06/17/2024 - PacketPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA – June 17, 2024
City of Tigard | 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 | 503-639-4171 | www.tigard-or.gov | Page 1
MEETING DATE: June 17, 2024 - 7:00 p.m.
HYBRID MEETING
IN-PERSON: City of Tigard – Town Hall SW HALL BLVD
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
MS TEAMS: https://www.tigard-or.gov/virtualPC
5. BRIEFING: RIVER TERRACE 2.0 KICKOFF 7:30 p.m.
Sr. Planner Schuyler Warren
6. INTRODUCE SAMBO KIRKMAN, INTERIM CD DIRECTOR 7:45 p.m.
Sambo Kirkman, AICP, Asst. Community Development Director and
Interim CD Director
7. OTHER BUSINESS 8:05 p.m.
a. Thoughts on closing our meeting by motion/vote.
President Jackson
6. ADJOURNMENT 8:15 p.m.
City of
Tigard
P lanning Commission
Agenda
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m.
3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m.
4. BRIEFING: ELECTRIC MOBILITY PROJECT: E-GO 7:10 p.m.
Assoc. Transportation Planner Henry Miller
City of
Tigard
P lanning Commission
MEETING DATE: June 17, 2024 - 7:00 p.m.
Location: Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd.- Hybrid Meeting
1. CALL TO ORDER
President Jackson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: President Jackson, Vice-President Miranda, Commissioner Bowerman, Commissioner Brandt,
Commissioner Choudhury (virtual), Alt. Commissioner Sabbe, Commissioner Murphy (virtual).
Absent: Commissioner Schuck (excused), Commissioner Tiruvallur.
Staff Present: Interim Community Development Director Sambo Kirkman, AICP, Senior Planner Schuyler Warren, Assoc.
Transportation Planner Henry Miller (virtual), Executive Assistant Joanne Bengtson.
3. COMMUNICATIONS
President Jackson asked if there were any external communications to share.
Hearing none, he noted Councilor Singh’s resignation has resulted in a new interim council liaison - Planning
Commission President Emeritus and now City Council President Hu.
The Commission received a set of draft minutes from the April 1, 2024, meeting and will have time to review them
before being asked for approval on the July 8, 2024, agenda. The same is true of March 18 and June 17 minutes.
4. ELECTRIC MOBILITY PROJECT: E-GO
Presenter: Assoc. Transportation Planner Henry Miller
Assoc. Transportation Planner Miller joined the city in March and was given the E-GO project. It used to be known
as the Electric Mobility and Curbside Management Strategic Plan - shortened to E-GO.
He stated 40% of Oregon's climate emissions are from the transportation sector so Tigard teammates started
asking how we might build in more carbon responsivity to ensure our roads, and the way we use them, help reduce
emissions? In 2022, the Tigard Climate Action Report was released and four of the five ways to lower
transportation sector carbon involved electrification. Our next task was to find a way to make sure the transition to
electrification is equitable and supports broader city policy objectives. E-GO supports transportation electrification
by making it easier to operate electric vehicles in the city and manage the public space needed for storage and
operation of electric vehicles.
Our plan is to analyze the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges related to electrification and then
recommend new policies and update existing policies that address EV parking supply, charging locations and
capabilities, storage and land use needs for EV transit, E- bikes, scooters, ride-shares and emerging micro mobility
modes.
To date, Assoc. Transportation Planner Miller interviewed 17 stakeholders from diverse backgrounds - housing,
transportation advocates, developers, property owners, agencies, businesses, and others. The interviews have been
incredibly promising with support for micro mobility as an affordable transportation option. The study areas focus
on the densest parts of the city; places where development is happening the fastest, especially the Triangle.
Work continues with the first of five stakeholder working group meetings, tabling at three different public events
from July through September, including the Tigard Area Farmers Market and the new night market. CD plans to
present this project at a CD Community Get Together in the fall and a follow up presentation in the spring. In July
2025, we will finish our last stakeholder working group and present findings and recommendations to City Council.
Planning Commission Mee ng| June 17, 2024 2
Commissioner Questions:
“When the weather is cold I’ve heard EVs have problems. With climate changing and winters getting colder, what has been
the feedback from stakeholders?” Mr. Miller said it hasn’t come up among stakeholders, although it’s a legitimate
concern especially if you’re parking outside and far from a charging station. From a land use perspective, it makes
more sense to encourage developers to include charging stations onsite as opposed to siting charging stations in the
public right-of-way.
“Have you looked at Portland’s Bureau of Planning and Sustainability and what they’ve done with their E charging in new
construction?” Mr. Miller said yes, he’s talking with Hannah Morrison at PBOT and the sustainability group about
how they’re making it advantageous to put the infrastructure in new construction and the savings gained by
installing it with new construction - $12,000 per spot versus $25,000 - $50,000 to retrofit. It’s optimal to have e-
bikes and scooters move around a central charging station. Expanding or redeveloping Power to the Pedal with e-
bike libraries located within dense apartment property would keep the bikes local and available for people to make
multiple, quick trips.
“Is this project for the City of Tigard or are you asking the Planning Commission to mandate new development put this into
our code? Who is funding the project – the city or developers? Is it a requirement for new construction?” Mr. Miller said this
project is an element of the strategic plan and intended to be a high-level study to assess the best model for Tigard.
The project is being funded by an ODOT grant with an Intergovernmental Agreement. We’ll be talking to
stakeholders about whether it makes sense to ask developers to install certain charging stations or if we want to set
up e-bikes in apartment libraries. We're not going to exclude anything, just analyze what makes the most sense.
“What kind of feedback did you get from the stakeholder interviews? Have you seen or noticed any common themes
triggering your design?” Assoc. Transportation Planner Miller said two recurring themes emerged - parking and
parking enforcement and sidewalk clutter (scooters left on sidewalks or in front of neighborhood homes).
Stakeholders expressed interest and openness to finding parking solutions and creating a bike corral – but not until
the city addresses infrastructure needs that make it safe to travel on 72nd Avenue. If our streets aren’t safe to ride
or walk, people won’t use them for those activities. It’s important to place a charging station or facility where it gets
use. If residents drive by and see no one using the equipment, it leads to a belief we wasted money that could have
been invested someplace more needed. It’s a balance that’s important to stakeholders.
“Have you seen any cities incentivize residents to use scooters or e-bikes?” Henry said Portland has Biketown with
programs to make it more affordable for people who are living on low incomes. The City of Pittsburg has a great Hub
program that integrates transit and e-bike stations. In heavily populated cities, transit and e-bikes are a lifeline for
low-income residents. Henry isn’t aware of any cities incentivizing developers to put in hubs, but he thinks Portland
is heading that way. He will look for information about that and send it to the Commission.
Henry mentioned Tigard’s Power to the Pedal program that’s operating out of two Community Partners for
Affordable Housing properties. There are three electric bikes at each location and residents of the apartment
complex use the bikes as much as they like for free. It’s a valuable resource for residents who can’t afford to own a
car and need an alternative for getting around, and it teaches us how residents are using e-bikes because they have
GPS on board.
Mr. Miller is working on a report right now using data collected from the program managed by the Westside
Transportation Alliance (WTA). Although data shows some residents use the bikes for recreation, others use them
every day, with one-third of users making trips to the grocery store, school, and other patterns. One takeaway is
that infrastructure really matters. When a property was impacted by a large ODOT redevelopment on 99W,
construction stifled use of the bikes. Once the project finished, use picked up again.
“One thing I keep coming back to is how we remind residents using the bikes that they have to take care of them and not
leave them wherever they like.” The WTA program manager reports very little upkeep to the equipment has been
needed. They’ve received only one breakdown report arising from a flat tire and zero incidents of vandalism, graffiti
or theft.
Planning Commission Mee ng| June 17, 2024 3
Assoc. Transportation Planner Miller thanked the Commission and said he’ll provide another update in the future.
5. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 KICKOFF
Presenter: Sr. Planner Schuyler Warren
Senior Planner Warren started by providing some history on the project. The River Terrace work was informed by
extensive community engagement. The first River Terrace expansion area was part of the West Bull Mountain
concept plan. The city completed and adopted the community plan for this area in 2014, followed by the
development code in 2015. We received the first land use applications for development in this area later that year.
Planners expected River Terrace 1.0 to develop over 20 years, producing 2,587 dwelling units or about 6,500 new
residents. Just nine short years later, this area is 85% entitled (having land use approval) with a total of 14
developments and 2,431 entitled units to date and more to come. We're only 100 units shy of our original goal, and
we've still got 15% of the acreage available to be developed. Entitled developments include duplexes, triplexes, and
a few row houses.
Our estimated park need was around 9 ½ acres of neighborhood parks and about 19 ¼ acres of community parks. To
date, we have 12.43 acres of neighborhood parks and 35.2 acres of community parkland - almost double our
community park target. Development of this area has happened so quickly that it’s considered a big success.
In 2019, Council directed staff to pursue the addition of the city's last two remaining urban reserves, collectively
known as River Terrace 2.0. The community development team went to work finding resources to support that
planning effort and in 2020, with support from grants from Metro and the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD), we kicked off the concept planning process for River Terrace 2.0. The following year, we
worked with stakeholders to develop a plan that addressed the needs of our community while meeting state and
regional requirements.
River Terrace 2.0 is bound by Kingston Terrace in the south, a part of King City's expansion area in the process of
being annexed. The project team based the concept planning process on council goals and the city's strategic plan –
identifying equity and climate as the lenses stakeholders would use to shape the vision for a community offering a
full matrix of affordable housing types that are intermixed throughout with a target density of 20 dwelling units per
acre. It's intended to implement a mixed-income neighborhood that offers equitable housing opportunities for first
time home buyers, seniors and lower income families with a focus on middle housing deployment.
That's about double what has been typical in urban growth boundary expansion areas. We're looking at policy
options to incentivize and support affordable housing.
In terms of commerce, the desire is for a neighborhood that's genuinely multimodal with walkable options to work
and transit supportive development patterns, parks that are focused on community gathering, places that are
distributed equitably, natural areas that retain their ecological function, including habitat connectivity that's
preserved and enhanced.
Lastly, we’re aiming for infrastructure that is cost efficient and sustainable and serves our housing goals. The vision
produced a concept plan for the area that is built around three neighborhood-scale Main Street areas.
Based on this concept plan and the housing approach Metro Council approved the city's application for an
expansion of the urban growth boundary in February of 2023. Once the UGB expansion was acknowledged, we set
to work building financial supports needed to complete this project.
Metro provided us with an award of $700,000, which was later increased to $800,000.
We received $117,000 from the DLCD to support housing and infrastructure planning.
Sr. Planner Warren recently learned we’ll receive $80,000 from the DLCD to support development code work.
Lastly, we have a formula grant from the Department of Energy that's provided under the provisions of the
Inflation Reduction Act that's provides $118,000 for climate and energy efficiency planning.
With just over $1 million in grant funding to support a project with a consultant budget of roughly $1.43 million, the
Planning Commission Mee ng| June 17, 2024 4
remaining amount will be funded through Community Development’s budget and spread over three fiscal years.
Our timeline has moved very quickly since Metro approved the UGB expansion. The city issued a request for
proposals for planning and community engagement services, selected two contractors and 10 days after contract
completion, we kicked off the project on April 11th with the core project management team. A week later, we held a
meeting with the full project team including consultants followed by a site tour with select members of the project
team. Mr. Warren expects the planning process will take about two years to complete, with Planning Commission
updates as work proceeds. The earliest we would expect to see development applications would be summer 2026.
Sr. Planner Warren said the city is trying to streamline as much as possible to help meet efficiency goals and in
recognition of property owners who've been waiting since 2019 to see development happen. We propose to run the
annexation process concurrent with the development process and then phase-in city taxes and keep the lands in
county zoning until our own zoning and regulations are complete.
That plan provides property owners and the city with efficiencies, including cost savings gained by utilizing a single
process and an existing legal description of the area – one we’re required to prepare for Metro. It also streamlines
the process for City Council by asking for one decision instead of several, reducing the amount of time required to
prepare these lands for development.
Normally we would start annexation after the concept or the community planning effort is complete, which adds at
least another six months to the process. When an annexation commences involving this many properties (38) that
are not associated with a specific land use approval, it requires a triple majority election. That process requires the
city to have consent from at least half of the property owners; get consent from property owners who represent at
least half the land area; and property owners who represent half the assessed value in the area. This represents
efficiencies for the city and certainty for the owners.
We expect we’ll have to incentivize participation around tax assessment. Some of RT2.0 properties won’t be eligible
for urbanization yet so we're proposing a property tax phase-in allowed under state law. It is the same process used
in 2011 when we annexed the original River Terrace areas. In that effort, we offered a city tax phase-in of 33% in
the first year, 66% in the second year and full value in year three.
For River Terrace 2.0 the phase-in should be enticing to property owners but allow us to maintain city services.
We propose property owners pay 0% in the first year, 50% in the second and then 100% in the third year. Tigard
Leadership agrees and we hope to begin the annexation process later this summer with regular updates to Planning
Commission and City Council.
Commissioner Questions: “Do you foresee any problems with the 38 landowners?”
Mr. Warren responded that about half the property owners have maintained contact with him over the last four
years and the city has been able to talk them through the process and help them understand why we're doing it, and
the efficiencies for them and us. There is a segment of property owners we don't have regular contact with except
through mailings, but we feel somewhat confident that we'll be able to get to a triple majority.
Sr. Planner Warren said we will not come to City Council with anything less than the triple majority. If we get to
December and we're a couple property owners shy of where we need to be, we'll take the time to work with them to
make the process successful for everyone. If we don't get the consent to the triple majority, we'll continue with
community planning and default to annexing properties individually which adds cost and time. If a property owner
who wants to develop is sandwiched between the current city boundary and a property owner who doesn't want to
annex, they're not going to be able to proceed because we can only annex contiguous parcels.
“There was some resistance to earlier annexations because it required connecting to city services. Is there a timeline with this
annexation that requires property owners comply with being connected to city services?”
Sr. Planner Warren noted we have the ability to condition an annexation so the owner doesn’t have to connect to
city services immediately. If a property is using a septic system, we can let them continue to use it until it fails, and
then require connection to city sewer service. We expect the process to transition quickly into other hands when
Planning Commission Mee ng| June 17, 2024 5
there's a developer or property broker involved. Mr. Warren said not all the properties are occupied by full time
residents. Some are rental properties, and some are vacant, agricultural use parcels.
“Is there anything in this process that will replicate issues encountered in the 2004 attempt to annex parts of Bull
Mountain?”
Sr. Planner Warren said no, we don’t expect that for two reasons. First, Oregon’s triple majority process is a result of
the Bull Mountain experience and how property owner’s consent is achieved. Secondly, River Terrace 2.0 has a very
different constituency. The properties are not already urbanized by Washington County like Bull Mountain was.
These owners are motivated to be inside the urban growth boundary and turn their property over to developers for
urbanization.
“What's your target for number of jobs or density or some metric for employment opportunities either for the residents or
from people commuting in?”
City Council’s original goal was 20 dwelling units/acre and 20 jobs/acre where there were commercial activities to
achieve high job density for efficient use of the neighborhood land. When we began this project, we were applying
to Metro for what's called a mid-cycle UGB expansion under the provisions of the Urban Growth Management
functional plan. Those are primarily for housing and any commercial activity would have to be supportive of just
residential use.
In terms of job density, we began this project about two months after the pandemic started, and the way people
were working, commuting, occupying space, occupying their home rapidly changed. We couldn’t foresee how
employment and its relationship to where people lived would evolve, so we created this employment area as a flex
space to accommodate some mix of residential, office and retail maker space. We'll look more closely at job density
in the community plan because post-pandemic, we have a better understanding of how people are using office space
in edge developments. We’ll have a market analysis that will help us assess how to use that flex space.
“Does Tigard own, or plan to own, any property in River Terrace 2.0? Are there other governmental agencies who own land
or intend to site a police station, library or school in the area?”
No, Tigard doesn’t currently own any property out there but at some point, we will own parks and public space
amenities and stormwater facilities. We own a rather large piece of property outside the urban growth boundary
called the Lasich Property, purchased with park bond money several years ago. Public Works is developing a long-
term plan for its future use but at this time the land is currently ‘undesignated’ and ineligible to be brought into the
urban growth boundary.
“Are there any plans or any ability for the city to incentivize or mandate the addition of a photovoltaic system, renewable
energy, electric charging stations, or other green tech on any of this land so that we can kind of keep our plans aligned?”
Sr. Planner Warren noted that Tigard received a $118,000 grant from the Dept. of Energy to focus on energy
efficient components of work we’ll do in River Terrace 2.0. We are already mandated through the state building
code for all new residential buildings to be solar ready.
Mr. Warren added that Oregon has statutory law that governs the provision of EV capacity at multifamily
developments as well as in commercial development. And then we have, by rule, an even greater EV conduit
capacity for residential developments. One challenge we’ve encountered is that no city can exceed state building
code requirements. We can’t codify policy more stringent than the state’s code so we may consider menu of
sustainability options that developers could take advantage of so that we're not violating state law.
We're also looking at purple pipe, which uses reclaimed gray water from the Durham Wastewater Treatment plant
to irrigate parks and plantings. Care will go into planning parks that reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, are
climate resilient in terms of their planting palate and material selection, and certainly it will be important to
preserve natural areas that contribute to carbon responsibility. Wildfire risks will be part of climate resilience
planning given the area’s proximity to the urban interface and surrounding rural agricultural use and the Tualatin
Wildlife Refuge. We’ve seen wildfire encroaching further and further into areas that historically would not have
been considered prone to wildfire or flooding. Stormwater management planning will be critical to many properties
located downstream of development upstream. We want to make sure they're resilient against flood events.
Planning Commission Mee ng| June 17, 2024 6
Sr. Planner Warren (SchuylerW@tigard-or.gov) thanked Commissioner Murphy for volunteering to serve as the P.C.
liaison on the RT 2.0 Community Advisory Committee. Mr. Warren invited the Commissioners to contact him
anytime they had questions about the project. He also said the team is still recruiting for the RT2 community
advisory committee. If you know someone who is interested in making sure we have a plan for equitable housing
options, how we build a transit supportive, multimodal neighborhood in a climate friendly way that provides people
with access to parks and amenities, please send them to Schuyler! If participation is dependent on resolving issues
with childcare, transportation, or something else, please know that we will work on finding a solution so residents
who want to participate, can do so.
6. INTRODUCE SAMBO KIRKMAN, AICP, INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
President Jackson introduced Sambo Kirkman, our new Assistant Community Development Director, and the
Interim Community Development Director.
Sambo introduced herself to the Commission and said she hopes to put a face on the Community Development
Department that’s collaborative and innovative in their work with the Planning Commission. She remarked that CD
has some great projects and opportunities in the Tigard Triangle and River Terrace 2.0. Not only are we planning for
new development, but also redevelopment that will invigorate and sustain our growing city.
Her experience has been as a planner for many years, mostly in the metro area, specifically in the City of Beaverton.
Living and working next door to Tigard for so long has made her a witness to our growth. Sambo graduated from
University of Oregon and then earned her master’s degree in public administration from Portland State University.
She’s very much a Pacific Northwest native whose professional focus has generally been in land use and specifically
in current planning.
This is Sambo’s fifth week with the city. She handed out her business card and invited commissioners to contact her
with questions, concerns or even a request to get coffee and chat. Her goal is to make sure we have a relationship
with communication flowing both ways. She emphasized the Planning Commission’s valuable role as leaders who
provide CD with feedback and insight about the community’s needs.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
President Jackson asked if there was new business to bring forward. Interim CD Director Kirkman said she had
nothing. President Jackson said he had two items to bring forward.
One of the items refers to long time trend where one or two members of the commission end up initiating all the
motions tied to agenda items. He asked the membership if they would be interested in getting more comfortable
with making motions by adopting a practice of asking for a motion to close the Planning Commission meeting.
It would also bring the commission more in line with City Council meeting practice. Asking for a motion and a
second would be less imposing and give formality to the audience that business is done. Then commission members
can talk or conduct interpersonal business knowing they're off the clock.
Joanne provided some information about motions in front of your monitor. Please send her your feedback or if
there's something else you might need or want.
Interim CD Director Kirkman suggested that prior to each meeting we provide President Jackson with a script that
outlines items on the agenda and walks through the actual hearing to the motion. At that point, there would be a
menu of motions to choose the one that fits the decision you’re making.
Commissioner Brandt restated President Jackson’s request, “I think what I'm hearing is we would want some sort of
sample script with something both for quasi-judicial decisions and for legislative decisions whether we want to
approve them, approve them with changes or not approve them.” Commissioners responded positively.
President Jackson emphasized the power associated with motions – whether a commissioner is planning to
continue in public office or promoting a cause. Joanne agreed to create a document that lives in the planning
commission folder so it’s always available.
Planning Commission Mee ng| June 17, 2024 7
Joanne reported findings from research requested by Commissioner Bowerman for an updated Planning
Commissioner handbook newer than the 2014 version posted to the League of Oregon Cities website. Joanne
learned the 2014 guide is still the most current document available and is written by the American Planning Society,
the credentialing agency for planning professionals.
President Jackson moved onto his second piece of business. With the voter-approved charter changes, he asked
commissioners to review planning commission bylaws and compare them to the new charter language. Specifically,
he’d like member feedback on term limits and how officers are elected to council and whether planning commission
bylaws are similar. President Jackson asked commissioners to share any concerns or request a staff presentation to
the commission and add the topic to the next meeting agenda.
8. ADJOURNMENT
President Jackson said the next meeting is July 8, 2024, and, “unless there's any further business, we will take a stab
at this close the meeting motion process. I would entertain a motion to adjourn.”
Commissioner Bowerman made a move to adjourn; Commissioner Murphy seconded. President Jackson asked for a
vote and hearing no opposed, declared the meeting adjourned at 8:28 PM.
Joanne Bengtson, Planning Commission Secretary
ATTEST: President Nathan C. Jackson
June 17th, 2024
Tigard E-Go Transportation Plan
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Background
•40% of Oregon’s climate emissions are from the transportation sector
•Most (87%) trips in Tigard are made in fossil fuel powered personal vehicles
•EVs are expensive and active and transit options are inconvenient
•Can we build in a way that is carbon responsible?
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Background
•4 of 5 transportation sector low-carbon actions in the Tigard Climate Action Report (2022) involve electrifying vehicles
•But how do we make the transition equitable and support broader city policy objectives?
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Project Purpose
Develop strategy to:
•Support transportation electrification and
•Equitably and effectively manage public space.
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Project Purpose
Electric Mobility (cars, bikes, scooters, etc.)
•Analyze strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges related to transportation electrification.
•Recommend new policies and updates to existing policies.
•Holistic approach inclusive of EV’s, transit, e-bikes, shared fleets, rideshares, and emerging e-micromobility modes.
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Project Purpose
Curbside Management
•Focus on areas with high parking demand.
•Produce a phased plan to address demand.
•Recommend on-street parking mgmt. policies, such as time zones, permits, commercial uses, transit, e-micro and accessibility needs.
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Objectives
•Identify opportunities, constraints, and recommendations related to electric mobility and curbside management
•Identify and elevate needs of underserved populations
•Create a roadmap with actions Tigard can take to advance transportation electrification and manage the curb in a way that reduces GHG emissions
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Objectives
•Develop recommendations and a planned approach to introduce shared e-micromobility options
•Develop recommendations and a planned approach to integrate e-mobility solutions with multifamily and residential mixed-use development
•Consider how shared e-mobility options and curbside management can address parking supply and demand challenges
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Project Update: Stakeholders
•Interviewed 17 stakeholders: housing and transportation advocates, developers, property owners, agencies, businesses
•Very nuanced perspectives with openness to new ideas.
•Common themes included e-bikes/scooters as a last mile solution, parking enforcement, bike/ped safety, EV and scooter share skepticism.
•People see e-mobility and parking management as potential transportation solutions, but they want to get it right.
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Next Steps
•June: Complete stakeholder interviews
•July: Schedule 1st of 5 SWG meetings
•July/August: Table at 3 events
•September: Present at 1st of 2 Community Get Togethers
•July 2025: Present to City Council
The 5 E’s – Tigard’s Community Promise: Equity l Environment l Economy l Engagement l Excellence
Questions?
Planning Commission
June 17, 2024
Tigard River Terrace 2.0:
Equitable, Walkable, Healthy, Accessible
River Terrace 1.0 | TigardRiver Terrace
South Cooper Mountain
(Beaverton)2014
SW Beef Bend Road
River Terrace 2.0 Concept PLan | TigardSW Scholls Ferry
2022
Kingston Terrace (King City)
River Terrace
River Terrace 2.0
River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan | TigardProject Focus
Two Lenses Shape Our Vision
Equity Climate
River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan | TigardProject Vision
A neighborhood for everyone and a complete community.
Housing
Affordability
Commerce
Transportation
Parks
Natural areas
Infrastructure
River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan | Tigard
River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan | TigardHousing Typologies
Main Street
•Commerce-centered
•Taller Forms
Even Mix
•Diversity block-by-block
Feathered Edge
•Lower-profile forms
•Integrates natural edges
River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan | TigardCommunity Plan Costs
•Consultant budget is $1.43 million
•Grants will cover most of this cost
•Metro: $800,000
•DLCD: $117,000
•DLCD (pending): $80,000
•Department of Energy: $118,610
•Remainder is paid from CD consultant budget over 3 FY
River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan | TigardCommunity Plan Timeline To Date
•October 2023: Request for Proposals released
•December 2023: Contractors selected
•March 2024: Contracting complete
•April 11, 2024: Project management team kickoff
•April 16, 2024: Full project team kickoff
•April 23, 2024: Project team site tour
River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan | TigardSummer
2026
Spring
2025
Spring
2024
Fall
2024
Summer
2024
Engagement:
Project Introduction
Engagement: Reporting Findings &
Gathering Feedback
Engagement:
Questions Decision-making
Winter 2024-
25
Summer
2025
Fall
2025
Winter 2025-
26
Spring
2026
Adoption
Draft
Implementation
Docs
Draft
Topical
Plans
Refining
Recommendations
Drafting
RecommendationsAnalysisContext
And Goal
Setting
Community Plan Timeline Moving Forward
= major community engagement events
= community advisory committee meetings
River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan | TigardConcurrent Work: Annexation
•Proposal
•Annex subject properties alongside planning work
•Phase-in city taxes
•Keep County zoning (FD-20)
•Purpose
•Provide certainty to development by bringing all properties in
at once
•Reduce costs for the city, property owners, and developers
•Utilize existing legal description from UGB annexation
•Streamline process for staff and Council
•Reduce time to prepare lands for development
River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan | TigardAnnexation Process
•Triple majority election – written consent from:
•At least half the property owners,
•Representing at least half the land area, and
•Half the assessed value
River Terrace 2.0 Community Plan | TigardProperty Tax Phase-In
•Allowed by OAR 150-222-0110
•Has recent Tigard precedent (2011, River Terrace)
•Previously used 33% -- 66% -- 100% phase in
•Challenge: balancing an attractive rate schedule for annexees
with city priorities
•Proposed rate structure for this annexation 0% -- 50% -- 100%
•Concurrence of Community Development, Public Works,
Finance, and Police
Questions / Discussion
Thank You
Schuyler Warren
schuylerw@tigard-or.gov| 503.718.2437
Robert’s Rules Common Motions
What you want to do When you might use it What to say Second needed?
Make a Motion Brings before the council, for its action,
any particular subject. “I move to…” Yes
Second a Motion To move an action forward. You don’t
need to be recognized for this. “I second the motion.” No
Request for
information
You would like additional information on
the main motion or subsidiary motion(s)
at hand before voting or debating
further
“Point of information” No
Amend a motion
When a motion is on the table, but you
want to add detail or change something
about it before it goes to a vote. Note:
you cannot reject a motion doing this
“I move that this motion be
amended by…” Yes
Ask a question A motion to ask a question “Point of inquiry” No
Take a break
You need to take a short break before
returning - not to be used if you want to
end debate entirely
“I move to recess
[for X minutes]” Yes
Enforce the rules
To bring to the group's attention that the
rules are being violated. You don't need
to be recognized prior to making a point
of order. Not really a motion but
requires the Chair rule on whether or
not immediate consideration is proper.
“Point of order” No
Call for a vote
Once everyone has had a chance to
speak, the President/Chair restates the
motion …
“It is moved and seconded that___.
Those in favor of the motion say
“aye”, those opposed say “no”.
Chair counts the vote if “The ‘ayes’
have it, the motion is adopted.
If the ‘nays’ have it, the motion
does not pass.
No
End the meeting It’s time to end the meeting or it has
overrun due to debate
“I move to adjourn” or,
“There being no further business
to come before the board, this
meeting is adjourned.”
Yes