09/27/2000 - Packet Summer Lake Task Force
MEMO
TO: Summer Lake Task Force
RE: Upcoming Task Force Meeting DATE: September 20, 2000
September 27,2000
Tigard Water Building
6:30—9:00 PM
FROM: Vaughn Bro40
Please note the meeting date change to September 27h. At the last meeting, several members
indicated that they would not be able to attend on October 4. Greg Berry polled task force
members and determined that this new meeting date allows broader task force participation.
The next Task Force meeting has two main purposes:
1. Complete the preliminary options evaluation
2. Outline the participant recruitment, involvement process and content for the upcoming
Neighborhood Meeting
Enclosed in this meeting briefing packet are the September 6'h meeting summary, an updated
evaluation worksheet with last meeting's rating results and a neighborhood meeting outline.
We will continue our options evaluation by picking up where we left off on the criteria ratings
worksheet. Please take the time to look at the enclosed worksheet and come prepared to
complete the task force's preliminary options evaluation.
The second part of the meeting will be used for planning the Neighborhood Meeting. Please
review the outline and come with ideas on how to recruit the appropriate people to attend and
participate. We will finalize the meeting agenda and format, identify what information displays
we need to prepare and determine what input you need to complete your task force
responsibilities.
Thank you for your participation on this project. Looking forward to seeing you on Wednesday
the September 27''.
---------------- ------- --------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summer Lake Task Force
September 27, 2000 O
6:30-9:00 PM
Tigard Water Building
J'
Agenda
6:30 Welcome and Meeting Purpose Brian
Review Previous Meeting Minutes
6:45 Alternatives Evaluation Task Force
Complete worksheet Vaughn
7:45 Preliminary Evaluation Results Summary Task Force
8:00 Public Comment
8:10 Neighborhood Meeting Plan Task Force
Date, Time, Location Vaughn
Feedback Needs
Meeting Format& Materials
Task Force Role
8:55 Next Steps
Schedule Next Meetings
9:00 Close Meeting Vaughn
Summer Lake Task Force771
Neighborhood Meeting
Planning Outline - DRAFT
Date Wednesday, Nov. 1
Time 7:00 to 8:30
Location
Feedback Needs Use comment cards, flip charts at Listening Posts, and note taking
during presentation Q&A to capture input on:
■ Criteria Statements
■ Alternative Approaches
■ Preliminary Evaluation Results
Meeting Format Modified Open House—
■ Welcome table with sign-in and handout materials—project
purpose and need, action options fact sheet, initial evaluation
ratings results, and comment form.
■ Open session with a presentation explaining the background of
the project, characterizing the task force process, describing
the 3 action options, summarizing the initial evaluation ratings
and outlining next steps and input opportunities. Q&A follows.
■ Set up 3 Listening Posts staffed by a consultant, city staff, and
citizen task force member. Participants are invited to assemble
in smaller groups to discuss the project and provide input on
available flip charts.
■ Collect comment forms as participants leave.
Recruitment
Summer Lake Task Force Rating Scale (RS) A: Acceptable U: Unacceptable * = 1 vote of non-
support
Options Evaluation Matrix - P: Preferred N: Neutral ** = 1 vote for
Preliminary September 2000 preferred condition
Open-Channel Piped Low Stream with Status Quo -
Evaluation Criteria Low Flow Bypass Flow Bypass Backwatered Areas Current Conditions
Water duality RS RS RS RS
Project must improve lake and downstream water Maintains stream Piped flows potentially Maintains stream
quality, to assist in meeting standards for temperature, temperature- Lake cooled by ground- Lake temperature- Backwater
bacteria, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, pH and continues to receive A* continues to receive P* areas may collect nutrients A* U**
chlorophyll. surface drainage during surface drainage during and slowly release in
low flows low flows summer months
Project must improve visual aesthetics(minimal weeds, Allows for chemical Allows for chemical Reduces stagnation
algae blooms) and reduce odors associated with lake treatment of aquatic A treatment of aquatic A impacts- Eliminates lake N U**
water. weeds I weeds feature
Neighborhood Impacts
Minimizes negative impacts(including property values) Minimal change in Minimal change in Reduced open water area
on the surrounding neighborhoods. current open water A current open water A with new backwater N* A
conditions I conditions features
Park Use
Project maintains a lake water feature as focal point of Yes A Yes A Small water features U A
Summer Lake Park.
Project maximizes present and future uses for the YesA Yes A Small water features A A
Summer Lake Park in conjunction with the Summer
Project allows for educational opportunities at the park Yes Yes Increased educational
to improve understanding of water quality and A A potential with more natural A A
fishtwildlife issues. I I habitat conditions
9
• Page 1 0
0
Open-Channel Piped Low Stream with Status Quo -
Evaluation Criteria Low Flow Bypass Flow Bypass Backwatered Areas Current Conditions
Fish&Wildlife Habitat and Travel Corridors RS RS RS RS
Project enhances a habitat where humans, fish and Some habitat P* Habitat creation potential A Increased habitat value A** U?
wildlife can coexist. enhancement
Project encourages the growth of native species while Use of natives to A Habitat creation potential A Most potential for native A N
discouraging the presence of exotic invasive species. vegetate streambank plantings
Project enhances fish and wildlife habitat including Improves passage for Fish passage through Major improvements for all
improving migratory passage for both. aquatic species A pipe may be less optimal A aquatic species A U*
than with other options
Regulations
Project meets, or works toward meeting, all applicable No violations Marginally acceptable Fully meets requirements
federal, state and regional local permitting A A A N
requirements, including CWA, ESA, Goal 5 and Title 3
USA D&C standards).
Project satisfies DEQ, USF&WS, ODFW, NMFS, Yes Yes Yes
USACOE, and DSL requirements through their early A A A U*
involvement.
Cost
Project is cost effective and affordable, for both Medium cost. Medium Least costly. Least likely Most costly. Most likely to
construction and operations& maintenance, with potential for funding. A to receive funding. A receive funding. A P
available funding.
Project minimizes maintenance costs. Intake, fish ladder& Intake, fish ladder& Least costly to maintain
chemical treatment cost A chemical treatment cost A A P
Recommended Alternative Demonstrates That:
Interested citizens, City and Agencies shall have had Yes Yes Yes
the opportunity to work collectively on solutions.
Project proponents can pursue partnership funding Moderate potential Least likely High potential
through stream and habitat enhancement grants from
government agencies.
The project can be monitored for effectiveness. Yes Yes Yes
The project has a high probability of successfully Yes Yes No lake water feature
meeting the objectives.
• • Page 2 � •