalk to curb line:
1. Most of the underground utilities will be under the sidewalk. Remaining utilities should go in an area
of reasonably flat grade.
2. Lighting will have to go behind sidewalks, reducing the value of the lighting.
3. Because of the meandering location of the massive fibre optic cable, in some areas the underground
utilities require all the area between the curb and R/W line.
~I
i 4. Utility vaults would fall in the sidewalk area.
5. Fire hydrants would have to be extended to a point behind the sidewalk.
6. The construction contract has been let. While most of the work is covered by unit prices, moving the
sidewalk would require taking a look at grading quantities and other unknown issues. I believe the
(City could be exposed to requests for expensive change orders and time extensions.
7. It was my understanding that movement of the sidewalk might require a modification to the Tigard
Triangle Plan which could delay the project. Such delay could well jeopardize timely completion of
the project and open the City to expensive Contractor claims.
If we are not able to agree with Corliss to grade the Project as designed, the retaining walls (keystone) will have
to be considered. Even that alternative is unattractive because it squeezes the precious distance available for
sidewalk, landscaping and utilities down from 1154ft. to approximately 954ft.
If the City elects to keep the sidewalk on the property line (which we highly recommend) it would be in the
City's best interest to negotiate a reasonable landscaping plan with Corliss to mitigate the concerns. If such
negotiations are not successful, I believe the keystone walls treatment is the only viable alternative.
Sincerely,
Marlin J. De E., P.L.S.
President
cc: 98.189.118
Attachment
MJD/lo
1891tr2.J15
,.e
1 ~ 1
i l
Sfo 1J+r,.Lr csdNil I~ I
' 1 I ~ Rcn NP1fl - Yeam4.i f M ' - ~ -
+ I , I w !
4
I WW
- - r r. I~
-
- -
IXAA-
- - - - - - - - -
4-1
,
_ _ r wad ' u I I I=
a, r I6d.oP ~ r6za+ l SYB PJ+ ' 4ffi
I O Ii K P6o.12 sfo ?Jr+2 I sla MrB3 ( D.
1 sro 2J+JO or M4..JJ ZS
N! I ' I s"Of 6yar •BnRirJ `e~i r? t rig Ps'co+W r I W-122.4 ,J ' I ( I6I / cwaw
rrJO Aar,RfaY II Sl*
RwSr Cg f+kp'acx slt-1212 I 11
14
t I ~It., i r'n r'axduA' Yca+duf rAn: pod i I II pbad 2°N
~l~1 I 8.Y LScaA.P 510 2J#
I I ~I~ sv-uv re 242 P04,046
V f7J
W I
I I Il PLAN
j
ce
SS 4H SCO. uH~
55 NH
1 sro 11.11,89 I
"GaWwl 110°nCaned
tt I'aanCu,r i`' I i ~ 5: 0 NN
I.
I I J 1 II ~ I
c - i II ~Vf s S
a f ns1 I II ®
l L r
:J " - - - - - rp
I
-
lit
'j ss 9s
81 g 8 h~A H N - ---i - -
- - - - - - -wa a'V St. ro J8` J2• - _ L _ X"r20 E-: aA^9 Pda ir'
• d -dYAC--. - •
C"q
P~ ,condo` E
J0 I
° sro 172 }y ~28*-40 - r•Gpwtar 800-ov4
IaaaOr I I ~ Bao-22x K2n.PS~I sv-uz7
sr-,zn 1 Lscww 1
R. 1624 I t -
gr1JYx' I sfa 16+80 K 1)280 - Chain era 18r55 AC 28899 CB
and lane lxncr rrbgnww 4H r F
,ern zr,.,r troaa rrk~aan ~
2.Smxarl ~ Race caidmr a
f
r{ - scab: 2•.10, - -
PLAN REDUCED :
I j ONE-HALF ORIGINAL SGA,'.
Exp. Ji/99 ~~}~~[1 s,at 3 • nx C.A.
69th AVENUE L
' ~ r~Bf S ~ ~ 31[11357 p.~ 1~ ■ • 6 1
s 1 ssoci~tes, Inc. STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Underground Power, Telephone, T.V. & Llghtlaq
y tassen+enu.
Ali
nRN fsw) af•tuo
j Cri r 6 rue an m e CITY GARD EN0NE4RRM ~PAH1irNS 9~t
FU NA 313 DKC N.d11E:
rsritd~ ply 15, X999 96.189.119. ce30 os