Washington County - Washington Square Regional Center TGM Grant I•
regon
Department of Transportation
Transportation Building
John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Govemor Salem,OR 97310
FILE CODE:
July 6, 1999
City of Tigard
Attn: Laurie Nicholson
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard OR 97223
AGR
Enclosed for your records is a fully executed copy of Amendment No. 3 to
Agreement No. 16017 covering the Washington Square Regional Center.
This project is a part of the Transportation Growth Management Program. This
amendment extends the time and limits the amount of work to be performed
after June 30, 1999.
We have retained a fully executed copy of this agreement for the Department of
Transportation's files.
Julie Redden, Agreement Coordinator
Construction Contracts Unit
Project Support Section
Enclosure
JR: pf
Form 734-3122(5/97)
Misc. Cc Icts& Agreements
No. 16017/TGM3GF17
TGM 1 W-97
AMENDMENT NO. 3
The State of Oregon,acting by and through its Department of Transportation,hereinafter referred to as ODOT,and
City of Tigard,hereinafter referred to as Grantee,entered into an Agreement on March 19, 1998,Amendment No.
I on June 1, 1998, and Amendment No. 2 on April 15, 1999. Said Agreement covers a Transportation and Growth
Management grant for Washington Square Regional Center.
It is now determined by ODOT and Grantee that the agreement referenced above,although remaining in full force
and effect, shall be amended by this agreement as follows:
Page 1, "Term of Agreement; Definitions",the expiration date of this contract shall be extended until
December 31, 1999. ODOT's payment of amounts under this contract attributable to work performed after
June 30, 1999, is limited to a maximum of$11,211. Work performed after June 30, 1999, shall be limited
to Phase V, Task 2, of Scope of Work.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have set their hands and their seals as of the day and
year hereinafter written.
The Oregon Transportation commission on March 18, 1999, approved Subdelegation Order No. 2,in which the
Director grants authority to the Branch and Region Managers to approve and execute agreements for projects
included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE ODOT
Approved as to legal sufficiency by the Attorney STATE OF OREGON,by and through its
General's office. Department of Transpo i
By—-----
By - �� �i si L,r-1 Craig Greenleaf,Deputy Director
Assistant Attorney General �1 Transportation Development Division
GRANTEE Date: J6
City of Tigard
B
Y
(O/cia�-Vs Signature)
vkneSe 3SJ Y- ►�r �, r c C�.c�rnrnv�v�. / 'l�eti2l o Q,�e �
(Printed Name and Title of Official)
Date: 111Y�2 ag-, (9 9 9
Laurie Nicholson Lidwien Rahman
City of Tigard 123 NW Flanders
13125 SW Hall Blvd. Portland,Oregon 97209-4037
Tigard, Oregon 97223 Phone:`503/731-8229
Phone: 503/639-4171 Fax: 503/731-8259
Fax: 503/684-7297 lidwien.rahman@state.or.us
laurie@ci.tigard.or.us
T:\SHELIA\WP\97-99\IGA\IWAMD3.WPD
70rl
c � on Department of Transportation
Region 1
John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Govemor 123 NW Flanders
Portland,OR 97209-4037
(503)731-8200
July 1, 1999 FAX(503)731-8259
FILE CODE:
Laurie Nicholson
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall.Blvd
Tigard, OR 9.7223
Project Name: Washington Square Regional Center
.File Name: 1W-97.
Dear Laurie Nicholson,
As our 1997-99 TGM projects end, here are some reminders and suggestions for
project closeout:
1 Please submit grant products and a completion_report to me, your.TGM grant
manager. . The grant agreement requires these to be submitted within 45
days after the ending date'.of the agreement. .i am requesting that you send
these to me by July 30, 1999. This will enable the ODOT Financial Services
people to complete their report for the Fiscal year as early as possible, and
will help avoid expenditures being charged to the new biennium's budget.
2. Your completion report should include the following information:
• A match report and any reimbursement requests not previously made.
These must include an accounting and documentation of the personnel
and other project costs. (example attached)
• The location of grant records, which may be subject to audit;
• A list of final products.
3. Remember to include (and have the contractor include) the , following
statement on each,of the final grant products:
"This project is; partially.:funded by a grant from the Transportation and
Growth .Management (TGM), Program, a joint. program .of the Oregon
Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land
Form 734-1850(1/98) - 1 -
i
i
Conservation and Development. This TGM grant is financed, in part, by
federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, local
government, and State of Oregon funds."
The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or
policies of the State of Oregon."
4. Unless otherwise stated in your grant agreement, submit two (2) copies of
each final grant product. Also, submit all final products produced using
generally available word processing (Word or WordPerfect are preferred) or
graphic programs for personal computers via e-mail or on IBM-compatible
3.5" computerdiskettes or disks.
If you have questions, please call me at 731-8229. 1 have enjoyed working with
you, and I look forward to receiving your completion report and final products!
Sincerely,
Lidwien Rahman
Senior TGM Grant Manager
LD: RK: BA: pk
97-99closelst
ail
- 2 -
June 21, 1995
INSTRUCTIONS FOR MATCH AND REIMBURSEMENT REPORTS
Please provide separate match reports and reimbursement requests.
You can use any format to report personnel and other direct costs. Here is one example:
Personnel Costs
Position/Name Hours Pay Rate OPE* Rate Total Rate Total Cost.
Assoc. Planner 84 $21.22 $5.88 $27.76 $2331.8
Mary Land 4
City Engineer 17 25.62 7.17 32.79 557.43
Lon Road
TOTAL $2889.27
Other direct costs:
Postage $52.20
Supplies 21.30
Travel 58.00
Printing 540.00
TOTAL $671:05
Total reimbursement request [matching cost] for project: $3560.32
Here are some other important items to remember:
1. Only direct project costs can be reimbursed or counted as match. Direct project costs
include salary and benefits of personnel working on the project, supplies, postage,
travel, and printing directly associated with the project. General administrative costs
and overhead are not direct project costs. (Councils of government with approved
cost plans may charge indirect costs.)
2. The reimbursement requests may not exceed the total "contract" amount listed in the
IGA.
3. Do not report consultant costs on reimbursement requests. Consultant bills are be
processed separately.
* Other personnel costs (health insurance, vacation, etc.)
PAGR11cLOSEOUT.MEM
regon
Department of Transportation
Transportation Building
John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Governor Salem,OR 97310
FILE CODE:
April 23, 1999
City of Tigard
Attn: Laurie Nicholson
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard OR 97223
AGR
Enclosed for your records is a fully executed copy of Amendment No. 2 to
Agreement No. 16017 covering the Washington Square Regional Center.
This project is a part of the Transportation Growth Management Program.
This amendment increases the grant, the personal services contract and the
grantee matching amount.
We have retained a fully executed copy of this amendment for the Department
of Transportation's files.
Julie Redden, Agreement Coordinator
Construction Contracts Unit
Project Support Section
Enclosure
JR:mt
Form 7343122(5/97)
,f1
Misc. Contracts&Agreements
No. 160.17/TGM3GF17
TGM 1W-97
AMENDMENT NO.2
The State of Oregon, acting by and through its Department of Transportation,hereinafter referred
to as ODOT, and City of Tigard,hereinafter referred to as Grantee,entered into an Agreement on
March 19, 1998, and Amendment No.,l on June 1, 1998. Said Agreement covers a
Transportation and Growth Management grant for Washington Square Regional Center.
It is now determined by ODOT and Grantee that the Agreement referenced above, although
remaining in full force and effect, shall be amended by this amendment as follows:
Paragraph 4 of"Term of Agreement; Definitions",page 2 which reads:
The grant amount is the sum of the grantee amount(defined below) and the personal
services contract amount(defined below)payable by ODOT. The grant amount shall not
exceed$160.000.
Shall be amended to read:'
The grant amount is-the sum of the grantee amount(defined below) and the personal
services contract amount(defined below)payable by ODOT. The grant amount shall not
exceed$180.000.
Paragraph 6 of"Term of Agreement; Definitions",page 2 which reads:
The personal services contract amount is the amount payable by ODOT to a personal
services contractor(s)'and is equal to the total amount payable for all deliverables
described in Exhibit.A for which the personal services contractor(s)is identified as
responsible: 'Tfie personal services contract amount is$160000.
Shall be amend6&t6 read:
The personal services contract amount is the amount payable by ODOT to a personal
services contractor(s)and.is equal to the total amount payable for all deliverables
described in Exhibit A for which the personal services contractor(s)is identified as
responsible. The personal services contract amount is$180.000.
Paragraph 7 of"Term of Agreement;Definitions",page 2 which reads:
Grantee matching amount is the maximum amount of matching funds which the grantee
is required to expend to fund the project and is 10.27%of the total project cost, or up to
$18,313.
Shall be amended to read:
Grantee matching amount is the maximum amount of matching funds which the grantee
is required to expend to fund the project and is 10.27%of the total project cost,or up to
$20,602.
The last page of Exhibit A shall be changed as shown on the TGM Project Budget
(amended) Summary nd.Site Vicinity Map, attached hereto and by this reference
made'a part hereof. .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF; the parties hereto have set their hands and their seals as of the
day and year hereinafter written.
The Oregon Transportation commission on June 19, 1998;,approved Subdelegation Order No. 2,
in which the Director grants authority to the,Branch and Region Managers to approve and
execute agreements for projects included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE ODOT
Approved as to legal sufficiency by the STATE OF OREGON,by and through its
Attorney General's office. Department of Transportation
13Y s By
Assistant Attorney General Crai br
eDeputyor
Transpoivision
GRANTEE Date:
City of Tigard
By
N.
OfticiaPsntZA4-Signature) PT F
:APR 13 1999
(Printed Name and Title ofOfficial). LAND,CONSERVATION
ANDDEVELOPMENT
Date:
Laurie Nicholson Lidwien Rahman
City of.Tigard ' 123 NW Flanders
13125 SW Hall'-Blvd. Portland,Oregon:97209-4037
Tigard, Oregon 97223 Phone: 503/731-8229
Phone: 503/639-4171 Fax:, 503/731-8259
Fax: :503/684-7297 lidwien.rahman@state:or.us
laurie@ci.tigard.or.us ;
January 10,1998
T:\SHELIA\WP\97-99\[GA\I-WAMD2.WPD
2
SCHEDULE OF LABOR COSTS AND EXPENSES WASMOT'ON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER
Budget Amendment of 1/26/99
Team Spencer& Kittelson Lloyd D. Cogan (DBE) Total Expenses Total
Kupper &Assoc. Lindley Owens Labor Costs
Project Tasks Cogan Costs
Public Imvolvemeat Program
1. Establish plan $1,600 S4,200 $5,800 $500 $6,300
Form Task Force $1,200 $840 $360 $2,400 52,400
- co- -x�ss� � - - 53'600 s26s8= _$250:3 52x38
4. TAC Meetings(10) $4,000 SZ,370 $2,700 51,575 SZ;400 $13,045 5500 $13,545
-
M Botmdary Definition and Data Collection
1. Collect and review all data $1,200 5632 $720 5480 $3,032 $3,032
2 Define RC boundary $3,000 $790 5900 5600 $5,290 $5,290
III. DevelopmendRedemlopma t Opportadities
2 Assessdevelopmend --- - --55,000 S1,800 $2,400 $9,200 $500 $9,700
re&%%Iopmeat potential
4. Design Standards $3,000 $632 $5,400 1 $480 $9,512 $9,512
IV.WSRc Transportation an6 Parking Plan
1 Fainting000drtions S1,2Q0 58,216 $360 59,776 $1,000 $10,776
2.A Future conditions-model,
analysis and plan(BY CITY) -
V. WSRC bV maeatsticn5W2 U
- ---
Subtotal,Labor $62,800 $35,178 $37,580 $21,275 S17,040 $173,873 $173,873
Expenses $6,127 $6,127
Totals,Labor&Ezpmses
S180,000
Budget Amendment 1/26/99 TGM PROJECT BUDGET(Amended) SUMMARY
Note:Budgets is shaded tasks amended to reflect additional public workshops and task force meetings and enlarged
planning area.
omw some soon
®
@@ @@ NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
I X t
4
210
w t:
LLI1
� 5 '
1On
' ASHNGTON-A co
oma.
SQUARE
sw Bo ER ST
LEHM
sr
z sir V LANDAM ST
o
., S 9D SW LOCUST ST
t SW OAK ST ti` SW OAK ST
SW PINE ST
ASH
- -•• c �f sw SPRUCE ST
T ' rc rc rc
F SW PFAFFLE ST
CITE Or
SITE VICINITY MAP
lWASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER FIGURE D/
TJrAPn opFr.nN ' '' I
%and
May 24, 1999
Laura Mundt
Growth Management,Services
Metro
600 NE Grand'Ave.
Portland,-OR 97232
Re: lnvoice for Work Performed Under Metro Contract 920841-
Washington Square Regional Center(Revised)
Dear Ms Mundt:
This letter constitutes ran invoice for consultant work and expenses performed
under Metro Contract 920841, specifically consultant services for work task 3
described in Exhibit.A of the agreement,and for presentation materials prepared
for the task force meetings and public workshops as authorized in Exhibit A.
Consultant work included:
3. Hold Additional Workshops
Prepared for and attended workshops,
Prepared presentation boards for display.
Total Due $4,391.00
Thank you.
John C. Spencer,AICP
Consulting Team Project Manager
c Laurie Nicholson,City of Tigard
-6 -
2W & tw
aW , U4V,4 cvt�I
{v► -hAt CeV&Wwt v�j Cvt .
John C. Spencer
SPENCER & KUPPER {� c"W
353'.3 N.E. 24T" AVENUE �
PORTLAND, OREGON 97212 (Awet
TELEPHONE 503.282.9853 .
FACSIMILE 503.282.2723
INVOICE#3
\ _511INGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTS
Personal Service Contract No. 16018
97/99TGM/City of Tigard,Washington Square Regional Center
Date of Invoice: December 28, 1998
Billie Period:October 1, 1998 thro December 28, 1998
Spencer&Kupper Task Previously This Billed to Report for Billing Period
Budget Billed Period Date
Project Tasks
I. Public Involvement Program
1. Establish plan $6,300 $6,300 $6,300
2. Form Task Force $2,400 $2,400 $2,400
3. Task Farce Meetings(12) $21,538 $7,180 $5,384 $12,564 Three task force meetings were held. Agendas and
minutes are attached.
4. TAC Meetings(10) $13,545 $1,354 $1,354 $2,708 One TAC meeting was held. Agenda and minutes
attached.
5. Public Workshops(2) $9,264 $4,632 $4,632
IL Boundary Definition and Data Collection
1. Collect and review all data $3,032 $3,032 $3,032
2. Define RC boundary $5,290 $5,290 $5,290
III. Development/Redevelopment Opportunities
1. Inventory land uses $7,400 $6,000 $6,000 GIS maps showing land uses,zoning and vacant
lands. Available on request.
2. Assess development/ $9,700 $6,000 $6,000 Buildable land analysis on GIS maps completed.
redevelopment potential Memo describing development scenarios attached.
3. Urban design concepts $12,032 $8,000 $8,000 First draft design concepts including districts,access
options and conceptual transportation concepts
developed for open houses. Maps available on
request.
4. Design Standards $9,512 $0
IV.WSRC Transportation and Parking Plan
1. Existing conditions $10,776 $10,776 $10,776
2.A Future conditions-model, $0
analysis and plan(BY CITY)
2.B Future conditions-alter. $9,464 $0
analysis memo and improvements
3. Develop Parking Strategy $13,814 $0
V. WSRC Implementation
1. Draft ordinance and plan $16,282 $0
amendments
2. Public hearing process(4) $9,651 $0
Totals $160,000 $40,964 $26,738 $67,702
oE�ELSONA-ASSO RTES,INC.
TRANSPORTATION PLANN1NWRAFFIC ENGINEERING -
610 SW ALDER,SUITE 700 • PORTLAND.OR 97205 (503)228-5230 FAX(503)273-8169
--MEMO DUM
Date: December 29, 1998 Project#: 2879
To: John Spencer
From: Elizabeth A.Wemple,P.E.
Project: Washington-Square-Regional Center
Subject: Existing Conditions Report Summary of Final Revisions Memo
The Washington-Square Regional Center Study Technical Advisory Committee met on November
10, 1998 to review project progress-to date._The October 29, 1998.transportation-existing conditions
memo was presented and discussed-with-ft committee. A number of corrections and additions were
identified.-The major modifications are:listed below: -
• Table--k_describing-Roadway Functional Classifications-should.also,include the City of
Beaverton classifications for their facilities,within-the study limits. As such,the,City of
Beaverton classifies Highway 217 as a.Highvuay4,Hd Boulevard and Scholls Fent Road as
Arterials,and Nimbus-Drive and£ascade Avenue as'Collectors.
Table-l-of the docurnent-should-have shown SW Hall Boulevard as having a District level
of importance according to ODOT policy and SW Scholls.Ferry Road does not have a ODOT
classification,-1 This will be corrected in_the,finaLreport for-the:projest:
Metro_requested-that-Table Lin-the final-product be-more-specific=regarding-the-differences
between the-functional-classific atirnr(traffrc-carrying capacity and type of trips.on roadways)
and regional street design classification_(itlationship between the roadway and surrounding
land uses)identified in-Table-1. Those_differences_will-be..noted-iwthe final�product.
Figure 3-identifymg_madwayr jurisdiction-containcderrers:-Sehells Ferry Road-between Hall
Boulevard and-the railroad-tracks-southAvest-offfighWay 217 is an ODOT facility. Hall
Boulevard-west of the railroad tracks west of Highway 217 is under the jurisdiction of the
City of Beaverton,- L_ocust._Street_and Oak Street-east-of_HalL Boulevard-art under the
jurisdiction.of-Washington-County;Greenburg-Road-south-of-Highway 217 is,under the
jurisdiction-of-the Cityof7igard.-
• Page 6 contains_a:description of the-lane figurations and traffic control.for the major
roadways and -intersections. in-:the-.study area;_ODOT ,and. Metro-nequesteci,additional
discussion in-this-section relating-tolocalstFeet connectivity. The existing conditions section
of the final report will include paragraphs OS follows:
FRE NAME:H.%PRO1FflM879%EXSTUPDT.WPD
John Spencer f Project 2879
December 29 199$ Peae,2
Between Hall Boulevard and Greenburg.Road,.local east/west streets are spaced
approximately:400 feet apart.- Due-to.the alignments of Greenberg-Road and Hall
Boulevard local north/south connections between them varies from 600 feet to over
800feet apart.
Fast Of Hall Boulevard east/west streets are spaced approximately_400 feet apart,
and northlsouth streets are spaced approximately_600 to 650 feet apart. North of
Hall Boulevard there is no specific Pattern.relating-to.the locatron.oflocal streets.
There are some anomalies in the-local street network within the study area. For
example within the study area,there is.existing-right of wayfor,streets that have not
yet been constructed, and there are streets that are.shown as continuous on local
maps that:either do.hot exist:or have-been blocked with landscaping. An aerial
review-and-windshield field survey was performed,to identify the degree of this
problem.. Our review is summarized in Figure XX(this figure will be included in the
final document_ The only continuous northlsouth-.street through-the-study area
between-:Oak Streetand-HallBoukvwW�-is 90th-Avenue, which includes a jog at
Locust Street: Locust Street and Oak Street are.the continuous:eastAvest streets in
-the study area between Greenburg Road and Hall Boulevard_ The_following streets
are shown-on local_.maps-as. through streets yet they have..been disconnected by
landscaping installed by local residents:
Spruce Street between SWRSth Avenue,and-SW 8,2nd Avenue;
• SW 82nd Avenue-between_.SW Pine Street-and SW Oak Street,
• SW 82nd Avenue_-between SW Oak-Street and-SWMapleleaf Street;
SW Mapleleaf Street--between-SW&5th-Avenue-an&SW 82nd Avenue;
• SW 92nd Avenue-between SW Locust Street and$W CorralStreet.
SW Oakway street, and SW Mapleleaf Street are shown as streets on local maps,yet
they either did not exist, or were only partially constructed at a.low standard
These discontinuities amldiscrepancies have affected how motorists,pedestrians and
cyclists travel in-this neighborhood. and demonstrate,a.need for-a review of the
functionality and connectivity of the local system as the transportation plan evolves.
• The existing congestion map shown-in Figure 8 should include congestion on Scholls Ferry
Road extending-north of Hall-Boulevard. . Also traffic.operations should be shown on
Cascade and Nimbus. Thew amendments.wMbe incorporated-into-the-fmaf-product.
• There was arequest to:specify that-for Figures-8-and-l3-roadway-congestion-was-defined as
a volume to-capacity-ratio-greater.than 0.-95. This will be-note in the final report.
• Page 14-includes a summary.of-transit service:in tie_study_area".Route 62.should be
amended to read*,. -.travels between Washington-Square,Sunset and-BarnexT''ransit Centers
via Scholls_Ferry Road,and Murray Boulevard. Table.2 will also be amended to;show that
Route 62 operate&at 15-minute headway
Figures }and-l-rwill-be amended to note that the park and ride lot near highway 2�7 is
temporary., The-text will also be amended to read:-.-.The-park and ride adjacent_to.Highway
2174s permitted by the City of Beaverton as a temporaryfacility. It was originally to be
• John Spencer Project.2879
December 29, 1998 Page,•3
removed after-the opening:of the Sunset Station parking garage:- However, because the
Sunset Garage-is filled-to capacity so rapidly-each day, and the demand for-the parking
facility has not diminished-Tri-met is consideringfiling an application with the City to make
the park and-ndea permanentfacility.
• Metmrequested=that the-Fedestrimfflicycte Circulation section of the existing ccmditions
report be amended to note that there is no walkway'betweit the Washington.Square
Transit-Center and the Washington-Square Mall. This-amendment wilt be-mcluded.in'the
existing conditions section-of the final report. -Metro also-,requested-that a-&eneraliized
description of pedestrian accessfeonneetivity in the neighborhood surrounding-the mall be
included.-. The existing conditions section of the final report will be amended to include the
following paragraph:
Pedestrian accessibilitylconnecuviti►in the neighborhoods between Greenburg Road
Hall Boulevard is limited by:the number of north/south and easOvest connecting
streets and by sidewalk.connectivity. Sidewalks_exist.on-one-or both,-sides of the
street on the major streets; however they are not-necessarily continuous. Further
sidewalks-do not exist on most of rhe local-residential streets in the study area. As
the plan development continues, pedestrian continuity improvements should be
cpnsidered.
Figure 13,Future Congestion,should show congestion on Scholls Ferry Road north of Hall
Boulevard.
ODOT requested-that-Table 3 of the nport will be amended to note that regional highways,
as defined by Metro are not included in the deficiency threshold criteria identified in Title
6.
The final report-prepared for this project will include-these modifications.- In the interim, these
modifications will be duly noted in the project progress and ultimate plan development.
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL.CENTER STUDY 11/17/98
Development Scenario 1: 2020 Base Case-UGNEP Allocations
Assumptions
Employment: Tatget Gr&Ah 8,000 jobs Existing Employment: 18,054 jobs
Retail Target 1106 jobs Existing Residents 5014
Non-retail Target 6900 jobs Existing SF uiiits 1178
Residents: Target 1550 people Existing t V Units 11 I4
Housing: Target 1000 MF units
Highet►siiy(All Structured Parking) Low Density(Sundtking}
Land Use Net Build Parking Parking Spaces
Area(SF) Ratios' Number (SFy Gros§Bldg. Avg. Und G� d r Avg Laird
Area(gFy FAR Needed Area(SF) tAR Needed
A s
O1$oelemploy 1,897,500P4.5
5,693 1;992,375 3,889,875 4 0 22.3 . 1,991,500 0.8 56.6
®215SF/emp
Retail @ 440;000 1,980 693,000 1,133,000 10 13.0 44d;000 0.5 11.0
400SF/emp
Lodging 285,0003 1.0 300 285,000 3.0 2.2 185,060 3.0 2.2
300 rooms @
950$F:
Housing 13009000 1.5 1,500 525,000 1,625,000 3.5 16.7 1,100,000 1.3 19.3.
1000 units
1100 SF
Parks° 8.5 $:5
Totals 3,722;500 9,473 3;210;375 6,932,875 56.6 3, 22,500 107.5
'Office, employment and retail per 1000 SF;lodging and housing per unit. Mid-range Metro Regional Parking Ratios,Zone A.
2350 SF/parking space
;Includes structured parking
'No. people+ 0.32 jobs X 2.06/1000=park acres needed
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER STUDY 11/17/98
Development Scenario 2: Metro 2020 Preferred Scenario Allocations
Assumptions
Employment: Target Growth 10,200 jobs Existing Employment: 18,054 jobs
Retail Target 4200 jobs Existing Residents 5074
Non-retail Target 6000 jobs Existing SF Units 1178
Residents: Target 1700 people Existing�ff Units 1114
Housing: Target 1100 MF units
High Density(All Structured Parking) Low Density(Surface larking)
Land Use Net Build Parking Parking Spaces
Area(SF) Ratios' Number (SFY Gross Bldg. Avg. Land Gross Bldg. Avg Land
Area(SF) FAR Needed Area(SF) FAR Needed
s Acres
Office/employ 1,650,000 3.0 4,050 1,732,500 3,382,500 4.0 19.4 1,650,000 0.8 49.2
@ 2755F/emp
Retail @ 1,680,006 4.5 7,560 2,646,000 4,326,000 2.0 49.7 1,680,000 0.5 90.0
4005F/emp
Lodging 285,0003 1.0 300 285,000 3.0 2.2 285,000 3.0 2.2
300 rooms @
950 SF
Housing 1,210,000 1.5 1,650 577,500 1,787,500 3.5 11.7 1,210,000 1.3 11.2
1100 units @
1100 SF
Parks° 10.2 10.2
Totals 4,825,000 14,460 4,956,000 9,781,000 93.2 4,$25,000 162.9
'Office, employment and retail per 1000 SF;lodging and housing per unit. Mid-range Metro Regional Parking Ratios,Zone A-
2 350
-
2350 SF/parking space
;Includes structured parking
No. people+0.32 jobs X 2.06/1000=park acres needed
1
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER TASK FORCE
October 21, 1998
3:00 to 5:00 PM'
Tigard Water Building
AGENDA
1. Results from Open Houses John Spencer, Elaine Cogan
2. Review and Finalize Guiding Principles Task Force
3. Re-name the Regional Center?
4. Task Force Membership
5. Public Comments
Cov�SI �,Gu � I Vv— U� �1 nM
DRAFT
10/28/98
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER STUDY
TASK FORCE MEETING
TIGARD WATER SERVICES BUILDING
OCTOBER 21,1998
SUMMARY MINUTES
Task Force Members Attending:•Tom Archer, Ruth Croft, Gene Davis, Nic Herriges, Dan
McFarling, Lyn Musolf, Adele Newton, Steve Perry, Jack Reardon, Councilor Bob Rohlf, Rick
Saito,Ted Spence,Dave Stewart,Pat Whiting,Nick Wilson
Staff/City of Tigard: Brenda Bernards (Metro); Laurie Nicholson, and Nadine Smith (City of
Tigard Staff); Lidwein Rahman (ODOT); Councilors Ken Scheckla and Brian Moore (City of
Tigard)
Consultant Team: Elaine Cogan,Kirstin Greene,Lloyd Lindley,John Spencer,Beth Wemple
Guests: Martha Bishop, Elisabeth Braam, Pieter H.M. Braam, Ellen Cooper' (for Charles
Cameron), Alexander Croghead, Cindy Laurila (for Beth Johnston), Michael Neunzert, Jerry
Offer(for Nawzad Othman),John Sparks.
Elaine .Cogan opened the meeting, introducing Ellen Cooper, Senior Deputy County
Administrator, Washington County. She attended for John Rosenberger, who is the permanent
replacement for Washington County Administrator Charles Cameron. She noted that the
boards displayed around the room were from the two open houses held on September 28th. All
comments have been compiled for the draft open house report. Comments from both the
daytime session (10am - 4pm, Washington Square Mall) and the evening session (6 - 8pm,
Metzger Elementary School) reflect the considerable amount of public interest in the project.
Elaine reviewed the agenda and introduced John Spencer,consultant team project manager.
In an overview of the attendance and format, John said that over 200 people viewed the
displays at the Washington Square Mall and nearly the same number participated in the
evening open house at Metzger Elementary School. Kirstin Greene, Cogan Owens Cogan,
summarized the findings.
Kirstin reviewed the results to date from the perceptionnaires and other comments from the
open houses. Laurie Nicholson announced that the cutoff date for the final open house/
questionnaire report will be November 6th. Notice also will run in the Agard Times To date,
over 169 perceptionnaires have been received; 154 of these were compiled in the draft open
house report mailed to task force members as part of their packets. A final compilation will be
developed after November 6th.
Questions from Task Force members and the public are in italics. Responses and
comments from consultants and staff follow in regular print.
1
DRAFT
10/28/98
I think more than 160 people attended the Metzger Elementary School open house session. Due
to the line at the door,some people I talked to justpassed by.
That is probably the case and one of the reasons we use the word"approximately".
I
Regarding the live/work map, do all respondents at the Washington Square Mall open house
live within the study area 7
No. Some live as far west as Hillsboro,and as far east as Gresham.
Next, members divided into three groups to review their original guiding principles and
comments received at the open houses and suggest changes.The efforts will be reviewed by the
consultants and presented to the Task Force as draft guiding principles at the next meeting.
Tigard City Councilor and Task Force member Bob Rohlf then apprised the group on the
decision of the City Council on Task Force membership. The city had received a letter and
petition from Elizabeth Braam on behalf of a number of Metzger residents requesting
additional representation from the Metzger area on the Task Force.
Bob said that the Council considered the request and sent it to the Task Force to make a
recommendation to the City Council on this matter.
According to Elizabeth Braam, contact person for the residents who signed the petition,
residents want to have more input in the process. With about 261 homeowners in the area,
members of her group think it is reasonable to add more representation.
Elaine reminded the group that Pat Whiting is the representative for the Washington County
Citizen Participation Organization 4M, which covers the Metzger area. Though Pat lives
outside of the study area, Steve Perry, another Task Force member, lives inside. Dr. Davis
added that he,too,lives inside the study area.
Is there a vehicle, or place where information generated through this process can be shared
with CPO members?
Yes, but we have limited resources. There are 350 residents on the CPO agenda list and we
have a lot on our agendas, including review of development applications. People have
invested a tremendous amount in their homes (in Metzger) and are planning to live here for
decades. Our group (discussing the guiding principles) had a lot of questions about identity
which can be well-addressed by those that live in the area.
I think the Metzger residents are amply represented by Pat. If we tried to represent everyone,
there are 50 retailers outside Washington Square and 120 inside, three of whom own their
properties. The committee can become unworkable if it becomes too large.
2
DRAFT
10/28/98
I agree on one hand, but when Ilook at the boards and the comments, there seems to be a lack
of credibility regarding the Task Forre and a general ignorance about what we are hying to do.
The message doesn't seem to be getting out there.
I don't.think of myself only as an advocate for the greup I represent, but also trying to create
the best place we can. Ido think there is a strong need to get the information out to community
members and flowing back in.
The community must feel that they are represented in the product we come up with. I think we
should atleast add a couple ofpeople
There is a large difference between business and home owners. I don't think it would be
harmful for additional representatives.
I was shocked that more Task Force members weren't at the open houses to talk to residents If
you are too busy to come,shouldn't you let other people be involved?
I think if we can accommodate one person we should also ask they use the public comment
period and other means available to participate. Ido agree we need to have more buy-in.
How far are we along in the process?
About half way.
I think this group is very sensitive to Metzger residents. Maybe the risk of being less producti ve
is worth it.
Elaine reminded the Task Force that there were three questions to address — further
representation in general; the number of representatives from Metzger if we agree to enlarge
the membership;and total number of Task Force members.
I don't think we need any more members. When this Task Force was formed, I was curious
why it was as large as it was I think it was well done,if not o verdone.
Efficiency isn't necessarily the highest priority.
What is representation from Metzger that isn't the CPO? We already have two residents from
within the study area in addition.
The Metzger representation would be more specific.
How would they be selected?
We could in vite people to the next CPO meeting and select a representative there.
3
DRAFT
10/28/98
The committee voted the following:
♦ to enlarge the committee to include additional Metzger representation:8 in favor,6 opposed
to have one additional Metzger representative(general agreement)
o to consider this additional member the final new representative on the Task Force
Finally, Elaine briefly reviewed the results of the previous work on the draft guiding principles
and asked if any group had any overarching themes:
We changed the language of"consider"the future existence of Metzger Park to strengthen it.
We chose to combine several principles rather than separating them.
The next Task Force meeting will be held on November'18th. The next public workshop
will be sometime early next year. An agenda will be mailed out in advance.
4
mom
i
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Development
Shaping A Better Community
MEMORANDUM
'CITY OF TIGARD
TO: Washington Square Regional Center Technical Advisory Committee Members
FROM: Laurie Nicholson, Planning Division
DATE: November 2, 1998
SUBJECT: Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
Our second Advisory Committee meeting is scheduled for November 10 from 3:00 to 5:00 at the
Tigard Water Building (8777 SW Burnham).
Enclosed please find the following materials for the meeting: a revised existing conditions transportation
report and a draft open house report.
MEETING AGENDA
1. Update on transportation conditions
2. Review results of the open houses
3. Review transportation and urban design concepts
Va LG.JL VNVV UUM .a.a/ vaaa va aavllAu 'EJ VVG/VV.)
i`
y '
DRAFT
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER STUDY .70/28/98
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
TIGARD WATER SERVICES BUILDING
NOVEMBER 10, 1998
SUMMARY MINUTES
Technical Advisory Committee Members Attending: Steve Gerber (City of Portland), Scott
King (Washington County), Bridget Wiegert (Metro Transportation), Brenda Bernards (Metro
Growth Management), Steve Sparks (City of Beaverton), Ron Hudson(Tigard-Tualatin School
District)
Staff/City of Tigard: Laurie Nicholson,Julia Hajduk,and Mark Roberts
Consultant Team: Lloyd Lindley,John Spencer,Beth Wemple
John Spencer opened the meeting with everyone introducing themselves around the table. He
then summarized the results of the open house that was held September 28,1998.
Bridget Wiegert of Metro Transportation asked about open house responses regarding the
guiding principle of creating a distinctive regional center. She found it interesting that many
respondents said that they did not want a distinctive regional center. John Spencer responded
that the negative response regarding a distinctive regional center came primarily from the
Metzger neighborhood and he felt that they responded this way because they do not want a
regional center.
Steve Sparks of Beaverton asked how we interpret the answers from the Metzger neighborhood
overall regarding the regional center. Lloyd Lindley responded by saying that the
perceptionaire is a gage from the existing neighborhoods on how tough it will be to gain
support for the regional center.Mr.Sparks then asked how the neighbors responded regarding
the berms in the area that block off local streets. Mr. Spencer said there was no response
regarding the berms.
Beth Wemple of Kittelson & Associates presented the existing conditions traffic report to the
Technical Advisory Committee. She said that the intent of the existing conditions traffic report
is to establish a reference document regarding transportation in the Washington Square
Regional Center study area. Based on her review of the area,Ms.Wemple stated that we have a
limited transportation system. Many key intersections in the area operate above capacity.
Steve Sparks of Beaverton said that the report should include the functional classification of
roads that are under the jurisdiction of the City of Beaverton. Bridget Wiegart of Metro
Transportation said that we need to consider establishing a process to settle jurisdictional
conflicts that may arise during this planning process,especially over the function of the roads.
1
s • v •
DRAFT
10/28/98
Lidwien Rahman of ODOT said that we should consider local street connections in the
transportation planning process. Scott King said'that,he could provide information from the
Street Connectivity Plan that Washington County Is currently undertaking. Ms. Wemple said
that local street connections would'be considered when developing theifuture streetplans.
Steve Sparks of Beaverton said that the park and ride lot on Scholls Ferry Road was supposed
to be temporary until the opening of Westside Light Rail,based on its land use permit with the
City of Beaverton. Mr. Sparks suggested that perhaps the park and ride lot should be made
permanent because both the Sunset Transit Center and the Scholls Ferry Road park and ride
lots fills up every day. He also said that many commuters take illegal left turns into the Scholls
Ferry park and ride lot.
Ms. Wemple said that a majority of the open house attendants expressed dissatisfaction with
the pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area and that this planning process will address those
needs.
l idwien Rahman asked about our assumptions regarding mode split in this area. Ms. Rahman
said that the Metro mode split assumption for Regional Centers is 45%,mostly carpooling. Mr.
Spencer said that mode isplit will be an issue for the citywide transportation system plan.
Ms. Wemple asked Ms. Rahman about what should the level of service assumption be for the
statewide facilities. Ms. Rahman said that level of service is evaluated on a case by case basis
and that ODOT does not tolerate freeway backup on Highway 217 from the freeway ramps.She
said that when back ups occur from the ramps, they will be metered or the timing changed on
the meters to accommodate free flow of traffic on the highway. Ms. Wiegert said that Metro
will begin its Major Investment Study for Highway 217 next February. A preliminary report for
Highway 217 should be available before the end of the year.
Ms. Wiegert said that as far as transportation modeling,we should assume that the projects for
the strategic regional transportation plan should be in place, which includes widening
Highway 217.
Mr.Lindley and Mr.Spencer went on to present urban design concepts for the area.
The meeting adjourned at 5:30 PM.
2
R
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER TASK FORCE
November 18, 1998
3:00 to 5:00;PM
Tigard Water Building
AGENDA
1. Finalize Guiding Principles Task Force
2. Re-name the Regional Center? Task Force
3. Update on Buildable Lands Analysis John Spencer
4. Update on Transportation Analysis Beth Wemple
5. Public Comments
r
DRAFT
12/1/98
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER STUDY
TASK FORCE MEETING
TIGARD WATER SERVICES BUILDING
NOVEMBER 18,1998
SUMMARYUINUTES
Task Force Members Attending: Tom Archer, Dick Burnham, Dr. Gene Davis, Nic Herriges,
Leo Huff, Jon Kvistad, Dan McFarling, Lyn Musolf, Michael Neunzert, Adele Newton, Steve
Perry,Jack Reardon,Councilor Bob Rohlf,Forrest Soth,Dave Stewart,Pat Whiting
Staff/City of Tigard: Brenda Bernards (Metro); Laurie Nicholson, Brian Moore, and Nadine
Smith(City of Tigard);Lidwein Rahman(ODOT);Councilor Ken Scheckla (City of Tigard)
Consultant Team: Elaine Cogan,Kirstin Greene,Lloyd Lindley,John Spencer,Beth Wemple
Guests: Steve Asson, Elisabeth Braam, Pieter H.M. Braam, Audin Erickson, Chuck Harper,
Justin Jaance,Trudy Knowles, R. Kramer,Cindy Laurila (for Beth Johnston), Kathy Lehtola (for
John Rosenberger),Penny Nash,Jill Tellez,Bob Y.
Elaine Cogan opened the meeting, introducing Michael Neunzert, a new Task Force member
from the Metzger neighborhood. Michael and other Task Force members introduced
themselves.
Next, the Task Force discussed another draft of the guiding principles resulting from changes
suggested at the last meeting.
Questions from Task Force members and the public are in italics. Responses and
comments from consultants and staff follow in regularprint.
Regarding the identity principles, there were a lot of comments at the open house about
enforcement and mitigation of wetland and floodplain development. I think there should be a
new#11.
I'm not sure we want to get that prescrrpti ve in the guiding principles
Fm not comfortable with that being assumed.
Could we include it in#5?
Do you mean preserve rather than mitigation?
Ido mean mitigate. There has already been losses in wetland and floodplain to development
even with existing standards.
1
DRAFT
12/1/98
Agreed: change to"maintain and preserve".
There were no changes to the guiding,principles regarding affected governments.
About transportation, there has been a tendency to express the mobility of automobiles, as in
#3, #5,and#8. They should be expressed as maintaining livability and a strong economy.
We should change#3 to read"accommodate people and height':.
We should plan for all modes of travel.
With the population increases forcasted, Washington County's share of that growth will be
35,000 families, each with an average of one and one half automobiles. Automobiles will
remain the primary means ofgettingfrom pointa to point b.
How about changing the principle to "plan for a multi-modal transportation system that
accommodates all needs of the community?"
I still disagree.
We need people to know we are looking at problems that come with automobile and non-
automobile travel.
Metro's plan includes increases in automobile use in this area, including widening Highway
217.
Put back auto and non-auto travel
On what basis would you take out increase? That's what we are facing. We will have an
increase in automobile travel and not to include it would not be a responsible way of
addressing the problem.
What"community"are we talking about? A lot of tra vel in the area is from people who do not
live in the immediate study area community.
Idisagree strongly with removingnon-automobile travel.
I'm concerned with protectingneighborhood livability. These are neighborhood streets
How about, "respect neighborhood livability and keep,through traffic out of neighborhoods."
This is what we have agreed on: #4 ends with livability and #7 speaks to accessibility and to
connections.
2
v
DRAFT
12/1/98
Regarding #5, whereas ODOT is interested in maintairdng level of service (LOS) on arterial
roads, our #1 priority is safety. What about actions to prevent cars from backing out onto
freeway lanes,for example?
Agreed to add safety on regional roads to#5,.
Now about"maintain a high level of accessibility within and to the study area"?
To#8,add the word"to'
Regarding#9, what does "appropriate street design"mean?
We are going to have workshops to look at that. There are existing local and national standards
for roads,streets and bicycles.
Can we reference the existing code?
Yes. There also.are engineering standards for street design. However, we want to develop
standards,that are appropriate for this regional center.
What about adding, "use street design appropriate to the regional center"?
Generally agreed.
In Bea verton, we ha ve looked at these and ha ve some examples
There are established lane widths for bicycles and cars. Metro also has guidelines for
neighborhood and other types of streets.
What about using the words "livable urban design"?
There can be two interpretations of appropriate-engineenngand/or neighborhood livability.
We will be talking about street trees,parking,and other details.
Appropriate refers to regional center development
Agreed: take out regional center.
The Regional Center Plan Should section should include something about encouraging
attractive,high-quality development that provides for the long-term viability for the area.
Don't#land#8 speak to that?
3
DRAFT
12/1/98
To me, this statement reflects a concern that this area does not look like Beaverton or other
town centers.
Can we replace conflict with complement?(Agreed)
Another aspect of what I heard at the public meeting that I don't see here is the concept of
having adequate infrastructure in place before encouraging high-density development. Thus has
been a problem, e.g., in Tigard, where multiple subdivisions developed withoutr roads and
other urban services such as sidewalks and roads,and concepts such asgood connectivity.
A lot of that is paid for by the development itself. It is closely connected with the infrastructure
plan.
In this regional center, we already ha ve most of the infrastructure in place.
How about changing"support" to"lead". (Agreed)
Most infrastructure improvements are paid for by the developer, and passed along to
homebuyers and renters
Remember,this is about planning and not about implementation.
"There area lot of different ways to install the necessary infrastructure. How about assure that
infrastructure is available to supportgrowth and development"? (Agreed).
We need to get the timing issue right. Private money moves faster than public, e.g., consider
waiting for the widening of Highway217 which could take years
Should we assume the infrastructure is available prior to development?
Part of what we are trying to do here is establish some safeguards.
The process already is in place to plan for development. We are laying out this conceptual
framework that ultimately development will BY
The consultant team agreed to review all the comments and mail out a final draft to the Task
Force before the next meeting December 16.
Next, the Task Force decided not to re-name the Washington Square Regional Center project
although there was a recognition that it might be confusing to the public.
John Spencer then provided an update on the buildable lands inventory process. The
consultant team is updating the buildable lands map and will have a package of information
4
DRAFT
12/1/98
about development, redevelopment and the study area boundary at the next meeting. We will
also be looking at large parking lots and residential areas that could be redeveloped. Properties
will be field-checked where necessary. John distributed handouts on two development
scenarios,a base case and a Metro 2020"preferred scenario' alternative.
I'm interested in information on parcels near major transportation access points including
commuter rail stations Also, how much land do we have in highway rights-of-way and
ramps?
We can check on that.
Will the map indicate current zoning as well?
Yes,the zoning according to the comprehensive plan map designations.
Are we going to ground-check this information?
First in this committee, then we will take it out to the public for review. We have used Metro's
information for Tigard, Beaverton and Washington County. The purpose is not to pinpoint
! individual parcels, but to look at what may be available for development and redevelopment
over the next-20 years. The other part of the equation is,how much can we develop?
What is your criteria for redevelopment?
Where the improvement to land value ratio is less than one. Large parking lots also need to be
looked at. Some in the Lincoln Center,for example,are planned for redevelopment.
You don't have assessed value for the parking loll in your spreadsheets There is a value for
parking lots, but they are not on an assessors'map.
That's why we wanted to call them out.
just because it is a parking lot,it doesn't mean it has no value.
Anything you can do to help us with the time line on redevelopablility, whether it is 5 or 25
years,is appreciated.
1 hope you are not considering parks and school sites redevelopable.
No. They are in the separate category of public ownership.
Can you bring along any proposed/future development applications that come across your
desk?
5
DRAFT
12/1/98
Yes. They are public information.
Do your figures include home occupations?
Yes. Depending on the business,they should have a business license.
John continued his explanation of projected needs for dwelling units and employment under
high density (all structured parking),and low density(surface parking) scenarios.
What is floor-area ratio(FAR?)
The ratio of the building to land area. We have assumed high FARs for the high density
scenario. Under this scenario, we would need about 57 acres to accommodate projected need
for the regional center. Over one hundred (107.5) acres of land would be needed in the low
density scenario.
You are adding two different types of commercial development, high density office and
industrial.
We will try to break those down between office and flexible-space/ medium density use.
Back to the assumptions, I do not think Metro distinguishes between single-family and multi-
family developments.
How did you translate this into people?
Metros forecast is for 1.55 persons per household, without distinguishing between single-
family and multi-family development. Regionally, the population per household ratio is
decreasing.
Will the developments be row houses or detached?
The multifamily units are not considered attached. All of these assumptions are open for
discussion. The second scenario reflects a higher level of jobs and people than the regional
allocation. I included another scenario for the sake of discussion and contrast. We can compare
these at the next meeting with more detail about how much land is available in the study area.
Next, Beth Wemple, Kittleson and Associates, described the status of the transportation
analysis and issues the task force will discuss during the planning process. The existing
conditions report is complete, and she is now developing a list of near-term improvements.
Then, she will do some modeling, development of alternatives, refinement, testing, and work
needed for a draft preferred alternative, and finally the draft transportation plan. She will use
transportation forecasts based upon land use and will incorporate Metro's policies such as
regional design standards, connectivity goals, modal split targets, and level of service
6
DRAFT
12/1/98
standards. Future public input also will be considered. At the next meeting, the task force will
be asked to consider Metros mode split (type of travel) targets and level' of service (time
waiting at a signalized intersection) standards. The task force may decide to choose to accept a
different mode-split target for different hours during the peak time of travel. For example, to
accept a lower level of service in order to build a regional center less dependent on the auto.
Can improvements include sidewalks,pedestrian paths and bicycleways?
Yes. We also need. to develop a base transportation network, including what level of
improvement we think is realistic considering the timeline for improvements to Highway 217,
and Hall Boulevard, for example. The goal is to develop options so that people in the area do
not have to get in their car for every single trip.
We are not talking about Hall Boulevard being widened so that it splits our community, are
we?
Not necessarily,no.
If we use Metro's minimum standards, what type of mode splits are we looking at?
Transit,l%of trips;bicycle and pedestrian,5%.
What level ofservice do wehave in the area now?
Typically,jurisdictions adopt a level of service standard D.
How is the system operating today?
I dont have the details of that analysis with me today. I will bring it next time.
At what level do federal funds become available?
The issues comes up when you try to target available funds for different improvements.
Currently, Highway 21'7 for the most part is a level of service D. The Highway 217/ Interstate
5 intersection is an F.
Will there be any interim modeling?
We can do increments.
Next,Pat Whiting,CPO 4M task force member distributed a copy of a flyer she developed and
distributed to area residents. She asked that similar copies be mailed to area residents if she
provides the mailing labels. The back of the flyer can be used to advertise dates, guiding
principles,and other appropriate information.
7
DRAFT
12/1/98
We are discussing with the City of Beaverton and Washington County ways of utilizing their
communication mediums.
Meeting adjourned.
Reminder: the next Task Force meeting will'be on December 16th from 3 to 5:pm,
8
WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER TASK FORCE
December 16, 1998
&O0 to 5:00 PM
Tigard Water Building
AGENDA
1. Task Force Roles and Responsibilities Elaine Cogan 30 minutes
2. Task Force Schedule John Spencer, 5 minutes
3. Final Guiding Principles Elaine Cogan, 5 minutes
4. Update on Transportation Analysis Beth Wemple, 10 minutes
5. Buildable Lands Work Session John Spencer, 60 minutes
6. Interested Parties 10 minutes
CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON
PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this qday of , 1996 by and between
the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipalcorporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called CITY;
and Spencer&Kupper,hereinafter called'CONTRACTOR.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, CITY has need for the services of a company with a particular training, ability,
knowledge,and experience possessed by CONTRACTOR, and
WHEREAS, City Manager has determined that Spencer & Kupper is qualified and capable of
performing the professional services as CITY does hereinafter require, under those terms and
conditions set forth:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree
as follows:
1. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED:
CONTRACTOR shall initiate services immediately upon receipt of CITY's notice to
proceed, together with an executed copy of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to
complete work which is detailed in Exhibit "A" and by this reference made a part hereof.
2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION:
This Agreement shall become effective upon the date of execution, and shall expire, unless
otherwise terminated or extended, on September 30, 1996. All work under this Agreement
shall be completed prior to the expiration of this Agreement.
3. COMPENSATION:
CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR not to exceed $50,000 for performance of those
services described herein, which payment shall be based upon the following applicable
terms:
a. Payment by CITY to CONTRACTOR for performance of services under this
Agreement includesall expenses incurred by CONTRACTOR, with the exception
of expenses, if any, identified in this Agreement as'separately reimbursable.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page I
b. Payment will be made in installments based on CONTRACTOR's invoice, subject
to the approval of,the City Manager, and not more frequently than monthly.
Payment shall be made only for work actually completed as of the date of invoice.
C. _ Payment by CITY shall release CITY from any further obligation for payment to
CONTRACTOR, for services performed or expenses incurred as of the date-of the
invoice: Payment shall not be considered acceptance or approval of any work or
waiver of any defects therein.
d. CONTRACTOR shall make payments promptly, as due, to all persons supplying
labor or materials for the prosecution of this work.
e. CONTRACTOR shall not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against
the CITY on any account of any labor or material furnished.
£ CONTRACTOR shall pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from
employees pursuant to ORS 316.167.
g. 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 shall not relieve
CONTRACTOR or their surety from obligation with respect to any unpaid claims.
h. CONTRACTOR shall pay employees at least time and a half pay for all overtime
worked in excess of 40 hours in any one week except for individuals under,the
contract who are excluded under ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or under 29 USC_ sections
201 to 209 from receiving overtime.
i. CONTRACTOR shall promptly, as due, make payment to any person,
copartnership, 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 or all sums which CONTRACTOR agrees to pay for
such services and all moneys and sums which CONTRACTOR collected or
deducted from the wages of employees pursuant to any law, contract or agreement
for the purpose of providing or paying for such service.
j. The CITY certifies that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure
to finance costs of this contract.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 2
4. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT:
CITY shall be the owner of and shall be 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 shall assign, sublet or transfer any interest in or duty under this Agreement
without the written consent of the other and no assignment shall be of any force or effect
whatsoever unless and until the other party has so consented. If CITY agrees to assignment
of tasks to a subcontract, CONTRACTOR shall be fully responsible for the acts or
omissions of any subcontractors and of all persons employed by them, and neither the
approval by CITY of any_subcontractor nor anything contained herein shall be deemed to
create any contractual relation between the subcontractor and CITY.
6. STATUS OF CONTRACTOR AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR:
CONTRACTOR certifies that:
a. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that for all purposes related to this Agreement,
CONTRACTOR is and shall be deemed to be an independent contractor as defined
by ORS 670.700 and not an employee of CITY, shall not be entitled to benefits of
any kind to which an employee of CITY is entitled and shall be 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 shall be 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. The undersigned CONTRACTOR hereby represents that no employee of the City of
Tigard, or any partnership or corporation in which a CITY employee has an interest,
has or will receiveany 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.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 3
If this payment is to be charged against Federal funds; CONTRACTOR certifies
that he or she is not currently employed by the Federal Government and the amount
charged does not exceed his or her normal charge for the type of service provided.
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.
C. CONTRACTOR certifies that it currently has a City of Tigard business license or
will obtain one prior to delivering services under this Agreement.
d. CONTRACTOR is not an officer, employee,or agent of the City of Tigard as those
terms are used in ORS 30.265.
7. INDEMNIFICATION:
CITY has relied upon the professional ability and training of CONTRACTOR as a material
inducement to enter into this Agreement. CONTRACTOR warrants that all 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 shall not operate as a waiver or release.
CONTRACTOR agrees to indemnify and defend the City of Tigard, its officers, agents and
employees 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 and (at both trial and appeal level, whether or not a trial or appeal ever takes place)
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
shall also cover claims brought against the City of Tigard under state or federal worker's
compensation laws. If any aspect of this indemnity shall be found to be illegal or invalid
for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity:shall not affect the validity of the
remainder of this indemnification.
8. INSURANCE:
CONTRACTOR and its subcontractors shall maintain insurance acceptable to CITY in full
force and effect.throughout the term of this contract. Such insurance shall cover all risks
arising directly or indirectly out of CONTRACTOR's activities or work hereunder,
including the operations of its subcontractors of any tier. Such insurance shall include
provisions that such insurance is primary insurance with respect to the interests of CITY
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 4
and that any other insurance maintained by CITY is excess and not contributory insurance
with the insurance required hereunder. Such policies or certificates must be delivered prior
to commencement of the work.
The procuring.of isuch required insurance shall not be construed to limit CONTRACTOR's
liability hereunder. Notwithstanding said insurance,CONTRACTOR shall be obligated for
the total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by negligence or neglect connected
with this contract.
Commercial General Liability Insurance
Contractor shall obtain, at contractor's expense, and keep in effect during the term of the
contract, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property
Damage on an "occurrence" form (1986 ISO or equivalent). This coverage shall include
Contractual Liability insurance for the indemnity provided under this contract. The
following insurance will be carried:
Coverage Limit
General Aggregate 1,000,000
Products-Completed Operations Aggregate 1,000,000
Personal &Advertising Injury 1,000,000
Each Occurrence 1,000,000
Fire Damage(Any one Fire) 50,000
Medical Expense(Any one Person) 5,000
Commercial Automobile Insurance
Contractor shall also obtain, at contractor's expense, and keep in effect during the term of
the contract, "Symbol 1" Commercial Automobile Liability coverage on an occurrence form
including coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single
Limit per occurrence shall not be less than$500,000.
Worker' Compensation Insurance
"The Contractor, its subcontractors, if any, and all employers providing work, labor or
materials under this Contract are subject employers under the Oregon Workers'
Compensation Law and shall 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 ata single location within Oregon for more than 30 days in a calendar
year. Contractors who perform the.work without the assistance or labor of any employee
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 5
need not to obtain such coverage." This shall include Employer's Liability Insurance with
coverage limits of not less than$1,000,000 each accident.
Notice of Cancellation
There shall be no cancellation,material change, exhaustion of aggregate limits or intent not
to renew insurance coverage without 30 days written notice to the City of Tigard. Any
failure to comply with this provision will not affect the insurance coverage provided to the
City. The 30 days notice of cancellation provision shall be physically endorsed on to the
policy.
9. METHOD AND PLACE OF GIVING NOTICE, SUBMITTING BILLS AND
MAKING PAYMENTS:
All notices, bills and payments shall be made in writing and may be given by personal
delivery or by mail. Notices, bills and payments sent by mail should be addressed as
follows:
CITY:
Nadine Smith, City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
CONTRACTOR:
John C. Spencer, Spencer&Kupper
3533 NE 24th Avenue
Portland, OR 97212
and when so addressed, shall be deemed given upon deposit in the United States mail,
postage prepaid. In all other instances,notices,bills and:payments shall be deemed given at
the time of actual delivery. Changes may be made in the names and addresses of the person
to whom notices, bills and payments are to be given by giving written notice pursuant to
this paragraph.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 6
10. 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 shall be effective unless and until it is
made in writing and signed by both parties.
11. TERMINATION WITHOUT CAUSE:
At any time and without cause, CITY'.shall have the right in its sole discretion, to terminate
this Agreement by giving notice to CONTRACTOR. If CITY terminates the contract
pursuant to this paragraph, it shall pay CONTRACTOR for services rendered to the date of
termination.
12. 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:
i. 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 maybe modified to accommodate a
reduction in funds.
ii. 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.
iii. 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.
iv. 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) shall be without prejudice to
any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to such termination.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 7
b. CITY, by written notice of default (including breach of contract) to
CONTRACTOR,may terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement:
i. If CONTRACTOR fails to provide services called for by this agreement
within the time:specified herein or any extension thereof,or
ii. If CONTRACTOR fails to perform any of the other provisions of this
Agreement,or so 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 in the above clause related to defaults (including
breach of contract) by CONTRACTOR shall not be 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 shall be entitled
to receive as full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and expenses incurred, an
amount which bears the same ratio to the total fees specified in this Agreement as the
services satisfactorily rendered by CONTRACTOR bear to the total services otherwise
required to be performed for such total fee; provided,that there shall be deducted from such
amount the amount of damages, if any, sustained by CITY due to breach of contract by
CONTRACTOR. Damages for breach of contract shall be those allowed by Oregon law,
reasonable and necessary attorney fees, and other costs of litigation at trial and upon appeal.
13. ACCESS TO RECORDS:
CITY shall 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.
14. FORCE MAJEURE:
Neither CITY nor CONTRACTOR shall 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 shall
within ten (10) days from the beginning of such delay, notify the other party in writing of
the cause of delay and its probably extent. Such notification shall not be the basis for a
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 8
claim for additional'compensation. Each party shall, however, make all reasonable efforts
to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and shall, upon cessation of the
cause,diligently pursue performance of its obligation under the Agreement.
15. 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.
16. NON-DISCRIMINATION:
CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of federal and state civil
rights and rehabilitation statues, rules, and regulations. CONTRACTOR also shall comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, ORS 659.425, and all.regulations and
administrative rules established pursuant to those laws.
17. ERRORS:
CONTRACTOR shall 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. ,
18. EXTRA(CHANGES)WORK:
Only the City Administrator may authorize extra- (and/or changes) work. Failure of
CONTRACTOR to secure Administrator's authorization for extra work shall constitute a
waiver of all right to adjustment in the contract price .or contract time due to such
unauthorized extra work and CONTRACTOR thereafter shall be entitled to no
compensation whatsoever for the performance of such work.
19. WARRANTIES:
All work shall be guaranteed by CONTRACTOR 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 shall be the best available unless otherwise
specified in the profession. Neither acceptance of the work.nor payment therefore shall
relieve CONTRACTOR from liability under warranties contained in or implied by this
Agreement.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 9
20. ATTORNEY'S FEES:
In case suit or action is instituted to enforce the provisions of this contract, the parties agree
that the losing party shall pay such sum as the court may'adjudge reasonable attorney fees
and court costs,including attorney's fees and court costs on appeal.
21. GOVERNING LAW:
The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the provisions of
the laws of the State of Oregon. Any action or suits involving any question arising under
this Agreement must be brought in the appropriate court of the State of Oregon.
22. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW:
CONTRACTOR shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws and ordinances
applicable to the work under this Agreement, including those set forth in ORS 279.310 to
279.320.
23. CONFLICT BETWEEN TERMS:
It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should there be any
conflict between the terms of this instrument in the proposal of the contract, this instrument
shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the said terms of
said proposal conflicting herewith.
24. 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 remainder of this Agreement shall
remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected or invalidated thereby.
25. COMPLETE AGREEMENT:
This Agreement and attached exhibits constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties.
No waiver, consent, modification, or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either
party unless in writing and signed by both parties. Such waiver, consent, modification, or
change if made, shall be effective only in specific instances and for the specific purpose
given. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not
specified herein regarding this Agreement. CONTRACTOR, by the signature_of its
authorized representative, hereby acknowledges that he has read this Agreement,
understands it and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions.
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 10
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly
authorized undersigned officer and CONTRACTOR has executed this Agreement on the
date hereinabove first written.
CITY OF TIGARD
Byj Bill Monahan,City Administrator
CONT CTOR
B Spencer&Kupper,John C. Spencer
i:Urpin\nadinelpsc.doc
Personal Services Contract:SPI
Page 11