ooun1y courtjoljhnat ;' 3, 0 p---rr-? · commissioners present: commissioners absent: ... on...

OOUN1Y COURTJOlJHNAt

MINUTES - TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING - Wednesday, January 12, 2011

WORKSHOP

F1L~[) "";'3, 0 p---rr- ?.AJ

JUL 1 2011

TASSI O'NEILCOUNTY CLEA~<

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:

STAFF PRESENT:

Charles J. Hurliman, ChairMark Labhart, Commissioner

Tim Josi, Vice Chair (Vacation)

Paul Levesque, Facilities, Fleet andContracts Director

STAFF PRESENT FOR PORTIONS OF THE MEETING: Dave Schrom, Public Works;Liane Welch, Director, Public Works; Terry Huntsman, UnderSheriff; Shane Grandlund,Commission on Children and Families and Health Department; Craig Wakefield,Community Development; Dave Dickman, Director, Human Resources and SuYaremchuk, Staff Assistant.

GUESTS: Gus Meyer and John Gettman.

CALL TO ORDER: By Chair Hurliman at 8:30 a.m. in Commissioners' Meeting RoomB.

ITEM NO.1: WELCOME & REQUEST TO SIGN GUEST LIST: Chair Hurlimanwelcomed everyone and reminded them to sign the guest list.

ITEM NO.2: PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were none at thistime.

ITEM NO.3: PUBLIC WORKS REPORT: a) DISCUSSION CONCERNINGTEMPORARY ROAD USE AGREEMENT WITH STIMSON LUMBER COMPANY TOENTER COUNTY LANDS TO MONITOR ROY CREEK: Liane Welch said this aMemorandum of Understanding between the partners for the culvert replacement onRoy Creek. It allows access with the adjacent property owner. This item will be carriedforward to the 10:00 a.m. meeting.

c) TAKEN OUT OF ORDER: DISCUSSION CONCERNING TILLAMOOK COUNTYPUBLIC WORKS ROAD RISK ASSESSMENT AND TREATMENT PLAN REPORT:Ms. Welch said this is the result of the series of meetings in response to revenue shortfalls. She summarized the plan approach. It will be posted to the web.

MINUTES- TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING ~ Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Chair Hurliman described the new congressional approach to funding which does notbode well for funding Secure Rural Schools. Dave Dickman said morale and leadershipare very high. Commissioner Labhart suggested she provide an overview of this andthe organizational plan at the 10:00 a.m. meeting.

b) DISCUSSION CONCERNING TILLAMOOK COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENTORGANIZATIONAL PLAN: As a result of the risk assessment Ms. Welch will be rollingout a new organizational plan. She will have only one district covered by 13 people, aswell as a smaller team for special projects. On February 13th she will go to four - tenhour work days. Dave Schrom said the biggest issue was consolidating to one district.Ms. Welch will not replace positions as retirements continue. Ditches will be prioritizedbased on input from prior foremen. Ms. Welch said the focus will be on safety. Theyhave 15 miles of critical ditches. Mr. Schrom will create an organizational chart.

ITEM NO.4: DISCUSSION CONCERNING PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTWITH ADVANCED PUBLIC SAFETY FOR E~TICKETING HARDWARE, SOFTWAREAND SUPPORT: Terry Huntsman talked about the e-ticket project. This contract willprovide hardware and software. The first phase will outfit four cars. It will eliminate a lotof data entry. He thought it will save four to five minutes on each stop and five to sixhours a week for the sheriff's department and more for justice court on data entry. Thecontract buys the software setup, four stations and training. It has to interface with ourrecords management system. (Twenty-Six Thousand ($26,000) Dollars). The statepolice will implement this on the coast as well. This item will be carried forward to the10:00 a.m. meeting.

ITEM NO.5: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION FOR OUT~OF~STATE TRAVELAUTHORIZATION REQUEST FOR TROY JACKSON TO TRAVEL TO BOZEMAN,MONTANA TO CONDUCT A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION: UndersheriffHuntsman said they interviewed for a position. The top candidate is already certifiedbut they want to complete an investigation for about three to five days. Chair Hurlimanrecommended obtaining insurance on the car rental.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve and sign the out-of-statetravel authorization for Troy Jackson to travel to Bozeman, Montana to conduct abackground investigation. The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. The motionpassed with two (2) aye votes. The commissioners signed the request.

MINUTES - TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING ~ Wednesday, January 12, 2011

ITEM NO.6: DISCUSSION . CONCERNING AMENDMENT 1 TO GRANTAGREEMENT (CFDA NO. 93.994) WITH OREGON HEALTH .& SCIENCEUNIVERSITY (COUNTY CONTRACT #4087) FOR MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTHSERVICES (CACOON PROGRAM): Shane Grandlund said this modifies for year twofunding for special needs children with an increase of Ten Thousand Five Hundred($10,500) Dollars. This item will be carried forward to the 10:00 a.m. meeting.

ITEM NO.7: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT: a) PERMIT REPORT: b)SANITATION REPORT and c) SHORT TERM RENTAL REPORT: Craig Wakefieldsummarized the reports. The numbers are still not what they would like to see. He willprovide a three-year running report. It is better than last year. There were ten planreviews last week. Many are new homes. He said loans are still the bottleneck.

On short term rentals, we are coming to the one year anniversary. They are stillworking on organizing the program. He talked about software that would help. There isfunding available for this type of issue through homeland security. He described thenexus for response issues. He described training his inspectors have taken for rapiddamage assessment. He also talked about consolidation and efficiency measures thatcould be implemented. He will create a paper. He added there will be significantchanges to the commercial code but we don't have training money. He is working withthe state. He also discussed public education.

OTHER: Chair Hurliman discussed the Dave Buchler incident yesterday and ORSChapter 455 excerpts (see attached) that provide exemptions. He urged followup onthis. Mr. Wakefield said Mr. Buchler had done additional work that was not permitted.The permitted work will be finalized while the additional work is being done. ChairHurliman said the exemptions provide an impetus for us to encourage permittingbecause of lenders increasing reluctance to lend on dwellings with unpermitted work.Mr. Wakefield added additional chronology on how the Buchler incident evolved.

Commissioner Labhart reminded Mr. Wakefield about the need for a one-year review onthe short term rental ordinance. The commissioners discussed a proposed process.

Mr. Wakefield updated the commissioners on the Scheckler enforcement issue involvingobstructions in the coastal floodway. He distributed copies of the third proposal fromSheckler's engineer after input from FEMA's engineer. Mr. Wakefield will be speakingon this to the Rockaway Beach Council tonight. This document will be sent to FEMAtoday. There will be costs associated with some of the fixes. This is the toughest issuehe has dealt with in 17 years.

MINUTES ...;.TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING - Wednesday, January 12, 2011

ITEM NO.8: FLEET, FACILITIES AND CONTRACTS REPORT: a) DISCUSSIONCONCERNING PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT & UTILITY EASEMENT WITHBLASE EDWARD IHNAT FOR THE HEBO JOINT WATER AND SANITARYAUTHORITY WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT: b) DISCUSSIONCONCERNING CHANGE ORDER #3 TO PREVAILING WAGE RATE CONTRACTFOR CONSTRUCTION #4142 WITH EMERY & SONS CONSTRUCTION, INC. FORTHE HEBO WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT and c) DISCUSSIONCONCERNING TRANSFERRING FUNDS BETWEEN BUDGETED LINE ITEMS FORTHE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FOR THE HEBO WATERSYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT: Paul Levesque said that items a through c all relateto the Hebo Water system upgrade. The construction contractor is finaliZing the majorupgrade project but there are still grant funds available. The granting agency and theHebo Joint Water and Sanitary Authority (HJWSA) Board agree the extra funds shouldbe spent on a pressure reduction valve that would be placed in the main line above thetown. Item 8a on the agenda, is the easement from the private property owner onwhose property the pressure reduction valve would be placed. Item 8b on the agenda,amends the scope of the construction contract by adding the pressure reduction valveto the project. As required by the granting agency, item 8c provides a formal record inthe minutes authorizing the line item transfers within the grant budget. These items willbe carried forward to the 10:00 a.m. meeting.

OTHER: Mr. Levesque updated the commissioners on the courthouse roofing project.He described his meeting with a representative from the Garland Company, who has arubberized asphaltic, layered roofing system with a 30-year warranty. This productcould be utilized under an DRS 279A.220 Interstate cooperative purchasing contract.The construction of the project would be competitively bid. Mr. Levesque said theproject budget is estimated at Three Hundred Thousand ($300,000) Dollars and it wouldreplace the entire existing roof, remove the old elevator shack, and include a treatmentfor the parapets. He has worked with the treasurer's office and funds are available fromthe building improvement fund.

The commissioners authorized Mr. Levesque to proceed.

Mr. Levesque also outlined recent developments with the proposed handicappedaccess for the south main entrance. We recently received word of a Thirty Thousand($30,000) Dollar grant from the County Clerk's Association to help with design andimplementation. Deputy Kilgore suggested we investigate a scissor lift comparable topublic facilities in McMinnville and Pendleton. Mr. Levesque said there is support forthis from the county building official, the Tillamook State Court Administrator, the statecourt accessibility official and others. Chair Hurliman and Commissioner Labhart saidthey favored the lift over an elongated ramp because it would be a shorter route andless strenuous on someone in a chair. The accessible parking would be re-Iocated to


the front of the courthouse. It also leaves open the opportunity to expand thecourthouse to the south. Mr. Levesque said the County Clerk's Association is beingpolled on the issue as an appropriate use of the Thirty Thousand ($30,000) Dollar grantfunds.

Mr. Levesque updated the commissioners on the status of the space committee. Heisstill waiting for a final report from the engineer addressing some use suitability issues.Dave Dickman asked the commissioners for their opinion as to the space committeeexpanding its scope to include departmental shifts. As an example, he suggestedpossible use of the commissioners' meeting rooms and adjoining juvenile departmentfor a state court function. Chair Hurliman said that given our critical storage issues anduse of outside storage facilities, the storage should be a primary consideration. He feltit would take an annex or another building to fully accommodate the state court needs.Commissioner Labhart agreed that the committee should not look at space elsewherethat would involve major relocations that would have significant costs at a time when weare struggling with present budget issues. Mr. Levesque will report that to the spacecommittee.

d) DISCUSSION CONCERNING RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OFJANUARY AS "SCHOOL BOARD RECOGNITION MONTH" IN TILLAMOOKCOUNTY, OREGON: This item was not discussed.

ITEM NO.9: STAFF.REPORT: a) DISCUSSION CONCERNING RESOLUTIONPROCLAIMING JANUARY 27,2011 AS "PROJECT HOMELESS CONNECT DAY" INTILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON: Su Yaremchuk outlined her presentation on"Homeless Connect".

b) SUGGESTION BOX: There were none today.

ITEM NO.1 0: DISCUSSION CONCERNING LETTER REqUESTING THAT A BANKOF MAIL BOXES BE LOCATED IN BEAVER: Chair Hurliman discussed the issueswith the loss of the Beaver Post Office. He said in Bend there are banks of mailboxes.He proposed a letter to the United States Postal Service (USPS) suggesting thatsomething similar be constructed in the Beaver area. Commissioner Labhart said he isprepared to approve the letter. This item will be carried forward to the 10:00 a.m.meeting.

ITEM NO. 11: BOARD CONCERNS - NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were none atthis time.

ITEM NO. 12: PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were none at this time.

MINUTES - TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OFCOMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING ~ Wednesday, January 12, 2011

There being no further business Chair Hurliman adjourned the meeting at 9:52 a.m.

MEETING

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:

STAFF PRESENT:

Charles J. Hurliman, ChairMark Labhart, Commissioner

Tim Josi, Vice-Chair (Vacation)

Paul Levesque, Facilities, Fleet andContracts DirectorWilliam K. Sargent, County Counsel

STAFF PRESENT FOR PORTIONS OF THE MEETING: Liane Welch, Director, PublicWorks; Neal Lemery, Justice of the Peace; Su Yaremchuk, Staff Assistant; MarlenePutman, Interim Director, Health Department and Director, Commission on Children andFamilies.

GUESTS: Laura Ruggeri, Gus Meyer and John Gettman.

CALL TO ORDER: By Chair Hurliman at 10:00 in Commissioners' Meeting Room A.

ITEM NO.1: WELCOME & REQUEST TO SIGN GUEST LIST: Chair Hurlimanwelcomed everyone and reminded them to sign the guest list.

ITEM NO.2: PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON-AGENDA ITEMS: There were none at thistime.

ITEM NO.3: PRESENTATION ON PROJECT HOMELESS CONNECT: SuYaremchuk provided background on Homeless Connect (see attached). CommissionerLabhart thanked Mrs. Yaremchuk for her work on this.

TAKEN OUT OF ORDER ITEM NO.5: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONPROCLAIMING JANUARY 27.2011 AS "PROJECT HOMELESS CONNECT DAY" INTILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON: A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart toapprove and sign a resolution proclaiming January 27, 2011 as "Project HomelessConnect Day" in Tillamook County, Oregon. The motion was seconded by ChairHurliman. The motion carried with two (2) aye votes. The commissioners signedResolution #R-11-001.


ITEM NO.4: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING MINUTES FORDECEMBER 9. 2008 AND SEPTEMBER 22. OCTOBER 6 AND DECEMBER 15.2010: A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve the consent calendar.The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. The motion carried with two (2) ayevotes. The commissioners signed the minutes.

ITEM NO.6: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OFJANUARY AS "SCHOOL BOARD RECOGNITION MONTH" IN TILLAMOOKCOUNTY, OREGON: Commissioner Labhart said every year the commissionersrecognize school board members. He said school boards and planning commissionsare the two most difficult boards to serve on. He said it was important to recognize themembers of all three local sChool boards.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart approve and sign the resolutionproclaiming the month of January as "School Board Recognition Month" in TillamookCounty, Oregon. The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. The motion passedwith two (2) aye votes. The commissioners signed Resolution #11-002.

ITEM NO. 7: CONSIDERATION OF TEMPORARY ROAD USE AGREEMENT WITHSTIMSON LUMBER COMPANY TO ENTER COUNTY LANDS TO MONITOR ROYCREEK: Liane Welch said this is part of a Memorandum of Understanding (MQU)involving multiple partners for culvert replacement. Commissioner Labhart said thiswas a big project. Ms. Welch said it will open seven and a half miles of stream to fish.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve and sign the temporary roaduse agreement with Stimson Lumber Company to enter county lands to monitor RoyCreek. The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. The motion carried with two (2)aye votes. The commissioners signed the MOU.

UNSCHEDULED: Ms. Welch presented the road asset risk management plan andproposed reorganization necessitated by projected revenue short falls. She describedthe process used. The plan focuses on safety as a first priority. Very little money willbe spent on asphalt. This report will be posted on the website. She then described thereorganization plan. The three existing districts will be consolidated into one. Shedescribed the two county-wide teams. Starting February 28th

, they will go to four - tenhour work days per week. At one time we had 50 employees, we will be down to 21.Thirteen will be on the roads.

MINUTES -- TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING· Wednesday, January 12, 2011

ITEM NO.8: CONSIDERATION OF PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITHADVANCED PUBLIC SAFETY FORE-TICKETING HARDWARE, SOFTWARE ANDSUPPORT: Neal Lemery, Justice of the Peace, was present to support this item. Hedescribed the current system of data entry by both the sheriff's department and justicecourt. He then described how the e-ticketing system would work. He said the OregonState Police are doing this in the valley. Within six to ten weeks, we will be doing this.The funds will come from a Twenty ($20) Dollar assessment per ticket.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve and sign the PersonalServices Agreement with Advanced Public Safety for e-ticketing hardware, softwareand support. The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. The motion carried withtwo (2) aye votes. The commissioners signed the agreement.

ITEM NO. 9: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT 1 TO GRANT AGREEMENT(COUNTY CONTRACT #4087) WITH OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY(CFDA NO. 93.994) FOR MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH SERVICES (CACOONPROGRAM): Marlene Putman described the services (medical assessments) that willbe provided under this contract. It increases the amount by Ten Thousand FiveHundred ($10,500) Dollars and adds one year.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve and allow the interim directorof the health department to sign amendment 1 to grant agreement (County Contract#4087) with Oregon Health & Science University (CFDA No. 93.994) for maternal andchild health cervices (CaCoon Program). The motion was seconded by ChairHurliman. The motion passed with two (2) aye votes.

ITEM NO. 10: CONSIDERATION OF A PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT &UTILITY EASEMENT WITH BLASE EDWARD IHNAT FOR THE HEBO JOINTWATER AND SANITARY AUTHORITY WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT:Mr. Levesque explained that items 10, 11 and 12 were all related to the Hebo watersystem upgrade project. There are extra grant funds and both Hebo Joint Water andSanitary Authority (HJWSA) and the granting agency have agreed that these funds canbe used for a new pressure reduction valve in the main line. This agenda item providesfor the easement needed for the pressure reduction valve.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve and sign a permanentaccess and utility easement with Blase Edward Ihnat for the HJWSA upgrades project.The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. The motion carried with two (2) ayevotes. The commissioners signed the easement.

MINUTES.,... TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING ~ Wednesday, January 12, 2011

ITEM NO. 11: CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE ORDER #3 TO PREVAILING WAGE .RATE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION #4142 WITH EMERY & SONSCONSTRUCTION, INC, FOR THE HEBO WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT:Mr. Levesque said that this agenda item amends the construction contract to includeprocurement and installation of the new pressure reduction valve,

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve and sign change order #3 tothe prevailing wage rate contract for construction #4142 with Emery & SonsConstruction, Inc. for the Hebo water system upgrades project The motion wasseconded by Chair Hurliman. The motion carried with two (2) aye votes, Thecommissioners signed the change order,

ITEM NO. 12: CONSIDERATION OF TRANSFERRING FUNDS BETWEENBUDGETED LINE ITEMS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTFOR THE HEBO WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT: Mr, Levesque stated thatthe state granting agency providing the funding for the Hebo water system upgraderequests that the commissioners' record reflect authorization for moving the funds forthe pressure reduction valve from the project contingency line item to the constructionline item.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve the transferring fundsbetween budgeted line items for the Community Development Block Grant for the Hebowater system upgrades project: The motion was seconded by Chair Hurliman. Themotion passed with two (2) aye votes.

ITEM NO, 13: BOARD CONCERNS - NON-AGENDA ITEMS & ANNOUNCEMENTS:Chair Hurliman talked about the closure of the post office in Beaver and the opportunityto have the United States Postal Service install a bank of boxes in Beaver,Commissioner Labhart thanked Chair Hurliman for the idea and he supports it.

A motion was made by Commissioner Labhart to approve the letter, The motion wasseconded by Chair Hurliman, The motion carried with two (2) aye votes.

II/II/1111/1111

MINUTES ... TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' BOARDMEETING· Wednesday, January 12, 2011

ITEM NO. 14: PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were none today.

There being no further business Chair Hurliman adjourned the meeting at 10:34 a.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this .k;tday of :::rv... JjCounty Clerk: Tassi O'Neil

S~,i;;or~~Qs~&Special Deputy

APPROVED BY:

,2011.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'WORKSHOP

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Mark LabhartTim Josi

AbsentCharles HurlimanPaul Levesque

Absent

PLEASE PRINTName Address Item of Interest

(Please use reverse if necessary)

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'MEETING

Wednesday, January 12,2011

Mark LabhartTim JosiBill Sargent

PLEASE PRINTName

Present AbsentV'"

z

Address

Present AbsentCharles Hurliman .,/Paul Levesque ~

Item of Interest

(Please use reverse if necessary)

'-----~~-~------~---------

NOTICE OF BOARD WORKSHOP AND BOARD MEETINGof the

TILLAMOOK COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSAlso sitting as the Board of the

SOLID WASTE SERVICE DISTRICT,THE 4-H AND EXTENSION SERVICE DISTRICT

AND COUNTY ROAD DISTRICTto be held

Wednesday, January 12, 2011Workshop at 8:30 a.m.

Commissioners' Meeting Room BCounty Courthouse, 201 Laurel Avenue, Tillamook, Oregon

Board Meeting at 10:00 a.m.Commissioners' Meeting Room A

County Courthouse, 201 Laurel Avenue, Tillamook, Oregon

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

Charles J. Hurliman, ChairE-mail: [email protected]

Tim Josi, Vice-Chair CommissionerE-mail: [email protected]

Mark Labhart, CommissionerE-mail: [email protected]

201 Laurel AvenueTillamook, Oregon 97141

Phone: (503) 842-3403 FAX: (503) 842-1384

ANY QUESTIONS? ContactPaul Levesque (503) 842-1809

E-mail: [email protected]

COUNTY WEBSITE: http://www.co.tillamook.or.us

WATCH THIS MEETING ON TV: TCTV Channel 4

Friday - 1:00 p.m.Monday - 7:00 p.m.Thursday - 9:30 a.m.

Saturday - 3:30 a.m.Tuesday - 10:00 p.m.

Sunday - 7:00 p.m.Wednesday - 7:00 a.m.

NOTE: The Board of Commissioners reserves the right to recess to Executive Session as may be requiredat any time during this meeting, pursuant to ORS 192.660(1).

NOTE: The Tillamook County Courthouse is accessible to persons with disabilities. If specialaccommodations are needed for persons with hearing, visual or manual impairments who wish to participatein the meeting, please contact (503) 842-3403 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting so that the appropriatecommunications assistance can be arranged.

AGENDA

WORKSHOP

CALL TO ORDER: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 8:30 a.m.

1. Welcome & Request to Sign Guest List

2. Public Comment - Non-Agenda Items

3. Public Works Report/Liane Welcha. Discussion Concerning Temporary Road Use Agreement with Stimson Lumber Company to

Enter County Lands to Monitor Roy Creekb. Discussion Concerning Tillamook County Road Department Organizational Planc. Discussion Concerning Tillamook County Public Works Road Risk Assessment and Treatment

Plan Report

4. Discussion Concerning Personal Services Agreement with Advanced Public Safety for E-TicketingHardware, Software and SupportlTerry Huntsman

5. Discussion and Consideration for Out-Of-State Travel Authorization Request for Troy Jackson toTravel to Bozeman, Montana to Conduct a Background InvestigationfTerry Huntsman

6. Discussion Concerning Amendment 1 to Grant Agreement (CFDA No. 93.994) with Oregon Health &Science University (County Contract #4087) for Maternal and Child Health Services (CaCoonProgram)/Marlene Putman

7. Community Development Report/Butch Parkera. Permit Reportb. Sanitation Reportc. Short Term Rental Report

8. Fleet, Facilities and Contracts Report/Paul Levesquea. Discussion Concerning Permanent Access Easement & Utility Easement with Blase Edward

Ihnat for the Hebo Joint Water and Sanitary Authority Water System Upgrades Projectb. Discussion Concerning Change Order #3 to Prevailing Wage Rate Contract for Construction

#4142 with Emery & Sons Construction, Inc. for the Hebo Water System Upgrades Projectc. Discussion Concerning Transferring Funds between Budgeted Line Items for the Community

Development Block Grant for the Hebo Water System Upgrades Projectd. Discussion Concerning Resolution Proclaiming the Month of January as "School Board

Recognition Month" in Tillamook County, Oregon

9. Staff Report/Su Yaremchuk, Sue Becrafta. Discussion Concerning Resolution Proclaiming January 27,2011 as "Project Homeless

Connect Day" in Tillamook County, Oregon/Su Yaremchukb. Suggestion Box/Sue Becraft

10. Discussion Concerning Letter Requesting that a Bank of Mail Boxes be Located in Beaver/Charles J.Hurliman

11. Board Concerns - Non-Agenda Items

12. Public Comments

ADJOURN

MEETING

CALL TO ORDER: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:00 a.m.

1. Welcome & Request to Sign Guest List

2. Public Comment - Non-Agenda Items

3. Presentation on Project Homeless Connect/Su Yaremchuk

CONSENT CALENDAR

4. Board of County Commissioners' Meeting Minutes for December 9, 2008 and September 22, October6 and December 15, 2010

LEGISLATIVE -ADMINISTRATIVE

5. Consideration of Resolution Proclaiming January 27,2011 as "Project Homeless Connect Day" inTillamook County, Oregon/Su Yaremchuk

6. Consideration of Resolution Proclaiming the Month of January as "School Board Recognition Month"in Tillamook County, Oregon/Paul Levesque

7. Consideration of Temporary Road Use Agreement with Stimson Lumber Company to Enter CountyLands to Monitor Roy Creek/Liane Welch

8. Consideration of Personal Services Agreement with Advanced Public Safety for E-TicketingHardware, Software and SupportiTerry Huntsman

9. Consideration of Amendment 1 to Grant Agreement (County Contract #4087) with Oregon Health &Science University (CFDA No. 93.994) for Maternal and Child Health Services (CaCoonProgram)/Marlene Putman

10. Consideration of a Permanent Access Easement & Utility Easement with Blase Edward Ihnat for theHebo Joint Water and Sanitary Authority Water System Upgrades Project/Paul Levesque

11. Consideration of Change Order #3 to Prevailing Wage Rate Contract for Construction #4142 withEmery & Sons Construction, Inc. for the Hebo Water System Upgrades Project/Paul Levesque

12. Consideration of Transferring Funds between Budgeted Line Items for the Community DevelopmentBlock Grant for the Hebo Water System Upgrades Project/Paul Levesque

13. Board Concerns - Non-Agenda Items & Announcements

14. Public Comments

ADJOURN

BOARD MEETINGS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Tillamook County Courthouse will be closed on Monday, January 17, 2011, in observance of MartinLuther King, Jr.'s birthday. The State Circuit Courts, Tillamook Library, administrative offices in the jail andjustice facility, Tillamook County Road Department, Tillamook County Community Development Departmentand health department and clinics will also be closed.

The commissioners will hold a workshop on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. with TillamookCounty Ports, cities, special districts and other entities interested in obtaining federal funding in the nextfiscal year. A prioritized list of local projects will be developed to submit to congress for funding. Theworkshop will be held in the commissioners' meeting rooms A & B in the Tillamook County Courthouse, 201Laurel Avenue, Tillamook.

The commissioners will hold a workshop on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. with NinaDeConcini and Christine Svetkovich of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to discussDEQ issues and activities. The workshop will be held in the commissioners' meeting room A in theTillamook County Courthouse, 201 Laurel Avenue, Tillamook.

The commissioners will hold a workshop on Monday, January 24, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. with staff concerningthe county's land use fee system and in particular, fee waivers. The workshop will be held in thecommissioners meeting room B in the Tillamook County Courthouse, 201 Laurel Avenue, Tillamook.

The Commissioners will hold a Workshop on Monday, January 31,2011 at 10:00 a.m. with John Upton fora Quarterly Report on Tillamook County's Retirement Plan. The Workshop will be held in theCommissioners' Meeting Room B in the Tillamook County Courthouse, 201 Laurel Avenue, Tillamook.

The Commissioners' evening meeting schedule is as follows:

January 19, 2011February 16, 2011March 16, 2011April 20, 2011May 18,2011

Kiawanda Community Center*County Courthouse*Manzanita City HallKiawanda Community CenterManzanita City Hall

*Note: The February 16th meeting was previously scheduled at the Manzanita City Hall. The meetinglocation has been changed to the courthouse to accommodate a public hearing. The March 16th meetingwill be held in Manzanita instead of the courthouse.

All evening meetings will begin at 6:30 p.m.

Tillamook County Public WorksRoad Risk Assessment &Treatment PlanRisk Assessment Levels 1, 2 and 3 for Optimized ResourceAllocation

PBS Consulting

Sustainable Infrastructure Management

Submitted to:

Tillamook County Public Works

503 Marolf Loop

Tillamook, OR 97141

Submitted by:

PBS Consulting, Inc.

3024 NE Bryce Street

Portland, OR 97212

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.l.1 December 2010Page 2

Document Control

.. --,., ....._~--

Revision

Number Date Revision Details Author Reviewer Approver_._. '-'''".

...__._,.... -."-,,.

1.0 December 23, Draft Document Patricia Bugas-Schramm

2010 PBS Consulting

f----------"" -, -- ... _". _._._-

1.0 December 29, Review Draft Document Liane Welch, Director,

2010 TCPW

-- ---,.".

1.1 December 30, Final Risk Document Patricia Bugas-Schramm

2010 PBS Consulting._~ .-- .._...", .. ', ... ,---

1.1 January 2011 Receive Final Report Liane Welch, Director,

TCPW..._---_..

1.1 January 2011 Distribute Final Report County Road Advisory

Committee (CRAC) &

Boa rd of Cou nty

Commissioners (BOCC)'-----.•.__.. -"., ----_. ....'.-'

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.1.1 December 2010Page 3

4Executive Summary - 5

1. Introduction - 7

2. The Decision Making Process - 8

3. Risk Management Franlework - 9

4. Tillamook County Context - 11

5. Change Drivers - 14

6. Communication & Consultation - 14

7. Levell - Are there known high risk services or assets? - 15

8. Level 2 - Community Safety Analysis - 18

9. Level 3 - Tradeoff Analysis - 22

10. Fiscal year 2011-2012 Treatment Plan - 23

Appendices - 26

~ i

References - 42

t.. ,. ," ,.,.;:'1i..,;


Executive SummaryTillamook County owns and operates transportation infrastructure

assets valued in 2010 at $406 million. County roads have been

underfunded for years. Over the last 25 years, the county road

budget has stayed approximately the same, while the number of

employees has dropped from 51 to 23. The County's financial

forecast anticipates the loss of the federal forest receipts by July

2013, also called the Secure Rural Schools fund. This will result in

less service and continued decline of the overall transportation

system.

Tillamook County Public Works Road Department is building

organizational capability to manage transportation assets and

services based on their cost, performance and risks. The risks

associated with delivering the desired level of County road services

was established in 2008 and an asset management policy adopted

in 2009 by the Board of County Commissioners. As identified in the

policy, risks are monitored and reported on an on-going basis. This

report updates the risk assessment process for the Fiscal Year 2011

2012 County budget process.

Risks are evaluated in terms ofthe Road Department's ability to

achieve the County's strategic objectives. Residual risks and their

long term cost and performance given various funding levels and

County road priorities are identified. The long term objective of

using a risk management process within the Road Department is to

link asset planning and long term financial management within

Tillamook County so that the long term costs of service and risks are

minimized.

This document:

• Explains the risk assessment process and techniques used

by the Road Department in 2010.

• Describes the Road Department's formal risk framework

and Road Performance Report information used to assess

risks associated with managing County transportation

network.

• Rates County road services and assets in terms ofthe

likelihood and the consequence of risk events occurring and

the consequence of their failure if they occurred given

current performance and known risks.

• Provides network service level alternatives, and evaluates tradeoffs between services in terms of their

cost, performance and risk.


• Describes a more detailed strategy for the Fiscal Year 2011-2012, "Reduced Road Services, Focus on

Safety and Legal Compliance," and a risk treatment plan that implements core road services. This

service level targets legal compliance, emergency response and ensures worker safety. This is a

reduced level of service, recognizing the loss of $800,000 July 1, 2011, a 46% reduction from Fiscal Year

2010-2011's $3.12 million in ongoing revenues. 1

Services were assessed based on:

• The adopted road management strategy, alternative pavement condition performance targets, their

cost, performance and risk 2

• Current status and future impacts as described in the Tillamook County 2010 Road Performance Report

• A two-day workshop with the Road Department management and employees in which County

transportation network information was presented and risks associated with providing County road

services were discussed, and business risk exposure identified.

• Two public meetings with the County Board, Advisory Committee and County managers and Public

Works managers and staff reviewed work to date. This included:

o Risk trends from 2008 and 2010, asset condition. All but two services are declining in

performance, and most assets and services are Extreme or High risks.

o Establishing core road service principles (legal compliance, emergency response and worker

safety).

o Reviewing service tradeoffs in terms oftheir cost, risk and performance.

o Priorities for delivering core road services, assuming a lower level of service.

o Recognition that the condition of the County transportation network will continue to decline,

given this lower level of funding.

• Based on this evaluation, the Road Department and the County Human Resources Manager are

developing strategies to deliver Fiscal Year 2011-2012 road services. The importance of setting service

level targets and adopting performance standards was underscored by the Director. Draft

performance standards and data collection for signs and culverts were circulated. Tracking work

performed is critical to identify residual risks and their impact on the Road Department's ability to

achieve County road strategic objectives.

There is a desire to focus FY 2011-2012 resources on those road activities which do not require significant

material purchases (e.g., asphalt), maintain existing staffing levels and target high risk assets (e.g., culverts,

signs, bridges and levees) and services that provide community safety while preserving road surface quality

(vegetation and drainage management, such as ditching and shoulder maintenance, brush cutting and weed

spraying).

The implications of this lower level of County road services will continue to be communicated to County road

stakeholders by the County Board and Public Works Road Department as a part of the Fiscal Year 2011-2012

budget adoption process, and throughout the year as the community considers future funding options and

their implication for Tillamook County's road services.

1 Another $500,000 reduction will occur in July 2012. The community is expioring options that fund county road services at a higher level, howeverOregon budget iaw mandates that each local agency budgets balance expenditures and anticipated revenues annually.2 Pavement Management Program Budget Options Report, Capital Asset and Pavement Services, October 2010.


1. Introduction

This report documents the risk assessment process and decisions used by

Tillamook County's Road Department in 2010 to identify and treat risks

associated with providing County transportation services.

OOle·CLI·V(\S

The objectives of this report are to:

• Describe levels of County transportation services, including

Levell ~ Unconstrained; Level 2 - Current Service Level; and

Level 3 - Reduced Road Services, Focus on Safety and Level

Compliance and their impact in terms of performance, cost

and risk.

• Summarize the 2010 risk assessment process used to evaluate impacts of alternative levels of

service

• Summarize County road services and asset performance options, their cost and credible

transportation asset risk exposure given alternative levels of County transportation services.

• Identify core service principles that guide the FY 2011-2012 service level implementation

• List prioritized services that require management treatment action plans based on a 3-phase risk

process, including handouts and presentations used during 2 public meetings (one televised) and 2

workshops with management and staff that occurred in November and December 2010. These

workshops involved:

o The Board of County Commissioners (BOCe)

o The County Road Advisory Committee (CRAe)

o County managers (Treasurer, Human Resources, legal counsel, facilities manager)

o Tillamook County Public Works Road Department managers and staff

• Define a high level risk treatment plan strategy to manage known risks for FY 2011-2012

implementation.

ThiS report updates the Tillamook County Public Works Core Infrastructure Risk Management Plan for Road

Assets, January 2009. It should be read in conjunction with:

• The Tillamook County Public Works Road Asset Management Plan 2008 which describes the links

between Tillamook County road management strategy, tactics and current operations.

• The Tillamook County 2010 Road Performance Report.

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.1.! December 2010Page 7

2. The Decision Making Process

Participants in the 2010 Tillamook County risk management process reviewed information, rated risks and

commented on final road service and asset priorities for Fiscal Year 2011-2012. These included:

• Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)

• County Road Advisory Committee (CRAe) members

• Public Works Director, managers and staff

• County Human Resource Manager, Treasurer, legal counsel

The Public Works Director will present the desired level of road services, Service Level 3 - Reduced Road

Services, Focus on Safety and Legal Compliance, to the Board of County Commissioners as a part of the

Tillamook County budget development process for Fiscal Year 2011-2012.

I

BOee,

t

Public

Budget

Committee180ce & 3 "(,,en;)

tPublic Works

Director

County Road

AdvisoryCommittee

Figure 1 - County Decision Ma,king Roles

• Step 1 - Define targets and time horizons for three levels of road services. Based on existing

performance measures (e.g., pavement condition index, bridge sufficiency information), compare

performance, cost and risk trends for each County road service on the ability to achieve the adopted

road management strategy. Transportation network performance, condition and costs were compared

and issues identified (see Tillamook County Public Works 2010 Road Performance Report).

• Step 2 - Discuss impacts on the County economy, social impacts (internal to the County road

stakeholders and external road stakeholders), and environmental impacts with Public Works

management and staff (November 8 and December 1,2010) and County leadership and road

stakeholders in public meetings (November 8 and December 6,2010).

• Step 3 - Based on the recommended risk rated services, develop a risk treatment strategy for Fiscal

Year 2011-2012. Develop implementation strategies with Public Works employees and managers

(December 16).


• Step 4 - Present risk assessment findings, and recommended risk treatment plan for Fiscal Year 2011

2012 County budget process and Board of County Commissioners consideration (January 2011).

3. Risk Management FrameworkAsset management is the systematic and coordinated set of activities and practices through which Tillamook

County Road Department provides the transportation network described in the County's Comprehensive Plan's

transportation element. By identifying and timing investments, asset failure, costly repairs or early

replacement of transportation assets can be avoided. Risk assessment techniques help determine when and

where:

• strategic goals are not being met

• events may occur, or assets may fail given their condition and use, and

• economic inefficiencies are occurring (e.g., where an asset's maintenance or operational costs exceed

the cost of replacement).

The goal is to provide the greatest value for the public's investment and communicate known risks to the

organization, and the County's transportation stakeholders. The risk management framework follows an

iterative process. Risks are specific to their context; are identified and managed, given available resources; and

then monitored and communicated to the organization and stakeholders.

....--

I I -Establish the Con-text

.... 1~ •t: .I I8 Identify the Risk 3:

'I I ~'C ... ~t:v.I .1 I. II:

Sl Analyze the Risk '0'1 I cv.I c:su

C • ...:::l

I Ig

E Evaluale the Risk cE 00 1

:iU

,l..1 Respond to the Risk I'1 I'----

-

Figure 2 Risk Management Framework3

A three-level risk assessment process was used to evaluate the best use of County road resources.

3 Adapted from Risk Management Principles & Guidelines, 15031000:2009, and A5/NZ5 4360:2004, a risk managementstandard, Australia and New Zealand that applies to all organizations. "Risk management" is defined as 'the culture,processes and structures that are directed towards realizing potential opportunities while managing adverse effects.' Riskcan affect objectives. Objectives can include financial, health and safety, and environmental goals and can apply atdifferent levels of an organization (e.g. strategic, organization-wide, project, and process).


19\f~ 1 ~HlI5k ,Il.IMI'JS'JIl'1I1I1I~tlr"1t1~kl1l711/11 ~ lisf.lM!IN~iM<)(~*'"

r.j .. i-ol~'ia\lf

NI!l'!:tPsriod

I

r,

Le'lI.~-C~SliIwly~ty5ia

1-5S~ft)i'~(hA~

5,.i)f1tIII;~yH~h

4"HiOI'lmnG~

j-f-l91 but &able,-, _Low

:f r,.l)n~rrl'JI,i!)' ~."I~1:'y IndIY.I!'Jl-::; ~lQI k~,(/w!1 for ~xtren~ar h!J;h !'lsI( '.1M<!i'!I or 15oe'Y"GI!'5 '1l"W11~:l1'):1!' '1&*

It\ltl~~:.JQIi 'Jf 1;1~W,;lo1 rl·,~'/;l,ir",-=- IliI,J'$! lo.:- dq<;"'r1',~n\¢.~ ;!,

"l!ik"l-lI1<J~n'~11tiJ<'lf'

1 _ 5 S-eoret&fEadlAa~.5aoUI_~'fHlqt1

."'ril9hI,W'ldI~ng

~bY(stJIJle

~~te

1 "Low

",~di;":ono:J: wetq~~!~9I;l1,:roM1',''1;::1 !'1',J/ ;)~

;~Pl-'I~

JRA Pr1Ol1l:~:: ,~~;:;.~~~~ w~~h P"9r.~'

:)f;I",rn::wi.,,~f"ii)rCl'tl!m,~;:.at<)l":'!o

3l':,0<Nr,

Figure 3 - Three Level Risk Process4

___, J--------_._-

• Level 1 Identify Overall Service Risk Exposure - Calculate the risk rating of each road asset group or

service based on the consequence and likelihood of a risk event occurring (Extreme, High, Medium,

Low). This is the process followed in 2008, and repeated as a first step in 2010.

• Level 2 Because almost all services and assets moved to Extreme or High risk in 2010, a more detailed

analysis of risk was taken. This refined analysis re-ranked risk exposure for Extreme and High risk

services and assets based on County strategic objectives, regulations and policies. It identified non

negotiable or core road services and assets required to comply with legal mandates, ensure

community safety and reliability along traffic lifeline routes, provide emergency response and ensure

worker safety as defined in federal and state requirements. Priorities evaluated economic impacts,

asset condition index, asset failure, or risk incidences (e.g., weather events, traffic crashes, tort claims,

and worker safety) where information was available.

• Level 3 This is a more detailed evaluation oftradeoffs between Iifecycle cost, performance and

environmental impacts for possible projects, activities and programs that deliver County road strategic

objectives. For Extreme and High risks, or non-negotiable assets or services from Level 2, an approach was

recommended that delivers road services (Risk Treatment Plan) given available resources. An operational

emphasis on safety and legal mandates was deemed as providing the biggest "bang for the buck."

Accomplishments will be tracked relative to risk mitigation and performance targets that can be achieved

given anticipated Fiscal Year 2011-2012 resources. Accomplishments will be tracked and results reported

annually in terms of their risk reduction and cost.

4 Used with permission from JRA, Sydney, Australia, 2010.


The community and County road stakeholders have participated in this process; further explanation of

road service priorities and implementation for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 will occur as a part of budget

adoption.

The following assumptions guide the 2010 risk assessment process:

• Fiscal Year 2009-2010 asset, cost and service information were used to identify impacts and

develop specific treatment plans. Risk assessments and treatment plans will be modified as severe

weather events occur, asset inventories and condition change, and management strategies

developed.

• This risk process does not replace the roles and responsibilities currently in place to manage

County tort claims.

• The business risk exposure (risk rating) is one consideration that informs the Board of County

Commissioners broader priority setting processes. Consideration of risk is an integral consideration

in this priority setting process. A risk "rating" or Business Risk Exposure (BRE) integrates asset

condition, service request and core risk criteria (worker and public safety, legal compliance).

• The confidence in information used in this risk assessment process is identified so that the basis of

County Road Department decisions is understood. Complete, timely and accurate information

about critical assets is important to managing risk; its absence is an inherent risk. s

4. Tillamool{ County ContextThe County owns and operates transportation infrastructure assets valued in 2010 at $406 million. Tillamook's

Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) has assigned responsibilities for managing risks associated with road

assets and service delivery to Tillamook County Public Works Director. TCPW is responsible for the following

managing county:

• 334 miles of roads (paved and gravel)• Structures 98 bridges, 7 levees and 10 miles of guardrails• Drainage (over 3,000 culverts and 198 miles of ditches)

• Traffic Safety (5,400 road signs, 299 miles of road markings, 1traffic signals)

• 115 Vehicles and equipment• 3 maintenance yards

• 2 quarries• Operational programs that support the above (Vegetation

Management, Emergency Management, Engineering and Administrative Services, Materials andStockpiling)

The Road Department is responsible for managing asset information, including the asset inventory, valuation,

condition and management of the current level of service. Department foremen and employees identify risks

sSee Appendix 2 - Confidence in County Road Asset Information

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.1.l December 2010Page 11

associated with providing the current level oftransportation services. The department is responsible to

develop, implement and monitor asset management strategies and an asset management plan that provides

the desired level of service in a cost effective manner, including:

• Asset identification, classification and valuation

• Condition assessments & forecasting

• Risk assessment & treatment plans

• Information management• Targeted maintenance & renewal

Tillamook County has implemented many asset management practices and procedures to identify and managerisks associated with managing the County's transportation network. As funding allows, these include:

• Operating a reactive maintenance services for all assets and services

• Operating a planned maintenance for critical assets, such as arterial pavements, bridges,

regulatory signs and pavement markings

• Monitoring condition and remaining service life for assets nearing the end of their useful service

life or prior to significant weather events

• Renewing and replacing assets to maintain service delivery

• Closing and disposing of assets not providing the required or safe service level; and

• Acquiring and constructing new assets to provide new and improved services


Table 1 - 2010 County Road Network Summary

TIL.L.!\MOOK COUNTY ROAD NETWORKINVENTORY, CONDITION, AND VAL.UE

JUL.Y 2010

FACILITY GAS834 STATUS REPLACEMENT CONDITION' TOTAl UNMEr

VAL.Ue VG G F P VP 8e NEED"

PAVEMENT

Pa"'Od X 269 centeMine miles 5261 ,60D 000 27% 15% 24% 34% $57,000,000

Gralel 1;15 c~nteri~ll~ mila:,; ~ X NiA

5264.005.670 $57,000,000

STRUCTURES

Bridge. X ~i8 $ 128, i>43 352 67% 2.0% 13% TBCGuardrail. "10"1 miles 51152385 39\)/(1, B~·'o 13t:>/0 33% 10% 2% S495,526

Lll'.<l<lS 7 .mo. X :lID;

$129,995.737 S495,526

DRAINAGE

CUI\Rtts X 3,210 $2,374,438 X lBD

DjtCMs 1980llias TBD I'%~ 6% G30f~ 2.2% 3Q:/Qo lBC

TRAFFIC SICNALS I rnD X lBC

STREET SIGNS

Signs (Condition for Stop Signs only) X 5 oW5 $172992 85% 14% '1%, lBC

Delineatorn X 4:;) $8221; X lBD

P,>sls X 4.165 ~ X lBD$239528

PAVEMENT MARKINGS

Painted cemer I",e. miles 299 r-L'A NfA

Painted SlOP Bars TED NiA ~A

VEHiCLES & EQUIPMENT'" X 115 $:),898879 TBD lBD

MAINTENANCE YAROS X 3 $4,000000 X

RIGHT.OF.WAY·" 2,367 acres $'1.,;17S,55'7

TOTAL $4%,989809

-Asset condition c"'"gone. ""y u.,ng 3. 4 "nct 5-1e'",,1 condition assessment catagon....

--I)n"",,! nood"'",," by a.set cl",,; 1M 10;\91 of ''''''Co; is deftned .peCific to tM as.el cl"5S hlgMSl periomlance ;Or Ihe .east cost. or can Simply 00 the eliminanOf'of assels in poor condition (e.g., s,gnS,I.

"-Tillamool< County Comprehensive rlrlalle,a! AnnUal Rep",!. June 30,2009. RO\\Mdlh: ",,,..,r ~rten~ls 8. n"'Jor collector GO foot; minor oollec tor h'idth is 60 feet;loe"l. 45 twt.

Notes: VG = Ve", Good, G = Good, F =Fair, P =Poor. VP " Very Poor, lBD - To Be Detemlll1W. NiA =Not Applicable

Source: 2010 Tillamook County Road Performance Report, Fall 2010


5. Change Drivers• County roads have been underfunded for years. Over the last 25 years, the county road budget has

stayed approximately the same, while the number of employees has dropped from 51 to 23.

• The County's financial forecast anticipates the loss ofthe federal forest receipts by July 2013, also

called the Secure Rural Schools fund. This represents a loss of 46% from Fiscal Year 2009-2010

revenues. This will result in less service and continued decline of the overall transportation system.

• Although road condition was stabilized from 2008 to 2010, it is still in an overall condition of "Poor",

and considered the worst system in the State with a network average Pavement Condition Index of 46,

one point up from 2008 when the PCI was 45. Any PClless than 50 is considered in poor condition.

• Tillamook County has experienced 7 federally declared weather events over the last several years.• There is only partial inventory and condition information on culverts that manage Tillamook's average

of 90" annual rainfall. The County continues to have catastrophic failures of culverts. Most of the

estimated 3,000 culverts are 50 to 60 years old.

• The OTIA state bridge program was completed in 2010. Six bridges were replaced, however 13% ofthe

98 County bridges are in poor condition and 4 are posted with weight limits.

• Federal, state and local regulations, and the increasing cost of energy, materials (asphalt) and

equipment impact the cost of transportation services and project design and construction.

• Planned retirements in January 2011 further reduce the Road Department staffing to 21. 6

6. Communication & Consultation

By involving internal and external stakeholders in the risk process (e.g. BOCC, CRAC, County managers, Road

Department managers and employees), those responsible for or affected by the asset or service level can

contribute their professional perspective, and understand the basis of decisions and required actions. Results

from this process are communicated to Tillamook County residents and businesses throughout the year at

public forums.

6 The Director is considering temporarily hiring 2 flagger positions to meet work zone safety requirements.

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.i.1 December 2010Page 14

7" Levell· Are there known high risk services or assets?'Three levels of risk techniques are described (see Appendix 1- Optimized Resource Allocation Model):

Level 1- High Level Service and Asset Risks, identifies what can

happen (events or business risks), and how it can happen. Credible

risks are identified for each major asset or service provided. Known

risks based on a high level assessment of likelihood and

consequence of failure. It documents risks and assigns appropriate

actions for extreme and high risk.

L~~ 1 ~ R i~1I; A.SSl!":§'§.m@fll ~At~ ~n@"~ I\nown ~ gt'l l"iSK$~,"";;;;:* ot as*t$o;

N ,; R'ilt'lIi'W

~~~~:~

p~r·,o

I

Figure4 - Levell Risk Assessment

Risk can be defined as "the threat or probability that an action or event will adversely or beneficially affect an

organization's ability to achieve its objectives." 7 By identifying the likelihood of failure and the consequence of

failure a systematic and coordinated action plan can be developed to mitigate risks within resource limitations.

The acceptance of risk should match customer expectations and willingness to pay for a level of service.

The probability of failure and the consequence of failure provide the risk rating or risk.

Risk = (Likelihood x Consequence)

The risk rating of likelihood and consequence identifies the combined relative risk the community faces when

physical assets or services fail. The risk analysis method relies on information or expert knowledge of the

transportation network, asset inventory, condition of physical assets and demands on transportation network

assets and services.

7 Business Case Development, Portland Water Bureau, October 2009


Table 2- Likelihood of Failure Ranking

Ranking Likelihood Frequency Description Ranking

IndivKJual assellailure based on The Ihreatcan be expeclBd III occur or a very poor stale 01Almost CertainNery High Near Certainty (90%) condilon delBrioralon is likely tJ knowildge has been established on Ihe Ihreat 5

occur wilhin Ihe yearIndivklual assetlailure based on The Ihrea! will quile cormonly occur or a poor stJIJ 01 knowledge

Likely/High Highly Likely (70%) condition delerioralon is likely tJ has been established on Ihe Ihreat 4occur within 2yearsIndivklual assetlailure based on The Ihreat may occur occasionally or a rmderate state olknowildge

Moderate Likely (50%) condition deiJrioralon is likely b has been established on Ihe Ihreat 3occur wiltlin 3 ID 5 yearsIndivklual assetlailure based on The Ihreatcould infrequenly occur or agood staiJ 01 knowledge has

Unlikely/Low Unlikely (20-30%) condition delerioration is likely tJ been established On Itle Ihreat 2occur wiltlin 6 tJ 10 yearsIndivKJual assetlailure based on The Ihreat may occur in exceptional circumstances or avery good

RareNery Low Rermle (10%) condilon delErioration is notllkely ID state ofknowledge has been established on Ihe Itlreat 1occur br 10 or rmre years

Table 2 identifies risk Likelihood ranking from ~1, Rare or Very Low likelihood to 5, Almost Certain!Very High

likelihood; no changes were made from 2008.

Consequences of failure are defined by economic, legal, community, human health and safety, County

reputation, environmental and human resources impacts. Impacts are rated based on a 1-5 scale, from

insignificant consequence to 5 or catastrophic consequence.

Table 3- Consequence of Failure - 20108

Consequences of RiskScore

Insignificant

FactorEconomic impact Less than $5,000

(damages 10community, losses,

additional expenditures)

Minor

$5.000-$25.000 $25,000 -$100.000

Moderate Major

$100,000 - $250,000

catastrophiC

Greater'ttHm $250,000

Legal compliance

Community impijct

Human health andsafety

Reputation

En\.tronment impact

Human Rosoul'Ces(Reduction in staff;

Employee s:afe~y,

owr1ime & workload;

~meraencv resl)onse)

County fully complies and is

on course with regulators toanticioate rnandf.lte~

community complaints

No injuries

No ad\erse media (all week.)

Short·term damage

County agrees to compliance County warned of compliance issues and adoptsschedule, and a\Qids lawsuit!:' correcti~ i;l(.tionand MAs.

unplannOd disruption to Simultaneous unplannea CMruption to multiplemultiple households, firms or households, firms, or community ser\ices/structures

communityservices/structures

Minor injuries Serious injuries

L.ocal media criticile co\mtv Regional madi~ Crificizes County for 2 daysfOr 1 week

Limited but medium-term Major but reco-..erable ecological damagenegatiVE! effect

County sued or fined formissing mandates.EX[lects to comDI' in 1Unpl\:lnned disruption tolarge number of

households

Single fatality or multiple~ariolJ~ ir'-\Jrles

National media criticizesCount for 2 days

Heav; ecological damage,

costl restoration

county sueCi Or finad for missingmandates. No viable plan to comply.

Unplanned disruption to essentialSBNCa (e.~., lifeline ro\lte)

Multiple fatalities

National media criticizes county fOr 1

week

permanent, widespread ecological

damaQe

Table 3 - Consequences of Failure were modified for 2010 conditions in a December 6, 2010 meeting with the

BOCC, CRAC and Road Department management. Catastrophic consequences now are defined as the loss of

more than $250,000 in community damage, or asset failures or greater expenditures (down from $500,000 in

2008), and the number of Road Department staff reductions (changed from "percentage of staff reductions"

given the small number of current Road Department staff).

8 Modified by SOOT AM Steering Committee, August 2010.

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.l.l December 2010Page 16

'.~I .. 2RIsktl

The Likelihood and Consequence of Failure definitions were applied across 16 Road Services and Assets and a

risk level identified, from Low (L) to Extreme (E) business risk exposure. Collaborative meetings on November 8

and December 1, 2010 with Public Works Road management and staff evaluated possible causes of asset or

service failure based on a review of available inventory, condition and valuation information, and their

knowledge of the transportation network. A prompt list of asset failure causes were used to spur discussions

(see Appendix 4 - Prompt List for Asset Failure).

The risk level indicates which risks may be tolerated as well as the risks where additional resources may reduce

the exposure to risk to a tolerable level. Risk identifies the likelihood of failure and the resulting impact or

consequences to an asset cost, network performance or impacts on stakeholder or the community served.

H

H

M

M

H

H

M

M

MM

Table 4 - Risk Rating

Consequence

2 3 4 5

Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic

M H H

1 Rare

Certain

4 Likely

2 Unlikely

3 Moderate

Likelihood

5Almost

Appropriate management strategies are stipulated given the risk rating. Assets or services with a High or

Extreme rating require a formal treatment, or immediate management response. This process is

summarized in Table4.

Table 5 - Risk Treatment

Risk Rating

Extreme Risk

High Risk

Medium Risk

Low Risk

Action Required

Immediate action reqUired to reduce risk

Management attention reqUired to manage risk

Management responsibilities specified and riskcontrols reviewed

Manage by routine procedures


Table 6 - Risk Management Strategies

Risk Management Strategies

Avoid

Transfer

Mitigate

Accept

Changing activity or asset management plan to eliminate the threat posed by an adverserisk; to avoid risk by clarifying requirements, obtaining information, improvingcommunications, or acquiring expertise.

Risk transference requires shifting the negative impact of a threat, along with theownership of the response to a third party (e.g. insurance, or transfer responsibility toprivate or other public entity). This doesn't eliminate the risk.

Implies a reduction in the probability and/or impact of an adverse risk event to anacceptable threshold.Retain the risk; Indicates decision to deal with a risk, or recognition of inability to identifyany other suitable response strategy.

A general strategy to manage risk was identified by Road Department management and staff.

Table 7 - Levell· 2010 County Road Service Risk Assessment and Management Plan (excerpt)

-- _....- --~,;~ ....»,~

-"""

LIIQ.;;sf'j'T'al)''No'CltII<"-.I,""=",If'~n:f,.tr...~i~P,",~q'

p:!Jr~I='~=~~ =:7~:c~~=~,~,~~~:~:'~~~r:t:i~ ',"~:::~=~~)/l~':~::~::=::~~;'.1:1lJ"~r»r'~"'>II"""'2 ,'J.t\l~"(i. 1~.JW1,)I ~"'P"r~nt,t tl'Juri'Sm. 'T1p,l':>':~ !judie ~.e...,'/~PQn~";~

,}:~\,~~I:;i

""'iQOI:'1o;:<},I~.....tij!;.i~

~~f1o\Y>

C.ji'>;jitoor,:l~lrte':ltj=n:

df "':J~ '.JpI~JJ'>j,\".;.;:l&"~"",, I"r».\; "I ',;'~, :t-:>j;Wf.>' ':<' ~"'I~: L:.:JDo:,'tjr .;.'r""~f

~"11!~':~~-=;::;Nt\T~ ~Ho,)rfI, ~ft'l)' ~'-:" I,~: M.~"-':",,,,"~,,;~

£",:~:-E=E ~~='~':i::f~J::E~~::~;:7",,",,~-3I~II)r"~'ln.

T·de!~IV~' ..>r~""," '''I~~

;~'~:,<""~l+rN',i~ l'f"~ Q!'~~r.;-;-;= 'pq(no>~,JI7'(Ip.;I"~

~.I~l:Inl",",a-j~:Js:f>::..lliov',]r"Ii:

,II'i~II"Q,~ 1"~'''¥'.oIM: -".fI~~'fI:!.'

:/,"'''''i:~J..:o.;:.'>!;} ()NI""'"

t)<;o';~:I)'''': S"lll~l'; ,)."~"W '~"'~

N =;.t¥"IIl't~ ,y ;UT1:,'-"; p.J.'~~'S;o,~r;),I"I,:~~IOM~

~I~i

:;r~IS'~"":fr ,,=.]O-:t~

",x-...,,:r,i~·\'''''~''1'le:t:.:tIU'lllL'iit1

.'1Cl'"'= ,'~:5i~rl~, -".lo~I~·

...~:MI~~ ~~ ,::t~ :I~'\I~.

':''.:,'~:Ir':'~'lil "'IjI~+"",""}+':'

.... gr:'1'J'\,JI"1,t+J,'l.alrIt~' ... '

1:'....;".,j~-t.»'"',',~'~'V·lrl:,"".,~)(",:j~.:',·I;;]j~I'I.'lf'\o!B~1'J,;j':

=-"cs;,,"~I!I,YC]t,y .. "T'II:lI1't"

·'::'·,:l<l~"'f':I.'Q.',;,.~.':j'I\<}1\

1~+:.f.M"l~pc-;'!~,,:,m:'L.

~·.~;'~I!f1e;o".tes

?~ ~~':>:>" fl'l:;'~, I~':::"I'\~ i:'..I.~i,: r.;,/;lJ\,.ITI~l1i r;:,,,,,l}i

8. Level 2 - Community Safety AnalysisOnce Extreme or High risk (critical) assets or services were identified in the Levell analysis, a Level 2

Stakeholder & Community Impact Analysis assessed risk at a more detailed level. Service requests, risk

incidents, asset condition index and asset failure trends were reviewed. These criteria are linked to Table 3,

Consequence Factors, and indicate changing service levels. They reflect the most significant stakeholder and

community effects when services or an asset fails.


Core, non-discretionary Road Department activities required to maintain basic services were identified. These

are services that are:

• legally required,

• those that provide emergency response, or

• federally mandated inspections or design guidelines (e.g., bridge inspection, regulatory sign

requirementsL or worker safety (OSHA) standards.

These are non-negotiable ("deal breakers") and receive top priority for available funds. For example, the

consequence of not providing regulatory (stop, speed) signs results in almost certain injury or death from

traffic crashes at intersections, and tort liability risk for the County due to non-compliance with federally

mandated traffic safety standards (MUTCD).

Staffing levels sufficient to ensure traffic and worker safety in work zones are non-negotiable. Lack of training

or inadequate staffing at a construction or road maintenance work site may result in unsafe travel zones,

traveler or worker injury, or death, as well as tort claims against the County. Providing response to severe

weather events or damage due to floods, wind or earthquakes requires a minimum of Road Department

staffing and equipment to 1) prepare for an event (e.g., inspect culverts along flood prone roadways; 2)

provide emergency response; 3) participate in the 911 call center during an event; 4) respond to emergency

requests for service along County Traffic Lifeline Routes. 9

June 2008 results were compared to December 2010 and trends identified. 2010 service requests and legal

requirements were noted for each service or asset. This information was presented to the Board and CRAC in a

public, televised meeting December 6,2010.

Table 8 Level 2 Risk Rating Trends, Performance, Service Requests and Legal Mandates shows:

• Most Tillamook County road assets and services have moved into Extreme or High risk categories between

the 2008 and 2010 risk assessment.

• In spite of stabilizing at 46 PCI, the condition of County paved roads are still in Poor condition, the worst in

the state. The majority of service requests (59%) are pothole complaints; this reflects community

dissatisfaction with the failing condition of County roads.

• There are insufficient resources to address known County road network risks. The County road asset

conditions are expected to decline over the next 5 years given current resources.

9 The Tillamook County's Transportation System Plan defines Tillamook County Lifeline Routes (see Appendix 4).


Table 8 - Level 2 Risk Rating Trends, Performance, Service Requests and Legal Mandates

Average network condition

Roadsstabilized at Poor condition (PCI 46);

59% NoI nadequate funds to achieve Good

oondition or prevent future dedine.

Spraying & mowingInadequate resources to maintain

Veg.Mgmt N/A regular maintenancei not meeting 9% Noroadsides

customer expectations

EmergencyRoads, Structures, Significant reduction in expenses

Drainage, Traffic Safety, (S%). No federally declared storms 1% NoManagement

Department Employees in Fiscal 2010.

68% Level A (Preventive

Maintenance) performed as

Equipment Fleet & Equipment needed, based on use; crew & shop N/A No

performed 100% safety check;

replaced spray truck

Staffing for cost Currently 23 (44% decline over 12accounting, budgeting

years). Employees are crucial toservice request &work

providing legally mandated roadAdmin. management, Director,

N/A services} and emergency response. N/A NoServices shop supervisor, Training requIred to comply with

foremen, equipmentOSHA and traffic safety

operators, work zone requirements.fla ers

Unknown condition & some

catastrophic failures; replaced

Culverts, ditches &several culverts; No ditching

Drainage 2-Low program; 2008 inventory & 11% Noshoulders

condition assessment; 93% require

some maintenance &30% in Poor

or Very Poor condition

99% stop signs in Good condition;MUTCD traffic sign

Traffic SafetySigns-Regulatory (stop

3-Moderatenighttime visibility signs deferred in

9% Yes and pavementsigns) 2010; inventory & condition not

marking safetyassessed annually

2 bridges added to inventory inNational Bridge

2010; 13 bridges in Poor conditionInspection Standards

Structures Bridges High High 5·0ptimalin 2009, up from 7 in 2008; OTIA

0% Yes (NBIS) every other

funding ended in FY 2010year to receive

federal funds


Table 8 - Risk Rating and Performance Trends with Service Requests and Legal Mandates (cant.)

Risk R;rtllll 1 2010 t.tPllr ,SUbprografll 2008 2010 ,

lnflll'matlOll Trend i ~l$ ~ :~Iil" I RJJllhltloo ClltfillWYI

.......

Re-painted annually; Marion CountyMUTCD traffic .ign

Traffic Safely Pavement marking. Hith ...•.. High 5-0ptimal ~ 0% Ye. and pavementcontract

marking .afely....

Material.21.. 000 cubic yards rock crushed at

Quarries HIJh HiSh 3-Moderate ...... Cloverdale and Nehalem pits - N/A NoMgmt.

...... $169,000 contract

...... ..•..•....

Gravel roads-county........... Reactive gravel road maintenance;

Road. Hllh High 2-Low inadequate staff to provide regular 3% Nom"'intained

maintenance

Engineering staff reduced by 40% in ASSHTO De.ign

2 year>; impact. ability to maintain Mj;mual

Engineering Engineering services Medium High N/A.ign and bridge.; reduced ability to

N/A Ye.requirements;

review re.idential &utility permit. County permit review

in timely mi;lnner; project and &engineering

contract management reduced standardsf---- .. - ..

In.pect building. quarterly for

Facilitie. Maintenance Yard. HlIh 2-Low safetYi pay utilities; dean up yard. N/A No

Building. exceed u.efuilife.

No guardrail program; reactive

Structures Guardrail. Medium Medium 3-Moderatereplacement only. 2007 inventory &

0% Nocondition assessment; 43% in Poor

condition

95% .top .ign. In Good condition;

Traffic Safety Sign••Other Medium Medium 3-Moderate nighttime vi.ibility .ign> deferred in See Signs TBD

201

2010 inventory & condition

Structures Levees TBD Medium 5·0ptimal t assessment; general assessment of0% No

Sati.factory or Adequate except

McDonald Dike

Other observations noted in Table 8 include:

• A levee inspection program instituted in 2009 indicates the 7 levees are in good condition.

• While paved road condition was stabilized, road condition is still 46 PCI or poor.

• The GTIA bridge program has replaced 6 bridges but there are no County funds to address critical

bridge repair and replacement.

• Pavement markings, quarries, guardrails, and non-regulatory signs (e.g., street name signs) remained

the same. All other services and assets received more severe risk rating.

• Bridge inspection, regulatory signs, and new environmental mandates and construction standards are

required. Drainage services (culverts and ditching) remain a critical need.


9, Level 3 - TradeofIAnalysisA description ofthe 2010 road performance information (inventory, condition, replacement value and need),

the risk assessment process, and rating of all services were presented at the December 6,2010 public meeting.

Community safety impacts were evaluated. Comparison of performance, cost and risk were described for

various levels of road services.

Alternatives for County paved road network performance were discussed at the meeting.

Sc S . pC! 3~,· $1.8fv1

SC .. 3 - PCI;l· $16.8M

-Sc 4 - PCI 46· $14M

l'oor

-f"ilr-~~--"-··--·~-·-"-··-~~------··-'''·5... 1 PC I Sf:) $>57 MTARCET

100

90

x SO~.= 70\;

.2 60-l6\; 50Q

1,..,1- 40\;QI

E 30<II::>-:. 20

10

0

20ll 2012 2DL3 2014 2015

Figure 5 -Five Pavement Performance Scenarios 2011-2015

• Service Levell, (Scenario 1, PCI 86, above) is an Unconstrained option. It require $57 million over 5

years and improves County paved road condition to 86 PO, or Good condition.

• Service Level 2, Target, (Scenario 3 PCI 56, above) is closest to the County's target of 60 PCI, or Fair.

This requires $20.S million over 5 years and improves road condition to Fair condition.

• Service Level 3, Reduced Road Services, Focus on Worker and Community Safety, Scenario 5- PCI 35,

above) is the current level of service. It requires $1.8 million over 5 years and results in a further

decline from 46 PO to 35 PCI, or Poor condition.


The impacts of Service Level 3 - Reduced Road Services, Focus on Worker and Community Safety, were

evaluated further. Average unit costs and accomplishments were evaluated against service level impacts and

targets.

Table 9 - Road Service Tradeoffs

Service AverageCosts' Sennce Levell~s

Pavement $175,000- Pavement condition NegligibleOverlay 225,000/mile continues to decline to

PO 34 in 5 years

Vegetation $7S0/mile or Significantly improves Achieves 50% ofManagement $250,000/334 traffic safety, improves target (Target: twice a(mowing, miles roadway drainage, year)spraying & reduces roadwaybrush deterioration,cutti ng) reduction of "danger"

trees

Shoulders& $25,000/mile Significantly improves Would need $1.5M toDitching or $5M/198 traffic safety, improves eliminate Poor;Very

miles of ditches roadway drainage, Poor (60 miles)reduces roadwaydeterioration &localized flooding

Culverts Varies by size, Allows waterflow To Be Determined;fish passage through the Identify & prioritizeissues, size of transportation potential public safetywaterway system, prevents risks

roadway flooding,improves public safety

Testimony ofthe Board members and public recognized Service Level 3 does not provide sufficient funds to

achieve County road strategic objectives. A citizen-led committee is exploring alternative funding solutions. 1o

10. Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Treatment Plan DevelopmentAn implementation strategy for delivering Service Level 3 - Reduced Road Services, Focus on Worker and

Community Safety was proposed by the Director and discussed at the workshop. It focuses primarily on

operational programs that preserve the roadway, relies on the current workforce knowledge and skills, and

reduces services that rely on large material purchases (asphalt):

• $250,000 per year on pavement overlays (Tillamook County's portion of Surface Transportation

Program annual funding)

• Grind Poor paved roads into gravel on reactive basis (public complaint); needs additional process to

identify priority of failed roads and strategy to affected road stakeholders and BOCC

10 See Tillamook County Citizens for Sustainable Roads (http://www.tillamookroads.orgjhome.html)


• Increase

o vegetation management

o ditching

o shoulder maintenance

o sign maintenance (including nighttime visibility assessment)

• Inventory and assess culvert condition & develop priority list

• Inspect & maintain bridges & seek money to replace bridges

A December 16,2010 workshop with the Road Department managers and staf( and County Human Resources

Manager initiated discussion about risk mitigation strategies for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 implementation.

Refining these into an implementation plan (risk treatment plan) will occur as a next step, including:

1. Assigning a planning work team to develop detailed operational strategies and an action plan for

County road core service delivery in Fiscal Year 2011-2012.

2. Establish performance targets for each service, given available resources and service priorities

developed in December 6,2010 workshop.

3. Evaluate alternative organizational structures that can safely deliver core road services.

4. Establish a calendar for delivering each core service target, and define operational strategies that

ensure worker safety, given available resources. By service this should include:

• Performance target

• Which roads, area or asset is to receive service so that greatest risk, performance and cost are

considered and tracked. Geographic equity, risk and performance are to be considered in core

service delivery planning.

• Identify specific actions to be performed by work crews, and performance standards (labor,

materials and equipment) required to accomplish each service. Estimate what can be

accomplished daily, given an 8 or 10~hourday and crew (labor, materials and equipment)

based on Tillamook County experience. These daily accomplishment standards are to be used

to estimate resources required to achieve performance targets for each road service. Results

are to be reported and monitored so initial performance standards can be improved. Future

annual budgets and long range financial plans will link to these performance standards and

service targets.

• Identify who (by name and position) is responsible to complete each action for completion of

the risk treatment (work plan) development. This is to ensure FY 2011-2012 County road

service delivery.

5. Prepare a draft risk treatment plan and draft performance standards for Director approval. Identify

current resources (labor, materials and equipment) and impediments to accomplishing the FY 2011

2012 work program. Decisions on how to resolve critical resource needs and reallocating resources is

the responsibility of the Director.

6. Identify actions to improve links between asset and work planning, work management, and financial

management (e.g., links between performance standards, work accomplished, asset inventory,

condition, service requests/work orders and time cards). Specifically review time cards, service

requests/work orders and how these link to performance standards (labor, materials and equipment)

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.l.! December 2010Page 24

used by location, asset or service and activity reporting. Identify changes required to make these links

on time cards to ensure data is collected in the field and entered in the cost accounting and inventory

modules in IRIS.

7. Revise time cards to track the location, units of work accomplished and assets worked on, as well as

labor, materials and equipment used to accomplish work.

8. Train all staff on how to enter data so that work performed can be monitored, assets and services

managed and reported. The necessity for accuracy, timeliness and completeness are to be

emphasized. Information will be used to identify remaining needs for each service, whether the annual

performance targets were achieved given available resources, as well as remaining work needed

(residual risk) for each service and asset. Results are published annually in the Road PerformanceReport and used for annual budget development.

9. Once reviewed and approved by the Director, this information will be conveyed to the Budget

Committee and BOCC as a part ofthe Fiscal Year 2011-2012 budget process.

Deliverable: Detailed description of targeted County road services for the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 budget

process.


Appendix 1 - Tillamook County Board Asset Management Policy 2009

lQt. li1 '~G[396 V_'WlW",,,..TIlE aOMO OIF COUtnV CCMIIISI!IOIIER6

FOM THE COUHl'Y OIF 11LLAMOOK '1M TliE STATE Of O~eGOflj

In til.. IIIllllltr of" TlIlamOlllk OflOER ~Coun~ P.hIk: Worl<o; __ JIJ: ~O~]

"""'lIement Pollc, 11M.:a:r.1 . ..'.TA&s4 O·.Il

~~~:::=::~::~-crc;..,,:~n~:!~requ..tif:'1TYr.l~R~Li"".Wei';', TIII.",oad< County PUilII. Wilt... 01__

Beil10 flJf~ apprizsd l>I1he reccrdl iIIlO III". thuruin, In. BllIiFU '" CoImmiHiomn~nd.... f<>bI<&:

1. "YlemOCik Gount(. relld notwell< 18th. ClIUnl\' QOWl'rMI8nt'. mDOlvalullbllt ph";""1 ••ul. In 2006, lhe~..""'-'t ••Ioa of the ~74 mi'"do;ourll)' FQ8d.""", eslim_ .1$304 millen Th. County !rill1spcrtlltlonnatworlC hili bItIttI UM..funallClior \'Ulllllll:l tnIt~ .Ion ot county'elld. 10 del:lIning.

2, Tn. Tillamook CoUlty Eioanl d CcmmlSOIOnor., eonetll'Mdlboullhol~lIlj"l<l ouodl1lon at county ",IICII; and b.-Idll"". aulYlI"Wod the Fl.",,"'Dep..rImentlo d<><:urn.ntb C>:lndllion "nd 11111~ 01 Courrty rOlld • ..-,_ idItnIltflhe ri.1aI thatm..tbfJ m,.,,~ In the County. TIll. OPP'(JI;lo!1,Il.nl>wn ... It_man_""t, haipo tal\)Ql.owillllbla <\>lid oOlIIt~ flO 1I"rtlIle gnoillllst riIb are man_for the Ieut cost.

3, The purpo... at .... A-.t Msnll(Jemmtpol,ay is to Mllllllidflllntll to,ImplMnonllrg co_nt __I .,III\SQe",. nt prrooe$_ Ihroug~oul

Till~Co<Jnty l'1AJ1ic Worka """"ttment.4. Tn. F\QIIdAdv~ CommiClee llliheit Ml) ~. 200S meeting acx:eptlld 1M

AHItt Ma~ment """,rt.

NOW THEREFORE. " 'IS HEREBY OI'lDEREO THAT:

,/--,-----

___1__

2000

v_l:;( "_",, .'_,,_

Ayo N...,

$, Th<I n""",ok CountyllMei "'IMQClm6nt POlley, 8rllllt A~ ",1di"""rportiOd h~... by .-f~""'0Il. be ond hereby iI .d",,1e<l

O. TMisorder iB tn ~.tfwQiyti :mm~IJ'.

Dl\TED n'ilS).d:. DAY OFT.....l"':.liIClARlJ Of COUNTY CQUIAISSIONIR&"01'. 'UMlOOK COUNTY, OlOEGON

-~b-TOl'l_,Ch.~

Arrf.$l~ 'hl",I{n••1(;"'''"1» Clo<.

v,.~~~~ .",1"1:


4.1.2 The County owns and uses approximately $304 millionroad asaets to support its core busine88 of delivering roadservica to the community.

4.1.3 Asset management practices Impact directly on the corebusiness of the county and appropriate assetmanagement ISI1Jql,Jired to achieve our strategic servicedelivery objectiVes.

4.1.4 Asset management relates directly to the TillamookCounty Transportation strategic Plan go. and strategi68:

Protect the function, operation lltld safety of existing andplanned roadways

\ • Consider land use impacts on ,existing or plannedtransportation faciliti&S

• COOrdinate WIth other jurisdictions to assure adequateconnectlons to streets and transportlltlon systemsbetween incorporated and unlnoorporatedareas

• The roadway nelwlJrk is not restricted toJuri9dictionaiboundaries.

- Roadway maintenance and improvement are to becoordinated 1n cooperation With other jurisdietlons.

-Rced function, access and "level of service standards"are to be implemented through regulation.

4.1.5 A strategic approach to aSll8t managemlilnt will en&Urethat the County Commission dellvlilr8 the highestappropriate level of 88l'Vioe through its assets. This willprovide positive Impact on:• Members of the public and staff;• The .ability 01 the County to deliver the expected level

of seMce and infrastructure based on availablere80UrI:8S.;

• The political environment in Which CountyCommission operates; and

• The legal liabilities of the County.

4.2 Pl1nclpil..

4.2.1 A oenslstent Asset Management Strategy must exist forimplementing systematic Bnlilt management andappropriate asset management best-practice throughoutthe County's road department.

4.2.2 All retevant legislative requirementstogettlerwith political.social and economic environments are to be taken intoaccount in asset management.

4.2.3 Asset management principles win be Integrated withinexisting planning and operational processes.

PBS for TCPW Road Risk Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.1.1 December 2010

Page 27

6.0 Standard

8.0 ReIlItedDocuments

ResponsIbility

4,2,4 An inspection regime will be used as part of assetmanagement to ensure agreed service levels aremaintained and to identify aSlet renewal priOrities, lIS

funding allows.4.2.5 ASI!I8trenewal plans wJII be prioritized and implemented

prcgreeslvely based on agreed service levels and theetfectlveness of the current aseeta to provide that level ofS8fVice.

4,2,6 Syalematlc and cyclic reviews will be applied to all aseetcl81i888 and ate loensul8 that theall88t8 are mMaged,valued and depreCiated In accordance with approprtatebest practice and applicable standards,

4.2.7 Future life cycle costs will be reported and considered Inall dedlllons relating to new services and assets andupgrading fA existlngseNlc:as and assets.

4.2.8 Future servlca levels Will be determined in consultationwith the community.

Government Accounting StandaR1aBoard (GASB) Statement 34

Tillamook County Road Asset Management Plan and Road RiskManagement Plan,

County Commlselonens are Alr$ponsible for adopting thepoficy and ensuring that sufficient reeources are applied tomanage the assets,

The Public Works DIrector has overallresponaibility fordeveloping an asset management strategy, plana andprocedures and reporting on the status and effl!tctiveness ofaseetmanagement wiltlin the County road network

This policy has a fife of4 years. It will be reviewed In June2013.

PBS for TCPW Rlad Ask Assessment & Treatment Ran - v.1, 1 D9cember 2010Page 28

Appendix 2 -COnfidence Level inRoad Asset InformationInformation quality affectsthe ability to forecast performance, manage Iifecyde cosl:sand minimize risks. Theexpression of accura<¥ and reliability in the areas of information (SJurce and reliability), process (ad hoc orrepeatable) and documentation (documented or not documented) are identified for each as:et dass.

Q:x>9ef odf !M \/If rtEf gojLjpot

MolpS!! Q:loejljpolBt ttt t n f oLlNf Li pe!OOeIQ:logef odt !Mvi m Q:ln qrhf of tt Gfrvfodz Qpdf t t IboelEpdvn f oLbjpo

No confidence No inventory No assessment method No process

Low confidence Partially Estimates used to assess condition Process not well documented

Moderate confidence Inventory complete Subjective process to estimate Some documentation in placecondition

High confidence Inventory complete Condition surveys conducted on a Well documented process followedregular schedule by well-trainedpersonnel

Optimal confidence Inventory complete Condition survey on a regular Objective process followed; Accuracy ofschedule data verified and well documented

Ljr1irl ppl !Q:lvoll:!Q:logefodf !Mw rtl!cz!Bt t f Llrnt t !. 3121

Asset Class Confidence

Pavement Optimal for the first 3 years and Moderate in years 4-5

Bridge Optimal

Culverts Low; inventory estimated and condition unknown.

Guardrails Moderate; inventory and condition assessment as of 2007; no inspection cycle established.

Signs Moderate; inventory and condition managed by trained staff through 2008; condition not entered in IRIS

Equipment Optimal

Maintenance Yards Low; annual safety inspection only

Levees Optimal; 2010 inspection & inventory by US Army Corp of Engineers

Quarries Moderate

Ditches Optimal; assessment, documentation and inventory 2008

Pavement Markings Not applicable; repainted each year based on inventory

PBS for TCPW !=bad Rsk Assessment & Treatment Ran, v.1.1 December 2010Page 29

Appendix 3 - Benefit Cost Risk Scoring

Risk (SR, RI, AF)Cost (MC,OC,RC)

BenefitService Level (SL)Condition (CI)Asset

-Risk-Cost-Benefit

> 1 > 2Score

>

Time (Asset Lifecycle)

PBS for TCPW Fbad Rsk Assessment & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 30

Appendix 4- Prompt List for Asset FailureThis prompt list provides typical risks to assets and County goals and objectives. It is not exhaustive. It could beused to identify caures of asset failure that prevent delivery of transportation rervic:es.

Lack of timely maintenanceInsufficient fundingFbordesignWet dimatelsnow/wind storm damageFbor drainageutility workTraffic loadingLack of enforcementLack of staffInadequate trainingInadequateQA/OCLack of private maintenanceLack of communicationCondition deteriorates to point of asset failure under normal traffic loadingUfeline failure during natural disaster event or restricted ureF€strictionson load/dimensions of ureAssets fail due to failure of roadside slopeLandslide or vehide impactNatural disaster caureserosion or embankment failure and floodingOJtdated inventory & condition a~entLack of mapped location informationInappropriate or outdated designLack of sign distanceVegetation overgrowthSgn obstructedLoss of key sign locationsVisibility below acceptable or regulated levelsVandalismInadequate replacement c.ydeInadequate preventive maintenanceFunctional obsolescence or inadequate for current safety or access regulationsCode violationLoss of asset due to saleInadequate staffing for volume of permitsdevelopmentQualified staff resigns or retires

PB$forTCPW RJad Rsk A$essment & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 31

Appendix 5 - Tillamook County Lifeline Routes11

uu.

u«a..

z<{

UJUo

f@1' " f~'. 55. c __•"-_ __ ..' 'jj§J....

vt(PIti( r··

/

~'~I/~~f~1rP1 ~ ...

.ri~~l ~.'. -~-.";~ .' ,...... rot.'.'..llJU _-- 'v •., ~.~~1U..A\fCO( r9' .

BAy --'--"l~

p, j~

IV::",,:",(:'·"·

);

I [[G[NDS.lal8"" de H"t~.glanol HwyDr,ltle! Hwy

~. . . "'-\l1nar Artorlal

......_ <ljor. Col.•dor

... , ~,- Min,or Collector(hi~lIl1iJ""W. tOl'" r.dem' "'d)

Lifo Une Roul., Priority ,II n ~If. Lin. Roule: Priority 2

TILLAMOOK COUNTYFi:'lCoonal Roadway Cla$sincalions

Speed ZonesLife Line Ro..!es

~ctv: SP<*'l, nol 5h"",n ",hi, C ~·l.tl'CS.

FigJre 3·1

iSCAL.: I "",1",; I

~~

11 8::lurce: Tillamook Cbunty Transportation EYfiem Ran, 2003.

PBS for TCPW R:>ad Rs< Assessnent & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 32

z~I1J()

o

()

Lt.

o<t:a..

LEGEND---- Statewide Hwy---- Regional Hwy--- DistrIct Hwy------- MInor Artorlal.................... Major Collector--- Minor Collector

(Ineligible f~r red.tal Aid)___ Ufe Une Route: Priority 1

~ Life Line Route: Priority 2

TILLAMOOK COUNTYFJnctional Roadway Classifications

Speed Zonesute Line Routes

Note: speoos not stlOW~ wilh!~ City Lilrits,

Figure 3-2

PBS for TCPW Fbad RskAssessment & Treatment Ran -v.1.1 December 2010Page 33

Appendix 7 - Road Service Priorities Workshop - December 6,2010

12/23/2010

Workshop Objectives

Tillamook CountyRoad Service Priorities

FIScal Year 20 \2 8uogl';T',lla,l1':ook (\"JWHyPIJb:ic. WorK~

Oecernber 6, 20 I C

County Public Works Mission

WfI' t.lH(' phdI' in 'iNII'fft9 ih~ public byt f1rcwldin-g1 ma.in'[a~n'ng. ;lI'lcl prt;".. ~~r""ir'lq .Ll $:lfc ~"d

e-fflr:';i~M COWlly rud.d rl~~wQtk. ~n,j

t quickl'( rcsponddig To WPilt h",r 1"\,'~liU _,'Incl hil.l~f(h

'!'t'e pro[ec( [[w pl~bIK'S Ith'e!.trTl<;n~ by) '.'II(lt'ki/l,g with Ol,ijl r.4J,(1f'lt~I" ~nl'j

• t.il!'fj~;'iUUJ flt~ources. to ml(umi~( long l:..::nn co:Hi>'~'hil€

t pro'J!(llrlg tnt:' b~'S( po\slble 5~ryiCC ~Iverr d'"allabler~,!iO\lrce ~.

I Introduct'jons

• Ovec",ew of Budget P'oce", Rtview Status, Cor;dit\on and Perr6nr\tH1te of

TranSPOrtation SVSU~fr1

• Rp..e", Asset ManagemeC\ princ!pl~S

~ OVf.rview of Ris,k A!i.s.~'5sment PraCC,$s SResults

I DIscuss & Agree un (UH~ Se~vl(es

> NexI S,epl

Yovr :':::cunty Haila' Dolldrs. ,At Work~ ~.t,~, .'." ,. hl)!l1",t,'Jl ,,\(, I: r',' ~ r l '/-'11 ,;~

Budget Process

, re.btuilfY 201 IPo;:\,It;',I'"I~ lh.. J~f:!1 l':e:ql.e~;..:p,<,;!>("."!1 DLld!J~1 ~o <:~'\e tQf rC((,.1\II'III:!JI;.J.:a(II.,l!l I,a N.dqr.1Con·;r;'t::'t~1; .

~ ,MMCh 20 11- BJdQe~ Pa,~ag~ IS due tc CQl,Jt~tVT r'~.:15",rcr

• Apr'i! 201 1 Pre-sent budget tG Bud!1t"1tCOr'nf'TiiUee

• Ma..,.-Ju.nc lOll Budget ~illah~i:d bll GiJdgetCOlllr'tliaee -

• J"ll' l. 2011 - FY 2CII-?012 ~ewoudget:mpli;!lmernation

1

PBS for TCPW Fbad Rsk A&iessment & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 34

12/23/2C

Budget Decision-making Roles

/.,.\.-.-.Where does our money come from"?

ROeU.! ()ep.ir1ment Fi's.,c,al Yeu (0) 0 Rt'V~ftIl1l;'

):{)uf'(I!:'~

Rcm'\tluril.'1I'~

,""'"LO~~~4'1-)

F",dl!lral4e~

What did we spend it on?Road Maintenance· Pavin9 Projects \'

O....... 'lity IlrCj~c.h ·1 O.OG m~I@'S

A'llJt:/Ui,1 ~,ll.Il.l

A'~~'l:;IUrI1~ l.:lClp II.Q~<:.I

hy 3u~m ~Q;ld

t"('¥Ud R.,A&

i'IK,'~"lIid A.'~lu"

L~"iI ""u.r~~ ~OOIl'

C'''''liI~' lto~4

"'Jk~l, Ill(tJo/li,t>.v..1~,~tHf1ltl' lI\ull

l~lif !"r'1I rllltl;l~ ',i):i '111:'1-, on", 'A.;c.~,I':J

MU::/lJ~~ $l~d

~~~lJr~K.kL(>"'j;llI;f,1.,td

t.l;;,CI:ry:!ifrllltl

1I11lt IIlIi4l:l i4 nUi.~, fH'l"A';

HD~,1~,.r'<1'!1"

}~...olIItl~"'n;l

Road Maintenance In 2010-$1 .7MCounty Road Condition

;;

==.'~"'.: --""-... --.".1

'4lI" Il!),*

I , ' '" Ir~

;;:010 ((lUnfy?iivlOd R:(~t:I

Con<;il.lOn 46: :;tel

• Stabilized roadcondition from 2008- PCI 46 or Poor

• SS% in Poor or VeryPoor condition

, Paved (J 0,04 miles), Chip Seal Miami Foley

Road (3.96 miles) &prepared fo r chip sealon Miami Foley

, Craded gravel roads, Shoulder maintenance• Pothole repair

51 911000 f·...~...I1

PBS for TCPW Fbad Rsk Assessnent & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 35

Pavement Condition HistoryComparing Road ConditionPavement Condition Index• Clatsop County 75• Lincoln County 76• Washington County 81, Polk County 83• Tillamook County 46" 'Why the

difference?-Local funding-Location-Historic decisions

• 2004 morein Poorthan Good

> 2010Stabilized

"'~"'--."-'""""-".""--."- '."..'.".."

~("j., • '" , "

J~lI. ,."""."""""".,,'" . ""'" , '" "" "" ",,"'•.••

J-L." "" " " ",.

IOn. ' "_ ,.,._'_' ,"'._'" ,..•,_

i:1."IIi. " " "

l''!'o .--"--•.-------."",, ,,"'_

Future Pavement Performance Drainage - $1 Mll~' of Service Request.s.Ropl"od 12 <ulvon<

l'\I,.n~I*t'fl Q4JloitV 14.0.l~ \ l!I;"fr-tt.hillh·~ Qulltr~ Jloo1d IH-1""Ilhr~~ ft¢'~4

iIII;utnn.gIOl1 Slr~tt

"'lnu.IoCtMk Rt:l.i.dIhl'n.. r \'lr..iI'I' (Ir~

Rndwt Str••t (l'lnl2",; StJ' ..~!. LJlp ......J,lesBI9Q\o..flllld:rr"'~~ Ihwl Ro.llc.~n(:r.~1o:

tHIC/II;"

InspeCIOd 7 levee•

'"' k ir· />(.; ,1:',. ~I ~,~

.,..'.';'" _ Pc.. ~.: ',~, J'r.~

.............~ ..,._~ ... ,••~" ....,-':.''' •• !'m•.. ',.,.,'''~,\.'''.•• ", ..•,_.. ',I

;;.M=. ij-'~ :: '',.o~~;..~,,:;'~;_~,.>0

Drainage170% Increase from 2009

• .1Bridges & Guardrails

• Bridges addedCoiloy MageFawcett Cretk BrIdgeFoland Creek 6"dgo

• Bridges repairedHolgato BridgoLewis Brid9~

Wald,on Bridgo

• OTIA completed

$300,000

3

PBS for TCPW Fbad Rsk~ent & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 36

Bridges & Guardrails - 6% funding Vegetation Management8rldg.., Guordr.,I,. Ftn,.. 2005-201 0

II

• Sou rce of 9% ofservicerequests

, BioengineeringEmsion Control(APWAJultanAwafd- 2010)

MiAmi·· FoleyRoadNielsen/Gienger-one Rood

Vegetation Management

• Up 9%, Fewer winter storms

and wet spring, More brush cutting

and mowing (521hours) and removedweeds (424 miles)

• 5% of expenditures

""Iwle:to!"'ii-it;ttil.P_\t'.~,"~!.~~~~.

~:a.I·~'llJ . ~~~

Traffic Safety

• 323 miles fe-striped(Mliflon County pannership)

• Sign maintenancefocuses on stopsigns - 99)6 in goodcondition

• Lou of staff maychange signcondition

,

Emergency Response

Emergency Response - BOOk60% less than 2009

~OC!ii. 7~!~',~· ~\,t.1~ ~~'~"; !D!(l

n.i.liIIlhilr

s ,'~v,OOIJ

~ i:,,:;~.OOC!

· ~ft1f:~~,~~I~~~,~lio~o• 3.517 .>torm r.spon..

hol..tr'5t Takes away from routln-=

maint~uIUK.t!

• ~~~&?~?l'li7t.r prtdlcted

.PBS for TCPW Fbad RsK Assessment & Treatment Plan - v.1.1

4_ J

December 2010Page 37

12/23/2010

Engineering Services

• Capi'a' ProJen.aridge. D."g"Contrilc;ts, & PrOjectManE1gement

Fola/1p Crt'tk.sorJiW(;etl cr~~~1t 8ridQ~s

Ih,ll..lIdlRf Creek Srldgf'Balle,- ll.l'idge

Dc.....cJopment Reviewroad approa(h piCtrnitsutillry p~tmit~

land u.!.~ I cviewp<i!rn,i(~

·C 7.4$ lfj~",l pli!tmlts~ EngineerIng Su\ff

Engineering Services· 65%Decline - $522,000

· 5(wff tedt,ced Mj%• Ir'!lpact~ ~j911 >Arlt:':l

bridge r'!'lanaoement• P'4!!rmitl'evi(:wloriGlerI Projecr &- CO(\lfi:l.c.t

l'rldflagern€!Ilt (E:~I.l(le:d

Dept Admir" .. 6%B03k V5. Overhead ~ 1338k Employees - 44% decline since 1998

S~rvil:'4.~ !kqllc~t~

l"r;llnmJ]

St1f@tyPWQI.:l.ITI)

CM{A,(QI.lr1lingBudg~~Jfl\l

ACCOl.lllti

1'~<'~I\I'J.bll","pa'l'.l.i;lk

FleqlJjYCld IUI'l~l1r~nsh~r to• Cenr::j,;jIFl,lod• Elkr::P,qgrilrn

ft,1il.ni\gem~nt

IIUlJlilnCf!'

Audir

Risk management is at the coreof Asset Managemer:!!. _

Benefit of Risk Assessment Better Decisions

Wh....H ,:Ire the Cf.tI(~1 r1 C,kt> & howdo W.~ mm!ml~C ~htm)

I Minimi2;e CQ:HS ~nd risks

• "TlprovE! lr,i.n'ipJ.n~:I\(Y or decio;;i(ms ')'lid bC!"ll:hmil.rkil~9

• Mall~ge 'it"Vice!; arld Cl,lHOrfi~(, l'eC,ues.ts

• Con'il'ittnl <1pprOach &- ul't'ctioi:\ for- a!>ses.s.1n9 ti~k'S

t ImprIJ~'ed /'mancl;ali,:ffl./..j1!I1("1j

• More sw,;,a,l,nabJe d~Cl'i:on~ Ii:lk as.set p:.ril1lrl~i Wlong t>:rm tm.anoal P!<1n, <In i~~r;Hil,ie pr'C(I!~s. .

II

• policy driven• Performance based• Options evaluated~ Decisions based on

quality informationt Clear a<;:C,Quntabill[¥

5

PBS for TCPW R:>ad RskA&essment & Treatment Ran -v.1.1 December 2010Page 38

!

Risk AssessmentA formal process to Identify, evaluate

and manage risks

l:3 lamlHy the' ~I:f.k •<l

i Iii At'lilIIli"iulhOHillt i~

i §C:,;"klQII~'!'lD' nlNl

~~'

" --

1r..1/ot1,..,....'.nU,...",IpflI...,_.llUJI!l«>'/t>l1I

County Public Works Mission

We tilke pnde in serving the public by• providing. maintaining, and preserving a safe and

efficient county road network, and• quickly responding to weather events and hazards.

We proteclthe public's investment by• working with our partners and, targeting resources to minimize long term costs

while• providing the best possible service giwn available

resources.

W09

Targeting the Tradeoffs

'"'';''"'':10,'''

Set the Context of Risk

• Establish the road service objectives., what arewein business to do?

, Who are the County road stakeholders!, What are the key issues related to

transportation services• What criteria will we use to evaluate the risks?

County Road Programs• Roads (paved and gravel)• Structures (bridges, levees and guardrails)• Drainage (culverts and ditches)• Traffic Safety (road signs" road markmg~. trafficsignal),

• Equipment management• Maintenance Yards• Quarries• Operational programs

Vegelat.ion ManagementEm~rgencyManagementEngineeringAdmlnJSlr31iVe ServicesM"enals and Stockpiling

Key Issues

~~..:",_..."m.r'~:::o .....''''"'"".' qi',t,"'":,~,~~

i

County Roads Financial PidureII

2S% cut first year,42% cumulative

• Slight increase inState gas taxannually

• No Local properlytax suPPOrt

1iI··········"',···· ..·,',···,················1.~1k:,.::': '.", ."

~j ,

• Declining ~nd uncertainfunding

• Severe & frequent weatherevent,

• Aging and inadequate1I1frastruclure

• Economy (dairy. logging &tourism)

• Rural. aging populationHigh cost construction &environmental standards& m~teri~ls

• Decreasing number ofRoad Dept. employees

Cllrnate·ccWet- 90 inches average rainfall- 5 rivers empty into Tillamook Bay

Risk Criteria to Judge Im~aetI

• Economic (damages to community, losses,additional expenditures)

• Legal compliance• Community impact (service reductiO'(! or

elimination) i• Human health and safety (COmmUni~Y)• Reputation I

• Environment I• Human resources (reduction in starp,

employee safety. overtime & worklOlld:emergency response) .

Consequence of Risk Likelihood of Failure[liili<~ Con.eqii!!'cooftaiIUre .II ~lk.llhoodor Follur.1

(IIII......_ ... _'ii!ifl

..., --.f="""'~~+:"',""'~...~~:.;,,=.~.;:::-'~: :~<~;; -;;~~;.~- ·.:':~::~~;:~:.r',:,':~;i\"

k=r-¥~"""',..-4~·;:~:" ~_,. ~:::.~;...:,~~:::::"::.::.:..';'_."'_ -:;~:.:r:.;;,:..';.,:'.:"' ••. ...~:::,;:~i:~~ ~,_.;:......~------ ;~,

·..","-w~;t~:\~·: .... t;"~..~::;::'~,:'~;~ ::~~ "- ~.' 0'- ... ~.'" ;':"'~J~~~

LRi.k ..'~;,;;S.Q~~<.Dri.I~",re~j(lik.u~~~'~~;~~~l~,-'~.~ I

7!

PBS for TCPW R:>ad Rsk A$essnent & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 40

Analyze Riskr~'k:"coii••q"~iice(iH.:i'i~i;,"x'lik;'fijtoOdorF'il"i. _

~~'-I,..::..~ -. ~ ..."'..... c...~~o~;--1

Risk Assessment & Treatmen Plan

-1

IMntioul

"ef\,o'j, ~ "' ...pr~lJ'I'( Qq~ 1.1t1V1lf'1 1""1:'1 11111 Kt~ "'l!rllll"m.nr~T .vQ~t

1111~4(t1

l.l.:hIN.l

I..Irgrlfhr-..r)

Unknown;Q,t.II.'lloph ~ rolill'~fIl!J"p~nU" p4jl1ht:Ulf~llItj"k

~ytlMtll:c:an41"1IjII'j

OIlftIi!lLlQ ~Qo dKJlAalo~]41"SiytMJ'l.

~lgnl~I(:"r'JIJyI""PfO'tlt~

tt,iJ1'ic ".IIt.~v. ~rnpIO"tt'S

rQ..l,dw.l¥ d,.;r.iIo'il".f.dI,lUI. ~1)~(Iw~dH~IIQlf.l[IOO,

rtdu{'tloo or -dl.n.Qr,,":i..1

Sig,..dkulUy J1l\1pr~$.

traftk -.aft!:lY.lmprO'fllJ.""",w Io1tWl-Wt".t4dual!li nwhr'.-ydil~Iilr"O:on'.IOU1Incl~IA'

Allgws Wiltu Plowl"",~nth.Iroln$pQt"~t1or

Jysl*M.pt......-JlJINdlllr'-V"o!Xldl"-g.JmP'O'I~1 pllb'il; 'iil:f~:,;

U''!r.QJlI''III.. OfnSO.OOO(JHffl'il~$

S,U.OOlJjrn/I"OI,SSOO'l,INrn.h.. of lSitch.,

\'MWI!-b'i'~lr ••n,itpu~.&,I!,I*I.JSV.~.II'zt or1Iir...t.~

\(tI:9"U-1I01'1Milll.l9f:mlr:l1t{m()wiltg.

'Pf~yi'n,"brl.l51l(~ttlj'jg'

Road Service Tradeoffs2010 Road Service Trends

• Meet legalregulatoryrequirements &standards (federal ,--=- :.::.._state, & local)Ensure workersafetY (OSHA)

• EmergencyResponse

Director's Recommended ServiceLevel Changes• S2S0k per year on pavement overlays (STP)• Grind Poor paved roads into gravel• Increase

vegetation managementditchingshoulder maintenance

c sign maintenance• Inventory and assess culvert condition &

develop priority liSt• Inspect & maintain bridges & seek money to

replace bridges

Next Steps

"December-January - PW develops r adservices strategy

. January - PW Director presents recor mendedapproach to CRAC/BOCC

.' February 2011 - Start budget proce s

8

PBS for TCPW R::lad Rsk Assessnent & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 41

References

1. AASHTO TransportationA~tManagement (TAM) GJide, Volume 2 - A Focus on Implementation,

Draft Rnal RJport, NQ-iFPOa69, May 2010.2. "Advanced O:mcepts, Techniques, and Tools in Infrastructure Asret Management," Padfic Northwest

Asret Manager User Qoup (AMUG) sponsored Workshop, s::>A, Portland, Oregon, Saptember 8-9,2010.

3. An~t Management Framework for the Intersate Highway E¥sem, NQ-i~632, Cambridge$,tstematics, 2009 http://onlinepubs.trb.orcv'onlinepubs' nchrpl nchrp rot 632.pdf.

4. Business Qlre Development fraft GJidebook, Portland Water BJreau, Portland, Oregon, October 20095. OJlvert Inspection & Reid Inventory Handbook, Oregon Department of Transportation, J.me 20106. Estimating the (bs of Unintentional Deaths, National arFety Coundl, 2006.

http://www.nsc.orcv' NEWS FffiJUR:ES INJ..JRY AND DEATI-l $fAllsnCS Pages' Est imat ingtheCostsofUnintent ionallnjuries.aspx

7. A-MlA 4-Hour Rsk Management Training Workshop, 1mayth Conference, Washington, D.C J:muary

2009.8. Intemationallnfrasrudure Management Manual, INC?8\J1UMI IPII\tEA, New Zealand/Australia, 2006.9. Ufe-Ojde (bs Analysis Ffimer, (R-IVVA IF~02-047), Washington, D.C, 2002.10. MaintenanreAcx:ountability Ffores.crReld Data (blledion Manual, Washington E:ept. of

Transportation, 2003.11. NAMSFt.USA GJided Pathway to SJsainable~t Management, Institute of AJblic Works

Engineering Australia, 2008.12. QJtimized Decision Making GJidelines, NAMSQoup, New Zealand 2004.13. FfXJTsFfopored Methods for calculating Ufe Ojde Cbs for~t~ and Fe!forming Ufe Ojde (bs

Analyss, Portland Transportation, 2004.14. Rsk Management Ffindples and GJideline~ IS) 31 000:2009.15. Transportation~t Management in Ausralia, canada, England and New Zealand, U.S Department

of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, November 2005.http://international.fhwadot.QOv/assetmanagement/2005tam.pdf

16. Triple futtom Une GJidebook for Busness case Elaluation~ Saattle AJblic utilities, Saattle

Washington, Interim Draft, May 2004

PBS for TCPW R::lad Rsk Assessnent & Treatment Ran - v.1.1 December 2010Page 42

MEMORANDUM

Date:To:From:Subject:

January 13, 2010 • , /

Staff .. .) ,fYtJV-Liane Welch, TillalTlook County Public WorW;:'-Organizational changes to reflect reduced level of service

I want to thank all staff for your ideas, input. and concerns regarding ourprocess to address our revenue cuts as a result of the demise of the FederalForest Safety Net funds.

These are certainly challenging times for our Department, and I challenge usto "do the best we can with what we have" with a positive attitude and valueeach member of our team as people who care about each other as we meetthese challenges.

I believe that as we implement these changes, it will not be a perfect world.Some things will work and others will not. We need to be flexible and figureout what works for us. Thank you for your patience as we move forward. Ihave included our Mission statement and Values for your review.

Director's Vision: My plan is to focus on getting preventative maintenanceactivities accomplished and fixing some of what is broken. All work needs tobe prioritized and we need a Plan to start. I can guarantee that the Plan willchange as issues arise that I am not aware of today.

Operations:The major shift wi II be to focus on activities that reduce our expenditureson materials and conduct activities that are labor intensive to get thebiggest bang for our buck for a safe transportation system. We'll continueto improve the way we track our work, report our accomplishments and keepour community informed o'n the challenges we face as we manage theCounty's road network.

This is my one year Plan. We will revisit this Plan at the end of the year andsee how it worked for us and if it needs modifications.

From our 4 November-December meetings we (our team, BOCC, CRAC and at2 public meetings) decided we will focus available reSourceS on legallymandated services, emergency response, and public safety. We will notsacrifice worker safety to do this. Some changes need to be implementedand are described below.

1. We need to change our thinking from Districts to County-wide work.Below presents wnere staff will be reporting. We all work forTillamook County. As we continue to reduce staff, there are notenough of us to have high functioning districts. So, we will eliminatethe concept of \\Districts".

2, I want one team, led by Rick Kjemperud, to focus on large teampreventative maintenance activities; snoulders, ditching, brushcutting. This work will be conducted across the entire County. Astrategy will guide how we address the greatest need wnile providinggeographic equity acroSS the County.

3. r want Grant Graves to work with Dave Schrom and develop aMaintenance Plan for the County. We need to be more organized andfocus our work where we can accomplish the greatest good, given ourresourceS. Grant will work with Ed Grimes and Rick to determine whatneeds to be done in their areaS of the County and develop a Planningdocument. r want a bridge maintenance plan, sign maintenance planand a culvert inventory, condition assessment and culvert replacementprioritized..

4. Ed Grimes will lead a smaller team to respond to work requests andother special projects. Grant will assist Ed with this work as needed.

5. Rick is responsible for the North County Facility (Nehalem Shop).6. Grant Graves is responsible for the South County Facility (Cloverdale

Shop).7. Chris Loffelmacher is responsible for our Fleet.8. Dave Schrom is responsible for the Tillamook County Facility.

Reporting Locations:Nehalem Shop - Fred Halverson, Bill DotsonTillamook Shop - Mel McDonald, Bill Knoke, Jerry Markee, Bill Harmon,Robert BishopCloverdale Shop - Greg Gass, Mike Wynands, Bill Beachy

Hours: We will be moving back to 4-10's starting February 28, 2011 untilOctober 27, 2011. I believe we are more efficient with less mobilizationwith 4 10's in lieu of 58's. Our hours will be from 7:00 to 5:30 MondayThursday, and closed on Friday.

Emergency Response: 911 should call any Foreman including Dave and Lianeprior to calling out represented employees. Any foreman can call anyemployee for assistance to respond to emergencies.

Mission Statement - why we come to work everydayWe take pride in serving the public by providing, maintaining, and preservinga safe and efficient county road network, and quickly responding to weatherevents and hazards. We protect the public's investment by working with ourpartners and targeting reSources to minimize long term costs of managingthe county's roads while providing the best possible service.

Values - how we treat each other at workTeamwork- We work together as a team, dedicated to exploring all optionswhile supporting each other in performing high quality work efficiently.Communication - We keep the lines of communication open with ouremployees, our partners and our customers.Professionalism - We strive for professional excellence by supportingemployee training focused on improved service delivery.Change - We anticipate and prepare for change to meet the needs of todayand the future.Accountability- We deliver on our promises, and we maximize the USe ofpublic funds to deliver the best possible results.Success- We provide successful solutions to the meet the needs of thepublic, and we celebrate our succeSseS.Safety- We perform our work safely to protect our employees, ourcustomers and our environment.

I appreciate all of you and look forward to challenging ourselves as we face

our new future.

APPENDIX B

ITILLAMOOK COUNTY OUT~OF-STATE TRAVEL AUTHORlZATION

Please complete this form and obtain the Board of Commissioner's approval before traveling.

1. Name ofEmployee: 'T'f--OLf ')QC~ts c'"..., 12. Date: {~S-~/f

3. Training Related/Conference (ifyes, attach Agenda): 4. Car Rental:DYes ~ No $33,00 +- h~ pe-r~

5. Itinerary: 6. Lodging Rate.' I

Destinatiou(City, State): 60"Z.e l1't-ttfl fJ1 01"1 17L /l--P_ Amount per Night: $ 7"7. OLJI

Est. Departure Date/Time: 1~'I7+11 a. n, Tax per Night: $ 7. 70

Est. Return Date/Time: I - ;L./ - / I flh Total per Night: $ ;;4.7V

Number ofNights: X L/Total $ -3 ;;>::>f£.3c)

7. Miscellaneous Expenses: (Identify Specific Expenses: Taxis, Shuttles, Phone, Etc.)

a. $ A'IV" -Qu~ - 11),; f.".2. ~ () OI"J'E. - WCLZp ./t7ciur:Ib. $ /lz.u"f\.$l.;1,.Q . 'e~ o{4

C. $ -d. $8. Meals: $ i..f-(,.'oD fey dllf .- 5 da; s 9. Estimated Cost ofTrip:

Rate # Meals Total MealslLodging: $ 5 t".t.SoBreakfast $ $ Airfare/Railfare: $ :jou,{)oLunch $ $ Personal Car Miles: $

Dinner $ $ j, 50,Do Car Rental: $ /<25,0<:)

Miscellaneous: $

Total: $ /D 53t'O10. Purpose ofTrip (Be Specific):

Bo.ekSrOund /n:csj,rhon On (2(1 aff / / e-O-frf uJe are.

elLIeuJa.:fe.d t2r!O{)k/l~ 10 Aile.. LJe. !LtJ.AJe... E Y.'fC/1 SL""$

'5 d~5', He S1oL-L/c! be e:-J/e !o (LOny,/e.le. III 3-L/ da-tS',

--- -.....11. ft!::ployee Signa}ure:

,Date:

- ~ /-5"'-1//._..

12. Deppro~ent:Head/Designee Signature: Date:

...A c-:>,-~-/I-- . -.- ...c;&QmS:Z1hairS,gnature. Date:

/...-/2--//./ y.

1/6/2011Dept. of Community Development - Building Section

Week Plan Structural Mechanical M.D. Mileage for Electrical Plumbing Short Term Rental Investigate Citations Stop Work CourtEnding Review Inspections Inspections insp. Inspectors Inspections Inspections Inspections Proj. cIll!{;k Issued Orders Hours

01/05/11 11 21 8 0 1031 25 6 3 1 0 0 0

01/12/11

01/19/11

01/29/11

02/02/11

02/09/11

02/16/11

02/23/11

TotalYTD 11 21 8 0 1031 25 6 3 1 0 0 0

oShort Term Rental Applications were received; 2 Short Term Rental Permits Issued.

1 Rental Permits was renewed.

.

,

,

For the week ending January 5, 2011Submitted By: Roberta Bettis

Sanitation Permit Intake: January 3..January 7, 2011Note: SE= site evaluation (location)

Week Permit #-Type rec'd field apv'd reason held01l03~01/07 11-0028-5 Authorization Notice 01/05 01/07

YEAR END ACTIVITY COUNT.. 2007 2008 2009 2010

Site Evaluations: .69 45 29 18Authorization Notices: 37 36 22 25Minor Repair/tank replacements: 68 68 28 42Construction Permits: 72 46 23 22Major Repair Permits: 38 23 25 22Major Alteration Permits: 3 1 1 2Minor Alteration Permits: 3 4 2 4Existing System Reports 1Final Inspections: 158 130 68 72Permit Renewals: 4 3 5Permit Transfers: 1 0 0Permit Reinstatements: 1 0 0Total Activities 445 359 201 213

Note: While site evaluations were down for the year from previous yearsat least we had site evals. Neighboring counties were almost at astandstill for the year in site evals. Septic tank replacements wereup greatly this year due to many homes being sold. It is commonfor a lending bank to require an old tank (usually steel) to bereplaced at the time of sale. All other numbers remained fairlysteady for the year.

Sanitation Permit Intake: December31, 2009-December 31, 2010Note: SE= site evaluation (location)

Week Permit # Type rec'd field apv'd reason held12/27w 12/31 10-3606w8 AN- paper 12/27 12/29 12/3012/27-12/2412/13-12/17 10-3518-8 Tank Replacement 12/15 12/16 12/16

10-3509-8 SE (Scherzinger) 12/14 12/20 12/2910-3508-8 SE (Scherzinger) 12/14 12/20 12/2910-3507-8 SE (Scherzinger) 12/14 12/20 12/29

12/06-12/10 10-3451 w8 SE (Tomlinson) 12/08 11/2910-3452-8 SE (Tomlinson) 12/08 11/2910-3437-8 Permit to Construct 12/08 10/06 12/1410-3425-8 Major Alteration 12/06 11/22 1211410-3422-8 Major Repair 12/06 11/30 12/0907-1336-8 Final Inspection 12/06 12/06 expired permit

11/29-12103 10-3412-8 Renewal 12103 12/09 12/0910-3229-8 Final Inspection 12102 12/06 0110610-3266-8 Upgrade to Major 11130 11/30 11/30

11122-.11/26 10-3270-8 Final Inspection 11/22 11/22 12/0911115-11/19 10-3209-8 Final Inspection 11/16 11/17 12/0911/08-11/12 10-3270-8 Tank Replacement 11112 11/15 11/15

10-3266-8 Tank Replacement 11/12 11115 needs upgrade to major10-3166-8 Final Inspection 11109 11/10 as-bui1t/matl ist10-3125-8 Final Inspection 11109 11110 as-built/mat list10-3111-8 Final Inspection 11109 11/10 as-built/mat list10-3232-8 Authorization Notice 11108 12/10 12/10 admin review10-3229-8 Tank Replacement 11/08 11/09 11/0910-3228-8 Tank Replacement 11/08 11/19 11/19

11/01-11/05 10-3209-8 Major Repair 11/03 11/04 11/1210-3110-8 Final Inspection 11/02 11/03 11/2910-3179-8 Tank Replacement 11/01 11/03 11/04

10/25-10/29 09-1555-8 Final Inspection 10/29 11/02 11/09 "'as-built/mat list10-1344-8 Final Inspection 10129 11/01 12/09 "'as-built/mat list10~3166-8 Tank Replacement 10/28 10/29 11/0110w2766-8 Final Inspection 10/28 10/29 11/23 sign as-built10-3162-8 Authorization Notice 10128 10/2910-0389-8 Final Inspection 10/28 10/28 ""as-built/mat list10-3162-8 Authorization Notice 10/27 11/04 *field uncover10-3153-8 Authorization Notice 10/27 12/14 12/14 ""admin review10-3146-8 Authorization Notice 10/2610-3125-8 Tank ~eplacement 10125 10/29 11/04 *site plan10-2893-8 Final Inspection 10125 10/26 11/09

10/18-10/22 10-3114-8 Tank Replacement 10/21 10/26 10/2710-3111-8 Tank Replacement 10/21 10/19 10/2710-3110-8 Permit to Construct 10121 09/30 1012710-1630-8 Final Inspection 10/20 10120 ""as-built/mat list10-3067-8 Final Inspection 10/20 10120 10/2710-0878-8 Final Inspection 10120 10/21 10/2510-3086-8 SE (Bourbon PI) 10/19 10/20 10/2010-3084-8 Tank Replacement 10/19 10/19 10/1910-3067-8 Tank Replacement 10/18 10/19 10/19

10111-10115 10-3007-8 Final Inspection 10/15 10/18 12/09 "as-built/mat list08-3541-8 Final Inspection 10/15 10/18 1012810-1657-8 Final Inspection 10/14 10/15 1011910-0385-8 Final Inspection 10/12 10/13 10126

10-3007-5 Tank Replacement 10/11 10/15 10/2810/04-10/08 10-2375-5 Final Inspection 10/08 10/08 10/14

10-2463-5 Final Inspection 10107 10/07 10/2710-2983-5 SE (Whiskey Crk) 10106 no test holes10-2982-5 Minor Alteration 10106 09/3010-2981-8 Authorization Notice 10/06 09/3010-2714-5 Final Inspection 10/06 10/07 "'tank not in10-2877-5 Final Inspection 10105 10/06 11/0210-2960-5 Permit to Construct 10/04 10/11 10/1110-1568-5 Final Inspection 10/04 10/04 10/07

09/27-10/01 10-2934-8 SE (Idaville) 10101 10/05 1010710~2256-8 Final Inspection 10/01 10/05 11/12 "'as-built/mat list10~2901-5 SE (Cascade Head) 09/30 09/30 10/0110-2567-5 Final Inspection 09/29 09/30 10/2810-2108-8 Final Inspection 09/29 09/3010-2331-8 Final Inspection 09/29 09/29 11/0210-2908-8 Permit to Construct 09/29 09/30 10/0810-2893-S Tank Replacement 09/29 09/30 10/0110-2877-S Tank Replacement 09/28 10/04 10/0410-1866~S Final Inspection 09/28 09/29 "'as-built/mat list10-2766~S Final Inspection 09/28 09/2910-2867-8 Permit to Construct 09/27 10/04 10/07

09/20-09/24 10-2479-5 Final Inspection 09/24 09/2810-2759-8 Final Inspection 09{23 09/2410-1770-8 Final Inspection 09/22 09/23 "sys start-up05-3692-8 Final Inspection 09/22 09/23 "as-built/mat list10-1568-8 Final Inspection 09120 09/21 "as-built/mat list10-1866-5 Final Inspection 09/20 09/21 "'as-built/mat list10-1770-8 Partial Inspection 09/20 09/20 "pressure test

09/13-09/17 10-2766-5 Tank Replacement 09/14 09/21 09/2110-2759-8 Major Repair 09/14 09/1310-2751-8 Tank Replacement 09/14 11/29 11/29 misfiled10~1770-8 Partial Inspection 09/13 09/14 ..tank&ATT

09/06-09/10 10-2730-8 Major Repair 09/10 09/13 09/27 *Till. sign-off10~2714-8 Permit to Construct 09/08 09/09 09/1010-2707-5 SE (Netarts) 09/08 09/10 09/20 "geo hazard

08/30-09/03 10-2670-8 Authorization Notice 09/02 09/08 09/1510-2667-5 Final Inspection 09/03 09/03 10/05 as-built/mat. list10-2667-5 Tank Replacement 09/02 08/31 09/0210-2664-8 Authorization Notice 09/01 10/26 10/27 "'planning10-2481-$ Final Inspection 08/26 08/30 09/01

08/23-08/27 10~2626-S SE (Collins St) 08/27 09/01 09/1509-2907-8 Final Inspection 08/27 08/27 as-bulltlmat. list10-2625-8 Authorization Notice 08/26 08/31 0910210-2620-8 Tank Replacement 08/26 08/31 09/02

08/16-08/20 10-2567~8 Tank Replacement 08/19 08/31 09/01 bay city sign-off09-1769-8 Final Inspection 08/16 08/16 10/27 as-built/mat list

08/09-08/13 10-2408-8 Final Inspection 08/13 08/13 08/2510-2509-8 Authorization Notice 08/13 08/19 08/1909~2256-S Final Inspection 08/12 08/12 08/2310-2481-8 Tank Replacement 08/11 08/13 08/1310-0969-5 Final Inspection 08/11 08/13 08/1310-2479-8 Major Repair 08/11 08/25 08/30 test pit10-2396-8 Final Inspection 08110 08/11 08/1710-2463-5 Major Repair 08/10 08/11 0811310-2543-8 Authorization Notice 08/09 08/06 08/19

10-0321-8 Final Inspection 08/09 08/10 0811308/02w08/06 10-2435-8 Tank Replacement 08/06 08/10 08/13

10-2427-8 Reinstatement 08/05 08/10 0811310-2408-8 Tank Replacement 08/03 08/04 0810510-2397w8 Reinstatement 08/03 08/03 08/0310-2396w8 Tank Replacement 08/03 08103 08/0309-1220-8 Final Inspection 08/02 08/02 08/13 as-built/mat list09-2576-8 Final Inspection 08/02 08/04 08/13 aswbuilt/mat list10-2383-8 Authorization Notice 08/02 08/10 08/1110-2375-8 Major Repair 08/02 08/04 08/05

07/26-07/30 10-2329-8 Final Inspection 07/29 08/02 08/0610-2346-5 Authorization Notice 07/29 08/03 0810308-3070-5 Final Inspection 07128 08/02 08/0510-2331-S Major Repair 07128 07/30 08/0310-2329-8 Tank Replacement 07/28 07/28 07/2910-2302-8 Tank Replacement 07126 07/26 07/2910-2002-8 Final Inspection 07/26 07/26 08/05

07/19~07/23 10.,.2278-8 AN (field) 07/22 08/02 08/1110-2212-8 Permit to Construct 07/20 signature10-2193.,.8 Permitto Construct 07/19 08/06 08/25 easement

07/12-07/16 09-2037-8 Final Inspection 07/15 07/16 08/0910-2168-8 Authorization Notice 07/15 plan review10-2150-8 Authorization Notice 07/15 07116 07/1609-2861-8 Final Inspection 07/14 07/16 08/09 tank cert10-2152-8 Authorization Notice 07/13 07/14 07/1410-2145-8 SE (Hwy 53) 07/13 08/04 08/12 admin review10-2134-8 Permit to Construct 07/12 07/13 07/13

07/05-07/09 10-2108-8 Permit to Construct 07/09 08/10 09/16 conditional use10-2094-8 Permit to Construct 07/08 07/20 07/20

06128-07/02 10-1521-8 Final Inspection 06/29 06/29 as-built/mat list10-1736-8 Final Inspection 06/28 06/28 06/29

06/21-06/25 10-2002-8 Tank Replacement 06/25 06/28 07/1510-1977-8 SE (Aldercrest) 06/23 06/28 07/08

06/14-06/18 09-1787-8 Final Inspection 06/18 06/18 as-built/mat. list10-1889-8 Final Inspection 06/17 06/18 0710610-1889-8 Tank Replacement 06/16 06/16 06/1710-1873-8 Existing System Review 06/1510-1866-8 Major Repair 06/14 06/17 07/0810-1391-8 Final Inspection 06/14 06/14 06/15

06/07-06/11 10-0108-S Final Inspection 06/10 06/10 06/1710-1833-8 Major Repair 06/10 06/11 plans10-1799-8 Major Alteration 06/07 06/11 06/1510-1560-8 Final Inspection 06/07 06/07 08/09 photos

05/31-06/04 10-1736-8 Minor Alteration 06/01 06/02 06/0210-1770-8 Permit to Construct 06/03 06/11 06/22 variance review

05/24-05/28 10-1657-8 Permit Renewal 05/24 05/25 OS/2510-1332-8 Final Inspection 05/24 05/24 OS/25

05/17-05/21 10-1630-8 Permit to Construct 05/19 OS/20 05/2009-1943-8 Final Inspection 05/18 05/19 05/1910-1604-8 Authorization Notice 05/18 05/20 05/2010-1578~S Permit to Construct 05/17 05/19 OS/2010-1668-8 Permit to Construct 05/17 05/18 05/1910w1560-8 Tank Replacement 05/17 OS/20 05/20

05/10-05/14 10-1466-8 Final Inspection 05/14 05/14 05/1410-1521wS Tank Replacement 05/12 05/13 05/1710-1516-8 Major Repair 05/11 05/13 05/14

10-1515-8 Permit to Construct 05/11 05/14 OS/2010~1214-$ Final Inspection 05/10 05/12 05/12

05/03-05/07 10-1466-8 Tank Replacement 05/07 05/14 05/1410-1406-8 Major Repair 05/04 05/07 05/1410~1391~S Major Repair 05/04 04/30 OS/2007-3574-$ Permit to Construct 05/04 05/10 05/10 retroactive10-1344-8 Permit to Construct 05/03 05/06 05/1710-1332-$ Permit to Construct 05/03 05/06 05/14

04/26~04/30 09-2744-$ Final Inspection 04/30 05/03 06/28 syst. aband,10-1293-8 . SE (Foss Rd) 04/29 06/10 09/02 test pits10-1214-8 Tank Replacement 04/28 04/29 04/2910-1186-8 Authorization Notice 04/27 04/29 04/2910~1185-S SE (8 101 Clvdale) 04/27 04/29 04/2909-2870~8 Final Inspection 04/26 04/27 04/28

04/19-04/23 10-1123-8 Authorization Notice 04/23 05/14 05/14 setbacks10-0596-8 Final Inspection 04/22 04/22 04/2810-1059-8 Tank Replacement 04/19 04/20 04/2110~1051-8 Authorization Notice 04/19 04/20 04/20

04/12-04/16 10~O154-8 Final Inspection 04/16 04/16 04/21 as-built10-0900-8 Final Inspection 04/16 04/16 04/21 as~built

10-0969~S Major Repair 04/12 04/13 04/1404/05-04/09 10-0200-8 Final Inspection 04/09 04/09 04/21

10-0962-8 Tank Replacement 04/09 04/01 04/0910-0720-8 Final Inspection 04/06 04/06 04/1210-0900-8 Tank Replacement 04/06 04/07 04/0810-0893~8 Authorization Notice 04/05 04/07 04/07

03/29-04/02 10-0879-8 8E (Fernwood) 04/02 04/07 04/0910-0878-8 Tank Replacement 04/02 03/09 04/0210-0842-8 SE (Hallstrom Rd) 03/29 04/16 06/30 plarl review

03/22-03/26 10-0465-8 Final Inspection 03/23 03/23 03/2403/15-03/19 10-0720-8 Major Repair 03/19 03/15 03/22

10-0573-8 Final Inspection 03f15 03/15 03/1603/04-03/12 10-0506-8 Final Inspection 03/11 03/11 as-built

10-0596-8 Major Repair 03/09 03f10 03/1110-0542-8 Final Inspection 03/08 03f08 03/0910-0578-8 Permit to Construct 03/08 03/09 03/0910-0573-8 Major Repair 03/08 02123 03/08

02/25-03/03 10-0542-8 Tank Replacement 03/03 03/01 03/0410-0539-8 8E (Hwy 53) 03/03 01/20 03/0410-0506~8 Tank Replacement 02/26 03/01 03/01

02/18-02/24 10-0492-8 AN (replace dwell) 02/24 03/01 03/0110-0465-8 Major Repair 02/23 03/01 03/17 need plans09-1102-8 Final Inspection 02/23 02/23 02/2310-0407-8 Final Inspection 02/22 02/22 02/2409-0242-S Final Inspection 02/19 02/22 02/2210-0376-8 Final Inspection 02/19 02/22 02/24

02/11-02/17 10~0407-8 Major Repair 02f17 02/18 02/1810-0387-8 Authorization Notice 02/16 02/17 02/1910-0389-8 Minor Alteration 02/16 02/17 02/1910-0385-8 Major Repair 02/16 02/17 02/1810-0376~S Tank Replacement 02/12 02/12 02/1210-0337-8 Final Inspection 02/11 02/11 02/12

02/04-02/10 10-0337-8 Tank Replacement 02/09 02/09 02/0909-2750-8 Re-Eval (Nest Bnd) 02108 02/11 02/2409-2749-8 Re-Eval (Nest Bnd) 02/08 02/11 02/2410-0321-8 Permit to Construct 02/05 02/09 02/09

10-0306-8 Authorization Notice 02/04 02/0S 02/05D1/28-02/03 10-0234~8 Final Inspection 02/02 02/03 02/11 as-built/mat list

09-2174-8 Pump Inspection 02/02 02/03 04/08 as-built/mat Ust10-0023~S Final Inspection 02/02 02/04 as-built/mat list10-0022-8 Final Inspection 02/02 02/03 as-built/mat list10-0234~S Tank Replacement 01/28 01/29 D2/01

01/21-01/27 09-3007~8 Final Inspection 01126 01/2? D1/2?10~0200-8 Permit to Construct 01/26 02/03 02/08 planning review10-0154w 8 Permit to Construct 01122 02/0S 02/0S admin review

01/14"01/20 D8-4130w S Final Inspection 01/19 01/19 01/2010-0108-8 Permit to Construct 01/15 01/1S 01/20

01/D7-01/13 10-0078-8 Tank Replacement 01/12 01/13 01/1310-0077w $ Permit Renewal 01/12 01/13 01/1309-2888-8 Finellnspection 01/07 01/07 01/20 as-built/mat list

12/31-01/06 10-0023w $ Tank Heplacement 01/04 01/06 01/0610-0022-8 Tank Replacement 01/04 01/0e 01/0609-3006-8 Final Inspection 01/04 01/05 02/26 as-built/mat list

455.310 Single-family residence repair and maintenance exempt from codes;exemption itemized. (l) It is not the purpose of this chapter to require that pennits beobtained or fees be paid for repairs and maintenance that do not violate the intent of thestructural and fire and life safety specialty provisions of the State of Oregon StructuralSpecialty Code and the Low-Rise Residential Dwelling Code, adopted pursuant to ORS455.020 and 455.610, ORS chapter 476, ORS 479.015 to 479.200 and 479.210 to479.220, when such repair or maintenance is done on a single-family residence, or aprivate garage, carport or storage shed that is accessory to a single-family residence.

(2) Items designated by the Director of the Department of Consumer and BusinessServices, with the advice of the Residential and Manufactured Structures Board, shall beexempt from permits and fees required under this chapter. The director shall, pursuant toORS chapter·183, develop and maintain an applicable list of such exempt items, whichshall include, but not be limited to, concrete slabs, driveways, sidewalks, ma"onry repair,porches, patio covers, painting, interior wall, floor or ceiling covering, nonbearingpartitions, shelving, cabinet work, gutters, downspouts, small accessory buildings, doorand window replacements, replacement or repair of siding and replacement or repair ofroofing. In making the list ofexempt items, the director shall further defme the items onthe list contained in this subsection so that no item which adversely affects the structuralintegrity of the dwelling shall be on the list. [Formerly 456.753 and then 456.915; 1993c.744 §93; 2003 c.675 §26; 2009 c.567 §17]

455.312 Exemption from code of residential prefabricated structures for out-ofstate delivery. (1) For a residential prefabricated structure manufactured in this state andintended for delivery in another state, the Director of the Department ofConsumer andBusiness Services may not require that:

(a) The prefabricated structure conform to the state building code.(b) An inspector provide plan approvals and inspections pursuant to ORS 455.715 to

455.740.(c) A person licensed under ORS 479.630, 693.060 or 693.103 perform electrical or

plumbing installations in the prefabricated structure.(2) Nothing in subsection (I) of this section exempts a person that is renting, leasing,

selling, exchanging, installing or offering for rent, lease, sale, exchange or installation aresidential prefabricated structure from meeting the insignia of compliance orcertification stamp requirements prescribed under ORS 455.705 if the prefabricatedstructure is delivered in or relocated to this state. [2005 c.31 0 §2; 2005 c.758 §42b]

Note: 455.312 was added to and made a part ofORSchapter 455 by legislative actionbut was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutesfor further explanation.

Note: Sections 6 and 8, chapter 310, Oregon Laws 2005, provide:Sec. 6. (l) The Department of Consumer and Business Services shall collect the

information, if any, supplied by industry sources in this state regarding the manufactureof prefabricated structures intended for delivery in other states. 'The types of informationto be collected by the department shall include:

(a) The applied and potential capacity of manufacturers to produce residentialprefabricated structures in this state;

(b) The number ofpersons the manufacturer employs in this state to produceresidential prefabricated structures intended for delivery in other states;

(c) The number of residential prefabricated structures produced in this state intendedfor delivery in other states; and

(d) Any information the department determines to be useful for assessing the effect orpotential effect of section 2 of this 2005 Act [455.312] on employment levels in this state.

(2) The department shall biennially report any information collected by thedepartment under this section to the Legislative Assembly. The department shall submitthe report to the Legislative Assembly as provided in ORS 192.245 no later than OctoberI of each even-numbered year. [2005 c.31 0 §6]

Sec. 8. Section 6 of this 2005 Act is repealed January 2, 2012. [2005 c.31 0 §8]

455.315 Exemption of agricultural buildings, agricultural grading and equinefacilities. (I) Nothing in this chapter is intended to authorize the application of a statestructural specialty code to any agricultural building, agricultural grading or equinefacility.

(2) As used in this section:(a) "Agricultural building" means a structure located on a farm and used in the

operation ofthe farm for:(A) Storage, maintenance or repair offann machinery and equipment;(B) The raising, harvesting and selling of crops;(C) The feeding, breeding, management and sale of, or the produce of, livestock,

poultry, fur-bearing animals or honeybees;(D) Dairying and the sale of dairy products; or(E) Any other agricultural or horticultural use or animal husbandry, or any

combination thereof, including the preparation and storage of the produce raised on thefarm for human use and animal use and disposal by marketing or otherwise.

(b) "Agricultural building" does not mean:(A) A dwelling;(B) A structure used for a purpose other than growing plants in which 10 or more

persons are present at anyone time;(C) A structure regulated by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to ORS chapter 476;(D) A structure used by the public; or(E) A structure subject to sections 4001 to 4127, title 42, United States Code (the

National Flood Insurance Act of 1968) as amended, and regulations promulgatedthereunder.

(c) "Agricultural grading" means grading related to a farming practice as defined inORS 30.930.

(d) "Equine facility" means a building located on a fann and used by the farm owneror the public for:

(A) Stabling or training equines; or(B) Riding lessons and training clinics.(e) "Equine facility" does not mean:(A) A dwelling;

(B) A structure in which more than 10 persons are present at anyone time;(C) A structure regulated by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to ORS chapter 476; or(D) A structure subject to sections 4001 to 4127, title 42, United States Code (the

National Flood Insurance Act of 1968) as amended, and regulations promulgatedthereunder.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, incorporatedcities may regulate agricultural buildings and equine facilities within their boundariespursuant to this chapter. [Formerly 456.758 and then 456.9] 7; 1995 c.783 §1; 2003 c.74§1; 2005 c.288 §3]

455.320 Owner-built dwellings exempt from certain structural code provisions;recording of exemption. (1) As used in this section, unless the context requiresotherwise:

(a) "Owner" means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser ofreal property, of record as shown on the last available complete assessment roll whichperson has not taken advantage of the exemptions under subsection (2) of this sectionduring the five years prior to applying for an exemption under this section.

(b) "Owner-built dwelling and outbuildings" means a single-family residence andadjacent auxiliary structures the structural components of which are constructed entirelyby the owner who intends to occupy the structures or by that owner and friends andrelatives of the owner assisting on an unpaid basis.

(2) Owner-built dwellings and outbuildings shall be exempt from any requirements ofthe structural code for ceiling heights, room sizes and the maintenance of specifictemperature levels in those structures. The exemption shall apply to the new construction,renovation, remodeling or alteration of an owner-built dwelling or outbuilding.

(3) A building permit issued for an owner-built dwelling or outbuilding shall notewhether the owner-built dwelling or outbuilding complies with the requirements it isexempted from under subsection (2) of this section. If the dwelling or other structure doesnot comply with these requirements, the owner-builder shall file a copy of the buildingpermit with the county clerk, who shall make the permit a part of the pennanent deedrecord of the property. The owner shall provide the county clerk with a description of theproperty sufficient if it were contained in a mortgage of the property to give constructivenotice of the mortgage under the law ofthis state.

(4) Noncompliance with subsection (3) of this section shall not affect, in any manner,any conveyance of interest in property subject to this section. [Formerly 456.920]

(Exemptions in Rural Areas)

455.325 Definitions for ORS 455.325 to 455.350. As used in ORS 455.325 to455.350, unless the context requires otherwise:

(1) "Owner" means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser ofreal property, of record as shown on the last available complete assessment roll.

(2) "Owner-built dwelling and outbuildings" means a single-family residence andadjacent auxiliary structures the components of which, that are exempted from thestructural code under ORS 455.330, are constructed entirely by the owner who intends to

-- ------- ----------------------

description of the property sufficient if it were contained in a mortgage of the property togive constructive notice of the mortgage under the law of this state.

(4) Any person, or that person's agent, selling an owner-built dwelling or outbuildingexempted from the structural code under DRS 455.325 to 455.350 shall notify eachpotential buyer of the existence, location and contents of the notice filed under subsection(3) of this section prior to any commitment to purchase the property. [Fonnerly 456.945;1999 c.1045 §16; 1999 c.1082 §12]

455.350 Purchaser's remedies. (1) An individual who purchases an owner-builtdwelling or outbuilding exempted from the structural code under DRS 455.325 to455350 from an owner who has not complied with DRS 455.345 (3) or (4) shall have acause of action against the seller, within two years of the date of making the sale contract,for actual damages, ifany.

(2) Noncompliance with DRS 455.345 (3) or (4) shall not affect, in any manner, anyconveyance of interest in property exempted from the structural code under DRS455.330. [Formerly 456.950]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTBUILDING, PLANNING & ON-SITE SANITATION SECTIONS

.Tillamook County

__ - __ •__•••_"•• '___ _", ••_ •• , __"" ,._••__ •••_'0__ ' , _

Land olCheese, hees und Ocean Brccze

January 12, 2011

RE: Charles SchecklerResidence

150 NW 20th

Rockaway Beach, ORObstructions in substantially improved residential structureFIRM: Community and panel number 41020 1 0001V-lO, Base Flood Elevation 26' NGVD

1510-8 Third StreetTillamook, Oregon 97141

Building (503) 842-3407Planning (503)842-3408

On-Site Sanitation (503) 842--3409FAX (503)842-1819

Toll Free 1 (800)488-8280

The following documents comprise the mitigation submittal packetintended to demonstrate NFIP regulation compliance. The intended

goals are:

• Remove identified obstructions• Complete the portion ofthe approved plans that has not been

executed.• Obtain final inspection of permit 06-0588R and occupancy

approval.

Craig WakefieldBuilding Official] 510 B Third StreetTillamook County, OR 9714](503)842-3407 Ext. [email protected]

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

""\:','

~'. ~I\l-'"/

:A

'";,:;('"'~

t:~

~2"J,

remove these

walls

'i

remove this wall. Replacewith beam for bearing,and breakaway masonrywall below beam.

z -X~

. . _ _ , "2'~ 3i8'

~-~ -l >~

,',~ I'-\1 '; I~'

I :, 's H.; 5~:':( ,~ I-+ 'av,w~:~T"r I~j, ,,~1"1. II ~.1; 3 "0

,.:e:.ove thiS wall ~I'~,~I.. ~' .. ".':'JD "::,"" L ,...., .'

. -e, <l'/'~'I~I"/ • ,"cd tOgc:~~ ·,1'1

/// 'il~: ' I

I( ..5 1:/1£/1

'j!

I','! "-~

L

BE :~J1. fOCYET

.... --.-.- .. _.._._-_..._----j

v'~ ocr :?) ,....20....06

'0

"S:~'i!j,-,7 .•,: L',,!; I Replace garage slab as necessary 'I ~ I

with new slab and turned down ; .".

';f~'12'" a,cc.W, , .~.".. ~." V-L.,' edge. Breakaway walls above slab -

Remove concrete walls L., t~1;(i 1 elevalLon.between columns. i 'r; L---'i L- ---l.--t._.+-_

,,'.'nee, ',CC !~i'T' ",'f). '.~ Bring sand to grade.

L~r -.J.---.....,...-------'

-- .-...:9>~~ 9b;<c

'"

Remove concrete walls

between columns.

;.,:<::'

(---"':\.......---- ...

Bring sand to grade.

1..1

I

J~ 33'8' _._ --1',3Y6' ~i -j '~... _._ ..!;.~~ .. -.. 1_;_.~ ::::--

Co:r,

~.

n

0:-;-;

-~

~

00Y5

i ~!j:'-':-t

$, ~

3 0'5 .-1' .. L..i~'~. ~_. "'·",;':3',,:·---"·' ""to 1/8 ['9 9%' '."'t, CC ••.,J '+-'.3'\ ,'3i8' I I .' 0 i' --j .... ' ~ I' ,"x6'

~--f "'::--L::--;~-; 1 ~ I .-"_';, -:<;.'.1" ! .. _. -~ - -(-~\:.:...~~}

·.~(TEK 1D E'·!(;j!·,LUIHG 'iDR [)'i:~,,\Jl.s

THE TOPOGRAPHY 6ND ERODABILITY OF THEC1JARL:ES SHECKLEKJ3·1~SJDENTIAL S)TE, RDCKAWAY BEACr L OREGQJi

See revised foundation plan by RNS-Consulting, dated 1-6-2011, for 111itigation details.

The finished construction of the Charles Sheckler propcrty includes establishing thefinished grade. The finished grade needs to match the existing grade on three sidcs of theSheckler residence. The thrcc sides that comprises finished gradc arc the leastmanipulated areas and have been stable for many decades.

Between the time of the demolition of the old cabin and the construction of the newdwelling, there had been a fair amount of grade manipulation including thc dig-out forthe concrete and steel columns that support the current dwelling. Placing sand back underthe elevated dwelling is an integral contribution to completion of the engineered designand mitigation of the effects of wave run-up.

The old cabinwas constructedon the forwardmost portion ofthe lot. The newdwelling wasreq uircd to meetset-backs usinglot-averagingfrom the dune.

The Sheckler residence is bounded by two roads to the North and East, the fore-dune tothe west, and a yard adjacent to his neighbor to the South. The two access roads, one apublic road on the north side and the access road to the neighbor to the east, wcre longago established grades. Thc public road elcvation integrates into the fore-dune elevationheading west. The fore-dune elevation continues to rise to the west to an elevation abovethe Base Flood Elevation which provides a barrier.

The two roadsadjacent to theSheckler horneare fixed gradesthat wereestablished manyyears ago. Thefore-dune rises tothe west of theroac! elevation,

'------~------

ASCE 24 addresses many aspects of building performance including the placement offill. One of the important factors in placing fill is that it is to be "stable under conditionsof flooding." By leveling out the grade from the west fore-dune to the easterly reach,which is the assumed direction a wave will travel, there will be significantly lessturbulence and friction than if the grade were to drop at the front of the newly constructeddwelling. The sand is constrained by the very nature of it being placed in a swale or low

depression.

To complete the finished grade, sand should be placed under the elevated dwelling.Completing the finished grade is integral to mitigating obstructions and would enhancethe free passage of flood water. When wave run-up has to flow ovcr rising and fallingterrain, the damaging forces gather in the low elevations, increasing the scour andcollecting the force as the water moves to escape to the higher elevation. Cf'he placing ofthe finished grade under the dwelling provides a more uniform grade sloping olIthe f()redune which allows flood water to pass under the elevated dwelling at the same grade asthe garage slab and the adjacent road elevation.

The sand placed under the dwelling will be constrained by the existing grades on threesides and the concrete walls to the south. The soil type is sand, so the placement ofadditional sand will integrate with the cxisting soil type, and therefore, there will not be aslip plane or any dissimilar materials to cause incompatibility.

'l'he prohibition against placing fill is associated with improper fill for footings, when fillimpedes the free flow of Hood waters, or when fill redirects f100d water in a damagingmanner. In the casc ofthe Sheckler design, none of the above deleterious scenarios wouldapply. Matching existing grades by placing the sand under the Sheckler residence wouldenhance the dynamics of the free f10w of flood water as opposed to creating an

impediment.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTBUILDING, PLANNING & ON-SITE SANITATION SECTIONS

Tillamook County

Land CilCheese, '11'ee.l' and Ocean Breeze

January 4,2011

Charles Sheckler150 NW 20th

(PO Box 1(33)Rockaway Beach, OR 97136

RE: Obstructions in substantially improved residential structure.Permit number 06-0588RFIRMpanel and community number 410201 0001,Flood zone V-I0, BFE 26"NGVD

Mr. Sheckler,

151 O-B Third StreetTillamook, Oregon 97141

Buildin[] (503) 842-3407Planning (503) 842-3408

On-Site Sanitation (503) 842-3409FAX (503)842-1819

Toll Free 1 (800)488-8280

Your building permit 06-0588R to construct a dwelling at the above noted addresswas issucd on February 17,2006. To this date there has not been a certificate ofoccupancy issucd because of unresolved issues.

The cngineer of record, RNS-Consulting, has provided a rcvised mitigationfoundation plan to address obstructions that have been identified as the principalreason for the increased Hood insurance ratcs assigned to your dwelling.

The concrete walls that have been poured between the steel colurnns (columnsnoted as detail SKI in the engineering packet) are not on the approvedconstruction plans and must be removed. The concrete walls arc not part of alateral force resisting system and only serve to provide containment of the easterlygrade, 'fhe easterly grade would be adequately supported if finished grade wascompleted as per the approved plans. Completing the finished grade would haveprovided support for the easterly grade, thereby eliminating the need for retainingbeyond the scope oflhe approved plans.

The existing storage area below the garage has been identified as an obstruction.'1'his area must be decommissioned and mitigated per the mitigation foundationplan provided by the engineer of record, RNS Consulting.


The concrete stair structure has been identified as an obstruction and must bemitigated per the mitigation foundation plan.

'1'0 allow the free How of Hood water under the dwelling in the ease of a floodevent the garage slab will require a turndown edge as designated by the mitigation

foundation plan.

Implementation of the ITlitigation j()Ll11dation plan could bring resolution to thelong standing issues that have prevented final occupancy approval and a reduction

of 1l0od insurance premiums.

Contact RNS-Consulting to obtain dctails for imp1cmentation of the mitigation

foundation plan.

Respcctfully,

Craig WakefieldBuilding Official1510 B Third StreetTillamook County, OR 97141503-842-3407 Ext. [email protected]

AN r·:QLJAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOY[:R

I_EcQl«lMI( •• 'DEVElOPMENT__.(OI.JNCft IOF TILLAMOOK COU NTY

Tillamook County CommissionersTillamook, Oregon 97141

1/11/11

Dear Commissioners:

The construction of the CDBG-R Hebo Water Systems Upgrade project isnearing completion. The CDBG grant is open until December 31,2011 to allowfor the close out of the administrative functions of the grant, as well asaccomplish the build out of the change order items you are considering at theJanuary 13th meeting.

As part of the final adjustments to the grant budget, it is necessary tomove some funds between line items. Accordingly, the request before you foryour consideration Wednesday, January 13th is to move $46,300 fromConstruction Contingencies to Engineering according to the schedule below:

CDBG-R Hebo Water Systems Upgrade #CR0903

Budget Line Items Existing Budget Revised Budget

Engineering ,- 85,780 132,080Construction 970,000 970000

ConstructionContinQency 97,000

" ,~,,~..- 50,70g~

Permits I Legal 13352 13,352Grant Administration 35,000 35,000Labor Standard 15,000 15,000

• __•__.-__"_0'."."· .,,,~ - ._-~'"U

Total 1,216,132 1,216,132

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Respectfully,

<··:?P?~4".l~,L£·i2vL.Marshall DoakExecutive DirectorEconomic and Small Business DevelopmentCDBG Grant Administrators for CR0903

~ (I Tn:~.~,~l,qC?,@:~Y bU(!)re~ n4301 Third Street, Tillamook, OR 97141 • Phone: 503~842-2236 • Fax: 503-842-8334

Commissioners:

Thank you for allowing me to present to you "Project Homeless Connect". Let me give you some

background. A friend of mine in Portland, every Christmas Eve, would gather her family, make

sandwiches and hot drinks and go under the Morrison Bridge and feed the homeless that evening.

Throughout the year she would gather coats, hats, small toys, toiletries, small gifts for women and

whatever else she felt the homeless might need. In Portland, most of the men remain on the streets

and the women and children are in the shelters. Being Christmas Eve, she and her family would ensure

that each person had a gift to give to a wife or child on Christmas Day, albeit small. This was my friends

Christmas tradition and she would allow no outsiders to go with her.

I felt that it was time Tillamook County did something along the same lines. After attending the

Homeless Summit a few months ago, I approached Marlene Putman of CCF and Erin Skaar of CARE and

made a proposal. Little did I know that there were programs out there in other counties that have been

implemented. The three of us decided that we should wait until after the holidays, to allow more time

for organization and to coincide our event with the next homeless persons count. We chose a day when

there were no meal sites open so as to maximize our attendance. Hence "Project Homeless Connect"

was established.

With myself in partnership with CCF and CARE an e-mail was sent out to invite people to the initial

meeting. We had many interested parties for several organizations and the general public. January 27th

was designated as "Project Homeless Day". The team has set out to get monetary and tangible

donations. Today our partners are:

First Christian Church providing the site and meal for the event

Tillamook Transportation District providing transportation to and from the event from anywhere in the

county

TLC a monetary donation

Dr. Lee Long toothbrushes and toothpaste

Marshall Doak a monetary donation

Food Bank 48 blankets

Werners Meats a monetary donation

State Farm Insurance monetary donation and volunteers

Dr. Anita Johansen vaccinations and food

United Paws sterilization and food

Dr. Doherty foot care

101 Laundromat afternoons of free washing and drying

Tillamook Laundromat afternoon of free washing and drying

4 people to do haircuts

As well as Women's Crisis Center, NW Seniors & Disabilities, Youth and Family Services, etc.

There are many more contributors that have not been established as yet but we are hoping for many

more.

I would like to see this become a semi-annual event in all three areas of the county but we needed to

start small to get the word out. We have no idea how many to expect but hope that it will be a great

turnout. Men, woman, children and pets are invited to have a hot meal of roast beef on a bun,

vegetable and dessert as well as a beverage and to sign up for food stamps, school lunch programs, get a

haircut, have your feet looked at, get necessities like shampoo, soap, shaving cream, razors, toilet paper,

diapers, feminine hygiene products, blankets, sleeping bags, tarps and find information on services

available to the people in need. Pets will receive vaccinations, spay or neuter certificates and food.

We encourage all those in need to attend between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. on January 27,2011 at the

First Christian Church. Bus tokens will be available at the food pantries throughout the county.

If anyone would like to volunteer or donate, please contact Su Yaremchuk (503) 812~0108.

Commissioners I thank you for your support in this great venture.

Tillamook County

Board of CommissionersCharles J. Hurliman. Tim Josi. Mark Labhart

201 Laurel AvenueTillamook, Oregon 97141

Phone 503-842-3403Fax 503-842-1384

TTY Oregon Relay Service

Land ofCheese, Trees and Ocean Breeze

January 20, 2011

Nancy EmersonCloverdale US Post Office34480 Highway 101 SCloverdale OR 97112-9555

RE: Community Mail Box Center in Community of Beaver

Dear Ms. Emerson:

Since the United States Postal Service closed the Post Office in the community of Beaver theresidents have been required to drive up to a fourteen mile round trip to pick up their mail at thePost Office in Cloverdale. Residents are finding this inconvenient and costly in both time andgas.

It has come to our attention that the community of Beaver would like to have a community mailbox center (a bank of mail boxes) placed at a location where they can drive by and pick up theirmail. This would solve the issue of the cost of everyone having to change their mailing addressand address some safety issues. Requiring that mail boxes along Highway 101 be placed onthe west side of the highway raises several issues including the fact that there is a guardrailalong the highway and there may not be room to place a mail box. This will cause safetyissues for the postal delivery person in their vehicle and for anyone crossing Highway 101 topick up their mail, especially for seniors and youngsters.

We request that the US Postal Service install a bank of mail boxes in one location in thecommunity of Beaver at a location where it is safe for the postal service delivery personnel andresidents to pick up their mail and save money for the USPS and residents of Beaver.

Thank you for considering our request.

Sincerely,

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERSFOR TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

/itt,aii'~ Vj;"';' Ab-:'- ~~L J.~Charles J. ~Jriiman, Chair Tim Ji, Vice-Cir MarkU'bh':rt,c~Hnl11iSsioner

cc: Senator Ron WydenSenator Jeff MerkleyRepresentative Kurt Schrader
