Economic Consultants Oregon, LTF Dba Econorthwest ~ 32400019
CITY OF TIGARD - CONTRACT SUMMARY & ROUTING FORM
Contract Overview
Contract/Amendment Number: 324000
Contract Start Date: 03/29/2024 Contract End Date: 06/30/2026
Contract Title: River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services)
Contractor Name: Economic Consultants Oregon, LTD d/b/a ECOnorthwest
Contract Manager: Schuyler Warren
Department: CD
Contract Costs
Original Contract Amount: $1,025,956.00 + $90,505 in Add/Alts – contingent on securing outside funding
and $75,000 contingency reserve.
Total All Previous Amendments: n/a
Total of this Amendment: n/a
Total Contract Amount: $1,191,461.00
Procurement Authority
Contract Type: Personal Services
Procurement Type: Formal RFP >$150K
Solicitation Number: 2024-07
LCRB Date: 02/13/2024
Account String: Fund-Division-Account Work Order – Activity Type Amount
FY 24 100-3000-54001 $250,000
FY 25 100-3000-54001 $545,125
FY 25 532-8000-56005 CP96062-External-DES $54,875
FY 26 100-3000-54001 $175,956
FY 24-26 100-3000-54001 – Contingency $75,000
FY 25 100-3000-54001 – Add/Alts $90,505
Contracts & Purchasing Approval
Purchasing Signature:
Comments:
DocuSign Routing
Route for Signature Name Email Address
Contractor Becky Hewitt hewitt@econw.com
City of Tigard Steve Rymer stever@tigard-or.gov
Final Distribution
Contractor Becky Hewitt hewitt@econw.com
Project Manager Schuyler Warren schuylerw@tigard-or.gov
Project Manager
Buyer Rosie McGown rosie.mcgown@tigard-or.gov
City of Tigard | 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 | (503) 639-4171 | www.tigard-or.gov
City of Tigard
FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES
QUALIFICATION BASED REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (QBS)
RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING
(PLANNING SERVICES)
2024-07
Proposals Due: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 - 10:00 am local time
Proposer must submit one (1) electronic copy in portable document format (pdf).
Submit Proposals To: ContractsPurchasing@tigard-or.gov
Direct Questions To: Email: tonir@tigard-or.gov
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 28 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
SECTION 7
PROPOSAL CERTIFICATIONS
******************************************
Non-discrimination Clause
The Contractor agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment or for
services, because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap or age with regard to, but not limited
to, the following: employment upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoffs
or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; selection for training; rendition of services. It
is further understood that any contractor who is in violation of this clause shall be barred from receiving
awards of any purchase order from the City, unless a satisfactory showing is made that discriminatory practices
have terminated and that a recurrence of such acts is unlikely.
Agreed by:
Firm Name:
Address:
*****************************************
Resident Certificate
Please Check One:
Resident Vendor: Vendor has paid unemployment taxes and income taxes in this state during the last
twelve calendar months immediately preceding the submission of this proposal.
Or
Non-resident Vendor: Vendor does not qualify under requirement stated above.
(Please specify your state of residence: )
Officer’s signature:
Type or print officer’s name:
ECOnorthwest
222 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
Lorelei Juntunen
Lorelei Juntunen
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 29 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
SECTION 8
SIGNATURE PAGE
The undersigned proposes to perform all work as listed in the Specification section and that all articles supplied
under any resultant contract will conform to the specifications herein,
The undersigned agrees to be bound by all applicable laws and regulations, the accompanying specifications,
and by City policies and regulations.
The undersigned, by submitting a proposal, represents that:
A) The Proposer has read and understands the specifications.
B) Failure to comply with the specifications or any terms of the Request for Proposal may disqualify
the Proposer as being non-responsive.
The undersigned certifies that the proposal has been arrived at independently and has been submitted without
any collusion designed to limit competition.
The undersigned certifies that all addenda to the specifications has been received and duly considered with all
addenda have been included in this proposal:
Addenda: No. through No. inclusive.
We therefore offer and make this proposal to furnish services herein in fulfillment of the attached
requirements and specifications of the City.
Name of firm:
Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
By: Date:
(Signature of Authorized Official. If partnership, signature of one partner.)
Typed Name/Title:
If corporation, attest:
(Corporate Officer)
Corporation Partnership Individual
Federal Tax Identification Number (TIN):
ECOnorthwest
222 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
503-222-6060 503-222-1504
Lorelei Juntunen, Partner/President
93-0639592
Lorelei Juntunen, Partner/President
November 2, 2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
City of Tigard
FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES
Qualification-Based Request for Proposal (QBS)
ADDENDUM #1
RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING
(PLANNING SERVICES)
2024-07
Proposals Due: Tuesday, November 14, 2023– 10:00 a.m.
Addendum Issue Date: Thursday, November 9, 2023
Submit Proposals To: ContractsPurchasing@tigard-or.gov
Direct Questions To: Toni Riccardi
ContractsPurchasing@tigard-or.gov
Total Page of this Addendum: 2
This addendum is issued to clarify, add, delete, correct and/or change the proposal documents to the extent
indicated and is hereby made a part of the above noted RFP documents on which the contract will be based.
Any modifications/changes made by this addendum affect only the portions or paragraphs specifically
identified herein; all remaining portions of the proposal to remain in force. It is the responsibility of all
proposers to conform to this addendum.
Questions and Answers
Interpretation and Translation services:
1. Q: Other than Spanish, are there any other languages that the City has determined a need for this process
or is this yet to be determined?
A: This is partially yet to be determined dependent on project need. Spanish language services are
required as a minimum. In the past, the city has provided language Vietnamese, Swahili, Arabic, and
Somali.
It is safe to assume that the only language services needed to support the Community Advisory
Committee will be Spanish, unless a participant has another language preference.
Assume that the following one-time production materials should be translated to the languages listed
above:
Basic website materials (main page)
Mailers
Surveys
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2 | P a g e
Assume that focus groups may be held in one or more languages simultaneously or independently
depending on participant need or the group being addressed.
These assumptions could change during scoping or during project implementation based on project
needs.
2. Q: Will the Community Engagement Consultant manage the provision of simultaneous interpretation and
translation services, and that interpretation and translation services should be included in the Community
Engagement budget.
A: The Community Engagement Consultant will manage the provisions of simultaneous interpretation
and translation services and that those services should be included in the budget. The city does have on-
call contract with two community-based organizations to provide those services, but a coordinated effort
results in better outcomes.
Stipends
3. Q: Will the City or Community Engagement Consultant manage stipends and/or other stakeholder
participation incentives? If the consultant, should cost of incentives be included in the Community
Engagement budget?
A: Please assume that stipends or stakeholder participation incentives will be managed by the Consultant
and should be included in the budget assumptions. The City is barred from providing direct participation
incentives to stakeholders.
Consultant Team Qualifications section:
4. Q: Is it acceptable to provide the requested information for this section in a different order than
outlined in the RFP?
A: Information should be provided in the format that best communicates the Proposer’s qualifications.
All requested information that is provided, will be considered. Where is would not be readily apparent to
a reasonable person that certain information is being provided, for instance when it is provided in a
completely in a completely different section of the response, please feel free to explain where that
information may be found.
5. Q: How are Sections B – List of Project Staff and C – Table of Personnel distinct from one another? Is
it acceptable to combine these sections to avoid duplication?
Project examples – Consultant Team Experience and Project Manager Experience
A: Please feel free to combine these if all requested information is provided.
6. Q: Is it acceptable to use the same project examples in both sections, if they are particularly applicable?
Would the City prefer to see different examples between sections?
A: It is acceptable to use the same project examples. The important factor in evaluating these past
projects will be their relationship to the City’s project and how they demonstrate experience, likelihood
of success, innovative approaches to problems and challenges, or anything else the Proposer wishes to
highlight as a factor in its qualifications.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
3 | P a g e
7. Q: Do you have a list of community-based organizations that would be suitable for this project?
A: The city does not maintain a list of preferred community-based organizations, nor are there
preferences for any CBOs other than demonstration of likelihood of success based on approach,
experience, and qualifications.
8. Q: Are you able to share a budget or upset limit for this project?
A: The city will be requesting cost proposals from the top three respondents as a next step in this
selection process. As this is a qualification-based RFP, there is no set budget amount. It is expected that
the selected Proposer will enter scope and budget negotiations with the city as a final step.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 30 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADDENDA
Project Title: 2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services)
Close: November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
I/WE HAVE RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING ADDENDA (If none received, write “None Received”):
1. 3.
2. 4.
Date
Signature of Proposer
Title
Corporate Name
ECOnorthwest
Partner/President
November 2, 2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 31 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL
Name of Consultant:
Mailing Address:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Fax: Email:
accepts all the terms and conditions contained in the City of Tigard’s Qualification Based Request for River
Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) and the attached professional services agreement
template (Attachment C):
Signature of authorized representative Date
Type or print name of authorized representative Telephone Number
Type or print name of person(s) authorized to negotiate contracts Telephone Number
ECOnorthwest
Lorelei Juntunen
503-222-1504
Becky Hewitt
222 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
hewitt@econw.com503-200-5077
503-200-5074
November 2, 2023
Cindy O'Connell 503-200-5076
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
32400019
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES)
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 29 day of March 2024 by and between the City of Tigard,
a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called City, and Economic Consultants Oregon,
LTD DBA ECOnorthwest, hereinafter called Contractor.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City’s 2024 fiscal year budget provides for services related to developing the River Terrace
2.0 Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the accomplishment of the work and services described in the Agreement is necessary and
essential to the program of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the Contractor to render professional planning services for the project
described in this Agreement, and the Contractor is willing and qualified to perform such services;
THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Contractor will perform professional planning services relevant to the Project in accordance with
the terms and conditions set forth herein, and as provided in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and
by this reference made a part of this Agreement.
2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION
This Agreement is effective upon the date of execution and expires on June 30, 2026, unless
otherwise terminated or extended. All work under this Agreement must be completed prior to
the expiration of this Agreement.
3. COMPENSATION
The City agrees to pay Contractor in accordance with the fee schedule outlined in Exhibit A. The
total amount paid to the Contractor by the City may not exceed One Million, One Hundred Ninety
One, Four Hundred Sixty One and No/100 Dollars ($1,191,461.00). Payments made to Contractor
will be based upon the following applicable terms:
A. Payment by City to Contractor for performance of services under this Agreement includes all
expenses incurred by Contractor, with the exception of expenses, if any, identified in this
Agreement as separately reimbursable.
B. Payment will be made in installments based on Contractor’s invoice, subject to the approval of
the City Manager, or designee, and not more frequently than monthly. Unless otherwise agreed,
payment will be made only for work actually completed as of the date of invoice.
C. Payment by City releases City from any further obligation for payment to Contractor for services
performed or expenses incurred as of the date of the invoice. Payment may not be considered
acceptance or approval of any work or waiver of any defects therein.
D. Contractor must make payments promptly, as due, to all persons supplying labor or materials for
the performance of the work provided for in this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
E. Contractor may not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against the City on any
account of any labor or material furnished.
F. Contractor will pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees pursuant to
ORS 316.167.
G. Contractor will pay all contributions or amounts due the Industrial Accident Fund from the
contractor or any subcontractor.
H. If Contractor fails, neglects, or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim for labor or services
furnished to Contractor or a subcontractor by any person as such claim becomes due, City’s
Finance Director may pay such claim and charge the amount of the payment against funds due or
to become due the Contractor. The payment of the claim in this manner does not relieve
Contractor or their surety from obligation with respect to any unpaid claims.
I. Contractor will promptly, as due, make payment to any person, co-partnership, association, or
corporation, furnishing medical, surgical, and hospital care or other needed care and attention,
incident to sickness or injury, to the employees of Contractor, of all sums that Contractor agrees
to pay for the services and all moneys and sums that Contractor collected or deducted from the
wages of employees pursuant to any law, contract, or agreement for the purpose of providing or
paying for services.
J. Contractor and its employees, if any, are not active members of the Oregon Public Employees
Retirement System and are not employed for a total of 600 hours or more in the calendar year by
any public employer participating in the Retirement System.
K. Contractor must obtain, prior to the execution of any performance under this Agreement, a City
of Tigard Business License. The Tigard Business License is based on a calendar year with a
December 31st expiration date. New businesses operating in Tigard after June 30th of the current
year will pay a pro-rated fee though the end of the calendar year.
L. The City certifies that sufficient funds are available and authorized for this Agreement during the
current fiscal year. Funding during future fiscal years is subject to budget approval by Tigard’s
City Council.
4. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT
City is the owner of and is entitled to possession of any and all work products of Contractor which
result from this Agreement, including any computations, plans, correspondence, or pertinent data and
information gathered by or computed by Contractor prior to termination of this Agreement by
Contractor or upon completion of the work pursuant to this Agreement.
5. ASSIGNMENT/DELEGATION
Neither party may assign, sublet or transfer any interest in or duty under this Agreement without the
written consent of the other and no assignment has any force or effect unless and until the other party
has consented. If City agrees to assignment of tasks to a subcontract, Contractor is fully responsible
for the acts or omissions of any subcontractors and of all persons employed by them. Neither the
approval by City of any subcontractor nor anything contained herein creates any contractual relation
between the subcontractor and City. The provisions of this Agreement are binding upon and will
inure to the benefit of the parties to the Agreement and their respective successors and assigns.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
3 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
6. STATUS OF CONTRACTOR AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Contractor certifies that:
A. Contractor acknowledges that for all purposes related to this Agreement, Contractor is an
independent contractor as defined by ORS 670.600 and not an employee of City. Contractor is
not entitled to benefits of any kind to which an employee of City is entitled and is solely
responsible for all payments and taxes required by law. Furthermore, in the event that Contractor
is found by a court of law or any administrative agency to be an employee of City for any purpose,
City is entitled to offset compensation due, or to demand repayment of any amounts paid to
Contractor under the terms of this Agreement, to the full extent of any benefits or other
remuneration Contractor receives (from City or third party) as a result of said finding and to the
full extent of any payments that City is required to make (to Contractor or to a third party) as a
result of said finding.
B. Contractor is not an officer, employee, or agent of the City as those terms are used in ORS 30.265.
7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The undersigned Contractor hereby represents that no employee of the City, or any partnership or
corporation in which a City employee has an interest, has or will receive any remuneration of any
description from Contractor, either directly or indirectly, in connection with the letting or performance
of this Agreement, except as specifically declared in writing.
If this payment is to be charged against Federal funds, Contractor certifies that he/she is not currently
employed by the Federal Government and the amount charged does not exceed their normal charge
for the type of service provided.
8. INDEMNIFICATION
City has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to
enter into this Agreement. Contractor represents that all of its work will be performed in accordance
with generally accepted professional practices and standards as well as the requirements of applicable
federal, state, and local laws, it being understood that acceptance of a Contractor’s work by City will
not operate as a waiver or release.
Contractor agrees to indemnify and defend the City, its officers, employees, agents, and representatives
and hold them harmless from any and all liability, causes of action, claims, losses, damages, judgments,
or other costs or expenses, including attorney's fees and witness costs (at both trial and appeal level,
whether or not a trial or appeal ever takes place including any hearing before federal or state
administrative agencies), that may be asserted by any person or entity which in any way arise from,
during, or in connection with the performance of the work described in this contract, except liability
arising out of the sole negligence of the City and its employees. Such indemnification will also cover
claims brought against the City under state or federal worker's compensation laws. If any aspect of
this indemnity is found to be illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity
does not affect the validity of the remainder of this indemnification.
9. INSURANCE
Contractor and its subcontractors must maintain insurance acceptable to City in full force and effect
throughout the term of this contract. Such insurance must cover risks arising directly or indirectly out
of Contractor's activities or work hereunder, including the operations of its subcontractors of any tier.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
4 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
The policy or policies of insurance maintained by the Contractor must provide at least the following
limits and coverages:
A. Commercial General Liability Insurance
Contractor will obtain, at Contractor’s expense, and keep in effect during the term of this contract,
Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an
“occurrence” form (CG 2010 1185 or equivalent). This coverage must include Contractual
Liability insurance for the indemnity provided under this contract. The following insurance will
be carried:
Coverage Limit
General Aggregate $3,000,000
Products-Completed Operations Aggregate $3,000,000
Personal & Advertising Injury $1,000,000
Each Occurrence $2,000,000
Fire Damage (Any one fire) $50,000
B. Commercial Automobile Insurance
Contractor must also obtain, at Contractor’s expense, and keep in effect during the term of the
contract, Commercial Automobile Liability coverage including coverage for all owned, hired, and
non-owned vehicles on an “occurrence” form. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence may
not be less than $1,000,000.
If Contractor uses a personally owned vehicle for business use under this contract, the Contractor
will obtain, at Contractor’s expense, and keep in effect during the term of the contract, business
automobile liability coverage for all owned vehicles on an “occurrence” form. The Combined
Single Limit per occurrence may not be less than $1,000,000.
C. Workers’ Compensation Insurance
The Contractor, its subcontractors, if any, and all employers providing work, labor, or materials
under this Contract that are subject employers under the Oregon Workers' Compensation Law
must comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage
that satisfies Oregon law for all their subject workers. Out-of-state employers must provide
Oregon workers' compensation coverage for their workers who work at a single location within
Oregon for more than 30 days in a calendar year. Contractors who perform work without the
assistance or labor of any employee need not obtain workers’ compensation coverage. All non-
exempt employers must provide Employer's Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less
than $1,000,000 each accident.
D. Additional Insured Provision
All required insurance policies, other than Workers’ Compensation and Professional Liability,
must name the City its officers, employees, agents, and representatives as additional insureds with
respect to this Agreement.
E. Insurance Carrier Rating
Coverages provided by the Contractor must be underwritten by an insurance company deemed
acceptable by the City. All policies of insurance must be written by companies having an A.M.
Best rating of "A-VII" or better, or equivalent. The City reserves the right to reject all or any
insurance carrier(s) with an unacceptable financial rating.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
5 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
F. Self-Insurance
The City understands that some contractors may self-insure for business risks and the City will
consider whether such self-insurance is acceptable if it meets the minimum insurance requirements
for the type of coverage required. If Contractor is self-insured for commercial general liability or
automobile liability insurance, Contractor must provide evidence of such self-insurance.
Contractor must provide a Certificate of Insurance showing evidence of the coverage amounts on
a form acceptable to the City. The City reserves the right in its sole discretion to determine
whether self-insurance is adequate.
G. Certificates of Insurance
As evidence of the insurance coverage required by the contract, Contractor will furnish a
Certificate of Insurance to the City. No contract is effective until the required Certificates of
Insurance have been received and approved by the City. The certificate will specify and document
all provisions within this contract and include a copy of Additional Insured Endorsement.
A renewal certificate will be sent to the below address prior to coverage expiration.
H. Primary Coverage Clarification
The parties agree that Contractor’s coverage is primary to the extent permitted by law. The parties
further agree that other insurance maintained by the City is excess and not contributory insurance
with the insurance required in this section.
I. Cross-Liability Clause
A cross-liability clause or separation of insureds clause will be included in all general liability,
professional liability, pollution, and errors and omissions policies required by this Agreement. A
certificate in form satisfactory to the City certifying to the issuance of such insurance will be
forwarded to:
City of Tigard
Attn: Contracts and Purchasing Office
ContractsPurchasing@tigard-or.gov
At the discretion of the City, a copy of each insurance policy, certified as a true copy by an
authorized representative of the issuing insurance company, may be required to be forwarded to
the above address.
Such policies or certificates must be delivered prior to commencement of the work. The procuring
of such required insurance will not be construed to limit Contractor’s liability hereunder.
Notwithstanding said insurance, Contractor is obligated for the total amount of any damage,
injury, or loss caused by negligence or neglect connected with this Agreement.
10. METHOD & PLACE OF SUBMITTING NOTICE, BILLS AND PAYMENTS
All notices, bills and payments will be made in writing and may be given by personal delivery, mail, or
by fax. Payments may be made by personal delivery, mail, or electronic transfer. The following
addresses will be used to transmit notices, bills, payments, and other information:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
6 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
CITY OF TIGARD ECONOMIC CONSULTANTS OREGON
DBA ECONORTHWEST
Attn: Schuyler Warren Attn: Becky Hewitt
Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223
Address: 222 SW Columbia St. Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
Phone: (503) 718-2437 Phone: (503) 220-5077
Email: schuylerw@tigard-or.gov Email: hewitt@econw.com
Notice will be deemed given upon deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or when so
faxed, upon successful fax. In all other instances, notices, bills and payments will be deemed given at
the time of actual delivery. Changes may be made in the names and addresses of the person to who
notices, bills, and payments are to be given by giving written notice pursuant to this paragraph.
11. SURVIVAL
The terms, conditions, representations, and warranties contained in this Agreement survive the
termination or expiration of this Agreement.
12. MERGER
This writing is intended both as a final expression of the Agreement between the parties with respect
to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the Agreement. No
modification of this Agreement will be effective unless and until it is made in writing and signed by
both parties.
13. TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE
At any time and without cause, City has the right in its sole discretion to terminate this Agreement by
giving notice to Contractor. If City terminates this Agreement pursuant to this paragraph, City will
pay Contractor for services rendered to the date of termination.
14. TERMINATION WITH CAUSE
A. City may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to Contractor, or at
such later date as may be established by City, under any of the following conditions:
1) If City funding from federal, state, local, or other sources is not obtained and continued at
levels sufficient to allow for the purchase of the indicated quantity of services. This Agreement
may be modified to accommodate a reduction in funds.
2) If federal or state regulations or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way
that the services are no longer allowable or appropriate for purchase under this Agreement.
3) If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Contractor, its
subcontractors, agents, and employees to provide the services required by this Agreement is
for any reason denied, revoked, or not renewed.
4) If Contractor becomes insolvent, if voluntary or involuntary petition in bankruptcy is filed by
or against Contractor, if a receiver or trustee is appointed for Contractor, or if there is an
assignment for the benefit of creditors of Contractor.
Any such termination of this agreement under paragraph (A) will be without prejudice to any
obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to such termination.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
7 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
B. City, by written notice of default (including breach of contract) to Contractor, may terminate the
whole or any part of this Agreement:
1) If Contractor fails to provide services called for by this Agreement within the time specified,
or
2) If Contractor fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement or fails to pursue
the work as to endanger performance of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, and
after receipt of written notice from City, fails to correct such failures within ten (10) days or
such other period as City may authorize.
The rights and remedies of City provided above related to defaults (including breach of contract)
by Contractor are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by
law or under this Agreement.
If City terminates this Agreement under paragraph (B), Contractor will be entitled to receive as
full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and expenses incurred, provided, that the City
may deduct the amount of damages, if any, sustained by City due to breach of contract by
Contractor. Damages for breach of contract include those allowed by Oregon law, reasonable
and necessary attorney fees, and other costs of litigation at trial and upon appeal.
15. ACCESS TO RECORDS
City will have access to such books, documents, papers and records of Contractor as are directly
pertinent to this Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts and transcripts.
16. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Contractor will comply with all federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
requirements and all Oregon safety and health requirements. In accordance with OSHA and Oregon
OSHA Hazard Communication Rules, if any goods or services provided under this Agreement may
release, or otherwise result in an exposure to, a hazardous chemical under normal conditions of use
(for example, employees of a construction contractor working on-site), it is the responsibility of
Contractor to provide the City with the following information: all applicable Safety Data Sheets, the
identity of the chemical/s, how Contractor will inform employees about any precautions necessary,
an explanation of any labeling system, and the safe work practices to prevent exposure. In addition,
Contractor must label, tag, or mark such goods.
17. FORCE MAJEURE
Neither City nor Contractor will be considered in default because of any delays in completion and
responsibilities hereunder due to causes beyond the control and without fault or negligence on the
part of the parties so disenabled, including but not restricted to, an act of God or of a public enemy,
civil unrest, volcano, earthquake, fire, flood, epidemic, quarantine restriction, area-wide strike, freight
embargo, unusually severe weather or delay of subcontractor or supplies due to such cause; provided
that the parties so disenabled will within ten (10) days from the beginning of such delay, notify the
other party in writing of the cause of delay and its probable extent. Such notification will not be the
basis for a claim for additional compensation. Each party will, however, make all reasonable efforts
to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and will, upon cessation of the cause, diligently
pursue performance of its obligation under the Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
8 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
18. NON-WAIVER
The failure of City to insist upon or enforce strict performance by Contractor of any of the terms of
this Agreement or to exercise any rights hereunder should not be construed as a waiver or
relinquishment to any extent of its rights to assert or rely upon such terms or rights on any future
occasion.
19. HOURS OF LABOR, PAY EQUITY
In accordance with ORS 279B.235, the following are hereby incorporated in full by this reference:
A. Contractor may not employ an individual for more than 10 hours in any one day, or 40 hours in
any one week, except as provided by law. For contracts for personal services, as defined in ORS
279A.055, Contractor must pay employees at least time and a half pay for all overtime the
employees work in excess of 40 hours in any one week, except for employees who are excluded
under ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or under 29 U.S.C. 201 to 209 from receiving overtime.
B. Contractor must give notice in writing to employees who work on a public contract, either at the
time of hire or before commencement of work on the contract, or by positing a notice in a location
frequented by employees, of the number of hours per day and days per week that the employees
may be required to work.
C. Contractor may not prohibit any of Contractor’s employees from discussing the employee’s rate
of wage, salary, benefits or other compensation with another employee or another person and may
not retaliate against an employee who discusses the employee’s rate of wage, salary, benefits or
other compensation with another employee or another person.
D. Contractor must comply with the pay equity provisions in ORS 652.220. Compliance is a material
element of this Agreement and failure to comply will be deemed a breach that entitles City to
terminate this Agreement for cause.
20. NON-DISCRIMINATION
Contractor will comply with all federal, state, and local laws, codes, regulations, and ordinances
applicable to the provision of services under this Agreement, including, without limitation:
A. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
B. Section V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973;
C. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended by the ADA Amendments Act
(ADAAA) of 2008 (Pub L No 101- 336); and
D. ORS 659A.142, including all amendments of and regulations and administrative rules, and all other
applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and
regulations.
21. ERRORS
Contractor will perform such additional work as may be necessary to correct errors in the work
required under this Agreement without undue delays and without additional cost.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
9 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
22. EXTRA (CHANGES) WORK
Only the City’s Project Manager for this Agreement may change or authorize additional work. Failure
of Contractor to secure authorization for extra work constitutes a waiver of all right to adjust the
contract price or contract time due to such unauthorized extra work and Contractor will not be entitled
to compensation for the performance of unauthorized work.
23. WARRANTIES
Contractor will guarantee work for a period of one year after the date of final acceptance of the work
by the owner. Contractor warrants that all practices and procedures, workmanship and materials are
the best available unless otherwise specified in the profession. Neither acceptance of the work nor
payment therefore relieves Contractor from liability under warranties contained in or implied by this
Agreement.
Any intellectual property rights delivered to the City under this Agreement and Contractor’s services
rendered in the performance of Contractor’s obligations under this Agreement, will be provided to
the City free and clear of any and all restrictions on or conditions of use, transfer, modification, or
assignment, and be free and clear of any and all liens, claims, mortgages, security interests, liabilities,
charges, and encumbrances of any kind.
24. ATTORNEY'S FEES
In the event an action, suit of proceeding, including appeal, is brought for failure to observe any of
the terms of this Agreement, each party is responsible for that party’s own attorney fees, expenses,
costs and disbursements for the action, suit, proceeding, or appeal.
25. CHOICE OF LAW, VENUE
The provisions of this Agreement are governed by Oregon law. Venue will be the State of Oregon
Circuit Court in Washington County or the U.S. District Court for Oregon, Portland.
26. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS/RULES
Contractor will comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations applicable
to the work in this Agreement.
27. CONFLICT BETWEEN TERMS
In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and Contractor’s proposal, this
Agreement will control. In the event of conflict between a provision in the main body of the Agreement
and a provision in the Exhibits, the provision in the main body of the Agreement will control. In the
event of an inconsistency between Exhibit A and Exhibit B, Exhibit A will control.
28. AUDIT
Contractor will maintain records to assure conformance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement and to assure adequate performance and accurate expenditures within the contract period.
Contractor agrees to permit City, the State of Oregon, the federal government, or their duly authorized
representatives to audit all records pertaining to this Agreement to assure the accurate expenditure of
funds.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
10 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
29. SEVERABILITY
In the event any provision or portion of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable or invalid by any
court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions will not be impaired
unless the illegal or unenforceable provision affects a significant right or responsibility, in which case
the adversely affected party may request renegotiation of the Agreement and, if negotiations fail, may
terminate the Agreement.
30. COMPLIANCE WITH TAX LAWS
Contractor represents and warrants that Contractor is, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge,
not in violation of any Oregon tax laws including but not limited to ORS 305.620 and ORS Chapters
316, 317, and 318. Contractor’s failure to comply with the tax laws of this state or a political
subdivision of this state before the Contractor executed this Agreement or during the term of this
Agreement is a default for which the City may terminate this Agreement and seek damages and other
relief available under the terms of this Agreement or applicable law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Contractor have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly
authorized officials. Awarded by Tigard’s Local Contract Review Board at their 02/13/2024_ meeting.
CITY OF TIGARD ECONOMIC CONSULTANTS OREGON
DBA ECONORTHWEST
By: __________________________________
By: __________________________________
Name: _______________________________
Name: _______________________________
Title: ________________________________
Title: ________________________________
Date: ________________________________
Date: ________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Lorelei Juntunen
President & CEO
4/5/2024
X
City Manager
Steve Rymer
4/8/2024
11 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
EXHIBIT A
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED
INTRODUCTION
The City is engaging Contractor to provide a range of services and produce documents that will be
collectively known as the River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan (Plan). This Plan will refine and operationalize
the vision presented in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan (2020).
The River Terrace 2.0 area is made up of two former urban reserves (River Terrace West and South) that
total approximately 500 acres of land. These areas were the subject of the City’s River Terrace 2.0 Concept
Plan, which laid out a vision for a complete neighborhood, with a focus on housing diversity and access,
main street commercial corridors, transit-supportive development patterns, multimodal transportation
options, carbon responsibility, climate resiliency, access to parks and nature, and protection and
enhancement of natural resource areas.
The City has set out ambitious goals for the development of this area. As a condition of proceeding with
this work, the City set out a policy that these areas would support 20 dwelling units per net acres in
residential areas, and 20 jobs per acre in commercial areas. The City also desires to see housing that is
accessible to first time homebuyers, lower-income households, and seniors. Tigard is heralded as a pro-
housing City and seeks partners who have a keen interest in and capacity for innovation in this area.
In addition, given the climate emergency we now face, the City desires to see this area develop in a manner
that reduces greenhouse gas emissions from a baseline of conventional development patterns and reduces
vehicle miles travelled.
The outcome of this work should not look like a typical comprehensive planning effort. A measure of the
success of this project will be its incorporation of new models for achieving Statewide Planning Goals in the
context of the challenges of the 21st Century.
SCOPE OF WORK AND DELIVERABLES
ELEMENT 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Project management is the joint responsibility of the City project manager (City PM) and ECOnorthwest (ECO).
ECO will generally be responsible for contractor team project communication and general coordination above
and beyond the meetings and tasks specified in this scope.
1.A. Project Managers Kickoff Meeting
Project Management Kickoff: The Project Management team (ECO project management team and
City PM) will meet with City PM for a 1.5-hour project kickoff meeting to prepare for the other tasks
within Element 1, to make productive use of the team’s time at the full team kickoff.
Background: City will identify and make available relevant documents for review, including technical
work that informed the Concept Plan and applicable local, regional, and state policies and requirements
that this project must comply with. The City will summarize the key aspects of these materials that guide
the Community Plan and implementation measures. The City will also assemble maps that identify
existing conditions (resources, tax lot boundaries and ownership, etc.) in the study area. If needed, the
City will prepare an updated map of property ownership to reflect any changes since the Concept Plan.
1.B. Contractor Team Kickoff Meeting
Team Kickoff: ECO will convene leads from all contractor team members for a 2-hour full Contractor
team kickoff meeting to review project goals, background, scope, and schedule.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
12 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Site Tour: In conjunction with or following the Contractor team kickoff meeting, Contractor team
members, including representatives from Walker Macy, Code Studio, DKS, Toole, Winterbrook, and
Carollo, will attend a 2-hour site tour with key City staff to ensure a common understanding of the site
context and conditions on the ground.
1.C. Project Management Team Meetings and Team Work Sessions
Standing Project Management meetings: ECO will hold 1-hour bi-weekly meetings for the duration of
the project (up to 52 meetings) with the City PM and, when necessary, with subcontractors.
Team work sessions: The Project Management team will hold up to two full team integration work-
sessions (key task leads from the Contractor team and City staff team) at key milestones. Work sessions
will be 1.5 hours, and held virtually.
1.D. Project Management Plan
ECO will prepare a project management plan that lays out a project schedule, key milestones, project management
agreements, protocols, and quality control methods. (1.1)
1.E. Monthly Reports
ECO will provide monthly reports with invoices that include schedule updates (adjustments to major milestones
or substantive schedule shifts), work completed to date, upcoming milestones, and any issues or changes. This
report must include a percentage complete versus percentage spent by task.
1.F. Community Engagement Coordination
ECO will coordinate with the Community Engagement contractor or contractor team and City staff (collectively,
the CE Team). The Community Engagement contractor will be performing activities under a separate contract.
Points of expected coordination are listed below.
1.F.1. Community Engagement Plan
ECO will support the CE team in developing the Community Engagement Plan, providing input on an
engagement schedule that aligns with project milestones, and helping map out how engagement will inform key
decisions during the project. ECO will partner with the CE team to identify where past engagement can inform
this project to avoid repeating similar questions. (1.3)
ECO (with subcontractors as needed) will participate in up to 8 check-in meetings with the CE team to plan for
upcoming engagement efforts and to coordinate the Technical Advisory Committee, the Housing Advisory
Committee, and Housing Focus Groups with the Community Advisory Committee and other engagement.
1.F.2. Community Advisory Committee
Chief responsibility for CAC meeting planning and facilitation rests with the CE Team. ECO (with subcontractors
as needed) will support up to six virtual community advisory committee meetings (the specific number of
meetings and meeting format may be refined during the development of the Community Engagement Plan
provided the level of effort remains aligned with the budget).
ECO (and other team members as appropriate) will work closely with the CE team to clarify key topics for each
meeting, prepare content and graphics to support the meetings, and participate in meetings as subject matter
experts.
1.F.3. Community Focus Groups
Chief responsibility for Community Focus Group meeting planning and facilitation rests with the CE Team.
ECO (with subcontractors as needed) will support up to three community focus groups with key stakeholders
identified by the CE Team (the specific number of meetings may be refined during the development of the
Community Engagement Plan provided the level of effort remains aligned with the budget). Preliminary meeting
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
13 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
plans and objectives will be determined during development of the Community Engagement Plan in Task 1.F.1.
Meetings may be held in-person, remotely, or any combination thereof, up to a maximum of two in-person focus
group meetings. Meetings will be held in English with simultaneous interpretation in other languages as needed
to accommodate stakeholders.
ECO (and other team members as appropriate) will work closely with the CE team to identify key topics and
agendas for each meeting, prepare content and graphics to support the meetings, and participate in meetings as
subject matter experts.
1.F.4. Public Open Houses
Chief responsibility for Public Open House meeting planning and facilitation rests with the CE Team. Contractor
will prepare content for and participate in up to three in-person public open houses. The specific number of
meetings may be refined during the development of the Community Engagement Plan provided the level of
effort remains aligned with the budget. These will be scheduled and planned to elicit public comment and
feedback at key decision points or milestones in development of the plan as determined appropriate during the
development of the Community Engagement Plan.
ECO (and other team members as appropriate) will work closely with the CE team to identify key topics and
agendas for each meeting, prepare content and graphics to support the meetings, and participate in meetings as
subject matter experts.
1.G. Water System Plan
Moved to Element 5.2.
1.H. Technical Advisory Committee
City PM will lead formation of the Technical Advisory Committee. ECO will plan, prepare materials for, and
facilitate up to six TAC meetings. Preliminary meeting plans and objectives will be determined during the
development of the Community Engagement Plan in Task 1.F.1. Specific agendas will be developed in
consultation with City PM as part of this task. Meetings for this TAC will be held remotely.
ELEMENT 1 DELIVERABLES:
1. Project Management Plan
a. Project Schedule
b. Project Milestones
c. Project Scope
d. Project Budget
e. Change management
f. Quality control methods
2. Monthly Reports
ELEMENT 2: HOUSING PLAN
This element will refine and operationalize the housing element of the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan. Housing
specific engagement will occur at key points in the schedule so community and stakeholder input can guide the
work of Task 2. ECO will lead a Housing Team responsible for guiding work to implement the housing outcomes
outlined in the Concept Plan. This team will include ECO, the City PM, Code Studio, and others as deemed
appropriate.
2.A. Housing Background and Context
City will compile and ECO will review and summarize relevant guidance and strategies from the Concept Plan,
relevant tools the City already has in place (including those implemented since the Concept Plan was completed),
and up to two additional relevant reports of the City’s previous housing work.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
14 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
City will identify and ECO will review and summarize other state, regional, and local policy requirements that
should guide the housing development standards and approval processes for River Terrace 2.0.
2.B. Housing Team
No work associated with this task.
2.C. Housing Advisory Committee
ECO and the Housing team will work with the City PM and CE team to identify committee membership for the
Housing Advisory Committee (HAC). The role of the Housing Advisory Committee is to discuss and review the
work of Tasks 2.E, 2.F, and 2.G. This Committee will be made of up of representatives of the following groups:
1. Market-rate developers
2. Small and middle housing developers
3. Regulated affordable housing developers
4. Housing Markets and Trends subject matter expert
5. CAC members
6. Prospective residents
7. Culturally specific groups
ECO will plan and facilitate up to three HAC meetings. Preliminary meeting plans and objectives will be
determined by the project team. Specific agendas will be developed in consultation with the City PM as part of
this task. Meetings for the HAC will be held remotely. ECO will work with the CE team to ensure housing-
specific engagement is coordinated with and integrated into the broader River Terrace engagement effort. The
Housing team will synthesize community feedback to inform recommendations.
2.D. Housing Focus Group
ECO will work with the CE team to organize, prepare for, and participate in one housing-specific focus group to
complement the Community Focus Groups. The meeting should occur early in the Housing Element work so
that input on housing needs and outcomes can inform housing recommendations. The role of this focus group
is to inform the work of Tasks 2.F and G and provide community input on housing needs and desired outcomes,
particularly with regard to those types of housing that have been shown to be in short supply – small units, entry-
level housing, affordable housing, senior housing, and others as determined by the Housing Team. Focus group
facilitation will be led by the CE Team.
ECO will work with the CE team to ensure housing-specific engagement is coordinated with and integrated into
the broader River Terrace engagement effort. The Housing team will synthesize community feedback to inform
recommendations.
2.E. Recommended Housing Policies and Strategies
ECO will work with the Housing team to develop policies and implementation strategies to support and
incentivize development of a full range of housing types as outlined in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan. These
policies will be informed by the work of the Housing Team, the Housing Advisory Committee, and the Housing
Focus Group, as well as other members of the project team.
2.E.1. Evaluating Development Challenges
ECO will evaluate development challenges associated with the residential density and mix identified in the
Concept Plan. ECO will analyze financial feasibility of the range of housing options envisioned for River Terrace
2.0 under expected market conditions and estimated development costs to identify how much “residual value” is
available to cover the cost of land and infrastructure for each housing option. The analysis will consider how unit
size and lot size/density impact residual value. ECO will also identify other challenges that may affect
development of the planned residential density and mix, such as demand/absorption, financing, etc. The analysis
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
15 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
will include up to 16 development “prototypes”—unique combinations of housing type/land use, unit size, lot
size / density, and/or layout—selected in consultation with the Housing Team.
2.E.2. Identifying and Evaluating Interventions for Desired Housing Options
ECO will identify potential interventions that could address the identified challenges or impact financial feasibility
for the desired housing options, including regulatory incentives, financial incentives, and System Development
Charge (SDC) rate structures and policies. ECO will evaluate to what extent these potential interventions could
impact the feasibility of the desired housing options and help achieve the target density.
2.E.3 Integrating Consideration of Interventions for Income-Qualified Housing
ECO will identify potential interventions to support development of income-qualified affordable housing within
River Terrace 2.0, including those identified in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan. Some of the potential
interventions may use the same tools identified in Task 2.E.2. For these, ECO will identify implementation
considerations associated with applying them to market-rate vs. income-qualified housing development, and will
evaluate which could have the greatest impact on income-qualified development to inform refined
recommendations.
2.E.4 Sharing Results and Refining Recommendations
ECO will prepare a concise memo to share findings from this evaluation of challenges and potential interventions
with the Housing Team and later with the HAC for review and feedback. Based on this feedback, ECO and the
Housing Team will identify recommended Housing Policies and Strategies to support development of a full range
of housing types, and of income-qualified affordable housing within River Terrace 2.0. ECO, working with the
Housing Team, will identify how the recommended Housing Policies and Strategies should be implemented, such
as in:
• the adoption-ready Community Development Code amendments covered in Element 10,
• the Finance Strategy of Element 9,
• other deliverables within the scope of this work,
• or a standalone document, where appropriate.
2.F. Density and Zoning Strategy
Code Studio and ECO will work with the Housing team and stakeholders to design an implementable strategy
for achieving the City’s goals for housing mix and overall density of 20 dwelling units per net acre. This work will
be informed by the neighborhood typologies presented in the housing component of the Concept Plan and the
evaluation in Task 2.E.1. The strategy will be part of the larger set of amendments covered in Element 10. The
outcomes of this Density and Zoning Strategy will be:
1. A scalable method for ensuring density targets are met across a range of development types and sizes;
2. A method for ensuring inclusion of the full range of middle housing types across developments at a
range of sizes; and
3. A set of preliminary recommended approaches to approval processes for housing development and
form-based standards for housing design that will be further refined as part of Element 10.
Code Studio will integrate the density and zoning strategy into the conceptual code framework and code concepts
in Task 2.G.
2.G. Form-Based Housing Code and Development Approval Processes
Code Studio will develop a conceptual code framework and code concepts to address housing mix, density,
design, form-based development standards, affordability incentives, and development approval processes. ECO
and Winterbrook will provide Oregon-specific expertise regarding approval processes and other relevant state
requirements, while the Climate Resilience team will review for opportunities to integrate climate resilient
development strategies. The code framework will include:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
16 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
1. A set of preliminary recommended approaches to developing form-based housing development
standards, and
2. A preliminary approach for approval processes that should be applied to development review in River
Terrace 2.0 and meet the requirements of state law. These approaches will each be further refined as
part of the Community Development Code amendments of Element 10.
Code Studio will lead two work sessions with the Housing Team and additional members of City staff to inform
the code concepts and framework, providing options for discussion and supporting information to craft the code
concepts and framework for each work session.
ELEMENT 2 DELIVERABLES:
1. Housing Advisory Committee agendas and meeting summaries
2. Housing Focus Group agenda and meeting summary
3. Housing Plan that includes:
a. Recommended Housing Policies
b. Density and Zoning Strategy
c. Preliminary Form-Based Housing Code and Development Approval Processes
ELEMENT 3: CLIMATE RESILIENT DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
This element will define and operationalize the City’s goals for carbon-responsible and climate-resilient greenfield
development, from both a mitigation and adaptation standpoint. The work of this element will directly inform
and impact the work of all the other elements by providing a diverse set of objectives, and actionable policies
strategies for reducing the carbon output of development in River Terrace 2.0 to the maximum extent practicable
and ensure that the neighborhood is prepared for oncoming climate change impacts.
The climate-resilient development approach for this project will be community-based, visionary, and fully
integrated into all elements of the Community Plan. The Climate Resilience team—Cascadia Consulting Group
and Walker Macy—will collaborate closely with the rest of the team throughout the process.
3.A. Climate Background and Policy Audit
The Climate Resilience team will conduct a “policy audit” by reviewing up to 12 relevant background documents
provided by City staff, including but not limited to the Tigard Community Resiliency Plan, policies, and work
programs, with a detailed review of up to 20 pages per document. The Climate Resilience team will then organize
key findings in a custom spreadsheet tool and facilitate a listening session with the core City team. Topics for
discussion are anticipated to include how climate resilience goals informed the previous Concept Plan process,
including the in-progress Community Resiliency Plan; potential gaps in existing goals and strategies; opportunities
to strengthen or build upon existing approaches; and relevant information on the status and authority to
implement climate-related provisions.
3.B. Goal Setting
Working with ECO and the City PM, along with other project stakeholders, the Climate Resilience team will lead
a process to identify and define the climate goals for this project. This is a critical path task and will be completed
as early in the project as possible after the project kickoff meeting and the completion of Task 3.A. These goals
will be incorporated into the vision for the project along with housing and equity goals identified from the
Concept Plan and by the City PM in accordance with the city’s adopted vision and goals.
The climate goal-setting effort will include three components:
• A gap analysis building on Task 3.A to identify which existing goals are supportive of climate
resilience, which may need adjustment, and where new goals may be needed.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
17 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
• Leading-edge case studies that offer tangible and transferable ideas for River Terrace where there
are gaps or potential improvements, drawing on the Climate Resilience team’s extensive experience
with other communities.
• Integrating community input and priorities to directly inform climate goal-setting. This could
include consideration of relevant themes from past public engagement efforts summarized by the
engagement team, and up to one virtual climate resiliency focus group with participants most impacted
by the climate emergency, including youth, elders, transit-dependent Tigard residents, renters, and
others.
The Climate Resilience team will present background information at a goal-setting workshop with key project
team members who are leading other elements of the plan. The workshop will be conducted as a half-day “climate
charrette” (in-person to the extent possible) using maps and visuals to discuss place-based goals and ideas. The
charrette aims to produce a set of positive and solution-focused climate resilience goals for River Terrace,
grounded in the physical landscape and community context, that communicate a healthy, resilient future for River
Terrace. Based on the goals, the Climate Resilience team will also provide considerations for each area of work
within the Community Plan as needed to facilitate integration of climate resilience strategies into every aspect of
the project. The Climate Resilience Team will conduct up to two rounds of review and refinement of the draft
climate resilience goals and considerations.
3.C. Climate Integration/ Document Consulting and Review
The Climate Resilience team will work closely with and support all members of the project team to facilitate
discussions and generally ensure that the project’s climate goals are met to the maximum extent possible, and that
the climate strategies are incorporated appropriately into project documents and draft policy and regulations.
The Climate Resilience team will develop design and policy strategies concurrently with each plan element,
building on Task 3.A goals, drafting initial ideas, and collaborating with specialists for further specificity. This
includes, but is not limited to:
Housing Plan of Element 2
Element 4, Transportation
Infrastructure plans of Elements 5-9, where appropriate based on the proposed climate strategies,
Natural Systems Plan of Element 10, and
Development Code amendments of Element 12.
One or more members of the Climate Resilience team will attend key topical meetings (up to 30 throughout the
life of the project, with Cascadia to attend up to 16 of these) related to other plan Elements. The Climate
Resilience team will review key draft deliverables led by others for each element and provide input related to
climate as needed. Key deliverables for each element will incorporate a section addressing climate considerations,
or weave them throughout. For any elements in which climate-responsive solutions have been determined not to
be applicable, this will be noted in writing in the key deliverable(s) for that element, along with the rationale.
3.D. Climate Report
Successful integration will result in a final plan organized around resiliency and adaptation as well as equity—an
“Equitable, Climate Resilient Community Plan”. A separate Climate Report will summarize the climate element,
provide additional detail, and document the work conducted through the plan. The report will emphasize how
community input informed climate resiliency goals and strategies and will serve as a resource for ongoing
adaptation and resiliency work, delineating phasing, timelines, lead entity, and implementation authority. The final
report will include:
Climate vision for the River Terrace 2.0 neighborhood;
General overview of climate strategies deployed and their context within the goals of this project and
other City-adopted documents;
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
18 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Climate objectives and strategies that were used in building the final Concept Plan to achieve the vision;
and
Climate policies, objectives, and strategies that are not yet incorporated into the plan or its deliverables
but should be deployed in future policies or as development occurs.
The report will define a recommended set of achievable climate strategies that will help the city meet the climate
goals. These strategies will be concrete implementation methods such as neighborhood design standards, building
design standards, development policies, energy efficiency standards or electrification requirements, water
management, fire resiliency, or any other method that the Project Team determines is impactful and achievable.
However, given the project’s bold nature, some strategies may be immediately achievable, while others depend
on external factors. Ideally, strategies beyond the Community Plan timeline can be integrated as longer-term
actions contingent upon changes to existing constraints. The Climate Resilience Team will conduct up to two
round or review and revisions on the Climate Report.
ELEMENT 3 DELIVERABLES:
1. Climate statement/climate goals
2. Climate report that includes:
a. Climate vision
b. Documentation of process and engagement as it relates to climate element
c. Climate objectives and strategies
d. Overview of recommended and deployed climate strategies
e. Recommended climate policies, objectives, and strategies
ELEMENT 4.1: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
This element will include robust analysis that results in a set of proposed transportation system improvements
and adoptable updates to the City’s Transportation System Plan (TSP) and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
The TSP update will take the form of an addendum that covers the plan area. This work will be conducted within
the context of the City’s broader mobility and climate goals. The technical aspects of the analysis will comply with
applicable policies, including the Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules, the new/pending
Metro Regional Mobility Policy, the Tigard Complete Streets policy, and the Tigard Transportation System Plan.
Toole Design and DKS Associates (the Transportation team) will collaboratively develop the area transportation
plan for River Terrace 2.0.
4.1.A. Transportation Background and Context
River Terrace 2.0 will build on many prior transportation planning studies for the greater River Terrace and
Cooper Mountain areas. The Transportation team will review previous transportation work from the Concept
Plan and key studies to become familiar with the outcomes that are desired and will review pertinent local,
regional, and state policy documents. DKS will summarize key issues and constraints, past decisions, existing
projects, and unresolved elements in a brief, graphical summary, as the basis for addressing outstanding
transportation needs through this process.
4.1.B. Street and Trail Network Plan
Toole Design will develop a street and trail network plan building off work completed during the Concept Plan.
The transportation network plan will facilitate mobility and access needs for motorized and non-motorized modes
within the River Terrace 2.0 area including connections to adjacent street and trail networks.
Based on available data and site visit(s) as needed, Toole Design will evaluate the current and projected
transportation system, emphasizing potential multimodal and trail improvements that advance the City’s mobility,
sustainability, and quality of life goals. The evaluation will rely on system performance indicators that align with
CFEC rules, the pending Metro Regional Mobility Policy, the Tigard Complete Streets policy, and the Tigard
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
19 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Transportation System Plan. The findings will guide the network plan recommendations and connections to
existing street and trail networks. The network plan will emphasize making nonmotorized modes appealing and
comfortable through an emphasis on separating these modes from vehicular traffic and giving special
consideration to natural and topographical features, with input from Walker Macy.
4.1.C. Multimodal Transportation Analysis
DKS will lead the multi-modal transportation analysis to determine how the preferred development scenario
performs across a variety of performance metrics, such as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), mode share, multimodal
level of traffic stress, and intersection capacity. This will include a future baseline analysis for comparison to the
preferred scenario. Toole Design will support the analysis of nonmotorized mode performance.
DKS will work with City and County staff to confirm the study area, critical elements of the transportation
network, analysis periods, horizon year, performance targets (including incorporation of the CFEC rules and the
pending Metro Regional Mobility Policy), and assumptions about planned improvements identified in the
financially constrained Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The analysis will include up to 15 study intersections,
PM peak count data, multimodal analysis of up to two network concepts, traffic control, and other analysis to
meet CFEC requirements. DKS will summarize the methods and assumptions in a technical memo.
Upon completion, DKS will summarize findings of the multi-modal transportation performance assessment in a
technical memo. DKS will refine roadway classifications as needed, flagging any significant changes to the ultimate
design concept for team discussion. The Climate Resilience team will review and provide input on the findings
and their climate implications as part of Task 3.C climate integration.
DKS will also review how the preferred development scenario and the findings of the off-site transportation
performance align with Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requirements, with findings and suggested actions
summarized in a TPR Compliance Review memo.
4.1.D. Street Design Concepts
Toole Design will develop street design concepts and cross-sections for collectors, local streets, alleys, and
woonerfs, leveraging their expertise in Complete Streets guidance and implementation and integrating input from
the project team, including Walker Macy and DKS. These concepts will be informed by city policies and
standards; national best design practices for people walking, bicycling, and taking transit, as well as driving, using
an “all ages and abilities” approach; the proposed land use and urban design context; and climate and parks
opportunities. Design considerations will include the pedestrian realm, bike facilities, curb lane management,
access management, design speeds, lane widths and configurations, landscaping and other materials, lighting and
furnishings, and signage.
4.1.E. Project List, Cost Estimates, and TSP Amendment
DKS will work with Toole Design to compile a comprehensive, multi-modal transportation project list from
Tasks 4.1.B, C, and D that identifies, categorizes, and maps relevant projects. The project team will prioritize
projects based on their importance to enabling future development within River Terrace 2.0 and their alignment
with broader goals and policies.
DKS will prepare planning level cost estimates for the project list using the detailed unit costs developed by DKS
for the recent Metro RTP update, including providing the cost spreadsheet to the project team. Cost estimates
will include allocations for major traffic control upgrades at key intersections, treatments at street and/or trail
crossings, stream crossings, and innovative cross-section elements.
DKS will compile the relevant information needed for an adoption-ready TSP addendum for RT2.0, including
updates to the functional class map as needed.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
20 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
ELEMENT 4.1 DELIVERABLES
1. Street and trail network plan
2. Street design concepts
3. Project list and cost estimates
4. Adoption-ready Transportation System Plan amendment
ELEMENT 4.2: SPECIAL STUDY REPORT – TILE FLAT ROAD EXTENSION
The Tile Flat Road extension has been the subject of multiple rounds of analysis. However, these studies were
not conducted using the requirements for new transportation facilities under Climate Friendly and Equitable
Communities (CFEC) rules, and did not address all of the factors identified in the RFP. This element is intended
to provide an evaluation process that addresses both City and County perspectives, complies with OAR 660-012-
0830, and informs City and County decision-making.
4.2.A. Baseline Analysis, Alternatives Development, and Alternatives Analysis
DKS, with support from Toole Design and input from other team members, will document anticipated
performance of key facilities or intersections without a Tile Flat Road extension, to confirm expected performance
without the River Terrace 2.0 preferred development scenario. Performance metrics will be those used in Subtask
4.1C. Where possible, prior analyses will be used to develop this documentation.
Toole Design, with support from DKS, will propose up to four (4) multimodal network, operations, and travel
demand management alternatives for addressing performance problems. Development of these alternatives will
meet RTFP and TPR requirements for studying alternatives to adding new vehicular capacity.
Toole Design, with support from DKS, will conduct a holistic analysis of anticipated performance, benefits, and
impacts associated with the Tile Flat Road extension and alternatives that could address the same issues that the
Tile Flat Extension is intended to solve.
This analysis will include performance metrics used in Subtask 4.1C as well as qualitative or quantitative
assessment of:
Equity (for all those who would use the facility or be impacted by it)
Safety (for all modes)
Connectivity and accessibility to key destinations within and outside RT2.0 (by all modes)
Overall project cost and infrastructure funding implications, including potential impacts to housing costs
Climate outcomes, including vehicle miles traveled per capita and greenhouse gas emissions
Minimizing impact to natural systems
Urban design and livability
Impact to major intersections within two miles of the proposed facility, up to 15 intersections total to be
determined by the project team, which may include major intersections from Task 4.1.C and/or new
intersections not analyzed in that task,
This analysis will also comply with the Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities Rules for new facilities in
OAR 660-012-0830 ‘Enhanced Review of Select Roadway Projects.’
The analysis will include consideration of the following alternatives at a minimum:
The potential extension of Tile Flat Road to the city’s Mountainside Way collector facility, as presented
in Framework B of the Concept Plan
A potential further extension of a County facility south from the city’s proposed Mountainside Way
terminus at Bull Mountain to Beef Bend, as presented in the Washington County Urban Reserves
Transportation Study
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
21 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Up to two multi-modal and travel demand management investment alternative(s), as required in OAR
660-012-0830
The Transportation team will work with staff to:
Clarify the previously identified rationale for the Tile Flat Road extension, and the specific issues it is
intended to address.
Confirm how buildout of the River Terrace 2.0 preferred development scenario affects those issues.
Confirm the specific options to evaluate for Tile Flat’s functional classification and connection points,
and identify multi-modal options to include in an alternatives analysis; and
Further detail the methodology and assumptions for the analysis.
Toole Design will serve as the task lead with DKS leading motor vehicle analysis and support from other project
team members in the evaluation, including the Climate Resiliency team and the Housing team.
The Transportation team will also work with the CE team to support the equity-centered engagement and public
process required for projects that trigger enhanced review under OAR 660-012-0830.
4.2.B. Recommendations
Based on the analysis in Task 4.2.A, the Transportation team (with input from other members of the Contractor
team) will refine the preferred alternative and prepare a recommendation report. This report will document how
well the preferred alternatives meet the city’s equity, climate, mobility, and other goals. The report will identify
projects that should be incorporated into the City and County Transportation System Plans, and
recommendations will be integrated into the City’s TSP amendment for the preferred network from Task
4.1.C.This report will propose cross sections, termini, and alignments for any proposed improvements, identifying
connections to the surrounding transportation network. If the preferred alternative includes extension of Tile Flat
or another roadway facility, the report will include recommendations for right-of-way reservation, options for
phased development, and performance measures and targets that indicate the need to proceed with development.
Recommendations will include programmatic or operations activities that the City, County, or partners may
undertake to manage travel demand and improve multimodal performance.
ELEMENT 4.2 DELIVERABLES
1. Baseline Analysis, Alternatives Development, and Alternatives Analysis
2. Recommendations report
3. Updated Adoption-ready TSP amendment for preferred network
ELEMENT 5.1: SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN
This element will provide an update to the City’s adopted plan through an addendum. Clean Water Services is in
the process of creating a basin plan for this area and the system plan will take this into account.
Carollo will lead the River Terrace 2,0 Addendum to the City’s adopted Sanitary Sewer System Plan (SSSP),
building on recent work with Clean Water Services (CWS) on the East Basin Master Plan.
5.1.A. Sanitary Sewer Background
5.1.A.1. Data Request
Carollo will develop and submit a data request to the City. The data request will include, but is not limited to the
following items:
a. The City’s adopted Sanitary Sewer System Plan.
b. City’s sanitary sewer system GIS data and available maps depicting the sewer system.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
22 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
5.1.A.2. Review Reports
Carollo will review the following documents related to the City’s sanitary sewer system:
a. Adopted Sanitary Sewer System Plan.
b. River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan Sanitary Sewer Utility Needs Analysis.
c. Clean Water Services (CWS) East Basin Facilities Plan.
5.1.A.3. Review Population and Flow Projections
Carollo will review the population projections and sanitary flow projections methodology for the River Terrace
2.0 as presented in the CWS East Basin Facilities Plan. The goal is to understand assumptions and flows developed
for the area. Flow projections will not be revised or updated for this task.
5.1.A.4. Review Current Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure Locations
Carollo will review maps and GIS data for the City’s and CWS’s existing sanitary sewer infrastructure.
Any existing or planned infrastructure for Kingston Terrace will be reviewed as part of Task 5.1.A. No
coordination with King City (discussing recommended improvements for the sewer system, working with King
City to develop any improvements, etc.) is included in this task.
5.1.B. Review Recommended Improvements
The purpose of this task is to review the previously developed recommended improvements for the City’s sanitary
sewer system to serve River Terrace 2.0.
5.1.B.1. Review Analysis Criteria
Carollo will review the sanitary sewer analysis criteria used to develop the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan Sanitary
Sewer Utility Needs Analysis and the CWS East Basin Facilities Plan. No change will be made to these criteria.
5.1.B.2. Review Infrastructure and Recommended Improvements
Carollo will review the recommended infrastructure size and locations as outlined in the River Terrace 2.0
Concept Plan Sanitary Sewer Utility Needs Analysis and the CWS East Basin Facilities Plan. As needed, the
recommended improvements to the City’s sanitary sewer system to serve River Terrace 2.0 will be updated. The
following infrastructure will be reviewed and confirmed:
a. Pump station sizing based on flows, and location.
b. Size of pipelines based on flows and pipeline routing based on topography.
c. Pipeline profiles will be reviewed to confirm pipe slopes and pipeline ground coverage.
No hydraulic modeling will be completed as part of this task. Flows for this analysis will not be revised, and will
be used as provided by the City. Only the recommended Improvements necessary for the River Terrace 2.0
system will be reviewed.
5.1.B.3. Index Cost Estimates to Current Dollars
City will provide the methodology and unit costs used to develop cost estimates in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept
Plan Sanitary Sewer Utility Needs Analysis. Carollo will index costs to current dollars using Engineering New -
Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) for Seattle, Washington. No new cost estimates or unit costs will
be developed.
5.1.B.4. Meetings
Prepare agenda, presentation material, and document discussion in meeting minutes for the following meeting:
Meeting 1 – Infrastructure and Recommended Improvements Review Meeting.
1. Purpose: Review the existing infrastructure, and changes to the recommended improvements, and cost
estimates.
2. Expected Contractor attendees: Project Manager and Senior Professional.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
23 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
3. Expected meeting duration: One (1) hour.
Coordination with CWS is limited to any meetings scheduled with the City and the coordination time with CWS
outlined in Task 5.1.B.
5.1.C. River Terrace 2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP
The purpose of this task is to develop the River Terrace 2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP and the general narrative
about the sewer system plan for the River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan Document.
5.1.C.1. Develop Draft TM to Summarize Work Completed
Produce and deliver a Draft River Terrace 2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP that summarizes the analysis and
recommended improvements.
5.1.C.2 Meetings.
Prepare agenda, presentation material, and document discussion in meeting minutes for the following meeting:
Meeting 2 – Comments Review Meeting
1. Purpose: Discuss City comments on draft River Terrace 2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP.
2. Expected Contractor attendees: Project Manager and Senior Professional.
3. Expected meeting duration: 1 hour.
5.1.C.3 Final TM.
Review City comments on Draft River Terrace 2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP and develop Final River Terrace
2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP. All deliverables will be submitted in electronic format. No hard copies will be
printed.
5.1.C.4 General Narrative for the River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan Document:
Carollo will develop a narrative for the Sanitary Sewer System Plan section of the River Terrace 2.0 Community
Plan Document.
ELEMENT 5.1 DELIVERABLES
1. Data request log (electronic).
2. Meeting agendas, materials, and minutes (electronic PDF).
3. Draft and Final River Terrace 2.0 Sanitary Sewer System Technical Memorandum.
4. Draft and Final General narrative for the RT2.0 Community Plan document.
ELEMENT 5.2 WATER SYSTEM PLAN
5.2.B. Project RT2.0 Demands and Systems Analysis
The purpose of this task is to project water demands for RT2.0, update the City’s hydraulic model, and perform
the initial system analysis to calculate storage and pumping needs.
5.2.B.1. Gather and Review Data.
Carollo will develop and submit a data request to the City. The data request will include, but is not limited to the
following items:
1. The City’s latest GIS pipeline and land use zoning data.
2. Approximate number of commercial units and assumed residential densities in RT2.0.
5.2.B.2. Project Demands.
Project 5-year, 10-year, 20-year, and buildout average day and maximum day demands for RT2.0. Demands from
the Kingston Terrace Addendum and the 2020 WSP will be used for the remainder of the system.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
24 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Key assumptions:
Water demands will only be developed for RT2.0.
Approximate number of commercial units and residential densities will be based on information
developed for the RT2.0 Concept Plan unless otherwise modified by City staff.
5.2.B.3. Update Hydraulic Model.
Update the hydraulic model to match the existing conditions of the distribution system and set up scenarios for
future conditions in the RT2.0 system.
a. Incorporate new piping and infrastructure since the last model update using the City’s GIS data.
b. Confirm operational data such as pump call on/off set points.
c. Apply the future demands to nodes in the RT2.0 system.
d. Assign fire flow requirements to the model nodes based on land use classification and specific elevated
fire flow requirements as identified by the City.
Key assumptions:
The hydraulic model will not be recalibrated as part of this project.
The planning criteria for this project will be consistent with those in the City’s 2020 WSP and the
Kingston Terrace WSP Addendum.
5.2.B.4. Evaluate Pumping, Supply, and Storage Needs.
Identify any pumping, supply, and storage needs to serve RT2.0 for the 5-year, 10-year, and 20-year planning
periods.
5.2.B.5. Develop Transmission Pipeline Network.
Lay out a future pipeline network for the RT2.0.
5.2.B.6. Meetings.
Prepare agendas, presentation materials, and document discussions, including action items and decisions, in
meeting minutes for the following meetings:
Meeting 1 – Projected Demands and Initial System Analysis.
Purpose: Review projected demands and initial system analysis (storage and pumping analysis and
transmission pipeline network) with City staff.
Expected Contractor attendees: Project Manager and Planning Lead.
Expected workshop duration: One and a half (1.5) hours.
5.2.C. Develop RT2.0 Improvements Plan
The purpose of this task is to develop and document the system improvements planned for the west part of the
City’s distribution system.
5.2.C.1. Size Pipelines.
Use the hydraulic model to size the pipelines in the RT2.0 area to meet build-out maximum day demands and fire
flow requirements. Prepare figures showing the results of pressure, velocity, and fire flow analyses.
5.2.C.2. Develop Cost Estimates.
Develop Class 10 level cost estimates for each of the identified capital improvements. The American Association
of Cost Engineering (AACE) defines Class 10 level cost estimates as long-range planning estimates.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
25 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
5.2.C.3. Develop WSMP Addendum
Produce and deliver an RT2.0 WSP Addendum that documents the RT2.0 improvements plan. City will review
and comment. City comments and Contractor responses will be tracked within the draft Word document in track
changes.
a. Draft RT2.0 WSP Addendum.
b. Final RT2.0 WSP Addendum.
Key assumptions:
Only improvements necessary for the RT2.0 system will be included in the WSP Addendum.
Only transmission piping along main roads will be included in the improvements plan.
All deliverables will be submitted in electronic format. No hard copies will be printed.
5.2.C.4. General Narrative for the RT2.0 Community Plan Document:
Develop narrative for the Water Supply and Distribution section of the RT2.0 Community Plan Document to
support Statewide Planning Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services.
5.2.C.5. Meetings.
Prepare agendas, presentation materials, and document discussions, including action items and decisions, in
meeting minutes for the following meeting:
Meeting 2 – RT2.0 Improvement Plan.
Purpose: Review the RT2.0 improvement plan with City staff before the submittal of the draft WSP
Addendum.
Expected Contractor attendees: Project Manager, Quality Manager, and Planning Lead.
Expected workshop duration: One and a half (1.5) hours.
All meetings will be held virtually
ELEMENT 5.2 DELIVERABLES
1. Draft and Final RT2.0 2020 WSMP Addendum provided in Word and PDF..
2. Draft and Final Water Supply and Distribution section of the RT2.0 Community Plan Document in
Word.
3. Updated hydraulic model.
ELEMENT 6: STORMWATER SYSTEM PLAN
This task will provide a River Terrace 2.0 Stormwater System Plan. Clean Water Services is currently completing
a regional stormwater strategy that will result in recommended approaches for addressing stormwater
management. Any approaches, requirements, etc. developed specifically for River Terrace 2.0 will be closely
coordinated with the results of that strategy.
6.A. Review Stormwater Planning Documents
Carollo will review the existing stormwater planning documents and data created for River Terrace 1.0, River
Terrace 2.0, and the Clean Water Services regional planning. Documents and data expected to be reviewed
include:
City of Tigard River Terrace Community Plan, dated December 2014.
City Tigard Administrative Rule No. 12.01.080-11-01, Storm and Surface Water Collection System
Responsibilities, Practices, and Procedures.
City of Tigard Citywide stormwater hydrologic and hydraulic modeling.
City of Tigard Citywide GIS data to support the stormwater hydrologic and hydraulic modeling.
River Terrace Master Plan and Updates, dated June 25, 2015.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
26 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan, dated October 2021.
River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan hydrologic and hydraulics modeling.
GIS data supporting the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan hydrologic and hydraulics modeling.
River Terrace 2.0 – Stormwater Needs Analysis, dated March 15, 2021.
Clean Water Services Administrative Procedures, Chapter 2.
Clean Water Services stormwater basin plan.
Current infrastructure locations.
Following review, Carollo will provide an additional data needs request, if additional information is needed to
complete the project.
Key assumptions:
City will provide data within 2 weeks of request.
Data can be relied upon without independent verification from the Contractor.
6.B. System analysis
6.B.1 Develop Modeling to Support Stormwater Plan.
Contractor will conduct modeling to support the stormwater plan using the following information:
The City’s latest GIS storm drain, topographic, and land use zoning data.
Existing stormwater modeling and GIS data for citywide stormwater management and River Terrace 1.0
and 2.0.
Proposed locations of Clean Water Services regional detention facilities.
Key assumptions:
The existing stormwater modeling and GIS are adequate to make recommendations.
Detailed hydrologic and hydraulic modeling is not anticipated for this effort. Should it be necessary, a
separate effort and budget will be negotiated.
No model calibration will be completed as part of this task.
6.B.2 Analysis Criteria for System.
Using the results of the modeling, Contractor will update recommendations in the River Terrace Master Plan for
open and closed channel conveyance, water quality treatment and water quality control.
6.B.3 Evaluate Regional Facilities.
Using the results of the modeling, the Contractor will review the locations of the Clean Water Services regional
facilities. If the locations appear to be infeasible, alternative locations will be proposed.
6.B.4 Downstream Analysis.
Using the existing modeling and information developed during the previous subtasks, Contractor will evaluate
the proposed regional facilities.
6.B.5 Develop Strategies for Protecting Stream Corridors and Aquatic Resources.
Using the results of the modeling and evaluation, Contractor will update recommendations in the River Terrace
Master Plan for protecting stream corridors and aquatic resources from stormwater impacts.
6.B.6 Recommended Improvements.
Contractor will review the remaining recommendations in the River Terrace Master Plan and recommend
revisions, if necessary, to align River Terrace 2.0 to coordinate with Clean Water Services.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
27 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
6.B.7 Meetings.
Prepare agendas, presentation materials, and document discussions, including action items and decisions, in
meeting minutes for the following meetings:
Meeting 1 –Recommended Improvements Review Meeting
Purpose: Discuss results of the stormwater system analysis and recommended improvements with City
Staff.
Expected Contractor attendees: Senior Professional and Assistant Professional.
Expected meeting duration: One (1) hour.
6.C. Infrastructure cost estimates
6.C.1 Index Cost Estimates to Current Dollars
City will provide the methodology and unit costs used to develop cost estimates in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept
Plan Stormwater Needs Analysis. Carollo will index costs to current dollars using Engineering New - Record
(ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) for Seattle, Washington. No new cost estimates or unit costs will be
developed.
6.C.2 Prioritization and Timing - OPTIONAL
As an optional task, following identification of the facilities needing updates or estimates, the Contractor will
develop a prioritization list for implementation of the facilities.
6.C.3 Maintenance - OPTIONAL
As an optional task, Carollo will develop planning level cost estimates for typical maintenance activities for each
of the facilities.
Key Assumptions:
City will provide feedback on order of implementation of the facilities.
No new cost estimates or unit costs for improvements or recommendations will be developed as part of
this task.
6.D. Addendum to River Terrace Stormwater System Plan.
The purpose of Task 6.D is to draft the Addendum to the River Terrace Stormwater System Plan and the narrative
for the River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan.
6.D.1 Addendum to the River Terrace Stormwater System Plan.
The Contractor will produce and deliver River Terrace 2.0 Stormwater System Plan that documents the
methodology, approach, and results of this analysis. It will include the system analysis, cost estimates, and
stormwater facility implementation and funding. City will review and comment on the draft document. City
comments and Contractor responses will be tracked within the draft Word document in track changes.
a. Draft Addendum to River Terrace Stormwater System Plan.
b. Final Addendum to River Terrace Stormwater System Plan.
Key Assumptions:
Contractor will only evaluate and recommend improvements necessary for the River Terrace 2.0 system
to be included in the Stormwater System Plan.
All deliverables will be submitted in electronic format. No hard copies will be printed.
6.D.2 General Narrative for the River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan Document:
The Contractor will develop a narrative for the Stormwater System Plan section of the River Terrace 2.0
Community Plan Document.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
28 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
6.D.3 Meetings.
Carollo will prepare agendas, presentation materials, and document discussions, including action items and
decisions, in meeting minutes for the following meetings:
Meeting 2 –Comments Review Meeting
Purpose: Discuss City comments on draft deliverable.
Expected Contractor attendees: Senior Professional and Assistant Professional.
Expected meeting duration: One (1) hour.
6.D.4 Coordination with Other Agencies: Meetings - OPTIONAL
The purpose of this task is to facilitate coordination with other agencies stormwater management policies and
procedures, specifically Clean Water Services, King City, and Washington County, if requested by the City as an
additional scope item.
Carollo will facilitate meetings with other agencies for stormwater facilities that either accept or receive stormwater
drainage from the City of Tigard. Three meetings are anticipated throughout the duration of the task.
Carollo will prepare agendas, presentation materials, and document discussions, including action items and
decisions, in meeting minutes for three coordination meetings with other agencies:
Expected Contractor attendees: Senior Professional and Assistant Professional.
Expected meeting duration: One (1) hour.
All meetings will be held virtually.
6.D.5 Coordination with Other Agencies: Develop Cost Share Breakdowns - OPTIONAL
Where stormwater facilities treat or convey runoff from the City of Tigard and at least one other agency, the
Contractor will develop three potential alternatives to support cost share of both construction and operation and
maintenance, if requested by the City as an additional scope item. The alternatives will be: 1. Drainage area based,
2. Runoff volume based, and 3. Peak flow based.
Key assumptions:
Contractor is only providing guidance on stormwater technical details. All City legal, policy, ordinance,
etc. topics are not included.
The majority of the effort is an update to the existing River Terrace Master Plan via updates to incorporate
River Terrace 2.0.
This is an optional task.
ELEMENT 6 DELIVERABLES
1. Stormwater modeling input and output files.
2. GIS data supporting modeling.
3. Draft and Final Addendum to River Terrace Stormwater System Plan provided in Word and PDF.
4. Draft and Final Stormwater System Plan section of the River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan Document in
Word.
ELEMENT 7: PARK SYSTEM PLAN
Walker Macy will lead the Parks System Plan element, focusing on a climate-friendly approach to park planning,
centering equitable, affordable, and low-carbon access.This task element will provide a small area plan for a system
of parks and trails in River Terrace 2.0. This plan will provide analysis sufficient to guide the acquisition, funding,
and development of parks and trails that meet the desires and needs of the residents, workers, and visitors to the
neighborhood.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
29 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
7.A. Parks Planning Context
Walker Macy will review the recently-completed City Parks and Recreation System Plan and the River Terrace
2.0 Concept Plan parks element along with other documents provided by the City. The City Parks and Recreation
System Plan conceptual framework of goals has been vetted by the local community. This task will include one
virtual meeting with City staff to understand the status of and any challenges related to RT 1.0 parks built or
planned, specific issues or concerns with the RT 2.0 Concept Plan’s park plans, as well as the latest thinking
embodied in the city-wide Parks and Recreation System Plan. Particular emphasis in the review will be placed on
the following:
Parks and Recreation System Plan
o Equity Goals
o Inclusive play / nature play approaches
o Accessibility / universal design
o Walkshed / 10-minute access goals
o Urban park development standards of Appendix E
River Terrace 1.0 Park System Plan
o Interpretive elements
7.B. Level-of-Service Analysis
The Concept Plan determined a general amount of community, neighborhood and linear parks for River Terrace
2.0 West and South. The Community Plan offers an opportunity to take a more place-based approach to
determining future park locations. The traditional methodology of using population-based levels of service for
standard categories of park types has gradually been replaced by more flexible and equitable consideration of how
a wide range of ages, cultures, genders and abilities use parks differently and how specific geographic constraints
like topography, pedestrian and bike access, and natural conditions should guide the location and scale of parks.
Walker Macy will conduct an analysis to inform the appropriate provision of parks within the neighborhood. This
task will include a review of innovative approaches to determining parks needs, and a Contractor team evaluation
of trade-offs and applicability to River Terrace, with input from the City Attorney to ensure alternatives would
be adoptable and legally defensible. The Contractor team will coordinate with the CE team to explore
opportunities for community input to guide the Contractor team’s assessment of parks needs and desired
programming for future parks, and will integrate relevant community engagement input provided by the CE team.
The outcome of this analysis will be a recommendation for either new level-of-service standards or a new
approach to the allocation of parks by size, type, and number that does not rely on conventional level-of-service
approaches. This will be documented in a concise summary presentation.
7.C. Geographic Analysis
Building on the level-of-service analysis of Task 7.B, Contractor will conduct an analysis of appropriate general
park locations based on the geography of the neighborhood. This analysis will consider, at a minimum:
1. Proposed park locations from the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan
2. Opportunities for collocating parks with regional stormwater facilities or other infrastructure
3. Protection of natural resource areas and their ecological functions
4. Opportunities for recreational nature trails.
Walker Macy will propose a set of “equitable park location and design principles” to guide subsequent work and
decisions using a wider range of locational criteria, such as:
Topography
Multimodal accessibility based on planned trail locations and future street designs
Beneficial adjacencies or co-location opportunities with proposed stormwater facilities, other major
infrastructure, resource areas, or future school sites
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
30 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Land ownership patterns, to ensure it will be feasible to deliver new parks with development wherever
possible
Alignment with land use plans so that parks can support livable density, walkable neighborhoods, and
vibrant commercial areas
Walker Macy will produce a map to illustrate where these factors suggest park locations and how this compares
to the locations identified in the Concept Plan. However, maps will not publicly identify proposed park sites
unless explicitly requested by City staff.
7.D. Sustainability Strategies
Walker Macy will provide a set of sustainability strategy recommendations for park development and
management. These recommendations will address lighting, and plant and material palettes with consideration of
resilience in the face of future rising temperatures and changing hydrological conditions as well as impacts on
energy consumption, urban heat, carbon capture, etc. Recommendations will also address maintenance as another
important and under-appreciated element of park sustainability. Walker Macy will participate in up to two virtual
meetings with parks maintenance/operations staff to help identify maintenance-related sustainability strategies.
Strategies will be summarized at a high level with considerations for sustainability, without design detail.
7.E. River Terrace 2.0 Parks and Recreation System Plan
Walker Macy will prepare a succinct Parks and Recreation System Plan for RT 2.0 incorporating the
recommendations that emerge from the analyses listed above, with an emphasis on implementation. The plan
will include:
1. Recommendations for parks type, location, and size based on Task 7.B and 7.C analyses
2. Programming recommendations
3. Implementation plan, to include priorities for acquisition; potential for phasing and funding; and near-
term program priorities.
4. Results of Tasks 7.B through 7.D
The Parks and Recreation System Plan will also include a summary of the planned park facilities and planning-
level cost estimates based on unit cost assumptions used in the City Parks and Recreation System Plan. This will
also provide the basis for a chapter in the final Community Plan.
ELEMENT 7 DELIVERABLES
1. Parks and Recreation System Plan
2. Project list and cost estimates
3. Adoptable level of service resolution to replace the current applicable resolution
ELEMENT 8: NATURAL SYSTEMS PLAN
This element includes varied tasks related to state Goal 5 natural systems planning, tree canopy preservation, and
sustainability. The River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan identified and mapped Goal 5 significant wetlands and Metro
Titles 9/13 vegetated corridors as required by Statewide Planning Goals and the Metro Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan. This element will focus on the identification and conservation of tree groves and
specimen trees.
8.A. Natural Systems Background
Winterbook will review relevant background documents with a focus on the inventory work completed for the
RT2.0 Concept Plan. The review will include the following materials, which will be provided by City PM:
1. Natural systems-related elements of River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
31 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
2. Tigard Development Code chapters related to natural systems,
3. Tigard Municipal Code related to tree regulations, and
4. Tigard Urban Forestry Plan and Manual
5. The methodology used for determining specimen trees in the Tigard Triangle Plan District.
8.B.1 Delineate significant tree groves and significant trees
Winterbook will prepare an inventory of Goal 5 significant tree groves in the River Terrace 2.0 planning area
using the same criteria and methodologies that were used for the city’s original significant tree grove inventory
and the River Terrace 1.0 significant tree grove inventory. Additionally, Winterbook will develop a methodology
for determining how to identify individual specimen trees and then conduct an inventory of specimen trees
meeting the criteria, as based on a number of factors, including but not necessarily limited to:
Climate value, including resilience, and
Value as outstanding specimens as representative of their particular species.
In developing/refining the tree inventory and evaluation methodology for River Terrace 2.0, Winterbrook will
work with the City project team and Climate Resilience team to incorporate specimen trees, and to address, where
appropriate, broader city goals related to natural area protection and climate.
8.B.2 Prepare ESEE Analysis of significant specimen trees and tree groves
Contractor will identify conflicting land uses (based on GIS data from the RT2.0 Concept Plan provided by the
City) and analyze the economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences of alternative local
protection programs for identified significant tree groves and specimen trees. The local protection options are to
provide full protection, limited protection, and no protection for significant trees and groves. The analysis will
consider the overlap of mapped Goal 5 significant wetlands and Metro Titles 9/13 vegetated corridors (based on
GIS data provided by the City) with identified significant trees and tree groves. The analysis will also evaluate
applicable statewide planning goals with a focus on Housing and Public Facility implications of tree protection
programs.
The Project team will conduct a workshop to develop an outline for a limited protection program (recommended
code concepts) that will be the focus of the ESEE analysis. The limited program will be consistent with the
Concept Plan and will provide the basis for code provisions. The role of a density transfer program will be
integrated with discussions about the density strategy, given the City’s target density for this area.
Key Assumptions:
City to provide GIS layers for RT2.0 planning area, including available layers from Concept Plan, Goal 5
inventories (Metro and other), floodplain/natural hazards.
8.C. Natural Resources Code amendments
While the work of Element 8 will largely focus on extending existing city natural resource protection to the River
Terrace 2.0 area, Winterbook will review and make recommendations for new policies and regulatory frameworks
that can address broader city goals related to natural area protection, carbon responsibility, climate mitigation, and
other climate goals, with input from the Climate Resiliency team.
Winterbrook will work with Code Studio to prepare a set of adoption-ready development code amendments to
provide effective protection for identified significant tree groves and specimen trees through incentives and/or
requirements. In addition, Winterbrook will prepare the following:
1. Municipal code amendments, where necessary, to support development code amendments,
2. Amendments to the existing Tigard Urban Forestry Manual or an appendix to this manual that applies
only to the River Terrace 2.0 area, and
3. Amendments to approved tree lists for streets, parking areas, and citywide.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
32 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
Draft development code language for resource protection in this area will be incorporated into the code
amendments in Element 10.
ELEMENT 8 DELIVERABLES
1. Maps in city-approved GIS format depicting all identified specimen trees and significant tree groves.
2. Adoption-ready code amendment package.
ELEMENT 9: EQUITABLE FINANCE STRATEGY
This element will provide a financing strategy for needed infrastructure improvements in River Terrace 2.0 and
off-site impacts associated with development of the area. The equitable finance strategy will refine the
assumptions and estimates from the Concept Plan, develop a recommended approach to addressing any identified
funding gaps, and establish fee schedules for any supplemental SDCs and other fees and charges recommended
for the area. This work will be conducted with an emphasis on equity, particularly the need to balance housing
equity against other priorities. The end result will be a strategy that includes a fees and charges schedule. ECO
will lead this task with input on infrastructure costs from other members of the team and support from GRG on
establishing any new charges for the area.
9.A. Summarize Updated Costs and Revenues from Existing Sources
ECO will work with leads for each infrastructure system—parks, water, transportation, sanitary sewer, and
stormwater—to summarize refined project cost estimates by relevant project categories and to identify priority
projects where funding is needed in the near-term. ECO will also update estimates of revenues that future
development in this area will generate from existing funding sources (e.g., SDCs) to allow for comparisons with
updated cost figures.
Key Assumptions:
Revenue projections will be based on the land use program specified in the Concept Plan and current
SDC rates.
City to provide current rates for all SDCs and copies of existing SDC methodology reports.
Cost estimates will be generated in other tasks but compiled and clarified (as needed) in this task.
9.B. Funding Options Evaluation
The funding options evaluation will identify key areas where new sources or strategies are needed to fund or
finance infrastructure. This includes:
Infrastructure systems or project categories for which existing funding sources are projected to be
insufficient relative to project costs;
Projects where funding is needed in the near-term, so that timing of funding availability can inform
selection of appropriate funding sources or financing strategies; and
Existing funding sources that the City controls for which updates may be appropriate to better align with
City/project goals related to climate or equity.
The evaluation of alternative funding strategies will consider potential additional local funding and financing tools
as well as state or federal grant or loan options, depending on the need. The evaluation may consider:
1. System development charges, tiering, and exemptions
2. Fees
3. Excise taxes, particularly construction or climate excise taxes
4. Special districts
5. Developer incentives
The evaluation will include consideration of revenue potential, eligibility and alignment with project needs,
political feasibility, and equity (integrating the equity evaluation in Task 9.D).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
33 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
The evaluation will also include input and buy-in from impacted service providers, including relevant City
departments and other agencies such as Washington County and Clean Water Services. ECO will support City
staff in meeting with service providers individually to focus on the topics or concerns most relevant to that agency,
attending key discussions that will inform funding plan decisions (up to eight total meetings) and assisting with
preparation for other meetings as needed.
The evaluation will be summarized in a concise memo, with up to two rounds of review and revisions (e.g., staff
review and stakeholder / agency review).
9.C. Infrastructure Funding and Financing Strategy
Following input on the Funding Options Evaluation from service providers (and, if appropriate, other
stakeholders as part of other engagement efforts), ECO will develop recommended strategies to address funding
gaps and timing issues in ways that align with climate and equity goals. The recommended strategy will be
summarized in an infrastructure funding plan with recommended new tools, projects or types of project assumed
to be funded through the new tools, recommended applicability of new tools (e.g., area-wide, Citywide, or select
properties), estimates of revenue from existing and new tools under recommended approach (including any
refinements to land use program that may occur following 9.A).
9.D. Equity Evaluation of Funding/Financing Options and Strategy
This report will serve as an ancillary part of the Financing Strategy but is specifically enumerated to emphasize its
importance. The purpose of this report is to summarize the methods used to ensure maximum equity in the
development and application of recommendations. Of particular importance is the need for equity in the various
fees and charges imposed on housing, to ensure that low-income households and those communities most
impacted by past housing discrimination have an opportunity to live in this neighborhood through both
homeownership and rental.
ECO will evaluate equity considerations associated with alternative funding and financing options, including who
bears the costs and how the source or strategy could impact the ability to deliver inclusive future neighborhoods
and lower-cost housing options. The findings of this evaluation will be integrated with the evaluation of alternative
funding and financing options in Task 9.B so that they can better inform recommendations. Key equity
considerations that informed the recommendations will also be captured as part of the final Infrastructure
Funding and Financing strategy.
9.E. Prepare recommended Fees and Charges Schedule
ECO and GRG will create a methodology for up to two new funding tools, with analysis to support scaling fees
to address equity / affordability considerations if appropriate.
ELEMENT 9 DELIVERABLES
1. Adoption-ready Infrastructure Financing Strategy
2. Adoption-ready Fees and Charges Schedule
ELEMENT 10: TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS AND PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
This element will provide adoption-ready development code amendments and all other implementation strategies
that will operationalize the outcomes identified and developed through all other elements of the Scope. The
implementation strategies will particularly focus on the Housing Plan elements but should also take into account
the Transportation Element and other infrastructure plans.
10.A. Development Code Context
Code Studio, with input from ECO, will review the existing code for River Terrace 1.0 (including the Plan District
and other applicable sections) and identify any elements that may be appropriate to apply to River Terrace 2.0.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
34 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
The Housing team will review the existing Development Code and identify, at a minimum:
1. Sections of the Development Code that may need amending to implement River Terrace 2.0, including a
description and brief rationale for each recommended amendment
2. Elements of the River Terrace Plan District or other plan districts that could be used for River Terrace 2.0
implementation
3. Other areas of existing code that could apply in River Terrace 2.0, either entirely or partially with
modifications specific to River Terrace 2.0
4. Sections of the existing Development Code that are outdated or no longer necessary.
The Housing team will review development outcomes in River Terrace 1.0 and seek input from staff on issues
that have arisen in applying the code.
This task will be conducted early in the project to inform Tasks 2.F and 2.G.
10.B. Prepare recommended Development Code amendments - OPTIONAL
The Contractor team will prepare adoption-ready Development Code amendments in collaboration with the City
PM. These amendments will provide the regulatory framework for meeting the vision and goals of the River
Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan, Community Plan, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and all ancillary policy documents.
At a minimum, these code amendments will implement the following:
1. Density and Zoning Strategy (see Element 2)
2. Form-Based Housing Development & Design Standards (see Element 2)
3. Streamlined review process for housing development (see Element 2)
4. Climate-resilient housing code standards (see Element 3)
5. Non-residential design and development standards (see Element 2)
6. Transportation and trails network
7. Other polices as determined by City PM
Code Studio will lead drafting of development code amendments. Winterbrook will contribute sections related
to resource protection developed in Task 8.C and provide input and review for other sections, including providing
Code Studio with an overview of Oregon-specific requirements and conducting a detailed review of the draft
code at two points during drafting. ECO will also provide input and review throughout the drafting process.
The code amendments will build on the code framework established in Task 2.F and the review of the existing
development code in Task 10.A, integrating recommended approaches from the density and zoning strategy,
form-based housing development and design standards, review processes, climate-resilient development
requirements, non-residential development and design standards, and requirements related to public facilities,
including parks, trails, and streets. New districts will include form graphics, metrics, and use standards. The
approach will be to integrate the changes as seamlessly as possible within Tigard’s existing Development Code,
although more substantive changes to the overall code structure may be proposed where necessary, in discussion
with the City PM and project team.
Draft Development Code amendments will be produced and shared with the City PM and project team as drafting
occurs. Typically, drafting would occur in “modules” such as 1) zoning districts and uses, 2) site development
standards (landscaping and tree protection, outdoor lighting, parking, etc.), and 3) administration (review
procedures). Each portion of the document will be introduced to the City PM and project team in a virtual
worksession (up to three in total). This initial version of the document may include sample graphics produced for
other codes, or otherwise unfinished. The full City review draft will incorporate all final graphics for review.
Following the initial draft modules, Code Studio will prepare up to three full drafts of combined “module”
revisions (City review, public review, adoption-ready). City will consolidate and reconcile comments on each draft.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
35 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
10.C. Implementation Strategies Report
ECO will work with other members of the Contractor team to summarize and prepare a list of recommended
additional policies and strategies (outside the development code) needed to implement the broader outcomes
identified and developed through all Elements of the Plan. Working with staff, the Contractor team will apply a
basic evaluation rubric (good, better, best, or similar) and identify recommended timing for implementation
(short-, medium-, or long-term) and key next steps to advance the strategies in the near-term. ECO will produce
up to three drafts of the Implementation Strategies Report (City review, public review, adoption-ready). City will
consolidate and reconcile comments on each draft.
10.D. Zoning Map
ECO and the Housing team will support the City to translate the Concept Plan map into a zoning map that aligns
with the Density and Zoning Strategy and the approach to form-based development and design standards
established in Task 10.1. Code Studio will provide recommendations or draft shapefiles for where to apply any
subdistricts or other geographically-specific code elements. As part of the refinement process, ECO will consider
parcel lines and property ownership patterns (and, to the extent known, properties where likely developers have
options to purchase) to ensure the Community Plan leverages larger land holdings to deliver key elements of the
plan. The Housing Team will hold a work session with staff to discuss refinements to the Zoning Map. ECO and
Code Studio will review draft maps and meet with staff up to three additional times to discuss refinements prior
to final adoption .
ELEMENT 10 DELIVERABLES
1. Adoption-ready Development Code Amendments
2. Implementation Strategies Report
3. Zoning Map
ELEMENT 11: COMMUNITY PLAN FINAL DOCUMENTS AND CLOSEOUT
This element involves preparing the community plan document and all ancillary documents produced in the
community planning process in their final form, as well as producing presentation materials for the adoption
process.
11.A. Prepare Community Plan Document
ECO will work with the Contractor team to prepare a final deliverable that captures the key findings and
engagement input that informed those components of the project. ECO will produce a graphically-oriented plan
document to provide lasting documentation. We will prepare an unformatted draft of the content for the
Community Plan for review by City staff and the CE team prior to designing the version(s) of the document to
share publicly. ECO will produce up to three drafts of the formatted Community Plan (City review, public review,
adoption-ready). City will consolidate and reconcile comments on each draft. The final Community Plan will
incorporate comments from the City and other stakeholders.
11.B. Collated Project Materials
At the conclusion of the project, ECO will coordinate with subcontractors to ensure that all final deliverables and
materials specified in the contract have been provided to staff, including final versions of any new GIS data
created in the course of the project.
11.C. Presentation Materials
ECO will work with the Contractor team and City PM to prepare presentation materials summarizing the
Community Plan, development code amendments and zoning map, and implementation strategies to support
adoption. ECO will provide up to two rounds of review and revisions for the presentation materials. The City
will deliver the presentation(s); the Contractor team is not expected to present or participate in the adoption.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
36 | P a g e
P S A T e m p l a t e
ELEMENT 11 DELIVERABLES
1. Draft Community Plan and Appendices
2. Final Community Plan and Appendices
3. Collated Project Materials
4. Presentation Materials
All tasks listed as optional (6.C.2, 6.C.3, 6.D.4, 6.D.5., and 10.B) will only be initiated through written approval
by the City Project Manager
INVOICING AND PAYMENT
All work under this agreement will not exceed $1,191,561.00. Funds may be moved between project elements
with prior approval of the City Project Manager, provided that the overall project budget is not exceeded, and all
terms of grantors are met in full.
Invoices will be sent to Schuyler Warren at schuylerw@tigard-or.gov. All tasks associated with Element 5.2 Water
System Plan will be invoiced separately from the rest of the elements.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
LeadElement / Task
Primary
Support
Additional
Support
Project
Director
Becky Hewitt
Project
Manager
Kailtin La
AssociateBonte
Senior
Advisor /
Project
Director
Senior
Research
Analyst
Research
Analyst
Senior
Technical
Manager
Technical
Manager
ECOnorthwest
Subtotal Hours
ECOnorthwest
Subtotal Labor
ECOnorthwest
Non-Labor
Expenses
ECOnorthwest
Principal/ PirieTotal
Project
Manager/ Kini
Urban
Designer/
Poston
Walker Macy
Subtotal Hours
Walker Macy
Subtotal Labor
Walker
Macy Non-
Labor
Expenses
Walker
Macy Total
Senior
Support StaffAssociate/Tillmann
Cascadia
Subtotal Hours
$/Hour $150.00$210.00$105.00$130.00$195.00$145.00$185.00$120.00 $105.00$230.00$135.00$165.00$220.00
Element 1: Project Management 74,775409000 0032227150 $75,075$300$ 7,2305023612 $75$ 202$7,305
1.A. Project Managers Kickoff Meeting ECONW All 9355------32 $935$0$ -0--- $0$ 0--$0
1.B. Consultant Team Kickoff Meeting ECONW All 2,64014------86 $2,690$50$ 2,16014266 $25$ 2-2$2,185
1.C. Project Management Team Meetings and Team Work Sessions ECONW All 42,210230-----1213484 $42,210$0$ 3,77026-206 $0 0$ --$3,770
1.D. Project Management Plan ECONW All 4,07022------148 $4,070$0$ 2602-2- $0 0-$ -$260
1.F. Community Engagement Coordination ECONW All -0-------- $0$0$ 1,0408-8- $50 0-$ -$1,090
1.F 1. Community Engagement Plan ECONW All 6,70038-----42410 $6,700$0$ -0--- $0 0-$ -$0
1.F 2. Community Advisory Committee ECONW All 5,16028-----41212 $5,160$0$ -0--- $0 0-$ -$0
1.F 3. Community Focus Groups ECONW All 3,95022-----4108 $4,050$100$ -0--- $0 0-$ -$0
1.F 4. Public Open Houses ECONW All 3,95022-----4108 $4,100$150$ -0--- $0 0-$ -$0
1.G. Water System Plan Coordination (no budget) -0-------- $0$0$ -0--- $0 0-$ -$0
1.H. Technical Advsiory Committee ECONW All 5,16028-----41212 $5,160$0$ -0--- $0 0-$ -$0
Element 2: Housing Plan 48,8753070003201258862 3,900$48,875$0$ 270216 0$0 00$3,900$
2.A. Review housing work from River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan ECONW WMCS 1,4209----441 130$1,420$0$ 1-1- 0$0 --$130$
2.B. Housing Team (no budget)WMECONW CS -0---- -0-$0$0$ -- 0-$0 -$0$
2.C. Housing Advisory Committee ECONW CS 5,43030----61212 -0-$5,430$0$ -- 0-$0 -$0$
2.D. Housing Focus Group ECONW CS 1,72510----343 -0-$1,725$0$ -- 0-$0 -$0$
2.E. Recommended Housing Policies and Strategies WMECONW CS 29,580194---24-1004030 6504-2$29,580$0$ 2 0--$0 $650$
2.F. Density and Zoning Strategy ECONW WMCS 7,08042---6-81612 2,47018-162$7,080$0$ 0--$0 $2,470$
2.G. Form-based Housing Code and Development Approval Processes ECONW WMCS 3,64022---2-4124 6504-22$3,640$0$ 0--$0 $650$
Element 3: Climate Resilient Development Strategies 10,7005600001403210 50,1553834032221$10,750$50$ 21690126$50,180$25$
3.A. Review Tigard Community Resiliency Plan, policies, and work programs ECONWWMCCG 1,5608----2-42 1,2359-81$1,560$0$ 684424$1,235$0$
3.B. Goal Setting ECONWWMCCG 2,68014----482 - 3,90028-244$2,730$50$ 503020$3,925$25$
3.C. Document Consulting and Review ECONWCCGWM 3,12016----484 - 24,8201881616012$3,120$0$ 70-70$24,820$0$
3.D. Climate Report ECONWCCGWM 3,34018----4122 - 20,200158241304$3,340$0$ 281612$20,200$0$
Element 4: Transportation System Plan 13,16070000203432 2 10,8108846348$13,160$0$ 000$10,810$0$
4.1A: Transportation planning context WMTDGDKS 7704-----22 - 3902--2$770$0$ 0--$390$0$
4.1B: Street and trail network plan WMDKSTDG 1,98010-----46 - 1,4601248-$1,980$0$ 0--$1,460$0$
4.1C: Transportation analysis ECONWTDGDKS 1,81010-----244 -0---$1,810$0$ 0--$0$0$
4.1D: Street design concepts WMDKSTDG 1,5408------44 1,77012264$1,540$0$ 0--$1,770$0$
4.1E: Project list and cost estimates ECONWTDGDKS 1,5408------44 -0---$1,540$0$ 0--$0$0$
4.2A: Tile flat road extension - Analysis TDGDKS WM, ECONW 2,88016---2--86 7,1906240202$2,880$0$ 0$7,190$0$
4.2B: Tile flat road extension - recommendations TDGDKS WM, ECONW 2,6401486 -0---$2,640$0$ 0$0$0$
Element 5.1: Sanitary Sewer System Plan 90 1,7050000054 -000 0$1,705$0$ 000$0$0$
5.1.A. Sanitary Sewer Background Carollo 2- 385-----11 ---- 0$385$0$ 0--$0$0$
5.1.B Review Recommended Improvements Carollo 3- 550-----21 ---- 0$550$0$ 0--$0$0$
5.1.C. River Terrace 2.0 Addendum to the City's SSSP Carollo 4- 770-----22 ---- 0$770$0$ 0--$0$0$
Element 5.2: Water System Plan 120 2,2000000084 -000 0$2,200$0$ 000$0$0$
5.2.B. Project RT2.0 Demands and Systems Analysis Carollo 6- 1,100-----42 ---- 0$1,100$0$ 0--$0$0$
5.2.C. Develop RT2.0 Improvements Plan Carollo 6- 1,100-----42 ---- 0$1,100$0$ 0--$0$0$
Element 6: Stormwater System Plan 120 2,2550000075 -000 0$2,255$0$ 000$0$0$
6.A. Review Stormwater Planning Documents and Data Carollo 2- 385-----11 ---- 0$385$0$ 0--$0$0$
6.B. System analysis Carollo 6- 1,100-----42 ---- 0$1,100$0$ 0--$0$0$
6.C. Infrastructure cost estimates Carollo 2- 385-----11 ---- 0$385$0$ 0--$0$0$
6.D. Addendum to River Terrace Stormwater System Plan Carollo 2- 385-----11 ---- 0$385$0$ 0--$0$0$
Element 7: Park System Plan 5,720300000001614 19,500142012616$5,720$0$ 000$19,500$0$
7.A. Review River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan parks element and Tigard Parks and Recreation System PlanWM 7704------22 2,86020-164$770$0$ 0--$2,860$0$
7.B. Level-of-Service Analysis ECONWWM 1,1556------33 2,34017-152$1,155$0$ 0--$2,340$0$
7.C. Geographic Analysis ECONW TDGWM 1,1556--- ---33 2,34017-152$1,155$0$ 0--$2,340$0$
7.D. Sustainability Strategies WM 7704--- ---22 4,68034-304$770$0$ 0--$4,680$0$
7.E. River Terrace 2.0 Parks and Recreation System Plan ECONWWM 1,87010--- ---64 7,28054-504$1,870$0$ 0--$7,280$0$
Element 8: Natural Systems Plan 5,44529000 0001712 2,015140113$5,445$0$ 000$2,015$0$
8.A: Natural systems background WB 3852------11 -0---$385$0$ 0--$0$0$
8.B.1: Significant tree and grove inventory WB 5503------21 5854-31$550$0$ 0--$585$0$
8.B.2 ESEE analysis WB 1,87010------64 9106-42$1,870$0$ 0--$910$0$
8.C: Natural systems plan and code amendments ECONW WMWB 2,64014------86 5204-4-$2,640$0$ 0--$520$0$
Element 9: Equitable Finance Strategy 44,330266620040705872 -0000$44,330$0$ 000$0$0$
9.A. Summarize costs and revenues from existing sources ECONW 8,5905432---4108 -0---$8,590$0$ 0--$0$0$
9.B. Funding options evaluation & ECONW GRG 8,53050-----201416 -0---$8,530$0$ 0--$0$0$
9.C. Infrastructure Financing Strategy & Service Provider Coordination ECONW GRG 19,54011820--2-402432 -0---$19,540$0$ 0--$0$0$
9.D. Equity Report ECONW GRG 2,35014-----644 -0---$2,350$0$ 0--$0$0$
9.E. Prepare recommended Fees and Charges Schedule ECONWGRG 5,3203010--2--612 -0---$5,320$0$ 0--$0$0$
Element 10: Implementation Documents 18,45011020000404028 4,220328204$18,450$0$ 000$4,220$0$
10.A. Review existing Development Code, particularly River Terrace Plan DistrictECONW CS 1,5408------44 -0---$1,540$0$ 0--$0$0$
10.C. Implementation Strategies Report – non-Development Code WMECONW CS 12,00076-----402412 3,700288164$12,000$0$ 0--$3,700$0$
10.D. Zoning Map WMECONW CS 4,910262-----1212 5204-4-$4,910$0$ 0--$520$0$
Element 11: Community Plan and Closeout 25,43015240000486634 5,8404616264$25,430$0$ 000$5,840$0$
11.A. Prepare Community Plan Document ECONW WM All 20 40 36 -----96 15,860$ $0 $15,860 2 20 16 38 4,670$ $0 $4,670 --0
11.B. Collated Project Materials ECONW All 2 8 2 ----4 16 2,610$ $0 $2,610 ---0 -$ $0 $0 --0
11.C. Presentation Materials ECONW WM All 12 18 10 -----40 6,960$ $0 $6,960 2 6 -8 1,170$ $0 $1,170 --0
Total Hours 427 598 317 14 38 0 0 68 1462 74 596 112 782 128 90 218
Total $$93,940 $98,670 $42,795 $3,220 $4,560 $0 $0 $9,860 $253,045 $350 $253,395 $14,430 $77,480 $11,760 $103,670 $100 $103,770 $26,880 $13,500
% of Base Budget $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0%25%12%59%8%$0 0%$0 $0 $0
Optional Tasks and Contingency Reserve
6.C - Optional components (6.C.2, 6.C.3)Carollo 5503------21 -0---$550$0$ 0--$0$0$
6.D - Optional components (6.D.4, 6.D.5)Carollo 5503------21 -0---$550$0$ 0--$0$0$
10.B. Prepare recommended Development Code amendments ECONWWBCS 15,26084-----124032 5204-4-$15,260$0$ 0--$520$0$
Contingency Reserve
Total with Optional Tasks and Contingency Reserve ECONorthwestWalker MacyCascadia Consulting GroupContractor fees
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Cascadia
Subtotal Labor
Cascadia
Non-Labor
Expenses
Cascadia
Total Principal Associate Graphics
Code Studio
Subtotal Hours
Code Studio
Subtotal Labor
Code Studio
Non-Labor
Expenses
Code
Studio
Total
Principal
Planner/
Brooks
Environmenta
l Scientist/
Smyth
Associate
Planner/
Coffey
Assistant
Planner/
Gladding
Project
Support/
Hawkins
Principal
Planner/ Greg
Winterowd
Winterbrook
Planning
Subtotal
Winterbrook
Planning
Subtotal Labor
Winterbrook
Planning Non-
Labor
Expenses
Winterbrook
Planning
Total
Engineering
Lead I, Planning
Lead I
GIS Specialist,
Project Engineer,
Project Planner
Engineer,
Planner II
Graphic
Designer
Toole Design
Subtotal
Toole Design
Subtotal Labor
Toole
Design Non-
Labor
Expenses
Toole
Design
Total
DKS Associates
Subtotal
DKS Subtotal
Labor
DKS Non-
Labor
Expenses
$225.00 $150.00 $135.00 $225.00 $145.00 $145.00 $130.00 $70.00 $225.00
$217.00 $143.00 $135.00 $110.00
420$ $0 $420 40 62 40 142 23,700$ $1,200 $24,900 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 2,250$ $25 $2,275 18 18 34 24 94 13,710$ $100 $13,810 66 #########$100
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
420$ $0 $420 16 2 - 18 3,900$ $600 $4,500 6 - - - - - 6 1,350$ $25 $1,375 6 2 6 -14 2,398$ $25 $2,423 9 1,705$ $25
-$ $0 $0 6 20 - 26 4,350$ $0 $4,350 3 - - - - - 3 675$ $0 $675 4 -8 -12 1,948$ $0 $1,948 10 1,730$ $0
-$ $0 $0 2 - - 2 450$ $0 $450 1 - - - - - 1 225$ $0 $225 2 ---2 434$ $0 $434 2 420$ $0
-$ $0 $0 16 40 40 96 15,000$ $600 $15,600 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 6 16 20 24 66 8,930$ $75 $9,005 45 8,025$ $75
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 39 54 0 93 16,875$ $1,200 $18,075 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 1 2 - 3 525$ $0 $525 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 8 8 - 16 3,000$ $0 $3,000 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 2 - 2 450$ $0 $450 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 4 4 - 8 1,500$ $0 $1,500 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 12 20 - 32 5,700$ $600 $6,300 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 12 20 - 32 5,700$ $600 $6,300 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
39,960$ $500 $40,460 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 7 3 12 0 22 3,568$ $75 $3,643 0 -$ $0
11,640$ $0 $11,640 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 1 1 2 -4 630$ $0 $630 0 -$ $0
8,700$ $500 $9,200 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 4 0 6 -10 1,678$ $75 $1,753 0 -$ $0
14,700$ $0 $14,700 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 -0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
4,920$ $0 $4,920 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 2 2 4 0 8 1,260$ $0 $1,260 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 1,350$ $0 $1,350 139 244 264 112 759 113,015$ $100 $113,115 639 #########$5,620
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 2 2 2 0 6 990$ $0 $990 72 #########$0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 25 60 80 30 195 28,105$ $100 $28,205 25 4,785$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 20 40 30 -90 14,110$ $0 $14,110 252 #########$2,810
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 30 50 60 40 180 26,160$ $0 $26,160 23 4,255$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 6 12 12 2 32 4,858$ $0 $4,858 74 #########$0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 6 - - - - - 6 1,350$ $0 $1,350 40 60 60 20 180 27,560$ $0 $27,560 73 ####### ## $2,810
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 16 20 20 20 76 11,232$ $0 $11,232 120 ####### ## $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 1 1 0 2 278$ $0 $278 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 -1 1 -2 278$ $0 $278 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 148 122 114 68 20 0 472 77,760$ $125 $77,885 0 1 1 0 2 278$ $0 $278 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 8 10 6 2 2 - 28 4,520$ $0 $4,520 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 28 84 32 6 6 - 156 24,320$ $25 $24,345 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 60 8 32 40 6 - 146 24,920$ $100 $25,020 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 52 20 44 20 6 - 142 24,000$ $0 $24,000 -1 1 -2 278$ $0 $278 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 32 36 12 80 14,220$ $0 $14,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ $0 $0 2 4 4 0 10 1,546$ $0 $1,546 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 8 12 - 20 3,600$ $0 $3,600 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 16 - - 16 3,600$ $0 $3,600 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 1 2 2 -5 773$ $0 $773 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 8 24 12 44 7,020$ $0 $7,020 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 1 2 2 -5 773$ $0 $773 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 6 8 0 14 2,550$ $0 $2,550 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 580$ $0 $580 6 8 16 18 48 6,586$ $0 $6,586 12 2,640$ $0
-$ $0 $0 2 2 - 4 750$ $0 $750 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 4 2 8 12 26 3,554$ $0 $3,554 4 950$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - 4 - - - 4 580$ $0 $580 0 4 2 2 8 1,062$ $0 $1,062 4 740$ $0
-$ $0 $0 4 6 - 10 1,800$ $0 $1,800 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 2 2 6 4 14 1,970$ $0 $1,970 4 950$ $0
117 160 52 329 164 122 118 68 20 0 492 172 279 332 154 937 717
$40,380 $500 $40,880 ######### ######### ######## $57,345 $2,400 $59,745 $36,900 $17,690 $17,110 $8,840 $1,400 $0 $81,940 $150 $82,090 $37,324 $39,897 $44,820 $16,940 $138,981 $275 $139,256 $128,625 $5,720
$0 $0 $0 3% 2% 1% $0 0% 6% 4% 2% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% $0 0% 8%13%14%18%6%0%$0 0%14%13%1%
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 - - - - - - 0 -$ $0 $0 ----0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0
-$ $0 $0 40 160 80 280 43,800$ $1,200 $45,000 - - - - - 48 48 10,800$ $0 $10,800 2 2 4 -8 1,260$ $0 $1,260 0 -$ $0DKS AssociatesCode StudioWinterbrook PlanningToole DesignDocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
DKS Total
Carollo
Engineers
Subtotal
Carollo Subtotal
Labor
Carollo Non-
Labor
Expenses
Carollo
Total
Galardi
Rothstein
Subtotal
Galardi
Rothstein
Subtotal Labor
Galardi
Rothstein
Non-Labor
Expenses
Galardi
Rothstein
Total Totals by Task
ECOnorth
west
Labor
Walker
Macy
Labor
Cascadia
Consulting
Group Labor
Code
Studio
Labor
Winterbrook
Planning
Labor
Toole
Design
Labor
DKS
Associates
Labor
Carollo
Engineers
Labor
Galardi
Rothstein
Group
Labor
Total Sub.
Labor
Sub.
Admin.
Fee
Total Labor ECONorthwest
Non-Labor
Walker Macy
Non-Labor
Cascadia
Consulting
Group Non-
Labor
Code Studio
Non-Labor
Winterbrook
Planning Non-
Labor
Toole Design
Non-Labor
$11,980 10 2,140$ $25 $2,165 4 900$ $0 $900
Element 1: Project Management $74,775 $7,230 $420 $23,700 $2,250 $13,710 $11,880 $2,140 $900 $62,230 $2,489 $139,494 $300 $75 $0 $1,200 $25 $100
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Project Managers Kickoff Meeting $935 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $935 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$1,730 6 1,284$ $25 $1,309 2 450$ $0 $450 B. Consultant Team Kickoff Meeting $2,640 $2,160 $420 $3,900 $1,350 $2,398 $1,705 $1,284 $450 $13,667 $547 $16,854 $50 $25 $0 $600 $25 $25
$1,730 2 428$ $0 $428 1 225$ $0 $225 C. Project Management Team Meetings $42,210 $3,770 $0 $4,350 $675 $1,948 $1,730 $428 $225 $13,126 $525 $55,861 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$420 2 428$ $0 $428 1 225$ $0 $225 D. Project Management Plan $4,070 $260 $0 $450 $225 $434 $420 $428 $225 $2,442 $98 $6,610 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$8,100 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 F. Community Engagement Coordination $0 $1,040 $0 $15,000 $0 $8,930 $8,025 $0 $0 $32,995 $1,320 $34,315 $0 $50 $0 $600 $0 $75
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 F 1. Community Engagement Plan $6,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 F 2. Community Advisory Committee $5,160 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,160 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 F 3. Community Focus Groups $3,950 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,950 $100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 F 4. Public Open Houses $3,950 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,950 $150 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 G. Water System Plan Coordination $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 H. Technical Advsiory Committee $5,160 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,160 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 2: Housing Plan $48,875 $3,900 $0 $16,875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,775 $831 $70,481 $0 $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review housing work from River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan $1,420 $130 $0 $525 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $655 $26 $2,101 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 B. Housing Team $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Housing Advisory Committee $5,430 $0 $0 $3,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000 $120 $8,550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 D. Housing Focus Group $1,725 $0 $0 $450 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $450 $18 $2,193 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 E. Recommended Housing Policies and Strategies $29,580 $650 $0 $1,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,150 $86 $31,816 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 F. Density and Zoning Strategy $7,080 $2,470 $0 $5,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,170 $327 $15,577 $0 $0 $0 $600 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 G. Form-based Housing Code and Development Approval Processes $3,640 $650 $0 $5,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,350 $254 $10,244 $0 $0 $0 $600 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 3: Climate Resilient Development Strategies $10,700 $50,155 $39,960 $0 $0 $3,568 $0 $0 $0 $93,683 $3,747 $108,130 $50 $25 $500 $0 $0 $75
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review Tigard Community Resiliency Plan, policies, and work programs$1,560 $1,235 $11,640 $0 $0 $630 $0 $0 $0 $13,505 $540 $15,605 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 B. Goal Setting $2,680 $3,900 $8,700 $0 $0 $1,678 $0 $0 $0 $14,278 $571 $17,529 $50 $25 $500 $0 $0 $75
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Document Consulting and Review $3,120 $24,820 $14,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,520 $1,581 $44,221 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 D. Climate Report $3,340 $20,200 $4,920 $0 $0 $1,260 $0 $0 $0 $26,380 $1,055 $30,775 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$119,725 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 4: Transportation System Plan $13,160 $10,810 $0 $0 $1,350 $113,015 $114,105 $0 $0 $239,280 $9,571 $262,011 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100
$12,060 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.1A: Transportation planning context $770 $390 $0 $0 $0 $990 $12,060 $0 $0 $13,440 $538 $14,748 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$4,785 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.1B: Street and trail network plan $1,980 $1,460 $0 $0 $0 $28,105 $4,785 $0 $0 $34,350 $1,374 $37,704 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100
$47,510 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.1C: Transportation analysis $1,810 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,110 $44,700 $0 $0 $58,810 $2,352 $62,972 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$4,255 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.1D: Street design concepts $1,540 $1,770 $0 $0 $0 $26,160 $4,255 $0 $0 $32,185 $1,287 $35,012 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$13,810 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.1E: Project list and cost estimates $1,540 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,858 $13,810 $0 $0 $18,668 $747 $20,955 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$16,495 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.2: Special study report- Tile flat road extension (optional task - budget below)$2,880 $7,190 $0 $0 $1,350 $27,560 $13,685 $0 $0 $49,785 $1,991 $54,656 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$20,810 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 4.2: Special study report- Tile flat road extension (optional task - budget below)$2,640 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,232 $20,810 $0 $0 $32,042 $1,282 $35,964 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 240 48,710$ $0 $48,710 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 5.1: Sanitary Sewer System Plan $1,705 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $48,710 $0 $48,710 $1,948 $52,363 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 44 9,086$ $0 $9,086 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review Tigard Sanitary Sewer System Plan $385 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,086 $0 $9,086 $363 $9,834 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 102 21,318$ $0 $21,318 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Population and Demand Projections $550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,318 $0 $21,318 $853 $22,721 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 94 18,306$ $0 $18,306 0 -$ $0 $0 D. Project List and Cost Estimates $770 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,306 $0 $18,306 $732 $19,808 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 251 50,649$ $0 $50,649 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 5.2: Water System Plan $2,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,649 $0 $50,649 $2,026 $54,875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 117 24,203$ $0 $24,203 0 -$ $0 $0 B. System Analysis $1,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,203 $0 $24,203 $968 $26,271 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 134 26,446$ $0 $26,446 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Population and Demand Projections $1,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $26,446 $0 $26,446 $1,058 $28,604 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 280 56,280$ $0 $56,280 0 -$ $0 $0 Element 6: Stormwater System Plan $2,255 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $56,280 $0 $56,280 $2,251 $60,786 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 59 11,991$ $0 $11,991 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review stormwater documents $385 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,991 $0 $11,991 $480 $12,856 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 113 23,087$ $0 $23,087 0 -$ $0 $0 B. System analysis $1,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,087 $0 $23,087 $923 $25,110 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 14 2,896$ $0 $2,896 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Infrastructure cost estimates $385 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,896 $0 $2,896 $116 $3,397 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 94 18,306$ $0 $18,306 0 -$ $0 $0 D. River Terrace 2.0 Stormwater System Plan $385 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,306 $0 $18,306 $732 $19,423 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 7: Park System Plan $5,720 $19,500 $0 $0 $0 $278 $0 $0 $0 $19,778 $791 $26,289 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan parks element and Tigard Parks and Recreation System Plan$770 $2,860 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,860 $114 $3,744 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 B. Level-of-Service Analysis $1,155 $2,340 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,340 $94 $3,589 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Geographic Analysis $1,155 $2,340 $0 $0 $0 $278 $0 $0 $0 $2,618 $105 $3,878 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 D. Sustainability Strategies $770 $4,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,680 $187 $5,637 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 E. River Terrace 2.0 Parks and Recreation System Plan $1,870 $7,280 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,280 $291 $9,441 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 8: Natural Systems Plan $5,445 $2,015 $0 $0 $77,760 $278 $0 $0 $0 $80,053 $3,202 $88,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $125 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 8.A: Natural systems background $385 $0 $0 $0 $4,520 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,520 $181 $5,086 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 8.B.1: Significant tree and grove inventory $550 $585 $0 $0 $24,320 $0 $0 $0 $0 $24,905 $996 $26,451 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 8.B.2 ESEE analysis $1,870 $910 $0 $0 $24,920 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,830 $1,033 $28,733 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 8.C: Natural systems plan and code amendments $2,640 $520 $0 $0 $24,000 $278 $0 $0 $0 $24,798 $992 $28,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 95 21,375$ $0 $21,375 Element 9: Equitable Finance Strategy $44,330 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $21,375 $21,375 $855 $66,560 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review recommended infrastructure costs $8,590 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,590 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 4 900$ $0 $900 B. Analyze various funding strategies and develop recommendations $8,530 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900 $900 $36 $9,466 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 4 900$ $0 $900 C. Infrastructure Financing Strategy $19,540 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900 $900 $36 $20,476 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 2 450$ $0 $450 D. Equity Report $2,350 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $450 $450 $18 $2,818 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 85 19,125$ $0 $19,125 E. Prepare recommended Fees and Charges Schedule $5,320 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,125 $19,125 $765 $25,210 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0
Element 10: Implementation Documents $18,450 $4,220 $0 $14,220 $0 $1,546 $0 $0 $0 $19,986 $799 $39,235 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 A. Review existing Development Code, particularly River Terrace Plan District$1,540 $0 $0 $3,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,600 $144 $5,284 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Implementation Strategies Report – non-Development Code $12,000 $3,700 $0 $3,600 $0 $773 $0 $0 $0 $8,073 $323 $20,396 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 C. Implementation Strategies Report – non-Development Code $4,910 $520 $0 $7,020 $0 $773 $0 $0 $0 $8,313 $333 $13,556 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$2,640 10 2,135$ $0 $2,135 4 900$ $0 $900
Element 11: Community Plan and Closeout $25,430 $5,840 $0 $2,550 $580 $6,586 $2,640 $2,135 $900 $21,231 $849 $47,510 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$950 4 906$ $0 $906 2 450$ $0 $450 A. Prepare Community Plan Document $15,860 $4,670 $0 $750 $0 $3,554 $950 $906 $450 $11,280 $451 $27,591 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$740 4 776$ $0 $776 1 225$ $0 $225 B. Collated Project Materials $2,610 $0 $0 $0 $580 $1,062 $740 $776 $225 $3,383 $135 $6,128 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$950 2 453$ $0 $453 1 225$ $0 $225 C. Presentation Materials $6,960 $1,170 $0 $1,800 $0 $1,970 $950 $453 $225 $6,568 $263 $13,791 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0
$0 791 103 Summary of Expenses
ECO Labor Walker
Macy Labor
Cascadia
Consulting
Group Labor
Code
Studio
Labor
Winterbrook
Planning
Labor
Toole
Design
Labor
DKS
Associates
Labor
Carollo
Engineers
Labor
Galardi
Rothstein
Group
Labor
Total Sub
Labor Sub Fee Total Labor ECO Non-Labor
Walker Macy
Non-Labor
Cascadia
Consulting
Group Non-
Labor
Code Studio
Non-Labor
Winterbrook
Planning Non-
Labor
Toole Design
Non-Labor
$134,345 $159,914 $25 $159,939 $23,175 $0 $23,175 $253,045 $103,670 $40,380 $57,345 $81,940 $138,981 $128,625 $159,914 $23,175 $734,030 $29,361 $1,016,436 $350 $100 $500 $2,400 $150 $275
13% 16% 0% 16% 2% 0% 2% 25% 10% 4% 6% 8% 14% 13% 16% 2% 72% 3% 99% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
$0 16 3,694$ $0 $3,694 0 -$ $0 $0 6.C - Optional components - prioritization and timing and maintenance tasks$550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,694 $0 $3,694 $148 $4,392 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 50 10,065$ $0 $10,065 0 -$ $0 $0 6.D - Optional components - Meetings with other agencies and City, Develop cost share breakdown, TM summarizing discussions and options$550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,065 $0 $10,065 $403 $11,018 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 0 -$ $0 $0 0 -$ $0 $0 10.B. Prepare recommended Development Code amendments $15,260 $520 $0 $43,800 $10,800 $1,260 $0 $0 $0 $56,380 $2,255 $73,895 $0 $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $0
Contingency ReserveCarollo EngineersGalardi Rothstein GroupDocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
DKS
Associates
Non-Labor
Carollo
Engineers
Non-Labor
Galardi
Rothstein
Group Non-
Labor
Total Non-
Labor
Total by
Task
% of
Total
Budget
Proposal
budget Delta Funding
Source
Total by
Task Delta
$100 $25 $0 $1,825 $141,319 14% $153,375 -$12,055 Metro $153,375 -$12,055
$0 $0 $0 $0 $935 0%
$25 $25 $0 $775 $17,629 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $55,861 5% $9,280
$0 $0 $0 $0 $6,610 1%
$75 $0 $0 $800 $35,115 3%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $6,700 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $5,160 1%
$0 $0 $0 $100 $4,050 0%
$0 $0 $0 $150 $4,100 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $5,160 1%
$0 $0 $0 $1,200 $71,681 7% $46,760 $24,921 DLCD $71,681 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $2,101 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $8,550 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $2,193 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $31,816 3%
$0 $0 $0 $600 $16,177 2%
$0 $0 $0 $600 $10,844 1%
$0 $0 $0 $650 $108,780 11% $96,390 $12,391 DOE $108,780 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $15,605 2%
$0 $0 $0 $650 $18,179 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $44,221 4%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $30,775 3%
$5,620 $0 $0 $5,720 $267,731 26% $174,301 $93,430 Metro / DOE / City $267,731 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $14,748 1% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $100 $37,804 4% Metro
$2,810 $0 $0 $2,810 $65,782 6% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $35,012 3% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $20,955 2% Metro
$2,810 $0 $0 $2,810 $57,466 6% DOE (GHG analysis) / City
$0 $0 $0 $0 $35,964 4% City
$0 $0 $0 $0 $52,363 5% $30,583 $21,781 Metro $62,166 -$9,803
$0 $0 $0 $0 $9,834 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $22,721 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $19,808 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $54,875 5% $54,875 DLCD $54,875 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $26,271 3%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $28,604 3%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $60,786 6% $33,357 $27,429 Metro $80,490 -$19,704
$0 $0 $0 $0 $12,856 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $25,110 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $3,397 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $19,423 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $26,289 3% $26,289 $0 Metro / DOE $26,289 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $3,744 0% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $3,589 0% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $3,878 0% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $5,637 1% DOE
$0 $0 $0 $0 $9,441 1% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $125 $88,825 9% $59,992 $28,833 Metro $88,825 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $5,086 0%
$0 $0 $0 $25 $26,476 3%
$0 $0 $0 $100 $28,833 3%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $28,430 3%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $66,560 6% $66,560 $0 Metro $66,560 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $8,590 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $9,466 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $20,476 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $2,818 0%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $25,210 2%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $39,235 4% $102,972 -$63,736 Metro / DLCD $120,292 -$81,056
$0 $0 $0 $0 $5,284 1% DLCD
$0 $0 $0 $0 $20,396 2% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $13,556 1% Metro
$0 $0 $0 $0 $47,510 5% $48,320 -$810 Metro $48,320 -$810
$0 $0 $0 $0 $27,591 3%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $6,128 1%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $13,791 1%
DKS
Associates
Non-Labor
Carollo
Engineers Non-
Labor
Galardi
Rothstein
Group Non-
Labor
Total Non-
Labor Total Budget
$5,720 $25 $0 $9,520 $1,025,956 $838,898 $1,149,385 -$123,429
1% 0% 0% 1% 100% 100%
$0 $0 $0 $0 $4,392 0% $43,723 -$39,331 $4,392
$0 $0 $0 $0 $11,018 1% $11,018 $11,018
$0 $0 $0 $1,200 $75,095 7% Metro $27,255
$75,000 $50,000 $25,000 $75,000 $0
$1,191,461 $932,621 $258,840 $1,251,640 -$60,179
##########
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
RIVER TERRACE 2.0
COMMUNITY
PLANNING
Prepared for the City of Tigard
Response to RFP 2024-07
PROPOSALNOVEMBER 14, 2023
POC: Becky Hewitt
222 SW Columbia St, Suite #1600
Portland, OR 97201
503-200-5077 | hewitt@econw.com
Exhibit B
Contractor's Proposal
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
November 14, 2023
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
The City of Tigard has a clear and compelling vision for what River Terrace 2.0 will become—an inclusive
community that a wide cross-section of people are proud to call home. A complete community that makes
it easy and enjoyable for residents to meet daily needs without a car. A model for climate-resilient, habitat-
friendly development. Realizing this vision will require innovation, creative problem-solving, and nuance to
tease out achievable steps that combine to deliver game-changing outcomes.
We have assembled a team to support the City in this effort with an emphasis on three core priorities: shared
values, specialized expertise, and collaboration. Our shared commitment to the City’s values around climate-
friendly, resilient, equitable, and inclusive development means that we relish the opportunity to push the
envelope on these priorities. Our specialized expertise will illuminate both what is achievable in the near-term
and how to scaffold towards the City’s visionary goals. Our team of constructive, engaged thought partners
offers staff a brain trust ready to innovate together and tailor national best practices to Tigard’s local context.
ECOnorthwest will serve as the prime consultant and overall project manager as well as leading the Housing
team and equitable infrastructure funding portions of the work. We bring a focus on implementable plans
that deliver on public goals, drawing on our understanding of the levers impacting development and of
infrastructure’s role in supporting desired growth. We prioritize a collaborative approach to multidisciplinary
projects and are committed to embedding equity and climate in our work.
Walker Macy will lead urban design, climate integration, and parks planning. They are keen observers with
detailed knowledge of the area’s physical landscape. Their experience with both climate resilience planning
and innovative growth area planning, along with their highly collaborative work style, will allow them to
effectively integrate climate considerations into River Terrace 2.0.
Cascadia Consulting Group will lead climate goal setting and complement Walker Macy’s integration role.
Their highly specialized climate resilience expertise and extensive work with communities pushing the
leading-edge of climate-responsible planning will bring depth and breadth to our climate strategies.
Code Studio will lead development of code concepts and drafting of development code amendments.
Their national experience with both form-based and traditional zoning codes offers flexibility to tailor the
regulatory approach to the local context and the City’s preferred code structure. Their experience includes
drafting middle housing regulations that balance design goals with development feasibility and writing codes
for walkable mixed use areas and urban neighborhoods.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Winterbrook Planning will lead the tree inventory and natural resources regulations, as well as providing
Oregon-specific code experience to complement Code Studio’s national expertise and ensure the final
regulations align with Oregon’s requirements. Their prior natural resources work for the City of Tigard will
allow them to efficiently take on natural resources planning for River Terrace 2.0.
Toole Design will lead multimodal transportation planning, with a focus on designing the transportation
network to support walking, biking, and transit. They bring in-depth experience designing for people rather
than vehicles and tailoring plans to be achievable in their local context.
DKS Associates will complement Toole Design’s transportation planning expertise, supporting the analysis
and modeling needed to address a range of concerns, including mobility. Their extensive experience with
prior transportation planning in and around this area offers insights into how to effectively navigate the
various parties’ key concerns to build consensus on solutions that balance local and regional priorities.
Carollo Engineers will lead stormwater and sanitary sewer planning, building on their recent and on-going
work with Clean Water Services on its East and West Basin Master Plans, and offering efficiencies integrating
the Water System Master Plan work that is contracted separately. They also offer expertise in climate
resilient and sustainable water resources management that will help the team integrate climate into the
utility planning.
Galardi Rothstein Group will support implementation of the infrastructure funding strategy with deep,
specialized expertise in establishing system development charges, utility rates, and other infrastructure
funding mechanisms.
Together, this team will partner with the City to advance implementation of the Concept Plan for River
Terrace 2.0 in ways that are both innovative and achievable. We have reviewed the deadlines in the RFP
and are confident we can meet them. We have laid out our suggested approach to the work in the attached
proposal, and look forward to the opportunity to further refine a scope, schedule, and budget in partnership
with the City if selected.
ECOnorthwest affirms its positive commitment to perform the services outlined in the RFP within the specified
time period. We guarantee the initiation and completion of the project within the deadlines stated in this RFP,
ensuring efficiency and adherence to the timeline. The person authorized to represent ECOnorthwest is: Tyler
Bump, Partner/Project Director at 222 SW Columbia St, Suite # 1600, Portland, OR 97201 | 503-200-5095
Sincerely,
Becky Hewitt, Project Director
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Project Understanding and Approach - - - - - - - - - - - 1
Consultant Team Qualifications - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12
Consultant Experience with Similar Projects - - - - - - - - - 18
Project Manager Experience with Similar Projects - - - - - -24
Diversity in Contracting - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 25
Appendix A: Required Forms
Appendix B: Resumes
Table of Contents
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
1RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Understanding
Tigard is a leader within the region on equitable
housing initiatives and prioritizing walkable, complete
communities. River Terrace 2.0 will contribute to
regional housing production, but it will provide
more than just housing units. It will allow the City to
set a new standard for equitable, climate-resilient
development: a complete community where future
residents can walk, bike, or take transit to meet
many of their daily needs, designed around natural
features that provide climate-friendly ecosystem
services, and where neighborhoods seamlessly
integrate a range of housing options. Achieving
these goals will require development regulations, street designs, funding strategies, and public-private
partnerships that are not typical for greenfield development. Novel approaches can be more challenging,
and will push all parties—developers, the City, and other service providers—to innovate and collaborate.
Our team shares a commitment to these values and is enthusiastic to lean into these challenges with the
City. Our team also offers the expertise and insight needed to seek achievable solutions that deliver on the
City’s ambitious goals.
Approach
The project approach below explains how the Consultant team will organize the work described in the
2024-07 QBS RFP Scope of Work. Unless otherwise noted, the consultant team assumes the same tasks
and deliverables included in Section 4 of the RFP. Tasks have been re-numbered below to align with
the recommended approach, but references to the task identifiers in the RFP are provided for clarity.
ELEMENT 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
1.1: PROJECT INITIATION AND GROUNDING
This group of tasks will set the stage for success in the rest of the project by ensuring all team members
have a common understanding of project priorities, context, and requirements.
u Project Management Team Kickoff (1A): The Project Management team will prepare for the other
tasks within 1.1, to make productive use of the team’s time at the full team kickoff.
u Background (expanded from 1A): The City PM will provide relevant documents, including technical work
that informed the Concept Plan and applicable local, regional, and state policies and requirements
that this project must comply with. We will work with the City to summarize the key aspects of these
materials that guide the Community Plan and implementation measures. We will also assemble maps
that identify existing conditions (resources, tax lot boundaries and ownership, etc.) in the study area.
If needed, we will prepare an updated map of property ownership to reflect any changes since the
Concept Plan.
u Consultant Team Kickoff (1B): We will convene leads from all consultant team members for this full-
team kickoff meeting to review project goals, background, scope, and schedule.
u Site Tour (recommended addition): In conjunction with or following the Consultant team kickoff
meeting, we propose a site tour with key City staff and Consultant team members to ensure a common
understanding of the site context and conditions on the ground.
u Project Management Plan (1D): We will prepare a project management plan that lays out the initial
high-level project schedule and key project management agreements and protocols.
Project Understanding and Approach
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
1.2: ONGOING PROJECT MANAGEMENT
This task includes ongoing project management and regular check-in meetings throughout the duration of
the project, beginning after the contract is finalized.
u PMT meetings (1C): Weekly meetings for the duration of the project with the consultant and, when
necessary, with subconsultants. In addition, we anticipate holding several full team integration work-
sessions (the full Consultant and City staff team) at key milestones.
u Monthly reports (1E): Invoices will include monthly progress reports.
u Coordination with Water System Plan (1G): Having Carollo, the City’s Engineer of Record for the
Water System on our project team will help ensure on-going coordination between this project and
the Water System Plan amendments in the Community Plan.
1.3: COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The Consultant team will coordinate with the Community Engagement team (CE team) throughout the
project. ECO will draw on our extensive experience collaborating on engagement efforts with public
engagement specialists and municipal partners.
u Input to Develop Community Engagement Plan (1F-1, part 1): The Consultant team will support the CE
team in developing the Community Engagement Plan, providing input on an engagement schedule
that aligns with project milestones, and helping map out how engagement will inform key decisions
during the project. We will partner with the CE team to identify where past engagement can inform
this project to avoid repeating similar questions.
u On-Going Community Engagement Planning and Refinement (1F-1, part 2): We recommend regular
check-in meetings with the CE team to plan for upcoming engagement efforts and to coordinate
the Technical Advisory Committee, the Housing Advisory Committee, and Housing Focus Groups
with the Community Advisory Committee and other engagement.
u Community Engagement Support (1F-2, 1F-3, 1F-4): ECO (and other team members as appropriate)
will work closely with the CE team to clarify key topics for each meeting, prepare content and
graphics to support the meetings, and participate in meetings as subject matter experts. The
specific number and type of meetings will be refined during scoping and budgeting and again during
the development of the Community Engagement Plan. We recommend establishing a contingency
reserve for additional engagement support to allow for flexibility in determining the best approach
to engagement during the project.
u Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) preparation and facilitation (1H): ECO will support the City PM
in establishing a TAC roster, starting with TAC membership from the Concept Plan, and will prepare
materials for and facilitate TAC Meetings.
ELEMENT 2: HOUSING PLAN
The Housing Plan Element is an opportunity to refine the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan with an eye towards
implementation. Our Housing team will consist of ECO, Code Studio, Walker Macy, the City PM and others
as appropriate.
2.1: HOUSING AFFORDABILITY STRATEGIES
ECO will review previous housing work, summarize relevant strategies from the Concept Plan (2A), and
work with staff to identify relevant tools the City already has in place, including those implemented since
the Concept Plan was completed. We anticipate incorporating research on examples or case studies
and/or analysis of potential scale of impact to inform refined recommendations. We will work with City
staff and the HAC to refine and update the identified affordability strategies, with a focus on identifying
implementation actions and timing for the highest priority measures (2E).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
3RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
2.2: HOUSING CODE CONTEXT AND FRAMEWORK
ECO will work with Code Studio to summarize guidance from the Concept Plan (2A) and other policy
requirements that should guide the housing development standards and approval processes for River
Terrace 2.0. Code Studio, with input from ECO, will review the existing code for River Terrace 1.0 (including
the Plan District and other applicable sections) and summarize key elements that may be appropriate
to apply to River Terrace 2.0 and those that are likely to require updates. The Housing team will review
development outcomes in RT1.0 and seek input from staff on issues that have arisen in applying the code.
(10A)
Code Studio will then develop a conceptual code framework and code concepts to address housing mix,
density, design, form-based development standards, affordability incentives, and development approval
processes. ECO and Winterbrook will provide Oregon-specific expertise regarding approval processes
and other relevant state requirements, while the Climate Resilience team will review for opportunities to
integrate climate resilient development strategies. (2F, 2G, and zoning- and design-related parts of 2E).
2.3 HOUSING-SPECIFIC ENGAGEMENT
Housing specific engagement will occur at key points in the schedule so community and stakeholder input
can guide the work of Tasks 2.1 and 2.2.
u Housing Advisory Committee (2C): ECO and the Housing team will work with the City PM and CE
team to identify committee membership for the Housing Advisory Committee (HAC) and to convene
the group to review and refine the potential strategies and code framework.
u Housing Focus Group (2D): ECO will work with the CE team to organize, prepare for, and participate
in a housing-specific focus group to complement the Community Focus Groups. The meeting should
occur early in the Housing Element work so that input on housing needs and outcomes can inform
housing recommendations.
ECO will work with the CE team to ensure housing-specific engagement is coordinated with and integrated
into the broader River Terrace engagement effort. The Housing team will synthesize community feedback
to inform recommendations.
ELEMENT 3: CLIMATE RESILIENT DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
Our climate-resilient development approach will be community-based, visionary, and fully integrated into
all elements of the Community Plan. In addition to the elements listed in the RFP, Element 4, Transportation,
is a critical component of carbon-responsible development. The Climate Resilience team will support the
Transportation team in designing climate responsible and resilient transportation solutions. The Climate
Resilience team—Cascadia Consulting Group and Walker Macy—will collaborate closely with the rest of
the team throughout the process. We will work with the City to design the project scope and budget to
accommodate critical early work and coordination on tasks 3.1 through 3.4 while working around the timing
of the NTP for Element 3.
3.1 CLIMATE POLICY AUDIT
The Climate Resilience team will conduct a “policy audit” by reviewing relevant background documents—
including but not limited to those identified in the RFP—and organizing key findings in a custom spreadsheet
tool. We will then facilitate a listening session with the core City team. Topics for discussion should include how
climate resilience goals informed the previous Concept Plan process, including the in-progress Community
Resiliency Plan; potential gaps in existing goals and strategies; opportunities to strengthen or build upon
existing approaches; and relevant information on the status and authority to implement climate-related
provisions. (3A)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
4RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
3.2 CLIMATE GOAL-SETTING
We recognize the need for ambitious and practical climate goals and strategies that address resilience
barriers and are designed for the resilience of those who will live and work in this community. We propose
three key components for a successful climate goal-setting effort.
u A gap analysis building on Task 3.1 to identify which existing goals are supportive of climate resilience,
which may need adjustment, and where new goals may be needed.
u Leading-edge case studies that offer tangible and transferable ideas for River Terrace where there
are gaps or potential improvements, drawing on the Climate Resilience team’s extensive experience
with other communities.
u Integrating community input and priorities to directly inform climate goal-setting. This could include
synthesis of relevant themes from past public engagement efforts, and potentially additional direct
engagement such as a climate resiliency focus group with participants most impacted by the climate
emergency, including youth, elders, transit-dependent Tigard residents, renters, and others.
The Climate Resilience team will present background information at a goal-setting workshop with the
full project team. We propose a half-day in-person “climate charrette” using maps and visuals to discuss
place-based goals and ideas. The charrette aims to produce a set of positive and solution-focused climate
resilience goals for River Terrace, grounded in the physical landscape and community context, that
communicate a healthy, resilient future for River Terrace. (3B)
3.3 CLIMATE INTEGRATION
The Climate Resilience team will develop design and policy strategies concurrently with each plan element,
building on Task 3.1 goals, drafting initial ideas, and collaborating with specialists for further specificity.
Saumya Kini of Walker Macy will serve as the point-person to integrate climate resilience with all other
aspects of the project including participating in regular project meetings. In addition, Saumya or other
members of the Climate Resilience team will attend key topical meetings and review and comment on
draft deliverables.
Through ongoing involvement of these team members in each element of the work, we can problem-solve,
develop implementable climate solutions, and avert missed opportunities. (3C)
3.4 CLIMATE REPORT
Successful integration will result in a final plan organized around resiliency and adaptation as well as
equity—an “Equitable, Climate Resilient Community Plan”. A separate Climate Report will summarize the
climate element and provide additional detail. The report will emphasize how community input informed
climate resiliency goals and strategies and will serve as a resource for ongoing adaptation and resiliency
work, delineating phasing, timelines, lead entity, and implementation authority.
Given the project’s bold nature, some strategies may be immediately achievable, while others depend on
external factors. Ideally, strategies beyond the Community Plan timeline can be integrated as longer-term
actions contingent upon changes to existing constraints. We commit to advocating for the most impactful
and equitable courses of action, prioritizing effectiveness over ease or minimal disruption (3D).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
5RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
ELEMENT 4: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
Toole Design and DKS Associates (the Transportation team) will collaboratively develop an area
transportation plan for River Terrace 2.0. Our approach aligns with the RFP and the City’s emphasis on
advancing mobility and climate goals.
4.1A: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CONTEXT
River Terrace 2.0 will build on many prior transportation planning studies for the greater River Terrace
and Cooper Mountain areas. The Transportation team will review key studies and summarize key issues
and constraints, past decisions, existing projects, and unresolved elements as the basis for addressing
outstanding transportation needs through this process.
TASK 4.1B: STREET AND TRAIL NETWORK PLAN
Based on available data, Toole Design will evaluate the current and projected transportation system,
emphasizing potential multimodal and trail improvements that advance the City’s mobility, sustainability,
and quality of life goals. The evaluation will rely on system performance indicators that align with CFEC
rules, the pending Metro Regional Mobility Policy, the Tigard Complete Streets policy, and the Tigard
Transportation System Plan. The findings will guide the network plan recommendations and connections to
existing street and trail networks. The network plan will emphasize making nonmotorized modes appealing
and comfortable through an emphasis on separating these modes from vehicular traffic and giving special
consideration to natural and topographical features, with input from Walker Macy.
TASK 4.1C. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
DKS will lead the multi-modal transportation analysis to determine how the preferred development
scenario performs across a variety of performance metrics, such as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), mode
share, multimodal level of traffic stress, and intersection capacity. This will include a future baseline analysis
for comparison to the preferred scenario. Toole Design will support the analysis of nonmotorized mode
performance. DKS will work with City and County staff to confirm the study area, critical elements of the
transportation network, analysis periods, horizon year, performance targets (including incorporation of the
CFEC rules and the pending Metro Regional Mobility Policy), and assumptions about planned improvements
identified in the financially constrained Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). DKS will summarize the methods,
assumptions, and findings of the multi-modal transportation performance assessment in a technical memo.
The Climate Resilience team will review and provide input on the findings and their climate implications.
DKS will use this assessment to refine and update transportation project lists and roadway classifications,
flagging any significant changes to the ultimate design concept for team discussion. New capital projects
that emerge from this process will include planning level cost estimates in Task 4.1.E.
DKS will also review how the preferred development scenario and the findings of the off-site transportation
performance align with Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requirements, with findings and suggested
actions summarized in a TPR Compliance Review memo.
TASK 4.1D: STREET DESIGN CONCEPTS
Toole Design will develop street design concepts and cross-sections for collectors, local streets, alleys, and
woonerfs, leveraging their expertise in Complete Streets guidance and implementation and integrating
input from the project team, including Walker Macy and DKS. These concepts will be informed by city
policies and standards; national best design practices for people walking, bicycling, and taking transit, as
well as driving, using an “all ages and abilities” approach; the proposed land use and urban design context;
and climate and parks opportunities. Design considerations will include the pedestrian realm, bike facilities,
curb lane management, access management, design speeds, lane widths and configurations, landscaping
and other materials, lighting and furnishings, and signage.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
6RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
4.1E: PROJECT LIST AND COST ESTIMATES
DKS will work with Toole Design to compile a comprehensive, multi-modal transportation project list from
Tasks 4.1.B, C, and D that identifies, categorizes, and maps relevant projects. The project team will prioritize
projects based on their importance to enabling future development within River Terrace 2.0 and their
alignment with broader goals and policies.
DKS will prepare planning level cost estimates for the project list using the detailed unit costs developed
by DKS for the recent Metro RTP update. Cost estimates will include allocations for major traffic control
upgrades at key intersections, treatments at street and/or trail crossings, stream crossings, and innovative
cross-section elements.
4.2: SPECIAL STUDY REPORT – TILE FLAT ROAD EXTENSION (OPTIONAL TASK)
The Tile Flat Road extension has been the subject of multiple rounds of analysis. However, these studies
were not conducted using the requirements for new transportation facilities under Climate Friendly and
Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules, and did not address all of the factors identified in the RFP. Our team
recognizes the challenges of reaching a collective decision on the Tile Flat Road extension, and will help
craft an evaluation process designed to address both City and County perspectives.
Should the City elect to add this study to the project, we will work with staff to craft a detailed approach
and scope that will address the factors identified in the RFP, comply with OAR 660-012-0830, and inform
City and County decision-making. We will work with staff to confirm the specific options to evaluate for
Tile Flat’s functional classification and connection points, and to identify multi-modal options to include in
an alternatives analysis. DKS and Toole Design will engage other project team members in the evaluation,
including the Climate Resiliency team and the Housing team, to provide a holistic assessment of the trade-
offs associated with the potential Tile Flat Road extension.
ELEMENT 5: SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PLAN
Carollo will lead the update of the City’s adopted Sanitary Sewer System Plan (SSSP), building on recent
work with Clean Water Services (CWS) on the East Basin Master Plan.
5.1: BACKGROUND FOR SSSP UPDATE
Carollo will review the sanitary sewer analysis completed for the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan and the
City of Beaverton’s Sanitary Sewer System Program. (Carollo is already familiar with CWS’s East Basin
Master Plan based on their prior work on this plan.) (5A) The East Basin Master Plan outlines expansion of
the collection system into identified growth areas, which includes the River Terrace area in Tigard.
5.2 DEMAND PROJECTIONS AND ANALYSIS
ECO will work with Carollo to develop population and employment projections for the new sewer service
area based on the best available information for River Terrace 1.0 and King City, and Concept Plan
assumptions for River Terrace 2.0. Carollo will work with CWS to confirm, or update, the residential and
non-residential unit flow factors and wet weather peaking factors to project dry weather and wet weather
flows for River Terrace 2.0. (5C)
Defining the level of service goals for the sanitary sewer system is necessary to evaluate any proposed
improvements to serve new customers in River Terrace 2.0. Carollo will coordinate with CWS to confirm
the sanitary sewer system design and evaluation criteria for surcharging manholes and the surcharge state
of gravity mains. Carollo will also coordinate with CWS to confirm evaluation criteria for sanitary sewer
interceptors and pump stations. Carollo will then evaluate the proposed sanitary sewer system expansions
outlined in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan against the established system criteria and confirm or update
the proposed improvements. (5B)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
7RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
5.3: PROJECT LIST REFINEMENT AND SSSP UPDATE
Carollo will develop a refined list of sewer system projects recommended to meet the City’s and CWS’s
system criteria and updated cost estimates for all recommended projects. Carollo will also provide a phased
improvement plan to expand the City’s sanitary sewer system to serve River Terrace 2.0. Carollo will work
with staff to add these components, along with the relevant portions of the funding strategy developed in
Element 9, to the existing SSSP. (5D)
ELEMENT 6: STORMWATER SYSTEM PLAN
This work element will focus on coordination with CWS to align the River Terrace 2.0 stormwater approach
with the regional stormwater strategy. Carollo has a long history of successful collaboration with CWS,
which will provide a foundation for continued coordination for the stormwater management approach.
6.1: BACKGROUND FOR STORMWATER SYSTEM PLAN UPDATE
Carollo will review existing relevant documents, including the stormwater analysis conducted as part of
the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan, the CWS stormwater basin plan, and the CWS regional stormwater
strategy, once completed. (6A)
6.2 STORMWATER ANALYSIS
If required, Carollo will analyze any potential flooding issues, including hydrologic/ hydraulic modeling to
determine peak developed discharge rates to be used to plan future facilities and to provide a basis for
a stormwater strategy. The EPA SWMM 5.0 computer model, which simulates real storm events based
on rainfall (hyetograph) and other meteorological inputs and systems such as catchment size and
characteristics, can be used to predict the quantity of stormwater flows in the drainage system. Carollo
will evaluate existing regional facilities and develop strategies for protecting stream corridors and aquatic
resources, in alignment with CWS’s regional plan. (6B)
6.3 SYSTEM PLAN UPDATE
Carollo will update cost estimates for all recommended projects, integrate relevant portions of the funding
strategy developed in Element 9, and prepare the River Terrace Stormwater System Plan. (6C and 6D)
ELEMENT 7: PARK SYSTEM PLAN
Walker Macy will lead the Parks System Plan element, focusing on a climate-friendly approach to park
planning, centering equitable, affordable, and low-carbon access.
7.1 PARKS PLANNING CONTEXT
The recently-completed City Parks and Recreation System Plan can and should serve as a guiding document
for RT 2.0 parks. That plan’s conceptual framework of goals has been vetted by the local community. This
task should include a conversation with City staff to understand the status of and any challenges related to
RT 1.0 parks built or planned, specific issues or concerns with the RT 2.0 Concept Plan’s park plans, as well
as the latest thinking embodied in the city-wide Parks and Recreation System Plan. (7A)
7.2 REVISITING PARK NEEDS AND LOCATIONS
The Concept Plan determined a general amount of community, neighborhood and linear parks for River
Terrace 2.0 West and South. The Community Plan offers an opportunity to take a more place-based
approach to determining future park locations. The traditional methodology of using population-based
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
8RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
levels of service for standard categories of park types has gradually been replaced by more flexible and
equitable consideration of how a wide range of ages, cultures, genders and abilities use parks differently
and how specific geographic constraints like topography, pedestrian and bike access, and natural conditions
should guide the location and scale of parks. We suggest conducting a review of innovative approaches to
determining parks needs, and a Consultant team evaluation of trade-offs and applicability to River Terrace,
with input from the City Attorney to ensure alternatives would be adoptable and legally defensible. We
also suggest coordination with the CE team to explore opportunities for community input to guide the
Consultant team’s assessment of parks needs and desired programming for future parks. (7B)
WM will propose a set of “equitable park location and design principles” to guide subsequent work and
decisions using a wider range of locational criteria, such as:
u Topography
u Multimodal accessibility based on planned trail locations and future street designs
u Beneficial adjacencies or co-location opportunities with proposed stormwater facilities, other major
infrastructure, resource areas, or future school sites
u Land ownership patterns, to ensure it will be feasible to deliver new parks with development
wherever possible
u Alignment with land use plans so that parks can support livable density, walkable neighborhoods,
and vibrant commercial areas
WM will map what these factors could suggest for park locations and how this compares to the locations
identified in the Concept Plan. However, we recommend caution in publicly identifying proposed park sites,
as this can affect negotiations with willing landowners. (7C)
7.3: PARKS SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGIES
Considerations of lighting, and plant and material palettes should include resilience in the face of future
rising temperatures and changing hydrological conditions as well as impacts on energy consumption,
urban heat, carbon capture, etc. Maintenance is another important and under-appreciated element of
park sustainability—engaging park facility staff in focused meetings can help identify maintenance-related
sustainability strategies. (7D)
7.4: RT2.0 PARKS AND RECREATION PLAN
WM will prepare a succinct Parks and Recreation System Plan for RT 2.0 incorporating the recommendations
that emerge from the analyses listed above, with an emphasis on implementation. Implementation can
include priorities for acquisition; potential for phasing and funding; and near-term program priorities. The
Parks and Recreation System Plan will also include a summary of the planned park facilities and planning-
level cost estimates based on unit cost assumptions used in the City Parks and Recreation System Plan. (7E)
ELEMENT 8: NATURAL SYSTEMS PLAN
Winterbrook will lead this element, building on its prior work developing the City’s tree grove inventory and
assessment methodology, and completing a comprehensive inventory of tree groves in the City of Tigard,
including River Terrace 1.0.
8.1 NATURAL SYSTEMS BACKGROUND
Winterbrook is familiar with all of the regulations noted in the RFP for this task, but will review relevant
background documents with a focus on the inventory work completed for the RT2.0 Concept Plan. (8A)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
9RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
8.2 SIGNIFICANT TREE AND GROVE INVENTORY
In developing/refining the tree inventory and evaluation methodology for River Terrace 2.0, Winterbrook
will work with the City project team and Climate Resilience team to incorporate specimen trees, and to
address, where appropriate, broader city goals related to natural area protection and climate.
8.3 NATURAL SYSTEMS PLAN AND CODE AMENDMENTS
The Natural Systems Plan needs to be integrated with other project elements through the economic,
social, environmental and energy (ESEE) analysis. Winterbrook’s approach looks at consequences for
housing, employment, public facilities, and “conflicting uses.” The limited protection program needs
to make allowances for these conflicting uses (in most cases) based on clear and objective standards.
Most of Winterbrook’s past work required ESEE analyses of programmatic alternatives. The ESEE analysis
considered programs that included density transfer based on clear and objective standards. The role of
a density transfer program will be integrated with discussions about the density strategy, given the City’s
target density for this area.
While the work of Element 8 will largely focus on extending existing city natural resource protection to the
River Terrace 2.0 area, Winterbook will review and make recommendations for new policies and regulatory
frameworks that can address broader city goals related to natural area protection, carbon responsibility,
climate mitigation, and other climate goals, with input from the Climate Resiliency team. Draft language for
resource protection in this area will be incorporated into the code amendments in Element 10. (8C)
ELEMENT 9: EQUITABLE FINANCE STRATEGY
The equitable finance strategy will refine the assumptions and estimates from the Concept Plan, develop
a recommended approach to addressing any identified funding gaps, and establish fee schedules for any
supplemental SDCs and other fees and charges recommended for the area. ECO will lead this task with
input on infrastructure costs from other members of the team and support from GRG on establishing any
new charges for the area.
9.1 SUMMARIZE UPDATED COSTS AND REVENUES FROM EXISTING SOURCES
ECO will work with leads for each infrastructure system—parks, water, transportation, sanitary sewer,
and stormwater—to summarize refined project cost estimates by relevant project categories (9A) and
to identify priority projects where funding is needed in the near-term. ECO will also update estimates of
revenues that future development in this area will generate from existing funding sources (e.g., SDCs) to
allow for comparisons with updated cost figures.
9.2 FUNDING OPTIONS EVALUATION
The funding options evaluation will identify key areas where new sources or strategies are needed to fund
or finance infrastructure (9B). This includes:
u Infrastructure systems or project categories for which existing funding sources are projected to be
insufficient relative to project costs;
u Projects where funding is needed in the near-term, so that timing of funding availability can inform
selection of appropriate funding sources or financing strategies; and
u Existing funding sources that the City controls for which updates may be appropriate to better align
with City/project goals related to climate or equity.
The evaluation of alternative funding strategies will consider potential additional local funding and financing
tools as well as state or federal grant or loan options, depending on the need. The evaluation will include
consideration of revenue potential, eligibility and alignment with project needs, political feasibility, and
equity. We recommend incorporating equity considerations—including who bears the costs and how the
source or strategy could impact the ability to deliver inclusive future neighborhoods and lower-cost housing
options—into the evaluation of alternative funding and financing options so that they can better inform
recommendations. (9D, part 1)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
10RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
9.3 SERVICE PROVIDER COORDINATION
Developing a viable infrastructure funding strategy requires input and buy-in from impacted service
providers, including relevant City departments and other agencies such as Washington County and Clean
Water Services. We suggest meeting with service providers individually to focus on the topics or concerns
most relevant to that agency, with consultant support for key discussions that will inform funding plan
decisions. (New task)
9.4 INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING/FINANCING STRATEGY
Following input on the Funding Options Evaluation from service providers (and, if appropriate, other
stakeholders as part of other engagement efforts), ECO will develop recommended strategies to address
funding gaps and timing issues in ways that align with climate and equity goals. (9C and 9D, part 2)
9.5 RECOMMENDED FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE
For any new local funding sources (e.g., supplemental SDCs, rate surcharges, or other measures), ECO
will work with GRG to develop the cost basis for each fee and methodology to divide costs among future
development in a manner that supports the City’s equity and climate goals. (9E) This may include analysis
to inform adjustments to rates based on unit size or other factors, depending on the recommendations
from the funding/financing strategy.
ELEMENT 10: Implementation Documents
10.1 DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS
Code Studio will lead drafting of development code amendments, with Winterbrook drafting sections
related to resource protection and providing input and review for other sections. ECO will also provide input
and review throughout the drafting process. The code amendments will build from the code framework
established in Task 2.2 and the existing development code, integrating recommended approaches from the
density and zoning strategy, form-based housing development and design standards, review processes,
climate-resilient development requirements, non-residential development and design standards, and
requirements related to public facilities, including parks, trails, and streets. New districts will include form
graphics, metrics, and use standards. The approach will be to integrate the changes as seamlessly as
possible within Tigard’s existing development code framework, although more substantive changes to the
overall code structure may be proposed where necessary, in discussion with the City PM and project team.
(10B; note that 10A is encompassed within Task 2.2.)
10.2 ZONING MAP
ECO will work with the Housing team to translate the Concept Plan map into a zoning map that aligns with
the Density and Zoning Strategy and the approach to form-based development and design standards
established in Task 10.1. As part of this refinement process, ECO will consider parcel lines and property
ownership patterns (and, to the extent known, properties where likely developers have options to purchase)
to ensure the Community Plan leverages larger land holdings to deliver key elements of the plan. (New task)
10.3 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES BEYOND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE
ECO will work with other members of the Consultant team to compile recommended strategies that go
beyond the development code to support housing affordability, equity, climate goals, infrastructure, and
other project elements as needed. Working with staff, the Consultant team will identify recommended
timing for implementation and key next steps to advance the strategies in the near-term. (10C)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
11RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
ELEMENT 11: COMMUNITY PLAN AND CLOSEOUT
11.1 COMMUNITY PLAN SUMMARY
ECO will work with the Consultant team to prepare a final deliverable that captures the key findings and
engagement input that informed those components of the project. (11A) Budget permitting, we recommend
producing a graphically-oriented plan document to provide lasting documentation as well as an interactive
story map or similar tool that makes the information more engaging for community members. We will
prepare an unformatted draft of the content for the Community Plan for review by City staff and the CE
team prior to designing the version(s) of the document to share publicly.
11.2 PRESENTATION MATERIALS
ECO will work with the Consultant team and City PM to prepare presentation materials summarizing the
Community Plan, development code amendments and zoning map, and implementation strategies to
support adoption. (11C)
11.3 PROJECT CLOSE OUT
At the conclusion of the project, ECO will coordinate with subconsultants to ensure that all final deliverables
and materials specified in the contract have been provided to staff, including final versions of any new GIS
data created in the course of the project. (11B)
Schedule and Meeting Timelines
Our approach for ensuring the project adheres to the timelines outlined in the Scope of Work centers
on planning, proactive monitoring, and adaptability. Our project management plan will outline the initial
schedule and establish clear timelines for each deliverable, identifying interdependencies between tasks
and creating a roadmap that guides the team’s efforts. Throughout the course of the project, we will track
milestones and conduct regular progress assessments for all tasks to ensure the project stays on schedule.
We emphasize effective communication and collaboration among team members. Regular check-ins,
status updates, and feedback sessions help identify potential bottlenecks early on, allowing for timely
course corrections. We work with our team and client to address unforeseen challenges and ensure that any
deviations from the timeline can be swiftly addressed without compromising the overall project schedule.
Through this comprehensive approach, we aim to foster a proactive and adaptive project environment,
ensuring that the project meets all required timelines, including grant deadlines.
Startup
Context & Goal Setting
Analysis
Recommendations
Drafting Topical Plans
Drafting Implementing Documents
Adoption
DEC ‘23 DEC ‘24 DEC ‘25
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
12RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
ECOnorthwest
ECOnorthwest specializes in economics, finance, and planning with unparalleled expertise in
housing market economics and land use policy analysis. Our work is informed by our knowledge of
the fundamentals of real estate and housing economics, finance, policy, zoning and development
processes, community planning approaches, and equitable development. We use an Equity
Framework to shape the questions we ask, the way we interpret findings, and how we arrive at
policy recommendations. ECO also has a growing body of work helping communities integrate
climate adaptation and resilience considerations into community planning processes. We have extensive
experience throughout the Metro region and relevant recent experience with the City of Tigard and with
other greenfield area plans.
Walker Macy
Walker Macy is a landscape architecture, planning, and urban design firm
that practices throughout the Western States from offices in Portland and
Seattle. They work with clients and community partners to create significant
places that have positive impacts on the community and the environment. The firm has set benchmarks
for pedestrian-friendliness, livability, vibrant mixes of uses, and high-performance sustainable landscapes
within master planning work, providing solutions that are feasible to implement and tailored to specific
communities. Through decades of work on community planning, the firm has advocated for walkability,
health, and the integrity of natural and cultural landscapes.
Cascadia Consulting Group
Since its founding in 1993, Cascadia Consulting Group has worked with public, corporate,
nonprofit, and tribal clients to advance projects that benefit their communities and
the environment. Cascadia’s expertise cuts across all aspects of climate analysis and
planning—and they have extensive experience applying these skills to help local governments across the
West Coast implement measures to reduce their emissions while building resiliency to climate impacts. They
bring decades of experience developing climate and sustainability plans for major cities and institutions
throughout the country and across all aspects of climate planning—from GHG analysis and target setting
to gathering and implementing community feedback on climate action plans.
Code Studio
Code Studio pursues planning and implementation work that yields vibrant, mixed use, walkable
communities through creative urban infill, incremental redevelopment and transformational
change. Founded in 2006, the firm is at the forefront of the emerging field of form-based codes.
The firm, based in Austin, TX, works across the United States and abroad completing combined
plan and code projects, as well as working on codes in places planned and designed by others.
Form-based code work constitutes a substantial part of Code Studio’s current national zoning practice.
Code Studio is currently crafting form-based codes with a focus on promoting the development of missing
middle housing in communities across the country, including Houston, Atlanta, and Charlottesville, VA.
Consultant Team Qualifications
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
13RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Winterbrook Planning
Winterbrook Planning provides land use and environmental planning services to public agencies
and private clients throughout the Pacific Northwest. Winterbrook’s team of 10 professional
planners and scientists have extensive working knowledge of local natural resources and
applicable codes and policies and have completed Goal 5 (natural resource) inventories,
analyses, and regulations for local governments throughout Oregon. Their work for Tigard
dates back to 1997 with the development of prototype stream corridor “safe harbor” regulations for the
City. More recently, Winterbrook prepared the Tigard Tree Grove Assessment and subsequently prepared
the River Terrace Tree Grove Assessment and the corresponding River Terrace Tree Grove ESEE Analysis.
Toole Design
Toole Design is at the forefront of numerous areas of multimodal transportation
planning, streetscape planning and design, and urban design. They emphasize the
mobility, accessibility, safety, wayfinding, and aesthetic experience of people rather than
prioritizing only the movement of motor vehicles. Their clients trust them to provide bold yet achievable
plans that prioritize safety for all modes, build on community goals, improve mobility, address both existing
and future land use and transportation challenges and opportunities, and meaningfully incorporate public
input.
DKS Associates
Founded in 1979, DKS Associates provides specialized transportation planning, design, and
engineering services to public agencies across the country. Firmwide, their staff includes
over 150 professionals with offices along the West Coast and Texas. DKS has provided the
City of Tigard with expert transportation and traffic engineering services since 1995. During
this time they are proud to have led and/or consulted on more than a dozen City of Tigard
projects. DKS will leverage its knowledge of the City, its staff, standards and procedures, and preferences
to support this team and the delivery of the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan.
Carollo Engineers
Carollo Engineers is a full-service, environmental engineering firm that has
been exclusively providing water and wastewater services across the U.S. for
90 years. Carollo is one of the largest firms in the country that is 100 percent focused on water-engineering
solutions. Carollo has consistently been a leader in the development of comprehensive master plans for
cities and agencies facing a variety of complex issues. Their regional planning team has completed more
than 70 master plans in the Northwest. Their projects range from small planning studies to comprehensive,
regional master plans.
Galardi Rothstein Group
Galardi Consulting (DBA Galardi Rothstein Group) is a single member limited liability (LLC), that has
been providing strategic financial and management consulting services to government agencies
and special districts in North America for over 25 years from their office in Portland, Oregon.
They provide technically advanced, innovative solutions to management, economic, and financial
challenges associated with the development and delivery of major infrastructure services. In
Oregon, Galardi Rothstein Group (GRG) is a leader in utility rate and System Development Charge
(SDC) methodology and policy development.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
14RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
ECO Key Personnel
Becky Hewitt, Project Director (she/her, 20% of time)
Becky has extensive experience with land use, housing, and development analysis and planning in Oregon
and across the country. Becky’s work at ECOnorthwest focuses on evaluating development feasibility and
readiness, housing strategies, and transit-oriented development. She has also played a lead role in middle
housing code evaluations and studies, advising communities on how to align regulations to support local
housing needs and goals. Becky is a strong project manager with experience leading technical analysis,
managing complex multi-disciplinary projects, presenting to advisory bodies and decision-makers, and
designing and implementing public and stakeholder engagement. Becky joined ECOnorthwest after
a decade in urban planning and land use analysis, including corridor revitalization plans, concept plans
for developing areas, development code audits and updates, and housing analyses. Becky has graduate
degrees in both urban planning and real estate development.
Kaitlin La Bonte, Project Manager (she/her, 20% of time)
Kaitlin is a Project Manager at ECOnorthwest, specializing in urban planning, land use and housing policy
analysis, land development, equitable development, and economic development. She has a strong
background in spatial analysis, land use and zoning code research, site development, and land use
entitlements. Kaitlin is passionate about working with public and private sector clients to address challenging
policy questions around affordable housing, economic development, equity, sustainability, and growth
management. Prior to joining ECOnorthwest, Kaitlin worked on public and private sector planning at civil
engineering and architecture firms in the Portland area. Kaitlin recently served on the Climate-Friendly
and Equitable Communities Rulemaking Advisory Committee for the Department of Land Conservation
and Development, and the Community Involvement Committee for the Portland Bureau of Planning and
Sustainability.
Organizational Chart
LEE EINSWEILER KELSEY MORROW
HOUSING TEAM
P.J. TILLMANN
CLIMATE RESILIENCE TEAM
KEN PIRIE SAUMYA KINI
KEVIN CHEWUK CARL SPRINGER
TRANSPORTATION TEAM
GWEN ECKELMAN TALIA JACOBSON
AURELIE NABONNAND NATALIE REILLY
UTILITY PLANNING TEAM
NATURAL RESOURCE TEAM
ANITYA SMYTH TIM BROOKS
INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING TEAM
DEBORAH GALARDI
BECKY HEWITT KAITLIN LA BONTE
PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
15RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Walker Macy
Ken Pirie, AICP CUD, LEED AP ND, Urban Design Lead (he/him, 5% of time)
Ken leads the firm’s planning and urban design work and has worked with communities to plan district
improvements, from public investments like streets, transportation, campuses, and public open spaces,
to private properties and development areas. Many of Ken’s recent projects across the Northwest have
addressed how cities can create a framework for growth in a manner that is beneficial to the community
and enhances sense of place and climate resilience. Ken is accredited in LEED’s Neighborhood Development
(ND) program and brings a holistic lens to his work that addresses the intersection of site, culture, and
environment in urban places. Ken works with communities of all sizes on comprehensive plans and urban
improvements and collaborates with ECOnorthwest on an ongoing basis.
Saumya Kini, Urban Designer & Climate Integration Lead (she/her, 15% of time)
With a dual background in architecture and urban and regional planning, Saumya is an urban planner and
designer with significant expertise in site master planning, community investment, and public engagement
with a social equity lens. Saumya helps to lead Walker Macy’s planning and urban design work; she focuses
on public engagement, development of planning concepts and strategies, and clear visual communication
of ideas through graphics and documents. She has recently worked on planning projects that provide
a framework for future design and development that supports long-term economic, urban design,
environmental, and community goals. Saumya has collaborated with ECOnorthwest on several recent
community planning projects including the Cooper Mountain Community Plan, the Glenwood Riverfront
Master Plan, and the Jade District/82nd Ave Equitable Development Strategy.
Cascadia Consulting Group
P.J. Tillmann, Climate Science Advisor (they/them, 10% of time)
P.J. brings a decade of experience in policy analysis, sustainability, stakeholder engagement, and project
management. They recently led climate planning processes for the City of Vancouver (WA), City of Port
Angeles, and for a large, multi-national foundation. P.J. provides the technical expertise and practical
guidance necessary to remain nimble and adaptive to the rapidly changing climate policy landscape.
They are familiar with the latest climate models and climate science, and have a proven track record of
accurately synthesizing and translating climate science and policy in the building, transportation, and natural
resource sectors to help jurisdictions answer critical implementation questions. P.J. holds a B.S. in Chemistry,
MPPA with a focus on environmental policy, and recently presented findings on effective implementation
strategies at the National Climate Adaptation Forum.
Code Studio Key Personnel
Lee Einsweiler, Code Drafting Principal-In-Charge (he/him, 10% of time)
Lee has been involved in planning, zoning and plan implementation in a variety of settings over the past
30 years, with an emphasis on redevelopment activity in urban areas across the country. Lee has been
personally responsible for over 50 code projects, offering a combination of conventional zoning know-
how and the ability to facilitate the consideration and adoption of modern code approaches .Lee has also
taught smart growth tools at the graduate level, served on the board of his local chapter of the Congress
for the New Urbanism (CNU), and spoken frequently at state and national conferences on zoning and form-
based codes.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
16RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Kelsey Morrow, Code Drafting Senior Associate (she/her, 20% of time)
Kelsey comes to Code Studio with a background in both urban design and planning. She has experience
in the public, private, and non-profit sectors and has conducted professional and graduate research on
affordable housing, sustainable development, and creative placemaking. Her love for community and the
arts fuel a passion for creating vibrant public spaces that strengthen local identity, improve public health,
and enhance citizen’s relationships with their city and with each other. During her 4+ years at Code Studio,
Kelsey has played a key role in many zoning code updates and design projects across the country.
Winterbrook Planning
Anitya Smyth, Senior Environmental Scientist (she/her, 5% of time)
Anita Smyth has more than 25 years of environmental science experience with projects involving
documentation of trees, wetlands, and habitat areas. Anita has completed numerous tree grove assessments
for communities throughout the state. This work includes the Tigard River Terrace Tree Grove Assessment
and the Tigard citywide Tree Grove Assessment. More recent tree inventories include a citywide Tree
Grove Assessments for the City of McMinnville.
Tim Brooks, Principal Environmental Planner (he/him, 10% of time)
Tim brings more than 35 years of experience in land use and environmental planning for local communities
throughout Oregon. Tim’s experience includes preparing environmental (Goal 5) studies and developing
plans and policies for communities across the state, including Tigard. For Tigard, Tim served as consultant
manager for the Tigard Tree Grove Assessment (citywide study) and the River Terrace Tree Grove
Assessment. He helped prepare the related River Terrace Tree Grove ESEE Analysis. Tim’s work in Tigard
and other local communities includes environmental documentation, code development, and regulatory
compliance.
Toole Design
Gwen Eckelman, PE, Multimodal Transportation Engineer (she/her, 10% of time)
Gwen is an engineer with experience in both the public and private sector thinking about and designing
for people. Gwen’s projects focus on multimodal transportation environments, alternatives analysis,
public outreach, and geometric design of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Gwen has developed
conceptual cross-sections and plan views for corridors and intersections on multiple projects. She also has
experience with signal design, parking management, and a vast number of transportation impact studies
of various scales. Additionally, she brings background in planning, designing, and implementing temporary
demonstration projects for alternative uses of the public space.
Talia Jacobson, Multimodal Transportation Senior Planner (she/her, 5% of time)
Talia specializes in working with decision-makers, stakeholders, and the public to craft plans rooted in
shared values. She has more than 10 years of experience working with Tigard, Washington County, Metro,
ODOT, and DLCD to plan for mixed income communities where meeting daily needs does not require a
private vehicle. She has a proven track record of building cross-agency consensus to support climate-
friendly growth, right-size technical analysis, and avoid the need for costly arterial expansions.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
17RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
DKS Key Personnel
Kevin Chewuk, PTP, Transportation Analysis Project Manager (he/him, 10% of time)
Kevin has led many transportation planning studies and traffic analysis tasks for DKS planning projects.
Kevin’s skills include corridor and intersection capacity analysis, safety analysis, access management
planning, multimodal level of service analysis, and geographic information system (GIS) mapping and
analysis. He has helped with transportation system plans (TSPs) that resulted in effective and usable plans
for local agencies. Many of these plans included metrics to illustrate systemwide walking, biking, and transit
needs and introduced a multimodal street system that considers how streets interact with the surrounding
land uses.
Carl Springer, PE, PTP, Transportation Analysis Principal-in-Charge (he/him, 5% of time)
Carl has led large-scale transportation planning studies for public agencies throughout the West Coast. As
a planning practice leader, he understands that effective planning requires a careful balance of technical
studies and building community understanding of strategies and trade-offs. His primary expertise is in
transportation system planning for cities, counties, and metropolitan areas; transportation finance; and
data visualization. He has built a reputation for clear and effective communication and is known for his
passion for delivering quality results that align with community values.
Carollo Engineers
Aurelie Nabonnand, PE, Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Lead (she/her, 5% of time)
Aurelie is a Carollo planning lead with ten years of civil engineering experience in water, wastewater,
and stormwater master planning projects and hydraulic modeling. She is also experienced with the
development and implementation of improvements and coordinated capital improvement plans. Aurelie
also has experience with infrastructure pre-design and the development of inflow and infiltration reduction
programs.
Natalie Reilly, PE, Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Professional (she/her, 5% of time)
Natalie has seven years of experience spanning many areas of wastewater and collection system planning,
including scenario planning, hydraulic modeling, and developing capital improvement plans. She brings
experience in evaluating existing systems, demographics, planning developments, and other unique
characteristics that can affect wastewater production.
She has assisted with over 20 water and sewer-related master plans for clients in Oregon and Washington.
Most recently, she led the demand projections, system analysis, and improvement recommendations for
the Kingston Terrace Addendum to the 2020 Water System Plan for the City of Tigard.
GRG
Deborah (Deb) Galardi, New Funding Source Methodology Lead (she/her, 5% of time)
Deb brings over 30 years of experience with funding for infrastructure systems (water, sanitary sewer,
stormwater, and transportation), including financial planning and cost-of-service rate studies, SDC studies,
and bond feasibility studies. Deb’s leadership in the utility financing industry is demonstrated by her depth
of experience with clients across North America, as well as national and international publications. Deb was
a primary author of the original Water Environment Federation (WEF) Manual of Practice, Financing and
Charges for Wastewater Systems. She also served as a member of the International Water Association’s
Economic and Statistics Specialist Group Management Committee where she traveled to other countries
around the world (most recently Tokyo, Japan and Brasov, Romania) to share information on North American
utility rate and financial rate trends and practices.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
18RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
MULTIDISCIPLINARY AREA PLANS
Washington Square Regional
Center Update—Tigard, OR
(2020-2022)
»Relevant Team Members:
ECOnorthwest (prime), Toole
Design (transportation lead);
Becky Hewitt served as Senior
Project Manager
»Reference Contact: Susan
Shanks, 503-718-2454, susans@
tigard-or.gov
»Reference Contact: Dave Roth,
503-718-2457, daver@tigard-or.
gov
ECOnorthwest led a multidisciplinary team to update 20-year-old land use and transportation plans for the
Washington Square Regional Center that had yielded little change to deliver the City and regional vision for
a walkable, vibrant, mixed-use urban center. In addition to serving as the prime consultant, ECOnorthwest
analyzed market trends, development feasibility, zoning code barriers, and displacement risks. ECO led the
team in developing strategies to support redevelopment, walkability, and displacement prevention.
Toole Design conducted an Active Transportation Audit and provided a detailed look at opportunities
for improving SW Greenburg Road. Toole and the project team provided a list of transportation project
recommendations that advanced the City goals while meeting existing standards and guidance to ensure
feasibility.
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u Collaborative project management: ECO worked in close collaboration with the City of Tigard’s
PM to refine substantive recommendations as well as the approach to engagement and analysis.
This exemplifies our preferred approach to engage with clients—as thought partners through
constructive discussion and collaboration.
u Being responsive: The timing of the project during the COVID-19 pandemic required flexibility to
adjust the approach to equitable engagement. A contingency reserve also allowed the team to
offer additional analysis to meet project needs, including the detailed study for Greenburg Road.
u Choosing barriers wisely: One of the priorities for the Plan Update was to remove barriers to
incremental development that would support progress towards the vision for the area. However,
along with recommendations to achieve this overall goal, aspirational minimum requirements were
retained to ensure efficient use of land in key areas, balancing the long-term vision against the need
for near-term results to build momentum for stretch goals.
u Prioritizing bikes and pedestrians despite constraints: Toole Design’s concept plan for SW Greenburg
Road through the study area included a review of right-of-way pinch points to inform a cross-section
that maximized safety and comfort for non-vehicular modes despite adjacent land use constraints.
Consultant Experience with Similar Projects
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
19RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Pleasant Valley District
Plan Update—Gresham, OR
(Ongoing)
»Relevant Team Members:
ECOnorthwest (prime). Becky
Hewitt is serving as Project Director;
Kaitlin La Bonte is serving as Project
Manager.
»Reference Contact: Carly Rice, 503-
618-2818, carly.rice@greshamoregon.
gov
»Reference Contact: Terra Wilcoxson,
503-618-2082, terra.wilcoxson@
greshamoregon.gov
ECO is leading a multidisciplinary consultant team in updating plans for Gresham’s Pleasant Valley—an area
brought into the Urban Growth Boundary over 20 years ago where little development has occurred. ECO
is working with the City of Gresham to update the Pleasant Valley District Plan to better align with current
market conditions and the priorities of a diverse range of local stakeholders, and to address challenges
with infrastructure delivery. ECO is leading the market, land use, and infrastructure funding and delivery
components of the project. The update retains a focus on delivering a complete, inclusive, and sustainable
community, but is evaluating new ways to achieve this vision. The result will be a set of recommendations
that advance the goals and vision of the District and will inform a second phase focused on plan and code
amendments.
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u Know where to push: The original plans for Pleasant Valley were highly ambitious but paid little
heed to market demand, ownership patterns, or infrastructure delivery challenges. As a result,
development on larger and more readily developable sites has missed opportunities to support
building a complete community. This informs ECO’s approach to crafting implementation strategies
for the City’s ambitious goals for River Terrace.
u Adapt to changing needs: ECO has adjusted the team and scope in consultation with staff as the
needs of the project evolved to include support for consultant-led code writing and a re-evaluation
of major roads planned for the area.
u Consensus building takes time: Working with staff across multiple departments to build a common
understanding of the issues and reach agreement on the best solutions requires budgeting for
sufficient time for discussion and a collaborative approach to developing recommendations.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
20RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
The Heights Equitable Development
Plan—Vancouver, WA (2022-2023)
»Relevant Team Members: ECOnorthwest (prime);
Kaitlin La Bonte served as Project Manager.
»Reference Contact: Amy Zoltie, 360-305-1909,
amy.stewart@cityofvancouver.us
»Reference Contact: Patrick Quinton, 360-487-7845, patrick.quinton@cityofvancouver.us
ECOnorthwest developed an equitable development plan for the Heights District in Vancouver, WA with
a focus on equitable development and anti-displacement. The plan outlines how the City can achieve the
housing, business opportunity, employment opportunity, and community service goals of the original Heights
District Plan (adopted by City Council in 2020) in the context of Vancouver’s current market conditions
and housing needs. ECOnorthwest conducted a residential and commercial market analysis, evaluated
development feasibility, identified financial and regulatory incentives, and crafted a development strategy
to support equitable development. This plan identifies best practices for how the City can maximize benefits
of new Heights District development for the entire community while minimizing negative impacts of new
development on existing businesses and lower-income residents. The final product of this project was a
plan that identifies a range of small business, affordable housing, anti-displacement, phasing and funding
strategies to support the vision of a community-serving redevelopment project on the former Tower Mall
site in Vancouver. The plan was adopted by City Council in 2023.
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u Equitable Development Strategies: Our team developed an extensive catalog of equitable
development strategies that a City can implement to ensure new development aligns with community
goals. This plan shows our ability to synthesize and summarize technical work across a range of
disciplines into a cohesive, action-oriented plan that implements the vision for an area.
Cooper Mountain Community Plan—Beaverton,
OR (2020-2023)
»Relevant Team Members: ECOnorthwest (market analysis
and infrastructure funding), DKS Associates (transportation
analysis), and Walker Macy (urban design).
»Reference: Brian Martin, 971-708-8894 bmartin@
beavertonoregon.gov
»Reference: Jabra Khasho, 503-526-2221, jkhasho@
beavertonoregon.gov
»Reference: Alissa Maxwell, 503-526-2513, amaxwell@beavertonoregon.gov
The Cooper Mountain Community Plan is a multi-year effort to plan for the 1,232-acre Cooper Mountain
area. The Cooper Mountain Community Plan establishes a long-term vision to create welcoming, walkable
neighborhoods that honor the unique landscape and ensure a legacy of connected and restored natural
areas. The area is anticipated to provide 5,000 homes, including a mix of single-detached homes; middle
housing, including duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, townhouses, and cottage clusters; and multi-unit
dwellings, some within mixed-use village centers.
ECO provided market analysis to inform the land use plans and target housing mix, and is continuing to lead
development of an infrastructure funding plan with an intentional focus on equity and housing affordability
DKS led transportation analysis and planning, including evaluating a range of multimodal circulation
alternatives to balance regional mobility with neighborhood safety and accessibility. DKS and Walker Macy
tailored complete streets within the community to meet the needs of the expected facility users. Walker
Macy also helped develop strategies to achieve the project goals of housing diversity, transit-supportive
development, walkability for daily needs, and resource preservation.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
21RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u Bigger isn’t always better: DKS worked with County and City staff to agree on narrower street
profiles on SW 175th Avenue to better meet community safety and accessibility needs even though
the traffic performance metrics suggested a wider facility.
u New-fashioned greenfield development: The Cooper Mountain project shares common goals related
to equity, inclusive neighborhoods, walkable neighborhood commercial, and resource protection.
Strategies included distributing denser housing along connector streets between neighborhoods
to achieve density goals while avoiding forested creek corridors and steep slopes; designing a
site-responsive grid of narrow, slow, and pedestrian-oriented green streets interconnected with
trails; use of “cluster housing” as a low-impact form of mixed and middle housing; and allowing for
neighborhood-serving small-scale commercial uses dispersed within neighborhoods.
u Local context: Given the close relationship between Cooper Mountain and River Terrace, there are
many similar transportation, landscape, and market conditions between the two. Our team is well-
versed in the issues and challenges likely to confront this area.
Additional Team Experience and Selected Project Examples
UTILITY MASTER PLANNING
Carollo
u Clean Water Services West Basin Facility Plan
u Clean Water Services East Basin Facility Plan
u Storm/Sewer Master Plans, Cottage Grove, OR
u Sewer Master Plan, West Linn, OR
u Wastewater Collection Master Plan, Redmond, WA
u Wastewater Collection Master Plan, Salem, OR
u Sanitary Sewer Master Plan, Medford, OR
u General Sewer Plan Update, Camas, WA
Project Highlight:
Carollo: Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update / City of Medford, Oregon (Ongoing)
»Reference: Alex Georgevitch, 541-774-2114, alex.georgevitch@cityofmedford.org
The City of Medford owns and operates a sewer collection system including approximately 258 miles of pipes,
and four pump stations. The Carollo planning team evaluated the City’s collection system infrastructure,
resulting in a defensible and affordable CIP, and a comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.
u Demographic and Flow Projections: The plan provided updated demographic and flow projections
using a comprehensive campaign of temporary flow monitoring of the existing collection system.
u Model Development and Capacity Analysis: Carollo developed a new all-pipe InfoSWMM model of
the City’s collection system and calibrated it using recent flow monitoring data. The new hydraulic
model was used to evaluate capacity in the existing system for the design storm, as well as develop
alternatives analysis to serve future growth. The City experiences significant inflow and infiltration
(I/I) in its downtown area. Carollo performed a more detailed I/I evaluation with varied potential I/I
reduction rates.
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u UGB Growth Analysis: The City anticipates significant growth in their UGB on the eastern side of the
currently developed area. Carollo used the City’s hydraulic model to understand the impact of future
growth and new area development to the existing collection system. Alternatives were developed
to connect the new expansion areas to optimize system improvements and impacts to the existing
conveyance system.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
22RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
DKS Associates
u River Terrace 1.0 Community Plan, Tigard, OR
u River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan, Tigard, OR
u South Cooper Mtn Concept Plan, Beaverton, OR
u Cooper Mountain Community Plan, Beaverton, OR
u West Preliminary Concept Plan, Sherwood, OR
u Transportation System Plan
and Land Use Refinement Plan, King City, OR
Toole Design
u Pacific Avenue Subarea Plan, Tacoma, WA
u Neighborhood/I-90 Land-Use Trail Design, Bellevue, WA
u Winslow Way Sub Area Plan, Bainbridge Island, WA
u Transportation Plan, Bloomington, IN
u Transportation Center Feasibility Study, Mariposa County, CA
u Multimodal Transportation Plan, Steamboat Springs, CO
MUNICIPAL FINANCING
Galardi Rothstein Group
u SDC Program: Infrastructure Systems, Salem, OR
u Stormwater Rate/SDC study, Portland, OR
u Water, Sewer, and Transportation Infrastructure Studies, Bend, OR
u SDC Methodology Updates, Eugene, OR
u Comprehensive Water SDC Methodology, Beaverton, OR
HOUSING PLANNING
ECOnorthwest
u Stevens Road Concept Plan, Market Study and Affordable Housing Assessment, Bend, OR
u Middle Housing Code Amendments, Eugene, OR
u Middle Housing Model Code, Statewide, OR
u Housing Production Strategy, Ashland, OR
u Middle Housing Model State Act and Local Best Practices Guide, AARP National
Code Studio
u Zoning Code, Atlanta, GA
u Unified Development Code, Buffalo NY
u Middle Housing Local Best Practices Guide—AARP (National)
FORM-BASED CODES
Code Studio
u Haywood Road Form-Based Code, Asheville, NC
u Berry / University Form-Based Code, Fort Worth, TX
u Brown Ranch Annexation, Steamboat Springs, CO
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
23RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Project Highlight:
Code Studio: Brown Ranch Annexation—Steamboat Springs, CO (2023)
»Reference: Rebecca Bessey, Planning and Community Development Director, 970-871-8202,
rbessey@steamboatsprings.net
The City of Steamboat Springs has adopted a series of long-range plans and amendments, crafted by Code
Studio, to address issues including affordable housing, climate action, water conservation and more—a
testament to the City’s prolonged efforts towards resilience. Code Studio recently worked with the City to
reevaluate and amend their Traditional Neighborhood zoning district (TND) to help the City implement their
vision for the future. Code Studio worked to strategically align the city’s efforts with community priorities,
through a series of citywide plans, sub-area plans, and ongoing community dialogue. The focus of the new
plans and amendments is on creating affordable housing and enhancing the resiliency of the natural and
built environment. Code Studio and the city implemented a Mithun plan for the Brown Ranch property,
resulting in a 100% affordable project by the Housing Authority. Code Studio created a new step-by-step
approach to a 20-year regulating plan, which includes smaller phased regulating plans, to apply the new
regulations and approaches citywide in the future.
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u Zoning for sustainability and climate resilience.
CARBON-RESPONSIBLE AND CLIMATE-RESILIENT PLANNING
Cascadia Consulting
u Resiliency Plan, Port Angeles, WA
u Climate Action Framework, Vancouver, WA
u Environmental Stewardship Plan, Bellevue WA
u Thurston County Mitigation Plan, OR
u Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Plan, Renton, CA
u DNR Fire Protection Strategic Plan, WA
u Climate Action Plan 2.0, Albany, CA
Walker Macy
u Duwamish Valley Sea Level Rise Adaptation Strategy, Seattle, WA
Project Highlight:
Cascadia Consulting: Climate Action Framework—Vancouver, WA (2020-2022)
»Reference Contact: Aaron Lande, 360-487-8612, aaron.lande@cityofvancouver.us
»Reference Contact: Rebecca Small, 360-839-6128, rebecca.small@cityofvancouver.us
Cascadia supported Vancouver in developing its Climate Action Framework (CAF). This included a GHG
emissions inventory update, three potential pathways and associated strategies to reach carbon neutrality,
and technical guidance including quantitative impact and cost modeling to inform the City’s exploration
of a Leading Edge pathway to reach carbon neutrality by 2040. Cascadia also collaborated with the City
to develop and implement a community and stakeholder engagement strategy, focusing on meeting
them where they are to ensure equitable opportunity to provide feedback. As the project expanded from
providing a menu of foundational implementation strategies to a full-fledged climate action plan, it was
important to scale up the community engagement as well.
Relevance to River Terrace 2.0:
u Goal-setting: Cascadia developed three goal pathways to reach carbon neutrality (Standard,
Ambitious, Leading Edge) and associated strategies for each.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
24RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
u Strategy development: Once the Leading Edge pathway was selected, Cascadia developed
strategies and actions for six sectors: equity & green economy, buildings & energy, transportation
& land use, natural systems & water resources, solid waste & wastewater, and city governance.
Strategies and actions ranged from high-level planning activities (e.g., an EV infrastructure plan)
to detailed actions (e.g., incentives for building decarbonization that stiffen to a ban on natural gas
over time).
u Strategy evaluation: Cascadia used both quantitative and qualitative approaches to refine the
initial set of strategies and actions to those included in the plan. They include quantitative estimates
of emissions reductions and costs to implement (calculated through our in-house dynamic Excel-
based model), and qualitative evaluation of “implementation-readiness” by considering feasibility,
community support, equity, and co-benefits (e.g., green jobs).
u Implementation plan: Each action is accompanied by key implementation information, including
responsible lead entity, timing and phasing, key partners, and funding.
Project Manager Experience with Similar Projects
ECOnorthwest uses a two-person project management team—a Project Director and a Project Manager—
to provide strong project leadership combined with comprehensive management of scope, schedule,
budget, and team. Becky Hewitt will serve as the Project Director on the River Terrace 2.0 Community
Planning project; Kaitlin La Bonte will serve as the Project Manager. As Project Director, Becky will set the
direction for how to approach the work, working through scope refinements with the client, ensure that
deliverables are aligned with the agreed-upon approach and meet the needs of the project, and ensure
that the project is achieving the City’s objectives. As Project Manager, Kaitlin will provide day-to-day
project management, tracking schedule and budget, coordinating contributions from ECO’s internal team
and subconsultants, preparing invoices, and sending email updates to the team.
Both Becky and Kaitlin have experience managing large, complex projects with interdisciplinary teams:
u Becky and Kaitlin are currently working together as Project Director and Project Manager on the
Pleasant Valley District Plan Update described on page 19. Together, they are managing a team with
multiple subconsultants and coordinating work across a range of disciplines in close coordination
with City staff.
u Becky served as Senior Project Manager for the Washington Square Regional Center Update
described on page 18, where she provided direction to subconsultants, directed and reviewed
ECOnorthwest’s market and feasibility analysis, served as the primary point of contact for the City,
and worked with the team to refine the work plan as needed.
u Kaitlin served as Project Manager for the Heights Equitable Development Plan described on page
20, including managing and synthesizing a market analysis, engagement strategy, best practices
research on anti-displacement and equitable development, and a development feasibility study.
u Prior to coming to ECO, Becky served as assistant project manager and lead land use planner on a
contentious Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion for the City of Bend, Oregon. Becky coordinated
the work of multiple subconsultants, outlining and integrating contributions from across disciplines,
and synthesizing results. Becky also played a lead role in the land use analysis and code amendments
and presented land use recommendations to the project’s Steering Committee. (Reference: Brian
Rankin, City of Bend Long Range Planning Manager, 541-388-5584 ,brankin@bendoregon.gov)
We will draw on this experience to establish clear lines of communication and foster a collaborative
environment with our team. Key elements of our project management approach include identifying and
tracking critical path dependencies, coordinating review periods with staff availability and advance notice,
and using collaborative project team work sessions to reach agreement on key issues that touch on multiple
disciplines.
Project Manager Experience with Similar Projects
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
25RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
ECO Support for Workforce Diversity
ECOnorthwest has a staff of 75 people across 5 offices. Of those, 54% are women. Of those women, 63%
are professional staff. We currently have 19% of staff who identify as non-white.
ECOnorthwest believes that our workplace and work product are improved when our staff bring a diversity
of perspectives and backgrounds to our work and have instituted hiring practices to support that goal. Our
internship program makes entry-level positions available to a broader range of students.
ECOnorthwest fosters workforce diversity through internships like the Emerging Leaders Portland Internship
(ELI), which opens doors for people of color and rural youth of lower socioeconomic status. Concurrently,
the Portland Planning Diversity Award Program (PPDA) supports students from underrepresented racial
and ethnic backgrounds, promoting a variety of perspectives in urban planning and bolstering the firm’s
diverse talent pool. We regularly pay to post job openings on platforms aimed at a diverse candidate pool
along with sharing them through our website and social media. We use trained “search advocates” in our
recruitment processes to ensure we are implementing equitable and inclusive recruitment, screening, and
evaluation practices. We continue to research and institute new methods for supporting workforce diversity
and outreach to minorities, veterans, and women.
Subconsultant COBID Certification
Three firms are COBID-certified.
u Cascadia Consulting: WBE, #12823
u Walker Macy: DBE/WBE, #10956
u Galardi Consulting: WBE, #621
Diversity in Contracting
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Appendix A: Required Forms
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 28 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
SECTION 7
PROPOSAL CERTIFICATIONS
******************************************
Non-discrimination Clause
The Contractor agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment or for
services, because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap or age with regard to, but not limited
to, the following: employment upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoffs
or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; selection for training; rendition of services. It
is further understood that any contractor who is in violation of this clause shall be barred from receiving
awards of any purchase order from the City, unless a satisfactory showing is made that discriminatory practices
have terminated and that a recurrence of such acts is unlikely.
Agreed by:
Firm Name:
Address:
*****************************************
Resident Certificate
Please Check One:
Resident Vendor: Vendor has paid unemployment taxes and income taxes in this state during the last
twelve calendar months immediately preceding the submission of this proposal.
Or
Non-resident Vendor: Vendor does not qualify under requirement stated above.
(Please specify your state of residence: )
Officer’s signature:
Type or print officer’s name:
ECOnorthwest
222 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
Lorelei Juntunen
Lorelei Juntunen
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 29 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
SECTION 8
SIGNATURE PAGE
The undersigned proposes to perform all work as listed in the Specification section and that all articles supplied
under any resultant contract will conform to the specifications herein,
The undersigned agrees to be bound by all applicable laws and regulations, the accompanying specifications,
and by City policies and regulations.
The undersigned, by submitting a proposal, represents that:
A) The Proposer has read and understands the specifications.
B) Failure to comply with the specifications or any terms of the Request for Proposal may disqualify
the Proposer as being non-responsive.
The undersigned certifies that the proposal has been arrived at independently and has been submitted without
any collusion designed to limit competition.
The undersigned certifies that all addenda to the specifications has been received and duly considered with all
addenda have been included in this proposal:
Addenda: No. through No. inclusive.
We therefore offer and make this proposal to furnish services herein in fulfillment of the attached
requirements and specifications of the City.
Name of firm:
Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
By: Date:
(Signature of Authorized Official. If partnership, signature of one partner.)
Typed Name/Title:
If corporation, attest:
(Corporate Officer)
Corporation Partnership Individual
Federal Tax Identification Number (TIN):
ECOnorthwest
222 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
503-222-6060 503-222-1504
Lorelei Juntunen, Partner/President
93-0639592
Lorelei Juntunen, Partner/President
November 2, 2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 30 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADDENDA
Project Title: 2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services)
Close: November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
I/WE HAVE RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING ADDENDA (If none received, write “None Received”):
1. 3.
2. 4.
Date
Signature of Proposer
Title
Corporate Name
ECOnorthwest
Partner/President
November 2, 2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2024-07 QBS – River Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) 31 | P a g e
Close – Tuesday, November 14, 2023 – 10:00 am
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL
Name of Consultant:
Mailing Address:
Contact Person:
Telephone: Fax: Email:
accepts all the terms and conditions contained in the City of Tigard’s Qualification Based Request for River
Terrace 2.0 Community Planning (Planning Services) and the attached professional services agreement
template (Attachment C):
Signature of authorized representative Date
Type or print name of authorized representative Telephone Number
Type or print name of person(s) authorized to negotiate contracts Telephone Number
ECOnorthwest
Lorelei Juntunen
503-222-1504
Becky Hewitt
222 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97201
hewitt@econw.com503-200-5077
503-200-5074
November 2, 2023
Cindy O'Connell 503-200-5076
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
RIVER TERRACE 2.0 COMMUNITY PLANNING (PLANNING SERVICES) PROPOSAL
Appendix B: Resumes
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Becky Hewitt, Project Director
Becky has extensive experience with land use, housing, and
development analysis and planning in Oregon and across the
country. Becky's work at ECOnorthwest focuses on evaluating
development feasibility, housing strategies, and transit -oriented
development for sustainable and equitable communities. Becky
advises communities on how to understand the market and
development potential for diverse housing and how to align
regulations and implementable strategies to support local housing
needs and goals. Becky has experience leading technical analysis,
managing complex multi-disciplinary projects, presenting to
advisory bodies and decision-makers, and designing and
implementing public and stakeholder engagement.
Becky joined ECOnorthwest in 2018 after a decade of working in
urban planning and land use analysis, including corridor
revitalization plans, concept plans for developing areas,
development code audits and updates, and housing analyses.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
Becky has served as Project Director on the following projects unless
otherwise noted:
▪ Gresham Pleasant Valley District Plan Update—Gresham, OR
(2022-Ongoing). ECOnorthwest is leading a multidisciplinary
consultant team in updating plans for Gresham’s Pleasant Valley to
address barriers to development. ECOnorthwest is the prime
consultant and is leading the market, land use, and infrastructure
funding and delivery components of the project.
▪ Middle Housing Model Act and Local Best Practices Guidebook —Nationwide, U.S.
(2022–Ongoing. As part of its efforts to support expand housing options, AARP sought
assistance from ECOnorthwest to develop a Model Act and guide to statewide legislation to
support advocates, legislators, and others in expanding middle housing options at the state
level. ECOnorthwest is currently working with AARP to develop a companion best
practices guide for local initiatives to enable middle housing, including case studies from
across the country and guidance on setting appropriate standards.
▪ Metro Residential Readiness—Oregon Metro (2022–Ongoing). ECOnorthwest is working
with Metro on research and analysis related to residential development readiness and
affordability to inform its upcoming growth management decisions. Topics include
development outcomes and challenges in past urban growth boundary expansion areas;
Education
Master’s in real estate
development, Portland State
University
Master’s in urban and
Regional Planning: Land Use
Specialization, Portland State
University
Continuing Studies in
Sustainable Design, Boston
Architectural College
B.S. Engineering: Civil and
Environmental Engineering,
Duke University
Years at ECOnorthwest: 6
Years in Industry: 18
Certifications:
American Institute of
Certified Planners
Areas of Expertise
Development Feasibility
Analysis
Housing Strategies and
Implementation Tools
Land Use Planning
Development Code Testing
Transit-Oriented Development
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
ECOnorthwest
housing affordability, filtering, and gentrification/displacement; and potential capacity from
for middle housing development and office-to-residential conversions.
▪ Cooper Mountain Community Plan—Beaverton, OR (2020–Ongoing). ECOnorthwest is
part of a multidisciplinary consultant team assisting the City of Beaverton with creating a
Community Plan for Cooper Mountain. ECOnorthwest prepared a Market Study and
preliminary Infrastructure Finance Strategy that respond to the City’s goals for creating an
inclusive new community. ECOnorthwest is currently leading a development of an
infrastructure funding plan for the area.
▪ Hillsboro Affordable Housing Tools Evaluation—Hillsboro, OR (2022). ECOnorthwest
assisted the City of Hillsboro with an evaluation of measures to support affordable housing
development and prevent displacement, including property tax abatement and impact fee
exemptions for encouraging affordable and mixed-income housing development.
▪ Downtown Equity Strategy—Beaverton, OR (2021–2022). ECOnorthwest worked with the
City of Beaverton to identify and evaluate strategies to guide future investment and
programs in the downtown area while avoiding displacement of businesses and residents.
Working with a project team including multiple culturally -specific organizations,
ECOnorthwest highlighted populations and businesses at risk of displacement and
recommended strategies to promote a multicultural downtown business core that serves to
attract and retain minority businesses and diverse residents in the area.
▪ Oregon SDC Study—Statewide, OR (2021-2022). In response to a legislative directive,
Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) contracted with ECOnorthwest and
subcontractors FCS Group and Galardi Rothstein Group to study the impact of System
Development Charges (SDCs) on housing costs in Oregon. The study addressed the role of
SDCs in funding infrastructure, factors that drive SDC rates, the relationship between SDCs
and housing costs, and the impacts of timing of SDC payments.
▪ Bend Stevens Road Concept Plan—Bend, OR (2021-2022). As part of a multidisciplinary
consultant team, ECOnorthwest helped to prepare a conceptual plan for a state-owned site
east of Bend's urban growth boundary. ECOnorthwest advised on affordable housing,
employment lands, commercial/mixed use areas, and market feasibility. ECOnorthwest also
took the lead in establishing land use program alternatives for the site, including
commercial/industrial acreage and housing mix, balancing policy goals and market realities
to identify a viable range of options for consideration.
▪ Washington Square Regional Center Update—Tigard, OR (2020–2021). ECOnorthwest led
a multidisciplinary team to update the land use and transportation plans for a regional
center that includes a major regional mall poised for partial redevelopment. The project
evaluated how changes to regulations and other measures can support development and
redevelopment that implement the City and regional vision for a walkable, mixed -use
center and meet local needs.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Kaitlin Willoughby La Bonte, Project Manager
Kaitlin is a Project Manager at ECOnorthwest, specializing in urban
planning, land use and housing policy analysis, land development,
equitable development, and economic development. She has a strong
background in spatial analysis, land use and zoning code research,
site development, and land use en titlements, which allows her to
search for creative solutions with an understanding of local
conditions and requirements. Kaitlin is passionate about working
with public and private sector clients to address challenging policy
questions around affordable housing, inclusive economic
development, equity, sustainability, and growth management.
Prior to joining ECOnorthwest, Kaitlin worked on a wide variety of
public and private sector planning projects at civil engineering and
architecture firms in the Portland area. Kaitlin recently served on the
Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities Rulemaking Advisory
Committee for the Department of Land Conservation and
Development, and the Community Involvement Committee for the
Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability . She is an active
member of the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning
Association.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
Kaitlin has served as Project Manager on the following projects,
unless otherwise noted:
▪ Gresham Pleasant Valley District Plan Update—Gresham, OR
(2022-Ongoing). ECOnorthwest is leading a multidisciplinary
consultant team in updating plans for Gresham’s Pleasant Valley —
an area brought into the Portland region's Urban Growth Boundary
over 20 years ago where little development has occurred. The Plan
Update is re-evaluating market conditions, infrastructure funding
and delivery approaches, planned land uses, development
regulations, and community priorities for the area. ECO northwest is
leading the market, land use, and infrastructure funding and
delivery components of the project, including an assessment specific
to funding and delivery for future parks in the area.
▪ Eugene Urban Growth Strategies —Eugene, OR (2023-Ongoing).
ECOnorthwest is working with the City of Eugene to develop a new
housing needs analysis, economic opportunities analysis, and
Education
Master of Urban and
Regional Planning, Portland
State University
B.A. in Political Science,
New College, the Honors
College of Florida
Years in Industry: 3
Years at ECO: 3
Certifications
American Institute of
Certified Planners (AICP)
Certified Planner
Areas of Expertise:
Urban Planning, Land
Development, Policy
Analysis, Equitable
Development, and Economic
Development
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
ECONorthwest
housing production strategy. This is a review of whether their urban growth boundary
includes enough land to accommodate growth. The project involves close coordination with
the City team implementing the Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities rules an d will
include a review of land use efficiency measures to increase capacity for development within
the UGB.
▪ Vancouver Comprehensive Plan Update—Vancouver, WA (2023-Ongoing). Task Lead –
Economic Element. ECOnorthwest, as a part of a larger team, will assist the City of
Vancouver with the periodic update of their Comprehensive Plan. ECO's work is focused on
supporting the Housing and Economics updates and equity/opportunity analysis.
▪ Downtown and Tinman Landing Subarea Plans—La Center, WA (2023-Ongoing). As a part
of a multidisciplinary team, ECOnorthwest is leading market analysis and economic
development tasks as a part of a project to create subarea plans for the Downtown and
Timmen Landing Subareas. Our work will identify the regional influences on the local
economy, benchmark existing economic and real estate conditions, and identify the cities
opportunity and role in the regional economy.
▪ Heights Equitable Development Plan —Vancouver, WA (2022-2023). ECOnorthwest
conducted market analyses, evaluated development feasibility, identified financial and
regulatory incentives, and crafted a development strategy to support equitable development
for the Heights District, to support the vision of a community-serving redevelopment project
on the former Tower Mall site in Vancouver.
▪ Ashland Housing Production Strategy—Ashland, OR (2022-2023). ECOnorthwest worked
with the City of Ashland to prepare a Housing Production Strategy.
▪ Milwaukie Housing Capacity Analysis / Housing Production Strategy —Milwaukie, OR
(2022-2023). ECOnorthwest worked with the City of Milwaukie to develop a Housing
Capacity Analysis and a Housing Production Strategy.
▪ BART Transbay Rail Crossing—Oakland, CA (2022-Ongoing). As subs to WSP and
Cambridge Systematics, ECOnorthwest is developing a land use model to support transit
modeling of a new rail crossing in the Bay Area.
▪ Washington County Broadband Investment Strategy —Washington County, OR (2022-
2023). ECOnorthwest led a team with support from Uptown Services to create a Broadband
Investment Strategy for Washington County. ECO's role focuses on regional stakeholder
coordination and assessment of Economic Development Impacts.
▪ Hood River Affordable Housing Production Strategy —Hood River, OR (2021-2022).
ECOnorthwest developed an Affordable Housing Production Strategy and Implementation
Plan for the City of Hood River using existing Housing Needs Analysis data and housing
market and demographic information.
▪ Wilsonville Frog Pond East/South—Wilsonville, OR (2021-2022). Project Associate. As a
sub to Angelo Planning Group, as part of a master plan for an area added to the Metro UGB
in 2018, ECOnorthwest advised on affordable housing planning and providing an ADU
market analysis as well as advising on SDC options.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Ken leads the firm’s planning and urban design work and has worked with
communities to plan district improvements, from public investments like
streets, transportation, campuses, and public open spaces, to private
properties and development areas. Many of Ken’s recent projects across
the Northwest have addressed how public spaces can support major
redevelopment areas and create a framework for growth in manner that
is beneficial to the community and enhances sense of place. Ken is
accredited in LEED’s Neighborhood Development (ND) program, and brings
a holistic lens to his work that addresses the intersection of site, culture,
and environment in urban places. Ken works with communities of all sizes
on comprehensive plans and urban improvements and collaborates with
ECOnorthwest on an ongoing basis.
Education
• Master of Urban Planning, University of
Washington
• Bachelor of Arts, Geography and
Environmental Studies, McGill University
Registrations
• LEED AP ND #10729457
• AICP, 2004 - present, #019345
• Certified Urban Designer
KEN PIRIE, AICP, LEED ND
PRINCIPAL, CERTIFIED PLANNER, URBAN DESIGNER
Walker Macy
Relevant Projects
• Astoria Waterfront Master Plan and Code
Updates, Astoria, OR
• Bend Central Area Urban Design Plan,
Bend, OR
• Bend Core Area Action Plan, Bend, OR
• Cooper Mountain Community Plan,
Beaverton, OR
• Creekside District Master Plan, Beaverton, OR
• Depot District Subarea Plan, Lacey, WA
• Downtown Beaverton Loop and Urban Design
and Transportation Plan, Beaverton, OR
• Downtown Redevelopment Plan, Madras, OR
• Downtown Streetscape Plan, Salem, OR
• Duwamish Valley SLR Adaptation Strategy,
Seattle, WA
• East Albany Concept Plan, Albany, OR
• Flora District Concept Plan, Bellingham, WA
• Foothills District Framework Plan, Lake
Oswego, OR
• Frog Pond-Advance Road Concept and
Master Plan, Wilsonville, OR
• Glenwood Riverfront Master Plan, Glenwood, OR
• Happy Valley Downtown Plan, Happy Valley, OR
• Hillside Master Plan, Milwaukie, OR
• Hoquarton Area Plan, Tillamook, OR
• John Day Innovation Gateway, John Day, OR
• Kaiser-Harrison Opportunity Area Plan,
Olympia, WA
• North Redwood Development Concept Plan,
Canby, OR
• Northwest Crossing, Bend, OR
• Parkrose-Argay Development Study,
Portland, OR
• Pleasant Valley/North Carver
Comprehensive Plan, Happy Valley, OR
• Quail Run Mixed-Use Neighborhood Plan,
Spokane, WA
• Riverfront Master Plan, Newberg, OR
• Southeast Bend Concept Plan, Bend, OR
• South Cooper Mountain Concept Plan,
Beaverton, OR
• South Downtown Concept Refinement,
Milwaukie, OR
• South Hillsboro Master Plan, Hillsboro, OR
• South Waterfront Greenway Development
Plan, Portland, OR
• Spokane South University District Urban
Components R&D, Spokane, WA
• Villebois New Community Master Plan,
Wilsonville, OR
• Whatcom Waterfront District Master Plan,
Bellingham, WA
• Waterfront Framework Plan, St. Helens, OR
• Waterfront Master Plan, Roseburg, OR
• Westside Area Concept Plan, Hood River, OR
• Willamette Falls Legacy Project, Oregon City, OR
• Yarrow New Community Master Plan,
Madras, OR
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
With a dual background in architecture and urban and regional planning,
Saumya is an urban planner and designer with significant expertise in site
master planning, community investment, and public engagement with a
social equity lens. Saumya helps to lead Walker Macy’s planning and urban
design work; she focuses on public engagement, development of planning
concepts and strategies, and clear visual communication of ideas through
graphics and documents. She has recently worked on planning projects
that provide a framework for future design and development that supports
long-term economic, urban design, environmental, and community goals.
Saumya has collaborated with ECOnorthwest on several recent community
planning projects including the Cooper Mountain Community Plan, the
Glenwood Riverfront Master Plan, and the Jade District/82nd Ave Equitable
Development Strategy.
Education
• 2019 Fulbright Graduate Research
Fellowship in Okayama, Japan
• Master of Urban and Regional Planning,
Portland State University
• Bachelor of Architecture, University of
Oregon
SAUMYA KINI
PROJECT MANAGER, PLANNER, URBAN DESIGNER
Walker Macy
Relevant Projects
• Cooper Mountain Community Plan,
Beaverton, OR
• Downtown Streetscape Plan, Salem, OR
• Duwamish Valley SLR Adaptation Strategy,
Seattle, WA
• Frog Pond-Advance Road Concept and
Master Plan, Wilsonville, OR
• Hoquarton Area Plan, Tillamook, OR
• Glenwood Riverfront Master Plan, Glenwood, OR
• Jade District Equitable Development
Feasibility Study, Portland, OR
• John Day Innovation Gateway, John Day, OR
• Kaiser-Harrison Opportunity Area Plan,
Olympia, WA
• LINK to Opportunity / Hilltop District
Streetscapes, Tacoma, WA
• Mount Baker Station Area Site Planning and
Urban Design Study, Seattle, WA
• North Redwood Development Concept Plan,
Canby, OR
• Northwest Crossing, Bend, OR
• Quail Run Mixed-Use Neighborhood Plan,
Spokane, WA
• South Hillsboro Master Plan, Hillsboro, OR
• South Cooper Mountain Concept Plan,
Beaverton, OR
• Southeast Bend Concept Plan, Bend, OR
• St. Helens Waterfront Framework Plan, St.
Helens, OR
• Stevens Road Scenario Planning, Bend, OR
• Tacoma Theater District Placemaking,
Tacoma, WA
• Three Creeks Concept Plan, Clark County, OR
• Urban Revitalization Action Plan, Madras, OR
• West Area Concept Plan, Hood River, OR
• Willamette Falls Legacy Project, Oregon City, OR
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc. | www.cascadiaconsulting.com
P.J. Tillmann
Deputy Director
P.J. is skilled at leading collaborative strategic planning efforts and distilling
technical findings into actionable recommendations tailored to local needs. As a
core member of Cascadia’s Planning & Facilitation team, P.J. is involved in a
range of sustainability projects, from climate change action and adaptation plans
to natural resource protection strategic plans. They bring a unique combination
of analytical expertise focused on emissions reduction, climate mitigation, and
resilience planning coupled with inclusive public engagement and stakeholder
facilitation experience. Their cross-cutting experience includes leading
stakeholder-driven processes throughout the Northwest that have resulted in
actionable, sustainable, and equitable policies and plans.
Education • M.P.P.A., Focus in Environmental & Science Policy; University of Massachusetts -
Amherst
• B.S., Chemistry, Spanish minor; Western Washington University
• Certificate, Foundations in Public Participation; International Association for Public
Participation
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
2020-2022. City of Vancouver (WA). Climate Action Framework.
Project Manager. Led strategy development and analysis and public, stakeholder, and City staff engagement;
emphasized an equitable green recovery from COVID-19. Led client communications, managing budget and
timeline.
2021-Present. City of Renton (WA). Clean Economy Plan; Electric Vehicle Charging Plan.
Policy Analyst & Implementation Lead. Supporting the development of a citywide sustainability strategy for Renton—
including developing a plan to implement electric vehicle infrastructure expansion and City fleet transition.
2022-Present City of Auburn (WA). Comprehensive Plan Update & Climate Integration
Policy Analyst. Supporting the integration of climate risk analysis and planning into the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
2020-Present. Global Development Foundation (NDA). Climate & Sustainability Strategy.
Evaluation Lead & Deputy PM. Leading evaluation of foundation impacts and influence on achieving Sustainable
Development Goals, including comprehensive literature review and synthesis, focus groups, interviews, and
surveys. Developing foundation-wide recommendations to embed climate-smart thinking in work.
2022. Regional Non-Profit (NDA). Climate Policy Scan.
Policy Research Lead. Led policy research and analysis of current and potential future climate policies in
Washington and Oregon.
2020-2021. Tulalip Tribes (WA). Climate and Health Resiliency Indicators.
Engagement Support. Worked with project team and Tribal representatives to support the Climate & Health Steering
Committee, perform a literature review, and develop climate and health indicators to track and improve Tribal
resilience.
2020. Puget Sound Partnership (WA). Integration of Climate Change Considerations .
Project Manager. Led an assessment of climate impacts on Puget Sound ecosystem recovery and developing
framework to integrate climate considerations into future planning efforts.
2020-2021. City of Port Angeles (WA). Climate Action Plan.
Project Manager & Strategy Selection Lead. Managing Climate Action Plan development, including handling client
and project team communications, overseeing public participation, leading evaluation of climate action strategies,
and supporting plan writing.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
LEE EINSWEILER
FOUNDING PRINCIPAL
Lee has been involved in planning, zoning and plan implementation in
a variety of settings over the past 30 years. His emphasis has been on
redevelopment activity in urban areas, beginning in south Florida in
the 80’s and 90’s, and continuing with his recent work in Los Angeles,
Charlottesville VA, Greenville SC and Concord NH.
Lee sharpened his skills in the preparation of zoning and subdivision
regulations across the country, and has been personally responsible for
over 50 code projects, including the complete revision and adoption of
over 30 codes and the preparation of almost 20 form-based codes. His
combination of conventional zoning know-how and new code approaches
are rare in the profession, and his ability to facilitate the consideration
and adoption of new zoning serves his clients well.
Lee has served as an adjunct faculty member in the Department of
Community & Regional Planning at the University of Texas, teaching
smart growth tools at the graduate level, which serves as a constant
source of innovation. He is a former board member of the Central Texas
chapter of the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU). Lee is a frequent
speaker at state and national conferences on the issue of zoning and
form-based codes.
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Los Angeles Zoning Update. Lee is currently leading a team in the
process of replacing Los Angeles' 1946 zoning code. The new code will
eventually cover the entire City, implementing community plans as they
are updated. This multi-year effort includes a downtown code.
Sandy Springs Development Code. Lee recently worked with this 10-year
old City to replace their former County zoning with new concepts tailored
to match their recently adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Amherst Mixed Use Activity Center Zoning. The Town of Amherst, NY
is committed to grow more sustainably. Lee is preparing sustainable
centers strategy plan amendment, along with new zoning to implement
the sustainable centers concept.
EDUCATION
Master of Regional Planning
University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill
Bachelor of Science
Environmental Planning/
Regional Analysis
University of Wisconsin at Green Bay
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
KELSEY MORROW
SENIOR ASSOCIATE / URBAN DESIGNER
Kelsey comes to Code Studio from Asheville, North Carolina with a
background in both urban design and planning. She has experience in
the public, private, and non-profit sectors and has conducted professional
and graduate research on affordable housing, sustainable development,
and creative placemaking. Her lifelong love for community and the arts
has led to a passion for creating vibrant public spaces that strengthen
local identity, improve public health, and enhance citizen’s relationships
with their city and with each other.
After living in many cities in the U.S. and abroad, and traveling
extensively, Kelsey offers a global perspective when it comes to
community design. During her 3+ years at Code Studio, Kelsey has played
a key role in many zoning code updates and design projects across
the country. Her artistic background helps ensure that every project is
presented in a clear and polished format.
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Piqua Development Code. Kelsey is currently working on a citywide new
development code update for Piqua, Ohio. The code will feature new
zoning districts that allow for a wider variety of housing options and a
fully updated set of use standards.
Cleveland Pilot Neighborhoods Form-Based Codes. Kelsey recently
worked on developing graphics and community engagement materials
for a series of public charrettes in a handful of Cleveland neighborhoods
selected as form-based coding pilot areas for the City.
San Antonio TOD Districts. Kelsey is currently working on design
standards and regulations for a set of new Transit-Oriented Development
districts for the City of San Antonio, to accompany their upcoming UDC
updates.
EDUCATION
Master of Urban Design
University of North Carolina
at Charlotte
Bachelor of Science
Urban and Regional Planning
East Carolina University
OFFICE LOCATION
Asheville, NC
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
ANITA CATE SMYTH, PWS
Professional
Employment
▪ Senior Environmental
Scientist, Winterbrook
Planning, Portland,
OR, 2010-present.
▪ Principal, Westbrook
Science & Design,
LLC, Beaverton, OR,
2005-present.
▪ Environmental
Scientist, WH Pacific,
Portland, OR, 1996-
2005.
▪ Engineering
Technician,
Clackamas County
Department of
Transportation &
Development, Oregon
City, OR, 1993-1996.
Education
▪ Professional
Master’s Degree,
Oregon State
University, 2004.
▪ Bachelor of Arts,
Willamette
University, 1993.
Professional
Membership
▪ Society of Wetland
Scientists
Anita is an environmental scientist with more than 25 years of experience with
projects involving documentation of trees, wetlands, and habitat areas. Anita
has completed numerous Local Wetland Inventories, stream and riparian
studies, and tree grove assessments for communities throughout the state.
Anita’s projects in the Portland Metro area include tree inventories and
assessments for Tigard, including the River Terrace 1.0 plan area. More recent
tree inventories include a citywide survey for the City of McMinnville. She has
prepared local, state and federal environmental documentation for projects
throughout Oregon, most of which included upland, riparian and wetland
surveys.
Anita works with public and private clients to navigate environmental and
regulatory challenges, emphasizing creative site planning with clients and
agency staff to find mutually acceptable solutions early in the permit and design
process.
Anita is a certified Senior Professional Wetland Scientist (SPWS).
Selected Projects
▪ City of McMinnville and Tigard, Tree Inventory and Assessments
(2021)
▪ City of Tigard, River Terrace Tree Grove Assessment (2012-2013)
▪ Multnomah County Drainage District: On-call biological services
(2015-present)
▪ Portland Parks and Recreation, Columbia Children’s Arboretum
environmental documentation (2019-2022)
▪ City of Pendleton, Local Wetland Inventory (2021)
▪ Metro, Environmental Baseline Studies for sites including Boardman
Wetlands, White Oak Savanna, Lilly K. Johnson Park, Madsen Farm.
(2012-17)
▪ Metro, On-call planning and biological services (2015-17)
▪ Portland BES, Wilkes Creek Headwaters Restoration Project and
Lower Slough Refugia Project
▪ Portland Water Bureau, Powell Butte Reservoir Phase 2, Bull Run
Supply Treatment Improvement Project and Kelly Butte Reservoir
(2009-13)
▪ City of The Dalles, Natural Features Inventory, Stream Corridor and
Wetland Assessments (2010-2012)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
TIM BROOKS, ASLA
Professional
Employment
Principal, Winterbrook
Planning, Portland, OR,
2001 to present
Environmental
Planning Program
Manager, Adolfson
Associates, Portland,
OR, 1995 - 2001
City Planner, City of
Portland, Portland, OR,
1989 - 1995
Landscape Designer,
Århus Nature
Department, Århus,
Denmark, 1988
Botanist/Surveyor,
Leach Botanical
Garden, Portland, OR,
1985 - 1987
Education
Master of Arts,
Landscape Design,
Conway School of
Landscape Design,
Conway, MA
Bachelor of Arts,
Interdisciplinary,
Reed College,
Portland, OR
Professional
Memberships
American Planning
Association
American Society of
Landscape Architects
Society of Wetland
Scientists
Tim is co-founder of Winterbrook Planning and has more than 35 years of
experience in land use and environmental planning for local communities
throughout Oregon. His diverse experience includes managing the land use
and environmental compliance tasks for some of the largest and most
complex public projects in Oregon, including Portland’s CSO Tunnel,
Pipeline and Pump Station projects. He is currently managing the land use
and environmental tasks for the Bull Run Water Filtration Program. Tim
has led environmental inventories, sensitive species surveys, and developed
(Goal 5) natural resource plans, codes and policies for communities across
the state, including Albany, Corvallis, Eugene, Junction City, Medford,
Molalla, Newberg, Pendleton, Portland, Prineville, The Dalles, Tigard,
West Linn, and Woodburn.
For Tigard, Tim served as consultant manager for the Tigard Tree Grove
Assessment (citywide study) and the River Terrace Tree Grove
Assessment. Tim helped prepare the related River Terrace Tree Grove
ESEE Analysis. Working with Clean Water Services and Tigard City
planners, Tim helped draft a new plan district (Durham AWTF Plan
District) as part of Tigard’s development code. Tim’s work in Tigard and
other local communities includes environmental documentation, code
development, and regulatory compliance.
Following is a selection of relevant projects:
Selected Projects
• City of Tigard, River Terrace Tree Grove Assessment
• City of Tigard, Tree Grove Assessment
• City of McMinnville, Tree Inventory and Assessments
• Clean Water Services, Tigard Code Amendments (Durham AWTF
Plan District)
• Clean Water Services, Large Diameter Trunkline Rehabilitation
(district-wide project included Tigard)
• Multnomah County Drainage District, On-call planning services
• Portland Water Bureau, Bull Run Filtration Program
• Metro, Environmental Baseline Studies for sites including Boardman
Wetlands, White Oak Savanna, Lilly K. Johnson Park, Madsen Farm.
• Metro, On-call planning and biological services
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Gwen is an engineer with experience in both the public and private sector thinking
about and designing for people. Gwen’s projects focus on multimodal transportation
environments, alternatives analysis, public outreach, and geometric design of
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Gwen has developed conceptual cross-
sections and plan views for corridors and intersections on multiple projects. She
also has experience with signal design, parking management, and a vast number of
transportation impact studies of various scales. Additionally, she brings background
in planning, designing, and implementing temporary demonstration projects for
alternative uses of the public space.
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of Tigard Washington Square Regional Center Update, Tigard, OR
Toole Design was part of the consultant team working on the Washington Square
Regional Center (WSRC) Update. Originally planned and adopted in 2000, the
WSRC was due for an evaluation and refinement to align with current city goals.
Toole Design documented existing conditions of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit
infrastructure as well as planned routes and improvements in order to identify
gaps to be considered for inclusion. Gwen later led project phases to analyze
proposed land use scenarios to understand the impact on locations of concern in
the transportation system. A Synchro traffic model was developed to provide an
understanding of existing and proposed operations.
Broadway Corridor Development Plan, Portland, OR
Gwen helped lead the transportation planning for a consultant team on the
Broadway Corridor project. The team created a redevelopment plan for a 32-acre
project in the heart of downtown Portland, including the now-adopted Master Plan
for the former United States Postal Service building. Gwen assisted in developing
and drafting concepts for new roads within the site and various circulation
alternatives for people accessing the site via all modes.
Beaverton Downtown Design and Development Phase II, Beaverton, OR
Toole Design was part of the consultant team working on the Beaverton Downtown
Development Plan and led the transportation efforts. Gwen aided the team in
identifying Street Typologies for Downtown Beaverton and helped apply those
typologies to existing streets with current and future adjacent land uses. Gwen
created cross-section and plan view graphics for these design concepts which
were used for city working groups and community-facing outreach to work
towards a consensus on what these streets could look like in the future.
Santa Maria Downtown Streetscape, Santa Maria, CA
Gwen served as an engineer on this rural downtown streetscape project in
southern California. She worked with the project team to develop a set of concept
plans with the goal of revitalizing the downtown core while preserving the
function of the two intersecting highways traveling through the town. Starting with
conceptual cross-sections, Gwen provided technical input to get the proposed
ENGINEER
PROFESSIONAL
HIGHLIGHTS
Years of Experience: 8
Toole Design: 2017-Present
Lancaster Engineering and
Street Lab: 2015-2017
EDUCATION/
CERTIFICATION
Bachelor of Science,
Civil Engineering, Portland
State University: 2015
Professional Engineer: OR
AWARDS
Association of Pedestrian and
Bicycle Professionals: Winner
2018 Young Professional of the
Year Award
APPOINTMENTS/
AFFILIATIONS
Institute of
Transportation Engineers
Association of Pedestrian and
Bicycle Professionals
Young Professionals in
Transportation,
Membership Chair: 2015-2017
GWEN ECKELMAN, PE
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
design into a plan view layout that provides both interim and long-term opportunities. Additionally, she prepared
a conceptual striping plan that would incorporate components of the future design into an upcoming road
resurfacing and restriping project for an interim treatment.
Edmonds Reimagining Streets and Public Space, Edmonds, WA
Gwen is supporting the project team and city staff in the development of street and public space types in the City
of Edmonds. The street types are intended to strengthen the existing Complete Streets Ordinance and the public
space types create a framework for the city as they find opportunities to create new, permanent public spaces.
Gwen is leading the creation of three types - Pocket Plaza, Linear Plaza, and Transformative Spaces - and is
working with the team to finalize design criteria and examples for each.
Portland Lloyd Center Parking Study, Portland, OR
Gwen led Toole Design staff in the review of existing and future parking demands for the Lloyd Center Shopping
Center in Portland, OR. As the retail industry shifts towards online sales, existing shopping centers are being
forced to re-think how best to serve the community around them. Gwen coordinated two occupancy studies
to gain a sense of the existing demand for the site. Using published parking rates from ITE and ULI, the team
determined demand for land uses being removed or added to the site and evaluated how parking may be utilized
in the future and how that demand can be managed.
South Park Blocks Master Plan, Portland, OR
Gwen assisted the consultant team throughout the development of the South Park Blocks Master Plan. In
collaboration with Parks Bureau staff and the community engagement lead, the team worked on documenting the
SPB history and developing a plan for how it can continue to thrive into its future. The team worked closely with
both PBOT and Parks to understand how the Green Loop alignment could look and operate for people walking, and
bicycling while still providing access to the park and neighboring businesses, institutions, and homes.
Outer Powell Transportation Safety Project, Portland, OR
Gwen assisted the project team in the development of a concept-level design to improve safety for all modes of
travel along the Outer Powell high crash corridor. The team evaluated cross-section, intersection treatment, and
other multimodal features to determine the preferred design. Gwen helped with the development of graphics for
both the technical memorandum and the public outreach information to clearly describe the concept to stakeholders.
Dallas Strategic Mobility Plan, Dallas, TX
Gwen was part of the consulting team working on the Dallas Strategic Mobility Plan. Specifically, Gwen assistws
with curbside management task where Toole Design led a workshop to understand from city staff and area
stakeholders the parking and curbside environment within three distinct areas of Dallas. Based on a review of
best practices and innovative solutions used around the U.S., Toole Design tied policy decisions to their functional
outcomes. The final deliverable was a set of policy recommendations for curbside management and customized
graphics to show the various curbside typologies proposed for the three Dallas neighborhoods.
ENGINEER
GWEN ECKELMAN, PE
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Talia specializes in working with decision-makers, stakeholders, and the public
to craft plans rooted in shared values. She has more than 10 years of experience
working with Tigard, Washinton County, Metro, ODOT, and DLCD to plan for mixed-
income communities where meeting daily needs does not require a private
vehicle. She has a proven track record of building cross-agency consensus to
support climate-friendly growth, right-size technical analysis, and avoid the need
for costly arterial expansions.
SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Beaverton Complete Streets, Beaverton, OR
Talia serves as the Project Manager and Lead Facilitator for Beaverton’s efforts
to adopt a Complete Streets Policy, develop street design typologies, and lay
the groundwork for implementation. The city’s leadership wants to transform
streets into beautiful, safe, sustainable, and inviting public spaces that support
multimodal transportation and economic development. Talia leads her team in
bringing together design best practices, engaging visuals, and practical actions to
advance a new modal hierarchy that prioritizes people over cars.
Washington County Liaison, Washington County, OR
Talia served as ODOT’s key point of contact on planning issues for Washington
County and its cities. She led the state’s participation in a wide array of locally-
led transportation and land use efforts, including TSPs, comprehensive plans,
corridor studies, development review, and annexations. Talia provided planning
expertise on efforts like the Urban Reserves Transportation Study, which assessed
the multimodal infrastructure needs of River Terrace and other growing areas.
As TGM Grant Manager for Tigard, Washington County, and neighboring cities, she
built relationships with agency staff and gained understanding of each community’s
unique vision for the future. During development review and project delivery, she
provided technical assistance on active transportation, equitable engagement,
universal design, smart growth, and navigating state regulatory requirements.
King City Transportation System Plan and Land Use Refinement, King City, OR
Talia brought her project management expertise and multimodal knowledge to
this unusual challenge: a first ever TSP for a city preparing to double its acreage.
Founded as a retirement community but now fully intergenerational, King City
hopes to make active transportation the first choice for residents of all ages as
they meet their daily needs. Talia worked closely with economic experts to answer
regional questions about development potential of a future town center, and tailored
transportation performance measures to respond to community concerns.
PORTLAND OFFICE DIRECTOR I SENIOR PLANNER
PROFESSIONAL
HIGHLIGHTS
Years of Experience: 15
Toole Design: 2021-Present
Oregon Department of
Transportation: 2008-2020
Institute on Aging, Portland
State University: 2008-2009
EDUCATION/
CERTIFICATION
Master of Urban and Regional
Planning, Portland State
University: 2009
Bachelor of Arts, Psychology,
Whitman College: 2004
SPECIALIZED
TRAINING
Intercultural Competency Trainer
APPOINTMENTS/
AFFILIATIONS
TRB Transportation Demand
Management Committee:
2015-Present
TALIA JACOBSON
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
1
KEVIN CHEWUK , PTP
DKS Project Manager
Kevin has led numerous citywide transportation system
plans, concept plans, regional sub-area plans, on-call
services projects for public agencies, corridor studies and fee
studies for DKS. Kevin’s skills include multimodal analysis,
corridor and intersection capacity analysis, safety analysis,
access management planning, and geographic information
system (GIS) mapping and analysis.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Cooper Mountain Concept Plan, Beaverton, OR. Kevin led
the transportation plan element for the 2,300-acre site in the
southwest corner of the City of Beaverton. The concept plan
area includes over 7,400 housing units and more than 450 jobs.
A major component of the plan was balancing the impacts
associated with regional motor vehicle traffic traveling along
major streets next to the concept plan area. The transportation
plan identified strategic improvements to balance the local
circulation system with the regional system needs, including an
accessible network of new streets and off-street trails and
pathways. The planning process involved extensive public
engagement with community members including existing
residents and land owners. The outcomes include a detailed circulation map for walking, biking and
driving along with project priorities and funding strategies for implementation .
City of Tigard River Terrace Community Plan, OR. Kevin led the transportation plan element
for about 500 acres encompassing the River Terrace Community Plan area in the northwest corner
of the City of Tigard. The plan identified an interconnected network of multi -modal streets and
shared-use paths, one that conforms to the rolling topography, yet builds upon and connects with
the existing infrastructure in the area. Through the community outreach efforts, traffic speed
management, and neighborhood traffic impacts emerged as high-priority issues. The resulting plan
reflects these community desires with a focus on providing greater balance between safety and
mobility by employing design techniques to create safe, slow streets without affecting vehicle
capacity.
City of Oregon City South End Concept Plan, OR. As the lead planner, Kevin prepared the
transportation element for the Oregon City South End Concept Plan to accommodate about 3,000
housing units and two neighborhood commercial/mixed -use areas with approximately 400,000
square feet of neighborhood commercial land use areas. The community values maintaining the
existing character of the neighborhood. The resulting plan includes transportation infrastructure
that represents the context of the neighborhood, rei nforcing its rural nature while accommodating
all modes of travel for users of all ages and abilities. The streets will be more than just places for
PROFESSIONAL HIGHLIGHTS
Years of Experience: 15
EDUCATION
MS, Urban and Regional Planning,
Transportation Planning
Specialization, Florida State
University, 2008
BS, Environmental Studies and
Transportation Planning, Florida
State University, 2006
REGISTRATION
Professional Transportation Planner
(PTP) No. 412
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2
automobile travel, recognizing that they are where people gather, walk, bike, access transit, and
park their vehicles. They will give residents and visitors more safe travel choices to destinations.
OMSI Master Plan, Portland, OR. Kevin led the transportation planning for the Oregon Museum
of Science and Industry (OMSI) 18+ acre waterfront site in the City of Portland. The plan identified
an interconnected network of multimodal streets and shared-use paths that links the district with
the Willamette River. Key components of the plan include an expanded and improved Willamette
River Greenway Trail, and realignment of Water Avenue with enhanced walkways and incorporation
of a cycle track for bicyclists. The resulting plan provides for more frequent and higher quality river
access opportunities and allows for convenient and comfortable travel for all people regardless of
their choice of mode.
ODOT Portland Outer Powell Boulevard Concept Plan, OR. Kevin led the transportation
planning and analysis for a five-mile urban arterial corridor to determine the appropriate future
streetscape and multimodal design. This unimproved corridor was planned to have five lanes with
bike lanes and sidewalks. The community did not feel this design reflected the surrounding land
uses. The plan divided the corridor into unique “character areas,” with context -sensitive designs
created for each area. Kevin’s work included multimodal level of service analysis for ranges of
designs with different numbers of auto lanes, bike facility types, landscape treatments, pedestrian
accommodations, and bus stop locations.
Innovation Gateway Area Plan, John Day, OR. Kevin led the transportation and design
element of the plan to revitalize the former Oregon Pine mill site and adjacent riverfront properties
into a dynamic, thriving and welcoming public space. The plan creates safe and comfortable
connections between the Innovation Gateway site and nearby destinations and includes new trails
on the north and south banks of the John Day River that connect and circulate to and within nearby
parks. Three additional footbridges over the John Day River encourage exploration of the restored
river and better connections for adjacent neighborhoods. The plan also includes an extension of 7th
Street adjacent to the river that will connect the only two functioning bridges for vehicles to th e
north side of the city.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
1
CARL SPRINGER, PE, PTP
DKS Principal
Carl has led large-scale transportation planning studies for
public agencies throughout the West Coast. As a planning
practice leader, he understands that effective planning
requires a careful balance of technical studies and building
community understanding of strategies and trade-offs. He
has built a reputation for clear and effective communication
and is known for his passion for delivering quality results
that align with community values.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Cooper Mountain Community Plan, Beaverton, OR. DKS
Associates led the transportation plan development for the
Concept Plan for this 2,300-acre site in southwest corner of the
City of Beaverton. The City’s vision for this area is to serve
growth in Washington County. The plan laid out a framework for
urban development. The transportation plan identified strategic
improvements required for the existing circulation system and
identified a balanced and accessible network of new streets and
off-street trails and pathways. The planning process was
informed by extensive public engagement with community
members including existing residents and landowners. The
outcomes include a detailed circulation map for walking, biking, and driving along with project
priorities and funding strategies for implementation.
Urban Reserve Transportation Study (URTS), Washington County, OR . Carl led the
transportation planning efforts to understand how full development of all county urban reserves
might impacts the regional system performance. The primary purpose of this study was to flag
major system issues that were expected with urban growth and to identify preliminary solutions
and cost estimates that local agencies better navigate the process. This included the ultimate
improvements for Cooper Mountain, River Terrace and Kingston Terrace planning areas. Final work
products included an infrastructure funding plan template and toolkit for each designated Urban
Reserve Area within the County.
River Terrace Community Plan, Tigard, OR. Carl led the transportation element for the River
Terrace community area, once it was annexed into the City of Tigard. He previously led similar
efforts for Washington County years prior for the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan work. The focus
of these efforts was to tailor a safe and reliable travel system on the slopes of Bull Mountain that
can support a mix of land uses and traveler demands. This included a core roadway system and
integrated on-street and off-street facilities for walking and bicycling within the community and to
nearby major destinations.
PROFESSIONAL HIGHLIGHTS
Years of Experience: 42
EDUCATION
MS, Transportation Engineering,
University of California Berkeley,
1983
BS, Civil Engineering, Washington
State University, 1980
REGISTRATION
Oregon Professional Traffic
Engineer No. 18910
Professional Transportation Planner
(PTP) No. 17
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
2
West Bull Mountain Concept Plan, Washington County, OR. Carl led the transportation plan
element for a UGB expansion in the southwest Portland metropolitan area. The plan area, which
lies 16 miles from the central business district of Portland, is expected to serve 4,000 residents.
Carl managed the development of an efficient and convenient roadway and trail system in an area
with steep grades and many wetlands, the assessment of potential traffic intrusion (cut -through
traffic) in adjoining neighborhoods, and how to balance total transportation infrastructure costs
with expected land value to keep development economically viable.
Clackamas County Regional Center Multimodal Mixed -Use Area Plan, OR. DKS led the
development of a comprehensive multimodal plan to improve the safety and accessibility of this
regional economic center. The work implemented a broader set of transportation system objectives
and performance measures to better align with the County’s vision for safe facilities for all users.
This planning process highlighted needs for better walking and biking options within the center
area, and for enhanced crossings on the major arterial roadways that separate the surrounding
neighborhoods from the office and retail destinations. The plan developed a prioritized list of over
30 multimodal projects. The County Board of Commissioners fully supported the plan and funded
the design and construction of the recommended projects by 2018.
Springwater Master Urbanization Plan, Gresham, OR. Carl was the lead on the transportation
consultant team that developed an urban street layout and facility plans for 1,500 acres of new
urban lands southeast of the City of Gresham. The concept planned for up to 18,000 industrial and
retail employees, a village center, and 3,000 housing units. Outcomes included plans for
pedestrian, bicycle, transit, freight, and motor vehicle modes consistent with state and regional
planning standards.
Selected Listing of Transportation System Plans Updates that Carl either led as the Project
Manager or served a major contributor to the technical or narrative development for the plan.
• Pasco, WA (2022)
• King City (2021)
• Corvallis, OR (2019)
• Linn County, OR (2018)
• Bend, OR (2016)
• Washington County, OR (2004, 2015)
• Oregon City, OR (2013)
• Sisters, OR (2010)
• West Linn, OR (2009)
• Sherwood, OR (2005)
• Troutdale, OR (2005)
• North Bend, OR (2004)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
B:\Resumes\SEA\NabonnandAurelie.docx
Education
MS Environmental
Engineering, Strasbourg
University, France, 2012
MS Science of Earth and
Environment, ENGEES
(National School for
Water and Environmental
Engineer, 2012
Licenses
Professional Engineer,
WA, OR
Professional
Affiliations
American Water Works
Association (AWWA)
Pacific Northwest
Section (PNWS)
Water Environment
Foundation (WEF)
Pacific Northwest
Clean Water
Association (PNCWA)
Aurelie Nabonnand, PE
Aurelie Nabonnand has eight years of civil engineering experience in water,
wastewater, and storm-water master planning projects and hydraulic modeling. She
has developed new wastewater and water hydraulic models using City’s system-wide
GIS data as well as implemented several extensive model updates and calibration. She
is also experienced with the development and implementation of improvements and
coordinated CIPs. Aurelie has experience with infrastructure pre-design and the
development of inflow and infiltration reduction programs.
Relevant Experience
→ Lead modeling engineer for the
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan
for the City of Salem, Oregon. The
WWCSMP will replace the collection system
portion of the City's existing Master Plan
with a separate and comprehensive
Wastewater Collection System Master Plan.
The plan will establish a baseline system
condition and hydraulic capacity, optimize
the system's capacity and establish Capital
Improvements Plan needs. Aurelie led the
wastewater flow projections and the
hydraulic model update and calibration
tasks.
→ Lead modeling engineer for the City of
Cottage Grove, Oregon, Storm Drainage
and Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. The
hydraulic model was originally constructed
in EPA SWMM l5.1 as part of the previous
draft master plan. Ms. Nabonnand
responsibilities as part of this Master Plan
included updating the hydraulic model with
latest City's GIS data, updating future
wastewater flow projections based on the
City's new Urban Growth Boundary. The
Plan also identified a new stormwater
management plan, and reclaimed water
study. She was also responsible for the
system analysis and the development of
improvement alternatives to mitigate
existing capacity deficiencies and required
infrastructure to service future growth, and a
capital improvement plan. She was also
involved in the preparation of the City's
master plan report.
→ Planning engineer for the Surface Water
Master Plan and Sanitary Sewer Master Plan
(SSMP) for the City of West Linn, Oregon. In
this joint venture project, Carollo is leading
the SSMP that includes an evaluation of
sanitary system performance that considers
infill, redevelopment and new development,
the identification of reduction strategies for
inflow and infiltration, and operations and
maintenance assessment, and the
development and prioritization of capital
improvement projects.
→ Lead modeling engineer for the
Collection System Master Plan Update for
the City of Redmond, Oregon. The goal of
this master plan is to present plans for
improving and expanding the collections
system and recommend capital
improvements to guide the expansion of
these systems to meet the needs of our
growing community. The master plan
updates will take place in two phases. The
first phase will consist of an analysis of the
existing wastewater collection systems and
calibration of the City’s existing collection
system model. The second phase will
include the identification of deficiencies and
the development of a Capital Improvement
Program to facilitate growth and address
deficiencies in the 20-year planning period
horizon. Aurelie is leading wastewater flow
projections and hydraulic modeling tasks.
→ Project engineer for the ongoing City of
Medford, Oregon, Sanitary Sewer Master
Plan. Aurelie’s responsibilities as part of this
Master Plan include flow monitoring,
demographic analysis, flow projections, and
hydraulic model development. A new
hydraulic model of the City’s sewer system is
developed from scratch utilizing City’s latest
GIS data and calibrated using flow
monitoring data. The collection system
capacity is analyzed using the new
calibrated model and capital improvement
plan projects developed to mitigate
identified deficiencies. Aurelie is also
involved in the development of
recommendations to serve future growth, in
the identification of required infrastructure,
and impact to downstream basins.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Aurelie Nabonnand, PE
B:\Resumes\SEA\NabonnandAurelie.docx
→ Lead modeling engineer for the City of
Grants Pass, Oregon, Collection System
Master Plan. Aurelie’s involvement included
a condition assessment of the City's
wastewater system piping system, and the
development of future wastewater flow
projections for both short-term and long-
term conditions. Carollo constructed and
calibrated the City's hydraulic model using
the H2OMap SWMM platform as part of a
former analysis, incorporating five separate
collection system lift stations. Capital project
recommendations were made to alleviate
existing identified deficiencies. Aurelie also
developed recommendations to serve
future growth, identified required
infrastructure, and impact to downstream
basins. She is also involved in the
development of a prioritized capital
improvement plan.
→ Staff engineer for the City of Lake
Oswego, Oregon, Sewer Model Expansion
and Refinement Project. This project
included adding details to the City’s Mike
Urban existing model in the vicinity of four
new developments and the evaluation of
the impacts on the collection system
capacity these four developments would
have.
→ Planning engineer for the Clean Water
Plan for King County, Washington. This
project involves the creation of a 40-year
plan to serve a growing population,
improve water quality, and protect public
health. The Clean Water Plan is being
developed through a scenario planning
process, followed by a more traditional
strategic utility planning phase. Both a
financial plan and an environmental impact
study are part of the project. The plan
includes a variety of elements, such as
compliance with existing regulations,
wastewater treatment, stormwater
managements, resource recovery, climate
resiliency, water quality enhancements of
Puget Sound and inland water bodies, asset
management, equity and social justice,
affordability, and active community
engagement.
→ Project manager for the ongoing City of
Tukwila’s sewer and water system plan
updates. The 2020 updated plan will include
future flow projections, hydraulic modeling,
system analysis, and a capital improvements
plan (CIP) for existing (2019), 10 year, and
build-out scenarios.
→ Project manager for the Wastewater
Flow Data Analysis for the City of Salem,
Oregon. This project will review recent flow
monitoring and rainfall data, develop
parameters for dry and wet weather flow
conditions, prepare build-out flow
projections and discuss Rainfall Dependent
Inflow and Infiltration (RDII) reduction.
→ Lead modeling engineer for the
ongoing City of Tacoma, Washington, CTP
Wastewater Collection System Model
Update, and Capacity Evaluation. Aurelie is
involved in the update and calibration of the
City's Mike Urban CTP wastewater collection
model and the sizing of two near-term key
planned collection system projects using the
updated and calibrated model. Her
involvement also includes performing a
system-wide capacity evaluation of the CTP
collection system under existing conditions.
Lead Hydraulic Modeler for the Wastewater
Facilities Plan Update and Treatment Plant
Predesign for the City of Scappoose,
Oregon. The Plan update will identify and
detail the necessary WWTP capital
improvements over the 20-year planning
period and provides the City with a state-
approvable facilities plan that satisfies all
requirements for the City applying for State
Revolving Fund financing for near-term
improvements. Aurelie’s involvement
included flow projections, review of the flow
monitoring data and necessary updates to
the InfoSWMM model. The project also
includes preliminary design of the capital
improvements that the City needs to
complete in the near-term (first five years).
→ Planning engineer for the 2018 Long-
Term CSO Control Plan Update for King
County, Washington. Included development
and evaluation of alternatives to provide
system-wide Combined Sewer Overflow
(CSO) control, including new alternatives in
uncontrolled CSO basins and analysis of
existing CSO treatment facilities contributing
loads to the WPTP.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
B:\Resumes\POR\ReillyNatalie.docx
Education
BS Civil Engineering,
Portland State University,
2016
BA Geology
Environmental Studies,
Whitman College, 2011
Licenses
Professional Engineer,
Oregon
Professional
Affiliations
American Water Works
Association (AWWA)
Pacific Northwest
Section (PNWS)
Water Environment
Foundation (WEF)
Pacific Northwest Clean
Water Association
(PNCWA)
Natalie L. Reilly, PE
Natalie Reilly joined Carollo in 2017 and has experience spanning many areas of
water and water resources planning, including hydraulic modeling, cost estimation,
scenario planning, and design optimization. Natalie is experienced with updating and
calibrating water hydraulic models and developing CIP projects based on modeling
results. She also has experience in water, wastewater, and reclaimed water treatment
design, including aquifer storage and recovery.
Relevant Experience
→ Planning lead for the City of Tigard
Kingston Terrace Addendum to the 2020
Waster System Master Plan. The City will
soon be expanding its water system to
provide water service to a new community.
The project will identify the preferred
transmission main routing as well as storage
and pumping needs for the new
community. Natalie will lead the project by
updating the hydraulic model, analyzing
water service to the new community, and
developing recommended improvements
and associated cost estimates.
→ Assistant project manager for the City of
Salem Wastewater Collection System
Master Plan. The Plan will replace the
connection system portions of the City’s
existing Master Plan and produce a separate
and comprehensive Wastewater Collection
System Master Plan. The plan will establish
baseline system condition and hydraulic
capacity, optimize the system’s capacity,
and establish capital improvement plan
needs while meeting requirements for
operational reliability and future growth.
Natalie is assisting with project
management through collaboration and
communication with the City and schedule
and project updates. Natalie also assisted
with reviewing the existing system and
developing initial plan chapters.
→ Project engineer for the City of
Wilsonville Wastewater Treatment Plant
Master Plan. This plan develops a capital
improvement program for the City’s WWTP
to accommodate future flows and loads,
future water quality regulations, and
potential future regulatory changes. Natalie
led the task to summarize the characteristics
of the planning area for the City’s WWTP.
→ Project engineer for the Clackamas
County Water Environment Services
Willamette Master Plan. The facilities master
plan includes the development of a 20-year
capital plan that identified improvements to
the District’s Kellogg Creek and Tri-Cities
facilities and associated conveyance
infrastructure to provide the best value to
WES ratepayers by maximizing the use of
existing infrastructure and optimizing
system operation while continuing to
protect water quality and human health and
support economic growth. Natalie assisted
the team with developing planning area
characteristics, conveyance system
improvement recommendations, and
overall plan integration.
→ Planning engineer for the Clean Water
Services Durham East Basin 2019 Master
Plan. The primary objective of the project
will update previous facilities planning
efforts by addressing key changes that have
occurred since their original development,
including demographics, improvements to
the treatment and conveyance systems, and
modification to the treatment approach at
the Durham AWTF. This project will include
a 10-year, 20-year, and ultimate build-out
planning horizons.
→ Staff engineer for the Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan Update and the
Comprehensive Water Plan Update for the
City of Tukwila. The resulting updated Plans
will provide an analysis of the City’s sanitary
sewer system and water distribution system
and a plan for future projects based on
deficiencies identified. Natalie led the
demographic analysis is used to develop
flow projections and water demand
projections.
→ Staff engineer for the Willamette River
Water Treatment Plant (WRWTP) 2017
Master Plan Update for the City of
Wilsonville, Oregon. This update will provide
the City with a stand-alone master plan for
the upgrade and expansion of the 15 mgd
WRWTP that best accommodates the City's
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Natalie L. Reilly, PE
B:\Resumes\POR\ReillyNatalie.docx
growing needs, as well as the upcoming
requirement to pump raw water to the
Willamette Water Supply Program WTP.
Natalie assisted with creating an interactive
CIP workbook and preparing the Master
Plan Update Report.
→ Staff engineer for the Clean Water
Facility for the City of Oak Harbor,
Washington. Planning and design services
for the development of a 3.2 mgd
greenfield wastewater treatment facility.
Natalie assisted with the creation of the
engineering report for the Reclaimed Water
system at the Clean Water Facility.
→ Staff engineer for Thermal MAO
Assistance for the Winston and Green
Sanitary District, Oregon. This project was
completed to provide assistance in
negotiating a new thermal load Mutual
Agreement and Order with Oregon DEQ.
Natalie assisted with developing potential
alternatives to address non-compliance with
the current thermal load allocations.
→ Project engineer for the Water System
Plan Update for the Joint Water
Commission, Oregon. This plan focuses on
the water treatment plant, reservoirs, and
transmission lines and will lay a foundation
for the next 20 years of successful JWC
operations and capital improvements. The
updated plan includes an evaluation of the
capacity and resilience of the water system
and development of a comprehensive and
achievable capital improvement program.
Natalie completed the transmission system
evaluation, including a storage analysis and
hydraulic modeling, and helped develop the
comprehensive CIP.
→ Project engineer for the Comprehensive
Water System Plan Update for the City of
Tukwila, Washington. The comprehensive
plan includes development of water
demand projections and an analysis of the
water distribution system. Natalie developed
the projected water demands, performed
the hydraulic model update and calibration,
analyzed the water distribution system, and
recommended capital improvements. Staff
engineer for the City of Corvallis Water
Distribution and Treatment Facility Master
Plan. Carollo developed the City’s first water
master plan that includes in-depth
evaluations and recommendations for the
City’s water treatment facilities as well as
their distribution system. Natalie assisted the
team with hydraulic modeling and cost
estimating tasks.
→ Project engineer for the City of Salem
Water System Master Plan. This plan will
review the existing water treatment and
distribution system and make
recommendations leading to short- and
long-range capital improvement projects
that will improve system reliability and allow
flexibility for growth. Natalie is assisting with
reviewing historical water demands and
developing water demand projections.
→ Staff engineer for the Water System
Master Plan for the Clackamas River Water
Authority, Oregon. This comprehensive
evaluation of the District’s water distribution
and supply system identified system
deficiencies, determined future supply
requirements, and recommended facility
improvements. The Plan will include a 20-
year CIP. Natalie performed the storage and
pumping analysis, recommended
improvements for the water distribution
system, and assisted in preparing the Water
System Master Plan Report.
→ Staff engineer for the Water System
Comprehensive Plan Update for the City of
Shelton, Washington. The resulting updated
Water Plan serves as a strategic plan for the
City’s water service inside City limits and the
Urban Growth Area for the next six years.
Natalie led the overall plan integration,
water system analysis, and recommended
capital improvements.
→ Staff engineer for the development of a
Reclaimed Water Comprehensive Plan for
the City of Lacey, Washington. This Plan
identifies potential future uses for reclaimed
water, and where the City should focus
efforts to develop a distribution system,
capital improvement program, and financial
plan toward that goal. Natalie is assisting
the team with developing alternatives for
reclaimed water infrastructure to serve
potential future customers.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Deb Galardi, Infrastructure Funding
Deb brings over 30 years of experience developing funding plans and
rates and charges for major infrastructure systems (water, sanitary
sewer, stormwater, transportation, and parks) that includes financial
planning and cost-of-service rate studies, SDC studies, and bond
feasibility studies.
Deb’s leadership in the infrastructure financing industry is
demonstrated by her depth of experience with clients across Oregon, as
well as national and international publications. Deb was a primary
author of the original Water Environment Federation (WEF) Manual of
Practice, Financing and Charges for Wastewater Systems. She also
served as a member of the International Water Assoc iation’s Economic
and Statistics Specialist Group Management Committee where she
traveled extensively (most recently Tokyo, Japan and Brasov, Romania)
to share information on North American utility rate and financial rate
trends and practices. Deb has led some of the most complex and
innovative infrastructure rate funding projects in Oregon over the past
few decades.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
▪ Utility Financial Consultant of Record, City of Salem, Salem, OR. Ms.
Galardi GRG has served as the Financial Consultant of Record for the
City of Salem since 1998. During that time, GRG has conducted
numerous financial analyses for the water, sewer, stormwater, parks,
and transportation systems, including development of long-range
financial plans, comprehensive cost-of -service analyses, and evaluation
of alternative rate structures and financial policies. Deb Galardi has
worked collaboratively with city staff to successfully secure stakeholder
support for each biennial rate proposal. GRG has also completed
important policy and technical work over the past two decades to
support the city’s SDC program for all five infrastructure systems.
▪ Rate and SDC Studies, City of Bend, Bend, OR. Ms. Galardi
conducted numerous water, wastewater, and transportation rate and
SDC studies for the City of Bend since 2000. She is in the final stages of
completing a major overhaul of the water, sewer, and transportation
SDC methodologies to provide funding for projects identified in
recently completed system plans and to redesign the fees for greater
consistency across systems and alignment with housing affordability
objectives. Other work has included analysis of a potential
Education
B.S. Economics, University
of Oregon
Years at GRG: 27
Years in Industry: 32
Certifications:
Women Business Enterprise
(#621)
Areas of Expertise
Utility Rate Studies
System Development Charge
Methodologies
Infrastructure Funding Plans
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
ECONorthwest
transportation SDC overlay and transportation utility fee, and development of SDCs for the
Park and Recreation District.
▪ Water and Wastewater Rate and SDC Studies, City of Pendleton, Pendleton OR. Ms. Galardi
worked with the City of Pendleton to develop new water, wastewater, and stormwater
financial plans and SDCs. Master plan projects were reviewed, and growth -eligible cost
components identified using hydraulic modeling data and facility design criteria. The study
included evaluation of funding options and a specific SDC for infrastructure in the city’s
airport industrial area.
▪ Water and Wastewater Rate and SDC Studies , City of Albany, Albany OR. Ms. Galardi was
project manager for water and wastewater system financial planning, rate and SDC studies for
the City of Albany. She developed utility system financial policies and long -term financial
plans and assisted the city in the evaluation of different financing options and rate strategies.
She recently worked with the City to update its water and wastewater SDCs and assisted in the
development of the city’s stormwater rate structure.
▪ Water and Wastewater Rate and SDC Studies , City of Newberg, Newberg OR. For the City
of Newberg, Ms. Galardi has worked with a citizens’ rate review committee to update the
water, sewer, and stormwater financial plans and rates biennially since 2002. Additionally,
Ms. Galardi has conducted special financial analysis for the City to evaluate rates and cost
recovery for customers served by different springs and non-potable water sources. Ms.
Galardi recently updated the city’s water SDC methodology and rates following completion of
a new master plan.
▪ Water Infrastructure Funding Analysis and SDC Studies, City of Beaverton, OR Deb
conducted a financial analysis of the city’s nonpotable “purple pipe” system that included
evaluation of an area-specific purple pipe SDC and development of a comprehensive water SDC
methodology.
▪ Water and Wastewater Rate and SDC Studies, City of Newberg, Newberg OR. For the City
of Newberg, Ms. Galardi has worked with a citizens’ rate review committee to update the
water, sewer, stormwater, and transportation system financial plans and rates biennially since
2002. Additionally, Ms. Galardi has conducted a special financial analysis for the City to
evaluate rates and cost recovery for customers served by different springs and non -potable
water sources. Ms. Galardi recently updated the city’s water SDC methodology and rates
following completion of a new master plan.
▪ OREGON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
CHARGES STUDY. Deb Galardi served in a lead role for a comprehensive study for the
Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) Department to identify the history and role
of SDCs in funding infrastructure and how SDCs contribute to the cost of housing. Deb was the
task lead in identifying SDC methodological practices and how SDCs may be designed to
better address housing affordability objectives. She conducted research, led focus groups and
workshops with stakeholders, and met with Oregon Legislative Committees to discuss study
findings.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Template Version 08/05/2022
Special Terms and Conditions
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
City of Tigard (“Recipient”), which is identified in Block 5 of the Assistance Agreement, and the
Office of State and Community Energy Programs (“SCEP”), and Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Block Grant Program (“EECBG”), an office within the United States Department of
Energy (“DOE”), enter into this Award, referenced above, to achieve the project objectives and
the technical milestones and deliverables stated in Attachment 1 to this Award.
This Award consists of the following documents, including all terms and conditions therein:
Assistance Agreement
Special Terms and Conditions
Activity FileAttachment 1
Federal Assistance Reporting Checklist andAttachment 2
Instructions
Budget Information SF-424AAttachment 3
Intellectual Property ProvisionsAttachment 4
Energy Efficiency and Conservation StrategyAttachment 5
The following are incorporated into this Award by reference:
DOE Assistance Regulations, 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910 at
http://www.eCFR.gov.
National Policy Requirements (November 12, 2020) at
http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/rtc.jsp.
The Recipient’s application/proposal as approved by SCEP.
Public Law 117-58, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL).
Exhibit C
Federally Required Terms and Conditions
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
2
Table of Contents
Subpart A. General Provisions ............................................................................................................................ 4
Term 1. Legal Authority and Effect ....................................................................................................................... 4
Term 2. Flow Down Requirement......................................................................................................................... 4
Term 3. Compliance with Federal, State, and Municipal Law ............................................................................. 4
Term 4. Inconsistency with Federal Law .............................................................................................................. 4
Term 5. Federal Stewardship ................................................................................................................................ 4
Term 6. NEPA Requirements ................................................................................................................................ 4
Term 7. Notice Regarding the Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products – Sense of Congress .... 6
Term 8. Reporting Requirements ......................................................................................................................... 6
Term 9. Lobbying ................................................................................................................................................... 6
Term 10. Publications ............................................................................................................................................. 6
Term 11. No-Cost Extension ................................................................................................................................... 7
Term 12. Property Standards .................................................................................................................................. 7
Term 13. Insurance Coverage ................................................................................................................................. 7
Term 14. Real Property ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Term 15. Equipment ............................................................................................................................................... 8
Term 16. Supplies .................................................................................................................................................... 9
Term 17. Property Trust Relationship .................................................................................................................... 9
Term 18. Record Retention ..................................................................................................................................... 9
Term 19. Audits ....................................................................................................................................................... 9
Term 20. Indemnity ............................................................................................................................................... 10
Term 21. Foreign National Participation .............................................................................................................. 10
Term 22. Post-Award Due Diligence Reviews ...................................................................................................... 10
Subpart B. Financial Provisions.......................................................................................................................... 11
Term 23. Maximum Obligation ............................................................................................................................. 11
Term 24. Refund Obligation.................................................................................................................................. 11
Term 25. Allowable Costs ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Term 26. Indirect Costs ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Term 27. Decontamination and/or Decommissioning (D&D) Costs .................................................................... 12
Term 28. Use of Program Income ......................................................................................................................... 13
Term 29. Payment Procedures ............................................................................................................................. 13
Term 30. Budget Changes ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Subpart C. Miscellaneous Provisions ................................................................................................................ 14
Term 31. Environmental, Safety and Health Performance of Work at DOE Facilities ........................................ 14
Term 32. System for Award Management and Universal Identifier Requirements ........................................... 15
Term 33. Nondisclosure and Confidentiality Agreements Assurances ............................................................... 16
Term 34. Subrecipient Change Notification ......................................................................................................... 17
Term 35. Conference Spending ............................................................................................................................. 18
Term 36. Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters ...................................................................................... 18
Term 37. Export Control ........................................................................................................................................ 20
Term 38. Interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance .................................................................. 21
Term 39. Organizational Conflict of Interest ........................................................................................................ 21
Term 40. Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment ............ 22
Term 41. Human Subjects Research ..................................................................................................................... 23
Term 42. Fraud, Waste and Abuse ....................................................................................................................... 24
Subpart D. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)-specific requirements ................................................................. 24
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
3
Term 43. Reporting, Tracking and Segregation of Incurred Costs ....................................................................... 24
Term 44. Davis-Bacon Requirements ................................................................................................................... 24
Term 45. Affirmative Action and Pay Transparency Requirements .................................................................... 26
Term 46. Potentially Duplicative Funding Notice ................................................................................................ 27
Term 47. Transparency of Foreign Connections................................................................................................... 27
Term 48. Foreign Collaboration Considerations .................................................................................................. 28
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
4
Subpart A. General Provisions
Term 1. Legal Authority and Effect
A DOE financial assistance award is valid only if it is in writing and is signed, either in writing or
electronically, by a DOE Contracting Officer.
The Recipient may accept or reject the Award. A request to draw down DOE funds or
acknowledgement of award documents by the Recipient’s authorized representative through
electronic systems used by DOE, specifically FedConnect, constitutes the Recipient's acceptance
of the terms and conditions of this Award. Acknowledgement via FedConnect by the
Recipient’s authorized representative constitutes the Recipient's electronic signature.
Term 2. Flow Down Requirement
The Recipient agrees to apply the terms and conditions of this Award, as applicable, including
the Intellectual Property Provisions, to all subrecipients (and subcontractors, as appropriate), as
required by 2 CFR 200.101, and to require their strict compliance therewith. Further, the
Recipient must apply the Award terms as required by 2 CFR 200.327 to all subrecipients (and
subcontractors, as appropriate), and to require their strict compliance therewith.
Term 3. Compliance with Federal, State, and Municipal Law
The Recipient is required to comply with applicable Federal, state, and local laws and
regulations for all work performed under this Award. The Recipient is required to obtain all
necessary Federal, state, and local permits, authorizations, and approvals for all work
performed under this Award.
Term 4. Inconsistency with Federal Law
Any apparent inconsistency between Federal statutes and regulations and the terms and
conditions contained in this Award must be referred to the DOE Award Administrator for
guidance.
Term 5. Federal Stewardship
SCEP will exercise normal Federal stewardship in overseeing the project activities performed
under this Award. Stewardship activities include, but are not limited to, conducting site visits;
reviewing performance and financial reports; providing technical assistance and/or temporary
intervention in unusual circumstances to address deficiencies that develop during the project;
assuring compliance with terms and conditions; and reviewing technical performance after
project completion to ensure that the project objectives have been accomplished.
Term 6. NEPA Requirements
DOE must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to authorizing the
use of Federal funds. Based on all information provided by the Recipient, SCEP has made a
NEPA determination by issuing a categorical exclusion (CX) for all activities listed in the Activity
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
5
File approved by the Contracting Officer and the DOE NEPA Determination. The Recipient is
thereby authorized to use Federal funds for the defined project activities, subject the
Recipient’s compliance with the conditions stated below and except where such activity is
subject to a restriction set forth elsewhere in this Award.
Condition(s):
1. This NEPA Determination only applies to activities funded by the Administrative and
Legal Requirements Document (ALRD) for the EECBG Program Formula Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (EECBG Formula - IIJA) awarded to non-tribal recipients
proposing non-ground disturbing activities within states that have a DOE executed
Historic Preservation Programmatic Agreement.
2. Activities not listed under "Blueprints and additional activities” within this NEPA
determination are subject to additional NEPA review and approval by DOE. For activities
requiring additional NEPA review, Recipients must complete the environmental
questionnaire (EQ-1) found at https: //www.eere-pmc.energy.gov/NEPA.aspx and
receive notification from DOE that the NEPA review has been completed and approved
by the Contracting Officer prior to initiating the project or activities.
3. Activities proposed on tribal lands or tribal properties would be restricted to
homes/buildings less than forty-five (45) years old and without ground disturbance.
Recipients must contact the DOE Project Officer for a Historic Preservation Worksheet
to request a review of activities that are listed below on tribal homes/buildings forty-
five (45) years and older and/or ground disturbing activities. The DOE NEPA team must
review the Historic Preservation Worksheet and notify the Recipient’s DOE Project
Officer before activities listed on the Historic Preservation Worksheet may begin.
4. This authorization does not include activities where the following elements exist:
extraordinary circumstances; cumulative impacts or connected actions that may lead to
significant effects on the human environment; or any inconsistency with the "integral
elements" (as contained in 10 CFR Part 1021, Appendix B) as they relate to a particular
project.
5. The Recipient must identify and promptly notify DOE of extraordinary circumstances,
cumulative impacts or connected actions that may lead to significant effects on the
human environment, or any inconsistency with the “integral elements” (as contained in
10 CFR Part 1021, Appendix B) as they relate to project activities.
6. Recipients must have a DOE executed Historic Preservation Programmatic Agreement
and adhere to the terms and restrictions of its DOE executed Historic Preservation
Programmatic Agreement. DOE executed Historic Preservation Programmatic
Agreements are available at https://www.energy.gov/node/812599.
7. Recipients are responsible for reviewing the online NEPA and Historic preservation
training atwww.energy.gov/node/4816816 and contacting EECBG.NEPA@ee.doe.gov
with any EECBG NEPA or historic preservation questions.
8. Recipients are required to submit an annual Historic Preservation Report in the
Performance and Accountability for Grants in Energy system (PAGE) at
https://www.page.energy.gov/default.aspx.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
6
9. Most activities listed under “Blueprints and additional activities” within this NEPA
determination are more restrictive than the Categorical Exclusion. The restrictions
included in the “Blueprints and additional activities” must be followed.
10. This authorization excludes any activities that are otherwise subject to a restriction set
forth elsewhere in the award.
This authorization is specific to the project activities and locations as described in the Activity
File approved by the Contracting Officer and the DOE NEPA Determination.
If the Recipient later intends to add to or modify the activities or locations as described in the
approved Activity File and the DOE NEPA Determination, those new activities/locations or
modified activities/locations are subject to additional NEPA review and are not authorized for
Federal funding until the Contracting Officer provides written authorization on those additions
or modifications. Should the Recipient elect to undertake activities or change locations prior to
written authorization from the Contracting Officer, the Recipient does so at risk of not receiving
Federal funding for those activities, and such costs may not be recognized as allowable cost
share.
Term 7. Notice Regarding the Purchase of American-Made Equipment and
Products – Sense of Congress
It is the sense of the Congress that, to the greatest extent practicable, all equipment and
products purchased with funds made available under this Award should be American-made.
Term 8. Reporting Requirements
The reporting requirements for this Award are identified on the Federal Assistance Reporting
Checklist, attached to this Award. Failure to comply with these reporting requirements is
considered a material noncompliance with the terms of the Award. Noncompliance may result
in withholding of future payments, suspension, or termination of the current award, and
withholding of future awards. A willful failure to perform, a history of failure to perform, or
unsatisfactory performance of this and/or other financial assistance awards, may also result in a
debarment action to preclude future awards by Federal agencies.
Term 9. Lobbying
By accepting funds under this Award, the Recipient agrees that none of the funds obligated on
the Award shall be expended, directly or indirectly, to influence congressional action on any
legislation or appropriation matters pending before Congress, other than to communicate to
Members of Congress as described in 18 U.S.C. § 1913. This restriction is in addition to those
prescribed elsewhere in statute and regulation.
Term 10. Publications
The Recipient is required to include the following acknowledgement in publications arising out
of, or relating to, work performed under this Award, whether copyrighted or not:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
7
Acknowledgment: “This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department
of Energy’s Office of State and Community Energy Programs (SCEP) under the Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECBG) Award Number DE-
SE0000704.”
Full Legal Disclaimer: “This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor
any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness,
or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or
represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to
any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.
The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect
those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.”
Abridged Legal Disclaimer: “The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent
the views of the U.S. Department of Energy or the United States Government.”
Recipients should make every effort to include the full Legal Disclaimer. However, in the
event that recipients are constrained by formatting and/or page limitations set by the
publisher, the abridged Legal Disclaimer is an acceptable alternative.
Term 11. No-Cost Extension
As provided in 2 CFR 200.308, the Recipient must provide the Contracting Officer with notice in
advance if it intends to utilize a one-time, no-cost extension of this Award. The notification
must include the supporting reasons and the revised period of performance. The Recipient
must submit this notification in writing to the Contracting Officer and DOE Technology
Manager/ Project Officer at least 30 days before the end of the current budget period.
Any no-cost extension will not alter the project scope, milestones, deliverables, or budget of
this Award.
Term 12. Property Standards
The complete text of the Property Standards can be found at 2 CFR 200.310 through 200.316.
Also see 2 CFR 910.360 for additional requirements for real property and equipment for For-
Profit recipients.
Term 13. Insurance Coverage
See 2 CFR 200.310 for insurance requirements for real property and equipment acquired or
improved with Federal funds. Also see 2 CFR 910.360(d) for additional requirements for real
property and equipment for For-Profit recipients.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
8
Term 14. Real Property
Subject to the conditions set forth in 2 CFR 200.311, title to real property acquired or improved
under a Federal award will conditionally vest upon acquisition in the non-Federal entity. The
non-Federal entity cannot encumber this property and must follow the requirements of 2 CFR
200.311 before disposing of the property.
Except as otherwise provided by Federal statutes or by the Federal awarding agency, real
property will be used for the originally authorized purpose as long as needed for that purpose.
When real property is no longer needed for the originally authorized purpose, the non-Federal
entity must obtain disposition instructions from DOE or pass-through entity. The instructions
must provide for one of the following alternatives: (1) retain title after compensating DOE as
described in 2 CFR 200.311(c)(1); (2) Sell the property and compensate DOE as specified in 2
CFR 200.311(c)(2); or (3) transfer title to DOE or to a third party designated/approved by DOE
as specified in 2 CFR 200.311(c)(3).
See 2 CFR 200.311 for additional requirements pertaining to real property acquired or improved
under a Federal award. Also see 2 CFR 910.360 for additional requirements for real property
for For-Profit recipients.
Term 15. Equipment
Subject to the conditions provided in 2 CFR 200.313, title to equipment (property) acquired
under a Federal award will conditionally vest upon acquisition with the non-Federal entity. The
non-Federal entity cannot encumber this property and must follow the requirements of 2 CFR
200.313 before disposing of the property.
A state must use equipment acquired under a Federal award by the state in accordance with
state laws and procedures.
Equipment must be used by the non-Federal entity in the program or project for which it was
acquired as long as it is needed, whether or not the project or program continues to be
supported by the Federal award. When no longer needed for the originally authorized purpose,
the equipment may be used by programs supported by DOE in the priority order specified in 2
CFR 200.313(c)(1)(i) and (ii).
Management requirements, including inventory and control systems, for equipment are
provided in 2 CFR 200.313(d).
When equipment acquired under a Federal award is no longer needed, the non-Federal entity
must obtain disposition instructions from DOE or pass-through entity.
Disposition will be made as follows: (1) items of equipment with a current fair market value of
$5,000 or less may be retained, sold, or otherwise disposed of with no further obligation to
DOE; (2) Non-Federal entity may retain title or sell the equipment after compensating DOE as
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
9
described in 2 CFR 200.313(e)(2); or (3) transfer title to DOE or to an eligible third party as
specified in 2 CFR 200.313(e)(3).
See 2 CFR 200.313 for additional requirements pertaining to equipment acquired under a
Federal award. Also see 2 CFR 910.360 for additional requirements for equipment for For-Profit
recipients. See also 2 CFR 200.439 Equipment and other capital expenditures.
Term 16. Supplies
See 2 CFR 200.314 for requirements pertaining to supplies acquired under a Federal award. See
also 2 CFR 200.453 Materials and supplies costs, including costs of computing devices.
Term 17. Property Trust Relationship
Real property, equipment, and intangible property, that are acquired or improved with a
Federal award must be held in trust by the non-Federal entity as trustee for the beneficiaries of
the project or program under which the property was acquired or improved. See 2 CFR 200.316
for additional requirements pertaining to real property, equipment, and intangible property
acquired or improved under a Federal award.
Term 18. Record Retention
Consistent with 2 CFR 200.334 through 200.338, the Recipient is required to retain records
relating to this Award.
Term 19. Audits
A. Government-Initiated Audits
The Recipient must provide any information, documents, site access, or other
assistance requested by SCEP, DOE or Federal auditing agencies (e.g., DOE Inspector
General, Government Accountability Office) for the purpose of audits and
investigations. Such assistance may include, but is not limited to, reasonable access
to the Recipient’s records relating to this Award.
Consistent with 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910, DOE may audit the
Recipient’s financial records or administrative records relating to this Award at any
time. Government-initiated audits are generally paid for by DOE.
DOE may conduct a final audit at the end of the project period (or the termination of
the Award, if applicable). Upon completion of the audit, the Recipient is required to
refund to DOE any payments for costs that were determined to be unallowable. If
the audit has not been performed or completed prior to the closeout of the award,
DOE retains the right to recover an appropriate amount after fully considering the
recommendations on disallowed costs resulting from the final audit.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
10
DOE will provide reasonable advance notice of audits and will minimize interference
with ongoing work, to the maximum extent practicable.
B. Annual Independent Audits (Single Audit or Compliance Audit)
The Recipient must comply with the annual independent audit requirements in 2
CFR 200.500 through .521 for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, and state and local governments (Single audit), and 2 CFR 910.500
through .521 for for-profit entities (Compliance audit).
The annual independent audits are separate from Government-initiated audits
discussed in part A. of this Term and must be paid for by the Recipient. To minimize
expense, the Recipient may have a Compliance audit in conjunction with its annual
audit of financial statements. The financial statement audit is not a substitute for
the Compliance audit. If the audit (Single audit or Compliance audit, depending on
Recipient entity type) has not been performed or completed prior to the closeout of
the award, DOE may impose one or more of the actions outlined in 2 CFR 200.339,
Remedies for Noncompliance.
Term 20. Indemnity
The Recipient shall indemnify DOE and its officers, agents, or employees for any and all liability,
including litigation expenses and attorneys' fees, arising from suits, actions, or claims of any
character for death, bodily injury, or loss of or damage to property or to the environment,
resulting from the project, except to the extent that such liability results from the direct fault or
negligence of DOE officers, agents or employees, or to the extent such liability may be covered
by applicable allowable costs provisions.
Term 21. Foreign National Participation
If the Recipient (including any of its subrecipients and contractors) anticipates involving foreign
nationals in the performance of the Award, the Recipient must, upon DOE’s request, provide
DOE with specific information about each foreign national to ensure compliance with the
requirements for participation and access approval. The volume and type of information
required may depend on various factors associated with the Award. The DOE Contracting
Officer will notify the Recipient if this information is required.
DOE may elect to deny a foreign national’s participation in the Award. Likewise, DOE may elect
to deny a foreign national’s access to a DOE sites, information, technologies, equipment,
programs or personnel.
Term 22. Post-Award Due Diligence Reviews
During the life of the Award, DOE may conduct ongoing due diligence reviews, through
Government resources, to identify potential risks of undue foreign influence. In the event, a risk
is identified, DOE may require risk mitigation measures, including but not limited to, requiring
an individual or entity not participate in the Award.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
11
Subpart B. Financial Provisions
Term 23. Maximum Obligation
The maximum obligation of DOE for this Award is the total “Funds Obligated” stated in Block 13
of the Assistance Agreement to this Award.
Term 24. Refund Obligation
The Recipient must refund any excess payments received from SCEP, including any costs
determined unallowable by the Contracting Officer. Upon the end of the project period (or the
termination of the Award, if applicable), the Recipient must refund to SCEP the difference
between (1) the total payments received from SCEP, and (2) the Federal share of the costs
incurred. Refund obligations under this Term do not supersede the annual reconciliation or
true up process if specified under the Indirect Cost Term.
Term 25. Allowable Costs
SCEP determines the allowability of costs through reference to 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2
CFR part 910. All project costs must be allowable, allocable, and reasonable. The Recipient
must document and maintain records of all project costs, including, but not limited to, the costs
paid by Federal funds, costs claimed by its subrecipients and project costs that the Recipient
claims as cost sharing, including in-kind contributions. The Recipient is responsible for
maintaining records adequate to demonstrate that costs claimed have been incurred, are
reasonable, allowable and allocable, and comply with the cost principles. Upon request, the
Recipient is required to provide such records to SCEP. Such records are subject to audit.
Failure to provide SCEP adequate supporting documentation may result in a determination by
the Contracting Officer that those costs are unallowable.
The Recipient is required to obtain the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer for any
foreign travel costs.
Term 26. Indirect Costs
A. Indirect Cost Allocation:
The budget for this Award does not include an allocation of segregated
indirect billing rates. Therefore, indirect charges shall not be charged under
allocated billing rates, nor shall reimbursement be requested for this project
for segregated indirect cost billing rates, nor shall any indirect charges for this
project be allocated to any other Federally sponsored project. The Recipient
cannot claim indirect costs separately as cost share.
B. Fringe Cost Allocation:
The budget for this award does not include an allocation of segregated fringe billing
rates. Fringe benefit costs have been found reasonable as incorporated in the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
12
Recipient’s burdened labor rate or under an allocated indirect cost billing
rate. Therefore, fringe benefit costs shall not be charged as a separate rate
allocation to this Award. SCEP will not reimburse fringe benefit costs as a separate
budget item. Fringe benefit costs for this Award cannot be allocated as a separate
rate allocation to any other Federally sponsored project.
C. Subrecipient Indirect Costs (If Applicable):
The Recipient must ensure its subrecipient’s indirect costs are appropriately
managed, have been found to be allowable, and comply with the requirements of
this Award and 2 CFR Part 200 as amended by 2 CFR Part 910.
D. Indirect Cost Stipulations:
i. Modification to Indirect Cost Billing Rates
SCEP will not modify this Award solely to provide additional funds to cover
increases in the Recipient’s indirect cost billing rate(s). Adjustments to the
indirect cost billing rates must be approved by the Recipient’s Cognizant
Agency or Cognizant Federal Agency Official.
The Recipient must provide a copy of an updated NICRA or indirect rate
proposal to the DOE Award Administrator in order to increase indirect cost
billing rates. If the Contracting Officer provides prior written approval, the
Recipient may incur an increase in the indirect cost billing rates.
Reimbursement will be limited by the budgeted dollar amount for indirect
costs for each budget period as shown in Attachment 3 to this Award.
ii. Award Closeout
The closeout of the DOE award does not affect (1) the right of the DOE
to disallow costs and recover funds on the basis of a later audit or other
review; (2) the requirement for the Recipient to return any funds due
as a result of later refunds, corrections or other transactions including
final indirect cost billing rate adjustments; and (3) the ability of the DOE
to make financial adjustments to a previously closed award resolving
indirect cost payments and making final payments.
Term 27. Decontamination and/or Decommissioning (D&D) Costs
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Award, the Government shall not be responsible
for or have any obligation to the Recipient for (1) Decontamination and/or Decommissioning
(D&D) of any of the Recipient’s facilities, or (2) any costs which may be incurred by the
Recipient in connection with the D&D of any of its facilities due to the performance of the work
under this Award, whether said work was performed prior to or subsequent to the effective
date of the Award.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
13
Term 28. Use of Program Income
If the Recipient earns program income during the project period as a result of this Award, the
Recipient must add the program income to the funds committed to the Award and used to
further eligible project objectives.
Term 29. Payment Procedures
A. Method of Payment
Payment will be made by reimbursement through the Department of Treasury’s
ASAP system.
B. Requesting Reimbursement
Requests for reimbursements must be made through the ASAP system.
C. Adjusting Payment Requests for Available Cash
The Recipient must disburse any funds that are available from repayments to and
interest earned on a revolving fund, program income, rebates, refunds, contract
settlements, audit recoveries, credits, discounts, and interest earned on any of those
funds before requesting additional cash payments from SCEP.
D. Payments
All payments are made by electronic funds transfer to the bank account identified
on the Bank Information Form that the Recipient filed with the U.S. Department of
Treasury.
E. Unauthorized Drawdown of Federal Funds
For each budget period, the Recipient may not spend more than the Federal share
authorized to that particular budget period, without specific written approval from
the Contracting Officer. The Recipient must immediately refund SCEP any amounts
spent or drawn down in excess of the authorized amount for a budget period. The
Recipient and subrecipients shall promptly, but at least quarterly, remit to DOE
interest earned on advances drawn in excess of disbursement needs, and shall
comply with the procedure for remitting interest earned to the Federal government
per 2 CFR 200.305, as applicable.
Term 30. Budget Changes
A. Budget Changes Generally
The Contracting Officer has reviewed and approved the SF-424A in Attachment 3 to
this Award.
Any increase in the total project cost, whether DOE share or Cost Share, which is
stated as “Total” in Block 12 to the Assistance Agreement of this Award, must be
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
14
approved in advance and in writing by the Contracting Officer.
Any change that alters the project scope, milestones or deliverables requires prior
written approval of the Contracting Officer. SCEP may deny reimbursement for any
failure to comply with the requirements in this term.
B. Transfers of Funds Among Direct Cost Categories
The Recipient is required to obtain the prior written approval of the Contracting
Officer for any transfer of funds among direct cost categories where the cumulative
amount of such transfers exceeds or is expected to exceed 10 percent of the total
project cost, which is stated as “Total” in Block 12 to the Assistance Agreement of
this Award.
The Recipient is required to notify the DOE Technology Manager/Project Officer of
any transfer of funds among direct cost categories where the cumulative amount of
such transfers is equal to or below 10 percent of the total project cost, which is
stated as “Total” in Block 12 to the Assistance Agreement of this Award.
C. Transfer of Funds Between Direct and Indirect Cost Categories
The Recipient is required to obtain the prior written approval of the Contracting
Officer for any transfer of funds between direct and indirect cost categories. If the
Recipient’s actual allowable indirect costs are less than those budgeted in
Attachment 3 to this Award, the Recipient may use the difference to pay additional
allowable direct costs during the project period so long as the total difference is less
than 10% of total project costs and the difference is reflected in actual requests for
reimbursement to DOE.
Subpart C. Miscellaneous Provisions
Term 31. Environmental, Safety and Health Performance of Work at DOE
Facilities
With respect to the performance of any portion of the work under this Award which is
performed at a DOE -owned or controlled site, the Recipient agrees to comply with all State and
Federal Environmental, Safety and Health (ES&H) regulations and with all other ES&H
requirements of the operator of such site.
Prior to the performance on any work at a DOE-owned or controlled site, the Recipient shall
contact the site facility manager for information on DOE and site-specific ES&H requirements.
The Recipient is required apply this provision to its subrecipients and contractors.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
15
Term 32. System for Award Management and Universal Identifier
Requirements
A. Requirement for Registration in the System for Award Management (SAM)
Unless the Recipient is exempted from this requirement under 2 CFR 25.110, the
Recipient must maintain the currency of its information in SAM until the Recipient
submits the final financial report required under this Award or receive the final
payment, whichever is later. This requires that the Recipient reviews and updates
the information at least annually after the initial registration, and more frequently if
required by changes in its information or another award term.
B. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)
SAM automatically assigns a UEI to all active SAM.gov registered entities. Entities no
longer have to go to a third-party website to obtain their identifier. This information
is displayed on SAM.gov.
If the Recipient is authorized to make subawards under this Award, the Recipient:
i. Must notify potential subrecipients that no entity (see definition in paragraph C
of this award term) may receive a subaward from the Recipient unless the entity
has provided its UEI number to the Recipient.
ii. May not make a subaward to an entity unless the entity has provided its UEI
number to the Recipient.
C. Definitions
For purposes of this award term:
i. System for Award Management (SAM) means the Federal repository into
which an entity must provide information required for the conduct of
business as a recipient. Additional information about registration procedures
may be found at the SAM Internet site (currently at https://www.sam.gov).
ii. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) is the 12-character, alpha-numeric identifier
that will be assigned by SAM.gov upon registration.
iii. Entity, as it is used in this award term, means all of the following, as defined
at 2 CFR Part 25, subpart C:
1. A Governmental organization, which is a State, local government, or
Indian Tribe.
2. A foreign public entity.
3. A domestic or foreign nonprofit organization.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
16
4. A domestic or foreign for-profit organization.
5. A Federal agency, but only as a subrecipient under an award or
subaward to a non-Federal entity.
iv. Subaward:
1. This term means a legal instrument to provide support for the
performance of any portion of the substantive project or program for
which the Recipient received this Award and that the Recipient
awards to an eligible subrecipient.
2. The term does not include the Recipient’s procurement of property
and services needed to carry out the project or program (for further
explanation, see 2 CFR 200.501 Audit requirements, (f) Subrecipients
and Contractors and/or 2 CFR 910.501 Audit requirements, (f)
Subrecipients and Contractors).
3. A subaward may be provided through any legal agreement, including
an agreement that the Recipient considers a contract.
v. Subrecipient means an entity that:
1. Receives a subaward from the Recipient under this Award; and
2. Is accountable to the Recipient for the use of the Federal funds
provided by the subaward.
Term 33. Nondisclosure and Confidentiality Agreements Assurances
A. By entering into this agreement, the Recipient attests that it does not and will not
require its employees or contractors to sign internal nondisclosure or confidentiality
agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting its employees or
contactors from lawfully reporting waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated
investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency
authorized to receive such information.
B. The Recipient further attests that it does not and will not use any Federal funds to
implement or enforce any nondisclosure and/or confidentiality policy, form, or
agreement it uses unless it contains the following provisions:
i. ‘‘These provisions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or
otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by
existing statute or Executive order relating to (1) classified information, (2)
communications to Congress, (3) the reporting to an Inspector General of a
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
17
violation of any law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of
funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public
health or safety, or (4) any other whistleblower protection. The definitions,
requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, and liabilities created by
controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions are incorporated into
this agreement and are controlling.’’
ii. The limitation above shall not contravene requirements applicable to
Standard Form 312, Form 4414, or any other form issued by a Federal
department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.
iii. Notwithstanding provision listed in paragraph (a), a nondisclosure or
confidentiality policy form or agreement that is to be executed by a person
connected with the conduct of an intelligence or intelligence-related activity,
other than an employee or officer of the United States Government, may
contain provisions appropriate to the particular activity for which such
document is to be used. Such form or agreement shall, at a minimum,
require that the person will not disclose any classified information received
in the course of such activity unless specifically authorized to do so by the
United States Government. Such nondisclosure or confidentiality forms shall
also make it clear that they do not bar disclosures to Congress, or to an
authorized official of an executive agency or the Department of Justice, that
are essential to reporting a substantial violation of law.
Term 34. Subrecipient Change Notification
Except for subrecipients specifically proposed as part of the Recipient’s Application for award,
the Recipient must notify the Contracting Officer and Project Manager in writing 30 days prior
to the execution of new or modified subrecipient agreements, including naming any To Be
Determined subrecipients. This notification does not constitute a waiver of the prior approval
requirements outlined in 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910, nor does it relieve the
Recipient from its obligation to comply with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and
executive orders.
In order to satisfy this notification requirement, the Recipient documentation must, as a
minimum, include the following:
A description of the research to be performed, the service to be provided, or the
equipment to be purchased.
Cost share commitment letter if the subrecipient is providing cost share to the Award.
An assurance that the process undertaken by the Recipient to solicit the subrecipient
complies with their written procurement procedures as outlined in 2 CFR 200.317
through 200.327.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
18
An assurance that no planned, actual or apparent conflict of interest exists between the
Recipient and the selected subrecipient and that the Recipient’s written standards of
conduct were followed.1
A completed Environmental Questionnaire, if applicable.
An assurance that the subrecipient is not a debarred or suspended entity.
An assurance that all required award provisions will be flowed down in the resulting
subrecipient agreement.
The Recipient is responsible for making a final determination to award or modify subrecipient
agreements under this agreement, but the Recipient may not proceed with the subrecipient
agreement until the Contracting Officer determines, and provides the Recipient written
notification, that the information provided is adequate.
Should the Recipient not receive a written notification of adequacy from the Contracting Officer
within 30 days of the submission of the subrecipient documentation stipulated above, the
Recipient may proceed to award or modify the proposed subrecipient agreement.
Term 35. Conference Spending
The Recipient shall not expend any funds on a conference not directly and programmatically
related to the purpose for which the grant was awarded that would defray the cost to the
United States Government of a conference held by any Executive branch department, agency,
board, commission, or office for which the cost to the United States Government would
otherwise exceed $20,000, thereby circumventing the required notification by the head of any
such Executive Branch department, agency, board, commission, or office to the Inspector
General (or senior ethics official for any entity without an Inspector General), of the date,
location, and number of employees attending such conference.
Term 36. Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters
A. General Reporting Requirement
If the total value of your currently active Financial Assistance awards, grants, and
procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies exceeds $10,000,000 for
any period of time during the period of performance of this Federal award, then you
as the recipient during that period of time must maintain the currency of
information reported to the System for Award Management (SAM) that is made
1 It is DOE’s position that the existence of a “covered relationship” as defined in 5 CFR 2635.502(a)&(b) between a member of
the Recipient’s owners or senior management and a member of a subrecipient’s owners or senior management creates at a
minimum an apparent conflict of interest that would require the Recipient to notify the Contracting Officer and provide
detailed information and justification (including, for example, mitigation measures) as to why the subrecipient agreement does
not create an actual conflict of interest. The Recipient must also notify the Contracting Officer of any new subrecipient
agreement with: (1) an entity that is owned or otherwise controlled by the Recipient; or (2) an entity that is owned or
otherwise controlled by another entity that also owns or otherwise controls the Recipient, as it is DOE’s position that these
situations also create at a minimum an apparent conflict of interest.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
19
available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently the Federal
Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)) about civil,
criminal, or administrative proceedings described in paragraph 2 of this term. This is
a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41
U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information
posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15,
2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts,
will be publicly available.
B. Proceedings About Which You Must Report
Submit the information required about each proceeding that:
i. Is in connection with the award or performance of a Financial Assistance,
cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the Federal
Government;
ii. Reached its final disposition during the most recent five-year period; and
iii. Is one of the following:
1. A criminal proceeding that resulted in a conviction, as defined in
paragraph E of this award term and condition;
2. A civil proceeding that resulted in a finding of fault and liability and
payment of a monetary fine, penalty, reimbursement, restitution, or
damages of $5,000 or more;
3. An administrative proceeding, as defined in paragraph E of this term,
that resulted in a finding of fault and liability and your payment of
either a monetary fine or penalty of $5,000 or more or
reimbursement, restitution, or damages in excess of $100,000; or
4. Any other criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding if:
a. It could have led to an outcome described in paragraph B.iii.1,
2, or 3 of this term;
b. It had a different disposition arrived at by consent or
compromise with an acknowledgment of fault on your part;
and
c. The requirement in this term to disclose information about
the proceeding does not conflict with applicable laws and
regulations.
C. Reporting Procedures
Enter in the SAM Entity Management area the information that SAM requires about
each proceeding described in paragraph B of this term. You do not need to submit
the information a second time under assistance awards that you received if you
already provided the information through SAM because you were required to do so
under Federal procurement contracts that you were awarded.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
20
D. Reporting Frequency
During any period of time when you are subject to the requirement in paragraph A
of this term, you must report proceedings information through SAM for the most
recent five-year period, either to report new information about any proceeding(s)
that you have not reported previously or affirm that there is no new information to
report. Recipients that have Federal contract, Financial Assistance awards,
(including cooperative agreement awards) with a cumulative total value greater than
$10,000,000, must disclose semiannually any information about the criminal, civil,
and administrative proceedings.
E. Definitions
For purposes of this term:
i. Administrative proceeding means a non-judicial process that is adjudicatory
in nature in order to make a determination of fault or liability (e.g., Securities
and Exchange Commission Administrative proceedings, Civilian Board of
Contract Appeals proceedings, and Armed Services Board of Contract
Appeals proceedings). This includes proceedings at the Federal and State
level but only in connection with performance of a Federal contract or
Financial Assistance awards. It does not include audits, site visits, corrective
plans, or inspection of deliverables.
ii. Conviction means a judgment or conviction of a criminal offense by any court
of competent jurisdiction, whether entered upon a verdict or a plea, and
includes a conviction entered upon a plea of nolo contendere.
iii. Total value of currently active Financial Assistance awards, cooperative
agreements and procurement contracts includes—
1. Only the Federal share of the funding under any Federal award with a
recipient cost share or match; and
2. The value of all expected funding increments under a Federal award and
options, even if not yet exercised.
Term 37. Export Control
The United States government regulates the transfer of information, commodities, technology,
and software considered to be strategically important to the U.S. to protect national security,
foreign policy, and economic interests without imposing undue regulatory burdens on
legitimate international trade. There is a network of Federal agencies and regulations that
govern exports that are collectively referred to as “Export Controls.” The Recipient is
responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable United States Export Control laws and
regulations relating to any work performed under a resulting award.
The Recipient must immediately report to DOE any export control violations related to the
project funded under this award, at the recipient or subrecipient level, and provide the
corrective action(s) to prevent future violations.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
21
Term 38. Interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance
The DOE interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance (COI Policy) can be found at
https://www.energy.gov/management/department-energy-interim-conflict-interest-policy-
requirements-financial-assistance. This policy is applicable to all non-Federal entities applying
for, or that receive, DOE funding by means of a financial assistance award (e.g., a grant,
cooperative agreement, or technology investment agreement) and, through the
implementation of this policy by the entity, to each Investigator who is planning to participate
in, or is participating in, the project funded wholly or in part under this Award. The term
“Investigator” means the PI and any other person, regardless of title or position, who is
responsible for the purpose, design, conduct, or reporting of a project funded by DOE or
proposed for funding by DOE. The Recipient must flow down the requirements of the interim
COI Policy to any subrecipient non-Federal entities, with the exception of DOE National
Laboratories. Further, the Recipient must identify all financial conflicts of interests (FCOI), i.e.,
managed and unmanaged/ unmanageable, in its initial and ongoing FCOI reports.
Prior to award, the Recipient was required to: 1) ensure all Investigators on this Award
completed their significant financial disclosures; 2) review the disclosures; 3) determine
whether a FCOI exists; 4) develop and implement a management plan for FCOIs; and 5) provide
DOE with an initial FCOI report that includes all FCOIs (i.e., managed and
unmanaged/unmanageable). Within 180 days of the date of the Award, the Recipient must be
in full compliance with the other requirements set forth in DOE’s interim COI Policy.
Term 39. Organizational Conflict of Interest
Organizational conflicts of interest are those where, because of relationships with a parent
company, affiliate, or subsidiary organization, the Recipient is unable or appears to be unable to
be impartial in conducting procurement action involving a related organization (2 CFR
200.318(c)(2)).
The Recipient must disclose in writing any potential or actual organizational conflict of interest
to the DOE Contracting Officer. The Recipient must provide the disclosure prior to engaging in
a procurement or transaction using project funds with a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary
organization that is not a state, local government, or Indian tribe. For a list of the information
that must be included the disclosure, see Section VI. of the DOE interim Conflict of Interest
Policy for Financial Assistance at https://www.energy.gov/management/department-energy-
interim-conflict-interest-policy-requirements-financial-assistance.
If the effects of the potential or actual organizational conflict of interest cannot be avoided,
neutralized, or mitigated, the Recipient must procure goods and services from other sources
when using project funds. Otherwise, DOE may terminate the Award in accordance with 2 CFR
200.340 unless continued performance is determined to be in the best interest of the Federal
government.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
22
The Recipient must flow down the requirements of the interim COI Policy to any subrecipient
non-Federal entities, with the exception of DOE National Laboratories. The Recipient is
responsible for ensuring subrecipient compliance with this term.
If the Recipient has a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization that is not a state, local
government, or Indian tribe, the Recipient must maintain written standards of conduct covering
organizational conflicts of interest.
Term 40. Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance
Services or Equipment
As set forth in 2 CFR 200.216, recipients and subrecipients are prohibited from obligating or
expending project funds (Federal and non-Federal funds) to:
(1) Procure or obtain;
(2) Extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain; or
(3) Enter into a contract (or extend or renew a contract) to procure or obtain equipment,
services, or systems that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a
substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any
system. As described in Public Law 115-232, section 889, covered telecommunications
equipment is telecommunications equipment produced by Huawei Technologies Company
or ZTE Corporation (or any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities).
(i) For the purpose of public safety, security of government facilities, physical security
surveillance of critical infrastructure, and other national security purposes, video
surveillance and telecommunications equipment produced by Hytera
Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, or
Dahua Technology Company (or any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities).
(ii) Telecommunications or video surveillance services provided by such entities or
using such equipment.
(iii) Telecommunications or video surveillance equipment or services produced or
provided by an entity that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director
of the National Intelligence or the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
reasonably believes to be an entity owned or controlled by, or otherwise connected
to, the government of a covered foreign country.
See Public Law 115-232, section 889 for additional information.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
23
Term 41. Human Subjects Research
Research involving human subjects, biospecimens, or identifiable private information
conducted with Department of Energy (DOE) funding is subject to the requirements of DOE
Order 443.1C, Protection of Human Research Subjects, 45 CFR Part 46, Protection of Human
Subjects (subpart A which is referred to as the “Common Rule”), and 10 CFR Part 745, Protection
of Human Subjects.
Federal regulation and the DOE Order require review by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) of
all proposed human subjects research projects. The IRB is an interdisciplinary ethics board
responsible for ensuring that the proposed research is sound and justifies the use of human
subjects or their data; the potential risks to human subjects have been minimized; participation
is voluntary; and clear and accurate information about the study, the benefits and risks of
participating, and how individuals’ data/specimens will be protected/used, is provided to
potential participants for their use in determining whether or not to participate.
The Recipient shall provide the Federal Wide Assurance number identified in item 1 below and
the certification identified in item 2 below to DOE prior to initiation of any project that will
involve interactions with humans in some way (e.g., through surveys); analysis of their
identifiable data (e.g., demographic data and energy use over time); asking individuals to test
devices, products, or materials developed through research; and/or testing of commercially
available devices in buildings/homes in which humans will be present. Note: This list of
examples is illustrative and not all inclusive.
No DOE funded research activity involving human subjects, biospecimens, or identifiable
private information shall be conducted without:
1) A registration and a Federal Wide Assurance of compliance accepted by the Office of
Human Research Protection (OHRP) in the Department of Health and Human Services;
and
2) Certification that the research has been reviewed and approved by an Institutional
Review Board (IRB) provided for in the assurance. IRB review may be accomplished by
the awardee’s institutional IRB; by the Central DOE IRB; or if collaborating with one of
the DOE national laboratories, by the DOE national laboratory IRB.
The Recipient is responsible for ensuring all subrecipients comply and for reporting information
on the project annually to the DOE Human Subjects Research Database (HSRD) at
https://science.osti.gov/HumanSubjects/Human-Subjects-Database/home . Note: If a DOE IRB
is used, no end of year reporting will be needed.
Additional information on the DOE Human Subjects Research Program can be found at:
https://science.osti.gov/ber/human-subjects
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
24
Term 42. Fraud, Waste and Abuse
The mission of the DOE Office of Inspector General (OIG) is to strengthen the integrity,
economy and efficiency of DOE’s programs and operations including deterring and detecting
fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement. The OIG accomplishes this mission primarily through
investigations, audits, and inspections of Department of Energy activities to include grants,
cooperative agreements, loans, and contracts. The OIG maintains a Hotline for reporting
allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement. To report such allegations, please visit
https://www.energy.gov/ig/ig-hotline.
Additionally, the Recipient must be cognizant of the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.113
Mandatory disclosures, which states:
The non-Federal entity or applicant for a Federal award must disclose, in a
timely manner, in writing to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through
entity all violations of Federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity
violations potentially affecting the Federal award. Non-Federal entities that
have received a Federal award including the term and condition outlined in
appendix XII of 2 CFR Part 200 are required to report certain civil, criminal, or
administrative proceedings to SAM (currently FAPIIS). Failure to make
required disclosures can result in any of the remedies described in § 200.339.
(See also 2 CFR part 180, 31 U.S.C. 3321, and 41 U.S.C. 2313.)
Subpart D. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)-specific requirements
Term 43. Reporting, Tracking and Segregation of Incurred Costs
BIL funds can be used in conjunction with other funding, as necessary to complete projects, but
tracking and reporting must be separate to meet the reporting requirements of the BIL and
related Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance. The Recipient must keep separate
records for BIL funds and must ensure those records comply with the requirements of the BIL.
Funding provided through the BIL that is supplemental to an existing grant or cooperative
agreement is one-time funding.
Term 44. Davis-Bacon Requirements
This award is funded under Division D of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). All laborers
and mechanics employed by the recipient, subrecipients, contractors or subcontractors in the
performance of construction, alteration, or repair work in excess of $2000 on an award funded
directly by or assisted in whole or in part by funds made available under this award shall be
paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on similar projects in the locality, as
determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title
40, United States Code commonly referred to as the “Davis-Bacon Act” (DBA).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
25
Recipients shall provide written assurance acknowledging the DBA requirements for the award
or project and confirming that all of the laborers and mechanics performing construction,
alteration, or repair, through funding under the award are paid or will be paid wages at rates
not less than those prevailing on projects of a character similar in the locality as determined by
Subchapter IV of Chapter 31 of Title 40, United States Code (Davis-Bacon Act).
The Recipient must comply with all of the Davis-Bacon Act requirements, including but not
limited to:
(1) ensuring that the wage determination(s) and appropriate Davis-Bacon clauses
and requirements are flowed down to and incorporated into any applicable
subcontracts or subrecipient awards.
(2) being responsible for compliance by any subcontractor or subrecipient with
the Davis-Bacon labor standards.
(3) receiving and reviewing certified weekly payrolls submitted by all
subcontractors and subrecipients for accuracy and to identify potential
compliance issues.
(4) maintaining original certified weekly payrolls for 3 years after the completion
of the project and must make those payrolls available to the DOE or the
Department of Labor upon request, as required by 29 CFR 5.6(a)(2).
(5) conducting payroll and job-site reviews for construction work, including
interviews with employees, with such frequency as may be necessary to assure
compliance by its subcontractors and subrecipients and as requested or directed
by the DOE.
(6) cooperating with any authorized representative of the Department of Labor
in their inspection of records, interviews with employees, and other actions
undertaken as part of a Department of Labor investigation.
(7) posting in a prominent and accessible place the wage determination(s) and
Department of Labor Publication: WH-1321, Notice to Employees Working on
Federal or Federally Assisted Construction Projects.
(8) notifying the Contracting Officer of all labor standards issues, including all
complaints regarding incorrect payment of prevailing wages and/or fringe
benefits, received from the recipient, subrecipient, contractor, or subcontractor
employees; significant labor standards violations, as defined in 29 CFR 5.7;
disputes concerning labor standards pursuant to 29 CFR parts 4, 6, and 8 and as
defined in FAR 52.222-14; disputed labor standards determinations; Department
of Labor investigations; or legal or judicial proceedings related to the labor
standards under this Contract, a subcontract, or subrecipient award.
(9) preparing and submitting to the Contracting Officer, the Office of
Management and Budget Control Number 1910-5165, Davis Bacon Semi-Annual
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
26
Labor Compliance Report, by April 21 and October 21 of each year. Form
submittal will be administered through the iBenefits system
(https://doeibenefits2.energy.gov) or its successor system.
The Recipient must undergo Davis-Bacon Act compliance training and must maintain
competency in Davis-Bacon Act compliance. The Contracting Officer will notify the Recipient of
any DOE sponsored Davis-Bacon Act compliance trainings. The Department of Labor offers free
Prevailing Wage Seminars several times a year that meet this requirement, at
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/construction/seminars/events .
The Department of Energy has contracted with, a third-party DBA electronic payroll compliance
software application. The Recipient must ensure the timely electronic submission of weekly
certified payrolls as part of its compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act unless a waiver is granted
to a particular contractor or subcontractor because they are unable or limited in their ability to
use or access the software.
Davis Bacon Act Electronic Certified Payroll Submission Waiver
A waiver must be granted before the award starts. The applicant does not have the right to
appeal SCEP’s decision concerning a waiver request.
For additional guidance on how to comply with the Davis-Bacon provisions and clauses, see
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/construction and
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/protections-for-workers-in-
construction.
Term 45. Affirmative Action and Pay Transparency Requirements
All federally assisted construction contracts exceeding $10,000 annually will be subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 11246:
(1) Recipients, subrecipients, and contractors are prohibited from
discriminating in employment decisions on the basis of race, color, religion,
sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or national origin.
(2) Recipients and Contractors are required to take affirmative action to
ensure that equal opportunity is provided in all aspects of their
employment. This includes flowing down the appropriate language to all
subrecipients, contractors and subcontractors.
(3) Recipients, subrecipients, contractors and subcontractors are prohibited
from taking adverse employment actions against applicants and employees
for asking about, discussing, or sharing information about their pay or,
under certain circumstances, the pay of their co-workers.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
27
The Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office of Federal Contractor Compliance Programs (OFCCP)
uses a neutral process to schedule contractors for compliance evaluations. OFCCP’s Technical
Assistance Guide2 should be consulted to gain an understanding of the requirements and
possible actions the recipients, subrecipients, contractors and subcontractors must take.
Term 46. Potentially Duplicative Funding Notice
If the Recipient or subrecipients have or receive any other award of federal funds for activities
that potentially overlap with the activities funded under this Award, the Recipient must
promptly notify DOE in writing of the potential overlap and state whether project funds (i.e.,
recipient cost share and federal funds) from any of those other federal awards have been, are
being, or are to be used (in whole or in part) for one or more of the identical cost items under
this Award. If there are identical cost items, the Recipient must promptly notify the DOE
Contracting Officer in writing of the potential duplication and eliminate any inappropriate
duplication of funding.
Term 47. Transparency of Foreign Connections
During the term of the Award, the Recipient must notify the DOE Contracting Officer within
fifteen (15) business days of learning of the following circumstances in relation to the Recipient
or subrecipients:
1. The existence of any joint venture or subsidiary that is based in, funded by, or has a
foreign affiliation with any foreign country of risk;
2. Any current or pending contractual or financial obligation or other agreement
specific to a business arrangement, or joint venture-like arrangement with an
enterprise owned by a country of risk or foreign entity based in a country of risk;
3. Any current or pending change in ownership structure of the Recipient or
subrecipients that increases foreign ownership related to a country of risk;
4. Any current or pending venture capital or institutional investment by an entity that
has a general partner or individual holding a leadership role in such entity who has a
foreign affiliation with any foreign country of risk;
5. Any current or pending technology licensing or intellectual property sales to a
foreign country of risk; and
6. Any current or pending foreign business entity, offshore entity, or entity outside the
United States related to the Recipient or subrecipient.
2 See OFCCP’s Technical Assistance Guide at:
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ofccp/Construction/files/ConstructionTAG.pdf?msclkid=9e397d68c4b111ec
9d8e6fecb6c710ec Also see the National Policy Assurances http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/rtc.jsp
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F
Award No. DE-SE0000704.0000 With City of Tigard
Special Terms and Conditions
28
Term 48. Foreign Collaboration Considerations
a. Consideration of new collaborations with foreign organizations and governments.
The Recipient must provide DOE with advanced written notification of any potential
collaboration with foreign entities, organizations or governments in connection with
its DOE-funded award scope. The Recipient must await further guidance from DOE
prior to contacting the proposed foreign entity, organization or government
regarding the potential collaboration or negotiating the terms of any potential
agreement.
b. Existing collaborations with foreign entities, organizations and governments. The
Recipient must provide DOE with a written list of all existing foreign collaborations in
which has entered in connection with its DOE-funded award scope.
c. Description of collaborations that should be reported: In general, a collaboration will
involve some provision of a thing of value to, or from, the Recipient. A thing of value
includes but may not be limited to all resources made available to, or from, the
recipient in support of and/or related to the Award, regardless of whether or not
they have monetary value. Things of value also may include in-kind contributions
(such as office/laboratory space, data, equipment, supplies, employees, students).
In-kind contributions not intended for direct use on the Award but resulting in
provision of a thing of value from or to the Award must also be reported.
Collaborations do not include routine workshops, conferences, use of the Recipient’s
services and facilities by foreign investigators resulting from its standard published
process for evaluating requests for access, or the routine use of foreign facilities by
awardee staff in accordance with the Recipient’s standard policies and procedures.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 85F861B4-C116-4E89-B47F-D766B434E54F